Footnotes

Treasury 5, no. 929


白地寶藍料套鼻煙壺
推定為御用玻璃廠作，北京，1720～1760


Floating Ruyi

Transparent sapphire-blue and semi-transparent milky glass, extensively crizzled on the interior surface; with a flat lip and recessed, slightly convex foot surrounded by a protruding flat footrim; carved as a single overlay with a continuous design of two kui dragons, one disposed on each main side, above a band of formalized lotus petals and beneath a band of formalized lingzhi heads
Attributed to the imperial glassworks, Beijing, 1720–1760
Height: 5.71 cm
Mouth/lip: 0.75/1.32 cm
Stopper: pearl; coral collar
Condition: small shallow chip in upper neck and into lip; miniscule further abrasions to inner and outer lip, visible only with magnification and not obtrusive; two small chips and minor abrasions to inner and outer footrim slightly trimmed, barely visible to the naked eye and not obtrusive; other tiny, irrelevant nibbles to relief in places, and signs of extensive wear and scratching, but all repolished at some time in the past, partly hiding it all. General relative condition: good


Illustration: watercolour by Peter Suart

Provenance:
Robert Hall (London, 1987)

Published:
Hall 1987, no. 44
Kleiner, Yang, and Shangraw 1994, no. 101
Treasury 5, no. 929

Exhibited:
Robert Hall, London, October 1987
Hong Kong Museum of Art, March-June 1994
National Museum, Singapore, November 1994-February 1995

Commentary:
In certain instances the indications of an imperial attribution are so convincing that practically no further corroboration is necessary. This typically imperial archaistic design is a good example, such archaistic designs being typical of the eighteenth century palace workshops. Yang Boda, with his extensive knowledge of the archives and the imperial collection in Beijing, informs us that archaic forms, decorative motifs and styles were adopted as standards for Qing imperial production from the Kangxi period onwards. They were also embraced with a particular passion by the Qianlong emperor (see Yang Boda 1992). Here, however, we find corroborating evidence in the shape of extensive crizzling on the interior surface of the bottle. Given the milky colour of the ground this is unexpected, since whatever turned colourless glass white also seems to have inhibited crizzling. This suggests the first half of the eighteenth century as a likely date, and although a late Kangxi date is also possible, the most probable date is a little later. Our problem in identifying pre-Qianlong snuff bottles is the scarcity of reign-marked examples to provide comparative data, although the relatively wide mouth here does allow an early dating.
The very low relief design here is superbly laid out and exquisitely well carved. The style is derived from archaic jades, upon which sculpted surfaces are detailed with engraved lines, thus to some extent disguising the supreme artistic confidence behind a simple style. A clue to the level of artistic commitment, however, is provided by the carving of the formalized lotus petals round the base, which are executed in a rare and distinctive manner. Perfectly laid out and balanced, a groove is cut round the inside edge of each petal, extending right down to the ground plane to leave a defining white line separating the inner and outer portion. Each of these is then carefully detailed, the outer one being cut with a concave groove all round, the inner area carved with a central, vertical ridge. Of superlative quality, this is surely among the most impressive of all lotus-petal borders in the lapidary arts. Another touch speaking eloquently of artistic flair is to be found in the separation of this lotus-petal border from the footrim by means of another engraved line, which barely reaches the lower plane of colour. The other bottle in the collection to display this unusual detail, Treasury 5, no. 920, is also early, crizzled and attributable with some confidence to the imperial glassworks. In that case, the corresponding line creates a perfect foil for the emphatic lines of the petals themselves, but is still barely necessary. The shoulder border may be discerned as equally well finished, each line carefully grooved to make it even more intriguing.

The upper shoulders and neck, although strangely blank, work well artistically but are sufficiently surprising to raise a query whether further decoration might not have been removed. In a Lingzhi-head border of this sort one would expect the upper lines of the pattern, where they peter out, to have been joined to create a continuous design. The natural patination of tiny, random scratches, however, is both distinctive and evenly spread over the surface of the bottle, proving that no such surgery has taken place recently. Indeed, we find proof it has never taken place in that the grooves in the lines defining the lingzhi-head motifs stop short neatly before the end of the blue overlay. Had these grooves ever been continuous, surgery would have cut through them, whereas in each case it is evident where the spinning wheel engraving the lines stopped short, tapering off as such wheel-cut lines must.

