I‘m no expert, but the dancing figures, even if they are foreigners, look a bit strange to me. Not Ming painting style, at least none I have seen before. 

Dear alejanac,

I am not quite clear. Are you the owner of the moon flask that failed to sell? I assume you are, given that you speak of the scientific analysis conducted on it that appears essentially to have confirmed it as being of the Yongle period.

There may be some complicated issues at work here that I can only guess at. Let me stress that I do not know the full story of what may be going on in this particular case, though I am aware of the moon flask sale at Drouot having taken place. 

Here is a scenario that may, or may not, apply. As I stated and must stress, I do not know the full circumstances.

Once an expert has declared his or her opinion on an item to a premier auction house, it may be difficult to get that house to change its view on that item, even when scientific analysis contradicts the expert's opinion. I know that there is no rationality whatsoever behind this, but other considerations may be in play that have nothing to do with rationality. For instance, what is the exact nature of the relationship of the expert to the auction house? Does he or she also consign items to it on a regular basis? If so, it might be an embarrassment to the auction house to find itself put into a position of having to oppose the view of an expert/consigner with whom they already have an established relationship; there may a risk of losing further consignments by angering them. Believe me, the egos of experts can be exceedingly fragile. If those experts are influential, as usually they are, an auction house could even incur some financial losses in future as a result of their displeasure. So a calculation is made: does an auction house follow an influential expert's opinion in the face of contrary evidence, or does it not, thereby risking the displeasure of that influential expert?

This scenario may seem cynical, but I regret to say that it is not implausible. The pronouncement of an expert alone can spell death to a potential consignment if that pronouncement is not favourable.

In the case of the moon flask under review, if it is indeed yours, would you consider having a further test conducted on it by Oxford Authentication? Since Sotheby's, for one, sets especial stock by that particular laboratory's results, a positive result from them on the moon flask ought, on the face of it, be more difficult to ignore and set aside.

Regards,

Alan

Yeah its no usual. It was made to exportation to arabian market. In Imperial Museum of Taipei you can see one exact the same, with the same dancer and painting but in blue and white.

Dear Alan,

Many thanks for your opinion and advice. This helps me to understand better the chinese porcelain market.

About the test, really I prefer Kotalla to Oxford, because Kotalla give me the graphical of the thermoluminiscence and the doses and specific results obtained in each sample. Oxford doesnt givet any information. You only can accept the result, but with Kotalla you can analyze all information he gives in four or five pages. Its only an opinion. I think Oxford is reliable too and perhaps i have to ask their services too.

Anyway, there are other analysis, if you have readen the analysis of HEBOLABO, a Belgium laboratory is very clear. How many labs i should do? I have done TL, ICPMS, Surface analysis with EXDRF, ink analysis composition, inclusions, oxides... I ask myself, have you seen before a piece more analyzed than mine? Have you seen a piece before  in Sothebys or Christies with more scientifics guarantees?

Dear alejanac,

Thank you for clarifying that you are the owner of the moon flask.

As I said in my original post about it, the reasons why an item may be rejected are not in every case rational. Some vested interests may be at work which have nothing whatsoever to do with the authenticity issue. It is exceptionally frustrating and galling if authenticity is ever set aside in favour of protecting vested interests. 

I can only sympathise. I still suggest you do indeed consider approaching Oxford Authentication, for the reasons I have already mentioned.

Regards,

Alan

I think it would help people here if you provided some photos ,  and a link to the taipei moonflask, so it is easier to compare. The photos in the report are ok but not enlargeable etc. 

Maybe also , without being specific, you could say how you acquired the piece and whether it has any provenance. Obviously with a potentially very valuable and rare item , the big auction houses want to see some documented evidence of its history.

Giovanni has commented before on the limitations of especially the Oxford Lab TL tests. My understanding is that TL testing is useful for ancient pottery , but for Ming or later porcelain the margin of error is great, and basically cannot be used for Qing porcelain at all. . So maybe the expert assessment that rejected the piece discounted the TL test.  

Dear Tam,

First, excuse me for my english.

For your illustration, link to the Taipei museum. I think mine is a copy for exportation of this one.  they are not the same but similars. The link

https://theme.npm.edu.tw/selection/Article.aspx?sNo=04001095&lang=2

About the provenance is right. We will give the documents to the buyer.

My opinion about tl tests is that in the last years have improve the results. A british study inform that tl test gave definitive results for 92% of the ming dynasty porcelain pieces analyzed. There are risks, as irradiation. But you can take samples of different parts and its very difficult that, if the piece was irradiated, the results are homogeneus. Other risk in porcelain is the way of taking the samples, if you use a drill is possible that you generate enough hot to anule your own samples. Anyway I think, nowaday, is the most reliable test and there are several laboratories that can do it...

If the piece is important you can complete the tl test to avoid this risks with the ICP MS. The University of Pekin have published the quimical composition of the pieces by period. Its very interesting and in combination with tl test, is acuracy.

There are another type of studie that you can do, of the surface. The surface, with the centurys, presents weathering signs. Here is interesting analysis of bubbles that pieces in each period should have (specially chinese studies describe it) and inclusions too. Its mycroanalysis method, very common in China but not very developed in Europe.

I have really enjoyed studing some pieces of my collection.

I have no doubt about authenticity of the piece, but i have many doubts about the fair play in the market. Sometimes i dont understand it. Now i am learning, with your help. Thanks

Dear Alejanac 

thank you for the link to the very beautiful vase in the Taipei Museum - I find it amazing that in the Yongle period they could produce such a vase with foreign figures, including non-chinese faces and clothes. The clothes and faces look more Caucasian than Arabic, I mean from the Caucasus, with fur trim and boots. But that is just my feeling. 

It seems yours is a copy of the blue and white vase, because the arrangement of the figures is the same , but the painter was not familiar with the people or clothes he was painting , so the faces and clothes are much less convincing. Also the composition of the foreground and background is not so elegant and there is less 'separation' and balance , with oversized plants and much less defined mountains in the background. 

I realise that painting in copper red was much harder than in cobalt and that could explain the relative blurring and clumsiness of some of the decorative elements of your vase. 

The question is when was the copy made? in Yongle or later? Without the evidence of the tests, I would have said this is later , possibly qing, but the scientific evidence seems incontrovertible , so I really don't know. 

Alan has made some interesting points about the egos of experts and their relationship with major auction houses. You could always try a smaller auction house , and let the market decide, but I understand there could be a problem , given that it was previously withdrawn from the Paris auction. 

Hopefully you get lots of other opinions here to guide you . Good luck!

Dear Alejanac,

Very interesting thread. I read the report of this moon flask. It's a joke. 

It's very obvious that the flask is a modern fake.  ? 

The shape, the decoration and the underglaze red colour don't match porcelains of the Ming dynasty.

You think it's of a export type. No. This kind of flask is made by official kiln and will not exported. Most export porcelain went to Persia, Arabia and Turkey. And in these culutre blue and white are popular. They don't buy red and white. That's the fact. 

There are underglaze red porcelains made at Yongle period, but very little. Most of them are blue and white. Underglaze red is very hard to made/burn. It's hard to controll the temperature for getting this red colour. 

At Hongwu emporer era there are a lot underglaze red porcelains are made. Most of them are very dark, almost gray. Because it's too hard to reach a bright red colour.

The decoration is quite chaotic. The painting is ugly. Sorry I said that. But it's the truth.

I just can't believe that KOTTALA did this test and gave this report.

If you need more info, just tell me.

Best regards,

Xin

I just came across this one. Looks like it could be the very same flask.

http://en.51bidlive.com/Item/1512268

Dear Corey, no doubt it is the same vase. Good detective work!

Dear Alejandro, keeping in mind that all what has been said by Alan is true. How the market, auction houses, experts, play in the high end market is exactly as he said.

And I must also say that I agree with you about Oxford Authentication. There are other reliable labs around, in my opinion even more professional.

But all that said, unfortunately I am totally convinced, especially after having seen the pictures of the vase of the NPM, which I didn’t know before, that your vase is a modern copy, Tam and Xin are right. I do not think that it has been made let say in the 18^th century, the hand is not there at all.

It is evident that the decorator was copying, the difference is macroscopic. It is not matter of less skilled decorator, because it is not conceivable that a vase of this importance was commanded to a beginner.  Besides the hand, which is of maximum importance, another indicator is the uniformity of the red, which is not possible to see on a genuine Yongle big vase.

You could ask me how to explain the result of the TL test, I have no answer. But it is not the first time that this happens, and I know of other cases from the same lab.

If I may go further about the tests performed, the other long analysis is substantially useless in my opinion. Everything they said can be replicated, there is not a single firm point authenticating age there.

Giovanni

BTW: if I click on the name of the auction house in the link provided by Corey (Chinese Imperial Porcelain) I access pages of rare porcelains, all of high level, and all invariably fake. An incredible collection of fakes.

Giovanni

Dear Xin,

The Hebolab report is of other laboratory called HEBOLABO, in Belgium. You can contact with Mr. Raymond without contact with Kotalla.

If you joke of the authenticity of the piece I joke of your knowledge. An expert never have seen before all objects of all painters of all kilns. Do you know something about thermoluminiscence. Read Oxford page. If you dont know about thermoluminiscence, please study something about icp ms,.. please. Your kn but you have to be more seerious in your opinions. Perhaps your opinion is fake and is authentic the science developed during decades in Europe.

You should be more prudent.

Thanks

Dear Clayandbrush,

I am going to contact with this webpage. Really his piece is very similar of mine. I am going to ask him if he had done scientific test and more information about the piece.

Its very difficult to say if one seller have all fakes or not without study the pieces on hand. Anyway most of the pieces auctioned in invaluable and liveauctioneers I think they are fakes. I always ask for scientifics proofs. Provenance is not enough, because the bills sometimes are fakes.

Thanks for the information.