Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The artisans of Ching-tê-chên in late imperial China Lee, Robert 1980

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1980_A8 L44.pdf [ 3.41MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0100251.json
JSON-LD: 1.0100251+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0100251.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0100251+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0100251+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0100251+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0100251 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0100251.txt
Citation
1.0100251.ris

Full Text

THE ARTISANS OF CHING-TE-CHEN IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA B.A., York University, 1979 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June 1980 © Robert Lee, 1980 by ROBERT LEE in In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of History The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T.1W5 Date 20 June 1980 ABSTRACT This thesis deals with the artisans of Ching-te-chen, with emphasis on their vocational lives and on their relations with the government during the Ming and the Ch'ing dynasties. The thesis is divided into three chapters. The first chapter traces the development of the artisan regulations of the Ming and the Ch'ing periods. The second chapter, which constitutes the main body of the thesis, surveys the town of Ching-te-chen, the porcelain industry of Ching-te-chen, and the artisans of the town's porcelain industry. The third chapter attempts to answer two questions in the context of Ching-te-chen: What was the effect of the artisan regulations on the artisans and on artisanry? Were the artisans socially homogeneous? Drawing heavily from institutional works, gazetteers, and travelogues, the general conclusion derived is that the artisan regulations, though an obvious infringement on the artisans' freedom and livelihood, did contribute to the artisans' craftsmanship. This was quite evident in Ching-te-chen's porcelain production. As for social homogeneity, the artisans of Ching-te-chen were apparently "trade-conscious" rather than "class-conscious". Moreover, artisans of the same trade tended to fraternize among themselves only in times of adversity, but not in times of prosperity. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 Chapter I. THE ARTISAN REGULATIONS OF LATE IMPERIAL CHINA 6 II. CHING-TE-CHEN IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA 15 III. THE ARTISANS OF CHING-TE-CHEN: A DISCUSSION 48 NOTES 59 BIBLIOGRAPHY 66 APPENDICES A GLOSSARY OF CHINESE NAMES AND TERMS 71 B A LIST OF REIGNS IN THE MING AND THE CH'ING DYNASTIES . . 75 Hi 0 10 20 30 40 50 j _i 1 1 J «. Mile Scale MAP OF JAO-CHOU PREFECTURE AND ITS VICINITY iv INTRODUCTION Throughout the course of Chinese history, artisans had to a great extent played an inconspicuous role. In spite of that, the development of the artisan class was itself far from uneventful. This was particularly true during the Ming and the Ch'ing periods when, due to commercial growth and administrative alteration, significant changes were made in the artisans' vocational lives and in their relations with the government. In the case of one group of artisans, those in Ching-te-chen, such changes were most acutely manifested. Indeed, being employed in the porcelain center of China and being closely linked with the official porcelain enterprise there, the artisans of the town could not help but be affected. The purpose of this study is to describe the general status of the artisans in Ching-te-chen and to trace the changes they experienced. The time frame of this study is "late imperial China", a period which extends from the early Ming dynasty in the mid-fourteenth century to the late Ch'ing dynasty in the mid-nineteenth century. The starting date is so chosen because the Ming dynasty was essentially the beginning of a transition in the development of the artisan class. As for the terminal date, the mid-nineteenth century is adopted because Ching-te-chen was completely devastated by the Taiping rebels in 1853. The town never 1 fully recuperated until after the Liberation in 1949. In view of this sudden change of events, it seems advisable to leave out the post-1853 period altogether. Before outlining the scope of the study, it is necessary to have a broad understanding of the artisans as a class and of the changes they underwent over the course of history. Basically, there were two categories of artisans in imperial China: (1) craftsmen who were involved in artisanry as a trade, and (2) peasants who were involved in artisanry as a side-line industry. Of these two categories, however, only the former were conventionally recognized as "artisans" (kung). In imperial China, the term "artisan" was understood to mean a group of people who possessed an artistic skill and who used this skill to earn a livelihood. This is the definition adopted here. As a class, the artisans were under several restrictions. Notably, they were subjected to registering their status with the government. Once registered, their status was then maintained on a hereditary basis. In addition, the artisans were under obligation to work for the government for a certain number of days every year. Such work could be in the capital or could be in any of the major cities. This conscript labor was, in effect, an indispensable source of manpower to various government enterprises, particularly arsenals and salt-mines. For this reason, the restrictions on the artisans were persistently enacted. The T'ang dynasty statute on the subject, for example, reads: 2 The sons of artisans are forbidden to transfer into other census categories once their status has been established within the artisan registry. (1) The Ming dynasty statute was even more specific: The statuses of all households are determined according to their respective census registrations, such as military (chun), civilian (min), courier (chan), salt-miner (tu), physician (i)» fortune teller (pu), artisan (kung), musician (lo), and so on. Those guilty of fraudulent substitutions, whereby they avoid the heavier obligations by taking the lighter ones, will be beaten eighty strokes. Officials found carelessly permitting such fraudulent acts or guilty of changing anyone's census status will be given the same penalty. (2) Here it should be noted that, even though artisan status was hereditary, not every member of an artisan household was required to register as an artisan. Indeed, the general rule was that if an artisan household had two or three male adults, only one of them was required to register. Needless to say, the quota increased as the number of male adults in the household increased: two out of every four or five, and a maximum .of three out of six or more, were required to register as artisans. In addition, sickness and 3 poverty could also release an artisan from his census status. With these exemptions, the total number of artisans in the country could therefore be much higher than indicated by the artisan census. However, because no census was kept of these unregistered artisans, it is impossible to even estimate their population. Be that as it may, one thing is positive: these unregistered artisans were not subjected to the artisan regulations. When the artisans were not serving conscript labor, they were free to carry on with their own trade. Almost as a rule, most 3 artisans tended to operate in the capital or in the major cities. The reason is obvious. In the rural areas, where the peasants often filled the role of the artisans by producing much of their own implements, the need for artisans was kept to a minimum. However, in the cities, where most of the mercantile and commercial activities were concentrated, the demand for the artisans' service was invariably greater. During the T'ang dynasty (A.D. 618-907), commercialization became prevalent. One of the outcomes was the increased demand for both commodities and luxury goods. To accomodate this demand, some artisans, as well as merchants, attempted to increase the scale of production by hiring artisans to work in workshops. In essence, this marked the beginning of China's commercial handicraft industry. In the middle of the Ming dynasty (A.D. 1368-1643), the government restrictions on the artisans finally began to be relaxed. By then, the artisans could pay a special tax in lieu of performing their conscript labor. Nevertheless, they still had to register their status with the government. Eventually, even this regulation was abolished at the beginning of the Ch'ing dynasty (A.D. 1644-1911). The above is, of course, only a brief history of artisans and of artisanry in imperial China. Not surprisingly, it raises more questions than it answers. For instance, how socially homogeneous were the artisans? What effect did the artisan regulations have upon the artisans' way of life? In turn, how did the artisans respond to the artisan regulations? Also, why did the Ming government loosen these regulations and why did the Ch'ing 4 government abolish them altogether? Furthermore, did the loosening and the eventual abolition of the regulations change the disposition of the artisans and the nature of artisanry? The above questions essentially set the course for this study of the artisans of Ching-te-chen. Lastly, a word about source materials is in order. In this study, both contemporary sources (viz. eighteenth and nineteenth century literature) and relatively recent ones (viz. early twentieth century literature) are employed. Here, the question is: how compatible are these sources? Upon comparison, it appears that, aside from statistical data, their descriptions of the artisans' 4 way of life generally agree. On this premise, their employment is justified. 5 CHAPTER I THE ARTISAN REGULATIONS OF IATE IMPERIAL CHINA After the third century B.C., classes and statuses in China ceased to be hereditary. However, because the government wanted to assure that there would be a constant supply of manpower at its disposal, certain groups continued to register their status on a hereditary basis and continued to work for the government whenever their services were needed. The artisans were among these groups. In the subsequent centuries, hereditary status registration and conscript labor continued to apply to the artisans. The rigidity in implementing these regulations, however, depended on the government concerned. In the beginning of the Ming dynasty, the government seemingly did not exercise any strict regulations on the artisans. From the information available, it appears that the artisans were subjected to conscription only when the government deemed it 1 necessary. In effect, this caused considerable inconvenience for the artisans. For one thing, not knowing when their services were required, they could not be committed to any long-term project. After many remonstrations, the government finally introduced a more rigid set of artisan regulations in 1385. Under these regulations, all the artisans were to be organized according to the nature of their trade. Once every three years, they 6 were to report to the capital in Nanking to serve the government for a period of three months. The mobilization of these artisans was to 2 be the responsibility of the local authorities. For a while, the regulations proved satisfactory to both the government and the artisans. However, a problem soon developed. Namely, the services of some of the artisans were not always needed when they reported to work at the capital. Undoubtedly, to the artisans concerned, the trip to the capital and the idle sojourn 3 there were extremely frustrating and annoying. Recognizing this problem, the government thus again revised its artisan regulations. In this revision, presented in 1391, artisans of different trades were stipulated to report to the capital at different intervals, ranging from once every year to once every five 4 years. As before, each conscription lasted three months. Because of the rotating feature of this stipulation, all the artisans involved were collectively known as the rotating artisans (lun-pan kung-chiang). In principle, all the rotating artisans were to serve their conscription at the capital. In practice, however, this was not always the case. Indeed, since some of the government enterprises were located elsewhere and since these enterprises also demanded manpower, appropriately skilled artisans were, therefore, required to report there rather than to the capital. The Imperial Porcelain Factory at Ching-te-chen and the Imperial Silk Factory at Soochow, for example, were the main recipients of conscripted potters and 7 silk-weavers. All the artisans who served their conscription outside the capital were collectively designated as stationary artisans (ts'un-liu kung-chiang). Despite the incessant service of the rotating and stationary artisans, the government preferred to have a crew of artisans permanently residing at the capital, so that there would always be a source of manpower on hand. Against this background, the residential artisans (chu-tso jen-chiang) came into being in the early fifteenth century. In many ways, the residential artisans were different from both the rotating and stationary artisans. To begin with, even though the residential artisans also served their conscription on a rotating basis, their term was extended. On the average, they had to serve ten days a month, or approximately four months every year. Whether they were on conscription or not, the residential artisans were required to reside at the capital permanently.