Glass Society Glass Matters_No.11, Jun 2021

June 2021

Issue No. 11

ISSN2516-1555

Chairmens’ message

Uranium Colours in Glass

John Frith

Barcelona Stained Glass

Bubbled Glass

Nigel Benson

Sandro Pianon’s Career

Ian
Turner

Bonhams Glass

Jim
Peake

Giled Irish Lilies

Simon
Cook

Mateus Rose

Stan Parry

Kings Over the Water

Bill
Davis

Georgian Love Tokens

Neal Chaney

Factory Girls: Part I

Kate Round

Paperweights

Peter
Kaelllgren

Roman Aryballoi

Collectors

Sam Herman

Prof
Keith Cummings

Ian Wolfenden

David
Philips &

Charles Hajdamach

Derek Woolston

Simon Cottle

Heaton, Butler & Bayne’s

Ian Philips

News & Corrections
3

7
11

28
30

38
39

Jodi Bonet & Niiria Gil

Editorial

A
s this issue is going to print, the sun is shining, and

if that Indian variant doesn’t rise up to overwhelm

us, we’ll soon be able to meet up again without fear of a

viral disaster. To see glass collecting friends, discuss styles

and view collections curated to cater for the most unusual
idiosyncrasies is part of our life enjoyment. The benefit

of ‘lockdown’ has been the increased contact through the

WWW with our membership worldwide, whether by email,

WhatsApp or Zoom. Let’s stay together – I hope that
Glass

Matters
has helped the darker days.

GLASS

SOCIETY

Contents

ISSN 2516-1555

Issue 11, June 2021
Published by the Glass Society,

©Contributors and The Glass Society

—

— , — —

Editor: Brian J Clarke

[email protected]
– —

Design
&
layout:
Emma Nelly Morgan

[email protected]

Printed by:
Warners Midlands plc

www.warners.co.
uk

Next copy date:
First
week September
2021

E-mail news
&

events to
[email protected]

“The Glass
Society Committee do not bear any responsibility for the

views expressed in this publication, which are those of the contributor

in each case. Copyright is acknowledged for the photographs

illustrating artides, though neither the Editor nor the committees

are responsible for inadvertent infringements. All photographs are

THE GLASS SOCIETY
Charity Number 1185397

Website:
www.theglasssociety.org

Honorary Presidents:

Charles Hajdamach;
[email protected]

Simon Cottle;
[email protected]

Honorary Life President:
Dwight Lanmon;
[email protected]

Joint Chairmen:
David Willars;
[email protected]

Susan Newell.
[email protected]

Vice-Chairman:
Paul Bishop:
[email protected]

Membership Secretary & Treasurer:
Maurice Wimpory;
[email protected]

Meetings Organiser:

Anne Lutyens-Stobbs;
annelh60@hotmaiLcom

Publications Editor:

Brian Clarke;
[email protected]

Trustees of The Glass Society:

Paul Bishop; Brian Clarke; Susan Newell; Jim Peake;

David Willars; Robert Wilcock; Maurice Wimpory

Committee Members:

The above trustees, along with; Nigel Benson;
Peter Cookson; Anne Lutyens-Stobbs

GLASS MATTERS EDITORIAL COMMITEE:
Nigel Benson; Susan Newell; Simon Wain-Hobson;
Bob (Robert) Wilcock; James Measell

FRONT COVER:
A self-portrait glass by Adrianus Hoevenaar

Snr. A late C18th Dutch diamond-point engraver. Image courtesy

of The Hoevenaar Museum facilitated by Anna Lameris. (article

on pages 26’27)

BACK COVER: A
multi coloured bowl by Zoot Zynsky, USA, circa

1994. Formed with fine glass filaments, slumped and manipulated.

Private Collection. Image Courtesy of Lyon 8z Turnbull.

Glass Matters Issue no.1 I June 2021

Sue Newell, Joint Chairman

David Willars, Joint Chairman

of The Glass Society

CHAIRMEN’S MESSAGE

Chairmen’s
Message

Time to Reflect and Look Forward

W
elcome to the latest edi-

tion of
Glass Matters.
Our

Editor, Brian Clarke, has

assembled
a great offering for us

in terms of articles, as usual. Nigel
Benson discusses the attribution of

bubbly glass, and we welcome back
Ian Turner, who this time exam-
ines the wonaderfully quirky and
colourful creations of Alessandro

Pianon. Nuria Gil, a researcher, has
joined forces with Jordi Bonet, the

Director of J. M. Bonet (stained-

glass manufacturers), to provide us
with a rare insight into the work of
Birmingham stained-glass designer,

Thomas Camm, for the Palau Giiell by

Antoni Gaudi in Barcelona. Georgian
love tokens, gilded lilies as well as an
article on uranium glass, also feature
in this rich and varied compilation.
Just when you thought that every

aspect of the pandemic had been aired,

along comes a new – glass related –

thread to pick up. Those of you who

attended Stephen Pollock-Hill’s talk in

March will remember our discussion
about the production of Covid vac-
cine bottles or vials. During the crisis,

glass manufacturers have stepped up

to supply huge volumes of high speci-
fication glass vials. Following queries

about the recycling and/or re-use of
these vials, we decided to explore the

matter further and made approaches
to several industry bodies to under-

stand better what is happening now,
and how the situation may evolve in
the future. We learned that concerns
over the deaning of vials mean that
re-melt, rather than re-use, is the

more likely path. Dedicated re-melt

channels do not exist today, partly due

to the glass types used, and so far as

we could ascertain, all vials current-
ly end up as landfill. Discussions are,
at least, underway to establish a new

UK based manufacturing plant. As a

charity dedicated to glass education,
lobbying industry and government

bodies on this matter is beyond
our remit, but your thoughts are

welcomed on this important issue.
Another topical subject we have

engaged with concerns the Victoria

and Albert Museum in London. The

Museum’s collections are appreciat-
ed globally, and the same goes for the

skills of its curators, often honed over
decades through working with collec-
tions of exceptional scope and quali-

ty. In March we learned in the press

that departmental changes were afoot

that would potentially undermine

materials-based expertise within the

Museum. We wrote to the Museum’s
Director expressing our concerns, add-

ing the Glass Society’s voice to that of
many different groups dedicated to

the appreciation and study of particu-

lar materials (ceramics, silver, textiles

etc.). The cumulative effect of these
representations may have played a

part in the modification of the original

proposals, and specific recognition of

materials, enshrined in the Museum’s
ethos since its inception almost two

hundred years ago, will be maintained.

The proposed changes were (of course)
prompted by the need to cut costs due
to the Museum’s depleted income over

the past year of compulsory dosures.

We are sympathetic to this issue which
raises questions about the value we
place on the cultural sector, and the

degree to which this has been reflect-
ed in the government’s approach to

arts funding during the pandemic.
Again, if you would like

to read more about these
discussions or wish to participate

taking them forward please contact us.
These interventions represent

a new departure for the Society in
terms of our activities, and we hope

that they meet with your approval. If

you feel strongly about these or oth-
er glass-related topics, please get in

touch and we will discuss what, or if,

it is possible to do something. We are
currently investigating establishing

Glass Society bursaries for students
engaged in historical research on glass,

as this seems particularly appropriate

against the background of financial
hardship caused by the pandemic.
In conclusion, we must ask again

for practical help in running your

Society. Interest and enthusiasm are
the only requirements, although a

working knowledge of Word (and
possibly Excel) would be helpful, as

well as prompt communication by
email. In the short term, we need

an Editor for the next issue of our
online Newsletter. We have many

snippets of interesting material
already, and the Editor’s job is sim-
ply to put their own stamp on the

issue by selecting items or investi-

gating different ones, provide a few
sentences of introduction, and liaise
with our designer, who will do the
entire layout. Assistance with proof
reading and guidance about content

would be supplied by the Committee.
If you think you would like to be

involved, please get in touch — we

look forward to hearing from you!
Susan Newell and David Willars

Joint Chairmen, The Glass Society

Glass Matters Issue no.! I June 2021

URANIUM COLOURS IN GLASS

Uranium Glass: Part 1

Its
origins: Riedel, Pohl or Whitefriars?

John Frith

U
ranium glass is generally a

translucent yellow or green

glass, coloured by a uranate,

uranyl or uranium oxide salt and fluo-
resces bright yellow-green under ultra-

violet light. It was probably first made
by Johann Pohl in Neuwelt, northern
Bohemia, in 1831, and later by Franz

and Joseph Riedel in Antoninov,
northern Bohemia, in about 1835, as

Annagelb
and
Annagrun.
It was made

in Britain in 1836 by Whitefriars as
Topaz
glass; in 1844 by Thomas Webb

& Sons as Canary glass and in France
in 1843 by Baccarat as
Cristal dichroide.

In Europe at the time, other common

names for this new yellow glass,

were
Verre Canari
and
Chamaleon.

From the early 1840s in America,

uranium glass was known as
Canary

flint glass and from 1864, due to the

shortage of lead, as soda-lime glass;
from 1924 it was called
Vaseline
glass.

Uranium oxide was used to make

many shades of yellow and green glass

– it is also often found in other glass
colours, such as pink, amber, brown,

blue, and turquoise. The various
colours were made by addition of dif-

ferent colourants; iron oxide and cop-
per sulphate made green; copper and
chromium oxides made green, blue and
turquoise; manganese oxides made

pink; cadmium and sulphur salts made

amber and brown. It was used in a
variety of multi-coloured shaded glass-
es such as
Burmese;
in opaque glasses

such as
Ivory, Custard
and

Jade;
in

combination with gold ruby in Rubina

Verde and Amberina; in opalescent

glasses such as
Pearline
and

Opaline

Brocade,
and to applied colour glass

decoration, used in the many styles of
coloured Victorian fancy glass.
1, 2, 3, 4

A variety of the colours of

Uranium glass are shown in Figs.1-6.

DISCOVERY OF URANIUM OXIDE

BY MARTIN HEINRICH KLAPROTH

A yellow uranium oxide salt, probably
either Na
2
0(UO
3
)
2
(sodium diuranate),

LEFT Fig. 1

Opalescent

cruet (for oil or
vinegar)

RIGHT Fig. 2

Small opalescent

bowl, with a

‘claw’ foot
or UO

2
(NO
3
)
2
, (uranyl nitrate), was dis-

covered in 1789 by Martin Heinrich
Klaproth, a German chemist, while

experimenting with pitchblende,

which was thought at the time to be
an ore of iron and zinc and which we
now know is uranium ore. Klaproth

heated the salt to obtain a black pow-
der. Thinking he’d discovered a new
element, he named it Uranium after
the planet Uranus. Elemental urani-
um was not discovered until 1841 by

a French chemist, Eugene-Melchior
Peligot, who also demonstrated

that the black powder Klaproth pro-
duced was not elemental uranium

but a uranium oxide compound. 1,
3
‘
4

Pitchblende, originally thought

to be a blended ore of iron and zinc,

is a form of uraninite, and the most

common mineral in which uranium

is found. Uranium oxides make up to
50% to 80% of that mineral, the rest

being lead and thorium oxides, radi-
um, and other rare earth elements. In

1850 the main source of pitchblende

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

Fig. 4

A
uranium yellow

‘sherry’ glass
(perhaps a cordial)
URANIUM COLOURS IN GLASS

Fig. 3

A pair of uranium yellow salts and a Lemon Peathne cream or sugar bowl

was from Jachymov, a town at the
foot of the Ore Mountains of north-
ern Bohemia, later it became available

from Cornwall in the UK. The process
of extracting the yellow uranium salt

from pitchblende was expensive,

and as much of Riedel’s and other
Bohemian glassmakers’ uranium

glass pieces were elaborately deco-
rated with enamelling and gilt, they

were made for royalty and aristocracy.
In 1912 Robert Theodore Gunther

of the University of Oxford was pur-
ported to have found yellow uranium

glass from a mosaic mural in an exca-

vated Roman Villa on Cape Posillipo

in the Bay of Naples, Italy, dating

from 79 AD, which when analysed

was said to contain uranium oxide.
Barrie Skelcher in his 2002 book
The

Big Book of Vaseline Glass,
stated that

Geiger counter surveys that were
conducted in the Bay of Naples after

World War II, as well as of examples
of glass in German museums, did
not find evidence of uranium in their

manufacture. Other surveys of Roman

glass have not found levels of urani-
um higher than would be expected to

be naturally occurring in sand used

by glassmakers, so it is unlikely that
the Romans really did purposefully
use uranium oxide to colour glass.
4
‘
5

FRANZ RIEDEL, JOHANN POHL, AND

THE DEVELOPMENT OF BOHEMIAN

URANIUM GLASS IN 1830S

The Riedel family is credited in many
references as being the first to use ura-

nium oxide in glass in their family glass-

works in Antoninov and Kristianov in
the Jizera Mountains (Isergebirge) of
northern Bohemia in the early 1830s,

possibly around 1835, although
Haanstra states it was 1830.
1-7

Riedel: The Wine Glass Company

History and Generations,
Lynn & Lynn

and Remos state Franz Xaver Anton
Riedel and his nephew, Josef, made

yellow and green glass beakers which
they called
Annagelb
and
Annagrun

respectively after Franz’s daughter,

Anna Maria.
8
‘
9
‘
10
Other references

state Franz named them
Annagelb

and
Eleonorengrun
after his two

daughters, Anna and Eleonore
11
‘
12

and some that it was Josef, who mar-

ried his cousin Anna, who named them

Annagelb
and
Annagrun.
The Riedel

family made uranium glass from the

1830s to late 1840s. However, the
Riedel family may not have actually

been the first to make uranium glass.

Langhamer
13
(p.71) refers to the

development of uranium glass in

the 1830s by a number of Bohemian

glassmakers including Franz Riedel,

Johann Pohl, and others, producing

yellow (Annagelb) and green glass
(Annagriin and Eleonorengrtin),
“a

beautiful gold crystal with a breath of
light green”.
13
Langhamer (p.79)

refers to a uranium glass containing

alabaster – a mineral calcium sulphate
used as an opaquing agent – called

Chrysopras,
being made by Count

Harrach’s glass factory at Neuwelt in

northern Bohemia in 1831, under the
direction of Johann Pohl who later per-

fected yellow uranium glass.
13
Donna

Strahan
14

also refers to a yellow-green

fluorescent glass being shown by
Count Harrach’s Neuwelt glass facto-
ry at an exhibition in Prague in 1831.

