Well, I begin with a few more details from the recent trip bouncing around Myanmar. A bit of repeat from an earlier posting. This ain’t literature:

I have family in both Yangon and Mandalay, so we added side trips to Maymyo and Bagan to an otherwise family visits holiday.

I did not exert much effort in search for new weights, but did drop in at several of my old contacts. In short, prices have vastly escalated. Mostly, this reflects the well-heeled tourist art buyers who have little time and too much money. Not to mention the dwindling supply.

It is also now apparent that there has been a sharp increase in skills being devoted to replicas. Many can still be judged at a glance, but many are increasing in sophistication.

In Mandalay, I did see several breath-taking pieces.., and at breath-taking prices. A 10 (yes, ten) viss lion of the later version from the rice trade. Asking price was US$5k. It was lovely. I saw a 2.5 viss duck of the convex wings and broad daffy-duck tail far finer than any sample of any size of that series I have seen. Stunningly beautiful. 4k. A lovely Pyu 50 tical of museum quality condition. Sigh.

Of this upright duck-like group of the convex wings, I’ll post some MUCH lower quality samples. I’m having trouble dating them.

NOTE: If anyone cares to comment and advise on dating this group, I would be grateful.



Anyway, back on the road:
The Hajji U Soe Win in Maymyo was always a scoundrel, but now is shameless. He owns every antique shop in town. Mostly it's trash, and he'll do his best to pass on the best of the replicas at fine art prices. That said, he has a back room that a young nephew inadvertently let me enter several years ago where I saw extensive crate boxes of weights. He "Hoovers" (aka: Nothing Sucks like Electrolux) the Shan Hills, and everywhere else, too. If you can work him, he has treasures, but you'll more likely be the suckered. I recommend to avoid.

Still, I didn't come away empty handed from the travels. I collected 5 pieces of one of my favorite of the lesser-known groups, generally called "Mon weights". I have posted photos of these already, but will add shots of these below.

These, so-called, Mon weights are also difficult to date. While possibly late 19th century, they could also conceivably date from the fall of Pegu.

AGAIN: If anyone is willing to venture judgment on possible dating of this group, I would be most interested.



Another, possible cross-over specimen


Back on the road: I have one trading man who knows that I appreciate these strange, sometimes ugly, sometimes elegantly Spartan style of this apparent series. He saves them up for me, which is nice.

Some are just curious:


I also found a fabulous 50 tical pyu bird that is truly lovely. Customs at the airport took a strong interest in the x-ray and wanted to look. I did a tap dance, while my wife schmoozed in Burmese. They politely demurred. Whew. Photo attached:



I also bought a much more common style 1-viss "bug-eyed" bird that is in almost pristine condition. And a couple of sweet Shan birds of both late types in 5, 10 and 20 tical weights.



Open to comments. Help on the dating is very much appreciated.

Cheers,

Owen

Hallo Owen,
According to the first photo the 3 birds are genuine. The right pair I call Hintha 3A1 (Gear 2D). I put it directly after the Bodawpaya-Chinthes about 1820, because there are some similarities in the handles of both forms. I see these Hinthas to be the forerunners of the frequent protruding-eyes-Hinthas you showed a nice 1 Viss piece in your last picture. The left bird I allocate to the Shan-forms at the end of the 19th / beginning of 20th century. I call the Shan forms Hintha 4 and I separate the different forms by letters. This one would be H4B. H4D means the nicely decorated form you called "less well documented groups". H4C is the ShanAGroup in your gallery, H4A is the ShanBsingle_comb.

Bird 2 reminds me of the Arakan forms. Quite typical are small tails and heads and the edge around the base. Nice patina.

The birds 3 and 4 I havn't seen in Burma. Arakan forms?

The Hintha No 5 I am not shure about. Please compare it with my genuine/imitation examples No 2.

Best wishes hartmutmollat

Hallo right back, Hartmutmollat,

Thank you for these observations. Your distinction among the first three makes excellent sense. I like the view of the Hintha 3A1 as forerunners of the bug-eyes. How to view the left example as a Shan form is particularly helpful, although late 19th / beginning of 20th seems a little late. I’d think more like early-to-mid 19th century. No? While I see the Shan flavor, this style does not feel right as the second of 4 Shan forms, does it? The wing style and more “drake-like” appearance feels well before the others of that H4_ group. (As on all thoughts, I’m open to further education.)

To consider Bird #2 above and its group as Arakan is a surprise to me. The aesthetic makes some sense, but mine have mostly come from points south and east. I’d really appreciate any further sample of Arakin images that might illustrate this. I lived for some years in a house owned by the family that produced the local coffee table book on Mrauk-U and Arakanese artifacts, but they knew nothing of the weights. Something I found odd, but few people really are(!).

The two middle pieces are simply odd-balls. The first does seem more to what I think of Arakanese. The second shows great wear&tear, which presents its own charm.

The Hintha #5 above is much better to the hand than to the eye. The scalloping on the appendage is ink. A recent addition, but done carefully. If part of the metal, it would disqualify. The weight has been routinely covered, smeared, “washed” with some sort of tumeric or saffron herb. It doesn’t buff off easily, as it is rather deeply embedded by seeming years of such handling. The photo doesn’t capture this. Everything feels right, but I am open to reconsider. I do have other larger pieces that are more closely like some you mark as reproductions.

Your expertise and comments are really welcome.