^ Secondly, unlike the rotating and stationary artisans who were under the jurisdiction of the Board of Works (Kung-pu), the residential artisans were under the Imperial Household Ministry (Nei-wu-fu)Finally, in contrast with the rotating and stationary artisans who had to support themselves while on conscription, the residential artisans received stipends from the government whenever they were serving their conscript labor. In general, these stipends were in the form of rations, which included rice, salt, and vegetables.^ On some special occasions, such as the inauguration of a new emperor, the residential artisans also received 8 a cash bonus. 8 In 1392, seven years after the Ming artisan regulations came into effect, the number of rotating artisans was registered at 9 232,089. This figure remained largely the same in the subsequent decades. In 1454, for example, the number was 240,000. By then, the capital had been transferred from Nanking to Peking. Be that as it may, both these cities.continued to be the focus of all conscript labor. Indeed, of the 240,000 rotating artisans in 1454, 182,000 of 10 them reported to Peking and 58,000 to Nanking. As for the population of the stationary artisans, no information is available. Unlike the rotating artisans, whose population was relatively stable throughout the Ming dynasty, the population of the residential artisans underwent considerable fluctuation. In 1531, for example, Peking had a total of 25,167 residential artisans. Then, in the same year, this number was reduced to 12,255, because the government found that the services of some residential artisans were not frequently 11 needed. The last figure, in fact, was stipulated by the government as the quota of residential artisans permissible in Peking. Despite the quota, the number of residential artisans in the capital continued to fluctuate, being 18,443 in 1561, 15,884 in 1567, 12 and 15,139 in 1615. Conceivably, this fluctuation was due to the imperial court's vacillating demand for artisanal services. The number of residential artisans in Nanking was considerably less than that of the new capital. In 1530, for example, their number 13 totalled some 7,600. Unfortunately, no further figures on the Nanking artisans are available. 9 As the Ming dynasty progressed, more and more artisans, particularly the rotating ones, began to evade their conscription. There were two reasons for this evasion. First, for the rotating artisans, especially those who lived a distance from the capital and those who had to serve their conscription once every year, the impressment was extremely bothersome. Indeed, it must be remembered that although the duration of the stay in the capital was only three months, there was also the time needed to travel back and forth from and to the capital. Altogether, the conscription actually took up a considerable portion of their time, not to mention the transportation cost incurred which they themselves had to bear. Needless to say, the livelihood of these artisans was seriously hampered. Second, in its attempt to maintain the level of craftsmanship, the government was stringent toward the artisans. As specified in the statute, if a conscripted artisan's products did not meet the set standard, he was subjected to forty strokes. The same penalty also 14 applied to any delay in production on his part. Furthermore, to ensure that the products of each artisan could readily be identified, the government required the artisans to mark their respective products. In 1415, for example, all the carriage-makers were ordered to register their name and their products with the Imperial Household Ministry. If these carriages did not prove to be satisfactory, their makers 15 would be punished accordingly. Because of all this oppression, many artisans thus turned to evasion. By and large, the most prevalent form of evasion was abscondence. 10 In such instances, the artisans would simply flee their native place, where their status was registered, and resettle elsewhere. Although the exact number of artisans who chose this form of evasion is unknown, it was recorded that, in 1438 alone, 4,255 absconders were apprehended by the government. By 1450, the number soared to 34,800. Added to this figure are, of course, those artisans who employed other forms of evasion and those artisans who successfully evaded their conscription. In an attempt to curb these evasions, the government, in 1454, again revised its artisan regulations. This time, it stipulated that all the rotating artisans were to serve their conscription uniformly 17 at regular intervals of four years. The effect of this change in stipulation is largely unclear, except for the fact that it took another thirty years before another major revision was made. Besides evasion, the government was troubled by another problem. In spite of the harsh penalties, the standards of skill and the performance of the conscripted artisans generally showed a deterioration. The imperial shipyard, for example, complained that most of the artisans there "no longer have the skill (once displayed by their forefathers)" and "not even one or two out of a hundred know 18 their craft." There is no ready explanation for this deterioration. One might speculate that this was partly due to the artisans' resentment of conscription and partly due to the loss of many artistic skills as a result of the massive evasion. With these problems plaguing the artisan regulations, the government thus considered commuting the conscription. In a memorial 11 submitted by the Board of Works in 1485, it was suggested that those rotating and stationary artisans who wished to be exempted from their conscription could do so by paying a special tax. Tentatively, the tax rate was set at .9 tael of silver per month for the "southern artisans" (ie. those who reported to Nanking for their conscription) and .6 tael of silver per month for the "northern artisans" (ie. those who reported to Peking for their conscription). Those artisans who did not want, or could not afford, to pay this amount were to continue 19 to perform their conscription. Strangely enough, commutation did not apply to the residential artisans. Conceivably, the imperial court 20 still found their services indispensable. Although the suggestion was adopted by the throne, the Board of Works seems to have been uncertain about the viability of this alteration. As a result, various adjustments were made in the subsequent years. In 1533, for example, the regulations stated that only those artisans whose residence was distant from the capital could be qualified for commutation. 21 As for the others, they were to serve their conscription as before. Finally, in 1562, a more definite set of regulations was introduced. This time, commutation of conscription was made compulsory. Under the new regulations, all the rotating and stationary artisans were to continue to register their status with the government. Yet, each year, in lieu of the conscription, they were to pay a special tax in the amount of .45 tael 22 of silver. Again, the residential artisans were the exception to the regulations. By this time, the number of rotating and stationary artisans was, probably as a result of the massive evasion, reduced to approximately 12 240,000. The total amount of revenue generated from this commutation therefore came to about 110,000 taels of silver. This amount was then used by the government to hire proficient artisans for various undertakings. Henceforth, commutation became the core of the Ming dynasty's artisan regulations. It remained in effect until 1643, when the dynasty was overthrown by the Manchus. The Ch'ing government was established in 1644. In the following year, it declared that, with the exception of salt-miners, all the hereditary status groups, such as couriers, artisans, and musicians, 24 were to be abolished. Conceivably, the abolition was an attempt by the Manchus to win over the Chinese. In the case of the artisans, commutation, along with census registration, was also abrogated. In 1658, however, the government reintroduced commutation. According to the official record, the reason was due to a shortage of funds in financing the various government undertakings. Therefore, as a compensation, anyone whose ancestors were registered as artisans in the census was required 26 to pay an annual tax of .45 tael of silver. Needless to say, those 27 who were of artisan descent protested bitterly against the regulation. Unfortunately, because no information is available on the number of artisan descendants and on the total amount of revenue collected from them, it is.impossible to determine the effectiveness of this regulation. Whatever the case, the regulation was relatively short-lived. Yet, for reasons that are unclear, its abolition came to different provinces at different times. For instance, Chekiang was exempted in 1698, Shantung in 1703, Honan and Shensi in 1713, Chihli in 1724, and Kiangsu, Kwangtung, 28 and Anhwei in 1729. This abolition, though not synchronously enacted, marked the end of any artisan regulations in imperial China. 14 CHAPTER II CHING-TE-CHEN IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA The Town The prefecture of Jao-chou was situated in the northeast of P'o-yang Lake in Kiangsi province. Under its jurisdiction were seven districts—P'o-yang, An-jen, Yu-kan, Te-hsing, Lo-p'ing, Wan-nien, and Fou-liang. This last district, Fou-liang, was, like most districts in China, not particularly well-known save for one of its towns. For here lies Ching-te-chen, the porcelain center of China. Ching-te-chen is situated on a plain surrounded by high mountains. Because of the mountainous environs, agriculture was never a major industry in the area. Instead, the natives made their living from either trade or handicrafts. Since the soil of Ching-te-chen and its vicinity was generally recognized as ideal for producing potteries and porcelains, ceramic industry thus figured prominently. Eventually, this industry was to reign supreme not only in the town, but also in China. The history of Ching-te-chen as a porcelain producer goes back to the Han dynasty (206 B.C.-A.D. 220). However, one should not assume that the town was recognized as the porcelain center of China right from the very beginning. In effect, this recognition is obtained through _ . i 1 centuries of development. 15 Before the middle of the Sung dynasty (A.D. 920-1280), Ching-te-chen, then known as Hsin-p1ing-chen, was one of the many porcelain producers in China. Although the town enjoyed a respectable reputation, it was overshadowed by no less than eight other porcelain 2 producers in north China. However, a combination of events soon changed all this. During the reign of Ching-te (1004-1007) in the Sung dynasty, the potters of Hsin-p'ing-chen were ordered to produce fine wares for the court. The quality of the wares eventually produced was so impressive that the reputation of Hsin-p1ing-chen as a porcelain producer was greatly enhanced. Moreover, because these wares were inscribed with the characters Ching-te-nien chih (made in the reign of Ching-te), they came to be conveniently known as the "Ching-te wares", and the town which produced them also came to be referred to 3 in the same manner. Ultimately, the name of the town was changed from Hsin-p'ing-chen to Ching-te-chen, after its famous product. The early twelfth century marked the beginning of the Jurchen invasion of China. Due to the pressure, the Sung court was forced to move from north China to south China. Many civilians, among them potters, did likewise. Since Ching-te-chen was the leading porcelain 4 producer in south China, these potters naturally migrated there. Given this additional manpower, which also meant additional skill and technology, the quality of the wares produced at Ching-te-chen thus became superlative. Thenceforth, continuous progress was made. By the Ming dynasty, Ching-te-chen was generally recognized as the 16 porcelain center of China. Given the importance of Ching-te-chen as a porcelain center, it comes as no surprise that all the contemporary accounts (ie. eighteenth and nineteenth centuries literature) on the town were concerned with this theme: , The town of Ching-te is imposingly situated in the southeast (of China). Both the potters and the buyers of potteries are gathered there. The great benefits which the whole country has derived from pottery have given Ching-te a great reputa tion. (5) Fou-liang is situated among the ten-thousand mountains and the township of Ching-te is a large center to the south of the district. Because of the prosperous pottery trade, people come here from all quarters of the compass and all sorts of merchandise are displayed here. One can in truth describe it as a flourishing scene. (6) Ching-te-chen is a large township on the right of the river belonging to the Fou district. Its business is pottery for the benefit of the whole country. People from far and near and from all four quarters of the compass, depending on their skill, go there to earn them a livelihood. (7) Fou-liang's territory extends to just above 100 _li. The earth is suitable for pottery. If one includes both the pottery business itself and all the items incidental to the pottery trade, Fou-liang accounts for nearly half. Truly it may be said that Ching-te-chen is a place of importance in Fou-liang. (8) Although all the above accounts paid tribute to Ching-te-chen's porcelain industry, it should be noted that, during the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, there were other porcelain producers in China. However, the difference between them and Ching-te-chen was that the others produced coarse wares, while Ching-te-chen mainly produced wares of exquisite quality. In fact, with the only exception of Te-hua in the province of Fukien, Ching-te-chen virtually monopolized the market on fine porcelain. 17 On the whole, the best known and certainly the most informative description of Ching-te-chen was offered by a Jesuit missionary, Pere d'Entrecolles, who lived there in the early eighteenth century.