+------------------------------------------------+
| Note: |
| |
| Chinese characters are labeled [Chinese]. |
| Bold surrounding =text=. |
| Italics surrounding _text_. |
| |
+------------------------------------------------+
CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN
_This Edition is limited to 1,500 copies, of which this is_
_No 669_
[Illustration]
[Illustration: Statue of a Lohan or Buddhist Apostle, T'ang dynasty
(618-906 A.D.)
Height with stand 50 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 "Catalogue 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. I
Pottery and Early Wares
CASSELL AND COMPANY, LTD
London, New York, Toronto and Melbourne
1915
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
INTRODUCTION xv
BIBLIOGRAPHY xxvii
1. THE PRIMITIVE PERIODS 1
2. THE HAN [CHINESE] DYNASTY, 206 B.C. TO 220 A.D. 5
3. THE TANG [CHINESE] DYNASTY, 618-906 A.D. 23
4. THE SUNG [CHINESE] DYNASTY, 960-1279 A.D. 43
5. JU, KUAN, AND KO WARES 52
6. LUNG-CH´ÜAN YAO [Chinese] 76
7. TING YAO [Chinese] 89
8. TZ´Ŭ CHOU [CHINESE] WARE 101
9. CHÜN WARES AND SOME OTHERS 109
10. MIRABILIA 136
11. PORCELAIN AND ITS BEGINNINGS 140
12. CHING-TÊ CHÊN 152
13. THE YÜAN [CHINESE] DYNASTY, 1280-1367 A.D. 159
14. KUANGTUNG [CHINESE] WARES 166
15. YI-HSING [CHINESE] WARE 174
16. MISCELLANEOUS POTTERIES 184
17. MARKS ON CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN 207
LIST OF PLATES
STATUE OF LOHAN OR BUDDHIST APOSTLE, T´ANG DYNASTY (618-906 A.D.).
_British Museum_ (_Colour_) _Frontispiece_
PLATE FACING PAGE
1. CHOU POTTERY 4
Fig. 1.--Tripod Food Vessel. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Jar with deeply cut lozenge pattern.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
2. HAN POTTERY 8
Fig. 1.--Vase, green glazed. _Boston Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with black surface and incised designs.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with designs in red, white and black pigments.
_British Museum._
Fig. 4.--"Granary Urn," green glazed. _Peters Collection._
3. HAN POTTERY 12
Fig. 1.--"Hill Jar" with brown glaze. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Box, green glazed. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--"Lotus Censer," green glazed. _Rothenstein Collection._
4. MODEL OF A "FOWLING TOWER" 12
Han pottery with iridescent green glaze. _Freer Collection._
5. T´ANG SEPULCHRAL FIGURES 26
Fig. 1.--A Lokapala or Guardian of one of the Quarters, unglazed.
_Benson Collection._
Fig. 2.--A Horse, with coloured glazes. _Benson Collection._
Fig. 3.--An Actor, unglazed. _Benson Collection._
6. T´ANG SEPULCHRAL FIGURES, UNGLAZED 26
Figs. 1, 2 and 4.--Female Musicians. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Attendant with dish of food. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
7. T´ANG SEPULCHRAL POTTERY 26
Fig. 1.--Figure of a Lady in elaborate costume, unglazed.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase, white pottery with traces of blue mottling.
_Breuer Collection._
Fig. 3.--Sphinx-like Monster, green and yellow glazes.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
8. THREE EXAMPLES OF T´ANG WARE WITH COLOURED GLAZES:
IN THE _Eumorfopoulos Collection_ (_Colour_) 30
Fig. 1.--Tripod Incense Vase with ribbed sides; white pottery
with deep blue glaze, outside encrusted with iridescence.
Fig. 2.--Amphora of light coloured pottery with splashed glaze.
Fig. 3.--Ewer of hard white porcellanous ware with deep purple
glaze.
9. T´ANG POTTERY 32
Fig. 1.--Ewer of Sassanian form with splashed glazes; panels of
relief ornament. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase with mottled glaze, green and orange.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Ewer with dragon spout and handle; wave and cloud
reliefs; brownish yellow glaze streaked with green.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
10. T´ANG POTTERY 32
Fig. 1.--Dish with mirror pattern incised and coloured blue, green,
etc.; inner border of _ju-i_ cloud scrolls on a mottled yellow
ground, outer border of mottled green; pale green glaze underneath
and three tusk-shaped feet. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Ewer with serpent handle and trilobed mouth; applied
rosette ornaments and mottled glaze, green, yellow and white.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
11. T´ANG WARES 32
Fig. 1.--Cup with bands of impressed circles, brownish yellow
glaze outside, green within. _Seligmann Collection._
Fig. 2.--Cup of hard white ware with greenish white glaze.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Melon-shaped Vase, greyish stoneware with white slip and
smooth ivory glaze. _Breuer Collection._
Fig. 4.--Cup of porcellanous stoneware, white slip and crackled
creamy white glaze, spur marks inside. _Breuer Collection._
12. T´ANG POTTERY WITH GREEN GLAZE 40
Fig. 1.--Bottle with impressed key-fret. _Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Ewer with incised foliage scrolls. _Alexander
Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with foliage scrolls, painted in black under the
glaze, incised border on the shoulder. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
13. T´ANG POTTERY 40
Fig. 1.--Pilgrim Bottle with lily palmette and raised rosettes,
green glaze. KOECHLIN COLLECTION.
Fig. 2.--Pilgrim Bottle (neck wanting), Hellenistic figures of
piping boy and dancing girl in relief among floral scrolls,
brownish green glaze. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
14. T´ANG WARES 40
Fig. 1.--Incense Vase, lotus-shaped, with lion on the cover,
hexagonal stand with moulded ornament; green, yellow and brown
glazes. _Rothenstein Collection._
Fig. 2.--Sepulchral Amphora, hard white ware with greenish white
glaze, serpent handles. _Schneider Collection._
Fig. 3.--Ewer with large foliage and lotus border in carved relief,
green glaze. _Koechlin Collection._
Fig. 4.--Sepulchral Vase, grey stoneware with opaque greenish grey
glaze. Incised scrolls on the body, applied reliefs of dragons,
figures, etc., on neck and shoulder. (?) T´ang. _Benson
Collection._
15. SUNG WARES 48
Fig. 1.--Peach-shaped Water Vessel, dark-coloured biscuit, smooth
greenish grey glaze. (?) Ju or Kuan ware. _Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
Figs. 2 and 3.--Shallow Cup with flanged handle, and covered box,
opalescent grey glaze. Kuan or Chün wares. _Rothenstein
Collection._
16. SUNG WARES (_Colour_) 58
Fig. 1.--Bowl with six-lobed sides; thin porcellanous ware, burnt
brown at the foot-rim, with bluish green celadon glaze irregularly
crackled. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Tripod Incense Burner. White porcelain burnt pale red under
the feet. (?) Lung-ch´üan celadon ware. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
17. TWO EXAMPLES OF SUNG WARES OF THE CHÜN OR KUAN FACTORIES
(_Colour_) 64
Fig. 1.--Bowl with lavender glaze, lightly crackled. _O. Raphael
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase with smooth lavender grey glaze suffused with purple.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
18. SUNG DYNASTY 66
Fig. 1.--Bowl with engraved peony design under a brownish green
celadon glaze. Northern Chinese. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase moulded in form of a lotus flower, dark grey
stoneware, burnt reddish brown, milky grey glaze, closely
crackled. _Freer Collection._
19. VASE OF CLOSE-GRAINED, DARK, REDDISH BROWN STONEWARE,
WITH THICK, SMOOTH GLAZE, BOLDLY CRACKLED. Ko ware
of the Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection_ (_Colour_) 70
20. DEEP BOWL OF REDDISH BROWN STONEWARE, WITH THICK,
BOLDLY CRACKLED GLAZE. Ko ware of the Sung dynasty.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection_ (_Colour_) 74
21. THREE EXAMPLES OF LUNG-CH´ÜAN CELADON PORCELAIN 80
Fig. 1.--Plate of spotted celadon. (?) Sung dynasty.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Octagonal Vase with crackled glaze and biscuit panels
moulded with figures of the Eight Immortals in clouds. (?)
