Liao To Ming Dynasty Nephrite Cup With Pseudomorphs, Part One
Exquisite Two Dragon Cup With Pseudomorphs
Liao to Ming Dynasty Period
6 Cm Height X 13 Cm Width X 7 Cm Depth
Ronald Edwin Prosser Estate Collection Two Dragon Nephrite Jade Cup
Pseudomorphs Showing On Inside Of The Two Dragon Cup
We have chosen this phenomenal Nephrite Jade Cup, from the Ronald Edwin Prosser Estate Collection, to demonstrate not only the archaistic beauty achieved by later Dynastic carvers, but also to point out some aspects of Burial Jades which, to the best of our knowledge, have not been written about at length, and are outside the mainstream of common knowledge on the subject. While we will, throughout the article, be making references to other well-known jade authors, collections and museums, it is not our intent to harm, chastise, or berate in any way the marvelous pieces or authors and researchers involved. It is our intent to help add to the knowledge bank, and to do our part in furthering the research on Jade and Jadeite from both archeological and geological standpoints. We shall also attempt to show why we believe the obscure dragon design on this vessel, and the accompanying nephrite chosen for its construction, should bear out an earlier stylistic dating than what some have written thus far. As with many things, it is a matter of opinion only, and not to be taken as ‘gospel’, but we hope it does stimulate the ‘jade community’ to investigate further.
The unusually wide range (for us) in dating of the Octagonal Two-Dragon Cup is due to the fact that somewhere in our thousands of volumes of research material, we have seen an exact duplicate design of this cup, with a dating to the Liao Dynasty (907-1125 CE) of Northern China. After searching for a week through thousands of photographs (we thought it was in The Complete Collection Of Jades Unearthed In China – Gu Fang), we have yet to re-find it. If any person out there who reads this article and knows of this other cup (it will look like an exact mate and very possibly is, octagonal and with two dragons), please write to admin@timelessjade.com, and we will review it and revise this article. However, being stated as Liao to Ming Dynasty, we personally believe the design to be towards the earlier dating, both from a stylistic point of view and by what we have discovered under microscopic conditions, after first cleaning the item of all waxes and residues from its obvious re-polishing and re-patina-ing.
It is a well-known design change toward the rendition of dragons in general which occurred around one thousand years ago, in both jade and pottery designs during the Liao and Song Dynasties. The major changes to previous renditions are of more ‘flowing’ dragon with longer tails, arm and legs. While some items from the Han Dynasty reflect these same attributes, as can be easily verified in the aforementioned volumes of burial jades from China, we see a more consistent approach toward this ‘sinuousness’ in the dragon designs which follow old Han Dynasty models. In this Jade Vessel we find the lengthening of the appendages but with a much more ‘ridged’ approach than came be more commonly found throughout the Song Dynasty and into the Ming Dynasty. While one famous museum talks of the their piece as possibly being a late Qing Dynasty work (we will reference this a little later), we believe the cup should undergo a further analysis, as we find, in our opinion, the reasoning behind their stylistic dating technique to be possibly flawed, and the science used to determine its dating as lacking.
Lengthening Of The Appendages On Prosser Collection's Dragon Cup
Bottom Of The Prosser Collection Jade Cup Showing Octagonal Foot Rim, Complimenting The Cup's Shape
The stone for this marvelous cup was surely chosen for its intrinsic mottled beauty, and the Chinese knew well the Pseudomorphs in Nephrite Jade from the Khotan-Hetian Region (as is obvious from the over three-thousand year-old Collared Disc, shown in Book 13, Page 26 of The Complete Collection Of Jades Unearthed In China, and can be seen in many other Shang Dynasty pieces in the same book). Nephritic material, such as that in the cup above, is known to have been used intentionally during the Song Dynasty, as it closely resembles, in color and texture, some objects they were unearthing from the Han Dynasty tombs a thousand years before. The Song Dynasty Jades often reflect their reverence of the old designs, and it would seem most likely the Northern Kingdom of the Liao Dynasty would also imitate in their own manner, much the same as the Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasty archaistic jades. It follows the pattern set down through successions of periodic ancestor worship when the teachings of the Tao and Confucianism were at their height. With the longer bodies and sinuous bifurcated tails worked into the cup in high relief, with the deep piercing, the dragons on the Prosser Collection cup appear to have some, if not all of the properties described in Plate 164 of the book Later Chinese Jades – Ming To Early Twentieth Century, from The Asian Art Museum in San Francisco, and dated most likely to the period of the 19Th Century. However, while the deeper piercing might indicate this later date for their beautiful cup, other examples of deeply pierced designs were not uncommon in earlier Dynastic periods. Coupled with the likelihood that their cup was also re-polished, as was the cup above (indicated in the much rougher area to be seen underneath the dragon on their cup, which most likely received less re-polishing), it might be wise to re-evaluate their single-dragon cup, after the removal of any wax or other coatings it might have received after its re-polishing. This would allow a much greater opportunity to study the original tooling marks which may well underlie the re-polishing marks. The description for this single dragon cup also mentions a rough finish to the interior as being an indication of a Ming Dynasty date, which to our way of thinking falls more into the degradation aspect and re-polishing facet. To make blanket statements about Ming Dynasty rough finishes flies directly into the face of the fact that many Ming Dynasty jade artifacts were as finely made and polished as some of the finest pieces known to have been made in the famous Qianlong Era of the Qing Dynasty (see The Complete Collection Of Jades Unearthed In China for numerous examples). We believe, as we see everyday in both old artifacts and modern jade carvings, a differing degree of skill and polishing from one artist to another. For further review of this concept, one can also realize the great discrepancies in every period of jade and stone workmanship simply by studying the examples unearthed in China, and even from the exact same tombs. From examples found in the Marquis Yi’s tomb alone in Book 10 of The Complete Collection Of Jades Unearthed In China, the stunning difference in quality of workmanship is staggering. We also feel this most wonderful series of books may expose some of the most unrecognized flaws in archeological dating, such as the well-known fact that literally millions of Chinese people have loved to collect, study, revere, and then be buried with their older treasures; whether a piece was left unfinished because of time restraints, and buried with the deceased, or simply came from a more remote region with unrefined carvers, are among other possibilities for explanations of dating challenges.
