Porcelain utensils are still among the most commonly used objects in the life of both ancient and modern people. It was also the main material for most utensils at the Qing Imperial Court (1644-1911). Whether the porcelain was used in daily life at Court, displayed in the palaces, used as temple furnishings or in rituals, or simply exchanged as gifts, a vast number of ceramics were used during the Qing dynasty. To meet this high demand, the Qing Court continued the system of Imperial kilns and porcelain factories in Jingdezhen, Jiangxi Province, which had begun in the Ming dynasty, to make porcelain specifically for Imperial use. As early as the Shunzhi reign at the beginning of the Qing dynasty, the Imperial kilns had a limited fixed scale of production. In the ‘Regulations and Precedents of the Imperial Household Department, Made by Imperial Order’ (Qinding zongguan neiwufu xianxing zelie), it is recorded: 

‘In the tenth month of the nineteenth year of the reign of Emperor Kangxi (1680), by his Imperial majesty’s command, an official from the Imperial Household Department, as well as an official from the Department of Works together with a scribe each were dispatched to use the money and grain from the Jiangxi State Provincial Warehouse to produce porcelain utensils for use in the Great Within. The Department of Works will compensate for revenue used.’ 1 

From then on, the Imperial Kilns officially resumed production. Until the end of the Qing dynasty, the Imperial kilns received large orders of porcelain utensils from the Imperial family. The Forbidden City, as the main Imperial palace of the Qing dynasty, was undoubtedly the final destination for many of these products. 

Today, there are more than 300,000 pieces of Imperial porcelain from the Qing Court Collection preserved in the Palace Museum. The cultural relics tagged ‘Qing Court Collection’ refer to those pieces originally in the Imperial collections in the Forbidden City and several other Qing royal palaces such as the Summer Palace, the Chengde Mountain Resort and the Shengjing Palace (now the Shenyang Palace Museum) and were inherited by the current Palace Museum. Overall, the Qing Court Collection of porcelain represents a variety of different periods and eras, elegant and classical forms, stunning decoration and exquisite craftsmanship. The collection not only allows us to study Qing Imperial porcelain; it is also the most valuable source for studying the history of Qing porcelain production. 

Imperial porcelain from the Qing Court Collection, specifically from the Qianlong period (1736-1795), both in terms of quantity and quality can justly be called the crown of the collection. The Qianlong era represented the peak of political, economic and social development in the Qing dynasty. The economy prospered, and the empire was at its strongest. Thus, the Imperial kiln had strong financial backing and could be prolific in its output. Moreover, the Qianlong emperor was diligent in government affairs and was also passionate in his pursuit of culture and art. He was skilled in calligraphy and painting, good at poetry and writing, and was obsessed with antiques and porcelain. After he succeeded to the throne, he continued to apply himself to ensuring a healthy production of porcelain. 

While fortunate in having the craftsmanship and skill of the esteemed master technocrat Tang Ying (1682-1756) in charge of the Imperial porcelain works, Qianlong also inherited the tradition from the Kangxi and Yongzheng emperors of directly intervening and micro-managing the production of porcelain. He regularly issued decrees ordering paintings to be used as models or that new models for porcelain be made. After personally inspecting the prototype it would be sent to the Imperial porcelain factory and kiln for firing. This process has been preserved in the Qing Imperial archives. For example, in the Imperial Household’s archive of ‘Qing Files of Labour and Works’ (Gezuo chengzuo huoji qingdang) it is recorded under ‘Jiangxi’ that in the seventh year of the Qianlong reign (1742):

‘On the eighth day of the fourth month, by order of the Emperor, Grand Minister Haiwang delivered a painting of a ‘clear-sky white’ ground underglaze red dragon and horse wall vase to Tang Ying in Jiangxi as a model to fire several pieces to be sent up. It was so decreed.’ 2 

In addition to this, on the same section it is recorded:

‘On the twenty-ninth day of the eighth month, treasurer Bai Shixiu came to say that Eunuch Gao Yu delivered a blue and white double-cloud handled hexagonal zun vase, by Imperial order. This vase’s form and pattern was very good; Tang Ying, according to this model produced several more pieces. However, because the body of the dragon on the belly of this vase was not correct, it was corrected. The handles too were not good and Tang Ying improved the form of the handles, whereupon he fired several more pieces. Only when the dragon on the belly did not need changing, and when the right pattern and form was achieved, was it sent. It was so decreed.’ 3 

From this we can see that during the Qianlong era the manufacture of Imperial porcelain, in almost all aspects from the shape to the decoration, was strongly influenced by the emperor’s aesthetic taste and standards, forming a distinctive style unique to his era. Fundamentally, however, it was a continuation of his father, the Yongzheng emperor’s style of Imperial intervention and supervision that ensured the ‘Inner Court manner’. According to the Imperial Household Department’s records, the ‘Files of Handicraft’ (Huoji dang), in the fifth year of the Yongzheng emperor’s reign (1727), on the third day of the third month: 

‘A decree came from the Yuanmingyuan [i.e. the Yongzheng emperor], passed on by Minister Haiwang, stating: keep the models from previous projects We have worked on. If the models are not kept, it is feared that later, it will not achieve what was originally intended. Although We see that those works made previously by the Imperial Workshops that were good are few, they still conformed to the Inner Palace style. Recently, although the craftsmanship is ingenious, many have the air of the ‘Outer’. When you manufacture items do not lose that Inner Court manner.’ 4 (Fig.1) 

fig1

The jiu’er zun vases (literally, ‘turtle-dove’ handled zun) from the Qing Court Collection offer a perfect example of Qing porcelain embodying the characteristics of the so-called ‘Inner Court manner’. 

