CHAPTER VI

LUNG-CH´ÜAN YAO [Chinese]

IN discussing the celebrated Lung-ch´üan celadons, we are able to build our structure on a more solid basis. For one group of them, at any rate, is so familiar that we should be tempted to abandon the difficult Chinese descriptions and construct an essay on the ware from actually existing specimens, were it not that in so doing we should miss our chief opportunity of applying a living test to the Chinese phrases.

The district of Lung-ch´üan in the prefecture of Ch´u-chou, province of Chekiang, was noted for its potteries as early[154] as the beginning of the Sung dynasty, but its greatest celebrity was attained by the market town of Liu-t´ien, where the Chang brothers are reputed to have worked.[155] The story that the elder Chang moved to Liu-t´ien while the younger brother remained at Lung-ch´üan is, I believe, based on a misreading of a Chinese passage,[156] the true meaning of which seems to be that while the elder brother made new departures which earned for his ware the distinctive name of Ko yao, the younger continued the Lung-ch´üan traditions, and consequently his ware was known as Lung-ch´üan yao. It appears that one vital difference between the two wares was crackle, which was used by the elder and not by the younger brother.

The productions of the Lung-ch´üan district are variously named in the _Ko ku yao lun_, "_Ch´u_ ware" (from Ch´u-chou Fu, the name of the prefecture), "_ch´ing_ ware," and "old _ch´ing_ ware," and the various Chinese accounts agree in distinguishing two broad classes, the one having a thin body of fine material, and the other a thick body of coarser and heavier make.

The first of these two classes includes the Chang yao, or ware of the younger Chang, of which the _Ch´ing pi ts´ang_ gives the following description: "There is one kind in the manufacture of which white clay is used, and the surface of the ware is covered with _ts´ui_[157] glaze through which the white shows in faint patches. This is what was made by the Chang family in the Sung dynasty, and is called Chang yao. Compared with the Lung-ch´üan ware in style and make, it gives the impression of greater delicacy and refinement." Another writer[158] describes it as "single-coloured and pure, like beautiful jade, and ranking with the Kuan yao; whereas the Ko yao was pale in colour."

The eleven examples figured and described in Hsiang's Album are all apparently of this class, and their colour is variously described as "green, of jade-green tint (_ts´ui pi_), like a wet, mossy bank or slender willow twigs," "green like the green of onion (sprouts)" (_ts´ui jo ch´ing ts´ung_), "green like parrot's feathers," "green like the dull green (_lü_) of a melon," and "soft jade-green like onion sprouts in autumn." Hsiang's similes leave no doubt as to the prevailing tint of the ware, which clearly aimed at rivalling the tint of the prized green jade. As might be expected, few if any of Chang's celadons are to be found in our collections. Relatively few in numbers, assuming them to have been the work of one lifetime, and slender in structure, it is improbable that many of them can have survived the chances of eight or nine hundred years, and even supposing that any of them have reached Europe, their identity now could only be a matter of conjecture.

The second class is best known to us in those thick, massive porcelains with greyish white body and smooth grey green glaze which have been named in Persian countries _martabani_ and in Europe _celadon_. The former name is no doubt derived from the port of Martaban, on the coast of Pegu, a meeting place of Eastern and Western traders, from which the Chinese goods were shipped or transhipped for Europe and the nearer East. The latter name has a more capricious origin, deriving from the shepherd Céladon, a stage personality whose familiar grey green clothing suggested a name for the grey green porcelain. He appeared in one of the plays founded on the early seventeenth-century romance, _L'Astrée_, written by Honoré d'Urfé.

Large dishes and plates, bowls, vases, bulb bowls and jars of this green ware have found their way to all parts of Europe in considerable numbers, and they evidently formed a staple of far Eastern trade in the Middle Ages. The subject of their distribution will be treated presently. First, we must complete their description.

