Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries

When I started collecting jades, I understood that it would take me a while to learn how to authenticate or date a piece of jade carving by examining their tool marks, quality of carvings, styles and forms, therefore I followed the suggestions of some jade books and started studying the materials used to carve Chinese jade carvings.

My original goal was just to enable myself to purchase jade carvings that were made of genuine jades and not other non-jade materials. My original definition of jade is very typical and that of western: jade is either nephrite or jadeite.

It is not until I started learning more about jades that I truly understood that in ancient China, any stones that were beautiful would be considered "jade". Later, I also learn that even beautiful stones cannot be called jade unless they possess the five following virtues:

(1)Benevolence (wish to do good; kindness) � you can see the light or halo exhibited by a person with a kind and gentle heart, just like the beautiful luster, smoothness and beautiful color shown on a piece of jade.

(2)Justice � the heart of a righteous person is pure and just, just like a piece of jade that is pure and without any impurity, inclusions, cracks or mixed colors.

(3)Wisdom � when a wise person speaks, people would want to listen and his words will be heard from far away just like the beautiful sound made by a jade piece.

(*According to a Chinese saying, the most beautiful sound is made when jade beads (or pearls) dropping on a jade basin/bucket. I have a pair of small C-dragon made of high quality nephrite, when I use one to hit the other, it results in the most beautiful musical sound I have ever heard.)

(4)Courage � a person with courage will never bend nor compromise and will fight to his last breath for a just cause, he will rather die than surrender, just like the hardness of a jade piece, it will rather break than yield.

(5)Honor (integrity; honesty; cleanliness) � a honorable person with integrity will always remain humble and will not be corrupted by power or wealth and will not show their arrogance toward other people, it is just like a piece of jade that has beautiful inner texture and translucency because it simply has nothing to hide.

According to many Chinese jade experts or collectors, the only jade stone that possess all of the above five virtues is Hetian jade.

However, to summarize the five virtues of jade:

Jade must be beautiful (in both color and luster), without any impurities such as inclusions, natural cracks or mixed colors;

It must make beautiful sound when you hits it (with another jade piece or metal);

It must be hard (with hardness 5.0 or higher) and with great translucency (light can pass through).

In order to demonstrate what I have said and to show some of the unique "jade" materials I have encountered and collected, I have posted this link at the other forum:

http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/read.php?forum=1&id=28929

Please note that I did not claim any pieces posted there are authentic except the first piece. Even then, it may not be 100% authentic.

My purpose is to show the unique and/or beautiful materils used to make these carvings. The appearnces of some of them as seen on pictures had surely fooled me in misidentifying their materials as they may fool some of you. You can try to identify the material of each piece without reading my comments and see how well you will do. I didn't do too well with some of these pieces myself. So do not feel bad.

For example, the zhulong (pig dragon) I posted there I had the utmost confidence in proclaiming what it was made of. After I held it in my hand, I was doubly sure. However, after I did both specific gravity and hardness test on it, it totaly shocked me to find out what it was made of. I was caught totally off guard. One of the most experienced Hongshan jade collector was also completely caught off guard. I am not going to disclose too much here so that it would not spoin your fun. You should look at its pictures first and make your conclusion (regarding its material) before you would read my comments.

My advice to all beginning collectors is this:

While it is indeed important to be able to authenticate and date a jade carving by examining its tool marks, weathering, style and forms, stains, etc., please do not forget the beauty and quality of the "jade" material has to be as equally if not more important than all other criteria.

I have examined many pieces of archaic jade carvings, both on books, in private and public colletions, no matter what dynasties they were made, there is always one thing in common among them:

Most of them were made of the most beautiful yellow, white or celadon Hetian jade or jades similar in beauty or quality to Hetian jades. Very seldom they were made of low quality green neprhite jades with complete white weathering.

Therefore, please train your eyes in discerning good "jades" from bad "jades" and do not let some greedy dealers in selling you pieces of junks - jades that are niether beautiful or high quality.

