A Glass Amphora Vase By Borek Sipek

The glass amphora is a signature form in the oeuvre of Bořek Šípek (often written Borek Sipek), the Czech architect-designer whose postmodern “baroque” sensibility helped redefine studio glass in the late 20th century. For collectors and appraisers, these vases sit at the productive crossroads of Czech crystal traditions and Italian Murano virtuosity: exuberant in profile, painterly in color, and laden with hot-applied ornament. This guide explains how to identify, date, evaluate, and care for a Šípek amphora with an appraiser’s eye.

Why Šípek’s Amphora Matters

• Design significance: Šípek (1949–2016) was a leading figure in postmodern design, known for theatrical, highly crafted objects that blend architecture and sculpture. The amphora—an ancient two-handled vessel—became a recurring stage for his experiments in asymmetry, color layering, and hot-worked details.
• Studio lineage: Šípek collaborated with master glassblowers in Murano and, crucially, with the Ajeto Glassworks in Lindava, Czech Republic, where he served as artistic director. Many amphorae were unique or made in small variations, even when nominally part of a series.
• Aesthetic fingerprint: Expect elongated necks, exaggerated handles (often zoomorphic or thorned), prunts and applied threads, and deliberate asymmetry. The form’s classical roots are always visible, yet the execution is resolutely late-20th-century—expressive, playful, and technically complex.

Understanding this hybrid identity is essential to accurate attribution and value.

Defining Features: How to Identify an Authentic Šípek Amphora

1. Overall form

• Amphora silhouette: Ovoid or elongated body, narrow neck, and flared mouth; typically two handles, sometimes dramatically upswept or curling. Feet can be domed, pad, or disk-shaped, sometimes with an applied foot ring.
• Asymmetry: Handles may differ in shape or angle; decoration on one side may not mirror the other. Asymmetry is intentional and should feel “composed,” not haphazard.

2. Hot-worked ornament

• Handles: Common motifs include ribbon handles with ribbing, thorned spurs, swan-neck curls, or spiral twists. Ends may terminate in claws, beaks, or horn-like tips.
• Prunts and rigaree: Small hot-applied “buttons” (prunts) and trailing threads often articulate shoulders and neck. Prunts are usually well-defined, with no sharp edges or smeared joins.
• Applied color elements: Contrasting-color bands, canne (cane) applications, and murrine inserts appear on higher-complexity examples.

3. Color and technique

• Layering: Sommerso-like encasements, incalmo-style horizontal banding, or internal veils of color are common. Šípek favored bold color juxtapositions: cobalt/amber, ruby/emerald, citron/violet, and opaque/pastel contrasts.
• Surface: Typically glossy; intentional texture appears as hot-applied ribbing or threads, not acid-etching or sandblasting (those are uncommon on amphorae).
• Thickness: Walls tend to be substantial but not clumsy; weight can be notable on Czech-made crystal-bodied examples.

4. Finish and base

• Pontil: Expect a ground and polished pontil scar. The base may be wheel-polished flat or subtly concave.
• Signature: Look for an engraved or diamond-point inscription, usually on the underside: “B. Sipek,” “Borek Sipek,” or “Bořek Šípek,” sometimes with diacritics. Dates (e.g., “1994”) and workshop references (e.g., “Ajeto”) may appear. Numbering (e.g., “1/8”) occurs on limited runs.
• Quality cues: Clean transitions at handle joins, no devitrified (milky) patches, and confident hot-work are hallmarks. Amateur or “school” pieces often show messy joins, collapsed coils, or wavering symmetry that lacks intention.

5. Scale

• Heights vary: Many amphorae range 25–55 cm (10–22 in), with some monumental examples exceeding 60 cm (24 in). Larger, more complex pieces carry stronger values, especially with elaborate handles and multi-layer colorwork.

Dating and Attribution: Murano vs. Ajeto and Period Clues

Šípek’s amphora vases span roughly the mid-1980s through the early 2000s, with continued iterations thereafter. Identifying production context helps refine dating and value.

