Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => Malta Glass => Topic started by: Patrick on October 18, 2014, 05:46:44 PM
-
Hi,
I have looked at all posts on this much addressed subject but unable to find an answer. :)
I recently bought an early chalice with an offer on a 'Buy it now' sale on ebay Germany.
The signature is scribed rather than dremeled and maybe it could be that of 'Ettore' ...... one of Boffo's sons.
Many thanks,
Patrick.
-
It looks more like a variation of a Dobson or Said signature to me, although perhaps executed by somebody else?
Ettore died in '71, I believe he was mostly his father's assistant, rather than a major maker in his own right, from comments made recently from a wfs source (I can't remember who, sorry. Memory problems.).
However, these large chalices were a collaberation between Michael Harris and Vicente Boffo. It was "Papa" Boffo who put the big trailed knops on the stems.
-
Some images of pawmarks.
The first two are confirmed as being those of Said and of Dobson.
The other two are variations, I am not sure which is who, but they do both look quite similar to the mark on your chalice.
If the names that were written as signatures were those of Dobson and Said, it's still not definitely them who would have done the signing. It might have been other folk who had a bit of free time and did the writing, thus introducing so much variation. But your mark definitely looks like one of the variations. To me anyway.
-
I have not studied these signatures as John and Sue have and it does look like a different hand to those shown so could as Sue says be a variation on 'E Dobson' as well.
But I can see why you think it might read Ettore. It also looks as though it has a squiggle line under the sig and an exclamation mark after the 'name'. Does it have an exclamation mark? that's a bit curious.
m
-
This is a little lightweight in places but here goes anyway....
The shape of the bowl is quite rounded rather than square, that and the amethyst colour of the chalice for me places it in MH's era so roughly 1969 - 1972. The lack of date would tend to support that idea, I know of no item with an engraved date that is earlier than 1973.
So we can rule out Said as the engraved name, his just does not crop up until post 1973 (as far as I know). Which basically leaves us with only one option really, that of Eric Dobson. The only engraved names that have turned up to my knowledge are that of Harris and the two assumed to be either Joseph Said or Michael Dobson. Never heard of anything signed with either of the Boffos names, never say never, just not yet...
An early piece signed with Dobson's name is in itself unusual.
John
-
I hadn't considered that in nearly as much depth as you did, John. You are prefectly right - Said would not have been in a position to be one of the signatories so early on. He would just have been "one of the apprenctices", busily learning. He would not have been involved with something as complicated as a chalice!
The "Bell-shaped" chalice bowls are all Harris period, as you said, so the pawmark is most likely to be that of Dobson, (which was where I was leaning. His mark often does have that spikey sort of E shape at the beginning.
Although it is a bit odd that Dobson's signature would be on a piece which was made by Harris and V. Boffo, maybe it was during a period when they were trying out putting an "artist's mark" on pieces to see if they sold better? I think that did happen, probably around the same time as Rosenthal was being designed for the American market, and the artist's mark was required. (for example, most Japanese Globes have a Michael Harris signature on them)
There is one other signature found on some bits of Mdina - I have 2 examples, both on pieces that were post-Harris though.
-
Thank you all for your comments........
It appears to be very hard to decipher some of these signatures because those of Eric Dobson are not consistent.
I am going to try and find a website of handwriting experts who might be able to read the signature. I am not going to tell them what it might be because by doing that, they might be influenced.
It is hard to say for sure if there is an exclamation mark but there is certainly a squiggle..........
Thanks again,
Patrick.
-
Just interested to know, but does what appears to be the folded rim, provide any further clues?
m
-
???
No folded rims there - but it is very difficult to make out where the signature actually is.
Is it around the rim or around the pontil scar?
Is it really that important whose name is written on the base? Or who wrote it?
(But as you know, I'm not bothered about signatures at all and detest having to pay a premium for something because it has one. It's just an unseen mark on the base. :))
I's an early chalice, so it was made by Michael Harris and Vicente Boffo. It has an added "extra" of a name written on the base, but not that of either of the makers, it was just an addition made at the time.
I believe many of the workers may have chipped in to add marks if they had free time and marks were needed.
-
Sue there does appear to be a folded rim around the rim of the bowl?
And it appears that it is on a couple of other pieces I found online as far as I can see, but not on all the chalices I saw.
m
-
Not folded but a clear trail I believe, seems standard on chalices I have had through my hands.