I hope you will enjoy pictures of these pieces I have posted there and let me know what you think of any piecec. I also welcome you in posting unusual "jade" (material) pieces here. I think it would be fun.

Thanks.

Bill

Ha ha ha,


Young jade / new carving

At least you show us your "fantastic" "genuine"
"HS" jades.

Anyway thank you for sharing.

I don't mean to be rude, but I invite you to compare with a real HS jade (5000 years old)...

yours:new carving/young jade
http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/bin/IMG_1115.JPG
(front)
http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/bin/IMG_1040.JPG
(back)
real HS jade (5000 years old):
http://www.pipane.com/contentFiles/catalog/itemImages/fullSize/849.jpg
front
http://www.pipane.com/contentFiles/catalog/itemImages/fullSize/850.jpg
back

Does it help?

Good luck.

Pipane

Again in order to help you understand:

New pig dragon: new jade, brain new carving, no evidence of great age, no baojiang and wrong jade type (means this is not the kind of jade one can find in HS culture Area):
yours:
http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/bin/IMG_1144.JPG
http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/bin/IMG_1145.JPG
http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/bin/IMG_1147.JPG

Real 5000 to 8000 years old HS Culture jade pig dragon from Pipane Asian Art Gallery:

http://www.pipane.com/contentFiles/catalog/itemImages/fullSize/844.jpg
http://www.pipane.com/contentFiles/catalog/itemImages/fullSize/846.jpg
http://www.pipane.com/contentFiles/catalog/itemImages/fullSize/845.jpg

Does it help or to you prefer to listen to your friend Dasai who find your jades: quote Dasai:

"Bill, the two of them (First Bird and small Zhulong) are very beautyful, I think they are made of pure nephrite. I have never seen something like the green quartz eagle before, it's color?

Particulary interesting to me is the IMG_1040.JPG. It shows genuine color infiltration with very regular progression and genuine luster. I believe this could not be reproduced on old or new hongshan/neolithic interpretational pieces.

Diasai"

Regards,

Pipane

Bill,

To learn about HS jades and HS Culture the best reference book so far is:

IBSN 7-81074-290-6
Hongshan Culture, great find in Chinese Archeoogy
Inner Mongolia University Publishing Company

Page 198: HS Culture jades type
(what is HS jade made of?)
Page 105 and 104: HS archaic characters
(to answer one of your question from a previous post)
page 40 to 43: HS Culture / Neolithic period tools
...


You can also look for the following yahoo group I created recently:

Hongshan_jades � Hongshan Culture Jades

Regards,

Pipane

Hi, Pipane or whatever your real name is:

Thank you very much for your inputs and will take them under advice.

However, I was very disappointed with you because you would like to turn everything into a circus and using the opportunity in promoting your high-priced "authentic" Hongsha jades on your site. If you can really read English and will read my whole thread at the other forum again you should learn that I had never said any pieces of the jades posted there are "authentic" except may be the first bird. Even then, I said it with reservation. My main goal is not to show any authentic Hongshan materials as you claimed but to show some unusual jade materials. I did not even claim all the materials I posted are beautiufl buy just unique.

If you are truly a Hongshan expert, I would love to learn from you.

Would you please tell me:

(1) Were Cinnabar (Vermilion) ever found in any Hongshan burials and are there any cinnbar stains ever found on any authentic Hongshan jades?

(2) Can you tell us the unique tool marks found inside the grooves of authentic Hongshan jade pieces?

(3) Can you tell us what unique charateristics you can use to identify an authentic Hongshan piece especially a zhulong?



I am awaiting your responses.

Bill

Hi, Pipane:

It is very unfortunate that you do not seem to have a good command of the English language which was reflected by the incorrect spellings on many words you used in your messages and the fact that you failed to comprehend that I had never claimed the pig dragon shown in my thread was authentic. As a matter of fact, my HS jade friend told me it was a reproduction, not because of its material but because of other factors. His verdict was clearly posted on that thread if you even bother in reading it.

