[106] Hsiang's Album, op. cit., Fig. 19.
[107] Son of the author of the Ch´ing pi tsang. His father (see p. [53]) declared that he had seen Ju porcelain.
[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.
[109] Op. cit., plate 20.
[110] Cosmo Monkhouse, Chinese Porcelain, plate 1, and Bushell, Chinese Art, vol. ii., pg. 7.
[111] Liu Yen–t´ing.
[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."
[113] The Cho kêng lu, published in 1368, but based on a thirteenth–century Sung work (see p. [55]).
[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
