Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => British & Irish Glass => Topic started by: Leni on August 07, 2005, 10:21:45 AM
-
Long, long ago in a thread far away :wink: I posted a picture of a vase of mine which is amber with clear glass ribbed feet and rigaree, and Kevin said:
I think Leni's vase is English (Stourbridge, for want of a more precise attribution). The "odd" thing to me is that the feet are really nice but the rigaree and the "Continental" style of flat, sliced-off rim seem to be slightly out of keeping. As a pure guess, I'd suggest Boulton & Mills.
I thought no more about it, until this morning when I was browsing on the '1st Glass' Victorian glass pages (as one does :roll: :wink: ) and found these: http://tinypic.com/a3i8w0.jpg (copyright 1st Glass, of course)
For comparison, here's the picture of my vase again: http://tinypic.com/a3ib01.jpg
Of course, the feet are different, but IMHO the body of the vase and the rigaree are practically identical!
So what happened to the neck? :? How about this for a theory: The neck was originally like the ones in the 1st Glass pictures, and it was cut off to remove some sort of damage! :shock:
Does this seem a likely explanation to anybody else?
Leni
-
Yes Leni it does seem very plausible to me. I have seen several pcs of old Victorian glass that were drastically repaired just to save it. An old piece of China with metal staples in it to hold it together still amazes me. Guess it proves they were not the throw away society we are today. Terry
-
Enough similarity to assume same maker ? I would say yes but have limited experience of this period and style.
How are they identified by 1st Glass ?
-
Enough similarity to assume same maker ? I would say yes but have limited experience of this period and style.
How are they identified by 1st Glass ?
Tony simply describes them as "Pair of Victorian Mould Blown Amber Glass Vases - English - c.1880's"
Actually, looking at the pictures again, I've now confused myself :oops:
The ones on the 1st Glass site look shorter and more rounded. Mine is taller and comes to a definite point at the botom, between the applied feet. So If Tony says his are mould blown, mine was either made in a different mould - or by a different maker! :shock: So not identical at all! :(
IGMC :oops:
Leni
-
So what happened to the neck? :? How about this for a theory: The neck was originally like the ones in the 1st Glass pictures, and it was cut off to remove some sort of damage! :shock:
Does this seem a likely explanation to anybody else?
Leni
It would explain the unbalanced look that your piece has Leni. I can't imagine it being made and left the way you had it from that date - it just doesn't look "right".
As to the difference in feet - I can't comment as my experience of feet is limited- the only ones that I seem to be able to recognise at the moment are Davidson/Chippendale style ones, and yours aren't them for sure! :lol:
Mod 13 December 08 - New info on this piece. Leni writes: "I have, since the date of the original thread, obtained a copy of Mervyn Gulliver's 'Victorian Decorative Glass', and there is a picture on page 91 of a vase identical in every way to mine, except that mine is a 1/4 inch taller, at 6 & 1/2 inches. Gulliver describes it as an "Amphora shaped vase, c.1880" and describes the rim as being "ground off and polished". So it looks as if it was not damaged, but actually made that way!'
Thanks for that, Leni!
Cathy