Two Victorian/Edwardian trophy vases | ||
| Slave-to-glass's loves52 of 1274 |  |  |
welzebub loves this.
Slave-to-glass loves this.
scottvez loves this.
Galejk loves this.
racer4four loves this.
vetraio50 loves this.
kivatinitz loves this.
aghcollect loves this.
Michelleb007 loves this.
blunderbuss2 loves this.
MacArt loves this.
SEAN68 loves this.
Rick55 loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Posted 10 years ago
IanBrighton
(573 items)
1) Oxblood, yellow, green, royal blue and (2) oxblood, acid orange, and green aventurine. They are almost, but not entirely, the same shape, as you can see, and the clear handles are slightly differently treated but "organic" on both.
The smaller is 17.9cm, the taller 18.7cm.
I think both Welz but am happy to be put right.
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
I agree that they are both Welz.
I would say they are the same shape, differences are due to different stages of the ware of the mold.
There are no related decors or shapes labeled Welz. There is no manufacturers documentation showing this shape or these decors as Welz. There is absolutely nothing showing Welz made the shape or the decors in question.
This shape above was manufactured in a variety of decors. One of those decors, oxblood red and white spatter with red lining, was found on a different shape but with a Anton Ruckl & Sons label. Based upon this, a manufacturers label, my best guess is Ruckl.
The Welz attribution for these wares doesn't utilize labels or manufacturers documentation of any nature.
Of the many Welz vases I have seen, and those that I own, one of the interesting things about them to me is how the different colors of glass in the vases have distinct, often sharp edges to them - they do not appear to be swirled together or have soft, rounded edges as is usually seen in so-called spatter vases from other glass companies. I think this quality is well shown in these two vases. But besides that point, I think that for years these decors and shapes have been shown to be Welz by the use of shape and decor comparison. Now, charcoal says that Welz attribution does not "utilize labels or manufacturers documentation of any nature." First point - there are quite a few pieces of Welz found with original Welz labels. Second point - has a Rindskopf vase ever been found with a label or marking of any kind? Or has a catalog of their art glass ever come to light? Not to my knowledge....and they are well accepted makers of Bohemian glass; shape and decor studies have been used to identify their work.
Please add a link to one of the "many original Welz labels" on a related decor.
BTW: Here's a Rindskopf Catalog for you: http://www.glas-musterbuch.de/Rindskopf-1915.8.0.html
Great Welz!
BIG THANKS to welzebub for all of his research and analysis to document some of this maker's production!
scott
Thanks, I have seen that Rindskopf catalog, but it is only for pressed glass; I referred to their art glass production, specifically.
Charcoal: "There are no related decors or shapes labeled Welz. There is no manufacturers documentation showing this shape or these decors as Welz. There is absolutely nothing showing Welz made the shape or the decors in question."
There is actually a very large, supportable and robust body of empirical research, supporting the attributions....... Robust and supportable research, which it appears you will enter yet another new year ignoring.
There is no Rindskopf art glass shown in that Catalog, or any of the others shown on that website. There is also no labeled Rindskopf Art Glass production known..... at least that I am aware of..... A point your seemingly continue to ignore, as opposed to providing a viable explanation of how that can work to identify Rindskopf and others, but not for Welz.
I must add, I am incredibly impressed at the amount of information one is able to extract from a single known example of a labeled vase, especially in a relatively common decor style. Not only am I impressed by how much Rückl can be attributed ("my best guess is Ruckl.(sic)" as a result of it, I am also extremely impressed at the number of instances that a single vase can be used for, in attempts to discredit other information.
As always Charcaol, I for one, appreciate your input though.
Welzebub, as per usual same old arguments from those unwilling to listen:
"If you waste your time a-talkin' to the people who don't listen,
To the things that you are sayin', who do you think's gonna hear."
("Beat the Devil", Kris Kristofferson)
scott
Charcoal: "Please add a link to one of the "many original Welz labels" on a related decor."
When shown labels on Deco Era Welz production you, claimed that Welz did not even make glass, and traded patent use rights, for glass to Export under their name.... all the while claiming that the Franz Welz being discussed was studying electric trains for Seimans in Germany and wrote a book about it... even when it was suggested that it was a different Franz Welz than the one actually running Antonienhütte in Klostergrab.
