CANDELABRA AND CANDLESTICKS
=Early types--The Adam style and its promulgation to the Continent--The
candelabrum--The varieties of the spiral form--The tri-form
candelabrum--The chamber candlestick--The evolution of the table
candlestick.=
In commenting upon early types of Sheffield plated candlesticks a good
deal of past history has to go by the board. One does not need to
discuss pricket candlesticks of ecclesiastical form. Unfortunately the
exquisite Stuart examples, the symmetrically ideal forms of the Charles
I period, so rarely found, and the finely balanced types of the Charles
II, James II and the William period pass--as they were never duplicated
by Sheffield.
Sheffield commences with George II and Sheffield ended with George III.
Happily the banalities of the early-Victoria era never encompassed her
craftsmen. Therefore, the early types of candlestick belong to the days
of George II. They belong to the days when Boulsover looked to Joseph
Hancock, the master cutler, for inspiration, and Joseph Hancock the
cutler of Sheffield set out on a true path. A certain modernity was
in the air. The year 1751 had only 282 days, and the year 1752 only
355. The calendar was in process of reform. Joseph Hancock's types
of the early days (we are speaking of 1750 to 1765) must have been
the ordinary types made by the great silversmiths, though it may be
imagined, as though in leading strings, Sheffield gently pursued her
way with experimental copying.
To come to technique there were the edges of the silver and copper
plate, an ugly witness of inferiority. These must be hidden somehow by
godrooned edges, of solid silver maybe, rather than show the poverty of
the rolled plate. If they were cast then there were the seams to screen
from common observation. To this day the seams denote the genuineness
of the old plate. Dies came into being. Portions were cast, ornaments
were soldered together and attached to the article. At first there was
always the factor determinable enough by close inspection that the
silver was only on one side of the copper. The interior of vessels
was copper, which was tinned. In candlesticks this was not a very
formidable obstacle to successful imitation, as the nozzles could be
French plated and otherwise concealed. The bottom could be plugged with
a mahogany post and filled with solder, could be covered with shellac
at the base and have a fine baize screen from all obtrusive gazers. But
Sheffield soon got above and beyond any of these artifices.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDLESTICK.
One of a pair, with finely shaped facets, decorated with leaf ornament.
Date 1785.
(_In the possession of G. H. Wallis, Esq., F.S.A._)]
It is curious how collectors have come to love the candlestick,
possibly it is because it represents something that vanished during the
horrible era of the gas chandelier and the paraffin lamp, and has been
resuscitated in later days in the form of an electric chandelier or in
electric standards. Electricity has galvanized the old candlestick and
the antique candelabrum into life. The Dutch hanging brass pendants are
now one of the stock lines of the electric fitter who furnishes the
villa in pseudo-Jacobean or pseudo-Georgian style. The shopwalker or
his satellites will pronounce empirically upon styles with the surety
of an encyclopædia. In consequence all electric lights are hall-marked
with "periods": they are "Adams" (_sic_), or "Chippendale," or
"Sheraton." Possibly collectors of another age may find shoddy written
over a lengthy period of our modern fitments for illumination.
=The Adam Style and its Promulgation.=--That Sheffield did great
things in candlesticks is shown by a visit to the Victoria and Albert
Museum. One of the finest examples of the classic style with urn shaped
nozzle with classic pilaster column, both urn and base decorated with
festoons in classic style, of the period of 1782, is a Sheffield silver
candlestick. Sheffield was undoubtedly making fine silver candlesticks
and candelabra at this period, and this is not unimportant in regard
to the consideration of what she did as an echo of such work. During
the last twenty years of the eighteenth century her output was of the
highest character. Since 1773, as we have shown, Sheffield had stood
on her dignity as the proud possessor of an assay office with all the
newly acquired rights of silversmiths jealous of infringements on so
close a corporation. This had, without doubt, an enormous influence on
the quality of the work perpetrated by the silver platers. Sheffield
made a bid to become a silversmiths' centre and she has not lost her
ancient ambitions to-day.
