Topic: Rare 1840s Baccarat uranium glass becher -show and tell Launay Hautin 1841

[flying free]

And this one in a Percival Vickers catalog (4 different sizes known)

I'm not familiar with the other houses mentioned but are sizes known at all?
Personally, I think that keeping an open mind is important and wherever an item's bought, it doesn't confirm its origin.

Referring back to these comments -

The one shown in the Launay Hautin 1841 catalogue is listed with a no 1.  which if I read it correctly means two things - it was for water or water/beer and also that it only came in one size it seems.


If I've now bought another which is a bigger size (owner says it is 4 1/2 " tall whereas mine is 10cm) then if they are the same, either they are from different houses possibly OR Baccarat later produced more sizes, or they are from a house which produced more than one size.
We know Percival Vickers produced in 4 sizes (see Neil's comment), however the shape doesn't look like that one.

Will be interesting to see a comparison photo of them both together as I think they're identical from the photographs although owners photograph is truly awful and a shot taken from the top rim down.  I wonder if the new one is uranium and the same colour?

[flying free]

Possible difference between seeing a catalogue drawing in Launay Hautin 1840 catalogue and the item in real life? I could be wrong as the bowl looks the shape of the item 1990 on the left of it but with the pattern of item no 1992:

2me Partie Planche 59
No 1992 (I think the S.L written above the picture means produced by Saint-Louis glass)
Bottom row second from right
https://www.glas-musterbuch.de/Launay-Hautin-1840.20+B6YmFja1BJRD0yMCZwcm9kdWN0SUQ9NzY1JmRldGFpbD0_.0.html

and this goblet in the V&A - does not say which item but refers to it being shown in the Launay Hautin catalogue 1840:
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O5605/goblet-launay-hautin-et/

[flying free]

ok, it's arrived

Shape
I still think the shape does not fit the Percival Vickers drawings.
I also think it is not the same shape as the Molineaux Webb drawing because neither the small one or my new one are as waisted in shape as the MW one.
However,the teardrop shapes on both are definitely more similar to the slightly pear shaped teardrop on the MW version v the more rounded-top version of Baccarat.

Colour
I do think they are from the same maker/same design however ... they are definitely not the same batch as they are  very noticeably different colours in real life, although difficult to show the correct shades of green on camera.
The small one is bright green but has a slight yellow tinge to it.  The large one is grass/emerald green with no yellow tinge.
I don't think it's anything to do with the thickness of the glass as the larger one still 'feels' similar in thickness although perhaps a teeny bit thicker.

Size
What could possibly have been drunk from the larger one though.  beer/juice?  It is easy to hold because of the shape but has a great heft where empty it weights 570gms.  The smaller one weighs 400gms.

When you fill it up to the lip line just at the top where the pattern finishes (ie. without including the flat unpatterned lip part), the smaller one holds 150ml and the larger one holds 250ml.
The small one would be too small for ale but the larger one would probably be a good fit for a beer at table.

They are both gorgeous glasses to hold and drink from.  If I found more I'd definitely use them on the table.

My photos don't do the colours justice.  They are MUCH brighter green in real life. The top photo is the best colour match.

Maker?
So - I think they are the same design.  Is it possible given I've bought both here, that they are from MW? 
The shape doesn't appear to fit PV unless we take into account their drawings were a bit 'off'.  However it's in two sizes at least and we know PV made four sizes. 

I'll have to work out the quarts sizes again and see if they fit when filled only to the start of the plain unpatterned lip.
And have a look at any PV uranium glass piano insulators to see if the greens match at all.

It's coming up for 180 years old and was described as 'modern' 

[flying free]

Baccarat uranium glass for colour comparison (on my screen and copying it next to my photograph, this is the same or remarkably similar if not, colour to the larger glass)
This set linked is being sold as Baccarat and referenced to catalogue dated 1893  n°3571.

https://www.rouillac.com/ddoc-232717-cf2e0d69ba392e39a3aaa34efc13183e-273_1.jpg

https://www.rouillac.com/fr/lot-141-42718-encrier_cristal_vert_ouraline_baccarat

[flying free]

Some links to Baccarat pieces 19th century:

1) Baccarat uranglas (uranium green glass) dating to 1893 - pressed glass

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2013-3w-vogt-bacc-weihwasser-1893.pdf

This is a good match for the colour of the smaller glass.


