Richard Batterham? RB mark

First I wanted to thank all of you for your hard work and dedication. What you all do helps validate the art that we create. This is my first post, I hope I have attached the photos.

So, here I go. I bought this vase recently, 9" with a 1" mouth. Someone posted a similar mark/seal and noted that it is "Richard Batterham". While I have read many many sites, posts, Pinterest, and so on. I don't believe it is. I have read what "studio-pots" said that he doesn't mark his work with a seal. And the fact that his work is so meticulous. This piece has many flaws and I can find anything so plain. Can anyone tell me if you know this mark/seal?

Well crossing my fingers -- Kelly

I am going to have to break. I am cross-eyed.

Richard did use a mark for a few years up until the early 1960s, which can be found on this site somewhere. However, it is not the one that has been associated with him previously. His son, Reuben, is a potter and uses an RB mark...………………… but we'll wait for your photo.

You really have to own a Richard Batterham to just realise the difference. The form is sublime, the glazing pure perfection. His quality control is amazing. We have a few. Anything else is just pure imitation. My vote for probably the best potter of the Leach school bar none. This teapot stands alone on a window sill facing the garden. And it just sings.....

I was talking to one of my customers the other day after he had commented that he didn't like potters, who didn't mark their work because it always left a doubt. My comment was that with some that might be the case but you really don't need a mark to say whether a pot made by Richard in the last 50 years is his or not.

Its interesting isn't it. Richard Batterham's work is 'Of' the Leach/Cardew style, and yet it is something else again. Somehow he seems to have fused a quintessential Englishness into his work that is like no other potter. The many fine Leach inspired 2nd or 3rd generation Leach style potters...Jim Malone, Mike Dodd, Phil Rogers to name but a few, are superb potters. Yet their work is 'Of' a particular Anglo/Oriental school. You could not mistake their work for that of Richard Batterham. Which is unique.....and that is extremely rare.

Its not Richard Batterham I'm afraid.

When I say I have researched, researched, and researched, I did. When I found this site; I read, read, and then keep reading. I knew. I thought maybe he did it in elementary school. [ I also don't think it's his son ] Thank you both for your valued input. KA

I don’t think it’s his early mark (see photo below) because I’m not seeing the two dots and the letter fonts look a bit different.