Glass Circle News_No.91, Jun 2002

EDITORS

No. 91

NOTICES

2
June

0
0 2

Web site, www.glasscircle.org
E-mail, [email protected]
David C. Watts

27 Raydean Rd,

Barnet, Herts. EN5 IAN.

F. Peter tole
5 Clayton Ave.

Didsbury, Manchester, M20 6BL.

Henry Fox
20 Ockford Road,

Godalming, Surrey, GU7 1QY

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS

4.

Silver-Mounted Claret Jugs
Key the words “Claret Jug History” into your computer search engine and you are

liable to be presented with the helpful information that Tom Watson currently owns

four more claret jugs than Tiger Woods! The reason is that this delightful vessel is
a favourite trophy for golf tournaments. Claret, the red wines of Bordeaux, has,

however, a much longer history than this in the UK. Excavations at Finlaggan on

Islay – chief residence of the Lords of the Isles, who ruled the Hebrides in the 14th

and 15th centuries, have revealed French pottery from Bordeaux from
c.

1300, which

seems to represent the remains of jars of imported claret. It was much loved by the
English from William Shakespeare onwards; gadrooned jugs with nipt diamond waies

decoration made by Ravenscroft might well have held this delightful tipple.
continued on page 6

Right. A silver mounted cut overlay

Claret Jug (green over clear).
Intaglio decoration is
by
Joshua

Hodgetts for Stevens & Williams.
c. 1897.

The silver mount to the neck and

stopper are marked
“STERLING”
an

indication that they were almost cer-
tainly applied in the United States
where
Stevens and Williams exported

to a select number of manufacturers

and retailers such as Tiffany and
the

Gorham Mfg. Co. of Providence.

Rhode Island, USA.
Kent collection.
Above. A silver gilt and frosted

glass Askos-form Claret Jug.

London, 1836.

The jug has a fitted oak box with a
green baize lined interior and the

label of “Storr & Mortimer, 156 New

Bond St., Factory 17, Harrison St.,

Gray’s Inn Rd.” The front of the box

has inscribed on a brass plaque “Sir

Richard Acton Bart.” and may,
therefore, be a presentation piece.

This design of jug, copied from

Greco-Roman Pottery vessels was
very popular from the 1830’s to

1850’s and was made both in silver

mounted crystal as well as in solid
silver, by a variety of firms.

Ht. 8 1/4″.
Kent collection.

a look at Irish Glass,
see

page 11.
. . . and what is this

all
about?
see page 2.

Left. A Cork Glass Co. engraved mallet-shaped decanter and stopper, c.1800
engraved with

the ‘vesica’ pattern above moulded flutes, below three milled neck rings, possibly matched grid-

moulded stopper. The base moulded with “CORK GLASS CO.” Ht. 27 cm.

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002
a

Editorial

W
hen did you last

walk over Tower

Bridge? I was on my way

from Tower Hill station to
the Design Museum to in-

spect the exhibition of

Blaschka’s glass marine

animals. It must be 60
years since I stood in the

middle of Tower Bridge

and felt the two bascules
bounce against each other

in response to the traffic – wobble without tears! It is a terrific

structure and now you can view London from its glass-walled
upper walkways and admire its polished ancient machinery. The

whole area, with the Tower of London at its centre, is a great

tourist attraction. Looking west, however, London’s historic past

along the South Bank has changed for ever. Victorian
warehouses, reduced to rubble by Hitler, have given way, at last,
to a string of new developments known as ‘New London’

comprising some ten large buildings with an estimated occupancy

of 15,000 people (more trouble for Transport Secretary, Stephen

Byers’ successor!) the most important of which is the new Greater

London Authority Building. This lop-sided giant puff ball de-

signed by Arup, working with architects Foster’s and Partners,

aims to become a “world-
class example of energy

conscious design”. Its

outer double skin is en-
tirely glass (picture right)
and clearly exploits the

same technology as they
used to cover the Great

Court of the British
Museum. It opens in the

summer when the public
can freely parade up and down its internal spiral walkway and

experience the “puffing” of the GLA committees.

Behind the GLA building, in my picture, is the Guy’s “Tower”,

currently the tallest building on the South Bank, the inspiration
of Lord Robens, back in the ’70s, to camouflage the hospital’s

new boiler-house chimney. Alongside it, to be sited by London

Bridge Station (also to be revamped), I have outlined the latest

cause of contention, the nick-named “Shard of Glass” or, to give

it its proper name, “London Bridge Tower”. This attenuated
pyramid when (if) built will stand, at 1016 feet, nearly 21/2 times

that of Guy’s tower, becoming the tallest structure in Europe. And

this could house yet another 10,000 people in shops, offices and

flats. The building has 70% support by the Southwark locals and

final planning consent was given on March 30′. In fact, prelimi-
nary demolition would have started by now had not Mr. Byers

put the project on “hold”. There are problems; English Heritage

is against it and the Tower would sit dangerously close to the

Heathrow landing flight path eastern approach along the Thames.
From an archaeological viewpoint it would not overlay anything

of glass interest on this already extensively developed site. So
will the “Shard” be of glass – a sharp symbol of Southwark – or

merely an icicle that melts away in the summer sun?

Completing my crossing of Tower Bridge, I descended to the
riverside footpath and followed it east along the river for some
400 yards to the Design

Museum. The Museum fronts

the river and there is only lim-
ited disabled parking. Entrance

is £6 (£4 concessions). The

ground floor is given over to a
shop and café, while museum
galleries occupy the two upper

floors. The Blaschka exhibits

are housed in about twelve

south flailkmew of

cases – some 70, or so, models

Tower Bridge

mostly borrowed from Cardiff

National Museum – along with

preparatory drawings made by the
Blaschkas, some of their tools

and explanations about how the models were made. Their
purpose was accurately to portray the huge diversity of soft-

bodied marine animals that lost their form when preserved. In

this they are remarkable, one, of the Hydroid,
Tubularia,

bringing back haunting memories of my B.Sc. practical

examination. The cases allow close inspection and the breath-

taking detail of the lamp-work is clear. Looking at a model of

a
Portugese-Man-of-War
I felt this might have been the inspira-

tion in miniature for Dale Chihuly’s chandeliers. Two models

are shown as dissections, one, of a squid, being quite remarkable
for its detailed accuracy. We are told that most of the models

were designed from drawings in biological text-books and I was

intrigued that one of them carried a label saying “Sowerby”. I

believe that one of this glassmaking family did, indeed, publish

zoological books but perhaps members can advise me on this

matter. A booklet of an appropriate unusual design
Leopold and

Rudolf Blaschka
with excellent colour plates of many of the

exhibits is good value at £8.95.

Life-size Blaschka model of
an

octopus.

The Design Museum itself is modern, bland and, so far as glass
is concerned, quite appalling. It focuses on the 20′ century and

the best it can do for English glass are a 1960s Pyrex spray-
painted red fruit bowl and two blue fruit dishes. One feels that

many curators would give an arm and leg for the space wasted
in what one can only assume is meant to be “ambience”. At first
I though the Design Museum was intending to take up where

the V&A left off but the latter has more in its upper gallery than
this entire museum. The problem may be financial as it does

seem to run on sponsored exhibitions. Currently, the whole first
floor (half the total space) is given over to Italian designer, Gio
Ponti and includes four Murano pieces thereby doubling the

glass on show. The Museum’s approach does, however, raise the
question of the relationship between design and decoration, the
latter being noticeably absent from the exhibits on show. Maybe

we have here a theme for a future Glass Circle exhibition.

I walked back along the South
Bank to London Bridge Station,
the preferred route to avoid the
thronging tourists. Some 500

years ago a Dutchman called
Wilhelm Christian made the first

English blue smalt, somewhere
along this path, only for him to

be diddled out of his invention
Large Blaschka model of Tubularia

by a Scotsman, Lord Hay, but

that is another story. *

All pictures © D.C. Watts

GLA Building with Guy’s Tower and the

proposed “Shard of Glass” in the

background.

Page 2

2002

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

Much Ado at the
Museum of London
111211U

fit
he Museum of London is getting a substantial makeover,

I both in its bricks and mortar and in the presentation of its

contents. The former involves the creation of a new entrance, a

covered court with increased exhibition space and a larger shop
and restaurant, hopefully to be completed by mid 2003. The
latter is part of an ongoing process, searching to display the

Museum’s diverse contents in context and to the best advantage.

The successful Roman section with its glassworking workshop
remains unchanged but a large new arrangement has been given

over to create a
“World City 1789-1914”
relating London and

its activities to the wider environment of the time. Here, of

particular note, in a section called Victorian Walk

– a warren of shop fronts and partial
interiors – is a recreation of a White-

friars Glass showroom. It can only be

viewed through the glazed door and

two side windows but it encloses a feast

of well-lit glass as it packs in as much

of the Museum’s substantial holding as
could be managed. It includes a few
pieces of later C.18
th

glass and a fine Irish

canoe bowl but most of it is Whitefriars of

the 19″‘ and early 20
th
centuries plus two

colourful mosaic panels, a few pieces of
pottery and an office where the accounts are

kept. My snapshots give some idea of the

layout.

Also, in the Victorian Walk one finds glass

associated with the pharmacy, pub (with

fine etched and cut windows and mirrors)

and a well-stocked pawnshop as well as Above.
The

Whitefriars

interesting light fittings. None of the exhibits carry detailed

explanations and, indeed it would be difficult to do so. This

exhibition is all about ambience and I encountered a (live)
“Victorian” photographer, complete with black cloak and ma-

hogany plate camera, adding to the illusion.