^ His description is worth quoting here at length: King-te-tching (Ching-te-chen) only needs to be surrounded by walls to be called a city, and even to be compared with the largest and most populous cities of China. The places called tching (chen, or town), which are few in number, but distinguished by a large traffic and trade, are not usually walled—perhaps in order that they may grow without hindrance, perhaps to facilitate embarking and disem barking merchandise. King-te-tching is estimated to contain eight een thousand households, but some of the large merchants have premises of vast extent, lodging a prodigious multitude of workmen, so that the population is said to number over a million souls, who consume daily over ten thousand loads of rice and more than a thousand hogs. It (Ching-te-chen) extends for more than a league along the bank of a fine river. It is not, as you might imagine, an indiscriminate mass of houses; the streets are straight as a line and cross at regular intervals; every inch of ground is occupied, so that the houses are too crowded and the streets far too narrow; when passing along you seem to be in the midst of a fair, and hear nothing but the cries of the street porters trying to force their way through. (11) In the above description, Pere d'Entrecolles mentioned in passing that the population of Ching-te-chen was "over a million souls." This is questionable. During the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, the population of Fou-liang district, in which Ching-te-chen lies, was recorded as follows: Year Household Total Population 1391 18,731 134,970 1412 15,941 92,592 1462 17,577 97,183 1502 17,660 99,721 1512 17,020 99,865 1522 17,068 100,029 1532 16,691 100,037 1542 15,711 103,661 1552 15,714 100,192 1573 16,149 100,192 1583 16,127 100,192 18 Year Household Total Population 1593 1603 1782 1802 1821 16,111 16,110 55,896 58,792 59,606 100,192 100,192 250,290 281,477 288,220 Source: Fou-liang hsien-chih (Gazetteer of Fou-liang District), 4:lla-12b. Chiang-hsi t'ung-chih (Gazetteer of Kiangsi Province), 47:28a-b. Even allowing that there might be some inaccuracies in these figures, nowhere do they approach Pere d'Entrecolles1s estimate of one million. Besides, it must be remembered that there were other towns in Fou-liang district. Therefore, the population of Ching-te-chen could conceivably be less than the figures indicated above. In his description, d'Entrecolles also mentioned that the total number of households was 18,000. In proportioning that with the population figure he provided, this would mean each household contained fifty-five people! This is a highly unlikely ratio. Furthermore, the area of Ching-te-chen in the Ming and the Ch'ing periods was thirteen li in length and three li in breadth, or thirty-nine square li. To put it in ratio, this would mean a density of some 25,641 people per square _li! Again, this is rather 12 unlikely. d'Entrecolles' s figures are totally erroneous. For one thing, being a contemporary observer, his estimates do have credibility. Perhaps the discrepancies between his figures and those stated in the gazetteers could be explained in the following ways: First, the gazetteers' figures Despite the above computations, one should not conclude that 19 might be grossly inaccurate. Second, d'Entrecolles might have over stated the population, while understating the number of households. Indeed, it should be noted that d'Entrecolles wrote this description in 1712. As one can see, the gazetteers' figures on population and the number of households are conspicuously absent in that period. Hence, there is no real base to refute d'Entrecolles's estimates. Finally, it is possible that the "households" d'Entrecolles spoke of included both "family households" and "factory households", and that his estimates of the population and "households" were made during the porcelain season, that is to say, any time between April and November. These are important considerations, as explained in a Japanese survey of Ching-te-chen in the 1910s: In normal times, the population (of Ching-te-chen) is 20,000 and the number of households approximately 3,000. But at the kiln opening time, people come from various places to work in the factories and the population increases suddenly. The natives claim that, at most, there are 150,000 people and approximately 5,000 households. The kilns are opened in April and closed in November. (13) In proportioning the above figures, this would mean Ching-te-chen's population-household ratio was approximately 7:1 in the off-season and 30:1 during the porcelain season. The latter ratio essentially supports d'Entrecolles's observation that "some of the large merchants have premises of vast extent, lodging a prodigious multitude of workmen," and also his observation of the seemingly incredible population-"household" ratio. All in all, d'Entrecolles1s estimates, though implausible, ought not to be dismissed. As all the contemporary accounts imply, Ching-te-chen was a 20 single-industry town. Basically, the town was composed of three groups of people, all of whom were connected with porcelain production in one way or another. The first of these were the merchants, who can be divided into two categories: those who operated the kilns and the workshops and those who supplied Ching-te-chen with provisions and commodities. Here, it should be mentioned in passing that Ching-te-chen was never self-sufficient. Indeed, according to d'Entrecolles, the town's cost of living was the highest in Jao-chou prefecture, because 14 everything had to be brought from outside. The second group were the artisans. Similarly, they can be divided into two categories: those who were devoted to porcelain production and those who performed subsidiary trades, such as making crates and barrels for packing the porcelains. Almost as a rule, the former category of artisans (eg. moulders, glazers, and bakers) were employed in the kilns and the workshops, while the latter category of artisans (eg. carpenters, blacksmiths, and bamboosmiths) operated on their own. The last of these groups were the workmen, who undertook assorted physical labors. Included in this group were the porters, the miners, the boatmen, and the like. Notwithstanding the importance of these groups of people, their population and ratio remain largely unknown. The Industry Porcelain Production Before discussing Ching-te-chen's porcelain industry, a brief survey of the process of porcelain production is useful. Basically, 21 there were four phases involved: (1) mining the clay, (2) moulding and glazing the ware, (3) baking the ware, and (4) ornamenting the ware. Each of these phases, in turn, could be broken down further. Mining the Clay The production of porcelain required two types of clay: kaolin and petuntse. Both of them were found in the vicinity of Ching-te-chen. After the mining and the purification, the clay was shaped into brick form and delivered to the workshops. Moulding and Glazing the Ware Upon receiving the clay brick, the workshop usually purified it once more. When deemed satisfactory, the clay was then given to the moulders to be shaped, and subsequently to the glazers to be glazed. In the actual production, moulding and glazing were done through an assembly-line process. In producing a teacup, for example, the first moulder's job was to give the cup its contour, the second to add the cup's foot, and the third to finalize the form. With this last step completed, the cup was then passed on to the glazers. In the glazing process, there was again a division of labor. Some artisans were responsible for mixing the glaze and some were responsible for applying the glaze to the ware. Depending on the shape of the piece, glazing could be done in the following ways: dipping, sprinkling, and being blown through a bamboo tube. Again, different artisans were responsible for different methods of glazing. 22 Baking the Ware One of the most crucial stages in porcelain production was "filling the kiln" (man-yao). Although the process simply involved putting the wares and the fuels into the kiln, it was by no means easy. In order to have a successful baking, both the wares and the fuels must be precisely and strategically placed. This process, in fact, was performed by a special group of artisans known as the "kiln-fillers" (man-yao-kung). In the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, these "kiln-fillers", with their own shops, were entirely divorced from the kilns. Generally, they rendered their service on a contract basis. When it came to the actual baking, each kiln had a head-keeper (pa-chuang-t'ou), whose responsibility was to supervise the overall execution. In particular, he must be able to control the temperature of the kiln at a desirable level. Ornamenting the Ware If a piece of ware needed ornamentation, it was then taken to a workshop which specialized in such undertakings. Similar to moulding and glazing, ornamenting was also done through an assembly-line process. In drawing a pattern, for example, one artisan would sketch the outline, while another artisan would fill in the color. All other forms of ornamentation, such as embossing, engraving, and carving, were more or less done in the same fashion. In effect, most of the ornamenters were artistic in only one type of pattern or design. Finally, after the ornamentation was completed, the ware was 23 then taken to an oven to be baked again. Unlike the first baking, in which great care was required, the second baking was relatively facile. In general, the workshop had its own bakers to perform the process. With this last process completed, the porcelain was now ready for the market. Of the various occupational groups involved in the above four phases of porcelain production, almost all of them were legally recognized as "artisans" in imperial China. The only exceptions were the miners of porcelain clay, who were "workmen" (fu) rather than "artisans" (kung). Nevertheless, they were also subjected to conscrip tion whenever their services were needed.''""' The Ming Imperial Porcelain Factory In imperial China, there were basically two types of porcelain enterprises: the official kiln (kuan-yao) and the private kiln (min-yao). As their names imply, the former was official enterprise, whose products were intended for the court, while the latter was private enterprise, whose products were destined for trade. The official kiln did not come into being prior to the Ming dynasty. Instead, the government set up a special office.in each major porcelain center. Whenever porcelain was required, the superintendent of this office would go to the private kilns, select their choice wares, and convey them to the court. Occasionally, the court would order a list of special porcelains, with which the private kilns were required to comply in their production. Again, it was the responsibility of the superintendent to oversee their production 24 and conveyance to the court. Usually, these wares were not paid for, 16 because they were considered a "tribute" from the private kilns. In the beginning of the Ming dynasty, the government probably found it expedient to establish its own porcelain enterprise rather than to set up porcelain offices in various localities. Since Ching-te-chen was generally acknowledged, by this time, as the porcelain center of China, it was chosen as the site of this establishment. This was the origin of the Imperial Porcelain Factory (Yii-ch'i ch'ang). Basically, the Imperial Porcelain Factory was comprised of two sections: administration and production. In the administration section, the personnel were as followed: Superintendent: 1 Assistant Superintendent: 1 Secretary: 2 Clerk: 1 Attendant: 1 Messenger: 1 Guard: 17 Porter: 8 Storage Keeper: 1 Jailer: 1 Sedan-chair Bearer: 5 Drummer and Trumpeter: 6 Geomancer: 1 Town Elder: 15 Tax Collector: 13 Local Militia: 20 Source: Ching-te-chen t'ao-lu (A Record of the Ching-te-chen Pottery), 1:6a-b. During the Ming dynasty, no magistrate was assigned to Ching-te-chen. Instead, the town was administered by the official stationed there to supervise the porcelain industry. From the above list, it is apparent 25 that the inclusion of the town elders, the tax collectors, and the like was for the purpose of administering the town. As for the other personnel, their roles are self-explanatory. In the production section, the Imperial Porcelain Factory was staffed by stationary artisans. As mentioned earlier, these were artisans who served their conscription in a distinct location rather than in the capital. Drawn from the seven districts of Jao-chou prefecture, the stationary artisans at Ching-te-chen usually served their conscription at yearly intervals, each term being three months in duration. Throughout the Ming dynasty, the total number of conscripted artisans working in the Imperial Porcelain Factory 17 fluctuated from three to five hundred. Besides the artisans, the Imperial Porcelain Factory also conscripted a number of workmen. Basically, these workmen were divided into two categories: journeymen (shang-kung-fu) and laborers (sha-t'u-fu). The difference between the two categories was that the former were assistants to the artisans, while the latter were simply toilers of sundry works. Again, the number of conscripted workmen working in the Imperial Porcelain Factory fluctuated from time to time. According to the local gazetteer, some 370 journeymen 18 and 190 laborers were generally involved during the Ming dynasty. Like the artisans, these workmen were also drawn from the seven districts of Jao-chou prefecture. In production, all the artisans in the Imperial Porcelain Factory were first categorized into divisions according to their 26 trade and to their specialty (ie. the type of ware they were most pro ficient in producing). Then, one or more foremen were selected from each division to supervise the production process. In the latter half of the sixteenth century, the divisions were thus: Division No. of Foreman No. of Artisan Maker of Bowls 4 22 Maker of Dishes 2 16 Maker of Basins 3 20 Maker of Cups 2 1 Maker of Wine Cups ? 