The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty: the Case of Zhang Yanyuan’S Lidai Minghua Ji

Home , Lu Sui, Mo (Chinese zoology), Yan Liben, Zhang Sengyou

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222

brill.com/cad

The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty: The Case of Zhang Yanyuan’s Lidai minghua ji

Ning Xiaomeng Department of Philosophy, Peking University, PR China [email protected]

Abstract

This essay offers a critical reflection on the central concept of “famous painting” as expounded in Zhang Yanyuan’s Lidai minghua ji (历代名画记, A Record of Famous Paintings of All Dynasties). Building upon the past scholarship, this essay will proceed in the following three steps. I propose to distinguish the concept of “famous painting” from the common understanding of painting. I argue that it is the former that plays a central role in the entire text of the Lidai minghua ji. As a result of this new approach, I will outline an intentional and discernable structure formed by the fifteen essays in the first three books. I proceed with discussing the relationship between famous paintings and famous painters so as to demonstrate Zhang Yanyuan’s implicit intention and considerations in selecting and evaluating painters and their works. Finally, I examine the basic formats of famous painting and further elucidate the historical dimension embedded within the concept of famous painting that constituted and changed the very idea under consideration.

Keywords famous painting – famous painter – scroll – screen – huazhang – mural

1 Introduction1

Among all the written works in the history about Chinese painting, Zhang Yanyuan’s (张彦远) Lidai minghua ji (历代名画记, A Record of Famous Paintings of All Dynasties) is regarded as a reference.2 Although it was neither the first record in history of the lives and works of famous painters, nor the first evaluation of painters and their works according to clearly defined and systematic criteria, the Lidai minghua ji provided the basic ideas and format for historical writing on Chinese painting, setting a quasi-inescapable paradigm for subsequent works in the field. The Lidai minghua ji consists of ten books, with the first three books describ- ing briefly the significance, historical development, and basic factors of painting, and the seven succeeding ones containing the biographies of painters in all dynasties up to the author’s own time. This compilation structure has been highly valued by those who have studied it. For example, Yu Shaosong (余绍宋, 1883-1949) argued that this work was written after the manner of standard histories. He regarded the first part (Books 1 to 3) as playing the role of shu 书 or zhi 志 (historical records), whilst the second part (Books 4 to 10) as analogous to the style and form of collective biographies (列传). Thus, the relationship

1 This essay is a revised version of a text that was originally published in Chinese as “Minghua de guannian ji qi meixue yiyi: yi Lidai minghua ji wei hexin” (名画”的观念及其美学意义——以《历代名画记》为核心), Wenyi yanjiu (文艺研究), No. 9 (2016): 28-38. 2 Zhang Yanyuan (张彦远), Lidai minghua ji (历代名画记) (Hangzhou: Zhejiang renmin meishu chubanshe, 2011). The full text in English has been translated and annotated by William Reynolds Beal Acker as A Record of the Famous Painters of all the Dynasties, with the first three books in Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol.1 (Leiden. E.J. Brill, 1954), and the remaining seven in Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol.2 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1974). Some paragraphs of this work have also been translated in Early Chinese Texts on Painting, compiled and edited by Susan Bush and Hsio-yen Shih (Cambridge/ London: Harvard University Press, 1985) and the translation of some sentences and terms have been discussed by Erik Zürcher in “Recent Studies on Chinese Painting: Review Article”, T’oung Pao, Second Series, Vol.51, Livr. 4/5 (1964): 377-422. This paper will take Acker’s translation as the main reference with slight modifications in some places, while references are also made to the other two works. In order to avoid the confusion for the English readership, the translation of the title of the Lidai minghua ji will be amended to A Record of the Famous paintings of all the Dynasties, which somehow maintains the original form of Acker’s translation, while by replacing the term “painters” with “paintings”, it tries to keep the translation accordant with the original text literally. Furthermore, similar amendments will also be made to the translations of some relative works, such as Tangchao minghua lu (唐朝名画录, Records of the Famous Paintings in the Tang Dynasty), Yizhou minghua lu (益州名画录, Records of the Famous Paintings at Yizhou), Shengchao minghua ping (圣朝名画评, Comments on the Famous Paintings of the Present Dynasty), and Wudai minghua buyi (五代名画补遗, A Supplement to the Famous Paintings of the Five Dynasties).

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 193 between the first three books and the latter ones is similar to that between the records and biographies in the standard histories. It is precisely this character- istic that makes Yu Shaosong lauded that the author was “writing a history of painting without being confined to work simply on biographies, this is where the author’s outstanding insight and knowledge are shown.”3 He therefore considered the Lidai minghua ji to be the work that played the most important role in the history of Chinese painting, just as the role that Shiji (史记 The Grand Scribe’s Records) played in Chinese historiography. In this sense, the Lidai minghua ji is not merely a record of the works and lives of painters, but should be considered as an exemplar for writing the history of Chinese painting. For this, Yu even called it the “progenitor” of the written history of Chinese painting, and “the best work ever in the history of (Chinese) painting.”4 Zong Baihua (宗白华, 1897-1986), the famous esthetician, also highly ac- claimed this work. For him, “although the title of Zhang Yanyuan’s work seems to be in the form of history, the work itself provides us with systematic considerations and discussions of the essence of painting.”5 He also noticed the differences between the first three books and the rest, and considered the fifteen essays in the first part as monographic treatises on different topics concerning painting, whereas the second part as purely historical records. He compared this work to Winckelmann’s Geschichte der Kunst des Altertums, which is also composed of two parts, the first part being a study on the essence of art, while the second part a history of art in the narrow sense. Both “have systematic considerations first, and are followed by detailed historical records.”6 What Zong Baihua highlights here is the systematizing tendency shown in the structure. For him, the treatises in the first part are not merely what Yu Shaosong described as “those that are not suitable to be included in the biographies.”7 As an esthetician, he was drawn more to the theoretical concerns of painting. He found in the fifteen essays in the first part an implicit intention to set up a system of art criticism. Following this consideration, Zong Baihua tried to lead the readers to see Zhang Yanyuan’s confidence in evaluating and classifying painters,8 and summarized Zhang’s contributions to the methodology of criticism into four aspects, and they are “setting up criteria,” “maintaining logical

3 Yu Shaosong (余绍宋), Shuhua shulu jieti (书画书录解题) (Hangzhou: Xiling yinshe chubanshe, 2012), 6-8. 4 Ibid., 6. 5 Zong Baihua (宗白华), “Zhang Yanyuan ji qi ‘Lidai minghua ji’ ” (张彦远及其《历代名画记》), Xueshu yuekan (学术月刊), vol. 1, (1994): 6. 6 Ibid. 7 Yu Shaosong, Shuhua shulu jieti, 6. 8 Ibid., 5.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 194 Ning consistency in principle,” “analyzing painters’ works in light of their different brush-stroke styles,” and “differentiating works according to the styles and the periods [to which they belong].”9 It should be noted here that Zong Baihua’s view is strongly colored by the Kantian aesthetics, which pays more attention to the judgment of taste and to the exemplary meaning of the great artists. It is from this point of view that Zong Baihua tried to reveal Zhang Yanyuan’s at- tempt in building a theory of judgment of taste and art criticism in this work, which had not received enough attention before. To frame it in the conventional terms of Chinese painting, we may conclude that Zong Baihua emphasizes on the aspect of pin (品, appreciation and classification) of the Lidai minghua ji, rather than treating it merely as a history. A similar point had been made by Ruan Pu (阮璞, 1918-2000), a famous art historian. He agreed with Yu Shaosong in comparing the structure of the Lidai minghua ji to the record-biography format in the standard histories. Moreover, he pointed out that this work had both the characteristics of pindi (品第, evaluation-classification) and zhulu (著录, records).10 As he put it,

… no matter with respect to the whole structure of the work, or to Zhang Yanyuan’s own purport in forming up the conception, this work com- bines together the characteristics of history, evaluation-classification, and records. It should not be simply placed in the category of historical works, as modern bibliographers have done. Classifying it as history has obscured the contribution of the relatively independent parts on evaluation-classification and records, and Yanyuan’s real ambition in this work thus sank into darkness.11

Taking these viewpoints into account, the crucial significance concerning the structure of the Lidai minghua ji lies in its providing a foundation of the sty- listic rules and in laying out the history of Chinese painting, i.e., its threefold consideration of historical description (史书), systematic evaluation and classification (品第), and recording and cataloguing (著录). This particular set of concerns alludes to a unique style and form of the discipline that we call the history of Chinese painting. In a sense, it is through these concerns that the main traits of Chinese painting both as history and as art criticism, as well as its inseparable relationship with appreciation and collection may be well

9 Ibid., 10-11. 10 Ruan Pu (阮璞), “Lidai minghua ji yi shizhuan zhi shu er jian ju pindi zhulu xingzhi” 《( 历代名画记》以史传之书而兼具品第著录性质), in Hua xue congzheng (画学丛证) (Shanghai: Shanghai shuhua chubanshe, 1998), 134-135. 11 Ibid.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 195 maintained. What is more, this threefold consideration is in evidence throughout the entire work, both in Books 1 to 3 and in the seven books of biographies. Only are they elucidated in the first three books as a systematic construction of theory, whereas in the biography part they are implemented in a more practi- cal way.