In the illustration given (p. 65) of a candlestick from a copper-plate
engraving of pure Adam style, in date about 1775, it is seen how far
Sheffield had advanced to be able to send such pattern books with
designs broadcast to buyers of her ware on the Continent of Europe.
This and another illustration (p. 69) indicate the class of candlestick
Sheffield was prepared to export. Sheffield had not snatched at renown,
she had won it. A series of Design Books of the period, from which
we reproduce illustrations, establish the fact that Sheffield plated
wares were as acceptable on the Continent as being something especially
English, as were the equally original products of Wedgwood in pottery,
and at a later date the Ironstone Ware of Mason, where it is said that
he inflicted more injury upon the French potters than did the English
fleet under Nelson.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With two lights detachable for use of standard as a single light.
Removable nozzles. Date about 1800. Showing signs of copper owing to
bad usage.
(_In the collection of Author._)]
These are trade matters, but interesting withal, as they show the rapid
rise under careful and patient intuition of skilled craftsmen whose
resplendent models tempted the Continent to buy our replicas where
perhaps the original work was either not proffered for sale or was too
expensive for the continental market.
We give another illustration (p. 75) of two table candlesticks, 1797
in date, sent out, as the catalogue states, by R. C. & Co. (Robert
Cadman and Company). In one example we have the favourite design of
the ostrich feathers beloved of Hepplewhite and others in the chair
backs of the same period. The classic influence of Adam is waning.
There is nothing purely Grecian in the column. The Ionic pillar has
long since disappeared. We have something as a substitute in design.
The Maltese cross as a novelty finds itself as a feature in the design.
It is composite, it is in a measure feeble in comparison with previous
designs. It marks the oncoming period. It is just the sign of something
confused in the design. We shall soon see something not only confused
but extremely mixed and utterly banal with false and meretricious
ornament, with little meaning except that here it stands, as ornament
or as attempt at ornament, but as to balance or symmetry--that has
been irretrievably lost. The age of decadence no one can explain. One
marvels as much at ineptitude as at beauty in design.
Happily the Sheffield designers went backwards for some of their
designs in a period that threatened decadence. The smaller of the
candlesticks (illustrated, p. 75) suggests the reticence and
simplicity of a brass candlestick of the Stuart period. As such it must
be regarded. It stands quietly unassailable in its English dignity.
A fine clean-cut example, in date 1785, of pure design, with facets
sharply cut and decorated with acanthus leaf design in due subjection,
is illustrated (p. 83). The urn stem and the urn nozzle determine the
period, and the candlestick stands on a fine round base. Its clear
defined reticence is almost like cut steel work on a minor plane of the
same period, such as frames to cameos and later adapted to purses and
chatelaines. Cut steel mounts to clock faces belonged to the coming
Empire days. Here, in this candlestick illustrated, is an indication of
facetted work as clean cut as glass, which in its working and in its
technique is a metal too.
=The Candelabrum.=--Whatever may have been the varieties of the
hanging candelabrum in Dutch interiors, finely wrought brass and copper
with a variety of designs always pleasing and so attractive as to find
a ready duplication as a modern electric light candelabrum, we do not
find the table candelabrum at an early date in England. As days went
on it became massive, and had seven or eight lights. Old engravings
depict Jewish and other candelabra as standing on the ground, sometimes
of great height and with many lights, but for domestic use their
acceptance as table or sideboard lights came in the middle
eighteenth century, in Georgian days with great spread of mahogany and
massive furniture. They seem almost related to the Adam resuscitation
of classic candelabra on tripod feet. But most of the massive Sheffield
plated examples bear relationship to Hogarthian pre-Chippendale
mahogany, and solid sideboards groaning with silver, engirt with
monteiths and punch bowls and all the equipments of a period when
members of Parliament hiccupped their speeches in the House, and when
fox-hunting and port-drinking squires drank each other under the
table. The evolution of the candelabrum from its simple form with two
lights to its conclave of twelve is as interesting as the evolution
of the gate-leg table during a somewhat longer period. In regard to
practicability, as has been pointed out to the writer, some of the
later replicas overdo the number in the attempt to be ornate, and if
filled with candles and lighted they would burn each other. This is
an interesting fact as indicating that sometimes in his attempt to be
original the modern fabricator invents something that could never have
been used. For, after all, our ancestors, however handicapped they were
by want of illuminative mechanism, were never so foolish as to employ
candelabra that would cause guttering by one candle firing another on
account of its close proximity.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
Branched with seven lights. A square base with ball feet. Fluted
decorations on column. Date 1820.
