Ch'Ien Hsüan and His Figure Paintings

Ch'Ien Hsüan and His Figure PaintingsAuthor(s): James CahillSource: Archives of the Chinese Art Society of America, Vol. 12 (1958), pp. 10-29Published by: University of Hawai'i Press for the Asia SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20067006 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 19:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press and Asia Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Archives of the Chinese Art Society of America.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.154 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 19:46:14 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asiasoc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20067006?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


*

?.

8^

^3

10



Ch'ien Hsiian and His Figure Paintings

James Cahill

Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D. C.

A recent acquisition of the Freer Gallery of Art provides an opportunity to raise once more the problem of Ch'ien Hsiian.1 The works of this artist fall into three more or

less distinct groups: 1) birds-and-flowers, "cut branches," fruit, etc.; 2) figures, with or without landscape setting; and 3) landscape proper. The first group has been treated by Richard Edwards, in connection with the scroll attributed to Ch'ien Hsiian in the Detroit Institute of Art;2 any consideration of the third is hampered by a scarcity of

materials.3 The second group, figure paintings, has received little attention, and it is this

group which I shall consider here. I should like to begin, however, by supplementing the

scanty information about this artist which is available in Western-language sources.

The exact dates of Ch'ien Hsiian's birth and death are not known; he was probably born around 123 5, and died shortly after 1300.4 The basic source of information about him is the short notice in Tru-hui pao-chien, compiled by Hsia Wen-yen, whose preface is dated 1365. Hsia writes:

"Chfien Hsiian, tzu (style) Shun-chii, hao

(literary name) Y?-t'ana (Jade Pool), was a

native of Cha-chfuan.5b During the Ching-ting era of the Sung dynasty (1260-1265), he took his chin-shih degree through the Village ad vancement' system.6 He was good at figures,

landscapes, flowers and trees. In [painting] ani

mals and birds, he followed Chao Ch'ang; in

blue-and-green landscapes, he followed Chao

Ch'ien-li [Po-chii]. He was also good at doing cut branches. On his best-realized works, he

would inscribe a poem of his own composition."7

Other sources add that in figure painting, he

followed Li Kung-lin. Besides the names men

tioned by Hsia Wen-yen, Ch'ien also used the

following: Sun-fengc (Southeast Peak), Ch'ing chfu Lao-jend (Pure and Emaciated Old Man) and Hsi-lan Wenge (Habitual Sloth Greybeard), the last taken from his Hsi-lan-chai (Studio of

Habitual Sloth). He practiced painting from an

early age, according to the younger brother of

Chao M?ng-fu, Chao M?ng-yii, who writes in a

colophon on a Ch'ien Hsiian landscape:

"Shun-ch?, while he was still a child, loved to

play at painting, drawing flowers and grasses so

that they looked just as if alive. People contended with each other to get them. In his late years he

aspired increasingly to [the qualities of] plain ness and placidity, and did many landscapes."8

Chao goes on to comment that although the

painting at hand was modelled upon the manner

of Tung Yuan, Ch'ien had made significant alterations in this manner, thus "forming a sepa rate school of his own" (tzu chreng i chia) ,f and

that he can therefore be properly classed as "with

out predecessors." A fairly standard statement,

this interests us chiefly, perhaps, for what it

adds to the large body of evidence at variance

with a frequently-made assertion: that admira

tion for originality and innovation played no

great part in Chinese evaluations of art. The ref

erence to Tung Yuan (Ch'ien himself states in

11



his inscription that the painting was based on a

Tung Yuan landscape) has other implications, however, which will be noted below.

Several writers remark that although Ch'ien

was best known to his contemporaries as a

painter, it was rather for his scholarship that he

deserved renown. Huang Kung-wang writes in

a colophon, dated 1348, on the Dwelling on

Floating Jade Mountain scroll (Fou-yii shan-chii

fu)s:

"Cha-ch<i Weng [Ch'ien Hsiian] of Wu-hsing was a man of broad learning. The classics and

histories were strung together like beads within

his breast. No one of his time, however, knew

this. It was only with Ao Ch?n-shan9 that he

would discuss [classical literature, philosophy, etc.] and exchange cups of wine; together they

would penetrate to the innermost principles.

"Chao W?n-min [M?ng-fu] once studied under him ? not studying his painting in par

ticular, but rather all manner of things, ancient

and modern. [Ch'ien] was also profoundly versed in the study of the tones of music. So

lofty was his personal quality! Nevertheless, the

people of his time usually praised him [only] as a painter. This was paying undue attention to

his play [i.e., to his avocation] while obscuring his real studies."10

Another Yuan writer, Hu Chang-ju, makes

the same observation, stressing also the remark

able technical facility which was probably a

chief cause for Ch'ien's being confused with

professional artists. Hu's colophon is dated 1300.

"Shun-chii, when young, was given to drink

ing wine, and was fond of music. He was also

good at painting; his superior works attain the

point of being indistinguishable from those of the ancients. Once he borrowed from someone a

picture of a gyrfalcon, copied it and remounted

it during the night, and the next morning re

turned the copy. The owner didn't know the

difference.

"Now he is old, and his paintings are becoming more and more hard to get. Those of the people of Hu-chou who have at one time or another

been under the guidance and tutelage of Shun

chii all praise him for his ability as a painter. But

Shun-chii is [more] lofty [than they know]."11

To a picture of Clustered Chrysanthemums by Ch'ien Hsiian, an unidentified Yuan writer who

signs himself "Tan-ku"h added the following colophon:12

"Ch'ien Shun-chii of Wu-hsing was regarded

by his contemporaries as an artisan painter; but

he was nothing of the sort. In the early years of

this dynasty, he was associated with such famous

persons as Chao Sung-hsiieh [Meng-fu], Hsien

yii Yin-Hsiieh [Shu], Li Hsi-chai [K'an] and Hs? Jung-chai [Yuan].13 He took no interest in official service and advancement, but read books

and composed poems, living in leisurely poverty. He took pleasure in painting; when in a state of

exhilaration, he would do it vigorously.14 At

first, he wouldn't [even bother to] choose a

[suitable] scroll of paper, and his pictures all attained a wonderful refinement. Later, when he

tried for this quality consciously, he couldn't

catch it again. Common artisans have been

usurping his name and competing with each

other in turning out forgeries to deceive people. But the difference is as plain as that between

jade and stones ? how could anyone confuse

them?"

Like so many other painters, Ch'ien Hsiian did

not always await the spontaneous occurrence of

this fine state of exhilaration, but frequently evoked it with wine. On one of his pictures he

inscribes this wry quatrain:15

"Last year, alas! I had no fields to plant,

And so this spring I lack the stuff for wine.

From somewhere near, the birds and flowers

laugh?

Pretended-drunk, I lie in my upstairs room."

12



Hs? Ch'ien, who lived a generation after

Ch'ien Hsiian, goes so far as to claim that Ch'ien

was incapable of painting while cold sober:

"Ch'ien Hsiian of Wu-hsing was a capable

painter. He was fond of wine; when not drunk

with wine, he couldn't paint. But when he was

completely drunk, he couldn't paint either. It

was only when he was about to be drunk, but

before he became hopelessly inebriated, that his

mind and hand were mutually attuned?this

was the time propitious to painting. When a

painting was finished, he spent no time on exam

ining it in detail, and so his pictures were often

carried off by collectors. People nowadays have

[paintings on which] the seals are fresh and

bright, and alongside which are attached garru

lous poems and crude labels; these are all for

geries, not from his hand. Or, if they are from

his hand, they aren't his best-realized works."16

A fifteenth century writer, Hsia Shih-cheng,

suggests that in Ch'ien Hsiian's later years there

were so many imitations being produced that

the artist inscribed all his later works to distin

guish them from the forgeries.17 From these

statements and from Tan-ku's colophon, it is

apparent that forgeries were current in large numbers even during Ch'ien's lifetime; and we

would be foolish to adopt Tan-ku's confidence

in regard to the ease of detecting the fakes.

Which is not to say that the effort to distinguish them is futile; but such remarks must lead us to

view with some suspicion even those candidates

which appear to date from the Yuan period.

