SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION. UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF CERAMIC ART IN CHINA, WITH A CATALOGUE OF THE HIPPISLEY COLLECTION OF CHINESE PORCELAINS. ALFRED E. HIPPISLEY, Commissioner of the Imperial Maritime Customs S&rvice of China From the Report of the United States National Museum for 1900, pages 306-416, Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/sketchofhistoryoOOhipp SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION. UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF CERAMIC ART IN CHINA, WITH A CATALOGUE OF THE HIPPISLEY COLLECTION OF CHINESE PORCELAINS. ALFRED E. HIPPISLEY, Commissioner of the Imperial Maritime Customs Service of China. From the Report of the United States National Museum for 1900, pages 305-416, with twenty-one plates. fern WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. I902. \ G/D KETCH OF THE HISTORY OE CERAMIC ART IN CHINA, WITH A CATALOGUE OF THE HIPPISLEY COL- LECTION OF CHINESE PORCELAINS. ALFRED E. HIPPISEEY, Commissioner of the Imperial Maritime Customs Service of China. 305 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATES. Facing page. 1. Bowis of wiiite K’anghsi porcelain (Nos. 27 and 46) 374 2. Vases of K’anghsi porcelain (No. 53) and Chienlung porcelain (No. 236) . . 378 3. Vases of white K’anghsi porcelain (Nos. 81 and 60) 382 4. Vase of K’anghsi porcelain (No. 82) 384 5. Plates of white Yungcheng porcelain (Nos. 117 and 118) 386 6. Vases of white Yungcheng porcelain (Nos. 130, 125, and 129) 388 7. Vases of white Yungcheng porcelain (Nos. 133, 128, and 124) . 388 8. Pilgrim-bottle of white Chienlung porcelain (No. 176) 390 9. Plates of Chienlung porcelain (Nos. 191 and 192) and pencil holder (No. 221 ) . 392 10. Vases of Chienlung porcelain (Nos. 195 and 194) : 394 11. Vase of Chienlung porcelain (No. 202) 394 12. Vase of white porcelain (No. 206) .... 396 13. Vases of white Chienlung porcelain (Nos. 220, 226, and 185) 398 14. Vase of white Chienlung porcelain (No. 235) 398 15. Vase of white Chienlung porcelain (No. 238) ^ . 398 16. Vase of white Chienlung porcelain (No. 245) 400 17. Vases of white Chienlung porcelain (Nos. 264 and 204) ,, 402 18. Teapot and cups of Chienlung porcelain (Nos. 330-332) 406 19. Rice bowls of Yungcheng porcelain (Nos. 329 and 328) and vase of Chien- lung porcelain (No. 336) 406 20. Pencil holder and wine cups of Ku Yueh-hsiian ware (Nos. 327, 325 and 326) 408 21. Vases of white Chienlung porcelain (Nos. 333 and 334) 408 307 A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF CERAMIC ART IN CHINA, WITH A CATALOGUE OF THE HIPPISLEY COLLECTION OF CHINESE PORCELAINS . 1 By Alfred E. Hippisley, Commissioner (if the Imperial Maritime Customs Service of China . For such information as we possess regarding the history of the ceramic art in China, we have till recently been chiefly indebted to the labors of the famous French sinologue, M. Stanislas Julien, who, under the title of L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, translated, and published in 1856, the History of the Manufactory of Chingte-chen (a small town in Kiangsi province, but for centuries the most important seat of the Chinese Porcelain industry), a work written by a local magistrate in 1815 from older documents, and to the valua- ble letters from the same town written in 1712 and 1722 by the Jesuit missionary Pere d’Entrecolles, the priest in charge there, which have been published in the collection of Lettres edifiantes et curieuses. Within the past three years, however, very valuable additional light has been shed upon this subject by the labors of two gentlemen who are at once collectors and Chinese scholars, S. W. Bushell, M. D., physician to H. B. M. legation, Pekin, and F. Hirth, Ph. D., a member of the imperial maritime customs service of China. Doctor Bushell has been fortunate enough to secure from among the dispersed library of the Prince of I the manuscript of a descriptive catalogue (of which nath^e experts see no reason to doubt the authenticity), with illustrations painted in water-color, of eighty-two celebrated specimens of old porcelain seen in the collections of noted connoisseurs or possessed by the author him- self, one Hsiang Yuan-p’ien (styled Tzu-ehing), a native of Tsui-li, an 1 In 1887 Mr. A. E. Hippisley, a commissioner of the imperial maritime customs service of China, deposited in the U. S. National Museum a large and important col- lection of Chinese porcelains, with the understanding that the Museum should print a descriptive catalogue, which it did in the Annual Report for 1887-88. The edition of this catalogue having long ago been exhausted, and the demand for it having recently increased, owing to the current interest in all matters relating to China, it is now republished with emendations and with the addition of a number of plates illustrating type examples from the various provinces represented. 309 310 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. ancient name of Chia-ho, now Chiahsing-fu, in Chehkiang province, who was a celebrated collector of all kinds of antiquities during the latter half of the sixteenth century. A translation of this work, with explan- atory details by Doctor Bushell, has been published in the journal of the Pekin Oriental Society, under the title of Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, and it is, I believe, to be shortly republished in an amplified form with reproductions of the original drawings. Should this be done, the work would, in my opinion, form by far the most important and valuable contribution to our knowledge of this interesting subject. The information regarding Chinese porcelain which has been bequeathed to us b}^ native authors is to be found in their encyclopedias or in special treatises chiefly based upon the ency- clopedias. These are, however, compilations of such vast extent that the authors had not, nor could be expected to have, the intimate knowledge of an expert upon all of the very many subjects treated in them. Hearsay evidence or unverified rumors have thus but too often been allowed to crystallize into permanent record, with the result that it is impossible after an interval of centuries to attempt to recon- cile the many contradictions of statement contained in the different works. In this catalogue, however, are contained the reproductions in color of eighty-two specimens of the choicest productions of a period extending over upward of five centuries, from A. D. 960 to 1521, either possessed or seen by the artist, and scattered notes from the pen of one of the most noted connoisseurs of his age regarding the respective merits and rarity of the various kinds of ware. Existing realities are presented to us in place of the vague generalities and con- tradictory essays of the encyclopedists, and there can, I apprehend, be little doubt as to the comparative value of the two varieties of evi- dence. Doctor Hirth’s contribution — Chinese Porcelain: A Study in Chinese Mediaeval Industry and Trade — is an important paper, treat- ing chiefly of Chinese celadon porcelain and its distribution over the Mohammedan world. EARLIEST MENTION OF PORCELAIN. According to the legendary records of the prehistoric period of Chinese chronology, porcelain was already manufactured under Huang-ti, an emperor who is said to have entered upon a reign of one hundred years in B. C. 2697; and the Emperor Yu-ti-Shun, another monarch of the legendary period, is believed to have himself made porcelain before mounting the throne in B. C. 2255. Under the suc- ceeding dynasty of Chou, mention is made of an official director of pottery, and the processes of fashioning on the wheel and of mold- ing are distinguished; sacrificial wine jars and altar dishes, coffins, - ooking utensils, and measures being mentioned among the articles produced. Eater Chinese writers have, however, long admitted that CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 311 the productions of that age could only have been of earthenware (possibly glazed), and that no greater antiquity can be claimed for the manufacture of real porcelain than the reign of the Han dynasty, which held the throne of China from B. C. 202 to A. D. 220, and that after this date progress in the system of man- ufacture was for a long period but slow. At one time, early in the present century, European archaeologists were inclined to believe than an antiquity might be conceded to Chinese porcelain almost equal to the wildest claims of Chinese historians. 1 Some small porcelain bot- tles, decorated with flowers and inscriptions in Chinese, having been brought to Europe by M. Rosellini, who stated that the} r had been found in undisturbed Egyptian tombs dating from at least 1800 B. C., it was concluded that the manufacture of porcelain must have existed in China anterior to that date. M. Julien discovered, however, that the inscrip- tions upon these bottles were written in the cursive character, a style of writing not introduced till B. C. 48; and later Mr. (afterwards Sir Walter) Medhurst, then an interpreter in the Hongkong govern- ment service, was able with Chinese aid to identify the inscriptions with quotations from poems written during the T 4 ang dynasty, and later than the seventh century of the Christian era. Any title to such great antiquity in the manufacture of Chinese porcelain, based on these bottles, which had evidently been surreptitiously introduced into the tombs by Arabs, thus fell to the ground. Indeed, M. du Sartel, who has published an exhaustive work on LaPorcelaine de la Chine, argues that the manufacture of true porcelain in China did not begin till some centuries later than the period assigned to it by M. Julien-,. who dates it from the reign of the Han dynasty and somewhere between the years B. C. 185 and A. D. 87. This point will be consid- ered when we come to the reign of the T 4 ang dynasty, the period in which M. du Sartel claims true porcelain was first made. HAN DYNASTY, B. C. 202 TO A. D. 220. It is during the Han dynasty that mention is first made of Tz^u, the Chinese designation of porcelain. It was then made at Hsinpfing, a district in the State of Ch 4 en, and corresponding with the modern Huai- ning district, in Honan province. WEI DYNASTY, 221 TO 265. Under the Wei dynasty, which from A. D. 221 to 265 enjoyed, with the dynasties of Wu and of Han of Szechuen, divided supremacy as rulers of China, manufactories are mentioned at several places in the department of Hsi-an, in Shensi province (the products of which were known as Kuanchung-yao), and at Loyang, in Honan province (products termed Loching-t 4 ao), as supplying porcelain for the imperial palace. 1 Rosellini, I Monumenti dell’ Egitto, 1834. Sir John Davis, The Chinese, 1836. J. Gardener Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1837. $12 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. CHIN DYNASTY, 266 TO 419. Under the Chin dynasty (A. D. 266 to 419) another manufactory is mentioned as existing in the present department of Wenchou, in Cheh- kiang province, which produced porcelain (known as Tung-ou Uao) of a blue (or possibly celadon) color which was held in high esteem. SUI DYNASTY, 581 TO 617. Under the Sui dynasty, in spite of its short-lived existence, consid- erable progress appears to have taken place. Mention is made of a green porcelain manufactured under the directions of Ho Chou or Ho- Kuei-lin, president of the board of works, to replace glass, the method of making which had been forgotten “since its introduction into China by Indian or Syrian artisans about A. D. 424. 5,1 A celebrated work- man, named T*ao Yu, 1 2 is said to have produced porcelain so like jade, that is, semitransparent and of vitreous appearance, that his vases were known as “artificial jade;” and about the close of this or the beginning of the following dynasty porcelain, white in color and bright as jade (known as Ho-yao, i. e., Ho porcelain), was manufac- tured by Ho Chung-ch 4 u, a workman who came from Hsinp’ing, the district where porcelain (fe%) had its first origin under the Han dynasty. An imperial decree of 583 ordered the establishment of a manufactory at the place now known as Chingte-chen (so named from the title of the period, 3 Chingte, in which it was inaugurated) for articles for the use of the imperial household, and several others sprang up in the vicinity shortly afterwards. 