A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820
Lot 39
A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820
Sold for HK$ 475,000 (US$ 61,236) inc. premium

Lot Details
A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820 A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820 A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820 A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820 A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820 A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820
A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle
Perhaps Imperial, possibly Suzhou, 1736-1820
7.4cm high.

Footnotes

  • Treasury 1, no. 90

    白玉雕仿古鳳紋鼻煙壺
    或御製品,或蘇州,1736~1820

    A white nephrite 'phoenix' snuff bottle

    Nephrite of pebble material with small areas of skin; well hollowed, with a recessed foot; carved with an identical design on each side of two formalized, archaistic fenghuang facing each other, their tails and the edges of one wing of each joined, with two raised bosses between them, the foot inscribed in relief seal script Xiaocun shi zhi ('Made by/for Mr. Xiaocun')
    Possibly imperial; possibly carved in Suzhou, 1736–1880
    Height: 7.4 cm
    Mouth/lip: 0.5/1.61 cm
    Stopper: coral; pearl finial; vinyl collar

    Condition: workshop condition

    Provenance:
    Robert Hall (1985)

    Published:
    Treasury 1, no. 90

    Exhibited:
    Israel Museum, Jerusalem, 1997

    When viewing this snuff bottle, one may well ask, is why so little of the skin was left visible, since a reduction in the thickness of the bottle of less than a millimetre would have eliminated it entirely? Or, if a skin relief had been intended, why not leave more and make it visually more impressive? The thinness of the few patches of remaining skin seems to rule out the possibility that the artist was merely caught by surprise at the depth of the skin and was unable to remove all of it. What remains sits so shallowly on the surface that a very small amount of extra polishing would have eliminated it so it must have been intentional, in which case we are faced with the opposite conclusion: that far from wanting to remove it, it was essential that at least some skin remain to indicate the pebble origin of the material.

    The value of pebble material is well known and its popularity at the Qing court is proven by the high proportion of bottles in the imperial collection in Taipei that are either natural pebble material or white nephrite stained to resemble it. Bottles apparently stained are published in Chang Lin-sheng 1991, nos. 113–115, 129, 159, 161, 164, 165, 206, 207, 209, and 216, some of which have only minimal, token staining, suggesting that a hint was sufficient to convey the spirit of pebble material and, therefore, to some extent, of ancient material.

    The choice made with regard to the skin material on this bottle, then, is very much in tune with imperial aesthetics. The archaistic design is also suggestive of courtly origins. As Yang Boda 1992 shows, the Qianlong emperor explicitly and actively promoted the production of imitations of ancient jades that involved heating the replicas to alter their colour and engraving them with fake carver or collector signatures. As early as the first month of the eighth year of his reign (1743), he decreed as follows:

    Give the two volumes of Kaogu tu to An Ning and Tu La and inform them to reproduce the selected jade items including two pieces of bixie, one piece each of the horse in red jade, horse in black jade, tiger and immortal. Select some eminent carvers to reproduce one piece each of them as close to the recorded measurements as possible. Inscribe the names of the carvers and the collectors of the original pieces onto the reproductions wherever appropriate. Also keep a detailed record of their designs and measurements.

    The Kaogu tu ('Illustrations for the Study of Antiques') was a regular source-book of ancient design at the Qing court. An Ning and Tu La served at the imperial Silk Manufactory at Suzhou, through which locally-made jade carvings were ordered for the court. The pixie is a class of mythical animal sometimes translated into English as a chimera. Eleven months later, three of the pieces ordered were presented to the emperor for his approval. His further instructions were noted:

    Bake the white jade immortal and horse to create some stains so they look like the Han jades and make an elegant stand for each of them.

    Yang Boda also records that the next day he further decreed that all future productions of white jade immortals and horses should be antique-finished to the colour recorded in the Kaogu tu. The reference to baking refers to the process of staining jade, apparently undertaken with a mixture of pigment and heat.

