Topic: Info on James Powell Topaz glass - "The Queen Victoria Topaz bowl"

[flying free]

Re the V&A uranium glass bowl is engraved with a crown and a VR and the arms of the City of London.



The V&A description does not say this was produced for the QV Guildhall banquet in 1837.

That was mentioned from the Whitefriars book on reply #4 by Essi here:
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,70066.msg390276.html#msg390276

It was also mentioned by Hajdamach in British Glass 1800-1914.
See my information posted much earlier in this thread
Quote
1) On page 57 of Charles Hajdamach's British Glass 1800-1914 it shows colour plate 4  including this bowl seen in the V&A link I gave earlier.
It's photographed against a white background so a little easier to see the 'real' colour and it appears as a yellow colour glass (in my opinion the yellow is quite clear but leaning towards slightly honey coloured yellow rather than citron if you can picture it).  Described  in the caption as '... the bowl in yellow glass, ...'

On page 54 talking about this colour plate and bowl, and as part of a suggestion that England, France and Bohemia were all experimenting with colour technology at around the same time period rather than England lagging behind, it says:

'Stunning proof which underlines this theory is found in a set of finger bowls in yellow glass comparable to the 'Annagrun' or yellow-green colour, achieved with uranium, which had been discovered by Josef Riedel in Bohemia in the 1830s. The finger bowls and matching plates in clear glass, partly frosted and engraved, were used at a banquet in the Guildhall for Queen Victoria in 1837 to celebrate her first official visit to the City of London.'
[/b]
But there is definitely no mention of a maker in the description in CH British Glass pg54.  So I'm not sure how this is 'proof' that the English were experimenting with coloured glass at the same time a Bohemia and France really.' unquote.





The V &A description does say it was made by Davenport 1837.

https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O2170/finger-bowl-davenport--co/

The Description in The Examiner of the finger bowls being 'topaz glass' and Walter Spiegl's description of what 'Topas-Glas' was, does not appear to match these uranium glass bowls.

[flying free]

...
3) Neither the V&A or CH describe this bowl as Topaz but I think, whilst the link the Museum of London print site of the bowl has disappeared suddenly, it was described there a Topaz glass,because a link to that description and the bowl still comes up on another print site called Memory Prints here (and gives credit to the Museum of London):
http://www.memoryprints.com/image/142383/james-powell-and-sons-whitefriars-ltd-finger-bowl-in-topaz-glass-1837
...

I mentioned this info where the bowl now in the V&A and it's  topaz descriptor was first seen via the Museum of London and said that the link had disappeared but that I had found it on a memory prints site.

The link to the bowl on the memory prints site has now disappeared.

[flying free]

Correction to reply #250
where I said
'The V&A description does not say this was produced for the QV Guildhall banquet in 1837.'


On the link to the object the V&A does not mention it was made for the Guildhall Banquet.
However
The V & A shows the bowl on a blog on uranium glass and does state it was made for the 1837 banquet:

'The first object is a finger bowl from the early 19th century, an example of the first uranium glass to be produced in Britain. The first use of uranium oxide in glass manufacturing is credited to Josef Riedel, who developed it in 1834, at his glassworks in the Isergebirge, Austria. This finger bowl, as part of a service of 6,000 pieces, was designed not long after in 1837. Made by the firm Davenport & Co., the service was commissioned by the Corporation of the City of London, for a banquet at the Guildhall to celebrate the accession of Queen Victoria.'

https://www.vam.ac.uk/blog/museum-life/seeing-more-glow-in-the-dark-glass?doing_wp_cron=1733167821.1470279693603515625000

[flying free]

In contrast to the comment regarding uranium glass development and Riedel given in the post above, Neuwirth W in Farbenglas I page 277 says:

'The history of uranium glass lies in obscurity'.

[flying free]

 Oddly written evidence of James Powell & Son's link with uranium glass in 1851?

Source: Illustrated London News August 9th 1851
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Illustrated_London_News/_6VUAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=uranium+glass+powell+%26+sons&pg=PA193&printsec=frontcover

Page 193 written and then engravings of their vases on display on page 196:

Page 193 mentions their stall and says that the engraved group on page 196 is theirs.
The article then says:
'At the same stall is a specimen vase of yellow glass, produced by the oxide of uranium, first applied by Messrs. Powell to the colouring of glass many years ago, at which period it was sold as high as a guinea per ounce, but from it's having been brought since that time into general use, may now be purchased at a much less price per pound'.

