Glass Circle News_No.132, Jul 2013

GLASS CIRCLE

Vol. 36 No. 2
ISSN 2942-652

Issue 132 July 2013

lent beads • Candlesticks • Opaque twists

orld museums • Reports • News, views, diary

CONTENTS

Editorial
Letters

My favourite glass

Ancient beads
World museums
Opaque twists

Candelsticks
Reports

Reviews
Obituaries

News/Curiosity corner

Diary

Glass Circle News
ISSN 2043-6572

Vol. 36 No. 2 Issue 132 July 2013

published by The Glass Circle

© Contributors and The Glass Circle
www.glasscircle.org

Editor

Jane Dorner
[email protected]

9
Collingwood Avenue, N10 3EH

Design and layout
Athelny Townshend

[email protected]

Neither the Glass Circle nor any of as officers or comma-tee members bear

any responsibility for the views expressed in this publication, which arc
those of the contributor in each case. Every effort has been made to trace and

acknowledge copyright in the photographs illustrating articles. The Editor
asks contributors to clear permissions and neither the Editor nor rho Glass
Circle 16 responsible for inadvertent infringements. All photographs are
copyright the author(s) unless otherwise credited.

Printed by
Micropress Printers Ltd

www.micropress.co.uk

Next copy date:
15 September 2013 for the
November edition.

COVER ILLUSTRATION:
Detail of a Roman face bead (full picture on page 9)
© The Corning Museum of
Glass
EDITORIAL

Editor’s letter

he article on ancient

ir
g
n

glass in the last issue

attracted more letters

for one article than I

have had all the time I have been
Editor. I am only printing three

(there were four more). The

author asked if he might have

ten copies to give to collecting

colleagues and he tells me four of
them have now joined the Circle or are
about to join. One wrote to ask whether
I anticipated further articles on ancient

glass, before making up his mind. This

edition leads with an article on 3500
years of beads — and there isn’t much
more ancient than that.
I explained that I am somewhat

dependent on what I can persuade and

cajole people into writing. I also have to

keep in mind the wide-ranging interests

of our readers. For example, there is a
posse of paperweight collectors who
probably think it is a long time since

there was an article on paperweight
collecting in the magazine. If one of

them were to come forward, the subject

would be covered, and indeed, I have
asked from time to time (and do cover
important sales), but as they have their

own magazine perhaps they are happy.
Other special interests include

Simon Cottle
Honorary President

John P Smith
Chairman & Publications
[email protected]

[email protected]

Laurence Maxfield

Honorary Treasurer & Membership

Secretary
[email protected]

Susan Newell
Honorary Secretary

[email protected]
amberina glass, custard glass, dumps,

fly-traps, Jack-in-Pulpit, Pallme-Konig,
peachblow, rose bowls, toothpick

holders, Ysart to mention only a handful
of collecting categories. As Editor,

all I can hope to do is keep some
of the membership happy some

of the time. Most of those with
esoteric interests are fortunately

interested in all kinds of glass

and so I do not worry unduly about
covering all of the zoo-plus categories I
have so far collected up. Some of the real
oddities come up in Curiosity Corner.
The mainstay of the membership, it

has to be said, is comprised of collectors

of 18th century drinking glasses, and

I would not ignore them as I am one
myself. So I particularly welcome the

article on how opaque twists were (and

are) made, especially as I have (in an inept
modern way) made a few myself and so

I find the argument wholly convincing.

This is going to be a two-part article with
a closer look at the Barrington Haynes
nomenclature in the next edition. Cut

glass and candlestick collectors are also

catered for in this issue, and what is
particularly pleasing about the article on

pages zo-zz is that it was triggered by the

early facet cut wineglass featured in ‘My

favourite glass’ in the last issue.

Vernon Cowdy
Web site manager

[email protected]

Shaun Kiddell
Geoffrey Laventhall

Anne Lutyens-Humfrey
Meetings Organiser

Marianne Scheer

Athelny Townshend
Publications Production and

Graphic Design

Anne Towse

Graham Vivian

by

Jane

Dorner

Glass Circle committee members

2

Glass

Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2

objets d’art : « Verre de Venise.

Tres grand gobelet avec pied. La

coupe en forme de cone evase et
renverse, verre incolore (catalogue

Soltykoff, n° 814). La tige du
pied est °me d’un double nceud

nervure saillantes. Le pied evase

avec larmes en relief. Decors divers

decailles, de feuilles d’acanthe sur

la coupe. Toutes les parties en

relief sont dorees et rehaussees de

cabochons rouges, blancs et bleus

turquoise »

(archives du musk Conde, Na

41/5).

As this glass was once in

Twickenham it would be

wonderful if we could find out
more about it.

by

John P

Smith

Brooklyn Museum

128 I wrote about my visit to the

museum in Chantilly, France.

The
conservateur general

of that

museum, Nichole Gamier later

wrote to me pointing out various

errors in my report, the stained

glass is dated 5540-43 not 5640-50,
I should always carry a note book,

and the ‘reverse painted’ pictures
in a dark corridor are prints, I

should always carry a torch! She

agreed that the fantastic Venetian

goblet is unpublished, sent me the
catalogue entry, and asked for our

help.

