CHAPTER VII

TING YAO [Chinese]

TING ware is by general consent ranked among the finer Sung porcelains,

and it is happily, like the Lung-ch´üan celadons, fairly well known to

Western collectors. Its name derives from its place of origin, Ting Chou,

the modern Chên-ting Fu, in the province of Chihli, where the manufacture

of a white ware, if not actually a white porcelain, appears to have

existed from remote times. Indeed, the "white ware (_pai tz´ŭ_) of Ting

Chou" is mentioned in the middle of the seventh century,[188] though

nothing further is heard of it until it came to enjoy the patronage of the

Sung emperors. As already hinted in connection with the Ju Chou porcelain,

the Ting ware suffered a temporary eclipse at Court owing to some defects

in the glaze; but it was not long in recovering its reputation, for the

_Ko ku yao lun_ states that it was at its best in the Chêng Ho and Hsüan

Ho periods, which extended from 1111 to 1125 A.D., and we learn that

the Ting Chou potters accompanied the Court in its flight across the

Yangtse in 1127. The manufacture seems to have been re-established after

this event in the neighbourhood of Ching-tê Chên, and the _nan ting_ or

Southern Ting ware is said to have so closely resembled the original that

to distinguish the two in after years was regarded as a supreme test of

connoisseurship.[189]

Ting ware has a white body of fine grain and compact texture, varying from

a slightly translucent porcelain to opaque porcellanous stoneware. Though

not so completely vitrified as the more modern porcelains, and lacking

their flint-like fracture, it was nevertheless capable of transmitting

light in the thinner and finer specimens, and consequently it can be

regarded as one of the earliest Chinese wares which fulfils the European

definition of porcelain. The glaze is of ivory tint, sometimes forming

on the outsides of bowls or dishes in brownish gummy tears, which were

regarded by Chinese collectors as a sign of genuineness.[190] The finer

and whiter varieties are known as _pai ting_ (white Ting) and _fên ting_

(flour Ting), as distinct from the coarser kind, whose opaque, earthy body

and glaze of yellowish tone, usually crackled and stained, earned it the

name of _t'u ting_ or earthen Ting.

In the best period the pure white undecorated Ting ware, with rich

unctuous glaze, compared to "congealed fat" or "mutton fat," was most

esteemed, though ornament was freely used, especially on the Southern

Ting. Designs carved in low relief or etched with a point were considered

best, the moulded and stamped ornament being rightly regarded as inferior.

There is a remarkable, though sadly damaged, example of Northern Ting

ware in the British Museum. It was found in a Manchurian tomb of the

twelfth century, and bears out the current descriptions of the ware with

its fine white body, rich ivory glaze, and "tear drops" on the reverse.

The ornament, a lotus design in bold freehand carving, displays all the

freshness and power of Sung craftsmanship. This dish has, moreover, a

characteristic common to the Sung Ting bowls and dishes, viz. the mouth

rim is bare of glaze. Many of the early wares were fired upside down,

whence the bare mouth rim, which was usually hidden by a metal band.[191]

Favourite carved designs with the Ting potters seem to have been the

mu-tan peony, the lily, and flying phœnixes. They are, at any rate,

usually singled out for mention by Chinese writers.[192] Garlic and rushes

are also incidentally mentioned as motives, and a few examples of a

beautiful design of ducks on water are known in Western collections. The

moulded ornament is generally more elaborate, dense peony scrolls with

phœnixes flying through them, radiating panels of flowers, dragons in

clouds, fishes among water plants and wave patterns, etc. To judge from

Hsiang's Album, carved designs borrowed from ancient bronzes must have

been highly prized.

Of the three kinds of ornament usually associated by Chinese writers

with the Ting ware; the _hua hua_ (carved decoration) and the _yin hua_

(stamped or moulded decoration) have already been mentioned. The meaning

of the third, _hsiu hua_,[193] is not so clear, as the phrase can bear

two interpretations, viz. painted ornament or embroidered ornament. In

the latter sense it would suggest a rich decoration like that of brocade

without indicating the method by which it was applied. But in the former

it was the usual Chinese expression for painted ornament, and it is

difficult to imagine that it was intended to indicate anything else in

the present context. On the other hand, no examples of painted Ting ware

are known to exist either in actual fact or in Chinese descriptions. This

anomaly, however, may perhaps be explained in one of two ways. A creamy

white ware of _t´u ting_ type, boldly painted with brown or black designs,

is known to have been made at the not far distant factories of Tz´ŭ

Chou[194] in the Sung dynasty, and it is possible that either the painted

Ting ware has been grouped with the Tz´ŭ Chou ware in modern collections,

or that Chinese writers mistook the Tz´ŭ Chou ware for painted Ting ware

and added this third category to the Ting wares by mistake. In any case

they regarded the painted ware as an inferior article.

