Topic: Vase signed G.S.F. - American?

[Paul S.]

thanks -  so the man got about then

[flying free]

Kev you refer to a bulbous vase in reply #37 - does it look like this please?

http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,35137.msg255206.html#msg255206

I am so curious as to who made these.  I haven't come across any information that links them to known Harrach shapes so far.  I'm beginning to wonder if a) they might have been made by another Bohemian maker or b) they really were specialist designs from Wittmann and Roth or GSF  made especially for them by say.. Harrach perhaps or another Bohemian maker, and because they were an outside source (Wittmann and Roth or GSF) designs they were never replicated in other decors.   If we'd come across the shape in other known decors that would give a good link to possible maker.  But never see them in anything but the fishscale or hammered shapes.

Btw - throwing a curved ball here, that pink always reminds me of Stevens and Williams (and Steuben for that matter, but then I'd not expect to see them in the quantities I have, here in the UK).

m

[Paul S.]

looking at some of the knowledgeable comments from two or three years back, regarding the W. & R. 'scale' pattern Rd. 41925, I can't now help but feel we've currently been wasting a lot of time and effort going back over what appears to be very well trodden ground.           I should perhaps read these things in more depth, but it seems there was no shortage of folk being very emphatic, then, that T/Webb had been quite properly dismissed as the maker of these pieces.             Taking that thought together with Manley's comments etc., it would seem pointless for anyone to maintain the Webb provenance.

Unfortunately, when a reputable auction house - many of whom understandably don't have the time for in-depth research  -  maintains faith in a particular provenance/attribution, then there is an assumption, by the public, that the assertion/s must be true.

[flying free]

Well, the only thing is, it's ok to be emphatic but there was never a definitive no to Thomas Webb on the basis of pattern books.
And then I found two vases Fieldings 'sold as Thomas Webb' that had the same collar pattern and gilding (they weren't the fish scale or hammered vases though).  So that does raise a query.

I am adding a link to a good example of a gilded pink fishscale vase - so people can look at the attributions of these vases and perhaps get more clues:

https://fineart.ha.com/itm/art-glass/webb/an-english-satin-and-enamel-glass-vase/a/614-30228.s

- it has a polished pontil, a black enamelled GSF signature on the base, the firepolished crimped rim, and a gilded design on it.

m

[Paul S.]

hello m.          well, Manley commented that T/Webb had no record of this surface pattern, and commentators from 2012/2013 GMB posts appear to have exhausted all avenues and came to the conclusion there was no justifiable reason for hanging on to the Webb provenance.     As for your comments about the Webb catalogue, this is possibly an instance of not being able to disprove a negative, so to speak.
The Webb attribution has been maintained by those who it appears have not carried out proper research, instead relying on prior comments from others only and just copy the wording - combined with the mysterious G.S.F. initials  -  which as far as I can see have never been shown to belong to anyone at T/Webb who can be linked positively to manufacture of the Rd. 41925 design.
Your link is another States based source, and it does seem the other side of the pond are more than keen to maintain the Webb attribution since it will carry a better price  -  despite the probable fact that none of them has actually researched these pieces, and what does the comment "Concurs with house" mean?

Looking back to where I added pix of the original photos of the designs from W. & R. (for scale and hammered decoration), my opinion is that the piece in your link shows the hammered design Rd. 39086, and not the scale design Rd. 41925.
Again, only my opinion, but the lack of details of provenance by the auction house, in your link  -  omitting the W. & R. connection, and attributing their vase to the wrong decorative pattern - shows that research has not been done effectively.     Again, like so many sellers of these things, on the face of it there looks to be copying of someone else's description, and not a good one at that.

Have to say that I was surprised that Fieldings described Rd. 41925 (for the scale pattern) in the link to their sale, as being cut  -  it seemed far more likely that it had to be a moulded pattern.

[chilternhills]

Sorry, I have been away for a couple of days. But in the meantime the vase has arrived. It's gorgeous. Here are some pictures so that we have the vase on record.

Now that I have the vase I must say it looks moulded: white inside then pink added and then into a mould. But don't take that as gospel. I have little experience with Victorian glass.

Anton

Mod: eBay image used with permission: Nine Caroline Antiques say "we would be happy to have you use them".

[chilternhills]

And finally the signature. My mother, who is in her 80s and more used to older style script, reckons it says G.L.F. And who am I to contradict my mum?  Actually, I think she is right and I was wrong in an earlier comment. That agrees with a previous identification by an auction house.

Anton

Mod: eBay image used with permission: Nine Caroline Antiques say "we would be happy to have you use them".

[Paul S.]

thanks Anton  -  it's a cracker of a piece.               It's useful to have your confirmation that the surface is 'probably moulded', although not so sure we actually know how they did it.
That middle letter is a tease - I'd agree it's likely to be an L, but not entirely sure.

[KevinH]

This post is added as a quick memo - to help me remember to look at something else, but also to make some brief comments that do not need to be retained.

Yes, nice vase and good photos. Personally I think the middle letter is either "I" or "S" as these seem to tie in better with "copperplate" style letters.

I still cannot get my head around how the outer pattern on the vase was made to continue over the top of the rim of that vase (and others) but seemingly only on the parts that are gold painted / gilded.

The thing I need to look further into is the sale catalogue of the Cyril Manley collection in 1986. Just to see if the three items with so-called "fish scale" pattern [what we are now calling "hammered"] in the early American British Glass book were in that sale and maybe had some interesting descriptions. I may be a while - there was a lot of glass and very few pics.

Also, for completeness, I will review the many previous links from this and the other long thread on the "fish scale" subject, to try to locate examples that are close to the three Manley had.

[Lustrousstone]

I'm with Kev  and an I
These complex moulds are common - think Kralik or Loetz Martele - though getting the pattern over the top was clever but surely easier with blow moulding than pressing