The entry reads:
Hist. : Inventaire de Chantilly,

1845,
f
14 n°

9 : «

verre dit de

Venise, partie doree, avec emaux,

a
pied, origine : vente de M. Baron

[vente, Paris, 19-24 janvier 1846,

voir catalogue BNF et Doucet],

envoye en Angleterre le 12 juin

1852 » ; inventaire de Twickenham

(1853-1872), f
74 v
°
: «

1411
grand

verre emaille et peint
a
pied,

forme vase (verre de Venise) 0 ;
inventaire de Chantilly, Mobilier
et Objets d’art, 1879, f 285 v°, n°
21 : ‹< grand verre a pied peint et dore (de Venise ou de Naples) Bibl. : Germain Bapst, fiches manuscrite pour le catalogue des Saturday meetings I am particularly delighted to I read of the suggestion to meet on a Saturday afternoon at the Kensington Library. I'm sure this would suit other members who are concerned about late trains home outside London. The Kensington Library has a fairly large, cosy lecture theatre (with lecturing equipment, screen, etc.) though the catering arrangements are not ideal. There is a separate room (with a small kitchen) and one can take tea in plastic cups (accompanied by biscuits) which doesn't really matter as we have plenty of time for after-lecture gossip. There's NCP parking under the library (at a cost) but parking is free after 1.30 p.m. if one can find a space. Regarding the proposed merger with the Glass Association, perhaps we could investigate both sets of aims and objects and establish a joint basis for co- existence and study, ensuring that the interests of one society do not overwhelm the other's. Could I suggest an email/postal vote to establish members' opinions? There are probably members who belong to both societies anyway. Rosalind Pulver Stanmore LETTERS - EffalliMMINNOMINII11 n 114 Chairman's letter n April I went to tg — Jane Spillman's retirement dinner at the Corning Museum of Glass. Jane had been at the museum for 46 years and can only be described as the doyen of American Glass. This set me thinking that a Glass Circle trip to the USA might be a good idea. A possible itinerary could be to fly to Detroit airport, which is near Toledo with its amazing purpose-built museum of glass. Then to Corning, easily accessible by air from Detroit. Possibly then fly to Philadelphia (direct flight) for the Lorrimer collection, then train to New York for the Metropolitan Museum of Art, with great glass, and also Brooklyn Museum (pictured), under-visited but very worthwhile from the glass perspective. This would be either in the Autumn of 2054 or the spring of zo15. Any feedback would be much appreciated. The discussions with The Glass Association are progressing slowly and carefully and I will keep you all informed if and when we make further progress. In Vol. 34 no. 3 Issue no. Letters to the Editor Research tips I wanted to tell you how thrilled I was with the latest issue of Glass Circle News. The quality of the illustrations is superb and I always find the content interesting. The Glass Circle has become up-to- date, scholarly and informative. As a scholar from Canada and a former decorative arts curator who has been pursuing research on silver, ceramics, furniture and glass in London since the 198os, I thought I would like to pass on some small suggestions for researching glass. Anne Towse's essay on her father's and her Editor's note: All letters about a previous edition of the magazine refer to Vol. 36 No. 1 Issue no. 131 unless otherwise stated. Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 3 LETTERS own favourite glass offers a good opportunity to do this. Anne was not able to find information on a certain catalogue. With a name like Hamilton Clements (the provenance of the glass in question), it is always worth checking the online catalogue of the National Art Library (NAL) at the V&A. Over the years the NAL has assembled an impressive range of auction catalogues which cover most of the major collections that have been sold in the last zoo years. What you simply do is conduct a search under the person's surname, in this case `Clements, Hamilton, art collections'. Using that, I have just done a quick search of the NAL online catalogue and discovered that Sotheby's, London, conducted four sales of glass from that collection during 1930. I suspect that Anne's glass may come from the first sale which features drinking glasses prominently in the title. Several points worth remembering when consulting auction catalogues at the NAL: catalogues published prior to 1970 usually have illustrations for only a small number of the lots (you may have to compare measurements to make an identification); catalogues prior to 1960 sometimes include prices realised and occasionally the names of the purchasers: and, most important of all, the catalogues are bound together in groups of up to 6 to a volume. This can cause confusion. Sometimes one of the bound volumes may be irretrievable because another researcher is consulting one of the sections. However, I have to commend the librarians at the National Art Library who are extremely helpful and courteous and can assist with the latter situation. Given enough time, they may be able to do a more in- depth search and find an auction catalogue that you believe exists but were unable to find using the search words you have identified. I have also found it helpful to consult the Dictionary of National Biography and Who was Who (volumes usually cover a decade with the deceased being listed al- phabetically). Both of these are available in the Manuscripts and Music Reading Room at the Brit- ish Library. Who was Who often provides information on people who once were well-known fig- ures in society or collecting circles. Their club memberships, career associations and other informa- tion may indicate connections re- lating to provenance. Peter Kaellgren Ontario Watford footnote I think my father, the late Malcolm Pollock-Hill, was one of those who recommended that Faye Peck receive an MBE. He was President of the British Glass Manufacturers Federation in 1968 to 1970, and met with many Government Ministers including Anthony Barber who was Edward Heath's Chancellor from 1970-1973. Through his wife, Barber was connected to Redfern National Glass and was Chairman from 1967 - 197o, so a member of the GMF, and my father's guest at the annual GMF lunch at the Savoy Hotel. They wanted to encourage British exports and have more women receiving honours and Faye Peck filled both these roles. She also sat on the Hand Section Committee and was a GMF stalwart. Other glass industry members supported the nomination. I was told not to tell her and never did, but with her travelling and business success she made a good business ambassador. Stephen Pollock-Hill Nazeing Collecting glass rirst: my wife and I like your I magazine very much as glass collectors who collect glass from Roman times to the 18th century. Second: we like it even more when we can read about ancient glass, and so wanted to let you know that we appreciated the article by David Giles and hope that ancient glass gets a bit more attention in the issues to come. Theo Zandbergen Bavel, The Netherlands How times have changed I enjoyed the article on Waterford glass by John Hearne in Issue 130 (pp11-13) and hope that a later article will bring the story up to date in such fine detail. Clearing out some old files, I remembered that in 1960, a second generation Belgian glass importer John Wuidart who had played a crucial role in introducing Swedish Glass into the UK in the mid 1950s and employed both Ronnie Stennett Willson and Frank Thrower, approached the Directors of Waterford Glass offering his services to set up an agency for Waterford in London. They roared with laughter at his ambition, for at the time, The National Art Library 0 4 Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 LITTERS pillaged, and the resulting illegiti- mate trade in objects out of their archaeological context. Presumably the argument goes `stamp out the trade, then stolen artifacts will lack a market, and thieves will just give up..: Not very convincing. Put simply, it is theft that is the crime, not the legitimate trade. He ends with a heartfelt appeal against nationalism in collecting antiquities, and emphasises that the more that knowledge and love of antiqities is nurtured and passed on by educated collectors, the greater service to mankind. Stephen Gottlieb London there were five major British crystal companies based in Stourbridge,Thomas Webb, Stuart Crystal, Royal Brierley, Webb Corbett and Tudor Crystal. John Wuidart was a jovial character, a real buccaneer, with a truffle pig's nose for a business opportunity, and he was prepared to provide showroom facilities just off Holborn. So they made a bet that if he could build up the Waterford sales to the UK to over Elm a year in under ten years (about £3.5m in today's values) they would buy him the car of his choice. In November 1971 Tableware International showed a photograph of a very happy John Wuidart seated on the bonnet of his brand new Jaguar XJ, his bet winning gift, next to glamorous actress Suzie Kendall, and the Directors of Waterford with the charming Noel Griffin then MD. I remember with affection both John and Noel along with Charles Bacik, and Mirek Havel, the Czech saviours, part of the team who brought back Waterford Crystal from the history books to a leading player, in the days when British and Irish crystal were riding high. Stephen Pollock-Hill Nazeing Ancient glass O ne need not be a collector of ancient glass to appreciate David Giles's fine article. Written with an infectious love for his sub- ject, it had beautiful photographs of many very seductive pieces, an excellent starter bibliography for those who might become infected, but above all it had something that struck me most forcibly, a highly civilised and healthy attitude to- ward the ethics and morality of the legitimate trade in antiquities. He dissected this tricky matter in some detail, and very clearly. The morality of separating a particular piece from its country of origin is prob- ably something most glass collec- tors of say ,16th to zist century glass, need not seriously consider. But the world of ancient glass, we learn, is rather more fraught with moral problems. David Giles points out that these stem largely from the legitimate worries of many archaeologists concerning the looting of archaeological sites, or of museums in war zones being Roman glass I read David Giles's fascinating in- troduction to collecting Ancient Roman glass with great interest. I hope that more members will con- sider collecting Roman and other ancient glass, as doing so func- tions both as a fascinating study area, and in a very real sense, is ac- tively preserving important parts of our common Western herit- age. These vessels are some of the very earliest blown glass objects man created, and building even a small collection from reputable dealers can help ensure that these rare and precious artefacts are cared for and looked after for generations to come. But only thorough study of genuine originals can lead to a collector acquiring a sufficiently good eye' for the real thing. The only sensible way to combat the ever-increasing march of fakes and forgeries of ancient glass that still assault the salerooms, online markets and sometimes even the unwary museum curators of the David Giles's Roman ribbed bowl John Wuidart with his prize: a brand new Jaguar XJ, next to Suzie Kendall, and the Directors of Waterford, and MD, Noel Griffin. Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 5 LETTERS world, is by greater education and study of the subject, whereby col- lectors become as informed as some of the archaeological finds specialists. David Hill Andover Coloured glass I 'm pretty sure the coloured glasses on page 30 of the last magazine are derived from William Jacob Rozendahrs Aristrocrat service for Maastricht, 1932, but that has an arched foot. They are very similar. Andy McConnell Rye The hookah curiosity I first came across a cut glass hookah at the 2003 Glass Circle exhibition 'Palace to Parlour' in 2003 (page 17 of the catalogue) described as c.1820. When an 'apothecary jar' came up on an online auction site, I was lucky enough to be the sole bidder and now own the item illustrated. It is of course a hookah base and an outstanding piece of steam driven cutting. Just holding the weight of the metal to cut the fine diamonds must have been problematic. Height 26 cm (10 1 /4») Following this, I started some research on the subject of cut glass hookahs and it appears to me that there are two types: heavily cut English lead glass, always of bell form; and Indian native, decorated mostly gilt or enamel, some cut as the latter in naive or rock crystal fashion. My researches suggest that Irish-made hookahs were being exported to India via the East India Company. The ones I ABOVE: Enamelled, twist-stem wineglass c. 1760. cat. D51- 1 973 LEFT: Mr Weddell's hookah auction sleeper bargain significant collections of Jacobite glass which I believe numbers over 300 items. Over the past months, the Gallery has had an exhibition of about 12o of the more significant items in the collection including two Amen glasses. I viewed this exhibition today and it is outstanding. As the period of the exhibition has been extended to the end of the year, I thought that it should be brought to the attention of our members who might be planning to visit Australia this year. Photographing of the collection is in progress and many of items can be viewed on the gallery website at www.ngv.vic.gov.au. Bill Davis Melbourne Unknown jug n Vol. 33 No. 3 Issue No. 124, I Andy McConnell commented on an unknown glassworks jug by Clayton Bros. I have just received pictures by Paul Stirling with a better pressing of the base showing clearly that the RD number is 785302 and not 735702 as stated. This number is listed in the Glass 0 -s z z have come across all seem to be in high Regency cut style could easily sit with a date of 1816. Paul Weddell Kent Editor's note: Paul Weddell sent some extensive research notes in support of his comments which he allowed me to pass on to