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With five lights: on hexagonal base with claw feet. Nozzles urn-shaped,
richly decorated. Column with acanthus leaf and diaper ornamentation.
Date 1810.
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
In considering candelabra, the ordinary branched three-light
candelabrum is interesting, and many forms follow each other
indicating the steady progress onwards. The example illustrated (p. 87)
is capable of being used as a single candle or as two lights. It is in
the usual nomenclature of the trade termed a three-light candelabrum,
though only two lights are capable of being used at the same time. The
nozzles are removable. Now the removable nozzle was not introduced
into silver plate until about 1758, when the tall Corinthian column
types first had this invention. But the example under notice has other
indications to place it about 1800. It has the slight suggestions of
oncoming Empire style, the commencement of a return to austerity, a
poverty of design, and the urns and nozzles betray the newer forms of
ornament. The oval bases and the touch of floriate ornament under the
nozzle urns have their indicative note. It will be observed that the
camera, with more penetration than the human eye, has brought out the
thinness of the plate, and it is here represented in the illustration.
It denotes perhaps less of a delinquency on the part of the plater or
a flaw in his technique than a grave indictment against generations of
housemaids who have used metal polish which contained mercury or some
other noxious compound inimical to the longevity of the superimposed
silver. So here it is indicating a last stage of its simulation and the
base copper peeps forth triumphantly.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
One of a pair. Two-light: about 1790. Fluted column handwork. Fluted
leaf ornament on cups, with Gothic looped branches surmounted by an
acorn.
(_In the collection of B. B. Harrison, Esq._)]
A glorious candelabrum of massive form branched with seven lights
on square base with ball feet is in date about 1820 (illustrated, p.
91). The grease cups indicate its late date, and underneath is the
same bud-like floriate ornament we noticed in the last example. But
in addition to give it yet a later date is the broken branch with
ball-like ornament. It is a fine example, especially noteworthy as
being representative of a period just before a decadence of design set
in which thrusts the collector out and freezes any interest he may take
in perfect technique by reason of a fearfulness he has of banal design.
A splendid example of a candelabrum with five lights, one of a pair is
illustrated (p. 93). The late classic influence from Pompeii derivative
through French sources is here evident. The tripod stand terminates
on claw feet embellished by a floriated winged design. The column has
a richness almost akin to the worker in ormulu. The base is decorated
with acanthus leaf ornament, followed by ordinary fluting which breaks
off in the centre of the pillar. The upper portion is decorated in a
diaper pattern and the capital is a fluted urn, from which spring the
branches. The grease pans are richly godrooned, and here the feature
underneath is noticeable, the little circular boss beneath the pans.
At a later date the grease pan disappeared, but the little rosette
was left. This is especially noticeable in the example in date 1800
(illustrated, p. 87). The grease pans have become too diminutive to
be of use, but there is sufficient suggestion of their presence left
to disturb the fine proportions of the urn above. The fluted branches
have an added ornament which it is charitable to believe was placed
there for practical reasons to give added strength to the branches, but
denotes a wavering in design from exquisite, unbroken curves. Ornate as
this great candelabrum is, possessing design carried out with cunning
technique, there are restless elements in its conception, which mark it
as belonging to a transition period.
=The Varieties of the Spiral Form.=--There is something peculiarly
interesting in following the variation of spiral forms in the branched
candelabra from the early days until at the last they sank into
mediocrity and became in the last stages little better than what was
afterwards the standard pattern of the mid-Victorian gas bracket or gas
chandelier, with its meaningless branched arms and its fulsomeness of
meretricious ornament, a form, be it said, actually copied by the early
electricians till they learned better and walked serenely in the paths
of old design.