    From these records we learn that the Qianlong emperor was so fond of ancient
    materials that he went to the trouble of staining white jade to simulate it, and that he also approved the addition of false marks.

    Throughout his life, the Qianlong emperor was almost obsessively interested in the art of jade carving. He is on record as having personally examined every single item of jade either made to his order or presented to him, which apparently ran into the tens of thousands (about twenty thousand of which remain in the Palace Museum in Beijing, according to Yang Boda, quite apart from those in Taipei). He exerted enormous influence over the jade-carving industry of China during the eighteenth century, an influence that Yang believes created a Qianlong style that persisted into the twentieth century.

    We have suggested the possibility of a Suzhou provenance, albeit very tentatively, for reasons other than the fact that An Ning and Tu La were based in Suzhou. The style of the signature is typical of Suzhou both in the relief, the choice of script and its formalization. Very few Suzhou carvers signed their works but, as far as we know, none from Beijing did so during the Qing period. Another Suzhou carver who signed his name was the Kangxi carver Zhiting (see Watt 1980, nos. 216 and 217, and here, discussion under no. 122).

    In Treasury 1, we revealed some uneasiness with the name on the bottom, for shi is ordinarily used with a family name, and Xiaocun is not a Chinese family name. But in fact, shi can be used with a sobriquet as well, and there are several Qing-dynasty figures who called themselves Xiaocun. We shall mention the two most socially prominent of them, on the theory that they would be able to tap into the network that supplied imperial snuff bottles. The first is Zhou Ming'en (1799 --?), a jinshi of 1832. He apparently was awarded the jinshi degree as a native of Dantu (Zhenjiang, across the Yangzi from Yangzhou), but he is generally listed as a native of Daxing (now part of Beijing). We do not have extensive details about his career, but his posts included junior compiler in the Hanlin Academy, assistant examining official, and censor. The second is Shao Youlian (d. 1901), who had served with the Qing mission that went to Russia in 1878 to negotiate Russian withdrawal from the parts of Chinese Turkestan it had occupied in 1871; in 1882—1886, he was in charge of the circuit that included Suzhou, Songjiang, and Shanghai. Herbert Giles (1845 – 1935) stated in his Biographical Dictionary (1898), 'As taot'ai at Shanghai he proved himself an obstructive of the worst type, and in spite of his European experiences an inveterate enemy to the foreigner'; but then, Giles (as British vice consul at Shanghai) and Shao had taken opposite positions in a protracted legal battle. Between Zhou Ming-en and Shao Youlian, we would have to favour Zhou as living at a time when a snuff bottle of this style was more likely to have been carved, even though Shao probably spent far more time in the Suzhou area. It is also possible that Shao added his name to an older bottle.

    As a work of art this bottle flies in the face of the established wisdom that the snuff bottle is better viewed in the hand. Up close, the marginally less than perfect finish leaves an undulating ground with some carving marks still showing that become slightly confused with the archaistic detail on the relief design. From a distance of a foot or more, however, it suddenly comes into its own, with the relief design visually separating from the ground plane and becoming far more powerful.

    白玉雕仿古鳳紋鼻煙壺

    卵石料閃玉,有石皮;掏膛完整, 斂底;兩正面雕一對對稱的仿古鳳凰,每對中間浮雕半圓球形枚;壺底有"小村氏製",陽刻篆款。
    或許為御製品,也許是在蘇州雕的,1736–1901
    高﹕ 7.4 厘米
    口經/唇經: 0.5/1.61 厘米
    蓋: 珊瑚;珍珠頂飾,乙烯基座

    狀態敘述﹕出坊狀態

    來源﹕
    羅伯特.霍爾 (1985)

    文獻﹕
    Treasury 1, 編號90

    展覽﹕
    Israel Museum, 耶路撒冷,1997年

    說明﹕
    雕本壺時,雕匠只保存了薄薄的卵石皮,好像是為了表明石料的性質。毫無疑問,清廷很重視卵石料,甚至皇家珍藏中有不少 沁染和烤染的白玉器, 如張臨生 1991, 編號 113–115, 129, 159, 161, 164, 165, 206, 207, 209 及 216。有時候,只有一點點的赭黃斑紋表達卵石皮的氣魄就夠了,如這這件天然石子形狀鼻煙壺。