1 F. Hirth, China and the Roman Orient, pp. 230 et seq. 2 The producer’s reputed name, meaning as it does “ faience or kiln jade,” sounds apocryphal, and seems more likely to have been the term by which this ware was known. 3 It being contrary to etiquette to mention the personal name of a Chinese sovereign, the practice was introduced B. C. 163, under the earlier Han dynasty, of the mon- arch, on his accession to the throne, selecting some title for his reign in place of the title of Prince so-and-so, which had been usually employed prior to the time of Shih Huangti, B. C. 221. These titles were usually so chosen as to be of happy augury, but if, in spite of such good omen, disorder or misfortune ensued or some other rea- son seemed to render a change advisable, one title would be abandoned in favor of another. This title is termed nien-hao, “the year designation,” because so long as it, lasted the date of all events was chronicled as such and such a year of such and such a title, or nien-hao. Upon his death, however, the emperor received an honor- ific title, and but one title, no matter how many nien-hao , or “year designations,” he may have employed while alive, under which the religious ceremonies due to him. were offered, and which is therefore termed the miao-liao , or “temple designation.” Thus it results that when in Chinese literature a deceased emperor is personally alluded to he is spoken of under his “temple designation,” while if the date of an event which occurred during his reign is quoted it is said to have taken place in such and such a year of the appropriate “year designation.” Take, as an instance, the last emperor of the Yuan dynasty, who reigned from 1333 to 1367; if spoken of per- sonally his title would be Shunti of the Yuan dynasty; but if the year 1334 were CERAMIC ART IK CHINA. 313 T‘ANG DYNASTY, 618 TO 906. Under the succeeding, the T 4 ang dynasty, which ruled from 618 to 906, the manufacture appears to have spread over the greater part of the empire, and to have reached in some places a degree of excellence far in advance of that previous^ attained. The following varieties are specifically enumerated (in the reverse order of their merit): The Hungchou-yao , a yellow-black porcelain from Hungchow, the present department of Nan-ch 4 ang, in Kiangsi province. The Skou-yao , a yellow porcelain from Shouchou in (present) Kiangsu province. spoken of, it would read “the second year of (the) Yuan t‘ung (period),” and simi- larly 1336 and 1343 would read “the second year of (the) Chihyuan period)” and ■“ the second year of (the) Chihcheng (period).” Owing to the fact that dates are thus rendered by the Chinese foreign writers have at times erroneously spoken of the nien-hcio , or “period,” as the reign, whereas the miao-hao or “ temple designation ” alone corresponds to the Western idea of reign, so far as any time prior to the Ming dynasty is concerned. During the Ming and its successor, the present dynasty, how- ever, each emperor has practically used but one “year designation” throughout the period he has occupied the throne, because though Ying Tsung of the Ming dynasty employed two such designations they were separated by an interregnum of- seven years’ duration; and though T‘ai-Tsung-Wen, of the present dynasty, also employed two, he seldom or never comes to the notice of foreign writers. The term “period” being in any case an inconvenient one, and the ‘ 4 year designation ’ ’ under the Ming and the present dynasty being synchronous with the reign, it Seems hyper- critical to insist on uniformly translating nien-hcio by “period” in the case of emperors of those dynasties, especially as consistency would require that names so well known to every schoolboy, as Kanghsi, Yungcheng, and Chienlung be replaced by the proper titles, Sheng-Tsu-Jen Huangti, Shih-Tsung-Hsien Huangti, and Kao- Tsung-Shun Huangti. In the following pages, therefore, the nien-hcio or “year designation ” has been rendered 4 4 period” prior to the accession of the Ming dynasty in 1368, and subsequently to that date as 4 4 period” or “reign,” according to circum- stances. The dates upon porcelain are also usually recorded by the use of the nien-hcio, as above described, though other marks are mentioned by Chinese writers, and if the article has been manufactured for the special use of some emperor or prince, it will possibly bear the name of the pavilion or portion of the palace for which it is spe- cially intended. Chinese writers state that the practice of marking the date of man- ufacture was instituted by the Emperor Chen Tsung of the Sung dynasty, when, on the establishment of the government factory at Chingte-ch^n, he ordered that each article manufactured should be marked with the nien-hcio then used “Chingte, 1004 to 1007.” Foreign writers on the marks upon porcelain specify other marks of the same dynasty, but upon what authority is not clearly specified. So far as my own knowledge goes, I am unaware of any such date-marks being inscribed under the glaze prior to the Ming dynasty. Since that time, putting aside monochromes, which, in probably the majority of instances, bear no mark, they have been employed uninterruptedly, except during a portion of K’anghsi’s reign. In 1677 the magis- trate in charge at Chingte-chen forbade the practice alike of inscribing the date and of portraying the actions of celebrated personages, on the ground that if the article were broken, disrespect might be shown to them or to the emperor. During this period, which was of but short duration, however, a leaf, a censer, and other marks replaced the nien-hao. NAT mus 1900 23 REPOET OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. 31 1 The Yo-yao , a blue porcelain, according to Julien, but the color was more probably a pale green, for the CITa ching, a Treatise on Tea, written in the eighth century, says cups of this ware gave to the infusion a green tint — from the department of Yochou, in (present) Hunan province. The Wu-yao and Ting-yao , of colors unspecified, from the department of Wuchou, corresponding with the present department of Chinhua in Chehkiang province; and from the department of Tingchow, corresponding with the present district of Chingyang in the Hsi-an department, Shensi province, respectively. The Yueh-yao , a blue, or for the same reason as in the case of Yo-yao a pale-green porcelain, much sought after from the earliest times, from Yiiehchou, corresponding with the present department of Chaohsing in Chehkiang province; and lastly The Shu-yao or Szechuen porcelain, easily first among the productions of that age, snow-white in color, with a clear ring, thin but strong, and graceful in shape, fram the city^ of Ta-i, in the department of Kfiungchou, in (present) Szechuen province. THE ANTIQUITY OF TRUE PORCELAIN. As already stated, M. du Sartel declines to admit the antiquity attrib- uted by M. Julien, on the authority of the native work he translated, to the production of true porcelain in China, namely, the time of the Han dynasty, and somewhere between the years B. C. 185 and A. D. 87. His arguments, however, are marked b}^ strange inaccuracies. Having referred the productions of Hungchou, Shouchou, Yochou, and Yiieh- chou, which, as above, Chinese authors claim to have been first manu- factured under the T‘ang dynasty, back to the Chfin dynasty, that is, to a period nearly two centuries earlier, M. du Sartel argues that the remarks made in the Treatise on Tea above referred to (which, when enumerating the varieties of T fc ang porcelain, classifies them merely according to the suitability of their colored glazes to impart an agree- able tint to tea held in them) tend to show that the bowls or cups in question could not have been transparent porcelain, bearing a decora- tion in the colors named under the glaze, but must have been of an opaque substance, covered internally with a thick colored glaze. In this view he considers himself supported by the description given of the Sui dynasty manufactures. This, he argues, gives an idea of trans- parence, but the transparence is due merely to the use of a more vit- reous composition or to a more thorough baking than had been pre- viously customary, and the white color and other distinctive qualities of true porcelain are only to be first found in the productions of the T w ang dynasty — that is, in those productions which M. du Sartel, in disregard of the statements of Chinese writers, the only authorities we have to guide us, himself elects to refer to this dynasty. Secondly, he CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 315 argues that the porcelain manufactured under the Sui and preceding dynasties is uniformly denominated tfao, that from the latter half of the T 4 ang dynasty this word is replaced by the designation yao , which has continued in use up to the present time, and that the change in name coincides with a change in the character of the porcelain manufactured. The word yao as a designation of porcelain came into general use, it is true, at the beginning of the T 4 ang dynasty, but that fact would scarcely justify the conclusion that it was designedly intro- duced in order to mark a synchronous change in the character of the ware, since the same word, which is in any case but a neutral term applicable to any kind of pottery, is met with four centuries earlier to designate some of the products of the Wei dynasty; and besides, in the titles of the chapters in the Provincial Topographies dealing with these manufactures, also in the Treatise on Pottery (the T 4 ao shuo, written by Chu T 4 ung-ch 4 uan during the reign of Chien-lung, 1736 to 1795, the authority on this subject), and in the work translated by M. Julien, it is the word tfao, not yao , that is used to designate porcelain. Chinese terminology is but an insecure foundation on which to base arguments, and it might with no less fairness be contended, as the Chi- nese author translated by M. Julien does contend, that the introduc- tion of the character signifying 44 porcelain,” and employed down to the present day to designate the pottery of the Han dynasty, was rendered necessary by the production of an article hitherto unknown, and that this article was true porcelain. On different grounds from those advanced by M. du Sartel, Doctor Hirth, also, refers the earliest manufacture of true porcelain totheT 4 ang ' instead of to the Han dynasty. He says: 44 The Cheng-lei-pen-ts 4 ao, the pharmacopoeia of the Sung dynasty, compiled in 1108, under the head of 4 Porcelain Earth’ (Kaolin) or Pai-ngo, quotes from the writ- ings of T 4 ao Yin-chti that 4 this substance is now much used for paint- ing pictures,’ and from the T 4 ang pen-ts 4 ao, the pharmacopoeia of the T 4 ang dynasty, compiled about 650: 4 This earth is now used for painters’ work, and rarely enters into medical prescriptions; during recent gen- erations it has been used to make white porcelain.’” As T 4 ao Yin-" cbu was a celebrated author on pharmaceutical and other scientific subjects, who died A. D. 536, Doctor Hirth argues that had the pai-ngo or kaolin been used in his time on an extensive scale in the manufac- ture of chinaware, so learned a writer would almost certainly have mentioned the subject, and he therefore concludes that porcelain earth for the manufacture of pottery came into use later than 536, and at some time during the T 4 ang period, prior to 650, about which date the pharmacopoeia of that dynasty was compiled. This negative testimony does not, however, dispose of the strong argu- ment in favor of the earlier date, afforded by the coining during the Han dynasty of a new word, fe 4 $, to designate the productions of that age, 316 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. a word which, as already stated, is still in ordinary use to designate porcelain. On this point Doctor Hirth thinks he has detected that the word tz‘u has had different significations at different epochs, for while in the Shuo-wen, a glossary published A. D. 100, tz‘u is defined as “ earthenware,” it is defined in the dictionaries of the Sung period — nine centuries later — as “hard, fine-grained pottery; ” and calling atten- tion to the fact that there are now two forms of this character in use, the original form with the radical denoting “ brick or earthen material,” and a later form with the radical “stone,” he thinks that 4 4 this substitu- tion by later generations for the original sign of a character of the same sound, but with a radical more appropriate to the category of the word as it was at the time understood, may be regarded as indicating a change from the original meaning.” 