It would appear that at first the spiral curl of the branched
candelabrum was in due subjection, that is to say, it was a well
considered part of a complete design. It fell within the four corners
of a set harmonious whole. It did not detract from the whole by any
eccentricity, nor did it attract especial attention except as
a factor in an _ensemble_. For instance, take three examples and
examine them minutely. The first is on one of a pair, in date 1790
(illustrated, p. 97). The convolutions of the spirals are apparently
intricate till one more closely realizes that they approximate to
the Gothic designs then being promulgated by Chippendale. The top
loop forming a circle, the side loops forming similar circles, the
intersections of these and the lower arcs forming an angle over the
urn-ornamented nozzle are little other than the loops and angles
forming the tracery of a Gothic design which might with little addition
be the leadwork of a window. These same designs may, with an observant
eye, be traced in fanlights and doorways in the suburbs of London where
the middle and late eighteenth century styles still linger in the
façades and in the railings.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With two lights: having branches with interlaced spiral design as
central ornament. Date 1790.]
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With two lights: having S-shaped branches interlacing at centre. Date
1790.
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATE CANDELABRUM.
Two lights, oval base, removable nozzles, fluted lobes, and single
spiral branches. Date 1790.
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
Take another example still in date about 1790 (illustrated, p. 101);
here the base is an urn and the single-candle standard form nothing
very especially removed from a design very beloved by the brass turners
of a slightly later date. But it is the branched form which commands
respect as a piece of decorative ornament. Its =C=-shape spirals
interlace at centre and form a pleasing ornament. Its simplicity and
grace are at once apparent. It has the practicability that it is not
readily injured by ill-usage. Its wearing parts are confined to a
narrow space. Among all the spiral forms there is nothing, however
elaborate, that excels this in grace. It is almost honeysuckle like in
conventional ornament. We have seen the ironworker spin such reticent
spirals, but in the silversmiths' work it is rare to find this form.
Another 1790 design (illustrated, p. 101) carries the loops out in
such a manner as to suggest an elongated urn. The oviform intersection
of the loops, plain and formal though they appear at first glance, do
not come into such a severe classic position by mere accident. The
low dropping loops afford just that contrast and upward spring which
make the intersection, and give it its maximum ornament as two bands
enclosing a space, which space is in itself a component part of the
ornament to the candelabrum.
Two fine examples illustrated (pp. 103, 107) exhibit respectively the
fine use of the twisted form in the arms. They are both two-light
candelabra with central vase ornament. In the former with single loops
the vase is very properly left nearly level with the apex of the arms.
This would have been a blemish in the other example illustrated (p.
107), where the vase ornament is larger and carries off the strong
double twisted design in the arms. This example is original in its
treatment of curves and carries the idea to the utmost limit. Beyond
this the ornament became disastrous and added a note of eccentricity to
otherwise well-balanced designs.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD CANDELABRUM.
Two lights: oval base, acanthus leaf decoration in column. Double
spiral branches.
(_In the collection of B. B. Harrison, Esq._)]
When the loop went awry, as it did, it became an excrescence. In two
examples this is shown in varying stages of decadence. It is obvious
that the designer had lost sight of the fact that the curved loops
could so be manipulated as to become an integral part of the design
and contribute to its harmony. The same thing happens in regard to
chair-backs. It was here that Chippendale proved himself a prince of
designers. It was not so much what he put in as what he left out. In
other words, take a great design of one of his superlative chair-backs
and let the eye trace the spaces, that is the space form, trying if
possible to eliminate the concrete solid design. The silhouette of the
outlines of the spaces are really the key to the justness and beauty of
the design. If one could remove the mahogany portions of an intricate
carved back and placing it against a black sheet retain the beautiful
outline of the spaces, the result, example after example, would be a
design book in itself as fascinating as a book of Japanese stencil
plates.
