Page 33 - Chinese Works of Art Chritie's Mar. 22-23 2018

Scholars tend to believe that the Longquan celadons made at the Dayao A slightly smaller bowl (D: 32.5 cm.) with somewhat simpler decoration
kilns are of the highest quality, and excavations begun in 2006 have provided to the current bowl is in the collection of the Zhejiang Provincial Museum
an indication of the extensive production at this site, which appears to have (illustrated in Longquan qingci, op. cit., p. 274, no. 260). A further bowl
continued for some 400 years. Excavated examples from the early Ming from the collection of the Zhejiang Provincial Museum, also of slightly
period have shown that this was another highpoint for Longquan celadon smaller size (D: 30.3 cm.) was included in the exhibition Green Wares from
production, when both large and fnely potted vessels of superb quality Zhejiang in Hong Kong, 1993, no. 79. Similar bowls, dated to c. AD 1400,
were manufactured. One fragment of a Ming dynasty dish excavated at are in the collection of the Topkapi Saray, Istanbul. One is slightly smaller
the Dayao kilns bore the Chinese character guan oficial on its base. The than the current bowl (D: 36 cm.) is illustrated by J. Ayers and R Krahl in
Daming Huidian, vol. 194 states that in the 26th year of the Hongwu reign Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapi Saray Museum Istanbul, vol.I, Yuan and Ming
(AD 1393) some imperial wares were made in the Yao and Chu kilns [in Dynasty Celadon Wares, London, 1986, p. 359, no. 488, while a group of
Jiangxi and Zhejiang]. Volume I of the Ming Xuanzong Shilu suggests that four slightly larger bowls (D: 38-40 cm.) are described on page 295 of the
a court-appointed oficial was regularly sent to supervise the fring of these same publication, one being illustrated as no. 222. Two further examples
wares for imperial use up to AD 1457, and possibly even to AD 1465 (see are in the collection of the British Museum, London. One of similar size to
Zhu Boqian (ed.) Longquan qingci, Taipei, 1998, p. 47; and Tsai Mei-fen (ed.), the current example is illustrated by J. Harrison-Hall in Ming Ceramics in
Bilu - Mingdai Longquanyao qingci, Taipei, 2009, p. 22). After the Chenghua the British Museum, London, 2001, p. 480, no. 16:47, while a slightly smaller
reign (AD 1464-85) the quality of Longquan celadons declined, and their fnal bowl is illustrated in the same volume, no. 16:48. All these bowls have dense
‘golden era’ was over. decoration with a distinctive decorative band around the exterior rim, like
that on the current bowl, often bearing a lingzhi scroll. The interiors, like that
Nevertheless, the literati in the late Ming dynasty frequently refer to of the current bowl, have a central foral medallion and a foral scroll around
Longquan celadons in their writings. Among the vessels which were the interior walls. They all have an unglazed ring on the exterior base to
specifcally mentioned are large vessels, such as bowls or dishes to hold allow fring on a cylindrical setter. All are evenly potted and bear generous,
Buddha-hand citrons and meiping vases. Vessels of large size, such as the soft green, glazes. A slightly smaller bowl (D: 32 cm.) of this type is in the
current bowl, were regarded as especially desirable. Although the quality of collection of the National Palace Museum, Taipei, illustrated in Bilu - Mingdai
Longquan celadons declined after the 15th century, nevertheless even in 1591 Longquanyao qingci, op. cit, pp. 66-7, no. 26.
one writer noted that: ‘If plum blossoms are to be arranged in winter, large
Longquan celadon vases are a necessity’. It seems probable that he was While by the middle of the Ming dynasty, production at the Longquan kilns
referring to those vessels made in the early Ming period. had declined, the current bowl provides ample proof of the high quality of
prestigious wares made at the Longquan kilns - for the elite in China or for
In August 2009 the excavation of a Longquan celadon deposit at Hexia, distinguished foreign patrons - in the early part of the Ming dynasty.
Huai’an City, Jiangsu province revealed a huge quantity of vessels, 明初十五世紀 龍泉窯青釉刻蓮塘水藻紋大盌
predominantly dating to the Ming dynasty from the reign of the Hongwu
Emperor (1368-98) to that of the Tianshun Emperor (1457-64). The
archaeologists surmise that celadons from the Longquan kilns were sent
here to be shipped up the Grand Canal to the court. The fnds suggest
that only the fnest pieces were chosen and that those deemed to lack the
required perfection were broken and discarded.

31