Glass Circle News_No.131, Mar 2013

GLASS CIRCLE.

Vol. 36 No. 1
ISSN 2942-652

Issue 131 March 2013

Ancient glass
Salt Et sugar shakers
Fitzwilliam Museum

Watford Crystal
Reports

Curiosities
News, views, diary

CONTENTS

Editorial
Letters

My favourite glass

Ancient glass

Salt Et sugar shakers
Fitzwilliam Museum

Watford Crystal
Reports

Reviews
Curiosities

Last words on flint
News and diary

Glass Circle News
ISSN 2043-6572

Vol. 36 No. 1 Issue 131 March 2013

published by The Glass Circle

www.glasscircle.org

Editor

Jane Dorner
[email protected]
9 Collingwood Avenue, NIO 3EH

Design and layout
Athelny Townshend

[email protected]

Neither the Glass Circle nor any edits officers
Or Cl7111111ilt,

members bear

any responsibility for the views expressed in
dill

puLVivanov which are

those of the contributor in
each case.
Every effort ha, been made to trace and

acknowledge copyright in the photographs illustrating articles. The Editor

asks contributors to clear permissions and neidler the Editor nor the Glass
Circle is responsible her inadvertent infringements. All photographs are

Printed by
Micropress Printers Ltd

www.rnicropress.co.uk

Next copy date:

15 May 2013 for the July edition.
EDITORIAL

Editor’s letter

t
g
-1

lave enjoyed putting

this issue together: it

falls nicely within the
broad church interests of

the Circle and the Association
combined. Our two magazines

have coincidentally been moving
closer to each other in subject
matter in the last year or so
— neither of the two editors

knowing about the current proposals.

Our earliest piece pictured dates right

back to
c.
14th century BC (page 8) and

the latest to 1976 (page 29); not counting

the artist’s impression of the hotshop of
the future at Corning.
The article on ancient Egyptian and

Roman glass will be welcomed by many as

several respondents to our questionnaire

three years ago asked for more on this

subject. It
has
had a reasonable airing

over the years, but when I looked back

at the survey responses, I was surprised
to see a request for more on ‘modern

studio glass and ancient Greek, Middle
Eastern and Roman glass’. It’s refreshing

to see more than one collector making
connections between items so many

centuries apart.
There’s plenty to interest the collector

who buys ‘whatever turns up by chance
that I can afford or arouses curiosity’: if

it’s affordability you are after, look at the
little gems in the article on condiment
sets of the Victorian era.

There’s plenty to interest the hard-

core 18th century afficionado as well

in the stunning photographs of the
new displays at the Fitzwilliam

Museum, taken by Michael Jones

at the museum especially for this

article. I chose one of these for the
cover as it is such a fine example

of painting and disguise skill.

This article was flagged up last time, and

looks like a prime target for one of those

joint visits the Chairman outlines on the

next page.
Also promised, and delivered, is the

piece on the rise and fall of the Watford
Glass Company, with its intriguing

insights on how a concern of this sort
is manned, and why it can’t survive in
today’s climate. This was when you

worked your way up from the bottom to

the top.
Finally, apart from our regular pieces,

my arm has been twisted to set the

matter straight
again
on flint glass. But

as the present Editor to the ex-Editor –
that’s the last word on the subject now.

My latest installation accompanies

this editorial (no one is crying a halt to

this shamelessness). This is a screen in

a newly-built house is Gloucestershire
and is made in collaboration with

my husband, the lutemaker Stephen
Gottlieb.

Jane

Dorner

COVER ILLUSTRATION:
Detail of an enamelled glass vase (full picture on

page zo) © The Firtzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No.4

LETTERS

Chairman’s
etter

Monteith made

by Joseph Ward,
hallmarked 17o9-

1710. Museum
number: M./4:1,

2-1973

gum he Edward V

Phillips

sale,

at Halls of

Shrewsbury

(see
back page) was a great success.

The room was packed to standing
room only, collectors of 18th

century drinking glasses are not a

dying breed, nor are members of

our society.

I would like to thank those

who sent me their opinions
and constructive suggestions
concerning a possible merger

of the Glass Circle and the
Glass Association. The overall

impression I received was that

of slight sadness tempered by a
realisation that it was inevitable

if there was to be a long term

future for a society for those

interested in glass. Also several

members stressed that , from their

experience of similar situations, it

was important that we progressed

slowly and carefully.
I held an informal meeting of

committee members recently to

discuss all these issues. We could

see that great savings would be
made by merging news magazines,

journals and web-sites, and that
with a bigger pool of contributors,

maintaining quality would not
be a problem. Foreign visits most

years would continue as before.

These are great fun for those who
attend, and bring back knowledge

of the interaction of glass makers

in different countries, both in the
past and today. Meetings would

continue, much as before, but

hopefully with greater attendance

by a greater membership, there
could be meetings outside
London, largely at the weekend,

and meetings in London, usually
on a Tuesday evening. The legal

and logistical matters seemed
to us quite resolvable. With

increased costs, hire of meeting

venues, printing costs and the

staggering rise in postal rates,

subscriptions will have to up, but

they will have to go up anyway. If

we merge we expect to offer our
members a better service for their

subscription.

Our lecture series is now

virtually fully planned for the
next
12
months, suddenly it has all

come together for Anne Lutyens-
Humfrey, our meetings organiser

whose hard work makes it happen.
These meetings, in the historic
ArtWorkers’ Guild building, with

coffee, sandwiches and gossip

beforehand, are the back-bone of

the society.

Two suggestions came up at

our meeting, whether we merge

or not. The first, that we should

have a series of informal meeting

in museums, largely provincial,

in museums which have glass,

organised by a member local to

the museum. The format would
be to meet around 10.30 on a

Saturday morning for coffee

followed by an examination of

Editor’s note:
All letters referring

to a previous edition of the
magazine refer to Vol. 35 No. 3

Issue no. 13o unless otherwise

stated.

Monteith

I recently came across this snippet
of information in the online

catalogue of the National Register

of Archives for Scotland, in a list

of miscellaneous papers relating

to the Countes of Roxburgh.

There is no date given, but all the

papers are from 1684 — 1743.
Headed: ‘Directions by the

Countess of Roxburghe to

James Wathell, probably her
butler’, it consists of a long list of

instructions about food and drink

allowed to the various servants, for
example: ‘the washers are given 3

mutchkins ale between them at

each meal..: which are interesting

in their own right, and continues:

‘the footman whom Wathell is
the museum’s collection, with or

without a curator if the museum
has one. Followed by lunch and

a
post mortem.

Looking at a

collection with a group of friends

with different levels of knowledge
is always more fun than looking

by oneself. The other suggestion

was that occasionally our London

meetings should take place on

a Saturday afternoon, probably

in a lecture room in Kensington
Library, which has some, minimal,

catering facilities, enough for tea

and biscuits, with two lectures.

This format, which is used by the
English Ceramics Circle, might be

better for members who live out

of London, or who do not like to

go out in the evening, especially in
winter. Feedback from members

on both these suggestions would

be most welcome. You can contact
me at [email protected].

allowed to have as assistant is to
cover the table and draw the drink,

and stand at the cupboard and fill

all the drink at the table and when

the servants give him the glasses

let him throwe what is left in
them in the cisteren, and put the

John P.
Smith

Letters to the Editor

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

LETTERS

glass in the muntieth amongest
the watter which is to stand upon

the glass cupboard full with fish

wafter every day;…

It goes on to say that Wathell

and the footman have to clean the

silver, etc.
I just thought it might be a

useful insight into the use of

the monteith in the late i7th-

earlyi8th century. The reference

is NRASHoo/Bundle 803 should

anyone care to follow this up.
Jill Turnbull

Edinburgh

Editor’s note:
a longer article on

monteiths and their uses is in

preparation as a result of this letter.
If any readers have information

they would like to contribute, we

would be pleased to hear it.

Posh paperweight
A
n item
in
The Daily Express

frA(17
October 2012) on the

25 richest people ever caught my
eye. ‘The hereditary Nizam of

Hyderabad ruled the principality

from 1911 to 1948 when it was

absorbed into India. Hyderabad
was the world’s sole supplier of

diamonds in the 19th century and
Nizam used the Jacob diamond –

the seventh biggest in the world –

as a paperweight: How’s that for a

paperweight!
Michael Vaughan

Lanarkshire

Research notes 1

L
ooking through some old

research notes I came across the

following: State Papers Venetian,

p.22, 1621, 16 April. Girolamo
Lando, Venetian Ambassador in

England, to Doge and Senate in

Venice:
Many are thinking of removing the

monopoly on flint glass, as when

brought from Venice it would cost

little more than what is made here
and it is considerably finer, while it

would not consume the wood in the
furnaces, there being a great scarcity

of it in the kingdom. I have tactfully
encouraged this idea.

So it would appear that the term

‘flint glass’ had its origin in Venice
many years before Ravenscroft

and was simply adopted as a
matter of convenience for the

English version.
I don’t

think it

means that glassmakers generally

in England made glass from
crushed flints at that time.
David Watts

London

Research
notes 2

I
was at the British Library last

week trying to find the reference

David Watts quoted regarding

Robert Hooke’s sight of ‘calcined

flints as white as flower’. Although
I have so far missed this, what I

did find was the entry of Saturday
February 28th 1673/4 which

states:
Lazenby [a chirurgeon]

affirmed that he saw the man at

the Savoy for making his crystal

put into the pot first a layer of
borax, then a layer of sand then

nitre [saltpetre]. Of sand borax

the
2/3
of pot was filled that being

put into the fire it boiled and

made a great noise. Afterwards

it settled and the …with an iron
ladle took off the scum. His flints
he heat and quenched often then

beat them to powder in wooden

mentors.
Mike Noble

Dunmow

Wrong chandelier

T
he Chairman has spotted that

the chandelier on page 11 in

my article is not the one described

in the caption. That one is, in fact,
manufactured in 1804 and is one
of four produced that year in the

Waterford factory. The chandelier
hanging the council chamber in

Waterford City Hall and dated

1786 is this one (pictured). It
was commissioned by the Lord

Lieutenant, Rutland.
Martin Hearne
Waterford
Impartial

review?

Vour review of
Bibliography

I of Glass: From the Earliest

Times to the Present
by Willy Van

den Bossche (page 26) is more
favourable than is justified.

Putting it to the test, I first

ran through the names of the

Swedish glass designers currently
uppermost in mind: Vicke

Lindstrand, Erik
Hoglund,

Bertil

Vallien, Goran Warff, Signe
Persson Melin and Lars Hellsten.

This formidable group of
contemporaries produced a huge

swathe of work, totalling many
thousands of designs, for some
of the leading glassworks of their

era, including Orrefors, Kosta and

Boda. Their work was expressed

in both production pieces that

sold in millions and, setting the
trend over recent decades, unique
art objects.
An index check of this book

reveals that none of them is

mentioned at all. Not even one of

them, once. Perhaps the author
considered them too obscure?
Yet Lindstrand ranks amongst
the greatest glass designers of the

past century. So, if Lindstrand is

considered unworthy of inclusion,
how about the glassworks

themselves, Orrefors, Kosta and
Boda? No mention of Orrefors,

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

LETTERS

though Kosta Boda does
appear under the
Kosta

Boda Book of Glass,

published in 1986 to
celebrate Kosta’s 25oth

anniversary.
So, what of the

Finns, Tapio Wirkkala

and Timo Sarpeneva,

whose work for Ettala

won Grand Prix at
the 1951 and ’54 Milan

Triennales.

Neither

appears, though space
is found for ‘Sasparilla

Bottles’, which rate two

listings.
It can be deduced

that this book is not
for those interested in

Scandinavian

postwar

glass. But what about the
foremost British glassworks

of the same era: Thomas
Webb, Webb Corbett, Stuart,

Brierley, Whitefriars and

Dartington? None are indexed,

though Waterford does appear,
once.

Travelling back through history,

I adore the work of James Giles

[1718-80], Britain’s greatest 18th
century glass gilder/enameller,

whose work was explored in two in-

depth articles for Apollo in zoo5.

With increasing predictability,

this book does not mention him.

Also absent is the Bielby family

of Newcastle whose enamelling
became synonymous with English

Rococo and examples of which can

fetch tens of thousands of pounds.

Facon
–
de
–
Venise
glassware, which

dominated European taste for

almost a century from
c.
1700,

appears just twice.

So what
does
this book contain?

The city of Liege, near where
the author lives, merits 18 index

listings. This compares to nine for
Finland.

Underlining this paucity, I

visited the Corning Museum of
Glass’ Rakow Library Catalog

on-line for comparison. It lists
five works on James Giles, 21 on
Vicke Lindstrand,

49
for Tapio

Wirkkala and
739
for Orrefors. It

even supplies
zo8

entries for Liege.

So much for reviewing impar-

tiality!
Andy McConnell, Rye

Looking forward

Thank
you so much for

I including some of the earlier

periods of glass manufacture
in your magazine. Reading and

studying glass of the Ancient,
Merovingian and Medieval times

is fascinating and we appreciate
your focusing on them.
Carole Allaire
New Jersey

Glass safety

I
happen to live in Israel, where we

I have the worries of bombs from
any direction, and earthquakes.