EARLY BRITISH DEVELOPMENT

AND WHITEFRIARS

Skelcher refers to the 1817 book by
CS Gilbert An Historical survey of the
Country of Cornwall which mentions

the use of uranium to colour glass and

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

URANIUM COLOURS IN GLASS

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

An
enamelled and gilt uranium green Biscuit Barrel

An uranium green Posy Basket

states
“Its oxides impart bright colours

to glass, which are, according to the pro-
portions, brown, apple green, or emerald

green”.
3
Filipa Lopes
2
in the study

Uranium Glass in Museum Collections,

also refers to Gilbert’s book, but also
cites Brenni
1
as stating that there is

no reliable literature on its use in this

period.
1, 2
In the 1830s, British and

French glassmakers also experimented

with making uranium glass. Skelcher
3

refers to William Vernon Harcourt,

a British scientist, experimenting

with uranium in glass in 1834 and
Skelcher
4
(p.13) refers to Whitefriars

Glassworks of London – then known

as James Powell & Sons – experiment-
ing with uranium glass in 1835 and

in 1836, when they made a pair of

yellow uranium
Topaz
girandoles that

were presented to Queen Adelaide.
3
‘
4

The exact origins and how the

process of adding uranium to glass
came about are not very clear and

certainly not well documented. There

is no doubt that many glassmakers

were experimenting with uranium in
glass in the early 1830s, primarily in

Bohemia and Britain. And although

it is the Riedel family of Bohemia that

is generally credited in the literature

with being the first, it is possible that
Johann Pohl at the Harrach Glassworks

in Nov3
–
7 Svet in 1831 was the first

to make and exhibit uranium glass.
John Firth, a Glass Society member

from Australia, provided the photos

for the article, but was unable to iden-

tify specific manufacturers or dates.

REFERENCES
1.
Brenni, Paulo. (2007) Uranium glass

and its scientific uses.
Bulletin ofthe

Scientific Instrument Society
92: 34-39.

2.
Lopes, F, Ruivo, Muralha, S, et al.

(2008) Uranium Glass in Museum

Collections.
Journal of Cultural

Heritage
Vol. 9, Supplement,

e64-e68. Available at https://run.
unl.pt/bitstream/10362/1954/1/

Lopes 2008.pdf

3.
Skelcher Barrie. (1998)

Uranium

Glass.
Available at http://www.glas-

sassociation.co.uk/sites/default/files/
Uranium Glass sample artide.pdf

4.
Skelcher, Barrie. (2002)

The Big

Book of Vaseline Glass.
Atglen,

Pennsylvania: Schiffer Publishing

Ltd, 2002, p. 12-16.

5.
Skelcher, Barrie. (2007)

Vaseline

Glassware.
Atglen, Pennsylvania:

Schiffer Publishing, p. 9-13.

6.
Peterson, DavidA. (2002)

Vaseline

Glass: Canary to Contemporary.
Marietta, Ohio: Glass Press Inc., p. 6-7.

7.
Haanstra, Ivo. (2001)
Glass Fact

File A-Z.
London: Millers/Octopus

Publishing, p. 147.

8.
Riedel: The Wine Glass Company.
(2020)

History and Generations.

Available at https://www.riedel.com/

en-aulriedel/history-generations .

9.
Lynn, Guy and Lynn, J-Me. (2015)

Bohemian Glassmakers — The Riedel
Family.
2 May 2015. Available at

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/

bohemian-glassmakers-riedel-fami-

ly-guy-j-me-lynn?trk=portfolio arti-
cle-card title .

10.
Remos, Ana B. (2013)
The Riedel

Glass Dynasty: Glassworks of Austria.

22 April 2013. Available at https://

www.azureazure.com/personalities/

the-riedel-glass-dynasty/ .

11.
Geiselberger, Siegmar. (2000)

Anna-gelb and Eleonoren-gran
— Uran-gefarbtesnm Pressglas.

Pressglas-Korrespondez
Januar 2000.

[German] Available at https://press-

glas-korrespondenz.de/aktuelles/

pdf/pk-2000-2w-sg-annagelb-eleon-

orengruen-uran.pdf .

12.
Riedel, Claus Josef, Urbancova, Jana,

and others. (1994)
Riedel since 1756.

Anna yellow and Eleonoren green from
Riedel, Polaun.
[Excerpt — German,

translated from translate.google]

13.
Langhamer, Antonin. (2003)

The

Legend ofBohemian Glass.
Zlin,

Czech Republic: Tigris, p. 71, 79, 93.

14.
Strahan, Donna. (2001) Uranium

in glass, glazes and enamels: history,

identification and handling.
Studies

in Conservation
46:181-195.

Glass Matters Issue no.I 1 June 2021

BARCELONA STAINED GLASS

T.W.Camm and the Shakespearean

Stained Glass at
Barcelona’s Guell Palace

Jordi Bonet with Maria Gil
Fig.
1

Palau Guell facade. © MontserratBaldoma
Diputacio de Barcelona. Palau Gaell

13
arcelona’s Giiell Palace is one

of the first buildings by the
renowned architect Antoni

Gaudi (1886-1890). He received the
commission from the businessman,
entrepreneur and patron Eusebi

Guell i Bacigalupi, who wished to

have a palace in the city centre to

accommodate his large family. The
building, located within the bounds
of the dense and cramped old town,

is another outstanding piece of archi-
tecture, especially remarkable for

the use of daylight coming from the

penthouse to illuminate the main
floor located two storeys below and

also for its double use as the family
house and as representation house

for the business of Mr. Gtiell.
1
(Fig./)

Among the decorations of the elab-

orate interior, the palace holds a large
collection of stained glass in various

styles; these are considered to be one
of the most important and unique
sets preserved in a private building in
Catalonia. Unfortunately, not much

information on the construction of

the building, such as invoices from

masons, painters, furniture makers

and glaziers is readily available for
investigation, so in certain cases,
the authors of the windows remain
unclear. However, particular panels

have recently been the subject of suc-
cessful research.
2
Four of the most

unusual, concerning their style, depict
characters of William Shakespeare’s
theatre plays, which is an unusual

topic for local stained glass. Hamlet

and Macbeth’s figures decorate the

bedroom of the eldest daughter of
the family, Isabel Lopez,
(Fig.2 upper)

and King Lear and Bertram appear

at the central medallion of the win-
dows that illuminate the hall lead-

ing to the entrance of the smoking
room on the main floor,

(Fig.2 lower).

The first notions that those win-

dows could be of English origin were
made by the authors in 2013, when

the management of Guell Palace com-

missioned them with cataloguing all of

the windows and glass objects. Apart

from the depicted scenes, some oth-

er properties made the stained glass
unusual – for instance, the presence of

Venetian glass,
a pronounced texture

glass only produced in England. Also,
the design of the rich and elaborate

detailing of grisaille was not common
in Catalan stained glass of the period.
The provenance of the glass used

on the vast amount of stained glass
produced in Barcelona at the end

of the 19th century still requires a
thorough investigation. Some very

specific patterns can easily be related
to a manufacturer, but others can be
found in the catalogues of different

makers, leading to very similar end
results and therefore very difficult to

identify. The glass made by the French
manufacturer Saint Gobain can eas-

ily be found. However, it is not the
case for the more uncommon glass
produced by Chance and Co. Despite

that, some patterns can be found in

the glazing of interior windows of the

buildings in the Eixample
3
district.

English glass and some inventions

of the English glass industry never
reached the Catalan stained- glass

industry. Novelties such as Prior’s

glass/Norman Slab have never been

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

►
.
. —a.. • ….au,.

-VevAtivil4r:AN vsoi
.

BARCELONA STAINED GLASS

Fig. 2

Details of the four stained glass windows preserved in the Palace describing characters

of Shakespeare’s plays: Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear, and Bertram. ©Jordi Bonet

identified and Venetian
4
and Venetian

ripples were identified for the first

time in the windows of the Palace.
Oral memories about the use of
English glass are alive at the studios,

especially regarding difficulties in its

cutting. However, documentation

on the importation of the preserved

glass is very scarce and not descrip-
tive of the purchased items; there

are only occasional random docu-

ments, which in the best cases, are

still left to be consulted by historians.
The Giiell family had a close rela-

tionship with Britain; Eusebi as well

as his sons had received part of their

academic education in the country and

as businessmen traded there regular-

ly and were connoisseurs and enthu-

siasts of English cultural heritage.

The Shakespeare subject is unusu-

al but not rare. The Arts and Crafts

movement was a source of inspira-

tion for many Catalan artists and

craftsmen. William Shakespeare

was an admired author and his plays

were often represented in the local

theatres. Some of the craftsmen that
had a relevant role in the decoration

of the palace were deeply influenced

by English culture. The polyhedric

artist, Alexandre de Riquer, illustra-
tor, writer, poet, and painter, travelled

on some occasions to England, where
he established a relationship with the

Arts and Crafts movement. There
he met and mailed Edward Burne-

Jones and William Morris, and he

is believed to be the importer of the
British inspired
art nouveau
trend.
5

Also, the interior decorator and fur-
niture maker Francesc Vidal had a

solid commercial relationship with
the English decorative arts industry

– the most notorious would be the
Cloisonné Glass Company’s (London)

commercial relationship with Vida1.
6

Despite solid evidence, the mys-

tery of the stained-glass provenance

could not be confirmed until the

gallery,
Tomkinson’s Stained Glass
of

Clophill, Bedfordshire, published the

images of three panels for sale’ from

its collection with representations
of Sir Thomas More, Titania, Queen

of the fairies from A Midsummer
Night’s Dream, and Hamlet. This last

panel has the same measurements

(46x24cm) and paint finishes as the

one at the Guell Palace and was prob-

ably painted using the same cartoon.

The three panels came from the

T.W.Camm studio. The gallery also
kept the cartoon of a Sir Thomas More

panel purchased at auction and an

original from the same artist. This evi-
dence left no doubt about the author-

ship of the four palace panels.
(Fig.3)

The importance of this discovery

is especially relevant in Catalonia,

since it is the only panel of English
origin known so far. Imported panels

from Germany and often France, are

not rare: Maumejean, Meyer, Zetler,

windows are not frequent but, they
do occasionally occur. However, at

the peak of the excellence of English

stained glass, when panels were
exported all around the world only the

ones at Giiell’s Palace are known. The
present research also found that the

daughter of T.W Camm, Florence, was

an extraordinarily skilled painter, who
created stained glass for the Artaza
Palace in Guetxo, Basque Country.

THOMAS WILLIAM CAMM
Thomas William Camm was a rele-

vant stained-glass maker active at
the end of the 19th and the begin-
ning of the 20th century. Among the
English studios, it was a medium-size

company, far different from the huge

companies that employed up to a

hundred workers, but at the same
time much bigger than the artist

studios run by a single man
8
(Fig.4).

Camm was born in Spon Lane, West

Bromwich, in 1839. His apprenticeship

as a stained-glass maker took place at
Chance Brothers & Co, of Smethwick,

where he started work from an early

age. This company pioneered many

aspects of the production of glass, such

as the introduction of cylinder glass

and the improvement of drawn sheet
glass. Chance & Co. gained a solid,
high- quality reputation for providing

the glass used in the building of Crystal
Palace, the main building used in the

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

BARCELONA STAINED GLASS

Fig. 3

Two of the panels displayed at the Tomkinson’s Stained Glass Gallery, Titania, the fairy queen of

A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and a portrait of Sir Thomas More. ©Tomkinson’s Stained Glass

International Exhibition of 1851 and

also glass for the Houses of Parliament,
reconstructed 1840 to 1870.

Chance Brothers & Co. had a

department devoted to the produc-

tion of stained glass. The head of

the art department was Sebastian
Evan (1830-1909) who noticed the

skills of T.W.Camm and promoted

him. In 1865 the company closed
the stained-glass department and

focused on the production of glass.
That same year Thomas established

his own studio together with his

brothers, and set up a company
named Camm Brothers, while Chance

supported them by recommending
their services to those requesting the

already dosed stained-glass service.
The studio had commercial success

and expanded from its foundation,

working both on religious and secular

stained glass. They gained interna-
tional reputation by participating in
national and international exhibitions

where they were awarded various
medals. A gold medal was obtained in

1878 at the international exhibition of
Paris’ for the exhibited panels depict-

ing Shakespearean characters. The
panels were illustrating scenes similar

to the ones at Guell Palace, though
not the same; the ones at the exhibi-

tion were from
A Midsummer Night’s

Dream: Titania in love with Bottom
or

Oberon giving instructions to Puck.
He

also exhibited Arthuric scenes with the
Holy Grail, and other allegories from

the four seasons, art and music, all of

them designed by T.W.Camm. He was

also praised for the quality of his work

in the press of the time. In 1879 he was

awarded another medal at the Sydney
international exhibition, also a gold
medal at the
Fine arts and Industrial

Exhibition
celebrated in Bradford in

1882, and a silver one in 1884 at South
Kensington. Camm’s publicity also

claims that they produce forged iron

and design for ceramics and mosaic.
In 1882 the business was bought by

R.W.Winfield from Birmingham but

worked under the same name, and
the Camm brothers became employ-
ees until 1888 when T.W. Camm set

up his studio under his own name.

In 1862 Camm married Charlotte

Middleton and they had nine chil-

dren. Three of them followed the fam-

ily tradition: Florence (1874-1960),
Robert (1878-1950), and Walther

Herbert (1881-1967). Florence was

especially outstanding as a designer

and maker,'” was a successful artist

trained at the Birmingham School of

Arts, and earned her reputation at the
Turin 1911 International Exhibition.

Thomas Camm passed away in

1912, but the studio carried on, run

under his descendants until 1960.

THE

SHAKESPEAREAN

WINDOWS AT PALAU GUELL

In the room that once was the bed-
room of Isabel Giiell, there are two

windows showing standing figures of
Hamlet and Macbeth. Both panels are

quite large: 207x81cm with an acid-
etched blue glass background. Each of

these blue pieces has an acid-etched
crown, and some of the pieces are also

painted with silver stain. The charac-

ters appear in the central part of the

windows; the figures of each of them
also have the name written on a foot

sign. It is believed that the blue back-
ground was executed by local studios
and was built to fit the panels to the

final measurements, probably by Hijos
de Eudald R.Amigo, author of other

windows of the building. The central
panels were probably mounted in the

Fig. 4

Portrait of T.W. Camm. © Sandwell Community
History and Archive Service

Glass Matters Issue no.11 June 2021

BARCELONA STAINED GLASS

Fig. 5

Comparison between the stained glass window of Tomkinson’s gallery (left) and the

stained glass window of Palau Guell (right). ©Tomkinson’s Stained Glass ©Jordi Bonet

window by a Catalan studio, but pur-
chased as a finished decorative panel

that was entirely painted and leaded by
Camm Studios. The image of Hamlet

is the same as the one at Tomkinson’s
Stained Glass and the Macbeth image

follows the same technical methods

and size. The figures are surround-
ed by a wavy pattern painted with

tracing grisaille and silver stain on a

white glass, which has close similari-
ties to the pattern that decorates the

window Christ the Bread of life and
Christ the True Vine,
part of the Oak

and the Lily, from Swedenborgian
Church, Wretham Road, Handsworth,
exhibited now at the Birmingham
Museum and Art Gallery
(Fig. 5).

At the hall that gives entrance to the

smoking room on the main floor, there

are two roundels with the portraits of
King Lear and Bertram. The last one is

painted in a similar style and materials

as Macbeth and Hamlet. King Lear is
probably made by an English studio but
the use of carnation makes it slightly

different in style from the other three.
Despite knowing the author, the

origin of the panels is not fully known.
It is believed that the panels might

have been purchased by the furniture

maker Francesc Vidal i Javelli, who was
responsible for the decoration of the

palace. It is known that Vidal had com-
mercial agreements with the English

firm T.Webb & Co, which traded with

luxury glass objects. While some of the
Camm Studio drawings appeared at
the auction room, some other docu-

mentation of the studio remains pre-

served at the archive of T.W.Camm, at

Black Country, Smethwick. The library

keeps part of the documentation of

the studio – mainly drawings, letters

and accountancy books. Among the

copies of the letters, there is one send

by T.W.Camm to Webb & Co accepting

the proposal of the latter to represent

them in Spain. It is supposed that the

letter is a reply to the previous one by

Webb to Camm offering his services as

a commercial agent. This fact does not

prove that this was the way the panels

arrived at the Guell Palace, however
it might have been a possible path.
Regarding the creative method of

this outstanding architect, it is always

a source of controversy how much of
his work was his own will and how

much was owed to the skill, craft, and

initiative of his collaborators, Jujol,
Domenec Sugranes, Rubi6, Amigo

Studio, and others. This present
research is a small, new opening on a

special field of decorative arts, where
until now not much has been unveiled
regarding Gaudi’s stained glass. Being

able to prove the English provenance
of these panels at the Barcelona

Antoni Gaudi building has been a
thrill, it has also left many unan-

swered questions that hopefully will

soon be addressed by British experts.

ENDNOTES
1.
Lacuesta, R. Gonzalez, A, (2013)
El

Palau Guell. Una obra mestra d’An-

toni Gaudi.
Diputacio de Barcelona.

Barcelona.

2.
Gil, N. (2017).
L’enigma del vitrall del

Palau Guell
(Diputaci6). Barcelona.

3.
Eixample is a term that literally

means expansion , was the name of

a plan to organize the growth of the

urban network beyond the old city
center, constrained and overcrowded

by the City walls.

4.
Benyon, T. (2005). The development

of Antique and other glasses used
in 19th and 20th-century stained

glass.
Journal of Stained Glass,
XXIX,

184-198.

5.
Trenc Ballester, Eliseu,
Alexandre de

Riquer,
Barcelona, CaixaTerrassa.

Lunwerg, 2000

6.
Jordi Bonet, Nada Gil, “Cloisonné

Glass, un fenomen modernista”,

in
Coup de fouet,
num. 26, 2015,

p. 26-37.

7.
http://www.vitraux.co.uk/product/

ref-ron409-roundel-3-antique-

stained-glass-windows-arts-crafts/
Last visited on the 5th of April, 2021

8.
An archive with some of the

work by T.W. Camm is pre-
served at
Black Country History,

Smethwick (Birmingham) http://

www.cylex.uk.co.uk/reviews/

viewcompanywebsite.aspx?firma-
Name=tomkinson+stained+glass+lt-

d&companyId=16622481

9.
Allen, J. (2018). The windows for

the world. Manchester: Manchester

University Press.

10.
Cormack, P. (2015).
Arts&Crafts

stained glass. (Y.
U. Press, Ed.).p.262

1
0

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

ARCULUS OR WALSH WALSH

Bubbled Glass Anomaly

NigelBenson
Fig. 1
Image of bubbly range teardrop vase by

Arculus, from C Hajdamach, plate 192
Fig. 2

Similar bubbly range teardrop vase to Fig.1

in Amethyst. But Arculus or Walsh Walsh?

F
rom time to time in the glass

world an anomaly will turn

up that confounds exist-

ing wisdom. A little while ago I
advised someone on Facebook

who runs his own page on British
Glass, that the vase he had was by

the firm of Arculus. I used Charles
Hajdamach’s book
“20th Century

British Glass”,
page 98, plate 192 as

my reference
(Fig.1),
since there is

a memorable half-page illustration,
which was easy to bring to mind.
To be honest, I was quite taken

with the piece that is a deep amethyst
colour
(Fig.2),
so asked if it might

be for sale; unfortunately, it wasn’t

because he likes to keep anything

with teardrop decoration. Ah well!

A few months passed and I found

a different vase in auction and man-
aged to buy it. This had diagonal
teardrop decoration around the base
of the body, above the foot
(Fig.3).

It has the same type of self-co-

loured glass with random bubble

inclusions as the piece I’d admired
on Facebook, but was a different

colour, so I felt I’d managed to get a

good consolation prize. All I needed
to do was identify its manufacturer.
I knew that I’d seen my vase illus-

trated, and eventually recalled that it

was in an article by Lesley Jackson in
The Journal of The Glass Association,

Volume 5, 1997, so I
investigated.

It was, but unfortunately the pho-

tograph that included the vase was

a reproduction from a Hill Ouston
catalogue for 1934
(Fig.4).
My vase

is shown at the lower left and the

vase pattern in
Figs.1&2
is shown at

the lower right. Sadly, Hill Ouston
does not reference the glass manu-

facturers that made the products it

sold, so effectively this was a dead

end. However, it was illustrated with

four other similarly made pieces
that might help if any of those could

be identified from other sources.
Having a couple of Hill Ouston

catalogues myself, I checked them,

as that could also help, even if
obliquely. My vase turned up again,

in catalogue 10,
(Fig.5);
but

along with different pieces

shown on the page with

the vase in
Fig.4,

most not

matching the bubbly body.
Where could I continue

my search? I decided to

look in the catalogues at
the back of Eric Reynolds

book on John Walsh Walsh,

as it reminded me of their
range known as ‘Pompeian’.

Although both Reynolds
and Hajdamach illustrate
pieces of Pompeian glass

Fig. 3

Pompeian bubbly glass teardrop vase

in amber, by Walsh Walsh
as photographic plates, neither

show teardrop vases, so the line
drawings it was to be. Whilst scru-

tinising the tiny representations,
up came the vase from Hajdamach
(pattern A5440) and the Facebook

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

10 I

gir

TTY

Fig. 6

Page from Reynolds book on Walsh Walsh, Fig.299

oiadr,-
-1″

f
•
•

fig.299
A5056 illustrates registered design hand bell,
see

Fig. 5

Page from Hill Ouston Catalogue 10

HAND MADE AR’
AS

ARCULUS OR WALSH WALSH

Fig. 4

Plates 32-34 in Lesley Jackson’s article, The Journal of The GA, p.57

collector at the top of page 121,

fig.299, but pattern A5047
(Fig.6)

and diagonally lower down on
the previous page, 120, fig.298,

my vase
(Fig.7),
pattern A5043.

So, here is the anomaly, two

well-respected books each giving
a different maker for the same
vase. From a conversation I had in

2006 at the NEC with members of

the Arculus family, I knew that the

items illustrated in Hajdamach came
from that source, whilst it is origi-
nal John Walsh Walsh catalogues

that are illustrated in Reynolds.
Given the origin of both sources
of information, could it be that both

companies made the same vase?

Unlikely. Perhaps only one maker

made the vase and it was sold by both?
In fact, there are other items

shown in Hajdamach that might

also be Walsh – possibly the jug
and bowl on page 100, plate 197.

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

A •

A
ARCULUS OR WALSH WALSH

Fig. 7

Page from Reynolds book on Walsh Walsh, Fig.298

Were they made by Walsh as an
outsourced product for Arculus?

Or is there an unfortunate clash
of information in the two tomes?
I doubt whether there is

currently an answer to this

conundrum, but it does seem

sensible to flag up the irregulari-
ty, so that other collectors might

be aware – and perhaps someone
eagle-eyed and knowledgeable

could come up with an answer.

Thanks to Chris Parry for

the use of his photograph of the

vase that started this article.

REFERENCES

•
Hajdamach, C.H.

20th Century British

Glass
pages, 98-100

•
Jackson, L. `Whitefriars Lookalikes’

The Journal of The Glass Association

Vol.
5,1997, pages 46-60

•
Reynolds, E.
The Glass of John Walsh

Walsh 1850-1951,
pages 120 and 121

•
Catalogues, Hill Ouston 1934,1938.

ALESSANDRO PIANON’S Vistosi Birds
A confession, a correction, and a conclusion

Ian Turner

I
sometimes wish the inter-

net had not been invented.

Without it, however, historical

research in any field of collecting

would be very difficult. But you
have to ask the right questions.
I have now written two arti-

cles about the iconic glass bird

sculptures which were made by
the Vistosi glasshouse in Murano

in the 1960s. Everything that
I wrote about their manufac-
ture – the company, the designs,

the dates, and the techniques

— is correct. And everything I
wrote about Alessandro Pianon’s

work as an interior decorator in

New York in the 1970s is correct.
But the details of his life and

death remained an enigma.
In the
Journal of The Glass

Society,
volume 1, I commented

that Alessandro Pianon, who had

been appointed Vistosi’s design-
er in 1956, had been replaced

by 1962, and that
“…….after

1962 (he) seems to have disap-
peared. He is almost unknown in

Italy.”
This statement is wrong.

When I discovered that
Alessandro and his wife Paola had

passed through immigration con-
trol in New York on August 27th

1960, and that he had subsequently
become famous in America as an
interior designer, I thought I had

found the answer. There was docu-
mentary evidence that he had been

employed by Adnan Khashoggi to

convert part of the Olympic Tower

in central New York into his office
and apartment. I reported this
in an update published in
Glass

Matters
in January 2021 and con-

cluded:
“It now seems probable that

Glass Matters Issue no. I I June
2021

SANDRO PIANON’S CAREER

Fig. 1
Sandro Pianon presenting plans for the Porto Rotondo project

the reason Alessandro Pianon disap-
peared in 1962 and was subsequently

almost unknown in Italy is because

he wasn’t there. He emigrated to the

United States, and in the following

decade became famous as an interior

decorator to the world’s super-rich.”

Although he had been reported
as having died in 1984, I had not

been able to find a death certif-
icate or an obituary, and I spec-

ulated that ”

perhaps he is still

alive, a wealthy pensioner living in a

Florida retirement village. He would
now be 89.”
I was wrong again.

I concluded the
Glass Matters

article by asking
“if anyone knows

what happened to Alessandro
Pianon, Venetian glass designer and

American interior designer, would
they please let me know by email.”
Two readers contacted me

in response. One was Bruce
Elliott, an historian and gene-

alogist in Toronto, and through
him the other was Adam

Tihany, Alessandro’s partner
on the Olympic Tower project.

I had been searching the

internet for the wrong man.
As both an architect and an

interior designer, Alessandro
Pianon had abbreviated his name

and was known as
Sandro Pianon.

Searching under that name I

learnt that he was well known in
Italy, though not as famous as Gio

Ponti or Renzo Piano; that his wife

Paola is still alive, although they

had long been separated; and that
one of his sons, Luca Pianon, is also

an architect and continues to this
day to practise at Studio Pianon.
I have been in contact with Luca.
I can now conclude my research

into Alessandro’s (Sandro’s) career

as a Venetian glass designer,

architect and interior decorator.
In 1962, after completion of

his work for the Vistosi company,

Fig. 2

Sandro Pianon in Italy, 1981
Sandro Pianon had practised as

an architect with his own office
in Venice. In 1963 he had been

appointed designer (progettis-

ta) of the Porto Rotondo tourist
resort in Sardinia by two Venetian

developers, Luigi and Nicolo Dona

dalle Rose. Porto Rotondo was con-
ceived by them from the outset as

an exclusive resort for the super-
rich, and Sandro prepared the

master plan and designed several

public buildings and many villas.
Fig.1
is a contemporary photo-

graph of Sandro Pianon, showing
his plans for the resort to Luigi
Dona dalle Rose. He subsequently

designed villas elsewhere, and in

1974 was commissioned by Adnan
Khashoggi to renovate and deco-

rate his homes in Cannes, Monte

Carlo, Madrid, Marbella, Paris and
Kenya, and his home and office in
the Olympic Tower in New York.
Alessandro and Paola Pianon

did not emigrate – Sandro Pianon

had lived and worked in Italy.
Fig.2
is a photograph taken in

1981, when he was a successful
architect and interior designer.
But a few years later he became

seriously ill, and his family sent
him for specialist treatment

to New York where he died on
29th May 1984 at the age of 53.
There is a salutary lesson to be

learnt about relying on the inter-
net for historical research – the

internet gives the right answers

if you ask it the right questions.
My research is now complete,

and I apologise for the red herrings.
“Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pas-

tures new.”
(John Milton, LYCIDAS)

My thanks to Marzia Scalon

at the Fondazione Georgio Cini

in Venice, Bruce Elliott, Adam
Tihany, and Sandro’s son, Luca
Pianon, for their assistance.

IMAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figs.1 & 2 of Sandro Pianon (AP),

are scanned prints, provided by
courtesy of Luca Pianon

Glass Matters Issue no.1 I June 2021

BONHAMS GLASS

BONHAMS
Fine Glass and British Ceramics sale:

Knightsbridge 29 September 2020

Jim Peale

T
his postponed Spring 2020

auction included 98 lots

of glass, centred around

33 lots of early Venetian and
facon de Venise glass from the
Cartwright Collection, shown

in
Glass Matters 10.
The 65 lots

following on from this were the
property of various owners.
The demand for good early piec-

es of Continental glass continued

into the latter part of the sale,

with a very rare early 17th century

Venetian or facon de Venise goblet

decorated in
vetro a fili and vetro a
retorti (Fig.1)

selling on estimate for

£5,000, in spite of its replacement

silver foot and various annealing
fractures. Belonging to a distinctive

group of latticino glass with grad-
uating constrictions to the lower

part, it was one of only two known

similar examples, with the only
other recorded goblet being part

of the collection at Veste Coburg.
Perhaps the crowning glory

of the mixed-owner section of
Continental glass was a fine Dutch

stipple-engraved wine glass by
Alius’ dating to circa 1760
(Fig.2).
Previously unrecorded, it was del-

icately engraved with a gentleman
with his arms around the waist
of his companion and set on a
faceted stem. Although he never

signed any of his engravings, `Alius’
is considered one of the most

important Dutch master engrav-
ers of the 18th century, specialis-

ing in the stipple technique and

equal to that of his better-known

contemporary David Wolff. In

spite of a lack of provenance, it
realised well over double its low
estimate when it sold for £15,000.

Fig. 1
Lot 36

Glass Matters Issue no. I I June 2021

BONHAMS GLASS

English glass from the first few

decades of the 18th century has

also proven to be a strong and popu-

lar investment over the years, with
heavy balusters being the quintes-

sential early English glasses. The
English glass section was repre-

sented by just one heavy baluster,

a ‘Liberty’ goblet dating to circa

1710-20 engraved with the Horse
of Hanover and inscribed `AUREA

LIBERTAS’ in diamond-point

(Fig.3).
Unsurprisingly, it sold

above estimate for £3,700.
The English glass section includ-

ed a broad offering of Jacobite

engraved glasses and glass of

Jacobite interest, for which there

was healthy competition. A small
firing glass of circa 1750 engraved
`THE FRIENDLY HUNT’ performed

particularly well
(Fig.4),
bringing

£2,500 (estimate £1,200-1,800).

The inscription refers to a Jacobite

society founded in 1747 known as
The Friendly Association, which
met annually in Worcestershire.

