Lot 1133
Treasury 5, no.776 (‘Imperial Command’)
HK$625,000

Translucent yellow glass with scattered groups of small air bubbles of various sizes; with a flat lip and recessed convex foot surrounded by a protruding flattened foot rim; the narrow sides carved with mask-and-ring handles, the foot engraved in seal script, Qianlong yuzhi 乾隆御製 (‘Made by imperial command of the Qianlong emperor’)
Imperial, 1736-1799
Height: 5.68 cm
Mouth/lip: 0.68/1.49 cm
Stopper: tourmaline; vinyl collar

Provenance:
Gerd Lester (1986)

Published:
Antiques World, September 1980, p. 67
Kleiner 1987, no. 64
Arts of Asia, September-October 1990, p.97, fig. 30
Kleiner, Yang, and Shangraw 1994, no. 64
Kleiner 1995, no. 111
JICSBS, Winter 2000, p. 8, fig. 16
Treasury 5, no.776

Exhibited:
Sydney L. Moss Ltd., London, October 1987
Creditanstalt, Vienna, May-June 1993
Hong Kong Museum of Art, March-June 1994
National Museum, Singapore, November 1994-February 1995
British Museum, London, June-October 1995
Israel Museum, Jerusalem, July-November 1997

Among imperial glass of the Qianlong period, this falls short of the finest standards of formal integrity. In cutting in the mask handles, the lapidary has simply reduced the surface height of the area surrounding them, without blending this recession seamlessly into the overall form. This result is a distinct kink, particularly noticeable from the main-side profile, above the animal heads. Looking at the mask-and-ring handles from the narrow-side views, it is also evident that neither handle is centred, nor do they hang straight. Each is sloping downwards at a slight but perceptible angle from right to left. The detailing of the foot also falls short of the confident standard for the best Qianlong palace carving, and has left a foot rim of uneven thickness. Comparison with the perfect formal integrity of Sale 5, lot 107> will demonstrate the higher technical standard that bottle represents in terms of lapidary work.

With this technical shortcoming as a clue, we can consider the glass itself. The range of different yellows produced at court was fairly wide, but there is a slightly greenish tint to this one, with greater transparency and more visible air bubbles in comparison to Sale 1, lot 70 and Sale 5, lot 107, both of which can reasonably be attributed to the imperial glassworks. Given the extraordinary skills of the lapidaries at the command of the Qianlong emperor right through to the end of his reign, we can only assume that if this were produced at the imperial glassworks, it was intended to test the work of a new carver. Otherwise, the answer may be that it was ordered elsewhere. This may represent wild speculation given the shortage of clues at our disposal, but it is worth considering.

This is not the Sotheby’s sale catalogue. This is a product of Hugh Moss for the purposes of this website. For the catalogue details please refer to Sotheby’s website or request a copy of a printed sale catalogue from Sotheby’s.