There is a fault cutting through
Israel, north to south, but

`happily’, the line is about 60 km
east of where I live in Tel Aviv.
Residents of Jerusalem should be

more concerned.

II February zoo4 was the date

of our last local’ quake, measuring
5.2, and centred in the Dead Sea

region, perhaps
8o

km from here.

I claim to have broken the World

52-meter sprint record, from office
to glass collection, in time to
see

several of them rocking slightly. It
is a horrible experience.

But it does not need a conflict or

a natural disaster to knock glasses
over. Parties, grandchildren, new
cleaning ladies and tripping over
the rug will do it nicely.

I strongly recommend preven-

tive action. The product recom-

mended to me initially by John

Smith, and which I now use, is
called Museum Gel. It is a clear

wax-like material which, like
putty, you knead into very small

beads and place under each foot

– in perhaps
3
places. You then

place the glass onto the shelf in a

simple action of slightly twisting
and mashing.

That’s it. The glass is then sta-

ble, and will withstand the kind

of shaking that most events will
cause. It is clear, but it can be seen
– but not more visible than a one of

those small round identity stick-

ers. With gentle rocking action,
the glass can be quite easily and

cleanly released from its position.

So this is not a permanent fix.
Stephen Pohlmann
Tel Aviv

ABOVE:

Vickie

Lindstrand’s

internally decorated

Autumn vase,

designed for Kosta,
Sweden,
1953.

Lindstrand, one of

the most significant

glass designers of

the zoth century,

is amongst
many

who do not
merit

a mention in the

Bibliography of

Glass

RIGHT:
Stephen

Pohlmann’s

collection

prophylactically

secured with

Museum Gel
©
Geo
f
f Law
son
/
An
dy
Mc
Conne
ll/
Glass
Etc

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

FAVOURITE GLASS

My favourite glass

Anne

Towse

c…

/g
–
y father’s pas-

sion, mainly for

18th century
English

drinking glasses, but for beautiful

glass objects generally, was the
inspiration for my own interest

in — and love of — glass. I cannot

remember a time in my life when

he was not enthusing about one or

another piece, going to museums,
reading books and learning all

he could; so of course when our
Editor asked me to write about

my favourite glass, I immediately

thought of my
father’s
favourite,

which is illustrated here.
In his last years, when he was

becoming very frail, my father

would ask me to give him ‘the glass

— you know which one’. He would

hold it and look at it for a while,
then he would heft it in one hand

and the other. Finally, he would
beam at me and say’That is a
lovely

glass!’ I agree with him; it is also an

interesting piece, which merited

his research into it after he had

bought it.
Seven and a half inches tall (19

cm), with a deceptive bell bowl,
and very heavy — nearly 1 lb (500

grams) — it is very comfortable

to hold and must have been a

splendid toastmaster’s glass. It

holds less than one fluid ounce
(3o ml). Every part of it is faceted,
except the inside of the bowl

and the underside of the foot.

The bowl has long diamond and
triangular facets; the stem has

long hexagonal and pentagonal

facets. The domed foot is terrace-

cut, then has flat pentagonal slices
to the edge, which is also cut in

long diamond shapes. I have seen

it described elsewhere as a cordial,
but I think the proportion of the

bowl to the stem (as opposed to

the bowl’s capacity) is too big for

that.

When my father bought the

glass, the auction catalogue dated
it at around 1780 and stated that

an identical glass was sold … from
the Hamilton Clements collection,
on 6th November 1930′ and that

it was illustrated in
Old English

Glass
by Francis Buckley. Buckley

lists it under ‘early cutting’
The Hamilton Clements glass

was also illustrated in W.H.
Thorpe’s
A History of English and

Irish Glass.
Thorpe dates it to
about 1740, describing it as’a heavy

glass probably dating from before
the Excise Act of 1745-46 and

showing the elaboration possible
even so early, given a good bulk

of metal’. Both books ascribe the

glass to the Hamilton Clements
collection. My father always
preferred Thorpe to Buckley as an

authority and was delighted with
the earlier dating.
One evening I was visiting my

parents; generally a quiet, peaceful
time. Suddenly my mother and I
heard my father cry out; we rushed

to his study, where he was clutching
Buckley and looking amazed

and triumphant: he had found

in the Catalogue of the Plates a

detailed description of a flaw low

down in the stem’ — exactly what

he was looking at in the glass on
his desk… He had proof that his

glass is not merely ‘identical to’ the
Hamilton Clements one — it is

that very glass.
I have tried to find out more

about Hamilton Clements but

could only find reference to a

193o publication:
Catalogue of

the Well-known Collection of Old
English Glass, the Property of the
Late Hamilton Clements.
Had he

lived another few years, surely

Mr Clements would have been

a founder member of the Glass
Circle in 1937.
My father’s enthusiasm was

infectious

and

considering

his favourite glass, reading his

handwritten catalogue entry,

following his research and reading
up on aspects I was ignorant about,

not only brings him to life in the

happiest way, but lights up my own

continuing interest in glass.

John Towse joined the Glass Circle
around 1970 and remained an

enthusiastic member the rest of his
life. In retirement he wrote a regular

column
for Glass Circle News
and

was for some years Joint Editor with

David Watts. He also gave a talk on

‘Collectors and collecting’ in which
he discussed the ‘collecting gene’.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

ROMAN & PRE-ROMAN GLASS

Collecting ancient glass

tyi
s glass collectors go,

those specialising

in ancient glass
are much thinner

on the ground than, for example,

collectors of Georgian or Victorian

glass. What one collects is often

influenced by meeting an existing

collector. For a long time there
have been a lot of Georgian

and Victorian glass
collectors in the UK

and so they are a

numerous

group, whereas one
rarely meets an ancient

glass collector and those
that there are seem to

have little interaction

with other collectors.
Until I was well into

early middle age I had no

idea that ancient glass or

any antiquities could be
purchased or collected

by private individuals.

It was by chance that
through my business

I developed a client in

Israel and I had occasion
to visit that country on

business on more than 90

separate trips. My client had

nothing whatsoever to do with

antiquities, but my many visits did

give me the opportunity to explore

the country in great depth in my

free time. This led to the visiting of
many historical and biblical sites

and museums, arousing a great
interest in ancient art and history.

I was pleasantly surprised on visits
to Old Jaffa and Jerusalem to

discover dealers authorised by the
Israel Antiquities Authority to sell

antiquities. So in the mid 198os we
made our first foray into ancient

art with the purchase of a Roman
oil lamp. The first piece of ancient

glass I bought was for my wife,
as I thought that would appeal
to her more than other material,

but in time glass became an equal

passion for both of us.
This first piece was a small

Roman glass pitcher in a honey
that subsequently we would look

back on as mediocre or inferior
examples of the genre. Our
most important considerations

in buying any piece is to be

confident about the authenticity,

genuineness and provenance of

the item. I am able to say that

from the very beginning we

applied ourselves diligently
to studying books on
the subject and
visiting many glass

museums to see
examples excavated

from archaeological

sites. We built a

substantial library of

our own but actually

found it quite difficult

to find a number of titles
on ancient glass, part-

icularly those long out
of print. Consequently
when we came across
duplicates of these

rarer titles we bought

them to enable us to

assist other collectors

in building their own

libraries. When I retired

from my career in the city

I developed my current

occupation of supplying

books on glass, which is more

of a hobby than a business. A

suggested basic library is given at
the end of this article.
I am often saddened to hear

tales of people buying fake

antiquities on the internet and
this happens quite a lot. What is

most revealing is to find that, more

often than not, such people rely

on the description on the website

rather than consulting a reference

library or using knowledge and

judgement acquired through
studies of collections in museums.

Therefore the best advice I can

give to new collectors of ancient

glass is to build up a good library,

visit a lot of museums and do a lot

of homework before buying any
piece of glass. By studying and

handling hundreds of pieces of

yellow colour with a lovely

rainbow patina. This came to be

followed by many purchases of

ancient glass absorbing a big share
of our disposable income. We had

got the collecting bug. It was and
still is surprising how inexpensive

the simpler items of ancient glass

were, but of course when you find

David
Giles

really rare and fine examples then

the price can be in seven figures

though these are few and far

between. There are thousands of
common Roman tear drop glasses

and similar available in the market

at modest cost.
Like most collectors new to the

game, we were often in too much
of a hurry to build our collection

and we bought quite a few items

Fig. 1. Roman

free-blown glass
cinerarium 1st-

2nd century AD.

Probably from Gaul.

26 cm H.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

ROMAN & PRE-ROMAN GLASS

ancient glass, over a long period
of time, one acquires an almost

sub-conscious data base of typical

size, shape, form, colour, weight

and surface condition for the
main categories of glass. Almost

instinctively one knows if a

glass is genuinely ancient or not.

Unfortunately there is no absolute

scientific test for dating ancient

glass, but factors such as chemical

analysis of the ingredients can go
some way to establishing this. This
is done by a gadget known as an
XRF scanner.

At the time we started buying

ancient glass it was with the

understanding that we could

buy such items as legitimate

trade. We still hold with this
understanding and correctly so

but nevertheless recently there

has a grown a body of academics

who resent such trade and who
have done their utmost to try to

curtail it. The obvious destruction

and looting of archaeological sites

and Museums in places like Iraq

and Afghanistan is something we

would all condemn. This however
is a long way removed from the

traditional and legitimate trade

that has existed since the time of

The Grand Tour. If we consider

the great museum collections of

ancient glass in the Metropolitan
Museum, New York; the British

Museum, London; the V&A,
London; the Louvre, Paris; the

Israel Museum, Jerusalem; the
Romisch Germanischen Museum,

Koln; Corning, Getty, Toledo,

Newark, Pittsburgh and Yale
Museums, USA — none of these

glass collections would be there

had it not been for the great

private collectors who donated

their collections. These include:

Greau, Charvet, Sangiorgi, Slade,
Moore, J.P. Morgan, Cesnola,

Dobkin,

Winfield-Smith,

Schaefer, Bergman, Drummond,
Curtis and Oppenlander, who

donated or sold their collections
to the museums. In effect these

private collectors were custodians
Fig. 2. Fragments

of core glass vessels

from Egyptian

New Kingdom 18th
Dynasty c. 14th

century BC.

Fig. 3. Core

glass alabastra

from Eastern

Mediterranean c.

4th century BC.

Largest of this

group of three.
12.3

cm H.

Fig.
4.
Hellenistic

cast and cut glass
kantharos c. 2nd

century BC.
15
cm

x
8cm.

Fig. 9. Hellenistic

cast and cut glass
bowl with 12 bosses

c. znd century BC.
17.9 cm D.

Fig. 6. Saxon or

Frankish free-blown

glass palm cup 6th-
7th century AD. 9
cm
D.

Fig.
7.
Hellenistic

cast and cut glass
pyxis c. znd century
BC. 8.9 cm D.

ROMAN & PRE-ROMAN GLASS

of the glass in their lifetimes

and passed on their collections

to the nation at the end of their

lives. This spirit continues and
the private collectors of ancient

glass today are as passionate and
dedicated as ever.

There is an argument that

items that emerge out of context
lose valuable archaeological

information. This is true if it

is a major unique piece, but

overwhelmingly the objects

found in private collections are

examples of types where many

archaeological parallels are

already contained in museum and

academic collections throughout
the world. In other words they

are quite common types of which

many examples have been found

in archaeological context and so
the areas of manufacture and the

dating of them is well-established.

A couple of years ago there

appeared in the commercial

market a huge Roman glass cameo

amphora which was such a rare and

important piece that it obviously

should have been reported to

antiquities authorities at the
time of find so that information

of the context and place of find

could be properly recorded.
Because of its importance and

lack of any recorded provenance

or paperwork it became a refugee
in the glass world with nobody
really able to handle it. It has now

disappeared from view. So there

definitely needs to be a sensible

and balanced approach to the

subject. There are thousands of

common glasses which can be
traded, but something unique is

in a class of its own, and relies on

good paperwork and provenance,

ideally with information of place

and date of find.

One of the major influences on

the anti-collecting lobby has been

the rise of nationalism in some

of the Mediterranean countries.

These countries have belatedly

realised how politically valuable it

is to be associated with an ancient

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

Fig. 8.

Roman

ribbed bowl

century AD.

Made by pinching

radial ribs on a flat
pancake of glass
and

then slumping over a

former.

Fig. 9. Roman

free-blown glass

balsamarium 4th

century AD. 16.5
cm H.

Fig. so. Roman free-
blown glass askos

1st-2nd century AD.
15.5 cm
L.

ROMAN & PRE-ROMAN GLASS

heritage and civilisation and

how it can add to their prestige.

