04-07-2018 10:25 AM
04-07-2018 11:43 AM - edited 04-07-2018 11:47 AM
Unfortunately it would appear to be a fake mark - see here, at the foot of the page:
http://www.thepotteries.org/fake/index.htm
'2) There is no known original manufacturer who uses the trade name "IRON WARE" - this appears to be an attempt to imitate the genuine trade names such.' as "IRONSTONE" "STONEWARE"
3) The arms mark appears to be an attempt to reproduce the Royal Arms (but the lion and the unicorn are on the wrong sides) - it was not uncommon for both American and English potters to use a "fake" arms mark.'
04-07-2018 10:32 AM
It helps to see the entire piece.
04-07-2018 11:04 AM
More photos
04-07-2018 11:04 AM
04-07-2018 11:43 AM - edited 04-07-2018 11:47 AM
Unfortunately it would appear to be a fake mark - see here, at the foot of the page:
http://www.thepotteries.org/fake/index.htm
'2) There is no known original manufacturer who uses the trade name "IRON WARE" - this appears to be an attempt to imitate the genuine trade names such.' as "IRONSTONE" "STONEWARE"
3) The arms mark appears to be an attempt to reproduce the Royal Arms (but the lion and the unicorn are on the wrong sides) - it was not uncommon for both American and English potters to use a "fake" arms mark.'
04-07-2018 11:53 AM
I was thinking that but couldn’t find for sure. Thank you