2 Painting and Famous Painting

Minghua (名画, famous painting) is an established term in history. In most cases, it appears in pair with fashu (法书, model works of calligraphy). Both fashu and minghua can be regarded, in the view of modern people, as famous and precious works of art. Zhang Yanyuan’s own works the Fashu yaolu (法书要录, Essential Memoranda on Model Works of Calligraphy)12 and the Lidai minghua ji (历代名画记) use these two terms precisely in this sense. This pair of terms shows that, for most people, “famous works” of calligraphy and painting should be distinguished from common writings and paintings. They are precious and worthy of being collected by the noble and wealthy as the national treasure. As recorded by Zhang Yanyuan: “the Sui Emperor (i.e., Wendi 文帝, r. 581-604) had two terraces built behind Guanwen Hall (观文殿) in Luoyang, the Eastern Capital. The one to the east was called the Terrace of Wonderful Patterns (妙楷台), where fine examples of calligraphy from early times were stored. The one to the west was called the Terrace of Precious Brush-tracks (宝迹台), which contained famous paintings of antiquity.”13 There are many similar records like these that cannot be presented here due to the limited space. The term minghua (famous paintings) also appears frequently in the titles of some works on the history of painting, such as Tangchao minghua lu (唐朝名画录, Records of the Famous Paintings in the Tang Dynasty), Yizhou minghua lu (益州名画录, Records of the Famous Paintings in Yizhou), Shengchao minghua ping (圣朝名画评, Comments on Famous Paintings of the Present Dynasty), and Wudai minghua buyi (五代名画补遗, A Supplement on the Famous Paintings of the Five Dynasties). Each of these works may have different understandings of the term minghua, but this does not affect the fact that they all treat famous paintings as precious works. In this sense, we may find that in the study

12 The title of Fashu yaolu has been translated by William Reynolds Beal Acker as Essential Memoranda on Model Works of Calligraphy, in Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, Vol. 1, and Vol. 2 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1954 and 1974), and has been translated as Essential Record of Calligraphy Exemplars in Early Chinese Texts on Painting by Susan Bush and Hsio-yen Shih, (Harvard University Press, 1985.) In Acker’s translation of the Lidai minghua ji, fashu is also translated as “masterpieces of calligraphy” in some cases. 13 Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 124-125.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 196 Ning of Chinese painting, the idea of minghua (famous painting) is indeed a concept which appears in very high frequency while lacking a thematized discussion and close analysis. It should be treated as a basic concept in the study of Chinese painting, but moreover, the embedded systematic and thematic concern on evaluation, collection, and appreciation should also be revealed and clarified. To certain degree, it is only in this way that the significance of the concept of famous painting for the history of Chinese painting can be fully shown. Attention should also be paid on how the issue of “famous painting” should be approached. Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) has already shown us, in his famous The Origin of the Work of Art, that inquiries into the concept of the work of art are always entangled with that of the artist and art. As he put it:

What art is we should be able to gather from the work. What the work is we can only find out from the nature of art…. It is said that what art is may be gathered from a comparative study of available artworks. But how can we be certain that such a study is really based on artworks unless we know beforehand what art is?14

Thus, Heidegger showed us that such an inquiry would come to a circle, a circle that we usually try to avoid but he invited us to move into. The circle reveals the difficulty in exploring the relationship between artwork and art theory. To some degree, the study of the concept of famous painting is in a similar situation. If one tries to answer what a famous painting is, one should have already known the criteria for judging whether a painting is “famous;” however, if one wants to know what the criteria are, one should have already observed famous paintings. In this sense, in order to explain the implications of the concept of “famous painting,” a purely literal definition is not enough. Because an understanding of the criteria for evaluating and appreciating paintings is already contained in one’s original impression of the idea of famous painting. That is to say, the investigation of the concept of famous painting should be accom- panied by a study of the theory of evaluation and appreciation of painting, in which the concept of famous painting itself is embedded. In order to show the particularity of the concept of famous painting, we should, first of all, differentiate it from the understanding of painting in general. In the first essay in Book 1, Zhang Yanyuan traced the origin of painting. He

14 Martin Heidegger, “The Origin of the Work of Art”, in Off the Beaten Trace, ed. & trans. Julian Young and Kenneth Haynes (London and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 2.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 197 briefly introduced several definitions of the word hua (画, painting), including “to paint is to cause to resemble” (in Guangya 广雅),15 “to paint is to give form” (in Erya 尔雅),16 “[the character] hua 画 is [derived from] the [pictogram of] raised paths between fields. [The character itself] depicts the boundary-paths and the edges of fields, and is therefore itself a drawing” (in Shuowen 说文),17 and “[The word] hua has to do with gua 挂 (to place upon, lay down, hang on). It means to depict the appearance of things with the use of colors” (Shiming 释名).18 After this survey of definitions, he also traced the history of painting in its relation to writing. As he had found out, the original form of painting is among the first styles of writings, for example, the bird writings (鸟书).19 Furthermore, paintings were one of the ways – xiangxing 象形 or pictograms – by which Chinese characters were created.20 Besides, Zhang Yanyuan talked more about the functions of paintings. After surveying paintings throughout history, he summarized their functions as “perfecting civilization and helping social relations” (成教化，助人伦). As well, pictures are the means by which virtuous people can be recognized as exemplary figures for people to com- memorate and to learn after, and the means by which evils can be illustrated with terrifying visual effects so that beholders could be warned and hence avoid doing wrong. Although it appears that Zhang Yanyuan has given detailed information on interpreting paintings, a number of researchers do not take this discussion as an elaboration of the central concept of this whole work, nor an original idea on this concept.21 Zhang Yanyuan did not come back to any of these definitions in his following descriptions and discussions on famous paintings, nor did he rely on any of the functions enumerated here to form his own opinion on the painters and the paintings he recorded.22 In a sense, the discussion on the origin of painting is more like a routine usually found

15 Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 67. 16 Ibid., 68. 17 Ibid., 69. 18 Ibid., 70. 19 Ibid., 64. 20 Ibid., 66. 21 Wei Bin (韦宾) points out that the definitions discussed in “On the Origin of Painting” were compiled from a series of other works, and all the important points in this essay have already been discussed in Jiangshi’s (江式) On Calligraphy (论书), compiled in Fashu yaolu, Book 2. See Wei Bin, Tangchao hualun kaoshi (唐朝画论考释) (Tianjin: Tianjin renmin meishu chubanshe, 2007), 73-77, 87. 22 It can be seen in the following discussion that Zhang Yanyuan’s love of painting almost has nothing to do with its function, but in contrast, the true meaning of possessing famous paintings, for him, lies in the appreciation and contemplation before them.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 198 Ning at the beginning of an article (or a book). As Erik Zürcher said in his review of the translation of the Lidai minghua ji,

The text of this section is interesting and well worth explaining. However, one should not be led astray by it. At the risk of appearing cynical, we dare say that this kind of introduction should not be taken too seriously. Its only purpose is to underline the importance of the art of painting, and to show that its pedigree is as ancient and as noble as that of literature and of the art of writing.23

According to this understanding, the discussion on the definitions and the origin of painting at the beginning of this work is not meant to be a clarification of the basic concepts for building the whole theory, as we usually expected in philosophical works, but rather, this essay only functions as a formal opening of the work, and to some extent, it shows Zhang Yanyuan’s attitude in a firm statement that painting has a noble status in Chinese culture. This presents a contrast to the embarrassing situation of the painters in their real life. Since a conventional understanding of painting is not enough to support Zhang Yanyuan’s discussion in this work, it is necessary to explain why the concept of famous painting can play such an important role. Indeed, in the second essay “On the Vicissitudes of the Art of Painting” (叙画之兴废), one notices that what Zhang Yanyuan described as vicissitude does not apply to the painting in general. His discussion in this section shows actually a history of the collection and damage of old paintings and the works created by those who were famous for painting. It is obvious that the general idea of painting, i.e., hua in its literal sense, cannot be damaged in fires, wars or relocations. The leading concept in this section is precisely “famous painting” – paintings that are collected by imperial courts throughout the dynasties since Han. Moreover, collection does not mean the systematic acquisition of any and all paintings, but only antique and precious ones. Hence, gradually, beginning with this section, Zhang Yanyuan moved from a description of the painting in general to “famous painting”, which, as mentioned above, always go along with “model works of calligraphy.” For example, “[This love of art was] even more marked in [the rebellious general] Huan Xuan, avaricious by nature and fond of curious things, who could not but try to make all the masterpieces of calligraphy and famous paintings in the whole empire come to his own hands” (重以桓玄，

