Vase sitting on low standPlate 22.—Vase of Lung–ch´üan Porcelain.With grey green celadon glaze of faint bluish tone, peony scroll in low relief. Probably Sung dynasty. Height 191/2inches.Peters Collection.
Plate 22.—Vase of Lung–ch´üan Porcelain.With grey green celadon glaze of faint bluish tone, peony scroll in low relief. Probably Sung dynasty. Height 191/2inches.Peters Collection.
Plate 22.—Vase of Lung–ch´üan Porcelain.
With grey green celadon glaze of faint bluish tone, peony scroll in low relief. Probably Sung dynasty. Height 191/2inches.Peters Collection.
TING YAOChinese characters
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 theKo ku yao lunstates that it was at its best in the Chêng Ho and Hsüan Ho periods, which extended from 1111 to 1125A. 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 thenan tingor 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 Chinesewares 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 aspai ting(white Ting) andfên 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 oft'u tingor 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; thehua hua(carved decoration) and theyin 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 oft´u tingtype, 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 theYün 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 inscriptionli hsi yai(Chinese characters) 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. "AlthoughT´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 theLiu 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 theKo ku yao lun,[197]viz.mao(thatch),mieh(bamboo splints), andku 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 frommangandku ch´u.
Thepai tingand thet´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 theKo ku yao lunandCh´ing p´i tsang, which only speak of purple or brown (tzŭ) Ting, and black Ting."There is purple[199]Ting," says theKo 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 beingtzŭ 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 theKo ku yao lun, but other writers, such as the author of theCh´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 commonert´u tingcontinued 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 theKo 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 ofhsin tingor New Ting, and amateurs collect it at great cost, which is most ridiculous." Again, thePo wu yao landescribes 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 ofWên wangcensers[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 andporcelain collected in books viii. and ix. of theT´ao luis a story narrated in theYün 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.' TheT´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, theT´ai ch´ang'snephew, 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 thePo 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 havebeen 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 ofpai tingporcelain 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 theT´ao lu[210]that at the end of the eighteenth century there were still potters at Ching–tê Chên who made a specialty ofpai ting ch´ior 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 theKo ku yao lunmentions 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. TheT´ao lunames 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 oft´u tingtype. 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 wordsChinese charactershan hsing("to contain fragrance").
Plate 23.—Ivory white Ting Ware, with carved ornament. Sung dynasty.Fig. 1.—Bowl with lotus design. Diameter 81/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.Fig. 2.—Dish with ducks and water plants. Diameter 83/4inches.Alexander Collection.
Plate 23.—Ivory white Ting Ware, with carved ornament. Sung dynasty.Fig. 1.—Bowl with lotus design. Diameter 81/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.Fig. 2.—Dish with ducks and water plants. Diameter 83/4inches.Alexander Collection.
Plate 23.—Ivory white Ting Ware, with carved ornament. Sung dynasty.
Fig. 1.—Bowl with lotus design. Diameter 81/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Fig. 2.—Dish with ducks and water plants. Diameter 83/4inches.Alexander Collection.
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 111/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collin.
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 111/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collin.
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 111/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collin.
Plate 25.—Ting Ware with moulded designs, Sung dynasty.Fig 1. Plate with boys in peony scrolls, ivory white glaze. Diameter 73/4inches.Peters Collection.Fig. 2. Bowl with flying phœnixes in lily scrolls, crackled creamy glaze;t´u tingware. Diameter 6 inches.Koechlin Collection.
Plate 25.—Ting Ware with moulded designs, Sung dynasty.Fig 1. Plate with boys in peony scrolls, ivory white glaze. Diameter 73/4inches.Peters Collection.Fig. 2. Bowl with flying phœnixes in lily scrolls, crackled creamy glaze;t´u tingware. Diameter 6 inches.Koechlin Collection.
Plate 25.—Ting Ware with moulded designs, Sung dynasty.
Fig 1. Plate with boys in peony scrolls, ivory white glaze. Diameter 73/4inches.Peters Collection.
Fig. 2. Bowl with flying phœnixes in lily scrolls, crackled creamy glaze;t´u tingware. Diameter 6 inches.Koechlin Collection.
