Topic: ID help with classical style vase please

[Lustrousstone]

What Kev says about opal is a point Bernard has made. The origins of descriptors are generally based on observations, i.e., but to quote myself

It seems like somewhere/sometime the use of opaline became inaccurate

It was probably arose as a marketing ploy; white opal/white opaline is so much more romantic and attractive sounding than white and you could apply to all of the colours. The manufacturers needed spiel to attract the retailers who needed it to attract the customers. Think how many of us hoover...

[Paul S.]

just as an aside - and slightly amusing in the context of this thread (but annoying to me, the seller)..............
I've a piece of Webb's/S&W 'peachblow' gowing up for aution in Surrey in early Feb., and I've a copy of the handwritten original receipt when I submitted the glass, which shows the word 'peachblow' (which I gave to the auctioneer)
Just received the on line confirmation of the catalogue entry for my glass, and it shows the description as 'Red and White Opaline' ....ughhhh.

Firstly my compliments to m for her mammoth efforts on this subject - although not sure that a conclusion is any nearer - almost a case of the more you learn the less you know.

Reading the Count's words (repeated above more than once), he comments that the translucent milky blue effect is produced by the inclusion of calcined bones......and he goes on to say that the sunset colours (my words) are seen when viewed in transmitted light.
WHAT HE DOESN'T SAY........is that the metal needs to be re-heated in order to achieve this effect (or did I miss that somewhere) - thus the phosphates in the bones produce the fiery glows independently of any additional heating.     This type of glass showing the suset glow is by definition OPALESCENT, and is what most people call to mind when they use the term.
The thicker the glass the greater the opacity/milky blue effect, and the deeper/reder the sunset glow.
The similar pale blueish glass from Salviati (I do have a wine glass) does have a sunset glow, and is therefore also opalescent.

If you read Cottle and look at the Venetian Revival glass from Sowerby (from the 1870's), presumably influenced by Salviati, you again see the pale blueish translucent effect of opalescence.

In conclusion - can we say that any translucent/partially translucent glass which has calcined bones added to the metal (or modern phosphates) - whether coloured with metal oxides or not - is by definition 'opalescent' - due to the sunset glow.           

In my opinion 'opalescent' may be a more practical word as a description (in view of the fact that it accords with the sunset glow), than opaline - and in view of m's link to the Count's early description we now seem forced to accept that the two words are synonyms.
If the sunset glow cannot be seen, and the glass is opaque (coloured or white), then the material is not opalescent.

Confusion has be made worse by the multitude of trade names that have been used over the past 150 years or so - using some form of the word opal.

The above may apply to English speaking communications only, perhaps ...........maybe the French are alread sharpening their knives (wanting to retain 'opaline') - and I may get a knock on the door any moment.
 

[Paul S.]

oppps, sorry Anne..

Ref. 'Sowerby - Gateshead Glass'   -  Simon Cottle         -       (Tyne and Wear Musuem Service)   -   1986.

[flying free]

Paul
I have just formulated a very long reply to posts above your comments and drawn some conclusions - using pictures to demonstrate.  It would be very helpful and less confusing if you could delete your reply above and wait until I've posted   would you mind awfully?  It then might answer some of the questions you have raised.
Thank you
m

[Paul S.]

hello m
Whilst I appreciate the politness of your request, I fail to understand that one post needs to be withdrawn  -  before posting another, I've not been aware of this happening previously.

My post is an effort to define a conclusion -  assuming this is what we are all trying to do - however, if you consider it out of place, then I shall instruct the Mods. to delete entirely   -  I would not wish to provide a post that is thought to be detracting from a conclusion.

Will the Mods. please therefore delete my post entirely and not replace at any later time.         Many thanks

P.S.    Pleased to say that the auction house have agreed to amend the description of my peachblow.

[flying free]

This reply was formulated before Paul wrote his two posts just above -
Paul, I apologise if my request offended you, but I've spent the last two hours formulating a response to the posts made above your most recent two posts and I just wondered whether you might wait until I had posted my response before adding yours please, to avoid any confusion?  My conclusions are just that...mine, i.e.they are not conclusions to the whole debate
If not don't worry.
m


I agree with Kev and Christine and think the word opal is just used as a posh version of 'white' to make it sound better.  And I’ve found a good reference to demonstrate this in the Cristallerie de Clichy book - can we address that issue in a separate thread?)

