THE CASE OF THE THREE PAINTINGS
BY WANG MENG
by
HELEN WODEHOUSE GRIFFIN
B.A., University of British Columbia, 1938
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS
in the Department of
Fine Arts
We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
April, 1968 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the
Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his represen• tatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.
Department of Fine Arts
The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada
Date April 25, 1968 ABSTRACT
The problem in this thesis is to find out which of three of
(the Chinese fourteenth Century painter) Wang Meng's paintings in the
Palace Collection in Taiwan, is the original or "least-corrupted" and which the copies. They are hanging scrolls, ink and slight colour on paper, approximately four feet by two feet titled Hua-ch'i yuVyin.
The aim is to show that by using Western scientific art history analysis^some advance is possible; and the results may help in establishing pivot points, called here "prime objects", necessary for establishing a history of styles for Chinese painting.
Materials used were photographs taken by the University of
Michigan, Department of History of Art in 1965-6 in Taipei, Taiwan.
Methods used were those istamdard^for.;western art historians, adapted for Chinese paintings and now being put into practice by
Professor Wen Fong of Princeton.
Data was gathered from translations of ancient critics in China by 0. Siren and discussions of these by Sherman Lee, James Cahill,
Richard Edwards and others. But most important was a detailed, energetic and time consuming study of the reproductions of the three paintings, and the application of Professor Wen Fong's reasoning to this study.
It was found that internal, painting-style, analysis was supported by external, colophon-seal findings, to give a more convincing r result. Results showed that A is most likely to be the original while
B is probably a forgery of A and C a "free" copy of B. TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Copies 1
Necessity of establishing "true" works .... 5
Importance of Wang Meng 7
II. THE PROBLEM 11
Description of paintings 11
Previous classifications 13
Aim and approach 15
III. CHOICE OF SUBJECT 18
A Later version 23
IV. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 25
Poems 25
Seals 34
V. INTERNAL EVIDENCE 36
Tracings ' 37
Techniques 38
Ink Tone 38
Space recession 39
Brush stroke 40
Roots 40 CHAPTER rAU£
Rocks 41
Bamboo 41
Thatch 42
Mountains 42
Leafy tree 43
Results: Ch'i Yun 44
VI. CONCLUSION 45
BIBLIOGRAPHY 50
ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1 A, YV73 "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by
Wang Meng ("Original" ?)
Figure 2 B, YV264 "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by
Wang Meng ("Copy" ?)
Figure 3 c, YV265 "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by
Wang Meng ("Free Copy" ?)
Figure 4 D, NAlOd "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by Wang Meng ("Free Copy" ?)
Figure 5 A Detail of lower left side
Figure 6 A Detail of lower right side, roots
Figure 7 A Detail of lower left side, rock
Figure 8 B Detail of lower left side, rock
Figure 9 C Detail of lower left side, rock
Figure 10 An inscription and seals by Empe ror
lung ("Original and Copy")
Figure 11 A, B and C Tracings
Figure 12 A, B and C Showing composition
Figure 13 A, B and C Thatch roofs and tree trunks PREFACE
The problem is to show which of three paintings illustrated:
Figures 1, 2 and 3, is the most likely to be the original one done by Wang Meng. (13087-1385)
The unavoidable weakness is that I have not been able to inspect the originals of these, which are in the National Palace
Collection in Taiwan. Nevertheless, this thesis is the ground work which is necessary in preparation for first hand inspection; and I hope to be able to examine the original paintings in the near future.
This thesis was possible because' of:J the recent acquisition by the U.B.C. Library, of the National Palace and Central Museums Photo• graphic Archives. These photographs were taken in the National 1
Palace Museum, Shih-lin, Taipei, Taiwan in 1965-6, by the University of Michigan, Department of the History of Art in Ann Arbor.
The team responsible included: James Cahill, Richard Edwards,
Marvin Eisenberg, and Laurence Sickman.
This particular work was ;aided-i' by the kindness of the Director of the Museum in Taipei, Dr. Fu-ts'ung Chiang,who informed me of the existence of these three paintings; two of which, are not in the
1 Now called the Chung Shan Museum. 1 U.B.C. archives.
The photographs are exceptionally clear. They allow a close inspection and a good opportunity for comparison, which would be hard to match in any museum. There are coloured slides of details to go with them, from which Figure 5 is taken.
I should like to thank my advisor Dr. Mary Morehart for help and encouragement far above and beyond her line of duty. Also I should like to thank Professor Fo-ch'uan Chang, Professor Li Chi and Wai-lam Lee for their help and advice. They are of course, not responsible for the opinions expressed.
1 Hereafter the U.B.C. Collection of the National Palace and Central Museum Photographic Archives is referred to by U.B.C. Archives and the originals of these, as the Palace Collection in Taipei. CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
I. Copies
Copies, imitations, and downright fakes, partial forgeries, over- restored paintings, and copies of copies are enough to put one off the studying of Chinese painting almost before one begins. However, recent study is making considerable headway.
Early in the 6th century Hsieh Ho ^ wrote a treatise on painting, the importance of which can hardly be overestimated both for artist-painters and art critics. His six principles were based on current ideas but mostly on writers before him. The first, the most important, is discussed at the end of Chapter V. The last principle is partly responsible for all these subsequent copies. It is ^^"^
ch'uan muli,.hsieh: "transmit models by copying". Thus every
Chinese painter was a potential forger. As the Chinese culture has to a certain degree been built on ancestor worship, copying honoured famous masters. It was not always with the intent to deceive. That came later, when connoisseurs developed eclectic tastes and paintings became a commodity. Before this, and even now, copies were not scorned as they are now in the West. In fact a well made copy was
1 Osvald,Siren, The Chinese on the Art of Painting (Schocken Books, N. Y., 1963), p. 21. 2
something to be proud of, and the greater the number of copies one
owned, the greater the boasting: such paintings could, indeed, be of
great individual merit, in some cases, even superior to the originals
for:
. . . they marked not only the students way of learning but also their deference to some old master or school of painting which had served as their guide or inspiration. 1
So we must be thankful for this attitude even though it is caus•
ing art historians so much trouble; because without it, we would
undoubtedly know much less about Chinese art.
But beside these honest copies^are the many forgeries intended
to deceive, hence are done for monetary gain. Forgeries are usually
tracings whereby every single element and line is to the last detail, exactly as in the original, or as much as is humanly possible. But
as we shall see there are always giveaway, tell-tale signs if we can
but find them. "Free" copies use the same frame-work as the original
but within that the artist creates in his own way, thereby improving
or otherwise, on the original, as he sees fit. Between the "free"
copy, the variation on a theme, and the forgery, are all manner of
"transmitters of style" as the Chinese call them. And there has been
1 Ibid., p. 151. 3 so much skull-duggery going on down through the ages that the genuine works and forgeries were freely mingled, and people could not tell them apart:
"Painting by the end of the Ming had fallen into evil ways. The most corrupt school was that of Chekiang; but even in Wu-men and Yun- chien the works of great masters like Wen (Cheng-ming) and Shen (Chou) and . . . Tung Ch'i-ch'ang were all confused and muddled by counterfeits. Falsehoods begot further false• hoods, until fraud had spread everywhere". 1
Wu Hsiu, early 19th century, tells a revealing story of forgeries and the sad fate of an original:
During Ch1ien-lung"s reign 1736-96 a Suchow studio bought Kao K'o-kung's Morning Clouds in Spring for 400 pieces of gold. A certain Chang bought ts'e-li paper and commissioned Chai Yun-p'ing (died 1804) to make two copies for 10 pieces of gold. Then he had Cheng Hsueh-ch'iao (Cheng Chia) copy the inscription and seals for 10 pieces of gold. The copies were soaked in clear water and laid out flat
on a lacquer table. When dry,. they; were soaked again and again constantly for 3 months. After that they were treated with pai-chi to give a surface sheen to the paper. When I examined these copies the ink had blended into the paper. The general feeling of the brush
1 Wang Yuan-ch'i, Yii-ch'uang Man-pi. in Mei-shu. 1/2/1, p. Ir. Cited by Wen Fong, "The Problem of Forgeries in Chinese Painting", Artibus Asiae XXV (1962), p. 101.
