There are no prizes for guessing the identity of the lady in the pearlware figure above. Her cornucopia reveals that she is Ceres, goddess of agriculture and plenty. But look again, and you will notice an unusual detail, other than the pretty base. Have you found it? It's the tiny animal (a lion?) peeping out from beneath her skirt.
Small Staffordshire pottery figures of Ceres are usually around six inches in height, and they were mainly made in the late eighteenth century and just into the post-1800 period. They tend to look like the example below, made by Neale/Wilson around 1785, and they do not include a small animal.
Excavated shards link the model-with-animal to William Greatbach's pot bank in the 1775-1782 period. The shards are decorated with colored glazes, so presumable the figure would have looked like the one below, which is currently on eBay. Again, that little beastie peeps out from beneath Ceres's skirt.
Courtesy eBay seller hugh-jarms
This model may have neither originated with Greatbach nor ended with him, for molds changed hands routinely in the Potteries then. I was intrigued to see the small figure of Ceres below in a private collection. She is the only other enamel-painted figure I have recorded from the same molds as the figure at the top of this page. This time the beastie really looks like a lion. Love Ceres's eye makeup!
Courtesy Malcolm Trundley.
Last month, I commented on how pleasing the detail in figures can be, and detail can be found on even quite huge figures. The potter of this large lion in Martyn Edgell's stock was very determined that the beast should have great big ear holes but, more appealing is the motif of putti with a lion in relief beneath the animal's belly.
Courtesy Martyn Edgell.
A putto atop a lion’s back occurs in classical imagery dating back to Roman times. It conveys the theme of the power of love, or “love Conquers All” (“Omnia Vincit Amor” from Virgil’s Eclogue). This same scene appears on a Wedgwood jasper plaque in the Buten Collection, which was modeled in 1776 after a carved gem. And it appears on a plaque in my collection.
Another large figure with an interesting detail coming to auction soon is the lady below. Any idea who she is?
Courtesy Woton Auctions.
The devil is in again in the detail, for the lamp holds the clue to her identity. She portrays the Wise Virgin, as in the Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25: 1–13), also known as the Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins. This parable tells of ten virgins awaiting the coming of a bridegroom. Each carries an oil torch. The five wise virgins have sufficient oil for their lamps, but the five foolish virgins have not. Because the foolish virgins have to seek more oil, they are not present when the bridegroom arrives. They miss their big opportunity!
The Wise Virgin has been represented in imagery for centuries holding her oil light, as does the Staffordshire figure. (A figure portraying the Foolish Virgin has not yet been documented.) Of course, that outstretched arm is just asking to be snapped off, which is why I have yet to see a Wise Virgin with an intact arm in a private collection or in a dealer's stock. I know of only two intact examples, both in museum collections, and they can be seen is Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840, Vol. 2. For completeness, note that in this case the ewer that should be present in the lady's other hand is missing.
Missing details are so frustrating! A few months back I was intrigued to see a hitherto unrecorded figure on eBay. The flower on the base is an Enoch Wood/Wood & Caldwell feature, so I know which pot bank made her...but what did this lovely lass once hold in her arms? The details that would pinpoint her identity have long since been lost.
The Wise Virgin has been represented in imagery for centuries holding her oil light, as does the Staffordshire figure. (A figure portraying the Foolish Virgin has not yet been documented.) Of course, that outstretched arm is just asking to be snapped off, which is why I have yet to see a Wise Virgin with an intact arm in a private collection or in a dealer's stock. I know of only two intact examples, both in museum collections, and they can be seen is Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840, Vol. 2. For completeness, note that in this case the ewer that should be present in the lady's other hand is missing.
Missing details are so frustrating! A few months back I was intrigued to see a hitherto unrecorded figure on eBay. The flower on the base is an Enoch Wood/Wood & Caldwell feature, so I know which pot bank made her...but what did this lovely lass once hold in her arms? The details that would pinpoint her identity have long since been lost.
I have since seen a similar figure with her arms restored to hold a musical instrument of sorts. A botched job if ever there was one! If the world can drool over the armless Venus de Milo, why do we collectors demand perfection?
