Steph

Alley made dishes.

Yeah, it's fun to have one's efforts made fun of. Sorry I didn't get that. I'm just slow on the uptake. Here ya go. I'm laughing. haha :icon_lmao: -steph right wing extremist

This one sports some yellow. Brighter than the pic shows.

Here's a mystery mib of mine. For the longest while I thought it was ceramic or paper mache. (lol ... I was confused with Gutta Perchas) Now I realize that color is painted on, like latex housepaint. I've seen one other like it ... and no one recognized that one either. What unsolved mysteries and general oddballs do you have?

Here are a couple of examples of oxblood I found in non-marble contexts. How well do they fit with what you are picturing? . . (1) . . (2) Late additions ..... another palette example, another glaze example and a much more brown example in dyed wool: (click to enlarge) . . . . . . (3), (4), (5)

What is red? I've never been quite sure. My mother knew it as an artist but I couldn't keep it straight. This is what the computer thinks is red: RED Do you mean that should be in oxblood? Funny thing about red ... I think clinical tests have shown that what males tend to consider "true red" is different from what females tend to consider "true red". Or maybe the test was about what males considered the best shade of red being different from what females tend to be attracted by. Like the red which would appeal on the most visceral level and help make a sale. Funny thing about the black, I have been under the impression that most oxblood does not contain black. Once upon a time I heard that what we perceive as black is actually transparent green. Alan's post in that other oxblood thread might be the first time I heard anyone say that both green and black were possible.

These were dug in England. I think the one with the star is being called Pearlware. The dimension looks odd because less than half the marble is there. (pdf source, 1.16 MB)

Marbles are frequently mentioned in archaelogical articles. Supposedly they can be used to help figure out the date of other items in the site. Here's an article which might make some reference to that, but from my quick skim it seems that that author might just be learning about marbles, not learning from them. Still looks interesting. Losing your marbles: Post-medieval gaming marbles of pottery and stone from Canterbury excavations address: http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/annreps/pdfs/1998/005.pdf (1.16 MB) Hosted by the Canterbury Archaelogical Trust Ltd. site. Some of the mibs under discussion: [space reserved for other archaeology articles]

The Far Eastern Economic Review, several years Not entirely online, but snippets at Google Books enabled me to learn that Hong Kong built a marble factory in 1954, and it was used to make cat's eyes, which were described as "transparent marbles with colour-core". That was from an article entitled "The Glass Marble Industry of Hongkong" in the 1956 edition.

I saw some vaseline glass frogs ONCE, and only once that I recall -- those I would love if I had the chance to get them -- do yours by chance glow, Brian?

The inventors of "the" marble machine include at least Martin Christensen Berry Pink Art Fisher Clinton Israel That is, according to various reports. There might be others. There have been so many that I've lost track. The reports aren't just saying that they invented one type of machine. They out and out mean THE machine. A 1970 article about Vitro says Art Fisher founded Vitro in the 1930's after inventing his machine and before he came along glass marbles were made by hand. Same story with Israel. Before he invented the first automatic machine in 1926, marbles were handmade. This was reported in 1959, in a very nice full page article which identified Israel as "West Virginia's Marble King". Charles Turnbull is said to have designed and built most of Ravenswood's equipment but I don't see him credited with starting it "all".

well, I thought I was done with the cosmics but I didn't see your response, PlanB. Are you saying they were Anacortes mibs after all? I'm confused now. edit: I'm even more confused now, I just read some more in AMMM and they seem to contradict the date they gave for when Paris was making marbles. Looks like that continued through much of 1987. Plus they seem to give two different dates for the move to Anacortes. I give. One day I'll get it straight. By the way, I found a newspaper interview of a Vitro manager, John Masters, who doesn't seem to be mentioned in AMMM. Was "manager" different from "plant manager"? I still have plenty to sort out, I guess.

