Topic: Has anybody ever seen this kind of glass before?

[antonizz]

But this whole piece is gone..

[flying free]

Opaline glass can be shiny or satin (matt) finished.
shiny here c.1840s/1850:
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=50027.0;attach=115370;image
matt here - blue vase in the middle:
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=53085.0;attach=132746;image

Opaline glass was produced in Bohemia as well as France (and other countries as well).  Opaline is a translucent glass.

Alabaster glass was produced in Bohemia in the Biedermeier period (early 1800s). Especially by Annathal and also Adolfshutte bei Winterberg iirc.  and is known as alabasterglas.

Bohemian Alabasterglas comes in various colours not just white.  It is translucent glass but does not have a fiery glow to it when held up to light.
Example here of one of my pieces:
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=71293.0;attach=245363;image
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,71293.msg396901.html#msg396901
Example here on page 10:
http://www.glas-forschung.info/pageone/pdf/farbglas.pdf

Opaline glass can have a fiery glow when held up to light or it may not.  I have  the blue opaline vase (linked earlier in this post) that has a matt surface (19th century ) but that has no fiery glow when held up to light.
I have a smaller piece of French opaline glass from Bercy that has a bright red glow when held up to light, dating to the early 1800s. It is opaline glass but has a fiery glow to it.
Examples of Montcenis turquoise blue opalines from very early 1800s here (my piece is Bleu Lavande in colour not turquoise):
https://www.creusotmontceautourisme.fr/sites/creusot-montceau/files/styles/gallery_lightbox/public/content/images/musee_de_lhomme_et_de_lindust_4.jpg?itok=61LnvNCa

My two blue pieces are both opaline glass but one has a fiery glow, the other doesn't because the batch was made up with other compounds which made it opaline but not fiery (no lead arsenate?)


See Walter Spiegl explanations for details and comparison to Opal glas or opaline glass. See also previous information I have posted from Marco Verita

Page 10

http://www.glas-forschung.info/pageone/pdf/farbglas.pdf


I don't know where your vase was made but I can understand your query - the base looks mold made.  It's possible the whole thing was mold made perhaps?  It's not easy to see any cutting on the edges of the castellated rim.  Perhaps it was acid etched after being made and cut?

[Paul S.]

sometimes m I think your efforts are almost wasted on us lesser mortals - congratulations on such comprehensive work.      As we've seen before in our discussions on these related C19 glass types, there seem to be almost limitless variations on what constitutes valid criteria for inclusion, leaving us to wonder how little - at times - doesn't qualify, for example, as opaline.
I'm big on taxonomy - it's comforting for me to know where something stands in the overall scheme of things - how it's classified and why - but reading many of the definitions, mostly for coloured glass relating to types where 'opal' is a prefix, leaves me feeling that almost anything qualifies.
And, herein lies a problem not only for collectors who struggle to understand this umbrella of inclusion, but at the same time gives the seller carte blanche to use as defense when accused of mis-selling.     
With such a wide range of criteria, I think the op here, will struggle to convince his seller that something isn't right  -  and for the same reasons it's why so many folk who post here and on-line, refer to much coloured glass as opaline.
Genuine French opaline - from Baccarat for example - fetches big bucks and by association this 'worth' too often attaches to anything that's described as opaline.         

In recent years the Board's links and explanations relating to similar coloured glass appear to have made it impossible now to separate original C19 forms of glass bearing 'type' descriptions from later copies and variations which are of lesser interest and value, and probably don't qualify as the genuine article.                 Not the least reason for this is that possibly it's no longer known how the originals were made. 

thank goodness I mostly collect clear glass, though assume of course that in view of your hard work in all these areas you do know 100% more than we do.

[flying free]

Later versions of opaline glass would I guess still fall under the opaline umbrella but I think iirc correctly, Ivo stated that they should always be handblown to qualify as opaline.  I also recall that if it is cased it would not fall under the opaline umbrella.
However in contrast, again if I recall correctly, I remember seeing some Clichy glass referred to as opaline in the book and it is neither very translucent and is also cased colour over white I think.  I'll look it up in the Cristallerie de Clichy book and see if I can provide a link to those items .

