Steph

The Goebel decorative ware business was funded with profits from marbles sales. That was new info to me. W. Goebel Porzellanfabrik Company

1957 (click to enlarge) 1958 (click)

Hi Peter. Sorry no one chimed in. Might be good to start a new thread, but then again, it's such a unique practice anymore, you still might not get a response. (tho' I personally would love to hear more.) I saw some reference to people making playing marbles this way in the 1940's and 1950's. Just a couple of them, only small individual operations. I might have seen something a little later than that, but nothing very recent. Oh, I think I remember Brian Graham talking about them being available at some point in the last couple of years. I don't know what came of that. But he might be a good person to talk to anyway. His i.d. here is akronmarbles. Here's his site: http://akronmarbles.com/

I was about to link to that page, even before I saw that there was a Victory bottle on it. Not because I necessarily thought yours was a "fake", but because I bought a codd bottle last year, then found it on that page and wrote the guy whose email address is given on the contact page. It took a coupla weeks, for which he apologized, but he wrote to tell me that mine isn't "fake" exactly. just newer. Mine was still in use in India, he said.

Those are cute. Thanks for posting them. Not surprisingly, there were stories of kids vandalizing the highway signs to get the marbles.

LOL all of that was because I finally decided to check out that Defoe passage after seeing it for the umpteenth time this evening when I pieced together the following: 1951 (click to enlarge) Sorry if the ransom note look seriously bugs anyone. I sorta like it. Breaks up the monotony of plain type.

1720 The Life and Adventures of Mr. Duncan Campbell, by Daniel Defoe This book used to be mentioned fairly often in articles about marbles. Many (most? all?) quote Defoe as saying "marbles and alleys". But it appears that the word he used was "alloys". Alleys makes sense as Alabasters, but Alloys makes sense as composite materials. "Marbles and alleys" might be redundant. Here's an example of what seems to be a misquotation -- the 1903 book Slang and Its Analogues Past and Present by John Stephen Farmer. Note: the "pellets, vulgarly called alleys, which boys play withal" reference should have an earlier date than 1807. This text has the reference and it was published in 1756. The quotation maybe be older than that. I see a reference to the year 1665 but I am having trouble reconciling that date and the names Hauksbee and John Martyn. Perhaps when I read more I will learn that this is being quoted from some other place. But we at least have as early 1756. The alley reference is in a table of specific gravities computed for various items. The table seems to have been compiled from various sources. The reference to alleys, and a later reference to marbles, are apparently to help make clear what substance is being measured. Doesn't "pellet" sound more like clay than stone? (click to enlarge) On the 2nd page check out the reference to spotted factitious marble. What would that be?! John Martyn (? - 1680) at Wikipedia Francis Hauksbee, the elder (1666-1713) Francis Hauksbee at Wikipedia Francis Hauksbee, the younger (c. 1687 - 1763)

Lloyd, I actually can't quite make out what those marbles look like. They base comes across as sort of cloudy on my monitor, and I know how particular some are about a ringer base being totally clear. but I'm not sure I'm seeing it right. That's why I was confused by what John said. I thought things were cool enough to ask a question without it being turned into a flame.

Huh? I wasn't insinuating that Lloyd had anything improper in the box. But how many types of marbles did Akro sell in that box? And still we call one particular type a Ringer. How many marbles did Akro sell in Popeye boxes? and still we call one particular type a popeye. Why would I slam you? I wanted to know what you meant. So I asked, without making any negative assumptions about you. Killer box, Lloyd.

Different version with a better look at the text but less detail on the image:

Um, so no, not tongue in cheek. Well, I wondered because I don't suppose the question of what real ringers look like will ever be put to rest. Someone will always say that ringer is a game, not an Akro company name. Someone else will say they saw other marbles in some well-known ringer box. Someone else might say they remember that box, but it wasn't how the first person remembered. Someone else will debate how clear the interior needs to be. Most of us will listen only to the people who are saying what we already believe to be true. I'll be chewing my knuckle trying to resist the temptation to fill a post with pix I think are relevant but no one else would ... ... or something like that ....

Original content moved, leaving spare space for now

Ooooh, Janice did good!

1931 (click to enlarge)

Of course you meant that :-) Was this tongue in cheek?

1924 (click to enlarge)

Not all CAC white lights up. The white in my guinea cullet doesn't. Kokoken said about 50/50 for both bloodies and guineas.

Any of ya'll seen these before? This is from the Aug. 1936 popular science. It has small "reflector buttons". "Reflector button" seems to be the industry's name for the individual mounted reflecting units like those in signs and auto reflectors. So some reflecttor buttons had marbles. But in this case the patent called for something more like "gems". Red ones.

Quite an assemblage! Thanks for taking time out to post.

The bottom never looked particularly Akro to me but it's starting to look more so. With that clear, slightly bubbly base, and light wispiness, the top does look Akro. The bottom also seems to have the wispiness. The main thing which puzzles me is that pale orange. That's a weird color. (If it's actually pale yellow, that would be more in my realm of experience. is it pale yellow?) 'Course I'd feel better all around if I had a good handle on both ends of the ribbons on both of the mibs. I guess I'm seeing one end on each? but not clearly. Would be looking for hints of corky structure.

Would larger ones have more screen marks than smaller? From the weight? That one has so many interesting spots we could analyze. This looks like a plug. At more than 1 and 1/2", would this one actually have been hollow?

p.s. it seems quite possible that the process might have been mechanized at some point. And quite possible that it never was. Rounding machinery was invented long before bennies stopped being made. iiuc. But would it have been employed by bennie making concerns? I dunno. It would have meant modernization of time-tested methods/equipment during hard economic times, so?

I actually have quite a bit of info from the 1800's about marble making in that century, and about the marble makers. Some would be boring to most (do you want to know how much they were paid, and how many were employed in 1850, and how that compared to the numbers in 1880?). Some would be false I think (unless chinas did really come from china). Some might give some insight, if only tangentially. I'm not sure whether this is a guess or a memory: the clay for the bennies may have been cut into cubes, as stone agates also were of course, prior to rounding into spheres. That would have given more or less uniform sizes, and you could see how that might lead to the occasional shear mark. But if they were rolled into tubes (or molded into tubes) and then cut that would have made the hand-rounding stage easier. And that would explain antipodal shear marks.

yeah, what they said. :Party_fest33:

the mover of marbles!