Elsewhere in the Museum there is glass a plenty including
unique finds from archaeological digs in London such as the rare

find of a C.14
th
goblet of possibly Italian origin (above, extreme

right). Hardly a corner can be turned without finding a piece of

interest, be it a fine regency pineapple stand and cover (above
left) or the urn-shaped “vase” on lemon-squeezer foot with a

double stopper that inverts to form a candlestick (above, centre),
as well as the more hum-drum sealed Ravenscroft etc.

A serious disadvantage of displaying glass in its social context

is that much of the associated material necessitates low lighting

conditions that may make it impossible to identify detail, such
display and some of the glasses in the windows. (All pictures 0 D.C. Watts)

as engraving, on the glass. The committed student might
therefore consider taking a torch, binoculars for the more remote

pieces, such as the Chesterfield (Scudamore) Flute and, for one

group from the famous Garton collection, a short stepladder,

perhaps disguised as a Victorian photographic tripod, would

prove a handy accessory!

The Museum opens (free of charge) at 10 am, at noon on

Sunday, and closes at 5.30 pm.

L
ast year, developers (obligatorily) spent £40 million on

archaeology in London, £200 million in the last ten years.

The best and most important of the finds from these excavations,

including glass, are now in the Museum of London. The London
Archaeological Archive and Research Centre, a branch of the

Museum, has its base at Mortimer Wheeler House (46 Eagle
Wharf Road, just off the New North Rd., Hackney, London,

N1 7ED. Tel: 020 7490 8447, which is a short but ride (76,

141, 271) from Old St. U/G station) where it holds information
on, and many of the finds from, over 5000 sites or projects that

have taken place in Greater London over the past 100 years. It

is open for study to the public by appointment, free of charge.

Preliminary searches can be carried out via the www.museum-

london.org.uk/MOLsite/menu.htm site. For those interested in

the nitty-gritty of recording site details of archaeological explo-
rations this web site also has a free 113-page downloadable book

of practical information. It only touches on glass but is

interesting for the exactness of the way in which archaeological

information is recorded as well as providing general explana-

tions of structural details of buildings and so on. It is essential

reading to understand the shorthand graphics of site records.*

Page 3

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002

471/MTV RS74E6716115
4

V. Pam ..date

A
nyone who scribbles a periodical column finds that one has

either a plethora of subjects on which to write, or that

nothing whatsoever springs to mind. Fortunately, often when

one is at something of a loss for a subject upon which to reflect,

a sudden concatenation of events provides a worthwhile topic.

Thus, a recent conversation with our Editor strayed onto the

subject of the C.18
th
production of lead-glass in Continental

Europe, in which he reiterated his impatience with those who

strive to establish its production there without adequate
evidence. The matter would probably have rested there, had not

a few days later Christies issued a sale catalogue of the Dr.
Anton Dreesmann Collection, amongst which were some fifty-

five Glasses, all well illustrated and nearly all choice specimens
of Dutch engraved Glasses. Looking at these, the traditional

ascription of many of the Glasses themselves as being English

seems to pose stylistic questions; in some cases the catalogue
skated round this problem of the origin of the Glass by

advancing no comment, but even where it came down firmly on

an English origin, one occasionally felt a twinge of uncertainty.

Peter Francis in an article in
Apollo

magazine for February

2000, considers the problem of
The development of Lead

Glass’.
He fairly convincingly establishes that development

work on lead Glass was taking place in Holland, Ireland and
Sweden, simultaneously with Ravenscroft’s work in London.

But much of his evidence is capable of more than one

interpretation, and whether some, or any, of these developments

progressed into ongoing artistic, technical and commercial

successes seems to be an open question. Colin Brain, in his

recent Glass Circle lecture, suggested that Dutch lead Glass

developments at this time had an 8 — 12% lead content, only
one third of the level of the successful English formula; possibly

herein lies the apparent failure to succeed. Francis emphasises

the need for improved furnace control to achieve the aim of a

metal with improved clarity, solidity and brightness, and cites

the ‘Amsterdam Furnace’, with its enhanced draught control, as
a means to this end. But he does not consider the long
development, over a period of nearly seventy years before
Ravenscroft’s work, of the coal-fired furnaces that were unique

to Britain. The description of the flue arrangements to control

draught in the ‘Amsterdam Furnace’ seems similar to those of

the ‘wind furnaces’ used in Britain from the early

examples of which have been excavated, and reported in detail,

at Haughton Green and Bolsterstones. By the end of the C.17″,

control of the coal-fired furnaces had been even further im-
proved by the advent of the Glass Cone, and coupled with the

better calorific value of coal over wood, it is surely this ability

to control furnace temperature that gave British Glass-houses an
edge. Apart from the slightly tenuous evidence of lead Glass

output from the Dublin Glass-house, cited by Francis, there

seems little evidence of the survival of a continuous series of

late C.17
th
or early C.18

th
lead Glass drinking vessels from

outside England; nonetheless, that a Glass cone was constructed
in Dublin before 1700 may perhaps confirm ongoing lead Glass

production there, although one school of thought regards early

cones as indicative of bottle production. The work on Scottish

Glass-houses, recently published by Jill Turnbull, demonstrates
various short-lived attempts to produce lead Glass at this time,

perhaps paralleling the situation described by Francis, albeit for

different reasons. But by the mid C.18t
h

, one really becomes less

sure that lead Glass was confined to Britain, even if one
excludes from consideration the Norwegian Nostetangen

Glassworks, as being a special case.

Much the biggest question mark about the country of origin
hangs over that important group of lead Glass comprising the

‘Newcastle stems’. Catherine Ross’s work seems firmly to have

precluded their originating from Newcastle-on-Tyne, and she

found evidence only for the export of utility Glass from
Newcastle to the Low Countries; yet no other Glass producing

district in Britain lays claim to these stems. An undecorated
`Newcastle stem’ is rare, for the overwhelming majority of them

carry Dutch engraving, both wheel and stipple. There are a very

few with Beilby enamelling on them, but even here there are

Dutch connections. Anecdotally, the high incidence of Dutch

engraved ‘Newcastle stems’ in British collections may possibly

be explained by the practice of some London dealers, between
the wars, of popping over to Holland to buy further supplies of

`Dutch engraved English Glass’,
although a small group of

Glasses with Jacobite emblems on Newcastle stems does pose

some questions. That some Dutch engraving was done on
imported English Glass is confirmed by contemporary newspa-

per advertisements, but an inference from their wording is that

it was a minority.

Two similar composite stem Glasses in the Dreesmann Collec-
tion prompted these reflections. Both have a dumb-bell airtwist

upper section, surmounting a plain section also with dumbbell
knops and with a straggly tear throughout its length, together
with a wide round funnel bowl; one has a signed and dated

engraving by Jacob Sang of 1760, the engraving on the other is

fifteen years or so later, of
‘t’ Huis to Doom,
taken from a 1773

engraving of the house, which was completely rebuilt in 1780.
The catalogue ignores the origin of the Glasses themselves,

which are presumably of lead Glass, but look thoroughly un-
English; at first sight the slight neck between the airtwist section

and the bowl looks narrow, although closer study suggests that

this is an optical illusion. However, when one turns to the
Newcastle stems which form the majority of this collection,

many do have a relatively narrow neck in comparison with the

main portion of the stem, a feature that is absent from other
English Glass of the mid C.18″. The Dreesmann Collection is a

fine and representative group, and has half a dozen late C.17
th

facon de Venise
Low Countries Glasses, all of which have this

narrow neck characteristic, and its persistence on most of the
Newcastle stems into the second half of the C.18″ adds some
weight to the idea that these Glasses may be of Low Countries

origin.

The reflection above on a Netherlandish origin for C.18″ lead
Glass is all circumstantial, but one positive reference for lead

Glass production by Sebastien Zoude’s Glass-house at Namur,

established in 1753, is given by Robert Charleston. In his paper

on
‘The Transport of Glass’,
reported as

Circle of Glass

Collectors Paper No: 152,
he notes a contemporary document

which records that whilst the Glass-hawkers could carry six or

seven hundred of soda Glasses, due to the greater weight they

could only carry four hundred of Zoude’s lead Glasses. The
Belgian firm of Val St. Lambert commenced production in 1826,
and an intriguing pointer as to how late Newcastle stems

apparently persisted is given by two items in their museum at
Liege. There is a Newcastle stem Glass, with arabesque engrav-

ing round the rim, labelled
as: “early Val St. Lambert”,
and even

more revealing is a pincer mould with which to form Newcastle
type stem knopping.

The uncertainty over the origin of Newcastle stems is reflected
in Vol II of the Rjksmuseum Catalogue, where they are generally

described as coming from ‘England or Netherlands’; some have
even suggested that the few Newcastle stems with English

embellishment, and in particular those by Beilby, may represent
imports of Glass to Britain from the Netherlands. That much of

this remains surmise, and is at odds with traditional ascriptions

is true, but to accept them all as English requires at least as many
unsupported assumptions to be made as if one accepts them as

Netherlandish. The fact that many earlier eminent authorities

took them to be English should not be allowed to weigh too
heavily, for a dreadful warning against regarding earlier attribu-

concluded overpage

Page 4

2002

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

Glass Circle Matters

Glass Circle Library – new accessions
We are delighted to report that a series of publications,as listed

below, has been presented to the Library by our long-standing
American members, Phyllis and Jack Martin.