Fourteenth century. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Dish with engraved lotus scrolls and two fishes in
biscuit. Sung dynasty. _Gotha Museum._
22. VASE OF LUNG-CH´ÜAN PORCELAIN 88
With grey green celadon glaze of faint bluish tone, peony scroll
in low relief. Probably Sung dynasty. _Peters Collection._
23. IVORY-WHITE TING WARE, WITH CARVED ORNAMENT. Sung dynasty 96
Fig. 1.--Bowl with lotus design. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Dish with ducks and water plants. _Alexander Collection._
24. SUNG AND YÜAN PORCELAIN 96
Fig. 1.--Ewer, translucent porcelain, with smooth ivory white
glaze. Sung or Yüan dynasty. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase of ivory white Ting ware with carved lotus design.
Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
25. TING WARE WITH MOULDED DESIGNS. Sung dynasty 96
Fig. 1.--Plate with boys in peony scrolls, ivory white glaze.
_Peters Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with flying phœnixes in lily scrolls, crackled
creamy glaze; t´u ting ware. _Koechlin Collection._
26. T´U-TING WARE, SUNG DYNASTY, WITH CREAMY CRACKLED GLAZE 96
Fig. 1.--Brush washer in form of a boy in a boat. _Rothenstein
Collection._
Fig. 2.--Figure of an elephant. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
27. VASE OF BRONZE FORM, WITH ROW OF STUDS AND MOULDED BELT OF
_k´uei_ DRAGON AND KEY-FRET PATTERNS 96
"Ostrich egg" glaze. (?) Kiangnan ware, of Ting type; Sung dynasty.
_Peters Collection._
28. VASE OF BRONZE FORM, WITH BANDS OF RAISED KEY PATTERN 96
Thick creamy glaze, closely crackled and shading off into brown
with faint tinges of purple. (?) Kiangnan Ting ware. Fourteenth
century. _Koechlin Collection._
29. VASE OF PORCELLANOUS STONEWARE 104
With creamy white glaze and designs painted in black. Tz´ŭ Chou
ware, Sung dynasty (960-1279 A.D.). _In the Louvre._
30. FOUR JARS OF PAINTED TZ´Ŭ CHOU WARE 104
Fig. 1.--Dated 11th year of Chêng T´ing (1446 A.D.)
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Painted in red and green enamels. (?) Sung dynasty.
_Alexander Collection._
Fig. 3.--Lower half black, the upper painted on white ground.
Sung dynasty. _Benson Collection._
Fig. 4.--With phœnix design, etched details. Sung dynasty.
_Rothenstein Collection._
31. TZ´Ŭ CHOU WARE 104
Fig. 1.--Tripod Incense Vase in Persian style with lotus design
in pale aubergine, in a turquoise ground. Sixteenth century.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Pillow with creamy white glaze and design of a tethered
bear in black. Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
32. TZ´Ŭ CHOU WARE 104
Fig. 1.--Figure of a Lohan with a deer, creamy white glaze coloured
with black slip and painted with green and red enamels. Said to be
Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase with graffiato peony scrolls under a green glaze.
Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
33. TZ´Ŭ CHOU WARE 104
Fig. 1.--Vase with panel of figures representing music, painted in
black under a blue glaze. Yüan dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase with incised designs in a dark brown glaze, a sage
looking at a skeleton. Yüan dynasty. _Peters Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase with painting in black and band of marbled slips.
Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
34. TZ´Ŭ CHOU WARE 104
Fig. 1.--Bottle of white porcellanous ware with black glaze and
floral design in lustrous brown. Sung dynasty or earlier. (?)
Tz´ŭ Chou ware. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle with bands of key pattern and lily scrolls cut
away from a black glaze. Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Bottle with _graffiato_ design in white slip on a
mouse-coloured ground, yellowish glaze. Sung dynasty.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
35. FLOWER POT OF CHÜN CHOU WARE OF THE SUNG DYNASTY (_Colour_) 112
Grey porcellanous body: olive brown glaze under the base and the
numeral _shih_ (ten) incised. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
36. CHÜN WARE (_Colour_) 116
Fig. 1.--Flower pot of six-foil form. Chün Chou ware of the Sung
dynasty. The base is glazed with olive brown and incised with the
numeral _san_ (three). _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl of Chün type, with close-grained porcellanous body
of yellowish colour. Sung dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
37. CHÜN CHOU WARE WITH PORCELLANOUS BODY (_tz´ŭ t´ai_). Sung
dynasty 118
Fig. 1.--Flower Pot, with lavender grey glaze. Numeral mark _ssŭ_
(four). _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bulb Bowl, of quatrefoil form, pale olive glaze clouded
with opaque grey. Numeral mark _i_ (one). _Freer Collection._
38. CHÜN WARE (_Colour_) 122
Fig. 1.--Bowl of eight-foil shape, with lobed sides, of Chün type.
Sung dynasty. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 2.--Pomegranate shaped Water Pot of "Soft Chün" ware. Probably
Sung dynasty. _Alexander Collection._
39. TWO EXAMPLES OF "SOFT CHÜN" WARE (_Colour_) 126
Fig. 1.--Vase of buff ware, burnt red at the foot rim, with thick,
almost crystalline glaze. Found in a tomb near Nanking and given in
1896 to the FitzWilliam Museum, Cambridge. Probably Sung dynasty.
Fig. 2.--Vase of yellowish ware with thick opalescent glaze. Yüan
dynasty. _Alexander Collection._
40. CHÜN CHOU WARE 128
Fig. 1.--Bulb Bowl, porcellanous ware with lavender grey glaze
passing into mottled red outside. Numeral mark _i_ (one). Sung
dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase of dense reddish ware, opalescent glaze of pale misty
lavender with passages of olive and three symmetrical splashes of
purple with green centres. Sung or Yüan dynasty.
_Peters Collection._
41. CHÜN CHOU WARE 128
Fig. 1.--Dish with peach spray in relief. Variegated lavender grey
glaze with purplish brown spots and amethyst patches, frosted in
places with dull green. Sung dynasty. _Freer Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase and Stand, smooth lavender grey glaze. Sung or Yüan
dynasty. _Alexander Collection._
42. Two _Temmoku_ BOWLS, DARK-BODIED CHIEN YAO OF THE SUNG DYNASTY
130
Fig. 1.--Tea Bowl (_p´ieh_), purplish black glaze flecked with
silvery drops. _Freer Collection._
Fig. 2.--Tea Bowl with purplish black glaze shot with golden brown.
_British Museum._
43. THREE EXAMPLES OF "HONAN _temmoku_," PROBABLY T´ANG DYNASTY 132
Fig. 1.--Bowl with purplish black glaze, stencilled leaf in golden
brown. _Havemeyer Collection._
Fig. 2.--Ewer with black glaze. _Alexander Collection._
Fig. 3.--Covered Bowl, black mottled with lustrous brown. _Cologne
Museum._
44. EARLY TRANSLUCENT PORCELAIN, PROBABLY T´ANG DYNASTY 150
Fig. 1.--Cinquefoil Cup with ivory glaze clouded with pinkish buff
stains. _Breuer Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase of white, soft-looking ware, very thin and translucent,
with pearly white, crackled glaze powdered with brown specks.
_Peters Collection._
45. T´ANG AND SUNG WARES 150
Fig. 1.--Square Vase with engraved lotus scrolls and formal borders.
