Asian Arts | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries | Message Board

I own a celadon 'mystery' ewer that is almost exactly the same as the Song dynasty ewer on exhibit at the Shaanxi History Museum, Xi'an. I would like to know its age.

Here is a link to the photo of the Shaanxi History Museum's ewer...

http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotos-g298557-d325698-w2-Shaanxi_History_Museum-Xi_an_Shaanxi.html#21438544

Here is a link to photos of my ewer...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23676403@N07/sets/72157623501407201/

Here is a link to photos of a modern reproduction being sold on Ebay....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23676403@N07/sets/72157623506936725/

I don't believe my piece is from the Song dynasty as the glaze seems different, my piece and some of the carving on my piece seem to be more pronounced (less delicate) than what I see in the photo of the authentic piece owned by the museum.

However, I don't think my piece is a modern reproduction, either. The details on my piece are much more refined, including the spout in the shape of a lioness nursing its cub, which you can see the fine details of the teeth, facial expression, muscles/tendons in the paws, and detailed head & body of the nursing cub. In addition, the overall scrolling lotus design seems to be a strong match to the authentic piece.

Further more, the quality of the porcelain and glaze in my piece seems to be of a finer quality and there is oxidation that can be seen on the teeth of the lioness, on the foot, and a few areas where the glaze did not fully cover the porcelain. I also notice there is some speckling in the porcelain (impurities) that might suggest an older piece.

I've read that in the Qianlong period that many famous porcelain pieces were copied. Is it possible that this is a Qianlong copy?

Has been noted many times, dating monochromes can be very difficult.

Yours could be copy of the museum piece. I notice yours has inscribed lines on top where museum piece looks more like glaze crackle.

Missing data: dimensions each piece.

I wonder also about color your piece.

Any porcelain can have specks / imperfections. This have nothing to do with age. A copy of "famous" type in Qianlong reign would be produced to highest standard and would not have such specks.

Just because piece now in museum not mean that it was considered wonder or highly regarded 200 years ago. That museum did not exist until 20th century. How did piece come to museum? When? Was it excavated in 1980s?

Good luck,
Cal

Cal,

Thanks for responding. You bring up some interesting points, but let me start by answering your questions.

The Shaanxi museum website states the vase was unearthed in 1968. Measures 18.3cm high and the diameter is 14.3cm.

My tape measure doesn't measure metric, but it converts to approximately the same dimensions. Dimension given for the Ebay ewer are also approx the same.

Sotheby's makes reference to published photos of the museum piece in 1998 and the Shaangxi Museum opened in 1991. Based on this information, for my ewer to be a replica of the museum piece, rather than an earlier 'commemorative' piece, it seems that it would have had to been made in the last 20 years.

The glaze, color, and crazing are different from the museum piece, but I found several Song dynasty pieces sold at auction that have the same color/style/crazing of celadon glaze (although I don't think my piece is Song). And, I also saw some Qianlong ceramics that seemed to have the same speckled porcelain. This is how I came to suppose that this could be an early replica = being a novice collector, I realize I could be drawing a completely eronious conclusion.

Can oxidation, as seen on the lion's teeth (for example), occur in a 20 yr time frame?

What is your opinion of the quality of the carving?

Ultimately, I'm looking for your best estimate of age. Even if the piece is a modern replica, the quality of the piece is quite nice, I like it, and there was no major investment to buy it.

Regards, Tim

Since piece in museum excavated 1968, would not be copied Qianlong reign.

What you call oxidation may simply be clay imperfection.

Imperfections in clay can exist any time. Person wealthy enough to commission copy 200 years ago would require best quality porcelain. Such a piece would not be imperial or scholarly taste then.

Doubt your piece 'carved'. More likely molded, perhaps with some hand retouching to conceal mold marks, refine details. If cast from plaster mold from museum piece, would be a little smaller since plaster shrink, clay shrink a little in drying and firing.

Judging by odd combination motifs and configuration of pot would wonder if piece excavated 1968 could have been buried 1966, or significantly reconstructed. Never have been lion in China. Naturalistic motif with nursing cub strange.

Good luck,
Cal

Asian Arts | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries | Message Board