2016: marble pier table & high-back fancy chair

Posted by scott on Dec 24, 2016 in Art I See

INTRODUCTION

I made just one decorative art acquisition in 2016–a c. 1830 marble-top pier table–but I’d like also to write about a rare high-back fancy chair purchased in early 2014 because its twin was auctioned off this year.  The pier table in and of itself is interesting, but so is why I bought it, what research I did before purchase and what I learned after it came to live with us. Discussing the fancy chair allows me to admit how lucky I was to be  able to remove its dark surface grime and how lucky I was not to bid on its twin.

Pier table

The pier table is an interesting form. As its name attests its function is to sit in the space–the pier–between two windows.  Most often its top is marble. It usually has no drawers. The center of the back houses a mirror. The front often is composed of free-standing columns that rest on a shelf, which in turn rests on short legs. The form seems to appear in America around 1800 and continue, reflecting the current fashion, through the 19th century.

The piers in our 1850s Baltimore townhouse are rather narrow, too narrow for most pier tables.  So acquiring one was not high on our list. Yet I admired the form. In 2013 my interest grew during negotiations with an antiques dealer to make her a floorcloth for her federal house in exchange for furniture from her inventory. Two of her three pier tables–particularly a stenciled 1810 Philadelphia one–interested me, but she wouldn’t budge on either of them. I have no regrets, however, with the over-mantel mirror and card table I ended up with.  (See  the making of her floorcloth at: http://www.scottponemone.com/floorcloth-painted-canvas-for-1806-hallway/)

Our search ended at an antiques show in York, PA, this September.  I immediately liked the strength of its broadly fluted tapered columns and pilasters as well as their simple Doric capitals.  The frieze under the marble top of pointed Gothic arches and acorn-shaped corbels was equally attractive. The top of what is usually referred to as Egyptian marble was stunning.

Even the mirror plate with its severe flaking was a positive because it was original (and not to be seen at face height).  The other condition question was the repair to the marble. It had broken. The break followed the pale, rather straight vein visible near the left edge of the image above.  There had also been a few small repairs to the mahogany veneer.

The asking price seemed fair.  But other than taking a few photos and asking the dealer (from Kentucky, this being his first York show) for his card, I left the show without making a bid on the table. But negotiations had in fact begun.

The first task was to go home and look online for auction records for similar tables, maybe even finding the sale of the exact table.  I would also check books for similar tables.

Well, my reference library failed me, but the liveauctioneers.com site didn’t.  While I didn’t find “my” table, I did come across some variations, and the auction  prices suggested that the one I saw in York was fairly priced. The top example had much wider arches, nubby acorns and the frieze corners differently than “mine.” The frieze (shown above on the right) corners with a completed arch both on the front and on the side so that an acorn wraps around the corner.  On what would become my table (right) and on the example above, lower right, the frieze corners at the top of the arch both on the front and on the side.

So the example on the lower right is closer to mine.  It’s wider–by one arch across the front; its capitals are somewhat different. The height of its mirror plate–probably replaced–is the same.  (Note that in the example on the top, the mirror plate is taller.)  The top example also has a flat bead running below the acorns and at the base of the plinth.  There’s no bead anywhere on mine and on the lower right example.

I include the example on the lower left just to show a variation.  The column shafts are the same, but the capitals are Ionic.  The arch frieze is missing, but the flat bead is present. The mirror height matches the one on mine.

All three examples have black Egyptian marble.  Like my table, the marble tops on the top and lower right examples have been repaired.  Maybe the dramatic veinage of this marble makes it subject to breakage.

So we saw the table on Friday. I did my research on Saturday and tried to hold off calling the dealer until Sunday. But I couldn’t constrain myself.  Late Saturday I offered him 20 percent less by email.  He countered saying he couldn’t go below a 10 percent discount.  That’s as far as it went until Sunday morning, when I called him. We chatted a bit. He claimed he’s had a lot of interest in the table and so refused to drop the price further.  In short I yielded, but would he accept about three/eights now and two equal checks for the balance post-dated for late October and late November.  He agreed but wanted the initial payment in cash when he delivered the table. (Free delivery!)

One other point: Only my table had feet (left). The ones I saw online were in the French console style–without feet.  So when the dealer  arrived, I checked the bottom of the feet before he removed the table from his vehicle. Were the feet added? I figured that if they were, they would have to have been screwed in from the bottom.  But there were no screws. Rather each foot had three wire nails toenailed in (hammered in at an angle) near where the each foot met the plinth.  This was done, I suspected, because the tenons had become loose. (In the photo you can see the head of one of the nails. It’s the very small bright spot above the highest ring turning of the foot.)

With its very Greek columns my pier table fits nicely in with late neoclassical American furniture, maybe 1830s.  The frieze of pointed arches is called Gothic.  While pointed arches are associated with the short-lived American Gothic Revival style of around 1840 and the 1850s, American cabinetmakers were incorporating pointed arches much earlier.  Above is a desk and bookcase by John Shaw and his workshop in Annapolis (active 1770 to around 1825).  Shaw used pointed arches as early as 1790.  The above example is from around 1800.  (See more examples at: http://www.chipstone.org/images.php/564/American-Furniture-2006/) Baltimore cabinetmakers used pointed arches on cabinet doors–particularly on sideboards–as early as 1815.

Guess what?  Another search, another result.  I think this time I might have written “Empire pier table” when searching sold items at Live Auctioneers. It certainly is my table: pre-repair to the marble, identical mirror flaking and little turned feet.  Being an inveterate bargainer, I admit I was a little taken aback with the $475 hammer price. That’s only $536.75 with 13% buyer’s premium. I wondered if the seller of my table was the winning bidder for it at the May 27, 2013, Mark Mattox auction. So I had to ask.

Taylor Thistlethwaite of Thistlethwaite Americana (that’s  www.thistleamerica.com) graciously agreed to answer some questions:

So I was primed when I came across the red-painted one at the 2014 winter version of the Original Semi-Annual York Antiques Show.

 

Trackback URL: https://www.scottponemone.com/2016-marble-pier-table-high-back-fancy-chair/trackback/

One comment on “2016: marble pier table & high-back fancy chair”

1. Leslie Harned on October 18, 2017 at 5:10 pm said:

   Hi Scott –

   I have acquired what I believe is a Baltimore “Fancy” chair–a rocking chair with caned seat and back. I wonder if you might be willing to take a look and give me your impression.

   I live in the correct region to have acquired it (about 45 west of Baltimore). It is lovely, but was a bit of a mystery to me as I was unable to find another on the internet. My mother sorted through all of her reading materials, etc. and believes it to be a “Fancy” chair. I’m really excited about it. Thank you and please let me know if you would be willing to take a look.

   Best wishes,

   Leslie Harned

   Reply ↓