7 Maker of Seggars* 3 24 Writer of Seal-marks 2 16 General Painter 4 19 General Writer 5 7 Sculptors 4 11 Plasterer 1 18 Ornamenter 3 13 First-class Carpenter 4 35 Second-class Carpenter 2 19 Ship-builder 2 13 Blacksmith 3 30 Bamboosmith 1 9 Pigment Producer 1 3 Rope-maker 1 8 Barrel-maker 1 8 Dyers 1 7 First-class Grinder ? 7 Second-class Grinder 7 7 Source: Ching-te-chen t'ao-lu (A Record of the Ching-te-chen Pottery), 3:2a-3b. Throughout its history, the Ming Imperial Porcelain Factory was plagued with administrative problems. One problem was that the factory superintendent was constantly changing. In the beginning of the dynasty, a Secretary of the Board of Works (Kung-pu yuan-wai-lang) was sent to Seggar is a clay vessel for containing the porcelain pieces during the baking process. 27 assume the superintendency. Later, an official with the title of Official Record Officer (Ying-tsao-so-ch1eng) replaced him. This was followed by a series of appointments and dismissals of eunuchs (chung-kuan), of assistant sub-prefects (t'ung-p'an), of sub-prefects (t'ung-chih), and of prefects (chih-fu) as superintendents of the 19 Imperial Porcelain Factory. There were many reasons for this instability. In the early 1530s, for example, a superintendent was imprisoned because he was found guilty of blackmarketing the imperial 20 wares. Another superintendent was dismissed in 1538 because he did 21 not convey the wares to the court on time. Fifteen years later, yet another superintendent was dismissed and arrested because the quality 22 of the wares he supervised was deemed unsatisfactory. Occasionally, charges of corruption and oppression laid against the superintendent of the Imperial Porcelain Factory also made it necessary for the government to replace him. Besides having an unsteady administration, the Imperial Porcelain Factory was, in fact, not continuously in operation. Indeed, during the reigns of Cheng-t'ung (1436-1449), Ching-t'ai (1450-1456), Hung-chih (1488-1505), T'ai-ch'ang (1620-1621), T'ien-ch'i (1621-1627) and Ch'ung-chen (1628-1644), production was either kept to a minimum or suspended altogether. Again, there were many reasons for this inactivity, the major ones being natural calamities (viz. fire and flood), tension from foreign invasions (viz. the Mongol and the Manchu invasions), and lack of imperial patronage. Notwithstanding all the obstacles, the Imperial Porcelain Factory 28 did produce an enormous amount of exquisite wares, particularly those of the reigns of Hsuan-te (1426-1435), Ch'eng-hua (1465-1487), Cheng-te (1506-1521), Chia-ching (1522-1566), Lung-ch'ing (1567-1572), and Wan-li (1573-1619). Yet, even then, the establishment was faced with other problems, notably those concerned with productivity. Although there were no annual quotas, the output of the Imperial Porcelain Factory was, on the average, 18,500 pieces a year in the 23 beginning of the Ming dynasty. Gradually, this output increased, as the court's demand for porcelain became more extravagant. Indeed, by the middle of the dynasty, especially during the reigns of Chia-ching (1522-1566), Lung-ch'ing (1567-1572), and Wan-li (1573-1619), a single 24 order for 100,000 pieces of porcelain was not infrequent. Here, it should be remembered that for the Imperial Porcelain Factory to comply with such an order, more than 100,000 pieces of porcelain had to be produced. The reason is obvious: the superintendent had to assure himself that only quality pieces were conveyed to the court. Hence, the porcelains dispatched were invariably selected from a total production of immense dimension. Not surprisingly, this heavy demand for porcelain led to a number of consequences. First of all, memorials were repeatedly submitted by censors remonstrating about the extravagance. In 1583, for example, when the court placed an order for 96,000 pieces of porcelain, which included such items as 20,000 boxes, 4,000 vases, and 5,000 jars, the following memorial was submitted: Now, with reference to the list of porcelains ordered by the court, 29 the bowls, plates, teacups, and wine-cups, being for the service of the sovereign, must be produced. Still less must there be any deficiency in the sacrificial vessels. But as to the chessmen, the chessboard, and the jar to hold the pieces, these are items of no utility, and the same goes for the wind-screen, vases, jars, covered boxes, and incense-pots requisitioned ... The order for 96,000 pieces of porcelain is indeed far too extortionate. (25) Despite this and similar remonstrations, the court did not lessen its demand for porcelain. However, it did allow the Imperial Porcelain Factory to convey the requisitioned wares on installments. A 1517 order for 96,000 pieces of porcelain, for example, was filled 26 in a nine year span. The heavy demand also led to an increase in the finance and the size of the Imperial Porcelain Factory. During the Ming dynasty, funding of this establishment was obtained from the treasury of Kiangsi province rather than from the Board of Works or the Imperial Household Ministry. Conceivably, the imperial wares produced at Ching-te-chen were considered a "tribute" from the province of Kiangsi to the throne. In the beginning, the annual subsidy from the Kiangsi treasury to the imperial factory was 12,000 taels of silver. By the 27 middle of the sixteenth century, the amount was raised to 140,000. Strangely enough, the officials of Kiangsi province did not voice any complaint about the increase or the overall financial burden incurred. Instead, almost all the remonstrations against the soaring expenditure on porcelain production came from the censors in the court. Because of the rising output, the scale of production was bound to expand. At first, the Imperial Porcelain Factory was comprised of twenty kilns, all located within the compound of the 30 establishment. During the reign of Hsuan-te (1426-1435), however, the number of kilns was increased to fifty-eight. In fact, because the additional kilns could not be accommodated in the Imperial Porcelain 28 Factory, they were situated outside among the private kilns. Despite the additional funds and kilns, the Imperial Porcelain Factory still found it difficult to meet the court's demand. Finally, during the reign of Chia-ching (1522-1566), the practice of "official supervision civilian production" (kuan-ta-min-shao) was conceived as a solution. The porcelains conveyed to the court were customarily divided into two categories: court wares (ch'in-hsien tz'u-ch'i, or wares intended for the imperial household) and tributary wares (pu-hsien  tz'u-ch'i, or wares intended for tributary purposes*). Under the practice of "official supervision civilian production", the court wares were to be produced by the Imperial Porcelain Factory, while the tributary wares were to be contracted to the private kilns for production. On the surface, it may appear that the practice was beneficial to the private kilns. However, this was hardly the case. There is no information on the exact number of private kilns being contracted with by the Imperial Porcelain Factory. Be that as it may, it is known that such kilns were designated "celadon-contracted Fine porcelains, being appreciated in China and elsewhere, were often used by the court as a bestowal to meritorious officials and as a tribute to foreign countries. Any porcelain put to such uses was called "tributary ware". 31 kiln" (pao-ch'ing yao) and that they were most active in the reigns of Chia-ching (1522-1566), Lung-ch'ing (1567-1572), and Wan-li (1573-1619). Here, the designation "celadon-contracted kiln" needs explanation. During the Ming dynasty, celadon porcelain was in vogue. For this reason, both court wares and tributary wares were predominately ornamented in this color. When the Imperial Porcelain Factory contracted the private kilns, a stipulation was therefore made to the effect that all the porcelains produced must be of this specific color. If the kilns failed to produce them in the first baking, they were required to 29 try again, until the desired wares were resulted. Thus the designation "celadon-contracted kiln". There were two additional stipulations. First, the Imperial Porcelain Factory only paid for the pieces it selected, while there was no compensation for any expenses incurred during production. Second, all the orders placed on the private kilns had to be delivered on time. Otherwise, both the potter-households (t'ao-hu, operators of the private kilns) and the potters (t'ao-kung, artisans of the private kilns) would 30 be punished. To add to the injury, the Imperial Porcelain Factory usually paid for the private kilns' wares at less than their market value. For instance, the imperial factory paid only twenty taels of silver for the large fish-bowl, which actually could fetch about 31 fifty-five taels on the market. By and large, little information is available on the conscripted artisans of the Imperial Porcelain Factory. The local gazetteer, for example, only referred to them concerning their occasional pilferage of 32 the factory's stock. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that even though commutation of conscription was made compulsory on a national scale in 1562, the Imperial Porcelain Factory actually did 32 not made the transition until 1584, almost twenty-two years later! The persistence of the Imperial Porcelain Factory in its use of conscripted artisans, at least for a longer period of time, has two implications: (1) the establishment was resourceful in preventing the evasion and in enforcing the artisan regulations, or (2) evasion was not a widespread phenomenon among the artisans at Ching-te-chen. In view of the Imperial Porcelain Factory's eventual transition to commutation, the first implication is less likely. If the second implication is true, then it would appear that the artisans of the town were relatively compliant toward their conscription, until later on when they responded differently. After 1584, the stationary artisans at Ching-te-chen, like most artisans elsewhere, were required to pay a special tax of .45 tael of silver a year in lieu of performing their conscription. Instead of hiring artisans to replace these conscripted artisans, the Imperial Porcelain Factory simply made "official supervision civilian production" the formal mode of production for both the court wares and the tributary wares. Given the oppressive nature of "official supervision civilian production", it goes without saying that the private kilns suffered in the process. Fortunately for them, the Ming dynasty was not to last long. In 1644, some sixty years later, it was superseded by the Ch'ing dynasty. 33 The Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory In comparison, the history of the Imperial Porcelain Factory under the Ch'ing dynasty was uneventful. In 1651, eight years after the inauguration of the regime, a decree was issued stating that the production of imperial porcelain at Ching-te-chen was an extravagance 33 and that it should be terminated. Despite the decree, however, it appears that no such termination took place. For one thing, the local gazetteer recorded that, in 1654 and again in 1659, commissions were sent from the Board of Works to Ching-te-chen to supervise the production of imperial wares. In several ways, the Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory was different from its predecessor. First of all, the term of the superintendency was changed. Instead of having a resident super intendent, the establishment was now generally under the supervision of the Governor of Kiangsi province. In certain instances, such as the ones mentioned above, a commission from either the Board of Works or the Imperial Household Ministry might be sent to supervise the work. Functionally, the Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory continued with the practice of "official supervision civilian production", but without the oppression and exploitation that the practice had entailed. Now, the private kilns no longer had to warrant the quality of their products, the potter-households and the potters were not subjected to punishment if their products were deemed unsatisfactory, and all the 34 wares produced were to be paid according to their market value. Also, from the mid-eighteenth century onward, artisans who worked in the contracted private kilns actually received, in addition to the wages they earned from their employer, welfare benefits from the Imperial Porcelain Factory. The benefits usually covered their marriage, 35 funeral, and medical expenses. Conceivably, all these policies were implemented in the hope of winning over the artisans, so that they could be more fervent in their work. In effect, because of these efforts to restrain official oppression and exploitation, the Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory was largely innocuous for the artisans in Ching-te-chen. During the Ch'ing dynasty, a magistrate was appointed to Ching-te-chen. In essence, this meant the Imperial Porcelain Factory was relieved of its role of administering the town. Instrinsically, however, the establishment was now an administrative apparatus rather than a productive one. In other words, instead of being responsible for the production of porcelain, the establishment's main function was now the supervision of the work in the various private kilns with which it contracted. For this reason, the personnel of the Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory were entirely different from those of the Ming: Superintendent: 1 Secretary: 2 Registrar: 1 