23 E. Zürcher, “Recent Studies on Chinese Painting: Review Article,” T’oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 51, Livr. 4/5 (1964), 409.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 199

性贪好奇。天下法书名画，必使归己).24 Sometimes, it is replaced by mingji 名迹 (literally, famous brush tracks), e.g., “Yanyuan’s family has had for gen- erations produced aficionados of painting. My great-great-grandfather Hedong 河东 [Zhang Jiazhen 张嘉贞], and my great grandfather [Zhang Yanshang 张延赏] the Duke of the Principality of Wei successively collected famous works of art (彦远家代好尚，高祖河东公、曾祖魏国公相继鸩集名迹)”,25 or by mingzong 名踪 (literally, famous brush traces), e.g., “The Duke of Qian 汧 was widely versed in the learning of antiquity and also versatile in arts. Studying the best works exhaustively, he collected rare things, and famous works of the Wei and Jin dynasties filled his chests and boxes” (汧公博古多艺，穷精蓄奇。魏晋名踪，盈于箧笥).26 In addition, the term mingshou 名手 (famous painter; literally, the one who is famous for his skill of painting) also appears more and more frequently in connection with discussions on famous paintings. In many cases, to say famous painting is the same to say the work of mingshou. As such, famous paintings, to a large extent, can be regarded as the works of those who are famous for their painting skills. Therefore, the identity of the painter becomes the most important consideration in the evaluation of paintings. Taking this into account, it is not difficult to understand why the text in the Lidai minghua ji is arranged according to a chronological list of painters rather than the works. Consequently, the study of the concept of famous painting requires an examination of the famous painters.

3 Famous Paintings and Famous Painters

A painting is deemed famous mainly because of its painter. This is probably the reason why almost all early historical writings on Chinese painting were structured around a list of painters, and why even works with a title such as “records of famous paintings” (which is the literal meaning of “minghua ji”) devot- ed most chapters to recording the biographies of painters. However, the term “painters” we use here is not a precise translation. Indeed, there is no painter at Zhang Yanyuan’s time who could play the role of an artist as we know it today. Although people are accustomed to calling a man a painter if he demonstrates painting talent, the meaning and social status of painters has evolved with time. According to the Lidai minghua ji, there was no expression that meant exactly the same as the term “painter.” We can only find proximate terms such

24 Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 115-117. 25 Ibid., 132. 26 Ibid., 133.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 200 Ning as huagong (画工, an artisan skillful at painting and coloring) or huazhi (画直, a professional painter in an imperial court whose duty, in most cases, is to draw portraits or to record important occasions of the empire or of the emperor via painting). Another expression, huashi (画师, master painter), appeared in some cases but is obviously not an honorific title. Some would feel ashamed to be thus called,27 while others might use it on themselves to show humility.28 Zhang Yanyuan rarely used this kind of appellations to call the creators of famous paintings, except for those who really worked as huazhi.29 In most cases, what we call famous painters nowadays was described by him as neng-hua-zhe (能画者, those who had mastered the skill of painting), shan-hua-zhe (善画者, those who were good at painting), or mingshou (名手, those who were famous for their skill in painting). Among all these terms, huagong, huazhi and huashi referred to men who took up painting as a profession, whereas neng-hua-zhe, shan-hua-zhe, and mingshou denoted those who had painting talent or who were experts in painting irrespective of their professions. In fact, most of them had official positions that were not related to painting.

3.1 Contrasts between mingshou (Famous Painters) and huagong (Artisans) It is not difficult to find that, Zhang Yanyuan somehow despised the paintings of huagong (artisans). When commenting on paintings in his time, he said, “The paintings of modern men are confused and messy and altogether meaningless. Such are the works of the mass of artisans.”30 It is obvious that not all paintings at his time were made by artisans. The term huagong here was more likely referring to the style and quality of paintings by artisans than to a certain group of artisans. For him, this kind of painting appeared all in a mess, which could not be included in his discussion of famous paintings. In contrast, he believed that

27 The story of Yan Liben recorded in the Lidai minghua ji clearly shows this. See Acker: Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 2, 214. 28 Wang Wei (王维) wrote in a poem: “My contemporaries have mistaken me as a poet, indeed I should have been a master painter in my previous life.” (Wang Wei, Ouran zuo liushou (zhi liu) [偶然作六首（之六）]), in Quan Tang Shi (全唐诗), compiled and edited by Peng Dingqiu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1960), 1254. 29 In book 9, Zhang Yanyuan recorded, “Yang Shuer (杨树儿), Geng Chun (耿纯) and Ren Zhenliang (任贞亮) were employed in the Court of Assembled Genii in an auxiliary capacity During the Kaiyuan era (713-742). At that time there were also the Painter in Attendance Shao Zhaiqin (邵斋钦), and the Calligraphic Hand Ji Kuang (吉旷), both of them understood painting.” Cf. Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 2, 252. 30 Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 149.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 201

… from ancient times, those who had excelled in painting have all been capped and gowned men of noble descent, retired scholars and lofty- minded men who awakened the wonder of their own time and left behind a good name for posterity. This is not a thing that a yokel can ever do.31

It should be noted here that Zhang Yanyuan was not exactly dividing two groups of people merely according to their social classes. As mentioned above, the contrast between artisans and those who have excelled in painting lies in the differences in the quality and style of their paintings. This difference is also apparent in another requirement for painters. For Zhang Yanyuan, “unless one is acquainted with the succession of teachings of the (various) masters, one cannot talk about painting.”32 This emphasis on the succession of teachings was not meant to set a strict limit to painters or critics, but rather pointed to the importance of the spirit of the rules and methods in painting. He criticized artisan paintings as “confused and messy, and altogether meaningless,” which means that artisans always lost overall consideration on composition and arrangement, and therefore could not bring out their painting conceptions clearly and successfully. In contrast, those who excelled themselves in painting had learned from their predecessors, but they did not merely stick to what they had learned. Hence Zhang Yanyuan argued that,

… in each case, tradition was passed from master to pupil and from one generation to another. Some started new schools or branches themselves, while others had never attained disciple status. Some excelled their teachers just as green comes from blue but excels blue or ice comes from water but is colder than water. And even among those who resem- bled one another, their works demonstrated differences in the degree of exquisiteness.33

Accordingly, Zhang Yanyuan is not saying that a good painter must be trained in schools (indeed, such kind of institutions has not been set up at that time) or after a master. For him, even the relationship between a master and a pupil may be regarded as mutual learning from each other. In this sense, Zhang

31 Ibid., 153: “自古善画者，莫匪衣冠贵胄逸士高人，振妙一时，传芳千祀，非闾阎鄙贱之所能为也。”. 32 Ibid., 161-162: “若不知师资传授，则未可议乎画。”. 33 Ibid., 166-167: “各有师资，递相仿效。或自开户牖，或未及门墙。或青出于蓝，或冰寒于水，似类之间，精粗有别。”.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 202 Ning

Yanyuan revealed precisely the tension between the rules for painting and the free play in creation. For him, good painters paint with the rules and methods in mind while not being constrained by them. To some degree, the best artisans may also reach this standard, and that is why the names of some famous artisans also appeared on his list.34 According to this, we may find that the contrast between “capped and gowned men of noble descent” and “retired scholars and lofty-minded men” (衣冠贵胄，高人逸士) on the one hand and vulgarians (俗人) on the other is not strictly set between these two classes of people. To Zhang Yanyuan, the contrast lies in their respective ideas and knowledge in creating paintings.

3.2 Scope and Criteria for Zhang Yanyuan’s Selection of the Painters Comparing with the works before the Lidai minghua ji, Zhang Yanyuan’s scope of selection appears unprecedentedly large. Since Xie He’s (谢赫) Guhua pinlu (古画品录), compilations of the early works of Chinese paintings had been in the form of a record of painters and, in most cases, the paintings were arranged according to the author’s own ranking. Xie He first proposed the “Six Laws”35 as the standard of evaluating paintings. For him, “while painting has its six laws, few painters were able to master all six of them and, from ancient times until now, most could master only one (particular) branch.”36 Ever since then, the “Six Laws” has become the principal standard for critics to make evaluation and classification, although Xie He had not really provided an explicit guide for critics. Since the paintings recorded by Xie He can no longer be seen, and the text we have is brief and understated, it is very difficult to grasp how the “Six Laws” really function in his evaluation and classification. The only thing we can trace from his text is that, for him, the best painter showed his prominence in all six aspects – very few people could attain this pinnacle of achievement except two great painters, Lu Tanwei (陆探微) and Wei Xie (卫协). Other painters excelled themselves at least in one branch. What is more, most painters recorded in Guhua pinlu excelled in the subject of the human figure. This, for