However, to be 100% sure, since it actually possesses quite a few of the characteristics of genuine Hongshan zhulongs, he advised me to send it to him so he can examine it closely. He said you could never judge the authenticity of a Hongshan jade by pictures alone. He once bought a �perfect� zhulong based on pictures and only found it to be a great reproduction piece later.

The main reason I posted it there is because the unique color and polishing of the zhulong. If I didn�t tell you that it was made of serpentine I believe you would never could have guessed in a million years. If you doubt my words, I can post some other pieces and let you take a guess. After testing more than 1,000 pieces of carvings, there are simply not too many pieces escaping my notices. The one that did were sometimes truly unique. I also do not believe this piece is �modern� because it is almost very difficult to achieve such perfect polishing (with no marks at all) on a serpentine piece. If you do not agree with me, please post a picture of a perfect serpentine modern zhulong from any sites here for comparison, just make sure it is really made of serpentine though.

While I was grateful that you were trying to recommend me a book that I have already owned:

http://auction1.taobao.com/auction/item_detail-0db1-b0103065aa0b080e569690a220c679bc.jhtml

I really wonder how much you really understand the articles in the book since they were written in Chinese. May be that is why you didn�t bother in quoting from the book. Worse yet, you did not express your own opinions even though you are supposed to be a Hongshan jade expert.

If the expertise of a Hongshan jade collectors can be quantified by the number of Hongshan books they possess then I am afraid any one of the collectors in the other forum may be more expert than you because I know each one of them had spent a lot of money in buying jade books including many of the most current Hongshan jade books written by Hongshan jade experts.

While the author of the book, Liu Dong Qing is indeed a very experienced HS jade collector, he still had to kowtow to experts such as Guo Dashun and Sun Shou-dao (who passed away two years ago) or may be even Xu Qiang and Gu Fang. For that matter, do you own any jade books written by any of them? Did you have any one of these experts in appraising those high-priced �authentic� Hongshan pieces in your site that you did not even own, but only acted as a middle-man, sometimes selling them sight unseen by yourself, just based on the personal opinions of the owners themselves. Have you even personally examined each of those jade pieces you are selling? (*For a picture of Liu Dong Qing, see
http://www.gotoread.com/vo/2649/page277130.html)

Dr. David Anderson had the chance in meeting Professor Guo Dashu and will meet him again later this year. Have you ever met with Prof. Guo?

Furthermore, please express your own opinions regarding jade materials, scripts, tool marks, etc. Please do not just ask me to read a book. Of course I have read those books and will read them again. Even many Hongshan jade experts cannot agree on what the most credible jade material used on Hongshan jade carvings is. Most of the jade experts in this forum seem to believe it is serpentine. What exactly is your opinion since you did not say? (*If you want to see my opinion, please read my messages posted on the other forum, I have said so many times I am not going to repeat it and bore everybody.)

My HS jade friend actually told me to throw away all my books and forget everything I have ever learned about jade materials, chum-sik (color stains), bao-jiang because they simply do not mean anything. You must study and compare authentic HS pieces with reproductions before you can truly learn. I have not studied but he had. Once he has shown me some of the facts, I couldn�t believe how I could have missed them before. Some of them were actually shown on the pictures on HS jade books but nobody pointed them out to me. Did I know all of them now, no, far from it, I still have to acquire more authentic pieces and study them, but not from those pieces listed in your web site.

Therefore, please express your true expertise in Hongshan jades, not just by asking people to read a book or look at the jades (which you do not own) in your site but saying something a lot more substantial.

Please, indeed.

Bill

Hi Bill,

Interesting reading. May I add that the 5 virtues of jade can be also be as follows:

(1) It is moist and glossy, possessing the characteristics of "Jen" (kind and loving)

(2) Upon examining its exterior, its interior is revealed to those who understand the stone, for it resembles the character of "Yi" (Perfect understanding and good treatment)

(3) Its sound is musical and far-reaching, like the character of "Tsi" (intelligent)

(4) Although it may be cut, it remains to itself completeness, thereby displaying an inherent charracteristic of self-defence like the character "Yung" (Brave)

(5) It is without blemish when clear, similar to the character "Chieh" (Pure).