The signatures are not consistent because various people did the signing. The last one Sue shows is in the hand of the lady who did the signing for many years through the 1970s (sorry forgotten her name but her Mdinas are what we think of as the 'typical looping Mdina'), I think this is just her version of Dobson's name.
-
oh thanks John :)
m
-
::)
I was thinking you were referring to a folded foot, m. :-[
And I'd completely forgotten about the trail of glass around the rims of these big early bell Chalices. I've just checked all of mine, and every single one has the trail.
Were you thinking of Marlene Bristow, John? She left Mdina when the Harris family left and went to IoWSG with them, or was it somebody else known to be at Mdina, going on after that into the later '70s?
;D I know Marlene did just about everything apart from glassmaking and that her organisational skills and incredibly accurate and detailed memory made her a truly amazing asset to the company. I don't know if she got given a job as part-time engraver as well... ?
-
:) yes sorry Sue, I didn't explain that very well.
I've never seen one of these so wasn't quite sure what I was looking at.
m
-
No not Bristow, this ladies script carries on through pretty much all of the 70s and probably into the 80s as well.
Trailed rims not feet sorry, a folded foot would be a first. ;D
-
No worries m, it's my brain on a go-slow. ::)
Thanks, John. Not Marlene.
I did think the thin loopy script went on for a few years after they left. There was also the great thick one, in the '80s, which looked like the same writing - just made with a vibrating tool that did a side-to-side thing.
-
Hi, in my opinion this signature is unlike any other ive seen, do you not agree? Although its being said that all sorts were signing these this doesn't look like any Dobson signature I know of and in fact I can clearly read Ettore as the signature. I know it goes against the grain that Ettore would sign one of these but I think here it has to be considered a possibility?
I also have some other facts that could be relevant to this discussion about the Boffos and Mdina, which I will put in a new topic.
-
There was a 'general reluctance' to sign in the early years at Mdina - part of the Harris philosophy. Michael Harris' signature is found on some but by no means all of the well executed and larger items. Many items for the American market were simply engraved Mdina (with a diamond point). So the majority carried no marking at all.
So far that is pretty much all that has surfaced as far as I know from 1972 or earlier, apart from a couple of items that also include personal inscriptions (one of which I have here).
I am suspicious of the signature on this goblet, there is something vaguely familiar about the goblet, perhaps it was sold on ebay in recent months. The signature does not look 'right' to me, hard to say exactly why but it's position is odd for one thing. It could read Ettore or for that matter Eric Dobson, if it read Ettore that would really make me suspicious....
John
-
[/quote]
I am suspicious of the signature on this goblet, there is something vaguely familiar about the goblet, perhaps it was sold on ebay in recent months. The signature does not look 'right' to me, hard to say exactly why but it's position is odd for one thing. It could read Ettore or for that matter Eric Dobson, if it read Ettore that would really make me suspicious....
John
Yes you are correct...... here is link to the Ebay listing.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/281440054939?_trksid=p2060778.m2749.l2649
I made an offer of 150 Euros that to my surprise was accepted.
The writing does go diagonally across the foot but but I think if someone was going to do a fake signature he would try and do it as those that are freely available to view online.
Maybe Ettore was the only available person available to do a signature for a passing 'Tourist Sale' ?
Regards,
Patrick.
-
Personally I don't think it resembles any of the 'known' Dobson signatures and could easily be read as Ettori ?
Maybe 'never let the facts get in the way of a good story' could be used in reverse here.
Maybe the thought that a lot of the early stuff may in fact have been made by Boffo or Jim Munnelly and not Michael Harris at all doesn't sit too comfortable with the MH purists could be a factor ;)
-
Thanks Patrick, that explains the familiarity.
The writing does go diagonally across the foot but but I think if someone was going to do a fake signature he would try and do it as those that are freely available to view online.
You would think so, but the faked signatures that I have seen are often wildly inaccurate, including incorrect spelling, upper instead of lower case, incorrect placement etc, etc. The people who fake signatures are interested in fooling somebody into paying more, to do so they need someone with both an interest in a given item and a lack of knowledge about that item, otherwise they would not be duped so easily. The forger does not give two hoots about accuracy, all they see is greed and often they are not too bright (see above).
Then there is the problem of wanting to believe an item is genuine - I have been caught by that too, the desire to add another item to my collection is strong.
