A Short History of Chinese Art

A Short History of Chinese Art

Tao-chi (Shih-t’ao, c1641-c1717): Landscape. Album leaf; ink and

slight colour on paper. Ht. 48cm. Ch’ing Dynasty.

Detail of Plate 68b.

A Short History of

CHINESE ART

Michael Sullivan

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Berkeley and Los Angeles

University of California Press

Berkley and Los Angeles, California

© 1967 by Michael Sullivan

New, revised printing, 1970

Library of Congress Card Number: 67-21260

SBN 520-01239-9

Printed in Great Britain

To KHOAN

Foreword

In this book I have, after much reflection, preserved the continuous narrative framework of my earlier Introduction to Chinese Art, because I feel that only a broadly historical approach, one which combines ‘vertical’ continuity down the ages with ‘horizontal’ wholeness across each period, makes it possible for the reader, perhaps approaching Chinese art for the first time, to get a glimpse of the whole pattern. Other methods — devoting separate chapters to painting and ceramics, for example, or discussing one art form under each successive dynasty — have their advantages; but the first isolates the arts from each other, while the second leaves large areas untouched. But while the shape of the book remains unchanged, the text has been extensively revised and rewritten to keep it as far as possible abreast of recent discoveries and research, and many of the illustrations are new.

I should like once more to thank my friends and colleagues to whose teaching and writing I owe so much. I should like also to express my thanks to all the private collectors and museums that have sent me photographs and permitted their reproduction, to Mr N.S.Hyslop for drawing the maps, to Mr Thomas Greeves for the drawings on pages 150 and 207, and to Mr P.L.Moldon for the care with which he has seen the book through the press.

M. S.

London

July 1966

This new printing has enabled me to make some minor revisions, and to correct errors in the text. I am particularly grateful to Max Loehr and James Cahill for their very helpful suggestions.

M.S.

London

August 1969

Contents

Contents

Chronological Table

CHAPTER ONE Before the Dawn of History

CHAPTER TWO The Shang Dynasty

CHAPTER THREE The Chou Dynasty

CHAPTER FOUR The Period of the Warring States

CHAPTER FIVE The Ch’in and Han Dynasties

CHAPTER SIX The Six Dynasties

CHAPTER SEVEN Sui and T’ang

CHAPTER EIGHT The Five Dynasties and Sung

CHAPTER NINE The Yüan and Ming Dynasties

CHAPTER TEN From 1644 to the Present Day

BOOKS FOR REFERENCE AND FURTHER READING

Index

Chronological Table

Reign Periods of Ming and Ch’ing

NOTE

The earliest exactly known date in Chinese history is 841 B.C. According to calculations made by a number of scholars on the basis of probable reign lengths, the date of the founding of the Shang Dynasty has been put between 1766 and 1523 B.C., that of the Chou conquest between 1122 and 1018 B.C.

CHAPTER ONE

Before the Dawn of History

In far off times the Universe, according to a popular Chinese legend, was an enormous egg. One day the egg split open; its upper half became the sky, its lower half the earth, and from it emerged P’an Ku, primordial man. Every day he grew ten feet taller, the sky ten feet higher, the earth ten feet thicker. After eighteen thousand years P’an Ku died. His head split and became the sun and moon, while his blood filled the rivers and seas. His hair became the forests and meadows, his perspiration the rain, his breath the wind, his voice the thunder — and his fleas our ancestors.

A people’s legends of its origins generally give a clue as to what they think most important. This one is no exception, for it expresses a typically Chinese viewpoint — namely that man is not the culminating achievement of the creation, but a relatively insignificant part in the scheme of things; hardly more than an afterthought, in fact. By comparison with the beauty and splendour of the world itself, the mountains and valleys, the clouds and waterfalls, the trees and flowers, which are the visible manifestations of the workings of the Taot he counts for very little. In no other civilization — unless it be, in far smaller compass, in that of Britain — do the forms and patterns of nature, and man’s humble devotion and response to it, play so big a part. We can, moreover, trace the germs of this attitude back into the remote past, when in North China nature was a kinder master than she is now. Half a million years ago, in the time of Peking Man, that region was comparatively warm and wet; elephants and rhinoceros roamed a more luxuriant countryside than today’s barren hills and windswept plains. Within this now inhospitable area, forming the modern provinces of Honan, Hopei, Shensi and Shansi, was born a uniquely Chinese feeling of oneness with nature which, in course of time, was to find its highest expression in philosophy, poetry and painting. This sense of communion was not merely philosophical and artistic; it had a practical value as well. For the farmer’s prosperity, and hence that of society as a whole, depended upon his knowing the seasons and attuning himself to the ‘will of Heaven’, as he called it. Agriculture in course of time became a ritual over which the emperor himself presided, and when at the spring sowing he ceremonially ploughed the first furrow, not only did he hope to ensure a good harvest thereby, but his office was itself further ennobled by this act of homage to the forces of nature.

