Topic: Not Clichy nor Pantin in my view !!

[Tony G]

Hi All,
            I hope it is not against the rules to post this link.  This item on ebay USA was originally stated to be Clichy ( the sellers were advised such). It has been ended pending the change below. To me it isn't Clichy and I contacted them. They have since had a second opinion as NOT Clichy but now stated to be PANTIN !! This is apparently from the very eminent Paul Dunlop.

Am I completely crazy, as I cannot see anything Pantin in this?

From my George Kulles book on the less familiar weights, I could see a possibility of it being St. Mande based on the rose cane being almost the same as the drawing of a St. Mande rose on page 58. The centre design looks similar. Like a multi-petalled flower itself. This is very tenuous and I would love to find out what it really is!!

Any other views?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/390735771663?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

[KevinH]

Hi Tony,

I hope it is not against the rules to post this link.

Your post is perfectly ok and follows the guidance in the Board Policy details with respect to:

If you wish to draw attention to an on-line auction which you consider to be "not as described" you may provide a link to the auction but you should only state that "in my opinion this piece has not been described correctly."

As for the weight, I think it is exceptionally tidy in its setting but I have no idea which company may have made it.

[Tony G]

Thanks Kevin,
                      I'm glad I'm finally getting the hang of the protocol.

Cheers,

[Nick77]

I saw this and also didn't think Clichy but didn't know who it was made by.

Pantin are recorded as having exhibited millefiori weights at the 1851 Paris exhibition but to date to the best of my knowledge none have been positively identified. I have spent many hours trying to track down information on this without success so far.

See this earlier thread on the subject http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,51948.msg294678.html#msg294678

Nick

[Tony G]

Hi Nick,
            thanks for that thread reference. If Paul Dunlop says it's Pantin, then either a) It's a major find and needs writing up with an explanation etc. or b) It remains to be proven but would be an interesting bit of work comparing the canes to known producers.

Cheers,

[Nick77]

Hi Tony,

I kind of hope it is by Pantin as the reason I've been trying to find information is that I have a weight that I strongly believe also  may be a Pantin millefiori, the canes are very similar to this one although many are better quality. Maybe I should find Paul Dunlop's email address.

Nick

[tropdevin]

***

Hi all.

I am not convinced by the arguments that have been put forward elsewhere that Pantin millefiori paperweights definitely exist.  Much appears to turn on a single paperweight shown in the Clichy book with a Pantin like lampwork tulip, and a garland of 'later Clichy' canes. That seems to have led Paul Dunlop to suggest that the canes are really Pantin, and so therefore are some of the paperweights we call 'later Clichy'.  The Clichy book was written with the assistance of the descendants of the owners of the Clichy factory, which gives some authority to it, in my view - although that is not a clinching argument.

Now, canes move around...so what happened to the cane stock when Clichy closed? Maybe it was used as cullet, or sent to landfill. Maybe it went to a glass factory in another Paris suburb that was still making paperweights (which we refer to as Pantin), where it was used to make paperweights - hence some Clichy/Pantin hybrids...  I would have happily accepted the eBay weight was a later Clichy, and nothing fancier.  On the other hand, maybe there really are Pantin millefiori weights, and maybe some of the unknowns in my collection are Pantin.

I know where I would puy my money though...

Alan

[mildawg]

I saw this weight when it was being auctioned (not on ebay) and immediately thought clichy. I studied it a little closer and was not sure. I ended up missing bidding and missed a decent deal whatever it is. Anyway it will be interesting to follow comments and see what happens.