Richard Channon for his dossier on the hookah in his portrait of the subaltern officer in the Bengal Engineers on page 30 of the last magazine. The outcome will be published in the next issue. Jacobite glass 0 ur National Gallery of Victoria here in Melbourne has one of the world's more Association book of Registration Numbers as allocated Clayton Bros on 28.07.1933, five years later than originally suggested. Unfortunately we still do not know any more about the factory other that it was somewhere in Wandsworth. David C. Watts London 6 Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 An early 19th century engraved tumbler FAVOURITE GLASS My favourite glass e..... /g - y first interest in 18th century English glass started whilst I was selling some of my father's collection of weights and measures at a local antiques fair. Standing next to me was Celia Cullen, a lovely lady, with a collection of 18th century drinking glasses. Celia was very generous with her knowledge and was happy to discuss the different styles and manufacturing processes used to produce these beautiful glasses. For some time, I had wanted to get involved in the antiques trade; however, I was unsure which discipline to focus on. I have Celia to thank for introducing me to early English glass. It has been difficult to choose my favourite glass as this tends to change as glasses come and go. However, I do have a particular fondness for engraved English tumblers. The form is simple, predominately straight sided or barrel shaped, and the engraved decoration covers a multitude of subjects. The glass I have chosen is a tumbler I purchased from Delomosne in zoos. There are a number of reasons I have chosen this tumbler; firstly, it is made of particularly good quality metal, a comforting weight and finely engraved; secondly, it fits nicely in the hand and on very rare occasions, a pleasure to drink from. However, the main reason is for its historical significance. It commemorates the failed assassination attempt on George III on the 15 May 1800. The tumbler is engraved with two outlined roundels, one depicting a crossed sword and sceptre, surmounted by a Royal Crown. Engraved within the outline is 'God Save the King'. The second contains the royal monogram G R and reads 'Preserved from Assassination May 151800: On the evening of the 5 May 1800, George III attended the Theatre Royal Drury Lane. Whilst standing in the royal box George was shot at by James Hadfield. Fortunately for the King, Hadfield missed his target. It was reported that after lowering his pistol Hadfield shouted `God Bless your Royal Highness; I like you very well; you are a good fellow: James Hadfield had fought at the battle of Tourcoing in 1794, where he sustained serious head injuries before being captured by the French. On his return to England, he became involved in a millennialist movement during which time he came to the belief that the second coming of Jesus Christ would be advanced by his judicial execution. His attempt on the King's life was designed to bring about this end. He was tried for high treason but subsequently acquitted on the grounds of insanity. Defendants deemed insane faced an uncertain future, often being released back into the custody of their families. However, Parliament speedily passed the Criminal Lunacy Act of 1800 which allowed Hadfield to be detained indefinitely. He was incarcerated in Bethlem Royal Hospital and despite an attempt to escape remained in captivity until his death in 1841. Despite extensive research into glass engraving through auction catalogues, reference books and articles, I have failed to identify any other glass commemorating this historical event. If any member has come across this subject, I would be interested to hear from them. Robert Marris trades in L8th, 19th and early 20th century English & Irish glass and is a member of the British Antiques Dealers' Association. by Robert Marris Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 7 BEADS 3,500 years of glass beads lass beads have frequently been overlooked in the history of glass, but, in fact, they offer great insight into the development of glass manufacturing. Beads have been produced over much of the 35 centuries of glass, developing alongside larger glass forms. They were often the initial attempts in glass production and preceded the creation of vessels. Many beads display the same techniques used to much acclaim in larger vessels, simply on a smaller scale. by Adrienne Gennett LEFT: Fig. 1 Pomegranate bead, Egypt, 1400.1300 BC, cat. 59.1.48 BOTTOM LEFT: Fig. 2 Eye bead, Egypt, 1400-2100 BC, cat. 54.1.141-6 BOTTOM RIGHT: Fig. 3 Necklace with glass pendants and _faience beads, Mycenaean, 1400-1250 BC, cat. 66.1.196 At the Corning Museum of Glass, there is a diverse collection of glass beads. Many of these beads were gifted to the collection throughout its history, often by well-known erudite collectors. Many of the beads came along with larger collections of historical glass. Scholars such as Dorothy Blair, known for her important contributions to the knowledge of Japanese glass, gifted many examples of Asian glass beads that she gathered throughout her career. Another significant donor was the archaeologist Alastair Lamb, who worked in both Africa and South-east Asia. Throughout his career he developed a keen interest in glass beads and gifted the Museum a significant collection of African trade beads, African made beads, and indo-Pacific beads. Many of those beads continue to be a source of interest for study and chemical analysis as they can offer researchers much more information about the nascent glass industries of those regions. The collection of glass beads at The Corning Museum of Glass includes examples that have been highly collectible, as well as fine specimens of beads that may have existed as part of everyday life. Many continue to intrigue those interested in further understanding the development of glass manufacturing throughout the world. This article attempts to examine a few of those beads and their historical significance. It is thought that glass beads first appeared in Western Asia in the latter half of the third mil- lennium BO. By the 7th and 8th Dynasties in Egypt, glass beads were being made using both core forming and winding, but it was not until around 1400 BC (fig. 1) that they were made in large amounts. These beads are often opaquely coloured and made in imitation of other precious and semi-precious stones'. This period also saw the further development of the eye bead (fig. 2), expanding from the original stone beads that used natural striations as the eye motifs. Eye beads would continue to be a dominant type and theme in the history of glass beads. In the same period, beginning around 1400 BC, the Mycenaeans in the Mediterranean region were Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 8 BEADS fashioning distinctive blue glass pendants and beads (fig. 3). They were mould- ed and cast in the same moulds used to make their su- perb metal jew- ellery. The re- sult was a work with moulded relief decora- tion on one side and these were produced in a range of designs. This variety is known only to be made by the Mycenaean culture, making these exceptional and unique forms of glass. Another distinctive and extraordinary form of glass bead was created by the Phoenicians, whose power extended around the Mediterranean, from the Syro-Palestinian coast and into northern Africa. They were known to be highly skilled glassmakers and this is obvious in their imaginative head beads or pendants, made from about 700 BC to around 25o BC. While they made various types of demon heads and animals such as baboons or rams, the heads depicting bearded male faces with curling hair are the most spectacular (fig. 4). The great detail was masterfully crafted using the core- forming process. It is thought that many of these may have been produced in the port city of Carthage, a powerful Phoenician metropolis from 800 BC 4 . In the same period, the Chinese were also crafting exceptional glass beads, which are well known to collectors today. During the Warring States period in the latter half of the Zhou dynasty, from 481-221 BC, the Chinese had perfected a stratified (or layered) eye bead, often called a horned-eye bead (fig. 5). These beads were extremely complex in their formation and design, much more so than many of the beads being made in the West'. The eyes protrude off the surface of the bead, rotating around the circumference, giving both movement and depth to the bead. The advent of Roman glassmaking brought great technical mastery and discovery to the field. This is evident in many of the beads produced by Roman glass-makers, who often used techniques found in their larger vessels, such as ribbon glass, gold sandwich glass, and mosaic glass. It was with the mosaic technique that the Romans developed their best known and most extraordinary beads. Face beads were fashioned by either inserting small slices of canes, which were meticulously formed to create miniature faces, around the matrix of a bead or by simply perforating the cane slice (fig. 6 and cover). In one spectacular bead, eighteen tiny cane slices are used to completely decorate the form of the bead (fig. 7). The designs include a lion, rosettes, and papyri, placed in LEFT: Fig. 5 Horned-eye bead, China, 399 - 300 BC, cat. 68.6.3. ABOVE: Fig. 6 Face bead, Roman, 99 BC-99 AD, cat. 66.1.45- LEFT: Fig. 4 Pendant with man's head, Phoenician, 400-250 BC, cat. 68.1.15. Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 9 three registers encircling the bead, and the bead is by far one of the most complex mosaic glass beads, attesting to the immense skill of the Roman glassmakers. From 700 to 1400, Islamic glassmakers further explored the techniques of the Romans in their beads. There is a continuation of the mosaic technique, which was often used to form eye motifs on Islamic glass beads and in combination with other designs such as trailing. The use of trailed and tooled decoration, as seen on many larger vessels of this period, was a popular form of decoration also taken from Roman precedent°, but given colours and scale that were decidedly Islamic in style (fig. 8). In the 14th century, glass beadmaking was resurrected in Europe, most importantly by the Venetians. Venetian glassmaking is known throughout the world for its tremendous beauty and high quality and also for the innovation of those glass makers. This also extended into the production of glass beads and the Venetians would bring back techniques lost to Europe since the Roman era, but would also create many new forms and styles that would travel the world. By the second half of the 15th century, Venetians had rediscovered the ability to draw hollow canes of glass. This made the process much more efficient and allowed for more uniformity in the beads than the traditional method of winding beads at the furnace. The drawing of beads would lead to the mass production of beads that would proliferate in the i9th century and become the core for the trade bead industry. The best known bead of this type that began to be produced early in the 16th century is the chevron bead (fig. 9), which were multilayered glass beads with some layers moulded into the characteristic star shape. This layered gather was drawn out into a hollow cane, cut into sections, and faceted or ground to best display the interior star pattern. The chevron was one of the early trade beads made by Venetians, along with the two-layered cornaline d'aleppo (fig. io). These beads became key components to the age of exploration and trade, as they were taken by those travelling to distant lands (such as Africa and North America where many have been found) to be used as gifts or in exchange and as a way to make contact with the indigenous cultures. Lampworked beads began to appear from Venetian glass beadmakers in the late 16th century. This included what are often now called 'fancy' beads, which come in a plethora of motifs and decorative techniques such as the arabesque, feathered (fig.ii), and various other trailed designs. Lampworked beads included the now famous mosaic and millefiori beads (fig.iz). In the 19th century these were by far the most popular type of bead being produced and an enormous range of designs were created. These beads were the heart of the powerful trade bead industry. Many of these designs were made to send to places such as Africa, which had a constant desire for glass beads and specific tastes as to what beads they purchased. In Bohemia glass beadmaking began initially as a response by the garnet cutters to the competition of the Venetian glass beads. They successfully developed a formula for glass that imitated the colour and composition of garnets and they transitioned into glass cutting (fig. 13) 8 . In the 18th century the Bohemian glass beadmakers quickly learned the Venetian techniques and began to innovate. In the i9th century they initiated the use of mould pressing, allowing the beadmakers to manufacture beads at a much BEADS 10 Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 BEADS OPPOSITE TOP: Fig. 7 Mosaic bead, Roman, 99 BC-99 AD, cat. 74.1.40. OPPOSITE MIDDLE: Fig. 8 String of beads, Islamic, 900-1299, cat. 59.1.431. OPPOSITE BOTTOM: Fig. 9 Chevron bead, Venice, Italy, 1600.1799; cat. 66.3.1oA. TOP LEFT THIS PAGE: Fig. lo Cornaline dAleppo beads, Venice, Italy, 1800-1899; cat. 70.3.217B. LEFT: Fig. 11 Bead, fancy type, Venice, Italy, 1800.1899; cat. 70.3.269D. BOTTOM LEFT: Fig. 12 Millefiori bead, Venice, Italy,1800-1899; cat. 70.3.120-14. ABOVE: Fig.13 Three faceted biconical beads, Bohemia, 1801.1970; cat. 71.3.28. BELOW: Fig. 14 String of satin beads (conch shells), probably Czechoslovakia, 1900-1999; cat. 91.3.636. Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 TOP: Fig. is String of modern chevrons, Czechoslovakia, ;goo.1999; cat. 91.3.765. ABOVE: Fig. 16 Bodom bead, West Africa, 1800-1899; cat. 733.351. LEFT: Fig. 17 Kira bead, West Africa, Mauritania, late zoth century; cat. 86.3.108-1. BEADS higher rate and with greater control of the output, while developing many new designs (fig. 14)9. By the second half of the 19th century Bohemian beadmakers had greater productivity than Venice and were able to make examples indistinguishable from the Venetians, along with wholly new styles of beads (fig. 15 overleaf) While these trade beads were being exported into Africa in ever growing amounts, some Africans were developing their own glass beads. Much of this work took place and continues to exist in West Africa, in Ghana, Nigeria, and Mauritania. In the 19th and zoth century African artisans started producing glass beads using crushed glass powder, made from bottles, scrap glass, or even at times other European beads. This type of beadmaking is unique to the region and not known to be practised in other parts of the world. The bodom bead, a large spherical bead, is considered the most spiritual and highly valued of the glass beads that have been made in this method (fig. 16). The beads are believed to have been made with a wet core, but the process is no longer known to modern beadmakers, making them even more valuable and powerful. There are other types of powder glass beads that continue to be produced today, but the Kiffa beads from Mauritania are considered some of the finest (fig. 17). These distinctive beads can be found in several shapes, most often brightly coloured in a range of red, blue, white, and yellow. They are laborious to produce, made one at a time by women, who imbue the patterning with their own beliefs and spirituality. The knowledge of how to craft these beads was rapidly disappearing in the latter half of the zoth century, but as their popularity grew a concerted effort to continue their production has led to their resurgence°. The original desire for beads has only grown, best seen in the development of the reverse trade bead industry found in the later zoth century. The European beads made specifically for trade became highly valued by many collectors especially in the United States and Europe and began to be exported en masse from Africa, just as they had once been imported. The immense range of styles and production methods that can be found in glass beads make these objects coveted to many types of collectors, from the scholarly academician and the archaeologist, to the lover of unique jewellery. A lively contemporary glass bead industry has developed which grows greater each year, and also helps to continue the fascination with and the collection of historical glass beads. Adrienne Gennett is Assistant Curator of Collections and Education at Iowa State University and is the co-curator of the exhibition with Karol Wight of the life on a String: 35 Centuries of the Glass Bead' at the Corning Museum of Glass from 18 May to 5 January 2014. Endnotes 1. Dubin, Lois Sherr (2009) A History of Beads: from 30,000 BC to the present New York: Abrams, 38. 2. Ibid., 41-43. 3. Ibid., 43. 4. Lankton, James W (zoo3) A Bead Timeline: A Resource for Identification, Classification, and Dating, va, Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC: Bead Society of Greater Washington, 49-50. 5. Ibid, 51. 6. Spaer, Maud (zoos) Ancient Glass in the Israel Museum: Beads and Other Small Objects Jerusalem: Israel Museum, 103. 7. Francis, Peter Jr., (1988) The Glass Trade Beads of Europe: Their Manufacture, Their History, Their Identification Lake Placid, NY: Lapis Route Books, 13-14. 8. Ibid., 32. 9. Ibid., 33. to.Simak, Evelyn (2006)'Mauritanian Powder-Glass Kiffa Beads: Decline, Revival, Imitations', Ornament v. 29, no. 5: 60. 12 Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 GLASS TRAVELS Around the world in glass .......") ast year I set off on a six-month trip to see glass from around the world. Here is a whistle-stop account focussing on the glass highlights of my trip. First stop was Goa where there are some wonderful mansions and historic houses from the time of Portuguese rule and former prosperity that are sadly falling into decay. Cabinets appear to have very nondescript glass items, but there are some very beautiful chandeliers in the grand halls and ballrooms. These superb chandeliers (fig. t) are always described as Belgian, although, I understand some experts challenge this view and they could be by Osler. All the drinking glasses are reputed to be from Baccarat and the owners enjoy recounting former days of banquets where seven glasses per dinner guest were used at each table setting. I then moved on to Hong Kong and visited the excellent Hong Kong Museum of Art across the water from Hong Kong Island. There was much on display related to the historic trading with Canton and there were some excellent and fascinating pieces of Chinese glass of which the most spectacular were some extremely beautiful red and yellow glass vases. Singapore was a short stop and sadly I didn't find anything of glass-related interest to report on, apart, perhaps, from the glass protection wall of the sky park at the top of the Hotel Marina Bay Sands. And so to Perth where I met Glass Circle member and Georgian drinking glass collector Vic Rumble. His impressive collection of English and Dutch engraved 18th century drinking glasses was well worth the visit and only the third time I have been fortunate enough to be invited to see a fellow collector's personal and private collection. Then to Sydney where the early 19th century houses unfortunately no longer have their original contents and there was no glass of note. The exception was Vauclaus, a small estate in the Regency Gothic style where the dining room had some elegant early 19th century English decanters and other glass vessels. The site of the original 18th century Governor's house is now the main city museum, Museum of Sydney and they have on display items excavated from the Georgian house and its grounds, including pieces of early English drinking glasses and fragments of rummers. Although, only fragments I still find these interesting in the context of wares being imported from England and ending up all round the colonies. In Melbourne I had arranged to meet another fellow Glass Circle member, Bill Davis, to look at his collection. Bill has built up a very good and broad collection of early drinking glasses. I get to see gems such as his early crizzled baluster c 1690, along with Schneider engraved Silesian pokal and an example of stipple engraving on a Newcastle baluster attributed to Hoolaart. Bill had advised me to visit the National Gallery of Victoria which has a truly impressive collection of 18th century drinking glasses, early English and Irish cut glass and tableware on display. I was lucky enough to see it in a private, behind the scenes tour, with one of the curators. He showed me some acquisition papers neatly bound in volumes that I found fascinating and would make an interesting Glass News article in itself (fig. z). These papers give details of bequests and purchases and several have Robert Charleston's expert advice and comments. I was delighted to come across one note advising the museum to add English cut glass to their collection. This was music to my ears as I have a special interest in cut glass myself — one London dealer affectionately calls me the cut-glass freak. Highlights include an early 13 LEFT: Fig. Perreira-Braganza House, Margao, Goa, India by Shaun Kiddell BELOW: Fig. 2 Robert Charleston's annotations GLASS TRAVELS © Na t iona l Ga llery o f Vic tor ia, Me l bo urne, A English chandelier from the Dr Robert Wilson Collection that has an almost magical quality with its sunbursts (fig. 3). It is incorrectly thought to be Irish and of Dublin manufacture, and may date to 1815-25. This masterpiece is featured in The English Glass Chandelier'. I also marvelled at the over-ornate, but highly impressive Tsar's candelabrum dating to early zoth century and manufactured by Baccarat (fig. 4). The Johnston Collection in Melbourne is an imposing resid- ence in a rather smart suburb and there I had a personal guide. This is made up of antique dealer William Robert Johnston's own collection and some of his old sales stock. The impressive collection and delightful room settings contained some good glass and also various loth century copies of Georgian cut glass. Next to Hawaii via Fiji where there is little historic glass of note on display apart from Shangri La just outside Honolulu, the former residence of American billionaire Doris Duke, where there is a very good collection of Islamic glass and some fine, imposing candelabra. The other glass I came across must be unique. When I was on the Big Island I attended a guided walk in the Hawaii National Volcano Park. The ranger had the group search whilst out in the lava fields for naturally occurring glass formed from the erupting volcanoes. Moving on now to San Francisco. The city boasts impressive uses of modern building glass, including a huge aquarium in the Academy of Sciences providing an'up close and personal' experience with exotic fish There, too, is the de Young Museum with interesting studio glass; not normally one of my own interests, but I picked out a glass still life fruit by Flora C. Mace and Joey Kirkpatrick (fig. 5), and the cast and cut dress by. Karen LaMonte. The Legion of Honor Museum is more familiar ground for me, but I found their display of European glass rather drab as it was poorly lit and inadequately interpreted. After some stops in national parks, I headed to Las Vegas where the newish Cosmopolitan Hotel impressed me with its famous three-storey chandelier in the casino concourse. The chandelier, which took about a year to complete and was designed by the Rockwell group, combines more than two million octagon- shaped crystal beads all handmade in China. The 65-foot tall fixture is made up of large crystal curtains combining layers of string that work to create a semi-transparent skin around the interior (fig. 6). I then crossed to New York where there are many well-known collections. Less familiar, perhaps, is Boscobel Restoration Mansion upstate in Poughkeepsie. This was dismantled and rebuilt on a new location with most impressive views down the Hudson River. The house was furnished with 14 Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 OPPOSITE TOP: Fig. 3 Sunburst chandelier OPPOSITE BOTTOM: Fig. 4 Baccarat Tsar, pair of candelabra 1911 (designed 1903) National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia OPPOSITE MIDDLE COLUMN TOP: Fig. 5 Fruit Still Life Flora C. Mace &Joey Kirkpatrick in the de Young Museum San Francisco OPPOSITE MIDDLE COLUMN BOTTOM: Fig. 6 The Chandelier, Cosmopolitan hotel, Las Vegas To RIGHT: Fig. 7 Sulphide plaque of Napoleon in cut glass vase (1820-30) by Apsley Pellatt at Corning Museum of Glass RIGHT: Fig. 8 Ancient Egyptian glass (probably Horus) in the Corning Museum of Glass BELOW: Fig. 9 German glass in cabinet from Boston Museum of Fine Art 15 GLASS TRAVELS period English antiques, and it has regained some of its original contents. The house was once the home to States Morris Dyckman who came to London to seek monies owed him. Whilst in London in 1800-1803 he went on a shopping spree to the finest and most fashionable shops to purchase housewares, decorative objects, clothing and personal gifts to send back to his wife Elizabeth as he was concerned about their reputation and status. Included in this were items bought at John Blades showroom on Ludgate Hill. The receipt exists and the house still contains items traceable to that receipt, most notably the table lustres and candelabra. Niagara Falls, apart from its tourist attractions, had a glass- blowing studio where, despite my interest in old glass, I saw glass being blown for the first time. Further up river I came across the delightful little River Bank museum in Queenstown that proudly displayed a collection of Georgian English tea caddies and some fine English cut-glass salts. After a two-day drive across the top of New York state I came to Corning where I spent three entire days at the Corning Museum of Glass from shortly after its opening until the evening closing. Interestingly, amongst their collection of English and Irish cut glass I found some Perrin and Geddes Prince of Wales glasses incorrectly labelled as Apsley Pellatt from the Falcon Glass House, so maybe I have learnt something these past few years. Corning museum has an excellent and enviable collection of cut glass. If there was one item I had to choose as my favourite in the whole of this six-month trip it would probably be the Aspley Pellatt cut-glass vase with the sulphide of Napoleon (fig. 7). To me, being passionate about Regency decorative arts, this was an absolute treasure that I dream Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. of one day acquiring for my own collection. The Corning Museum provides excellent interpretation and I was impressed by how much I learnt from the experience of studying the collection. I so enjoyed learning the origins of glass manufacture and marvelled at this bird from ancient Egypt (fig. 8). My own research is on the Georgian London glassman John Blades and I was pleased to find that Corning's archives contained a few papers I had not seen or come across before. In Boston I had hoped to find some early Irish cut glass after reading much was exported out here. Sadly, my trail around various 'thrift' shops in the hope of a lucky find proved fruitless. The Museum of Fine Art, however, has a carefully-arranged 18th century room-setting complete with English wine bottles and drinking glasses. The real gem is a fine storage cupboard taken from George Jaffrey's house in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, c 1730. In his estate inventory of1749 it notes the 'beaufait' cupboard contains expensive English glass along with ceramics imported from China. The other glass display cabinets also show some German ceremonial enamelled glass which is exceptionally fine (fig. 9). The whole trip covered some 26 destinations in over 6 months and I saw a great variety of glass. It is remarkable that so much English glass has found its way all around the globe. Shaun Kiddell is a new member of the Glass Circle committee and collects early cut glass. He is currently researching the Georgian glassman John Blades. Endnotes I. Mortimer, Martin (1999) The English Glass Chandelier, Woodbridge: Antique Collectors Club Ltd, plate 106, p168. 