With regard opaline glass for the moment:
Here is a link to the book, 'La Cristallerie de Clichy' - not everything in the book is shown but there are many opaline pieces to view. 
In my opinion viewing these adds much to this thread particularly because of the diversity of the appearance of the glass.  I also think it demonstrates the 'change' from the Count's description of opaline glass in 1834, through the description of of 1844 from the Encyclopaedia of Domestic Economy,  to Newman's description of 20th century (looking back on many more years of production than the Count was in 1834).
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KEYMY4_ytuUC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=cristallerie+de+clichy&source=bl&ots=pTrRmfJT0n&sig=NRryzvIL1VOiils2KUSsqePB1nA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=0_IAUcixCeOl0AWipID4DA&ved=0CEkQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=cristallerie%20de%20clichy&f=false

The Count described opaline in 1834 as -
' Opaline glass is produced by mingling in the common metal of white glass, a portion of calcined bones, which gives a blue shade without impairing the transparency.'       
Reading the article he has written it did appear he was describing opalescent glass or something similar given the context of the article. I then mused that perhaps opaline glass had changed in appearance since he wrote the article.
Page 16 of the book shows a group of  Charles X early opaline glass in a colour known as gorge de pigeon, dating to between 1824 and 1830 (the reign of Charles X).  It's not exactly as I thought he was describing but there are two pieces there that would fit with his description easily, the largest being the jug, the other the beaker on the left.  These may not be the colour of opaline he was referring to and it could well be that early white opaline also had these quite transparent properties but these are the best pictures I could find to demonstrate his description.

It is also possible that he was describing Boule de Savon opaline – this piece also dates to Charles X and is the third one down on this link to Alexia Amiato’s site which sells the most beautiful opaline glass btw   http://www.alexiaamatoantiques.com/sold5.asp?category=6

Thereafter the appearance of the opaline glass shown in the Cristallerie de Clichy (page no's to follow) does not match his description but does appear to match the description of the Encyclopaedia and of Newman.

However, I think I would raise a query over Newman’s description – on the basis that his description states that opaline glass is made using bone ash to achieve its diffused nature.  This does not tie in with the Encyclopaedia definition I gave above which states that bone ash, oxide of tin or phosphate of lime is used.  I also believe Ivo has said arsenic can be used (need to find my reference) and I’ve also found another reference to arsenic being used as well (references to be added)

So in my opinion the description I would use for opaline glass is the one from the Encyclopaedia from 1844, with the addition of arsenic as an opacifier.  This is open to debate, because is it possible that  in more recent times other opacifiers are now used or are they still the same ones?  Please add to this discussion .

For ease of reference I have again included these two descriptions* at the bottom of this post so you don’t have to go back and forth to check what they were.

Going back to the opaline glass shown in the Cristallerie de Clichy book, I’ve included page numbers below to show the different opaline.
Going through the book and comparing, I think I have found an interesting point about the use of the word opal as a description as well but we’ll come back to that.

The opaline glass shown in the online book and either captioned opaline glass or appearing under the chapter of opaline glass titled ‘Les opalines de Clichy’ is as below.  The actual chapter runs from pages 255 to 282.   There are a few other reference pictures of opaline glass captioned as such elsewhere in the book that I have also included.

16 – gorge de pigeon - Charles X
48 – green  - 1850-1855
51 – yellow -1855
124 – green and blue perfumes
125 – celadon
259 – white
261 – green and blue
262 Green
274 blue - 1850
278 black -1870

These references raise two interesting issues for me
1)    regarding the ‘appearance’ of opaline glass – so for example there are clear differences between the appearance of the green opaline vases bottom right on page 262 and the green opaline  page 48.  And another example would be the black opaline glass on page 278.  This doesn’t appear to be translucent.
 i.e. the appearance and the translucency of opaline can vary, but as long as it is not opaque and has some translucence it would  be classed as opaline glass

2) On page 277 which is under the chapter ‘Les opalines de Clichy’ there are two white vases.  These are also opaline glass as they appear under the Chapter header, but these are described as 'opale cristal' - I guess that is translated as 'opal crystal' or basically, using Kev's descriptor of opal,  white crystal.  Their appearance seems to be no different to the green page 262 and black page 278 versions described as opaline glass...except they are white.  Their appearance is different to another set of white opaline shown on page 259 and is different to the white opaline glass I showed earlier in the thread, but I believe they are still classed as white opaline since they come under the chapter of ‘Les opalines de Clichy’.  So, ‘opale cristal’ or opal crystal is presumably just a fancy way of saying white rather than a description of the glass make-up content.