Judy

PS - I am unable to access your post at Chicochai forum. Can you please email http//:www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/read..... to me private email address. Thanks.

Hi, Judy:

Thank you for your input. Your five virtues of jade seem to be identical to mine but with better interpretation that the one I found.

You cannot just click on the link posted in my message to access the site, try to copy and then paste it on the top Address at your web page (Internet Explorer or Mozilla), hit GO then you should have no problem in getting there. If you still have problem, let me know and I would e-mail you the link. I tried and had no problem.

Bill

P.S. I am posting the link here as a direct link and post the five virtues of Jade in Chinese.

Bill,
Why do you deem it necessary to post your opinions on both this and the Chicochai forums?

I doubt you will appreciate my commentary, but I am interested to hear your response to my comments.

1. The first jade has netsuke-like holes and evidence of turning marks within these holes. Please show some similarly carved pieces from a recognised reference source.

2. The left eye of the bird in the second piece is relatively rounded and could possibly be mistaken for one made with a bamboo drill. Not so the right eye which has been roughly gouged out with modern machine tools.

3. The pig dragon appears to be artificially stained and polished and its lines are not clearly defined, as on the very rare genuine published examples. The 4th picture shows modern parallel cutter marks on the bottom groove.

4. The green quartz? eagle shows an unusual carving technique, the lines of which usually show a relatively deeply cut inner edge and more gently sloping outer edge. That is not weathering but a flaw in the stone, and the last photo shows cross-line tool marks. As the cut lines were done by lengthwise abrasion, these cross-line tool marks are clear evidence of modern tooling.

5. The bird again shows netsuke-like holes and white unpolished recesses of modern tooling. There are also vertically running tool marks in the netsuke holes, a physical impossibility if a turning drill was used.

6. You say the red cicada has old tool marks? I again see cross-line cutter marks, not the polished length running grooves caused by abrasion.

7. The two red cicada also show cross-line cutter marks.

8. The pale green jade again shows cutter lines across the grooves.

9. The goat shows cutter marks under the eye in the first picture and above the eye in the second.

10. The Qing? bird has netsuke holes and clear evidence of modern cutter marks running into the left hole. There is also chipping around the entry hole, further evidence of modern tooling.

These are among the most obviously identifiable group of fakes I have ever seen. They bear little if any resemblence to genuine archaic jades, and if there is a positive comment I have to make, it is that none of them have the raised crystals of the majority of the fakes on the Chicochai forum.

You have shown three examples with netsuke-like holes. Care to find another three in any Chinese or Western reference source?

I await your reply.
Regards
Tony

Tony:

Thank you for your comments and they indeed sound very interesting though not necessarily correct.

If you read my message posted in the other forum you would learn that my goal is not to show that all those pieces posted there are archaic or authentic. The only piece I believe to be authentic is the first piece (bird) and even then only with 90% certainty. My main goal is to discuss the different types of materials used for jade carvings and the difficulty in correctly identifying them based on pictures alone. Therefore, you comments on their tool marks may have some truth but since you are no expert in tool marks yourself your comment can only be taken with a grain of salt.

If you remember not very not ago, I have asked two questions in this and the other forum regarding tool marks:

What are modern tool marks?

How modern is modern?

Nobody in this or other forum can provide satisfactory and credible answers to both questions.

That reflects how difficult it is to determine what modern tool marks vs ancient tool marks are.

Even now, nobody can know for sure what type of tools were used to "carve" jades at the Hongshan time because such tools were simply no longer in existence. Nobody including experts can agree in how to correctly date a jade carvings based on tool marks alone. Margaret Sax had published a research paper on this topic and may be you can read it and discuss it here.

