Chinese pottery | ||
| Asian Antiques2324 of 10500 |  |  |
MALKEY loves this.
jscott0363 loves this.
SEAN68 loves this.
iggy loves this.
Mrstyndall loves this.
blunderbuss2 loves this.
nittygritty1962 loves this.
ho2cultcha loves this.
fortapache loves this.
vetraio50 loves this.
aura loves this.
Newfld loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Posted 5 years ago
Mrstyndall
(903 items)
I just got this awesome pottery. It is old and beat up and crazed, but that just adds to its charm. There was a sticker on bottom saying it is from the Ching dynasty, but I have no clue. Also, there is a bright red seal or mark on bottom. Any help would be great!!
Help us close this case. Add your knowledge below.
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
Amazing piece, I'm no expert but hope you can get it authenticated
The bottom definitely looks like a 19th century base. Unfortunately, it's really dirty and pieces are artificially aged by burying them. i'd try to clean it up very well first.
Jenni, thanks so much!
Ho2cultcha, I had someone on a different forum tell me that this was Ming swatou. Would that mean it would date from 1600’s or earlier? Does that seem right??
Any other ideas about this piece?
I really like the look of the object but here’s what troubles me about it:
As ancient as it looks in general, the mark in the bottom is as bright as new.
Whoever placed the paper label in the bottom had plenty of space to put it anywhere, but chose to partially cover the mark.
There is no fading away of the mark in the areas where part of the mark is missing—that makes me think it was deliberately painted that way, leaving bits and pieces out.
Even though the red mark is missing areas, there are no corresponding areas of wear on the bottom of the item.
Where the paper label has been pulled back, it seems to have pulled off some red paint.
The item does look very old but I don’t think the red mark is as old. If adhesive of a paper label can pull of paint, I doubt the mark would have held up for centuries.
So, all that suspicion of the age of the red mark brings the age of the entire piece into question.
Just my humble opinion. And I should add that I’ve been wrong plenty of times. :-)
Watchsearcher, thanks for the comment. Yeah, I don’t know what the red mark is. I see what you’re saying though, maybe it was added later for some reason, I don’t know. Either way, whatever the age, I like it. Thanks for commenting
If I recall correctly the red mark is a designation by the government for export? Is it wax? It probably is identified as from the Qing dynesty, spelling likely a matter of transcription. In any case, an interesting and appealing piece.
I totally agree with Watchsearcher. That had me wondering too. I would think that where the crazing is, so to it would be on the makers mark. and finders9 is correct on the spelling... Qing dynasty. I don't know it's from that era due to the type written sticker. That just doesn't happen. Sorry to have to say that.
Here is a great site that has tons and tons of porcelain id's.
http://www.gotheborg.com/marks/20thcenturychina.shtml
http://www.gotheborg.com/
I know these are the same names, but try to find the one that has the https in front of it. This has always been where the most info is freely given. There are literally pages upon pages of info. I searched for a piece I had for a very long time and actually found it on my own here just by the bottom writing. I think you may quickly find that someone probably did bury this to make it look old but hey, ya never know!!! Try this site and see what you find, I'd be interested to know!
Finders, it looks more like paint, but not sure. Thanks for the info.
Share, thanks for the info and link. It does have a lot of info on there
Glad I could help!
Renedijkstra, this did not come from eBay. Purchased at store.