1 Even if this be true, no data are thereby afforded to help fix even the approximate date of change in the method of manufacture. For after the change in the system of manu- facture had taken place, a considerable period would almost certainly elapse before an author of sufficient literary importance to impose a new style of writing on the nation would learn sufficient regarding the altered ingredients employed to have the corresponding modification in the descriptive word suggested to his mind, and a still longer period would elapse before this newly coined word would pass into current use. The authors translated by M. J ulien, too, state distinctly that the introduction of the later form — that with the radical “stone” — and the continued use of it are due to ignorance and error. At TVu-chou, a district anciently within the department of Changte, in Honan prov- ince, but now belonging to the department of Kuangpfing, in Chihli province, a kind of porcelain was made during the Sung dynasty which enjoyed a very high reputation, the plain white specimens bringing even higher prices than the celebrated productions of Tingchow, which it closely resembled. This ware was known as Tz^u ware, or porcelain from Tz 4 u-chow, and thus this form of the character, which was origi- nally a local designation, not an intentional modification of the older form introduced to typify a modification in the system of manufacture, jiassed into general use to designate not merely this special class, but (erroneously) all porcelain. 2 * ORIGIN OF TERM “PORCELAIN.” It is a curious coincidence that no less diversity of opinion has existed regarding the date at which the western equivalent of this word tz^u, the term “porcelain,” was introduced and the article it has at different 1 F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain, p. 2. a S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 29: This is, I think, probably the true explanation of the change of form; for the only correct way of writing this character recognized at the present time by the Imperial Academy is the original form, with the radical “ earthenware,” not that with the radical “stone,” CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 317 times been used to designate. Pere d’Entrecolles affirms that the name porcelain was first given by the Portuguese to the Chinese vases imported by them into Europe in 1518, but further researches into the history of the word by M. Brongniart and M. de Laborde show that the name arose from a supposed resemblance in appearance of surface between the transparent pottery of the East and certain shells which had been previously so designated. M. de Laborde says: Les anciens ayant trouve ou cherche une ressemblance entre ce qu’ils appelaient porca et certaines coquilles, donnerent a celles-la le nora de porcella. Le moyen Age accepta cette analogie en appelant porcelaine une famille entiere de coquilles, et aussi les ouvrages qui etaient faits de nacre de perle, et, par metonymie, la nacre seule tiree de la coquille. A partir du XIV e siecle, les gardes des joyaux decrivent en grand norabre dans les inventaires, et les experts mentionnent et estiment dans leurs rapports, des vases, des ustensiles de table, des tableaux de devotion, et des joyaux faits de la porcelaine. Cette expression a travers quelques variantes sans importance, reste la meme et s’ ap- plique aux memes choses jusqu’au XVI e siecle; de ce moment elle se bifurque pour conserver d’une part sa vieille signification, et s’etendre de 1’ autre a des vases et ustensiles . d’ importation etrangere qui offraient la meme blancheur nacree. C’etait la poterie emaillee de la Chine qui s’emparait de ce nom auquel elle n’avait droit que par une analogie de teinte et de grain. M. du Sartel is strongly of opinion that the word porcelain was used in its present sense far earlier than the date assigned by M. de Laborde, and in support of his view quotes the mention of u pourcelaine ” in ro} r al inventories dating from 1360 to 1416 for France, and from the beginning of the sixteenth century for the Roman Empire. These documents appear to me, however, rather to support M. de Laborde’s views; foi; the details given in the French inventories of representations on the articles named, of our Lord, the Blessed Mother, and of Saints, and of their decoration with jewels, 1 would seem to make the possibility of their being oriental porcelain more than doubtful; while the inventories belonging to the Roman Empire — that is, from the date M. de Laborde says the word was applied to oriental pottery, do mention articles undoubtedly of real porcelain, all, with one exception, in monochrome. A statement quoted by M. du Sartel from Pierre Belon, of 1553, is worth reproducing, as evidence that in the latter half of the sixteenth century the word porcelain was still applied to shells, to mother-of-pearl, to oriental pottery, and even to Italian faience. He says: Des vaisseaux de porcelaine, qu’il a vus vendre en public au Caire, lesquels vases de porcelaine sont transparents et coustent bien cher au Caire et ilk disent mesme- ment qu’ilz les apportent des Indes, mais cela ne me sembla vraysemblable; car on 1 With regard to the last mentioned, it should be stated that in the magnificent Dresden collection, formed chiefly by Augustus the Strong, King of Poland and Elector of Saxony, between 1694 and 1705, there is a small ivory-white plate with uncut rubies and emeralds in gold filigree let into the paste, with the character fa, happiness, on the foot in blue under the glaze, which is said to have been brought by a crusader from Palestine in the twelfth century. 318 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. n’en voilroit pas si grande quantite ni de si grandes pieces s’il les falloit apporter de si loing. Une esguiere, an pot ou an autre vaisseau, pour petite qu’elle soit, couste un ducat; si c’est quelque grand vase, il coustera da vantage. Et les voyant nommez d’une appellation moderne et cherchant leur etymologie frangoise, j’y trouve qu’ils sont nommez du nom que tient une espece de coquille de porcelaine. Mais l’affinite de la diction Murex correspond a Murrhina; toutefois je ne clierc.he 1’ etymologie que du nom frangois en ce que nous disons vaisseaux de pource- layne, scachans que les Grecs nomment la mirrhe de Smirna, les vaisseaux qu’on vend pour ce aujourd’liui en nos pais, nommez de pourcelaine, ne tiennent tache de la nature des anciens; et combien que les meilleurs ouvriers de l’ltalie n’en font point de telz, toutefois, ils vendent leurs ouvrages pour vaisseaux de pourcelaine, combien qu’ils n’ont pas la matiere de mesme. 1 2 THE FIVE DYNASTIES, 907 TO 959. To the T’ang succeeded the epoch of the five dynasties, all of them short-lived and naming* themselves successors to some one of the more important dynasties that had. preceded them. Under one of these, the Posterior Chou, during the reign of the Emperor Shih-tsung (95d to 959), a celebrated porcelain, far superior to an} r yet produced, was manufactured in the district of Pien, the present department of K’aifeng, in Honan province. It is described as being sky-blue in color, of brilliant surface, thin as paper, and giving out a clear musical sound when struck, the only defect being that the base was apt to be disfigured by the remains of the coarse sand on which the vessel had rested in the furnace, and which had become attached to it during the process of baking. The color was adopted in obedience to an imperial order that porcelain intended for palace use should thence- forward be 4 4 as blue as the clear sky after rain. ” This porcelain, which was consequent^ termed Yu-yao , 4 4 Imperial porcelain,” and, after the accession of the succeeding dynasty, Cfcai-yaoS'QY&i porcelain” (Ch 4 ai being the Emperor’s family name), was very highly prized, and becom- ing in subsequent years, owing to its delicate make, exceedingly rare, the smallest fragments were treasured as cap ornaments or necklace pendants. Porcelain, blue in color and with the characters 44 blue as the clear sky after rain ” stamped in the glaze, is at the present time to be obtained in China. It is scarcely necessary to state, however, that such specimens do not date from the time of Shih-tsung; on the contrary, they are of quite modern manufacture. Already in the sixteenth cen- 1 Du Sartel, Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 33. 2 Florio, in his Italian dictionary (1598), gives “ Porcellana, a kinde of fine earth called Porcelane, whereof they make fine China dishes called Porcellan dishes. China, a Venus basin,” i. e., a Venice basin. It may remain a question whether Majolica, exported by way of Venice, was called China from a supposed resemblance to oriental porcelain, or whether the wares alluded to by Florio were in fact oriental. Minsheu, in his Spanish dictionary (1599), gives “ Porcellana , a kinde of earthen vessel 1 painted; costly fruit dishes of fine earth, painted ” — quoted in Marryat’s History^of Pottery and Porcelain, p. 242. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 319 tury Hsiang Tzu-ching writes in the preface to his catalogue, “In the present day men search for a fragment of this porcelain without being able to find one, and declare it to be but a phantom.' 71 EARLIEST PORCELAIN EXTANT DATES FROM SUNG DYNASTY. In truth, the description which has been attempted of the varieties of porcelain hitherto enumerated possesses merely a historical interest. No specimens manufactured prior to the advent of the Sung dynasty have survived to the present day, and even of the Sung productions the finer kinds have entirely disappeared. Such specimens as have weathered the storms and dangers of the subsequent eight centuries are, so far as I am aware, only celadons of considerable solidity — chiefly Lungch 4 uan or Chunchow ware — or small pieces of no great fineness. Three cen- turies ago even the finest varieties were already scarce, as is evident from a passage in the P^ing an essay on flower-pots and flowers in pots, from the pen of Chang Ch 4 ien-te, an author who wrote near the close of the Ming dynasty, that is, about the beginning of the seven- teenth century: In ancient times no vases were made of porcelain, and up to the T‘ang dynasty all such vessels were of copper. It was not till then that pottery came into vogue. After this period we find a large number of classes of porcelain, such as the kinds known as Ch‘ai (that described above), Ju, Kuan, Ko, Ting, Lungch‘uan, Chiinchou, Changsheng, Wuni (all of the Sung dynasty period), Hsuante, and Ch’enghua (of the Ming dynasty). Among antiquities, copper articles are the best; of porcelain, the Ch‘ai and Ju kinds, though the best of all, have ceased to exist; Kuan, Ko, Hsiian, and Ting porcelains are the most precious curiosities of the present day; whereas the porcelains called Lungch‘uan (the heavy old celadons of modern collectors), Chun- chou, Changsheng, Wunie, and Ch’enghua are esteemed as objects of only secondary value.” 1 2 As Chang Ch 4 ieri-te further says that he constantly met with speci- mens of Juchou porcelain, and since vases of that ware are figured in Hsiang Tzu-ching’s catalogue, it would appear that this highly esteemed porcelain must have disappeared from the market towards the close of the sixteenth century. It is curious, too, that while Chang Chfien-te places the productions of the Ch’enghua period (1465 to 148T) at the foot of the list of porcelains of “only secondary value,” the prices paid for this ware within a century of its production were very high. In Hsiang Tzii-ching’s catalogue the price paid for a tazza-shaped cup is stated to have been 60 taels (or $90 gold); and of two miniature wine cups he says, 44 these are choice specimens of the wine cups of this celebrated reign, and are valued at 100 taels ($150 gold) the pair, yet now even for this money it is impossible to get them.” 3 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, p. 72. 