A HIGHLY IMPORTANT EARLY MING COPPER-RED DECORATED EWER, KENDI - HONGWU PERIOD (1368-1398)

The well-potted body of globular form expertly painted in rich, varied greyish tones of underglaze-red with branches of camellia, prunus and bamboo issuing from the petal border below towards the cloud collar above, with an ornamental rock in their midst positioned on the side opposite the conical spout rising diagonally from the shoulder, surmounted by a waisted neck encircled by ascending bands of petals, reserved classic scroll and scallops below a flanged knob, and with a narrow key-fret border below the slightly lipped mouth rim, the flat ring foot and slightly concave base unglazed and burnt red in the firing. 6 in. (15.2 cm.) high, box. Price Realized: HK$33,927,500 ($4,368,132)

Provenance: Turner Henderson, sold at Sotheby's London, 7 May 1957, lot 27
Messrs Sparks, London
Ruth Dreyfus, no. 179
Arthur M. Sackler, sold at Christie's New York, 1 December 1994, lot 156

Literature: J.M. Addis, The Arts of the Ming Dynasty, T.O.C.S., Vol. 30, 1955-57, p. 23
Sherman E. Lee and Wai-Kam Ho, Chinese Art under the Mongols: The Yuan Dynasty (1279-1368), Cleveland, 1968, Catalogue, no. 178
M. Medley, Yuan Porcelain and Stoneware, Faber and Faber, London, 1974, pl. 56A
Chinese Art from the Ching Wan Society Collections, Chang Foundation, Taipei, 1998, p. 17, no. 8
Christie's, 20 Years in Hong Kong, 1986-2006, Hong Kong, 2006, p.61

Exhibited: Oriental Ceramic Society, London, Arts Council Gallery, The Arts of the Ming Dynasty, 15 November - 14 December, 1957, Catalogue, no. 152
The Cleveland Museum of Art, Chinese Art Under the Mongols: The Yuan Dynasty (1279-1368), Ohio, 2 October - 24 November, 1968, Catalogue, no. 178
Tel Aviv Museum, 3500 Years of Chinese Art: Ceramics from the Arthur M. Sackler Museum Collections, Israel, 9 July - 31 October 1987

Lot Notes: Previously sold at Christie's Hong Kong, 6 November 1997, lot 1031.

While underglaze-red was not uncommon in the Yuan and early Ming, its scale of production did not increase greatly in the following centuries, unlike that of blue and white porcelain. This was largely due to a number of technical difficulties encountered by potters since copper as a colourant was volatile, and in effect produced an unpredictable range of shades from rich red to brownish grey, and often was dissipated during the firing. Notwithstanding, many of the very finest underglaze-red decorated porcelains appear to have been made in the early Ming during the Hongwu period.

Compare nine examples from important collections, the first decorated with peony and chrysanthemum, formerly from the Grandidier collection and now in the Musee Guimet, Paris, is illustrated in Oriental Ceramics, the World's Great Collections, vol. 7, pl. 16. The second ewer with peonies in the Museum of Decorative Arts, Copenhagen is illustrated by Lion-Goldschmidt in Ming Porcelain, no. 23. Two others are in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, illustrated by Ayers, Far Eastern Ceramics in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 1980, col. pl. 42 (formerly from the Stephen D. Winkworth collection, designed with lotus flowers, pods and leaves among aquatic plants), and pl. 140 (with camellia, formerly from the Bloxam collection). The fifth with a peony meander, former collections of Sir Harry and Lady Garner and Frederick Knight, illustrated by Lee and Ho, Chinese Art Under the Mongols: The Yuan Dynasty (1279-1368), Ohio, 1968, Catalogue, pl. 177. The sixth, also with camellia, bamboo, and prunus blooms, is illustrated in Sekai Toji Zenshu, vol. 14, p. 161, pl. 138. Finally, three are in the Palace Museum collection, Beijing, illustrated in Blue and White Porcelain with Underglaze Red, Part 1, Hong Kong, 2000, nos. 202-204.