This sense of ‘attunement’ is fundamental in Chinese thinking. Man must attune himself not only to nature but also to his fellow men, in ever-widening circles starting from his family and friends. Thus his highest ideal has always in the past been to discover the order of things and to act in accordance with it. As in the following pages the history of Chinese art unfolds, we will find that its characteristic and unique beauty lies in the fact that it is an expression of this very sense of attunement. Is that one reason why Westerners, often with no other interest in Chinese civilization, collect and admire Chinese art with such enthusiasm? Do they sense, perhaps, that the forms which the Chinese artist and craftsman have created are natural forms — forms which seem to have evolved inevitably by the movement of the maker’s hand, in response to an intuitive awareness of a natural rhythm? Chinese art does not demand of us, as does Indian art, the effort to bridge what often seems an unbridgeable gulf between extremes of physical form and metaphysical content; nor will we find in it that pre-occupation with formal and intellectual considerations which so often makes western art difficult for the Asian mind to accept. The forms of Chinese art are beautiful because they are in the widest and deepest sense harmonious, and we can appreciate them because we too feel their rhythms all around us in nature, and instinctively respond to them. These rhythms, moreover, this sense of inner life expressed in line and contour, are present in Chinese art from its earliest beginnings.

Every lover of Chinese art today is familiar with the magnificent painted pottery of the Neolithic period, and we are apt to forget that fifty years ago this stage in the evolution of Chinese civilization, and all that went before it, was completely unknown. It was not until 1921 that positive evidence was found that China had actually passed through a Stone Age at all. In that year the Swedish geologist J. Gunnar Andersson and his Chinese assistants made two discoveries of immense importance. The first was at Chou- k’ou-tien, northwest of Peking, where in a cleft in the hillside Andersson picked up a number of flint tools, indicating that it had been occupied by very early man. He himself did not excavate, but his find led to further excavations and to the eventual discovery by Dr P’ei Wen-chung of fossil bones which, with the exception of late Java Man, Pithecanthropus erectus, were the oldest human remains yet discovered. The bones were those of a hominid, Sinanthropus pekinensis, who lived in the middle Pleistocene period, about half a million years ago. The remains in the deep cleft, fifty metres thick, represent many thousands of years of occupation. Peking Man had tools of quartz, flint and limestone, made either from pebbles chipped to shape or from flakes struck off a large pebble. He was a cannibal who broke open the bones of his victims to suck out the marrow; he had fire, ate grain, and probably knew some very primitive form of speech. In 1964, in deposits on an open hillside in Lan-t’ien County, Shensi, palaeontologists discovered the skull of a hominid believed, from related fossil remains, to be at least 100,000 years older than Peking Man, and so roughly the same age as early Java Man, Pithecanthropus robustus.

In 1935 and 1939 Dr G. H. R. von Koenigswald, examining some ‘dragon bones’ in a chemist’s shop in Kwangsi, found three teeth of a giant apelike creature which he named Gigantopithecus. In a cave at Holung, also in Kwangsi, were discovered remains of late Palaeolithic man (200,000 years ago) and of Homo sapiens of the Mesolithic period (10,000-7000 B.C.). Thus in Kwangsi alone it is now possible to study every stage of human development from the oldest hominid up to modern man. Some idea of the speed with which discoveries are now being made can be gained from the fact that within the last nine years more teeth and bones of Peking Man have been discovered at Chou-k’ou-tien; at Ting-ts’un in Shansi teeth and tools of a later stage of early man have been found (200,000 years old); while the remains of a girl of Neanderthal type of 80,000 years ago have been unearthed at Tze-yang in Szechwan.