It's not definitive evidence is it?  The way it's worded makes it look like Powell's had a yellow vase stood on their stall but it doesn't explicitly state they made it.  It just references that Powell's applied it to the colouring of glass 'many years ago'.

The way it's worded implies that the group is the group mentioned in page 193 but that the yellow glass vase was a separate item and isn't in the group.  Was the yellow glass vase just there as an example of uranium glass produced by some other maker, there to show the colour?

It does seem as though they are saying uranium oxide was expensive when Powell's 'applied it to the colouring of glass many years ago',  but I don't have a clue what a guinea was.

[flying free]

a goblet shown in yellow uranium glass dating to c.1837
Pressed or molded but very interesting cutting execution on the stem.
Pressglas Korrespondenz 2018-1

seite 13 von 19

Quote:
'Abb. 2014-2/21-01, Becher mit Reliefportrait, anna-grün / -gelb
Erzherzog Johann von Österreich (1782-1859)
Inschrift „DBV K.K. PRIV. GLASFABRIK E. HERZOG JOHAN
B STEYERMARK 1840“
Benedikt Vivat, Langerswald, bis 1837, Benediktenthal,
ab 1837; vgl. PK Abb. 2000-5/179, aus Eibiswald 1978, Abb. 94'


https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2018-1w-varl-vivat-annales-aihv-2015.pdf

Correction - this isn't dated to 1837. 

The inscription reads "DBV K.K. PRIV. GLASFABRIK E. HERZOG JOHAN
B STEYERMARK 1840"

[flying free]

in Pressglas Korrespondenz
Seite 4 von 12

Benedikt Vivat - Benediktthal glas
Two pokal or goblets with cutting on the pedestal stem that reminds me of the QV bowl.
The foot with the flat round top but cut base which creates the ridged effect around the side of the foot but not the top.
It's not identical to the V&A bowl but is reminiscent of.

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2017-1w-bernhard-becher-franz-I-vivat-1830.pdf

The uranium pokal is in the Burgmuseum Deutschlandsberg
https://www.archeonorico.at/index.php/de/das-museum/ausstellungen/3000-jahre-steirisches-glas

https://www.archeonorico.at/index.php/de/component/joomgallery/image?view=image&format=raw&type=orig&id=174




A MUCH better closer photos of the goblet here in Pressglas Korrespondenz 2014-2 seite 1 & 2 von 11

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2014-2w-hoepp-vivat-erzherzog-johann-1840.pdf
Quote
'SG: The Anna-green goblet was delivered to the auction house Dorotheum in Vienna. It is the first uranium-green glass of this type that has been found so far! Mr. Bernhard, curator of the glass collection at the Archeo Norico castle museum in Deutschlandsberg, informed me that the museum was able to purchase the valuable goblet at auction at Dorotheum Vienna. It is now part of the collection and will be shown as part of the exhibition “From forest glass to the first industrial glass - 3000 years of Styrian glass”. The following pictures were taken by Bernhard, Archeo Norico. '

And description of the goblet:
Quote (my underlining)
'PK 2014-1, Jakob: The mold-blown glass is a specimen that was already shown in PK 2000-5, p. 83. The glass shown there is identical to mine and repeats the motifs that can be found on the Tschuttera in the Stopfer collection (presented in PK 2011-4, 54 ff.). Photographing the "soft pattern" in the colorless glass is almost impossible. I have tried out various variants and hope that you can make something out of the material. I think that the pattern is definitely sharper on the glass than the photos make it appear. The glass is 16 cm high and has an upper diameter of 7.7 cm. Only the bowl is mold-blown. This was attached to the ground shaft. The glass is ground in a radial pattern under the stand. In the middle there is a dislocated part. The attribution is quite clear because the manufacturer is immortalized in the glass: Benedikt Vivat, Langerswald around 1840. On the cup is an inscription
“E.HERZOG JOHANN”.'

