Topic: shaft and globe decanter for show.

[Paul S.]

This is very attractive and reasonably easy to date - McConnell suggests this compressed shaft and globe appearance, with similar cutting/engraving, dates probably to c. 1840 to 1860.     The stopper is flat topped, faceted, nearly ball shaped and with tear, and shows engraving giving a nod to fruiting vine.       In my experience, quite remarkable for this pair to have remained together for all this time  -  most of the older bottles in charity shops have replacement stoppers.       The body is wheel engraved showing pheasants, fruiting vine and some broad leaf work very much like the W/Fs engraving in McConnell's book (first edition - page 315).      I did wonder which might be the correct description for the cutting on the shaft - scale, lens or hexagon  -  IMHO possible the last of those but correct me if I'm wrong, and the ground/polished pontil depression on the underside is wide and high quality.
It took a while to find the matching No. on the body  -  it's on the string rim - I've not seen a bottle with a No. in that location before - however the No. on the stub of the stopper is typical .................   44 is quite a high No.  -  from experience they're mostly single digits with decreasing commonness as the No. climbs. 
Apparently these compressed shaft and globe jobs were knocked out in large numbers during the first two or three decades of Victoria's reign, but thereafter seem to have taken a back seat to the more common spherical shapes.                    Height, with stopper, is 12 inches (c. 305 mm), and the cost was £5.
Looking at the 'face' of the No. it's likely this was a British made bottle, but can never be sure of course.       some of the pix drop over to the following reply, and apologies not all pix are as good as I would have liked and what the pencil is doing in picture 4 I've no idea.     

[Paul S.]

three more pix. 

[neilh]

There is one in the Molineaux Webb pattern book quite similar to this - same shaft, a decorated stopper. The body is more modestly decorated with leaves and grapes. I would date the MW one to c1852 +-3 years given its numbering in the book

[Paul S.]

thanks Neil.     Have to say I've not seen the M. & W. example, and Andy McConnell's book was the source of much of my info for this post.      Mostly we struggle to date pieces even reasonably accurately, and the decoration we see on this bottle, with one exception, is seen commonly over a long period of time, and it's really only the fact that the C19 renaissance of the shaft and globe appears to have had one of the shortest life-spans that makes dating less guesswork than usual.             The exception is this rather wide and sinuous leaf-looking motif, which off hand I don't recall seeing before but that means nothing - but it's showing in the Decanter book, and referenced, as mentioned, to W/Fs.        Can't be easy to make a piece of wheel engraving look 3D, but not a bad effort in this instance.   

Not all shaft and globes qualify as 'compressed' examples - many have bodies with more substantial capacity than mine, or come to that, the W/Fs examples showing in McConnell's book, which have noticeably squashed bodies, and an almost 'collar' shape at the base of the shaft.          Is the M. W. example a compressed piece or is it a standard type larger body  -  I don't think McConnell mentions it.            Perhaps these things were made for spirits or liqueurs.

My bottle has a small chip at the pouring rim area - great shame - but for the money and attractiveness can't complain.           Correction  ...  think the expression is 'string ring.

[neilh]

I would say the MW is bulbous and similar to yours. There appear to be a few of that body shape, but most are standard. There is one - a frosted greek key example - which is exaggerated bulbous, very wide. And a few are pear shaped.

[Ekimp]

Hi, I can’t find anything similar as Whitefriars in the second edition of McConnell but it is near enough identical to the 1860 B & J Richardson pattern drawing shown on page 262 (2nd ed.).

The proportions might be very slightly different as it is hard to tell by comparing photographs to the drawing. The cutting even looks the same although the butterfly and bird aren’t shown, presumably because they are around the back. It would be interesting if you could provide a photograph from the side with the grapes in the centre, facing the camera, for a direct comparison with the drawing.

A nice find!

Edit: I see it’s a flower not a butterfly.

[Paul S.]

thanks - when I saw the word butterfly I thought I'd missed something, and almost went to check the bottle again, so thanks for the edit  -  my picture of the whole is not good, I know, I seem unable to produce the sort of quality pix that I once did, so must try harder.       Think what I need is a source of white light, not the yellowy candle coloured thingy I'm using currently.         Regret to say I never got around to buying his second edition, so can't check the Richardson reference mentioned  -  does that pattern show the broad leaf motif I mentioned? - though appreciate it doesn't include the pheasant.     The W/Fs picture I mentioned, in the first edition, also doesn't include the bird, so can only assume I got good value for money .            I do have the large W/Fs book, so will give that a look shortly, and will post some more pix if still required at the weekend.

[Ekimp]

The drawing in the book is from the same direction as your first photo but obviously directly from the side so would be easier to compare a photo from a similar angle. I thought your photos were perfectly good...except for morphing a flower into a butterfly

The drawing in the book looks like a drawing of your decanter but with some minor differences between what was drawn and what was executed. The broad leaves are there (that look like two types of fern) in the same orientation as far as I can see, as are the vine type leaves. I just notice the flower is drawn off to the side to show the design that wraps around the side.

The stopper in the book looks more spherical but otherwise very nearly identical, with the flower with fan above and below and facets etc. Nine rows of oval cuts on the neck with the little gaps at the corners between ovals. Has the same rings around the neck and the faceted neck above the top ring.

I won’t be buying the third edition, it hurt enough forking out for the 2nd!

[Paul S.]

Have now seen there is a virtually identical bottle included in Mark West's 'Glass Antiques Checklist' - a small offering from Miller's - page 119, which West says is "around 1850".     Neither the Miller's example or the Webb's mentioned by Neil appear to include a pheasant as part of the wheel engraving - if only mine didn't have a small chip.

Mark West's almost pocket sized book is very useful and something I've dipped into and used for reference over many years  -  particularly good on decanters (though obviously not in the same league as McConnell) and drinking glasses (though again not as comprehensive as Bickerton) - but handy for quick reference.

[cagney]

In USA this cutting called a saint Louis neck. Also saint Louis panel. Term in use as far back as the last three quarters of the 19c. One book states the English/ Irish term is "convex diamond"