About 15" tall. Any age or recent? I was not able to find the same, with no tiagrams but just the insiced borders.
Thanks
Age is difficult to tell with monochromes. And, the foot rim is not visible due to the adhering fibres. However, the saw-like appearance of the edge of the glaze, along the foot rim, is normally associated with Qianlong period porcelain. Just giving you a direction for further research.
Thanks for the reply. I will remove the felt and take better pictures of the foot rim. There are no crackles on the glaze, no rust spots either. I do see some yellow staining on some areas.
I am a bit surprised the base is not marked with even spurious seal. Did they make such vases during Early Qing strickly for the palace or they were produced commercially as well?
Here are the photos of the foot. I see some age now.
Does the glaze on the bottom have a slightly wavy appearance? If yes, that would probably mean that it cannot be older than Qianlong. The consistency of the foot rim seems to confirm the impression that the saw-shaped glaze edge gives. Probably mid-Qing; I opt for Qianlong because of the typical glaze edge.
Please be aware that I have never seen such a flat Cong vase before. All is based on the bottom/foot rim features alone.
Comment:
This is an extract from the E-book:
<quote>
... it is advisable to start with decorated porcelain. That means with porcelain that either has a blue and white or polychrome decoration. While monochrome items .... may look appealing to you, they are more difficult to authenticate.
Polychrome porcelain gives you more points of reference to check on an item's authenticity than plain or monochrome porcelain would.
<unquote>
In other words, the risk is higher with monochromes. If for example there was an old bottom attached to a new body, and the evaluation is based on the bottom alone...
You will have to find similar items to conform the findings. :-)
Peter, what do you mean by saw shaped glaze edge. Like it is not straight? That side that I've shown on the pictures has a bit more grits and the glaze edge is rougher but that rest is more even and smoother.
The bottom feels a bit bumpy. The sides are also not perfecly even. Slightly convex.
I also cannot find cong vase with flat sides. At least not green celadon ( here more like pale blue-grayish). Saw few blue and other colors with no decoration but they don't have the incised frames.
I don't know if that can give a clue about the edge but there is a glaze pooling around the inside of the neck and crack in the glaze.
These occur during firing at may occur in any kiln, especially wood or coal fired ones.
Hello, first reply in this forum and sorry for me broken English
This one should not be a Celadon vase, if it is celadon glazed, there should be crackles under the glaze. even if it is a Ru glazed vase (which is slightly Blueish), there should also be some small crackles under the glaze. For the glaze and the base I think it is kinda similar to the style of Dehua ???. I was working in a chinese antique gallery and I saw a Qianlong Cong Vase in Dehua glaze with 6characters imperial mark, the color for the glaze very similar to the plastic cover we use in Hong Kong (see attachment).
and ff it is attached with an old base, you can use your finger to rub it, the texture of the old base should be different with the other parts of your vase.
Hi, please first explain what you mean with texture, that is the texture of what? The glaze?
Correct me if I am wrong but not every celadon glaze should have crackles. Their development depends on number of reasons. Any glaze can get crazing, some with the time, some during or right after the production. I guess in the beginning only the Older Brother pieces were coming crackled.
As to the possibility of attaching an old base, I doubt that. If someone wanted to fake age they would at least go with more common decoration, like molded tiagrams or other relief.
Peter, should I seek for an expert/hands-on opinion or further investigation is not worth it? It is not an Imperial piece so I guess it won't matter much if it is Early, Mid or Late Qing.
By the way, is it true that some of the Yongzheng palace pieces were not marked? If so, why?
more pics of the glaze edges
Yes, looks indeed as if the bottom was not attached later. Sometimes the glaze is not covering the seam uniformly. They probably use the glaze for fusing both parts together and cover the whole with new glaze. Anyway, it could be as connoisserbear mentioned, that it possibly is not celadon, but all depends on the lighting conditions under which you took the pictures. It is a bit pale, if it were.
Please read the marks section. What is written about items not being marked is valid for all Ming and Qing reigns. Do not get fixed on the marks. Also, the glaze line is a Qianlong specific feature. It could not have been there in the Yongzheng reign, at least not as far as I know. I also never have seen it on a fake until now.
By the way, I thought this was used as a vase, due to what looks like a mended hole inside, bu there is none on the underside. What is that inside? Is something stuck on or the glaze not covering all?
I am not sure if I get that. Looks like the bottom was or it was not attached later?
It was used as a vase. There was a paper stuck on the bottom that I removed.
The color of the glaze is blueish-greyish but some areas appear dark yellow-brownish but I don't know due to what.
>>Hi, please first explain what you mean with texture, that is the texture of what? The glaze?
Yes, the glaze, I inspected a Qianlong blue and white zhadou (??) before. And find out that the base is Qianlong, but the body is Republic of China. when we rub these two parts, the sense of touch is different
but i think this vase should not be reattached with an old base, since it is a monochrome vase, it is hard to connect two pieces and the cost involved is very high. And if they want to attach with an old base, they should try to get a base with marks to get a higher price
So paper it was... An attached bottom is just one way of faking. You have to take that into consideration when evaluating authenticity. The interior seems indeed to have a greenish hue, not the whitish/grayish look the other pictures show.
