Cup with decorated stand on legsPlate 44.—Early Translucent Porcelain, probably T´ang dynasty.Fig. 1.—Cinquefoil Cup with ivory glaze clouded with pinkish buff stains. Diameter 33/4inches.Breuer Collection.Fig. 2.—Vase of white, soft–looking ware, very thin and translucent with pearly white, crackled glaze powdered with brown specks. Height 31/8inches.Peters Collection.
Plate 44.—Early Translucent Porcelain, probably T´ang dynasty.Fig. 1.—Cinquefoil Cup with ivory glaze clouded with pinkish buff stains. Diameter 33/4inches.Breuer Collection.Fig. 2.—Vase of white, soft–looking ware, very thin and translucent with pearly white, crackled glaze powdered with brown specks. Height 31/8inches.Peters Collection.
Plate 44.—Early Translucent Porcelain, probably T´ang dynasty.
Fig. 1.—Cinquefoil Cup with ivory glaze clouded with pinkish buff stains. Diameter 33/4inches.Breuer Collection.
Fig. 2.—Vase of white, soft–looking ware, very thin and translucent with pearly white, crackled glaze powdered with brown specks. Height 31/8inches.Peters Collection.
Vase on holding stand with legsPlate 45.—T´ang and Sung Wares.Fig. 1.—Square Vase with engraved lotus scrolls and formal borders.T´u–tingware, Sung dynasty. Height 20 inches.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. Height 151/4inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Plate 45.—T´ang and Sung Wares.Fig. 1.—Square Vase with engraved lotus scrolls and formal borders.T´u–tingware, Sung dynasty. Height 20 inches.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. Height 151/4inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Plate 45.—T´ang and Sung Wares.
Fig. 1.—Square Vase with engraved lotus scrolls and formal borders.T´u–tingware, Sung dynasty. Height 20 inches.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. Height 151/4inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
The whole question of these interesting porcelains is complicated by the fact that the Coreans were admittedly indebted to the Ting Chou potters for many of their designs;[323]and by the fact that while close intercourse between China and Corea existed the Coreans may well have imported Chinese wares and deposited some of them in the tombs. An authentic find of these porcelains in a Chinese tomb would give important evidence on this point, but so far there is no evidence of their being found in China beyond the statement of traders, and it is quite certain that they have been found in Corean tombs. It may be added that the Japanese class them ashakugoraior white Corean ware, and stoutly support their Corean origin.
CHING–TÊ CHÊN
CHING–TÊ CHÊN, the metropolis of the ceramic world, whose venerable and glorious traditions outshine Meissen and Sèvres and all the little lights of Europe, and leave them eclipsed and obscure, is an unwalled town or mart (chên) on the left bank of the Ch´ang River, which flows into the Po–yang Lake, on the northern border of the province of Kiangsi. In ancient times it was known as Ch´ang–nan Chên, the mart on the south of the Ch´ang, but when the Sung Emperor Chên Tsung commanded that officially manufactured porcelain (kuan chih tz´ŭ) should be sent to the capital, and that the workmen should inscribe the pieces with thenien haoor name of the period, which in this case was Ching Tê (1004–1007), the name of the place was changed to Ching–tê Chên.
The district town is Fou–liang, seven miles higher up the river, a place of relatively small importance, but the residence of the district magistrate; and both Fou–liang and Ching–tê Chên are within the prefectural jurisdiction of Jao Chou Fu, which is situated near the mouth of the Ch´ang.
The wares of Ching–tê Chên are distributed by various routes, some overland to Chi–mên or to Wu–yuan and thence to Hang Chou, Su Chou, Shanghai, etc.; the rest by boat down the Ch´ang, and thence either to Kiu–kiang on the Yangtze for further dispatch to Chin–kiang and northwards via the Grand Canal, or to the south–west corner of the lake and up the estuary of the Kan River to Nan–Ch´ang Fu. From this latter town they could be carried by water (with an interruption of thirty miles of road) all the way to Canton. They are known under various names in Chinese books—Chên yao, Ching–tê yao, Fou–liang yao, Jao Chou yao, Jao yao, Ch´ang–nan yao, and Nan–ch´ang yao—all of which are easily explicable from the foregoing paragraph.