Of special interest is the statement made by

Huang Kung-wang that Chao M?ng-fu studied

under Ch'ien Hsiian. Huang, in support of his

contention that Ch'ien should not be thought of

primarily as a painter, is careful to explain that

it was not only painting which Chao studied; but

Huang's friend Chang Yii, in a colophon which

precedes Huang's on the same Dwelling on Float

ing Jade Mountain scroll, and is likewise dated

1348, writes:

"The late Wu-hsing [Chao M?ng-fu], in his

early years, learned painting technique from

Shun-chii. Shun-chii mostly painted figures and

birds-and-flowers; therefore, his landscapes were

rare [even] in his own time."18

Chao M?ng-fu was born in 1254, and so was

about twenty years younger than Ch'ien; it is

reasonable to suppose that during Chao's youth,

the two stood in the relationship of master and

pupil. Later, however, they seem to have asso

ciated on a more equal footing, and formed, with

six friends, a scholarly coterie known as the

"Eight Talents of Wu-hsing."19 The group was

dispersed in 1286, when Chao M?ng-fu was

called to court to hold an important position as

minister under Yuan Shih-tsu, or Kublai Khan.

Most of the others accompanied him and ac

cepted official positions. Ch'ien Hsiian remained

behind. The late Yuan and early Ming scholar

and painter Chang Yii (not to be confused with

the earlier Chang Yii quoted above) inscribed on

a Ch'ien Hsiian landscape a poem about this

event, and added to it the following account in

prose:

"In Wu-hsing, at the beginning of the Yuan,

there were [eight scholars] known as the 'Eight

Talents.' Tzu-ang [Chao M?ng-fu] was gener

ally considered their chief, but Ch'ien Hsiian was

of equal status. During the Chih-yiian era,

Tzu-ang was recommended [for official service] and went to the imperial court.20 The other gen

tlemen all attached themselves to him, and were

given government positions and advancement.

Shun-chii alone felt otherwise, and did not join them. He devoted his time to poetry and paint

ing, and thereby spent the remainder of his

life."21

Chao's was doubtless a vexing decision; he was

still young when the Sung fell, and waited a

decent interval before accepting a position; but

he was a descendant of one of the Sung emperors,

and was never entirely forgiven by later genera

tions for the choice he made.22 For Ch'ien, a

13



locally-respected man of about fifty years of age,

the renunciation of this road to wealth and pres

tige, the decision to remain in comfortable

obscurity, was surely easier.

Chao M?ng-fu and Ch'ien Hsiian are the par

ticipants in a famous conversation, which is,

however, probably apocryphal. The best-known

version is the one related by Tung Ch'i-ch'ang

(1555-1636), and runs as follows:

"Chao W?n-min asked Ch'ien Shun-chii

about painting: 'What can one say of the "gen

tleman's spirit"?' [Ch'ien] said, 'It is [painting

in] the //' manner [i.e., the manner of li-shu, the

"official script" of calligraphy]. If a painter can

manage this, then he can "fly without wings"; if

not, then he descends into evil ways, and the

more skilful he is, the further he is from it.' "23

A different account of the conversation, how

ever, appears in Ko-Ku yao lun, a work compiled

in 1387:24

"Chao Tzu-ang asked Ch'ien Shun-chii, 'What

sort of thing is scholar-gentlemen's painting?'

Shun-chii answered, 'It is the painting of the

li-chia1 (amateurs).' Tzu-ang said, 'But look at

Wang Wei, Li Ch'?ng, Hs? Hsi, Li Po-shih

[Kung-lin] ?

they were all lofty and respected

scholars, yet their paintings transmit the spirit of

the [depicted] object, completely capture its

wonderful qualities. As for people of recent

times who do scholar-painting, how very mis

guided they are!' "

This version two centuries earlier than Tung

Ch'i-ch'ang's, is of more interest and signifi

cance; whether or not the conversation ever took

place, the opinions expressed in it by the two

artists are not at all inconsistent with their posi

tions in the history of Chinese painting. To

better understand these opinions, we may digress

a bit and review the background of the archaist

movement in which Ch'ien and Chao played

major roles.

The concept of painting as the transmission of

the spirit or "soul" of the object in nature, re

ferred to in Chao M?ng-fu's remarks, was the

traditional and orthodox view in China; it was

not until the eleventh century, when a specifi

cally w?n-)?n hua (literati painting) theory was

first put forth, chiefly by Su Tung-p'o (or Su

Shih, 1036-1101) and the group of scholars around him, that this concept was seriously con

tested. The new attitude, adopted by most sub

sequent literati painters and critics, was that the

expressive content of a painting depended more

upon the nature and the state of mind of the art

ist himself than upon any qualities of his

subject.25

Related to this new concept, but of earlier

origin, is an anti-traditional movement in paint

ing style, which produced the i-prin ("untram

meled class") painting of the late T'ang, Five

Dynasties and Northern Sung, as well as influ

encing strongly some of the styles practiced

chiefly by the literati from the late Northern

Sung onward.26 By departing more radically

from observed appearances, by allowing more of

individuality and eccentricity, and by assigning a less representational and more independently

expressive function to brush line, breaking down

the traditional Chinese insistence on firm and

elegant lineament to allow highly unorthodox

kinds of brushwork?in short, by shifting em

phasis from the subject of the art work to the

work itself and its creator?this movement al

lowed, even necessitated, a rethinking of funda

mental issues in art theory.

However, while the "retreat from likeness,"

often combined with a deliberate "awkward

ness," was the dominant tendency within the

literati painting movement, it was not followed

by all the scholar-painters; even among the

founding fathers were some?notably Li Kung

lin and Wang Shen?who continued to work in

careful, manifestly competent manners which

were confusingly like those of the much-abused

professionals and academicians. Prof. S. Shimada,

14



after pointing out the influence of i-pHn paint

ing on eleventh century w?n-j?n hua, describes

this sub-tradition as follows:

"Of course, the painting style which had been

correct and orthodox since the Six Dynasties

period was also carried on by the literati artists of

this age. Li Kung-lin, who was singled out by

Yuan dynasty literati critics as the leading artist

of the Sung period, was completely representa

tive of the literati painting of his time, but was

famous for the excellence of his classical line

drawing (pai-miao) in the manner of Wu

Tao-tzu . . . Chao M?ng-fu, spearhead of the

w?n-j?n hua movement in the Yuan period, is

said to have revived the orthodox, classical style.

A special kind of chaste, refined pai-miao paint

ing, even though it belonged to the orthodox

style, was considered to be worthy of the culti

vated man . . ,"27

The special feature of this sub-movement

which distinguished it from most of the contem

porary professional painting was its element of

archaism; it aimed at the revival of old styles which had fallen into disuse, and was thus

dependent upon the connoisseurship and close

acquaintance with earlier painting in which the

literati painters, many of whom were themselves

collectors, excelled. Li Kung-lin followed T'ang

modes of figure painting, and did horses and

grooms in the manner of Han Kan. Wang Shen

painted landscapes in the Kuo Hsi manner, but

also revived the blue-and-green landscape style of

the T'ang artists Li Ssu-hsiin and Li Chao-tao; in

this he was followed, a generation later, by Chao

Po-chii.

To return to the conversation: it is, in fact, a

succinct statement of the point of view held

within this orthodox (perhaps it would be better

termed "anti-unorthodox") branch of w?n-j?n

hua. Chao asks the nature of "gentleman

scholar's painting." Ch'ien, in answering, avoids

any characterization which would distinguish it

stylistically from other painting; he defines it

only as that painting which is done by amateurs.

A truism even at that time, no doubt, and more

meaningful for what it does not say than for

what it does. Chao then rounds off the exchange

by naming great scholar-painters whose works

were acceptable by traditional criteria as well as

by the new standards, and contrasts them with

painters of more recent times. While we lack

materials for the investigation of w?n-j?n hua in

the Southern Sung period, and are thus at a loss

to account for the obscurity into which this tra

dition fell during the intervening centuries, we

may speculate that, as Chao suggests, its chief

fault may have been an extreme of wilful hetero

doxy, perhaps akin to the "viciousness" and "lack

of ancient method" for which the Ch'an Bud

dhist artists of the late Sung and early Yuan

(including the now much admired Mu-ch'i) were condemned by literati critics. The efforts

of Chao and Ch'ien were perhaps directed in part

at correcting such abuses.