On Seite 4 von 11 there is a good close up photograph of the cut stem on one of their clear glass goblets or pokals and it shows the top of the foot and the underside cut very clearly for reference:
https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2014-2w-hoepp-vivat-erzherzog-johann-1840.pdf



I'm pontificating that this bowl may have been made elsewhere and imported and subsequently engraved at Pellatt's maybe (?) they were fond of 'garland engraving' style.   

Then for the Banquet of Lord Mayors for Prince Albert prior to the Great Exhibition it might have been further engraved  and had the crown and the odd 'UR' and the City of London coat of arms added to it - after that initial garland engraving - by a Bohemian engraver?

Or - it was made for the Great Exhibition and engraved abroad (hence odd UR mark) with the crown and garland to show support for the Queen.  City of London arms added afterwards for another banquet or because they ordered a set?

Benedikt Vivat showed at the Great Exhibition.

[flying free]

I'm pontificating that pondering whether this bowl may have been made elsewhere and imported and subsequently engraved at Pellatt's maybe (?) they were fond of 'garland engraving' style.   

Then for the Banquet of Lord Mayors for Prince Albert prior to the Great Exhibition it might have been further engraved  and had the crown and the odd 'UR' and the City of London coat of arms added to it - after that initial garland engraving - by a Bohemian engraver?

Or - it was made for the Great Exhibition and engraved abroad (hence odd UR mark) with the crown and garland to show support for the Queen.  City of London arms added afterwards for another banquet or because they ordered a set?

Benedikt Vivat showed at the Great Exhibition.

This is the example in the Corning for colour:
https://glasscollection.cmog.org/objects/19460/bowl?ctx=def10427804b5461ac823dfacd7ee337941a9b83&idx=9

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2014-2w-hoepp-vivat-erzherzog-johann-1840.pdf

I think the bowl was made and beautifully designed and cut and made as a cut piece with no engraving.
Then at a  later date someone engraved the garland design on the flared neck/collar of the bowl.
I'm also wondering whether it's possible that  the City of London shield and the Crown and VA were added at an even later period.

[flying free]

This is the example in the Corning for colour:
https://glasscollection.cmog.org/objects/19460/bowl?ctx=def10427804b5461ac823dfacd7ee337941a9b83&idx=9

https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/pdf/pk-2014-2w-hoepp-vivat-erzherzog-johann-1840.pdf

I think the bowl was made and beautifully designed and cut and made as a cut piece with no engraving.
Then at a  later date someone engraved the garland design on the flared neck/collar of the bowl.
I'm also wondering whether it's possible that  the City of London shield and the Crown and VA were added at an even later period.

Which could be why the City of London arms are incomplete?  There wasn't room to engrave a complete emblem which might normally have been engraved perhaps?
There is a Varnish goblet produced for the Banquet of Prince Albert that has the City arms fully engraved:

engraving of it here but the actual goblet is shown (it's green) in British Glass 1800-1914, Hajdamach C., page 260
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/51259/51259-h/images/ill_pg_407_lg.jpg

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/51259/51259-h/51259-h.htm

The author says:
'Having illustrated this volume with a murrhine vase, belonging to the House of Brunswick, and a curiously worked crystal cup, as gems of ancient production, we give here, as modern works of art, an engraving representing three superb drinking cups,—one for his Royal Highness Prince Albert, and one each for the Lord Mayors of London and York: the first is in ruby glass, a portion of the stem and base internally checquered with silver, and on the sides bearing white sunken medallions of her Majesty and the Prince Consort, and the royal arms of England. The other two cups were of the same size and shape, but, instead of being ruby and silver, the colours were emerald and silver; and on the sides were the private arms of each of the Lord Mayors, together with the usual heraldic emblazonments of the cities of London and York respectively. They were presented by the author of this work in the name of the Patent Silvered-Glass Company.'

[flying free]

Looking again at the crown and the way it's engraved on the bowl, in the link below is a goblet in the V&A that they say is possibly Apsley Pellatt.
https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O4287/wine-glass-apsley-pellatt/#object-details
There is an engraved crown on it which can be seen and the V&A say there are also the arms of the City of London, which cannot be seen.
The crown is impeccably and beautifully engraved by comparison to the crown on the uranium bowl:
https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O4287/wine-glass-apsley-pellatt/#object-details

bowl and plate here for comparison:
https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O2170/finger-bowl-davenport--co/?carousel-image=2006BE8998

There is a stark difference in the way the crown is engraved.