Featured Eunuch's Badge (?)

I acquired this piece of Chinese silk embroidery from an antique shop. It was sold to me as a Eunuch's badge. There were 10 of thousands of Chinese Eunuchs, but it is my understanding that only those who served in the Imperial Palace were allowed to have a dragon with five claws. The dragon is made of gold thread. I have about a dozen pieces of Chinese silk embroidery and usually can tell whether it was created for the tourist trade having broad stiches or lacking detail or could possibly be a piece of Chinese history in the form of an altar cloth, cut from a piece of clothing, etc. I'm not sure about this one, so I am asking for some feedback. The back of the frame has a flyer about a dragon robe, but this is not that piece. I don't know what the intention was for attaching the flyer to the frame . Can anyone help me with this?

 

Possibly made for the exhibition shop before USC took over..... https://pacificasiamuseum.usc.edu/exhibitions/current/

 

That makes sense. A souvenir. Except it was framed in 1980 and the exhibit was in 1997.

 

Ed Boswell appears to still be framing. Why don't you ask him?

https://www.houzz.com/pro/artguyla/boswell-design

Debora

 

I could try that. Good idea. Sent him an email.

 

FWIW, it has been my understanding that Chinese dragons usually have 5 claws while Japanese usually have 3. Of course, I could be wrong.
Patd

 

Dragons (usually with five claws on each foot) were a symbol for the emperor in many Chinese dynasties. During the Qing dynasty, the imperial dragon was colored yellow or gold, and during the Ming dynasty it was red. In the Yuan dynasty, the two-horned five-clawed dragon was designated for use by the Son of Heaven or Emperor only, while the four-clawed dragon was used by the princes and nobles.[4] Similarly during the Ming and Qing dynasty, the five-clawed dragon was strictly reserved for use by the Emperor only. The dragon in the Qing dynasty appeared on the first Chinese national flag.[5]

 

It is beautiful, Kiko. I think your analysis is correct, and I would say museum replica.
This is very much a Chinese piece, not Japanese.
The importance and significance of the number of claws or toes depends on the period and region. Since this is probably a replica of an older one, probably intended to be worn at the Imperial court, it has the importance and significance of the original one.

Confusion arises when people apply the same rules to post-imperial period dragons, or dragons that were out of imperial reach, so to speak. Or from a different time or region altogether.
That is why I usually say, forget about the claws. Look at the bigger picture. If that gives you any reason to study the how and why of the number of claws, then by all means do so.

 

I hope he remembers. Will you let us know what he says?

 

Will do.

 

I am intrigued by the idea that this might be a museum replica. It appears to be hand embroidered, which represents a significant investment of time, not to mention the metallic threads used. It seems it would be prohibitively expensive to have been made as a museum souvenir. Does anyone know of similar badges of this quality made as replicas?
I imagine the paper taped to the back was just added as a reference, to help explain it.

 

Must say... it doesn't appear to be of the quality one would expect to find in a museum store. Others may disagree but... Knowing how some minds work, wonder if it isn't the case of (older) owner going to museum exhibit and, seeing something similar to an item he has at home, affixes the catalog to back of it's frame so heirs won't be so quick to toss when time comes.

Debora

 

I have a museum souvenir from a dragon robe exhibit at the Bowers Museum in Southern California about 25 years ago. You are right, the museum souvenir from this exhibit was far more simplistic - simple outlines. I went to the exhibit at the Pacific Asian Museum before it became part of USC and saw they were selling off some textiles and other art to support the museum. The question is whether this piece was created as a reproduction or is a real badge, whatever the reason it was created.

 

If this would help, I have an actual Chinese rank badge - a white crane badge - from the 19th century.

 

An exhibition of Chinese textiles was held at the Royal Ontario Museum in 1977. (The museum has one of the world's best collections of Chinese textiles.)

This is the cover of the catalog:


As I recall, the badge shown is Imperial. The Chinese were strict in their protocols, and I think civil and military rank badges were square. I also think the five-toed dragon was an Imperial prerogative

I would guess yours is a facsimile based on something like this. Could still be hand done, but would have no official standing. Worth your life to wear an unauthorized badge. But wouldn't it be nice if it were the real deal.

 

A quote from the article here:
http://journalofantiques.com/features/chinese-rank-badges/

"Before going any further I must warn new collectors of mandarin rank badges to beware of newly manufactured badges. The “antique” stores of mainland China, Hong Kong, Singapore, as well as some stores in the USA and London are filled with brand new badges being sold as very old. Some dealers go so far as to advertise their badges are Ming. It is fairly safe to say that 95% of badges currently being offered for sale on eBay are brand new, no matter what the sellers might claim. And frequently the copies are quite marvelous and can fool all, but the most expert, long-time collector."

 

It may be a roundel cut from an Imperial woman's surcoat:

Woman's surcoat (longgua): This surcoat was worn over a semi-formal dragon robe (jifu) by a court concubine or noblewoman. It is ornamented with dragon medallions which also contain auspicious symbols of clouds, Buddhist swastikas, and bats symbolising happiness. Tossed in the waves of the sea are Buddhist symbols such as the canopy, wheel of law and endless knot.
* Silk and gold-wrapped metal thread on silk satin, made in the early 1900s. Powerhouse Museum collection. Gift of Mr and Mrs Mikulicic-Rodd 1971. A5918.
http://archive.maas.museum/hsc/evrev/chinese_dress.html

The center dragon on the front of the coat would be in two pieces to allow for the coat opening, and the lower two dragons on the front would be asymmetrical pairs. But there would be a central one on the back that would be in one piece.
Also:
https://www.christies.com/features/Chinese-robes-collecting-guide-7813-1.aspx

 

I like that idea. Thanks for looking this up

 

Could this be your Gary Massaro?

http://legacy.historycolorado.org/sites/default/files/files/Researchers/Mss.02645.pdf