Post-Lot Text: An Extremely Rare and Important 14th Century
Underglaze Copper Red Kendi

Rosemary Scott
International Academic Director, Asian Art Departments

This kendi is not only a rare and important example of the Chinese potter's art; it is also a very interesting vessel for its place in the history of Chinese ceramics. The precise origins of the kendi form, how it came to be made in porcelain with underglaze copper red decoration at the Chinese kilns at Jingdezhen, and why vessels of this type were preserved in the Qing Court Collection, remain questions of debate amongst scholars. Most scholars agree that there is a relationship between the Chinese versions of the 'kundika' and the 'kendi', neither of which have handles, but both of which usually have a flange on the neck to facilitate holding and pouring the vessel. However the kundika was intended to be filled via the wider, and sometimes lidded, opening on its shoulder and poured, or sprinkled, from the vertical spout rising from the neck, while the kendi was to be filled from the wider vertical neck and poured from the spout on its shoulder. In both cases the hole from which the water is poured is small. Indeed the Tang dynasty Buddhist pilgrim Yi Qing, who travelled to India in the late 7th century, described the upper part of a kundika that he saw used by Indian Buddhist monks, saying that the tip was two fingers' width above the flange and the hole was as small as a bronze chop-stick (1), and this narrow spout-tip seems to have been adopted for both Chinese kundika and kendi.

The other form that relates to the kendi and the kundika is an elongated flask or bottle that also has the distinctive flange on the neck but no spout on the shoulder. The ceramic version of this flask, which is often referred to as a 'pure water' or 'holy water' bottle or flask, has a slightly wider mouth than that seen on the kundika. The kundika with shoulder spout is of course, also often referred to as a pure or holy water flask or sprinkler. It is sometimes difficult to see if it is the flask with no shoulder spout, or the kundika, with shoulder spout, that is held in the right hand of the Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara, in painted or sculptural depictions. What is noticeable, however, is that in the majority of depictions, the Bodhisattva holds the vessel by the neck, using the flange to suspend it between two fingers. An example can be seen in the right hand of Avalokitesvara in a painting dated AD 910 from Cave 12 at Dunhuang (2).

While Eng-Lee Seok Chee mentions that Sumerian vessels with spouts but without handles, similar to kendi, have been found in contexts suggesting a date in the 3rd millennium BC (3), there is little evidence to suggest that these influenced later Indian, Chinese or Southeast Asian vessels. Certainly, in China there appears to be a strong link between the kundika and the kendi, and the kundika is believed to have entered China, with Buddhism, from India. A bronze kundika dating to the 1st-3rd century AD was excavated at Brahmapuri in the western Deccan (4), and it has been noted by Dawn Rooney that in India the kundika appears in depictions of the Hindu gods Brahma and Shiva, as well as those of the Buddhist deities Maitreya and, most frequently, Avalokitesvara (5). It has been suggested by several authors that the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim Fa Xian, who travelled to India in AD 399-414 and wrote of his experiences, was referring to a kundika when he noted that, during a voyage between Sri Lanka and Java, he threw his water bottle into the sea during a heavy storm, rather than risk the ship's crew throwing his sacred texts or Buddhist images overboard (6).

There is a lexical link between the kundika and the kendi in Chinese, although both forms have been referred to by a variety of names over the centuries. The Tao Shuo notes that in the Journey to the West in the Great Tang Dynasty (Datang Xiyouji), an account of his travels to Central Asia and India written by the Chinese Monk Xuanzang (AD c. 602-664), he transliterates the name kundika from Sanskrit into Chinese as jun chi ga. The same first two syllables are also used to transliterate kendi, and to the present day kendi are usually referred to as junchi in Chinese scholarly publications, such as those of the Palace Museum, Beijing. Whether this lexical link is due to the closeness of the sound of the Sanskrit words, or a link in the development of the two vessels in China, is difficult to determine.

Evidence suggests that the kundika was well established in China by the Tang dynasty. From China, the form was passed to both Japan and Korea where it appears in both ceramic and metalwork examples. Interestingly, a Tang dynasty Chinese kundika, now in the National Museum in Jakarta, was found at Palembang, Sumatra, the site of the kingdom of Srivijaya, which was an important entrepot on the Asian trade routes in the Tang dynasty (7). Depictions of kundika can also be seen in stone relief carvings of the 8th-9th century, contemporary with the Tang dynasty, at the famous Buddhist temple site of Borobudur in Magelang province, Central Java (8). A kundika is also held by an 8th century Maitreya from Pra Kon Chai, Buriram province, northeast Thailand. (9)

Extant Tang and Song dynasty examples of white ceramic kundika show that very high quality vessels of this type were being made in north China. A fine Tang dynasty white-glazed kundika, for example, is preserved in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing (see fig.1) (10). Several Northern Song kundika were excavated at the site of the Jingzhi Temple Pagoda, in Dingzhou, Hebei province, from a deposit dated AD 977. These included one silver gilt vessel, five white ceramic Ding ware examples, and one with copper green glaze (11). Northern Song dynasty ceramic kundika with flanged necks were also excavated from the Jingzhongyuan Temple Pagoda at Dingzhou, dated AD 995. These included a very fine Ding ware example and a more modest example with sancai-type glaze (12).