The high estimation in which fine specimens of white Ting ware have always

been held by Chinese connoisseurs is well illustrated by a passage in

the _Yün shih chai pi t´an_.[195] It tells how Mr. Sun of the Wu-i river

estate treasured in his mountain retreat Ting yao incense-burners, and

among them one exquisite specimen of the Sung period. It was a round

vessel with ear handles and three feet, and the inscription _li hsi yai_

([Chinese]) was engraved in seal characters on the stand. During the

Japanese raids in the Chia Ching period this vessel passed into the hands

of one Chin Shang-pao, who sold it to T´ang, the President of Sacrifices

(_t´ai ch´ang_), of P´i-ling. T´ang, whose residence bore the romantic but

chilly name of Ning-an (Frozen Hut), is the celebrated collector mentioned

in connection with another Ting vessel on p. 95. "Although T´ang had many

wonderful porcelains," the story runs, "when this vessel arrived, they

all, without exception, made way for it. And so throughout the land when

men discuss porcelains, they give the first place to T´ang's white incense

vase. T´ang, they say, did not readily allow it to be seen." And in this

respect, if all accounts are true, T´ang was not unlike a good many

Chinese collectors of the present day.

On the other hand, the Ting ware was often marred by certain blemishes

which are not always easy to understand. The "awns" (_mang_), for

instance, which degraded it at Court in favour of the Ju Chou ware in the

early Sung period were probably flaws in the glaze. The "bamboo thread

brush marks" mentioned in the _Liu ch´ing jih cha_[196] may perhaps be

lines left in the glaze which was applied by means of a bamboo brush.

Three other defects which rendered the ware comparatively worthless are

named in the _Ko ku yao lun_,[197] viz. _mao_ (thatch), _mieh_ (bamboo

splints), and _ku ch´u_ (bare bones). The author fortunately explains that

(1) to thatch (_mao_) means to cover over defects, (2) bamboo splints

(_mieh_) is used of lines and recalls the brush marks mentioned above, and

(3) bare bones (_ku ch´u_) are patches where the glaze is defective and

the body shows through. _Ku_, in the sense of "body or biscuit," we are

further informed, is a "curio-market expression." Modern collectors will

probably not be so fastidious as the Chinese of the fourteenth century,

and will welcome a Sung specimen of Ting porcelain, even though it suffer

from _mang_ and _ku ch´u_.

The _pai ting_ and the _t´u ting_, the fine and coarse white varieties,

alone have been identified in Western collections; but there are coloured

Ting porcelains which are known to us by literary references. An

apocryphal red Ting ware[198] (_hung ting_) is mentioned in two passages

of ambiguous meaning which need not necessarily have implied a true red

glaze. In any case it finds no place in the older works, such as the _Ko

ku yao lun_ and _Ch´ing p´i tsang_, which only speak of purple or brown

(_tzŭ_) Ting, and black Ting. "There is purple[199] Ting," says the _Ko

ku yao lun_, "the colour of which is purple; there is ink Ting, the colour

of which is black, like lacquer. The body in every case is white, and the

value of these is higher than that of white Ting."

Hsiang, who figured five specimens in his Album, compared them to the

colour of ripe grapes and the skin of the aubergine fruit or brinjal,

one specimen being _tzŭ ts´ui_ (purple blue); and he further states that

out of a hundred and more specimens of Ting ware he had only seen ten of

purple and one of black colour.

The solitary specimen of black Ting, which appears in a very unconvincing

illustration in Hsiang's Album,[200] is divided into two zones, one

black, the other white, and Hsiang regards it as inestimably rare and

precious. In this appreciation he follows the _Ko ku yao lun_, but other

writers, such as the author of the _Ch´ing pi ts´ang_, take an entirely

different view, holding neither the purple nor the black Ting ware of

much account. With us at present the question is of academic interest

only, as no examples of either kind worthy of notice have been identified

in Western collections. The nearest approach to the description of the

purple variety which I have seen is a small box from a tomb in Shansi,

made of white porcellanous ware with a purplish black glaze on the cover.

