The Origins of Guyue Xuan Enamelled Glass Wares by Hugh Moss
A Documentary Group of Qing Imperial Enamels Produced in the Inner Palace between 1767 and the 1770s
Kindly reproduced with permission from Orientations magazine where this article was first published
The studio name古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’) is well known to students of Qing art. It is associated with a group of enamelled glass wares, many of which are snuff bottles, the earliest bearing precise dates from 1767 to 1770, with one additional example from 1775. After an initial, experimental period when various designations were used, often in unexpected places, the enamellerssettled into the standard use of either the studio name Guyue xuan, or 乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (‘Made during the Qianlong period’) both in regular script. Later, these evolved into more impressive wares, spanning the rest of the Qianlong reign, that are now broadly accepted as genuine imperial wares, although not without controversy. Guyue xuan wares as a whole have been the subject of considerable confusion as the mystery of the origins of the name and the wares associated with it were fancifully addressed. For a century from the late Qing, art history morphed into mythology, inventing and embellishing upon explanations about the name and extending far beyond reason the appropriate range of wares involved, with resulting confusion.
The mystery of the origins of the name was finally solved by the architectural detective work of He Chongyi and Zeng Zhaofen in the 1970s and 1980s. They meticulously reconstructed on paper the Jian yuan (‘Viewing Garden’), an establishment built in a corner of the Changchun yuan (‘Eternal Spring Garden’), apparently intended as a retirement home for the Qianlong Emperor. The imperial garden complex is misleadingly known in the West as the Summer Palace but was never considered a summer home, it was simply an alternative, and for several emperors, preferred imperial residence. A central pavilion of part of the Jian Yuan was named Guyue xuan – xuan might also be translated as ‘gallery.’ They also found evidence of extensive reconstruction of the Jian yuan in 1810, under the Jiaqing emperor resulting in the loss of the Guyue xuan. The names of the many halls, studios, pavilions, terraces and other structures would not have been widely known outside the Palace where the name was only associated with the wares, providing fertile ground for inventive interpretations of both name and wares. The reconstruction on paper of the plans for the Jian yuan was published in 1981. The significance of the new information was passed on to the art-world, and snuff bottle enthusiasts in particular, by Peter Y. K. Lam of the Art Gallery of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, from whom the following maps are borrowed.
Plan of the Imperial garden complex.
Plan of the Jian yuan.
Construction of the Jian yuan was begun in 1751 but not inaugurated until the sixth month of 1767. The earliest snuff bottle from the Guyue xuan group is dated to the same time.
The earliest Guyue xuan wares are snuff bottles with the exception of a single thumb-ring. They were produced between the sixth month of 1767 and the sixth month of 1770, with one further, but rather more sophisticated example precisely dated to 1775. Other undated wares, undoubtedly from the same enamellers, enlarge the group, some dated only to the Qianlong era (1736-1795, although the reign mark continued in use for some wares while the abdicated emperor still lived until 1799). They are enamelled in a limited palette of enamels with sparing use of the famille-rose palette that had been introduced earlier in the century, and painted mostly on translucent white glass but with exceptions on turquoise, green, black, dark blue, and in one case transparent ruby-red glass. The blank glass bottles are all likely products of the Imperial glassworks in Beijing.
For many years this early group, with and without dates, has been recognized as anomalous and has often been dismissed as faking from the Republic-era (1912-1949). I believe they are not only genuine wares but important documentary evidence of the initial impulse for Guyue xuan wares.
The earlier wares are clearly experimental, not only in mastering enamelling techniques and painting skills, but in the use of reign-marks and the studio name itself. Several have Qianlong reign marks in unusual places, such as around the neck, or as part of the main decoration accompanying other inscription and the Guyue xuan designation often occurs together with the reign mark, again in some unexpected places. On a few examples of the undated wares, the mark is on the foot but engraved in regular script rather than enamelled. The name also appears in seals as part of the main decoration, usually shortened to古月(‘Ancient Moon’) in seal script, whether as a single or two separate seals. The precise dates inscribed often identify the month of completion and nearly all are dated to the sixth or seventh month of the year, suggesting some significance for this burst of summer production. The earliest that survive are from the sixth month of 1767 followed by one from the seventh month (figs. 1-5).
Fig. 1. Sixth month of 1767. The neck inscribed Keren ruyu 可人如玉 (‘A most suitable man is as estimable as jade’). Formerly Hamilton Collection, Dallas.
Fig. 2. Sixth month 1767. The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). J & J Collection.
