Went for a trip back to the library and wanted to continue posting in this thread, but got somewhat upset by the arrogance and sarcasm in the post by "clayandbrush", so I'll have to wait untill I have calmed down...

Dear Corey,

may be you really need to calm down a bit.

You said that I have been sarcastic and arrogant. Let see:

You did post a vase, bought as you said at an established (hence competent) dealer who sold it as not Qianlong (first voice against the authenticity), which according to you it is indeed Qianlong because in your opinion it has the same colors of a completely different vase. Not only that, it could even be painted by the same hand. I am really interest to know where you see the same hand on your flower vase and the European subject vase.

Shinigami, Kev, Tam, Julia, and Alan told you that you were wrong.  This make a total of six opinions against the authenticity; more important, 100% of the opinions against that.

You just said thank you and you kept your idea, alleging, to support it, some totally irrelevant things.

Yes, I am not arrogant in calling them irrelevant.

Is it relevant to say that the blue is the same? You can find million of vases with the same blue. And how do you compare the tone of the blue with a different image, taken with different light and camera?

Is it relevant to say that “the glaze is smooth and shiny like the European subject vase”? Take from the net one thousands of images of Qianlong, Guangxu, Republic vases and compare the glazes. It is a non sense, for the same reasons of the previous point.

Is it relevant to report the description made by Sotheby’s of a b&w gallbladder vase? How many gallbladder vases are around? How many could have a similar description?

Is it relevant to say that a famille rose vase has the same color palette of another famille rose vase? Almost all them has the same color palette. Is it matter of the tone? Then take a picture of your vase with an over and a lower exposition of a half F stop and you will see that the tone color of the enamels changes.

After that you did compare the shape with a glass vase, which has nothing to do. Do you really think relevant that you have found a glass vase that has a similar shape? Do you really think that it is a valid reason for thinking that your vase is mark and period?

Then you went to the motif of the decoration. Peony, magnolia, etc etc. Is that relevant? In Chinese iconography many different motifs are repeated. If I have a vase with the “three friends of winter” motif should I think that it is Qianlong because I have seen a Qianlong one with the same motif? You can find many porcelain items with those flowers.

At the end, you even concluded that things were clear.

Now, let go back to my “arrogant and sarcastic” message.

I told you practically what said here above, that your points are not, in any way, to be considered as important factors for supporting your idea that your vase is m&p.  This, after having been told to you by ALL the previous posters which you ignored completely.

If I were in the same situation, I would humbly think that maybe I am wrong and start to study and increase my education about the matter. Instead you persisted in your opinion, with useless arguments. Who has been arrogant? I believe somebody else than me.

Do you think sarcastic telling to someone that what he thinks is wrong, especially motivating the reasons for that? If you will follow what suggested to you at every point you will see that there is nothing sarcastic.

At every point, I told you to look for how many similar examples you can find.

Instead you were focusing your searches only on a few examples, which even had nothing to do with your vase.

Did you search among examples from Republic to about 1960? I don’t think so, because if you did, you should have seen how much many similar examples you will find.

No arrogance and no sarcasm dear Corey, it is just matter of having a bit of humility (= less arrogance) and consider that you may be wrong and try to look at what it has been suggested to you.   

If you wish to do that, re-read my last sentence in my previous post: “You will see (looking at Republic and onward ware) that almost all them has the same colors (and MOST important, style).” Note that I did stress the importance of looking at the style. Then, look at how the flowers are randomly scattered on your vase, like “flying”. Verify if you will find a m&p Qianlong piece with that typical layout. And see instead how it is typical for much later items.

With all respect dear Corey, it is a friendly suggestion, aimed to suggest you how to look at a piece, not an arrogant one.

Giovanni

Come on Giovanni.

The vase is really nice quality, and I think there is some merit to your comparisons, including the similarly shaped glass vase. For me, at the least this vase is in the style of the porcelain immitations of Peking glass as mentioned previously. As for telling you the age, I would need to do a bit more research as this is fairly unchartered territory for me, as it seems to be for others in the thread.

I will say that I have seen a few pieces immitating this type of ware that originate in the 20th century.

I do think that it would be fruitful to continue this thread to determine the exact age of the piece, even if it is not period. I do disagree with the idea that bringing up similarities in aspects such as the colours of enamels is irrelevant. It doesn't lead to an instant conclusion, but it is neccesary to ruminate such things as they can lead to other conclusions. We are detectives here, what are we looking at on a porcelain apart from it's various characteristics.

Best wishes.

I agree with Giovanni that you are being a little too defensive about this piece, albeit for good understandable reasons - you have time and money invested in the thing, but I think you posted here to share your doubts or questions about the vase, not your confidence that it's qianlong mark and period. 

The reality is it was sold by reputable dealer as qianlong mark, but not m&p.

