- 290
清乾隆 紫檀雕卷草花卉紋坐墩
描述
- bronze
來源
Condition
In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE.
拍品資料及來源
The present stool is exquisitely carved with an elaborate design of delicate blooms and scrolling acanthus leaves displaying European and Mughal decorative influences. Furniture of this high quality was most likely created in the workshops of Beijing. Hu Desheng in A Treasury of Ming and Qing Dynasty Palace Furniture, Beijing, vol. 1, 2008, pp. 38-40, notes the two sources for zitan furniture; the Suzhou-style (Sushi) and the Beijing-style (Jingshi), commenting that the former was renowned for its beautiful forms, elegant lines, lucid construction, balanced proportions and intricate decoration.
During the mid-18th century, European technology and design was much favored by the Qing imperial court. Jesuit artists were employed at the court to redesign the imperial palaces. The result was a distinctive blending of Italian Rococo, French rocaille, and Mughal-inspired foliate designs as seen on the present stool but tempered by a refined subtlety and balance intrinsic to the Chinese aesthetic. Zitan, which is even denser than Huanghuali, provided an exemplary medium for this new sumptuous style. Its durability and hardness allow for slender lines and intricate relief carving which would be lost on other woods. The resinous quality of the wood is ideal for its inherent luster which highlights the elaborate designs. After the forms were made and carved, the furniture would then have been polished as well. Writing on this topic, Tian Jiaqing comments that according to Qing archival records, polishing, carpentry and carving were held in equal regard. According to Tian Jiaqing, there were two types of polishers, mofu, who looked after the daily household polishing and more simple forms and mogu who were responsible for the finer, more elaborately carved pieces of furniture such as the present example. A type of rush, known as jiejiecao or muzei was repeatedly and vigorously rubbed over the surface by hand to bring up the luster and highlight the fine carving. For further reading see the complete article, Tian Jiaqing, 'The Art of Decorative Carving on Qing Dynasty Furniture', Orientations, May 1996, pp. 49-53.
Only one other example of this identical form is known and illustrated in Zitan The Most Noble Hardwood, Hong Kong 1996, pp. 18-19 and sold at Christie's Hong Kong, 27th November 2007, lot 1674. Two stools of related form and decoration are retained in the Palace Museum, Beijing. One is illustrated in Hu Deshang, A Treasury of Ming & Qing Dynasty Palace Furniture, vol. 1, Beijing, 2008, pl. 156, and the other in Tian Jiaqing, Classic Chinese Furniture of the Qing Dynasty, Hong Kong, 1996, no. 14. A related stool was sold in these rooms, 17th March 2015, lot 205.