Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: mhgcgolfclub on July 04, 2021, 08:42:46 AM
-
Found these recently in a charity shop.
Possibly Bohemian enamelled and gilded large pedestal vases.
Missing a 2nd smaller one and possibly lids, although the rims were gilded.
I thought most likely Bohemian but cannot find anything quite as similar in the lower end of the market.
Not signed or marked.
Height 16" and 13.25, diameter of base 6" and 5.5"
Weight just over 1600gm an 1100gm
Thanks for looking
Roy
-
The shape and decoration make me think they are more likely French late 19th. century, but I can't name a maker. Also the way the gilding's been done doesn't look Bohemian
-
Thanks Nev French would have been my next possibility.
Thanks Roy
-
They look very Bohemian to me
-
And to me. Also the enamelling. It doesn't look French.
Harrach did vases that have this kind of pedestal shape.
Schachtenbach made this opaline glass as well iirc.
-
Excuse my ignorance but are these opaline or just white glass that has been frosted? It looks like there are areas of gloss finish that’ve not been frosted on the knops and rims etc.
-
Ekimp you are correct about the frosted and gloss finish. The vases are made in five sections with some parts frosted and some gloss.
There are very few pedestal vases online and the ones that are seem to be mostly Harrach exhibition vases. The white vases are described as either alabaster , opaque, opal, frosted and opaline which one is correct I am not sure myself.
I will try to send some pictures to the Harrach museum.
-
but the vase bodies are opaline glass. Opaline can be glossy or frosted.
They would be either opaline or alabaster as a descriptor. I have seen alabaster used to describe German or Bohemian glass in opaline.
They are not opaque they are translucent. Opaque white glass is opaque - cannot be seen through.
There was another type of clear Bohemian glass that had been frosted on it's surface that dates to around the 1820s. That is never described as opaline or alabaster because it is clear glass that has been frosted on the outer surface by abrasion. It has a different descriptor.
-
Thanks for the information. They look quite impressive pieces and I should imagine easily knocked over and smashed.
Flying free, the clear glass frosted by abrasion on its surface sounds interesting (especially regarding my recent post on the frosted decanter). Was the frosting on clear to give a cheap opaline effect? Don’t suppose you have any references handy or the descriptor so I could have a look?
-
Well it's just my opinion but no I don't really think it was done to achieve an opaline effect. It was it's own 'special effect' in my opinion. They were also making 'milchglas' pieces in the same style and with the same detailed cutting, gilding and enamelling which frankly are probably nearly opaque but look like white opaline so I think these frosted versions were just to create a new special effect.
I had thought perhaps it was invented to ensure good adherence of the enamelling colours they were using at that point however it's a very similar style and complexity to the white opaline (described as milchglas) vase I've seen which doesn't appear to have been frosted. The enamelling is scenic along with decorative bands of leaves and sprays with cut leaves on the surface and gilded bands and edges to the cut leaves. The decoration is detailed and complex and I wouldn't have said 'cheap' at all.
-
Ok, thanks. You mention about the possibility of the frosting being used to improve adherence of the decoration which would seem a good idea, I don’t know if they worried about that. I don’t have any frosted glass with fancy decoration but a few pieces with gilt bands, like on Roy’s. On my pieces the gilding is only on the areas that are not frosted, no wonder it wears off!
-
I suppose you also have to take into account that these pieces we own have probably been handled by many people and dusted (hideous for gilding etc ) for many years - 100-150 years. So in that context, not bad really.
The decorated and frosted transparent vases I'm referring to have all their various decorations both gilding and enamelling intact and date to the 1820s so 200 years ago. They are in museum collections. But that's another reason that makes me think they were not 'cheap'.
-
I suppose you also have to take into account that these pieces we own have probably been handled by many people and dusted (hideous for gilding etc ) for many years - 100-150 years. So in that context, not bad really.
The decorated and frosted transparent vases I'm referring to have all their various decorations both gilding and enamelling intact and date to the 1820s so 200 years ago. They are in museum collections. But that's another reason that makes me think they were not 'cheap'.
So as an example of what I mean here, I have a piece of 'matted' glass from that period. It's a lilac blue with shades of darker blue that turns red held close under bright light. The enamelling on it is perfect, absolutely perfect. Fired on I think. The gilding bands can be seen where they were placed but have been worn off. It looks as though that portion wasn't 'matted' but I wonder if that's because the gilding was applied on top of a 'glue' to ensure the gilding adhered. So the glue has left a sheeny band to be seen where the gilding has almost completely worn off.
-
Yes, not fair to expect perfection after 100+ years :o I probably could have phrased that better when I said ‘cheap’ but was speculating that it may have been a less expensive or less technically demanding alternative to opaline glass, if in fact opaline glass was particularly expensive or difficult to produce.
It looks as though that portion wasn't 'matted' but I wonder if that's because the gilding was applied on top of a 'glue' to ensure the gilding adhered. So the glue has left a sheeny band to be seen where the gilding has almost completely worn off.
If there was a glue I would imaging you would be able to see signs of decay after 200 years. If the glue was a cold process and not fired on, it would’ve been something organic.
-
Gold is fired on; the glue is a size of some sort and the medium for applying the gold
-
Thank you Christine. I thought it would be fired on and also couldn't remember the word 'size' for the glue! My head's not really in a glass place at the moment. Well either that or my memory's shot :-\
-
Yes, not fair to expect perfection after 100+ years :o I probably could have phrased that better when I said ‘cheap’ but was speculating that it may have been a less expensive or less technically demanding alternative to opaline glass, if in fact opaline glass was particularly expensive or difficult to produce.
If there was a glue I would imaging you would be able to see signs of decay after 200 years. If the glue was a cold process and not fired on, it would’ve been something organic.
This is from The Engineer's and Mechanic's Encyclopaedia 1836 VOL II Luke Hebert - page 672 - a very detailed and thorough description of how size was made :o and then the same also regarding size for gilding:
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Engineer_s_and_Mechanic_s_Encyclop%C3%A6/JPKzAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=uranium+glass+cornwall+1836&pg=PA679&printsec=frontcover