2 Paraphrase of quote from Mei-shu II/6/4, p. lOr. Cited by Wen Fong "Forgeries," (1962), p. 97. 4 work looked almost exactly like the original, only the ch'i was not so deep and serene and the shen-yun was not so harmoniously blended. One copy was mounted with the brocade borders of the original scroll, along with the original collectors seals of Wang Shih-min 1592-1680, and Kao Shih-ch'i 1645-1704. The original cartouche written by Kao Shih-ch'i was also removed from the original scroll and fixed on the copy. At that time the collector Pi Lung, late 18th century, happened to be sick in bed and was confined to his room. As soon as he was shown the forgery, he was full of praise and bought it for 800 pieces of gold . . . The other copy was also fixed up and taken to Chiang-hsi province. It was bought by Governor Ch'en for 500 pieces of gold. The original is still in Su-chou today. Nobody even asks to look at it. 5
II. Necessity of Establishing "true" works
It is absolutely necessary to establish "true" works in order to establish a history of styles for Chinese painting. Wen Fong says:
. . . for the historian of Chinese art, it amounts to a practical necessity to begin his enquiry with the theoretical critical problems. 1
When the identity of original works is obscured by copies and for• geries, liberally decorated with supposed signatures, seals, and dates of the intended master it is very difficult to detect and then 2 interpret the "prime objects", that is,the originals which are basic to the establishing of style changes of history.
Therefore, we must attempt to reconstruct the original vital moments of creation by finding the least corrupted -- if not actually
the original for every principal stage of style changes. These stages then, must be formed "into a sequence of related, though clearly 3 differentiated form-categories".
Once the style changes are understood then the copies can be dated, weeded out or placed in the sequence according to their merits.
1 Wen Fong, "Chinese Painting, A Statement of Method", Oriental Art, vol. 9 Summer 1963, p. 73.
2 Ibid., p. 73.
3 Ibid., p. 78. In other words, they can take their own place in history if they so deserve. But in reconstructing a history of styles, we are dealing not only with the complicated processes of artistic creation and recreation of different periods, but also with the equally perplexing problem of critical and historical interpretations of 1 all past periods.
This paper is related to such a problem in that it attempts to separate and establish the differences between an original and two copies.
We need to see Chinese culture in our terms in order to under• stand it. And so this Western scientific approach parallels that 2 being applied to China in other fields such as history. This new atmosphere seems to have been generated (partly) by Hu Shih in the
1920's when he elevated \E) ^ bai hua to a proper realm for serious study by scholars.
Here, by using Western methods, I attempt to separate one original from two copies. In regard to the history of Chinese painting, such a method, put into practice by Professor Wen Fong of Princeton
University seems a worthwhile venture.
1 Wen Fong, "Forgeries", (1962), p. 103 (paraphrased).
2 So that much of what went before is now appearing as myth. 7
III. Importance of Wang Meng
It is agreed by most historians that in the whole history of
Chinese painting a major change took place in the Yuan dynasty with 1 the Four Masters; and, that possibly this change was started with 2 Chao-Meng-fu in the early 13th century. Wang Meng was the grand- 3 son of Chao Meng-fu and the youngest of the Four Masters. So thus, because he was taught by his grandfather he had a link with the introduction of the change and thentMir production saw the firm establishment of this change; that is,their production formed the 4 bridge from the art of the past to the art of future. Briefly: this actual change seems to have been the process whereby solid large 5 plastic forms were turned into brush-line descriptive forms. Or, the
Sung painters used their eyes whereas the Yuan painters used their minds. And other elements, besides the shapes of nature were entering
1 These four: Huang Kung-wang, Ni Tsan, Wu Chen and Wang Meng.
2 Chu-ts'ing Li, "Autumn Colors", Artibus Asiae, Suppl. XXI, Ascona, Switzerland 1966. But this is still a very controversial point.
3 Victoria Contag, "Characteristics of Calligraphy in the Painting of Wang Meng and others of the Southern School", Ostasiatische Zeitschrift. (Berlin 1961), p. 48.
4 That would roughly be the period of Mongol occupation of the 14th century.
5 This involved a change of the upright brush to the slanting brush. 8 a Yuan painters work, including his personality, and its revelation in the painting.
These important Four Masters exemplified the spirit of the
wen jen hua and of the later Southern School of Tung Ch'i- ch'ang. The prime tenets of which were mainly: a belief in the thorough interpenetration of all the arts: painting, poetry, calli- 1 graphy and philosophy as well as the absolute exclusion of any hint of material gain whatsoever. In other words they painted only for their own and for each other's pleasure.
His fellow recluse, Ni Tsan, says of him in a colophon "His brush is refined and his ink wonderful like those of Wang Hsi-chih. His heart is pure like that of Tsung Ping ... . There has been no one 2 equal to him for a hundred years".
He imitated Li Sheng who in turn was a follower of Wang Wei and
Chang Tsao, but freed himself from them,going to nature as the only real master, "his heart learned from Creation itself" as his ideas advanced beyond those of the ancient worthies. So with Wang Meng,
1 Victoria Contag "Tung Ch'i-ch'ang's Hua-Ch'an Shih Sui-Pi", Ostasiatische Zeitschrift IX (Berlin 1933) p, 83-97, p. 174-187.
2 0. Siren, Chinese Painting. Leading Masters and Principles. Ill (1956-8), p. 86 citing Chang Ch'ou. Same quote in Pan, T'ien-shou (Chinese Gazetteer) says "for five hundred years," such are the vagaries of translation! because he too learned more from Creation than from any of the 1 accepted old models.
Wang Meng introduced movement to his landscapes by the writhing
undulating composition and brush strokes. Also he seems to have 2 used texture as an integrated part, of the whole, where it becomes
the all-overness of the painting, so unified is each part with the whole. Here he is noted for his-^^ lung mo;dragon veins which are the unseen connecting lines which give unity. These are
evident in good calligraphy (Figure 7, first two characters from
right and fourth line 3rd and 4th characters). Thus "the interwoven
brush strokes function both in depth as representation and as strokes 3 on the surface of the paper" and "There is a rough and ropy exterior 4 which one must penetrate to find the substance of his art".
1 Kuo Jo-hsu, Soper's edition 1951, p. 32.
2 "Texture" means conventional type-forms to describe a certain element as type of leaf, type of roof, type of water.