Together with the present lot

only a handful of other examples

are known to exist. Following on

from this, a rare set of six Jacobite

engraved air-twist wine glass-

es
(Fig.5)
sold mid-estimate for

£4,000. It is thought that a set of

twelve Jacobite engraved glass-

es, eleven of which were sold at
Bonhams in Edinburgh for £5,800

in 2013, may be the largest surviv-

ing, fully matching set of English
drinking glasses from the mid-18th
century (see
Glass Circle News,

no.119, June 2009, p.16 for a dis-
cussion). Nevertheless, Jacobite

sets of any size are rare and even a

set of six represents a remarkable

survival. Another rare Jacobite
air-twist glass, inscribed ‘Fiat’ and

with the word `Redi’ between two
oak leaves on the foot
(Fig.6),
gen-

erated much interest and realised

over estimate at £3,800; possibly
for the ‘Oak Society’, a Jacobite

club which met at the Crown &

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

Fig. 9

Lot 93
BONHAMS GLASS

Anchor on the corner of Arundel
Street and The Strand in London,

it is one of only a handful of surviv-

ing examples with this inscription.
The mid-late 18th century

English glass included sever-

al group-lots of air-twist and
opaque-twist wine glasses, which

have become very affordable in
recent years. Among these were

two gilded wine glasses decorat-
ed in the atelier of James Giles,

dating to circa 1765-70
(Fig.7),

one with an opaque- twist stem

and the other on a faceted stem.
The market in Giles gilded glasses

has been variable in recent years

and prices seem to have fallen

steadily. Cautiously estimated
as a result, they were fine exam-
ples of their type which brought

over three times the low estimate

when they sold for £1,900, per-
haps indicating a much-deserved
renewed interest in these pieces.
Contemporary glass is typi-

cally included in Modern Design

sales at Bonhams rather than
traditional Glass sales, but the

work of Laurence Whistler has

become a staple feature, with
several of his pieces appearing in

Fine Glass sales over the last few

years. Pieces by his son, Simon

Whistler, are considered less
desirable amongst collectors of

Whistler stipple-engraved pieces.

This sale included a goblet finely
engraved by Simon Whistler with

a view of Carreg Cennen in Wales,
executed in 1989
(Fig.8),
which

echoed the prices usually seen for

work by his father when it sold for

£3,000, doubling the upper esti-

mate. This artist’s work is clearly

becoming widely recognised as
something to rival his father’s,

so Simon Whistler is certainly a
name to look out for in the future.
The sale culminated with a

collection of rare and interest-

ing millefiori objects, followed

by paperweights. These objects
typically form a distinct field of

collecting in their own right, rel-

ative to more traditional English

and Continental glass. The earli-
est of these was a rare pair of late

17th century French knife han-

dles
(Fig.9)
attributed to Bernard

Perrot (1640-1709), a glassmaker

of Italian origin who was active

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

Fig. 11

Fig. 10

Lot 89

Lot 92

Fig. 12

Lot 88

BONHAMS GLASS

in Orleans from 1662. Although
damaged and mounted with later

19th century blades, they gener-
ated considerable pre-sale inter-
est, selling well above estimate

for £2,200. The rediscovery of the
millefiori technique in the 19th

century is traditionally credit-
ed to Dr Wilhelm Eduard Fuss, a

chemist who joined the Matterne
Brothers in their glassworks in

Hoffnungsthal in 1830. Assisted

by Franz Pohl, his experiments

were successful in 1833 when he

succeeded in producing his first
millefiori canes. He set up his own

workshop in his chemical factory
in Magdeburg-Schoenebeck in

1841, where he mainly produced
jewellery amongst other mille-

fiori- decorated pieces including
small plaques and handles. His

workshop closed in 1842 as it was

not economically viable and he

gave up glassmaking. A rare, cased

Silesian close-packed millefiori
demi-parure from the Workshop

of Dr Fuss
(Fig.10)
was acquired by

The Corning Museum of Glass for
£1,900, nearly double the estimate.
The experiments of Dr Fuss

enabled Karl Pohl to develop

millefiori glass at his glassworks

in Karlsthal, and ultimately pro-

vided the foundations for the pro-
duction of millefiori paperweights

in the mid-19th century. The ear-

liest millefiori paperweights are
thought to have been produced

around 1843 and Pietro Bigaglia

was among the first Venetian
craftsmen to make them. The
earliest dated examples are from

1845, the year in which Bigaglia

exhibited paperweights for the
first time at the Exhibition of

Austrian Industry in Vienna.
Bigaglia’s glass often incorporated

canes made by Franchini. Although

cracked, a Franchini cane handle
dated 1845
(Fig.11)
sold for £1,300

(estimate £600-800). Similarly, a

small Franchini plaque dated 1846
(Fig.12)
made £2,000 (estimate

£700-900) in spite of small chips.

Again, where rarity is concerned
damage is far less of an issue.
The next sale of Fine Glass

and British Ceramics will take

place at Bonhams, Knightsbridge
on 23 June 2021 as part of The

Classics season, a series of auc-

tions dedicated to the Classic Arts.

Glass Matters Issue no, I I June 2021

GILDED IRISH LILIES

IRISH CONNECTIONS
and
Gilded Irish Lilies?

Simon Cook
Fig. 1

The sugar basin, showing a

golden hue in the engraving

T
he acquisition of a pet-

al-moulded, engraved, blue-
rimmed, ‘perhaps Irish, c.

1800’ sugar basin
(Fig.1)
was the

starting point of an exciting voy-
age of discovery. Equipped with
just a
few
books, a modest budget

for more glass and an enquiring
mind, I set sail. With a casual but

passionate interest in old glass,

but with few personal contacts and

limited or no access to reference

sources and other collections, I
was excited about the possibility of
finding out more. The subsequent,

years-long voyage and the many
ports of call led to many discoveries

and much knowledge being gained.

This article is about several

small and apparently otherwise

undistinguished pieces of Georgian

Irish glass, which, except for one,

appeared on the market over the
course of several years. In addition

to being engraved, quite extraor-

dinarily for Irish glass and against
expectations, they all appeared to

show signs of gilded decoration. It
is also noteworthy that none of the

vendors of the glasses made any
reference whatsoever to there being

any ‘colour’ in the engraving. The

group consists of the sugar basin,
the Macdonald rummer
(Fig.2)
held

by Glasgow Museums, the sham-
rock rummer
(Fig.3),
the ship and

anchor rummer, the star and sun-
burst wineglass and an 18th centu-
ry cordial glass, shown in
Fig.4.
The

latter, having a thick foot, a thick

stem and a thick base in the bowl,
is in the Irish tradition. It is also
one of the many ‘Volunteer’ glass-
es that were created and engraved

by Franz Tieze in Dublin, probably
early in the 20th century. Included

in the decoration, which has typ-

ical Tieze sprays of shamrocks
and a characteristic spelling

error, are the words MALLOW
INDEPENDANT (sic) VOLUNTEERS.
Early on in my voyage, photo-

graphs of the sugar basin were
sent to various specialists for their
comments. The dealer through

Fig. 2
The Macdonald rummer

(By courtesy of Glasgow Museums)
whose hands it had passed said

that the perceived wisdom in the
trade was that discolouration like

this in engraving is due to the

accumulation of cigar smoke and
that he could see no
glitter of gold.

A museum curator doubted the

Fig. 3

The very heavy shamrock
rummer

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

GILDED IRISH LILIES

Fig. 4

The petal-moulded ‘ship and anchor’ rummer, the slice-cut ‘star and sunburst’ wineglass and

the cordial that purports to be from
the MALLOW LNDEPENDANT
(sic)
VOLUNTEERS

authenticity of the sugar basin

and said that it was so unusual
that it may well have been pro-
duced in the early 20th century

to look like antique Irish glass. An

auction-house specialist said that

although the moulding, engrav-
ing and the blue rim put the basin
firmly into an Irish and Waterloo
Company context, he doubted

that the engraving was also gild-

ed –
This would be highly unusual for

Irish glass and very unlikely for such

a small object.
Finally, and several

years later, an Irish glass special-
ist said that he thought that the
colour in the engraving was pos-

sibly a picture-frame restoration
product called `Goldfinger’ – this
first appeared on the market in

the 1960s and spawned a fad for

decorating old, engraved glasses.

The first book to which I turned

was by Phelps Warrens. In it there
is a photograph of the Macdonald
rummer, fig.162. Presumably,

Warren never examined the glass

himself as there is no mention of
the apparent gilding. Because the

bow-knot and leaf-frond deco-
ration was similar to that on the

sugar basin, I went to Glasgow
and examined and photographed
the rummer. I then tried to find
references to Irish thin-walled,

engraved sugar basins and cream
jugs. In Warren’s chapter on Irish

luxury glass under ‘Table Use’ there
is no sub-category for sugar basins,

although there is one for cream

jugs. This is strange, as the two of

them normally went hand-in-hand.

Westropp
2
says that when the Cork

Glass Company’s factory closed in

1818 the stock included both sugar
bowls and cream ewers plus rum-
mers and wine glasses. But, like

Warren, he doesn’t either illustrate

or mention thin-walled exam-
ples; only cut pieces are included.
Warren states under ‘BOWLS’:

Barring decanters, there is no group

so large. It is notable that all the

bowls shown are decorated with

cutting; none is engraved. Engraved
bowls which can confidently be con-
sidered Irish have not come to hand.
I could find no trace at all of Irish
thin-walled, engraved sugar basins

and cream jugs in the literature.
However, a small Irish (probably

Cork) blue-rimmed cream jug from

the Kenneth Tughan collection is
now held by the National Museum

of Ireland, Dublin. It is engraved

with ribbon bows and hatched

swags and the museum believes
that it is an important piece.
English gilded glass such as that

by Isaac Jacobs of Bristol, James
Giles of London and William

Absolon of Yarmouth is familiar
and well known. However, it can-
not be said that Irish gilded glass

is also familiar and well-known, for
there is no famed Irish equivalent

of these men. In stark contrast,

all that does appear to be known

seems to refer to two obscure prac-
titioners, John Grahl and Richard
Hand, who undertook oil gilding,

a tantalising reference to gilding

becoming a speciality in Cork
3
and

18th century advertisements for

glass “gilt or plain”. The legacy, in

terms of known pieces, seems to
consist solely of just a few plates

by Grahl and a pair of cold-gild-

ed ‘Land We Live In’ decanters.

Of gilding, Westropp says that

gilt glass was often imported, and
naturally the Irish manufacturers

would have endeavoured to copy

it and probably a small quantity
was gilt.
Westropp discusses the

known output of Grahl and Hand,

which is minimal. Warren illus-
trates two glasses, figs.166 & 181,

which he says have the remains of
gilding in the letters; however, it
is now known that both of them

were engraved by Franz Tieze.
In his book on rummers, Mills’

describes cold gilding, as opposed

to gilding fired-on in a kiln:
The

process required the gold leaf or

powder to be applied over an oil or

varnish base. The decoration was
allowed to dry and was then bur-

nished to provide a bright finish.
Most gilding seen on rummers was

applied using this method. It would

have been cheaper to execute and was

thus more widely available. However,

a major disadvantage of this process

was the inability of this gilding to
withstand continued washing and

rubbing so much of what survives

today is badly worn and incomplete.

Cold gilding was also applied to some

engraved glasses but this practice
was not particularly common in

Glass Matters Issue no.11 June 2021

Britain. Although the slight depth of

the engraved image may have afford-

ed a little protection to the gilding,
many examples are still badly rubbed

with just the dark staining of the
fixative remaining.
Several exam-

ples are illustrated in his book.
So, could it be shown that the

golden colour in the engraving
on the sugar basin
(Fig.5)
and the

shamrock rummer
(Fig.6)
was actu-

ally gold? The Birmingham Assay
Office said that they could not test
the sugar basin so other methods

had to be employed. Careful wash-
ing with warm soapy water and a

cotton bud did remove some colour
from the basin’s engraving but it

was not brown or golden but grey,

Fig. 7

A closer view of the Macdonald
rummer,
showing

the golden hue in the engraving
indicating smoke residue or dirt.

The golden colour was left intact,

suggesting that it was bonded
to the glass. A simple gold-test-

ing kit was obtained and the
results did seem to indicate gold.

Interestingly, although the test-

ing solution contained some acid,
this still did not remove any of the

golden colour from the engraving.

The subsequent comments

about Goldfinger led me to look
once again at the colour in the
engraving of the sugar basin and

the shamrock rummer. Since it

didn’t seem to be dirt – compare

with
Fig.8,
a different rummer

– or smoke residue, I still leant
towards gilding and particularly
cold gilding, as the source of the

golden hue. I also wondered why

anyone in recent times would go
to the trouble of applying fiddly

gold paste so very carefully and
delicately to every single tiny leaf

on the leaf fronds. On the sugar

basin there are 269 leaves and,
on the shamrock rummer, there

are 250. The work has been so
finely done that I find it difficult
to imagine that the material used

was Goldfinger. And if Goldfinger
is the source, why is it so rubbed

and worn, if it was applied just

a few decades ago at the most?
However, I did follow up a sug-

gestion to further test the engrav-
ing with some paint and varnish

Fig. 8

Dirt (or
perhaps
black enamelling?) in the star

of a different but contemporary Cork
rummer
GILDED IRISH LILIES

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

A
golden star on the sugar basin

Detail from the shamrock
rummer

Glass Matters Issue no, I I June 2021

GILDED IRISH LILIES

stripper. First, I tested some kiln-
fired gold on an Isaac Jacobs cream
jug and it was unaffected. I then

tested one of the leaves on the

basin and rummer and the gold
colour was removed fairly easily.
I was not surprised though, giv-

en that the cold-gilding process

required the gold leaf or powder

to be applied over an oil or varnish

base. I then checked the pattern

of wear on the leaves of the sugar

basin, the shamrock rummer and
the Macdonald rummer and it was

the same – seemingly consistent

with 200 years of washing and

rubbing. Miss J.C.C. Macdonald, a

member of the Society of Scottish

Antiquaries and active in the early
20th century, had varied collec-

tions of objects and her glass was

acquired by what is now Glasgow
Museums in 1947. Crucially, the

early 20th century was long before

Goldfinger came onto the market,

so the inescapable conclusion is

that the worn gold colour on the

Macdonald rummer is what is left

of cold-gilded decoration
(Fig.7).

Consequently, because the

colour and the pattern of wear

on all three pieces is so similar,

because the colour is badly worn

and incomplete, because ‘gild-

ing became a speciality in Cork’,
because the ‘Land We Live In’
cold-gilded decanters are believed

to be from Corks, because gilt glass

was advertised and because of my
close examination and testing, I

have concluded that both the sugar

basin and the shamrock rummer

were also cold gilded when made.

It was subsequent to these findings

and conclusions that the remaining

three pieces in the study group sur-

faced and were acquired. I believe

that the rummer and wineglass

may also be attributed to Cork.

The ship and anchor rummer has

quite a lot of colour remaining in
the engraving and, like the sugar

basin, there is a comma motif in

the centre of the leaf fronds. The
design may reflect the maritime

heritage of Cork. The star and sun-

burst pattern on the small wine-
glass has very little trace of gilding
now but the pattern may also be

seen on at least one marked Cork
decanter
(Warren, fig.21,
p.79).