It is, however, a crude object, and of no particular merit. As for the

black Ting, the nearest analogue to that which I can quote is the vases

with black or brown black glaze belonging to the Tz´ŭ Chou class. Some

of these (see Plate 30) have zones of black and white recalling Hsiang's

description. It is, perhaps, worth noting in this connection that the

black glaze on these wares was liable to shade off into lustrous brown,

indicating the presence of iron oxide, and to resemble in this respect

the so-called "hare's fur" or "partridge" glazes of the celebrated Chien

yao tea bowls.[201] This fact may account for a passage in an early

writer,[202] who says "the ancients favoured as tea bowls Ting ware with

hare's fur marking, and these were used in the powdered-tea competitions,"

but the work deals with tea rather than ceramics, and it is probable that

a confusion had arisen in the author's mind between the Chien yao tea

bowls and Ting ware. On the other hand, it would appear that bowls with

glaze which has some analogies with the "hare's fur" were made at an early

date in Northern China. (See Fig. 1 of Plate 43 and p. 132.)

Though little is heard of the coloured Ting wares after the Sung

period,[203] the manufacture of white Ting and the commoner _t´u ting_

continued at Ching-tê Chên and elsewhere. In fact, it cannot be said to

have suffered intermission up to the present day. A few of these imitative

wares of later date were of such excellence as to merit historical

notice. In the Yüan dynasty, for instance, P´êng Chün-pao, a goldsmith of

Ho Chou, in Shansi,[204] was celebrated for his imitations of old Ting

wares, and the _Ko ku yao lun_, an almost contemporary work, describes

his productions as exactly like Ting ware when of fine body,[205] but as

being "short" and "brittle," and consequently not really worth much. "But

dealers in curiosities give them the name of _hsin ting_ or New Ting, and

amateurs collect it at great cost, which is most ridiculous." Again, the

_Po wu yao lan_ describes another wonderful imitation of Ting ware made

in the sixteenth century[206] by Chou Tan-ch´üan, a native of Wu-mên, who

settled at Ching-tê Chên, and was reputed the best potter of his time.

Though, generally speaking, his material was not as fine as the original,

still his copies of _Wên wang_ censers[207] and sacrificial vessels with

"monster heads and halberd ears" so closely resembled the originals that

it was only necessary to "rub away the kiln-gloss all over the surface" to

make the illusion complete. Among the literary references to pottery and

porcelain collected in books viii. and ix. of the _T´ao lu_ is a story

narrated in the _Yün shih chai pi t´an_, illustrating the cleverness of

Chou Tan-ch´üan. Julien[208] has translated it as follows: "One day he

(Chou) embarked on a merchant boat from Kin-tchong and landed on the right

bank of the Kiang. Passing P´i-ling, he called on T´ang, the President of

the Sacrifices (_T´ai ch´ang_), and asked permission to examine at leisure

an ancient tripod of Ting porcelain[209] which was one of the gems of his

collection. With his hand he took the exact measurements of the vessel;

then he made an impression of the patterns on the tripod with some paper

which he had hidden in his sleeve, and returned at once to Ching-tê Chên.

Six months after he returned and paid a second visit to Mr. T´ang. Taking

from his sleeve a tripod, he said to him, 'Your Excellency owns a tripod

censer of white Ting porcelain. Here is its fellow, which belongs to me.'

T´ang was astounded. He compared it with the old tripod, which he kept

most carefully preserved, and could find no difference. He tried its feet

against those of his own vessel and exchanged the covers, and found that

it matched with perfect precision. T´ang thereupon asked whence came this

wonderful specimen. 'Some time ago,' answered Chou, 'I asked your leave

to examine your tripod at leisure. I then took all its measurements with

my hand. I assure you that this is a copy of yours, and that I would not

deceive you in the matter.' The _T´ai ch´ang_, realising the truth of this

statement, bought for forty ounces of silver the tripod, which filled him

with admiration, and placed it in his collection beside the original as

though it were its double. In the Wan Li period (1573-1619), Tu-chiu, of

Huai-an, came to Fou-liang. Smitten with a deep longing for T´ang's old

censer, he could think of nothing else, and even saw it in his dreams.