3 Sherman Lee, Chinese Landscape Painting, 1962, p. 47.
4 Ibid ., p. 47. 10
For Wang Meng's art had substance. He was known first and foremost
as a painter of nature; he was
. . . above all a real painter who found his inspirations in what he saw with his eyes and experienced through his senses . . . His attention was centred on the beauty and grandeur of mountains and rivers in themselves ... He felt the cosmic pulse and made it comprehensible in pictor• ial form. 1
1 0. Siren, Chinese Painting III (1956-8), p. 90-1. 11
CHAPTER II
THE PROBLEM
I. Description of Paintings
There are three paintings in the National Palace Museum in
Taipei, Taiwan which are almost exactly the same. They all have
the inscription and signature of 5- Wang Meng, revered by the
Chinese as one of the Four Great Masters of the YUan Dynasty.
These plates are listed here by the labels used in the National
Palace Museum as well as in the U.B.C. archives.
The sizes vary slightly:
Figure 1 A is YV73 size 124.1 cm x 56.7 cm
Figure; 2 B is YV264 size 129.1 cm x 57.6 cm
Figure 3 C is YV265 size 128.5 cm x 54.5 cm 1 J. Figure 4 D is NAlOd size 31.2 cm x 64.9 cm o -
1 These sizes were given by the Museum but D is obviously mistaken because one can see even without measuring, that D photograph is in width less than twice its height, not more. Without knowing exactly the conditions of photography the outside measurements cannot be compared too accurately.
2 Romanization should be Hua-hsi ytl-yin. colours. The little album leaf D is called ^> 3=T /g- ^E- IK ^ ^
IS]) Q 1^ ' ^ "flif /? Ming-hua hui tsui Huach'i shu wu or just Hua cih'i ghu t^U. & 3_ ' "—— •—"~ for short: "Studio at the flowered stream." It is also signed by Wang
Meng and done on paper with ink. It appears to be a free copy of the most liberal type. A fuller discussion of D takes place later.
(Chapter III) 13
II. Previous Classifications
The three similar paintings A, B and C are listed in the
Ku-kung shu-hua lu "Ancient Palace Book Painting Records", in which there are two sections: one is the ii" ^ cheng mu for import• ant works of the first class where A is listed. This rating suggests that A was regarded as the original. The other section is the >vf a Pel q chien mu for less important works where B and C are listed.
Li Lin-ts'an of the National Palace Museum has recently published 1 an article on these three paintings whereby he reverses the listings of A and B. He promotes B to the cheng mu, suggesting it is the 2 original and A he relegates to the chien mu as a "free" copy of B. That this case of the three paintings has been controversial for some time is seen by the fact that Siren in 1956-8 chose B for his 3 illustration of this title giving it an authentic rating in his 4 annotated list. But A was chosen by Dr. James Cahill}and staff of the
1 Wang Chi-ch'ien and Li Lin-ts'an "A Study of Wang Meng's Masterpiece", National Palace Museum Quarterly Vol. 1, No. 1, October 1966, Wang Ch'ien is the CC. Wang of the Bamboo Studio in New York.
2 Ibid., p. 24 " . . . then version A can easily be assigned to a position of being a free copy".
3 0. Siren, Chinese Painting, Vol. VI, pi 111.
4 0. Siren, Chinese Painting, Vol. VII p. 138 - (But there seems to be some discrepancy between his description in the^annotated list and his actual illustration, because he describes A while illustrating B. University of Michigan to represent the three paintings in the
U.B.C. Archives (but with no written statement concerning them) in
1965-6. A is also the choice of the Director of the Palace
Collection in Taipei who states "only the one with the Ch'ien-lung 1 poetry on it is the original one".
1 Fu-ts'ung Chiang, in a letter to me August 24, 1966. 15
III. Aim and Approach
On careful examination and comparison of the three paintings
I hope to show that the original classification is the correct one, that A is the most likely one to be original.
In this paper I make use of methods partly derived from the same 1 pragmatic attitudes which produced criminology, those indicated by 2 Wen Fong in Streams and Mountains Without End and in his "The Problem 3 of Forgeries" as well as in his "Chinese Painting, a Statement of
Method" and "The Lohans and a Bridge to Heaven."
And here I am greatly assisted by the fact that one of the artists with whom Wen Fong is greatly concerned in "The Problem of Forgeries" is Chao Yuan of the same time and same general area of Chiang-nan as
Wang Meng. Chao Yuan started painting under Chao Meng-fu as a small
1 By this I mean the western scientific methods of assembling, compar• ing and eliminating evidence.
2 Wen Fong-, Streams and Mountains Without End, Ascona, Switzerland, 1955.
3 Wen Fong, "Forgeries" (1962), pp. 95-140.
4 Wen Fong, "Chinese Painting, a Statement of Method" Oriental Art, (Summer 1963) p. 73-78.
5 Wen Fong, "The Lohans and a Bridge to Heaven" Freer Gallery of Art, Occ. Papers, (Publication 4305, Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D. C. 1958.) 16 1 boy as did Wang Meng. Also he died in 1372. In other words the milieu was the same so the over-all styles and aims might be consid• ered the same for both painters.
This investigation involves two categories of evidence: the external, by which I mean the poems and seals, and the internal by which I mean the actual painting.
The external evidence includes everything but the painting itself: that is: the paper, ink, seals, colophons, records, and usually it results in an objective but necessarily negative result because, as has been shown, the original authentic colophons with signatures and seals can be removed from the original paintings and applied to blank paper 2 later to be painted on by others.
Included in the internal evidence is the subject of the painting, its mood, communication and means of obtaining this. These means are: all the qualities of ink tone, brush stroke, texture, composition, recession and space, which make up styles. But the results of these tend to be subjective depending as they do on knowledge of style and
1 I suspect, although have been unable to find the evidence, that Chao Yuan was also a grandson of Chao Meng-fu, making Wang Meng and Chao Yuan first cousins.
2 Wen Fong, "Forgeries", (1962) p. 101. one's interpretation of such. The method I will use here is essentially standard practice of Western art and history, with
adaptations to Chinese art history as required. Where the internal
analysis tends to be subjective, but positive, the external tends
to be objective, but negative. Nevertheless, combining the two we
find that the external results can often greatly substantiate the
internal conclusions. 18
CHAPTER III
CHOICE OF SUBJECT
1 My land and house - a little more than ten acres, In the thatched cottage - only eight or nine rooms. Elms and willows shade the back verandah, Peach and plum trees in rows before the hall. Hazy and dimly seen a village in the distance.
No dust and confusion within my doors and courtyard; In the empty rooms, more than sufficient leisure. Too long I was held 2 within the barred cage. Nowl am able to return again to Nature.
of the 4th century A.D. describe Wang Meng's landscape -- though "landscape" does not adequately denote the personal significance which the painting so successfully gives, especially if we know about the literary allusions in the colo• phons and about the life of Wang Meng himself.
1 This poem is not on the painting itself. But I use it to introduce the subject and mood.
2 Barred cage refers to his work as an official. Especially does one appreciate this painting, when one realizes that Wang Meng at this time was a recluse. At the time he signed his hao name to his poem, top right, 01 Huang Ho Shan Chung Ch'iao Che Wang Meng, the "Fuel Gatherers of
Yellow Crane Mountain; he had retired into the Yellow Crane mountain.
