Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 1. Pottery and early waresHobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
History
Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 1. Pottery and early wares
Hobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
Porcelain, Chinese; Pottery, Chinese
[Chinese] 34 94 54 14 74
[Chinese] 35 95 55 15 75
[Chinese] 36 96 56 16 76
[Chinese] 37 97 57 17 77
[Chinese] 38 98 58 18 78
[Chinese] 39 99 59 19 79
[Chinese] 40 100 60 20 80
[Chinese] 41 101 61 21 81
[Chinese] 42 102 62 22 82
[Chinese] 43 103 63 23 83
[Chinese] 44 104 64 24 84
[Chinese] 45 105 65 25 85
[Chinese] 46 106 66 26 86
[Chinese] 47 107 67 27 87
[Chinese] 48 108 68 28 88
[Chinese] 49 109 69 29 89
[Chinese] 50 110 70 30 90
[Chinese] 51 111 71 31 91
[Chinese] 52 112 72 32 92
[Chinese] 53 113 73 33 93
[Chinese] 54 114 74 34 94
[Chinese] 55 115 75 35 95
[Chinese] 56 116 76 36 96
[Chinese] 57 117 77 37 97
[Chinese] 58 118 78 38 98
[Chinese] 59 119 79 39 99
[Chinese] 60 120 80 40 100
[Chinese] 61 121 81 41 101
[Chinese] 62 122 82 42 102
[Chinese] 63 123 83 43 103
It will be seen that cyclical dates without any indication of the
particular cycle intended are merely tantalising. On the other hand when
the reign is specified as well, the combination gives the most precise
form of date. But unfortunately there are many cases in which the reign
name is absent, and we can only judge the cycle by the style of the ware,
a calculation which is always open to dispute. It is not often that the
cycle is so clearly indicated by an indirect method as in the oft-quoted
mark _yu hsin ch´ou nien chih_ [Chinese] = made in the _hsin ch´ou_
year recurring (_yu_).This can only be 1721, when the _hsin ch´ou_ year
actually recurred in the (sixty-first year of) reign of K´ang Hsi.[453]
(_b_) The more usual form of date mark is that which gives the reign name
of an Emperor. On ascending the throne the Emperor discarded his family
name and assumed a title by which his reign was thenceforth known. This is
the name which appears in the date marks, and it is known as the _nien_
(period) _hao_ (name). After his death the Emperor received another title,
the _miao hao_, or name under which he was canonised; but though reference
might be made to him in history under his _miao hao_, it is obvious that
the posthumous name cannot occur on contemporary date marks.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account