Author Topic: Cameo piece: revisited  (Read 1182 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mrvaselineglass

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.vaselineglass.org
Cameo piece: revisited
« on: November 27, 2005, 05:26:03 PM »
Hello all
I just got this little cameo vase out of an antique store north of Seattle Washington USA.
http://www.vaselineglass.org/cameo05.jpg
Measurements: The vase is 4 1/2" tall (11 1/2 cm).  The top rim is 2 3/16" diameter.  The widest part is approximately 3 1/2".  The bottom rim is 2".
On the base is this marking:  646./.17.  (on outside rim on bottom)
It is IN the glass, not a pencil marking.  The mark is on the bottom a second time in the center, but it was written on the bottom.  that mark is the same, but the little period marks are not shown on that one:  646/17
Here is a pic of the base, with the WRITTEN marking in the center shown and enhanced for better viewing.  I have yet to get a good photo of the original mark that is etched.  The etched mark is quite wide in the thickness of the numbers.  
http://www.vaselineglass.org/cameo64617.jpg
You can sort of see the marking IN the glass above the highlighted area.
I found a reference in Hajdamach's book that said that the rings at the top and bottom are a characteristic of work done at Stevens and Williams.
Any help with the numbers, design, attribution, etc., would be greatly appreciated.

On my travels, I also found this nice little marmalade/sweetmeat dish and thought I would share the photo.  The opalescent stripes make it stand out a little more than the usual vaseline opalescent marmalade of this style.
http://www.vaselineglass.org/marmaladestripe.jpg

Dave Peterson


Offline Lustrousstone

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 11154
  • Gender: Female
    • Warrington, UK
    • My Gallery
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2005, 05:50:00 PM »
Just one thought, the handwritten numbers looked to be written by someone NOT from the UK. Much more like a continental European hand script. Vase doesn't have an English look somehow either.

Both items are very pretty I'm jealous!


Offline mrvaselineglass

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.vaselineglass.org
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2005, 07:02:41 PM »
I thought about that too, but that could be that a future owner had it and was on the Continent.  The mark that I think is more original is the one that was etched (rather than written) into the glass.  that one does not have the horizontal line through the "7".  The original mark also has the dots after the 646 and before and after the 17.

Dave


Offline chuggy

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 826
  • Gender: Male
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2005, 08:37:42 PM »
I saw an identical piece at a small fair yesterday with a silver collar. The collar carried a London hallmark for 1903 and the dealer had the vase labelled as Stourbridge.
Paul
There is no distance on earth as far away as yesterday.


Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4577
    • England
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2005, 12:37:28 AM »
Dave said:
Quote
I found a reference in Hajdamach's book that said that the rings at the top and bottom are a characteristic of work done at Stevens and Williams.
Dave, could you please let me know where this is said. I imagine it's in British Glass 1800-1914 but I don't recall where.

Thing is, I have always thought that the rings at top and bottom of cameo pieces were a common motif and certainly used by Thomas Webb & Sons, Stevens & Williams and Richardson. For example, in British Glass, plates 202 and 203, on page 214, there are illustrations from a Richardson pattern book which show variations of the feature.

I have also looked through the Ray & Lee Grover book, English Cameo Glass, but other than coming up with the possibility that the pattern on your vase may be "apple blossom", I have not found anything yet to confirm or deny a maker.

One thing that struck me was that on your piece, the general cameo work appears quite "solid", although the leaves do show a good level of detailed carving. Also, the rings at both foot and rim seem to be rather uneven and of varying thickness. Another feature is that the stem hanging from the upper part does not connect with the rim's lower ring, which from other images I have seen would appear to be the preferred way. However ... in the Grover book, they show several items where there is some unevenness in the rings and also where the cameo work has a "solid" look to it, and some are marked such as Thomas Webb & Sons. So those features on your vase may not necessarily be a reason for it not being from the Stourbridge region.

