Topic: Topaz or Canary or Victoria

[flying free]

Issue arises:

In the link to the research I gave above, the source referenced, I think,  for the acquisition of glass from Davenport was from Carol E Kohan's Historic Furnishings Report for Lindenwald (Reference 213 on page 52):


https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Historic_Furnishings_Report_for_Lindenwa/RVRhp8ObPAIC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=martin+van+buren+DAvenport+glass&dq=martin+van+buren+DAvenport+glass&printsec=frontcover

I have done a quick search in the Carol E Kohan Report but cannot access the Report.  On the quick search searching the word 'Davenport' the Davenport that appears to come up is a ' William Davenport Liverpool' (see the reference snippet for page 79 attached).

Information here on the Davenport connection in Liverpool - possibly running under the name Davenports, Fynney & Co. in Liverpool at the time Van Buren ordered his glass:
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/db071d3e-e56e-48f6-914e-fd7e66d751ed

Interestingly page 156 in the snippet link to the Report seems to indicate that Van Buren requested additional tumblers and glasses to go with decanters he already owned and that they were, quote,  'plain fine glass not cut'.

[flying free]

  You are exactly where I am at. I have questions. George W Leighton sure seems to use the two terms interchangeably. Trying to find a second source to either discount or account for this topaz terminology. A bit obsessed to know if the English terminology is the same as the bohemian. No luck , need help. I seem to recall that Bohemian topaz had a certain gold matrix added . Am I correct in my recollection?
 

Re your question about the 'certain gold matrix' added to 'Bohemian topaz' -
Apsley Pellatt Curiosities of Glassmaking page 73
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Curiosities_of_Glass_Making/FCwGAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=apsley+pellatt+topaz+glass&pg=PA144&printsec=frontcover
'... light tinted glasses ... beautiful semi-opalescent yellowish-green colour; produced chiefly by the expensive oxide of uranium, mixed with a slight portion of copper, and appearing yellow or light green, just as the rays of light happen to fall...'
and
'... also produced by uranium alone, used as the colouring oxide for gold topaz: ...'

[flying free]

  I think your critiques of the VR bowl have some validity, especially the foot. As to the difficulty in the making of uranium/canary glass, I don't think it necessarily that difficult. My theory is that cullet used may interact negatively in the batch. Leightons advice to use flint batch No. 1 in his canary or topaz is telling, he literally makes his own cullet from the same flint glass recipe.
 

re the difficulty of uranium glass
Apsley Pellatt Curiosities of Glassmaking - 1849
page 78
'Uranium is specially affected by an excess of alkali, the colour varying from deep gold topaz to light amber-like opalescent green, as the alkali predominates.  The proportion of lead is diminished in either case; and although an excess of alkali extracts most colour from the oxide, it renders the Glass liable to become unhomogeneous, by the exudation of it's alkali'.

I can't find my reference to Pellatt's supplying an order of uranium glass and having it crumble and having to resupply it but I'm 100 percent certain I read this from him - either in a lecture he gave or perhaps something written for the Great Exhibition or maybe elsewhere in the book but I can't find it at the moment?  But I definitely read it.
See bottom of page 71 and top of page 72 for a description of uranium glass cracking and having to be completely re-supplied 3 months after it was made and sent out from the Falcon Glassworks:
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Curiosities_of_Glass_Making/FCwGAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=apsley+pellatt+topaz+glass&pg=PA144&printsec=frontcover

Which is what makes me wonder about the John Ford notes in his recipe book that I read from recent research where John Ford notes that his uranium glass was successful.  If Apsley Pellatt thought his was so successful he cut an order from it and sent it out, and it then crumbled, who is to know whether John Ford's apparently successful batch failed at a later date after being supplied?

[flying free]

Note - I've amended my previous post to include the information regarding the cracking of a supply of uranium glass objects and them having to be resupplied.

[cagney]

  I am currently working on two theories concerning both counts. The VA table set and Topaz. I find it hard to believe that one company makes this splendid array of table glass and does not insert their name into published accounts. Was it a joint effort and as a result no one would claim progeny. A sort of  "for Queen and Country" thing. As far as topaz goes the term seems to change or morph the farther you get from the original source Bohemia.

[flying free]

- It seems Davenport was asked to 'supply' the goods.  The question is where they 'gathered' the goods from at such short notice I think.  As you seem to be saying I think, if they were the sole maker of this huge supply you'd think they'd have publicised it, accounted for it and shouted it from the rooftops.