34 Huang Miaozi (黄苗子) distinguishes some artisans from the list of painters according to their names. For him, some names, such as Wang Naier (王耐儿), Zhang Aier (张爱儿), Liu Shagui (刘杀鬼), Dong Nuzi (董奴子), Wang Tuozi (王陀子), Chen Jingxin (陈净心), Chen Jingyan (陈净眼), Li Guonu (李果奴), are not like the names of literati. He therefore lists them as artisans in contrast with the famous painters. See Huang Miaozi (黄苗子), Yilin yizhi (艺林一枝) (Beijing: Sanlian shudian, 2011), 282-283. 35 Among various translations and discussions on liufa (六法), I take James F. Cahill’s translation for reference. See James F. Cahill: “The Six Laws and How to Read them,” in Ars Orientalis, vol. 4 (1961), 372-381. 36 Xie He, Guhua pinlu (古画品录), in Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 4, with some modifications.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 203 one thing, reflects the main theme of painting at that time, and for another, reveals indirectly that Xie He’s rules were set, to a great extent, on the basis of his own concern with the painting of the human figure. This kind of consideration continued for a long while, even until Zhang Yanyuan’s time. It is remarkable that in Zhu Jingxuan’s 朱景玄 Tangchao minghua lu (唐朝名画录, Celebrated Paintings of the Tang Dynasty), a work written almost at the same period with the Lidai minghua ji, the author said, “painters give priority to the human figure, and thereafter rank in descending order birds and beasts, landscapes, and architectural subjects.”37 For Zhu Jingxuan, the human figure is the most difficult to paint among all themes. If a painter can show his mastery in painting the human figure, his skill in painting other objects cannot be bad.38 Hence, as we can find in Zhu Jingxuan’s record, painters whose works were ranked as “divine class” (神品) were all those who excelled not only in painting human figures and also on other themes. In a sense, Zhu Jingxuan inherited the traditional rules for evaluation and classification, i.e., taking the criteria for evaluating painting human figures as the standard for all painting. Meanwhile, as a contemporary of Zhang Yanyuan, he also showed his awareness of the changes in paintings at his own time, made some modifications or even innovation in his records and comments on painting. For example, in his work, painters who were particularly skilled in landscape painting or architectural subjects were also ranked, though in relatively lower grades. He had also introduced some constraints in ranking painters. As he put it:

I, Jingxuan, in my humble way, love the art and have kept up a constant search for its monuments. Nothing that I have not inspected in person will be cited here, but nothing that I have seen will be omitted. I have done my best, without fear of being thought a vulgarian. For my basic classification, I have used the three categories, inspired [神],excellent [妙], and capable [能], that were established by Zhang Huaiguan [张怀瓘] in his Huapin-duan [画品断] Each category is further subdivided into top, middle, and bottom grades. Since there are some men who

37 Zhu Jingxuan (朱景玄), T’ang Ch’ao Ming Hua Lu (唐朝名画录), this text is translated in English as Celebrated Paintings of the T’ang Dynasty by Chu Ching-hsüan of T’ang, trans. Alexander C. Super, in Artibus Asia, Vol. 21, No. 3/4 (1958), 206. 38 Similar descriptions can be found in Gu Kaizhi’s discussions on paintings recorded in the Lidai minghua ji, “Of all paintings, figure is the most difficult, followed by landscape, and then dogs and horses. Terraces and pavilions are nothing but fixed objects.” (Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 150, and vol. 2, 58.).

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 204 Ning

fall outside this system by not subscribing to any orthodox rules, I have added an ‘untrammeled’ category [yipin 逸品] to indicate their relative excellence.39

With this ranking system, Zhu Jingxuan’s history abandoned those painters whose works could no longer be seen. As a result, in his record, ninety-seven painters of the Tang Dynasty were listed in four categories (divine, wonderful, proficient, and untrammeled) with three members of the imperial family separately listed at the beginning without grading. In addition, twenty-five painters’ names, which were mentioned without any further comment in Li Sizhen’s (李嗣真) Huapin-lu (画品录, Evaluation of Painters), were also included at the end of the list. Therefore, although the standard of selecting painters remained traditional, the range of the selection was changed. Against such a background, Zhang Yanyuan’s scope covered both concerns, i.e., both works recorded in histories or legends, and those which had been observed by the author himself. Hence the list of painters in his record is much longer than any other preceding works. The list traced back to the ancient times, taking Shi Huang (史皇) at the time of Xuanyuan (轩辕) as the beginning of the history of painting, and Wang Mo (王默) who was active during the Zhenyuan era (贞元, 785-805) as the end. More than three hundred seventy painters were recorded in this work, and some two hundred of them lived in the Tang dynasty, whose works had probably been seen by Zhang Yanyuan in person, and their stories had been heard from elder members of his family or from his friends who shared the same interest in painting and calligraphy. The painters of earlier times had been studied and recorded according to histories and other earlier works. By a thorough examination of the references cited by Zhang Yanyuan in the Lidai minghua ji, Wei Bin pointed out that, it was probably due to his responsibility to compile the almanac of Tang that Zhang Yanyuan got the opportunity to freely read the books collected and preserved by the imperial court.40 Endymion Wilkinson noticed that,

Despite the huge burst of writing of standard histories in the Tang, there is good evidence to suppose that most of the histories compiled in this dynasty went largely unread except by a small number of scholars who specialized in history.41

39 “Celebrated Paintings of the T’ang Dynasty by Chu Ching-hsüan of T’ang”, 206. 40 Wei Bin, Tangchao hualun kao shi (Tianjin: Tianjing renmin chubanshe, 2007), 89. 41 Endymion Wilkinson, Chinese History: A New Manual (fifth edition), 706.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 205

It so happened that Zhang Yanyuan was precisely among the “small number of scholars” who had the opportunity to read these histories. In the Lidai minghua ji a large number of quotations were taken from standard histories such as Hanshu (汉书, History of the Former Han), Songshu (宋书, History of the Song), Nan-Qishu (南齐书, History of the South Qi), Weishu (魏书, History of the Wei), Liangshu (梁书, History of the Liang), Chenshu (陈书, History of the Chen), Bei-Qishu (北齐书, History of the Northern Qi), Suishu (隋书, History of the Sui), Jinshu (晋书, History of the Jin), as well as Guoshi (国史, State History, probably compiled by Wei Shu 韦述 and disappeared later in history).42 In addition, there were still a lot of other books mentioned by Zhang Yanyuan. This shows that Zhang Yanyuan’s official career in the history office can probably provide an explanation of the resources and style he applied in his writing. As for the standard of selecting painters, Zhang Yanyuan commented,

But how could I have regarded perfection in all the Six Laws as an indis- pensable condition [for a painter to be included in this book]? I have simply taken even painters who excelled in only one branch. (By this I mean that each has something in which he excelled: some in [painting] per- sonages, some in houses and trees, some in landscapes, some in saddle- horses, some in demons and divinities, and some in flowers and birds.)43

He took those who were perfect in all the Six Laws as the most brilliant painters. In his mind, only two painters – Wu Daoxuan (吴道玄) and Yan Liben (阎立本) – deserved such appraisal. However, he did not insist that the more fields a painter was competent, the higher the grade he deserved, but rather, a painter’s talent should be viewed individually. Even if a painter’s brilliance was found in only one branch or one theme, he could also have a spot in Zhang Yanyuan’s history. With this consideration, Zhang Yanyuan did not directly rank painters, but organized his biographies in chronological order, as was the practice in standard histories. Since he took all the branches and themes almost equally as fields in which a painter could demonstrate talent, no one single branch or theme had precedence over others. Hence painters are no longer selected and sorted solely on their capability of painting human figures. Yan Liben and Wu Daoxuan are both described as being perfect in all the Six

42 Wei Bin has a very detailed research on the references and quotations in the Lidai minghua ji, see Tangchao hualun kao shi, pp. 68-70, 89. 43 Acker, Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol.1, 146. “何必六法俱全？但取一技可采。(谓或人物，或屋宇，或山水，或鞍马，或鬼神，或花鸟，各有所长。)”.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 206 Ning

Laws: “Yan (Liben) was perfect in all the Six Laws, and faultless in every subject” (阎则六法备该，万象不失),44 and “only when we gaze upon the works of Wu Daoxuan may we say that all Six Laws have been brought to perfection and that he could not fail to exhaust the ten thousand phenomena” (唯观吴道玄之迹，可谓六法俱全，万象必尽).45 Indeed, both masters are famous for their painting of human figures. Yan Liben is famous for two of his most celebrated works Exalted Portraits of the Eighteen Scholars of the Qin Palace (秦府十八学士图), and Pictures of Twenty-four Meritorious Ministers in Lingyan Pavilion (凌烟阁二十四功臣图), which are both pictures of human figures. Wu Daoxuan is famous for drawing Buddhist figures as well as human figures. However, it is obvious that Zhang Yanyuan lauded Wu Daoxuan throughout the Lidai minghua ji, with more attention on his achievements in landscape paintings than human figure paintings, while his description of Yan Liben, by contrast, seems to be merely a flat record of a famous painter. In addition, the essay “On Mountains and Waters, Trees and Rocks” can be seen as one of the first treatises on landscape paintings. It is a supplement for the essay on the Six Laws. For, in his description of Six Laws, the discussion on the standard of evaluation focused on traditional subjects (which usually meant human figures), and discussions on landscape painting were very limited. While in this treatise, contributions on landscapes by the painters of his time were shown, and famous landscape painters are listed separately with brief descriptions of their styles. Also, it can be seen that, among all the biographies, the painters who were good at landscape painting invariably got more detailed descriptions than other painters. By this regard, it can be supposed that there was an implicit ambition for raising the status of landscape paintings in Zhang Yanyuan’s writings. This probably explains why he adopted different standards from his ancestors in the selection and classification of painters.