It is near Hangchow where he escaped from the terrible rebellions going on around Lake T'ai in Chekiang and Kiangsu, as pirates and rebels were fighting for supremacy. By the time this fighting was over, the 88 year's occupation of the Mongol §ccupatioi} had come to an end. These troubles echoed those of the Ch'in in the third century B.C. which instigated the more famous writing of T'ao Ch'ien called Peach Blossom Spring. So the scholars, unable to hold office, retired, while the winner Chu Yuan-ch'ang, became the new emperor
Hung-wu. He had been a very low grade, uneducated beggar who joined the Buddhists in order to eat, then eventually rose to found the new Ming dynasty. In establishing his rule he had to make use of the scholar bureaucrats. He then became suspicious of them (probably quite rightly) because his low birth made him a target of the scholars who would communicate with each other by literary allusions at the emperor's expense, for he would not know the references. In
1 Cyril Birch, Anthology of Chinese Literature, Grove Press, New York (1965), p. 167. 20 the end most of them were liquidated. Wang Meng was put in prison in 1380 where he died of starvation five years later. Nearly all his friends came to bloody ends just about this time, in two great purges when 30,000 of the top scholar-officials met their fate at the 1 hands of this emperor. The poet Kao Ch'i was cut in half alive at 2 the age of 39 years, Chao Yuan, the painter, lost his head and Hsu
Pen, another famous painter, died in prison. Ch'en Wei-yun, a great friend of Wang Meng, who sometimes collaborated with him in paintings, was another victim. Ch'en had been military advisor to the chief rival and deadly enemy of Chu Yuan-ch'ang (Emperor Hung-wu) and this could have been the reason for Wang Meng's fate. Or it could have been because Wang Meng had once looked at paintings in the home of the 3 prime minister, Hu Wei-yung, who e vaisouliad' m&t/se the same end.
He had become so powerful he virtually controlled the Ming empire for its first ten years. So to wrest back control, Hung-wu had to get rid
1 C.C.M. Serruys, The Mongols in China during the Hung-wu Period, 1368-1398. These were in 1380 and 1394, p. 279 citing Ming shih 308.46.
2 F. W. Mote, Life and Times of Kao Ch'i. This book gives an excellent description of these times, towards the end of the life of Wang Meng in that area in Chiang-nan and Lake T'ai.
3 The Hu Wei-yung affair became famous for its slaughter. 21 of them all, never again has the office of the prime minister been of any importance in China. It was abolished.
The use of this hao name by Wang Meng deepens one's knowledge of the circumstances under which Wang Meng painted his picture.
So the choice of subject has literary allusions going back to
T'ao Ch'ien's Peach Blossom Source, because Wang Meng was a recluse from the same sort of situation as T'ao Ch'ien and had named his studio after T'ao Ch'ien's famous prose poem. Here the myth describes as
Utopia, a village of happy people cut off from the world. They have lived for centuries in this Peach Blossom Valley only knowing by hearsay of the ir 1 A recluse in China is not someone living alone in a cave but someone who has retired to the mountains or elsewhere in nature and who does not work as an official. It is called eremitism by F.W. Mote, "Confucian Eremitism in the Yuan Period", Confucian Persuasion, California: Stanford University Press, 1960. 22 of nature, calling their retreats Peach Blossom Studio, Valley or Cottage. The subsequent scholar recluse likes to compare himself to T'ao Ch'ien who retired from official life at 33. Later, in the 8th century, another poet, who was a painter too, Wang Wei, also retired from official life to Wang Ch'uan villa, where he wrote his famous "Peach Blossom Source" and painted his famous villa. Thus Wang Meng, in the mid 14th century, does the same thing and in doing so, he alludes to these former recluses. Still later, in the 18th century Shih T'ao with his painting, "Peach Blossom Spring", shows the fisherman still holding his oar, gazing down on the happy, valley; behind, with a mountain dividing the scene is his little boat beached on the shore waiting for him. Called Hua-ch'i yii-yin, the "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse" versions A, B and C figures 1, 2 and 3 are all of the same scene. It is late spring in the Peach Blossom Valley. The trees are in full bloom yet the fresh green leaves are also out. The mountains coil up in a 1 twisting, writhing force to the high knobby crown at the top which almost pushes itself out of the edge. But down at the bottom under the 1 These are called by the Chinese critics "alum heads" and are typical of Wang Meng. They are derived from Chli-jan the monk of the late 11th century. Siren, Chinese Painting, Vol. Ill, p. 88. 23 trees confortably floating in his little boat with his wife and servant boy is the artist fishing with his rod and reel, imagine a reel before 13501 He is not caring if he catches a fish but he cares much for his peace, his lovely surroundings and his cozy cottage and in the valley behind him, his distant studio. One can feel all this in the mood of the painting; so magic is the communication that we know the fisherman's love for his little hideaway and his awe of nature. This subject is typical of the Yuan period and specifically of Wang Meng: knobby mountain tops, curling dragon formation-like sea monsters, in a vertical winding rhythm, long spits of grass protruding into the water, the picture plane almost filled. All these are typical of the 14th century in that Chiang nan area. The subject is monumental yet there are always small intimate places to rest such as the small houses one can see into, a few people, or just a philosopher who is thinking as the painter is thinking, for he is the point de depart and the raison d'etre. The far distance is usually allotted to a very small corner. A Later Version In later years as Wang Meng became more famous and this particular painting better known, the little album leaf D (see Figure 4) was probably commissioned to represent the then renowned Wang Meng and to refer back over the hundreds of years to the Peach Blossom Valley of 24 antiquity. This sort of retreat was becoming increasingly, the ideal of every scholar-official. It is not of the style of C, who was under the influence of the manuals, for it is not belaboured with texture and pattern, rather, it is a fresh and spontaneous sketch by a competent painter. But it is a painting of a painting. It is the time when painting was highly sophisticated, when painting consisted of allusions to other painters their styles and their milieu. Taking the top half of A as a model, D has freely moved the mountain tops down, created more distant pale-wash mountains, and put the tiled house in toward the central focus area, yet the leafless trees are in the same positions and same shapes of the Wang Meng scene as also are the contours of the hills and rocks. But gone is the coiling mountain composition and the pulsating feeling, instead we see a pastoral scene done in a spontaneous brush line. Where C is a free copy D is a much freer copy, where C is so concerned with line, D is more concerned with the actual (pictured) scene as he saw it from Wang Meng and not obsessed with his pattern books. Finally, it is signed with the hao of Wang Meng but in making the final character thus left out one stroke. " 25 CHAPTER IV EXTERNAL EVIDENCE I. Poems Now I must do what a Chinese scholar would do first, that is: examine the paper, ink, artists inscriptions, signature and seals, then the colophons and seals of the collectors, leaving the paint• ing itself until last. But we must keep in mind that it is 1 possible for authentic colophons to be found on forged paintings. In the hands of dishonest dealers the official records of all famous paintings help in the free manipulation of seals and calligraphy. Also my aim must be kept in mind, which is: to find not necessarily the original but the one most likely-to-be the original. Poems (4) (3) (1) (1) (3) (1) (2) (2) (2) A B C 1 See Chapter I, p. 3 above. 