2 OPACWE TWISTS But one twist: opaque twist stems Part 1 Tp ine glasses with opaque twists have something intrinsically beautiful about them. The graceful and interlacing canes occasionally tinged by colour; the harmony of the movement completely in phase with the rococo tendencies of the day. The distance of time prevents us from knowing exactly how they were made. The gaffers are gone and the written record is remarkably sparse. Probably the earliest readily available reference is of course Hartshorne's magnum opus from 1897 but it tells us surprisingly little'. Reginald Wilkinson's book contains precious details, no doubt because he was in the family business of glass making, cutting and decorating 2 . It has been said of the double- series opaque twists (DSOTs) that the inner structure was first partly twisted and then twisted again upon addition of the outer tapes or multi-plies'''. The observation that the slope or angle of the inner gauze is greater than that of the outer multi-ply is taken to substantiate two rounds of twisting". Others would have the inner structure first twisted the other way'. The sheer variety among authors over more than a century means that we don't really know. There are web sites showing how contemporary glass makers reproduce old opaque twists 6 . But what about the originals themselves — were they made in the same manner? Fortunately the glasses themselves can talk to us provided we are prepared to observe and think. The present work sets out to explore how they were made. Its premise is an a posteriori analysis of the relative geometry of the twisting opaque canes. It will be shown that all opaque stems we have examined were twisted but once. A single twist or a question of pitch Let us start with a two-dimen- sional analogy, those of regularly meandering lines, or in technical terms si- nusoidal waves. All the waves in fig. i have the same wavelength although their amplitude varies. Normally such a figure would be shown hori- zontally, but shown vertically it approaches an 18th century loose corkscrew stem (fig. 1). The yel- low inner wave of low amplitude hardly deviates from the vertical while the outer red wave (alias cane or tape in glass termi- nology) meanders considerably. The angles that each cane makes when cutting the vertical vary con- siderably even though the wavelength is invari- able, as shown by the regu- lar spacing between what are called nodes (fig. Now let's move to Georgian twist stems. While in everyday parlance the word spiral would not raise eyebrows, the air and opaque twists are actually helices rather than spirals because their diameters are constant. By contrast, the gyre of a spiral is constantly widening. There are two types of helices, left- handed and right-handed. Georgian air and opaque twists are resolutely right- handed, that is to say the helix moves to the right as it rises. For a helix the key terms are pitch and diameter (fig. 2, opposite). The pitch represents the height of one complete turn of a helix. The pitch of an opaque twist is in the range of o.5 to 2 centimetres. For DSOTs careful inspection shows that the pitch of the inner and outer structures are the same (fig. 2 opposite). by Simon Wain- Hobson Athelny Townshend 16 ass Circle News Issue 132 pitch pitch diameter pitch A - SSOT spiral gauze + 3 threads C - DSOT lace gauze + 2 laminated corkscrews At. D - DSOT 2 spiral threads + 2 laminated corkscrews pitch inner diameter - oso - r 2 tapes + 1 tape OPAQUE TWISTS 0 This observation is not a special case; indeed it is so for all the DSOTs we have examined. Interestingly, for a single-series opaque twist (SSOT), which by consensus is twisted but once, the pitches of all components are the same (fig. 2d below). This tells us that the twisting of all the components was simultaneous, whether it be a SSOT or a DSOT, for one twisting movement simply cannot produce elements with different pitches. Note that the more the twisting, the smaller the pitch or the more compact the opaque twist. The angular question Numerous authors and endless glass collectors have noticed the steeper angle formed by the inner element of a DSOT compared to the outer elements. Yet the same thing pertains to individual canes of a loose corkscrew (fig. I). The angles at which the inner and outermost canes intersect the diameter are very different, yet nobody would doubt that all the canes were drawn and twisted simultaneously. Going back to DSOTs stems, if the pitches of the inner and outer elements are the same, then what has happened? The observation of course is not in question; it is the explanation that is lacking. Superimposing red and green triangles on three DSOT stems (fig. z right) it is clear that the bases of the triangles, in fact the diameters of the inner elements of the stem, are smaller for the inner than the outer elements. The angles perceived by the eye are 'a' and Ty for the triangles corresponding to the 'outer' and 'inner' elements respectively (fig. z below). In terms of trigonometry the tangent (tan) of angle a= pitch(p)/outer diameter. For the triangle superimposed over the inner structure tan p p/inner diameter. The ratio of the two angles is: tan I3/tan a = (p/inner diameter)/(p/outer diameter) which simplifies to: tan I3/tan a = outer diameter/ inner diameter (equation i) As the base of the inner triangle is smaller than that of the outer triangle, while both have the same pitch (p), tan (3 has to be greater than tan a, which in turn means that the angle is greater than angle (3. In short the steeper angle of the inner structure results from it having a smaller diameter than the outer structure and nothing else. The above example isn't formally exact, for it superimposes a 2D triangle on a 3D structure. For a single pitch of a helix the base of the triangle is the circumference of the circle seen in a cross section (fig. a). The correction is simply made by multiplying the diameter of the inner and outer elements by mathematical pi, or a. Accordingly the circumference of the outer structure would be it X outer diameter, while that for the inner structure would be at X inner diameter. For a single complete helix of pitch p and diameter d, the angle of the pitch is given by tan a = p/n outer diameter for the outer helix (i.e. multi-ply in glass parlance) whereas tan 13 = p/n inner diameter for the inner helix (i.e. gauze). The ratio of the two angles is: tan I3/tan a = (p/at inner dia- meter)/(p/at outer diameter) which simplifies to: tan 13/tan a = outer diameter/ inner diameter (equation 2) which is the same as equation 1. In short, for outer and inner opaque twist structures with the same pitch the ratio of the outer to inner angles is the reciprocal of the diameters of the outer and inner structures. In other words, the steeper angle for the inner gauze is simply due to the fact that the corresponding diameter is smaller than that of the outer multi-ply. No matter the stem type, the inner structure will always have a smaller diameter than the outer structure so the FAR LEFT: Fig. 1. Sinusoidal waves with different amplitudes and a loose corkscrew. Note how the different waves (canes) make different angles with respect to the vertical despite having all the same wavelength. RIGHT: Fig. 2. The pitches of all elements of a DSOT or SSOT are the same and equal. In the top row of stems the red vertical lines describe the pitches of the inner and the green the outer elements of each DSOT stem and the blue the equal pitches of an SSOT stem. The bottom row of stems show the angles subtended by the inner and outer elements. To the right the triangles have been separated and annotated for greater clarity. ue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 17 40 50 ratio of outer to 1.5:1 211 5:1 inner diameter n ••• n 311 10:1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 90 80 70 60 30 2 0 10 OPAQUE TWISTS ".17.727. same explanation pertains to all stems. Fig. 3 gives a simulation of the inner and outer angles as a function of the ratio of the outer to inner diameter. The smaller the inner compared to the outer diameter the more the angle of the inner helix appears steeper compares to that of the outer helix. Out of curiosity, what are real values for inner and outer angles for opaque twists? These can be calculated from photos remembering equation 2. Although measurement of the An g le of inner helix i3 pitch (p) and diameter (d) from a photo will not yield real values given the magnification at which the photo is reproduced, the angle is determined by the ratio of the two values and so the angle will be exact. Table i shows some examples calculated from the well-known photos of opaque twist stems from chapter XIX of Bickerton'. The figure numbers are given so that the reader can easily find the photos. There is considerable variation. No doubt if more stems were measured more variation would become apparent. Having grasped the importance of pitch and angles, let us consider what would happen if the precursor to a gauze was partly drawn and twisted and then 18 redrawn and twisted as part of a second structure in which, say, two canes were applied to surround the gauze. The pitch of the inner gauze would be less than that of the outer canes because it would be more twisted. Secondly, the angle of the inner gauze would be close to, and perhaps even less than that of the outer canes. As we have not come across any such examples they must be very rare. What would happen if the inner gauze were first twisted the other way, followed by twisting the conventional way, as has been suggested'. In short first make a left-handed helix followed by forcing a right-handed helix on the left-handed helix. Upon the second drawing and twisting the inner left-handed helix risks being - reverted to a column of parallel opaque canes, or only a slightly twisted inner gauze. Once again, the outer and inner structure will have different pitches, and once again, neither of us has seen an opaque twist with an inner left- handed and an outer right-handed helix. Secondly, for aesthetic reasons we feel it would almost certainly have been rejected; opaque twists belong to the rococo period dominated by Hogarth's ideas of serpentine curves, ogees and cusps, to which straight lines would stick out like a sore thumb. Bielby scrollwork attests to the flow of the day. Although straight columns of opaque canes did exist in the beginning of the opaque period', their dearth suggests that they were not too appreciated. Finally, we would like to apply Ockham's razor — this does seem a complicated endeavour when all that needs to be done is to twist the inner and outer structures together to achieve right-handed helices. Finally, McIver Percival° notes that 'two such [opaque] twists may be made into a double spiral as described above for air stems revolving round one another, or the one may be upright in the middle, while the other in a softened state is wound round it like a corkscrew. A band or"tape" is added to a twisted centre by taking a simple twist and "threading' a line of hot glass round it while it LOOT: Fig. 3 . Relationship of the angles for the inner and outer elements as a function of the ratio of the outer to inner diameters. BELOW: Table 1. Inner and outer angles for a number of stems calculated from photos in Bickerton'. An g le of outer helix u Bickerton Opaque stem Inner Outer (1986) angle (b) angle (a) Fig. 1188 Two inner tapes & outer 17-ply 40° 3 Fig. 1192 Inner gauze & outer 6-ply 33° 17° Fig. 1195 Inner gauze & outer 12-ply 45° 17° Fig. 1199 Inner gauze & 4 outer threads 30° 13° Fig. 1200 Inner spiral gauze & 3 outer threads 20° 16° Fig. 1201 Inner lace twist & outer 4-ply 21° 14° Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2 OPAQUE TWISTS is revolving, this being afterwards covered with a layer of clear glass: This would require remarkable accuracy in overlaying the tape and get exactly the same pitch and is a very demanding solution when a far simpler one exists. Again, Ockham's razor rules against it. By far the simplest means to find out what is going on is to simply measure the pitch of the inner and outer structures, the more so as they suffer no optical distortion. If they are the same all elements in the stem were drawn and twisted simultaneously and but once. If they are different, you have something curious and will be highly motivated to make more measurements to find out exactly how the stem was made. Inspection of double-series air- twist stems reveals the same result: the inner and outer elements all have the same pitch. Barrington Haynes never referred to pitch; concentricity was his criterion for distinguishing single-series and double-series stems'°. In Part z, we will show that he fudged the issue, that his single-series and double-series terms are unsatisfactory when considering how opaque twists were made and difficult to use - even Bickerton slipped up more than once. The bottom line is that the air and opaque twist stems were twisted once. Perhaps not surprisingly, contemporary glassmakers do the same. Simon Wain-Hobson is Professor of Molecular Virology at the Institut Pasteur, Paris simon.wain-hobsonapasteur.fr Athelny Townshend is a dealer in 18th century drinking glasses and retired school teacher Endnotes 1. Hartshorne, Albert (1897) Old English Glasses, London: Edward Arnold. z. Wilkinson, Reginald (1968) The Hallmarks of Antique Glass, London: Richard Madley. 3. Hughes, G. Bernard (1956) English, Scottish and Irish Table Glass, London: Batsford, pm. 4. Newby, Martine S. (2006) The Turnbull collection of English 18th-century drinking glasses, Mompesson House, The National Trust, 1,18. 5. Watts D.C. (2008) A History of Glassmaking in London and its development on the Thames South Bank. London: Watts Publishing. Online at
6.
www.georgianglassmakers.co.uk/index.

