Topic: Another lozenge mark....Webb

[Paul S.]

ninety nine percent of the time lozenges are legit. and give us the right answer  -  fortunately it's only very rarely they go wrong like this, but even wrong ones have their use by reminding us to be cautious.
If you see lozenges as worn as these - and there are lots of them around - then you're probably going to struggle anyway with authenticating the details, and may never determine the factory.       That's not to say all worn diamonds are frauds - quite the opposite - but it does make for frustration unless the design/pattern is recognizable, and worn marks can give rise to guesswork, potentially giving a false result, such as this one.

Keep these things coming Angela - it gives Fred and myself something to do.             Big thanks also to Fred for all the work on posting Registration details on the Board's Gallery and in particular the history on Ed. Webb earlier in this thread.

The III in the top oval refers to the CLASS No.  -   CLASS III being solely for glass............   I think there were something like thirteen CLASSES in all. 

[Simba]

Been reading up a little more on old glass and got a copy of Colin R Lattimore book 'English 19th Century Press Moulded Glass' and he shows an example of a Greener Lozenge mark which has a R rather than the usual Rd (curiously it is a design for a pattern of grapes & vine leaves reg 23 July 1876 shown on a milk glass plate)

[agincourt17]

Actually, Angela, Lattimore mis-read the Henry Greener lozenge, because the (rather indistinct) day identifier is actually 29 (not 23), giving a registration date of 29 July July 1876 – Parcel 6, corresponding to RD 302199. I have 2 reference photos of the mark and, as you say, both have an ‘R’ rather than the usual ‘Rd’, but both marks are also surmounted by Henry Greener's ‘1st lion’ trademark (used between c.1875 and c. 1885).

Lattimore also points out that the design was for the looped border rather than the shape, and although the grape and vine decoration appears on some of the RD 302199 shapes, it does not appear on all of them (see Lattimore's plate 54 on page 84, and my last photo). It is interesting, though, that Henry Greener pieces around this period are often found in opaque white glass (though normally the opacity is quite dense and uniform rather than milky), so it is not impossible that the covered pedestal bowl shown in your opening posts may turn out to be a Henry Greener piece.

Fred.

[Simba]

Thanks Fred for clarifying that, I am learning more every day    Looking at the lozenge mark in the lid of mine  under a strong magnifying glass it appears to be different to the one in the base.