In the Southern Song dynasty potters in south China appear to have responded to the export market and began to make kendi for trade with Southeast Asia. These kendi seem to have been formed after a Southeast Asian model rather than adapted from the kind of kundika being made in north China. While they are handleless, have a spout on the shoulder and a vertical neck, they have no flange on the neck. Instead they have a wider neck and flared mouth rim, which could have allowed the vessel to be held by the neck without slipping, but would not have been as convenient as a flange. A number of Southern Song dynasty kendi with qingbai-type glaze have been excavated at the Dehua kiln site (13). These Southern Song Dehua kendi (see fig. 2) have moulded decoration, but are not of the same high quality as the northern kundika. A Yuan dynasty qingbai-glazed kendi of similar form but without any moulded decoration was excavated at the same site (14).

At the Jingdezhen kilns in the Yuan dynasty a transformation of the form appears to have taken place. A Yuan dynasty qingbai-glazed kendi with compressed globular body, double ridged neck, expanded mouth and spout on the shoulder has been excavated at the Hutian kiln site at Jingdezhen (15). This vessel shares with the Dehua kendi a compressed globular body, but its elongated, more slender, neck with ridges reminiscent of flanges suggests a possible connection with the Ding ware kundika. This kind of vessel might have been made both for export and for use in China. Perhaps even more significant for the development of the current underglaze-red kendi, is the fact that a sherd of a properly flanged neck of a holy water bottle with underglaze-blue decoration has been excavated from the Yuan dynasty site at Luomaqiao, Jingdezhen (16). This was a form that was not only to continue to be produced at Jingdezhen into the early 15th century, but was demonstrably desired by the Chinese court, as evidenced by a brown-glazed holy water bottle, with flanged neck, excavated from the Yongle strata at the imperial kilns at Zhushan, Jingdezhen (17).

A number of writers have described Hongwu underglaze copper-red kendi, such as the current example, as having been made for export to Southeast Asia, but the current author is not convinced that this is the case. Firstly, the painted decoration on these kendis is strikingly similar to that seen on porcelain excavated from the Hongwu stratum at the site of the imperial kiln at Jingdezhen, and of significantly higher quality than the painting seen on the majority of underglaze copper-red wares exported to Southeast Asia. Secondly, no less than three kendi of this type were preserved in the Qing Court collection, now in the Palace Museum, Beijing (see figs. 3, 4 & 5). Thirdly, although the extensive collection of Chinese ceramics in the Museum Pusat Jakarta, for example, has numerous Chinese white porcelain and brown-glazed stoneware kendi dating to the Song-Yuan period, and Chinese blue and white porcelain kendi dating to 16th-17th century, there appear to be no published examples of the Hongwu copper red kendi in its collection. Fourthly, although the export trade in ceramics did not cease during the Hongwu reign, it was much diminished compared to the quantity of ceramics exported during the Yuan dynasty. It would be surprising if a new version of the kendi form (with bulbous spout) were to be made in a high-quality, expensive, and difficult to control medium (porcelain decorated in underglaze copper-red) at the Jingdezhen kilns merely for the export trade. While it is undoubtedly true that Song-Yuan and 16th-17th century Chinese ceramic kendi were made for export to Southeast Asia, the case has not been made for Hongwu copper- red porcelain vessels of this type being made for export. Indeed, evidence points more strongly to the Chinese elite as patrons of these wares. How else would they have been retained in China and entered the Qing Court Collection? Is it not more likely that this new expensive type of porcelain vessel, which was made for a remarkably short period time, was produced in response to an order from the court? Would it not seem reasonable that the Hongwu emperor who had spent some of his youth in a Buddhist monastery, who was at pains to establish imperial production at Jingdezhen as early as the second year of his reign (AD 1369), and who had in the same year decreed that vessels of porcelain rather than bronze be used on the imperial altars, should have required new vessels to be made at Jingdezhen?