These publications will be stored with the rest of our library at

30, Oxford Street and can be seen weekdays by appointment up
to 7.00 pm (i.e. a convenient stopping-off place before a Glass

Circle meeting).

Concise History of Glass Represented in the Chrysler Museum
in Virginia.

Corning Glass Center. A Guide Book.

Dodsworth, Roger. Glass and Glassmaking. Shire Album #83

(Autographed).

Four Approaches to Glass: Asian and Western Masterpieces in

the Suntory Museum, Tokyo, 2001 (in Japanese).

Glass Art Society Journal, 1989.

Iwata – Contemporary Glass Art from Japan of Toschichi,

Iwata and Hisatoshi Iwata. Kemper Museum of Art, Kansas
City. 1997-1998.

Keberle, John. “A Touch of Glass” in Texas Highways,

December, 1987.

Kock, Jan & Torben, Soda. Glass, Glass Beads, and

Glassmaking in Northern India (Two copies, one in English,

one in Danish).

Libensky, S. & J. Bychtova. Exhibition Catalogue. Clara

Scrimini Gallery. Paris.

Littleton Collection, the. Asheville, N.C. Art Museum. 1993.

Maloney, F.J. Terrence. Glass in the Modern World.

Doubleday, NY. 1968.

Markkus Salon Lasia: The Glass of Marrku Salo. litala

Exhibition catalogue. Finnish Glass Museum, 1991.

New Glass Work #33. Spring 1988.

Neues Glas/New Glass.
Nordic Glass 2000 – Glass Without Boundaries. Denmark.

Ricke, Helmut. Neues Glas in Japan/New Glass in Japan.
Kunstmuseum, Dusseldorf, 1993.

Schluter, Mogens. Danske snapseglas fra 1850-1950. An

offprint.

Smith, Ray Winfeld. “History Revealed in Ancient Glass.” An

offprint from the National Geographic for September 1964.

Stankard, Paul. Nature in Glass – A Calendar for 1995.

Thirty Years of New Glass – a thin brochure on an exhibition

in Corning and Toledo, Ohio.

This is Glass. The Corning Glass Works, Corning, N.Y.
Woodward, H.W. Art, Feat and Mystery – The Story of the

Thomas Webb & Sons Glassmakers, Mark Moody Ltd.,

Stourbridge, 1978.

Whitefriars Rare Books Now Bound
The rare glass books presented by Dr. A. Baker in memory of
her grandfather, Harry J. Powell, of Whitefriars, as mentioned

in the last issue of GC News, have now been rebound and are

available for consultation at Sotheby’s Olympia during normal
working hours. To make an appointment to study these books

please ring Simon Cottle on 020 7293 5133.

Limpid Reflections. concluded

tions as sacrosanct is contained in an ill judged submission by

our founder, John Bacon, in
Circle of Glass Collectors Paper

No: 33,
of 1942. He severely criticised, mainly on the grounds

that older and better men had previously thought differently, the

`Connoisseur’
article by Captain Horridge and Barrington Hay-

nes setting out views on the
AMEN
Glasses that form the basis

of today’s understanding of these Glasses. If Bacon had lived
longer, he would surely have regretted penning such a criticism.

I was going to conclude by saying that the jury is still out on
this question of C.18
th
commercial production of lead Glass on

the Continent, but the matter has not really yet got to a trial. But

the search for evidence is probably going on at a rate that will
result in a high profile trial, ere too much longer.*
Glass Circle Summer Outing

14th September, 2002. Reply Reminder

This year’s Summer Outing will provide a privileged occasion
to study, at closer quarters than usual, the exceptionally fine

collection of glass at the Cecil Higgins Art Gallery, Bedford.
Details are given in the separate notices enclosed herewith.

Please note that if you wish to take part it is vital that you return

the reply slip by Friday 26th July.

Glass display at the Bedford Museum
We are pleased to state that the rumour that the Bedford

Museum was about to take its superb glass collection off display
has proved unfounded. It apparently started because the glass

gallery had to be closed and used as a temporary store when the

basement flooded as a result of the recent heavy rains.

Building Developments and the Glass Display at the

Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

The Director, Professor Duncan Robinson, has most kindly
accepted The Circle’s invitation to speak about the Museum’s

current building project – ‘The Courtyard Development’ – and to

discuss the future plans for gallery displays, including that of
the famous post-medieval glass collection, about which The

Circle has formally expressed concern.

This lecture will take place on December 17th, 2002.

Welcome to New Members:
Mr. and Mrs. F. D. Hopkins

Mr. Harald Leuba

Mr. P. Richardson

Mr. J. Sinclair and Mr. D. Lancaster

Your dates for the 2002 – 2003 Season of

Glass Circle Meetings.
All meetings will be held at the Artworkers Guild,

6 Queen’s Square, WC1. 6.30pm for 7.15pm.

Tuesday

8
th
October

2002

Thursday

14
th

November

2002

Tuesday

17
th
December

2002

Tuesday

4
th
February

2003

Thursday

13
th
March

2003

Tuesday

8
th
April

2003

Tuesday

6
th
May

2003

Tuesday

10t
h
June

2003

Thursday

16th October

2003

Tuesday

18th November

2003

Tuesday

9th December

2003

Glass Circle News; copy deadlines.
No. 92 Mid-August for publication in September

No. 93 Sept./Nov. for publication in December/January

Thanks to Rosemary Watts for proof-reading this issue.

Glass Bridge ?
According to the Cheekwood Botanic Garden and Museum of

Art, Nashville, Tennessee, some 500 years ago Murano glass-

blowers tried to build a
glass
bridge over the Grand Canal in

Venice. Sadly, they say, the sparkling gem collapsed into the
lagoon, not to be recreated…. until now by Siah Armajani

(pictured above on dry land!). Well! Nashville is a long way

from London so they probably haven’t seen the one in the
Science Museum which spans the third floor and has electronic

responses as you walk over it. But what I would really like to

know is whether the Muranese glassblowers really did try to

bridge the Grand Canal with glass? Is there any member who

knows the answer?

Page 5

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002

Silver-Mounted Claret
Jugs in the Kent Collection

By David Watts

I
n Shakespeare’s time earthenware jugs were generally pre-

ferred for claret, with silver for the very rich. The distinctly

English glass claret jug did not emerge until the last quarter of

the 18
th
century and seems to correspond with the emergence of

cut decoration enhanced by engraving, becoming particularly

dominant in the early 19
th
century. It was an expensive container

for an expensive beverage for the early clarets for these jugs
were heavily fortified and more like port wine. The drink we

know today did not emerge until the second half of the 19th

century.

By the 1830s the industry was looking for a way to revitalise
the jaded image of cut decoration. Silversmiths provided the

answer and the silver mounted claret jug made its first

appearance. Richard Kent, an American collector, has formed a

magnificent assemblage of these jugs and shares his achieve-
ment with the world on his web site, www.claretjugs.com. All

the examples shown here are selected from this site with his

permission to show the scope, form and decoration from the

point of view of a glass collector.

For movements like the Arts and Crafts, opposed to
industrialisation, it was an ideal symbol of the relationship

between man and his work. Such intimacy was never cheap and,
today, while an unmounted claret jug will normally fetch around

£500 going up to £900 with plated mounts, a silver mounted jug

will soar into five figures. The bidding for a silver mounted jug
in the form of a seal – the marine mammal – (see later), at an

auction in Bristol last September, brought gasps of amazement
when it topped out at £13,200 against the estimate of a mere

£500. Jugs with an historical association, fetch exceptional

prices. A pair (unmounted) given by Queen Alexandra, to her
grandson, Edward, Duke of York, who abdicated from being
King of England, was sold by Sotheby’s to a Los Angeles buyer

for $35,000; the estimate was $3,000.
Early, unmounted claret jugs are commonly thick and heavily

cut, a reflection of the introduction of steam cutting in the first

decades of the 19
th
century. Perhaps it was because this form of

decoration was beginning to lose favour that, in the early 1830s,
the silver-mounted jug, with particular appeal to the
Nouveau

Riche,
came on the scene. Perhaps, too, because of the price gap

they are always classified as silver and this may explain why
they have been unjustly overlooked for their importance as glass.

But, not only do they display some of the finest glass decoration

of the period, but also provided a lifeline in the survival of the
Stourbridge glass industry, in particular, at a difficult time

towards the end of the 19
th
century when they peaked in

popularity. Additionally, thanks to the silver mounts, they can

be accurately dated, often a problem for the glass collector.

The earliest jug in the collection is the askos form (a Roman

shape) in plain crystal (see cover picture) characterised by an
elegance of shape and simplicity of decoration. It is also an early

example of the use of matting glass, a treatment popular on

tableware about this time. In the 1840s coloured glass found

favour, particularly green and gold ruby, commonly undecorated

within a pierced silver mount (1), although amber and amethyst

were also used. As with wheel-engraved decoration, the vine

was a popular motif. Cased glass, recorded in the Richardson

and Stevens & Williams pattern books (Hadjamach,
British

Glass
pp. 47/8) from 1829, also made an appearance at this time.

Two Reiley & Storer mounted jugs in the collection are probably
Richardson glass (2). Heavily cut overlays (3) allowed a better
appreciation of the wine within as did plain crystal, both

engraved (4) or cut (5), to the end of the century.

