拍品 138
  • 138

元末/明初 剔紅花卉紋大盤

估價
400,000 - 600,000 GBP
Log in to view results
招標截止

描述

  • Lacquer
of circular form, the shallow rounded sides resting on a short foot, the interior superbly carved in deep relief through the thick red lacquer with a design of flowering branches of peony to the centre, surrounded by chrysanthemum, prunus, another blossoming fruit tree, camellia, another kind of peony, prunus, pomegranate, viburnum or hydrangea, gardenia and lotus accompanied by arrow-head, blade-like leaves of wild rice and three-petalled blooms of big floating heard, each plant carefully picked out with incised details, all reserved on a yellow ground, the underside similarly carved, the base lacquered in dark brown, incised Zhang Cheng mark

來源

大維德爵士(1892-1964年)伉儷收藏
倫敦蘇富比1962年5月29日,編號173(650英鎊)
Bluett & Sons,倫敦
Percy D. Krolik 收藏
倫敦蘇富比1970年2月24日,編號77(1,900英鎊)
Spink & Son,倫敦
L.A Basmadjieff 收藏
倫敦蘇富比1972年3月14日,編號36(1,600英鎊)

展覽

《The Arts of the Ming Dynasty》,東方陶瓷學會展覽,倫敦,1957年,編號227

出版

Fritz Low-Beer,〈Lacquer of the Ming Dynasty〉,《Oriental Art》,卷4,第1期,1958年春季,頁13,圖1
B. J. St. M. Morgan, 〈Carved Lacquer in the Krolik Collection〉,《Oriental Art》,卷13,第4期,1967年冬季,頁251,圖1

Condition

This important and rare dish is generally in good condition, but does have some condition issues relating to its age: There are two long cracks running to the interior, one in an arc to the upper section (approximately 37cm long), and one to the lower section (approximately 23cm long). There is also some lighter cracking to the yellow ground to the right of the central flower that does cross over various branches in this area. There is also a further crack to the yellow ground at 5 O'clock that outlines a flower head and runs though the top section of the lower petal and past it through an adjacent leaf. There is also a small chip to the lacquer to this same flower and minor nibbles to the central flower, the top flower and some others throughout. There are five areas of chipped lacquer and areas of loss to the lower area of the dish at 6 O'clock, which equate with larger than expected areas of no lacquer. There are characteristic cracks running through the rim of the dish, the largest at 6 O'clock which also runs approx. 6.5cm along the rim and joins with another crack running over the rim, there is an associated chip to a flower to the exterior rim just below this. There is another crack running approx. 6.5cm along the rim at 9O'clock, which also has an associated area of lacquer loss to the exterior rim of approx. 1cm by 2mm. There is also a V-shaped crack to the rim at 1O'clock that covers an area of approximately 5cm. There is a small area (approx. 2cm long) of loss to the lacquer to the exterior just below the rim at 2O'clock and a chip to a leaf in the same area at just below 3'Oclock and another, smaller chip to a flower just below 5O'clock and another to a leaf at 7O/clock. There is an approx. 19cm long crack running along the base of the foot rim at 12O'clock and another smaller one approx. 10cm one at 6O'clock.There are also three or four bruises to the lacquer to the footrim to the uppers section and some minor ones in various areas. There are also four light cracks running through the footrim to the lower section. There is also some light horizontal cracking to the base. It should also be noted that there is some warping to the dish.
"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. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."

拍品資料及來源

明辨善鑒:大維德爵士舊藏雕漆大盤

康蕊君


本盤珍罕瑰麗,製於中國雕漆工藝巔峰時期,並屬該時期菁華臻例。盤身花卉刻劃自然,細膩豐美,花葉蜿蜒交錯,佈局精巧諧和,堂皇華麗,而且雕工上乘,尺寸碩大,堪稱一絕。晚元至明初一個世紀,青花瓷器發展長足,南方雕漆則自裝飾工藝演變至宮廷製品,工精藝絕。因青花與雕漆工藝精進,永樂帝用於外交,賞賜來使。然而雕漆工序繁複,難於大量製作,僅靠個別藝匠造詣而成珍器,故同期漆器遠較瓷作為罕。此時期之雕漆藝匠,名號傳至後世,然而個別漆器出自何人,則歷來難辨。

如此碩大之漆盤,與瓷器同始製於元朝,續製於明代,承帝命為宮廷御製,止於宣德。本盤製作上乘,厚施多層漆料,如此工藝,自宣德年後鮮見。本器打磨細潤,紋飾輪廓渾圓柔雅,屬該時期特質,然而紋飾繁縟精美,活潑生動,則卓越於同期漆作。盤通體飾十數品種花卉植物,綴綻放花枝,絲絲互扣,枝葉高低穿插,三種紋飾層層覆蓋,佈局精妙,豐富多姿,滿飾全器,同時可見紋飾下黃漆地,如庭院繁花盛放,欣欣向榮。