htm

7.
Bickerton, L.M. (1986)
Eighteenth

century English drinking glasses, an

illustrated guide.
Woodbridge: Antique

Collector’s Club, and revised edition.

8.
Lloyd, Ward (1969)
Investing in

Georgian glass,
London: Barrie & Rockliff,

P74.
9.
Percival, Maciver (1918)
The Glass

Collector — a guide to old English glass,

London: Herbert Jenkins Ltd, and edition,

p229.

so.Barrington Haynes, E. (1959)
Glass

Through the Ages,
revised edition,

Middlesex: Penguin Books.

BELOW:

Fig.

4

A selection of 18th

century white

opaque stemmed
drinking glasses

illustrating some of

the wide variety of

designs: all of them

only twisted once.

…. •

Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2

19

CANDLESTICKS

Glass, brass and silver

t was wonderful

tg
–

to read the article

`My

Favourite

Glass’ in the March

edition of
Glass Circle News

(page

6), in which Anne Towse wrote
so eloquently about a unique
and special glass which had once
belonged to her father.
As such a special item, it would

seem that this glass is something

we could not hold a candle to, or

can we
This glass was not unknown

to me, having first come across

it illustrated in
A History of Old

English Glass
by Francis Buckley .

It is also referred to in
The

Decanter
and in a catalogue

essay in
English Wineglasses

with Facetted Stems .
Each

time the same sole glass is

shown as a unique example

of possibly the earliest
English cut drinking glass.

As mentioned in the March

article, the item once belonged
to Hamilton Clements and

it is often referenced to this

collection.
When I first saw Buckley’s

illustration I had a feeling of

déjà vu
and went to retrieve one

of the heaviest items of cut glass

I have. Holding it against the

illustration it became apparent
that I may own a fraternal twin
or if not a twin at least a close

relation.
The item is a candlestick,

almost certainly lead glass
and unlike nearly all other cut

glass candlesticks published or
available to the author for study.

However, it is not unlike a type

of English candlestick that was

briefly in fashion in silver and

brass for a short period of
time at the start of the

18th century. This

article briefly
explores comparisons between

the glass candlestick and silver

and brass examples with a view to

attributing a date, which if correct,
could also apply to the glass.

Figs i and
2

show the candlestick

side-by-side with the glass. The
contrast in both photographs has

been increased to emphasise the

cutting.

Cutting
The cutting techniques evidenced

on the candlestick incorporate all

of those of the glass with a couple

of additions. For easy comparison
to the March `My favourite glass’, I

have followed the order in which

the cutting on the glass was
described.
It is nine inches tall (22
3

/4 cm)

with a slightly stubby socket, and
very heavy — ‘lb 13oz (814 g). Every

part is faceted except the inside

of the socket and the
underside of the
foot. The socket has

long diamond and
triangular facets which
are very slightly concave

and may be considered

hollow diamonds.
Primarily, between the

knops, the stem has been

made octagonal by the

grinding lengthways of eight
flat facets. These are continued
into the recess beneath the

socket and take the form of

`valleys’ formed by a flat cut to
each side, as if a square of paper

were folded in half and opened.

Each knop has eight

indented diamonds; again

these are formed as valleys in
the manner described above

except the square of paper
would be folded diagonally.

Under each diamond, the edge
of the octagon stem has
been canted with
a

3
/4 inch (1.9 cm) slightly concave

elongated oval (nearly hexagonal)
cut like those upon the stem of the

glass under comparison. Nearly

hexagonal is the best description

as they do not truly abut against

another cut in an angled plane to

form a defined edge.
The domed foot is terrace cut to

form octagonal steps, and then has

eight inverted equilateral triangles

intersecting with eight pentagonal

facets, the bottom of which sit
upon a flat lunette on the surface

of the foot.
The edge is simply shaped

without points or chamfering and
looks to be created by the same
technique as the stem. There are

eight semi-circular indents and
eight notches. The latter created,

as the knop diamonds, by two flat
cuts, each at 9o° to the other.
As with the glass,
there is a `flaw’ in

the stem, a string

of about
6

tiny air

bubbles, they may

just be visible in

the image in the top

knop. There are also

striations throughout

the stem. At the

bottom of the stem

where it joins the foot

the stem diameter is
I%

in, just under 3 cm.