Tung Ch'i-ch'ang, either misunderstanding or

(more probably) deliberately distorting Ch'ien Hsiian's reply, changed the term li-chia (ama

teurs) to li-fi, i.e. the // style of script, to accord

with his own belief that "scholars who paint

should do it in the manner of the tsrao and //'

scripts and unusual characters."28 He also aug

mented Ch'ien's answer to make of it a dis

paragement of the employment of skill in paint

ing, which is just the reverse of its real implica tion.29 Tung, one feels, would have liked to

equate literati painting, insofar as possible, with

his "Southern School"; he may, accordingly, have been reluctant to accept from Ch'ien

Hsiian, a literatus above reproach (Tung some

times deals harshly with Chao M?ng-fu), the

suggestion that the amateur's art was not at all

incompatible with styles of painting which were,

in Tung's system, decidedly "Northern."

What Ch'ien Hsiian and Chao M?ng-fu reju

venated, then, was not so much the styles of the

T'ang masters as such, but the reinterpretation

of them within the "orthodox" branch of literati

15



painting, the practice of cultivated archaism.

Ch'ien's figure paintings are said to have been

based, not upon Wu Tao-tzu or some other

T'ang artist, but upon Li Kung-lin; his blue

and-green landscapes, not upon Li Ssu-hsiin, but

upon Chao Po-chii. Chao M?ng-fu has received

the chief credit for this revival, perhaps because

he was of a less self-effacing disposition than

Ch'ien Hsiian; in a number of inscriptions, he

points out to his contemporaries the affinities

between his own and earlier painting, with an

outspokenness which suggests an immodest desire

to occupy the center of the stage. In one famous

passage, for example, he castigates other painters of his time for concentrating on delicate drawing and bright colors, and thus losing the "antique

conception" (ku-i). "Now, my painting," he

says, "although it may look simple and rough, will be recognized by the perceptive viewer as

being close to the ancients, and is therefore to be

considered as [really] excellent."30

Ch'ien Hsiian is nowhere excepted from Chao's

scornful generalizations of "contemporary

painting," nor does Chao ever acknowledge any

indebtedness to Ch'ien Hsiian as a painter. The

only words of praise for his teacher which we

have from him are directed, perhaps signifi

cantly, toward Ch'ien's flower pictures, the only

category of painting which Chao himself seems to have had no interest. "The wonderful thing about Shun-chii's flower paintings in color," he

writes, "is their air of vitality and fleeting move

ment. Of late, however, he spends his days and

nights deeply immersed in the 'village of drunk

enness,' and I'm afraid there will be no opportu

nity to get such paintings any more."31 This is a

harsher judgment than Ch'ien receives from the

other Yuan writers quoted above; nowhere else

is it suggested that his fondness for wine pre

vented him from painting. If we suppose Chao's

inscription to have been written in the old age

of Ch'ien Hsiian, after Chao and his six followers had departed from Wu-hsing, perhaps we might read into it an unkind implication that Ch'ien had remained behind for reasons other than

purely ethical, and a diversion of attention from

Chao's own somewhat equivocal position.

We may wonder, in any event, whether Chao's

enthusiasm for T'ang modes of figure and horse

painting, for archaic landscape manners, for

elegant pai-miao drawing, was not included

among the "all manner of things, ancient and

modern" which he learned from his teacher. The

surviving paintings of Ch'ien Hsiian surely sug

gest that it may have been. Chao is usually cred

ited also with the revitalization of the Chiang nan landscape tradition of Tung Yuan and

Chii-jan, another tradition which had been re

discovered by the eleventh century literati

painters, chiefly by Mi Fu; but, as we have seen

in a quotation above, Ch'ien Hsiian admired and

imitated Tung Yuan as well. The Dwelling on

Floating Jade Mountain handscroll mentioned above (cf. note 10) appears to be an attempt at

creating a new landscape style combining some

elements of the Tung-Chii manner with a spe

cifically "literary" archaistic awkwardness. This

is an exception, however, among the paintings of

Ch'ien Hsiian; his typical works all belong to the fine-line manner. The fashion for "a special kind

of chaste, refined pai-miao painting" had been

set earlier by another native of Chekiang Prov

ince, Chao M?ng-chien (1199-1295), in his

pictures of narcissus and other flowers; Ch'ien

Hsiian stands, perhaps, as an intermediate figure between the two Chaos in the renewed develop

ment of this taste.

It was a fairly new taste for the time, and no

doubt still limited to a small circle of scholars and connoisseurs; we need not be surprised that

Ch'ien's neighbors missed the subtle distinction

between careful, relatively realistic painting done

by an orthodox-archaistic literatus, and superfi

cially similar painting by the conservative pro

fessionals of the day. There was doubtless little use in explaining that while the latter followed Southern Sung styles, the former set out to paint as if the Southern Sung had never existed; to the

non-style-conscious eye, a picture was either a

16



convincing representation of a figure or a

flower, or it was not. The distinction, however,

cannot be dismissed as specious and purely intel

lectual; all that we know of later Southern Sung

painting will not serve to account for the styles

of Ch'ien Hsiian, as it will for those of, e.g., Sun

Chiin-tse and Meng Y?-chien, early fourteenth

century conservatives of the class with whom

Ch'ien was confused. Wu Sheng, seventeenth

century compiler of Ta-Kuan lu, recognizes this

distinction when he writes of Ch'ien Hsiian:

"Although there are, among his late works,

some 'carved paintings' [i.e., pictures in a stiff er

manner], even these are imbued with antique

method, and are thus completely in the scholarly

spirit."32

The Southern Sung period is generally ignored in the Chinese critics' tracing of the sources of

Ch'ien's and Chao's styles, both in figure paint

ing and in landscape. Chao himself claims to have

passed over the whole of the Sung period, and to

have returned to T'ang modes. "The figure

painting of the Sung artists is vastly inferior to

that of the T'ang," he writes. "I have made a

point of studying the T'ang artists, and have

tried to rid myself absolutely of the techniques (lit., "brush and ink") of the Sung men."33 But

a sixteenth century writer, Ho Liang-chiin,

assigns Li Kung-lin his proper place in this devel

opment, writing:

"Now, every painter belongs to a tradition or

school, and these don't intermix. In figure paint

ing, for example, there are two kinds of pai-miao

(ink-outline drawing). Chao Sung-hs?eh

(M?ng-fu) derives from Li Lung-mien (Kung

lin), and Li Lung-mien from Ku K'ai-chih.

Theirs is the so-called iron wire drawing. Ma

Ho-chih and Ma Yuan derive from Wu Tao-tzu;

theirs is the so-called orchid leaf drawing."**

An inscription by Huang Kung-wang on a

picture of the Taoist immortal Hung-yai (cf. note 49) attributed to Yen Li-p?n is also of

interest in suggesting that while Ch'ien Hsiian's

figure paintings were not by any means close

imitations of T'ang styles, it was with T'ang

painting that they were compared:

"In former years, whenever I saw a painting of

the Immortal Hung-yai by Ch'ien Shun-ch? or

Kung Ts'ui-yen (Kung K'ai), the figures always

bore some resemblance to those on this scroll, but

in their brush line and use of color, they each

differed somewhat [from T'ang painting]. Now

when I see this picture, the execution of it is all

according to the T'ang method; it's nothing that

Ch'ien or Kung could do, but is a genuine

antiquity."35

The new acquisition of the Freer Gallery fits

neatly with most of these observations (Fig.

1-2).36 Even the subject is, on the surface at

least, antique and orthodox. It represents Yang

Kuei-fei, famed concubine of the T'ang emperor

Hsiian-tsung (popularly known as Ming

huang-ti, 68 5-762, reigned 713-756), mounting a horse, while the emperor, already mounted, sits

waiting. Various T'ang artists had represented

the activities of this illustrious pair; several such

pictures are recorded in the catalog of the Sung

emperor Hui-tsung, Hsiian-ho hua-pru. Han

Kan, who served under Hsiian-tsung as a painter

of horses, had also depicted Yang Kuei-fei Mounting a Horse; his version, which, either in

the original or in a copy, was still extant in the

late Ming dynasty, had a colophon by Chao

M?ng-fu, and may thus have been known to

Ch'ien Hsiian.37 Still another version, by Chao

M?ng-fu himself, was in the possession of the

sixteenth century collector Yen Sung, who also

owned Ch'ien Hsiian's painting.38 The two Yuan

artists may have based their compositions on

Han Kan's; but since, so far as I know, only Ch'ien Hsiian's is extant, there is no way of de

termining the extent of his indebtedness to the

T'ang master.