However the descendants of these

ancient civilisations do not just
live in modern Greece, Egypt or
Italy but are now dispersed all

over the world. If on the other
hand one argues that articles

from ancient times attach to their

physical region of manufacture
then you have a real problem

with Roman glass because it was
made in an area stretching from

Syria to England and much of it

is of similar form. If one further
argues that it attaches to its place

of find, then we have an additional
problem as a huge amount of this
material was uncovered a long time

ago and in some cases hundreds of

years ago and became souvenirs
of the Grand Tour. In such times

there was hardly any paperwork

and so we don’t know where they
were found. What are we to do

with these many thousands of
orphans? The answer really is

that antiquity is something that
belongs to the world community

and as such any group of people
that is doing its best to preserve

this heritage is doing mankind a

service, regardless of where they

are located.
Of course, it is correct that in

modern times better care is taken

to protect archaeological sites and

our world heritage but we cannot
undo the practices of bygone ages

when such care was not taken. We
have to be thankful that during

those uncontrolled times, patrons

of the Metropolitan Museum, the
British Museum and many other

major museums, secured and saved

some of this material for posterity.

Much of the material from those
times is still in circulation in the

antiquities trade.
When we purchase glass we

always look for provenance and

a good paper history. One of the
problems with this is that up until

about 25 years ago nobody cared

very much about this and so a lot

of material was traded without

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

ROMAN & PRE-ROMAN GLASS

proper records. We always try
to buy glass that has an export

licence from the country of origin;

is recorded on the art loss register

and if possible a full history of
its previous ownership if coming
from an old collection. Using a
reliable and established dealer is

also advisable.

When we look at the skills and

techniques that the glass workers

possessed it is nothing short of

miraculous and humbling for us

in these modern times. Even with

all our technology we are hard

pushed to equal the beauty of
form, colour and technical ability

exhibited by these ancient glass

makers, the cameo glass, mosaic

glass and the works of the ancient
master glass maker Ennion, to

name but a few. The fragility and

grace of some of the pieces is
breathtaking and when you add

to that some of nature’s rainbow
patination we are witnessing some

of the most beautiful glass work in

man’s history.
The passion for this subject

has not dimmed over the
25
years

we have been collecting. Our
knowledge continues to grow and
the stimulus is always there. I can’t

think of anything more wondrous

than to hold in my hand an intact

piece of glass that is
2,000
years

old and sometimes 3,500 years old

and to wonder about what person

originally held it in their hand and

about all the events it has survived

since then.
ABOVE LEFT:

Fig. 11. Roman free-

blown
and
splashed

glass aryballos 1st
century
AD.
10.2

OH
H.

ABOVE RIGHT:

Fig.
12.
Roman

mould-blown twin

grotesque glass head
flask. 3rd-4th
century

AD. 15 cm
H.
David Giles used to work in the City

where he was a partner in a large

international shipbroking company.
His complete stock of books is listed

at www.gilesancientart.com.

All illustrations are from the author’s

collection and are his own copyright.

Ancient glass: a basic reference library

Auth,
S.
Ancient Glass at the Newark Museum,
N.M. 1976

Bianchi, R.
Reflections on Ancient Glass
from
the Borowski Collection,
PvZ, 2002

Christie’s Catalogue
Ancient
Glass Formely in collection of Kofler-Truniger,
Christie’s, 1985

Goldstein, S.
Pre-Roman and Early
Roman Glass in
The Corning Museum of Glass,
C.M.G., 1979

Grose, D.
Early
Ancient Glass at The Toledo Museum,
Hudson Hills, 1989

Harden, D.
Glass of
The Caesars,

Olivetti Milan, 1987

Harden, D.
Ancient
Glass,
Royal Archaeological Institute, 1972

Kunina,
N.
Ancient Glass in The Hermitage Collection,
A.R.S. St Petersburg, 1997

Lightfoot, C.
Ancient Glass in National Museums Scotland,
N.M.S. Edinburgh, 2007

Matheson, S.
Ancient Glass in the Yale University Art
Gallery,
Y.U.A.G New Haven, 1980

Miho Museum,
Ancient Glass,
Miho Museum Japan, 2001

Neuburg,
F. Glass in Antiquity,
Theodore Brun, 1949

Newby, M.
Fascination of Ancient Glass,

Antiek Lochem, 1999

Saldern, A. Von
Glaser
Der
Antike — Sammlung Oppenlander,

PvZ, 1974

Sotheby’s
Important Ancient Glass from the Collection of the British Rail Pension Fund,
1997

Sotheby’s Catalogue
The Constable Maxwell Collection of Ancient Glass,
London, 1979

Sotheby’s Catalogue
The Benzian Collection of Ancient and Islamic Glass,
London, 1994

Stern, M.
Roman
Mold Blown Glass The First through Sixth Centuries,
Bretschneider, 1995

Tait, H.
Five Thousand

Years of Glass,
B.M.P. London, 1991

Whitehouse, D.
Three Volumes of Roman Glass in The Corning Museum,
C.M.G.1997/2001/2003

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

SMALL OBJECTS OF DESIRE

Salt and sugar shakers
by

Scott

Beale

uring

uring the Victorian

era, especially between
the years 1880 and

1910, the people of

the day had something created for

just about everything. This
was especially true when it
comes to items made for
the table. There were four-
piece table sets that would

include a butter dish,

sugar bowl, creamer, and spooner.

Ornate containers to hold pickles,
mustard, syrup, vinegar or maybe

oil, and toothpicks were commonly
produced. Small containers with

perforated tops for salt, pepper,

and larger containers for sugar

were very popular and came in
an endless number of designs and
types of glass produced during

that period.
The glass industry was very

competitive and makers were

always trying to outdo the
competition. New designs and
types of glass were being developed

and patents defended readily.

Factories like Consolidated Glass,

Challinor Glass, Taylor Glass
Hobbs Brockunier Glass and the

Mt Washington, New England,

and Northwood glass companies,
to name just a few, were major

producers from this period. It is

this diversity that makes them
objects of desire.
As a collector I love all the items

produced from that special period.

However, I found that shaker

collecting was my true passion. I
find them desirable because they

are small and you can build a large
collection and display them is a

relatively small area. Interestingly,

it is not unusual to find old notes
telling about the piece or where

it came from tucked inside the

shaker from its past owners.

Sugar shakers were made

to contain and dispense sugar,
usually a powdered type and were

not really included as part of a set
(fig. I). Salt and pepper shakers

were sold as a set and the addition
of a mustard jar and maybe even
a small oil bottle or cruet were

found in more elaborate sets. I

find that the two and three piece

sets are much easier to find than
the four piece sets.

Salt shakers and all

related bottles can come

in almost all types of glass.
Most were mould blown

and included cased glass

and decorated opal-ware

as well as many other forms of

enamelled glass. Others include
Amberina, Burmese, Peachblow,
Findlay Onyx, Opalescent,

Chocolate Glass and many others
(fig. 2).

Many Victorian era shakers

have either a two-piece or a one-
piece top. Two-piece tops contain

a collar that is cemented to the

shaker using plaster (fig. 3). This
collar contains the threads that the
top screws on to. The glass itself

does not contain any threads. The

second is a one-piece top in which
the glass itself contains molded

threads and the top screws on

like modern-day tops. On most

shakers that have a one-piece top

you will notice a very thin rough

top edge.
This rough chipped edge is a

tell-tale sign the shaker is an old
one, but not in all cases. Many

pieces do have a ground top and
to tell the old ones from the new,
experience in handling different

pieces is important. Of course,
this top edge is hidden once the

top is screwed on. There are some

reproductions in the marketplace;

most will have a ground or smooth

top edge and may be a heavier

glass. As mentioned above, not

all
old
shakers have rough chipped

edges and experience will give you

the skills to spot them.
When buying a Victorian era

shaker, do not be discouraged if
the top is missing. Unless it’s a

shaker with a very specific top
that is part of its identity, you can
always find a top you can use. Most

shaker collectors have a box of old

tops for just this reason. Some
Al
l p
hotog

rap
hs
© Scott
Bea
le

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

SMALL OBJECTS OF DESIRE

OPPOSITE TOP:
Fig. i. An example

of mother-of-pearl

glass decorated

sugar shaker,
late igth century.

Probably made
by either Mt

Washington or

Phoenix glass.

OPPOSITE BOTTOM:
Fig.
2.

Opalescent

ring neck stripe

condiment set in

silverplate holder.

Produced by Hobbs

Brockunier & Co.

5888-5891. Four-

piece sets are harder

to find especially

with the silverplate

holder.

TOP LEFT:
Fig. 3. Example

of a typical two-
piece top that was

used during the
Victorian era.

LEFT:
Fig.4

A Mt Washington

Glass Company

Chick Head shaker
with figural top.
This is held on

with prongs that

provided pressure

against the glass
body to hold it tight.

BOTTOM LEFT:

Fig.
5.
This is an

unusual
mustard

jar made by New

England Glass
Company in their

green opaque glass.

Notice the delicate

decoration around
the top. This

mustard jar
is very

Hard to
find in this

type of glass.

TOP RIGHT:
Fig.

6. A
pair
of Mt

Washington Glass
Company Eggs in

original silverplate

holder. A typical

set found in the late

1.800s.

RIGHT:
Fig.

7.
Not

much is known

about most old

carnival glass

shakers. This is

an example of a

pattern called shell

& seaweed, maker
unknown. The

colour is marigold

finish on moonstone

glass.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

SMALL OBJECTS OF DESIRE

of these speciality tops, usually
figurative in design, that were used

mainly by Mt Washington, were

fastened to the glass body with a
prongs that held it by pressure (fig.

4
page 13).

The most common item that

goes along with a salt and pepper

shaker set is a mustard jar. This
held powdered mustard which

was dispensed with a small spoon.
They came in all the same patterns

and glass types as the shakers.
Actually, mustard jars are harder

to find because, generally speaking,

there was only one mustard jar
(fig. 5 page 13) for every two

shakers made.
Every shaker and mustard had a

top of some sort. These tops were

made of many types of materials.

Typically brass, nickel, pewter, and

silver were used. The tops can come
BELOW LEFT:

Fig. 8. Hard-to-find

examples of New
England Glass

Company peachblow

shaker and
mustard

jar. These types of

pieces are getting

harder
and
harder

to locate.

RIGHT:
Fig.
9.

Very rare Indiana

Tumbler & Goblet Company
Golden

Agate also known as

Holly Amber Glass.
This type of glass

was made for a very
limited time and is

very rare.

plain or embossed with designs
and flowers. These speciality tops

were reserved for certain shakers
made by Mt Washington and

C. F. Monroe’s Wavecrest line to

name a couple. Mt Washington

made some shakers in the forms

of tomatoes, eggs, chicks, and figs
(fig. 6 page 13) . These shakers had

speciality tops that were made just

for the shaker they are on. They

are part of the form of the object
they represent. Victorian shakers

can range from very plain shapes
to objects found in nature such

as animals, acorns, flowers, and
stylised representations of natural

objects.
Some of my favourite pieces

are odd colour or non-production

colours, slag glass shakers as

well as old carnival glass shakers

which are very rare to find (fig. 7
page 13) . Some of the more rare
colours would be any of the true

peachblow pieces either produced

by New England Glass (fig. 8) or

Mt Washington Glass Company.

The Indiana Tumbler & Goblet

Company produced some shakers
in Chocolate Glass as well as
Golden Agate (fig. 9). The Findlay

Glass Company produced Findlay
Onyx and any of its variations.

When it comes to odd colours

and non-production colours, the

variety is really unknown due

to the fact that any kind of odd
colour may turn up that was not

a normally produced colour or a
mistake due to a bad glass batch.

Enamelled shakers can be

miniature works of art (fig. so)
representing flowers, designs,

Mary Gregory-type figures, and

even flying insects like butterflies.

Also figural shakers can be most

interesting and many hard to

come by. They can represent owls,

chickens, eggs, and tomatoes to
name a few as mentioned above.

Mt Washington made a number

of shakers that represented these
kinds of objects. Atterbury & Co.

and Challinor produced some of

the owl pieces (fig. II).

Shakers come in all price ranges

so they are affordable for new
collectors. There are many very
nice pretty shakers that can be

bought for under £50 (or the same

in dollars). At the other end of the

spectrum, high end collectors can

spend several thousand pounds
for some very rare unique pieces.

Most of the better pieces fall

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

SMALL OBJECTS OF DESIRE

between
£75
and £300 each.

Collecting shakers can be a dis-

ease like any other type of collect-

ing and even though they are small

they do have a habit of multiply-

ing quickly and filling every space.

They can be a bit of a challenge to
display well and I find that narrow
wall cabinets work best.
Shaker collecting has a large

following and it is hard to find
bargains any longer — certainly

not in antique shops. The major

marketplace for them is on e-Bay

and glass-collector shows. It can get
very competitive for the better items.
The most interesting thing

about e-Bay is that it gives the
collector the ability to view and bid

on pieces that one would normally

never have the opportunity to
have access to. Sellers from all over

can sell nice shakers that could
have been found in a sale or attic

that day and it gives the ability

for buyers from almost anywhere
to buy them. Sellers don’t need

to be knowledgeable in glass;

they will sell themselves if they

are good pieces. One can build a
collection in a short period of time
that would really not have been

possible for most, years ago.
Victorian art glass shakers

and condiment sets are just one

category of the many table items

that were used to set a table in

the Victorian era. Its amazing to

think that glass workers of that
era would never believe that their

handiwork making these little

works of art would be alive and
well in the zest century.