2 F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain, p. 10. 3 S. W.Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, No. 55, 59. 320 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. SUNG DYNASTY, 960 TO 1259. The porcelain manufactured under this d 3 uiasty appears to have far excelled in quality and delicacy of workmanship all that preceded it, the Ch‘ai-yao alone perhaps excepted. The shapes and ornamental decorations appear to have been modeled, as a rule, after ancient bronzes, figured in illustrated catalogues of the most celebrated specimens of such vessels (as the Po-ku-t 4 u), published during the Hsiian-ho period, 1119 to 1125, and the K‘ao-ku-t 4 u; and when not modeled after such ancient designs, the vessel took the form of some natural object, as a tree or flower or of some animal, real or imaginary. In the former the pattern was engraved with a pointed style in the paste, and was broken here and there by lions’ or dragons’ heads in bold relief, with an elaboration and wealth of ornament hitherto un- dreamed of. That a remarkable degree of proficiency had by this time been obtained in the ceramic art is evident from the descriptions pre- served by Hsiang Tzu-ching of some specimens of Tingchou ware seen by him. (1) A sacrificial jar in the form of an elephant from an ancient bronze design. The body forms the wine vessel, the uplifted trunk the spout, a narrow canopy arch- ing over the saddle the handle, to which is attached a round cover ornamented with geometrical and spiral scroll borders surmounted by a knot. The rope girths and ornamental details engraved under a white glaze. (2) A branched pricket candlestick — a slender pillar on a solid foliated stand curves at the top to end in a phoenix head, from the back of which hangs a ring chain, which suspends the stem of a lotus, branching into three flowers to hold the candles, which are shaded by a huge overhanging leaf. Ornamented with engraving under a pure wnite glaze. (3) A jar which was of irregular quadrangular section, carved in relief after an ancient bronze design, with lobes on the body, a scroll border below, and a band of ornament in the form of coiled dragons round the neck. Loop handles terminating in horned heads and with rings hanging from them project from the neck. Covered with glaze the color of ripe grapes, transparent and of a perfect luster — a beautiful vase to hold flowers for the table. 1 INTRODUCTION OF COLORED DECORATION. Prior to the Sung dynasty the external color of all porcelain appears to have been solely determined by that of the glaze, and to have been almost entirely monochrome. In a few instances vases were covered with parti-colored glazes, which were apt to flow into one another in the heat of the kiln, and so gave rise to the fortuitous productions known as Yao-pien (the French jlambes ), articles the decoration of which changed during the process of baking.” The Sung porcelain was essentially, I believe, of the same character, the coloring of the article produced being determined only by the kind of glaze which was spread over the paste or biscuit. 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, Nos. 33, 80, 18. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 321 With the sole exception of the Nanfeng ware, and a portion of that from Linch’uan, produced during the Yuan dynasty, none of which seems to have survived to the present day, but which is described as having been decorated with flowers coarsely painted under the glaze, 1 can find nothing in the works of Chinese writers on this subject to justify the concession of a greater antiquity than the early part of the Ming dynasty— that is, the first half of the fifteenth century — to the ornamentation of vases with arabesques and scroll work, with land- scapes, historical scenes, or genre paintings in several colors. This conclusion, if correct, is a point of considerable importance as an aid in determining the true age of specimens which are at times credited with an origin far remote. It is true that celadon vases, into the orna- mentation of which leaves enter, are sometimes described as having the leaves veined with dark green, but these deeper shades may result from the fact that the ornamentation has been engraved in the paste, and that the coloring matter has sunk into the line of engraving, thereby producing a darker shade along the lower levels. Other specimens of celadon ware had one or sometimes two bands of ornamentation of a deeper green than the body of the vase. This deeper tone might, however, have been produced by a double layer of glaze; in any case the peculiarity would not amount to ornamentation in several colors in the sense in which I use that expression. Again, the single speci- men of black Tingchou porcelain illustrated (and indeed ever seen) by Hsiang Tzu-ching is described as “a duck-headed vase, bottle shape, with swelling body and ringed neck, which curves over to end in a duck’s head, a round orifice with a small cover being on the convexity of the curve. The black color is painted on the head and neck, gradu- ally fading away on the body of the vase, which is enamelled white.” 1 This description conveys the idea that the head and neck of the duck were covered with black glaze, the body of the vase with white glaze, and that in the baking the former spread downwards and gradually merged into the white of the body. It in no way invalidates the con- clusion above suggested. It will be advisable to examine in greater detail the several varieties' of porcelain manufactured under this dynasty, following the order of merit usually ascribed to them by Chinese writers. JU-YAO. Ju-yao or Juchou jiorcelain .- — Chinese authors state that the porcelain manufactured at Tingchow (see p. 324), being unfit for presentation to the Emperor, the establishment of a factory for the manufacture of more suitable articles was ordered at Juchow, in Honan Province. According to some writers the defect of the Tingchou ware was its 1 S. W. Bushel 1, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, No. 35. 322 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. gritty character; according to others, the frequency of cracks caused by too rapid or careless baking. As, however, they agree in ascribing the introduction of Ju-yao and its success to the early part of the Sung dynasty — that is, to the very time from which date the finest specimens of the Tingchou porcelain— it is difficult not to conclude that native authors, writing centuries later, have ascribed the establishment of this factory to erroneous causes. The finest specimens, which were very thin and delicate, were supe- rior to imperial ware (. Kuan-yao ), and were of either plain or crackled 1 surface, with the ornamentation engraved under the paste. The craquelure , though coarse in inferior specimens, must in the better grades have been very close and fine, as it is described as resembling fishroe. But that not crackled was the most highly esteemed. Hsiang Tzii’-ching, describing a beaker of old bronze design with engraved decoration under a bluish-green color not crackled, speaks of it as “a rare kind of Juchou ware.” In color it was celadon. In one place this porcelain is described, it is true, as being like the sk}^ after rain, but as elsewhere it is stated to have resembled the Ko-yao , or Crackling ( craquelure ) was originally considered in Europe a defect of baking, which resulted from a lack of homogeneity between paste and glaze, causing one to contract more rapidly than did the other. It was not till a comparatively recent date that the actual facts came to be appreciated, namely, that in the eyes of the Chinese the craquelure is a species of decoration, and that they have a special kind of en- amel, into the composition of which steatite enters largely, the sole object of which is to produce this curious appearance. By means of this enamel they can at will cover the surface of a vase With any one of a variety of craquelure, either large “ like cracks in iced’ or small as “ the fish roe, ’ ’ “the dodder,” or “the crabs’ claws.” In some specimens bands are found crackled separating other bands not crackled ; or colors, usually either black or red, are rubbed into the crackling to render it more apparent, or to impart a tinge to the entire surface. In other specimens again, though for what reason is not known, the paste, after having been decorated, is cov- ered with a crackled glaze, and a second decoration, having no apparent connection with that beneath, is painted above the glaze. The colors of the Juchou, govern- ment {Kuan), Ko, Lungch‘uan and Chunchou porcelains were all some shade of what the Chinese .call ch l ing. Now ch l ing means in some combinations blue, in others a pale dull green, as of the fresh olive, which is called by the Chinese ch l ing-kuo, the mgr colored fruit. Pere d’Entrecolles, when writing of the Lungch‘uan ware, describes its color correctly as teinte d’ olive. M. Julien, however, in spite of a hint- given from the technical annotator M. Salvetat, which might have set him right, rejected this sense on what seemed to him sufficient grounds, and insisted on (errone- ously) translating this word throughout his work as “blue,” though by so doing he had to make his porcelain “as blue as [green] jade ” — with the result that subsequent writers on this subject have failed to derive any assistance from his work in deter- mining the origin and history of celadon porcelain. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porce- lain, p. 7. Celadon was originally the name of the hero in the popular novel V Astree, written by Honore d’Urfe in the seventeenth century. Celadon was attired in clothes of a kind of sea-green hue with gray or bluish tint, and his name thus came to be applied to the clothes he wore, precisely that designated by the Chinese as chhng. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 323 crackled celadons, in color, though somewhat darker in shade, there seems no reason to doubt that its real tint was bluish-green — that is, celadon — especialty as the specimens of this ware illustrated in the cat- alogue translated by Doctor Bushell are so painted. 1 Hsiang Tzu 4 - ching, the author of this catalogue, after describing a vase 6£ inches high, which is stated to have cost 150,000 cash, or about $150 gold, says, u Specimens of Juchou ware are very rare, and, when met with, are usually plates and bowls. A perfect unbroken vase like this is almost unique, and as it excels Kuan and Ko porcelain both in form and glaze, it is far more valuable.” Within three or four decades later, as has already been stated, it seems to have been impossible to find any specimens at all of this ware. KUAN-YAO. Kuan-yao — that is, official or Government porcelain — was the produce of the imperial factories established under the Sung dynasty between the years 1107 and 1117 at Pienliang, the present department of K 4 aifeng, in Honan province, and after the removal southwards of the court before the advancing Mongols, at the southern capital, Hangchou, in Chehkiang province. During the Takuan period (1107 to 1110) the shades specially affected were, first, pale white like the moon, the Drench clair delune; second, pale bluish -green; and third, dark green; but during the Chingho period (1111 to 1117) the only color employed was bluish-green, both dark and pale in tint. This porcelain was very thin, and in some cases crackled all over so finely as to resemble crab’s claws, wdth the red brim and iron-colored foot distinctive of the true celadon. The Po-wu-ycio-lan , quoted in the Kao-shuo ’ Treatise on Pottery (chap. 2, p. 9), explains this latter expression as follows: As regards Kuan-yao , it should be known that the porcelain earth found at the foot of the Fenghuang-shan, or Phoenix hill, near Hangchou, is red; for this reason the foot (the base on which the vessel rests when being fired, and which is therefore not covered by the enamel), resembles iron in color. This was at the time called “red- mouthed and iron-footed. ’ ’ The term * ‘ red mouth ’ ’ refers to the brim or opening of the vessel, which becomes red by the enamel flowing down and away from it, so ash} be much thinner on the brim than it is on the body of the vessel, thus allowing spots of red paste to become visible. Doctor Hirth, after quoting this explanation, adds: The red or iron colored bottom, usually appearing in the shape of a ring, is a char- acteristic feature of the LungclPuan celadons; but if the above explanation is cor- rect, the bottom of LungchYian vessels differed from Kuan-yao bottoms, since the paste of Hangchou celadons (the southern Kuan-yao ) is said to be red in itself, whereas that of the Lungch ‘‘iian-yao is originally white, and merely turns red in such parts of the surface as are not covered by the enamel. 