The ware, as a general rule, has a greyish white mass varying from porcelain to stoneware, and with the peculiar quality of assuming a reddish brown tint wherever the glaze is absent and the "biscuit" was exposed to the fire of the kiln. It has, in fact, the "iron foot" though not the "brown mouth," for the body is of a whitish colour under the glaze, and consequently the mouth of the vessel varies from green to greenish white, according to the thickness of the glaze. The decoration is either carved, etched with fine point, or raised in relief by pressing in an intaglio mould or by the application of small ornaments separately formed in moulds. All these processes are applied to the body before the glaze is added, and the glaze, though covering them over, is transparent enough to allow the details to appear fairly distinctly. In the case of the applied reliefs, however, the glaze is often locally omitted, and the ornaments stand out in biscuit, which has assumed the usual reddish brown tint. This is well illustrated on Plate 21, in which two brown fishes are represented swimming round a sea green dish. A dish in the British Museum shows three fishes swimming beneath the green surface of the glaze. This fish design was frequent enough to have earned special notice in Chinese books, which are excessively niggard in their enumeration of designs. The _Ko ku yao lun_,[159] for instance, says "there is one kind of dish on the bottom of which is a pair of fishes, and on the outside are copper rings attached to lift it."

Elaborate designs of flowers, flying phœnixes in peony scrolls, dragons in clouds or waves, formed in relief by pressure in moulds, were certainly used on Sung celadons just as they were in the white Ting wares, but they seem to have been still more common on the Ming wares. But the best and most characteristic Sung decoration was a beautiful freehand carving executed with admirable spirit and taste, in those bold, half naturalistic, half idealised sketches which distinguish the art of the time. Complex ornament, such as landscape and figure subjects, is occasionally found on old celadons; and there is one kind of bowl of rounded form with rather high narrow foot which is decorated inside with groups of figures carved or impressed in intaglio, the subjects being the eight Taoist Immortals, or historical personages such as Confucius, the chess-playing General, etc., usually labelled with their names in Chinese characters. The glaze on these bowls varies widely in colour and texture, being sometimes smooth celadon green, sometimes yellowish or brownish green or again a pale apple green with crackled surface; and it is possible that they come from some district other than Lung-ch´üan.[160]

The Lung-ch´üan celadon glaze is singularly beautiful with its soft, smooth translucent texture and restful tints, which vary from olive green through grass green and sea green to pale greenish grey, occasionally showing a decidedly bluish tone. The ware has enjoyed immense popularity in almost every part of the world for untold years, and nowhere more than in Japan, where choice specimens have always been highly valued, and it is not a little surprising to find that in this country alone its merits are underestimated. The Chinese themselves have been always loud in their praises of the finer varieties, though they have not always spoken in complimentary terms of the thick and massive types which were so suitable for the export trade. Of these the _Ch´ing pi ts´ang_ observes that they readily withstand usage and handling, and do not easily break; but the workmanship is somewhat clumsy, and the designs are lacking in antique elegance. With the finer examples within reach, these strictures were perhaps only natural; but there has never been any doubt of the Chinese appreciation of the celadon glaze, for while they have never ceased to reproduce it in other factories, it is always the old Lung-ch´üan ware which serves as their standard and model.

The modern celadon glaze is made by mixing ferruginous clay with the ordinary feldspathic glaze and adding a pinch of cobalt (the mineral from which the blue colour is obtained) to give it the requisite tone[161]; and it is certain that the colour of the old celadons is due to the presence of oxide of iron, whether assisted or not by oxide of cobalt. Possibly the earliest celadons were the accidental result of the iron in a strongly ferruginous clay escaping in the heat of the kiln and imparting a green tinge to an otherwise colourless glaze. The conditions in the Lung-ch´üan district would have specially favoured such an accident, for the local clays were of the ferruginous kind, as is shown by their peculiarity, which we have already noted, of turning red or reddish brown when exposed without protection to the heat of the kiln. The presence of iron in greater or less quantity is a common feature of potter's clays all the world over, and it is usual in modern potteries to pass the clay over strong magnets in order to remove this disturbing element when a pure white ware is in view. This fact alone will explain the prevalence of green tints of the celadon type among the earlier Chinese wares, and observation of these results would naturally lead to the discovery that a certain quantity of particular clay mixed with the ordinary glaze would produce a beautiful green colour, resembling jade. The reddish brown spots occasionally observed in old celadon glazes are no doubt due to flaws in the glaze-covering, which allowed a partial exposure of the body, or to a local excess of iron oxide in the material. Like a great many other accidental effects, these were turned to account by the Chinese, and in some examples we find patches of brown which evince a deliberate intention (Plate 21). These effects are highly prized by the Japanese, who call the ware _Tobi seiji_ or "spotted celadon."