So in theory there aren't that many 20th century pieces that fall under hand blown, translucent, one colour, coloured in the batch and not cased.  At least not that many I've ever come across.  Stevens and Williams 'alabaster' range being one and Steuben ?alabaster? being the other.

Then there are the mid 20th century Italian pieces which I think Ivo said were known as Opalina.



The desirability of the early opalines (early 1800-about 1850 - both in France and in Bohemia) for me is that they were experimental, they will never be made again, and they were rare and unusual because, especially in the earlier part of that time frame, the individual houses were all making their own colour recipes and the colours were generally exquisite and expensive to produce.  Some are more translucent than others.  I have an alabasterglas piece c.1840 that might look to be opaque on camera but is in fact translucent when you view it in real life. Likewise the small blue v. early French piece.  Looks opaque on first glance but is incredibly translucent.  That was a part of their beauty I think.

[Paul S.]

thanks - beauty in glass is something that always makes a piece desirable - along with rarity    - I recall the lines from one of the Indian Jones films  ....  "If I take this cheap watch bought in the market for a dollar or two, and bury it in the sand for a thousand years it becomes priceless.                    I'd suggest that with some areas of glass collecting, buying without seeing something in the flesh, can be asking for trouble  -  it shouldn't of course, but human nature being what it is we should know to exercise caution.            I think the piece here is a good example  -  perhaps the op might not have bought this one had they been able to handle the item.

[flying free]

There is an odd disconnect in the vase so I can see why the query.  It looks at the top, like a cut faceted/panel cut body with a cut crenallated rim vase made in the Biedermeier period.  However the metalwork looks later than that.  Also the pedestal base, formed in a mold and square also doesn't feel quite right - it could be right, I don't know, but it would raise an odd question for me if I was buying it.
There is an opaline vase here being sold as c.1860 that has similarly decorative metalwork:
https://www.antiquesboutique.com/antique-opaline-glass/antique-palais-royal-white-opaline-vase-with-blue-opaline-baubles/itm10411#.YeQ0Qf7P1PY

Without seeing it it's difficult to know what the opaline 'feels' like.  Very difficult to judge glass online really.  It looks to me as though it could be crizzled but then the close ups are not showing that either.

And then again, that level of work (crenallated rim cut, cut and faceted body) on a later vase?  I can't see that somehow either.  Well maybe up to 1860s but not much later really.

A difficult one made more so by the decorative metalwork and the square pedestal which looks molded/mold blown.  hmmm.

[flying free]

Antonizz can you upload your photos to 600 x 400 pixels if you do any more please?  It makes it easier to see the detail

Also, do you have the Harrach book 'From Neuwelt to the Whole World'?
There is a vase in there dated 1844 that it reminds me of a little in terms of shape and design. page 122.

There are also vases on page 157 that have some similarities in shape and cutting- a little.  They were exhibited at the Great Exhibition in London in 1851 and bought from there directly for the collections of the Musée des Arts et Métiers in Paris.  So something like that could explain why the vase looks Bohemian in design and cutting but appears to have, what might be perceived as (I'm not great at metalwork so could be wrong), French metalwork on it hence the disconnect in design and presentation.

m

[flying free]

Later versions of opaline glass would I guess still fall under the opaline umbrella but I think iirc correctly, Ivo stated that they should always be handblown to qualify as opaline.  I also recall that if it is cased it would not fall under the opaline umbrella.
However in contrast, again if I recall correctly, I remember seeing some Clichy glass referred to as opaline in the book and it is neither very translucent and is also cased colour over white I think.  I'll look it up in the Cristallerie de Clichy book and see if I can provide a link to those items .

So in theory there aren't that many 20th century pieces that fall under hand blown, translucent, one colour, coloured in the batch and not cased.  At least not that many I've ever come across.  Stevens and Williams 'alabaster' range being one and Steuben ?alabaster? being the other.