4 The Forms of Famous Paintings

Taking famous paintings merely as things different from ordinary paintings, or as the works of famous painters, is obviously not enough to form an adequate understanding of the concept of “famous painting.” We still need a more detailed description of the form of famous paintings.

44 Ibid., 168. 45 Ibid., 151.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 207

4.1 Famous Paintings and the History of Collection From the essay “On the Vicissitudes of the Art of Painting” (叙画之兴废), we see that the prosperity, decline and perishing of paintings are closely tied to the collection of famous paintings. According to the history of painting collections, famous paintings (as well as model works of calligraphy) are like antique books, which are so precious that collectors are eager to acquire with very high prices, and would even build pavilions for their preservation. It has been recorded that Emperor Wu of the Han dynasty had built the Secret Pavilion (秘阁) for the purpose of collecting pictures and writings, and Emperor Ming of Later Han had set picture rooms (画室) and founded Hongdu Xue 鸿都学 (Academy of the Great Metropolitan Gate) in order to gather rare works of art.46 These descriptions also tell us something about the basic physical formats of famous paintings: they must be something portable. Thus, those paintings regarded as architectural elements, such as murals, were not to be treated as famous painting. Hence the differences between murals and paintings on silk or paper became visible and remarkable. It is not difficult to find in Zhang Yanyuan’s description of famous paintings that they are painted, in most cases, on silk or paper. Both in his essays and in the detailed descriptions of the works in the biographies, we see such words:

… at the time of the civil wars (189-192) of the usurper Dong Zhuo [董卓], when the Prefect of Shanyang moved the capital to the West, the soldiers of his army all seized upon drawings, paintings, and [rolls of] silk and used them for tents and bags.47

And in the biography of Zhang Zao (张璪), when Li Yue (李约), a very close friend of Zhang Yanyuan’s grandfather Zhang Hongjing, learned that someone had some panels of pines and rocks by Zhang Zao at home, he went to buy them. “But the young wife of the household had already been recycling the silk [on which they were painted] to make linings for garments! All he got were two strips on which were painted two cedar trees and a rock.”48 Besides, among the works recorded under Gu Kaizhi’s name (顧愷之, 345-406), there were “a piece of white hemp paper (scroll) with virtuous women and immortals”, “a piece of white hemp paper with an eleven-headed lion” and “the likeness of Sima xuanwang [司馬宣王] is found on a piece of white silk and also on a

46 Ibid., 112-113. 47 Ibid., 113-114. “及董卓之乱，山阳西迁。图画缣帛，军人皆取为帷囊。”. 48 Some Tang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, Vol. 2, 283-284.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 208 Ning piece of paper.”49 Due to the nature of paper and silk, famous paintings were easily damaged in fires. For example, “during the Wei and Jin Dynasties, collections certainly increased (again), but when barbarian invaders entered Loyang, all these were burned in an instant”;50 and “when the time came for Yuan Di [元帝] to surrender, he had two hundred and forty thousand scrolls of famous paintings, fine calligraphy and classical texts gathered together [into a pile], and he ordered the Steward of the Rear Apartments Gao Shanbao to set fire to them.”51 The historical fact that most famous paintings on silk and paper have been damaged or disappeared reminds us to pay attention to the murals, which, by contrast, are still easily to be seen in the Tang Dynasty. There were big differences between famous paintings (on silk and paper) and murals: famous paintings were rare and private, only the collectors and the aficionados would have the opportunity to observe; while murals were abundant and more public (due to the fashion of wall painting at that time), they are much more easily to be seen by the visitors. However, the shortcomings of murals were quite obvious: they were not easily transportable, they were in many cases exposed to the open air, and they would be damaged with the wall on which they were painted. Hence, whether or not the murals could be regarded as famous paintings by Zhang Yanyuan remains doubtful. Consequently, murals in general were treated separately from famous paintings. It can be seen in the essay “Notes on Wall Paintings in Buddhist and Taoist Temples in the Two Capitals and the Provinces” (记两京外州寺观画壁) that all murals were recorded according to the places they belonged to, rather than listed according to the painters – as a contrast, all the famous paintings were noted in the biography part of the Lidai minghua ji after the brief biography of the painter they related to. This difference shows that, for Zhang Yanyuan, murals could not be treated like famous paintings as a matter of fact; they are somehow different from paintings kept by collectors. On the other hand, murals might also be considered as famous paintings, as demonstrated in two cases. The first one is the story of Xiaozhai (萧斋, Xiao Studio):

49 Ibid., 47. 50 Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 114-115. “魏晋之代，固多藏蓄。胡寇入洛，一时焚烧。”. 51 Ibid., 122-123. “元帝将降，乃聚名画法书及典籍二十四万卷，遣后閤舍人高善宝焚之。”.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 209

Li [Yue] of the Department of War also obtained in Jiangnan a [section of a] wall with the character Xiao 萧 written on it in flying white [feibai 飞白] style. He had it boxed and brought it home to Luoyang, and presented it to my great uncle (Zhang Shen [张谂]), who had it taken to Xiushan Li [修善里] where he built a pavilion for it and called the pavilion Xiaozhai [萧斋] – the Xiao Studio.52

The other case records the situation about some murals during the years of Huichang (会昌), when the majority of temples were destroyed per imperial order:

In the fifth year of the Huichang era (845), Emperor Wu Zong destroyed the temples and pagodas of the whole empire, leaving only two or three of such buildings in each of the two capitals. Accordingly, all but one or two of the famous paintings on the walls of Buddhist temples survived. But at the time when this happened, there were some art aficionados who took out these surviving murals and reset in the walls of their homes. [But even so,] only a very few of these murals still existed. But Ganlu Temple [甘露寺], which was built by Prime Minister Li Deyu 李德裕 when he was Defense Commissioner of western Zhejiang, escaped destruction, so wall-paintings from other temples in the jurisdiction were sent there for keeping.53

In these two cases, the murals were treated like famous paintings,54 but they had to be removed from their original settings for the purpose of collection and preservation. Although there are not enough records to show this was a common practice, at least these two cases show the possibility of moving murals to a secure place for collection and appreciation. It is in this sense that murals also have the chance to be treated like famous paintings. But that does not mean that all murals can be treated as famous paintings. It will be shown later that the main features of murals do not fit so well with the definition of famous paintings.

52 Ibid., 137-138. “李兵部又于江南得萧子云壁书飞白萧字，匣之以归洛阳，授予叔祖，致之修善里，构一亭，号曰萧斋。”. 53 Ibid., 367-370. “会昌五年，武宗毁天下寺塔。两京各留三两所。故名画在寺壁者唯存一二。当时有好事或揭取陷于屋壁。已前所记者，存之盖寡。先是宰相李德裕镇浙西，创立甘露寺，唯甘露不毁。取管内诸寺壁画置于寺内。”. 54 The first case is concerning the calligraphy on the wall but not painting. However, since famous painting and model work of calligraphy are usually treated in the same way, this case can also be used here for revealing a possible way of collecting wall paintings.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 210 Ning

4.2 The Physical Formats of Famous Paintings 4.2.1 Scrolls In most cases, famous paintings were counted in scrolls. For example,

Emperor Gao (479-482) of South Qi ranked painters into different grades, and made a list of all famous painters from antiquity up to his own time. He did not arrange them in chronological order, but only distinguished their relative excellence (as painters). He classified forty-two men from Lu Tanwei [陆探微] to Fan Weixian [范惟贤] into forty-two grades. Their works filled twenty-seven scroll casings 帙 consisting of 348 scrolls.55

The scroll is the main format of famous paintings since the early times. It was recorded in Guhua pinlu that since few works by Lu Sui (陆绥) had been handed down, “they are what may be called rare scrolls, and therefore they are highly treasured.”56 However, since hanging scrolls had not yet appeared at that time, whenever the term juanzhou (卷轴) appears in this text, it does not mean “hand scrolls and hanging scrolls,” but the two characters juan and zhou together form one term meaning hand scroll.57 Zhang Yanyuan was still talking about handscrolls when he used this term in “On Grading by Name and Price” (论名价品第) and said that