No way, that is, except through style; and

the stylistic evidence certainly suggests an eighth

17



&?'*#- m ?- - til ?s.. '1 i -F"4

F/g. 1,2. Ch'ien Hsiian: Yang Kuei-fei Mounting a Horse. Freer Gallery of Art (57.14).

century origin for the design. The lack of any

landscape setting in the picture might be seen as

an archaic feature; the prevailing tendency in

Sung and later figure compositions was toward

integration of the figures into a suitable environ

ment, whether landscape or architectural,

whereas numerous examples of figures set against

such a neutral ground as this are to be found

among T'ang paintings or copies of T'ang paint

ings. The arrangement of the figures in space,

with the groups set diagonally, moving back and

forth within a shallow stage, is paralleled in the

similar zig-zag composition of the famous Tun

ing the Lute and Drinking Tea scroll in the

Nelson Gallery, Kansas City, attributed to the

eighth century master Chou Fang. The faces of

the women suggest a mid-T'ang model; in par

ticular, that of the servant-girl at extreme left,

turned slightly away from the viewer, has close

counterparts both in the Chou Fang composition

just mentioned and in another, attributed to the

same artist, in the Freer Gallery of Art (see Siren,

Chinese Painting, vol. Ill, pi. 109 and 110, for

these two pictures). As for the horses, the prob lem of depicting them from the front or back

seems to have occupied T'ang painters more than

later ones, even though they seldom if ever solved

it with any greater freedom from awkwardness

than Ch'ien Hsiian displays here.

Whether or not it is derived from a T'ang

composition, however, the Freer picture surely

represents Ch'ien Hsiian's paraphrase of the

orthodox T'ang style of figure and horse paint

ing. But between Ch'ien and his model stands Li

Kung-lin. The horses are closer relatives to Li's

Five Horses** than to the famous portrait of

Ming-huang's favorite steed Shao-yeh-po, attrib

uted to Han Kan, in the collection of Sir Percival

David.40 The depiction of the dappled flank of the imperial concubine's mount is closely paral leled in the treatment of the first of Li Kung

lin's horses,41 and the two animals have other

features in common?the folds of the necks, the

bodily proportions. We may note also the resem

blance of the face of Ming-huang to that of one

of the grooms in Li's scroll (Fig. 5 ), and the sim

ilarity in the drawing of clothing?sleeves, caps,

shoes?in the two paintings. While Ch'ien Hsiian's

reference to T'ang styles extends, as Li Kung

18



:m:y # ̂ w^c^^?"?9: ^-. w fmn

f"M

Fig. 2

lin's does not, to a suggestion of shading, espe

cially in the clothing of several of the figures,

there is no such use of modelling with the aim of

creating a real illusion of solidity as we see in the

Han Kan horse or in parts of some figure paint

ings which reveal or reflect T'ang styles: the Yen

Li-p?n Portraits of the Emperors in the Boston

Museum of Fine Arts,42 the scroll attributed to

Chang S?ng-yu in the former Abe Collection,

Osaka,43 and others. Ch'ien Hsiian has restored to

the T'ang manner the element of color which Li

Kung-lin, who characteristically painted in ink

only, usually omitted;44 but Ch'ien's technique is

still essentially outline-drawing with color washes

added?a technique which was carried on by the

followers of Chao M?ng-fu, and presumably by Chao himself, although the most reliable of his

extant works are in other manners. Chao

M?ng-fu's son Chao Yung, for example, copied a section of Li Kung-lin's Five Horses, following Li's lineament closely but adding color (Fig. 6).

Another picture in the Freer Gallery (31.3),

showing horses crossing a stream, attributed to

Chao M?ng-fu but probably by a close follower,

is in the same manner, and a number of others

are known from this period.

The imperial pair, in Ch'ien Hsiian's painting, are about to set off with their retinue on a hunt.

Two youths lead the way, one carrying a bow in

a bowcase, both with quivers slung from their

shoulders and swords from their belts. The

emperor, flanked by two attendants, sits

astride a white horse ? Shao-yeh-po?

? and

looks back, showing no sign of impatience. The

horse also regards the proceedings, with an ex

pression of greater concern. This first half of

the picture is a scene of activity suspended, in

which everything waits and watches; the atten

tion of all the participants, and so of the viewer,

is directed toward the group which next appears as one further unrolls the scroll.

The well conceived and beautifully drawn

main group, the focus of their attention, is any

thing but static; a minor problem in engineering is being undertaken (Fig. 3). The portly favor

ite, she who set the fashion for plump pulchri tude in the later T'ang, stands on a stool, while

two ladies-in-waiting help her to keep her bal

ance. She has inserted one foot into the stirrup; a

groom pulls on the opposite stirrup, to prevent

the saddle from slipping leftward. As we know

19



F/g. 4. Ch'ien Hs?an: Yang Kuei-fei Learning to Play the Flute. Courtesy Dr. Osvald Sir?n.

from tomb figurines, the T'ang ladies scorned

the side-saddle seat of their Occidental sisters. An

older attendant, perhaps a palace eunuch, stands

at the horse's head. Two youths with broad fans,

and two girls, one with a fly-whisk and the other

with a smaller fan and a furosbiki-\ike bundle,

complete the procession.

There exists another painting by Ch'ien Hsiian

of a related subject, the Ping-ti Tru,2 which rep

resents Ming-huang teaching Yang Kuei-fei to

play the transverse flute, while one attendant

accompanies with wooden clappers and two

others look on in astonishment (Fig. 4).45 The

similarities between the drawing of the figures, and especially of the face of the emperor, in the

two pictures strongly support the assumption

that they are indeed from the same hand. A bit

of probing into the sub-surface implications of

the subjects of the paintings, moreover, reveals

that there is more to link them than points of

style and a common dramatis personae. Both are,

in fact, pictorial renderings of Chinese euphe misms for erotic activities. One must keep in

mind this emperor's reputation for extravagant

dissipation, and the part he and his concubine

play in Chinese popular tales. The two paintings

may have belonged to a set representing, in sym

bolic guise, the amorous amusements of Ming

huang and Yang Kuei-fei. "Riding a horse"

(shang-ma)^ is a vulgar term for sexual inter

course, but may have had some more specific

meaning;46 "playing the flute" has equally im

proper implications, which cannot be elaborated

here.47

We may expect to find some ambiguity and

dotible-entendre in the inscriptions, and we are

not disappointed. The poem on the Freer picture

might be rendered as follows:

"With jade bridle and engraved saddle, he favors T'ai-chen;

Year after year, with autumn past, he rejoices in the Floriate Clear [Palace].

With four hundred thousand horses in the

K'ai-yiian [Imperial Stables]; What brings him, now, to mount a mule, to

ride off on the road to Shu?"

T'ai-chen, "Great Verity," is the name by

which Yang Kuei-fei ("Precious Consort Yang") was known before she received the latter title.

The Floriate Clear Palace (Hua-ch'ing Kung) was built at the hot-springs near Ch'ang-an, at

the present Lin-t'ung-hsien; the emperor's in

20



Fig. 5. Li Kung-lin: Five Horses with Grooms (detail). (From Hatada, Pageant of Chinese Painting.)

fatuation with Yang Kuei-fei began when, in

738 A.D., he saw her bathing in these springs. He

named the palace Hua-ch'ing Kung in 747, and

between that year and Yang Kuei-fei's death in

756, the two spent every winter, usually three

months, seeking pleasure there.4S "The Road to

Shu" refers to the tragic ending of the story: the

emperor and his consort are driven from

Ch'ang-an by the insurrection of An Lu-shan

and flee toward Szechwan (Shu) ; on the way,

Yang Kuei-fei is put to death at the demand of

the disgruntled soldiery. The allusion to a mule

may refer to the fact that Yang Kuei-fei was

childless, the concluding couplet then implying:

"Why of all the lovely ladies available to him, does he choose this woman for his favorite con

sort, when she is not only barren, but also brings about his political downfall?"