The old name of Fou–liang was Hsin–p´ing, and according tothe Annals of Fou–liang the manufacture of pottery[324]was traditionally held to have begun in the district of Hsin–p´ing in the Han dynasty. In the same passage the development of the local industry is traced by means of a few significant incidents. In the first year of Chih Tê in the Ch´ên dynasty (583A. D.) the potters of the district were called upon to provide plinths for the Imperial buildings at Chien–k´ang (afterwards Nanking), but the plinths, when finished, though cleverly made, were not strong enough to carry the weight of the columns. In the fourth (or, according to another reading, the second) year of Wu Tê of the T´ang dynasty (621A. D.), "porcelain jade"[325]was offered as tribute to the Emperor under the name of false jade vessels (chia yü ch´i), and from this time forward the duty (of supplying the Emperor) became an institution,[326]and a potter named Ho Chung–ch´u gained a great reputation. In the Ching Tê period of the Sung dynasty, as already stated, officially manufactured porcelain was sent to the capital, where it supplied the needs of the palaces and great establishments. In the T´ai Ting period of the Yüan dynasty (1324–1327) the porcelain factory came under the inspection of the Intendant of the Circuit, who supplied the required wares when orders had been received, and closed the factory if there were no orders (from the Court).
Continuing into the Ming dynasty, the same authority gives details of the various administrative changes which may perhaps be "taken as read," one or two important facts only calling for mention. Thus in the thirty–fifth year[327]of Hung Wu, we are told that the factories were opened, and that supplies of porcelain were sent to the Court. There seems to have been some difference of opinion about the building of the Imperial Ware Factory (Yü ch´i ch´ang).
Some authorities place this event in the Hung Wu period, but theChiang hsi t´ung chih,[328]though quoting the other opinions in a note, mentions only the building of the Imperial Factory in the reign of Chêng Tê (1506–1521) in the main text, viz.: "In the beginning of the Chêng Tê period the Imperial Ware Factory was established for dealing specially with the Imperial wares." The Imperial establishment was burnt down in the Wan Li period, and again destroyed in the revolt of Wu San–kuei in 1675, but the most serious blow dealt to the prosperity of Ching–tê Chên fell in the T´ai p´ing rebellion in 1853, when the town was sacked and almost depopulated. The Imperial Factory was rebuilt in 1864, and the industry has in a great measure revived, though it is still but the shadow of its former greatness.
Though this great porcelain town has traded with the whole world for several centuries, "bringing great profit to the Empire and to itself great fame" (to quote from theT´ao lu), it seems to have been rarely visited by Europeans, and first–hand descriptions of it are few. We are fortunate, however, in possessing in the letters[329]of Père d'Entrecolles an intimate account of the place and its manufactures, written by a Jesuit missionary who was stationed in the town in the early years of the eighteenth century. These interesting letters are so well known that I shall not quote them extensively here. The picture they give of the enormous pottery town, with its population of a million souls and the three thousand furnaces which, directly or indirectly, provided a living for this host, and of the arresting spectacle of the town by night like a burning city spouting flames at a thousand points, a description which inspired the oft–quoted lines in Longfellow's "Keramos," shows us the place in the heyday of its prosperity.
A more modern but scarcely less interesting account of Ching–tê Chên and the surrounding country appears in a Consular report,made in 1905, of aJourney in the Interior of Kiangsi,[330]from which I have taken the following paragraphs:
"During the last forty–five years Ching–tê Chên has had time to recover, in a very large measure, from this last calamity, but it is said to be not so busy or so populous as before the T´ai p´ing rebellion.
"Everything in Ching–tê Chên either belongs to, or is altogether subordinate to, the porcelain and earthenware industry. The very houses are for the most part built of fragments of fireclay (called 'lo–p´ing–t´u') that were once part either of old kilns or of the fireclay covers in which porcelain is stacked during firing. The river bank is covered for miles[331]with a deep stratum of broken chinaware and chips of fireclay, and, as far as one could judge, the greater part of the town and several square miles of the surrounding country are built over, or composed of, a similar deposit. A great industry, employing hundreds of thousands of hands, does not remain localised in a single spot for 900 years without giving to that spot a character of its own.
"This is perhaps what struck me most forcibly in Ching–tê Chên—that it is unlike anything else in China. The forms, the colour, the materials used in the buildings, the atmosphere, are somewhat reminiscent of the poorer parts of Manchester, but resemble no other large town that I have ever visited.
