John Alexander Pope was affiliated with the Smithsonian Institute for over 40 years and served as the Director of the Smithsonian's Freer Asian Arts Gallery from 1962 through 1971. He retired as director, yet remained as the Curator of Far Eastern Art until his death in 1982. He authored many books during his time and was considered by scholars as one of the best sources of knowledge in the field of Chinese Fourteenth Century blue and white porcelain.

In 1952, two years after he conducted his study, he published his findings under the title:

.

Fourteenth Century Blue and White

A Group of Chinese Porcelains

in the Topkapu Sarayi Muzesi, Istanbul

[publication¹]

This publication provided invaluable data towards the authentication of fourteenth century blue and white. Included in the publication are detailed descriptions of thirty-one pieces determined to be fourteenth century.

Though the studies were conducted in 1950, it wasn't until 1956 that he published a second book:

.

Chinese Porcelain

from the Ardebil Shrine

[publication²]

This large, detailed publication² offers excellent research information on Chinese blue and white. The collection was started in 1587 by the Shah Abbas, and later added to by other Ottoman Turk rulers. Select pieces were chosen for the study to give a broad overall scope of the collection. Of the total 805 pieces in the collection, 618 are blue and white, and 320 of those are dishes. Of these dishes, mostly fifteenth and sixteenth century, there are 24 determined as belonging to the fourteenth century.

It is among this small group of 24 dishes that I will base my comparisons to the Anhui Dish. In trying to be somewhat objective, here are some of my observations. In referring to both publications, I will make reference to each as publication¹ or publication² as shown above.

.

Style

There seem to be three basic styles of rims known to Hongwu plates and dishes. They are flat, flat with foliate edge, and plain. I've chosen three from my collection for examples below. The first two are the most common, but those with a plain rim are extremely rare. Of the 24 known fourteenth century dishes in the Ardebil Shrine collection in Iran, there are none with a plain rim. There is however one in the Topkapi Surrey Museum collection. 

.

Shape and Size

Shape and size play an important part in authentication. I've chosen Plate 3 from the first publication¹ as a good comparison to start with. The reason being that it has the plain rim, the trellis-diaper band, which is also on 6 of the first 7 plates in the study, and a similar outline-wash to certain areas of the decoration.

Page 49, Plate D of the first publication¹ shows five different cut-away profiles of the large dishes and bowls in the Topkapi collection. Of these, Number 4 is in the style of the Anhui Dish. The depth of the dishes in the collection seems to average 3", with the diameter ranging from about 12" to just over 18". Figure 1. below is a scan from the book, figure 2 is the exact profile of the Anwui Dish.  Only FireFox does it to scale, Chrome and Edge a bit smaller.

In regard to the position of the foot rim between the two, only a very slight difference of about 1/10^th inch exists. As to the overall potting thickness, from the rim down is an average 3/16^th inch, with the lower area where it curves into the base averaging 5/16^th inch. The Anhui Dish is slightly thicker by just a small margin in some areas. Neither publication makes reference to weight, so no comparison can be made. The Anhui Dish however is quite heavy, weighing 2 pounds, 9.6 ounces.

.

Glazed versus Unglazed Bases

Though bases of fourteenth century porcelains are almost exclusively unglazed, there are a few exceptions. To deny a piece as belonging to the fourteenth century solely on the fact it has a glazed base would be absurd. Many 'experts' choose this path as it simplifies their job. A true scholar always accepts the possibility that there will be an occasional exception. There is no clear cut-off date as to when the unglazed became glazed. It would be safe to say it was a gradual transition during the latter part of the 30 year Hongwu reign with glazed bases becoming more common in the early fifteenth century, specifically during the reign of Xuande.

Also worth mention are the visible cracks, as many as 5 in one of the plates in the study. These cracks appear on both the glazed and unglazed areas and are believed to be the result of either drying of the clay prior to firing, or of the cooling within the kiln prior to removal. The cracks seem to be confined to large plates and dishes. In comparison, the 3 visible cracks on the Anhui Dish seem to be of the same nature, where as if it were dropped it would have surely shattered due to it's size and weight.

.

Decoration

As to the decoration, there are differences between the Anhui Dish and those of the study. In comparing the differences, mostly the scene, I had to remind myself that the dishes in the study were collected (or even ordered) to satisfy certain tastes within the Persian Empire. The Anhui Dish seems to be a freer style, conforming perhaps more to Chinese taste and creativity.

The lotus wreath decorating the exterior sides of the Anhui Dish lacks the 'spiky' leaves which seem to be common to those of the study. The second publication², however, shows a group of 60 fourteenth century fragments (shards) excavated from Kharakhoto, Mongolia. They display mostly the plain style leaves, identical to the Anhui Dish.

The fact that only one style of bloom is used on the wreath of the Anhui Dish is also key, and also mentioned in the study. This trait seems to be quite common to fourteenth century design, where as fifteenth and sixteenth century design often shows mixed blooms on a single wreath, often times as many as four or five different blooms. It is also noted that in the later wares, the continuous foliate wreath is often broken, or shown in separate groupings. Not a trait of fourteenth century design.

The outline-wash technique conforms with the study. In fact, publication¹ specifically points out the outline-wash technique used in Hongwu decoration as being possibly applied with a wider than normal brush. This is quite apparent on the Anhui Dish. Looking again at the second publication², the outline-wash technique is the same as that used on the Anhui Dish.

The trellis-diaper band which is also on 6 of the first 7 plates in the study, is most common to fourteenth century pieces, and not commonly used on fifteenth and sixteenth century pieces.

If the cobalt were not of the Mohammedan Blue variety, I would suspect the Anhui Dish as being mid to late fifteenth, or possibly even sixteenth century. Being of the Mohammedan variety adds strong support to it being from the reign of Hongwu, and possibly during the first 3 years of the reign. It is well documented that in 1371 Hongwu issued a decree prohibiting foreign contact and trade. This says that the now limited supply of Mohammedan blue cobalt would have been saved and used only by the Imperial kiln. Another important thing to note is that the 1371 decree also forbid the use of former emperors, queens, dragons, phoenix, sages, chilin, or lions to be used in the design of blue and white porcelain. To go against this order would impose a death sentence to either the Imperial kiln or private kiln perpetrators. 

.

Mark (Nian hao)

None of the dishes in the study were marked. There is no Hongwu mark that has ever been authenticated. The Anhui Dish bears a dynastic mark however, signifying that it was made during the Ming dynasty. It wasn't till the reign of Xuande that the standard reign mark became common. Since the Imperial kiln had been closed for some years under the Yuan rule before Hongwu, certain standards were not yet in place which explains the calligraphic style of the mark as not being of the quality established for the later reign marks.

In support of the dynastic style mark, quoting Hobson³, "it is plausible [credible] that this mark was used during the reign of Hongwu."

Taking all into consideration makes the Anhui Dish quite possibly the earliest known marked porcelain of the Ming dynasty.