Topic: Red marbled vase with enamel, Loetz Marmoriertes Carneol? or Harrach? other?

[BSevern]

Hi Ken,

I'm not sure what email Dave has (perhaps my old cisco email, but I've moved on to greener pastures).

Please feel free to contact me at my personal email addy I've had for almost 20 years: 

b_severn AT yahoo DOT com

As long as yahoo doesn't go belly up, it won't change  :thup:

Happy hunting,
Brian

[Ohio]

Thanks Brian. Ken

[flying free]

with reference Brian's post here on page 4
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,45286.msg260749.html#msg260749
 in response to a query I made regarding a vase in Gulliver's Decorative Victorian British Glass 1850-1914, I saw a pair of these vases on our favourite auction site.  Not my thing so I didn't bid but one was clearly marked on the base in the shot
'MADE IN BOHEMIA' and the reg design no also although the pic hard to see and the last number looked like it could have been a 4.
Sorry it's a link and the pics will disappear in time.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/A-pair-of-Bohemian-glass-vases-/330857677429?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT&nma=true&si=e447Of30ZdzIJI0EiiWjsE6X0jE%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

m

[Ohio]

M this is actually very helpful as this particular (exact) vase is & has been in the past attributed as Mt. Washington by a few. Thanks, Ken

[TxSilver]

I had always seen this design attributed to Harrach. It is in Truitt's book if I remember right.

[flying free]

Hi Anita
I wasn't questioning Brian's identification, but thought that having a shot of the vase clearly marked might be good.
My original question in the thread was because there is a vase the same in Gulliver's Victorian Glass identified as registered by John Walsh Walsh.
m

[azelismia]

Gullivers book was wrong on those. they are absolutely Harrach. Walsh walsh did not make glass like these. it was a misattribution before people knew who harrach were. people also still mistake Harrach for mt washington. it's a fallacy that will never end apparently

Btw, I still hold that the marmorietes in this thread is absolutely Harrach.

[flying free]

I know that 
 Brian had already elucidated on that. 
My original question was raised because there was a conflict in reference sources between vases on an net site and a vase in Gulliver's.  I just though it would be nice for the board members who don't have copies of the books, to be able to see what was discussed and the markings on the base of the vase, which are not clear in the Gulliver's book.
And no that vase is not in Truitt's 1880-1940 under Harrach,  unless I've missed it re-checking

With regards my Marmoriertes vase, I need proof   I raised the question in the first place because of conflicting pieces on the net.
But I've not been able to match the shape or the decor to Harrach. But then I've not seen the archive collection and I've not got the book to be fair. However Truitt's photographed at the museum and they don't have an example in the book.  All their examples are categorised as Loetz.
m

[azelismia]

Loetz never marked vases like this. Loetz designations had roman numerals and then a number. Sometimes their earlier pieces just had four numbers in gold.

Harrach commonly did mark with Letters and numbers. (sometimes they used a roman numeral too but it was in different format than you see the loetz pieces). The P stands for production number and I have a lot of Harrach pieces in my collection with a mark starting with a P.followed by a few numbers.


Here are some examples

http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-484.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/images-large/177-e.JPG
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-389.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-131.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-33.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-128.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-141.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-263.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-264.html
http://www.thegildedcurio.com/item-265.html



The Harrach museum and PMC also had a ton of examples marked thusly.

It's very hard to tell loetz and harrach marmorietes apart but a mark like this is a pretty clear differentiation to my eye. 

[azelismia]

https://picasaweb.google.com/thefiresidecatt/20120526?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCOmx1Prm15WjVA&feat=directlink

here is an example of the second piece in question at the Harrach museum