Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries

I'd like your opinion of this bowl. I am told it is from a ship wreck and is Song dynasty.

Hello,

I think you have here a nice Song (/early Yuan) Temmoku (hare fur) teabowl probably from Jian kiln in Fujian. The wreck must be the "Bai Jiao" wich was recovered in the 1980's.

Regards,

Arjan

Have more doubt than Arjan. Have not seen Fujian ware with this light colored clay.

On other hand, also have not seen the somewhat later Northern ware with markings so similar to hare's fur, although the glaze appearance on outside (dark brown iron-saturated glaze over lighter-colored ferruginous sometimes called 'caramel' colored) is sometimes seen in northern wares. One example dark-over-light found in famous wreck dating ca. 1323 CE found off Korea coast (a bottle).

Since clamshell-type deposit can be put on ceramics by immersing in living clam-type mollusc group for few weeks, they are not proof that an item came from wreck.

Can't say "no" but wondering.

Good luck,
Cal

Hello Cal (and others of course),

This older ware isn't realy my area so you can be right. The first thing I see now (rereading my own post)is that I wrote "Jian kiln" where I meant "Dong Zhang kiln". Jian kiln is well known because of it's dark Purplish paste (I think this is what you meant) while the Dong Zhang ones have a various greyish color. I also read that the ones from the Bia Yiao probably came from this last- and nearby kiln(s). Again, not my field but just read a little about it.

Regards,

Arjan

Found this since my post.
See Pgs 70, 73, 76-80.
Looks like the same to me. What do you think?? What else should I do to authenticate this?





URL Title :Bai Jiao 1 Report

A pity... link doesn't work

I believe this is the correct link...

URL Title :click

Link to article works if add "df" at end, corrected link here.

Wihout color photos hard to compare with your piece. From descriptions can tell that black-glazed bowls found in ship have these differences from yours:

1) unglazed lip
2) one type glaze on bowl exterior, not two
3) some or all bowls found at site have unglazed circle in lower part bowl, since bowls fired stacked in kiln. Have seen this in some late Yuan or perhaps later examples attributed northern kilns, but do not recall other examples.

Note your bowl have three glazes: light, dark brown, and third with higher iron-saturation to produce streaks similar to hare's-fur.

Article authors attribute bowls in ship find to unknown kiln or kilns Fujian Province. Possible, but unproven.

Purpose of dual glaze in northern ware was to moderate visual impact of very light colored ware with black/brown main glaze. Some northern potters had trouble controlling drip of black glaze to foot at certain temperatures, so did not completely black-glaze pieces. Northern wares sometimes fired on pads of clay to keep base from sticking to floor or saggar. What northern potters could not achieve was insulating porosity of jianyao clay.

Article briefly quotes statement that Jiangxi potters developed hares-fur glaze, but examples attributed to northern kilns (based on clay type) are uncommon. Northern potters did often produce streaks and spots using special glaze formulations painted on before firing.

As for "authentication" -- without examples from known kiln sites that agree in form, clay and glazing, only thermoluminescence test can verify date-range made.

The chemical-components tests in article are useful, but based on having specific kiln examples for comparison. I do not know of components-test database of known-site northern blackwares, but Chinese scientists probably have done such recently.

Fujian potters (and doubtless others) have been producing imitation jianyao with hares-fur type glaze in past 30 years, and were also making such in early 20th century.

I regret I cannot tell more about your bowl. For survey of such blackwares from collections, see exhibition catalogue: Robert D. Mowry, et al., /Hare's Fur, Tortoiseshell, and Partridge Feathers/, Cambridge, Mass, USA: Harvard University Art Museum, 1996. Book has survey many types and good discussion plus more references to explore.

Attached is example use of dark and light glaze in northern ware.

Good luck,
Cal



URL Title :Article

Cal, Arjan and Alex,

Thank you all for your expert assistance. Cal, your comments leave me a bit confused. I have several of these bowls as well as the advantage of being able to examine them in detail. Here are my observations re your comments:

“1) unglazed lip”
The report states on pg 75: “…The glazes vary in thickness, but are mostly thin glaze, and part of the clay matrix is often revealed on the upper lip…”

From the chip on the rim (seen at 10:00 on my 1st pic and again at 11:00 on the second) it appears to me that the rim was glazed and as the glaze ran down during firing the paste became exposed. See the Pic of the “speckled bowl” posted below. This seems to me to be consistent with the report.

”2) one type glaze on bowl exterior, not two”
and “Note your bowl have three glazes: light, dark brown, and third with higher iron-saturation to produce streaks similar to hare's-fur.”

The report states on pg 75: “…There is two schools of thought as to the whether there are one or two glazes used on each bowl. The lighter brown colour found to underlie the much thicker black glaze is shown in Figure 21...” (Fig # 117?)
I believe my bowls have 2 glazes. One highly ferrous under-glaze and a black over-glaze. There is a darker brown that exactly follows the black but I believe that it is from absorption of the black because the overall workmanship makes it unlikely such a precise following of the black would have been done. I’ll say more on this later in this post.

”3) some or all bowls found at site have unglazed circle in lower part bowl, since bowls fired stacked in kiln. Have seen this in some late Yuan or perhaps later examples attributed northern kilns, but do not recall other examples.“
I couldn’t find this in the report. Do you have another source? The report does illustrate the firing technique the author supposes was used to produce the black bowls in Figure 134 on Pg 86. This would not produce an unglazed circle in the bowls would it?

