Topic: shaft and globe decanter for show.

[Paul S.]

thanks for that  -  useful to know should anyone else use those expressions.

[Ekimp]

It looks to me that Paul’s decanter has been decorated using Northwood’s Intaglio technique, see http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,68028.msg380843.html#msg380843

In The Decanter (2nd edition), McConnell says on page 282 that intaglio engraving is “...an ancient effect midway between wheel engraving and cutting” that was “revived” by Northwood I.

When McConnell says “ancient” I assume that means several centuries ago but Hajdamach and Northwood II talk about it being a technique invented by Northwood I in the early 1890s, rather than just revived by him.

This decanter from Paul looks to have the scimitar blade shape standard Intaglio cuts described by both Hajdamach and McConnell, but it also matches a design shown by McConnell (page 262) from the B & J Richardson pattern drawing - that he dated 1860. So apparently Intaglio cuts from the 1890s on a decanter designed in 1860s?

I can’t see anywhere in Hajdamach or McConnell where they talk about the Intaglio technique dating to earlier than c 1890s except for the “ancient” reference in McConnell. So when was it invented, 1860s or 1890s or other? Is the early 1890s not reliable for the first appearance of this technique or is there a misunderstanding somewhere?

JN II page 126 says “Stevens and Williams can very justly claim to be the original producers of Intaglio decoration”. That is in the early 1890s.

Agree the decanter shown in West’s checklist looks identical except the engraved decoration is different. It’s a small pixilated photograph in the book but you can see the vine leaves look bigger, are in a different position, and have five segments to the leaves. So possibly the same blank with alternate decoration.

[Paul S.]

thanks for the information and up-date.            It's possible that the pheasant makes this one unusual, and I wonder how many of these have survived 160 + years, and with the original stopper.

I think you've become the Board's 'intaglio' expert - I certainly take your word for it in this instance, and probably all the others too. 

Agree, West's book is v. useful - I think had he done something on the scale of Hajdamach, then we'd have had a real gem much earlier.        Don't know that I'm in favour of 'pocket books' - I never go on my charity shop travels with it - would probably lose the thing anyway  -  but it's cheap and certainly as reliable and helpful, and more so, than many other guides.

[Ekimp]

No, I just have the book

[flying free]

|Interesting decanter in V&A for comparison of engraving. Decanter made 1800-1820, engraving added by Franz Tieze and signed by him ...1910

https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O249879/decanter-and-stopper-unknown/?carousel-image=2018LA1596

[Paul S.]

sorry, think the wrong item has come up  -  what is appearing is the 'Waterford Volunteers' bottle with pulley neck rings and dated 1782  ??         or is it just me being thick m?

[flying free]

No, it's the right item.
The detailed label says:

Decanter and stopper , with engraved decoration Ireland, 1800-20 Wilfred Buckley Collection (C.642 &A-1936) The decoration added, and signed, by Franz Tieze about 1910. .(18/06/2009)

I was just pointing out the engraving ... dated 1910 on a decanter made 1800 - and to compare it to the engraving on yours.


m

[flying free]

https://www.antiquesboutique.com/antique-decanters/engraved-shaft-and-globe-decanter-richardson-c1840/itm35769#.Ya4Nt9DP1PY

Sure this isn't Richardson's c.1820 as I don't think they were going then.
But does the bird look similar?

m

[Ekimp]

Yes, that decanter (antiquesboutique) looks the same although the grapes are smaller. It looks like there are three sections of decoration, two with birds on flowers and one with bird on butterfly. Maybe there is some variation. I see they say c1840 in the title but c1820 in the description Assume a replacement stopper also. I’m sure Paul’s decanter is an example of the design shown in McConnell, its not just similar to.

Lucky the V&A decanter was signed, I can’t zoom in too far to see detail but doesn’t look like any Intaglio in that one, which makes sense if it’s replicating engraving from 1782.

[Paul S.]

sorry Ekimp  -  our words have crossed, apologies, I just hit send twice and it went.        I see we both agree on the replacement stopper

firstly .............     sorry to say, but the wheel engraving on the Waterford bottle doesn't look like mine at all - the garland of leaves, or whatever, is simplistic and small in detail compared to the broad engraving of leaves, vine leaves, grapes and bird etc. on mine - but of course thanks for posting and trying to help.       The garland engraving is akin to what we call pteridomania, I think.
Apparently, there were an identical pair of these, and Phelps Warren showed both in his 'Irish Glass' which was re-printed in 1981 - whether the V. & A. have both I don't know.    Apart from the leaf decoration, the harp is beautiful, likewise the crown engraving and the three triple neck rings are impressive.   
Warren wrote of these two            ..............  "The pair of decanters engraved 'Success/To The/Waterford Volunteers/1782' (Plate 10) presents another enigma.       Except for a slightly full body, the outline here has the characteristics of a Penrose Waterford bottle: very wide lip, three triple neck rings, generous profile, moulded comb flutes of appropriate size.       Yet the Penrose Waterford glass house, which produced so many bottles akin to this one, was not founded until 1783.         The date 1782 is presumably commemorative."

Off-hand I can't remember how the dates stack up re the Richardson beginnings, but agree that the bird is almost identical  -  probably a pheasant I think - and most of the other engraving is very similar to mine - could even be the same hand.             However, IMHO the stopper is a later replacement - it doesn't have the grandeur which would compliment a bottle of high quality.    The quoted date could also be a tad optimistic and possibly a little early for these shaft and globe bottles.            I'm always a little cautious when a high end piece is offered without some evidence of provenance or attribution  -  this may be a genuine Richardson decanter from c. 1840, but would have been good to see that someone had made the effort to locate a source of proof.

The very early years of the Richardson dynasty are complex and involve one of the Webb's I think, I will have to read Hajdamach and see if I can fathom it again, but you could be right that there wasn't a Richardson Company at the date in question. 

thanks again.