2) Baccarat dark green pokal/glass 1840 Launay Hautin here seite 9/13 bottom right picture on page:

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2014-3w-jakob-bacc-pokale-gruen-1840.pdf

and here in Pressglas-korrespondenz there is a discussion around the similar shapes produced at different time periods/maker and also a good comparison of a dark green drinking glass from Baccarat with a picture of it in the Launay Hautin catalogue.  Good to compare and contrast.
https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2008-1w-vogt-bacc-becher-gruen.pdf
m

[flying free]

Right, I think there is leeway on the subtle difference in shape on the top of the teardrop.  I'd describe mine as very slightly wider and pear drop rather than upside down teardrop.
However, this comparison on Pressglas-Korrespondenz shows an 1840 blue pressed Baccarat footed goblet with lenses and compares it to the Launay Hautin catalogue drawing and to my eye, the actual goblet lenses do not look as curved as they do on the Launay Hautin pattern drawing:

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2017-2w-mueller-pokal-kobalt-bacc-1840.pdf

And having once again copied the MW pattern and the PV patterns and compared them side by side with the glasses and then compared the Launay Hautin one on the other side, I definitely feel they fit the Launay Hautin shape.  I don't feel they fit the MW or the PV shapes as shown in the patterns.

I do accept that I've bought both here in the UK.  However I do wonder how much Launay Hautin 'catalogue' stuff was on sale here in England - given it was in a catalogue. 
I can't imagine that Baccarat/Saint-Louis wouldn't have been trying to sell their stuff here.  They had a massive Russian market so selling abroad was standard fare I think. 
And remembering all the stuff I'd read when researching the E Varnish silvered glass, I think there was quite a trade and easy toings and froings between France and here at least by 1850. 
There are only Launay Hautin catalogues for 1840 and 1841 on the link though so who knows how long they produced this for.  It think it was only in the 1841 cat not the 1840 one.

[flying free]

Another good comparison here of a lidded dish and underplate.

Not the same design but it does come from the 1841 catalogue and has lenses.  The lenses are very similar to those on mine in that they aren't very rounded and rain/teardrop shaped but have a v slightly squared off pear-shape to them as mine does.  They definitely look different to the way they're portrayed in the catalogue.

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2013-3w-vogt-baccarat-1841-1842.pdf


Unless I find out Baccarat were not doing uranium glass in 1841 ish, I am pretty sure mine match the Baccarat shape in the LH catalogue.

m

[neilh]

One thing you are missing here is that very few catalogues from the days of early pressed glass survive, and this shape appears in most or all of them. It is a familiar story with moulded tumblers and goblets. If every catalogue has survived you would be comparing your piece to 10, 20, 30 catalogues showing a variation of the shape in the UK, US and Europe. In the Manchester glass group we've been having similar debates recently about a plain piece with the same upper body as yours but with a clawed foot, which is close to a catalogue image. I did have a piece of luck recently in finding a Manchester tumbler with the pattern number stamped on the base, which is the only way you can be totally sure, unfortunately.

[flying free]

I don't think it's the shape of the MW catalogue and neither the PV catalogue unless they are badly drawn items of their own products.

Put side by side I do feel it matches the shape in the LH catalogue for Baccarat (page 80).

Are there differences between the numbered tumbler you found and the drawing in their catalogue ? 



Subtle differences can be seen in catalogue pictures and the example of the Baccarat religious cross item v. the Bohemian version can be seen in one of the links I gave.  However it is very easy to 'spot the difference' and I would not have thought in that instance that one could be confused with the other.

My only hesitance is that I bought both from the UK, however is it impossible that there would  have been some form of trade in French pressed glass during the period?
In addition to which we also had the tax on glass production problems here up until 1845 didn't we (can't remember what they were called) which stifled production development I thought?
Need to look into that again to see what impact that had but iirc it was being cited as a reason at the Great Exhibition that the Bohemian coloured glass was so advanced by comparison.

I will keep an eye out for other items exactly the same though. I would be more than happy to have a set of these to drink from.  They're amazing.

Do you know  which other catalogues I should be looking into please?

[neilh]

The only catalogue which I haven't seen and may be of use is the 1870 Edward Moore catalogue. Joseph Webb is another contender and you can see he was doing fancy tumblers from the moulds bought by Moore later on. As for my marked tumbler, there was a little extrapolation required because it was in a different size to the catalogue image. There were also virtually identical designs in two other catalogues. Some of the premium tumbler lines would have been made in a range of sizes, ten or more, from a small shot thimble to around 330ml, and catalogues might show the full size range, or only a few, or one. I'm pretty sure I saw a plain tumbler in the same or similar shape as yours for sale on eBay USA. Alas I didn't save the image off and it seems to have gone. Whatever the attribution, they are nice glasses to own and use. These mid-Victorian tumblers and goblets seem to be designed for the pattern to be a natural finger hold, very tactile.