.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
As suggested by Wang Shixiang and Curtis Evarts, Masterpieces from the Museum of Classical Chinese Furniture, Chicago, 1995, p. 120, "the term coffer is used in the West to describe a piece of Chinese storage furniture with a long, narrow top, free-standing legs, and drawers surmounting a hidden storage compartment. There are many Ming-style huanghuali coffers in existence; the historical development of this furniture type is, however, unclear, and it probably emerged at a relatively late date."
The present example maintains the integrity of the above-mentioned early design although it does not incorporate the hidden storage space mentioned by Wang and Evarts. In his eloquent description of the current example, Marcus Flacks, Classical Chinese Furniture V, New York, Spring, 2002, no. 10, comments, "The strength of this piece lies in the simplicity of the design and its ability to incorporate a new element (drawers) into an established form whilst maintaining the integrity of the classical design. The lack of surface decoration, the simple hardware and the high quality of the timber used all help to achieve this. This rare coffer follows the design of the earliest tables with drawers. Here a pair of drawers has been added to the classical recessed-leg form. Later designs included panels below the drawers and long carved spandrels on the sides."
The rear legs and sections of the back of the coffer appear to be made from nanmu, which may have been chosen due to a lack of precious huanghuali at the time. It is not unusual to see rear sections of huanghauli furniture utilizing other types of wood since they would likely have been placed up against a wall and the rear-section would not have been commonly seen.
For a further discussion of this form, see Curtis Evarts, 'The Enigmatic Altar Coffer,' Journal of the Chinese Classical Furniture Society, Autumn 1994, pp. 29-44. Evarts points out, interestingly, that although this form has been specifically sought after and appreciated by twentieth-century furniture collectors there are relatively few citations in the traditional sources used in furniture research. The lack of traditional sources and literary references to this furniture form may be due to its connection with more domestic household furniture in traditional China.
For a larger (39 in. wide) coffer of similar form, although with three drawers, see Wang Shixiang and Curtis Evarts, Masterpieces from the Museum of Classical Chinese Furniture, Chicago, 1995, pp. 120-121, no. 56, later sold at Christie's, New York, 19 September 1996, lot 63.
The present example maintains the integrity of the above-mentioned early design although it does not incorporate the hidden storage space mentioned by Wang and Evarts. In his eloquent description of the current example, Marcus Flacks, Classical Chinese Furniture V, New York, Spring, 2002, no. 10, comments, "The strength of this piece lies in the simplicity of the design and its ability to incorporate a new element (drawers) into an established form whilst maintaining the integrity of the classical design. The lack of surface decoration, the simple hardware and the high quality of the timber used all help to achieve this. This rare coffer follows the design of the earliest tables with drawers. Here a pair of drawers has been added to the classical recessed-leg form. Later designs included panels below the drawers and long carved spandrels on the sides."
The rear legs and sections of the back of the coffer appear to be made from nanmu, which may have been chosen due to a lack of precious huanghuali at the time. It is not unusual to see rear sections of huanghauli furniture utilizing other types of wood since they would likely have been placed up against a wall and the rear-section would not have been commonly seen.
For a further discussion of this form, see Curtis Evarts, 'The Enigmatic Altar Coffer,' Journal of the Chinese Classical Furniture Society, Autumn 1994, pp. 29-44. Evarts points out, interestingly, that although this form has been specifically sought after and appreciated by twentieth-century furniture collectors there are relatively few citations in the traditional sources used in furniture research. The lack of traditional sources and literary references to this furniture form may be due to its connection with more domestic household furniture in traditional China.
For a larger (39 in. wide) coffer of similar form, although with three drawers, see Wang Shixiang and Curtis Evarts, Masterpieces from the Museum of Classical Chinese Furniture, Chicago, 1995, pp. 120-121, no. 56, later sold at Christie's, New York, 19 September 1996, lot 63.