Page 132 - C.T. Loo A paper about his impact and activities in the Chinese art Market

132

“have an outstanding personality with a more pronounced Hindu influence in the

decoration and movement” (C. T. Loo 1937).

Like India, Siberia served as a link between Chinese and Greek art in Loo’s art

historical map. The collection of Sino-Siberian art (Ordos art), a large group of bronze

objects with animal motifs from North China, constituted a distinct category in Loo’s

collection (Fig. 36). In 1927 Loo’s collection of inlaid bronzes of the Han dynasty was

catalogued by Michael I. Rostovtzeff. Loo’s decision to employ Rostovtzeff, a non-

Chinese art specialist, to catalogue this collection was a curious one. Rostovtzeff

admitted in the catalogue that he had no expertise in Chinese art, “…I am not a specialist

in Chinese antiquities, Chinese history and Chinese language. I am therefore not able to

quote the Chinese written sources to explain the religious ideas of which the Chinese

objects are mostly an artistic expression. I cannot use the detailed knowledge of Chinese

archeologists as developed in their ancient and recent works.” (Rostovtzeff 1927, 7-8)

To hire Rostovtzeff to catalogue this collection was a deliberation. Rostovtzeff was a

prominent figure in the field of Classical art and archaeology with a specialization in

Roman and Hellenistic world, and cross-cultural contacts. In 1922, he published Iranians

and Greeks in South Russia, which concerned the Scythians and their interchange with

the Greeks. His prestige and scholarship made him a perfect candidate to incorporate

Loo’s collection into the discourse of Western art and archaeology in terms of origination

and methodology. In the catalogue of the Inlaid Bronzes of the Han Dynasty in the

Collection of C. T. Loo, Rostovtzeff stated, “In dealing with Chinese antiquities, I am

using the same methods which are familiar to me from my studies in the antiquities of the