… it is an internal urge that collectors want to feel scrolls in their hands, determine their value by discussion, and not to be stingy with money (in buying them) but to regard the keeping of them in their chests and boxes as the only important thing.58

However, it should be noticed that handscroll is not merely a format of paintings, but rather a format for mounting, and it was originally and most commonly used for compiling books. It is in the form of books that famous paintings and model works of calligraphy are preserved and collected together with classic books by imperial households first, and then by noble families

55 Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 117-118. 56 Ibid., 13. “所谓希见卷轴，故为宝也。”. 57 Here, zhou (轴) means the roller used for rolling the scroll. Physical examples can be seen in the copies of Buddhist scriptures found in Dunhuang, which are dated in the period of North Zhou, Sui and in the era of Wu-zhou. See Zhang Pengchuan (张朋川): “Cong Dunhuang xiejing he bihua kan zhongguo juanzhou shuhua geshi de qiyuan he xingcheng” (从敦煌写经和壁画看中国卷轴书画格式的起源和形成), Wenwu (文物), 2000 (8), fig. 1-6, 53-55. 58 Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 200.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 211 and art lovers. In Zhang Huaiguan’s Erwang deng shu lu (二王等书录, Record of Masterpieces of Calligraphy by Wang Xizhi [王羲之] and Wang Xianzhi [王献之]), we can find a record of the rules and form of mounting,

Emperor Xiaowu of Song (宋孝武帝) ordered Xu Yuan (徐爰) to do the preserving and mounting work for his collection of Wang Xizhi’s and Wang Xianzhi’s calligraphy. Xu combined every ten pieces of calligraphy into one scroll. Later, Emperor Ming [of Song] examined and classified these old collections, sending messengers to the Wu (吴) area to collect scattered and missing works of the two Wangs, and then asked Yu He, Chao Shangzhi, Xu Xixiu, and Sun Fengbo to compile and mount them. They made each scroll into two zhang (丈) in length. As a result, they got two casings containing twenty-four scrolls of works on silk, with rollers made of coral; two casings containing twenty-four scrolls of works, with rollers made of gold; five casings containing fifty scrolls of works, with rollers made of tortoiseshell, each roll adorned with a golden paint label, pins made of jade, and bands made of woven material; two scrolls of calligraphies on the cover of fans, and two casings containing fifteen scrolls of works in the style of flying-white or simplified cursive script (zhangcao 章草) on paper, all with rollers made of sandalwood, and one casing containing twelve scrolls of works written for fun, which were all top works in calligraphy. Besides, there were a total of five hundred twenty scrolls of works classified into three grades kept in fifty-two casings, with rollers made of sandalwood.59

Two points are worth noticing in this passage. First, each of the scrolls con- sisted of different works, which might be created in different forms for different purposes and even collected from different places (not to say that some of them might not be authentic works of the two Wangs). The scroll was only a format for compiling works, whether they were paintings, calligraphies, or books. Second, the scroll format in any one period was quite specific. For example, in this record, the scrolls from the Song (of the Southern Dynasty) had a maximum length of two zhang, comprising ten pieces of works in each scroll. They were embellished and differentiated with rollers of different materials. Whereas in the Zhenguan era (贞观, early Tang dynasty), all the works by Wang Xizhi, “totaling two thousand two hundred ninety works were mounted into one hundred twenty-eight scrolls contained in thirteen casings. Among them,

59 Zhang Huaiguan (张怀瓘), Er Wang Deng Shu Lu (二王等书录), in Fashu yaolu, ed. Zhang Yanyuan (Hangzhou: Zhejiang renmin meishu chubanshe, 2012), 120, my translation.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 212 Ning fifty pieces of works were in formal script (zhengshu 正书), every eight sheets of work to a scroll, the length of which was determined by the lengths of the works; two hundred forty pieces in running script (xingshu 行书) were mounted into forty scrolls in four casings, each scroll limited to four chi 尺 (Chinese feet) in length; two thousand pieces in cursive script (caoshu 草书) mounted into eighty scrolls contained in eight casings, each scroll limited to one zhang and two chi (i.e., twelve chi), with rollers bedecked with jewels and gilt edges, and the casings were also made of woven material.”60 It was also recorded by Zhang Yanyuan that the scrolls in the imperial storehouse (neifu 内府) during the era of Zhenguan and Kaiyuan (开元), were all “mounted on rollers of white sandalwood with roller-tips of dark sandalwood, faced with red sandalwood, and provided with bands of woven material”, which was recognized as “the standard mounting for all official paintings.”61 Therefore, while scrolls are the common format of famous paintings in the Tang dynasty, we should always bear in mind that they might not be the original form of paintings, but just a common way of preserving paintings. The paintings in a scroll might not be created originally according to the format and length of a scroll, but instead were later compiled and fit into it. What is more, the works mounted in the same scroll, in many cases, were not created for the same topic or in a similar style; sometimes they were just fragments of an old piece of work, and the final appearance of a scroll was determined by the collector. Thus, it is not difficult to understand Zhang Yanyuan’s requirement for mounting:

In all things concerning pictures and manuscripts, the main thing is perfection from start to finish. For famous works of art are not in a realm wherein one may lightly speak of cutting them up and altering them. If it is thought necessary to arrange together in a series [in one mounting] either three sheets or five sheets, or on a screen of three panels or five panels and also in cases where the order of upper, middle, and lower [sections of a manuscript] have become mixed up, or never had any logical sequence, then it will certainly be best to place the best part at the beginning, the worst parts next, and the middling parts last of all. Why should this be so? Because whenever people look at paintings, they are of course keen when the scroll is first opened, and grow indolent and tired about halfway through, but then if they come to things of middling quality they

60 Ibid., 122, my translation. 61 Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 251.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 213

will go on and on without realizing it until they come to the end of the scroll.62

This shows that paintings were not created with a concern of the format and size of the scroll. A scroll is more like a format of mounting rather than the original format of painting itself.

4.2.2 Screen and Huanzhang63 According to Zhang Yanyuan, screen and huazhang (画幛), which were preva- lent in late Tang, are the main forms of paintings at his time. As he has it in “On Grading by Name and Price,”

A single standing screen by Dong Boren, Zhan Ziqian, Zheng Fashi, Yang Zihua, Sun Shangzi, Yan Liben or Wu Daoxuan is worth twenty thousand (taels) of gold, and that (even) a slightly inferior specimen will sell for fifteen thousand. [Before the Sui dynasty, most paintings were on standing screens (pingfeng), and I have never heard that painted hanging scrolls existed (before that time). Therefore, I take the standing screen as my standard].64

Unlike scrolls, paintings on screen or huazhang are more like something dis- played to beholders, instead of being secured and kept in studios or pavilions. Paintings on screens were usually installed into the wooden frames of the screen, and the screens were placed in rooms as a kind of furniture for ornamental or shielding purposes. Most researchers notice in one of Li Shangyin (李商隐)’s poems a description of a tool for hanging up huazhang, viz, a hanging stick with a forked head (展幛玉鸦叉) for stretching out and displaying a painting in the form of huazhang.65 Although the widespread use of such a device still has to be substantiated, and although we are not sure about how, where, and for how long a huazhang was hanged, the purpose of a huazhang was for displaying is obvious. However, neither a screen painting nor a huazhang is regarded as pure artwork solely for appreciation. Rather, they

62 Ibid., 243-244. 63 The form of paintings on huazhang (画幛) still lacks substantial investigation so far. In order to be differentiated from the paintings on screens, the term huazhang will not be translated as “painted screen” or “screens in the type of single-panel”, but just left untrans- lated in this paper. 64 Ibid., 200. 65 Li Shangyin, “Bingzhong wen hedonggong leying zhijiu kouzhan jishang” (病中闻河东公乐营置酒口占寄上), in Quan Tang Shi, 6, 250.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 214 Ning were treated as ornamental furniture in a room and, in most cases, they were still used for shielding purposes. So, on the one hand, huazhang were always on display, and, on the other, displaying was not the only purpose. It should also be noted that, unlike the scroll, a form which was given to paintings afterward, the format and size of a screen or huazhang were known by the painter before his creation. This means that the painters could take the size and form of the silk or paper into consideration before or during painting. Both screens and huazhang are found in different forms: some are made up of six panels (such as the six cranes in the style of Xue Ji, 薛稷), some eight panels (such as Zhang Zao’s eight-screen panels of landscape scenes for Zhang Yanyuan’s family), some twelve panels (such as Yan Liben’s “Twelve Panels of Screens of Country Scenes” recorded in Yan’s biography), and so on. It is not difficult to imagine that when a painter was invited to paint a screen or huazhang, he could probably take into consideration the style and form of the screen or huazhang for his design and composition of the work. He had to make the paintings for each panel separately, as well as to make efforts to harmonize the paintings because they would be viewed together. Thus, another difference between paintings on screen or huazhang from those in scrolls is the involve- ment of the physical format in the painter’s creation. For paintings on screens or huazhang, the physical format somehow becomes one decisive element in the painter’s composition, while for paintings in scrolls, the physical format is just a feature of the presentation of the work. In addition, different from the paintings on furniture or buildings, huazhang is something that can easily be carried. It can be seen in Du Fu (杜甫)’s poem:

In the clear dawn this old fellow was combing his white hair a Daoist from Dark Metropolis Lodge came to pay me a visit I wrung out my hair, called my boy and invited him in the door in his hand he held a new painting, a screen with green pines

老夫清晨梳白头，玄都道士来相访。握发呼儿延入户，手提新画青松幛。 66

It is shown here that a huazhang can be held in hands, which means that it is something soft (made of silk or cloth), unframed (but may be decorated with

66 Du Fu, Song on His Reverence Li’s Screen with Pines, in The Poetry of Du Fu, trans. & ed., Stephen Owen, Boston/ Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Inc., 2016, p. 968.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 215 ornaments on the borders), and light in weight. Yang Zhishui (扬之水) believes that huazhang is almost the same as hanging scrolls which appear in a later period. She even finds in a Ming-dynasty book an illustration of ruanzhang (软障), which looks the same as hanging scrolls.67 However, there is no evidence that there is a roller in huazhang as found in hanging scrolls. What is more, in Du Fu’s description, the painting was “held in hand” (ti 提), that is, the painting was probably not rolled up, which also shows that huazhang had not taken the format of hanging scrolls. Contrary to scrolls, most of the paintings on screens or huazhang were works by the painters who lived in the Tang Dynasty, or in “modern time” (from Sui Dynasty to Zhang Yanyuan’s time). For Zhang Yanyuan, antique paintings were usually described as in the form of scrolls. For example, “as a general rule, people who amass collections feel that they must possess well-known scrolls by Gu (Kaizhi), Lu (Tanwei), Zhang (Sengyou), and Wu (Daozi) before they can say that they own any paintings.”68 In a sense, it can be supposed that even if the antique paintings were originally made on screens, collectors would mount them in scrolls for better safekeeping. Hence, it is possible that scrolls might refer, to a great extent, to antique paintings and the works of painters who lived before the Tang Dynasty, while screens and huazhang referred mainly to modern works (from Sui to Zhang Yanyuan’s time). Of course, this is only a conjecture instead of a strong assertion.

4.3 The Appreciation of Famous Paintings Paintings are waiting to be seen. However, how and why a painting is looked at, can, in turn, define or change the understanding of the nature of the painting itself. It has been pointed out in the first section that the concept of “famous painting” should be distinguished from that of painting in general. Conventionally, paintings play some educational role. In seeing them, one can learn good and evil, can be encouraged to practice virtue, and can be kept from doing wrong. What is seen by the beholders are the stories and the morals con- veyed by the images, but not by the painting itself. However, for beholders of famous paintings, what meet their eyes are the artworks and the worlds in- voked by them. There are three aspects of looking at famous paintings. First, who are the beholders of famous paintings? According to the analysis in the previous sections,

67 Yang Zhishui 扬之水: “Xingzhang, huangzhang, lizhou” (行障、画障、立轴), in Tang Song jiaju tanwei (唐宋家具探微), Beijing: renmin meishu chubanshe, 2015, 96. 68 Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 199: “凡人间藏蓄，必当有顾陆张吴著名卷轴，方可言有图画”.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 216 Ning famous paintings are those eagerly sought by collectors. However, if an owner of such works is contented with merely possessing them, or with keeping and hiding them in pavilions or studios, he is not a real collector. Aficionados of famous paintings dream of acquiring one, and once they have succeeded in acquiring, they would like to be around it all the time, cleaning them and keeping them in good condition, sitting before it and gazing over it admiringly. As Zhang Yanyuan himself experienced,

… when there was a chance of getting something, I would even sell my old clothes and cut down (the allowance for) rice and other foods. My wife and children and servants would tease and sneer at me, sometimes saying, ‘What good does it do, after all, to spend all day doing useless things?’ At which I would sigh and say: ‘But if one does not do these useless things, then how can one find pleasure in this limited life?’69

The expression “useless things” perfectly describes the gazing upon famous paintings by aficionados. In a sense, like what modern estheticians would say, it is a kind of pure appreciation, which is apart from any care of material interests, and which is neither concerned with the cognition of things nor with moral rules. It is useless, but it brings pure joy to the beholder. Hence, it is with this sense of pure appreciation that famous paintings are studied by aficionados and collectors. Second, famous paintings are closely tied to judging, preserving, collecting, and appreciating. For Zhang Yanyuan, among those who had a large collection of paintings,

… were some who collected [paintings] without being able to appreciate them; some who could appreciate them without being able to enjoy them; some who could enjoy them but could not mount them; and still others who could mount them but could not arrange them systemati- cally. All these are faults in an aficionado of painting.70

In Zhang Yanyuan’s mind, a famous painting is not merely kept by its owner as an ordinary piece of possession, or as a precious treasure that should be

69 Ibid., 212. “可致者，必货弊衣，减粮食。妻子童仆切切嗤笑，或曰：‘终日为无益之事，竟何补哉？’ 既而叹曰： ‘若复不为无益之事，则安能悦有涯之生？！’ ”. 70 Ibid., 203: “有收藏而未能鉴识，鉴识而不善阅玩者，阅玩而不能装褫，装褫而殊亡铨次者，此皆好事者之病也。”.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 217 hidden and locked up in a treasure house. A famous painting so treated would lose its meaning. It is only through judging, preserving, collecting, and appreciating that the true meaning of a famous painting can be conserved. In this sense, looking at a famous painting means more than gazing towards the physical body of the painting, it also involves caring, appreciating, and com- municating with it. Thus, Zhang Yanyuan has raised rigorous requirements for looking at famous paintings. He said,

Writings and paintings should not be entrusted to the care of anyone who is not an aficionado of the arts. One should not look at calligraphy and paintings near a fire or candle, in the wind or under direct sunlight, or when one has just been eating, drinking, spitting, or blowing one’s nose without first washing one’s hands.71

And,

In one’s home it is desirable to set up a level and steady couch with a mattress on it, and after dusting and wiping it, unroll a painting on it and look at it. For big scrolls, it is best to build a frame on which to hang them when looking at them. For all writings and paintings, if they are unrolled from time to time, worm and moisture damage can be prevented.72

Always take good care of paintings, know how to preserve and display them properly, and know how they can be arranged in an order that is suitable for both appreciating and maintaining the scroll – these are the basic requirements for aficionados of paintings. Third, the activity of looking at famous paintings has already been an important part in the lives of literati. The descriptions of this activity can be found in many verses, for example:

71 Ibid., 210: “非好事者不可妄传书画，近火烛，不可观书画，向风日，正飡饮唾涕，不洗手，并不可观书画。”. 72 Ibid., 210: “人家要置一平安床褥，拂拭舒展观之。大卷轴宜造一架，观则悬之。凡书画时时舒展，即免蠹湿。”.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 218 Ning

Displaying [the painting] in the north hall, it seemed that I was brought in front of the south mountain

置陈北堂上, 仿像南山前

And

So delightful I was sitting right before it and enjoying the appreciation of it that my heart is thus taken far away to the mountains and seas.

对玩有佳趣, 使我心渺绵.73

Hence, for literati, the appreciation of paintings means more than what meets his eyes. By immersing into a painting, he would feel as if he were transposed to the world depicted by the painting (usually mountains and rivers). It is the ideal world that he pursues; it is where he would love to have his spirit dwelling. This being so, looking at paintings is a way for a literati to experience a journey to his Utopia. This explains why painting aficionados always take the activity of looking at paintings seriously, treating it almost like a ritual, and why this activity bears such important significance for defining the concept of famous painting. Hitherto, the main characteristics of famous paintings have been shown. It is apparent that, as objects for collections, famous paintings should be movable or portable. As far as physical format is concerned, famous paintings (of the Tang dynasty) usually refer to paintings on paper or silk, which are always mounted into scrolls, while later ones, particularly those which can still be seen in private collections or can be purchased at Zhang Yanyuan’s time (late Tang period), are usually in screen or huazhang format. What is more, the meaning of famous paintings also depends on the beholders’ perception. As artwork showcased in private places, famous paintings should be viewed differently from murals in temples or other public buildings. They are not to be taken as tools for moral education. Instead, they should be appreciated for their aesthetic value, and even the unique experience of appreciation is a way for the literati to reach their ideal world, which contributes to a deeper understanding of the significance of appreciating famous paintings.