The manufacture of celadon must have been very extensive in the Lung-ch´üan district. Besides the principal factories at Liu-t´ien Shih, there were minor works at Chin-ts´un already mentioned, and according to the _T´ao lu_[162] at Li-shui Hsien[163] in the Ch´u-chou Fu, the latter already operative in the Sung dynasty. Its wares were included in the comprehensive term _Ch´u yao_, and "the material was coarse and thick, the colour similar to that of Lung-ch´üan ware, both dark and light, but the workmanship was coarser."

At the beginning of the Ming dynasty, we are told[164] that the Lung-ch´üan factories were removed to Ch´u-chou, and that the ware made on the new site was green (_ch´ing_), with a white body which, like the older ware, assumed a red colour in the exposed parts, but that the ware was not so good as the old. Local tradition asserts that the celadon industry in the district came to an end with the Ming dynasty.[165]

[Illustration:

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Plate 21.--Three examples of Lung-ch´üan Celadon Porcelain.

Fig. 1.--Plate of spotted celadon. (?) Sung dynasty. Diameter 6½ inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._

Fig. 2.--Octagonal Vase with crackled glaze and biscuit panels moulded with figures of the Eight Immortals in clouds. (?) Fourteenth century. Height 9¼ inches. _Eumorfopoulos Collection._

Fig. 3.--Dish with engraved lotus scrolls and two fishes in biscuit. Sung dynasty. Diameter 11 inches. _Gotha Museum._]

Connoisseurs are much exercised over the differences between Sung and Ming celadons. The _T´ao lu_ tells us nothing beyond the bare statement that the Ming ware was not so good, and the two general rules which have been laid down[166] for our guidance--viz. (1) that the colour of the Sung wares is deeper and more grass green, that of the Ming more grey green, and (2) that the bottoms of the Ming vessels are distinguished by an unglazed ring of reddish brown colour--can only be accepted with reserve. Of the two the colour test is probably the more reliable, but I have found too many exceptions in which the grey green occurs on pieces of obviously Sung origin to feel any great confidence in its guidance. The ring test breaks down in practice, and is illogical in its conception, implying, as it does, that the use of a circular support in the kiln was limited to one particular place and period. On the contrary, we know that this method of support was usual in the Siamese factories at Sawankalok,[167] and apparently before the Ming period, and as the Siamese potteries were started by Chinese, probably sent from Western China, it is only fair to suppose that this method of manufacture was in general use at an early date. The safest criterion of Sung workmanship is the style of the ware, and especially the boldness and freedom of the carved designs. In the Ming period the Sung patterns already exhibit an inevitable staleness and conventionality with a tendency to overcrowding of detail. In some cases, too, the designs are of a later order, and closely analogous to those of the blue and white Ming porcelains.

In addition to the Lung-ch´üan and Ch´u-chou celadons, which are readily recognised by their peculiar glaze and their reddish brown foot rims, there are many other kinds which are not easy to classify. Some of these have a dry, buff stoneware body and brownish green glaze, while others have a glaze of decided grey or blue grey tone. In conjecturing the origin of these we must take into consideration the private factories which existed under the Northern Sung at Ch´ên-liu[168] and other localities in the neighbourhood of the eastern capital (_tung ching_), now named K´ai-fêng Fu, in Honan. The _Ko ku yao lun_[169] describes the ware of these parts under the heading _Tung yao_[170]: "It is pale green (_ch´ing_) in colour, with fine crackle, and in many cases has a brown mouth and iron foot. Compared with Kuan ware it lacks the red tinge, and its material is coarse, wanting in fineness and lustre, and far from equalling that of the Kuan ware. At the present day (i.e. 1887) it is rarely seen." Other writers repeat this passage with little alteration, though the author of the _T´ao lu_ adds that the clay was of black colour and the glaze of varying depth. Hsiang's Album includes one specimen of the _tung ch´ing tz´ŭ_, describing the colour as _t´ieh ts´ui_, which probably means the blue green shade of distant hills.[171] _Tung ch´ing_ glaze is included in the list of those imitated in the Imperial factories about 1780, two kinds, pale and deep, being specified; and the _T´ao lu_[172] informs us that the _Tung ch´ing_ was copied to a considerable extent at Ching-tê Chên in the early nineteenth century, and that the modern glaze was exactly like the old. That this modern glaze was only a variety of celadon is shown by the recipe given in the same work,[173] viz. "to add to the ordinary glaze some of the mixture containing ferruginous earth," which differs from that given for the modern Lung-ch´üan glaze only in the absence of the pinch of cobalt (see vol ii., p. 189).

