1393 large mug from Alice - Is this New Zealand pottery?

I saw the auction for this large dumpy mug, and asked Alice if we could have some photos for the gallery, and she kindly obliged - Thank you Alice! (Miacam)


A comparison photo to give an idea of size.

Haven't seen that one before !
Checked the records and 1393 entry says -
Large Rolled Cross Flower Pot (was 313)
Here is a 313....
http://newzealandpottery.forumotion.net/gallery/Crown-Lynn-Shapes-Gallery/300-to-399/313-pic_3060.htm
So will wait for more info before putting it into the Gallery ......
Gosh those numbers look like they fit don't they??????

I just spotted this during an internet search for something else.
As much as I’d like it in my hands to look at, and in my cupboard if it is CL I have a few reservations.

To the best of my knowledge shape number substitution/replacement was not a thing in the four digit days. With few exceptions the shape numbers are in chronological order. If this had been “the original” 1393 the replacement numbers (three digit to four digit) for the vase range would have been different, but likely still sequential. And if the vases were “original” use of this number, the cup would have been a different, larger, number. There are one hundred numbers unused (the 1500s) in the castware earthenware range, with numbers in the high 1400s being very late shapes, ie, the 1400s had not been used up when CL fell.

If this had been a CL cup I would expect it to be within the cups numbering (3000s) range because to me it looks like a cup with a stick-on handle not one cast in-situ. That said, I know for a fact that some 3000s cups were remade at times as castware.

By the time CL got to 1393, moulds were made so that the number sticks out rather than appearing impressed.

There is a fault in the footring, not something I would expect from CL.

The deco doesn’t look right to me either, but decos can be anything can’t they!

All that said, the general look would certainly have me asking if it was CL too.

My first thought was that it looked liked Hornsea English pottery.
An image search brings this up. Looks simalar...
More research is required!!
There is a Hornsea Pottety group on FB, they could help? To confirm or eliminate that theory
The more i look at this i am thinking NOT hornsea lol