New collectors will find the

following books on the subject
useful, though they are out of

print so I would suggest finding
them on the secondary market.

Peterson, Arthur G.
Glass Salt

Shakers,
Wallace Homestead

Book Company, 1970 and Lechner,

Mildred & Ralph
The World of Salt

Shakers,
Volumes 1,2,3, Collector

Books, 1992. The Antique Glass

Salt and Sugar Shaker Club at
www.antiquesaltshakers.com is

another useful starting point.

Scott Beale is a manager in the

electronic security industry living

in New Jersey USA and has been
collecting shakers and condiment sets

since
1995.

BELOW LEFT:

Fig.

10. This miniature

work of art is on

a shaker called

Flared Panel,
maker

unknown. This

Mary-Gregory-type

decoration was

produced around

1890.

BELOW:
Fig. it.

This piece was

produced by the
Atterbury Glass

Company, probably

in the 188os. This
tall shaker stands

taller
than
most at

14 cm. Produced in
both Milk Glass and

crystal, it’s a most

unusual piece.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

FITZWILLIAM GLASS

The new display of British glass at the

Fitzwilliam Museum
he Applied Arts

gm
,

Department at

The Fitzwilliam
Museum,

Cambridge houses over
20,000

objects, amongst which are nearly

1,o5o pieces of British glass, as

well as small quantities of Islamic,
Chinese and Continental glass.’

The first pieces of British glass to
be acquired were two dark green

Nailsea-type jugs that were given
by the Friends of the Fitzwilliam in

191o’; the most recent acquisition
in this field was a group of two
male heads (one blue, the other

greenish-white) by David Reekie,

entitled
Something of a Relationship

III,
given by Nicholas and Judith

Goodison through The Art Fund
in 2009.3
As Julia Poole highlighted in

her interesting
1999
article, the

Fitzvvilliam’s collection of British

glass is ‘in effect an agglomeration
of private collections and single
items donated or bequeathed’:
Mrs W.D. (Frances) Dickson

gave groups of glasses in 193o,

A’

l
c

6′

q
,

A’

,e;

n
‘

g
by

Victoria

Avery

RIGHT:
Fig. 1

Goblet, Jacopo

Verzelini’s glass-

house, dated

1578. Ht. 21.6 cm.

C.4-1967

BELOW LEFT:
Fig.
2

Roemer, c. 1680. Ht.
24.7 cm C.295-1961

BELOW RIGHT:

Fig.
3
Punch bowl,

C. 169o, ladle later.

Ht. 21.6. d. 29.3 cm.
C.266.1961
1932 and

1945;
the J.C. Varty-

Smith collection was given by his
sisters in 1931; the Reverend Alfred

Valentine

Valentine-Richards

(1866-1933) bequest was received

in
1933;
the Donald Howard Beves

(1896-1961) bequest in 1961; and

the Ivan Napier collection was

given by Miss E.H. Bolitho in
1975.

Of these, the most important by

far was the Beves collection, which

was described in 196o as ‘probably
the finest private collection of
English glass in existence Since

1975,
the Fitzwilliam’s glass

collection has grown more slowly,

with acquisitions focussing
on pieces from the nineteenth
century onwards, in an effort to
extend the range. That said, the
Museum continues to be gifted

outstanding examples of earlier
dates: in 1998, for example, Sir

Ivor and Lady Batchelor gave an

extremely rare six-spouted open-
flame lamp on a tubular stem with

spreading foot of c. 1700-1720.°

As a result of gifts and purchases,

the Department’s holdings of

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

2:
1112
.00

10
,

‘‘.
FITZWILLIAM G

LASS

British glass now cover some 43o

years, starting with its spectacular
Verzelini goblet initialled AT and

dated 1578 (fig. 1) and ending with
the Reekie heads of 2009. The
collection’s particular strength lies,

however, in glass made in England

between 1670 and 1830.
Following the Courtyard

Development project (2002-

4), during which Applied Arts

lost its dedicated glass gallery, a

chronological display of about

ninety pieces of late 17th to early

zoth century glass was installed
in a conservation-grade case on
the Mezzanine Level outside the
Department’s reserve, with the

intention of treating this as a small

exhibition to be changed when time

permitted. The Verzelini goblet

was displayed in the Rothschild
Gallery of Medieval and

Renaissance Art (Gallery 32) and
loth-century glass was displayed

in the Adeane Gallery (Gallery

12). The rest of the collection,

including our Ravenscroft and

other late 17th century glass with
crizzling or a propensity for

crizzling, was carefully stored in

the reserve, where it could be seen
by appointment—which, indeed,

remains the case today.’
Given that space in the

Mezzanine case was limited, and
relatively few visitors found their

way to this area, it was decided

last summer to find an alternative

location, where a larger proportion
of our late 17th- and 18th-century

glass could be displayed. The site
chosen consisted of three large

wall-cases in Gallery 26 (Lower

Marlay) on the ground floor of
the Museum. Admittedly, it is
not ideal for the display of glass

(particularly engraved glass): the

large windows make it very light,
and the backs of all the cases

are covered with cream fabric

(originally chosen to show off
the bright colours of blue-and-

white and enamelled porcelains
or as a non-reflective background

for silver). However, the gallery

is much easier for the public to

locate (being sited between both
entrances), the space available is

much larger (meaning more of

the collection can be displayed),

and relevant context is provided

by other objects displayed here

(namely, 17th- and 18th-century
English, Continental and Japanese

porcelain). On balance, we felt
that the advantages outweighed

the disadvantages, and thus went

ahead with the move.
The glass on display in Gallery

26
is all English and ranges in

date from about 1680 to 1790.
It is designed to illustrate the

development of drinking and

dessert glasses, with associated

objects such as punchbowls,

ladles, decanters, and dessert

stands. Over
200
items are now on

display, with nearly three-quarters
from the Beves bequest.’ The

displays are basically chronological

and focus on certain types of glass.
The earliest glass on display is

late 17th-century stable lead glass

as represented by a large covered
goblet, possibly from the glass-
house of George Ravenscroft or

his successor, Hawley Bishopp

(fig.
2 —
illustrated here without

its cover), and the punch bowl

decorated with trailing and ribbed

moulding on a plain pedestal foot

(fig.
3 —
shown here with a later

ladle).
In terms of twist stem glasses,

the Fitzwilliam boasts an

impressive collection datable to the
third quarter of the 18th century—

including incised twist, air twist,

mercury twist, opaque white twist,

and coloured twist (fig. 4) —with

a large variety of bowl shapes and

sizes. Given how popular these

are with the public, the aim was
to show as many different types

and forms as possible. A small

group of later 88th-century cut

stems—currently, a class under-
represented in the Museum’s

collection—is displayed nearby.
The collection also includes an

extraordinary range of different

early 18th-century lead-glass

baluster stems, including a giant

BELOW:

Fig.
4
Five

wine glasses with

colour twist stems, c.

1760. 1
–
Its. 13.5 cm,

14.4 cm,

17.8 cm, 19.5 cm,

and 14.5
cm. C.553

–

1961,
C.645.1961,

C.585-1961, C.642-

1961, and C.530-1961

.41

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

RIGHT:

Fig. 6

‘Lynn glass’ wine
glass and mallet-

shaped decanter, c.

1760-75. Ht. is cm

and 25.2 cm. C.40-

1975
and C.

48
,1
975

RIGHT:

Fig. 5

Giant goblet, c.

1700-10. Ht. 39.5 cm.

C/Gao-1933

FITZWILLIAM GLASS

goblet (fig. 5). Measuring 39.5
cm high, it is one of the largest

glass goblets known. These are
contrasted with a number of
later light balusters, and wine

glasses and sweetmeat glasses with
moulded pedestal stems, including

one wine glass moulded with the
inscription ‘GOD BLESS KING

GEORG [sic]’ probably for

George I.
Another important aspect of

the collection is its Lynn glass,

presumed to date from the mid-
to later-18th-century.'” It includes

a wine glass with round funnel
bowl, horizontal grooves, and

plain heavy stem and foot” and an

unusual mallet-shaped decanter

again with the horizontal ‘Lynn’
rings of c. 1775 (fig. 6). As is the

case with these examples, most of

our Lynn glass was given by Miss
Bolitho in
1
975•’

The new glass display also has

small groups of tumblers and

firing glasses, as well as mugs and

two-handled cups. A particularly
fine example of a late-18th-century

two-handled cup is shown in

fig. 7, which is decorated with

a wheel-engraved ship in an

oval medallion, inscribed ‘The

Crawford’. The reverse is engraved

with the following verse:
May prosperous breeses (sic]

Ever speed

The Crawford on her way
And may the family all

Be blest

In heaven at the last day.

The George III silver coin dated

1787 trapped inside the hollow
knop provides a firm
terminus ante

quem
for the date of production.”

Glass

two-handled

covered

cups echoed silver equivalents,

which were highly popular as
commemorative gifts in the i8th

century.
In addition, the Fitzwilliam’s

collection includes a number of clear

lead glass wine glasses and goblets

with opaque-twist stems enamelled
by members of the Beilby family of

Newcastle in the mid- to later i8th

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

viL

.
„ _
ote4

FITZWILLIAM GLASS

century. The best known of the
Fitzwilliam’s Beilby glasses is an

armorial goblet with bucket bowl
and gilt rim, enamelled in colours

with the Royal Arms of England
(front) and the Prince of Wales’

triple feather badge (back):4 It
is thought to have been made to
commemorate the birth in August

176z of the future King George IV
and is proudly signed by William

on the back.’ Not so well known

but of great interest is the large

bucket bowl armorial goblet with
opaque-twist stem (fig. 8), which
is enamelled in colours and gilded

with arms of the Watson family
(for the Marquis of Rockingham)

and Bright family. Datable to c.

1765, it was also probably painted
by William Beilby, but may have

been designed by his younger
brother Ralph who was an heraldic

specialist. ‘ Displayed nearby is a

rare decanter and stopper (fig. 9)

of the same date. It is enamelled

in white with hops, barley and a
butterfly and inscribed, ‘BEER’.
Also on display is a group of

opaque-white enamelled glass

made to imitate porcelain or, in

the case of the guglet enamelled

in blue with landscapes, English

delftware.’ The largest of these

faux porcelain items is a beautiful

opaque-white glass vase of
inverted baluster shape with a
domed cover with a knob, dated
c. 1760-65 (fig. Jo — or see cover).

The Dutch-style flowers, insect

and butterfly decorations done in
polychrome enamels may be the

work of the painter who signed

P.F. or P.P. on the 1764 water bowl

in the V&A.”
The new display also contains

a selection of lead glass dessert

glasses, including ones which have

been described as jelly glasses,

syllabub glasses, posset cups
(with spouts), and tall-stemmed

sweetmeat glasses with variously

decorated rims, and circular

footed stands:
9
Fig. ii shows a

sample of these glasses: on the
left is a 9.3 cm high posset pot
with panel-moulded body, and

plain handle and spout, believed
to date from the first quarter of

the 18th century; in the centre is a

20.1
cm high sweetmeat glass with

a moulded pillar stem on collars

and domed and folded foot of c.

8745; and on the right a 11.3 cm
high Jacobite jelly glass of
c.
1750,

engraved with a Jacobite rose, oak

leaf, star and ‘FIAT’ (Latin for ‘let

it come to pass’).”
We are pleased that feedback

from the public about the new

displays has been positive thus
far, and we intend to photograph

in colour the entire collection of

English glass (when funds become

available) so that high-quality
images can be added to the online

catalogue. We would warmly

welcome comments from readers
regarding the database’s contents:

the glass collection was one of

the first to be entered onto our

electronic database from the old

paper catalogues, and we are aware

that many entries are now in need

of revision. We also hope that

readers will be inspired to visit the
Fitzwilliam Museum, and
see
the

new displays for themselves.

ABOVE:

Fig. 7

Covered two-

handled cup, c.1787.
Ht. 28.4 cm (with

cover). C.254 &
A-1961

LEFT: Fig. 8

‘Rockingham
Goblet; probably

enamelled by
William Beilby,

c. 1765-70.
Ht.
22.6
cm. C.910-

1961

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

FITZWILLIAM GLASS

Dr Victoria Avery FSA is Keeper,

Department of Applied Art at the

Fitzwilliam Museum.

Endnotes

1.
For glass at The Fitzwilliam, see

the exhibition
catalogue,
Glass at

The Fitzwilliam Museum
Cambridge

University Press, 1978; and Julia Poole,

‘The Fitzwilliam Museum: Bequests from

Two Cambridge Collectors, The Reverend

Alfred Valentine Valentine-Richards MA

(1866-1961 [sic]) and Donald H. Beves

MA (1896
–
1961)’ in
Glass Collectors and

their Collections in Museums in Great
Britain
The Glass Circle, London,
1999,

pp.
49-55.
Information about individual

pieces can be found via the Museum’s

online Collections Explorer database

(www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/explorer/)
which is being added to constantly.

