Subject:Re: Fine hand painted Chinese vase worth restoring also identification?
Posted By: JLim Sat, Nov 25, 2017
I share your irritation. I hope you got some recompense from the deliverers. It may not be 18th century, but I believe your vase is antique.
Like Bokaba, I did not comment on this object because I was not sure if the green-on-black design, which did exist in the 18th century, was revived at all in the 19th century.
I am still not sure if it was revived; I have not looked it up - but if green-on-black was NOT revived in the 19th century, then your object is probably relatively modern, not Qianlong.
I'm sure you're a fine graphic designer, but please note the following factors which make your object 19th century or later:
First, the footrim looks roughly levigated, with apparent rust spots. This is typical of late 19th century ware but not of 18th century ware, which was more fine and smooth. It is also not typical of modern fakes, which tend to be even smoother with artificial ageing applied over the top.
Second, the profile of the footrim, what I call the "toblerone rim" if you know what a Toblerone is - especially combined with the little "ledge" running around the inside of the footrim - can you see it? - is typical of the late 19th century.
Third, the double circle mark in the foot is hand painted - a lot of modern fakes simply print it on, so this is reassuring.
Fourth, the white glazed portions of the porcelain seem to contain a lot of reassuring flaws like black spots etc - which I would tend to associate with 19th century wood kilns.
Fifth, the diaper patterns at the "ankle" and "shoulders" seem to possess an olive, slightly opaque shade of green and a slightly pinkish shade of red. I would associate this with the 19th century - 18th century greens and reds would be more transparent emerald and matte scarlet.
Sixth, I hate to cast aspersions on your eye, but the foliage on the main body of the vase looks extremely stiff and robotic compared to the 18th century originals.
Seventh, the way the bat has been delineated is typical of Guangxu but not Qianlong. It is always interesting to compare the way the Chinese have painted creatures over the generations.
For example, the Lion is a symbol of Buddhism and was once common in Buddhism's native India; the Chinese had no lions at all and depicted the lion as a kind of long haired dog, with the dog getting more and more playful and puppy-like over the generations.
Similarly the Tiger, once it became rare in China, was frequently depicted from the 18th century onwards as a kind of scrawny cat.
In the case of the Bat, there are obvious reasons why artists might lack personal experience with what bats looked like; thus by the time of Guangxu the bat strongly resembles a kind of moth, especially the furry, blunt abdomen.
In your case the moth-bat seems to have become extremely sculptural, even architectural, and to have become frozen in the centre of the design. This, too, I think is typical of the late 19th century.
From all this, I would suspect that your vase dates to the late 19th century and was possibly part of the Kangxi/18th century revival from the 1890s to the very early 20th century.
Someone else would have to respond to your need for advice on whether and how to repair your abused vase.