2 1 S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 63. S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, Nos. 19, 22, 34. 2 F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain. 324 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. From Hsiang Tzu-ching’s catalogue it would seem as if there were originally two recognized classes of this ware — ordinary Kuan-yao and Ta-huan , or superior Kuan-yao. Among the latter he mentions an ink slab for the Emperor’s use, in which “an oval w T as left unglazed in the center for rubbing the ink on, showing theu*ed paste.” Both were celadon in color; in the superior variety {ta-Jcuan) , however, the glaze appears to have been more brilliant — it is described as “clear and lus- trous, like an emerald in tint.” The two specimens of this ware de- scribed were both coarsely crackled. The ordinary Kuan-yao was in some cases crackled with a glaze varying from pale green to deep onion; in other specimens uncrackled, the latter being seemingly of a lighter tint than the crackled; the ornamentation, consisting of a variety of scroll designs or of some geometrical patterns broken by animals’ heads in relief, was engraved under the glaze. 1 After the court had been removed south to Hangchou, Shao Ch 4 eng- chang, superintendent of the Northern Imperial Park, is said to have established a factoiy in the residence of the junior director of the palace. Made of very pure clay, with great grace of form and covered with a transparent, brilliant glaze, this porcelain, which was termed Nei-yao porcelain of the palace or Kuan-yao — Government porcelain — gained a high reputation. TING-YAO. Ting-yao , or porcelain of Tingchow, was manufactured originally in the district of that name in Chihli province, near the present depart- ment of Chengting. It was known as Pei-ting or Northern Ting* (960-1126), in contradistinction to the Nan-ting or Southern Ting, pro- duced at Hangchow after the retreat of the court southward before the advancing Mongols in 1127. The former was the more highly prized, and the finest specimens of this ware were those produced, it is said, during the period Chengho (1111 to 1117) and Hsuanho (1119 to 1125). In color they were brilliant white, purple, or black; and though the Ko-hu-yao-lan (a work treating of antiquities, completed in 1387), as quoted in the Pao-shuo , or Treatise on Porcelain, from which the au- thors translated by M. Julien derive most of their information regarding the ceramics of earlier dynasties, gives as the test of Tingchow porce- lain “the purity of its white color and brillancy of its glaze,” it is evi- dent that the connoisseur Hsiang Tzu-ching experienced a stronger affection for his “beautiful purple glaze, uniformly brilliant and trans- parent, resembling the tint of ripe grapes or of the aubergine (egg- plant)” and his black, than he did for the white glaze, though it were, in his own words, “ uniformly lustrous and translucent, like mutton-fat or fine jade.” Both the purple and black varieties were far rarer than T S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, Nos. 2, 5, 8, 13, 15, 17, 47, 50, 53, 73. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 325 the white. u I have seen.” says the collector, u hundreds of specimens of the white, scores of purple-brown, but the black is extremely rare, and I have only seen the one specimen I have described in liiy whole life” — and he then had in his possession at least one of the specimens more than fifty years. It is, I think, in this rarity of the purple and black glazes that the explanation of the dictum above quoted is to be found, and probably the} 7 were unknown to its authors. The varieties mentioned in the Ko-ku-yao-lan as inferior to the white do not include these colors, and seem to result from impure clay or defective glaze. The same work (the Ko-ku-yao-lan) says that one of the signs of the genuineness of this ware was the presence of marks on it like tears. This probably means granulations, for it is explained that these marks were caused by the manner in which the enamel was thrown upon the white paste. Specimens having ornamental designs engraved in the paste were the best, though the plain or unornamented were also highly esteemed; the second class consisted of such as had the ornamentation worked into the enamel, and a third of such as had the decoration printed or pressed upon them with a mold, the ornaments chiefly used being the Chinese peony or Poeonia moutan , the hsuan-ts'ao or Ileinero- callisfulva , and the Hying f eng huang (Phoenix). In Hsiang Tzu-ching's catalogue, however, eleven specimens, all undoubtedly of the finest quality — six of the white glaze, four of the purple, and one of the black — are described, into the ornamentation of no one of which enters either of these so-called u usual” patterns; the decoration in every case is in general character exactly similar to that found on the Juchow ware already described. Tingchow ware was well imitated during the Yuan dynasty (1260 to 1367) by one P 4 eng Chiin-pao at Hochow, in Kiangnan province, and later on very successfully at Chingte-chen. 1 His productions, known as P‘eng porcelain, after himself, and Ho porcelain, from the locality, are described as u fine in paste and white in color, looking very much like real Ting-yaoP lungch‘uan. LungcPuan-yao (Lungchfiian porcelain) was manufactured from the early part of the Sung dynasty (end of tenth or beginning of eleventh century) in the district of that name, situated in the department of Chfiichow, Chehkiang province. The ornamentation was engraved under the glaze, which was of various shades from the color of grass to deep onion-green, sometimes crackled and sometimes not crackled; and occasionally bands of foliate or scroll pattern are found of deeper tone than the rest of the vessel. The biscuit, which was of fine clay, turned brown when the absence of glaze had exposed it to the effect of heat a S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porceiaine Ohinoise, pp. 21, 61. F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain, pp. 13 et seq. 326 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. during baking, though when covered by the glaze and in fractures it remained white, and on the base or foot was a ferruginous ring. The specimens which survive are mostly coarse and thick, but as the best examples were considered but little inferior to Kuan-yao , these prob- ably represent only the rougher and inferior grades. In the designs no little artistic merit is shown at times. One specimen which is described b} r Hsiang Tzu-ching (and I have myself seen one exactly similar) consists of a whorl of palm leaves surrounding a hollow stem to hold flowers. Another is u a sacrificial urn moulded in the form of a horn- less rhinoceros, the body hollowed out to hold wine, with a peaked saddle on the back as cover, after a bronze design from the Po-hu-Cu encyclopaedia. ” The author translated b}^ M. Julien says that this ware was subsequently successfully imitated at Chingte-chen, and that the latter surpassed the originals in beauty. Doctor Hirth, however, avers on the authority of native connoisseurs that the pure Lungchbian products can be distinguished from all imitations; first, because it is a peculiarity of the clay used in the manufacture of the former alone to turn brown or red on the surface when left exposed during baking, wbiile the biscuit remains white where covered; and, secondly, because, owing to this peculiarity of the clay, the ferruginous ring on articles of white porcelain manufactured elsewhere can only be produced by artificially coloring the foot or base; an act which, of course, admits of ready detection on the part of an experienced collector. 1 KO-YAO OR CHANG-YAO. Subsequently, after the removal of the court southward in 1127, according to an authority quoted in the Topography of the Chehkiang* province, the brothers Chang, natives of Ch bichow, but having their factory in the Lungch‘uan district, gained a high reputation for their porcelain. These brothers are known as Sheng-i, the elder-born, and Sheng-erh, the second-born. The produce of the former’s kiln was called Ko-yao , or elder-brother’s porcelain, to distinguish it from that manufactured by the younger Chang, which was termed Chang-yao or Chang Lung cPuanyao, i. e., Lungchbian porcelain made by Chang (the younger). Both are celadon in color, though the elder brother’s ware appears to have been lighter in tint, and both have the distinctive marks of celadon, the red mouth or opening and ferruginous ring on the foot. The main difference between the two seems to have been that the Ko-yao was crackled — so closely in the best specimens as to resemble the fish- roe — -whereas the Chang-yao was uncrackled. In other respects the descriptions are curiously conflicting. The history of the Chingte- chen factory says that Ko-yao was extremely thin, while the I Vu-ts^a- tsu , a work of the Ming dynasty, speaks of it as the one kind of por- 1 S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 69. F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain, pp. 31 et seq. S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty. Nos. 12, 16, 23, 25-27, 29, 32, 36, 67, 77. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 827 cekin of this epoch 44 of which it is not too difficult to obtain specimens, owing to its peculiar heaviness, which enables it to last long.” As compared with the more ancient porcelain of Lungchffian, the produc- tions of the two Chang are described as 4 4 smaller, more graceful in shape, and showing greater delicacy of workmanship.” 1 CHUN-YAO. The Chun-yao was a porcelain made from the early part of the Sung dynasty, in the district of Chunchow or sometimes wrongly correspond- ing to the present district of Yu-chow, in the department of K 4 * * aifeng, Honan province. It was sometimes molded in grotesque forms (as a lamp formed of a hornless dragon with scaly body and four short legs, the serpent-like head protruding with mouth open to receive the wick and body hollowed into a receptacle for oil), but was usually modeled after ancient bronzes and ornamented with scroll or floral patterns under the glaze, which, according to Hsiang Tzu-ching, was either vermilion- red or aubergine purple — the two most valuable colors — moonlight white (chair de lune) or pale green, and sometimes marked with granula- tions. The authorities quoted in the Pao-shuo, or Treatise on Pottery, would lead one to believe that the best pieces had two or more colors of glaze on the same vase. The higher qualit} 7 , according to them, con- sisted of pieces having a color red like cinnabar and green like onion leaves and kingfisher’s feathers, which is commonly called parrot-green, and aubergine purple, or of pieces red like rouge, green like onion leaves and kingfisher’s feathers, and purple like ink; these three colors being intact and unchanged by baking. Mo Julien enumerates seven varie- ties: (1) green or blue like plums; (2) purple-brown like the auberg- ine; (3) red like the Pyrus japonica; (4) pig’s liver; (5) mule’s lungs; (6) mucus; (7) sky-blue. But such differentiation appears erroneous, for the Treatise on Pottery says: Pieces that have one or two numbers on the bottom as a trade-mark, and are of a color resembling pig’s liver — since the red, ch l ing (celadon), and green colors got mixed together like saliva hanging down through not being sufficiently fired — are not to be distinguished as different kinds; for such names as mucus or pig’s liver, which are given to this class of porcelain, have been invented for fun’s sake. Among these porcelains those which have bottoms like the flower pots in which sword grass is grown are considered the most excellent; the others, namely, those which have ton-shaped censers, Ho-fang jugs, or Kuan-tzu, are all of a yellowish sandy paste, for which reason they are not good in appearance. 