Elephant is decorated with fringed drape and flat saddlePlate 26.—T´u ting Ware, Sung dynasty, with creamy crackled glaze.Fig. 1.—Brush washer in form of a boy in a boat. Length 71/8inches.Rothenstein Collection.Fig. 2.—Figure of an elephant. Length 101/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
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 71/8inches.Rothenstein Collection.Fig. 2.—Figure of an elephant. Length 101/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
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 71/8inches.Rothenstein Collection.
Fig. 2.—Figure of an elephant. Length 101/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Plate 27.—Vase of bronze form with row of studs and moulded belt ofk´ueidragon and key–fret patterns."Ostrich egg" glaze. (?) Kiangnan ware, of Ting type; Sung dynasty. Height 175/8inches.Peters Collection.
Plate 27.—Vase of bronze form with row of studs and moulded belt ofk´ueidragon and key–fret patterns."Ostrich egg" glaze. (?) Kiangnan ware, of Ting type; Sung dynasty. Height 175/8inches.Peters Collection.
Plate 27.—Vase of bronze form with row of studs and moulded belt ofk´ueidragon and key–fret patterns.
"Ostrich egg" glaze. (?) Kiangnan ware, of Ting type; Sung dynasty. Height 175/8inches.Peters Collection.
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 151/2inches.Koechlin Collection.
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 151/2inches.Koechlin Collection.
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 151/2inches.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]theT´ao shuoalludes 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 theT´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 theKo ku yao lun, probably because of the connection of P´êng Chün–pao (see p. 94) with this place in the Yüan dynasty. TheT´ao lutells 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 theSung, 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 centuryCh´ing po tsa chih.[219]It was situated at Huang–p´u Chên, in Yao Chou, where, as we are told in theT´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 thet´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. TheKo 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 ShuChinese character. We are further informed by theChü 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 kindof 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 theKo ku yao lunasserts 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 theT´ao luwe learn that crackle was a speciality of some of the Yung–ho potters. Under the heading ofSui 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 usedhua 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 interestingspecimen 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 charactersO mi t´o fo(Amitabha Buddha), which was sometimes written in this way as a charm against evil.
TZ´Ŭ CHOUChinese charactersWARE
ALARGE and important class of wares, closely related to the Ting group, was made at Tz´ŭ Chou, formerly in the Chang–tê Fu in Honan, and now included in the Kuang–p´ing Fu in Chihli. The name of the place, previously Fu–yang, was changed to Tz´ŭ Chou in the Sui dynasty (589–617A. D.), and as it was derived, as Chinese writers are careful to explain, from thetz´ŭstone from which the ware was made, we may infer that this material, and no doubt the local potteries, assumed importance at this early date. There were, in fact, a few fragments of pottery of the Tz´ŭ Chou type, decorated with brown spots, among the Chinese wares found on the ninth–century site of Samarra, in Persia, by Professor Sarre (see p. 148); and a finely painted fragment of a Tz´ŭ Chou vase in the Anthropological Museum at Petrograd was brought from a site in Turfan, which was in all probability as early as the tenth century. Moreover, it is constantly asserted by traders in China that this or that piece of painted Tz´ŭ Chou ware was found in a T´ang tomb, and in many cases, such as that of the brown–painted vase with lotus design mentioned on p. 33, the form of the specimen and the style of the decoration are quite consistent with a T´ang attribution. There is, however, no information on the subject earlier than the Sung dynasty, when the Tz´ŭ Chou factories enjoyed a high reputation.[230]TheKo ku yao lungives the following brief notice of them under the heading "Old Tz´ŭ wares":—
"Old Tz´ŭ wares (tz´ŭ ch´i) were made at Tz´ŭ Chou, in the Chang–tê Fu in Honan. Good specimens closely resemble Ting ware, but have not the tear–stains. There are, besides, specimens with engraved and painted[231]ornament. The plain white pieces command a higher price than Ting ware. The recent (i.e. latefourteenth century) productions of the factory are not worthy of consideration."
If, as this account seems to imply, the Tz´ŭ Chou factories were in low water at the end of the Yüan dynasty, like many other potteries at this time, they managed to retrieve their fortunes, for they still carry on an unbroken tradition to this day.[232]The ware is in general use among the common folk of Peking and Northern China,[233]and is still decorated (though coarsely) in the antique style with free and sketchy painted designs in dark brown and maroon slip, the body being greyish white, with creamy crackled glaze. This is, of course, only one kind out of many, but the traditions have been so closely preserved that from this type alone it is easy to identify many Tz´ŭ Chou specimens among the early wares which have lately come from excavations in China.
