Hi Peter, I just picked this up at the local auction, the vase is attributed to the Republic Period 1912 - 1949 and is bearing the artists signature it is 56.9 cm tall, the detail is top notch in this style the white ground is very white and very little age signs, there appears to be a stress crack at the bottom near the foot, could you tell me if there is a date and if it is signed by the artist, I know that most of this type the written characters are in bad shape and faded these are not but this is a large vase and would have been used as an art object rather than utilitarian use, your expertise is always appreciated, I will post 15 photos, thanks for viewing.
Here are more photo's to view.
Here is another set of photo's.
Here is the last set of photo's, thanks for viewing, P.S. I post a pair of vase awhile back that I think were supposed to be from this artist but I think they were touched up, but this vase the quality is far superior. Thanks again.
Hi Stan,
Very nice Qianjiang vase. Not sure if it is authentic. The writing is black and there are no clear age signs. However, the name is given as Wang You-tang, there is a month, but no year. First, I need to say that his style is very well known, possibly many of the later artists did copy his works. He was apparently specialized on painting people and landscapes.
He is said to have been most active during the late Guangxu reign to early republic. I do not know if the writing is authentic. It is excellent, can be read easily, but it would be necessary to compare the calligraphy with an authentic work. That is usually necessary to verify if the work of a master painter is authentic, when no clear age signs are present.
Thank you Peter, for giving me the right reading of his name, and the good sense for comparing writing, I will see if I can find out anything on the web, thanks again.
Hi Peter, I did a search and a couple of items came up, I could not figure out where the signature is on my vase to compare, could you tell me where it says Wang You-tang on my vase, thanks.
It's the first three characters on the last line. The last line is the one where the seal is applied.
Thanks Peter, I found a couple of pieces by Wang You-tang, the black characters look similar with no missing black enamel and not ware, but it all looks the same to me, thanks I will try to compare the name, there is a couple of pieces on Gotheborgs site, but I do not know if what he has is authentic.
In my search, all I could come up with was a couple pieces that say they are from Wang Youtang but they hardly look like a master painted them, they are actually crude and poor quality, so no such luck in my search.
> but I do not know if what he has is
That is the problem...one should have access to an authenticated piece. I'm afraid that what is on non-museum sites is hardly admissible for comparison, especially if it is in the west, because minor differences in the writing may not be detected.
The west is not a good place to compare, that is the problem, thanks peter for all your help.
Hi Stan you could look at this site for reference .
whether the site has original pieces and not fake I don't know but worth a look.
Your painter is half way down the page.
www.koh-antique.com/qj/qjmain1.html
Thanks Calder, I will take a look.
Hi, it says painted in fall of 1936 (year of ??), but not likely authentic. The calligraphy looks not good to me.
silk is right, Stan!
Oh my, we have been looking over this repeatedly and did not see this. Thought the ? was an abbreviation of ? as the ? is so close that it looks as if it were part of the upper character. So much to the handwriting...
1936 or 1876 - While this type of Qianjiang might fit into the year 1876, the vase itself cannot be that early, I'm afraid.
There is one other thing - I have been looking for evidence that the character ? in the same column as the year was used in this simplified form in earlier times. It is a simplified character nowadays used in the PRC. I could find no proof of its existence, not even in the Kangxi dictionary. The normal writing should be ? . If that is correct and it was never abbreviated like that in earlier times, then it means that the writing has to be from the era of the PRC, not earlier than 1956.
Thanks Peter, and thank you Silk.
Sorry Peter and silk, here is a photo of the left side, I do not see the character the Peter is talking about, it all looks Greek to me.
Which one?
? is the first one, ?? is the third respectively fourth character, both in the second last line (second column from the left).
So not earlier than 1956, thanks Peter.