• Murano collaborations (late 1980s–1990s): Expect soda-lime compositions, vibrant color palettes, and confident hot applications typical of Venetian maestros. Some feature cane and murrine familiar from Venetian practice. Signatures may be solely “B. Sipek” without workshop mention; the weight may be slightly lighter relative to Czech lead crystal pieces of similar size.
• Ajeto Lindava (from mid-1990s): Ajeto’s crystal-based work can feel heavier and “ring” more when lightly tapped. Color programs may skew toward saturated jewel tones and luminous transparencies. Many Ajeto pieces are signed with both artist and workshop; occasional paper labels also exist. Šípek’s tenure as art director during this period supports strong attribution when Ajeto is indicated.
• Series vs. uniques: Šípek conceived families of forms but allowed (or embraced) workshop-level variation. “The same model” can differ meaningfully in handle posture, prunt placement, or color. Limited editions may bear fractional numbering; unique pieces are typically dated and signed without edition markings.
• Catalog and exhibition provenance: Documentation from design galleries or catalogues confirms date windows and can elevate value. Period photographs showing the exact piece, especially in exhibitions, are probative.

Tip: Weighing, measuring, and photographing details (base, handles, prunts) against known period traits can strongly indicate whether a vase is Murano-made or Ajeto-made when the signature is incomplete.

Assessing Condition and Originality

Amplitude of ornament makes amphorae vulnerable. Appraisers should systematically inspect:

• Handles: Check for heat checks (fine stress lines) at the joins, concealed repairs, or replaced handles. UV light can reveal modern adhesives.
• Neck and mouth: Look for annealing fractures, chips to the rim, or ground-down rims (indicated by atypically sharp or dead-flat rims).
• Prunts and threads: Missing or reglued prunts are common. Under magnification, adhesives and micro-gaps appear; genuine hot-applied prunts integrate seamlessly into the base glass.
• Foot and base: Examine for edge chips, skidding scratches from display, and regrinding. A fully re-polished base may reduce value if it removes a signature.
• Devitrification and bloom: Improper cleaning can produce a cloudy film; true devitrification is within the glass matrix and not removable.
• Internal fractures: Star cracks or bubbles that have cracked can occur at points of color transition.

Originality considerations:

• Lids or stoppers: Some amphorae include sculptural stoppers. Non-matching replacements reduce value materially, often by 20–40%.
• Over-restoration: Invisible repairs stabilize but affect value. Be transparent in reports; condition drives market confidence.

Valuation Benchmarks and Market Trends

Values vary by size, complexity, workshop, date, and provenance. As of recent market behavior:

• Small to medium amphorae (25–35 cm), modest hot-work, signed, good condition: typically $1,500–3,500.
• Medium to large amphorae (35–50 cm) with elaborate handles, layered color, and strong signature/provenance: generally $3,500–8,000.
• Monumental or exhibition-level amphorae, exceptional colorwork, rare forms, documented Ajeto/Murano collaborations: $8,000–15,000+, with outliers higher for iconic examples.
• Factors that lift value:
  • Distinctive asymmetrical or zoomorphic handles
  • Complex incalmo or canne techniques
  • Early, documented Murano period or art-director Ajeto pieces
  • Gallery or museum provenance, literature or exhibition history
• Factors that depress value:
  • Replaced or repaired handles
  • Ground rim or heavily polished base (especially if signature lost)
  • Clouding/devitrification or thermal stress cracks
  • Ambiguous attribution (no signature, generic form)

Note: Markets are regionally sensitive. Continental European sales may be more robust for Ajeto-attributed pieces; Italian sales may favor Murano-period works. Private-sale results for best-in-class vases can exceed public auction prices.

