| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. II.: An account of the potter's art in China from primitive times to the present day.
Author: Hobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. II.: An account of the potter's art in China from primitive times to the present day." ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
PORCELAIN; VOL. II. ***
Transcriber’s Notes:
1. [chch] = Chinese character. [chch 2] = 2 Chinese Characters, etc.
2. Items marked wth an asterisk (*): Pieces mentioned here from the
British Museum collection.
3. The items marked with two asterisks (**) are stated to have been
copied from old specimens in the palace collections.]
CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN
_This Edition is limited to 1500
copies, of which this is_
_No._ 669
[Illustration:
Covered Jar or Potiche, painted with coloured enamels on the
biscuit. Eight petal-shaped panels with flowering plants, birds
and insects on the sides; with a band of smaller petals below
enclosing lotus flowers, and borders of red wave pattern and
floral sprays. Base unglazed. Early part of the K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722)
Height 25 inches. _British Museum._]
CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN
AN ACCOUNT OF THE POTTER’S ART IN CHINA
FROM PRIMITIVE TIMES TO THE PRESENT DAY
BY
R. L. HOBSON, B.A.
Assistant in the Department of British and Mediæval Antiquities and
Ethnography, British Museum. Author of the “Catalogne of the
Collection of English Pottery in the Department of British
and Mediæval Antiquities of the British Museum”;
“Porcelain: Oriental, Continental, and British”;
“Worcester Porcelain”; etc; and Joint Author
of “Marks on Pottery.”
_Forty Plates, in Colour and Ninety-six in Black and White_
VOL. II
Ming and Ch’ing Porcelain
CASSELL AND COMPANY, LTD
London, New York, Toronto and Melbourne
1915
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
1. THE MING [chch] DYNASTY, 1368–1644 A.D. 1
2. HSÜAN TÊ [chch 2] (1426–1435) 7
3. CH’ÊNG HUA [chch 2] (1465–1487) AND OTHER REIGNS 22
4. CHIA CHING [chch 2] (1522–1566) AND LUNG CH’ING [chch 2]
(1567–1572) 34
5. WAN LI [chch 2] (1573–1619) AND OTHER REIGNS 58
6. THE TECHNIQUE OF THE MING PORCELAIN 91
7. MISCELLANEOUS PORCELAIN FACTORIES 107
8. THE CH’ING [chch] DYNASTY, 1644–1910 117
9. K’ANG HSI BLUE AND WHITE 128
10. K’ANG HSI POLYCHROME PORCELAINS 145
11. K’ANG HSI MONOCHROMES 176
12. YUNG CHÊNG [chch 2] PERIOD (1723–1735) 200
13. CH’IEN LUNG [chch 2] (1736–1795) 227
14. EUROPEAN INFLUENCES IN THE CH’ING DYNASTY 250
15. NINETEENTH CENTURY PORCELAINS 262
16. PORCELAIN SHAPES IN THE CH’ING DYNASTY 272
17. MOTIVES OF THE DECORATION 280
18. FORGERIES AND IMITATIONS 304
LIST OF PLATES
COVERED JAR OR POTICHE _(Colour) Frontispiece_
Painted with coloured enamels on the biscuit. Eight petal-shaped
panels with flowering plants, birds and insects on the sides;
with a band of smaller petals below enclosing lotus flowers, and
borders of red wave pattern and floral sprays. Base unglazed.
Early part of the K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722). _British Museum._
PLATE FACING PAGE
59. WHITE EGGSHELL PORCELAIN BOWL WITH IMPERIAL DRAGONS FAINTLY
TRACED IN WHITE SLIP UNDER THE GLAZE 4
Mark of the Yung Lo period (1403–1424), incised in the
centre in archaic characters.
Fig. 1.--Exterior. Fig. 2.--Interior view. _British
Museum._
60. REPUTED HSÜAN TÊ PORCELAIN 8
Fig. 1.--Flask with blue decoration, reputed to be Hsüan
Tê period. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Brush rest. (?) Chang Ch’ien on a log raft;
partly biscuit. Inscribed with a stanza of verse and
the Hsüan Tê mark. _Grandidier Collection._
61. PORCELAIN WITH _san ts’ai_ GLAZES ON THE BISCUIT 8
Fig. 1.--Wine jar with pierced casing, the Taoist
Immortals paying court to the God of Longevity,
turquoise blue ground. Fifteenth century._Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Screen with design in relief, horsemen on a
mountain path, dark blue ground. About 1500. _Benson
Collection._
62. BARREL-SHAPED GARDEN SEAT (_Colour_) 16
Porcelain with coloured glazes on the biscuit, the
designs outlined in slender fillets of clay. A lotus
scroll between an upper band of clouds and a lower
band of horses in flying gallop and sea waves.
Lion-mask handles. About 1500 A.D. _British Museum._
63. BALUSTER VASE 24
With designs in raised outline, filled in with coloured
glazes on the biscuit; dark violet blue background.
About 1500. _Grandidier Collection (Louvre)._
64. FIFTEENTH CENTURY POLYCHROME PORCELAIN 24
Fig. 1.--Vase with grey crackle and peony scrolls in
blue and enamels. Ch’êng Hua mark. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with turquoise ground and bands of floral
pattern and winged dragons incised in outline and
coloured green, yellow and aubergine. _S. E. Kennedy
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Box with bands of _ju-i_ clouds and pierced
floral scrolls; turquoise and yellow glazes in dark
blue ground. _Grandidier Collection._
65. MING _san ts’ai_ PORCELAIN 24
Fig. 1.--Vase with winged dragons, _san ts’ai_ glazes
on the biscuit, dark blue ground. Dedicatory inscription
on the neck, including the words “Ming Dynasty.”
Cloisonné handles. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Figure of Kuan-yin, turquoise, green and
aubergine glazes, dark blue rockwork. Fifteenth century.
_Grandidier Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with lotus scrolls, transparent glazes in
three colours. Late Ming. _Grandidier Collection._
66. PORCELAIN WITH CHÊNG TÊ MARK 32
Fig. 1.--Slop bowl with full-face dragons holding
_shou_ characters, in underglaze blue in a yellow
enamel ground. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with engraved cloud designs in transparent
coloured glazes on the biscuit, green ground.
_Charteris Collection._
67. BLUE AND WHITE PORCELAIN. Sixteenth Century 32
Fig. 1.--Bowl with Hsüan Tê mark. _Dresden Collection._
Fig. 2.--Covered bowl with fish design. _Dresden
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle, peasant on ox. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 4.--Bottle with lotus scrolls in mottled blue.
_Alexander Collection._
68. BLUE AND WHITE PORCELAIN. Sixteenth Century 40
Fig. 1.--Perfume vase, lions and balls of brocade. _V.
and A. Museum._
Fig. 2.--Double gourd vase, square in the lower part.
Eight Immortals paying court to the God of Longevity,
panels of children (_wa wa_). _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle with medallions of _ch’i-lin_ and incised
fret pattern between. Late Ming. _Halsey Collection._
69. SIXTEENTH CENTURY PORCELAIN 40
Fig. 1.--Bowl of blue and white porcelain with silver
gilt mount of Elizabethan period. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Covered jar, painted in dark underglaze blue
with red, green and yellow enamels; fishes and water
plants. Chia Ching mark. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
70. PORCELAIN WITH CHIA CHING MARK 40
Fig. 1.--Box with incised Imperial dragons and lotus
scrolls; turquoise and dark violet glazes on the
biscuit. _V. and A. Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with Imperial dragons in clouds, painted
in yellow in an iron red ground. _Cologne Museum._
71. SIXTEENTH CENTURY PORCELAIN 40
Figs. 1 and 2.--Two ewers in the Dresden Collection,
with transparent green, aubergine and turquoise glazes
on the biscuit, traces of gilding. In form of a phœnix,
and of a crayfish.
Fig. 3.--Bowl with flight of storks in a lotus scroll,
enamels on the biscuit, green, aubergine and white in a
yellow ground. Chia Ching mark. _Alexander Collection._
72. VASE WITH IMPERIAL FIVE-CLAWED DRAGONS IN CLOUD SCROLLS
OVER SEA WAVES (_Colour_) 46
Band of lotus scrolls on the shoulder. Painted in dark
Mohammedan blue. Mark on the neck, of the Chia Ching
period (1522–1566) in six characters. _V. & A. Museum._
73. TWO BOWLS WITH THE CHIA CHING MARK (1522–1566), WITH
DESIGNS OUTLINED IN BROWN AND WASHED IN WITH
COLOURS IN MONOCHROME GROUNDS (_Colour_) 50
Fig. 1.--With peach sprays in a yellow ground.
_Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--With phœnixes (_feng-huang_) flying among
scrolls of _mu-tan_ peony. _Cumberbatch Collection._
74. TWO BOWLS WITH GILT DESIGNS ON A MONOCHROME GROUND.
PROBABLY CHIA CHING PERIOD (1522–1566) (_Colour_) 54
Fig. 1.--With lotus scroll with etched details on a
ground of iron red (_fan hung_) outside. Inside is
figure of a man holding a branch of cassia, a symbol
of literary success, painted in underglaze blue. Mark
in blue, _tan kuei_ (red cassia).
Fig. 2.--With similar design on ground of emerald green
enamel. Mark in blue in the form of a coin or _cash_
with the characters _ch’ang ming fu kuei_ (“long life,
riches and honours”).
75. MING PORCELAIN 64
Fig. 1.--Tripod Bowl with raised peony scrolls in
enamel colours. Wan Li mark. _Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Blue and white Bowl, Chia Ching period. Mark,
_Wan ku ch’ang ch’un_ (“a myriad antiquities and
enduring spring”). _Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin._
Fig. 3.--Ewer with white slip _ch’i-lin_ on a blue
ground. Wan Li period. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 4.--Gourd-shaped Vase with winged dragons and fairy
flowers, raised outlines and coloured glazes on the
biscuit. Sixteenth century. _Salting Collection._
76. BLUE AND WHITE PORCELAIN. Sixteenth Century 64
Fig. 1.--Vase with monster handles, archaic dragons.
_Halsey Collection._
Fig. 2.--Hexagonal Bottle, white in blue designs. Mark,
a hare. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle with “garlic mouth,” stork and lotus
scrolls, white in blue. _Salting Collection._
Fig. 4.--Vase (_mei p’ing_), Imperial dragon and scrolls.
Wan Li mark on the shoulder. _Coltart Collection._
77. TWO EXAMPLES OF MING BLUE AND WHITE PORCELAIN IN THE
BRITISH MUSEUM (_Colour_) 72
Fig. 1.--Ewer of thin, crisp porcelain with foliate
mouth and rustic spout with leaf attachments. Panels
of figure subjects and landscapes on the body: “rat
and vine” pattern on the neck and a band of hexagon
diaper enclosing a cash symbol. Latter half of the
sixteenth century.
Fig. 2.--Octagonal Stand, perhaps for artist’s colours.
On the sides are scenes from the life of a sage.
Borders of _ju-i_ pattern and gadroons. On the top are
lions sporting with brocade balls. Painted in deep
Mohammedan blue. Mark of the Chia Ching period
(1522–1566).
78. PORCELAIN WITH PIERCED (_LING LUNG_) DESIGNS AND BISCUIT
RELIEFS. Late Ming 74
Fig. 1.--Bowl with Eight Immortals and pierced swastika
fret. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with blue phœnix medallions, pierced
trellis work and characters. Wan Li mark. _Hippisley
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Covered Bowl with blue and white landscapes and
biscuit reliefs of Eight Immortals. _Grandidier
Collection._
79. WAN LI POLYCHROME PORCELAIN 80
Fig. 1.--Vase (_mei p’ing_) with engraved design, green
in a yellow ground, Imperial dragons in clouds, rocks
and wave border. Wan Li mark. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with pierced casing, phœnix design, etc.,
painted in underglaze blue and enamels; cloisonné
enamel neck. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Covered Jar, plum blossoms and symbols in a
wave pattern ground, coloured enamels in an aubergine
background. _British Museum._
80. COVERED JAR OR POTICHE (_Colour_) 84
Painted in iron red and green enamels, with a family
scene in a garden, and brocade borders of _ju-i_ pattern,
peony scrolls, etc. Sixteenth century. _Salting
Collection, V. & A. Museum._
81. BEAKER-SHAPED VASE OF BRONZE FORM (_Colour_) 88
With dragon and phœnix designs painted in underglaze
blue, and red, green and yellow enamels: background of
fairy flowers (_pao hsiang hua_) and borders of “rock
and wave” pattern. Mark of the Wan Li period (1573–1619)
in six characters on the neck. An Imperial piece.
_British Museum._
82. LATE MING PORCELAIN 90
Fig. 1.--Jar of Wan Li period, enamelled. Mark, a hare.
_British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with Eight Immortals in relief, coloured
glazes on the biscuit. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Figs. 3, 4 and 5.--Blue and white porcelain, early
seventeenth century. _British Museum._
83. VASE 90
With blue and white decoration of rockery, phœnixes,
and flowering shrubs. Found in India. Late Ming
period. _Halsey Collection._
84. VASE OF BALUSTER FORM WITH SMALL MOUTH (_mei p’ing_).
(_Colour_) 96
Porcelain with coloured glazes on the biscuit, the
designs outlined in slender fillets of clay. A meeting
of sages in a landscape beneath an ancient pine tree,
the design above their heads representing the mountain
mist. On the shoulders are large _ju-i_ shaped lappets
enclosing lotus sprays, with pendent jewels between;
fungus (_ling chih_) designs on the neck. Yellow glaze
under the base. A late example of this style of ware,
probably seventeenth century. _Salting Collection,
V. & A. Museum._
85. VASE (_Colour_) 104
With crackled greenish grey glaze coated on the exterior
with transparent apple green enamel: the base unglazed.
Probably sixteenth century. _British Museum._
86. FUKIEN PORCELAIN. Ming Dynasty 112
Fig. 1.--Figure of Kuan-yin with boy attendant. Ivory
white. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with prunus sprigs in relief, the glaze
crackled all over and stained a brownish tint.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Figure of Bodhidharma crossing the Yangtze on
a reed. Ivory white. _Salting Collection, V. & A.
Museum._
87. IVORY WHITE FUKIEN PORCELAIN 112
Fig. 1.--Libation Cup. About 1700. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Cup with sixteenth century mount. _Dresden
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Incense Vase and Stand. About 1700. _British
Museum._
88. TWO EXAMPLES OF THE UNDERGLAZE RED (_chi hung_)OF THE K’ANG
HSI PERIOD (1662–1722), SOMETIMES CALLED _lang yao_.
(_Colour_) 120
Fig. 1.--Bottle-shaped Vase of dagoba form with
minutely crackled _sang-de-bœuf_ glaze with passages
of cherry red. The glaze ends in an even roll short of
the base rim, and that under the base is stone-coloured
and crackled. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase with crackled underglaze red
of deep crushed strawberry tint. The glaze under the
base is pale green crackled. _Alexander Collection._
89. THREE EXAMPLES OF K’ANG HSI BLUE AND WHITE PORCELAIN
IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM (_Colour_) 132
Fig. 1.--Ewer with leaf-shaped panels of floral
arabesques, white in blue, enclosed by a mosaic
pattern in blue and white: stiff plantain leaves on
the neck and cover. Silver mount with thumb-piece.
Fig. 2.--Deep Bowl with cover, painted with “tiger-lily”
scrolls. Mark, a leaf.
Fig. 3.--Sprinkler with panels of lotus arabesques, white
in blue, and _ju-i_ shaped border patterns. A diaper of
small blossoms on the neck. Mark, a leaf.
90. COVERED JAR FOR NEW YEAR GIFTS (_Colour_) 138
With design of blossoming prunus (_mei hua_) sprays in
a ground of deep sapphire blue which is reticulated
with lines suggesting ice cracks; dentate border on the
shoulders. _V. & A. Museum._
91. BLUE AND WHITE K’ANG HSI PORCELAIN 142
Fig. 1.--Triple Gourd Vase, white in blue designs of
archaic dragons and scrolls of season flowers.
_Dresden Collection._
Fig. 2.--Beaker, white magnolia design slightly raised,
with blue background. _British Museum._
Fig. 3.--“Grenadier Vase,” panels with the Paragons of
Filial Piety. _Dresden Collection._
92. BLUE AND WHITE K’ANG HSI PORCELAIN 142
Fig. 1.--Sprinkler with lotus design. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with biscuit handles, design of graceful
ladies (_mei jên_). _Fitzwilliam Museum (formerly D.
G. Rossetti Collection)._
Fig. 3.--Bottle with handles copied from Venetian glass.
_British Museum._
93. BLUE AND WHITE PORCELAIN 142
Fig. 1.--Tazza with Sanskrit characters. Ch’ien Lung
mark. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Water Pot, butterfly and flowers, steatitic
porcelain. Wan Li mark. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bowl, steatitic porcelain. Immortals on a log
raft. K’ang Hsi period. _British Museum._
94. PORCELAIN DECORATED IN ENAMELS ON THE BISCUIT 142
Fig. 1.--Ewer in form of the character _Shou_
(Longevity); blue and white panel with figure designs.
Early K’ang Hsi period. _Salting Collection._
Fig. 2.--Ink Palette, dated 31st year of K’ang Hsi
(1692 A.D.). _British Museum._
95. TWO EXAMPLES OF PORCELAIN, PAINTED WITH COLOURED
ENAMELS ON THE BISCUIT, THE DETAILS OF THE DESIGNS
BEING FIRST TRACED IN BROWN. K’ANG HSI PERIOD
(1662–1722) (_Colour_) 150
Fig. 1.--One of a pair of Buddhistic Lions, sometimes
called Dogs of Fo. This is apparently the lioness,
with her cub: the lion has a ball of brocade under
his paw. On the head is the character _wang_ (prince),
which is more usual on the tiger of Chinese art.
_S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase and Stand moulded in bamboo
pattern and decorated with floral brocade designs and
diapers. _Cope Bequest, V. & A. Museum._
96. VASE OF BALUSTER FORM PAINTED IN COLOURED ENAMELS ON
THE BISCUIT (_Colour_) 154
The design, which is outlined in brown, consists of a
beautifully drawn prunus (_mei hua_) tree in blossom
and hovering birds, besides a rockery and smaller
plants of bamboo, etc., set in a ground of mottled
green. Ch’êng Hua mark, but K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722). _British Museum._
97. SQUARE VASE (_Colour_) 156
With pendulous body and high neck slightly expanding
towards the top: two handles in the form of archaic
lizard-like dragons (_chih lung_), and a pyramidal
base. Porcelain painted with coloured enamels on the
biscuit, with scenes representing Immortals on a log
raft approaching Mount P’eng-lai in the Taoist
Paradise. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722). _British
Museum._
98. K’ANG HSI PORCELAIN WITH ON-BISCUIT DECORATION. _Dresden
Collection_ 160
Fig. 1.--Teapot in form of a lotus seed-pod, enamels
on the biscuit.
Fig. 2.--Hanging Perfume Vase, reticulated, enamels
on the biscuit.
Fig. 3.--Ornament in form of a Junk, transparent _san
ts’ai_ glazes.
99. K’ANG HSI PORCELAIN WITH ON-BISCUIT DECORATION 160
Fig. 1.--Ewer with black enamel ground, lion handle.
_Cope Bequest, V. & A. Museum._
Fig. 2.--Figure of the Taoist Immortal, Ho Hsien Ku,
transparent _san ts’ai_ glazes. _S. E. Kennedy
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase and Stand, enamelled on the biscuit.
_Cope Bequest._
100. SCREEN WITH PORCELAIN PLAQUE, PAINTED IN ENAMELS ON THE
BISCUIT 160
Light green background. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722).
_In the Collection of the Hon. E. Evan Charteris._
101. VASE WITH PANELS OF LANDSCAPES AND _po ku_ symbols in
_famille verte_ ENAMELS 160
In a ground of underglaze blue trellis pattern. K’ang
Hsi period (1662–1722). _Dresden Collection._
102. TWO DISHES OF _FAMILLE VERTE_ PORCELAIN IN THE DRESDEN
COLLECTION. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722) 160
Fig. 1.--With birds on a flowering branch, brocade
borders. Artist’s signature in the field.
Fig. 2.--With ladies on a garden terrace.
103. CLUB-SHAPED (_rouleau_) VASE (_Colour_) 166
Finely painted in _famille verte_ enamels with panel
designs in a ground of chrysanthemum scrolls in iron
red; brocade borders. Last part of the K’ang Hsi
period (1662–1722). _Salting Collection, V. & A.
Museum._
104. THREE EXAMPLES OF K’ANG HSI _famille verte_ PORCELAIN 168
Fig. 1.--Square Vase with scene of floating cups on the
river; inscription with cyclical date 1703 A.D.;
_shou_ characters on the neck. _Hippisley Collection._
Fig. 2.--Lantern, with river scenes. _Dresden
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Covered Jar of _rouleau_ shape, peony scrolls
in iron red ground, brocade borders. _Dresden
Collection._
105. COVERED JAR PAINTED IN _famille verte_ ENAMELS 168
With brocade ground and panel with an elephant (the
symbol of Great Peace). Lion on cover. K’ang Hsi
period (1662–1722). _Dresden Collection._
106. K’ANG HSI _famille verte_ PORCELAIN. _Alexander
Collection_ 168
Fig. 1.--Dish with rockery, peonies, etc., birds and
insects.
Fig. 2.--“Stem Cup” with vine pattern.
107. _Famille verte_ PORCELAIN MADE FOR EXPORT TO EUROPE. K’ang
Hsi period (1662–1722). _British Museum_ 168
Fig. 1.--Vase with “sea monster” (_hai shou_).
Fig. 2.--Dish with basket of flowers. Mark, a leaf.
Fig. 3.--Covered Jar with _ch’i-lin_ and _fêng-huang_
(phœnix).
108. DISH PAINTED IN UNDERGLAZE BLUE AND _famille verte_ ENAMELS.
(_Colour_) 172
In the centre, a five-clawed dragon rising from waves
in pursuit of a pearl. Deep border in “Imari” style
with cloud-shaped compartments with chrysanthemum
and prunus designs in a blue ground, separated by
close lotus scrolls reserved in an iron red ground in
which are three book symbols. K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722). _Alexander Collection._
109. FIGURE OF SHOU LAO, TAOIST GOD OF LONGEVITY 176
Porcelain painted with _famille verte_ enamels. K’ang
Hsi period (1662–1722). _Salting Collection, V. & A.
Museum._
110. TWO EXAMPLES OF THE “POWDER BLUE” (_ch’ui ch’ing_) PORCELAIN
OF THE K’ANG HSI PERIOD (1662–1722) IN THE VICTORIA
AND ALBERT MUSEUM (_Colour_) 182
Fig 1.--Bottle of gourd shape with slender neck: powder
blue ground with gilt designs from the Hundred
Antiques (_po ku_) and borders of _ju-i_ pattern,
formal flowers and plantain leaves.
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase with _famille verte_ panels
of rockwork and flowers reserved in a powder blue
ground. _Salting Collection._
111. TWO EXAMPLES OF SINGLE-COLOUR PORCELAIN IN THE SALTING
COLLECTION (VICTORIA AND ALBERT MUSEUM). (_Colour_) 186
Fig. 1.--Bottle-shaped Vase of porcelain with landscape
design lightly engraved in relief under a turquoise
blue glaze. Early eighteenth century.
Fig. 2.--Water vessel for the writing table of the form
known as _T’ai-po tsun_ after the poet Li T’ai-po.
Porcelain with faintly engraved dragon medallions
under a peach bloom glaze; the neck cut down and
fitted with a metal collar. Mark in blue of the K’ang
Hsi period (1662–1722) in six characters.
112. THREE FIGURES OF BIRDS, LATE K’ANG HSI PORCELAIN, WITH
COLOURED ENAMELS ON THE BISCUIT 192
Fig. 1.--Stork. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Hawk. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 3.--Cock. _British Museum._
113. PORCELAIN DELICATELY PAINTED IN THIN _famille verte_ ENAMELS.
About 1720 192
Fig. 1.--Dish with figures of Hsi Wang Mu and attendant.
Ch’êng Hua mark. _Hippisley Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with the Eight Immortals. _S. E. Kennedy
Collection._
114. HANGING VASE WITH OPENWORK SIDES, FOR PERFUMED FLOWERS 192
Porcelain painted in late _famille verte_ enamels. About
1720. Blackwood frame. _Cumberbatch Collection._
115. VASE OF BALUSTER FORM (_Colour_) 206
With ornament in white slip and underglaze red and blue
in a celadon green ground: rockery, and birds on a
flowering prunus tree. Yung Chêng period (1723–1735).
_Alexander Collection._
116. YUNG CHÊNG PORCELAIN 208
Fig. 1.--Imperial Rice Bowl with design of playing
children (_wa wa_), engraved outlines filled in with
green in a yellow ground, transparent glazes on the
biscuit. Yung Chêng mark. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Blue and White Vase with fungus (_ling chih_)
designs in Hsüan Tê style. _Cologne Museum._
117. YUNG CHÊNG PORCELAIN 208
Fig. 1.--Vase with prunus design in underglaze red and
blue. _C. H. Read Collection._
Fig. 2.--Imperial Vase with phœnix and peony design in
pale _famille verte_ enamels over underglaze blue
outlines. _V. & A. Museum._
118. EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ENAMELS 208
Fig. 1.--Plate painted at Canton in _famille rose_
enamels (_yang ts’ai_ “foreign colouring”). Yung
Chêng period. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Arrow Stand, painted in late _famille verte_
enamels. About 1720. _V. & A. Museum._
119. YUNG CHÊNG PORCELAIN, PAINTED AT CANTON WITH _FAMILLE ROSE_
ENAMELS. _British Museum._ 208
Fig. 1.--“Seven border” Plate.
Fig. 2.--Eggshell Cup and Saucer with painter’s marks.
Fig. 3.--Eggshell Plate with vine border.
Fig. 4.--Armorial Plate with arms of Leake Okeover.
Transition enamels, about 1723.
120. COVERED JAR OR POTICHE, PAINTED IN _famille rose_ OR
“FOREIGN COLOURS” (_yang ts’ai_) WITH BASKETS OF
FLOWERS (_Colour_) 222
Deep borders of ruby red enamel broken by small panels
and floral designs. On the cover is a lion coloured
with enamels on the biscuit. From a set of five vases
and beakers in the _Collection of Lady Wantage_. Late
Yung Chêng period (1723–1735).
121. TWO BEAKERS AND A JAR FROM SETS OF FIVE, _famille rose_
ENAMELS. Late Yung Chêng porcelain 224
Fig. 1.--Beaker with “harlequin” ground. _S. E. Kennedy
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Jar with dark blue glaze gilt and leaf-shaped
reserves. _Burdett-Coutts Collection._
Fig. 3.--Beaker with fan and picture-scroll panels,
etc., in a deep ruby pink ground. _Wantage
Collection._
122. WHITE PORCELAIN WITH DESIGNS IN LOW RELIEF 232
Fig. 1.--Vase, peony scroll, _ju-i_ border, etc.
Ch’ien Lung period. _O. Raphael Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with “garlic mouth,” Imperial dragons
in clouds. Creamy crackled glaze imitating Ting ware.
Early eighteenth century. _Salting Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with design of three rams, symbolising
Spring. Ch’ien Lung period. _W. Burton Collection._
123. EIGHTEENTH CENTURY GLAZES (_Colour_) 236
Fig. 1.--Square Vase with tubular handles, and
apricot-shaped medallions on front and back. _Flambé_
red glaze. Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795). _British
Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase with deep blue (_ta ch’ing_)
glaze: unglazed base. Early eighteenth century.
_British Museum._
Fig. 3.--Vase with fine iron red enamel (_mo hung_) on
the exterior. Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795). _Salting
Collection, V. & A. Museum._
124. MISCELLANEOUS PORCELAINS 240
Fig. 1.--Magnolia Vase with _flambé_ glaze of crackled
lavender with red and blue streaks. Ch’ien Lung
period. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with elephant handles, yellow, purple,
green, and white glazes on the biscuit. Ch’ien Lung
period. _British Museum._
Fig. 3.--Dish with fruit design in lustrous transparent
glazes on the biscuit, covering a faintly etched
dragon pattern. K’ang Hsi mark. _British Museum._
125. CH’IEN LUNG WARES. _Hippisley Collection_ 240
Fig. 1.--Brush Pot of enamelled Ku-yüeh-hsüan glass.
Ch’ien Lung mark.
Fig. 2.--Bottle, porcelain painted in Ku-yüeh style,
after a picture by the Ch’ing artist Wang Shih-mei.
Fig. 3.--Imperial Presentation Cup marked _hsü hua t’ang
chih tsêng_.
Fig. 4.--Medallion Vase, brocade ground with bats in
clouds, etc. Ch’ien Lung mark.
126. VASE WITH “HUNDRED FLOWER” DESIGN IN _famille rose_
ENAMELS. 240
Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795). _Grandidier
Collection, Louvre._
127. VASE PAINTED IN MIXED ENAMELS. THE HUNDRED DEER. 240
Late Ch’ien Lung period. _Grandidier Collection, Louvre_
128. CH’IEN LUNG PORCELAIN. _British Museum_ 248
Fig. 1.--Vase with “rice grain” ground and blue and
white design.
Fig. 2.--Vase with “lacework” designs. Ch’ien Lung mark.
Fig. 3.--Vase with the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo
Grove in _lac burgauté_.
Fig. 4.--Vase with “robin’s egg” glaze.
129. OCTAGONAL VASE AND COVER, PAINTED IN _famille rose_
ENAMELS 248
Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795). _One of a pair in the
Collection of Dr. A. E. Cumberbatch._
130. VASE WITH PEAR-SHAPED BODY AND WIDE MOUTH; TUBULAR
HANDLES (_Colour_) 254
Porcelain with delicate _clair de lune_ glaze
recalling the pale blue tint of some of the finer
Sung celadons. About 1800. _British Museum._
131. EIGHTEENTH CENTURY PAINTED PORCELAIN 264
Fig. 1.--Plate painted in black and gold, European
figures in a Chinese interior. Yung Chêng period.
_British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Dish with floral scrolls in _famille rose_
enamels in a ground of black enamel diapered with
green foliage scrolls. Ch’ien Lung period. _Wantage
Collection._
132. Vase painted in mixed enamels, an Imperial park and a
bevy of ladies 264
Deep ruby pink borders with coloured floral scrolls
and symbols. Ch’ien Lung mark. About 1790. _Wantage
Collection._
133. LATE _famille rose_ ENAMELS 280
Fig. 1.--Bowl painted in soft enamels, attendants of
Hsi Wang Mu in boats. Mark, _Shên tê t’ang chih_.
Tao Kuang period. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Imperial Fish Bowl with five dragons ascending
and descending, borders of wave pattern, _ju-i_
pattern, etc., _famille rose_ enamels. Late eighteenth
century. _Burdett-Coutts Collection._
134. PORCELAIN SNUFF BOTTLES. Eighteenth Century. _British
Museum_ 280
Fig. 1.--Subject from the drama, black ground. Yung
Chêng mark.
Fig. 2.--Battle of demons, underglaze blue and red.
Mark, _Yung-lo t’ang_.
Fig. 3.--Blue and white “steatitic” ware.
Fig. 4.--Crackled cream white _ting_ glaze, pierced
casing with pine, bamboo and prunus.
Fig. 5.--“Steatitic” ware with Hundred Antiques design
in coloured relief. Chia Ch’ing mark.
CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN
CHAPTER I
THE MING [chch] DYNASTY, 1368–1644 A.D.
As we have already discussed, so far as our imperfect knowledge
permits, the various potteries which are scattered over the length and
breadth of China, we can now concentrate our attention on the rising
importance of Ching-tê Chên. From the beginning of the Ming dynasty,
Ching-tê Chên may be said to have become the ceramic metropolis of the
empire, all the other potteries sinking to provincial status. So far
as Western collections, at any rate, are concerned, it is not too much
to say that 90 per cent. of the post-Yüan porcelains were made in this
great pottery town.
What happened there in the stormy years which saw the overthrow of
the Mongol dynasty and the rise of the native Ming is unknown to us,
and, indeed, it is scarcely likely to have been of much interest.
The Imperial factories were closed, and did not open till 1369, or,
according to some accounts, 1398.[1] If we follow the _Ching-tê Chên
T’ao lu_, which, as its name implies, should be well informed on
the history of the place, a factory was built in 1369 at the foot of
the Jewel Hill to supply Imperial porcelain (_kuan tz’ŭ_), and
in the reign of Hung Wu (1368–1398) there were at least twenty kilns
in various parts of the town working in the Imperial service. They
included kilns for the large dragon bowls, kilns for blue (or green)
ware (_ch’ing yao_), “wind and fire”[2] kilns, seggar kilns
for making the cases for the fine porcelain, and _lan kuang_
kilns, which Julien renders _fours à flammes étendues_. The last
expression implies that the heat was raised in these kilns by means of
a kind of bellows (_kuang_) which admitted air to the furnace,
and Bushell’s rendering, “blue and yellow enamel furnaces,” ignores an
essential part of both the characters[3] used in the original.
From this time onward there is no lack of information on the nature
of the Imperial wares made during the various reigns, but it must be
remembered that the Chinese descriptions are in almost every case
confined to the Imperial porcelains, and we are left to assume that
the productions of the numerous private kilns followed the same lines,
though in the earlier periods, at any rate, we are told that they were
inferior in quality and finish.
The Hung Wu [chch 2] palace porcelain, as described in the _T’ao
lu_, was of fine, unctuous clay and potted thin. The ware was left
for a whole year to dry, then put upon the lathe and turned thin, and
then glazed and fired. If there was any fault in the glaze, the piece
was ground down on the lathe, reglazed and refired. “Consequently the
glaze was lustrous (_jung_) like massed lard.” These phrases
are now so trite that one is tempted to regard them as mere Chinese
conventionalities, but there is no doubt that the material used in
the Ming period (which, as we shall see presently, gave out in the
later reigns) was of peculiar excellence. The raw edge of the base rim
of early specimens does, in fact, reveal a beautiful white body of
exceedingly fine grain and smooth texture, so fat and unctuous that one
might almost expect to squeeze moisture out of it.
The best ware, we are told, was white, but other kinds are mentioned.
A short contemporary notice in the _Ko ku yao lun_,[4] written in
1387, says, “Of modern wares (made at Ching-tê Chên) the good examples
with white colour and lustrous are very highly valued. There are,
besides, _ch’ing_[5] (blue or green) and black (_hei_) wares
with gilding, including wine pots and wine cups of great charm.” Such
pieces may exist in Western collections, but they remain unidentified,
and though there are several specimens with the Hung Wu mark to be seen
in museums, few have the appearance of Ming porcelain at all. There is,
however, a dish in the British Museum which certainly belongs to the
Ming dynasty, even if it is a century later than the mark implies.
The body is refined and white, though the finish is rather rough, with
pits and raised spots here and there in the glaze and grit adhering
to the foot rim; but it is painted with a free touch in a bright
blue, recalling the Mohammedan blue in colour, the central subject a
landscape, and the sides and rim divided into panels of floral and
formal ornament. It must be allowed that the style of the painting is
advanced for this early period, including as it does white designs
reserved in blue ground as well as the ordinary blue painting on a
white ground.
_Yung Lo_ [chch 2] (1403–1424)
The usual formulæ are employed by the _T’ao lu_ in describing the
Imperial ware of this reign. It was made of plastic clay and refined
material, and though, as a rule, the porcelain was thick, there
were some exceedingly thin varieties known as _t’o t’ai_[6] or
“bodiless” porcelains. Besides the plain white specimens, there were
others engraved with a point[7] or coated with vivid red (_hsien
hung_). The _Po wu yao lan_,[8] reputed a high authority on
Ming porcelains and written in the third decade of the seventeenth
century, adds “blue and white” to the list and gives further details of
the wares. The passage is worth quoting in full, and runs as follows:
“In the reign of Yung Lo were made the cups which fit in the palm of
the hand,[9] with broad mouth, contracted waist, sandy (_sha_)
foot, and polished base. Inside were drawn two lions rolling balls.
Inside, too, in seal characters, was written _Ta Ming Yung Lo nien
chih_[10] in six characters, or sometimes in four[11] only, as fine
as grains of rice. These are the highest class. Those with mandarin
ducks, or floral decoration inside, are all second quality. The cups
are decorated outside with blue ornaments of a very deep colour,
and their shape and make are very refined and beautiful and in a
traditional style. Their price, too, is very high. As for the modern
imitations, they are coarse in style and make, with foot and base burnt
(brown), and though their form has some resemblance (to the old), they
are not worthy of admiration.”
As may be imagined, Yung Lo porcelain is not common to-day, and the
few specimens which exist in our collections are not enough to make
us realise the full import of these descriptions. There are, however,
several types which bear closely on the subject, some being actually
of the period and others in the Yung Lo style. A fair sample of the
ordinary body and glaze of the time is seen in the white porcelain
bricks of which the lower story of the famous Nanking pagoda was built.
Several of these are in the British Museum, and they show a white
compact body of close but granular fracture; the glazed face is a pure,
solid-looking white, and the unglazed sides show a smooth, fine-grained
ware which has assumed a pinkish red tinge in the firing. The coarser
porcelains of the period would, no doubt, have similar characteristics
in body and glaze. The finer wares are exemplified by the white bowls,
of wonderful thinness and transparency, with decoration engraved in
the body or traced in delicate white slip under the glaze and scarcely
visible except as a transparency. Considering the fragility of these
delicate wares and the distant date of the Yung Lo period, it is
surprising how many are to be seen in Western collections. Indeed, it
is hard to believe that more than a very few of these can be genuine
Yung Lo productions, and as we know that the fine white “egg shell”
porcelain was made throughout the Ming period and copied with great
skill in the earlier reigns of the last dynasty, it is not necessary
to assume that every bowl of the Yung Lo type dates back to the first
decades of the fifteenth century.
[Illustration: Plate 59.--White Eggshell Porcelain Bowl with
Imperial dragons faintly traced in white slip under the glaze.
Mark of the Yung Lo period (1403–1424) incised in the centre in
archaic characters. 1. Exterior. 2. Interior view. Diameter 8¾
inches. _British Museum._]
It is wellnigh impossible to reproduce adequately these white
porcelains, but Plate 59 illustrates the well-known example in the
Franks Collection, which has long been accepted as a genuine Yung Lo
specimen. It represents the _ya shou pei_ in form, with wide mouth
and small foot--the contracted waist of the _Po wu yao lan_; the
foot rim is bare at the edge, but not otherwise sandy, and the base is
glazed over, which may be the sense in which the word “polished”[12] is
used in the _Po wu yao lan_. The ware is so thin and transparent
that it seems to consist of glaze alone, as though the body had
been pared away to vanishing point before the glaze was applied--in
short, it is _t’o t’ai_ or “bodiless.” When held to the light
it has a greenish transparency and the colour of melting snow, and
there is revealed on the sides a delicate but exquisitely drawn design
of five-clawed Imperial dragons in white slip (not etched, as has
too often been stated), showing up like the water-mark in paper. On
the bottom inside is the date-mark of the period etched with a point
in four archaic characters (see vol. i, p. 213). A more refined and
delicate ceramic work could hardly be imagined.
Close to this bowl in the Franks Collection there are two smaller bowls
or, rather, cups which in many ways answer more nearly the description
of the _ya shou pei_,[13] though they are thick in substance
and of coarser make. They have straight spreading sides, wide at the
mouth, with foliate rim, and contracted at the foot. The foot rim is
bare of glaze, but the base is covered. They are of an impure white
ware with surface rather pitted, and inside is a lotus design traced
in white slip under the glaze and repeated in radiating compartments.
These are perhaps a product of the private factories. The same form is
observed among the blue and white porcelain in two small cups, which
are painted in blue with a landscape on the exterior and with bands
of curled scrolls inside and the Yung Lo mark in four characters. The
base is unglazed, and though they are undoubtedly intended to represent
a Yung Lo type, these not uncommon bowls can hardly be older than the
last dynasty. Another blue and white bowl in the Franks Collection has
the Yung Lo mark and the scroll decoration inside, and on the exterior
a long poem by Su Shih, covering most of the surface. It is painted in
a grey blue, and the ware, though coarse, has the appearance of Ming
manufacture, perhaps one of the late Ming copies which are mentioned
without honour in the _Po wu yao lan_. It is, however, of the
ordinary rounded form.[14]
Hsiang Yüan-p’ien illustrates in his Album one Yung Lo specimen, a low
cylindrical bowl of the “bodiless” kind, “thin as paper,” with a very
delicate dragon and phœnix design, which is seen when the bowl is
held to the light and carefully inspected. This style of ornament is
described as _an hua_ (secret decoration), but it is not stated
whether, in this case, it was engraved in the paste or traced in white
slip.
The mention of “fresh red” (_hsien hung_), which seems to have been
used on the Yung Lo porcelain as well as in the succeeding Hsüan Tê
period, brings to mind a familiar type of small bowl with slight
designs in blue inside, often a figure of a boy at play, the exterior
being coated with a fine coral red, over which are lotus scrolls
in gold. There are several in the British Museum, and one, with a
sixteenth-century silver mount, was exhibited at the Burlington Fine
Arts Club in 1910.[15] The term _hsien hung_ is certainly used for an
underglaze copper red on the Hsüan Tê porcelain, and it is doubtful
whether it can have been loosely applied to an overglaze iron red on
the earlier ware. For the bowls to which I refer have an iron red
decoration, though it is sometimes wonderfully translucent and, being
heavily fluxed, looks like a red glaze instead of merely an overglaze
enamel (see Plate 74). Several of these red bowls have the Yung Lo
mark, others have merely marks of commendation or good wish. Their form
is characteristic of the Ming period, and the base is sometimes convex
at the bottom, sometimes concave. They vary considerably in quality,
the red in some cases being a translucent and rather pale coral tint,
and in others a thick, opaque brick red. Probably they vary in date as
well, the former type being the earlier and better. It is exemplified
by an interesting specimen in the Franks Collection marked _tan kuei_
(red cassia), which indicates its destination as a present to a
literary aspirant, the red cassia being a symbol of literary success.
This piece has, moreover, a stamped leather box of European--probably
Venetian--make, which is not later than the sixteenth century. This,
if any of these bowls, belongs to the Yung Lo period, but it will be
seen presently that the iron red was used as an inferior but more
workable substitute for the underglaze red in the later Ming reigns,
and, it must be added, these bowls are strangely numerous for a
fifteenth-century porcelain. That they are a Yung Lo type, however,
there is little doubt, for this red and gold decoration (_kinrande_
of the Japanese) is the adopted style which won for the clever Kioto
potter, Zengoro Hozen, the art name _Ei raku_, i.e. Yung Lo in Japanese.
CHAPTER II
HSÜAN TÊ [chch 2] (1426–1435)
In this short reign, which Chinese writers regard as the most brilliant
period of their porcelain industry, the number of kilns occupied with
the Imperial orders had increased to fifty-eight, the majority of them
being outside the Imperial factory and distributed among the private
factories. According to the _T’ao lu_,[16] the clay used at this
time was red and the ware like cinnabar, a statement which is difficult
to reconcile with the glowing description of the jade-like white altar
cups and other exquisite objects for which the reign was celebrated.
It is, of course, possible that a dark coloured body was employed in
some of the wares, as was done at other periods, or it may be that the
words are hyperbolically used to describe a porcelain of which the
exposed parts of the body assumed a red colour in the firing. This
latter peculiarity is noticeable on specimens of later Ming porcelain,
particularly the blue and white of the Chia Ching period. But in any
case a red biscuit cannot have been invariable or even characteristic
of the period, for no mention is made of such a feature in the _Po
wu yao lan_, which gives by far the fullest account of the Hsüan Tê
porcelain.
The description in the _Po wu yao lan_,[17] which seems to
have been generally accepted, and certainly was largely borrowed by
subsequent Chinese works, may be freely rendered as follows:
“Among the wares of the Hsüan Tê period there are stem-cups[18]
decorated with red fish. For these they used a powder made of red
precious stones from the West to paint the fish forms, and from the
body there rose up in relief in the firing the precious brilliance of
the fresh red ravishing the eye. The brown and blackish colours which
resulted from imperfect firing of the red are inferior. There were
also blue decorated wares, such as stem-cups with dragon pine and plum
designs, wine stem-cups with figure subjects[19] and lotus designs,
small cinnabar pots and large bowls in colour red like the sun, but
with white mouth rim, pickle pots and small pots with basket covers and
handles in the form of bamboo joints, all of which things were unknown
in ancient times. Again, there were beautiful objects of a useful kind,
all small and cleverly made with finely and accurately drawn designs.
The incense vases, trays and dishes[20] were made in large numbers, and
belong to a common class. The flat-sided jars with basket covers, and
the ornamented round pots with flanged[21] mouth for preserving honey,
are very beautiful and mostly decorated in colours (_wu ts’ai_). The
white cups, which have the character _t’an_ (altar) engraved inside the
bowl, are what are known as 'altar cups.’ The material of these things
is refined and the ware thick, and the form beautiful enough to be used
as elegant vases in the true scholar’s room. There are besides white
cups for tea with rounded body,[22] convex[23] base, thread-like foot,
bright and lustrous like jade, and with very finely engraved[24] dragon
and phœnix designs which are scarcely inferior to the altar cups. At
the bottom the characters _ta ming hsüan tê nien chih_[25] are secretly
engraved in the paste, and the texture of the glaze is uneven, like
orange peel.[26] How can even Ting porcelain compare with these? Truly
they are the most excellent porcelains of this reign, and unfortunately
there have not been many to be seen since then. Again, there are the
beautiful barrel-shaped seats, some with openwork ground, the designs
filled in with colours (_wu ts’ai_), gorgeous as cloud brocades, others
with solid ground filled in with colours in engraved floral designs, so
beautiful and brilliant as to dazzle the eye; both sorts have a deep
green (_ch’ing_) background. Others have blue (_lan_) ground,
filled in with designs in colours (_wu ts’ai_), like ornament carved
in cobalt blue (_shih ch’ing_, lit. stone blue). There is also blue
decoration on a white ground and crackled grounds like ice. The form
and ornament of these various types do not seem to have been known
before this period.”
[Illustration: Plate 60.--Reputed Hsüan Tê Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Flask with blue decoration, reputed to be Hsüan Tê
period. Height 3¼ inches. _British Museum_.
Fig. 2.--Brush Rest. (?) Chang Ch’ien on a log raft; partly
biscuit. Inscribed with a stanza of verse and the Hsüan Tê mark.
Length 6 inches.
_Grandidier Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 61.--Porcelain with _san ts’ai_ glazes
on the biscuit.
Fig. 1.--Wine Jar with pierced casing, the Taoist Immortals
paying court to the God of Longevity, turquoise blue ground.
Fifteenth century. Height 11½ inches. _Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Screen with design in relief, horsemen on a mountain
path, dark blue ground. About 1500. Height 14 inches. _Benson
Collection._]
It will be seen from the above that the Hsüan Tê porcelains included
a fine white, blue and white and polychrome painted wares, underglaze
red painted wares, and crackle. The last mentioned is further specified
in the _Ch’ing pi tsang_ as having “eel’s blood lines,”[27] and
almost rivalling the Kuan and Ju wares. The ware was thick and strong,
and the glaze had the peculiar undulating appearance (variously
compared to chicken skin, orange peel, millet grains, or a wind ruffled
surface) which was deliberately produced on the eighteenth century
porcelains.
Another surface peculiarity shared by the Hsüan Tê and Yung Lo wares
was “palm eye” (_tsung yen_) markings, which Bushell explains as
holes in the glaze due to air bubbles. It is hard to see how these can
have been other than a defect. Probably both these and the orange peel
effects were purely fortuitous at this time.
Of the various types which we have enumerated, the white wares need
little comment. The glaze was no doubt thick and lustrous like mutton
fat jade, and though Hsiang in his Album usually describes the white of
his examples as “white like driven snow,” it is worthy of note that in
good imitations of the ware particular care seems to have been given to
impart a distinct greenish tint to the glaze.
The honours of the period appear to have been shared by the “blue and
white” and red painted wares. Out of twenty examples illustrated in
Hsiang’s Album, no fewer than twelve are decorated chiefly in red,
either covering the whole or a large part of the surface or painted
in designs, among which three fishes occur with monotonous frequency.
The red in every case is called _chi hung_, and it is usually
qualified by the illuminating comparison with “ape’s blood,” and in one
case it is even redder than that!
The expression _chi hung_ has evidently been handed down by oral
traditions, for there is no sort of agreement among Chinese writers
on the form of the first character. The _T’ao lu_ uses the character
[chch], which means “sacrificial,” and Bushell[28] explains this “as
the colour of the sacrificial cups which were employed by the Emperor
in the worship of the Sun.” Hsiang uses the character [chch] which
means “massed, accumulated.” And others use the character [chch] which
means “sky clearing,” and is also applied to blue in the sense of the
“blue of the sky after rain.” In the oft quoted list of the Yung Chêng
porcelains we find the item, “Imitations of Hsüan _chi hung_ wares,
including two kinds, _hsien hung_ (fresh red) and _pao shih hung_
(ruby red).” There can be little doubt that both these were shades of
underglaze red derived from copper oxide, a colour with which we are
quite familiar from the eighteenth century and later examples.
For in another context we find the _hsien hung_ contrasted with
_fan hung_, which is the usual term for overglaze iron red,
and the description already given of the application of _pao shih
hung_ leaves no doubt whatever that it was an underglaze colour. The
two terms are probably fanciful names for two variations of the same
colour, or perhaps for two different applications of it, for we know
that it was used as a pigment for brushwork as well as in the form of a
ground colour incorporated in the glaze. The secret of the colour seems
to have been well kept, and the general impression prevailing outside
the factories was that its tint and brilliancy were due to powdered
rubies, the red precious stone from the West which gave the name to the
_pao shih hung_.[29] It is known that in some cases such stones
as cornelian (_ma nao_) have been incorporated in the porcelain
glazes in China to increase the limpidity of the glaze. This is reputed
to have happened in the case of the Ju yao, but neither cornelian nor
ruby could serve in any way as a colouring agent, as their colour would
be dissipated in the heat of the furnace. The real colouring agent of
the _chi hung_ is protoxide of copper. If there were nothing else
to prove this, it would be clear from the fact hinted in the _Po wu
yao lan_ that the failures came out a brownish or blackish tint.
This colour has always proved a difficult one to manage, and in the
early part of the last dynasty, when it was freely used after the
manner of the Hsüan Tê potters, the results were most unequal, varying
from a fine blood red to maroon and brown, and even to a blackish tint.
The peculiar merits of the Hsüan Tê red were probably due in some
measure to the clay of which the ware was composed, and which contained
some natural ingredient favourable to the development of the red. At
any rate, we are told[30] that in the Chia Ching period (1522–1566)
“the earth used for the _hsien hung_ ran short.”
Among the favourite designs[31] expressed in the Hsüan Tê red were
three fishes, three fruits,[32] three funguses, and the character
_fu_ (happiness) repeated five times.[33] All these are mentioned
among the Yung Chêng imitations. A good idea of the fish design is
given by a cylindrical vase in the Franks Collection, which is plain
except for two fishes in underglaze red of good colour, and rising in
slight relief in the glaze. The glaze itself is of that faint celadon
green which was apparently regarded as a necessary feature of the
Hsüan Tê copies, and which incidentally seems to be favourable to the
development of the copper red. The _sang de bœuf_ red of the last
dynasty is avowedly a revival of the Hsüan Tê red in its use as a glaze
colour. Indeed, certain varieties of the _sang de bœuf_ class
are still distinguished as _chi hung_. The large bowls, “red as
the sun and white at the mouth rim,” as mentioned in the _Po wu yao
lan_, have a counterpart in the large bowl of the last dynasty with
_sang de bœuf_ glaze, which, flowing downwards, usually left a
colourless white band at the mouth.
The Hsüan Tê period extended only to ten years, and specimens of Hsüan
red are excessively rare to-day, even in China. It is doubtful if a
genuine specimen exists outside the Middle Kingdom, but with the help
of the old Chinese descriptions and the clever imitations of a later
date,[34] there is no difficulty in imagining the vivid splendours of
the “precious stone red” of this brilliant period.
Among the “blue and white” wares of all periods, the Hsüan Tê
porcelain is unanimously voted the first place by Chinese writers, and
its excellence is ascribed principally to the superior quality of an
imported mineral variously described as _su-ni-p’o_, _su-p’o-ni_ and
_su-ma-ni_. These outlandish names are, no doubt, attempts to render
in Chinese the foreign name of the material, which was itself probably
the name of the place or people whence it was exported. There is little
doubt that this mysterious substance was the same species as the
Mohammedan blue (_hui hui ch’ing_) of the following century. Indeed,
this latter name is applied to it in Hsiang’s Album. The Mohammedan
blue was obtained from Arab traders, and its use for painting on
pottery had been familiar in the Near East, in Persia and Syria for
instance, at least as early as the twelfth century.[35] The _su-ni-p’o_
blue was no doubt imported in the form of mineral cobalt, and though
there was no lack of this mineral in the neighbourhood of Ching-tê
Chên, the foreign material was of superior quality. It was, however,
not only expensive but unsuited for use in a pure state. If applied by
itself, it had a tendency to run in the firing, and it was necessary
to blend it with proportions of the native mineral varying from one
in ten for the finest quality to four in six for the medium quality.
The native mineral used by itself tended to be heavy and dull in tone,
owing to its inability to stand the intense heat of the kiln, and was
only employed alone on the coarser wares. The supply of Mohammedan
blue was uncertain and spasmodic. It ceased to arrive at the end of
the Hsüan Tê period, and it was not renewed till the next century (see
p. 29). Its nature, too, seems to have varied, for we are expressly
told that the Hsüan Tê blue was pale in tone while the Mohammedan
blue of the sixteenth century was dark. Possibly, however, this was
not so much due to the nature of the material as to the method of its
application, for Chinese writers are by no means unanimous about the
paleness of the Hsüan Tê blue. The _Ch’ing pi ts’ang_, for instance,
states that “they used _su-p’o-ni_ blue and painted designs of dragons,
phœnixes, flowers, birds, insects, fish and similar forms, deep and
thickly heaped and piled and very lovely.”
Authentic specimens of Hsüan Tê blue and white are virtually unknown,
but the mark of the period is one of the commonest on Chinese porcelain
of relatively modern date. In most cases this spurious dating means
nothing more than that the period named was one of high repute; but
there is a type of blue and white, usually bearing the period mark of
Hsüan Tê, which is so mannered and characteristic that one feels the
certainty that this really represents one kind at least of the Hsüan
porcelain. It is usually decorated in close floral scrolls, and the
blue is light dappled with darker shades, which are often literally
“heaped and piled” (_tui t’o_) over the paler substratum.
I have seen examples of this style belonging to various periods, mostly
eighteenth century, but some certainly late Ming[36] (see Plate 67,
Fig. 4). Seven examples of Hsüan blue and white porcelain are figured
in Hsiang’s Album,[37] comprising an ink pallet, a vase shaped like a
section of bamboo, a goose-shaped wine jar, a vase with an elephant
on the cover, a tea cup, a sacrificial vessel, and a lamp with four
nozzles. In five of these the blue is confined to slight pencilled
borders, merely serving to set off the white ground, which is compared
to driven snow. The glaze is rich and thick, and of uneven surface,
rising in slight tubercles likened to “grains of millet.” This is the
“orange skin” glaze. The blue in each case is _hui hu[38] ta ch’ing_
(deep Mohammedan blue). Of the two remaining instances, one is painted
with a dragon in clouds, and the other with “dragon pines,” and in the
latter case the glaze is described as “lustrous like mutton fat jade,”
and the blue as “of intensity and brilliance to dazzle the eye.”
The impression conveyed by all these examples is that they represent a
type quite different from that described as “heaped and piled,” a type
in which delicate pencilling was the desideratum, the designs being
slight and giving full play to the white porcelain ground. It is, in
fact, far closer in style to the delicately painted Japanese Hirado
porcelain than to the familiar Chinese blue and white of the K’ang Hsi
period.
Plate 60 illustrates a little flask-shaped vase in the Franks
Collection, which purports to be a specimen of Hsüan Tê blue and white
porcelain. It has a thick, “mutton fat” glaze of faint greenish tinge,
and is decorated with a freely drawn peach bough in underglaze blue
which has not developed uniformly in the firing. The colour in places
is deep, soft and brilliant, but elsewhere it has assumed too dark a
hue.[39] Its certificate is engraved in Chinese fashion on the box
into which it has been carefully fitted--_hsüan tz’ŭ pao yüeh p’ing_,
“precious moon vase of Hsüan porcelain”--attested by the signature
Tzŭ-ching, the studio name of none other than Hsiang Yüan-p’ien, whose
Album has been so often quoted. Without attaching too much weight to
this inscription, which is a matter easily arranged by the Chinese,
there is nothing in the appearance of this quite unpretentious little
vase which is inconsistent with an early Ming origin.
On the same plate is a brush rest in form of a log raft, on which is a
seated figure, probably the celebrated Chang-Ch’ien, floating down the
Yellow River. The design recalls a rare silver cup of the Yüan dynasty,
which was illustrated in the _Burlington Magazine_ (December,
1912). Here the material is porcelain biscuit with details glazed and
touched with blue, and the _nien hao_ of Hsüan Tê is visible on
the upper part of the log beside two lines of poetry. Whether this
brush rest really belongs to the period indicated or not, it is a rare
and interesting specimen. Two other possible examples of Hsüan Tê blue
and white are described on p. 32.
[Illustration: PLATE 62
Barrel shaped Garden Seat: porcelain with coloured glazes on the
biscuit, the designs outlined in slender fillets of clay. A lotus
scroll between an upper band of clouds and a lower band of horses
in flying gallop and sea waves. Lion mask handles. About 1500
A.D.
Height 14¼ inches. _British Museum._]
As to the other types of Hsüan ware named in the _Po wu yao lan_,
with one exception I can find no exact counterpart of them in existing
specimens, though parts of the descriptions are illustrated by examples
of apparently later date. Thus the form of the white tea cups, “with
rounded body, convex base, and thread-like foot,” is seen in such bowls
as Fig. 1 of Plate 74, which is proved by its mount to be not later
than the sixteenth century. Other examples of these bowls will be
discussed later. They are characterised by a convexity in the centre
which cannot be shown in reproductions.
The secret decoration (_an hua_) consists of designs faintly traced
usually with a sharp-pointed instrument in the body and under the
glaze. There is an excellent example of this in a high-footed cup in
the Franks Collection which has the Hsüan Tê mark, the usual faintly
greenish glaze, beneath which is a delicately etched lotus scroll
so fine that it might easily be overlooked and is quite impossible
to reproduce by photographic methods. It is, no doubt, an early
eighteenth-century copy of Hsüan ware.
The one exception mentioned above is the type represented by the
“barrel-shaped seats.” The description of these leaves no room for
doubt that they belonged to a fairly familiar class of Ming ware, whose
strength and solidity has preserved it in considerable quantity where
the more delicate porcelains have disappeared. Plate 62 gives a good
idea of the Ming barrel-shaped garden seat, “with solid ground filled
in with colours in engraved floral designs.” The other kind, “with
openwork ground, the designs filled in with colours (_wu ts’ai_),
gorgeous as cloud brocades,” must have been in the style of Plate 61.
These styles of decoration are more familiar to us on potiche-shaped
wine jars and high-shouldered vases than on garden seats, but the type
is one and the same. Quite a series of these vessels was exhibited at
the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910, and they are fully described
in the catalogue. Some had an outer casing in openwork; others had
the designs outlined in raised threads of clay, which contained the
colours like the ribbons of cloisonné enamel[40]; in others, again,
the patterns were incised with a point. The common feature of all of
them was that the details of the pattern were defined by some emphatic
method of outlining which served at the same time to limit the flow
of the colours. The colours themselves consist of glazes containing a
considerable proportion of lead, and tinted in the usual fashion with
metallic oxides. They include a deep violet blue (sometimes varying to
black or brown), leaf green, turquoise, yellow,[41] and a colourless
glaze or a white slip which served as white colour, though at times the
white was represented merely by leaving the unglazed body or biscuit to
appear. These coloured glazes differ from the on-glaze painted enamels
in that they are applied direct to the body of the ware, and are fired
at a relatively high temperature in the cooler parts of the great
kiln, a circumstance expressed by the French in the concise phrase,
_couleurs de demi-grand feu_.[42]
The central ornament consisted chiefly of figures of sages or deities
in rocky landscape, or seated under pine trees amid clouds, dragons in
clouds, or beautiful lotus designs; and these were contained by various
borders, such as floral scrolls, gadroons, _ju-i_ head patterns,
fungus scrolls, and symbols hanging in jewelled pendants. As a rule,
the larger areas of these vases are invested with a ground colour and
the design filled in with contrasting tints. Sometimes the scheme of
decoration includes several bands of ornament, and in this case--as
on Plate 62--more than one ground colour is used. The _Po wu yao lan_
speaks of green (_ch’ing_) and dark blue (_lan_) grounds, and existing
specimens indicate that the dark violet blue was the commonest ground
colour. Next to this, turquoise blue is the most frequently seen; but
besides these there is a dark variety of the violet which is almost
black, and another which is dark brown, both of which colours are based
on cobaltiferous oxide of manganese. It has already been observed that
this type of decoration was frequently used on a pottery body as well
as on porcelain.
The question of the antiquity of the above method of polychrome
decoration is complicated by the contradictory accounts which Dr.
Bushell has given of a very celebrated example, the statuette of
the goddess Kuan-yin in the temple named Pao kuo ssŭ at Peking.
The following reference to this image occurs in the _T’ung ya_,
published in the reign of Ch’ung Chêng (1625–1643): “The Chün Chou
transmutation wares (_yao pien_) are not uncommon to-day. The Kuan-yin
in the Pao kuo ssŭ is a _yao pien_.” Dr. Bushell, who visited the
temple several times, gives a minute description of the image, which
contains the following passage[43]: “The figure is loosely wrapped in
flowing drapery of purest and bluest turquoise tint, with the wide
sleeves of the robe bordered with black and turned back in front to
show the yellow lining; the upper part of the cloak is extended up
behind over the head in the form of a plaited hood, which is also
lined with canary yellow.” To the ordinary reader, such a description
would be conclusive. A fine example of Ming porcelain, he would say,
decorated with the typical coloured glazes on the biscuit. Bushell’s
comment, however, is that the “colours are of the same type as those
of the finest flower pots and saucers of the Chün Chou porcelain of
the Sung dynasty.” It should be said that the temple bonzes insist
that they can trace the origin of the image back to the thirteenth
century. If these are indeed the typical Chün Chou glazes, then all
our previous information on that factory, including Bushell’s own
contributions, is worthless. In another work,[44] however, the same
writer states that it (the image in question) is “really enamelled in
'five colours’--turquoise, yellow, crimson, red brown and black.” This
is precisely what we should have expected, and it can only be imagined
that Bushell in the other passage was influenced by the statement in
the _T’ung ya_ that it was a furnace transmutation piece, a statement
probably based on the superstition that it was a miraculous likeness
of the goddess, who herself descended into the kiln and moulded its
features. As to the other temple tradition, that it was made in the
thirteenth century, it is not necessary to take that any more seriously
than the myth concerning its miraculous origin, which derives from the
same source.
It is hardly necessary to state that all the existing specimens of this
class (and they are fairly numerous) do not belong to the Hsüan Tê
period. Indeed, it is unlikely that more than a very small percentage
of them were made in this short reign. Whether the style survived the
Ming dynasty is an open question; but it is safe to assume that it was
largely used in the sixteenth century.
The discussion of this group of polychrome porcelain leads naturally
to the vexed question of the introduction of enamel painting over the
glaze. By the latter I mean the painting of designs on the finished
white glaze in vitrifiable enamels, which were subsequently fixed in
the gentle heat of the muffle kiln (_lu_)--_couleurs de petit feu_, as
the French have named them. No help can be got from the phraseology of
the Chinese, for they use _wu ts’ai_ or _wu sê_ (lit. five colours)
indifferently for all kinds of polychrome decoration, regardless of
the number of colours involved or the mode of application. There is,
however, no room for doubt that the delicate enamel painting, for which
the reign of Ch’êng Hua (1465–1487) was celebrated, was executed with
the brush over the fired glaze. It is inconceivable that the small,
eggshell wine cups with peony flowers and a hen and chicken “instinct
with life and movement” could have been limned by any other method.
If this is the case, then what could the Chinese writers mean when
they contrasted the _wu ts’ai_ ornament of the Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng
Hua periods, but that the same process of painting was in use in both
reigns? The Ch’êng Hua colours were more artistic because they were
thin and delicately graded, while the Hsüan Tê _wu ts’ai_ were too
thickly applied.[45] For this reason, if for no other, we may rightly
infer that painting in on-glaze enamels was practised in the Hsüan Tê
period, if, indeed, it had not been long in use.[46]
There is another and an intermediate method of polychrome decoration
in which the low-fired enamels (_de petit feu_) are applied direct to
the biscuit, as in the case of the _demi-grand feu_ colours, but with
the difference that they are fixed in the muffle kiln. This method was
much employed on the late Ming and early Ch’ing porcelains, and it will
be discussed later; but it is mentioned here because there are several
apparent examples of it in Hsiang’s Album, one[47] of which is dated
Hsüan Tê. The example in question is a model of the celebrated Nanking
pagoda, and it is described as _wu ts’ai_, the structure being white,
the roofs green, the rails red, and the doors yellow, while the date
is painted in blue. I have hesitated to assume that this is intended
to represent an on-glaze painted piece, though there is much in the
description to indicate such a conclusion; but it is certainly either
this or a member of the class under discussion, viz. decorated in
enamels of the muffle kiln applied to the biscuit.[48] In either case
it proves the knowledge of vitrifiable enamels at this period to all
who accept the evidence of Hsiang’s Album.
Examples of Hsüan Tê polychrome porcelain enumerated in the _T’ao
shuo_ included wine pots in the form of peaches, pomegranates,
double gourds, a pair of mandarin ducks and geese; washing dishes (for
brushes) of “gong-shaped outline,” with moulded fish and water-weeds,
with sunflowers and with lizards; and lamp brackets, “rain-lamps,”
vessels for holding bird’s food, and cricket[49] pots (see vol. i, p.
188).
Specimens of on-glaze painted porcelain with the Hsüan Tê mark are
common enough, but I have not yet seen one which could be accepted
without reserve. Perhaps the nearest to the period is a specimen in the
Franks Collection, a box made of the lower part of a square vase which
had been broken and cut down. It was fitted with a finely designed
bronze cover in Japan, and it is strongly painted in underglaze blue
and the usual green, yellow, red and purple on-glaze enamels. The mark
is in a fine dark blue, and the porcelain has all the character of a
Ming specimen.
There is, in the same collection, a dish of a different type, but
with the Hsüan Tê mark in Mohammedan blue and other evidences of Ming
origin. The glaze is of a faintly greenish white and of considerable
thickness and lustre, and the design consists of lotus scrolls in gold.
Painting in gold in the Hsüan Tê period is mentioned in the _T’ao
shuo_[50] in connection with the pots for holding the fighting
crickets alluded to above.
CHAPTER III
CH’ÊNG HUA [chch 2] (1465–1487) AND OTHER REIGNS
The Ch’êng Hua porcelain shares with that of the Hsüan Tê period the
honours of the Ming dynasty, and Chinese writers are divided on the
relative merits of the two. Unfortunately, no material remains on
which we might base a verdict of our own, but we may safely accept the
summing up which the _Po wu yao lan_, the premier authority on early
Ming wares, gives as follows[51]: “In my opinion, the blue and white
porcelain of the Ch’êng Hua period does not equal that of the Hsüan Tê,
while the polychrome of the Hsüan period does not equal that of the
'model[52] emperor’s’ reign. The reason is that the blue of the Hsüan
ware was _su-ni-p’o_[53] blue, whereas afterward it was all exhausted,
and in the Ch’êng Hua period only the ordinary blue was used. On
the other hand, the polychrome (_wu ts’ai_) decoration on the Hsüan
ware was deep and thick, heaped and piled, and consequently not very
beautiful; while on the polychrome wares of the Ch’êng Hua period the
colours used were thin and subdued,[54] and gave the impression of a
picture.”[55] Elsewhere we read that the Hsüan Tê porcelain was thick,
the Ch’êng Hua thin, and that the blue of the Hsüan blue and white was
pale, that of the Ch’êng Hua dark; but on this latter point there are
many differences of opinion, and among the wares made at the Imperial
factory in the Yung Chêng period we are told that there were “copies
of Ch’êng Hua porcelain with designs pencilled in pale blue (_tan
ch’ing_).”[56]
The only types of Ch’êng Hua porcelain considered worthy of mention
by Chinese writers are the polychrome, the blue and white, and the
red monochrome, though doubtless the other methods of previous reigns
were still used. Stress is laid on the excellence of the designs which
were supplied by artists in the palace,[57] and on the fine quality of
the colours used, and an interesting list of patterns is given in the
_T’ao shuo_,[58] which includes the following:
1. Stem-cups (_pa pei_), with high foot, flattened bowl, and spreading
mouth; decorated in colours with a grape-vine pattern.
“Among the highest class of Ch’êng Hua porcelain these are unsurpassed,
and in workmanship they far excel the Hsüan Tê cups.” Such is the
verdict of the _Po wu yao lan_, but they are only known to us by later
imitations.
A poor illustration of one of these is given in Hsiang’s Album,[59]
and we are told in the accompanying text that the glaze is _fên pai_,
“white like rice powder,” while the decoration, a band of oblique vine
clusters and tendrils, is merely described as _wu ts’ai_ (polychrome),
but it is obviously too slight to be executed by any other method than
painting with enamels on the glaze. The price paid for this cup is
stated as one hundred taels (or ounces) of silver.
2. Chicken cups (_chi kang_), shaped like the flat-bottomed,
steep-sided, and wide-mouthed fish bowls (_kang_), and painted in
colours with a hen and chickens beneath a flowering plant.
A valuable commentary on Ch’êng Hua porcelains is given by a late
seventeenth-century writer in notes appended to various odes (e.g.
on a “chicken cup” and on a Chün Chou vase). The writer is Kao
Tan-jên, who also called himself Kao Chiang-ts’un, the name appended
to a long dissertation on a Yüan dynasty silver wine cup, which now
belongs to Sir Robert Biddulph and was figured in the _Burlington
Magazine_.[60] “Ch’êng Hua wine cups,” he tells us, “include a great
variety of sorts. All are of clever workmanship and decoration, and are
delicately coloured in dark and light shades. The porcelain is lustrous
and clear, but strong. The chicken cups are painted with a _mu
tan_ peony, and below it a hen and chicken, which seem to live and
move.” Another writer[61] of the same period states that he frequented
the fair at the _Tz’ŭ-iên_ temple in the capital, where porcelain
bowls were exhibited, and rich men came to buy. For Wan Li porcelain
the usual price was a few taels of silver; for Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng Hua
marked specimens two to five times that amount; but “chicken cups”
could not be bought for less than a hundred taels, and yet those who
had the means did not hesitate to buy, and porcelain realised higher
prices than jade.
An illustration in Hsiang’s Album[62] gives a poor idea of one of
these porcelain gems, which is described as having the sides thin as
a cicada’s wing, and so translucent that the fingernail could be seen
through them. The design, a hen and chicken beside a cock’s-comb plant
growing near a rock, is said to have been in the style of a celebrated
Sung artist. The painting is in “applied colours (_fu sê_), thick and
thin,” and apparently yellow, green, aubergine and brown. Like that of
the grape-vine cup, it is evidently in enamels on the glaze.
3. Ruby red bowls (_pao shao wan_)[63] and cinnabar red dishes (_chu
sha p’an_). These were, no doubt, the same as the “precious stone red
(_pao shih hung_) and cinnabar bowls red as the sun,” described in the
chapter on Hsüan Tê porcelain. Kao Chiang-ts’un remarks on these that
“among the Ch’êng wares are chicken cups, ruby red bowls, and cinnabar
dishes, very cleverly made, and fine, and more costly than Sung
porcelain.”
4. Wine cups with figure subjects and lotuses.
5. “Blue and white” (_ch’ing hua_) wine cups, thin as paper.
6. Small cups with plants and insects (_ts’ao ch’ung_).[64]
7. Shallow cups with the five sacrificial altar vessels (_wu kung
yang_).
8. Small plates for chopsticks, painted in colours.
9. Incense boxes.
10. All manner of small jars.
All these varieties are mentioned in the _Po wu yao lan_, which
gives the place of honour to the grape-vine stem-cups. The only kind
specifically described as blue and white is No. 5, and the inference is
that the other types were usually polychrome.
[Illustration: Plate 63.--Baluster Vase
With designs in raised outline, filled in with coloured glazes on
the biscuit; dark violet blue background. About 1500. Height 14¾
inches.
_Grandidier Collection_ (_Louvre_).]
[Illustration: Plate 64.--Fifteenth-century Polychrome Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Vase with grey crackle and peony scrolls in blue
and enamels. Ch’èng Hua mark. Height 16¼ inches. _British
Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with turquoise ground and bands of floral pattern
and winged dragons incised in outline and coloured green, yellow
and aubergine. Height 22 inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 3.--Box with bands of _ju-i_ clouds and pierced floral
scrolls; turquoise and yellow glazes in dark blue ground.
Diameter 10 inches. _Grandidier Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 65.--Ming _san ts’ai_ Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Vase with winged dragons, _san ts’ai_ glazes on the
biscuit, dark blue ground. Dedicatory inscription on the neck,
including the words “Ming dynasty.” Cloisonné handles. Height 22¼
inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Figure of Kuan-yin, turquoise, green and aubergine
glazes, dark blue rockwork. Fifteenth century. Height 28 inches.
_Grandidier Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with lotus scrolls, transparent glazes in
three colours. Late Ming. Height 20 inches. _Grandidier
Collection._]
The following designs are enumerated and explained by Kao Chiang-ts’un
in the valuable commentary which has already been mentioned:--
11. Wine cups with the design known as “the high-flaming candle
lighting up red beauty,” explained as a beautiful damsel holding a
candle to light up _hai-t’ang_ (cherry apple) blossoms.
12. Brocade heap pattern[65]; explained as “sprays of flowers and fruit
massed (_tui_) on all sides.”[66]
13. Cups with swings, with dragon boats, with famous scholars and with
children.
The swings, we are told, represent men and women[67] playing with
swings (_ch’iu ch’ien_): the dragon boats represent the dragon boat
races[68]; the famous scholar (_kao shih_) cups have on one side Chou
Mao-shu, lover of the lotus, and on the other T’ao Yüan-ming sitting
before a chrysanthemum plant; the children (_wa wa_) consist of five
small children playing together.[69]
14. Cups with grape-vines on a trellis, fragrant plants, fish and
weeds, gourds, aubergine fruit, the Eight Buddhist Emblems (_pa chi
hsiang_), _yu po lo_ flowers, and Indian lotus (_hsi fan lien_) designs.
None of these need explanation except the Buddhist Emblems, which are
described on p. 298, and the _yu po lo_, which is generally explained
as a transcription of the Sanskrit _utpala_, “the dark blue lotus.”
Though the reader will probably not have the opportunity of identifying
these designs on Ch’êng Hua porcelain, they will help him in the
description of later wares on which these same motives not infrequently
occur. The nine illustrations[70] of Ch’êng Hua porcelain in Hsiang’s
Album, for the most part feebly drawn and badly coloured, form an
absurd commentary on the glowing descriptions in the text. Their chief
interest lies in their bearing on the question of polychrome painting.
In some cases the designs have all the appearance of on-glaze enamels;
in others they suggest transparent glazes or enamels on the biscuit.
The colours used are green, yellow and aubergine brown, the _san ts’ai_
or “three colours,” notwithstanding which the decoration is classed
under the general term _wu ts’ai_ (lit. five colours), or polychrome.
The phrases used to describe the colouring include _wu ts’ai_, _fu sê_,
_t’ien yu_, of which _fu sê_[71] means “applied colours,” which might
equally suggest on-glaze enamels or on-biscuit colours, and _t’ien
yu_[72] decidedly suggests on-biscuit colouring. On the other hand, in
one case[73] we are expressly told that the “colour of the glaze is
lustrous white and the painting _upon it_[74] consists of geese, etc.,”
an unequivocal description of on-glaze painting.
Though the Ch’êng Hua mark is one of the commonest on Chinese
porcelain, genuine examples of Ch’êng Hua porcelain are virtually
unknown in Western collections. The Imperial wares of the period were
rare and highly valued in China in the sixteenth century, and we can
hardly hope to obtain them in Europe to-day; but there must be many
survivors from the wares produced by the private kilns at the time,
and possibly some few examples are awaiting identification in our
collections. Unfortunately, the promiscuous use of the mark on later
wares, the confused accounts of the blue in the “blue and white,”
and the conflicting theories on the polychrome decoration, have all
helped to render identifications difficult to make and easy to dispute.
The covered cake box in the Bushell collection, figured by Cosmo
Monkhouse[75] as a Ch’êng Hua specimen, is closely paralleled in make
and style of decoration by a beaker-shaped brush pot in the Franks
Collection.[76] Both are delicately pencilled in pale blue; both have a
peculiar brown staining in parts of the glaze and a slight warp in the
foot rim. In the British Museum piece, however, the foot rim is grooved
at the sides to fit a wooden stand, a feature which was not usual
before the K’ang Hsi period, and something in the style of the drawing
is rather suggestive of Japanese work. There is, however, another
specimen in the Franks Collection[77] which is certainly Chinese of the
Ming dynasty, and possibly of the Ch’êng Hua period, of which it bears
the mark. It is a vase of baluster form, thick and strongly built, with
great weight of clay at the foot, and unfortunately, like so many of
the early polychrome vases which have come from China in recent years,
it is cut down at the neck. It has a greyish crackled glaze, painted
with a floral scroll design, outlined in brown black pigment and washed
in with leaf green, yellow, manganese purple and bluish green enamels,
which are supplemented by a little underglaze blue, and the mark is in
four characters in blue in a sunk panel under the base.
Though too clumsy to belong to any of the groups of Imperial wares
described in the _Po wu yao lan_, this vase is certainly an old
piece, and possibly the production of one of the private factories of
the Ch’êng Hua period. In the Eumorfopoulos and Benson Collections[78]
there are a few examples of these massive-footed vases, most of them
unfortunately incomplete above, decorated in polychrome glazes with
engraved or relief-edged designs, but not, as a rule, in on-glaze
enamels. These are clearly among our earliest examples of polychrome
porcelain, and we should expect to find here, if anywhere, specimens of
the coloured porcelain of the fifteenth century. See Plate 64.
Though the fifteenth century was distinguished by two brilliant
periods, there are considerable gaps in the ceramic annals of the time.
The reign of the Emperor Chêng T’ung,[79] who succeeded to the throne
in 1436, was troubled by wars, and in his first year the directorate of
the Imperial factory was abolished; and, as soldiers had to be levied,
relief was given by stopping the manufacture of porcelain for the
palace. In 1449 this emperor was actually taken captive by the Mongols,
and his brother, who took his place from 1450 to 1456 under the title
of Ching T’ai,[80] reduced the customary supplies of palace wares in
1454 by one third. The reign of Ching T’ai is celebrated for cloisonné
enamel on metal.
In 1457, when Chêng T’ung was released and returned to the throne under
the title of T’ien Shun[81] (1457–1464), the Imperial factory was
re-established, and the care of it again entrusted to a palace eunuch.
There are no records, however, of the wares made in these periods,
though we may assume that the private factories continued in operation
even when work at the Imperial pottery was suspended. The directorship
was again abolished in 1486, and porcelain is not mentioned in
the official records until the end of the reign of Hung Chih[82]
(1488–1505).
In Hsiang’s Album[83] we are told that the pale yellow of the Hung Chih
period was highly prized, and that the polychrome wares vied with those
of the reign of Ch’êng Hua. Four examples are given: an incense burner,
a cup moulded in sunflower design, and a spirit jar (all yellow),
besides a gourd-shaped wine pot with yellow ground and accessories in
green and brown, apparently coloured glazes or enamels applied to the
biscuit. The yellow glazes are described as pale yellow (_chiao_[84]
_huang_), and likened to the colour of steamed chestnuts (_chêng
li_[85]) or the sunflower (_k’uei hua_[86]).
The yellow colour is of old standing in Chinese ceramics. We have
found it on T’ang pottery, in the _mi sê_ of the Sung period, in the
blackish yellow of the Yüan ware made at Hu-t’ien, and in the early
Ming porcelains. Peroxide of iron or antimony are the usual metallic
bases of the colour, and it was used either in high-fired glazes or
in enamels of the muffle stove. The yellow for which the Hung Chih
period was noted was a yellow glaze, applied direct to the biscuit, or
added as an overglaze to the ordinary white porcelain. When applied to
the biscuit it assumes a fuller and browner tint than when backed by
a white glaze. These yellow glazes often have a slightly mottled or
stippled look, the colour appearing as minute particles of yellow held
in suspension in the glaze.
Marked examples, purporting to be Hung Chih yellow, are occasionally
seen, but the most convincing specimen is a saucer dish in the Victoria
and Albert Museum, of good quality porcelain, with a soft rich yellow
glaze and the Hung Chih mark under the base in blue. Part of its
existence was spent in Persia, where it was inscribed in Arabic with
the date 1021 A.H., which corresponds to 1611 A.D.
A beautiful seated figure of the goddess Kuan-yin in the Pierpont
Morgan Collection, not unlike Plate 65, Fig. 2, but smaller, is
decorated with yellow, green and aubergine glazes on the biscuit, and
bears a date in the Hung Chih period which corresponds to 1502.
A dish of fine white porcelain with the Hung Chih mark is in the
British Museum, and examples of the blue and white of the period may
be seen in the celebrated Trenchard bowls. These last are the earliest
known arrivals in the way of Chinese porcelain in this country, and
they were given by Philip of Austria, King of Castile, to Sir Thomas
Trenchard in 1506. One of them is illustrated in Gulland’s _Chinese
Porcelain_,[87] with a description written by Mr. Winthrop after a
personal inspection. The decoration consists of floral scrolls outside
and a fish medallion surrounded by four fishes inside. The account of
the colour, however, is not very flattering: “One of the bowls bore
this decoration very distinctly traced in blackish cobalt, while the
other bowl had a very washed-out and faded appearance.” The ware itself
is described as “rather greyish.” Probably these bowls were made for
the export trade, and need not necessarily be regarded as typical of
the Hung Chih blue and white.
_Chêng Tê_ [chch 2] (1506–1521)
The reign of Chêng Tê, though not mentioned in the _Po wu yao lan_
and but briefly noticed in the _T’ao shuo_, must have been an
important period in the history of Chinese porcelain. The _yü ch’i
ch’ang_ (Imperial ware factory) was rebuilt[88] and the direct
supervision of a palace eunuch renewed. The porcelain, we are told in
the _T’ao lu_, was chiefly blue painted and polychrome, the finest
being in the underglaze red known as _chi hung_. An important
factor in the blue decoration was the arrival of fresh supplies of the
Mohammedan blue.[89] The story is that the governor of Yunnan obtained
a supply of this _hui ch’ing_ from a foreign country, and that it
was used at first melted down with stone for making imitation jewels.
It was worth twice its weight in gold. When, however, it was found
that it would endure the heat of the kiln, orders were given for its
use in porcelain decoration, and its colour was found to be “antique
and splendid.” Hence the great esteem in which the blue and white of
the period was held.[90] The merit of this new Mohammedan blue was its
deep colour, and the choicest kind was known as “Buddha’s head blue”
(_Fo t’ou ch’ing_). Its use at this period was not confined to the
Imperial factory, for we read that the workmen stole it and sold it to
the private manufacturers. In the following reign a method of weighing
the material was instituted, which put an end to this pilfering.
Some account has already been given[91] of this material and its use in
combination with the commoner native mineral blue. It was, no doubt,
the blue used on Persian, Syrian and Egyptian pottery of the period
exported by the Arab traders. One of the oldest routes[92] followed by
Western traders with China was by river (probably the Irrawady) from
the coast of Pegu, reaching Yung-ch’ang, in Yunnan, and so into China
proper. This will explain the opportunities enjoyed by the viceroy of
Yunnan. There were, of course, other lines of communication between
China and Western Asia by sea and land, and a considerable interchange
of ideas had passed between China and Persia for several centuries, so
that reflex influences are traceable in the pottery of both countries.
Painting in still black under a turquoise blue glaze is one of the
oldest Persian methods of ceramic decoration, and we have seen that it
was closely paralleled on the Tz’ŭ Chou wares (vol. i, p. 103).
It is related that a thousand Chinese artificers were transplanted
to Persia by Hulagu Khan (1253–1264), and it is probable that they
included potters. At any rate, the Chinese dragon and phœnix appear
on the Persian lustred tiles of the fourteenth century. At a later
date Shah Abbas (1585–1627) settled some Chinese potters in Ispahan.
Meanwhile, quantities of Chinese porcelain had been traded in the
Near East, where it was closely copied by the Persian, Syrian and
Egyptian potters in the sixteenth century. The Persian pottery and
soft porcelain of this time so closely imitates the Chinese blue and
white that in some cases a very minute inspection is required to
detect the difference, and nothing is commoner than to find Persian
ware of this type straying into collections of Chinese porcelain.[93]
Conversely, the Persian taste is strongly reflected in some of the
Chinese decorations, not only where it is directly studied on the
wares destined for export to Persia, but in the floral scrolls on the
Imperial wares of the Ming period. The expressions _hui hui hua_
(Mohammedan ornament or flowers) and _hui hui wên_ (Mohammedan
designs) occur in the descriptions of the porcelain forwarded to
the palace, and there can be little doubt that they refer to floral
arabesque designs in a broad sense, though it would, of course, be
possible to narrow the meaning to the medallions of Arabic writing not
infrequently seen on Chinese porcelain, which was apparently made for
the use of some of the numerous Mohammedans in China.
An interesting series of this last-mentioned type is exhibited in the
British Museum along with a number of bronzes similarly ornamented.
Many of these are of early date, and five of the porcelains bear the
Chêng Tê mark and unquestionably belong to that period. These comprise
a pair of vases with spherical tops which are hollow and pierced
with five holes, in form resembling the peculiar Chinese hat stands;
the lower part of a cut-down vase, square in form; an ink slab with
cover, and a brush rest in the form of a conventional range of hills.
The body in each case is a beautiful white material, though thickly
constructed, and the glaze, which is thick and of a faint greenish
tinge, has in three of these five pieces been affected by some accident
of the firing, which has left its surface dull and shrivelled in places
like wrinkled skin.[94] The designs are similar throughout--medallions
with Arabic writing surrounded by formal lotus scrolls or cloud-scroll
designs, strongly outlined and filled in with thin uneven washes of a
beautiful soft Mohammedan blue. The glaze being thick and bubbly gives
the brush strokes a hazy outline, and the blue shows that tendency
to run in the firing which we are told was a peculiarity of the
Mohammedan blue if not sufficiently diluted with the native mineral
cobalt. The inscriptions are mainly pious Moslem texts, but on the
cover of the ink slab is the appropriate legend, “Strive for excellence
in penmanship, for it is one of the keys of livelihood,” and on the
brush rest is the Persian word _Khāma-dān_ (pen rest). In the same
case are three cylindrical vases, apparently brush pots, decorated in
the same style but unmarked. One has dark Mohammedan blue and probably
belongs to the next reign. The other two, I venture to think, are
earlier. They are both of the same type of ware, a fine white material,
which takes a brownish red tinge in the exposed parts, and the glaze,
which is thick and of a soft greenish tint, has a tendency to scale off
at the edges. The bases are unglazed and show the marks of a circular
support. The larger piece is remarkably thick in the wall, and has a
light but vivid blue of the Mohammedan sort; the smaller piece is not
quite so stoutly proportioned, but the blue is peculiarly soft, deep,
and beautiful, though it has run badly into the glaze, and where it has
run it has changed to a dark indigo.[95] One would say that this is
the Mohammedan blue, almost pure; and if, as I have suggested, these
two specimens are earlier types, they can only belong to the Hsüan Tê
period.
Another blue and white example with Chêng Tê mark in the British Museum
is of thinner make and finer grain; but, as it is a saucer-dish, this
refinement was only to be expected. It is painted in a fine bold style,
worthy of the best Ming traditions, with dragons in lotus scrolls, but
the blue is duller and greyer in tone than on the pieces just described.
Two specimens of Chêng Tê ware are figured in Hsiang’s Album,[96] one
a tripod libation cup of bronze form and the other a lamp supported
by a tortoise, and the glaze of both is “deep yellow, like steamed
chestnuts.”
[Illustration: Plate 66.--Porcelain with Chêng Tê mark.
Fig. 1.--Slop Bowl with full-face dragons holding _shou_
characters, in underglaze blue in a yellow enamel ground. Height
3½ inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with engraved cloud designs in transparent
coloured glazes on the biscuit, green ground. Height 8⅛ inches.
_Charteris Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 67.--Blue and White Porcelain. Sixteenth
Century.