2.
Accession numbers C.1-1910 and C.2-

Iwo

3.
C.15A-C-2oo9

4.
Poole

1999
(as at note s); quotation

from p.
49.
Dickson, Beves and Napier

were all members of The Circle of Glass

Collectors, with Beves Hon. Vice-
President.
5.
Robert Charleston,’Cambridge

Connoisseur;
Connoisseur,
CXLV June

1960, pp. 32-7.

6.
C.5-1998

7.
Glass in the Applied Arts reserve

may be viewed by prior appointment

on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and
Thursdays. To do so, please contact the

Collections Manager in writing, by email

([email protected].

ac.uk) or by telephone: 01223 332945.
8.
Beves Bequest: 146 items; Napier

collection:
24

items; Valentine-Richards

Bequest:
23

items; Dickson gifts:
8
items;

Varty-Smith collection:
6;
with
4 items
acquired by other means.

9.
C.486-1961

so. See Delomosne & Son Ltd.,
Lynn

glass? Glass of the 18th century traditionally

associated with King’s Lynn or Norwich,

1995.
u.
C.40-1975

12.
The Cambridge Journal & Weekly Flying

Post, No.167,
z8 November
1747,
induded

an advert for the sale, possibly of Lynn

glass, by weight to be held on 16 December

1747,
which included’A large Quantity of

fine flint Glass, both/figur’d and plain,

well sorted, being the whole Stock of the/
Glass House Company there; Consisting

of a great Variety of the most/Saleable lots

of Drinking Glasses, Decanters, Salvers,

and other Glass/Ware./To be view’d at

the said Glass-House in/the Common

Staith Yard in Lynn any time before the

sale: I am grateful to Julia Poole for this

information and reference.

13.
Initial attempts to identify’The

Crawford’ have proved unsuccessful, so if

any reader can help us identify the ship,
we would be most grateful.

14.
C.570-1961

s5. The inscription reads: ‘W. Beilby Jun.r
Ncastle inv.t &

s6.For further discussion of Beilby glass

and the roles played by the various siblings
in the family workshop,
see
Simon Cottle,

‘William Beilby and the Art of Glass;
Glass Circle Journal
9,
2005, pp. 28

–
40.

17.
C.118-1950

18.
For further examples, see R.J.

Charleston,
Gilding the Lily. Rare forms of

decoration on English Glass of the later 18th

century
(London, 1978), for example, fig. 21

on p. 16.

19.
See the articles by R.J. Charleston, Tim

Udall, and Helen McKearin in The
Glass

Circle
5, 1986.

20.
C.IO2-1975,
C.417-1961 and C.507-1961

respectively.

ABOVE: Fig. lo

Vase
and
c over,

enamelled opaque-
white glass, c. 1760-

65. Ht. 26.4 cm.
& A-1945

LEFT:
Fig. 9

Decanter and

stopper, enamelled
by a member of the

Beilby family,

c. 1765. Ht. 26.8 cm.

C.5o9 & A-1961

ABOVE RIGHT:

Fig.
11
Posset pot,

sweetmeat glass,
and jelly glass, 18th

century. Hts. 9.3

cm,
20.1
cm, and

11.3 cm. C.io2-1975,

C.417-1961, C.597-

1961

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

WATFORD CRYSTAL

Watford Glass Company: 1932-1992

heWatford

gm
,

Glass Company

can trace its
roots back to

Gebruder Kiewe (Kiewe Brothers)
in Offenbach, Frankfurt am

Main, Germany. I have no records

of when Gebruder Kiewe was

founded, but the factory was large,

as can be seen from the illustration
on its notepaper (fig.1).

In the early 192os Gus, my

grandfather and one of

the Kiewe brothers, was
on holiday in Wiesbaden,
Germany and met Malke,

from England. A holiday
romance followed and they

married. She moved to Germany.

They travelled often to England
and, as Jews, were becoming aware

of the changes in Germany. They

decided in 1929 to move with their

EERNSPRECHER:

IIEUSFEISTANIM 976

NACI-1 GESCIMM55.1.1/55:
FIRANKFIAM AM MAIN

AMI• NORDEN NII.MM9

DR All TA N SC H RIFT,
KIEWE

HEUSENSTAMM

OFFENBACHMAIN
young daughter, Felicity (Fay),

to England, leaving his brother

Heinz in charge of the factory. Gus

returned once to Frankfurt before

the war, but had a bad encounter

with some officials and did not

go back. When Heinz became
a victim of the Nazis Gebruder
Kiewe was left in the hands of the
manager but he disappeared and

the factory was expropriated.
On
2
June 1932 Gus set up

Watford Glass Company
(Watford Crystal) in
Liverpool Road, Watford.

After the war Fay, who
had been a WREN, joined

her father in the company.

They worked together until
1957,

when Gus died suddenly of a heart
attack. Very shocked, deeply upset

and about to give birth to me, Fay
took over the running of Watford
Glass. By this time she was Fay

Peck, having married Lionel in

1952 (fig. 3).

The company carried on the

tradition of buying blank glass-

ware from Europe. I vividly re-

member, each year, going with

my parents on a buying trip

around Europe. We would start

in Belgium at Val St Lambert and
then go onto FX Nachtmann in

Germany and finally Glassexport

in Liberec in what was then
Czechoslovakia. Gus had bought

from all these companies for his

factory in Germany. The real

sadness for my mother was going
back to Prague under communist

rule, as she remembered it as

a mini Paris before the regime

changed. Several of the old factory

owners had killed themselves

when the Russians took over.
We also bought blanks from the

UK-based companies Nazeing

Glass and Whitefriars Glass and
the Italian company CALP. All

these pieces were then cut using

a diamond cutting wheel. Once
cut, the pattern looked opaque

until polished in acid (this is

documented in Issue No. 53o).
The council was not happy

having an industrial unit in a semi-

residential area and so the factory

moved in 1959 to Faraday Close,

Holywell Industrial Estate, now

Gaby

Franklin

GEDRUDER rfIEWIE

MITTELDEUTSCHES7K R I
S`T
A L LGLAS-S:,CHLEIFWERK

RANK KONt01

DIIMMION DER DIANONIO.
OESMIACNA.,

FRANKFURT A. M.

MAUI KONSTAINAR WACIM
MNIIMSOM

POSTS CHECK

•

MAMMA, 1MAIN
n
NM

liEUSENSTAMM, Offenbach (M) Land, den
31

.
3
•

193
2

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

LEFT:

Fig.

Gebruder Kiewe

factory notepaper

LEFT: Fig.
2
Fay

and
Lionel

BELOW RIGHT:
Fig. 3 Gus and
Malke

WATFORD CRYSTAL

Watford Business Park (fig. 4). At

that time the company employed

nearly 4o people: cutters, packers,

acid polishers, salesmen, glass
cleaners, office, shop staff and a

cook.

Watford Crystal flourished

in the 196os and 7os. In 1970

Fay was awarded an MBE for

her services to export (fig.5).

She was completely surprised
to receive this medal and never

knew who had recommended

her for the honour. She became
quite a celebrity, especially being a

woman in business. A much rarer
TOP:

Fig.
4
Faraday

Close factory

ABOVE:
Fig s Fay

receiving her MBE

in 197o

BELOW:
Fig.
6

The Pristine series
occurrence then than now

Macy’s and Marshalls in the

USA were big export customers,

as was El Corte Ingles in Spain.
Other foreign markets were the

Caribbean, Bermuda, Hong

Kong, Gibraltar, New Zealand,

Kuwait, Denmark and the

Channel Islands. The company

had a very good agent, Vic Farmer,

in Scotland and during the 197os
this was a booming market. I
remember doing a large amount

of business with the Scottish Co-

op. UK retailer outlets included

Chinacraft, a chain of London
based shops, Harrods, Fortnum

and Mason and House of Fraser.
Watford Crystal produced

hand-cut crystal drinking glasses,

vases, bowls, decanters, dishes,

jugs and cased coloured crystal.
All these items were decorated

in different patterns: Cheney,

Sunburst,

Chelsea,

Boston,

Blandford, Bedford, Dogwood

Rose,

Worcester,

Pristine,

Buckingham, Abbey, April and

several more (figs. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 &
ii). The most popular ranges were

Cheney and Sunburst.
The company also made special

commemorative pieces for the

Queen’s Silver Jubilee, the wedding

of Charles and Diana and a series
of glasses decorated with the Four

Musketeers for the Russian poet

Yevgeny Yevtushenko. Much of
the range was packed in silk-lined

presentation boxes, first in blue

and then in purple.

At the beginning of each year the

company exhibited at Harrogate

and Birmingham Spring Fairs.
Apart from taking orders there

was a real feeling of camaraderie
between the glass companies. It

was a relatively small industry
and everyone knew everyone else.

Sadly, I don’t think any exist today
in the form they did back then.
My working days at the factory

started during my school holidays.
My first job was in the blacking

off room. I spent the days cleaning

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

WATFORD CRYSTAL

off the black marks that were put

on each piece of glass to guide

the cutters where to cut. I began

working full time with my mother
in the late 197os and worked

in the office, designing, buying
blanks and travelling round the
UK selling, The factory opened

its own on-site gift shop, which
quickly became the company’s

best customer. I remember that

when we started taking credit
cards our sales doubled overnight.
When Watford FC, the Town

Hall or local businesses needed

gifts Watford Crystal was often
their first port of call. It was a

breath of fresh air to have people

come to the factory not thinking

we were Waterford. This mistake

seems to have continued, as I
was interested to discover when

I recently received an email from

Maurice and Pauline Wimpory of

the Glass Association:
About xo years ago we bought a blue-

cased glass
vase
cut and engraved with

fish/waving weeds and bubbles. It was

sold to us as Webb Corbett.

An exhibition in London about

eight years ago curated by Jeanette

Hayhurst and Nigel Benson attributed

an identical clear vase as being made by
Waterford. We were surprised by this

because it was totally unlike any of their

other cut glass items.
Whilst researching something else

we stumbled across a Watford Glass

advert in The Pottery Gazette for a

green cased vase identical to our blue
one and called ‘Deep Water’. Hayhurst/

Benson and a
Miller’s Guide
all mistook

it for Waterford.

We were actually older than

the current Waterford, which was

founded in the 195os by a Czech

glassmaker, Charles Bacik, and a
consortium of Irish businessmen

(glass had been made in Waterford
from the 178os for about a century

but had then ceased until the

195os). In fact my grandfather
Gus knew Bacik, who had talked
to him about his new business

venture.
In the 198os, as well as the

traditional range, the company

undertook corporate business –

producing a few thousand medals

and trophies for corporate games.
It also worked with Colefax and

Fowler and Jane Churchill, making

a range of own-label glasses, vases,

jugs and candlesticks.
My mother and I worked

together until the mid-198os

when her high blood pressure
and heart condition made her

slow down. I took over the day-

to-day running but business was

becoming difficult with the advent

of cheap glass from China and
Eastern Europe. It was proving

uneconomical to cut the glass in

the UK and sadly like so many

British manufacturing businesses,

we could not survive and in 1992
the factory closed after 6o years.

Writing this piece made me
FROM TOP DOWN:

Figs.? &
8
The

Sunburst series

Fig
9

Buckingham

brandy glass
10 A Watford

State Goblet

BELOW:
Fig. 11 The

Buckingham series
wonder — if we had done things

differently, would Watford Crystal

still be around? The answer is yes

and no. The only way it would have

survived would have been to stop
any cutting in Watford and get

everything made in China, as even
Eastern Europe was becoming

too expensive. The name would
have survived, the product would

have been good but it would have
been just an import company. My

mother was passionate that we

should always create something in
Watford and that she had to carry
on what her father had started;

that was why it did not close until

after her death. Watford Glass

had the fate of nearly all the UK
crystal companies. Closure.
In the winter of 1991 my mother

and I visited Frankfurt. We saw
her childhood house and the site
of her father’s factory. Gebruder
Kiewe had been replaced by a

police station. I often asked her

why she had not tried to get the
factory back or any compensation

from the German government, but

she never really gave me a good
reason other than she just didn’t

want to. Fay died in the summer
of 1991 of a heart attack. She was

only 67.

Gaby Franklin is the last owner of
Watford Glass and now concentrates

on interior design and running a

commercial property company.

Glass Circle News Issue
131 Vol. 36 No. 1

-0

REPORTS

A
••

Circle meetings and outings

Jan van der
Straet
An

alchemist’s
laboratory’

(
1
57

)

October 2012

Alchemy, Archaeology

and Glass by Dr Marcos
Martinon-Torres

In this extremely well-

presented talk, Dr
Martin:in-Torres took

us on down one of the

lesser-known avenues of
our subject, allowing us a

glimpse of the role of glass

in early natural science. He
was careful to stress that he

was not a glass specialist, but

an archaeologist specialising
in archaeological science of
the late mediaeval to 57th

century period.
He introduced his subject

by examining the different
meanings of’alchemy’ past

and present. Skirting briefly
over transformation of self
(as found in Paul Coelho’s
novel
The Alchemist),
and

Harry Potter’s magical

potions, it was clearly a

third dimension of early

modern alchemy that Dr

Martin6n-Torres had in
his sights: the alchemist

as a proto-scientist. While
this character had attained

a certain mythic notoriety
in Europe linked to an

obsessive search for the

‘philosopher’s stone’ capable
of transmuting base metal
into gold, historically

alchemists were real
individuals interested in a
wide range of experiments.

