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:Qianlong four-character reign mark
Posted By: Kenneth Baird Leth Wed, May 20, 2015 IP: 81.234.111.36

Hello, I'm in possession of a large famille rose vase with a blue Qianlong Yu zhi mark. I've been told, that the Qianlong mark is often used on copies as an homage to the period. My question is why would a copyist use the rare kai shu style mark ass opposed to the more common seal script mark. And wouldn't he get in trouble copying the Yu zhi mark rather than the ordinary nian zhi mark? I'd be most grateful for your input.

https://www.bukowskis.com/en/auctions/586/320-vas-porslin-sen-qingdynasti-med-qianlongs-marke



Subject:Re: Qianlong four-character reign mark
Posted By: Bill H Fri, May 22, 2015

Around the time of the Guangxu Reign (1875-1908), the use of Guangxu and earlier reign marks on Chinese commercial kiln wares started becoming commonplace, which phenomenon has been attributed by Taiwan author Liu Liang-yu in part to the Empress Dowager Cixi's habit of handing out marked palace wares as gifts to various ministers. This practice, along with corruption in the palace contributed to the popularization of imperial patterns and marks.

Seeing as how the Guangxu emperor was a prisoner of the Empress Dowager, I don't believe anyone got into trouble for copying his or the other marks if they devoted their money and allegiance to the right people at court.

These marks seem to have been used less in homage to ancestral emperors and more in honor of profits to be made, in my opinion. It is true, however, that during the late 19th and early 20th century, it was a popular family practice to include porcelain with such marks in a daughter's wedding dowry, a practice which certainly helped drive the market.

As to the mark on your vase, I can find no evidence in any recent reference book, including the latest relevant Western and Mainland China publications, that a mark of "Qianlong Yu Zhi" was used during the Qianlong reign or the late Qing period. According to Liu Liang-yu, the Cultural Revolution caused a flood of Republic-era porcelains with Qianlong and other fake reign marks to pour out of the Mainland, although the "Qianlong Nian Zhi" mark is the only one he mentions in that regard.

Based on these findings, I'd guess your vase with the "Qianlong Yu Zhi" mark probably is a late 20th century product, with a small chance of it being a Republic-era product.

Best regards,

Bill H.

Subject:Re: Qianlong four-character reign mark
Posted By: Kenneth Baird Leth Fri, May 22, 2015

Hi Bill, thank you very much for your insightful answer.

In order to estabish a timeline, I would like to tell you how the vase was obtained by my farther in mainland China. My farther was a merchant sailor (an engine officer). He and his shipmates would smuggle large quantities of American cigarettes in hidden compartments of the ship during the early 1950's. These were used in payment of many chinese artifacts and even furniture, and to bribe the customs officers. The bribes were usually tokken size, but in the case of this vase the customs officers were very reluctant to let my farther export it, though they complimented him on his fine taste. He finally succeded at a substantial price. This leads me to believe, that the vase was already an antique in the early 1950's.

If you examine the photo of the reign mark (link in original post), it is evident that it is applied by calligraphy and is not stamped on. Futhermore the mark is made in a good quality cobalt blue underglaze (not hollow lines with an watery interior).

As you might see from the link, the vase is currently up for auction. The auction house has deemed the vase as late Qing (not period). This is mainly down to the high standard of Famille Rose from the imperial kiln in the early Qianlong era, which my vase does not meet. Then again, if the mark is period, the vase would have been produced at the palace workshop, and not the imperial kiln. Which brings me back to the original question: Why would a later copy, of somewhat lesser quality, be made with the Yu zhi mark in kai-shu, when no one would believe it then or now.

I realize that a period vase from the Qianlong palace workshops is rarer than a unicorn, and extremly valuable .. but it still defies logic why anyone would apply this mark to a "cheap knock-off".

Subject:Re: Qianlong four-character reign mark
Posted By: Bill H Sat, May 23, 2015

Your vase is rather presentable, but the fact remains that neither Sotheby's nor Christie's seem to have ever sold a piece of porcelain with this mark. I did get returns on my queries of eBay and liveauctioneers.com archives, but some were misreadings of the 'Qianlong Nian Zhi' mark, and others were on porcelain easily identifiable as late 20th century.

With the provenance you cite, I would still have to reckon your vase probably dates to within a few years of the time your father obtained it, with a small chance it was made earlier in the Republic-era.

Gunhild Avitabile's 1987 catalog of the Weishaupt Collection, 'Vom Schatz der Drachen' (From the Dragon's Treasure), shows one long-necked vase with the 'Qianlong Yu Zhi mark', which piece is illustrated in the section titled "After Hongxian" (post-1916). According to Avitabile, Jingdezhen production withstood the Civil War, increasing and continuing relatively undisturbed for more than a decade after the death of the Hongxian emperor. However, porcelain-making almost ceased after the Japanese invasion of 1937.

This author also notes the fondness for Qianlong and other traditional markings on the porcelains made during the post-Hongxian era. It applies to my thinking that I've seen evidence of Chinese porcelain at least as good as yours dated to 1947, which indicates that Jingdezhen was producing very soon after the end of World War II. I understand further that quite a few potters and painters who were at Jingdezhen before the war resumed work there in the early years of the People's Republic (post-1949), before the 1956 Hundred Flowers campaign and 1958 Great Leap Forward set the Chinese Economy and Society on a downhill roll to the disastrous Cultural Revolution on the 1960's and 70's.

Your vase exhibits the kind of production fritting wherein problems with glazes and kiln temperatures combine to cause overly thin glaze to form and then flake off from places like the mouth rim (also on the ring beneath the animal mask). The presence of such flaws guarantees that your vase was not meant for imperial use, and suggests strongly to me that the vase was made at a time when the kiln itself or the porcelain glaze formula might have been stressed by shortages of raw materials or fuel. I believe both deprivations probably existed when Jingdezhen was gearing up production immediately after WWII, at the time your father obtained the vase, if not the phase when the kilns began winding down work right after Japan's 1937 invasion.

Best regards,

Bill H.

Subject:Re: Qianlong four-character reign mark
Posted By: cervantes Sat, May 23, 2015

hello, very interesting your comment, i'm not an expert in the matter as you can see, posted some days ago for first time leave the link here, cos found something really interesting, due me stressful life still couldn't find out about by any experienced person, after investigating myself, have to relate this vase to the old summer palace looting of 1860, due the really similar vase shown on photo, used by cixi, who imitates qianlong, cant see in my pictures (other side) but the scene you can see in cixis vase, it is very similar to mine, deers standing in same position, due, the looting of old summer palace, i related that the vase of cixi is a replacement?? the vase has a metal ring in bottom and top, from when in some points when mixing with porcelain is coming a small quantity of rust the blue enamel, have not a very detailed finished, it is more than a hairline, there is some enamel scales lost,i think due to a dilatation of a metal ring which is inside the porcelain in the middle of the neck, next to the mark, there is a rare black line parallel to the frame of the mark, and some more between the characters (low visible on photos) please, could you gime any of your wonderful comments?

Thanks, hope you can tell me something about




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