Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: flying free on April 17, 2022, 04:56:50 PM
-
This arrived along with something else I bought.
It's tiny at just 7cm tall. Firepolished rim and snapped off pontil mark. Opalescent glass handles. Swirly white glass in or under a clear glass. The stem is not broken, it's just clear glass . I'm wondering how the foot has the white in it? I don't really know.
The black speckles in the body are in the glass.
Excuse the dirt around the inside lip base of the rim. I just resized some pics I took when it arrived.
Absolutely no idea of who might have made it or the date. Any help much appreciated :)
Thank you for any thoughts.
m
-
The white specks in the foot suggest the clear glass for the stem was rolled in white glass frit which was then worked into the clear glass. It looks as if they are blending into the white foot.
Ian
-
Thank you for looking and trying to help :)
The little specks do look like frit. I wonder if that helps to date it? It is strange how the body looks opaque and with the white having a swirled effect though. Not an effect I would have thought it might have looked like had it been rolled in frit. It's an odd thing.
m
-
I think frit has been used for a long time but don't quote me on that. My understanding is that the clear glass is rolled in it, then put back in the kiln and as it melts is worked into the glass so it becomes a solid colour. The specks in the centre have remained untouched, and those at the inner edge of the white foot less so.
I think this method can be used to create swirls of colour (such as in Hartley Woods), but I'm not a glass artist so someone here may need to correct this.
Ian
-
That sounds logical, the way spots of colour can be worked into streaks is apparent in much of Midsummer Glass's production. Does anyone else agree that this is very unlikely to have been lamp worked? Is there a layer of clear glass over the white? Presumably the foot and body were made in the same manner and then joined with a small gather of clear.
From the photos it gives me the impression of early 1800s - perhaps with the possibility of a contemporary museum reproduction.
John
Looking again it seems skilfully made, graceful handles.
-
Thank you both for your input :)
John I've been wondering whether it was made in one piece with the foot drawn down from the stem and body ...or vice versa rather . That's what it looks like to me. There isn't any evidence it was joined with a clear join but it could have been done that way, very carefully I presume? That is what is curious. So my thoughts were that the white glass may have been an opalescent frit which when added to the gather has gone opalescent on reheating or cooling.
When I say old, I just meant that I didn't think it was made yesterday but that's just a feeling on looking at it. I honestly have no idea of how old it could be but I don't think it's an old old shape if you see what I mean? It just strikes me as a shape that might have been made late 1800s onwards really.
And I'm not even sure it is Italian (shape/application of handles). I'd been wondering if it might have been made elsewhere but can't think of where apart from Lauscha. But then, would it be lampworked glass most likely?
m
-
Is there a layer of clear glass over the white? Presumably the foot and body were made in the same manner and then joined with a small gather of clear.
John I've had another look. I think the foot was made with the stem pulled out of it all in one piece then that was applied to the bottom of the vase body. I say this because I can feel a very slight change in thickness on the bottom of the vase body. The rim of the neck at the top is firepolished. I presume the pontil mark is there where it was held to smooth the rim then apply the handles?
-
That sounds simpler. It would be something along the lines of blow a bubble, make the foot on the end of another rod and attach it to the bubble. Remove the blowing iron then open the bubble out forming the shape of the rim. Add the handles. Just like that and all working in red hot glass, not easy.
-
Just bumping this tiny vase to see if anyone has any further thoughts :)
All/any ideas appreciated.
Is it inconceivable that this could be Murano glass and date c.1800s? Is the shape right?
Would the handles application and the way the white glass specks have been worked in the clear gather preclude it being made even earlier than that?
I've come across this which is why the questions :)
http://www.archiviodellacomunicazione.it/sicap/ENG/ArtWorks/14408/?WEB=MuseiVe
But I can't think the shape of mine sits right for anything earlier than the 1800s really?
m
-
I suspect you are asking questions that few of us here have any experience with, apart from drinking glasses there are so few items pre 1800 to be found. However the Venetian vase you have found is striking, interesting to compare yours with it - from the photos they would sit well alongside each other.
In terms of shape I am not sure I would agree, would it not go back to the Roman era in terms of glass and even earlier as a form?