Fig. 1.--Bowl with Hsüan Tê mark. Diameter 4 inches. _Dresden
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Covered Bowl with fish design. _Dresden Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle, peasant on an ox. Height 8½ inches.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 4.--Bottle with lotus scrolls in mottled blue. Height 9
inches. _Alexander Collection._]
The Chêng Tê mark is far from common, but it occurs persistently on
certain types of polychrome porcelain. One is a saucer-dish with carved
dragon designs under a white glaze, the depressions of the carving
and a few surrounding details being washed over with light green
enamel. The design consists of a circular medallion in the centre
enclosing a dragon among clouds, and two dragons on the outside, the
space between them faintly etched with sea waves. The ware is usually
thin and refined. These dishes are not uncommon, and it is difficult
to imagine that they can all belong to such an early period. On the
other hand, one also meets with copies of the same design with the
Ch’ien Lung mark (1736–1795), which display unmistakable difference in
quality. Another type has the same green dragon design with engraved
outlines set in a yellow ground, and in most cases its antiquity is
open to the same doubts. It is certain, however, that these pieces
represent a style which was in vogue in the Chêng Tê period. A small
vase of this kind was the only piece with the Chêng Tê mark in the
exhibition at the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910,[97] and it had
the appearance of a Ming specimen. A good example of this Chêng Tê
polychrome belonging to the Hon. Evan Charteris is illustrated in Fig.
2 of Plate 66. It has the designs etched in outline, filled in with
transparent green, yellow and aubergine glazes, the three colours
or _san ts’ai_ of the Chinese; and the Chêng Tê mark is seen on the
neck.[98] And a square bowl in the British Museum, similar in body
and glaze to the blue and white specimens with Arabic inscriptions,
is painted in fine blue on the exterior with dragons holding _Shou_
(longevity) characters in their claws, the background filled in with a
rich transparent yellow enamel. This piece (Plate 66, Fig. 1) has the
mark of Chêng Tê in four characters painted in Mohammedan blue, and is
clearly a genuine specimen.
CHAPTER IV
CHIA CHING [chch 2] (1522–1566) AND LUNG CH’ING [chch 2] (1567–1572)
The Imperial potteries at Ching-tê Chên were busy in the long reign
of Chia Ching, grandson of Ch’êng Hua, under the supervision of one
of the prefects of the circuit who took charge in place of the palace
eunuch of previous reigns. Chinese accounts of the porcelain of this
important period, summarised in the _T’ao shuo_, include passages from
the late Ming and therefore almost contemporary works, the _Shih wu
kan chu_ and the _Po wu yao lan_. In the former we are told that the
Mohammedan blue was largely used, but that the material for the “fresh
red” (_hsien hung_)[99] was exhausted, and that the method of producing
the red colour was no longer the same as of old, the potters being
capable only of making the overglaze iron red called _fan hung_. The
_Po wu yao lan_ gives a more intimate description of the ware, and the
passage[100]--the last in that work on the subject of porcelain--may be
rendered as follows:--
“Chia Ching porcelain includes blue-decorated and polychrome wares of
every description; but unfortunately the clay brought to the place from
the neighbouring sources in Jao Chou gradually deteriorated, and when
we compare these two classes of porcelain with the similar productions
of the earlier periods of the dynasty the (Chia Ching) wares do not
equal the latter. There are small white bowls (_ou_) inscribed inside
with the character _ch’a_ [chch 1] (tea), the character _chiu_ [chch 1]
(wine), or the characters _tsao t’ang_ [chch 2] (decoction of dates),
or _chiang t’ang_[101] [chch 2] (decoction of ginger); these are the
sacrificial altar vessels regularly used by the Emperor Shih Tsung
(i.e. Chia Ching), and they are called white altar cups, though in form
and material they are far from equalling the Hsüan Tê vessels. The Chia
Ching shallow wine cups with rimmed mouth,[102] convex centre,[103]
and foot with base rim,[104] decorated outside in three colours with
fish design, and the small vermilion boxes, no bigger than a “cash,”
are the gems of the period. As for the small boxes beautifully painted
with blue ornament, I fear that the Imperial factories of after times
will not be able to produce the like. Those who have them prize them as
gems.”
A few supplementary comments in the _T’ao shuo_ further inform
us that the Mohammedan blue of the Chia Ching period was preferred
very dark (in contrast with the pale blue of the Hsüan Tê porcelain),
that it was very lovely, and that supplies of this blue arrived
providentially at the time when the “fresh red” failed[105]; and also
that the supplies of earth from Ma-ts’ang were daily diminishing till
they were nearly exhausted, and consequently the material of the ware
was far from equalling that of the Hsüan Tê period. The _T’ao lu_
adds practically nothing to the above statements.
Fortunately, there are still to be found a fair number of authentic
specimens of Chia Ching porcelain, but before considering these in
the light of the Chinese descriptions, it will be helpful as well
as extremely interesting to glance at the lists of actual porcelain
vessels supplied to the palace at this time. From the eighth year of
this reign, the annual accounts of the palace porcelains have been
preserved in the Annals of Fou-liang, from which they were copied in
the provincial topographies. Two of these lists (for the years 1546
and 1554) are quoted by Bushell,[106] and a general summary of them is
given in the _T’ao shuo_.[107] To quote them in full here would
take too much space, but the following notes may be useful to the
reader, who, with his knowledge of the later porcelains, should have
no difficulty in reconstructing for himself the general appearance of
the court wares of the time.
The actual objects[108] supplied consisted chiefly of fish bowls
(_kang_), covered and uncovered jars (_kuan_), of which some were
octagonal, bowls (_wan_), dinner bowls (_shan wan_) of larger size,
saucer dishes (_tieh_) and round dishes (_p’an_), tea cups (_ch’a
chung_), tea cups (_ou_), wine cups (_chiu chan_), and libation cups
(_chüeh_) with hill-shaped saucers (_shan p’an_) to support their three
feet, various vases (_p’ing_), slender ovoid jars for wine (_t’an_),
ewers or wine pots (_hu p’ing_), and wine seas (_chiu hai_) or large
bowls. A large number of complete dinner-table sets (_cho ch’i_) occur
in one of the lists, and we learn from the _T’ao shuo_ that uniform
sets with the same pattern and colours throughout were an innovation
of the Ming dynasty. A set[109] comprised 27 pieces, including 5 fruit
dishes (_kuo tieh_), 5 food dishes (_ts’ai tieh_), 5 bowls (_wan_), 5
vegetable dishes (_yün tieh_), 3 tea cups (_ch’a chung_), 1 wine cup
(_chiu chan_), 1 wine saucer (_chiu tieh_), 1 slop receptacle (_cha
tou_), and 1 vinegar cruse (_ts’u chiu_). The slop receptacle appears
to have been a square bowl used for the remnants of food (see Plate 66,
Fig. 1).
The sacrificial vessels of the period included tazza-shaped bowls and
dishes (_pien tou p’an_), large wine jars (_t’ai tsun_), with swelling
body and monster masks for handles, “rhinoceros” jars (_hsi tsun_) in
the form of a rhinoceros carrying a vase on its back, besides various
dishes, plates, cups, and bowls of undefined form.
The decorations are grouped in six headings:--
(1) Blue and white (_ch’ing hua pai ti_, blue ornament on a white
ground), which is by far the largest.
(2) Blue ware, which included blue bowls (_ch’ing wan_), sky-blue bowls
(_t’ien ch’ing wan_), and turquoise bowls (_ts’ui ch’ing wan_). In
some cases the ware is described as plain blue monochrome, and in one
item it is “best blue monochrome” (_t’ou ch’ing su_), while in others
there are designs engraved under the glaze (_an hua_). In others,
again, ornament such as dragons and sea waves is mentioned without
specifying how it was executed. Such ornament may have been etched
with a point in the blue surface,[110] or pencilled in darker blue on
a blue background or reserved in white in a blue ground. Another kind
is more fully described as “round dishes of pure blue (_shun ch’ing_)
with dragons and sea waves inside, and on the exterior a background of
dense cloud scrolls[111] with a gilt[112] decoration of three lions and
dragons.” Bushell[113] speaks of the “beautiful mottled blue ground for
which this reign is also remarkable,” and which, he says, was produced
by the usual blend of Mohammedan and native blue suspended in water.
(3) Wares which were white inside and blue outside.
(4) White ware, plain[114] or with engraved designs under the glaze
(_an hua_, lit. secret ornament).
(5) Ware with brown glaze in two varieties, _tzŭ chin_ (golden brown),
and _chin huang_ (golden yellow), with dragon designs engraved under
the glaze. These are the well-known lustrous brown glazes, the former
of dark coffee brown shade, and the latter a light golden brown.
(6) Ware with mixed colours (_tsa sê_), which included bowls and
dishes decorated in iron red[115] (_fan hung_) instead of the “fresh
red” (_hsien hung_); others with emerald green colour (_ts’ui lü sê_);
bowls with phœnixes and flowers of Paradise in yellow in a blue ground;
cups with blue cloud and dragon designs in a yellow ground; boxes with
dragon and phœnix designs engraved under a yellow glaze; dishes with
design of a pair of dragons and clouds in yellow within a golden brown
(_tzŭ chin_) ground; and globular bowls with embossed[116] ornament in
a single-coloured ground.
To these types Bushell adds from other similar lists crackled ware
(_sui ch’i_), tea cups of “greenish white porcelain” (_ch’ing pai
tz’ŭ_), which seems to be a pale celadon, and large fish bowls with pea
green (_tou ch’ing_) glaze.
The source of the designs of the porcelain is clearly indicated in
the following passage in the _T’ao shuo_[117]: “Porcelain enamelled
in colours was painted in imitation of the fashion of brocaded silks,
and we have consequently the names of blue ground, yellow ground, and
brown gold (_tzŭ chin_) ground. The designs used to decorate it were
also similar, and included dragons in motion (_tsou lung_), clouds
and phœnixes, _ch’i-lin_, lions, mandarin ducks, myriads of gold
pieces, dragon medallions (_p’an lung_, lit. coiled dragons), pairs
of phœnixes, peacocks, sacred storks, the fungus of longevity, the
large lion in his lair, wild geese in clouds with their double nests,
large crested waves, phœnixes in the clouds, the son-producing lily,
the hundred flowers, phœnixes flying through flowers, the band of
Eight Taoist Immortals, dragons pursuing pearls, lions playing with
embroidered balls, water weeds, and sporting fishes. These are the
names of ancient brocades, all of which the potters have reproduced
more or less accurately in the designs and colouring of their
porcelain.”
The following analysis of the designs named in the Chia Ching lists
will show that the blue and white painters of the period took their
inspiration from the same source:--
=Floral Motives.=
Celestial flowers (_t’ien hua_), supporting the characters _shou
shan fu hai_ [chch 4], “longevity of the hills and happiness
(inexhaustible as) the sea.”
Flowers of the four seasons (the tree peony for spring, lotus for
summer, chrysanthemum for autumn, and prunus for winter).
Flowering and other plants (_hua ts’ao_).
The myriad-flowering wistaria (_wan hua t’êng_).
The water chestnut (_ling_).
The pine, bamboo, and plum.
Floral medallions (_t’uan hua_).
Indian lotus (_hsi fan lien_).
Knots of lotus (_chieh tzŭ lien_[118]).
Interlacing sprays of lotus supporting the Eight Precious Symbols or
the Eight Buddhist Emblems.[119]
Branches of _ling chih_[120] fungus supporting the Eight Precious
Symbols.
_Ling chih_ fungus and season flowers.
Lotus flowers, fishes, and water weeds.
Floral arabesques (_hui hui hua_).
Flowers of Paradise (_pao hsiang hua_) [chch 3].
The celestial flowers and the flowers of Paradise are no doubt similar
designs of idealised flowers in scrolls or groups.[121] The _pao
hsiang hua_, which is given in Giles’s Dictionary as “the rose,” is
rendered by Bushell “flowers of Paradise” or “fairy flowers.” Judging
by the designs with this name in Chinese works, and also from the fact
that the rose is a very rare motive on Chinese wares before the Ch’ing
dynasty, whereas the _pao hsiang hua_ is one of the commonest in
the Ming lists, Bushell’s rendering is probably correct in the present
context.
=Animal Motives=, mythical or otherwise.
Dragons, represented as pursuing jewels (_kan chu_); grasping jewels
(_k’ung chu_); in clouds; emerging from water; in bamboo foliage and
fungus plants; among water chestnut flowers; among scrolls of Indian
lotus; emerging from sea waves and holding up the Eight Trigrams (_pa
kua_); holding up the characters _fu_ [chch] (happiness) or _shou_
[chch] (longevity), as on Fig. 1 of Plate 66.
Dragons of antique form. These are the lizard-like creatures
(_ch’ih_) with bifid tail which occur so often in old bronzes and
jades.
Dragon medallions (_t’uan lung_).
Nine dragons and flowers.
Dragons and phœnixes moving through flowers.
Dragon, and phœnixes with other birds.
Phœnixes flying through flowers.
A pair of phœnixes.
Lions[122] rolling balls of brocade.
Flying lions.
Hoary[123] lions and dragons.
Storks in clouds.
Peacocks (_k’ung ch’iao_) and _mu-tan_ peonies.
Birds flying in clouds.
Fish and water weeds.
Four fishes.[124]
=Human Motives.=
Children (_wa wa_) playing.
Three divine beings (_hsien_) compounding the elixir of
Immortality.
Two or four Immortals.
The Eight Immortals (_pa hsien_) crossing the sea; or paying court
to the god of Longevity (_p’êng shou_), or congratulating him
(_ch’ing shou_).
A group of divine beings (_hsien_) paying court to the god of
Longevity.
Two designs of doubtful meaning may be added here:
(1) “Jars decorated with _chiang hsia pa chün_,”[125] a phrase
which means “the eight elegant (scholars) of Chiang-hsia (i.e. below
the river),” but has been translated by Bushell, using a variant
reading,[126] as “the eight horses of Mu Wang.” The latter rendering
ignores the presence of _chiang hsia_, and the former, though
a correct reading of the original, is not explained in any work of
reference to which I have had access.
(2) “Bowls with _man ti ch’iao_,” lit. “graceful (designs) filling
the ground.” The meaning of _ch’iao_ is the difficulty, and
Bushell in one translation[127] has rendered it “graceful sprays of
flowers,” which sorts well with rest of the phrase, but in another[128]
he has assumed that it means “graceful beauties” in reference to the
well-known design of tall, slender girls, which the Dutch collectors
named _lange lijsen_ (see Plate 92, Fig. 2). The latter rendering,
however, goes badly with _man ti_, “filling the ground,” which is
certainly more applicable to some close design, such as floral scroll
work. This is, however, a good example of the difficulty of translating
the Chinese texts, where so much is left to the imagination, and
consequently there is so much room for differences of opinion.
[Illustration: Plate 68.--Blue and White Porcelain. Sixteenth
Century.
Fig. 1.--Perfume Vase, lions and balls of brocade. Height 8¾
inches. _V. & A. Museum._
Fig. 2. Double Gourd Vase, square in the lower part. Eight
Immortals paying court to the God of Longevity, panels of
children (_wa wa_). Height 21 inches. _Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle with medallions of _ch’i-lin_ and incised
fret pattern between. Late Ming. Height 9 inches. _Halsey
Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 69.--Sixteenth Century Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Bowl of blue and white porcelain with silver gilt mount
of Elizabethan period. Height 3¾ inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Covered Jar, painted in dark underglaze blue with red,
green and yellow enamels; fishes and water plants. Chia Ching
mark. Height 17 inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 70.--Porcelain with Chia Ching mark.
Fig. 1.--Box with incised Imperial dragons and lotus scrolls;
turquoise and dark violet glazes on the biscuit. Diameter 9½
inches. _V. & A. Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with Imperial dragons in clouds, painted in yellow
in an iron red ground. Height 8½ inches. _Cologne Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 71.--Sixteenth Century Porcelain.
Figs. 1 and 2.--Two Ewers in the Dresden Collection, with
transparent green, aubergine and turquoise glazes on the biscuit,
traces of gilding. In form of a phœnix (height 11 inches), and of
a crayfish (height 8¼ inches).
Fig. 3.--Bowl with flight of storks in a lotus scroll, enamels on
the biscuit, green, aubergine and white in a yellow ground. Chia
Ching mark. Diameter 7 inches. _Alexander Collection._]
=Emblematic Motives.=
Heaven and Earth, and the six cardinal points (_ch’ien k’un liu
ho_[129]), or “emblems of the six cardinal points of the Universe.”
_Ch’ien_ and _k’un_ are the male and female principles which are
represented by Heaven and Earth, and together make up the Universe. The
identification of these emblems is obscure. They might simply be the
Eight Trigrams (_pa kua_), which are explained next, for two of these
are known as _ch’ien_ and _k’un_, and together with the remaining six
they are arranged so as to make up eight points of the compass. But in
that case, why not simply say _pa kua_ as elsewhere?
On the other hand, we know that certain emblems were used in the Chou
dynasty[130] in the worship of the six points of the Universe, viz. a
round tablet with pierced centre (_pi_) of bluish jade for Heaven; a
yellow jade tube with square exterior (_ts’ung_) for Earth; a green
tablet (_kuei_), oblong with pointed top, for the East; a red tablet
(_chang_), oblong and knife-shaped, for the South; a white tablet, in
the shape of a tiger (_hu_), for the West; and a black jade piece of
flat semicircular form (_huang_) for the North. All these objects are
illustrated in Laufer’s _Jade_, but as they have not, to my knowledge,
appeared together in porcelain decoration, the question must for the
present be left open.
* * * * *
The _pa-kua_ [chch 2] or Eight Trigrams, supported by dragons or by
waves and flames.
These are eight combinations of triple lines. In the first the lines
are unbroken, and in the last they are all divided at the centre, the
intermediate figures consisting of different permutations of broken and
unbroken lines (see p. 290). These eight diagrams, by which certain
Chinese philosophers explained all the phenomena of Nature, are
supposed to have been constructed by the legendary Emperor Fu Hsi (B.C.
2852) from a plan revealed to him on the back of the “dragon horse”
(_lung ma_) which rose from the Yellow River.[131] Among other things,
they are used to designate the points of the compass, one arrangement
making the first figure represent the South (also designated
_ch’ien_[chch] or Heaven), and the last figure the North (also
designated _k’un_[chch] or Earth), the remaining figures representing
South-West, West, North-West, North-East, East, and South-East.
* * * * *
The _pa pao_ [chch 2], or Eight Precious Symbols, supported by fungus
sprays.
These are usually represented by (1) a sphere or jewel, which seems
to have originally been the sun disc; (2) a circle enclosing a
square, which suggests the copper coin called a “cash”; (3) an open
lozenge, symbol of victory or success; (4) a musical stone (_ch’ing_);
(5) a pair of books; (6) a pair of rhinoceros horns (cups); (7) a
lozenge-shaped picture (_hua_); (8) a leaf of the artemisia, a plant of
good omen, which dispels sickness. (See p. 299.)
* * * * *
The _pa chi hsiang_ [chch 3], or Eight Buddhist Symbols, supported on
lotus scrolls.
These symbols, which appeared among the auspicious signs on the foot
of Buddha, comprise (1) the wheel (_chakra_), which is sometimes
replaced by the hanging bell; (2) the shell trumpet of Victory; (3)
the umbrella of state; (4) the canopy; (5) the lotus flower; (6) the
vase; (7) the pair of fish, emblems of fertility; (8) the angular knot
(representing the entrails), symbol of longevity. (See p. 298.)
The hundred forms of the character _shou_ (longevity)--_pai shou
tz’ŭ_.
* * * * *
_Ju-i_ sceptres and phœnix medallions.
The _ju-i_ [chch 2] (“as you wish”) sceptre brings fulfilment of
wishes, and is a symbol of longevity (see vol. i., p. 227). The head of
the _ju-i_, which has a strong resemblance to the conventional form of
the _ling chih_ fungus, is often used in borders and formal patterns
variously described as “_ju-i_ head patterns,” “cloud-scroll patterns,”
or “_ju-i_ cloud patterns.”
Close ground patterns of propitious clouds (_yung hsiang yün ti_).
Cloud designs are propitious because they symbolise the fertilising
rain, and they are commonly represented by conventional scrolls as well
as by the more obvious cloud patterns.
* * * * *
Crested sea waves (_chiang ya hai shui_).
_Chiang ya_ [chch 2] (lit. ginger shoots) is rendered by Bushell
“crested waves,” the metaphor being apparently suggested by the curling
tops of the young plant.
Cups decorated[132] with the characters _fu shou k’ang ning_ [chch 4]
(happiness, long life, peace, and tranquillity).
A blue and white vase with these characters in medallions framed by
cloud scrolls on the shoulders is shown on Plate 68.
=Miscellaneous Motives.=
The waterfalls of Pa Shan [chch 2] in the province of Szechuan.
Gold weighing-scales (_ch’êng chin_ [chch 2]).
A design named _san yang k’ai t’ai_ [chch 4], a phrase alluding to the
“revivifying power of spring,” and said by Bushell to be symbolised by
three rams. Cf. Fig. 2 of Plate 122.
The mark of the Chia Ching period, though not so freely used as
those of Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng Hua, has been a favourite with Japanese
copyists, whose imitations have often proved dangerously clever. Still,
there are enough genuine specimens in public and private collections in
England to provide a fair representation of the ware. In studying these
the blue and white will be found to vary widely, both in body material
and in the colour of the blue, according to the quality of the objects.
Plate 77 illustrates a remarkably good example of the dark but vivid
Mohammedan blue on a pure white ware of fine close grain with clear
glaze. The design, which consists of scenes from the life of a sage,
perhaps Confucius himself, is painted in typical Ming style, and
bordered by _ju-i_ cloud scrolls and formal brocade patterns. The Chia
Ching blue is often darker[133] and heavier than here, resembling thick
patches of violet ink, to use Mr. Perzynski’s phrase. This powerful
blue is well shown in the large vase given by Mr. A. Burman to the
Victoria and Albert Museum (Plate 72), and by a fine ewer in Case 22 in
the same gallery. The latter has an accidentally crackled glaze on the
body with brownish tint, due, no doubt, to staining.
On the other hand, a large double-gourd vase in the British Museum,
heavily made (probably for export), is painted with the eighteen
Arhats, or Buddhist apostles, in a dull greyish blue, which would
certainly have been assigned to the Wan Li period were it not for the
Chia Ching mark. This is, no doubt, the native cobalt without any
admixture of Mohammedan blue.
The body material in these specimens varies scarcely less than the
blue. In the colour stand on Plate 77 the ware is a pure clean white,
both in body and glaze. On other specimens--particularly the large,
heavily built jars and vases made for export to India and Persia--the
ware is of coarser grain, and the glaze of grey or greenish tone. The
tendency of the Ming biscuit to assume a reddish tinge where exposed
to the fire is exaggerated on some of these large jars, so that the
exposed parts at the base and foot rim are sometimes a dark reddish
brown. Doubtless the clay from different mines varied considerably,
and the less pure materials would be used on these relatively coarse
productions. On the other hand, the better class of dish and bowl made
for service at the table is usually of clean white ware, potted thin
and neatly finished, and differing but little in refinement from the
choice porcelains of the eighteenth century. Such are the dragon dish
described on p. 32 and the polychrome saucers which will be mentioned
presently.
The export trade with Western Asia and Egypt, both by sea and land,
must have been of considerable dimensions in the middle of the
sixteenth century. Broken pieces of Chinese blue and white are found
on all the excavated sites in the Near East, and the influence of the
Chinese porcelain is clearly seen in the blue, or blue and brown,
painted faience made in Persia, Syria, and Egypt in the sixteenth
century. The reflex influence of Persia on the Chinese wares has
already been noted, and it is clear that Persian taste was studied
by the makers of the dishes, bottles, pipes, and other objects with
birds and animals in foliage and floral scrolls of decidedly Persian
flavour, which are still frequently found in the Near East. It was this
type of Chinese porcelain which inspired Italian maiolica potters in
their decoration _alla porcellana_, as well as the decorators of
the Medici or Florentine porcelain, the first European porcelain of
any note. Françesco Maria, the patron of the Medici porcelain, died
in 1587, and as little, if any, of the ware was made after his death,
the rare surviving examples may be safely taken as reflecting, where
any Chinese influence is apparent, the influence of the mid-sixteenth
century porcelains.
[Illustration: PLATE 72
Vase with Imperial five-clawed dragons in cloud scrolls over
sea waves: band of lotus scrolls on the shoulder. Painted in
dark Mohammedan blue. Mark on the neck, of the Chia Ching period
(1522–1566) in six characters.
Height 21 inches. _Victoria and Albert Museum._]
An interesting series of Ming blue and white export wares collected
in India was lent to the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910 by
Mrs. Halsey. It included a few Chia Ching specimens, and among them a
melon-shaped jar with lotus scrolls in the dark blue of the period.
This melon form has been popular with the Chinese potters from T’ang
times, and it occurs fairly often in the Ming export porcelains. A
companion piece, for instance, at the same exhibition was decorated
with handsome pine, bamboo, and plum designs. Others, again, are
appropriately ornamented with a melon vine pattern, a gourd vine, or a
grape vine with a squirrel-like animal on the branches. The drawing of
these pieces is usually rough but vigorous, the form is good, and the
blue as a rule soft and pleasing; and though entirely wanting in the
superfine finish of the choice K’ang Hsi blue and white, they have a
decorative value which has been sadly underrated.
The polychrome porcelains of the Chia Ching period are rarer than
the blue and white, but still a fair number of types are represented
in English collections. Of the colours applied direct to the biscuit
the early glazes of the _demi-grand feu_--turquoise, aubergine
violet, green and yellow--were doubtless applied as in the previous
century to the large wine jars, vases and figures in the round. An
unusual specimen of this class is the marked Chia Ching cake box
in the Victoria and Albert Museum, illustrated on Plate 70. The
design--Imperial dragons among floral scrolls--is traced with a
point in the paste and covered with a delicate turquoise glaze, the
background being filled with violet aubergine. Similarly engraved
designs coloured by washes of transparent glazes in the three
colours--green, yellow and aubergine brown--are found with the Chia
Ching mark as with that of Chêng Tê, and Plate 73 illustrates two
singularly beautiful bowls with designs outlined in brown and washed
in with transparent glazes. The one has flowering branches of prunus,
peach and pomegranate in white, green and aubergine in a yellow ground,
and the other phœnixes and floral scrolls in yellow, green and white in
a ground of pale aubergine. Both have the Chia Ching mark. Fig. 2 of
Plate 71 is another member of the same group, with a beautiful design
of cranes and lotus scrolls in a yellow ground. There are, besides,
examples of these yellow and aubergine glazes in monochrome. A good
specimen of the latter with Chia Ching mark in the British Museum has
fine transparent aubergine glaze with iridescent surface, the colour
pleasantly graded, which contrasts with the uniform smooth glaze and
trim finish of a Ch’ien Lung example near to it.
Two interesting ewers in the Dresden collection (Figs. 1 and 2 of Plate
71) probably belong to this period, or at any rate to the sixteenth
century. They are fantastically shaped to represent a phœnix and a
lobster, and are decorated with green, yellow, aubergine and a little
turquoise applied direct to the biscuit. Parts of the surface have been
lightly coated with gilding, which has almost entirely disappeared.
These pieces are mentioned in an inventory of 1640, and a lobster
ewer precisely similar was included in the collection made by Philipp
Hainhofer in the early years of the seventeenth century.[134]
Among the examples of on-glaze enamels of this period are those in
which the coral red derived from iron oxide (_fan hung_) is
the most conspicuous colour. This red is often highly iridescent,
displaying soft ruby reflections like Persian lustre; at other
times it is richly fluxed, and has a peculiarly vitreous and almost
sticky appearance. The former effect is well seen in a small saucer
in the British Museum, which has a wide border of deep lustrous red
surrounding a medallion with lions and a brocade ball in green. The
latter is seen on a square, covered vase in the same case, decorated
on each side with full-faced dragons in red and the usual cloud
accessories in inconspicuous touches of green and yellow. The yellow
enamel of the period is often of an impure, brownish tint and rather
thickly applied, but these peculiarities of both yellow and red
continued in the Wan Li period.
[Illustration: PLATE 73
Two Bowls with the Chia Ching mark (1522–1566), with designs
outlined in brown and washed in with colours in monochrome
grounds.
Fig. 1 with peach sprays in a yellow ground. Diameter 8 inches.
_Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2 with phœnixes (_fêng-huang_) flying among scrolls
of _mu-tan_ peony. Diameter 7 inches. _Cumberbatch
Collection._]
The combination of enamel colours with underglaze blue, which was so
largely used in the Wan Li period as to be generally known by the name
_Wan li wu ts’ai_ (Wan Li polychrome), is not unknown on Chia Ching
wares. The wide-mouthed jar, for instance, from the collection of Mr.
S. E. Kennedy[135] (Plate 69, Fig. 2) is decorated with a design of
fish among water plants in deep Chia Ching blue combined with green,
yellow and iron red enamels; and a small bottle-shaped vase in the
British Museum has the same blue combined with on-glaze red, green,
yellow and aubergine, the design being fish, waves, and water plants.
The greens of this and the Wan Li period include various shades--bright
leaf green, pale emerald, and a bluish green[136] which seems to
be peculiar to the late Ming period.
A box in the collection of Dr. C. Seligmann has a dragon design
reserved in a blue ground and washed over with yellow enamel, on which
in turn are details traced in iron red; and another peculiar type of
Chia Ching polychrome in the Pierpont Morgan Collection (Cat. No. 882)
is a tea cup with blue Imperial dragons inside, “on the outside deep
yellow glaze with decoration in brownish red of intensely luminous
tone, derived from iron, lightly brushed on the yellow ground: the
decoration consists of a procession of boys carrying vases of flowers
round the sides of the cup with addition of a scroll of foliage
encircling the rim.” Both these specimens have the Chia Ching mark.
Allusion has already been made (p. 6) to a type of bowl which belongs
to the Ming period, though opinions differ as to the exact part of
that dynasty to which it should be assigned. The bowls vary slightly
in form, but the most usual kind is that shown on Plate 74 with
well rounded sides. A common feature, which does not appear in the
photograph, is a convex centre. Others, again, are shallow with concave
base, but no foot rim. The decoration of those in the British Museum
includes (1) a coral red exterior with gilt designs as described on
p. 6, combined with slight underglaze blue interior ornament, (2) a
beautiful pale emerald green exterior similarly gilt, with or without
blue ornament inside, and (3) a single specimen with white slip
traceries in faint relief under the glaze inside, the outside enamelled
with turquoise blue medallions and set with cabochon jewels in Persia
or India. There are similar bowls in the Dresden collection, with pale
sky blue glaze on the exterior. As already noted, one or two of the
red bowls have the Yung Lo mark, but, as a rule, they are marked with
phrases of commendation or good wish,[137] such as _tan kuei_ (red
cassia, emblem of literary success), _wan fu yu t’ung_ (may infinite
happiness embrace all your affairs!) Two of them are known to have
sixteenth-century European mounts, viz. the red bowl mentioned on p. 6,
and a green specimen in the British Museum.[138] Without denying the
possibility of some of the red examples dating back to the Yung Lo
period, the conclusion is almost irresistible that we have here in one
case the _fan hung_ decoration which replaced the _hsien hung_ in the
Chia Ching period, and in another the _ts’ui lü_ (emerald green), named
among the colours of the Imperial Chia Ching porcelains.
The Chia Ching monochromes already mentioned include white, blue, sky
blue, lustrous brown, turquoise, green, yellow, and aubergine, with or
without designs engraved in the paste (_an hua_). None of these call
for any further comment, unless it be the distinction between blue and
sky blue of the Imperial wares. The former, no doubt, resulted from
the Mohammedan blue (blended with native cobalt) mixed with the glaze,
and must have been a fine blue of slightly violet tone: the latter was
apparently the lavender-tinted blue which goes by the name of sky blue
on the more modern porcelains.
We read in more than one passage in the Chinese works that the
imitation of the classical porcelains of Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng Hua was
practised in the Chia Ching period, and the name of a private potter
who excelled in this kind of work has been preserved. A note on this
artist, given in the _T’ao lu_[139] under the heading _Ts’ui kung[140]
yao_, or Wares of Mr. Ts’ui, may be rendered as follows:--
“In the Chia Ching and Lung Ch’ing periods there lived a man who was
clever at making porcelain (_t’ao_). He was famed for imitations of the
wares in the traditional style and make of the Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng Hua
periods, and in his time he enjoyed the highest reputation. The name
given to his wares was Mr. Ts’ui’s porcelain (_ts’ui kung yao tz’ŭ_),
and they were eagerly sought in all parts of the empire. As for the
shape of his cups (_ch’ien_), when compared with the Hsüan and Ch’êng
specimens[141] they differed in size but displayed the same skill and
perfection of design. In the blue and polychrome wares his colours were
all like the originals. His were, in fact, the cream of the porcelains
made in the private factories (_min t’ao_).”
[Illustration: PLATE 74
Two Bowls in the British Museum with gilt designs on a monochrome
ground. Probably Chia Ching period (1522–1566)
Fig. 1 with lotus scroll with etched details on a ground of iron
red (_fan hung_) outside. Inside is figure of a man holding
a branch of cassia, a symbol of literary success, painted in
underglaze blue. Mark in blue, _tan kuei_ (red cassia.)
Diameter 4½ inches.
Fig. 2 with similar design on ground of emerald green enamel.
Mark in blue in the form of a coin or _cash_ with the
characters _ch’ang ming fu kuei_ (long life, riches and
honours!). Diameter 4¾ inches.]
It is interesting to note that the imitation of the early Ming
porcelains began as soon as this, and we may infer from the usual
Chinese procedure that the marks of the Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng Hua periods
were duly affixed to these clever copies.
_Lung Ch’ing_ [chch 2] (1567–1572)
We read in the _T’ao shuo_[142] that the Imperial factory was
re-established in the sixth year of this reign (1572), and placed under
the care of the assistant prefects of the district. This would seem to
imply that for the greater part of this brief period the Imperial works
had been in abeyance. Be this as it may, there was no falling off in
the quantity of porcelain commanded for the Court, and the extravagant
and burdensome demands evoked a protest from Hsü Ch’ih, the president
of the Censorate,[143] in 1571. It was urged among other things that
the secret of the copper red colour (_hsien hung_) had been lost,
and that the potters should be allowed to use the iron red (_fan
hung_) in its place: that the size and form of the large fish bowls
which were ordered made their manufacture almost impossible: that
the designs for the polychrome (_wu ts’ai_) painting were too
elaborate, and that square boxes made in three tiers were a novelty
difficult to construct. Fire and flood had devastated Ching-tê Chên,
and many of the workmen had fled, and he (the president) begged that a
large reduction should be made in the palace orders.
We are not told whether this memorial to the emperor had the desired
effect. In the case of the next emperor a similar protest resulted in
a large reduction of the demands. But the document discloses several
interesting facts, and among other things we learn that the designs for
some of the ware and for the coloured decoration were still sent from
the palace as in the days of Ch’êng Hua.
The official lists of porcelain actually supplied to the Court of Lung
Ch’ing have been briefly summarised in the _T’ao shuo_[144];
but they do not include any new forms, and the motives of decoration
were in the main similar to those recorded in the Chia Ching lists.
The following, however, may be added to the summary in the previous
chapter:--
The _yü tsan hua_, rendered in Giles’s Dictionary as the “tuberose,” by
Bushell as the “iris.”
Clumps of chrysanthemum flowers.
Interlacing scrolls of _mu-tan_ peony.
_Ch’ang ch’un_ (long spring) flowers, identified by Bushell with the
“jasmine.”
A “joyous meeting,” symbolised according to Bushell by a pair of
magpies.
The Tartar pheasant (_chai chih_).
The season flowers supporting the characters [chch 4] _ch’ien k’un
ch’ing t’ai_, “Heaven and earth fair and fruitful!”
Monsters (_shou_) in sea waves.
Flying fish.
Historical scenes (_ku shih_), as well as genre subjects (_jên wu_).
Children playing with branches of flowers.
This last design occurs both in the form of belts of foliage scrolls,
among which are semi-nude boys, and of medallions with a boy holding a
branch, on blue and white and polychrome wares of the late Ming period.
But it is a design of considerable antiquity, and it is found engraved
on the early Corean bowls which, no doubt, borrowed from Sung originals.
Though all these designs are given under the general heading of blue
and white, we may infer that the polychrome which is occasionally
mentioned was used in combination with the blue. Thus the mention of
“phœnixes in red clouds flying through flowers,” of “nine red dragons
in blue waves,” and of “a pair of dragons in red clouds,” recalls
actual specimens which I have seen of Lung Ch’ing and Wan Li boxes
with designs of blue dragons moving through clouds touched in with
iron red. Again, where the blue designs are supplemented with “curling
waves and plum blossoms in polychrome (_wu ts’ai_),” one thinks of the
well-known pattern of conventional waves on which blossom and symbols
are floating, as on Plate 79. Other types of decoration mentioned are
yellow grounds and white glaze, both with dragon designs engraved under
the glaze (_an hua_), peacocks and _mu-tan_ peonies in gilding, and
moulded ornament. A specific example of the last are the lions which
served as knobs on the covers of the ovoid wine jars (_t’an_).
The author of the _T’ao shuo_ pays a handsome tribute to the skill
of the late Ming potters. “We find,” he says, “that the porcelain of
the Ming dynasty daily increased in excellence till we come to the
reigns of Lung Ch’ing and Wan Li, when there was nothing that could not
be made.” At the same time he finds fault with a particular kind of
decoration which was encouraged by the degraded and licentious tastes
of the Emperor Lung Ch’ing, and seems to have only too frequently
marred the porcelain of the period.[145]
The rare examples of marked Lung Ch’ing porcelain in our collections
do not call for special comment, and the unmarked specimens will
hardly be distinguished from the productions of the succeeding Wan
Li period. There are, however, two boxes in the British Museum which
may be regarded as characteristic specimens of the Imperial blue and
white porcelains. Both are strongly made with thick but fine-grained
body material and a glaze of slightly greenish tone; and the designs
are boldly sketched in strong outline and washed in with a dark indigo
blue. One is a square box with four compartments decorated with
five-clawed dragons in cloud scrolls, extended or coiled in medallions
according as space demanded; and the other is oblong and rectangular,
and painted on the sides (the cover is missing) with scenes of family
life (_jên wu_). In both cases the base is unglazed except for a sunk
medallion in which the six characters of the Lung Ch’ing mark are
finely painted in blue.
CHAPTER V
WAN LI [chch 2] (1573–1619) AND OTHER REIGNS
The long reign of Wan Li, the last important period of the Ming
dynasty, is certainly the best represented in European collections, a
circumstance due to the ceramic activity of the time not less than to
its nearness to our own age. In the first year of the reign orders were
given that one of the sub-prefects of Jao-chou Fu should be permanently
stationed at Ching-tê Chên to supervise the Imperial factory. It
appears that he proved a stern taskmaster, and at the same time that
the potters were severely burdened by excessive demands from the
palace. The picture drawn by the censor in the previous reign of the
afflicted condition of the potters, and the story told elsewhere[146]
how they had made intercession daily in the temple of the god that the
Imperial orders might be merciful, are fitting preface to the tale of
the dragon bowls told as follows by T’ang Ying,[147] the director of
the factory in the first half of the eighteenth century.
“By the west wall of the Ancestral-tablet Hall of the spirit who
protects the potters is a dragon fish bowl (_lung kang_). It is
three feet in diameter and two feet high, with a fierce frieze of
dragons in blue and a wave pattern below. The sides and the mouth are
perfect, but the bottom is wanting. It was made in the Wan Li period of
the Ming. Previously these fish bowls had presented great difficulty in
the making, and had not succeeded, and the superintendent had increased
his severity. Thereupon the divine T’ung took pity on his fellow
potters, and served them by alone laying down his life. He plunged into
the fire, and the bowls came out perfect. This fish bowl was damaged
after it had been finished and selected (for palace use), and for a
long time it remained abandoned in a corner of the office. But when
I saw it I sent a double-yoked cart and men to lift it, and it was
brought to the side of the Ancestral-tablet Hall of the god, where it
adorns a high platform, and sacrifice is offered. The vessel’s perfect
glaze is the god’s fat and blood; the body material is the god’s body
and flesh; and the blue of the decoration, with the brilliant lustre of
gems, is the essence of the god’s pure spirit.”
The deification of T’ung was a simple matter to the Chinese, who
habitually worship before the tablets of their ancestors; but he seems
to have become the genius of the place, and in this capacity to have
superseded another canonised potter named Chao,[148] who had been
worshipped at Ching-tê Chên since 1425.
To add to the difficulties experienced by the potters in satisfactorily
fulfilling the Imperial demands, it had been reported in 1583 that
the supplies of earth from Ma-ts’ang were practically worked out, and
though good material was found at Wu-mên-t’o, which is also in the
district of Fu-liang, the distance for transport was greater, and as
the price was not correspondingly raised the supply from this source
was difficult to maintain. Consequently we are not surprised to learn
that in this same year another memorial was forwarded to the emperor by
one of the supervising censors, Wang Ching-min, asking for alleviation
of the palace orders, and protesting specifically against the demands
for candlesticks, screens, brush handles, and chess apparatus as
unnecessarily extravagant. It was urged at the same time that blue
decoration should be substituted for polychrome, and that pierced work
(_ling lung_) should not be required, the objection to both these
processes being that they were difficult to execute and meretricious in
effect.
It is stated in the _T’ao lu_[149] that the supply of Mohammedan blue
had ceased completely in the reign of Wan Li, and that on the other
hand the _chi hung_ or underglaze copper red was made, though it was
not equal in quality to the _hsien hung_ or _pao shih hung_[150] of
the earlier periods. Both these assertions are based on the somewhat
uncertain authority of the _T’ang shih ssŭ k’ao_, and though the
truth of the second is shown by existing specimens, the first is only
partially true, for there are marked examples of Mohammedan blue in the
British Museum and probably elsewhere. Either there were supplies of
the Mohammedan material in hand at the beginning of the reign, or they
continued to arrive for part at least of the period.
The lists of porcelain supplied to the Court of Wan Li may be consulted
with advantage, and the extracts from those of the previous reigns may
be supplemented by the following, which, though not necessarily new
forms and designs, do not appear in the Chia Ching and Lung Ch’ing
records:--
=Forms.=
Trays for wine cups (_pei p’an_).[151]
Beaker-shaped[152] vases (_hu p’ing_ [chch 2]).
Flat-backed wall vases in the form of a double gourd split vertically.
Chess boards (_ch’i p’an_).
Hanging oil lamps[2] (_ch’ing t’ai_ [chch 2]).
Pricket candlesticks (_chu t’ai_). See _Cat. B. F. A._, 1910, E 6: a
pricket candlestick with cloud and dragon designs in blue and the Wan
Li mark.
Jars for candle snuff (_chien chu kuan_).
Screens (_p’ing_).
Brush handles (_pi kuan_).
Brush rests (_pi chia_).
Brush pots (_pi ch’ung_). Apparently the cylindrical jars usually
known as _pi t’ung_.
Fan cases (_shan hsia_).
Water droppers for the ink pallet (_yen shui ti_).
Betel-nut boxes (_pin lang lu_).
Handkerchief boxes (_chin lu_).
Hat boxes (_kuan lu_).
Cool seats (_liang tun_), for garden use in summer.
=Motives for Painted Decoration.=
_Floral, etc.:_
Lily flowers (_hsüan hua_).
Hibiscus (_kuei_) flowers on a brocade ground.
Round medallions of season flowers.
Flower designs broken by medallions of landscape.
Marsh plants.
Sections of water melons (_hsi kua pan_).
Foreign pomegranates; sometimes tied with fillets.
The sacred peach.
Medallions of peach boughs with the seal character _shou_
(longevity).
Apricot (_hsing_) foliage.
Pine pattern brocade.
Ginseng (_hsien_).
Hemp-leaved (_ma yeh_) Indian lotus.
Borders of bamboo foliage and branching prunus.
Grape-vine borders.
_Animals, etc.:_
Monsters: variously described as _hai shou_ (sea monsters) and
_i shou_ (strange monsters).
Nine blue monsters in red waves.
Strange monsters attending the celestial dragon.
Sea horses.
Full-faced dragons (_chêng mien lung_). See Plate 66.
Medallions of archaic dragons (_ch’ih_) and tigers.
Ascending and descending dragons.
Couchant, or squatting (_tun_) dragons.
Flying dragons.
The hundred dragons.
The hundred storks.
The hundred deer. (As in the “Hundred Shou Characters” and other
similar phrases, the “hundred” is merely an indefinite numerative
signifying a large number.)
Elephants with vases of jewels (of Buddhistic significance).
Water birds in lotus plants.
Six cranes, “symbolising the cardinal points of the universe” (_liu
ho ch’ien k’un_).
Phœnixes among the season flowers.
Bees hovering round plum blossom.
_Human:_
Men and women (_shih nü_).
Medallions with boys pulling down (branches of) cassia (_p’an kuei_).
The picture of the Hundred Boys.
_Fu_, _Lu_, _Shou_ (Happiness, Rank, and Longevity). It is not stated
whether the characters only are intended, or, as is more probable, the
three Taoist deities who distribute these blessings.
=Emblematic Motives and Inscriptions.=
The eight Buddhist emblems, bound with fillets (_kuan t’ao_).
_Ju-i_ sceptres bound with fillets.
_Ju-i_ cloud borders (_ju i yün pien_).
Midsummer holiday symbols (_tuan yang chieh_). Explained by Bushell as
sprigs of acorns and artemisia hung up on the fifth day of the fifth
moon.
Emblems of Longevity (_shou tai_), e.g. gourd, peach, fungus, pine,
bamboo, crane, deer.
The “monad symbol” (_hun yüan_), which is apparently another name
for the _yin yang_, and the Eight Trigrams. See p. 290.
Lozenge symbols of victory (_fang shêng_).
“The four lights worshipping the star of Longevity” (_ssŭ yang p’êng
shou_).
Spiral (_hui_ [chch 1]) patterns.
Sanskrit invocations (_chên yen tz’ŭ_). See Plate 93.
Ancient writings found at Lo-yang (_lo shu_). Lo-yang (the modern
Honan Fu) was the capital of the Eastern Han (25–220 A.D.).
Inscriptions in antique seal characters (_chuan_).
Dragons holding up the characters [chch 4] _yung pao wan shou_ (ever
insuring endless longevity); and [chch 6] _yung pao hung fu ch’i t’ien_
(ever insuring great happiness equalling Heaven).
Borders inscribed [chch 4] _fu ju tung hai_ (happiness like the
eastern sea); and [chch 8] _fêng t’iao yü shun t’ien hsia t’ai p’ing_
(favouring winds and seasonable rain: great peace throughout the
empire).
“A symbolical head with hair dressed in four puffs”[153] bearing the
characters [chch 4] _yung pao ch’ang ch’un_ (ever insuring long spring).
Taoist deities holding the characters [chch 8] _wan ku ch’ang ch’un
ssŭ hai lai ch’ao_ (through myriads of ages long spring; tribute
coming from the four seas); or the same sentiment with _yung pao_ (ever
insuring) in place of _wan ku_.
Dragons in clouds holding the characters [chch 2] _shêng shou_, the
emperor’s birthday.
=Miscellaneous.=
Representations of ancient coins (_ku lao ch’ien_).
Landscapes (_shan shui_).
Necklaces (_ying lo_ [chch 2]).
Jewel mountains in the sea waves (_pao shan hai shui_). This
is, no doubt, the familiar border pattern of conventional waves with
conical rocks standing up at regular intervals.
Round medallions (_ho tzŭ_, lit. boxes) in brocade grounds.
Most of these designs are given under the heading of “blue and
white,” though, as in the Lung Ch’ing list, the blue is in many cases
supplemented by colour or by other forms of decoration such as patterns
engraved in the body (_an hua_), and “designs on a blue ground,” the
nature of them not explained, but no doubt similar to those described
on p. 61. The method of reserving the decoration in white in a blue
ground (_ch’ing ti pai hua_) is specifically mentioned under the
heading of “mixed decorations.” The supplementary decoration consists
of on-glaze enamels mixed with the underglaze blue; bowls with coloured
exterior and blue and white inside or vice versa; yellow grounds with
designs engraved under the glaze; gilded fishes among polychrome water
weeds, and other gilded patterns; curling waves in polychrome and plum
blossoms; red dragons in blue waves, the red either under or over the
glaze; relief designs (_ting chuang_[154]) and pierced work (_ling
lung_[155]).
The “mixed colours” included garden seats with lotus designs, etc.,
in polychrome (_wu ts’ai_) and with aubergine brown (_tzŭ_) lotus
decoration in a monochrome yellow ground; tea cups with dragons in
fairy flowers engraved under a yellow glaze; yellow ground with
polychrome (_wu ts’ai_) decoration; banquet dishes, white inside, the
outside decorated with dragons and clouds in red, green, yellow, and
aubergine.
The custom of minutely subdividing the work in the porcelain factories
so that even the decoration of a single piece was parcelled out among
several painters existed in the Ming dynasty, though perhaps not
carried so far as in the after periods. It is clear that under such
a system the individuality of the artists was completely lost, and
we never hear the name of any potter or painter who worked at the
Imperial factory. In the private factories probably the division of
labour was less rigorous, and it is certain that many of the specimens
were decorated by a single brush. But even so, signatures of potters
or painters are almost unknown; and only one or two private potters
of conspicuous merit at the end of the Ming period are mentioned by
name in the Chinese books. Mr. Ts’ui, for instance, has already been
mentioned in the chapter on the Chia Ching period, and three others
occur in the annals of the Wan Li period.
[Illustration: Plate 75.--Ming Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Tripod Bowl with raised peony scrolls in enamel colours.
Wan Li mark. Height 5¾ inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Blue and white Bowl, Chia Ching period. Mark, _Wan ku
ch’ang ch’un_ (“A myriad antiquities and enduring spring!”).
Height 3 inches. _Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin._
Fig. 3.--Ewer with white slip _ch’i-lin_ on a blue ground.
Wan Li period. Height 9 inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 4.--Gourd-shaped Vase with winged dragons and fairy flowers,
raised outlines and coloured glazes on the biscuit. Sixteenth
century. Height 8¾ inches. _Salting Collection._]
Of these, the most interesting personality was Hao Shih-chiu,[156]
scholar, painter, poet, and potter, who signed his wares with the
fanciful name _Hu yin tao jên_[157] (Taoist hidden in a tea pot), to
show that he “put his soul” into the making of his pots. He lived, we
are told,[158] in exaggerated simplicity, in hut, with a mat for a
door and a broken jar for a window; but he was so celebrated as a man
of talent and culture that his hut was frequented by the _literati_,
who capped his verses and admired his wares. The latter were of great
refinement and exquisitely beautiful, and his white “egg shell”[159]
wine cups were so delicate as to weigh less than a gramme.[160] No less
famous were his red wine cups, bright as vermilion, the colour floating
in the glaze like red clouds. They were named _liu hsia chan_[161]
(_lit._ floating red cloud cups), which has been poetically rendered
by Bushell as “dawn-red wine cups” and “liquid dawn cups,” and were
evidently one of the reds of the _chi hung_ class produced by copper
oxide in the glaze, like the beautiful wine cups with clouded maroon
red glaze of the early eighteenth century. All these wares were eagerly
sought by connoisseurs throughout the Chinese empire. “There were
also elegantly formed pots (hu), in colour pale green, like Kuan and Ko
wares, but without the ice crackle, and golden brown[162] tea pots with
reddish tinge, imitating the contemporary wares of the Ch’ên family at
Yi-hsing, engraved underneath with the four characters, _Hu yin tao
jên_.”
The “red cloud” cups are eulogised by the poet Li Jih-hua in a verse
addressed to their maker as fit to be “started from the orchid pavilion
to float down the nine-bend river.”[163]
[Illustration: Plate 76.--Blue and White Porcelain. Sixteenth
Century.
Fig. 1.--Vase with monster handles, archaic dragons. Height 10⅞
inches. _Halsey Collection._
Fig. 2.--Hexagonal Bottle, white in blue designs. Mark, a hare.
Height 11½ inches. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle with “garlic mouth,” stork and lotus scrolls,
white in blue. Height 11 inches. _Salting Collection._
Fig. 4.--Vase (_mei p’ing_), Imperial dragon and scrolls.
Wan Li mark on the shoulder. Height 15 inches. _Coltart
Collection._]
The two other potters of this period whose names have survived are
Ou of Yi-hsing fame (vol. i., p. 181) and Chou Tan-ch’üan, whose
wonderful imitations of Sung Ting ware have been described in vol.
i., p. 94. Many clever imitations of this latter porcelain were
made at Ching-tê Chên in the Wan Li period, and a special material,
_ch’ing-t’ien_[164] stone, was employed for the purpose; but the
followers of Ch’ou Tan-ch’üan were not so successful as their master,
and their wares are described as over-elaborate in decoration and quite
inferior to Ch’ou’s productions. There was one type, however, which
is specially mentioned, the oblong rectangular boxes made to hold
seal-vermilion. These are described in a sixteenth-century work[165] as
either pure white or painted in blue, and usually six or seven inches
long. They are accorded a paragraph in the _T’ao shuo_[166] under
the heading of _fang ting_ or “imitation Ting ware,” and they were
probably of that soft-looking, creamy white crackled ware to which
Western collectors have given the misleading name of “soft paste.”[167]
Another private manufacture specially mentioned in the _T’ao lu_[168]
was located in a street called _Hsiao nan_ [chch 2] where, we are told,
“they made wares of small size only, like a squatting frog, and called
for that reason frog wares (_ha ma[169] yao_). Though coarse, they were
of correct form; the material was yellowish, but the body of the ware
was thin; and though small, the vessels were strong. One kind of bowl
was white in colour with a tinge of blue (_tai ch’ing_), and decorated
in blue with a single orchid spray or bamboo leaves; and even those
which had no painted design had one or two rings of blue at the mouth.
These were called “white rice vessels” (_pai fan ch’i_). There were,
besides, bowls with wide mouths and flattened rims (_p’ieh t’an_)[170]
but shallow, and pure white, imitating the Sung bowls. All these wares
had a great vogue, both at the time and at the beginning of the present
(i.e. the Ch’ing) dynasty.”
Out of the comparatively large number of Wan Li porcelains in
European collections the majority are blue and white. This is only
to be expected, having regard to the preponderance of this style
of decoration in the Imperial lists, and also to the fact that it
was found easiest of all processes to execute. In fact, the censor
pleading on behalf of the potters in 1583 asks that this style may be
substituted for the more exacting polychrome and pierced work. It has
already been mentioned that the supplies of Mohammedan blue apparently
came to an end early in the reign, but there are enough examples of
this colour associated with the Wan Li mark to show that it was used
for part at least of the period. One of these is a well-potted bowl
of fine white porcelain, entirely covered with Sanskrit characters
(_chên yen tz’ŭ_), in the British Museum; and another piece* is a
dish moulded in the form of an open lotus flower with petals in relief,
and in the centre a single Sanskrit character. Both are painted in a
clear and vivid Mohammedan blue, and have the Wan Li mark under the
base. A dark violet blue, closely akin to the typical Chia Ching colour
but with a touch of indigo, occurs on two dishes,* decorated with a
pair of fishes among aquatic plants and bearing the four characters of
the Wan Li mark surrounding a cartouche, which contains the felicitous
legend, “Virtue, culture, and enduring spring” (see vol. i., p. 225).
An intense but more vivid violet blue, which betrays something of the
Mohammedan blend, is seen on a ewer* of Persian form, decorated with a
_ch’i-lin_ reclining before a strangely Italian-looking fountain.
The ware of this piece, though thick, is of fine grain, and the glaze
has a faint greenish tinge, and its mark, a hare,[171] (see vol. i., p.
227) occurs on several other examples of varying quality, but all of
late Ming character.
Another group of marked Wan Li ware, comprising bowls and dishes
with trim neat finish and obviously destined for table use, has a
soft-looking glaze, often much worn, but, even in the less used parts,
with a peculiar smoothness of surface which is, no doubt, largely due
to age. There are three examples of this group in the British Museum,
all painted in the same soft, dark indigo-tinged blue. One is a bowl
with baskets of season flowers round the exterior, insects, and a
border of dragon and phœnix pattern; while inside is a blue medallion
with a full-face dragon reserved in white. The other two are dishes
with figure subjects and gourd vine borders, which are interesting
because the painting shows signs of a transition state, part being
in flat Ming washes, and part showing the marbled effect which was
afterwards characteristic of the K’ang Hsi blue and white.
In striking contrast with this smooth, soft-surfaced ware is a vase* of
square, beaker shape, and details which indicate a form derived from
bronze. Though evidently an Imperial piece, it is of strong, heavy
build, with a hard thick glaze of greenish tinge, so full of minute
bubbles as to spread in places a veritable fog over the blue decoration
beneath. The design, consisting of a dragon and phœnix among sprays of
(?) lily, with rock and wave borders, is repeated in all the spaces,
and below the lip in front is the Wan Li mark extended in a single
line. A similar vase,* but with polychrome decoration, illustrated
on Plate 81, will serve to show the form and design. Both are fine,
decorative objects, in a strong, rugged style, which takes no account
of small fire-flaws and slight imperfections in the glaze. The same
strong, hard body and glaze is seen again on three flat, narrow-rimmed
dishes,* which are conspicuous for unusual borders, two having a large
checker and the third a chevron pattern, in addition to a thin blue
line on either side of the edge. Sand adhering to the foot rim and
faint radiating lines scored in the base are indications of rough
finish, and they are clearly all the work of a private factory perhaps
catering for the export trade.
A variety of boxes figured in the Imperial lists, destined for holding
incense, vermilion, chess pieces, handkerchiefs, caps, sweetmeats,
cakes, etc. A fair number of these have survived and found their way
into Western collections. Round, square, oblong with rounded ends,
and sometimes furnished with interior compartments, they are usually
decorated with dragon designs in dark blue, occasionally tricked out
with touches of iron red; but miscellaneous subjects also occur in
their decoration, as in a fine example exhibited at the Burlington Fine
Arts Club in 1910,[172] which has figure subjects on the cover and a
landscape with waterfall, probably from a picture of the celebrated
mountain scenery in Szechuan. Sometimes the covers of these boxes are
perforated as though to allow some perfume to escape. Other interesting
late Ming porcelains in the same exhibition were a pricket candlestick
with cloud and dragon ornament and the Wan Li mark; a curious perfume
vase (Plate 68, Fig. 1), which illustrates the design of lions sporting
with balls of brocade, an unmarked piece which might even be as
early as Chia Ching; and a wide-mouthed vase lent by the Ashmolean
Museum, Oxford, with the familiar design of fantastic lions moving
among peonies and formal scrolls on the body and panels of flowers
separated by trellis diaper on the shoulder. The last is a type which
is not uncommon, but this particular example is interesting because it
belonged to one of the oldest collections in England, presented to the
Oxford Museum by John Tradescant, and mostly collected before 1627.
The export trade with Western Asia was in full swing in the reign of
Wan Li, and the Portuguese traders had already made their way to the
Far East and brought back Chinese porcelain for European use. That it
was, however, still a rare material in England seems to be indicated
by the sumptuous silver-gilt mounts in which stray specimens were
enshrined. Several of these mounted specimens still exist, and seven
of them were seen at the Burlington Fine Arts Exhibition, 1910,[173]
the date of the mounts being about 1580–1590. Taken, as they may
fairly be, as typical specimens, they show on the whole a porcelain
of indifferent quality, with all the defects and virtues of export
ware--the summary finish of skilful potters who worked with good
material but for an uncritical public, and rapid, bold draughtsmanship
in an ordinary quality of blue usually of greyish or indigo tint. The
most finished specimen was a bowl from the Pierpont Morgan Collection,
with a design of phœnixes and lotus scrolls finely drawn in blue of
good quality. Unlike the others, it had a reign mark (that of Wan Li),
and probably it was made at the Imperial factory. A bottle mounted
as a ewer from the same collection had a scale pattern on the neck,
flowering plants and birds on the body, and a saucer dish was painted
in the centre with a typical late Ming landscape, with mountains, pine
trees, pagoda, a pleasure boat, and sundry figures. The blue of this
last piece was of fair quality but rather dull, and it had a double
ring under the base void of mark. Another bowl had on the exterior
panel designs with deer in white reserved in a blue ground, in a style
somewhat similar to that of the bottle illustrated on Plate 76, Fig.
3. There is a bowl in the British Museum, mounted with silver-gilt
foot and winged caryatid handles of about 1580 (Plate 69, Fig. 1).
The porcelain is of fine white material with thick lustrous glaze of
slightly bluish tint and “pinholed” here and there; and the design
painted in blue with a faint tinge of indigo consists of a vase with a
lotus flower and a lotus leaf and three egrets, in a medallion inside
and four times repeated on the exterior. This is clearly an early Wan
Li specimen, if, indeed, it is not actually as old as Chia Ching.
The most remarkable collection of Chinese export porcelain is
illustrated by Professor Sarre[174] from a photograph which he was
able to make of the _Chini-hane_ or porcelain house attached to the
mosque of Ardebil, in Persia. Ranged on the floor are some five
hundred specimens--jars, vases, ewers, and stacks of plates, bowls
and dishes, many of which had formerly occupied niches in the walls
of the building erected by Shah Abbas the Great[175] (1587–1628).
Unfortunately, the conditions were not favourable to photography, and
the picture, valuable as it is, only permits a clear view of the nearer
objects, the rest being out of focus and represented by mere shadows
of themselves. They are, we are told, mainly blue and white, but with
a sprinkling of coloured pieces, and it is clear from the picture that
they belong to various periods of the Ming dynasty, mostly to the later
part. They include, no doubt, presents from the Chinese Court,[176]
besides the porcelains which came in the ordinary way of trade, and
we recognise a large vase almost identical with the fine Chia Ching
specimen on Plate 72: a small-mouthed, baluster-shaped vase, similar in
form and decoration to a marked Wan Li specimen in the Pierpont Morgan
Collection[177]; a bowl with lotus scrolls in blotchy blue, recalling
the style of Plate 67, Fig. 4; a ewer with the curious fountain design
described on p. 67; besides a number of the ordinary late Ming export
types and some celadon jars and bulb bowls of a slightly earlier
period. Some of the pots, we are told, are almost a metre in height.
Among the tantalising forms in the indistinct background are some large
covered jars with a series of loop-handles on the shoulders, such as
are found in Borneo and the East Indies (see vol. i., p. 189).
One of the most attractive types of late Ming export porcelain, and at
the same time the most easily recognised, consists of ewers, bowls,
and dishes of thin, crisp porcelain with characteristic designs in
pale, pure blue of silvery tone; see Plate 77, Fig. 1. The ware is of
fine, white, unctuous material with a tendency (not very marked) to
turn brown at the foot rim and in parts where the glaze is wanting.
The glaze partakes of the faintly greenish tinge common to Ming wares,
but it is clear and of high lustre. Here, again, a little sand or grit
occasionally adhering to the foot rim and radiating lines lightly
scored in the base indicate a summary finish which detracts from
the artistic effect no more than the obviously rapid though skilful
brushwork of the decoration. Sharply moulded forms and crinkled
borders, admirably suited to this thin crisp material, give additional
play to the lustrous glaze, and the general feeling of the ware is well
expressed by Mr. F. Perzynski[178] in his excellent study of the late
Ming blue and white porcelains, in which he remarks that “the artists
of this group have used thin, brittle material more like flexible metal
than porcelain.”
The designs as shown in the illustration are typical of the ware.
[Illustration: PLATE 77
Two examples of Ming Blue and White Porcelain in the British
Museum
Fig. 1.--Ewer of thin, crisp porcelain with foliate mouth and
rustic spout with leaf attachments. Panels of figure subjects and
landscapes on the body: “rat and vine” pattern on the neck and a
band of hexagon diaper enclosing a cash symbol. Latter half of
the sixteenth century. Height 7 inches.
Fig. 2.--Octagonal stand perhaps for artist’s colours. On the
sides are scenes from the life of a sage; borders of _ju-i_
pattern and gadroons. On the top are lions sporting with brocade
balls. Painted in deep Mohammedan blue. Mark of the Chia Ching
period (1522–1566). Diameter 4¾ inches.]
A freely drawn figure of a man or woman usually in garden surroundings,
standing before a fantastic rock or seated by a table and a
picture-screen often form the leading motive, though this is varied by
landscape, floral compositions, spirited drawings of birds (an eagle
on a rock, geese in a marsh, a singing bird on a bough), or a large
cicada on a stone among plants and grasses. The borders of dishes and
the exteriors of bowls are divided into radiating compartments (often
with the divisions lightly moulded) filled with figures, plant designs,
symbols, and the like, and separated by narrow bands with pendent
jewels and tasselled cords, which form perhaps the most constant
characteristics of the group. Small passages of brocade diapers with
swastika fret, hexagon and matting patterns, are used to fill up the
spaces. The finer examples of this group are of admirable delicacy both
in colour and design; but the type lasted well into the seventeenth
century and became coarse and vulgarised. It appears in a debased
form in the large dishes which were made in quantity for the Persian
and Indian markets, overloaded with crudely drawn brocade diapers and
painted in dull indigo blue, which is often badly fired and verges on
black. The central designs on these dishes, deer in a forest, birds in
marsh, etc., usually betray strong Persian influence.
I am not aware of any specimens of this group, either of the earlier
or the more debased kinds which bear date-marks, but still a clear
indication of the period is given by various circumstances. A bowl in
the National Museum at Munich is credibly stated to have belonged to
William V., Duke of Bavaria (1579–1597),[179] and a beautiful specimen,
also a bowl, with silver-gilt mount of about 1585, is illustrated
by Mr. Perzynski.[180] The characteristic designs of this ware are
commonplace on the Persian pottery of the early seventeenth century,
and a Persian blue and white ewer in the British Museum, which is dated
1616, clearly reflects the same style. The shallow dishes with moulded
sides are frequently reproduced in the still-life pictures by the Dutch
masters of the seventeenth century, from whose work many precious hints
may be taken by the student of ceramics. To give one instance only,
there are two such pictures[181] in the Dresden Gallery from the brush
of Frans Snyders (1579–1657).
We shall have occasion later on to discuss more fully another kind of
blue and white porcelain for which the Chinese and American collectors
show a marked partiality, and which has received the unfortunate
title, “soft paste,” from the latter. It has an opaque body, often
of earthy appearance, and a glaze which looks soft and is usually
crackled, and the ware is usually of small dimensions, such as the
Chinese _literatus_ delighted to see in his study, and beautifully
painted with miniature-like touches, every stroke of the brush clear
and distinct. Ming marks--Hsüan Tê, Ch’êng Hua, etc.--are not uncommon
on this ware, and there is no doubt that it was in use from the early
reigns of the dynasty, but the style has been so faithfully preserved
by the potters of the eighteenth century that it is wellnigh impossible
to distinguish the different periods. A dainty specimen with the Wan Li
mark illustrated in Fig. 2 of Plate 93 will serve to show the delicacy
and refinement of this exquisite porcelain. At the same time it should
be mentioned that the imitation Ting wares described on p. 96, vol. i.,
when painted in blue, are included in this group.
[Illustration: Plate 78.--Porcelain with pierced (_ling
lung_) designs and biscuit reliefs. Late Ming.
Fig. 1.--Bowl with Eight Immortals and pierced swastika fret.
Diameter 3¾ inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with blue phœnix medallions, pierced trellis work
and characters. Wan Li mark. Height 2¼ inches. _Hippisley
Collection._
Fig 3.--Covered Bowl with blue and white landscapes and biscuit
reliefs of Eight Immortals. Height 6½ inches. _Grandidier
Collection._]
Two interesting kinds of decoration mentioned in the Wan Li list[182]
are frequently found in combination with blue and white; these are
relief (_ting chuang_ or _tui hua_) and pierced work (_ling lung_).
Though both have been seen in various forms on the earlier wares,
they occur at this period in a fashion which challenges special
attention. I allude particularly to the small bowls with or without
covers, decorated on the sides with unglazed (or “biscuit”) figures
in detached relief, or with delicately perforated fretwork, or with
a combination of both. The catalogue[183] of the Pierpont Morgan
Collection illustrates two covered bowls of the first type with the
Eight Immortals in four pairs symmetrically arranged on the sides,
and a “biscuit” lion on the cover doing duty for a handle. A similar
bowl, formerly in the Nightingale Collection, had the same relief
decoration and painted designs in the typical grey blue of the Wan
Li period; and Fig. 3 of Plate 78 represents an excellent example
from the Grandidier collection. The Chinese were in the habit of
daubing these biscuit reliefs (just as they did the unglazed details
of statuettes) with a red pigment which served as a medium for oil
gilding, but as neither of these coatings was fired they have worn away
or been cleaned off in the majority of cases. In the Rijks Museum,
Amsterdam, is a picture[184] by Van Streeck (1632–1678), which shows
one of these covered bowls with the biscuit reliefs coloured red, and
Mr. Perzynski[185] alludes to another in a still-life by Willem Kalf
(1630–1693) in the Kaiser Frederick Museum, Berlin, with the figures
both coloured[186] and gilt. An excellent example of the second kind
of decoration is illustrated by Fig. 2 of Plate 78, one of a set of
four bowls in the Hippisley Collection, with phœnix medallions and
other decoration in a fine grey blue, the spaces filled with perforated
designs of the utmost delicacy, veritable “devil’s work,” to borrow a
Chinese term for workmanship which shows almost superhuman skill. The
small pierced medallions contain the characters _fu_, _shou_, _k’ang_,
_ning_[187] (happiness, longevity, peace, and tranquillity), and under
the base are the six characters of the Wan Li mark. A line cut in the
glaze (before firing) at the lip and on the base-rim seems to have
been designed to give a firm hold to a metal mount, a use to which it
has been actually put in one case; and in another the glazing of the
mark under the base has been omitted with the result that it has come
from the kiln black instead of blue. The third kind which combines the
reliefs and the pierced ornament is illustrated by Fig. 1 of Plate 78.
The reliefs of these medallions are small and very delicately modelled,
and the subjects are various, including human and animal figures, birds
and floral compositions; the borders are often traced in liquid clay,
which is left in unglazed relief. An example in the British Museum
has an interior lining washed with blue to serve as a backing for the
pierced work, and it is painted inside with dragon designs in Wan Li
grey blue. It bears a mark which occurs on other late Ming porcelains,
_yü tang chia ch’i_ (beautiful vessel for the Jade Hall).[188]
Examples of this same pierced and relief work in white, without the
supplementary blue designs, though rare, are yet to be seen in several
collections. If marked at all they usually bear the apocryphal date of
Ch’êng Hua, but an example in the Marsden Perry collection, Providence,
U.S.A., has the T’ien Ch’i (1621–1627) date under the base, which no
doubt represents the true period of its manufacture. This intricate
_ling lung_ work, which the Wan Li censor deprecated as too difficult
and elaborate, has been perpetuated, though it was probably never more
beautifully executed than in the late Ming period. The later examples
are mostly characterised by larger perforations, which were easier
to manage. There are several references to the pierced and relief
decorations in the lists of porcelain supplied to the Court of Wan
Li, e.g. “brush rests with sea waves and three dragons in relief over
pierced designs, and landscapes,” “landscape medallions among pierced
work,” and “sacred fungus carved in openwork, and figures of ancient
cash.” In the finer examples of pierced work the most frequent design
is the fret or key pattern often interwoven with the four-legged
symbol known as the swastika, which commonly serves in Chinese for
the character _wan_ (ten thousand), carrying a suggested wish for
“long life,” as expressed in the phrase _wan sui_ (Jap. _banzai_), ten
thousand years. The pierced patterns are carved out of the porcelain
body when the ware has been dried to a “leather-tough” consistency, and
the manipulative skill exercised in the cutting and handling of the
still plastic material is almost superhuman. Similar _tours de force_
distinguish the Japanese Hirado porcelain, and Owen’s work in our own
Worcester ware exhibits extraordinary skill, but I doubt if anything
finer in this style has ever been made than the _ling lung_ bowls of
the late Ming potters.
Another form of decoration which, if not actually included in the _ling
lung_ category, is at any rate closely allied to it, is the fretwork
cut deeply into the body of the ware without actually perforating it,
the hollows of the pattern being generally left without glaze. This
ornament is used in borders or to fill the spaces between blue and
white medallions after the manner of the pierced fretwork, and it was
evidently contemporaneous with the latter, viz. dating from the late
Ming period onwards (Plate 68, Fig. 3).
It will be convenient here to consider another type of decoration
which was probably in use in the early periods of the Ming dynasty,
certainly in the reign of Wan Li, and which has continued to modern
times. This is the decoration in white clay varying in thickness from
substantial reliefs to translucent brush work in thin slip or liquid
clay, which allows the colour of the background to appear through
it. The designs are painted or modelled in white against dark or
light-coloured grounds of various shades--lustrous coffee brown (_tzŭ
chin_), deep blue, slaty blue, lavender, celadon, plain white, and
crackled creamy white--and they are usually slight and artistically
executed. The process, which is the same in principle as in the modern
_pâte sur pâte_, consisted of first covering the ground with
colouring matter, then tracing the design in white slip (i.e. liquid
clay) or building it up with strips of clay modelled with a wet brush,
and finally covering it with a colourless glaze. In this case the
white design has a covering of glaze. When a celadon green ground is
used the design is applied direct to the biscuit and the celadon glaze
covers the whole, but being quite transparent it does not obscure the
white slip beneath. Sometimes, however, as in Fig. 3 of Plate 75, the
design is unglazed and stands out in a dry white “biscuit.” Elaborate
and beautiful examples of slip decoration were made in the K’ang Hsi
and later periods, and Pére d’Entrecolles, writing in 1722, describes
their manufacture, stating that steatite and gypsum were used to form
the white slip.[189] The Ming specimens are usually of heavier make
and less graceful form, and distinguished by simplicity and strength
of design, the backgrounds being usually lustrous brown or different
shades of blue. They consist commonly of bottles, jars, flower pots,
bulb bowls, dishes, and narghili bowls, and many of them were clearly
made for export to Persia and India, where they are still to be found.
On rare examples the slip decoration is combined with passages of blue
and white.
There is little to guide us to the dating of these wares, and marks
are exceptional.[190] There is, however, a flower pot in the British
Museum with white design of _ch’i-lin_ on a brown ground which has
the late Ming mark _yü t’ang chia ch’i_[191]; and a specimen with an
Elizabethan metal mount was exhibited at the Burlington Fine Arts
Club in 1910.[192] These are, no doubt, of Ching-tê Chên make; but
there is a curious specimen in the British Museum which seems to be
of provincial manufacture. It is a dish with slaty blue ground and
plant designs with curious feathery foliage traced with considerable
delicacy. The border of running floral scroll has the flowers outlined
in dots, and the whole execution of the piece is as distinctive as
the strange coarse base which shows a brown-red biscuit and heavy
accretions of sand and grit at the foot rim. The same base and the same
peculiarities of design appeared on a similar dish with celadon glaze
exhibited by Mrs. Halsey at the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910,[193]
and in the British Museum there are other dishes clearly of the same
make, but with (1) crackled grey white glaze and coarsely painted blue
decoration, and (2) with greenish white glaze and enamelled designs
in iron red and the Ming blue green. It is clear that we have to deal
here with the productions of one factory, and though we have no direct
clue to its identity, it certainly catered for the export trade to
India and the islands; for the enamelled dishes of this type have been
found in Sumatra. Mrs. Halsey’s dish came from India, and fragments
of the blue and enamelled types were found in the ruins of the palace
at Bijapur,[194] which was destroyed by Aurungzebe in 1686. Probably
the factory was situated in Fukien or Kuangtung, where it would be
in direct touch with the southern export trade, and the style of
the existing specimens points to the late Ming as the period of its
activity.
The process of marbling or “graining” has been tried by potters all the
world over, and the Chinese were no exceptions. The effect is produced
either by slips of two or more coloured clays worked about on the
surface, or by blending layers of clays in two or more colours (usually
brown and white) in the actual body. Early examples of this marbling
occur among the T’ang wares, and Mr. Eumorfopoulos has examples of the
Ming and later periods. One of these, a figure with finely crackled
buff glaze and passages of brown and white marbling in front and on the
back, has an incised inscription, stating that it was modelled by Ch’ên
Wên-ching in the year 1597.[195]
The use of underglaze red in the Wan Li period has already been
mentioned (p. 59), and though Chinese writers classed it as _chi hung_
they would not admit it to an equality with the brilliant reds of the
fifteenth century.[196] Where red is named in the lists of Imperial
porcelains we are left in doubt as to its nature, whether under or over
the glaze; but there are two little shallow bowls in the British Museum
with a curious sponged blue associated with indifferent underglaze red
painting, which bear the late Ming mark _yü t’ang chia ch’i_.[197] A
bowl of lotus flower pattern, similar in form to that described on p.
66, but deeper, and painted with similar designs in pale underglaze
red, though bearing the Ch’êng Hua mark, seems to belong to the late
Ming period.
The Wan Li polychromes will naturally include continuations of the
early Ming types, such as the large jars with decoration in raised
outline, pierced or carved and filled in with glazes of the _demi-grand
feu_--turquoise, violet purple, green and yellow--wares with flat
washes of the same turquoise and purple, incised designs filled in
with transparent glazes of the three colours (_san ts’ai_), green,
yellow and aubergine, and, what is probably more truly characteristic
of this period, combinations of the first and last styles. A good
example of the transparent colours over incised designs is Fig. 1 of
Plate 79, a vase of the form known as _mei p’ing_ with green Imperial
dragons in a yellow ground and the Wan Li mark. All three of the _san
ts’ai_ colours were also used separately as monochromes with or without
engraved designs under the glaze, a striking example in the Pierpont
Morgan Collection being a vase with dragon handles and engraved designs
under a brilliant iridescent green glaze, “which appears like gold in
the sunlight.”[198] But though these types persisted, they would no
doubt be gradually superseded by simpler and more effective methods
of pictorial decoration in painted outline on the biscuit, filled in
with washes of transparent enamels in the same three colours. These
softer enamels, which contained a high proportion of lead and could be
fired at the relatively low temperature of the muffle kiln, must have
been used to a considerable extent in the late Ming period, though
their full development belongs to the reign of K’ang Hsi, and there
will always be a difficulty in separating the examples of these two
periods, whether the colours be laid on in broad undefined washes, as
on certain figures and on the “tiger skin” bowls and dishes, or brushed
over a design carefully outlined in brown or black pigment. There is
one species of the latter family with a ground of formal wave pattern
usually washed with green and studded with floating plum blossoms,
in which are galloping sea horses or symbols, or both, reserved and
washed with the remaining two colours, or with a faintly greenish flux,
almost colourless, which does duty for white. This species is almost
always described as Ming; and with some reason, for the sea wave and
plum blossom pattern is mentioned in the Wan Li lists as in polychrome
combined with blue decoration. But the danger of assuming a specimen to
be Ming because it exhibits a design which occurred on Ming porcelain
is shown by an ink pallet in the British Museum, which is dated in the
thirty-first year of K’ang Hsi, i.e. 1692. This important piece (Plate
94, Fig. 2) is decorated in enamels on the biscuit over black outlines
with the wave and plum blossom pattern, the same yellow trellis diaper
which appears on the base of the vase in Plate 97, and other diaper
patterns which occur on so many of the so-called Ming figures. This
piece is, in fact, a standing rebuke to those careless classifiers who
ascribe all on-biscuit enamel indiscriminately to the Ming period, and
I am strongly of opinion that most of the dishes,[199] bowls, ewers,
cups and saucers, and vases with the wave and plum blossom pattern and
horses, etc., in which a strong green enamel gives the dominating tint,
belong rather to the K’ang Hsi period. The same kind of decoration is
sometimes found applied to glazed porcelain, as on Fig. 3 of Plate 79,
a covered potiche-shaped vase in the British Museum with the design
of “jewel mountains and sea waves,” with floating blossoms, and _pa
pao_[200] symbols in green, yellow and white in an aubergine ground,
supplemented by a few plain rings in underglaze blue. The style of this
vase and the quality of the paste suggest that it really does belong to
the late Ming period.
[Illustration: Plate 79.--Wan Li Polychrome Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Vase (_mei p’ing_) with engraved design, green in a
yellow ground, Imperial dragons in clouds, rock and wave border.
Wan Li mark. Height 15 inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with pierced casing, phœnix design, etc., painted
in underglaze blue and enamels; cloisonné enamel neck. Height 23
inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Covered Jar, plum blossoms and symbols in a wave pattern
ground, coloured enamels in an aubergine background. Height 15½
inches. _British Museum._]
The use of enamels over the glaze was greatly extended in the Wan Li
period, though practically all the types in vogue at this time can
be paralleled in the Chia Ching porcelain, and, indeed, have been
discussed under that heading. There is the red family in which the
dominant colour is an iron red, either of curiously sticky appearance
and dark coral tint or with the surface dissolved in a lustrous
iridescence. Yellow, usually a dark impure colour, though sometimes
washed on extremely thin and consequently light and transparent,
and transparent greens, which vary from leaf tint to emerald and
bluish greens, occur in insignificant quantity. This red family is
well illustrated by a splendid covered jar in the Salting Collection
(Plate 80), and by three marked specimens in the British Museum, an
ink screen, a bowl, and a circular stand. It also occurs on another
significant piece in the latter collection, a dish admirably copying
the Ming style but marked _Shên tê t’ang po ku chih_[201] (antique
made for the Shên-tê Hall), a palace mark of the Tao Kuang period
(1821–1850). It should be added that this colour scheme[202] is
frequently seen on the coarsely made and roughly decorated jars and
dishes with designs of lions in peony scrolls, etc., no doubt made in
large quantities for export to India and Persia. They are not uncommon
to-day, and in spite of their obvious lack of finish they possess
certain decorative qualities, due chiefly to the mellow red, which are
not to be despised.
But the characteristic polychrome of the period, the _Wan Li wu
ts’ai_, combines enamelled decoration with underglaze blue, and
this again can be divided into two distinctive groups. One of these is
exemplified by Plate 81, an Imperial vase shaped after a bronze model
and of the same massive build as its fellow in blue and white, which
was described on p. 67. Here the underglaze blue is supplemented by the
green, the impure yellow and the sticky coral red of the period, and
the subject as on the blue and white example consists of dragons and
phœnixes among floral scrolls with borders of rock and wave pattern.
The object of the decorator seems to have been to distract the eye
from the underlying ware, as if he were conscious of its relative
inferiority, and the effect of this close design, evenly divided
between the blue and the enamels, is rather checkered when viewed from
a distance. But both form and decoration are characteristic of the
Wan Li Imperial vases, as is shown by kindred specimens, notably by a
tall vase in the Pierpont Morgan Collection, of which the design is
similar and the form even more metal-like, having on the lower part
the projecting dentate ribs seen on square bronze and cloisonné beakers
of the Ming dynasty. Two other marked examples of this colour scheme,
from which the absence of aubergine is noteworthy, are (1) a ewer
in the British Museum with full-face dragons on the neck supporting
the characters _wan shou_ (endless longevity) and with floral
sprays on a lobed body, and (2) a straight-sided box with moulded
six-foil elevation, painted on each face with a screen before which
is a fantastic animal on a stand, and a monkey, dog and cat in garden
surroundings.
The second--and perhaps the more familiar--group of _Wan Li wu ts’ai_
is illustrated by Fig. 1 of Plate 82, on which all the colours,
including aubergine, are represented in company with the underglaze
blue. There is no longer the same patchy effect, because the blue
is more evenly balanced by broader washes of the enamel colours,
particularly the greens. The design of this particular example is a
figure subject taken from Chinese history (_shih wu_), supplemented
by a brocade band of floral scroll work on the shoulder and formal
patterns on the neck and above the base. The former and the latter
positions are commonly occupied in these vases by a band of stiff
leaves and a border of false gadroons, both alternately blue and
coloured. The stiff leaves in this instance are replaced by floral
sprays, and the coloured designs are outlined in a red brown pigment.
The mark under the base is the “hare,” which has already been noticed
on examples of late Ming blue and white.[203] Another late Ming mark,
_yü t’ang chia ch’i_,[204] occurs on a dish in the British Museum, with
design of the Eight Immortals paying court to the god of Longevity (_pa
hsien p’êng shou_), painted in the same style but with a predominance
of underglaze blue.
[Illustration: PLATE 80
Covered Jar or potiche. Painted in iron red and green enamels,
with a family scene in a garden, and brocade borders of
_ju-i_ pattern, peony scrolls, etc. Sixteenth century.
Height 17½ inches.
_Salting Collection_ (_Victoria and Albert Museum_).]
But it is not necessary to multiply instances, for the type is well
known, and must have survived for a long period. Indeed, many competent
authorities assign the bulk of this kind of porcelain to the Yung
Chêng period (1723–1735); and it is undoubtedly true that imitations
of Wan Li polychrome were made at this time, for they are specifically
mentioned in the Yung Chêng list of Imperial wares.[205] But I am
inclined to think that the number of these late attributions has been
exaggerated, and that they do not take sufficiently into account the
interval of forty-two years between the reigns of Wan Li and K’ang
Hsi. It was a distracted time when the potters must have depended
largely upon their foreign trade in default of Imperial orders, and it
is probable that much of this ware, characterised by strong, rather
coarse make, greyish glaze and boldly executed decoration in the Wan Li
colour scheme, belongs to this intermediate period. The vases usually
have the flat unglazed base which characterises the blue and white of
this time.[206] Two handsome beakers, with figure subjects and borders
of the peach, pomegranate and citron, and a beautiful jar with phœnix
beside a rock and flowering shrubs, in the British Museum, seem to
belong to this period, but there are numerous other examples, many of
which are coarse and crude, and obviously made wholesale for the export
trade.
Among the various examples of Wan Li polychrome exhibited at the
Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910, there was one which calls for
special mention, a box[207] with panels of floral designs surrounded by
fruit and diaper patterns in the usual colours of the _wu ts’ai_, with
the addition of an overglaze blue enamel. It is true that this blue
enamel was clearly of an experimental nature and far from successful,
but its presence on this marked and indubitable Wan Li specimen is
noteworthy. For it has long been an article of faith with collectors
that this blue enamel does not antedate the Ch’ing dynasty, being,
in fact, a characteristic feature of the K’ang Hsi _famille verte_
porcelain. The rule still remains an excellent one, and this solitary
exception only serves to emphasise its general truth, showing as
it does that so far the attempts at a blue enamel were a failure.
But at the same time the discovery is a warning against a too rigid
application of those useful rules of thumb, based on the generalisation
from what must, after all, be a limited number of instances.
Marked examples of Wan Li monochromes are rarely seen, but we may
assume that the glazes in use in the previous reigns continued to be
made--blue, lavender, turquoise, violet and aubergine brown, yellow in
various shades, leaf green, emerald green, apple green, celadon, coffee
brown, and golden brown--besides the more or less accidental effects
in the mottled and _flambé_ glazes. The plain white bowls of the
period had a high reputation,[208] and a good specimen in the British
Museum, though far from equalling the Yung Lo bowl (Plate 59), is
nevertheless a thing of beauty. The white wares of the Ting type made
at this time have been already discussed.[209] The monochrome surfaces
were not infrequently relieved by carved or etched designs under the
glaze, but it must be confessed that monochromes are exceedingly
difficult to date. Particular colours and particular processes
continued in use for long periods, and the distinctions between the
productions of one reign and the next, or even between those of the
late Ming and the early Ch’ing dynasties, are often almost unseizable.
At best these differences consist in minute peculiarities of form and
potting, in the texture of the body and glaze, and the finish of the
base, which are only learnt by close study of actual specimens and
by training the eye to the general character of the wares until the
perception of the Ming style becomes instinctive. But something further
will be said on this subject in the chapter on Ming technique.
[Illustration: PLATE 81
Beaker-shaped Vase of bronze form, with dragon and phœnix designs
painted in underglaze blue, and red, green and yellow enamels:
background of fairy flowers (_pao hsiang hua_) and borders
of “rock and wave” pattern. Mark of the Wan Li period (1573–1619)
in six characters on the neck. An Imperial piece. Carved wood
stand with cloud pattern.
Height 18½ inches.
_British Museum._]
THE LAST OF THE MINGS
_T’ai Ch’ang_ [chch 2] (1620)
_T’ien Ch’i_ [chch 2] (1621–1627)
_Ch’ung Chêng_ [chch 2] (1628–1643)
Chinese ceramic history, based on the official records, is silent
on the subject of the three last Ming reigns, and we are left to
infer that during the death struggles of the old dynasty and the
establishment of the Manchu Tartars on the throne work at the Imperial
factory was virtually suspended. The few existing specimens which bear
the marks of T’ien Ch’i and Ch’ung Chêng (the T’ai Ch’ang mark is
apparently unrepresented) are of little merit. A barrel-shaped incense
vase with floral scrolls and a large bowl with four-clawed dragons
of the former date in the British Museum are painted the one in dull
greyish blue, and the other in a bright but rather garish tint of
the same colour; both have a coarse body material with blisters and
pitting in the glaze, and the painting of the designs is devoid of any
distinction. Similarly, a polychrome saucer dish with the same mark
and in the same collection, decorated with an engraved dragon design
filled in with purple glaze in a green ground, carries on the early
tradition of that type of Ming polychrome, but the ware is coarse,
the design crudely drawn, and the colours impure.[210] From the
same unflattering characteristics another dish in the British Museum,
with large patches of the three on-biscuit colours--green, yellow and
aubergine--may be recognised as of the T’ien Ch’i make. This is a
specimen of the so-called tiger skin ware, of which K’ang Hsi and later
examples are known--a ware which, even in the best-finished specimens
with underglaze engraved designs, is more curious than beautiful. On
the other hand, one of the delicate bowls with biscuit figures in high
relief, already described (p. 75), proves that the potters of the T’ien
Ch’i period were still capable of skilful work when occasion demanded.