If however the goods were gathered from British companies and companies from abroad, then there is a question were Davenport also a 'middleman'  as well as a maker, or was it just for this particular Coronation Banquet that they acted in that way on behalf of 'the nation'?
Also, Davenport seems to have been a prodigious supplier of china so their standing as a company may be because of that, whereas it appears the glass seems to have been secondary and something they were not as famous for at the time.


- I've not had a chance to check the Farbenglas books yet but I think there is mention in there of the Neuwelt 'Gold Topaz'.  I'll check it out over the weekend and post again.

[cagney]

  The use of middlemen seems to have been a common practice. Successive administrations including the Jackson admin. in 1833 ordered glassware for the White House from third party dealers in china and glass to augment the original service made by Bakewell in 1829. Breakage and probably outright theft was considerable. At times large receptions would be held open to the general public {as one newspaper put it the "washed and unwashed"] involving hundreds. These third party orders were considerable, involving anywhere from 5 to 10 different articles bought  per dozen or dozens.

  19th century topaz or gold topaz in the bohemian sense seems to have not survived in any quantity. Perhaps it was unstable similar to Heisy's marigold.

   George W. Leightons notes concerning different batches can be very informative I think. Two examples involving copper in the batch I find very interesting. Monkey is term he uses for a small furnace to do experiments.

[flying free]

  Photos are selected entries from Geo. W. Leightons copy of William Leightons batch book with other notations. Available online from the Rakow Library at CMOG. Creative Commons, no copyright.
Seems to use topaz and canary as similar if not the same. Victoria maybe a little more green, all use approximately the same amount of uranium. A handful or more other recipes using uranium listed as well.

Thank you for the further info.

 I wonder why William Leighton has a uranium glass recipe  called Victoria?
Am I right in thinking these recipes are from post 1839 when Thomas Leighton had his discussions with John Ford?

[flying free]

  I think the Leighton - Ford correspondence c. 1839 intimates a slightly earlier date, " You likewise informed me that to make your Canary Metal you used nothing but the oxide of Uranium in your flint
batch". John Fords recipe works out to about 1 lb. of uranium per 91 lbs. of flint batch. Leighton seems to have refined it down to about 1 lb. of uranium per 133 lbs. of  flint batch.
  Concerning finger glasses/cups/bowls I can give you this tidbit from Jane Shadel Spillmans book on ' White House Glassware '. Among the glassware purchased through James P. Drummond "Importer and Dealer in China, Glass and Earthenware" by Presdent Van Buren for the White House in 1837 are 6 doz.green finger cups @$3.66 per dozen. Among the glassware  ordered by President Tyler in 1841 are 1 doz. green finger bowls. One housewife's advice book of the period described there use, under the listing "finger glasses".

  One other tidbit from the same book. Van Buren owned a personal set of English table glass, bought by his son in England in June 1839. According to the invoice for the set, there were two dozen each of six sizes of stemware, all engraved in Queens pattern.

 

That date is good for their correspondence but whether the glass mix was successful is a question.
There is some information here that seems to imply 1841 for Holyrood uranium glass (my bold in the quote below) ?
Source: excerpt online from
The Magic and Misery of Glassmaking: Researching the History of the Scottish Glass Industry
By Jill Turnbull
Published by Society of Antiquaries of Scotland
'...One early venture was the production of uranium glass, called canary or topaz. In May 1841, pot number one (of eight) in the furnace was charged with 545lbs of their clear ‘flint’ (lead) glass[1] to which 6lbs of ‘oxide of uranium’ was added. It ‘turned out very good’.
https://booksfromscotland.com/2017/09/magic-misery-glassmaking-scotland/

[cagney]

  I take the citation of May 1841 as documentation of a successful large batch of uranium glass, not necessarily the first. Although it seems to imply such. Wether Ford had made previous successful batches perhaps an open question? Leightons query about only the amount of uranium in Fords "Canary Metal" and the use of the of the term "to make your Canary Metal" in his letter seems to imply heavily that he was successful at this time. Wether in smaller batches unknown.

  Victoria I think is a more green version of canary. The addition of brass filings in the recipe given at the beginning of this thread serves this purpose I think. In the less than handful of other recipes for Victoria "virtigris" or "blue vitriol" is substituted. These two ingredients are also used in various uranium based greens for special purposes, green for plating, etc.

  Doubtful that any of these go back as far as 1839. George W. Leighton's reciept book is divided into sections  according to his notes with some overlap. Pages 1-12 recipes made at Wheeling,West Virginia c. late 1880s.
Pages12-16  recipes made at NEAG 1858-1866. Pages 30-63 his fathers[grandfathers] recipes. No dates are given. Pages 64-75 various recipes collected from various sources.