It has often been stated that the Hongwu emperor was particularly fond of ceramics decorated in copper red. Some scholars have suggested that the new emperor showed a particular interest in red decoration because his family name Zhu means red or vermillion in Chinese, or because Hong, the first part of his reign name, is homophonous with another Chinese word meaning red. Others have pointed to a shortage of good quality cobalt for painting in blue, due to the reduction of foreign imports. Whatever the reason for it, the imperial admiration for red appears to have been confirmed by the results of excavations carried out at the Nanjing Palace, the construction of which was started by General Zhu Yuanzhang (AD 1326-98) in the south-eastern part of the city (then called Jinling) in 1366, some two years before he finally defeated the Mongols and re-established a native Chinese dynasty in 1368 under the reign name Hongwu. In 1989 archaeologists excavating within the early Ming Palace walls between the Xiye Gate and the Temple of the God of Earth and Grain found eight 14th century white roof-end,goutou and dishui, tiles decorated with relief designs painted in underglaze red. The round tiles were decorated with five-clawed dragons, while the cloud-shaped tiles bore phoenixes (18).

From its first appearance in the Tang dynasty, the use of copper to produce red on high-fired ceramics has provided a formidable challenge to the potters. The process of producing the desired colour is so sensitive that great care has to be taken with the composition of the base glaze, the percentage of copper, the temperature and degree of reduction in the firing, and the placement of the vessels within the kiln. It was not until the Yuan dynasty that decoration using copper red was adopted by the potters of Jingdezhen, and they appear to have made a concerted effort to master this elusive decorative material. It is a testament both to the value placed on such pieces and the extreme difficulty of producing them that so many of those which have been allowed to survive from that period are, by all normal standards, failures.

By the early Ming dynasty Hongwu reign copper-red was applied to porcelain vessels in conjunction with a differently constituted glaze to that used in the Yuan period. This new glaze was less likely to 'run' in areas where the copper was dense, but underglaze copper-red was still extremely difficult to fire successfully. The colour had a tendency to 'bleed' into the surrounding glaze, as on a jar in the Shanghai Museum (19), or to turn grey, as on some of the bowls excavated at Dongmentou Zhushan (20). In some cases the colour disappeared almost entirely. Nevertheless, such was the appreciation of these porcelains that the potters persevered and a few successful examples of 14th century underglaze red decorated porcelains, like the current kendi, have survived.

Nevertheless, a relatively small number of Hongwu underglaze red kendi are preserved in international collections, and they do not seem to have been produced after the end of the 14th century until the form was revived with underglaze blue decoration in the 16th century. The same basic decorative scheme appears to have been applied to all of the extant Hongwu underglaze red kendi. In each case there is a floral band providing the major decoration around the body of the vessel. Around the foot of the vessels and just below the neck torque are either bands of petals or lappets. The neck flange and mouth are decorated with narrow bands of several different types. There are two variable narrow bands around the base of the spout, while the main part of the spout has a floral scroll before finishing with a very narrow, contrasting, band around the opening.

A Hongwu underglaze copper-red kendi in the Victoria and Albert Museum, which was a gift to the Museum from Sir Percival David, is unusual in being decorated with a quite freely painted design of lotus (12). The Victoria and Albert Museum also has another Hongwu underglaze red kendi (22), which, like the current vessel, has a design of camellias, but without the prunus and bamboo seen on the Sackler kendi. Five Hongwu underglaze red kendi decorated with peony scrolls have been published. One in the Kunstindustrimuseet in Copenhagen is illustrated by D. Lion-Goldschmidt in Ming Porcelain, Thames and Hudson, London, 1978, p. 63, pl. 23. Three vessels with very differently painted peony scrolls are in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing, where they have been preserved from the Qing Court Collection (23). A fifth vessel with peony decoration, from the collection of Sir Harry and Lady Garner, is illustrated by Sherman E. Lee and Wai-kam Ho in Chinese Art under the Mongols: The Yuan Dynasty (1279-1368), Cleveland, 1968, no. 177. Lastly, there is a Hongwu underglaze copper red kendi in the Musee Guimet, which has a chrysanthemum scroll (24).

The current kendi is unusual in incorporating three different plants, including bamboo, into its main decorative band. Naturalistic painting of bamboo, as seen on the current kendi, is particularly attractive and was used as part of both formal and informal designs at the Hongwu imperial kilns, as can be seen on a number of vessels excavated from the imperial kiln site. Among these are an underglaze blue decorated ewer and three underglaze blue decorated dishes (25). Both the bamboo and the blossoming prunus seen on the current kendi appear in the decoration of two underglaze copper-red Hongwu pear-shaped vases (yuhuchun ping) in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing (26), while bamboo is included in the central design on a Hongwu underglaze copper-red dish in the same collection (27).