One day he went with Kien-yu, the _T´ai ch´ang's_ nephew, and after much

importunity he succeeded in getting from him for a thousand ounces of

silver the imitation made by Chou, and returned home completely happy."

Other examples of Ting imitations in the late Ming period, described in

the _Po wu yao lan_, include "magnolia blossom cups; covered censers and

barrel-shaped censers with chain-armour pattern, ball and gate embroidery

and tortoise pattern mingled together in an ornamental ground." But we

gather that though these have been confounded with Chou's work they were

inferior both in material and workmanship to his early masterpieces.

At any rate, it is certain that besides these conspicuous craftsmen

whose names have become historical, there were many nameless potters at

Ching-tê Chên who devoted their skill to the imitation of _pai ting_

porcelain in the Ming and Ch´ing dynasties. Very beautiful wares of this

class are occasionally seen which have a "slickness" of decoration and a

mechanical refinement of finish characteristic of an art which is already

crystallised and has lost its freshness and spontaneity. These are, no

doubt, the work of later copyists. Indeed, we are expressly told in the

_T´ao lu_[210] that at the end of the eighteenth century there were still

potters at Ching-tê Chên who made a specialty of _pai ting ch´i_ or white

Ting wares. These, moreover, were makers of curiosities and ornamental

wares (_wan_), and they sometimes painted their wares with underglaze blue.

Among the provincial wares of the Ting type the _Ko ku yao lun_ mentions

Hsiang yao, which "has crab's claw crackle. When rich and lustrous it is

highly esteemed, but when yellow and of coarser material, it is of little

merit or value." Another work[211] gives this ware a flattering mention in

stating that the Ting ware resembled Hsiang yao in colour. The locality

of its manufacture is left in doubt, but it was probably Hsiang-shan, in

the Ning-po prefecture of Chekiang. The _T´ao lu_ names a good number

of producers of white ware, some definitely described as of Ting type,

among the lesser factories. Su Chou,[212] for instance, in Anhui, in the

modern prefecture of Fêng-yang, had a pottery dating from the Sung period.

Its productions resembled Ting ware in colour, and had a considerable

reputation. In fact, when the Ting porcelain became scarce the Su Chou

ware was largely bought in Northern China as a substitute, though in

reality it was far from equal to the genuine Ting.

Ssŭ Chou,[213] too, another place in Anhui, had a pottery dating from Sung

times, which made wares of Ting type, and "persons who liked a bargain

often bought them in place of Ting porcelain." In the same district,

during the Yüan and Ming periods, a thin white ware with "earthen" body

was made at Hsüan Chou,[214] which was evidently of _t´u ting_ type.

Brinkley[215] speaks of a pottery of this kind which is greatly esteemed

by the Japanese under the name of Nyo-fu ware[216]; and a little wine cup

with a slight engraved floral decoration in the British Museum is possibly

an example of this class. It has an earthy looking body, and creamy white

glaze, and is thin and very light to handle. Under the base are engraved

the words [Chinese] _han hsing_ ("to contain fragrance").

[Illustration:

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Plate 23.--Ivory white Ting Ware, with carved ornament. Sung dynasty.

Fig. 1.--Bowl with lotus design. Diameter 8½ inches. _Eumorfopoulos

Collection._

Fig. 2.--Dish with ducks and water plants. Diameter 8¾ inches.

_Alexander Collection._]

[Illustration:

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Plate 24.--Sung and Yüan Porcelain.

Fig. 1.--Ewer, translucent Porcelain, with smooth ivory white glaze. Sung

or Yüan dynasty. Height 6 inches. _Alexander Collection._

Fig. 2.--Vase of ivory white Ting ware with carved lotus design. Sung

dynasty. Height 11½ inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collin._]

[Illustration:

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Plate 25.--Ting Ware with moulded designs, Sung dynasty.

Fig 1. Plate with boys in peony scrolls, ivory white glaze. Diameter 7¾

inches. _Peters Collection._

Fig. 2. Bowl with flying phœnixes in lily scrolls, crackled creamy glaze;

_t´u ting_ ware. Diameter 6 inches. _Koechlin Collection._]

[Illustration:

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Plate 26.--T´u ting Ware, Sung dynasty, with creamy crackled glaze.