The poem is signed "Ch'ien Hsiian, Shun-chii, or Wu-hsing." Three of the artist's seals follow.49

The painting bears, besides these seals, only those

of the Ch'ien-lung, Chia-ch'ing and Hsiian

t'ung Emperors; it is recorded or mentioned,

however, in a number of books, the earliest dat

ing from the sixteenth century.50

The poem on the other picture is even more

oblique than that on the Freer scroll:

Fig. 6. Chao Yung: Horse and Groom, after Li Kung-lin (detail). Freer Gallery of Art (4532).

"A new melody for the jade flute?

In its marvelous features it surpasses all else, as

the parrot knows.51

It seems that the emperor should attend to

court, but the days of dissipation are

sweet?

When all nine parts of the flute music are

completed, the phoenix comes."52

This Playing the Flute picture is unrecorded until modern times, but has on it, besides the

seals of the Ch'ien-lung Emperor, those of two

famous earlier collectors, Pien Yung-yii (1645

1712) and An Ch'i, or An I-chou (b. 1683).53

Among the other figure paintings which have

been reproduced as works of Ch'ien Hsiian are

some which may be dismissed quickly.04 Others,

along with the two scrolls described above, de

serve more serious consideration, either as prob able originals or as fairly accurate copies which

may be used as evidence for his figure style. Three of his figure compositions which have been

widely recorded in the various catalogs appear to

be preserved either in originals or in copies. One

of these is Shih Lo Reverencing the Buddha (Fig. 7).i>D Of four versions of this picture which I

have seen, the best, and perhaps the original, is

the one reproduced here, in the collection of Mr.

21



4* ^1

is-S S ?s

;> fe.

00

.00

22



J. D. Ch'en, Hongkong.56 Another is Hung-yai

Moving His Residence (Fig. 8) .57 The third rep resents the Sung dynasty poet Lin Pu gazing at a

branch of flowering plum (Fig. 9) .58 Two others

might be added, which, although unrecorded, seem sufficiently closely related in style to the

above-mentioned pictures to merit some atten

tion. One is the handscroll depicting the poet T'ao Ch'ien (T'ao Yiian-ming) walking with a

staff (Fig. 10).59 The other, which is (unlike any of the others) a hanging scroll, is said to

represent the fourth century flute player Huan I

cleaning his fingernail.60

These pictures are drawn in a fine, precise

lineament of generally even thickness; only a

few of the shorter lines, mostly to be seen in the

folds of the drapery, display that swelling at corners and ends which is often loosely described

as "calligraphic." The delineation of clothing

seems, in comparison with that of much other

Chinese figure painting, fairly free of manner

ism; hems hang naturally, sleeves rumple con

vincingly, interior lines are meaningful, with

little that strikes us as empty elaboration. There

can be a wide variation in hardness or softness

of line within a single picture. Several of the

attendants in the Freer scroll are drawn quite

heavily, others in lineament so thin and dilute as

to be nearly invisible. It appears to be the value

of the color bounded by this lineament which determines its strength; an area of purple, for

example, will be enclosed by harder outlines, a

white area by the very faintest.

The colors applied in washes within this linear

drawing are by no means subdued. That fond

ness for bright mineral pigments?reds, greens,

blues ? which is displayed in Ch'ien Hsiian's

landscapes is very evident in those of the figure

paintings which I know in the originals, and

perhaps in some of the others. A further richness

is given to the Freer picture by the use of pow

dered gold in decorative motifs on belts, horse

trappings, various accessories, on Yang Kuei-fei's

gown, and elsewhere. This use of gold, like the

gold outlines used with heavy mineral colors in

the green-and-gold landscapes, may be a tech

nical allusion to T'ang painting. The landscapes and figures of Ch'ien Hsiian are, in their color

ing, more florid than his flowers; in the bird and flower pictures, color is usually limited to less

intense, more dilute hues, often neutralized with

a thin admixture of ink. Subtler colors appear

also, however, in the figure paintings ? on the

Freer scroll, notably in the soft violets, blues and

greens of the attendants' costumes.

The dominant mood, especially of the prin

cipal personages, is of calm and dignity. A degree of animation in some minor figures?notably the

prancing dwarf in the Playing the Flute scroll?

only heightens this mood with incidental con

trast. The faces are, on the whole, sober, an

occasional slight smile being the only break in a

general impassivity. Expression of states of mind

is accomplished instead, as it usually is in Chinese

figure paintings, through posture and gesture:

the purposeful stride of T'ao Yiian-ming, the

obeisant stance of Shih Lo.

That this quality of calm, along with a "plain ness and placidity" (pring-tan) in the drawing,

marks a departure from the main tradition of

figure painting directly preceding Ch'ien Hsiian's time, is immediately apparent if we

align the works of some Southern Sung academy artists and compare them with those of Ch'ien

Hsiian (Fig. 11-13). From Li T'ang through Liang K'ai, lineament was usually more articu

lated and restless, faces and gestures more emo

tionally charged.61 Figures were often caught in

momentarily-arrested action. The drawing was

imbued with a kind of liveliness by means of

pronounced fluctuations in thickness of brush

line, by traces of swiftness of movement, by

vigorous thrusts, even where the effect of these

devices is not especially appropriate to the sub

ject: the jaggedness of outline in the robes of Ma

Yiian's Four Old Men (Fig. 12) is a bit distract

ing, for example, when one expects a glimpse into the unruffled lives of noble recluses. Liang

23



!?1

Fig. 13.

K'ai, in his imaginary portrait of Wang Hsi

Chih (Fig. 13) seems to have aimed at a more

suitable air of supple, scholarly elegance in the

brushline, but really only exchanges one kind of

linear agitation for another, and the result is

perilously close to mannerism.62

The distinction between the lineament in

these paintings and Ch'ien Hsiian's line drawing is without doubt the same distinction made by

Ho Liang-chiin, between "iron wire drawing" and "orchid leaf drawing"; the "orchid leaf"

surely refers to that swelling and diminishing in

thickness of line seen in the Southern Sung

academy works.63 But the figures of Ch'ien

Hsiian differ from these works in other ways as

well: in a coolness and composure of mood, a

restraint upon expressiveness of face and gesture in the depictions of major personages; and,

except in the case of the Shih Lo picture, in an

absence of landscape or other setting. We are thus

led by the surviving evidence to go back further

than the Southern Sung period in our quest for

probable origins of Ch'ien Hsiian's figure style, and come, inevitably, to Li Kung-lin. The draw

ing of the Yang Kuei-fei Mounting a Horse

belongs with that of the Five Horses scroll, and

nothing known from the later twelfth or thir

teenth centuries properly belongs between. We

conclude, then, by returning?as I think we

often will?to a point of substantial agreement

with the Chinese critics: Ch'ien Hsiian seems,

indeed, to have followed Li Kung-lin in his figure paintings, and to have taken a leading part, along with his pupil Chao M?ng-fu, in the late Sung and early Yuan revival of the orthodox

archaistic branch of literati painting.

Fig. 11. Li Vang: The Two Virtuous Brothers (detail). Peking Museum. (From Chung-kuo hua, No. 1.)

Fig. 12. Ma Yuan: The Four Old Men of Shang-shan (detail). Courtesy of the Cincinnati Art Museum.

Fig. 13. Liang K'ai: Wang Hsi-chih Writing on a Fan. (From Siren, Chinese Painting, 111, plate 327.)

24



NOTES

(Note: I have not given Chinese characters or bibliographical ref erences for catalogs included in Ferguson's index of recorded

paintings, Li-tai chu-lu hua-mu, Nanking, 1934, or for some other

well-known books.)

1. Yang Kuei-fei Mounting a Horse (Fig. 1-3). See note 36.

2. "Ch'ien Hsiian and 'Early Autumn,' "

Archives VII, 1953, pp. 71-83.

