Hi Peter! Thanks again, yes it explains a lot now.
Mar 05, 2011
Chinese plate by: Irene
Peter, thank you very muth for the comments. I have a question. When the earlier marks were used on later porcelains and why if it is so? Regards
I am not completely sure what you mean, but if you are asking why they did copy marks of earlier reigns at all, and when...
If it concerns export wares: the reason is for giving the wares a higher perceived value. For other porcelain it depends. Back to the export wares, originally they were not marked, but as far as I know the East India Companies specifically ordered porcelain with marks because it was requested in Europe. Much of the export wares made in the Guangxu reign, for example, had Kangxi or Qianlong or other marks painted on, rather than Guangxu marks. It is quite normal to see Guangxu porcelain with Kangxi marks, for example, but it is also quite common to see Guangxu porcelain with Kangxi patterns. Basically, it was thought that the mark would give an item a higher perceived value.
Tell me if this does not answer your question.
Peter
Mar 05, 2011
blue plate with gilt decoration by: peter
Hi Irina, This looks like Qing dynasty, but I cannot pinpoint the reign. Personally, I would think rather middle or early Qing, but the gilt... Looks like early Imari porcelain from the Kangxi reign, but I have doubts about this. The reason is that the gilt is possibly too bright for that period. As far as I understand the Chinese gilt was darker and less reflective at that time.
However, it is also known that much of the porcelain items had gilt or other decoration added in Europe's workshops. It is possible that the blue and white plate was made in China, and the gilt decoration added in Europe. That could explain why the gilt does not seem to fit the age of the plate.