In the 1880s two new forms emerged, commercial cameo,
achieved with acid and copper wheels rather than the laborious

use of chisels (6), and animal forms in clear glass (7). Both

forms were made by J. & J. Northwood’s factory in Wordley
(8). Commercial cameo had a relatively short life and, since it

Ruby glass Claret Jug encased in a naturalistic
basket of cast and chased silver fruiting vines by

Reily & Storer.
This style is said to have been popular from about

1830 onwards and was the artistic ‘antidote’ to the

more formal and rigid “Pompeian grandeur” of the

Neoclassical Revival period that preceded it.

1840. Ht. 11 3/4″.
A double overlay Claret Jug (blue and white over

a clear glass ground) cut
and

engraved with a

stylised meander and floral motif typical of Rich-
ardson’s or Bacchus & Sons. The silver mount

by Reily & Storer is embossed with trailing
foliage and a domed cover with flower finial and
loop handle terminating in a bacchic mask.

c.1845. Ht. 13 3/4″.
Blue overlay Claret Jug with panel and cut loop

motif, the glass and cutting probably English,

with fruiting vine silver mount by Charles Fox.
1841. Ht. 12 1/2″

Page 6

2002

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

Claret Jug with engraved festoon and foliage

Cut glass Claret Jug, by C. Edwards, London.

Commercial cameo glass Claret Jug, the silver

decoration, by W. & G. Sissons, Sheffield.

1891. Height 13″.

mount with garlands of roses and the spout a

1866 Ht. 111/2″.

cast head of Baccus by Fredrick Bradford

McCrea, London. 1884. Ht. 10 1/4″.

was
still expensive and gave no indication of

the contents within; it was most probably
used solely as an opulent a presentation piece.

On the other hand, novelty jugs in clear
crystal in the form of birds, fish, mammals

and even reptiles seemed to have achieved

great popularity and are well represented in

the Kent collection. Thomas Webb produced

a novelty jug in the form of a melon with
reddish to fawn veining over a white ground
(9). It is an extraordinary achievement of

glass technology and the silver mount is
respectfully minimal.

The decline of commercial cameo as the 19
th

century drew to a close caused concern to
W.O. Bowen, manager of J. & J. Northwood,

not to lose his skilled force of engravers. In

consultation with John Northwood, he came
up with the new invention of Intaglio, cutting

with small stone wheels, but in the manner of copper wheel

engraving. It was not an easy transition for the engravers and a

stronger lathe was required to withstand the extra weight of the

stone wheels. At that time Northwood had become Director of
Art and Works Manager of Stevens and Williams; one of their

workers, Joshua Hodgetts, mastered the technique and became

one of its greatest exponents. The silver mounted intaglio cut

overlay (green on clear) claret jug (cover picture) is a good
example of his work, combining deep cutting with the versatility

of the copper wheel. No less skilled, though, was John Orchard,
at the same firm (10). Again the silver mounts are very respectful

of the engravers’ talents. Incidentally, “Tag” as it became known,
is the technical basis of rock crystal engraving that is then highly

polished, at which Orchard was exceptional, and is why Stevens

and Williams became such great exponents of it. However, a

silver mounted jug in this form remains elusive although

Broadfield House has fine unmounted examples.

As today, a new century invited a new direction and we conclude

with a design by Charles Robert Ashbee (11), letting the glass,

by Whitefriars, speak for itself supported by an elegant but

correspondingly simple flowing silver mount. The Arts and

Crafts movement, in the form of Christopher Dresser, had
presaged the design approach some 20 years earlier (12) but it

took the best part of a generation to really penetrate the public

psyche and mass production another generation later for it to

become a commercial reality.
J. & J. Northwood design for a Thomas Webb & Son’s

crystal “Bird” jug with a double cameo Claret Jug in the form

wing-shaped handle and with a of a canteloupe melon. The

silver-mounted head.

mount is by John Grinsell &

From:
John Northwood
by John Sons, Birmingham.

Registration mark No. 6399
beneath the thumb piece.

1888, Ht. 7″.

This short review highlights a few of the fine jugs in the Kent
collection but you are recommended to look up the site to
examine the full range, illustrated in colour, mostly British, of

this stunning assemblage. Often they are counterparts of solid

silver equivalents but with the unique difference that hand-made
and decorated glass brings to a piece. There really is no other

vessel in the world quite like it. *

Left. Ruby cased Jug by Stevens and Williams. After a design by John

Orchard. Mount by Heath & Middleton, London. 1890. Ht: 11″.

Centre. A
Whitefriars
Guild of Handicraft Ltd.

Jug. Designed by Charles

Robert Ashbee , London. Cover incised 5070. 1903. Ht. 8 1/4″.
Right.
Arts and Crafts silver-mounted claret Jug designed by Christopher

Dresser, 1881, Maker’s mark of Hukin & Heath, London, 1885.
The silver engraved with the Monogram “GN” beneath a Count’s coronet.

P.O.D.R. Number. Ht: 8 1/4″.

Crystal Claret Jug in the form of a Northwood II, FSGT, Mark and

monkey. Silver mount by Richard Moody, Stourbridge, p. 110,

Hodd. London, 1893. Ht. 11″.

1953.

Page 7

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002

410144ilhilf CAVC
– 4
144110,CfC G(Affit/IPTkc

by Nickola Smith

A
A

view of Mr. Hypan’s

Na
–

Gar
family
glassworks
in central

Myanmar (more familiarly,
Rangoon
in Burma)

provided one of the most singular of a
whole

series of unusual

experiences on a recent holiday in that
wonderfully

friendly and

picturesque, yet wretchedly governed
country.

Parking in a side street in the city centre, we passed through a

gap in the fence and down a dusty path under a
canopy

of tall

jungle trees and creepers. On our right was a shoulder high
mound of builders bags disgorging quantities of broken bottles,

jars, window glass etc. Even allowing for the extreme
climate,

the thick coating of leaves and debris suggested
that recycling

was not a priority here but cut feet might be a
regular

hazard.

Mr. Hpan himself, a lively gent with a real twinkle in
his eye

and a rare mastery of frequently incomprehensible English,
welcomed us in his office/showroom – a classic Burmese

building, timber-framed, clad in woven bamboo panels and
roofed with rows of ’tiles’ of neat cut palm leaves.

Some distance beyond, the appearance of the glasshouse was
positively medieval and if some of the conditions recently

observed in the north Czech Republic would give a health and
safety officer nightmares, here he would not have been able to

sleep at all! The single small dome furnace we saw standing on
a raised earth bank was brick built but now also clad in sheets
of corrugated iron. Mr. Hpan was grateful that the recent

government provision of a gas supply made a consistent tempera-

ture in the furnace easier to regulate. The men worked in pairs

with long, western style, blowing irons and a young woman was

summoned to hold the mould as and when required. Their

ingenious method of cutting the rim of a blown vessel was to
insert the top while still hot into the neck of a cold glass cup of

slightly wider dimension. A quick twist of the pontil rod and a

clean break was achieved – this way they coped without a cutting
machine. The rims were later polished by three ladies on a

treadle-operated sanding pad with a trickle of water keeping the

sand moist. The annealing chamber was still wood-fired. Goods
spent 24 hours at a temp of 500°C ,then the fire was doused and
the glass left to cool ‘for as long as it takes’. The metal itself

was a fairly heavy soda glass and its chief ingredient, sand taken

from the extensive sand banks in the Irrawaddy river. The owner

assured us the sand was of such purity it needed no further
cleansing. While we were there the glassblowers were concen-

trating on an order of beer mugs for the German
market

and

they certainly appeared almost imperfection free. Mr.
Hpan told

us with pride that he had supplied drinking glasses to
all the

major tourist hotels in Yangon city.

But the truly amazing aspect of the Nagar glassworks
was

neither the works itself nor its situation. The winding path

between glasshouse and office which meandered between the

trees and stretched for 50 metres at least, was hedged in on both

sides by literally thousands of finished items of glassware;
mounds of assorted lampshades, oil lamp columns, scientific

vessels, witchballs and much more beside. Some was packed in

straw, most heaped higgledy-piggedly and exposed to the

elements – a true Aladdin’s cave of glass. So
much

for stock

control
or rotation! What one would have done for an hour or

so to
pick
things over and a van to transport one’s findings away.

No
wonder
Mr. Hpan was popular with exporters of oil lamp

globes and
columns, and glass domes that satisfy the antique

market in the West. We, however, had to drag ourselves away

and be happy with small glass mementoes from the sales table

suitable for tucking into in our flight bags.

Back in the shop our companions were distracted from the

glassware by an
ancient
Vauxhall car. Now in a sorry state, this

vintage model filled with rubbish and measled with rust spots

presided behind the
counter.
Mr. Hpan’s father had purchased

it in 1937. It was a
symbol
of his prospering business and much

envied. Its last outing
was
fourteen years ago when it took the

family to a university graduation ceremony. Assurances that it
was still roadworthy if only the Government would grant a

licence were greeted with
some
scepticism.

Nagar Glassworks has been a
family

concern for three genera-

tions and most of the workforce
had long

term connections with

it too, but Mr. Hpan was not
optimistic

about the future. The

younger generation were no
longer prepared

to undertake such

arduous work; they were hoping to
acquire

IT skills and make

a career in front of a computer screen
and in

an air-conditioned

office. But even when or if the
glassworks

folds Mr. Hpan

should be able to obtain a living for
some time

to come from

the heaps of ware accumulated along
that pathway. *

Book Review
by F.P. Lole

Bonnie Prince Charlie and the making of a

myth; a study in portraiture 1720 – 1892
by Robin Nicholson
(2002) 28.5 x 22.5 cm. 156 pages. ISBN 0-8387-5495-3

Price £45.

