Posted By: pierrevdw
Posted Date: Feb 29, 2008 (09:01 AM)
Hello Jim,
I'm sorry if my comments were interpreted as an intention of insulting the person who posted those objects. It was, and is not the case.
That those 3 objects are an insult to the extremely high level of craftmanship in gold work from the Tang dynasty, yes, I think they are.
But what interest me in your comment is, and I quote: "even if I may not be in total agreement"
So please, I would be greatfull if you could explain your point of view regarding those 3 pieces, I'm not infaillible.
- Gold and silver objects were symbols of high rank, exclusively reserved for the royal households and officials of the top three ranks.
Therefore one can expect high degree of craftmanship. Specially when we know that Tang gold and silver pieces were made in the Imperial workshop.
The Horse:
No finesse overall and no finesse in the details.
A rather dull position + way too agressive mouth.
Also, the horse's tail is not of style of that period.
The Fat Lady:( No insult intended ;)
Again, no finesse overall and no finesse in the details.
To me it looks like she is definitely wearing a hat.
I have not yet seen a Tang fat lady wearing a hat. They normally are represented with the particular hair style of that period, decorated with ruban, hair pins etc...
The Unicorn:
Same as above regarding the overall look.
Supposed to be a horse with one horn, but could also be some less attrative/noble animal with 1 or 3 horns, as per Chinese representation since the BC dynasties.
But a mouse or rat tail, I have not seen before either.
This is a brief study of those objects, without having to go into an analysis of the material and corosions and without even speak about the probability rate of finding such pieces, provenance etc...
Attached, some real Tang gold for comparaison.
Have a nice day,
Pierre.
- pierrevdw - Mar 05, 2008 (06:49 AM)