Ed Bush writes and asks whether we can use this newsletter for research. Posed because he’s
struggling with an issue. Well Ed, the answer is certainly so. The Carder Steuben Club is a
501(c)(3) organization. That is tax law speak for we’re a not for profit organization with one of its primary purpose of education. So, Ed, we thank you for posing your Carder issue and hopefully someone will respond to the questions you raise and we can pass it on.
While at this, after we pose Ed’s question read on for some responses from David Goldstein and Dick Stark for some of the history on the dedication piece the museum would like to acquire from the Joan Miller collection we e-mailed you about yesterday.
Hi Alan: Last Friday I began research on how to distinguish between the 10″ goblets #6394 and #6445.
(As Marshall Ketchum points out in his book, Gardner mistakenly calls the former #6395 in the line drawings and in Plate #XXVIIIC.) The line drawings of these goblets are virtually identical, differing only in the thickness and possibly diameters of the disks. I have two such goblets in my collection whose disks differ in this way and in some other respects. It’s a mystery to me why Carder felt the need to offer two such similar goblets. Each goblet, incidentally, has its own unique set of accessories such as candlesticks, compotes, center bowls, etc.
Another factor is the identity of the engravings on these goblets. My goblets have similar fountain-like engravings, one with 6-around and one with 8-around. The #6396 covered urn and #6418 candlesticks in the Carder Gallery which are illustrated in Tom’s book have this engraving, and they call it “Fountain”.
Records at the Rakow indicate that these goblets were engraved with the “Jette d’Eau” pattern, which is included in the table of engravings in Gardner. So I am wondering if these goblets exist with two different fountain-like engravings, or what. I suspect that “Jette d’Eau” is actually the only fountain engraving that was used with these goblets and accessories.
These goblets are fairly rare, and I wonder if the Gazelle Gazette could be used to solicit information from the Club’s membership about the goblets of these types in their collections. This would include measurements of the disk diameters and descriptions of the engravings, etc.

David Goldstein’s comments on the silver overlay is:
The Silver Overlay is definitely American, but American silver companies did overlay on European glass; i.e. Loetz overlay is common.
The origin of the glass is more problematic. It was sold by Sotheby’s as Tyrian many years ago in the sale of the Hoover collection. No provenance was given at that time. There is an inconsistency between the 1902 date of John Northwood I’s death, the later founding of Steuben and the still later development of Tyrian.

Dick Stark adds the following information:
Are you aware that the silver overlay Steuben vase described in your message is one from a very important group of Steuben items which sold in Nov 82 at Sotheby’s ? it is described as Tyrian. I think you should make an effort to find this catalog if you don’t already have one.
It belonged to Barbara Hoover. Joan bought it along with the Tiffany blue at that sale.
Incidentally, the size in Bonham’s is incorrect. It is one inch taller. There was a decorated yellow, a Steuben Burmese, a cagework Diatreta , a Cintra perfume similar to Bonham’s cover and several other goodies. as such, the providence is fine. I’m confident it’s right as rain but saw it 25 yrs ago. Much of the English glass items were sent to the U.S. for silver overlay mountings. the earlier ones at Gorham and later at the Alvin Company and possibly others. usual in the art nouveau and later deco motifs. most were unmarked due to the risk of damage in the strike. some had product numbers scratched in glass. Malcolm MacNeal the Quezal expert is familiar with this info.
Thanks for the input and hopefully there will be further input, discussion and help in the search and thirst for knowledge.