The deposits in another cave at Chou-k’ou-tien reveal a much more advanced culture than that enjoyed by Peking Man. ‘Upper Cave Man’ (c. 25,000 B.c.) had a wider range of tools; he wore coarsely-woven clothing, and his wife adorned herself with stone beads, drilled and painted red with hematite. Similar sites have been found in Shensi, Ninghsia and Suiyuan, the latter including many beautifully-shaped microliths — stone knives and arrowheads only a few centimetres long. By 10,000 B.C., sites in Manchuria such as Djalai-nor show a further advance; a fragment of a basket (possibly a fish-trap), wooden tools, microliths and, for the first time, artefacts decorated with geometric designs.

The men who inhabited the earliest Neolithic sites in Manchuria and Mongolia, such as Ang-ang-hsi, differed chiefly from their Mesolithic forebears of Djalai-nor in knowing the art of making pottery. It is crude stuff: a coarse greyish-brown ware, sometimes adorned with rough comb-marked geometrical designs. In the next stage, represented by Lin-hsi in north Jehol, we find a finer, light brown pottery crudely painted with red and grey stains and decorated with textile impressions. These were a sedentary agricultural people, with a wider range of stone tools. At Hung- shan-hou, also in Jehol, Japanese archaeologists unearthed in addition to the grey pottery, a fine red ware with designs painted in black, and well-polished stone axes.

The first definite evidence of the existence of a Neolithic culture in China was found in 1921 by Andersson and his assistants, who located at Yang-shao-ts’un in Honan an extensive deposit of Neolithic tools and beautiful red pottery painted with designs in black. Before long more sites had been discovered in Honan. In 1923 Andersson went to Kansu to attempt to trace the connecting links which he suspected existed between this painted pottery and that of the Near East, and there found more than fifty prehistoric sites representing a gradual development from about the third millennium B.C. to the Late Chou.

Some of the features of this Neolithic culture are common to all early civilizations and belong to a culturecomplex that extends from the Nile Valley to Mesopotamia, from the Indus Valley to the Tarim Basin, linked to China by the ‘Corridor of the Steppes’, a natural migration route. In all these areas there developed at about the same time the use of polished stone tools and of the bow and arrow, the domestication of animals, the cultivation of cereals and the making of pottery. At first it was thought that in China this culture was concentrated in two areas only — Honan and Kansu, where Andersson made his finds; but more recent excavations by Chinese archaeologists — particularly those that have followed in the wake of the huge reconstruction schemes that have been in progress since 1950 — reveal that it was widely diffused throughout China.

For many years we had to visualize Chinese Neolithic culture in terms of the rather poor sites found by Andersson — notably the single grave at Pan-shan in Kansu, and the extensive but imprecise deposits at Yang-shao in Honan. This picture was dramatically revised in 1953 by the discovery of a complete Neolithic village at Pan-p’o, east of Sian on the right bank of the Chan River. The village covers two and a half acres; four separate layers of houses have been found in a cultural deposit three metres thick, representing several centuries of occupation between about 2500 and 2000 B.c. The earliest inhabitants lived in round wattle-and-daub huts with reed roof and plaster floor and an oven in the centre, the design perhaps copied from an earlier tent or yurt. Their descendants built rectangular or square houses with a framework of wooden planking, sunk a metre below ground level and approached by a flight of steps. The roof of one particularly large building over twelve metres long was supported on three rows of posts. In the village were found no less than six pottery kilns, of two types: a simple pocket-shaped pit with a perforated floor, and a cylindrical tunnel with forced draft, leading to a beehive-shaped chamber. In these kilns the Pan-p’o potters made both a coarse grey or red pottery and a fine red ware burnished and then painted in black with geometric designs and occasionally with fishes and human faces. They seem not to have known the potter’s wheel, but made their vessels by coiling long strips of clay. From clay they also made spindle-whorls and even hairpins, but the finer objects such as needles, fish hooks, spoons and arrowheads were made of bone. Part of the village of Pan-p'o has been roofed over and preserved as a museum of Chinese Neolithic culture.