It is not so much that I think the signature cannot be Ettore Boffo it is just that I remain to be convinced that it is. As already stated more than one person signed the very same names, so 'signatures' will differ.
Maybe the thought that a lot of the early stuff may in fact have been made by Boffo or Jim Munnelly and not Michael Harris at all doesn't sit too comfortable with the MH purists could be a factor ;)
Chris, that is utter rubbish and as far as I am concerned patronising.
-
i'm always happy to accept new info. that appears if it can be substantiated.
I'm a scientist - when info. does not support the theory, the theory must be abandoned.
I don't know anything about a Jim Munnelly, I'd be happy to find out.
I have a fair number of early experimental pieces I know are Boffo (rather than Harris) and I'm very happy about them being lovely early Boffo bits.
All this sort of silly stooshie is a major reason I detest and mostly try to ignore pawmarks and just look at the glass.
Nobody here has commented on the chalice itself. ???
-
there is a possibly interesting comment in Mark Hill's book page 24 (I'm quoting it all, so in light of new evidence on the other post from What ho! please ignore the comment he makes about Ettore and Vicente joining at the same time as that is not the point I want to highlight)
'As the studio's sales grew, Michael needed further experienced and skilled help with making the glass so that he could keep up with the constant demand from distributors and continue to work on improving the skills of his team of trainees. This had been anticipated before he left England and in October 1969, the team of twelve was joined by Ettore Boffo and his father Vicente (also known as Poppa), who were experienced blowers from Whitefriars. Both had trained in glassmaking in Italy and had grown dissatisfied with the repetitive nature of their work at Whitefriars, which focused purely on making goblets.'
My point is, that this paragraph seems to say that Ettore was an experienced glassblower who had trained in Italy and had been doing repetitive work at Whitefriars focusing purely on making goblets. I've never seen a chalice but believe them to be much larger than goblet size, however this paragraph does seem to say that Ettore was experienced and trained in making that shape.
Adding also that on page 25 it says with regards the Boffos arriving at Mdina
'...Simple goblets and chalices and candlesticks with trailed, 'craggy' stems ( see page 48) were also introduced upon their arrival...'
Page 48 shows a Chalice and says 'made by Michael Harris and signed around the foot rim ' Michael Harris Mdina Glass Malta'. c1970..'
m
-
see my post above
and further info can be found on page 48 where it says
'One of the most common shapes found is a large, decorative goblet or chalice that is too large to be of functional use as a drinking vessel. It was designed by Michael together with Ettore and Vicente Boffo, who had both been responsible for making goblets, amongst a couple of other shapes, at the Whitefriars glass factory in England. Upon their arrival at the Mdina studio in 1969, their experience allowed this form to be introduced.'
So it seems to me there is nothing I could find to say that Ettore (or Vicente) couldn't have made a chalice.
I guess the 1uestion is, is the signature period to the piece? and does it read Ettore ( I read it as 'Ettore?' or 'Ettore!' with a squiggle underneath)
m
-
Somebody from wfs said, fairly recently, that Ettore was "just" his father's assistant, and did not have any great skill of his own, but I can't remember who said it or where.
A lot of "info." seems to be contradictory, I'm not willing to "side" with any one position or another, but I do take the caveats of newspaper "stories" into consideration; I don't really trust them.
If both Boffos had trained in Italy and at wfs, they both had plenty of time to develop their skills, I would suspect they were likely both to be rather good, personally.
Does anybody have any examples of work known to be by Jim Munnelly, so that his "hand" in glassworking could be compared with that of known pieces by Boffo or Harris?
I like your point, m. that; "would this pawmark be consistent with the period in which the piece was made?" and I would say no. Absolutely not. I don't like the way it's written in the "wrong" place, I don't like the wobbles in the lines of the words "Mdina Glass Malta", they are faltering, not confident and the squiggle could be trying to emulate either a Dobson or a Said squiggle. There could be an E at the beginning - but does it stand for Eric or Ettore?
Or is it just a complete fake?
I don't know. My guts suspect a dremmeller at a much later date.
It's a lovely chalice and it was a good price, Patrick. It would have been a good price for a completely unmarked one.
-
Sue, I also remember reading a comment somewhere about Ettore being an assistant or something - I can't remember the wording but it definitely left me with the opinion that he wasn't an experienced glassmaker.
