A blue and white globular 'dragon' vase (Tianqiuping), Seal mark and period of Qianlong | 清乾隆 青花穿花龍紋天球瓶 《大清乾隆年製》款

Acquired in Paris, circa 1985.

__________________________________________________________________________

約1985年得自巴黎

Of enormous size and globular form, the present tianqiuping is a rare and extraordinary symbol of imperial might and the grandeur of the Qianlong court. Their rounded bodies said to resemble the spherical planets of the night’s sky (tianqiu), vases of this remarkable form have long been considered symbols of imperial legitimacy and physical manifestations of an emperor’s Mandate of Heaven. Produced at the start of the illustrious Qianlong period (1735-1795), the present vase is no exception. Swirling with a rare and vibrant imperial design, the piece stands as a testament to the unmatched creativity and craftsmanship of the imperial kilns in the early Qianlong period and the watchful supervision of Superintendent Tang Ying (1682–1756).

In form and decoration, the present tianqiuping makes a conspicuous nod to celebrated prototypes from the early Ming dynasty. Employed in the Neiwufu (Imperial Household Department) in the Forbidden City from the age of sixteen, Tang Ying exposed himself to the vast range of forms and designs preserved in the Qing court collection – including Ming tianqiuping – and soon developed an essential understanding of the vision and taste of the Qianlong Emperor. From its swirling lotus scrolls, rendered boldly to simulate the ‘heaping and piling’ of early cobalt pigments; to the crashing waves around the neck and foot – a celebrated motif from the Yongle reign (1403-1424) – the present vase highlights the familiarity Tang and his potters must have had with a small number of Ming prototypes. Compare, for example, a related pair of blue and white tianqiuping from the Yongle reign, strikingly painted with large dragons among lotus scrolls, preserved in the Qing court collection and almost undoubtedly known to the Qianlong potters, now preserved in the National Palace Museum, Taipei (accession nos gu ci 01142 and 011423), and included (in part) in the Museum’s exhibition Mingdai chunian ciqi tezhan / Special Exhibition of Early Ming Period Porcelain, Taipei, 1982, cat. no. 5.

Similar Ming prototypes were first recreated – likely also with Tang Ying’s guidance – during the reign of the preceding Yongzheng Emperor but, being for the most part direct imitations, they neither capture the strength of the original designs, nor are they infused with the vibrancy of Qianlong examples. Compare three Yongzheng examples of this type from the Qing court collection, still preserved in Beijing, published in The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum. Blue and White Porcelain with Underglazed Red (III), Shanghai, 2000, including pl. 81, depicting the dragon amongst lotus scrolls; pl. 102, with the dragon incised and reserved in white; and pl. 197, with the dragon painted in copper-red. The dragons on these Yongzheng vases have all the characteristics found on the Ming period version: three claws and the characteristic blunt nose, strained bulging eyes beneath rich lashes and an especially pronounced antler-form horn.

In contrast, while Qianlong artisans clearly also referenced early Ming prototypes when creating their tianqiuping, the present vase is also a testament to their relentless quest for innovation and refinement. Broadening the neck and lifting the shoulders slightly to create a more imposing form, tianqiuping from the Qianlong period are noticeably taller and more grand than their Yongzheng counterparts with a body that tapers down towards the foot, heightening the elegance of the silhouette. 

Swirling around the body of the vase with grace and ferocity, the varied dragons of the present design similarly epitomise the blend of creativity and respect for the past embodied by the Qianlong potters. While many of the dragons depicted on the present vase represent early Qing innovations, similarly represented on contemporaneous porcelain and textiles, others maintain in their rendering a whisper to their roots in the early Ming. The vase features five distinct depictions of dragons, including three with the five claws traditionally associated with the emperor himself, and two others with three claws in homage to the more free-flowing depictions of dragons in the Yuan and Ming dynasties. Similarly, while winged dragons (yinglong) were gradually incorporated into the Qing canon in the Yongzheng and Qianlong periods, featuring prominently on a series of large charger dishes produced for Manchu feasts, they too find their origins in much earlier sources. Compare a prototypical example of yinglong designs on porcelain on a Yongle period jar illustrated in Sotheby’s. Thirty Years in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 2003, pl. 211 and sold in our Hong Kong rooms, 16th May 1989, lot 112; and an example of its interpretation in the early Qing among related floral scrollwork and wave bands on a Yongzheng charger, sold at Christie’s Hong Kong, 29th April 2001, lot 609.

Although the dragons are slightly smaller than those on most Ming and Yongzheng prototypes, they retain their sense of power by wrapping around the vase’s globular body and striding freely among the lotus scrolls, which seem to hover in reverence of the imperial creatures. This treatment and the masterful manipulation of negative space in the overall composition also helps to achieve a sense of balance and harmony in the design; further testament to the refined eye of Tang Ying and his potters.

