Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: bfg on September 25, 2013, 08:30:15 PM
-
evening :)
I have a bristol green funnel / trumpet bowl wine glass which I had tentatively put around 1930s give or take 10 years based on the previous owners provenance but on trawling the net I have seen similar ones given a much earlier date
have I got it wrong? is this shape typical of a particular era?
Ht: 5 inches
many thanks for any pointers
Mel
-
not easy pieces to be certain of always, but my thoughts for what they're worth are.........
this is a certainly a shape that occured around 1810 - 30 (mainly Regency I think) although perhaps not the most common - and the colour is probably o.k.
BUT..........
on yours the stem appears a little too thin - looking at pix of genuine examples, there doesn't appear to be any stinting on thickness of stem - definitely more chunky than yours, and the mouth might be a tad narrow on this one. It should be quite heavy for it's size - they tend to be somewhere between 4 and 5 inches, and the originals should sit firmly on their feet, not just on the rim.
Is it lead glass - it should be, and give a good ring - and can't quite see the finish in the pontil area.
Peter may have a much better idea :)
-
hi Paul, was hoping you were still about this eve, thanks for your thoughts :-)
I'll add some daylight pics tomorrow to show the colour better and the shadows may give the illusion of a thinner stem than it actually is
I'd say the foot sits flat and it has a lovely and lingering ring but the pontil mark looks very clumsy to me. I have some lovely early Viccy cut wine glasses and the finish is far more refined than this
THe width of the bowl at rim is 2.75 inches
yes, would welcome Peter's comments too if he pops in
-
hi Mel
meant to say that these Bristol coloured drinking glasses weren't apparently intended for wine, but were made for drinking port - and
as to the bowl shape, it seems to be that if there is any flaring to the bowl then it's trumpet, but if the sides are straight then it's conical.
The colour is not a major factor - these things came in a variety of shades, from pale to very dark, so it doesn't help when dating.
For period, the foot should be generous in diameter when compared with size of the rim - and a possible indication of a Georgian/Regency bowl is that small raised cushion (sometimes with a central dimple) found at the bottom of the bowl - as opposed to a plain curved profile of later bowls.
Feet should have plenty of striations and tool marks, and if early C19 is likely to have an edge profile that curves downward to meet a flat foot.
Don't think you want to see a symmetrically round edge to the foot. I could be wrong, but would prefer to see a depression under the foot rather than a snapped scar.
I've six or seven of these things, but must admit to not really being sure about them - green was a much copied colour, especially in drinking glasses, well into the C20 - and I dare say are still being made. There's hardly an antiques centre anywhere that doesn't have a few knopped, conical shaped, Bristol green 'Georgian' glasses - allegedly - on show. ;D
May well be wrong, but regret to say I'm still of the opinion that your glass appears too slim for period.
Neil might also have some ideas on this - believe he collects this period. :)
-
HI
Unfortunately I cant really add much, as has been said these types can span a hundred year period so without it being in the hand to look at the metal it is very difficult to determine which era it may have come from , personally it looks to be a later example to me , the flattish foot etc ,
Can I also say Paul that the dimple sometimes found at the base of bowls is only found in 3 piece glasses, it being the result of glass being pushed up from under the bowl during attachment of the stem you will not see it in 2 piece glasses, a day out with the Georgian glass makers at Quarley is a real eye opener for learning about the construction of antique glasses
Sorry I can be of more help on this 1 .
cheers ,
Peter.
-
thanks for the correction Peter re the dimple at the bottom of bowl :).
Whilst I appreciate that C18 pieces have the higher terraced/domed shape of foot (originating with the need to accommodate a substantial snapped scar that wouldn't scratch the table), I had a feeling that with much of this 'Bristol' coloured material from the early C19, feet were, in comparison, a lot flatter. I'd agree this one might well be a much later copy.
-
thanks Paul & Peter
lots of useful info there
Will stick to my original thoughts :-)
-
Hi ,
The great majority of 18th c drinking glasses have what are termed conical feet which can be quite flat. they can be plain or folded these have just enough clearance for the scar to be lifted above the table , some can be higher than others but still referred to as conical ,terraced feet ,normally found on Firing glasses can be quite flat but again with just enough clearance to avoid scratching,clever guys the Georgians were , domed feet yes by there nature will accommodate a pretty rough scar and domed feet can be either have a flared conical edge if that makes sense? which is plain or folded.
cheers ,
Peter.
edited to add , I could if it would helpful provide images of most types of feet found on 17th and 18th c glass.
-
I for one would be most grateful for that, thank you Peter
-
Hi ,
Try these for starters , there are other foot forms , not done the photos yet though some like the domed and terraced and the double domed are very very rare and have escaped capture so far there are also moulded feet of various types and one or 2 others , I do have them so will add them to the album in the future. I have also include the glasses the feet belong too so that you can see them in context
https://picasaweb.google.com/100765996251128945027/FootForms?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCMTSqoDS3-yldw&feat=directlink
cheers ,
Peter
edited , more added
-
wow! :o
masterclass
Thank you :-*
-
many thanks Peter - extremely useful information, and pictures convey so much more that reams of words - I'll add these to my references, and will look forward to more if you have them some time.
