Longquan Celadon Bowl

[tipton444]

Hello all, I'm very glad to have found this forum.

Let me start by introducing myself!  My name is Eric, and I'm a small dealer in Massachusetts.  Over the last two years, I have been selling a lot of Asian antiques.  A man by the name of Robert Cornell, recently passed away, and his life-long collection has been dispersed through out my area.  Mr. Cornell was highly educated in his field, and he owned a high end Asian Antiques gallery, where he also held private auctions.  He was a regular at Sotheby's, and was a big time collector.  I have been lucky enough to purchase quite a few pieces that belonged to him.  I have sold some incredibly Chinese antiques, with many in the tens of thousands of dollars, and some pieces not so much.

I have had this beautiful celadon bowl, and it has just been sitting around while I have been trying to do my research.  I know there are a LOT of fakes out there, so I really just want to get other people's opinions.  I really don't know celadon too well, so any information would be greatly appreciated.  I have seen other similar bowl designs sell for anywhere from $1,000 to $10,000 on Ebay and Sotheby's past auction results, so I'm hoping I'm in that neighborhood!  But I really want to know if you guys see any characteristics that may give it away as authentic or reproduction.  Thank you all.  I look forward to being a regular here!

i64.tinypic.com/2qnmctj.jpg
i64.tinypic.com/2hcj8tf.jpg
i66.tinypic.com/nn0faa.jpg
i67.tinypic.com/2cqiely.jpg
i66.tinypic.com/2a7a55i.jpg

[tipton444]

Hmm... My pics didn't show up.  Can you guys help me with whatever I'm doing wrong?  Or allow for the pictures to come through, as the links to the uploading website work.  Thanks

[peterp]

Yuan, Song and earlier porcelain is not my mainline, I know a bit only with a few types from that period.
Longquan is one of those I know more of...but I'm afraid this cannot be Longquan.

Longquan's main feature is a thick glaze, which I have measured up to 1mm on a Ming Longquan item. The base is never like this. It looks more like a Ding base, but the color should not be Ding kiln either.
Looking at the petal-like indents of the bowl rim - normally that should be only 4-6 from the Tang dynasty to the Yuan dynasty. Anything having more is suspect. I would advise to verify this information.

I would recommend to be careful with items that should be 400-600 years old, but show no clear usage or age signs, no traces that they were excavated or lifted from shipwrecks. Items should have at least 'some' clear age features.
Again, you may want to verify the information above regarding the number of bowl lobes existing in those periods.

[tipton444]

Great, thank you very much for your help.  That is great information!  I was a bit nervous about the impeccable condition as well, but then I find one in similar shape that sold for quite a bit, so I figured I'd better get some other opinions.  Hopefully a couple others can chime in with their thoughts.  I really appreciate it.  I will also be making another post about a possible Kangxi period ginger jar soon! 

[tipton444]

I'm not sure if sold listing links are allowed here, but this is what I was looking at and supposedly it hadn't been cleaned: 

<admin>No we do not encourage links to commercial sites or products, because it may give the impression that we endorse them or their products. Museum items and some other institutional links are fine. Your understanding is appreciated.</admin>

  The information about it not being longquan and about the edges is really valuable information to me.

[peterp]

I have had a look at the item you linked to. Yes, that is in the same category as yours, and that one is no good, probably. I would not rely on Ebay sellers' for comparison, even those who have been many good items in the past. Unfortunately, many of them, including professional dealers do not know enough about Chinese ceramics. They just sell what they get, and may not be able to discern between a good fake and an authentic antique.

Many things that this site teaches may be different from those in the west. It is relying more on knowledge like the shape, porcelain body and/or manufacturing methods, etc. information of which is at least partially the result of Chinese kiln archaeology and ceramics research.

[tipton444]

Very good.  I am now excited to learn, as I find it incredibly fascinating.  I will sit back and read :)  Peterp, I really appreciate the help.  Thank you! 

[Stan]

The shape is a bit unusual for Chinese in my opinion, my first impression is Japanese Meiji period, I searched through my books on Chinese celadon and could not find anything with that shape or decoration.

[tipton444]

Very interesting... Thanks Stan