本器底,針刻《張成造》款。張成,曹昭洪武二十一年著《格古要論》有述:「元末西塘楊匯有張成楊茂剔紅最得名」,西塘位於嘉興府,今上海西南(大維德爵士,1971年,頁146及頁303,圖42a)。二人雖各有帶款珍品傳世,然而王世襄認為楊茂工藝似難及張成(王世襄,1987年,頁18)。仿製品早已有之,於《格古要論》亦有論及,後人先製器,再加《張成造》款,故時至今日,眾學者仍不願定斷漆器為張成親製,甚至連張氏雕漆風格實際如何,亦鮮有定論。

北京故宮博物院收藏一梔子花紋小盤,多份出版均斷為張成製,清宮舊藏,錄《故宮博物院藏文物珍品大系:元明漆器》,香港,2006年,圖版3;另比較一蓋盒,帶張成款,並刻元朝官方文書文字八思巴文款,故可斷代元朝無疑,錄於《中國漆藝二千年》,香港東方陶瓷學會,香港中文大學文物館,香港,1993年,編號34。

張成,元代工匠,至洪武年間應仍健在,或享壽至永樂早年。1685年嘉興縣誌記載,永樂帝聞張成藝絕,召其進宮,唯張已歿。張成有子張德剛,繼承父業,遂進京,任工部營繕所副使。據霍吉淑述,果園廠為京城御用漆器作坊,1410年代啟用,由張德剛掌管,製珍品多件。英國維多利亞與艾伯特博物館收藏一雕漆桌,帶宣德款,即出自果園廠(Clunas 及 Harrison-Hall ,2014年,頁107)。

張成雕漆絕藝,由晚元起製器,其子張德剛應續製至永樂、以至宣德年間。由於子承父藝,故雕漆器由晚元至早明風格發展無間,而此時期漆器斷代未可更為精確,皆因此淵源。考慮如此背景,或可推斷,帶張成款及永樂、宣德款之同款或相近漆器,或別具重要性,本盤正為一例:另參考一盤,尺寸更大,紋飾風格相同,唯刻永樂、宣德二款,現存於牛津阿什莫林博物館(圖1,見下)。

觀察帶御款之雕漆器,可推斷永樂雕漆風格,然而洪武雕漆作坊,後人則所知不詳。《格古要論》著於洪武年間,其中全章論述雕漆,唯斷代洪武之雕漆仍極罕。明宮舊檔,記錄永樂帝賜日本足利幕府國禮清單,故可推斷,洪武年間,漆器作坊技術先進。據載,永樂元年至1407年間,明朝共賜足利幕府203件剔紅漆器,其中重器58件賜於永樂元年。記載詳盡,足以斷定數款漆器。

雕漆技藝費工耗時,成品常需數年之久。先層層髹漆至相當厚度,每髹一層,需時日待乾。反復無數,方可始雕,再加修磨,完品可成。如上工序,僅永樂元年幾月之時斷難完工。建文(1399-1402年)一朝甚短,亦不可成,且惠帝曾有詔諭,除必要外,終製他品。永樂元年所賜日本之國禮,記載清晰,綜上可斷當屬洪武一朝所製。

基如上研究,李經澤、胡世昌醫生歸總洪武、永樂雕漆風格,並嘗試辨認多件洪武雕漆(李經澤、胡世昌,2001年及2005-06年)。二人並研究三十餘件漆器,先刻永樂款,後以宣德金款覆之,刻工纖細。其中九件,或帶永樂款、或帶宣德款、或二款同器,均可斷代洪武,包括前述阿什莫林博物館收藏盤例(圖1),以及維多利亞與艾伯特博物館收藏雕漆桌。 二人論述,洪武漆器喜雕四時花卉,而永樂器則僅飾一類,兩者並飾之盤,極其珍罕。

二人認為,永樂漆器成品無款,待自南京運至新都北京,而後加之。正因如此,存世可見洪武器書永樂款,亦可解釋永樂款筆法不似官出之惑,及為何帶張成款之器亦帶纖細針刻年款。關於永、宣二款同器之品,目前尚無確實解論,或因新器製作耗時,故新帝繼任,未及完工,故取成器改款再用。