"At present there are 104 pottery kilns in the town, of which some thirty or so were actually in work at the time of my visit. The greater part of the kilns only work for a comparatively short season every–summer. During this busy season, when every kiln is perhaps employing an average of 100 to 200 men, the population of Ching–tê Chên rises to about 400,000, but of this nearly, if not quite, half are labourers drawn from a wide area of country, chiefly from the Tuch´ang district, who only come for the season, live in rows of barrack–like sheds, and do not bring their families with them."
It is interesting to compare this modern account with the Memoirs of Chiang,[332]written in the Yüan dynasty, from which wesee that the work was carried on in the same intermittent fashion, the potters receiving land to cultivate instead of payment, living round the master of the pottery, and being liable to be summoned to the kilns when required. The opening of the kilns in those days was in some measure dependent on the success of the harvest, and in any case the work depended on the season, as the paste would freeze in winter, and could not be worked.
The hills which surround Ching–tê Chên are rich in the materials required by the potters, china clay and china stone of various qualities, fireclay for the seggars (cases to protect the porcelain in the kiln), or for mixing in the coarser wares, and numerous other minerals. There was water–power which could be used in the mills for crushing and refining the minerals, and abundant wood for firing. Although coal is worked nowadays not many miles away, the potters still adhere to the wood, which has served their kilns from time immemorial. It should be added that at the present day—and no doubt for some time past—the local clays have been supplemented from various districts, supplies coming overland from Chi–mên and by water from greater distances.
A good Chinese map of Ching–tê Chên is given in theT´ao lu(bk. i., fol. 1), and a large map of the district is attached to Mr. W. Clennell's report, which is easily obtainable.
This description of Ching–tê Chên has led us far from the period with which we are at present concerned. In the Sung dynasty the place had already arrived at considerable importance, and the record of its 300 kilns implies a very large population. The excellence of its porcelain had already won for it the onerous privilege of supplying Imperial needs, and, as we have seen, it was consecrated under the new and Imperial name of Ching–tê Chên in the opening years of the eleventh century. The earliest existing record of its productions, the Memoirs of Chiang, written at the beginning of the fourteenth century, tells us that the Sung porcelains made at Ching–tê Chên were pure white[333]and without a flaw, and were carried for sale to all parts under the proud name of "Jao Chou jade." It rivalled the "red porcelain" of Chên–ting Fu and the green of Lung–ch´üan in beauty.
TheKo ku yao lundescribes the Imperial ware of this time as "thin in body and lustrous," and mentions "plain white pieces with contracted waist," adding that the specimens "with unglazed rim,"[334]though thin in body, white in colour, lustrous, and surpassingly beautiful, are lower in price than the Ting wares.
It is not too much to assume that some of this "Jao Chou jade" has survived to the present day, and we may look for it among the early translucent white porcelains, of which a considerable number have reached Europe during the last few years. Many of these have Sung forms and the Sung style, though, of course, plain white wares are always difficult to date. In the specimens to which I refer the glaze is usually of a warm ivory tone, tending to cream colour; it is hard and usually discontinued in the region of the base, both underneath and on the side, and the exposed body is rather rough to the touch. (See Plate 24, Fig. 1.)
It is not clear whether we are to infer from the comparison with Lung–ch´üan ware quoted above that the Ching–tê Chên potters produced a celadon in the Sung dynasty, but it is probable enough that they did so, and that the green or greenish white (ch´ing pai)[335]made in the Yüan period was a continuation of this. If we can believe the statement in theT´ao lu, they began early to copy the wares of other factories, imitating the Chün Chou ware at the end of the Sung period and the crackled Chi Chou ware in the Yüan.
It seems to me possible that the reference to the imitation of Chün ware may be explained by an interesting passage from a late twelfth–century[336]writer quoted in theT´ao lu, who says that in the Ta Kuan period (1107–1110) there were among the Ching–tê Chên wares "furnace transmutations" (yao pien) in colour red like cinnabar.[337]He is inclined to attribute this phenomenon to the fact that "when the planet Mars in the Zodiac approaches its greatest brightness, then things happen magically and contrary to the usual order." The potters were evidently disturbed by the appearance of the wares, and broke them. He tells us, further, that he stayed at Jao Chou and obtained a number of specimens(of the local ware), and after examining them he could say that, "compared with the red porcelain (hung tz´ŭ) of Ting Chou,[338]they were more fresh and brilliant in appearance." It will be remembered that an echo of this last sentence occurred in the Memoirs of Chiang.