My further observations:

The report states on pg 73: “ In some instances the glazes appear to have lost some of the original lustre. Some crazing of the glaze was noticed…“
My bowls have a “flat appearance” (lack of lustre) and look much better when wet.

The report states on pg 75: “…a general description would include the following features:
small stoneware bowls, with a two stepped curved cavetto with brown/black glaze on the rim area and a deeper black green or black yellow cavetto: generally, 4–5 cm high and 10–11 cm wide…”
This is an accurate description of the shape of my bowls.

The report continues of pg 75 to state: “… All of the bowls have a low ring foot which originated from the cake-shape foot. The potter has scrapped the central part of the cake-shape foot when the paste was still wet. The carved trace, with a small circular protruding eye in the centre of the outside bottom, still remains...” and “…The base was unglazed (Figure 21)…“ (figure# 117?) and “ …Glaze colours are however quite considerable in variation from greens through to speckled browns, (see pic with this post) reds and yellows. The rough paste used for these bowls has, in some cases caused the glaze to exhibit an orange peel effect…” and “…The majority of the bowls recovered had a clay matrix that was grey or light brown in colour.”
All accurate descriptions of my bowls.

Finally, the report states on pg 75:
“… There is two schools of thought as to the whether there are one or two glazes used on each bowl. The lighter brown colour found to underlie the much thicker black glaze is shown in Figure 21. The author considers that one glaze has been used and the lighter glazed sections observed are due to the absorption of the glaze into the porous clay body. Where the glaze is thick enough this absorption does not occur…”
I believe the author is incorrect here. It appears to me that the curved shape of the ferrous under-glaze is consistent with the bowls being held on their side and partially submerged in a pool of under-glaze. I dipped a bowl into water and found it easy to exactly match the under-glaze pattern with the water.

I may be able to have the composition of the paste tested spectrographically in the future and will be looking for titanium oxide…

I don’t want to see more than what is here, but I still don’t see anything that doesn’t fit the description of the bowls in the report. Am I missing anything?

I am naturally skeptical and wonder how likely it is that a recent fake could match so well to the report. Since these seem to be worth around $300 - $600 each, it doesn’t seem that the cost of a TL test could be recovered in value added if the age is confirmed. What else should I do or look for?

Thank you all for sharing your experience and expertise.


URL Title :Full Report

Don't know what happened to the pics...
Here they are again

Regarding your observations:

1) Unglazed lip; page 77, fig. 117, caption says unglazed rim and foot.

2) Number of glazes. In the discussion you partly quote, the article author meant to discuss how many glazes used by jianyao potters: question whether second glaze added to make hare's-fur effect. His conclusion was that one glaze was used, part of which did not have the hare's fur because the glaze was partly absorbed by clay.
--but your bowl clearly has 2 different glazes on exterior, and I believe a third was added with a different formulation to produce the streaked effect (which in your bowl is not quite like the jianyao hare's fur -- but it is quite difficult to photograph in any case, in part because the effect depends on the play of light within glaze as well as on surface).

3) Unglazed circle in well of bowl -- you are right, I misread article page 77, where description of "Celadon A" was of this type. In my hasty reading I missed the subtitle and thought this was the meaning of the bowl descriptions on page 75, upper right, from 1990 excavation report, which say "unglazed bottom" instead of what would be more clear, "unglazed base."

On your further observations:

a) lack of lustre. There are many ways to make a bright glaze matte: chemical treatment, sand-blasting, sanding with fine paper. Careful observation with magnifying glass can sometimes detect surface alteration. There are also modern glaze formulae that give matte surface.

b) shape. Can be made by any potter. Bowl shapes varied by how tea to be made and served. Do web search for "whipped tea" you begin to get idea. During Song times were several shape types popular, range from shallow rounded to deeper with vertical mouth.

c) Ring foot. Can be made by any potter.

c) How glaze(s) applied. You describe age-old way dip dish into glaze. Sometimes potter leave ancient fingerprints. This method done by many thousands potters over more than thousand years.

The authors copied from many sources, but sometimes not really understand what source was meaning. Discussion of 4- and 6-character marks and colors of marks relevant discussion of porcelain but not relevant to anything found in excavation site.

Discussion of creation hare's-fur marking a bit silly. Has to do with amount iron in glaze, other glaze components and firing conditions (atmosphere; length of time kiln held at particular temperature; rate of cooling) not absorption -- or not-- of glaze by clay.

Discussion use of saggars silly also. Amount oxygen for reduction firing controlled by conrol air to fire, not tightness of saggar top. Also in these type glaze need oxygen introduced right time for iron to oxidize make red-orange effect.

Discussion of having clay in excavation finds lighter in color ("grey or light brown") than typical Fujian products because lesser "quality" also silly. Has to do with clay source, and authors not find kiln-site excavation report with similar clay. They stuck in idea the excavation bowls were lesser-quality jianyao. They not look to North or West as possible source.

Other book you might find helpful would be Nigel Wood's book on Chinese glazes, give good history and examples, some discussion firing and glaze recipes.

Good luck,
Cal

This bowl has a brown slip coating under the black glaze and lighter color claybody. It can't be Jian ware. These are the features of Cizhou type Northenrn black ware from Sung/Jin period. They made a lot of Jian style tea bowl.

Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries |