@thomasumjohnson you are doing what you should be doing researching  and debating this is how we all learn by learning we all benefit. Everyone’s goal is to save money and make money either to collect or sell but not get screwed. I have learned more being wrong than being right. Just FYI if it was a fare price it would be on my wall also.

@lotusblack Hello again Brian,

Sorry to bother you once more with questions but I was looking at the back of the Plaque and in regards to your comment on the tooling marks I assumed that the criss cross pattern on the back is what you were referring to.  But I did start looking at the back of Kangxi plaques (again I am not saying mine is Kangxi!) but I noticed a similar symmetrical pattern to the back - more like a republic type figure that has been left to dry on fabric or something has imprinted the base..   So I just wanted some clarity concerning these tool marks, so I have taken a more detailed photo of the pattern to the back of the plaque for you to look at, and the Kangxi example, to compare..   Hope I'm not barking up the wrong tree... 

@thomasumjohnson you are correct there have been many topics on the fabric marks on older pieces in both Chinese and Japanese ceramics. If your plaque had these same patterns that would be a good sign. The pattern on yours looks only vertical and linear. That’s not a good sign. If you notice the fabric pattern it’s knotted and uneven it look like fabric. The lines on your look perfectly straight no unevenness the gaps are identical like is was grove mechanically the groves look like they are under the kiln grit. So I ask myself if the kiln grit was caused during firing why would it be sticking to an unglazed surface? But it looks like glaze was added so did they add the glaze to stick the grit to the back. Investigation is turning more questions great study piece.

@lotusblack Thanks Brian,

Sorry it's hard to see as I'm taking photos in the dark over here in the U.K. but the marks are moving in both directions in a criss cross pattern.  Like I say it's hard to see I'll need to take photos in the daylight, but as I say they aren't moving in one direction but in a criss cross pattern..

But yes more uniform and regimented..

@thomasumjohnson it’s hard to tell the cross hatching I would like to see comments from other members. I have not seen a glazed back on a plaque before either maybe other members have and can chime in. It’s looks pretty shiny from the photo you just took.

@thomasumjohnson I'm very glad you're keeping this discussion going and not just accepting others assessments as truth. As others have already pointed out, that is how we all learn, by questioning and debating through our observations and opinions. I lack the specific knowledge that some other members have in terms of certain telltale details that are tells for it's age, but I like your plaque, and it still would not surprise me to find out it dated to the early 20th C or even late 19th. But neither would it surprise me to learn it was a modern fake. So, for what it's worth, my jury is still out, and probably will be until Peter gives an opinion, so hopefully that can happen soon. At any rate, I'm enjoying everyone's contributions to the discussion.  John 

@johnshoe I'm very glad you're keeping this discussion going and not just accepting others assessments as truth. As others have already pointed out, that is how we all learn, by questioning and debating through our observations and opinions

Facts matter.  Facts are not opinions, and are not subjective. I think there comes a time when the focus turns away from fact, and dives deep into obscure unfounded nuance.  

This discussion already has two feet firmly planted in foot deep muddy nuance.

Not one shred of fact has been presented that this plaque is late 19th c.  Plenty of innuendo, but not fact.

On the other hand, the details of the construction of the plaque and rendering of the design being wrong for 19th c. or earlier is fact.  Unless you have the one and only example of the late 19th c. made in this manner, the facts stand.

I really hope nobody thinks that questioning and debating in this manner is constructive. Sorry...I don't think so. We should be investing our time expanding our knowledge of widely accepted principles used for assessing age/authenticity.

Instead, it really sounds like you're holding out hope some obscure finding will disprove all the fundamental rules of assessing porcelain age/authenticity, and that your plaque is genuinely antique.

Even if that were to happen, it would be a rare exception, and shouldn't be counted on when assessing future pieces.

Sorry...

Wet Blanket

OK, So I've found something interesting, which could be good news..   This C19th Plaque sold at Bonhams, which has grit over the back which could be glazed and is reasonably large without any support marks... The market also seemed to agree with the dating..  See more photos in the link to Bonhams

There are lots of photos in the listing on the Bonhams website:

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/26840/lot/18/

@greeno107 @lotusblack @johnshoe 

Infact you can see the back has been glazed..   see my previous post..

But it doesn't answer the question as to why the back was glazed... and how it was made?

@thomasumjohnson To quote my last post just before this plaque was referenced...

Even if that were to happen, it would be a rare exception, and shouldn't be counted on when assessing future pieces.

And, here we are.  A VERY RARE example of a large (not as large as yours) famille rose plaque depicting boys... $40,000 sale price!

Look at the manner of the back, color, texture, and edges of your plaque as compared to the one example you found without the ridges. You think they look alike? No, they are not.

This might be hard to believe, but I wonder if the Bonham's plaque is actually 18th c. The rendering is quite exceptional, more in the taste of Qianlong.  If Qianlong, then likely the porcelain was ground smooth on on the back before firing the glazes and slip.  Just look at all the extra grit on the back to keep it from bonding to the kiln.

The back looks old, and the quality looks fantastic on the Bonham's plaque...so your plaque has what in common with this plaque?  Oh yes, a back without ridges - that's it.  Then your plaque must be late 19th c., right? 

We can not pick and choose, but props to you for finding an old plaque without ridges on the back.

Best,

Tim

@greeno107 Sorry Tim, But I understood the fact there were no supports on the back and that the back was glazed with kiln grit stuck to it was the main reason that my plaque was regarded as a modern copy and had no age.  Now I have discovered one with the same qualities you want to tell me that this discovery is meaningless.   Obviously there is a lack of logic to your comment

@greeno107 And they do look very much alike, both have brown streaks running horizontally through the back underneath the kiln grit, both have kiln grit stuck to the glazed base and both have a smooth back with no support marks.

Here is a comparison of the backs, I see plenty of correlation.

 not as much grit, the lighting is bad in my photo, but you see the brown horizontal streaks and the smooth glazed base right? with kiln grit stuck to it?

@thomasumjohnson I understood the fact there were no supports on the back and that the back was glazed with kiln grit stuck to it was the main reason that my plaque was regarded as a modern copy and had no age.

I never mentioned 'kiln grit' in my defence, but the absense of ridges on the back is still one of the main reasons why your plaque is not of the 19th c. It was also not the only reason why I said it was not of the period....let's not forget that.

I'll reiterate what I've said all along - the artistic qualities and construction need to matching 100% with known examples.  Yours does not.

But, go ahead and pick and choose what qualities you want to acknowledge or ignore, but you'll soon find that kind of approach will lead you into buying many copies and fakes....rest assured. 

One last thing...if you think that a large famille verte plaque depicting dragon & carp that was offered by a reputable auction house on LiveAuctioneers and other online websites was somehow overlooked by Chinese collectors, and because of a 'fast hammer' you stole it for well under $1,000, you are misleading yourself.  There would have at least been a few left bids, but there weren't. 

That should say something about given you are now comparing your plaque to one that sold for $40,000 USD.

Still, it's a pretty plaque.