Perhaps "Lustrousstone" has a good point about the shape of the vase, but as yet I have not made shape comparisons to the many hundreds of images in the Glover book, so I won't commit myself to a comment on that right now.
KevinH


Offline mrvaselineglass

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.vaselineglass.org
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2005, 01:21:05 AM »
KevH:
Yes, it was in Hajdamach's book, BRITISH GLASS 1800-1914.  pg. 399, narrative for plate #363:  "The band around the neck, a characteristic of the Stevens and Williams cameo carvers, can be compared to the band on the vase in the centre of the group in plate 358, which, disregarding its possible fake Stevens and Williams mark, is from the Stevens and Williams factory.

It was in the chapter on Fakes, Forgeries and Reproductions, comparing authentic to fake versions.  

I thought it was a bit unusual also that no center design connected to the base, but it might have been a blank where the white coating over the top was thin in spots, so it was removed (just a speculation).  I also thought the bottom petal on the blossom looked smaller as compared to the other petals.  There is detail on the flower, but not a lot of depth where the base color shows through.  My camera is also not the best.  

It might have been made by one of the apprentices, too.  I suspect that not every piece that came out of the factory was by one of the masters.  

I have written an email to Hajdamach to see if he can clue me in, but that was less than 24 hours ago, so no response yet.
Dave


Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4577
    • England
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2005, 01:34:06 AM »
Thanks for the confirmation and page details, Dave. I think the "band on the neck" refers to the wide decorative band around the neck just above the body rather than to the band(s) around the rim of the neck. (You and I - and others with the book - will know what we are talking about here.)

Quote
It might have been made by one of the apprentices, too. I suspect that not every piece that came out of the factory was by one of the masters.
Yes, indeed, but maybe also by a regular and well-trained worker rather than an apprentice. I am reasonably happy that my only example of a 19th (or early 20th) century cameo piece (which could be Stevens & Williams or Richardson) is a "factory" item and not one carved by a "named master".
KevinH


Offline mrvaselineglass

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.vaselineglass.org
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2005, 01:43:54 AM »
Yes, I am also VERY HAPPY with my only example of a cameo piece, and it just happens to be in citron/uranium glass.  I have seen some citron pieces that did not glow under a blacklight (no uranium) and always check before considering purchasing.  This is a small example, but large ones cost LARGE $$$, so was happy to find one in my price range.  I had seen it in this antique store for two years (that I only get to once a year, due to it being 2000 miles away) and decided to make a low offer.  I trimmed the price 25% and the seller decided to get what they could out of their investment.  I paid about the equivalent of 150 GB Pounds for it. ($320 USDollars).  A fair deal, yes?


Offline mrvaselineglass

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.vaselineglass.org
Cameo piece: revisited
« Reply #8 on: November 30, 2005, 05:18:58 AM »
Hello all
I have shown the photos to my email group, and some believe this might be an florentine or enameled piece.  This was the reply I gave.  

I did a 'red hot needle test' on the white portion (around the bottom rim) and it did not faze the white or mark it in any way. (Not recommended IF it is an enamel piece, but I was convinced the layer was glass.) It might not be Stevens and Williams OR Webb, but I still believe it is a real cameo piece.  The bottom and top rim are also shiny, as it did not have it's entire (top) surface carved (manually or by a wheel). IF it was hardened enamel paint that had been applied and carved, a hot needle would leave SOME kind of mark!  It might be a bohemian piece, as you say, but the white portion is as hard and durable as the yellow-green glass underneath it.  I know that in later years, shortcuts were taken where the majority of the white outer layer on a cameo piece was taken off by acid and then the final work was done to the blank.  In this close up, you can see where the wheel cutting was done around the leaf.  I took several pictures, but this is the only one that turned out super-sharp in focus.   As you can see in the pointed areas of the leaf, it is a smooth transition from the white to the yellow.

Here is the photo link that I provided.
I am at a loss here and need to learn more about the differences.  Can anyone help by looking at this close up?  
http://www.vaselineglass.org/closecameo.jpg
The original photo link can be found in my first posting at the top of this topic thread.
Dave Peterson


 



This Website is provided by Angela Bowey, PO Box 113, Paihia 0247, New Zealand