The present tianqiuping is also remarkable in its use of an extremely rare and early reign mark. As scholar Geng Baochang described in his seminal work Mingqing ciqi jiangding [Appraisal of Ming and Qing porcelain], Hong Kong, 1993, pp 182-3, marks of this type – featuring ‘a quite fresh type of seal script with round and soft strokes at turning points’ – are among the earliest in the Qianlong repertoire and are attested on only a handful of pieces produced under the supervision of Tang Ying. Indeed, relying on notes preserved in the Palace Records, scholars have suggested that this mark was likely only applied to select wares produced for the Emperor between 1737 and 1747, before the advent of the more commonly attested zhuanshu reign mark. Compare three other attested examples of this coveted mark: a closely related tianqiuping decorated with three copper-red dragons, in the Palace Museum, Beijing, illustrated in the Complete Collection (III), op. cit., pl. 211; another blue and red tianqiuping, most recently sold at Bonhams New York, 17th March 2025, lot 24; and an extremely closely related blue and white hu-form vase from the collection of Francis Capel Harrison (1863-1938), most recently sold at Christie’s Hong Kong, 3rd June 2015, lot 3128. The Harrison vase, formerly on loan to the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, in 1903 and 1905, and sold in our London rooms, 9th November 2005, lot 327 (fig. 1), features a strikingly similar design of varied three- and five-clawed dragons swirling amidst lotus scrolls, wave borders and lotus lappets framing the design. While porcelain orders from this early period have yet to be decoded in detail, it is highly likely that the producers of the Harrison vase were closely aware of – if not personally responsible for – the production of the present vase, rendered in almost exactly the same hand.

To date, no other tianqiuping of this extraordinary design appear to survive. Compare a related pear-shaped vase of Qianlong mark and period decorated with a very closely related design of five dragons, scrolling lotuses and waves sold in our Hong Kong rooms, 8th April 2011, lot 3106. For similar Qianlong tianqiuping – likely of slightly later date – decorated more closely in line with Ming prototypes with two dragons amidst lotus scrolls, compare an example sold in our London rooms, 18th June 1968, lot 53; another from the Naval and Military Club and Jingguantang Collections, sold in our Hong Kong rooms, 31st October 1974, lot 184, illustrated in The Tsui Museum of Art. Chinese Ceramics IV. Qing Dynasty, Hong Kong, 1995, pl. 72, and sold again at Christie’s London, 3rd November 1996, lot 553; a third, illustrated in Sotheby's Thirty Years in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 2003, pl. 269 and sold more recently at Christie’s Hong Kong, 27th November 2007, lot 1688; and a fourth from the collection of Carrie H. (1859-1937) and Martin A. (1856-1932) Ryerson and the Art Institute of Chicago, sold at Christie’s New York, 12th September 2019, lot 763.

While not originally associated with the present vase, the accompanying zitan wood stand also appears to have imperial origins. Inscribed with the inspection mark of the Qianlong Emperor (Qianlong yu jian), a description of its original companion – a ‘Zhou dynasty wine vessel decorated with a key-fret design’ (Zhou leiwen yi) – and the character er (‘two’), the present stand appears to exactly correspond with a bronze stembowl recorded in the 1793 addendum to the catalogue of imperial bronzes in the Qianlong collection, Xiqing xujian jiabian, juan 7, p. 42, the present whereabouts of which is apparently unattested.

此器體量恢弘，造型渾圓，為乾隆朝帝王威儀與宮廷壯麗的稀世象徵。其渾圓器形寓意夜空，此類造型自古即被視為皇權正統與天命承傳的具體體現。本品燒造於乾隆盛世之初（1735–1795），為其早期御窯藝術高度之縮影。瓶身飾以罕見且氣勢非凡的帝王圖飾，展現出乾隆初期景德鎮御窯卓越創造力與技藝，亦體現督陶官唐英（1682–1756）在精細監督下達到的工藝高峰。

就造型與紋飾而言，此天球瓶明顯承襲明初經典器例之風格語彙。唐英自十六歲起於紫禁城內務府任職，得以接觸清宮典藏諸多歷代器物，包括明代天球瓶，因而深刻體會乾隆皇帝的審美旨趣與文化理想。瓶身所飾纏枝蓮紋，以濃重筆意模擬早期鈷料濃淡堆疊之效，瓶頸與圈足之翻騰海水紋則源自永樂（1403–1424）一朝經典樣式。此等細節，皆印證唐英與其工匠對明代少數珍罕範本之深刻理解。可參考一對永樂朝青花天球瓶，飾巨龍與纏枝蓮紋，現藏台北國立故宮博物院（故瓷01142 與 011423），並曾於1982年「明代初年瓷器特展」展出，編號5。

此類器型最早於雍正時期再度燒製，應亦由唐英主導，然多為仿製且未能全然捕捉原作神韻，亦少乾隆時期所具有之生動氣韻。可比較北京故宮舊藏雍正朝三例天球瓶，載於《故宮博物院藏文物珍品全集．青花釉裏紅（下）》，上海，2000年，包括圖版81（青花穿花龍紋天球瓶）、圖版102（青花海水白龍紋天球瓶）與圖版197（青花釉裡紅海水龍紋天球瓶）。上述器上龍形皆見三爪設計、圓鈍鼻、鼓脹雙目與鹿角狀角，悉承明代特徵。

相比之下，乾隆時期御匠雖仍取法明初原型，然更致力於創新與形制上的再詮釋。本瓶擴大瓶肩、略高瓶頸，使整體比例更為挺拔宏偉，體現乾隆天球瓶於形制氣勢上遠勝雍正作品。本器龍紋姿態各異，盤旋飛騰，或馳騁蓮葉之間，雄健之中不失雅逸，展現御窯對古典圖像之尊重與再創之精神。所繪五龍中，三龍具五爪，象徵皇權；另二龍為三爪，似為對元、明兩代較為自由龍紋風格的致意。瓶上亦見應龍，該形象於雍正、乾隆時期逐步納入清宮紋樣體系，尤常見於滿洲御宴所用大盤。此一題材可追溯至更早樣式，諸如一永樂朝罐飾應龍紋，載於《蘇富比香港三十年》，2003年，編號211，售於1989年5月16日香港蘇富比，編號112；另見雍正青花海水白龍紋大盤，售於2001年4月29日佳士得香港，編號609。

本器之龍紋雖略小於多數明代、雍正前例，但其騰挪之勢繞瓶旋轉，動感強烈，蓮紋在其間穿插躍動，彷若朝聖般環繞帝龍。整體構圖巧妙留白，虛實相生，層次分明，進一步體現唐英及御匠深厚藝術修養與美學眼光。尤為珍貴者，在於本器所署年款。此款為乾隆早期所用極罕見樣式，如耿寶昌於《明清瓷器鑑定》（香港，1993年，頁182–183）所言，「初期的官窯款識中，還有一種較爲新穎的篆書體，連筆轉折處圓柔」，僅見於唐英督陶時期之少數器例，或僅使用於乾隆二年（1737年）至十二年（1747年）間。可比較北京故宮所藏一件青花釉裏紅三龍天球瓶，載於同書三卷，頁211；另見一件青花釉裏紅龍紋天球瓶，售於2025年3月17日紐約邦瀚斯，編號24；以及Francis Capel Harrison（1863–1938）舊藏的青花蒼龍教子穿蓮紋螭龍耳尊，售於2015年6月3日香港佳士得拍賣，編號3128。此尊曾於1903及1905年借展於牛津阿什莫林博物館，亦先於2005年11月9日倫敦蘇富比拍賣，編號327（圖一）。尊身飾以三爪與五爪龍紋、纏枝蓮紋、海水紋及蓮瓣紋，構圖與本品極為接近，氣勢磅礴。

目前尚無與本品裝飾風格完全一致之天球瓶。可參見一件乾隆款五龍、纏枝蓮與海水紋膽瓶，售於2011年4月8日香港蘇富比，編號3106。另見若干乾隆天球瓶，或為稍晚期製，其風格更接近明代前例，如1968年6月18日倫敦蘇富比編號53；1974年10月31日香港蘇富比編號184，舊藏於海軍與軍官俱樂部與靜觀堂，並載於《徐氏藝術館：陶瓷IV．清代》，香港，1995年，圖版72，後於1996年11月3日佳士得倫敦再度釋出，拍品553；另見《蘇富比香港三十週年》，香港，2003年，圖版269，並於2007年11月27日佳士得香港再上拍，編號1688；以及原凱莉（1859–1937）與馬丁‧ 賴爾森（1856–1932）伉儷舊藏，曾藏於芝加哥藝術博物館，售於2019年9月12日紐約佳士得，編號763。

雖與本器原不屬一組，惟所配紫檀木座同樣極具特色，疑為清宮原製。座面陰刻「乾隆御覽」印記，並題「周雷紋彝」與序號「二」。該座與《西清續鑑甲編》卷七（1793年增補乾隆銅器目錄）頁42所載一件高足青銅彝器記述相符，惟其銅器本體迄未見現藏紀錄。