The gilding on the cordial is later
and brighter but now, with at least
three engraved glasses by Tieze

showing the remains of gilding in
the letters, the questions are who
did it, how, where, when and why?
After years of exciting but

unpredictable collecting and
research, it was extremely gratify-

ing to receive Peter Francis’ com-
ments about the sugar basin and

the shamrock rummer:
They are

both Cork, probably Waterloo Glass
Co. as the in-house engraving con-
forms to patterns found on marked

Waterloo decanters, so, early 19th

century. The sugar bowl in particular
is rare, especially with a blue rim – I’ve
seen small jugs like this, but never

such a fine moulded bowl. Both are

lovely pieces of period Irish glass. The

bowl in particular is a great thing,
and rare enough to be of museum

quality.
Of the dozens of engraved

Irish glasses that I have examined,
the engraving on the sugar basin

is among the best of all. With its

elegant proportions and four dif-
ferent decorative techniques, I see

it as a high-quality piece of Irish

glass, more than worthy of adorn-
ing any gracious table in the land.
From the foregoing it is evident

that very few pieces of Irish gilded

glass are known. Anna Moran said
it may be that more Irish gilded

glass was produced than we know

about, but perhaps detailed records

were either not kept or have been

lost and very few gilded examples

have survived. Additionally, in my
experience, much Irish glass on
the market is not even described

as such, being mostly attributed
to England. It does now seem that

more gilded glass was produced

in Ireland and specifically in Cork
than was previously known. The

five pieces of glass here (exclud-

ing the cordial) are thus elevated

into an entirely different and
rarefied league. The fact that

the sugar basin (which may well

be unique) and the other Cork

glasses still show traces of gold
or gilding, after all these years,
truly does make them “Gilded
Irish Lilies”. Further sampling

and research may well reveal more
examples of previously unknown

gilded Irish glass but whatever,
I wonder, happened to the sug-

ar basin’s matching cream jug?

Simon Cook has taken the text

for this article from his `work-in-

progress’ on glass with Irish connec-

tions. A member of The Glass Circle

and The Glass Association since the
1980s, now a member of The Glass

Society, he’s been an enthusiastic

collector of mainly Georgian glass.
With Barclays Bank for 19 years,

he has now lectured on small cruise

ships around the world for 25 years.

Simon works on the sea, lives by the

sea, collects sea glass and is now
principally interested in engraved

Irish drinking glasses. He can be con-

tacted via [email protected].

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.
Warren, Phelps,

IRISH GLASS

Waterford-Cork-Belfast in the Age of

Exuberance.
Faber & Faber. London,

(2nd ed. 1981).

2.
Westropp, M.S. Dudley, M.R.I.A.

IRISH GLASS an account of glass-mak-

ing in Ireland from the XVIth century
to the present day.
Allen Figgis,

Dublin, (revised edition 1978).

3.
Hughes, G. Bernard,
English,

Scottish and Irish Table Glass.
BT

Batsford Ltd. London, (1956), p.368

4.
Mills, Timothy, Rummers,

A Social

History Told in Glass,
(2013).

5.
Mortimer, Martin M.B.E.,
Glass

Circle News No. 101,
(2004).

`Marked Irish Glass, Part 2.

Edwards, Belfast’, p. 8.

Glass Matters Issue no. I I June 2021

WINE TO GUITAR SLIDE

Vintage
Mateus Rose:

Bottle neck to guitar slide

Stan Parry

I
can just see you thinking,

what on earth does Mateus
Rose have to do with the

world of glass? Just bear with me
and we will get there eventually.

I am sure a number of the member-

ship will have some fond and not so
fond memories of this wine, the head-

aches it created and of course the con-

version of the bottle into a table lamp,
this being achieved by the purchase of

a push-in lamp holder inserted into
the neck of the bottle or, more dras-
tically, the drilling of a hole and then
running the cable inside the bottle to

the lamp holder. Neither method was

aesthetically pleasing as the lighting

cable was always on show, especially

when the lamp was lit. I have always
felt that the early Caithness lamps suf-

fered from this problem, despite the
design being of its time. That said, I

have seen a Walsh Walsh catalogue

from the 1930s showing the attached

light fitting in dose proximity to water,

which filled the glass bottle/vase
holder below, something that would

never be allowed in this day and age.
I digress, but the conversion of a wine

bottle into a lamp must be an early
incarnation of recycling. I am not sure
many people would put their hands up

to still having and using a Mateus Rose

wine bottle lamp – famous last words!
So, you may well ask, what
does

Mateus Rose have to do with the world

of glass? I am fairly sure we have all

seen examples of various bottles recy-

cled into items – such as the Teacher’s

whisky bottle in its slumped form to
create an ash tray, the cut-down body
to create a tumbler, and the neck and

upper shoulders of a bottle turned

into a functioning funnel. As good

as they may be, these reincarnations

are not very imaginative, that is
until we come to the world of music.

I am fortunate enough to live near

the Ruskin Glass Centre, the old Webb
Corbett factory, which is just down
the road from the Stuart Cone and the

soon to be opened Stourbridge Glass
Museum, care of the British Glass

Foundation. While on a visit to Blue

Glass Liners, the glass repair unit, I

spotted a small glass tube, obvious-

ly being a cut down part of the neck
of a wine bottle. Ever curious, I was
introduced to Ian McWee, owner of

“Diamond Bottlenecks”. Education
now commences. Ian explained this

curious use of glass tubes was an
important item in the world of acous-
tic guitar playing; they were used as

a slide across the strings to create

a unique set of sounds, one of his
main customers being the world-re-
nowned acoustic guitar player Mark
Knopfler. At this point I was suffi-

ciently intrigued to ask Ian if he could
make me a couple of slides from some

of my empty wine bottles, which he

duly agreed to undertake. See
Fig.1

for

the result. You will note the sides of

the slides are not parallel, due to the

form of the bottle’s neck. At the time I

had no idea why I asked Ian to produce
the slides as I am not a guitar player,
other than to say they fit into my

main collecting area, which I will save

for another time. It was at this point
that I began to understand just how

many different types of guitar slides
are made from recycled material and

also being made from scratch by local
glassmakers for Ian. The plan is now

to offer one of my slides and associat-
ed bottle to the new Stourbridge Glass
Museum collection to use as examples

from the recycling world of today.
So, let’s get onto the Mateus Rose

Fig. 1

Guitar slides from former Vintage Claret bottles

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

WINE TO GUITAR SLIDE

bottle neck and see what it brings to
the world of the acoustic guitar. It is

fair to say the science associated with

the Mateus Rose slide, which is revered

and widely sought after, is not under-
stood, other than to say it is an essen-
tial piece of equipment used by players

all over the world. Unfortunately, and
this is where ‘vintage’ comes into play,

Mateus Rose has never, as far as I am

aware, been produced as a vintage

wine, but as a refreshing daily drink.

A little-known fact is that at one stage
Mateus Rose was providing 40% of
Portugal’s wine exports. Vintage does

however apply to the acoustic guitar

world, where only this one particular
bottle shape produces such an out-

standing musical response from its
neck — that of Mateus Rose; though

the bottles concerned are only the

ones made prior to and not after 1973
(Fig.2). Fig.3
shows the neck of a bot-

tle and the bottle from which it was
removed, before being finally worked

on to produce the finished item, shown

in
Fig.4,
this style of slide retains the

top of the neck.
Fig.5
shows a plain

style of the slide — where the top of the
neck has been smoothed down. One

major advantage of the early Mateus
Rose bottle is that the neck has parallel

sides
(Fig.3),
which may explain some

of its advantages over other versions.
In terms of acoustic science, is it

the glass recipe; the colouring agent;

the parallel sides; or anything else you

can think of, which makes it so unique

and widely sought after? However,

you never know if a glass technologist,

sound engineer, chemist, physical sci-
entist or a combination of all of them,
may be able to answer the question.
Perhaps it is best on balance to accept

it for what it is, rather than trying to

come up with an explanation. The

human ear is of course the final arbiter.
Ian also explained that finding

sources of this bottle for conversion
is becoming very difficult, and as

such, acoustic guitar people all over

the world actively search them out to

send to Ian for him to work his magic.

Ian did explain that in recent times
Fig. 2

Vintage Mateus Rose bottles

he’d heard of a local publican who had

found a wooden case of twelve full pre-

1973 Mateus Rose bottles in his cellar.
The publican was a little astonished

when Ian said he would purchase the
lot – but he could keep the case and
the contents and Ian only wanted the

empty bottles. It was at this point it

became even better, as a further three

bottles were found in the cellar cor-
ner – resulting in fifteen very happy

acoustic guitar player customers.

It is fair to say that Ian would be

very happy to receive any donations
of this type of bottle to help main-

tain a supply, albeit low, into the

marketplace. So, if you have a such a

bottle send an image to Ian for him
to confirm it is the real deal, in the

knowledge that your old lamp could

go on to a third life, with the remains

going into cullet for further reuse.
Finally, and even better, if you do

intend to visit the new Stourbridge

Fig. 3
A Vintage Mateus Rose wine-bottle

separated from its neck

Glass Matters Issue no. I I June 2021

Fig. 4

Completed guitar slide
from a Vintage Mateus

Rose wine bottle,

showing the parallel

sides: neck top style
Fig. 5

Completed guitar

slide from a
Vintage Mateus

Rose wine bottle:
plain style
WINE TO GUITAR SLIDE

Glass Museum when it opens, Ian

would be more than happy for you
to visit him at the Redhouse Glass

Crafts glass repair shop inside the
Ruskin Glass Centre and make a

donation of any pre-1973 Mateus
Rose bottles. Remember, it must

be the version shown in
Fig.2.

The downside to all this is that the

Mateus Rose slide cannot meet the

worldwide demand for guitar slides

and that’s why it is so sought after. This
is where Diamond Bottlenecks comes

into its own, providing a wide range
of many different types including

one made in metal with a glass insert.
Space and time do not allow more

explanation in this article so do go
to www. diamondb o ttlene cks . com

for more technical and user
information on the incredible range,

all offered with some type of glass in
them – it will be well worth the effort.

Plus, you’ll see and hear examples

of various types of slides in use, also
the use of a pill bottle as a slide: fas-

cinating. I can guarantee you will

be entertained for longer than you
think and in more ways than one.
So when people say Stourbridge

glass is no longer in existence you
can now demonstrate it still has a

unique role in the world of glass. I
can also say Diamond Bottlenecks

is not the only small glass enclave

hiding away in Stourbridge. This is
one of the few examples where
craft

and art come together in perfect sym-
metry and harmony –
it is not often

you can make that as a statement.

Jacobite Glass in the : ational Gallery of Victoria

I
n 2013 the National Gallery of

Victoria (NGV) staged an exhi-
bition of Jacobite glass with

over one hundred exhibits drawn

from the NGV’s extensive Jacobite

glass collection. The exhibition was
researched and curated by Dr Matthew
Martin, former Assistant Curator,

International Decorative Arts and

Antiquities, and titled ‘Kings Over the
Water’. A summary of the exhibition is
available on the NGV website together

with an excellent essay on the Jacobites
and their glasses by Dr Martin at

https: //www. ngv.vic.gov.au/es say/
kings-over-the-water-jacobite-glass-

in-the-national-gallery-of-victoria/

As no catalogue was prepared for

the exhibition, I proceeded to prepare

my own record given the importance of

the subject. The exhibits were mounted

in thirteen display cases with a descrip-
tion of each at the side of each case.
I decided to use Power Point to

prepare the record and Dr Martin was

most helpful in providing me with the
description of each item used in the
exhibition. Unfortunately, few photo-

graphs of the glasses were available on
the NGV data base at the time but I was

aware that the Gallery was planning to
photograph all the glass in its collec-

tion over the coming years. This was

a relatively slow process and although
I was able to add some photographs

as these became available, I am afraid
I neglected to finalise the record.
When Peter Henderson’s article

introducing ‘Glass at the National

Gallery of Victoria’ appeared in

the October 2020 edition of Glass
Matters I was stirred to complete

my record of the ‘Kings over the

Water’ which I have now done.
I thought the record would be

of particular interest to members

of the Glass Society and obtained
the support of Amanda Dunsmore,

Senior Curator, International
Decorative Arts and Antiquities,

at the NGV, to make it available.
I found that the Power Point record

was over 30MB in size and as such, was
difficult to email. This was overcome

by converting the record to pdf. This
pdf, NGV KOW Jan 2021.pdf, is now

available on the Society web site for

the enjoyment of Society members.

Glass Matters Issue no.I 1 June 2021

LOVE TOKENS

GEORGIAN LOVE TOKEs,part2
Neil Chaney

R
egular readers of

Glass

Matters
will recall an article

that appeared in February

2020, issue No.7, titled “Georgian
Love Tokens”. The article described

two diamond-point engraved

Georgian glasses that were related

to each other in that they had both

been engraved by a Nicolaas Ludolph
Hoevenaar as tokens of affection to

his wife, Maria Elisabeth Vroome,

one before and one after marriage.
I had thought that would be the end

of the matter, although I did men-
tion at the end of the article that it

would be wonderful if such objects of

sentiment could be returned to the
Hoevenaar family in the event that

somebody knew an existing relative.

I received no immediate response

from the article, but after a delay of

several months eventually heard

from a Belgian collector based in The
Netherlands who referred me to a

Hans Hoevenaar who acts as curator

Fig.
1

A self-portrait glass by
Adrianus Hoevenaar Snr
of the Hoevenaar Art Museum, a

virtual museum that collates the
art work of generations of the
Hoevenaar family of which Nicolaas

was a part. The museum can be

viewed at hoevenaarartmuseum.nl.
It turns out that the Hoevenaars

were a family dating back to the 17th
century with a long line of talented

artists in different media. Pieter
Hoevenaar (d. 1637) was a talented

painter and a work of his still hangs in
the Rotterdam Historical Museum.

Some four generations after Pieter,
the attention of Adrianus Hoevenaar

Sr. (1732-1793) and his epony-
mous son turned to engraving on

glass, many to excellent effect.
Adrianus Snr. was a leading Dutch

patriot, a pro-democracy cam-

paigner who felt that the Orangists

had too much power, and worked

as a prosecutor and notary based
in Utrecht. There are only three
examples of his diamond-point

engraved glasses on the Hoevenaar

website but he showed no little skill,
as can be seen in the calligraphic
decoration on the bowl of the

tumbler shown below
(Figs.1&2).

Adrianus Jnr. (1764-1832) was

the equal of his father in terms of skill

and many more examples of his work
can be seen on the website. He had a

colourful career as skipper of a barge

ferrying passengers on the Utrecht

– Amsterdam route. The family had
to flee the country in 1787 when

Willem V and his wife, Wilhelmina

invited in Prussian troops to quell
the patriotic movement. Eight

years later, at the commence-
ment of the Batavian Republic, he
returned to The Netherlands where

he resumed his career on the barge.
His engravings on glass are a pic-

torial history of the times. He used

a combination of diamond-point

line engraving and stipple engrav-

ing to carry out his work. By using

a diamond pin to create dots on the

glass, he could make parts of the
glass lighter in colour as he desired.

Fig. 2

The reverse of the glass in Fig.1,
showing the initials AH

Glass Matters Issue nail June 2021

:64,
k
t

9 CY
LEFT Fig. 3

The varied

font text on a

glass engraved
by Adrianus
Hoevenaar Jnr.