A passage in thePo wu yao lan[339]might be taken to mean that blue–painted porcelain, "blue and white," was made at Ching–tê Chên prior to the Yüan period, but as the remainder of the sentence seems to be based on theKo ku yao lun, and no evidence is given for the words in question, too much importance need not be attached to a phrase which may be a confusion arising from thech´ing paiof earlier writers.
THE YÜANChinese characterDYNASTY, 1280–1367 A.D.
THE Yüan dynasty, which lasted from 1280 to 1367, was established by Kublai Khan, grandson of the great Mongol conqueror, Genghis Khan. The Mongols completely subjugated China, and though their rule was comparatively brief, it had a disastrous effect on the artistic development of the country. The Mongol governors whose services to the reigning house had been rewarded by all the lucrative posts, made full use of their opportunities to enrich themselves by extortion and oppression. Trade and industry were convenient subjects for their exactions, and these consequently languished. The ceramic industry was among the sufferers, and many of the old potteries were closed down in this troubled period. The potteries at Ching–tê Chên, which had gradually risen to a position of great importance in the Sung dynasty, suffered for this eminence by being brought under the immediate care of a Mongol commissioner, and much of their trade passed into the hands of manufacturers in Kiangsi and Fukien.[340]The earliest account[341]which we have of the industry in this important centre, written at the beginning of the fourteenth century, ends with a bitter cry against the depredations of the governors and the subordinate officials, who were banded together to rob the people, and against whom no redress could be obtained. Dr. Bushell published a translation of the chief part of it inOriental Ceramic Art,[342]and apart from the sorrowful picture which it draws it gives a good idea of the productions of the district in the Yüan dynasty. A short notice in theT´ao lugives a slightly different impression, and leads us to suppose that the heavy hand of the Mongol officialswas felt chiefly at the Imperial potteries, while the private factories were comparatively flourishing and even supplied some of the wares required by the Court.
We learn from the Memoirs of Chiang that a variety of porcelains were made to meet the tastes of the different regions of Southern China. The market in Northern China does not seem as yet to have been studied. Thus, while the kilns at Hu–t´ien,[343]on the river bank opposite to Ching–tê Chên, supplied a brownish yellow[344]ware which was popular in the province of Chêkiang, the greenish white[345]porcelain of Ching–tê Chên found a profitable market in Hunan and Hupeh, Szechuan, and Kuangtung. The inhabitants of Kiangsu and Anhui seem to have been less critical, for the inferior wares known as "yellow stuff" (huang liao), which did not sell in Kiangsi, Kiangnan, Kuangtung, Fukien, and Chêkiang, was foisted on them.
The finest porcelain was made of the stone (shih) from Chin–kêng, while stone and earth from other neighbouring sites were used for mixing in the inferior wares and for making seggars[346]and moulds. The glaze was made of "glaze earth" from Ling–pei mixed with the ashes of brushwood from the Yu–shan hills which had been burnt with lime and persimmon wood. I mention these technical details because their similarity with the description of the manufacture in the eighteenth century show that the method of porcelain making at both periods was essentially the same. The decoration was effected by stamping or pressing in moulds, by painting or by carving[347]; and the ware was fired either upright or inverted.
Some idea of the forms and ornament of these wares may be gathered from another passage which would be far more illuminating if the fanciful names used were less difficult to understand. Bushell has boldly translated them according to his ideas, and I quote his renderings in inverted commas and in the pious hope that they may be correct, giving at the same time the original characters.
There were bowls (wan), with high feet and with fish and waterornament; platters (t´ieh) with "glazes shaded in different tones,"[348]sea eyes, and snow flowers[349]; dishes (p´an) of the horse hoof and betel–nut kinds, the latter suggesting a brownish red colour; large bowls (yü) with lotus ornament (or shaped like a lotus flower), or of "square form with indented corners"[350]; bowls and platters (wan t´ieh) with painted decoration,[351]with silver designs,[352]with "fluted sides,"[353]and with "encircling strings."[354]Such wares as these had a profitable market in Chêkiang, Kiangnan, Kiangsi and Fukien.