A
s its title suggests, this book is mainly about the portraits

of Prince Charles Edward Stuart; indeed the ‘blurb’ notes

that: “The book is primarily art historical, …”. Nonetheless, as

one would expect from the principal curator of the Drambuie

Collection. it touches on Jacobite Glass, having fourteen index
references and devoting in aggregate perhaps three or four full

pages, and a couple of pictures, to the subject. The main theme

of the book is the popularisation of the iconography of Prince
Charles, which almost entirely took the form of tartan

representations, as opposed to the ‘court’ iconography, which

never used tartan images.

The value of this work for Jacobite Glass is that it helps resolve
two aspects of the portrait Glasses that were fundamentally

questioned in Peter Francis’ critique. Firstly it clearly demon-

strates the climate of demand for tartan representations of Prince

Charles, and secondly it helps to establish the sources of the
images used for the tartan portrait Glasses. The source of the

image for the rare ‘Augustan’ portrait Glasses has long known
to be the Lemoyne bust of 1746, probably through the medium

of four medals with this profile, struck between 1748 and 1753.

Page 8
At the latter end of the Jacobite period, the coloured

enamel

portrait Glasses derive from Robert Strange’s ‘Highlander’
print;

this print Nicholson fairly convincingly dates to the 1770s, a

time already suggested by Churchill in 1956 as the period when

the Glasses themselves were produced. But the source of the
image for the mass of wheel engraved tartan portrait Glasses has

never been well established, although the ‘Highlander’ print has

often been wrongly cited. Nicholson considers the Tartan images

available shortly after 1745, mainly prints, and seems to estab-
lish a generic group as the inspiration. Copying of these images,
however, is never so exact or consistent as with the ‘Augustan’

or the enamel portraits (although one must except the enamel
specimen in the Swansea museum, which is a very definite ‘odd

man out’).

Nicholson remains slightly querulous about the authenticity of

Jacobite Glass, commenting, in particular, that he finds it strange

that so few Jacobite Glasses were displayed at the 1889
‘Royal

House of Stuart’
Exhibition, although his apparent comment that

there were only two is misleading, for, in fact, nine Glasses were

displayed there. This notice is not the place to explore the

subject, nor are we told whether he considers all the Glasses in
his care at Drambuie to be authentic. Despite the subject matter

being largely pictorial rather than Glass, and the art historical

language sometimes requiring the OED to be at hand, this is one

of those “interdisciplinary studies” that all who spoke at our

1996 V &
A
conference on Judging Jacobite Glass agreed were

essential to the study and authentication of Jacobite Glass. *

2002

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

Shades of Red Part II. Gold Ruby Glass
by
David Watts

Summary of a lecture held at The Artworkers Guild on February 14th, 2002.
The hosts were Mrs. J. Benson, Mrs. A. Ginige and Mr. D. Woolston.

Most would consider gold ruby glasses to be the true ruby glass.

Gold, its use going back more than six millenia, is, without

question, the most exciting and evocative metal in the world. In
terms of ownership it is the substance of desire. And it is this

desire that provides much of the driving force behind the

development of gold ruby glass throughout its history.

To make ruby glass requires a soluble form of gold. The earliest
known piece is the Lycurgus cup, its suggested date AD 300-

400. Herein lies the first challenge as the cup dates well before

the earliest known synthesis of Aqua Regia, the only known acid

solvent for gold. The first synthesis of its constituent acids,
hydrochloric and nitric, is attributed to an alchemist, Jabir ibn

Haiyan (AD b. 721 in Kufa, present day Iraq, d. 803, known in

the West as Geber, the Father of Chemistry). Possible explana-

tions of how the Lycurgus cup was made without Aqua Regia

were considered, including the use of gold leaf, gold/mercury

amalgam and gold/antimony compounds, all of which were
known to the ancients and might have arisen as part of the well-

developed gold industry. It also explains why gold ruby was so

slow on the scene compared with the copper reds. Only a few

other shards of gold ruby are known from this early period. The
transparent ruby colour is due to a fine particulate (colloidal)

form of the metal. The glass, initially yellow, becomes red when
reheated, changing to blue and eventually brown (spoiled ruby)

as the gold particles get larger.

The earliest exploitation of Aqua Regia is attributed to another
Iranian chemist, Mohammad Ibn Zakariya al-Razi (AD 864-

930). Al Razi describes making a gold ruby glass specifically
using potash, soda ash and borax. He is clearly not influenced

by knowledge derived from whoever made the Lycurgus cup
which was made using pure soda from the Egyptian salt lakes

without potash or borax. A possible example of this type of ruby

is the 9
th
– 10
th
century mounted dish from San Marco, Venice,

exhibited in the CMOG 2001 exhibition,
Glass of the Sultans.

In the modern world, collectable gold ruby glass begins with

Johann Kunckel in
c.

1679 and if you have a few thousand

pounds to spare it is not difficult to own a piece from this period.

As a practising glassmaker (born 1630-38 at Hutten, Schleswig-

Holstein, Germany), Kunckel’s achievement was to translate into

commercial reality knowledge on this subject developed from
the early years of the century by a succession of alchemists.

Although Neri
(L’Arte Vetraria,
1612) knew about gold ruby,

we have no pieces that can be ascribed to this date.

The ability to colour glass red is an extremely sensitive test for

gold; for this reason it was important to alchemists bent on
transmuting base metals. In England, in the sixteenth century,

Henry VII is said to have outlawed the alchemical production

of gold. This may explain why the next stage in the emergence

of gold ruby
glass
took place on the continent, although even

Sir Isaac Newton and Robert Boyle, “the father of modern

chemistry”, clearly accepted the theory of alchemical
transmutation. The first significant advance was made by An-

dreas Libavius (1560-1616). His most notable discovery from
the point of view of ruby glass was the manufacture of tin

(stannous) chloride from a mixture of tin and corrosive sublimate

(mercuric chloride). Stannous chloride is a key component of

Purple of Cassius. He is also said to have made ruby glass by

using gold leaf although the actual colour achieved seems open

to question. (Incidentally, Roy Newton has dispelled the myth

that gold ruby can be made by simply adding a solid gold coin

to a pot of molten glass. He talked to Stourbridge glassmakers
who had seen this done, but only to impress visitors to the

factory, not to make ruby glass). More important is Johann
Glauber (1647) Had he been a glassmaker rather than pursuing

the lost cause of transmutation, gold ruby glass could have been

his for the making. For, not only do his writings describe ruby

glass made from dissolved gold in Aqua Regia but he also

recognises the value of adding tin, the basis of what we now call
Purple of Cassius.

It is probable that both Cassius, a medical

doctor, and Kunckel initially learnt about it from Glauber’s

writings. Glauber, incidentally, mentions that gold and silver

together impart a green colour to “Venice glass”, interesting in

the context of the Lycurgus cup that also depends on this

combination for its opaque green colour by reflected light.

Kunckel’s ruby glass was a typical potash glass and depended

on the presence of tin, provided by the
Purple of Cassius,
for

forming the orange-red colour which was developed by

reheating. By the end of the century Kunckel’s ruby was being

manufactured in quantity by glasshouses in southern Germany,

Saxony and Bohemia. This is the source of most of the ruby for

the collectors’ market. As those who went on the Czech trip will
know, ruby glass was superbly exploited there in the early years

of the le century. The first Bohemian factory to produce ruby

glass (rubine), including that decorated with metallic gold
fragments, is in Juliovka, located at Marenice. It was founded in

1687 by Julius Franz, the owner of the Zakupy estate and whose

castle we visited. Today, as we also saw, Chribska uses gold
ruby extensively in its coloured wares.

The method crossed to England and, in 1691, Robert Hooke(s)
and Christopher Dodsworth were granted a 14-year patent to

make ruby glass of all sorts. None of this glass, if
ever
made, is

now recognised and it may be that it is all mis-attributed to the

continent. Maybe, too, it simply did not catch on. At that time

attention in England was focussed on Ravenscroft’s new lead

crystal glass whose gleaming bubble-free clarity, exploited in

new heavy flowing designs, contrasted sharply with the off-color

bubble-ridden continental product, ruby or otherwise.

Not until 1755 do we encounter gold ruby glass again in England
in the shape of a patent awarded to Mayer Oppenheim. His first

patent, which I now think has a chunk missing, and a second in

1770, describe complex processes for preparing gold ruby glass

essentially based on Glauber’s writings. Examples of his glass
include ruby hanging lamps in The Corning Museum of Glass

and a lamp and bowl in the Victoria and Albert Museum. But

there is nothing to suggest it was a spectacular commercial

success as he became bankrupt in 1777 and spent three years in

a debtors prison before moving to France. Ruby threads appear
in many colour twist glasses and are attributed to Stourbridge.

After this the scene goes quiet again on both sides of the channel
until the early decades of the 19″ century. Then goblets appear

with gold ruby threads alongside the cut and engraved glass of
the Biedermeier period, perhaps in response to Egermann’s new

copper ruby overlay and stained glass. We tend to give all such

pieces a Bohemian attribution but other European countries had

a modest but significant output. In Croatia, the Osradek factory,
was particularly prolific and examples of their work can be seen

in the Arts and Crafts Museum in Zagreb. In England, the first

gold ruby in this period seems to have been made by Richardsons

prior to repeal of the duty in 1845 (c.f. the silver-mounted claret

jug no. 1, page 6.) and soon became widely exploited with the
repeal of the glass duty in 1845. Gold, dissolved in Aqua Regia

readily forms a ruby in lead crystal without the addition of Purple

of Cassius although it tends to give a more plum colour
compared with the non-lead continental product which shades

orange due to the presence of tin. Thomas Webb’s
Alexandrite

exploits this effect with glass shaded yellow (from uranium),
through red to blue, obtained by selective heating of the glass.