3. The handscroll illustrating T'ao Ch'ien's "Homecoming" ode

(Kuei-ch'?-lai t'u) in the Metropolitan Museum, New York; the Fou-y? shan-ch? fu ("Dwelling on Floating Jade Moun

tain") and Shan-ch? fu ("Dwelling in the Mountains") handscrolls, both of which I know only through photographs

(detail from the latter in T. Nait?, Shina kaiga-shi, PI. 67); and a handscroll representing Wang Hsi-chih Admiring the

Geese, in the collection of Mr. C. C. Wang, New York, are

the only pictures known to me which reveal the landscape style of Ch'ien Hsiian. The first, third and fourth of these

agree with the statement in T'u-hui pao-chien (quoted below) that he employed the blue-and-green manner of Chao Po-ch?, and the landscape setting in the Shih Lo scroll (cf. note 55) is in a somewhat similar manner.

4. The standard Chinese reference work on birth and death

dates, Li-tai ming-j?n sheng-tsu nien-piao, p. 91, says that he was probably born in the Tuan-p(ing or Chia-hsi eras of Sung

(together covering the period 1235-40), and died in the Ta-te era of the Yuan period (1297-1307). Arthur Waley, in his Index of Chinese Artists, writes: "Born about 1235, died about 1290," and these dates have been adopted by some

other writers. The only dated inscriptions known, however, are both from later years; one from 1292 (Ta-kuan lu XV/ 40a and elsewhere), the other from 1300 (Chring-ho shu-hua

fang VI/45b). Also, Hu Chang-ju (see note 11), in a colo

phon dated 1300, writes, "Now he is old . . .", indicating that Ch'ien was still alive at that time.

5. South of Wu-hsing, in Chekiang Province.

6. Hsiang-kung,1 a system by which the scholar receives his

degree in his district, without going to the capital for the

regular examination.

7. Tfu-hui pao-chien, ch. 5 (Kuo-hs?eh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edi

tion, p. 97).

8. Chao Meng-y?,m colophon on Ch'ien's Shan-ch? fu; see

Ta-kuan lu, XV/4lb. The word tan,n here translated as "pla cidity," interchanges in this phrase with tan,0 "insipid, flat."

P'ing-tanv is especially difficult to render because such words as "tasteless, insipid, bland," while reasonably faithful to the

Chinese, are hardly words of praise in the Occident, and mis

lead the reader into thinking that the writer is condemning the paintings for dullness. Actually, the literati critics applied the term pHng-tan to works of painters whom they especially admired, such as Tung Yuan, Chii-jan, and the Four Great

Masters of the Yuan period. The suggestion that Ch'ien Hsiian

sought this quality of "plainness" in his late years is in keep ing with the report that he imitated Tung Yuan during those

years ( see below ).

9. Ao Chiin-shan? was Ao Chi-kung,r a scholar of the classics who lived in Wu-hsing, and who, along with Ch'ien Hsiian, is said to have been Chao Meng-fu's teacher. See Chung-kuo j?n-ming ta-tz'u-tien (cited hereafter as JMTTT), 983.

10. Colophon on the Fou-y? shan-ch? scroll; see Shan-hu wang hua-lu, ch. 7. The colophon, along with the painting, is still in existence, although its whereabouts is unknown to me.

11. Hu Chang-ju,s 1238-1314 (JMTTT 692). This passage is

found in his colophon on Ch'ien's Lieh-n? fu ("Portraits of Famous Women," see T'ieh-ivang shan-hu Hua/lll/27b), and is also quoted, in curtailed and slightly variant form, from his

collected literary works in P'ei-wen-chai shu-hua p'u, 53/4a.

12. Since he speaks of "the early part of [this] dynasty" (kuo

ch'u) he must himself be a Yuan figure, but I have been

unable to locate him. For this colophon, see Ta-kuan lu,

XV/50.

13. Hsien-yii Shu* (JMTTT 1709), 1256-1301; scholar, connois

seur and calligrapher. Li K'an (JMTTT 409), 1235-1320, famous painter of bamboo. Hs? Yiianu (JMTTT 791), scholar in the Hanlin academy during the Chih-yiian era.

14. Literally "brandishing the ink," a curious variant of the com

mon "brandishing the brush." I do not think it can mean

that he painted directly with the ink-stick, although this prac tice was known in China as early as the T'ang dynasty; see

Shimada, "Ippin gaf? ni tsuite." ("Concerning the i-p'in

style of painting," Bijutsu Kenkyu 161, pp. 264-290) p. 270.

15. Ta-kuan lu, XV/45a.

16. Hs? Ch'ienv (JMTTT 1040), 1270-1337. Quoted from his

collected works in P'ei-wen-chai SHP 53/3b.

17. Hsia Shih-chengw (JMTTT 746); see Ta-kuan lu, XV/51b.

18. Chang Yiix (JMTTT 941), 1275-1348; poet, calligrapher, occasional painter; friend of Huang Kung-wang, Ni Tsan and

other noted artists of the age. See Shan-hu-wang hua-lu, ch. 7, for this colophon.

19. The other members were Chang Fu-hengy (JMTTT 955), scholar and poet; Mou Ying-lungz (JMTTT 277), 1247

1324; Hsiao Tzu-chung,aa Ch'en Wu-i,ab Ch'en Chung-hsin,ac and Yao Shih.ad The last four are otherwise unknown.

20. More accurately, in the twenty-third year of Chih-y?an, 1286.

Chao was thirty-two years old at the time.

21. Chang Yiiae (JMTTT 931), 1333-1385. This colophon ap

pears in his collected literary works, Ching-ch? ch?A? (Ssu-pu

ts'ung-k'an reprint of the edition of 1491), III/7b.

22. An extremely interesting analysis of acceptance or refusal of

official position by Yuan scholars, with some attention to

Chao M?ng-fu in particular, is found in Frederick Mote's

study, "Eremetism in the Intellectual Life of the Yuan

dynasty," delivered at the Third Conference on Chinese

Thought, Stockbridge, Mass., in 1957, and published in

mimeographed form. Revealing and moving is Dr. Mote's

translation of a poem composed by Chao for a painting illus

trating T'ao Ch'ien's "Homecoming" poem. Chao states that "Each person lives his life in this world according to his own

times," and praises T'ao for withdrawing from official service, in contrast to others who, like himself, "remain, irresolute, in

this dusty world."

23. Jung-fai chi,a? preface (by Ch'en Chi-ju) dated 1630, III/49a.

24. Ko-ku yao-lun,'dh compiled by Ts'ao Chaoai in 1387. I have not seen the original edition; but, as pointed out by John Pope (Chinese Porcelains from the Ardebil Shrine, Washing ton, D. C, 1956, p. 39), the edition which appears in 1-men

kuang-tu,^ a collectanea compiled in 1597, appears to be a

reprint of the 1387 original. It is in three ch?an, as was the

original, and does not contain the passages designated as "ad ditions" in the edition revised and augmented by Wang Tsoak in 1456-59- I am indebted to Dr. Pope for a photostat of the 1-men kuang-tu edition. The Ch'ien-Chao conversation, under the title "Scholar-gentlemen's Painting" (Shih-fu hua), occurs on p. 13a of the first ch?an. It is to be found also in the Tu shih hua-pfu*1 (III/7a), compiled by Tu Chiinam in the six

teenth century and included in his Tu-shih ssu-p'u,**1 a copy of which is in the Library of Congress (see Wang Chung-min,

25



A Descriptive Catalog of Rare Chinese Books in the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C, 1957, vol. I, p. 593.) A large part of the Tu-shih hua-p'u is merely a reprint of material from the section on painting in Ko-ku yao-lun, with minor

changes. The Tu-shih hua-p'u is later reprinted, with a false attribution to the painter T'ang Yin (1470-1523), as the

Liu-ju ch?-shih hua-p'u3-0 (to be found in Mei-shu ts'ung shu

11/9 and elsewhere); the conversation thus appears in virtu

ally identical form in that book (III/7a).

25. I have discussed these two concepts at length in an unpub lished study of w?n-j?n hua theory, and so omit detailed dis cussion here.

26. The definition of the i-p'in as a term used in reference to

style, the application of it to a particular group of artists and

pictures, and the recognition of its vital role in the rise of both w?n-j?n hua and Ch'an painting, are the important con tributions of S. Shimada in his article cited above (note 14).

