A Dendritic Chalcedony and Crystal Snuff Bottle Official School, Qing Dynasty, 18th / 19th Century

Hugh M. Moss Ltd.
Robert Hall, London, 1984.

Moss et al., 1996-2009, vol. 2, no. 200.

There are minor nibbles to the mouth (largest 0.2cm), and an area of polishing at the foot to cover a chip.
"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."

This type of chalcedony, with variegated brown, sometimes almost black markings in a grey-beige or pale brown matrix, is one of the standards for the snuff-bottle maker that seems to have remained popular throughout the Qing dynasty. For whatever reason, however, it was extremely rare in works of art prior to the invention of the snuff bottle at some time in the seventeenth century.

The appeal of this sort of stone is obvious, with its endlessly intriguing markings allowing powerful and evocative representational subjects. There is one area that is quite obviously crystalline, suggesting that this piece of chalcedony formed in association with crystal and that perhaps this area of the stone may originally have been attached to relatively large crystals of colourless quartz.

As with so many chalcedony bottles where natural markings in the material are the main subject and the editing of them by the human hand merely a means to reveal them at their most powerful, the formal integrity of this example is necessarily flawed. It is not perfectly symmetrical, the surface having been cut through unevenly on one side to bring out the markings to their best advantage. Parts of the dendritic markings are slightly diffused beneath a thicker layer of slightly milky chalcedony, leaving it indistinct (although back lighting helps to overcome this). It may have been left that way as a foil to the foreground diagonal line of dark, dendritic markings, which seems to float closer to the viewer.

Although there is something magical about a perfect natural design that has been brought out to maximum advantage without compromising formal integrity, such as Sale 1, lot 82; Sale 4, lot 95; Sale 6, lots 126 and 164, and lot 1097 in this sale, in practice this is seldom realisable, and many of the most exciting of naturally marked chalcedony bottles of this group are formally compromised to some extent. But while the carver of this bottle might have preferred to present his subject in a more symmetrical shape, faced with the inevitability of an irregular one, he has arrived at a very positive use of the irregularity in order to make it an asset rather than a liability. The bulge visible in the side views, accentuated by the sharp angle at which the crystal area of the stone is cut back to the foot rim, gives the bottle considerable character. When seen from the side with the diagonal yellow-brown inclusions in the stone, this dynamic profile is further accented by those inclusions.