Topic: Mdina Pulled Ear vase - age?

[jakgene]

Just received this - which I bought because I have always wanted a pulled ear vase - and it looked as if it may be an early piece.
would welcome opinions from the experts please!

No engraving to base, but plenty of wear. some blobs of gold iridescence in the colours. One large bubble in the body of the vase. "Ears" lopsided - ie the "shoulder length" is not even.  Smallish top rim - although not quite small enough to call "button" I don't think. Rim not flat - slightly sloped and not circular - uneven.
Perhaps it is just wishful thinking but to me it looks more like the shape on p 43 of Mdina Glass than the later p 50 image

Would welcome your opinions!
regards

Jackie

[Nemmie]

Size?

[Greg.]

Hi Jackie - My thoughts were similar regarding the top rim, certainly not one of the early buttons tops, but certainly much smaller than some of the later wider rims. Also as Sue mentioned in an earlier thread the shape is certainly more ovoid and doesn't have the wider shoulders as seen on some of the later examples.

So on balance my personal guess would be not very early, but reasonably early, probably around 72-74. Certainly after this point the form started to change.

Interested to see what others think on the date.

[jakgene]

Whoops! forgot the size - sorry Nemmie.

15 cm or 6 inches tall.

Thanks Greg - yes that is about when I was thinking - early 70's.
Interested to hear more comments though.

thanks
Jackie

[chopin-liszt]

I'd say early '70s too.
I really don't think one can pinpoint a "change" from the flat button to a slightly necked buttony shape to a particular date, - there isn't even evidence that one preceeded the other - it's all just assumptions.

However, what we do know is that it was the influence/teaching of the Boffos that resulted in the formation of "proper" necks and wider, flat, slim flanges.
But that doesn't mean all flanges were wide and flat from that date on - we simply don't know.

The more egg-like shape suggests early as does the small rim. I wouldn't be so keen to put this piece to post-Harris. It could equally well be from his time - or slightly after.

[jakgene]

Thanks Sue

That is pretty much what I was hoping to hear.

regards

Jackie