RIGHT Fig. 4

The reverse of the

glass in Fig3
LOVE TOKENS

This way, he could subtly vary

between light and dark effects

and also use evenly scratched
marks to provide a matt-like fin-

ish. Perversely, his works include

a “VIVAT ORANGE” glass, which

features a dove of peace but with an
orange tree twig rather than an olive

branch. Perhaps a sign of hoped for
reconciliation between the nation-

alist and Orange movements. My

favourite is the ovoid bowl rummer
engraved in no less than seven dif-
ferent fonts and which celebrates
the 58th birthday of Lady Christina
Gesina van Hoorn in 1796. It

shows finely drawn putti and illus-
trates his skill nicely
(Figs.3&4).

Other engraved goblets include

a majestic portrait of the Dutch
King Louis Bonaparte (reigned

1806-1810), a portrait of one
of the Cossacks who liberated

The Netherlands in 1813, a por-
trait of Willem I and his wife,

and a self-portrait, an unusu-

al subject for a glass engraver.
The Nicolaas who engraved

my two glasses was the brother of

Adrianus Jnr. and engraved fewer
glasses than his relatives. He appears

to have had a colourful military
career, serving in the French Foreign

Legion and then in the Hussars. He

reached the rank of Colonel and was
decorated by Napoleon with the
Knight of the Union award and later

as a Knight of the Legion d’Hon-

neur, losing his right arm along the

way in 1811. The glass in
Fig.5
is

attributed to Nicolaas, though the
three other glasses on the website

which feature engraving attributed

Fig. 5

A glass engraved by Nicolaas Hoevenaar
to him show a style similar to those

which were featured in my previous
article. His skills as an artist were

not as great as his ancestors, but we

have to suppose that his opportu-

nities to practice his craft were not

as significant as those of his more

sedentary father. One interesting
note is that the second of the two

glasses I featured in the article was
engraved after he lost his right

arm: so, either a leftie or someone
unbowed by the mere loss of a limb.
I am pleased to say that those two

glasses are now with the Hoevenaar
family and appear on the website

alongside the three that were already

there. It is so good to see a wish play

out and we hope the Hoevenaars

of the current generation get to
enjoy them for many years to come.
We would like to thank Hans

Hoevenaar for his assistance with

this article as well as Anna Lameris,

who published an article on the same

subject in ‘Adrianus Hoevenaar, dia-
mantlijn- en stippelgraveur in roerige

tijden’, in:
Collect,
September 2009,

number 7, 14th year, p. 22-24, and

who provided much of the informa-
tion for this article. All the images are

courtesy of The Hoevenaar Museum.

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

WORKING WITH ACID

Factory Girls; Part 1:
Voicesfrom
the past

Kate Round
BELOW
Dulcie May Harper

S
everal years ago, glass enthu-

siasts Kate Round and James
Measell separately chatted

with former ‘factory girls’ who had

worked in some capacity in the
Stourbridge glass industry. At the
time of two of these interviews,

the women were more than 90

years old, but the recollections of
their employ in the glass industry

were quite vivid and interesting
to hear. This interview is with

Dulcie May Harper by Kate Round.

DULCIE MAY HARPER
I was researching information

about the role of women in the glass
industry for the 2012 British Glass
Biennale, and was able to speak with
Dulcie May Harper, who worked

in the glass industry when it had

been a flourishing Black Country
trade. Dulcie
(nee
Perrins) start-

ed work at Royal Brierley Crystal

(Stevens & Williams) in 1950.
Both her mother and aunt worked

at Stevens & Williams in the early

1920s, straight from leaving school,
when they were thirteen years old.

KR:
How did you get your job at

Stevens and Williams?
DMH: Mum

[Florence Perrins] and Aunty
Emma [Emma Tunley] lived in

Brockmore, and they got me the
job. It was my first job leaving

school, I was fourteen. Mum had
returned to work after having me

and our Iris, and my grandmother

and grandfather looked after me,

so I was known as Dulcie Tunley.
My dad’s name was Perrins. I lived

in the Delph and walked to work
at the Moor Lane end. I worked

in the acid-dipping shed. That
was one of the hardest jobs on the

site done by women. My mother
worked there with Aunty Emma,

Jesse Goran, and Linda Geary.

KR:
Tell me about your job.
DMH:

My job was ‘carrying off.’ After

the acid polish [a mixture of hydro-

fluoric acid and sulfuric acid], the

pieces were put on a draining board

and swilled with water, then put
on a table. I carried the pieces on

a tray around my neck, like an ice
cream tray carried by the usherette

at the cinema, and I took them to

the warehouse. I was like a gener-

al ‘dogsbody.’ You just did as you

were told. To see the pieces of glass
before the acid polish, in the raw,

you would not look at them twice,
they were dull and with no shine.

When it came out of the acid, the
pattern sparkled. The roughers
used a rough stone wheel, then the

smoother refined the cuts, then the
piece was acid polished. We could

look at a piece of finished glass,
and we knew who the rougher and

smoother was just by looking at it.

KR:
What do you recall about the

acid?
DMH: When you walked from

the intaglio room down the wooden

steps and across the yard, carrying
the ‘tagged’ [intaglio cut] pieces,

you opened the door to the acid
room and the fumes made you gasp.
If you worked in the acid, you could

not wear glasses as they would go all

frosted, the fumes spoilt the lenses.

And you had to tie your hair up in a
scarf because the acid fumes would

turn it yellow. When you came to

work, you changed your clothes.

Glass Matters Issue no. I I June 2021

WORKING WITH ACID

The acid polishers would tear off

long strips of brown paper from
the packing shops. They would

take all their clothes off, even their

bra, before wrapping themselves in

brown paper tied with string. Then
they put on the rubber aprons and

long gloves, with gaiters. The paper
kept them warmer and caught the

acid spots. Only ladies worked in
the acid. Occasionally one of the

men would come in and dip a piece
just to see how long it took if it

was a new pattern. If the glass was
left in the ‘bosh’ [acid mixture] for
even two seconds too long it was

ruined, it blistered it. There was

a changing room, but no washing
facilities. We had a cupboard. The

acid smell would linger on your

body and in your hair. When I

got home, you would stand in the
brew house and wash down with a

bucket of water. If the fire under
the boiler was lit after someone’s

wash day, I would often fill the
boiler and have a warm bath … that

was lovely in the warm brew house.
KR:
Were there accidents?
DMH: It

was dangerous work; we often had
acid burns and you just washed it
off and took no notice. If it splashed

in your eye, we knew exactly what
to do. We would run to the tap and

fill a glass with water and wash our

eye out, you just got on with it.

There were breakages all the time,
even the smallest chip and the piece

was broken up for ‘cullef . Sometimes
pieces were carried out in back

pockets. The gaffers must have
known as they used to visit workers

houses, so they would see the glass-
es and ornaments. It was worthless

to us, we worked with it all day, it

had no value. I gave away a lot,
other people would beg for them. I

gave away whole sets, liquors, sher-

ries, right up to the larger pieces.

KR:
What do you recall about your

wages?
DMH: We worked by piece

work [pay depending upon the
`number of pieces processed.’ If you

processed more than required in

allotted time, your pay increased].

You dare not be late because you
would hold up the line. Nobody fin-
ished working until the ‘bull’ went
[an audible sound like a bull’s bel-

low to signal the start and ends

of shifts]. Then there was always

a line at the clock, everyone had

a clocking in and out card, even
the gaffer, though I don’t know if

he used it. I never thought about

working anywhere else until I got
older and realised that it was quite

poorly paid. In the acid room car-
rying off, I earned 7/6d per week

[about £10 in today’s value]. There

were six acid workers in there, mum
and aunty Emma, Jesse and Linda,

Carrie Philpotts, and Lily Gennard.
Nobody trained you, you just got on

with it. All the time I worked there
and until I got married, I turned my
money up to my mother. When I got

married, mother gave it all back to

me and said, ‘here, you may need

this.’ I worked there for seven years
until I realised that there was more

money to be earned elsewhere. I

worked for a time at the Co-op in
Dudley. I walked [about 3 miles]

from Brierley Hill], every day. Then
I went to work in the motor trade,

where I met my husband-to-be. I

didn’t marry a man from the glass
trade, they didn’t earn enough,

and I had enough cut glass anyway!

KR: Did you
see
other places

and workers in the glass factory?
DMH: I used to watch the girls in

the marking room. They used a red
paste [toxic red lead called litharge’

mixed with linseed oil] to mark the

patterns around the glass. One girl

would sit by a wheel and set it up
and put rings around the piece, then

it was passed on to the next girl who
would put the fleur-de-lys or dia-
monds on it, whatever they were

supposed to. The gaffers were very
fair and nice, they would help you if

you were struggling with anything.
There was a lot of backbiting among
some of the girls and favouritism

with the gaffers. They knew their

workers, they seemed to like me as
my grandma had always taught me
to ‘pay attention to detail.’ They

were long, tedious days, but we
used to have a laugh and joke to

pass the time. The lads at the side of

the lehr used to whistle, they were
the ‘tekers-in’ [as apprentices, their

first job was to take pieces made

by the chair to the lehr. Hence,
`take-it-in’ became ‘teker in’].

KR:
Did you have tea breaks and

time to take your meals in a canteen?
DMH: We made our tea in a glass
jug and drank from a glass, usually

it was engraved with our name and

date of birth. I still have mine some-

where. The engravers would do
them for us. If we wanted a drink of

water, we would just pick up a glass.
Canteen? No, we would just go into
the warehouse and find somewhere

to sit. We would bring some food

from home, usually a bacon sand-

wich, not cooked! We would take
them into the furnace to cook it or

make ourselves some toast on the

fire. It was cold work in the winter,

nowhere was warmed up. I used

to go into the glasshouse some-

times, if I had to give a message to

a neighbour or something. They
took no notice [glasshouse super-

stitions held that women brought
bad luck, causing work to fail or

be substandard; age 14, Dulcie

was considered a child]. They used

to say, ‘Oh, it’s only our Dulcie.’

Kate adds: Dulcie May Harper sad-

ly passed away on January 23, 2021,
aged 94 years. The celebrant at her
funeral was sad because the lady had
no family and had lived in care for

the last years of her life. I was able to

help with information for her eulo-

gy, and went to her funeral to pay
respects, personally and on behalf

of the Stourbridge glass industry.
Kate Round is an out-

reach presenter and tour guide
for Dudley Museum Service.

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

DESKTOP TWISTS AND MILLEFIORI

Glass for
the

Writing Table

Peter Kael4ren, Ph.D

I
very much appreciated Dr. Alan

Thornton’s lecture on paper-

weights on 9 February 2021.

Alan provided a very insightful
perspective on the topic by dividing
paperweights into three different

phases. This overall approach to

understanding the topic is schol-

arly and appropriate in a 21st
century context. I especially
enjoyed Alan’s research into the
history and origins of cane-mak-

ing teachniques and the produc-

tion of the earliest paperweights

in Bohemia and Central Europe.
To fully understand the origin of

the glass paperweight, it is helpful

to consider the historical context in

which it appeared. Travel in Europe
was becoming easier at the time

because of the recently constructed
railroads. Spas or mineral springs,

where one took the mineral waters
for health and relaxation or soaked

in them, were becoming magnets for
the rich and famous. A good exam-

ple was Carlsbad (now Karlovy Vary

in the Czech Republic). One of the
key markets for luxury glass was the

spas where people often purchased

special glasses to take the waters or
to carry home as souvenirs. Beakers

or the so-called
Ranftbecker
(a low,

cylindrical form with a narrow,
thick base and a body that flared

wider towards the rim) were one
of the preferred glass drinking ves-

sels. This primarily ornamental
form does not appear among British
drinking glasses. It is interesting
that one of the earliest examples

of glass with canes illustrated in

Alan’s lecture was a
Ran ftbecker

with canes in its heavy foot.
The other factor in glass retail-

ing was stationer’s shops. By the
mid-1800s, reliable and reasonably

priced mail service with postage

stamps was coming into operation.

The rich and famous could usually
read and write and did so copiously,

particularly when they were travel-

ling. Literacy was spreading to the
middling classes. Stationer’s shops

featured a range of fine writing

paper, notebooks, ledgers, enve-

lopes, cards, gummed paper stick-
ers (wafers) for sealing letters, ink,

calling cards, pens, rulers, sealing

wax, and by the 1840s, interesting
novelties like glass paperweights.
The collection of paperweights

and related glass in the European
Department at the Royal Ontario

Museum is considered to be among
the top three museum collections

in the world. Three cases showing
the historical development of paper-

weights and other related glass were
installed in the Glass Study Gallery

of the Samuel European Galleries

when they opened in October of
1989. These are still on view today.

Initially when paperweights were

introduced through fine stationery

shops, they were part of a much

wider range of glass novelties. With
this in mind, Brian Musselwhite, my

fellow curator at the Royal Ontario
Museum (ROM), Toronto, Canada,

acquired a number of these early
forms between the 1980s and 2007.

All of the examples illustrated are
from the collection of the Royal
Ontario Museum, Toronto, Canada.

Rulers were useful since fine paper

could be expensive and paper with

printed lines was not yet available.
Most rulers were hexagonal wooden
rods about 10 inches (25 cm) long.

If you required only part of a larger

sheet of paper for a note or invoice,

you could neatly tear off a smaller
piece using a ruler. If you were set-
ting up a ledger for your accounts,

you could use the ruler to draw
the lines and columns on the page.
Glass rulers with enclosed canes

were made at the St. Louis Factory
in France in the period c. 1840-

1850
(Figs.1 and
2). Glass pens,

both plain and with enclosed twists

in the handle, were produced in
quantity and apparently still made

occasionally as novelties at fairs

where lamp workers did demonstra-

tions up to the early 1900s
(Fig.3).

In the early years of paperweight

Fig.
1

Ruler – filigree glass, tooled and polished. France, Lorraine, St Louis Factory, c.1840-50. D x L 1.8 x 25.1 cm. Acquisition no. 989.134.5

Fig. 2
Ruler – filigree glass, tooled and polished. France, Lorraine, St Louis Factory, c.1840-50. D x L 1.2 x 25.4 cm. Acquisition no. 989.134.6

Glass Matters Issue no.11 June 2021

Fig. 3

Pen – tooled glass enclosing

a spiral twist. American,

late 1800s D x L 1.2 x
15.2 cm. Acquisition
no.981.19.249

DESKTOP TWISTS AND MILLEFIORI

production, St. Louis also made

small glass dishes with a paper-
weight foot to hold the wafers
(gummed paper stickers) used to

seal letters
(Fig.4).
The pen wiper

in the ROM Collection seems to

be a rare form
(Fig.5).
I have seen

only two other examples. Steel pen
nibs could easily become clogged

with dried ink and difficult to use if
they were not wiped off from time

to time with a small cloth. Some

writers preferred to wipe their nibs
on animal bristles mounted onto

a brass base weighted with lead

Fig. 4

Pen Wiper-tooled glass dish with twisted canes
mounted in gilded brass with animal bristles at

top and lead weight inside base. France, c. 1850:

the glass Baccarat Factory,• metal mounts stamped
1-1ANSOM”,probal4 assembled in Paris. H. 4.8 cm.

Diameter (dish) 7.7 cm. Acquisition no. 987108.2
and surrounded by a glass dish.