_T´u-ting_ ware, Sung dynasty. _Peters Collection._
Fig. 2.--Ewer with phœnix head, slightly translucent porcelain with
light greenish grey glaze with tinges of blue in the thicker parts;
carved designs. Probably T´ang dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
46. TING WARE AND YÜAN PORCELAIN 162
Fig. 1.--Bottle with carved reliefs of archaic dragons and
_ling chin_ funguses. _Fên ting_ ware, said to be Sung dynasty.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bowl with moulded floral designs in low relief, unglazed
rim. Translucent porcelain, probably Yüan dynasty. _Eumorfopoulos
Collection._
47. VASE OF BUFF STONEWARE (_Colour_) 170
With scroll of rosette-like flowers in relief: thick flocculent
glaze of mottled blue with passages of dull green and a substratum
of brown. Kuantung ware, seventeenth century. _Benson Collection._
48. KUANGTUNG WARE 172
Fig. 1.--Dish in form of a lotus leaf, mottled blue and brown glaze.
About 1600. _British Museum._
Fig. 2.--Vase with lotus scroll in relief, opaque, closely crackled
glaze of pale lavender grey warming into purple. (?) Fourteenth
century. _Peters Collection._
Fig. 3.--Figure of Pu-tai Ho-shang, red biscuit, the draperies
glazed celadon green. Eighteenth century. _British Museum._
49. COVERED JAR OF BUFF STONEWARE 172
With cloudy green glaze and touches of dark blue, yellow, brown
and white; archaic dragons, bats and storks in low relief;
border of sea waves. Probably Kuangtung ware, seventeenth
century. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
50. YI-HSING STONEWARE, SOMETIMES CALLED _Buccaro_ 176
Figs. 1 to 4.--Teapots in the Dresden Collection, late seventeenth
century.
(1) Buff with dark patches.
(2) Red ware with pierced outer casing.
(3) Black with gilt vine sprays.
(4) Red ware moulded with lion design.
Fig. 5.--Peach-shaped Water Vessel, red ware. _Dresden Collection._
Fig. 6.--Red Teapot, moulded design of trees, etc. Inscription
containing the name of Ch´ien Lung. _Hippisley Collection._
51. TWO VASES WITH GLAZE IMITATING THAT OF THE CHÜN CHOU WARE
(_Colour_) 180
Fig. 1.--Vase of Fat-shan (Kuangtung) Chün ware. Late Ming.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Bottle-shaped Vase, the base suggesting a lotus flower and
the mouth a lotus seed-pod, with a ring of movable seeds on the rim.
Thick and almost crystalline glaze of lavender blue colour with a
patch of crimson. Yi-hsing Chün ware of the seventeenth century.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
52. WINE JAR WITH COVER AND STAND (_Colour_) 186
Fine stoneware with ornament in relief glazed green and yellow
in a deep violet blue ground. Four-clawed dragons ascending and
descending among cloud scrolls in pursuit of flaming pearls; band
of sea waves below and formal borders including a _ju-i_ pattern on
the shoulder. Cover with foliate edges and jewel pattern, surmounted
by a seated figure of Shou Lao, God of Longevity. About 1500 A.D.
_Grandidier Collection, Louvre._
53. VASE WITH CHRYSANTHEMUM HANDLES (_Colour_) 192
Buff stoneware with chrysanthemum design outlined in low relief and
coloured with turquoise, green and pale yellow glazes in dark purple
ground. About 1500 A.D. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
54. VASE WITH LOTUS HANDLES (_Colour_) 196
Buff stoneware with lotus design modelled in low relief and coloured
with aubergine, green and pale yellow glazes in a deep turquoise
ground. About 1500 A.D. Grandidier Collection, Louvre.
55. MING POTTERY WITH DULL _san ts´ai_ GLAZES 200
Fig. 1.--Wine Jar with pierced outer casing, horsemen and attendants,
rocky background. Fifteenth century. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 2.--Tripod Incense Vase, dragons and peony designs and a panel
of horsemen. Dated 1529 A.D. _Messel Collection._
56. MISCELLANEOUS POTTERY 200
Fig. 1.--Jar with dull green glaze and formal lotus scroll in relief
touched with yellow and brown glazes. About 1600. _Goff Collection._
Fig. 2.--Beaker of bronze form, soft whitish body and dull green
glaze. (?) Seventeenth century. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._
Fig. 3.--Vase of light buff ware with dull black dressing,
vine reliefs. Mark, _Nan hsiang t´ang_. Eighteenth century.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
57. SEATED FIGURE OF KUAN YÜ, THE WAR-GOD OF CHINA, A DEIFIED
WARRIOR (_Colour_) 204
Reddish buff pottery with blue, yellow and turquoise glazes,
and a colourless glaze on the white parts. Sixteenth century.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._
58. MISCELLANEOUS POTTERY 206
Fig. 1.--Jar with lotus design in green, yellow and turquoise glazes
in an aubergine ground. About 1600. _Hippisley Collection._
Fig. 2.--Vase of double fish form, buff ware with turquoise, yellow
and aubergine glazes. (?) Seventeenth century. _British Museum._
Fig. 3.--Roof-tile with figure of Bodhidharma, deep green and creamy
white glazes. Sixteenth century. _Benson Collection._
Fig. 4.--Bottle with archaic dragon (_ch´ih lung_) on neck,
variegated glaze of lavender, blue and green clouded with purple and
brown. (?) Eighteenth century. Yi-hsing ware. _Peters Collection._
INTRODUCTION
When we consider the great extent of the Chinese Empire and its teeming
population--both of them larger than those of Europe--and the fact that a
race with a natural gift for the potter's craft and a deep appreciation of
its productions has lived and laboured there for twenty centuries (to look
no farther back than the Han dynasty), it seems almost presumptuous to
attempt a history of so vast and varied an industry within the compass of
two volumes. Anything approaching finality in such a subject is out of the
question, and, indeed, imagination staggers at the thought of a complete
record of every pottery started in China in the past and present.
As far as pottery is concerned, we must be content with the identification
of a few prominent types and with very broad classifications, whether
they be chronological or topographical. Indeed, the potteries named in
the Chinese records are only a few of those which must have existed; and
though we may occasionally rejoice to find in our collections a series
like the red stonewares of Yi-hsing, which can be definitely located,
a very large proportion of our pottery must be labelled uncertain or
unknown. How many experts here or on the Continent could identify the
pottery made in South Germany or Hungary a hundred years ago? What chance,
then, is there of recognising any but the most celebrated wares of China?
In dealing with porcelain as distinct from pottery, we have a simpler
proposition. The bulk of what we see in Europe is not older than the Ming
dynasty and was made at one of two large centres, viz. Ching-tê Chên in
Kiangsi, and Tê-hua in Fukien. Topographical arrangement, then, is an easy
matter, and there is a considerable amount of information available to
guide us in chronological considerations.
The antiquity of Chinese porcelain, its variety and beauty, and the
wonderful skill of the Chinese craftsmen, accumulated from the traditions
of centuries, have made the study of the potter's art in China peculiarly
absorbing and attractive. There is scope for every taste in its
inexhaustible variety. Compared with it in age, European porcelain is but
a thing of yesterday, a mere two centuries old, and based from the first
on Chinese models. Even the so-called European style of decoration which
developed at Meissen and Sèvres, though quite Western in general effect,
will be found on analysis to be composed of Chinese elements. It would be
useless to compare the artistic merits of the Eastern and Western wares.
It is so much a matter of personal taste. For my own part, I consider
that the decorative genius of the Chinese and their natural colour sense,
added to their long training, have placed them so far above their European
followers that comparison is irrelevant. Even the commoner sorts of old
Chinese porcelain, made for the export trade, have undeniable decorative
qualities, while the specimens in pure Chinese taste, and particularly the
Court wares, are unsurpassed in quality and finish.
