Topic: A Decanter

[Laird]

Could I please have help with this decanter?
I think it is probably early Victorian.
Engraved on it is 'Corporation', which made me think it perhaps was one of a set purchased by a municipality for use at official events. It's a pity it doesn't identify which Corporation.
My impression is that it is of superior quality, as I would expect a Victorian municipality to use for official functions. The base is not engraved, but is smooth and polished.
Date - ?
Comments?

[chopin-liszt]

ok, cut stuff is not my thing, but I was paying attention when I was in the Ulster Museum of Belfast and I did take pics of the Waterford and the really old Irish cut stuff there.

I kind of feel this belongs with them. I've done a bit of a dig and found the pics i took in the Museum. Two might be of interest to you. I can't match captions to photos though.

There's a jug towards the back of one pic and a decanter at the bottom side of another. Sorry about the pics not being great. - my first attempt to use a different resizing thingie and i'm all confuddled.
And I was struggling with banging my head on cabinet fronts. 

[Paul S.]

hello Laird -  nice looking bottle.         Other than the word CORPORATION, which doesn't appear to be a particularly C19 style of lettering, what makes you suggest early Victorian?      -     is there the sort of wear that might indicate that sort of age?            My thoughts are ………………    the interior looks remarkably clean and uncloudy for a decanter of that age  -  the style of cutting is usually unhelpful in dating, since the Victorians - and some of the big manufacturers in the C20 - were notorious for copying earlier fashions, many of which were of high quality.
You say the base is smooth and polished  -  literally dead smooth all over?              Might be of use if you're able to post a picture of the underneath please.                    Are there matching Nos. on the stopper and body.

I could be wrong, but this appears to be a bludgeon shape with mushroom stopper  -  very common in the second half of the C19, then copied commonly in the C20, which is the sort of date that I'd suggest this is.
I've looked in McConnell's book but don't see the word CORPORATION in the index, though that's not conclusive one way or the other.

Dating decanters can be a headache  -   have you looked at the aforesaid book for any assistance?

[Laird]

Thanks for your thoughtful response.
Yesterday I bought, and today I received McConnell's book - been wanting to buy it for more than a year and finally decided to bite the bullet - I've had an interest in collecting decanters for a couple of years and decided it was necessary to up my information resources. So, today, when the book arrived I scanned through the illustrations and to my surprise found on Page 183, decanter illustration No. 6, what appears to be the exact twin of my decanter. Exactly the same engraving designs, hobnail panels interspersed with sunburst panels, with the identical fluting above and below.
I do think however that the stopper on mine is not original, for two reasons, my stopper is slightly wider than the spout rim, AMcC writes that mushroom stoppers are rarely wider than the rim, and secondly there is a scratched number 12 on the rim, while there is no numeral on the stopper - so I think that's conclusive that the stopper isn't original.
The decanter shown in the illustration is dated 1810-1815 height 21.7cm. Just measured mine and it is also 21.7cm!
I think the evidence is fairly conclusive. Of course the 'CORPORATION' remains a question mark.

[Anne]

Laird, the rings round your decanter look like those found on the Penrose decanter here http://100objects.ie/penrose-glass-decanter/?portfolioID=1182

[Laird]

Indeed, they are the same.
Can I imagine that my decanter might be from the same manufacturer, viz. Penrose/Waterford?

[Anne]

I think there's a strong possibility, as every decanter I found with those rings was identified as a Penrose.

[Ekimp]

Hi, isn’t it a bit of a stretch to associate this type of neck ring with a particular manufacturer? I have one but have thought this is just one of the designs of neck rings, like a drinking glass has different styles of stem knop. They have been around for 200 plus years then they must have been made in this style by many?

Scottish Antiques have a decanter marked Penrose (moulded in) dated 1780 and another attributed as such and they are both mould blown with additional cutting. Ref https://scottishantiques.com/georgian-table-glass/decanters-carafes/waterford-penrose . The decanter in Anne’s link is also mould blown.

When I saw Laird’s decanter, I thought similar to Paul S. My decanter with similar neck rings and Anglo Irish type cutting has a very notable grey tone. If this decanter was mine, I would put my finger in the neck to see if there is a depression under the neck rings, indicating they were moulded, not applied. I have also read somewhere that numbered stoppers/necks were more recent than Georgian.

[Paul S.]

Have to say I remain sceptic re the alleged provenance and age which have been attributed to this bottle, though I admit to being anything other than clever when it comes to Anglo-Irish bottles from that late Georgian period.               I'm well aware of the almost identical appearance of this one to the quoted similar decanter in McConnell, to which he assigns a date of c. 1805 - although there is a small difference of slanting blazes on the book example  -  this is assuming I'm looking at the correct image.           In fact I don't have the later Decanter book which believe Laird is possibly referring to  - mine is the earlier McConnell volume (2004), but think we're speaking of the same bottle.       IIRC, McConnell appears not to provide a specific glass house for the bottle in question, simply commenting "   Anglo-Irish Prussian Decanter".           

We are back to the proverbial problem of making an attribution etc. on something we can only see on the screen  -  this may well be a genuine period example - though IMHO dating based on appearance of cutting style alone is very unreliable.         The cutting style is what we assume tells us most about a date, and in truth it should, but with decanters it's often the least helpful since there are more copies around than you can shake a stick at  -  mostly produced between c. 1870 and 1930 (what McConnell calls 'endemic plagiarism'), and yes, this particular style of triple neck ring has been copied by other glass houses.
Phelps Warren discusses much of the early history of The Waterford Glass House -  the Penrose family members started the business in 1783 selling out to 'Gatchell and his partners' in 1799  -  and it's for this reason that the early years of the Company's history are referred to as Penrose/Waterford  -  the Company ceased in 1851, re-appearing in the mid C20.      Most of the known Penrose period decanters look to have engraved decoration rather than cutting, and if you didn't know, then looking cold at this bottle and the McConnell example, neither has what might be thought of as typical late C18 Irish engraved decoration, and the legendary 'blue' tint aside, I would have thought that some degree of typical lead colouring to the metal would have been expected.

I don't think this decanter is a dip-mould made piece - perhaps that sort all have a kick in the base - but I'd have thought there might have been a radial cut star on the base with a central ground depression.     Would also agree that matching Nos. are a feature from later in the C19, though the replacement stopper is of no consequence here.           I think it's only the early dip-mould pieces that carry the glass house name on the base.

A bottle that is assumed to be over 200 years old will have definite signs of age related wear, both inside and out  - and still waiting to see a photo of the underneath please.

P.S.     Phelps Warren is a stunning good read if you're at all into C18 and C19 Irish glass  -  the later revised edition from 1981 (not the 1970 job)

 

[Laird]

I have examined the base and there isn't a name - it is plain as seen in the pic below.
There are no depressions in the neck under the rings.