Then there are the mid 20th century Italian pieces which I think Ivo said were known as Opalina.



The desirability of the early opalines (early 1800-about 1850 - both in France and in Bohemia) for me is that they were experimental, they will never be made again, and they were rare and unusual because, especially in the earlier part of that time frame, the individual houses were all making their own colour recipes and the colours were generally exquisite and expensive to produce.  Some are more translucent than others.  I have an alabasterglas piece c.1840 that might look to be opaque on camera but is in fact translucent when you view it in real life. Likewise the small blue v. early French piece.  Looks opaque on first glance but is incredibly translucent.  That was a part of their beauty I think.

Just adding that I think some Loetz tango glass was also opaline as well - can't remember and don't have anything left to check with now, but I had a pink bowl with a black rim and I think that was not cased in clear.

[flying free]

Later versions of opaline glass would I guess still fall under the opaline umbrella but I think iirc correctly, Ivo stated that they should always be handblown to qualify as opaline.  I also recall that if it is cased it would not fall under the opaline umbrella.
However in contrast, again if I recall correctly, I remember seeing some Clichy glass referred to as opaline in the book and it is neither very translucent and is also cased colour over white I think.  I'll look it up in the Cristallerie de Clichy book and see if I can provide a link to those items .

So in theory there aren't that many 20th century pieces that fall under hand blown, translucent, one colour, coloured in the batch and not cased.  At least not that many I've ever come across.  Stevens and Williams 'alabaster' range being one and Steuben ?alabaster? being the other.

Then there are the mid 20th century Italian pieces which I think Ivo said were known as Opalina.



The desirability of the early opalines (early 1800-about 1850 - both in France and in Bohemia) for me is that they were experimental, they will never be made again, and they were rare and unusual because, especially in the earlier part of that time frame, the individual houses were all making their own colour recipes and the colours were generally exquisite and expensive to produce.  Some are more translucent than others.  I have an alabasterglas piece c.1840 that might look to be opaque on camera but is in fact translucent when you view it in real life. Likewise the small blue v. early French piece.  Looks opaque on first glance but is incredibly translucent.  That was a part of their beauty I think.

La Cristallerie de Clichy - Roland Dufrenne, Jean Maes, Bernard Maes  - see page 255, 261, 262 and there are other examples of their opalines in the pages between which are not cased
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/La_Cristallerie_de_Clichy/KEYMY4_ytuUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cristallerie+de+clichy&printsec=frontcover

[antonizz]

Bohemian Alabasterglas comes in various colours not just white.  It is translucent glass but does not have a fiery glow to it when held up to light.
Example here of one of my pieces:
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=71293.0;attach=245363;image
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,71293.msg396901.html#msg396901

Your piece looks like a Bohemian version of some Baccarat pieces I've had before. I'm sure the green glass contains uranium.

Here are a couple of links that you might find interesting:
1) https://www.catawiki.com/nl/l/50896611-baccarat-of-saint-louis-opaline-suikerpot-sucrier-meloen-louis-philippe-glas-uranium-opaline
2) https://www.boisgirard-antonini.com/recherche?language=fr&query=+opaline+sucrier&isvisible=&ok=Rechercher&myGroup=1&actuDatefilter=&venteType=all&ordre=pertinence
3) https://parisianhoursofidleness.wordpress.com/2015/05/01/treasures-of-sand-and-fire/#jp-carousel-915
4) http://www.auctioneve.com/en/search?language=en&query=opaline+sucrier&isvisible=&ok=Search&myGroup=1&actuDatefilter=&venteType=all&ordre=pertinence
5) https://in.pinterest.com/pin/570127634076651948/
6) https://www.alexiaamatoantiques.com/en-GB/sold---french-opaline-glass/antique-french-white-and-blue-opaline-glass-pear-shaped-casket-box/prod_11478#.YeYljv7MKUk


I didn't find a exact similar one.