It would be very  unlikely that the dealer got it wrong and 'under-sold' it, also it's unlikely that everyone here who believes it's modern or C20th are all also wrong. The problem may be that it's a good copy , in potting and colour etc. , but as the Macau vase illustrates , maybe sometimes the best fakes get sold as real. 

I also agree with goldentoad, some of the things mentioned as perhaps irrelevant by Giovanni , such as enamel colour and porcelain colour , are sometimes the only thing we can judge by , even if monitors and photos vary enormously. To master and spot 'qianlong period style' or whatever is a counsel of perfection, and only possible if you are immersed in that world and see lots and lots of examples. . 

Dear all,

each one of us has his approach on how to look at a piece. I believe that I have already said elsewhere here which is my approach, which is not belonging from a deliberate method. It belongs, I think, directly from experience, it seems logical to me.

Let’s make an example. The grower of an orchard knows a lot of varieties of apples. If you show him a new variety of apple that he has never seen before, and which looks similar to a pear, he will see instantly that it is an apple and not a pear. His eye is trained to what to look at, without the necessity of ratiocinating about that.

 In the same way, my eye first evaluates the characteristics of a piece, like the painting style or the shape.

I am not able in many instances to exactly date a 20^th century piece, but my eye tells me if it is Qianlong or later.

Once I have that conclusion, “not Qianlong”, it is useless that I pay attention at the kind of blue, the paste, etc etc.

Now regarding this vase, which is indeed well painted, what appears immediately unfitting are those many “flying” flowers, highlighted in the first picture below. The correct representation, and not only during Qianlong, shows the branches together, as if originating from the lower rim.

The second and third pictures shows an example.

Besides that, the way of painting, which I repeat is nice, is not so lively as is during Qianlong, which in turn is less lively than during Yongzheng.

If we want to further inspect, I can’t put my hand on fire but to me the lower ruyi band too is wrong.

That “flat” motif within the ruyis, with the dot over it, I believe doesn’t fit and I have probably never seen before.

And just to show you dear Corey that you should not look only for the similarity of a detail, the last two pictures are of a Yongzheng vase which description of the painting made by Christies is of the type that you have brought in support to your idea. Here is the description; does that means that your vase could be Yongzheng?

Giovanni

A MAGNIFICENT AND RARE FAMILLE ROSE VASE, TIANQIUPING

YONGZHENG SIX-CHARACTER SEAL MARK AND OF THE PERIOD (1723-1735)

The vase is robustly potted with a large globular body rising to a slightly flared cylindrical neck, delicately painted with luxuriant peony plants bearing large blossoms rendered in shades of pastel pink, yellow, white and iron red and lush leaves in two tones of green, shrewn with a slender stem of crab apple blossoms and buds and a tall magnolia branch picked out in white and soft-brown. The exuberant scene is further adorned by two fluttering butterflies of more subtle tones of sepia and yellowish-white.

20 1/8 in. (51 cm.) high

I do appreciate where you are coming from Giovanni, like most areas of study. When you are very good at it you are using more of an instinct or intuition, a gut feeling about a piece which is likely based upon the thousands of hours of experience that have seeped into your sub-conscious. This can mean that it might be hard to verbalize exactly what you mean as it is quite a complex determination.

Having said this, as I have learned about Chinese porcelain I have had a few experiences where I have genuinely been caught off guard about a certain aspect, especially in areas that I lack experience. This keeps me open to other possibilities a lot of the time.

Best wishes.

Yes dear Thegoldentoad, the trap is always there, ready to shoot.

I have been already fooled by very good fakes. Their quality is growing and in some cases they are incredibly well done. BTW the vase of Corey is not a fake, it just has an apocryphal mark.

Also, there are always odd items. It is indeed like and endless path.

Giovanni

An endless path indeed. Quite literally endless due to new fakes being created all of the time as you say.

Best wishes.

Allright guys, I just came back to the library. But could you please hold on with the postings? Now I almost don't know where to begin or where to end. I need a little break to express my thoughts, considerations and observations in realation to this vase, and to address all different opinions and views shared in this thread.

I actually have a reference for Qianlong vases with the flowering branches scattered around the vase, and not emerging from the base like you say. These also have the "flying flowers" and are decorated with a similar band of bright blue (different tone and slightly differently painted) ruyis with (red) dots.

http://www.alaintruong.com/archives/2017/04/28/35225289.html

A similar yellow ground vase with ruyis in the same intense blue color as on my vase was available at gianguan auctions in singapore:

http://www.alaintruong.com/archives/2016/03/08/33484066.html

The subject of the blue color was brought up by the other posters, so at least therefore it was relevant. I've have seen other examples with the same blue color.

