Topic: LITTLE OLD LADY tea set

[SamCogar]

Tell me something about these, date, etc.

The wife said she found a reference that these were made by H. J. Wood.

Teapot bottom impressed mark:

LITTLE OLD LADY
Reg No 827655
MADE IN
ENGLAND


Sugar and creamer bottom stamped mark:

MADE IN
ENGLAND

[Lustrousstone]

I suspect your wife is right. The number dates the design to 1938/39 but the teapot's age depends on how long the design was used. The Little Old Lady certainly seems to have many incarnations and was reproduced by Tony Wood in the 1980s, although I don't know how these are marked.

[SamCogar]

Well now, if Tony Wood reproduced them in the 1980s .... then I can't imagine these were made by him. The crazing of the pieces makes me discount that.

The wife purchased them at an estate "tag sale" in the late 90's and the Administrator had hired a professional appraiser to "tag" the contents. Of course that doesn't prove anything.

But, it was an estate that I was familiar with since childhood. Since my "Trick or Treating Days" because Mrs. Hamric would always give me a hand full of candy even if it was 2 weeks before Halloween. 

And ps, are there other marks on them other than what I described?

[Anne]

These were a Woods design. I think the one you have is a later one - the earlier ones were painted rather than having sprigged flowers (are they transfers?). (My mother has one she bought for her mother with her first week's pay when she started work in 1943 - hers is the pink/green/purple one -  I don't have a picture of it here sadly.)  They are sometimes known as Sarah Gamp / Saray Gamp teapots because of the umbrella.

The earlier pre-war / wartime ones I've seen are usually a creamier base pottery and have a paintress mark / initials added on to the base as well. The later ones / repros seem to be much a whiter pottery base like yours, so my feeling is that you have one of the later production type.

By the way, the crazing doesn't help date it much as I have pottery bought new in the 1980s/1990s which crazed on first use - as soon as hot liquid hit it the crazing appeared. It's more to do with the glaze itself than the age of the piece.

[Lustrousstone]

I don't think yours are the Tony reproductions (or perhaps I should say reissues) though, more likely 1950s, which would fit with the flowers

[SamCogar]

Thanks all, I consider it a bad day if I don't learn something new.

The earlier pre-war / wartime ones I've seen are usually a creamier base pottery and have a paintress mark / initials added on to the base as well. The later ones / repros seem to be much a whiter pottery base like yours, so my feeling is that you have one of the later production type.

Mine are definitely white .... but now what about those paintress marks / initials?

Did the later ones / repros also have them?

I am asking because in the picture of the base above, that little roundish purple mark in the center ...... is under the glaze.

And I checked the base of the creamer and there is a wee small (1/16") letter "P" under the glaze. And the base of the sugar has a larger (1/4") letter "F" under the glaze.

I have all these questions because I know the wife will be asking them when she gets home.

Sam

[Anne]

Hi Sam, the white based ones I've seen pics of online don't have any marks other than the impressed maker details like yours. The earlier cream based ones I've seen have small hand-written/painted  marks below the impressed marks, e.g. like this:

J.W.C.
9
K

I've also seen an all-green version which had no decorator/paintress marks on it.

(By the way, I should add that proper Sairey Gamp teapots are entirely different in style and were made by Doulton and Beswick and possibly others, but you can sometimes find images of the Little Old Lady one listed as such if you do an image search in Google etc.)

More examples of the Little Old Lady variations in style:
http://www.goantiques.com/scripts/images,id,16505.html
http://cgi.ebay.com.sg/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=350063857965
and this one shows the bottom and an example of the paintress mark:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140195335921 (this is like my mother's one.)

Another set with transfers is here: http://www.rubylane.com/shops/victoriasjems/item/03822 - I agree with Christine that these would more likely be 1950s rather than the early ones or the later repros, so still a reasonable age to them.

An example of the later Tony Woods one is here... with a totally different backstamp:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=310053252717

[Lustrousstone]

The Tony Wood ones also seem to be partly sprayed rather than brush painted

[SamCogar]

UT OH, I made a boo-boo in my 1st post.

The wife read this thread for the 1st time yesterday evening and she ?spotted it?.

Me make typo error in last digit of the Reg No.

I entered it as 827655 ?.. and it should have been 827653

I?ll attach a pic of the creamer & sugar bottom. The ?F? is on the sugar and there is a wee little ?P? on the creamer at the bottom of the picture that is blurry in the pic.

Anne, the wife?s set is identical to this one that you referenced, to wit:

Another set with transfers is here:
http://www.rubylane.com/shops/victoriasjems/item/03822

Thanks much for all help.