HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 



The preceding report of Mr. Nichols leaves no doubt that the 

 pottery in question, as confirmed by Mr. Hobson, is a porcelanous or 

 porcelain-like ware, as regards the composition of both body and glaze. 

 It is a forerunner of true porcelain; it represents one of the initial or 

 primitive stages of development through which porcelain must have 

 passed before it could reach that state of perfection for which the 

 Chinese product gained fame throughout the world. The history of 

 porcelain has been singularly exposed to misrepresentations and mis- 

 understandings, chiefly for the reason that Chinese accounts of the 

 subject are obscure, enigmatic, and, moreover, disappointingly meagre 

 and unsatisfactory. In his eminently critical and excellent work, 

 Hobson has done a great deal to eradicate many of the old supersti- 

 tions. It was obvious that the problem of the origin of porcelain could 

 be solved only by archaeological, not by philological, methods; and it 

 is due to the investigations of Mr. Nichols that we may now for the 

 first time formulate certain opinions regarding the beginnings of porce- 

 lain, which are grounded on matter-of-fact observation, and not on 

 a more or less arbitrary interpretation of texts. Therefore the question 

 may first be discussed from an archaeological viewpoint; and then it 

 remains to be seen whether, with the result thus obtained, Chinese 

 traditions may not be better and more profitably understood. 



Before attempting to determine the date of the "Han" porcelanous 

 ware, it will be useful to raise the question whether there is now a 

 possibility of dating the first manufacture of true porcelain. I shall 

 not insist on the evidence deduced by Bushell and Hobson from Chinese 

 sources, to the effect that porcelain was made under the T'ang dynasty 

 (618-906) as early as the beginning of the seventh century. Refer- 

 ence will be made to only one source which has not yet been enlisted 

 for the study of the question, and then we may proceed to archaeological 

 evidence. 



An incontrovertible proof for the existence of porcelain in the 

 seventh century is contained in the memorable account of the Buddhist 

 pilgrim I-tsing (635-713), who visited India from 671 to 695. In dis- 

 cussing the utensils to be utilized by the monks of India, I-tsing speaks 

 also of Indian earthenware vessels, and remarks, "In India, there was 

 originally neither porcelain (ts'e §£) nor lacquer. Porcelain, if glazed, 

 is no doubt clean. Lacquered articles are sometimes brought to India 



95 