27. Shimada, op. cit., p. 287.

28. Hua-ch(an-shih sui-pi,^ 11/1.

29. The two versions of the conversation are discussed by Aoki Masaru in his Chuka bunjinga-dan ("Talks on Chinese Liter ati Painting," Tokyo, 1949, p. 8). Aoki, evidently following the Liu-ju ch?-shih hua-p'u, attributes the earlier version to

Wang Ssu-shan, or Wang I,a(l a Yuan dynasty portraitist and author of an essay on portrait painting, the Hsieh-hsiang pi-ch?eh. However, the reason for this false attribution is

easily seen if we compare the Liu-ju ch?-shih HP with its

source, the Tu-shih HP (see note 24). In the Tu-shih HP, it

appears without attribution to any author. It would seem that the copyist who reproduced this work as the Liu-ju ch?-shih

HP simply attached to each anonymous passage the name of the author of the last attributed passage before it; so that

Wang I, a part of whose Hsieh-hsiang pi-ch?eh occurs as the last quotation in Tu-shih HP which is ascribed to any author,

was mistakenly credited with all that followed (some twenty quotations in ch. 3). Two earlier passages, in ch. 2, are ascribed in the Liu-ju ch?-shih HP to Ching Hao through the same error. These misattributions are repeated in some later

books, such as the Chieh-tzu-y?an hua-chuan, and it is useful to clarify the matter here.

Aoki is the first, so far as I know, to point out the true

meaning of li-chia in this passage; he establishes that the terms li-chiai and hang-chiaar (the former written with various characters for li) were current by Yuan times, and were used

by Chao M?ng-fu himself. It is interesting to note that the

original edition of Ko-ku yao-lun, the earliest source of this

conversation, uses the same character for li in li-chia1 as Chao

M?ng-fu uses in the passage cited by Aoki; whereas the aug mented edition of the fifteenth century uses the other lias which occurs also in the Tu-shih HP and Liu-ju ch?-shih HP, as well as in the phrase li-fiat (li style of script) of Tung Ch'i-ch'ang's version.

30. T'ieh-ivang shan-hu, shu-p'in V/23a. Chao also painted in the

rougher manner of the other branch of w?n-j?n hua, as is re vealed in several extant bamboo-and-rock pictures, and it is this manner to which he refers here.

31. Ibid., the inscription which follows the one quoted above.

32. Ta-kuan lu, XV/34a. About Ch'ien Hsiian's calligraphy, how ever, his contemporaries may have felt somewhat differently; the late Yuan scholar T'ao Tsung-i writes: "His hsiao-k'ai

(small standard script) is not without method; but it hasn't

yet succeeded in sloughing off the decadent and debilitated

spirit of the end of Sung." See his Shu-shih hui-yao,an VII/6b. I am not certain that "carved paintings" is the right rendering for k'o-hua, the term used by Wu Sheng; it may be related to

k'o-ssu, pictorial tapestry weave, and refer to paintings in a

fine, rather hard manner, which resemble woven tapestry."

33. Yii Chien-hua, Chung-kuo hua-lun lei-pien, Peking, 1957, p. 92. Quoted from T'ieh-wang shan-hu; I have been unable to locate the passage there, however.

34. Ho Liang-ch?n, Ssu-yu-chai hua-lun,axv sixteenth century. Mei-shu ts'ung-shu (III/3), 8b.

35. Tieh-wang shan-hu, I/lb. Two paintings are extant which are,

according to the inscriptions, copies by Ch'ien Hsiian of works

by Yen Li-pen and his brother Yen Li-t?. The latter repre sents Barbarians Bringing Animals as Tribute; it is now owned

by Mr. Ch'eng Ch'i, Tokyo, and will be published in a scroll

reproduction by the Institute for Humanistic Research, Kyoto. The other, after Yen Li-p?n, appears to be made up of

part of the same composition, somewhat rearranged; see Siren, Chinese Painting, vol. VI, pi. 32, top. I have not seen either

painting in the original.

36. Freer Gallery of Art, 57.14. Handscroll, colors on paper; height: .295 m. length: 1.170 m. Inscription and two seals of the artist, plus eleven other seals, on the painting.

37. See Nan-yang ming-hua piao by Chang Ch'ou, early seven teenth century. For a Sung dynasty version of the same sub

ject, see a fan-shaped album leaf in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, reproduced in Tomita, Portfolio of Chinese Paint

ings in the Museum, Boston, 1933, plate 73.

38. Recorded in T'ien-shui ping-shan lu and Ch'ien-shan-fang shu-hua chi; see note 50, below. Also mentioned in Chang Ch'ou's Chen-chi jih-lu, 11/38.

39. Osvald Siren, Chinese Painting, III, PI. 191-2.

40. Ibid., PI. 99.

41. Ibid., PI. 191, bottom.

42. Ibid., PI. 72-75.

43. Ibid., PI. 16-17.

44. But see Hou-ts'un fi-pa,ax by Liu K'o-chuang,ay early twelfth

century, IV/8b, where a copy by Li Kung-lin of a Han Kan horse painting is described. Kung-lin, says the author, usually paints in ink on paper; but here he has worked in colors on silk. Why is this? he asks, and answers: because he wanted his picture to resemble Han Kan's; if he had done the horses in ink on paper, they would have been Li Kung-lin's horses, not Han Kan's. This concept of copying is hardly orthodox for the w?n-j?n hua school; but the passage indicates that Li did use colors and silk on occasion.

45. Formerly in the National Museum, Peking; present where abouts unknown.

46. See R. H. Van Gulik, Erotic Colour Prints of the Ming Period, I, 229; also p. 221, the description of picture 17 in the book Hua-ying chin-chen, "Reining the Green Bridle," which

suggests that the term may refer to a particular mode of intercourse.

47. Ibid., p. 183.

48. See Edward Sch?fer, "Bathing in China and the Floriate Clear

Palace," Journal of the American Oriental Society 76, 1956, pp. 57-82.

49. The seals read: a) Shun-ch? yin-changa an intaglio seal; b) Shun-ch?, relief; and c) Ch'ien Hs?an chih yin,ha intaglio. It is worthy of note that the signature and seals match perfectly those on a generally accepted work of Ch'ien Hsiian in the

Chinese National Collection, Taichung, depicting an autumn melon (see Ku-kung shu-hua chi, 16). I am indebted to Messrs. Li Lin-ts'an and Chuang Yen, Taichung, for compar

ing the inscription and seals on this picture with a photo graph of those on the Freer painting, and reporting to me the exact correspondence between them. The inscription and seals on the Playing the Flute scroll are not shown in the photo graph I have. Nor could I locate any other painting attributed to Ch'ien Hsiian which bears impressions from these same

seals; the impressions on all other paintings appear to vary to some degree.

26



50. The picture is recorded in T'ien-shui ping-shan lu, p. 236; this is a list of objects confiscated from the famous collector and corrupt minister, Yen Sungbb (JMTTT 1768) in the

year 1565. Several other books mention the picture, quoting from the same source; see Ch'ing-ho shu-hua fang (1616) IV/25; Shan-hu-wang hua-lu (1643) 23/28; P'ei-wen-chai SHP (1708) 98/27; Chu-chia ts'ang-hua pu (ca. 1800). It is also recorded, with complete description, in the catalog of the Ch'ien-lung Emperor's collection, Shih-ch'? pao-chi, Part

II, Y?-shu-fang section, 19a. Although it was presumably among the paintings taken to Manchuria by the Hsiian-t'ung Emperor, it is not listed in the register of paintings and callig raphy lost from the Ku-kung collection (Ku-kung i-i shu-chi shu-hua mu-lu ssu-chung),bc but is mentioned in the volume of annotations and supplement to that book by J. D. Ch'en, (Ku-kung i-i shu-hua mu chiao-chu,hd Hongkong, 1956, p.

38a.) The painting was evidently owned at one time by the con

temporary painter and collector Chang Yuan (Ta-ch'ien), who copied a section of it and indicates in his inscription that the original was then in his possession (see Tchang Ta-ts'ien, peintre chinois, Paris, 1956, pi. 17). Another painting of the same subject attributed to Ch'ien Hsiian, painted on silk, and

with a somewhat different poem, is recorded in Jang-li-kuan kuo-yen lu (1891) V/13.