They had been depicted
by artists in Europe (often

with considerable artistic

licence) as unkempt and
impoverished individuals,

working in the midst of
retorts, stills, tubes, books,

noxious fumes and furnaces.
While alchemists work

might appear very different

from science today, in

parallel with modern
researchers their work had

its own logic (based then

on Aristotelian theories

of matter) and language

with its own symbols.
Their aim was to replicate
in the laboratory what

happened in nature over
time. It was suggested
that glass itself, with its

bright colours and variable

opacity/transparency was

an intrinsically alchemical
material which had made it

possible to imitate nature in
the form of semi-precious

stones and minerals. Indeed
the fact that it rivalled

and possibly outshone
minerals such as lapis or

rock crystal had exercised
Pliny and other luminaries.

The invention of glass in

the region of Mesopotamia
had been a landmark in the

development of material
culture with economic and

philosophical implications.

Prized by powerful rulers,

it became a valuable and

widely traded commodity,

coveted by all.
The evidence for

glass being used in early
alchemists workshops is
rare, but some phials and

distillation equipment have
been discovered in Egypt
in the late Roman period,

coinciding with the era of
the alchemist, Maria the

Jewess. An archaeological dig

in a church in Lower Austria
has revealed evidence of an

alchemist’s laboratory in a
church dating to the second
half of the 56th century.

This included locally made

‘forest glass’ bottles and thin

transparent glass vials and

distillation columns possibly
made in Venice. In c.1607

alchemists were among the
new colonists in Jamestown,

Virginia, sent there to
make a’tryall of glass using

local resources. (The crude
black glass excavated there

explains why the venture

was abandoned.)
Nearer to home,

Solomon’s House on the
old site of the Ashmolean
Museum in Oxford

was discussed. Inspired
by Francis Bacon as a

foundation whose aim
was to investigate ‘the

Knowledge of Causes

and the Secret Motion of

Things’, it incorporated a

library, a garden, a cabinet of
curiosities and a laboratory.

In
1999
a dig on the site

yielded glass and ceramic

alchemical apparatus,

confirming the presence of

a laboratory in the original
museum as cited in Elias

Ashmole’s bequest of 5683.

Indeed, Robert Plot, first
Keeper of the Museum,

was also described as

‘Director of Experiments

and Professor of Chymistry:
The residues within the

laboratory artefacts revealed

the presence of sulphur and
mercury, traces of zinc and

manganese sulphide and

antimony.

This wide-ranging lecture

closed with discussion of a

subject dear to the heart of
many Glass Circle members:

lead glass. A trail of glass

which had dripped down
the side of a shard from a

ceramic crucible, had been

analysed and found to have

a very high lead content.
Plot is known to have
visited George Ravenscroft

(since 5674 holder of the
royal patent for producing

lead glass) however the

experimentation with lead

glass at the old Ashmolean

lab reveals interest in a
property of Ravenscroft’s

glass other than its pleasing
quality for drinking vessels.
This find of lead glass, a

developed version of the

‘vitrum Saturni’ of earlier

alchemists, brought the
fascinating story full circle,

for while on a philosophical

level it perhaps bore witness

to their interest in imitating
natural rock crystal, it

also brought us back to
their fabled pursuit of the

‘philosopher’s stone’.

Susan Newell

We are grateful to Nickola

Smith, Gordon Baker, and Jay

and
Ann
Kaplan for hosting

this meeting.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

REPORTS

13 November 2012
Composite Glass Objects by

Juanita Navarro

Juanita Navarro defined
‘Composite Glass objects: or

‘marriages or assemblages’

to be discussed as items

with glass repairs, not with
added metal parts. Her area
of investigation covered the

19th century boom in antique
glass collecting from the
mid-century on, with repairs

that were probably intended

to deceive the collectors who
had bequeathed, given or

sold important glass pieces
to various leading museum

collections: the Wallace

Collection where she
currently works, the Victoria
& Albert Museum where

she previously worked, the
British Museum, Courtauld
Institute and others. Some

of these early Venetian or

facon-de-Venise
pieces may be
traced back to the dealer and

collector Frederic Spitzer
(1815-189o), and some of the

restorers he used, such as the

goldsmith, restorer and faker
Alfred Andre (1839-1919).

An early example of the

skill in deceptive repairs
was of an enamel on copper
plaque by Leonard Limousin

(c.15o5-1577) of
Catherine de’

Medici as Juno.
An irregular

area of loss had been cleverly
infilled with an exactly-
fitting piece of painted and
fired copper, back-filled with

putty and soldered to the

loss, and the edge concealed

with cold painting.
Tips for finding deceptive

repairs included:

•
The main evidence is

the presence of grinding

marks

•
Examine the piece in good

light, with a torch; turn

around to see from all

angles;
•

Compare with similar

pieces, but remember the
comparative pieces may

themselves have been

•
Look for evidence of

old organic adhesives,
which yellow; they may
have been removed and

replaced with newer

synthetic adhesives, which

may still be clear and thus

less visible;

•
Check for adhesives with

a low-output UV lamp,
though not all show up
under this. Organic

binders will show up

better than synthetic

ones, not all of which will

appear;

.
Repairs are themselves

fragile, so they may have
been replaced by newer
repairs which will be less

visible

.
Scientific analysis is not a

high priority but might be

considered.

Juanita then displayed

slides of objects where close

examination showed more

or less deceptive repairs and
their techniques:
A two-part goblet,

British Museum: knops are

misaligned, and a stem knop

does not match. Another
covered cup was one of a
group of three items with

repairs, acquired in the

188os all with the same
provenance;
A scallop-shaped bottle

with a pair of shoulder

handles that did not match:

availability of plenty of

broken pieces for repairs

suggests a thriving repair
industry;
A dark blue goblet with

the unusual number of six
knops on the stem, acquired

by the Wallace Collection in
the 188os: the top knop had

been painted green-blue on
the inside and would have

matched the blue five-knop

stem for some time. As
the join was unstable the

old putty was removed and
replaced with a new repair,

for stability;
A bowl/vase at the

Courtauld Institute was
compared with a similar one

at the Victoria and Albert
Museum: there was a repair

at the top to a merise, the
parts matching, but a repair

at the base showed that
the foot was a replacement

attached with a dowel and
putty;
A cruet (left) in the

Wallace Collection, acquired

in 1865: the spout differed
from comparators and

was shown to have a line
levelled by grinding, the
replacement join disguised

with another added piece
[a mask grunt]. The foot

was also a replacement,

with a hollow knop painted

inside with bronze-based

gold paint, now betrayed
by discolouration, the knop
filled with putty and held

together by the stem still

attached to the replacement

foot; at the V&A, a goblet

where a stem knop fits

inside another as join to
a replacement foot, and

another acquired in 1893

from the Spitzer collection

where the base of the goblet
had been ground out and
the bowl base of another

with stem and foot had been

inserted;
Lastly, an ewer acquired

ABOVE:

Ewer

BELOW: Cruet

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

Dickens

losIto It.’
I

KENT’S VENTILATED ICE SAFES I
Prodi

PATENTED MAY, 1963.

viaim

cum
rater.

duvet

88 vet
Refit,

is the
Conn
narr

Pater
be bet

List
Vent

List
Ve

ORDINARY ICE
SAFES AND REFRIGERATORS AT

RENT’S MINIATURE REFRIGERATORS

Adapted for :lin

PATENTED

MAY, 1866

REPORTS

by the Wallace Collection in

1865 or the 187os had been

ground down below a knop
and an (unstable) organic

filler used.
Juanita finished with a

quote from Neil McGregor

of the British Museum:’We
can’t understand the objects

without the conservators’. :
Anne Lutyens-Humfrey

We are grateful to B

Abrahams, Marie Polley,

Donald Hepburn and Anne
Horne for hosting this meeting.

11 December 2012

Dickens and Glass by Alex
Werner

This talk touched on
the period covered by

Dickens’s life (1812-187o),

an era of great change, with
the industrial revolution

impacting in a major way
on glass production and

more generally on people’s

lives. The glass industry
expanded rapidly with
new glass-making centres

emerging alongside old

ones to meet the demand

of a growing population as

well as expanding overseas

markets. Steam-powered

cutting, coloured glass and
the introduction of pressed

glass are just a few of the
important developments
of the period. From his

earliest childhood memories
right through to the last

passages of text that he

wrote, Dickens showed that

glass was very much part of
everyday life – from mirrors

and windows to wine glasses

and bottles.

Dickens’s other novels

were produced in serial
form. Month-by-month,

a new part of the story

was published, made up

of three chapters and one
illustration, surrounded by
pages of advertisements.

It was Hugh Wakefield in

1961 who first wrote about
the Apsley Pellatt abridged

illustrated price list found in
the Nicholas Nickleby serial

26
of November 1838. This

gives insight into the design
and cost of wine glasses

and tumblers described
in Dickens’s work. It is
not known what type of

table glass Dickens himself

owned, but he was very fond

of punch and champagne.

The advertsisments in the
part works show many other

types of glass including

cruets, medicine bottles,

lamps and, most amusingly,
a pair of cut glass decanters
in a promotion for ‘ventilated

ice safes:
Perhaps the most

memorable and noteworthy
use of table glass in Dickens’s

work is for the serving of
punch. A good description

appears in Our
Mutual

Friend
where readers are

introduced to the Six Jolly
Fellowship Porters, a small,
ramshackle Limehouse
public house, and some

interesting drinks and

glasses. It is noteworthy how
hot alcoholic drinks appear

again and again throughout
Dickens’s novels and stories

(and not just those passages

describing Christmas
celebrations). This British
tradition of drinking hot

alcoholic drinks is less
common now.. When one
examines the thick-walled

wine glasses and tumblers
of the 19th century, it is

worth considering that many

would have been used for
consuming hot drinks. One

does not really think of glass

as a suitable material for this.
Furthermore, glasses often

had to withstand the heat of

a red hot poker thrust into

the liquid, as this added to

the flavour of the punch.
The Pickwick Papers

has more descriptions of
drink and food than any of
Dickens’s novels. Someone

has worked out that
there are 35 breakfasts, 3z

dinners, to luncheons and
249
references to drink in

the work. One of the most

amusing scenes involving
glass is when Mr Bob
Sawyer makes rum punch
in his chemist shop. As

there was only one tumbler

in the house’, Bob used’a

glass funnel with a cork
in the narrow end’ and’a
wide-lipped crystal vessel

inscribed with a variety

of cabalistic characters, in

which chemists are wont

to measure out their liquid

drugs in compounding

prescriptions’ to allow
him and his two friends

to consume the punch . In
Dickens’s stories wine glasses

and tumblers are often in
short supply and have to be

shared or borrowed. This
was associated particularly

with Victorian lodging
houses where many of

the glasses had had’their

feet snapped off: In one
case, a landlady’s glasses

were described as ‘little,
thin, blown-glass tumblers

whereas those that she
had borrowed from the

local tavern were ‘great,
dropsical, bloated articles,
each supported on a huge

gouty leg: In
The Mistaken

Milliner,
glass is seen as a

status symbol of genteel
living’ for a relatively poor
newly-wed couple where

on each of their sideboards
there were found`three

wine-glasses and a tumbler:
And the next time we are

considering wine glasses,

decanters and toasting

glasses we should remember

Dickens’s description of a

large dinner:

The moment the noise

ceases, up starts the toast-
master:—’Gentlemen,

charge your glasses, if you

please!’ Decanters having
been handed about, and

glasses filled, the toast-

master proceeds, in a

regular ascending scale:—.

‘Gentlemen—air—you—all

charged? Pray—silence-

gentlemen—for—the
cha-i-r!

Alex
Werner

We
are grateful to Graham

Vivian, Donald Hepburn,
Tim
Udall, Gordon & Mrs

Slater for hosting this meeting.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

November

Circle outing:
Visit to the Museum of

London stores

A group of Circle members
made their way through

the side streets north of

Moorfields Eye Hospital
to Eagle Wharf Road and

the discreet entrance of

Mortimer Wheeler House.
We were welcomed by Alex

Werner, Head of History

collections, and Beatrice
Behlen, Senior Curator for

Decorative Arts, with coffee

and biscuits, before entering
the Glass and Ceramics

store.
The principal collections

of interest were the Garton
collection, put together for
the London businessman

Sir Richard Garton between

1927 andIg34 (when
Garton died) by the leading
dealer Cecil Davis, and
presented to the Museum
in
1943
by Garton’s heirs.