In the example 1795, with the three lights (illustrated, p. 111) there
is little to quarrel with the design except that the long stem and
wanton simplicity and lack of grace suggest the cast iron standard
which effect is carried out by the common place spiral leading to the
central light, which, by reason of its curves, attracts an attention
to itself which is unwarranted by any special beauty it possesses. It
is a blemish. It has no meaning as a curve and it detracts from a
simplicity which otherwise the candelabrum might possess.
The other example illustrated (p. 111) has unmeaning spiral design
utterly vitiating an otherwise harmless candelabrum. Its spirals run
riot and offer nothing pleasing. They stand as an attempt undoubtedly
original on the part of the designer to produce something effective
as a novel design. The style otherwise of the candlestick does not
suggest that the craftsman had a hold upon sound design, but we might
pass that. We are extremely thankful to know that nobody seems to have
continued this style. In all possibility, by the laws of practical
usage, the housemaid placed her vengeance on the offending spiral arms
with no support and they broke in halves. The same servitor teaches
the offending potter a lesson when, in vessels intended for everyday
use, he adds ornament that is unduly projecting in handle or in spout.
They pass into the heap of shards because common utility abhors useless
ornament.
As a comparison with other forms of branched candelabra and as
exemplifying the completed mastery the artist craftsman had over his
design and its execution, two examples of rare form and character are
illustrated (p. 113). The two-light candelabrum is of unusual shape,
the standard being a full-bodied urn on which stands another urn.
Branches issue from the lower urn and in their intersections form
beautiful curves of pleasing form.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With three lights: having central branch with corkscrew spiral.
Standard of unusual form. Date 1795.]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With two lights: having elongated spiral branches interlacing at
centre. Date 1790-1795.]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDLESTICK.
On oval base, with standard in form of lyre. Threaded oval cups and
nozzles. Date 1795. Height 10 in.]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With two lights: having =S=-shaped branches, with standard in form
of vase surmounted by another vase ornament.
(_In the collection of B. B. Harrison, Esq._)]
The single candlestick (illustrated, p. 113), has another adaptation of
curves in ornament. The standard springs from a circular base and is
in the form of a lyre which supports an urn-shaped nozzle. This form
undoubtedly is derivative from French sources. We find it in ornaments
to metal clock cases, and it bespeaks the Sheraton period in possessing
a grace and _finesse_ associated with the designs of _Louis Seize_ that
he acclimatized in this country.
=The Tri-Form Candelabrum.=--The candelabrum with three branches
has been found capable of much variation in character. These branches
have had the advantage of being able to conform to conventional usages
in regard to a triangular conformation and a trifid ornament. It is a
favourite device in art from the lotus leaf of the Buddhist emblems to
the _fleur-de-lys_. The love of a threefold ornament appealed to the
wood-carver, and it is found on sprigs decorating porcelain. The use
of three balancing adjuncts in ornament is universal, apart from the
deeper or symbolical meaning of such forms.
In the example illustrated (p. 117), in date 1805, the three curved
branches spring upwards and the lights are all level. This form is
typical of some of the best three-branched candelabra then made. It
is solid and massive, and has no false or overloaded ornament. It is
dignified and imposing. The other example, in date 1810, illustrated
on the same page, betrays at once classic influence. The old models of
Herculaneum and Pompeii had been eagerly refashioned as something new
in the First French Empire. The portrait of Madame Rècamier by David
shows her sitting on an empire settee with a tall standing candelabrum
at its foot. The couch is a replica of old Roman stone forms and the
candelabrum is a duplicate of a Pompeian style on tripod feet. The
candelabrum illustrated has a stand consisting of three tapering legs
reeded, and ending in claw feet. This supports an urn which in its turn
supports another, which latter can be used as a light. From the lower
urn proceed three branches, spread out in triangular manner.
A later candelabrum with two arms and centre light, illustrated (p.
