A SAMARKAND CONICAL BOWL
VAT rate of 5% is payable on hammer price and at 1… Read more
A SAMARKAND CONICAL BOWL

CENTRAL ASIA, 10TH CENTURY

Details
A SAMARKAND CONICAL BOWL
CENTRAL ASIA, 10TH CENTURY
Extremely finely potted with sloping sides on short foot, the white interior painted with brown, red, and green, with two large brown confronted ibexes either side of a red flask, outlined in red and against a stippled ground, the interstices filled with red medallions of different sizes, sepia cusping around the rim, the exterior rim painted with manganese rope-pattern, repaired clean breaks, considerable repainting of flaked original glaze
11½in. (29cm.) diam.
Special notice
VAT rate of 5% is payable on hammer price and at 15% on the buyer's premium

Lot Essay

This remarkable bowl is very finely potted, and its beautifully delineated decoration is under a very thin glaze. It seems to have a number of features in common with a large bowl depicting a seated ruler that is in the Khalili Collection (Ernst J. Grube, Cobalt and Lustre, The Nasser D.Khalili Collection of Islamic Art, London, 1994, no.36, pp.46 and 48). The condition of that dish was also very similar to that of the present example. All the body of our dish is preserved here, but the glaze had obviously flaked off about half of it which has been overpainted to match the original glazed areas. Judging from the precedent of the Khalili bowl, the original painting here is likely to be preserved under the restored paintwork. And while the drawing and in particular the treatment of the background are very similar in both, the present bowl also has a third colour, the sepia slip used around the rim that is absent in the Khalili example.

In his discussion of the Khalili example, Professor Grube points out its similarities to Abbasid lustre pottery. The link here is not nearly as obvious, although the cusping around the rim is something that both bowls have in common. But in the same way that the Khalili example appears to be a superbly drawn version of another type, so the present bowl clearly has a similar design to the bowls traditionally attributed to Sari. Whether this bowl and others like it served as the influence for Sari wares, or whether the influence was the other way around, is not however possible at present to determine.

More from Art of the Islamic and Indian Worlds

View All
View All