Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: AndyD on January 22, 2018, 11:11:12 AM
-
Just wondering if anyone can confirm this as a Monart bowl. It has a concave pontil. As it's not with me at the moment I only have the one image but can add more in a few weeks if needed. It measures 6 inches tall and is 10 inches across the rim. I can't find the shape anywhere.
Many thanks,
Andy
-
It does look very Monarty to me, colourwise.
It does look like an unusual shape, but not an unlikley one.
Have you searched this website?
http://ysartglass.com/
-
My image does make it look more top heavy than it is. There are similar shapes but not with the footed base.
Thanks for the web site I will have a look.
Andy
-
:-[
I hadn't noticed the applied foot. That makes it more Monart-y.
I have also just realised you said this is the only photo you have - is it your photo or somebody else's?
For copyright reasons, we cannot allow images you do not own to be posted and I will ask a moderator to remove it.
You can post a link to the image, in its original location, so that copyright is not infringed.
-
Shape UC looks closest, towards the bottom of the page: http://ysartglass.com/Moncat/Page04.htm
John
-
It is my image, the bowl is somewhere else at the moment but I took a few images before it went. None of it from the side or bottom that would of been more useful.
Thanks John, I'll have a look, there is another one for sale on a popular auction site very similar although smaller and with no foot.
I'm 99 percent sure it's monart. Was it ever etched as with Vasart or did they only use labels?
Thanks, Andy
-
No problem then, thanks for letting us know.
I asked a moderator to keep an eye on this, just in case.
I would be pretty confident the piece is Monart.
(But I can't answer questions about marks and labels.)
What else could it possibly be? ;D
The only other possible contenders would be Schneider or perhaps WMF, but I think those highly unlikely. ;D
-
Thanks very much Sue, really helpful.
I agree with you John, shape UC is very similar and the 91/2 inch would be about right, I guess the sizes were approx.
Many thanks,
Andy
-
Yes, sizes were approximate. They were all unique, individually made pieces.
Miles and miles ahead of their time. ;D
-
They do seem to be well ahead of the rest for the period, I like this piece so much I have ordered a book on the Ysart family to learn as much as possible and hopefully find more beautiful pieces.
Thanks again both for your help. :)
Andy
-
Is that the fabulous Ysart Glass book by Frank Andrews, Andy? Frank's a long-standing member of this board. 8)
LINK (https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,19154.msg110778.html#msg110778)
-
Hi Anne,
Yes it is, I found a copy on line, can't wait to get it and start reading.
-
Frank Andrews and Ian Turner although Ian's not a member here. ;)
And it's Frank's Ysart site. So is the main one, Scotland's Glass.
You will also find a lot of information, browsing here.
Nigel Benson gave a really interesting lecture at the Edinburgh conference on whether Ysart glass should be considered to be the forerunner of the Studio Glass Movement, the only thing that disqualifies it is being considerably earlier than that, because the birth of the Studio Glass Movement can be accurately pinpointed to the date of the Toledo Lectures.
The Ysarts were working with materials that were rather inferior to those availavle today, they struggled to find coloured enamels during/between the wars and even ended up grinding down celedon glass (that opaque pale green, used in kitchens and bathrooms) and scraping the surfaces of ceramic tiles to obtain some (this is why Vasart glass has duller colours than Monart or Strathearn) and they were working in an old draughty wooden shed, they had real troubles with controling the temperatures of the annealling ovens.
Because of the troubles with the ovens, many bits of glass have since turned themselves into crazed jigsaws. They do still hold together. Sometimes, damaged bits are well worth having, they're a lot cheaper than undamaged and still display well.
That's just a short potted resume of what I know, but I only flirt around the edges of Ysart glass and might not be overly accurate. My family collects it, so I know it, in terms of seeing it, holding it and discussing it, but I don't collect it myself. I only have two bits. One is a jigsaw. ;)
-
and I know even less, but must admit much of that material is very desirable - I wouldn't dare start collecting it.
Not sure how they compare in price or availability, but I see that both parts I and II of the Christie's 1997/8 catalogues for the Parkington Collection are currently on Abe Books .................... part I is £11.90 and II is £15 - both post free, so good value for money bearing in mind the wide variety of factories shown, plus the addition of p/ws.
Without trying to be exact, there must have been something like 200 plus pieces of Monart in Michael Parkington's collection - the pix aren't massive, but the colour reproduction looks good, and many entries include the shape reference. Also included were Vasart pieces and many of the Scottish p/ws.
Of course you don't get volume of text info. that you would in a book, but for the prices these catalogues are very worthwhile having in view of the other glass included - starting with the early C18 and coming right through to some of Baxter's designs for W/Fs. I see there was a nice deep amethyst Walsh 'Water Lily, Iris and Bulrush' vase included. ;D
-
It's a fascinating book Andy, I am very fortunate to have been gifted one. I don't have any Ysart glass to go with it (yet!) though.
-
Thanks again all for the information, I'm learning fast and it's great to be able to add knowledge about such an amazing family who gave so much to the glass industry. I'm leaning more to Monart but not sure I have the budget to add many pieces (can't stop buying early Mdina when I see it) still a joy to learn about.
The book should be here soon, I found a fairly cheap copy so hoping it's not too damaged.
I will also have a look at the Christies catalogues, they sound like a must have for reference.
:) Andy