The Leach Pottery. St Ives

I did wonder about that, but it’s a substantial object to test glaze on. Can’t see that it was made for sale though, I can’t see a use for a bowl like this without internal glazing.

Might make a rather posh cactus pot

It has the “England” stamp too, faintly below the Leach mark so I think probably not stamped by a student- but I agree about the finish - the base is rather perfunctory!

Magnifying glass . I’ve been IDing miniature studio pottery pots this evening and it’s been invaluable!

The England would put it in the 60's, and the marks pretty much in the standard ware range. One could guess an experiment that did not work out? Or a piece that did not fire properly in the kiln?  Every firing usually has its fail pieces, that is just the whim of the kiln firing.

The main issue is the sheer weight of the bowl- it’s nicely proportioned but very thickly thrown. That was obvious when made, which is why I’m struggling to see why it was glaze fired anyway!

Interesting to know it can be dated to the 60s, thanks.

Its the use of both the St Ives mark and England that is curious. That implies it was meant for sale, not a student aberration. A trial with a new type of clay mixture? The standard ware range was meant for hard, everyday use, So strength would be an important feature. At attempt to make them even sturdier?
We have some soup bowls that we have used for years and they still look in perfect condition.

mortar and pestle ? sans pestle

Oh, that’s a good idea! That would explain the lack of internal glazing - I’ll do a bit of research.

Mystery solved, I think - I’ve come across this photo of a 70s mortar  and pestle with a very similar bowl. Thanks for the help!

A quick update - look what turned up in a job lot of pottery from the same auction room this week! (The pestle - the mortar is the one I asked about.) Same vendor apparently so I’m pretty sure this is a match.

That was lucky.

luckily they sold the mortar first

So are you saying that the pestle and the mortar were separated out and auctioned separately? Good grief! Should we now look for lids auctioned separately from jars, one bookend sold separately from another, cups separated from saucers, and so on?

Yes, this was the “sell by the boxful” type of auction - just occasionally the boxes contain studio pottery rather than the usual dinnerware and ornaments. I’ve got five lovely lids missing their own pots, and three sad lidless pots. Luckily the good stuff makes up for it - and there’s something exciting about picking a 1970s Marks and Spencer vase out of what turns out to be a perfect Walter Keeler pot!

Thank you both... eeeeyes I can see how that would be the case. Also explains why I have a cheese dome with a slightly unexpected plate, and a flagon with a stopper that has a darker glaze. Sigh.

Byron Temple worked at the Leach pottery in the late 50's and then returned in the 1970's. He had a bust up with Janet Leach however, and after this he went to work at John Leach's Mulcheney pottery for some while. His work at Mulcheney seems to have consisted mostly of Work similar to John Leach's Black Mood pieces. This piece however is which was at auction just recently as it is a 'Black Mood' piece with the St Ives and Byron Temple's own mark on. It must be quite rare,

Leach st Ives 8” jug.
Stoneware, brown and grey glazing. Scroll handle

Is this a standard ware piece and is it probably 196os?
It only has the Leach mark, no ENGLAND stamp.
Thank you

.

It is known in the a catalogue as a Lemonade Jug and it was 5in by 8in. It was £1.20 in a early 60's catalogue and £3.00 in a 1976 catalogue, which was amongst the more expensive things in standard ware. The most expensive being 12.5 inch DECORATED PLATE at £6.95. and those go for big money nowadays. Date? Well they made it straight through the 50's,60's and 70's!

Thank you. It holds 3 pints of lemonade.