The merits and beauty of porcelain have always been recognised by the
Chinese, who ranked it from the earliest days among their precious
materials. Chinese poets make frequent reference to its dainty qualities,
its jade-like appearance, its musical ring, its lightness and refinement.
The green cups of Yüeh Chou ware in the T´ang dynasty were likened to
moulded lotus leaves; and the white Ta-yi bowls surpassed hoar-frost and
snow. Many stanzas were inspired by the porcelain bowls used at the tea
and wine symposia, where cultivated guests capped each other's verses.
In a pavilion at Yün-mên, in the vicinity of Ching-tê Chên, is a tablet
inscribed, "The white porcelain is quietly passed all through the night,
the fragrant vapour (of the tea) fills the peaceful pavilion," an echo
of a symposium held there by some distinguished persons in the year 1101
A.D., and no doubt alluding to wares of local make. Elsewhere[1] we read
of a drinking-bout in which the wine bowls of white Ting Chou porcelain
inspired a verse-capping competition. "Ting Chou porcelain bowls in colour
white throughout the Empire," wrote one. Another followed, "Compared with
them, glass is a light and fickle mistress, amber a dull and stupid female
slave." The third proceeded: "The vessel's body is firm and crisp; the
texture of its skin is yet more sleek and pleasing."
The author of the _P´ing hua p´u_, a late Ming work on flower vases,
exhorts us: "Prize the porcelain and disdain gold and silver. Esteem pure
elegance."
In their admiration of antiques the Chinese yield to none, and nowhere
have private collections been more jealously guarded and more difficult of
access. Even in the sixteenth century relatively large sums were paid for
Sung porcelains, and £30 was not too much for a "chicken wine cup" barely
a hundred years old. The ownership of a choice antique--say, of the Sung
dynasty--made the possessor a man of mark; perhaps even a marked man if
the local ruler chanced to be of a grasping nature.
A story is told on p. 75 of this volume of a Ko ware incense burner
(afterwards sold for 200 ounces of gold), which brought a man to
imprisonment and torture in the early Ming period; and, if the newspaper
account was correct, there was an incident in the recent revolution which
should touch the collector's heart. A prominent general, who, like so many
Chinese grandees, was an ardent collector, was expecting a choice piece
of porcelain from Shanghai. In due course the box arrived and was taken
to the general's sanctum. He proceeded to open it, no doubt with all the
eagerness and suppressed excitement which collectors feel in such tense
moments, only to be blown to pieces by a bomb! His enemies had known too
well the weak point in his defence.
Collecting is a less dangerous sport in England; but if it were not so,
the ardent collector would be in no way deterred. Warnings are wasted on
him, and he would follow his quarry, even though the path were strewn
with fragments of his indiscreet fellows. Still less is he discouraged
by difficulties of another kind, as illustrated 'by the story[2] of
T´ang's white Sung tripod, which was so closely imitated that its owner,
one of the most celebrated collectors of the sixteenth century, could not
distinguish the copy from the original. An eighteenth century Chinese
writer points the moral of the story: "When connoisseurs point with
admiration to a vessel, calling it Ting ware, or, again, Kuan ware, how
can we know that it is not a 'false tripod' which deceives them?" The
force of this question will be appreciated by collectors of Sung wares,
especially of the white Ting porcelains and the green celadons; for there
is nothing more difficult to classify correctly than these long-lived
types. There are, however, authentic Sung examples within reach, and
we can train our eyes with these, so that nothing but the very best
imitations will deceive us; and, after all, if we succeed in obtaining
a really first-rate Ming copy of a Sung type we shall be fortunate, for
if we ever discover the truth--which is an unlikely contingency--we may
console ourselves with thoughts of the enthusiast who eventually bought
T´ang's false tripod for £300 and "went home perfectly happy."
In spite of all that has been written in the past on Oriental ceramics,
the study is still young, and it will be long before the last word is
said on the subject. Still our knowledge is constantly increasing, and
remarkable strides have been made in recent years. The first serious
work on Chinese porcelain was Julien's translation of the _Ching-tê
Chên t´ao lu_, published in 1856. The work of a scholar who was not an
expert, it was inevitably marred by misunderstanding of the material,
and subsequent writers who followed blindly were led into innumerable
confusions. The Franks Catalogue, issued in 1876, was one of the first
attempts to classify Oriental wares on some intelligible system; but it
was felt that not enough was known at that time to justify a chronological
classification of the collection, and the somewhat unscientific method
of grouping by colours and processes of decoration was adopted as a
convenient expedient. At the end of last century Dr. S.W. Bushell
revolutionised the study of Chinese porcelain by his _Oriental Ceramic
Art_, a book, unfortunately, difficult to obtain, and by editing Cosmo
Monkhouse's excellent _History and Description of Chinese Porcelain_.
These were followed by the South Kensington Museum Handbook and by the
translation and reproduction of the sixteenth century Album of Hsiang
Yüan-p´ien, and later by the more important translation of the _T´ao shuo_.
It would be impossible to over-estimate the importance of Bushell's
pioneer work; and I hasten to make the fullest acknowledgment of the free
use I have made of his writings, the more so because I have not hesitated
to criticise freely his translations where necessary. The Chinese language
is notoriously obscure and ambiguous, and differences of opinion on
difficult passages are inevitable. In fact, I would say that it is unwise
to build up theories on any translation whatsoever without verifying the
critical passages in the original. For this reason I found it necessary to
work laboriously through the available Chinese ceramic literature, a task
which would have been quite impossible with my brief acquaintance with
the language had it not been for the invaluable aid of Dr. Lionel Giles,
who helped me over the difficult ground. I have, moreover, taken the
precaution of giving the Chinese text in all critical passages, so that
the reader may satisfy himself as to their true meaning.
While Dr. Bushell's contributions have greatly simplified the study of
the later Chinese porcelains, little or no account was taken in the older
books of the pottery and early wares. The materials necessary for the
study of these were wanting in Europe. Stray examples of the coarser
types and export wares had found their way into our collections, but not
in sufficient numbers or importance to arouse any general interest, and
the condition of the Western market for the early types was not such as
to tempt the native collector to part with his rare and valued specimens.
In the last few years the position has completely changed. The opening
up of China and the increased opportunities which Europeans enjoy, not
only for studying the monuments of ancient Chinese art, but for acquiring
examples of the early masterpieces in painting, sculpture, bronze, jade,
and ceramic wares, have given the Western student a truer insight into
the greatness of the earlier phases of Chinese art, and have awakened a
new and widespread enthusiasm for them. An immense quantity of objects,
interesting both artistically and archæologically, has been discovered in
the tombs which railway construction has incidentally opened; and although
this rich material has been gathered haphazard and under the least
favourable conditions for accurate classification, a great deal has been
learnt, and it is not too much to say that the study of early Chinese art
has been completely revolutionised. Numerous collections have been formed,
and the resulting competition has created a market into which even the
treasured specimens of the Chinese collectors are being lured. Political
circumstances have been another factor of the situation, and the Western
collector has profited by the unhappy conditions which have prevailed in
China since the revolution in 1912.
The result of all this, ceramically speaking, is that we are now familiar
with the pottery of the Han dynasty; the ceramic art of the T´ang period
has been unfolded in wholly unexpected splendour; the Sung problems no
longer consist in reconciling ambiguous Chinese phrases, but in the
classification of actual specimens; the Ming porcelain is seen in clearer
perspective, and our already considerable information on the wares of
the last dynasty has been revised and supplemented by further studies.