The current underglaze copper-red decorated kendi is an important and fascinating piece in the history of Chinese ceramics in the 14th century.

(1)William Willetts, Chinese Art, vol. 2, Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1958, pp. 467-8.

(2)Illustrated by Whitfield and Farrer in Caves of the Thousand Buddhas - Chinese art from the Silk Route, British Museum, London, 1990, p. 39, no. 12.

(3)Eng-Lee Seok Chee, Kendis - A Guide to the Collections, National Museum Singapore, 1984, p. 8.

(4)K. Khandalavala, 'Brahmapuri', Lalit Kala, no. 7, 1960, fig. 44.

(5)Dawn Rooney, Kendi in the Cultural Context of Southeast Asia - A Commentary, http:/ rooneyarchive.net/articles/kendi.

(6)J, Legge, A Record of Buddhist Kingdoms, Dover, New York, 1965 edition, p. 12.

(7)Illustrated in The World's Great Collections, Oriental Ceramics vol. 3 Museum Pusat, Jakarta, Kodansha, Tokyo, 1977, pl. 7.

(8)Illustrated by Eng-Lee Seok Chee, op. cit., p. 2, fig. 1a.

(9)Illustrated by John Guy, 'Southeast Asian Glazed Ceramics: A Study of Sources', New Perspectives on the Art of Ceramics in China, G. Kuwayama (ed.), Los Angeles County Museum, 1992, p. 111, fig. 34.

(10) Illustrated in The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum - 31 - Porcelain of the Jin and Tang Dynasties, Commercial, Press Hong Kong, 1996, p. 169, no. 156.

(11) Illustrated in Treasures from the Underground Palaces - Excavated Treasures from Northern Song Pagodas, Dingzhou, Hebei Province, China, Idemitsu Museum of Arts, Tokyo, 1997, nos. 7, 57-61 and 83, respectively.

(12) Illustrated in Treasures from the Underground Palaces - Excavated Treasures from Northern Song Pagodas, Dingzhou, Hebei Province, China, op. cit., nos. 87 and 96 respectively.

(13) Illustrated in Dehua Wares, Fung Ping Shan Museum, University of Hong Kong, 1990, p. 81, nos. 46 & 47.

(14) Illustrated ibid. p. 108, no. 92), as was a Yuan dynasty white-glazed holy water bottle with flanged neck (illustrated ibid. p. 109, no. 94.

(15) Illustrated in Ceramic Finds at Jingdezhen Kilns, Fung Ping Shan Museum, University of Hong Kong, 1992, no. 108.

(16) Illustrated in Ceramic Finds at Jingdezhen Kilns, op. cit., no. 150.
(17) Illustrated in Ceramic Finds at Jingdezhen Kilns, op. cit., no. 201.
(18) Nanjing Museum and the Art Gallery of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, A Legacy of the Ming: Ceramic Finds from the Site of the Ming Palace in Nanjing, Hong Kong, 1996, p. 35, nos. 7, 7.1, 8, 8.1-3.

(19) Wang Qingzheng (ed.), Underglaze Blue and Red, Multi-art Press, Hong Kong, 1993, p. 64, no. 36.

(20) Chang Foundation, Imperial Hongwu and Yongle Porcelain excavated at Jingdezhen, Taipei, Taiwan, 1996, pp. 84-5, no. 9.

(21) Illustrated by John Ayers in Far Eastern Ceramics in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 1980, colour plate 42.

(22) Illustrated ibid. plate 140.

(23) Illustrated in The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum - 34 - Blue and White Porcelain with Underglaze Red (I), Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 2000, pp. 218-220, nos. 202-204.

(24) Illustrated in The World's Great Collections, Oriental Ceramics, vol. 7, Musee Guimet, Paris, Kodansha, Tokyo, 1981 edition, colour plate 16.

(25) All illustrated in Jingdezhen chutu Yuan Ming guanyao ciqi, Wenwu chubanshe, Beijing, 1999, p. 75, no. 12, p. 88, no. 28, pp. 91-2, nos. 32 & 33.

(26) Illustrated in The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum - 34 - Blue and White Porcelain with Underglaze Red (I), op. cit., pp. 214-6, nos. 199 and 200.

(27) Illustrated ibid., p. 221, no. 205.

Christie's Hong Kong. The Imperial Sale including Elegance and Artistry. Treasures from a Private Collection. 27 May 2008