I hate to labour the point, especially in view of your experience and knowledge, but I'm wondering if there may be a point of difference here - regarding flatness of feet when speaking of early C19 Bristol green styles only - when compared to the flint examples you've shown, which I'm assuming all pre-date 1800.
Looking at my own few green glasses which are probably 1810 - 1830, and some of the very similar book examples - plus the style of Mel's glass - flatness of feet seems to be the norm. If the feet of these coloured glasses are compared to feet generally from the C18, such as the clear examples only that you've posted, then the flatness of feet on green examples is quite striking.
There's a small but quite useful little book published by Ward Lock in 1967 called 'English Glass' with contributions by people like Elville, which has one plate (No. 152) showing green glasses from this category of Bristol colours, and from which it appears that flatness of feet for late C18/early C19 Bristol green glasses ONLY is quite a feature.
Unfortunately, the picture in question avoids dating the glasses, but I suspect 1780 - 1830 wouldn't be far out.
Do you have any of these Bristol coloured examples, from the early C19/Regency period, which I think was the period Mel was hoping her glass came from.? :)
P.S. wish he wouldn't show us such mouth watering glasses ;D
-
Hi,
quote " If the feet of these coloured glasses are compared to feet generally from the C18, such as the clear examples only that you've posted, then the flatness of feet on green examples is quite striking. " yep I cant disagree with that and commented above , quote " personally it looks to be a later example to me , the flattish foot etc.
Again these are out of my main interest period so am very happy with info provided, re the book , yep another I don't have but would be interrested in the evidence for this , quote " and from which it appears that flatness of feet for late C18/early C19 Bristol green glasses ONLY is quite a feature. )
cheers ,
Peter.
-
would agree that we have probably dispelled any remaining thoughts Mel had of owning a genuine Regency port glass. ;D
Appreciate that your interest doesn't include the Bristol colours Peter, probably quite wise - far too many copies out there. Unfortunately there are very few books that include a section on these things - there's Davis and Middlemas book called 'Coloured Glass' (bit out of date perhaps?), but precious little else it seems. But there are some very desirable coloured pieces from 1730 - 1780 period - including the wines with coloured twists.
-
Hi,
You mean like these 1 and 2 ;D
or these no 3 :)
cheers ,
Peter.
-
;D ;D - what can I say ........ and I bet you drink out of them ;D ;D thanks Peter.
-
frequently ;D.
cheers ,
Peter.
-
meant to say Peter.........I think that first pale green example with the very high domed foot appears to be the exact piece from the Davis & Middlemas book - page 23 'rare example c. 1760 with opaque spiral stem and high domed foot'. very nice indeed. :)
well, be it on your own head if you drop one ;D ;D ;)
-
Hi.
It may well be the one but unlikely they are all pretty much the same , touch wood there has never been an accident in decades, but if I do then ;D
cheers ,
Peter.
-
I give up - and we must stop meeting like this ;)
-
ahem! Paul, I was only checking I hadn't got it wrong so that I didn't give them away at a silly price - as per my OP the previous owners and I back dated them to 1930-ish after that their recollection of their family history became vague :)
It would have been a nice surprise but heyho
I too have bookmarked the link and will be comparing a plethora of glasses I have in boxes with ??? on them lol
I like being able to bounce things off like minded peeps. My confidence in my abilities is shot to pieces these days and I do prefer to list as accurately as possible x
-
Hope you do well with them anyway Mel. :)
-
a possible indication of a Georgian/Regency bowl is that small raised cushion (sometimes with a central dimple) found at the bottom of the bowl - as opposed to a plain curved profile of later bowls.
Can I also say Paul that the dimple sometimes found at the base of bowls is only found in 3 piece glasses, it being the result of glass being pushed up from under the bowl during attachment of the stem you will not see it in 2 piece glasses, a day out with the Georgian glass makers at Quarley is a real eye opener for learning about the construction of antique glasses
Amazing what you can find buried in the depths of this message board. I've been wondering about the dimples in a couple of glasses I have. Is this something that is specific to Georgian glasses? When did they phase out?
-
think I've learned to be a lot more cautious in the intervening years regarding the dating of drinking glasses in 'Bristol' colours - and probably other glasses too.
It takes a few years of collecting, and disappointments, to appreciate the extent to which these green, blue and amethyst glasses were reproduced in the late C19 and the early years of the C20 - v.g. copies some of them are too.
See attached picture showing some amethyst glasses in C18 and Regency shapes, though I doubt that any of these were made before c. 1900, and most probably more recent than that - some of these have a bump in the bowl. The exception here is the clear-stemmed example - very typical, IMHO, of a rather common shape from c. 1860 (without the collar they are apparently dated a bit later, so I'm told).
The 'bump' in the bottom of the bowl, the reason for which Peter (oldglassman) provided the correct answer some way back in this thread, certainly continued will into the C20, and seems to occur, deliberately, on some of the 'Bristol' coloured wine glasses made in quite recent times.
Obviously, machine made glasses avoid this hall mark, but I suspect it's found on many three piece glasses of quality from the C20, though as Peter mentioned, it won't be found on drawn stems. Wouldn't suggest this feature is used for accurate dating though - far too unreliable.