CHAPTER I

THE PRIMITIVE PERIODS

POTTERY, as one of the first necessities of mankind, is among the earliest of human inventions. In a rude form it is found with the implements of the late Stone Age, before there is any evidence of the use of metals, and all attempts to reconstruct the first stages of its discovery are based on conjecture alone.

We have no knowledge of a Stone Age in China, but it may be safely assumed that pottery there, as elsewhere, goes back far into prehistoric times. Its invention is ascribed to the mythical Shên-nung, the Triptolemus of China, who is supposed to have initiated the people in the cultivation of the soil and other necessary arts of life. Huang Ti, the semi-legendary yellow emperor, in whose reign the cyclical system of chronology began (2697 B.C.), is said to have appointed "a superintendent of pottery, K´un-wu, who made pottery," and it was a commonplace in the oldest Chinese literature[6] that the great and good emperor Yü Ti Shun (2317-2208 B.C.) "highly esteemed pottery." Indeed, the Han historian Ssŭ-ma Ch´ien (163-85 B.C.) assures us that Shun himself, before ascending the throne, "fashioned pottery at Ho-pin," and, needless to say, the vessels made at Ho-pin were "without flaw."

According to the description given in the _T´ao shuo_, the evolution of the potter's art in China took the usual course. The first articles made were cooking vessels; then, "coming to the time of Yü (i.e. Yü Ti Shun), the different kinds of wine vessels are distinguished by name, and the sacrificial vessels are gradually becoming complete."[7]

I should add that the author of the _T´ao shuo_, after accepting the earlier references to the art, inconsistently concludes: "I humbly suggest that the origin of pottery should strictly be placed in the reign of Yü Ti Shun, and its completion in the Chou dynasty" (1122-256 B.C.).

Unfortunately, none of the writers can throw any light on the first use of the potter's wheel in China. It is true that, like several other nations, the Chinese claim for themselves the invention of that essential implement, but there is no real evidence to illuminate the question, and even if the wheel was independently discovered in China, the priority of invention undoubtedly rests with the Near Eastern nations. Palpable evidence of its use can be seen on Minoan pottery found in Crete and dating about 3000 B.C., and on Egyptian pottery of the twelfth dynasty (about 2200 B.C.); while it is practically certain that it was used in the making of the Egyptian pottery of the fourth dynasty (about 3200 B.C.).

So far, the Chinese have nothing tangible to oppose to these facts earlier than the Chou writings, in which workers with the wheel (_t´ao jên_) are distinguished from workers with moulds (_fang jên_), the former making cauldrons, basins, colanders, boilers, and vessels (_yü_), and the latter moulding the sacrificial vessels named _kuei_ and _tou_. We learn that at this time the Chinese potters also used the compasses and the polishing wheel or lathe. With this outfit they were able, according to the _T´ao shuo_, to effect the "completion" of pottery.

Whatever the truth of this pious statement may be, reflecting as it does the true Chinese veneration of antiquity, it is certain, at any rate, that the potter was not without honour at this time: for we read in the _Tso Chuan_[8] that "O-fu of Yü was the best potter at the beginning of the Chou dynasty. Wu Wang relied on his skill for the vessels which he used. He wedded him to a descendant of his imperial ancestors, and appointed him feudal prince of Ch´ên."

Examples of these early potteries have been unearthed from ancient burials from time to time, and the _T´ao shuo_ describes numerous types from literary sources. But neither the originals, as far as we know them, nor the verbal descriptions of them, have anything but an antiquarian interest.

The art of the Chou dynasty, as expressed in bronze and jade, is fairly well known from illustrated Chinese and Western works. It reflects a priestly culture in its hieratic forms and symbolical ornament. It is majestic and stern, severely disdainful of sentiment and sensuous appeal. Of the pottery we know little, but that little shows us a purely utilitarian ware of simple form, unglazed and almost devoid of ornament.

On Plate 1 are two types which may perhaps be regarded as favourable examples of Chou pottery. A tripod vessel, almost exactly similar to Fig. 1, was published by Berthold Laufer,[9] who shows by analogy with bronzes of the period good reasons for its Chou attribution, which he states is confirmed by Chinese antiquarians. His example was of hard "gray clay, which on the surface has assumed a black colour," and it had the surface ornamented with a hatched pattern similar to that of our illustration. It has been assumed that this hatched pattern is a sure sign of Chou origin, and I have no doubt that it was a common decoration at the time. But its use continued after the Chou period, and it is found on pottery from a Han tomb in Szechuan, which is now in the British Museum. It is, in fact, practically the same as the "mat marking" on the Japanese and Corean pottery taken from the dolmens which were built over a long period extending from the second century B.C. to the eighth century A.D.

The taste of the time is reflected in a sentence which occurs in the _Kuan-tzŭ_, a work of the fifth century B.C.: "Ornamentation detracts from the merit of pottery."[10] The words used for ornamentation are _wên ts´ai_ [Chinese] (lit. pattern, bright colours), and they seem to imply a knowledge of some means of colouring the ware. As there is no evidence of the use of glaze before the Han period, and enamelling in the ordinary ceramic sense is out of the question, we may perhaps assume that some of the pottery of the Chou period was painted with unfired pigments, a method certainly in use in the Han dynasty. There is a vase in the British Museum of unglazed ware with painted designs in black, red and white pigments, which has been regarded as of Han period, but may possibly be earlier (Plate 2, Fig. 3).

In addition to the Chou tripod, Laufer[11] illustrates five specimens of pre-Han pottery, excavated by Mr. Frank H. Chalfant "on the soil of the ancient city of Lin-tzŭ in Ch´ing-chou Fu, Shantung," a district which was noted for its pottery as late as the Ming period.[12] This find included two pitchers, a deep, round bowl, a tazza or round dish on a high stem, and a brick stamped with the character _Ch´i_, all unglazed and of grey earthenware. From this last piece, and from the fact that Lin-tzŭ, until it was destroyed in 221 B.C., was the capital of the feudal kingdom of Ch´i, Laufer concluded that these wares belonged to a period before the Han dynasty (206 B.C. to 220 A.D.).

[Illustration:

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

Plate 1.--Chou Pottery.

Fig. 1.--Tripod Food Vessel. Height 6⅛ inches.

Fig. 2.--Jar with deeply cut lozenge pattern. Height 6¾ inches.

_Eumorfopoulos Collection._]

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 6: e.g. the K´ao Kung chi, a relic of the Chou dynasty (1122-256 B.C.).]

[Footnote 7: _T´ao shuo_, bk. ii., fol. 1. See S.W. Bushell, Chinese Pottery and Porcelain, being a translation of the _T´ao shuo_, Oxford, 1910, p. 34.]

[Footnote 8: A work of the fifth century B.C., quoted in the _Ching-tê Chên T´ao lu_, bk. ix., fol. 1.]

[Footnote 9: _Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty_, Leyden, 1909, pp. 10-14.]

[Footnote 10: Quoted in the _Ching-tê Chên T´ao lu_, bk. ix. fol. 1.]

[Footnote 11: Loc. cit.]

[Footnote 12: See p. 200.]