The first gold ruby glass made in America, is attributed to
William Leighton at the New England Glass Company, before

1850. A spectacular triple overlay vase in gold-ruby, green and

white over crystal is in the Corning Museum of Glass. This

covered vase, 30 inches tall, is thought to be by the New England

Glass Co. and is dated to 1845. America pioneered the produc-

tion of shaded gold ruby glass with such popular colours as

Amberina and Burmese, soon to be produced under licence by
Thomas Webb & Sons. The century ended in a blaze of colour
and the lecture concluded with examples of its diversity.*

Page 9

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002

English Drinking Glass 1660-1700 by Colin Brain

Report of a meeting held at The Artworkers Guild on 16th April 2002. The
hosts on this occasion were Mrs. D. Daugherty, Mr. R. Hardy, Dr. G. Seddon
and Mr. T. Udall.

The second half of the 17t
h
century saw England rise from a

third-rate glass-manufacturing nation to a world leader. It is also

notable as being something of a ‘black hole’ in our knowledge
of English drinking glass history. This talk, based on over thirty
years of research by Colin and his wife Sue, endeavoured to

partly fill this void by giving a brief overview of the drinking

glass styles, the drinks for which they were used and the industry

that produced them.

The restoration of Charles II in 1660 bought an end to the
Commonwealth spawned by the civil war, but did not diminish

the legacy of ideas that had resulted from this cataclysmic

upheaval. In fact, his patronage of the Royal Society, coupled
with the continental influences bought back by his returning

court, served to create an environment for radical change. Table
glass, already a ‘high-tech’ industry, quickly profited from

growing demand fuelled by fashion and industrialisation fuelled

by new science.

Prior to 1660 there were only two common types of drinking

glass, wine and beer; ale was not then made with hops and

references imply it was frequently drunk hot. However this soon

changed with specialist wineglasses being introduced for sack,

German wines and brandy. There are few period illustrations
of drinking glass use, but these suggest that several drinkers
shared a glass. Some excavated fragments have period repairs,

suggesting glass was still relatively scarce.

Two main stem designs were in use at the start of the period,
‘cigar’ stems and those with mould-blown lion-mask motives,

almost reflecting the conventional ’roundhead’ and ‘cavalier’
stereotypes and remaining essentially unchanged for over fifty

years. Most excavated examples appear to be of English origin,

but noticeably inferior to the rarer imported Venetian glasses,

both in the colour and clarity of the glass ‘metal’ and in the

fineness of the details. These glasses invariably have strength-

ening mereses at the stem-bowl and stem-foot junctions. Docu-

ments show the continued import of considerable quantities of

glass, particularly relatively low-cost glasses from France and
the low-countries, whilst the English industry concentrated on

the more lucrative high-end domestic and export markets.

The earliest known indication of change is the orders of glass
from Venice by the London glass seller John Greene. Not only

do these include glasses for the new types of drink, but they also

represent entirely new styles. It is the first time we have

evidence for a merchant designing English glasses instead of a
glassmaker at the chair. In the talk, examples were shown of
transition glasses and excavated fragments that matched John

Greene’s designs. Although virtually all the glasses ordered by

Greene from Venice retain the strengthening mereses of the

earlier glasses, many contemporary English products start to
dispense with one or both of them. Greene’s orders stopped

when lead glass was introduced in Britain.

Preserved with Greene’s Venetian letters are his designs for
`English glass’. The name taper stem has been coined for this

type, reflecting the tapered shape of the stem. As glassmakers
were then applying seals to glasses, it is no surprise that

examples of all but one known type of seal occur on this type
of stem. Seven types of seal have been identified and two more

are known from documents, implying that virtually all drinking-

glass-makers used seals. Whilst later glasses, including the

classic inverted baluster-stemmed and plain-stem trumpet-bowl
glasses, can be seen as developments of these taper stems,

evidence was also shown for links to other earlier types. The

Dutch influence on styles, linked to William and Mary from
1688, is as important as the better-known German influence

associated with George 1″ in 1714. In particular, wrythening

becomes common from 1689, although it re-emerges four or five

times during the next century and a half.
An example of a classic ‘Anglo-Venetian’ glass was shown, but

Colin argued that the evidence available pointed to this being a
glass from the 1860s, not from the 1680s — an area where more

research is clearly required.

The second part of the talk addressed glass making in the late 17
th

century. The alchemist symbol for lead glass (shown below) was
introduced and linked by Glauber’s text to ‘the perfection of

metals’ through its use as a flux.

b)
,

X

Alchemist’s symbol for ‘Lead Glass’.

Glauber writing in 1652 was well aware of ‘lead glass made
of…flints and …minium (lead oxide)’, but dismissed it as

unsatisfactory. However, he does say that by mixing this high-

lead glass with ‘Venice’ glass, good results could be achieved.

In glass made this way lead oxide is present as a network former,

rather than as a network modifier. Analysis of glass by UV-
fluorescence can distinguish between these two types of lead

bonds. Results from late-17
th
century ‘flint glasses’, including a

raven-head sealed glass, suggest that they were made using this
process published by Glauber. Glauber also developed a new
furnace design. Records show that he worked in the Rozengracht

glass house, Amsterdam, where one of the glassmakers that

founded the crystal glass house in Stockholm came from. There
are also links between the Rozengracht and the `Jacobspital’
glasshouse in Nijmegen and through this site to Da Costa, credited

with bringing the invention of ‘flint-glass’ to England and Odacio,

credited with bringing flint glass making to Ireland, both in the

early 1670s.

The discovery of a 17
th
century glass house at Caine in Wiltshire

provides evidence that wood rather than coal was used as a glass-

making fuel and arguments were presented that much ‘flint-glass’
was initially melted this way. This may explain the lack of

evidence for the use of closed glass making pots before the very

end of the 17
th

century.*

There is more material on 17th century English drinking glass on Colin’s web

site: www.interalpha.net/customer/cbrain

Glass Trade Cards & Bills

In the autumn of 2001 the Bodleian Library held an exhibition of
trade cards and bills, covering the period 1654 to 1860, held in

their John Johnson collection, and entitled
‘A Nation of

Shopkeepers’.
A well-illustrated catalogue of the same title not

only discusses the items exhibited, but also provides useful essays
about such ephemera. There were fourteen items concerned with

the Glass Trades, none of them from the well known, but

restricted, group that has already been widely published in the

Glass literature. One of the more interesting was a trade bill from
William Parker & Son, of 1788, who presented themselves as

`Proprietors of Argand’s Patent Lamp & etc.,’
with the Parker

name in a very subsidiary position. This reflects the enormous
economic importance of the lamp developed by the Swiss distiller,

Ami Argand, in 1784. Unfortunately for both Argand and Parkers,

Argand’s British partner, Mathew Boulton, carelessly allowed the

patent to lapse, so that pirated versions of the lamp rapidly became
available. Nonetheless, the fact that Parkers presented this as their

main business, portraying as subsidiary their other Glass concerns,

including their chandeliers to which Martin Mortimer devotes two
chapters of his book on chandeliers, indicates how much the

mainstay of the lighting trade had rapidly become oil lighting,
leaving chandeliers and candle lighting as the cream on the top

of their main business. One of the illustrations of the Cries of

London, ‘Buy my fine Singing Glasses’
originated as early as

1687, and a useful warning is implicit in the coloured 1790s trade

card of
‘Hayward, Glazier and Painter’

of London, who appears

in the directories as both a Glazier and a Glass Cutter; clearly his
cutting was confined to sheets of window glass, and not the to
the decoration of vessels which is how one normally regards the

term ‘Glass Cutter’. The catalogue may be ordered from the

Bodleian Library, price £17.50 + p & p. (Tel: 01865 277047)

F.P.L.

Page 10

2002

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

A Look At Irish Glass
by Simon Cottle and David Watts

A
Ithough Irish glass manufacture didn’t come

.L.into prominence until 1777 when an exten-

sion of the glass duty drove many glassmakers
out of England, it still falls squarely within the

traditional collector’s period although dating of
individual glasses to within 20 years in the early

19th century can be difficult. However, while for
English glass the focus is upon wine glasses, for

Irish glass, with the exception of commemorative

engraved pieces, it is mostly everything but the
wine glass. This is mainly because there is no

clear distinction between the products of the two

countries although Ireland did produce some

distinct shapes and engraved designs. With other
tableware clear Irish characteristics emerge.

These are well represented in the 71 lots of
Sotheby’s Irish sale of 16′
h

May, 2002.

This was composed as follows:-

Drinking glasses
6

Footed bowls
8

Plain bowls and dishes
10

Jugs
9

Decanters
22

Wine coolers
5

Salts and cruets
5

Misc.
6
Four Drinking Glasses

(Left to Right)

1.
Goblet with barrel-shaped bowl engraved with crossed barley ears and shamrock. Star-cut

foot. 19th century. Ht. 15.2 cm.

2.
Goblet with a band of diamonds between prismatic cut borders. Star-cut foot.

c.1820. Ht. 13.8 cm.

3.
Goblet with a panel-cut ovoid bowl above a narrow band of strawberry diamonds and triple

annular knop.
c.
1830. Ht. 15 cm.