    就仿古風尚來說,楊伯達1993a引《養心殿造辦處各偢成就活計清檔》,1743年正月,太監高玉、胡世杰交《考古圖》二本﹕
    奉旨﹕將《考古圖》二交與安寧、圖拉[楊伯達按﹕二人均系蘇州織 造],安圖上選定的玉辟邪二件、璊玉馬一件、玄玉驄一件、玉虎一件、仙人一件,共六件,著爾等尋好玉工勉力照圖上記載之尺寸各仿舊作一件。做得時其玉上系何人成做,何人收藏之處,爾等酌量將古人名字刻於其上,圖樣並尺寸記載一一詳細記下......欽此
    同年十一月,胡世杰、張玉交白玉仙人一件、白玉馬一件﹕"傳旨﹕將白玉仙人、白玉馬俱燒漢玉,配文雅座";翌日﹕"將做來白玉人、白玉馬照《考古圖》內顏色燒造。欽此"。

    這種鼻煙壺反應宮廷的審美標準,是因為是給宮廷作的還是因為宮廷的審美標準在那時是很有勢力的,很難說。關於蘇州來源的可能性,底款在字形、書體、浮雕各方面,都是典型的蘇州款式。

    在寫Treasury 1 的論述時,我們覺得底款的"氏"字有點不對勁兒,因為"小村"不是漢族的姓。現在我們了解到了,"某某氏"的號也是有的, 而清代有些人號小村。其中有兩人社會上的地位比較高,他們或許能借用御用作坊的藝匠給自己作玉鼻煙壺。第一位是周銘恩,1799生,1832進士。周銘恩的號也作筱村。他是丹徒進士,好像原籍丹徒,但他也稱為順天大興人。他先 後任翰林院編修、副考官、御史等職。第二位是邵友濂(1901卒)。1878年,他隨崇厚出使俄國,1882—1886年間,他任蘇松道道臺,英國駐上海的副領事翟理思很討厭他。無論述如何,周銘恩在世時,這種煙壺製作的可能性較大;邵友濂去蘇州的機會應該是比較多的,但他的活躍時期有點太晚。如果本壺屬於他,可能是他是在舊壺上加自己的號的。


Auction information

This auction is now finished. If you are interested in consigning in future auctions, please contact the specialist department. If you have queries about lots purchased in this auction, please contact customer services.

Buyers' Obligations

ALL BIDDERS MUST AGREE THAT THEY HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD BONHAMS' CONDITIONS OF SALE AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THEM, AND AGREE TO PAY THE BUYER'S PREMIUM AND ANY OTHER CHARGES MENTIONED IN THE NOTICE TO BIDDERS. THIS AFFECTS THE BIDDERS LEGAL RIGHTS.

If you have any complaints or questions about the Conditions of Sale, please contact your nearest customer services team.

Buyers' Premium and Charges

For all Sales categories excluding Wine:

Buyer's Premium Rates
25% up to HKD800,000 of the Hammer Price
20% from HKD800,001 to HKD15,000,000 of the Hammer Price
12% over HKD15,000,000 of the Hammer Price.

Shipping Notices

For information and estimates on domestic and international shipping as well as export licences please contact Bonhams Shipping Department.

Contacts
  1. Vincent Wu
    Auction Administration - Chinese Paintings
    Bonhams
    Work
    Suite 2001, One Pacific Place
    Hong Kong
    Work + 852 3607 0016
  2. Meilin Wang
    Specialist - Chinese Paintings
    Bonhams
    Work
    Suite 2001, One Pacific Place
    Hong Kong
    Work +852 2918 4321
    FaxFax: +852 2918 4320
Similar Items