.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Bowls of this type are very rare. There are two related versions of this bowl type sharing similar size, the thinly potted sides, slightly spreading foot and hand-cut lobed edge. One has five bow-shaped petals, and the other has four bracket-lobed petals. In view of the fact that the shape of these petals had to be cut by hand using a knife after throwing and while the clay was leather hard, it is easy to understand why the bracket-lobed form seen in the Falk example was rarer. Successful cutting of the sharp points in addition to the undulations must have required considerable skill. The thin potting of these bracket-lobed bowls combined with the points at the rim made them very susceptible to damage. The Falk bowl has been preserved in fine condition, but a similar bowl found at Mount Muria in Central Java and now in the Museum Pusat in Jakarta has damage to all four points, as can be seen from its illustration in Oriental Ceramics, The World's Great Collections, vol. 3, Tokyo, 1982, no. 10. A better-preserved example is illustrated by B. Gyllensvärd in Chinese Ceramics in the Carl Kempe Collection, Stockholm, 1964, p. 113, no. 341. Another is published in Special Exhibition - Chinese Ceramics, Tokyo National Museum, 1994, p. 96, no. 138.
A few more examples of the related bow-petalled form have survived. One in the Percival David Foundation, is included in Illustrated Catalogue of Ting and Allied Wares, Percival David Foundation, London, 1980, pl. III, no. 10. Another in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, is illustrated in their Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Ting Ware White Porcelain, 1987, no. 4. A third in the collection of the Nanjing Museum, is illustrated in Zhongguo meishu quanji, Taoci, (zhong), Shanghai, 1988, p. 104, no. 115. A bowl of this form was excavated in 1961-2 at Jiancicun, Hebei province, illustrated in Kaogu, 1965: 8, pl. II, nos. 6 and 9, where it is dated to the Five Dynasties period. A broken bowl of this type excavated in 1978 at Qiuyangxian, Hebei province, is illustrated in Zhongguo Taoci Quanji, 9, Dingyao, Shanghai, 1981, no. 3. This suggests that these bowls may have been the product of the Ding kilns in the Five Dynasties period. The Qiuyang bowl is inscribed with the characters xin guan (new official), as is the Percival David Foundation bowl. The National Palace Museum bowl bears the single character guan (official). The Nanjing bowl, like the Falk bowl, is unmarked.
A few more examples of the related bow-petalled form have survived. One in the Percival David Foundation, is included in Illustrated Catalogue of Ting and Allied Wares, Percival David Foundation, London, 1980, pl. III, no. 10. Another in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, is illustrated in their Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Ting Ware White Porcelain, 1987, no. 4. A third in the collection of the Nanjing Museum, is illustrated in Zhongguo meishu quanji, Taoci, (zhong), Shanghai, 1988, p. 104, no. 115. A bowl of this form was excavated in 1961-2 at Jiancicun, Hebei province, illustrated in Kaogu, 1965: 8, pl. II, nos. 6 and 9, where it is dated to the Five Dynasties period. A broken bowl of this type excavated in 1978 at Qiuyangxian, Hebei province, is illustrated in Zhongguo Taoci Quanji, 9, Dingyao, Shanghai, 1981, no. 3. This suggests that these bowls may have been the product of the Ding kilns in the Five Dynasties period. The Qiuyang bowl is inscribed with the characters xin guan (new official), as is the Percival David Foundation bowl. The National Palace Museum bowl bears the single character guan (official). The Nanjing bowl, like the Falk bowl, is unmarked.