Superb drinking glasses,

jelly glasses, sweetmeats,
candle- and taper-sticks and

other pieces from c1650 to

the 1830s, not all British,

were ranged deep on metal

shelves in glass-sided storage
cabinets, making viewing

rather tantalising.
The internal museum

of Whitefriars Glass, from
James Powell’s early

straw-

coloured Arts and Crafts
pieces to the vibrant colours

and textures of the 196os

and up to its closure in

1980, was the other notable

collection, with many items

of great beauty.
This is a general store

for finds from the Greater
London area, so other items

of interest could be seen

around. A small number
of objects from glasshouse
excavation sites, mainly
twist stem fragments,

were put out on a table for
handling, though as Alex

Werner pointed out the

glass industry has always

been green’ in recycling
cullet, so few finds remain
— and those might not

be originally from the

glasshouse on the site
where they were found.
Other finds were stored by

period or site. There were a
number of bottles of varied
periods, including a large

carboy, near some yards-of-

ale, glass walking sticks and

Victorian flashed pieces;

also, among the ceramics a

noticeable group from the

Chelsea-Derby factory.
Thanks to Alex Werner

and the Museum of London

staff for making us welcome
on a Saturday.
Anne Lutyens-Humfrey

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1
REPORTS

19 February 2013
Andy McConnell: Scratching

Around, the Glories of

Engraved and Etched Glass

Andy McConnell, author of
The Decanter: an Illustrated
History
1650-1950 and An-

tiques Roadshow specialist,

took us on an enjoyable
romp through
2000
years of

engraved glass history.
Starting in antiquity, we

were shown the delightful

wheel-abraded Populonia
Bottle (140AD) at Corn-

ing. We then sped across
the Med to Cairo as the first

transparent high art seen by
mediaeval Europeans were
Fatimid rock crystal artefacts

looted by crusaders some
9

centuries later. Rock crystal

cutting skills were re-invent-
ed in Renaissance central
Europe when’fossilised ice

objects were imbued with
quasi-supernatural qualities.

By the late 17± century these

skills were being applied to

glass, resulting in wheel-en-

gravingfacon
de Boheme,
and

relief-carving
hochschnitt.

Prior to this, glass-making

know-how had spread

throughout Europe thanks

to the Venetians. In the

17th century Low Countries,
diamond-point engraving is

seen onfacon
de Venise

glass,

latterly with
Berainesque
and

calligraphic ornament. Apart
from some rare exceptions,

diamond-point engraving

gave way to wheel- engraving
which continued to develop
in northern Europe in the
re century. In Britain it was

mainly in the mid-19th cen-

tury, when cut glass fell out

of fashion, that demand for
engraved glass grew. British

glassmakers then employed
many highly-skilled Bohemi-

an artist/craftsmen, and their
work was universally admired

at the London International
of 1862. At a lower level, itin-
erant engravers would walk

from town to town pushing
barrows with foot-operated

treadles, engraving glass to

order. In the 20th century en-

graving received a new boost
at Orrefors in Sweden where
German craftsmen executed

artists’ designs.
Andy invited glass

engraver Katharine Coleman
to bring the story up-to-

date. In a thought-provoking

finale, the stunning pieces

shown by Katharine brought
home her warning that, given

the dearth of specialised
courses now, wheel-engraving

on glass may well be a dying

art.
Susan Newell

We are grateful to John New-

gas & Mrs Eveline Newgas,
Maurice Mclain and
Tim

Udall for hosting this meeting.
ABOVE:

Whitefriars

glass

BELOW:

Simon
Gate

engraving

for Orrefors,

192os

Boudoir Labels

1752-1987

John Salter
The Wine Label Circle,
2012. £65 (special offer to

Circle members of £5o +

f
‘
5
P&P)

ISBN

978-0-9572523-o-1

208 pages
REVIEWS

Book reviews

JOHN SALTER

T
his is the last of the

author
‘
s trilogy of publi-

cations on labels, the others
being
Wine Labels

and
Sauce

Labels.
And fine scholarly

works they are too in their

albeit limited field. This one

lists some
558

silver, enam-

elled and printed labels with

extensive commentaries and

54
0
pictures comprehensively

cataloguing glass bottles,

boxes and other bibelots

that would have been part

of a lady
‘
s boudoir.

Perfume bottles and

toiletries of all kinds (and

variously labelled) one

might expect. Also bottles

and labels for soft drinks
(including the toxic ratafia

and a number of not-so-soft
cordials) and medicines

(including red Constantia,

chartreuse, orange curacao

and methylated spirits). But
the mistress of the house

didn
‘
t need disguise to mask

her collection of boudoir

tipples as she would be

well-versed in making her
own and had novelty bottles
for night caps and cocktail
pick-me-ups, including the

enchanting snake liqueur

decanter (right) made by

Saunders and Shepherd

in 1895. A whole chapter is

devoted to boudoir tipples

enumerating the choices

from absinthe to white port

and detailing their non-

dining-room use.
Decanter collectors will

be disappointed perhaps

that the elegant decanters
referred to in the text are de-

picted sparingly, but this is
a book about the labels that

show what is held inside

the bottles and the book is

well, and fully, illustrated

with much to interest any

glass bottle collector. Some
pictures are not of the best

resolution for book produc-

tion, but those are printed

inoffensively small and the

general impression is of a
well-made book, nicely laid

out. Certainly it is thor-

oughly researched, drawing

on primary sources such as
housekeeping books and

apothecaries lists and giving

descriptions, anecdotes and

the occasional recipe as well.
There is a full descriptive

catalogue of silversmiths
in the penultimate chapter.

This is a book for browsing

and referring to, rather than
for serial reading.

I found the paragraph

numbering somewhat

irksome —
9.541
for Ylang-

Erwin Eisch
Hirmer Verlag, Munich,

2012.
€49.90

ISBN 978-3-7774
–
5191
–

(UK), English & Ger-

man texts in parallel

242 pages

This
collection of essays

I by artists, curators and

friends provides a vital

insight into the life and

work of Erwin Eisch, one
of the key members of the

Studio Glass movement
(50th anniversary) also the

warm, charismatic focus
of the BildWerk Summer

Academy, Frauenau.
Kruse
‘
s
Introduction

covers Eisch
‘
s early life and

art
school years. Eisch’s
Ylang or 13.112 for Yapp &

Woodward being uneasy

on the eye — and confus-

ingly the figure numbers
don
‘
t relate to the paragraph

numbering thus making it

quite hard to find pictures
referred to in the index.

Nevertheless, I was pleased

to find out what quuetche,

oppoponax and cinq a Sept

were, though paxarette
eluded me and weicsel

appeared to be in a non-ex-
istent chapter. Still, I
‘
ve got

a bottle of red Constantia in
my cellar and am delighted

to find I should move it to
my medicine cupboard, if

not my boudoir.
An esoteric book, but a

must-have for collectors of

any kind of bottle and an
unusual window on social

history.
Jane Dorner

Editor’s note:
If anyone

would like my review copy

in return for an s.a.e. the
first person to email me

with a promise of a
600-

word article on their own
favourite glass can have it.

difficulties with formal art
teaching in the 19405 and

5os, his rejection of ideo-

logies and war, his love of

freethinking. Eisch has glass

in his blood – his father

owned a glass factory — so
it is not surprising he came

to see glass as a material

with artistic potential. This

book could be called
When

Harvey Met Erwin,
so great

was the influence each had

on the other when Harvey

Littleton met Eisch in 196z.

Sam Herman adds,
‘
He

(Eisch) taught us not only

the technique but also the

true understanding of how

glass could be used as a fine

art form:
Ricke
‘
s essay details

Eisch’s early group
of

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

REVI EWS

READERS’ NOTES

Curiosity corner

LEFT:
Eight

Heads of

Harvey

Littleton,

1976

anti-establishment artists,
including Gretel, his wife.

Eisch’s ‘creative approach

was always focused on art

and not the material used
disliking the charms and
transparency of glass. There

is interesting material on
Eisch’s early glass works and

exhibitions, quoting him in

196z: ‘I would like to lead
glass out of the so-called
sphere of good form, to

liberate it once again and to
regard it as a material that
can hold an entire world

of poetic possibilities … I

feel an inclination towards

everything that a goody-
two-shoes ideology has
rejected as dirt or contami-

nation: Indeed, the most

interesting words in this

book are Erwin Eisch’s own,

quoted from exhibition

catalogues.
Many will be interested to

read about Eisch’s work as a

painter and printmaker, his
main interest since the mid-

1970s, his theme:’Heaven
starts on the ground. Ines

Kohl’s essay explores Eisch’s
use of drawing in all his

artwork and his refusal to

accept the term ‘glass artist;

seeing the artist as a creative

person who views all
materials in terms of their

creative potential.
English speakers will

find Kevin Petrie’s lucid

essay on Eisch’s inspiration

and printing techniques a
delight, penetrating through

the fog of philosophy

and interpretation. Petrie

examines the prints from

a technical perspective as
well as for their content,
through their development

over the years since 1981,

painting a vivid portrait of
Eisch, artist and man. Eisch

has produced more than
75
editions of prints and

further single experimental

prints and monoprints.

With Littleton in the USA

Eisch developed a new

technique, vitreography,
printing from engraved glass

plates.
Charles Hajdamach

focuses on the
Great Heads

which, after the
Telephone,

made Eisch famous,

including in 1976

`The Eight Heads of

Harvey Littleton’.

Many other series,

heavily enamelled, gilded

and engraved, include

`Sixteen Heads and the Space

in Between’,
a dialogue

between pairs of male

and female busts. Tina

Oldknow considers these
his most significant works

of all. Hadjamach addresses

Eisch’s ambivalence to
Picasso and stresses Gretel

Eisch’s involvement.
Nonetheless, everyone

should read this book to

understand why Eisch is

one of the most significant

artists of his generation.

Like all prophets, Eisch’s

careful words are often

taken out of context and

sorely misunderstood — and
like all prophets, he is an

exceptionally tolerant and
kindly man. Ironic that a

glass engraver should review

the life and work of this

great champion of all that

repudiates such work!
Katharine Coleman
Bitters

he’ What’s
this’ object

I illustrated on page

25 (issue 130) is a 19th

century bitters dispenser.
First compounded in 1824

by the German physician,

Dr Johann Siegert (1796-

1870), as a cure for sea sick-

ness and stomach maladies,

bitters was for a period used

by the Royal Navy.
The dispensers, like the

one illustrated, would have

been filled from the base

and then a cork inserted.

The funnel-shaped end,

with a hole about the size

of a pinhead, then allowed a

small quantity of bitters to

be easily poured.
While these glass objects

were always of the same
basic form, the cutting can

vary. Some have plain bod-

ies with simple cut faceting

only on the funnel end,
while others have quite so-

phisticated cutting all over.
This object was also illus-

trated in
Antique Collecting,

September issue and I sent
my reply then so perhaps

that clears up your ‘Even
curiouser’ comment.
Anthony Lester

Isle of Wight

What is this ship?
f any reader can identify

I this ship from The Craw-
ford glass in the Fitzwilliam

Museum, please let us know.
See the article on page 16.
Ship’s glass

Qill
Davis’s comments

LP (page 4 issue 130)

regarding his ‘ship’s glass

is certainly interesting and

a subject worthy of more
research. While such glasses

have always been referred

to as ‘firing glasses; it is not
beyond the realms of possi-

bility that such glasses were

indeed used on ships.
That said, his remarks

about the bowl shape is not,
in my view, significant. I
have an early 19th century

Masonic glass of similar
form but on a plain stem

and a io mm thick foot. It is

engraved with Masonic em-
blems and the words ‘Alfred

Lodge, Oxford, 649′. Clearly,

this was not destined for use

on ships.

Anthony Lester
Isle of Wight

Soldier, soldier

The picture (overleaf)
I shows a portrait of a sol-

dier in the summer undress

of a subaltern officer of the

Bengal Engineers that hangs

in our drawing room. The
clothes date it to between

1834 and 1848.
I have been researching

this fine painting, both to

find out who the sitter was

and where it was painted –
in India or while the young

man was on furlough at
home, surrounded by exotic

purchases from abroad.

Of these, the hookah

pipe stands out — clearly

cut glass. My first question

is, was cut glass produced
in India? If not, who in

this country would have
produced such an unusual
item? Was there an export

trade in such things? There

is an air of wealth about

the picture, particularly
associated with the silver
mounts of the pipe, which

could have been shipped

back from India to be fitted

to the vessel. Knowledge

of where the vessel was

BELOW:

Hand, 1968

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

Had the pipe been taken

back to England I doubt

that the mat would have

gone with it. Had the
young man been posing

in England I do not think
that this would have been

the furniture to bring out

onto the porch. But these

are just guesses. We know

that hubble-bubbles were

shipped to India in the

18th century from London

glasshouses, so one should
not rule out that possibility.

Then again, the real clue

may lie in the identification

of the greenery that looks

like the crowding of nature

rather than the product of

English garden landscaping.

