TABLES smallish tripod and quadripod, 1800-1850
At first antique tripod tables followed the same form as the larger single tables but, with the inventiveness of the Regency period, individual designs emerged. The Victorians produced small Victorian tripod tables with four small legs which strictly speaking do not belong in the same section but which, for the sake of convenience, have been included.
A more decorative treatment of the same basic design Sweeps to the top and bottom of the legs are emphasised with applied brass rosettes. The stem is tapered and ringed, the top has a rim. Value is enhanced by the fact that the height is adjustable. Anything which moves, adjusts or can be fiddled with seems to command a premium. c. 1815
A turn of the century mahogany table, showing plain classical elegance. The legs have a clean simple curve and the stem is decorated with spiral reeding. The top is cross-banded in satinwood. c. 1800
If you look at page you will notice that many high quality ‘hairy feet’ have wings or spurs at the back and one can see that they provide a good balance by supporting the base over a reasonable area, instead of
looking as though they were screwed on at the end. This is a well-thought-out mahogany design, the sturdiness of which is justified by the heavy marble top. c. 1825
A novel little four-legged table note its quality and the scroll behind the hairy feet. Curious that the carved Chippendale vase is retained on the centre column. The flaps have well-matched veneers which meet when the table is in the erected position, giving a fine effect. One of the best of its sort.
It really is hard to be charitable about this horrible little table. Loudon
(1833) had the same problem about a fairly revolting sofa table of the period. “The justness of this criticism will appear more obvious, by applying it to the table… which has two supports more highly enriched by
carving than those of any of the other pieces and yet has a plain top. This is in bad taste and ought not, in a work like the present, to be passed over without notice.” Quite right. Not only is the top plain but out of
proportion to the base and the decoration seems mindless. c.1830
Loudon would approve this design because both top and bottom have ,enrichments’, but he might, like the present writer, be happier with it if the two sets of beading had been more of a size. c.1830
A conventional papier mache floral and gilt, with mother-of-pearl inlay, tilt-top table. Well decorated and elegant with the shape of the top helping to create an interesting piece. A good compact pedestal. c. 1840
Typical small mahogany tripod table of the period. Commercially not desirable. Not enough decoration for the Continental buyer and too small for a cheap dining table. Same design still offered by Light in 1881. 1830-1850
The use of iron was an obvious method of obtaining the maximum decoration as cheaply as possible. Once the mould was made presumably any number could be cast. Again the quality of painting is important. The
price in this case is helped because the painting is topographical shipping on the Clyde. c. 1850
A good papier mache table with a delightful hop harvest scene painted on the top. If one can discover the artist or if it is by Jennens and Bettridge then the value will be more than quoted. c. 1850
Made over a considerable period of time, a form of simple table which was produced in huge quantities. The baluster-shaped turning on the pedestal is competent but attempts too much. Basically 1830s