A verse from a poem by Chang-lei (1046-1106) indicates the green colour of the ware: "Green jade (_pi yü_) when carved makes a vessel; know it to be the porcelain (_tz´ŭ_) of the Tung kilns [Chinese]."[174]

In the classification of old celadons due account must be taken of the imitations made from the earliest times at Ching-tê Chên. Many of these would be distinguishable by their white porcelain body, the ordinary porcelain clay of the district not having the peculiar qualities of the Lung-ch´üan and Ch´u-chou Fu material. In fact, we know that it has been a common practice in recent times among the Ching-tê Chên potters to dress the exposed parts of their ware with brown ferruginous earth when they wished to reproduce the "brown mouth or iron foot" of the archaic wares. Another method which was found effective by imitators of the antique was to use a coarse yellowish clay for the body of the ware. This, however, should be generally recognisable. But the skill of the Chinese copyist is proverbial, and a good instance of his cunning is given in the now celebrated letters of Père d'Entrecolles, a Jesuit missionary stationed at Ching-tê Chên in the K´ang Hsi period. The passage[175] is interesting enough to be quoted in full:

"The mandarin of _Kim tê Chim_, who honours me with his friendship, makes for his patrons at the Court presents of old porcelain which he has himself a genius for fabricating. I mean that he has discovered the art of imitating antique porcelain, or at least that of comparative antiquity; and he employs a number of workmen for this purpose. The material of these false _Kou tom_, viz. counterfeit antiques, is a yellowish clay, obtained in a place quite near _Kim tê Chim_, called _Ma ngan chan_. They are constructed very thick. The mandarin has given me a plate of this make, which weighs as much as ten ordinary plates. There is nothing peculiar in the manufacture of these kinds of porcelain beyond that they are covered with a glaze made of yellow stone, mingled with the ordinary glaze, the latter predominating in the mixture, which gives the porcelain a sea green colour. When it is fired it is placed in a very rich broth made of chicken and other meats; in this it is baked a second time, and after that it is put in the foulest drain that can be found and left for a month or more. On issuing from this drain it passes for three or four hundred years old, or at any rate for a representative of the preceding Ming dynasty, when porcelain of this colour and thickness was appreciated at Court. These counterfeit antiques resemble the genuine pieces also in their want of timbre when struck, and if one holds them to the ear they produce no reverberation."

The worthy father's acquaintance with the antiques was probably limited, or he would not have instanced the last quality as evidence of good imitation. On the contrary, the lack of timbre would be regarded by Chinese connoisseurs as indication of a spurious ware, the note of the old porcelains being one of the criteria of their excellence. But the passage is otherwise most instructive.

It should be remembered, too, that at the time of which d'Entrecolles speaks, an extensive use was being made at Ching-tê Chên of a beautiful celadon glaze on a fine white porcelain body. These celadons of the period will be discussed in their proper place, as they make no pretence of antiquity and are easily distinguished by their pure white body and pale soft green glaze. Indeed, they often have the ordinary white glaze under the base and a period mark in blue.

Another factory which made free use of the celadon glaze was that of Yang Chiang, province of Kuangtung. As a rule, the ware is recognisable by its reddish brown stoneware body, but in cases where the biscuit is lighter in colour and more porcellanous in texture, confusion may easily arise.

Nor must we forget the extensive manufacture of celadons outside China itself. The Corean wares have already been mentioned. As a rule, their soft velvety glaze is recognised by its peculiar bluish grey tone, difficult to describe but easy to remember when once seen. The colour, however, varies to distinctly greener and browner shades, which are liable to be confused with Chinese celadons of the Lung-ch´üan and northern types. Fortunately, most, though not all, of the Corean decorations are very characteristic, particularly the delicate inlaid designs[176] in white and black clays; and the finish of the ware underneath is usually distinctive, a very low foot rim, the base slightly convex, and the disfiguring presence of the sand, which in three little piles supported the ware in the kiln.