In the 1800s, letters were often

sealed with coloured sealing wax
that was stamped with a personal

seal having a coat of arms, initials
or some other personal device.
Most seals were metal, bronze or

even iron. The finer ones were

semi-precious stones cut in inta-
glio, either as a single piece or
mounted in a metal handle. It was

easy to produce intaglio designs in

glass and glass seals could look just
as attractive as stone. The ROM
Collection includes a paperweight

seal in clear glass with a limpid
oily appearance enclosing flowers

made of rather crude striped canes
(Fig.6).
This particular type of glass

was produced in either Bohemia
or Russia in the mid-1800s. It is

often thought of as being Russian

Fig. 5
Seal with Bouquet of Flowers (Strawflowers?)

– lamp-work flowers from striped rods enclosed
in clear, non-lead glass, cut and polished with
monogram DI engraved on base. Probably Russia

or Bohemia, made for the Russian market, glass,
1850s. L. 6.6 cm. Acquisition no. 988.228.1
Fig. 4

Wafer Dish – tooled glass with paperweight base,

red and white cane to the rim, and fine wheel-

engraved decoration to the bowl exterior. France,

Lorraine, St Louis Factory, c. 1845-55. H. 10

cm. Acquisition no. 987.52.2

because paperweight examples have
turned up with Cyrillic inscriptions.
One other form from the period

that is not represented in the ROM
Collection is the letter opener. I
have seen at least one from the

mid-1800s on the London market

where the handle was mounted with
polished millefiori glass plaques

possibly of Bohemian or Central
European origin. What a diverse

range of glass novelties for the writ-

ing table was introduced around

1850! Only the paperweight stayed
in production, most likely because

its aesthetic appeal and the opti-

cal quality of its dome continue to

fascinate successive generations.
To learn more about paper-

weights at the Royal Ontario
Museum, consult Brian Musselwhite

Glass Worlds: Paperweights from the
ROM’s Collection
(Toronto: Royal

Ontario Museum, 2007). It was pub-

lished to accompany an exhibition
of the same name showing paper-

weights and glass made using paper-

weight and lamp-work techniques

at the Royal Ontario Museum,

April 28 to November 25, 2007.
Peter Kaellgren, Ph.D., is Curator

Emeritus (European Decorative Arts)
Royal Ontario Museum, Canada

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figs.1, 2, 4, 6. Acquisitions made

possible with the support of

the J.A. Howson Brocklebank
Fund of the ROM Foundation.

Fig.3 Gift of Alice Baldwin Hall.

Certified by the Canadian Cultural
Property Export Review Board

under the terms of the Cultural
Property Export and Import Act

Fig.5 Collection of the

Royal Ontario Museum

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

ROMAN ARYBALLOI

ARYBALLOI in Dutch collections:
Part 3

Author Hans van Rossum

English translation: Theo Zandbergen

TT
his last part displays arybal-

loi in private collections that
were unable to be shown in

Parts 1 and 2 in GM7 and GM8. The

collectors were delighted to show the
variety of design, shape, size, colour
and decoration that are available.
The Aryballoi articles have been

presented by a Dutch collector’s
club,
De Oude Flesch,
who publish

a magazine called
Glashistorsich

Tijdschrift.
They do not special-

ize in aryballoi but collect Roman

glass in general, each collector
having his or her specific interest.
In 2011, Hans van Rossum and

Joop took an initiative together with

the Thermenmuseum in Heerlen to

exhibit glass that came from Roman
times and is in private collections.

So, Hans and Joop visited known
collectors, selecting examples from
their respective collections. Before

then, many of us had not known

each other. The exhibition was suc-
cessful, even though Heerlen, locat-

ed in the south of the Netherlands

was not (even now!) on ‘the map’.
Hans and Joop also authored the

book accompanying the exhibition
titled
Romeins glas uit particulier bezit

(Roman glass from private property).

The book is only available in Dutch.
Ells

The exhibited glasses came from

nine collectors. After that exhibition,
Hans proposed organizing an annual

event for the collectors and their part-

ners to get together. Each year a differ-
ent collector would have the honour
to arrange and host the event. Eight

of the collectors concentrate on glass
from Roman times, some also collect
Elisabeth & Theo Zandbergen

Merovingian glass. My wife and I also

collect Venetian glass and English

glass from the 18th century. In 2018,
and with a smaller group, we had

an exhibition in a small museum
in Dordrecht. This was mainly glass
from Roman times but also includ-

ed a collection of drinking glasses
from Roman times to circa 1920.

LEFT Fig. 26

Aryballos, Roman
Empire; 2nd century CE;
H= 7.3 cm, D= 6.4 cm;
W = 73 g

RIGHT Fig. 27

Aryballos, Eastern
Mediterranean; 2nd

century CE; H= 8.4 cm,
D = 8.4 cm; W = 118 g

LEFT Fig. 28

Aryballos, probably
Northern Italy; 2nd

century CE; H = 6.7 cm,
D=6.0 cm;W= 44g

RIGHT Fig. 29

Aryballos, probably
Syria; 1st century CE;
H= 5.5 cm, D= 4.2 cm;

W = 21 g

Annelies Bos-Pette
Windmill Collection

Fig. 30

Fig. 31

Fig. 32

Fig. 33

Aryballos, Roman Empire, probably

Aryballos, Windmill collection. Roman Aryballos, Windmill collection.

Aryballos, Windmill collection. North

Gaul; lst-2nd century CE;

Empire, probably Rhineland; 2nd

Rhineland; 1st century CE;

Italy or Asia Minor; 2nd century CE;

H= 5.0 cm, D= 4.8 cm; W = 36 g

century CE; H = 8.3 cm, D = 8.7 cm

H= 6.6 cm, D =
6.1
cm

H= 7.4 cm, D= 6.7 cm

Glass Matters Issue no, I I June 2021

Joop van

Joop
van der Groen

Nico Bijnsdorp
Nico Bijnsdorp

Nico Bijns

ABOVE Fig. 42
Aryballos, Roman Empire, probably Asia
Minor; 2nd century CE; H = 16.2cm,
D = 14.0cm; W = 248g

RIGHT Fig. 43

Aryballos, Rhineland; 2nd century CE;
H = 4.2cm, D = 6.0cm; W = 58g
ROMAN ARYBALLOI

Fig. 34
Fig. 35
Fig. 36

Fig. 37

Aryballos, Roman Empire; 2nd
Aryballos, Roman Empire; 1st – 2nd
Aryballos, Roman Empire; 1st

Aryballos, Roman Empire; 2nd

century CE; H = 12.9 cm,
D =
9.4 cm;

century CE; H= 6.0 cm, D = 6.2 cm;
century CE; H= 8.5 cm, D= 6.5 cm

century CE; H = 13.9 cm, D = 11.4 cm

W = 148 g
W = 45 g

Fig. 38
Fig. 39
Fig. 40

Fig. 41

Aryballos, Eastern Mediterranean or
Aryballos, Roman Empire, perhaps Asia
Aryballos, Western Roman Empire,

Aryballos, Eastern Mediterranean;

Italy; 1st century CE; H = 12.0cm, D
Minor; 2nd century CE; H = 15.2cm,
probably Rhineland; 2nd century CE;

1st century CE; H = 7.2cm,

= 10.0cm; W = 171g
D = 13.2cm; W = 71g
H = 5.8cm, D = 7.7cm; W = 54g

D 5.4cm; W = 32g

LEFT Fig. 44

Aryballos, Roman Empire, probably
Northern Italy; 2nd century CE;

H = 5.1cm, D = 7.5cm; W = 54g

BELOW Fig. 45

Aryballos, Roman Empire, probably Egypt;
2nd — 3rd century CE; H= 6.0cm,

D = 7.1cm; W = 98g

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

IN MEMORIAM

Samuel Jacob Herman
(1936-2020)

Prof. Keith Cummings
Fig. 1

Sam
Herman at the Royal College of Art, London, where he was head of

the Glass department, 1967-74.
Courtesy of the Frestonian Gallery.

S
am Herman, one of the major

pioneers of the British Studio
Glass movement, sadly died on

November 29th last year, peaceful-

ly at home in Gloucestershire. As a
maker, teacher and powerful apostle
of hot glass forming, his influence

on the development of the British

Studio glass movement has been

long lasting and truly revolutionary.

As one of the original students of
Harvey Littleton’s glass course at the

University of Wisconsin-Madison in
the early 1960s, he experienced at

first hand the development of the

small furnace at Wisconsin by Harvey
Littleton and Dominic Labino, which

allowed art students to actively shape
the glass themselves, and to use glass

as a genuinely creative studio materi-

al for the first time. “Once I’d tried it,
glass became my first love … every-
one helped each other — there were no

secrets.” For Herman glass was “like a
dance … it requires immense atten-
tion and foresight to handle a material

that has what amounts to a life of its

own in a molten state”. It also placed

glass in American colleges as a Fine Art
material. There were only a few cours-
es in glass design within British Art

Schools at this time, all of which saw

glass as part of a strict design process
in which students’ designs were then
realised by skilled industrially trained

craftsmen. When Sam Herman came
to Britain in 1966 – after graduating

with an MFA – together with an exhi-
bition of work by Wisconsin students,

his impact during visits to Edinburgh,
Stourbridge, and the Royal College of

Art demonstrated both a new way of

making and a new way of seeing glass

as a vehicle for creative education.
His personal example and refresh-

ingly direct way of talking about his
work set in motion the entire first

wave of British studio glass makers,
among them Pauline Solven, Karlin
Rushbrooke, and George Elliott.

He was invited to teach at the

Royal College of Art, becoming head

of the glass department from 1967

to 1974, during which time he led

the first group of students who were

able to work hot glass from the new
Wisconsin-style furnaces. In 1969 he
helped to establish the Glasshouse in
London which provided glass studios

for rent and also as an outlet for their

work. The Glasshouse became the

only place in Britain where the general

public could see hot glass being blown

and buy work by young glass artists.
His joint exhibition in 1971 with

the jeweller Gerda Flockinger, held

in the Victoria and Albert Museum,

further established his growing global
reputation and signalled that studio

glass in Britain had come of age. He

worked and exhibited across the

world in a long, rich and productive
life and career. His mature work was
characterised by powerful flowing

forms with occasional figurative ref-
erences and by vibrant colour and

iridescent effects. Herman appeared

to work in an unpremeditated fash-

ion, following his instincts, respond-

ing above all to the ductility of the
medium. He was always unmistak-

ably American in his strong, direct

approach to teaching and making;

he never stopped experimenting and
encouraged his students to do the

same. He nevertheless chose to settle
in Britain, and remained a lifelong
presence. The recent book on him

edited by Rollo Campbell, with a fore-

word by the Marquess of Queensberry,
is a fitting testament to his passing.
Rollo Campbell & Matt

Incledon of The Frestonian Gallery

in Holland Park, London, add:
We feel hugely thankful that in

2019 we were able to publish, with
Lund Humphries, Sam’s long overdue

Glass Matters Issue na I I June 2021

IN MEMORIAM

monograph and hold his correspond-

ing retrospective show at the gallery,

especially as it was only a few months

later, in his beloved Mallorca, that Sam

had a stroke that started a long and
difficult battle with his deteriorating

health. Through his exceptional work,

he will be remembered for evermore.
Further notes from Tanya Harrod’s

obituary, (February 2021, The Guardian):

At the height of his success, in 1974

Herman moved to Adelaide, South

Australia, where he was invited to help
create an arts centre and workshops,

building furnaces and creating a hot
glass production workshop, taking
The Glasshouse as a model. The devel-
opment of The Jam Factory — which
continues to this day — was a wonder-

ful if gruelling experience in which he
juggled training a glass-making team

with his own work and satisfying a
business model imposed from above.
His marriage to Judith

Christiansen, whom he had wed in

1963, came to an end and in 1979
he returned to London with his two
children, setting up a new hot glass

studio in Lots Road, Chelsea, where
for five years he was able to work

with great freedom and productiv-
ity, making around 1,500 pieces.

Thereafter he worked as a sculptor

and painter, with the encourage-
ment of his partner, Joanna Shellard.
A tough childhood had prepared

Sam Herman for his adventurous

career choices. His Jewish mother

and three aunts had left Poland in

the mid-30s, the rest of the extended

family perishing in Nazi concentration

camps. Sam never knew his father,
Moises Herman. After a privileged

existence in Mexico City, he and his

adoring mother, Chana Rosa Dorf,

moved on to New York when he was
eight. She worked as a seamstress

for a furrier; mother and son lived

in a small one-bedroom apartment

in Queens, later relocating to the

Fig. 2

A flared vase from Sam Herman’s series at Val St.
Lambert, France. Private Collection.
Bronx when his mother married.

With poor school grades Herman

joined the US Navy (1955-59), which

enabled him to qualify for a grant
to attend Western Washington

University, where he studied anthro-

pology and sociology. On graduating
he was encouraged to study for an
MFA in fine art, beginning a course at

Seattle, dropping out, and finally arriv-
ing at the University of Wisconsin.

He is survived by Joanna, whom

he married in 2010, his son, David,

and daughter, Sarah, from his first
marriage, and granddaughter, Alice.
Mark Hill added his own thoughts

in a memorial article, published in
The Art Newspaper in January 2021:
Editor: In correspondence with

Joanna Shellard, she wrote:
He strug-

gled over the last couple of years – not
really in pain but with just a dreadful

tiredness and no desire to work at all

which was so unlike him. He was always
creating something and so I knew when

he did not want to go into his studio
anymore that things were not right. His
death was very peaceful, at home look-

ing out over the lake we live by – no
struggle, this is all we can all hope for.
What has been said by Mark Hill, Tanya

Harrod, Rollo, Keith Cummings and

others and in the book really says it all.
Graham Cooley, with Mark Hill,

interviewed Sam Herman at Adam

Aaronson’s previous Zest studio in
2008. The stimulating, edited and

adapted text from the recording

was published in
The Journal of The

Glass Association, Volume 8.
The arti-

cle was sub-titled
‘Father of British

Studio Glass’.
In
The Glass Cone of

The Glass Association,
issue no.105,

May 2014, Sam wrote the major part

of
‘A few memories of the early days

with Harvey Littleton’.
The book on

Sam’s life, published in 2019, was

thoughtfully reviewed by Charles

Hajdamach in
Glass Matters,

issue

no.7, where he said that
‘it was well

worth the wait’.
Copies of the Journal

and the magazines are still avail-

able: contact Maurice Wimpory at
[email protected]

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

IN MEMORIAM

Ian Wolfendeu
(1942-2020)

David Philips – an ex-student and former colleague
Charles Hajdamach, Hon.President

an Wolfenden, one of the three
founder members of
The Glass

ssociation
alongside the late Tony

Waugh and Charles Hajdamach, sadly

passed away on Tuesday 8th December

2020, at Didsbury, Manchester.
In later years Ian gave up his inter-

est in glass and became an accom-

plished photographer; though his

main love was playing tennis, espe-

cially at his dub, where he was greatly

supported by friends through his last
weeks of illness. Of course, Ian will
best be remembered for his learned
catalogue on
‘English Rock Crystal

Glass 1878-1925’
and the accom-

panying exhibition at Dudley Art
Gallery in August/September 1976.
Ian Wolfenden was born in 1942

in Waterloo, Liverpool. From the

age of 11, he attended Merchant
Taylor’s School in Crosby, just a

short walk from home. He went to
Trinity College, Cambridge with an
exhibition award – slightly less grand
than a scholarship – in 1960 and read

Classics. His first museum job was

in the decorative arts department

in Liverpool Museum, where he was

active in children’s Saturday activities.
In 1971 he started to teach on the

Course in Art Gallery and Museum

Studies in Manchester University’s
History of Art Department, working

with Alan Smith. Alan left at the end
of the seventies, and Ian then ran the

course helped by David Phillips until

both took early retirement in 1997.

