Commenting is deactivated.

Please post all new topics and queries to the
Discussion Forum

Marks on several porcelain

by John
(Burma)

All the marks, except the 6th one (which I found, except the ring, means "Fu" from the Ming Dynasty), do not seem to look like marks posted on this site.
Any suggestion/idea on significance/age of each mark? Thanks in advance for your expert advice, time and patience again and we hope you do not mind with our endless questions. Sorry I do not know how to hyperlink here, so I just pasted the links.
1st item
image 1 image 2

2nd item
image 3 image 4

3rd item
image 5 image 6

4th item
image 7 image 8

5th item
image 8 image 9

6th item
image 10 image 11

7th item
image 12 image 13

8th item
image 14 image 15

Comments for Marks on several porcelain

Click here to add your own comments

Apr 21, 2010
 re: chinese porcelain
by: John

Thanks again Peter for your info.

Some of what we have show good age signs although I admit some have too little scratches for their age. The conditions of some items are mostly quite bad, as you have seen earlier, as previous owners do not have knowledge about their value. We have never sold such items before and there are less than 7-8 dealers of Chinese porcelain (in the whole country of about 50 million) and none of them, including us, are quite competent technically so they might have unintentionally bought and sold fakes/reproductions.

No individual transaction, I heard, went above US$3000. We still have about a dozen others which I haven't asked you for opinion and to be honest, it will all we have after asking about them as these porcelain wares, authentic or not, are very rare here even if we can afford the money.

It is hard even to get an appraisal since most appraisers need to see an item in person and we can't just afford to go abroad only for an appraisal for an item (imagine we spend $2-3k for travel expenses for sth which may be judged to be worth only several hundred dollars!!!) which is why I asked you earlier about reliable internet appraisal services.

Thanks for referring to us asianart.com and gotheborg.com and your patience and assistance to us several times. Please come visit us when you are in Myanmar (Burma).
Apr 21, 2010
 chinese porcelain
by: peter

John,
Just don't get marks-bound. Many items have marks that are from earlier periods, even those that were made during the Qing dynasty. Marks are the last we take into consideration when it comes to age, etc., and there are much too many fakes on the market. I guess 99% of all sold currently in China and here in Taiwan are fakes. But,it might well be that you find more genuine items in Burma than elsewhere.

What I meant with usage traces is, for example, scratches in the glaze, etc.
Bowls, plates, cups, etc. are all items that were in actual daily use and it is suspicious if something that is 200 or 300 years old shows no signs of use at all. Sometimes scratches are only visible with a magnifier, but something should be there.
Like with marks, provenance is unreliable and should not be used to determine an item's value or age, in my view. It can easily be made up to make an item seem more credible.

Did I mention asianart.com? You could also post or obtain information there to increase knowledge, but if you or your boss wants to really get into collecting (or dealing), gotheborg_com is probably the most relevant site on the English speaking internet. Just, it requires a yearly membership to access the forums. There are lots of experienced dealers and collectors specialized on Chinese ceramics on the forums there.
Apr 21, 2010
 to peter
by: John

Peter,
Thanks for your comments and time.
I do not know what you meant by 'usage traces'. After all, we are very new in this field since my boss and I just started collecting Chinese wares only 3-4 weeks ago. Here in Burma, there isn't anybody who can offer a 'hands-on' inspection, so if you happen to be here, you are more than welcome to visit us (please send me an email first). My boss just collected whatever he believes is good, mainly by their decorative apparel, so we have no idea of their provenance.
Apr 19, 2010
 underglaze blue items
by: peter

John,

The following is my personal view about thiese items. You should always ask for a second opinion.

Item 1:
Painting and mark seem to be early Qing, but looks overall too new and from the pictures could be a more recent item. Would probably need a hands-on inspection.

Items 2, 3:
17th or early 18th century (do they have any usage traces on the glaze?)

Item 4:
Possibly vintage or early 20th century. This type of bowl has been made since at least the middle of the Qing dynasty and is still made today. The collectible value is not high as there are still too many available.

Items 5, 6, 7:
17th century

Item 8:
Vintage or recent. Looks pretty new.

6 and 7 are my favourites. They have very good, unmistakable age characteristics, the others look rather glossy for their age despite their other age signs, and no scratches or other usage signs are visible on the glaze. (Could be due to lghting when photographing.)

Click here to add your own comments

Return to Ask a question or contribute - archived 2011.

search by keyword