Rare Chinese antiques sell for more than £130k
Two rare Chinese antiques more than 300 years old and part of a family collection in East Sussex have been sold for a combined £135,500.
The vase and wine pitcher were from the reign of the Kangxi Emperor (1661 to 1722) and were bought by art connoisseur and philanthropist William Cleverley Alexander in 1907 and 1913.
Both items had been in Mr Alexander's private collection at his country home in Heathfield Park for more than a century.
John Axford, chairman of the auction house Woolley & Wallis, said the family were "delighted" with the auction result on Tuesday.
He added: "What the sale really shows is the importance of history and provenance - collectors prize provenance very highly."
The vase, which has a rare underglaze decorated with two squirrels hiding in a fruiting grapevine, was sold to a buyer in the Far East for £94,500 against an estimate of £20,000-£30,000.
The pitcher was sold for £41,000 to a European buyer against an estimate of £4,000-£6,000.
Mr Axford said: "This shows despite the economic and political troubles in the world, really good items remain highly desirable."
He explained ceramic wares modelled in the form of characters like the wine pitcher were a "remarkable" innovation of the Kangxi period - an era of stability following the collapse of the Ming Dynasty.
He added the pitcher was a "particularly decorative example". It has a blue Buddhist lion finial, an unusually long neck and moulded as the combined Chinese characters of Fu (good fortune) and Shou (longevity).
There were various uses for wine pitchers of this period, including ritualistic, ceremonial or funerary use.
"They were were created to literally 'toast' the dead and some for more practical usage," Mr Axford added.
Mr Alexander (1840-1916), who was also a banker, was credited for popularising Asian art in Britain during the Victorian era.
Born into a wealthy family, he used his financial resources to amass an impressive collection of Asian art.
His patronage of arts supported emerging artists of the time, including James McNeill Whistler who was famous for his painting Whistler's Mother.
According to the auction house, Mr Alexander bought the wine pitcher for £45 from William Dickinson & Son in 1907.
He then bought the vase from antiques dealer John Sparks on June 1913 for just £30.
Follow BBC Sussex on Facebook, on X, and on Instagram. Send your story ideas to southeasttoday@bbc.co.uk or WhatsApp us on 08081 002250.
Dodo bone and letter fetch £23,000 at auction
Hendrix tape sold for nearly double expected price
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
China to fast-track applications for rare-earth minerals to US, EU
A rare earth mine is in Ganxian county in central China's Jiangxi province. Photo by EPA-ESE June 7 (UPI) -- China has agreed to fast-track approvals for the shipment of rare earth minerals to the United States and some European Union nations. U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke Thursday about easing trade tensions. On Saturday, China's Minister Seceary Wang Wentao said his nation is "willing to establish a green channel for qualified applications to speed up approval." Details weren't given, including the speed of the process and which EU nations are included. China controls 90% of the global processing of rare earth minerals. Major deposits also are found in the United States, Australia and Russia. Smaller amounts are in Canada, India, South Africa and Southeast Asia. Rare earth minerals are in the Earth's crust, making them difficult to extract. They include lanthanide, scandium and yttrium, all on the Periodic Table of Elements. Some major minerals that contain rare earth elements are bastnasite, monazite, loparite and laterite clays. The first rare-earth mineral was discovered in 1787 -- gadolinite, a black mineral composed of cerium, yttrium, iron, silicon and other elements. U.S. needs rare earth minerals The minerals are critical to American industries and defense, including use in cars and fighter jets. Batteries contain the minerals Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday "there should no longer be any questions respecting the complexity of rare Earth products." On April 29, the United States and Ukraine created a Reconstruction Investment Fund that includes rare earth mineral rights in the European nation. Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky were originally set to sign the minerals deal on Feb. 28, but the plan was scrapped after a tense exchange between them in the Oval Office in which Trump accused him of "gambling with World War III." The United States wants access to more than 20 raw materials in Ukraine, including some non-minerals, such as oil and natural gas, as well as titanium, lithium, graphite and manganese. The Chinese commerce ministry confirmed some applications have been approved without specifying industries covered. Some Chinese suppliers have recently received six-month export licenses, the American Chamber of Commerce in China said Friday, but it noted that there is a backlog of license applications. In a survey of member companies conducted by the American Chamber of Commerce in China late week, 75% say their stock would run out within three months, CNN reported. Jens Eskelund, the chamber president, said member companies were "still struggling" with the situation. "I hadn't realized just how important this rare earth card was before. Now the U.S. side is clearly anxious and eager to resolve this issue," he said a video on Thursday. "But of course, we'll link this issue to others -- the U.S. is restricting China on chips and jet engines, then China certainly has every reason to make use of this card. "As for whether China will change its rare earth export control policy, that probably still needs to be negotiated in more detail," Jin added. Trump said Xi and himself "straightened out" some points related to rare earth magnets, calling it "very complex stuff." The U.S. federal government said China had reneged on its promise made in Geneva on May 12. Delegations from Beijing and Washington plan to meet in Great Britain on Monday for trade negotiations. At the height of tariff war, China had imposed export restrictions on some minerals on April 4. Trump two days planned a 120% "reciprocal" tax on top of 25% levy on Chinese goods. But one week later it paused the bigger tariffs, including on other countries for 90 days. European nations' needs China's commerce ministry pledged to address the EU's concerns and establish a "green channel" for eligible applications to expedite approvals. He went to Brussels, Belgium, earlier this week and met with European Union's trade commissioner, Maros Sefcovic. It's a problem for China and the EU. Sefcovic said the pause was slowing deliveries for manufacturers of a wide range of items from cars to washing machines. Wang urged the EU to "take effective measures to facilitate, safeguard and promote compliant trade of high-tech products to China." On Friday, the European Chamber, a Beijing lobby group, warned progress had "not been sufficient" to prevent severe supply chain disruptions for many companies.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
The ultimate loser of Trump and Musk's bloody battle royale could be the nation
Godzilla vs King Kong. Ali vs Frazier. Yankees vs. Red Sox. Trump vs. Musk is bigger than all of them because — unlike the first match — this one is real. And unlike the other two, it has real-world consequences. The future of the republic — not to mention the future of Tesla, SpaceX and Musk's other cutting-edge tech companies — could be at stake, depending on how bad it all gets. Of course, with this pair, they could make up while this column is at the printer. Musk is known to do 180s in business like most people breathe, and he seems open (at least for now) to rapprochement. That's why, after tanking during early rounds of the fight, Tesla shares spiked on Friday. Trump, meanwhile, can be forgiving when he sees an opportunity. Remember how he mocked 'Little Marco,' who after a MAGA-esque transformation is now Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Trump wanted to ban TikTok but as I was first to report, he's extending its life in the US. He came to believe that even if it is Chinese spyware, it helped him win a second term. But there's a better case that the Trump-Musk feud will linger. These men maintain some of the biggest egos on the planet; Musk actually thinks he's the reason Trump got elected since Elon owns X (formerly Twitter), which became a MAGA megaphone. If you know Trump like I do, someone taking credit for his success is a third rail. Plus, Musk isn't a natural convert to MAGA. These dudes bonded because Musk, a former Democrat, believed his party lost its mind on woke. His EV maker Tesla, a darling of the environmental movement, has a big operation in China, the main target of Trump's trade war. Musk called Peter Navarro, Trump's lead trade warrior, 'Peter Retarrdo' because Elon's no fan of tariffs. For his part, Trump is no budget hawk. It's telling that this fight started with Musk's critique that the president's 'big, beautiful bill' spends too much money. It quickly exposed other fissures lurking beneath the surface, according to my sources, and now it has gotten messy. No way to treat a pal Trump is teeing up killing all of Musk's lucrative government contracting after Musk outrageously — and foolishly — claimed the president is holding back the Jeffrey Epstein files because Trump's in the docs in some nefarious way. Not a way to treat a friend, particularly a powerful one. All of which gets me to laying odds on the winner if this feud keeps going. I say Trump is the heavy favorite. Musk has no political base, even if he splinters and begins spending his billions on Dems. Yes, some lefties are relishing the battle, but Musk will never be acceptable to most Democrats for the unforgivable sin of aiding Trump, then via DOGE cutting all that government lefty spending. Charlie Gasparino has his finger on the pulse of where business, politics and finance meet Sign up to receive On The Money by Charlie Gasparino in your inbox every Thursday. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Meanwhile, Musk poses little threat to MAGA. He's not a natural politician — he's not even comfortable in his own skin. He controls X and has a huge following, but Trump has his own following and social media platform that attracts as much media attention. And Trump can hit him where it hurts — his pocketbook. Musk is the world's richest man, but mostly on paper. It could diminish fast given how much of it is built on government work. Recall Musk smoking a joint on Joe Rogan, which is a no-no when you do defense contracting as SpaceX does. I reported how it sparked scrutiny by the feds that went nowhere. Maybe now it goes somewhere. Musk's accounting at Tesla has drawn regulatory attention in the past; it now might get some more. The company just had a lousy quarter as its lefty EV-buying base went somewhere else. Shares have recovered somewhat but remain under pressure. They fell as much as 16% when the feud went defcon. Trump could go after other parts of the Musk empire. The president could throttle SpaceX's government contracts, using the weed issue as an excuse to re-examine the relationship. Maybe more of those go by the wayside along with all his other government contracts. Musk is obviously miffed that Trump's tax bill didn't cut enough fat, but what might have really stoked his anger is that it did take aim at various green-tax credits that Tesla has feasted upon. Musk's recklessness in his attacks underscores one of his weaknesses as a CEO; he once said he had a buyer to take it private at a premium but no one emerged. And you wonder why the Epstein barb shouldn't be taken seriously. The smarter move Yes, Trump has a lot of levers to pull to get at what makes Musk so powerful. But here's why he shouldn't: For all of Musk's flaws, he's smart and has his finger on the pulse of the emerging economy. Tesla's tech is first-rate. SpaceX is transformational, and serves a significant national security function. Musk is rich and can continue to elect Republicans to keep Trump from being impeached and derailing what is really working in his second term, such as his war on woke, closing the border and, when this tariff stuff subsidies, tax cuts to grow the economy. And they did make beautiful music together exposing stuff with DOGE. Someone please call a timeout.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
What Elon Musk's feud with Trump means for Tesla shareholders
For Tesla investors, Elon Musk's involvement with Donald Trump has been a car wreck that's unfolded in two chapters, one in slow motion, the next on dizzying fast-forward. During Musk's 130 days running DOGE, a crusade whose dogged aggression virtually defined the administration's mindset in the early months, the EV chief infuriated European customers by backing far-right politicians, and as sales dropped in the likes of Germany and France, and severe competition shrank its market share in China, neglected tackling Tesla's mounting problems by doubling down by famously battling to slash departments and headcount from the White House. In his absence, Tesla's stock and earnings tanked. Bad as that episode proved for Tesla, it at least provided a potential upside. 'Even before DOGE, Musk clearly had too many spoons in too many pots through SpaceX, Neuralink, X and his other ventures, then he got even more preoccupied by putting another spoon in another pot,' says Eric Talley, a professor of law and business at Columbia University. 'But being in the White House also included a bit of an insurance policy for Tesla….sitting close to the seat of decision making was a big potential advantage.' Now, says Talley, Musk has singlehandedly turned that 'insurance policy' into a liability—the threat that the administration will penalize the EV-maker, or at best do nothing to protect it. When Musk departed DOGE on May 30 amid the fanfare of Trump's Oval Office sendoff, Tesla shareholders still had little to toast, since the CEO wasn't offloading his empire's myriad duties to refocus on the troubled manufacturer. Then, the Musk-Trump feud that exploded on June 5th, triggered by the former's lacerating takedown of the President's signature budget bill, put Tesla overnight into a spot where it's threatened not only by poor finances but the insults unleashed at his former sponsor that both invite retaliation by Trump and endanger Musk's survival as the enterprise's leader that's so critical to its gigantic valuation. 'The thing that's different in the last 24 hours,' says Talley, 'is that Musk not only walked away from an insurance policy of having a CEO situated high in government. He took out an anti-insurance policy. Any moment could erupt in a flameout from either side over social media that puts a target on Tesla's back.' He notes that Tesla's rivals are confronting the same headwinds from the wind-down in EV subsidies to purchasers subsidies proposed the so-called 'Great Big Beautiful Bill,' but the the overhang from antagonizing the president 'is a target its competitors don't have.' Indeed, the day it detonated, the blowup sent Tesla shares reeling 14.3% in a freefall that erased $153 billion in market cap, the biggest one-day drop in the company's history. Though it clawed back around a third of those losses the following day, the stock's still sitting 40% below its recent summit in mid-December. Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, and one of the leading experts on the rules and ethics governing boards, told Fortune that in any other major public company but Tesla, Musk would be gone—and the dumping would have happened well before the new hurricane. 'If his name had been Joe Dokes, he'd be gone in a nano-second,' says Elson, 'given the reputational damage he did alienating a good number of customers by going into politics at DOGE. It's a mess. No other board would have let a CEO get involved in that way. You don't have time to be a CEO!' What keeps Musk in the job is his iron grip on the board, says Elson. He notes that Musk controls 30% of the shares, and that his influence extends beyond the power of that stake due to the loyalty built, in part, by awarding directors large options grants that made many of them extremely rich. Elson reckons that it would be extremely difficult for disgruntled shareholders to prevail in lawsuits versus board members that might work toward forcing out Musk. 'The road to winning liability cases against directors is a twisting, bumpy one,' he avows. 'That Tesla re-incorporated from Delaware to Texas makes it much tougher. That's why Tesla moved to Texas. It was a race to the bottom and they ran all the way to the bottom of the barrel.' For Elson, Musk can't be forced to leave, and won't go unless he wants to, 'and there's nothing anybody can do about it.' Nevertheless, the size of Musk's ownership stake that's the source of his control, and his attachment to Tesla going forward that's attached to that position, are being tested by a landmark decisions in the Delaware courts. The rulings, handed down last year, negated the $56 billion stock package awarded by the board in 2018 that accounts for two-thirds of Musk's holdings. Tesla's now appealing to get that comp restored. If the Delaware Supreme Court upholds the decision, Tesla's certain to attempt getting that compensation reinstated. But that route courts much higher risks now. According to Talley, the board under Texas law could either attempt to restore the package unilaterally, or put the issue to a shareholder vote. He reckons that the former, more direct approach is now looking a lot less attractive to the directors than a few days ago. 'The board may prefer now to go with a shareholder vote,' he says, given the potential backlash from rewarding Musk so royally when Tesla's struggling, mainly because of his own actions. 'It might appeal to the board to go that way and count on a rejection,' he adds. A turn down raises another potentially ghoulish outcome. 'If they have a shareholder vote, and it goes negative, then you have a succession problem. You don't want a CEO to take vengeance on the company,' a path the mercurial legend could take. It's also unclear how Musk will react if the Delaware Supreme Court rules against him—same upshot, he owns far less of Tesla, and his incentive to rebuild his the greatest source of his wealth would be greatly diminished. Tesla enjoys a gigantic premium courtesy of Musk's iconic status and the serial promises of delivering self-driving technology that will transform Tesla from a metal-bender into a fabulously lucrative tech player. As I detailed after Tesla reported Q1 results, it actually lost money selling cars and batteries and only managed a tiny profit through the sales of regulatory credits. Its 'hardcore,' repeatable earnings from the auto and battery franchises over the previous four quarters totaled just $3.5 billion, down from $12 billion in 2022. At a PE of 30 that's three times the auto industry average, Tesla—based on bedrock fundamentals—might be worth $100 billion. But even after the recent selloff, its valuation stands at $960 billion. Hence, the difference of well over $800 billion arises from what I'll call the 'Musk magic premium,' created by his promises of epic innovations to come. If Musk were to depart, a big part of that magic premium exits with him. It may be fading already. So for Tesla shareholders, it's bad either way. Musk leaves and a hands-on leader arrives, but the genius' halo no longer shields the stock, or he stays and keeps starting fights that undermine the brand and spreads his time among half a dozen pioneering ventures that he may find more riveting. As Elson puts it, 'Anyone else would be fired after this but he feels he can't be. He has this aura that makes him feel untouchable. He's got a cult status that seems to follow him and make folks think it's okay that he doesn't operate in a normal way.' But, Elson cautions, as Musk's behavior gets more and more outrageous, the burden he's heaping on Tesla, now and what investors increasing perceive is looming, is catching up with him. We've just seen a shocking example of how fast that can happen, and how rapidly the myth can dissolve. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