The painted pottery first discovered at Pan-shan in Kansu has not been matched in quality and beauty by any Neolithic wares discovered since. It consists chiefly of mortuary urns, wide and deep bowls and tall vases, often with loop-handles set low on the body (Plate la). Though the walls are thin, the forms are robust, their generous contours beautifully enhanced by the decoration in black pigment which was clearly executed with a crude form of brush. Some of the designs are geometric, consisting of parallel bands or lozenges containing concentric squares, crosses or diamonds. The lower half of the body is always left undecorated, perhaps because it may have been set in the sandy ground to prevent it overturning. Many vessels are adorned with magnificent sweeping wave-like bands which gather into a kind of whirlpool; others make use of the stylized figures of men, frogs, fishes and birds, while a human face with some sort of ceremonial headdress found at Pan-p’o perhaps represented a shaman. Shards found at Ma-chia-yao in Kansu reveal a quite sophisticated brush technique, in one case depicting plants each of whose leaves ends in a sharp point with a flick of the brush — the same technique that was to be used by the Sung artist, three thousand years later, in painting bamboo. The naturalistic motifs however are rare, and the vast majority are decorated with geometric or stylized patterns whose significance is still a mystery. In point of technique, shape and even to some extent in the motifs themselves, the Yang-shao pottery seems to be influenced by that of Western Asia, for the very similar painted red ware found at Anau in Russian Turkestan is at least one to two thousand years older (page 33). But the Kansu vases reveal in their lively, uplifted forms, and still more in the dynamic linear movement of their brush decoration, a quality that is uniquely Chinese.

In 1928 Dr Wu Chin-ting of the Academia Sinica discovered at Ch’eng-tzu-yai, near Lung-shan in western Shantung, a quite different type of prehistoric pottery. It was made on the wheel of black clay fired in a reducing atmosphere, sometimes built up in thin sheets laminated together. Many of the shapes are elegant and somewhat metallic; while the decoration, consisting chiefly of raised bands, grooves and milled rings, gives it a rather machine- made look. Several of the Lung-shan shapes, notably the wide dish, beaker and dish on a tall stem (Plate ib) resemble vessels in use from one to two thousand years earlier in Western Asian sites such as Tepe Hissar, Anau and Susa; while in East Asia it has been found in a huge are stretching from Northeast China down to Thailand and northern Malaya. At some sites, such as Miao-ti-kou, it lies over a painted pottery stratum going back to about 3000 B.C. while in its later phases, as at Hu-shu near Nanking, it continued down to about 500 B.C., and hence well into the late Bronze Age.

Among the black pottery types one vessel, the li tripod, was destined to have a special significance in early Chinese culture. This vessel, which is found also in the grey wares, appears to be derived from the joining together of three tall ovoid jars with pointed bottoms. Perhaps three such vessels had stood together over a fire, and some practical housewife had the idea of combining them into one, the hollow legs (whose mammiform shape cannot have been accidental) both supporting the body and presenting a greater surface to the fire. This shape, which in Kansu only appears in the latest Neolithic sites such as Hsin-tien, seems to be uniquely Chinese. It was transmitted into the bronze culture of the Shang

Dynasty, where it gave the form to the most important and characteristic of the early ritual vessels. When supporting a pot with a perforated base, it becomes the bsien steamer, the pictograph for which meant ‘to sacrifice*.

Some of the precision and symmetry of the black Lung-shan ware appears also in the thin wheel-made, grey pottery found by Andersson, and later by Hsia Nai, at Ch’i-chia-p’ing in Kansu. The elegance of its vases and pitchers with their long thin handles also suggests an origin in metal forms, and it is perhaps this rather than archaeological findings which has led scholars to date the Ch’i-chia wares between 1500 and 500 B.c.¹ Indeed it seems that Neolithic culture persisted in outlying regions long after the beginning of the Bronze Age in North China. Painted pottery of Yangshao type, for example, has been found in South China, Formosa and Szechwan, while in Ning-yang District, Shantung, has been found a Lung-shan type ware decorated with triangles, circles and scrolls in black and white which seem to show links with the Yang-shao tradition. Other and more important sites in North China, notably Chengchow and Anyang, were in continuous occupation from late Neolithic times well into the Bronze Age. These will be dealt with in the next chapter.2

Some of the stone weapons and artifacts used in prehistoric China are common to all the Neolithic peoples of Asia, others are of purely Chinese origin. Among the latter we find a wide-bladed hoe and the ko type dagger-axe (which was later to be translated into bronze and iron), and a broad rectangular chopping knife bound to the handle by thongs passed through two holes bored in the upper part. Some of these tools are beautifully polished, the finest being made in jade which, because of its hardness, fine texture and purity of colour has been an object of special veneration from ancient times until today. In the Kansu hills, Andersson found beautifully worked jade axes, knives, ornaments and rings. The latter included the circle (buon) and flat disc (pi), while elsewhere was found a ring, square outside and circular inside, possibly the ancestor of the ts’ung (page 71). By the Chou Dynasty the pi and the ts(ung had acquired an almost sacred place in court ritual as symbols of Heaven and of Earth. Whether or not these, or indeed any, symbolic meanings were already attached to them in the Late Neolithic period it is impossible to say*