元代漆器,粗獷豪邁,口沿多帶弦紋,外壁環飾 「屈輪」(「剔犀」)紋飾。明永樂器則依隨宮廷風格,含蓄精細,或用於宮廷,或為國禮,贈外邦元首。 比諸元朝漆器,本盤施工更見嫻熟,相較永樂雕漆,則花卉佈局更為靈動。故此,本品或製於兩期之間,可能斷代洪武。本盤雖不能證實出自張成之手,唯其品質上乘,綜觀風格、落款,皆無理由懷疑非為張製。

與本盤同組之例僅記載只一盤,紋飾相同,尺寸相近,或無款,應屬日本私人收藏,曾展於《特別展東洋の漆工芸》,東京國立博物館,東京,1977年,編號513;除此之外,紋飾相同之例現存僅只另一品,尺寸更大,先刻永樂款,上覆宣德款,出自Beurdeley收藏,現存於牛津阿什莫林博物館,曾售於倫敦蘇富比1980年7月15日,編號211,並曾展於 《明:皇朝盛世五十年》,大英博物館,倫敦,2014年,展覽圖錄圖 87(圖1),圖錄並述,該品最可能斷代洪武。

風格相近之漆器,可參考兩例,分別雕飾牡丹及茶花,尺寸較小,均斷代永樂,錄於《故宮博物院藏文物珍品大系:元明漆器》,前述出處,圖版20及21;尺寸相近之例,可比較一蓋盒,斷代元朝,以及一永樂盤例,亦可參考一宣德盒例及一早明盒蓋,出處同上,圖版6、17、57及 64,皆為清宮舊藏,現存於北京故宮博物院。

本品來源顯赫,先後納入三個重要收藏,包括大維德爵士伉雅蓄,是次乃半世紀內第四度亮相倫敦蘇富比。爵士明辨善鑒,從其現存大英博物館之瓷器珍藏可知。入藏本盤,亦見其前瞻慧眼,領先鑒藏風潮。大維德爵士對款識向來興趣甚濃,本品佳器菁華,上刻署款想必曾能引起其好奇。

六十年前,東方陶瓷學會舉行明代骨董展覽,本盤亦有參展 。Fritz Low-Beer乃當時最頂尖之漆器鑒藏家之一,評此展覽時曾論述:「吾等感謝東方陶瓷學會展出珍藏五十五件漆器珍品。在此之前,明代漆器從未如此矚目亮相英國。業界僅於數年前開始關注此門中國工藝,至今所知甚少,亦未擁有斷代絕對清晰之明代重要漆器,至於漆器屬明代何朝,更加無從入手。」 (Low-Beer,前述出處,頁12)該次展出漆器皆無斷代,唯展覽形容本盤與同組(第一組)漆器「雕刻深邃,十四至十五世紀風格」,(本組漆器)「全屬此早期風格」。以當時而論,推斷頗為大膽。 Low-Beer評述本盤及其他三品,聲稱「此盤饒富趣味,唯製於何時何地,吾並無絕對意見。」

Percy D. Krolik 曾收藏重要中國工藝, 1970年部份售於倫敦蘇富比,包括一組掐絲琺瑯器,Edgar Bluett於1965年冬《Oriental Art》有述。Krolik收藏古玉,部份現藏於倫敦維多利亞與艾伯特博物館。保加利亞藏家Luben Alexandrov Basmadjieff曾收藏重要早明青花瓷器,1972年售於倫敦蘇富比。

參考書目

大維德爵士,《Chinese Connoisseurship: The Ko Ku Yao Lun: The Essential Criteria of Antiquities》,倫敦,1971年。

Harry M. Garner,〈The Export of Chinese Lacquer to Japan in the Yüan and Early Ming Dynasties〉,《Archives of Asian Art》,卷25,1971/2年,頁6-28。

王世襄,《中國古代漆器》, 北京,1987年。

李經澤及胡世昌,〈Inscriptions on Ming Lacquer〉,《Bulletin of the Oriental Ceramic Society of Hong Kong》,第10期,1992-3年,頁28-34。再版於《疊彩:抱一齋藏中國漆器》,香港中文大學文物館,香港,2010年,頁191-200。

李久芳,〈明代剔紅漆器和時大彬紫砂壺〉,《故宫博物院院刊》,第4期,1997年。

李經澤及胡世昌,〈Carved Lacquer of the Hongwu Period〉,《Oriental Art》,第47期,編號1,2001年,頁10-20。再版於《疊彩:抱一齋藏中國漆器》,前述出處,頁171-82。

李經澤及胡世昌,〈Further Observations on Carved Lacquer of the Hongwu Period〉,《Oriental Art》,第55期,編號3,2005-6年,頁41-7。再版於《疊彩》,前述出處,頁183-90。

Craig Clunas及Jessica Harrison-Hall編,《明:皇朝盛世五十年》,大英博物館,倫敦,2014年。