Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: lyndhurst44 on September 21, 2008, 07:45:59 PM
-
Hi,
I bought this bowl yesterday, it was in a filthy state but I decided to risk my £1 and buy it ::). It cleaned up a treat and I can't find any damage so I'm well pleased. I tried it under UV light and it glows (see photo 3). I am assuming that it is English but can anyone please confirm (maker?) or suggest otherwise please.
Thanks again.
Bryn.
-
Hi,
Forgot to state that this piece has a polished pontil and measures 6" at widest.
A friend has suggested Richardson's but is far from sure.
We seem to have droves of experts on modern glass but probably far fewer on earlier pieces.
cheers,
Bryn
-
These pieces are difficult. It could be English; it could equally be Czech. These frilly uranium opal glass things with blue (or amber) trim seem to have been made by several manufacturers and the style of pontil or its lack isn't a good indicator of which country - so unless it can be found in catalogues or colour matched to known pieces you're probably not going to find out much. It does date to about 1900 or thereabouts (possibly up to 1930s if Czech). (And if I'd have seen it, I'd have bitten the seller's hand off for £1 and said it was Czech)
-
I knew I'd seen something like this before... ;D
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,17853.0.html
-
Hi,
Thanks for your replies. Very interesting, much to see on the Verre D'Art site.
I actually picked up another uv react opaline piece today, a small bowl or vase with cranberry legs again for the same price, unfortunately one of the legs has a side chip which probably accounted for the price. However it sits well and looks fine. It was late evening when I got in so the picture has been taken with flash and is of poor quality.
Does anyone recognise this as well please.
Thanks,
Bryn
-
Just look at this sort of lookalike bowl attributed to Stevens and Williams on Ebay Canada - 260289631615 and what a price expectancy, and a reserve to boot. :huh:
Nice stuff if you can get it. ;D
Bryn
-
I would say that ebay item was wishful attribution. Just look how huge the feet look compared with the rest. Not very S&W to my mind. Having said that, there is a pink-lined unattributed one that is very similar in Gulliver, so it's probably British. And all the guff about who it was made for is just tosh. These sorts of pieces were "best" for relatively ordinary people. If you look at this picture here (http://jssgallery.org/Other_Artists/Forbes_Stanhope_Alexander/The_Health_of_the_Bride.html) you can see a a small flower arrangement to the left of the small boy's head and above the oranges. Those flowers are in an opal uranium frilled glass basket with an amber handle. I've seen the picture in the flesh (when it was at the Penlee Gallery in Penzance) and got really excited when I saw a basket very like one of mine in a painting of the period. It's a large canvas so it was easy to see. The basket is the only table ornament, if I remember rightly.
Bryn, your latest find is more unusual than the blue one, but I've no idea who might have made it.
-
Hi,
Does the first bowl have a pontil? :huh: If not, it looks so similiar in style to Fenton's Aqua Crest.
lenore
-
... that is very similar in Gulliver, so it's probably British. ...
Careful, Christine. I'm certain that Mervyn makes no general claim that any unattributed glass illustrated or discussed in his book is British. It is, perhaps, also worth remembering that when an author signs a contract with an established publisher, he or she loses control of almost everything except, possibly, his or her text. In particular this includes the title, dustwrapper, binding, and even picture captions, which potential problem Mervyn cleverly circumvented by not having separate picture captions.
I have yet to find any significant errors in the book, although, as an important groundbreaking work, my copy is acquiring plenty of pencilled supplementary notes.
Bernard C. 8)
-
Except that the publisher in question often merely slaps stuff between covers with little regard to layout or design and no editing (speaking as someone who works in publishing), so is unlikely to have changed anything significantly. A good publisher lets an author approve, or not, until the item is printed because they haven't done the research. The foreword and the title imply that most of the items are British and that European and US items are in the minority. I discussed the Britishness of the items with Leni and she was of the opinion that they wouldn't be in the book if Mervyn didn't have strong evidence that they were (unless otherwise indicated). (And the book is mostly captions and little body text!) Don't get me wrong, I love the stuff in the book and there is a lot of useful info, but how does one know where to stop believing.