Thank you for registering for our auction! You are required to provide: 1. Deposit; 保证金待商议； 2. Copy or images of ID card (front and back) or Passport 3. Images of Credit card (front and back).
A MUGHAL GILT-COPPER REPOUSSé AND ENAMELLED BOWL AND DISH NORTH INDIA, 17TH CENTURY The bowl with rounded body decorated in repoussé with scrolling floral motifs on blue enamelled ground, the interior with gilt painted floral motifs within a lattice on blue enamelled ground, the dish of flat circular form similarly decorated around a central floral motif, losses to gilding Bowl 5 ?in. (14.4cm.) diam.; dish 7 ?in. (18.2cm.) diam.
This elegant enamelled and gilt bowl and saucer is related to a pandan that was formerly in the collection of Simon Digby and which sold in these Rooms, 7 April 2011, lot 246. The pandan was previously published by Mark Zebrowski who described it as ‘one of the most beautiful objects of the Mughal age’ and ‘without a doubt the earliest example of Indian copper enamelling to have survived’ (Zebrowski, 1997, pp.88-89, pl.75-77). Like ours that pandan was decorated in a lilac-blue enamel which contrasted beautifully with copper-brown flowers that were reserved against it.
There has been a recent suggestion that the Digby pandan and a tray in the Khalili Collection which employed similar colours and techniques were made in the Punjab, possibly Multan. In the Khalili catalogue, the author attributes the dish to Multan largely on the basis of the colours used, which include two tones of blue and white which relate to the tile work there (Pedro Moura Carvalho, Gems and Jewels of Mughal India, London, 2010, pp.34-35, no.6).
Our bowl and dish, which use only one colour enamel, is more closely comparable to a group discussed by Zebrowski which includes three pandans, a hilt and a fly-whisk handle which he catalogues as all dating to the 17th century (Zebrowski, 1997, p.91, pls.80-84). Two use two-tone blue enamel but the others use only the lilac-blue seen here. Like ours they have slightly bolder, fleshier floral motifs with one, no.82, bearing really very close resemblance to ours. Despite the suggestion that these were originally gilt, none of the others seem to retain any of their gilding. Our bowl is remarkable in that it does, giving a feeling of what this distinct group of objects must have been like when they were conceived.