Fig. 3. Dated to Qianlong 1767, with the name Hu Xuan 胡軒, the neck inscribed Shangshang 上賞 (‘First Prize’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
Fig. 4. Dated to the sixth month of 1767, with the name Hu Xuan胡軒 concealed within the shoulder band. Sanctum of Enlightened Respect Collection, Singapore.
Fig. 5. Dated 1767 seventh month, the foot inscribed 古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Laurence Souksi, Paris.
Those from 1768 are shown in figs. 6-10.
Fig. 6. Dated to the third day of the seventh month of 1768 in the Qianlong reign, the shoulder band inscribed Hu Xuan jingzh i胡軒敬製 (‘Respectfully made by Hu Xuan’). The foot without text. Water, Pine and Stone Retreat Collection.
Fig.7 Dated to the sixth month 1768 and inscribed Zuoyu neiting 作于内廷 (‘Made at the Inner Court’). Formerly in the Mary and George Bloch Collection.
Fig. 8 Dated to the Autumn of 1768 in the Qianlong reign. Archival photograph
Fig. 9 Thumb-ring dated to 1768 with seal Hu 胡. Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
From 1769 there is the unique addition of a seal used exclusively by the Qianlong emperor and found on many imperial works of art either made for him or inscribed by him on the wares themselves or on elaborated stands or screens made to contain them. Taken from the Eight Trigrams, it consists of three unbroken horizontal lines and means ‘purity.’ It is read as qian and stands as a rebus for the initial character of the reign title (fig. 10).
Fig. 10 Dated summer of 1769, with the trigram seal Qian, preceding the inscription, the foot inscribed 乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (‘Made during the Qianlong period’). Bonhams, New York, 1 February 2018.
Fig. 12. Dated to 1769 of the Qianlong reign, the foot inscribed乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (‘Made during the Qianlong period’). Stephen Lee collection.
Fig. 12 Dated 1769 of the Qianlong reign, the foot inscribed 古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
One example from 1770 is on dark blue glass and might appear to be an improvement in the artistry but the impression is misleading. It is just in remarkably good condition allowing a glimpse of original condition (fig. 13).
Fig. 13 Dated to the sixth month of 1770, the foot inscribed 古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). The Crane Collection.
The use of precise dates, whether or not the month is identified, was gradually phased out as the wares settled into more standard production during the 1770s. The use of the Guyue Xuan and Qianlong reign marks combined becomes exceptional after 1770. A single bottle from 1775, clearly evolved with better painting and a more complex design, has the two cyclical characters of the sexagenary dating system incorporated in a seal as part of the design (fig. 14). It is the last of the precisely dated examples.
Fig. 14 Dated to 1775 in the seal, the foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat Collection
Between 1767 and 1770 most of the examples that include the time of year are from the sixth month with far fewer from the seventh month, and one dated simply to the Autumn, but since the first month of Autumn is the seventh month, we are looking at a continuous burst of dated production from the summer or Autumn, and probably early Autumn, with nothing for the rest of each year.
The name Hu Xuan 胡軒 appears on some of the dated group. This is almost certainly what led to some fanciful speculation during the century of confusion over Guyue xuan wares (late Qing dynasty to the 1970s). The obvious connection between the names Hu Xuan and Guyue xuan where separating the two parts of the family name provide us with gu 古and yue月cannot have escaped late-Qing commentators, but without knowledge of the pavilion in the Jian Yuan the logic could be reversed to assume that the studio name arose from the family name. One fanciful story claimed that a Mr. Hu from Jingdezhen – Suzhou in another version – a famous enameller, was summoned to Court and put in charge of the enamelling workshop. Once we isolate the Guyue xuan designation from its extended and misleading inclusion of earlier wares and ceramics, and recognize the tentative and low-level artistry of the earliest wares, this story becomes untenable. No enameller capable of only the artistically and technically limited dated wares would impress an emperor who had long since overseen the production of far finer wares at the Yuanming yuan. Clearly, the name Hu Xuan is nothing more than a rather obvious pseudonym playing on the characters for Guyue xuan. With long inscriptions echoing the literati painting tradition, signatures and seals prompted the use of seals and names to stand as signatures and at the time it would have been inappropriate for an enameller to use his real name on an imperial product. By taking the first two characters as a family name transforming Guyue 古月into Hu 胡 and using the third character xuan 軒 as part of a two-character name, a clever reference to the imperial studio doubled as a name to add to inscriptions.