However reading all the various comments above in Mark Hill's book seems to imply that he was trained and experienced glassmaker.
m
-
Sorry to appear stupid, but Patrick when you say the signature is 'scribed rather then dremmeled' do you mean it has been signed with a diamond point engraver?
It doesn't look like the same tool used to engrave as that used on the sigs Sue has shown is what I mean specifially first sig and last sig where the juddering can be seen in the lines.
Michael Harris used a diamond point engraver didn't he?
m
-
This was the comment about Ettore's glass skills
'Ettore was not a highly skilled glassblower and was his father's servitor whilst at Whitefriars'
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,57946.msg328804.html#msg328804
This appears to contradict what Mark Hill said in his book (quotes earlier).
m
-
see post above and...
according to What ho's post it appears Ettore left Whitefriars in September 1969 and according to Mark Hill's book joined Mdina in October 1969.
He died in 1971.
If this comment
'Ettore was not a highly skilled glassblower and was his father's servitor whilst at Whitefriars'
is correct, then does two years give him enough time to become highly skilled enough to blow the Chalice and therefore sign it?
Or was he in fact as Mark Hill described in his book, a trained and experienced glassblower and therefore does that lend more credence to him being able to blow and execute the Chalice in the opening post?
m
-
'I like your point, m. that; "would this pawmark be consistent with the period in which the piece was made?" and I would say no. Absolutely not. I don't like the way it's written in the "wrong" place,... '
With ref your point on the position of the sig on the op's goblet Sue, every signed goblet and chalice I've managed to find has been signed around the edge of the rim of the foot whether by Michael Harris or otherwise later pieces.
m
-
The blowing and the signing were not neccessarily done by the same person.
Yes, m. Every signed chalice I've seen has had the signing around the outside rim of the foot. I have 4, (I had 5 but let somebody else have one) and have been quite interested in the chalices since ~ 2000.
I've seen MH signatures around the pontil marks, but those are from IoWSG; attenuated bottles and Seaward etc..
I've never seen any writing that scrawls across the body of the base like this before, from Mdina.
There is a lovely streak of silver swirling around the body of the bowl. This occurred when the gob of glass got slightly disconnected from the iron during the blowing, and silver metal gas escaped from inside it, to become deposited on the outside.
Originally an accident, it produced a lovely effect, so it was replicated on purpose. So the bowl of this chalice was made by somebody who could "do" that.
When it came to marking the glass, it was only done when and if there was time and the spare staff and equipment available to do it, or if a customer asked for it, otherwise it just got left blank. They had trouble keeping the shelves in the shop stocked, it sold so well.
-
Hi,
I think in retrospect my comment about Ettore's skill level was inappropriate......... I was thinking that the writer had got Ettore mixed up with Vicente but thanks to Wolfie Rayner's research that shows Vicente could not have been there, so the article is correct.
Ettore was Vicente's servitor at Whitefriars, the next position up from a Servitor is Gaffer. A FLYING FREE says, there is no reason to think that after some years as a servitor he would not have the skills of a gaffer......... after all he was his father's son.
Cheers,
Patrick.
Ps, At Whitefriars the footmaker would gather the glass, the servitor would blow the bowl and pass it to the Gaffer who would apply the stem and foot and then finished the bowl with the piece either on a puntee or gadget.
-
When it came to marking the glass, it was only done when and if there was time and the spare staff and equipment available to do it, or if a customer asked for it, otherwise it just got left blank. They had trouble keeping the shelves in the shop stocked, it sold so well.
Hi Sue,
This is exactly the reason why I have previously stated that Ettore might have signed it.............
Regards,
Patrick.
-
If he was a skilled glass maker it would have been far more important that he was making glass. Just playing devils advocate... If he had signed it it would simply say Mdina, like every other signed example that does not include Harris' signature.
And why would his name appear on a goblet anyway? Presumably, only if he had significant input into the design, it was not the convention for the glass makers name to be added or we would see many different names. If it was the case why do all signed goblets not carry his name?
His name might appear if there was a personal inscription but there is not.
-
My opinion is that it's either a forgery (because of being written in the wrong place and wobbly-ly) or just a facsimile "artist's mark", no different (really) to any of the other facsimile Dobson or Said pawmarks.
It is also odd that there is not a date.
-
The chalice is lovely, a really good example. Given the shape we assume it dates from before 1972. In this time period we only find either "Mdina" or "Michael Harris Mdina Glass Malta" engraved.