Clerk: 1 Attendant: 1 Purchasing Agent: 1 Porcelain Selector: 1 35 Assistant Porcelain Selector: 1 Supervisor of Round Wares (ie. bowls, plates, etc.): 1 Supervisor of Lapidary Wares (ie. vases, statues, etc.): 1 Supervisor of Celadon Wares: 1 Kiln-filler: 1 Draftsman: 1 Foreman: 7 Storage Keeper: 1 Doorman: 1 Porter: 1 Source: Ching-te-chen t'ao-lu (A Record of the Ching-te-chen Pottery), 2:3a-b. In the beginning of the Ch'ing dynasty, there was no annual production quota for imperial porcelain. The operational rule for the Imperial Porcelain Factory was simply "to produce when there is a demand and to cease when there is none" (yu-ming tse kung wu-ming tse chih). Eventually, a quota of 20,000 pieces was set in the early 3 6 eighteenth century. However, this amount was only limited to the court wares. For the tributary ones, their amount, depending on the need, varied from time to time. As before, the Imperial Porcelain Factory was financed by the treasury of Kiangsi province. Throughout the Ch'ing dynasty, the subsidy was set at 8,000 taels of silver a 37 year, which certainly was a sharp reduction from the enormous amount drawn during the Ming dynasty. In terms of quality, the Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory's products rivalled those of the Ming. On the whole, the best porcelains were produced when Tsang Ying-hsuan, Lang T'ing-chi, Nien Hsi-yao, and T'ang Ying were the superintendents of the establishment. Tsang's superintendence lasted from 1680 to 1688, Lang's from 1705 to 1712, Nien's from 1726 to 1735, and T'ang's from 1736 to either 1749 or 36 1753. Except for Ts'ang Ying-hsuan and, for a while, T'ang Ying, these superintendents did not reside in Ching-te-chen. In effect, in the case of an absentee superintendent, the arrangement was for him to inspect the establishment once a year and have all the imperial wares sent to him for approval, before conveyance to the 38 court. That the Ch ing Imperial Porcelain Factory could function smoothly with this arrangement is an indication of its competency. Toward the end of the eighteenth century, the court began to show a lack of interest in porcelain. Consequently, even though the production of imperial wares continued in Ching-te-chen, the quality of the wares produced gradually became wanting. To add to the degeneration, the Imperial Porcelain Factory, along with Ching-te-chen, was completely ravaged by the Taiping rebels in 1853. Although both the town's porcelain industry and the imperial factory were subsequently regenerated, their vigor was gone. The Private Kilns Prior to the T'ang dynasty, the private kilns at Ching-te-chen were small-scale operations. Most often, a household, by itself, 39 constituted a production unit. Given the limited market of the time, such operations were deemed sufficient. From the T'ang dynasty onward, the expansion of both domestic and overseas trade led to a growing demand for porcelain. To keep up with the demand, it was necessary that the scale of production be increased. For this reason, large-scale operations were initiated by 37 wealthy artisans and merchants. This simply involved the establishment of sizable workshops, the employment of an extensive number of artisans, and the adoption of the assembly-line process as the mode of production. Because of the efficiency and competition of the large workshops, the small-scale operations soon became obsolete. Thus, porcelain production at Ching-te-chen became highly industrialized. Despite their activity in the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, little is known about Ching-te-chen's private kilns. Nevertheless, if the Republican situation could be taken as an indication, then it would appear that the private kilns, as well as the imperial factory, were set up according to the four phases of production described earlier. In other words, some enterprises performed only the mining, some performed only the moulding and the glazing, some performed only the baking, some performed only the ornamenting, and some performed 40 the entire process of production. In the case of the private kilns, the orientation of each enterprise conceivably depended on the wealth and preference of its owner. Here, it is interesting to note that, as a general rule, each private enterprise always confined itself to 41 producing only one type of ware. For instance, one enterprise would produce only bowls, while another would produce only plates. The reason for this specialization was perhaps due to the enterprises' intention of perfecting their products and, at the same time, of promoting efficiency in production. In 1712, Pere d'Entrecolles wrote that there were some 3,000 42 private kilns at Ching-te-chen. However, according to T'ang Ying, who 38 was the superintendent of the Imperial Porcelain Factory from 1736 to 43 either 1749 or 1756, there were only 200 to 300. The discrepancy between these two contemporary observations is indeed glaring. How could one explain it? Here, the answer might lie in their different connotation of the term "kiln". Perhaps, by "kiln", d'Entrecolles was referring to both the "workshops" (ie. enterprises which dealt with mining, moulding, glazing, and ornamenting) and the "kilns" (ie. enterprises which dealt with baking). Meanwhile, T'ang Ying used the term "kiln" to mean the genuine "kilns" (ie. enterprises which solely dealt with baking). In the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, the ratio between the "workshops" and the "kilns" was approximately 44 8:1. Therefore, T'ang Ying's figures, if put in d'Entrecolles's terms, would also mean a total of 1,800 to 2,700 "kilns" at Ching-te-chen. Seen in such light, the two observations do agree. The Artisan Population There is a dearth of information on the artisan population of Ching-te-chen. According to one Ming source, the artisans of the town were "drawn from all quarters of the compass," and their number was 45 "no less then hundreds of thousands." Later, according to T'ang Ying, who was one of the superintendents of the Ch'ing Imperial Porcelain Factory, the number of artisans in Ching-te-chen still was "no less 46 than hundreds of thousands." These figures are certainly imprecise. However, because no census was kept, they have to be accepted for 39 whatever they are worth. In 1931, an article in the Tientsin Ta-kung pao stated that "(i)n the beginning of the Ch'ing dynasty when the porcelain industry at Ching-te-chen was at its height, there were some 150,000 to 180,000 ,47 artisans working there. Unfortunately, because these figures were not documented, their validity is uncertain. Origin During the Sung and the Yuan periods, Ching-te-chen was the recipient of artisans from various provinces, namely, Hopei, Honan, Fukien, and Kiangsi itself. As mentioned earlier, the artisans' migration to Ching-te-chen was often a result of external pressure, such as foreign invasion. Later, during the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, Ching-te-chen's artisans primarily came from the seven districts of Jao-chou prefecture in Kiangsi province. Perhaps, the earlier migrating artisans had settled in this area in order to avoid the long-distant travel to and from their native place apropos of the porcelain season. From the information available, it appears that the majority of the artisans did not permanently reside in Ching-te-chen. Instead, they only went to work there during the porcelain season, which lasted from 48 April to November. This reluctance to live in the town might be due to two reasons. First, being a small town of only thirty-nine li_ in circum ference, Ching-te-chen could not comfortably accommodate all the artisans who worked in its porcelain industry. Since the porcelain season was only eight months in duration, most artisans might deem it 40 better to reside elsewhere nearby rather than crowding in the town all year round. Second, because the cost of living in Ching-te-chen was the highest in Jao-chou prefecture, it was economically unwise to live there. Whatever their place of origin, all the artisans seemingly had to adjust themselves to the working environment of Ching-te-chen. For one thing, in the industry, all the conversations were in the local dialect, which contained frequent colloquial expressions and slang 49 abbreviations. Although the majority of the artisans in Ching-te-chen were from the seven districts of Jao-chou prefecture, most of the merchants were, for reasons unknown, from the district of Tu-ch'ang, which belonged to Nan-kang prefecture in Kiangsi province.In effect, this demarcation in native place was a source of conflict between the merchants and the artisans during the Ming and the Ch'ing periods. The nature of this conflict will be discussed later. Organization Since the porcelain industry at Ching-te-chen was characterized by a rigid division of labor, it is not surprising to find that the organization of the artisans was also highly diversified. Unfortunately, because contemporary sources on the subject are insufficient to provide all the information needed, a discussion of the organization of the artisans has to rely on more recent sources, namely, those of the early twentieth century. 41 As stated above, porcelain production at Ching-te-chen was basically comprised of four phases: mining, moulding and glazing, baking, and ornamenting. The organization of the artisans differed in each of these phases. Throughout the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, the industry of mining the porcelain clay was, to a great extent, monopolized by four 51 clans—the Hos, the Wangs, the Fengs, and the Fangs. Apparently, these four clans passed on their business from generation to generation, because their domination of the market lasted for some six hundred years. For other clay-mining enterprises to obtain a share of the market, they often had to resort to forgery, by inscribing one of the four clans' 52 mark on their products. Strictly speaking, however, neither the entrepreneurs nor the workmen of this clay-mining industry were considered "artisans" in imperial China. The former were merchants and the latter mere workmen. In addition to the clay-mining industry, there was the kiln-building industry, which was also organized on a clan basis. This industry was dominated by one Wei clan in Ching-te-chen, who started the industry back in the Yuan dynasty. Although other artisans had tried to imitate the Wei clan's method of kiln-building, they simply could not reach the same level craftsmanship. Consequently, the 53 Wei clan came to monopolize the industry. Needless to say, the trade of these kiln-building artisans was passed down from generation to generation. In the moulding, glazing, baking, and ornamenting industries, 42 the artisans were organized in guilds. However, unlike most guilds, whose members were all of the same trade, the guilds in these industries were of a different composition. Notably, they were associations of workshops rather than of individual members. Moreover, each guild was set up according to the type of ware produced rather than to the members' trade. To give an example, in the early twentieth century, there were a total of twenty-three guilds in Ching-te-chen. Of these twenty-three, twenty-one specialized in the production of only one type of ware, while 54 the other two specialized in baking. Here, two points should be noted. First, it appears that, within these guilds, the owners of the workshops played a more active role than did the artisans. One indication was that in the annual sacrifice to the patron deities, only the owners took part in the ceremony.Second, all these guilds, in which the membership was product-oriented rather than trade-oriented, actually possessed the same line of artisans. That is to say, they each had their moulders, glazers, bakers, ornamenters, and so on. Within each workshop, however, the organization was uniform. In every process of the production—be it moulding, glazing, baking, or ornamenting—a foreman was selected from among the artisans. Basically, the duty of this foreman was three-fold: to supervise the other artisans, to disburse their wages, and to hire or dismiss any artisan when deemed necessary. Yet, unlike the labor contractor of the early twentieth century who also assumed similar responsibilities, the foreman did not receive any additional pay for his role. In fact, it was not uncommon for the owner of the workshop to act as foreman.^ 43 Wage Again, because of insufficient information, an inquiry into the wages of the artisans of Ching-te-chen must rely upon the early twentieth century data. According to a report made by an ad hoc committee in the early 1920s, the term of employment for Ching-te-chen's artisans was generally set in the following manners: by long-term contract (ie. on a yearly basis), by short-term contract (ie. on a monthly or weekly basis), by job (ie. by each assignment), or by piecework (ie. by the amount of work performed)."^ Almost as a rule, the miners, moulders, glazers, and bakers were contracted either on a long-term or a short-term basis, the kiln-fillers and the kiln-builders on a job basis, and the ornamenters on a piecework basis. If an artisan was contracted on a yearly basis, his wage was then given out in two installments: one in April, at the beginning of the porcelain season, and one in October, near the end of the porcelain season. However, if the artisan concerned was an ornamenter and if he was also contracted on a yearly basis, then his wage was given out in four installments: one in May, one in mid-July, one in mid-October, 58 and one at the end of the porcelain season. Finally, regardless of their trade, all the artisans in Ching-te-chen received rations while 59 they were on their job. Ching-te-chen*s porcelain industry are unknown. Nevertheless, of the groups known, the wages were roughly as followed: By and large, the wages of each occupation group working in Type of Artisan Maker of Large Dragon-Bowl Ornamenter Annual Wage Tls. 12.6 9.0 44 Type of Artisan Annual Wage Moulder Tls. 7.2 Glazer 7.Source: Fou-liang hsien-chih (Gazetteer of Fou-liang District), 4:32b. Although not explicitly so, these figures are presumably for the Ch'ing period. In comparison to other occupations, the wages of the above artisans were not particularly high or low. For instance, a contemporary tailor earned 7.2 taels of silver a year, a charcoal-burner 7.2, a paper-maker 6.0, and a coal-miner 6.0.