Royal Worcester Thimble Painters - Thimbleselect Catalogue

Learn more about Royal Worcester
Thimble Painters

--- www.thimbleselect.com ---

Build and share your knowledge about thimbles - new topics added regularly

Click on a photo to see a bigger picture

INTRODUCTION - DATING RW THIMBLES - THIMBLE PAINTERS - 19TH CENTURY OR UNSIGNED THIMBLES

I have always had a deep love for handpainted Royal Worcester thimbles.
My best find is an unmarked 19th century handpainted bird, with the lovely translucent porcelain of early Worcester's and the taller, narrow shape of their early thimbles. This was found here in Brisbane. It was sold to me as milk or opaline glass, a term I had never heard before - it is a term used for the translucent porcelain of 19th century Royal Worcester. Another term associated with early Royal Worcester porcelain, is blush, peach bloom or a biscuit finish, describing the warm creamy ground of the porcelain. It is rare to find that the apex has been gilded - usually a sign that it is not an early Royal Worcester thimble?
Then there is the handpainted Kookaburra (1926) that Edwin Holmes first described in May 1994. This is the only type of Royal Worcester that I have encountered with a self-patterning of indentations on both sides. Holmes could not explain this at the time. I have seen 2 thimbles with Kookaburras with this type of marking. Have you come across this unusual surface that flanks the painting on RW thimbles?
Neither of these are signed, but that doesn't bother me too much.

an example of a handpainted Locke thimble that preceded the Royal Worcester brand

i - example of a Royal Worcester cardboard thimble box - found with thimbles with a puce mark
ii - example of traditional earlier blue thimble box - paper name on front edge
iii - example of traditional blue thimble box - name lettered in gold over 2 lines, with white trim
iiii - example of traditional blue thimble box - name lettered in gold
iiiii - example of traditional blue thimble box - name lettered in gold with different logo
iii iii - example of a 1980s green thimble box - name lettered in gold over 2 lines, with white trim
iiii iii - example of traditional later blue thimble box with no lettering on front
iiii iiii - example of a clear plastic covering - box modern with Royal Warrant [post 1952- ] whereas thimble is old

Originally I was not going to include any of the unsigned or unmarked Royal Worcesters, but they are so glorious that I couldn't resist!!

return to top

Dating your Royal Worcester Thimbles

The early blush, biscuit or translucent thimbles of the late 19th century have no signatures or marks. Up to the 1880s, later painters cannot surpass the fine painting. The exception is William Powell's exquisite bird studies.

Royal Worcester thimbles with a puce or purple backstamp date from late nineteenth century to 1963 and are signed by the painters. The dating of these thimbles can be calculated from 1891 by a series of dots and/or symbols. The table can be found in Thimble Society of London, winter 1997, p5. (reproduced below)

Thimbles with the black Royal Worcester backstamp date from 1964 onwards. Though the thimbles are still signed, it is not possible to date these thimbles.

Royal Worcester produced hand-painted thimbles until 1986. Those Royal Worcester thimbles currently in production are decaled thimbles.

Royal Worcester Porcelain Backstamps (1862 - 1963)
Reproduced from Thimble Society of London, winter 1997, p5.

The Royal Worcester Porcelain Co., Ltd. was formed as a Joint Stock Company in 1862 and since that time pieces have been marked with some type of date code.
The standard backstamp, illustrated here, includes the number 51 in the centre which refers to the year 1751 when the Worcester Porcelain Company was founded by Dr. John Wall.
In ignorance this number is often mistaken for the date of manufacture of a particular thimble!!

1862
Between 1862 and 1867 specific indications of the year of manufacture are rare but may sometime be found in the form of the last two figures of the date, e.g. 64 for 1864, printed below the standard mark.

1876
From 1867 a letter system was used to indicate the year of manufacture. From 1876 the crown sits down in to the circle. The maker's mark is in puce or light purple.