4.
Goblet engraved with alternating bands of rosettes and stars. Lemon squeezer foot.

c. 1830. Ht. 15 cm.

Far Left.
A mixing glass

engraved with an Irish

Harp crest within a stylised

floral scroll above a band of

prismatic cutting and cut

panels. Star-cut base.

c.
1800. Ht. 10.6 cm.

Left.
A large rummer , the

bucket bowl cut with alter-

nating arched panels of
raised strawberry dia-

monds and fine-cut
diamonds.

c. 1820. Ht. 21.2 cm.

A list of Irish glasshouses from this period, with their dates, is

shown below. It follows that the stated date of a piece has to
fall within those of the manufacturer if this is known. Thus the
Waterloo decanter shown overpage could be later, but not

earlier, than the c.1815 indicated.

Dublin
Richard Williams and Co.
1764-1827/9

Charles Mulvaney,
et al.

Mainly a

dealer but said to manufacture.
1785-1846

Thomas & John Chebsey
1786/-1798

B
elfast

Benjamin Edwards
1776-1812

Belfast Glass Works
1803-1840

Smylie & Co. (bottles/windows)
1786-1800

John Wheeler/Shamrock G/hse
1823-1825/1825-1850

Waterford
Waterford G/hse.

Penrose/Gatchell
1783-1851

Cork
Cork Glass Co.
1783-1818

Waterloo Glass House Co.
1815-1835

Terrace Glass Works
1818-1841

From Phelps Warren,
Irish Glass,

1970.

Some lots were sold in pairs, sets or groups but the emphasis
away from the wine glass is striking. The six lots of drinking

glasses, one a mixer, are shown above. These are general

purpose and might have been used for water, wine, punch or

spirits.

The houses of the owners of this glass were large and spacious
with substantial furniture. A polished sideboard with a central

fruit bowl, typically with a turnover rim or of a canoe shape
(pictures right), flanked by a pair of decanters must have been

a common sight, combining restrained opulence with traditional

hospitality. All the glass in the sale, but for one rare amber
inkwell, was of plain crystal, typical of the period. The decanters
Turnover-rim bowl with triple-knop stem and oval moulded fluted foot.

Cut with flat facets and raised diamonds. This and the bowl below are
typical Irish shapes.

c.
1790 Ht. 31.5 cm

Canoe-shaped bowl with scalloped rim on a single knop and lemon
squeezer foot. Flat cut with rosettes and stylised leaves.

C. 1800. Ht. 30.3 cm.

Page 11

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002

are thinly blown, light for their size (beware of heavier
reproductions), into dip moulds that formed a characteristic ring

of fine flutes and sometimes, as with some of the examples here,
with the manufacturer’s name set into the base. Many are then

wheel engraved with swags or with vesicas (see cover picture)

or stylised flowers (right) unless they have been specially

commissioned. The enclosed areas are often filled with fine

cross-hatching. Waterford glass, as is now well known, is not

blue (beware of continental forgeries) but Cork glass often has

a distinct blue-grey tinge. One assumes that these decanters

would have been used for wine although one square-bodied

decanter (far right) is clearly intended for something stronger.

All the other glass is quite thickly blown and heavily cut. The

jugs shown here for water and milk, or cream – and the country
has plenty of all of these – are good examples. On a white linen
tablecloth they would twinkle in the candlelight, shutting out any

gloomy Irish weather. The earlier glass is flat cut on the treadle
lathe with each side of a V-shaped groove being separately
formed. Some of the cutting on the fruit bowls is remarkable in

this respect. But much of the slightly later glass, in what might

be called Regency styles, carries the indication of power cutting,
perhaps water-power rather than steam as became common in

England at this time. Each groove is made by a single cut with

the wheel. This is most noticeable in the patterns on the jugs

with endless bands of step (prismatic) cutting, particularly round

the lip. Few rims escape treatment, either the common scallop,
used on three of the jugs shown here, or complex vandyke*

(below left) or fan (below right) shapes, regions that commonly

suffer small chips from use.

Unless objectionable to the eye such chips have little effect on
value and preferably should not have been subject to some form

of repair. The cut is polished on the wheel with a variety of

fine abrasives and this usually leaves characteristic uneven areas
on the flat surfaces, particularly with flat cutting, easily seen

when the surface is made to reflect the light. In places, the

roughness of the original cutting may show through, particularly

near the sharp edge of the cut. These are quite distinct charac-

teristics from acid polishing that dates from around the end of

the 19
th
century and is part of the charm of early cut glass. Note,

incidentally, that jugs have the handles attached from the top
rather than the base as became the rule later in the century.

Cut condiment sets were always popular; indeed, salts in the
form of miniature canoe bowls on lemon squeezer feet remain

so to this day. More special are the pair shown below, one for

pickle or dry mustard, the other for oil or vinegar. The cutting,

well executed, is of typical Irish design.

A pair of cruet bottles with extensive prismatic cutting around central
lenses and star cutting to the base and stopper

19. century, Ht. 14.5 cm.
Left. A Waterloo Co. decanter, target stopper, with an engraved band

of stylised flowers and leaves and tied ribbons above moulded flutes.

c.1815, Ht. 26 cm.
Right Square magnum decanter and star-cut mushroom stopper. Cut

with bands of fine diamonds and facets between prismatic cut lines.

C.19th, Ht. 28 cm.

Two thickly blown jugs with prismatic cutting round the neck. That on
the left is ambitiously decorated with a pillar-cut body intersected by
lunar slices, scalloped rim and slice-cut handle, while that on the right
has the more common panel cutting and a thumb grip at the top of

the handle.
19th. century, Hts. 23 and 21 cm.

Two thickly blown cream jugs, extensively treated with scalloping and
prismatic cutting. That on the left with a band of panel cutting above

diamond facets and a star-cut base. The jug on the right has pillar moulding.

Both have the sides of the handles flattened with a single slice.

c.
1820, Ht. 16cm (left) and

a

1825-30, Ht.13.8 cm

Similar treatment to that shown here is given to a wide range
of other Irish glass:- finger bowls, dishes, celeries, butter dishes
and stands, piggins, covered urns, candlesticks, inkwells and
even whisky measures and pocket flasks. Vases, on the other

hand, are not that common. Perhaps someone can tell us why? *

* So called after the style of collar frequently depicted in portraits by Van
Dyke, forming an article of fashionable dress in the 18th century. OED.

Acknowledgements to Sotheby’s Olympia for permission to reproduce
pictures from their catalogue.

Page 12

Picture courtesy of Jeanette Hayhurst

2002

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

AROOKID THE FAIRS
WITH
1-15r.12
,
-/
FOX

T
he Sunday Spring Glass Fair in Woking had a steady stream

of visitors and business looked to be reasonably brisk. This

fair seems to have established itself and now provides a wide

variety of glassware. C.18th drinking glasses, particularly from

the second half of the century were well in evidence. I noticed,

too, several examples of Victorian spirit measures on more than

one stand. These seem to be popular (picture centre top) There

was an eager crowd around the bookstall, and both new and out

of print books seemed to be in demand.

I made a special journey to the Bath

Antiques & Decorative Arts Fair which

is organised by dealers in the Avon area.

This was very much a decorative arts and

country items fair, but I found one glass-

only exhibitor, Margaret Hopkins of

Bath, who was showing a good selection

of mid to late C.18th drinking glasses as
well as jelly glasses and later glassware.

On a nearby stand I discovered an attrac-
tive good size heavy baluster wine and an

unusual shape Irish decanter moulded on

the base “Penrose Waterford”, c 1800.

My next fair was the BADA, held in a huge marquee in the

grounds of the former Duke of Yorks Barracks, Kings Road, in
London. This fair never ceases to amaze me with its variety of

fine and rare pieces of furniture, pictures, china and glassware
to name but a few of the wide range of categories on offer.

Several of our dealer members were present. The choice of glass

was extensive. Jeanette Hayhurst was particularly pleased to

display a good selection of interesting C.18
th

drinking glasses

recently acquired from private sources, as well as a number of

attractively engraved C.19
th

decanters and other glassware from

this period, including tumblers diamond point engraved by Hagg

of Kenilworth. Mark West was also showing a wide range of
glass, including C.20th Art Deco, while C & L Burman had

finely cut Regency period
glassware. Elsewhere I spotted a

few reverse paintings on glass, but
less than usual; several furniture

stands had exceptional period mir-
rors along with superb examples of

Regency period candelabra. All in

all, this fair exudes luxury, but do
not be put off as there is much in

the way of good honest examples
of competitively-priced antique

and period glassware.

In May I went to the Sunday Glass

Fair at the Motorcycle Museum.
Over the years this twice-yearly

fair has established itself as a

“must go to event” in most glass

collectors’ diaries. Meeting up
with many old friends, members and dealers alike was again a

happy social occasion. There is always a buzz — the excitement

of the chase — “will I, wont I?” find the bargain of the year, or

perhaps that special rarity, which each one of us hankers after

to add as the highlight to our collection. This time round the fair

was spread over the three ground floor rooms; the basement was

closed. Several dealers were not present, but I knew that a few
of the usual exhibitors were standing at other general antique

fairs that overlapped with this specialised one. That said, the
quantity, range and general quality of glassware on offer was

such that few, if any, visitors could have been disappointed.
There was something for everyone, although I have to admit that

Roman glass was not seen. (Indeed it rarely is; anyone interested
in this area of glass collecting should seek out fairs specialising

in antiquities. Roman and earlier glass can be found at some

fairs that feature coins and medals.) Several stands were showing

C.18th drinking glasses, although most of those on offer were

from the second half of the century. I saw a large mushroom
knopped baluster glass contrasted with a small acorn knopped
one — both great recognised rarities to collectors of this period.