There are, however, quite a number of ambiguous celadons with a brownish green glaze, usually bowls, of which some are decorated inside with beautiful carved and moulded designs of bold foliage (Plate 18, Fig. 1) and even with the design of boys among flowering branches and the slight combed patterns which are found on the Corean white wares. Were it not for the apparently Chinese provenance of so many of these bowls, and the absence of the Corean characteristics in their bases, one would be tempted to class them as Corean on the strength of their general appearance. Probably we have in this group both the Chinese prototypes and the close imitations made by the Corean potters who followed these models just as they followed the white ware of Ting Chou. One of the combed bowls formerly treasured as a tea bowl in Japan is now in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin, but unfortunately the Japanese name _shuko-yaki_, by which Dr. Kümmel informs me it was known in Japan, sheds no light on the question of its origin.

The Sawankalok wares of Siam, too, have already had a passing mention. These are easily distinguished by their coarse grey body, reddish at the base, and thin, watery green glaze, very transparent and showing a bluish efflorescence where it has run thick. Once seen, they are hardly likely to be confused with any Chinese celadon, except a few of the coarser Ming and later types, in which the glaze happens to be very pale and thin. The Siamese wares, moreover, usually have a small raw irregular ring under the base, made by the end of a tubular kiln support, and differing from the broad regular ring on the Lung-ch´üan dishes described above.

But the most puzzling of the external celadons are those made at various times and places in Japan. They are, as a rule, close and careful copies of Chinese types, with which they are readily confounded by persons not familiar with Japanese peculiarities. In many cases, too, they will puzzle the most expert. It is well-nigh impossible to put into words any distinctive criteria of these wares. The biscuit is usually white and porcellanous, and though it sometimes assumes a natural tinge of red at the base, the colour is not so deep and decided as on the Lung-ch´üan wares. The chief distinction is an inevitable Japanese flavour in the form and decoration of the ware, but this, again, is an intangible feature which can only be realised by the practised eye. Finally, it should be said that remarkably close copies of the celadon green glaze (and of the typical ornament as well) were made in Egypt and Persia in the late Middle Ages. At a short distance they might often be taken for Chinese, but on inspection the body will be found to have that soft, sandy texture which is an unmistakable characteristic of the near-Eastern pottery.

It is impossible to leave the subject of celadon without a few words on the distribution of the ware in the Middle Ages, though I have no intention of embarking on the lengthy discussion which the interesting nature of the subject invites, nor of reopening the much-debated _Celadonfrage_ which elicited many interesting contributions[177] from Professors Karabacek, A.B. Meyer, and Hirth, and Dr. Bushell. Probably no single article of commerce can tell so much of the mediæval trade between China and the West as the old celadon porcelains whose fragments are constantly unearthed on the sites of the old-world trading stations. The caravan routes through Turkestan and the seaborne trade through the Eastern Archipelago and the Indian Ocean to the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, and east coast of Africa can be followed by porcelains deposited at the various trading centres and ports of call. Much, too, has been learnt from the writings of Chinese, Arab, and European travellers and geographers. Professor Hirth, as early as 1888, worked out the principal routes of Chinese seaborne trade from the "Records of Chinese Foreign Trade and Shipping,"[178] compiled by Chao Ju-kua about 1220 A.D., starting from the Tingui[179] of Marco Polo, which he identifies with Lung-ch´üan itself, and finishing in Egypt and Zanzibar. The porcelain was carried by land and river to the great port of Ch´üan-chou Fu, and thence in junks to Bruni in Borneo, Cochin China, and Cambodia, Java, Lambri, and Palembang, in Sumatra, where the traders of the East and West met and exchanged goods. Thence the trade proceeded to Quilom in Malabar, Guzerate, Cambray, and Malwa, and as far as Zanzibar. Numerous other localities might be mentioned, and much has been written[180] of the veneration in which old Chinese wares have always been held in the Philippines and Borneo, and of the magic powers attributed to the old dragon jars by the natives of these countries.