51. I miss the allusion here; perhaps it is to a poem by Tu Fu about a parrot, which includes the line: "Still the red beak

betrays too much knowledge." See Wm. Hung, Tu Fu, China's Greatest Poet, Cambridge, Mass., 1952, vol. I, p. 236.

52. The last line is quoted, with minor changes (chiu-tsoube for

chiu-ch'eng,M simply f?ng instead of f?ng-huang for the

phoenix) from the Shu-ching, III AI 9. See Legge, The Chinese

Classics, HI/1, p. 88; also Karlgren, "Glosses on the Book of Documents" (BMFEA 20), pp. 141-143, and "The Book of Documents" (BMFEA 22), p. 12. Karlgren renders the line, "When the shao-music of the Pan-flutes is achieved in 9 parts, the male and female phoenixes come and (arrive=) put in an appearance." One Chinese commentator understood the last part of the line as "The male and female phoenixes come and mate," and perhaps it was this interpretation which

Ch'ien Hsiian had in mind.

53. Three seals of Pien Yung-yii; two of An Ch'i. The painting is

not, however, recorded either in Pien's Shih-ku-fang shu-hua hui-k'ao (1682) or in Ans Mo-y?an hui-kuan (1742). More

mysterious still, it fails to appear in Shih-ch'? pao-chi. There is no reason, however, to doubt the authenticity of the

Ch'ien-lung seals, as the painting was certainly in the Ch'ing imperial collection; it is recorded both in the catalog of cal

ligraphy and paintings formerly in the imperial palace at Mukden (Sheng-ching ku-kung shu-hua lu, 1924, III/18a)

and in the catalog of the former Ministry of the Interior Mu seum in Peking (Nei-wu ku-wu ch'en-lieh-so shu-hua mu-lu, 1925, IV/24b). A suggested explanation for the absence of references to it in other catalogs is that the crypto-erotic sub

ject matter made the collectors hesitate to introduce and de scribe the picture in the catalogs of their collections. The fact that the Ministry of the Interior catalog does not print the artist's inscription or the colophons, as it does in the cases of other paintings, is perhaps due to a similar embarrassment. The other catalog (Sheng-ching ku-kung shu-hua lu) includes the colophons; the first is by the noted Yuan period scholar and bon-vivant Yang Wei-chen.

54. Among them are the following, which may, I think, be re

jected as works of Ch'ien Hsiian: a. L? T'ung Brewing Tea. Ku-kung, 6. b. Washing the Elephant, after Chang Seng-yu. One version

reproduced in Kokka, 259, now in the Art Institute of Chi

cago; another reproduced in Ferguson, Chinese Painting, p. 146, now in the Freer Gallery of Art (11.1630- An ex

panded treatment of the subject in hanging scroll form, sup posed to be after Li Kung-lin, is reproduced in Ku-kung shu hua chi, 31.

c. The Emperor T'ai-tsu of Sung Playing Soccer. Repro duced in To so Gemmin, 144. Purports to be Ch'ien Hsiian's

copy of an earlier picture. d. T'ao Y?an-ming Drunk. Reproduced in Ta-feng-fang

ming-chi, v. IV.

e. A Taoist Magician. Reproduced in Ku-kung chou-k'an, 20. Small and unclear reproduction.

f. Horse and Groom. Reproduced in Ku-kung, 38. g. Mounted Nobleman with a Bow. British Museum; re

produced in Venice Exhibition Catalog, no. 784.

55. Shih Lo ts'an fo t'u.*? Shih Lo (A.D. 273-332; see Giles, Biographical Dictionary, 1720) ruled the state of Chao in northeastern China from 319 until his death. The painting is recorded in Ch'ing-ho shu-hua fang, VII/27; Shan-hu-wang hua-lu, 23/28; Ch'ien-s h an-fan g shu-hua chi (another cata

log of objects confiscated from Yen Sung, cf. note 42; com

piled by the painter Wen Chia [1501-1583]), 14; and other books.

56. Reproduced in color in Chin-k'uei ts'ang-hua chi (Chinese Paintings from King Kwei Collection), v. 2, pi. 13. I do not

agree with Mr. Ch'en in the attribution of this picture to an

anonymous Sung artist. The other versions known to me are in the former Abe collection, Osaka (S?raikan, 11/33), a version which lacks the background landscape; the Freer Gal

lery of Art (11.210), and a private collection, New York.

57. Hung-yai i-ch? fu.bh Hung-yai (JMTTT 671) was a legend ary Taoist alchemist and immortal. A published version in the Y?rinkan, Kyoto, appears to be a close copy, from the

similarity of the drawing to that of more reliable pictures; see Y?rin Taikan, 3. According to J. D. Ch'en (Ku-kung i-i . . ., cf. note 50, p. 38b), another version, unpublished, for

merly in the Ch'ing Imperial collection, is now in the Tung pei Po-wu Yuan, China; this may be the original.

58. Lin Pu,bi better known as Lin Ho-chingbj (965-1026, see

JMTTT 587). The painting is recorded in Ch'ing-ho shu hua fang, VI/46; T'ieh-wang shan-hu, III/27; Shan-hu

mu-nan, VI/21, and various other books. It is presumably in some mainland Chinese collection at present, and is repro duced in Hsieh Chih-liu, T'ang Wu-tai Sung Yuan ming-chi, Shanghai, 1957, pi. 92.

59- Reproduced in T?s? Gemmin, 142; a telescoped reproduction in Chung-kuo ming-hua, 9.

60. Huan I,bk tzu Yeh-wangbl (JMTTT 810). The painting is

reproduced in the auction catalog of the Kawasaki collection, Ch?shunkaku . . ., 1936; also in Kokka, 66. It bears a "Shun ch?" seal. I do not accept it as an original, but it may well be after a Ch'ien Hs?an picture.

Another figure painting attributed to Ch'ien Hs?an, copied (according to the inscription) from a work by the T'ang

master Yen Li-t?, has recently come to light in Japan. It is owned by Mr. Ch'eng Ch'i, and is to be published in facsimile in the near future. I know it only from photographs, and do not wish to make any judgment of it, beyond saying that it appears quite likely to be a genuine work. But since it seems to have been copied closely after the T'ang picture, showing little of Ch'ien's own style, it is in any case of less interest to our present investigation.

61. The intensification of expression in the faces is carried further

by some of the Ch'an Buddhist artists of the late Sung and

early Yuan, becomes distinctly repellent in some paintings attributed to Yen Hui in the later Yuan, and continues in

figure paintings by the Ch? School artists of the Ming period, to arrive at an unlamented end in grotesque works by certain later and lesser painters of that school.

62. Liang K'ai may, however, be indulging in pictorial play, alluding in his brushwork to the "grass" manner of callig raphy, of which Wang Hsi-chih was the greatest master. This picture does not, in any case, represent Liang K'ai at his greatest?there are superior paintings in Japanese collections

?and it is introduced here not as representative of the artist, but as another illustration of that linear disquiet observable in

much Southern Sung figure painting.

63. The term "orchid-leaf drawing" is sometimes used in a more

particular sense, which would not include all the various kinds of figure drawing practiced by the Sung academicians. Ho

Liang-ch?n, however, evidently means it to include some other kinds which are related but usually distinguished from the "orchid-leaf" proper.

27



a

b

c

a

e

f

h

i

?

k

1

m

n

o

P

q

r

s

t

u

V

w

f "I

im %

an %-&

Chinese Characters

A

4$- vTu

ab fi*il

ad

ae

af

ag ah

ai

aj ak

al

am

an

ao

ap

aq

ar

as

at

au

av

aw

ax

ay az

ba

bb 28

?ir 'If M

t? M #-, f MS *&*?? ^

f IX ?

II



be ?*l?6* t$k-$? ?S% &1&

bd ftti^if ? ? /?

be 1U M> bf /U ?

bg y? $*^ ^ ?fl bh & f% ff /$ jf]

bk ^? ,^

29



Date post:	15-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	james-cahill
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times