So much progress, in fact, has been made, that it was high time to take
stock of the present position, and to set out the material which has been
collected, not, of course, with any thoughts of finality, but to serve as
a basis for a further forward move. That is the purpose of the present
volumes, in which I have attempted merely to lay before the reader the
existing material for studying Chinese ceramics as I have found it, adding
my own conclusions and comments, which he may or may not accept.
The most striking additions to our knowledge in recent years, have without
doubt been those which concern the T´ang pottery. What was previously a
blank is now filled with a rich series covering the whole gamut of ceramic
wares, from a soft plaster-like material through faïence and stoneware
up to true porcelain. The T´ang potters had little to learn in technical
matters. They used the soft lead glazes, coloured green, blue, amber, and
purplish brown by the same metallic oxides as formed the basis of the
cognate glazes on Ming pottery. They used high-fired feldspathic glazes,
white, brownish green, chocolate brown, purplish black, and tea-dust
green, sometimes with frothy splashes of grey or bluish grey, as on the
Sung wares. Sometimes these glazes were superposed as on the Japanese
tea jars, which avowedly owed their technique to Chinese models. It is
evident that streaked and mottled effects appealed specially to the taste
of the time, and marbling both of the glaze and of the body was practised.
Carving designs in low relief, or incising them with a pointed instrument
and filling in the spaces with coloured glazes, stamping small patterns
on the body, and applying reliefs which had been previously pressed out
in moulds, were methods employed for surface decoration. Painted designs
in unfired pigments appear on some of the tomb wares, and it is now
practically certain that painting in black under a green glaze was used
by the T´ang potters. Moreover, the existence of porcelain proper in the
T´ang period is definitely established.
One of the most remarkable features of T´ang pottery is the strong
Hellenistic flavour apparent in the shapes of the vessels and in
certain details of the ornament, particularly in the former. Other
foreign influences observable in T´ang art are Persian, Sassanian,
Scytho-Siberian, and Indian, and one would say that Chinese art at
this period was in a peculiarly receptive state. As compared with
the conventional style of later ages which we have come to regard as
characteristically Chinese, the T´ang art is quite distinctive, and almost
foreign in many of its aspects.
The revelation of T´ang ceramics has provided many surprises, and
doubtless there are more in store for us. There are certainly many gaps
to fill and many apparent anomalies to explain. We are still in the dark
with regard to the potter's art of the four hundred years which separate
the Han and T´ang dynasties. The Buddhist sculptures of this time reveal a
high level of artistic development, and we may assume that the minor arts,
and pottery among them, were not neglected. When some light is shed from
excavation or otherwise upon this obscure interval, no doubt we shall see
that we have fixed our boundaries too rigidly, and that the Han types must
be carried forward and the T´ang types carried back to bridge the gap.
Meanwhile, we can only make the best of the facts which have been revealed
at present, keeping our classification as elastic as possible. Probably
the soft lead glazes belong to the earlier part of the T´ang period and
extend back to the Sui and Wei, linking up with the green glaze of the
Han pottery, while the high-fired glazes tended to supersede these in the
latter part of the dynasty.
The high-fired feldspathic glazes seem to have held the field entirely in
the Sung dynasty, and the lead glazes, as far as our observation goes, do
not reappear until the Ming dynasty.
The Sung is the age of high-fired glazes, splendid in their lavish
richness and in the subtle and often unforeseen tints which emerge from
their opalescent depths. It is also an age of bold, free potting, robust
and virile forms, an age of pottery in its purest manifestation. Painted
ornament was used at certain factories in black and coloured clays,
and, it would seem, even in red and green enamels; but painted ornament
was less esteemed than the true ceramic decoration obtained by carving,
incising, and moulding--processes which the potters worked with the clay
alone.
If we could rest content with a comprehensive classification of the Sung
wares, as we have had perforce to do in the case of the T´ang, one of the
chief difficulties in this part of our task would be avoided. But the
Chinese have given us a number of important headings, under which it has
become obligatory to try and group our specimens. Some of these types have
been clearly identified, but there are others which still remain vague and
ill-defined; and there are many specimens, especially among the coarser
kinds of ware, which cannot be referred to any of the main groups. But
the true collector will not find the difficulties connected with the Sung
wares in any way discouraging. He will revel in them, taking pleasure in
the fact that he has new ground to break, many riddles to solve, and a
subject to master which is worthy of his steel.
Apparently a coarse form of painting in blue was employed at one factory
at least in the Sung period,[3] and we may now consider it practically
certain that the first essays in painting both under and over the glaze
go back several centuries earlier than was previously supposed. Blue
and white and polychrome porcelain chiefly occupied the energies of the
Imperial potters at Ching-tê Chên in the Ming dynasty, and the classic
periods for these types fall in the fifteenth century. The vogue of the
Sung glazes scarcely survived the brief intermediate dynasty of the Yüan,
and we are told by a Chinese writer[4] that "on the advent of the Ming
dynasty the _pi sê_[5] began to disappear." Pictorial ornament and painted
brocade patterns were in favour on the Ming wares; and it will be observed
that as compared with those of the later porcelains the Ming designs are
painted with more freedom and individuality. In the Ch´ing dynasty the
appetite of the Ching-tê Chên potters was omnivorous and their skill was
supreme. They are not only noted for certain specialities, such as the
K´ang Hsi blue and white and _famille verte_, the _sang de bœuf_ and
peach-bloom reds, and for the development of the _famille rose_ palette,
but for the revival of all the celebrated types of the classic periods of
the Sung and Ming; and when they had exhausted the possibilities of these
they turned to other materials and copied with magical exactitude the
ornaments in metal, carved stone, lacquer, wood, shell, glass--in a word,
every artistic substance, whether natural or artificial.
The mastery of such a large and complex subject as Oriental ceramics
requires not a little study of history and technique, in books and in
collections. The theory and practice should be taken simultaneously, for
neither can be of much use without the other. The possession of a few
specimens which can be freely handled and closely studied is an immense
advantage. They need not be costly pieces. In fact, broken fragments
will give as much of the all-important information on paste and glaze as
complete specimens. Those who have not the good fortune to possess the
latter, will find ample opportunity for study in the public museums with
which most of the large cities of the world are provided. The traveller
will be directed to these by his "Baedeker," and I shall only mention a
few of the most important museums with which I have personal acquaintance,
and to which I gratefully express my thanks for invaluable assistance.
_London._--The Victoria and Albert Museum possesses the famous Salting
Collection, in which the Ch´ing dynasty porcelains are seen at their
best: besides the collection formed by the Museum itself and many smaller
bequests, gifts, and loans, in which all periods are represented. The
Franks Collection in the British Museum is one of the best collections for
the student because of its catholic and representative nature.
_Birmingham_ and _Edinburgh_ have important collections in their art
galleries, and most of the large towns have some Chinese wares in their
museums.
_Paris._--The Grandidier Collection in the Louvre is one of the largest
in the world. The Cernuschi Museum contains many interesting examples,
especially of the early celadons, and the Musée Guimet and the Sèvres
Museum have important collections.
_Berlin._--The Kunstgewerbe Museum has a small collection containing
some important specimens. The Hohenzollern Museum and the Palace of
Charlottenburg have historic collections formed chiefly at the end of the
seventeenth century.
_Dresden._--The famous and historic collection, formed principally by
Augustus the Strong, is exhibited in the Johanneum, and is especially
important for the study of the K´ang Hsi porcelains. The Stübel Collection
in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, too, is of interest.
_Gotha._--The Herzögliches Museum contains an important series of the Sung
and Yüan wares formed by Professor Hirth.
_Cologne._--An important and peculiarly well-arranged museum of
Far-Eastern art, formed by the late Dr. Adolf Fischer and his wife, is
attached to the Kunstgewerbe Museum.