73 Zhang Jiuling 张九龄, “Writing on a Screen of Landscape Scene” 题画山水障, in Quan tang shi, 578.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 219

5 Conclusion

What is painting for Chinese people? This question is not as simple as it seems. In recent years, more and more researchers are aware of the importance of clarifying this basic concept, and some issues that have been unclear for a long time have now been reexamined. Among them, Wu Hong (巫鸿, 1945-) has stated this problem most succinctly. In a recent paper, he wrote,

… the ‘painting’ discussed here, is in the narrow sense of this term, i.e., the movable or portable painting. Those which cannot be moved from buildings are not in the scope of this paper. To some degree, paintings on screens or huazhang is a special form which is in-between the two kinds of paintings described above. It can be regarded both as independent painting and as an architectural element. Hence, considering that the creating, mounting and transferring of the paintings on screens are related closely with what is discussed here, we also take them into the scope of our discussion on painting.74

He deliberates on this point cautiously, and adds a note stating that

… the classification (of painting) itself is also based on a historical understanding of this concept, which has not appeared until Tang Dynasty in China, although Zhang Yanyuan still included murals into his record of the paintings of Tang Dynasty.75

For Wu Hong, Zhang Yanyuan failed to separate the murals from portable paintings when he wrote the Lidai minghua ji. However, as mentioned in section 3 of this paper, Zhang Yanyuan treated differently the murals and the so-called famous paintings. It is interesting that the last two essays in Book III of the Lidai minghua ji, “Notes on Wall Paintings in Buddhist and Taoist Temples in the Two Capitals and the Provinces” (记两京外州寺观画壁), and “On Ancient Secret Paintings and Treasured Pictures” (述古之秘画珍图) seem to be a group apart from the other essays. The first three essays – “On the Origin of Painting” (叙画之源流), “On the Vicissitudes of the Art of Painting” (叙画之兴废), and “List of the Names of Men of the Successive Dynasties who were Skilled in Painting” (叙历代能画人名) – can be regarded as a survey of

74 Wu Hong: “Muzang kaogu yu huihuashi yanjiu” (墓葬考古与绘画史研究), in Gudai muzang meishu yanjiu (古代墓葬美术研究), vol. 4, ed. Wu Hong, Zhu Qingsheng and Shao Yan, Changsha: Hunan meishu chubanshe, 2017, 1-26. 75 Ibid., 23n.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 220 Ning the history of famous paintings in successive dynasties. The next five essays from “Discussing the Six Elements of Painting” (论画六法) to “On Grading by Name and Price” (论名价品第) can be taken as a discussion on the criteria for evaluating and classifying famous paintings. The three subsequent ones from “On Appreciating, Preserving, Collecting and Enjoying” (论鉴识收藏购求阅玩) to “On Mounting, Backing, Ornamental Borders and Rollers” (论装备褾轴) show the important elements concerning the collection and preservation of famous paintings, which are themselves involved in building the concept of famous painting. The remaining two essays do not seem to belong to any of the above groups, and they themselves are also independent of each other. Often times, researchers study the descriptions of these murals in conjunction with the paintings by the corresponding artists recorded in the biography section. In doing so, the murals are indeed treated in the same sense as the paintings in the form of scrolls or screens. Even so, the essay “On Ancient Secret Paintings and Treasured Pictures” still stands out. Why would Zhang Yanyuan, who had already contributed so many detailed descriptions and recorded all the aspects of painting, have left an essay that did not fit in with his systematic discussion of painting? According to the concept of famous painting illustrated in this paper, there is a logical explanation. It has been discussed in this paper that famous paintings are usually works of those who are famous for their skill in painting, and in most mases, the definition of famous painting depends largely on the artist to whom the work is attributed to, although it is more a commonsense conclusion, than a necessary condition. Furthermore, famous paintings are usually conceived as those which can be collected, or be acquired through purchasing or exchanging, hence “being movable or portable” is another basic requirement for qualify- ing as famous paintings. Consequently, the paintings recorded in these last two essays do not fit well with the concept of famous painting. The murals in temples or other buildings (such as residences of noble families or studies of imperial scholars) are all immovable architectural elements. Although most of the murals recorded by Zhang Yanyuan are recognized as “brush works” left by famous painters, which is the reason why scholars always count them as famous paintings, it is also possible that they were not entirely painted by the famous painters themselves. It is revealed in the records of the Tang dynasty that painters often asked artisans to have their drawings colored, and in some cases, they just supplied the artisans with a miniature sample of the mural called fenben (粉本) without doing the painting on the walls in person. This explains why when a mural painting was colored by the painter himself or by another painter instead of an artisan, it was always specifically recorded. For example, “it is also said that there were votive icons at Ci’en Temple [慈恩寺]

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access The Concept of Famous Painting in the Tang Dynasty 221 that he (Yan Liben) himself colored,”76 and “whenever Master Wu painted, he would lower his brush (to the painting surface) and then simply departed, and he would usually employ Yan [Zhai Yan 翟琰] or Zhang Zang [张藏] to put in the colors.”77 What is more, the main concern about the standard of evaluating paintings, for Zhang Yanyuan, lies in the brushwork, such as what he discussed in the essay “On the Brushwork of Gu, Lu Zhang, and Wu.” However, in most mural paintings, the brush strokes are hard to tell, particularly when the colors on the murals have faded or peeled off and the brush strokes become indistinct due to exposure to open air. In such cases, the murals might have undergone repair, which means they might have been repainted or re- colored by someone else, and this kind of repair might probably have taken place many times in history. Because of these differences, murals cannot be treated the same as famous paintings, which show subtle brush touches and are collected and preserved in better conditions. As for those ancient secret paintings and treasured pictures, they were all anonymous works, and Zhang Yanyuan only recorded their titles with a few descriptions that were probably copied from other records or histories. We have reasons to suppose that these pictures had been kept in an imperial repository, which Zhang Yanyuan was not able to view in person, as he said, “It is my constant regret that I have never been able to examine the famous works of the imperial repository personally to add to the varieties of writings and paintings.”78 Hence these works were not described according to style or quality, but were just listed by titles in a style similar to book catalogues (经籍志或艺文志) in standard histories. Since no information about the artists could be traced, nor descriptions of the images could be recorded, these pictures could only be recorded for being “ancient,” “secret,” and “precious,” indicating the rare opportunity to see them. Therefore, these pictures cannot be evaluated according to their style and brushwork and have thus lost the qualification to be regarded as famous paintings. Based on the above considerations, the last two essays on mural paintings and ancient pictures can be seen as records for paintings or works recorded in histories. Zhang Yanyuan probably had doubts about whether these paintings could be regarded as famous paintings, so he listed them separately, apart from his record of famous paintings. The concept of famous painting can be regarded as the central concept in the Lidai minghua ji, as well as for the history of Chinese painting. If my argument in this essay is correct, this concept was not formed through

76 Celebrated Paintings of the T’ang Dynasty by Chu Ching-hsüan of T’ang, 213. 77 Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, vol. 1, 237. 78 Ibid., 217-218. “余常恨不得窃观御府之名迹，以资书画之广博”.

Culture and Dialogue 6 (2018) 191-222 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 12:03:28PM via free access 222 Ning textual elaboration. Rather, it was formulated through the implicit application of Zhang Yanyuan’s special theoretical and historical description of paintings. Shi Rui (史睿) has pointed out that Zhang Yanyuan, as a member of one of the most important families for collecting and critiquing paintings, had his own inclination in taste (particularly in his advocating for landscape paintings). His theoretical concern shown in his historical writings might have a great influence on his contemporaries as well as on the history of painting.79 In a sense, Zhang Yanyuan was not merely a recorder of paintings seen or heard in history, but also a facilitator of the history of painting. The development of his basic concepts, frameworks, and ideas on painting precisely shows this fact. From a historical point of view, the concept of famous painting is not a term defined by certain texts. Instead, it is one that has evolved over time. Distinguished from the common understanding of painting, Zhang Yanyuan’s concept is but- tressed with all aspects of detailed considerations. What is more, as a basic concept in the history of painting, it also plays an important role in changing the knowledge of painting and even for influencing the creative ideas of painters. Such influence can be found in various exemplary works of famous paintings, such as various paintings on the themes of Wangchuan (辋川) – dwelling in the mountains, or in a village beside river banks. Throughout history, these themes are painted in different styles and forms, but their meanings are more and more specifically and adequately expressed. This historicity embedded within the formation of the concept of famous painting is what this paper has ultimately aimed to reveal.

Biography

Ning Xiaomeng received her Bachelor of Arts and and Master of Arts de- grees in philosophy from Peking University and her PhD in philosophy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. She is currently Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy of Peking University and research fellow at the Research Center for Aesthetics and Aesthetic Education, also at Peking University. Her main research interests lie in twentieth century French philosophy, phenomenology, philosophy of art, and the history of Chinese painting.

79 Shi Rui, “Tangdai liangjing de shuhua jiancang yu shiren jiaoyou: yi Zhang Yanyuan jiazu wei zhongxin” (唐代两京的书画鉴藏与士人交游：以张彦远家族为中心), in Tang Yanjiu (唐研究), vol. 21, (2015), 117-118.

Culture and DialogueDownloaded from 6 (2018)Brill.com09/30/2021 191-222 12:03:28PM via free access