On the same stand was a collection of Anglo-Dutch (Newcastle)

engraved glasses. It was good to see these — often very elegant

— glasses coming to the fore; I have to agree with those who

now say that the collecting again of these glasses is long overdue

as they now represent in most cases excellent value for money,

and much of the engraving found on them is well executed and

of historic interest. (picture centre bottom, courtesy of Jeanette
Hayhurst). Good paperweights from the classic C.19th French
glassmakers to other later examples, in-

cluding fine modern American weights,
were shown by Sweetbriar, one of the

country’s leading specialist dealers; a
modern Northern paperweight maker

was also surrounded by eager collectors.

I spotted numerous Sowerby nursery
rhymne pieces, including a few of the

more unusual examples. On Alan Sedge-

wick’s stand were several shelves of

Carnival glass along with pressed glass.

Colourful pieces from the Art Nouveau

period were displayed on several stands.

Mid to late C.19th glassware was also

well represented, especially by John

Stallebrass a specialist dealer in this period. As well as several

attractive epergnes I particularly liked a low gilt metal and glass

table centre piece shown by Lin Holroyd (this, I have since
learnt, is winging its way to Japan). I also noticed, as I went

round, examples of Stourbridge glassware, such as ink wells,

decorated with paperweight canes in the base and stopper.
However, the dramatic rise in price of glass dumps or door stops
in shades of green with silver foil flower style inclusions

surprised me. Do any members collect these, other than as

ornaments to make a decorative statement? I was pleased to see

several examples of Stuart’s enamelled wares of the 1930’s.

Davidson’s jade and cloud glass was seen on several stands, but

not so much of the rare orange range. A totally new exhibitor
was a firm called “The Country
Seat” from Henley, Nr. Reading.

It has recently changed direction

and now holds regular selling

displays of Powell/Whitefriars

glassware. Jenny Grifiths had a

selection of C.19th glass. On
this stand, too, was a substantial

piece said to be the largest glass
item at the fair!

Lastly, I rushed up to Birming-

ham again a few days later — this

time to view the NEC “Antiques

for Everyone”. Friday proved to

be a very good day. It was not

at all crowded. In fact, I began

to wonder “where have all the
people gone?” There even

seemed to me to be fewer stands. However, I enjoyed my visit

and can report that glass was well represented, ranging from
C.18th to C.20th, including fine examples of French Art

Nouveau. I saw a few interesting mirrors and more pressed glass

than usual. Cranberry glassware was on offer on at least two

stands. C.18th drinking glasses were thin on the ground, but our

dealer Brian Watson had several interesting items such as an
early knopped cordial, and a delightful, engraved tumbler

complete with its original circular leather embossed case. This
interesting late C.18th item with its initials and love token

decoration had been fully identified; it was in all probability a
wedding gift given to the bride by her husband. He went on in

later life to found the Metropolitan Mounted Police. I found a

C.19th Baccarat glass plaque containing a sulphide of Queen

Marie Antoinette on this stand, too. On another stand I was

shown a late C.19th wavy-edged goblet of a pale yellowish

colour, decorated with a bold light creamy opalescent brocade

design; this was thought to be by John Walsh Walsh of

Birmingham. *

Page 13

GLASS CIRCLE NEWS No. 91

2002

AUCTION ACTION and PRICE-CHECK” by Henry Fox

*Capes Dunn, Manchester —
26t

h
March, Clive Barlett

Collection, Part I. This single owner sale was extensively

advertised. The Collection appeared to be generally pressed
glass dating from c.1880 up to 1960’s, including some American
examples. The catalogue for Part I did not really contain

anything particularly special and I think several collectors of this
type of glass were in for a disappointment. To start with, none

of the items on the front cover were in the sale as far as I could

ascertain. The illustrations were not marked with the lot numbers

for easy identification. However in the catalogue effort had gone
into adequately describing the lots and where

possible pattern numbers and factory were

given, but no estimates. Here are a few prices:
a Fenton Marigold Carnival glass shallow dish

“Stag and Holly” design raised on three tab
feet, plus a Fenton dish “Leaf Chain and Berry

and Leaf ” pattern, £210; a Fenton Marigold
Carnival glass circular dish embossed with

grape and cable design, plus an Imperial bowl

with centre windmill design and serrated edge,

£110; a Sowerby Mikado posy vase of tapering

squared section, moulded with figures in
cream opaque glass (which I take to mean
Ivory Queen’s Ware) made £170. Part II of

this collection comes up 11
th
June.

*Neales, Nottingham —
25′ April,

Ceramics, Glass etc — Among the
glassware items of interest were
two claret jugs (included in with

silver because of their mounts)
hall marked 1903 London (top,

left) and 1899 Sheffield (top,

right); these fetched £2,400 and

£1,400 respectively.

*Duke’s, Dorchester –
11
th

/12
th

April, Antiques and Fine Art Sale

— Included in this sale was an

unexpected item of glass associ-

ated interest. At first glance the

early cricketing badge shown
(picture, centre) would appear to
have no glass connection, but

closer examination, particularly
that of the setting for the

miniature, reveals all. The scene is

set into an enamelled garter with
the wording “By manly exercise we promote health” and this in

turn is surrounded by a star setting composed of paste stones

and these two facts make for the glass association. The

back of the badge is inscribed “The unanimous gift of

the Thursday Cricket Society to their late President

Mr. Saml. Welch, 1788”. The star and garter form

alludes to the eponymous public house where the

Thursday Club noblemen met in 1774 to establish the

first rules of the game, and the miniature scene would

appear to be Kennington Common (south London)
with the Horns tavern in the background. The badge

was keenly contested, and finally sold to an anony-
mous buyer for £28,000. It has since made, in full

colour, the front cover of
Country Life
(9-05-02).

*Sotheby’s Olympia, London —
7t

h
May, British and

Continental Glass — This sale was particularly pleas-
ing because it contained three private collections of

C.18th drinking glasses, but somewhat surprisingly
not every lot found a willing buyer. However, the sold lots were

mostly within estimate and in a few cases well in excess. A
number of very unusual, as well as rare examples, were included,

but it was the traditional “goers” such as Beilby decorated

glasses, Motto engraved Jacobites, and colour twist stemmed

glasses which were keenly sought out and paid for accordingly.
Highlights from these collections were firstly Richard Strong

t
Hammer Prices unless otherwise stated.
Collection: engraved Jacobite, the round funnel bowl with rose

and two buds and reverse with star and the word
Fiat,

the bowl

further inscribed below the rim
Turno Tempu erit,

and set on

shoulder and centre knopped mult-spiral airtwist stem, which
fetched £2,800; a typical Beilby wine glass with a white opaque
double series twist stem, the bowl white enamelled with two

goats and a sheep with leafy tree and low fence was briskly taken
to £13,000; whilst a similar style glass enamelled by Beilby with

fruiting vine below the rim went for £1,600; a bell bowl wine

glass set on stem containing a pair of white opaque spiral bands
edged in translucent red made £2,600; a

pedestal stemmed sweetmeat with ribbed dou-
ble ogee bowl and panel moulded domed foot
reached £1,000; in contrast a triple knopped

airtwist multi-spiral stemmed wine with en-

graved bowl made £380. Next, from the
Paddy Wood Collection: a rare white opaque

twist stemmed sweetmeat with honeycomb
moulded double ogee lipped bowl and simi-

larly moulded domed foot went for £1,800; In

contrast a rare sweetmeat, the lipped double

ogee bowl with swirling white opaque threads

set on pedestal stem and plain dome and

folded foot was bid to £7,000 (picture,
bottom); whilst another sweetmeat

of similar shape but plain bowl and
domed and folded foot and with a

shoulder and basal knopped multi-
spiral white opaque twist stem
made £950; a good heavy baluster

goblet , the round funnel bowl solid

at the base above an inverted balus-
ter with basal knop over folded foot

went for £3,000; another large bal-
uster goblet with flared trumpet

bowl with solid base set on collar

and cushion knop above a true bal-
uster and domed and folded foot

made £6,800. Finally, the Bikker

Collection: a mercurial airtwist

trumpet cordial fetched £580 in

contrast to a lot of four assorted

airtwist wines which made £1,100;

an opaque multi-spiral stemmed
wine glass with centre and basal

knop went for £380; a gilt decorated

(rubbed) facet stem small cordial or liqueur glass went for £450.
Among other British glass on offer was a green drawn trumpet
airtwist wine bid to £1,600 and an engraved mixed

colour twist with a cobalt spiral encircled by multi
airtwist spiral which was bid to £7,000. From the

Continental group I’ve chosen the top priced item
which was an early German green tinted Krautstrunk

c.1500 which made £19,500, and a German enamelled

Kurfurstenhumpen dated 1597 which realised £9,000,

whilst a Franconian enamelled Lebensalterhumpen

c.1600 made £7,500; much later at c.1880 a fine

Lobmeyr two handled gilt and enamelled “Persian

style” vase made £9,000. Among the paperweights

were three that I particularly liked (pictures below,

left to right), a St. Louis stylised pink flower weight
that made £4,800; a smaller Baccarat dark red rose

weight, that went for a modest £2,000, and a Clichy

gentian violet bouquet weight for £5,000. *

Page 14