One thing is sure, it is hand made. Apart from the traces in the interior which indicate this, the fact that the interior bottom is not perfectly square/rectangular is also a sign of this. In the old times it was difficult to get this perfect.
Just keep looking for a similar item, and do not forget to let us know if you find one. I would really like to get confirmation regarding its age, because the glaze edge is important for dating.
To connoisseurbear,
>>when we rub these two parts, the sense of touch is different
Like what? Like plastic? Do you think it could have been an artificial glaze covering the item in that part?
I happen to restore porcelain and restorers use what is called a "cold glaze", to cover repaired/restored areas. This is a synthetic material which has a different feel and, before all, does not feel cool to the touch as a vitrified glaze does. You cannot re-fire items repaired with modern techniques, because the heat would destroy the special glues and materials used.
Some fakers in China use Japanese high quality cutting tools to cut the bottom from porcelain shards. The normal way would then be to use traditional glaze to attach the bottom to the new body, a technique that has been used since hundreds of years ago in porcelain production. After that the area of the connection would be over-glazed and the item re-fired. To the touch the result should be the same hard, cool, glassy feel on both sides, because the fired glaze(s) would have a vitreous layer covering them. But as I said, if it is an artificial glaze it may feel different.
Yes like plastic, that kind of texture, I do not know the technique of restoration, but I was once visit a restorer in Hong Kong, he helped many dealers/ major auction houses for restoration. The technique is called "spray plastic" ??, he did it to repair cracks or chips. And for this technique, if we use a flash light and put it behind the restored part, the restored part is not as transparent as the original part, and if used a eyepiece to examine that part, can see a clear difference between the original one and the restored one, such as there is no bubble in the restored part.
You are right about the imperfections in the shape. The exterior edges are not perfectly staight either. I find it a bit strange for the side panels to be with uneven surface. They are just rectangulars, with no decoration. Should not be that hard to make them flat. Or maybe they were made this way on purpose.
Peter, I have no experts in my area. Don't know if I write to an auction house they will be able to tell by pictures about the age.
I searched in English and Chinese but did not find the same vase. Moat of the celadon cong vases have relief decoration, the one with no such have handles or crackles or something.
Round items could be thrown on the wheel, but with rectangular ones the side panels are made individually and then fit together, making the production more labour intensive. I am told that is one reason that such items are less plenty, and angles are not right.
I encourage you to try with an auction house, but sometimes they cannot tell for sure either. I wonder how many auction specialists really have more than a superficial knowledge in view to production related issues.
I have seen one of the top tier international auction houses auctioning items which would be fakes (to us), but their specialists cannot know everything...nobody can.
Just keep on waiting until another one comes around.
Peter, maybe I should try different keywords to search in Chinese. I don't know if cong is the right term?
[admin - Sorry, but had to remove the link to the video to avoid potential trouble.]
"Cong" is the right pinyin. I checked for similar items in Chinese but found none. Sometimes it takes time until something comes up. Just be patient, please.
There is something I did not pay attention before. The neck. On my vase it has a straight wall at the base. I don't think I can find a cong vase with such neck.
Auction house C. and auction house B. think that it is modern. Maybe I am wrong but if they see a piece with no mark, no decoration and no obvious age signs that what they usually reply.
I mentioned to C. about the saw-like glaze edge but no comment.
Waiting on auction house S. but I expect the same answer.
Peter, you used to post on Asianart forum before, right. Seems like the boards there are pretty unactive recently.
There is a good reason why auction houses like to rely on provenance. With the ever increasing quality of fakes it is getting more difficult even for their specialists. They cannot know all and may sometimes not recognize items they have never seen.
That is where the difference is. When you evaluate based mainly on decoration, then that is it. If you can evaluate based on shape, glaze, colors, or manufacturing related factors, you have more points to rely on.
It is not only asianarts that has slowed down.
I know it is hard to tell by images but you are doing pretty good job even with low resolution pictures.
I wonder how many people at the big auction houses can do evaluation based on more then 2-3 points. Who knows how many of the sold "period" pieces are from the actual periods.
Got a reply from the London office of S. They think it is Qing but no exact period suggested. They'd like to handle it as they cannot tell the exact color of the glaze by the photos. The problem is that I can't fly all the way to UK. I expect them to write back with more details and I will keep you posted.
Peter, any clue how to tell celadon from qingbai?
In my experience the term Qingbai is hardly used in Ming and Qing ceramics. During the Song and Yuan dynasties that was a glaze that looked white or whitish overall, but in the recesses where more glaze would accumulate, the thicker glaze had a greenish or bluish tint. Actually, Qing is the term use for celadon, in Chinese, and Bai means white.
Thanks. On Koh they explain the difference but it is not easy to quite understand it.
In second email S. thinks that the vase is late Qing. Of course no explaination why. I guess most people would expect something with richer decoration from Qianlong piece.