Hello everyone,
Could this vase be of the period?
I believe the stamped mark is Guanxu.
Thanks in advance for your opinions!
Kind regards,
JJ
More pictures!
1 pic more
I know Guangxu marks were usually written in Kaishu but I'm not sure if Zhuanshu marks are common as well.
Hello,
this is not an antique vase. It is made in late 20.century in my view. Colours, decoration and mark are not right for an antique piece. The mark on chinese pieces alone will not tell you the age.
Hi Konniela,
Thanks for your insights!
The decorations seemed possible to me, mark is indeed very suspicious.
Could you tell me what is wrong with the colors?
Thanks!
JJ
There are no age signs on the food or on the vase, too white and bright to be more than 100 years old. The decoration is surrounded with black lines mostly. This kind of mark was not used in Guangxu, a piece with such a mark and food can not be antique.
I have to complete, that you can find both, kaishu and zhuanshu marks on pieces from guangxu, but zhuanshu marks looks not like this one here.
That's very usefull information, thanks a lot!
Regards,
JJ
The foot is not a traditional foot that you would see on Chinese Antique Porcelain, I believe that they started this type of foot in the 60's until now.
Hey Stan,
Thanks for your insight!
Could you specify the differences of the foot antique vs new?
Is it the glaze, the rim, the size or a combination of these?
Thanks in advance!
JJ
Hi JJ, the bottom almost connects to the foot and slightly con-caved, bottoms like this came into existence around the 60s I believe, a traditional foot and bottom has a foot that varies in depth usually a quarter inch to half an inch in depth and that can very depending on size and shape, the bottoms are usually flat and the foot could be tapered or straight up from the bottom, and the marks are usually centered in the bottom, On Chinese Antique Porcelain, the bottoms would have age signs, pitting, glaze retractions, cracks from shrinking during firing, blisters, bubble bursts, rust spots, and from period to period not all are the same, some periods with more or less age signs are visible however, their are Imperial examples with none of the above and lucky you if you have one, their are multiple examples on this sight to get a better understanding and not all are like this, I believe there are some Ming examples that that have unglazed con-caved bottoms with no foot because they were fired on sand in the kiln and then you have sand on the bottom baked into the porcelain, this is just off the top of my head, like I say their are multiple example on this sight of traditional foot rims and bottoms to view.
Hi Stan,
That's the kind of info that is super useful!
Kind regards,
JJ