Now that I'm done with my part of the cosmic research I'll say what I should've said awhile back -- those aventurine bananas are sharp! hmmm ... while i'm in the neighborhood catching up ... the wirepull colors seem like the vacor wicked owl. how sure are you of it being european?

Here's my St. Mary's:

could be two beautiful Akros. :-)

Yeah, that makes sense ... either way ... odd glimpses of the neighboring marbles and/or some enhancement by the artist. Makes me want to fill a pitcher with clearies and then stare at it for awhile to see what I notice that I hadn't expected, like clouds.

I think these are the ones AMMM calls "Mystery Marbles II". AMMM says those have been found in 5/8" and 7/8".

I made inquiries. :-) A couple of people contributed to the verdict, which is that Cosmic Rainbows are not Gladding Vitro, and thus were not made between 1969 and 1982, nor before 1969. Paris Mfg bought Gladding Vitro in 1982, and changed the name back to Vitro Agate. According to AMMM, Paris made mibs from 1982 to 1985. So, how about an estimate of 24 to 27 years?

The glass looks like Japanese "transitionals" from the 30's or so. However, at LOM the votes so far are for it being an early German marble. To me the pontil looks like a cleaned up version of the pontils on some marbles which were dug in Shanghai. Most of the unpolished ones have odd crimps, with a spot in the middle which looks like the glass broke off there. But there were other mibs from the dump, not slag-types, which did look like at attempt might have been made to smooth the end. I don't know how to go about framing the suggestion that this might be from Shanghai. I haven't seen enough German pontils to know how similar they would be to the ones from the Shanghai dumpsite. This is the first ground pontil I've seen in person. Plus, the Shanghai mibs I've seen had reverse 9's. But it sure is intriguing to me to think that the ones in the dumpsite might have been rejected before the pontil grinding stage, while this one made it all the way through and out into the world. a few Shanghai examples:

In terms of minerals there is something called moonstone which is different from Akro's moonie glass. Akro advertisements described Moss Agates as being made of the "highest quality moonstone glass". Naturally that did not mean Moss Agates had the same base as Akro moonies. Seems a good chance that moonstone was the material used to make the 1800's version of moonies. Main point for this thread ... and why I separated it from the other snot agate thread ... was that these marbles pre-date Akro and Christensen. So what snot agate referred to this year might be very different from what it referred to in the 30's. And I wonder what that was.

Deleted. Edna, I thank you for defending me in the past when I could not defend myself. I guess I'll be responsible for my own defense from now on. And that's okay with me. I'm a big girl.

Thanks David. One source defines "snot agate" as an agate with a veined and clouded interior. (and "snotty" is short form for snot-agate). I think that simply a mossy interior might have earned the name moonie. What I wonder is whether in 1914 the snot agate would have referred to a stone marble or glass. Not many choices it seems if it was glass, but I don't know enough about minerals and real agates to guess which stone might have been involved.

Edna, I presume you are speaking of me. I have a legitimate desire to protect the old standards for words such as oxblood. Akin to the line Sue draws with the name Joseph's Coat. It is not nitpicking or bullheaded to draw a meaningful line and defend it. This is about marbles. It is a legitimate topic. If there are improper (read: personal) overtones here, they are not of my making.

Nevertheless the transparent oxblood to which I referred was copper-based. Anyone has the right to call things most anything they want. However, the rest of us have a right to do what we can to warn the unsuspecting of how some people use words in a nontraditional way. Red flags go off when people do this often, and/or without making it clear that this is what they are doing. We have the right to advise newbies that it is safest to steer clear of people who seem to be doing this, and in particular to guard against spending traditional oxblood money on non-traditional "oxblood" glass. Oxblood prices are rightly associated with Haematinum red glass. When people seem to be riding the coat tails of Haematinum's market success, their reputation suffers. I'd hate to see that happen to anyone I know.

Mostly Chinese, I believe. Imperial is a company which was formed well after Akro went out of business. They distribute toys made elsewhere. Their suppliers have been known to included U.S. makers in the past and other countries, including different Asian countries. But most famously they buy from China.