390 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSETTM, 1888. 



SUI DYNASTY, 581 TO 617. 



Under the Sui dynasty, in spite of its short-iived existence, consider- 

 able progress appears to have taken place. Mention is made of a 

 green porcelain manufactured under the directions of Ho Chou or Ho 

 Kuei-lin, president of the board of works, to replace glass, the method 

 of making which had been forgotten " since its introduction into China 

 by Indian or Syrian artisans about A. D. 424." * A celebrated workman 

 named T'ao Yiif is said to have produced porcelain so like jade, that is, 

 semi-transparent and of vitreous appearance, that his vases were known 

 as "artificial jade;" and about the close of this or the beginning of the 

 following dynasty, porcelain, white in color and bright as jade (known 

 as Ho-yas, i. e., Ho porcelain) was manufactured by Ho Chung-ch'u, a 

 workman who came from Hsinp'ing, the district where porcelain (te'w) 

 had its first origin under the Han dynasty. An imperial decree of 583 

 ordered the establishment of a manufactory at the place now known 

 as Chingte-chen (so named from the title of the period,| ChingtS, in 

 which it was inaugurated) for articles for the use of the imperial house- 

 hold, and several others sprang up in the vicinity shortly afterwards. 



* Dv Hirtb: China and the Roman Orient, pp. 230 et seq. 



t The producer's reputed name, meaning as it does "faience or klin jade" sounds 

 apocryphal, and seems more likely to have been the term by which this ware was 

 known. 



t It being contrary to etiquette to mention the personal name of a Chinese sovereigi, 

 the practice was introduced B. C. 163, under the earlier Han dynasty, of the mon- 

 arch, on his accession co the throne, selecting some title for his reign in place of the 

 title of Prince so-and-so, which had been usually employed prior to the time of Shih 

 Huangti, B. C. 221. These titles were usually so chosen as to be of happy augury, 

 but if, in spite of such good omen, disorder or misfortune ensued or some other reason 

 seemed to render a change advisable, one title would be abandoned in favor of 

 another. This title is termed nien-has, " the year designation," because so long as 

 it lasted the date of all events was chronicled as such and such a year of such and 

 such a title or nien-has. Upon his death, however, the emperor received an honor- 

 ific title, and but one title, no matter how many me/i--/ias or "year designations" 

 he may have employed while alive, under which the religious ceremonies due to hiui 

 were offered, and which is therefore termed the mias-Aas or "temple designation." 

 Thus it results that when in Chinese literature a deceased emperor is personally 

 alluded to, he is spoken of under his " temple designation," while if the date of an 

 event which occurred during his reign is quoted, it is said to have taken place in such 

 and such a year of the appropriate " year designation." Take as an instance the 

 last emperor of the Yiian dynasty, who reigned from 1333 to 1367 : if spoken of per- 

 sonally, his title would be Shunti of the Yiian dynasty ; but if the year 1334 were 

 spoken of, it would read "the second year of (the) Yiian t'ung (period)," and simi- 

 larly 1336 and 1334 would read " the second year of (the) Chihyiian (period)" and 

 "the second year of (the) Chihcheng (period)." Owing to the fact that dates are 

 thus rendered by the Chinese, foreign writers have at times erroneously spoken of 

 the nien-has or" period" as the reign, whereas the mias-has or" temple designation " 

 alone corresponds to the western idea of reign, so far as any time prior to the Ming 

 dynasty is concerned. Daring the Ming and its successor, the present dynasty, how- 

 ever, each emperor has practically used but one " year designation " throughout the 

 period he has occupied the throne, practically because though Ying Tsung of the 

 Ming dynasty employed two such designations, they were separated by an interreg- 



