A FAMILLE-ROSE PORCELAIN 'PEKINESE AND DOVES' SNUFF BOTTLE SEAL MARK AND PERIOD OF DAOGUANG

Robert Kleiner, 1994.

Hugh Moss, Victor Graham and Ka Bo Tsang, A Treasury of Chinese Snuff Bottles: The Mary and George Bloch Collection, vol. 6, Hong Kong, 2007, no. 1327.

A little fading to the enamelling and the seal mark on base. Otherwise, good 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. 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."

According to the Taoya 陶雅, by antique expert Chen Liu 陳瀏 (1863 – 1929), the Daoguang emperor was fond of doves, and one of his consorts was fond of small dogs, ‘so the porcelain cups of the time were often painted with these two creatures’ (成廟喜鴿而貴嬪喜小狗，故當時瓷碗多畫此二物). There is nothing remarkable about palace ladies being fond of small dogs, and which of the emperor’s consorts is meant here is not known, but the dove-and-dog motif is found on a variety of snuff bottles that are unquestionably from the Daoguang era. The same design appears on a range of enamelled Yixing wares, helping to date that group as well (see Sale 3, lot 110). The fact that only a single dog is pictured on this bottle is unusual.

This is a unique version of the various sets that were produced, being considerably smaller than the standard size for imperial porcelain snuff bottles of the period. Were it not marked, one might allow that it could be a little after the Daoguang period, so perhaps it comes from late in the reign.