The designation Shangshang 上賞 (‘first prize’) appears on several of the dated group, and on some undated examples (figs. 3, 6, and 16). This is a straightforward indication that they were produced as prizes or rewards in which case the high honour bestowed by the Emperor rendered artistic quality irrelevant. One of the earliest examples is inscribed, also around the neck, Keren ruyu 可人如玉 (‘A most suitable man is as estimable as jade’), fig. 1. Suggesting the recipient is an ideal gentleman would have been an appropriate but generalized sentiment for a prize or other form of gift. The entire imperial examination system was essentially aimed at producing the ideal gentleman for service to the emperor.
The dated bottles are characterized by stylistically simple designs, usually lotuses with pink blooms outlined in iron-red, green leaves delineated in black enamel, and occasionally an additional butterfly to symbolise longevity, with mostly iron-red inscriptions in either seal, regular or running script. Various poems appear, mostly on the subject of the lotus, some frequently repeated, including one famous ode to the flower by the Tang poet Li Bo. It appears obvious that the painters are neither serious artists nor master enamellers. For similar products made over a period of three full years of dated, and possibly more of undated wares all without much visible sign of artistic or technical improvement seems unlikely, particularly at a time when Palace enamellers were certainly capable of far finer work both artistically and technically. It would appear that initially there was no particular pressure on the artists to produce better wares.
Fig. 15 Inscribed around the neck 乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (Made during the Qianlong period) The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’).
Fig. 16 Inscribed in seal script preceding the main-side inscription 乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (‘Made during the Qianlong period’), any mark on the foot unrecorded. Arts of China, Hong Kong.
These early, dated bottles are accompanied by undated but stylistically identical snuff bottles with similarly unexpected inclusion of text. They can only have been made at the same time as the dated examples (figs. 18-22).
Their manufacture in the Forbidden City is confirmed on one example formerly in the Bloch Collection (fig. 8). Dated to the sixth month of 1768, it is inscribed unambiguously Zuoyu Neiting (‘Made at the Inner Court’). The Neiting, or Inner Court is an area between the Gates of Heavenly Purity and Earthly Peace, located centrally in the northern section of the Forbidden City.
Now that we know the origins of the name and the date of the inauguration of the Guyue xuan in 1767; the burst of production in a few months of Summer/Autumn of each year, and their place of manufacture in the Forbidden City; we are in a position to consider their purpose.
With these clues we can suggest that they were produced initially as prizes to be distributed at the imperial hunting trip when, most years, the Court would move north of the Great Wall in either late September or October by the western calendar. Based at Chengde (Rehe, Jehol), a true Summer Palace, it provided an excuse to train troops in the essential Manchu martial skills of archery and horsemanship. Apart from the Emperor and members of his family, officials and servants, the Manchu and Mongolian banners of the Eight Banner army were included – Han Chinese soldiers were not. It provided an opportunity to reverse the effects among the Eight Banners of living a largely Chinese lifestyle in cities.
The hunt did not take place every year, but for the years of the dated bottles, from 1767-1770 it did. We know of the prevalence of such prizes from the imperial archives. In 1751 (sixth month, twenty-fourth day) it is recorded that a range of wares, including thirty unspecified snuff bottles were delivered to be presented as prizes during the hunt.[i] In 1754 (first month, thirtieth day) the emperor orders one hundred glass snuff bottles in a variety of colours, to be prepared for use as gifts while hunting.[ii] Zhang Weiyong, who noted this, goes on to explain that it was the custom while on hunting trips with his courtiers for the emperor to distribute gifts and prizes to successful hunters.[iii] In 1755 (sixth month, twenty-eighth day) an order is placed for five hundred glass snuff bottles and three thousand pieces of glass and utensils to be used as gifts at the palace at Chengde – the main base for the Hunt.[iv] The predominance of snuff bottes among such prizes is due to the fact that the Manchus were snuff takers, following the lead of the Kangxi and subsequent emperors, and the snuff bottle, like the thumb-ring, the shaved forehead and pig-tail, became a Manchu national marker. Another archival entry in 1755 records that the Guangdong Maritime Customs Office submitted three hundred bottles of foreign snuff to be forwarded to the Court at Chengde. These would not have been snuff-bottles as we use the term, but the large glass flasks in which imported snuff much of it from Brazil, arrived in China.