121) betrays every sign of bad design. The floral scroll work is
hard and offensive. The leaf and shell ornament at base is equally
unsatisfactory. It was this form that survived as it came on the
threshold of the era of illumination by coal-gas. It was about this
date that Sir Walter Scott lit Abbotsford by gas. "His application of
gaslight to the interior of a dwelling house was in fact attended by so
many inconveniences," says Lockhart his biographer, "that ere long all
his family heartily wished it had never been thought of. The effect of
the apparatus was at first superb. In sitting down to table in autumn
no one observed that in each of three chandeliers there lurked a
tiny bead of red light. Dinner passed off, and the sun went down, and
suddenly at the turning of a screw, the room was filled with a gush
of splendour worthy of the palace of Aladdin; but as in the case of
Aladdin, the old lamp would have been better in the upshot. Jewelry
sparkled, but cheeks and lips looked cold and wan in this fierce
illumination; and the eye was wearied and the brow ached if the sitting
was at all protracted. I confess, however, that my chief enmity to the
whole affair," continues Lockhart, "arises from my conviction that Sir
Walter's own health was damaged in his latter years in consequence of
his habitually working at night under the intense and burning glare of
a broad star of gas."
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With three lights: having spiral branches interlacing at centre.
Circular base terminating in vase ornament. Date 1805.]
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With four lights: having spiral branches on tripod column with claw
feet, standing on hexagonal base. Date 1810.
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
=The Chamber Candlestick.=--This form has had a long survival and
up to quite a recent date, before the adoption of electricity, a row of
earthenware candlesticks formed part of the appurtenances of the hall
or corridor of any provincial hotel. The illustration (p. 123) entitled
_Serena_, from an engraving by J. R. Smith after Romney's picture,
shows a fair reader, entranced in some old world romance, illuminated
by the light of a single candle, as injurious in its faint glimmer
as was the glare of the gas to Sir Walter Scott. Romney painted Miss
Sneyd as _Serena_ at a date between 1770 and 1790. The form of the
candlestick in the print, it will be seen, differs somewhat from the
Sheffield plate examples illustrated on the same page. The example
with the circular nozzle and circular base is in date about 1810,
and the two others with square nozzles and square bases are in date
respectively 1815 and 1825. They are ornate in their ornament, and
have silver filled mounts and edges. The example of the latest date is
silver gilt.
=The Evolution of the Table Candlestick.=--The table candlestick
is of long lineage. The Sheffield plated examples cover the last
hundred years of the existence of the candlestick as a means of
domestic lighting. During this period, especially during that portion
from 1765 to 1790 a brilliant procession of fine designs in silver,
made under the direction of highly inspired artist-craftsmen, exhibits
a flexibility of ornament and a diversity of character rarely equalled
in English metal work covering so short a period of time. It embraces
the traditions of the Queen Anne period still retained in the types
carried on in the reign of George II as robust as were the designs in
mahogany in Chippendale's early manner following the broader splats
and swelling lines of the Hogarthian period. With the Adam influence
reticent decoration eminently fitted to grace and embellish table
ornament made its permanent impression on the period, tinctured with
inclinations towards flowing lines--the ribbon decorations of the
carved wood chair-back, or later the subtle graces of boudoir art
reflected in the designs of Thomas Sheraton. And with the steady
flow of models of table candlesticks reflecting the exuberance and
native originality of a crowded art-period the creations of the potters
were running concurrently in emulation of silver. Chelsea and Bow
produced candlesticks environed with peasant maids and shepherdesses,
in the technique appertaining to the clay, rich in colours and pleasing
in effect. Wedgwood produced table candlesticks in black and blue
jasper ware with cameo decorations in white, or finely modelled classic
figures in basalt in which candelabra were embodied, and running
through the period are the competitive creations of table candlesticks
as an echo of silver forms by the glass-worker.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDELABRUM.
With two arms and centre light. Arms curved and ornamented with floral
scroll work. Base plain, with circular band of silver leaf and shell
ornament. Height 24 in. Width 24 in. Date 1820.
(_At the Sheffield Public Museum._)
(_Reproduced by permission of the Corporation of Sheffield._)]
[Illustration: "SERENA."
(From an old print.)