There were besides incense burners of many forms, most of which were modelled after bronzes, e.g. those shaped like the fabulous beasti, "which eats tigers and can go five hundredliat a bound"[355]; those like the bronze incense burners on three or four feet (ting), like the cups used in the ancestral temple (i), like the large iron cauldrons (li). Others had elephant legs, and others were shaped like incense caskets or barrels. The vase forms include the goblet (ku),[356]the gall–bladder (tan), the wine pot (hu) with spout and handle, the Buddhist washing vessel (ching), the gardenia (chih tzŭ), the lotus leaf (ho yeh), the gourd (hu lu), musical pipes (lü kuan), vessels with ring–and–mask handlesshou huan,[357]and glass (liu li) forms.
TheKo ku yao lun, which was written about sixty years later than the publication of the Memoirs of Chiang, supplements this information in a short paragraph on "Old Jao Chou wares." "Of the Yüan wares," it says,[358]"those with small foot and moulded ornament (yin hua), and the specimens inscribed inside with the charactersshu fu[359]are highly valued. The recently made wares with large foot and plain white (su) glaze are wanting in brilliancy (jun). There are also green (ch´ing) wares and those with enamelled(wu sê)[360]ornament, and they are very common. Of the modern (i.e. beginning of the Ming dynasty) wares good specimens with white colour and lustrous material are very highly valued. There are besides dark green[361]wares with gilt ornament. They are chiefly wine pots and wine cups, which are very lovely."
TheT´ao luhas a paragraph on theshu fuwares which reflects (not always very clearly) these earlier accounts, adding that "this is the ware made in the private (min) factories and supplied to the palace; the material had to be fine, white and unctuous clay, and thin specimens were preferred.... Inside them were written the charactersshu fuas a mark. At the time the private factories also issued imitations of these wares; but of the porcelains destined for the Emperor ten out of a thousand, one out of a hundred, only were selected. The private factories were unable to achieve uniform success." The author has inserted the gilt and enamelled,[362]and a large number of the other wares mentioned in the Memoirs of Chiang and theKo ku yao lunin that irresponsible fashion which makes much of the Chinese ceramic literature exceedingly difficult to handle. Indeed, one is tempted to ask what was his authority for the statement that the "private factories" made theshu fuware, in spite of the very circumstantial tone of the passage.
It is clear that the best of the Yüan wares made at Ching–tê Chên was plain white or white with engraved and moulded designs; and in this connection it is interesting to find an example ofshu fuporcelain described and illustrated in Hsiang's Album.[363]It is a small, bottle–shaped vase with bulbous mouth, engraved with a dragon and cloud design, and stated to be marked with the charactersshu fuunder the base. We are told that in colour, form, and design it was copied from a specimen of the Northern Ting ware, and that theshu fuware, itself copied from Ting Chou originals, served as a model for the fine white engraved porcelains of the Yung Lo and Hsüan Tê periods of the Ming dynasty. It stood, in short, midway between the soft, opaque–looking, creamy white Sung ware and the thin, hard, and highlytranslucent Ming porcelain, such as the white Yung Lo bowl in the Franks Collection (see Plate 59). Just such an intermediate position as this is held by a bowl[364]in the British Museum with white, translucent body, soft–looking glaze of faint creamy tinge and engraved design of phœnixes and peony plants in Sung style. It has, moreover, a raw mouth rim which shows that it was fired inverted, and as there is noshu fumark it may well have been one of the copies of the Palace types which theT´ao luinforms us were made at the private factories.
Plate 46.—Ting Ware and Yüan Porcelain.Fig.1.—Bottle with carved reliefs of archaic dragons andling chihfunguses.Fèn tingware, said to be Sung dynasty. Height 83/4inches.Fig. 2.—Bowl with moulded floral designs in low relief, unglazed rim. Translucent porcelain, probably Yüan dynasty. Diameter 8 inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Plate 46.—Ting Ware and Yüan Porcelain.Fig.1.—Bottle with carved reliefs of archaic dragons andling chihfunguses.Fèn tingware, said to be Sung dynasty. Height 83/4inches.Fig. 2.—Bowl with moulded floral designs in low relief, unglazed rim. Translucent porcelain, probably Yüan dynasty. Diameter 8 inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
Plate 46.—Ting Ware and Yüan Porcelain.