A pair of wine cups in the British Museum, with freely drawn designs of
geese and rice plants in pale greyish blue under a greyish glaze, are
the solitary representatives of the Ch’ung Chêng mark.
In the absence of Imperial patronage, and with the inevitable trade
depression which followed in the wake of the fierce dynastic struggle,
it was fortunate for the Ching-tê Chên potters that a large trade with
European countries was developing. The Portuguese and Spanish had
already established trading connections with the Chinese, and the other
Continental nations--notably the Dutch--were now serious competitors.
The Dutch East India Company was an extensive importer of blue and
white porcelain, and we have already discussed one type of blue and
white which figures frequently in the Dutch pictures of the seventeenth
century.
There is another group of blue and white which can be definitely
assigned to this period of dynastic transition, between 1620–1662. A
comparative study of the various blue and white types had already led
to the placing of this ware in the middle of the seventeenth century,
and Mr. Perzynski, in those excellent articles[211] to which we have
already alluded, has set out the characteristics of this ware at some
length, with a series of illustrations which culminate in a dated
example. There will be no difficulty in finding a few specimens of
this type in any large collection of blue and white. It is recognised
by a bright blue of slightly violet tint under a glaze often hazy with
minute bubbles, which suggested to Mr. Perzynski the picturesque simile
of “violets in milk.” Other more tangible characteristics appear in
the designs, which commonly consist of a figure subject--a warrior or
sage and attendant--in a mountain scene bordered by a wall of rocks
with pine trees and swirling mist, drawn in a very mannered style and
probably from some stock pattern. Other common features are patches of
herbage rendered by pot-hook-like strokes, formal floral designs of a
peculiar kind, such as the tulip-like flower on the neck of Fig. 4 of
Plate 82; the band of floral scroll work on the shoulder of the same
piece is also characteristic. In many of the forms, such as cylindrical
vases and beakers, the base is flat and unglazed, and reveals a good
white body, and European influence is apparent in some of the shapes,
such as the jugs and tankards.
As for the dating of this group, an early example of the style of
painting in the Salting Collection[212] has a silver mount of the
early seventeenth century, and a tankard of typical German form in the
Hamburg Museum has a silver cover dated 1642.[213] There is, besides, a
curious piece in the British Museum, the decoration of which has strong
affinities to this group. It is a bottle with flattened circular body
and tall, tapering neck, with landscape and figures on one side and
on the other a European design copied from the reverse of a Spanish
dollar, and surrounded by a strap-work border. The dollar, from a
numismatic point of view, might have been made equally well for Philip
II. (1556–1598), Philip IV. (1621–1665), or Charles II. (1665–1700),
but there can be little doubt from the style of the ware that it
belonged to one of the two earlier reigns.
A comparison of the ware and the blue of this group leads to the
placing of the fairly familiar type illustrated by Figs. 3 and 5
of Plate 82 in the same intermediate period, and similarly certain
specimens of polychrome, with underglaze blue and the usual enamels,
display the characteristic body and blue painting, and even some of the
decorative mannerisms. These specimens, particularly when of beaker
form, are often finished off with a band of ornament engraved under the
glaze.
[Illustration: Plate 82.--Late Ming Porcelain.
Fig. 1--Jar of Wan Li period, enamelled. Mark, a hare. Height 9
inches. _British Museum._ Fig. 2. Bowl with Eight Immortals
in relief, coloured glazes on the biscuit. Height 3¼ inches.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Figs. 3, 4 and 5.--Blue and white porcelain, early seventeenth
century. Height of Fig. 5, 17 inches. _British Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 83.--Vase
With blue and white decoration of rockery, phœnixes, and
flowering shrubs. Found in India. Late Ming period. Height 22
inches. _Halsey Collection._]
CHAPTER VI
THE TECHNIQUE OF THE MING PORCELAIN
Although the processes involved in the various kinds of decoration and
in the different wares have been discussed in their several places, a
short summary of those employed in the manufacture of the Ching-tê Chên
porcelain during the Ming period will be found convenient. The bulk of
the materials required were found in the surrounding districts, if not
actually in the Fou-liang Hsien. The best kaolin (or porcelain earth)
was mined in the Ma-ts’ang mountains until the end of the sixteenth
century, when the supply was exhausted and recourse was had to another
deposit at Wu-mên-t’o. The quality of the Wu-mên-t’o kaolin was
first-rate, but as the cost of transport was greater and the manager
of the Imperial factory refused to pay a proportionately higher price,
very little was obtained. The material for the large dragon bowls, and
presumably for the other vessels of abnormal size, was obtained from
Yü-kan and Wu-yüan and mixed with powdered stone (_shih mo_) from
the Hu-t’ien district. Other kaolins, brought from Po-yang Hsien and
the surrounding parts, were used by the private potters, not being
sufficiently fine for the Imperial wares.
The porcelain stone, which combined with the kaolin to form the two
principal ingredients of true porcelain, came from the neighbourhoods
of Yü-kan and Wu-yüan, where it was pounded and purified in mills
worked by the water power of the mountains, arriving at Ching-tê Chên
in the form of briquettes. Hence the name _petuntse_,[214] which,
like kaolin, has passed into our own language, and the term _shih
mo_ (powdered stone) used above.
The glaze earth (_yu t’u_) in various qualities was supplied from
different places. Thus the Ch’ang-ling material was used for the blue
or green (_ch’ing_) and the yellow glazes, the Yi-k’êng for the pure
white porcelain, and the T’ao-shu-mu for white porcelain and for “blue
and white.” This glazing material was softened with varying quantities
of ashes of lime burnt with ferns or other frondage. Neither time nor
toil was spared in the preparation of the Imperial porcelains, and
according to the _T’ung-ya_[215] the vessels were, at one time at any
rate, dried for a whole year after they had been shaped and before
finishing them off on the lathe. When finished off on the lathe they
were glazed and dried, and if there were any inequalities in the
covering they were glazed again. Furthermore, if any fault appeared
after firing they were put on the lathe, ground smooth, and reglazed
and refired.
It was not the usual custom with Chinese potters to harden the ware
with a slight preliminary firing before proceeding to decorate and
apply the glaze, and consequently such processes as underglaze painting
in blue, embossing, etc., were undergone while the body was still
relatively soft and required exceedingly careful handling. The glaze
was applied in several ways--by dipping in a tub of glazing liquid
(i.e. glaze material finely levigated and mixed with water), by
painting the glaze on with a brush, or by blowing it on from a bamboo
tube, the end of which was covered with a piece of tightly stretched
gauze. One of the last operations was the finishing off of the foot,
which was hollowed out and trimmed and the mark added (if it was to be
in blue, as was usually the case) and covered with a spray of glaze.
To the connoisseur the finish of the foot is full of meaning. It is
here he gets a glimpse of the body which emerges at the raw edge of
the rim, and by feeling it he can tell whether the material is finely
levigated or coarse-grained. The foot rim of the Ming porcelains is
plainly finished without the beading or grooves of the K’ang Hsi wares,
which were evidently designed to fit a stand[216]; and the raw edge
discloses a ware which is almost always of fine white texture and close
grain (often almost unctuous to the touch), though the actual surface
generally assumes a brownish tinge in the heat of the kiln. The base
is often unglazed in the case of large jars and vases, rarely in the
cups, bowls, dishes, or wine pots, except among the coarser types of
export porcelain. A little sand or grit adhering to the foot rim and
radiating lines under the base caused by a jerky movement of the lathe
are signs of hasty finish, which occur not infrequently on the export
wares. The importance of the foot in the eyes of the Chinese collector
may be judged from the following extract from the _Shih ch’ing jih
cha_[217]:--
“Distinguish porcelain by the vessel’s foot. The Yung Lo
'press-hand’ bowls have a glazed bottom but a sandy foot;
Hsüan ware altar cups have 'cauldron’[218] bottom (i.e. convex
beneath) and wire-like foot; Chia Ching ware flat cups decorated
with fish have a 'loaf’ centre[219] (i.e. convex inside) and
rounded foot. All porcelain vessels issue from the kiln with
bottoms and feet which can testify to the fashion of the firing.”
It is not always easy unaided by illustration to interpret the Chinese
metaphors, but it is a matter of observation that many of the Sung
bowls, for instance, have a conical finish under the base, and that the
same pointed finish appears on some of the early Ming types, such as
the red bowls with Yung Lo mark. The “loaf centre” of the Chia Ching
bowls seems to refer to the convexity described on p. 35. The blue and
white conical bowls with Yung Lo mark (see p. 6) have, as a rule, a
small glazed base and a relatively wide unglazed foot rim.
But this digression on the nether peculiarities of the different wares
has led us away from the subject of glaze. The proverbial thickness and
solidity of the early Ming glazes, which are likened to “massed lard,”
are due to the piling up of successive coatings of glaze to ensure a
perfect covering for the body, and the same process was responsible
for the undulating appearance of the surface, which rose up in small
rounded elevations “like grains of millet” and displayed corresponding
depressions.[220] This uneven effect, due to an excess of glaze, was
much prized by the Chinese connoisseurs, who gave it descriptive
names like “millet markings,” “chicken skin,” or “orange peel,” and
the potters of later periods imitated it freely and often to excess.
Porcelain glazes are rarely dead white, and, speaking generally, it
may be said that the qualifying tint in the Ming period was greenish.
Indeed, this is the prevailing tone of Chinese glazes, but it is
perhaps accentuated by the thickness of the Ming glaze. This greenish
tinge is most noticeable when the ware is ornamented with delicate
traceries in pure white clay or slip under the glaze.
[Illustration: PLATE 84
Vase of baluster form with small mouth (_mei p’ing_).
Porcelain with coloured glazes on the biscuit, the designs
outlined in slender fillets of clay. A meeting of sages in a
landscape beneath an ancient pine tree, the design above their
heads representing the mountain mist. On the shoulders are large
_ju-i_ shaped lappets enclosing lotus sprays, with pendent
jewels between: fungus (_ling chih_) designs on the neck.
Yellow glaze under the base. A late example of this style of
ware, probably seventeenth century.
Height 11 inches.
_Salting Collection_ (_Victoria and Albert Museum_).]
As for the shape of the various Ming wares, much has already been
said in reference to the various lists of Imperial porcelains, more
particularly with regard to the household wares such as dishes,
bowls, wine pots, boxes, etc. No precise description, however, is
given in these lists of the actual forms of the vases, and we have
to look elsewhere for these. There are, however, extracts from books
on vases[221] and on the implements of the scholar’s table in the
_T’ao shuo_ and the _T’ao lu_, in which a large number of shapes are
enumerated. Observation of actual specimens shows that bronze and metal
work supplied the models for the more elaborate forms which would
be made, partly or wholly, in moulds. These metallic forms, so much
affected by the Chinese _literatus_, though displaying great cleverness
in workmanship and elaboration of detail, are not so pleasing to the
unprejudiced Western eye as the simple wheel-made forms of which the
Chinese potter was a perfect master. Of the latter, the most common in
Ming porcelains are the potiche-shaped covered jar (Plate 80) and the
high-shouldered baluster vase with small neck and narrow mouth (Plate
84), which was known as _mei p’ing_ or prunus jar from its suitability
for holding a flowering branch of that decorative flower. Next to
these, the most familiar Ming forms are the massive and often clumsy
vases of double gourd shape, or with a square body and gourd-shaped
neck, bottles with tapering neck and globular body, ovoid jars,
melon-shaped pots with lobed sides, jars with rounded body and short
narrow neck, all of which occur in the export wares. These are, as a
rule, strongly built and of good white material, and if the shoulders
are contracted (as is nearly always the case) they are made in
two sections, or more in the case of the double forms, with no pains
taken to conceal the seam. Indeed, elaborate finish had no part in the
construction of these strong, rugged forms, which are matched by the
bold design and free drawing of the decoration. I may add that sets of
vases hardly come within the Ming period. They are an un-Chinese idea,
and evolved in response to European demands. The mantelpiece sets of
five (three covered jars and two beakers) are a development of the
mid-seventeenth century when the Dutch traders commanded the market.
The Chinese altar-set of five ritual utensils is the nearest approach
to a uniform set, consisting as it did of an incense burner, two flower
vases, and two pricket candlesticks, often with the same decoration
throughout.
The Ming bowls vary considerably in form, from the wide-mouthed,
small-footed bowl (_p’ieh_) of the early period to the rounded forms,
such as Fig. 1 of Plate 74. In some cases the sides are moulded in
compartments, and the rims sharply everted. Others again are very
shallow, with hollow base and no foot rim; others follow the shape
of the Buddhist alms bowl with rounded sides and contracted mouth;
and there are large bowls for gold-fish (_yü kang_), usually with
straight sides slightly expanding towards the upper part and broad
flat rims, cisterns, hot-water bowls with double bottom and plug hole
beneath, square bowls (Plate 66, Fig. 1) for scraps and slops, and
large vessels, probably of punch-bowl form, known as “wine seas.” The
commonest type of Chinese dish is saucer-shaped, but they had also
flat plates bounded by straight sides and a narrow rim, which has no
relation to the broad, canted rim of the European plate constructed to
carry salt and condiments.
The Chinese use porcelain plaques for inlaying in furniture and
screens, or mounting as pictures, and there are, besides, many objects
of purely native design, such as barrel-shaped garden seats for summer
use, cool pillows, and hat stands with spherical top and tall, slender
stems. But it was only natural that when they began to cater for the
foreign market many foreign forms should have crept in, such as the
Persian ewer with pear-shaped body, long elegant handle and spout, the
latter usually joined to the neck by an ornamental stay: the hookah
bowl: weights with wide base and ball-shaped tops for keeping down
Indian mats, etc., when: spread on the ground; and at the end of the
Ming period a few European shapes, such as jugs and tankards. In the
Ch’ing dynasty European forms were made wholesale.
* * * * *
In considering the colours used in the decoration, we naturally take
first the limited number which were developed in the full heat of
the porcelain furnace, the _couleurs de grand feu_ of the French
classification. These were either incorporated in the glazing material
or painted on the porcelain body and protected by the glaze. Chief
among them was blue, which we have already discussed in its various
qualities. The Mohammedan blue--the _su-ni-p’o_ of the Hsüan Tê period
and the _hui hui ch’ing_ of the reigns of Chêng Tê and Chia Ching--was
an imported material of pre-eminent quality but of uncertain supply.
It was supplemented--and, indeed, usually blended--with the native
mineral[222] which was found in several places. Thus the _po-t’ang_
blue (so called from a place name) was found in the district of
Lo-p’ing Hsien in the Jao-chou Fu; but the mines were closed after a
riot in the Chia Ching period, and its place was taken by a blue known
as _shih-tzŭ ch’ing_ (stone, or mineral, blue) from the prefecture of
Jui-chou in Kiangsi. According to Bushell[223] the _po-t’ang_ blue was
very dark in colour, and it was sometimes known as _Fo t’ou ch’ing_
(Buddha’s head blue) from the traditional colour of the hair of Buddha.
Another material used for painting porcelain was the _hei chê shih_
(black red mineral) from Hsin-chien in Lu-ling, which was also called
_wu ming tzŭ_. It was evidently a cobaltiferous ore of manganese and a
blue-producing mineral, doubtless the same as the _wu ming i_ (nameless
wonder), which we have already found in use as a name for cobalt.
Much confusion exists, in Chinese works, on the subject of these blues,
and it is stated in one place that the “Buddha head blue” was a variety
of the _wu ming i_, which would make the _po t’ang_ blue and the _wu
ming i_ and the _wu ming tzŭ_ one and the same thing. In effect they
were the same species of mineral, and the local distinctions are of no
account at the present day except in so far as they explain the variety
of tints in the Ming blue and white. It is, however, interesting to
learn from a note on Mohammedan blue in the K’ang Hsi Encyclopædia
that the native mineral, when carefully prepared, was very like the
Mohammedan blue in tint.
All these blues were used either for painting under the glaze or for
mixing with the glaze to form ground colours or monochromes, which
varied widely in tint, according to the quantity and quality of the
cobalt, from dark violet blue (_chi ch’ing_) through pale and
dark shades of the ordinary blue colour to slaty blue and lavender.
Some of them--notably the lavender and the dark violet blue--are
often associated with crackle, being used as an overglaze covering a
greyish white crackled porcelain. This treatment of the surface is
well illustrated by a small covered jar in the British Museum with a
dark violet blue apparently uncrackled but covering a crackled glaze.
Two lavender blue bowls in the Hippisley Collection with the Chêng Tê
mark are similarly crackled. Other Ming blue monochromes are a small
pot found in Borneo and now in the British Museum with a dark blue of
the ordinary tint used in painted wares, and a wine pot in the same
collection with dragon spout and handle of a peculiar slaty lavender
tint strewn with black specks, the colour evidently due to a strain of
manganese in the cobalt.
Next in importance to the blue is the underglaze red derived from
copper, which was discussed at length in connection with the Hsüan Tê
porcelains.[224] Its various tints, described as _hsien hung_ (fresh
red), _pao shih hung_ (ruby red), and cinnabar bowls “red as the
sun,” are, we may be sure, more or less accidental varieties of the
capricious copper red. The same mineral produced the _sang de bœuf_,
maroon and liver reds, and probably the peach bloom[225] of the K’ang
Hsi and later porcelains.
Other colours incorporated in the high-fired glaze in the Ming period
are the pea green (_tou ch’ing_) or celadon, and the lustrous brown
(_tzŭ chin_) which varied from coffee colour to that of old gold. Both
of these groups derived their tint from iron oxide, carried in the
medium of ferruginous earth. The use of two or more of these coloured
glazes on one piece is a type of polychrome which was doubtless used on
the Ming as on the later porcelains.
The glazes fired at a lower temperature, in the cooler parts of the
great kiln, and known for that reason as _couleurs de demi-grand feu_,
include turquoise (_ts’ui sê_), made from a preparation of old copper
(_ku t’ung_) and nitre; bright yellow (_chin huang_), composed of 1⅕
oz. of antimony mixed with 16 oz. of pulverised lead; bright green
(_chin lü_), composed of 1⅖ oz. of pulverised copper, 6 oz. of powdered
quartz and 16 oz. of pulverised lead; purple (_tzŭ sê_), composed of 1
oz. of cobaltiferous ore of manganese, 6 oz. of powdered quartz and 16
oz. of pulverised lead. These colours, melting as they did at a lower
temperature than that required to vitrify the porcelain body, had to be
applied to an already fired porcelain “biscuit.”[226]
The irregular construction of the Chinese kilns resulted in a great
variety of firing conditions, of which the Chinese potter made good
use; so that, by a judicious arrangement of the wares, glazes which
required a comparatively low temperature were fired in the same kiln
as those which needed the same heat as the porcelain body itself. The
glazes just enumerated are familiar from the large covered jars, vases,
garden seats, etc., with designs raised, carved, or pierced in outline,
many of which date from the fifteenth century.[227] Their manufacture
continued throughout the Ming period, both in porcelain and pottery,
and in the latter, at any rate, continued into the Ch’ing dynasty.
Another group of glazes applied likewise to the biscuit and fired in
the temperate parts of the kiln differs from the last mentioned in its
greater translucency.[228] These are the _san ts’ai_ or three colours,
viz. green, yellow and aubergine, all of which contain a considerable
proportion of lead, and differ little in appearance from the on-glaze
enamels of the muffle kiln. They were used either as monochromes, plain
or covering incised designs, or in combination to wash over the spaces
between the outlines of a pattern which had been incised or painted on
the biscuit.
Finally, the enamels of the _Wan li wu ts’ai_,[229] overglaze
colours used in addition to underglaze blue, were composed of a
vitreous flux coloured with a minute quantity of metallic oxide. The
flux, being a glass containing a high percentage of lead, was fusible
at such a low temperature that it was not possible to fire them in the
large kiln. Consequently these enamels were painted on to the finished
glaze, a process which greatly increased the freedom of design, and
fired in a small “muffle” or enameller’s kiln, where the requisite heat
to melt the flux and fix the colours could be easily obtained.
Though the _T’ao shuo_, in the section dealing with Ming technique,
makes a general allusion to painting in colours on the glaze, the only
specific reference to any colour of the muffle kiln, excepting gold,
is to the red obtained from sulphate of iron (_fan hung sê_). This, we
are told, was made with 1 oz. of calcined sulphate of iron (_ch’ing
fan_) and 5 oz. of carbonate of lead, mixed with Canton ox-glue to make
it adhere to the porcelain before it was fired. This is the iron red,
the _rouge de fer_ of the French, which varies in tint from orange or
coral to deep brick red, and in texture from an impalpable film almost
to the consistency of a glaze, according to the quantity of lead flux
used with it. On the older wares it is often deeply iridescent and
lustrous, owing to the decomposition of the lead flux. This _fan hung_
is the colour which the Chia Ching potters were fain to substitute for
the underglaze copper red (_chi hung_) when the usual material for that
highly prized colour had come to an end, and difficulty was experienced
in finding an effective substitute.
The remaining colours of the on-glaze palette are more obviously
enamels; that is to say, glassy compounds; and as they were, in
accordance with Chinese custom, very lightly charged with colouring
matter, it was necessary to pile them on thickly where depth of colour
was required.
Hence the thickly encrusted appearance of much of the Chinese enamelled
porcelain. The Wan Li enamels consisted of transparent greens of
several shades (all derived from copper), including a very blue green
which seems to have been peculiar to the Ming palette, yellow (from
antimony) pale and clear or brownish and rather opaque, and transparent
aubergine, a colour derived from manganese and varying in tint from
purple to brown. Two thin dry pigments--one an iron red and the other
a brown black colour derived from manganese--were used for drawing
outlines; and the brown black was also used in masses with a coating
of transparent green to form a green black colour, the same which is
so highly prized on the _famille noire_ porcelains of the K’ang Hsi
period. As for the blue enamel of the K’ang Hsi period, it can hardly
be said to have existed before the end of the Ming dynasty.[230]
Gilding, which was apparently in use throughout[231] the Ming period,
was applied to the finished porcelain and fired in the muffle kiln. The
gold leaf, combined with one-tenth by weight of carbonate of lead, was
mixed with gum and painted on with a brush. The effect, as seen on the
red and green bowls (Plate 74), was light and filmy, and though the
gold often has the unsubstantial appearance of size-gilding, in reality
it adheres firmly[232] and is not easily scratched.
Of the other processes described in the _T’ao shuo_,[233] embossed
(_tui_ [chch]) decoration was effected by applying strips or shavings
of the body material and working them into form with a wet brush.
Some of the more delicate traceries, in scarcely perceptible relief,
are painted in white slip. Engraved (_chui_ [chch]) decoration was
effected by carving with an iron graving-tool on the body while it was
still soft. And so, too, with the openwork (_ling lung_), which has
already been described.[234] All these processes were in use in one
form or another from the earliest reigns of the Ming dynasty, and some
of them, at any rate, have been encountered on the Sung wares. High
reliefs, such as the figures on the bowls described on p. 74, would
be separately modelled and “luted” on by means of liquid clay; and,
as already noted, these reliefs were often left in the biscuit state,
though at times we find them covered with coloured glazes. It is hardly
necessary to add that the same processes were applied to pottery, and
that the reliefs took many other forms besides figures, e.g. dragon
designs, foliage, scrollwork, symbols, etc.
[Illustration: PLATE 85
Vase with crackled greenish grey glaze coated on the exterior
with transparent apple green enamel: the base unglazed. Probably
sixteenth century.
Height 14 inches.
_British Museum._]
The crackled glazes of the Sung period were still made, though the Ming
tendency was to substitute painted decoration for monochrome; and we
have already noted the crackled blue and lavender in which a second
glaze is added to a grey white crackle. This process is particularly
noticeable in the “apple green” monochromes (Plate 85), both of the
Ming and Ch’ing dynasties, in which a green overglaze itself uncrackled
is washed on to a crackled stone grey porcelain. The green is often
carried down over the slightly browned biscuit of the foot rim, forming
a band of brown. But this, so far from being a peculiarity of the
Ming technique, is much more conspicuous on the porcelains of the early
eighteenth century, when it was the constant practice to dress the foot
rim of the crackled wares with a brown ferruginous earth in imitation
of the “iron foot” of their Sung prototypes.
The work at the Imperial factory[235] was divided between twenty-three
departments, nine of which were occupied with accessories, such as
the making of ropes and barrels, general carpentry, and even boat
building. Five separate departments were employed in making the large
bowls, the wine cups, the plates, the large round dishes, and the tea
cups; another in preparing the “paste” or body material, and another in
making the “seggars” or fireclay cases in which the ware was packed in
the kiln. Five more were occupied in the details of decoration, viz.
the mark and seal department, the department for engraving designs, the
department for sketching designs, the department for writing, and the
department for colouring.
It does not appear that the work of decoration was so minutely
subdivided in the Ming period as in later times, when we are told that
a piece of porcelain might pass through more than seventy hands; but it
is clear, at least, that the outlining and filling in of the designs
were conducted in separate sheds. This is, indeed, self-apparent
from the Ming blue and white porcelains, the designs of which are
characterised by strong and clear outlines filled in with flat washes
of colour.
With regard to the actual designs, we are told that in the Ch’êng
Hua period they were drawn by the best artists at the Court, and
from another passage[236] it is clear that the practice of sending
the patterns from the palace continued in later reigns as well.
Such designs would no doubt accumulate, and probably they were
collected together from time to time and issued in the form of
pattern books.[237] Another method in which the painters of Ming
blue and white were served with patterns is related in the _T’ao
shuo_[238]:--“For painting in blue, the artists were collected each
day at dawn and at noon, and the colour for painting was distributed
among them. Two men of good character were first selected, the
larger pieces of porcelain being given to one, the smaller pieces
to the other; and when they had finished their painting, the amount
of the material used was calculated before the things were taken to
the furnace to be baked. If the results were satisfactory, then the
pieces were given as models to the other painters, and in the rest of
the pieces painted, the quantity of the colour used and the depth of
the tint was required to be in exact accordance with these models.”
There was little scope for originality or individual effort under
this system, where everything, even to the amount of material used,
was strictly prescribed. To translate their model with feeling and
accuracy was the best that could be expected from the rank and file.
But with the manual skill and patient industry for which the Chinese
are proverbial, and the good taste which prevailed in the direction
of the work, it was a system admirably suited to the task, and it
unquestionably led to excellent results.
As to the systems in use in the private factories we have no
information, but we may fairly assume that their processes were much
the same; and that, not having the benefit of the designs sent from
Court, they were more dependent upon the pattern books and stock
designs more or less remotely connected with the work of famous
painters.
CHAPTER VII
MISCELLANEOUS PORCELAIN FACTORIES
Although from the Ming period onwards our interest is almost entirely
centred in Ching-tê Chên, there were other factories which cannot be
altogether ignored. A certain number have already been mentioned at the
end of the first volume, our scanty information being drawn chiefly
from the pottery section of the K’ang Hsi Encyclopædia. The same
monumental work includes in another part[239] a discourse on porcelain
(_tz’ŭ ch’i_), in which several additional factories are named. The
passage in question is prefaced by a quotation from the _Tien hung k’ai
wu_, a late-seventeenth century manual, in which we are told that the
white earth (_o t’u_[240]) necessary for the manufacture of fine and
elegant ware was found in China in five or six places only[241]: viz.
at Ting Chou, in the Chên-ting Fu in Chih-li, at Hua-ting Chou in the
Ping-liang Fu in Shensi, at P’ing-ting Chou in the T’ai-yüan Fu in
Shansi, and at Yü Chou in the K’ai-fêng Fu in Honan, in the north; and
at Tê-hua Hsien in the Ch’üan-chou Fu in Fukien, at Wu-yüan Hsien and
Ch’i-mên Hsien in the Hui-chou Fu, in Anhui, in the south. As to the
wares made in these localities, we are told that the porcelains of the
Chên-ting and K’ai-fêng districts were generally yellow and dull and
without the jewel-like brilliancy, and that all put together were not
equal to the Jao Chou ware. It would appear, then, that the Ting Chou
factories so noted in Sung times were still extant, though they had
lost their importance. For the rest, the Ch’i-mên district supplied
Ching-tê Chên with the raw material, the Tê-hua wares will be discussed
presently, and we have no information about the productions (if any) of
the other localities.
The province of Fukien apparently contained several factories
besides the important centre at Tê-hua. The Annals of Ch’üan-chou
Fu (celebrated as a trading port in the Middle Ages), for instance,
are quoted with reference to a porcelain (_tz’ŭ ch’i_) manufacture
at Tz’ŭ-tsao in the Chin-chiang Hsien, and three other places in the
district of An-ch’i are named as producers of white porcelain which was
inferior to that of Jao Chou. Similarly, the Annals of Shao-wu Fu, on
the north-east border of the province, allude to white porcelain made
at three places,[242] the factory at T’ai-ming in An-jen being the
best, but all were far from equalling the Jao Chou ware.
The district of Wên-chou Fu (formerly in the south of Fukien but now
transferred to northern Chekiang) was noted for pottery in the distant
days of the Chin dynasty (265–419 A.D.), and for the “bowls
of Eastern Ou.”[243] Of its subsequent ceramic history we have no
information, but there is an interesting specimen in the British Museum
which seems to bear on the question. It is an incense burner in the
form of a seated figure of the god of Longevity on a deer, skilfully
modelled in strong white porcelain and painted in a good blue in the
Ming style; and on the box in which it came was a note to the effect
that it is Wên-chou ware. If there is any truth in this legend (and it
would be quite pointless if untrue), then a blue and white porcelain in
the style of the better class of Ming export ware was made at Wên-chou.
Another interesting specimen in the same museum, which should also be
mentioned here, is a bottle with wide straight neck, of fine white ware
thickly potted, with soft, smooth-worn glaze painted in a greyish blue
with a medley of flowers, fruit, insects, and symbols, completed by
borders of _ju-i_ heads and stiff leaves. It is marked under the base
in a fine violet blue, _fu fan chih ts’ao_, which, rendered “made on
the borders of Fukien,” might refer to the factories at Shao-wu Fu or
even Wên-chou Fu. This is another piece which has many affinities with
the late Ming export blue and white.
But the Fukien porcelain _par excellence_ is a white ware of
distinctive character and great beauty which was and still is made
at Tê-hua Hsien, in the central part of the province.[244] This is
the _blanc de Chine_ of the French writers and the modern Chien yao
of the Chinese, but to be carefully distinguished from the ancient
Chien yao with mottled black glaze which was made in the Sung dynasty
at Chien-yang in the north of the province.[245] The _T’ao lu_[246]
informs us that the porcelain industry at Tê-hua began in the Ming
dynasty, that the cups and bowls usually had a spreading rim, that the
ware was known as _pai tz’ŭ_ (white porcelain), that it was rich and
lustrous but, as a rule, thick, and that the images of Buddha were very
beautiful. This condensed account is supplemented by a few remarks in
the K’ang Hsi Encyclopædia,[247] from which we gather that the material
for the ware was mined in the hills behind the Ch’êng monastery and
that it was very carefully prepared, but if the porcelain was worked
thin it was liable to lose shape in the kiln, and if it was too thick
it was liable to crack. At first it was very expensive, but by the time
of writing (about 1700) it was widely distributed and no longer dear.
Tê-hua porcelain is, in fact, a fine white, highly vitrified material,
as a rule very translucent and covered with a soft-looking, mellow
glaze which blends so intimately with the body that they seem to be
part and parcel of one another. The glaze varies in tone from ivory or
cream white to the colour of skim milk, and its texture may be aptly
described by the homely comparison with blancmange. When the ivory
colour is suffused by a faint rosy tinge, it is specially prized; but
I can find no reason for supposing that the cream white and milk white
tints represent different periods of the ware. On the contrary, there
is good evidence to show that they were made concurrently.
As the ware is with few exceptions plain white or white decorated
with incised, impressed, moulded, or applied ornaments of a rather
formal and often archaic character, there will always be a difficulty
in determining the date of the finer specimens, viz. whether they
are Ming or early Ch’ing. The nature of the ware itself is a most
uncertain guide, for one of the most beautiful examples of the material
which I have seen is a figure of a European soldier which cannot be
older than 1650. I need hardly say that owners of Fukien porcelain,
particularly of the figures, habitually give themselves the benefit of
this ever present doubt, and that these pieces are usually listed in
sale catalogues as Ming or early Ming according to taste. This attitude
is fundamentally illogical, for the ware is still made at the present
day, and the Ming specimens in modern collections are likely to be the
exception, and not, as optimistic owners would lead one to suppose, the
rule. But in any case it will be more convenient to deal with the ware
as a whole in the present chapter than to attempt the difficult task of
treating its different periods separately, even though the bulk of our
examples belong to the Ch’ing dynasty.
Tê-hua porcelain can be conveniently studied in the British Museum,
where there is a fairly representative collection comprising more
than a hundred specimens. It includes a number of the figures for
which the factories were specially noted, of deities and sages such
as Kuan-yin, goddess of Mercy; Kuan-yü, god of War; Bodhidharma, the
Buddhist apostle; Manjusri, of the Buddhist Trinity; Hsi-wang-mu, the
Taoist queen of the west; the Taoist Immortals; besides small groups
representing romantic or mythological subjects such as Wang Chih
watching the two spirits of the pole stars playing chess. But the
favourite subject of the Tê-hua modeller was the beautiful and gracious
figure of Kuan-yin, represented in various poses as standing on a cloud
base with flowing robes, seated in contemplation on a rocky pedestal,
or enthroned between her two attributes, the dove--which often carries
a necklace of pearls--and the vase of nectar, while at her feet on
either side stand two diminutive figures representing[248] her follower
Lung Nü (the dragon maid), holding a pearl, and the devoted comrade
of her earthly adventures Chên Tsai. The Kuan-yin of this group is
reputed to have been the daughter of a legendary eastern King named
Miao-chuang, but other accounts make the deity a Chinese version of the
Buddhist Avalokitesvara, and it is certain that her representations
as the Kuan-yin with eleven heads and again with a “thousand” hands
reflect Indian traditions. In the latter manifestations the sex of the
deity is left in doubt, but there can be no question on that head when
she is represented with a babe in her arms as “Kuan-yin the Maternal,”
to whom childless women pray, a figure strangely resembling our images
of the Virgin and Child. Indeed, we are told[249] that the Japanese
converts to Christianity in the sixteenth century adopted the Kuan-yin
figure as a Madonna, and that there is in the Imperial Museum in the
Ueno Park, Tokio, a remarkable collection of these images among the
Christian relics. There is, however, another deity with whom this
Kuan-yin may easily be confounded, viz. the Japanese Kichimojin, also
“the Maternal,” the Sanskrit Hâriti, who was once the devourer of
infants but was converted by Sakyamuni and was afterwards worshipped as
the protector of children. This deity figures in Japanese pictorial art
as a “female holding a peach and nursing in her bosom an infant, whose
hands are folded in prayer. In front stand two nude children, one of
whom grasps a peach, the other a branch of bamboo.”[250]
Among the Tê-hua porcelains in the British Museum are no fewer than
nine specimens--groups, figures, or ornamental structures--with figures
in European costumes which date from the middle to the end of the
seventeenth century. One, a soldier apparently Dutch, about 1650,
is well modelled in deliciously mellow and translucent cream white
porcelain. Most of the others are more roughly designed, and vary in
tint from cream to milk white.
It is said that the natives of the Fukien province are among the most
superstitious of the Chinese, and Bushell[251] sees a reflection of
this religious temperament in the nature of the Tê-hua wares. If this
is so, they must have had exalted opinions of their European visitors,
whom they often furnish with the attributes of Chinese divinities,
representing them in positions and poses which seem to caricature
native deities and sages. There is, for instance, an ornament in form
of a mountain retreat with a shrine in which is seated a figure in a
three-cornered European hat and a Buddha-like attitude. Another group
consists of a European mounted on a _ch’i-lin_, posing as an
Arhat, and another of a European standing on a dragon’s head which
would symbolise to the Chinese the attainment of the highest literary
honours.
There are, besides, in the British Museum collection figures of animals
and birds, the Buddhist lion, the cock, the hawk, or the parrot,
mostly fitted with tubes to hold incense sticks; and there are a pair
of well modelled figures of Chou dogs.
As for the vessels of Tê-hua porcelain, they consist chiefly of incense
vases and incense burners, libation cups shaped after bronze or
rhinoceros horn models, brush pots, wine cups, water vessels for the
study table and the like (often beautifully modelled in the form of
lotus leaves or flowers), boxes, tea and wine pots, cups and bowls, and
more rarely vases.
An extensive trade was done with the European merchants, whose
influence is apparent in many of the wares, such as coffee cups with
handles, mugs of cylindrical form or globular with straight ribbed
necks in German style, and “barber-surgeons’ bowls” with flat pierced
handles copied from silver models. Indeed, the superficially European
appearance of some of these pieces has led serious students to mistake
them for early Meissen porcelain and even for that nebulous porcelain
supposed to have been made by John Dwight, of Fulham, at the end of the
seventeenth century. Père d’Entrecolles[252] incidentally mentions the
fact that some Ching-tê Chên potters had in the past removed to Fukien
in the hope of making profits out of the European traders at Amoy, and
that they had taken their plant and even their materials with them, but
that the enterprise was a failure.
Conversely, the influence of the Tê-hua wares is obvious in many of the
early European porcelains, such as those made at Meissen, St. Cloud,
Bow, and Chelsea, which were often closely modelled on the Fukien
white. There is, indeed, a striking similarity between the creamy
soft-paste porcelain of St. Cloud and the creamy variety of the _blanc
de chine_, both having the same mellow, melting appearance in the glaze.
[Illustration: Plate 86.--Fukien Porcelain, Ming Dynasty.
Fig 1.--Figure of Kuan-yin with boy attendant. Ivory white.
Height 10¼ inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with prunus sprigs in relief, the glaze crackled
all over and stained a brownish tint. Height 9⅛ inches.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Figure of Bodhidharma crossing the Yangtze on a reed.
Ivory white. Height 7½ inches. _Salting Collection_ (_V. &
A. Museum_).]
[Illustration: Plate 87.--Ivory White Fukien Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Libation Cup. About 1700. Length 3⅞ inches. _British
Museum._
Fig. 2.--Cup with sixteenth-century mount. Height 2 inches.
_Dresden Collection._
Fig. 3.--Incense Vase and Stand. About 1700. Diameter 6¾ inches.
_British Museum._]
It would be possible to guess from these European copies, if we had no
other means, the character of the Tê-hua porcelain of the K’ang Hsi
period with its quaintly moulded forms, its relief decoration of prunus
sprigs, figures of Immortals, deer, etc., the only conspicuously absent
type being the incised[253] ornament which was unsuited to the European
ware. But there is no lack of actual specimens of the period of
active export which extended from about 1650–1750. Naturally they vary
greatly in quality, which depends on the purity and translucence of
the ware whether it be cream or milk white, and on the soft aspect
and rich lustre of the glaze. A large series, which may be taken as
representative of the K’ang Hsi period, was collected by Augustus
the Strong, and is still to be seen at the Johanneum at Dresden; or,
rather, part of it is still there, for much of that historic collection
was given away or pilfered from time to time, and many specimens with
the Dresden catalogue numbers engraved are now to be found in our own
museums. Many of the figures at Dresden have evidently been coated
with a kind of black paint, which probably served as a medium for oil
gilding, but this unfired colouring has worn away, and only traces now
remain.
Occasionally one finds among the Tê-hua wares a specimen with dry
appearance and crazed or discoloured glaze, defects due to faulty
firing or to burial in damp soil. Such pieces are surprising in a
ware with such apparent homogeneity of body and glaze, and the crazed
examples might be easily mistaken for one of the _t’u ting_ (or
earthy Ting ware) types.
As to the history of the factories, it is expressly stated in the
_T’ao lu_ that they were started in the Ming dynasty. No account
need be taken of the few legendary specimens to which tradition assigns
an earlier origin than this, such as the so-called flute of Yoshitsune,
a twelfth-century hero of Japan, and the incense burner in St. Mark’s,
Venice, which is reputed to have been brought from China by Marco Polo.
The latter is of the same model as Fig. 3 of Plate 87, perhaps from the
same mould, and I have seen at least half a dozen others in London. A
third piece which was long regarded as a document is the jewelled white
plate in the Dresden collection, supposed to have been brought back
from Syria by a Crusader in the twelfth century. The story is no doubt
apocryphal, but in any case it has no real bearing on the question,
for the plate is not Fukien ware but a specimen of white Ching-tê Chên
porcelain with a “shop mark” in underglaze blue. It has been set with
jewels in India or Persia, like a sixteenth-century bowl in the British
Museum, but the “Crusader plate” is probably a century later.
Brinkley[254] asserts, without giving any authority, that the Tê-hua
industry was virtually discontinued at the end of the eighteenth
century, and revived in recent years. The latter part of the
statement is unquestionably true, for we have the eye-witness of a
missionary[255] who visited the place about 1880 and describes the
manufactory as the most extensive of its kind in Fukien--“pottery,
pottery everywhere, in the fields, in the streets, in the shops. In
the open air children are painting the cups. Each artist paints with
his own colour and his own few strokes, whether a leaf, a tree, a
man’s dress or beard, and passes it over to his neighbour, who in
turn applies his brush to paint what is his share in the decoration.”
Unfortunately there is no reason to suppose that the writer made his
observations with an expert eye which would make a distinction between
pottery and porcelain, but in any case it is certain that he found a
vast ceramic industry in full blast at Tê-hua.
With reference to the modern ware Brinkley says[256]: “A considerable
number of specimens are now produced and palmed off upon unwary
collectors. But the amateur can easily avoid such deceptions if he
remembers that in genuine pieces of ivory white the ware is always
translucid when held up to the light, a property which, if not entirely
absent, is only possessed in a comparatively slight degree by the
modern product. The general quality of the glaze and the technique
of a piece should be sufficient guides, but if any doubt remains an
examination of the base of the specimens will probably dispel it. In
the old ware the bottom of a vase or bowl, though carefully finished,
is left uncovered, whereas the modern potter is fond of hiding his
inferior pâte by roughly overspreading it with a coat of glaze.”
Probably these observations are in the main correct, but experience
shows that relative opacity and glazed bases are by no means confined
to modern wares. Still, if the collector aims at acquiring pieces of
good colour, whether cream or milk white, with translucent body, pure
glaze and sharp modelling, he is not likely to go far astray.
The description quoted above of the painting of modern Fukien ware
is interesting in view of the common assertion that the Tê-hua white
porcelain was never painted. This assertion is probably based on a
passage in the first letter of Père d’Entrecolles: “Celle (i.e. la
porcelaine) de Fou-kien est d’un blanc de neige qui n’a nul éclat et
qui n’est point mélangé de couleurs.” On the other hand, a distinct
reference is made to the painting in colours in a modern Chinese
work.[257] Unfortunately, the question has been complicated by the
existence of many pieces of Fukien white which have been enamelled
in Europe. In the first half of the eighteenth century in Holland,
Germany, and elsewhere, there were decorators busy enamelling white
porcelain of whatever kind they could get, and the _blanc de
chine_ offered a ready subject for this treatment. The decoration
thus added was usually in Oriental taste, and might be confused with
indifferent Chinese work. Many of these pieces are in the British
Museum. On the other hand, there are in the same collection two
cups with roughly painted floral designs in green and red which
are obviously Chinese, though they might well have been painted in
the mechanical method described by Mr. Dukes, which was probably
traditional. Mr. Eumorfopoulos possesses several good examples of this
painted Fukien ware, one of which may be described to show the style
of painting affected. It is executed in leaf green, lustrous red, and
the turquoise green which we associate with the Wan Li period, and
the form--a double-bottomed bowl--is likewise reminiscent of the Ming
dynasty.
The Japanese, whose traditions have often proved most misleading,
have frequently classed the Fukien white as Corean porcelain
(_haku-gorai_ or white Corean), probably because specimens reached
them from the Corean ports. In the British Museum, for instance, there
is a beautiful white incense vase, formerly in the collection of Mr.
Ninagawa of Tokio, and labelled by him as “Corean porcelain, 500 years
old.” It has all the characteristics of the finest cream white Fukien
ware of late Ming or K’ang Hsi period, and if this piece is Corean,
then I do not believe that even the subtle perception of the Japanese
could find any difference between Corean and Fukien white. It is only
right to add that other Japanese experts have pronounced it Chinese.
Incidentally, I may mention that the base of this vase is glazed.
Marks were occasionally used by the Tê-hua potters, either incised or
stamped in seal form,[258] on the bottoms of cups and other vessels,
and on the backs of figures. Reign marks are rare, but apocryphal
dates of the Hsüan Tê period occasionally occur, as on a figure of Li
T’ieh-kuaì in the British Museum. Others consist of potters’ marks too
often illegible because the thick glaze has filled up the hollows of
the stamps, fanciful seal marks, frets, whorls, and occasionally the
swastika symbol. A few examples are given in vol. i., p. 222.
CHAPTER VIII
THE CH’ING [chch] DYNASTY, 1644–1910
The reigns of the Manchu chieftains T’ien Ming, T’ien Tsung, and Ts’ung
Tê (1616–1643) are included in the chronology of the Ch’ing or Pure
Dynasty, but it is more usual to reckon that period from 1644, when
the Emperor Shun Chih [chch 2] was firmly established on the throne
after the suicide of the last of the Mings. Little is known of the
ceramic history of the seventeen years during which Shun Chih occupied
the throne. The official records which deal only with the Imperial
factory are almost silent, and when they do speak it is merely to
chronicle failures. It is clear, however, that the Imperial factory
at Ching-tê Chên had again been opened; for orders were sent in 1654
for a supply of large “dragon bowls” for the palace gardens. They were
to be 2½ feet high, 3½ feet in diameter, 3 inches thick at the sides,
and 5 inches at the bottom. For four years the potters wrestled with
this difficult order without success. This time there was no “divine
T’ung” to purchase success by a holocaust of himself; and eventually
the Emperor was persuaded to withdraw the command. No better fortune
attended an order given in 1659 for oblong plaques (3 feet by 2½ feet,
and 3 inches thick) which were intended for veranda partitions.
Beyond these two negative items there is no information of the reign of
Shun Chih in the Chinese books, and the porcelain itself is scarcely
more illuminating, for authentic marked examples of this period are
virtually unknown. A figure already mentioned as bearing the date 1650
belongs rather to the pottery section, but it shows that the traditions
of the Ming glazes of the _demi-grand feu_ were still kept alive.
The blue and white and the polychrome made in the private factories at
this time have been discussed with the transition wares (pp. 89 and
90), and for the rest we can only assume that the Shun Chih porcelains
are not to be distinguished from those of the last Ming reigns on the
one hand, and those of the early years of K’ang Hsi on the other.
Reflecting on the insignificance of the Shun Chih porcelains, one is
tempted to ask how it is that the celebrated Lang T’ing-tso, whose
name is usually associated with the beautiful Lang yao of the K’ang
Hsi period, did not succeed in raising the wares of this period to a
more conspicuous level. Lang T’ing-tso was governor of Kiangsi from
1654 and viceroy of Kiangsi and Kiangnan from 1656–1661 and again from
1665–1668. His name is mentioned (according to Bushell,[259] at any
rate, for I have not been able to verify the statement) in connection
with the efforts to make the dragon bowls for the palace in 1654; but
we shall return to this point in discussing the Lang yao.
Meanwhile, we pass to the reign of K’ang Hsi [chch 2] (1662–1722),
the beginning of what is to most European collectors the greatest
period of Chinese porcelain, a period which may be roughly dated from
1662–1800. Chinese literary opinion gives the preference to the Sung
and Ming dynasties, but if monetary value is any indication the modern
Chinese collector appreciates the finer Ch’ing porcelains as highly
as the European connoisseur. These latter wares have, at any rate,
the advantage of being easily accessible to the Western student, and
they are not difficult to obtain provided one is ready to pay the high
price which their excellence commands. It will be no exaggeration to
say that three quarters of the best specimens of Chinese porcelain in
our collections belong to this prolific period, and they may be seen
in endless variety in the museums and private galleries of Europe and
America, nowhere perhaps better than in London itself.
[Illustration: PLATE 88
Two examples of the underglaze red (_chi hung_) of the K’ang
Hsi period (1662–1722), sometimes called _lang yao_
Fig. 1.--Bottle-shaped Vase of dagoba form with minutely crackled
_sang-de-bœuf_ glaze with passages of cherry red. The glaze
ends in an even roll short of the base rim, and that under the
base is stone-coloured and crackled. Height 8½ inches.
_British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase with crackled underglaze red of deep
crushed strawberry tint. The glaze under the base is pale green,
crackled. Height 10¾ inches.
_Alexander Collection._]
With regard to the porcelains made in the early years of K’ang Hsi
there is very little information, and their special excellence has
been assumed mainly on the supposition that the Viceroy Lang T’ing-tso
exercised a beneficent influence on the wares of this period. He is
reputed to have been sponsor of the Lang yao, which in the ordinary
acceptation of the term[260] includes the beautiful _sang de
bœuf_ red, an apple green crackle, and perhaps a cognate crackled
green glaze on which are painted designs in _famille verte_ enamels.
The explanation of the term _lang yao_ is far from clear, and, as
already hinted, the connection of the viceroy Lang T’ing-tso with this
or any other of the K’ang Hsi porcelains is by no means established.
Bushell[261] accepted the derivation of Lang yao from the first part
of the viceroy’s name as representing the best of several Chinese
theories, and on the supposition that “the ceramic production of this
time has retained the name of the viceroy, in the same way as the names
of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan, Nien Hsi-yao, and T’ang Ying, who were in turn
superintendents of the Imperial potteries, were afterwards given to the
_Ts’ang yao_, _Nien yao_, and _T’ang yao_.” There are many objections
to this reasoning. In the first place, Lang T’ing-tso was viceroy of
the two provinces of Kiangsi and Kiangnan for three or four years only
(1665–1668) during the reign of K’ang Hsi, and it was only in his
capacity as viceroy of Kiangsi that he would have been concerned with
Ching-tê Chên, even supposing that the man who had charge of two large
provinces could find time to devote himself to the details of ceramic
manufactures. Secondly, it is nowhere recorded that Lang T’ing-tso was
concerned in any way with the direction of the potteries, so that there
is in this respect no parallel between him and the directors Ts’ang,
Nien, and T’ang. Thirdly, the history of Ch’ing-tê Chên as given in the
_T’ao lu_, and the history of Chinese porcelain as given in the _T’ao
shuo_, make no mention whatever of _lang yao_ or of Lang T’ing-tso,
while the former takes special notice of the wares of Ts’ang, Nien, and
T’ang, and the latter discusses T’ang’s work at some length. Had so
important a person as the viceroy of two provinces been connected with
the invention or perfection of such celebrated wares as the _lang yao_,
the occurrence would hardly have escaped the notice of the Chinese
chronicler.
There are other attempts to explain the name _lang yao_. In the
catalogue of Mr. A. B. Mitford’s collection[262] it is stated that “the
Lang family were a family of famous potters who possessed the secret
of this peculiar glaze and paste. They became extinct about the year
1610.” Bushell[263] dismisses this with the comment that “the family is
apocryphal and the porcelain antedated,” and in the same passage gives
an alternative theory, viz. “this name has been derived by some Chinese
of less weight from that of Lang Shih-ning, an artist protégé of the
Jesuits,[264] who also lived in the reign of K’ang Hsi, and whose
pictures are still appreciated.”
The evidence for all these versions seems to be equally defective.
They are, in fact, mere assertions, and the reader can take his choice
of any of them, provided he does not insist on Mr. Mitford’s date
(anterior to 1610), for all authorities are now agreed that the _lang
yao_ is a K’ang Hsi production. The fact is that the name has been
handed down without any explanation, and the current theories are of
comparatively modern construction. The secret of the _lang yao_
consisted in the first instance in the knowledge of means to produce
a brilliant red glaze from copper oxide. It was not a new discovery,
but merely a revival of the wonderful “precious stone” red of the
early Ming period.[265] The supplies of some essential ingredient
for this colour had failed in the Chia Ching period,[266] and the
secret of the true colour had been temporarily lost. This secret was
now recovered probably by a potter of the name of Lang, and that
name has been associated with it ever since. So far from the _lang
yao_ being limited to the early part of the reign of K’ang Hsi or
to the few years when Lang T’ing-tso might have been concerned with
it, there can be little doubt that the _sang de bœuf_ red or red
_lang yao_ is the special colour described in detail by Père
d’Entrecolles in 1712, and again in 1722 under the significant name
of _yu li hung_, or “red in the glaze.” The reader can judge for
himself from the description given in the second letter[267]: “This
red _inside the glaze_ is made with granulated red copper and the
powder of a certain stone or pebble of a reddish colour. A Christian
doctor told me that this stone was a kind of alum, used in medicine.
The whole is pounded in a mortar and mixed with a boy’s urine and
the ordinary porcelain glaze; but I have not been able to ascertain
the quantities of the ingredients, for those in possession of the
secret take good care not to divulge it. This mixture is applied to
the porcelain before it is fired and no other glaze is used; but care
has to be taken that the red colour does not run to the bottom of the
vase during the firing. They tell me that when they intend to apply
this red to porcelain they do not use porcelain stone (_petuntse_)
in the body, but they use in its place, mixed with the porcelain
earth (_kaolin_), a yellow clay prepared in the same manner as
the _petuntse_. Probably it is a kind of clay specially suited
to receive this colour.” Would that the worthy father had named the
possessors of the secret! Had it been a Jesuit family, is it likely
that he would not have said so? But here, at any rate, is not only such
an accurate description of the manufacture of the _sang de bœuf_
red that little need be added to it, but also a valuable commentary on
the obscure passages in which the allusion is made to the brilliant
red of the Hsüan Tê and other early Ming periods. For what is the
reddish stone or pebble but the “red precious stone from the West,”
which played a mysterious part in the _pao shih hung_ of the Hsüan
Tê period? Chinese tradition has imagined this stone to have been the
ruby, on the impossible assumption that the red colour of the glaze
was derived from the red of the ruby. But it was, in all probability,
cornaline (the _ma nao_ used in the Sung porcelain of Ju Chou) or
amethystine quartz, and its only function would have been to increase
the brilliancy and transparence of the glaze, the red colour being
entirely due to copper oxide. It is interesting, too, to note that the
composition of the porcelain body was varied to suit this red colour,
and that a yellow clay was substituted for the porcelain stone, in view
of the alleged difficulties in obtaining the proper “earth for the
fresh red (_hsien hung_)” in the Chia Ching period. In a similar
manner a more earthy composition was found to be more sympathetic than
the pure white porcelain to some of the other monochromes, as may be
observed in existing specimens of turquoise blue.
The _lang yao_, then, is the _chi hung_ of the K’ang Hsi period, the
brilliant blood red commonly known by the French name _sang de bœuf_,
and to-day it is one of the most precious monochromes. A choice example
illustrated on Plate 88 shows the changing tints from a brilliant
cherry red below the shoulder to the massed blood red where the
fluescent glaze has formed thickly above the base. The colour flowing
down has left an even white band round the mouth, and has settled in
thick coagulations on the flat parts of the shoulders and again above
the base; but in spite of its apparent fluidity the glaze has stopped
in an even line without overrunning the base. The glaze under the base
is of pale buff tone and crackled, and a careful examination of the
surface generally shows that a faint crackle extends over the whole
piece. The glaze, moreover, is full of minute bubbles and consequently
much pinholed, and the red colour has the appearance of lying on the
body in a dust of minute particles which the glaze has dragged downward
in its flow and spread out in a continuous mass, but where the colour
and the glaze have run thick the particles reappear in the form of a
distinct mottling or dappling.
To obtain the best colour from the copper oxide in this glaze
it was necessary to regulate the firing to a nicety, the margin
between success and failure being exceedingly small. Naturally, too,
the results varied widely in quality and tone; but the permanent
characteristics of the K’ang Hsi _sang de bœuf_ are (1) a brilliant
red varying in depth and sometimes entirely lost in places,[268] but
always red and without any of the grey or grey blue streaks which
emerge on the _flambé_ red and the modern imitations of the _sang de
bœuf_; (2) the faint crackle of the glaze; (3) the stopping of the
glaze at the foot rim. The colour of the glaze under the base and
in the interior of vases varied from green or buff crackle to plain
white. The secret of this glaze, which Père d’Entrecolles tells us was
carefully guarded, seems to have been lost altogether about the end
of the K’ang Hsi period. Later attempts to obtain the same effects,
though often successful in producing large areas of brilliant red, are
usually more or less streaked with alien tints such as grey or bluish
grey, and are almost invariably marred by the inability of the later
potters to control the flow of the glaze which overruns the foot rim
and consequently has to be ground off. But it is highly probable that
the modern potter will yet surmount these difficulties, and I have
actually seen a large bowl of modern make in which the ox-blood red
was successfully achieved on the exterior (the interior was relatively
poor), and the flow of the glaze had been stopped along the foot rim
except in one or two small places where the grinding was cleverly
masked. So that it behoves the collector to be on his guard.
Fig. 2 of Plate 88 shows another type of red, also classed as _lang
yao_, which has the same peculiarities of texture as the _sang de
bœuf_, but the colour is more of a crushed-strawberry tint, and has in
a more marked degree that thickly stippled appearance which suggests
that the colour mixture has been blown on to the ware through gauze.
This is probably the _ch’ui hung_ or _soufflé_ red mentioned by Père
d’Entrecolles in connection with the _yu li hung_. The same glaze
is often found on bowls, the colour varying much in depth and the
base being usually covered with a crackled green glaze beneath. This
crackled green is a very distinctive glaze, highly translucent and full
of bubbles, like the red _lang yao_, and it is sometimes found covering
the entire surface of a vase or bowl and serving as a background for
paintings in _famille verte_ enamels. It seems, in fact, to be the true
green _lang yao_, and one is tempted to ask if it was not in reality
intended to be a _sang de bœuf_ red glaze from which a lack of oxygen
or some other accident of the kiln has dispelled all the red, leaving
a green which is one of the many hues produced by copper oxide under
suitable conditions. These conditions might well be present in such an
enclosed space as the foot of a bowl; and if they happened to affect
the whole of the piece, what more natural than to trick out the failure
with a gay adornment of enamel colours?
On the other hand, what is commonly known as green _lang yao_ is
the brilliant emerald or apple green crackle which has already been
discussed on p. 102. But why this colour should be connected in any
way with the Lang or any particular family is a mystery. The method
of producing it is transparently obvious--a green enamel laid over a
stone-coloured crackle; and there are examples of all periods from
the Ming down to modern times. Indeed, the modern specimens are only
distinguished with the greatest difficulty from the old.
* * * * *
To return to the history of the period from which we digressed to
discuss the _lang yao_, the progress of the reviving industry suffered
a rude set-back between 1674–1678 when the Imperial factory was
destroyed during the rebellion of Wu San-kuei, viceroy of Yunnan. It
is improbable that up to this time any notable development had taken
place in the manufacture of porcelain, and those who think to flatter
a specimen by suggesting that it is “_very_ early K’ang Hsi” are likely
to be paying a doubtful compliment. When, however, peace was restored
and the factory rebuilt, a veritable renaissance of the porcelain
industry began. In 1680[269] an official of the Imperial household was
sent to reside at the factory and to superintend the work; and we are
told in the _T’ao shuo_[270] that “previously to this the first-class
workmen had been levied from the different districts of Jao Chou;
but now all this forced labour was stopped, and as each manufactory
was started the artisans were collected and materials provided, the
expenses being defrayed from the Imperial exchequer and the money paid
when due, in accordance with the market prices. Even the expenses for
carriage were not required from the different districts. None of the
proper duties of the local officers were interfered with; both the
officials and the common people enjoyed the benefit, and the processes
of manufacture were all much improved.”
The success of this new movement was assured by the appointment in
1682 of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan [chch 3] to the control of the Imperial
works. We are not told how long this distinguished person retained the
directorship, but his merits are clearly indicated in the encomiums
of a subsequent director, the celebrated T’ang Ying. In his “History
of the God of the Furnace Blast,” the latter states that when Ts’ang
was in charge of the factory the god laid his finger on the designs
and protected the porcelain in the kiln, so that it naturally came
out perfect. Unfortunately, the notice of Ts’ang’s work in the _T’ao
lu_[271] is in the conventional style, and extremely meagre. The earth
used, we are told, was unctuous, the material lustrous and thin. Every
kind of colour was made, but the snake-skin green (_shê p’i lü_), the
eel yellow (_shan yü huang_), the (?) turquoise ([chch 2] _chi ts’ui_),
and the “spotted yellow” ([chch 3] _huang pan tien_) were the most
beautiful. The monochrome (_chiao_)[272] yellow, the monochrome brown
or purple (_tzŭ_), the monochrome green, the _soufflé (ch’ui)_ red and
the _soufflé_ blue, were also beautiful. The Imperial factory under the
administration of T’ang-ying imitated these glaze colours.
Most of these colours explain themselves. The _soufflé_ red is no
doubt the same as the _ch’ui hung_ described by Père d’Entrecolles and
discussed above with the so-called _lang yao_. The _soufflé_ blue will
be no other than the familiar “powder blue.” But the “spotted yellow”
is an ambiguous term, for the Chinese _huang pan tien_[273] might
mean a yellow glaze spotted with some other colour, a mottled yellow,
or even a glaze with yellow spots like that of a rare vase in the
Eumorfopoulos Collection, which has a brown black glaze flecked with
greenish yellow spots.
Bushell identified the spotted yellow glaze with the “tiger skin,”
with its patches of green, yellow and aubergine glazes applied to
the biscuit, which in the finer specimens is etched with dragon
designs.[274]
This is practically all the direct information which the Chinese annals
supply on the K’ang Hsi period, but in contrast with this strange
reticence we have a delightful account of the industry at Ching-tê Chên
during this important time in the two oft-quoted letters[275] written
by the Jesuit father, d’Entrecolles, in 1712 and 1722. The worthy
father’s work lay among the potters themselves, and his information was
derived from first-hand observation and from the notes supplied by his
potter converts, with whatever help he was able to extract from the
Annals of Fou-liang and similar native books. No subsequent writer has
enjoyed such a favoured position, and as his observations have been
laid under heavy contribution ever since, no apology is necessary for
frequent reference to them in these pages.
CHAPTER IX
K’ANG HSI BLUE AND WHITE
Western collectors have agreed to give the place of honour to the K’ang
Hsi blue and white. The Ming wares of the same kind, mainly from lack
of adequate representation, have not yet been fully appreciated; and in
the post-K’ang Hsi periods the blue and white took an inferior status,
owing to the growing popularity of enamelled wares. The peculiar
virtues of the K’ang Hsi blue and white are due to simple causes.
Blue was still regarded as the best medium for painted designs, and
the demand for it, both in China and abroad, was enormous. The body
material was formed of carefully selected clay and stone, thoroughly
levigated and freed from all impurities. No pains were spared in the
preparation of the blue, which was refined over and over again until
the very quintessence had been extracted from the cobaltiferous ore.
Naturally this process was costly, and the finest cobalt was never used
quite pure; even on the most expensive wares it was blended with a
proportion of the lower grades of the mineral, and this proportion was
increased according to the intended quality of the porcelain. But the
choicest blue and white of this period was unsurpassed in the purity
and perfection of the porcelain, in the depth and lustre of the blue,
and in the subtle harmony between the colour and the white porcelain
background; and the high standard thus established served to raise the
quality of the manufacture in general.
Vast quantities of this blue and white were shipped to Europe by the
Dutch and the other East India companies, who sent extensive orders
to Ching-tê Chên. It need hardly be said that this export porcelain
varied widely in quality, but it included at this time wares of the
highest class. Indeed, in looking through our large collections
there are surprisingly few examples of the choice K’ang Hsi blue and
white which cannot be included in the export class, as indicated by
the half-Europeanised forms of plates, jugs, tankards, and other
vessels, and by the fact that the vases are made in sets of five. But
considering that it was made to suit purchasers of such varied tastes
and means, it is surprising how little of this K’ang Hsi porcelain is
bad. Even the roughest specimens have a style and a quality not found
on later wares, and all have an unquestionable value as decoration.
It would be futile to attempt to describe exhaustively the different
kinds of K’ang Hsi blue and white and the innumerable patterns with
which they are decorated. We must confine our descriptions to a few
type specimens, but first it will be useful to give the points of a
choice example. Such a vessel, whatever its nature, will be potted with
perfect skill, its form well proportioned and true. The surface will
be smooth, because the material is thoroughly refined and the piece
has been carefully trimmed or finished on the lathe, and finally all
remaining inequalities have been smoothed away with a moist feather
brush before the glazing. The ware will be clean and white, and the
glaze[276] pure, limpid, and lustrous, but with that faint suspicion of
green which is rarely absent from Chinese porcelain. The general effect
of the body and glaze combined is a solid white like well set curds.
The base, to which the connoisseur looks for guidance, is deeply cut
and washed in the centre with glaze which reaches about half-way down
the sides of the foot rim. This patch of glaze is usually pinholed,
as though the nemesis of absolute perfection had to be placated by
a few flaws in this inconspicuous part. The rim itself is carefully
trimmed, and in many cases grooved or beaded, as though to fit a wooden
stand,[277] and the unglazed edge reveals a smooth, close-grained
biscuit whose fine white material is often superficially tinged with
brown in the heat of the furnace. The decoration is carefully painted
in a pure sapphire blue of great depth and fire, and singularly free
from any strain of red or purple--a quality of blue only obtained by
the most elaborate process of refining. The designs, as on the Ming
porcelains, are first drawn in outline; but, unlike the strong Ming
outlines, these are so faint as to be practically unobserved; and the
colour is filled in, not in flat washes, as on the Ming blue and white,
but in graded depths of pulsating blue. This procedure is clearly shown
by two interesting bowls in the British Museum. They are identical
in form and were intended to match in pattern; but in one the design
(the Eight Immortals of the Wine Cup) is completed, while on the other
it remains in outline only, giving us a wonderful illustration of
the beautiful firm touch with which the artists traced these faint
outlines. The work of decoration was systematically subdivided in the
Chinese factory, and Père d’Entrecolles tells us that “one workman is
solely occupied with the ring which one sees on the border of the ware;
another outlines the flowers, which a third paints; one does the water
and the mountains, another the birds and animals.”[278] Whatever the
advantages and disadvantages of this divided labour, the designs on the
blue and white were admirably chosen to show off the fine qualities
of the colour; and it is to the blue that the collector looks first.
The distinction between the various qualities of blue hardly admit
of verbal definition. It can only be learnt by comparing the actual
specimens, and by training the eye to distinguish the best from the
second best.
The patterns are not always blue on a white ground. Many of the most
beautiful results were obtained by reserving the design in white in a
blue ground, and both styles are often combined on the same piece. The
second is fairly common on the K’ang Hsi porcelains, being specially
suited to the lambrequins, arabesques, and formal patterns which were a
favourite decoration at this time. See Plates 89 and 91.
[Illustration: PLATE 89
Three examples of K’ang Hsi Blue and White Porcelain in the
British Museum
Fig. 1.--Ewer with leaf-shaped panels of floral arabesques,
white in blue, enclosed by a mosaic pattern in blue and white:
stiff plantain leaves on the neck and cover. Silver mount with
thumb-piece. Height 7⅛ inches.
Fig. 2.--Deep bowl with cover, painted with “tiger-lily” scrolls.
Mark, a leaf. Height 7½ inches.
Fig. 3.--Sprinkler with panels of lotus arabesques, white in
blue, and _ju-i_ shaped border patterns. A diaper of small
blossoms on the neck. Mark, a leaf. Height 7⅛ inches.]
The choicest materials were lavished on the porcelains with these
formal designs, which consisted now of bands of _ju-i_ shaped
lappets[279] filled with arabesque foliage, forming an upper and lower
border, between which are floral sprays, now of a belt of three or four
palmette-like designs, similarly ornamented, and linked together round
the centre of a vase or bottle; of large, stiff, leaf-shaped medallions
borrowed, like the patterns which fill them, from ancient bronzes,
and of ogre-head designs from a similar source; of successive belts of
arabesque scrolls and dragon designs covering cylindrical jars; of a
mosaic of small blossoms, or of network diapers recalling the pattern
of a crackled porcelain. The white on blue process is constant in a
well known decoration in which archaic dragons, floral arabesques,
roses or peonies are arranged in “admired disorder” over the whole
surface of a cylinder vase or a triple gourd, as on Plate 91. Sometimes
the roses occupy the greater part of the design, and among them are
small oval or round blank medallions, which have earned for the pattern
the name of “rose and ticket.”
This type of ware is represented in almost every variety in the Dresden
collection, and there are examples of the “rose and ticket” jars in
the _Porzellan-zimmer_ of the Charlottenburg Palace. Both these
collections are mainly composed of the export porcelain sent from
China in the last decades of the seventeenth century, and the latter
is practically limited to the presents made by the English East India
Company to Queen Sophia Charlotte of Prussia (1688–1705). The white on
blue patterns are also freely used in combination with blue and white
to form borders and to fill in the ground between panels.
As for the blue on white designs, they are legion. There are the old
Ming favourites such as the Court scenes, historical and mythological
subjects, pictorial designs, such as ladies looking at the garden
flowers by candlelight.[280] There are landscapes after Sung and Ming
paintings, the usual dragon and phœnix patterns, animal, bird, and
fish designs, lions and mythical creatures, the familiar group of a
bird (either a phœnix or a golden pheasant) on a rock beside which
are peony, magnolia, and other flowering plants. Panel decoration,
too, is frequent, the panels sometimes petal-shaped and emphasised by
lightly moulded outlines, or again mirror-shaped, circular, fan-shaped,
leaf-shaped, oval, square, etc., and surrounded by diapers and “white
in blue” designs. The reserves are suitably filled with figure subjects
from romance, history, or family life, mythical subjects such as the
adventures of Taoist sages, the story of Wang Chi watching the game of
chess, Tung-fang So and his peaches, or, if numerical sequences are
needed, with the Four Accomplishments (painting, calligraphy, music and
chess), the flowers of the Four Seasons, the Eight Taoist Immortals,
the Eight Immortals of the Wine Cup, etc. Another favourite panel
design is a group of vases, furniture, and symbolical objects from the
comprehensive series known as the Hundred Antiques.[281] Sometimes
the whole surface of a vase is divided into rows of petal-shaped
compartments filled with floral designs, figure subjects, birds and
flowers or landscapes. Plate 91, Fig. 3, from a set of five, is one of
the large vases in the Dresden collection which, tradition says, were
obtained by Augustus the Strong from the King of Prussia in exchange
for a regiment of dragoons. It is decorated with panels illustrating
the stories of the Twenty-four Paragons of Filial Piety.
Some of the purely floral patterns strike perhaps a more distinctive
note. The “aster pattern,” for instance, is a design of stiff,
radiating, aster-like flowers usually in a dark tone of blue and
displayed on saucer dishes or deep covered bowls. Some of the specimens
of this class appear to be a little earlier than K’ang Hsi. The
so-called “tiger-lily” pattern illustrated by Fig. 2 of Plate 89 is
usually associated with deep cylindrical covered bowls of fine material
and painted in the choicest blue. A beaker (Plate 91, Fig. 2) shows a
characteristic treatment of the magnolia, parts of the blossoms being
lightly sculptured in relief and the white petals set off by a foil of
blue clouding. It evidently belongs to a set of five (three covered
jars and two beakers) made as a _garniture de cheminée_ for the
European market.
The squat-bodied bottle (Plate 92, Fig. 1) illustrates a familiar
treatment of the lotus design, with a large blossom filling the front
of the body.
But perhaps the noblest of all Chinese blue and white patterns is the
prunus design (often miscalled hawthorn) illustrated by Plate 90, a
covered vase once in the Orrock Collection and now in the Victoria and
Albert Museum. The form is that of the well-known ginger jar, but these
lovely specimens were intended for no banal uses. They were filled with
fragrant tea or some other suitable gift, and sent, like the round cake
boxes, by the Chinese to their friends at the New Year, but it was not
intended that the jars or boxes should be kept by the recipients of the
compliment.
The New Year falls in China from three to seven weeks later than in our
calendar, and it was seasonable to decorate these jars with sprays and
petals of the flowering prunus fallen on the ice, which was already
cracked and about to dissolve. The design is symbolic of the passing of
winter and the coming of spring; and the vibrating depths of the pure
sapphire blue broken by a network of lines simulating ice cracks form
a lovely setting for the graceful prunus sprays reserved in the pure
curd-like white of the ware.
The prunus pattern has been applied to every conceivable form, whether
to cover the whole surface or to serve as secondary ornament in the
border of a design or on the rim of a plate, and the prunus jar
appears in all qualities of blue and on porcelain good and bad, old
and new. The graceful sprays have become stereotyped and the whole
design vulgarised in many instances; and in some cases the blossoms are
distributed symmetrically on a marbled blue ground as a mere pattern.
But nothing can stale the beauty of the choice K’ang Hsi originals, on
which the finest materials and the purest, deepest blue were lavished.
The amateur should find no difficulty in distinguishing these from
their decadent descendants. The freshness of the drawing, the pure
quality of the blue, and the excellence of body, glaze, and potting
are unmistakable. The old examples have the low rim round the mouth
unglazed where the rounded cap-shaped cover fitted, and the design on
the shoulders is finished off with a narrow border of dentate pattern.
The original covers are extremely rare, and in most cases have been
replaced with later substitutes in porcelain or carved wood.
There are, besides, a number of types specially prevalent among the
export porcelains, some purely Chinese in origin, others showing
European influence. Take, for example, the well-known saucer dish with
mounted figures of a man and a woman hunting a hare--a subject usually
known as the “love chase”--a free and spirited design, rather sketchily
painted in pale silvery blue. The porcelain itself is scarcely less
characteristic, a thin, crisp ware, often moulded on the sides with
petal-shaped compartments, and in many ways recalling the earlier type
described on p. 70. It is, however, distinguished from the latter class
by slight differences in tone and finish which can only be learnt by
comparison of actual specimens. It is, moreover, almost always marked
with a _nien hao_ in six characters, whereas marks on the other type
are virtually unknown. The _nien hao_ is usually that of Ch’êng Hua,
but an occasional example with the K’ang Hsi mark gives the true date
of the ware.
A quantity of this porcelain was brought up by divers from wrecks of
old East Indiamen in Table Bay, among which was the _Haarlem_, lost in
1648,[282] though most of the ships were wrecked at later dates. It
is a thin and sharply moulded ware, often pure eggshell, and the blue
varies from the pale silvery tint to vivid sapphire. The usual forms
are of a utilitarian kind--plates, saucer dishes, cups and saucers,
small vases and bottles, jugs, tankards, and the like--and the designs
are not confined to the “love chase,” but include other figure subjects
(e.g. a warrior on horseback carrying off a lady,[283] and various
scenes from romance and family life), floral designs, deer, phœnixes,
fish, birds, etc., and perhaps most often the tall female figures,
standing beside flowering shrubs or pots of flowers, which are vulgarly
known as “long Elizas,” after the Dutch _lange lijsen_ (see Plate 92,
Fig. 2).
Graceful ladies (_mei jên_) are familiar motives in Chinese
decoration, but this particular type, usually consisting of isolated
figures in small panels or separated from each other by a shrub or
flowerpot, and standing in a stereotyped pose, are, I think,[284]
peculiar to the export wares of the last half of the seventeenth
century.
This same type of thin, crisply moulded porcelain was also painted with
similar designs in _famille verte_ enamels over the glaze. It has a
great variety of marks, the commonest being the apocryphal Ch’êng Hua
date-mark, while others are marks of commendation,[285] such as _ch’i
chên ju yü_ (a rare gem like jade), _yü_ (jade), _ya_ (elegant), and
various hall-marks.
[Illustration: PLATE 90
Covered Jar for New Year gifts, with design of blossoming prunus
(_mei hua_) sprays in a ground of deep sapphire blue, which
is reticulated with lines suggesting ice cracks: dentate border
on the shoulders
Height 10 inches. _Victoria and Albert Museum._]
Yet another group of superior quality is obviously connected with the
European trade by a peculiar mark (see vol. i., p. 228) resembling the
letter C or G. It is most commonly represented by pairs of bottles with
globular body and tall, tapering neck, decorated with flowing scrolls
of curious rosette-like flowers, a design stated with much probability
to have been copied from Dutch delft. As the Dutch design in question
had evidently been based on a Chinese original, the peculiar nature
of the flowers explains itself. There are other instances of patterns
bandied in this way between the Far East and the West. The same
peculiar floral scroll appears in _famille verte_ associated with
the same mark; and the same G mark occurs on two rare bottles in the
collection of Mr. J. C. J. Drucker, which have blue and white painting
on the neck and _famille verte_ designs in the finest enamels on the
body. A deep bowl in the Eumorfopoulos collection with _famille verte_
panels of symbols from the Hundred Antiques, and a ground of green
“prunus” pattern, bears the same mark. Neither of these last examples
can be even remotely connected with Dutch influence, so that we may
dismiss the suggestion that the letter in the mark is intended to be
a D, standing for D(elft), for this reason quite apart from the fact
that such a mark on Delft ware is non-existent. I imagine that the true
explanation is that this peculiar mark is a merchant’s sign placed by
order on the goods made for some particular trader.
A close copy of the “wing handles” of Venetian glass on certain blue
and white bottles (Plate 92, Fig. 3), the appearance of Prince of
Wales’s feathers in the border of a plate and of an heraldic eagle in
the well of a salt cellar, no less than many forms obviously Western
in origin, further emphasise the close relations between the Ching-tê
Chên potters and European traders.[286] An immense quantity of
indifferent blue and white was made for the European table services,
and summarily decorated with baskets of flowers, the usual flowering
plant designs, close patterns of small blossoms, floral scrolls with
large, meaningless flowers, ivy scrolls, passion flowers, and numerous
stereotyped designs, such as dragons in sea waves, prunus pattern
borders, pine tree and stork, a garden fence with rockery and flowering
shrubs, groups from the Hundred Antiques, a parrot on a tree stump,
etc. The blue of these pieces is usually rather dull and heavy, but
the ware has the characteristic appearance of K’ang Hsi porcelain, and
was evidently made for the most part about the year 1700. If marked
at all, the marks are usually symbols, such as the double fish, the
lozenge, the leaf, a tripod vase, and a strange form of the character
_shou_ known as the “spider mark” (see vol. i., p. 225). The
plates are often edged with lustrous brown glaze to prevent that
chipping and scaling to which the Chinese glaze was specially liable on
projecting parts of the ware.[287]
Something has already been said[288] of another very distinctive class
of blue and white for which the misleading name of “soft paste” has
been widely adopted. The term is of American origin and has been too
readily accepted, for it is not only inaccurate as a description,
but is already current in Europe for a totally different ware, which
it describes with greater exactitude, viz. the artificial, glassy
porcelains made at Sèvres and Chelsea and other factories, chiefly in
France and England, in the middle of the eighteenth century. In actual
fact the Chinese ware to which the term “soft paste” is applied has
an intensely hard body. The glaze, however, which is softer than that
of the ordinary porcelain, contains a proportion of lead, and if not
actually crackled from the first becomes so in use, the crackle lines
being usually irregular and undecided.
A detailed description of the manufacture of this ware is given by Père
d’Entrecolles,[289] though he is probably at fault in supposing that
its chief ingredient was a recent discovery in 1722. It was made, he
says, with a mineral called _hua shih_ (in place of kaolin), a stone of
glutinous and soapy nature, and almost certainly corresponding to the
steatite or “soapy rock” which was used by the old English porcelain
makers at Bristol, Worcester and Liverpool. “The porcelain made with
_hua shih_,” to quote Père d’Entrecolles, “is rare and far more
expensive than the other porcelain. It has an extremely fine grain; and
for purposes of painting, when compared with ordinary porcelain, it is
almost as vellum to paper. Moreover, this ware is surprisingly light
to anyone accustomed to handle the other kinds; it is also far more
fragile than the ordinary, and there is difficulty in finding the exact
temperature for its firing. Some of the potters do not use _hua shih_
for the body of the ware, but content themselves with making a diluted
slip into which they dip their porcelain when dry, so as to give it a
coating of soapstone before it is painted and glazed. By this means it
acquires a certain degree of beauty.” The preparation of the _hua shih_
is also described, but it is much the same as that of the kaolin, and
the composition of the steatitic body is given as eight parts of _hua
shih_ to two of porcelain stone (_petuntse_).
There are, then, two kinds of steatitic porcelain, one with the body
actually composed of _hua shih_ and the other with a mere surface
dressing of this material. The former is light to handle, and opaque;
and the body has a dry, earthy appearance, though it is of fine grain
and unctuous to touch. It is variously named by the Chinese[290]
_sha-t’ai_ (sand bodied) and _chiang-t’ai_ (paste bodied), and when the
glaze is crackled it is further described as _k’ai pien_ (crackled).
The painting on the steatitic porcelain differs in style from that
of the ordinary blue and white of this period. It is executed with
delicate touches like miniature painting, and every stroke of the
brush tells, the effects being produced by fine lines rather than by
graded washes. The ware, being costly to make, is usually painted by
skilful artists and in the finest blue. Fig. 3, of Plate 93, is an
excellent example of the pure steatitic ware, an incense bowl in the
Franks collection, of which the base and a large part of the interior
is unglazed and affords a good opportunity for the study of the body
material. The glaze is thin and faintly crackled, and the design--Hsi
Wang Mu and the Taoist Immortals--is delicately drawn in light, clear
blue.
The second type, which has only a dressing of steatite over the
ordinary body, has neither the same lightness nor the opacity of the
true steatitic ware, but it has the same soft white surface, and is
painted in the same style of line drawing.
There are, besides, other opaque and crackled wares painted in
underglaze blue, which are also described as “soft paste,” and, indeed,
deserve the name far more than the steatitic porcelain. The creamy,
crackled copies of old Ting wares, for instance, made with _ch’ing
tien_ stone,[291] are occasionally enriched with blue designs; and
the ordinary stone-coloured crackle with buff staining is also painted
at times with underglaze blue,[292] or with blue designs on pads of
white clay in a crackled ground.
On the other hand, there are numerous wares of the Yung Chêng and
Ch’ien Lung periods which are probably composed in part, at least, of
steatite. They are usually opaque, and the surface is sometimes dead
white, sometimes creamy and often undulating like orange peel, and in
addition to blue decoration, enamel painting is not infrequent on these
later types. The purely steatitic porcelains are generally of small
size, which was appropriate to the style of painting as well as to the
expensive nature of the material. The furniture of the scholar’s table,
with its tiny flower vases for a single blossom, its brush washers and
water vessels of fanciful forms, its pigment boxes, etc., were suitable
objects for the material, and many of these little crackled porcelains
are veritable gems. Snuff bottles are another appropriate article, and
a representative collection of snuff bottles will show better than
anything the great variety of these mixed wares and so-called “soft
pastes.”
It has been already observed that crackled blue and white porcelain
of the steatitic kind is found with the date marks of Ming Emperors,
and there can be little doubt that it was made from early Ming times,
but as the style of painting seems to have known no change it will be
always difficult to distinguish the early specimens. It is safe to
assume that almost all the specimens in Western collections belong to
the Ch’ing dynasty, a few to the K’ang Hsi period, but the bulk of the
better examples to the reigns of Yung Chêng and Ch’ien Lung. Modern
copies of the older wares also abound.
[Illustration: Plate 91.--Blue and White K’ang Hsi Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Triple Gourd Vase, white in blue designs of archaic
dragons and scrolls of season flowers. Height 36½ inches.
_Dresden Collection._
Fig. 2.--Beaker, white magnolia design slightly raised, with blue
background. Height 18 inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 3.--“Grenadier Vase,” panels with the Paragons of Filial
Piety. Height 44 inches. _Dresden Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 92.--Blue and White K’ang Hsi Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Sprinkler with lotus design. Height 6¼ inches.
_British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with biscuit handles, design of graceful ladies
(_mei jen_). Height 11 inches. _Fitzwilliam Museum
(formerly D. G. Rosetti Collection)_.
Fig. 3.--Bottle with handles copied from Venetian glass. Height
6¼ inches. _British Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 93.--Blue and White Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Tazza with Sanskrit characters. Ch’ien Lung mark. Height
4¼ inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Water Pot, butterfly and flowers, steatitic porcelain.
Wan Li mark. Height 1⅞ inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bowl, steatitic porcelain. Immortals on a log raft.
K’ang Hsi period. Diameter 5¾ inches. _British Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 94.--Porcelain decorated in enamels on the
biscuit.
Fig. 1.--Ewer in form of the character _Shou_ (Longevity);
blue and white panel with figure designs. Early K’ang Hsi period.
Height 8¾ inches. _Salting Collection._
Fig. 2.--Ink Palette, dated 31st year of K’ang Hsi (1692
A.D.). Length 5¼ inches. _British Museum._]
An interesting passage in the first letter[293] of Père d’Entrecolles
describes a curious kind of porcelain, of which the secret had already
been lost. It was known as _chia ch’ing_ or “blue put in press,”
and it was said that the blue designs on the cups so treated were
only visible when the vessel was filled with water. The method of
the manufacture is described as follows: “The porcelain to be so
decorated had to be very thin; when it was dry, a rather strong blue
was applied, not to the exterior in the usual manner, but on the
interior to the sides. The design usually consisted of fish, as being
specially appropriate to appear when the cup was filled with water.
When the colour was dry a light coating of slip, made with the body
material, was applied, and this coating enclosed the blue between
two layers of clay. When this coating was dry, glaze was sprinkled
inside the cup, and shortly afterwards the porcelain was placed on the
wheel. As the body had been strengthened on the interior, the potter
proceeded to pare it down outside as fine as possible without actually
penetrating to the colour. The exterior was then glazed by immersion.
When completely dry it was fired in the ordinary furnace. The work is
extremely delicate, and requires a dexterity which the Chinese seem no
longer to possess. Still, they try from time to time to recover the
secret of this magical painting, but without success. One of them told
me recently that he had made a fresh attempt, and had almost succeeded.”
No example of this mysterious porcelain is known to exist, and it is
probable that the whole story is based on some ill-grounded tradition.
It is true that water will bring out the faded design on certain old
potteries, but this is due to the action of the water in restoring
transparency to a soft decayed glaze. But how the water or any other
liquid could affect the transparency of a hard, impenetrable porcelain
glaze, still less influence the colour concealed beneath a layer of
clay and glaze, is far from clear. Indeed, the whole story savours of
the “tall tales” quoted in chap. x. of vol. i.
But perhaps it will not be inappropriate to mention here another
peculiar type of blue and white, which, if we may judge by the early
date mark usually placed upon it, throws back to some older model. The
design, usually a dragon, is delicately traced with a needle point on
the body of the ware, and a little cobalt blue is dusted into the
incisions.[294] The glaze is then applied, and when the piece is fired
and finished the dragon design appears faintly “tattooed” in pale blue.
The effect is light and delicate, but of small decorative value, and
the few examples which I have seen are redeemed from insignificance
by a peculiarly beautiful body of pure glassy porcelain. They bear an
apocryphal Ch’êng Hua mark, but evidently belong to the first half of
the eighteenth century, to the Yung Chêng, or perhaps the late K’ang
Hsi period.
CHAPTER X
K’ANG HSI POLYCHROME PORCELAINS
Broadly speaking, the polychrome porcelains of the Ming and K’ang
Hsi periods are the same in principle, though they differ widely
in style and execution. The general types continued, and the first
to be considered is that in which all the colours are fired in the
high temperature of the large kiln, comprising underglaze blue and
underglaze red, and certain slips and coloured glazes. Conspicuous
among the last is a pale golden brown commonly known as Nanking
yellow, which is found in narrow bands or in broad washes, dividing
or surrounding blue designs, and is specially common on the bottles,
sprinklers, gourd-shaped vases, and small jars exported to Europe in
the last half of the seventeenth century. The golden brown also darkens
into coffee brown, and in some cases it alternates in bands with buff
crackle and pale celadon green.
A deep olive brown glaze is sometimes found as a background for
ornament in moulded reliefs which are touched with underglaze blue and
red. A fine vase of this type is in the Salting Collection, and a good
example was given by Mr. Andrew Burman to the British Museum. Both seem
to be designed after bronze models.
But the central colour of this group is undoubtedly the underglaze
red. Derived from copper it is closely akin to the red of the _chi
hung_ glaze, and both were conspicuous on the Hsüan Tê porcelain,
both fell into disuse in the later Ming periods, and both were revived
in the reign of K’ang Hsi.