_New York._--The Metropolitan Museum is particularly rich in Ming and
Ch´ing porcelains. It is fortunate in having the splendid Pierpont Morgan
Collection and the Avery Collection, and when the Altmann Collection is
duly installed in its galleries it will be unrivalled in the wares of the
last dynasty. The Natural History Museum has a good series of Han pottery.
_Chicago._--The Field Museum of Natural History has probably the largest
collection of Han pottery and T´ang figurines in the world. It has also
an interesting series of later Chinese pottery, including specimens from
certain modern factories which are important for comparative study. These
collections were formed by Dr. Laufer in China. There is also a small
collection of the later porcelains in the Art Institute.
_Boston._--The Museum of Fine Arts has a considerable collection of
Chinese porcelain, in which the earlier periods are specially well
represented. The American collections, both public and private, are
especially strong in monochrome porcelains, and in this department they
are much in advance of the European.
To acknowledge individually all the kind attentions I have received from
those in charge of the various museums would make a long story. They will
perhaps forgive me if I thank them collectively. The private collectors
to whom I must express my gratitude are scarcely less numerous. They have
given me every facility for the study of their collections, and in many
cases, as will be seen in tile list of plates, they have freely assisted
with the illustrations. I am specially indebted to Mr. Eumorfopoulos,
Mr. Alexander, Mr. R. H. Benson, Mr. S. T. Peters, and Mr. C. L. Freer,
who have done so much for the study of the early wares in England and
America. Without the unstinted help of these enthusiastic collectors it
would have been impossible to produce the first volume of this book.
What I owe to Mr. Eumorfopoulos can be partly guessed from the list of
plates. His collection is an education in itself, and he has allowed me
to draw freely on it and on his own wide experience. Of the many other
collectors who have similarly assisted in various parts of the work, I
have to thank Sir Hercules Read, Mr. S. E. Kennedy, Dr. A. E. Cumberbatch,
Mr. C. L. Rothenstein, Dr. Breuer, Dr. C. Seligmann, M. R. Koechlin, Mr.
O. Raphael, Mr. A. E. Hippisley, Hon. Evan Charteris, Lady Wantage, Mr.
Burdett-Coutts, the late Dr. A. Fischer, Mr. L. C. Messel, Mr. W. Burton,
Col. Goff, Mrs. Halsey, Mrs. Havemeyer, Rev. G. A. Schneider, and Mrs.
Coltart. A portion of the proofs has been read by Mr. W. Burton. Mr. L.
C. Hopkins has given me frequent help with Chinese texts, and especially
in the reading of seal characters; and my colleague, Dr. Lionel Giles, in
addition to invaluable assistance with the translations, has consented to
look through the proofs of these volumes with a special view to errors in
the Chinese characters. Finally, I have to thank my chief, Sir Hercules
Read, not only for all possible facilities in the British Museum, but for
his sympathetic guidance in the study of a subject of which he has long
been a master.
R. L. HOBSON.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: In the _Kuei ch´ien chih_ quoted in the _T´ao lu_, bk. ix.,
fol. 10.]
[Footnote 2: See p. 95.]
[Footnote 3: See p. 99.]
[Footnote 4: In the _Ai jih t´ang ch´ao_, quoted in the _T´ao lu_, bk.
ix., fol. 18 verso.]
[Footnote 5: The _pi sê_, or "secret colour," is used as a general term
for glazes of the celadon type, among which the writer in question
includes all the celebrated wares of antiquity from the T´ang "green
(_ts´ui_) of a thousand hills," the Yüeh ware, the Ch´ai "blue (_ch´ing_)
of the sky after rain," to the Sung Ju, Kuan, Ko, Tung-ch´ing, and
Lung-ch´üan wares.]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ANDERSON, W., Catalogue of the Japanese and Chinese Paintings in the
British Museum. 1886.
BINYON, L., "Painting in the Far East."
BRETSCHNEIDER, E., "Mediæval Researches from Eastern Asiatic
Sources," Truebner's Oriental Series. 1878.
BRINKLEY, CAPT. F., "China, its History, Arts and Literature," vol.
ix. London, 1904.
BURTON, W., "Porcelain: A Sketch of its Nature, Art and
Manufacture." London, 1906.
BURTON, W., AND HOBSON, "Marks on Pottery and Porcelain." London,
1912.
BUSHELL, S.W., "Chinese Porcelain, Sixteenth-Century coloured
illustrations with Chinese MS. text," by Hsiang Yüan-p´ien,
translated by S.W. Bushell. Oxford, 1908. Sub-title "Porcelain of
Different Dynasties."
BUSHELL, S. W., "Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty," being
a translation of the last, with notes. Peking, 1886.
BUSHELL, S. W., "Description of Chinese Pottery and Porcelain," being
a translation of the _T´ao shuo_. Oxford, 1910.
BUSHELL, S. W., "Oriental Ceramic Art, Collection of W.T. Walters."
New York, 1899.
BUSHELL, S. W., Catalogue of the Pierpont Morgan Collection. New York.
BUSHELL, S. W., "Chinese Art," 2 vols., "Victoria and Albert Museum
Handbook." 1906.
CHAVANNES, EDOUARD, "La Sculpture sur pierre en Chine au temps des
deux dynasties Han." Paris, 1893.
CHAVANNES, EDOUARD, "Mission Archéologique dans la Chine
Septentrionale." Paris, 1909.
The _Chiang hsi t´ung chih_ [Chinese]. The topographical history of
the province of Kiangsi, revised edition in 180 books, published in
1882.
The _Ch´in ting ku chin t´u shu chi ch´êng_ [Chinese]. The
encyclopædia of the K´ang Hsi period, Section XXXII. Handicrafts
(_k´ao kung_). Part 8 entitled _T´ao kung pu hui k´ao_, and Part 248
entitled _Tz´ŭ ch´i pu hui k´ao_.
_Chin shih so_ [Chinese] "Researches in Metal and Stone," by the
Brothers Fêng. 1821.
The _Ch´ing pi ts´ang_ [Chinese] "A Storehouse of Artistic
Rarities," by Chang Ying-wên, published by his son in 1595.
The _Ching-tê Chên t´ao lu_ [Chinese], "The Ceramic Records of
Ching-tê Chên," in ten parts, by Lan P´u, published in 1815. Books
VIII. and IX. are a corpus of references to pottery and porcelain
from Chinese literature.
The _Ching tê yao_ [Chinese], "Porcelain of Ching-tê Chên," a volume
of MS. written about 1850.
The _Cho kêng lu_ [Chinese], "Notes jotted down in the intervals of
ploughing," a miscellany on works of art in thirty books, by T´ao
Tsung-i, published in 1368. The section on pottery is practically
a transcript of a note in the _Yüan chai pi hêng_, by Yeh Chih, a
thirteenth-century writer.
D'ENTRECOLLES, PÈRE, "Two Letters written from Ching-tê Chên in
1712 and 1722," published in _Lettres édifiantes et curieuses_, and
subsequently reprinted in Bushell's "Translation of the _T´ao shuo_"
(q.v.), and translated in Burton's "Porcelain" (q.v.).
DE GROOT, J. J. M., "Les Fêtes Annuellement Célébrées à Émoi,"
"Annales du Musée Guimet," Vols. XI. and XII. Paris, 1886.
DE GROOT, J. J. M., "The Religious System of China." Leyden, 1894.
DILLON, E., "Porcelain" (The Connoisseur's Library).
DUKES, E. J., "Everyday Life in China, or Scenes in Fuhkien." London,
1885.
FOUCHER, A., "Étude sur l'iconographie bouddhique de l'Inde." Paris,
1900.
FRANKS, A. W., Catalogue of a Collection of Oriental Porcelain and
Pottery. London, 1879.
GILES, H. A., A Glossary of Reference on Subjects connected with the
Far East. Shanghai, 1900.
