Can anyone translate old Chinese inscription?

[DP]

I would treat them very carefully as it hasn't been discussed if they are possibly authentic. Do you know? Could they be just copies of old artifacts sold as home decor, e.g.?

Something like this may be worth an awful lot of money. On Antiques Roadshow once, a woman brought in four small jade articles bequeathed to her by her dad that he had gotten as an attaché in Japan after WW2. He had made friends with an antiques dealer and bought the articles in Japan. But it turned out these four small articles were commissioned by the court of a Chinese emperor and the group was estimated to be worth between $900K to over $1million! And as a side note, if you look up the episode, the women's reaction upon hearing this was priceless-

[rgG]

DP wrote:
I would treat them very carefully as it hasn't been discussed if they are possibly authentic. Do you know? Could they be just copies of old artifacts sold as home decor, e.g.?

Something like this may be worth an awful lot of money. On Antiques Roadshow once, a woman brought in four small jade articles bequeathed to her by her dad that he had gotten as an attaché in Japan after WW2. He had made friends with an antiques dealer and bought the articles in Japan. But it turned out these four small articles were commissioned by the court of a Chinese emperor and the group was estimated to be worth between $900K to over $1million! And as a side note, if you look up the episode, the women's reaction upon hearing this was priceless-

Because they are ivory, they have no monetary value, as they cannot be sold, under US law, even if they are indeed as old as they purport to be. I suspect she bought them when they were in China/Hong Kong in the early 90's but I am not sure. She also had some other Chinese antiquities that have been donated to a museum because they were funerary artifacts and probably should not have been sold to her in the first place. Some other things were sold or are waiting to be sold, but these will just be hanging around our place, unless the laws change, which seems unlikely, as the laws have gotten more strict rather than less, and I support that, even if it means these are worthless, from a monetary point of view.
I really like the looks of them and they are well executed, so I will enjoy them and then they will be our daughter's problem at some point.

[DP]

rgG wrote:
[quote=DP]
I would treat them very carefully as it hasn't been discussed if they are possibly authentic. Do you know? Could they be just copies of old artifacts sold as home decor, e.g.?

Something like this may be worth an awful lot of money. On Antiques Roadshow once, a woman brought in four small jade articles bequeathed to her by her dad that he had gotten as an attaché in Japan after WW2. He had made friends with an antiques dealer and bought the articles in Japan. But it turned out these four small articles were commissioned by the court of a Chinese emperor and the group was estimated to be worth between $900K to over $1million! And as a side note, if you look up the episode, the women's reaction upon hearing this was priceless-

Because they are ivory, they have no monetary value, as they cannot be sold, under US law, even if they are indeed as old as they purport to be. I suspect she bought them when they were in China/Hong Kong in the early 90's but I am not sure. She also had some other Chinese antiquities that have been donated to a museum because they were funerary artifacts and probably should not have been sold to her in the first place. Some other things were sold or are waiting to be sold, but these will just be hanging around our place, unless the laws change, which seems unlikely, as the laws have gotten more strict rather than less, and I support that, even if it means these are worthless, from a monetary point of view.
I really like the looks of them and they are well executed, so I will enjoy them and then they will be our daughter's problem at some point.
(tu) But, I wouldn't mind solving the problem for you!

[rgG]

DP wrote:
[quote=rgG]
[quote=DP]
I would treat them very carefully as it hasn't been discussed if they are possibly authentic. Do you know? Could they be just copies of old artifacts sold as home decor, e.g.?

Something like this may be worth an awful lot of money. On Antiques Roadshow once, a woman brought in four small jade articles bequeathed to her by her dad that he had gotten as an attaché in Japan after WW2. He had made friends with an antiques dealer and bought the articles in Japan. But it turned out these four small articles were commissioned by the court of a Chinese emperor and the group was estimated to be worth between $900K to over $1million! And as a side note, if you look up the episode, the women's reaction upon hearing this was priceless-

Because they are ivory, they have no monetary value, as they cannot be sold, under US law, even if they are indeed as old as they purport to be. I suspect she bought them when they were in China/Hong Kong in the early 90's but I am not sure. She also had some other Chinese antiquities that have been donated to a museum because they were funerary artifacts and probably should not have been sold to her in the first place. Some other things were sold or are waiting to be sold, but these will just be hanging around our place, unless the laws change, which seems unlikely, as the laws have gotten more strict rather than less, and I support that, even if it means these are worthless, from a monetary point of view.
I really like the looks of them and they are well executed, so I will enjoy them and then they will be our daughter's problem at some point.
(tu) But, I wouldn't mind solving the problem for you!
Lol, I'll be sure to let her know.

[rgG]

Winston wrote:
[quote=rgG]
I really like them but we probably would have sold them as part of her estate except they are ivory so they cannot be sold. A few years back, I believe, they could have been sold because they were antique ivory, but now apparently no ivory can be sold, or traded or anything. I agree with the ivory ban 100% but it makes it difficult to know what to do with something like this.

We have a very ornate antique chess set, also antique ivory from her estate, that we are looking for a museum or university or someplace that would be interested in taking it. I think that is all we can legally do with it.

These small dogs are small enough just to sit quietly on the shelf and gather dust, while being appreciated by me for their fine artistry even though I despise the medium, but the chess set is just too big and delicate and needs a more appropriate home.

As I understand it, antique ivory items can be sold, but you have to have some kind of proof that they were purchased in the distant past. This can be family records, such as it being mentioned in an estate or earlier accounting, or a sales receipt. They can also be carbon dated, although that might cost a few hundred dollars to do.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ener...bc6b28062a
"Antiques at least a century old are also exempt, but owners must prove an artifact’s age through a professional appraisal or some other document that can be verified . . ."

Not an expert on this, but you might want to do some additional investigation of the options. Some detailed info here:
https://www.fws.gov/international/travel...swers.html


The only ivory item we have that I know of is a piano made in 1903 inherited from a great-great aunt, which has ivory keys. I imagine it will stay in the family, but I'd be annoyed if the government ever prevented it being sold solely for that reason.


Good luck.

- Winston
Neither of the dealers we had working on her estate would even look at anything ivory, even if we had documentation, so we will just hold onto them. There might have been some receipts, but the auction houses said no go on anything ivory at all. I do want to donate the chess set, so I hope we can find an appropriate place for it.

From the article linked above:
"Ivory dealers and collectors said century-old artifacts worth an estimated $11.9 billion will be worthless when the rule goes into effect in about a month because proving their age will be too difficult. Large auction houses such as Sotheby’s distanced themselves from the material months ago, refusing to sell it."

Sotheby's was one of the two places that sold some of her things and they said no way. Brunk was the other place and they too said no way.

[Winston]

rgG wrote:
Neither of the dealers we had working on her estate would even look at anything ivory, even if we had documentation, so we will just hold onto them. There might have been some receipts, but the auction houses said no go on anything ivory at all. I do want to donate the chess set, so I hope we can find an appropriate place for it.

From the article linked above:
"Ivory dealers and collectors said century-old artifacts worth an estimated $11.9 billion will be worthless when the rule goes into effect in about a month because proving their age will be too difficult. Large auction houses such as Sotheby’s distanced themselves from the material months ago, refusing to sell it."

Sotheby's was one of the two places that sold some of her things and they said no way. Brunk was the other place and they too said no way.

That's interesting to hear. Guessing that they are concerned about the government coming back at them after the fact, and their lawyers told them it wasn't worth the trouble. And/or pressure to not deal in ivory, even if the sales are legal. The fws.gov link I gave also says that some states have prohibited the sale of ivory under any circumstances - that could also be the issue.

Per http://www.aaps-journal.org/Fossil-Ivory...ation.html, California, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York and Washington state ban the sale of all ivory (although Washington allows the sale of fossil ivory). Given that Sotheby's is based in NY, I can see their reticence. But that wouldn't apply to Brunk, which is in North Carolina.

There is also a ban on trade in any item which was repaired after 12/28/73, even if ivory of the same age is used for the repair.

Federal law does not prohibit donating an item made of ivory, or giving it as a gift, "provided it was lawfully acquired and there is no exchange for other goods or services involved". Don't know about state laws.

In looking around on this I found that in addition to elephant ivory (which is what most of us think of), there is ivory from sperm and killer whale teeth, narwhal tusks, hippopotamus teeth, and warthog tusks. The latter two don't have any restrictions on trade, but require a license for import or export. Bone and a number of other substances are used as substitutes for ivory.
http://www.aaps-journal.org/articles/WWF-Ivory-1992.pdf


Good luck.

- Winston

[Lemon Drop]

RgG,
I think these would be amazing art pieces to have on the shelf and tell your grandkids about! What an interesting history, not just their Chinese historical and cultural significance, but also their role in our evolving understanding of species protection. I hope elephants will still be around in the African wild when our grandkids grow up, but that's not a certainty.

Would be a kick to take these on Antiques Roadshow - they could tell you the date of origin and the significance. Here's their piece on ivory laws - last updated 7/2016. Interesting stuff.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadshow/stories...ivory-law/

[rgG]

Yeah, I think all the major auction houses just feel it isn’t worth the possible hassle even if it would be legal.

I do like the way they look and they are small, so I will enjoy having them but I wish they weren’t made of ivory as I don’t condone the slaughter of animals for decorative objects. I do wonder what type of ivory they are, but I doubt I will ever test them to find out.

[OWC Jamie]

Prettyt sure if you can prove it is more than 100 years old you can do whatever you want with it.

[Winston]

Winston wrote:
There is also a ban on trade in any item which was repaired after 12/28/73, even if ivory of the same age is used for the repair.

This is apparently a huge problem for repairing keyboards on old pianos. American pianos used ivory for keys until the 1950s, and European pianos into the 1970s. Any repair, even using old ivory, causes the item to lose its grandfathered status.

Apparently will (and probably has) caused the junking of some decent older pianos, especially uprights, where replacing the keys isn't economic.

I very much see the value of trying to stop trade in ivory, but apparently there is no evidence that the musical instrument industry has ever used ivory illegally. I also wonder if older works of art made of or containing ivory will end up being destroyed. Yet if ivory can be made to have no commercial value, then the incentive for poaching goes away (if you can get places like China to come on board). Hard to see how allowing a trade in antique items would not encourage modern forgeries using new ivory, especially if the rarity causes prices to go up. So I see the rationale for banning all trade. But the "taking" part of not allowing trade in something legally acquired bothers me. No easy answers.


- W