Reproduction of an ancient vessel

Thanks to a discussion on the old Antiques board a few years ago, I know this is depicting the myth of Atalanta and Meleager. I never figured out what it's made of, though. After the board helped me identify the myth, I found the original online vessel, which was centuries old and had been sold on Christie's.

Does it look like the material is one of those compositions that's resin-based but includes other substances? It's cool to the touch, weighs more than resin normally would, and doesn't feel like plastic. I tried the not needle test on the bottom, but the needle didn't penetrate.

I've never found another one of these in my searches, so assume it was a relatively-limited museum reproduction. Does that sound right?

How would you describe the material in a listing?

 

Alabastrite?

 

Is that even a thing ???

I was going to say some form of concrete....but ????

 

Alabastrite is a new one for me, SIS. Would the bottom look like this or would it be smoother with alabastrite?

It does look like concrete on the bottom so perhaps concrete's mixed in? I don't think it's heavy enough for there to be a lot of conrete, though.

There are little pits here and there in the surface. I don't know if that was done to make it look old, or it's a natural consequence of the process used to create it.

 

If anyone's interested in seeing the original, here's a link...
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/LotDetailsPrintable.aspx?intObjectID=5338671

It's carved ivory and of course a lot nicer than my reproduction.

 

Try hypertufa.

 

It looks like Hydrocal or similar. Hydrocal is harder than plaster but still can be marked with a knife. If this is harder than that, it is probably some kind of cultured stone ( For example marble dust plus resin to create faux marble).

 

Thanks, Bear and Brad. I'm getting the feeling that the mix of materials that went into making this would be hard to pin down. I'm think when I list it I'll just say it appears to be a composite.

That said, I was just tapping the top and inside with my fingernail, and it sounds to me the way pottery sounds when you tap it. More of the puzzle, I guess.

 

I could use help in what to call this? In the Christie's auction they called the original a "beaker" but I honestly don't think that fits.

By definition, a beaker is supposed to have a wide mouth, amd this is actually narrower than the average glass.

Any suggestions on terminology?

 

Why not what you used in this post---ancient vessel?

 

I would call it an "ancient vessel" but I suspect it would be a rare buyer who would search for the word vessel. I might use it in the description, but I think it would be kind of useless as a keyword in the title.

I feel like a total dope... I remembered the discussion on the eBay board from a few years ago, but totally forgot that just this past June I asked about the composition of this piece in Antiquers. I just found the Antiquers thread... via Google. Duh!

I apologize, especially to the members who replied to my query both times!

As for the keywords, after thinking about it more, I'll just use "beaker," too. I imagine this was handled at Christie's by someone who knew the correct terminology, plus they referred to two other originals that apparently were also called "beakers" by the institutions that have them in their collections. I think I can feel safe in trusting their collective judgment.

Thanks for the help to everyone who posted... both times!

 

When I saw the original post, I expected a boat.

 

Lol! That makes sense for Steersman.