394 EEPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1888. 



as it was at the time understood, may be regarded as indicating a 

 " change from the original meaning."* Even if this be true, no data are 

 thereby afforded to help fix even the approximate date of change in the 

 method of manufacture. For after the change in the system of manu- 

 facture had taken place, a considerable period would almost certainly 

 elapse before an author of sufficient literary importance to impose a new 

 style of writing on the nation would learn sufficient regarding the al- 

 tered ingredients employed to have the corresponding modification in 

 the descriptive word suggested to his mind, and a still longer period 

 would elapse before this newly-coined word would pass into current use. 

 The authors translated by M. Julien, too, state distinctly that the 

 introduction of the later form — that with the radical "stone" — and the 

 continued use of it, are due to ignorance and error. At Tz'u-chou, a 

 district anciently within the department of Changte, in Honau prov- 

 ince, but now belonging to the department of Kuangp'ing, in Chihli 

 province, a kind of porcelain was made during the Sung dynasty which 

 enjoyed a very high reputation, the plain white specimens bringing 

 even higher prices than the celebrated productions of Tingchow, which 

 it closely resembled. This ware was known as Tz'il ware, or porcelain 

 from Tz'u-chow, and thus this form of the character, which was origi- 

 nally a local designation, not an intentional modification of the older 

 form introduced to typify a modification in the system of manufacture, 

 passed into general use to designate not merely this special class, but 

 (erroneously) all porcelain.t 



ORIGIN OF TERM "PORCELAIN." 



It is a curious coincidence that no less diversity of opinion has ex- 

 isted regarding the date at which the western equivalent of this word 

 tz^ii, the term " porcelain," was introduced and the article it has at dif- 

 ferent times been used to designate. Pere d'Entrecolles affirms that 

 the name jjorcelain was first given by the Portuguese to the Chinese 

 vases imported by them into Europe in 1518, but further researches 

 into the history of the word by M. Brongniart and M. de Laborde show 

 that the name arose from a supposed resemblance in appearance of sur- 

 face between the transparent pottery of the East and certain shells 

 which had been previously so designated. M. de Laborde says: 



Les anciens ayant trouvd ou chercli6 une ressemblance entre ce qu'ils appelaient 

 porca etcertaines coquilles, donn^rent a celles-la le nom de porcella. Le moyeu age 

 accepta cette analogie en appelant porcelains une faraille entiere de coquilles, et 

 anssi les ouvrages qui^taient faits de nacre de perle, et, par metonymie, la nacre 

 seule tir€e de la coquille. 



*Dr. Hirth: Ancient Chinese Porcelain p. 2. 



t Julien, op. cit., p. 29: This is, I think, probably the true explanation of the change 

 of form ; though, writing from memory as I do, and without the necessary works at 

 hand to refer to, I can not state this to be a fact. I believe that the only correct 

 form of writing this character recognized at the present time by the Imperial Acad- 

 emy is the original form, with the radical "earthenware," not that with the radical 

 "stone." 