Fig. 1.--Brush washer in form of a boy in a boat. Length 7⅛ inches.

_Rothenstein Collection._

Fig. 2.--Figure of an elephant. Length 10½ inches. _Eumorfopoulos

Collection._]

[Illustration: Plate 27.--Vase of bronze form with row of studs and

moulded belt of _k´uei_ dragon and key-fret patterns.

"Ostrich egg" glaze. (?) Kiangnan ware, of Ting type; Sung dynasty. Height

17⅝ inches. _Peters Collection._]

[Illustration: Plate 28.--Vase of bronze form with two bands of raised key

pattern.

Thick creamy glaze, closely crackled and shading off into brown with faint

tinges of purple. (?) Kiangnan Ting ware. Fourteenth century. Height

15½ inches. _Koechlin Collection._]

In Kiangsu, the western portion of Kiang-nan, is the "white earth village"

Pai-t´u Chên,[217] where potteries existed from Sung times, making a ware

of the local clay, very thin, white and lustrous, beautiful in form and

workmanship. Thirty kilns were worked, chiefly by families of the name

Tsou, under the direction of a headman, the potters numbering several

hundreds.

Under the heading of Hsi yao,[218] the _T´ao shuo_ alludes to four

factories in the province of Shansi, which are interesting to-day in

view of the various wares excavated in the railway cuttings now under

construction in that province. A fuller description of these potteries

is given in the _T´ao lu_, which mentions P´ing-yang Fu in the southern

half of Shansi as a pottery centre in the T´ang and Sung dynasties, where

the ware was white but disqualified by a glaze lacking in purity. At Ho

Chou, in the same district, a superior ware was made as early as the

T´ang dynasty, which was even considered worthy of mention in the _Ko ku

yao lun_, probably because of the connection of P´êng Chün-pao (see p.

94) with this place in the Yüan dynasty. The _T´ao lu_ tells that the

Ho ware was made of fine rich material, the body unctuous and thin, and

the colour usually white, and that it was more beautiful than P´ing-yang

ware--a qualified compliment! A coarse pottery made at Yu-tzü Hsien, in

the T´ai-yüan prefecture in the north, and at P´ing-ting Chou in the

west, complete the quartet. The former dated from T´ang times, and the

latter, dating from the Sung, was made of a dark-coloured clay which gave

a dusky tinge to the white glaze. A small melon-shaped vase, reputed to

have come from a tomb in Shansi, is shown in Plate 11. It has a hard, buff

grey body, with a dressing of white slip and white glaze, the effect of

the combination being a pleasing surface of solid-looking ivory white. A

factory which made white wares in the neighbouring province of Shansi is

named in the twelfth century _Ch´ing po tsa chih_.[219] It was situated

at Huang-p´u Chên, in Yao Chou, where, as we are told in the _T´ao shuo_,

they had at an early date made flat-bottom bowls which were called "little

seagulls." The place is near Hsi-an Fu.

Wares of the _t´u ting_, the "earthy" Ting, type, with creamy glaze, were

made at Nan-fêng Hsien,[220] in the province of Kiangsi, during the Yüan

dynasty; and at Chi Chou[221] in the same province there were factories in

the Sung dynasty which deserve some attention. The latter were situated

at Yung-ho Chên, in the Chi Chou district, in the prefecture of Chia-an

Fu, and one of the productions appears to have resembled the purple

(_tzŭ_) Ting ware, though it was coarser and thicker, and of no great

merit. The _Ko ku yao lun_[222] speaks of five factories in this place

producing white and purple (_tzŭ_) wares, flower vases of large size and

considerable value, and small vases which were ornamented, and crackled

wares of great beauty. The best of these potteries belonged to a man named

Shu [Chinese]. We are further informed by the _Chü chai tsa chi_[223] that

Shu, the old man (_Shu wêng_), was skilled in making ornamental objects,

and that his daughter, _Shu chiao_ (the fair Shu), excelled him. Her

incense burners and jars of various kinds commanded a price almost equal

to that of Ko yao. The author proceeds to describe a dish and a bowl in

his own collection as of "grey ware with invisible blue[224] glaze, which

was capable of keeping water sweet for a month." It has been assumed that

the decoration of the "small vases" was painted,[225] but the expression

in the text (_yu hua_)[226] gives no clue to the kind of decoration, and

we are left quite in the dark as to its real nature.