Dear Corey,

if you are convinced that you have found examples that validate your vase as Qianlong M&P, that’s fine, good for you. If you really think that your vase is of the same type of the last ones that you have shown, that’s good. Treasure it or send it to Christie’s.

I am not so keen to repeat all what I have already said, if somebody do not want to listen, there is nothing to do.

And it is useless to say to all the previous posters, since they already know, that it has no sense at all to think that a vase is Qianlong because it has the same blue of a Qianlong vase. They know very well that there is not an unique Qianlong blue nor an unique, let say, Republic blue.

They also see, as it is evident to whom want to see, that the “filling” motif between the ruyis is completely different than that on your vase.

And they also understand that the decoration on your last shown vases is called “butterfly” because the main subject there are the butterflies, and it has sense that the flowers are depicted around in a butterfly scene. It is different than a motif dedicated to “combination of white magnolia (yulan 玉蘭), crab apple (haitang 海棠) and peonies (fuguihua 富貴花)” as you said. Without mentioning the huge difference in representation between those flowers and the ones on your vase; they still are branches and not flying single flowers.

Anyway I am not interested in polemics, I do not want to be right at all costs, especially if one do not want to listen.

Best regards

Giovanni

I never said I was convinced the examples I've posted validate my vase as Qianlong M&P. You said that.

No specific date was given by the dealer I bought it from and I didn't ask which I perhaps should, but I assume it's most likely republic period.  I asked about provenance but the person I corresponded with said his boss was quite old and couldn't remember about provenance. I was looking for republic period porcelain on eBay because these does very well at the moment, especially on chinese auctions. This vase caught my interest because of the flower motives, the shape, the ruyi borders with the wan (卍)  character, the gold rim, the base and because of the similarity of the enamelling with the Macau vase. So I gues you can say I bought it in the hope it would be an unidentified mark and period example.

And as tam18 correctly noted I posted it here to share my own doubts and to ask questions especially about its shape as I haven't been able to find any examples that mathes with both the sligthly tappering neck and the proportions between the thickness of the neck and the body, untill I came across the glass vase at British Museum. (If you know some examples you're very velcome to show me) It's also very interesting (to me at least) that the glass vase is painted with chrysanthemum and peony, eventhough these flowers are often seen on Qing dynasty porcelains as well as on the later copies. Magnolia, crab apple and Lingzhi are less common. So starting this thread haven't been totally fruitless. Now I know there is most likely also Qianlong period porcelain vases in the same shape and the same proportions somewhere out there which I will hopefully come across sooner or later. So far the closest example I could find is a republic period vase from Christie's.

http://www.artvalue.com/auctionresult--republic-period-1912-1949-chin-bottle-vase-4076796.htm

That's it for today for my part. It's getting late, I'm going home.

Goodnight!

Dear Corey,

things are clear now I think. By your first messages it was implicit that you were hoping for a Qianlong date of your vase. You did mention the type of blue and other points which can be found in a large time frame, from 18^th century until now.

But I did not understand that by comparing it with some other examples you were referring to that exact shape, with the slightly everted mouth.  

You are right that it is not very common (besides being much more elegant than the gallbladder ones with straight neck) and you are right that magnolia is much less common than other plants in Chinese iconography on porcelain.

I frankly do not know how to exactly date your vase, because after Republic I have no interest and in my mind everything after that is just “modern”, but I believe that it is not earlier than Republic. And it is of good quality, no doubt.

In conclusion, the meaning of my messages was essentially to suggest you to not look only for rare items in trying to date what you have in hands.

Giovanni

That's nice! But with the fear of appearing ignorant or defensive I must say that I'm still of the opinion there is a fair chance the vase is of the Qianlong period. The thing is that all the observations that were made by the other posters like the blue color, the footring and the red mark etc., I had all ready researched this when I bought the vase. It would of cause have been wise if I had specified all this in my first post, but the computer I was using decided to close down.

I wanted to write a longer post here, but the unusual hot weather here makes it uncomfortable to be inside. But I found another famille rose vase in the same shape on a chinese auction site.

http://chinadavids.com/display.asp?id=741

It's kind of frustrating that there is no specific dating of that one in the description but the estimate equals that of some of the other lots in that sale, for example lot 1035, a Yongzheng gallbladder vase.

http://chinadavids.com/info.asp?base_id=1&second_id=1003&pageIndex=2

Dear Corey,

good luck if you want to persist with this way of “searching”.

A last tentative:

• if you have researched the type of blue for dating a vase, you have through away your time. Totally useless. It is not worth to explain why, since you have an idea in your mind and obviously are not willing to hear.
• Exactly the same must be said for the shape.
• That gallbladder vase of lot 1035 of the Chinese auction site is Yongzheng in your opinion? If yes, I have really nothing more to add, except that I am understanding why you think that your vase is Qianlong.

Regards

Giovanni