GRANDIDIER, E., "La Céramique Chinoise." Paris, 1894.
GRÜNWEDEL, A., "Mythologie des Buddhismus in Tibet und der
Mongolei." Leipzig, 1900.
GULLAND, W. G., "Chinese Porcelain." London, 1902.
HIRTH, F., "China and the Roman Orient." Leipzig, 1885.
HIRTH, F., "Ancient Porcelain," a Study in Chinese Mediæval Industry
and Trade. Leipzig, 1888.
HIRTH, F., AND W.W. ROCKHILL, "Chau Ju-kua, his Work on the Chinese
and Arab Trade in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, entitled
_Chu-fan-chi_." St. Petersburg, 1912.
HOBSON, R. L., "Porcelain, Oriental, Continental and British," second
edition. London, 1912.
HOBSON, R. L., "The New Chaffers." London, 1913.
HOBSON, R. L., AND BURTON, "Marks on Pottery and Porcelain," second
edition. London, 1912.
HSIANG YÜAN-P´IEN. See BUSHELL.
JACQUEMART, A., AND E. LE BLANT, "Histoire de la Porcelaine." Paris,
1862.
JULIEN, STANISLAS, "Histoire et Fabrication de la Porcelaine
Chinoise." Paris, 1856. Being a translation of the greater part of
the _Ching-tê Chên t´ao lu_, with various notes and additions.
The _Ko ku yao lun_ [Chinese], "Essential Discussion of the Criteria
of Antiquities," by Tsao Ch´ao, published in 1387 in thirteen books;
revised and enlarged edition in 1459.
LAUFER, BERTHOLD, "Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty," Leyden, 1909.
LAUFER, BERTHOLD, "Jade, a Study in Chinese Archæology and
Religion," Field Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Series,
Vol. X. Chicago, 1912.
The _Li t´a k´an k´ao ku ou pien_ [Chinese], by Chang Chin-chien.
1877.
MAYERS, W. F., "The Chinese Reader's Manual." Shanghai, 1874.
MEYER, A. B., "Alterthümer aus dem Ostindischen Archipel."
MONKHOUSE, COSMO, "A History and Description of Chinese Porcelain,
with notes by S.W. Bushell." London, 1901.
PLAYFAIR, G. M. H., "The Cities and Towns of China." Hong-Kong, 1910.
The _Po wu yao lan_ [Chinese], "A General Survey of Art Objects," by
Ku Ying-t´ai, published in the T´ien Ch´i period (1621-27).
RICHARD, L., "Comprehensive Geography of the Chinese Empire."
Shanghai, 1908.
SARRE, F., AND B. SHULZ, "Denkmäler Persischer Baukunst." Berlin,
1901-10.
STEIN, M. A., "Ruins of Desert Cathay." London, 1912.
STEIN, M. A., "Sand-buried Ruins of Khotan." London, 1903.
_Shin sho sei_, etc., "Japan, Antiquarian Gallery." 1891.
_T´ao lu._ See _Ching-tê Chên t´ao lu_.
_T´ao shuo_ [chch 2], "A Discussion of Pottery," by Chu Yen, in six
parts, published in 1774. See BUSHELL.
_Toyei Shuko_, An Illustrated Catalogue of the Ancient Imperial
Treasury called Shoso-in, compiled by the Imperial Household. Tokyo,
1909.
_T´u Shu._ See _Chin ting ku chin t´u shu chi ch´êng_.
WARNER, LANGDON, AND SHIBA-JUNROKURO, "Japanese Temples and their
Treasures." Tokyo, 1910.
WILLIAMS, S. WELLS, The Chinese Commercial Guide. Hongkong, 1863.
YULE, SIR H., "The Book of Ser Marco Polo." London, 1903.
ZIMMERMANN, E., "Chinesisches Porzellan." Leipzig, 1913.
CATALOGUES AND ARTICLES IN PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS
BAHR, A. W., "Old Chinese Porcelain and Works of Art in China."
London, 1911.
BELL, HAMILTON, "'Imperial' Sung Pottery," _Art in America_, July,
1913.
BÖRSCHMANN, E., "On a Vase found at Chi-ning Chou," _Zeitschrift für
Ethnologie_, Jahrg. 43, 1911.
BRETSCHNEIDER, E., _Botanicon Sinicum_, Journal of the North-China
Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. New Series, Vol. XVI., Part 1,
1881.
BRINKLEY, F., Catalogue of the Exhibitions at the Boston Museum of
Arts, 1884.
_Burlington Magazine, The_, _passim._
BUSHELL, S. W., "Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty,"
Journal of the Peking Oriental Society, 1886.
Catalogue of a Collection of Early Chinese Pottery and Porcelain,
Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1910.
CLENNELL, W. J., "Journey in the Interior of Kiangsi," Consular
Report. H. M. Stationery Office.
COLE, FAY-COOPER, "Chinese Pottery in the Philippines, with
postscript by Berthold Laufer," Field Museum of Natural History,
Publication 162. Chicago, 1912.
EITEL, E. J., "China Review," Vol. X., p. 308, "Notes on Chinese
Porcelain."
GROENEVELDT, W. P., Notes on the Malay Archipelago, Verhandelingen
van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Deel.
xxxix.
HIPPISLEY, A. E., Catalogue of the Hippisley Collection of Chinese
Porcelains, Smithsonian Institute. Second Edition. Washington, 1900.
HOBSON, R. L., Catalogue of a Collection of Early Chinese Pottery and
Porcelain, Burlington Fine Arts Club. 1910.
HOBSON, R. L., Catalogue of Chinese, Corean and Japanese Potteries.
New York Japan Society, 1914.
HOBSON, R. L., _Burlington Magazine_, Wares of the Sung and Yüan
Dynasties, in six articles, April, May, June, August, and November,
1909, and January, 1910.
HOBSON, R. L., "On Some Old Chinese Pottery," _Burlington Magazine_.
August, 1911.
HOBSON, R. L., AND O. BRACKETT, Catalogue of the Porcelain and Works
of Art in the Collection of the Lady Wantage.
KERSHAW, F. S., Note in Inscribed Han Pottery, _Burlington Magazine_,
December, 1913.
LAFFAN, W., Catalogue of the Pierpont Morgan Collection in the
Metropolitan Museum, New York.
MARTIN, DR., Note on a Sassanian Ewer, _Burlington Magazine_,
September, 1912.
MEYER, A. B., "On the Celadon Question," _Oesterreichische
Monatsschrift_, January, 1885, etc.
MORGAN, J. P., Catalogue of the Morgan Collection of Chinese
Porcelains, by S.W. Bushell and W.M. Laffan. New York, 1907.
PARIS, Exposition universelle de 1878, Catalogue spécial de la
Collection Chinoise.
PERZYNSKI, F., "Towards a Grouping of Chinese Porcelain,"
_Burlington Magazine_, October and December, 1910, etc.
PERZYNSKI, F., "Jagd auf Götter," in the _Neue Rundschau_, October,
1913.
PERZYNSKI, F., on T´ang Forgeries, _Ostasiatischer Zeitschrift_,
January, 1914.
READ, C. H., in _Man_, 1901, No. 15, "On a T´ang Vase and Two Mirrors
from a Tomb in Shensi."
REINAUD, M., "Relation des Voyages faits par les Arabes et les
Persans dans l'Inde et à la Chine dans la IX⚭ siècle de l'ére
chrétienne." Paris, 1845.
SOLON, L., "The Noble Buccaros," North Staffordshire Literary and
Philosophic Society, October 23rd, 1896.
TORRANCE, REV. TH., "Burial Customs in Szechuan," Journal of the N.
China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XLI., 1910, p. 58.
VORETZSCH, E. A., Hamburgisches Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe, Führer
durch eine Ausstellung Chinesischer Kunst, 1913.