2 * 1 S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, pp. xxvi, 70. F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain, pp. 31, et seq. S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before .the Present Dynasty, No. 11. 2 The translation followed is Doctor Hirth’ s, but the sense is better brought out by Doctor Busheli’s more correct rendering, which runs thus: “Among these porcelains the flower pots and saucers for growing sword grass are the most beautiful, the others, namely, the barrel seats, censers and boxes, square vases and jars with covers,” etc. (North China Herald, 12th May, 1888.) The words here rendered, “the flower 328 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. The same authority adds that none of these porcelains lasted long. Specimens are, however, I believe, still to be found. Hsiang Tzu- ching, after describing a small jar, of globular form, with two boldly designed phoenixes molded in high relief as handles, interrupting a border of spirally ornamented medallions, adds: Chiinchow porcelain is put at the bottom of the Sung potteries, yet a jar like this one, of elegant form, good color, and fine engraved work, equals, if not excels, as a flower vase, one of Ju, Kuan, Ko, or Ting pottery. It is marked beneath with the numeral wu, five, an additional proof that it is really a Chun piece. * 1 tung-ch 4 ing-yao. Tung-ch^ng-yao , or celadon porcelain, from the eastern capital, was produced at factories situated in the department of K 4 aifeng, Honan province, the so-called eastern capital of the Sung monarchs, before their retreat southward, from 960 to 1126. It was of various shades of celadon, uncrackled (seemingly), with the ornamentation engraved under the glaze. The description given by Hsiang Tzu-ching of a small vessel of this ware will convey a truer idea of its character than the vague disquisition of the er^clopsedists. “It is of hexagonal form, with lobed border, decorated in panels, with formal sprays of flowers, plum blossoms, polyporus fungus, and grass, chrysanthemum, bamboo, etc., carved in relief under a glaze of bright green color like jade, raised in faint millet-like tubercles.” 2 LESS CELEBRATED VARIETIES. in addition to the above celebrated productions of the Sung dynasty, the following less remarkable varieties may be mentioned: The Hsiao-yao , from the Hsiao district, in the department of Hsuchou, Kiangnan province, extremely thin and brilliant, white in color, and very elegant in shape and workmanship. The Chichow-yao , from the district of that name, corresponding with the present Luling district, in the department of Chi-an, Kiangnan province; both white and violet, the latter closely resembling the pots and saucers for growing sword grass,” are translated by M. Julien “les plats sous le pied desquels on a peint un glaieul.” This misconception of the meaning has, as Doctor Hirth points out, led astray all later writers on porcelain and its marks, who have thus been led by Julien into describing the acorus as a mark, when found on the foot of a vessel of its being a Kiun (Chlin) piece of the finest quality. Doctor Hirth also draws attention to the fact that the expression t l u-ssu-iven, translated by Julien when treating of one class of this porcelain as showing “veines imitant les soies (poils) du lievre,” really means showing veining like the cuscuta or dodder — 1‘u-ssu being the name of that plant. 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, No. 20, 30, 41, 79. S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, pp. 74, 75. F. Hirth Ancient Chinese Porcelain, pp. 16, 17. 2 S. Julien, op. cit. , pp. 67-69; S. W. Bushell, op. cit. , No. 70. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 329 violet porcelain of Tingchow. The best was made by the famil}- Shu; that produced by the daughter, Shu Chiao, realizing almost as much as Ko-yao (the elder Chang’s porcelain). Her large vases for holding flowers would fetch several ounces of silver each. Regard- ing the violet variety, the technical annotator of M. Julien’s work adds the following note: “II est probable que ces porcelaines vio- lettes etaient fabriquees a l’etat de biscuit, et colorees ensuite avec un email plombeux colore par le manganese. Cette consideration reporterait a Pannee 960 de notre ere les glagures plombiferes; ce n’est qu’en 1283 qu’un potier de Schlestadt trouva le procede de vernir la poterie au moyen du plomb, et put creer une fabrication veritablement industrielle. ” The Ilsiuchow-yao and Ssuchow-yao , from the districts respectively of the same name in the Kiangnan province. They resembled the (white?) Tingchow porcelain, but were far inferior in quality. The Yang-yi-yao and Tengchow-yao , manufactured in the T‘ang and Tengchow districts of the department of Nayang, Honan province — both celadon, but, like the next, inferior to Juchow ware. The Yaochow-yao , from the district of that name in the department of Hsi-an, Shansi province. They were originally celadon, but vases of white porcelain, possessed of considerable merit, though lacking- in grace and strength, were subsequently produced. The Wuni-yao, from the department of Chienning, Fukien province— a celadon made from black coarse clay, lacking in polish and with dry looking glaze. The Chien-yao , from the department of Chienchow, the present district of Chienyang, in the department of Chienning, Fukien province- thin, of pale black color and of high polish, it was highly esteemed; some specimens were studded with granulations resembling drops or yellow pearls. The Yuhang-yao , from the Yiihang district, in the department of Hangchow, Chehkiang province — a kind of celadon, resembling Kuan-yao, but inferior, possessing neither the same crackle nor brilliancy. The lishui-yao , from Lishui district, in the department of ClYuchow, Chehkiang province — heavy and thick, resembling in color the LungclTuan (that is, celadon) ware, but far inferior to it. 1 YUAN DYNASTY, 1260 TO 1349. Under the Mongol dynasty, the Yuan (1260 to 1349), the manufac ture of porcelain generally appears to have retrograded. Exceptions, however, must at least be made in favor of that produced for the special use of the Emperor. This ware — to judge from the specimens 1 S. Julien, L’histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, pp. 12-21- NAT MUS 1900 24 330 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. described by Hsiang Tzii-ching — was white in color, with the orna- mentation faintly engraved in the paste. Plates, bowls, etc., are said to have borne the characters shu-.fu , “the palace,” inscribed on the interior on the foot. Hsiang Tzu-ching 1 says that this shu-fu porce- lain was copied from the Tingchow ware of the Northern Sung dynasty, and the vase in his own collection he considers altogether like a Ting piece in its form, in the color of the paste, and in the engraved design. The details given by native writers regarding the productions of this period are scanty in the extreme. They mention, however, that at Lungch 4 uan celadons were produced on the model of the Chang ware, but the clay used was coarse and dry, and failed to give the fine color which had characterized the older productions. At Ho-chow, in the Kiangnan province, F 4 eng Chun-pao produced, as already stated, some excellent porcelain, known as New Ting-yao and from the name of the district in which it was produced, Ho-yao or ware of Ho, and closely resembling the older ware from Tingchow. Made from fine, white, plastic clay, it was very thin and celadon in color. Other varieties mentioned are: The Ssuanchow-yao , from the department of that name in Kiangnan province, very thin and white in color. The Lincfruan-yao, from the district of that name in the department of Fuchow, Kiangsi province, was a porcelain made from soft white clay. It was thin, and generally white, with a light yellow tinge; but some bore flowers coarsely painted. The Nanfeng-yao , from the district of that name in the department of Chienchang, Kiangsi province, was a somewhat thick porcelain, in many cases ornamented with flowers in blue. These two latter kinds appear to have been very famous under the Yuan dynasty, and to have been ‘much preferred to the productions of Chingte- chen. The Hutfien-yao, manufactured in the neighborhood of Chingte-chen, was either a yellowish-black, or, if white, had a tint of that color . 2 No specimens of these wares have, however, so far as I am aware, survived to the present day, and among those which Chinese connois- seurs now declare to be red products of the Yuan dynasty one seldom sees any but such as are of a uniform whitish purple with deep red splashes. MING DYNASTY, 1368 TO 1649. Under the Ming dynasty the ceramic art made great progress, both in the fineness of the ware and in the excellence of the decorative workmanship. It would appear that under the Yuan dynasty imperial 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, No. 21. 2 S. Julien, L’Historie et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, pp. 23, 24, 86. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 331 orders were not invariably executed at the government factories, but were frequently intrusted to private enterprise. None, however, of the articles tendered was accepted unless considered perfect, and the test was so severe that as much as 90 per cent was at times rejected. Under the Ming dynasty, however, the manufacture appears to have been more and more restricted to the Chingte-chen factories, which thenceforward practically monopolized the production of artistic por- celain. The administration was reformed, and officers were dispatched from the capital with the orders, the execution of which they had to superintend, and on completion to deliver to the palace — duties which, like most others of emolument and dignity, were absorbed by eunuchs during the reigns of the last emperors of that dynasty. In their paintings, which are always in water color, the Chinese, while of course requiring on the artist’s part a knowledge of the tech- nique adequate to a proper treatment of the subject chosen, admire chiefly a boldness of stroke which proves complete mastery over the pencil, and a facility of conception which permits of improvisation, so to speak; that is, of the elaboration of the original design currente calamo , and without having previous^ 7 outlined a sketch of it upon the object to be decorated. This style of painting is termed pi-i, “ follow- ing the will of the brush.” An artist who first sketches out his design and then carefully and elaborately fills in the details, a style which is depreciatingly termed kung-i , ‘‘mechanical,” occupies in their estima- tion a very subordinate position. And the characteristics of the two styles are so clearly defined, or at least are so patent to the practiced native eye, that a single glance almost suffices to enable a connoisseur to determine to which of the two a painting belongs. In a country, too, where painting as a profession does not exist, and where the interchange of fans or scrolls painted by the donors, as one of the most ordinary forms of courtesy, generates, if not a profound knowledge of the art, at least a very general practical proficiency in it, it has resulted that the most noted artists are to be found among the class enjoying the most leisure — that formed of the successful competi- tors in the literary examinations which constitute the one entry to offi- cial employment. In this way the more highly esteemed stjde of paint- ing, with its bold free stroke, came to be considered (as indeed it prac- tically was) the almost exclusive production of the literary or official class. Hence when, during the Cbdenghua period, the decoration of porcelain in many colors came to be that most