A = 1867 K = 1875 U = 1883

B = 1868 L = 1876 V = 1884

C = 1869 M = 1877 W = 1885

D = 1870 N = 1878 X = 1886

E = 1871 P = 1879 Y = 1887

G = 1872 R = 1880 Z = 1888

H = 1873 S = 1881 O = 1889

I = 1874 T = 1882 a = 1890

1892
From 1891 pieces were coded with a system of dots and/or symbols below the standard mark. The maker's mark is in puce or light purple.
1891 'Royal Worcester England' added
1892 One dot
1893 Two dots
1894 Three dots
continued until 1915 when 24 dots are arranged around the standard mark.

1916 1916 * below the backstamp
1917 * and one dot
1918 * and two dots
continued until 1927 when 11 dots are arranged around the standard mark.The maker's mark is in puce or light purple.

1928 1928 ϑ and the words "made in england" ; The maker's mark is in puce or light purple.
[these words have been noted on Worcester thimbles from 1926 - added by Sue Gowan]
1929 ◊
1930 ÷
1931 ºº
1932 ººº
1933 ººº ·
1934 · ººº ·
continued until 1941 when there were 9 dots and the triple circle mark

1956

1959 1942-48 no dating system used.
From this time onwards the maker's mark is in black.
1949 V
1950 W
1951 W ·
1952 · W ·
1953 · W ··
continued until 1963 when 13 dots are arranged around the standard mark. After 1956 the letter W was nearly almost always substituted with a letter R in a circle, i.e. 1960 R or W under the circle with dots
Notice that there are differences in the actual backstamp wording for this era, as per this 1959 example

1964 - No dating system for all items made after 1964

2 modern sized backstamps
L for 1960s - R for 1970s-1980s John has drawn my attention to the two different sizes of the black backstamps used by RW after 1964. Compare the two sizes. Can it be assumed that the larger is for the 1960s, the smaller, for the 1970s-1980s? I know this is simplistic, but there is definitely a difference in the sizes of the black backstamps. Check your thimbles for yourself!! Using my own collection of thimbles, the artists with 1960s larger backstamps, I have written "1960s- [larger backstamp]" alongside their names, the others "1970s-".
Checking these two backstamps against the black dot-dated thimbles, those earlier RW backstamps are in-between the later two sizes in size!

return to top

DO YOU KNOW ANY MORE DETAILS ABOUT ANY OF THE THIMBLES LISTED ABOVE?
DO YOU HAVE ANY ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS POSED?
DO YOU HAVE ANY PHOTOS OF OTHER HAND PAINTED ROYAL WORCESTER THIMBLES?
DO YOU KNOW OF ANY OTHER ROYAL WORCESTER THIMBLE PAINTERS?
EMAIL thimbleselect@bigpond.com TO SHARE YOUR KNOWLEDGE.

For more information on Royal Worcester, visit ...

www.royal-worcester.co.uk

References
John von Hoelle - Thimble collector's encyclopedia. 3rd ed. - 1986
Henry Sandon - Royal Worcester porcelain from 1862 - 1972
Christie's South Kensington - Thimbles & needlework accessories (auction catalogue) - Dec 1997
Phillips Auctioneers - Sylvia Groves' collection (auction catalogue) - Dec 1999
Phillips Auctioneers - Fine antique sewing boxes, thimbles,... (auction catalogue) - Dec 1998
Joanna Waciorski's website - www.sewmanybits.co.uk
Thimble Society of London
Royal Worcester thimble artists - Thimbletter - vol 7, issue 3, May-June 1980
The Royal Worcester story - Collector Circle Gazette - vol VI, no 3 - winter 1981/82
Het Vingerhoedje - vol 4 no 1
Dorset Thimble Society - Royal Worcester thimble painters. May 1991
A blog on William Powell www.ispyabird.co.uk/blogs/756
FriederickeBaechle - Antique Hand-painted Royal Worcester thimbles - TCI Bulletin Winter 2012

Contributors

This listing of Royal Worcester thimble painters does not purport to be complete or accurate in all aspects. Rather it invites comment and contribution to add to our knowledge of these highly prized handpainted thimbles. My thanks to all the contributors for sharing their knowledge and photos.

Enjoy!

Any questions or comments?
thimbleselect@bigpond.com
I do not offer any type of valuation or advice on prices.

Last updated 1 May 2012
return to the top