Here is the quick and dirty. King's Crown started life as a pattern called X.L.C.R. back in 1890 by a soon to be purchased glass company called Adams & Co.
They were absorbed in 1891 by the United States Glass Company who greatly expanded the product line, producing pieces as U.S. Glass Co. from 1892 to 1904 when they
pretty much stopped producing new pieces, but kept selling old inventory till around 1926. Despite not having an official manufacturer, resellers and counterfeiters
continued the product line in part from around 1900 to around 1940. After a change of public tastes, U.S. Glass Co. reworked and then reintroduced the pattern in 1943,
calling it Dubonnet. It went strong until 1952 when they renamed it King's Crown, and they continued production till they were destroyed by a tornado in 1963. In 1959,
Indiana Glass Company started their own version of the pattern, keeping the pattern going until 1971 when Lancaster Colony Corporation took control, streamlined it, and
renamed it Colony Crown. Sometime in the neighborhood of 1985, Lancaster Colony ended production of Colony Crown, and the pattern ended altogether.
Despite its huge country-wide footprint (maybe even world-wide now as I have chatted with collectors as far away from the original production source as New Zealand),
the whole 90 year lifecycle took place in a circular drive you could do (without stopping, but where is the fun in that) in a day. Click the image to see the (few) sites
that were involved in the pattern's history.
Our documentation focuses more on those that made the pattern, and less on those that sold it. When I discover a manufacturer, I add them. For instance, one seller of
the pattern was L.G. Wright. They aren't listed as a manufacturer on the timeline because I discovered that they ordered "blanks" from Indiana Glass Co., and then decorated
just it themselves. No manufacturing of the pieces.
What you can see from the chart below is that we have a span from circa 1900 to circa 1940 where I have "other / unknown" listed. The short truth is that for a
period in the early 1900s, the pattern was sometime produced both in the USA and (as some evidence suggests) Europe by companies that may not have had the legal capacity to do
so. As it is hard to track down such types of production, this is a placeholder on the timeline until I learn more.
You'll also note in the above graphic that U.S. Glass Co. has three entries. I could have loaded them up under one line, but they did something I though warranted different entries.
First, although they continued a product line from a glass company they bought, they dramatically expanded it both in piece and coloring, making it really a different release.
Second, they discontinued the line, then brought it back when it was advantageous of them to do so, but again as with completely different pieces. Thus, Dubonnet gets a new line.
But when they just renamed it to King's Crown, it was just a marketing stunt, not a difference in the pattern. I gave a new line to the Antique Thumbnail line only because there is
evidence that they allowed the hand-formed parts of many pieces to deviate from the 1940's style to be more 1960's modern. As such, maybe it deserves a new line item, maybe not.
After all, the pressed parts were the same.
As you will learn if you read more, Indiana Glass was also a subsidiary of Lancaster Colony Corporation (ish, I'm paraphrasing) pretty much from the get-go of the product line.
But there is strong evidence that they acted alone for a large portion of the product line, and that when Colony took interest, they changed part of the product's look and coloring
(not to mention the name) – thus, new timeline entry.
I'm always open to suggestion.
Putting context around the pieces significantly increased my understanding and ability to identify the pieces, where they came from, and why they were made in the manner they were.
The summaries of the manufacturers do not focus on the company's entire life, but only on those areas that involve the pattern.