I have seen two examples of this colour in combination with underglaze
blue bearing the hall mark _chung-ho-t’ang_, and cyclical dates
corresponding to 1671 and 1672 respectively. In neither of these
pieces, however, was the red very successful, and probably the better
K’ang Hsi specimens belong to a later period of the reign. It was,
however, always a difficult colour to fire, and examples in which the
red is perfectly developed are rare. As a rule, it tends to assume a
maroon or dark reddish brown tint.
Nor is the method of its application always the same. Sometimes it is
painted on in clean, crisp brush strokes; at others it is piled up in
thick washes which flow in the firing and assume some of the qualities
and the colour of _sang de bœuf_ red, even displaying occasional
crackle; on other pieces again a “peach bloom” tint is developed.[295]
On two of the best examples in the Franks Collection, where a deep
blood red is combined with a fine quality of blue, it is noteworthy
that the surface of the white glaze has a peculiar dull lustre. This,
I understand, is due to “sulphuring” in the kiln, a condition which,
whether accidental or intentional, is certainly favourable to the red
colour. It is also noticeable that the red is particularly successful
under a glaze which is faintly tinged with celadon green such as is
often used on imitations of Ming porcelains, and it was no doubt this
consideration which led to the frequent use of celadon green in this
group. The celadon is used either as a ground colour for the whole
piece or in parts only of the design, and the addition of white slip
further strengthened the palette. With these colours some exquisite
effects have been compassed in such designs as birds on prunus boughs
and storks among lotus plants, the main design being in blue, the
blossoms in white slip slightly raised and touched with red, and the
background plain white, celadon green (Plate 115), and sometimes pale
lavender blue. The celadon and pale lavender vases with this decoration
were favourites with the French in the eighteenth century, and many
sets of vases and beakers in this style have been furnished with
sumptuous ormolu mounts by the French goldsmiths.
The painting in underglaze red, which was revived in the K’ang Hsi
period, continued with success in the succeeding reigns of Yung Chêng
and Ch’ien Lung (indeed it has not ceased to this day), but the bulk
of the finer examples in our collections seem to belong to the late
K’ang Hsi and the Yung Chêng periods. The underglaze red is used alone
as well as in combination, and some of its most successful effects are
found on small objects like colour boxes and snuff bottles.
The black or brown pigment used for outlining designs under the
softer enamel colours such as green and yellow, though in one sense an
underglaze colour, does not belong to this group.
From this group of polychrome porcelain we pass to another in which the
colour is given by washes of various glazes. A few of the high-fired
glazes are employed for this purpose, especially blue in combination
with celadon green and white, and a few clay slips, of which the
commonest is a dressing of brown clay applied without any glaze and
producing an iron-coloured surface. The most familiar members of this
group are small Taoist figures of rough but vivacious modelling with
draperies glazed blue, celadon and white,[296] and the base unglazed
and slightly browned in the firing. Collectors are tempted to regard
these figures as late or modern productions, but examples in the
Dresden collection prove that this technique was employed in the K’ang
Hsi period. In the same collection there are numbers of small toy
figures, such as monkeys, oxen, grotesque human forms, etc., sometimes
serving as whistles or as water-droppers. They are made of coarse
porcelain or stoneware with a thin dressing of brown ferruginous clay,
and touches of high-fired glazes. The appearance of these, too, is so
modern that we realise with feelings of surprise that they formed part
of the collection of Augustus the Strong.
The polychrome porcelain coloured with glazes of the _demi-grand
feu_ (i.e. glazes fired in the more temperate parts of the large
kiln) has been discussed in the chapters on the Ming period.[297]
The group characterised by green, turquoise and aubergine violet,
semi-opaque, and minutely crackled is not conspicuous among K’ang
Hsi porcelains; indeed it seems to have virtually ceased with the
Ming dynasty. The individual colours, however, were still used as
monochromes; in combination they are chiefly represented by aubergine
violet and turquoise in broad washes on such objects as peach-shaped
wine pots, Buddhist lions with joss-stick holders attached, parrots,
and similar ornaments.
The other three-colour group, composed of transparent green, yellow
and aubergine purple glazes, usually associated with designs finely
etched with a metal point on the body, were freely used in the K’ang
Hsi and Yung Chêng periods in imitation of Ming prototypes. Such
specimens are often characterised by extreme neatness of workmanship
and technical perfection of the ware. The best-known examples are thin,
beautifully potted rice bowls, with slightly everted rim, and a design
of five-clawed Imperial dragons traced with a point and filled in with
a colour contrasting with that of the ground, e.g. green on yellow, or
green on aubergine, all the possible changes being rung on the three
colours. Being Imperial wares these bowls are usually marked with the
_nien hao_ of their period, but such is the trimness of their make
that collectors are tempted to regard them as specimens of a later
reign. But here again the Dresden collection gives important evidence,
for it contains a bowl of this class with dragons in a remarkable
purplish black colour (probably an accidental variety of the aubergine)
in a yellow ground. It bears the mark of the K’ang Hsi period.
The application of similar plumbo-alcaline glazes to a commoner type of
porcelain is described by Père d’Entrecolles[298]:--“There is a kind
of coloured porcelain which is sold at a lower rate than the enamelled
ware just described.... The material required for this work need not
be so fine. Vessels which have already been baked in the great furnace
without glaze, and consequently white and lustreless, are coloured by
immersion in a bowl filled with the colouring preparation if they are
intended to be monochrome. But if they are required to be polychrome
like the objects called _hoam lou houan_,[299] which are divided
into kinds of panels, one green, one yellow, etc., the colours are
laid on with a large brush. This is all that need be done to this
type of porcelain, except that after the firing a little vermilion
is applied to certain parts such as the beaks of birds, etc. This
vermilion, however, is not fired, as it would evaporate in the kiln,
and consequently it does not last. When the various colours have been
applied, the porcelain is refired in the great furnace with the other
wares which have not yet been baked; but care is taken to place it at
the bottom of the furnace and below the vent-hole where the fire is
less fierce; otherwise the great heat would destroy the colours.”
[Illustration: PLATE 95
Two examples of Porcelain painted with coloured enamels on the
biscuit, the details of the designs being first traced in brown.
K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722)
Fig. 1.--One of a pair of Buddhistic Lions, sometimes called Dogs
of Fo. This is apparently the lioness, with her cub: the lion has
a ball of brocade under his paw. On the head is the character
_wang_ (prince) which is more usual on the tiger of Chinese
art. Height 18 inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase and Stand moulded in bamboo pattern
and decorated with floral brocade designs and diapers. Height 8¾
inches. _Cope Bequest_ (_Victoria & Albert Museum_).]
In this interesting passage, written in 1722, we have a precise
account of the manufacture of one of the types of porcelain which
have been indiscriminately assigned to the Ming period. This on-biscuit
polychrome was undoubtedly made in the Ming dynasty, but in view of
d’Entrecolles’ description it will be safe to assume that, unless
there is some very good evidence to the contrary, the examples in our
collections are not older than K’ang Hsi. The type is easily identified
from the above quotation, and there is a little group of the wares in
the British Museum, mostly small figures and ornaments with washes
of green, brownish yellow and aubergine purple applied direct to the
biscuit, and on some of the unglazed details the unfired vermilion
still adheres. These coloured glazes are compounded with powdered
flint, lead, saltpetre, and colouring oxides, and the porcelain
belongs to the comprehensive group of _san ts’ai_ or three-colour
ware, although the three colours--green, yellow and aubergine--are
supplemented by a black formed of brown black pigment under one of the
translucent glazes and a white which d’Entrecolles describes[300] as
composed of ⅖ ounce of powdered flint to every ounce of white lead.
This last forms the thin, iridescent film often of a faintly greenish
tinge, which serves as white on these three-colour porcelains. In rare
cases also a violet blue enamel is added to the colour scheme.
A characteristic of this particular type is the absence of any painted
outlines. The colours are merely broad washes bounded by the flow of
the glaze, and this style of polychrome is best suited to figures and
moulded ornamental pieces, in which the details of the design form
natural lines of demarcation for the glazes. On a flat surface this
method of coloration is only suited to such patchy patterns as the
so-called tiger skin and the tortoiseshell wares.
The Dresden collection is peculiarly rich in this kind of _san
ts’ai_, but though two or three of the specimens (Plate 71, Figs. 1
and 2) differing considerably from the rest, are clearly of the Ming
period, the great majority are undoubtedly contemporaneous with the
forming of the collection, viz. of the K’ang Hsi period. The latter
include numerous figures, human and animal, and ornaments such as the
junk on Plate 98, besides some complicated structures of rocks and
shrines and grottos, peopled with tiny images and human figures. To
this group belong such specimens as the “brinjal bowls,” with everted
rim and slight floral designs engraved in outline and filled in with
coloured glaze in a ground of aubergine (brinjal) purple. There are
similar specimens with green ground, and both types are frequently
classed with Ming wares. Some of them may indeed belong to the late
Ming period,[301] but those with finer finish are certainly K’ang Hsi.
They are usually marked with rough, undecipherable seal marks in blue,
which are commonly known as shop marks.
Some of the figures of deities, birds and animals, besides the
small ornamental objects such as brush-washers in the form of lotus
leaves and little water vessels for the writing table are of very
high quality, skilfully modelled and of material far finer than that
described by d’Entrecolles. Fig. 2, Plate 99, a statuette of Ho
Hsien-ku, one of the Eight Immortals, is an example. The flesh is in
white biscuit, showing the fine grain of the porcelain, white to-day,
though possibly it was originally coloured with unfired pigment and
gilt as was often the case. The glazes on this finer quality of ware,
especially the green and the aubergine, are peculiarly smooth and
sleek, and the yellow is fuller and browner than on the kindred ware,
enamelled on the biscuit, which we now proceed to investigate.
The French term, _émaillé sur biscuit_, is used somewhat broadly to
cover the coloured glazes just described, as well as the enamels proper
of the muffle kiln. We shall try to confine the expression, “on-biscuit
enamels,” to the softer, verifiable enamels which are fired at a lower
temperature and in a smaller kiln or muffle. These are, in fact, the
same enamels as are used in the ordinary _famille verte_ porcelain
painted over the finished glaze, but when applied direct to the biscuit
they have a slightly darker and mellower tone, the background of
biscuit reflecting less light than the glittering white glaze.
[Illustration: PLATE 96
Vase of baluster form painted in coloured enamels on the biscuit.
The design, which is outlined in brown, consists of a beautifully
drawn prunus (_mei hua_) tree in blossom and hovering birds,
beside a rockery and smaller plants of bamboo, etc., set in a
ground of mottled green. Ch’êng Hua mark but K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722)
Height 16¾ inches. _British Museum._]
Though the colour scheme of this group is substantially the same as
that of the _san ts’ai_ glazes, and though the enamels when used in
wide areas are not always easily distinguished from the glazes, the
former do, in fact, differ in containing more lead, being actually
softer and more liable to acquire crackle and iridescence, and in some
cases there are appreciable differences in tint. The yellow enamel,
for instance, is as a rule paler, and even when of a dark tint it has
a muddy tone wanting in the fullness and strength of the yellow glaze;
the green enamel varies widely in tone from the glaze, and includes,
besides, several fresh shades, among which is a soft apple green
of great beauty; and the aubergine is less claret coloured and often of
a decidedly pinkish tone.
But perhaps the most distinctive feature of this _san ts’ai_ of
the muffle kiln is the careful tracing of the design in a brown black
pigment on the biscuit. The transparent enamels are washed on over
these black outlines, and give appropriate colours without obscuring
the design which is already complete in itself.[302] The same brown
black pigment[303] is also used over wide areas, laid on thickly and
washed with transparent green to form the fine green black which is so
highly prized. Like so much of the porcelain with coloured ornament
applied to the biscuit this large group has been indiscriminately
assigned to the Ming dynasty. The lack of documentary evidence has
made it difficult to combat this obvious fallacy, obvious because
the form and style of decoration of the finest specimens are purely
K’ang Hsi in taste and feeling; but, while fully recognising that the
scheme of decoration was not a new one, but had been in use in the
Ming porcelains, I would point a warning finger again[304] to the ink
slab in the British Museum with its design of aubergine plum blossoms
on conventional green waves, its borders of lozenge and hexagon
diaper, all enamelled on the biscuit, and in the characteristic style
habitually described as Ming in sale catalogues, but actually dated
1692. Another consideration is the quantity of these pieces in the
Dresden collection which consists mainly of K’ang Hsi wares, and the
presence of several examples (e.g. bamboo vases such as Fig. 2 of Plate
95) in the rooms of the Charlottenburg Palace, which were furnished
mainly with presents made by the British East India Company to Queen
Sophia Charlotte (1668–1705).
Marks are rare on this group, as a whole, though they occur fairly
frequently on the large vases, the commonest being the date mark of the
Ch’êng Hua period. No one would, however, seriously argue a fifteenth
century date from this mark which is far more common than any other on
K’ang Hsi porcelain; and I have actually seen the K’ang Hsi mark on
one or two specimens which appeared to be perfectly genuine. Curiously
enough the K’ang Hsi mark is more often a sign of a modern imitation,
but this in view of the perverse methods of marking Chinese porcelain
is in itself evidence that the modern copyist regards the reign of
K’ang Hsi as the best period of manufacture for this style of ware.
[Illustration: PLATE 97
Square Vase with pendulous body and high neck slightly expanding
towards the top: two handles in the form of archaic lizard-like
dragons (_chih lung_), and a pyramidal base. Porcelain
painted with coloured enamels on the biscuit, with scenes
representing Immortals on a log raft approaching Mount P’êng-lai
in the Taoist Paradise. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722)
Height 20½ inches. _British Museum._]
The noblest examples of this group, and perhaps the finest of all
Chinese polychromes, are the splendid vases with designs reserved
in grounds of green black, yellow or leaf green. Plates 96, 97 and
Frontispiece will serve to illustrate the colours and at the same
time some of the favourite forms[305] of these sumptuous pieces, the
baluster vase, and the square vase with pendulous body, pyramidal
base, and two handles usually of archaic dragon form. The favourite
design for the decoration of these forms is the flowering prunus tree,
beside a rockery with a few bright plumaged birds in the branches, one
of the most familiar and at the same time most beautiful of Chinese
patterns (see Plate 96). The flowers of the four seasons--peony, lotus,
chrysanthemum and prunus--form a beautiful decoration for the four
sides of another favourite form, a tall vase of square elevation with
sides lightly tapering downwards, rounded shoulders, arid circular
neck, slightly flaring at the mouth. The specimens illustrated are in
the British Museum, but there is a wonderful series of these lordly
vases in the Salting Collection, and in the Pierpont Morgan and Altmann
Collections in New York. To-day they are rare, and change hands at
enormous prices. Consequently all manner of imitations abound, European
and Oriental, the modern Chinese work in this style being often highly
successful. But the most insidious copies are the deliberate frauds
in which old K’ang Hsi vases are stripped of a relatively cheap
form of decoration, the glaze and colour being removed by grinding,
and furnished with a cleverly enamelled design in colours on the
biscuit. The actual colours are often excellent, and as the ware seen
at the base is the genuine K’ang Hsi porcelain even the experienced
connoisseur may be deceived at first, though probably his misgivings
will be aroused by something in the drawing which betrays the copyist,
and a searching examination of the surface will reveal some traces of
the sinister treatment to which it has been subjected or the tell-tale
marks, such as black specks or burns, left on the foot rim by the
process of refiring. There is much truth besides in the saying that
things “look their age,” and artificial signs of wear imparted by
friction and rubbing with sand or grit are not difficult for the
experienced eye to detect.
As already noted, the black of the precious black-ground vases, the
_famille noire_ as they are sometimes called, is formed by
overlaying a dull black pigment with washes of transparent green
enamel. The result is a rich greenish black, the enamel imparting life
and fire to the dull pigment; and as the green is fluxed with lead it
tends to become iridescent, giving an additional green _reflet_
to the black surface. The modern potters have learnt to impart an
iridescence to their enamels, and one often sees a strong lustre on
specimens which are clearly “hot from the kiln”; but these enamels
have a sticky appearance differing widely from the mellow lustre which
partial decay has spread over the K’ang Hsi colours. It will be found,
besides, that the shapes of the modern copies are wanting in the grace
and feeling of the originals.
This type of porcelain enamelled on the biscuit is particularly well
suited to statuettes and ornamental objects of complex form. The
details of the biscuit remain sharp and clear, and there is no thick
white glaze to soften the projections and fill up the cavities, for the
washes of transparent enamel are too slight to obscure the modelling.
Consequently we find in this style of ware all the familiar Chinese
figures, the Buddhist and Taoist deities, demigods, and sages, which,
like our own madonnas and saints, mostly conform to well established
conventions, differing mainly in their size, the quality of their
finish, the form of their bases or pedestals, and the details of the
surface colouring. Of these the figures of Kuan-yin[306] are the most
frequent and the most attractive, the compassionate goddess with
sweet pensive face, mounted on a lotus pedestal or a rocky throne
and sometimes canopied with a cloak which serves as a hood and a
covering for her back and shoulders. She has moreover a long flowing
robe open at the neck, and displaying a jewelled necklace on her bare
bosom. There are, besides, the god of Longevity: the Eight Immortals:
Tung-fang So with his stolen peaches: the star-gods of Longevity, Rank,
and Happiness: the twin genii of Mirth and Harmony: Kuan-ti, the god
of War, on a throne or on horseback: Lao-tzŭ on his ox: the demon-like
Kuei Hsing, and the dignified Wên Ch’ang, gods of Literature; and all
the throng. There are a few animal forms such as the horse, the ox, the
elephant, the mythical _ch’i-lin_, and most common of all the Buddhist
lions (sometimes called the dogs of Fo), usually in pairs, one with a
cub, and the other playing with a ball of brocade, mounted on an oblong
base, to which is attached, in the smaller sizes at any rate, a tube
for holding incense sticks. Other familiar objects are four-footed
or tripod stands for manuscript rolls, boxes for brushes colours,
etc., ink screens, water pots of fanciful shape for the writing
table, picture plaques (Plate 100), supper sets made up of a number
of small trays which fit together in the form of a lotus flower[307]
or a rosette, perforated boxes and hanging vases for fragrant flowers
(Fig. 2 of Plate 98), “butterfly cages,” and “cricket boxes.” Another
well-known specimen represents the famous T’ang poet, Li T’ai-po, the
Horace of China, reclining in drunken stupor against a half overturned
wine jar, the whole serving as a water vessel for the writing table.
Instances of the combination of on-glaze and on-biscuit enamels in the
same piece also occur. Thus on the splendid black-ground potiche in
the Franks Collection (Frontispiece) passages of white glaze have been
inserted to receive the coral red colour which apparently could not
be applied to the biscuit. And conversely in the ordinary _famille
verte_ decoration on the glaze there are sometimes inserted small
areas of on-biscuit enamels on borders, handles, base ornaments,
etc. Such combinations give an excellent opportunity for observing
the contrast between the softer, fuller tints on the biscuit and the
brighter, more jewel-like enamels on the white glaze. In rare instances
we find passages of blue and white decoration associated with the
on-biscuit enamels as on the curious ewer illustrated by Fig. 1 of
Plate 94. Blue and white is similarly combined with decoration in
coloured glazes on the biscuit in a late Ming jar in the Victoria and
Albert Museum (Case 9, No. 4396–57).
[Illustration: Plate 98.--K’ang Hsi Porcelain with on-biscuit
decoration.
_Dresden Collection._
Fig. 1.--Teapot in form of a lotus seed-pod, enamels on the
biscuit. Height 2¾ inches.
Fig. 2.--Hanging Perfume Vase, reticulated, enamels on the
biscuit. Height 3½ inches.
Fig. 3.--Ornament in form of a junk, transparent _san ts’ai_
glazes. Height 11½ inches.]
[Illustration:
Plate 99.--K’ang Hsi Porcelain with on-biscuit decoration.
Fig. 1.--Ewer with black enamel ground, lion handle. Height 8¾
inches. _Cope Bequest_ (_V. & A. Museum_).
Fig. 2.--Figure of the Taoist Immortal, Ho Hsien Ku, transparent
_san ts’ai_ glazes. Height 10⅛ inches. _S. E. Kennedy
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase and Stand, enamelled on the biscuit. Height 8¾
inches. _Cope Bequest._]
[Illustration: Plate 100.--Screen with Porcelain Plaque, painted
in enamels on the biscuit.
Light green background. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722). Total
height 22½ inches.
_In the Collection of the Hon. E. Evan Charteris._]
[Illustration: Plate 101.--Vase with panels of landscapes and
_po ku_ symbols in _famille verte_ enamels
In a ground of underglaze blue trellis pattern. K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722). Height 32 inches. _Dresden Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 102.--Two Dishes of _famille verte_
Porcelain in the _Dresden Collection_. K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722).
Fig. 1.--With birds on a flowering branch, brocade borders.
Artist’s signature in the field. Diameter 16 inches.
Fig. 2.--With ladies on a garden terrace. Diameter 21 inches.]
The familiar phrase, _famille verte_, was first used by Jacquemart as a
class name for the enamelled porcelains on which green plays a leading
part. According to this definition it should include the _Wan li wu
ts’ai_, the Ming enamelled porcelain, as well as much of the on-biscuit
enamelled wares, in addition to the typical K’ang Hsi enamelled
porcelain to which usage has specially consecrated the term. A direct
descendant of the _Wan li wu ts’ai_, the _famille verte_ includes
the combinations of underglaze blue with the translucent on-glaze
enamels green, yellow, and aubergine, and the coral red (derived from
iron), the French _rouge de fer_, which is so thin that it
resembles a pigment rather than a vitreous enamel. Add to these the
brown black pigment, which is used to trace the outlines of the design
and with a covering of green to form the green black, and we have one
type of _famille verte_ which differs in no essential from the Wan
Li prototype. It is, in fact, no easy matter to find the line which
divides the two groups. The nature of the ware and the style of the
painting are the best guides; and the study of the K’ang Hsi blue and
white will be a great help in this delicate task.
But the real K’ang Hsi _famille verte_, which we might call the _K’ang
hsi wu ts’ai_, is distinguished by the addition of an overglaze blue
enamel which enhanced the brilliancy of the colour scheme, and at the
same time removed the necessity of using underglaze and overglaze
colours together.[308] It is not to be supposed, however, that the
underglaze blue disappeared entirely from the group. The old types
were always dear to the Chinese mind, and there were frequent revivals
of these in addition to the special wares,[309] such as the “Chinese
Imari,” in which this kind of blue was essential. There are indeed
examples of both blues on the same pieces.
The history of this overglaze blue enamel has already[310] been
partially discussed, and evidence has been given of its tentative
use in the Wan Li porcelain. A passage in the second letter of Père
d’Entrecolles[311] actually places its invention about the year 1700,
but the worthy father’s chronology (based no doubt chiefly on hearsay)
is often at fault. It is fairly certain, however, that the blue enamel
was not used to any extent before the Ch’ing dynasty, owing no doubt to
the fact that it had not been satisfactorily made until that date.
A beautiful enamel of violet blue tone, it is an important factor of
the _famille verte_ decoration, and the merits of a vase or dish are
often decided on the purity and brilliance of this colour alone. There
is, however, something in the nature of the enamel which seems to
affect the surrounding glaze; at any rate, it is often ringed about
by a kind of halo of dull lustre, reflecting faint rainbow tints to a
distance of perhaps an inch from the edge of the blue. It is as though
an exhalation from the blue enamel deposited a thin film of lustre on
the glaze, and it is a very frequent occurrence, though not always in
the same conspicuous degree. Collectors who are ever looking for a sign
have been tempted to hail its presence as a sure proof of antiquity.
But it is by no means constant on the old _famille verte_, and it has
yet to be proved that the same enamel will not produce a similar effect
on the modern glaze.
In view of the appreciation of _famille verte_ porcelain at the
present day a contemporary criticism will be of interest. D’Entrecolles
in his first letter,[312] referring to “porcelain painted with
landscapes in a medley of almost all the colours heightened with
gilding,” says: “They are very beautiful, if one pays a high price, but
the ordinary wares of this kind are not to be compared with blue and
white.” And again,[313] following an exact description of painting with
enamel colours on the finished glaze and of the subsequent refiring of
the ware, we read: “Sometimes the painting is intentionally reserved
for the second firing; at other times they only use the second firing
to conceal defects in the porcelain, applying the colours to the faulty
places. This porcelain, which is loaded with colour, is not to the
taste of a good many people. As a rule one can feel inequalities on the
surface of this kind of porcelain, whether due to the clumsiness of the
workmen, to the exigencies of light and shade in the painting, or to
the desire to conceal defects in the body of the ware.”
The tenor of these criticisms will not be endorsed by the modern
collector of K’ang Hsi porcelain. _Famille verte_ porcelain is
enthusiastically sought, and even indifferent specimens command a
high price, while the really choice examples can only be purchased
by the wealthy. As to the inequalities on the surface, the second of
the three reasons hazarded by d’Entrecolles is nearest the truth. The
enamels used by the Chinese porcelain painter contain a remarkably
small percentage of colouring oxide, and one of the characteristics
of _famille verte_ colours is their transparency. To obtain full
tones and the contrast between light and shade (even to the limited
extent to which the Chinese use this convention) it was necessary
to pile up the layers of colour at the risk of unduly thickening the
enamel. But the connoisseur of to-day finds nothing amiss in these
jewel-like incrustations of colour, so long as the enamels are pure and
bright, and have not scaled off or suffered too severely from the wear
to which their prominent surface is exposed.
It seems[314] that when the porcelain was destined to receive on-glaze
enamels (without any underglaze blue) a special glazing mixture was
used in which only one part of the softening element[315] was combined
with thirteen of the ordinary glazing fluid. This glaze was very white
and strong, and too opaque to do justice to an underglaze blue.
There is a reference in the first letter of Père d’Entrecolles to
a white colour which was used on the “porcelain painted in various
colours.” It was fluxed with lead like the other enamel colours, and
it was also used mixed with the latter to modify their tint. In fact
there can be little doubt that it was arsenical white, an opaque white
familiar on the Yung Chêng and Ch’ien Lung porcelains, and prominent in
the _famille rose_ palette, but not usually suspected of such an
early appearance as 1712, the date of the letter in question.
The designs of the _famille verte_ porcelain, like those on the blue
and white, are first traced in outline and then filled in with washes
of colour. The outlines are in a dry dull pigment of red or brown black
tint, inconspicuous in itself, but acquiring prominence when covered
with transparent enamel. M. Grandidier tried to formulate certain rules
for these outlines which, if reliable, would simplify greatly the task
of dating the porcelains. On Ming ware, he said, the outlines were
blue; on K’ang Hsi wares the face and body outlines were red, those of
the vestments and other objects black. Unfortunately the first of these
generalisations is wholly wrong, and the second pointless, because only
partly right.
Omitting the underglaze blue as foreign to this particular group of
_famille verte_ under discussion, the colours consist of dark leaf
green often of a mottled appearance, a beautiful light apple green,
which is characteristic of the K’ang Hsi wares just as the blue green
is of the sixteenth century polychrome, an aubergine colour (derived
from manganese) which varies from purple brown to rosy purple, a yellow
of varying purity and usually of brownish tone, a green black formed
of the brown black pigment under washes of transparent green, a blue
enamel of violet tone, and the thin iron red. The blue enamel and the
red are sometimes omitted, leaving a soft harmony of green, aubergine
and yellow in which green plays the chief part. A little gilding is
often used to heighten parts of the design.
As for the shapes of the _famille verte_ porcelain, they are
substantially the same as those of the blue and white and call for
no further comment. The designs, too, of the painted decoration are
clearly derived from the same sources as those in the blue and white,
viz. books of stock patterns, pictures, illustrations of history
and romance, and of such other subjects as happened to be specially
appropriate or of general interest.
To take a single instance of a pictorial design, the familiar rockery
and flowering plants (peony, magnolia, etc.) and a gay-plumaged
pheasant lends itself to effective treatment in enamel colours. It
is taken from a picture, probably Sung in origin, but there are many
repetitions of it in pictorial art, one of which by the Ming painter
Wang-yu is in the British Museum collection.[316] The original is said
to have been painted by the Emperor Hui Tsung in the beginning of the
twelfth century. Another familiar design--quails and millet--is reputed
to have been painted by the same Imperial artist.
A good instance of the kind of illustrated book which supplied the
porcelain decorator with designs is the _Yü chih kêng chih t’u_
(Album of Ploughing and Weaving, compiled by Imperial order),
which deals with the cultivation of rice and silk in some forty
illustrations. It was first issued in the reign of K’ang Hsi, and
there are copies of the original and of several later editions in the
British Museum. A specimen of _famille rose_ porcelain in the
Franks Collection is decorated with a scene from this work, and in the
Andrew Burman Collection there are two _famille verte_ dishes with
designs from the same source. In the Burdett Coutts Collection, again,
there is a polygonal bowl with subjects on each side representing
the various stages of cotton cultivation, evidently borrowed from an
analogous work.
[Illustration: PLATE 103
Club-shaped (_rouleau_) Vase finely painted in _famille
verte_ enamels with panel designs in a ground of chrysanthemum
scrolls in iron red; brocade borders. Last part of the K’ang Hsi
period (1662–1722)
Height 17 inches. _Salting Collection_ (_Victoria and
Albert Museum_).]
Signatures and seals of the artist usually attached to a stanza
of verse, or a few phrases which allude to the subject, are often
found in the field of the pictorial designs. Fig. 1 of Plate 102,
for instance, belongs to a series of beautiful dishes in the Dresden
collection, which display the same seal--apparently[317] _wan
shih chü_ (myriad rocks retreat), the studio name not, I think, of the
porcelain painter but of the artist whose picture was copied on the
porcelain. There are numerous examples of similar seals in the field
of the design, and we shall return to the subject later in a place
where important issues turn on the solution of the problem which it
raises.[318]
The types of _famille verte_ porcelain are extremely numerous, almost
as varied as those of the blue and white (p. 136). Like the latter they
include much that was obviously made for European consumption, and most
of the groups which were singled out from the mass of blue and white
for special description can be paralleled in the _famille verte_. The
thin, crisp, moulded ware with petal-shaped panels and lobed borders,
the group with the “G” mark, and many other types are found with the
same peculiarities of paste and glaze, and even the same design painted
in on-glaze enamels. As in the case of the blue and white, the quality
of this export ware varies widely, and the individual specimens will
be judged by the drawing of the designs and the purity and fire of the
enamels.
A few of the more striking types are illustrated on Plates 103 and 104.
Perhaps the most sumptuous effects of this colour scheme are displayed
in the vases decorated with panel designs surrounded by rich diapers
borrowed from silk brocades. A favourite brocade pattern consists of
single blossoms or floral sprays woven into a ground of transparent
green covering a powder of small brown dots. This dotted green ground
is commonly known as “frog’s spawn,” and another diaper of small
circles under a similar green enamel is easily recognised under the
name of “fish roe.” But the variety of these ground patterns is great,
and in spite of their prosaic nomenclature they render in a singularly
effective manner the soft splendour of the Chinese brocades.
In dating the _famille verte_ porcelains the collector will find
his study of the blue and white of great assistance. There is, for
instance, the well-known type of export ware--sets of vases with
complex moulding, and dishes and plates, etc., with petal-shaped lobes
on the sides or borders. The central design of the decoration commonly
consists of _ch’i lin_, and phœnix, sea monsters (_hai shou_), storks
or ducks beside a flowering tree or some such familiar pattern; and
the surrounding petal-shaped panels are filled each with a growing
flower, or a vignette of bird and plant, plant and insect, or even a
small landscape. These bright but often perfunctorily painted wares
are paralleled in the early K’ang Hsi blue and white. They are among
the first Chinese polychrome porcelains to be copied by the European
potters. See Plate 107.
In the purely native wares the early Ch’ing _famille verte_ is
distinguished by strong and rather emphatic colouring, the energy
of the drawing and the breadth of design which recall the late Ming
polychromes. The zenith of this style of decoration was reached about
1700, say between 1682 and 1710. This is the period of the magnificent
vases with panel designs in brocaded grounds, or with crowded figure
subjects, Court scenes, and the like, filling large areas of the
surface, such vases as may be seen in the splendid series of the
Salting Collection or in the Grandidier Collection in the Louvre. They
are probably children of the great renaissance which began under the
auspices of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan. Dated examples are extremely rare, and
consequently the square vase on Plate 104 assumes unusual importance on
account of the cyclical date which occurs in the long inscription, “the
29th day of the 9th moon of the _kuei mo_ year,” which we can hardly
doubt is 1703. Incidentally another side of this vase illustrates the
celebrated scene of the wine cups started from the “orchid arbour to
float down the nine-bend river.”[319]
Another example with a cyclical date (the year _hsin mao_, and no
doubt 1711) is a globular water bottle “of the highest quality and
technique, decorated with transparent luminous enamels of great beauty
and delicacy,” in the Pierpont Morgan Collection.[320] But in this case
the date is attached to a verse in the field of the decoration, and it
may belong to the design rather than to the porcelain.
[Illustration: Plate 104.--Three Examples of K’ang Hsi _famille
verte_ Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Square Vase with scene of floating cups on the river;
inscription with cyclical date 1703 A.D.; _shou_ characters
on the neck. Height 18⅜ inches. _Hippisley Collection._
Fig. 2.--Lantern with river scenes. Height 13¾ inches. _Dresden
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Covered Jar of _rouleau_ shape, peony scrolls in
iron red ground, brocade borders. Height 22 inches. _Dresden
Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 105.--Covered Jar painted in _famille
verte_ enamels
With brocade ground and panel with an elephant (the symbol of
Great Peace). Lion on cover. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722). Height
21¼ inches. _Dresden Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 106.--K’ang Hsi _famille verte_
Porcelain. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 1.--Dish with rockery, peonies, etc., birds and insects.
Diameter 16¼ inches.
Fig. 2.--“Stem Cup” with vine pattern. Height 5¾ inches.]
[Illustration: Plate 107.--_Famille verte_ Porcelain made
for export to Europe. K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722). _British
Museum._
Fig. 1.--Vase with “sea monster” (_hai shou_).
Fig. 2.--Dish with basket of flowers. Mark, a leaf. Diameter 11
inches.
Fig. 3.--Covered Jar with _ch’i-lin_ and _fêng-huang_
(phœnix).]
The lateness of this latter date and the use of the word “delicacy”
in the description of the piece lead us naturally to that peculiarly
refined type of late _famille verte_ in which the ware is of eggshell
thinness, the painting extremely dainty and delicate, and the
colours rather pale but of perfect purity. Such are the well-known
“birthday plates” with the reign mark of K’ang Hsi on the back and the
birthday salutation in seal characters on the border: _wan shou wu
chiang_--“a myriad longevities without ending!” They are reputed to
have been made for the Emperor’s sixtieth birthday which fell in the
year 1713, but the story is supported by no evidence of any kind, and
they would have been equally appropriate for any Imperial birthday. The
character of these wares is more suggestive of the Yung Chêng period,
and it is probable that they belong to the extreme limit of the long
reign of K’ang Hsi. To this period then we shall assign these and the
whole group of kindred porcelains, the plates with designs similar
to those of the “birthday plates,” but without the inscribed border,
the small eggshell plates with one or two figures painted in the same
delicate style, others with a single spray of some flowering shrub
almost Japanese in its daintiness, and occasional bowls and vases with
decoration of the same character. See Plate 113.
For extreme delicacy of treatment is by no means a feature of the K’ang
Hsi _famille verte_ in general, in which the Ming spirit with its
boldness and vigour still breathed. It is rather a late development in
the decadence of the ware, heralding the more effeminate beauty of the
_famille rose_, and were it not for the evidence of the birthday plates
I believe many connoisseurs would be tempted to ascribe these delicate
porcelains to a much later reign.
Such, however, is the evolution of the _famille verte_ during the sixty
years of the K’ang Hsi period, from the strong colours and forceful
Ming-like designs of the earlier specimens to the mature perfection
of the splendid wares made about 1700, and thence by a process of
ultra-refinement to the later types in which breadth of treatment gives
place to prettiness and the strong thick enamels to thinner washes of
clear, delicate tints. These thin transparent colours continued in use;
indeed, they are a feature of a special type of enamelling which will
be discussed with the Yung Chêng wares; but the pure _famille verte_
may be said to have come to an end with the last years of the reign
of K’ang Hsi. Later reproductions of course exist, for no style of
decoration is ever wholly extinct in Chinese art, but they are merely
revivals of an old style, which even before the end of the K’ang Hsi
period had reached the stage of transition to another family. The
opaque enamels of the _famille rose_ palette had already begun to
assert themselves. Timid intruders at first--a touch of opaque pink,
a little opaque yellow and arsenical white breaking in upon the old
harmony of transparent tints--they gradually thrust the _famille verte_
enamels into a subsidiary position, and in the succeeding reigns rose
pinks entirely dominate the field.
A word must be said of the use of the _famille verte_ painting in
combination with other types of decoration, in the subordinate position
of border patterns or more prominently in panel designs. Exquisite
effects are obtained by the latter in a ground of coral red, or
where a brilliant powder blue field is broken by shapely panels with
flowering plants and birds and other familiar vehicles for _famille
verte_ colouring. Occasionally we find the enamels actually painted
over a powder blue or an ordinary blue glaze, but the combination
is more peculiar than attractive; for the underlying colour kills
the transparent enamels, and the enamels destroy the lustre of the
blue ground. Indeed, it is probable that in many cases these freak
decorations were intended to hide a faulty background.
A similar painting over the crackled green _lang yao_ glaze has already
been described, and it occurs over the grey white crackles, and rarely
but with much distinction, over a pale celadon glaze. But perhaps
the most effective combination of this kind is that in which a pale
lustrous brown or Nanking yellow is the ground colour. The quiet and
refined effects of this union are well exhibited by a small group of
vases, bowls, and dishes in the Salting Collection.
Something has already been said of the use of underglaze blue in
combination with _famille verte_ enamels. The blue is either an
integral part of the general design as in the Wan Li “five colour”
scheme, or it forms a distinct decoration by itself, apart from the
enamels, though sharing the same surface. The latter use is exemplified
by a pair of bottles in the Salting Collection which have blue patterns
on the neck and _famille verte_ decoration on the body, consisting
of landscape panels surrounded by brocade patterns.[321] But the great
drawback to this union of underglaze and overglaze colours is usually
apparent. The blue was liable to suffer in the subsequent firings
necessitated by the enamels, even though those firings took place at
a relatively low temperature. Probably the potter would not expose
his finest blue to such risks, but at any rate the blue of this mixed
decoration is rarely of first-rate quality.
[Illustration: PLATE 108
Dish painted in underglaze blue and _famille verte_ enamels.
In the centre, a five-clawed dragon rising from waves in pursuit
of a pearl. Deep border in “Imari” style with cloud-shaped
compartments with chrysanthemum and prunus designs in a blue
ground, separated by close lotus scrolls reserved in an iron
red ground in which are three book symbols. K’ang Hsi period
(1662–1722)
Diameter 19½ inches. _Alexander Collection._]
There is one group of porcelain which combines the underglaze blue
with on-glaze enamels, and which deserves special notice if only
because it has been recently favoured with particular attention by
collectors. This is what we are pleased to call “Chinese Imari.”
Our ceramic nomenclature has never been noted for its accuracy, and
like good conservatives we hold firmly to the old names which have
been handed down from days when geography was not studied, and from
ancestors who were satisfied with old Indian china, or Gombroon ware,
as names for Chinese porcelain. So Meissen porcelain is still Dresden,
the blue and white of Ching-tê Chên is Old Nanking, Chinese export
porcelain painted at Canton with pink roses is Lowestoft, and the ware
made at Arita, province of Hizen, in Japan, is Imari, because that is
the name of the seaport from which it was shipped. In fact, there are
many shops where you cannot make yourself understood in these matters
unless you call the wares by the wrong name.
The Arita porcelain in question, this so-called Imari, was made from
the middle of the seventeenth century onwards, and it must have
competed seriously with the export wares of Ching-tê Chên. At any
rate, it was brought to Europe in large consignments by the Dutch
traders, who enjoyed the privilege of a trading station on the island
of Deshima, after the less politic Portuguese had been driven out of
Nagasaki in 1632. For the moment we are specially concerned with two
types of Arita ware. The first is distinguished by slight but artistic
decoration in vivid enamels of the _famille verte_, supplemented
by gilding and occasionally by underglaze blue. Favourite designs are
a banded hedge, prunus tree, a Chinese boy and a tiger or phœnix; two
quails in millet beside a flowering prunus; simple flowering sprays
or branches coiled in circular medallions; or only a few scattered
blossoms. Whatever the nature of the design, it was artistically
displayed, and in such a manner as to enhance without concealing
the fine white porcelain. This is what the old catalogues call the
_première qualité coloriée de Japon_, and a very popular ware it
was in eighteenth century Europe, when it was closely copied on the
early productions of the St. Cloud, Chantilly, Meissen, Chelsea, and
other porcelain factories. To-day it is commonly known as Kakiemon
ware, because its very distinctive style of decoration is traditionally
supposed to have been started by a potter named Kakiemon, who, with
another man of Arita, learned the secret of enamelling on porcelain
from a Chinese merchant about the year 1646.
The second type was made entirely for the European trade, and it
is distinguished by large masses of dark, cloudy blue set off by
a soft Indian red (derived from oxide of iron) and gilding. These
colours are supplemented by touches of green, yellow, and aubergine
enamels, and occasionally by a brownish black. The ware itself is
heavy, coarse and greyish, but its rough aspect is well concealed by
irregular and confused designs of asymmetrical panels surrounded by
mixed brocade patterns. The panels often contain Chinese figures,
phœnixes, lions, floral designs of chrysanthemums, peony and prunus,
a basket of flowers, rough landscapes or garden views. They are
medleys of half-Chinese, half-Japanese motives, a riot of incoherent
patterns, but not without broad decorative effect thanks to the bold
masses of red, blue and gold. Such is the typical “Old Imari.” There
is, however, a finer and more Japanese variety of the same group
which is distinguished by free use of the chrysanthemum rosette, and
the Imperial kiri (paulonia imperialis), and by panels of diaper
pattern and floral designs alternating and counter-changed in colour,
the grounds now red, now blue, and now gold. The same colour scheme
prevailed in this sub-group, and the dark blue was usually netted over
with gold designs.
It was no doubt the success which these wares met in European commerce
that induced the Chinese to take a lesson from their pupils, and to
adopt the “Imari” style. At any rate, they did copy all these types,
sometimes very closely, sometimes only in part. Thus in some cases the
actual Japanese patterns as well as the colour scheme are carefully
reproduced, in others the Japanese colour scheme is employed on Chinese
patterns or vice versa, and, again, there are cases in which passages
of Japanese ornament are inserted in purely Chinese surroundings. But
whether pure or diluted the Japanese style is unmistakable to those who
have once learnt to know its peculiarities, of which masses of blue
covered with gilt patterns and the prominence of red and gold are the
most conspicuous.
There will, of course, always be a few specimens the nationality of
which will be difficult to decide, but to anyone familiar with Chinese
and Japanese porcelain the distinction between the Chinese “Imari”
and its island prototype is, as a rule, a simple matter. The Chinese
porcelain is thinner and crisper, its glaze has the smooth oily sheen
and faintly greenish tint which are peculiar to Chinese wares, and the
raw edge of the base rim is slightly browned. The Japanese porcelain,
on the other hand, is whiter in the Kakiemon ware, greyer and coarser
in the “Old Imari,” and the glaze in both cases has the peculiar
bubbled and “muslin-like” texture which is a Japanese characteristic.
The Japanese underglaze blue is dark and muddy in tone, the Chinese
bright, and purer, and the other colours differ, though not perhaps so
emphatically. The iron red of the Chinese, for instance, is thinner and
usually lighter in tone than the soft Indian red or thick sealing-wax
colour of the Japanese; and to those who are deeply versed in Oriental
art there is always the more subtle and less definable distinction, the
difference between the Chinese and Japanese touch and feeling.
Plate 108 is a fine specimen which shows the blend of Chinese motives
and the Japanese colouring.
The general character of the Chinese “Imari” is that of the K’ang Hsi
period, to which most of the existing specimens will be assigned; but
it is clear that the Chinese continued to use Japanese models in the
succeeding reign, for the last three items in the Imperial list of
porcelain made in the Yung Chêng period comprise wares “decorated in
gold and in silver in the style of the Japanese.”[322]
CHAPTER XI
K’ANG HSI MONOCHROMES
In passing to the K’ang Hsi monochromes we enter a large field with
boundaries ill defined. Many of the colours are legacies from the
Ming potters, and most of them were handed on to after generations;
some indeed have enjoyed an unbroken descent to the present day.
Consequently there are few things more difficult in the study of
Chinese porcelain than the dating of single-colour wares.
In some cases the origin of a particular glaze has been recorded, and
within certain limits the style of the piece will guide us in assessing
its age; but how often must we be content with some such non-committal
phrase as “early eighteenth century,” which embraces the late K’ang
Hsi, the Yung Chêng and the early Ch’ien Lung periods? On the other
hand, the careful student observes certain points of style and finish,
certain slight peculiarities of form which are distinctive of the
different periods, and on these indefinite signs he is able to classify
the doubtful specimens. To the inexpert his methods may seem arbitrary
and mysterious, but his principles, though not easy to enunciate, are
sound nevertheless.
[Illustration: Plate 109.--Figure of Shou Lao, Taoist God of
Longevity.
Porcelain painted with _famille verte_ enamels. K’ang Hsi
period (1662–1722). Height 17¼ inches. _Salting Collection_
(_V. & A. Museum_).]
We have already had occasion to discuss a few of the K’ang Hsi
monochromes in dealing with the question of _lang yao_. But besides
the _sang de bœuf_ there is another rare and costly red to which the
Americans have given the expressive name of “peach bloom.” Since their
first acquaintance with this colour in the last half of the nineteenth
century,[323] American collectors have been enamoured of it, and as
they have never hesitated to pay vast sums for good specimens, most
of the fine “peach blooms” have found their way to the United States,
and choice examples are rare in England. “The prevailing shade,” to
quote from Bushell’s description, “is a pale red, becoming pink
in some parts, in others mottled with russet spots, displayed upon a
background of light green celadon tint. The last colour occasionally
comes out more prominently, and deepens into clouds of bright apple
green tint.” The Chinese, in comparing the colour, have thought of the
apple rather than the peach; it is _p’in-kuo hung_ (apple red), and
the markings on it are _p’in-kuo ch’ing_ (apple green), and _mei kuei
tzŭ_ (rose crimson). Another Chinese name for the colour is _chiang-tou
hung_ (bean red), in allusion to the small Chinese kidney-bean with its
variegated pink colour and brown spots.
It is generally supposed that, like the _sang de bœuf_, the “peach
bloom” owes its hue to copper oxide, and that all the accessory tints,
the russet brown and apple green, are due to happy accidents befalling
the same colouring medium in the changeful atmosphere of the kiln.[324]
This precious glaze is usually found on small objects such as water
pots and brush washers for the writing table (see Plate 111[325]),
and snuff bottles, and a few small elegantly formed flower vases of
bottle shape, with high shoulders and slender neck, the body sometimes
moulded in chrysanthemum petal design, or, again, on vases of slender,
graceful, ovoid form, with bodies tapering downwards, and the mouth
rim slightly flaring. In every case the bottom of the vessel shows a
fine white-glazed porcelain with unctuous paste, and the K’ang Hsi
mark in six blue characters written in a delicate but very mannered
calligraphy, which seems to be peculiar to this type of ware, and to a
few choice _clair de lune_ and celadon vases of similar form and make.
The colour in the peach bloom glaze, as in the _sang de bœuf_, is
sometimes fired out and fades into white or leaves a pale olive green
surface with only a few spots of brown or pink to bear witness to the
original intention of the potter. The glaze is sometimes crackled and
occasionally it runs down in a thick crystalline mass at the base of
the vessel.
Needless to say this costly porcelain has claimed the earnest attention
of the modern imitator. The first real success was achieved by a
Japanese potter at the end of the last century. He was able to make
admirable copies of the colour, but failed to reproduce adequately the
paste and glaze of the originals. I am told that he was persuaded to
transfer his secret to China, and with the Chinese body his imitations
were completely successful. The latter part of the story is based
on hearsay, and is given as such; but it is certain that there are
exceedingly clever modern copies of the old peach blooms in the market;
otherwise how could an inexpert collector in China bring home half a
dozen peach blooms bought at bargain prices?
The copper red used in painting underglaze designs[326] will sometimes
develop a peach bloom colour, and there is a vase in the British Museum
with parti-coloured glaze in large patches of blue, celadon, and a
copper red which has broken into the characteristic tints of the peach
bloom vases.
Another red of copper origin allied to the _sang de bœuf_ and the
peach bloom, and at times verging on both, is the maroon red, which
ranges from crimson to a deep liver colour. There are wine cups of this
colour whose glaze clouded with deep crimson recalls the “dawn red”
of the wine cups made by Hao Shih-chiu.[327] Sometimes the red covers
part only of the surface, shading off into the white glaze. The finer
specimens have either a crimson or a pinkish tinge, but far more often
the glaze has issued from the kiln with a dull liver tint.
Naturally the value of the specimens varies widely with the beauty of
the colour. The pinker shades approach within measurable distance of
the pink of the peach bloom, and they are often classed with the latter
by their proud owners; but the colour is usually uniform, and lacks the
bursts of russet brown and green which variegate the true peach bloom,
and the basis of the maroon is a pure white glaze without the celadon
tints which seem to underlie the peach bloom. It may be added that the
maroon red glaze is usually uncrackled.
As to the overglaze red, which is known by the names of _mo hung_
(painted red) and _ts’ai hung_ (enamel red), it is the colour
derived from iron, and it was used both as one of the enamels of the
_famille verte_ palette and as a monochrome. In both capacities it
figured on Ming porcelain, and was fully discussed in that connection.
On K’ang Hsi wares it varied in tone from dark brick red to a light
orange, according to the density of the pigment, and in texture from
a thin dry film to a lustrous enamel, according to the quantity of
fluxing material[328] combined with it. Among the richly fluxed
varieties is a fine tomato colour of light, translucent tone. Sometimes
the iron red is found as sole medium for painted designs, as on a
rouleau vase in the Salting collection, but more commonly it serves as
a ground colour between panels of enamelled ornament (Plate 103), or in
border passages. In these last two positions it is usually of a light
orange shade, and broken by floral scrolls reserved in white. A dark
shade of the same pigment is also used in diapers of curled scrolls,
forming a groundwork for enamelled decoration. There are besides
beautiful examples of a pure red monochrome formed of this colour, but
I have only met with these among the later wares.
* * * * *
The blue monochromes include a large number of glazes varying in depth
and shade with the quality and quantity of the cobalt which is mingled
with the glazing material. These are _chiao ch’ing_ (blue monochrome
glazes), and they are all high-fired colours. They include the _chi
ch’ing_[329] or deep sky blue, whose darker shades are also named
_ta ch’ing_ (_gros bleu_), the slaty blue, the pale clear blue,[330]
the dark and light lavender shades, and the faintly tinted _clair de
lune_ or “moon white” (_yüeh pai_), in which the amount of cobalt used
must have been infinitesimal. But it would be useless to attempt to
catalogue the innumerable shades of blue, which must have varied with
every fresh mixture of colour and glaze and every fresh firing.
There is, however, another group materially different from the
ordinary blue glazes. In this the colour was applied direct to
the body, as in blue and white painting, and a colourless glaze
subsequently added, with the natural result that the blue seems to be
incorporated with the body of the ware rather than with the glaze.
There were several ways of applying the colour, each producing a
slightly different effect. The cobalt powder could be mixed with water,
and washed on smoothly with a brush, or dabbed on with a sponge to give
a marbled appearance, or it could be projected on to the moistened
surface in a dry powder, through gauze stretched across the end of a
bamboo tube.
The result of the last process was an infinity of minute specks of
blue, a massing of innumerable points of colour. This is the well-known
“powder blue,” the _bleu soufflé_, or blown blue described by Père
d’Entrecolles in his second letter[331]: “As for the _soufflé_ blue
called _tsoui tsim_ (_ch’ui ch’ing_), the finest blue, prepared in
the manner which I have described, is used. This is blown on to the
vase, and when it is dry the ordinary glaze is applied either alone or
mixed with _tsoui yeou_ (_sui yu_), if crackle[332] is required.” We
are further told that as on the blue and white a glaze softened with a
considerable proportion of lime was necessary for the perfection of the
colour.
The “powder blue” seems to have been a new invention in the K’ang Hsi
period. Under the name of _ch’ui ch’ing_ (blown blue) it figures in the
_T’ao lu_[333] among the triumphs of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan’s directorate.
It is certainly a singularly beautiful colour effect, and worthy of the
homage it has received from collectors and ceramic historians. Though
the blue used was as a rule of the finest quality, it varied much in
intensity and tone with the nature of the cobalt and amount applied.
Probably the majority of collectors would give the palm to the darker
shades, but tastes differ, and the lighter tones when the blue is pure
sapphire have found whole-hearted admirers. A notable feature of the
powder blue is its surprising brilliancy in artificial light, when most
other porcelain colours suffer eclipse.
[Illustration: PLATE 110
Two examples of “Powder Blue” (_ch’ui ch’ing_) Porcelain
of the K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722), in the Victoria and Albert
Museum
Fig. 1.--Bottle of gourd shape with slender neck: powder blue
ground with gilt designs from the Hundred Antiques (_po ku_)
and borders of _ju-i_ pattern, formal flowers and plantain
leaves. Height 7½ inches.
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase with _famille verte_ panels of
rockwork and flowers reserved in a powder blue ground. Height 7
inches. _Salting Collection._]
It was used indifferently as a simple monochrome or as a ground
in which panel decoration was reserved, the panels painted in
_famille_ _verte_ enamels or in blue and white; and in both cases
the blue surface was usually embellished with light traceries in gold.
Plate 110 illustrates both types. Both are highly prized by collectors,
and change hands at high prices when of the good quality which is usual
on the K’ang Hsi specimens. We have already noted[334] the occasional
decoration of the powder blue ground with designs in _famille verte_
enamels, and Père d’Entrecolles[335] records another process of
ornamentation which was applied to all the blue grounds of this group,
viz. the washed, the sponged, and the powder blues: “There are workmen
who trace designs with the point of a long needle on this blue whether
_soufflé_ or otherwise; the needle removes as many little specks of
dry blue as are necessary to form the design; then the glaze is put
on.” From this precise description it is easy to recognise this simple
but effective decoration. There are two examples in the British Museum
with dragon designs etched in this fashion, the one in a washed blue,
and the other in a sponged blue ground. The pattern appears in white
outline where the blue has been removed by the needle and the porcelain
body exposed.
Long usage has given sanction to the term “mazarine blue.” It was
applied to the dark blue ground colour of eighteenth century English
porcelain, and in the contemporary catalogues the name “mazareen” was
given to any kind of deep blue from the mottled violet of Chelsea to
the powdery _gros bleu_ of Worcester. In reference to Chinese porcelain
it is used to-day with similar freedom for the _ta ch’ing_ or dark sky
blue and for the powder blue. Assuming that the phrase derives from the
famous Cardinal Mazarin, it cannot in its original sense have had any
reference to powder blue, for the Cardinal died in 1661, and, if he
had a weakness for blue monochrome, it must have been for some variety
of the _chiao ch’ing_ or blue glazes proper which were current at the
end of the Ming and the beginning of the Ch’ing dynasties. At the
present day it is impossible to guess the true shade of mazarine blue,
and we must be content to regard it as a phrase connoting a deep blue
monochrome the exact definition of which has gone beyond recall.[336]
The K’ang Hsi mark is sometimes found on porcelain coated with a very
dark purplish blue glaze with soft looking surface and minute crackle.
It is apparently one of those glazes which are fired in the temperate
parts of the kiln, and its use is more frequent on porcelains of a
slightly later period.
Finally, the turquoise blue, variously named _fei ts’ui_ (kingfisher
blue) and _k’ung ch’iao lü_ (peacock green), was freely used as a
monochrome on figures and ornamental wares. It is a colour which
descends from Ming times, and whose use has continued unchecked to the
present day, so that it is often extremely difficult to give a precise
date to any particular specimen, especially if the object happens to be
of archaic form, a copy of an old bronze or the like. Its nature has
already been discussed[337] among the Ming glazes, and one can only
say that the K’ang Hsi pieces have all the virtues of the K’ang Hsi
manufacture--fine material, good potting, shapely form, and beautiful
quality of colour. The tint varies widely from the soft turquoise blue
of kingfisher feathers to a deep turquoise green, and some of the most
attractive specimens are mottled or spotted with patches of greenish
black. The glaze is always minutely crackled, and has sufficient
transparency to allow engraved or carved designs on the body to be
visible. It is a colour which develops well on an earthen body, and the
potters often mixed coarse clay with the ware which was intended to
receive the turquoise glaze; but this, I think, was mainly practised
after the K’ang Hsi period, and the K’ang Hsi specimens will, as a
rule, be found to have a pure white porcelain basis.
As in the Ming wares, the turquoise sometimes shares the field
with an aubergine purple of violet tone, both colours being of the
_demi-grand feu_. The purple is also used as a monochrome. There
are, in fact, two aubergine purple monochromes, the one a thick and
relatively opaque colour sometimes full of minute points as though it
had been blown on like the powder blue, the other a thin transparent
(and often iridescent) glaze of browner tone. Both are derived from
cobaltiferous ore of manganese, both have descended from the Ming
period, and have already been discussed as monochromes and as colours
applied to the biscuit.
[Illustration: PLATE 111
Two examples of Single-colour Porcelain in the Salting Collection
(Victoria and Albert Museum)
Fig. 1.--Bottle-shaped Vase of Porcelain with landscape design
lightly engraved in relief under a turquoise blue glaze. Early
eighteenth century. Height 8½ inches.
Fig. 2.--Water Vessel for the Writing Table of the form known as
_T’ai-po tsun_ after the poet Li T’ai-po. Porcelain with
faintly engraved dragon medallions under a peach bloom glaze; the
neck cut down and fitted with a metal collar. Mark in blue of the
K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722) in six characters. Height 2¾ inches.]
The cobaltiferous ore of manganese is the same material which is used
to give a blue colour, but in this case the manganese is removed, and
the cobalt rendered as pure as possible. For the manganese if in excess
produces a purplish brown, and its presence in however small a
quantity gives the blue a purple or violet strain. By the simple method
of graduating the amount of manganese which was allowed to remain with
the cobalt the potters were able to obtain many intermediate shades
between dark blue and purple for their monochrome glazes.
The green monochromes are scarcely less numerous than the blue. There
are the transparent greens of apple or leaf green shades whether even
or mottled, which have been described among the glazes applied to the
biscuit and among the enamels of the _famille verte_. These were used
as monochromes and ground colours; and closely akin to them are (1)
the cucumber green (_kua p’i lü_), in which a yellowish leaf green is
heavily mottled with darker tints, and (2) the snake skin green (_shê
p’i lü_), a deep transparent green with iridescent surface, one of the
colours for which the directorate of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan was celebrated.
There are good examples of both in the Salting Collection, but it would
be useless to reproduce them except in colour.
There are the apple and emerald green crackles (in both cases a
green glaze overlying a grey or stone-coloured crackle), but these
have already been discussed.[338] A somewhat similar technique
characterises the series of semi-opaque and crackled green glazes of
camelia leaf, myrtle, spinach, light and dark sage, dull emerald and
several intermediate tints. These are soft-looking glazes with small
but very regular crackle,[339] and their surface often has a “satiny”
sheen which recalls the Yi-hsing glazes. They are evidently glazes
of the _demi-grand feu_, and the colouring agent is doubtless
copper, though apparently modified with other ingredients. How far this
particular group was used in the K’ang Hsi period is hard to say. Most
of the specimens which I have seen give me the impression of a later
make, but as there are a few which might come within the K’ang Hsi
limits I have taken this opportunity to discuss them.
There is one specimen of a rare green in the British Museum to which I
cannot recall a parallel. It is a bowl with the ordinary white glaze,
but covered on the exterior with a very bright yellowish green, like
the young grass with the sun shining on it. It is, perhaps, rather in
the nature of an enamel than a glaze, but the ware has the appearance
of age and should belong to the early part of the K’ang Hsi period.
Most of the green glazes are low fired, melting in the temperature
of the _demi-grand feu_ and the muffle kiln. The high-fired greens
are those of celadon class. There is the _lang yao_[340] green, which
has been discussed under that heading, a crackled glaze, in colour
intermediate between apple green and the sea green celadon, and with a
surface texture hazy with bubbles like the _sang de bœuf_, to which it
is a near relation. This soft and beautiful colour has been described
as a “copper celadon,” and though Dr. Bushell refuses his blessing on
the name it seems to me a particularly happy expression. For the colour
apparently results from the same copper medium which under slightly
different firing conditions produces the _sang de bœuf_ red and at the
same time its tint approaches very nearly to the typical celadon green.
The true celadon glaze was freely employed on the early Ch’ing
porcelains, especially on those of K’ang Hsi and Yung Chêng periods.
It is a beautiful pale olive or sea green colour, made light by the
pure white porcelain beneath which its transparent nature permits to
shine through. Compared with the Sung celadons as we know them,[341]
the Ch’ing dynasty ware is thinner in material and glaze, wanting in
the peculiar solidity of appearance of the ancient wares; the body
is whiter and finer, and the base is usually white with the ordinary
porcelain glaze. There is, moreover, no “brown mouth and iron foot,”
unless indeed this feature has been deliberately added by means of a
dressing of ferruginous clay, a make-up which is too obvious to deceive
the initiated. There were, however, some careful imitations of the
ancient celadons made at this time and got up with the appearance of
antiquity, but these were exceptional productions.[342]
Père d’Entrecolles, writing in 1722, alludes to the K’ang Hsi celadon
in the following terms[343]:--“I was shown this year for the first
time a kind of porcelain which is now in fashion; its colour verges
on olive and they call it _long tsiven_. I saw some which was called
_tsim ko_ (_ch’ing kuo_), the name of a fruit which closely resembles
the olive.” The _long tsiven_ is clearly a transliteration of the
characters which we write _Lung-ch’üan_, the generic name of the old
celadons; but it is odd that Père d’Entrecolles should not have seen
copies of this glaze before 1722, for its use must have been continuous
at Ching-tê Chên from very early times, and we have found reference to
it in various periods of the Ming dynasty. It is evident, however, that
the colour was enjoying a fresh burst of popularity just at this time.
D’Entrecolles gives a few further notes which concern its composition.
His recipe is substantially the same as that given in Chinese works,
viz. a mixture of ferruginous earth, which would contribute a
percentage of iron oxide, with the ordinary glaze.[344] He also states
that _sui yu_ (crackle glaze) was added if a crackled surface was
required, and there are numerous examples of this kind of ware to be
seen. The most familiar are the vases with crackled celadon or grey
green glaze interrupted by bands of biscuit carved with formal patterns
and stained to an iron colour with a dressing of ferruginous earth.
Monster heads with rings (loose or otherwise) serve as twin handles on
these vases, which are designed after bronze models. These crackled
celadons are evidently fashioned after an old model, but they have
been largely imitated in modern times, and almost every pawnbroker’s
window displays a set of execrable copies (often further decorated in
underglaze blue) which are invariably furnished with the Ch’êng Hua
mark incised on a square brown panel under the base.
The yellow monochromes of the K’ang Hsi period are mostly descendants
of the Ming yellows. There is the pale yellow applied over a white
glaze reproducing the yellow of “husked chestnuts,” for which the Hung
Chih (q.v.) porcelains were celebrated; and there is a fuller yellow,
usually of browner shade, applied direct to the biscuit. Yellow is
one of the Imperial colours, the usual tint being a full deep colour
like the yolk of a hen’s egg, and the Imperial wares are commonly
distinguished by five-clawed dragons engraved under the glaze. Other
glazes[345] used on the services made for the Emperor are the purplish
brown (aubergine) and the bright green of camelia leaf tint, which
with the yellow make up the _san ts’ai_ or three colours. In fact
the precise shades of these colours are those used on finer types
of three-colour porcelain[346] with transparent glazes fired in the
temperate part of the great kiln. All these glazes tend to become
iridescent with age.
The colouring medium of the pale yellow is antimony combined with
a proportion of lead, and iron oxide is added to give the glaze an
orange or brown tinge.[347] It is noticeable that the yellow applied
to the biscuit is usually browner in tone. This is the nature, if we
may judge from the excellent coloured illustrations in the Walters
catalogue,[348] of the eel yellow (_shan yü huang_), a brownish colour
of clouded smoky appearance, and one of the few glazes named in the
_T’ao lu_ as a speciality of the directorate of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan.
The other yellow associated with the name of Ts’ang is the “spotted
yellow” (_huang pan t’ien_), discussed on p. 127. Its identification
is uncertain, and Brinkley describes it as “stoneware with a dark
olive green glaze with yellow speckles,” while Bushell (_O. C. A._, p.
317) regards it as a “tiger skin” glaze with large patches of yellow
and green enamel, the same as the _huang lü tien_ (yellow and green
spotted), which he quotes from another context.
All these varieties belong to the _couleurs de demi-grand feu_; but
there are besides several varieties of yellow enamels fired in the
muffle kiln. Of these the transparent yellow was used as a ground
colour in the K’ang Hsi period, but the opaque varieties, such as the
lemon yellow, etc., belong rather to a later period. Among the latter I
should include the crackled mustard yellow, though examples of it have
often been assigned to the K’ang Hsi and even earlier reigns. There is,
for instance, a bottle-shaped vase with two elephant handles in the
Victoria and Albert Museum, which Bushell[349] regarded as a specimen
of the old _mi-sê_ (“millet colour”) glaze of the Sung dynasty. A
careful examination shows that this crackled brownish yellow is made in
much the same fashion as the apple green and the sage green crackles,
viz. a yellow glaze or enamel overlying a stone-coloured crackle. This
is not a Sung technique, but rather an imitative method belonging
perhaps to the Yung Chêng period, when old glazes and archaic shapes
were reproduced with wonderful skill and truth.
There is a solitary specimen of a high-fired glaze of pale buff yellow
colour in the British Museum, which perhaps should be ranked with the
yellow monochromes, though its appearance suggests an exceptional
effect of the pale _tzŭ chin_ or “Nanking yellow” glaze. And a
rare vase in the Peters Collection has a minutely crackled brownish
yellow glaze clouded with dark olive in bold markings like those of
tortoiseshell.
Another Ming monochrome freely used in the K’ang Hsi period is the
lustrous brown (_tzŭ chin_), formed like the celadon by mixing
ferruginous earth called _tzŭ chin shih_ with the ordinary glaze.
Presumably the quantity of this material was greater in the brown glaze
than in the celadon. Père d’Entrecolles describes this glaze in its
diverse shades of bronze, coffee and dead-leaf brown, but he makes the
curious error of proclaiming it a new invention in 1722.[350] He also
refers to its use on the exterior of white cups and as a ground colour
in which white panels were reserved. “On a cup or vase,” he tells us,
“which one wished to glaze with brown, a round or square of damped
paper was applied in one or two places; after the glaze had been laid
on, the paper was peeled off, and the unglazed space was painted in
red or blue. This dry, the usual glaze was applied to the reserve by
blowing or by some other method. Some of the potters fill the blank
spaces with a ground of blue or black, with a view to adding gilt
designs after the first firing.”
There were other methods of decorating these panels, and perhaps
the most familiar is that in which the early _famille rose_
enamels were employed. This combination of brown ground with panels
of floral designs in thick opaque rose red, yellow, white and green
was a favourite with the Dutch exporters. In fact this ware is still
called Batavian, the old catalogue name derived from the Dutch East
Indian settlement of Batavia, which was an entrepot for far-Eastern
merchandise. The date of the Batavian porcelain is clearly indicated by
the transition enamels as late K’ang Hsi.
The _tzŭ chin_ brown was used as a monochrome in all its various shades
from dark coffee colour to pale golden brown, and the lighter and more
transparent shades were sometimes laid over engraved decoration. In
the British Museum there are two candlesticks, the stems of which
with dragon designs in full relief are in an intensely dark _tzŭ
chin_ glaze, so dark, indeed, that the tops have been exactly matched
in the deep brown ware made by Böttger of Dresden about 1710, the
latter polished on the lathe to simulate the lustrous surface of the
Chinese glaze. In the same collection are two saucer dishes of dark
_tzŭ chin_ glaze of fine quality painted with slight floral designs
in silver.[351] This kind of decoration must have been singularly
effective in its original state, but the silver does not stand the test
of time, and though it still firmly adheres its surface has turned
black. An unusual effect is seen on a vase in the Peters collection
which has a lustrous coffee brown glaze passing into olive and clouded
with black; and a very rare specimen in the same collection has a
“leopard skin” glaze of translucent olive brown with large mottling of
opaque coffee brown. The latter piece bears the Wan Li mark.
The lightest shade of this colour is what has been described as Nanking
yellow.[352] It is used as a monochrome or as a ground colour with
panels usually of _famille verte_ enamels, and sometimes with enamelled
decoration applied over the brown glaze itself. It is clear that the
_sui yu_ or crackle glaze was sometimes mixed with the _tzŭ chin_, for
we find many examples of beautiful lustrous brown crackle. They have,
however, in many cases an adventitious tinge of grey or green, for
which the crackle glaze is perhaps responsible.
A near relation to the _tzŭ chin_ (brown gold) glaze is the _wu chin_
(black gold), a lustrous black glaze obtained by mixing a little impure
cobaltiferous ore of manganese (or coarse blue material[353]) with
the _tzŭ chin_ glaze. Like the latter the black is an intensely hard
glaze fired in the full heat of the great kiln, and it has a lustrous
metallic surface which earned for it the name of “mirror black.”[354]
This glaze seems to have really been a K’ang Hsi innovation,[355] and
possibly it was a confusion with this fact which led d’Entrecolles into
his erroneous statement about the date of the lustrous brown.
[Illustration: Plate 112.--Three figures of Birds, late K’ang Hsi
Porcelain, with coloured enamels on the biscuit.
Fig. 1.--Stork. Height 17¼ inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Hawk. Height 10 inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 3.--Cock. Height 13½ inches. _British Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 113.--Porcelain delicately painted in thin
_famille verte_ enamels. About 1720.
Fig. 1.--Dish with figures of Hsi Wang Mu and attendant. Ch’êng
Hua mark. Diameter 6¾ inches. _Hippisley Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with the Eight Immortals. Diameter 8⅞ inches. _S.
E. Kennedy Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 114.--Hanging Vase with openwork sides, for
perfumed flowers. _Cumberbatch Collection._
Porcelain painted in late _famille verte_ enamels. About
1720. Blackwood frame. Total height 17 inches.]
The mirror black is usually a monochrome tricked out with gilt
traceries, but as in the case of the powder blue the light Chinese
gilding is usually worn away, and often its quondam presence can now
only be detected by a faint oily film which appears when the porcelain
is held obliquely to the light. It is a common practice to have this
lost gilding replaced by modern work.
There are several large vases of triple-gourd form in the
Charlottenburg Palace with the upper and lower lobes coated with
gilt mirror black, and the central bulb enamelled with _famille
verte_ colours; and another use of the glaze as panel decoration in
a lustrous brown ground has already been noted in an extract from Père
d’Entrecolles; it is also found on rare specimens as a background for
panels of _famille verte_ enamelling. But its most effective use
is as a pure monochrome only relieved by faint gilding, and some of the
choicest K’ang Hsi specimens have soft brown reflexions in the lustre
of the surface. Another and probably a later type of mirror black is a
thick lacquer-like glaze with signs of minute crackle.
There is a type of glaze which, though variegated with many tints,
still belongs to the category of monochromes. This is the _flambé_,
to use the suggestive French term which implies a surface shot with
flame-like streaks of varying colour. This capricious colouring,
the result of some chance action of the fire upon copper oxide in
the glaze, had long been known to the Chinese potters. It appeared
on the Chün Chou wares of the Sung and Yüan dynasties, and it must
have occurred many times on the Ming copper monochromes; but up to
the end of the K’ang Hsi period it seems to have been still more or
less accidental on the Ching-tê Chên porcelain, if we can believe
the circumstantial account written by Père d’Entrecolles in the year
1722[356]:--“I have been shown one of the porcelains which are called
_yao pien_, or transmutation. This transmutation takes place in the
kiln, and results from defective or excessive firing, or perhaps from
other circumstances which are not easy to guess. This specimen which,
according to the workman’s idea, is a failure and the child of pure
chance, is none the less beautiful, and none the less valued. The
potter had set out to make vases of _soufflé_ red. A hundred pieces
were entirely spoilt, and the specimen in question came from the kiln
with the appearance of a sort of agate. Were they but willing to take
the risk and the expense of successive experiments, the potters would
eventually discover the secret of making with certainty that which
chance has produced in this solitary case. This is the way they learnt
to make porcelain with the brilliant black glaze called _ou kim_ (_wu
chin_); the caprice of the kiln determined this research, and the
result was successful.”
It is interesting to read how this specimen of _flambé_ resulted from
the misfiring of a copper red glaze, no doubt a _sang de bœuf_; for in
the most common type of _flambé_ red (see Plate 123, Fig. 1) passages
of rich _sang de bœuf_ emerge from the welter of mingled grey, blue and
purple tints. The last part of d’Entrecolles’ note was prophetic, for
in the succeeding reigns the potters were able to produce the _flambé_
glaze at will.
There are, besides, many other strangely coloured glazes which can
only be explained as misfired monochromes of the _grand feu_, those
of mulberry colour, slaty purple, and the like, most of which were
probably intended for maroon or liver red, but were altered by some
caprice of the fire. But it would be useless to enumerate these erratic
tints, which are easily recognised by their divergence from the normal
ceramic colours.
The French have always been partial to monochrome porcelains. In the
eighteenth century they bought them eagerly to decorate their hotels
and châteaux, and enshrined them in costly metal mounts. But as the
style of the mounting, rococo in the early part of the century,
neo-classical in the latter part, was designed to match the furniture
of the period, the oriental shapes were often sacrificed to the
European fashion. Dark blue and celadon green were favourite colours,
if we may judge by surviving examples, and to-day enormous prices are
paid for Chinese monochromes fitted with French ormolu mounts by the
Court goldsmiths, such as Gouthière, Caffieri, and the rest.[357]
But these richly mounted pieces have more interest as furniture and
metal work, and the ceramophile regards them askance for their foreign
and incongruous trappings, which disturb the pure enjoyment of the
porcelain.[358]
It remains to consider the white porcelain, that is to say the
porcelain which was intended to remain white and undecorated with any
form of colouring. White was the colour used by the Court in times
of mourning, and large services of white porcelain were made for the
Emperor on these occasions. But it is not to be supposed that all the
beautiful white wares were made solely for this purpose.[359] They
have always been highly esteemed by the Chinese from the early Ming
times, when the Yung Lo bowls and the white altar cups of Hsüan Tê were
celebrated among porcelains, down to the present day. Many exquisite
whites were made in the early reigns of the Ch’ing dynasty, and as with
so many of the perennial monochromes their exact dating is full of
difficulty. We are not concerned here with the _blanc de chine_
or white porcelain of Tê-hua in Fukien, which has already been
discussed, but with the white of Ching-tê Chên, the glaze of which is
distinguished from the former by its harder appearance, and its bluish
or greenish tinge.
The latter was made to perfection in the K’ang Hsi period. Having no
colours to distract the eye from surface blemishes, nothing short of
absolute purity could satisfy the critic. In choice specimens the paste
was fine, white and unctuous, the glaze clear, flawless, and of oily
lustre,[360] the form was elegant and the potting true. Such pieces
without blemish or flaw are the very flower of porcelain, whether they
be of eggshell thinness (_t’o t’ai_), half eggshell (_pan t’o t’ai_),
or of the substance of ordinary wares.
But though innocent of colour the white porcelain was rarely without
decoration. The finest Imperial services were usually delicately etched
under the glaze with scarcely visible dragon designs. Other kinds have
the ornament strongly cut, such as the eggshell cups and saucers with
patterns of hibiscus, lotus, or chrysanthemum petals firmly outlined,
or the vases with full-bodied designs in low relief obtained by carving
away the ground surrounding the pattern.[361] Others have faint
traceries or thickly painted patterns in white slip, in steatite,[362]
or in fibrous gypsum under the glaze. A fuller relief was obtained by
pressing in deeply cut moulds or by applying strips and shavings of
the body clay, and working them into designs with a wet brush after
the manner of the modern _pâte sur pâte_. There are still higher
reliefs in K’ang Hsi porcelain, figures, and symbolical ornaments,
formed separately in moulds and “luted” on to the ware with liquid
clay, but these generally appeared on the enamelled wares, and are
themselves coloured. The applied reliefs on the white wares are usually
in unglazed biscuit, and there are, besides, pierced and channelled
patterns, but these processes have been fully described among the late
Ming wares,[363] and nothing further need be said of them, except that
they were employed with supreme skill and refinement by the K’ang Hsi
potters. Père d’Entrecolles[364] alludes to these perforated wares in
the following passage:--“They make here (i.e. at Ching-tê Chên) another
kind of porcelain which I have never yet seen. It is all pierced _à
jour_ like fretwork, and inside is a cup to hold the liquid. The cup
and the fretwork are all in one piece.” Wares of various kinds with
solid inner lining and pierced outer casing are not uncommon in Chinese
porcelain and pottery. Sometimes, however, the cups are completed
without the inner shell, like Fig. 2, of Plate 78, which could be
fitted with a silver lining if required to hold liquid.
Objects entirely biscuit are exceptional. There are, however, two small
Buddhistic figures, and two lions of this class in the British Museum,
and curiously enough both are stamped with potter’s marks, which is
itself a rare occurrence on porcelain. The former bear the name of
Chang Ming-kao and the latter of Ch’ên Mu-chih (see vol. i., page 223).
Bushell[365] tells us that the Chinese call biscuit porcelain _fan
tz’ŭ_ (turned porcelain), a quaint conception which implies that
the ware is turned inside out, as though the glaze were inside, and
the body out; and this illusion is occasionally kept up by applying a
touch of glaze inside the mouth of the unglazed vessel.
Biscuit porcelain is specially suitable for figure modelling, because
the sharpness of the details remains unobscured by glaze. It has been
largely employed in European porcelain factories for this purpose, but
the Chinese seem to have been prejudiced against this exclusive use of
the material. As a rule they reserve it for the fleshy parts of their
figures, giving the draperies a coating of glaze or of enamel or both.
A rare example of the use of biscuit is illustrated in the catalogue of
the Walters Collection (_O. C. A._, Plate XXIX.), a white bottle
with a dragon carved out of the glaze and left in biscuit.
The white wares so far described were made of the ordinary porcelain
body and glaze, but there is another group of whites which is ranked
with the so-called “soft pastes.” This is a creamy, opaque and often
earthy-looking ware, the glaze of which is almost always crackled.
It is in fact an imitation of the old Ting yao (q.v.), and its
soft-looking surface and warm creamy tone are seen to perfection in
small vases, snuff bottles, and ornamental wares. Indeed, the elegantly
shaped and finely potted vessels of this soft, ivory crackle are among
the gems of the period.
Crackle is a feature which is common to many of the monochromes, and
incidental mention has frequently been made of it in the preceding
pages. It is essentially a Chinese phenomenon, dating back to the Sung
dynasty, and there are various accounts of the methods employed to
produce it. We are speaking of the intentional crackle which is clearly
defined and usually accentuated by some colouring matter rubbed into
the cracks, as opposed to the accidental crazing which appears sooner
or later on most of the glazes of the _demi grand feu_, and on many
low-fired enamels. One crackling process used by the Sung potters has
been described on p. 99, vol. i. Another method is mentioned in the
K’ang Hsi Encyclopædia,[366] viz. to heat the unglazed ware as much as
possible in the sun, then plunge it into pure water. By this means a
crackle was produced on the ware after the firing.
But the normal process in the Ch’ing dynasty seems to have been to
mix a certain ingredient with the glaze which produced a crackle when
fired. There are constant references to this ingredient under the name
of _sui yu_ (crackle glaze) in the letters of Père d’Entrecolles in
connection with various monochromes, and in the first letter,[367] the
following definite account appears:--“It is to be observed that when
no other glaze but that composed of white pebbles[368] is added to the
porcelain, the ware turns out to be of a special kind known as _tsoui
ki_ (_sui ch’i_ = crackled ware). It is marbled all over and split up
in every direction into a infinite number of veins. At a distance it
might be taken for broken porcelain, all the fragments of which have
remained in place. It is like mosaic work. The colour produced by this
glaze is a slightly ashen white.”
The effect of this ingredient of the glaze whatever its composition may
have been is easily understood. All porcelain and pottery undergoes a
considerable amount of contraction--from loss of moisture, etc.--in
the kiln, and to obtain a perfectly even glaze it is necessary that
the contraction of the glaze should be the same as that of the body.
Clearly this ingredient caused the glaze to contract to a greater
extent than the body, and so to split up into minute fissures. The
Chinese were able to control to a great extent the size and nature of
the crackle, as is shown by the appearance of alternate bands of large
and small crackle on the same piece. The methods of colouring the
crackle include rubbing red ochre, ink, and decoction of tea leaves
into the cracks before the ware was quite cool. Another method is
described by Bushell (_O. C. A._, p. 511) by which a white crackled
ware was stained pink or crimson. The vessel was held in the fire in an
iron cage until thoroughly heated, and then water mixed with gold-pink
colouring matter was blown on to it. This, however, is a later process.
Most of the monochrome glazes are occasionally crackled, but the most
characteristic colours of the crackle glazes are the greyish white (the
_blanc un peu cendré_ of Père d’Entrecolles), and light buff, which
were probably intended to recall the ash colour (_hui sê_) and the
millet colour (_mi sê_) of the Sung _Ko yao_. Some of the light buff or
“oatmeal” crackles of the early Ch’ing period are peculiarly refined
and beautiful.
Though this has seemed a favourable opportunity for discussing crackle
glazes it is not to be supposed that they were a speciality of the
K’ang Hsi period. They are common to every age since the Sung dynasty,
and probably they were never made in such abundance and with such care
as in the Yung Chêng and early Ch’ien Lung periods.
CHAPTER XII
YUNG CHÊNG [chch 2] PERIOD (1723–1735)
The Emperor, K’ang Hsi, was succeeded by his son, who reigned from
1723–1735 under the title Yung Chêng. The interest which the new ruler
had taken as a prince in ceramic manufactures is proved by a passage
in the first letter (written in 1712) of Père d’Entrecolles in which
he instances among remarkable examples of the potter’s skill a “great
porcelain lamp made in one piece, through which a torch gave light to
a whole room. This work was ordered seven or eight years ago by the
Crown Prince.” We are further told that the same prince had ordered the
manufacture of various musical instruments in porcelain. These could
not all be made, but the most successful were flutes and flageolets,
and a set of chimes made of nine small, round and slightly concave
plaques, which hung in a frame, and were played with drum-sticks.
Apparently the Emperor continued to take an intimate interest in the
industry after he had ascended the throne, for he commanded his brother
the prince of Yi to announce personally to T’ang Ying his appointment
at Ching-tê Chên in 1728.
At the beginning of the reign the direction of the Imperial factory was
in the hands of Nien Hsi-yao,[369] who, in his capacity of inspector
of customs at Huai-an Fu,[370] dispensed the funds for the Imperial
porcelain. A brief note in the _T’ao lu_,[371] under the heading
“Nien ware of the Yung Chêng period,” sums up in the usual compressed
style of Chinese ceramic writers the character of the porcelain made
at this time. The duty of Nien, inspector of customs at Huai-an Fu,
we read, was to select the materials, and to see that the porcelain
was furnished to the Imperial orders. The ware was extremely refined
and elegant. The coloured porcelains were sent twice monthly to
Nien at the Customs, and forwarded by him to the Emperor. Among the
vases (_cho ch’i_) many were of egg colour, and of rounded form,
lustrous and pure white like silver. They combined blue and coloured
decoration, and some had painted, engraved, etched, or pierced ornament
all ingeniously fashioned. Imitation of the antique and invention of
novelties, these were truly the established principles of Nien.
The interesting list of wares made at the Imperial factory which is
given in detail on pp. 223–226 supplies a full commentary on this
meagre notice, illustrating the types which are merely hinted in
the _T’ao lu_ and specifying the particular kinds of antiques
which were reproduced and many of the new processes invented in this
reign. With regard to the last, however, it appears that the chief
credit was due to Nien’s gifted assistant, T’ang Ying. Most of the
actual processes, such as carving, engraving, piercing _à jour_,
embossing in high and low relief, blowing on of the glazes, painting
in enamels, in gold and in silver,[372] have already been described in
previous chapters. Indeed we may assume that all the science of the
K’ang Hsi potters was inherited by their successors in the Yung Chêng
period, and we need only concern ourselves with the novelties and the
specialities of the period.
A few words should be said first about the ware itself. Necessary
variations in the appearance of the Ching-tê Chên porcelain, which
were due to purely natural causes such as the use of clays of varying
qualities or those from different localities, have been noted from time
to time. These differences are generally quite obvious and they explain
themselves. But apart from these there are numerous instances in which
the potters have deliberately departed from the normal recipes in order
to obtain some special effect. Thus we saw that the _ch’ing-tien_
stone was introduced into the body in imitations of the opaque and
rather earthy-looking white Ting Chou ware; _hua shih_ (steatite)
was used for another type of opaque porcelain which offered a
vellum-like surface to the blue painter; and coarse, impure clays were
found of great service in the imitation of the dark-coloured body of
the antique wares.
Many other modifications appear in the porcelain of the first half of
the eighteenth century. There is, for instance, a very dead white ware,
soft looking, but translucent, which occurs on some of the choicer
examples of armorial porcelain.[373] There are several specimens of
this in the British Museum, one of which bears the early date, 1702,
while others belong to the Yung Chêng period. Again there is the highly
vitreous ware evolved by T’ang Ying to imitate the opaque glass of
_Ku-yüeh-hsüan_; but that will be discussed later.[374] These
special bodies were mainly employed for articles of small size and
ornamental design, and they can be studied in all their varieties in
a representative collection of snuff bottles. The Chinese potters
lavished all their skill on these dainty little objects. Not only
do they include every kind of ware, crackled or plain, translucent
or opaque, but they illustrate in miniature every variety of
decoration--monochrome, painted, carved, moulded, incised, pierced and
embossed. Probably the choicest snuff bottles were made in the Yung
Chêng and Ch’ien Lung periods; but the Chinese have never ceased to
delight in them, and many beautiful examples were manufactured in the
nineteenth century, particularly in the Tao Kuang period.
The ordinary Yung Chêng porcelain differs but little from that of the
previous reign, though it tends to assume a whiter appearance, and
the green tinge of the glaze is less marked. Moreover, a change is
noticeable in the finish of the base rim of vases and bowls. Bevelling
of the edge is less common, and gives place to a rounded or angular
finish, the foot rim being often almost [symbol: V]-shaped; while the
slight tinge of brown around the raw edge, which is usual on K’ang Hsi
wares, is often entirely absent. The actual potting of the porcelain
displays a wonderful degree of manipulative skill, and the forms,
though highly finished, are not lacking in vigour. They are, in fact,
a happy mean between the strong, free lines of the K’ang Hsi and the
meticulous finish of the later Ch’ien Lung porcelains. The verdict of
the _T’ao lu_, “extremely refined and elegant,” is fully justified
by the porcelain itself no less than by its decoration.
Not the least deserving of this praise, though mainly made for export,
is the important group discussed on page 209, viz. the saucer dishes,
plates, tea and coffee wares, etc., of delicate white porcelain,
painted, apparently at Canton, in the _famille rose_ enamels. It
is an “eggshell” porcelain, white, thin, and beautifully finished,
and the dainty little conical or bell-shaped tea cups, though without
handles, are the perfection of table ware. This kind of “eggshell” is
easily distinguished from the Ming type, which is greener in tone and
has the appearance of melting snow by transmitted light.
The Yung Chêng period is not conspicuous for blue and white porcelain.
The perfection of the _famille rose_ colours and the growing
demand for enamelled wares seem to have withdrawn the attention of the
potters from their old speciality. Marked examples of Yung Chêng blue
and white are so uncommon that it is difficult to estimate the merits
of the ware from them. A saucer dish in the British Museum shows the
familiar pattern of a prunus spray reserved in white in a marbled blue
ground; but though the ware itself preserves much of the K’ang Hsi
character, the blue is dull and grey, and wanting in the vivacity and
depth of the old models. One would say that little care had been spent
on the refining of the blue, and without the old perfection of material
the K’ang Hsi style, with its broad washes of colour, was doomed to
failure. Considerations of this sort may have led the painters to
abandon the washes in favour of pencilling in fine lines, a method
apparent on the armorial porcelain which can be dated to this period.
Such a treatment of the blue was admirably suited to small objects.
Indeed it was the usual style of decoration on the steatitic porcelain,
of which many excellent examples belonging to this time are to be found
among the snuff bottles, vermilion boxes, and the small, artistic
furniture of the writing table. On large specimens the effect is thin
and weak.