Into this short chapter we have compressed half a million years of human history in China* Although the picture is enormously oversimplified (particularly in regard to the Neolithic) it shows that before the dawn of recorded history there had already emerged many of those characteristics which we consider essentially Chinese: a highly organized social life centred on agriculture and bound together by ritual» high standards of craftsmanship» the flexible brush as an instrument of artistic expression, the ceremonial use of jade» and pre-occupation with man’s fate after death. This primitive culture lingered on in South and West China long after the coming of bronze had opened a new and incomparably richer chapter in Chinese history.

1 A distant descendant of the Ch’i-ch’ia-p’ing pottery has been found in the bronze age slate tombs of the Lifan district of Szechwan, which have been dated approximately between 500 and 1 B.C. Most remarkable among die Lifan wares are the burnished dark grey amphorae with bold volutes curling over the body, which are unique in the history of Chinese ceramics, and of which there is a fine specimen in the British Museum. It is illustrated (though wrongly dated) in Leigh Ashton and Basil Gray, Chinese Art (London, 1951), Plate 1b.

2 Excavation in China since 1950 has proceeded at such a pace that the archaeological picture is constantly becoming out of date. New sites are continually being discovered and, until the Cultural Revolution began in 1966, were published within a commendably short time in such journals as Wen-wu, K(ao-ku Hsueh-pao and Kaogu (K'ao-ku), while brief English summaries of recent developments appeared from time to time in China Reconstructs, A useful summary of findings up to 1960 is given by William Watson in his China Before the Han Dynasty, (London, 1961). Cheng Te-k’un’s ‘Archaeology in Communist China’ (The China Quarterly, July-Sept. 1965, 67-77) describes how the archaeological service is organized.

CHAPTER TWO

The Shang Dynasty

For centuries, farmers living in the village of Hsiao-t’un near Anyang in Honan have been picking up peculiar bones which they found lying in the fields after rain or while they were ploughing. Some were polished and shone like glass; most had rows of oval notches in their backs and T-shaped cracks; a few had marks on them that looked like primitive writing. The farmers would take these bones to apothecaries in Anyang and neighbouring towns, who often ground off the marks before selling them as ‘dragon bones*, a potent ingredient in restoratives» In 1899 some of the inscribed bones fell into the hands of the noted scholar and collector Tuan Fang, who recognized the writing as a still older form of the archaic script of the Chou ritual bronzes. Soon other scholars, notably Lo Chen-yü and Wang Kuo-wei, took up the study of what were, in fact, fragments of the archives of the royal house of Shang, the actual existence of which had hitherto not been proved, though Chinese historians had never doubted it.

The bones were traced to Anyang» The farmers began to dig deeper, and before long there began to appear on the antique market in Peking and Shanghai magnificent bronze vessels, jades and other objects, whose exact place of origin was kept secret» For nearly thirty years the farmers and dealers’ agents, working at night or during the idle winter months, continued their indiscriminate pillaging of Shang tombs» Finally, in 1928, the Chinese National Research Institute (Academia Sinica) began at Anyang an important series of excavations which were to provide the first definite archaeological evidence that the Shang Dynasty had

actually existed and was not, as some western writers had come to suspect, a pious fabrication of the backward-looking Chinese. By 1935 more than three hundred graves had been discovered, ten of which, of enormous size, were undoubtedly royal tombs.

These discoveries posed more problems than they solved. Who were the Shang people, and where did they come from? How was it that their earliest remains revealed a culture of such sophistication, particularly in their bronze techniques? If the Shang existed, then perhaps remains would be found of the even earlier Hsia Dynasty.

The Chinese traditionally believe that they are descended from Huang Ti, the Yellow Emperor, who lived for a hundred years. After him came Fu Hsi, who first drew the magical diagram pa kua (the ‘eight trigrams’) from which the art of writing is descended. Shen Nung, the Divine Farmer, invented agriculture and discovered the use of medicinal herbs. Then came Yao and the filial Shun, the ideal rulers, and finally Yü the Great, who founded the Hsia Dynasty. In these legendary figures the Chinese personified all that they held most sacred: agriculture, good government, filial piety, and the art