The industry seems to have ended abruptly at the beginning of the Yüan

dynasty, the story being that when the Sung minister Wên was passing by

all the ware in the kilns turned to jade, and the potters, fearing that

the event might reach the Emperor's ears, closed down the kilns and fled

to Ching-tê Chên. The meaning of this myth has never been satisfactorily

explained, but it was pointed out that a large number of Yung-ho names

appear in the early lists of Ching-tê Chên potters, and the _Ko ku yao

lun_ asserts that excavations on the site of the kilns were made in the

Yung Lo period (1403-1424), and that several kinds of jade cups and bowls

were found--cautiously adding, however, that this might or might not have

been the case. The ruins of the Yung-ho potteries seem to have been still

visible in the fifteenth century.[227]

From a passage in the _T´ao lu_ we learn that crackle was a speciality

of some of the Yung-ho potters. Under the heading of _Sui ch´i yao_[228]

(crackle wares), we are told that "these are the wares made in the

Southern Sung period. Originally, they were a special class of the ware

made at Yung-ho Chên.... The clay was coarse but strong, the body thick,

the material heavy. Moreover, there were 'millet coloured' (_mi sê_)

and pale green (_fên ch´ing_) kinds.[229] The potters used _hua shih_

(steatite) in the glaze, and the crackle was in running lines, like a

broken thing. They smeared and blackened the ware with coarse ink or

ochreous earth; then they finished it. Afterwards they rubbed it clean,

and it was found to have hidden lines and stains of red or black, like

cracked ice, beautiful to look at. There were besides pieces with plain

crackled ground, to which they added blue decoration." This appears to be

the first mention of painted blue decoration, and if it is true that it

was made in the Sung period, it carries this important method back farther

than has been usually supposed. Possibly the ware was of the same type as

the coarse crackled porcelain, with roughly painted blue designs, found in

Borneo and Malaysia, where it is credited with great antiquity. There is a

very interesting specimen in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin, which bears

on this question. It came from Japan, where it had been treasured as a

Chinese tea bowl of the Sung period, and it has a brownish green crackled

glaze painted in dark blue with the characters _O mi t´o fo_ (Amitabha

Buddha), which was sometimes written in this way as a charm against evil.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 188: See Hirth, _Ancient Chinese Porcelain_, op. cit., p. 4.

The passage discovered by Hirth occurs in the _T´ang pên ts´ao_, the

pharmacopœia of the T´ang dynasty, compiled about 650 A.D.]

[Footnote 189: See _T´ao shuo_, bk. ii., fol. 7 verso.]

[Footnote 190: See _Ko ku yao lun_, bk. vii., fol. 23. "Specimens with

tear stains (_lei hên_) outside are genuine."]

[Footnote 191: The _T'ao lu_, bk. ix., fol. 13, quotes from _T'ang shih

ssŭ k'ao_ the following passage which bears on this point: "The Ting and

Ju ware used by the Court generally have a copper band on the mouth. This

was regarded as destroying their value. But modern collectors of Ting and

Ju wares have come to regard the copper band on the mouth as a sign of

genuineness. Dealers in curios declare it to be a sign of age."]

[Footnote 192: e.g. _Po wu yao lan_, _T'ao lu_, etc.]

[Footnote 193: [Chinese] or [Chinese]. The word _hua_ (lit. flowers)

is used in the general sense of "ornament." The attempts of certain

translators to confine it to the literal sense "flowers" has led to

ridiculous results.]

[Footnote 194: See p. 101.]

[Footnote 195: An early eighteenth-century work, quoted in the _T´ao lu_,

bk. ix., fol. 11.]

[Footnote 196: See _T´ao shuo_, bk., ii., fol. 7.]

[Footnote 197: Bk. vii., fol. 23.]

[Footnote 198: The _Memoir of Chiang_ (see p. 159), written in the Yüan

dynasty, says that the "pure white ware of Ching-tê Chên in the Sung

dynasty, when compared with the red porcelain (_hung tz´ŭ_) of Chên-ting

and the Lung-ch´üan green ware, emulated these in beauty." Chên-ting

is the Chên-ting Fu, the prefectural town of Ting Chou, and the ware

indicated is no doubt Ting ware; but here the comparison clearly seems to

be between white wares, and unless the word _hung_ (red) applies to some

variety of the Ting biscuit as distinct from the glaze, it is difficult to

understand.]