Fig.1.—Bottle with carved reliefs of archaic dragons andling chihfunguses.Fèn tingware, said to be Sung dynasty. Height 83/4inches.
Fig. 2.—Bowl with moulded floral designs in low relief, unglazed rim. Translucent porcelain, probably Yüan dynasty. Diameter 8 inches.Eumorfopoulos Collection.
It is always difficult to determine the age of plain white wares, but among the archaic specimens of translucent porcelain with creamy white glaze and rough finish at the base which have come from China in recent years under the varying descriptions of Sung, Yüan and early Ming, there are, no doubt, several examples of the Yüan wares of Ching–tê Chên (see Plate 46, Fig. 2).
The mention, in the Memoirs of Chiang and theKo ku yao lun, of painted decoration, enamelled ornament, silvering, and gilding, though apparently but crudely used and little appreciated, is nevertheless of great interest from the historical standpoint.
The potteries at Hu–t´ien which are mentioned in the Memoirs of Chiang (see p. 160) were only separated from Ching–tê Chên by the width of the river. They are described in theT´ao lu[365]as active at the beginning of the Yüan dynasty and producing a ware which, though of coarse grain, had "a considerable amount of antique elegance," and appealed to the taste of the inhabitants of the Chêkiang. The clay was hard and tough, and the colour of the ware brownish yellow[366]as a rule, but even when of a "watery white" tone it was tinged with the same brown colour. At the end of the eighteenth century all trace of the factories had disappeared, though the village still existed[367]and the old wares were still to be found.
Brinkley, who seems to have met with examples of the ware in Japan, describes it as follows[368]: "Thepâteis thick and dense, without any of the delicacy of porcelain, and the glaze is muddyyellow.... The surface of the pieces is generally relieved by deeply incised designs of somewhat archaic character, figure subjects being most common. Some examples are preserved in Japanese collections, where they are known asNingyo–de(figure subject variety) in allusion to the nature of the incised designs." In spite of its apparent roughness it was thought worthy of imitation at Ching–tê Chên in the Ming dynasty.[369]
Among the causes to which was attributed the lack of prosperity at Ching–tê Chên in the Yüan period, the Memoirs of Chiang includes (1) the uncertainty of the season on which the opening of the factory partly depended, (2) the intolerable taxation and the exactions of officials, and (3) the competition of the potteries at Lin–ch´uan, Nan–fêng Hsien, and Chien–yang, all of which, as Bushell indicates, lay on the trade route between Ching–tê Chên and south–eastern coast towns.
Of these we learn in theT´ao luthat Lin–ch´uan[370]in the Fu–chou Fu in Kiangsi (not far south of Ching–tê Chên) made a ware of fine clay and thin substance, the colour of which was mostly white with a slight yellowish tinge, and that some of the pieces were coarsely ornamented, though we are not informed how the ornament was applied. The same authority informs us that Nang–fêng Hsien[371]in the Chien–yang Fu (also in Kiangsi) made a ware of refined clay but somewhat thick substance, which was, as a rule, decorated with blue designs (ch´ing hua), though some had the colour of thet´u tingware, i.e. the coarser and yellower variety of Ting Chou porcelain.
From this passage it appears that "blue and white" may be added to the types of ware made in the Yüan period.
The third factory, at Chien–yang in Fukien, has already been discussed at some length. It was chiefly celebrated for the dark–coloured wares (wu–ni yao) and the "hare's fur" and "partridge" tea bowls.[372]
These names by no means exhaust the list of factories which were active in the Yüan period. Others have been incidentally mentioned elsewhere under the headings of Yüan–tz´ŭ, P´êng ware, Hsin Ting ware, etc.[373]
TheKo ku yao lunenumerates certain pottery forms which, it asserts, were not in use before the Yüan period. As usual, the Chinese descriptions are exceedingly difficult to visualise, and in many cases are open to several interpretations, and are not easy to reconcile with established facts. However, I quote the passage as it stands: "Men of old when they drank tea usedp'ieh[374](? bowls with curved sides), which were easy to drain and did not retain the sediment. For drinking wine they used cups (chan); they had not yet tried cups with handles (pa chan[375]), and in old times they had noch'üan p'an.[376]The Ting warech'üan p'anwhich one sees nowadays are the brush washers (hsi) of olden times. The men of old used 'decoction vases' for pouring wine, and did not use ewers (hu p'ing) or bowls with contracted lip or tea cups (ch'a chung) or dishes with rims.[377]These were all forms used by the Mongols. The men of China only began to use them in the Yüan dynasty. They never appear in old Ting or Kuan wares."[378]
KUANGTUNGChinese charactersWARES
THOUGH the province of Kuangtung has long been celebrated for its pottery, only very meagre information is procurable on the history of its factories. A single reference in theT´u shu[379]carries us back to the T´ang dynasty (618–906), when we learn that earthenware cooking vessels were made in the potteries (t´ao chia) of Kuang Chou (i.e. Canton), which when glazed were better than iron vessels and more suitable for the decoction of drugs. "A vessel of the capacity of a bushel sold for ten cash: and they were things which were worth preserving."