26 Poems (1) are by Wang Meng, 14th century. Poems (2) are by Shen Liang, unknown. Poems (3) are by Shen Meng-1in, unknown. Poem, (4) is by Ch'ien-Lung, 18th century. The following translations are all by Professor Li Chi of the Department of Asian Studies, U.B.C. They are all written in a T'ang dynasty verse form called -t "= ^j^" T^j: Chi yan Iii shih: seven- character-regulated verse. After the first poem, by Wang Meng, the others refer back to his, in form as well as in parallelism using his 1 five rhyming words. Poem (1) on all three, by Wang Meng. West of Yll-erh, at the head of the Chai Stream, Peach Flowers on both sides of the flowing stream. With Tung-lao I get drunk with thousand-day-drunk-wine. With Hsi-shih ^we floated in a boat on the five lakes. Of the young men who played the heroes and knights- errant, who are still here? The white-haired enjoys the freedom of mists and waves. From ancient times glory has proven to be like a dream, I look at the seagulls with a pleased smile . ^ This is addressed to my honourable uncle both the painting and the poem -- signed by Wang Meng (using his hao name) 1 These of course don't show up in translation. 2 Hsi-shih is a beauty from a Ch'un-ch'iu myth of 722-481 B.C. 3 David Hawkes, Tu Fu, p. 110. In ancient Chinese tradition, to be a friend of the seagulls is to be innocent and simple, a child of nature. 27 1 As has been observed by Li Lin-ts'an the eighth character in this verse is t'ao: peach. This appears with the omit sign beside it "j^}^* in both B and C, but not in A, otherwise the poem is character-for-character identical in all three copies. Li Lin-ts'an thought that this duplication of a mistake in B and C indicated that C was copying from B and because of this, 2 therefore B must be the original, or else why would C copy a mis- 3 4 take? Moreover he states A to be a "free copy" of B, presuming (I suppose) that that freedom allows for A to correct B's mistake. I differ from this explanation in suspecting that B made the first mistake, he was "original" in the mistake only. It seems quite likely to me that in copying or typing, or any kind of manual work that requires no creative thinking that it is more possible to make a mistake while one's thoughts might be elsewhere than while one is 1 Wang Chi'ch'ien and Li Lin-ts'an, " A Study of W.M.'s Masterpiece Hua Ysi Yu-Yiu", The National Palace Museum Quarterly, No. 1, Vol. 1 (October, 1966). Again this second character ^£ is romanized yet a different way3as Ysi instead of Hsi. 2 This is in support of his arguments to say B is the original. 3 But can we assume that the copyists know which was the original? Th is a reasonable assumption but by no means positive. 4 Li Lin-ts'an, " A Study of Wang Mengs Masterpiece", (1966), p. 24. 28 actually creating. In any case, the odds are against the painter- poet himself making the mistake. Moreover, is A likely to go to all that trouble to forge so exactly the painting, as we shall see in Chapter IV, the poems etc. and then correct the mistakes of the"original" here in the eighth character ? I do not think so. Poem (2) on all three, by Shen Liang: All day long I drop my rod at the ancient ferry How many people now-a-days understand such pleasure? For awhile I stay here with the man who planted peach trees, My thoughts go back to the boat loaded with medicinal herbs of past time. Facing a scene like this I think of Lu and Ch'i (two ancient recluses) Entering the mountain let me find Chao and Yu. (two more ancient recluses) When I have got a fish and bought wine I drimk with my wife, I get drunk, I forget all wordly desires but make friends with the seagulls. This corresponding poem is signed by Shen Liang of whom we know nothing except that he indicates he was a friend who was there with Wang Meng in his retreat. Another still more convincing mistake is in the corresponding poem by Shen Liang, (2). The seventh character, fourth line ^ 1 Lu is the name of the first recluse, a very seldom used word. This i as it should be and correct in A. But in both Brand C the ^ has been interpreted as chiao-- horns of an animal. This latter is a commonly used character and so is easy to mistake, but it simply does not fit in the poem. Li Lin-ts'an says this is an understandabl 29 mistake and if the poet was not a scholar of literature it would be quite possible. Again, I differ by saying that the poet himself is the most likely one to get it right and the copyist to get it wrong, for one of two reasons:either that of not knowing the literary allusion to the ancient recluses Lu and Ch'i or, not knowing the rarely used character. So this fact does at least, strongly suggest that A has the original Shen Liang poem on it. And this would also indicate: that in the case of the Shen Liang poem both B and C might be copies, probably one of the other. Poem (3) is the same regulated verse only in the short form of four lines instead of eight called £j ch'ueh chii: short verse. It is signed by Shen-Meng-lin: Specks of dirt everyday whirl in the air On the streams the peaks shine purple or blue. I would take a fishing boat and depart, But first seek an oracle from Ling-feng on the peach source stream. How can we explain the fact that this jLs on A, not on B, yet _is_ on C. Possibly C at some later time added this poem, even hundreds of years later. But whenever it was, it makes one suspect that C at 1 Ling-feng is the priest who divined for Ch'u Yuan in his famous poem Li Sao of the 3rd century B.C. and who told him to seek his lady, far afield and not to be faint hearted, for what woman could refuse him? It is the first Chinese poem to have its author known. 30 that time believed A to be the original. At the former time, the time of copying the rest of the scroll (painting and colophons) he must have copied B which does not have this poem. The fourth poem is by Emperor Ch'ien Lung (1735-95). This is also a seven character, eight line regulated verse corresponding to Wang Meng's poem: Peach blossoms bordering the stream have opened, There are failed' petals to decorate the current. It was not that he longed for the shun''- that he returned home. It was because he wanted to hide frgm the world that he took a fisherman's boat. A new picture differing from the one given by P'eng-ts'e, 5 A will that emulates that of Tse:. Yu. I also have played with the mist and water of Yu-erh Ascending the waves I see only seagulls. 1 Shun is a water plant. 2 A reference to an official who returned home because he longed for the special shun and fish of his home place. 3 This is what Ni Tsan did at the same time as Wang Meng. 4 T'ao Ch'ien, another hao, the Chin,:, poet of 4th century A.D. who wrote"Peach Blossom Spring described in Chapter III. 5 An ancient recluse. 31 It also corresponds to the Wang Meng poem in form, images and five of the rhyme endings• So in deciding between A and B, it seems reasonable to presume that, since A appears to have the original Shen Liang poem (2) at 1 least Shen Liang thought A was the original painting. So similarly did Shen Meng-1in poem (3) think that A was the original and wrote his poem on A and not on B. (Although it is on C) Also the Ch' ien-*-Lung Emperor thought A was the original and wrote his poem on it and not on B or C. At least all seem to have written their own original poems on A. So we have the poets, Shen Liang, Shen Meng-1in and Ch'ien lung all writing on A, presumably believing A to be the original. And possibly later, C himself also believes A to be the original and copies the Shen Meng-lin onto his format. From an aesthetic point of view I would choose, of the whole block-shape of the three versions of the Shen Liang (2) poems, that of A for the way it fits neatly into its' space in the bay, equi• distant from the shoreline. Even in the Shen Meng-lin (3) the shape Moreover, the poem indicates its author was contemporary with Wang Meng, thus if so, would be more likely to know if it was the original. 