highly prized, it became customary to have the designs drawn b} 7 the most celebrated artists among the palace officials and to transmit them to the manufactory to be there executed by the most skilled painters. Owing to the care thus exercised in obtaining decorative designs from the brushes of the best artists and in having them executed by the most able workmen, the manufacture reached a higher point of excellence 332 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. during this (the Clffenghua) period than at any other time during the Ming dynasty, and the steps of development which led to this result may be distinctly traced. As has been remarked earlier, decoration by painting in colors as dis- tinct from the general coloring imparted by glaze was, I believe, first reached under the Ming dynasty. In the Yunglo period (1403 to 1424) it took the form of decoration in blue under the glaze. Special atten- tion was paid to this style during the Hsiiante period (1426 to 1435), and owing probably to the adoption of a special kind of foreign blue (known in Chinese as Su-ni-po , which appears to have been obtainable during this period alone), a brilliancy of color was attained which was never afterwards quite equaled. At the same time, however, a brilliant red color attracted universal admiration. At first this was used by itself either as a uniform coloring over the outside of bowls and cups, or for the delineation of fishes or peaches upon the white ground, the contrast of the two colors, both striking in brilliancy, being highly admired. Then a form was adopted which, while it gave due prominence to the highly prized crimson, admitted of the introduction of other colors in a subordinate capacity, such as vessels in the shape of persimmons ( Diospyros kaki) on a leafy branch forming the handle, the fruit being red, and the leaves and stalk of their natural colors, green of various shades and brown respectively. From this form of decoration it required but a step to reach the use of the enamel colors for which the CITenghua period (1465 to 1487) is famous. The use of enamel colors continued during the Hungchih period (1488 to 1505), some of the specimens being scarcely inferior to the best pieces of ClYenghua ware, but gradually gave way in public favor to a pale yellow glaze covering an ornamentation engraved in the paste. This was also the most highly esteemed production of the Clffengte period (1506 to 1521); though the efforts to obtain further supplies of blue from the west being crowned with success, a revival in favor of U blue and white” china took place during this and especially the fol- lowing reign till the supply was once more exhausted. Peculation, misgovernment and its attendant disorders, and an increasing difficulty in finding the finer qualities of clay combined to cause a steady decline from this period onward in the artistic excellence of the porcelain produced. The rapidity of the downward course was con- siderably accelerated by the enormous extent of the imperial orders for the supply of the palace, which, sometimes aggregating 100,000 pairs of articles on a single occasion, taxed the resources of the gov- ernment factories beyond their strength, with the result that, in order to economize money and labor, colors which were expensive or difficult to procure were replaced by others less costly and more simple in their ingredients, and artistic beauty and excellence of workmanship were sacrificed to promptness in providing the supplies ordered. It is the gradual dispersion of the articles comprised in the vast orders CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 333 issued during the Lungchfing (1567 to 1572) and Wanli (1573 to 1619) periods that has provided the bulk of the specimens in the possession of modern collectors of what has come to be considered (though, in view of the much higher artistic merit of the ware produced under earlier emperors, very unfairly considered) the characteristic Ming porcelain, porcelain somewhat coarse in make, faulty in shape, and decorated with paintings which, though characterized by boldness of design, are usually marked by want of care in execution. While, however, the work of the government factories showed these unmistakable signs of decadence, strenuous efforts were made by a few isolated private manufacturers to raise the art to its earlier level of excellence. The imitations by Chou Tan-ch 4 uan of the beautiful old Tingchow ware, and the cups of Hao Shih-chi of a “dewy-dawn red” and of eggshell (the latter at times only weighing one-fortieth of an ounce apiece), are spoken of in terms of the highest admiration, and brought fabulous prices. But though these efforts were, if the statements of Chinese writers can be relied upon, crowned with com- plete success, so far as the artist’s individual productions were con- cerned, they were inadequate to prevent the downward tendency exerted by the government establishments at Chingte-chen, which had alread}^ for a long while almost monopolized the production of porce- lain in China. During the remainder of the period that the Ming dynasty held the throne its energies were so much occupied in endeavoring to suppress internal disorder and in resisting the attacks of the Manchu Tartars on its northern frontiers that no attention was paid to the ceramic art. From 1403 to 1424. During the Yunglo period (1403 to 1424) much white porcelain, with ornamentation in blue under the glaze, commonly known in Europe as “blue and white china,” was manufactured, which holds third place in regard to excellence among this class of ware produced during the Ming dynasty, that of the Hsliante period (1426 to 1435) occupying the first and that of the CITenghua period (1465 to 1487) the second place. The blue employed is said, in the annals of Fouliang, to have been brought from some Mohammedan country as tribute, and was thence known as Mohammedan blue. During the Yunglo and Hsiiante periods it was termed Su-mct-li or Su-ma-ni blue, and during the latter Su-ni-po also. Where this bhre came from and whether these Chinese designa- tions are the reproductions of the name of a country or of a color has never been determined. Doctor Hirth, while pointing out the resem- blance of the former in sound to smalt (mediaeval Latin smaltum . ), and of the latter to Schneeberg, “under which name the Saxon blue after- wards became famous all over the world,” 1 thinks a search into Arabian 1 F. Hirth, Ancient Chinese Porcelain, p. 65. 334 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. or Persian records of that day may yet supply the missing explanation. Whatever it was, the supply was exhausted during the Ch‘enghua period. Somewhat later, however (during the Chengte period, 1506 to 1521), Tatang, the governor of Yunnan province, succeeded in obtain- ing further supplies of Mohammedan blue by paying for it twice its weight in gold; and during this and the greater part of the subsequent reign (Chiaehing period, 1522 to 1566) it continued available — a fact to which is doubtless attributable the excellent color of the productions of that time. Towards the close of the latter reign, however, the sup- ply again gave out, when an incinerated cobaltiferous ore of manga- nese (termed wu-ming-i) replaced the western product; the color obtained from this native ore, far from equaling the brightness and transparency of the foreign blue, however, showed a dull and heavy tint after baking. EGGSHELL PORCELAIN. Eggshell porcelain of very delicate workmanship was produced, but owing to its extreme fragility good specimens are now difficult to obtain. It appears also to have had a tendency to crack during the process of firing. These porcelains are termed among the Chinese tfo-tfai, or porcelain from which the “ embryo” or biscuit has been removed, and are divided into two classes: “True t'o-t'ai” the very thin, also known as eggshell ( ian-p^i or luan-mu ), and “semi the somewhat thicker. The true tfo-tfcii especially present great diffi- culties in the manufacture and require extraordinary dexterity in the handling, for so thin is the portion of the body the workman allows to remain that it seems as though all had been removed; and it is only quite recently that the Government manufactory at Sevres has succeeded in producing such porcelain, and then by an entirely different process — by casting or moulage en oarbotine. The work translated by M. J ulien states that while the production of this ware originated during the Yunglo period, it was only the thicker variety that was then made, and that the true tfo-tfai dates from a later epoch, having been produced during the Ch‘enghua period (1465 to 1487) at the government manufactory and during the Lungchfing (1567 to 1572) and Wanli (1573 to 1619) periods at private factories. This statement appears, however, to be erroneous; for in No. 295 of this collection will be found a specimen, so at least Chinese experts state, of the semi (though it seems difficult to believe that a bowl of such size could be made much thinner and yet be of practical utility), and in Nos. 289 to 294 specimens of the true tfo-tfai, both having the inscription Yung-lo- nien-chih , “Made during the Yunglo period,” engraved in the old seal character on its foot. Moreover, the one specimen of this ware described by Hsiang Tzu-ching is a small cup “as thin as paper,” called fo-Vai, “body less, ”i. e., true fo-frai^not semi tfo-tfai, of which he says “there CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 335 are not a few of these wine cups left, yet they are highly appreciated by collectors of taste.” 1 Specimens of the Ch 4 enghua eggshell will be found in Nos. 296 to 303. In spite of the extreme thinness of this ware, many specimens — such as Nos. 289 to 294, already referred to — are adorned with very elabo- rate designs engraved under the glaze (an operation requiring excep- tional delicacy of workmanship), which are scarcely visible unless the vessel be held against the light or be tilled with liquid. These speci- mens possess additional interest from the fact that they enable us to picture to ourselves what the porcelain manufactured for the special use of the palace under the Yuan dynasty (the Shu-fu) and the Ting- chow ware of the Sung dynasty were like; though, of course, these latter had not the thinness and delicacy of the eggshell porcelain. For Hsiang Tzu-ching, after describing a specimen of Shu-fu porce- lain decorated with dragons in the midst of clouds and with lion’s head handles, all faintly engraved in the paste under a white glaze, states that u the porcelain of our own dynasty (the Ming) of the reigns of Yunglo and Hsuante, decorated with patterns engraved under a white glaze, was made after this Shu-fu porcelain, which was itself copied from the Tingchou porcelain of the northern Sung dynasty.” 2 . From 1426 to 1435. Among the porcelain manufactured during the Hsuante period (1426 to 1435), that covered with crimson glaze or bearing designs in that color holds the highest place in the eyes of Chinese connoisseurs. 44 It truly stands preeminent among the celebrated porcelains of different dynasties, a precious jewel of our own times,” saj^s Hsiang Tzu-ching. Some of the descriptions left by this author are worth reproducing. (1) An incense burner from an old bronze design. 4 4 The upper two-thirds of the bod}^ and the handles, which are molded in the form of fish, are covered with a deep red glaze of rosy dawn tint, the lower part enameled white, pure as driven snow, the two colors mingling in a curved line, dazzling the eyes.” (2) A wine pot (6^ inches high), copied from a similar vessel of carved jade used by the emperor. 44 The body, slender below, swelling towards the top, is decorated with engraved cloud scrolls and bands of geometrical and spiral pattern, with conical cover, spirally curved handle, and spout moulded and engraved in the form of a phoenix head, all covered with deep-red ( chi hung) glaze. ” It is said to have cost the owner 200 ingots of silver in paper notes, a sum Doctor Bushell estimates to be equivalent to about <£600. Another style of decoration much esteemed at the time for open vessels was 4 4 three red fish on a white ground pure as driven snow, the fish boldly outlined and red as fresh blood, of a brilliant color 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, No. 61. 