The next mention occurs in theT´ao lu, which gives a short account of the wares under the headingKuang yao, but beyond the statement that the industry originated at Yang–Chiang, it gives no information as to the date or circumstances of its commencement.[380]For the rest this account is very confused and unsatisfactory,and seems in part to refer to the porcelain decorated at Canton (see vol. ii., p. 211), or more probably to the Canton enamels. It is only in the last passage that we come into touch with a ware which is readily recognised as the familiar Canton stoneware. This is a hard–fired ware, usually dark brown at the base, but varying at times to pale yellowish grey and buff, with a thick smooth glaze distinguished from other ceramic glazes by its characteristic mottling and dappling. The colour is often blue, flecked and streaked with grey green or white over a substratum of olive brown, or again green with grey and blue mottling. At times the brown tints predominate, but the most prized varieties are those in which the general tone is blue. These were specially selected for imitation at the Imperial factories under T´ang Ying, and they are highly valued in Japan, where the ware in general goes by the name ofnamako.[381]In other specimens the glaze has a curdled appearance, and sometimes it seems to have boiled up like lava. The mottled glazes at times have a superficial resemblance to the dappled Chün wares, and there is no doubt that in recent times these imitative effects have been studied.
The dating of the mottled Kuangtung wares, or Canton stonewares as they are commonly named, is always a difficult matter. They are still made and exported in large quantities, but it is certain that they go back at least to late Ming times. Sir Arthur Church exhibited a tray of this ware at the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1910[382]which bore a date corresponding to 1625, and the name of the maker, Chin–shih. The glaze of this interesting piece is remarkably deep, rich and lustrous, and it may be regarded as typical of the finest period of the ware. The tray illustrated by Fig. 1 of Plate 48 closely resembles it in colour and quality. Stamped marks occasionally occur in these wares, the most frequentbeing the seals used by two potters, apparently brothers, named Ko Ming–hsiang and Ko Yüan–hsiang (see p. 221). It was formerly said that they lived at the end of the Ming period, but Dr. Bushell in hisChinese Art[383]reduced their antiquity to the reign of Ch´ien Lung (1736–1795). No reason is given for either of these dates, but their work is familiar, and as some of the examples have a decidedly modern aspect, I am strongly in favour of the later attribution. Plate 47 is a fine example of a Kuangtung glaze, in which the blue is conspicuous.[384]It is probably of seventeenth–century date.
Another Kuangtung group consists chiefly of figures and objects modelled in the round and coated with rich crimson redflambéor pea green celadon glazes, with a liberal display of dark brown or red biscuit. Figures of the god of War and other deities are often represented, the draperies heavily glazed and the flesh parts in unglazed biscuit, which sometimes has the appearance of being browned by a dressing of ferruginous clay. (See Plate 48.)
Vase of buff stoneware with a scroll of rosette–like flowers in relief: thick flocculent glaze of mottled blue with passages of dull green and a substratum of brown. Kuangtung ware, seventeenth century.
Vase of buff stoneware with a scroll of rosette–like flowers in relief: thick flocculent glaze of mottled blue with passages of dull green and a substratum of brown. Kuangtung ware, seventeenth century.
Height 101/4inches.Benson Collection.