I do not know what you meant by cross cutter marks and I do not believe you understand what exactly modern tool marks are. You should watch the video clip on CCTV regarding to modern jade carving tools you would understand better (link posted on the other forum). Those cutter marks were not left by modern electrical tools.

You called the holes on the first bird netsuke holes and again I have no idea what you are referring to. You said you saw modern tooling with the holes and the use of a turning drill. That shows you that there may be a lot you do not know about Hongshan tool marks. Those holes on authentic Hongshan pieces were made by solid rod drill with quartz on its tip. They are genuine holes. This piece had been authenticated by two Hongshan collectors who have far more experience than you in that area. No pun intended.

I have learned there are unique tool marks inside the groove of authentic Hongshan jade piece, resulted from different types of tools: tu wheel, tu and rod tipped with quartz. Such tool marks were unique to Hongshan pieces. There are also unique marks found between the eyes of a bird and that of a pig dragon. It is because of such lack of unique tool marks on the pig dragon and other factors, it was proclaimed as a reproduction (if you would read it). Therefore, you really need to know what to look for on a Hongshan jade piece in order to know what you are talking about. I was lucky to have two very good teachers.

I really do not need to prove anything to you or even to show you anything. What is the purpose? Your opinion does not affect my view for the bird one bit although many of your points would be well taken and kept under advice. But once again you are barking on the wrong tree, I am trying to discuss materials and you are trying to pick bones from an egg. What is the purpose?

If you are indeed interesting in expressing your opinions in what modern tool marks are and how they should look and what ancient tool marks are and how they should look, you are more than welcome in posting your own thread here or at the other forum and let us have an open discussion. After all, I really do want to learn.

I did post some Hongshan tool marks and even some modern one for comparison at:

http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/read.php?forum=1&id=29094

You may want to take a look, of course you would not agree with some of them, then you can use your own theory and evidence in showing us why.

Thanks.

Bill

In his message, Tony said about the green quartz eagle:

"The green quartz? eagle shows an unusual carving technique, the lines of which usually show a relatively deeply cut inner edge and more gently sloping outer edge."

"That is not weathering but a flaw in the stone, and the last photo shows cross-line tool marks. As the cut lines were done by lengthwise abrasion, these cross-line tool marks are clear evidence of modern tooling."

Tony said the fissure and weathering found on the eagle was a flaw in the stone. He thought the carver found such a stone with flaw and then carved on the piece.

I believe the eagle was carved first and then the fissure and weathering happened later. It should be apparent because the fissure and weathering are on top of the carving lines rather the other way around. The weathering found on this eagle is genuine and if somebody did indeed find a weathered green quartz stone and then carved it with modern tools, then such tool marks should be on top of the weathered surface.

The tool marks found in the grooves are indeed made with old tools (Tu) and were stained. However, there were indeed some interesting looking scratch lines on top of the old tool marks that may be modern and might be resulted from an attempt in cleaning up the grooves. However, old tool marks were definitely present on the two grooves on its rear.

B

Hi Bill,

The Five Virtues of Jade were supposedly said by Confucius. The English translation which I posted earlier came from this (see pic).

Judy

Hi, Judy:

Thanks for posting the beautiful calligraphy regarding the virtues of jade. I belive it was calligraphed by one of my favorite Chinese writers.

I did a quick search and found that both you and I can be correct regarding the origins of the virtues of jades.

The original 11 virtues (some listed as ten) of jade are indeed were first mentioned by Confucius in Li Ji published around the Spring-Autumn and Warring States periods. The five virtues of jades were later published by Xu Shen in Shuo Wen Jie Zie (see the one posted by me) in Eastern Han with most but not all (such as courage) virtues possibly using those mentioned by Confucius as reference.

For more info, please refer to:
http://www.yanruyu.home.sunbo.net/show_hdr.php?xname=UN1PH11&dname=0D2SH11&xpos=23&cname=&cpos=3

Again, thanks for sharing this with me. I am learning everyday.