After 1972, the signing convention changes, Mdina is still found but now we find "Mdina Glass" then a date followed by a signature. This goblet does not conform to either convention and the signature looks wrong as Sue noted.
Ettore Boffo died in 1970 (page 26 of Mark Hill's book).
-
John you are right, it was a typo from me as below -
'according to What ho's post it appears Ettore left Whitefriars in September 1969 and according to Mark Hill's book joined Mdina in October 1969. He died in 1971.
- Ettore died in December 1970.
I apologise for my error.
m
-
Sorry m, I just added that as it seemed relevant to the rest of my rambling.
-
:) but errors like that end up being re-quoted somewhere along the line.
It also does mean that Ettore was only at Mdina for just over a year.
m
-
Hi,
I am not convinced that this is a forged signature because anyone wanting to make a convincing signature would endeavour to copy a known existing example……… This signature and wording does not copy any other known example.
The chalice is an early one and could easily have been made in the 4 or 5 months that Michael, Vicente and Ettore worked together.
Glassobsessed tells us that there are known early engraved pieces with "Michael Harris Mdina Glass Malta" …… My chalice has "Mdina Glass Malta" plus the unknown signature.
I have this photo of Vicente that someone sent me some years ago when I was discussing his animals. I had not realized that it shows him casting on a foot to what looks like a chalice. Nice to see the master at work.
-
But having those words does not prove it is a genuine period signature, nor does it (on current evidence), or the photo, prove that Ettore made your Chalice.
Is it diamond engraved by the way?
Lovely photo and thanks for generously sharing it :)
m
-
Hi 'm',
I am not saying Ettore made it just that he might have signed it for a customer that wanted to buy it with a signature. He may have been the only available person that was capable of doing it on that day.
It is diamond engraved as per the early signatures...........
I am glad I found the pic.
Patrick . :) :) :)
-
I think the 'Mdina Glass Malta' looks very ,very similar to the one Sue posted above....look at the G on glass and especially the way the two S's have been joined (and written, I think it's a match) ....I think your idea of showing it or both these photos to a handwriting specialist is a good one Patrick . The signature looks different though...Thanks for the superb photo ;)
-
I am not saying Ettore made it just that he might have signed it for a customer that wanted to buy it with a signature. He may have been the only available person that was capable of doing it on that day.
Perfectly possible Patrick, been thinking about this on and off half the day (with most of it spent up to my arms in paint stripper and gungy varnish mix). Some of the wonkiness of the signature could be explained if the engraver was not experienced with engraving.
Have you contacted Ron Wheeler (Artius Glass)? He might have access to info that could help. If you are going to the National bring it along to show, nothing beats actually handling an item to get an impression, photos can only go so far.
John
-
Hi John,
Your suggestion to show the chalice to Ron Wheller sounds like a good idea.............. I will take it to the National Glass Fair and see what he thinks.
If you are going I would be happy for you or anyone else to view it , maybe by leaving it with Wolf Rayner who will be selling at the fair.
Regards,
Patrick.
-
That would work Patrick, I will look forward to seeing it.
-
Im no handwriting expert but I have compared the 'Mdina Glass Malta' part of the signature and the way the letters are formed is extremely similar to known examples.
Looking at this my personal feeling is that this has not been faked as possibly suggested and if it has it has been done its been done by an expert, imho it is just too accurate.
And if an someone has gone to the trouble to get this very accurate why are other bits not accurate? Why is not written on the edge of the rim and why is it not signed with what would make it most valuable ie 'Michael Harris'?
I think the 'Mdina Glass Malta' is of period and the sig has possibly done by Ettore because that what looks like it reads.
-
Hi,
These questions I am going to ask are slightly off topic but are ones that it would be great to have answered please....
Are there any known trailed knopped chalices with a Malta Decorative Glass label..... ?
Also has anyone an image of what could be a MDG trailed knopped chalice.
Thanks in advance,
Patrick.
-
The only thing that I have that might be an MDG chalice is un-knopped, but it could also have been made at Mdina, un-knopped.
It's in the group photo I posted.
I have not seen any other potential MDG chalice, and certainly none with labels.
I know of perhaps another two attenuated bottles to the one I have, (there's one illustrated on Worthpoint) I have the only lollipop I've seen and the only tricorn bowl I've seen.
-
Hi,
I have just revisited this topic and can say the signature is not 'Ettore'...........
This has been confirmed by his sister .
Best wishes,
Patrick.