In the 1751 record, wares for the hunt were delivered in the sixth month, while the majority of the dated Guyue xuan wares are also produced in the sixth month, so given those inscribed Shangshang (‘First Prize’), it is reasonable to assume that Guyue xuan wares originated as prizes for the hunt. Most of the dated group are from the sixth month, with far fewer from the seventh. By the western calendar the sixth month of 1767 was from 26 June - 25 July; in 1768, 14 July - 11 August, and in 1769, 3 July – 1 August. One of the exceptions is dated to Autumn of 1768. Autumn begins with the seventh month which in 1767 began on 11th August by the western calendar, the Court leaving for the hunt over a month later on 22nd September. In other years the journey north was later (in 1767, 8th October; 1769, 9 October, and 1770, 14 October).[v]
What appears to have happened in 1767 is that the emperor decided to set up a separate production centre for enamelled snuff bottles for distribution, not to impress with the artistry involved so much as to provide gifts and prizes. There was no need for these to live up to the exacting, and technically difficult demands of the finest Yuanming yuan wares. They needed little more than appropriately symbolic subject matter, and some evidence of the imperial nature of the gift. To receive such a gift from the Emperor was sufficient honour, the nature of the gift itself was incidental. Large numbers of Imperial bottles distributed as imperial gifts during the Qing dynasty tended to end up in the tombs of the Qing elite. If one took a snuff bottle to the afterlife at all, it would of course be the bottle that represented the high honour of being singled out by the emperor. Some of the broad group of enamelled wares of this group have also been excavated from tombs (see fig. 31). The advantage of this plan for the Court was the avoidance of the expense and time involved in producing the finest enamelled glass wares, where the failure rate was relatively high, and produce quickly and reliably much simpler wares. Those involved in the new, or re-opened, enamelling facility in the Forbidden City seemed to have started from scratch with rudimentary skills both artistically and technically.
We might also read some significance into the two common subjects. The lotus grows in summer and autumn, the chrysanthemum being firmly associated with Autumn, but there is no need to do so to establish their period and purpose.
Because they are obviously not in a class with the finest Palace enamelled-glass wares of the Qianlong period, they became suspect and often dismissed as later fakes.
So far research into the archives has yet to reveal any mention of Guyue xuan wares, but it is clear that not everything produced at the Palace Workshops was recorded. Thousands of glass snuff bottles were not but we know they were produced by constant orders that are recorded for large batches to be stoppered by another workshop where archival records were more common. Clearly much of the vast quantities produced in Imperial workshops was not considered in need of detailed archival record. If Guyue xuan wares were initially made with little regard for their artistry it is unlikely that they would have been recorded. A main focus of the Archives was on what the emperor was personally interested in, ordered, and responded to rather than lower-level production where he was not involved. Even the masterpieces of enamelled glass were only occasionally recorded.
After the wares from 1767 to 1770, dated or not, we begin to see growing sophistication in the painting and subject matter, beginning in the 1770s. After the dated wares, the Guyue xuan designation, mostly in iron red, migrates to the foot, while the style, subject matter, and limited palette of enamels remains much the same, although a frog sometimes appears with the lotus. The absence of any further precisely dated ware obscures the chronology of this evolution.
Fig. 17 The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Anita and Mario Zurrer collection.
Fig. 18 The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Formerly Mary and George Bloch Collection.
Fig. 19 The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Rosemary and Hugh Henry-May collection.
One of the undated bottles probably produced in the 1770s is not only unusual in introducing panels of decoration and formalized surrounding designs, but has an engraved Guyue xuan mark – an occasional variant.
Fig. 20 The foot engraved with古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Private collection, England.
A unique bottle from the gradually evolving early wares is stylistically similar, with the same subject of lotus, but the glass has been carved in relief first, albeit in a rather unsophisticated manner (fig. 21), heralding the later, relief-carved Guyue xuan wares.
Fig. 21. The earliest known example with partial relief carving. The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Marakovic Collection, Vienna.
One of the undated examples probably from the 1770s shows a marked improvement (fig. 22) and hints at the style of the classic Guyue xuan wares that followed where some were single-plane, the enamelling going straight onto the flat glass surface, and some dual-plane, where the glass had been previously carved inn relief with the main elements of the design to be completed by the enameller. Again the poetic sentiment on one side refers to the ideal gentleman: ‘It [the lotus] stands upright, resembling the virtue of a noble man; it is unsullied, like the air cultivated by the ancients.’
Fig. 22. The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Formerly Mary and George Bloch collection.
On the dated wares the commonest subject was the lotus, although some were decorated with chrysanthemums, combined with text and with the occasional butterfly. Together the pictorial and textual content offer auspicious symbolism suitable for general distribution to unidentified recipients. If the bottles were made for imperial consideration, the same subject and general composition over and over would have become tiresome, but if they were to be distributed always to different individuals, there was no need to vary the designs. The lotus carries symbolism of peace, harmony, purity and continuity. Lianlian (‘lotus-lotus’), based on one name for the lotus, is a pun on niannian (‘year after year’), suggesting the recipient should strive for excellence in service to the emperor year after year.