So in summary –

1)   Opaline glass was made in many countries not just France, and was made in many countries in the 19th century. Link to Alexia Amiato Antiques given above and link here to Mousa Antiques http://www.mousaantiques.co.uk/  both of whom sell the most beautiful opaline glass from various countries and have a huge inventory to browse through for eye candy  

   
2)    I believe the Harrach Etruscan vases and the Webb Etruscan blanks are opaline glass on the basis of:

-    Using the Cristallerie de Clichy opaline glass pictures as a reference
-   and that both Mel’s and my vase are translucent (Mel’s more so than mine, but mine is definitely not opaque),
-   and  given the date Mel’s vase was most likely made (it is most probable that Mel’s vase is a c1847 Webb Etruscan blank) and my Harrach vase was made (c1860 Harrach Etruscan), which would indicate it is likely they were opacified using bone ash or tin oxide or phosphate of lime (mine has a red shine when held up to strong light) and there is no evidence to demonstrate they were opacified using anything else,
-   and that it is evidenced that opaline glass was made in many countries not just France, 
-   and that on page 113 of British Glass 1800-1914 Hajdamach shows a photograph of a vase that appears to be quite dense white glass in a similar vein to ours with a caption descriptor ‘White opaline vase, sepia enamelled with a scene of Ulysses weeping at the song of Demodocus, after an engraving by Flaxman; c1851. Height 18 ½” 47.2cm’ 

3)     Therefore,  I believe the title descriptor used in the article from the Art-Union magazine June 1847 page 222, and which article was    reproduced in Hajdamach’s British Glass 1800-1914 on page 138, and which describes Webb’s Etruscan blanks as ‘Etruscan forms &c Opalescent Glass’ is incorrect to describe these as Opalescent Glass.

4)   I believe the description of opaline glass needs to be -   'Opaline glass is of a semi-transparent opaline hue, used for various ornamental articles, chiefly for the boudoir.  The effect is produced by adding to the best glass a small quantity of oxide of tin or what is better, phosphate of lime, or well burnt bone ash, or arsenic (I need to find my references for arsenic being used as an opacifier)

5)   I cannot find any evidence that opal glass is an actual descriptor of how a vase was made, and I believe it is most likely that this is either a descriptor of the colour white or a ‘range name’ given as a marketing tool – separate discussion thread to be opened on the other descriptors that cause confusion.

Of course, this is open to discussion

I will add some reference pictures later to show the difference between opalescent glass and opaline glass and the variations on opaline glass (as I believe it to be) appearance so they remain on the thread for reference - but need a coffee now 

*References for the descriptions of opaline glass:
In 1844  the Encyclopaedia states -   'Opaline glass is of a semi-transparent opaline hue, used for various ornamental articles, chiefly for the boudoir.  The effect is produced by adding to the best glass a small quantity of oxide of tin or what is better, phosphate of lime, or well burnt bone ash.'
In  20th century (can someone add the date of the book please?) Newman states - ‘Opaline – a dense translucent glass that derives its diffused nature from the addition of bone ash, and is colored using metallic oxides, usually in pastel hues.'

m

[flying free]

With reference my summary point no 4) * in my post above and regarding whether or not the addition of arsenic should be added to the description of opaline, Newman (same reference as previous) says this of Arsenic -
'Arsenic – an oxide of arsenic used to improve color, transparency, and brilliance, often used when producing opaque white glass or opaline.'

I don't know enough about glass production to know whether that indicates arsenic is used in conjunction with, or whether it can be used on it's own as an opacifier.


With regard the use of the word opal Newman says:
'Opal – see Opaline'
Does this mean that opal and opaline can be used as either/ or and be described as the same thing?
the other reference to the word  opal in his list  is under 'Alabaster glass' where he says
'Alabaster glass – see Milk glass and Opal glass.'

In addition to my point 2) in my summary above, in my reasons for describing Mel's vase and mine as opaline glass, I would like to add another Newman reference (same source as previously quoted)
where he says of opaque glass
'Opaque glass – solid colored glass that allows little or no light to pass through.' 

m



*4)   I believe the description of opaline glass needs to be -   'Opaline glass is of a semi-transparent opaline hue, used for various ornamental articles, chiefly for the boudoir.  The effect is produced by adding to the best glass a small quantity of oxide of tin or what is better, phosphate of lime, or well burnt bone ash, or arsenic (I need to find my references for arsenic being used as an opacifier)

[Lustrousstone]

I'm pretty sure asrsenic oxide doesn't opacify without reheating. Tin oxide doesn't require reheating to opacify. Burnt bone and phosphate of lime are essentially the same thing and I'm pretty sure they don't require reheating to opacify either.

[flying free]

So arsenic should not be included then.
Thanks
m

[Lustrousstone]

Depends what you are trying to say. I'm pretty sure it's what creates the opalscent effect