Engraved by J. R. Smith, after Romney.]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CHAMBER CANDLESTICKS.
Gilt: silver-filled, gadroon and shell edges. Date 1825.
Circular base, vase-shaped nozzle, silver-filled mounts. Date 1810.
Square base, ornate silver-filled mounts; single plate. Date 1815.]
The series of illustrations of the various types of Sheffield plated
table candlesticks do little more than approximately indicate the
rapidly changing styles in a period so richly inventive in decorative
ornament. In the group illustrated (p. 127) the example on the left, in
date 1765, is on a square base with cluster columns and leaf capitals.
The example on the right is in date 1770. The base is round. It is here
that the plater has exercised his ingenuity in fine reticent die work,
and the edging is delicately beaded. The candlestick in the centre has
a square base, with fine batswing fluting, and square-shaped columns
ornamented with classic medallions. The nozzle has a character of its
own in having a rim which is pierced.
The illustrations (p. 129) show other forms in process of evolution.
The tall Corinthian column made a handsome table ornament. The example
on left is one of a set of four, twelve and a half inches high. The
bases are square and are decorated in clever die work with rosettes
and festoons carried around the pyramidal base. This type has cluster
columns terminating in capitals decorated with formal leaf design. The
adjacent candlestick is a form found about 1790. The base is square and
fluted, and the column is in classic style terminating in a capital in
Ionic style, with volutes springing out of twisted leaves and husks.
The third example in the upper row is about 1795 in date. The base is
square and follows the same classic suggestions of previous types. The
capital is square and fluted, and is decorated with conventional floral
ornament. The nozzle is urn shaped.
The three lower examples of the period from 1810 to 1830 show signs
of debasement in form. The bases have now become circular. Each
candlestick has certain beauties in it, little touches which invite
respect and regard, but each also contains blemishes detracting from
the exact symmetry which was the character of the earlier types. The
floriate decoration as an ornament to the lower half of the column in
the first example may be passed. In the second it has grown into an
unpleasing excrescence, and the base is decorated in a florid manner
disturbing to the eye. The last example has lost that fine feeling
dependent on the easy flow of simple line. It is composite in
character, it betrays a lack of inspiration. It is a very poor relation
to the fine table candlesticks of the earlier period, where the beauty
wins and fascinates. There is no such grace and distinction in these
late examples, but they doubtless reflected the silver fashions then
prevalent, which were in the main execrable in taste.
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDLESTICK.
With broken fluted column on square base with ball ornament. Nozzle
richly decorated with acanthus leaf design. Date 1765. Height 10 in.
(_By courtesy of Walter H. Willson, Esq._)]
[Illustration: OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED CANDLESTICKS.
With square base, batswing fluting, square-shaped column with
medallion, and having unusual nozzle with pierced gallery. Date 1795.
Height 12 in.
(_In the collection of B. B. Harrison, Esq._)
With circular base, column and nozzle fluted, ornamented with bead
edging at base, column and nozzle. Date 1770. Height 10 in.
(_In the collection of B. B. Harrison, Esq._)]
[Illustration: GROUP OF CANDLESTICKS, OLD SHEFFIELD PLATED.
Exhibiting types and variation in style for fifty years.
_Upper Row_--
=1780.= Broken fluted
column. Acanthus leaf decoration, square base, medallion and ribbon
ornament.
=1790.= Square base, broken fluted column, terminating in Ionic
capital.
=1795.= Square base, tapering column fluted, surmounted by urn
nozzle.
_Lower Row_--
=1810.= Circular base, spiral fluting, lobe decoration,
urn-shaped nozzle retained.
=1820.= Circular base, with bulbous column heavily decorated with
floral scrolls.
=1830.= Broken circular base, onion-shaped column, bulbous
ornament.]
IV
SALT CELLARS AND MUSTARD POTS
THE SALT CELLARS
THE PATTERN BOOKS OF SHEFFIELD
THE NEW STYLE OF TABLE SALT CELLAR
THE MUSTARD POT
A BID FOR THE CONTINENTAL TRADE