Ian and Alan established the course as
the principal route into art museums

for those students who did not choose
the PhD route into specialist depart-

ments, complementing the Leicester

Course for museums of science and

history. The Manchester Course typ-
ically had twenty-one or so students,
chosen from often over 300 appli-

cants. From the mid-nineties, a small
number of students each year, mostly

from overseas, studied for a more

academic MA. Government vocation-

al training support, which had been

available for these two university
courses, then tailed off, as practical-

ly based vocational diploma courses

no longer fitted easily into university

funding criteria. Museum Studies
MAs proliferated in many universities

and have flourished in Manchester.
From the start, Ian and Alan

organised the course around practical

work, with an annual exhibition in
the Whitworth Art Gallery, where the

1986 exhibition was devoted to glass,

titled
Reflections ofVenice: the influence

of Venetian Glass in Victorian England.
Each year there were also six projects

in museums over the North West, as
well as a month of ‘work experience
attachment’ arranged separately for

each student in museums all over
the country and occasionally abroad.
Away from his Museum Studies

work, Ian undertook important
research into various aspects of the

history of glass and its products.
In 1976 he completed work on his

research into
‘English Rock Crystal

Glass 1878-1925′
which in August

and September of that year, as a pre-

cursor to the opening of Broadfield
House Glass Museum, culminated

in a definitive catalogue accompa-
nying an exhibition at Dudley Art

Gallery in the West Midlands. It was
the first complete publication on a

subject which had been ignored by
most glass historians. Ian’s exhibi-

tion then inspired many collectors

to begin acquiring examples. The
catalogue continues to be quoted as
the standard work on the subject by

auctioneers such as Sotheby’s and
Bonhams whenever they are selling

pieces of rock crystal glass today.
In 1983, Ian, with two
other members of

The Glass Circle,

the London-based society for glass
collectors, museum curators and

makers, was instrumental in found-

ing a new glass collectors’ society,
The Glass Association.
The new soci-

ety established branches in all the
main geographic areas of the UK to

give members a nationwide meeting
place, instead of the London-centric

bias that
The Glass Circle
had at that

time.
The Glass Association
published

a yearly Journal to which Ian sub-

scribed two articles on subjects which
again had been ignored by previous

glass historians. In 1987 he submit-
ted
“The ‘WHR’ Drawings for Cut Glass

and the Origins of the Broad Flute Style
of Cutting”,
and in 1992, he submit-

ted
“Cut Glass in the Pattern Books of

Matthew Boulton’s Soho Manu factory” .
Both remain the definitive arti-

cles on those hitherto unexplored

areas of 19th century British glass.
Outside of his professional life,

Ian had been an enthusiastic tennis

player (as well as a dedicated Everton
football support) from childhood,

when he was taken to Wimbledon
every year by his parents. He was for

many years an enthusiastic member

of the
Didsbury Lawn Tennis Club,

near to his home, and after retire-
ment became the Chair of the club.
He devoted much of his time to the

business and facilities of the club,

then latterly, when less active as a

player, he supported many younger
players by ferrying them to tour-

naments up and down the country.
In retirement he also became a

very serious and expert photogra-
pher of flowers and landscapes. Ian
took great pleasure in being an active

member of the
Nature Photographers

Network,
a site for exchange and

informed discussion of members’

portfolios. The network posted a
i
n
•

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

IN MEMORIAM

Derek Wooloon
(1936-2021)

Simon Cottle, Hon. President

I
t is with great sadness that we

have to report that Derek C.

Woolston (1936-2021) passed

away from Covid on 12 January.
Derek had been a long-time mem-

ber of the Glass Circle and was an
avid collector of English 18th cen-
tury drinking glasses. For the Circle,

he took on the important role of

Treasurer and Membership secre-
tary from early 1993 until late 2007.
During his long tenure he controlled

the Circle’s finances in an extremely

professional and rigorous manner,

based on his extensive experience

in banking at a very high level. With

Tim Udall, the former treasurer,
Derek hauled the Circle out of a deep

financial pit and his stern strictures

were felt by the committee when it

was not being decisive about various
ventures and their cost-effective-

ness. Derek was a regular attendee

at Circle lecture meetings in London

and participated in the various
overseas trips organised by the late
John Smith, our former Chairman.
Born in West Wickham on 28

February 1936, where he went to

prep school before attending Dulwich

College, Derek was a keen swimmer.
He followed his father into a banking

career, joining the Midland Bank as

a tea boy at the age of 16. Following
his National Service in the RAF
where he trained as a photographer,

he returned to the Midland Bank
(now HSBC) where he became Head

of Retail Credit and Risk for the UK

Banking Sector until taking early

retirement at the age of 53. He mar-

ried his wife, Faith, in 1961, and they

went on to have a daughter, Julie,
and subsequently to his and Faith’s

great delight, two grandchildren.
Aside from his keen interest in

glass, Derek had a passion for music
and was an active member of his local
church in Meopham, near Gravesend.
It was in Meopham that he became

well known for his fundraising activ-
ities and tireless support for others

in the community, acting as a trustee
in various causes, both charitable

and for individuals. In retirement,
Derek also focussed on photography,

in which he was most accomplished.

He is remembered by his friends

in the Glass Circle for being a thor-
oughly decent and kind man. Derek

was also very brave, as he battled

with diabetes from early in his life

and later on, other illnesses about

which he never complained. He took
a very positive approach to his life

in public and never let his illnesses

prevent his joining in Glass Circle

activities. A man with high standards,
it has been recollected that during a
memorable Glass Circle visit to the
Czech Republic, organised by John

Smith, he was most unhappy with
the hotel and its accommodation — it

appeared to have been built as a hos-
pital in the early days of the Russian

occupation and reeked of cigarette

smoke, let alone retaining elements
of its original usage. He said that he

would not go on another trip with
the Circle unless the choice of hotel

was upgraded! John took note of this
and thereafter the hotels improved.
Sadly, after breaking his pelvis two

years ago he moved into a care home

where he passed away. His funeral took
place at Thames View Crematorium

on 8th February. Our sincere con-
dolences go to Faith and her family.

Ian Wo1fenden continued •

memorial page for Ian at https://

community.naturephotographers
network/t/rip-ian-wolfenden/19025
The page includes a link to

a portfolio of his photos at:

https://community.nature-

photographers.network/u/
ian wolfenden/activity/portfolio
Ian was an enchanting colleague

— genial, humorous, and utterly
reliable. He was a lucid lecturer with

a gift for drawing the best from his

students, with guidance rather than
direction. He claimed to find silence

a good way of drawing ideas from

them, triumphantly boasting at the

end of one afternoon to have sweat-

ed the way forward from a small

project group, by sitting with them

in dead silence for ten minutes. He
sometimes expressed exasperation,

but never anger, though his invari-

ably mild and mischievously humor-
ous demeanour concealed a very

tough core. He was quietly steely in

successfully defending the dedicat-
ed rooms and resources enjoyed by
the Museum’s students, faced with

the occasional challenges that are

the small change of academic life.

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

‘%11

11.11
e

”

-01141
11
.1*

‘1
1
r0 like- of .Patti

– offt.Wpiiristitatirrs natio
YAW

l’

HkaabL
e
…

HEATON.BUTLER AND BAYNE’S GLASS

Church of St John:
Stained-glass windows

Ian Philips

I
would like to draw attention to a

series of stained-glass windows
hidden away in the parish church

of St John in a small village, Facit,

in a township, Whitworth, some
four miles north of Rochdale. Sadly,
Pevsner seemingly knew nothing of

it and neither did the latest edition

of his volume on the architecture of
that part of Lancashire. They missed

something very special. Fortunately,
the Parish Magazine of 1870 and the

inscriptions on the windows tell it all.

In memory of their first two vicars a
trio of small windows light the tiny

baptistry
(Figs.la, lb, 1c).
The mag-

azine tells us that they are the work
of Heaton, Butler and Bayne and to

my mind they are among their best.
Interestingly, the work of the

firm was well known because of
the rather dull series of windows
portraying kings and queens of

England that they made for the

impressive town hall in Rochdale.
But that is not the whole story.

A later Parish magazine gives an
account of yet more windows in the
nave of St John’s, also the work of
Heaton, Butler and Bayne. These win-

dows are dedicated to members of the

Whitworth family, wealthy inhabi-
tants of the village. They are again of
high quality and considerable beauty.

One of them,
(Fig.2),
includes the fig-

ure of a young Victorian gentleman,
possibly John Whitworth, with a
neat moustache — and a halo – among

a group of saints around Christ.
It has to be admitted that

stained-glass enthusiasts are not

going to flock to Lancashire, but
perhaps an enlightened few will

make the effort, and I hope that
they will be included in the next

edition of the south-Lancashire
Pevsner, due in about 50 years’ time.
The
Pevsner Architectural

Guides
are a series of guide

books to the architecture of Great

Britain and Ireland. Begun in the

1940s by the art historian Sir

Nikolaus Pevsner, the 46 volumes of

the original
Buildings ofEngland

series

were published between 1951 and

1974. The series was then extended
to Scotland, Wales and Ireland in

the late 1970s. Most of the English

volumes have had second editions,
chiefly by other authors. Sir Nikolaus
Bernhard Leon Pevsner CBE FBA

was a German-British art histori-
an and architectural historian best
known for his monumental 46-vol-
ume series of county-by-county

guides,
The Buildings of England.

Fig. la

Fig. lb

Fig. lc

Fig. 2

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 2021

NEWS, CORRECTIONS AND APOLOGIES

Meetings online with Zoom
ur chairmen and meetin
g
s

or
g

aniser have worked hard to

keep our membership entertained

over this year. The increased numbers

attendin
g
the meetin

g
s on Zoom

have been
g

ratifyin
g
and show the

stren
g

th of our international appeal.

Wherever possible, the online events

will be followed up with articles in
Glass Matters from the presenters.

The meetin
g

s have been with:

•
Alan Thornton on 9 February:

Glass Paperweights – the three key
phases of their history
•

Stephen Pollock-Hill on 23

March:
The Glass Valley — Luxury

perfume packaging

•
Ian Freestone on 13 April:

Origins, manufacture and decay of

the glass of the Great East Window,

York Minster

•
Ni
g

el Jeffries on 15 May:
17th to

19th-century English glass bottles

with applied seals, from archaeolog-

ical excavations in London

For your diary
Do watch your email inboxes. As

Covid unlockin
g

continues, we are
lookin

at the possibility of havin
g

the Zoom presentations from ‘face

to face’ meetin
g
s at The Artworkers

Guild. They will continue at 7pm

on Zoom until further notice:

•
Ni
g

el Benson on 29 June,

title to be finalised

•
Miranda Lowe on 21 October:

The Blaschka exhibits at the Natural

History Museum

•
Thomas Moser on 18 November:

Vitreous Waves – Emile Galle’s

Oceanic Glasswork Between Art

and Aquaristics

Corning Museum of Class:

Annual Seminar online

K
it Maxwell,

Curator of European

Glass at The Corning Museum of

Glass,
who
g

ave our first GS Zoom

talk in July 2020, titled
In Sparkling

Company,
writes: The exhibition will

be openin
g
in just a few weeks, which

feels like nothin
g
short of a miracle’.

We have also just announced

our
59th Annual Seminar on Glass,

which will be presented virtually,

in conjunction with the special

exhibition
In Sparkling Company:

Glass and Social Life in Britain
during the 1700s.

For the first time,

the Annual Seminar on Glass will

take place online on Friday 8 and

Saturday 9 October 2021. It will be

presented with pre-recorded and live
materials. The live events will also

be recorded and made available to
re
g

istrants. We’re tryin
g
to make

it time-zone friendly – at least
for those in time zones from the

West Coast to the U.K. & Ireland.

All are welcome to re
g

ister for the

free two-day seminar, which

will include lectures and panel
discussions and include the pre-

and post-seminar di
g
ital materials.
We hope this edition of the

seminar will be of interest to
CMoG Members, students, museum

and academic professionals,

dealers, collectors, artists,
g
lass

enthusiasts, and anyone curious
to learn more about
g
lass in the

18th century. We look forward
to welcomin
g

speakers and

attendees from around the world.
https://www.cmog.org/collection/

exhibitions/sparkling
Editor: Enter a link into Google.

This will lead you to the CMoG

website with registration details

and information on the two days.

Research Request
imon Wain-Hobson, a member

10 of our Editorial Committee

and contributor of
g

lass articles

to Glass Matters, is researchin
g

Arthur Churchill and E. Barrin
g

ton

Haynes, two eminent
g
lass dealers

of the last century. Any information,

anecdotes or photos would be
g
reatly

appreciated. He can be contacted at
[email protected]

Finnish stamp translation error
t has taken Glass Society member
011i Ahtola from Finland to

correct my translation of the stamp
from Finland, shown in GM10. “I was

hi
g

hly amused when I read ‘Editor’s

note’ under the picture on pa
g
e 39.
It reads `Glasindustrin is Croatian

and Lasiteollisuus is Finnish’. Why

would you think that a Finnish

stamp would have ‘Glass Industry’
in Croatian? – Finland and Croatia

are thousands of miles apart.
Glasindustrin is Glass Industry

in Swedish! Finland is a bilin
g
ual

country, and all official documents

are bilin
g
ual, hence posta

g
e stamps

are in Finnish and Swedish. SUOMI

is Finland in Finnish. FINLAND is

also Finland, but in Swedish.” My

apolo
g

y to 011i Ahtola and all readers

is that
Glasindustrin

is also Croatian!

and it came up first on my Google

query.
As with Ian Turner’s closin
g

words on Sandro Pianon (p.14) – the
internet
g
ives the ri
g

ht answers

if you ask it the ri
g
ht

q
uestions.
Correction and apology

Manchester’s Glass Industry and

the Life of William Nelson (1836-

1915): Part2

I
n the article by Sally Haden in

GM10, the editin
g
re
g
rettably

created a number of inconsistencies,

for which we apolo
g

ise. One major

error occurred in the first column on

pa
g
e 42: Sally was makin

g
a closin
g

statement on Weinich’s life –
From

there he moved to Amblecote by 1910 to

join his compatriots, dying in that area

in 1927. —
Re
g

rettably, this was edited

to –
From there, by 1910, he’d moved

to Amblecote, joining his compatriots
working in the dyeing trade in that

area in 1927.

Weinich was never

part of the ‘ra
g
trade’ or ‘dyein
g
‘.

Glass Matters Issue no.I I June 202 I

Join

Search

Member

Join

Search

Member

Join

Search

Member

Glass Society Glass Matters_No.11, Jun 2021

Recent Posts

Address

Email

Instagram

Facebook