Documentation, Provenance, and Appraisal Tips

• Signature capture: Photograph the entire base and a raked-light close-up of the inscription. Record exact inscription text and location.
• Measurements: Provide height, maximum width, rim diameter, foot diameter, and handle span. Include weight if possible.
• Color analysis: Describe base glass color(s), banding, inclusions, and any murrine or canne features. Note transparency vs opacity and any sommerso-like layering.
• Construction notes: Identify prunts (count and placement), rigaree, and handle type(s). Note asymmetry deliberately and positively—it supports authenticity.
• Provenance: Collect invoices, gallery labels, certificates, catalog pages, and exhibition records. Where possible, obtain a statement from original vendors or workshops confirming period and production.
• Comparative research: Assemble comparables with similar scale, handle complexity, and colorwork. Avoid comparing a simple two-color vase to a multi-technique showpiece.

For formal appraisals, state the intended use (insurance scheduling vs. fair market value) and the applicable standard and market level. Condition commentary should be explicit and illustrated.

Care, Display, and Risk Management

• Handling: Support the body from beneath; never lift by handles or neck. Remove stoppers before moving.
• Cleaning: Use lukewarm deionized water, a drop of pH-neutral soap, and a soft cloth. Avoid abrasive brushes, dishwasher cycles, and sudden temperature changes. Rinse thoroughly; air-dry.
• Sunlight and heat: Prolonged direct sunlight can stress adhesives on prior repairs and fade certain pigments. Display away from heat sources.
• Mounting: Use museum gel or quake wax for seismic security; consider felt pads to prevent base abrasion. Level, stable shelves preferred.
• Insurance: Schedule significant pieces individually with appraisals updated every 3–5 years. Document condition after any move.

Practical Checklist for Owners and Appraisers

• Verify form: Classical amphora profile with deliberate asymmetry; two sculptural handles.
• Inspect hot-work: Clean joins, purposeful prunts/threads, no smeared applications.
• Read the base: Polished pontil; engraved “B. Sipek”/“Bořek Šípek,” date, possible “Ajeto,” and any edition numbers.
• Date and attribute: Compare weight, color program, and technique for Murano vs. Ajeto cues; corroborate with documentation.
• Condition scan: UV-check handles and prunts; assess rim, foot, and internal stresses; note any regrinding.
• Measure and photograph: Full profiles, details of handles/prunts, base signature in raked light.
• Value context: Match with comparable scale/complexity; adjust for condition and provenance.
• Protect and insure: Proper display supports, pH-neutral cleaning, and current insurance schedule.

FAQ

Q: How can I tell if my Šípek amphora is Murano-made or from Ajeto?
A: Murano pieces often exhibit classic Venetian soda-lime clarity, agile cane/murrine accents, and slightly lighter weight for size. Ajeto works (mid-1990s onward) often feel heavier in hand, with crystal brilliance and saturated colors. Signatures may include “Ajeto.” Handle style and prunt execution are similar across both, so use weight, color language, and inscriptions together.

Q: What are typical sizes for these vases?
A: Most amphorae fall between 25–55 cm (10–22 in) tall, with monumental examples exceeding 60 cm (24 in). Width is driven by handle spread; measure across the outermost handle points for shipping and display planning.

Q: Do repairs destroy the value?
A: Not necessarily, but they reduce it. An expert, minimal repair to a handle may lessen value by 20–30% on a desirable piece; multiple repairs or structural cracks can halve value. Transparent disclosure helps maintain market confidence.

Q: Are unsigned amphorae ever authentic?
A: Yes, but they require stronger corroboration—workshop labels, period invoices, or gallery documentation. Given the number of “in the style of” works, an unsigned example without provenance will be valued conservatively.

Q: How should I clean cloudy deposits inside the vase?
A: Try deionized water with a small amount of pH-neutral soap and a soft, non-abrasive bottle swab. Avoid acids and abrasive media; they can permanently damage the surface. If clouding persists, consult a conservation professional, as devitrification cannot be reversed.

A Šípek amphora rewards close looking: its bravura details are not merely decorative but carry the story of a designer translating architecture into glass. For the appraiser, that story is told in the balance of form, technique, and inscription—each a piece of evidence that can transform a colorful vessel into a documented work of late-20th-century design.