Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: Anne Tique on March 14, 2018, 05:56:52 PM
-
Hello everybody,
I bought this jardinière, or bowl, a while ago on the net in Germany.
It measures 26 cm in length and is 11 cm high at its highest point.
I've taken some pictures on my mirrored centre-piece/runner, which I can recommend to everybody .... It's just a bathroom mirror from any hardware store, and I think it looks very stylish on an older table ... but I'm loosing track again already, it's just to show the patterns and shape from different angles.
What attracted me to this piece is the cutting, the 'sand-grain' and the parts with the stars are particularly well done, imho, and I have seen especially the last a lot in France but also in Belgium, but I don't know if this was done elsewhere. Having bought it in Germany, doesn't mean it's German of course, as items tend to travel too.
I thought this piece could be dated early 20th C, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
The bowl has a little foot and this is cut at the bottom too, which I thought was unusual.
Any thoughts from anybody? I think a particular manufacterer is going to be difficult to identify this piece to, but it would be great if anybody could say where, as in country, it could be from.
Thanks for your time and replies,
Anne.
-
A couple of images added.
-
hello Anne - IMHO this is not saying early C20 to me. Although you don't comment as such, I assume this is lead glass - does it ring when 'flicked'. Neither do you mention wear - bowls that are one hundred years old can accummulate a fair amount of wear, both inside and out, although the cross-hatching on the underside of the foot - on this bowl - will tend to mask any foot wear. Sorry to be thick - is your 'sand-grain' the same as my cross-hatching?
The cross-hatching is a decorative feature that does have a long history, but the star-like or daisy flower/wheel cutting is suggestive - to me at least - of mid C20, and may just possibly indicate Czechslovakia.
As you've mentioned, it's unusual to have this 'all-over' cutting on the underside of the foot - again, in my opinion not a feature you might find on first half C20 cut glass bowls - though I've learned almost anything is possible :)
Another point about early C20 cut pieces is that the cutting should be sharp to the touch - the process of acid polishing is a later practice, as you probably know. Are there remains of the grinding marks still visible in the mitres?
Many of us on the GMB would interpret a jardiniere (forgive the missing grave/accent) as a container for plants - it would be sacrilege to use this very attractive bowl for plants :)
So now you don't have a mirror in the bathroom ;) - but I know we've had people here in the past who've used this same method to show the glass to better effect - it looks very good.
Really, this piece might be from almost anywhere they sell cut glass, but I'd still suggest Czechoslvakia/Germany, and second half C20 probably - but as you say we'll likely never know its origin, but great bowl for your fruit.
Unfortunately, there is often little response to requests regarding cut glass - possibly because C20 material is often difficult to pin down - but who knows - so fingers crossed.
-
Hello Paul and thank you for your reply and time to look at the images.
To tell you the truth, I'm a little lost ... the all over design makes me think of the transition period at the turn of the century, and the quality of the cutting is, in my opinion, correct for that period. I can't spot a fault on it in symmetry and perhaps i'm wrong, but i would have thought that such cutting would be earlier than half 20th C. The bowl rings like a bell and has a nice clear sound to it and not dull.
I didn't mention wear because I believe that doesn't have to say anything in particular ... i have seen more recent pieces that are in worse condition than some older ones ... It depends, as you know, on how it's been looked after throughout the years but this piece doesn't have a lot of wear. The starcrossing, as you mentioned (my sand-grain cut) is not as sharp on the bottom as it is on the sides of the bowl, but only to the touch as my eyes are not what they used to be 8) and it is a bit smoother at the bottom.
The star/daisy cut is already illustrated in the 1908 VSL catalogue, for example, so that's why i thought it was a little older then half 20th century.
I'm afraid i'm not familiar with the term 'mitres' when it comes to glass ... Do you mean the large facets?
A jardinière could be made of anything, really ... Nowadays we would think twice but bowls this shape are often catalogued as such...whether that was just a name and not referring to use, is unknown to me ... a bit ahead of my time but jut a bit.
Thank you Paul, for your time and sharing your thoughts and knowledge ... it is very much appreciated.
-
Anne - hope my words weren't interpreted as critical of the quality of this piece - it is a fine bowl and I'm envious.
your 'all-over cutting' may well be a reference to American Brilliant Period (ABP) style of cutting - though I doubt this piece qualifies as it lacks being 'smothered' by a variety cuts so favoured by the States c. 1890 - 1920. 'Mitres' are reference to cuts that appear as deep V cuts in the surface - not a fussy detailed cut as with pin wheels, daisy wheels, or cross hatching etc., rather just a plain cut with the edge of the grinding wheel to create the V. Good to hear this is lead composition glass - in addition to making the cutting easier, lead oxide in the metal makes for that wonderful ring when flicked.
