Topic: Small facet cut stem ruby glass - Gorge de pigeon / Gold-ruby instead

[flying free]

Small glass large foot despite the deceptive photographs which refuse to show the real dimensions.
  The diameter of the rim is 1 1/2" max(4cm) and the diameter of the foot is 1 7/8"or 4.85cm.

The height of the whole glass is only 10.5cm or 4 1/8" so it's not very big - a liqueur of some sort.

The faceting is hexagonal rather than diamond shaped.

I'm sure it's Bohemian but the foot is polished completely flat and I can't work out how it was made so was just wondering whether this might date into the 19th?  Does the completely polished foot preclude it being earlier?
Have seen a larger version dated 1780 but not sure how mine compares in detail of making and whether that would put it earlier or later.
http://scottishantiques.com/bohemian-gilded-facet-cut-goblet?filter_name=facet%20stem#.Vys9lYQrLIU
Any ideas - many thanks for any help:)
m

[flying free]

base pic - highly polished with a mark left after polishing.

Rim is cut polished and bevelled on each side on all facets.  Very nicely made.

Foot has wreathing on it and is large.
m

[Paul S.]

hello m  -  Continental not really my scene, but.....................

I'd imagine such coloured pieces (for Rhenish white?) were made in  similar fashion to U.K. wine glasses, although what the origin, and why the need, for a completely flat base I've no idea, but unlike the U.K. it's a common feature on Continental drinking glasses.               In terms of manufacture, your glass may well have been made in the usual three parts  -  bowl, stem and foot  -  looking at it can you see if this sounds plausible - and then the bowl would have been ground/polished to produce the flats, finishing off with the bevelling to the rim.          After detaching from the pontil rod the entire base would have been ground/polished flat.             Gilded when all was polished, but don't know how to tell if yours was finished in a muffle kiln or cold gilded - perhaps since you've lost some then the latter - am sure you'll find all the relevant info. on the Board's search.              I also did a load of spiel some couple of years back re the use of gold in colloidal solution to make red glass, and something about selenium not being used until 1920 ish.     ...........   can't find it at the moment.

The hexagonal cutting on the stem - in British pieces - would date this to latish C18 - early C19 I seem to remember, but on Continental glasses this may have been a decorative feature until more recent times.         Have a feeling that Peter picked me up on this and said it also occurred much later.             As I say, my meagre knowledge is based on British glasses  -  I suspect Ivo will be much more accurate than me.

Nice glass - don't suppose you have the other nine or five

[Paul S.]

not that I think it would help remotely re dating, but I'm unable to see the 'wreathing' you say is on the foot?             Do you mean in the sense of a floral wreath i.e. leaves etc.?

If I had to take a punt on this one I'd go for mid C19 give or take a little  -  and my thoughts are that the imperfectly finished grinding on the underside of the foot, plus the rather naïve gilding might suggest not a high end piece -  although the cutting does lift it up from being run of the mill.   
Would agree your suggestion of Bohemian, but then we always say that, don't we

[flying free]

hi Paul

Thanks so much for your info and response.

I do think it's Bohemian - but might not be possible to date it specifically.  It could date from 18th to 19th I guess but was wondering if anything about the making and the facet cut stem would date it nearer end 18th.  The decoration was used I believe from at least mid 18th well into the 19th. Certainly I have seen Bohemian faceted pieces with this design on (decanter)that apparently date to c.1840.  I have also seen ruby faceted decanters dated to a similar period but again they are not goblets with faceted stems.

The only goblets I've found are on Scottish Antiques and that has an earlier date.  I think my glass is no different to that one to be honest having tried to do a complete comparison (their goblet was a wine glass rather than a liqueur size).  Mine has a completely polished foot though.

The polished foot is  beautifully done.
  It is where something was removed - where they attached the foot possibly?

The gilding is fine and not out of keeping with other pieces with this style/design of gilding.  It is worn a bit which might make it look less 'perfect' but there's nothing different between it and other pieces with this style of decoration on.
 Unfortunately my camera doesn't like red and makes it very dark and I wasn't able to light the gilding very well.  I'll try with a different lightbulb so it can be seen properly.

So the quality is very good in terms of the production of the glass.  It has a beautifully cut, bevelled both sides, and polished and gilded rim with the cut stem and completely polished foot. But does the foot and they way it's made, put it c.1840s or earlier 

Hmm, wreathing - I meant it has fine swirls of glass on it around the top of the foot, i.e. it is not completely smooth perfect, mold made type thing.  It's not 'writhen' as it's not contorted or out of shape but it does look hand formed.

m

[Ivo]

Definitely Bohemian, I would say mid to end 19th century. Not a high quality item in terms of decoration with gold applied to a flat surface, not engraved and filled n as you would expect from more luxury items. Magnificent cutting, though.

[Paul S.]

will leave you to thank Ivo for his knowledgeable opinion      can see how easy it is to wrongly assess a date by some feature which in other situations might imply a much earlier manufacture.

when the worker snaps/detaches the rod, the scar can sometimes be more substantial perhaps than was intended, and subsequent grinding and polishing doesn't always remove all the damage.

Neither wreathing or wrythen applicable in this instance m, I don't think  ...........     these are marks caused probably by the workers tools when forming the flat circular shape of the foot  -  bearing in mind the date of this piece then it's likely to have been the pucelas, rather than wooden foot clappers - but that's only my opinion.              A lot of older hand made bowls and feet show similar circular swirling effects.

[flying free]

Thanks both:)  However a question:

So what is the difference between mine and this one then?  This one is dated late 18th.  The gilding is the same, the colour of the glass is the same (mine really is bright red but for some reason my camera is making it appear much darker on screen and I don't know how to lighten it so the photos reflect the colour it really is).
The only difference I can see is that mine has a polished flat foot.
It's not a big deal to me, but I am curious as to how one could date them more specifically.

http://scottishantiques.com/bohemian-gilded-facet-cut-goblet?filter_name=facet%20stem#.Vyxh9IQrLIV

m

[Paul S.]

Oh, probably about £250.00

just for the sake of accuracy, 1780 would be George III (he started I think in 1760) - not George II.

In your link the underside of the foot is described as 'snapped' - and in common with other wines where the scar remains untreated, we make the assumption, generally, that the piece is C18 rather than later - but as you know, this is not a hard and fast rule  -  it's a pitfall that many people make.              There's also the aspect - mentioned above - that the hexagonal stem cutting may have different date lines as to whether Continental or British in origin, and it's not impossible that this may be responsible for the date provided. 

For what it's worth I think the snapped pontil and scale type cutting are the most likely reasons for dating your link to the C18 - the mention of lead glass may also have some bearing on that decision.                          To me the foot in your link looks flat, not conical as stated, perhaps I need Specsavers, again.

As always these are my opinions only.        

[oldglassman]

Hi ,
             Just having a rest from packing for the fair and noticed this thread , and this question ,
"So what is the difference between mine and this one then? "     to my eye , not a lot !! , the flat polished foot is no indication of age , if the glass did not sit flat when made the cutting shop when doing the stem and bowl would just polish the base flat which removes both the pontil scar and allows the glass to sit level in one operation .also a pontil scar is not a good indication of age so how the linked glass can be accurately dated without reference to documented parallels I don't know,  lead glass ? is it ? is yours lead glass m ? what I do know though is that glasses dated pre 1800 sell better than glasses dated into the 19th c , !!!

19th c would be my best guess,early, middle, late , not sure!!

cheers ,
Peter.