Posted 4 years ago
sklo42
(898 items)
I've known for a while that Welz made Burmese style glass, thanks to IronLace and his amazing collection. That said I didn't expect to find one myself and even less to find another only four months later. The first one, seen in image four, is a known Welz shape so easy.
The one I'm posting today was listed on ebay.uk as, Stourbridge, Burmese, Uranium, Satin Glass. However no one was bidding so I concluded that it probably was not Webb. It does have the green tinge that is sometimes seen on Welz Burmese. Additionally the rim crimp is unusual and it turns out there are two Welz vases on a Welz shelf in the Passau Museum with the self same crimp to their rims. I have added an image of the vases at Passau, with the relevant rim crimp.
Height 19 cm./7.5 inches
Although many glass houses made a similar crimp which could be defined as an "M crimp", no other house made the shorter form with this drastic of a crimp. There are certainly similar examples which I have studied. Also, no one else made the same M crimp on the same shape, in a glass which was covered by a patent granted to Welz in the Austro-Hungarian empire in late 1899. There are also examples of that glass in the Welz case in Passau, and one of those examples is also made using the same unique rim crimp design on the taller vase in this post.
A translation from the Passau volumes:
A new décor type consisting of rusty brown, rosa-purple marbled glass, overlaid by clear glass, appeared on typical vases shaped according to fig. IV. 329."
That reference is to an image of a shape I will link to below. It is also worth noting that other examples in the same case, using the patented glass, show the same extreme M crimp on them also.
The simple fact that someone may have used a similar M crimp does not negate the strong supportable empirical evidence that the short piece in this post is Welz in origin. That link has been shown in this forum many times. If you missed it, ignored it, or just did not pay attention, that is on you. Your lack of understanding, or lack of belief, does not negate actual research.... Sorry... That is not how the real world actually works.
Your anti-Welz sentiment is well known across many forums and glass groups. I would think you would have embarrassed yourself enough times by now to stop Leah, but apparently not.... astounding really.
Your cry for "documentation" is an age old lament, which at this point only makes you look like you are spouting off facts which you can not, and never do actually support when it comes to your anti Welz sentiment. You love that cry for "documentation". It is truly beyond laughable at this point.
The fact that Welz produced Burmese style glass is absolutely not disputable. It is found in several forms unique to their production. The rim crimp on the tall vase in this post is seen on two vases in the Welz case in Passau. One of those vases is also produced using a proprietary glass that Welz patented as mentioned above. The other example is a vase that was incorrectly declare by Alfredo to be by Kralik, because Welz did not make a draped decor. That was a mistake on his part.
Here is a link to a Welz case image from Passau:
http://www.kralik-glass.com/CW/WelzPassauCase.jpg
The rim crimp on this tall example is one I have only seen on those two examples of Welz production. Not on any other glass until now. If you know of others from other houses, please feel free to share them..... I am always looking to learn new things.
Otherwise, once again, I and likely some others, will simply consider your opinion to be based on an unsupportable anti-Welz sentiment you can not seem to let go of. You are one that loves to sow the “seeds of doubt” about Welz, but it seems that sadly... nothing ever really takes root and grows in that garden of yours……
Sad really.... Not unexpected.... but still sad.
Peggy, this is such a stunning vase & what an brilliant & fortuitous find. The shape is superb, so Art Nouveau...& I can easily picture this same form in green or purple with an intense iridescence...
However, may I kindly request that you please change the pronoun "she" in your post, as I am not a woman. You could perhaps refer instead to "IronLace's" amazing collection", or "Marin's collection" (many thanks for describing my collection as amazing...I'll take that any day, especially from someone with a wonderful collection like yours!).
It's just that another person, in the process of referring to an item I posted a couple of weeks ago, misgendered me, which I do find rather upsetting. Thanks in advance for your understand (I realise it was an honest mistake, rather than an attempt to upset me).
Anyway, aside from that issue, I am simply thrilled to see another fine example of Burmese glass that was definitely not made by Webb, Mount Washington, etc.
