Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries


Visitors' Forum

Asian Art  Forums - Detail List
Asian Art Forums

Message Listing by Date:
Message Index | Back | Post a New Message | Search | Private Mail | FAQ
Subject:Guangxu Five Lotus Dish
Posted By: JLim Mon, Sep 15, 2014 IP: 144.132.240.119



Hi all

I involuntarily missed bidding on the attached item.

Am I right in ascribing this to Guangxu mark and period, although not Imperial in quality? The painting of the signature closely resembles some in Mr Allen's book.

Regards
JLim







Subject:Re: Guangxu Five Lotus Dish
Posted By: Bill H Wed, Sep 17, 2014

I wouldn't have a problem calling this dish mark & period, because the mark reflects some of the production problems that afflicted Jingdezhen periodically during the cash-strapped and militarily active late Qing times.

Here are pictures of three different editions of this lotus pattern, which I believe descended from Kangxi-era modifications to the Ming design. In order, these dishes are (1) a 5.25-inch Tongzhi six-character mark and period saucer; (2) a 9.625-inch Guangxu six-character mark & period plate; and (3) a 5.625-inch cyclically dated "Jiashen" (1884) saucer. These dishes seem to pretty much span the late 19th century.

The cyclical date possibly celebrates the Sino-French Tianjing Accord in May 1884, which led to the end of military strife between China and France in 1885. Also, in June 1884, the Treaty of Hue was signed, paving the way for 70 years of French dominion over Indochina. While either event could have been cause to commission porcelain, the metal rim on this piece is something more associated with Bleu de Hue and other exports from China to Southeast Asia, so would be my first choice of a potential raison d'etre for dating this item. The Guangxu plate is well-decorated, but it suffered in the kiln and also has some post-production damage.

The European dealer who sold me the Tongzhi saucer, which is one of a pair, believed it to be imperial. These saucers are noticeably better than the Guangxu plate in their painting and condition, so I haven't ruled out the palace ware possibilities, but would imagine that such dishes still would not likely have been used by anyone much higher-ranking than the homeliest concubine in the harem.

Best regards,

Bill H.








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