On the other hand the Yung Chêng potters, who excelled in reproducing
the antique, were most successful in their imitation of the old
Ming blue and whites. The Imperial list[375] includes such items as
“reproductions of the pale blue painted designs of Ch’êng Hua,” and
of the dark blue of Chia Ching. An interesting example of a Ming
reproduction is a bowl in the British Museum, which is painted on the
exterior with the old design of ladies walking in a garden by candle
light.[376] In spite of its Yung Chêng mark this piece is obviously a
copy of a Ming model. The porcelain is white and thick, and the glaze,
which is of greenish tint, has a peculiar soft-looking surface, while
the blue design inside is of characteristic Ming colour, though that of
the exterior is scarcely so successful.
Another type much copied at this period as well as in the succeeding
reign is that in which the blue is mottled and blotched with darker
spots, a type discussed among the early Ming wares.[377] And similarly
such specimens as Fig. 2 of Plate 116, which bears a Hsüan Tê mark,
doubtless belong to this period of imitative manufacture. It is of
thick, solid build with smooth, soft-looking glaze, whose bubbled
texture gives the blue a hazy appearance.
Painting in underglaze red alone, or in combination with underglaze
blue, was freely practised in the reign of Yung Chêng, and probably
most of the fine examples of this type in our collections belong to
this and the succeeding reign (Fig. 1, Plate 117). There is a good
example with the Yung Chêng mark in the British Museum, a vase of
“pilgrim-bottle” form with central design of the three emblematic
fruits--peach, pomegranate, and finger citron, symbols of the Three
Abundances of Years, Sons and Happiness. The fruits are in a soft
underglaze red, verging on the peach-bloom tint, and the foliage,
together with the borders and accessory designs, are pencilled in dark
blue.
The Imperial list alludes to this decoration under the heading of “red
in the glaze” (_yu li hung_), including (1) red used alone for
painted designs, and (2) red foliage combined with blue flowers.[378]
Examples of both these styles are frequent in large and small objects,
and especially in the decoration of snuff bottles, which often bear the
Yung Chêng mark. They are, however, by no means confined to the Yung
Chêng period, but have continued in uninterrupted use to the present
day.
[Illustration: PLATE 115
Vase of baluster form with ornament in white slip and underglaze
red and blue in a celadon green ground: rockery and birds on a
flowering prunus tree. Yung Chêng period
(1723–1735)
Height 15½ inches. _Alexander Collection._]
Other references in the list[379] to underglaze red painting include
designs of three fishes,[380] three fruits, three funguses, and five
bats (for the five blessings) in the Hsüan Tê style, red in a white
ground; and the same red designs in a celadon green ground, the
latter combination being a novelty of the previous reign. Plate 115
is a choice example of the underglaze colours in a celadon ground;
and similar designs in a pale lavender blue ground, besides other
combinations of the same colours, coloured slips, and high-fired glazes
which form the polychrome decoration of the _grand feu_ have been
already discussed on p. 146. They belong to the Yung Chêng and Ch’ien
Lung periods no less than to the K’ang Hsi.
Of the other kinds of polychrome, the porcelain with glazes of the
_demi-grand feu_, and enamels of the muffle kiln in the three
colours, green, yellow, and aubergine, was still made. It is hardly
likely that the manufacture[381] which Père d’Entrecolles describes
in 1722 ceased immediately, and we know that the finer types with
engraved designs and transparent glazes in the three colours were made
to perfection at the Imperial factory. Fig. 1 of Plate 116 illustrates
a bowl of this kind with the Yung Chêng mark and, to judge from its
exquisite quality, an Imperial piece. The ornament is in green, in a
full yellow ground. This type of decoration is a legacy from the Ming
dynasty, and doubtless many of the saucer dishes, bowls, etc., with
Chêng Tê marks, but with all the trimness and neatness of the Yung
Chêng wares, belong to the latter period. One variety is actually
specified in the Imperial list[382] viz. “reproductions of porcelain
with incised green decoration in a monochrome yellow ground.”
As for the on-glaze enamels of the muffle kiln the old _famille verte_
colour scheme was to a great and increasing extent supplanted by the
_famille rose_. It survived, however, in certain modified forms--in the
delicately painted wares, for example, usually of eggshell thinness and
decorated in thin, clear, transparent enamels, such as were described
in connection with the late K’ang Hsi “birthday plates ” (see Plate
113). And again the same colours were employed in a special type of
decoration which seems to have originated in the Yung Chêng period,
though it was freely used in later reigns. In this the design was
carefully traced in pale blue outlines under the glaze, and filled in
with light uniform washes of transparent enamels on the glaze. The
effect is delicate and refined, though somewhat weak in comparison with
the full, iridescent colours and broad washes of the older _famille
verte_.
Possibly this style of decoration was intended to reproduce the
traditional refinement of the Ch’êng Hua cups. The Imperial list[383]
includes “reproductions of Ch’êng Hua polychrome (_wu ts’ai_),”
and four exquisite eggshell wine cups in the Hippisley Collection
which bear the Ch’êng Hua mark, are painted in this fashion.[384]
Similarly in the Bushell collection there are some beautiful
reproductions of the Ch’êng Hua “stem-cups,” with grape vine patterns,
etc., which are no doubt of the same origin. Larger work in the same
style is illustrated by a fine vase in the Victoria and Albert Museum
with a phœnix design which suggests an Imperial destination (Plate
117).
[Illustration: Plate 116.--Yung Chêng Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Imperial Rice Bowl with design of playing children
(_wa wa_), engraved outlines filled in with green in a
yellow ground, transparent glazes on the biscuit. Yung Chêng
mark. Diameter 6 inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Blue and white Vase with fungus (_ling chih_)
designs in Hsüan Tê style. Height 7½ inches. _Cologne
Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 117.--Yung Chêng Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Vase with prunus design in underglaze red and blue.
Height 15 inches. _C. H. Read Collection._
Fig. 2.--Imperial Vase with phœnix and peony design in pale
_famille verte_ enamels over underglaze blue outlines.
Height 25⅝ inches. _V. & A. Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 118.--Early Eighteenth Century Enamels.
Fig.1--Plate painted at Canton in _famille rose_ enamels
(_yang ts’ai_, “foreign colouring”). Yung Chêng period.
Diameter 21½ inches. _S. E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Arrow Stand, painted in late _famille verte_
enamels. About 1720. Height 19¼ inches. _V. & A. Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 119.--Yung Chêng Porcelain, painted at
Canton with _famille rose_ enamels. _British Museum._
Fig. 1.--“Seven border” Plate. Diameter 8¼ inches.
Fig. 2.--Eggshell Cup and Saucer with painter’s marks (see p.
212). Diameter of saucer, 4½ inches.
Fig. 3.--Eggshell Plate with vine border. Diameter 8¼ inches.
Fig. 4.--Armorial Plate with arms of Leake Okeover. Transition
enamels, about 1723. Diameter 8⅞ inches.]
Thirdly, there are the reproductions of the enamelled porcelain of
the Chêng Tê and Wan Li periods[385] (q.v.), characterised, no doubt,
by the combination of underglaze blue and overglaze enamels. We have
already seen[386] from the note on Nien yao in the _T’ao lu_ that
this combination was conspicuous at this period, and it is probable
that much of the “five colour” porcelain in late Ming style should
be dated no further back than the Yung Chêng revival. Other types
of Ming coloured wares reproduced at this time were “porcelain with
ornament in Hsüan Tê style in a yellow ground,”[387] which seems to
mean underglaze blue designs with the ground filled in with yellow
enamel--a not unfamiliar type--and porcelain with designs painted in
iron red (_ts’ai hung_) “reproduced from old pieces.”[388] But the most
prominent feature of the enamelled porcelains of this time is the rapid
development of the _famille rose_ colours. We have already noted the
first signs of their coming in the thick rose pink and opaque white,
which made their appearance in the latter years of K’ang Hsi. The group
derives its name from its most conspicuous members, a series of rose
pinks graduating from pale rose to deep crimson, all derived from gold,
the use of which as a colouring agent for vitreous enamel was only at
this period mastered by the Chinese potters. It includes besides a
number of other colours distinguished from those of the _famille verte_
palette by their relative opacity. They display, moreover, a far wider
range of tints, owing to scientific blending of the various enamels
and to the judicious use of the opaque white to modify the
positive colours. Most of the opaque colours have considerable body,
and stand out on the porcelain like a rich incrustation, and they
are laid on not in broad washes, but with careful brush strokes and
miniature-like touches.
The _famille rose_ colours are known to the Chinese as _juan ts’ai_
(“soft colours,” as opposed to the _ying ts’ai_, or hard colours of the
_famille verte_), _fên ts’ai_ (pale colours), or _yang ts’ai_ (foreign
colours). Their foreign origin is generally admitted, and T’ang Ying
in the seventeenth of his descriptions of the processes of manufacture
alludes to them under the heading, “Decorating the round ware and
vases with foreign colouring.”[389] Painting the white porcelain in
polychrome (_wu ts’ai_) after the manner of the Europeans (_hsi yang_),
he tells us, is called foreign colouring, and he adds that the colours
employed are the same as those used for enamels on metal (_fo lang_).
Taking this statement with the note on “foreign coloured wares” in the
Imperial list,[390] where reference is made to painting on enamels (_fa
lang_) “landscapes and figure scenes, flowering plants and birds,”
it is evident that _fa lang_ is used here not in the usual sense of
cloisonné enamel, but for the painted enamels on copper which we
distinguish as Canton enamels. These, we are told elsewhere,[391] were
first made in the kingdom of Ku-li, which is washed by the Western sea.
Ku-li is identified as Calicut, but it does not necessarily follow that
the Chinese associated the origin of the painted enamels with India.
The expression was probably used quite vaguely in reference to European
goods which came by way of India, and does not really conflict with the
other phrase, _hsi yang_ (Western foreigners), which is always rendered
“Europeans.”
There is quite a number of references to the foreign or European
colours in the Imperial list,[392] e.g. “porcelain in yellow after the
European style,” which Bushell considers to be the lemon yellow which
originated in this reign; “porcelain in purple brown (_tzŭ_) after
the European style”; “European red-coloured wares,” i.e. rose pink;
“European green-coloured wares,” which Bushell explains as pale bluish
green or _eau de nil_ enamel; and “European black (_wu chin_) wares.”
In fact the words, “foreign or European,” seem to be practically
synonymous with “opaque enamel.”[393]
The most complete display of the foreign colouring is given by a
special group of porcelain which is painted in a characteristic
and mannered style. It is best known as “eggshell” or “ruby-back”
porcelain, from the fact that it is usually very thin and translucent
and beautifully potted, and that the exterior of the dishes and plates
is often coated with a gold pink enamel varying from pale ruby pink to
deep crimson. It usually consists of saucer-shaped dishes, plates, and
tea and coffee wares, obviously intended for European use. Occasionally
there are vases and lanterns of exquisite lightness and translucency,
but the vase forms usually required a more substantial construction,
and such specimens as Plate 120, are strongly built, though decorated
in the same style as the eggshell wares.
The decoration of these porcelains is scarcely less distinctive than
their colouring. The central design usually consists of one of the
following: a Chinese interior with figures of ladies and children,
groups of vases and furniture, baskets of flowers and dishes of
fruit, a pheasant on a rock, two quails and growing flowers, a cock
and peonies, etc.; and these designs are enclosed by rich borders,
sometimes totalling as many as seven in number, composed of hexagon
and square, lozenge, trellis or matting diapers, in varying colours,
and broken by small irregular panels of flowers or archaic dragons.
There are, of course, many other kinds of decoration on these wares.
Sometimes the whole design is executed in opaque blue enamel, sometimes
it is black and gold. On some the borders are simpler, merely
delicately gilt patterns; on others they are ruby pink, plain or
broken by enamelled sprays. On the vase forms the ruby either covers
the entire ground or is broken, as in Plate 121, Fig. 3, by fan-shaped
or picture-shaped panels with polychrome designs. The painting is, as
a rule, very finely and carefully executed, but almost always in a
distinctive style which is closely paralleled by the Canton enamels.
Indeed, it is impossible to resist the conclusion that much of this
ware was actually decorated in the enamelling establishments at Canton,
the porcelain itself being sent in the white from Ching-tê Chên. The
same designs are found on both the porcelain and the enamels, and there
is one instance at least of an artist whose paintings were used on
both materials, as is testified by his signature. This is the painter
whose art-name is _Pai shih shan jên_ (hermit of the white rock), or
in a shortened form, Pai-shih (see vol. i., p. 223). He was evidently
a Cantonese, for one of his designs on a saucer in the British Museum
is inscribed _Ling nan hui chê_ (a Canton picture), the subject being a
vase of flowers and a basket of fruit. His signature is also attached
to a dish with cock and peonies in the Victoria and Albert Museum,[394]
and to a similar design figured by Jacquemart,[395] which also bears
the date corresponding to 1724. It occurs, besides, fairly frequently
on Canton enamels, though in this case usually attached to landscape
designs. In all these instances, however, it is placed in the field of
the design appended, as a rule, to a stanza of verse or a descriptive
sentence. This is a usual position for the signature of a painter on
silk or paper, and we can hardly be wrong in inferring that Pai-shih
was the artist whose designs were copied on the wares, perhaps one who
was specially employed to design for the enamellers, rather than an
actual pot-painter or enameller. The proper place for the signature
of the latter is underneath the ware, on the base; and here we find
on a cup and saucer in the British Museum the name apparently of the
real decorator whose painting is not to be distinguished from that
on the piece with the Pai-shih signature, just mentioned as in the
same collection. Under the saucer (Plate 119, Fig. 2) is the seal _Yü
fêng yang lin_, i.e. Yang Lin of Yü-fêng, an old name for the town of
K’un-shan; and under the cup is the seal _Yu chai_ (quiet pavilion),
which is no doubt the studio name of Yang-lin.[396] K’un-shan Hsien is
situated between Su-chou and Shanghai, in the province of Kiangsu, and
we are to understand that Yang-lin was either a native of K’un-shan
or that he resided there--more probably the former, for his work is
typical of the Canton enamellers. It is, however, probable enough that
there were decorating establishments working for the European markets
in the neighbourhood of Shanghai as well as at Canton, just as there
are still decorating kilns not only at Ching-tê Chên but “at the other
towns on the river.”[397]
It is highly probable that the brushwork of the Canton enamellers, like
the enamels themselves, was copied at Ching-tê Chên, and even that
some of the enamellers migrated thither. A tankard among the armorial
porcelain in the British Museum, bearing the arms of Yorke and Cocks,
combines a few touches of underglaze blue with passages of _famille
rose_ decoration in the Canton style. The blue can only have been
applied at the place of manufacture, and as no porcelain of this kind
was actually made at Canton, it is evident that the piece was made and
decorated elsewhere (which can only mean at Ching-tê Chên), unless we
assume the improbable alternative that the tankard travelled from the
factory, bare save for a faintly outlined shield with a saltire in
blue, to be finished off at Canton.
Needless to say there is much _famille rose_ porcelain in which
the Cantonese style is not apparent, and this we assume without
hesitation to have been decorated at Ching-tê Chên.
It only remains to say a few words on the dating of the _famille rose_
wares and for this we must return to the ruby-back porcelains. Dated
pieces are rare, but the British Museum is fortunate in possessing a
few documentary specimens. The most interesting of these is a bowl with
pale ruby enamel covering the exterior, and a dainty spray of flowers
in _famille rose_ enamels inside. It is marked in blue under the glaze
with the cyclical date “made in the _hsin chou_ year recurring” (see
p. 213). The only year to which this can be referred is 1721, when
the _hsin chou_ year came round for the second time in the long reign
of K’ang Hsi.[398] It is of course possible that this bowl was not
enamelled in the year of its manufacture, but there are two other
pieces in the same case, an octagonal plate with ruby border and a
dish, both with the mark of the Dresden collection, and therefore
not later than the early years of Yung Chêng. A fourth document is a
ruby-back saucer dish delicately painted with a lady and boys, vases
and furniture in typical style, which has the mark of the Yung Chêng
period.
Unfortunately it is no longer possible to regard the year 1724, to
which the signature Pai-shih is attached on the plate mentioned above,
as conclusive evidence of the date of decoration.[399] It is certainly
the date of the design, and it is probable enough that the porcelain
was painted within a few years of the original picture, but beyond
that no further inferences can be drawn.[400] The Yorke-Cocks tankard,
however, to which we have also alluded, must for heraldic reasons have
been painted between the years 1720 and 1733; and there is an eggshell
cup and saucer in the British Museum painted in rose pink and other
enamels of this type, with the arms of the Dutch East India Company and
the date 1728.
From this cumulative evidence it is clear that the manufacture of
eggshell dishes and services with _famille rose_ enamels in the
Canton style and with “ruby backs” was in full swing in the Yung Chêng
period, and the general tendency to label them all Ch’ien Lung errs on
the side of excessive caution.
Passing from this particular group, which was affected by special
influences, the general character of the Yung Chêng enamelled
decoration is one of great refinement in design and execution. The
over-elaboration and the overcrowding which are observable on the later
Ch’ien Lung _famille rose_ are absent at this period. The tendency
was on the contrary towards elegant and restrained effects, such as a
flowering spray thrown artistically across the field, birds on a bough
and other graceful designs which left plenty of scope for the fine
quality of the white background. It is this nicely balanced decoration
coupled with the delicacy of the painting and the beautiful finish of
the porcelain itself, which gives the Yung Chêng enamelled wares their
singular distinction and charm.
There are still a few special types of painted wares to be noticed
before passing to the monochromes. One of these is named in the
Imperial list,[401] under the heading “Porcelain painted in ink
(_ts’ai shui mo_),” a figurative expression, for Indian ink could
not stand the heat even of the enamelling kiln, and could never have
served as a true ceramic pigment. The material used was a dry black or
brown black pigment derived from manganese, and closely allied to the
pigment which had long served in a subordinate position for tracing
outlines. Evidently this material was now greatly improved, and could
be used for complete designs which resembled drawings in Indian ink or
in sepia. It is certain, however, that the Chinese, whose methods were
necessarily empirical, had first experimented with actual ink, for Père
d’Entrecolles wrote in 1722[402]--“an attempt made to paint in black
some vases with the finest Chinese ink met with no success. When the
porcelain had been fired, it turned out white. The particles of this
black had not sufficient body, and were dissipated by the action of the
fire; or rather they had not the strength to penetrate the layer of
glaze or to produce a colour differing from the plain glaze.” Between
that date and about 1730 when the Imperial list was drawn up, the
secret of the proper pigment seems to have been mastered, and we find
the black designs effectively used on Yung Chêng eggshell and other
wares, alone or brightened by a little gilding. Among other uses it was
found to be admirably suited for copying the effect of European prints
and line engravings, a _tour de force_ in which the proverbial
patience and imitative skill of the Chinese are well exemplified.
Another effect sometimes mistaken for black painting is produced by
silvered designs which become rapidly discoloured; but it is generally
possible to see a slight metallic sheen even on the blackened silver if
the porcelain is held obliquely to the light.
Another refined and unobtrusive decoration was effected by pencilling
in pale iron red supplemented with gilding. There is a large series of
this red and gold porcelain in the Dresden collection, and it seems
to belong to the late K’ang Hsi or the Yung Chêng period. Another
telling combination, including black, red and gold, dates from this
time. The black and gold variety is well illustrated by an interesting
plate in the British Museum which represents European figures in early
eighteenth-century costume in a Chinese interior (Plate 131, Fig. 1).
The Imperial list[403] alludes to the use of silver and gold both to
cover the entire surface like a monochrome (_mo yin_ and _mo chin_),
and in painted designs (_miao yin_ and _miao chin_).[404] Three of
these decorations are said to have been in Japanese style, but the
precise significance of this is not clear. Gilding was freely used in
combination with red and blue, and especially over the blue, on Arita
porcelain, but the application of it does not seem to differ from the
ordinary Chinese gilding. The one feature common to the Chinese and
Japanese gilding is its lightness and restraint as compared with the
heavy gilding of European porcelains.
Plate 125 illustrates a peculiar ware which belongs in part to the
reign of Yung Chêng and in part to that of Ch’ien Lung. It attempts to
reproduce the soft colouring on the enamelled glass made by Hu,[405]
whose studio-name was Ku-yüeh-hsüan (“ancient moon pavilion”). A small
brush holder[406] of this glass is shown on Fig. 125, an opaque white
material, not unlike our old Bristol glass, delicately painted in
_famille rose_ colours with groups of the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo
Grove. It is said that[407] the Emperor admired the soft colouring on
this ware, and expressed a wish to see the same effect produced in
porcelain. T’ang Ying thereupon set out to solve the problem by making
a highly vitreous body with glassy glaze on which the enamels assumed
the soft tints of the original model. This type of porcelain, known as
_fang ku yüeh hsüan_ (“imitation of Ku-yüeh-hsüan”), is greatly prized.
Mr. A. E. Hippisley has described a small group in the catalogue of his
collection from which I have been permitted to illustrate an example
(Plate 125). Mr. Hippisley states that the earlier specimens of the
glass are marked with the four characters _ta ch’ing nien chih_ (made
in the great Ch’ing period), the reign name Yung Chêng being omitted;
the later pieces, of which the brush pot in our illustration is one,
have the Ch’ien Lung mark in four characters. Bushell[408] has figured
a yellow glazed snuff bottle with the actual mark _Ku yüeh hsüan chih_
(see vol. i. p. 219).
The reigns of Yung Chêng and Ch’ien Lung were prolific in monochromes.
Never since the Sung dynasty had these wares been produced in such
quantity, and the tale of the glazes was swollen to an unprecedented
extent by the accumulated traditions of the past centuries, and by the
inventive genius of T’ang Ying. It is scarcely practicable to attempt
to distinguish very closely between the Yung Chêng monochromes and
those of the early years of Ch’ien Lung. The activities of T’ang-ying
extended from 1728–1749, and we are expressly told that many of the
types enumerated in the Imperial list were his inventions, besides
which there was nothing made by the potters of the past which he could
not reproduce. To enumerate all the colours now used would be merely
to repeat what has been said under the heading of monochrome porcelain
in the previous chapters. Moreover, the Imperial list given on page
223 serves to draw attention to the principal types, and it is only
necessary here to supplement it with a few comments.
A special feature of the time was the reproduction of the glazes made
in the classical periods of the Sung and Ming dynasties, and in many
cases these copies were based on originals lent to the factory from the
Imperial collections. Thus the Ju, Kuan, Ko, Lung-chüan, Tung-ch’ing,
Chün and Ting wares, all the specialities of the Sung dynasty, are
included in the list, and though one type of Kuan glaze is specifically
stated to have been laid on a white porcelain body, many of the others,
we read, were provided with special bodies imitating the copper-and
iron-coloured wares of antiquity. But experience shows that in the
majority of cases the potters were content to simulate the “brown
mouth and iron foot” of the dark-bodied Sung wares by dressing the
mouth and the exposed part of the base with ferruginous clay. This is
observable on the lavender crackles which imitate the Kuan, and the
stone grey crackles of the Ko type, by which the Sung originals were
until recent years represented in most Western collections.
In other cases coarse clays of impure colour, and even earthenware
bodies were used in the reproductions. The admirable imitations of the
mottled and _flambé_ Chün glazes which were apparently a special
triumph of T’ang-ying appear both on a white porcelain which had to be
carefully concealed by the coloured glazes, and on a soft earthenware
body. Both these kinds are found with the Yung Chêng mark stamped in
the paste, and so correct are the glaze effects that even collectors of
considerable experience have been deceived by specimens from which the
mark in question has been ground away.
In addition to the copies of the high-fired Chün glazes, there was the
“Chün glaze of the muffle kiln” (_lu chün yu_) which is described as
something between the glaze applied to the Yi-hsing stoneware and the
Kuangtung glazes. The items immediately following this information in
the Imperial list[409] make it clear that the writer refers to the
glazes of Ou on the Yi-hsing pottery, and to the blue mottled glazes
of the Canton stoneware. The enamel which most closely answers to
the description of this Chün glaze of the muffle kiln[410] is that
illustrated in Fig. 4 of Plate 128, a vase with dark-coloured foot rim,
and an opaque greenish blue enamel flecked with dark ruby pink. This
enamel varies considerably in appearance according to the preponderance
of the red or the blue in the combination; but it is an enamel of the
muffle kiln and its markings recall the dappled Chün glazes. I have,
moreover, seen this glaze actually applied to a teapot of Yi-hsing red
stoneware. This glaze seems to belong to a type, which was largely
developed in the Ch’ien Lung period, of glazes resembling if not
actually imitating the mottled surface of certain birds’ eggs, e.g.
the robin, the lark, the sparrow, etc. In these instances one colour
seems to have been powdered or blown on to another, the commonest kind
having a powdering of ruby pink on pale blue or green. This glaze
differs from the Chün glaze, described above, only in the size of
the pink specks. It was probably in experimenting for the effect of
the _flambé_ Chün glazes that T’ang Ying acquired the mastery of the
furnace transmutations (_yao pien_) which made it possible for him and
his successors to produce at will the variegated glazes. These had
been described by Père d’Entrecolles a few years earlier as accidental
effects in his time, but the French father already foresaw the day when
they would be brought under control.
Of the celebrated Ting Chou wares only the fine ivory white Ting
(_fên ting_) was copied at the Imperial factory; but this does
not preclude the reproduction of the other kind, the creamy crackled
_t’u-ting_, in the other potteries. There are, at any rate, many
lovely porcelains in both styles which appear to belong to the Yung
Chêng and early Ch’ien Lung periods. Coloured glazes with crackle and
crackled grey-white of the Ko type were made in great quantity, and
most of the choicer crackles in our collections, especially those of
antique appearance but on a white and neatly finished porcelain body,
date from this time.
The reproductions of Ming monochromes include the underglaze red and
the purplish blue as in the previous reign, and the eggshell and pure
white of the Yung Lo and Hsüan Tê periods. The purplish blue or _chi
ch’ing_ of this time is illustrated by a large dish in the British
Museum which is further enriched with gilding. It is covered with a
splendid deep blue of slightly reddish tinge, varying depth and rather
stippled appearance, and it was found in Turkey, where this colour has
been much prized. Turquoise green, aubergine purple and yellow of the
_demi-grand feu_, and the lustrous brown (_tzŭ chin_) in two
shades, brown and yellow, are all mentioned in the Imperial list as
used with or without engraved and carved designs under the glaze.
As for the K’ang Hsi porcelains it may be assumed that practically
all their glaze colours were now reproduced. A few only are specified
in the list, eel yellow, snake-skin green, spotted yellow, _soufflé_
red, _soufflé_ blue (powder blue) and mirror black (_wu chin_). The
term _soufflé_ red may refer to the underglaze red from copper or the
overglaze iron red. The latter is further subdivided into _mo hung_
or _ta hung_, the deep red of Ming origin, and the _tsao’rh hung_ or
jujube red, a softer and more vitreous[411] variety of the same colour
which Dr. Bushell considered to have originated in the Yung Chêng
period. On the _soufflé_ red under the glaze we may quote Bushell’s
remarks[412]: “Two of the colours especially characteristic of the
Nien yao or 'Nien porcelain’ of this epoch are the _clair de lune_
or _yüeh pai_, and the bright _soufflé_ copper red.” The latter is
further described on a vase in the Walters collection “exhibiting the
characteristic monochrome glaze of bright ruby red tint, and stippled
surface. The _soufflé_ glaze is applied over the whole surface with the
exception of a panel of irregular outline reserved on one side, where
it is shaded off so that the red fades gradually into a nearly white
ground.” This panel was afterwards filled in with a design in overglaze
enamels. A tazza in the British Museum has this same red covering
three-quarters of the exterior, and fading into the white ground. This
red also occurs in its beautiful translucent ruby tints on a pair of
small wine cups in the same collection, and on a set of larger cups
belonging to Mr. Eumorfopoulos. One would say it was the “liquid dawn”
tint of the celebrated wine cups of the late Ming potter, Hao Shih-chiu.
The _clair de lune_ or moon white (_yüeh pai_), an exquisite glaze
of palest blue, is illustrated on Plate 130. It is often faintly
tinged with lavender which bears out its description in the Imperial
list[413]: “This colour somewhat resembles the Ta Kuan glaze, but the
body of the ware is white. The glaze is without crackle, and there are
two shades--pale and dark.” The Kuan glaze, it should be explained, was
characterised by a reddish tinge.
In addition to the foreign colours which were capable of being used as
monochromes as well as in painted designs, there are a few other new
glazes named in the Imperial list. The _fa ch’ing_ (cloisonné blue)
which “resulted from recent experiments to match” the deep blue of the
enamellers on copper, is identified by Bushell with the dark sapphire
blue known as _pao shih lan_ (precious stone blue). It was, we are
told, darker and bluer than the purplish _chi ch’ing_, and it had not
the orange peel and palm eye markings of the latter. It has, however,
a faint crackle, and is apparently a glaze of the _demi-grand feu_.
We learn elsewhere that this cloisonné blue was one of T’ang-ying’s
inventions.
Among the yellows are “porcelain with yellow after the European style”
which is identified by Bushell with the opaque lemon yellow enamel
introduced at this time, and there are two kinds of _mi sê_ (millet
colour) glazes,[414] pale and dark, which we are told “differed from
the Sung _mi sê_.” Bushell’s explanation of the term _mi sê_ given in
Monkhouse’s _Chinese Porcelain_,[415] traverses his rendering of the
terms as rice colour in other books: “The Chinese term used here is _mi
sê_, which Julien first translated _couleur du riz_, and thereby misled
us all. It really refers to the colour (_sê_) of the yellow millet
(_huang mi_), not of rice (_pai mi_). _Mi sê_ in Chinese silks is a
full primrose yellow; in Chinese ceramic glazes it often deepens from
that tint to a dull mustard colour when the materials are less pure.
It has often been wondered why the old “mustard crackle” of collectors
is apparently never alluded to in “L’Histoire des Porcelaines de
King-tê-chin.” It is necessary to substitute yellow for “rice coloured”
in the text generally, remembering always that a paler tone is
indicated than that of the Imperial yellow, which Mr. Monkhouse justly
likens to the yolk of an egg.”
In Giles’s Dictionary _mi sê_ is rendered “straw colour, the colour of
yellow millet,” and all my inquiries among Chinese collectors as to
the tint of the _mi sê_ glaze have led to the same conclusion. One of
the Chinese experts indicated a bowl with pale straw yellow glaze of
the K’ang Hsi period as an example of _mi sê_, and this I take to be
the _mi sê_ which “differed from the Sung colour,” being, in fact, an
ordinary yellow glaze, following the type made in the Ming dynasty, and
entirely different in technique from the Sung glazes.
[Illustration: PLATE 120
Covered Jar or _potiche_ painted in _famille rose_ or
“foreign colours” (_yang ts’ai_) with baskets of flowers:
deep borders of ruby red enamel broken by small panels and floral
designs. On the cover is a lion coloured with enamels on the
biscuit. From a set of five vases and beakers in the collection
of Lady Wantage. Late Yung Chêng period (1723–1735)
Height 34 inches.]
The precise nature of the Sung _mi sê_ which is included among the Ko
yao, Chün yao and Hsiang-hu wares reproduced by the Yung Chêng potters
according to the Imperial list is a little doubtful. Possibly one type
was illustrated by the “shallow bowl with spout: grey stoneware with
opaque glaze of pale sulphur yellow,” which Mr. Alexander exhibited at
the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910.[416] Another is indicated in the
Pierpont Morgan collection[417] in a “shallow bowl with greenish
yellow crackled glaze,” apparently of the type found occasionally in
Borneo, where such wares are still treasured by the Dyaks. The vase in
the Victoria and Albert Museum which is figured by Monkhouse (op. cit.,
Fig. 22) as a specimen of old _mi sê_, appears for reasons already
given[418] to be a Yung Chêng reproduction of this type. The “mustard
yellow” which Bushell included under the description _mi sê_ is an
opaque crackled enamel which can hardly have originated before the Yung
Chêng period, and it is possible that it resulted from an attempt to
reproduce the old Sung _mi sê_ crackle.
The following list of the decorations used at the Imperial factory was
compiled by Hsieh Min, the governor of the province of Kiangsi from
1729 to 1734.[419] It was translated by Bushell in his _Oriental
Ceramic Art_; but reference has been made to it so often in these
pages, and its importance is so obvious, that no apology is necessary
for giving it in full. The following version is taken from the
_Chiang hsi t’ung chih_, bk. 93, fols. 11 to 13, and in most cases
Bushell’s rendering has been followed:--
1. Glazes of the Ta Kuan period (i.e. Sung Kuan yao) on an
“iron” body, including moon white (_yüeh pai_), pale blue
or green (_fên ch’ing_) and deep green (_ta lü_).**
2. Ko glaze on an “iron” body, including millet colour (_mi
sê_) and _fên ch’ing_.**
3. Ju glaze without crackle on a “copper” body: the glaze
colours copied from a cat’s food basin of the Sung dynasty, and
a dish for washing brushes moulded with a human face.
4. Ju glaze with fish-roe crackle on a “copper” body.**
5. White Ting glaze. Only the _fên Ting_ was copied, and
not the _t’u Ting_.
6. Chün glazes. Nine varieties are given, of which five were
copied from old palace pieces and four from newly acquired
specimens; see p. 000.
7. Reproductions of the _chi hung_ red of the Hsüan Té
period: including fresh red (_hsien hung_) and ruby red
(_pao shih hung_).
8. Reproductions of the deep violet blue (_chi ch’ing_) of
the Hsüan Tê period. This glaze is deep and reddish (_nêng
hung_), and has orange peel markings and palm eyes.
9. Reproductions of the glazes of the Imperial factory:
including eel yellow (_shan yü huang_), snake-skin green
(_shê p’i lü_), and spotted yellow (_huang pan tien_).
10. Lung-ch’üan glazes: including pale and dark shades.
11. Tung-ch’ing glazes: including pale and dark, shades.
12. Reproductions of the Sung millet-coloured (_mi sê_)
glaze: copied in form and colour from the fragmentary wares dug
up at Hsiang Hu (q.v.).
13. Sung pale green (_fên ch’ing_) glaze: copied from wares
found at the same time as the last.
14. Reproduction of “oil green” (_yu lü_) glaze: “copied
from an old transmutation (_yao pien_) ware like green
jade (_pi yü_), with brilliant colour broken by variegated
passages and of antique elegance.”
15. The Chün glaze of the muffle stove (_lu chün_). “The
colour is between that of the Kuangtung wares and the Yi-hsing
applied glaze[420]; and in the ornamental markings (_hua
wên_) and the transmutation tints of the flowing glaze it
surpasses them.”
16. Ou’s glazes, with red and blue markings.
17. Blue mottled (_ch’ing tien_) glazes: copied from old
Kuang yao.
18. Moon white (_yüeh pai_) glazes. “The colour somewhat
resembles the Ta Kuan glaze, but the body of the ware is white.
The glaze is without crackle, and there are two shades--pale and
dark.”
19. Reproductions of the ruby red (_pao shao_) of Hsüan Té:
in decoration consisting of (1) three fishes, (2) three fruits,
(3) three funguses, or (4) the five Happinesses (symbolised by
five bats).
20. Reproductions of the Lung-ch’üan glaze with ruby red
decoration of the types just enumerated. “This is a new style of
the reigning dynasty.”
21. Turquoise (_fei ts’ui_) glazes. Copying three sorts,
(1) pure turquoise, (2) blue flecked, and (3) gold flecked
(_chin tien_).[421]
22. _Soufflé_ red (_ch’ui hung_) glaze.
23. _Soufflé_ blue (_ch’ui ch’ing_) glaze.
24. Reproductions of Yung Lo porcelain: eggshell (_t’o
t’ai_), pure white with engraved (_chui_) or embossed
(_kung_) designs.
25. Copies of Wan Li and Chêng Tê enamelled (_wu ts’ai_)
porcelain.
26. Copies of Ch’èng Hua enamelled (_wu ts’ai_) porcelain.
27. Porcelain with ornament in Hsüan Tê style in a yellow ground.
28. Cloisonné blue (_fa ch’ing_) glaze.[422] “This glaze
is the result of recent attempts to match this colour (i.e. the
deep blue of the cloisonné enamels). As compared with the deep
and reddish _chi ch’ing_, it is darker and more vividly
blue (_ts’ui_), and it has no orange peel or palm eye
markings.”
29. Reproductions of European wares with lifelike designs carved
and engraved. “Sets of the five sacrificial utensils, dishes,
plates, vases, and boxes and the like are also decorated with
coloured pictures in European style.”
[Illustration: Plate 121.--Two Beakers and a Jar from sets of
five, _famille rose_ enamels. Late Yung Chêng Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Beaker with “harlequin” ground. Height 15¾ inches. _S.
E. Kennedy Collection._
Fig. 2.--Jar with dark blue glaze gilt and leaf-shaped reserves.
Height 21½ inches. _Burdett-Coutts Collection._
Fig. 3.--Beaker with fan and picture-scroll panels, etc.,
in a deep ruby pink ground. Height 14½ inches. _Wantage
Collection._]
30. Reproductions of wares with incised green decoration in a
yellow glaze (_chiao huang_).
31. Reproductions of yellow-glazed wares: including plain and
with incised ornament.
32. Reproductions of purple brown (_tzŭ_) glazed wares:
including plain and with incised ornament.
33. Porcelain with engraved ornament: including all kinds of
glazes.
34. Porcelain with embossed (_tui_) ornament: including all
kinds of glazes.
35. Painted red (_mo[423] hung_): copying old specimens.
36. Red decoration (_ts’ai hung_): copying old specimens.
37. Porcelain in yellow after the European style.[424]
38. Porcelain in purple brown (_tzŭ_) after the European
style.
39. Silvered (_mo yin_) porcelain.
40. Porcelain painted in ink (_shui mo_): see p. 214.
41. Reproductions of the pure white (_t’ien pai_)[425]
porcelain of the Hsüan Tê period: including a variety of wares
thick and thin, large and small.
42. Reproductions of Chia Ching wares with blue designs.
43. Reproductions of Ch’êng Hua pale painted (_tan miao_)
blue designs.
44. Millet colour (_mi sê_) glazes. “Differing from the
Sung millet colour.” In two shades, dark and light.
45. Porcelain with red in the glaze (_yu li hung_):
including (1) painted designs exclusively in red, (2) the
combination of blue foliage and red flowers.[426]
46. Reproductions of lustrous brown (_tzŭ chin_) glaze:
including two varieties, brown and yellow.
47. Porcelains with yellow glaze (_chiao huang_) decorated
in enamels (_wu ts’ai_). “This is the result of recent
experiments.”
48. Reproductions of green-glazed porcelain: including that with
plain ground and with engraved ornament.
49. Wares with foreign colours (_yang ts’ai_). “In
the new copies of the Western style of painting in enamels
(_fa-lang_) the landscapes and figure scenes, the flowering
plants and birds are without exception of supernatural beauty
and finish.”[427]
50. Porcelain with embossed ornament (_kung hua_):
including all kinds of glazes.
51. Porcelain with European (_hsi yang_) red colour.
52. Reproductions of _wu chin_ (mirror black) glazes:
including those with black ground and white designs and those
with black ground and gilding.
53. Porcelain with European green colour.
54. European _wu chin_ (mirror black) wares.
55. Gilt (_mo chin_) porcelain: copying the Japanese.
56. Gilt (_miao chin_)[428] porcelain: copying the Japanese.
57. Silvered (_miao yin_) porcelain: copying the Japanese.
58. Large jars (_ta kang_) with Imperial factory (_ch’ang
kuan_) glazes. “Dimensions: diameter, at the mouth, 3 ft.
4 or 5 in. to 4 ft.; height, 1 ft. 7 or 8 in. to 2 ft. Glaze
colours, (1) eel yellow, (2) cucumber (_kua p’i_) green,
and (3) yellow and green mottled (_huang lü tien_).”
This last item, which is not included in Bushell’s list, appears to
be almost a repetition of No. 9, with slightly different phrasing.
_Huang lü tien_, which is used instead of the difficult phrase
_huang pan tien_, may perhaps be taken as a gloss on the latter,
indicating that the spots in the mottled yellow were green. In this
case it would appear that the “spotted yellow” was a sort of tiger skin
glaze, consisting of dabs of green and yellow (and perhaps aubergine as
well). Bushell interpreted it in this sense.
CHAPTER XIII
CH’IEN LUNG [chch 2] (1736–1795)
The brief reign of Yung Chêng was followed by that of his son, who
ruled under the title of Ch’ien Lung for a full cycle of sixty years,
at the end of which he abdicated in accordance with his vow that he
would not outreign his grandfather, K’ang Hsi. Ch’ien Lung was a
devotee of the arts, and they flourished greatly under his long and
peaceful sway. He was himself a collector, and the catalogue of the
Imperial bronzes compiled under his orders is a classic work; but more
than that, he was personally skilful in the art of calligraphy, which
ranks in China as high as painting; and he was a voluminous poet. It
is no uncommon thing to find his compositions engraved or painted on
porcelain and other artistic materials. Bushell[429] quotes an example
from a snuff bottle in the Walters Collection; there is a bowl for
washing wine cups in the Eumorfopoulos Collection with a descriptive
verse engraved underneath, and entitled, “Imperial Poem of Ch’ien
Lung”; and a beautiful coral red bowl in the British Museum has a
similar effusion pencilled in gold in the interior.
His interest in the ceramic art is further proved by the command given
in 1743 to T’ang Ying to compose a description of the various processes
of manufacture as a commentary on twenty pictures of the industry which
belonged to the palace collections; and one of the earliest acts of his
reign was to appoint the same celebrated ceramist in 1736 to succeed
Nien Hsi-yao in the control of the customs at Huai-an Fu, a post which
involved the supreme control of the Imperial porcelain manufacture.
There is little doubt that T’ang Ying[430] was the most distinguished
of all the men who held this post. He is, at any rate, the one whose
achievements have been most fully recorded. He was himself a prolific
writer, and a volume of his collected works has been published with a
preface by Li Chü-lai. His autobiography is incorporated in the _Chiang
hsi t’ung chih_; his twenty descriptions of the processes of porcelain
manufacture are quoted in the _T’ao shuo_ and the _T’ao lu_, and in
themselves form a valuable treatise on Chinese porcelain; and before
taking up his post at Huai-an Fu in 1736 he collected together, for
the benefit of his successors at Ching-tê Chên, the accumulated notes
and memoranda of eight years. This last work is known as the _T’ao
ch’êng shih yu kao_ (“Draughts of Instructions on the Manufacture of
Porcelain”), and the preface[431] quoted in the Annals of Fou-liang
furnishes some interesting details concerning Tang’s labours. We learn,
for instance, that when he was appointed to the factory at Ching-tê
Chên in 1728, he was “unacquainted with the finer details of the
porcelain manufacture in the province of Kiangsi,” having never been
there before. He worked with heart and strength, however, sleeping and
eating with the workmen during a voluntary apprenticeship of three
years, until in 1731 “he had conquered his ignorance of the materials
and processes of firing, and although he could not claim familiarity
with all the laws of transformation, his knowledge was much increased.”
The commissionership of the customs was transferred in 1739 from
Huai-an Fu to Kiu-kiang, which is close to the point of junction
between the Po-yang Lake and the Yangtze, and considerably nearer to
the Imperial factory at Ching-tê Chên, the control of which remained in
T’ang’s hands until 1749.
The _Ching-tê Chên T’ao lu_[432] is almost verbose on the subject of
T’ang’s achievements. He had a profound knowledge, it tells us, of
the properties of the different kinds of clay and of the action of
the fire upon them, and he took every care in the selection of proper
materials, so that his wares were all exquisite, lustrous, and of
perfect purity. In imitating the celebrated wares of antiquity he never
failed to make an exact copy, and in the imitation of all sorts of
famous glazes there were none which he could not cleverly reproduce.
There was, in fact, nothing that he could not successfully accomplish.
Furthermore, his novelties[433] included porcelains with the following
glazes and colours: foreign purple (_yang tzŭ_), cloisonné blue (_fa
ch’ing_), silvering (_mo yin_), painting in ink black (_ts’ai shui
mo_), foreign black (_yang wu chin_), painting in the style of the
enamels on copper (_fa lang_), foreign colouring in a black ground
(_yang ts’ai wu chin_), white designs in a black ground (_hei ti pai
hua_), gilding on a black ground (_hei ti miao chin_), sky blue (_t’ien
lan_), and transmutation glazes (_yao pien_). The clay used was white,
rich (_jang_) and refined, and the body of the porcelain, whether thick
or thin, was always unctuous (_ni_). The Imperial wares attained their
greatest perfection at this time.
The preface to T’ang’s collected works, which is quoted in the same
passage, singles out as special triumphs of his genius the revival of
the manufacture of the old dragon fish bowls (_lung kang_) and of the
Chün yao, and the production of the turquoise and rose (_mei kuei_)
colours in “new tints and rare beauty.” It is obvious from these
passages that T’ang was responsible for many of the types enumerated
in Hsieh Min’s list in the preceding chapter, not only among the
reproductions of antiques but among the new inventions of the period,
such as the cloisonné blue, foreign purple, silvering, painting in ink
black, and foreign black. It follows, then, that these novelties could
not have been made much before 1730, for T’ang was still at that time
occupied chiefly with learning the potter’s art. It is equally certain
that he continued to make a specialty of imitating the older wares
during the reign of Ch’ien Lung, so that we may regard the best period
of these reproductions as extending from 1730–1750.
In reading the list of T’ang’s innovations the reader will perhaps be
puzzled by the varieties of black decoration which are included. Before
attempting to explain them it will be best to review the different
kinds of black found on Chinese porcelain of the Ch’ing dynasty. There
is the high-fired black glaze, with hard shining surface likened to
that of a mirror and usually enriched with gilt traceries. This is the
original _wu chin_ described by Père d’Entrecolles.[434] The other
blacks are all low-fired colours of the muffle kiln applied over the
glaze and ranking with the enamel colours. They include at least five
varieties: (1) The dry black pigment, derived from cobaltiferous ore
of manganese, applied like the iron red without any glassy flux. (2)
The same pigment washed over with a transparent green enamel. This is
the iridescent greenish black of the _famille verte_, and it continued
in use along with the _famille rose_ colours in the Yung Chêng and
Ch’ien Lung periods and onwards to modern times. (3) A black enamel
in which the same elements--manganese black and copper green--are
compounded together. This is the modern _wu chin_, of which a sample
in the Sèvres Museum (from the collection of M. Itier) was described
by Julien[435] as “noir mat; minerai de manganese cobaltifère et oxyde
de cuivre avec céruse.” It appears on modern Chinese porcelain as a
sticky greenish black enamel, inferior in depth and softness to the
old composite black of the _famille verte_; but for all that, this
is the _yang wu chin_ (foreign black) of the Yung Chêng and Ch’ien
Lung periods. In the days of T’ang Ying it was a far superior colour.
(4) A mottled greenish black occurs as a monochrome and as a ground
colour with reserved discs enamelled with _famille rose_ colours on the
exterior of two bowls in the British Museum, both of which have the
cyclical date, _wu ch’ên_, under the base, indicating the year 1748 or
1808, probably the latter. (5) An enamel of similar texture but of a
purplish black colour is used on a snuff bottle in the same collection
to surround a figure design in underglaze blue. This piece has the Yung
Chêng mark in red, but from its general character appears to be of
later date.
In the list of T’ang’s innovations there is _yang wu chin_ (foreign
black), which is doubtless the same as the _hsi yang wu chin_ (European
black) of Hsieh Min’s list. It is clear that this is something
different from the old green black of the _famille verte_ porcelain,
and we can hardly be wrong in identifying it with the _wu chin_ enamel
described above in No. 3. Compared with the original mirror black _wu
chin_ glaze this enamel has a dull surface, and we can only infer that
the term _wu chin_ had already lost its special sense of metallic
black, and was now used merely as a general term for black.
Assuming this inference to be correct, the term yang _ts’ai wu chin_
(foreign painting in a black ground) should mean simply _famille rose_
colours surrounded by a black enamel ground of the type of either No.
2 or No. 3. It is, of course, possible that the _wu chin_ here is the
old mirror black glaze on which enamelling in _famille rose_ colours
would be perfectly feasible; but I do not know of any example, whereas
there is no lack of choice porcelains answering to the alternative
description.
The two remaining types, _hei ti pai hua_ (white decoration in a black
ground) and _hei ti miao chin_ (black ground gilt), apparently leave
the nature of the black undefined, but as the expressions appear
verbatim in the note attached to No. 52 of Hsieh Min’s list, which is
“reproductions of _wu chin_ glaze,” we must regard the black in this
case, too, as of the _wu chin_ type. The black ground with gilding can
hardly refer to anything but the well-known mirror black glaze with
gilt designs; and the white designs in black ground is equally clearly
identified with a somewhat rarer type of porcelain in which the pattern
is reserved in white in a ground of black enamel of the type of No.
3. There are two snuff bottles in the British Museum respectively
decorated with “rat and vine,” and figure subjects white with slight
black shading and reserved in a sticky black enamel ground. Both these
are of the Tao Kuang period, but there are earlier and larger examples
elsewhere with a black ground of finer quality. Such a decoration
is scarcely possible with anything but an enamel black, and though
there is some inconsistency in the grouping of an enamel and a glaze
together in Hsieh Min’s list, they were apparently both regarded as
“reproductions” of the old mirror black _wu chin_.
Out of the remaining innovations ascribed to T’ang’s directorate,
the _fa ch’ing_ (cloisonné or enamel blue) and the _fa long hua fa_
(painting in the style of the enamels on copper) have already been
described in connection with Hsieh Min’s list. The latter expression
occurs verbatim in the note attached in the Annals of Fou-liang[436]
to No. 49 of the list, which is “porcelain with foreign colouring,”
and it clearly refers to the free painting on the Canton enamels for
reasons already given.[437] It is true that _fa lang_ (like _fo lang_,
_fu lang_, and _fa lan_, all phrases suggestive of foreign and Western
origin) is commonly used in reference to cloisonné enamel, but the
idea of copying on porcelain “landscapes, figure subjects, flowering
plants, and birds” from cloisonné enamels is preposterous to anyone who
is familiar with the cramped and restricted nature of work bounded by
cloisons. It is a pity that Bushell has confused the issue by rendering
this particular passage “painting in the style of cloisonné enamel” in
his _Oriental Ceramic Art_.[438]
But, it will be objected, the painting in foreign colours has been
already shown to have been in full swing some years before T’ang’s
appointment at Ching-tê Chên. The inconsistency is only apparent,
however, for it is only claimed that T’ang introduced this style of
painting on the Imperial porcelain, and it may--and indeed must--have
been practised in the enamelling establishments at Canton and elsewhere
for some time before. Indeed, when one comes to consider the list of
T’ang innovations which we have discussed so far, they are mainly
concerned with the adaptation of various foreign colours and of
processes already in use in the previous reign.
Of those which remain, the _t’ien lan_ or sky blue may perhaps be
identified with a light blue verging on the tint of turquoise, a
high-fired glaze found occasionally in the Ch’ien Lung monochromes.
But probably the greatest of T’ang’s achievements was the mastery of
the _yao pien_ or furnace transmutation glazes, which were a matter
of chance as late as the end of the K’ang Hsi period. These are the
variegated or _flambé_ glazes in which a deep red of _sang de bœuf_
tint is transformed into a mass of streaks and mottlings in which blue,
grey, crimson, brown and green seem to be struggling together for
pre-eminence. All these tints spring from one colouring agent--copper
oxide--and they are called into being by a sudden change of the
atmosphere of the kiln, caused by the admission of wood smoke at the
critical moment and the consequent consumption of the oxygen. Without
the transformation the glaze would be a _sang de bœuf_ red, and in
many cases the change is only partial, and large areas of the deep red
remain. Fig. 1 of Plate 123 illustrates a small but characteristic
specimen of the Ch’ien Lung _flambé_. It will be found that in
contrast with the K’ang Hsi _sang de bœuf_ these later glazes are
more fluescent, and the excess of glaze overrunning the base has been
removed by grinding.
[Illustration: Plate 122.--White Porcelain with designs in low
relief.
Fig. 1.--Vase, peony scroll, _ju-i_ border, etc. Ch’ien Lung
period. Height 7 inches. _O. Raphael Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with “garlic mouth,” Imperial dragons in clouds.
Creamy crackled glaze imitating Ting ware. Early eighteenth
century. Height 9½ inches. _Salting Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with design of three rams, symbolising
Spring. Ch’ien Lung period. Height 3½ inches. _W. Burton
Collection._]
Another development of the _yao pien_ at this time is the use of a
separate “transmutation” glaze which could be added in large or small
patches over another glaze, and which assumed, when fired, the usual
_flambé_ appearance. When judiciously applied the effect of this
superadded _flambé_ was very effective, but it is often used in a
capricious fashion, with results rather curious than beautiful. There
are, for instance, examples of blue and white vases being wholly or
partially coated with _flambé_, which have little interest except as
evidence that the potters could now produce the variegated effect at
will and in more ways than one.
The use of double glazes to produce new and curious effects is
characteristic of the period. The second glaze was applied in various
ways by blowing, flecking, or painting it over the first. The Chün
glaze of the muffle kiln belongs to this type if it has, as I think,
been correctly identified with the blue green dappled with crimson on
Fig. 4 of Plate 128; and the bird’s egg glazes mentioned on p. 217
belong to the same class.[439] Others of a similar appearance, though
not necessarily of the same technique, are the tea dust (_ch’a yeh
mo_) and iron rust (_t’ieh hsiu_).
The tea dust glaze has a scum of dull tea green specks over an ochreous
brown or bronze green glaze, applied either to the biscuit or over an
ordinary white glazed porcelain; and it seems to have been a speciality
of the Ch’ien Lung period, though there are known specimens with the
Yung Chêng mark and many fine examples were made in later reigns. But
neither this glaze nor double glazes in general are inventions of
this time. It would be more correct to speak of them as revivals, for
the early Japanese tea jars, which are based on Chinese originals,
illustrate the principle of the double glaze, and there are specimens
of stoneware as old as the Sung if not the T’ang dynasty, with dark
olive glaze flecked with tea green, and scarcely distinguishable
from the Ch’ien Lung tea dust. It is stated on the authority of M.
Billequin (see Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 518) that a “sumptuary law
was made restricting the use of the tea dust glaze to the Emperor, to
evade which collectors used to paint their specimens with imaginary
cracks,[440] and even to put in actual rivets to make them appear
broken.”
The iron rust is a dark lustrous brown glaze strewn with metallic
specks (due to excess of iron), and in the best examples clouded
with passages of deep red. But these are only two examples of skill
displayed by the Ch’ien Lung potters in imitating artistic effects in
other materials. Special success was attained in reproducing the many
tints of old bronze and its metallic surface. Bright-coloured patina
was suggested by touches of _flambé_, and the effects of gilding
or gold and silver inlay were rendered by the gilder’s brush. The
appearance of inlaid enamels was skilfully copied. “In fact,” to quote
from the _T’ao shuo_,[441] “among all the works of art in carved
gold, embossed silver, chiselled stone, lacquer, mother-of-pearl,
bamboo and wood, gourd and shell, there is not one that is not now[442]
produced in porcelain, a perfect copy of the original piece.” Nor is
this statement much exaggerated, for I have seen numerous examples in
which grained wood, red lacquer, green jade, bronze, and even _mille
fiori_ glass have been so closely copied that their real nature was
not detected without close inspection.
Reverting to T’ang’s achievements, we find special mention made of
the reproductions of Chün yao which have been already discussed in
detail,[443] and of the revived manufacture of the large dragon fish
bowls. The latter are the great bowls which caused such distress
among the potters in the Wan Li period. They are described in the
_T’ao lu_[444] as being fired in specially constructed kilns, and
requiring no less than nineteen days to complete their baking. The
largest size is said to have measured 6 ft.[445] in height, with a
thickness of 5 in. in the wall, one of them occupying an entire kiln.
The old Ming dragon bowl found by T’ang Ying[446] at the factory was
one of the smaller sizes, and measured 3 ft. in diameter and 2 ft. in
height. They were intended for the palace gardens for keeping gold-fish
or growing water-lilies, and the usual decoration consisted of Imperial
dragons. They are variously described as _lung kang_ (dragon
bowls), _yü kang_ (fish bowls), and _ta kang_ (great bowls).
[Illustration: PLATE 123
Eighteenth Century Glazes
Fig. 1.--Square Vase with tubular handles, and apricot-shaped
medallions on front and back. _Flambé_ red glaze. Ch’ien
Lung period (1736–1795). Height 6¾ inches.
_British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase with deep blue (_ta ch’ing_)
glaze: unglazed base. Early eighteenth century. Height 15¾ inches.
_British Museum._
Fig. 3.--Vase with fine iron red enamel (_mo hung_) on the
exterior. Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795). Height 5 inches.
_Salting Collection (V. & A. Museum)._]
Owing to the tremendous difficulty of firing these huge vessels the
order for their supply in the reign of Shun Chih was eventually
cancelled, and no attempt was made to resume their manufacture until
T’ang’s directorate. The usual fish bowl of the K’ang Hsi period is
a much smaller object, measuring about 20 in. (English) in diameter
by 1 ft. in height; but from the note appended to Hsieh Min’s list
in the _Chiang hsi t’ung chih_ on the Imperial _ta kang_, it appears
that already (about 1730) the manufacture had been resumed on the old
scale,[447] for the dimensions of those described are given as from 3
ft. 4 or 5 in. to 4 ft. in diameter at the mouth, and from 1 ft. 7 or
8 in. to 2 ft. in height. An example of intermediate size is given on
Plate 133, one of a pair in the Burdett-Coutts Collection measuring 26½
in. in diameter by 20 in. in height.
It remains to notice two glaze colours to which T’ang Ying appears
to have paid special attention: the _fei ts’ui_ (turquoise) and the
_mei kuei_ (rose colour). The former has already been dealt with in
connection with Ming, K’ang Hsi, and Yung Chêng porcelain, and it is
only necessary to add that it occurs in singularly beautiful quality
on the Ch’ien Lung porcelains, often on vases of antique bronze form,
but fashioned with the unmistakable “slickness” of the Ch’ien Lung
imitations. Occasionally this glaze covers a body of reddish colour
due to admixture of some coarser clay, which seems to have assisted
the development of the colour, and it is worthy of note that there
are modern imitations on an earthen body made at the tile works near
Peking which, thanks to the fine quality of their colour, are liable
to be passed off as old. I have noticed that Ch’ien Lung monochrome
vases--especially those which have colours of the _demi-grand feu_ like
the turquoise--are often unglazed under the base. The foot is very
deeply cut, and the biscuit is bare or skinned over with a mere film of
vitreous matter, which seems to be an accidental deposit.
The _mei kuei_ is the colour of the red rose (_mei kuei hua_), and
it is obviously to be identified with the rose carmines derived from
gold which were discussed in the last chapter. These tints are found
in considerable variety in the early Ch’ien Lung porcelains, from
deep crimson and scarlet or rouge red to pale pink, and they are used
as monochromes, ground colours, and in painted decoration. A superb
example of their use as ground colour was illustrated on the border
of Plate 120, which is probably a Yung Chêng piece. Among the gold red
monochromes of the the Ch’ien Lung period one of the most striking is a
dark ruby pink with uneven surface of the “orange peel” type. Mr. S. E.
Kennedy has a remarkable series of these monochromes in his collection.
Speaking generally, the Ch’ien Lung monochromes repeat the types in
vogue in the previous reigns of the dynasty with greater or less
success. Among the greens, the opaque, crackled glazes of pea, apple,
sage, emerald, and camellia leaf tints described on p. 187 were a
speciality of the time, and the snake-skin and cucumber tints were
also made with success. There were, besides, beautiful celadon glazes
of the _grand feu_, and an opaque enamel of pale bluish green _eau de
nil_ tint. Underglaze copper red was used both for monochromes and
painted wares, but with the exception of the liver or maroon colour
the former had not the distinction of the K’ang Hsi _sang de bœuf_ or
the Yung Chêng _soufflé_ red. There is a jug-shaped ewer with pointed
spout in the British Museum which has a fluescent glaze of light liver
red deepening into crimson, and known in Japan as _toko_. It has the
Hsüan Tê mark, but I have seen exactly similar specimens with the mark
of Ch’ien Lung, to which period this colour evidently belongs. On the
other hand, great improvement is observable in the overglaze coral red
monochrome derived from iron, whether it be the thin lustrous film of
the _mo hung_ or the richly fluxed “jujube” red which attains the depth
and fullness of glaze. Fig. 3, Plate 123, is a worthy example of the
iron red monochrome of the period. As a thick, even and opaque colour
this enamel was used in small pieces which wonderfully simulate the
appearance of red cinnabar lacquer.
An endless variety of blue glazes were used, the pure blue in dark and
light shades, _soufflé_ or plain, the purplish blues and violets, the
lavenders and _clair de lunes_. These are mainly high-fired glazes,
but a favourite blue of this period is a deep purplish blue of soft,
fluescent appearance and minutely crackled texture which is evidently a
glaze of the _demi-grand feu_. The “temple of heaven” blue is of this
nature, though of a purer and more sapphire tint. It is the colour of
the ritual vessels used in the worship of heaven and of the tiles with
which the temple was roofed. Another variety of this glaze has the
same tint, but is harder and of a bubbly, pinholed texture, apparently
a high-fired colour. The _t’ien ch’ing_ (sky blue) has already been
mentioned--a lighter colour between lavender and turquoise. And among
the blue enamels which were sometimes used as monochromes at this time
is an opaque deep blue of intense lapis lazuli tone.
Among the yellows, in addition to the transparent glazes of the older
type, there are opaque enamels, including the lemon yellow with rough
granular texture, the waxen[448] sulphur yellow which often displays
lustrous patches, and the crackled mustard yellow.
Among the purples and browns there are few changes to note, though much
of the greenish brown crackle probably belongs to this time; and there
is little to be said about the white wares except that both the true
porcelain, whether eggshell or otherwise, and the opaque crackled wares
of the Ting yao type were still made with exquisite refinement and
finish. The uneven glaze surface, happily compared to “orange peel,”
was much affected on the Ch’ien Lung whites in common with many other
wares of the time. But there were many new enamel monochromes formed by
blending the _famille rose_ colours, shades of opaque pink, lavender,
French grey, and green, which are sometimes delicately engraved with
close scroll patterns all over the surface, a type which is known
by the clumsy name of _graviata_. These enamel grounds are often
interrupted by medallions with underglaze blue or enamelled designs,
as on the vase illustrated in Plate 125, Fig. 4, and on the so-called
Peking bowls; or, again, they are broken by reserved floral designs
which are daintily coloured in _famille rose_ enamels. But we are
already drifting from the monochromes into the painted porcelains of
the period, and we shall return to the Peking bowls presently.
With regard to the Ch’ien Lung blue and white, little need be added
to what was said of this kind of ware in the last chapter. It was
still made in considerable quantity, and T’ang Ying, in his twenty
descriptions of the manufacture of porcelain, supplies a commentary to
three pictures[449] dealing with the “collection of the blue material,”
“the selection of the mineral,” and “the painting of the round ware
in blue.” From these we learn that large services were made in blue
and white, and the decoration was still rigidly subdivided, one set
of painters being reserved for the outlining of the designs and
another for filling them in, while the plain blue rings were put on
by the workman who finished the ware on the polishing wheel, and the
inscriptions, marks and seals were added by skilful calligraphers. The
blue material was now obtained in the province of Chêkiang, and close
attention was paid to the selection of the best mineral. There was one
kind of blue “called onion sprouts, which makes very clearly defined
strokes, and does not run in the fire, and this must be used for the
most delicate pieces.” This latter colour is to be looked for on the
small steatitic porcelains and the fine eggshell cups.
In common with the other Ch’ien Lung types, the blue and white vases
are often of archaic bronze form, and decorated with bronze patterns
such as borders of stiff leaves, dragon feet and ogre heads. Another
favourite ornament is a close pattern of floral scrolls studded with
lotus or peony flowers, often finely drawn but inclined to be small
and fussy. These scrolls are commonly executed in the blotchy blue
described on p. 13, and the darker shades are often thickly heaped up
in palpable relief with a marked tendency to run into drops. On the
other hand, one sometimes finds the individual brush strokes, as it
were, bitten into the porcelain body, and almost suggesting scratched
lines. Both peculiarities, the thick fluescent blue and the deep brush
strokes, are observable on a small vase of unusually glassy porcelain
in the Franks Collection. Two other pieces in the same collection may
be quoted. One is a tazza or high-footed bowl with a band of Sanskrit
characters and deep borders of close lotus scrolls, very delicately
drawn in a soft pure blue, to which a heavily bubbled glaze has given a
hazy appearance. This piece (Plate 93, Fig. 1) has the six characters
of the Ch’ien Lung seal-mark in a single line inside the foot. The
other is a jar which bears the cyclical date corresponding to 1784.
Like the last, it has a decoration of Buddhistic import, viz. the four
characters [chch 4] _t’ien chu ên po_ (propitious waves from India),
each enclosed by formal cloud devices. It is painted in a soft but
rather opaque blue, and the glaze is again of bubbly texture.
[Illustration: Plate 124.--Miscellaneous Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Magnolia Vase with _flambé_ glaze of crackled
lavender with red and blue streaks. Ch’ien Lung period. Height 7
inches. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with elephant handles, yellow, purple, green
and white glazes on the biscuit. Ch’ien Lung period. Height 8¼
inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 3.--Dish with fruit design in lustrous transparent glazes on
the biscuit, covering a faintly etched dragon pattern. K’ang Hsi
mark. Diameter 9⅞ inches. _British Museum._]
[Illustration: Plate 125.--Ch’ien Lung Wares. _Hippisley
Collection._
Fig. 1.--Brush Pot of enamelled Ku-yüeh-hsüan glass. Ch’ien Lung
mark. Height 2⅜ inches.
Fig. 2.--Bottle, porcelain painted in Ku-yüeh style, after a
picture by the Ch’ing artist Wang Shih-mei. Height 7 inches.
Fig. 3.--Imperial Presentation Cup marked _hsü hua t’ang chih
tsêng_. Height 2 inches.
Fig. 4.--Medallion Vase, brocade ground with bats in clouds, etc.
Ch’ien Lung mark. Height 7¼ inches.]
[Illustration: Plate 126.--Vase with “Hundred Flower” design in
_famille rose_ enamels.
Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795). Height 19¼ inches. _Grandidier
Collection_ (_The Louvre_).]
[Illustration: Plate 127.--Vase painted in mixed enamels. The
Hundred Deer. _Grandidier Collection_ (_Louvre_).
Late Ch’ien Lung period. Height 18 inches.]
In the commoner types of Ch’ien Lung blue and white, the blue is
usually of a dullish indigo tint, wanting in life and fire. There is,
in fact, none of the character of the K’ang Hsi ware; the broad washes,
the clear trembling sapphire, and the subtle harmony existing between
the glaze and blue, are all missing. Moreover, the decoration, with its
careful brushwork and neat finish, has none of the freedom and
breadth of the older types. On the whole, it is small wonder that the
collector finds little to arouse enthusiasm in the blue and white of
this period, if we except the steatitic[450] or “soft pastes,” which
are eagerly acquired.
Underglaze red painting, and the same in combination with blue or with
high-fired glazes and coloured slips, celadon, white, golden brown,
olive brown and coffee brown, were perpetuated from the previous
reigns; and underglaze blue designs are found accompanied by yellow
or coral red enamel grounds in old Ming style, and even by _famille
rose_ painting.
Decoration in transparent glazes of three colours--green, yellow and
aubergine--applied direct to the biscuit is not common on Ch’ien Lung
porcelain, but when used it displays the characteristic neatness and
finish of the period. I suspect that many of the trim rice bowls with
neatly everted mouth rim and dragon designs etched in outline and
filled in with aubergine in a green ground, yellow in an aubergine,
or the other combinations of the three colours, belong to this reign,
in spite of the K’ang Hsi mark under the base. At any rate, the body,
glaze and form can be exactly paralleled in other bowls which have a
Ch’ien Lung mark.
This criticism applies equally to a striking group of porcelain of
which Fig. 3 of Plate 124 is an example. It consists of bowls and
dishes, so much alike in decoration that one might suppose all existing
examples to be parts of some large service. The body is delicately
engraved with five-clawed dragons pursuing pearls, and somewhat
inconsequently over these are painted large and boldly designed
flowering sprays (rose, peony, etc.) or fruiting pomegranate branches
with black outlines filled in with fine, transparent aubergine, full
yellow and green in light and dark shades. The remaining ground space
is coated with the thin greenish wash which does duty for white in
this colour scheme, but in these particular pieces it is unusually
lustrous and iridescent. In fact, on the back of a dish in the British
Museum it has developed patches of golden lustre of quite a metallic
appearance and similar to those noted on the sulphur yellow monochrome
described on p. 239. This lustrous appearance, however, is probably no
more than an exaggerated iridescence, for there is no reason to suppose
that the Chinese ever used metallic lustre of the Persian or European
kind.[451] This group of porcelain always bears the K’ang Hsi mark, but
a comparison with the bowls of later date, both in material and in the
general finish of the ware and the style of the colouring, irresistibly
argues a later period of manufacture, unless, indeed, we admit that the
Imperial bowls of the late K’ang Hsi and the Ch’ien Lung periods are
not to be differentiated. The finish of these wares, in fact, compares
more closely with that of the finer Tao Kuang bowls than with the
recognised types of K’ang Hsi porcelain.
Another kind of on-biscuit decoration of the Ch’ien Lung--and perhaps
the Yung Chêng--period is best described from a concrete example, viz.,
Fig. 2 of Plate 124, a pear-shaped bottle in the British Museum with
sides moulded in shallow lobes, an overlapping frill or collar with
scalloped outline on the neck, and above this two handles in shape of
elephants’ heads. The ground colour is a deep brownish yellow relieved
by borders of stiff leaves with incised outline filled in with smooth
emerald green; and the collar and handles are white with cloud scroll
borders of pale aubergine edged with blue. The general colouring, as
well as the form of this vase, is closely paralleled in fine pottery of
the same period.
It may be added that _famille rose_ enamels are sometimes used
in on-biscuit polychrome decoration, but the effect is not specially
pleasing. Some of the opaque colours serving as monochromes are also
applied in this way, but here the absence of a white glaze beneath is
scarcely noticeable, owing to the thickness and opacity of the enamels.
* * * * *
But all the other forms of polychrome decoration at this period must
yield (numerically, at any rate) to the on-glaze painting in _famille
rose_ enamels, or, as the Chinese have named them, “foreign
colours.” The nature of these has been fully discussed, but there is
no doubt that their application was widely extended in the Ch’ien Lung
period, and one point of difference, at least, is observable in their
technique, viz. the mixing of the tints in the actual design so as to
produce the European effect of shading. By this means the graded tints
in the petals of a flower, and the stratified surface of rocks and
mountains, are suggestively rendered.
It would be impossible to enumerate the endless varieties of design
employed in this large group. Contrasting the decoration of his own
time with that of the Ming porcelain, the author of the _T’ao
shuo_,[452] which was published in 1774, says: “Porcelain painted
in colours excelled in the Ming dynasty, the majority of the patterns
being derived from embroidery and brocaded satins, three or four only
out of each ten being from nature and copies of antiques. In modern
porcelain, out of ten designs you will get four of foreign colouring,
three taken from nature, two copies of antiques, one from embroidery or
satin brocade.”
In their ordinary acceptation the terms are not mutually exclusive, and
the last three types might be, and indeed are, all expressed in foreign
colouring; but presumably the writer refers especially to that kind of
“foreign colouring” which was directly based on the Canton enamels and
is illustrated in the ruby-back eggshell dishes.
The designs taken from nature would include figure subjects
representing personages and interiors, landscapes, growing flowers and
fruit, and the like, good examples of which are shown on Plates 126 and
127. The one represents the “Hundred Flowers,” the vase being, as it
were, one great bouquet and the flowers being drawn naturalistically
enough to be individually recognised. The other recalls the
celebrated picture of the “Hundred Deer” by the late Ming artist, Wên
Chêng-ming.[453]
The copies of antiques would comprise bronze patterns and designs
borrowed from old porcelain, examples of which are not uncommon. And
the brocade patterns, in spite of the low proportion assigned to them
in the _T’ao shuo_, occur in relatively large numbers in Western
collections. They mostly consist of flowers or close floral scrolls
in colour, and reserved in a monochrome ground of yellow, blue, pink,
etc. This is the characteristic Ch’ien Lung scroll work which is used
both in borders and over large areas such as the exterior of a bowl
or the body of a vase. The reserved pattern, highly coloured and
winding through a ground of solid opaque enamel, suggests analogy with
the scroll grounds of the contemporary cloisonné enamel; but this
incidental likeness has nothing to do with the question of “painting in
_fa lang_ style,” which was discussed among T’ang’s innovations.
The finer Ch’ien Lung porcelains, and especially those enamelled with
brocade designs, are frequently finished off with a coating of opaque
bluish green enamel inside the mouth and under the base, a square panel
being reserved for the mark. Needless to say, with all this weight of
enamelling little or nothing is seen of the porcelain itself, the fine
quality of which is only indicated by the neatness of the form and the
elegance of the finish.
The green black which was discussed earlier in the chapter is used with
striking effect, both in company with _famille rose_ colours (as
on Fig. 2 of Plate 131) and without them. An effective decoration of
the latter kind is shown on a beautiful bottle-shaped vase with wide,
spreading mouth in the Salting Collection, which is covered with close
floral scrolls reserved in a ground of black pigment, the whole surface
being washed over with transparent green. The result is a peculiarly
soft and rich decoration of green scrolls in a green black ground.
Nor was the iron red--a colour much employed in monochromes at this
time--neglected in the painted wares. Indeed, it occurs as the sole
pigment on many pieces, and on others it forms a solid brick red or
stippled _soufflé_ ground for floral reserves, medallions and panels of
_famille rose_ enamelling.
Among the opaque enamels a few shades of blue are similarly used, while
the others, as already mentioned, form plain or engraved backgrounds
for floral reserves and panel decoration as on Fig. 2 of Plate 125,
and on the Peking bowls. The latter are so named not because they
were made at Peking, but because the specimens acquired by Western
collectors have been chiefly obtained from that source. Many of them
have the Ch’ien Lung mark, and their ground colours comprise a variety
of pinks, yellow, green, French grey, dark blue, slaty blue, amaranth,
lavender, bluish green,[454] delicate greenish white and coral red.
The medallions on the bowls--usually four in number--are commonly
decorated with growing flowers, such as the flowers of the four seasons
in polychrome enamels, while others have figure subjects, frequently
European figures in landscape setting and with Chinese attributes,
such as a _ju-i_ or _ling-chih_ fungus. The finish of these bowls is
extremely fine, and they are well worthy of the Imperial use to which
they were mostly destined.
The mention of a delicate greenish white enamel on these medallion
bowls reminds us that this colour is used with exquisite effect for
borders of floral design, or even for the main decoration of tea
and coffee wares; and there is a little plate in the British Museum
with Ch’ien Lung mark on which it appears with a peculiar chilled or
shrivelled surface as a background for painted designs in iron red.
There is a large class of enamelled porcelain, doubtless made chiefly
for export, which found its way into our country houses in the last
half of the eighteenth century. It is painted with panels of figure
subjects in which rose pink and iron red are uncompromisingly blended,
and the space surrounding the panels is filled with composite designs
of blue and white with passages of pink scale diaper or feathery
gilt scrolls broken by small vignettes in which a bird on a bough,
insects, growing plants or fragments of landscape are painted in
_camaieu_ pink, red or sepia. In some cases the panels are framed
with low, moulded reliefs, which extend into the border spaces, and the
groundwork in these parts is powdered with tiny raised dots. The wares
include large punch bowls, bottle-shaped ewers with their basins, and
sets of five vases, two of which are beakers and three covered jars
with lion knobs, ovoid or square, and sometimes of eggshell thinness.
Others again have their panels enclosed by wreaths of flowers and
foliage or “rat and vine pattern” in full relief, and many of them
have a glaze of lumpy, “orange peel” texture. The name “Mandarin” has
been given to these wares because the central figure subjects usually
contain personages in official dress; and the large punch bowls
brought back by the tea-merchants are included in this group, though
the mandarin figures in the panels are in this case often replaced by
European subjects.
Elaborately moulded and pierced ornament coloured in _famille
rose_ enamels often appears on the table ware of this period, a
familiar example being the lotus services in which the motive of
the pink lotus flower is expressed partly by moulding and partly by
painting, the tendrils and buds being utilised for feet and handles;
and there are elegant _famille rose_ teapots which have outer
casings with panels of prunus, bamboo and pine carved in openwork in
the style of the Yi-hsing pottery.
Gilding was, of course, freely employed, and, to a lesser extent,
silvering. Elaborate gilt patterns are found covering dark blue,
powder blue, lustrous black, bronze green, pale celadon, and iron red
monochrome grounds; and the finer enamelled vases and bowls are often
finished off with gilt edging, which does not seem to have been much
used before this period, though traces of gilding are sometimes seen on
the lustrous brown edges of the older plates and bowls.
The manual dexterity of the Ch’ien Lung potters is shown in openwork
carving and pierced designs on lanterns, perfume boxes, insect cages,
spill vases, etc., but more especially on the amazing vases with
free-working belts, revolving necks, or decorated inner linings which
can be turned round behind a pierced outer casing, chains with movable
links, and similar _tours de force_.
There are, beside, two types of ornament dating from this period which
demand no little manual skill. These are the lacework and rice grain.
In the former the design is deeply incised in the body and the whole
covered with a pale celadon green glaze, and it is usually applied to
small vases and tazza-shaped cups, the pattern consisting of close and
intricate Ch’ien Lung scrollwork. The resultant effect is of a very
delicate green lace pattern, which appears as a partial transparency
when held to the light (Plate 128, Fig. 2). The rice-grain ornament
carries the same idea a step farther, for the incised pattern is cut
right through the body, leaving small perforations to be filled up by
the transparent glaze. Only small incisions could be made, and these
generally took the lenticular form which the French have likened to
grains of rice (Plate 128, Fig. 1). The patterns made in this fashion
are naturally limited. Star-shaped designs or flowers with radiating
petals are the commonest, though occasionally the transparencies are
made to conform to the lines of painted decoration and even of dragon
patterns.
Both ordinary and steatitic porcelain are used for this treatment; and
the ware is either plain white or embellished with underglaze blue
borders and designs, and occasionally with enamels. The effect is light
and graceful, especially when transmitted light gives proper play to
the transparencies.
As to the antiquity of this decoration in China, I can find no evidence
of its existence before the eighteenth century, and I am inclined to
think it was even then a late development. There are two cups in the
Hippisley Collection with apocryphal Hsüan Tê dates, but the majority
of marked examples are Ch’ien Lung or later. Out of fourteen pieces in
the Franks Collection five have the Ch’ien Lung mark, two have palace
marks of the Tao Kuang period,[455] and one has a long inscription
stating that it was made by Wang Shêng-Kao in the fourth month of
1798.[456] The rest are unmarked. The manufacture continues to the
present day, and the same process has been freely used in Japan, where
it is called _hotaru-de_, or firefly decoration. In this type of
ornament the Chinese were long forestalled by the potters of Western
Asia, for the rice-grain transparencies were used with exquisite effect
in Persia and Syria in the twelfth century if not considerably earlier.
It remains to mention a species of decoration which is not strictly
ceramic. It consists of coating the porcelain biscuit with black
lacquer in which are inlaid designs in mother-of-pearl, the _lac
burgauté_ of the French (Plate 128, Fig. 3). This porcelain is known
by the French name of _porcelaine laquée burgautée_, and it seems
to have been originally a product of the Ch’ien Lung period; at any
rate, I can find no evidence of its existence before the eighteenth
century.
In the Ch’ien Lung period Chinese porcelain reaches the high-water
mark of technical perfection. The mastery of the material is complete.
But for all that the art is already in its decline. By the middle of
the reign it is already overripe, and towards the end it shows sure
signs of decay. At its best the decoration is more ingenious than
original, and more pretty than artistic. At its worst it is cloying
and tiresome. The ware itself is perfectly refined and pure, but
colder than the K’ang Hsi porcelain. The _famille rose_ painting
is unequalled at its best for daintiness and finish, but the broken
tints and miniature touches cannot compare in decorative value with the
stronger and broader effects of the Ming and K’ang Hsi brushwork. The
potting is almost perfect, but the forms are wanting in spontaneity;
and the endless imitation of bronze shapes becomes wearisome, partly
because the intricate forms of cast metal are not naturally suited to
the ceramic material, and partly because the elaborate finish of the
Ch’ien Lung wares makes the imitation of the antique unconvincing. In
detail the wares are marvels of neatness and finish, but the general
impression is of an artificial elegance from which the eye gladly
turns to the vigorous beauty of the earlier and less sophisticated
types.
[Illustration: Plate 128.--Ch’ien Lung Porcelain. _British
Museum._
Fig. 1.--Vase with “rice grain” ground and blue and white design.
Height 7¾ inches.
Fig. 2.--Vase with “lacework” designs. Ch’ien Lung mark. Height
7¾ inches.
Fig. 3.--Vase with the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo Grove in
_lac burgauté_. Height 14½ inches.
Fig. 4.--Vase with “robin’s egg” glaze. Height 4⅛ inches.]
[Illustration: Plate 129.--Octagonal Vase and Cover, painted in
_famille rose_ enamels. Ch’ien Lung period (1736–1795).
Height 35 inches. _One of a pair in the Collection of Dr. A. E.
Cumberbatch._]
As already mentioned, T’ang Ying was commanded by the Emperor in 1743
to arrange and explain twenty pictures of the manufacture of porcelain
which were sent to him from the palace. In twelve days he completed
the descriptions which have since been incorporated in various books
on porcelain, including the _T’ao shuo_ and the _T’ao lu_.
They have been translated by Julien[457] and by Bushell,[458] and
as most of their facts have been embodied in the previous pages, it
would be superfluous to give a verbatim translation of them. The
following summary, however, will give the drift of them, and Bushell’s
translation of the _T’ao shuo_ can be consulted for a full
rendering.
_Illustration_
I.--COLLECTION OF THE STONES AND FABRICATION OF THE PASTE.
The porcelain stone (_petuntse_) was obtained at this
time from _Ch’i-mên_, in the province of Kiangnan.
“That of pure colour and fine texture is used in the
manufacture of bowls and vases of eggshell (_t’o-t’ai_),
pure white (_t’ien pai_), and blue and white porcelain.”
Other earths, including _kaolin_, were mined within the
limits of Jao-chou Fu.
II.--WASHING AND PURIFICATION OF THE PASTE.
III.--BURNING THE ASHES AND PREPARING THE GLAZE.
The ashes of burnt lime and ferns were mixed with
_petuntse_ in varying proportions to form the glazing
material.
IV.--MANUFACTURE OF SEGGARS.
The seggars, or fireclay cases, by which the porcelain
was protected in the kiln were made of a coarse clay
from Li-ch’un, near Ching-tê Chên, and we are told that
the seggar-makers also manufactured rough bowls for the
use of the workmen from the same material.
V.--PREPARING THE MOULDS FOR THE ROUND WARE.
VI.--FASHIONING THE ROUND WARE ON THE WHEEL.
VII.--FABRICATION OF THE VASES (_cho ch’i_).
VIII.--COLLECTION OF THE BLUE COLOUR.
The mineral was obtained at this time from Shao-hsing
and Chin-hua in Chêkiang.
IX.--SELECTION OF THE BLUE MATERIAL.
X.--MOULDING THE PASTE AND GRINDING THE COLOURS.
XI.--PAINTING THE ROUND WARE IN BLUE.
XII.--FABRICATION AND DECORATION OF VASES.
XIII.--DIPPING THE WARE INTO THE GLAZE OR BLOWING THE GLAZE
ON TO IT.
Three methods of glazing are described: the old method
of painting the glaze on with goat’s-hair brush; dipping
the ware into a large jar of glaze; and blowing on the
glaze with a bamboo tube covered at the end with gauze.
XIV.--TURNING THE UNBAKED WARE AND HOLLOWING OUT THE
FOOT.
This turning or polishing was done on a wheel. For
convenience of handling the foot of the vessel was left
with a lump of clay adhering until all the processes,
except firing, were complete; the foot was then trimmed
and hollowed out, and the mark painted underneath.
XV.--PUTTING THE FINISHED WARE INTO THE KILN.
XVI.--OPENING THE KILN WHEN THE WARE IS BAKED.
XVII.--DECORATING THE ROUND WARE AND VASES IN FOREIGN
COLOURING. See p. 242.
XVIII.--THE OPEN STOVE AND THE CLOSED STOVE.
Two types of small kiln used to fire the on-glaze enamels.
XIX.--WRAPPING IN STRAW AND PACKING IN CASKS.
XX.--WORSHIPPING THE GOD AND OFFERING SACRIFICE.
There are a few illustrations appended to the _T’ao lu_ which
cover much the same field, but they are roughly drawn. A much better
set of coloured pictures is exhibited in frames in the Franks
Collection in the British Museum, showing most of the processes
described by T’ang.
CHAPTER XIV
EUROPEAN INFLUENCES IN THE CH’ING DYNASTY
Hitherto the references to European influence on Chinese porcelain
have been of an incidental nature. But the use of Western designs on
the porcelains of the Ch’ing dynasty, and especially in the eighteenth
century, attained such large proportions that it is necessary to
treat the wares so decorated as a class apart. A highly instructive
collection of this type of porcelain is exhibited in the British
Museum, where it has been subdivided in groups illustrating porcelain
painted in China with European armorial designs, porcelain painted in
China after pictures, engravings and other patterns of European origin,
European forms in Chinese porcelain, and, lastly, Chinese porcelain
decorated in Europe.
The un-Chinese nature of these decorations, which is apparent at the
first glance, justifies their segregation. Indeed, the foreign features
are in many cases so conspicuous that it is small wonder if in days
when little was known of Chinese ceramic history these wares were
often attributed to European manufacture. We now know so much of the
intercourse between China and Europe in the past, and of the enormous
trade carried on by the various East India companies, that no surprise
is felt at the idea of orders for table services sent out to China
with armorial and other designs for their decoration. Not that anyone
whose eye was really trained to appreciate the peculiarities of Chinese
porcelain could ever mistake the nature of these wares. The paste and
glaze are, with few exceptions, uncompromisingly Chinese, no matter
how closely the decorator with his proverbial genius for imitation may
have rendered the European design. And even here, if the Oriental touch
is not betrayed in some detail, the Chinese colours and gilding will
disclose themselves to the initiate.
It is hardly necessary here to allude to the absurd notion that any
of this group was made at the little English factory of Lowestoft. If
an error which has once had currency is ever completely dissipated,
Chaffers’s great blunder on the subject of Chinese armorial porcelain
should be forgotten by now. But it is high time that those who are
fully aware of the facts of the case should abandon the equally
stupid and wholly illogical expression, “Oriental Lowestoft,” not
for Lowestoft porcelain decorated in Chinese style, which would be
reasonable enough, but (save the mark!) for Chinese porcelain decorated
with European designs. As if, indeed, an insignificant Suffolk pottery,
which made no enamelled porcelain[459] until about 1770, had any
influence on the decoration of a Chinese ware which was distributed all
over Europe during the whole of the century.
The European style of flower painting and the European border patterns
were used by the Chinese decorators on this class of ware in the last
half of the century, but they were the patterns which originated at
Meissen and Sèvres, and which were adopted and developed at Chelsea,
Derby and Worcester. Any of these wares might have found their way to
China and served as models to the Canton decorators, but the likelihood
of Lowestoft porcelain exerting any appreciable influence in the Far
East is simply laughable.
But to return to the subject of this chapter, the actual European
shapes found in Chinese porcelain can be dismissed in a few words.
There are a few figures, such as the well known pair reputed to
represent Louis XIV. and his queen. These are of K’ang Hsi type, and
decorated with enamels on the biscuit. And there are numerous groups
or single figures of the same period in the white Fukien porcelain,
discussed on p. 111. A few vase forms, copied apparently from Italian
wares and belonging to a slightly later date, and a curious pedestal
in the British Museum, modelled in the form of a tree trunk with two
Cupids in full relief near the top, are purely Western.[460] Needless
to say, the bulk of the useful ware, being intended for European
consumption, was made after European models, which speak for themselves.
Much might be written on the painted designs of this class if space
permitted, but we must be content with citing a few typical instances,
most of which may be seen in the Franks Collection. To the K’ang Hsi
period belong some curious imitations of Dutch Delft, in which even
the potter’s marks are copied, the designs having been, oddly enough,
borrowed in the first instance from Oriental wares by the Dutch
potters. There are the so-called “Keyser cups,” tall, covered cups with
saucers, painted in blue with kneeling figures surrounding a king and
queen, who probably represent St. Louis of France and his consort; and
in the border is the inscription, L’EMPIRE DE LA VERTU EST ESTABI
JUSQ’AU BOUT DE L’UNERS. Another cup has a design of a ship and a
syren, with legend, GARDES VOUS DE LA SYRENE; and there are
small plates with the siege of Rotterdam[461] copied in blue from a
Dutch engraving.
