Featured Thoughts on a Qianlong Seal Marked Monochrome Vase Please

I bought this very attractive 17cm tall monochrome vase yesterday. I hesitate to describe it as Sang De Beouf as it is slightly lighter than usual Sang De Boeuf pieces although I have seen pieces in this colour so described.

The seal mark reads Qianlong. The seller had seven or eight pieces of Chinese porcelain. All were definitely Qianlong and genuine. I am sure that this is antique but is it Qianlong? Would welcome views. The mark is underglaze - very difficult to tell if stamped or extremely finely painted.

 

Bumb

Tricky one john,

@Ce BCA

@say_it_slowly

@Ownedbybear

@blooey

What ever happened to blooey, he's much missed

 

Perhaps closer to “peachbloom”.

 

Why's the reign mark look so large? I don't think I've seen a seal script mark take up that much space..

 

The better question is Why is the bottom of this vase so small.

 

The cracking in the glaze is a bit troubling to me. Puzzler.

 

does it look like the color has run or the mark has smeared in some way? Along the bottom edge of the mark there is a faint blue line. The characters all along the bottom seem to be smeared or something.

Also the 5 prong character in the lower left. One of the website says only the historic quianlong seals have the five prong, the apocryphal quianlong have three prongs. All the examples I have seen online seem to conform to this rule. But someone else here more knowledgeable than me says that's not a thing. Still its a concern. I will try to find the website that said that.

Also is the seal dead center? Cant tell from the pics.

Also not clear if you mean by "antique" that this piece is actual Quianlong 18th cent piece or apocryphal late 19th early 20th cent.

 

I feel confident that it is over 100 years old but don’t know any more than that. Seal is pretty much dead centre and yes, slight blurring at bottom.

 

if you scroll about 80% of the way down he says "specific advice is helpful such as a real mark should have five prongs..." but says its only a clue. Also mentions that the mark should be dead center and also its size should be in proportion to the size of the vase.

https://antique-marks.com/qianlong-porcelain-marks-on-vases-and-other-art-from-qianlong-period.html

this site about 1/3 of the way down also mentions the issue. Says "A common mistake made in underglaze quianlong characters .." and mentions the three prong five prong thing. Then says "this does not always signify authenticity." Making the entire passage unclear as to what is meant:

https://www.igavelauctions.com/blog...ction-to-chinese-qing-dynasty-porcelain-marks

 

Thanks very much for this.

 

if its blurred on the bottom does that not signify that the mark is stamped? Also the lines on your mark seem to be consistent in opacity whereas most of the marks I see there is toning, darker and lighter sections to the lines. Perhaps thats relevant.

 

also the way its smeared. Along the left side of the mark there seem to be two "jets" or streaks pointing to the left. One at the top and one at the bottom. Those seem so regular straight and parallel to one another that it suggests a mechanical stamper to me.

 

My feeling after a day or so and after reading all the helpful comments is that the mark is most probably stamped (not necessarily mechanically). The shape is unusual and not one found in modern pieces. In fact I’ve only found two pieces in the many hundreds I’ve looked at with this exact shape. I’ve found scores with flared rims. I even took out the colour and searched in black and white.

Both I’ve found in this exact shape were c1800-1850 and I’m inclined to think that mine dates to around then. I’m going to list it on eBay in a few weeks. The experts will certainly find it if it’s earlier. I’m not going to state it is Qianlong.

thanks again for all the help.