Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => Bohemia, Czechoslovakia, Czech Republic, Austria => Topic started by: CraigR on December 23, 2018, 07:42:30 PM
-
Hello, have a look:
(https://i.imgur.com/LyQoghC.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/fR0fNFk.jpg)
I think I've identified this piece as a Feigl & Morawetz Libochovice no. 1917, thanks in part to old posts on this forum. However I don't have access to Marcus Newhall's book so I'm wondering if anyone who does can tell me when it was made or anything else about it. The brass(?) is somewhat of a mystery as well because it's not present on any other pictures of this vase that I've found.
Thanks in advance.
-
Hi,
I've seen similar brass collars and feet on both Libochovice and Reich pieces sold in the US. I've often suspected that they were added by an importer/ retailer as we don't tend to see them in Europe.
It can be hard to date Czech glass of this type as many patterns appear to have been in production for a long time. The vase is shown in the pre- 1958 catalogue so was certainly in production in the 1950s. It seems many people date this design to the late thirties (understandable based on style and technique), but I don't recall any hard evidence for when the design was introduced.
Steven
-
Resurrecting this discussion as trying to find out something about another vase.
I'm just wondering if the fact the piece is mold marked Czechoslovakia and also Tchécoslovaquie on the base has any bearing on the date it might have been made?
m
-
;D
I haven't seen this thread before - but I can't help noticing that the brass sections are not nicely in tune with the design of vase itself. It's some sort of forced marriage. I do not think the brass could possibly be original.
-
I’d tend to agree it’s a forced marriage, but I think from the number that I’ve seen (all in the US) that this was done by the importer or retailer when the vases were new. I’ve also seen similar metal mounts on some S. Reich pieces. There’s an example here, but I think in this case the mounts look better and the handles tend to complement the design somewhat: http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,60270.msg340088.html#msg340088
-
I was just wondering if the fact the piece is marked on the base has any bearing on it being made pre 1938.
m
-
Sorry for the distraction, m. :-[ I got rather annoyed at the brass plonked over the horses with absolutely no regard for them.
You are making an important point/query about the marks and dating. But I can't help.
Is one mark in French? If so, it might indicate made for export, and that might help a little.
-
Hi Sue :)
yes the brass is strange but I've seen it on other pieces. I think they look quite classy with the mounts (but I also think they look better mounted simply on a plain black base :) ). With the gilt/brass mounts though, I can imagine if they aren't properly adjusted it would distract from the pressed image though but perhaps it's the pic of the item that shows the mount slightly in the wrong place?
Regarding my question about the Tchecoslovaquie mark:
In 2009 Marcus (iirc I think it was Marcus that was user Sklounion ) gave some very good information on this query about the French Tchecoslovaquie mark here:
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,26653.msg146501.html#msg146501
I quote his whole post - the bold part relates to my question and is my bold :
'With less than perfect knowledge, I would like to make the following observations:
Rudolfova Hut moulds were predominantly made 1905- 1950s, by Ulrich and Christl, Mstisov. Only when that company, by then nationalised, became part of Sklarny Inwald, did Rudolfova Hut acquire an "in-house" mould-making capability.
Rosice moulds were mostly made for the factory, prior to 1946, by the Brno based H.Kiko mould-making company, which following the Benes decrees, continued as supplier, becoming Brnoform in the post-communist era, and supplying Rosice when it was, for a limited period, a part of Crystalex.
Libochovice moulds were supplied by both Czechoslovakian companies, tho' three tableware patterns definitely used imported moulds from the USA.
I have no information regarding Hermanova Hut's suppliers.
Raised marks to Inwald items are the exception, not the rule.
Hermanova Hut, Libochovice and Rosice items also carry the mark, but again not on all items. Another pre-war Czechoslovak manufacturer to use the raised mark on pressed glass was S.Reich.
The mark appears not to have been used after WWII.
Regards,
M'
It was posted as part of the conversation in this thread:
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,26653.msg146436.html#msg146436
I was just wondering if anything had transpired since then in terms of any new light on the matter.
-
As an example, this vase and the Birds vase appeared in the Libochovice catalogue of 1930-1939:
https://www.pressglas-korrespondenz.de/archiv/pdf/pk-2010-1w-06-mb-libochovice-1930-1939-foto.pdf
As I noted on another thread, I had found the Birds vase in the pre-1958 catalogue on Marcus' DVD which came with the book.
I suppose I'm wondering if they still used the same molds with the Czechoslovakia and Tchecoslovaquie mold marked on the base, in their production after WWII. i.e. just continued using pre-war molds to produce even if the molds used were marked Czechslovakia and Tchecoslovaquie on the base.
m
-
Do we have any idea how many identical moulds were normally made?
-
I recalled mentioning a discussion about moulds with the late David C Watts (author of A History of Glassmaking in London) where he said that 4 moulds would usually be the norm.. see http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,60606.msg342089.html#msg342089 (http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,60606.msg342089.html#msg342089)
-
For London. This side of the Iron Curtain. Where profits are the overriding concern and mould making is expensive.
There was money available for culture and the arts on the Eastern side. It is likely, I think that far more moulds were made there, and there are a few designs that have been found that do not seem to have been made in huge numbers, which makes me suspect moulds were made far more promiscuously, unconfined by commercial overlords.
That is good info. Anne, thanks, but I'm really not sure it can be applied here. :-\
-
We don't know that for sure though.
Also pre-war may have been a different monetary position to post-war. Molds were re-used post war so there may have not been a) money available at certain periods to re-make molds and b) the person-power available to make the pieces, depending on time frame obviously as the term 'post war' covers a very long period up to now.
Pre-war, would they have been any less efficient in their processes than they were anywhere else? I know there may have been more person-power available to make glass, but cost and efficiency would still have been a factor. Mrs Graydon-Stannus makes disparaging remarks about continental glass being sold here so it may have been at a lower capital cost as well. Therefore they would have had to make their systems efficient surely?
m
-
This article is about Carnival Glass and is from Glen and Stephen Thistlewood and their site 'Carnival Glass Worldwide'.
The discussion is around a candlestick with the word Tchecoslovaquie impressed on the base. The article appears quite emphatic that with the impression of that mark it dates the mould to 1918-1938:
Quote
'On the base of our single stem candlestick is the moulded word TCHECOSLOVAQUIE, which dates the production of the mould to between 1918 and 1938 (before WW2)'
and
'... It seems possible – even likely – that the candlestick mould for 1224 (Sublime Deco) was made before this time, possibly in the somewhat more settled years of the early 1930s (we know, because of the TCHECOSLOVAQUIE mark, that it was made before 1938).'
https://www.carnivalglassworldwide.com/sublime-deco.html
Incredibly interesting article about Libochovice and mentioning Feigl & Morawetz with discussion around pre and post war.
In summary then:
- It seems from this article above that the mark dates the mould being made between 1918 and 1938.
- The outstanding question on the vase on this thread is whether the moulds with those marks were still used after the war to continue to produce.