[Illustration: PLATE 130
Vase with pear-shaped body and wide mouth; tubular handles.
Porcelain with delicate _clair de lune_ glaze recalling the
pale blue tint of some of the finer Sung celadons. About 1800
Height 7¾ inches. _British Museum_.]
But the group which probably commands the greatest interest is that
known as “Jesuit china,” decorated with subjects bearing on the
Christian religion. The earliest examples are painted in underglaze
blue, the Christian designs being accompanied by ordinary Chinese
ornaments. An early (to judge from the general style of the piece,
late Ming) example is a pear-shaped ewer, with elongated spout and
handle, in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin. On the side is the sacred
monogram IHS, surrounded by formal ornament, and it has been plausibly
suggested that the little vessel had been used for Communion purposes.
A bowl with fungus mark in the Franks Collection has a Crucifixion on
the exterior, framed in a pattern of cloud-scrolls, and inside with
truly Chinese tolerance is painted a Buddhist pearl symbol in flames
and clouds. A cup in the same series with the “jade” mark[462] has a
Crucifixion half lost among the surrounding arabesque scrolls. These
two are of the K’ang Hsi period, and were probably made with the pieces
to which Père d’Entrecolles[463] alludes, in his letter dated 1712, as
follows: “From the debris at a large emporium they brought me a little
plate which I treasure more than the finest porcelain made during the
last thousand years. In the centre of the plate is painted a crucifix
between the Virgin and St. John, and I am told that this kind
of porcelain was shipped sometimes to Japan, but that this commerce
came to an end sixteen or seventeen years ago. Apparently the Japanese
Christians took advantage of this manufacture at the time of the
persecution to obtain pictures of our mysteries, and these wares,
mingled with others in the crates, eluded the vigilance of the enemies
of our religion. This pious artifice was no doubt eventually discovered
and rendered useless by more stringent investigation, and that is why
the manufacture of this kind of ware has ceased at Ching-tê Chên.”
These early types, which are rare to-day, have a special interest
because they were decorated at Ching-tê Chên, and their general style
indicates that they were made for Oriental use.
After an interval of some years the Jesuit china reappeared in a
more sophisticated form, probably the work of Canton decorators. The
designs, various Biblical scenes, are copied in black and gold from
European engravings, and they occur on plates with rims, tea and coffee
services, and other articles of European use. The earliest may date
from the Yung Chêng period, but they are mostly Ch’ien Lung, and the
same designs are occasionally executed in enamel colours. In addition
to the Christian china there are plates and dishes decorated with rings
of Koranic inscriptions in Arabic, surrounding magic squares, and
destined for the Mussulman markets.
The Franks Collection includes, besides, numerous examples of
profane subjects[464] copied in black or in colours from European
engravings and designs. A striking instance of the patient skill of
the Chinese copyist is given by two large plates completely covered
with the designs--the Triumph of Mordecai and Achilles dipped in the
Styx--copied line for line, apparently, from Le Sueur’s engravings.
The effect of the fine lines and cross-hatching is perfectly rendered,
and one would say at first that they had been transfer-printed if
this process had ever been used by the Chinese. It is amusing, too,
to find English topical and political subjects rendered on Chinese
porcelain, mugs and punch bowls, with busts of the Duke of Cumberland,
Prince Charles Edward, and John Wilkes with appropriate inscriptions.
There are, too, satirical pictures in the style of Hogarth, and a few
popular but not overrefined subjects which gain an additional drollery
from the obviously Chinese rendering of the figures. Many large punch
bowls still survive decorated to suit their owner’s tastes, with a
full-rigged ship for the sea captain, a hunting scene for the master
of hounds, and agricultural designs for the farmer, often proudly
inscribed with the name of the destined possessor and the date of the
order. The Chinese touch is usually betrayed in these inscriptions,
which are obviously reproduced mechanically, and with no compunction
felt for a letter here and there inverted or misplaced.
These porcelains with European pictorial designs are, as a rule, more
curious than beautiful, but it cannot be denied that the next group
with European coats of arms emblazoned in the centre is often highly
decorative. This is particularly true of the earlier examples in
which the shields of arms are not disproportionately large, and are
surrounded with tasteful Chinese designs. The heraldry is carefully
copied and, as a rule, the tinctures are correct. In the older
specimens the blue is usually under the glaze, and from this, and from
the nature of the surrounding decoration in _famille verte_ or
transition colours, one may assume that the pieces in question were
decorated at Ching-tê Chên. From the middle of the Yung Chêng period
onwards a large and constantly increasing proportion of the ware was
decorated at Canton, in the enamelling establishments which were in
close touch with the European merchants, and from this time European
designs begin to encroach on the field of the decoration. Finally,
in the last decades of the century the Chinese armorial porcelain is
decorated in purely European style. An important though belated witness
to the Canton origin of this decoration is a plate in the Franks
Collection with the arms of Chadwick in the centre, a band of Derby
blue, and a trefoil border on the rim, and on the reverse in black the
legend, _Canton in China, 24th Jan^y, 1791_.
Side by side with this armorial porcelain, and apparently also
decorated at Canton, there was painted a large quantity of table
ware for Western use with half-European designs in which small pink
rose-sprays are conspicuous. These are the cheaper kinds of useful ware
which are found everywhere in Europe, and must have formed a large
percentage of the export trade in the last half of the eighteenth
century. The decoration, though usually slight and perfunctory, is
quite inoffensive and suitable to the purpose of the ware.
But to return to the armorial porcelain: apart from its heraldic and
decorative value, it is often important to the student of Chinese
ceramics, because there are specimens which can be dated very
precisely from the armorial bearings and other internal evidence.
In the British Museum series there are some twenty pieces belonging
to the K’ang Hsi period, including an early underglaze blue painted
dish with arms of Talbot, and one or two specimens of pure _famille
verte_, including the plate dated 1702, which has already been
mentioned as being of a peculiar white and glassy-looking ware. There
are examples with underglaze blue and enamel decoration in the Chinese
Imari style, and there is a very distinctive group which can be dated
armorially[465] to the late K’ang Hsi and early Yung Chêng period.
These latter pieces are usually decorated with a shield of arms in the
centre in enamel colours, with or without underglaze blue; the sides
are filled with a band of close floral scrolls or brocade diaper in red
and gold, broken by small reserves containing flowers and symbols; on
the rim are similar groups of flowers and symbols and a narrow border
of red and gold scrolls; and on the reverse are a few floral sprays in
red. The enamels are of the transition kind, _famille verte_ with
occasional touches of rose pink and opaque yellow. The porcelain is
the crisp, sonorous, well potted ware with shining oily glaze of K’ang
Hsi type, and the accessory ornament is of purely Chinese character.
A border of trefoil cusps, not unlike the strawberry leaves of the
heraldic crown, but traceable to a Chinese origin, makes its first
appearance on this group. It is a common feature of subsequent armorial
wares, like the narrow border of chain pattern which seems to have come
into use about 1730.
Dated specimens of Yung Chêng armorial, with painting in the “foreign
colours,” have been already described.[466] Other examples of this
period have the decoration in underglaze blue outlines washed with
thin transparent colours, in black pencilling and in black and gold.
The border patterns of lacework, vine scrolls, bamboos wreathed with
foliage and flowers, and fine floral scrolls, are often beautifully
executed in delicate gilding or in brown and gold.
In the Ch’ien Lung period there was an ever-increasing tendency to
displace the Chinese patterns in favour of European ornament. About
the middle of the century small bouquets and scattered floral sprays
in the well-known Meissen style of painting made their appearance, and
the gradual invasion of the border patterns by European motives is
apparent. It may be of interest to note a few of the latter as they
occur on dated specimens:
1. Light feathery scrolls, gilt or in colours: first half of Ch’ien
Lung period.
2. Rococo ornaments combined with floral patterns: first half of Ch’ien
Lung period.
3. Large shell-like ornaments and scroll edged frames of lattice work,
loosely strung together: early Ch’ien Lung period.
4. Similar motives with more elaborate framework, enclosing diapers,
and interrupted by four peacocks at regular intervals and generally
black and gold: about 1740 to 1760.
5. Black and brown hexagon diaper, edged with dragon arabesques in
gold: an early type of border, but lasting as late as 1780.
6. Composite borders with diapers, symbols, flowers, etc., and
sometimes including butterflies, half Chinese and half European: on
specimens ranging from 1765 to 1820.
This last border pattern was adopted at Coalport and in other English
factories to surround the willow pattern.[467]
In the last decades of the century, such purely European borders as the
swags of flowers used at Bow and Bristol, floral and laurel wreaths
and husk festoons; the pink scale patterns of Meissen; ribbons and
dotted lines winding through a floral band, feather scrolls, etc., of
Sèvres origin, and afterwards adopted at Worcester, Bristol, Lowestoft
and elsewhere in England; blue with gilt edges and gilt stars, as on
the Derby borders, which also derive from Sèvres; and the corn-flower
sprigs of the French hard-paste porcelains.
A conspicuous feature of the Ch’ien Lung export porcelain in general
is the use of a thin, washy pink in place of the thick carmine of the
early _famille rose_. This is a colour common to European porcelain
of the period, and it may have been suggested to the Chinese by
specimens of Western wares. We may, perhaps, note here a design
of Oriental figures (as on the Mandarin porcelain) in pink and red
surrounded by borders of pink scale diaper, broken by small panels of
ornament. It has no connection with the armorial group, but it has
apparently been bandied back and forward from East to West. Based on
a Chinese original, it was largely copied on English porcelain, such
as Worcester, Lowestoft, etc., and apparently services of the English
make found their way east and were copied again at some coast factory,
or even in Japan, for the export trade. Much of this hybrid ware is
found in Australia and on the east coast of Africa, and though the
material and the colours are obviously Oriental, the drawing of the
faces reflects a European touch. The porcelain is coarse and greyish,
and the decoration roughly executed, probably in the first decades of
the nineteenth century.
The trade in Chinese armorial porcelain seems to have gradually died
out in the nineteenth century, for reasons which are not far to seek.
As far as England was concerned, the improvements in the manufacture
both of porcelain and fine earthenware changed her position from that
of a consumer to that of a producer. In addition to which, a high
protective duty must have adversely affected the import trade, for we
read[468] in the notes of Enoch Wood, the Staffordshire potter, that
alarm was felt in 1803 in the potteries at the “proposed reduction of
£59 8s. 6d. per cent. from the duty on the importation of Oriental
porcelain, leaving it at 50 per cent.”
Not the least interesting part of the Franks Collection is the section
devoted to Chinese porcelain decorated in Europe. In the early years
of the eighteenth century a number of enamelling establishments
appeared in Holland and in other countries where glass and pottery were
decorated in the enamel colours which were then coming into play. As
the supply of home-made porcelain was as yet practically non-existent,
the enamellers had to look for this material in the Oriental market.
Chinese porcelains with slight decoration, plain white wares, or those
mainly decorated with incised and carved design under the glaze, and
white Fukien porcelain offered the most suitable surface; and these
we find treated by Dutch enamellers with the decoration then in vogue
among the Delft potters. In the British Museum there are plates with
portraits of Dutch celebrities, with designs satirising John Law’s
bubble, and even with Japanese and Chinese patterns, especially those
which the Delft potters were in the habit of copying from the “old
Imari.” Thus we find the curious phenomenon of Chinese porcelain
decorated in Europe with Oriental patterns, and, as may be imagined,
these pieces have caused much perplexity to collectors. They are,
however, to be recognised by the inferior quality of the enamels and
the stiff drawing of the copyists. In the case of the Fukien porcelain
with relief ornament, the decorators often confined themselves to
touching the raised pattern with colour.
As a rule, these added decorations are crude and unsightly, but there
were artists of great skill among the German _chambrelans_
(as these unattached enamellers were called), such men as Ignatius
Bottengruber and Preussler of Breslau,[469] who flourished about 1720
to 1730. Their designs of figures, mythical subjects, etc., enclosed by
baroque scrollwork, were skilfully executed in _camaieu_ red or
black, heightened with gilding, and their work, which is very mannered
and distinctive, is highly prized at the present day. Occasionally
we find the handiwork of the Dutch lapidary on Chinese porcelains, a
design of birds and floral scrolls being cut through a dark blue or
brown glaze into the white biscuit.
About the middle of the eighteenth century a more legitimate material
was found for the European decorator in small quantities of Chinese
porcelain sent over “in the white.” Regular supplies in this state
must have been forwarded from Ching-tê Chên to Canton for the
enamellers there, and, no doubt, the European merchants were able to
secure a small amount of this. Thus it was that Chinese porcelain is
occasionally found with decoration by artists whose touch is recognised
on Chelsea and other wares. It is not necessary to assume that such
pieces were painted in the Chelsea factory. That may have been the
case, but we know of important enamelling establishments, such as
Duesbury’s in London, where Chelsea, Bow and Worcester porcelains
obtained in the white were decorated to order. It is probable that the
painters trained in this work afterwards passed into the porcelain
factories. There are rare examples of Chinese porcelain with transfer
prints executed at Battersea or even at Worcester, and apparently one
or two pieces have had inscriptions added at Lowestoft; but, after
all, this group of decorated Oriental is a very small one, and the
specimens painted in the style of any particular English factory
except Chelsea could be counted on one’s fingers. No doubt the same
proceedings were repeated in various parts of the Continent, and there
are certainly specimens decorated in the Meissen style, and in one
piece in the Franks Collection the Meissen mark has been added.
But besides this more or less legitimate treatment of Chinese
porcelain, there is a large group of hideously disfigured wares known
by the expressive name of “clobbered china.” On these pieces Chinese
underglaze decoration has been “improved” by the addition of green,
yellow, red, and other enamels and gilding, which fill up the white
spaces between the Chinese painting and even encroach on the blue
designs themselves. This malpractice dates from the early years of the
eighteenth century, and we find even choice specimens of K’ang Hsi blue
and white among the victims. Possibly there was a reaction at this time
against the Chinese blue and white with which the Dutch traders had
flooded the country, but it is pitiful to find nowadays a fine vase or
bottle of this ware plastered with meaningless daubs of inferior colour.
Strange to say, the clobberer became an established institution, and
he was at work in London in the last century, and maybe he is not yet
extinct; and, stranger still, his wretched handiwork has been actually
taken as a model for decoration in English potteries, even to the
ridiculous travesties of Oriental marks which he often added as the
last insult to the porcelain he had defaced. As a rule, the clobbered
decoration occurs on blue and white and follows more or less the lines
of the original, though it is at once betrayed by its clumsiness and
the wretched quality of the enamels used. Occasionally the clobberer
was more ambitious, as on a bottle in the British Museum decorated
with three spirited monsters in underglaze red. Into this admirably
spaced design the clobberer has inserted graceless trees and three
ridiculous figures in classical dress standing in Jack-the-giant-killer
attitudes with brandished swords over the Chinese creatures. The effect
is laughable, but it was vandal’s work to deal in this way with choice
K’ang Hsi porcelain.
CHAPTER XV
NINETEENTH CENTURY PORCELAINS
_Chia Ch’ing_ [chch 2] (1796–1820)
There is little to distinguish the porcelain of this reign from that of
Ch’ien Lung. The old traditions were followed and the high standard of
technical skill was maintained to a great extent, though in the absence
of original ideas the natural tendency was towards a gradual decline.
The blue and white is a mere echo of the Ch’ien Lung blue and white, as
is shown by a square jar in the Franks Collection, which bears the date
corresponding to 1819. Another dated specimen in the same collection
is a little bowl with design of the “Eight Ambassadors of the Tribes
of Man” mounted on strange beasts, painted in thin garish blue under a
bubbly glaze. There are well-finished monochromes of the Ch’ien Lung
type, conspicuous among which is an intense brick red (derived from
iron), which has all the depth and solidity of a glaze. The enamelled
wares are in no way inferior to their late Ch’ien Lung models, and the
medallion bowls with engraved enamel grounds are particularly choice.
Plate 132, a richly decorated vase belonging to the Lady Wantage,
illustrates a type common to both periods. The design of ladies of the
harem in an Imperial pleasure ground is carefully painted in mixed
colours and enclosed by rich borders of dark ruby pink enamel, brocaded
with polychrome floral scrolls. Another vase in the same collection
(marked Chia Ch’ing) has a movable inner lining and pierced outer shell
richly enamelled in the same style. The blue green enamel of the Ch’ien
Lung porcelain was freely used to finish off the base and mouth of the
vases of this time.
Bushell[470] describes as a speciality of the Chia Ch’ing period, vases
with elaborate scrollwork of various kinds in underglaze blue enhanced
by a richly gilded background; and the mark of this reign will be found
on many of the choicer snuff bottles, including those sumptuous little
vessels with richly carved and pierced outer casing as finely tooled as
Su Chou or Peking lacquer.
We have already seen that rice-grain decoration was effectively used at
this time, and no doubt many specimens of the kindred “lacework” were
also made. In fact in a general classification of Chinese porcelain it
would be almost superfluous to separate the Chia Ch’ing from the Ch’ien
Lung groups.
_Tao Kuang_ [chch 2] (1821–1850)
The reign of Tao Kuang is the last period of which collectors of
Chinese ceramics take any account. It is true that the general
deterioration which was already remarked in the previous reign became
more and more conspicuous towards the middle of the nineteenth century.
It seemed as though the wells of inspiration in China had dried up and
the bankrupt arts continued to exist only by virtue of their past.
Curiously enough the same wave of decadence was felt all the world over
at this period, and if we compare the porcelain of Tao Kuang with the
contemporary English and Continental productions we must confess that
the decadence of China was Augustan beside the early Victorian art.
The Tao Kuang porcelain in the main is saved from utter banality by
the high traditions on which it was grounded and by the innate skill
of the Chinese potters. Indeed there are not a few out of the numerous
specimens of this period in our collections which have a certain
individuality and distinction entitling them to a place beside the
eighteenth-century wares.
But, speaking generally, the porcelain is a weak edition of the Yung
Chêng types. The forms are correct but mechanical, the monochromes
are mere understudies of the fine old colours, and the enamels are of
exaggerated softness and weak in general effect.
There are numerous marked specimens of all varieties in the Franks
Collection. These include a blue and white vase with bronze designs of
ogre heads, etc., in the K’ang Hsi style, but painted in pale, lifeless
grey blue, and a bowl with lotus designs and symbols surrounding four
medallions with the characters _shan kao shui ch’ang_[471] neatly
painted in the same weak blue and signed by Wen Lang-shan in the year
1847. Among the monochromes is a dignified vase of bronze form with
deep turquoise glaze dated 1844, besides coffee brown bowls, full
yellow bowls, vases with curiously bubbled glaze of dark liver red, and
a coral red jar and cover. There is also a large bowl with “tiger skin”
glaze patched with yellow, green, aubergine and white. All of these
pieces are lacking in quality and distinction, though I have seen far
superior specimens of lemon yellow monochrome and tea dust glaze.
The enamelled wares are much more attractive, and many of the rice
bowls are prettily decorated in soft colours. The Peking or medallion
bowls, for instance, are little if anything below the standard of
previous reigns, and in addition to the medallions in engraved enamel
grounds of pink, green, grey, etc., outside, the interior is often
painted in underglaze blue. There are tasteful bowls with white bamboo
designs reserved in a ground of coral red, and there are dishes with
blackthorn boughs with pink blossom in a white ground. The Yung Chêng
style of underglaze blue outlines with washes of thin-transparent
enamels was also affected, but the most characteristic enamelling of
the period is executed in a mixture of transparent and opaque enamels,
a blend of _famille verte_ and _famille rose_. This colouring, soft
and subdued, but often rather sickly in tone, is frequently seen on
bowls and tea wares with Taoist subjects, such as the Eight Immortals,
the fairy attendants of Hsi Wang Mu in boats, or the goddess herself
on a phœnix passing over the sea to the _t’ien t’ang_ or cloud-wrapt
pavilions of Paradise, preceded by a stork with a peach of longevity in
its beak. The sea is usually rendered by a conventional wave pattern
delicately engraved in greenish white, and sometimes the ground of
the design is washed with the same thin, lustrous, greenish white,
which was remarked on a group of porcelains described on page 151.
The porcelain of these bowls has a white, if rather chalky, body and
a greenish white glaze of exaggerated oily sheen, and of the minutely
bubbled, “muslin-like” texture which is common to Japanese porcelains.
But the ordinary Tao Kuang wares are of poor material, greyish in tone
and coarser in grain, with the same peculiarities in the texture of the
glaze in an exaggerated degree.
[Illustration: Plate 131.--Eighteenth Century Painted Porcelain.
Fig. 1.--Plate painted in black and gold, European figures
in a Chinese interior. Yung Chêng period. Diameter 9 inches.
_British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Dish with floral scrolls in _famille rose_
enamels in a ground of black enamel diapered with green foliage
scrolls. Ch’ien Lung period. Diameter 23¼ inches. _Wantage
Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 132.--Vase painted in mixed enamels, an
Imperial park and a bevy of ladies. _Wantage Collection._
Deep ruby pink borders with coloured floral scrolls and symbols.
Ch’ien Lung mark. About 1790. Height 30 inches.]
A typical example of the fine Tao Kuang rice bowl with Taoist design
in the Franks Collection, delicately painted in mixed colours, which
recall the Ku-yüeh-hsüan ware of the early Ch’ien Lung period, has
the palace mark, _Shên tê t’ang_,[472] in red under the base. A
specimen with this mark in the Hippisley Collection[473] is inscribed
with a poem by the Emperor Tao Kuang, definitely fixing the date of
this hall mark, which is found on choice porcelains made for Imperial
use. It occurs on a vase of fine workmanship in the British Museum,
decorated with polychrome five-clawed dragons in a lavender enamel
ground, of which the base and interior are coated with blue green
enamel; and we have already[474] commented on an interesting dish with
archaic designs in Ming red and green, which is explained in the mark
as an “imitation of the antique made for the _Shên-tê_ Hall.”
It is worthy of note that most of the porcelain with hall and studio
marks in red belong to the nineteenth century, chiefly to the Tao
Kuang period. Several of these marks are figured and explained on
p. 220 (vol. i.), but it may be useful if we describe here a few of
the specimens on which they occur. The hall mark, _Ch’êng tê t’ang_,
appears on a shallow bowl in the Franks Collection painted inside with
a coiled dragon in green and a border of bats in red, while outside
is a landscape carefully painted in mixed colours in a style similar
to Plate 125, Fig. 3. The latter has the Imperial hall mark, _Hsü hua
t’ang_, with addition of the word _tsêng_ (for presentation), and it
has besides an inscription proclaiming that it is the “cup of him who
departed as General and returned as Grand Secretary” (_ch’u chiang ju
hsiang chih pei_). It is painted with a scene in the palace grounds
with the Emperor receiving a military officer.[475] A pretty bowl in
the Franks Collection with rockery, flowering plants, fungus, etc., in
colours has the palace mark, _ssŭ pu t’ang_; and there are two saucer
dishes with Buddhist decoration of palmettes in cruciform arrangement,
and a border of Sanskrit characters painted in underglaze blue with
washes of transparent enamels marked respectively _Ts’ai jun t’ang_,
and _Ts’ai hua t’ang_ (hall of brilliant colours and hall of brilliant
decoration), which are probably synonymous.
A distinctive group of porcelain, which seems to belong to the Tao
Kuang period, consists of small boxes and of vases with landscapes
and similar elaborate ornament deeply carved in the manner of red
lacquer. The surface is usually covered with an opaque green or yellow
monochrome enamel, but occasionally it is left in white biscuit. These
pieces have almost always a maker’s mark, such as Wang Ping-jung, Wang
Tso-t’ing (see vol. i., p. 223), and probably come from one factory.
Bushell[476] also alludes to white unglazed porcelain made at this
time, and recalling the English Parian ware. It is chiefly seen on
small objects for the writing table.
The collector will always be glad to secure specimens of the palace
porcelains of the Tao Kuang period, and of the smaller objects on
which the weakness of the colouring is not noticeable. There are, for
instance, many exquisite snuff bottles with the mark of this reign,
with carved, monochrome and enamelled ornament. On the other hand
quantities of these little objects coarsely manufactured and sketchily
decorated were made at this time, and among them the crude specimens
with a floral spray on one side, a line of verse in grass characters
on the other, and a granulated border coated with opaque yellowish or
bluish green enamel, whose supposed discovery in ancient Egyptian tombs
made a sensation some sixty years ago. It is not difficult to guess how
these objects traded among the Arabs found their way into the tombs
which were in course of excavation, but for a time they were believed
to prove the existence of Chinese porcelain in the second millennium
before Christ.[477]
Three other types of indifferent ware may be mentioned here in passing.
They belong to the middle of the nineteenth century, and in part
at least to the Tao Kuang period. One is painted with a large pink
peony and foliage in a bright green enamel ground; the second has cut
flowers, butterflies and insects in strong rose colours on a celadon
green glaze; and the third has rectangular panels with crowded figure
subjects in red and pink enclosed by a brocade pattern of flowers,
fruit and insects as in the second type. This third class is often
represented by large and rather clumsily shaped vases with two handles
of conventionalised dragon form, and the border patterns are sometimes
backed with gilding; but it also occurs in quite recent manufacture in
tea and toilet services made for the export trade. The porcelain in all
these cases is of a rough, coarse-grained make, and the reader might
have been spared a description of them were it not that in spite of
their inferior quality they are the subject of frequent inquiries.
_Hsien Fêng_ [chch 2] (1851–1861)
In the third year of Hsien Fêng the T’ai p’ing rebels captured Ching-tê
Chên and burnt down the Imperial factory, which was not rebuilt till
1864. The potters themselves were killed or scattered; and, naturally,
marked examples of this reign are scarce. Such, however, as do exist
are of little account, and may be regarded as continuations of the Tao
Kuang manufacture. Bushell[478] mentions vases of good form painted
in soft colours with nine five-clawed dragons on a white background,
which is etched in the paste with scrolled waves, and a dinner service
of bowls, cups and saucer dishes painted in colours with processional
figures of the eighteen Lohan. And in the British Museum there is a
large globular bowl on a high foot painted with green dragon designs
and a bowl with medallions of lanterns and vases separated by lotus
ornament, neither of which are in any way different from the Tao Kuang
wares. No doubt a good deal of porcelain was made at the private
factories even during this troubled period, but the specimens which I
have seen are not worthy of description.
_T’ung Chih_ [chch 2] (1862–1873)
When the T’ai p’ing rebels had been expelled from the province of
Kiangsi by the celebrated viceroy, Li Hung-chang, in 1864, the Imperial
factory was rebuilt on the old lines by the new director, Ts’ai
Chin-ch’ing. In the same year a list of the porcelain forwarded to the
Emperor was drawn up, and it is published in the _Chiang hsi t’ung
chih_[479] immediately after Hsieh Min’s list. It consists mainly of
bowls, wine and tea cups, saucer dishes and plates classified as _yüan
ch’i_ (round ware), and a few vases under the general heading, _cho
ch’i_; and though there is little originality in the designs, lists of
this kind are so rare and so instructive that I have no hesitation in
giving it in full below, following Bushell’s[480] renderings in most
cases.
Actual examples of T’ung Chih porcelain are not inspiring. Those in
the British Museum include a covered bowl with coloured sprays in a
ground of red diaper; a bowl with enamelled sprays on a pale brown
(_tzŭ chin_) glaze; a saucer with dragons etched under a transparent
green glaze, the exterior in unglazed biscuit painted in black; a
cup with red dragons in a ground of black enamel and the cyclical
date 1868; a low, octagonal bowl with the Eight Trigrams in relief
outside, the interior of this and of the preceding specimen as well
being coated with blue green enamel; and a basin enamelled with the
Eight Ambassadors of the Tribes of Man. The most favourable specimen
of the ware in the same collection is a carefully painted wedding bowl
with canary yellow ground and medallions of appropriate symbols, the
peach-and dragon-headed staff of longevity, the double fish symbol
of conjugal felicity, and the group of pencil brush, cake of ink and
_ju-i_ sceptre forming the rebus _pi ting ju i_, “may things be as you
wish.”
LIST OF IMPERIAL PORCELAINS SUPPLIED IN THE THIRD YEAR OF T’UNG
CHIH (1864)
VASES (_cho ch’i_)
1. Quadrangular vases with apricot medallions and two tubular
handles with Chün glaze. [For the shape see Plate 123, and for
the glaze see p. 1.]
2. Vases of the same form with Ko glaze.
3. Quadrangular vases with the Eight Trigrams (_pa kua_),
and Ko glaze. [The form is quadrangular body with round neck and
foot, moulded in relief with the trigrams; for the Ko glaze see
vol. i., p. 71.]
4. Vases in form of jade ewers (_yü hu ch’un_) with _chi
hung_ (or copper red) glaze.
5. Vases of the same form, with blue and white decoration and
raised threads. [Bushell explains that the surface is divided
into patterns or sections by raised rings.]
6. Vases of the same form, with blue and white decoration with
balcony (_lan kan_). [Bushell explains, “garden scenes
enclosed by railings.”]
7. Paper-beater (_chih ch’ui_) vases with the _t’ai
chi_ symbol and the glaze of the Imperial factory decorated
in colours. [The form is the club-shape or _rouleau_; and
the symbol is apparently the _yin-yang_, the Confucian
symbol for the Absolute.]
8. Quadrangular vase with elephant symbol of great peace
(_t’ai ping yu hsiang_, a rebus meaning “augury of great
peace”). [These are apparently square vases with two handles in
form of elephant (_hsiang_) heads.]
ROUND WARES (_yüan ch’i_)
9. Medium-sized bowls with dragons in purple brown (_tzŭ_).
10. Medium-sized bowls with _chi hung_ glaze.
11. Large bowls (_wan_) with Indian lotus (_hsi lien_)
in blue.
12. Five-inch dishes (_p’an_), similarly decorated.
13. Medium-sized bowls with storks and Eight Trigrams (_pa
kua_).
14. Wine cups with narcissus flowers (_shui hsien hua_) in
enamels.
15. Wine cups with spreading rim painted with dragons in red.
16. Dishes (_p’an_) a foot in diameter decorated in blue with a
pair of dragons filling the surface.
17. Soup bowls (_t’ang wan_) with incised dragons under a dark
yellow monochrome glaze. [These, according to Bushell, are
smaller and shallower than rice bowls.]
18. Medium-sized bowls, barrel shaped, with dragons engraved
under a yellow monochrome glaze.
19. Yellow monochrome tea cups.
20. Medium-sized bowls with dragons engraved under a yellow
monochrome glaze.
21. Medium-sized bowls with the three fruits in groups (_pan
tzŭ_[481]) painted in blue. [The fruits are peach, pomegranate
and finger citron.]
22. Soup bowls with expanding rim and dragons incised under
yellow monochrome glaze.
23. Six-inch bowls with a pair of dragons in blue.
24. One-foot dishes painted in blue with silkworm scrolls
(_ts’an wên_) and longevity characters.
25. Tea cups decorated in blue with _mu hsi_ flowers (a
small variety of the _olea fragrans_).
26. Medium-sized bowls with precious lotus in enamel colours.
27. Tea cups with white bamboo on a painted red ground.
28. Six-inch dishes painted in blue with the “three friends”
(_san yu_) and figure subjects. [The three friends in floral
language are the pine, bamboo and prunus. It is also a name
given to the group of Confucius, Buddha, and Lao-tzŭ, who are
often represented examining a picture scroll or standing in
conversation.]
29. Tea dishes (_ch’a p’an_) with a pair of dragons in blue.
[Bushell describes these as “little trays with upright borders,
of oblong, four-lobed, and fluted outline.” They must in fact
have closely resembled the old teapot stands of European
services.]
30. Six-inch dishes with green dragons on a ground of engraved
water-pattern painted in colour.
31. One-foot dishes painted in blue with archaic phœnixes
(_k’uei fêng_). [These designs are ornaments of bird form,
terminating in scrolls such as appear on ancient bronzes.]
32. Nine-inch dishes with blue ground and dragons in clouds
painted in yellow.
33. Medium-sized bowls with pure white glaze and ruby red (_pao
shao_) phœnix medallions.
34. Tea cups with dragons and clouds painted in yellow in a blue
ground.
35. Six-inch dishes with _chi hung_ (copper red) glaze.
36. Medium-sized bowls with _chi ch’ing_ (deep violet blue)
glaze.
37. Nine-inch dishes with _chi hung_ glaze.
38. Soup bowls, barrel shaped, with lustrous brown glaze.
39. Medium-sized bowls with red phœnix medallions in a celadon
(_tung ch’ing_) glaze.
40. Nine-inch dishes with silkworm scrolls and _ju-i_[482]
ornament in enamel colours.
41. Tea cups enamelled in colours with mandarin ducks and lotus
flowers.
42. Tea bowls (_ch’a wan_) with _chi ch’ing_ glaze.
43. Tea bowls decorated in colours with the _pa pao_ (eight
attributes of the Taoist Immortals; see p. 287).
44. Large bowls with the Eight Immortals in blue on red
enamelled waves.
45. Medium-sized bowls, blue and white inside, and with coloured
lotus flowers outside.
46. Bowls with the Eight Buddhist symbols of happy augury (_pa
chi hsiang_).
47. Porcelain bowls with green designs and peach yellow ground.
48. Five-inch dishes with purple and green dragons in a yellow
monochrome ground.
49. Three-inch platters with similar ornament.
50. Soup bowls of the fourth size (_ssŭ hao_) with green
monochrome glaze.
51. Five-inch dishes with phœnixes in clouds.
52. Medium-sized bowls with dragons and phœnixes among flowers
in coloured enamels.
53. Four-inch platters (_tieh_) with purple and green dragons in
yellow monochrome ground.
54. Nine-inch dishes painted in colours with the eight Buddhist
symbols among flowers.
55. Large bowls painted in colours with archaic phœnixes
(_k’uei fêng_) among flowers.
_Kuang Hsü_ [chch 2] (1875–1909)
Marked examples of this modern ware in the Franks Collection include a
saucer with coloured sprays in a cloudy pink enamel ground; a covered
cup with spout decorated in red with cartouches of seal characters
accompanied by translations in the ordinary script, and a dish with
blackthorn bough and pink blossoms in Tao Kuang style. In every case
the ware is coarse-grained and rough to the touch, while the glaze is
of the lustrous surface and “musliny” texture, which is characteristic
of the nineteenth century porcelains; and the painting is mechanical
and devoid of any distinction. There are two little saucers of better
quality both in material and painting, with stork and lotus designs in
mixed enamels and marks[483] which show that they are palace pieces
made for the Empress Dowager.
But the collector’s interest in Kuang Hsü porcelain is of a negative
kind. When it is frankly marked he sees and avoids it. But the Chinese
potters towards the close of the century evidently recovered some part
of the skill which the ravages of the T’ai p’ing rebels seemed to have
effectually dissipated; for they succeeded in making many excellent
_sang de bœuf_ reds and crackled emerald green monochromes which
have deceived collectors of experience. Even the best, however, of
these wares should be recognised by inferiority of form and material,
and in the case of red the fluescent glaze will be found in the modern
pieces to have overrun the foot rim, necessitating grinding of the base
rim. There are also fair imitations of the K’ang Hsi blue and white and
the enamelled vases of _famille verte_ or on-biscuit colours, and
even of the fine black and green grounds. But here again the inferior
biscuit, the lack of grace in the form and the stiffness of the designs
will be at once observed by the trained eye. When marked most of these
imitations have the _nien hao_ of K’ang Hsi, and this is almost
invariable on the modern blue and white.
There is, of course, a great quantity of modern porcelain, chiefly
enamelled and blue and white, made for the export trade and sold at
prices which compete successfully with those of the European wares.
It is chiefly in the style of the K’ang Hsi and Ch’ien Lung wares,
and is marked accordingly; but the ware is coarse-grained, and the
decorations summary, and there is no excuse for mistaking these obvious
reproductions for anything but what they are and, in fact, what they
pretend to be.
The brief reign of Hsüan T’ung [chch 2] (1909–1911) is a blank so
far as ceramic history is concerned; and with the fall of the Ch’ing
dynasty in 1912 the Imperial works ceased its activity, and it remains
to be seen whether Ching-tê Chên will again have the advantage of a
state factory to set a standard for the industry in general.
CHAPTER XVI
PORCELAIN SHAPES IN THE CH’ING DYNASTY
A considerable number of the forms which Chinese porcelain assumes have
been described in the chapters dealing with the Ming wares; but these
may be usefully supplemented by a rapid survey of those employed by
the potters of the Ch’ing dynasty. The latter will, of course, include
many of the former because the Chinese delight in reproducing the older
types.
The brief summary of the eighteenth-century porcelain forms given in
the opening pages of the _T’ao shuo_[484] begins in the correct style
with the reproductions of the ancient ritual vessels _tsun_, _lei_,
_yi_, _ting_, _yu_ and _chüo_. These are all bronze forms, _tsun_ being
applied to wine vessels, _lei_ to vases ornamented with the meander
pattern known as “cloud and thunder” scrolls,[485] _yi_ to bowl-shaped
vessels without feet, _ting_ to cauldrons with three or four legs and
two handles, _yu_ to wine jars with covers, and large loop handles for
suspension, and _chüo_ to libation cups of helmet and other shapes.
The bronze forms are commonly decorated with bronze patterns such as
the key-fret, archaic dragon and phœnix scrolls, cicada pattern, ogre
heads and bands of stiff (banana) leaves, either painted, moulded,
engraved, or carved in relief; and the complicated bronze shapes are
usually fashioned in moulds, and in many cases furnished with ring
handles attached to monster heads. Another ritual type manufactured
in porcelain as well as bronze is the altar set of five pieces (_wu
kung_), which consists of a _ting_ or tripod incense vase, two flower
vases, and two pricket candlesticks. A humbler altar set was composed
of a single censer or a tazza-shaped cup (Plate 93, Fig. 1) for
flowers, and a pair of lions on stands fitted with tubes for holding
sticks of incense. The bronze forms have always been used by the
Chinese potters, but they were specially affected in the archaising
period of Ch’ien Lung.
In the Western judgment, however, which is unbiased by the associations
of these antique forms, the true pottery shapes, made on the wheel,
will appear far more attractive; for nothing can surpass the simple
rounded forms which sprang to life beneath the deft fingers of the
Chinese thrower. Their simplicity, grace, and perfect suitability
for their intended uses have commended them as models to the Western
potter far more congenial than the cold perfection of the Greek
vases. Naturally they vary in quality with the skill and taste of the
individual, but a high level of manual skill ruled among the Chinese
potters, and their wheel-work rarely fails to please.
It would be useless to attempt to exhaust all the varieties of
wheel-made forms. Many of them are due to slight alterations of line
according to the caprice of the thrower. It will be enough to enumerate
the principal types and to note a few of the more significant changes
which came in at ascertained periods. By comparing the illustrations
in different parts of this book, and better still, by comparing the
specimens in some well classified collection, the reader will soon
learn to notice the periodical changes of shape. To take the familiar
bottle-shaped vases as an instance, there is probably no shape on which
more numerous changes have been rung, nor one which is more susceptible
to the individual touch; and yet the trained eye will generally
distinguish the K’ang Hsi bottle from the later forms, though the
distinction is often more subtle than that which separates the typical
K’ang Hsi form (Plate 123, Fig. 2) from that with depressed body and
straight wide neck (Plate 128, Fig. 3), which is characteristic of the
Ch’ien Lung period.
The K’ang Hsi bottles vary in themselves in length and slenderness
of neck, and in the form of the body, which may be globular, ovoid,
barrel shaped or pear shaped. Again they are often of double or even
triple gourd shape, or plain with a bulbous swelling on the upper part
of the neck or actually at the mouth. The last variety are called
“garlic-shaped” bottles by the Chinese. The normal types are used to
hold a single spray or a flowering branch, but there are others with
slender necks tapering to a point which are designed for sprinkling
perfumes and are generally known as sprinklers.
Of flower vases there are numerous varieties: egg-shaped vases;
baluster-shaped vases with spreading mouth; high-shouldered vases
with small mouth, the _mei p’ing_ of the Ming period; beakers (_ku_)
with slender body, swelling belt in the middle and flaring mouth;
the so-called _yen yen_ vase with ovoid body and high neck with
trumpet mouth,[486] which is used for some of the choicest K’ang
Hsi decorations (Plate 101); the _Kuan yin_[487] vase of ovoid form
with short neck and spreading mouth; the cylindrical vase with short
straight neck and spreading mouth (Plate 103), called by the French
_rouleau_ and by the Chinese “paper-beater” (_chih ch’ui p’ing_),
whence our name “club-shaped.” A smaller form of the same is known to
the Chinese as _yu ch’ui p’ing_ (oil-beater vase).
There is besides the wide oval jar or _potiche_ with dome-shaped cover
(_tsun_), and the more slender form known as _t’an_, which often has a
lion or _ch’i-lin_ on the cover serving as a knob; the tall cylinder
to hold arrows and the low cylinder for brushes, and numerous pots and
jars for various uses.
Most of these rounded forms have counterparts among the square and
polygonal vases which are made in moulds or built up by the difficult
process of joining together flat bats of clay. The square vases made
by the latter method were a source of much trouble to the potters
owing to the danger of imperfect jointing or of warping in the kiln.
Fig. 1 of Plate 104 illustrates an effective type of the square
vase with gracefully tapering body, the four sides of which are so
often appropriately decorated with the flowers of the four seasons.
Occasionally the angles are flattened, giving an irregular octagonal
form. Another form selected for sumptuous decoration is the square vase
with pendulous body and two dragon handles figured on Plate 97; and
another is the arrow stand and square tube with deeply socketed stand
and railed border (Plate 118).
The pilgrim bottle supplies an effective model with a flattened
circular body, small neck and foot, and loops on the periphery to carry
a cord. These loops tended to disappear when the form had lost its
first significance and was only regarded as a vase.
The list of Imperial wares made in the reign of T’ung Chih includes
vases for divining rods of square form with low round neck and base,
ornamented with _pa kua_ designs in relief; vases with apricot
medallions and tubular handles like Fig. 1 of Plate 123. Other familiar
types are the bag-shaped vases with the mouth tied with silk, melon
and gourd forms, and the vase shaped like a double fish erect on its
tail or a single fish rising from waves.
To quote a few of the types named in the _T’ao shuo_[488]:--“For
holding flowers there are vases from two or three inches to five or
six feet high, round like a _hu_, round and swelling below like a
gallbladder (_tan_), round and with spreading mouth and contracted
below like a _tsun_, with flat sides and full angles like a ku, upright
like bamboo joints, square like a corn measure (_tou_), with contracted
mouth and flattened sides, with square and round flutings, and cut in
halves with flat backs for hanging on walls.”
For pot-pourri and for fragrant flowers to perfume the rooms various
covered jars were provided, hanging vases with reticulated sides
(Plate 114), and boxes with perforated covers. For growing plants
there were deep flower pots and shallow bulb bowls, and the large and
small fish bowls were used for growing water-lilies as well as for
keeping gold-fish; and shallow bowls were apparently used as arenas for
fighting crickets.[489] As for the vessels in which the crickets were
kept, various suggestions have been made in reference to the “cricket
pots” mentioned in Chinese books, and the name is sometimes given to
reticulated vases and boxes; but we are told that the cricket prefers a
damp dwelling, and that their pots were consequently made as a rule of
absorbent earthenware. There is a snuff bottle decorated with crickets
in the British Museum, and one is represented perched on an overturned
pot from which he has apparently escaped, the lid having fallen off.
This pot is of ordinary ovoid jar form apparently ornamented with
incised fret pattern.
The apparatus of the library table is peculiarly Chinese; and
as calligraphy and painting were regarded as among the highest
accomplishments, so the potter lavished on the implements of the writer
his most ingenious fancies and his most beautiful workmanship. There
were porcelain handles for the pencil brush called _pi kuan_; a brush
rest (_pi ko_) of many fanciful forms (see Fig. 3 of Plate 60) of which
a miniature range of hills was the commonest; a bed (_pi ch’uang_)
for it to lie down on, and a cylindrical jar (_pi t’ung_) for it to
stand up in; vessels called _hsi_ to wash it in, usually of shallow
bowl form or shaped like crinkled lotus leaves or in some such dainty
design. There were rests for the writer’s wrist and paper weights of
fantastic form. For the ink (_mo_), there is the pallet (_mo yen_) for
rubbing (Plate 94, Fig. 2), and a bed for the ink-cake (_mo ch’uang_),
a screen (_yen p’ing_) behind which it was rubbed, small water pots
(_shui ch’êng_) in innumerable shapes and served by a tiny ladle, and
water droppers (_shui ti_) of quaint and ingenious designs.[490] There
were rollers for picture scrolls (_hua chou_) with porcelain ends, and
stands for books in the form of small elegantly shaped tables with
three or four legs often beautifully painted in enamels on the biscuit.
With these is the incense-burning apparatus which consists of incense
box (_hsiang ho_), the vase to hold the tiny tongs and shovel used for
the charcoal and incense, and the urn or burner (_shao hsiang lu_).
The last appears in very varied shapes, of which the most usual is
the tripod cauldron (_ting_) with upright ear-handles. Others take
the purely fantastic form of figures of animals, birds and even human
beings with open mouth or nostrils to emit the smoke. Tiny vases for a
single flower are usually placed upon the writing table, the furniture
of which is completed by seals (_yin_), which are commonly modelled
after Han dynasty jades with handles in form of camels, tortoises,
dragons, tigers, etc., and small boxes to contain the seal vermilion
(_yin sê ch’ih_).
Other porcelain objects which combined use and ornament were plaques
(_pan_) for screens and slabs for inlaying in pillows, beds, couches
and verandah partitions; actual pillows of oblong or semicircular shape
with concave surface, the inside hollow and capable of being filled
with fragrant herbs; bowls, shaped like the Buddhist alms bowl, for
holding black and white chess pieces, and the other requisites for
chess (_wei-ch’i_) or _gô_.
With regard to the plaques, we learn that the Emperor Shun Chih gave
an order in 1659 for oblong plaques 3 feet by 2½ feet and 3 inches in
thickness, but these like the large fish bowls were beyond the powers
of the potters at that time. Indeed Père d’Entrecolles tells us that
in 1712, the date of his first letter,[491] the potters had much
difficulty in executing the orders given by the European merchants for
plaques for table tops, etc., and that the largest practicable size
was only about a foot square. No advantage was obtained by giving them
additional thickness to prevent the fatal warping in the kiln, and
it was found better to make the two faces in separate slabs united
by cross pieces. Bushell points out that these double plaques were
frequently sawn apart and mounted in screens, etc., as separate panels.
The complete plaque is usually decorated on one side with a figure
subject and on the other with flowers.
We should mention also among miscellaneous objects the beautiful
hanging lanterns of eggshell thinness or perforated in openwork
patterns; the barrel-shaped garden seats; the curious hat stands,
a sphere on top of a tall stem or a little box mounted on long
curved legs, the top in either case being hollow and perforated to
hold perfumes or ice or charcoal according to the season; boxes of
all kinds; small personal ornaments such as hair-pins, ear-rings,
girdle-clasps, rosary beads, thumb rings, fingernail covers, tubes for
mandarin feathers, buttons and pendants; the little bottles or flasks
originally intended for drugs but afterwards consecrated to snuff when
the Spaniards or Portuguese had introduced the tobacco plant into China
at the end of the sixteenth century; and finally the ornamental heads
of opium pipes made chiefly in pottery.
For household use the _T’ao shuo_ enumerates rice spoons, tea spoons
(_ch’a shih_), sets of chop sticks, vessels for holding candle snuffs,
wax pots, vinegar droppers, washing basins (_tsao p’ên_), pricket
candle sticks (_têng ting_), pillows (_chên_), square and round, tubs
(_p’ên ang_), jars (_wêng_) with small mouth, alms bowls (_po_) with
globular body and contracted mouth, plates (_tieh_), and bowls (_wan_);
and for tea and wine parties and dinner services, tea pots, wine
vessels, bowls, and dishes of every sort.
Bowls (wan) are found in many sizes and shapes, the commonest being the
small rice bowl; the shallower type was used for soup (_t’ang wan_).
There are deep bowls with covers which might almost be described as
jars, and there are tea bowls with covers used for infusing tea in the
absence of a tea pot. In drinking from these it was usual to tilt the
cover very slightly so as to leave only a narrow egress for the tea and
to prevent the leaves accompanying it.
When a tea pot was used, the liquid was served in a tea cup (_ch’a
chung_) of tall upright form without handle[492] or cover. The
Chinese cup is not furnished with a saucer in European style, but
there are straight-edged trays which serve a similar purpose, holding
one or more cups, and the old tea bowls and wine cups used to be
provided with a circular stand with hollow ring in which the base of
the cup could be inserted. The tea pot itself does not seem to be older
than the Ming dynasty, and before that time tea bowls only had been
used, the vessels with spouts and handles being reserved for wine and
other liquids.
A tiny bowl is the usual form of wine cup, but beside these there are
goblets with deep bowl, and the shallow-bowled _tazze_ with high
stems, like the early Ming “stem cups.” For ceremonial purposes, the
wedding cups and libation cups were shaped after bronze ritual vessels
or rhinoceros horn cups; and wine cups for ordinary use sometimes
take the ornamental form of a lotus leaf or a flower. The commonest
form of wine ewer is the Persian type with pear-shaped body, long
graceful handle and spout. Others take fanciful forms like that of a
peach or aubergine fruit, a gourd or melon. The peach-shaped ewer with
opening under the base is the original of our Cadogan tea pot, and we
need be surprised at nothing in Chinese art when we find this same
principle and practically the same form in a ewer of T’ang date in the
Eumorfopoulos collection. The tall cylindrical ewers with body jointed
like a bamboo, and the front shaped at the top like a tiara, are used
for sweet syrups.
The Chinese dish is for the most part saucer-shaped. When over half a
foot in diameter it is called _p’an_, the smaller dishes or platters
being named _tieh_. There are large dishes for fragrant fruits to
perfume the room, and lotus-leaf shaped dishes for sweetmeats and
various small trays of fanciful form for the dinner table; and there
are the “supper sets” consisting of a varying number of ornamental
trays which can be used separately, or joined together to form a
pattern suggesting a lotus or some other many-petalled flower.
In addition to the native Chinese forms there is a host of specialised
objects made for export and designed in foreign taste; such as the deep
bowls with pagoda covers for Siam; weights to hold down the corners of
a mat for India, in form like a door knob mounted on a circular base;
narghili bowls and ewers for Persia, besides the bottle-shaped pipes
with mammiform mouthpieces, which sometimes take animal or bird forms
such as those of the elephant or phœnix; round covered dishes for
Turkey; and all the familiar objects to meet European requirements. The
sets of five vases (three covered jars and two beakers) are a purely
European garniture intended for the mantelpiece or the sideboard.
There are, besides, all manner of figures--human, animal, or
mythical--but they belong rather to the chapter on ornamental motives.
CHAPTER XVII
MOTIVES OF THE DECORATION
Chinese decoration, its motives and its meaning, might form the subject
for a substantial and very interesting volume. But it can only be
treated here in a summary fashion by enumerating a few of the motives
which occur most frequently in porcelain. The designs on the earlier
wares have already been discussed in the chapters dealing with the
Ming and the preceding periods, but in view of the conservatism of the
Chinese artists a certain amount of repetition will be inevitable in
discussing the ornament of the Ch’ing dynasty porcelain.
If we except some of the hybrid designs on the export wares which were
made for people unfamiliar with Chinese thought, we may assume that
there is a meaning in all Chinese decoration apart from its ornamental
intention; and this applies not only to the central motives but also
as a rule to the subsidiary ornament such as borders and formal
patterns. Consequently it is clear that a study of this inner meaning
is a necessary condition for the full appreciation of the decorated
porcelain.
Figure subjects and symbolical ornaments probably require the most
explanation for the Western student; but unfortunately the former are
often so difficult to identify that we have to be content with general
headings such as court scenes, military scenes, dramatic subjects,
illustrations of romance, etc. Possibly to the unusually well-read
native most of these scenes would recall some known story, but the
European can only hope to identify one here and there by a lucky
chance. He can, of course, take a book of Chinese legends and by the
exercise of a little imagination find a story for every scene; but such
methods are not to be recommended, and it is infinitely preferable to
give the design no label at all unless the identification is fully
established. That at least leaves the question open.
[Illustration: Plate 133.--Late _famille rose_ Enamels.
Fig. 1.--Bowl painted in soft enamels, attendants of Hsi Wang
Mu in boats. Mark, _Shên tè t’ang chih_. Tao Kuang period.
Diameter 6⅞ inches. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Imperial Fish Bowl with five dragons ascending and
descending, borders of wave pattern, _ju-i_ pattern, etc.,
_famille rose_ enamels. Late eighteenth century. Height 20
inches. _Burdett-Coutts Collection._]
[Illustration: Plate 134.--Porcelain Snuff Bottles. Eighteenth
Century. _British Museum._
Fig. 1.--Subject from the drama, black ground. Yung Chêng mark.
Height 2¾ inches.
Fig. 2.--Battle of demons, underglaze blue and red. Mark,
_Yung-lo t’ang_. Height 3¾ inches.
Fig. 3.--Blue and white “steatitic” ware. Height 2½ inches.
Fig. 4.--Crackled cream white _ting_ glaze, pierced casing
with pine, bamboo and prunus. Height 3¼ inches.
Fig. 5.--“Steatitic” ware with Hundred Antiques design in
coloured relief. Chia Ch’ing mark. Height 2½ inches.]
These scenes from history and romance were favourite subjects with
the K’ang Hsi decorators of blue and white and _famille verte_
porcelains. To instance a few types: the scene of the half-legendary
Yao with his cavalcade coming to greet the Emperor Shun who is engaged,
like the Roman Cincinnatus, in ploughing; the episodes of the three
heroes of the Han dynasty, Chang Liang, Ch’ên P’ing and Han Hsin[493];
the heroes of the romantic period of the Three Kingdoms (221–265
A.D.) whose stories may be compared with those of our knights
of the Round Table; the stories of brigands in the reign of Hui Tsung
of the Sung dynasty.[494] The story of Su Wu, the faithful minister of
Han Wu Ti, tending cattle in captivity among the Hiung-nu, is depicted
on a bowl in the British Museum, and a dish in the same collection
shows an emperor (perhaps Kao Tsu, the first of the T’ang dynasty)
surrounded by his captains.
Processional scenes and subjects illustrating the life and customs of
the times, peaceful domestic scenes with interiors of house or garden
peopled by women and children, are more common in the _famille
rose_ period when the warlike tastes of the Manchus had already been
softened by a long period of peace. A civil procession and a military
procession sometimes balance each other on two vases, the one being
the _wên p’ing_ (civil vase), and the other the _wu p’ing_
(military vase). A mock dragon-procession formed by children at play is
a not uncommon motive. Indeed playing children (_wa wa_) have been
from the earliest times a subject frequently and most sympathetically
depicted on Chinese porcelain. A historical child-scene is that in
which the boy Ssŭ-ma Kuang broke the huge fish bowl with a stone to let
out the water and save his drowning companion.
There are many motives intended to appeal to the Chinese literatus,
and specially suited to ornament the furniture of the writing table.
Symposia of literary personages, for instance, make an appropriate
design for a brush pot, or again, the meeting of the celebrated
coteries, the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo Grove who lived in the
third century, and the worthies of the Orchid Pavilion, including the
famous calligrapher, Wang Hsi-chih, who met in the fourth century to
drink wine, cap verses, and set their cups floating down the “nine-bend
river” (see Plate 104, Fig. 1). The Horace of China, Li T’ai-po, the
great T’ang poet, is represented in drunken slumber leaning against an
overturned wine jar or receiving the ministrations of the Emperor and
his court. He also figures among the Eight Immortals of the Wine Cup, a
suitable subject for an octagonal bowl. Poets, painters, and sages are
often seen in mountain landscapes contemplating the beauties of Nature;
two sages meeting on a mountain side is a frequent subject and is known
as the “happy meeting,” or again, it is a single sage, with attendant
carrying a bowl, book, and fan, or sometimes bringing an offering of a
goose. In rare instances these figures can be identified with Chinese
worthies such as Chiang Tzŭ-ya, who sits fishing on a river bank, or
Chu Mai-ch’ên, the wood-cutter, reading as he walks with his faggots on
his back.
The stories of the _Twenty-four Paragons of Filial Piety_ provide a
complete series of popular subjects, which may be seen in the panels
of Plate 91, Fig. 3. Women are represented by the Virtuous Heroines;
by celebrated beauties such as Yang Kuei-fei, consort of the T’ang
ruler Ming Huang,[495] and Hsi Shih, the Chinese Delilah who was the
undoing of Fu Ch’ai, prince of Wu, in the fifth century B.C.; by the
poetess Tan Hui-pan, and by a hundred nameless figures which occur
in genre designs, and by the idealised beauties, _mei jên_ (graceful
ladies), which the Dutch ungallantly dubbed with the name of _lange
lijsen_ or long Elizas. The domestic occupations of a lady form another
series of subjects for polygonal vessels; and women are sometimes
seen engaged in the Four Subjects of Study--Poetry, Rites, History,
and Music--or in the Four Liberal Accomplishments--Writing, Painting,
Music, and Checkers--but the groups who make up these scenes are more
often composed of men. The game of checkers or _gô_, which is so often
loosely rendered chess,[496] is _wei ch’i_ the “surrounding game,” a
favourite Chinese amusement, which figures in two well-known subjects
of porcelain decoration. One of these is the legend of Wang Chih, the
Taoist patriarch, watching the game played by two old men, the spirits
of the Pole Stars, in a mountain retreat; the other is the story of the
general Hsieh An, who refused to allow the news of an important victory
to disturb his game.
Ladies of the court picking lotus flowers from boats on an ornamental
lake in the presence of the Emperor and Empress represent the annual
Lotus Fête at Peking, and there are numerous scenes in the Imperial
pleasure grounds in which bevies of ladies from the harem are depicted.
The Eight Ambassadors of the Tribes of Man, the barbarian nations from
the eight points of the compass, form a processional subject suitable
for the exterior of bowls and cups. The ambassadors are grotesquely
drawn figures, sometimes mounted on strange beasts, and carrying gifts
as tribute to the Emperor. Dreams and visions are depicted in the
usual Oriental manner by a cloud issuing from the dreamer’s head and
expanding into a scene which represents the subject of the dream. Thus
the youthful scholar is seen asleep with a vision of his future dignity
floating above his head. Divine apparitions are differentiated by the
presence of clouds around or below the main figures.
Deities and deified mortals are favourite subjects for porcelain
decoration as well as for figures and groups modelled in the round.
The three principal Chinese religions--Confucianism, Buddhism, and
Taoism--exist side by side with perfect mutual toleration. Indeed the
principles of the one are in many cases incorporated in the others.
Buddhist and Taoist emblems are freely mingled in decorative art,
and the three founders--Confucius, Buddha, and Lao-tzŭ--are grouped
together in friendly conversation or examining a scroll on which is
drawn the Yin-yang symbol of the duality of Nature.[497]
Confucianism is the religious or rather philosophical system officially
recognised in China, but its adherents are chiefly among the literati.
Though it inculcates ancestor-worship, it is not in itself concerned
with an after life, and it contains few romantic superstitions
calculated to fire the popular imagination or to suggest motives for
decorative art. Confucius himself is frequently represented both in
painting and sculpture, and his meeting with Lao-tzŭ is familiar in
pictorial art. Confucianism recognises certain canonised mortals, the
logical outcome of ancestor-worship, and among these the best known
in art is Kuan Yü, a warrior famous at the end of the Han dynasty,
who was not, however, canonised until the Sung period, and only in
1594 raised to the rank of a god (of War) under the title of Kuan
Ti. It is reasonable to suppose that most of the numerous statuettes
of this popular deity were made after the latter date. He is usually
represented as a dignified personage with flowing beard seated in
full armour with right hand raised in a speaking attitude; but he
figures also on horseback or beside his charger, and with his faithful
squires--Chou Ts’ang, who carries a halberd, and Kuan P’ing, his own
son. Occasionally he is seen seated with a book in his hand, in which
case he is regarded as a literary rather than a military power.
The gods of Literature have a very large following in China, where
scholarship has been the key to office for upwards of two thousand
years, the chief deity of the cult being Wên Ch’ang, or in full, Wên
Ch’ang ti chün. He is the star god who resides in one of the groups of
the Great Bear, a dignified bearded figure in mandarin dress seated
with folded hands or mounted on a mule. A lesser but more popular
divinity is the demon-faced K’uei Hsing, who was canonised in the
fourteenth century. Originally a scholar, who though successful in the
examinations was refused office on the ground of his preternatural
ugliness, he threw himself in despair into the Yangtze and was carried
up to heaven on a fish-dragon. He is easily recognised as a demon-like
person, poised with one foot on the head of a fish-dragon (_yü
lung_) which is emerging from waves. He brandishes triumphantly in
his hands a pencil brush and a cake of ink.[498] The fish-dragon is
itself a symbol of literary aspiration, from the legend that when the
salmon come every year up the river to the famous falls of Lung-mên
(the dragon gate), those which succeed in leaping up the falls are
transformed into fish-dragons. This metamorphosis of the fish as it
emerges from the water into the dragon is a favourite motive for
porcelain decoration.
Buddhism, which was officially recognised in China by the Emperor
Ming Ti in 67 A.D., had a far-reaching influence over the
arts of sculpture and painting, and the revolution which it worked in
the greater arts was naturally reflected in the lesser handicrafts.
Buddhistic motives appear early in the Chinese pottery, and in the
period with which we are at present concerned, the Buddhist religion
supplied a great number of motives for the porcelain painter and the
figure modeller. Sakyamuni himself is depicted or sculptured in various
poses: (1) As an infant standing on the lotus and proclaiming his
birth; (2) as an ascetic returning from his fast in the mountains;
(3) seated cross-legged on a lotus throne with right hand raised in
teaching attitude, the most frequent representation; (4) recumbent on
a lotus pillow, in Nirvana; (5) in the Buddhist Trinity holding the
alms bowl or patra between the Bodhisattvas Manjusri and Samantabhadra.
These two last when represented singly are usually mounted, Manjusri on
a lion, and Samantabhadra on an elephant.
But by far the most popular figure of the Buddhist theogony in China
is Kuan-yin, the Compassionate, and Kuan-yin, the Maternal; in the
latter capacity she holds a child in her arms and displays a wonderful
likeness to our images of the Virgin. But a full account of her has
been given on p. 110, and need not be repeated. Next in popularity
perhaps is the jolly monk with the hempen bag, Pu-tai Ho-shang, a
semi-nude, corpulent person, with smiling face, and a large bag full
of the “precious things.” He is also a great favourite in Japan, where
he is known as Hotei, and worshipped as the god of Contentment. By the
Chinese he is also regarded as Mi-lo Fo, the Maitreya or coming Buddha,
and he has been added by them to the list of Arhats or apostles of
Buddha. He is often represented surrounded by playful children to whom
he is devoted.
The Arhats, or Lohan, are all known by their several attributes, but
in porcelain decoration they usually appear in groups consisting of
the whole or a large part of their number, which, originally sixteen,
was increased in China to eighteen by the inclusion of Ho-shang and
Dharmatrata. The latter is a long-haired individual who carries a vase
and a fly whisk in his hands and a bundle of books on his back while he
sits gazing at a small image of Buddha.
He is not to be confused with Tamo, the Indian Bodhidharma, the
first Chinese patriarch, who came to Lo-yang and remained there in
contemplation for nine years. The legend is that after his death (about
530 A.D.) he was seen returning to India wrapped in his shroud
and carrying one shoe in his hand, the other having been left behind
in his tomb. This is the guise in which he frequently appears in art
(Plate 86), and he is often depicted crossing the Yangtze on a reed.
Many of the symbolical ornaments on porcelain have a Buddhistic
significance, such as the eight emblems (see p. 298), the crossed
dorjes or thunderbolts of Vajrapani,[499] the Buddhist jewel in a
leaf-shaped halo of flames; and Sanskrit characters of sacred import
are used as decoration for bowls and dishes, made no doubt for the use
of the faithful. The principal animals associated with Buddhist designs
are the elephant, who carries the jewel vase on his back, the white
horse (_pai ma_), who brought the Buddhist scriptures across the
desert from India, the hare, who offered himself as food to Buddha, and
the Chinese lion who, under the name of the “dog of Fo” (Buddha), acts
as guardian of Buddhist temples and images.
But the religion which has taken the greatest hold on Chinese
imagination and which consequently has supplied the largest number of
motives for their decorative art is undoubtedly Taoism. As originally
taught by Lao-tzŭ, a contemporary of Confucius, in the sixth century
B.C., the doctrine of Tao (the Way) pointed to abstraction
from worldly cares and freedom from mental perturbation as the highest
good. But just as the later but closely analogous doctrine of Epicurus
degenerated into the cult of pleasure, so the true teaching of Lao-tzŭ
was afterwards lost among the adventitious beliefs and superstitions
which were grafted on to it by his followers. The secret of transmuting
metals into gold and of compounding the elixir of life became the
chief preoccupations of the Taoist sages, the latter quest appealing
particularly to the Chinese with their proverbial worship of longevity;
and a host of legends grew up concerning mortals who won immortality
by discovering the elixir, about fairies and the denizens of the Shou
Shan or Hills of Longevity, about the Isles of the Blessed and the
palace of Hsi Wang Mu in the K’un-lun mountains. It is this later and
more popular phase of Taoism which figures so largely in porcelain
decoration.
Lao-tzŭ is represented as a venerable old man with bald, protuberant
forehead, who rides upon an ox, the same in features as the god of
Longevity, Shou Lao, who is in fact regarded as his disembodied spirit.
Shou Lao, however, is more commonly shown enthroned upon a rocky
platform in the Hills of Longevity, holding in one hand a curious
knotted staff, to which are attached rolls of writing, and in the
other a peach, and surrounded by his special attributes, the spotted
deer, the stork, and the _ling chih_ fungus. Thus seated he
receives homage from the Eight Immortals and the other Taoist genii or
_hsien_, who are as numerous as the fairies of our countryside.
Other designs represent Shou Lao riding on a deer or flying on the
back of a stork, or simply standing with his staff and peach, his
robes embroidered with seal forms of the character _shou_
(longevity). In this last posture he is often grouped with two other
popular deities, one in mandarin robes and official hat holding a
_ju-i_ sceptre, which fulfils every wish, and the other also in
official robes but holding a babe who reaches out for a peach in his
other hand. Together they form the Taoist triad, Shou-hsing, Lu-hsing,
and Fu-hsing, star-gods (_hsing_) of Longevity, Preferment, and
Happiness. Fu-hsing in addition has sometimes two boy attendants
carrying respectively a lotus and a hand-organ.
The Eight Taoist Immortals (_pa hsien_) are:--
1. Chung-li Ch’üan, also known as Han Chung-li, represented as a fat
man, half-draped, who holds a _ling chih_ fungus in one hand and a
fly-whisk or fan in the other.
2. Lü Tung-pin, a figure of martial aspect armed with a sword to slay
dragons and evil spirits. He is the patron of barbers.
3. Li T’ieh-kuai, Li with the iron crutch, a lame beggar with a crutch
and pilgrim’s gourd from which issue clouds and apparitions. He is
patron of astrologers and magicians.
4. Ts’ao Kuo-ch’iu, in official robes, wearing a winged hat, and
carrying a pair of castanets. He is patron of mummers and actors.
5. Lan Ts’ai-ho, of uncertain sex, carrying a hoe and a basket of
flowers. Patron of gardeners and florists.
6. Chang Kuo Lao, the necromancer with the magic mule, of which he kept
a picture folded up in his wallet. He would make the beast materialise
from the picture by spurting water on to it; and at other times he
would conjure it out of a gourd. His attribute is a musical instrument
consisting of a drum and a pair of rods. He is patron of artists and
calligraphers, and ranks as one of the gods of Literature.
7. Han Hsiang Tzŭ, who gained admission to the Taoist paradise and
climbed the peach-tree of Immortality. He is shown as a young man
playing on a flute, and is specially worshipped by musicians.
8. Ho Hsien Ku, a maiden who wears a cloak of mug-wort leaves and
carries a lotus. She is patroness of housewives.
The Immortals are commonly represented in a group paying court to Shou
Lao, or crossing the sea on the backs of various strange creatures or
other supernatural conveyances on their way to the Islands of Paradise.
Grouped in pairs they lend themselves to the decoration of quadrangular
objects.
Other frequenters of the Shou Shan are the twin genii[500] of Union
and Harmony (_ho ho êrh hsien_), an inseparable pair, depicted as
ragged mendicants with staff and broom, or as smiling boyish figures,
the one with a lotus and the other holding a Pandora box of blessings,
from which a cloud is seen to rise; Tung-fang So, who stole the peaches
of Hsi Wang Mu and acquired thereby a longevity of nine thousand
years, is represented as a smiling bearded old man, not unlike Shou
Lao himself, carrying an enormous peach, or as a boy with a peach to
recall his youthful exploit. Liu Han, with his familiar three-legged
toad, a wild-looking person, who waves a string of cash in the air, and
very closely resembles the Japanese Gama Sennin (the Hou Hsien Shêng
of China); Wang Tzŭ-ch’iao, who rides on a crane playing a flute, and
Huang An, the hermit, whose steed is a tortoise. The god of Alchemy is
figured, according to the identification of a statuette in the Musée
Guimet, as a tall, draped person with beard and moustaches flowing down
in five long wisps, a leaf-shaped fan in his left hand, and beside
him a small figure of a devotee who holds up a book with questioning
gesture.
The Queen of the Genii is Hsi Wang Mu (Queen Mother of the West). Her
home is in the K’un-lun mountains, and the peach tree of Longevity
grows in her gardens. In the tenth century B.C., the Emperor
Mu Wang is reputed to have visited her palace, and the reception forms
a pleasing subject for the artist, as does also her return visit paid
to the Emperor Wu Ti of the Han dynasty. She also figures frequently on
porcelain with her fair attendants crossing the sea on a raft, flying
on the back of a phœnix or standing with a female attendant who carries
a dish of peaches. Her messengers are blue-winged birds like the doves
of Venus, who carry the fruit of longevity to favoured beings. With
her attendant phœnix she presents a strong analogy with Juno and her
peacock; and her Western habitat has favoured the theories which would
connect her with Græco-Roman mythology, though her consort Hsi Wang
Fu (King Father of the West and a personage obviously invented _ad
hoc_) is quite insignificant and has nothing in common with the
cloud-compelling Jove.
There is a female figure which is scarcely distinguishable from one of
the attendants of Hsi Wang Mu on the one hand and from Lan Ts’ai-ho
on the other. This is the Flower Fairy (_Hua hsien_) who carries a
basket of flowers suspended from a hoe. And there are besides numerous
magicians of more or less repute, such as Chang Chiu-ko, who is seen
transforming pieces cut from his scanty garments into butterflies;
and a host of nameless _hsien_ of local fame who figure in mountain
retreats, such as the _Ssŭ hao_ or four hoary hermits.[501]
The animals connected with Taoist lore include the eight fabulous
horses of Mu Wang which brought him to the palace of Hsi Wang Mu. They
are usually seen at pasture frisking about in wild gambols. The deer,
the familiar of Shou Lao, is depicted usually with a _ling chih_
fungus in his mouth; the toad and hare live in the moon where they
pound the elixir of immortality; and the tortoise develops a long bushy
tail after a thousand years of existence. All these are suggestive of
longevity, as is also the crane and a number of flowers, fruits and
trees such as the pine, bamboo and prunus (the three friends), the
chrysanthemum, the willow, the peach, the gourd, and more especially
the _ling chih_ fungus, the _polyporus lucidus_, which was
originally an emblem of good luck, but afterwards of longevity.
The head of the _ling chih_ closely resembles[502] that of the familiar
_ju-i_ sceptre which grants every wish, an auspicious object commonly
seen in the hands of Taoist genii; and the same form occurs in a
decorative border (see Plate 77, Fig. 2) which is variously known as
the _ju-i_ head border, the _ju-i_ cloud border, or the cloud-scroll
border, the conventional cloud being commonly rolled up in this form.
It will also be found that formal ornaments, pendants and lambrequins
often take the form of the _ju-i_ head in Chinese decoration.
The attributes of the Eight Immortals occur among the many symbols
used in porcelain ornament; and among the landscapes will be found
the gardens of Hsi Wang Mu and Mount P’êng-lai,[503] one of the three
islands of the blessed, situated in the ocean east of China. Here the
fountain of life flows in a perpetual stream: “the pine, the bamboo,
the plum, the peach, and the fungus of longevity grow for ever on its
shores; and the long-haired tortoise disports in its rocky inlets,
and the white crane builds her nest on the limbs of its everlasting
pines.”[504] Presumably, too, the Shou Shan is situated on this
delectable island; and perhaps also the heavenly pavilion (_t’ien
t’ang_), which appears among clouds as the goal to which a crane
is often seen guiding some of the Taoist genii. Possibly, too, the
conventional border of swirling waves punctuated by conical rocks
carries a suggestion of the rocky islands of paradise rising from the
sea.
[Illustration: Fig. 1.--The Yin-yang and Pa-kua]
There are besides many primitive beliefs traceable for the most part
to Nature-worship, which prevailed in China long before the days of
Confucius, Lao-tzŭ or Buddha. Some of these have been incorporated
in the later religious systems, especially in that of Taoism, which
was ready to adopt any form of demonology. The oldest system is
that expounded by the legendary Fu Hsi, in which the phenomena of
Nature were explained by reference to the mystic diagrams revealed
to him on the back of a dragon horse (_lung ma_) which rose from the
Yellow River. These are the _pa-kua_ or eight trigrams formed by the
permutations of three lines, broken and unbroken, as in Fig. 1. A more
common arrangement of them is according to the points of the compass,
and enclosing another ancient device, the Yin-yang, a circle bisected
by a wavy line, which symbolises the duality of Nature, _yin_ being the
female and _yang_ the male element.
Demons abound in Chinese superstitions, and the demon face appears
early in art on the ancient bronzes, from which it was sometimes
borrowed by the porcelain decorator. This is the face of the _t’ao
t’ieh_ (the gluttonous ogre) supposed originally to have represented
the demon of the storm, and as such appropriately appearing against
a background of “cloud and thunder” pattern, as the key-fret is
called by the Chinese. Afterwards the _t’ao t’ieh_ seems to have been
regarded, on homœopathic principles, as a warning against greed. Demons
also appear in complete form in certain battle scenes and conflicts,
such as the combat of the demons of the water and of air which proceeds
in front of a group of Chinese dignitaries seated in the Kin-shan
temple on the Yangtze river (see Plate 134, Fig. 2).
The sky and the stars of course contribute their quota of divinities.
Beside the Taoist star-gods of Longevity, Honours and Happiness, there
is the Jade Emperor or supreme lord of the universe, Yü wang shang
ti, who is represented in mandarin dress holding a _ju-i_ sceptre and
closely resembling Lu Hsing, the star-god of Honours. There is, too,
the goddess of the Moon with a butterfly ornamenting the front of her
robes, and a mirror in her right hand, besides the other denizens of
the moon--Liu Han, the moon-hare and the moon-toad. A cassia tree also
grows in the moon, and the “cassia of the moon” is a symbol of literary
success.
The Sun is represented as a disc on which is a three-legged bird; and
it is probable that the sun-disc is represented also in the so-called
“pearl”[505] which is pursued or grasped by dragons; but this idea
of the power of the storm threatening the sun was lost sight of in
later art, and “a dragon pursuing a pearl” was considered a sufficient
description of the motive. A curious scene depicting a mandarin
shooting arrows at a dog in the sky alludes to the dog who devours the
sun and so causes the eclipse.
The zodiacal animals are named on p. 211 (vol. i), and the four points
of the compass are symbolised by the azure dragon for the East, the
white tiger for the West, the black tortoise for the North, and the red
bird for the South. The romance of two stars is embodied in the story
of the Spinning Maiden (_Chih Nü_) and her lover, the Cowherd (_Ch’ien
Niu_), who are separated for all the year save on one night when the
“magpies fill up the Milky Way and enable the Spinning Damsel to cross
over.”
Chang Ch’ien, the celebrated minister of Han Wu-ti, was one of the
first great travellers of China, and among the legends which grew
around his exploits is one which makes him ascend the Milky Way and
meet the Spinning Damsel herself. This story arose because he was
reputed to have discovered the source of the Yellow River, which had
hitherto been supposed to rise in heaven, being in fact a continuation
of the Milky Way. Chang Ch’ien is sometimes represented in Chinese art
as floating on a log-raft on the Yellow River, and carrying in his hand
a shuttle given to him by the Spinning Maiden.[506] The poet Li T’ai-po
is also figured in the same kind of craft, but he is distinguished by a
book in place of the shuttle.
Motives borrowed from the animal world are frequent on porcelain,
though they represent to a large extent mythical creatures, first and
foremost of which is the dragon. We need not enter into the conflicting
theories as to the origin of the Chinese dragon. Whether he sprang
from some prehistoric monster whose remains had come to light, or was
evolved from the crocodile, he appears in any case to have belonged
to Nature-worship as the power of the storm and the bringer of
fertilising rain. There, are, however, various kinds of dragons--those
of the air, the sea, the earth--and the monster takes many different
forms in Chinese art. The archaic types borrowed by the porcelain
decorators from ancient bronzes and jades are the _k’uei lung_ [chch
2] or one-legged dragon, and the _ch’ih lung_ [chch 2], the former a
tapir-like creature which is said to have been, like the _t’ao t’ieh_,
a warning against greed,[507] the latter a smooth, hornless reptile of
lizard-like form with divided tail, who is also described as a _mang_.
But the dragon (_lung_) _par excellence_ is a formidable monster with
“bearded, scowling head, straight horns, a scaly, serpentine body, with
four feet armed with claws, a line of bristling dorsal spines, and
flames proceeding from the hips and shoulders.” Such is the creature
painted by the great master of dragon painting, Chang Sêng-yu, of the
sixth century, and as such he is the emblem of Imperial power and the
device of the Emperor. The Imperial dragon in the art of the last two
dynasties has been distinguished by five claws on each of his four
feet[508]; the four-clawed dragon was painted on wares destined for
personages of lesser rank. The dragons are usually depicted flying in
clouds, and pursuing the disc or pearl, which was discussed above, or
rising from waves. Nine dragons form a decoration specially reserved
for the Emperor; and on the palace porcelain the dragon and the phœnix
(_fêng_) frequently appear together as emblems of the Emperor and
Empress.
The _fêng-huang_,[509] a phœnix-like bird, is usually shown with the
“head of a pheasant and the beak of a swallow, a long flexible neck,
plumage of many gorgeous colours, a flowing tail between that of an
argus pheasant and a peacock, and long claws pointed backward as it
flies.” It is the special emblem of the Empress. In archaic designs
there is a _k’uei fêng_ or one-legged phœnix, a bird-like creature
terminating in scrolls, which, like the corresponding _k’uei lung_,
occasionally appears in porcelain designs. Another bird-like creature
scarcely distinguishable from the _fêng_ is the _luan_; the former
being based, as it is said, on the peacock of India, and the latter
on the argus pheasant. Another creature of dual nature is the _ch’i
lin_, commonly called the kylin, which consists of the male (_ch’i_)
and the female (_lin_). It is in itself a composite animal with the
“body of a deer, with the slender legs and divided hoofs; the head
resembles that of a dragon, the tail is curled and bushy, like that
of the conventional lion, and the shoulders are adorned with the
flame-like attributes of its divine nature. It is said to attain the
age of a thousand years, to be the noblest form of animal creation,
and the emblem of perfect good; and to tread so lightly as to leave
no footprints, and so carefully as to crush no living creature.”
Its appearance was the sign of the coming of a virtuous ruler. It
is important to note that the _ch’i lin_ is quite distinct from the
Chinese lion, and is also to be carefully separated from the other
chimera-like creatures known in Chinese art under the general title
_hai shou_ or sea monsters.
The lion in Chinese art (_shih_ or _shih tzŭ_, the Japanese _shishi_),
though of qualified ferocity in appearance, is in reality a peaceful,
docile creature who expends his energy on a ball of silk brocade,
the streamers from which he holds in his massive jaws. In general
aspect (Plate 95), in his tufts of hair and his bushy tail, he closely
resembles the Peking spaniel, who is in fact called after him the lion
dog (_shih tzŭ kou_). He is usually represented in pairs, the one with
one foot on a ball of brocade, and the other, presumably the lioness,
with a cub. The larger lion figures are placed as guardians by the
gates of Buddhist temples, from which function the lion has earned the
name of “dog of Fo” (i.e. Buddha); the smaller sizes, usually mounted
on an oblong base with a tube attached to hold an incense-stick, have
a place on the domestic altar. Another mythical creature not unlike the
lion is the _pi hsieh_ of archaic art which is supposed to ward off
evil spirits.[510]
The king of beasts in China is the tiger (_hu_), whose forehead is
marked by Nature with the character _wang_ [chch] (prince). He is
the solar animal, the lord of the mountains, and the chief of all
quadrupeds. The white tiger represents the western quadrant and the
autumn; and images of tigers in ancient times served many purposes,
such as guarding the graves of the dead and summoning the living to
battle.
In addition to the sea monsters there are sea horses, who speed at a
flying gallop over waves; and there are the _pai ma_ and _lung ma_
and the eight horses of Mu Wang, already described, to represent the
horse in art. The deer is a Taoist emblem of longevity, and also in
its name _lu_ suggests the auspicious word _lu_ (preferment); and
there is a fabulous one-horned creature distinct from the _ch’i lin_,
and known as the _t’ien lu_ or deer of heaven. Rams are sometimes
represented as personifying the revivifying powers of spring; and the
monkey occasionally figures in decoration, his name _hou_ suggesting
another word _hou_, which means to expect (office), and providing
an appropriate design for presentation to a candidate in the State
examinations. Another motive suitable for the same purpose is the
fish leaping from waves, which has been already explained; and fish
in general are cleverly depicted by the porcelain decorators swimming
among water plants. The fish has always been a favourite motive in
China, and in ancient art it appears to have symbolised power and rank.
The double fish is one of the Buddhist emblems, and also symbolises
conjugal felicity. The tortoise has already been mentioned among the
emblems of longevity.
Birds are drawn with wonderful skill and spirit by Chinese artists,
and they provide a frequent motive both for the painter and figure
modeller. The crane is the companion of Shou Lao and a symbol of long
life; a pair of mandarin ducks suggest conjugal affection; egrets among
lotus plants, geese, and wild duck in marshy landscapes also pleased
the Chinese fancy. The magpie is an emblem of happiness, and two
magpies foretell a happy meeting; the cock is the bird of fame, and he
is often associated with the peony, which is the _fu kuei_ flower, to
suggest the phrase _kung ming_ (fame), _fu kuei_ (riches and honours!).
There are other birds which are associated with special trees and
flowers; the pheasant is often seen perched on a rock beside the peony
and magnolia; partridges and quails go with millet; swallows with
the willow; sparrows on the prunus, and so on. A comprehensive group
represents the “hundred birds” paying court to the phœnix.
The bat is a symbol of happiness from its name _fu_ having the same
sound as _fu_ (happiness). Among insects, the cicada (at one time
regarded as a symbol of life renewed after death) is a very ancient
motive; and the praying mantis who catches the cicada is an emblem
of courage and perseverance.[511] Fighting crickets are the fighting
cocks of China, and supply a sporting motive for the decorator; and
butterflies frequently occur with floral designs or in the decoration
known as the Hundred Butterflies, which covers the entire surface of
the vessel with butterflies and insects.
Flower painting is another forte of the Chinese decorator, and some
of the most beautiful porcelain designs are floral. Conventional
flowers appear in scrolls, and running designs, especially the lotus
and peony scrolls and the scrolls of “fairy flowers,” the _pao hsiang
hua_ of the Ming blue and white. But the most attractive designs are
the more naturalistic pictures of flowering plants and shrubs, or of
floral bouquets in baskets or vases. The flowers on Chinese porcelain
are supple, free, and graceful; and, though true enough to nature to
be easily identified, are never of the stiff copy-book order which
the European porcelain painter affected at one unhappy period. A long
list of the Chinese porcelain flowers given by Bushell includes the
orchid (_lan_), rose, jasmine, olea fragrans, pyrus japonica, gardenia,
syringa, several kinds of peony, magnolia (_yü lan_), iris, hydrangea,
hibiscus, begonia, pink and water fairy flower (_narcissus tazetta_).
Many more no doubt can be identified, for the Chinese are great
cultivators as they are great lovers of flowers. In fact, the word
_hua_ [chch] flowery is synonymous with Chinese, and _chung hua_ [chch
2] is China. Plate 126 is an example of the Hundred Flower design,
known by the French name _mille fleurs_, in which the ground of the
vase is a mass of naturalistic flowers so that the porcelain looks like
a bouquet.
There are special flowers for the months[512]:--(1) Peach (_t’ao_) for
February, (2) Tree Peony (_mu tan_) for March, (3) Double Cherry (_ying
t’ao_) for April, (4) Magnolia (_yü lan_) for May, (5) Pomegranate
(_shih liu_) for June, (6) Lotus (_lien hua_) for July, (7) Pear
(_hai t’ang_) for August, (8) Mallow (_ch’iu k’uei_) for September,
(9) Chrysanthemum (_chü_) for October, (10) Gardenia (_chih hua_)
for November, (11) Poppy (_ying su_) for December, (12) Prunus (_mei
hua_) for January. From these are selected four to represent the
seasons--_mu-tan_ peony for spring, lotus for summer, chrysanthemum for
autumn, and prunus for winter--which supply charming motives for panel
decoration or for the sides of quadrangular vases.
The chrysanthemum besides is associated with its admirer T’ao
Yüan-ming, and the lotus with Chou Mao-shu and the poet Li T’ai-po. But
as a rule the floral designs carry some hidden meaning, the flowers
being grouped so as to suggest some felicitous phrase by a play on
their names.[513] The peony we have seen to be the _fu kuei_ (riches
and honours) flower; the chrysanthemum, as Dr. Laufer has suggested,
being the flower of the ninth (_chiu_) month, may connote longevity
through the word _chiu_ (long-enduring); the prunus (_mei hua_) carries
the obvious suggestion of _mei_ (beautiful), and instances might easily
be multiplied.
Among the trees, the cassia suggests literary honours, the willow
longevity, as also the pine, bamboo and plum, who are called the “three
friends,”[514] faithful even in the “winter of our discontent.” Among
the fruits the gourd is an emblem both of long life and of fertility,
and the three fruits (_san kuo_)--peach, pomegranate and finger
citron--symbolise the Three Abundances of Years, Sons and Happiness.
The orange is a symbol of good luck, and no doubt the others which
occur less frequently contain similar suggestions.
Landscape (_shan shui_) is one of the four main divisions of Chinese
pictorial art, and it is well represented in porcelain decoration. The
Sung and Ming masters provided designs which were freely copied, and
views of the beauty spots of China and of the celebrated parks and
pleasure grounds were frequently used. It is one of these landscapes
which the English potters borrowed for the familiar “willow pattern”
design, and the sentimental tale which some fanciful writer has
attached to the pattern is a mere afterthought. Figure subjects and
landscapes are combined in many designs, such as the meeting of sages,
romantic incidents, besides the more homely motives of field work,
fishing, rustics returning from the plough mounted on their oxen, and
the like. The four seasons, too, are represented in landscape with
appropriate accessories, such as blossoming peach trees in a mountain
scene for spring, a lake scene with lotus gatherers for summer, a
swollen river and autumn tints for autumn, and a snowstorm for winter.
A great variety of symbols and emblematical devices appear in the
porcelain decoration of all periods, whether interwoven with the
designs, grouped in panels, or placed under the base in lieu of a mark.
Bushell[515] classifies the most familiar of them under the following
headings:--
1. Symbols of Ancient Chinese Lore: _Pa-kua_ and _Yin-yang_ (see p.
290); _Pa yin_ (eight musical instruments); _Shih êrh chang_ (twelve
ornaments embroidered upon sacrificial robes).
2. Buddhist symbols: _Pa chi hsiang_ (eight emblems of happy augury).
_Ch’i pao_ (seven paraphernalia of the _chakravartin_ or universal
sovereign).
3. Taoist symbols: _Pa an hsien_ (attributes of the Eight Immortals).
4. The Hundred Antiques (_Po ku_). _Pa pao_ (the Eight Precious
Objects).
The _pa-kua_ (eight trigrams) and the _Yin-yang_ symbol of the duality
of Nature have been described. The eight musical instruments are: (1)
_Ch’ing_, the sounding stone, a sort of gong usually in form of a
mason’s square. It forms a rebus for _ch’ing_ (good luck). (2) _Chung_,
the bell. (3) _Ch’in_, the lute. (4) _Ti_, the flute. (5) _Chu_, the
box, with a metal hammer inside. (6) _Ku_, the drum. (7) _Shêng_, the
reed organ. (8) _Hsüan_, the ocarina, a cone with six holes.
