Thalia and Melpomene. I'd have bought that for my actress mama.
It's a common pattern. Wedgwood and Minton did them, but so did others.
Oh, nice work, well done. In which case, it's worth emailing them!
Not a carving set, that's a fish knife or similar. God knows what the spoon thing is for. I dunno: my first glance thought was Eastern...
If it's any help, the hyphen usually indicates between the wars.
Yup, Enoch not Jos. I agree that first one looks Asian.
I can't make the standard mark out at all - you're thinking lion rampant? That mark looks awfully rubbed for 1980 and the maker's mark isn't a...
Me too! I checked Bradbury's pocket and have just cross checked in my big Jackson's Bible. Both show that F as 1735.
What did it read as?
I'm a bit leary of this: if she saw bubbles, it's glass. Did she use a spectrometer?
Bradbury's has the bar going completely through the centre for 1735. The 1980 mark also doesn't have the elaborate curlicue on the top bar.
Might even be British. We used 585 as a mark and not all gold had full hallmarks. I've certainly seen that style of setting here.
I'd say coffee cup too. And indeed, no pattern names.
Nope, some are nothing like. You need to repost these with numbered photos please.
They're Scottish spongeware other than the Adams which is obviously English - and isn't spongeware or pottery, it's painted bone china. I'd missed...
See my other reply. Mostly Scottish spongeware. Other than the last two, obvs.
I don't mind at all! It's rarity. Your transferware is very very common - some can still be of real value if it's an unusual design or maker, or...
Those are more interesting and of much better worth. 19th C and earlier Scottish spongeware. The bowl is especially unusual....
Sounds feasible. I don't think we get Beth Torah here.
Yes, the Wedgwood Livingston pattern ones are monogrammed. The Johnson one is 1890s as well. What's that bowl with the green pattern, it looks...
Separate names with a comma.