Bill

Bill,
I think, seeming that you have deigned to criticise my comments and experience, readers of this posting should know a bit about yours. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong on any point.

Firstly, you joined the Chicochai forum on 8 July 2006, just over 18 months ago, claiming an interest in jade but no experience. In fact, one of your first postings was of a C-dragon, complete with certificate of authenticity from one of eBay's most notorious sellers of fakes. You stated in a subsequent post that you got your money returned. Good on you Bill. Every collector of Chinese antiques gets their fingers burned at some stage. Many are not so lucky to get a refund. One of your problems is that you don't seem to learn from the experience.

You stated above I was no expert in tool marks, that you could tell modern cutter marks, and that you rely on the advice of two (unnamed)Hongshan collectors "who are more experienced than you". You have also stated that you rely on the advice of two sik chums on the Chicochai forum (I won't name them), both Chinese, whose comments at times verge on the insane.

Bill, you also have a habit of forgetting what you previously posted. Take the jade bird, which in an earlier posting you accepted as modern, is now 90% certain to be genuine, but may not be 100% authentic. How can anything "may not be 100% authentic?"

From your earlier postings you have admitted you do not travel, and your 18 months experience with jade has come exclusively from books and internet web-sites. Yet in that time you claim to have gone from an inexperienced novice to expert. You have ventured opinions on a huge range of jades, most of which are visibly fake to a trained eye, even from a photograph.

Take the netsuke-like holes I referred to, of which you say you have no idea. These are two small relatively shallow drill holes, done at an angle towards one another so that the bottom of the holes meet. They are usually at the back or underside of the carving, so the item is not disfigured. This enables a cord or wire to be inserted through the hole, so that it can be hung (in the case of a netsuke from the belt or obi) from ones body, or attached to fabric.

This type of drilling is (and I stand to be corrected on the point) rarely if ever found on Chinese jades before the Qing dynasty (1644 to 1912). In fact I can only ever recall seeing two netsuke-like holes on an ancient Chinese jade, and that was on a Han dynasty sword pommel.

You also don't listen to advice, so you do not learn. I remind you again, the longitudinal cuts on these ancient jades were done by abrasion, backwards and forwards. If there were any ancient cut marks evident they would run lengthways, but almost all signs of this workmanship was removed by the final polishing. Not so with many modern pieces, of the like you have shown, which have either parallel lengthways cutter marks which have not been polished out; or, more obviously, cutter marks which run acroos the groove from side to side. Other modern cut marks are often not polished at all, exposing the white powdery surface which is not found on the genuine artifacts. These come from a high speed rotating cutter, either on a fixed spindle (as I show in this photograph), or from a handheld Dremmel or similar instrument.

You may recognise this dragon as similar to the ones fawned over on the Chicochai site. The factory would not let me see the final finishing stage, where the crystals are exposed and the surface altered.

Bill, with your ability to read Chinese characters you have much to offer this forum. For example you recognised that the alleged ancient Chinese characters on one item on the Chicochai site, were in fact written in modern script. Another jade seal had the characters written upside-down. Previously they showed a group of characters which were meaningless, and earlier, a reference to a Shang dynasty Buddha. These glaring historical errors should immediately alert you to the evidence of fakery, but with your tunnel vision, you seem unable to see or think outside the square. Does it not dawn on you that that the surface alteration so commonly shown on Chicochai, does not run over the reign marks (viz the latest Yongzheng absurdity), and this identical alteration occurs from pieces they date from the neolithic period to the Qing? If you sat back and objectively considered these contradictions, then perhaps you wouldn't so readily accept the advice of the proponents.

This forum was established so people, myself included, could learn. Not to be browbeat by outspoken inexperienced collectors pushing their own barrow.

Step back for once and listen to what you are being told.

Regards
Tony

Hi, Anthony:

First of all, thank you for your compliments and sorry if I again came on too strong on you in my replies to you. I apologize.

