Share your favorites on Show & Tell

Kralik bottom to lidded jar.

In Art Glass > Bohemian Art Glass > Show & Tell.
Bohemian Art Glass1410 of 6486Loetz Tango PN III-597Collection A. Ruckl Peloton Decor Glass 1925-35 - The many shapes and colors.
Love it
Like it

welzebubwelzebub loves this.
MALKEYMALKEY loves this.
Michelleb007Michelleb007 loves this.
truthordaretruthordare loves this.
IronLaceIronLace loves this.
antiqueroseantiquerose loves this.
IvonneIvonne loves this.
fortapachefortapache loves this.
vetraio50vetraio50 loves this.
blunderbuss2blunderbuss2 loves this.
auraaura loves this.
See 9 more
Add to collection

    Please create an account, or Log in here

    If you don't have an account, create one here.

    Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate

    Posted 4 years ago

    (833 items)

    Not sure if this this is Bohemian glass, or not. Missing its frog or lid. One small chip on rim. Other than that, no noticeable wear. It is 4 1/4" tall and 5" wide. I paid $.99 for it at a thrift shop in Champaign/Urbana, IL. today. Putting it in the Bohemian Glass category as I am guessing there are folks monitoring that category.

    Mystery Solved
    Bohemian Art Glass
    See all
    Antique Moser Bohemian Painted Gold Enamel Amethyst Footed Glass Rose Bowl
    Antique Moser Bohemian Painted Gold...
    Czech Bohemian Egermann Cranberry Cut to Clear 7 3/4" Wine Goblets Set of 6
    Czech Bohemian Egermann Cranberry C...
    Loetz Art Glass Book: 'LOETZ. THE PASSION' - NBVD (2015, English / German edit.)
    Loetz Art Glass Book: 'LOETZ. T...
    Bohemian Czech Crystal 6" Round Bowl Hand Cut Queen Lace 24% Lead Glass
    Bohemian Czech Crystal 6" Round...
    Antique Moser Bohemian Painted Gold Enamel Amethyst Footed Glass Rose Bowl
    Antique Moser Bohemian Painted Gold...
    See all


    1. charcoal charcoal, 4 years ago
      Great find! My best guess would be Ruckl, Bohemian Glass. Here's an example for comparison.
    2. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Thanks, charcoal! I see the resemblance. Any idea when it was made?
    3. charcoal charcoal, 4 years ago
      I'm sorry. It's Czech Glass, not Bohemian. Around 1931
    4. charcoal charcoal, 4 years ago
      Your CW Category is fine though, I believe.
    5. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Thanks, again, charcoal. Amazing what turns up in thrift shops in Illinois. This came from a little food bank/thrift shop in Champaign/Urbana, IL.
    6. scottvez scottvez, 4 years ago
      Nice find and great price. I wouldn't be took quick to assign a ruckl attribution to this. I don't see YOUR vase's shape or decor in the provided link.

      And I don't know how the vases in the link were determined to be of a "typical ruckl shape".

    7. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Thanks for the input, Scott. I went by the color of the first piece, but am an extreme neophyte where this type of glass is concerned. I switch back to mystery unsolved and add a question mark to Ruckl.
    8. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      This looks like it:

      Liked from another CW post on Ruckl:

      Looks like it lost it's top.
    9. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Just curious. Is something like this worth anything, or is it just a research opportunity?
    10. welzebub, 4 years ago
      Great find for .99 cents.... A great example of Czech glass.

      Many spatter decors can be difficult to nail down on appearance alone. Kralik also made a pale blue spatter similar to this, as likely did other houses.

      The key to identifying this piece accurately will lay in the location of the same shape in a decor which can be solidly linked to a specific production house, or in the same shape being identified as specific production by a known house. In this case, I think what you have here is a covered piece, which is missing it's lid. The ridge on the foot, and the ring at the base of the stem, along with the overall form, serve as indicators to help identify the shape's maker.

      In this case, the form is the same as the following Kralik pieces, with the exception that these are shown with lids, and yours is not. Other than that, the shape and size seem to be consistent with yours.

      Based on the fact that the linked image shows known Kralik production, and the shape of the piece without the lid appears to be the same basic form as your piece, I would arrive at the supportable conclusion that the piece is most likely Kralik production.

      I like the empirical approach much better than the "best guess" method, which in this case seemed to fail, as it has repeatedly done in this forum in the past.
    11. welzebub, 4 years ago
      Looks like you were typing when I was.
    12. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      The first link seems to suggest that the covered jars are Ruckl, not Kralik, or am I misreading the post?
    13. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Had to move to another computer where I can cut and paste. This link says the covered jars are Ruckl, I think:

    14. charcoal charcoal, 4 years ago
      Here's where the Ruckl attribution for the shape in my link originates. (for scottvez)

      Here's that Ruckl vase shape in the spatter decor that is seen on the "Kralik"covered jar from comment 10.
    15. welzebub, 4 years ago
      Like I said above, the shape with a definable decor, when looking at spatters, is the most useful. The covered pieces are Kralik, as the decors on the right two are definitively Kralik Milifiori decors. The second vase linked to by Charcoal is a Rückl shape in what appears to be the same decor. That is why shapes play such an important role. Relying solely on matching simple spatters is a recipe for incorrect attributions leaps..... Something Charcoal has shown us how to do many times before.

      The covered pieces in the linked image are also found with the arched Kralik mark on them.

      For what it is worth, this same argument was presented unsuccessfully by Charcoal almost 4 years ago. While at the same time making the following claim which actually flies in the face of commonly accepted findings.... as much then as now......

      "It is not documented that Kralik applied or owned the rights to the Iris label. In addition, it has not been proven that Kralik applied or owned the rights to the arched mark. Pretending these are manufacturer labels and markings is inaccurate, therefore attributions based upon these things are also inaccurate."

      So it would seem that Charcoal believes that denying accepted knowledge is good, and making a blind leap from a simple decor to a shape found in other Kralik decors, supports a "best guess" attribution to Rückl.....

      I generally refer to a "best guess" as a WAG..... a Wild Ass Guess. Because you are either guessing, or you are actually trying to do supportable research......

      IMHO, your piece is by Kralik, and there is little doubt of it.
    16. welzebub, 4 years ago
      A comparison of your shape to known Kralik production.
    17. truthordare truthordare, 4 years ago
      I also think Kralik, these are one of their most common lidded jars. They have multiple examples in this shape and different decors, and marked.

      The light blue spatter glass can be found on some Ruckl glass, as many other spatters glass decors from that period, they both produced it so then it comes down to the shape and other examples in that shape.

      Here is another Kralik grouping from my site, one has an IRIS Kralik label on the lid.
    18. truthordare truthordare, 4 years ago
      Oops, that only showed one in the iris decor, instead of ten different ones. You get the idea. :-)
    19. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Thanks, everyone, for the input! Had to step away for a bit, but back and reading the comments.
    20. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Going with the Kralik identification, since there are labelled examples. Thanks for all the help and interesting and educational comments!
    21. kwqd kwqd, 4 years ago
      Thanks for the conversation and information charcoal, scottvez, welzebub and truthordare. I learned a lot from this.

      Thanks for the loves


    Want to post a comment?

    Create an account or login in order to post a comment.