The natural and convincing wear of most examples, some so worn as to partially obliterate parts of the design, suggest considerable age and extensive use. This is to be expected of a gift from the emperor. The recipient would be likely to use it for the rest of his life, offering snuff to friends so they might enjoy both the content and the implications of the container.
This documentary, early group, then evolves steadily for the rest of the reign. One distinctive group is associated with what is probably another pseudonym, Wu Yuchuan吳玉川, usually signed in a seal, but in fig. 24, Yuchuan appears in regular script above the seal of the full name. The example on a blue ground (figs. 23) obviously arises out of the early dated group. A series of imperial connections can be made with Wu Yuchuan wares through imperial designations or likely imperial subject matter. There is also one on imperial yellow glass, probably a product of the Imperial glassworks.[i] It is possible that the name first appears in the 1770s, and may have continued into the abdication years from 1796-1799, as some of the finest works bearing this name are inscribed on the foot 大清年製 Da Qing nian zhi (‘Made during the Qing dynasty’) – fig. 24, which is possibly by the same enameller but in this case without the name. In the late eighteenth century the only reason that suggests itself for such a usage is during the abdication years when the Jiaqing emperor was officially on the throne, but the Qianlong emperor still wielded overriding power, and had his own reign title added to orders produced during the first years of the Jiaqing reign. The continued use of both reign marks on products is confirmed in the archives, but if these wares were still being used as prizes at the Hunt, the more generic dynasty designation might have resolved a tricky protocol issue. After the first group of documentary wares, both the archives and the wares themselves fall silent. Indeed, after the early dated wares, we can no longer be sure which group was being made where. Between the 1770s and 1799, as quality of both art and techniques improved, more skilled enamellers from the Forbidden City may have been transferred to the Yuanming Yuan, or carried on producing much improved wares at the Inner Court facility.
Fig. 23. Probably 1770-1780. Signed Wu Yuchuan 吳玉川in a seal, the foot inscribed 古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Formerly Mary and George Bloch collection.
Fig. 25. Probably 1770-1799. The foot inscribed 大清年製 Da Qing nian zhi (‘Made during the Qing dynasty’). J & J Collection.
We can follow the evolution of the early dated group, through the Wu Yuchuan wares to a series of wares with a broader palette, better quality of painting and thin, painterly use of the enamels (fig. 26).
Fig. 26. Probably 1770-1799. The foot inscribed 古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
Fig 27 was probably enamelled on an existing glass bottle already engraved with its reign mark; it represents the earlier phase of the classic Guyue xuan wares, beginning perhaps as early as the 1770s but probably continuing until 1799. It is possible that the use of the Guyue xuan designation continued for a while after the death of the Qianlong emperor, even if his reign title did not. The reign name was not used apocryphally until gathering antiquarian interest in old snuff bottles from the early Daoguang period.
Fig. 27. The foot engraved 乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (‘Made during the Qianlong period’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
Fig. 28 is typical of the best of the single plane Guyue xuan wares which probably evolved into the dual-plane equivalents which would probably then have continued as a parallel option thereafter rather than as a replacement.
Fig 28. The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
Fig. 29 represents at the highest level the two-plane group.
Fig. 29. The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection.
With production from the end of the eighteenth century it becomes more difficult to separate out distinct groups. Fig. 30 is an example where the jewel like quality of the enamels is inherited from mid-reign masterpieces from the Yuanming yuan workshop, but the bottle has the standard Guyue xuan designation on the foot. In this case, however, by reference to enamelled metal wares, we can date this subject, and general composition of pairs of birds, to the latter years of the Qianlong emperor’s life. From the abdication years from 1795 to 1799, there are two versions known enamelled on metal, one marked Jiaqing yuzhi 嘉慶御製Jiaqing yuzhi (‘Made by imperial command of the Jiaqing emperor’), the other, 乾隆御製 Qianlong yuzhi (‘Made by Imperial command of the Qianlong Emperor’), probably painted at the same time one for each emperor. The design and composition may, of course, predate these two bottles, but it does establish the theme as still current in the abdication years even if this particular bottle may have been made earlier at whichever workshop.
Fig. 30. The foot inscribed古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’).
There are equivalents of some of these groups in wares other than snuff bottles (and the lone thumb-ring), although the Wu Yuchuan wares are confined to snuff bottles. With the broader range of vessels either the Guyue xuan, or Qianlong, four-character regular-script marks appear on the foot.