32 of A is more pleasing than C. And in the Wang Meng (1) poems, that of A, also, for the way to line endings go around the very distant mountains instead of running into them. A seems to be free of mistakes while B'.and C have the mistakes. Moreover the Ch'ien-lung Emperor (1735-95) who wrote on A, is more likely to have known of A's authenticity because Wang Yttan-ch'i 1 (1642-1715), was responsible for gathering most of this collection for Emperor K'ang-hsi (1662-1722) whence it was bequeathed to Ch'ien lung then to his son Chia-ching. This painter, Wang Yuan-ch'i, collator of the Imperial Collection was reputed to be an admirer of Huang Kung-wang and Wang Meng and also known for his paintings "after Wang-Meng" which are signed ~\/)ic fang in the manner of: followed by J_ . So one might conclude that Wang Yuan-ch'i knew better than most subsequent collectors just which paintings were by the hand of Wang Meng. Moreover this "f^iC. absolves the painter from any hint of deceit, and this was the honourable way for a scholar to transmit the style of an old master. 1 Chinese Art Treasurers. U.S. exhibition, (Skira, 1961-2), p. 15. 2 See in the U.B.C. Archives numbers CV71 and CV72. This colophon calligraphy seems more telling than a seal which would seem only to indicate ownership. Thus, in summary, B and C seem to be most alike. That is, they both have the same mistakes and corrections in two of the poems, hence, indicate that one is a copy of the other. 34 II. Seals Seals on Chinese paintings are interesting and sometimes extremely important. They can indicate the whole history of the painting after it leaves the artist's hands. Thus they give a history of the chang• ing fashions in art -- the tastes of the connoisseurs. But like colophons it is possible that all of them can be false ones or, even 1 true ones on false paintings. C is the only one of these three with the seal of Wang Meng, i.e. at the end of Wang Meng's poem..' Li Lin-ts'an has pointed out 2 that the Hsiang Yuan-pien seals on C are false. Thus if one seal is false it seems probably that no reliance can be placed on the Wang Meng seal. B has at least eleven seals of Hsiang Yuan-pien (1525-90) , vfo has a very good reputation as a collector of taste, and this is enough for some experts to vouch for this painting. But without being an expert in seals, I cannot put any faith in this fact, especially when the other facts are so strongly stacked against B, except that it , might indicate Hsiang Yuan-pien thought this to be a genuine painting of Wang Meng's. 1 As pointed out by Wen Fong regarding the true Kao-K'o-kung painting in Forgeries. Vol. XXV, (1962), pp. 95-140. 2 Li Lin-ts'an, "Study of Wang Meng's masterpiece", Vol. I, No. I, (1966), p. 23. 35 A has the seals as well as the colophon of Ch'ien-lung whilst all three have the seals of Chia-ehing, the Emperor son of Ch'ien- lung. 1 In conclusion the evidence of the seals on C tend to back up the evidence of the colophons on B and C to indicate that C could have copied B and beforehand B could have copied A,in other words that A is the one most likely to be the original. But as pointed out at the beginning, no conclusions on this external evidence alone, are really possible. Because all can be removed from the original to a forgery or all can be copied so exactly that it is virtually impossible yet to detect -- they can and have been freely manipulated (see 2 Figure 10) . 1 As Li Lin-ts'an indicates: the Wang Meng seal is false and the Hsiang Yuan-pien seals are in the wrong place on C. 2 Wen Fong, "Forgeries", XXV (1962), Figure 9. 36 CHAPTER V INTERNAL EVIDENCE Looking at these paintings (nearly four feet tall), one seems to be invited in and made familiar with the surroundings. For instance in A, by way of the dim and hidden path from the right behind the big peach trees, one is led into the painting through the orchard and into the gatehouse, or if one prefers, he can pass in front of and around the houses to the left and then finally wind behind the centre mountain peak to reach the studio in the middle distance. In the far distance, in the last bay is seen a tiny man fishing and still another on the path returning to his tile-roof house. Or if visiting by boat one can zig-zag up the waterway in the same general curve as the mountain ridge to the gatehouse where he leaves his boat. Although all three are the same, this description tends to fit A more than B and C. Why is this? This chapter attempts to find out. It seems to be a case of being invited into the painting so that one feels how the objects look from behind at the back even when that part is not shown in the painting. Focusing attention on the painting itself, that is, not on the inscriptions or seals, I find immediately that A and B are almost identical; whereas externally B and C were more alike (they have the same mistakes and corrections as shown in Chapter IV). I. Tracings By experiment I found all three actually were tracings, with the tracing paper moved ever so slightly so as to narrow (if B traced A) or widen (if A traced B) the format. C is also a tracing -- it matches B if a narrow strip 1/8 inch wide is taken out of Bacross the middle. It appears to have been done, accompanied by gradual movement of the tracing paper, rather than one or a number of calculated movements. This, of course, only proves a tracing is a tracing. It doesn't say which was a tracing of which (A from B or B from A) but right here, again C becomes suspect because it has a longer, narrower format which is more typical of Ming period. To conform with this he has had to move in both the far boat and the Shen Liang poem. . Whereas if, in fact, B had traced C he is unlikely to have moved the boat out. He is more likely to have expanded the tracing in the centre. (see diagrams on tracing paper, figure 11) Although the outlines and objects are so similar, on much diligent investigation I find they are quite different in tone, stroke and general aim of the painter. 38 II. Techniques Ink Tone. First of all, considering the ink tones: looking with narrowed eyes, at all three together from a distance, one notices that the range of tones vary. A is softer, quieter, while 1 B is markedly dark-light-dark-light from bottom to top. C has the same dark-light pattern only it is more elaborate because the dark blocks are further broken up into ridges and rills. There are very few medium or half tones. Whereas A has mostly medium or half tones. These instigate an immediate wish for closer inspection. The dark-light contrast makes of B and C,a different composi• tion by emphasizing the horizontals, the rows of trees, coming out from the "gj^ shaped coiling mountain ridges. (See Figure 12) 1 This is with allowances for the better condition of B. 39 Space and Recession. The ungraduated black and white contrast in B and C lessens the concept of space (or distance). Moreover B and C tend to overplay all horizontals as well as the far right mountains. (Figure 12) This strangely disturbs the peace of the whole painting, and this is a strange thing to say because horizon• tals are a well-known means (today) of making up a peaceful composi• tion. But here in B and C, they tend to make a pattern. This pattern gives a design quality which is obtrusive, especially in C. (Figure 3) This in turn, produces a lack of recession. Whereas, in A the horizontals between the land points are underplayed in comparison with B and C adding to the recession of space: a quiet peaceful bay, or place to rest the eyes. Also the top right mountains are a great distance away from the bottom curve of mountains further adding to recession of space. One can really feel oneself inside this composi• tion. But in B and C, the top of the curve and the far distant mountains are almost as close to the viewer as the bottom of the curve. And in between, the bay is not so much a space as a textured surface. So we have, seemingly, a wall in front of us. One cannot get in. Not only is recession denied in the whole of the paintings B and C, but also in the individual elements. 