The quantity of pottery produced at Tz´ŭ Chou in the last nine or ten hundred years must have been enormous, but as the post–Sung wares do not seem to have appealed to Chinese connoisseurs, little has been heard of it until recent times, and the stray specimens which did find their way to Europe were either unclassified or grouped with Corean specimens in deference to a mistaken Japanese opinion.[234]Now, however, considerable interest has been taken in the ware by Western collectors, and a plentiful supply is forthcoming, so that it is possible to make a comparative study of the different types, and to appreciate the varied and clever decorative methods of the Tz´ŭ Chou potters. But the conservative nature of the wares will always make it extremely difficult for us to fix the exact period during the many centuries when any individual piece was made, and the early dates assigned indiscriminately, though perhaps excusable on account of the archaic character of the painted decoration, should be accepted with caution.
The plain white Tz´ŭ Chou wares of the Sung period, which favourably compared with the Ting porcelain, have been identified in a few instances only by peculiarities of shape. Indeed, it is unlikely that we shall have any other means of discriminating them from the latter ware. But by far the largest group ofthe Tz´ŭ Chou family consists of the painted wares. Like the rest of the Tz´ŭ Chou pottery which has so far been identified, these have a greyish buff body of porcellanous stoneware usually coated with a white clay slip and covered with a transparent glaze almost colourless, but with a creamy tinge. On this glaze, and sometimes under it, the painters executed rapid, bold, and rather impressionist designs in shades of brown, varying from black to a soft sepia colour. The earliest specimens seem to have been of this kind, and it is certain that this method of decoration was practised in the Sung period, if not earlier.[235]In a few cases the glaze seems to have been omitted, the brown painting appearing on a lustreless white slip; and where the brown or black colour was laid on in broad washes, details were often etched out with a pointed instrument. The black, moreover, when in considerable areas, sometimes developed passages of lustrous coffee brown[236](due to the presence of iron), such as is seen in the "partridge cups" of Chien yao. It is probable that the Sung Tz´ŭ Chou ware, with its solid ivory white surface, often crackled, and its sketchy floral designs, may have served as a model to the Japanese for the Kenzan style of decoration and the ivory white Satsuma faience.
Another style of ornament, which may date from Sung times, and is certainly common on later wares, consists of a broad band of floral scrolls, with large lily or aster flowers, enclosed by smaller zones of floral pattern or formal designs. Next come the large panels of figure subjects, usually of Taoist sages, or birds and animals in foliage, enclosed by bands of formal ornament or floral scrolls. In some cases a beautiful pale blue glaze of turquoise tint covers this class of ornament (Plate 32, Fig. 1), strangely recalling the Persian and Syrian pottery with still black paintings under a turquoise glaze. Indeed, it was a common error a few years backto class the stray specimens of this type as Persian; but a comparison with the brown–painted Tz´ŭ Chou specimens shows their true origin, and the discovery of a small dish of this kind in a Sung tomb[237]proves the antiquity of this method of decoration in China.
The brown and black was supplemented, in the Ming period if not earlier, first by a maroon slip and later by iron red and green enamel.[238]A specimen with panelled decoration in these colours was described by Brinkley[239]as having been preserved in Japan since 1598, showing that this class of decoration was at any rate contemporary with the "red and green family" of porcelain. A specimen in the Benson Collection shows, further, that aubergine and green were sometimes used in combination with turquoise glaze, as in the Ming "three–colour porcelain." Under–glaze blue is also found on Tz´ŭ Chou wares, but we have no clue to the date when it was introduced.