^ Apprenticeship In Ching-te-chen's porcelain industry, a person was to be accepted as an apprentice only on two conditions: first, the apprentice had to be between the ages of eight and fifteen; second, he had to have been recommended to the artisan. If he was accepted as an apprentice, he was then required to enter into a contract with the artisan acknowledging 61 their relationship. Albeit the varying complexity of different trades, the length of apprenticeship period was, in most instances, fixed at 62 three years. During the first year, the apprentice acted more or less as an attendant to the artisan by doing his cooking, cleaning, and other miscellaneous work. It was only during the second year that he began to 63 learn the trade from his master. As a rule, an apprentice did not receive any wages during the period of apprenticeship. Be that as it 64 may, his livelihood was provided for by his master. In selecting their apprentices, the artisans apparently did not emphasize native place tie as a criterion. The kiln-filling trade is a 45 good example. Originally, it was the artisans of Lo-p'ing district who first undertook this line of work. Later, they took on P'o-yang natives as their apprentices. These P'o-yang artisans, in turn, took on natives of Tu-ch'ang district as their apprentices. Eventually, in the Ming and the Ch'ing periods, the Tu-chang and the P'o-yang artisans entirely 6 5 dominated this trade. Working Condition The artisans of Ching-te-chen generally worked eleven hours a day. In the spring and in the summer, they worked from six o'clock in the morning to five o'clock in the evening. Those artisans who wanted to work overtime could extend their hourse to ten o'clock at night. In the autumn, however, the working hours were advanced by one hour — that is, from seven o'clock in the morning to six o'clock in the evening. Again, those artisans who wanted to work overtime could extend their 66 hourse to eleven o'clock at night. By and large, the only group of artisans who worked on different hours was the bakers. Because their work was a non-stop process, they worked in shifts rather than in regular hours. Each year during the porcelain season, the artisans of Ching-te-chen received six days of holiday: two for the Dragon Boat Festival, two for the Mid-Autumn Festival, and two days in July, when the entire porcelain industry took a break. During those two days, the owners of the kilns and the artisans were to settle any dissension 67 between them. Other than these six days of holiday, the artisans 46 of Ching-te-chen were to work seven days a week, without any break. On the whole, the living condition in Ching-te-chen could not be considered sanitary. For one thing, the pollution from all the kilns was always a major environmental problem. Besides, according to a report on Ching-te-chen in the early twentieth century, the town was long known to have "five abundances": opium dens, prostitutes, bugs, rats, and 68 latrines. This was hardly the ideal place in which to live or work. 47 CHAPTER III THE ARTISANS OF CHING-TE-CHEN: A DISCUSSION Before discussing the artisans of Ching-te-chen, a word about the commercialization of the town's porcelain industry is in order. Hitherto, it has generally been assumed that porcelain production at Ching-te-chen was highly commercialized during the Ming and the Ch'ing periods. The validity of this assumption, however, still lacks concrete documentation. Nevertheless, there are implications to suggest that commercialization did, in fact, take place. Although Ching-te-chen did not keep records of its porcelain output until the early twentieth century, the scale of production was seemingly on the increase since at least the Yuan period. According to the available information, Ching-te-chen had a total of 300 kilns (ie. enterprises which performed the baking process) in the Yuan 1 2 period, and 200 to 300 in the early Ch'ing period. Judging from these figures alone, it would appear that the town's porcelain output was constant throughout this course of time. However, this was not the case. Indeed, it should be noted that the Ming kilns were, on 3 the average, three to four times bigger than the Yuan ones, and in turn, the Ch'ing kilns were, on the average, five times bigger than 4 the Ming ones. Altogether, the enlargement of the kilns in each successive period not only suggests a continual increase in the 48 porcelain output of Ching-te-chen, but also suggests a continual increase in the overall demand for porcelain. Probably as a result of this increasing demand, the porcelain industry at Ching-te-chen underwent several changes. First of all, the assembly-line process was widely adopted by the industry as the mode of production. Without a doubt, the adoption was aimed at increasing the productivity. Secondly, in some porcelain enterprises, the industrial relations betweent the employers and the employees began to be formulated on a contract basis. In essence, this was a divorce from the old hereditary tradition, in which the son of an artisan often succeeded to his father's trade, as well as status. Again, the change was likely to be an endeavor to organize a proficient work force by hiring and securing the services of only the competent artisans. Finally, porcelain production at Ching-te-chen became highly market-oriented. During the Ch'ing period, for example, porcelains with Arabic inscriptions were often produced to accommodate the Mohammedan market. In addition, the production of custom porcelains also became a common practice.^ All these features in the porcelain industry of Ching-te-chen are suggestive of commercialization. When it comes to studying the artisans of Ching-te-chen, or of artisans anywhere in China in late imperial times, two questions are deemed significant. First, what was the effect of the artisan regulations on the artisans and on artisanry as a whole? Second, were the artisans a socially homogeneous class? It is to these questions that the attention now turns. 49 In the beginning of the Ming dynasty, when the artisan regulations were first instituted, those artisans conscripted for work in the Imperial Porcelain Factory in Ching-te-chen appear to have accepted these regulations with compliance. True, they might have resented the regulations because of their exploitative nature. Yet, any resentment they might have harbored was not manifested openly. Therefore, in the official record or in the local gazetteer, there were no indications of their indignation vis-a-vis the artisan regulations. Perhaps because of the heavy workload that resulted from the increasing demand for imperial wares, or perhaps because of the awareness derived from remonstrations against the artisan regulations elsewhere, the artisans in Ching-te-chen began to show signs of resentment toward their conscription. According to the gazetteer, in the reign of Chia-ching (1522-1566), some of the artisans in the Imperial Porcelain Factory became sluggish at work and some of ,them even pilfered the stock from the establishment as a form of protest. Naturally, this alarmed the superintendent of the imperial factory. In response, various measures were adopted to curb these abuses. For instance, output of each artisan was recorded, and so were the porcela materials allocated to them.^ Furthermore, to stimulate the artisans' interest in their work, material rewards were given to those artisans g who performed efficiently. Whether these measures were successful or not is unclear. However, conscription did remain in force in Ching-te chen for another sixty years before it was commuted. 50 In 1597 and again in 1599, two riots took place in Ching-te-chen. By this time, conscription had become obsolete and the practice of "official supervision civilian production" had been adopted by the Imperial Porcelain Factory as one of its modes of production. Apparently, both these riots were a result of the oppression occasioned by the superintendent of the imperial factory. In the first riot, the artisans simply burned the gate-house of the Imperial Porcelain Factory in 9 protest. In the second riot, they burned down the entire establishment. In effect, the disorder lasted for three years until it was finally 10 mediated by the magistrate of Fou-liang district. Unfortunately, details of these two incidents are largely unknown. From what is available, it appears that only one person was arrested in these two riots. Moreover, the authorities could not positively identify the 11 person arrested as being a rioter or a spectator. Four possible implications can be drawn from this sole arrest. First, the situation at the time was too chaotic for the authorities to make any arrest or identification. Second, the rioters were not artisans who were working in the imperial factory at the time; otherwise, they could have been easily identified. Third, the rioters were so powerful that the authorities found it unwise to make arrests lest they provoke further riots. Finally, the rioters were elusive enough to avoid being apprehended. Whatever the implication, one thing is clear: the artisans of Ching-te-chen were fully capable of inciting a riot when they were pressed. From the history of the Ming Imperial Porcelain, one cannot 51 really conclude that the artisan regulations had a negative effect on the artisans. Without a doubt, the regulations were an infringement on the artisans' freedom and livelihood. Nevertheless, the regulations did, to a certain extent, contribute to the artisans' craftsmanship. Indeed, it is important to note that, during the Ming dynasty, there was a direct correlation between the demand for imperial wares and the improvement of craftsmanship in porcelain production: the more lavish and demanding the order, the higher the quality of the product. Basically, there were two reasons for this correlation. To begin with, the artisans working in the Imperial Porcelain Factory were compelled to produce whatever wares the court demanded. Any failure to do so, as mentioned earlier, would result in punishment. For this reason, these artisans were actually forced to be productive, as well as creative. In short, this was a negative incentive. Also, because the Imperial Porcelain Factory was solely concerned with the quality of its output and because of its relatively rich funds, the artisans could therefore undertake various experiments in porcelain production with indulgence. This was an opportunity not readily available to them when they were working in the private kilns, both because of the time and because of the expense involved. Even though conscription was no longer extant in the Ch'ing dynasty, Ching-te-chen continued to experience occasional unrest. During this period, the conflicts were often between the owners of the kilns and the artisans, and between artisans of different trades. By and large, these conflicts were manifested in several ways. The most common one was strike action (t'ing-kung). According to the gazetteer, "whenever the artisans were discontented (with the 12 management), they would then immediately stop their work." However, not all strike, actions produced the desired result. In the reign of Chia-ch'ing (1796-1820), for example, the town's moulders went on strike because they were dissatisfied with the type of silver paid to them as wages. Yet, despite their effort, 13 no changes were made. In the case of a conflict between artisans of different trades, one party would resort to "stifling the market" (pa-shih). For instance, if the moulders were at odds with the bakers, then they would stop sending their wares to the latter for baking. Also, they would persuade all the town's moulders to do the same. On the whole, however, this type of action was infrequently used during the 14 Ming and the Ch'ing periods. Under extreme circumstances, the artisans were not hesistant to resort to violence. Although the available information is scanty, it appears that in the mid-sixteenth century, several outbreaks of violence took place in Ching-te-chen. The first recorded incident occurred in 1540, when, because of the damages resulting from a flood, the kiln-owners could not pay the artisans' wages. Instead, they tried to dismiss them. Needless to say, the artisans were outraged. At once, they gathered together in an attempt to loot the kilns, as well as the kiln-owners' household. In response, all the kiln-owners organized themselves to repel this assault. Altogether, 53 some 2,000 kiln-owners and artisans were engaged in a battle. Unfortunately, its outcome is unknown. This was not the only instance in which the artisans fought with the kiln-owners. 16 Indeed, similar struggles occurred again in 1541 and in 1556. The last recorded incident of violence between the kiln-owners and the artisans was in 1604. As mentioned earlier, most of the kiln-owners in Ching-te-chen were from the district of Tu-ch'ang. Whether these Tu-ch'ang merchants were particularly oppressive or exploitative is unclear. However, one thing is certain: they were intensely disliked by those artisans who came from other districts. Hence, in 1604, an attempt was made by these artisans to drive out the Tu-ch'ang merchants. Before the incident developed further, however, the magistrate of Fou-liang district intervened.