Canalblog
Editer l'article Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog
Alain.R.Truong
Alain.R.Truong
Visiteurs
Depuis la création 51 153 151
Archives
Newsletter
Alain.R.Truong
21 novembre 2024

A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty

A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty
A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty
A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty
A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty
A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty

Lot 808. A Junyao purple and blue-glazed tripod narcissus bowl, Ming dynasty (1368-1644); 20.2cm. Lot Sold 4,560,000HKD (Estimate 800,000 - 1,500,000 HKD). © Sotheby's

 

potted with shallow rounded sides raised on three ruyi-feet, the exterior bordered by a band of evenly spaced studs between two raised ribs around the rim, and another band of studs above the feet, applied overall with a two-tone glaze, the interior with a sky-blue glaze, the exterior with a purple glaze transmuting to lavender-blue and thinning to a mushroom tone at the raised edges, the base wheel-cut with numeral wu (five) and later engraved with ba (eight), surrounded by a ring of spur marks revealing the stoneware body, the interior of one foot carved with another ba (eight).

Provenance: The Canton Collection, Hong Kong, and thence by family descent.

Note: This form of this narcissus bowl, also known as ‘drum nail’ basins, belongs to a distinct group of Jun flower receptacles with robust forms and thick luminous glaze. Enveloped in varied purplish-blue glazes that gently drape along the sides, these vessels have been prized by the imperial families and connoisseurs alike since their production.

The dating of these wares has been long debated, but recent research and archaeological evidence suggest they were most likely made in the early Ming dynasty. Scholars had previously relied on a mould for coins inscribed with the reign of Xuanhe (1100-1126) unearthed at the kiln site. This inscription is, however, stylistically different from that found on genuine Xuanhe yuanbao coins. Thermoluminescence (TL) tests carried out by the Shanghai Museum have further challenged the conventional Northern Song attribution, suggesting that they were made at the height of the early Ming dynasty (Chen Kelun, ‘Juntaiyao “Bei Song Junyao” chanpin shidai de zai tantao [Re-dating the ‘Northern Song dynasty Jun ware’ from Juntai kiln], 2005 Zhongguo Yuzhou Junyao xueshu yantaohui lunwenji [Compilation of presentations at the 2005 Yuzhou Junyao academic conference], Zhengzhou, 2007, pp. 66-70).

This type of Jun narcissus bowl is often inscribed with numerals from one to ten that seem to correspond to the size of the vessels. The present example, however, is incised with two different numerals at three locations: one foot is incised with the numeral ba (eight) on the inside, and the same character is again later engraved on the exterior base, where a further character wu (five) is wheel-cut at the centre. Although uncommon, there are other instances of vessels inscribed with more than one numeral. Compare two hexafoil purple-glazed tripod narcissus bowls in the Palace Museum collections in Taipei and Beijing. The Taipei example is inscribed with the numerals one and four, and the Beijing one with seven and nine; see The Enchanting Splendor of Vases and Planters: A Special Exhibition of Flower Vessels from the Ming and Qing Dynasties, Taipei, 2014, cat. no. I-09 and Selection of Jun Ware. The Palace Museum’s Collection and Archaeological Excavation, Beijing, 2013, pl. 111. The author of the latter suggests that the numeral seven was later incised in the palace to match its companion piece.

In terms of the glaze quality and the arrangement of the spur marks, the present vessel is closely related to the examples unearthed in 2004 from the Yuzhou Pharmaceutical Company premises in Henan. See an excavated purple-glazed ‘drum nail’ tripod narcissus bowl, illustrated ibid., pl. 114. There is yet a consensus on the exact dating and manufacturing background of this group of receptacles. Some scholars, such as Liu Tao, believe that the production of these vessels shortly precedes those with fewer and finer spur marks (Liu Tao, ‘The Review of Jun Porcelain Archaeology Research over the Past Decade’, Palace Museum Journal, vol. 191, 2017, no. 3, p. 54). Wang Guangyao, on the other hand, suggests these two groups of receptacles were made concurrently, and the discrepancies should be considered as normal variations of the kiln production (Mingdai gongting taoci shi [History of Ming imperial ceramics], Beijing, 2010, p. 176).

 

 

Sotheby's. Power & Culture – Heirlooms from the Poon Family Collection, Hong Kong, 16 October 2024

Commentaires