The twelve _chang_ or ancient embroidery ornaments are: (1) _Jih_,
the Sun, a disc in which is a three-legged bird, and sometimes, the
character _jih_ [chch]. (2) _Yüeh_, the moon; a disc with hare, toad
and cassia tree, and sometimes the character _yüeh_ [chch]. (3) _Hsing
ch’ên_, the stars: represented by three stars connected by straight
lines. (4) _Shan_, mountains. (5) _Lung_, dragons. (6) _Hua ch’ung_,
the “flowery creature,” the pheasant. (7) _Tsung yi_, the temple
vessels: one with a tiger design and the other with a monkey. (8)
_Tsao_, aquatic grass. (9) _Huo_, fire. (10) _Fên mi_, grains of rice.
(11) _Fu_, an axe. (12) _Fu_, a symbol of distinction[516] (see vol.
i., p. 227).
The Eight Happy Omens (_pa chi hsiang_) were among the signs on the
sole of Buddha’s foot. They are usually drawn with flowing fillets
attached (Fig. 2), and they are as follows: (1) _Lun_, the wheel or
chakra, sometimes replaced by the bell (_chung_). (2) _Lo_, the shell.
(3) _San_, the State umbrella. (4) _Kai_, the canopy. (5) _Hua_, the
(lotus) flower. (6) _P’ing_, the vase. (7) _Yü_, the fish; a pair of
them.[517] (8) _Ch’ang_, the angular knot representing the entrails; an
emblem of longevity.[518]
[Illustration: Fig. 2.--The Pa chi hsiang]
The Seven Gems (_ch’i pao_) are: (1) _Chin lun_, the golden wheel. (2)
_Yü nü_, the jade-like girl. (3) _Ma_, the horse. (4) _Hsiang_, the
elephant. (5) _Chu ts’ang shên_, divine guardian of the treasury. (6)
_Chu ping ch’ên_, general in command of the army. (7) _Ju i chu_ the
jewels which fulfil every wish; a bundle of jewelled wands bound round
with a cord.
The _Pa an hsien_, Attributes of the Eight Immortals, as detailed above
(p. 287), are: (1) _Shan_, the fan of Chung-li Ch’üan. (2) _Chien_,
the sword of Lü Tung-pin. (3) _Hu lu_, the gourd of Li T’ieh-kuai. (4)
_Pan_, the castanets of Ts’ao Kuo-chiu. (5) _Hua lan_, the basket of
flowers of Lan Ts’ai-ho. (6) _Yu ku_, the bamboo tube and rods of Chang
Kuo Lao. (7) _Ti_, the flute of Han Hsiang Tzŭ. (8) _Lien hua_, the
lotus flower of Ho Hsien Ku.
The _Po ku_, or Hundred Antiques, is, as its name implies, a
comprehensive group including all manner of symbols and symbolical
ornaments, which were frequently grouped together in panel decoration.
Bushell[519] describes two typical panels on specimens in the Walters
collection. One contained the apparatus of the scholar and painter,
viz. books on tables, brushes in vases, water pots and scroll
pictures, all enveloped with waving fillets mingled with tasselled
wands and double diamonds, which are symbols of literary success. The
other contained a tall vase with peonies; a low vase with peacock
feather, an emblem of high rank; a lion-shaped censer on a four-legged
stand, the incense smoke from which rises in form of a pair of storks;
a set of incense-burning implements, a bundle of scroll pictures, a
_ju-i_ sceptre, a musical stone, a sword, and a paper weight.
A favourite set of _Po-ku_ emblems is the _Pa pao_ (Fig. 3) or Eight
Precious Objects: (1) _Chu_, the pearl, which grants every wish. (2)
_Ch’ien_, the “cash,” a copper coin used to symbolise wealth. (3)
Lozenge, or picture (_hua_). (4) _Fang shêng_, the open lozenge, symbol
of victory.[520] (5) _Ch’ing_, the musical stone. (6) _Shu_, a pair of
books. (7) _Chüeh_, a pair of horn-like objects. (8) _Ai yeh_, the leaf
of the artemisia, fragrant plant of good omen and a preventative of
disease.
A branch of coral, a silver ingot, a pencil brush and cake of ink
are common emblems; and the swastika occurs both by itself (vol. i.,
p. 227) or interwoven with the character _shou_ (vol. i., p. 227),
or even as a fret or diaper pattern. The swastika is a world-wide
symbol; in China it is called _wan_, and used as a synonym for _wan_
(ten thousand), and as such it is regarded as a symbol of _wan shou_
(endless longevity). A lyre wrapped in an embroidered case, a chess-or
_gô_-board with round boxes for the white and black pieces, a pair
of books, and a pair of scroll pictures symbolise the “four elegant
accomplishments,” _ch’in_, _ch’i_, _shu_, _hua_ (music, chess, writing
and painting).
[Illustration: Fig. 3.--The Pa pao]
The figurative aspect of Chinese decoration has been repeatedly
noticed, and occasional examples of direct play upon words or rebus
devices have been given incidentally. The Chinese language is
peculiarly suited for punning allusions, one sound having to do duty
for many characters; but it is obvious that a fair knowledge of the
characters is required for reading these rebus designs. There is,
however, a certain number of stock allusions with which the collector
can easily make himself familiar. The commonest of these is perhaps
the bat (_fu_) which symbolises happiness (also pronounced _fu_ in
Chinese). The Five Blessings (_wu fu_), which consist of longevity,
riches, peacefulness and serenity, love of virtue and an end crowning
the life, are suggested by five bats; and a further rebus is formed
of red bats among cloud scrolls, reading _hung fu ch’i t’ien_, “great
happiness equally heaven” (_t’ien_); _hung_ being the sound of the
character for “great, vast,” as well as for red, and red being, so to
speak, the colour of happiness in Chinese eyes.
Other common rebus designs are suggested by such words as _lu_ (deer),
_lu_ (preferment); _yü_ (fish), _yü_ (abundance); _ch’ing_ (sounding
stone), _ch’ing_ (good luck); _ch’ang_ (the intestinal knot), _ch’ang_
(long); and the composition of the rebus phrase often includes such
ideas as _lien_ (lotus), _lien_ (connect, combine); _tieh_ (butterfly),
_tieh_ (to double). But almost every sound in the Chinese spoken
language represents a considerable number of characters, and it would
be possible with a little ingenuity to extract several rebus sentences
out of any complicated decoration. It is well to remember, however,
that most of the ordinary allusions have reference to some good wish
or felicitous phrase bearing on the five blessings, on the three
abundances or on literary success.
To quote a few further instances: the design of nine (_chiu_) lions
(_shih_) sporting with balls (chü) of brocade has been read[521] _chiu
shih t’ung chü_, “a family of nine sons living together.” An elephant
(_hsiang_) carrying a vase (_p’ing_) on its back (_pei_) is read[522]
_hsiang pei tai p’ing,_ “Peace (p’ing) rules in the north (_pei_).” A
tub full of green wheat is read[523] _i t’ung ta ch’ing_, “the whole
empire (owns) the great Ch’ing dynasty.” Three crabs holding reeds is
read[524] _san p’ang hsieh ch’uan lu_, “three generations gaining the
first class at the metropolitan examinations.” Two pigeons perched on a
willow tree is read[525] _êrh pa_ (_k’o_) _t’eng t’ê_, “at eighteen to
be successful in examinations.”
A group of three objects consisting of a pencil brush (_pi_), a cake
of ink (_ting_) and a _ju-i_ sceptre crossed one over the other (Fig.
4), occurs both in the field of the decoration and as a mark under the
base. It is a pure rebus, reading _pi ting ju i_, may things be fixed
(_ting_) as you wish (_ju i_, lit. according to your idea). Another
obvious rebus which occurs as a mark (Fig. 5) consists of two peaches
and a bat (double longevity and happiness), and floral designs are very
commonly arranged so as to suggest rebus phrases.
[Illustration: Fig. 4]
[Illustration: Fig. 5]
But the Chinese decorator did not always express himself in riddles.
Inscriptions are frequent on all forms of decorative work, as is
only natural in a country where calligraphy ranks among the highest
branches of art. To the foreign eye Chinese writing will not perhaps
appear so ornamental as the beautiful Neshky characters which were
freely used for decorative purposes on Persian wares; but for all
that, its decorative qualities are undeniable, and to the Chinese
who worship the written character it is a most attractive kind of
ornament. Sometimes the surface of a vessel is almost entirely occupied
by a long inscription treating of the ware or of the decoration which
occupies the remaining part; but more often the writing is limited to
an epigram or a few lines of verse. The characters as a rule are ranged
in columns and read from top to bottom, the columns being taken from
left to right; and rhyming verse is written in lines of three, five
or seven characters each. The inscriptions are often attested by the
name or the seal of the author. The Emperor Ch’ien Lung, a prolific
writer of verses, indited many short poems on the motives of porcelain
decoration, and these have been copied on subsequent pieces.
As for the style of writing, the ordinary script is the _k’ai shu_,
which dates from the Chin dynasty (265–419 A.D.), but there are besides
many inscriptions in which the archaic seal characters _chuan tzŭ_ are
employed, or at least hybrid modern forms of them; and there is the
cursive script, known as _ts’ao shu_ or grass characters, which is said
to have been invented in the first century B.C. The seal and the grass
characters are often extremely difficult to translate, and require a
special study, which even highly educated Chinese do not profess to
have mastered.
Single characters and phrases of auspicious meaning in both seal
form and in the ordinary script occur in the decoration and also in
the place of the mark. Many instances have already been noted in the
chapters dealing with Ming porcelains, such as _fu kuei k’ang ning_
(riches, honours, peace and serenity), _ch’ang ming fu kuei_ (long
life, riches and honours), etc., see vol. i., p. 225. The most frequent
of these characters is _shou_ (longevity), which is written in a great
variety of fanciful forms, mostly of the seal type. The “hundred forms
of shou” sometimes constitute the sole decoration of a vase; and as
already observed[526] the swastika (_wan_) is sometimes combined
with the circular form of the seal character _shou_ to make the _wan
shou_ symbol of ten thousand longevities. _Fu_ (happiness) and _lu_
(preferment) also occur, though less frequently.
Buddhistic inscriptions are usually in Sanskrit characters, but we find
occasional phrases such as _Tien chu en po_ [chch 4] (propitious waves
from India) and _Fo ming ch’ang jih_ [chch 4] (the ever bright Buddha)
in ordinary script or seal, one character in each of four medallions;
and the sacred name of _O mi t’o fo_ [chch 4], Amida Buddha, similarly
applied, would serve as a charm against evil.
In addition to the central designs, there is a number of secondary
ornaments which round off the decoration of a piece of porcelain.
Chief of these are the border patterns, of which a few favourites
may be exemplified. At the head of the list comes the Greek key-fret
or meander (see Plate 12, Fig. 1), which, like the swastika, is of
world-wide use. On the ancient bronze this pattern was freely used both
in borders and as a diaper background, and it is described by Chinese
archæologists as the “cloud and thunder pattern.” It is sometimes
varied by the inclusion of the swastika, in which case it is known
as the swastika fret. Another bronze pattern freely borrowed by the
porcelain decoration is the border of stiff plantain leaves which
appears appropriately on the neck or stem of an upright vase (see Plate
89, Fig. 1).
The border of small “S” shaped scrolls is apparently derived from
silkworm cocoons; but the curled scrolls and another scroll pattern
with more elaborate curves are intended to suggest clouds. A further
development of the cloud pattern is scarcely distinguishable from the
_ju-i_ head border (see Plate 77, Fig. 2). Indeed the terms, “connected
cloud” pattern, _ju-i_ cloud pattern, and _ju-i_ head pattern, are used
almost interchangeably by Chinese archæologists.
Conventional waves are represented by a kind of shaded scale pattern
or a diaper of spiral coils, and the more naturalistic “crested wave”
border, punctuated by conical rocks, has already been mentioned. There
are besides narrow borders of zig-zag pattern with diagonal hatching,
and the ordinary diaper designs, in addition to the familiar gadroons
and arcaded borders.
The wider borders are usually borrowed from brocade patterns with
geometrical or floral ornament, broken by three or four oblong panels
containing symbols or sprays of flowers; and when a similar scheme is
followed in some of the narrow edgings, the flowers are unhesitatingly
cut in half, as though the pattern were just a thin strip taken from a
piece of brocade.
A few special borders have been described on the pages dealing with
armorial porcelain,[527] among which were the well-known “rat and vine”
or “vine and squirrel” pattern (see Plate 119, Fig. 3), reputed to have
first appeared on a picture by the Sung artist, Ming Yüan-chang.[528] A
rare border formed of red bats side by side occurs on a few plates of
fine porcelain which are usually assigned to the K’ang Hsi period, but
are probably much later.
On the whole, the Chinese border patterns are comparatively few in
number, being in fact a small selection of well-tried designs admirably
suited to fill the spaces required and to occupy the positions assigned
to them on the different porcelain forms.
As to the sources from which these and the other designs described in
this chapter were borrowed by the porcelain decorator, we can only
speak in general terms. Ancient bronze vessels, metal mirrors, carved
jades, stamped cakes of ink, embroideries, brocades, handkerchiefs,
and illustrated books no doubt provided the greater part of them. The
purely pictorial subjects would be based on the paintings in silk and
paper which the Chinese arrange in four chief categories: (1) figures
(_jên wu_),(2) landscape (_shan shui_),(3) nature subjects (_hua niao_,
lit. flowers and birds), and (4) miscellaneous designs (_tsa hua_).
Selections of desirable designs from various sources were no doubt
arranged in pattern books, and issued to the porcelain painters.
CHAPTER XVIII
FORGERIES AND IMITATIONS
With their intense veneration for the antique, it is only natural
that the Chinese should excel in imitative work, and a great deal
of ingenuity has been quite legitimately exercised by them in this
direction. The amateur will sometimes have difficulty in distinguishing
the clever copies from the originals, but in most cases the material
and the finish of the work frankly belong to a later period, and
sometimes all doubt is removed at once by a mark indicating the true
period of manufacture. But the collector has to be on his guard against
a very different kind of article, the spurious antique and the old
piece which has been “improved” by the addition of more elaborate
decoration or by an inscription which, if genuine, would give it
historic importance. The latter kind of embellishment is specially
common on the early potteries of the Han and T’ang periods. Genuine
specimens taken from excavated tombs have often been furnished with
dates and dedicatory legends cut into the body of the ware and then
doctored, to give the appearance of contemporary incisions. But a
careful examination of the edges of the channelled lines will show
that they have been cut subsequently to the firing of the ware, when
the clay was already hard. Had the inscription been cut when the pot
was made, it would have been incised in a soft unfired substance,
like the writing of a stylus in wax, and the edges of the lines would
be forced up and slightly bulging; and if the ware is glazed, some
of the glaze will be found in the hollows of the inscription. There
are, besides, minor frauds in the nature of repairs. Pieces of old
pottery, for instance, are fitted into a broken Han jar; the lost heads
and limbs of T’ang figures are replaced from other broken specimens,
and defective parts are made up in plaster. Such additions are often
carefully concealed by daubs of clay similar to that with which the
buried specimen had become encrusted. Further than this, Han and T’ang
figures have been recently manufactured in their entirety, and mention
has already been made (Vol. I., p. 27) of a factory at Honan Fu, where
figures and vases with streaked and mottled glazes, fantastic ewers
with phœnix-spouts and wing-like excrescences, and the like, are made
with indifferent skill.
The collector of Sung and Yüan wares, too, has many difficulties to
surmount. The fine imitations made from the Yung Chêng period onwards,
both in pottery and porcelain, fortunately are often marked; but
sometimes the mark has been carefully removed by grinding, and the scar
made up to look like the natural surface. The imitative wares made in
Kuangtung, at Yi-hsing, and in various Japanese factories have been
already discussed in the sections concerned; and there is pottery with
lavender blue, “old turquoise” and splashed glazes resembling the Chün
types, but made at the present day in Honan and elsewhere, which is
likely to deceive the beginner. The commonest kind has a buff earthen
body which is usually washed with a dull brown clay on the exposed
parts. But such obstacles as these add zest to the collector’s sport,
and they are not really hard to surmount if a careful study be made of
the character of authentic specimens. The eye can be easily trained to
the peculiarities both of the originals and of the various imitative
types, and no one who is prepared to take a little trouble need be
afraid of attacking this fascinating part of Chinese ceramics.
The _T’ao lu_[529] quotes an interesting note on the repairing of
antique wares: “In the _Chu ming yao_ it is stated with regard to old
porcelain (_tz’ŭ_), such as (incense-) vessels which are wanting in
handles or feet, and vases damaged at the mouth and edge, that men
take old porcelain to patch the old, adding a glazing preparation, and
giving the piece one firing. When finished it is like an old piece,
and all uniform, except that the patched part is dull in colour. But
still people prefer these specimens to modern wares. If the process of
blowing the glaze on to (the joint of the repair) is used in patching
old wares, the patch is still more difficult to trace. As for specimens
with flaws (_mao_), I am told that on the Tiger Hill in Su-chou there
are menders who have earned the name of _chin_ (close-fitters).” The
collector knows only too well that there are “close-fitters” in Europe
as well as in China.
Apart from the numerous instances in which early Ming marks[530]
have been indiscriminately added to later wares, the careful copies
and imitations of true Ming types are comparatively few. Among the
imitative triumphs of the Yung Chêng potters a few specialties are
named, such as blue and white of the Hsüan Tê and the Chia Ching
periods, and the enamelled decoration of the Ch’êng Hua and Wan Li, but
reference has already been made to these in their respective chapters.
The modern Chinese potters make indifferent reproductions of Ming
types; and the most dangerous are those of the Japanese, who from the
eighteenth century onward seem to have taken the sixteenth century
Chinese porcelains as their model. The Chia Ching and Wan Li marks are
common on these reproductions, which often catch the tone and spirit
of the Ming ware with disquieting exactitude. A well-trained eye and
a knowledge of the peculiarities of Japanese workmanship are the only
protection against this type of imitation.
The high esteem in which the K’ang Hsi porcelains are now held has
naturally invited imitation and fraud. The ordinary modern specimen
with a spurious K’ang Hsi mark is, as a rule, feeble and harmless, and
even the better class of Chinese and Japanese imitations of the blue
and white and enamelled porcelains of this period are, as a rule, so
wide of the mark as to deceive only the inexperienced. Many frauds,
however, have been perpetrated with French copies of _famille verte_,
of _famille rose_ “ruby-back” dishes, and of vases with armorial
decoration. These are cleverly made, but the expert will see at once
that the colours and the drawing lack the true Oriental quality, and
that the ware itself is too white and cold. Clever copies of Oriental
porcelain, especially of the _famille rose_, have also been made at
Herend, in Hungary. But perhaps the most dangerous Continental copies
are some of the French-made monochromes of dark blue and lavender
colours, with or without crackle, fitted with ormolu mounts in
eighteenth century style, which conceal the tell-tale base. Monochromes
are, as a rule, the most difficult porcelains to date, and the
well-made modern Chinese and Japanese _sang de bœuf_, apple green, and
peach bloom are liable to cause trouble, especially when the surface
has been carefully rubbed and given the appearance of wear and usage.
The expert looks to the truth of the form, the finish of the base, and
the character of the clay exposed at the foot rim, and judges if in
these points the piece comes up to the proper standard.
But without doubt the most insidious of all the fraudulent wares are
those which have been redecorated. I do not refer to the clobbered[531]
and retouched polychromes or to the powder blue and mirror black on
which the gilding has been renewed, but to the devilish ingenuity
which takes a piece of lightly decorated K’ang Hsi porcelain, removes
the enamelling, and even the whole glaze if the original ornament
has been in underglaze blue, and then proceeds to clothe the denuded
surface in a new and resplendent garb of rich enamel. Naturally, it
is the most sumptuous style of decoration which is affected in these
frauds, such as the prunus tree and birds in a ground of black,
green, or yellow enamel on the biscuit; and the drawing, execution
and colours are often surprisingly good. The enormous value of this
type of vase, if successful, repays the expense and trouble involved
in the _truquage_; and the connoisseur who looks at the base for
guidance is disarmed because that critical part has been undisturbed,
and has all the points of a thoroughbred K’ang Hsi piece. If, however,
his suspicion has been aroused by something unconvincing in the design
or draughtsmanship, he will probably find upon minute examination some
indication of the fraud, some trace of the grinding off of the glaze
which the enamels have failed to cover, suspicious passages at the edge
of the lip where the old and new surfaces join, or traces of blackening
here and there which are rarely absent from a refired piece. But if the
work is really successful, and no ingenuity or skill is spared to make
it so, his suspicions may not be aroused until too late. Frauds of this
kind belong to the most costly types, and concern the wealthy buyers.
The poorer collectors have to deal with small deceits, the adding
of a _famille verte_ border to a bowl or dish, the retouching
of defective ornament, the rubbing of modern surfaces to give them
fictitious signs of wear, the staining of new wares with tobacco juice,
and other devices easily detected by those who are forewarned. Against
all these dangers, whether they be from wilful frauds or from innocent
imitations, I can only repeat that the collector’s sole defence is
experience and a well-trained eye.
INDEX
Accomplishments, Four, ii. 133, 282, 299
Adams, H., ii. 136
Akahada, i. 123
Alamgir, ii. 13
Alchemy, god of, ii. 288
Alexander Collection, i. 51, 56, 57, 68, 115, 121, 125; ii. 49,
119, 171, 205, 220
Alms bowl, ii. 285
Altar cups, ii. 7, 8, 35, 93
Altar sets, i. 206; ii. 272
Ambassadors of the Tribes of Man, eight, ii. 262, 268, 283
Amida Buddha, ii. 302
Amoy, i. 184, 202; ii. 112
Ancestor worship, ii. 283
Anderson, W., ii. 111, 281, 303
_An hua_ (secret decoration), ii. 6, 8, 17, 37, 52, 56, 63
Animal forms, ii. 159
Animal motives, ii. 292
Annals of Fou-liang, i. 141, 153, 155; ii. 35, 228, 231
Annals of Han Dynasty, i. 144
Annals of the Sui Dynasty, i. 143
Anthropological Museum at Petrograd, i. 101
Antiques, the Hundred, ii. 134, 181, 297, 298
“Ant tracks,” i. 117
Arabesques, ii. 130, 131, 133
Arabic writing, ii. 31
Architectural pottery, i. 201, 205, 206
Ardebil, ii. 69
Arhats, i. 35; ii. 43, 285
Arita, ii. 173
Armorial porcelain, ii. 202, 203, 251, 256, 257, 258
Arrow cylinder, ii. 274
Ary de Milde, i. 178
Ash colour, _see_ Hui sê.
“Ashes of roses,” ii. 124
Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, i, 193; ii. 68
Astbury ware, i. 178
Aster pattern, ii. 134
Attiret, i. 205
Augustus the Strong, i. _xxiii_, 178; ii. 113, 134
“Awns,” i. 92
“Baba ghouri,” i. 87
Bahr, A. W., i. 32, 124, 171
Bamboo grove, ii. 208, 215, 281
Bamboo pattern, ii. 149, 264, 269
Bamboo thread brush marks, i. 92
Barrel-shaped seats, ii. 8, 15, 17, 97, 277
Basket of flowers, ii. 67
Batavian porcelain, ii. 191
Bats, five, ii. 11, 204, 224, 295, 300, 301
Battersea, ii. 260
Bear, the, i. 12
Bell, Hamilton, i. 114
Benson Collection, i. 56, 104, 169; ii. 27
Biddulph, Sir R., ii. 23
Bijapur, i. 87; ii. 78
Billequin, M., ii. 233
Binyon, L., i. 44; ii. 242
Bird, the red, i. 20, 56
Birds, ii. 294
Birds, the Hundred, ii. 295
“Birthday plates,” ii. 169, 207
Birthday, the Emperor’s, ii. 63
Biscuit, ii. 18, 75, 77, 100, 196, 197
Biscuit figures in high relief, ii. 89
Black and gold decoration, ii. 215
Black, brown, ii. 155
Black, _famille rose_, ii. 210
Black glaze, varieties of, ii. 156, 159, 192, 229
Black ground gilt, ii. 231
Black ground, white decoration in, ii. 231
Black, mirror, ii. 192, 193, 218, 226, 230
Black Rock Hill, i. 16
Blackthorn, ii. 264
Black Warrior, the, i. 20
_Blanc de Chine_, ii. 109, 112
Blessings, five, ii. 300
“Blue and white,” i. 164; ii. 3, 8, 9, 11, 13, 24, 26, 29, 36, 38,
47, 56, 89, 92, 203, 239, 240, 263, 268, 271
Blue and white, K’ang Hsi, ii. 67, 128–144
Blue and white porcelain, Ming, ii. 105
Blue, cloisonné, ii. 219, 220, 224, 229, 231
Blue, lapis lazuli, ii. 239
Blue, mazarine, ii. 183
Blue, mottled, ii. 204
“Blue of the sky after rain,” i. 41, 42, 52, 54, 62; ii. 10, 179
Blue painting on Sung wares, i. 99, 104, 158
Blue, powder, ii. 127, 170, 180, 181, 183, 218
Blue “put in press,” ii. 143
Blue, ritual significance of, ii. 195
Blue, scratched, ii. 144
Blue, sky, ii. 232, 238
Blue, soufflé, ii. 127, 180, 218, 224
Blue, sponged, ii. 180, 183
Blue, Temple of Heaven, ii. 238
Blue, turquoise, ii. 99, 184, 185, 229, 237
Bock, Carl, i. 87
Bodhidharma, ii. 110, 285
Book stands, ii. 276
Border patterns, ii. 67, 257, 258, 302
Borneo, i. 68, 87, 99, 189, 190, 193; ii. 70, 99, 223
Börschmann, Herr Ernst, i. 8
Bottengruber, ii. 260
Böttger ware, i. 178; ii. 192
Bow, ii. 112, 258, 260
Bowls, ii. 277
Bowls, alms, ii. 285
Bowls, brinjal, ii. 151
Bowls, bulb, i. 109, 110, 114
Bowls, double-bottomed, ii. 115
Bowls, fish, ii. 36, 59, 117, 229, 234, 275, 281
Bowls, hookah, ii. 97
Bowls, medallion, ii. 264
Bowls, Ming, ii. 97
Bowls, narghili, ii. 77, 278
Bowls, Peking, ii. 239, 244, 264
Bowls, Polynesian khava, i. 129
Bowls, “press-hand,” ii. 93
Bowls, rice, ii. 148
Bowls, soup, ii. 269
Bowls, swordgrass, i. 110
Bowls, tea, ii. 5, 278
Bowls, wedding, ii. 268
Boxes, ii. 56, 57, 60, 68, 85, 160, 246, 265, 275, 276, 288
Boy holding a branch, ii. 57
Boys, Hundred, ii. 62
Boys in branches, design of, i. 85, 150
Branches, the Twelve, i. 210
Bretschneider, i. 62
Bricks, i. 201, 202, 205
Brighton Museum, i. 193
Brinjal bowls, ii. 151
Brinkley, F., i. 97, 102, 104, 131, 163, 168, 171, 174, 175, 176,
190; ii. 111, 113, 114, 190
Bristol, ii. 141, 258
British Museum, _passim_
Brocade designs, ii. 38, 165, 167, 170, 243, 244, 303
Bronze forms, ii. 272
Bronze patterns, ii. 240, 243, 247
Brooke, Lieutenant, i. 10
Brown, coffee, i. 103
“Brown mouth and iron foot,” i. 60, 61, 66, 68, 72, 78, 83; ii.
188, 217
Brush pot, ii. 32, 60
Brush rest, ii. 14, 60, 76, 275
Brush washers, i. 165
“Buccaro,” i. 120, 178, 181
Buddha, ii. 40
Buddhism, i. 6, 36; ii. 284
Buddhist emblems, eight, ii. 25, 38, 42, 298
Bulb bowls, i. 109, 110, 114
Burdett-Coutts Collection, ii. 164
Burial customs, i. 14
Burlington Fine Arts Club Exhibition, catalogue of, i. 104, 114,
130, 149, 150, 167, 193, 209; ii. 6, 27, 33, 60, 68, 77, 78, 85
_Burlington Magazine_, i. 12, 34, 50, 68, 72, 79, 88, 102, 106,
123, 163, 168, 171; ii. 14, 17, 23, 70, 73, 75, 89, 90, 105,
209, 212, 213, 292
Burman, A., ii. 43, 145, 164
Burton, W., i. 47, 49, 50, 154; ii. 127
Burton and Hobson, ii. 247
Bushell, S. W., i. _xviii_, 1, 39, 50, 54, 55, 68, 102, 104, 140,
143, 145, 154, 159, 160, 162, 165, 168, 206, 218; ii. 1, 2, 8,
18, 19, 22, 26, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 121, 176, 188, 190, 196, 212,
223, 242, 248, 267
Butterflies, ii. 266, 289, 295
Butterfly cages, ii. 160
Cadogan Teapot, ii. 278
Caffieri, ii. 194
Cairo, i. 87
Calicut, ii. 209
Candle design, ii. 25, 133, 203
Candlesticks, ii. 272
Canton, i. 166, 184, 188; ii. 202, 212, 251, 260
Canton Chün, i. 127, 172
Canton enamels, i. 166, 167; ii. 209, 211, 243
Canton merchants, ii. 140
Canton, porcelain decorated at, ii. 211, 256
Canton ware, i. 167, 171, 172, 179, 190, 193, 194, 198
Cash, ii. 76, 288
Cassia tree, ii. 291, 296
Castiglione, i. 205
Catalogue of Boston Exhibition, i. 104
Catalogue of Burlington Fine Arts Club Exhibition, _See_ Burlington
Fine Arts Club.
Catalogue of Loan Exhibition, New York, i. 110, 124
Catalogue of Morgan Collection, i. 140
Celadon, i. 32, 39, 46, 54, 76, 77, 80, 81, 84, 85, 87, 88, 114;
ii. 77, 146, 188, 266, 270
Celadon, brownish, i. 85
Celadon, Corean, i. 51
Celadon, inlaid, i. 84
Celadon, Japanese, i. 85
Celadon, Ming, i. 81
Celadon, Siamese, i. 88
Celadon, spotted, i. 80
Celadon, Sung, i. 81
Celadon wares, traffic in, i. 88
_Celadonfrage_, i. 86
_Ch’a Ching_, i. 37, 40
Cha no yu, i. 131
_Ch’a Su_, i. 93
Ch’a yeh mo, ii. 233
Chadwick, arms of, ii. 256
Ch’ai ware, i. 40, 41, 42, 48, 49, 50, 52, 54, 124
Chain pattern border, ii. 257
Chalfant, F. H., i. 4
_Chambrelans_, ii. 260
Chang, potter, i. 105
Chang brothers, i. 67, 76
Chang Ch’ien, i. 6; ii. 14, 291, 292
Chang Chiu-ko, ii. 289
_Ch’ang ming fu kuei_, ii. 53
_Ch’ang nan chih_, i. 156
Chang-kuo Lao, ii. 284
Chang Sêng-yu, ii. 292
_Chang wu chih_, ii. 94
Chang yao, i. 77
Chang Ying-wên, i. 41, 60
Ch’ang-chou Chên, i. 202
Ch’ang-nan, i. 45
Chang-tê Fu, i. 101, 105
Chantilly, ii. 173
Chao, ii. 59
Chao family, i. 107
Chao Ju-kua, i. 86, 188, 189
Chao-ch’ing Fu, i. 172
Ch’ao-chou Fu, i. 184
Characters, grass, ii. 301
Characters, Sanskrit, ii. 66, 240, 286, 302
Characters, seal, i. 208, 209; ii. 301
Characters, the Hundred Shou, ii. 61
Charles Edward, Prince, ii. 255
Charlotte, Queen of Prussia, ii. 133, 155
Charlottenberg Palace, ii. 90, 133, 155, 193
Charteris, Hon. E., ii. 33
Chavannes, Prof. E., i. 7, 17
Chelsea, ii. 112, 140, 173, 183, 251, 260
Ch’ên Chün, i. 175
Ch’ên Chung-mei, i. 175, 176
Ch’ên-lin, i. 82
Chên Tsai, ii. 110
Ch’ên Wên-ching, ii. 78
Chêng Chou, i. 40
Chêng Ho, ii. 12
Ch’êng Hua mark, ii. 155, 189, 252
Ch’êng Hua wares, ii. 22–29, 203, 207, 224, 225
Ch’êng ni, i. 61
_Ch’êng tê t’ang_, ii. 265
Ch’êng Tê wares, ii. 29–33, 207, 208, 224
Chêng T’ung, ii. 27, 28
_Chêng tzŭ t’ung_, the, i. 15
Ch’êng-tu, i. 13, 199
Chên-ting Fu, i. 53, 89, 94, 156, 199; ii. 107
Chess, ii. 276, 282
_Chi Ch’ing_ (dark violet blue), ii. 99, 218, 219, 223, 270
Chi Chou ware, i. 71, 98, 157
_Chi hung_ (red), ii. 9, 10, 11, 29, 59, 79, 101, 118, 123, 145,
223, 268
_Ch’i sung t’ang shih hsiao lu_, i. 37
Chia Ching wares, ii. 11, 34–55, 203, 225
Chia Ch’ing wares, ii. 262, 263
_Chiang hsia pa chün_, ii. 40
_Ch’iang hsi t’ung chih_, i. 53, 60, 118, 141, 153, 154, 159, 181;
ii. 223, 228, 237, 267
Chiang, Memoirs of, i. 92, 155, 156, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163,
164; ii. 20
_Chiang-t’ai_, ii. 141
_Chiang t’ang_, ii. 34
Chicago, i. 146
Chicken cups, ii. _xvii_, 23, 24, 26
Ch’ien family, i. 38
_Ch’ien k’un ch’ing t’ai_, ii. 56
Ch’ien Lung, i. 31; ii. 33, 227–249
Ch’ien Lung, Imperial poems of, ii. 227, 301
Ch’ien Lung monochromes, ii. 216
Ch’ien Niu, ii. 291
Chien yao, i. 8, 31, 93, 94, 103, 130–135; ii. 109
Chien-an, i. 130, 131
Chien-ning Fu, i. 130, 132, 133; ii. 291
Chien-yang, i. 130, 164; ii. 109
_Chih lung_, ii. 157, 292
_Ch’i-hsia-lei-k’ao_, i. 67
Chih-t’ien, i. 136
Children playing with branches of flowers design, ii. 56
Children (_wa wa_), ii. 40, 281
_Ch’i-lin_, ii. 67, 293
_Ch’i-lin_ reclining before fountain, ii. 67
Chin dynasty, i. 16
_Chin huang_ (golden yellow), ii. 37
_Chin lü_, ii. 34
_Ch’in ting ku chin t’u shu chi ch’êng_, i. 127, 187
_Ch’in ying wên_, i. 113
Chinese and Japanese porcelain, the distinction between, ii. 174
_Chinese Commercial Guide_, i. 184, 187
Chinese porcelain decorated in Europe, ii. 259
_Ch’ing_, i. 16, 41, 46, 52, 60
_Ch’ing pi tsa chih_, i. 38
_Ch’ing pi ts’ang_, i. 41, 53, 54, 60, 77, 79, 92, 93, 109; ii. 9,
11, 13
_Ch’ing po tsa chih_, i. 52, 96, 97, 157
Ching T’ai, ii. 27
_Ch’ing tien_, ii. 142, 201
_Ch’ing ts’ung_, i. 62
_Ch’ing tz’ŭ_, i. 46
_Ch’ing_ ware, i. 76
_Ch’ing wei t’ang_, ii. 247
_Ch’ing yi lu_, i. 131
Ching-tê Chên, i. _xv_, 40, 45, 71, 83, 84, 89, 92, 94, 95, 96,
99, 109, 119, 120, 147, 152, 162; ii. 1, 12, 212, 228
_Ching-tê Chên t’ao lu, passim_
Ch’ing-yün, ii. 108
Chini-hane, ii. 69
Chin-shih, i. 167
Chin-ts’un, i. 76, 80
Chipped edges of plates, ii. 140
_Chiu_, wine, ii. 34
_Cho kêng lu_, i. 55, 60, 61, 66, 109, 134
Chou dynasty, i. 3, 44; ii. 41
Chou, Hui, i. 157
Chou kao-ch’i, i. 174
Chou Mao-shu, ii. 25, 296
Chou Tan-ch’üan, i. 94, 95, 96; ii. 65
Chou Ts’ang, ii. 284
Chrome tin, ii. 177
Chrysanthemum plant, ii. 25, 296
Ch’üan-chou Fu, i. 86, 188; ii. 108
_Chü chai tsa chi_, i. 98
Ch’ü Chih-kao, i. 201
_Chu fan chih_, i. 86
Chu Hsi, i. 20
Chu Mai-chên, ii. 282
_Chu ming yao_, ii. 305
_Chü pao shan_, i. 202
_Chu shih chü_, ii. 167
_Ch’ŭ yao_, i. 76, 80
Ch’ŭ-Chou Fu, i. 76, 77, 80, 83, 201
_Ch’ui ch’ing_, ii. 180, 181
_Ch’ui hung_, ii. 125
Chün chou, i. 179, 198
_Ch’un fêng t’ang sui pi_, i. 77
Chün glaze of the muffle kiln, i, 120, 177; ii. 217
Chün-t’ai, i. 109
Chün wares, i. 41, 42, 48, 62, 109–130, 157, 167, 179, 181; ii. 18,
19, 94, 220, 229
_Ch’ung Chên_, ii. 86
_Chung-ho-t’ang_, ii. 145
Church, Sir A., i. 167
Ch’ü-yang Hsien, i. 199
Cicada, ii. 73, 295
_Cicerone_, i. 87
Citron dishes, ii. 8
Civil and military vases, ii. 281
_Clair de lune_, i. 60; ii. 179, 219, 252
Clays, ferruginous, i. 80
“Clobbered china,” ii. 261
Clennell, W. J., i. 155, 156
Cloisonné blue, ii. 219, 220
Cloisonné enamels, i. 167; ii. 17, 82, 209, 232, 243
Cloud and thunder pattern, ii. 272, 290, 302
Cloud pattern, ii. 302
“Cloud scroll,” i. 113; ii. 42
Club shaped, ii. 274
Cobalt, ii. 12, 98
Cochin China, i. 144
Cock, ii. 294
Cole, Fay-Cooper, i. 87, 189
Colouring agents, i. 49
Colours, _famille verte_, ii. 163
Colours, foreign, ii. 221, 225, 229, 232, 242, 243
Colours iridescent, ii. 241, 264
Colours, mixed, ii. 264, 271
Combed patterns, i. 85, 150
Confucius, i. 7, 18, 79; ii. 40, 43, 283
Constantinople, i. 87
Convex centre, bowls with, ii. 51
Cope Bequest, ii. 149
Copper oxide, i. 118, 137; ii. 10, 177, 232
Copper red, ii. 6, 11, 55
Coral red, ii, 6, 48, 51
Corea, i. 39, 134, 148, 150, 151
Corean design, i. 34, 107; ii. 56
Corean wares, i. 39, 42, 54, 59, 84, 85, 102, 107, 149, 150, 151;
ii. 115
Cornaline, i. 53; ii. 123
Cornelian, ii. 10
Cornflower sprigs, ii. 258
Corpse pillows, i. 105
Cotton cultivation, ii. 164
_Couleurs de demi grand feu_, ii. 18, 20
_Couleurs de grand feu_, ii. 98
_Couleurs de petit feu_, ii. 20
“Crab’s claw” crackle i. 53, 60, 67, 96
Crab-shell green, i. 117
Cracked specimens, ii. 233
Crackle, i. 67, 68, 99, 171; ii. 9, 37, 99, 121, 142, 180, 189,
197, 198, 199, 218
Crackle, apple green, ii. 121, 125, 187
Crackle, buff, ii. 145
Crackle, fish roe, i. 53, 67
Crackle, green, ii. 170
Crackle, millet, ii. 197
Crackle, oatmeal, ii. 199
Crackle, plum blossom, i. 61; ii. 244
Crane, ii. 288
“Crane cups,” i. 17
Cranes, six, ii. 61
Cricket pots, fighting, i, 188; ii. 21, 160, 275
Crickets, fighting, ii. 295
Crucifixion, ii. 252
Crusader plate, ii. 113
Crutch, ii. 287
Cumberbatch Collection, ii. 49
Cups floating on river, ii. 168, 281
Cups, Keyser, ii. 252
Cups, libation, ii. 278
Cycles, table of, i. 211
Cyclical dates, i. 210, 213; ii. 213, 230, 240, 268
Cyclical dates, table of, i. 212
Dana Collection, i. 11
Date marks, i. 210
Date marks prohibited, i. 208
Dated porcelain, ii. 213, 257, 263
Deer, ii. 286, 294
Deer, the Hundred, ii. 61, 243
de Groot, Dr. J. J. M., i. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 105; ii. 25, 110
Delft, i. 178; ii. 139, 251, 252
Demons, ii. 290
_Denkmäler Persischer Baukunst_, ii. 69
Derby, i. 114; ii. 251, 258
Deshima, ii. 173
Dharmatrata, ii. 285
Dillon, E., ii. 26, 51
Dinner table sets, ii. 36, 267
Dishes, ii. 278
Divining rod vases, ii. 274
Dodder, i. 113
Dog, ii. 291
“Dog of Fo,” ii. 39, 149, 160, 293
Double gourd shape, ii. 94
Double ring under base, ii. 69
Dour-er-Raçibi, i. 87
Dragon, ii. 5, 32, 33, 39, 144, 292
Dragon and phœnix design, ii. 8, 30, 37, 39, 67, 81
Dragon and sea waves, ii. 37
Dragon, azure, i. 20; ii. 291
Dragon boat design, ii. 25
Dragon horse, ii. 41, 290
Dragon medallions, ii. 38, 39
Dragon of the East, i. 56
Dragon procession, ii. 281
Dragon rising from waves, ii. 170
Dreams, ii. 283
Dresden collection, i. 178; ii. 48, 51, 80, 112, 133, 134, 147,
148, 151, 155, 164, 167, 179, 215, 243;
mark of, ii. 213
Drucker, J. C. J., ii. 139, 170
Drums, pottery, i. 137
Ducks on water design, i. 90
Duesbury, ii. 260
Dukes, E. J., ii. 114, 115
Dutch, ii. 89, 111, 191
Dutch East India Company, ii. 89, 128, 213
Dutch enamellers, ii. 259
Dutch pictures, ii. 73, 89
Dwight, i. 37, 178; ii. 112
Dyaks, i. 189, 193; ii. 223
Eagle, heraldic, ii. 139
Eagle on a rock, ii. 73
Earth, symbol of, ii. 41
“Earthworm marks,” i. 113, 117
East India Company, British, ii. 133, 155
East Indies, ii. 70
East, symbol of, ii. 41
Edwards, Mr., i. 148
“Eel’s blood,” i. 61
“Egg and tongue” pattern, i. 35
Egg green, i. 61
“Egg shell” porcelain, ii. 4, 20, 64, 168, 169, 195, 202, 207, 210,
224, 243, 248
“Egg white,” i. 53, 54, 61, 71
Egypt, i. 2, 86, 88; ii. 30, 44
Egyptian tombs, i. 140
“Eight Ambassadors of the Tribes of Man,” ii. 262, 283
Eight Emblems of Happy Augury, ii. 297
Eight Immortals, attributes of, ii. 297
Eight Immortals of the Wine Cup, ii. 282
Eight Musical Instruments, ii. 297
Eight Precious Objects, ii. 297, 298
_Ei raku_, ii. 6
Elephants, ii. 61, 242, 269, 286
Elephant checkers, ii. 282
Elers, i. 178
Elixir of life, ii. 286, 289
_Emaillé sur biscuit_, ii. 152
Emblematic motives, ii. 41, 62
Embossed ornament, ii. 37, 102, 224
Embroidery ornaments, twelve, ii. 297
Empress Dowager, ii. 271
Enamel, apple green, ii. 103
Enamel, _famille rose_, ii. 210
Enamel glaze, ii. 21
Enamel on biscuit, ii. 21, 79, 80, 152, 153, 160
Enamel, white, ii. 163, 245
Enamelled ornament, i. 161, 162, 163
Enamelling establishments, ii. 260
Enamels, Canton, i. 166
Enamels, mixed, ii. 242
Enamels on glaze, ii. 18, 48, 160, 161, 170
Enamels, transition, ii. 169, 257
Engraved background, ii. 244
Engraved designs, i. 106; ii. 102, 224
d’Entrecolles’ letters, Père, i. 83, 84, 147, 154; ii. 77, 112,
114, 122, 124, 126, 127, 129, 130, 140, 141, 143, 148, 151, 161,
162, 163, 182, 183, 188, 189, 192, 193, 195, 196, 198, 218, 252,
276
Ephesus, i. 87
Epicurus, ii. 286
_Erh shih lu_, i. 138
Etched design, ii. 183, 195
Eumorfopoulos Collection, i. 29, 31, 34, 35, 42, 57, 59, 63, 69,
73, 107, 111, 114, 115, 131, 149, 171, 179, 191, 197, 203, 218;
ii. 27, 31, 52, 78, 79, 85, 115, 139, 204, 219, 227, 278
European influence, i. 205; ii. 90, 135, 209, 250–261
European merchants, ii. 139
European shapes, ii. 98, 128, 251
European subjects, ii. 244, 245, 255, 257
Ewers, i. 165
Excavations in Honan, i. 132
Exports forbidden, i. 88, 189
Export wares, ii. 44, 68, 70, 73, 78, 81, 85, 108, 128, 167, 202,
245, 258, 266, 271, 280
_Fa ch’ing_, ii. 219, 224, 231
_Fa lan_, ii. 231
_Fa lang_, ii. 209, 229, 231
Factories at Peking, ii. 126
Fairies, ii. 286
Falkner, Frank, ii. 259
_Famille noire_, ii. 101, 159
_Famille rose_, i. 177; ii. 163, 169, 191, 202, 203, 207, 208, 209,
210, 213, 214, 221, 242, 247
_Famille verte_, ii. 85, 121, 125, 136, 137, 160, 161, 162, 163,
167, 168, 173, 183, 193, 207, 256
_Famille verte_, dated examples of, ii. 168
_Famille verte_ enamels, over blue outlines, ii. 207
_Fan_, ii. 288
Fan Ching-ta, i. 136
_Fan hung_, ii. 10, 34, 35, 37, 48, 52, 55, 101
_Fan tz’ŭ_, ii. 196
Fat-shan Chün, i. 123, 171, 172, 179
Feet, cramping of, i. 24
_Fei ts’ui_, i. 38; ii. 237
Fei-kuan, i. 107
_Fên ch’ing_, i. 53, 54, 59, 60, 67, 71, 99
_Fên hung_, i. 60, 65
_Fên ting_, i. 90; ii. 218
Fêng-kan, i. 56
_Fêng-huang_, ii. 293
Field Museum, Chicago, i. 128, 182, 189, 194, 198, 199, 200
Figures, i. 107, 108, 197, 201; ii. 110, 151, 152, 197, 251, 279,
283
Figures in European costumes, ii. 111, 251
Figures in high relief, ii. 102
Firefly decoration, ii. 247
Fish bowls, ii. 36, 59, 117, 229, 234, 275, 281
Fish, double, ii. 294
Fish roe crackle, i. 53, 67
Fish roe design, ii. 167
Fish-dragon, ii. 284
Fishes, i. 78; ii. 7, 9, 11, 40, 204, 224
FitzWilliam Museum, i. 125, 127
Five blessings, ii. 300
Five colours, ii. 19, 20
Florentine porcelain, ii. 44
Flower Fairy, ii. 289
Flower pots, i. 109, 110, 113, 114, 197; ii. 19, 275
Flower vases, ii. 273, 275
Flowers, ii. 295
Flowers, basket of, ii. 67
Flowers, celestial, ii. 38
Flowers, fairy, ii. 295
Flowers for the months, ii. 295
Flowers, the Hundred, ii. 243
Flute, ii. 287, 288
“Flying gallop,” i. 12
Fly-whisk, ii. 287
_Fo lang_, ii. 209, 231
_Fo t’ou ch’ing_, ii. 30, 98
Foot, finishing off the, ii. 92, 202, 249
Foot rim, grooved, ii. 26, 92, 129
Forgeries, ii. 304–307
Forms, ii. 60, 272–279
Fou-liang, i. 140, 152
Fou-liang, Annals of, i. 141, 153, 155; ii. 35, 228, 231
Franks Collection, i. _xxiii_; ii. 4, 5, 14, 17, 21, 26, 27, 121
Franks, Sir Wollaston, ii. 212
Freer Collection, i. 33, 71, 114, 129
French, A. B., ii. 212
“Fresh red,” ii. 35, 36, 123
Fretwork, incised, ii. 76
Friends, three, ii. 269, 289, 296
Frog wares, ii. 66
Frog’s spawn, ii. 167
Fruits, three, ii. 11, 204, 224, 296
_Fu_ (happiness), ii. 11
Fu Chou, i. 16
_Fu fan chih ts’ao_, ii. 108
Fu Hsi, ii. 41, 290
_Fu ju tung hai_, ii. 62
_Fu kuei_ flower, ii. 294
_Fu lang_, ii. 231
Fu, Lu, Shou, ii. 62
_Fu sê_, ii. 24, 26
_Fu shou k’ang ning_, ii. 43, 75
Fu-hsing, ii. 287
Fukien porcelain, i. 8; ii. 78, 108, 110, 251, 259
Fulham, i. 178
“Funeral vases,” i. 56, 147
Fungus design, ii. 11, 95, 204, 224
Furnace transmutations, i. 137, 156, 175; ii. 18, 192, 218, 232
G (mark), ii. 136, 137, 167
Gama Sennin, ii. 288
Gandhara, i. 17
Garlic-shaped vases, ii. 273
Gems, seven, ii. 298
General, the chess-playing, i. 79
Genghis Khan, i. 159
Genii of Mirth and Harmony, Twin, ii. 159, 288
Gilding, i. 163, 177; ii. 37, 102, 162, 164, 173, 183, 215, 226,
231, 246
Giles, H. A., i. 24
Ginger jar, i. 182; ii. 134
Glass, i. 200; ii. 215
Glass, Bristol, ii. 215
Glass, _mille fiori_, ii. 234
Glaze, bird’s egg, i. 177; ii. 217, 233
Glaze, black, i. 11, 31, 42, 93, 103, 106, 131; ii. 192
Glaze, chocolate brown, i. 31
Glaze, crystalline, i. 171, 178
Glaze, donkey’s liver and horse’s lung, i. 119
Glaze, dragon skin, i. 110, 113
Glaze, first use of, i. 8
Glaze, _flambé_, i. 50, 118, 119, 168, 205; ii. 85, 124, 193, 218,
232, 233, 235
Glaze, Han, i. 10
Glaze, hare’s fur, i. 93
Glaze, iron rust, ii. 233
Glaze, lavender, i. 48, 63, 109, 168
Glaze, lavender grey, i. 49
Glaze, lemon yellow, ii. 264
Glaze, leopard skin, ii. 192
Glaze, liver, ii. 238
Glaze, maroon red, ii. 178, 179, 238
Glaze, Ming, ii. 93
Glaze, moon white, ii. 224
Glaze, oil green, ii. 224
Glaze, old turquoise, i. 48
Glaze, opalescent, i. 50, 51, 62, 110, 118
Glaze, peach bloom, ii. 99, 146, 176, 177, 178, 179
Glaze, pea green, ii. 37, 99
Glaze, preparing the, ii. 248
Glaze, red, i. 117; ii. 10, 11, 64, 79
Glaze, red Chün, i. 117
Glaze, robin’s egg, i. 120; ii. 217
Glaze, shrivelled, i. 110; ii. 31, 245
Glaze, sun-stone, i. 200
Glaze, T’ang, i. 24, 31
Glaze, turquoise, i. 48, 103; ii. 18, 99, 127, 184, 185, 224
Glaze, varieties of black, ii. 229
Glaze, yellow, ii. 28, 126
Glaze. _See also_ Black, Blue, Red, Yellow, Green, etc. _Also_
_Clair de lune_, _Sang de bœuf_, Crackle, Hare’s fur,
Kingfisher’s feathers, Tea dust, Iron rust.
Glazes, Chün, i. 114, 118, 120
Glazing, methods of, ii. 92, 249
Glazing mixture, ii. 163
Gods of longevity, rank, and happiness, ii. 159
Goff Collection, i. 193
Golden brown, ii. 65
Gombroon ware, i. 148; ii. 173
Gotha Museum, i. 71, 79
Gourd shape, ii. 94, 273, 287
Gouthière, ii. 194
Graceful ladies, ii. 40, 136
Græco-Buddhist influence, i. 34
Græco-Roman influence, i. 35
_Graffiato_, i. 106, 107, 135
“Grains of millet,” ii. 13
Grain pattern, i. 44
Grandidier Collection, Louvre, i. _xxiii_, 185, 195; ii. 75, 163,
168
Grape vine cup, ii. 24
Grass characters, ii. 301
Grasshoppers, ii. 24
_Graviata_, ii. 239
Great Bear, ii. 284
Great Wall of China, i. 202
Green, ii. 238
Green, apple, ii. 177, 188
Green, cucumber tint, ii. 157, 238
Green, _eau de nil_ tint, ii. 238
Green, emerald, ii. 37, 51, 52, 271
“Green of a thousand hills,” i. 82
Green, opaque bluish, ii. 244
Green, snake skin, ii. 127, 187, 223, 238
Grœneveldt, W. P., ii. 12
Grotto pieces, i. 197; ii. 151
Grünwedel Expedition, i. 16, 23
Gulland, W., ii. 29
Gypsum, ii. 77, 196
_Haarlem_, ii. 136
Hainhofer, Philipp, ii. 48, 73
_Hai shou_, ii. 61, 293
_Hakugorai_, i. 151
Hall marks, i. 217; ii. 265
Halsey, Mrs., ii. 13, 47, 78
Hamburg Museum, ii. 90
Han dynasty, the, i. 5–22
Han glaze, i. 10
_Han hsing_, i. 97
Handles, i. 165; ii. 277
Hang Chou, i. 43, 45, 60, 67, 72
Hang Chou Kuan ware, i. 61, 134
_Han Kan_, i. 25
Han Lin College, i. 218
Han-tan, i. 147
Hao Shih-chiu, ii. 64, 178, 219
“Happy meeting,” ii. 282
Hare mark, ii. 67, 82
Hare, the, ii. 286, 289, 291
“Hare’s fur” glaze, i. 93, 94, 113, 131, 133, 164; ii. 108
Hâriti, ii. 111
Hat stand, ii. 31, 97, 277
Hawthorn design, ii. 134
Heaven, symbol of, ii. 41
Heaven, Temple of, i. 205; ii. 195, 238
_Hei chê shih_, ii. 98
Hêng fêng, i. 201
Herend, ii. 306
Heroes of Han dynasty, the three, ii. 281
“Hill censer,” i. 12
“Hill jar,” i. 12
Hippisley, A. E., ii. 64, 122, 216, 290, 292, 300
Hippisley Collection, ii. 99, 207, 215, 246, 265
Hirado, ii. 14, 25, 76, 147
Hirth and Rockhill, i. 86, 88, 188
Hirth Collection, i. 71
Hirth, Prof., i. 5, 67, 81, 86, 89, 143, 145, 146, 188; ii. 30
_Ho_ (colour), i. 40
Ho Chou, i. 32, 94, 97
Ho Ch’ou, i. 17, 143, 144, 147
Ho Chung-ch’u, i. 153
Ho Hsien-ku, ii. 152
Honan, i. 193
Honan Fu, i. 27, 130; ii. 305
“Honeysuckle” pattern, i. 35
Hookah bowl, ii. 97
Ho-pin, i. 1
Horses of Mu Wang, the eight, ii. 289
Horses, sea, ii. 294
Horse, the white, ii. 286
Hose and McDougall, i. 193
Ho-shang, ii. 285
Hotei, ii. 285
Hou Hsien Shêng, ii. 288
Hsi Shih, ii. 282
Hsi Wang Fu, ii. 288
Hsi Wang Mu, i. 7; ii. 107, 141, 264, 286, 288, 289
Hsi yao, i. 97
Hsi Yung Chêng, i. 135
Hsi-an Fu, i. 15
Hsiang, i. 105
_Hsiang Ch’i_, ii. 282
Hsiang family, i. 199
_Hsiang ling ming huan chih_, i. 24
Hsiang yao, i. 96
Hsiang Yüan-p’ien, i. 50, 54; ii. 14
Hsiang-hu, i. 71; ii. 220, 224
Hsiang’s Album, i. _xviii_, 62, 71, 77, 90, 93, 94, 118, 161, 175;
ii. 7, 9, 12, 13, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 32, 127
Hsiao Hsien, i. 97
_Hsiao nan_, ii. 65
Hsieh An, ii. 282
Hsieh Min, ii. 223, 229, 230, 231, 237
_Hsien_, ii. 40, 289
Hsien Fêng, ii. 267
_Hsien hung_, ii. 3, 6, 10, 11, 34, 37, 52, 55, 59, 99, 123, 223
_Hsin Chou_ year, ii. 213
Hsin-p’ing, i. 141, 152, 156
_Hsin ting_, i. 94
Hsing Chou, i. 37, 147
_Hsiu hua_, i. 91, 101, 161
_Hsiu nei ssŭ_, i. 59, 60, 61
Hsü Ch’ih, ii. 35, 55
Hsü Ching, i. 39, 54, 151
Hsü Chou, i. 107, 108, 166
_Hsü hua t’ang_, ii. 265
_Hsü Shui Hu_, ii. 281
Hsü Tz’ŭ-shu, i. 93
Hsü wares, i. 66
Hsü Yu-ch’üan, i. 175
Hsüan Chou, i. 201
_Hsüan ho po ku t’u lu_, i. 44
Hsüan Tê, ii. 6, 7–21, 22, 24, 32, 204, 246
Hsüan T’ung, ii. 271
Hsü-chên, ii. 35
Hsün-wares, i. 66, 134
Hu kung, ii. 64
_Hu yin tao jên_, ii. 64, 65
_Hua_ (ornament), i. 91; ii. 43, 130
_Hua hua_ (carved ornament), i. 91, 106
_Hua shih_ (steatite), i. 99; ii. 141, 196, 198, 201
Huai-ch’ing Fu, i. 201
Huang An, ii. 288
Huang Ti, i. 1
Huang-chih, i. 143
Huang-ssŭ, i. 205
Hua-ting Chou, ii. 107
_Hui hui ch’ing_, ii. 12, 98
_Hui hui hua_, ii. 31
_Hui hui wên_, ii. 31
_Hui hu ta ch’ing_, ii. 13
_Hui sê_ (ash colour), i. 61, 67, 71; ii. 199
Hui Tsung, ii. 164
Hulagu Khan, ii. 30
Hundred Antiques, the, ii. 297, 298
Hundred Birds, ii. 295
Hundred Deer, the, ii. 61, 243
Hung Chih, ii. 28, 29
Hung-chien, i. 108
Hung Chou, i. 38
_Hung fu ch’i t’ien_, ii. 62, 300
Hung Wu, ii. 1, 2
_Huo yen ch’ing_, i. 113
Hu-t’ien, i. 160, 163; ii. 28
_I chih_, i. 208; ii. 35, 38
IHS, ii. 252
_I shou_, ii. 61
Imari, ii. 171, 173, 174
Imari, Chinese, ii. 161, 173, 174
Imitation of Chia Ching ware, ii. 225
Imitation of Chün glazes, ii. 217, 268, 223, 224
Imitation of Chün yao, ii. 234
Imitation of five colour porcelain, ii. 208
Imitation of Hsüan Te and Chêng Hua wares, ii. 55, 224
Imitation of Ko, Kuan, Ju and Lung-ch’üan glazes, ii. 223, 268
Imitation of mother-of-pearl, ii. 234
Imitation of peach bloom, ii. 178
Imitation of Sung wares, ii. 216, 224
Imitation of the antique, ii. 201, 203, 243
Imitation of Ting ware, ii. 65, 74, 142, 197, 223
Imitation of Tung-ch’ing and Lung-ch’üan glazes, ii. 224
Imitation of various substances in porcelain, ii. 234
Imitations, i. 83, 117, 119, 120; ii. 11, 43, 82, 156, 203, 304–307
Immortals, Eight Taoist, i. 79; ii. 40, 110, 134, 141, 159, 287,
289
Immortals of the Wine Cup, Eight, ii. 130, 282
Imperial colours, ii. 189
Imperial factory, i. 123, 153; ii. 1, 29, 30, 64, 105
Imperial porcelains, lists of, ii. 223, 267, 268
Imperial vases, ii. 81
Imperial wares, ii. 148, 195, 207, 229
Incense burners, i. 128, 161, 194, 198, 206; ii. 108, 112, 113, 276
Incised designs, ii. 112
Incised fret pattern, ii. 275
India, i. 88, 193; ii. 44, 76, 278
Indian lotus, ii. 25, 38
Indian market, wares for, ii. 73, 76, 78, 81
Ink pallet, ii. 80, 155, 276
Ink, porcelain painted in, ii. 214, 225, 229
Ink screens, ii. 160, 276
Ink slab, ii. 31
Inlaid designs, i. 84
Inlaid ornament, i. 107
Insect cages, ii. 246
Inscriptions, i. 177; ii. 62, 112, 252, 301
Inscriptions, Koranic, ii. 255
Inscriptions, posthumous, i. 9, 12
Iridescent colours, ii. 241, 242
Iron oxide, ii. 189
_Islam_, i. 148
Isles of the blessed, ii. 286
Ispahan, ii. 30
Italian wares, i. 106; ii. 44
Itier, M., ii. 10, 230
I-yang, i. 201
I-yang Hsien, i. 201
Jacquemart, ii. 160, 211
Jade Emperor, ii. 291
Jade, green, i. 82
Jade Hall, ii. 75
“Jade” mark, ii. 252
Jade, ware turned to, i. 99
Jao-chou Fu, i. 152; ii. 34, 107
“Jao-chou jade,” i. 156, 157
Jao-chou wares, old, i. 161
Japan Society of New York, exhibition of, i. 72, 113
Japanese patterns, ii. 174
Japanese porcelains, ii. 264
_Japanese Temples and their Treasures_, i. 36
Jesuit china, ii. 252, 255
Jesuits, ii. 122, 123
Jewel, Buddhist, ii. 286
Jewel Hill, i. 154; ii. 1
Jewels, set with, ii. 51, 113
Jih-nan, i. 144
“Joyous meeting” design, ii. 56
Ju-chou, i. 52, 56
Ju-chou wares, i. 39, 42, 45, 48, 49, 51, 52–59, 61, 67, 89, 90,
92; ii. 9, 10, 123
_Ju shih wo wên_, i. 41
_Ju-i_ head or cloud border, i. 113; ii. 289
_Ju-i_ pattern, ii. 71, 83, 130, 131
_Ju-i_ sceptre, ii. 42, 287, 289
Julien, i. 143, 145, 162; ii. 10, 24, 127, 228, 230, 234, 248, 266
Ju-ning Fu, i. 198
Junk, ii. 151
Kaga ware, ii. 155
K’ai-fêng Fu, i. 43, 52, 59, 60, 82, 109
Kaiser Friederik Museum, i. 148
Kakiemon ware, ii. 173, 174
_Kaki temmoku_, i. 31
Kan Chou, i. 135
K’ang Hsi, ii. 14, 27, 47, 77, 79, 80, 118, 122, 126, 128–199
K’ang Hsi blue and white, ii. 67, 128–144
_K’ang Hsi Encyclopædia_, i. 127, 187; ii. 107, 109, 197
K’ang Hsi mark, ii. 155, 177, 242, 271
K’ang Hsi monochromes, ii. 176
_Kao chai man lu_, i. 38
Kao Chiang-ts’un, ii. 23, 24, 25
_K’ao kung chi_, i. 1
Kao Tan-jên, ii. 23
Kao Tsung, i. 19
Kaolin, i. 123, 148; ii. 91, 123, 248
Karabacek, Professor, i. 86
Ka-shan, i. 206
Kennedy Collection, ii. 149, 194, 238
Kenzan, i. 103
Kershaw, F. S., i. 12
Key-fret, ii. 291
“Keyser cups,” ii. 252
Khotan, i. 23
Kichimojin, ii. 111
Kiln supports, tubular, i. 85
Kilns, Chinese, ii. 100
Kilwa, i. 87
“Kingfisher’s feathers,” i. 82
_Kinrande_, ii. 6
Kinsai, i. 22
Kin-shan, Temple of, i. 205; ii. 291
_Kinuta seiji_, i. 57
Kirk, Sir John, i. 87, 88
Kishiu, i. 197
Ko Ming-hsiang, i. 168, 171
Ko ware, i. 45, 48, 49, 65, 67–72, 73, 76, 77, 98, 99, 134, 181;
ii. 65, 199, 220
Ko Yüan-hsiang, i. 168
_Kochi yaki_, i. 190
Koranic inscriptions, ii. 255
_Ku chin t’u shu chi ch’êng_, ii. 107
_Ku ch’u_, i. 92
Ku Liu, i. 68
Ku Ying-t’ai, i. 40
_Ku yü t’u p’u_, i. 44
Kua Chou, i. 202
Kuan Chung, i. 16
_Kuan ku_, i. 54
Kuan P’ing, ii. 284
Kuan Ti, ii. 159, 284
Kuan wares, i. 45, 48, 49, 51, 59–67, 72, 77, 82, 124, 134, 181;
ii. 9, 65, 223
Kuan Yü, i. 203; ii. 110, 283
Kuang Hsi, ii. 271
Kuang Wu, i. 18
Kuang yao, i. 166, 172; ii. 224
Kuangtung, i. 123; ii. 78
Kuangtung wares, i. 166–173; ii. 217, 224
_Kuan-tzŭ_, the, i. 3
Kuan-yin, i. 176; ii. 18, 29, 110, 111, 156, 285
Kuan-yin vase, i. 55
Kublai Khan, i. 159
_K’uei fêng_, ii. 269, 293
_Kuei hai yü hêng chih_, i. 136
Kuei Hsing, ii. 159, 284
_Kuei lung_, ii. 292
Ku-li, ii. 209
Kümmel, Dr., i. 85
Kung-ch’un, i. 175, 176
Kung Hsien, i. 107
_Kung ming fu kuei_, ii. 294
Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin, i. _xxiii_, 100; ii. 51, 252
K’un-wu, i. 1
Kuo Tao-yüan, i. 39, 147
_Ku-yuëh-hsüan_, ii. 202, 215, 264
Kylin. See _Ch’i-lin_.
_Lac burgauté_, ii. 247
Lacework, ii. 246, 263
Lacquer, ii. 234, 263, 265
Laffan, Mr., ii. 118
Lambert, arms of Sir John, ii. 257
Lamp, porcelain, ii. 200
Lancastrian pottery, i. 49, 200
Landscape, ii. 296
Lang Shih-ning, ii. 122
Lang T’ing-tso, ii. 118, 121, 122
_Lang yao_, ii. 118, 119, 121, 122, 123, 124, 170, 176, 188
_Lange lijsen_, ii. 40, 136, 282
Lanterns, ii. 246, 277
Lan Tsa’i-ho, ii. 287, 289
Lao Yang, i. 26
Lao-tzŭ, ii. 40, 159, 283, 286
Lapidary, designs cut by, ii. 260
_L’Astrée_, i. 78
Laufer, Berthold, i. 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 15, 27, 44, 55, 65, 103,
144, 182, 188, 189; ii. 41, 289, 294, 295, 296
Law’s bubble, John, ii. 260
Le Sueur, ii. 255
Leaf stencilling, i. 106
_Lei kung ch’i_, i. 199
Lei-hsiang, i. 199
_Lettres édifiantes et curieuses_, ii. 127
_Li_, a, i. 155
Li Chü-lai, ii. 228
_Li Chung-fang_, i. 175
Li Fêng-ming, i. 62
_Li hsi yai_, i. 91
Li Hung-chang, ii. 267
Li Jih-hua, ii. 65
_Li ki_, i. 44
Li Po, i. 23
_Li t’a k’an k’ao ku ou pien_, i. 41, 127; ii. 115
_Liang ch’i man chih_, i. 107
Libation cups, ii. 278
Library table apparatus, ii. 275
Life movement, i. 136
Lin-ch’ing, i. 200, 202
Lin-ch’uan, i. 164
_Ling chih_, ii. 38, 95, 286, 289
_Ling lung_ (pierced work), ii. 59, 63, 74, 76, 102
_Ling nan hui chê_, ii. 211
_Ling piao lu i_, i. 166
Lin-kuei, i. 136
Lin-tzŭ, i. 4
Lions, ii. 39, 68, 272, 286, 293
Lions, Buddhist, ii. 149, 159
Lions in peony scrolls, ii. 81
“Liquid dawn cups,” ii. 64, 219
Li-shui Hsien, i. 76
Li T’ai-po, ii. 160, 177, 185, 282, 292, 296
Literary success, symbol of, ii. 291, 299
Literature, gods of, ii. 284, 287
_Liu ch’ing jih cha_, i. 52, 60, 92, 96, 113, 132, 133
Liu Han, ii. 288, 291
Liu t’ien, i. 67, 76
Liu Yen-t’ing, i. 55, 56
Liu-hsün, i. 166
_Liu-li_, i. 17, 143, 144, 161
Liu-li-chü, i. 200, 202
Li-shui Hsien, i. 80
Liu-t’ien Shih, i. 80
Liverpool, ii. 141
Lograft, ii. 292
Lohan, i. 35; ii. 285
_Lo kan ma fei_, i. 118
Lokapalas, i. 27
Long Elizas, ii. 136, 282
Longevity, ii. 286
Longevity, emblems of, ii. 62, 289
Longevity, god of, ii. 40, 108, 159
Longevity, hills of, ii. 286
Lorenzo de Medici, i. 87
Lorenzo, Magalotti, Count, i. 178
Lotus, ii. 25, 287, 288, 296
Lotus, Indian, ii. 25
Lotus service, ii. 245
Louis XIV., ii. 252
Love chase, ii. 134
Lowestoft, i. 187; ii. 173, 250, 251, 258, 259, 260
Lo-yang, i. 16, 143; ii. 62, 285
Lu, i. 188
Lu Hung-chien, i. 107
Lu Kuei-mêng, i. 37
Lu Yü, i. 37
_Luan_, ii. 293
_Luan ch’ing_, i. 62
_Luan pai_, i. 53, 61, 62, 71
Lu-hsing, ii. 287
Lung Ch’ing, ii. 55, 56, 57
_Lung kang_, ii. 229
_Lung ma_, ii. 41, 294
Lung Nü, ii. 110
Lung Shang, i. 201
Lung-ch’üan wares, i. 45, 46, 48, 49, 61, 72, 76–88, 134, 156, 189;
ii. 94, 189
Lung-mên, ii. 284
Lustre, golden, ii. 241
Lyman’s Collection, ii. 78
Ma-Chuang, i. 194
_Ma-chün_, i. 124
Ma-k’êng, i. 201
_Ma nao_, ii. 10, 123
Ma-ts’ang, ii. 35, 59, 91
Magnolia blossom cups, i. 95
Magnolia design, ii. 134
Magpies, ii. 291, 294
_Man_, i. 31
Manchu, ii. 86
Mandarin porcelain, ii. 245, 259
Mandarin ducks, ii. 294
_Mang_, ii. 292
Manganese, ii. 98, 184
Manjusri, ii. 110, 285
Mantis, praying, ii. 295
Marbling, i. 33, 107; ii. 78
Marco Polo, i. 22, 43, 86, 188; ii. 113
Mark, spider, ii. 140
Marks, i. 207–224
Marks and symbols, miscellaneous, i. 227
Marks, cyclical, i. 210
Marks, date, i. 210
Marks, hall, i. 217–219; ii. 265
Marks, imperial, ii. 244
Marks, numerals as, i. 109
Marks of commendation, i. 187, 224, 226; ii. 6, 136
Marks of dedication, i. 224
Marks of felicitation, i. 224, 225
Marks of painters, ii. 212
Marks, palace, ii. 264
Marks, palace hall, i. 220
Marks, potters’, i. 221–222
Marks, prohibited date, i. 208
Marks, shop, i. 220; ii. 89, 113, 152
Martaban, i. 77, 88
_Martabani_, i. 77
Martin, Dr., i. 34
Massagetae, i. 144
“Mat marking,” i. 3
Mazarin, Cardinal, ii. 183
“Mazarine blue,” ii. 183
Measures, Chinese, ii. 234
Medallion bowls, ii. 264
Medici porcelain, ii. 44
_Mei hua_ (prunus), ii. 153
_Mei jên_, ii. 136, 282
_Mei p’ing_, ii. 79, 94, 95, 274
Meissen, i. _xvi_; ii. 112, 173, 251, 258, 261
Melon-shaped vases, i. 32, 97; ii. 47, 94
Metal band on mouth, i. 90
Metallic specks, i. 200
Metropolitan Museum, New York, i. _xxiii_; ii. 251
Meyer, A. B., i. 86, 87, 193
_Mi sê_ (millet colour), i. 68, 71, 99; ii. 28, 190, 199, 220,
223, 224, 225
_Miao hao_, i. 213
Milky way, ii. 291
_Mille fiori_ glass, ii. 234
_Mille fleurs_, ii. 295
Millet colour. See _Mi sê_.
Millet markings in glaze, ii. 9, 13, 93
_Ming ch’ên shih pi chou chai yü t’an_, ii. 52, 57
Ming colours, ii. 98
Ming period, porcelain assigned to, ii. 151, 155
Ming pottery, i. 194
Ming shapes, ii. 94
Ming Ti, i. 6; ii. 284
Ming Tombs, near Nanking, i. 205
Ming Yüan-Chang, ii. 303
Minister, the Chinese, ii. 233
Minoan pottery, i. 2
Mirror black, ii. 192
Miscellaneous marks and symbols, i. 227
Miscellaneous potteries, i. 184–206
Mitford Collection, ii. 121, 122
_Mo hung_, ii. 179, 225
Mohammedan blue, ii. 3, 12, 21, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 43, 44, 45,
