Featured anyone have a parian ware guide?

circa 1850-1860 parian figure of rebecca at the well - almost certainly english - remarkable condition - on the back there is a scribble that I don't think is a signature but it's a peculiar location under the cliff of a rock so I added the pic... there are scribbles all over the back - I have several pieces of parian but my "keep mes" are all mythology theme as my living room is neoclassical - I have no interest in christian religion theme so I was hoping to find the maker to help move this young lady on... snagged it today for $10 at a yard sale! ohhh - she is large - a little over 13" tall

 

First took a look in the one little monograph I have on Parian ware, It's not indexed, so my cursory look through the pix & bits of text that listed some of the subjects from the major makers did not turn up anything useful, other than that Minton produced a 'Naomi and Her Daughters In Law'. Possible they did other subjects from the stories of the great patriarchs & matriarchs.

Rebecca is a very natural interpretation, but I have doubts. I'm not sure she would be depicted bare-breasted this way, head uncovered, with the elaborate necklace. Does she wear 2 earrings or only 1?

Rebecca appears in my space, the cameo world, mainly in versions taken from the painting by Vernet, which includes Eliezer. When she is alone, elements, such as palm trees & camels, are included in the scene to situate it in Biblical times & to evoke Rebecca's story.

I did notice in my Parian booklet that the big houses did a lot of allegorical figures. There's nothing conspicuous about this one to place her in that category, but...?

 

This on eBay doesn't add any info:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254917178380

No idea how accurate their info is.

And this, which seems to be the same:
https://www.gildings.co.uk/auction/...an-figure-rebecca-at-the-well/?lot=45797&sd=1

 

wow - Browen you are a very very observant person! yes her entire breast is exposed - she does only have one earring - her head is uncovered and yes it is an elaborate necklace....

hmmmm

 

ok - so what did this artist know that we don't?

Rebecca at the Well
Francesco de Rosa (1607–1656)



and why is there no mention of her nudity by whoever wrote the commentary on this painting?

"The scene shows Rebecca, great niece of Abraham, offering a large moulded ewer to the kneeling Eliezer and six others. It alludes to an episode in the Old Testament, Genesis 24, when Eliezer has been sent to Mesopotamia by Abraham to find a wife for his son, Isaac, and when he arrived in Nahor in Chaldea he prayed that whoever gave him and his camels water would be an eligible woman. The dog in the picture is an Helian Spinone."

 

From my work trying to identify cameo subjects & their sources, I have learned that the received wisdom on these matters is not always correct. At the end of this article is an account of how an image nowadays described as Mary Magdalen is actually an allegorical figure of Hope, not by the school of/circle of Guido Reni but by Reni himself:

https://cameotimes.com/index.php/profiles-1/allegorical/anchor-of-hope

I did originally have her in the article on Mary M., but never stopped being bothered by the inconsistencies of her steepled fingers & serenely upraised eyes, the way the Virgin looks in Reni's Immaculate Conception, and the robe slipped off the shoulder, more like the other Mary. I looked at I don't know how many Magdalens, learning that when praying she is conventionally shown with her fingers interlaced, hands clasped tightly together in supplication, with eyes rolled way back in an ecstatic transport. She was just wrong for the Magdalen, despite all the auction house descriptions.

I'm bothered in a similar way about the identification of this piece as Rebecca on the basis of the well alone. This lady is more of a gypsy. I took a quick look at images of the Samaritan woman at the well. Although Jesus calls her out for having had 4 husbands & to be currently living with a man to whom she is not married, artistic convention seems to portray her as properly covered up. Hmm indeed.

 

here is a passage that eludes that rebecca had an earring (non-plural)

Rebecca and Eliezer at the Well - The Leiden Collection

"Light falling over her face and cream-colored robes accents her earring, "

 

I was busy writing the dissertation above while you were finding the painting. I don't think I've seen anything bogus enough to compete with the description. I don't know enough to challenge the author on the breed of dog, but you only have to actually look at the painting to know that it has nothing to do with Rebecca. The supposed Elizer looks more like some old drunk checking to see if maybe there's not just a little more wine in the ewer. (Which is not "moulded".) The communication in the scene appears to be between the lady & the youth on the right.

 

1. “And so it came to pass, as the camels had done drinking, that the man took a golden earring of half a shekel weight, and two bracelets for her hands of ten shekels weight of gold” (Gen. 24:22).
   

 

In the painting you can't see her right ear, so the light is picking up the metallic ornament in her left. I asked about it because your figure is in the round & there are photos of both sides of her head, in only one of which I could see an earring.

In the story, Eliezer gives Rebecca 2 bracelets & 1 earring. As you have just found for yourself. It's why I asked: it's the one thing pointing toward Rebecca.

 

But he doesn't give her a necklace.

 

weird that the artist of this sculpture would dig so deep in accuracy to depict one earring but then depict no bracelets....

 

It will take a lot to convince me that the artist had Rebecca in mind when designing this piece. I think in this case the single earring is part of her exoticism.

 

As a worse possible situation: it's possible that this is new and Chinese, and that it's a rip-off of an older model. We've seen similar on these boards previously. In the links I posted there seems to be no nudity, and the "necklace" is more like the collar of her garment. Also, in the version you have, she more directly faces the viewer.

Here's a link to a previous discussion of a bronze:
https://www.antiquers.com/threads/d...is-sculptor-r-blohc.58346/page-3#post-3581599

 

I think this may be an artifact of the way OP is holding the piece at a slight angle. We need to see her sitting on a flat surface to compare.

Maybe this is like complaining about all the images of the Virgin wearing Renaissance dress.

 

I read from the New International Version of the Bible:

When the camels had finished drinking, the man took out a gold nose ring weighing a beka and two gold bracelets weighing ten shekels.
Genesis 24:22 NIV

https://genesis.bible/genesis-24-22

Linda

 

camels can drink quite a lot !!

 

Water.....worth it's weight in gold.............anyone from the US Southwest...

 

as you can see my yard sale adventures this weekend got out of control and has taken over my dining room table... but here is a pic of her sitting flat on table



it is definitely not a chinese repro - I have been handling antiques for 50 years - and it has all the signs of age it is supposed to have - like black age lines that take decades to occur if not a century...



the necklace isn't part of her garment - and her head in the back does show a cloak/partial covering...

 

Even if I feel artistic license is flirting with licentiousness, if you're planning to sell, probably best to go with Rebecca, unless a really convincing alternative can be found. Others fit the conventions better.



"Missing one jug". Makes her sound like an Amazon.