40 Brush Stroke. Since the Sung dynasty and very much so of the Yuan masters, the brush stroke reveals the painter's mood and temperament. This is the main tenet of the ~zz_ >^ Wen jen hua, scholar class painting school, so named by Tung Ch'i-ch'ang who took 1 the Four Masters as his prototypes. In this period, personality of stroke is sensitively balanced with truth to nature. But later the pendulum swings to the personality side. So here I think we can begin to eliminate C from our "Case of the Three Paintings": Roots: In the bottom right hand corner of all three paintings are the exposed roots of the old peach trees. (See Figure 6 detail of 2 A's roots ) C shows these as white against a dark background. They are not tactile or in any sense plastic but rather like cutouts pasted on -- flat. In A (although damaged) they are tactile and seem real. There are all sorts of comings and goings, in and out of space, with little roots going behind big roots, forming deep holes and shallow pockets. One can see, here in A, into the hollow trunk behind the roots. The roots in B although they are not as flat as C, neither are they as conscious of depth as A. This is due mostly to creative Victoria Contag, "Tung Ch' i-ch1 ang's Hua Ch'an Shih Sui-Pi", p. 2 Only a detail of A was available but B and C can be discerned with a magnifying glass. 41 outlook; but in execution it is due to both ink tone and brush stroke. Rocks: Another feature which depends on brush line, is the rock group across on the left side (See Figure 7, 8 and 9) In C we have the brush display at the expense of the rocks themselves which hardly look like rocks. They represent the exercising of a well- practiced stroke which fails' to convey the realness of the rocks and this is in contrast to A, (Figure 7). Here in A, the rocks stand out from the bamboo background, they seem to be real, moss-covered rocks that one could sit on or lean against. Bamboo: This bamboo coming up from behind the rocks is in A a bushy thicket and it is definitely growing up from behind the rocks. But in B the bamboo does not seem to come up from behind, but is flat with the rocks and is partly the reason these rocks don't look like rocks, it is messy, a hodge-podge that barely passes for bamboo! C's bamboo goes to the other extreme being a definite bamboo sample removed from the how-to-do-it-books such as the Mustard Seed Garden 1679-1701. It is making use of textured strokes as a later time did. And while we are looking at this rock we notice the small rock pointing to the right into the water which is also coming from behind in A and not in B. B in fact does not tell us whether it is on the same plane, or in front. C has omitted it entirely, (Figures 1, 2 and 3). 42 These features are the very core of the problem. It is the third dimension which gives reality. As noted by Wen Fong, it is a feature of the Yuan Dynasty masters. It is characteristic of an artist (painter) not of a copyist who tends to see the lines alone, without having in his mind the whole object which these lines merely delineate. Thus he cannot produce J|L chen, reality. Thatch: Still going up the painting we come to the thatch roofs of the houses in the centre and here again A is like B, and C has 'improved on them1 by dividing roofs into sections, whereas A and B have a sweep of lines from ridge to eaves. (Figure 13) Behind the houses are trees which reveal a finicky dtcxodle-type of short curved 1 stroke called "calligraphic mannerism" by Wen Fong. But it is underconscious of the forms in nature. Moreover this dividing, separating and curling of stroke is found almost throughout this C version of the painting. His handwriting is becoming familiar like the person we all know who always curls his C's and dots his i's with circles . Mountains: Going up, still following the dragon curves is seen the handwriting, typical of C. He divides up all the mountain 1 Wen Fong, "A Statement of Method" (1963) p. 76. 43 tops into a series of parallel ridges going first down to right, then to left, then right again to the centre top mountain where A and B have a quiet smooth surface. Here C could not resist subdivid• ing the space even more than his other sections. Here was his opportunity to reveal his personality by his brushstrokes. But the time that was done was still some way off. Leafy Tree: Though there are many more aspects in a similar view only one more will be dealt with here and that is the leafy tree whose roots were discussed before. In A there is a mass of light- filtering and light-reflecting foliage. It conveys that all-overness of dappled sun everyone knows in summer under trees. B has been unable to interpret this at all, if indeed he understood it. He treats it as a negative element rather than a positive element -- as a light mist behind the tree. C's treatment of it does not give that all-over effect, it is neither one nor the other, neither a negative nor a positive element. This is just one more example of A painting trees that are trees and B and C painting trees that are only brush strokes. i "How can it (the inspiration) be copied by a later man" and "the 2 forger merely catches the dregs and loses the spirit". 1 Shen Ts'ung Ch'ien of the mid-18th Century quoted by Wen Fong in "Forgeries", XXV (1962), p; 111. (brackets mine) 2 Ibid. 44 III. Results: Ch'i yun This critic is referring to ^ ch i yun: spirit, harmony, which is the first of Hsieh-Ho's famous six principles. It is the most important and the most difficult to explain. The critics have not helped because they failed to stress the physical means of attaining this ch'i. And even more important, they have neglected the changing of these physical means down through history. By ch'i is meant the pulse of life which gives rise to ^ ^J] shen tung or life-movement. For even rocks move or change as moss covers them or as water grinds them to sand, and volcanoes, or earth• quakes disintegrate them. The 'jj^ ch' i in turn comes from ^ chen: real, or genuine and leads to the eeternal \^ Tao: the way, all these, the subject of countless criticisms on Chinese painting. But it seems to me that chen, ch'i and Tao, are really just exactly those features here which A has, B and C do not have. It is in part the third dimension which gives a reality or truth to form because of the illusion of depth-. . 45 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION So it would seem that the painting style of- C is that of a later date. Its format is narrower in relation to its height. It shows an obsession with texture strokes, it denies recession of space, and most of all, stroke has become an end rather than means to an end -- this end'being that thing I call 'reality'. Only after the Yuan period did brush line become primarily a means of reveal• ing personality instead of a means of revealing forms in nature. The delicate balance had become upset. This was both caused by and the result of the writing and publishing of manuals like the Mustard Seed Garden of 1679-1701 and its predecessor the Treatise on the Paintings and Writings of the Ten Bamboo Studio of 1633. The results of which, were many more mediocre works by less talented painters. . With the preeminance of brush line and the lessening of reality, Wang Meng and the masters of his time still were conscious of the iM- li: the principles of nature. His tree trunks for instance, have a freedom, a lightness of touch, a twisting by thickening and thinning of lines giving roundness, yet solidness with the movement of growth to every tree and branch. For Wang Meng was known first and foremost as a painter of nature. This feeling in A, of 'reality' contributed to by the third dimension is also contributed to by the subtle ink tones, the brush 46 lines and the whole concept of the artist's aim in painting. Each rock and tree is real to him and so is the path he has walked along so many times. His aim was to get this feeling onto his paper. C probably was painted when a different set of visual and structural principles were prevailing. The aim of C was perhaps, to perform the composition of a past master in his own way, just as a pianist might play Beethoven today especially in the cadenza where he can improvise. He, C, performs within the same framework (the tracing) but feels free, according to C's own current standards, to embroider the chief themes of Wang Meng. The format is narrower, the distant boat is consequently moved down and in, the rock point behind the peach tree is omitted, making a "better" composition. C betokes a painter who has as it were "been doing his homework" via the manuals at the end of the 17th century. Whereas he denies space, the "Yuan Masters, who had radically turned away from the Sung balance and harmony of mountain, water and sky had 1 not gone that far." Moreover, as Wen Fong says about the Chao Yuan copy: "The copyist was clearly tracing a two-dimensional pattern 2 rather than creating a spatially moving picture." Far from being able 1 Max Loehr, Artibus Asiae, Vol. XXII, (1959) p. 1<51. 