We have explained the longevity symbolism of extended bodies on these dragon motifs under Treasury 5, no. 822. The lotus and lingzhi design communicates a meaning similar to that of the lotus and chrysanthemums. Although the pun on the name of the chrysanthemum - which is rich in symbolic significance but here denotes longevity - is replaced by the longevity symbolism of the lingzhi, the meaning remains: 'Conducive to prolonging life' (yannian yishou). When the lingzhi is read as a ruyi (the formalized head of a lingzhi forms the head of the standard ruyi sceptre, allowing this substitution), then combined with the lotus (lian) the meaning becomes: '[May your] wishes come true year after year' (niannian ruyi).'

Once alerted to the original stopper on Treasury 5, no. 828, and enthused by the possibilities of identifying further examples, it is easy to see how a stopper such as this may be, if not the original, then entirely appropriate. While the cork and spoon are obviously later replacements, the stopper itself is old and of lovely materials and accompanied the bottle when it was acquired from Robert Hall in 1987. The large pearl would be ideal upon a bottle made, perhaps, as a gift for the emperor, for which purpose the symbolism would also be appropriate.


靈芝頭飄蟠夔滾

通體乳白色半透明玻璃 ，套飾通明寶藍料；平唇、略凸斂底、突出平底圈足；各正面一層套料雕拐子龍紋，其上雕有靈芝雲頭紋一週，腹近足雕蓮瓣一圈

推定為御用玻璃廠作，北京，1720～1760
高：5.71 厘米
口經/唇經：0.75/1.32 厘米
蓋：珍珠，珊瑚座
狀態敘述：唇與唇緣有缺口，既小亦淺，口沿與唇緣尚呈其他撞痕，肉眼看不見而不引人注目，圈足內外小缺口與不重要的撞痕稍微削減過，肉眼幾乎看不見，不引人注目，套料呈有不緊要的咬痕，也有普遍磨損和擦傷的痕跡，但過去經重新拋光後有所掩飾；一般相對的狀態：良好

有彼德小話 (Peter Suart) 水彩畫

來源：
羅伯特．霍爾（倫敦，1987）
文獻﹕
Hall 1987，編號44
Kleiner, Yang, and Shangraw 1994, 編號101
Treasury 5，編號929
展覽﹕
Robert Hall, 倫敦，1987年10 月
香港藝術館，1994年3 月～6月
National Museum of Singapore, 1994年11月～1995年2 月

說明：
一般來說，擬古的紋飾可算是御製品的指標。可是，楊伯達所謂擬古主義的玉器藝術從明代就開始，乾隆後期為其高潮，後來雖入玉器衰微期，還是維持乾隆期的藝術模式（參閱楊伯達1998，頁78～84）。本壺內壁缺陷，這就表明它作得比較早（這是意外的， 因為玻璃內呈乳白色，而乳白化是與阻止玻璃面的缺陷關聯的），或許是十八世紀前半。康熙年間也是可能的。因為帶乾隆前年款的傳世鼻煙壺太少了，我們缺乏可靠的對比資料，很難推定製作年期。本壺口比較寬，而那也是早期鼻煙壺的指標。

本壺淺浮雕的圖案設計很好，刻藝精緻。仔細地看腹下方所飾的一圈仰蓮瓣的雕法，就能領會刻匠的能力與執著﹕每一朵瓣以細小的凹槽分成內外、比例協調的兩部分，外部中心刻著淺凹槽，內部雕出中脊，刀削明快，實為雕刻藝術界最令人稱絕的蓮瓣紋之一。蓮瓣圈與圈足外壁之間還有一條極其細致的凹槽，幾乎看不見，而它很有效地使硬朗的蓮瓣與全體維持平衡。

腹上方的一圈靈芝雲頭紋也許會讓人疑問，是不是無紋飾的肩部刮掉了連接靈芝雲頭的甚麼花紋？答案是﹕沒有。雖然無紋的肩部的確不平凡，但細看全壺呈現的微小磨損和擦傷的痕跡，肩部和全體的外面狀態是一致的，最近肯定沒有任何"美容手術"。而且，看繪出靈芝雲頭的每一條料，其中心切割砂輪所陰刻的小凹槽未到端點就止，不像把更長的料條切斷，一定會把那條小槽也切了。

本蓋是1987年本壺入伯樂珍藏的時候帶的。座與匙顯然不是原件，但如果這件煙壺曾是進貢給皇帝的，錦上添花的珍珠蓋可是恰如其分的。