-
John I'm glad you see what I see. It could be the photographs but it does sit well when I compare them side by side. Could be made entirely differently when compared in real life of course. It's so hard to tell.
It arrived with another piece that dates to the 1700s so I decided to take a look down that route having reached a dead end with this one.
You are right about the shape. It just seems so incredible, hence me thinking it must date to c.late 1800s. I think I need to have another good search to see what pre-1800 shapes are out there. I know La Granja and Neuwelt used white glass to create items in the 1700s and some were vase shaped.
It's interesting for such a small piece :)
m
-
ok, just thinking out loud here really. Going back to maybe 1800s and thinking Salviati as a possibility, I've come up with a smallish vase 9.5cm, with what looks like a similar foot formation. Also another piece, a lamp, that seems to incorporate the white and the clear glass with a strange hint of pink to the clear glass. The odd hint of pink is what the pontil mark seems to show on my vase.
Rather infuriatingly the pics in the link don't seem to enlarge enough to see any close up detail:
http://www.archiviodellacomunicazione.it/sicap/ENG/ArtWorks/308346/?WEB=MuseiVe
and this lamp
http://www.archiviodellacomunicazione.it/sicap/ENG/ArtWorks/304745/?WEB=MuseiVe
-
This tiny girasol goblet has a stem with a white core that was not opalescent. If it is like the white normally used in latticino it will be saturated with pigment (what is the right term?) so when drawn out it is still opaque rather than just fading away.
I don't think the two are contemporary, the goblet being late 19th C Salviati.
-
I know what you mean John (solid opaque rather than streaky and showing areas of clear?)
Great goblet. Was the foot the streaky white effect like the vase? Grasping at straws here but the clear on your photo also has that slightly pinky tinge.
That said my Salviati ewer also does not have the little fine black specks in the glass like the little vase does. So it was a long shot I guess.
mmm, right. More thoughts needed on my part I think.
Thanks ever so much for your help.
m
-
ok this is not related to mine in any way but I thought, given discussions on another thread and that I was questioning this technique in my mind, it was interesting that the handles were applied bottom up (well that's how it looks to me?). It's ancient.
https://ancientglass.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/miniature-amphora/
-
Re the vase shape and me questioning whether there were such shapes as vases in 'earlier than 19th century' Venetian glass, according to this Wikipedia page the blue vase at top left with handles applied bottom up, is 17th century Venetian glass and in the Hermitage. I have no idea if that info is correct. I'm amazed. Never seen anything like it before.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetian_glass
This chalcedony vase 1700s also in the Hermitage - handles applied bottom up. Not so worried about the handles now.
https://www.hermitagemuseum.org/wps/portal/hermitage/digital-collection/08.+applied+arts/203585
-
ok this is not related to mine in any way but I thought, given discussions on another thread and that I was questioning this technique in my mind, it was interesting that the handles were applied bottom up (well that's how it looks to me?). It's ancient.
No one told them they weren’t supposed to put their handles on that way….
-
;D - it's curious though, this constant discussion of bottom up v top down and when it changed.
-
Yes, and in which countries. I suppose it’s more of a guide than a rule :)
-
I think any pink tinge might be a result of the dark background and the artificial light source maybe with a hint of opalescence getting picked up, guesswork really.
As to handles top down or bottom up - there are so few hard and fast rules, they are comforting but ultimately result in you wearing blinkers... All fashions shift.
The foot of the goblet is made with the same girasol as the bowl.
-
Thanks for taking the time to do that John. I went through and checked all my opalescent pieces last night and none have a base like this vase. All have a base that looks like the body i.e. no little bits of white showing including in my oldest pieces. Perhaps the white frit used to create the white effect on the vase was only used at a certain time frame or place which might eventually help date it. I've only gone down the older route because it arrived with a piece that dates to 1700s, so thought worth checking out.
Agree on the handles.
m
-
Came upon Istvan Komaromy work this evening and suddenly wondered whether this little white vase might have been lampworked? Lauscha
maybe?
Any thoughts/views?
m
-
Could be Hebron glass...
-
Thanks Ivo. I'll look into it.
I did have a Hebron vase many moons ago, extremely delicate and lightweight. Like a feather weight.
This feels a bit different but I will investigate a new angle :)