Contradicting the common attribution of some of these wares to the Republic period, one of the undated bottles, from the broader group but stylistically attributable to 1767-1780, was recently excavated from a tomb in the environs of Beijing in a condition that suggests lengthy interment (fig. 31). It is painted on a transparent green glass bottle of a type that would, in any case, be reasonably associated with Imperial production and bears an iron-red, four character Qianlong reign mark. It also has an original, eighteenth-century style metal stopper corroded from long burial.
Fig. 31. Excavated from a tomb, probably in the environs of Beijing, the foot inscribed 乾隆年製 Qianlong nian zhi (‘Made during the Qianlong period’).
They are also found in early collections. One in the Victoria and Albert Museum was part of the Salting Bequest of 1910, while the above-mentioned yellow ground example signed with the name Wu Yuchuan was given to the Victoria & Albert Museum in 1916 as part of the Orchardson gift.[i] The signs of wear suggest considerable use and it is highly unlikely to have been produced, used, entered the Orchardson collection, and then been given to the museum all within the previous four years since the Republic period began.
The question-mark hanging over the group arose because it had become firmly established that enamelling on glass reached a far higher standard of technical and artistic perfection at the court well before the term Guyue xuan was introduced to the art. It seemed sensible to be cautious about a later imperial group that was, by comparison, artistically pedestrian.
A key to addressing this apparent anomaly rests in a well-known group of enamelled porcelain wares from the Kangxi reign bearing the designation康熙御製Kangxi yuzhi (‘By Imperial command of the Kangxi emperor’). They were considered fake in the West because they were far more sophisticated than similar wares made at Jingdezhen in the following Yongzheng reign. This was the view of English experts when I was a youngster and just beginning to study enamels. As soon as I did, I began to find the reasons for this conclusion unconvincing, and the wares themselves impossible to sensibly place as later copies. It took a few years to discover what the problem was, but when I did it was very simple. The criteria were correct. Had both groups been part of the same evolution of enamelling, the conclusions would have made perfect sense. But they weren’t, and that was the crucial clue that had been missed. The Kangxi wares and the Jingdezhen wares were made at two different places, developing independently both technically and artistically so conflating the two production centres was bound to be misleading. The finest of the Yuzhi wares were decorated at the Imperial workshops in Beijing, and subsequently at the Yuanming yuan, on blank porcelain sent from Jingdezhen, with the assistance of both skilled Jesuits, accomplished in the use of the new famille rose palette of enamels, and court artists either preparing designs or painting directly onto the blank porcelain.[ii] The success of the Beijing wares prompted the Court to order similar wares from the Imperial Kilns at Jingdezhen. The two groups were easily separated stylistically once dual production was recognized. The Beijing wares were predominantly made with the newly imported, European, more extensive palette of enamels and they were decorated on biscuit exteriors, not over glaze as were all the Jingdezhen examples. The Beijing wares also had, as standard after a brief experimental phase in the late Kangxi period, blue enamel, regular-script reign marks. The southern versions used the new palette sparingly, if at all, and had underglaze-blue reign marks, although still in regular script. Separated, they made perfect sense.
The same shift in criteria resolved the problem with the current group of enamelled glass bottles. They were made at a different imperial enamelling facility and for a different purpose without the need for a high level of artistry.
The Yongzheng emperor, who ascended the throne in 1723, preferred the Yuanming yuan to the Forbidden City, and not only moved himself and much of his administration there early in the reign, he moved some imperial manufacturing, including the enamelling workshops which remained in the Yuanming yuan well after his death and the ascension of the Qianlong Emperor in 1736. The Ruyiguan, the design and sometime production facility for the palace workshops, was apparently never in the Beijing palace, as is usually assumed, it was the name given to the artistic design facility set up by the Yongzheng emperor at the Yuanming yuan. That is where all the masterpieces of enamelling on metal and glass from the Yongzheng reign until 1767 were produced with artistic and technical excellence as primary goals. That production was under the direct control of the Emperor, for his own use or collection, or to distribute to family, friends, favoured officials, visiting dignitaries, respected literati, or anyone else at his sole discretion. At the Yuanming yuan enamelling workshop no expense was spared in mastering the art and technical control and producing the highest quality possible, even if, for whatever reason, some individual orders were inevitably of lesser quality depending upon imperial requirements. A direct order from the emperor would have been likely to merit greater attention than large quantities of wares for distribution - as with vast numbers of plain, or faceted glass bottles produced during the eighteenth century to be given away at banquets and festival occasions, partly as fancy containers for gifts of snuff.
