Large First Period Worcester Kangxi-Style Bowl | ||
| Pottery316 of 12310 |  |  |
Cisum loves this.
vetraio50 loves this.
dav2no1 loves this.
apostata loves this.
Vynil33rpm loves this.
jscott0363 loves this.
Newfld loves this.
Watchsearcher loves this.
vcal loves this.
kwqd loves this.
fortapache loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Posted 2 years ago
ho2cultcha
(5051 items)
I assume that this is a fruit bowl, but not sure. It's first period Worcester from around 1760. It's in excellent condition. i'm happy with it!
Help us close this case. Add your knowledge below.
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
well we are commited to the style according the lozenge and and the floral garlands , but that is only concerning the style
the question is are we commited are we commited to Bow or Isleworth
actually we are commited to an early Worchestor variation the so called Dr Wall variation and from DR Wall varation it is the first generation , because the scribbling mark , is out , the crescent mark is out and the triple flower but mark is out
this is quite well for a transfer plate , you always got spreading by transfer , it is not dominating and it not an boring design, actually you did quite well
thank you apostata. from what i've read, first period worcester can be painted or transfer printed - including these 'Lotus Pattern' pieces. I saw some of them which were obviously transfer printed, but i think this is painted. can you blow it up to see it well? what do you think?
this is des Pudels kern ( nitty gritty)
We have to be committed to cerscent moon marking , but , but what we got is an lozenge mark
so could it be sourcing out, i find one mark in the this way , with the remark , strange mark , experimental Worchester in the cataloques
the peony point of view is actually the technical discusion ( the Mansfield discussion
The mansfield discussion is the discussion is the late george 2 early George 3 style of discussion
thats difficult because the crescent moon marking is out we actually are formally
just speaking Attributed to Worchester
well is the copper plating (for the transfer known) known , no it aint
you got some elevation in the glazing , so you might be right
maybe some weak parts of the glazing were faded, actually i tend to your opinion
whatever it is ,it is good enough and i like it, i don,t see any trouble condition wise , fading happens , no sweat at all, I can,t see well enough to do a proper job
i run this this on early generation Dr wall Caughly Salopian because of the deviation of the mark , it does,not make . so i am out of options
thank you apostata. i appreciate your assistance.