Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 2. Ming and Ch'ing Porcelain

by R. L. Hobson

PLATE 88

Two examples of the underglaze red (chi hung) of the K’ang Hsi period (1662–1722), sometimes called lang yao

Fig. 1.—Bottle-shaped Vase of dagoba form with minutely crackled sang-de-bœuf glaze with passages of cherry red. The glaze ends in an even roll short of the base rim, and that under the base is stone-coloured and crackled. Height 8½ inches.

British Museum.

Fig. 2.—Bottle-shaped Vase with crackled underglaze red of deep crushed strawberry tint. The glaze under the base is pale green, crackled. Height 10¾ inches.

Alexander Collection.

With regard to the porcelains made in the early years of K’ang Hsi there is very little information, and their special excellence has been assumed mainly on the supposition that the Viceroy Lang T’ing-tso exercised a beneficent influence on the wares of this period. He is reputed to have been sponsor of the Lang yao, which in the ordinary acceptation of the term[260] includes the beautiful sang de bœuf red, an apple green crackle, and perhaps a cognate crackled green glaze on which are painted designs in famille verte enamels. The explanation of the term lang yao is far from clear, and, as already hinted, the connection of the viceroy Lang T’ing-tso with this or any other of the K’ang Hsi porcelains is by no means established. Bushell[261] accepted the derivation of Lang yao from the first part of the viceroy’s name as representing the best of several Chinese theories, and on the supposition that “the ceramic production of this time has retained the name of the viceroy, in the same way as the names of Ts’ang Ying-hsüan, Nien Hsi-yao, and T’ang Ying, who were in turn superintendents of the Imperial potteries, were afterwards given to the Ts’ang yao, Nien yao, and T’ang yao.” There are many objections to this reasoning. In the first place, Lang T’ing-tso was viceroy of the two provinces of Kiangsi and Kiangnan for three or four years only (1665–1668) during the reign of K’ang Hsi, and it was only in his capacity as viceroy of Kiangsi that he would have been concerned with Ching-tê Chên, even supposing that the man who had charge of two large provinces could find time to devote himself to the details of ceramic manufactures. Secondly, it is nowhere recorded that Lang T’ing-tso was concerned in any way with the direction of the potteries, so that there is in this respect no parallel between him and the directors Ts’ang, Nien, and T’ang. Thirdly, the history of Ch’ing-tê Chên as given in the T’ao lu, and the history of Chinese porcelain as given in the T’ao shuo, make no mention whatever of lang yao or of Lang T’ing-tso, while the former takes special notice of the wares of Ts’ang, Nien, and T’ang, and the latter discusses T’ang’s work at some length. Had so important a person as the viceroy of two provinces been connected with the invention or perfection of such celebrated wares as the lang yao, the occurrence would hardly have escaped the notice of the Chinese chronicler.

There are other attempts to explain the name lang yao. In the catalogue of Mr. A. B. Mitford’s collection[262] it is stated that “the Lang family were a family of famous potters who possessed the secret of this peculiar glaze and paste. They became extinct about the year 1610.” Bushell[263] dismisses this with the comment that “the family is apocryphal and the porcelain antedated,” and in the same passage gives an alternative theory, viz. “this name has been derived by some Chinese of less weight from that of Lang Shih-ning, an artist protégé of the Jesuits,[264] who also lived in the reign of K’ang Hsi, and whose pictures are still appreciated.”

The evidence for all these versions seems to be equally defective. They are, in fact, mere assertions, and the reader can take his choice of any of them, provided he does not insist on Mr. Mitford’s date (anterior to 1610), for all authorities are now agreed that the lang yao is a K’ang Hsi production. The fact is that the name has been handed down without any explanation, and the current theories are of comparatively modern construction. The secret of the lang yao consisted in the first instance in the knowledge of means to produce a brilliant red glaze from copper oxide. It was not a new discovery, but merely a revival of the wonderful “precious stone” red of the early Ming period.[265] The supplies of some essential ingredient for this colour had failed in the Chia Ching period,[266] and the secret of the true colour had been temporarily lost. This secret was now recovered probably by a potter of the name of Lang, and that name has been associated with it ever since. So far from the lang yao being limited to the early part of the reign of K’ang Hsi or to the few years when Lang T’ing-tso might have been concerned with it, there can be little doubt that the sang de bœuf red or red lang yao is the special colour described in detail by Père d’Entrecolles in 1712, and again in 1722 under the significant name of yu li hung, or “red in the glaze.” The reader can judge for himself from the description given in the second letter[267]: “This red inside the glaze is made with granulated red copper and the powder of a certain stone or pebble of a reddish colour. A Christian doctor told me that this stone was a kind of alum, used in medicine. The whole is pounded in a mortar and mixed with a boy’s urine and the ordinary porcelain glaze; but I have not been able to ascertain the quantities of the ingredients, for those in possession of the secret take good care not to divulge it. This mixture is applied to the porcelain before it is fired and no other glaze is used; but care has to be taken that the red colour does not run to the bottom of the vase during the firing. They tell me that when they intend to apply this red to porcelain they do not use porcelain stone (petuntse) in the body, but they use in its place, mixed with the porcelain earth (kaolin), a yellow clay prepared in the same manner as the petuntse. Probably it is a kind of clay specially suited to receive this colour.” Would that the worthy father had named the possessors of the secret! Had it been a Jesuit family, is it likely that he would not have said so? But here, at any rate, is not only such an accurate description of the manufacture of the sang de bœuf red that little need be added to it, but also a valuable commentary on the obscure passages in which the allusion is made to the brilliant red of the Hsüan Tê and other early Ming periods. For what is the reddish stone or pebble but the “red precious stone from the West,” which played a mysterious part in the pao shih hung of the Hsüan Tê period? Chinese tradition has imagined this stone to have been the ruby, on the impossible assumption that the red colour of the glaze was derived from the red of the ruby. But it was, in all probability, cornaline (the ma nao used in the Sung porcelain of Ju Chou) or amethystine quartz, and its only function would have been to increase the brilliancy and transparence of the glaze, the red colour being entirely due to copper oxide. It is interesting, too, to note that the composition of the porcelain body was varied to suit this red colour, and that a yellow clay was substituted for the porcelain stone, in view of the alleged difficulties in obtaining the proper “earth for the fresh red (hsien hung)” in the Chia Ching period. In a similar manner a more earthy composition was found to be more sympathetic than the pure white porcelain to some of the other monochromes, as may be observed in existing specimens of turquoise blue.

The lang yao, then, is the chi hung of the K’ang Hsi period, the brilliant blood red commonly known by the French name sang de bœuf, and to-day it is one of the most precious monochromes. A choice example illustrated on Plate [88] shows the changing tints from a brilliant cherry red below the shoulder to the massed blood red where the fluescent glaze has formed thickly above the base. The colour flowing down has left an even white band round the mouth, and has settled in thick coagulations on the flat parts of the shoulders and again above the base; but in spite of its apparent fluidity the glaze has stopped in an even line without overrunning the base. The glaze under the base is of pale buff tone and crackled, and a careful examination of the surface generally shows that a faint crackle extends over the whole piece. The glaze, moreover, is full of minute bubbles and consequently much pinholed, and the red colour has the appearance of lying on the body in a dust of minute particles which the glaze has dragged downward in its flow and spread out in a continuous mass, but where the colour and the glaze have run thick the particles reappear in the form of a distinct mottling or dappling.