With the dated group made at the Forbidden City, it is possible that production continued with little improvement in either art or technique for the first few years because they may have been produced only during the summer and early autumn by a very small group of artists and technicians, one a competent calligrapher, who perhaps returned to other duties in the Palace workshops for the rest of the year. It may not have been until enameled glass bearing a Guyue Xuan mark became a standard type of Palace enameled glass that more regular production began, leading to an improvement in quality, and the classic Guyue Xuan wares.
It is also likely that, initially, locally made enamels were used rather than those imported from European that were used on the finest wares and on the earliest before local enamels were produced at the Imperial glassworks by 1728. We know that there were ample stores of these imported enamels, since they survived into the twentieth century and were used by Ye Bengqi and even Wang Xisan as late as the 1960s. We also know that they were valued for their high quality.
Possible inspiration for naming the pavilion Guyue xuan may be found in the phrase guyue (‘ancient moon’) which appears in the emperor’s poetry and on a series of porcelain snuff bottles produced under the directorship of Tang Ying in the 1740s or possibly early 1750s – fig. 32).
Fig. 32. Poem by the Qianlong emperor with古月 guyue as the first two characters. Jingdezhen imperial kilns, under the directorship of Tang Ying, who probably wrote the text. Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection 21.3.583.
The Qianlong emperor may never have lived in the Jian Yuan, but he certainly made the one pavilion famous by association with the series of palace enamelled wares associated with it. After the Guyuexuan was lost to the reconstruction of 1810, it faded from memory other than as the designation of imperial enamel-arts produced at the Palace workshops. By the latter part of the Qing dynasty not only had the name been extended to a range of other Palace wares, including ceramics and earlier wares, a series of myths and legends had added to the confusion.
Two western scholars came to the correct conclusion as to the strictly limited range of Guyue xuan wares, although not to the origin of the name. Their focus was not primarily on enamels or the Guyue xuan problem, one being a glossary of Chinese art, the other a history of Chinese art generally.[i]
I began studying the problem in response to a meeting with Sir Percival David and his wife Sheila Yorke Hardy at their home in Belgravia as a teenager in about 1960. Subsequently, I acquired a copy of a book devoted to snuff bottles – the earliest in Chinese written in the 1880s by the literatus, artist and snuff and snuff-bottle connoisseur, Zhao Zhiqian. The translations of this useful work were gradually improved as I progressed from my local Chinese restaurant waiter, to a bilingual scholar at the Foreign Office, and eventually to Professor Richard John Lynn.[ii] It is his translation I paraphrase as follows, with his permission and help in re-considering the original translation. After dealing with glass overlay bottles, Zhao Zhiqian segues into: ‘Separate from these there is another type, the Guyue xuan, which has a white ground and is painted with enamels.’ For ‘white ground’ he used the term ‘clam shell jade,’ and for ‘enamel painting’ the traditional designation ‘decorated in five colors.’ Since this appears immediately following a section on overlay glass bottles, it has sometimes been misinterpreted as referring to a group of five-color overlay glass snuff bottles, but the use of the term ‘five colors’ to designate famille-rose enamels is so commonplace in the Imperial records that there can no longer be any doubt as to his intended meaning. He continues: ‘There are also those with painted enamel decoration, where short poems are inscribed in empty spaces, with the base inscribed Guyue Xuan. Those that are inscribed Qianlong nianzhi (‘Made in the Qianlong period’) are especially beautiful.’ Zhao then proceeds to identify a distinct group of Guyue Xuan wares which are enamelled on a carved, relief ground, a type familiar to snuff-bottle collectors. “There are also those that are carved with mountains of the immortals, with pavilion towers, rare birds, and wondrous beasts, all decorated with enamels....”
The reason for extending the Guyue xuan designation to a far wider range of both wares and periods may also be found here, either originating in Zhao’s workor simply reporting conventional wisdom at the time with his comment that of the Guyue xuan wares, those with Qianlong reign marks were especially beautiful. Whatever the reason, the term was extended to imperial enamelled glass wares generally.
The Guyue xuan designation is also found on a rare, small group of plain glass snuff bottles made at the Court, but of a quality more likely to indicate potential imperial use. The few known examples that are not recent copies are of an imperial type, one made of the realgar glass so popular at Court during the 18th century (fig. 33). It is far more sophisticated than the dated group of enamelled wares, and a clue that it was made for the Emperor rather than for distribution - apart from material, style and quality - may lie in the use of the more esoteric seal-script on all three. Regular script would have been more universally recognized. The other examples are also in seal-script.