^ Based on the above accounts, it is apparent that the artisans of Ching-te-chen were not afraid to defy authority, be it that of the government or of the kiln-owners, when they deemed it necessary. Precisely how did the artisans mobilize themselves for action? According to one source, if the artisans of a particular kiln wanted to stage a protest, they would select a leader from among them to guide the operation. Then, the leader and the artisans would take an oath to show their fidelity. This involved drinking a cup of wine mixed with chicken blood. Conceivably, the gesture was derived from the tradition of sha-hsueh wei-meng (to make a solemn oath by tasting blood). After the oath, a dispatch--in the form of a chopstick with a chicken feather attached--would be sent to artisans in all the kilns in 54 Ching-te-chen. Upon receiving this dispatch, these artisans would 18 immediately stop their work to join in with the protest. Although the above procedures of mobilization vaguely resemble those of a secret society, there is no indication that secret societies were ever involved in these protests. Also, that an artisan leader was selected in such a haphazard manner has two implications: first, the artisans were normally unorganized; and second, the foreman of a kiln was not necessarily the unanimous artisan leader. How solidified were the artisans in responding to such a juncture? According to the gazetteer, the artisans were highly 19 responsive to strike action and they usually acted in unison. However, there is reason to argue otherwise. For one thing, most of the protests that took place in Ching-te-chen were instigated by a specific group of artisans (eg. the moulders or the bakers) rather than by the entire artisan spectrum. Moreover, because the wage difference between the highest-paid artisans and the lowest-paid artisans was so substantial, it was improbable that they would have the same inducement for protest. In effect, it comes as no surprise that almost all the dissident artisans were from the lower echelon of the porcelain industry. Nevertheless, it is highly plausible that all the artisans did stop their work upon receiving the feather dispatch, but for a different reason. As mentioned earlier, porcelain production in Ching-te-chen involved an assembly-line process. For this reason, when one of the production units stopped its work, the entire production process 55 invariably also came to a halt. The following account, written by Pere d'Entrecolles, testified to this situation: Those Christians who are employed in the kiln find it difficult to attend church; they are only allowed to go if they can find substitutes, because as soon as the work is interrupted, all the other workmen are stopped. (20) Consequently, even though some of the artisans might have no intention to strike, they were nonetheless compelled to such an act. In times of adversity, the solidarity of some artisans was, as shown, quite conspicuous. Yet, what about in times of prosperity? Did they still fraternize with.one another? Also, what benefit did they receive from their guilds? In view of the following two accounts, both written in the eighteenth century, the answer to the above questions is negative: In Ching-te-chen, there are skillful artisans who, in their old age, could not find employment. They are totally helpless if they become sick. Many of them thus become drifters. With the town's massive pool of manpower, the owners of the kilns could afford to be selective in hiring artisans. In general, they hire only the capable ones and disregard the rest. For this reason, the old and the sick artisans are ignored. Since they cannot afford to return to their native place, they eventually die in the town. (21) The mountains all around (Ching-te-chen) are covered with tombs; at the foot of one of these is a very large pit encircled by high wall, in which the townsmen throw the bodies of the poor artisans who have no money to buy coffins, which is considered the greatest misfortune. This place is called wan-min-chung--that is, "Pit for the Myriad People". (22) There is no ready explanation for this lack of fraternity among the artisans of Ching-te-chen. The seasonal nature of the porcelain industry might conceivably be one of the reasons. However, without any statistics on the turnover rate of the artisans in the industry, it is extremely difficult to prove or disprove this as being the case. Another 56 reason might be due to government opposition to any artisan guilds or fraternities. Although there is no explicit evidence showing that this was so in Ching-te-chen, in other industrial centers elsewhere, particu larly the silk-weaving industry in Soochow, government opposition to artisan organizations is categorically evident in memorials and edicts. Indeed, the government feared that such organizations might be used by their more unruly members as a rallying point for any unlawful activities. To avoid this happening, it was therefore seen as best 23 to prevent their formation in the first place. In conclusion, it is appropriate to ask: how representative were the artisans of Ching-te-chen? To answer this question, a comparison between the porcelain industry at Ching-te-chen and the silk-weaving industry at Soochow might be illuminating. On the whole, these two industrial centers shared certain similarities: both were renowned for their respective product, both were the site of an official enterprise, both employed a sizable work force, and both 24 adopted the division of labor as their mode of production. With regard to the artisans, however, the potters of Ching-te-chen and the silk-weavers of Soochow were different in many ways. Notably, the Soochow artisans were more concerned with organizing their own gilds, they were more conscious of fraternal welfares, and interestingly enough, they were more prone to staging protests against both the 25 government and the management. Conceivably, the diverse nature of their trade and of their tradition, along with local variations, might explain these differences between the Ching-te-chen potters and the 57 Soochow silk-weavers. Yet, to what extent did these factors contribute to the differences? Were there other additional factors involved? In effect, did the Soochow silk-weavers respond to the artisan regulations in a fashion similar to that of the Ching-te-chen potters? Though beyond the scope of the present study, these questions deserve further research. 58 NOTES Abbreviations Used in the Notes CHTC: Chiang-hsi t'ung-chih (Gazetteer of Kiangsi Province) CK-TLC: Chung-kuo tzu-pen-chu-i meng-ya wen-t'i t'ao-lun chi (Collected Debates on the Problem of the Sprouts of Capitalism in China) CTCTL: Ching-te-chen t'ao-lu (A Record of the Ching-te-chen Pottery) CTCTTSK: Ching-te-chen t'ao-tz'u shih-kao (A Draft History of the Ceramics of Ching-te-chen) FLHC: Fou-liang hsien-chih (Gazetteer of Fou-liang District) JCFC: Jao-chou fu-chih (Gazetteer of Jao-chou Prefecture) MSL: Ming shih-lu (Veritable Records of the Ming Dynasty) TMHT: Ta-Ming hui-tien (Collected Statutes of the Ming Dynasty) INTRODUCTION ^'ang-lu-tien (The Six Statutes of T'ang Dynasty), cited in Shih Min-hsiung, Ch'ing-tai ssu-chih kung-yeh ti fa-chan (The Development of the Silk-Weaving Industry in the Ch'ing Period; Taipei, 1968), p. 15. 2TMHT, 19:19a. 3TMHT, 189:1b. 4 Compare, for example, the description of Ching-te-chen in the following works: Stephen W. Bushell, Oriental Ceramic Art (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1899), pp. 285-289. A. D. Brankston, Early Ming Wares of Ching-te-chen (Hong Kong: Vetch and Lee Limited, 1970), passim. Frank B. Lenz, "The World's Ancient Porcelain Center", in The National Geographic Magazine 38 (November 1920):391-406. John Shryock, "Kingtechen: The Porcelain City", in Asia and  the Americans 20 (November 1920):997-1002. CHAPTER I: THE ARTISAN REGULATIONS OF LATE IMPERIAL CHINA 1 In 1368, for example, large number of artisans were summoned to construct the palaces in the capital. See Hsu wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (A Supplement to the Encyclopedia of the Historical Records), comp. Wang Ch'i, 250 chuan (1747; Shanghai, 1936), 16:2914. 59 2 MSL, T'ai-tsu Hung-wu, 177:6b. 3MSL, T'ai-tsu Hung-wu, 230:3b. 4 MSL, T'ai-tsu Hung-wu, 230:3b. See also TMHT, 189:la-5b for details of this stipulation. 5TMHT, 189:1b. TMHT, 189:1a. 7TMHT, 189:42a. Ch'en Shih-ch'i, Ming-tai kuan shou-kung-yeh ti yen-chiu (A Study of the Official Handicraft Industry in the Ming Period; Hupei, 1958), p. 80. 9TMHT, 189:1b. ^Chang T'ing-yu et al., comp. Ming-shih (History of the Ming Dynasty), 332 chuan (1739; Taipei, 1962), 240:7a. 11TMHT, 189:11b. 12TMHT, 189:35a-b and 189:36b. 13 MSL, Shih-tsung Chia-ching, 114:4b-5a. 14TMHT, 172:3a. 15TMHT, 200:39a-b. 1 6 MSL, Ying-tsung Cheng-t'ung, 199:7a. 17TMHT, 189:7a. 18 Lung-chiang ch'uan-ch'ang chih (Annals of the Lung-chiang Shipyard), cited in Ch'en Shih-ch'i, op. cit., p. 94. 19TMHT, 189:5b. 20 Ch'en Shih-ch'i, op. cit., p. 105. 21TMHT, 189:7b. 22TMHT, 189:7b-8a. 23TMHT, 189:8a. 24 Ch'ing-ch'ao wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (Encyclopedia of the Historical Records of the Ch'ing Dynasty), comp. under the auspices of Emperor Ch'ien-lung, 300 chuan (1747; Shanghai, 1936), 21:5044. 25 Ch'in-ting Ta-Ch'ing hui-tien shih-li (Collected Statutes of the Ch'ing Dynasty with Cases and Precedents), comp. K'un Kang et al., 1,140 chuan (1899; Taipei, 1963), 952:6a. 2 6 Shen-tse hsien-chih (Gazetteer of Shen-tse District), cited in P'eng Tse-i, ed. Chung-kuo chin-tai shou-kung-yeh shih tzu-liao (Historical Materials on Modern Chinese Handicraft Industry; Peking, 1957), Volume 1, p. 395. 60 See, for example, Chang-p'u hsien-chih (Gazetteer of Chang-p'u District), cited in Ch'en Shih-ch'i, op. cit., p. 106. !See P'eng Tse-i, op. cit., Volume 1, pp. 391-396. CHAPTER II; CHING-TE-CHEN IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA '''For an account of the historical development of Ching-te-chen, see CTCTTSK, pp. 43-59 and pp. 95-111. 2 See CTCTL, 6;la-7b. 3CTCTL, 5:2a. 4 CTCTL, 6:passim. 5CTCTL, 8:1a. CTCTL, 8:la-b. 7CTCTL, 8:1b. 8CTCTL, 8:2b. 9 William Burton, Porcelain: A Sketch of Its Nature, Art, and  Manufacture (London: Cassell and Company, 1906), p. 65. ^For a biographical sketch of Pere d'Entrecolles, see Soame Jenyns, Later Chinese Porcelain: The Ch'ing Dynasty, 1644-1912 (London: Faber and Faber, 1965), pp. 15-16. 11 Stephen W. Bushell, Oriental Ceramic Art (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1899), pp. 283-284. 12 Cf. the general population densities and the urban population densities of late imperial China in G. William Skinner, ed. The City in Late  Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977), p. 213 and pp. 529-530. 13 Toa dobunkai, comp. Shina shobetsu zenchi (Gazetteer of China by Provinces; Tokyo, 1917), Volume 11, p. 82. 14 Stephen W. Bushell, op. cit., p. 284. 15FLHC, 4:41a-b. FLHC, 4:49a-b. 17FLHC, 4:47a; JCFC, 3:59b; CHTC, 93:10b. 18FLHC, 4:41b-42a. 19FLHC, 4:3 9a-40b. 20JCFC, 3:61b. 21 JCFC, 3:61b. 22JCFC, 3:61b. 61 23CTCTTSK, p. 97. 24FLHC, 4:46b. 25JCFC, 3:60a-61b. 26JCFC, 3:59a-b. 27CHTC, 93:8b. 28 CTCTL, 5:4a. 29CTCTL, 4:9a. 3°FLHC, 4:46b. 31FLHC, 4:46a-b. 32FLHC, 4:47b. 3 3 Ta-Ch'ing Shih-tsu Chang-huang-ti shih-lu (Veritable Records of Shih-tsu Chang-huang-ti of the Ch'ing Dynasty), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 101. 34FLHC, 4:43a-b. 35CHTC, 93:10b. CTCTTSK, p. 110. 37CHTC, 93:10a. 38CTCTL, 2:2a-b. O Q See Chiang Ch'i's T'ao-chi-lueh (Abstracts of Pottery Records), cited in FLHC, 4:48b-50a. 4°Su Ying, "Chiang-hsi Ching-te-chen ti tz'u-ch'i kung-jen" (The Porcelain Workers of Ching-te-chen in Kiangsi), in Tung-fang tsa-chih (The Eastern Miscellany; Volume 23, Number 12, June 1936):106. 41Ibid., p. 106. Stephen W. Bushell, op. cit., p. 284. 43CHTC, 93:22b. 44 FLHC, 4:47a. 45CTCTL, 8:14b. 46CHTC, 93:22b. 47 Ta-kung pao (The Public News), cited in Chiang Ssu-ch'ing, Ching-te-chen  tz'u-yeh shih (A History of the Porcelain Industry at Ching-te-chen; Shanghai, 1936), pp. 86-87. 48 CTCTL, 8:14b. Because of the cold weather, the months of December, January, February, and March were unsuitable for producing porcelain. During the off-season, the porcelain artisans probably engaged in other activities, such as making rattan wares and weaving cotton cloth. See Ch'ing-ch'ao hsu wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (A Supplement to 62 the Encyclopedia of the Historical Records of the Ch'ing Dynasty), comp. Liu Chin-tsao, 400 chuan (1921; Shanghai, 1936), 384:11316. 49 CTCTL, 4:la-b. 50JCFC, 3:63a. 51CTCTL, 4:2b. 52 CTCTL, 4:2b. 53CTCTL, 4:9b. 54 Chiang Ssu-ch'ing, op. cit., pp. 183-184. 55FLHC (1832 ed.), cited in P'eng Tse-i, op. cit., Volume 1, p. 276. "^Su Ying, op. cit., p. 107. "^Hsiang Ch'uo, "Ching-te-chen yao-yeh chi-shih" (A Record of the Porcelain Industry at Ching-te-chen), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 336. 58CTCTL, 4:10b-lla. 59CTCTL, 4:11a. *^The wages of the artisans also depended on their craftsmanship and output. The examples cited here are merely for the purpose of an offhand comparison. For a more comprehensive survey of the wages of various artisan groups in the Ch'ing period, see P'eng Tse-i, op. cit., Volume 1, pp. 396-414. ^Hsiang Ch'uo, op. cit., p. 336. 6 2 Hsiang Ch'uo, op. cit., p. 336. 63 Hsiang Ch'uo, op. cit., p. 336. 64 Tz'u-hsun yueh-k'an (Porcelain Monthly), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 337. CTCTL, 4:7a-b. Hsiang Ch'uo, op. cit., pp. 335-336. ^Hsiang Ch'uo, op. cit., p. 336. 