WILLIAMS, MRS. R. S., Introductory Note to the Catalogue of a Loan
Exhibition of Chinese, Corean, and Japanese Potteries held by the
Japan Society of New York, 1914.
ZIMMERMANN, E., "Wann ist das Chinesische Porzellan erfunden und wer
war sein Erfinder?" _Orientalisches Archiv. Sonderabdruck._
CHINESE POTTERY AND PORCELAIN
CHAPTER I
THE PRIMITIVE PERIODS
POTTERY, as one of the first necessities of mankind, is among the earliest
of human inventions. In a rude form it is found with the implements of the
late Stone Age, before there is any evidence of the use of metals, and all
attempts to reconstruct the first stages of its discovery are based on
conjecture alone.
We have no knowledge of a Stone Age in China, but it may be safely assumed
that pottery there, as elsewhere, goes back far into prehistoric times.
Its invention is ascribed to the mythical Shên-nung, the Triptolemus of
China, who is supposed to have initiated the people in the cultivation of
the soil and other necessary arts of life. Huang Ti, the semi-legendary
yellow emperor, in whose reign the cyclical system of chronology began
(2697 B.C.), is said to have appointed "a superintendent of pottery,
K´un-wu, who made pottery," and it was a commonplace in the oldest Chinese
literature[6] that the great and good emperor Yü Ti Shun (2317-2208
B.C.) "highly esteemed pottery." Indeed, the Han historian Ssŭ-ma Ch´ien
(163-85 B.C.) assures us that Shun himself, before ascending the throne,
"fashioned pottery at Ho-pin," and, needless to say, the vessels made at
Ho-pin were "without flaw."
According to the description given in the _T´ao shuo_, the evolution of
the potter's art in China took the usual course. The first articles made
were cooking vessels; then, "coming to the time of Yü (i.e. Yü Ti Shun),
the different kinds of wine vessels are distinguished by name, and the
sacrificial vessels are gradually becoming complete."[7]
I should add that the author of the _T´ao shuo_, after accepting the
earlier references to the art, inconsistently concludes: "I humbly suggest
that the origin of pottery should strictly be placed in the reign of Yü Ti
Shun, and its completion in the Chou dynasty" (1122-256 B.C.).
Unfortunately, none of the writers can throw any light on the first use
of the potter's wheel in China. It is true that, like several other
nations, the Chinese claim for themselves the invention of that essential
implement, but there is no real evidence to illuminate the question, and
even if the wheel was independently discovered in China, the priority
of invention undoubtedly rests with the Near Eastern nations. Palpable
evidence of its use can be seen on Minoan pottery found in Crete and
dating about 3000 B.C., and on Egyptian pottery of the twelfth dynasty
(about 2200 B.C.); while it is practically certain that it was used in the
making of the Egyptian pottery of the fourth dynasty (about 3200 B.C.).
So far, the Chinese have nothing tangible to oppose to these facts earlier
than the Chou writings, in which workers with the wheel (_t´ao jên_) are
distinguished from workers with moulds (_fang jên_), the former making
cauldrons, basins, colanders, boilers, and vessels (_yü_), and the latter
moulding the sacrificial vessels named _kuei_ and _tou_. We learn that at
this time the Chinese potters also used the compasses and the polishing
wheel or lathe. With this outfit they were able, according to the _T´ao
shuo_, to effect the "completion" of pottery.
Whatever the truth of this pious statement may be, reflecting as it does
the true Chinese veneration of antiquity, it is certain, at any rate, that
the potter was not without honour at this time: for we read in the _Tso
Chuan_[8] that "O-fu of Yü was the best potter at the beginning of the
Chou dynasty. Wu Wang relied on his skill for the vessels which he used.
He wedded him to a descendant of his imperial ancestors, and appointed him
feudal prince of Ch´ên."
Examples of these early potteries have been unearthed from ancient burials
from time to time, and the _T´ao shuo_ describes numerous types from
literary sources. But neither the originals, as far as we know them,
nor the verbal descriptions of them, have anything but an antiquarian
interest.
The art of the Chou dynasty, as expressed in bronze and jade, is fairly
well known from illustrated Chinese and Western works. It reflects a
priestly culture in its hieratic forms and symbolical ornament. It
is majestic and stern, severely disdainful of sentiment and sensuous
appeal. Of the pottery we know little, but that little shows us a purely
utilitarian ware of simple form, unglazed and almost devoid of ornament.
On Plate 1 are two types which may perhaps be regarded as favourable
examples of Chou pottery. A tripod vessel, almost exactly similar to Fig.
1, was published by Berthold Laufer,[9] who shows by analogy with bronzes
of the period good reasons for its Chou attribution, which he states is
confirmed by Chinese antiquarians. His example was of hard "gray clay,
which on the surface has assumed a black colour," and it had the surface
ornamented with a hatched pattern similar to that of our illustration.
It has been assumed that this hatched pattern is a sure sign of Chou
origin, and I have no doubt that it was a common decoration at the time.
But its use continued after the Chou period, and it is found on pottery
from a Han tomb in Szechuan, which is now in the British Museum. It is,
in fact, practically the same as the "mat marking" on the Japanese and
Corean pottery taken from the dolmens which were built over a long period
extending from the second century B.C. to the eighth century A.D.
The taste of the time is reflected in a sentence which occurs in the
_Kuan-tzŭ_, a work of the fifth century B.C.: "Ornamentation detracts
from the merit of pottery."[10] The words used for ornamentation are _wên
ts´ai_ [Chinese] (lit. pattern, bright colours), and they seem to imply
a knowledge of some means of colouring the ware. As there is no evidence
of the use of glaze before the Han period, and enamelling in the ordinary
ceramic sense is out of the question, we may perhaps assume that some of
the pottery of the Chou period was painted with unfired pigments, a method
certainly in use in the Han dynasty. There is a vase in the British Museum
of unglazed ware with painted designs in black, red and white pigments,
which has been regarded as of Han period, but may possibly be earlier
(Plate 2, Fig. 3).
In addition to the Chou tripod, Laufer[11] illustrates five specimens of
pre-Han pottery, excavated by Mr. Frank H. Chalfant "on the soil of the
ancient city of Lin-tzŭ in Ch´ing-chou Fu, Shantung," a district which was
noted for its pottery as late as the Ming period.[12] This find included
two pitchers, a deep, round bowl, a tazza or round dish on a high stem,
and a brick stamped with the character _Ch´i_, all unglazed and of grey
earthenware. From this last piece, and from the fact that Lin-tzŭ, until
it was destroyed in 221 B.C., was the capital of the feudal kingdom of
Ch´i, Laufer concluded that these wares belonged to a period before the
Han dynasty (206 B.C. to 220 A.D.).
[Illustration:
Fig. 1 Fig. 2
Plate 1.--Chou Pottery.
Fig. 1.--Tripod Food Vessel. Height 6⅛ inches.
Fig. 2.--Jar with deeply cut lozenge pattern. Height 6¾ inches.
_Eumorfopoulos Collection._]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 6: e.g. the K´ao Kung chi, a relic of the Chou dynasty (1122-256
B.C.).]
[Footnote 7: _T´ao shuo_, bk. ii., fol. 1. See S.W. Bushell, Chinese
Pottery and Porcelain, being a translation of the _T´ao shuo_, Oxford,
1910, p. 34.]
[Footnote 8: A work of the fifth century B.C., quoted in the _Ching-tê
Chên T´ao lu_, bk. ix., fol. 1.]
[Footnote 9: _Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty_, Leyden, 1909, pp.
10-14.]
[Footnote 10: Quoted in the _Ching-tê Chên T´ao lu_, bk. ix. fol. 1.]
[Footnote 11: Loc. cit.]
[Footnote 12: See p. 200.]