When shown labels on Welz production saying "Royal Art Glass", a label attributed to Welz by the Glasmarken Lexicon who cite their source, you claim it is an American lamp manufacturer in New York that applied their label to imported Czech glass..... a company that was out of business by the mid 1920's, while the Glasmarken source is a 1930's glass industry publication..... yet you, all the while, provide absolutely nothing to link the label and Czech glass to the American company..... other than what I have to assume is just another "best guess" on your part. Need I go on?
I am not exactly sure why someone would show a labeled piece of glass to you Charcoal..... it seems that nothing short of a time machine and a trip to 1920 Klostergerab would be capable of convincing you of anything regarding Welz......
and the real question that comes to mind, at least my mind......... is.....
"Exactly why is that?"
Here's the shape above in a red lined oxblood and white spatter decor:
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/22/1a/1e/221a1e881fe80ff3be9080979bbf7b8c.jpg
Here's that same exact decor on a different shape with a Ruckl label:
http://www.burchardgalleries.com/auctions/2012/feb1912/01images/l506.htm
Apparently Welz research methods using no labels ignores contradicting labels from other manufacturers.
I am really glad you brought that up.... Thanks for yet another information sharing opportunity.
Funny thing.... I own that exact trophy vase.... not one like it, but the actual vase you have a picture of and are using as a reference in your first link. That is the image from the ebay auction where I purchased it. Although the decor is quite similar, calling them exactly the same would be inaccurate.
First of all, a wide variety of companies made a burgundy and white swirl décor, and many of them are quite difficult to tell apart....... But you know that, and like many other pertinent facts, you seem to choose to selectively ignore inconvenient "details".
Although quite similar in appearance, the Burchard gallery image shows a vase in a décor which has a brick red interior lining. That is seen clearly in the second image in the link you provided.
The vase in question, mine...... actually has a clear lining. Based on that one difference in technique, any responsible researcher concerned with accuracy, would at best state they are quite similar, but can not be attributed to the same house based on exterior décor alone. While completely ignoring the interior difference, indicating a different technique, and possibly a different house may be convenient, it is not in the least supportable.
Labels or not, they are not the "same exact decor", so any leap to Rückl for the trophy vase would be based on an incomplete and inaccurate observation regarding the two pieces of glass.
Thanks for bringing it up though....
As always, I sincerely appreciate any and all opportunities you provide to compare our observation and attribution methods....
The two red lined vases I provided links to are indeed related. It's confirmed by both shapes being found in a totally separate decor. Here's the shape above in a orange lined multi-color spatter decor: http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/b9/43/f3/b943f3d5ca9343cb1166981aeed2a981.jpg
Here's that same exact decor on the 12" vase shape labeled Ruckl: http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=50562.0;attach=140690;image
Welz research methods using no labels ignores contradicting labels from other manufacturers.
Nice try Charcoal. I am done with your ridiculous "logic". It seems more than a little disingenuous when you want to try to use my pictures (the group shot) of parts of my own personal personal collection to prove your research into Rückl. There are differences between the two shapes, my tall one in Cadmium yellow, and the labeled piece in the Burchard Galleries images in a different décor. Those differences have been discussed in this forum in great detail before, and as I pointed out earlier you choose to ignore pertinent facts once again.
I am really done discussing this with you, as you ignore any pertinent details, and seemingly manufacture the ones that fit your desired result. When asked to explain discrepancies in your stated opinions you seem to like to avoid answering by presenting more nonsense. When flaws in your logic are discussed you ignore them like that will make them go away and people will forget or not pay attention.
I find myself wondering if you actually believe this nonsense you present here.
If you choose to believe that a single vase with a label is the foundation upon which you can build attributions for a line of glass by Rückl, then there is certainly nothing I can say or do to dissuade you from your objective.
Good luck with your collecting.... and I would wish you even more luck with your research..... but...
I have deleted 4 last posts, which I did not think added any more to the above. In 2 years of collecting, this debate has bubbled and simmered.
There have been people who claimed that Franz Welz was not a glass manufacturer, and who are happy to denigrate the wonderful efforts of some people (Craig, http://www.kralik-glass.com) whilst being happy to make assertions of their own with less evidence (and effort).
There are huge gaps in knowledge - I would be very surprised to find labels on 1930s glass - I think 0.001% of my collection (1 vase) has a label - they were gummed and designed to come off. I would be very suspicious of a vase retaining a label that seemed to have been used for its intended purpose.
I don't think labels are a good method for analysis for that reason, however, I have no beef with the identification made on the base of a label above.
You would think, reading the above, that we do not all share a similar passion (craze?) and that we disagree about a lot. However, I don't think either is true.