Fig. 33. Realgar glass made at the Palace glassworks and carved at the lapidary works, the foot inscribed in relief, seal-script古月軒 Guyue xuan (‘Ancient Moon Pavilion’). Water, Pine and Stone Retreat collection 34.2.686.
The designation was also subsequently, and quite inappropriately, used on the occasional late Qing ceramic snuff bottle and even on one inside-painted example, as manufacturers began to take advantage of the imperial designation to fool the mystified and further the confusion – and sell their wares.
Conclusion
The Guyue xuan wares, named for a pavilion in the Jian Yuan in the summer of 1767, were initially produced as prizes to be awarded at the annual hunt at the Mulan hunting grounds of the Qing emperors. To make them, a separate enamelling workshop was set up in the Forbidden city while high-end enamelling continued at the Yuanming yuan. At first they appear to have been produced by trainee enamellers in the summer and early autumn of 1767-1770, but they gradually evolved into more artistic wares in the 1770s and 1780s, culminating in the classic wares, and gradually becoming more important as part of imperial enamelling of the late Qianlong reign. Once the Guyue xuan wares evolve to greater artistic merit, the use of the term as a generic identifier becomes more problematic, but we can continue to safely include those with the Guyue xuan. Otherwise, at this point, any generic identification of Guyue xuan wares becomes unnecessary.
The term properly applies only to this evolution, and as a side-issue to the rare monochrome glass snuff bottles that bear the Guyue xuan name. To use it to describe any enamelled glass that predates 1767, or to a wider range of enamelled porcelain or metal produced at the imperial workshops is both inappropriate and misleading. It is also misleading to use the name qualitatively as an indication of the finest enamelling made at the Court.
Over the years, I have published earlier results of a long-term investigation into Guyue xuan wares illustrating many other pieces.[i]
Hugh Moss
At the Water, Pine and Stone Retreat, May 2022.
[i] Zhang Weiyong, p. 74.
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Lam Radiance, p. 56, archive no. 3448
[iv] Yang Clague, p. 79; Yang Brill, p. 144, and EBC BM, p. xxiii). Lam relates this event to the activities of de Broussard (Lam Radiance, p. 45), and Zhang deals with their delivery (Zhang Weiyong, p. 77). This must be the same order as that noted by Zhang Weiyong (Zhang Weiyong, p. 74), where the precise date is given, although Zhang’s version records five hundred snuff bottles and two thousand - rather than three thousand - other pieces, which is probably a mistake.
[v] Qianlong benji. Qing shigao (Basic Annals of Qianlong. Draft History of the Qing Dynasty.
[vi] Helen White, Snuff Bottles from China, London, Bamboo Publishing in Association with the Victoria and Albert Museum, 1990, Plate 61, centre, for the yellow glass example.
[vii] Ibid. Plate 60, lower right.
[viii] I published my findings, establishing them as genuine to a western audience in Hugh Moss, By Imperial Command: An Introduction to Qing Imperial Painted Enamels. Hong Kong: Hibiya, 1976.
[ix] S. Howard-Hansford, A Glossary of Chinese Art and Archaeology. London: The China Society, 1954. P.83 and Sherman E. Lee, A History of Far Eastern Art, New York, Harry B. Abrams, 1973. P.460. For a review of the confusion and some of the far-fetched responses can be found in Sheila Yorke Hardy ‘Ku Yue Hsuan. A New Hypothesis.’ Oriental Art, 2, no. 3, Winter 1949-1950. I also summarised this and other earlier myths in Hugh Moss, ‘Enameled Glass Wares of the Ku Yueh Hsuan Group’ Journal. The International Chinese Snuff Bottle Society, June 1978, pp. 5-25.
[x] Lynn, Richard John (1991), ‘Researches Done During Spare Time into the Realm of Yong Lu, God of the Nose: The Yonglu Xianjie of Zhao Zhiqian (1829-1884)’, Journal of the International Chinese Snuff Bottle Society, 23/3 (Autumn), 5-26.
[xi] The more recent versions are Hugh Moss, ‘Mysteries of the Ancient Moon,’ JICSBS, Spring 2006, pp. 24–26 (also available on e-yaji.com), and Hugh Moss, Victor Graham and Ka Bo Tsang, A Treasury of Chinese Snuff Bottles. The collection of Mary and George Bloch, Herald International, Hong Kong, Vol. 6 Arts of the Fire.