The ordinary ware, made in quite modern times at Tz´ŭ Chou, is illustrated by a small flask and a figure obtained by Dr. Bushell, and now in the British Museum. Though decorated in the characteristic style with slight sketchy design in brown and maroon, they show a decided falling off when compared with the older specimens. The body is a hard, greyish white stoneware; there is no slip covering, and the glaze is yellowish, soft–looking, and freely crackled, without the solid qualities of the older ivory glaze on a white slip coating. I am inclined to think that this degenerate type of ware dates back no farther than the nineteenth century, and that the Tz´ŭ Chou pottery preserved its character up to and perhaps throughout the eighteenth century. There are several examples of pottery pillows, with body and glaze of good quality and finely painted in black and brown, with panelled designs sometimes containing floral motives, sometimes figure subjects. One of these, exhibited at the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910,[240]was tentatively ascribed to the late Ming period. Since then the British Museum has acquired another, and I have heard of two more in private hands. The three last bear the mark of a potter named Chang,[241]and on some of them we find additional inscriptions containing the wordsku hsiang(of old Hsiang) andhsiang ti(of the region of Hsiang). Hsiang, I find, is the old name of Chang–tê Fu, the prefecture in which Tz´ŭ Chou is situated, and this fact definitely connects the ware with the factories under discussion. At the same time the relatively large number of these pieces in our collections and the style of Chang's mark seem to indicate that they are of fairly recent date, probably not older than the seventeenth century.
Plate 29.—Vase of Porcellanous Stoneware.With creamy white glaze and designs painted in black. Tz´ŭ Chou ware, Sung dynasty (960–1279A. D.). Height 17 inches.In the Louvre.
Plate 29.—Vase of Porcellanous Stoneware.With creamy white glaze and designs painted in black. Tz´ŭ Chou ware, Sung dynasty (960–1279A. D.). Height 17 inches.In the Louvre.
Plate 29.—Vase of Porcellanous Stoneware.
With creamy white glaze and designs painted in black. Tz´ŭ Chou ware, Sung dynasty (960–1279A. D.). Height 17 inches.In the Louvre.
Plate 30.—Four Jars of painted Tz´ŭ Chou Ware.Fig. 1.—Dated 11th year of Chêng T´ing (1446A. D.). Height 91/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.Fig. 2.—Painted in red and green enamels. (?) Sung dynasty. Height 41/2inches.Alexander Collection.Fig. 3.—Lower half black, the upper painted on white ground. Sung dynasty. Height 151/2inches.Benson Collection.Fig. 4.—With phœnix design, etched details. Sung dynasty. Height 93/4inches.Rothenstein Collection.
Plate 30.—Four Jars of painted Tz´ŭ Chou Ware.Fig. 1.—Dated 11th year of Chêng T´ing (1446A. D.). Height 91/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.Fig. 2.—Painted in red and green enamels. (?) Sung dynasty. Height 41/2inches.Alexander Collection.Fig. 3.—Lower half black, the upper painted on white ground. Sung dynasty. Height 151/2inches.Benson Collection.Fig. 4.—With phœnix design, etched details. Sung dynasty. Height 93/4inches.Rothenstein Collection.
Plate 30.—Four Jars of painted Tz´ŭ Chou Ware.
Fig. 1.—Dated 11th year of Chêng T´ing (1446A. D.). Height 91/2inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Fig. 2.—Painted in red and green enamels. (?) Sung dynasty. Height 41/2inches.Alexander Collection.
Fig. 3.—Lower half black, the upper painted on white ground. Sung dynasty. Height 151/2inches.Benson Collection.
Fig. 4.—With phœnix design, etched details. Sung dynasty. Height 93/4inches.Rothenstein Collection.
Plate 31.—Tz´ŭ Chou Ware.Eumorfopoulos Collection.Fig. 1.—Tripod Incense Vase in Persian style with lotus design in pale aubergine, in a turquoise ground. Sixteenth century. Height 61/2inches.Fig. 2.—Pillow with creamy white glaze and design of a tethered bear in black. Sung dynasty. Length 121/2inches.
Plate 31.—Tz´ŭ Chou Ware.Eumorfopoulos Collection.Fig. 1.—Tripod Incense Vase in Persian style with lotus design in pale aubergine, in a turquoise ground. Sixteenth century. Height 61/2inches.Fig. 2.—Pillow with creamy white glaze and design of a tethered bear in black. Sung dynasty. Length 121/2inches.
Plate 31.—Tz´ŭ Chou Ware.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Fig. 1.—Tripod Incense Vase in Persian style with lotus design in pale aubergine, in a turquoise ground. Sixteenth century. Height 61/2inches.
Fig. 2.—Pillow with creamy white glaze and design of a tethered bear in black. Sung dynasty. Length 121/2inches.