Could this be a Limoge Basket?

[annawaller-1]

I made a post about this basket earlier. I think I've figured it out to be a Limoge Basket. Please let me know if iam right. Whats a possible value ect? All info is appreciated 

 

 

 

[md1919]

How could it be one of the Limoges factories if it was made in Italy?

[annawaller-1]

I am just trying to figure this out.

[md1919]

well, suffice to say it was not made in Limoges, France

[klhmdg]

Looks like “art” pottery from Italy.

I don’t think it is a special manufacturer

[maxine*j]

NOT Limoges.   It says "Italy" right on it, so how could you think it to be Limoges?

=

[lacemaker3]

@annawaller-1 ,

This was positively identified on your other thread. This mark was identified as being used by the artist, Elsa Lagorio.

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Collectibles-Art/Please-Identify-Lamborghini-Basket/m-p/32449197

[maxine*j]

---

@lacemaker3 wrote:

This was positively identified on your other thread. This mark was identified as being used by the artist, Elsa Lagorio.

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Collectibles-Art/Please-Identify-Lamborghini-Basket/m-p/32449197

---

It is listed now, and the full description is:  "Capodimonte Gorgeous Pretty flower Basket basket on bottom it says L E Italy 569/1 .  It was purchased in Salem's Lot Massachusetts. From a very reputable dealer many yrs ago."

=

[argon38]

---

@maxine*j wrote:

---

@lacemaker3 wrote:

This was positively identified on your other thread. This mark was identified as being used by the artist, Elsa Lagorio.

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Collectibles-Art/Please-Identify-Lamborghini-Basket/m-p/32449197

---

It is listed now, and the full description is:  "Capodimonte Gorgeous Pretty flower Basket basket on bottom it says L E Italy 569/1 .  It was purchased in Salem's Lot Massachusetts. From a very reputable dealer many yrs ago."

---

I've no real complaints about the listing. OP may not feel comfortable about accepting the Elsa Lagorio ID, which is fair enough. It would have helped the item to sell had the information been included, but at least it isn't misdescribed.

[maxine*j]

Generally true, but md1919 is the real expert here, and he made the a point on one of the three threads about this piece that this is, of course, not Capodimonte.  Not the original, real thing, for sure.  Not even from the current Italian outfit that calls itself "Real Capodimonte, Srl." 

(For those unfamilar with it, Srl is Società a responsabilità limitata -- similar to Ltd. or Inc. or LLC.)

=

[argon38]

---

@maxine*j wrote:

Generally true, but md1919 is the real expert here, and he made the a point on one of the three threads about this piece that this is, of course, not Capodimonte.  Not the original, real thing, for sure. 

---

I can't imagine that anyone in their right mind would conclude that it is "original, real" (18th/19th century) Capodimonte. Nor is it a protected term. These days it indicates a style, and the OP is surely entitled to use it in that sense. There's no attempt to mislead.

[maxine*j]

---

@argon38 wrote:

---

... Nor is it a protected term. These days it indicates a style, and the OP is surely entitled to use it in that sense. There's no attempt to mislead.

---

I can, and do, continue my feeble fights against the misuse of words such as "Capodimonte" and "Murano".   You know that.

- Doña Quixote.

=

[argon38]

---

@maxine*j wrote:

---

@argon38 wrote:

---

... Nor is it a protected term. These days it indicates a style, and the OP is surely entitled to use it in that sense. There's no attempt to mislead.

---

I can, and do, continue my feeble fights against the misuse of words such as "Capodimonte" and "Murano".   You know that.

---

I think the only reason OP is using the term at all is that md1919 brought it up (in the context of the style). So we're just going to confuse them if we now say they shouldn't call it "Capodimonte" because their piece has no connection with 18th-century Capodimonte. We can't impose that limitation on the use of the term.

[maxine*j]

---

@argon38 wrote:

---

---

... We can't impose that limitation on the use of the term.

---

I cannot impose anything on anyone.  But I have my convictions, and anyone who comes here for help will just have to hear them, although I'm neither surprised nor discomposed when ignored.

=

[argon38]

---

@maxine*j wrote:

I cannot impose anything on anyone.  But I have my convictions, and anyone who comes here for help will just have to hear them, although I'm neither surprised nor discomposed when ignored.

---

It does go back a long way, though...

'The fault for the overuse of the term Capodimonte when applied to pottery and porcelain can be squarely laid at the feet of the Ginori family. In much the same way that the Carbone Import Company of Boston popularized the term “Murano” for all Venetian glass, so Ginori made popular the term “Capodimonte” for pieces done in a revival Bas-Relief (all those raised figures found on cups, vases and plates). Those early examples were originally created in the mid 1800’s in Doccia, outside Florence, not Capodimonte. Ginori used the term simply to advertise this line of pottery with the label “Capodimonte”.'

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/italianpotterymarks/capodimonte-and-the-ginori-mark-t32.html 

I'll concede you have a far stronger case when it comes to Murano. Using "Murano" in a listing does imply that a piece is from a specific location, so a buyer would be entitled to return the piece if it turned out to be made in (say) China.  But are buyers who see a modestly-priced trinket described as "Capodimonte" on eBay really in danger of being misled into thinking it might be a piece of 18th century porcelain? Would a "not as described" return in that situation be reasonable? I say, no. Buyers do need to have a little common sense.