@greeno107 I'm not comparing the price, I'm trying to work out how old it is.  And the fact that it wasn't listed as 19th C or dated at all and that most people, up until now would assume that any plaque with any age would have supports would reasonably explain the price that it sold for.  At least we have learned that there are exceptions to  that rule now, and that is something

@greeno107 Sorry Tim, I didn't know what Props for you meant.  I thought you were being sarcastic..

@thomasumjohnson No problem...'props to you'...in otherwords, you did great finding a plaque without ridges...truely, nice job researching!

But, it doesn't change my mind. Sorry.

With respect to price, I know you're not comparing prices/value, but you should understand that as a matter of the current market for genuine antique Chinese porcelain, that the likelyhood of a genuine 19th c. famille verte dragon & carp plaque of such large size to sell for under $1,000 in a widely advertised sale... the likelyhood is very low...it just doesn't happen now days.  

That type of evidence, although circumstantial, is relevant. 

It boils down to one question, really.  Are you looking for truth or affirmation of your personal beliefs?

You must know that I try very hard to offer very even handed evaluations with everyone who makes an inquiry on this forum.  I'm not perfect...mistakes happen....but, I do point to very specific & tangible details when I make an assessment.

@greeno107 I understand, I know there are armies of Chinese buyer on the net day and night, but I'm hopeful, nevertheless it's famille jaune... 

@greeno107 This sold for £500, I Loose sleep over it, it was worth a lot more to me..

@thomasumjohnson you have shown a plaque with characteristics of your plaque. I think it gives your plaque some credibility. The research is paying off. Know if you find a dragon it would be a good defense. Im very interested in Peters assessment. I also think theres a lot to learn from this plaque. Any piece that can be such a conversation piece is a special item.

@lotusblack Thanks Brian, Well, I have been looking for Kangxi Dragons with green eyes, and I found a couple, one is Famille Jaune with the same carp scene:  But 19th Century

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/26035/lot/180/

The other is Kangxi:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2018/st-george-street-sale-chinese-art-l18216/lot.416.html

and a similar carp:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2005/chinese-ceramics-and-works-of-art-l05212/lot.582.html

@greeno107 I do appreciate your dedication to promoting what you feel you know to be authentic in this trade. Just remember, we don't always know as much as what we think we do, and there is always more to learn, including the things we might not have felt were possible, but then they turn out to be later on. You've experienced enough surprises in your collecting tenure to realize that you will have many more before you're done. And, yes, this dialogue is absolutely productive, in large part because of your contributions, from which I am learning a lot, regardless of whether this is a late 20th C fake or a late 19th C version. So quit trying to shut down the discussion with comments like facts are facts, etc. That just comes across like your trying to bully less knowledgeable collectors into agreeing with you. I certainly hope that is not the case, because this debate and discussion is useful.  

@thomasumjohnson Here is a comparable design showing dragon and carp with the large scales and similar design…good sale result, too! $5,500.

https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/116826601_a-famille-verte-dragon-and-carp-jardiniere-qing-dyn

I don’t think the rendering of your plaque measures up, the bowl is more finely detailed, but the similarity is strikingly in style close.

However, do you see it also sold this year?

It’s a beautiful bowl, but a strange looking foot and with such a rare design? It could just as well be a modern rendition of very fine artistry.

@greeno107 The shape also seems a bit odd. It looks more modern to me, but beautiful regardless. 

@johnshoe 

So quit trying to shut down the discussion with comments like facts are facts, etc. That just comes across like your trying to bully less knowledgeable collectors into agreeing with you.

This plaque is worthy of discussion for all who participate here…it’s an interesting piece - I’ve said so from the start. And, whether or not my assessment is correct or not, I still think it’s important to stick within the boundaries of what we all (should) understand as a fact based assessment of how age/authenticity of objects are evaluated. 

What I had hoped to ‘shut down’ were comparisons made to pieces from different periods and different styles, then these comparisons being used as evidence of authenticity of a piece from yet another period and style. That is a bad practice that can lead to significant mistakes.

I’m sorry if it comes off as malicious. I give the best advice I can based upon my experience. 

I suppose we could just pick our own standards for authenticity, right?

It really is of no benefit to me whether you or others take my advice. All I can say is that I give my advice freely, and with good intentions.

@greeno107 "I suppose we could just pick our own standards for authenticity, right?"

That's the type of dig that I find unnecessary. It's aggressive and it seems to me like a tactic used to shut down debate or just be rude. Your knowledge and insights are a fantastic contribution to this forum, but the attitude you're bringing is a distraction in cases like this, and that is unfortunate.  

Hi Thomas,

Your plaque is causing quite a debate.  I feel there is nothing wrong with the contortions of your dragon. Chinese dragons have very long necks which coil and writhe. Depending on how the head is placed, it can be hard to tell which part the head is attached to, especially if one forgets the length of the neck and assumes the head would be near the shoulders.

I still believe your plaque is definitely not Kangxi, as much as anything the dragon scales are more reminiscent to me of a Qianlong dragon (example below). 

I am not sure I would refer to it as famille jaune, either; it looks more the typical aubergine, yellow and green glazed biscuit style: again, see below.

I was inclined to think it might be a late 19th c piece. Guangxu dragons do sometimes have green eyes, but despite Giovanni's conviction, I am not happy with a few things especially the scales and that out of proportion back claw - I feel I should write KER-POW next to it. 😊 Also he has a prnounced Habsburg jaw and no upper teeth which strikes me as odd. 

As a result, I wonder if this is actually a deliberate fake? It is attempting to be a Kangxi or 19th c revival piece but it is as though the person making it hasn't quite understood the decoration-styles of the period or that the chosen palette goes best with biscuit. The large size is unusual, too and the glazed back: not impossible, but unusual. Reading that this was in a widely advertised auction on an international platform but sold relatively cheaply, adds to my concerns about it.

Obviously, I could be being overly suspicious, it may be late 19th c, and I hope it is, that would be great. I am very much looking forward to hear what Peter thinks, or maybe Xin will look in and add his opinion. Here are the links:

http://www.alaintruong.com/archives/2019/04/03/37231600.html

https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/art-china-online-winter-sale/pair-green-yellow-aubergine-glazed-biscuit-lions-110/50771

Posted by: @julia

has a prnounced Habsburg jaw and no upper teeth which strikes me as odd

Hi Julia, Thanks for the input.  I mentioned this near the beginning of the post and was wondering if it is because it is not a fully formed dragon.  I believe this narrative of the dragon and carp is depicted through a time linage.  In other words there isn't a dragon and a carp, there is only one creature.  The carp is the dragon and the dragon is the carp,  It is showing the passage of time within the still image.  So I was wondering if the lack of upper teeth and the form of the dragon relates to it not being fully transformed into a true dragon yet.  Here are some other examples:

In this one you see the body of the carp in the dragon, and the dragon has no upper teeth (also notice the way the head is attached is similar to my plaque):

https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2015/important-chinese-art-n09477/lot.301.html

This one shows just a dragon without a carp with no upper teeth and no neck?:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2014/fine-chinese-ceramics-works-art-l14211/lot.58.html

This one has a similar gammy mouth but with the one upper tooth:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2014/fine-chinese-ceramics-works-art-l14211/lot.260.html

My plaque does have the one upper tooth if you look closley.  It's just coloured in aubergine.

I personally don't have a problem with how the dragon is painted.  I really can't see any issues, yes it is animated and should say Ka Pow, which is why I like it but I've sighted other dragons that are also 3d and animated that could also have featured in early episodes of batman 🤣 

and perhaps even more so:

http://elogedelart.canalblog.com/archives/2011/04/23/20961315.html