Brinkley[385]describes several additional types of Kuang yao, including a buff stoneware with "creamy crackled glaze of t´u Ting type."[386]"The characteristic type is a large vase or ewer[387]decorated with a scroll of lotus or peony in high relief and having paint–like, creamy glaze of varying lustre and uneven thickness, its buff colour often showing tinges of blue." Vases of similar make seem also to aim at copying the red–splashed lavender glazes of the Chün and Yüan wares, and sometimes the colour is very beautiful, but the glaze has distinctive characteristics (see Plate 48, Fig. 2). It is opaque, and lacks the translucent and flowing character of the originals, and the surface has a peculiar sticky lustre, and something of that silken sheen which distinguishes the Cantonand Yi–hsing glazes of this class. The crackle, too, is more open and obvious. Some of these pieces have the appearance of considerable antiquity, and are reputed to date back to Sung times.[388]Midway between these and the familiar mottled Canton stoneware come what are known in China as the Fat–shan Chün.[389]Their obvious intention to imitate the old Chün wares is declared by the appearance of numerals incised in Chün Chou fashion under the base. A typical example (see Plate 51) is a high–shouldered flower vase with short neck and small mouth (not a Sung but a Ming form, be it noted), with thick, rolling, crackled glaze of pinkish cream colour, shading into lavender and flushing deep red on the shoulders. In rare instances the crimson spreads over the greater part of the surface. The biscuit at the base is brownish grey if its light tint is not concealed by a wash of dark clay. The glaze, unlike that of the type described by Brinkley, is fairly fluescent, thin at the mouth, and running thick in the lower levels. Other examples of this class have heavily mottled grey or blue glazes nearer in style to the Canton stoneware. Indeed, they are clearly made at the same factory as the latter, for we have a connecting link between the two groups in a vase in the Eumorfopoulos Collection, a tall cylinder with streaky lavender blue glaze and the usual silken lustre, the base of buff colour washed with brown slip and marked with the square seal of Ko Ming–hsiang. Many of these "Fat–shan Chün" wares are exceedingly attractive, but by far the most beautiful are the rare dishes in which the glaze has been allowed to form in deep pools of glass in the centre.[390]In these pieces all the changing tints of the surrounding glaze are concentrated in the cavity in a crystalline mass of vivid colour. Such wares are, I think, not older than the Ch´ing dynasty, though they have been erroneously described by some writers as Sung.[391]
With regard to the dates of the Fat–shan Chün types, the remarks made on the Canton stoneware apply equally to them. Many are frankly modern; the finer pieces may be assigned to the eighteenth century, and a few perhaps go back to the Ming dynasty. From the current name we infer that they are made at Fat–shan, but this is the only evidence existing on the question. Fat–shan is situated a few miles south–west of Canton with which it is connected by railway. It is a large town, "renowned for its vast silk manufactures, cloth–making, embroidery, cutlery, matting, paper, and porcelain."[392]No doubt the word porcelain in this context is a comprehensive term, and includes stoneware and pottery, if, indeed, it means anything else. But the precise provenance of the various kinds of Kuang yao is far from clear. All that we learn from theT´ao luis that the Kuang yao originated at Yang–chiang. Probably the type of mottled glaze which characterises the Canton stoneware was first made there, and was afterwards adopted in the factories which sprang up in the neighbourhood of Canton. Other localities in the province of Kuangtung in which the ceramic industry is represented include Chao–Ch´ing Fu,[393]which may be only a trading centre for the wares; Shih–wan, in Po–lo Hsien, a few miles east of Canton, which is said[394]to supply the Canton markets with "pots, dishes, and jars of every needed shape and size, some of the latter as large as hogsheads, glazed and unglazed, together with a large variety of imitation grotto work and figures for gardens, gallipots, little images, etc."; and the prefecture of Lien–chou, in the extreme south of the province, which exports its wares from Pak–hoi. A few specimens bought in the neighbourhood of the Shih–wan potteries, and no doubt of local make, are in the British Museum. They consist of lion joss–stick holders, crab–shaped pots for growing lily bulbs, and small figures of a hard, rough stoneware of buff or drab colour. The bulb pots have an opaque green glaze with passages of transparentflambécolours, not unlike the Yi–hsing or Canton Chün glazes, and the other pieces have washes of the thin, translucent green, turquoise, yellow, and purplish brown glazes which are usually applied on the biscuit of pottery or porcelain. The exhibits at the Paris Exhibition[395]in 1878 included "tea jars, tobacco pots, medicine jars, cassolettes, various pots, plates, sauce vessels, rice bowls, wine and rice cups, spoons, bird–cage pots, mortars, candlesticks, crucibles and lamps" from the Pak–hoi district.