Author Topic: Another Paperweight-Quiz  (Read 8502 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4575
    • England
Another Paperweight-Quiz
« Reply #40 on: September 01, 2006, 03:49:31 AM »
Hmmmm. Very interesting.

Since I am still here (4:30 am), and I noticed the point from "addg - signature cane guy", I thought I'd save some of you the trouble of looking it up - or trying to find a copy of the 1999 PCA Bulletin, if you don't happen to have one.

But I am also a little confused. "addg" referred to "the cane with the yellow ring on the outside and the red dots in the center". But Nadine had origannly mentioned "the cane with the 5 red dots on the right side of the weight" - which I think was later shown to be a blue "pastry-mold" type cane with a white-over-red central cane and four white-over-red "cog" canes (hence the 5 red dots prior to the macro photos) with four yellow-rod-cluster centred white cog canes between the red ones. [Does that all make sense? Please see the extra photos that were shown on 28 Apr in page 1 of this message.]

However, there is a definite match to the Yellow-tube cane with central miniature roses that Nadine had also matched to a weight in Larry Selman's auction (see earlier comments and link).

On page 13 of the 1999 PCA Bulletin "addg" showed two canes as Figures 17 & 18 of his article, both of which have what look like the same central group of 8 miniature pink roses (1 central and 7 surrounding). Each of these is enclosed in a seemingly translucent sleeve of what looks to me to be a grey-green colour. The fig 17 example has the roses inside a white 16-point cog sleeve. The Fig 18 one has the roses in a pale-yellow-over-white tubular sleeve, and this whole cane does appear to be identical to to the one in Nadine's weight.

In the article, it is stated that the Fig 17 & 18 canes have "Bohemian pink roses".

So, where are we now with attributrion of the weight?

Nadine or Alan, or anyone else with the Clichy book ... can that yellow cane with hidden roses (or perhaps just those 8 roses as a part of another cane) be found in any of the weights in the new Clichy book? If it can, then we still have a mystery of why an apparently "Bohemian" cane would appear in a Clichy weight. If it does not appear in that book, does that leave us with a Bohemian attribution for the weight - and a misattribution of the weight in the Selman sale?

I am still looking forward to seeing the weight in September and getting the UV lights on it. But the problem here is that I have not viewed enough French or Bohemian weights to know what they "should" look like under UV. And, as far as I know, I have never UV tested a "later Clichy" weight - they might not fluoresce the same as early ones! What does the Clichy book say about the UV results for later Clichy? (The graphs and tables at the back of the book did not make a lot of sense to me when I saw them in my brief look.)

Oh my. This one is fun.  :D
KevinH


Offline tropdevin

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2089
  • Gender: Male
    • Paperweights
    • England
    • My Paperweights Website
Later Clichy - hidden rose canes / UV
« Reply #41 on: September 01, 2006, 08:42:04 AM »
All good fun, as Kevin says!

I agree that the cane with the yellow outer tube in Nadine’s weight matches the one in Andy Dohan’s article on Hidden Roses.  They are described as ‘Bohemian’ roses, but it is not clear why from the article.  Might the weight in which they are found be a later Clichy weight?  That could explain why something similar to Clichy roses appears in it!  I know that is an easy answer, but why look for complications?  Andy wrote the article about 8 years ago, and a weight might well have been attributed (mistakenly) to Bohemia, given there was little or no public knowledge of the later Clichy weights.  If that is the case, then the attribution of Nadine’s weight as later Clichy, and Selman Auction 32 lot 20 as Clichy are consistent.

I find it hard to believe the Selman weight is anything other than Clichy.  Not that I have 100% confidence in Larry’s attributions (he still calls Old English with 1848 canes early Whitefriars, for example).  It is just that the weight has so many Clichy roses!  If the weight to which Andy’s article refers is undeniably Bohemian, then, as Kevin says, we have a mystery.

I have looked through the illustrations in the Clichy book, where there are some 25 images of weights assigned to the later period.  I cannot see this particular yellow tube cane with the hidden roses, but the later Clichy weights do show a greater diversity of cane design and general style than the earlier weights.  But there are some canes in Nadine’s weight that are very like canes shown in the later weights.  The 8 cog canes with the blue valleys in the innermost ring appear in different colour ways in several weights ( blue valley and red centre, red valley red centre); and several weights include large white collapsed tube cane roses (sometimes alongside the cruder shard roses).  There are 3 canes in Nadine’s weight where an orange-brown 32(?) cog ring surrounds a white 10 cog ring that in turn surrounds a white 8 cog ring.  In the book, a near identical coloured 32 cog cane surrounds a thick white 6 cog ring.  I do recognise that this is no proof of attribution!

Turning to the UV question:  Roland Dufenne has examined only very few items, so I would be wary of drawing firm conclusions from his evidence (and I have misgivings about UV results anyway – more on that in due course!).  He reports that under illumination with a lamp using a Woods filter (so using 365 nm radiation) French weights fluoresce as follows:

Baccarat : rose-violet
St Louis : rose-salmon
St Mandé : pale yellow
Clichy : cloudy green-yellow
Clichy (later period) : cloudy grey-blue.

Also he shows a Bohemian weight fluorescing a strong yellow colour. Make of all that what you will!   He does give images that show the difference, but there are only 3 later Clichy items, and one each of the others.

[I will be in France for 3 weeks from Sunday, so I am sorry to say that I cannot be at the Cambridge meeting. Nor will I be able to contribute to this discussion during that period.]

Regards, Alan.
Alan
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."  Abraham Lincoln.

The comments in this posting reflect the opinion of the author, Alan Thornton, and not that of the owners, administrators or moderators of this board. Comments are copyright Alan Thornton.
 http://www.pwts.co.uk


Offline alpha

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 269
  • Gender: Male
Another Paperweight-Quiz
« Reply #42 on: September 01, 2006, 03:39:31 PM »
Not to add more confusion/clarity but the yellow cane illustrated in my article is from Paul Dunlop. The Bohmian attribution was Paul's. It might be helpful if Paul could be persuaded to post some pictures of other weights that he has with this yellow tube with mini roses inside.


Offline alpha

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 269
  • Gender: Male
Another Paperweight-Quiz
« Reply #43 on: September 05, 2006, 01:26:33 AM »
The same type of bundled rose cane is in this weight being offered on line:
Mod: link now dead

Despite the Clichy attribution of the seller, the Sulphide and the pulled feather decoration in the same weight would lead me to Bohemian/very early 20th Century German.


 

Search
eBay.com
eBay.co.uk

Link to Glass Encyclopedia
Link to Glass Museum
Enter
key words
to search
Amazon.com