The green celadon was highly valued in India and Persia, where it was reputed to have the power of disclosing the presence of poison. An early reference to the Chinese porcelain occurs in the writings of the Persian geographer Yacut,[181] who mentions "four boxes full of Chinese porcelain and rock crystal" among the effects of a native of Dour-er-Raçibi in Khouzistan, who died in 913 a.d. The trade with Egypt is indicated in the much-quoted incident of the gift of forty pieces of Chinese porcelain sent from Egypt by Saladin to Nur-ed-din in Damascus in 1171, and by the later gift of porcelain vases sent in 1487 by the Sultan of Egypt to Lorenzo de' Medici. A large proportion of the celadons in our collections has been brought and still comes from India, Persia, and Egypt.[182] The Sultan's treasure at Constantinople[183] teems with celadons collected in mediæval times. Fragments of celadon are unearthed on almost every important mediæval site which is excavated in the East. The British Museum has small collections of such fragments from Bijapur in India, the island of Kais in the Persian Gulf, Rhages in Persia, Ephesus, Rhodes, Cairo, and Mombasa, to mention a few sites only. Fragments of celadon were found, in company with Chinese coins ranging in date from 990-1111 A.D., by Sir John Kirk and Lieut. C. Smith, near Kilwa in Zanzibar, and the former, while British representative in Zanzibar, was able to form a considerable collection of complete specimens which were treasured by the natives with almost religious care. A story told by Sir John Kirk illustrates the attitude of the native mind towards these treasured wares. A celadon dish with particularly fine carving was the subject of a family dispute, and to satisfy the rival claims a local Solomon decided that it should be divided between the disputants. One large fragment of it is now in Sir John Kirk's collection, which includes many interesting dishes, crackled and plain, and ranging in colour from dark olive green to the pale watery tint of the Sawankalok[184] wares. Other specimens of interest are the large, wide-mouthed, bowl-shaped vases with sides deeply ribbed or carved in high relief with bold floral designs. They have the peculiar feature of being constructed at first without a bottom, which was separately made in the form of a saucer and dropped in, the glaze holding it firmly in position. Similar vases[185] have been found in India and elsewhere. One of the first pieces of celadon to arrive in this country was the celebrated Warham bowl, which was bequeathed to New College, Oxford, in 1530 by Archbishop Warham. It is of dull grey green celadon, the outside faintly engraved with four lotus petals, each containing a trefoil, and in the bottom inside is the character _ch´ing_ [Chinese] (pure) surrounded by rays. It has a fine silver-gilt mount of English make.[186] It would be possible to multiply references to the traffic in celadon wares which was carried on briskly between China and the West in the Middle Ages, but enough has been said to give some idea of the extent and nature of the trade, which was mainly in the coarsest types of ware. Apart from the unlikelihood that very fine or precious porcelains would be embarked on such long and hazardous journeys, there was actually a law in force in China as early as the eighth century[187] which forbade, under penalty of imprisonment, the exportation of "precious and rare articles," anticipating by a thousand years the restrictive legislation of the Italian Government.

[Illustration: Plate 22.--Vase of Lung-ch´üan Porcelain.

With grey green celadon glaze of faint bluish tone, peony scroll in low relief. Probably Sung dynasty. Height 19½ inches. _Peters Collection._]

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 154: See _T´ao lu_, bk. vi., fol. 4. A factory of inferior reputation is supposed to have existed at the neighbouring village of Chin-ts´un (see Hirth, _Ancient Chinese Porcelain_, p. 38). And the _T´ao lu_ (bk. vii., fol. 6) describes a factory at Li-shui Hsien in the Ch´u-chou district, whose productions were also known as Ch´u ware.]

[Footnote 155: In the _T´u shu_, bk. ccxlviii., section _Tz´ŭ ch´i pu hui k´ao_, fol. 13, we are told that the brothers Chang worked beneath the Han liu hill at Lung-ch´üan in the Sung and Yüan dynasties.]

[Footnote 156: _T´ao shuo_, bk. ii., fol. 12 recto.]

[Footnote 157: _Ts´ui_ has already been explained as meaning "kingfisher: a bird with bluish green plumage." That it also connotes the idea of a green colour is shown by the expression _ts´ui yü_, which is rendered in Giles's Dictionary, "emerald green jade."]

[Footnote 158: Author of the _Ch´un fêng t´ang sui pi_, quoted in the _T´ao shuo_, bk. ii., fol. 12.]

[Footnote 159: Bk. vii., fol. 24 verso.]

[Footnote 160: Two examples in the Gotha Museum were figured in the _Burlington Magazine_, June, 1909, Plate iv.]

[Footnote 161: See _T´ao lu_, bk. iii., fol. 12 verso.]

[Footnote 162: Bk. vii., fol. 7 recto.]

[Footnote 163: [Chinese]]

[Footnote 164: _T´ao lu_, bk. vi., fol. 6.]

[Footnote 165: See Hirth, _Ancient Chinese Porcelain_, p. 31.]