Cross-hatching when confined to the tops of large relief diamonds is then described as strawberry diamonds, and appropriate it is too, and this description of 'strawberry diamonds' originates c. 1800. As with much else in life, time was that cutters would spend time cutting multiple small diamonds, though this appears to have been economised by simply cutting shallow cross-cut lines thus giving the appearance of many small diamonds.
So, in effect your bowl is showing ............. deep mitres, the daisy wheel and large areas of cross-cut shallow lines. As with the radial cut star which appears underneath bowls etc., your cross-cuts underneath are decorative, but may also hide - as does often the radial arm star - defects in the original blank, or scars from the original mould. It may also be the case, as occurred with much ABP material, that the cutting originated with someone other than the maker of the blank.
Some of these cut patterns originated a long time ago, but their appeal means they had a long life too. Some cutting can be grouped - the ABP as mentioned is recognizable .................. the massively heavy geometric mitred cuts of VSL from c. 1905 to 1940s (is theirs mostly on coloured glass?) ............. the less heavy abstract/geometric deco inter war cutting in the U.K. mostly it seems on clear glass bodies of traditional shapes .............. Scandi cutting (all those fishing nets and nubile women) - plus central European very heavy cut to clear (Moser etc.)
Your bowl would seem not to fit easily into these categories - so really I'm as confused as you, other than thinking I've seen Czech. material with large areas of cross hatching - but I have to admit truthfully to being not a lot wiser. Is the glass very white and clear, or of a grey hue and with possibly some stones?
The undulating rim might be thought of as nouveau - sinuous and floral in outline - but I'm not being serious, and regret don't think we are going to nail this one down. Seeing pieces on the screen only is never satisfying in terms of assessment, but we sometimes have to live with just these pix. Is the circular clear window underneath the foot, a depression where some mould marks might have been removed, do you think?
Agree, jardinière may be made from virtually any material, it's just that I'd suggest this was made for decoration or fruit rather than four kilos of garden soil and an Aspidistra ;)
-
Thank you Paul for taking the time to explain everything you mentioned, your keyboard must be smoking! :D
Please don't think I took your earlier message wrong. I've said it before, maybe here or elsewhere, you never know the intention of something that's been said on a forum, as you haven't got the person in front of you, but I'm grateful that you're spending so much effort in replying and sharing your knowledge. Having said that, im a bit disappointed that you're already giving up so early .....just kidding ;D :-*
Whether the crosscutting on the bottom has been applied to hide something or not, I would never know...the pontil is polished, as you can see, hollow and about 0,5 cm deep. If this has been done to hide anything, then it's done properly, because it's very smooth and no trace is visible. The glass is very clear and white as you say, and has no tint or colour at all.
I agree with your reference to ABP designs and style, there's not enough going on for that on this piece, but there were other styles too at that time, and it made me think of that more than anything else, but as you say, maybe we'll never find out where it's from. If you think Czech, than I'm happy to go with that.
Would you mind explaining what you meant with grinding marks on the facets/mitres in your earlier post please? I've only seen cuttings that have been polished afterwards, that have no traces at all but just a smooth finish. Would you have an image at all please? I can't imagine what that would look like, acceptable enough for a company to distribute.
Just because you've mentioned it, VSL did from the late 19th C onwards large facets/mitres, often wavy and inspired on nature, on certain designs without any other cut patterns at all, in coloured, clear and doublé or CTC glass.
Thanks again Paul.
-
Anne - reference my comments re grinding marks - probably me being a little less than clear, but ..................
I'd hazard a guess there are few pieces of cut glass where the original grinding marks - within the mitres at least - have been removed entirely, by polishing, and you'd need a loupe to see them anyway. Faint traces of lines caused by the wheel grit seem to remain often, but regret I doubt that I could capture them with the camera. Try looking at various designs of cut glass - with your lens - and you will probably soon see some of these lines, albeit as I say they're quite faint mostly, and if present they will be most noticeable within deep mitres, and obviously will run in line with the long dimension of cuts.