Style
Amongst the various

design influences of the
late i7th and early 18th

century the predominate
influence in luxury items
was French. William III

employed Daniel Marot,

a Huguenot architect, to
assist in the remodelling
of Hampton Court and

French style became further
established in England

by

Paul

Weddell

BELOW:
Fig.

Candlestick in the

author’s collection.

BELOW RIGHT:

Fig. 2 ‘My favourite

glass; Anne Towse
Glass Circle News

Vol. 36 no. 2 Issue

no. 131.

© I A Towse.

20

Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2

ca
t.
M 11
01-
19
2
6.

© Vic

tor
ia
a
n
d

Alber
r
Mu

FAR LEFT:
Fig. 3

This example is

French in brass

c.mo.it has a stem
of octagonal form,

diamond facets on
the knop and the

shallow stepping
to the base. From
The Brass Book,

American, English,

and European: 15th

Century to 1850

um’
by permission of Schiffer

Publishing Ltd.

LEFT:
Fig. 4 An

English brass

example of about

1720 mimics the
design elements of
the previous French

example but the
plain facet design
was not to last

long before being

replaced with richer
ornament of the

knops and stem?.

LEFT:
Fig.
5

These English silver

octagonal examples

of1712 by maker

Nathaniel Lock

have intersecting
diamonds and

pentagons on the

base with a shallow

step above. The

socket is diamond

faceted.
Used by permission of

A.C. Silver – www.amilver.

co.uk.
CANDLESTICKS

Use

d
by
p
erm
iss
ion

o
f A.
C.
Si
t

when
40-50,000

Protestant

Huguenots emigrated to England

following the revocation of the
Edict of Nantes in 1685 by Louis

XIV of France.

In English silver, French types

appear around 1-700: in turn, silver
designs influenced the styles of

brass and an adapted form of

French design eventually becomes

fully
4

incorporated into English

style .

Under different influences of

design form and function, many
varied items were made in plain

geometric shapes before rococo
began to appear in about 1730.

This has historically been referred
to as the Queen Anne style.

From the first decade of the i8th

century octagonal designs were

applied to silver coffee, tea, and

chocolate pots: these remaining
fashionable until about 1718
5
.

Between 1690 and 1720

representative examples of this

style were produced by a wide
variety of makers: Staffordshire
teapots by David & John Elers;

London silver teapots such as

that by Thomas Tearle and at the
newly founded Meissen factory;

and Johann Friedrich B8ttger was

creating geometric vases, teapots

and the like.

Comparative examples of
candlesticks in brass after

silver examples 1700-1720

The silversmiths, brass makers,

potters and glass makers all strived

to produce goods that the market

demanded and occasionally it is

possible to find perfect copies
o
of

brass candlesticks made in glass .

Where brass patterns follow

dated silver examples it is possible

to give precise dates as no maker

would create an item subject to
the vagaries of fashion if that

style had already been replaced
by a later one.’ The same applies

to manufacture in any material,

including glass, allowing for
the different attributes of each

substance, as one tries to imitate
the other.

Various components of the

design of the glass stick can be

seen on the metal examples in figs
3 and 4 and all fall within a short

time frame at the start of the i8th

century.

On the third pair of examples

(figs 5 and 6), the socket is faceted

with intersecting diamonds as well

as having diamonds and pentagons

on the stepped base, which is an

early English detail
9

. According

to one study it appears as early

as 1705 and did not remain in
fashion for more than a few years

All studies consulted appear to

agree a date of about 172o for its
demise and hallmarked silver

versions appear to support this.

The equivalent to these two

decorative elements can be seen on
the glass candlestick as the hollow

diamonds on the socket and the
exact correlation of the diamond

and pentagon cutting on the raised
base.

The vertical bevelled planes on

‘Ss

Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2

21

BELOW:

Fig.
6

This

English hexagonal

brass candlestick, of

c1710 to 1720 shows
a

raised base and foot
plinth as on the glass

example.

CANDLESTICKS

the stem mimic the faceted stems
of the metal examples as do the

steps cut on the base.
So far the silver and brass

examples referred to exhibit plain

unadorned edges to the base. The

octagonal base loses its dominance
by about
1720
being gradually

replaced with the hexagonal base

and then by incurved, chamfered
corners on square bases. These

then develop into the more
elaborate base forms of the later

century.
Given the above, the shaped

edge of the glass candlestick

would seem to be out of time

with the other decorative features

so consideration must be given to
whether this was added at a later
date.
However, the thick flattish

nature of the edge appears, from

the image, to be like that of the

glass. In the hand, the edge cutting
appears to be contemporary with

the manner and execution of the

other cutting on the subject item.
A further counter argument

to any suggestion of recutting is

„, that the base size does not appear
diminished nor out of scale

and matches very closely other
examples of the same proportions.

g
The position of the wear on the

base also indicates that recutting
has not occurred.

;9
‘ There are shaped bases evident

in non-English candlesticks pre-

D700
particularly Spanish and

o
French, and again it is French

Louis XV examples of about

1720

that provide direct comparisons

to the glass candlestick’ . These
examples exhibit a base

with a ‘ruffled’ edge
which both looks like

and

perfectly

describes the
edge of the

glass

ver-

sion. This
is a simple
undulating

waved edge

as
opposed
to the sharper angular or tightly

curved edges which appear later.

Summary
In conclusion, the glass candlestick

appears to be English lead glass
made towards the end of the first

quarter of the 18th century, with
flat cutting or bevelling and made

in the French fashion prevalent in

luxury goods at the time.
The above is not an exhaustive

list of metallic examples displaying

similar attributes to the glass

example, nor have non-metallic

versions been considered here.
This limited stylistic survey was

based on various examples in both

silver and brass from multiple

sources. For the purposes of this
article and mindful of the limits

of image quality and copyright,

these have been distilled down

to the representative examples
described.
It is possible to find slightly

later examples displaying some
of these features, however, in the

author’s opinion; certain elements
of those illustrated so closely
match the glass candlestick as

to be useful when considering a
date. Additionally, the period of
time in which combinations of

the elements are variously used

on contemporary examples is
limited even if, individually, some

persisted for a short while.
Given that a luxury cut glass

object of this type would have

been very expensive, the commis-

sioning patron would want an
item of the very latest fashion, the
societal importance of which is

implied in the many ad-
vertisements found by
Buckley.
On the basis

of the above,

it would not
seem

un-

reasonable

to
suggest a

date for the

glass candle-
stick of about
1720

or just slightly later, when

the octagonal profile, plain faceted

stein, intersecting faceted base and
ruffled foot are contemporary and

just prior to when they are super-

seded by other forms.
If such a date is plausible, there

would be no reason not to assign
a similar date to the Towse glass

which displays almost identical

cutting. Anne’s father would
have been even more delighted

if it is indeed
60
years, or more,

older than the catalogue date at
purchase.

Paul Weddell is a keen collector of

glass and has been a member of the
Glass Circle since
2008.
His interest

in glass spans continental waldglass
of the 16th century to mid-zoth

century English crystal.

Endnotes

1.
Buckley, Francis (1925)
A History of

Old English Glass,
London: Ernest Benn,

plate XXV.
a. McConnell, Andy (2004)
The Decanter:

An Illustrated History of glass
from 165o,

Woodbridge: Antique Collectors Club,

plate
106.

3.
Delomosne & Son Ltd (2005)
English

Wineglasses with Faceted Stems.
North

Wraxall: Delomosne. Fig. a., p. 3.

4.
Schiffer, Peter, Nancy & Herbert (5978)

The Brass Book, American, English
and

European Fifteenth Century through 1850,

Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing, p190.

5.
Sterling and Francine Clark Art

Institute (5997),
English, Irish, & Scottish

Silver: At the Sterling and Francine
Clark

Art
Institute, New
York: Hudson Hills

Press, p278.

6.
Wilkinson, R (1968),
The Hallmarks of

Antique Glass,
London: Richard Madley

Ltd, p113.
7.
Gentle, Rupert & Belinda (revisions)

and Field, Rachael (1994)
Domestic

Metalwork 1640-1840,
Woodbridge:

Antique Collectors’ Club Limited, p93.

8.
Leeds City Art Galleries and Jessica

Rutherford (1992), Country House

Lighting ,66o -1890, Temple Newsam

Country House Studies Number
4, pg 54.

g.
Schiffer (1978), op. cit. p190.

Io.Koldeweij, Eloy (zoos)
The English

Candlestick 1425 —
1925, London: Christie’s

Books Ltd, CAT 147 p159.
II. Michaelis, Ronald F. (1997)
Old domestic

Base-metal Candlesticks,
Woodbridge:

Antique Collectors Club, psso.

12. Gentle and Field (1994) op. cit.
p143,

plate 74.

Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2

22

REPORTS

Circle meetings and outings

ABOVE:

Fig 1 altar

set of overlaid

glass carved in

relief, Qianlong
mark and

period, China,

1
73
6
‘
1

795.

N4675-7

LEFT:
Fig. 2

eye bead with

blue, yellow

and white

inlays, China,

4th-3rd century

BC.
N7847

TOP RIGHT:
Fig.
3
vase with

overlay carved

design of fish,

Qianlong
mark

and
period,

China, 1736-

1
795.
N4718

ABOVE RIGHT:

Fig. 4 cicada

of white glass
with black

inlay, China,
2nd-3rd

century AD.