52, 59, 66, 70, 98
Mohammedan design, ii. 31
Mohammedan flowers, ii. 31
Mombasa, i. 87
Mongols, i. 159, 165; ii. 1, 27
Monkey in design, ii. 82, 294, 297
Monkhouse, Cosmo, i. _xviii_, 55, 68, 124; ii. 26, 90, 220, 223
Months, flowers for, ii. 295
Monochrome, lustrous brown, ii. 191
Monochromes, blue, ii. 179
Monochromes, dating of, ii. 176
Monochromes, green, ii. 187, 238
Monochromes, red, ii. 177
Monochromes, yellow, ii. 189
Moon, goddess of, ii. 291
Morgan Collection, Pierpont, i. _xxiv_; ii. 29, 51, 69, 70, 79, 81,
116, 118, 156, 168, 220
Mortuary wares, i. 24
Mosaic, ii. 133
Mother-of-pearl, ii. 234, 247
Motives for painted decoration, ii. 60, 280
Mott, Mr., i. 168; ii. 177
Moulds, i. 2, 27
Mounts, metal, on porcelain, ii. 68, 69, 77
Mu Wang, Emperor, ii. 288
Mu Wang, the eight horses of, ii. 289
Muffle kiln, i. 120, 177; ii. 20, 79, 101
Munich, National Museum at, ii. 73
Musée Cernuschi, i. _xxiii_, 56
Musée Guimet, i. _xxiii_; ii. 288
Museum für Ostasiatische Kunst, i. 133
“Musical cups,” i. 39, 146
Musical instruments, eight, ii. 297
Musical instruments, porcelain, ii. 201
“Mustard crackle,” ii. 220
Nagasaki, ii. 173
Nail heads, i. 53
_Namako_, i. 167
Names, potters’, i. 223
Nan (-ning Fu), i. 137
Nan-Ch’ang, i. 152
Nan-fêng Hsien, i. 98, 164
_Nan ting_, i. 89
Nanking, i. 153, 187, 202, 206
Nanking, Old, ii. 173
Nanking Pagoda, i. 202; ii. 4, 20
Nan Shan, i. 15
Nara Collection, i. 23, 25, 32
Narghili bowls, ii. 77, 278
Natural History Museum, New York, i. _xxiv_, 182
Nature worship, ii. 290, 292
Nei yao, i. 61
_Neue Rundschau_, i. 35
Neuwenhais, i. 193
New Year, Chinese, ii. 134
New York Exhibition, i. 72, 113
_Ni ku lu_, i. 218
Nicholls, Dr., i. 15, 146
_Nien hao_, i. 213, 214
Nien Hsi-yao, ii. 121, 200, 227
Nien yao, ii. 121
Nightingale Collection, ii. 75
Ninagawa, Mr., ii. 115
_Ning chai ts’ung hua_, i. 136
Ning-kuo Fu, i. 201
Ningyo-de, i. 164
North, symbol of, ii. 41
Northern Sung, i. 52, 54
Nose drinking, i. 136
Numerals as marks, i. 109, 110, 113, 114
Nur-ed-din, i. 87
Nyo-fu ware, i. 97
O. C. A. (_Oriental Ceramic Art_, by S. W. Bushell), _passim_.
_Oesterreichische Monatschrift_, i. 86
O-fu. i. 2
_O-t’u_ (white earth), ii. 107
Ogre design, ii. 133, 263, 290
Old Imari, ii. 174, 260
“Old Kochi,” i. 190
_O mi t’o fo_ (Amitabha Buddha), i. 100; ii. 302
On-biscuit decoration, ii. 242
On-glaze enamels, ii. 18, 48
“Onion green,” i. 62
Opalescence, i. 50
Openwork designs, i. 177; ii. 102, 245, 246
Opium pipes, i. 177; ii. 277
Orange, ii. 296
Orange peel markings, ii. 8, 9
Orchid Pavilion, ii. 281
_Orientalisches Archiv_, i. 145
“Oriental Lowestoft,” ii. 251
Ormolu mounts, French, ii. 146, 194
Ornament, symbolical, ii. 285
Orrock Collection, ii. 134
_Ostasiatischer Zeitschrift_, i. 27
Ou, i. 17, 37, 120, 181; ii. 65, 217
Ou, Eastern, ii. 108
Owen, ii. 76
Ox, ii. 286
Oxide of copper, i. 118, 137
Oxides, metallic, i. 49
_Pa chi hsiang_, ii. 25, 42
_Pa kua_ (Eight Trigrams), ii. 39, 41, 67, 274, 290
Pa-kwoh, i. 187
_Pa pao_ (Eight Precious Symbols), ii. 42
_Pa pei_ (handle cups), ii. 7, 23
Pa Shan, waterfalls of, ii. 43
Pagoda, porcelain, i. 202; ii. 4, 20
_Pai ma_, ii. 286, 294
_Pai-o_, i. 146
Pai-shih, ii. 211, 212, 213
_P’ai-shih-lei-p’ien_, i. 68
Pai-shui, i. 199
_Pai-ting_, i. 92, 96
Pai-t’u Chên, i. 97
_Pai-tz’ü_, ii. 109
Painted decoration, i. 161
Painted T’ang wares, i. 34
Painted ornament, i. 91
Painted red flowers, i. 136
Painted Tz’ŭ ware, i. 101, 103
Painters’ signatures and seals, ii. 164, 212
Painting, i. 33
Painting in enamels, i. 46
Painting in gold, ii. 21
Painting porcelain, system of, ii. 63, 105, 106, 163, 239
Painting, red and green, i. 104
Pak-hoi, i. 172, 173, 184
Palace hall marks, i. 220
Palace porcelain, ii. 1, 271, 293
“Palm eye” markings, i. 53; ii. 9, 93, 219
Palmette-like ornaments, i. 28
Panel decoration, ii. 133
Pan Fei, i. 24
_Pan t’o tai_ (“half bodiless”), ii. 3, 195
P’an Yo, i. 16
_Pao hsiang hua_, ii. 39, 87, 295
Pao kuo ssŭ temple, ii. 18
_Pao shao_, ii. 24, 224
_Pao shih hung_, ii. 10, 24, 59, 99, 123, 223
_Pao shih lan_, ii. 219, 224
Paper-beater, shape, ii. 268, 274
_Paragons of Filial Piety, the Twenty-Four_, ii. 134, 282
Paraphernalia, seven, ii. 297
Parian ware, ii. 266
Paris Exhibition, i, 173, 184, 187, 188, 202
Parthian coffins, i. 9
Parthians, i. 5
“Partridge cups,” i. 93, 103, 131, 132, 164
Partridges, ii. 295
_Pâte sur pâte_, ii. 77, 196
Pattern books, ii. 105, 303
Peach, ii. 286, 288, 301
“Peach bloom,” ii. 99, 146, 176, 177, 178, 179, 185
Peacocks, ii. 39, 258
“Pear skin” clay, i. 174
Pearl or jewel, ii. 291
Peking, i. 200, 205, 206; ii. 126
Peking bowls, ii. 239, 244, 264
Peking lacquer, ii. 263
Pekingese spaniel, ii. 39, 293
Peking, tile works near, ii. 237
Pen rest, ii. 32
P’êng Chün-pao, i. 94, 97
P’êng ware, i. 164
Pêng-lai mount, i. 7; ii. 156, 290
Peony, ii. 294
Perfume vase, ii. 68
Persia, i. 86, 193; ii. 12, 29, 30, 31, 44, 69, 247, 278
Persian forms, ii. 67
Persian glazed bricks, i. 9
Persian Gulf, i. 149
Persian market, wares for, ii. 73, 77, 81
Persian monsters, i. 27
Persian ware, i. 34, 103, 104, 148; ii. 30, 48
Perzynski, F., i. 27, 35; ii. 43, 70, 73, 74, 75, 89, 90, 105
Peters Collection, S. T., i. 12; ii. 18, 190, 191, 192
Peters, S. T., i. 114
_Petuntse_, i. 148; ii. 91, 123, 248
Pheasant, ii. 295, 297
Philippines, i. 87, 189
Phillips, Rev. H. S., i. 132
Phœnix, i. 90; ii. 39, 269, 288, 293
Phœnix ewer, i. 149
Phœnix Hill, i. 59, 61, 72, 134
_Pi chuang so yü_, i. 72
_P’i hsieh_, ii. 294
P’i-ling, i. 91, 95
_Pi liu li_, i. 144
_Pi sê_ (secret colour), i. 38, 39, 40, 54
_Pi ting ju i_, ii. 301
_Pi t’ung_, ii, 275
_P’iao tz’ŭ_, i. 16, 143
Pictures of manufacture of porcelain, ii. 248
_P’ieh_, i. 165; ii. 5
Pierced design, i. 194; ii. 59, 75, 76, 79, 196, 246
Pigments, unfired, i. 3
Pilgrim bottles, ii. 274
Pilkington Tile Works, i. 200
Pillows, i. 104, 105, 107; ii. 97, 276
Pine, bamboo and plum design, ii. 47
_P’ing hua p’u_, i. _xvi_; ii. 94
_P’ing shih_, ii. 94
P’ing-ting Chou, i. 97; ii. 107
P’ing-yang Fu, i. 32, 97
Pink, ruby, ii. 238
Pipes, ii. 278
Plaques, ii. 97, 117, 277
Plates, ii. 97
Plates, seven border, ii. 211
Plum blossom crackle, ii. 244
Plum blossom design, i. 133
P’o-hai, i. 148
_Po shan lu_, i. 12
_Po t’ang_ blue, ii. 98
Points of compass, ii. 41
Polynesian khava bowls, i. 129
Pomegranate-shaped pots, i. 198
Pools of glass, i. 171
Porcelain, archaic specimens of translucent, i. 163
Porcelain, beginnings of, i. 15, 39, 89, 141–151
Porcelain, decorated, at Canton, ii. 211
Porcelain, special kinds of, ii. 201
Porcelain, white, ii. 195
Portuguese, ii. 68, 89
Po-Shan Hsien, i. 103, 107, 188, 200
_Po wu yao lan_, i. 61, 224
Po-yang Lake, i. 152
Pot-hook-like herbage, ii. 90
Potter Palmer Collection, i. 34, 35
Potters’ marks, i. 221
Potters’ names, i. 220, 223; ii. 64
Pottery, origin of, i. 2
Precious Objects, Eight, ii. 297, 298
Precious stone red, ii. 11, 122
Precious Symbols, Eight, ii. 42
“Press-hand” bowls, ii. 93
Preussler, ii. 260
Pricket candlesticks, ii. 60
Prints, copying effect of European, ii. 214
Prunus design, ii. 134, 135, 152
_P’u shu t’ing chi_, ii. 23
Puzzle jug, ii. 251
Quails, ii. 295
Radiating lines under base, ii. 92
Ram, ii. 294
Rams design, three, ii. 43
Raphael Collection, i. 63
“Rat and vine” pattern, ii. 231, 245, 303
Read, Sir C. Hercules, i. _xxv_, 31
Rebus designs, ii. 299, 300
Red and gold decoration, ii. 6
Red and green family, i. 104
Red biscuit, ii. 9
Red, copper, ii. 6, 11, 55
Red, coral, ii. 6, 48, 51, 160, 238
Red family of Wan Li porcelain, ii. 81
Red, _flambé_, ii. 124
Red in the glaze, ii. 204
Red, iron, ii. 51, 55, 165, 179, 215, 235, 244
Red, jujube, ii. 210, 219, 238
Red, liver, ii. 99, 178, 194, 238
Red, maroon, ii. 178, 179, 194
Red, crushed strawberry, ii. 119, 125
Red, ox-blood, ii. 124
Red, ritual significance of, ii. 195
Red, ruby, ii. 221, 224
Red, soufflé, ii. 127, 193, 194, 218, 219, 224, 238
Red, underglaze, ii. 10, 79, 99, 119, 145, 146, 204, 205, 241
Relief work, ii. 74, 196
Revolving necks, ii. 246, 262
Rhages, i. 87
Rhinoceros jars, ii. 36
de Ricci, M. Seymour, ii. 194
Rice grain pattern, ii. 246, 247, 263
Richard’s Geography, i. 56, 172
Rijks Museum, Amsterdam, ii. 75
Ring under base, double, ii. 69
Ritual vessels, ii. 272
Rock and wave design, ii. 81, 87, 290
Rockery and flowering plants, ii. 164
Rococo ornaments, ii. 258
Rome, i. 5
Roof tiles, i. 201
Rookwood Potteries, i. 200
Rose and ticket pattern, ii. 133
Rose pinks, ii. 210, 229, 237
Roth, Ling, i. 87, 193
Rotterdam, siege of, ii. 252
_Rouge de fer_, ii. 101, 160
_Rouleau_ shape, ii. 165, 269, 274
Rubbing with sand, ii. 159
“Ruby-back” porcelain, ii. 210, 213, 243
Rush pattern, i. 44
Ryoben, i. 36
Sages meeting in landscape, ii. 95
St. Cloud, ii. 112, 173
St. Louis of France, ii. 252
St. Mark’s, Venice, ii. 113
Sakyamuni, ii. 284
Saladin, i. 87
Salting Collection, i. _xxiii_, 197; ii. 81, 83, 90, 95, 145, 156,
160, 165, 168, 170, 179, 181, 185, 187, 235, 244
Salt glaze, ii. 144
Salvétat, M., ii. 10
Samantabhadra, ii. 285
Samarra, i. 101, 148, 149
Samian ware, i. 31
_San kuo_, ii. 11
_San ts’ai_ (three colours), i. 197; ii. 26, 33, 79, 100, 151, 152,
153
_San yang k’ai t’ai_, ii. 43
_Sang de bœuf_ red, ii. 11, 99, 121, 123, 124, 125, 146, 176, 194,
232, 271
Sanscrit characters, ii. 62, 66, 240, 286, 302
Sanuki, i. 200
Sarre, Professor, i. 101, 148; ii. 69
Sassanian, i. 34
Sassanian monsters, i. 27
Satsuma faience, i. 103
Saucers, ii. 278
Sawankalok, i. 81, 85, 88
Scale pattern, ii. 158, 259
Scholar design, famous, ii. 25
“Scratched blue,” ii. 144
Screens, ii. 277
Seagulls, little, i. 97
Sea-horses design, ii. 80
Sea waves, ii. 42
Seal characters, ii. 301
Seals, ii. 276
Seasons, flowers of four, ii. 38, 56, 134, 156, 296
Seasons, landscape, ii. 297
Seats, barrel-shaped, ii. 8, 15, 17, 60, 97, 277
“Secret colour” ware, i. 38, 59
Seggars, i. 156; ii. 248
Self-warming cups, i. 138
Seligmann, Dr. C., ii. 51, 67
Sepulchral furniture, i. 19
Sepulchral pottery, Han, i. 14
Sesamum design, i. 53
Seto, i. 123, 132
Sets, dinner-table, ii. 36, 267
Sets of five vases, ii. 97, 134, 279
Seven border plates, ii. 211
Sèvres, i. _xvi_; ii. 140, 251
Sèvres Museum, i. _xxiii_; ii. 230
_Sha t’ai_, i. 110, 123, 124, 128; ii. 141
Shah Abbas, ii. 30, 69
Shakuan, i. 172
Shan Chou, i. 201
_Shan kao shui ch’ang_, ii. 263
_Shan yü huang_, ii. 126
Shang dynasty, i. 44
Shanghai, i. 174, 188; ii. 212
Shansi, i. 97, 98
Shantung glass works, ii. 210
Shao Ch’êng-shang, i. 59
_Shao yao_, i. 61
Shao-wu Fu, ii. 108
_Shê p’i lü_, ii. 126
_Shên tê t’ang_, ii. 247, 264
_Shên tê t’ang po ku chih_, ii. 81
Shêng Tsung, i. 22
Shên-nung, i. 1
_Shih ch’ing_ (stone blue), ii. 9
_Shih ch’ing jih cha_, ii. 93, 305
Shin Huang Ti, i. 5
Shih Ta-pin, i. 175, 176, 177
Shih Tsung, i. 40, 41
Shih-kao, ii. 196
Shih-ma, i. 187
_Shih-mo_ (powdered stone), ii. 91
_Shih-tzŭ ch’ing_, ii. 98
Shih-wan, i. 172
_Shih wu kan chu_, ii. 30, 34
_Shin sho sei_, i. 94
Shop marks, i. 220; ii. 89, 113, 152
Shoso-in, i. 23, 25
_Shou_, ii. 33, 42, 302
Shou Characters, the Hundred, ii. 61
Shou Ch’êng, i. 25
Shou Chou, i. 40
Shou-hsing, ii. 287
Shou Lao, i. 185; ii. 286, 287, 289
Shou Shan, ii. 286, 288, 290
_Shou shan fu hai_, ii. 38
Shu, i. 98, 198
Shu chiao, i. 98
_Shu fu_ (mark), i. 161, 162, 163
_Shu wêng_, i. 98
_Shuko-yaki_, i. 85
Shun, the Emperor, i. 1; ii. 281
Shun Chih, ii. 117, 237
Shun-tê Fu, i. 39
_Shuo Wên_, i. 141
Siam, i. 81; ii. 278
Silkworm scrolls, ii. 270
Silvering, i. 161, 163; ii. 20, 175, 192, 215, 225, 226, 229
Slip decoration, ii. 77
Smith, Lieut. C., i. 87
Snuff bottles, ii. 202, 203, 216, 227, 262, 266, 277
“Soft Chün,” i. 121, 124, 127, 128
“Soft-paste” porcelain, i. 150; ii. 65, 75, 140, 142, 197, 241
Soleyman, i. 148
“Solid agate,” i. 33
Solon, M. L., i. 181
Southern Sung, i. 43, 67, 99
South, symbol of, ii. 41
Spanish, ii. 89, 252
Spanish dollar, ii. 90
Spider mark, ii. 140
Spinning Maiden, ii. 291, 292
Spirits of the Doorway, i. 20
“Spotted blue,” i. 166
“Spring painting,” ii. 57
Sprinklers, ii. 273
“Spur-marks,” i. 11, 53, 118
Square vases, ii. 274
Ssŭ Chou, i. 96
Ssŭ-hao, ii. 289
Ssŭ-ma Ch’ien, i. 1
Ssŭ-ma-kuang, ii. 281
_Ssŭ pu t’ang_, ii. 265
Ssŭ-t’iao, i. 144
Ssŭ-tu, ii. 108
Staff, knotted, ii. 286
Staffordshire, i. 33, 178
Stars, ii. 297
Statuettes, i. 24, 105; ii. 159
Steatite, ii. 77, 141, 196, 198, 201
Steatitic porcelain, ii. 141, 142, 203, 240, 246
Stein, Sir Aurel, i. 23, 25, 28, 31, 32, 107, 134, 149, 193
Stem-cups, ii. 7, 8, 202, 208
Stems, the Ten, i. 210
Storks, ii. 39, 286
Storks, the Hundred, ii. 61
Strawberry leaves border, ii. 257
Stübel Collection, i. _xxiii_, 84
Studio names, ii. 167, 215
Study, Four Subjects of, ii. 282
Su Chou, i. 96, 187, 188, 202
Su Chou lacquer, ii. 263
Su Shih, ii. 5
Su Wu, ii. 281
_Sui ch’i yao_, i. 99
Sui dynasty, i. 16, 17
Sulphate of iron, ii. 101
“Sulphuring,” ii. 146
Sultan of Egypt, i. 87
Sultan’s treasure, i. 87
_Su-ma-ni_, ii. 12
Sumatra, ii. 12
Summer Palace, i. 205
Sumptuary law, ii. 233
Sun, Mr., i. 91
Sun, the, ii. 291
_Su-p’o-ni_, ii. 12, 13
_Sung hsiang_, i. 187
Sung Pharmacopœia, i. 146
_Sung shih_, ii. 12
Sung wares, i. 43–51, 104
_Su-ni-p’o_, ii. 12, 22, 98
Supper sets, ii. 160, 278
Swallows, ii. 295
Swastika, ii. 76, 299, 302
Swatow, i. 184
Sword-grass bowls, i. 110
Symbol of literary success, ii. 6
Symbols, ii. 268, 297
Syria, ii. 247
Syrian pottery, i. 103; ii. 12, 30, 44
Syrup pots, ii. 278
Table Bay, ii. 136
_Ta chiao_, ii. 34
Ta-ch’in, i. 144
_Ta ch’ing_, ii. 179
Ta-yi bowls, i. _xvi_
Ta Yüeh-chih, i. 144
Tael, i. 175
Ta-hsin, i. 177
_T’ai ch’ang_, i. 91; ii. 86
_T’ai chi_, ii. 268
T’ai-ming, ii. 108
T’ai p’ing rebellion, i. 154, 155; ii. 267, 271
_T’ai p’ing yu hsiang_, ii. 268
T’ai-po tsun, ii. 177, 185
T’ai-yüan Fu, i. 97, 194
Takatori, i. 31
Taklamakan Desert, i. 25
_Ta kuan_, i. 59, 60
Talbot, arms of, ii. 257
_Ta lü_, i. 65
Tamo, ii. 285
Tan, i. 202
Tan Hui-pan, ii. 282
_Tan kuei_ (red cassia), ii. 6, 51, 53
_Tan pai_, i. 61, 67, 71
_T’an yung_, ii. 34
Tanagra, i. 24
_Tan ch’ing_, i. 53, 54
_T’ang chien kung t’ao yeh t’u shuo_, i. 113
T’ang, district, i. 55
T’ang dynasty, i. 166, 201; ii. 233
_T’ang kuo shih pu_, i. 39
_T’ang ming_, i. 217
_T’ang pên ts’ao_, i. 89
T’ang Pharmacopœia, i. 89, 146
T’ang polychrome pottery, i. 33
_T’ang shih ssŭ k’ao_, i. 90, 142; ii. 59
_T’ang Shu_, i. 201
T’ang, the President of the Sacrifices, i. _xvii_, 91, 95
T’ang tomb, i. 101
T’ang wares, i. _xx_, 11, 16, 23–42, 56, 132; ii. 28, 78
T’ang wares, base of, i. 26
_T’ang yao_, ii. 121
T’ang Ying, i. 71, 141, 166, 167, 181; ii. 59, 121, 126, 200, 201,
202, 209, 215, 216, 217, 220, 227, 228, 229, 230, 234, 237, 239,
248
_T’ang ying lung kang chi_, ii. 58
T’ang’s manufactory, i. 166
T’ang’s white incense vase, i. 92
Tantalus cup, ii. 276
_T’ao_, i. 141, 142
_T’ao chêng chi shih_, i. 166
_T’ao Ch’êng shih yü kao_, i. 71; ii. 228
_T’ao chi lüo_, i. 159
Tao kuang, ii. 263
_T’ao lu_, the, _passim_
_T’ao shuo_, the, _passim_
_T’ao t’ieh_, ii. 290
T’ao yin-chü, i. 146
T’ao yü, i. 147, 153
T’ao Yüan-ming, ii. 25, 296
Taoism, i. 7; ii. 286
Taoist Immortals, Eight, ii. 38
Tassie, ii. 251
Tattooed design, ii. 144
Ta-yi, i. 32, 40, 147
Tazza-shaped cup, ii. 272
Tea bowls, ii. 5, 278
Tea competitions, i. 94, 131
Tea cup handles, ii. 277
Tea drinking, i. 178
“Tea dust,” i. 31, 135; ii. 233, 264
Tea green, i. 31, 133
Tea leaves, staining with, ii. 197, 198
Tea pot, i. 176, 178; ii. 278
Tear stains, i. 90, 101, 113
Tê-hua porcelain, i. _xv_; ii. 107, 108, 109, 111, 112, 113, 114,
115
_Temmoku_ ware, i. 31, 131, 132, 133
Têng, district of, i. 55, 56
Têng-fêng Hsien, i. 201
“Three colours,” i. 104, 197; ii. 26, 100, 147, 151, 190, 207, 241
Three heroes of Han dynasty, ii. 281
Three kingdoms, ii. 281
Three-legged bird, ii. 291
_Ti_ (saucers), i. 110
_T’ieh hsin_, ii. 233
_T’ien Ch’i_ ii. 86
_T’ien ch’ing_, i. 62, 65; ii. 238
_T’ien chu ên po_, ii. 240
_T’ien kung k’ai wu_, ii. 107
_T’ien lan_, i. 117; ii. 232
_T’ien lu_, ii. 294
T’ien Ming, ii. 117
_T’ien pai_, ii. 37, 248
T’ien Shun, ii. 28
_T’ien t’ang_, ii. 264, 290
T’ien Tsung, ii. 117
Tiger, ii. 294
Tiger lily design, ii. 131, 134
Tiger of the West, i. 56
“Tiger skin,” i. 31; ii. 80, 89, 127, 148, 190, 226, 264
Tiger, the white, i. 20; ii. 291
Tiles, i. 187, 194, 201, 202, 205
Tiles, lustred, ii. 30
Tin, in the glaze, i. 182
Ting Chou, ii. 107
Ting Chou ware, red, i. 158
Ting Chou wares, i. _xvi_, 40, 45, 52, 85, 89–96, 105, 146, 147
_Ting chuang_, ii. 63, 74
Ting type of ware, ii. 86
Ting ware, i. 45, 78, 89–96, 101, 102, 146
Ting ware, black, i. 92, 93, 133
Ting ware, new, i. 94
Ting ware, Northern, i. 90, 162
Ting ware, purple, i. 92, 93, 98
Ting ware, red, i. 92
Ting ware, Southern, i. 90
Ting ware, white, i. 146, 149; ii. 201, 218
Ting yao, imitation of old, ii. 142, 197, 201
Toad, ii. 289, 291
_Tobi seiji_, i. 80
_Toko_, ii. 238
Tomb wares, i. 17, 24
Tombs, i. 9, 13, 101
Tombs, Egyptian, ii. 266
Torrance, Rev. Thomas, i. 10, 13, 14
Tortoise, i. 95; ii. 288, 289
Tortoise of the North, i. 56; ii. 291
_T’o t’ai_ (“bodiless”), ii. 3, 5, 195, 248
_Tou ch’ing_, ii. 37, 99
_Toyei Shuko_, i. 25
Trade between China and West, mediæval, i. 86
Tradescant Collection, i, 193; ii. 68
Trading station, i. 86
Transfer prints, ii. 260
Transition enamels, ii. 257
Translucent porcelain, i. 148
Transmutation ware, i. 137, 156, 175; ii. 18, 192, 218, 232
Trenchard bowls, ii. 29
Trigrams, Eight, ii. 39, 41, 62, 268, 290
Trumpeter service, ii. 255
Ts’ai, i. 198
Ts’ai Chin-ch’ing, ii. 267
T’sai-hsiang, i. 131
_Ts’ai hua t’ang_, ii. 265
_Ts’ai hung_, ii. 179
_Ts’ai jun t’ang_, ii. 265
_Ts’ang yao_, ii. 121
Ts’ang Ying-hsüan, ii, 121, 126, 168, 180, 187, 190
Ts’ao-chao, i. 40
Ts’ao Chiung, i. 75
_Tsao’rh hung_, ii. 218
_Tsao t’ang_, ii. 34
_Ts’ao tien yu chi_, ii. 58
_Tso Ch’uan_, the, i. 2
_Tsou_, i. 97, 188
Tsou Hsien, i. 201
_Ts’ui_, i. 77; ii. 161
_Ts’ui kung yao_, ii. 52
Ts’ui, Mr., ii. 52, 64
_Ts’ui sê_, i. 37
Ts’ung Tê, ii. 116
_Ts’ung ts’ui_, i. 109
Tu, i. 40, 147
_Tu shu_, i. 76, 166, 201; ii. 197
_T’u ssŭ wên_, i. 113
_T’u ting_, i. 90, 91, 92, 94, 97, 98, 135, 164, 168, 190; ii. 113,
218
Tu Yü, i. 16
Tu-chiu, i. 95
_T’u k’uai_, i. 27
_Tu kung t’an tsüan_, i. 62
Tulip-like flower pattern, ii. 90
Tun-huang, i. 28
T’ung, ii. 58, 59, 117
T’ung Chih, ii. 267
_Tung ch’ing_, i. 48, 75; ii. 189
T’ung-chou Fu, i. 199
Tung-fang So, ii. 133, 159, 288
Tung-han, i. 176
_Tung hsiang t’ang_, i. 198
Tung-p’o, i. 137
_Tung ya_, ii. 18, 19, 92
Tung ware, i. 66, 82
Turfan, i. 16, 23, 31, 36, 101, 107, 130, 134, 149
Turkestan, i. 86, 193
Turkey, ii. 218, 279
Twelve embroidery ornaments, ii. 297
_Tz’ŭ_ (porcelain), i. 140, 141, 142
_Tzŭ_ (purple), i. 93, 109
_Tzŭ chin_ (golden brown), ii. 37, 38, 65, 99, 191, 192
Tzŭ-ching, ii. 14
Tz’ŭ Chou ware, i. 46, 91, 101–108, 128, 133, 135, 149, 166, 193,
198, 218; ii. 30
Tz’ŭ-jén Temple, ii. 23
_Tz’ŭ_ stone, i. 101, 107, 147
_Tz’ŭ t’ai_ (Chün ware), i. 110, 113, 123, 128
_Tz’ŭ-tsao_, ii. 108
Urfe, d’, Honoré, i. 78
Ushaktal, i. 134
Vaidurya, i. 144
Vajrapani, ii. 286
Van Eenhorn, i. 178
Vase organ, i. 138
Vases, bottle shaped, ii. 273
Vases, civil and military, ii. 281
Vases, divining rod, ii. 274
Vases, flower, ii. 273, 275
Vases, perfume, ii. 68
Vases, square, ii. 274
Vash-shahri, i. 130, 134
Venetian glass, ii. 139
Vermilion boxes, ii. 35
Vermilion pigment, ii. 148
Victoria and Albert Museum, _passim_
Violet blue, dark, ii. 99
Virgin and Child, images of, ii. 111, 285
Virtuous Heroines, ii. 282
Voretzsch, i. 206
_Wa wa_(children), ii. 25, 281
Wall of China, great, i. 5
Wall vases, ii. 275
Walters Collection, ii. 227
_Wan_, ii. 76
_Wan fu yu t’ung_, ii. 51
_Wan ku ch’ang ch’un ssŭ hai lai chao_, ii. 62
Wan Li wares, ii. 24, 57, 58–81, 161, 208, 224
_Wan Li wu ts’ai_, ii. 48, 81, 82, 100, 160
_Wan shih chü_, ii. 167
_Wan shou_, ii. 82
_Wan shou am chiang_, ii. 169
Wang Ch’iao, ii. 288
Wang Chih, ii. 110, 133, 282
Wang Ching-min, ii. 59
Wang Hsi Chih, ii. 281
Wang Ping-jung, ii. 266
Wang Shêng-kao, ii. 247
Wang Shih-chêng, i. 201
Wang-tso, i. 40
Wang Tso-t’ing, ii. 266
Wang Wei, i. 23
Wang-yu, ii. 164
Wantage Collection, Lady, ii. 221, 262
Warham bowl, i. 88
Warner, Langdon, i. 36
Water droppers, ii. 276
Waterfall, ii. 68
Water pots, ii. 276
Wave and rock pattern, ii. 63
Wave pattern, i. 137; ii. 56, 302
Waves and plum blossoms design, ii. 56, 63, 80, 155
Wedding bowl, ii. 268
Wei, i. 27
_Wei ch’i_, ii. 282
Wei dynasty, i. 16
Wei Hsien, i. 103, 104
Weights, ii. 97
Well-head, i. 12
Wells Williams, S., i. 172, 184
Wên, Prince, i. 25
Wên (Sung minister), i. 99
Wên Ch’ang, ii. 159, 284
Wên Chêng-ming, ii. 243
Wên-chou, i. 143; ii. 108
_Wên fang ssŭ k’ao_, i. 60
Wên Lang-shan, ii. 263
_Wên p’ing_(civil vase) and _wu p’ing_ (military vase), ii. 281
_Wên-wang_ censers, i. 94
West, symbol of, ii. 41
Wheel, potter’s, i. 2
Whieldon wares, i. 25, 33
Whitechapel Art Gallery, ii. 233
“White earth village,” i. 97
White earth, where found, ii. 107
White in blue ground design, ii. 130
White porcelain, ii. 195
White slip, ii. 5
White ware, dead, ii. 201
Wilkes, John, ii. 255
Williams, Mrs., i. 110, 123
Willow, ii. 296
Willow pattern, ii. 258, 296
Wine cup, ii. 278
Wine Cup, Eight Immortals of the, ii. 282
Wine pot, i. 161, 162
Winter Palace, i, 205
Winthrop, Mr., ii. 29
Wolfsbourg, de, ii. 260
Wood, Enoch, ii. 259
Worcester, i. 187; ii. 76, 136, 141, 183, 251, 258, 259, 260
_Wu chên_, ii. 230
_Wu chin_, ii. 192, 193, 210, 218, 226, 229, 230, 231
Wu-ch’ing Hsien, i. 200, 202
Wu chou, i. 40
_Wu fu_, ii. 11
Wu I-shan, i. 175
_Wu kung yang_, ii. 24
_Wu lao_, ii. 283
Wu-mên-t’o, ii. 59, 91
_Wu ming_ tzŭ, ii. 12, 98
_Wu ming yi_, i. 187; ii. 12, 98
_Wu-ni_ wares, i. 61, 66, 67, 133, 134, 164
Wu San-kuei, i. 154; ii. 125
Wu _sê_, i. 162; ii. 20
Wu Tao-tzŭ, i. 23, 137
Wu Ti, i. 7, 11, 15; ii. 288
_Wu ts’ai_ (“decorated in five colours”), ii. 8, 9, 17, 20, 22, 23,
26, 55, 63
Yacut, i. 87
_Ya ku ch’ing pao shih_, i. 62
_Ya shou_ pei, ii. 3, 4, 5
Yang-Chiang, i. 84, 166, 172
_Yang-hsien ming hu hsi_, i. 139, 174, 176
Yang Kuei-fei, ii. 282
_Yang ts’ai_ (foreign colours), ii. 209, 225
Yangtze, i. 89
_Yang tz’ŭ_ ware, i. 166, 167
_Yao_, i. 142
Yao, ii. 281
Yao, district of, i. 55, 56
Yao Niang, i. 24
_Yao pien_, i. 137, 139, 157, 175; ii. 18, 193, 218, 224, 232
Yeh-chih, i. 55
Yellow, eel, ii. 127, 190, 218, 223
Yellow, European style, ii. 220
Yellow, mustard, ii. 190, 223
Yellow, Nanking, ii. 145, 170, 191, 192
Yellow, ritual significance of, ii. 195
Yellow, spotted, ii. 126, 127, 190, 218, 223, 226
Yellow, sulphur, ii. 220, 239
Yellow ware, i. 160, 163, 187; ii. 28, 190, 239
Yen-shên Chên, i, 200
Yen Shih-ku, i. 144
_Yen yen_ vase, ii. 156
Yesdijird, i. 34
Yetts, Dr., ii. 292
Yi, Prince of, ii. 200
Yi-chên, i. 200, 202
Yi Hsien, i. 201
Yi-hsing, ii. 65, 187
Yi-hsing Chün, i. 120, 179
Yi-hsing wares, i. _xv_, 120, 123, 127, 171, 172, 174–183, 188,
190, 198; ii. 217, 224, 245
_Yin hua_, i. 91, 161
_Yin Yang_, ii. 62, 268, 283, 290
_Yin yang tsa tsu_, the, i. 19
Yo Chou, i. 40, 199
_Yo fu tsa lu_, i. 39
Yorke and Cocks, arms of, ii. 212, 213
Yoshitsune, flute of, ii. 113
_Yu chai_, ii. 212
_Yü chih kêng chih t’u_, ii. 164
Yü Chou, i. 109, 124, 128, 147; ii. 107
_Yü fêng yang lin_, ii. 212
Yü-hang Hsien, i. 67
Yü-hang wares, i. 66, 134
_Yü lan_, i. 53
_Yu li hung_, ii. 122, 125, 204, 225
_Yu lü_, ii. 224
_Yu po lo_, ii. 25
_Yü t’ang chia ch’i_ mark, i. 218; ii. 75, 77, 79, 82
_Yu t’u_ (glaze earth), ii. 91
Yu-tzŭ Hsien, i. 97
Yü wang shang ti, ii. 291
Yü-yao, i. 38
_Yüan chai pi hêng_, i. 55
Yüan Ming Yüan, i. 205
Yüan tz’ŭ, i. 110, 124, 128, 129, 130, 164
Yüan wares, i. 41, 50, 155, 159–165
Yüeh Chou, i. _xvi_, 17, 37, 38, 39, 40, 54
_Yüeh pai_, ii. 224
Yüeh ware, i. 59
Yuima, the, i. 36
_Yün hsien tsa chi_, i. 138
Yün-mên, i. _xvi_
_Yün shih chai pi t’an_, i. 91, 95
_Yün tsao_, i. 83
Yung-ch’ang, ii. 30
Yung Chêng, i. 45
Yung Chêng imitations, i. 117, 119, 120; ii. 11, 43, 82
Yung Chêng list, i. 120
Yung Chêng mark, ii. 217
Yung Chêng monochromes, ii. 216
Yung Chêng wares, ii. 169, 200–226
Yung-Chou, i. 136
Yung-ho Chên, i. 98, 99
Yung Lo bowl, ii. 86
Yung Lo wares, ii. 3–6, 9, 12, 224
Yunnan, ii. 29
Zanzibar, i. 86, 87
_Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, the, i. 8
Zengoro Hozen, ii. 6
Zimmermann, E., i. 87, 145; ii. 5
Zinc, i. 168, 182
PRINTED BY CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, LA BELLE SAUVAGE, LONDON,
E.C. F 15.115
FOOTNOTES:
[1] See vol. i, p. 153.
[2] _fêng huo_. Bushell renders “blast furnaces.”
[3] [chch 2] _lan kuang_, lit. “burn tube.” Omitting the radical [chch]
(_huo_, fire) in both cases, Bushell takes the characters as _lan_
(blue) and _huang_ (yellow). Possibly Bushell’s edition had variant
readings.
[4] Bk. vii., fol. 25 recto.
[5] Or, perhaps, “greenish black,” taking the two words together.
[6] [chch 2] lit. “omit body.” A slightly thicker porcelain is known
as _pan t’o t’ai_, or “half bodiless.”
[7] [chch 2] _ts’ai chui_. These words seem to have been taken to mean
“decorated with an awl”; but they are better translated separately to
mean “bright coloured” and “(engraved with) an awl,” the suggestion
being that _ts’ai_ refers to enamelled porcelain.
[8] Bk. ii., fol. 8 verso.
[9] [chch 3] _Ya shou pei_, lit. “press hand cups.”
[10] “Made in the Yung Lo period of the great Ming dynasty.”
[11] The reading in the British Museum copy is [chch] _pai_ (white),
which seems to be an error for [hch] _ssŭ_ (four): taken as it stands,
it would mean written in white slip.
[12] [chch] _hua_, lit. “slippery.” The meanings include “polished,
smooth, ground,” etc., from which it will be seen that the word could
equally refer to a glazed surface or an unglazed surface which had been
polished on the wheel.
[13] This conical form of bowl was by no means new in the Ming period.
In fact, we are told in the _T’ao shuo_ that it is the _p’ieh_ of the
Sung dynasty, the old form of tea bowl. See vol. i, p. 175.
[14] There are several others of this type in Continental museums; cf.
Zimmermann, op. cit. Plate 23.
[15] _Cat._, F 6.
[16] Bk. v., fol. 5.
[17] Bk. ii., fol. 8.
[18] _pa pei_, lit. handle cups. This type, as illustrated in
Hsiang’s Album (op. cit., No. 54) is a shallow cup or tazza on a tall
stem which was grasped by the hand.
[19] An example of the figure subjects on Hsüan Tê blue and white is
given in the _T’ao shuo_, “teacups decorated with figures armed
with light silk fans striking at flying fire-flies”; see Bushell’s
translation, op. cit., p. 136.
[20] “Citron dishes” are specially mentioned in the _Wên chên hêng
ch’ang wu chi_ (_T’ao lu_, bk. viii., fol. 4).
[21] _Ch’ang k’ou_, lit. “shed mouth.”
[22] Lit. “pot-bellied.”
[23] Lit. “cauldron (_fu_) base.”
[24] _an hua_, secret decoration (see p. 6).
[25] “Made in the Hsüan Tê period of the great Ming dynasty.”
[26] Lit. “orange-peel markings (_chü p’i wên_) rise in the glaze.”
[27] i.e. red lines coloured by rubbing ochre into the cracks. See vol.
i, p. 99.
[28] _O. C. A._, p. 371.
[29] Unfortunately the term _pao shih hung_ has been loosely
applied in modern times to the iron red. See Julien, op. cit., p.
91 note: “Among the colours for porcelain painting which M. Itier
brought from China and offered to the Sèvres factory, there is one
called _pao shih hung_, which, from M. Salvétat’s analysis, is
nothing else but oxide of iron with a flux.” In other words, it is a
material which should have been labelled _fan hung_. This careless
terminology has led to much confusion.
[30] _T’ao lu_, bk. v., fol. 7 recto.
[31] The _Ch’ing pi tsang_ mentions “designs of flowers, birds,
fish and insects, and such like forms” as typical ornaments on the red
painted Hsüan porcelain.
[32] The three fruits (_san kuo_) are the peach, pomegranate, and
finger citron, which typify the Three Abundances of years, sons and
happiness.
[33] _Wu fu._ This may, however, be emblematically rendered by five
bats, the bat (_fu_) being a common rebus for _fu_ (happiness).
[34] See p. 122.
[35] According to Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 130, “cobalt blue, as we
learn from the official annals of the Sung dynasty (_Sung shih_, bk.
490, fol. 12), was brought to China by the Arabs under the name of
_wu ming yi_.” This takes it back to the tenth century. _Wu ming yi_
(nameless rarity) was afterwards used as a general name for cobalt
blue, and was applied to the native mineral. The name was sometimes
varied to _wu ming tzŭ_. Though we are not expressly told the source of
the _su-ni-p’o_ blue, it is easily guessed. For the Ming Annals (bk.
325) state that among the objects brought as tribute by envoys from
Sumatra were “precious stones, agate, crystal, carbonate of copper,
rhinoceros horn, and [chch 3] _hui hui ch’ing_ (Mohammedan blue).” See
W. P. Groeneveldt, _Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van
Kunsten en Wetenschappen_, vol. xxxix., p. 92. These envoys arrived
in 1426, 1430, 1433, 1434, and for the last time in 1486. Sumatra was
a meeting-place of the traders from East and West, and no doubt the
Mohammedan blue was brought thither by Arab merchants. Possibly some of
the mineral was brought back by the celebrated eunuch Chêng Ho, who led
an expedition to Sumatra in the Yung Lo period. See also p. 30.
[36] See _Cat. B. F. A._, 1910, L 23; a pilgrim bottle belonging
to Mrs. Halsey, inscribed after export to India with the word Alamgir,
a name of the famous Aurungzib. Cf. also the fine cylindrical vase in
the Victoria and Albert Museum (Case 2), with floral scrolls in this
type of blue combined with underglaze red, and the Hsüan Tê mark.
[37] Op. cit., Nos. 9, 31, 37, 39, 48, 69 and 83.
[38] _Hui hu_ is a variant for _hui hui_ (Mohammedan).
[39] Probably due to over-firing.
[40] On the parallelism between this type of porcelain decoration and
cloisonné enamel, see _Burlington Magazine_, September, 1912, p.
320. It is worthy of note that missing parts of these vases, such as
neck rim or handles, are often replaced by cloisonné enamel on metal,
which is so like the surrounding porcelain that the repairs are often
overlooked.
[41] The yellow of this group is usually of a dull, impure tint, but
there is a small jar in the Peters Collection in New York on which the
yellow is exceptionally pure and brilliant, and almost of lemon colour.
[42] In these cases the porcelain would be first fired without glaze
and the colours added when it was in what is called the “biscuit”
state. In the blue and white ware, on the other hand, and the bulk of
Chinese glazed porcelain, body and glaze were baked together in one
firing.
[43] Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 152.
[44] Translation of the _T’ao shuo_, op. cit., p. 51.
[45] This is the verdict of the _Po wu yao lan_, and it is
repeated in the _T’ao lu_, see Bushell, op. cit., p. 60.
[46] Painted decoration is mentioned in Chiang’s Memoir of the Yüan
dynasty (see vol. i, p. 160), but without any particulars; and the
_Ko ku yao lun_ speaks of _wu sê_ decoration of a coarse kind
at the end of the Yüan period (see vol. i, p. 161). The latter may, of
course, refer to the use of coloured glazes.
[47] Op. cit., fig. 77.
[48] The application of these enamels in large washes puts them
practically in the category of glazes, but for the sake of clearness
it is best to keep the terminology distinct. After all, the difference
between a high-fired glaze which is applied to the biscuit and a
low-fired enamel applied in the same way is only one of degree, but if
we use the term enamel or enamel-glaze for the colours fired in the
muffle kiln as distinct from those fired in the porcelain kiln, it will
save further explanations.
[49] A late Ming writer quoted in the _T’ao lu_ (bk. viii., fol.
18) says, “At the present day Hsüan ware cricket pots are still very
greatly treasured. Their price is not less than that of Hsüan Ho pots
of the Sung dynasty.”
[50] Bushell, op. cit., p. 140.
[51] _Po wu yao lan_, bk. ii., fol. 9 verso.
[52] [chch] _hsien_. The emperor Ch’êng Hua was canonised as Hsien
Tsung.
[53] See p. 12.
[54] [chch 2] _ch’ien tan_. The _T’ao shuo_, quoting this passage,
uses a variant reading, _ch’ien shên_ [chch], which Bushell renders
“whether light or dark.”
[55] _yu hua i_, lit. “have the picture idea.”
[56] See Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 385.
[57] See Hsiang’s Album, op. cit., fig. 38.
[58] Bk. vi., fols. 7–9, and Bushell’s translation, op. cit., pp. 141–3.
[59] Op. cit., fig. 55.
[60] _Burlington Magazine_, December, 1912, pp. 153–8.
[61] The author of the _P’u shu t’ing chi_ (_Memoirs of the
Pavilion for Sunning Books_), quoted in the _T’ao shuo_, loc.
cit.
[62] Op. cit., fig. 64.
[63] Bushell (_T’ao shuo_, p. 142) gives the misleading version,
“bowls enamelled with jewels” and “jewel-enamelled bowls,” omitting in
his translation the note in the text which explains their true meaning
as _pao shih hung_ or ruby red.
[64] [chch 2] _ts’ao ch’ung_ can equally well mean “plants and
insects” or “grass insects,” i.e. grasshoppers. In fact, Julien
translated the phrase in the latter sense.
[65] _Chin hui tui_, lit. brocade ash-heaps.
[66] Not as Bushell (_T’ao shuo_, op. cit., p. 143), “medallions
of flower sprays and fruits painted on the four sides”; _ssŭ mien_
(lit. four sides) being a common phrase for “on all sides” does not
necessarily imply a quadrangular object.
[67] _Shih nü_, strangely rendered by Bushell “a party of young
girls.”
[68] The dragon boats raced on the rivers and were carried in
procession through the streets on the festival of the fifth day of the
fifth month. See J. J. M. de Groot, _Annales du Musée Guimet_,
vol. xi., p. 346. A design of children playing at dragon boat
processions is occasionally seen in later porcelain decoration.
[69] Cf. the favourite design of children under a pine-tree on Japanese
Hirado porcelain.
[70] Op. cit., figs. 38, 49, 55, 56, 63, 64, 65, 66 and 76.
[71] [chch 2] Bushell has translated it “diffused colours,” but _fu_ is
also used for “applying externally” in the medicinal sense, which seems
specially appropriate here.
[72] [chch 2], lit. “fill up (with) glaze,” the colour of the glaze
being specified in each case. Cf. _lan ti t’ien hua wu ts’ai_
(blue ground filled up with polychrome painting), a phrase used to
describe the decoration of the barrel-shaped garden seats of the Hsüan
Tê period. See p. 17.
[73] Fig. 63, a cup in form like the chicken cups (_chi kang_).
[74] [chch 2] _ch’i shang._
[75] Op. cit., Plate ii.
[76] See E. Dillon, _Porcelain_, Plate xviii.
[77] See E. Dillon, _Porcelain_, Plate vii.
[78] See _Cat, B. F. A._, 1910, H 21, I 7.
[79] [chch 2]
[80] [chch 2]
[81] [chch 2].
[82] [chch 2].
[83] Op. cit., No. 42.
[84] [chch], delicate, beautiful.
[85] [chch 2].
[86] [chch 2].
[87] Vol. ii., p. 277.
[88] See vol. i, p. 154.
[89] See p. 12.
[90] This account is quoted from the _Shih wu kan chu_, published
in 1591.
[91] See p. 12.
[92] See Hirth, _China and the Roman Orient_, p. 179.
[93] The converse is equally true, and Chinese porcelain of this kind
is frequently classed among Persian wares. Indeed, there are not a
few who would argue that these true porcelains of the hard-paste
type were actually made in Persia. No evidence has been produced to
support this wholly unnecessary theory beyond the facts which I have
mentioned in this passage, and the debated specimens which I have had
the opportunity to examine were all of a kind which no one trained
in Chinese ceramics could possibly mistake for anything but Chinese
porcelain.
[94] This peculiarity occurs on a tripod incense vase in the
Eumorfopoulos Collection, which in other respects resembles this little
group, but it is a peculiarity not confined to the Chêng Tê porcelain,
for I have occasionally found it on much later wares.
[95] A somewhat similar effect is seen on the little flask ascribed to
the Hsüan Tê period. See p. 14.
[96] Op. cit., Nos. 52 and 80. These are the latest specimens which are
given by Hsiang Yüan-p‘ien.
[97] _Cat._, H 8.
[98] A similar vase is in the Victoria and Albert Museum.
[99] [chch 3] _hsien hung t’u_, lit. “the earth for the fresh red,” an
expression which would naturally refer to the _clay_ used in making
ware of this particular colour, though Bushell has preferred to take it
in reference to the _mineral_ used to produce the colour itself. See p.
123.
[100] Bk. ii., fol. 10.
[101] A Ming writer quoted in the _T’ao lu_, bk. viii., fol. 4, adds
that these cups were marked under the base [chch 2] _chin lu_ (golden
seal), [chch 2] _ta chiao_ (great sacrifice), [chch 2] _t’an yung_
(altar use).
[102] _Ch’ing k’ou_, lit. mouth like a gong or sounding stone.
[103] _Man hsin_, lit. loaf-shaped centre.
[104] _Yüan tsu_, lit. foot with outer border.
[105] An extract from the _I Chih_ (quoted in the _T’ao lu_,
bk. viii., fol. 14) states that “in the 26th year of Chia Ching, the
emperor demanded that vessels should be made with 'fresh red’ (_hsien
hung_) decoration; they were difficult to make successfully, and Hsü
Chên of the Imperial Censorate, memorialised the throne, requesting
that red from sulphate of iron (_fan hung_) be used instead.” A
memorial of similar tenor was sent to the emperor by Hsü Ch’ih in the
succeeding reign.
[106] _O. C. A._, pp. 223–6.
[107] Bk. vi., fols. 9–15. See also Bushell’s translation op. cit., pp.
145–51, and _O. C. A._, loc. cit.
[108] Some idea of the quantity supplied may be gathered from the
following items in the list for the year 1546: 300 fish bowls, 1,000
covered jars, 22,000 bowls, 31,000 round dishes (_p’an_), 18,400
wine cups.
[109] See Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 226.
[110] There are examples of this work in the British Museum, in which
the blue seems to have been sponged on or washed on, and the decoration
picked out with a needlepoint, and then the whole covered with a
colourless glaze.
[111] _hsiang yün_, lit. felicitous clouds.
[112] [chch 2] _t’ieh chin_, lit. stuck-on gold.
[113] _O. C. A._, p. 221.
[114] [chch 2] _t’ien pai_, a phrase frequently used in this sense,
though it is not quite obvious how it derives this meaning from its
literal sense of “sweet white.”
[115] See p. 34. The _fan hung_ is an overglaze colour of
coral tint, derived from oxide of iron; the _hsien hung_ is an
underglaze red derived from oxide of copper.
[116] _jang hua_, lit. “abundant or luxuriant ornament.”
_Embossed_ is Bushell’s rendering.
[117] See Bushell’s translation, op. cit., p. 151.
[118] [chch 3].
[119] See p. 298.
[120] [chch 2] _ling chih_, a species of agaric, at first regarded
as an emblem of good luck, and afterwards as a Taoist emblem of
immortality.
[121] See Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 563.
[122] [chch 2] _shih tzŭ_. The mythical lion is a fantastic animal with
the playful qualities of the Pekingese spaniel, which it resembles in
features. In fact the latter is called the lion dog (_shih tzŭ k’ou_),
and the former is often loosely named the “dog of Fo (Buddha),” because
he is the usual guardian of Buddhist temples and images.
[123] [chch] _ts’ang_, azure or hoary.
[124] Named by Bushell mackerel, carp., marbled perch, and another.
[125] [chch 4].
[126] [chch] _chün_, a fleet horse.
[127] Translation of the _T’ao shuo_ (p. 145).
[128] _O. C. A._, p. 227.
[129] [chch 4].
[130] See Laufer, _Jade_, p. 120.
[131] See Mayers, part ii., p. 335.
[132] _hua_ [chch]. Bushell (_T’ao shuo_, p. 146) has rendered this
with “flowers and inscriptions, etc.” In many cases in these lists it
is almost impossible to say whether the word _hua_ has the sense of
_flowers_ or merely _decoration_. The present passage _fu shou k’ang
ning hua chung_ seems to demand the second interpretation.
[133] This dark blue Chia Ching ware was carefully copied at the
Imperial factory in the Yung Chêng period. See p. 203.
[134] See _J. Böttger, Philipp Hainhofer und der Kunstschrank Gustav
Adolfs in Upsala_, Stockholm, 1909, Plate 71. The same interesting
collection includes a marked Wan Li dish with cloud and stork pattern
in underglaze blue, two cups, and a set of Indian lacquer dishes with
centres made of the characteristic Chinese export porcelain described
on p. 70.
[135] _Cat B. F. A._, D 17.
[136] A good example of this colouring is a large bowl with Chia Ching
mark in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin.
[137] See vol. i, p. 225.
[138] Figured in F. Dillon, _Porcelain_, Plate v.
[139] Bk. v., fol. 9 recto.
[140] [chch 2]. _Ts’ui_ is a fairly common name. It occurs as a mark on
a small figure of an infant in creamy white ware of Ting type in the
Eumorfopoulos Collection; but it is highly improbable that this piece
has anything to do with the Mr. Ts’ui here in question.
[141] The _Ming ch’ên shih pi chou chai yü t’an_, quoted in the
_T’ao lu_, bk. viii., fol. 4, says, “When we come to Chia Ching
ware then there are also imitations of both Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng Hua
types (they even are said to excel them). But Mr. Ts’ui’s ware is
honoured in addition, though its price is negligible, being only
one-tenth of that of Hsüan and Ch’êng wares.”
[142] Bk. iii., fol. 7.
[143] See Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 235.
[144] Bk. vi., fol. 16, and Bushell’s translation, p. 152.
[145] See _Ming ch’ên shih pi chou chai yü t’an_ (quoted in
_T’ao lu_, bk. viii., cf. 4 verso): “For Mu Tsung (i.e. Lung
Ch’ing) loved sensuality, and therefore orders were given to make this
kind of thing; but as a matter of fact 'Spring painting’ began in the
picture house of Prince Kuang Chüan of the Han dynasty....”
[146] See _T’ao lu_, bk. viii., fols. 10 and 11, quoting from the
_Ts’ao t’ien yu chi_.
[147] _T’ang ying lung kang chi_, quoted in the _T’ao lu_,
bk. viii., fols. 11 and 12.
[148] Chao was supposed to have displayed superhuman skill in the
manufacture of pottery in the Chin dynasty (265–419 A.D.).
[149] Bk. v., fol. 8.
[150] For explanation of these terms, see p. 10.
[151] Bushell’s rendering, “cups and saucers,” is misleading if not
verbally incorrect.
[152] These are Bushell’s renderings.
[153] [chch 3] _ssŭ hsŭ t’ou_, a phrase which would more usually
refer to the beard than the hair of the head. The above rendering is
Bushell’s.
[154] [chch 2].
[155] [chch 2].
[156] [chch 3].
[157] [chch 4]. There is an allusion in this name to the story of Hu
Kung, a magician of the third and fourth centuries, who was credited
with marvellous healing powers. Every night he disappeared, and it was
found at length that he was in the habit of retiring into a hollow
gourd which hung from the door post. See A. E. Hippisley, _Catalogue
of a Collection of Chinese Porcelains_, Smithsonian Institute,
Washington, 1900. Hao’s porcelain is also known as _Hu kung yao_
(the ware of Mr. Pots).
[158] See _T’ao lu_, bk. v., fol. 10, and bk. viii., fol. 7, and
_T’ao shuo_, bk. vi., fol. 26.
[159] [chch 2] _luan mu_, “the curtain inside the egg,” which conveys
the idea of extreme tenuity better than the most usual expression, “egg
shell” porcelain.
[160] Half a _chu_.
[161] [chch 3].
[162] _Tzŭ chin._ Golden brown with reddish tinge (_tzŭ chin tai
chu_), accurately describes one kind of stoneware tea pots made at
Yi-hsing (p. 177); but it is not stated whether Hao’s imitations were
in stoneware or porcelain.
[163] An allusion to the celebrated orchid pavilion at Kuei-chi, in
Chêkiang, the meeting place of a coterie of scholars in the fourth
century. The scene in which they floated their wine cups on the river
has been popularised in pictorial art. See Plate 104 Fig. 1.
[164] [chch 2].
[165] The _K’ao p’an yü shih_.
[166] Bk. vi., fol. 16 recto.
[167] See p. 140.
[168] Bk. v., fol. 10 verso, under the heading, _Hsiao nan yao_
(Little South Street wares).
[169] [chch 2], apparently referring to the size of the vessels and
not necessarily implying that they were shaped like a frog. On the
other hand, small water vessels in the form of a frog have been made in
China from the Sung period onwards.
[170] [chch 2].
[171] A similar ewer in Dr. Seligmann’s collection is marked with one
of the trigrams of the _pa kua_.
[172] _Cat._, L 24.
[173] _Cat._, E 19–25.
[174] _Denkmäler Persischer Baukunst_, Plate lii., Text p. 41 and
Fig. 44.
[175] The same emperor showed his appreciation for Chinese ceramics by
importing a number of Chinese potters into Persia. See p. 30.
[176] It is recorded that the Emperor Wan Li sent presents of large
porcelain jars to the Mogul Emperor, and it is likely that similar
presents had arrived at the Persian Court.
[177] _Cat._, Case X, No. 245, and Plate xv.
[178] _Burlington Magazine_, October, 1910, p. 40.
[179] See _Franks Catalogue_, No. 763.
[180] _Burlington Magazine_, March, 1913, p. 310. See also
_Hainhofer und der Kunstschrank Gustav Adolfs_, op. cit., Plate
69, where a set of dishes of India lacquer is illustrated, each mounted
in the centre with a roundel of this type of porcelain. These dishes
are mentioned in a letter dated 1628.
[181] Numbered 1191 and 1192. A number of other painters who have
introduced these Chinese porcelains into their work are named by Mr.
Perzynski (_Burlington Magazine_, December, 1910, p. 169).
[182] See p. 63.
[183] C 5–7.
[184] _Cat._, No. 112D.
[185] _Burlington Magazine_, December, 1910, p. 169.
[186] The figures sometimes stand out against a background coloured
with washes of green, yellow and aubergine glaze. See Plate 82, Fig. 2.
[187] See p. 43.
[188] See vol. i., p. 218.
[189] See p. 196.
[190] I have seen occasional specimens with the Wan Li mark.
[191] See vol. i., p. 218.
[192] _Cat._, J 21.
[193] _Cat._, A 33. In the Lymans Collection in Boston there are
several examples of this ware, including specimens with dark and light
coffee brown grounds and a jar in blue and white.
[194] A collection of these is in the British Museum, and they include
many types of late Ming export porcelains.
[195] _Cat. B. F. A._, K 37.
[196] A jar with vertical bands of ornament in a misty underglaze red
of pale tint in the Eumorfopoulos collection probably belongs to this
period. Though technically unsuccessful, the general effect of the bold
red-painted design is most attractive.
[197] See vol. i., p. 218.
[198] _Cat._, J 16.
[199] There is a whole case full of them in the celebrated Dresden
collection, a fact which is strongly in favour of a K’ang Hsi origin
for the group.
[200] Eight Precious Things. See p. 299.
[201] See vol. i., p. 219.
[202] The fact that the enamellers’ shops at Ching-tê Chên to this day
are known as _hung tien_ (red shops) points to the predominance of
this red family in the early history of enamelled decorations.
[203] See p. 67.
[204] See vol. i., p. 218.
[205] See p. 224.
[206] See p. 90.
[207] H 17, exhibited by Mr. G. Eumorfopoulos.
[208] See p. 4.
[209] See p. 94.
[210] Other saucers of this kind have a decoration of radiating floral
sprays, and there are bowls of a familiar type with small sprays
engraved and filled in with coloured glazes in a ground of green or
aubergine purple. Some of these have a rough biscuit suggesting the
late Ming period; others of finer finish apparently belong to the K’ang
Hsi period. They often have indistinct seal marks, known as “shop
marks,” in blue.
[211] _Burlington Magazine_, December, 1910, p. 169, and March,
1913, p. 311.
[212] Figured in Monkhouse, op. cit., Fig. 2. The date of the mount
is disputed, some authorities placing it at the end of the sixteenth
century.
[213] Figured by Perzynski, _Burlington Magazine_, March, 1913. A
vase of this style with tulip design in the palace at Charlottenburg
has a cyclical date in the decoration, which represents 1639 or 1699
(probably the former) in our chronology.
[214] [chch 3] _pai tun tzŭ_ white blocks.
[215] A sixteenth-century work. See p. 2.
[216] Many observers positively assert that the grooved foot rim does
not occur on pre-K’ang Hsi porcelain. If this is true, it provides a
very useful rule for dating; but the rigid application of these rules
of thumb is rarely possible, and we can only regard them as useful but
not infallible guides.
[217] Quoted in _T’ao lu_, bk. viii., fol. 6.
[218] _fu ti._
[219] _Man hsin._
[220] See _T’ao shuo_, bk. iii., fol. 7 verso. “Among other
things the porcelain with glaze lustrous and thick like massed lard,
and which has millet grains rising like chicken skin and displays palm
eyes (_tsung yen_) like orange skin, is prized.” The expression
“palm eyes” occurring by itself in other contexts has given rise to
conflicting opinions, but its use here, qualified by the comparison
with orange peel and in contrast with the granular elevations,
points clearly to some sort of depressions or pittings which, being
characteristic of the classical porcelain, came to be regarded as
beauty spots.
[221] e.g. The _P’ing shih_, the _P’ing hua p’u_, and the
_Chang wu chih_, all late Ming works. An extract from the second
(quoted in the _T’ao lu_, bk. ix., p. 4 verso) tells us that
“Chang Tê-ch’ien says all who arrange flowers first must choose vases.
For summer and autumn you should use porcelain vases. For the hall and
large rooms large vases are fitting; for the study, small ones. Avoid
circular arrangement and avoid pairs. Prize the porcelain and disdain
gold and silver. Esteem pure elegance. The mouth of the vase should be
small and the foot thick. Choose these. They stand firm, and do not
emit vapours.” Tin linings, we are also told, should be used in winter
to prevent the frost cracking the porcelain; and _Chang wu chih_
(quoted _ibidem_, fol. 6 verso) speaks of very large Lung-ch’üan
and Chün ware vases, two or three feet high, as very suitable for
putting old prunus boughs in.
[222] Cobalt, the source of the ceramic blues, is obtained from
cobaltiferous ore of manganese, and its quality varies according to the
purity of the ore and the care with which it is refined.
[223] _0. C. A._, p. 263. This very dark blue recalls one of the
Chia Ching types noted on page 36.
[224] See p. 10.
[225] But see p. 177.
[226] _Biscuit_ is the usual term for a fired porcelain which has
not been glazed.
[227] See p. 17.
[228] It has been suggested by Mr. Joseph Burton that the opacity of
the colours described in the preceding paragraphs may have been due to
the addition of porcelain earth to the glazing material.
[229] See p. 82.
[230] See, however, p. 85.
[231] See p. 2.
[232] The _T’ao lu_ (bk. ix., fol. 17 verso) quotes an infallible
method for fixing the gold on bowls so that it would never come off;
it seems to have consisted of mixing garlic juice with the gold before
painting and firing it in the ordinary way.
[233] Loc. cit., and Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 268.
[234] See p. 75.
[235] See _T’ao shuo_, bk. iii., fol. 10 verso.
[236] See p. 55.
[237] e.g. The _Chieh tzŭ yüan ma chuan_ of the K’ang Hsi period,
mentioned by Perzynski, _Burlington Magazine_, March, 1913, p. 310.
[238] Bushell’s translation, op. cit., p. 71.
[239] _Ku chin t’u shu chi ch’êng_, section xxxii., bk. 248,
section entitled _tz’ŭ ch’i pu hui k’ao_, fol. 13 verso.
[240] [chch 2]
[241] The supplies of porcelain earth in the immediate district of Jao
Chou Fu were exhausted by this time.
[242] The others were the Ch’ing-yün factory at Ssŭ-tu, and the
Lan-ch’i factory in the Chien-ning district. The latter district was
mentioned in vol. i., p. 130, in connection with the hare’s fur bowls
of the Sung period.
[243] See vol. i., p. 17.
[244] Tê-hua was formerly included in the Ch’üan-chou Fu, but is now in
the Yung-ch’un Chou.
[245] See vol. i., p. 131.
[246] Bk. vii., fol. 13 verso.
[247] Loc. cit.
[248] According to de Groot, _Annales du Musée Guinet_, vol. xi.,
p. 195.
[249] Brinkley, _China and Japan_, vol. ix., p. 274.
[250] See W. Anderson, _Catalogue of the Japanese and Chinese
Paintings in the British Museum_, p. 75.
[251] _O. C. A._, p. 628.
[252] In the letter dated from Jao Chou, September, 1712, loc. cit.
[253] Incised designs on Fukien wares consist of the ordinary
decoration etched in the body of the ware and of inscriptions which
have evidently been cut through the glaze before it was fired. The
latter often occur on wine cups, and are usually poetical sentiments or
aphorisms, e.g. “In business be pure as the wind”; “Amidst the green
wine cups we rejoice.”
[254] _Japan and China_, vol. ix., p. 273.
[255] _Everyday Life in China, or Scenes in Fukien_, by E. J.
Dukes, London, 1885, p. 140. The reference is given by Bushell in his
_Oriental Ceramic Art_.
[256] Loc. cit., p. 273.
[257] The _Li t’a k’an k’ao ku ou pien_, a copy of which,
published in 1877, is in the British Museum. This book does not inspire
confidence, but I give the passage for what it is worth: “When the
glaze (of the Chien yao) is white like jade, glossy and lustrous, rich
and thick, with a reddish tinge, and the biscuit heavy, the ware is
first quality ... Enamelled specimens (_wu ts’ai_) are second
rate.”
[258] In the Pierpont Morgan collection (vol. i., p. 78), a specimen
with a blue mark is described as Fukien porcelain; but I should accept
the description with the greatest reserve, white Ching-tê Chên ware
being very often wrongly described in this way.
[259] _O. C. A._, p. 294.
[260] In the second volume of the Pierpont Morgan catalogue--which,
unfortunately, had not the benefit of Dr. Bushell’s erudition--the
late Mr. Laffan extended the term _lang yao_ so as to embrace the
magnificent three-colour vases with black ground and their kindred
masterpieces with green and yellow grounds. It is impossible to justify
this extension of the term unless we assume that the pieces in question
were all made between the years 1654–1661 and 1665–1668, while Lang
T’ing-tso was viceroy of Kiangsi.
[261] _O. C. A._, p. 302.
[262] Quoted in the Franks _Catalogue_, p. 8.
[263] _O. C. A._, p. 302 footnote.
[264] See also Hippisley, _Catalogue_, p. 346, where another
version is given which makes this Lang actually a Jesuit missionary, a
version which Mr. Hippisley afterwards abandoned when research in the
Jesuit records failed to discover any evidence for the statement.
[265] See p. 11.
[266] See p. 34.
[267] Op. cit., Section ix. The paragraph in the first letter runs: “Il
y en a d’entièrement rouges, et parmi celles-là, les unes sont d’un
rouge à l’huile, _yeou li hum_; les autres sont d’un rouge soufflé,
_tschoui hum_ (_ch’ui hung_), et sont semées de petits points à peu
près comme nos mignatures. Quand ces deux sortes d’ouvrages réüssissent
dans leur perfection, ce qui est assez difficile, ils sont infiniment
estimez et extrêmement chers.”
[268] There is a very beautiful glaze effect known as “ashes of roses,”
which seems to be a partially fired-out _sang de bœuf_. It is a
crackled glaze, translucent, and lightly tinged with a copper red which
verges on maroon.
[269] The Emperor K’ang Hsi was specially concerned to encourage
industry and art, and in 1680 he established a number of factories
at Peking for the manufacture of enamels, glass, lacquer, etc.
Père d’Entrecolles mentions that he also attempted to set up the
manufacture of porcelain in the capital, but though he ordered workmen
and materials to be brought from Ching-tê Chên for the purpose, the
enterprise failed, possibly, as d’Entrecolles hints, owing to intrigues
of the vested interests elsewhere.
[270] Bushell, op. cit., p. 3.
[271] Bk. v., fol. 11.
[272] [chch] lit. watered. This word has been rendered by some
translators as “pale”; but probably it has merely the sense of “mixed
with the (glaze) water,” i.e. a monochrome glaze. The recipe given in
the _T’ao lu_ (see Julien) is incomplete, only mentioning “crystals
of saltpetre and ferruginous earth (_fer ologiste terreux_).” Another
_chiao_ which signifies “beautiful, delicate,” is applied to the Hung
Chih yellow in Hsiang’s Album. See vol. ii., p. 28.
[273] Lit. “yellow distribute spots.” See, however, p. 190.
[274] See O. C. A., p. 317.
[275] The two letters were published in _Lettres édifiantes et
curieuses_. They are reprinted as an appendix to Dr. Bushell’s
translation of the _T’ao shuo_. They have been well translated
by William Burton, in his _Porcelain_, Chap. ix.; Bushell gave a
_précis_ of them in his O. C. A., Chap, xi., and Stanislas Julien
quoted them extensively in his _Porcelaine Chinoise_.
[276] Père d’Entrecolles (second letter, section xii.) points out that
the glaze used for the blue and white was considerably softer than that
of the ordinary ware, and was fired in the more temperate parts of the
kiln. The softening ingredient (which consisted chiefly of the ashes of
a certain wood and lime burnt together) was added to the glaze material
(_pai yu_) in a proportion of 1 to 7 for the blue and white as
against 1 to 13 for the ordinary ware.
[277] On some of the large saucer-shaped dishes of this period the foot
rim is unusually broad and channelled with a deep groove.
[278] See Bushell, _T’ao shuo_, op. cit., p. 192. It is tolerably
clear that d’Entrecolles in this passage is giving a verbatim rendering
of a Chinese description. The “flowers” is, no doubt, _hua_, and
might be rendered “decoration” in the general sense, and the “water and
the mountains” is, no doubt, _shan shui_, the current phrase for
“landscape.”
[279] For the shape of the _ju-i_ head, see vol. i., p. 227.
[280] “Flaming silver candle lighting up rosy beauty,” a Ch’êng
Hua design (see p. 25) but often found in K’ang Hsi porcelain,
which usually has, by the way, the Ch’êng Hua mark to keep up the
associations.
[281] For further notes on design, see chap. xvii.
[282] There is a small collection of these porcelains salved from the
sea and presented to the British Museum by H. Adams in 1853; but there
is no evidence to show which, if any, were on board the _Haarlem_.
[283] This design was copied on early Worcester blue and white
porcelain.
[284] In spite of Bushell’s translation of a Ming passage which would
lead one to think otherwise; see p. 40.
[285] See vol. i., p. 226.
[286] There are frequent allusions to the European trade in the letters
of Père d’Entrecolles. In the first letter (Bushell, _T’ao shuo_,
p. 191) a reference is made among moulded porcelains to “celles qui
sont d’une figure bisarre, comme les animaux, les grotesques, les
Idoles, les bustes que les Europeans ordonnent.” On p. 193: “Pour
ce qui est des couleurs de la porcelaine, il y en a de toutes les
sortes. On n’en voit gueres en Europe que de celle qui est d’un bleu
vif sur un fond blanc. Je crois pourtant que nos Marchands y en ont
apporté d’autres.” On p. 202, to explain the high price of the Chinese
porcelain in Europe, we are told that for the porcelain for Europe new
models, often very strange and difficult to manufacture, are constantly
demanded, and as the porcelain was rejected for the smallest defect,
these pieces were left on the potter’s hands, and, being un-Chinese
in taste, were quite unsaleable. Naturally the potter demanded a high
price for the successful pieces to cover his loss on the rejected.
On the other hand, we are told (p. 204) that the mandarins,
recognising the inventive genius of the Europeans, sometimes asked
him (d’Entrecolles) to procure new and curious designs, in order that
they might have novelties to offer to the Emperor. But his converts
entreated him not to get these designs, which were often very difficult
to execute and led to all manner of ill-treatment of the unfortunate
workmen.
On the same page we are told that the European merchants ordered large
plaques for inlaying in furniture, but that the potters found it
impossible to make any plaque larger than about a foot square. In the
second letter (section x.), however, we learn that “this year (1722)
they had accepted orders for designs which had hitherto been considered
impossible, viz. for urns (_urnes_) 3 feet and more high, with a
cover which rose in pyramidal form to an additional foot. They were
made in three pieces, so skilfully joined that the seams were not
visible, and out of twenty-five made only eight had been successful.
These objects were ordered by the Canton merchants, who deal with the
Europeans; for in China people are not interested in porcelain which
entails such great cost.”
[287] This defect is noticed by Père d’Entrecolles, who mentions
another remedy used by the Chinese potters. They applied, he tells us
in section ii. of the second letter, a preparation of bamboo ashes
mixed with glazing material to the edges of the plate before the
glazing proper. This was supposed to have the desired effect without
impairing the whiteness of the porcelain.
[288] See p. 74.
[289] Second letter, section iv.
[290] See Bushell, O. C. A., p. 320.
[291] See p. 201.
[292] The use of crackle glaze over blue (_porcelaine toute
azurée_) is noted by Père d’Entrecolles in his first letter. See
Bushell, op. cit., p. 195.
[293] See Bushell, _T’ao shuo_, p. 197.
[294] A somewhat similar but clumsier decoration was the “scratched
blue” of the Staffordshire salt glaze made about 1750.
[295] On exceptional examples the red seems to have turned almost
black, and in some cases it seems to have penetrated the glaze and
turned brown.
[296] A similar combination of coloured glazes was effectively used on
the moulded porcelains of the Japanese Hirado factory.
[297] See pp. 48 and 100.
[298] Loc. cit., second letter, section xiv.
[299] Apparently _huang lü huan_, yellow and green (?) circles.
But without the Chinese characters it is impossible to say which
_huan_ is intended. The description seems to apply to the “tiger
skin” ware, where yellow, green and aubergine glazes have been applied
in large patches. Bushell (_O. C. A._, p. 331) makes this
expression refer to the specimens with engraved designs in colour
contrasting with the surrounding ground, such as Fig. 1 of Plate 79;
but this does not seem to suit the word _huan_.
[300] Loc. cit., section xiv.
[301] See footnote on p. 89.
[302] The same technique is employed on some of the Japanese Kaga wares.
[303] Apparently derived from manganese.
[304] See p. 80.
[305] Another favourite form is the ovoid beaker (see Plate 101),
which is sometimes called the _yen yen_ vase, apparently from
_yen_, beautiful. But I only have this name on hearsay, and it is
perhaps merely a trader’s term.
[306] See p. 110.
[307] A lotus-shaped set in the Salting collection numbers thirteen
sections.
[308] The underglaze blue almost invariably suffered in the subsequent
firings which were necessary for the enamels, and, as we shall see, a
different kind of glaze was used on the pure enamelled ware and on the
blue and white.
[309] Apart from the cases in which the enamel colours were added to
faulty specimens of blue and white to conceal defects.
[310] See p. 85.
[311] Op. cit., section vi. “Il n’y a, dit on, que vingt ans ou
environ qu’on a trouvé le secret de peindre avec le _tsoui_ ou en
violet et de dorer la porcelaine.” As far as the gilding is concerned,
this statement is many centuries wrong. The _tsoui_ is no doubt
the _ts’ui_, which is very vaguely described in section xii.
(under the name _tsiu_) of the same letter. Here it is stated to
have been compounded of a kind of stone, but the description of its
treatment clearly shows that the material was really a coloured glass,
which is, in fact, the basis of the violet blue enamel.
[312] Bushell, op. cit., p. 193.
[313] Loc. cit., p. 195.
[314] See d’Entrecolles, second letter, section xii.
[315] Burnt lime and wood ashes. See p. 92.
[316] Catalogue of the 1910 exhibition, No. 84.
[317] These seals are usually difficult to decipher, and the one in
question might be read _shui shih chü_ (water and rock dwelling).
This would be a matter of small importance did not the signature
read by Bushell as _wan shih chü_ occur in the Pierpont Morgan
Collection. Other instances in the same collection are _chu chü_
(bamboo retreat), _shih chü_ (rock retreat), and _chu shih
chü_ (red rock retreat). The signature _chu chü_ also occurs on
a dish in the Dresden collection.
[318] See p. 212.
[319] See p. 64.
[320] Cat., vol. i., p. 156.
[321] Similar bottles in the Drucker Collection have the “G” mark.
[322] _Fang tung yang_, “imitating the Eastern Sea” (i.e. Japan).
[323] The first specimens (according to Bushell, _O. C. A._, p.
309) to reach America came from the collection of the Prince of Yi,
whose line was founded by the thirteenth son of the Emperor K’ang Hsi.
[324] The general reader will probably not be much concerned as to
whether the peach bloom was produced by oxide of copper or by some
other process. Having learnt the outward signs of the glaze, he will
take the inner meaning of it for granted. Others, however, will be
interested to know that practically all the features of the peach bloom
glaze, the pink colour, the green ground and the russet brown spots
can be produced by chrome tin fired at a high temperature. I have seen
examples of these chrome tin pinks made by Mr. Mott at Doulton’s, which
exhibit practically all the peculiarities of the Chinese peach bloom.
It does not, of course, follow that the Chinese used the same methods
or even had any knowledge of chrome tin. They may have arrived at the
same results by entirely different methods, and the peach bloom tints
developed on some of the painted underglaze copper reds point to the
one which is generally believed to have been used; but the difference
between these and the fully developed peach bloom is considerable,
and though we have no definite evidence one way or the other, the
possibilities of chrome tin cannot be overlooked.
[325] The form of this water pot is known (according to Bushell,
_O. C. A._, p. 318) as the _T’ai-po tsun_, because it was
designed after the traditional shape of the wine jar of Li T’ai-po, the
celebrated T’ang poet. In its complete state it has a short neck with
slightly spreading mouth.
[326] See p. 146.
[327] See p. 64.
[328] i.e. lead glass.
[329] _Chi_, lit. sky-clearing, and _chi ch’ing_ might be
rendered “blue of the sky after rain.”
[330] There are some bowls and bottles in the Dresden collection with
glazes of a pale luminous blue which are hard to parallel elsewhere.
[331] Loc. cit., section xvii. In another place (section iii.) we are
told how the Chinese surrounded the ware with paper during the blowing
operation, so as to catch and save all the precious material which fell
wide of the porcelain.
[332] I cannot recall any example of the powder blue crackle which is
here described.
[333] See Julien, p. 107.
[334] P. 170.
[335] Second letter, section xvii.
[336] The word “mazarine” has become naturalised in the English
language. Goldsmith spoke of “gowns of mazarine blue edged with fur”;
and “Ingoldsby” says the sky was “bright mazarine.” See R. L. Hobson,
_Worcester Porcelain_, p. 101.
[337] See p. 99.
[338] See p. 102.
[339] These glazes generally have the appearance of being in two coats,
and in some cases there actually seem to be two layers of crackle.
[340] See p. 125.
[341] i.e. the strong heavy types. Chinese literature speaks of thinner
and more refined celadons of the Sung period, but few of these have
come down to our day.
[342] Père d’Entrecolles fully describes these spurious celadons. See
vol. i., p. 83.
[343] Second letter, section vii.
[344] The _T’ao lu_ (see Julien, p. 213) gives this recipe for the
kind of celadon known as _Tung ch’ing_, and a similar prescription
with a small percentage of blue added for the variety known as
_Lung-ch’üan_.
[345] See Bushell, O. C. A., p. 316.
[346] See p. 147.
[347] There are some fine examples of orange yellow monochrome in the
Peters Collection in New York. The colour was also used with success
in the Ch’ien Lung period, the mark of which reign occurs on a good
example in the Peters Collection.
[348] Bushell, _O. C. A._, Plates xxv. and lxxxiii.
[349] See Monkhouse, op. cit., fig. 22. The crackle on the mustard
yellow glaze is usually small, but there is a fine specimen in the
Peters Collection with large even crackle. Sometimes this yellow has
a greenish tinge, and in a few instances it is combined with crackled
green glaze.
[350] Second letter, section vi.
[351] See Père d’Entrecolles, second letter, section xiii.: “L’argent
sur le vernis _tse kin (tzŭ chin_) a beaucoup d’éclat.”
[352] See p. 145.
[353] The blue of the cobalt is sometimes clearly visible in the
fracture of the glaze; and in other cases the black has a decided tinge
of brown.
[354] d’Entrecolles, loc. cit., section viii.: “Le noir éclatant ou le
noir de miroir appellé _ou kim_” (_wu chin_).
[355] d’Entrecolles declares that it was the result of many
experiments, apparently in his own time. See p. 194.
[356] Second letter, section xi.
[357] See M. Seymour de Ricci in the introduction to the _Catalogue
of a Collection of Mounted Porcelain belonging to E. M. Hodgkins,
Paris_, 1911, where much interesting information has been collected
on the subject of French mounts and their designers. He quotes also
from the _Livre-journal de Lazare Duvaux marchand-bijoutier ordinaire
du Roy_ (1748–1758), which includes a list of objects mounted for
Madame de Pompadour and others, giving the nature of the wares and the
cost of the work.
[358] Persian, Indian, and occasionally even Chinese metal mounts are
found on porcelain; and Mr. S. E. Kennedy has a fine enamelled vase of
the K’ang Hsi period with spirited dragon handles of old Chinese bronze.
[359] White was also used in the worship of the Year Star (Jupiter).
Other colours which have a ritual significance are _yellow_, used
in the Ancestral Temple by the Emperor, and on the altars of the god
of Agriculture and of the goddess of Silk; _blue_, in the Temple
of Heaven and in the Temple of Land and Grain; and _red_, in the
worship of the Sun.
[360] Brinkley has aptly described it as “snow-white oil.”
[361] Cf. Père d’Entrecolles, second letter, section xviii.: “(The
designs) are first outlined with a graving-tool on the body of the
vase, and afterwards lightly channelled around to give them relief.
After this they are glazed.”
[362] See d’Entrecolles, loc. cit., sections iv. and v. After
describing the preparation of the steatite (_hua shih_) by mixing
it with water, he continues: “Then they dip a brush in the mixture and
trace various designs on the porcelain, and when they are dry the glaze
is applied. When the ware is fired, these designs emerge in a white
which differs from that of the body. It is as though a faint mist had
spread over the surface. The white from _hoa che_ (_hua shih_
or _steatite_) is called ivory white, _siam ya pe_ (_hsiang
ya pai_).” In the next section he describes another material used
for white painting under the glaze. This is _shih kao_, which has
been identified with fibrous gypsum.
[363] See p. 74.
[364] First letter, Bushell, op. cit., p. 195.
[365] _O. C. A._, p. 533.
[366] _Ku chin t’u shu_, section xxxii., vol. 248, fol. 15. In
this way, we are told, were produced (1) the thousandfold millet
crackle and (2) the drab-brown (_ho_) cups. The colour of the
latter was obtained by rubbing on a decoction of old tea leaves. The
former is a name given to a glaze broken into “numerous small points.”
[367] See Bushell, _T’ao shuo_, loc. cit., p. 195.
[368] The _Tao lu_ (see Julien, p. 214) informs us that the _sui
ch’i yu_ (crackle ware glaze) was made from briquettes formed of the
natural rock of San-pao-p’êng. If highly refined this material produced
small crackle; if less carefully refined, coarse crackle. In reference
to _sui ch’i_ in an earlier part of the same work, we are told
that the Sung potters mixed _hua shih_ with the glaze to produce
crackle. _Hua shih_ is a material of the nature of steatite, and
Bushell (_O. C. A._, p. 447) states that the Chinese potters mix
powdered steatite with the glaze to make it crackle. It is, then,
highly probable that the “white pebbles” of Père d’Entrecolles and the
rock of San-pao-p’êng are the same material and of a steatitic nature.
[369] [chch 3]. Another name of this official, _Yen kung_, is
mentioned in the _T’ao lu_, bk. v., fol. 11 verso.
[370] Situated at the junction of the Grand Canal and the Yangtze.
[371] Loc. cit.
[372] Silvering the entire surface (_mo yin_), as opposed to
merely decorating with painted designs in silver (_miao yin_),
appears to have been a novelty introduced by T’ang Ying.
[373] i.e. porcelain services painted with European coats of arms.
[374] See p. 215.
[375] See p. 225, Nos. 41 and 42.
[376] Cf. p. 25, where “high-flaming silver candle lighting up rosy
beauty” is explained in this sense among the Ch’êng Hua designs.
[377] See p. 13.
[378] See p. 225, No. 45.
[379] See p. 224, Nos. 19 and 20.
[380] A beautiful example of a “stem-cup” in the Eumorfopoulos
Collection, with three fishes on the exterior in underglaze red of
brilliant quality and the Hsüan Tê mark inside the bowl, probably
belongs to this class.
[381] See p. 148.
[382] See p. 225, No. 30.
[383] See p. 224, No. 26.
[384] See _Catalogue_ 300–303. “On each is a miniature group of
the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo Grove with an attendant bringing a jar
of wine and flowers. The porcelain is so thin that the design, with all
the details of colour, can be distinctly perceived from the inside.” It
is only right to say that their learned possessor has catalogued them
as genuine examples of the Ch’êng Hua period.
[385] See p. 224, No. 25.
[386] See p. 201.
[387] See p. 224, No. 27.
[388] See p. 225, No. 36.
[389] _T’ao shuo_, bk. i., fol. 15 verso.
[390] See p. 225, No. 49. _Fo-lang_, _fa-lang_, _fu-lang_, and _fa-lan_
are used indiscriminately by the Chinese in the sense of enamels on
metal.
[391] In the _T’ao lu_, under the heading _Yang tz’ŭ_. It is
a curious paradox that the Chinese called _famille rose_ porcelain
_yang ts’ai_ (foreign colours) and the Canton enamels _yang
tz’ŭ_ (foreign porcelain). See _Burlington Magazine_, December,
1912, “Note on Canton Enamels.”
[392] See pp. 224–226, Nos. 29, 37, 38, 49, 51, 53, and 54.
[393] Apart from the rose pinks which are derived from purple of
cassius, i.e. precipitate of gold, and the opaque white derived from
arsenic, the colouring agents of the _famille rose_ enamels are
essentially the same as those of the _famille verte_. The colours
themselves were brought to Ching-tê Chên in the form of lumps of
coloured glass prepared at the Shantung glass works. These lumps were
ground to a fine powder and mixed with a little white lead, and in
some cases with sand (apparently potash was also used in some cases to
modify the tones), and the powder was worked up for the painter’s use
with turpentine, weak glue, or even with water. Cobaltiferous ore of
manganese, oxide of copper, iron peroxide, and antimony were still the
main colouring agents. The first produced the various shades of blue,
violet, purple, and black; the second, the various greens; the third,
coral or brick red; and the fourth, yellow of various shades. A little
iron in the yellow gave the colour an orange tone.
The modifications of the green are more numerous. The pure binoxide of
copper produced the shade used for distant mountains (_shan lü_),
which could be converted into turquoise by the admixture of white. The
ordinary leaf green was darkened by strengthening the lead element in
the flux and made bluer by the introduction of potash in the mixture.
Combined with yellow it gave an opaque yellowish green colour known as
_ku lü_ (ancient green); and a very pale greenish white, the “moon
white” of the enameller, was made by a tinge of green added to the
arsenious white.
The carmine and crimson rose tints derived from the glass tinted with
precipitate of gold, which was known as _yen chih hung_ (rouge
red), were modified with white to produce the _fên hung_ or pale
pink; and the same carmine was combined with white and deep blue to
make the amaranth or blue lotus (_ch’ing lien_) colour.
The ordinary brick red (the _ta hung_ or _mo hung_) was derived from
peroxide of iron mixed with a little glue to make it adhere, but
depending on the glaze for any vitrification it could obtain. The
addition of a plumbo-alcaline flux produced the more brilliant and
glossy red of coral tint known as _tsao’rh hung_ (jujube red).
The dry, dull black derived from cobaltiferous manganese was converted
into a glossy enamel by mixing with green. This is the _famille
rose_ black as distinct from the black of the _famille verte_,
which was formed by a layer of green washed over a layer of dull black
on the porcelain itself.
There are, besides, numerous other shades, such as lavender, French
grey, etc., obtained by cunning mixtures, and all these enamels were
capable of use as monochromes in place of coloured glazes as well as
for brushwork.
[394] Bushell, _Chinese Art_, vol. ii., fig. 61.
[395] _Histoire de la porcelaine_, pt. viii., fig. 3.
[396] These marks were discussed by Bushell in the _Burlington
Magazine_, August and September, 1906. They are figured on vol. i.,
pp. 219 and 223.
[397] Quoted from a letter written to Sir Wollaston Franks by Mr.
Arthur B. French, who visited Ching-tê Chên in 1882.
[398] Officially the reign of K’ang Hsi dates from 1662–1722, but he
actually succeeded to the throne on the death of Shun Chih in 1661, so
that his reign completed the cycle of sixty years in 1721.
[399] As Bushell has done in _Chinese Art_, vol. ii., p. 42.
[400] See “Note on Canton Enamels,” _Burlington Magazine_,
December, 1912.
[401] See p. 225, No. 40.
[402] Op. cit., second letter, section xx.
[403] Nos. 39 and 55–57.
[404] _Miao_ is used in the sense of to “draw” a picture or design.
[405] Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 400, explains how the studio name
was formed by the common device of splitting up Hu [chch] into its
component parts _ku_ [chch] and _yüeh_ [chch].
[406] From the Hippisley collection, _Catalogue_, p. 408.
[407] _Catalogue of Hippisley Collection_, p. 347.
[408] _Chinese Art_, vol. ii., fig. 74.
[409] See p. 224, Nos. 15–17.
[410] A recipe given in the _T’ao lu_ (bk. iii., fol. 12 verso)
for the _lu chün_ glaze speaks of “crystals of nitre, rock
crystal, and (?) cobaltiferous manganese (_liao_) mixed with
ordinary glaze.” But apart from the uncertain rendering of _liao_
(which Bushell takes as _ch’ing liao_, i.e. the material used for
blue painting), it is difficult to see how this composition, including
the ordinary porcelain glaze, can have been fired in the muffle kiln.
[411] In the jujube red the iron oxide is mixed with the
plumbo-alcaline flux of the enameller, whereas in the _mo hung_ it
is simply made to adhere to the porcelain by means of glue, and depends
for the silicates, which give it a vitreous appearance, on the glaze
beneath it.
[412] _O. C. A._, p. 360.
[413] See p. 224, No. 18.
[414] See p. 225, No. 44.
[415] Op. cit., p. 67.
[416] _Catalogue_, K. 18.
[417] _Catalogue_, vol. i., p. 38. The colour has already been
discussed in a note on p. 68 of vol. i. of this book.
[418] See vol. i., p. 68.
[419] See Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 368
[420] The Chinese is _kua yu_ [chch 2], lit. hanging, suspended or
applied glaze. The Yi-hsing stoneware was not usually glazed; hence the
force of the epithet _kua_ applied.
[421] The gold-flecked turquoise has yet to be identified.
[422] Bushell says this is the sapphire blue (_pao shih lan_) of
the period.
[423] [chch] mo, lit. “rubbed.” Bushell (_O. C. A._, p. 383) explains
the term _mo hung_ as “applied to the process of painting the coral red
monochrome derived from iron over the glaze with an ordinary brush.”
[424] Bushell takes this to be the lemon yellow enamel which was first
used at this time.
[425] See p. 37.
[426] [chch 14] _yu t’ung yung hung yu hui hua chê, yu ch’ing yeh
hung hua chê._ Bushell (_O. C. A._, p. 386) gives a slightly
different application of this passage, but the meaning seems to be
obviously that given above.
[427] This note is given by Bushell, apparently from the Chinese
edition which he used; but it does not appear in the British Museum
copy. It is, however, attached to the list as quoted in the _T’ao
lu_.
[428] As already explained, _miao chin_ refers to gilt designs
painted with a brush, and _mo chin_ to gilding covering the entire
surface.
[429] _O. C. A._, p. 50.
[430] [chch 2]
[431] Translated by Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 398.
[432] Bk. v., fol. 12.
[433] [chch 3], _yu hsin shih_, lit. “also he newly made.” This is
undoubtedly the sense given by the Chinese original, and Julien renders
it “il avait nouvellement mis en œuvre.” Bushell, on the other hand,
translates: “He also made porcelain decorated with the various coloured
glazes _newly invented_,” a reading which makes the word _chih_ do duty
twice over, and leaves it doubtful whether T’ang was the inventor of
these types of decoration or merely the user of them. Both the grammar
and the balance of the sentences in the original are against this
colourless rendering.
[434] See p. 192.
[435] _La Porcelaine Chinoise_, p. 216.
[436] See p. 225. “In the new copies of the Western style of painting
in enamels (_hsi yang fa lang hua fa_), the landscapes and figure
scenes, the flowering plants and birds are without exception of
supernatural beauty.”
[437] See p. 209.
[438] P. 397.
[439] An interesting series of these bird’s egg glazes appearing,
as they often do, on tiny vases was exhibited by his Excellency the
Chinese Minister at the Whitechapel Art Gallery in November, 1913.
[440] There is a very old superstition in China that cracked or broken
pottery is the abode of evil spirits. The modern collector abhors the
cracked or damaged specimen for other reasons, and it is certain that
such things would not be admitted to the Imperial collections. Many
rare and interesting pieces which have come to Europe in the past
will be found on examination to be more or less defective, and it is
probable that we owe their presence chiefly to this circumstance.
[441] See Bushell’s translation, op. cit., p. 6.
[442] The _T’ao shuo_ was published in 1774.
[443] See vol. i., p. 119.
[444] See Julien, op. cit., p. 101, under the heading _lung kang
yao_ (kilns for the dragon jars).
[445] The Chinese foot as at present standardised is about two inches
longer than the English foot, and the Chinese inch is one-tenth of it.
[446] See p. 58.
[447] There are four examples of the large size of fish bowl in the
Pierpont Morgan Collection, but they are of late Ming date.
[448] Possibly the tint named in the _T’ao shuo_ (Bushell, op.
cit., p. 5). “They are coloured wax yellow, tea green, gold brown, or
the tint of old Lama books,” in reference to incense burners of this
period.
[449] Nos. 8, 9 and 11. See Bushell, _T’ao shuo_, op. cit., pp.
16–19.
[450] See p. 140.
[451] A plaque in the Bushell Collection with _famille verte_
painting has also a remarkably lustrous appearance, which I can only
ascribe to excessive iridescence.
[452] See Bushell’s translation, op. cit. p. 20.
[453] Figured by L. Binyon, _Painting in the Far East_, first
edition, Plate XIX. There is a fine vase of late Ming blue and white
porcelain with this design in the Dresden collection.
[454] This green enamel is sometimes netted over with lines suggesting
crackle studded with prunus blossoms. Possibly this is intended to
recall both in colour and pattern the “plum blossom” crackle of the
Sung Kuan yao; see vol. i., p. 61.
[455] _Shên tê t’ang_ and _ch’ing wei t’ang_. See vol. i., p.
220.
[456] See Burton and Hobson, Marks on _Pottery_ and _Porcelain_, p. 151.
[457] Op. cit., pp. 116–175.
[458] _T’ao shuo_, op. cit., pp. 7–30 and _O. C. A._, ch. xv.
[459] The Lowestoft factory started about 1752, but its earlier
productions were almost entirely blue and white, often copied, like
most of the contemporary blue and white from Chinese export wares.
[460] A curious instance of imitation of European ornament is a
small bowl which I recently saw with openwork sides and medallions,
apparently moulded from a glass cameo made by Tassie at the end of
the eighteenth century; and there is a puzzle jug with openwork neck,
copied from the well known Delft-ware model, in the Metropolitan
Museum, New York.
[461] Rotterdam was captured by the Spaniards in 1572; but those who
are interested in the anachronism of Chinese marks will observe that
these plates have the date mark of the Ch’êng Hua period (1465–1487).
[462] See vol. i., p. 226.
[463] Op. cit., p. 207.
[464] An interesting example of an early eighteenth century service
with European designs is the “trumpeter service,” of which several
specimens may be seen in the Salting Collection. It has a design of
trumpeters, or perhaps heralds, reserved in a black enamelled ground.
[465] One of these pieces, for instance, is a plate with arms of Sir
John Lambert, who was created a baronet in 1711 and died in 1722. It
has enamels of the transition kind.
[466] P. 209.
[467] The willow pattern is merely an English adaptation of the
conventional Chinese landscape and river scene which occurs frequently
on the export blue and white porcelain of the eighteenth century. That
it represents any particular story is extremely improbable.
[468] Frank Falkner, _The Wood Family of Burslem_, p. 67.
[469] Another _chambrelan_ who flourished about the same time and
who worked in the same style was C. F. de Wolfsbourg.
[470] _O. C. A.,_ p. 464.
[471] “The mountains are high, the rivers long.”
[472] See vol. i., p. 220.
[473] _Catalogue_, No. 367.
[474] Vol. i., p. 220.
[475] Hippisley Collection, _Catalogue_, No. 169.
[476] _O. C. A._, p. 469.
[477] This extravagant idea has been long ago exploded, and need not be
rediscussed. See, however, Julien _Porcelaine Chinoise_, p. xix.,
and Medhurst, _Transactions of the China Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society_, Hong Kong, 1853.
[478] _O. C. A._, p. 470.
[479] Bk. 93, fols. 13–15.
[480] _O. C. A._, pp. 474–83.
[481] Bushell applies the phrase _pan tzŭ_ to the bowls and
renders it “of ring-like outline.”
[482] Bushell renders _ju-i_ in the general sense, “with words
of happy augury”; it is, however, applied to ornaments of _ju-i_
staffs and to borders of _ju-i_ heads.
[483] See vol. i., p. 225.
[484] Bk. i., fols. 1 and 2; see Bushell, op. cit., pp. 3–6.
[485] This is a variety of the key pattern or Greek fret, which is of
world-wide distribution.
[486] A less usual variety has the ovoid body actually surmounted by a
beaker
[487] See Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 797.
[488] See Bushell’s translation, op. cit., p. 4.
[489] See Bushell, _O. C. A.,_ p. 489.
[490] Among others is the “tantalus cup,” with a small tube in the
bottom concealed by a figure of a man or smiling boy. When the water in
the cup reaches the top of the tube it runs away from the base.
[491] Loc. cit., p. 204.
[492] The cup with handle was made in the tea services for the European
market, but the handle is not, as has been sometimes asserted, a
European addition to the cup. Cups with handles were made in China as
early as the T’ang dynasty (see Plate 11, Fig. 2); but for both wine
and tea drinking the Chinese seem to have preferred the handleless
variety.
[493] When the names are known the incidents can usually be found in
such works of reference as Mayers’ _Chinese Reader’s Manual_,
Giles’s _Chinese Biographical Dictionary_, and Anderson’s
Catalogue of Chinese and Japanese Pictures.
[494] Told in the _Shui Hu Chuan_; see _O. C. A._, p. 570, a
note in Bushell’s excellent chapter on Chinese decorative motives, of
which free use has been made here.
[495] A not uncommon subject is the meeting of a young horseman with a
beautiful lady in a chariot, and it has been suggested that this may be
the meeting of Ming Huang and Yang Kuei-fei; but the identification is
quite conjectural.
[496] Another game, _hsiang ch’i_ (elephant checkers), is far
nearer to our chess.
[497] A group of five old men similarly employed represents the _wu
lao_ (the five old ones), the spirits of the five planets.
[498] Chang Kuo Lao, the Taoist Immortal, is also regarded as one of
the gods of Literature; see p. 287.
[499] Vajrapani is one of the gods of the Four Quarters of the Heaven,
who are guardians of Buddha. They are represented as ferocious looking
warriors, sometimes stamping on prostrate demon-figures. As such
they occur among the T’ang tomb statuettes, but they are not often
represented on the later porcelains.
[500] The Kanzan and Jitoku of Japanese lore.
[501] See _Catalogue of the Pierpont Morgan Collection_, vol. i.,
p. 156.
[502] Indeed it is likely that the modern _ju-i_ head derives from the
fungus. The _ju-i_ [chch 2] means “as you wish” or “according (_ju_)
to your idea (_i_),” and the sceptre, which is made in all manner of
materials such as wood, porcelain, lacquer, cloisonné enamel, etc., is
a suitable gift for wedding or birthday. Its form is a slightly curved
staff about 12 to 15 inches long, with a fungus-shaped head bent over
like a hook. On the origin of the _ju-i_, see Laufer, _Jade_, p. 335.
[503] The Japanese Mt. Horai.
[504] See Hippisley, _Catalogue_, op. cit., p. 392.
[505] The Buddhist pearl or jewel, which grants every wish.
[506] See a rare silver cup depicting this legend, figured in the
_Burlington Magazine_, December, 1912.
[507] See W. Perceval Yetts, _Symbolism in Chinese Art_, read
before the China Society, January 8th, 1912, p. 3.
[508] Hippisley (op. cit., p. 368), speaking of the various dragons,
says that “the distinction is not at present rigidly maintained, and
the five-clawed dragon is met with embroidered on officers’ uniforms.”
[509] A dual creature, the _fêng_ being the male and the huang the
female.
[510] See Laufer, _Jade_, pl. 43.
[511] See Laufer, _Jade_, p. 266.
[512] See Bushell, _Chinese Art_, vol. i., p. 111.
[513] See p. 300.
[514] They also symbolise the three friends, Confucius, Buddha, and
Lao-tzŭ.
[515] _O. C. A._, p. 106.
[516] It is also used as a synonym for “embroidered,” and when it
occurs as a mark on porcelain, it suggests the idea “richly decorated.”
[517] Also a symbol of conjugal felicity; and a rebus for _yü_,
fertility or abundance.
[518] Having the same sound as _ch’ang_ (long).
[519] _O. C. A._, p. 119.
[520] A pair of open lozenges interlaced are read as a rebus _t’ung
hsin fang shêng_ (union gives success); see Bushell, _O. C.
A._, p. 120.
[521] Bushell, _O. C. A._, p. 521.
[522] See Hippisley, _Catalogue_ No. 381.
[523] _Ibid._
[524] _Ibid._, No. 388.
[525] _Ibid._
[526] See p. 299.
[527] See p. 258.
[528] See Anderson, op. cit., No. 747.
[529] Bk. viii., fol. 4, quoting the _Shih ch’ing jihcha_.
[530] See chap. xvii. of vol. i., which deals with marks.
[531] See p. 261.
Transcriber’s Notes:
1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
corrected silently.
2. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g.
D^r. or X^{xx}.
3. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
been retained as in the original.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. II.: An account of the potter's art in China from primitive times to the present day." ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.