6 8 Tu Chung-yuan, "Ching-te-chen tz'u-yeh t'iao-ch'a chi" (An Investigation of the Porcelain Industry at Ching-te-chen), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 278. CHAPTER III: THE ARTISANS OF CHING-TE-CHEN: A DISCUSSION 1CHTC, 93:5b. 2CHTC, 93:22b. 3 Hsu Wen and Chiang Ssu-ch'ing, "Ts'ung Ming-tai Ching-te-chen tz'u-yeh k'an tzu-pen-chu-i yin-su ti meng-ya" (The Origin of the Sprouts of Capitalism as Seen in the Porcelain Industry at Ching-te-chen in the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume 2, p. 693. 63 4 Chiang-hsi sheng ching-kung-yeh-chang Ching-te-chen t*ao-tz'u yen-chiu-so, comp. Chung-kuo ti tz'u-ch'i (The Porcelain of China; Peking, 1963), p. 188. Stephen W. Bushell, op. cit., p. 609. FLHC, 4:43b. 7FLHC, 4:44a. Q FLHC, 4:44a. 9 FLHC, 4:40a. 10 FLHC, 4:40a. 11 FLHC, 4:40a-b. 12FLHC (1832 ed.), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 238. 13FLHC (1832 ed.), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 239. 14FLHC (1832 ed.), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 238. 15 MSL, Shih-tsung Chia-ching, 250:2b-3a. 16 MSL, Shih-tsung Chia-ching, 487:3b-4a. 17FLHC (1832 ed.), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 240. 18 Huang Yen-p'ei, "K'ao-ch'a chiao-yu jih-chi" (A Diary of an Investigation of Education), cited in CTCTTSK, p. 238. 19FLHC (1832 ed.), cited in P'eng Tse-i, op. cit., Volume 1, p. 418. 20 William Burton, op. cit., p. 90. 21CHTC, 94:19a-b. 22 Stephen W. Bushell, op. cit., p. 286. 23 For a general survey of the silk-weaving industry at Soochow, see: Sections on the silk-weaving industry in P'eng Tse-i, ed. Chung-kuo chin-tai shou-kung-yeh shih tzu-liao (Historical Materials on Modern Chinese Handicraft Industry), Volume 1, Peking, 1957. Shih Min-hsiung. Ch'ing-tai ssu-chih kung-yeh ti fa-chan (The Development of the Silk-Weaving Industry in the Ch'ing Period), Taipei, 1968. 24. For a general survey of the Soochow silk-weavers' protests, see: Li Hua. "Shih-lun Ch'ing-tai i-ch'ien ti shih-min tou-cheng" (A Draft Discussion on Urban Uprising prior to the Ch'ing Period), in Shang Yueh, ed. Chung-kuo feng-chien ching-chi  kuan-hsi ti jo-kan wen-t'i (Several Questions concerning the Feudal Economic Relations in China), Peking, 1958, pp. 317-345. 64 Fu I-ling. "Ming-tai Soo-chou chih-kung, Chiang-hsi t'ao-kung fan feng-chien tou-cheng shih-liao lei-chi" (Selective Historical Materials on the Anti-Feudal Struggle of the Soochow Weavers and the Kiangsi Potters in the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume 1, pp. 20-30. Liu Yen. "Ming-mo ch'eng-shih ching-chi fa-chan hsia ti ch'u-ch'i shih-min yun-tung" (Early Stages of the Urban Movement under the City Economic Development at the end of the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume 1, pp. 401-435. 65 BIBLIOGRAPHY Western Sources Brankston, A. D. Early Ming Wares of Ching-te-chen. Hong Kong: Vetch and Lee Limited, 1970. Burgess, John Stewart. The Guilds of Peking. New York: Columbia University Press, 1928; reprint ed., New York: AMS Press, 1970. Burton, William. Porcelain: A Sketch of Its Nature, Art, and  Manufacture. London: Cassell and Company, 1906. Bushell, Stephen W. Oriental Ceramic Art. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1899. Chu Ch'ing-yuan. "Government Artisans of the Yuan Dynasty." In Chinese Social History: Translations of Selected Studies, pp. 234-246. Translated by E-tu Zen Sun and John De Francis. New York: Octagon Books, 1966. Chu Yen. T'ao-shuo ("Description of Chinese Pottery and Porcelain"). Translated with notes by Stephen W. Bushell. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910; reprint ed., New York: AMS Press, 1973. Eberhard, Wolfram. Social Mobility in Traditional China. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962. Fried, Morton H. Fabric of Chinese Society. New York: Octagon Books, 1974. Golas, Peter J. "Early Ch'ing Guilds." In The City in Late Imperial  China, pp. 555-580. Edited by G. William Skinner. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977. Ho Ping-ti. The Ladder of Success in Imperial China. New York: Columbia University Press, 1967. Jenyns, Soame. Later Chinese Porcelain: The Ch'ing Dynasty, 1644-1912. London: Faber and Faber, 1965. Lan P'u. Ching-te-chen t'ao-lu ("The Potteries of China"). Translated by Geoffrey R. Sayer. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1951. Lenz, Frank B. "The World's Ancient Porcelain Center." The National  Geographic Magazine 38 (November 1920) :391-406. Medley, Margaret. "Ching-te-chen and the Problem of the 'imperial Kilns'." Bulletin of the (London) School of Oriental and African Studies 29 (1966) : 326-338. 66 Medley, Margaret. The Chinese Potter. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1976. Morse, Hosea Ballou. The Gilds of China with an account of the Gild  Merchants or Co-hong of Canton. London: Longmans, Green, and Company, 1909; reprint ed., Shanghai: Kelley and Walsh, 1932. Mote, Frederick W. "The Transformation of Nanking." In The City in  Late Imperial China, pp. 101-153. Edited by G. William Skinner. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977. Oort, H. A. Van. The Porcelain of Hung-hsien. Lochem: De Tijdstroom, 1970. Phillips, John Goldsmith. China-Trade Porcelain. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1956. Shryock, John. "Kingtechen: The Porcelain City." Asia and the  Americans 20 (November 1920):997-1002. Skinner, G. William, ed. The City in Late Imperial China. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977. Staehelin, Walter A. The Book of Porcelain. London: Lund, Humphries and Company, 1966. Tayler, John Bernard. "The Hopei Pottery Industry and the Problem of Modernisation." The Chinese Social and Political Science Review 15 (April 1930):184-211. van der Sprenkel, Sybille. "Urban Social Control." In The City in  Late Imperial China, pp. 609-632. Edited by G. William Skinner. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977. Chinese and Japanese Sources Chang T'ing-yu et al., comp. Ming-shih (History of the Ming Dynasty), 332 chuan, 1739; Taipei, 1962. Ch'en Chen-chung. "Yuan-tai ti shou-kung-yeh" (The Handicraft Industry of the Yuan Period), in Shang Yueh, ed. Chung-kuo feng-chien ching-chi  kuan-hsi ti jo-kan wen-t'i (Several Questions concerning the Feudal Economic Relations in China), Peking, 1958, pp. 230-303. Ch'en Shih-ch'i. Ming-tai kuan shou-kung-yeh ti yen-chiu (A Study of the Official Handicraft Industry in the Ming Period), Hupei, 1958. Chia Chih-fang. Chin-tai Chung-kuo ching-chi she-hui (The Economy and Society of Modern China), Shanghai, 1950. 67 Chia Ching-yen. "Ming-tai tz'urch'i ti hai-wai mao-i" (The Overseas Trade of Porcelain in the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume 1:47-51. Chiang Ssu-ch'ing. Ching-te-chen tz'u-yeh shih (A History of the Porcelain Industry at Ching-te-chen), Shanghai, 1936. Chiang-hsi sheng ching-kung-yeh-t'ing t'ao-tz'u yen-chiu-so, comp. Ching-te-chen t'ao-tz'u shih-kao (A Draft History of the Ceramics of Ching-te-chen), Peking, 1959. Chiang-hsi sheng ching-kung-yeh-chang Ching-te-chen t'ao-tz'u yen-chiu-so, comp. Chung-kuo ti tz'u-ch'i (The Porcelain of China), Peking, 1963. Chiang-hsi t'ung-chih (Gazetteer of .Kiangsi Province), comp. Chao Chih-ch'ien et al., 180 chuan, 1881; Taipei, 1967. Ch'ien Hung. "Ya-p'ien chan-cheng i-ch'ien Chung-kuo jo-kan shou-kung-yeh pu-men chung ti tzu-pen-chu-i meng-ya." (The Sprouts of Capitalism in Several Sectors of the Chinese Handicraft Industry prior to the Opium War", in CK-TLC, Volume 1:238-271. Ch'in-ting Ta-Ch'ing hui-tien shih-li (Collected Statutes of the Ch'ing Dynasty with Cases and Precedents), comp. K'un Kang et al., 1,140 chuan, 1899; Taipei, 1963. Ch'ing-ch'ao hsu wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (A Supplement to the Encycloped of the Historical Records of the Ch'ing Dynasty), comp. Liu Chin-tsao 400 chuan, 1921; Shanghai, 1936. Ch'ing-ch'ao wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (Encyclopedia of the Historical Records of the Ch'ing Dynasty), comp. under the auspices of Emperor Ch'ien-lung, 300 chuan, 1747; Shanghai, 1936. Chu Yen. T'ao-shuo (On Pottery), 6 chuan, 1774; Tokyo, 1914. CK-TLC: Chung-kuo tzu-pen-chu-i meng-ya wen-t'i t'ao-lun chi (Collected Debates on the Problem of the Sprouts of Capitalism in China), ed. Chung-kuo jen-min ta-hsueh Chung-kuo li-shih chiao-yen-shih, 3 Volumes, Peking, 1957. Fou-liang hsien-chih (Gazetteer of Fou-liang District), comp. Ts'ao Ting-yuan et al., 9 chuan, 1673. Fu I-ling. "Ming-tai Soo-chou chih-kung, Chiang-hsi t'ao-kung fan feng-chien tou-cheng shih-liao lei-chi" (Selective Historical Materials on the Anti-Feudal Struggle of the Soochow.Weavers and the Kiangsi Potters in the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume 1:20-30. 68 Ho Ping-ti. Chung-kuo hui-kuan shih-lun (An Historical Survey of Landsmanschaften in China), Taipei, 1966. Hsu Wen and Chiang Ssu-ch'ing. "Ts'ung Ming-tai Ching-te-chen tz'u-yeh k'an tzu-pen-chu-i yin-su ti meng-ya" (The Origin of the Sprouts of Capitalism as Seen in the Porcelain Industry at Ching-te-chen in the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume II: 685-702. " Hsu wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (A Supplement to the Encyclopedia of the Historical Records), comp. Wang Ch'i, 250 chuan, 1747; Shanghai, 1936. Hsueh-hai ch'u-pan-she pien-chi-pu, comp. Chung-kuo li-tai shih-huo  chih cheng-pien (A Compilation of Economics of Successive Dynasties of China), 2 Volumes, Taipei, 1970. Huang-ch'ao ching-shih wen-pien (Statecraft Literature of the Imperial Dynasty), comp. Ho Ch'ang-ling, 120 chuan, 1826; Taipei, 1972. Jao-chou fu-chih (Gazetteer of Jao-chou Prefecture), comp. Shih Ching-fang et al., 32 chuan, 1872; Taipei, 1975. Lan P'u. Ching-te-chen t'ao-lu (A Record of the Ching-te-chen Pottery), 10 chuan, 1891; Taipei, 1969. Li Hua. "Shih-lun Ch'ing-tai i-ch'ien ti shih-min tou-cheng" (A Draft Discussion on Urban Uprising prior to the Ch'ing Period), in Shang Yueh, ed. Chung-kuo feng-chien ching-chi  kuan-hsi ti jo-kan wen-t'i (Several Questions concerning the Feudal Economic Relations in China), Peking, 1958, pp. 317-345. Li Kuang-pi. "Ming-tai shou-kung-yeh ti fa-chan" (The Development of Handicraft Industry in the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume I: 31-46. Liu Yen. "Ming-mo ch'eng-shih ching-chi fa-chan hsia ti ch'u-ch'i shih-min yun-tung" (Early Stages of the Urban Movement under the City Economic Development at the end of the Ming Period), in CK-TLC, Volume 1:401-435. Lu Sheng. Chung-kuo t'ao-tz'u shih-hua (Historical Accounts of Chinese Ceramics), Hong Kong, 1974. Ming shih-lu (Veritable Records of the Ming Dynasty), comp. Yao Kuang-hsiao et al., 3,045 chuan, n.p., 1940. P'eng Tse-i, ed. Chung-kuo chin-tai shou-kung-yeh shih tzu-liao (Historical Materials on Modern Chinese Handicraft Industry), 4 Volumes, Peking, 1957. 69 Shih Min-hsiung. Ch'ing-tai ssu-chih kung-yeh ti fa-chan (The Development of the Silk-Weaving Industry in the Ch'ing Period), Taipei, 1968. Su Ying. "Chiang-hsi Ching-te-chen ti tz'u-ch'i kung-jen" (The Porcelain Workers of Ching-te-chen in Kiangsi), in Tung-fang tsa-chih (The Eastern Miscellany), Volume 33, Number 12, June 1936, pp. 105-108. Ta-Ming hui-tien (Collected Statutes of the Ming Dynasty), comp. Shen Shih-hsing et al., 228 chuan, 1587; Taipei, 1964. Toa Dobunkai, comp. Shina shobetsu zenshi (Gazetteer of China by Provinces), Volume 11, Tokyo, 1917. T'ung Shu-yeh and Shih Hsueh-t'ung. Chung^-kuo tz'u-ch'i shih lun-ts'ung (Collected Essays on the Porcelain of China), Shanghai, 1958. Wu Jen-ching and Hsin An-ch'ao. Chung-kuo t'ao-tz'u shih (A History of Chinese Ceramics), Shanghai, 1936. Wu Yun-chia. "Fou-liang t'ao-cheng chih" (The Pottery Administration of Fou-liang), in Wang Yun-wu, ed. T'ien-shan ping-shan lu chi ch'i-ta  i-chung (Record of T'ien-shan ping-shan and One Other Item), Shanghai, 1927. 70 APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF CHINESE NAMES AND TERMS An-jen -j^. chan chen J^. chih-fu Jj&'fc Ching-te-chen ^ j£ ^| Ching-te-nien chih ^ Jfj?^ fy- foj ch'in-hsien tz'u-ch'i chu-tso jen-chiang J\% 3£. )\ \f[. chun chung-kuan Fou-liang ^ ^ fu ^ Hsin-p'ing-chen ^ /^Jj i % Jao-chou jjj "kaolin" (kao-ling) ^ ^ kuan-ta-min-shao ^ ^ ^ kuan-yao v^ ^ kung Kung-pu J_ -^p Kung-pu yuan-wai-lang ^> || Lang T'ing-chi & M-li f. Lo-p'ing *jg -f-lun-pan kung-chiang ^^j) "£~M- ^— man-yao ^ ^ man-yao-kung . y$) ^ X. si min min-yao ^ Nan-kang \^ Nei-wu-fu \Q $f $ 72 Nien Hsi-yao Jt- ^ pa-chuang-t 'ou pa-shih 8t \-p pao-ch'ing yao ^? "petuntse" (pai-tun-tzu) (jp p^f P'o-yang p| pu y pu-hsien tz'u-ch'i 4f ^ j£ sha-hsueh wei-meng ^?>t^ \32-sha-t'u-fu ^J/ jt- -fc shang-kung-fu _k JL T'ang Ying y| ^ t'ao-hu j?§ t'ao-kung ]3^) X Te-hsing ^ jg? Te-hua 4|, ^ t'ing-kung JL_ 73 Tsang Ying-hsuan ^ ^ jSl ts'un-liu kung-chiang -^Zj- yff X )&. tu %X-Tu-ch'ang /j|p v§ t'ung-chih \$J fa t'ung-p'an frj -Chung j| ^ JV|? Ying-tsao-so-ch' eng £^ ^/jr YLUch'i ch'ang $J Yu-kan yg£ vf-yu-ming tse kung wu-ming tse chih $<J J$L ^jj J-_ wan-mm-Wan-nien 74 APPENDIX B A LIST OF REIGNS IN THE.MING AND THE CH'ING DYNASTIES Ming Dynasty-Title of Reign Accession Years of Reign Hung-wu 1368 31 Chien-wen 1399 4 Yung-lo 1403 22 Hung-hsi 1425 1 Hsuan-te 6 10 Cheng-t'ung 1436 4 Ching-t'ai 1450 7 T'ien-shun 1457 8 Ch'eng-hua 1465 23 Hung-chih 1488 18 Cheng-te 1506 16 Chia-ching 1522 45 Lung-ch'ing 1567 6 Wan-li 1573 47 T'ai-ch'ang 1620 1 T'ien-ch'i 1621 7 Ch'ung-chen 1628 17 Ch'ing Dynasty Title of Reign Accession Years of Reign Shun-chih 1644 18 K'ang-hsi 1662 61 Yung-cheng 1723 13 Ch'ien-lung 1736 60 Chia-ch'ing 1796 25 Tao-kuang 1821 3Hsien-feng 1851 H T'ung-chih 1862 13 Kuang-hsu 1875 34 Hsuan-t'ung 1909 3 75 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 15 1
Japan 7 0
China 6 14
United Kingdom 2 1
Australia 1 1
France 1 0
Poland 1 0
City Views Downloads
Huntley 9 1
Tokyo 7 0
Beijing 5 14
Ashburn 3 0
Unknown 3 13
Seattle 2 0
Shenzhen 1 0
Wilmington 1 0
Cambridge 1 1
Gorokan 1 1

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0100251/manifest

Comment

Related Items