This is the major problem (in our opinion) with relying almost entirely on stylistic approaches for dating and authentication purposes, when it is truly the original tooling marks that would better define the item’s correct place in history, along with at least a cursory study of the artifact and likely conditions of burial, based on microscopic analysis of both the stone and the old and newer tooling marks. Even while not having been there when an artifact was made and buried, some logical conclusions can still be ascertained, if one takes the time and preparation to access it with care and a certain degree of understanding. If an item was dyed, how and when was it dyed? Older dyes are not removed with solvent while modern ones are easily removed, and what lies beneath can be readily identified, as is often the case in restoration of an old artifact – it takes on a kind of ‘individual license’, as some are dyed and some are not. Sometimes the dyes and fire treatments are used to hide a repaired original crack in an original highly-oxidized artifact. Also, while the common ten-power loupes are easier on the eyes, we find they are rarely of much use in authenticating an older re-cut and re-polished jade artifact.
The similarity between the dragon design on the cup in the Asian Art Museum Of San Francisco collection and the ones on the Prosser Collection cup can be easily discerned. While we will never give a positive date or authentication by photograph alone, it is an extremely common occurrence throughout this industry to not only identify by photograph alone, but even to be so ‘expert’ as to be able to verify items of antiquity from 6 feet away, and whether they are in original condition, restored or reproduction. Sadly, we do not possess such ‘abilities’, and have to rely on more direct (aka scientific, and verifiable) methods, with both artifacts and reproductions. We feel this should be standard practice throughout the industry, given the numerous factors involved and the variety of methods of production, and reproduction, of such items of art of antiquity.
Side View Of One Of The Dragons And Variegated Type Of Grey Nephrite Used
All Above Photographs Taken With Canon EOS XSi Using Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Lens USM
Macro Lens Photograph Of Pseudomorphs & Chip To Rim Of Prosser Collection Cup at 1X
Above Photograph Taken With Canon EOS XSi Using MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Lens
We believe the nephrite jade originally used for this cup was chosen precisely because of its mottled properties, to mimic a true archaic jade from a earlier period. The iron oxides around the pseudomorphs were most likely deposited in the crack separating the morphing quartz crystal from the jade. This was almost surely caused, in this instance, by proximally placed iron-rich burial objects, which are well known from both archaic and later burials. The cracks around the pseudomorphing quartz crystals most likely were caused by what we have heard called ‘the alpha – beta stages’ of a growing quartz (explained in an earlier article on this site on pseudomorphs). As referred to before, this jade cup has been cleaned of all waxes by soaking in acetone for over three weeks, and then cleaned with our high pressure water gun. What is left is all original deposits that have not been sanded away in the restoration process. The reason the iron is so prevalent around the pseudomorph is due to the iron, over long-term burial, actually becoming a part of the whole, as it literally permeates the surfaces as they degrade along with the iron. This is very similar to what sometimes happens when manganese deposits adhere to the surface of stone and pottery items and actually start growing up and out from a central adhesion area. The chip in the viewer’s upper left corner in the second photograph above shows the well known ‘botryoidal’ look of chipped nephrite, and was left untouched in the re-polishing efforts. Veining of iron oxides (as can be seen in the photographs above) occurs over the entire surface of the jade, and is most likely a mixture of deposits inside the natural jade, and intrusions from degrading iron oxides during burial.
For a fine reference of similar stylistic types to the above mentioned jade cups, but from the Ming Dynasty period, please see Ms. Jessica Rawson’s exemplary book Chinese Jade – From Neolithic To The Qing – Part IV, pages 388-389. These marvelous examples, while being close stylistically, in our opinion are a bit more refined in the depiction and carving of the dragons, and to us, better reflect a closer association with Song Dynasty dragon depictions than do the Prosser Collection cup and one in the Asian Art Museum Of San Francisco Collection. As in all things, it is a matter of opinion based on individual conclusions, and not having had the pleasure to view the other collection’s pieces cleaned and under microscopic condition, we can only try to stimulate a hypothesis that perhaps the Prosser Collection cup and the one from the Asian Art Museum Of San Francisco could well be from the same area originally, due to the similarity of design and perhaps be of an older period than the ones in Ms. Rawson’s book.
Note: part two of this series will complete the description and continue with more in-depth Macro and Microscopic photographs.
David Fredericks — Yulongwei