Posted 9 years ago
CristinaW
(2 items)
Hi Guys,
This is a Chinese Blue and White Porcelain Teapot featuring the Quing Dynasty mark for the Yongzheng period (1723-1735) on the base. The mark is a six character mark, in a double rectangle. The piece is hand painted and really quite lovely, but unfortunately it appears that it did suffer an"accident". Of course, given it's delicate nature this is not surprising!
It appears that it must have tipped over at one point - resulting in crack through the body, and a separate, smaller crack near the bulb at the top /rim. The cracks are very tight, and the piece still holds water. It has a couple of 'flea bites' along the larger crack, but overall I would say they are very hard to see. It was not repaired, and is "as found". So sad, but still so beautiful! I am sure the person who tipped it over was furious with themself! Amazingly, this piece has survived with the scrolled handle, serpentine spout, and original lid / cover all in tact - which I would have guessed might have been the first to go! LOL!
So here's a couple of questions:
#1 I have heard that there are a lot of reproduction pieces out there with fake marks, but I am hoping this is not one of them! Any thoughts? Does this piece appear to be 'of the period'?
#2 Would we call this a teapot or an ewer? Or maybe something else altogether? The shape is so unusual, and I haven't been able to find anything quite like it.... So I am not entirely sure...
Would love to hear some opinions.
Thanks for looking!
This is not my area of expertise, but the bottom of the ewer seems awfully crisp and clean for a piece of porcelain of that great age. Very often, there are 20th century pieces made in the style of an earlier century, and the period marks are there as an acknowledgement rather than a gauge for dating said piece.
Hi Efesgirl,
Thanks for the love! So you are leaning towards an "Ewer"? :)
I agree, that the bottom does look fairly clean for the age, it is all glazes except for the rim - and only a narrow portion of that actually makes contact with the surface that it sits on. It looks a bit dirtier in person as well, but I see what you mean. That said however, it kind of seems like circumstantial evidence though. Right? All depending on how the piece was used and cared for over the years.
Would love to hear from anyone who considers themself an expert on this period. Does the patterning, color, shape, cordage, mark style, clay material say anything else about it?