Antique table identity

The Detroit Jewish Chronicle March 22, 1929, Page Image 6


https://chipstone.org/article.php/378/American-Furniture-1999/Grand-Rapids-Furniture:-The-Story-of-America’s-Furniture-City
Grand Rapids Furniture: The Story of America’s Furniture City
... "During the 1910s and 1920s, the Grand Rapids factories specialized in good-quality historical reproductions." ...

I selected the date range of 1922 - 1929. Many factories churning out furniture here ...
http://www.furniturecityhistory.org...yer[options][end_year]=1929&displayer[page]=1

 

I’m not @verybrad , but if you’ll allow me, I think that the table dates to 1885-1900, and the laquered finish is not original.

 

Based only on the styling, I have to agree that this is late 19th century. Besides the Eastlake influence noted, I have to throw in the Aesthetic movement. Also agree that the finish is not original.

Now, if we take into account that the label points to a later date based on location, maybe there is a way to reconcile this. Since the company seems to be a retailer, maybe there is a possibility that they retailed used furniture at some point. Another option might be that they repaired the piece at some point and stamped it then. Lastly, it could be a 20s piece done in an historic style. While there may be some precedence for this last option, I consider this to be the least likely.

 

Agree. The bosses in the legs and bas relief on the valences seem too detailed for a revival piece.

 

I’m of the firm opinion that new furniture being made post WWI was not going to look like a piece of furniture from thirty years earlier. Art Deco was the latest craze and prior to that was Art Nouveau, neither of which would have included a heavy, dark, oak blocky piece like this. Even the Edwardian period would be incorrect. I believe that this is a form of late Eastlake furniture done in dark varnished oak and was either owned by Zuieback and Cantor for personal use or was in their store as a used piece of furniture for sale. I don’t believe they made it, as every item I’ve seen on the web is marked “Made by Zuieback and Cantor”, where this stamp looks more like a shipping address stamp.

 

Here is a better picture of the base, which seems to be in much better shape concerning the finish, than the top. From what I can see by lightly scraping the hard, brittle finish, there appears to be a finished oak surface beneath. My assumption is someone decided to strip and refinish the top but never got around to tackling the rest of the piece, then someone else thought they could cover the oak surface with a very dark finish to match the rest. View attachment 473158 View attachment 473159 View attachment 473158 View attachment 473159

 

Absolutely agree about the Aesthetic Movement influence. I guess it would be considered a Victorian era, Eastlake Aesthetic parlor table!

 

Just occured to me that the top may be a replacement. I am not seeing oak for the base. I would expect the skirt to be original to the piece but perhaps a new top was made from a different table from a later period.

 

Very Brad, I believe you are spot on! Upon close examination of the base and top here’s what I’ve found. After gently removing one of the decorative foot designs and a light sanding on the back of the decoration as well as the matching area on the legs foot, both graining appear to be walnut. Looking over the top apron, a small piece of what looks like walnut veneer was bubbling up so I gently picked it off to confirm. And the three pieces that make up the top are definitely oak. One more interesting fact that puzzled me is that there are no screws underneath the top to secure the apron to the top. I found that rather odd, as I wanted to disassemble the top completely in order to reglue the loose top boards. So here’s my theory: I think the original piece was walnut with a marble top. Since there is no attaching screws with marble, it would have sat upon the decorative skirt that screws to the wood H frame that’s screwed to the legs. The marble must have broke at some point, so someone decided to use a top from a donor table, which explains why it has the Zuieback/Cantor mark. Or, same situation but used loose oak boards, which happened to include one from a table from that dealer. They decided to glue the oak boards to the skirt instead of pocket screwing it, and covered the top with a dark, paint like finish. Mystery solved (I think)!

 

I also thought it strange that the table top did not have a router edge: as nice as the base is, surely the manufacturer would have thought of that. Which makes me think the top was cobbled together by a non-craftsman.

 

ahh, but the base still stinks of Quality craftsmanship !!!!!!

 

Now starts my quest for another top if I can find one that works. I’d love to find a marble top table with a junk base that I could use as a donor, or a walnut table with a usable top. Until I do, I’ll have to see what I can do to help the oak top look better. If anyone knows of a donor table with usable top, please let me know! It needs to be pretty large, at 33x23.

 

Update! I was able to find an antique piece of marble that was very inexpensive, and had it cut to size. I think the table looks amazing and is now the way it was made to look!

 

Before and after!

 

I think it looks fabulous!!!!!

 

Beautiful. Much improved! Get the marble edged beveled at an angle for an even more authentic look.

 

Cool....I love the details on the legs

 

Agree, details like that make all the difference!

 

the legs make the table....but the white marble is a good find to cool off all that dark brown..