[Footnote 166: See Bushell, _Oriental Ceramic Art_, p. 150.]

[Footnote 167: A large number of fragments and wasters, besides a few complete specimens, found on the site of these potteries, about 200 miles north of Bangkok, are now in the British Museum. The prevailing type of ware has grey porcellanous body and a thin transparent glaze of watery green celadon colour, often distinctly tinged with blue.]

[Footnote 168: [Chinese] See _T´ao lu_, vol. vi., fol. 3.]

[Footnote 169: Bk. vii., fol. 22.]

[Footnote 170: [Chinese] A phrase which the author of the _T´ao lu_ considers to be a mistake for the homophone [Chinese] (_tung yao_ or Eastern ware). He also quotes another misnomer for the ware, viz. [Chinese] _tung ch´ing ch´i_ (winter green ware). This Tung ware is constantly alluded to in other works as _tung ch´ing_ [Chinese].]

[Footnote 171: [Chinese] lit. duplicated kingfisher green. Bushell, in his translation, renders it literally "kingfisher feathers in layers," a metaphor from the well-known jewellery with inlay of kingfisher feathers, which would suggest a turquoise tint. On the other hand, we find in Giles's Dictionary the phrase [Chinese] _Yüan shan t´ieh ts´ui_, "the distant hills rise in many green ranges" (the two forms of _t´ieh_ being alternatives), a phrase recalling the "green of a thousand hills," which is used in reference to early green wares. See p. 16.]

[Footnote 172: Bk. ii., fol. 9.]

[Footnote 173: Bk. iii., fol. 12.]

[Footnote 174: Quoted from the _Yün tsao_ (a selection of verses) in the _T´ao lu_, bk. ix., fol. 3.]

[Footnote 175: See _Recueil des lettres édifiantes et curieuses_. The above passage occurs in a long letter dated from Jao Chou, September 1st, 1712. See Bushell, _Chinese Pottery and Porcelain_, Appendix, p. 206.]

[Footnote 176: The only example which I have seen of an inlaid celadon which might be taken for Chinese is a dish in the Stübel Collection in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, Dresden. It has a faint design, apparently inlaid, in a brownish colour.]

[Footnote 177: In the _Oesterreichische Monatschrift_, January, 1885, and succeeding numbers, A.B. Meyer's _Alterthümer aus dem Ostindischen Archipel_, etc. etc.]

[Footnote 178: The _Chu fan chih_, the author of which was Imperial inspector of foreign shipping, etc., in the province of Fukien. See Hirth, _Ancient Chinese Porcelain: A Study in Chinese Mediæval Industry and Trade_, Leipsig, 1888; and the translation of the _Chu fan chih_, published by Hirth and Rockhill, 1912.]

[Footnote 179: Where Marco Polo (see Yule, bk. ii., p. 218) states that "they make vessels of porcelain of all sizes, the finest that can be imagined ... and thence it is exported all over the world."]

[Footnote 180: See A.B. Meyer, op. cit.; Ling Roth, _The Natives of Borneo_; Carl Bock, _Head Hunters of Borneo_; Fay-Cooper Cole, _Chinese Pottery in the Philippines_, Chicago 1912.]

[Footnote 181: A thirteenth-century writer, one of whose works is translated by Barbier and Maynard, _Dictionnaire Géographique de la Perse_. See p. 240 of this book. Fragments of celadon porcelain were found on the ninth-century site of Samarra on the Euphrates. (See p. 148.)]

[Footnote 182: Much of the celadon found in Egypt would seem to be as late as the early part of the sixteenth century, to judge from the general name given to it by Egyptian merchants, "_baba ghouri_," after the sultan who reigned at that time.]

[Footnote 183: See E. Zimmermann in the _Cicerone_, III. _Jahrgang_, s. 496 ff.]

[Footnote 184: See _Burlington Magazine_, June, 1909, p. 164. Other pieces, apparently of Siamese make, have been found in Egypt, and it is most probable that Siamese celadons were shipped by the traders at Martaban in Pegu and sold by them along with the Chinese goods.]

[Footnote 185: See _Catalogue of the Early Chinese Pottery and Porcelain_, Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1910, B. 27.]

[Footnote 186: See _Cat. B.F.A._, 1910, E 20, and Plate.]

[Footnote 187: See _Chau Ju-kua_ (translated by Hirth and Rockhill), p. 9.]