The jiu’er zun vases made in the Imperial porcelain manufactory in Jingdezhen for the Court, were based on models from the Yongzheng period, which in turn were based on archaic bronze zun and hu vessels from the Warring States, Qin and Han periods. One can see many different versions and styles of this form of vase from the Yongzheng and Qianlong periods, including jiu’er zun vases in blue and white, Ru style glazes, white Ding style glazes, flambé glazes and tea-dust glazes, and other varieties. The sizes of these vases can be divided into two categories: one is more than 45cm in height and approximately 22cm in diameter, the second type are about 20cm in height and approximately 7 to 8cm in diameter. Below are some related examples of jiu’er zun vases from the Qing Court Collection:

(1) A flambé glazed jiu’er zun vase, Qianlong mark (Fig.2), ‘water’ (shui) 3315, height 20.3cm, diameter 7.7cm, foot diameter 8.3cm. The whole body covered in a flambé glaze of purple-red colour with streaks of blue. The base with a Qianlong six-character mark. This vase was originally in the Hall of Supreme Principle (Taiji dian) in the Forbidden City. 6 

fig2

2) A Ding style white glazed jiu’er zun vase with embossed archaistic dragons, Qianlong mark (Fig.3), ‘remain’ (liu) 14031, height 20cm,diameter 7.6cm, foot diameter 7.8cm. The whole body is covered with a white glaze with a yellowish tint. The exterior decorated with archaistic dragons in low relief, the neck with wave patterns, the shoulders decorated with a ‘bow-string’ chord, the base with an incised Qianlong six-character mark. This piece was originally either in the ChengdeMountain Resort or Shengjing Palace (Shenyang Palace). 

fig

3) A Ru style jiu’er zun vase, Qianlong mark (Fig.4), ‘mark’ (hao) 2089, height 47cm, diameter 21.5cm, foot diameter 22cm7. The exterior and interior covered in an azure-blue glaze, the foot ring painted brown. The base with an underglaze blue Qianlong six-character mark. This piece was originally housed in the west wing of the Ningshou Mansion on Tingdong street outside the Forbidden City. 8 

fig4

(4) A blue and white jiu’er zun vase, Qianlong mark (Fig.5), ‘mark’ (hao) 1711, height 45.5cm, diameter 21cm, foot diameter 22.5cm. The mouth and foot rims decorated with foliate scrolls, the neck with a band of pendant ruyi-heads. The body vividly painted with meandering lotus scrolls, the handles in underglaze blue. The base with an underglaze blue Qianlong six-character mark. This piece was also originally housed in the west wing of the Ningshou Mansion on Tingdong street outside the Forbidden City. 9 

fig5

According to the statistics of cultural relics in the Forbidden City, there are eight jiu’er zun vases from the Qianlong period that were in the Qing Court Collection. Regardless of the size, the shape had to be consistent, with wide open mouth, broad neck, sliding shoulders and turtle-dove handles, a low centre of gravity and circular foot. They all have excellent glazes that display the rich range and superlative technology and craftsmanship of the time. Of these, the blue and white varieties share regular patterns commonly used on Qing dynasty Imperial porcelain, reflecting the fascination for antiquity as well as the innovations of the Qianlong period and the strict reverence for the ‘Inner Court manner’ style of the time. 

1. ‘shaozao ciqi’ in Qinding zongguan neiwufu xianxing zelie guangchu si, juan 1.
2. Qing gong neiwufu zaobanchu dangan zonghui, juan 11, p.75.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid, juan 2, p.646.
5. Gugong wupin diancha baogao. When the Palace Museum was established in 1924, all the pieces formerly in the Qing Court Collection were inventoried according to the Thousand Character Essay (Qian zi wen). Each character corresponded to a palace or location in the Forbidden City. For example, the character li 麗 corresponds to the fifth ‘antique house’ of the five inner courts of the Forbidden City. Therefore, based on the Qian zi wen, one can find the original location of a piece.
6. Gugong wupin diancha baogao di san pian, vol.1, juan 3, p.6.
7 Ibid., di si pian, vol.2, juan 1, p.107.
8 Ibid., p.109.
9 Ibid., p.86.

Bonhams. Fine Chinese Ceramics and Works of Art, Hong Kong 27 november 2018.