Vase with girl in flowers

I've had this vase for about 25 years and would like to know anything about who or when it was made. It is 9" tall. I believe the bottom markings are in the proper orientation because of the number 1 imprint and the hand written 33. The hand written markings seem to be under a dull glaze and can't be rubbed off. I have no idea why the first photo shows twice. I tried deleting and reloading 3 times and it happened every time. Sorry for wasting space.

Thanks,
henrylr

 

Art Nouveau.

Debora

 

I think you could call this "le style Mucha", which means inspired by the art of Alphonse Mucha (otherwise no connection). That might point to it being French or Belgian.

 

Lovely --

 

Thanks Debora. I am hoping the markings might shed some light. What could stampings 6861 and 61 stand for? Could the hand written bI be initials of the artist and 33 mean 1933? Just guessing

 

Sorry, not a clue. But others more knowledgeable in this area than I.

Debora

 

Mucha had crossed my mind but it would be great to know if bI are the initials of a known artist

 

I think it is Art Nouveau in style, but not age.

If you turn the base upside down the numbers 6861 becomes 1989

I see LDI, maybe the decorator.
Could be a mold that was painted by a hobbiest.

There is something off with the colors, which may be my monitor screen.

 

U may be on to something.......

 

The lady bears a strong resemblance to Evelyn Nesbitt...

 

If you look closely at the stamped numbers both 1s have the typical, short, downward slash starting at the top going towards the left. Also rotating it makes 33 backwards. I'm also pretty sure I bought between 1984 or 1987. Also chips on the tip of two of the flower petals, on the right, already were darkened with some age when I got it.

 

If 'you' look closely...you'll see that the stamped numbers are NOT stamped but made individually with an edged tool ( & the 1 's , started at the top would indeed have a deeper or smudged impression...at the bottom ) ....& the written on letters and 33 where placed there at a different time and did not orient themselves with the impressed numbers , so there's no reason to believe they are all facing in the same direction.

That and only being " pretty sure " of the purchase date....where 1987 is so close to 1989.....a mere 2 years apart when you're trying to remember something minor that occurred 28 or 30 years ago .......well.....it leads me to suspect that you're reading a photo.......which is upside down !

 

Don't worry, I don't mind seeing that lovely smile twice.
I like the vase, but it does look like a later piece.

 

Colours are indeed off for what this purports to be, which is late 19th C Austrian or somewhere else European majolica. That pink is too synthetic. I doubt the number is a date, but I do think it's 1970s or 80s.

 

Thanks for all the replies. I also doubt it is a date. The numbers were probably impressed with tools like those in the photos. A number 1 stamp always had that short, downward pointing little slash on the top.

 

then why aren't the 6's identical..

 

I have to say that when I first saw the photos I was thinking newer (like 1970s?) in an Art Nouveau style. Something about the color of the flowers and the profile of the face just looked more modern, even though the general shape seemed an older design. Kind of a puzzler.

However, the numbers on the base look positively older, early 1900's plus or minus. That type of font or whatever you want to call it, does not look modern.

Wondering if the flash from the photo is just making the glaze colors look a bit untrue?

Maybe French or Czech?

 

I did see the "1" in "61"

Makers numbers were not always aligned and going in the same directions. And decorator marks were added later.
Decorator marks were often upside down from maker marks.

 

i see an indentation...smudge....where a tool was stopped and lifted....
i do not see...a stamp mark.., or ...



or any number stamp like this.....

 

Here is another photo of markings. The 1 in 61 looks like the 1 in 6861...just not as sharp an impression. Notice the 8 is not a sharp, uniformly deep, impression. Regarding the 6 s, the smaller looking 6 is a shallower impression. Looking at the impressed numbers, with a magnifier, i believe they are 6861 and 61. And maybe the handwritten letter is a combined L and D followed by an I.