[Footnote 199: [Chinese] _tzŭ_, "purple or dark red brown," is, like

most Chinese colour-words, a somewhat elastic term. The dictionary gives

instances in which it is applied to "red sandal wood," "brown sugar," the

ruby, the violet, and the peony.]

[Footnote 200: Op. cit., fig. 35.]

[Footnote 201: See p. 131. I have seen a single specimen of a bowl with

carved design and creamy white glaze inside and all the appearances of

a Ting ware, but coated on the exterior with a lustrous coffee brown

monochrome. But without any other example to guide one's judgment, I

should hesitate to say that this piece was older than the Ming dynasty.]

[Footnote 202: Hsü Tz´ŭ-shu, author of the _Ch´a Su_, a book on tea,

quoted in the _T´ao shuo_, bk. v., fol. 15 verso.]

[Footnote 203: The potteries in the Chên-ting Fu district were active up

to the end of the Ming dynasty, at any rate (see p. 199); and no doubt

many of the coarse _t´u ting_ specimens belong to the Ming period, but as

their forms are archaic it is almost impossible nowadays to differentiate

them.]

[Footnote 204: Julien, op. cit., p. 21, places this town in Kiang-nan, but

this is clearly an error.]

[Footnote 205: In contrast with these there were specimens with "green

mouth," _ch´ing k´ou_ which were "wanting in richness and lustre."]

[Footnote 206: The date of Chou Tan-ch´üan is not given, but he is

mentioned in the _Ni ku lu_, a mid-sixteenth-century work.]

[Footnote 207: A well-known type of bronze incense burner of the Shang

dynasty. See the _Shin sho sei_, bk. i., fol. 2; and Hsiang's Album, fig.

1, where a Ting ware copy is illustrated.]

[Footnote 208: Julien, op. cit., pp. xxxiii.-xxxv.; the reference in the

_T´ao lu_ is bk. viii., fol. 5.]

[Footnote 209: Perhaps the celebrated "white Ting censer" described on p.

92.]

[Footnote 210: Bk. ii., fol. 9 verso.]

[Footnote 211: The _Liu ch´ing jih cha_, written by T´ien Yi-hêng in the

Ming dynasty.]

[Footnote 212: [Chinese] _T´ao lu_, vol. vii., fol. 9 verso. See also

bk. ix., fol. 9, where the _Ch´ing po tsa chih_ (1193 A.D.) is quoted as

follows: "The wares used at the present day, which are made at So Chou and

Ssŭ Chou, are not genuine Ting ware."]

[Footnote 213: [Chinese] _T´ao lu_, vol. vii., fol. 9 verso.]

[Footnote 214: [Chinese] _T´ao lu_, vol. vii., fol. 10 verso.]

[Footnote 215: F. Brinkley, _Japan and China_, vol. ix., p. 259.]

[Footnote 216: Nyo-fu is the Japanese name for Kiang-nan, the province of

which Anhui forms a part.]

[Footnote 217: In the district of Hsiao Hsien, department of Hsü Chou. The

ware is described in the _T´ao lu_ (bk. vii., fol. 7) under the name Hsiao

[Chinese] yao.]

[Footnote 218: [Chinese].]

[Footnote 219: Quoted in the _T´ao lu_, bk. ix., fol. 9.]

[Footnote 220: [Chinese]]

[Footnote 221: [Chinese]]

[Footnote 222: Bk. vi., fol. 23 verso. This account does not appear in the

original edition, and was added in the later edition of 1459.]

[Footnote 223: Quoted in the _T´ao shuo_.]

[Footnote 224: [Chinese] _yu_, which means "black," or "invisible blue or

green."]

[Footnote 225: See Bushell, _T´ao shuo_, p. 48.]

[Footnote 226: "Have ornament."]

[Footnote 227: See _Ko ku yao lun_, loc. cit.]

[Footnote 228: [Chinese] _T´ao lu_, bk. vi., fol. 7 recto and verso.]

[Footnote 229: These must have resembled Ko yao. Hence, perhaps, the

comparison in value between the fair Shu's ware and the Ko yao, p. 98.]

Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 1. Pottery and early wares · 第 7 / 17 章