Page 194 - Jindezhen Porcelain Production of the 19th C. by Ellen Huang, Univ. San Diego 2008

177

23
For a detailed discussion on these albums, see Yu Peichin, “Pinjian zhi qu: shiba shiji
de taoci tuce jiqi xiangguan wenti,” 133-166.

24 Yu Peichin, ibid., 151.

25
Yu Peichin’s main point is that the catalogues reveal the collectors’ sensibility towards
these porcelain objects but she does not stress the sense of history embedded in these
cataloguing productions. For Qianlong’s vanguard status in the exploration of historical
origins of ceramics, see Hsieh Mingliang ᑽ׼ڥ, “Qianlong de taoci jianshang guan,” ৻
ඤٙௗନᛠሧᝈ [Qianlong’s Connoisseurship of Ceramics] Gugong xueshujikan ݂ࢗ
ኪஔ֙̊ 21:2 (Winter 2003): 26.

26 See the poem reference in Hsieh Mingliang, “Qianlong de taoci jianshang guan,” 26, fn.
172. The Kaogong ji was a section of the book Zhouli (Zhou Rituals), an ancient work on
ritual artifacts, including construction of carriages, tools, vessels, supposedly all
employed by the Zhou court from the third century BC.

27 Yu Peichin, “Pinjian zhi qu: shiba shiji de taoci tuce jiqi xiangguan wenti,” 143; on
Qianlong’s historical sense see the discussion of sources and poems by Qianlong in Hsieh
Mingliang, “Qianlong de taoci jianshang guan,” 26, 27.

28 Jessica Rawson and Evelyn Rawski, eds., China: The Three Emperors, 1662-1795
(London: Royal Academy of Art, 2006).

29
Lorraine Daston and Katherine Park, eds., Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150-
1750 (New York: Zone, 1998); Oliver Impey, The Origins of Museums: The Cabinet of
Curiosities in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Europe (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1985). Collections of exotica were assembled for scientific purposes as well as for
personal predilection, and were most popular in the Hapsburg Empire, Germany, and
Italy. The period of early modern science spans 1660-1820 for historians of science, and
the Park and Daston volume examine the role of curiosity and wonder and its attendant
cognitive responses such as awe, delight, fear, befuddlement in the ambition for scientific
inquiry.

30
Pamela Crossley, Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 282-283.

31 The point that historicizing and knowledge production as part of the ideological
construction of imperial identity is precisely the main point of Crossley’s work, as she
contends that the reworking of knowledge created a set of identities within under the
emperor’s domain. Pamela Crossley, Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing
Imperial Ideology (1999). Erica Yao, “Qing Court Display in Duobao ge,” unpublished
conference paper for the Association for Asian Studies Annual Meeting (2008). I have