Dear MB,

good chances are that you have a genuine Shunzhi boy there.

Everything looks correct, with the exception that I do not any wear of the enamels. Especially the red enamel should show some fading due to surface wear.

To be sure, you should remove the metal base, that is a later addition if the boy is genuine, and anyway is adding nothing to it.

If it were mine, I would not hesitate in removing it. I would make a cut with a metal saw on one side of the base, so that it can open a bit and facilitate the detaching.

The base should be unglazed, with fine, white paste.

Regards

Giovanni

@clayandbrush You are brave, I would not get anywhere near it with a metal saw. Hati Hati, if you do.

The orange enamel (iron red) should be red (copper red), and the green enamel looks thickly rendered and dark. That brass base was popular on lamps from 1950's or there abouts, so not later than that.

I think late 19th c because I notice the lips have a pinkish hugh that rends me of the iron red used in qianjiang porcelain that seems to wear off easily from the surface of porcelain....seems to also be happening to your figure as well.

Dear Giovanni, Sharon and Greeno,

Thank you very much for the comments!
I managed to remove the base, it wasn't very difficult and I didn't even need to use a saw 🤗 , I just had to pull it with a little bit of force, it seems that it was attached with a kind of plaster. I also took some more pictures for your opinion on age.
Best,
MB

@mb1991 I'm stcking with my original assessment. Late 19th c. The bottom doesn't show me anything that changes my mind. 

Hello MB1991,

Nice Ho Ho Boy you have there the paste is very fine, and the glaze is very smooth, the face is nicely detailed and modeled with open mouth and teeth showing. Think the slightly bulging eyes are an indication of an earlier date than late 19thc. As a comparison I have loaded a few photo's of one I own which is a 20thc copy. You will note the lack of facial expression and that the paste is rough when compared with yours. Not everything made in the 18thc or early 19thc was palace quality in the painting or finishing everyday objects like your boy made for mere mortals can show less care and attention to detail so in my opinion yours could very well be 18th 0r early 19thc.

That's  all part of the fun of collecting listening and seeing different opinions.  Hope that @clayandbrush graces us with his view on your figure now we can see the base. And that @greeno107  gives a view comparing your figure with mine.

Cheers

Michael 

@brettm Well, this is interesting! I actually think that your ho ho boy is 17th c. based upon the use of true wucai enamels, not famille verte, and you can clearly see that your red is red, not orange, and therefore derived from copper, not iron as was typically used in the 19th c.

Not sure what the size of your figure is, but it looks smaller, which might account for the slightly messy rendering, but overall the details of the brocade fabric and the fineness of the red strings is consistent with 17th c. pieces.

Here is a pair that Christies credits as Kangxi He He Er Xian brothers that I think look quite similar:

https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-1657062

I have also found a pair sold by Sotheby's of Kangxi famille verte figures that are fantastically decorated and likely 18th c.:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2020/true-connoisseurship-the-collection-of-ezra-cecile-zilkha/a-pair-of-ormolu-mounted-chinese-export-famille

I'm still looking for a good example of late 19th-early 20th c that looks like MB's, but in the absence of a photo, I again point to the color of the red, which is orange (iron, the darkness and thickness of the green enamel, and overall broader brush strokes.

One other point I noticed is that Michael's figure lacks any burnt orange on the the edges of the base where the slip stops on the side and the unglazed porcelain of the base begins, which suggests the paste is high quality having low or no iron in it - typical for Kangxi porcelain, so this also points to being an earlier piece. However, MB's has the tell tale rust on the edges of the base typical of late 19th to early 20th c.

One last thought....

I have now looked at a few dozen honho boy figures in this upright standing position. All Kangxi examples appear to have closed mouths.

So, the open mouth and the blush colored lips really are consistant with late 19th - early 20th c. figues, most of which are famille rose, which is making it hard for me to find a perfect match. 

@greeno107

Hello,

Thank you for taking the the time to reply. Very nice examples you have found. My photo's are never the best and in this case I think they have flattered my example. The paste is of very poor quality it is what I would call off white in life. Yes the red is not orange, but it is very muddy and has a brownish hue in life. Mine is quite thickly potted and the base is like sandpaper, I think if it had any age the base would have worn a little smoother. It is 26.5cm tall. Also the mold marks are quite prominent in places think on older examples they would of been smoothed out more. And lastly mine has been looked at by an auction house not one of the majors but they have been operating down here in Melbourne for just on 100 years and have a good reputation. Funny never thought I would mount an argument that one of my items was newer rather than older. Just show how hard it is to judge based on photo's.

One of the reasons why I thing MB1991 example maybe is older is the white paste it seems very close to the examples you have shown. What I call hospital white. Of course everything depends on the screen you are viewing things on the Sothebys example you have shown the red looks very orange on my screen.

Cheers and thanks

Michael 

@brettm The quality of these figures in the Kangxi vary greatly. It sure coukd be the trick of the photos, but yours might be biscuit porcelain which is rougher and less white, but still would be low in iron.

https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-5520714

@brettm Here's a mirror of your figure!  I have no idea the reputation of this auction house, but the price just seems too high for this quality of rendering, and this one seems newer than Kangxi, so maybe it is just the photos paying tricks on me!

https://www.bukowskis.com/en/auctions/562/1382-a-famille-verte-figure-of-a-boy-qing-dynasty-kangxi-1662-1722

 Shunzhi Vase showing flat iron red,iron yellow,casual application and wear.

There are three elements that make me feel that this is a later piece.

The precision in which it is painted (compare the casual way the green is painted on 17th c pieces), The Red which should be a flat red if Shunzhi and a rich red if Kangxi. It appears orange in the pictures supplied by the Opening poster,and finally a total lack of iron yellow anywhere.

Vic

Dear MB,

Thanks to the new pictures, better showing the details, I have to say that Greeno was right, it is a later copy.

The reasons are the black outlines (I am referring to the type of black) the uniform pale red, the paste of the base, which is showing iron rust impurities and most of all the execution of the leaves and green tendrils. Ah, and also the lack of yellow as said by Vic.

If it is 19^th century or not, I can’t say. I think that these were not copied in the 19^th century nor at the beginning of 20^th century, but I may be wrong on this.

Dear Greeno, sorry but youi are making some confusion here.

Overglaze copper red? The copper red is a glaze, not an overglaze enamel, which exist only in iron red.

Also the possibility of being it biscuit is clearly not possible. Biscuit ware has a totally different, and well recognizable, appearance. And it is not glazed. On biscuit ware, the enamels are directly applied onto the body, and have a very distinctive appearance.

Dear Michael, like Greeno I too think that your boy could be a genuine one of Transitional/Kangxi period. Pictures of the details of the decorated areas (the stand and the body) will help. The black on the base is just dirty.

Regards,

Giovanni

Hello All.

OK my boy is in the bath will post some new pictures after a good soak and a gentle scrub.

Michael