N4808

BELOW:

Fig. 5 octagonal

cup with
diamond-point

engraving

China, 5730-

1
770. N4556

14 March

2013

Chinese Glass at Bristol

Museum by Kate Newnham

Kate Newnham’s talk

gave an overview of the
development of glass in
China from the collection

donated through the Art

Fund around
1949,
after it

had been declined by the

British Museum, Victoria

and Albert Museum and

National Museum of

Scotland. It was amassed
by Henry Burrows Abbey

(1872-1949) who collected
from
1933

to his death,

buying from Bluetts and

Spink, with 5o% of pieces
coming through Bluetts

from the collection of E.B.
Ellice-Clark of Hove, who
had lent 51 pieces shown at

the V&A between 1912 and

1923.

By 2003 some 40% of

pieces were showing signs of

glass disease or decay arising

from inherent instability

in the glass and display in

old cases with fluctuating

climates from back-lighting

with fluorescent tubes and

a defunct fan, possibly

worsened by storage in old

wooden cabinets. The worst

affected were dark blue

colour late 17th and early
i8th century, with advanced

crizzling. Others showed

imprinted finger-marks, and

decay under old labels from

their hydroscopic animal

glue. The Museum obtained
a £,86,000 grant from the
Designation Challenge

Fund for conservation, a

new gallery display and

website, over the two years

2004-2006. The entire

collection was conserved,

new display cabinets were

bought and all pieces were

digitally photographed,

featuring on the Portcities

website (wwwportcities.

org.uk and http://

discoveringbristol.org.uk/

glass). The local Chinese

community was consulted
about the project and their

involvement resulted in

gallery text being made
available in Chinese using

traditional characters aimed

at Cantonese speakers,

incorporating their detailed

comments on traditional

symbolism.

The earliest true glass in

China is beads from the 6th-
5th centuries BC: scientific

analysis of parallel pieces in
the Simon Kwan collection

show silica, lead as flux, and
barium. Lamp-worked ‘eye’

beads c.475-221 BC used

cobalt blue, its first use in

China, and are similar to

Egyptian beads traded to

China (see page 8). They are

found in coffins with jade

and gold items. Jade

items copied in glass

such as
bi
discs and

cicadas are found

in middle-ranking
tombs, discs were

placed on the body and

cicadas on tongues. This

use of glass to imitate

more precious materials

continued through Chinese

history. An ear’ cup cast in a

two-piece mould is an early
vessel, probably Han period.
Roman glass from

317-420 AD was found at

Nanjing, Jiangsu province;
a document from around

the same time records ten

shades of Roman glass
known in China. The

Chinese learned to blow

glass in the c.5th century

AD, with lidded blown glass

jars holding relics buried
under 6th-7th century

Buddhist pagodas. Facetted

glass from Iran has been
found in China, and is

depicted on a 9th century

Buddhist Bodhisattva

textile from Dunhuang.

Press moulded bracelets

featuring two dragons

with pearls, probably date
to the Song dynasty

(960-1279). Other
representations

of glass include

a painting of

chrysanthemums

of 1635, their stems

showing in a glass

vase.
Chinese glassmaking

was revived at the end of

the 17th century when the

Kangxi emperor ordered a

Jesuit priest, Kilian Stumpf

to set up a glass workshop
within the Forbidden

City. There are a handful

of reign-marked pieces

from the late 17th/early
i8th century, and in the

Yongzheng period (1723-35)

marks became mandatory.

Bristol pieces have been

matched to palace record

descriptions. Diamond-

point engraving was

introduced from the early

18th century, and’golden
star’
sparkling inclusions

from the 1740s. The glass

workshops continued to

make imitations of other

materials and of archaic

objects, alongside plainer

forms of translucent glass.

Carved overlay glass was a
particular Chinese speciality

achieved by carving through

layers of glass using a fast-

spinning wheel. A vase in
Bristol has a design using

seven colours made using

spot applications of molten

glass.

China now makes, and

probably uses,
8o%
of the

world’s processed glass

in many large factories,

producing a huge number

of hand-blown items such

as tea wares, moulded
wares as well as plate glass.

Studio glassmaking is now

being taught at a growing

number of universities

with traditions developing
from the Western schools

in which the tutors have

studied, or from Western
makers’ residencies.

Wolverhampton has been

noticeably influential,

with ex-students heading

the most established

departments at Shanghai
University (a Museum of

Glass opened in the city in

2010), Tsinghua University,

and Beijing.

Anne Lutyens-Humfrey

We are grateful to Josephine

Darrah, Lance Poynter,

Robin Wilson, Derek and

Faith Woolston for hosting

this meeting.

Glass Circle News Issue 132 Vol. 36 No. 2

23

REPORTS

Line 1
9
of

the chancery

document
where

Benjamin

Baker

mentions the

dama
g
e to

the Vauxhall

furnace,

action which

he attributes

to Geor
g

e

Ravenscroft.

9 April 2013

Skulduggery at the
Glasshouse: George

Ravenscroft and the

manufacture of looking glass
plates by David
C.

Watts

This investigation began
when I was asked whether
the Benjamin Baker
mentioned in Robert

Charleston’s
English Glass

as a man with ‘many years

experience of making mirror

plates’ and contracted with
George Ravenscroft in 1675

to make looking-glass plates’

was the same man as the

John Baker mentioned in

my
Glassmaking in London

with a similar experience

and who built a glasshouse
with Ravenscroft. A 168z

Chancery report in the

National Archives entitled

‘The several Answers of

Benjamin Baker and of the

Deft (John Bellingham)
to the Bill of Compte by
George Ravenscroft Gent

Compte makes clear that

Benjamin Baker and John

Baker were two different

people.
Benjamin was a

glassblower who in
the summer of 1677

had just completed his

apprenticeship at John

Baker’s glasshouse in

Chelsea. He was directed to

work, by a William Baicke
for, the ‘term of one fire in

the new glasshouse built

in Vauxhall by John Baker

and George Ravenscroft.
However, the furnace fire

went out in the winter of

1677 either by skulduggery

or the cold weather which
caused the river Thames
to freeze over. It left

Benjamin out of a job. Re-

employment at the Baker/

Ravenscroft glasshouse

was refused, apparently

without Ravenscroft’s
approval although he was

benefitting from the sale of
mirror plates made there.

Benjamin was snapped-up
and given considerably

increased wages by John

Bellingham of the Vauxhall

glasshouse. Ravenscroft,

clearly furious at the loss
of his best worker, then

adopted a clandestine plan

to get Benjamin to leave
Bellingham and work

under him. This involved

pulling down the Vauxhall

furnace, bullying, bribery
and finally promises to
protect Benjamin against

claims by Bellingham over
breaking his agreement.

This is because Benjamin,

now a Journeyman,

describes himself as the only

glassblower in London, if
not the whole of England,

‘who is able safely to make
and work mirror plates of
large size (over 4o inches).

Bellingham himself was

not able to make these large

plates, his business was
ruined and hence the court

case.
In 1679 the Duke’s

patent came to an end

and John Baker died.

Benjamin believed that in

1675 the Duke had sold
the Vauxhall glasshouse

to Ravenscroft for £500,

and that they planned to

remove Bellingham from

the Vauxhall glasshouse
and install him in a new
glasshouse. This did not

happen in 1675 but in

1679 when Ravenscroft
took over the Vauxhall

glasshouse. Bellingham
was cast out and by 1681

he occupied the Baker/
Ravenscroft glasshouse.

He made no more mirror

plates and died in about

1700. Benjamin remained
in the Vauxhall glasshouse

where he was joined by
another mirror plate maker,

John Dawson. Ravenscroft,
who died in 1683, sold the
Vauxhall glasshouse to John

Bowles who prospered with

Dawson in the manufacture

of blown mirror plates until
his death in 1707.
To conclude, Benjamin

Baker was not in 1675 a man

with many years experience
of the plate glass industry

as described by Charleston;

he did not form a contract

with Ravenscroft to make

blown mirror plates until

1679 and he was in not

involved in constructing the

John Baker/Ravenscroft
glasshouse (not mentioned

by Charleston). The Duke
of Buckingham appears

not to have been directly
involved in these events

nor did he sell the Vauxhall

glasshouse to John Bowles

in 1667 as stated by W.H.
Bowles.

This Chancery report

reveals a new very aggressive

side of Ravenscroft’s
personality. However,

it leaves much unsaid

about the reason for his
vitriolic relationship with

Bellingham which other

documents relating to

his 1682 Bill of Compte
may explain in the future.

But perhaps the most
remarkable aspect of this

story is that in spite of
the apparent success of

the Vauxhall plate glass

industry only one man,
Benjamin Baker was able to

make large mirror plates at

that time.
In a subsequent
discussion with Mike
Noble about transcribing

the original text he has

suggested that William

Baicke would better read as

William Hawkes. This is

quite possible.
David
C.

Watts

We are grateful to Laurence
Trickey, Gordon Baker,
Michael & Jenny Nathan

and Graham Vivian for

hosting this meeting.

11 June
A geometrical analysis

of opaque twist stems by
Simon Wain-Hobson and

Athelny Townshend

This talk is the subject

of a two-part article,
the first appearing on

page 16.

The Robert Charleston
Memorial Lecture: Vetro a

Retortoli glass of 16th and

17th centuries — some new
insights by Kitty Lameris
A report of this lecture

will appear in the next

issue.

We are grateful to Julius

& Ann Kaplan, Vincent

Emms and Jo Thomas for

hosting this meeting.

Original text line 19

ilatithrei