2 Idem, No. 2L 336 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. dazzling the eyes.” Occasionally these fish would be represented on the outside swimming on waves engraved in the paste, with two more on the inside. Though no less than four vessels so decorated are described by Hsiang Tzu-ching, they are stated to have been even then 4 ‘precious specimens of this rare kind of porcelain” — they are certainly so now. A rarer kind of decoration still was three pairs of peaches in red on a white ground — of these “onlv two or three were then known to exist within the four seas,” that is, the Empire. A still rarer decoration, found on a wine cup, is described as “the white ground decorated inside and outside with cloud scrolls engraved in the paste, a scroll border above colored crimson: the handle a dragon of bold design moulded in high relief coiled round the top, with teeth and four claws fixed in the rim, enamelled vermilion red.” (Vessels with a dragon moulded in relief upon the brim are, it may be added, always highly esteemed by the Chinese when intact, partly because of the artistic ability required to successfully execute the design, and partly because old specimens are seldom met with undam- aged.) “Only one or two of these beautiful little cups remain throughout the Empire, and 100 taels ($150 gold) is not considered too much to pay for a specimen.” Hsiang Tzu-ching states that the bril- liancy of this crimson glaze was obtained by the addition of powdered red gems from the west to the ordinary materials. Doctor Bushel], commenting upon this statement, says “this is impossible, and the colors being painted on under the glaze shows it to have been a copper silicate, the same doubtless that gave the bright red ( hsien hung ) to the monochromes of the period.” 1 M. Julien states that among the colors for porcelain painting brought from China by M. Itier (an employe in the ministry of finance, who accompanied the French ambassador to that country) and presented in 1844 to the manufactory at Sevres, was one named pao-shih-hung , “precious stone red,” which when analyzed by M. Salvetat proved to be merely “oxyde de fer avec du fondant.” 2 A decoration first met with in the productions of this period is obtained by the entire excision of a delicate pattern, by some sharp instrument, from the biscuit of which the cup or bowl is formed. When the vessel is dipped in the glaze, the latter fills up the excised open work with a thin film sufficiently thick after baking to retain the liquid in the cup, though so thin that the pattern is thrown out as a transparency upon the more opaque body. This decoration is com monly known among English collectors as “lace-work,” and the French term pieces so decorated reticules. 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, Nos. 6, 10, 40, 54, 56, 58, 60, 69, 71, and p. 117. 2 S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 91. CERAMIC ART IN CHINA. 337 From 1465 to 1487. During the CITenghua period (1465 to 1487) the production of porce- lain bearing a blue decoration under the glaze continued, but owing chiefly to the fact that the supply of Su-ni-j?o blue from abroad was exhausted and partly from the growing preference for ornamentation in enamel colors, this ware was inferior in color to that of the Hsiiante period; and it is for the decoration in enamel colors that this period is chiefly and justly famous. One authority states that among the productions of this period are the most beautiful of wine cups, the upper part of which is adorned with a Chinese peony (. Poeonia moutan) and having at the base a hen and chickens full of life and movement. 1 Hsiang Tzu-ching thus describes a pair: They are of rounded form, swelling below, so thin and delicate that one weighs less than a third of an ounce. The cockcombs, narcissus, and other flowers, the fly- ing dragon fly and crawling mantis, painted after life, in green, yellow, and crimson enamel. These are choice specimens of the wine cups of this celebrated reign, and are valued at 100 taels [say $150] the pair, yet now even for this money it is Impos- sible to get them. 2 Another miniature wine cup described by him is said to have been purchased for 60 ounces of silver ($90), while a pair in the possession of one of the high officers of the court under the Emperor Wanli is said by another writer to have been valued at 1,000 ounces, or $1,500. Whatever may be thought of the last statement, the prices mentioned by Hsiang Tzu-ching are fully confirmed by contemporary writers. The Treatise on Pottery (the T'ao-sliuo) quotes from a work written towards the end of the Ming dynasty as follows: On the days of new moon and of full moon 1 often went, while at the capital, to the fair at the Buddist temple Tz‘u-en-ssu, where rich men thronged to look at the old porcelain bowls exhibited there. Plain white cups of Wanli porcelain were sev- eral ounces of silver each, those with the marks of Hsiiante and Ch‘enghua were twice as much more, up to the tiny cups decorated with fighting cocks, which could not be bought for less than a hundred ounces of the purest silver, pottery being valued far more highly than precious jade. 3 From the time of the Emperor Wanli it was the endeavor of every man of taste, whose wealth could support such a strain, to set wine cups of ClFenghua ware before his guests. Considering how many pieces of this choice porcelain must have been thus sacrificed, it is not surprising that it is almost impossible to procure specimens at the present day — nearly three hundred years after they were selling at twelve times their weight in gold — though Doctor Bushell states that “one may be occasionally seen in a Chinese collection preserved in an ebony box 1 S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 94. 2 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, No. 59. 3 Quoted by Bushell, p. 98. 338 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. softly lined with padded silk.” Four specimens of these cups are con tained in the collection — Nos. 300 to 303. From this period also are supposed to date many of the large vases which form so prominent a feature in the European collections, dec- orated with historical scenes, in the coloring of which green plays so large a part, and which have in consequence been termed by French writers “la famille verte.” They are really, however, more modern. “The finest,” as Doctor Bushell truly remarks, “belong to the reign of K‘anghsi, so that one of a pair is often found with a Ming mark beneath, the other with a censer, flower, or other emblem (of the K?anghsi period); yet some connoisseurs pride themselves on being- able to distinguish the genuine Ming in this class from the false, con- fessing, however, that it is a difficult matter.” 1 This period is also noted for its eggshell porcelain. It was not, however, invented at this time, but, as we have already shown, first manufactured during the Yunglo period. The four small plates of this ware (Nos. 296 to 299) are worthy of special note, not only for their extreme thinness and transparency, but for the very unusual style of their decoration — landscapes in enamel colors above the glaze. From 1488 to 1505. During the succeeding period (Hungchih, 1488 to 1505), while enamel colors were still used, a very pale yellow glaze of the color of a newly husked chestnut was the tint most highly prized, the two kinds of decoration being at times combined. If the uniform yellow glaze was employed, ornamentation would be at times engraved in the paste or molded in relief beneath it. So little is said regarding the ware of this period by Chinese authors that it is worth while recording the descriptions of two choice specimens given by Hsiang Tzii-ching: (1) A wine pot “molded in the form of a gourd contracted in the mid- dle, the brown stalk forming the handle of the cover, a winding branch the tapering handle, from which spring green tendrils and leaves and a miniature gourd, all worked in relief in the yellow body, a second miniature gourd being fashioned into the spout. Light yellow was the color most highly valued in this reign, but enamelling in color was also employed, as in this piece, which reminds one of the porcelain of the reign of Ch 4 enghua; ” (2) a teacup “in the form of a hibiscus flower, covered outside with a delicate yellow glaze imitating the natural tint of the flower; white inside. I have seen many specimens of Hungchih porcelain, but nothing to surpass these little cups.” 2 1 S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, p. 99. 2 Idem, Nos. 7, 42, 46, 66. CERAMIC ART IK CHINA. 339 From 1506 to 1521. During the Chengte period (1506 to 1521), so far as the meager de - tails chronicled allow us to judge, while decoration in enamel colors continued and the successful endeavors of the governor of Yunnan to obtain further supplies of Mohammedan blue caused attention to be again turned to the production of porcelain ornamented with designs in blue under the glaze, the ware most highly prized was that covered with a yellow glaze, introduced under the previous reign, over patterns engraved in the paste, and a red monochrome termed chi-hung. This term appears to have included two shades — one the jMO-shih-hung , or u precious-stone red” already discussed under the Hsuante period, (p. 335), and the hsien-hung , a bright red, produced by a silicate of copper. This color, the Chinese records state, could not be success- fully produced subsequent to this period under the Ming dynasty, owing seemingly to inability to maintain a suitable condition of atmos- phere in the kiln — a difficulty explained by M. Salvetat thus: Si l’atmosphere du four est trop reductrice, le cuivre passe ad’etat de cuivre metal- lique; si 1’ atmosphere du four est trop oxydante, la coloration rouge disparait et la couverte devient verdatre ( Recueil des travaux scientifiques de M. Ebelmen, Tome I, p. 437) ; le protoxyde de cuivre seul donne un silicate d’une couleur rouge. 1 2 A curious kind of earthenware is mentioned by Hsiang Tzu-ching as having been produced in the Yi-hsing district, of the department of Changehou, Kiangsu province, by a celebrated pottei* named Kung Ch’un. Teapots of this ware were of a light brown like felt, or covered with a vermilion-red glaze. In either case the color is said to have changed to a /bright green when tea was poured in, and to have gradu- ally reverted to its original color, line by line, as the liquid was poured out. This curious peculiarity is said to have been merely the acci- dental result of some change effected by baking, but was highly prized by collectors — 500 ounces of silver ($750) having been paid for the two specimens described by our author. 3 From 1522 to 1566. During the Chiaching period (1522 to 1566) the yellow glaze, so par- ticularly affected during the two previous reigns, appears to have been entirely, and decoration in enamel colors to have been almost entirely, abandoned, the old style of ornamentation in blue under the glaze being chietty admired, till the supply of that color from the west was again exhausted during the later years of this reign; and to the pres- ent day the u blue and white” of this period is much sought after by collectors. Apart from this, the only kind of ware at all remarkable 1 S. Julien, L’Histoire et la Fabrication de la Porcelaine Chinoise, p. 97. S. W. Bushell, Chinese Porcelain before the Present Dynasty, Nos. 52, 78. 2 S. W. Bushell, Idem, Nos. 44, 45. 340 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1900. mentioned by Chinese writers is cups intended for use upon the palace altars, and hence termed Van-chan, which are said to have resembled white jade and to have been exceptionally beautiful. One maker, named Ts‘ui, who is stated to have lived during this and the following reign, is however mentioned as a successful imitator of the porcelain of the Hsiiante and ClPenghua periods, his productions being known as Ts‘ui-kung yao-tz'u , “ Mr. Tsffii’s porcelain ware.’ 51 From 1567 to 1619. During the Lungchdng (1567 to 1572) and Wanli (1573 to 1619) periods it appears to have been difficult to obtain supplies of good