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
[Footnote 104: In a passage referring to modern imitations, the _T´ao lu_
(bk. vii., fol. 10) states that "at Ching-tê Chên, the makers of the large
vases known as _kuan ku_ (imperial antiques) for the most part imitate
the colour of Ju yao glaze. Beautiful specimens of these (imitations) are
commonly called 'blue of the sky after rain.'"]
[Footnote 105: P. 39. Account of a mission to Corea in 1125 by Hsü Ching.]
[Footnote 106: Hsiang's Album, op. cit., Fig. 19.]
[Footnote 107: Son of the author of the _Ch´ing pi tsang_. His father (see
p. 53) declared that he had seen Ju porcelain.]
[Footnote 108: In the _Cho kêng lu_, published in 1368, but of special
interest because it repeats the statements of a Sung writer, Yeh-chih,
author of the _Yüan chai pi hêng_.]
[Footnote 109: Op. cit., plate 20.]
[Footnote 110: Cosmo Monkhouse, _Chinese Porcelain_, plate 1, and Bushell,
_Chinese Art_, vol. ii., pg. 7.]
[Footnote 111: Liu Yen-t´ing.]
[Footnote 112: It would seem as if the manufacture had never entirely
ceased at Ju Chou, for we read in Richard's Geography, p. 61, "The
environs (of Ju Chou) were formerly very industrial, but have lost their
activity. The manufacture of common pottery is still carried on and gives
it some importance."]
[Footnote 113: The _Cho kêng lu_, published in 1368, but based on a
thirteenth-century Sung work (see p. 55).]
[Footnote 114: The _T´ao lu_ (bk. vi., fol. 2 verso). It is obvious that
the term Kuan yao (Imperial ware) is liable to cause confusion, as it
might be--and indeed was--equally applied to any ware made at any time at
the Imperial factory. In recognition of this fact the Sung Kuan yao was
sometimes named in later writers _Ta Kuan_ [Chinese] ware, after the Ta
Kuan period.]
[Footnote 115: A passage quoted in _T´ao lu_, bk. ix., fol. 13, from an
eighteenth-century work, the _Wên fang ssŭ k´ao_, forms a commentary on
this attitude. "The old capital Kuan factory," It says, "had only a brief
existence, so that we must consider the _Hsiu nei ssŭ_ make to be first
and the 'recent wares' to be second."]
[Footnote 116: The list of wares made at the Imperial factories at
Ching-tê Chên about 1730, and published in the _Chiang hsi t´ung chih_
(vol. xciii., fol. 11), refers to the imitation of Kuan wares as follows:
"Ta Kuan glazes on an iron-coloured body. These are three kinds--yüeh
pai, fên ch´ing, ta lü--all imitating the colour and lustre of Sung ware
sent to (or from) the palace (_nei fa sung ch´i_)." There is no reason to
suppose that _Ta Kuan_ here is more than a mere synonym for _Kuan_ (ware).]
[Footnote 117: Chang Ying-wên in the _Ch´ing pi tsang_, published in 1595.]
[Footnote 118: [Chinese] a phrase which is not very lucid. In fact, I
suspect a confusion with another _tan_ [Chinese], which means "egg," and
would give the sense "egg white," like the _luan pai_ of the Ju yao.]
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