Some pix attached ............ deep mitres on a British Walsh made bowl. This is a high quality bowl with some of the deepest mitre cutting I've seen, and very faint grinding marks are apparent ............. this bowl dates to c. 1935 - 40.
strawberry diamonds - good example of criss-cross shallow cutting on large relief diamonds to imitate the surface of a strawberry - no idea of maker of the piece - probably late C19 / early C20.
small cut plate showing underside cutting in profusion, with lots of criss-cross cutting to imitate multiple very small diamonds. No idea of maker - just possibly Irish, and possibly first half C19 - more nibbles around the edge than a cocktail party, unfortunately.
It's likely that polishing presents the cutter with a dilemma - more so on older work where pumice/rottenstone used initially, with final polishing with fine rouge powder - all very labour intensive and time consuming, and you can see why the trade turned to polishing with acid. But acid isn't the same, and time saved was paid for by loss of sharp edges, and of course the danger involved. This loss of sharpness can be seen on much cut material from the past 60 years, where most sharpness is lost.
Haven't given up on your piece, but cut glass designs are prodigious - made everywhere - and earlier patterns are often copied. Will keep an eye out, but in the meantime fill your bowl with your cherries and enjoy its beauty. :)
-
have managed to capture couple of pix showing surfaces, within the mitres, where grinding marks still visible, on the Walsh bowl - hope these clear enough to see the lines. :)
-
Sorry for my late response to your explanation Paul, and I have to congratulate you on your knowledge.
I'm not going to try to take a picture through a small loupe, it's going to be a bit ... well, nerve wrecking is getting close ... holding and juggling with the loupe, camera and bowl in hand, but the bowl has been acid polished before cutting. I can't describe in words what it looks like but it clicked with your explanation. If I exaggerate ... It looks like drool on the mitres, invisible to the naked eye, especially at my age.
I salute you, as say the French and if I'd been wearing a hat, I'd take it off to you in humble admiration ... God I love old fashioned expressions.
-
Have to say that I did think you were avoiding me - but your sense of worship more than makes up for your absence. ;) In English we say 'nerve-wracking', though this is synonymous with wreck, and 'nerve-wrecking' sounds perhaps better and more akin to torture.
In English we also have 'I take my hat off to you' as a mark of admiration, so I guess something similar is a fairly universal type of expression.
I could be wrong, but would have thought it unlikely that your bowl was acid polished before cutting - it was my understanding that the acid polishing was carried out post cutting, in order to speed up the previously tedious job of manually polishing out the grinding marks, although as we've already said even high quality bowls still retain some evidence - within the mitres - of the original grinding marks. Acid polishing is detrimental to the sharpness of the cutting - just have a look at the vast amounts of dull-edged cut-glass from mid C20.
What makes you suggest your bowl was acid polished prior to cutting Anne? .............. and sorry, but will you please clarify - "drool on the mitres" please?
With a little practise, close up photography isn't too difficult - the most time consuming part is getting the light suitably angled (raking) so that the small area you want to see receives maximum illumination, though obliquely, and not at 90 degrees to the surface in question, and there's no need to hold the bowl, which is best placed on a level surface.
This allows one hand for the loupe and the other for the camera, whether you're 38 like me or older as with many members here ;)
Of course you may need to support or prop the bowl to achieve the correct angle for photography - try some time, not too difficult.
I suspect that most of these larger cut pieces are mould blown or pressed in some way, so I'd suggest that apart from treatment of the pontil scar, it is only the areas that have been cut that will eventually require acid polishing, but of course the entire piece is dipped eventually.
Some of the best 'old' expressions - in most languages probably - have their origins in trades/work practices and the military services, though meanings are not always obvious now. The origin of taking your hat off as a mark of respect no doubt dates to earlier centuries.
-
How could that be possible Paul, trying to avoid you. More importantly ... why?
Anyway, the cutting, besides the mitres, is too sharp and the 'stars' are not as shiny and mat for it to be finished with an acid polishing, following your explanations on the result of doing so.
With 'drool' I meant to say that it's not as smooth as when polished ... it looks like something ran down it and left traces. My loupe's only a tiny one, I'll try to take an image but can't promise anything, I'm not 38 anymore. ;)
-
Anne - perhaps drip or dripping might have been in your mind for 'drool'. Look forward to seeing some of your efforts with the loupe :)
-
I thought of that but there aren't any drops, so I came up with the best I could.
-
Anne - sure, I wasn't being picky. In fact your word is unrelated to the subject of glass - though must say I expect some of us drool over your linguistic skills of which I'm very envious. :)