Kind regards,
Marin.
And the best part Leah, is that the knowledge of Welz continues to advance and grow in a sound a supportable way with people literally all over the world understanding the research, and collecting it. And that continues to happen regardless of whether you agree or disagree with it, or approve of it!!! Life's great isn't it? :-)
Your kind amendment is much appreciated! :-)
IronLace, I can't say how sorry I am for my thoughtless mistake, for that's what it was. However it should never have happened as I would not wish to be disrespectful or hurtful.
I consider the first comment on this post to be disingenuous, aimed purely at causing trouble.
The squat vase above was not attributed to Welz on the M crimp of the rim but on the existence of the same shape in a Welz décor that I have on a life light.
Equally disingenuous is the suggestion that this shape was made in only one décor. If Welz invested in the moulds they would have made full use of them. There is always a first time for any new shape and further examples of this shape may turn up in a different décor. Equally the same shape could turn up with a different rim treatment. For me this 'not knowing what will turn up next' is the pleasure of Welz.
Craig has a different approach from me to the type of comment we saw in comment 1 but that's ok with me.
Peggy, it's all good & I know that you would never do that...just an honest mistake. My username is a bit femme...I ought to change it to something more "butch" if I could... LOL!
As to this vase, it is a pure pleasure to see, so alluring...& terrifically interesting to see Burmese colouration on an Art Nouveau style form. So very different to the more classically inspired forms used by Webb & Mount Washington for their Burmese.
I do not wish to become embroiled in this issue, but my Burmese fan vase with the extremely distinctive three ball footed base (which I obtained & posted on CW in 2017) seems to provide some rather compelling evidence in favour of Welz production of Burmese glass.
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/233470-welz-burmese-glass-vase-with-fan-top-and
Totally compelling evidence that Welz made Burmese glass. More specifically interesting to me is that one of your images shows a strong uranium content. One of the seller's images of the vase I posted here showed uranium content too. Of course I don't know whether all Burmese glass has a uranium content...........
Pleased to be of help with this matter...yes, this vase & all my other examples of Burmese contain uranium. It was in the original formula first produced & patented by Mount Washington in 1885, & soon afterwards licensed to Thomas Webb & Sons. True Burmese glass must contain uranium, as it provides the custard/pale yellow colour base. Gold creates the pink aspect. Burmese was an elite, high end glass at the time due to the expensive ingredients. The modern Burmese made by Fenton & Gibson glass from the 1970s onwards also contained uranium, though the modern version had vastly different shapes, & is generally thicker & heavier. The satin finish is also considerably less refined. Murano also made a Burmese type in the 1960s - 70s as part of their repros of Victorian art glass. However, it tends towards a muddy colouration, often with streaks between the custard & pink areas, rather than an evenly graduated transition. The Murano "Burmese" I've seen has also lacked a green glow under UV.
Good to know, thank you, IronLace
I have a different approach to comment 1 because I have grown completely intolerant of direct comments which are as you say "disingenuous, aimed purely at causing trouble."
I have found through the years of my life, that in the long run the only effective tool with which to fight "willful ignorance" is by presenting supportable facts, and let those that read both make up their own mind. I am likely best qualified to discuss Welz production and the research that has identified it.
I may not really participate here any longer, but I do not see responding to "willfully disingenuous claims" as participation. I find it to be a necessary response to counter unsupported innuendos and intentionally misleading suppositions...... especially when motivated by a personal dislike, as Leah's so obviously is, and has been for the last 8 or 9 years.
I shall delete all further comments on this post and you will have to discuss your patent issues etc elsewhere.
BEAUTIFUL Welz!!
And thanks to craig for a rehash of the empirical research to support the attribution.
scott
And thank you, scott.
I'm just here to say it's a beauty, Peggy!
Hope you are traveling well :)
Hi Karen, good to hear from you, glad you like it too! I haven't got my Australian phrasebook to hand, so guessing...... but I'm fine in the circs!