Ivor Noel Hume

Williamsburg
Indian trade

r
ut glass was made in

%..India, but there was

also a lively trade in glass
made in England for the

Indian market. This seems
to relate more closely to

English cut glass than (what

I remember) to be Indian-
made. There is a hookah of

similar form in the Corning
Museum collection, where

there are two hookah bases

that have the same shape as

the one in the painting, but
not with similar cutting.
Dwight Lanmon
Santa Fe

Editor’s note:
The Editor

consulted two readers
known to have an interest

in hookahs and received

the responses above. Other

thoughts are invited with a

view to a future article.

ABOVE

RIGHT:

Bases of

hookahs from
India 1700-

1
799
Coloured glass

i
t
A aybe a reader can iden-

tify these glasses. I have

around 90 different ones

and I have always thought
they were either Danish or
perhaps Swedish.

But now I think they are

from England. Have you
ever seen any of them?
Merete Moller

Denmark

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

READERS’ NOTES

made would help me iden-

tify where the portrait was

painted, and that, in turn,
might lead to narrowing

down who might have done
the painting — something

that has eluded the National
Portrait Gallery and the

Courtauld Institute.

I should be enormously

grateful for any evidence

readers may be able to

produce about the hookah

water vessel. Incidentally, I

understand that a hookah is

the least unhealthy way of

smoking tobacco, because
the nicotine washes out in

the vessel, turning it yellow.

Richard Channon
Colchester

30
Home thoughts from

abroad

‘What
an interesting

picture. I have a few

thoughts that lead me

to think that the picture

was painted in India. The

crowding of the foliage

behind the stone wall look

very un-English. I can see

the chair and the table as

Anglo-Indian. The solid

wall, too, is not what one

would expect at an Eng-
lish country house, nor is

the roundness of its cap.
Perhaps a textile authority

might have something to say

about the mat that looks as
though it belongs with the

hookah.

FLINT ADDENDUM

Lime, Lead and Flints –

the Ravenscroft Revolution

bile acknowl-

edging our edi-
tor’s comments

following Mike

Noble’s contribution in the last

issue I do feel that a short adden-

dum is necessary.
Regarding the use of lime Mike

is quite correct that while it is

essential to stabilise a non-lead

glass the early glassmakers make
no comment on its use. I discussed

this problem back in 2004 in the

GCN Centenary Supplement
and

its content remains generally valid.’
However, understanding has

moved on a little. Analyses’ reveal

that Venetian ordinary glass has a

calcium oxide (CaO) content of

9.98 wt% while cristallo, in spite of

being made with essentially CaO-

free soda, still contains 4.88wt%,

about half the amount. Hence
lime, in some form or another was
also added. This might have been

as unpurified ash or possibly some

of the washed lime sludge from
the ash purification process.3 Da

Costa would have been aware of
this and so might have tried it to

solve the crizzling problem. The
alternative solution of adding
lead glass comes directly from

the recipe for making calcedonio

and might not have been the
most

immediately

obvious

solution because of its potential

for breaking the melting pot.
The addition of lead glass would
normally be part of calcedonio

making and so the problem of

crizzling would not arise.
We are unlikely ever to resolve

the question of when lead was

added to the glass but I have
found one possible example

of a highly crizzled pre-lead
Ravenscroft period jug (fig. 1).

It comes from an article by Paul
Hudson, Jamestown museum

curator, Virginia.
4
It is included

in an illustrated list of all the

Ravenscroft period glass he could

find. In design and decoration it is

almost identical to a lead glass jug
in the Fitzwilliam
Museum and
another in the Corning Museum

of Glass. However, neither of

these jugs is sealed and so all

three might reflect attempts by

continental glasshouses to copy
the Ravenscroft discovery unlikely

as that may seem. Nipt diamond

waies and collars are common on

sealed Ravenscroft glasses but

pincered vertical stripes have not

been encountered so far.
Mike is also right in describing

the confused nature of patent law
prior to the James I edict of 1624.

But it is important not to stray

outside the time frame after that
date or it simply fogs the issue.

The new patent law defined by

James I applied to the Duke
of

Buckingham and to Ravenscroft,

not what happened before he

made it. Concerning the

law as it applied to Jews
during the Ravenscroft

period, Da Costa, as

an alien, was neither

a denizen (a patent

awarded by the King)

nor naturalised from

birth (awarded by the

government).
3
Further,

although he had a number
of well-placed relatives
in London, these awards

were not hereditary. Verzellini’s

sons were imprisoned for illegal
ownership of land although Jacob

was himself a denizen. These
laws also applied to Catholics
and Ravenscroft was a Catholic.
Hence da Costa could not apply

for a patent of his own and

Ravenscroft probably had to do

so with caution. It might explain

why he moved so quickly, perhaps
anticipating a legal problem. But
in answer to Mike’s question I

think it was his desire to get into

the lucrative mirror glass market

as reflected by his deal in 1675

with the Duke of Buckingham

over the Vauxhall patent. His lead

glass was ideal for this purpose

because of its clarity and softness

that made it much easier to

grind flat than
ordinary non-lead
glass. Ravenscroft was already

suspected of illegally importing
unpolished glass plates. The
Venetian ambassador, Girolama

Alberti reported to his Senate in
December 1671: ‘Meanwhile to the

detriment of the Venetian mirror
makers and contrary to the wish

of the Senate unpolished sheets of

glass continue to arrive in London
from Venice.’ This is a remarkable

story.
There remains the question of

flints. I have never been in any

doubt about their use, which is clear
from the documentary evidence

concerning the manufacture
of cristallo. The inventories of
the Vauxhall and John Baker’s

Chelsea glasshouses indicate

that both had flint mills. I have

been unable to establish whether

powdered flints were imported.
A list of Jewish merchants in
the Port of London books 1620-

1680 reveals that ‘flintstones’ were
exported but there is no mention

of any flint imports.’ Plots states
that the Henley glasshouse used

Oxfordshire flints ‘the black

ones well polished. Incidentally,

analysis of flints indicates that they

are better than 98% silicon oxide

and so could not be the source of
calcium found in cristallo.

References

1.
GC News Centenary Supplement
Sept.

2004, pp. 8-9. Also available at www.

glassmaking_in_london.co.uk. Click on
the sidebar logo.

2.
Watts and Moretti,
2011,
Glass Recipes

of the
Renaissance,

p. 42.

3.
Watts and Moretti,
2011,

loc.cit. p.

49.

4.
Hudson J.P.
George Ravenscroft and

his contribution to English glassmaking.
Antiques, Dec.1967, pp. 822- 831.

5.
Ross J.M.’Naturalisarion of Jews in

England’
The Jewish Historical Society

of England, Transactions
Vol. XXIV,

Miscellanies Pt. IX, 1975. pp. 59
–

72.

6.
Callendar, State Papers Venetian,

1971/2, Dec. 23rd., p.372.

7.
Woolf M.’Foreign Trade of London

Jews in the 17th century’.
The Jewish

Historical Society of England, Transactions

Vol. XXIV, Miscellanies Pt. IX,
1975•
pp.

38-58.

8.
Plot R.1677.
The Natural History of

Oxfordshire,
Oxford, First Edn. p.72.

David C.

Watts

Fig. 1. Very heavily

crizzled non-lead

Ravenscroft period

jug decorated with

nipt diamond waies

and
applied pincer

work. Ht. 8% ins.
Originally in the

Isaac Delgado
Art

Museum now called

the New Orleans

Museum of Art.

Similar jugs in

lead glass are in

the Fitzwilliam
Museum.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

DIARY/NEWS

Diary dates

Circle meetings
All held at the Art Workers

Guild. 6 Queen Square, WCiN
3AT. 7.15. Sandwiches from 6.30

p.m. Guests are welcome (there

is a charge of £.7 per guest for
refreshments).

14 March (NB a Thursday)
Kate Newnham, Senior Collec-

tions Officer at Bristol Muse-

urns:’Chinese Glass in Bristol

Museums’

9 April

David Watts, Honorary Vice-

President:Skulduggery at the

Glasshouse – George Raven-

scroft and the manufacture of

looking glass plates’

16 May
(NB a Thursday) Simon Cottle:

(title to be announced).

June

Kitty Lameris:’Filigrana glass

and Professor Simon Wain-

News
Hobson: A single twist

—
a

geometrical analysis of opaque
twist stems’

17th century glass study day:

the evidence for British crystal

glass 1660-17oo
i6 March

The Association for the History
of Glass Project Workshops,

Quarley, Hampshire,

SPii 8PX.

www.historyofglass.org.uk

300 years of Harrachov glass
February-26 May

From Neuwelt to the whole

world. Museum of Glass and
Costume Jewellery U Muzea

398/4 466 oi Jablonec nad
Nisou, Czech Republic

www.msb-jablonec.cz

National Glass Fair

12 May and so November
National Motorcycle Museum,

Solihull B92 oEJ
vvww.glassfairs.co.uk

07887 762872
Cambridge Glass Fair

22
September

Linton Village College, Cambs

CB2i 4JB
vvww.cambridgeglassfair.com

07887
762872

Society of Glass Technology II-13 September
Living Glass Conference 2013

Including history and heritage

session
www.cambridge2oi3.sgthome.

co.uk

Antiques Roadshow 2013
Andy McConnell will be on
hand to identify glass items at

these locations.

16 May: Polesden Lacey, Great
Bookham, Surrey, RH5 6BD.

9-4.3opm.

23 May: Eastbourne Bandstand,
Grand Parade, Eastbourne, East

Sussex, BN2i 3AD. 9-4.3opm.

27 June: Towneley Hall
Museum, Towneley Park,
Burnley, Lancashire. BI3113RQ

9-4.3opm.

4 July: Gregynog, Tregynon, Nr

Newtown, Powys, SYi6 3PW.

9-4.3opm.

9 July: Scone Palace, Perth PH2

6BD, Scotland. 9-4.3opm.

is July: The Scottish National

Gallery of Modern Art, 75

Belford Road, Edinburgh, EH4

3DR. 9-4.30.

25 July: The Sainsbury Centre

for Visual Arts, University of
East Anglia, Norwich, NR4

7TJ, Norfolk. 9-4.3opm.

5 September: The Royal Ballet

School, Richmond Park,
Richmond, Surrey TWio 5HR.

9-4.3opm.

iz September: Exeter Cathedral,

i
The Cloisters, Exeter EXi

Devon. 9-4.3opm.

19 September: Wentworth
Woodhouse, Wentworth,

Rotherham, S62 7T(2, South

Yorkshire. 9-4.3opm.

The Edward Phillips collection
Halls Auction House, Shrews-.

bury, 6 November
2012

The sale included 172 lots of

glass with no multiple lots.

129 of these lots were drinking
glasses,
20

sweetmeats, 8 candle/

taper sticks, the remainder

miscellaneous objects. There

were 4 baluster glasses, but the

majority were twist glasses, none

Lennoxlove Amen Glass
coloured, selling in the

£200 to

£800 range. There were 25 glass-

es of allegedly Jacobite interest

with 6 selling for over £1,000,
two for more than £10,000.
The star of the sale was the

Lennoxlove Amen glass which

the late owner had bought

from this reviewer when he was

working for Asprey in 1986. This
fetched
£52,030

including buyers

premium of 21%. The bargain

of the sale was undoubtedly lot

246, the well known AUDEN-

TIOR IBO portrait decanter

which fetched £6,292
This is the type of sale where

the provincial auction scores.

Collectors were able to buy just
the glass that interested them,

rather, than as happens with the

major London auction houses,
having to buy glasses lotted

together to meet the houses

policy,of having no lots with

an estimate of, say, £500. The

saleroom was completely full

with standing room, and the
auctioneer can be justifiably

pleased with the result.
John P Smith
New at Corning

Hotshop

Work has started on renovating
the ventilator building of the

former Steuben Glass factory

adjacent to the Corning

Museum of Glass. It will house
Hot Glass Show glassblowing

demonstrations and other

special glassmaking activities in

a space that will accommodate
500 people and offer 36o-degree

views of the glassmaking show.

The venue will have retractable
banked seating, and a gallery-

level balcony running around

the perimeter of the hotshop.

The glassmaking facility

will be energy-efficient and
includes a 32-inch glory hole, a
L000
–

pound furnace for clear
glass, two furnaces for coloured

glass and four 83-cubic-foot

annealers. The glass melting and
reheating furnaces are designed

to use waste heat to reduce

energy consumption. Sounds

a dream for glassblowers in

the locality,’the best hotshop

in the world in a light-filled,
temperature-controlled

environment says the press
release.

European glass curator

The Corning Museum of Glass

has appointed Dr Audrey
Whitty as its new curator of

European glass. Dr Whitty

comes to Corning from the

National Museum of Ireland.

She is also an expert in Asian
art, and will additionally curate

the Museum’s Asian glass

collection.

Stop press
David Whitehouse, former

executive director of the

Corning Museum of Glass, died
on 17 February 57. An obituary
will appear in the next edition.

Glass Circle News Issue 131 Vol. 36 No. 1

Join

Search

Member

Join

Search

Member

Join

Search

Member

Glass Circle News_No.131, Mar 2013

Recent Posts

Address

Email

Instagram