As I have repeatedly stated my original goal in posting the thread at the other forum is neither to show any authentic pieces (execept the first one) nor to discuss tool marks, however you have shifted the focus of my thread and turned them into a battleground of authenticiy in carvings and tool marks. I do not believe that is the time or place for such feat.

You said, "How can anything "may not be 100% authentic?"

Well, I am sorry you have to ask that question. Are you saying that nobody including experts have ever make mistakes in judging the authenticity of an item including yourself? (*I do not want to have to remind you with what happened between you and Pierre over a pottery piece you once sold him.)

Do you see my point? Anybody can make mistake.

The two holes on my first bird are authentic, they are the classical "trumpet" holes made with a rod tipped with quartz, with internal evidence present inside the holes unique to authenitc Hongshan. Some times, they have used more than one rod drill (or with different sizes of rods) to accomplish such task. Please refer to:

http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/read.php?forum=1&id=29094

for the picture of another trumpet hole found on an authentic Hongshan piece.

However, what you said is abosoltuely interesting and is worth some researching and I would like to ask you to post pictures of holes from authentic Hongshan pieces (birds if possible) for comparison and explanations. Thank you.

Tony, many times things are not as simple as they may seem. Although there are merits to what you have said, however, not being a jade carver yourself (or myself in that matter), we really cannot render our opinions as that of professionals in lapidary or as Hongshan jade experts.

If you do not believe me, look at the picture of a Hongshan style bird with those cutter marks you believed were "modern tool marks at this link:

http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/read.php?forum=1&id=23884

Read what Mr. Randy Li who had experince in both jade collecting and jade lapidary had said:

"Both man-power and electric-power can generate the result like the lines on the bird's tail. Foot-padel or electric power machine are turning in one direction, while bow drill turns back and forth."

Then what another collectors said,

"Sorry Randy, but the traditional foot-pedal powered bench lathe, used for many hundreds of years to work jade, grinds in both directions. That's one of the ways its marks can be distinguished from high-speed, electrically powered cutting."

Then his response to him:

"The single-padel propelled machine I know of can generate high RPM in one direction. It can be reversed, but the motion is in one-direction. Someone could have confused the bow-drill with the foot-pedal machine. I actually had learned some jade lipidary from a Jade Master in Macau before."

See, there are so many things we do not know regarding tool marks.

Now again, what do you consider as "moder tool marks", tool marks made with electrical tools?

Then how do you define modern?

I would recommend you in reading this link:

http://www.chicochai.com/jadeforum/read.php?forum=1&id=28089#28172

and then watch this video clip (first part of the translation was posted at the above link and you can find the answer to how modern is modern regarding tool marks there):

http://www.cctv.com/program/tsfx/topic/geography/C17924/20070301/105484.shtml

I have so far examined over 20 pieces of modern jade carvings and could not find any cross cutter marks on them. You have to be careful in distinguishing the cross cutter marks (if any) left by modern tools and those left by manual tools.

We simply cannot assume anything. It would be very productive if all members of this forum would contribute their knowledge regarding tool marks of jade carvings in a different thread.

Once again, although I do not agree with everything you said, I do respect your opinions, because unlike Pipane, you are a scholar and if these are opinions regarding ceramics or potteries I would definitely kowtow to your experiences.

Bill

Judy, has Peking Man gone missing again ? I see that you have moved on.

Hi Kelvin,

Moving on? I am now stranded in Shanghai because of the snow storm in China (smile). If I can find my way back to Shenzhen before The Spring Festival I will soon become "The Peking Woman".

Judy

Bill,
I give up trying to explain anything to you.

You do not listen and you seem unable to learn from the experience of others, or for that matter your own. And now I see that you are posting derogatory comments on the Chicochai forum, where too your jades have been declared fake.

I say again to you. Show me three examples (even one would do) of a neolithic Chinese jade with these "netsuke-like" interlinking holes, in any major collection. 50% of your jades have these holes and now you say only the first is genuine but may not be 100% authentic.