2 Wen Fong, "Forgeries" XXV, (1963), p. 112 as in same problem re Chao Yuan. 47 to render an illusion of roundness these lines are quite devoid of any modelling purpose; they actually flatten whatever they depict into two-dimensional docorative areas. They have become calligraph- 1 ically self-conscious. So we can eliminate C as a later and free copy, that is of the painting part of this work, where he had no intent to deceive. But the external evidence of C indicates a deliberate attempt to deceive. B is a little more difficult to separate from A but keeping in mind the arguments against C, we can see that they apply also to B even if only to a lesser degree. One reason making this separation and grading more difficult is the greater state of preservation of B. A appears to be rather beaten up. The surface seems as if sand papered and the strokes not as crystal clear as in the others (it could be a result of age and constant viewing or re-mounting. But nothing can entirely mask that marvellous sculpture-like quality to every item, and though sculptural, not heavy but light and full of life. The black tones in the top half seem to bear no relation to the rest of the painting. It would seem this may be due to retouching. (Note in Figure 1, a few small dots down the centre of the bottom half, they are so very black as to 1 Ibid., p. 107. 48 indicate retouching also. They have not aged with the rest of the painting.) Taking everything into consideration, the internal, positive evidence, supported by the external but negative evidence, I conclude that of the three paintings A, B, and C, that A is the "least 1 corrupted -- if not actually the original." A is closest to what is known as the style of Wang Meng and can take its place, necessary for the purpose "of establishing style changes of history." A can be taken as representative of Wang Meng's style. A belongs in the jj § flheng mu. The evidence suggests B to be a forgery but is so close a forgery, in fact the two are so close in style, composition and general type of brush work (the difference is only a hair's breadth) that different• iation for our purpose is not really necessary. Nevertheless, the internal but positive evidence is more in favour of A as the proto• type of B than vice versa. Further that the controversies over A's authenticity may have been due to probable retouching in the top half, whereas B is in a much better state of preservation. Finally, C can be ruled out as a later, "free" copy, although the colophons are not free. They seem to be an exact forgery of B's colophons complete with B's mistakes. 1 See Chapter 1, p. 16. Eliminating C is a beginning. Further steps would be to study other pairs in the Palace Collection in the same wayatogether with actual work on the originals until a corpus of the most authentic work: of Wang Meng can be built up to take its place as a "prime object." 50 BIBLIOGRAPHY Birch, Cyril (ed.). Anthology of Chinese Literature. New York: Grove Press, 1965. Cahill, James. Chinese Painting. Switzerlandj Skira, 1960. Chinese National Palace Museum, Chinese National Central Museum. Chinese Art Treasurers (Travelling exhibition in U.S. by Gov't of Republic of China) Taichung, China: Skira, 1961-62. Contag, Victoria. "Schriftcharakteristiken in der Malerai, dargestellt an Bildern Wang Meng's und anderer Maler der Sudschule"(Character• istics of Calligraphy in the Painting of Wang Meng and Others of the Southern School) Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, Berlin: 1941. pp. 46-61. (Translated by J. Delord) Contag, Victoria. "Tung Ch'i-ch'ang's Hua-Ch'an Shih Sui-Pi und das Hua-Shuo des Mo Shih-lung." Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, IX (May, 1933) pp. 83-97, (Oct., 1933) pp. 174-187. (Translated by J. Delord) Contag, Victoria-and Wang, Ch'i-ch'ien. Seals of Chinese Painters and Collectors of the Ming and Ch'ing Periods. Hong Kong University Press, rev. ed., 1966. Edwards, Richard and others. The Painting of Tao-Chi, Catalogue of an Exhibition August-September, 1967, at University of Michigan. New Haven: Eastern Press, 1967. Fong, Wen. "Chinese Painting, a Statement of Method," Oriental Art, IX, (Summer, 1963), pp. 73-78. Fong, Wen. The Lohans and a Bridge to Heaven. Freer Gallery of Art Occasional Papers, publ. 4305, Washington, D. C: Smithsonian Institute, 1958. Fong, Wen. "The Problem of Forgeries in Chinese Painting," Artibus Asiae XXV, (1962), pp. 95-140. Fong, Wen and Sherman E. Lee. Streams and Mountains Without End. Switzerland: Ascona, 1955. 51 Hawkes, David. Tu Fu. Oxford: Clarendon, 1967. Kuo Jo-HsU. Experiences in Painting. Translated and annotated by A.C. Soper. (American Council of Learned Societies Studies in Chinese and relative civilizations. No. 6). Washington, 1951. Lee, Sherman E. Chinese Landscape Painting. Cleveland Museum of Art, New York, 1954 (revised 1962). Li, Chi. "The Changing Concept of the Recluse in Chinese Literature." Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies. Vol. 24. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Yenching Institute, 1962-63. Li, Chu-ts'ing. Autumn Colors on the Ch'iao and Hua Mountains. Artibus Asiae Supplement XXI. Switzerland: Ascona, 1966. Li, Lin-ts'an. "A New Look at the Paintings of the Yuan Dynasty." National Palace Museum Bulletin. Taipei, Taiwan. Vol. II, No. 5. (November-December, 1967) Li, Lin-ts'an, and Wang, Chi-ch'ien. "A Study of Wang Meng's Master• piece Hua-Ysi YU-Yin." The National Palace Museum Quarterly. Vol. 1. No. 1. Taipei, Taiwan. (July, 1966) Loehr, Max. "Some Fundamental Issues in the History of Chinese Painting." Journal of Aesthetics XXIV No. 1, part 1, (Fall, 1965), pp. 37-43. Loehr, Max. "A Landscape Attributed to Wen Chen-ming." Artibus Asiae XXII (1959) pp. 143-151. Mote, F. W. The Poet Kao Ch'i 1336-1374. Princeton University Press, 1962. Mote, F. W. "Confucian Eremitism in the Yuan Period." Confucian Persuasion, Arthur F. Wright (ed.). California: Stanford University Press, 1960. P'an, T' ien-shou^^l? "Huang Kung-wang yd Wang Meng" (Gazetteer in Chinese). Shanghai, 1958. Rowley, George. Principles of Chinese Painting. Princeton, 1959. 52 Serruys, C.C.M. The Mongols in China during the Hung-wu Period 1368-1398, L'lnstitut Beige des Hautes Etudes Chinoises Melanges Chinois et Bouddhiques, Bruxelles: Imprimeria Sainte- Catherine, S.A. Juillet, 1959. Sickman, Laurence (ed.). Chinese Calligraphy and Painting in the Collection of John M. Crawford, Jr. New York, 1962. Siren, Osvald. Chinese Painting, Leading Masters and Principles. 7 vols., London: Lund Humphries, 1956-58. Siren, Osvald. The Chinese, on the Art of Painting, Translations and Comments. New York: Schocken, 1936 (revised 1963). Sullivan, Michael. "The Heritage of Chinese Art." The Legacy of China. Edited by Dawson, Raymond. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964. Taiwan. National Palace Museum. National Palace and Central Museum Photographic Archives. Photographed by Department of History of Art, University of Michigan, 1965-66. Mr & j. 4$-'% * ^ & Yi. d 5 **** % U £} 5 *f i# | Figure 4 D,NA10d. "Studio at the Flower Stream" by Wang Meng ("Free copy") Figure 5 A (detail of lower left ^ ' •,>" - vl ^ ", >r.. side of A) k, 2S> v. V I Figure 10 Inscription and seals by Emperor Ch'ien-lung ("Original and Copy") Figure 12 Composition of A, B and C.