Regardless of the identification of the Florida teapot (and Asian ceramics
are not my field) I have looked up Yixing ware and found it described
variouslly as earthenware (it is noted for its porosity) by modern
distributors and invariably as stoneware by museum curators. As it is today
apparently fired at 1200 0cent. it must be very close to being a stoneware
but is slightly porous which suggests it has not vitified ?? But as I said
before show the Florida pot  to a specialist. Must buy one when I am rich.

paul courtney


----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Borstel" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: Help on IDing a stone lamp


> I agree with Paul Courtney regarding the post from Michael Kolb.
> The vessel looks like a teapot rather than a lamp.  I'm not sure I
> agree with his attribution of the pot as an Yixing vessel.  While the
> size and the elaborate vine and flower sculpting are consistent with
> Yixing styles, it appears that the vessel is made of stoneware.  It's
> my impression, based mostly on a limited familiarity with modern
> Yixing teapots, that they are typically made of earthenware, often
> covered by a very fine, almost glaze-like, slip.  Nonetheless,
> perhaps Paul Courtney is correct, for as he points out it is difficult
> to discern the fabric or ware type from the photos, especially
> considering the pot's apparently prolonged immersion in salt water.
>
> --Chris Borstel
>