I rest my case.

Tony

Tony:

Show me examples of the netsuke holes you are talking about on three of your jade pieces and show me examples of three holes found on authentic jade pieces for comparison.

By the way, you are wrong about the holes on my bird.

As posted in the other link:

"Let me make one thing very clear here, the holes on my bird are not netsuke holes but are the classical trumpet holes found in genuine Hongshan jade pieces. They were drilled with rod drill tipped with quartz, sometimes had to drill with different drills as the old one worn out and had to be replaced with new ones. Because they were manual drills, as the drill went in, the hole becomes smaller, therefore ending up like the shape of a trumpet. I am going to post several pictures here to show that they are indeed one single trumpet hole on both sides, from wide to narrow."

This is what I had posted in the original link.

The reason the holes are getting narrower because it was done with a manual rod drill, as it was drilled into the hard jade material by hand, it becomes harder and harder. If these holes were drilled with an electrical drill, they would be in the same width all the way.

Also,

"There is another thing about the holes but you have to observe the inside of the holes and the picture simply would not capture it and I am not going to say any more than I should have.

Not too many people understand how authentic Hongshan holes should look inside and out. I begin to and I am not going to show Tony Allen. Let him figure it out himself"

See pictures posted

You may also see more pictures posted showing unique tool marks and stains found on this bird. Unfortunately I do not believe this will be enough to convince you since you have long ago made up your mind in what you are going to see.

It is sad that "you do not listen and you seem unable to learn from the experience of others, or for that matter your own....."

May be you should learn in how to listen too?

Bill

Bill, why persist in trying to persuade anyone regarding your convictions? Who are you trying to educate?

Do you sell items on eBay? Do you have anyone else sell your items on eBay? Do you sell your carved stones in any auction or retail setting?

Sorry about this belated post. I have been referring to netsuke-like holes. On Japanese netsuke their correct name is Himatoshi; two interlinking holes which enabled the netsuke to be attached to the cord.

These type of holes are rarely if ever found in neolithic jade carvings. I am tempted to say never, but for every rule in Chinese art, there is likely to be an exception.

The usual hole on ancient Chinese jades was drilled (sometimes pecked) from both sides until the holes met somewhere in between. Occasionally the carver drilled from one side. The holes are usually tapering.

Bill showed 3 examples with interlinking holes, identifying these immediately as modern. I can also see carving lines and scratches which have not been polished out, plus white powder in the lower reaches of the holes, all indicators of modern high speed tooling.

I have attached a photo of a modern netsuke showing similar drill holes.

Regards
Tony

Hello Bill,

A short answer to your posts:

Have you noticed this forum is dedicated to Asian art & antiques?

Please stop posting here all the fakes you own especially if you already know they are fake.

Quote Bill: "If the expertise of a Hongshan jade collectors can be quantified by the number of Hongshan books they possess..."

Interesting idea...Shall I run to the library?

Quote Bill: "Have you even personally examined each of those jade pieces you are selling?"

Of course I did!
Nobody can be expert in everything. Dedicated experts review antiques posted on our website.

Quote Bill: "Have you ever met with Prof. Guo?"

Can one become expert also by shaking hands?

Quote Bill: "My HS jade friend actually told me to throw away all my books and forget everything I have ever learned about jade materials..."

You're friend is right, follow his advices...

Be careful too with theories about jade virtues...

Pipnae

Bill,

You said:

"The reason the holes are getting narrower because it was done with a manual rod drill, as it was drilled into the hard jade material by hand, it becomes harder and harder. If these holes were drilled with an electrical drill, they would be in the same width all the way."

I beg to differ. Could I not take one of the devices shown herein by someone (Anita, I believe) that is comprised of a quartz crystal mounted on a bamboo rod, slap it in the chuck of my Black & Decker drill, and produce that exact hole while sipping my afternoon tea? I think a combination of old and new technology would do the trick nicely.

Cheers,
Stan

Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries |