sign in sign up
<<
Home , Dehua County, Ejin Banner, Guixi, Han dynasty, History of Song (book), Hu Weiyong

AND TRADE IN SOUTHEAST ——A CASE STUDY OF

XIN GUANGCAN ( , PekingU; , PekingU)

A THESIS SUBMITTED

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN STUDIES NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

2015

Acknowledgements

Upon accomplishing the entire work of this thesis, it is for me to acknowledge many people who have helped me. First, I will like to express my utmost gratitude to my supervisor Dr.John N. Miksic from the Department of

Southeast Asian Studies, National University of Singapore. He has dedicated a lot of precious time to supervising me, from choosing the thesis topic, organizing the fieldwork plans, to giving much valued comments and advice on the immature thesis drafts. I am the most indebted to him.

The committee member Dr. Patric Daly from the Asian Research Institute and Dr.

Yang Bin from the History Department, who gave me useful suggestions during the qualifying examination.

I also would like to thank the following people who have given me a lot of support during my fieldwork and final stage of writing.

For the fieldtrip in , with the help of Mr. Yueming, the director of Zhejiang Relics and Archaeology Institute, I was able to be involved in a meaningful excavation of a to ceramic kiln site in

County. During the excavation, the deputy team leader Mr. Jun and the local researcher Mr. Guanggui gave a lot of suggestions on the identification of

Longquan . Moreover, Ms. Qiuhua, Mr. Guanfu, and Mr. Xu

Xiaoping from the local Museum showed great hospitality to the archaeology team. I believe all the team members had benefited greatly from the

i surveys and excavations.

For the fieldtrip in Province, I got much advice from Mr. ’ from

Fujian Provincial Museum. I could not thank him more. His advice for my itinerary of the surveys in Southern Fujian was constructive. Ms. Li Rongqing and Mr. Song

Pengbo are also much appreciated for their help which had made my travel much easier. During my short visit to the museums, warm reception from local curators and staff is quite impressive. Mr. You Guopeng, Ms. Ke Fengmei and Mr. Xu

Feng from Museum showed me many samples from their own investigations.

Mr. Xu even accompanied me to several kiln sites on hills, which made the trip very fruitful. It was a memorable scene when Ms. Lifang from Dehua Museum who drove me to kiln sites on her electric bicycle. Mr. Enfeng from the

Maritime Museum and Ms. Wu Yijuan from the Quanzhou Museum kindly showed me the exhibitions and introduced their newly discoveries.

For the fieldtrip in , Drs. Soviyani Aris, the head of Trowulan Museum, provided me with nice accommodation in the museum, as well as a good environment for my classification work. The staff, especially those girls, Nurika, Rerwita, Putri,

Yanti, from the ceramic department, had helped me too much. How could I forget they gave me a lift to the office every morning and back to the guest room every night!

Mr. Minos Kosmadakis, an archaeology enthusiast from the University of

Copenhagen, helped a lot with the ceramic classification work in Trowulan Museum.

I will never forget the good time spent with Singapore archaeologists and volunteers in our Archaeology Laboratory. Dr. Goh Geok Yian from

ii

Technological University gave me a lot of suggestions on the classification of ceramic

sherds, as well as the organization of the dissertation’s framework. Her professional

advice has always been an important source of inspiration. The enthusiastic volunteer

Ms. Aoki Ryoko’s assistance to the lab work had enabled me to use the classified materials as sooner as possible. Her warm greetings also gave me much spiritual

support.

Mr. Lim Chen Sian from the Archaeology Unit of ISEAS kindly introduced me to the excavations he was involved and provided some photos of the artefacts found

from the excavations. Ms. Foo Tieng, also from the Archaeology Unit, and I

always communicated with each other on the most concerned issues in the field of

archaeology. Mr. Lim Tse Siang, who had generously agreed to offer his original

materials to me for extended research, is much appreciated.

My mentor Dr. Dashu from , Ms. Yuan Quan from Capital

Normal University, and Mr. Guangyao from the Museum helped me

with the identification of the sherds unearthed in Singapore. I will like to

express my most sincere gratitude to them. Ms. Wai Yee, now teaching in the

Chinese University of ， was a senior archaeology student in our department of Southeast Asian Studies, gave me a lot of spiritual encouragement which helped me tide through this very tough time of writing.

My very best friend Ms. Chong Yuan Jian is specifically appreciated with her inspiring thoughts and hardworking character, plus the friendliest Singapore state banquet.

iii

During the final stage of my thesis writing, several students from our department

had organized a small writing group, so that we could support each other. It was quite

a good experience. I owe my thanks to these group members, who make our writing

period much more pleasant. I will also like to thank Ms. Rohani Sungib at the general

office who has helped me with administrative matters. My thanks also go to all the staff in the department.

My landlord Ms. Yulan is the nicest Singaporean auntie I have ever met.

Since I rented one room of her small apartment on Dover Crescent Road in 2012, has been doing the laundries for me and keeping the house clean and tidy. Although it seems like a small matter, the most important thing is that I do not need to out

extra time to do any household chores even on weekends, so that I could concentrate

on my thesis writing.

I will like to dedicate my thesis to my parents. Without their spiritual

encouragement and financial support I would never been able to go farther on my way

to pursuing my academic goals. My grandmother, my aunt and my brother also gave me lots of warm support and I am deeply grateful for this.

I can never say enough about these fabulous people and how grateful I am to all of them. It is their supports that make the hopes over the whole way of finishing my dissertation. Without doubt, the path tomy PhD has made me a more mature research fellow.

iv

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements...... i

Table of Contents...... v

Summary...... ix

List of Tables...... x

List of Maps...... xii

List of Figs...... xiii

Chapter 1: Introduction...... 1

1.1 Historical perspectives on Chinese ceramics trade in during the

14th century C....... 1

1.2 Relevant research achievements...... 7

1.2.1 The seaborne routes between and Southeast Asia...... 7

1.2.2 Historic of the and before the 14th century..9

1.3 Archaeological discoveries and historical accounts regarding early Singapore.....12

1.3.1 Archaeological discoveries in Singapore...... 12

1.3.2 Current studies about 14th century Singapore—recovering early Singapore

in historical documents...... 14

1.4 Comparing Chinese ceramic sherds from Singapore with those found in the

original Chinese kiln sites...... 16

1.5 Comparing the artefacts in Singapore with Trowulan of the 14th century...... 18

1.6 Hypotheses and methodology...... 20

v

1.6.1 Hypotheses...... 20

1.6.2 Methodology...... 22

1.7 Contribution to the field...... 26

1.8 Strengths and limitations...... 28

Chapter 2: Historical Studies...... 30

2.1 Historical records and travel accounts...... 30

2.1.1 Previous textual studies on ancient Singapore...... 30

2.1.2 Accounts related to 14th century Southeast Asia...... 39

2.1.3 and policies for overseas trade in China...... 47

2.1.4 The recorded sea routes from China to ...... 58

2.2 Previous historical and archaeological research on urban sites in China and

Southeast Asia...... 61

2.2.1 Archaeology work on the Yuan and early capital sites...... 61

2.2.2 Archaeology work on other Yuan and early Ming urban sites in mainland

China...... 65

2.2.3 Archaeology work on cities in China...... 69

2.2.4 Archaeology work on urban sites in the 14th century Southeast Asia...... 71

Chapter 3: Archaeology and Ceramic Studies: Materials...... 78

3.1 Materials from Singapore...... 78

3.2 Materials from southeast China and Trowulan...... 90

Chapter 4: Comparison between Ceramics Unearthed from Singapore and China in

the 14th century...... 99

vi

4.1 Previous studies on ceramics unearthed from Singapore...... 99

4.2 Chronology of Chinese ceramics in the 14th century...... 101

4.2.1 Ceramics produced in kilns in Zhejiang Province...... 101

4.2.2 Ceramics produced in kilns in Fujian Province...... 108

4.2.3 Ceramics produced in kilns in , Province...... 119

4.2.4 Chronological materials from hoards, tombs and shipwrecks...... 128

4.3 Comparisons of Chinese ceramics in China and Singapore...... 154

4.3.1 Longquan celadon and Guan type wares...... 154

4.3.2 Fujian wares...... 170

4.3.3 Jingdezhen wares...... 175

4.3.4 wares...... 181

Chapter 5: Chinese Ceramics from Trowulan and Singapore...... 183

5.1 Historical sources on Yuan and Ming relations with ...... 183

5.1.1 Narratives of the warfare between Yuan and Java...... 183

5.1.2 Trade relations between China and Majapahit...... 187

5.2 Archaeology work and Chinese ceramics discovered in Trowulan...... 195

5.3 General illustration of Chinese ceramics found in Trowulan and Singapore...... 200

5.3.1 Chinese ceramic sherds from Trowulan...... 206

5.3.2 Chinese ceramic sherds from Singapore...... 241

Chapter 6: Trading Networks: 14th Century Southeast Asia...... 315

6.1 process in China...... 315

6.2 Comparisons between Singapore, Quanzhou, and Trowulan...... 322

vii

Chapter 7: Conclusions...... 344

7.1 Retrospect: the documented history of Southeast Asia—China relations.....344

7.2 Ceramic trade and maritime links ...... 350

7.3 Chinese trade and the evolution of port cities in Southeast Asia...... 352

Bibliography...... 356

viii

Summary

Located at the geographically important area of Malay Peninsula, Singapore had played an essential role in the long-distance maritime communication network in the

Indian-Pacific trading zone as early as in the 14th century C.E. Current archaeological excavations can provide evidence that there were extensive activities conducted by local residents in the 14th century. Evidence shows that Singapore has

already been a specialized society and a producer of finished artefacts.

During the 14th century in Southeast Asia, it is believed that maritime trade had

already thrived and given rise to plenty of highly urbanized port cities, one of which is

Singapore. This thesis is aiming to reconstruct the idea of early Singapore society based on mass artefacts analysis and discuss the causes that spurred this type of .

In this paper, Chinese trade ceramics is used as an important thread material.

Comparisons of Chinese ceramics are going to be made between Singapore, Yuan and

Ming China (places of origin), and Majapahit (end-users). This study also hopes to unveil the significance of Singapore as a transshipping emporia. Furthermore, it is the maritime trade that greatly facilitated the process of urbanization in Southeast Asia during the 14th century.

ix

List of Tables

Table 2.1.2.1 Pertinent southeast China and Southeast Asia port cities recorded in

13th-14th century historical accounts...... 44

Table 2.1.3.1The establishment and abolishment of Yuan Mercantile Shipping and

Transportation Bureaus...... 50

Table 2.1.4.1 Research from different scholars on the locations of the toponyms in

Yuanshi...... 60

Table 2.2.4.1 14th century trading ports recorded in historical accounts or published with archaeological data on the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra and Java...... 75

Table 3.2.1 Published surveys and excavations on Guangdong kilns of Yuan and Ming

period...... 92

Table 4.2.2.1 Investigations and excavations of Dehua kiln complexes...... 116

Table 4.2.4.1 Longquan celadon, Fujian wares and Jingdezhen wares discovered from

unearthed hoards of the 14th century...... 130

Table 4.2.4.2 Longquan celadon, Fujian wares and Jingdezhen wares discovered from

dated tombs of the 14th century...... 144

Table 4.3.1.1 Comparison between bowl sherds unearthed from Singapore and those

from Longquan area...... 163

Table 4.3.1.2 Comparison between plate sherds unearthed from Singapore and those

from Longquan area...... 166

Table 4.3.1.3 Comparison between jar sherds unearthed from Singapore and those

x

from Longquan area...... 169

Table 4.3.1.4 Comparison between celadon unearthed from the Turiang shipwreck and

those from the Longquan area...... 170

Table 4.3.2.1 Similarity illustration between Dehua wares found in Singapore and

China...... 172

Table 4.3.3.1 Similarity illustration between and white wares found in Singapore

and China...... 177

Table 5.2.1 Main types of Chinese ceramics and Southeast Asian ceramics of the

Majapahit period...... 199

Table 5.2.2 Proportional comparison of Zhizheng type blue and white wares found in

Trowulan...... 200

Table 5.3.1 Criteria for classifing Chinese ceramics found in Singapore and

Trowulan...... 202

xi

List of Maps

Map 6.2.1 Archaeological sites within the ancient town of Singapore...... 329

Map 6.2.2 Quanzhou’s location in southern Fujian...... 336

Map 6.2.3 Song Quanzhou’s four walls...... 337

Map 6.2.4 Structures in Quanzhou...... 338

Map 6.2.5 The location of Trowulan in ...... 349

Map 6.2.6 The distribution of cultural relics in the Trowulan area...... 341

xii

List of Figs

Fig 1 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 1...... 207

Fig 2 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 2...... 207

Fig 3 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 3...... 208

Fig 4 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 4...... 209

Fig 5 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 5...... 209

Fig 6 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 6...... 210

Fig 7 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 7...... 210

Fig 8 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 8...... 211

Fig 9 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 9...... 211

Fig 10 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 10...... 212

Fig 11 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 11...... 212

Fig 12 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 12...... 213

Fig 13 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 13...... 213

Fig 14 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 14...... 213

Fig 15 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 15...... 214

Fig 16 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 16...... 215

Fig 17 Trowulan plain celadon plate 1...... 215

Fig 18 Trowulan plain celadon plate 2...... 216

Fig 19 Trowulan plain celadon plate 3...... 217

Fig 20 Trowulan plain celadon plate 4...... 217

xiii

Fig 21Trowulan plain celadon plate 5...... 218

Fig 22Trowulan plain celadon plate 6...... 218

Fig 23 Trowulan plain celadon washer 1...... 219

Fig 24 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 1...... 219

Fig 25 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 2...... 220

Fig 26 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 3...... 221

Fig 27 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 4...... 221

Fig 28 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 5...... 222

Fig 29Trowulan plain celadon burner 1...... 222

Fig 30 Trowulan spotted celadon jarlet 1...... 222

Fig 31 Trowulan Dehua type bowl 1...... 223

Fig 32 Trowulan Dehua type washer 1...... 224

Fig 33 Trowulan Dehua type washer 2...... 225

Fig 34 Trowulan Dehua type washer 3...... 225

Fig 35 Trowulan Dehua type washer 4...... 226

Fig 36 Trowulan Dehua type box 1...... 226

Fig 37 Trowulan Dehua type box 2...... 227

Fig 38 Trowulan Dehua type lid 1...... 227

Fig 39 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 1...... 228

Fig 40 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 2...... 228

Fig 41 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 3...... 229

Fig 42 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 4...... 229

xiv

Fig 43 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 5...... 230

Fig 44 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 6...... 230

Fig 45 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 7...... 231

Fig 46 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 8...... 231

Fig 47 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 9...... 232

Fig 48 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 10...... 232

Fig 49 Trowulan Zhuangbian type jarlet 1...... 233

Fig 50 Trowulan Zhuangbian type jarlet 2...... 233

Fig 51 Trowulan Zhuangbian type lid 1...... 234

Fig 52 Trowulan yellowish bowl 1...... 235

Fig 53 Trowulan yellowish bowl 2...... 235

Fig 54 Trowulan yellowish jarlet 1...... 236

Fig 55 Trowulan qingbai bowl 1...... 236

Fig 56 Trowulan qingbai bowl 2...... 237

Fig 57 Trowulan qingbai bowl 3...... 237

Fig 58 Trowulan qingbai bowl 4...... 237

Fig 59 Trowulan qingbai plate 1...... 238

Fig 60 Trowulan qingbai cup 1...... 238

Fig 61 Trowulan qingbai washer 1...... 239

Fig 62 Trowulan qingbai jar 1...... 240

Fig 63 Trowulan qingbai lid 1...... 240

Fig 64 Trowulan blue and white bowl 1...... 241

xv

Fig 65 Trowulan blue and white bowl 2...... 241

Fig 66 Singapore plain celadon bowl 1...... 242

Fig 67 Singapore plain celadon bowl 2...... 243

Fig 68 Singapore plain celadon bowl 3...... 244

Fig 69 Singapore plain celadon bowl 4...... 244

Fig 70 Singapore plain celadon bowl 5...... 245

Fig 71 Singapore plain celadon bowl 6...... 246

Fig 72 Singapore plain celadon bowl 7...... 246

Fig 73 Singapore plain celadon bowl 8...... 247

Fig 74 Singapore plain celadon bowl 9...... 248

Fig 75 Singapore plain celadon bowl 10...... 249

Fig 76 Singapore plain celadon bowl 11...... 249

Fig 77 Singapore plain celadon bowl 12...... 250

Fig 78 Singapore plain celadon bowl 13...... 251

Fig 79 Singapore plain celadon bowl 14...... 252

Fig 80 Singapore plain celadon plate 1...... 253

Fig 81 Singapore plain celadon plate 2...... 254

Fig 82 Singapore plain celadon plate 3...... 254

Fig 83 Singapore plain celadon plate 4...... 255

Fig 84 Singapore plain celadon plate 5...... 256

Fig 85 Singapore plain celadon plate 6...... 257

Fig 86 Singapore plain celadon plate 7...... 257

xvi

Fig 87 Singapore plain celadon plate 8...... 258

Fig 88 Singapore plain celadon washer 1...... 259

Fig 89 Singapore plain celadon washer 2...... 259

Fig 90 Singapore plain celadon saucer 1...... 260

Fig 91 Singapore plain celadon 1...... 261

Fig 92 Singapore plain celadon Bo 2...... 261

Fig 93 Singapore plain celadon jarlet 1...... 262

Fig 94 Singapore plain celadon jarlet 2...... 263

Fig 95 Singapore plain celadon jar 1...... 264

Fig 96 Singapore plain celadon jar 2...... 265

Fig 97 Singapore plain celadon jar 3...... 265

Fig 98 Singapore iron spotted celadon jarlet 1...... 266

Fig 99 Singapore iron spotted celadon lid 1...... 266

Fig 100 Singapore Dehua type bowl 1...... 267

Fig 101 Singapore Dehua type washer 1...... 268

Fig 102 Singapore Dehua type washer 2...... 269

Fig 103 Singapore Dehua type box 1...... 269

Fig 104 Singapore Dehua type box 2...... 270

Fig 105 Singapore Dehua type jarlet 1...... 271

Fig 106 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 1...... 272

Fig 107 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 2...... 272

Fig 108 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 3...... 273

xvii

Fig 109 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 4...... 274

Fig 110 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 5...... 275

Fig 111 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 6...... 275

Fig 112 Singapore Zhuangbian type plate 1...... 276

Fig 113 Singapore Zhuangbian type plate 2...... 277

Fig 114 Singapore type bowl 1...... 277

Fig 115 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 1...... 278

Fig 116 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 2...... 279

Fig 117 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 3...... 280

Fig 118 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 4...... 280

Fig 119 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 5...... 281

Fig 120 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 6...... 282

Fig 121 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 7...... 282

Fig 122 Singapore transparent qingbai plate 1...... 283

Fig 123 Singapore transparent qingbai plate 2...... 283

Fig 124 Singapore transparent qingbai jarlet 1...... 284

Fig 125 Singapore transparent qingbai lid 1...... 285

Fig 126 Singapore transparent qingbai incense burner 1...... 285

Fig 127 Singapore transparent qingbai 1...... 286

Fig 128 Singapore transparent qingbai statuette 1...... 286

Fig 129 Singapore luanbai bowl 1...... 287

Fig 130 Singapore luanbai bowl 2...... 287

xviii

Fig 131 Singapore luanbai bowl 3...... 288

Fig 132 Singapore luanbai bowl 4...... 288

Fig 133 Singapore luanbai bowl 5...... 289

Fig 134 Singapore luanbai bowl 6...... 290

Fig 135 Singapore luanbai bowl 7...... 290

Fig 136 Singapore luanbai bowl 8...... 291

Fig 137 Singapore luanbai bowl 9...... 291

Fig 138 Singapore luanbai bowl 10...... 292

Fig 139 Singapore luanbai bowl 11...... 292

Fig 140 Singapore luanbai bowl 12...... 293

Fig 141Singapore luanbai bowl 13...... 293

Fig 142 Singapore luanbai bowl 14...... 294

Fig 143 Singapore luanbai plate 1...... 294

Fig 144 Singapore luanbai plate 2...... 295

Fig 145 Singapore luanbai plate 3...... 296

Fig 146 Singapore luanbai plate 4...... 296

Fig 147 Singapore luanbai cup 1...... 297

Fig 148 Singapore luanbai cup 2...... 297

Fig 149 Singapore luanbai cup 3...... 298

Fig 150 Singapore luanbai cup 4...... 298

Fig 151 Singapore luanbai cup 5...... 299

Fig 152 Singapore luanbai cup 6...... 299

xix

Fig 153 Singapore luanbai washer 1...... 300

Fig 154 Singapore luanbai stem cup 1...... 300

Fig 155 Singapore luanbai stem cup 2...... 301

Fig 156 Singapore blue and white bowl 1...... 302

Fig 157 Singapore blue and white bowl 2...... 302

Fig 158 Singapore blue and white bowl 3...... 303

Fig 159 Singapore blue and white bowl 4...... 303

Fig 160 Singapore blue and white bowl 5...... 304

Fig 161 Singapore blue and white plate 1...... 304

Fig 162 Singapore blue and white cup 1...... 305

Fig 163 Singapore blue and white cup 2...... 305

Fig 164 Singapore blue and white cup 3...... 306

Fig 165 Singapore blue and white cup 4...... 307

Fig 166 Singapore blue and white cup 5...... 307

Fig 167 Singapore blue and white jarlet 1...... 308

Fig 168 Singapore blue and white lid 1...... 308

Fig 169 Singapore blue and white stem cup 1...... 309

Fig 170 Singapore blue and white stem cup 2...... 309

Fig 171 Singapore blue and white vase 1...... 309

Fig 172 Singapore blue and white vase 2...... 310

Fig 173 Singapore blue and white vase 3...... 310

Fig 174 Singapore blue and white vase 4...... 311

xx

Fig 175 Singapore blue and white ewer 1...... 311

Fig 176 Singapore blue and white ewer 2...... 311

Fig 177 Singapore blue and white ewer 3...... 312

Fig 178 Singapore copper vase 1...... 312

Fig 179 Singapore iron spotted qingbai bowl 1...... 313

Fig 180 Singapore iron spotted qingbai saucer 1...... 313

Fig 181 Singapore iron spotted qingbai lid 1...... 314

xxi

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Historical perspectives on Chinese ceramics trade in Southeast Asia during

the 14th century C.E.

Chinese export trading activities during the 14th century are partially recorded in

both contemporary personal travelling notes and official documents of Chinese

government. For this period, these are the important written references to Southeast

Asia.

1) Dade Nanhai (1304 C.E.)

The is written by a native from Guangdong named Chen Dazhen (陈大震), who was living at the end of Southern Song and early . After

Guangdong was conquered by the , he resigned to return to his hometown.

Dade Nanhai Zhi is published in 1304 C.E. Unfortunately, the original version is lost,

only some paragraphs and items can be found from the citations in Yongle Dadian. In

this book, the so called modern Southeast Asia is the region of and

XiYang.

2) Yiyu Zhi (14thcentury)

This is a travelling note written possibly during the late Yuan Dynasty and early

Ming Dynasty. The author is not determined yet. This book refers to 123 ancient

places including those located in current , Southeast Asia and South Asia.

3) Daoyi Zhilue (1350 C.E.)

This book is a travelling description written by a Chinese trader Wang

1

(汪大渊) under the reign of the Yuan Dynasty. According to this book, the author’s travels cover ninety-nine places in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Africa along the sea routes. The author pays a lot attention to the different local environments, peoples, customs and products.

4) Rihla (1355 C.E.)

This is a travelling note written by , most of whose life is in the first half of 14th century. The author is a Moroccan Muslim scholar and traveler. He spent

nearly thirty years on excursions. This book records his long-distant journey covering

the area from North Africa, Europe, and the to Asia.

5) Yuanshi (1370 C.E.)

This is an official history book compiled by the Ming court to fulfill the

command of Hongwu at the of the . The editors

exploited many official documents of the Yuan court, therefore plenty of foreign

missions and tributes from kingdoms even warfare in Southeast Asia are listed in

these records.

In addition tothe references written in the 14th century, several other accounts

completed a little earlier or later can also give some clues to the complete picture of history. Zhufan Zhi completed in 1225 C.E. by a Southern Song official named

Rugua, describes the customs and products of more than a hundred places from

in Asia to as as Mediterranean Sea kingdoms. The author touches upon not only the places outside China but also the maritime routes in details.

Although the author did not visit those places in person, he gathered materials from

2

the statements of foreign residents and descriptions from another precursor travelling

notes, Lingwai Daida. Moreover, some Song-Yuan literati notes mainly describing social customs also slightly touched exotic affairs, e.g. Shilin Guangji written in Song and edited in the Yuan and Ming . The well-known world-wide travelogue

The Travels of Marco edited by Rustichello da Pisa in 1298 C.E., describes

Marco Polo’s travelling experience through Middle East, East Asia and Southeast Asia during the period of 1271 C.E. to 1291 C.E.

The accounts introduced above are completed approximately in the 14th century.

In fact, the political, economic and religious interactions between China and

Southeast Asia began much earlier. Intensive long distance maritime commercial activities gradually thrived along with large Chinese ceramic export in the Tang

Dynasty. Shipwrecks in water demonstrate that by the 9th century although

Chinese porters were making large quantities of ceramic products for export, these

were shipped off by non-Chinese (Flecker 2002). In 960 C.E., the Song Dynasty

reunified China after a long period civil ; the court began to concern itself with the

administration of economic and diplomatic relations with the polities of Southeast

Asia. The Song rulers declared a government monopoly on foreign trade and finally

established bureaucratic departments at the ports of southeastern and southern China,

including , Mingzhou and . Trading was limited to those who

conducted trade merely at the state level. China’s trading partners sent missions to

China and presented tributes of products; in return, the Song court would give

Chinese products according to a specific set of customary exchange equivalencies as

3

well as ceremonial attire and headdresses to the missions. It was termed tribute trade,

the aim of which was to fulfill the ruling class’ requirements for exotica, e.g. ivory,

auspicious , fragrant wood, incense and so on and so forth. Large numbers of

state level exchanges were conducted. Private overseas trading voyages were banned.

Tribute trade was the earliest governmental trade type and spanned the longest period.

However, the Song court gradually changed policies of maritime trade. Some kinds of

products began to be allowed to be freely traded instead of the total monopoly policy

to meet the requirements of Chinese citizens. Policies kept changing according to the

fiscal situation. Liberalization became an essential factor that influenced China’s

maritime economy. The Northern Song period was ended by Jurchens troops in 1126

C.E. The Song court moved south and established its new capital at the port city

Hangzhou located in Zhejiang, in 1127 C.E. The Southern Song court was forced to deal with the political and economic stresses, since the fertile agricultural and commercial hinterland in the north of the was lost. Southern Song court had to impose measures to increase financial income. Under this circumstance, the court was forced to look southward for its sources of state revenue, a quite important one of which was international maritime trade. After a series of attitude changes and administrative changes, the court officially encouraged large scale private maritime

trade. Foreign and Chinese traders could be conferred official ranks if they managed

to import foreign products worth a certain value. Consequently, not only the court

gained huge economic benefits, but also the manufacturing and value added industries

catering to demand by foreign markets thrived, such as the products of , ceramics

4 and so on. In return, foreign products were popular in the Chinese market. Take for example the aromatic and medicinal products sourced or transshipped by Southeast

Asia (Lin Tianwei 1960). A 1225 C.E. report written by Zhao Rugua stated that the

Chinese had bought so much spice from eastern Java that copper were flowing out of China already to a very dangerous extent. This report should be believable, since Zhao was the Commissioner of Foreign Trade at Quanzhou Port at that time and this report was presented to the court. Finally, in order to protect the , the court banned trade with Java (Hirth and Rockhill 1911). The Southern Song court rarely placed any restrictions on foreign shipping. Under the positive policy by the government, the Chinese private and foreign maritime shipping played an essential role in increasing the state revenue. However, the Southern Song court never intended to control the maritime trade beyond its . In total, the court benefited by liberalizing maritime economy activities. It was only from Southern Song Dynasty on that the private trading activities became prosperous.

In 1279 C.E., the Yuan rulers finally took over the dominion over the entire

Chinese mainland. The Yuan diplomatic policies were based on totally different motivations from Song courts. During the first few years of the Yuan Dynasty, the administration of China’s maritime trade in southern China remained largely the same as it had been during the late Southern Song. However, the length of time a private trading was allowed to spend voyaging outside China was no longer restricted as before. Both and Ibn Battuta noted that the Chinese ships predominantly sailed between , Southeast Asia and China. However, the Yuan court began to

5 gain benefits by monopolizing Chinese shipping since 1284 C.E.; meanwhile, private maritime trade was banned with harsh sanctions. This policy, however, was intermittently applied during the whole Yuan period. The was lifted in 1323 C.E. after which private Chinese trade got official permission till the end of the Yuan

Dynasty. During the Yuan period, in order to supervise maritime trading, mercantile shipping superintendents were stationed at designated ports. The chief Mercantile

Shipping and Transportation Bureau was set up at Quanzhou in 1284 C.E. As the chief bureau, it took the charge of assigning traders with ships and capital on behalf of the

Yua n government. It was by manipulating this administration that the court took control of ship trade. As mentioned above, the Song court also had mercantile shipping superintendents who were in charged of specific administrative departments.

The difference of the Yuan administration from the Song was that they were responsible for dispatching overseas trading voyages. However, the provincial administrations would take over customs inspections during the periods when superintendents were abolished. The Yuan court also created the Ortoq clique and established provincial Bureau of Ortoq Affaires at Quanzhou, which became the officially designated center of Chinese maritime trade and trade administration during the Yuan period. The Ortoq (斡脱) clique consisted of central Asian traders favored by the Mongol rulers. The establishment of the Bureau of Ortoq Affairs had been initiated through Yuan rulers’ attempts to monopolize the trade between China and since 1206 C.E. In 1285 C.E., it undertook the responsibility for supervising the mercantile shipping. In 1287 C.E., a provincial Bureau of Ortoq

6

Affairs was set up at Quanzhou. It became the chief leader of Chinese maritime trade

and trade administrations. The Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureau was

co-administrated by both provincial administrations and Bureau of Ortoq Affairs. For

a variety of reasons, the local Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus were established and abolished frequently. However, the prosperity of maritime trade still can be inferred from the statistics of the local bureaus.

The trade ports along the southeast coast of mainland China included ,

Ganpu, Hangzhou, Qingyuan, , Quanzhou and Guangzhou ports. In the regions around the ports, maritime trade spurred development of agricultural produce and manufacture products, especially those for export. Centers of textile and ceramic industries formed and gathered in these regions. After all, the fiscal regime was more favorable for import traders in the Yuan than in the Song Dynasty. (Heng 2009)

Private trade was allowed from 1323 C.E. until the early Ming when trade with proactive foreign policy started.

1.2 Relevant research achievements

1.2.1 The seaborne routes between China and Southeast Asia

As early as the 9th century in the , in Huanghua Sida

mentioned relatively detailed seaborne routes from the ports along the south coast of

China to ports located in modern , , Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Java,

Bay of , to as west as . Although most parts of this book have

7

been lost, we can still see some paragraphs compiled in Tangshu. The records

regarding the areas in Southeast Asia are relatively intact. We can see that the

shipping routes from Guangzhou port along the east coast of the Malay Peninsula to

Sumatra and Java existed at least in the . According to later Yuan and Ming

sources, such as Daoyi Zhilue, the shipping routes along this direction were used for a

quite long time.

The later work indicated other route links between continental

Southeast Asia, northern and the .1 When arrived in the Sulu Sea,

there was one direction leading into the Celebes Sea.

Presumably, an “eastern” route between Quanzhou and East Java appeared in use

during the Yuan Dynasty (Ptak 1998: 157-191). Some vague evidences from Yuan

sources imply the existence of this eastern route. Ptak cited a number of newly

appeared geographical names of islands in eastern Indonesia in Yuan sources in

contrast with the rarely mentioned clove imports via the Javanese ports which were

referred to in the earlier Song works. Dade Nanhai Zhi provided further geographical

indicators, including several place names of Banggai group and Timor without the

routes by which ships arrived at these places.

According to current archaeological and excavations, numerous 14th

century sites have been found in Southeast Asia, including Tambralingga, Ligor,

Langkasuka, Kelantan, Trengganu, Kuala Berang, , Temasik, South ,

1Except for Wenxian Tongkao, other references can also be seen in the following : Zisheng, “China-Africa relations before 1570s”, Xuebao, 1984, 2, p.32; Chen Taimin, The China-Africa Relation and in the Philippines, HongKong: Chao Yang Chubanshe, 1985, p.25. 8

Lambri, Semudra, Tamiang, Kompei, Kota China, , Jambi, Palembang, and

Trowulan. Among these, only four are purely 14th century sites. Most of them are port sites located on the coast except for a few capital cities in the hinterland. It is quite possible that more 14th century sites can be discovered in the future. However, these sites and unearthed artefact assemblages can already reveal answers to some academic questions. Apparently, the locations of these cities and written documents can be corroborated with each other.

1.2.2 Historic ports of the Malay Peninsula and Sumatra before the 14th century

The reason why we should examine the region around the Straits of Melaka is because it is an inevitable natural sailing route for exchanging between East and West.

The people living in the area of the Straits of Melaka were capable of satisfying their basic needs by virtue of the huge agricultural land available. The principle forces stimulating the rise of earliest trading ports around this region should be ascribed to the advanced maritime skills and the intersection of the maritime routes between

China, the Spice Islands and India. The monsoons across the Bay of Bengal, maritime

Southeast Asia and the played an essential role. In order to sail in conformity with the direction of the monsoon winds, the sailing ships from the western could mostly gain benefits by calling at a port of the Straits of

Melaka, where they could deposit their goods in a ware house and obtain merchandise from eastern Asia. Then they could return to the west with cargos. Otherwise, they would have to wait for half a year to continue the voyage northeast due to the

9

direction of monsoons. The locations of emporia ports hinged on not only

geographical and environmental factors, such as the good anchorage and warehouse

space, but also the political factors.

According to Chinese and Arab travelling accounts, major early sites of the trading kingdoms were located at Palembang of and Jambi of Malayu both in east Sumatra. Fierce competition existed between the two centers for the position of pre-eminent port of drumming up foreign trading ships through the Straits of Melaka.

From late through the beginning of , Palembang and Jambi

held the maritime supremacy in succession. Afterward, Kota Cina, existing only

during a short period from 1100 C.E. to 1300 C.E., formed a relatively minor port

near Medan.

Since the beginning of 11th century, the kingdom of Srivijaya seemed have

projected her seapower and even concluded her reign. More ports conducting foreign

trade came to exist besides the original several designated ports supported by

Srivijaya. The influx of Chinese emigrants along with the permission of private trade

became one of active element in the trade network of the Melaka Straits. In addition,

two other important forces should be highlighted after the declination of Srivijaya: the

Javanese and the Thai.

For a series of reasons including natural disasters and military attack around the

10th century, the highly civilized kingdoms of were went downhill, which

resulting in the growth of new kingdoms in East Java. Eventually the Javanese

dominance extended to Sumatra region. During the era of the ,

10

Javanizing non-indigenous culture was featured at the aspects of both poetry and bas- . It is the era when the cultural basis of Majapahit was achieved.

The most famous king who asserted Javanese supremacy over the declining Srivijaya was Kertanagara. He was murdered in 1292 C.E., shortly before the arrival of Mongol force, whose purpose was Singhasari’s subjection. Eventually his son-in-law was able to win the war of succession by manipulating the Mongol troops. (Tarling 1992) The kingdom of Majapahit, as Singhasari’s successor, gradually became the greatest of classical Indonesia. The of Trowulan became a large city and emporia. However, after a relatively brief moment of glory, Majapahit declined at the end of HayamWuruk’s reign, in 1389 C.E. when the Ming Dynasty had ruled for twenty years.

During the Yuan period, no Malay port was privileged by virtue of a special relationship with Yuan rulers. In early Ming, the proclaimed the strict policy of reimposition of tributary. Private trade was banned according to an interpretation of Confucian doctrines. This policy aroused the presumption of prerogative benefits. Malayu-Jambi considered that huge economic interests could be achieved by gaining Chinese recognition as a sovereign political entity on the basis of reestablishing the suzerain- relations. Continuous missions were sent to China from 1368C.E. to 1377C.E. These actions dissatisfied the east Javanese rulers who considered Malayu-Jambi as their own vassal. Finally the Javanese suppressed this polity’s attempt to independent in 1377 C.E. The of Palemang tried to establish a kingdom in 1389 C.E. when the Majapahit king HayamWuruk died.

11

However, the attempt failed by attack from Javanese. The Malay princess fled from

Palembang to Singapore, not very long before Singapore was terminated by an attack

from Siam or Java. (Miksic 1985)

1.3 Archaeological discoveries and historical accounts regarding early Singapore

1.3.1 Archaeological discoveries in Singapore

The 14th century is a very important time span to the early .

Although there is a lack of historical text referring to the history of Singapore before

Raffles disembarking at Singapore, the current archaeological discoveries have

provided evidence that a relatively mature civilization had formed and thrived from

the late 13th century C.E. at the earliest till the end of the 14th century C.E. The

archaeological discoveries can partially provide material evidence for the historical

documents and travelling notes as well.

In terms of archaeological explorations and excavations carried out in Singapore

since 1984, an abundant amount of artefact assemblage had been unearthed. Large

quantities of artefacts made of different materials were discovered since then,

including those made of , copper, , and gold. Among these artefacts,

, and make up the largest proportion.

There are four main sites involved can date back to as early as the late 13th

century and early 14th century, including Fort Canning Hill (FTC), Parliament House

Complex site (PHC), Empress Place site (EMP) and St Andrew’s Cathedral site

12

(SAC). All of these excavations were carried out via modern scientific excavation methods, so that the original recordings enable us to approach a scientific data.

Fort Canning Hill:

Fort Canning Hill is situated at the heart of Singapore. The hill was believed to have an ancient palace on it, thus the term of “Fort Canning Hill” bears a meaning of

“Forbidden Hill”. However, there was no substantive clue about this old story until in

1926 when some 14th century gold ornaments were found during the construction of a

reservoir. From then on, the pre-colonial history of Singapore began to draw people’s

attention gradually. However, there are no architecture relics above the ground on the

site. Recovery of the pre-colonial history can only rely on the remains underneath the

ground. The first official archaeological excavation commenced in January 1984.

The archaeological discoveries around Fort Canning Hill have been introduced

mainly in three publications.2 Although the Fort Canning Hill has yet been fully explored, earlier excavations have yielded plenty of meaningful artefacts. There were several widely separated exploited sites located around Fort Canning Hill. Intermittent excavations have been conducted since 1984. More significantly, the excavation reports and catalogues are published timely, which enable us to research and analyze the data validly.

Parliament House Complex Site:

This site is located on the left bank of the Singapore River. It lies midway

2John N. Miksic, Archaeological Research on the “Forbidden Hill” of Singapore: Excavations at Fort Canning, 1984, Singapore: National Museum, 1985; “Beyond the Grave: Excavations north of the Keramat Iskandar Syah, 1988.” Heritage10, 1990, pp.34-56; Alexandra Avieropoulou Choo, Report on the Excavation at Fort Canning Hill Singapore, Singapore: National Museum, 1986. 13

between Fort Canning Hill and the mouth of Singapore River. Excavations were

carried out in 1994 and 1995. Fortunately, there were large quantities of pre-colonial artefacts conserved in the undisturbed stratums apart from the completely disturbed area nearest the riverbank.

Empress Place Site:

This site is located on the left bank of the Singapore River, inside the river’s mouth. It is the third site that has been excavated in Singapore. During the ten of work in 1998, the excavation yielded a bunch of pre-colonial and colonial artefacts.

St Andrew’s Cathedral Site:

St Andrew’s Cathedral is situated in the Downtown Core of Singapore which surrounds the mouth of the Singapore River. The excavation project was conducted on the west lawn of the church. During the twenty eight weeks’ work, many 14th century

artefacts were excavated from the undisturbed context.

1.3.2 Current studies about 14th century Singapore—recovering early Singapore

in historical documents

With respect to the written history of early Singapore, many scholars have

attempted to recover the social structure and significant events by citing evidence

from historical accounts. Although debates still exist due to the vague and conflicting

recordings from different accounts, it is generally accepted that a hierarchy

community inhabited Singapore during a time span of approximately the whole 14th

century. It is necessary in this article to give a brief description about the stories which

14 might have occurred in early Singapore based on the scholars’ achievements.

The rise of classical Singapore can be assigned to the early 14th century on the grounds of the dating of archaeological sites. In terms of historical sources, the

Sejarah Melayu is worth mentioning, believed to derive from an early version of a genealogy manuscript titled Ceritera Asal Raja-Raja Melayu Punya Keturunan

(“Story of the Origin and Descent of the ‘Malay Rajas’”).

W. Linehan accomplished the chronology of Singapura’s history on the basis of acknowledgment of the Sejarah Melayu literally factual, although Wolters denied that the Sejarah Melayu’s account of Singapura actually refers to Singapore. In his opinion, the Singapura episode symbolizes events occurred in Palembang. Here we do not judge whether his debates are right or wrong but simply introduce the vivid stories, as both views cannot make the story sound plausible. Miksic (1985) has also briefly mentioned the relatively authentic items by comparison and attempted to retell the sequential historical stories. Briefly speaking, it begins with the arrival of Seri Turi

Buana (“Lord of the Three Worlds”) on the island of Sumatra under the reign of

Demang Lebar Daun. The Demang consigned the throne to Seri Turi Buana who became the first king of the Malays in 1279 C.E. Afterwards, Seri Turi Buana sailed to

Ujung Tanah (“Land’s End”) where he found Singapura and ruled till 1326 C.E. His successor Paduka Dikarangwira ruled until 1340 C.E. He defended against the invasion from Majapahit. After his reign, Seri ruled until 1365 C.E. and Seri

Iskandar Syah resisted Majapahit troops for three years and finally was driven away.

He fled to a place which was later named “Melaka”. Therefore, it is inferred that

15

Singapore remained important as an entrepot until around the end of the 14th century.

A general consensus is the fall of the Nagara Singapura, which is proved by

archaeological evidence and other historical accounts except for the Sejarah Melayu.

1.4 Comparing Chinese ceramic sherds from Singapore with those found in the

original Chinese kiln sites

We can infer that the prosperity of 14th century Singapore was closely related to trading activities, especially Chinese ceramics. Among the approximately four tons of

14th century ceramics yielded from archaeological excavations in Singapore, nearly half were locally made while the other half were Chinese ceramics. Geographically on the main shipping route, Singapore took advantage from exchanging commodities as a transfer station or middleman. It can provide tortoise shell, hornbill casques and so on to meet the demands of the Chinese market. Conversely, Chinese cargos were switched to the island people via Singapore. Archipelago is an obvious example.

It is situated to south of Singapore, the local people treated Chinese porcelains as precious offerings to be buried with the dead. (Miksic 2008)

The range of Chinese ceramics is extensive. In terms of shapes, the majority of them are vessels including bowl, plate, cup, jar, jarlet and so on, which are probably for daily use. There are fragments of two unusual pieces. One is a bowl; the other is a ceramic pillow in the form of a theater. (Miksic 2008) Because no tombs have been found in Singapore, there is no way of figuring out whether these ceramics were taken as offerings.

16

Since the majority of unearthed artefacts are imported products, it is necessary to compare these objects with those found in the places of origin. In terms of origins of production, products from several kilns have been identified, including those with characteristics of Longquan kiln system in Zhejiang Province, Jingdezhen kiln system in Jiangxi Province, Dehua kiln system and Putian kiln system in Fujian Province, and so on and so forth. Those involved kilns share a common ground that all of their locations are not far away from the export ports. The products can be shipped off to the ports by way of water. These kiln sites have been partially explored and excavated.

Many Chinese scholars have been devoted to the research on ceramics from aspects of dating, typology, functions and composition analysis. The condition is sufficient to make comparison of ceramics between Singapore and China. Export ceramics have even become an expertise in China. However, if viewing this professional field, a huge gap would be found between the archaeological discoveries and historical records. Due to the indifferent attitude towards handicraft industries in ancient China, there are quite few accurate and comprehensive recordings about ceramic products, kilns and workmanship, let alone those kilns and products for exporting. Therefore, it is problematic for archaeologists and historians to correspond archaeological discoveries with the ancient names of products and locations. In this case, archaeological discoveries in other countries are supposed to be another essential source to ascertain kilns which were producing for exporting and the operation channels. Vice versa, we could seek reasons for international trade fluctuation and structures from the Chinese government policies as well as the situations of kilns and

17

ports, on the condition that the Chinese is assumed to have capability of

controlling and prohibiting trade.

As mentioned above, China was under the reign of the Yuan Dynasty in the 14th

century. The trading policies in Yuan Dynasty were quite favorable for maritime

traders in terms of social status and economic benefits. Due to the support from the

Yuan government, ceramic export flourished in southeast China, especially in the

main ports. The nearby kilns along the coast took advantage from the trade and even

established several kilns specially for making products for the export trade. Under

these circumstances, Singapore may rise as one of the entrepots closely connected

with the prosperity of both Chinese international trade and advanced shipping routes.

There are various ceramics produced in Thailand and Vietnam. Although the

quantity is relatively small compared with that of Chinese products, they are still

noteworthy.

1.5 Comparing the artefacts in Singapore with Trowulan of the 14th century

According to the current shipwrecks excavated from the Pacific Ocean, only the

Turiang shipwreck belongs to the 14th century although large numbers of shipwrecks have been discovered (Brown and Sjostrand 2000). However, we can still infer the possible trading routes by generally connecting the contemporary sites. Since

Singapore is a transportation node along the shipping routes, it is also meaningful to draw comparisons between the Singapore artefact assemblage and other assemblage from comparable and contemporary archaeological sites, such as Trowulan, the

18 former capital city of Majapahit kingdom, centered in East Java.

Why is Trowulan selected? Majapahit’s main port was Tuban in the 14th century, a place west of Surabaya, on the north coast. However, no archaeological research has been conducted in Tuban, although the local museum conserves many Chinese ceramic wares confiscated from fishermen who have been looting shipwrecks in the bay. These ceramics could date back to Song to Yuan period. In the 15th century,

Tuban’ position was surpassed by Gresik as the major international port in East Java.

(Miksic 2010: 8)

Trowulan is situated in the hinterland but not along the coast. In Trowulan, repeated archaeological excavations have been carried out by local archaeologists to unravel the history of Majapahit’s capital. Quite similarly with the case in Singapore, among the artefacts discovered are a lot of imported ceramics from southeast China,

Thailand, Vietnam and locally produced earthenware. Based on the summary of inventory analysis in 2007, Chinese ceramics take up around 81% of the entire amount of ceramics, whilst Southeast Asian ceramics take up about 17%.

The Chinese ceramic categories generally include Longquan celadon ware, green glazed ware, Fujian ware, , blue and white ware, copper red ware,

Cizhou ware, jar etc. The Thai ceramic categories generally include Sukhothai ware,

Sawankhalok black-decorated ware, Sawankhalok green glazed ware etc.

The Vietnamese ceramic categories basically include monochromes ware, underglaze decorated ware, overglaze enamels ware, decorative ware, wall etc. (Dupoizat and

Harkantiningsih 2007)

19

Besides materials yielded from archaeology work, ceramics from private

collections also provide evidence for better reveal of Trowulan’s history. Take for

example the blue and white porcelain collection donated to the National University of

Singapore and Asian Civilization Museum in 2005. These ceramic sherds, including a

majority of Yuan and Ming porcelain as well as a small portion of Vietnamese

porcelain, are quite certain to be collected from Trowulan. Although these sherds have lost their original layer context, they are good supplement to the outcome of pure

archaeology work. In fact, this material could largely increase the percentage of blue

and white porcelain in the ceramic assemblage discovered in Trowulan. (Kamei

Meitoku 2010: 17-19)

These artefact assemblages share some common characteristics with those found

in Singapore, except for the differences of the proportion of the ceramic sherds of

different origins. There may be some same reasons stimulating the prosperity of

Chinese ceramic trading activities at both sites. In terms of political and economic

connections, Singapore and Majapahit were closely related. In the 14th century,

Singapore was not an independent country. It was claimed by the most powerful

Majapahit kingdom.

1.6 Hypotheses and methodology

1.6.1 Hypotheses

One of the recent most influential theories about the history of Southeast Asia is

20

Anthony Reid’s “Age of Commerce”. In his opinion, commercial prosperity and the

port cities emerging as hubs of commerce over the 15th to 17th centuries could

stimulate social, political and economic changes throughout the region. 14th century is

exactly the century before 15th century. During this period, a number of political and

commercial changes happened throughout China and Southeast Asia and led to the

emergence of new ports and urban centers. This thesis argues that during the 14th

century the maritime trade had already thrived and even given rise to the highly urbanized port cities, one of which is Singapore.

Although there is no official historical document complied by indigenous people,

early settlement in Singapore has been mentioned by other sources written in several

languages, such as Chinese, Malay and Portuguese and so on. By using these

occasional records, historians have attempted to reconstruct the early Singapore’s

history. As a matter of fact, the references show the truth that only after the end of 13th

century did Singapore become a noteworthy entrepot, even if there were human

activities before. The reason is largely due to the changes in Chinese export trade,

which deeply affected the trade relations in Southeast Asia. As an important trading

node, Singapore played an essential role in the long-distance maritime communication

network in the Indian-Pacific trading zone as early as in the 14th century. Singapore

remained important emporia until around the end of the 14th century.

Leeds (1961:27) has given a definition to ‘trading port city’. In his point of view,

a trading port city has four main characteristics: it is an independent specialized city

small kingdom; it is the transfer point between different eco-regions; it is normally a

21

neutral buffer zone; the local residents are not engaged in commercial activities

except for port administrative officials. The archaeological evidence demonstrates that

the 14th century Singapore was mostly in accordance with this definition. I consider

that Singapore was an economically independent polity.

This research is based on the presumption that the functional society of Singapore

in the 14th century can be reconstructed by analyzing the unearthed artefacts made of different materials.

As an international trading port, Singapore was not only an outpost of long distance maritime trade but also an exporter of finished artefacts in the 14th century.

By comparing with the places of origin and end-users, the significance of Singapore could be comprehended in the Sino-Malay trading zone.

Previous research has already established a fundamental framework that described Singapore as a growing commercial city. The purpose of this dissertation is to deepen the study based on the analysis of mass artefacts and comparison with foreign sources.

1.6.2 Methodology

First of all, it is necessary to make clear that ceramic analysis in this dissertation is taken as a thread. Although ceramic analysis takes up a large proportion in the dissertation, the main purpose is to reconstruct the history of the ancient port cities and the links between cities situated along maritime trading routes, from the late 13th

century to early 15th century.

22

Why is ceramics that important as the foundational material for this study? In

order to reconstruct the history of ancient settlements from an archaeological

, artefacts are the main object for analysis. Amongst all the different types

of artefacts, ceramics are nearly immortal. Archaeological research has demonstrated

that ceramics are well preserved in Southeast Asian sites. Compared to stone and

metal objects, ceramics have become the key objects to decipher historical puzzles,

due to their bigger proportion in artefacts assemblages. Before the 15th century, except for earthenware, the ceramics found in Southeast Asia were predominantly made in

China. To study these Chinese ceramics, it is necessary to study the Chinese about their periods and areas of origin in China.

It is a common perception that Chinese ceramics found in foreign sites were initially made for export. In China, formal archaeology work has made great progress since new China was established. In the beginning, Chinese archaeologists attached much importance to pre-historic relics, because the reconstruction of China’s

pre-historical civilization relied mostly on archaeological achievements. Historical

periods had been thought too “modern” for doing archaeology. The image of the past

in China has evolved, as more and more important historical period remains have

been recovered. Gradually, the archaeology community has realized that the

relationship between historical texts and archaeological remains should be

re-evaluated. Ample historical remains have begun to facilitate the emergence of more

specific archaeological research subjects, one of which is ceramic study.

People in China had mastered ceramic making techniques in very early . It

23

is not surprising to find kiln sites distributed across the whole of China. Numerous

ceramic kilns have been discovered and excavated. Ceramics have also been found in

tombs, residential sites, and shipwrecks. Archaeologists have become quite

experienced at dating ancient ceramics. They are doing well on classification and

typology analysis. A reliable ceramic chronology has been established.

It is meaningful for the archaeology of the historic period in Southeast Asia to summarize the achievements of Chinese archaeological work on a regional basis. It is feasible to date overseas ceramic finds by comparing them with the relatively mature

Chinese ceramic chronology. By comparison, the provenance and date of the overseas ceramic sherds could be able to be determined. Hence, this dissertation will first summarize the achievements of ceramic studies in relevant regions in China, and then discuss the corresponding categories of unearthed ceramics in Singapore and

Trowulan.

Another focus of this dissertation is to elaborate on the concept of urbanization in the context of 14th century Southeast Asia. The regions selected for study in this

dissertation are Singapore, Trowulan, and port cities in southeast mainland China.

These cities were thriving in a very special era, when Chinese ceramics were playing

an essential role in the early phase of the “Age of Commerce”. The concept of “Age of Commerce” was first proposed by Anthony Reid. In his argument, many new port cities emerged as entrepot hubs and urban centres over the 15th through 17th centuries.

Commercial activity is the main causal factor for the change of social structure (Reid

1988; 1993). My study supports the hypothesis that commerce played an important

24

role in the great social transition. I will also like to contribute to the debate by widening the scope of Reid’s proposal and by shifting the timeline of this process to an earlier period.

Singapore’s archaeological assemblage demonstrates a highly commercialized civilization existed in the 14th century and lasted till the late 16th centuries. Local

residents’ ability of consuming Chinese ceramics is astonishing, given that it was such

a small settlement without rich natural resources. This study regards the 14th century

Singapore as a typical model of a port city that purely emerged from trading activities.

If there had been no political interference from neighbouring big polities, Singapore’s

role as an entrepot might have lasted for longer time.

This paper will probe into the social structure of Singapore by comparing its structure with other sites in the region. Comparisons will also be made between 14th

century urban sites in China, Singapore and Trowulan in Indonesia. The existence of a

variety of different types of urban centres in the region would be strong evidence for

an “Age of Commerce”.

This dissertation will also take political influences into consideration, especially

the policies on maritime trade issued by the Chinese court. In my opinion, commerce

was undoubtedly the main factor that stimulated the emergence of port cities along

maritime trading routes. However, the impact from political factors should not be

ignored as well. To investigate how the policies implemented by the Yuan and Ming courts influenced trading activities, archival research will be conducted.

Archaeological and historical techniques for analysis differ in terms of

25

methodology. The thesis will integrate historical and archaeological sources into a

consistant picture of how the Chinese ceramics trade influenced the formation and function of port cities in Southeast Asia in the specific time span of the 14th century.

Archaeology materials will be the main sources as the basis for analysis. Archival research based on historical accounts will also be used in order to help interprate the archaeology materials. These historical recordings include official archives, travellers’

notes etc. Archival studies could narrate society development and interactions more

vividly and dynamically. The use of integrated approaches will facilitate the research

on complex society development in ancient Southeast Asia. (Junker 1999)

1.7 Contribution to the field

This study relates to my interest in finding an explanation for the prosperity of

maritime ceramic routes and the flourishing cities along the routes. I was trained in

the field of archaeology for seven years in Peking University, and later specifically

conducted research on Song-to-Yuan period ceramics and burial cultures in southeast

China from 2005 to 2008. My doctoral study will build on preliminary research on the

export of ceramics in China into a more complex investigation of the emergence of

new port cities along ceramic trading routes. This is done through a comparison of

sites in China and those in two different parts of Southeast Asia. All three locales were

connected politically and commercially from the 14th to 16th centuries.

Archaeologists have devoted some attention to 14th century materials in these

areas. However, this period has always been dealt with as part of studies covering a

26 longer time span. It is often treated as one unchanging set of conditions and phenomena. It has not been isolated as a specific chronological category. But, in my view, the 14th century is a significant period that requires a more elaborate study.

Although studing only one century seems relatively short, the materials analyzed cover a wide rang of areas. This is also the first comparative study devoted to port cities along the maritime ceramic routes in the region of maritime Southeast Asia and

China. This region occupies an important position in the Indo-Pacific trading zone.

Data from different countries will be synthesized for analysis. In the field of archaeology, I realize that the progress has been imbalanced in this type of research in the respective regions. However, much data has not been widely disseminated due to the fact that it is only published in local languages. I will like to take this opportunity to make available more materials written in languages other than English. Therefore, this study should enable the efforts of archaeologists from different regions to be acknowledged by more people from all over the world.

Specifically in this paper, archaeological data of ancient Singapore is quite unique for research. The data accumulated in Singapore are all from systematic archaeology fieldwork. A series of excavations have yielded large quantities of artefacts, which turn out to be buried within a limited time span. The Singapore site could become a very comparable archaeology site to link the simultaneous sites in both Southeast Asia and China. In this dissertation, studies will touch on the provenance kilns, entrepot cities and political centers. They are significant joints along the trading network. This research could help to form a basis for further studies

27 of Chinese ceramics in other parts of Southeast Asia.

In this paper, quantitative analysis is not much used on the collected materials.

They are mainly concerned with the presence of certain types in specific sites. This kind of methodology has been applied in former archaeological studies on the sites in

Southeast Asia. (Edwards McKinnon 1984) As for the statistical information about how many sherds of each type have been found from other sites in Southeast Asia, it could not be easily obtained from published data. The dating of sherds in publications is arguable because the authors’ lack of familiarity with Chinese sources. Integrated statistical work is far from being sufficient.

1.8 Strengths and limitations

The former research has almost reconstructed a history by exhaustingly exploring the historical accounts. It is unlikely to supplement the stories by discoveries of new materials. In contrast, more and more new archaeological finds can play a part in its function of testifying some conclusions, finding new historical facts and facilitating our thought style in historical research.

However, there are still limitations in reconstructing the history by archaeological methods. The first and foremost is the nature of archaeological findings.

Archaeologists can only draw conclusions from the current findings, which mostly include the less perishable materials, such as ceramics and metal wares, but quite a few organic remains. Hence, the conclusions can only recover human activities to a certain extent. We have to take into account the possibility that new excavations might

28

overthrow former and current conclusions. Secondly, we face the issue of uneven

coverage of the places for fieldwork. Apparently the author does not have enough time to compare the artefact assemblages of Singapore with all the relevant sites in

Southeast Asia and China. This limitation can be compensated in future research.

Considering all the above limitations, the direct aim of this fieldwork is to find out the origins and end users of the trade ceramics. Due to the scope of this dissertation, a preliminary study focusing on 14th century trade ceramics unearthed from Singapore

will be conducted.

The framework of this dissertation is briefly introduced here. Chapter 1 is the

introduction part. In this chapter, the thread of the thesis is reviewed. Chapter 2 will examine historical accounts and conduct text analysis. Chapter 3 is a general inroduction of archaeology and ceramic studies. The involved materials include excavations and artefacts in Singapore. Chapter 4 will discuss parallels between ceramics unearthed from Singapore and China in the 14th century. Chapter 5 will

evaluate findings of the Chinese ceramics discovered from Trowulan and Singapore.

Classification will be made according to their provenances. Chapter 6 will elaborate on the concept of urbanization within the context of 14th century Southeast Asia and

China. This concept will be linked with the emergence of ports along maritime shipping routes. Chapter 7 will be a review of the proposals mentioned in the first chapter and final responses will be provided.

29

Chapter 2: Historical Studies

2.1 Historical records and travel accounts

2.1.1 Previous textual studies on ancient Singapore

Before scientific archaeological surveys and excavations were conducted,

scholars had already paid attention to Singapore’s early history compiled in written

sources. They focus on extant historical records, which indicate the existence of the

settlement.

Since ancient Singapore was naturally conjectured to be a port along the coast, it

is inevitable to raise the issue of Singapore’s old strait and harbor. By examining the

practical knowledge mainly from the western accounts written through the 16th to 19th

century, Warren D. Barnes in 1911 pointed out that the western entrance to the harbor

of Singapore used in ancient times is supposed to be the newly named Keppel Harbor

(Barnes 1911: 25-34). The issue of Singapore’s old strait has constantly drawn the attention of researchers. In the 1950s, Gibson-Hill tried to reconstruct the development history of the old strait, by analyzing the contemporary travelogues and rutters in western accounts written during the period of 1580 to 1850 (Gibson-Hill

1954: 163-214).

Those who wish to examine ancient recordings about old Singapore must take into account Chinese historical resources. Clues are also provided by old Malay and

Indonesian accounts. On the basis of analyzing these accounts, researchers have been

30

trying to uncover Singapore’s old history. Singapore’s prominence in early history has

been known since the Melaka court chronicle Sejarah Melayu aroused Westerners’ interest in the early 19th century. Copied many times, there are 29 variant versions of

Sejarah Melayu known so far (Roolvink 1967: 302-324). Given Sejarah Melayu’s

ambiguous and legendary narratives, different researchers have given individual

re-interpretations, which are still debatable. 3 However, it has been generally

acknowledged that Singapura is linked with the toponym “”. In 1909, by

comparing the narratives from Sejarah Melayu and the old Indonesian accounts

Pararaton and , Blagden remarked that the Javanese toponym

“Tumasik” corresponds to “Temasak” in Malay, which was later given the name

“Singapura” as recorded in Sejarah Melayu (Blagden 1909: 139-162).

Dan-ma-xi in Chinese notes has been generally regarded as a reference to old

Singapore, since Paul Pelliot first proposed his opinion in 1904 (Pelliot 1904: 345).

The toponym of Dan-ma-xi appeared in Wang Dayuan’s Daoyi Zhilue twice: one in

the section on Long-ya-men; the other in the section on . Later in 1915, Rockhill

translated most of the Chinese account Daoyi Zhilue into English (Rockhill 1914,

1915). Several decades later, P. Wheatley also translated the text (Wheatley 1961).

Due to the importance of Daoyi Zhilue on the study of early Singapore, Dr.Geoff

Wade and Dr.Goh Geok Yian in Singapore have also interpreted word by word the

3The earliest extant version of “Raffles MS 18” was copied on paper with watermark of “1816”. Winstedt published a Romanized transcript of “Raffles MS 18”, titled “The Malay Annals or Sejarah Melayu”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1938, No.16, iii, pp.1-226. English version by C. C. Brown, “Sejarah Melayu or ‘Malay Annals’; A Translation of Raffles MS 18”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1952, No.25, ii-iii, pp.12-204. 31 text relevant to Singapore. (Miksic 2013: 174-178).

The two items are translated in the following part according to the text of Daoyi

Zhilue annotated by Jiqing:

Dan-ma-xi in the item of “Long-ya-men” in Daoyi Zhilue (Description of the

Barbarians of the Isles,《岛夷志略》)

The (Long-ya) men has two crossed hills like the shape of “’s teeth” in the

Dan-ma-xi (Temasek) kingdom. There is waterway between the two hills. The fields are not fertile. There are not many paddy fields. The weather is hot with heavy rains in April and May.

The local have custom of . One of the (former) chiefs ever got a crown when digging the ground. (From then on), at the beginning of every year, which is the first crescent day of the first month, the chief would wear crown and formal dress to receive congratulations. This becomes tradition till nowadays. Chinese people are living with the locals side by side. Most people wear the hair into a chignon. They normally wear short blouse, with black waistband.

The local produces coarse and tin. The commodities for trading include pure gold, black silk, cloth with patterns, porcelain, iron cauldrons etc. In general, because the nature here does not have treasured produces, the local could not provide rare tributes. The commodities sold to Quanzhou are all robbed (from the foreigners). (Foreign) junks sailing to the western ocean are safe when passing this place. When the junks are sailing back (eastward) to Ji-li-men, sailors have to setup their arrow shack, cloth mantle and arms for defence. Two or three hundred of pirate boats will come for sure. The preparation for battle lasts for days.

The junks would escape with good fortune, if there is a favouring wind. If not, the crews will

32 be butchered, and the cargoes robbed nearly in a moment.

Dan-ma-xi in the item of “Xian (Siam, 暹)” in Daoyi Zhilue

(The ships) go into the harbor through Xin-men-tai. The hills outside are rugged. The ridges inside are deep. The fields are barren, not fertile enough for farming. (The local’s) staple relies on Luohu every year. The climate is not regular. (The local people) have piracy customs. Whenever there is transhipping from other countries, they would embark in about a hundred junks fully loaded with sands and go to get (the foreign cargos) disregarding their life security. In recent years, (the Siamese) came in more than seventy junks to invade Dan-ma-xi

(单马锡). The city was raided for a month. The city defended itself by closing the gates.

(Dan-ma-xi) people dare not fight the battle. It happened that a Javanese envoy passed by (the place). The Siamese retreated after getting the , and robbed Xi-li (昔里) on the way back...

In the 1920s, Rouffaer also tried to trace the history of Singapore, mostly relying on the Malay account Sejarah Melayu, as well as Javanese accounts Pararaton and

Nagarakretagama. Pararaton (also called “Pustaka Raja” or “Book of Kings”) is a book written in Kawi language. It described the stories of the kings of Singhasari and

Majapahit. Nagarakretagama is a eulogy to Hayam Wuruk, during whose reign

Majapahit kingdom reached its heyday. It had detailed recordings of the important ceremonies. By identifying Tang Dynasty I’ Tsing’s recording of “-ho-hsin” as

“Hasin” in a Majapahit inscription and several phonetic conversions between

33

languages, Rouffaer speculated that Singapore already existed in the 7th century C.E.

(Rouffaer 1921: 1-174, 359-569). Rouffaer dedicated quite a long research paper to retrieve the history of the Malay Peninsula’s southern part that is the area of

Singapore, Johore and Melaka. Later, Winstedt gave a shorter outline of the core issues Rouffaer addresses in his paper. (Winstedt 1922: 257-260)

On the basis of his analysis of the oldest version of Malay Annals “Raffles MS

No.18”, W. Linehan in “The Kings of 14th Century Singapore” derived a precise chronology of the five kings who ruled Singapore from 1299C.E.-1391C.E. He used the Chinese text Mingshi (History of the Ming Dynasty) as a cross-reference for dating (Linehan 1947: 117-127).

Later, Pelliot’s opinion was challenged by Han Wai Toon, who argued that

Dan-ma-xi-men (Dan-ma-xi-Gate) referred to the west part of the Johore Strait. Han

Wai Toon also identified the Chinese toponym Long-ya-men as Kuala Johore in the east strait of Johore (Han Wai Toon 1948: 17-35). Han’s perspectives gained support from Collings, who unfortunately did not provide strong corroborative literature or material evidence (Collings 1948: 35). In this paper, Collings did not adopt the previous observations of the remains in Singapore by Crawfurd, who published his finds in 1830. This may be because Collings could not obtain as much archaeological evidence as Crawfurd did right after the British first landed in Singapore.

Han’s opinion contradicted to that of Hsu Yun -Ts’iao. Hsu attempted to reconstruct the ancient seafaring voyages around the southern tip of the Malay

Peninsula, by reinterpreting the toponyms written in ancient Chinese texts regarding

34

the history of the Han to Ming Dynasties. In this paper, Hsu concluded that

Long-ya-men as well as Dan-ma-xi-men referred to Singapore’s Keppel Harbor

passage (Hsu Yun-Ts’iao 1948: 1-16).

Roland Braddell summarized the contradictory views made by the previous

scholars on Long-ya-men and Dan-ma-xi. He indicated that many more physical

remains were discovered after the British landed on Singapore, which refuted Collings’

assertion that there were hardly any archaeological remains found in Singapore.

Braddell concluded that Dan-ma-xi refers to old Singapore. On the basis of

comparing the descriptions of both Chinese accounts from the Song to Ming

Dynasties and the later western travel accounts, Braddell proposed his personal

opinion that Ling-ya-men (凌牙门) represented the Strait of Lingga; Long-ya-men

referred to the Keppel Harbour passage; Ling-ya-men might be confused with

Long-ya-men due to similar pronunciation in some of the Chinese records (Braddell

1950: 37-51). Ling-ya-men was mentioned in Zhao Rugua’s Zhufan Zhi and Chen

Yuanliang’s Daoyi Zazhi (《岛夷杂志》, Jottings of the Barbarians of the Isles) of the

Southern Song Dynasty. Long-ya-men appeared in the later Yuan Dynasty accounts, such as Daoyi Zhilue illustrated above. It is also recorded in Yuanshi, which was compiled in the early Ming Dynasty but based on the official memoir written in the

Yuan period. The passages concerned are quoted as follows:

Ling-ya-men in Zhufan Zhi

San-fo- (Srivijaya) lies between Zhen la (Cambodia) and She-bo (Java). It rules over

35 fifteen zhou ( or towns). It lies to the south of Chuan-zhou. In the winter you sail with the monsoon and in a little more than a month you come to Ling-ya-men, where one-third of the passing (put in) before entering this country (San-fo-qi). (Hirth and

Rockhill 1911: 7)

Ling-ya-men in Daoyi Zazhi

Sailing from Guangdong due south by riding on the north wind in the winter for half a month, one reaches Ling-ya-men and in another five days enters San-fo-qi.( Hsu Yun-Ts’iao

1972: 3)

Long-ya-men in “Ban-” item in Daoyi Zhilue:

This locality is the hill behind Long-ya-men. It resembles a truncated coil. It rises to a hollow summit, (surrounded by) interconnected terraces, so that the people’s dwellings encircle it. The soil is poor and grain scarce. The climate is irregular, for there is heavy rain in summer, when it is rather cool. By custom and disposition (the people) are honest. They wear their hair short, with turbans of gold-brocaded , and red oiled-cloths (covering) their bodies. They boil seawater to obtain salt and ferment to make spirits called, ming-chia.

They are under a chieftain. Indigenous products include very fine hornbill casques, lakawood of moderate quality and . The goods used in trading are green , lengths of iron, cotton prints of local manufacture, chi , porcelain ware, iron pots, and suchlike. (Wheatley

1961: 83)

Long-ya-men in Yuanshi

In the ninth month of Yanyou Year 7 (1320 C.E.), (The Emperor) sent Ma Man (马

札蛮) and others as envoys to Zhan Cheng (占城, ), Zhan La (占腊, Cambodia) and

36

Long-ya-men, asking for tamed elephants. (Hsu Yun-Ts’iao, 1972: 3-4)

In the 1960s, Winstedt kept up his research on the earlier history of Singapore by

analyzing the Malay Annuals, although it is generally considered as a mix of legends,

stories, and history. Winstedt believed that its core story should be true that Singapore

was under the rule of Palembang approximately in the 7th Century (Winstedt 1964:

15-16).

In the 1970s, Hsu Yun Ts’iao also continued to trace more historical recordings of old Singapore from Chinese texts, such as Xin Tangshu (New Chronology of Tang

Dynasty), Liangshu (Chronology of Dynasty) etc. He dedicated much time to

scanning the fragmentary passages of Kang Tai’s Wushi Waiguo Zhuan (The Accounts

of Foreign Countries during the Wu Period, also known as Tusu, The Native

Customs of Banam, originally compiled in the mid-third century AD) the original of

which had been lost but was cited in various old works. Finally, he published his discovery that the term Pu Luo Zhong (蒲罗中) in Chinese corresponded to the transliteration of Pulau Ujong (literally means “the island on the end of the peninsula”) in Malay, which he supposed to be the oldest name of Singapore in the 3rd

century C.E. (Hsu Yun-Ts’iao 1972: 1-9).

On the basis of investigating the identified recordings on Singapore and the relics observed in Singapore, Colless generally periodized Singapore’s history into three phases: the Majapahit period (14th century), Srivijaya period (before 1300 C.E.), and

Funan period (before 550 C.E.). Colless’s periodization was apparently based on the

37

kingdom that regarded Singapore as a subordinate. Colless compared the texts and

Crawfurd’s discoveries of ancient Singapore’s ruins, which added credibility to the speculation of Singapore’s existence during the Majapahit period. With regard to

Singapore during the Srivijaya period and Funan period, Colless mainly presented his analysis based on previous textual studies. There is hardly any physical evidence proposed to support this inference (Colless 1969: 1-11).

Archaeological remains unearthed in Singapore were first opened to the public by

John Crawfurd when he published his discoveries. He first spoke of the Singapore extensive old town wall and moat. Besides and stone remains which he had discovered, Crawfurd also introduced some finds, which included Chinese coins and Chinese local . He also mentioned a stone with a pre-Islamic inscription (Crawfurd 1967). This stone had been considered as an important relic for studying the local history (Rouffaer 1921: 1-174, 359-569). Unfortunately its inscription was not deciphered before it was blown up by dynamite. None of these tangible remains were preserved. Winstedt also introduced some artefacts, such as gold armlets, gold rings and other gold ornaments, discovered from Fort Canning Hill

(Winstedt 1928: 1-4; 1969: 49-52). The first scientific archaeological excavation was conducted at Fort Canning in 1984, which yielded many significant artefacts. Under the circumstance of the most contemporary archaeological discoveries, Kwa Chong

Guan fully reviewed the textual studies on ancient Singapore. In his paper “Records

and Notices of Early Singapore”, he comprehensively traced the historians’

achievements step by step and narrated the probable history of early Singapore (Kwa

38

Chong Guan 1985: 100-143).

2.1.2 Accounts related to 14th century Southeast Asia

During the 14th century, the maritime trading networks grew rapidly and there

was advancement in nautical knowledge and in-depth interactions between people of

different places. This conclusion can be proved by historical accounts written in China

which recorded observations regarding the people and customs of overseas countries.

The more important accounts include Dade Nanhai Zhi (《大德南海志》), Daoyi

Zhilue (《岛夷志略》), Rihla, and Yuanshi (《元史》). Among these, Dade Nanhai Zhi,

Daoyi Zhilue and Yuanshi are the most commonly cited references for studying the

written history of Southeast Asia in the 14th century. In addition, Zhenla Fengtu Ji

(《真腊风土记》), ShilinGuangji (《事林广记》) and Yiyu Zhi (《异域志》) should

also be mentioned, as they were written around the 14th century. The following section

will summarize the important aspects of these books.

1) Dade Nanhai Zhi (1304 C.E.)

The author of this book was a native from Guangdong (Canton) named Chen

Dazhen (陈大震), who lived at the end of the Southern Song and the early Yuan period. After Guangdong was overcome by Mongol forces in 1279 C.E., he resigned

from government post of Feng-yi-lang (奉议郎) in -jiang-shuai-fu (静江帅府) to return to his hometown in Guangdong. He then wrote a work titled Dade Nanhai Zhi,

meaning “South Sea Chorography in Dade Reign”, which was completed in 1304C.E.,

25 years after the beginning of the Mongol reign. Unfortunately, the original version

39

has been lost; only some paragraphs and other extracts were found among the

citations in Yongle Dadian 《永乐大典》( , also known as The Yongle Canon, an official

encyclopaedia compiled by the order of Emperor Yongle). By looking at the surviving

texts, we know that this book is a local chorography (a genre of historical records for

a certain territory) of Guangzhou, which covered information on Guangzhou-centered

maritime trading and overseas transportation. The significance of this book was that it

recorded various overseas places that had trade relations with Guangzhou in the early

Yuan Dynasty. In this book, modern Southeast Asia was called the region of

DongYang (东洋, literally “East Ocean”) and Xiao XiYang (小西洋, literally “Little

West Ocean”).

2) Daoyi Zhilue (1350 C.E.)

Originally titled Daoyi Zhi, this is a travel account written by a Chinese trader

Wang Dayuan (汪大渊) in the late Yuan Dynasty. It is an authentic record of Wang

Dayuan’s personal experiences, which made it a very important historical source in the study of Southeast Asia during the 14th century. According to this book, the

author’s travels covered more than a hundred places in Southeast Asia, South Asia and

Africa that were situated along the sea routes. In addition, he cited a few items from

the earlier account Zhufan Zhi. From this book, we can find a great deal of

information on the environment, the indigenous people, local customs and the

exchange of products between the countries.

Inspecting the book content, it seems Wang Dayuan not only tried to provide

guiding notes to maritime traders do deal with varied cases that may occur, but also to

40

seek novelty and weird features of the exotic places. More importantly, Wang in his

postscript wrote another aim of writing the book is to manifest the Yuan’s national

prestige over such a vast region overseas. (Kwee 1997)

3) Rihla or The Journey (1355 C.E.)

This was a travelling account written by Ibn Battuta, most of whose life was

spent in the first half of the 14th century. The author was a Moroccan Muslim scholar and traveler. He spent nearly thirty years on excursions. This book recorded his long

distancejourney covering a vast area, from North Africa, Europe, and the Middle East

to Asia. His itinerary lasted from 1332 C.E. to 1346 C.E., including his travel back

and forth between Europe and China. His journeys between China and Southeast Asia

were mostly undertaken by sea.

4) Yuanshi (1370 C.E.)

This is an official historical source compiled by the imperial court under the

instruction of Emperor Hongwu at the beginning of the Ming Dynasty. It was

conventional for the imperial ruler of a new dynasty to write a history of the previous

one. One of the motives for doing so was to demonstrate that the previous dynasty had

lost the , and that the new dynasty was therefore justified in

usurping power. The editors of the Yuanshi had access to many official archives

recorded by the Yuan court. Therefore, plenty of missions and tributes from foreign

kingdoms as well as warfare in Southeast Asia can be traced from this account.

5) Yiyu Zhi (Ming Dynasty)

According toThe Summary of General Catalogue of 《四库全书总(

41

目提要》), the author of this work might be Zhou Zhizhong (周致中), according to the

preface written by Weiyong (胡惟庸). Zhou was living in the late Yuan and early

Ming Dynasties. As an official of the Yuan court, he was sent on six diplomatic

missions abroad, which allowed him to observe the people and customs in the foreign

lands. The original copy of this account, titled Luochong (《臝蟲録》), was

supposedly written in the early Ming period. Later, it was edited by other people and

given a new title, Yiyu Zhi . This account covered approximately two hundred ancient

places and ethnic groups including those located in current East Asia, Southeast Asia

and South Asia.

The Summary of General Catalogue of Siku Quanshu points out that the preface

written by might not be anthentic. The preface might be written by

someone else at a later time. So the author’s name mentioned in the preface is

unreliable. This account was unlikely to be written by Zhou Zhizhong. By comparing

with other accounts, it is apparent that the author cited contents from earlier books,

such as Shanhai Jing 《山海经》( ), Youyang Zazu 《酉阳杂俎》( ), Lingwai Daida 《岭(

外代答》)and Shilin Guangji (《事林广记》) (Lu Junling 2000: 1-4). Therefore, this

account is not substantial enough as a reference for scholarly research.

In addition, several other accounts completed around this period can also provide

some clues to the history of Southeast Asia in the 14th century. For example, the

Zhenla Fengtu Ji was written by Zhou Daguan (周达观) based on his visit to

Cambodia in 1296 C.E. We were able to have an insight of Cambodia’s society, politics, economy and customs during the late 13th century through this account.

42

Shilin Guangji’s author is Chen Yuanliang (陈元靓) who lived in the Southern

Song period. Later in the Yuan and Ming Dynasties, this book was amended and

supplemented by anonymous authors, who wrote that some of the supplementary

contents were based on official archives of the Guangzhou Mercantile Shipping and

Transportation Bureau. Although this account mainly described China’s social

customs, there was some coverage on exotic affairs in the later supplementary

contents, under the heading of “Foreign Countries (方国类)”.

Zhufan Zhi was completed in 1225 C.E. by a Southern Song official named Zhao

Rugua, who described the customs and products of more than a hundred places from

Japan of Far East Asia to the Mediterranean Sea kingdoms in the West. The author

also described the maritime routes in detail. Although the author did not visit these

places personally, he gathered materials from the statements of foreign residents

living in China and descriptions from the travel note Lingwai Daida.

The world renowned travelogue The Travels of Marco Polo compiled by

Rustichello da Pisa in 1298 C.E., described Marco Polo’s experience travelling

through the Middle East, East Asia, Southeast Asia and Africa during the period from

1271 C.E. to 1291 C.E. It is also an important source in the understanding of

China-Southeast Asia relations in the late 13th century. Marco Polo went overland to

the Orient and returned to the West via maritime routes. Although some scholars have

expressed doubt about whether Marco Polo personally journeyed from Europe all the way to the Far East, it is still noteworthy as an important reference. The content of this account included aspects of the places he claimed to have visited, including the

43 environments, terrains, , peoples, customs, and products and so on.

Table 2.1.2.1 Pertinent southeast China and Southeast Asia port cities recorded in

13th-14th century historical accounts

Places

Java Singapore Guangzhou Quanzhou Hangzhou

Accounts

Zhufan Zhi Y N

(1225 C.E.) (West Java)

The Travels of Y ? Y Y Y Y

Marco Polo

(1298 C.E.)

Dade Nanhai Zhi Y ?

(1304 C.E.)

Daoyi Zhilue Y Y

(1350 C.E.)

Rihla N N Y Y Y Y

(1355 C.E.)

Yuanshi Y Y

(1370 C.E.)

Yiyu Z hi Y N

(Ming Dynasty)

44

ShilinGuangji Y Y

(Song to Ming

Dynasties)

As can be seen from Table 2.1.2.1, Java appeared in Chinese historical accounts

much earlier than Singapore; travelers who travelled from the West to China, paid

more attention to essential port cities that had established commercial networks along

the maritime routes. The advanced development of these maritime routes made long distant travel possible, though they seem not very convenient by modern standards.

As for Java, the relatively earlier Chinese account Dade Nanhai Zhi named Java as Shepo (阇婆). Daoyi Zhilue under the term “Zhuawa” explains that “Zhuawa is another name of ancient Shepo Kingdom. Mount Menzhebayi is the location of its government.” (Wang Dayuan 1892: 11) This item could be conjectured to be a

description of East Java and its contemporary kingdom Majapahit. Yuanshi recorded details of the Yuan military force which was sent to subdue Java, and the subsequent establishment of Majapahit Kingdom. According to Yuanshi, Java is also called

“Zhua-”, with “Majapahit” called “Ma-nuo-ba- (麻喏巴歇)”.

Dade Nanhai Zhi, Daoyi Zhilue and Yuanshi have records of a place named

“Long-ya-men (龙牙门)”, which is considered by most scholars a place near the modern-day Singapore Strait or Keppel Harbor. Some scholars, such as Su Jiqing, held the opinion that Long-ya-men in Dade Nanhai Zhi should refer to the modern

Indonesia’s Lingga Island (Su Jiqing 1981: 255). In Shilin Guangji, there is a

45

toponym “Ling-ya-men (凌牙门)” to refer to an exotic place, which may be another transliteration term for “Long-ya-men”.

These historical accounts have been carried on with conventional methods found in textual research. From textological and bibliographic perspectives, collation and annotations have been contributed by many historians. For example, Daoyi Zhilue has been annotated by Shen Zengzhi (Shen Zengzhi 1912: 553-631), Su Jiqing (Su Jiqing

1981) etc, who have made important contributions to the study of in late 19th and 20th centuries. They have examined the toponyms and corresponded with

the locations. Not only did they adopt the former achievements, but they also

proposed their own ideas. Research especially on toponyms that appeared in Daoyi

Zhilue and other historical accounts had been conducted as well (Hujita Toyohachi

1970-1972). Many accounts have been translated into different languages. Daoyi

Zhilue has been partially translated to English together with the author’s annotations

(Rockhill 1915: 61-159, 236-271, 374-392, 435-467, 604-626). The Travels of Marco

Polo (Wei Yi 1913; Xinglang 1929; 1937; Feng Chengjun 1936; Chen Kaijun et al 1981) and Rihla (Ma Jinpeng 1985) have been translated into Chinese by quite a few scholars.

In general, in Yuan Chinese accounts, foreign countries are divided into different regions, namely “Little East Ocean (小东洋)”, “Big East Ocean (大东洋)”, “Little

West Ocean (小西洋)” and “Big West Ocean (大西洋)”. For example, “Little West

Ocean” in Dade Nanhai Zhi might refer to the Malay Peninsula and Sumatra; “Little

East Ocean” and “Big East Ocean” might refer to Kalimantan Island, the Philippines

46

and Java. Daoyi Zhilue also used terms such as “East Ocean (东洋)” and “West Ocean

(西洋)”. However, Daoyi Zhilue did not distinctly point out the exact boundaries of

“East Ocean” and “West Ocean”. By going through the relevant items, the “East

Ocean” might refer to Java and its eastern region, while “West Ocean” referred to

countries surroundingthe Indian Ocean. The of east and west oceans might

reflect the development of shipping networks. New maritime terminology possibly suggests a more advanced maritime knowledge (Yu Changsen 1994: 33). These terms

were more commonly seen in Ming and Qing accounts. But they should be initially

used in the Yuan period. (Kwee 1997: 2-3)

2.1.3 Bureaucracies and policies for overseas trade in China

The administrative system dealing with overseas trade in China that developed in the Tang and Song period, was beginning to mature during the Yuan Dynasty. During the first few years of the Yuan reign over southern China, the policy of maritime trade basically succeeded that of the late Southern Song period. Private maritime trade and customs duties rates were basically the same.

Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus (市舶司) were usually set up in important trade ports along the coast of southeast China. The bureau offices were

established and abolished repeatedly. As seen from Tabl e 2.1.3.1, trade ports along the

southeast coast of mainland China included Shanghai (上海), Ganpu (澉浦),

Hangzhou (杭州), Qingyuan (庆元), Wenzhou (温州), Quanzhou (泉州) and

Guangzhou (广州) from north to south. Quanzhou, Qingyuan, Ganpu, and Shanghai

47

were the first four bureaus established immediately after Yuan military forces

conquered Zhejiang and Fujian. When the Yuan court reunited the whole country, five

more bureaus were set up respectively in Zhejiang, Guangdong and . The

bureaus took charge of issues of organizing and dispatching overseas trading voyages.

The Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus were initially under the

supervision of the senior provincial governor. However, the Yuan court abolished this

policy very soon. The administration came under the control of the highest

professional officials in the bureaus. During the early and mid Yuan Dynasty, the

bureaus were politically led by their own provincial government as well as the

Provincial Quan Fu Bureaus (行泉府司). The National Quan Fu Bureau (泉府司) was

set up in the central government in 1284 C.E. It was related to the loan of capitals from the to merchants, as well as sharing the profits from maritime trade.

However, during the late Yuan period, the Provincial Quan Fu Bureaus were abolished.

The Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus were led merely by their

provincial government. Throughout the Yuan Dynasty, provincial governments

continued to supervise local Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus (Yu

Changsen 1994:49).

In addition to the establishment of Mercantile Shipping and Transportation

Bureaus in major port cities, the Yuan government during the early period was

directly involved in trading activities through the provision of low-interest loans to

traders. It was soon replaced by the “Government Funded Ship” (官本船) strategy in

1285 C.E. (Zhiyuan Year 22). According to Yuanshi, the Government Funded Ship

48 system was first conceived by Lu Shirong (卢世荣), one of the few premiers in the

Yuan court. The system was recorded explicitly as “the government provides ships and capitals to the traders, who go to overseas countries for commercial activities.

They shall keep three out of ten of the total profits for themselves. The remaining seven out of ten profits shall go to the government.”4

4“官自具船给本，选人入番贸易诸货物。其所获之息，以十分为率，官取其七，所易人得其三。” 引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷九十四，“市舶”条，殿本，影印本，台北：啓明书局，1962 年， 页 483。Quoted from et al, Yuanshi, Vol.94, “Mercantile Shipping and Transportation” item, Wuyingdian Version, Photocopy, Taipei: Qiming Press, 1962, p.483. 49

Table 2.1.3.1 The establishment and abolishment of Yuan Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus5

Location Haibei; Guangzhou Quanzhou Wenzhou Qingyuan Hangzhou Ganpu Shanghai

Year Hainan ()

1277 Set up Set up Set up Set up

1282 Set up

1285 Set up

1293 Set up Incoporated

Into Qingyuan

1294 Abolished

1298 Incoporated Incoporated

Into Into Qingyuan

5All the data are quoted from Yu Changsen, Oversea Trade in Yuan Dynasty, Xi’an: Northwest University Press, 1994, pp.47-48.The information is extracted basically from Yuanshi.

50

Qingyuan

1303 Abolished Abolished

1308 Reinstated Reinstated Reinstated Reinstated

1311 Abolished Abolished Abolished Abolished

1314 Reinstated Reinstated Reinstated

1320 Abolished Abolished Abolished

51

The Government Funded Ship policy was implemented during most of the Yuan

period, as the main form of Yuan official overseas trading. However, there were many

issues with the implementation and the Yuan court announced the termination of

Government Funded Ship system in In 1323 C.E., due to a lot of social and political

problems caused, the Yuan court announced the termination of Government Funded

Ship system and determined to only tariff the private overseas trade for profits.6 Thus, private trading activities finally became the predominant trading pattern in late Yuan

Dynasty.

Tribute trade was strongly related to political concerns. Besides the Government

Funded Ship system, the Yuan court also encouraged “tribute trade (朝贡贸易)” as a

kind of reciprocity exchange with overseas countries, which had been implemented in

previous dynasties in China. When foreign countries sent missions with local

specialties, called “tribute”, to the China court and the emperor, the China court

would give Chinese products and symbolic tokens to them as gifts in return. At the

beginning of the Yuan Dynasty, Kublai showed a positive attitude towards

establishing stable diplomatic relations with overseas countries. He instructed the officials in charge of overseas affairs in southeast China that, “the overseas countries located on the southeastern islands view China with respect, so you can express my opinion to the overseas traders; if the foreign countries send missions to express their

6“听海商贸易，归征其税。”引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷九十四，“市舶”条，殿本，影印本， 台北：啓明书局，1962 年，页 483。“Allow maritime traders to do commercial activities; tariff them when they are back.”Quoted from Song Lian et al, Yuanshi, Vol.94, “Mercantile Shipping and Transportation” item, Wuyingdian Version, Photocopy, Taipei: Qiming Press, 1962, p.483. 52

admiration, I shall treat them with courtesy.”7 Moreover, in order to carry out Kublai

Khan’s policy, the Yuan court sent missions overseas to establish diplomatic relations.

These activities proved to be fruitful. Missions from countries in Asia, Europe and

Africa sent tributes to the Yuan court. Among these foreign kingdoms, missions from

Southeast Asian area constituted a large proportion. For instance, Yuanshi briefly

recorded that Shepo (阇婆) sent tributes to the Yuan court 11 times. Among the

commodities sent, there were a gold , a leopard, a white , and a white

parrot. In return, the Yuan court bestowed a tiger-shaped tally and textiles as award

(回赐). Long-ya-men (龙牙门, possibly refers to Singapore) also sent a tribute trade

mission once to China. Not only did the Yuan rulers gain exotic treasures through the

tribute trade, it also helped to boost national pride. Despite this advantage, the Yuan

court incurred great expenses from its generous awards. The Yuan court also wasted

too many resources on the reception of missions and transportation of tributes. The

tribute trade gradually became a financial burden to the Yua n court. However, due to

political considerations, the Yuan court never thoroughly gave up tribute trade during

its entire reign.

Although the Yuan court could obtain a lot of exotic treasures by tribute trade, the

actual supply could not keep up with the demand. Therefore, the Yuan court kept

sending missions overseas to purchase rarities and luxuries. In order to control the

overseas trade, the Yuan court exercised its authority through the Mercantile Shipping

7“诸蕃国列居东南岛砦者，皆有慕义之心，可因蕃舶诸人宣布朕意，诚能来朝，朕将宠礼之。” 引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷十，殿本，影印本，台北：啓明书局，1962 年，页 41。Quoted from Song Lian et al, Yuanshi, Vol.10, Wuyingdian Version, Photocopy, Taipei: Qiming Press, 1962, p.41. 53

and Transportation Bureaus, Government Funded Ship, “tribute trade” and “overseas purchase”. Government Funded Ship, “tribute trade” and “overseas purchase” were government-directly-involved trade activities. The Yuan court showed a quite positive

attitude towards maritime trading in a search for economic and political benefits.

Besides government-involved trading activities, other forms of maritime trade,

such as Ortaq (斡拖) and private trade, continued to exist and evolve. Ortaq’s primal

meaning is “partnership”. It was not a Chinese tradition, but a Mongol custom. “Ortaq

trade” refers in particular to a certain kind of business model that the Mongol nobles

entrust their agents (Muslim merchants were always employed as agents) to run

business and practise usuries for profits. It became popular since the

period. After the Yuan regime was established, Ortaq trade model was gradually

transplanted into maritime trade. It might have inspired the conception of Government

Funded Ship. Because these agents were employed on behalf of their royal investors,

and they could often obtain privileges and support from the royal family. By taking

advantage of its special relations with the ruling class, it meant that the Ortaq trade

could gain huge benefits from illegal commodity trading but was able to avoid

prosecution. The Ortaqs were even freed from customs duties.

In contrast to the Ortaq trade, private maritime trade was very much suppressed

by the government, especially during the early to mid Yuan Dynasty when the

Government Funded Ship was strongly supported by the government. The Yuan court

also promulgated varied kinds of periodic bans on maritime trade to deal with

different affairs within a short time. Anyhow, private trade was firstly influenced by

54

the bans. The Yuan court did not thoroughly deregulate private maritime trade until

1323 C.E. in late Yuan period. The Government Funded Ship policy was terminated

that year and not resumed for the rest of the Yuan Dynasty. In the late Yuan period,

private trade began to flourish in favor of the proactive policy (Yu Changsen 1994:

106-116).

During the Yuan Dynasty, due to encouragement by the government, ship

building and seafaring technology made great progress. Unlike the Song Dynasty’s

policy, the Yuan court did not restrict Chinese vessels from going further abroad.

Historical accounts recorded that Chinese ships sailed long distances, even reaching as far as the ports along the coast of Indian Ocean. For example, from the notes written by Western travelers, such as Marco Polo and Ibn Battuta, who realized that the ships sailing between the ports of China, Southeast Asia and India were predominately Chinese. Unfortunately, there is a lack of shipwreck evidence to prove this.

In short, the fiscal regime was more favorable for the traders in the Yuan period

than ever before. In the wide areas around the ports, maritime trade spurred the

development of agricultural produce and manufactured products, especially those for

export. The centers of textile industries and ceramic industries formed and clustered

in these regions.

In the early Ming Dynasty, the founding emperor Hongwu completely banned

private maritime trade. The maritime trade policy implemented by the Hongwu

Emperor was of a “dual nature”. Under this policy, maritime trade by the populace

55 was forbidden. Not only were the private Chinese traders forbidden to go overseas for trading, but foreign traders also could not travel to China for commercial activities.

According to , the earliest record on the maritime trade ban was an order issued by Emperor Hongwu, “people living by the coast are forbidden to engage in private overseas travel”, in Hongwu Year 4 (1371 C.E.). Later, it became a national policy written into the Daming Lü (Laws of Ming China). This “Maritime Trade Ban” was dutifully implemented by the later Ming as “Zu ” (“祖训”literally means ancestors’ doctrines that are strictly adhered by the succeeding emporors) for more than one hundred years till the late Ming period.

However, during the early and mid Ming Dynasty, private maritime trade activities are believed to have continued to exist, albeit by illegal means. During the early Ming period, Hongwu issued several orders to prohibit maritime trade, and this suggests that private trade continued to be practiced furtively. In a bid to completely ban private maritime trade, in 1394 C.E. Hongwu Emperor even prohibited the transferring and selling of scented wood of Guangdong and to other places.

According to the Ming Shilu, Hongwu Emperor issued an that “Foreign and commodities shall be forbidden... All incenses and commodities coming from overseas are not allowed to be sold. If anyone still has stocks of these things, they should be removed within three months. For folk sacrifices and prayers, only incenses made from pine, cypress, maple and trees are allowed. Anyone who infringes on the edict will be found guilty. All the incense woods produced in Guangdong and

Guangxi shall be sold and used by indigenous people in the original places, but not

56

out of the province. They are put into the forbidden list, considering the possibility

that they might be sold together with other kinds of foreign incenses.”8This edict was

released in the Hongwu Year 27, near the end of Hongwu Reign. These continuing

prohibition orders indicate that early Ming ban on private maritime trade was not

completely effective. Private trade was still conducted secretly in small quantities.

Despite the ban on private maritime trade, Hongwu Emperor supported tribute trade. In the early and mid Ming Dynasty, tribute trade had almost become the only form of legal trading with foreign countries, especially when private maritime trade was strictly prohibited. Foreign missions that sent tribute gifts to the Ming court

usually benefitted from many valuable presents and tokens awarded by the Emperor.

As a result, a lot of countries sought to send tribute to China. The Ming court also set

up the Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureaus at several ports. These bureaus were mainly restricted to deal with issues regarding tribute trade. The bureaus

were set up or abolished according to periodic diplomatic policies. Besides the

tributes paid to the Ming emperor, foreign missions were also allowed to take a certain amount of local specialties as merchandise for marketing. Some of the specialties were selected and bought by the government in the first place. The remaining was permitted to be sold to designated merchants. Foreign missions were also allowed to buy goods from specific merchants. All the buying-and-selling

8“禁民间用番香番货。……凡番香番货，皆不许贩鬻，其见有者，限以三月销尽。民间祷祀，止 用松柏枫桃诸香，违者罪之。其两广所产香木，听土人自用，亦不许越岭货卖。盖虑其杂市番香， 故并及之。”引自《明太祖实录·附校勘记》，第五册，卷二百三十一，“洪武二十七年春正月辛 丑朔”条，台北：中央研究院历史语言研究所，1962 年， 页 3374。Quoted from Ming Taizu Shilu, Book 5, Vol.231, “Hongwu Year 27 Spring January”item, Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, , 1962, p.3374. 57

interactions were conducted under the supervision of the government. Only foreign

missions coming to China to pay tributes were allowed to undertake trade activities in

certain allocated places. (Li Jinming 1990:11-20)

2.1.4 The recorded sea routes from China to Majapahit

Although the Song account Lingwai Daida proposed concepts such as “South

Ocean Sea”, “East Ocean Sea” and “West Ocean Sea”, the geographical limits for

these areas are quite indistinctly expressed. By contrast with Song accounts, the Yuan

accounts already began to create relatively clear notions of East Ocean and West

Ocean to distinguish different regions based on shipping directions.

As for the “East Ocean” countries, new shipping routes between China and

Southeast Asia were discovered during the Yuan Dynasty, such as the shipping routes

from Quanzhou to the Philippines via the Pescadores and . The sea routes from

Quanzhou to Java via the coast and islets of the South China Sea were also discovered,

which was recorded in the Yuanshi. This is demonstrated in Bi’s (史弼) biography

in Yuanshi:

In 1289 C.E., Kublai Khanwas determined to send a military force to subdue Java.

He commissioned this expedition to Shi Bi. In 1292 C.E., Shi Bi led a fleet of five

thousand soldiers to Java. They embarked from Quanzhou in the lunar twelfth month.

The vessels jolted greatly due to strong waves at sea, all the soldiers suffered a lot

from not being able to eat . The fleet took the sea routes through Qizhouyang,

Wanlishitang, Kingdom, and Zhancheng Kingdom. During the lunar first

58

month, they passed by Dongdong and Xidong Mountains, and the Niujiyu Islet. Then

they went to Ganlan Islet in Ocean, Jialimada, and Goulan Mountains etc,

where they stationed their troops and lumbered to build boats to go to Java.9

Scholars have different opinions regarding the locations of the ancient toponyms

in Yuanshi, as shown in Tabl e 2.1.4.1. However, it can be seen that this shipping route

from China to Java was much shorter than the older routes via the coasts of Malay

Peninsula and Sumatra.

As for “West Ocean” countries, the sea routes from China to the West did not change significantly. For example, The Travels of Marco Polo records that Marco

Polo escorted the Yuan princess to Persia departing from Quanzhou, via Champa,

Condour, Pentan (possibly Bintan), Malaiur (possibly Malayu/Jambi), Lamburi

(possibly ), Necurveran (possibly Nicobars), Seilan (Sri Lanka), Maabar, Coilum,

Combay, Semenat, Kesmacoan to Cormos (Zhang Xinglang 1937). From this, we can

see that the sea routes to the “West Ocean” did not change significantly fromTang and

Song periods, especially for the routes in the Southeast Asian region. But it should be

noticed that Quanzhou had become the main departure port to the West during the

Yuan Dynasty, instead of Guangzhou port during the Tang and Song periods.

9“十二月，弼以五千人合诸军，发泉州。风急涛涌，舟掀簸，士卒皆数日不能食。过七洲洋、 万里石塘，历交趾、占城界，明年正月，至东董西董山、牛崎屿，入混沌大洋、橄榄屿、假里马 答、勾阑等山，驻兵伐木，造小舟以入。” 引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷一百六十二，《四部 备要·史部》，影印本，上海：中华书局，1935 年， 页 1154。Quoted from Song Lian et al, Yuanshi, Vol.162, Accounts of Government Officials 49, Account of Shi Bi, “ Beiyao” series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1154. 59

Tab le 2.1.4.1 Research from different scholars on the locations of the toponyms in Yuanshi

Yuanshi Toponym Qizhouyang Wanlishitang Jiaozhi Zhancheng Dongdong Niujiyu Ganlan Hundun Jialimada Goulan

Kingdom Kingdom and Xidong Islet (Olive) Ocean

Current Location Mountains Islet

W.P. Paracel Macclesfield Jiaozhi Champa Natuna? ? Indian Sea ? Billiton

Groeneveldt (Groeneveldt Islands Bank for Dongdong;

1960) Anamba? for

Xidong

Tan Qixiang (Tan the ocean

Qixiang 1994: 156-162) Eastern to

Hainan Island

60

2.2 Previous historical and archaeological research on urban sites in China and

Southeast Asia

From a historical perspective, historians have dedicated their research to the study of ports in Southeastern China. However, from an archaeological perspective, there has not been much research on port cities in mainland China. In the following sections,

I will briefly introduce the archaeological studies on urban sites in mainland China and Southeast Asia of the 14th century. As China in the 14th century was under the reign of the Yuan and Ming courts consecutively, there will be discussion on the urban sites of the Yuan and early Ming periods.

2.2.1 Archaeology work on the Yuan and early Ming capital sites

In mainland China, most studies on Yuan period cities have been mostly focused on their political importance. Take the two urban sites of the Yuan era for instance,

Xanadu (元上都, Yuan , located at what is now Wuyi Meadow (五一牧场) in

Xilingol League, Inner ) was the first capital of the Yuan Dynasty, and

Khanbaliq (元大都, Yuan Dadu, located at what is now City) was the main capital of the Yuan Dynasty.

There was a plan to establish Xanadu City in 1256 C.E, when Kublai ordered

Bingzhong (刘秉忠) to manage the project. In 1260 C.E., Kublai was enthroned in

Xanadu. It became the first capital of the Yuan Dynasty. In 1286 C.E., the construction of was completed; it became the primary capital of the Yuan.

61

By then, Xanadu became a secondary “summer capital”, nonetheless, it continued to

be an important political center almost throughout the Yuan Dynasty, but it suffered

from heavy damages during the uprisings and riots that occurred in the and

1360s.

Xanadu was abandoned after the whole administrative district was shifted by the

Ming regime in 1430 C.E. As this city was not used after it was abandoned, the urban

ruin is well-preserved, and archaeologists were able to obtain many important

materials. Since Xanadu site is a relatively intact urban ruin, modern archaeological

work on this site was conducted quite early compared to other urban sites in China.

The first archaeological excavations at Xanadu were carried out by the Japanese

before People’s Republic of China was established in 1949. Harada Yoshito and

Komai Kazuchika from Tokyo Imperial University dug the Xanadu site in 1937. The

excavation yielded abundant artefacts. An archaeological report was published soon

after the excavation in 1941 (Harada Yoshito and Komai Kazuchika 1941). This

archaeological research preserved a lot of primary resources of the early 20th century,

which makes it quite an important reference for today.

In the 1950s, the Chinese archaeological team conducted surveys

at Xanadu, followed by more surveys by the Inner Mongolia University in the 1970s.

Through the surveys, a lot of ruins such as , temples, residential areas etc., were investigated. The layout of the whole of Xanadu city was recovered ( Xinmin

1987: 33-40). In the 1990s, the Inner Mongolia Relics and Archaeology Institute

continued to conduct frequent surveys and excavations at the Xanadu urban site. The

62

functional structure of the whole city has now basically been clarified. Archaeological

work reveals that, the city layout is nearly square shaped. There are three city walls

enclosing the palace, the sub-city and outer city respectively. The palace is 570 metres

from east to west, 620 metres from north to south. Palatial architectures are scattered

within the palace. There are many pools as well. The sub-city is very spacious. There

are four temples separately located at the four corners of the sub-city. The palace and sub-city are both symmetrically designed. But the outer city is not symmetrical. As for the outer city, the northern part is the royal garden; the southwestern part is the market place. There are historical recordings that the Xanadu city had poor transportation links with the outside, which heavily restricted its economic development. The city mainly functioned as a summer resort for the emperors.

Khanbaliq (元大都) was the main capital during most of the Yuan Dynasty untill it was conquered by the Ming in 1368 C.E. The major palaces were demolished soon

in the early Ming era. Khanbaliq started to function as the Yuan’s major capital in

1286 C.E., when the city was established. Modern archaeological work on Khanbaliq began in the early 20th century. The first researcher Feng Kuan did some surveys in

Beiping (alias of Beijing at the time). He also referred to a lot of historical accounts.

By comparing the ancient records with practical surveys, he made a preliminary

investigation of the historical changes in the layout of Beijing City from the Liao to

Ming Dynasties (Feng Kuan 1929: 883-912). By combining accounts by Yuan and

Ming literati and the surface investigations, Kan Duo and Qiqian attempted to reconstruct the layout of the palaces in Beijing City specifically of the Yuan period

63

(Zhu Zijiang andKan Duo 1930:1-118). Similarly, Zhu Xie also recovered the layout

of Beijing City’s palaces during the period from the Yuan to , by

referring to the ancient literati’s drawings (Zhu Xie 1936a; 1936b). Wang Biwen

focused on the transformation of Khanbaliq’s different urban units that made up the

city, such as the fang (ward, a basic unit in a city) and temples (Wang Biwen 1936:

69-120; 1937: 130-161). also touched on the issue of Beijing City’s

layout transformation when he was investigating the changes of the course of the

Jinshui River crossing Beijing City during the Yuan and Ming Dynasties (Hou Renzhi

1946: 107-134; 1955: 142-168). We can see that the reconstruction of old Beijing’s

layout was basically done by non-archaeologist scholars at that time. The possible

reason is that archaeology studies were mainly focused on the pre-historical period.

Since the establishment of new China, more research has been done to reconstruct the ancient city planning and landscape of Khanbaliq. Zhao Zhengzhi proposed a new perspective that the urban central axis of old Beijing City had not

changed since the Yuan Dynasty (Zhao Zhengzhi 1979: 14-27). In the 1960s and

1970s, the Khanbaliq archaeology team conducted an intensive investigation on

Beijing city. They carried out salvage excavations at more than ten relic sites. The

whole picture of Khanbaliq’s layout was basically revealed (Khanbaliq Archaeology

Team 1972a: 19-28; Xu Pingfang 1995). Varied types of construction ruins, such as

drainage channels, dwellings (Khanbaliq Archaeology Team 1972b: 2-11, plate 1-8;

Xu Pingfang 1986: 629-631), warehouses (Khanbaliq Archaeology Team 1973:

279-285, plate 5-8), city walls (Wang Youquan 1994: 151) etc, were discovered and

64

excavated. The overall archaeology surveys and excavations not only yielded large

amounts of artefacts, but also provided plentiful materials for studying the types of districts and their relationship to each other of this major capital of the Yuan Dynasty

(Xu Pingfang 1998).

At the beginning of the Ming Dynasty, a new capital city was established in

Nanjing (南京), which was situated in the current City, Province.

Nanjing city functioned as the Ming capital from 1368 C.E. to 1420 C.E., mainly

under the reign of the first two emperors. The mass construction work started in 1366

C.E., even before the Ming regime officially announced its establishment.

Renovations and expansions continued during the Hongwu reign. Nanjing ended its

capital functions when the third Ming emperor Yongle ordered to move the capital to

Beijing. Nanjing was considered a good example of a well-conserved city with a long

history, when modern archaeology surveys and excavations, especially in the Ming

palace area, were conducted in the early 20th century (Ge Dinghua 1933; Zhu Xie

1936a; Miao Fenglin 1929: 6). Therefore, generally the Ming Nanjing city’s layout

was recovered fully on the basis of a relatively comprehensive gathering of

archaeological data.

2.2.2 Archaeology work on other Yuan and early Ming urban sites in mainland

China

Other types of Yuan urban sites have not been as extensivelysurveyed and

excavated as the capital cities. Urban sites in the hinterland, such as Liancheng (连城)

65

in Province ( 1965: 46-56), Xiaocheng (肖城) in

Province (Zhao Yonghong 1999：161-162), and (长沙) in Province

(Huang Gangzheng et al 1996) etc have been investigated to some extent.

In Inner Mongolia where the Yuan ruling class originally resided, archaeological work regarding urban sites has yielded abundant results. Twenty-four urban sites of the Yuan Dynasty were investigated in the 1970s, so that the spatial planning of the cities can be comprehensively described. Given the fact that Mongolia did not have the traditions of building cities, it turns out that the form of these cities was influenced by Central China (Ma Yaoqi and Ji Faxi 1980: 124-137).These cities have been classified into different types according to their reconstructed history. Therefore, a hierarchical system of the cities can be identified (Li Yiyou 1988: 143-152).

Among the urban sites in Inner Mongolia, Jininglu (集宁路) in Chahar Right

Front Banner is one of the most important sites, which has been largely revealed by archaeological work. A lot of artefacts meant for daily use were unearthed from excavations in the 1950s (Inner Mongolia Archaeology Team 1961: 52-57). In the

1960s and 1970s, structure remains (Zhang 1962: 585-587) and hoards (

Xingrong 1979: 32-36, plate 5-6) etc were also discovered within the Jininglu urban site.The structure remains are basically foundations. The hoards are normally big ceramic containers with valuables inside, such as fine porcelain wares, metal wares, precious metals, copper coins etc. More recent and extensive archaeological work at

Jininglu site was conducted early in this century, which revealed a lot of different types of sites, such as dwelling foundations, wells, and hoards etc.It is quite an

66

important discovery that several thousand pieces of relatively intact porcelain of Yuan

Dynasty were unearthed there. The porcelain wares could be classified into nine kiln

systems across China, including the kiln system (定窑系), Hebei Cizhou

kiln system (磁州窑系), Jun kiln system (钧窑系), Yaozhou kiln system (耀州窑系), Jiangxi Jingdezhen kiln system (景德镇窑系), Zhejiang

Longquan kiln system (龙泉窑系), Fujian Jian kiln system (建窑系), Fujian Jizhou

kiln system (吉州窑系), Korean wares (高丽青瓷). (Chen Yongzhi 2003: 16-25). In

Hohhot district, there are also several urban sites: Fengzhou (丰州) Town and

Dongshengzhou (东胜州) Tow n (Li Yiyou 1979: 365-374), which were ancient towns during the Liao, Jin and Yuan period. Yingchanglu (应昌路) Town, situated in

Heshigten Banner, Juu Uda, functioned as an important “touxia (投下)” (a special kind of administrative district) city during the Yuan Dynasty and before it was abandoned in the early Ming Dynasty. The Inner Mongolia archaeology team did surveys there in the 1960s (Li Yiyou 1961: 531-533, 554), followed by an aerial

photogrammetric archaeology by the in the late 1990s

(Remote Sensing and Aerophotography Archaeology Center of National Museum

ofChina, and Inner Mongolia Municipality Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute

2002: 204-217). The urban layout of the Yingchanglu urban site was basically

clarified, including the locations of palaces, feudal administrative government,

temples, workshops and residential areas.

Additionally, archaeological work was conducted in several more Yuan Dynasty urban sites, such as Buzi Town (卜子古城) in Siziwang Banner (四子王旗) (Wei Jian

67

and Li Xingsheng 1998: 117-118), Guangyilong Town (广益隆古城) in Chahar Right

Middle Banner (Wei Jian and Li Xingsheng 1998: 118-119) and Jingzhoulu(净州路)

ancient urban site (Zheng Long 1957: 65-67), Kharakhoto Town (亦集乃路 or

literally “Black Water” Town) in (Inner Mongolia Cultural Relics and

Archaeology Institute et al 1987: 1-23, plate 1-5)，Sanchahe (三岔河) urban site in

Uxin Banner (Wei Jian and Yin Chunlei 1998: 116-117). Among these sites,

Kharakhoto Town and Sanchahe old town were under the administration of the

Western regime in the now western China before they were conquered and

incorporated into the Yuan’s administrative territory.

There have also been archaeology surveys and excavations in

Municipality and Municipality in and Province in . Many urban sites of the Yuan period have been discovered and studied. Varied types of historical remains have been revealed, including hoards, palaces etc.

In view of the varieties of ancient urban sites in China and the rich findings so far, scholars have been trying to explore the city patterns and the overall evolutionary trend during a long time span. The city layout and street planning have been taken into consideration as essential dimensions to differentiate the urban site patterns.

Urban sites of the Song to Ming period were classified into four patterns by Xu

Pingfang (1986a: 486-492). Besides, patterns of the prior Sui to Tang period urban sites were first discussed by Su Bai (1990: 279-285). The issue of detecting and conserving urban ruins in modern cities has also been proposed to tackle the conflicts

68

between relic conservation and modern urban development, given that some

long-lasting cities were still functioning and have been frequently renovated after they

were built (Su Bai 2001: 56-63; Xu Pingfang 2001: 64-73). So far, archaeological work on these cities with long has not been conducted fruitfully due to the lack of methodological guidelines. To deal with this problem, Su Bai proposed several methodological points to direct future archaeological work. In his opinion, the transformation of city boundaries, city gates, city walls, streets, administrative buildings, religious temples should be paid particular attention. They are essential indicators shaping the city features of different times (Su Bai 1990: 279-285; 2001:

56-63). In conformity with this theory, Su Bai tried to recover the history of Xuanhua city (宣化城) (Su Bai 1998: 45-63) and city (青州城) (Su Bai 1999: 47-56).

Xu Pingfang also touched on this issue and studied Lin’an city (临安城) of the

Southern Song period located in the now Hangzhou as well as Khanbaliq (元大都) located in what is now Beijing (Xu Pingfang 1998).

2.2.3 Archaeology work on port cities in China

With regard to the ancient port cities in mainland China, archaeological work has been conducted at some urban sites of the Tang to Yuan Dynasties, though they are far from adequate.

In Jiangsu Province, a few archaeology surveys and excavations have been carried out in City (镇江城). It is situated at the crossroad of and the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand , which makes it geographically quite an

69

important inland port city. However, not enough information has been collected to

reconstruct the layout of the ancient city so far (Gong Liang and Wu Jianmin 1998:

53-57).

In Zhejiang Province, Ningbo port (宁波港), called Mingzhou (明州) mainly in the Tang and Northern Song period and Qingyuan (庆元) in most of the Southern

Song and Yuan periods, gradually became a very important port since the Tang

Dynasty. The sub-city of Tang and Song period Ningbo was excavated in 1977, which yielded a preliminary outline of the boundaries of the sub-city (Ningbo Cultural

Relics and Archaeology Institute 2002: 46-62, plate 5-8). Later in the 1980s, a port site was excavated at the East Gate of Ningbo City (Ningbo Heritage Board 1981:

105-129). Quanzhou port (泉州港) which functioned as an important port with the

name of Citong (刺桐城 or “Zaitun” by the and Marco Polo) during the Song

and Yuan periods, also began to be investigated in the 1970s. Scholars tried to recover

Quanzhou’s city layout at different periods by comparing the surface remains with old

accounts ( Weiji 1979: 367-379; Chen Yundun 1980: 1-13; Zhuang Jinghui

1987: 159-164; 1996: 19-36). Unfortunately, not many excavations have been

conducted in the city yet, except for an excavation at Deji Gate (德济门) relic site of

the Yuan Dynasty (Fujian Provincial Museum and Quanzhou Cultural Relics Bureau

2003: 14-40).

At Guangzhou (广州) urban site, archaeological surveys and research have been

in progress since the 1970s. Maritime trade has been considered as one of the main

factors that shaped the transformation of Guangzhou city since the in the

70

3rd century B.C. (Xu Junming 1979: 90-100). As a city with a long history, many excavations have yielded abundant artefact assemblages that spread over a long time span. However, no important 14th century relic sites have been revealed or reported to

the public yet. According to historical accounts, Guangzhou during the Yuan Dynasty

had not been subject to major renovations so the city layout should basically remain

the same as the prior Song Dynasty.

2.2.4 Archaeology work on urban sites in the 14th century Southeast Asia

By going through varied historical accounts, historians have managed to correlate

a number of toponyms of 14th century ports with their modern locations. As

demonstrated in Table 2.2.4.1, some trade ports along the coast of the South China

Sea and Java Sea have been rediscovered by examining historical accounts. However,

from the current published materials, it seems that adequate archaeological work has

not been conducted on many of these port sites yet, or at least has not been published

so far.

Along the traditional maritime routes from China to East Java, Singapore is one

of the few ports where archaeological investigations and excavations have been

conducted. Very few excavations have been carried out at 13th-14th century port sites in the Malay Peninsula.

In Sumatra, much archaeological work has been conducted in inland sites since

1970s, such as the excavations in Jambi and Palembang. With regard to the port sites, a few of them, such as Kompei, Kota Cina and Barus, have also been subjected to

71

archaeological work. Dr.E. Edwards McKinnon and Mr. Tengku LuckmanSinar

visited Pulau Kompei and did their investigations between 1974 and 1977. Pulau

Kompei is situated at the northern entrance to Aru Bay, northeastern Sumatra. The

artefact assemblage from surface collections made them believe that this is the

location of the ancient “甘毕\监蓖\甘杯 (Ganbi\Jianbi\Ganbei)” mentioned in

Chinese accounts (Edwards McKinnon 1981: 48-73). “Ganbi (甘毕)” appears in Xin

Tangshu, “Jianbi (监蓖)”in Lingwai Daida and Dade Nanhai Zhi. “甘杯港 (Ganbei

Port)” is plotted on the Mao Kun Map of Wubei Zhi. Edwards McKinnon carried out fieldwork at Kota Cina in northeast Sumatra, which formed the basis of his doctoral dissertation in 1984. By analyzing the artefact assemblage, the duration of medieval

Kota Cina site was basically determined as 12th -14th centuries (Edwards McKinnon

1984).

Jambi and Palembang are two important regions located on the lowland of

southeast Sumatra. Located at the Batang Hari Basin and Musi River Basin, Jambi

and Palembang respectively have yielded a number of important archaeological sites.

By observing the remains yielded from the investigations and excavations in these key

sites during the 1970s and1980s, Edwards McKinnon had basically addressed the

issues regarding the date and nature of these sites (Edwards McKinnon 1985: 1-36).

In Java, the inland city Trowulan, Majapahit’s capital, has been subject to

extensive investigations and excavations. However, trade ports near Trowulan, such as

Tuban, Surabaya, and Gresik, have not yielded scientific archaeological data yet. But

they are mentioned in Chinese accounts. In Zhufan Zhi, Daban (打板) possibly refers

72

to Tuban. It is described in the item “Sujidan (苏吉丹)” that, “Daban kingdom is

adjacent to its eastern Da Shepo, whose name is Rongyalu (戎牙路, Janggala)”. (Zhao

Rugua 2000) Daoyi Zhilue has it “Duping’s eastern kingdom is Zhongjialuo (重迦罗,

Janggala), which is adjacent to Java.”(Su 1981: 168) It seems Duping (杜瓶) is another transliteration of Duban. If the ancient Janggala overlaps with the present

Surabaya territorially, Zhufan Zhi and Daoyi Zhilue have “Zhongjialu (重迦庐)” and

“Zhongjialuo (重迦罗)” respectively as the probable transliterations.

Trowulan is located in the hinterland of East Java, about ten kilometers southeast of Mojokerto and fifty five kilometers southwest of Surabaya, which is on the seacoast. Trowulan has drawn the attention of researchers since the colonial period, when several excavations were conducted. In 1780, a set of copper sheets inscribed with Old Javanese characters, were dug up on Mt. Butak, west of . The inscriptions were later transcribed into modern Javanese in Surakarta. The general content of the inscriptions is that Wijaya, the new king of Majapahit, was grateful to the Kudadu villagers who saved his life when he was a fugitive two years ago. Wijaya was able to escape to the Madura Island, overturn the usurper and enthrone himself in

1294 C.E. More recordings about Majapahit kingdom’s history were found by accident. In 1894, a young Dutch official saved some manuscripts in the Balinese palace on Lombok Island when a Dutch expedition set fire to the palace after pillaging.

Among the manuscripts was a poem written in 1365 C.E., commonly known as

Nagarakrtagama (Miksic 1995: 13-14). Trowulan had been considered as the location of Majapahit then.

73

Field investigations on Trowulan actually began in 1815. Thomas Stamford

Raffles, the lieutenant-governer of Java, ordered Captain Johannes Willem

Bartholomeus Wardenaar to make a plan of Majapahit located at Trowulan.

Wardenaar was able to produce a map, a legend and some drawings, using his precise

mapping technologies. Unfortunately, only the map legend “Plan of Majapahit”, as

well as some drawings is preserved till today. In the mid and late 19th century, some

researchers, such as Rigg, Verbeek etc, conducted surveys at Trowulan and published

their research successively (Rigg 1849; Verbeek 1889). In early 20th century, under the

sponsorship of Oudheidkundige Vereeniging Majapahit（OVM）, Ir.Henri Maclaine

Pont carried out excavations at places like Kemasan, Nglinguk, Menak Jingga and so on. Many ceramic and fragments and foundation relics were found at

Kemasan and Nglinguk. (Soejatmi Satari 1995)

The National Research Centre for Archaeology continued to undertake archaeological work since independence in 1945 (Mengungkap Kejayaan 1995). The ceramic assemblages yielded from the excavations were stored in either the warehouse in Trowulan or in Jakarta. Ceramic analysis has been conducted on the basis of these ceramic collections (Abu Rhido 1983: 59-73). From 1976 to 1990, the

National Research Centre for Archaeology conducted a series of projects, including investigations and excavations. In order to reveal the functional urban system, the whole urban site was divided into several sectors for excavations. The basic information of the excavations in different sectors has been introduced (National

Research Centre for Archaeology, Republic of Indonesia 1995: 19-29). There are also

74 studies on the urban site of Trowulan. The layout of the whole urban site was recovered by looking through the relic remains above ground (Soejatmi Satari 1995:

31-41).

Tab le 2.2.4.1 14th century trading ports recorded in historical accounts or published with archaeological data on the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra and Java

Information from Accounts &

Archaeological Work Published archaeological data Historical recordings

Trading Ports

Malay Tambralingga N Y

Peninsula (7th-14th centuries)

Ligor N Y

(13th century)

Langkasuka\Patani N Y

(7th-14th centuries)

Kelantan N Y

(14th centuries)

Trengganu N Y

(13th-14th centuries)

Pahang N Y

(14th centuries)

75

Pengkalan Bujang Y ?

Singapore Y Y

(14th centuries)

Sumatra N Y

(13th-14th centuries)

Semudra N Y

(13th-14th centuries)

Tamiang N Y

(13th-14th centuries)

Kompei Y Y

(11th-12th centuries)

Kota Cina Y Y

(12th-14th centuries)

Jambi Y Y

(7th-14th centuries)

Palembang Y Y

(7th-14th centuries)

Barus Y Y

(11th-13th centuries)

Java Trowulan Y N

(13th-16th centuries)

Tuban N Y

76

Surabaya N Y

Bekachak N Y

Gresik N N

77

Chapter 3: Archaeology and Ceramic Studies: Materials

3.1 Materials from Singapore

The materials used in the thesis will involve the ceramic assemblage unearthed

from Singapore, especially the Chinese sherds. First of all, the history of Singapore’s

archaeology work should be elaborated. Hitherto, modern archaeological

investigations and excavations have been carried out in Singapore for three decades.

However, since the British colonial period, Singapore’s history had roused the

interests of scholars. Not only did they look for traces from archives and legends, some of them discovered that ancient relic remains still existed. They devotedly wrote

down what they found in notes, which have now become valuable records for current

studies.

The earliest explicit recording of the ancient town of Singapore is John

Crawfurd’s description of the ruins, which is found in his diary:

February 3 (1822) — I walked this morning round the walls and limits of the ancient

town of Singapore, for such in reality had been the site of our modern settlement. It was

bounded to the east by the sea, to the north by a wall, and to the west by a salt creek or inlet of

the sea. The inclosed space is a plain, ending in a hill of considerable extent, and a hundred

and fifty feet in height. The whole is a kind of triangle, of which the base is the seaside, about

a mile in length. The wall, which is about sixteen feet in breadth at its base and at present

about eight or nine in height, runs very near a mile from the sea-coast to the base of the hill,

until it meets a salt marsh. As long as it continues in the plain, it is skirted by a little rivulet

78 running at the foot of it, and forming a kind of moat; and where it attains the elevated side of the hill, there are apparent the remains of a dry ditch. On the western side, which extends from the termination of the wall to the sea, the distance, like that of the northern side, is very near a mile. This last has the natural and strong defence of a salt marsh, overflown at high-water, and of a deep and broad creek. In the wall there are no traces of embrasures or loop-holes; and neither on the sea-side, nor on that skirted by the creek and marsh, is there any appearance whatever of artificial defences. We may conclude from these circumstances, that the works of Singapore were not intended against fire-arms, or an attack by sea; or that if the latter, the inhabitants considered themselves strong in their naval force, and therefore thought any other defences in that quarter superfluous.( Crawfurd 1828: 68-70)

The earthen rampart that John Crawfurd mentioned mostly along the now

Stamford Road as it existed until the early 21st century and the north of Fort Canning

Hill. Now part of the road has been diverted which served as the campus of Singapore

Management University. Witnesses took this so-called Malay Wall as boundaries or defenses of the old town. In fact, as early as 1820, there were published reports about ancient relics inside this rampart. The Asiatic Journal and Monthly Registrar quotes the Gazette with regard to the remains:

It is said, that in digging under the walls of the very ancient fort of Singapore, the engineer has discovered several brass Chinese coins. The legend on one of these, and on only one, is extremely perfect, or at least sufficiently so as to make out that it is about 700 years old. (The Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register 1820: 198)

79

It appears by the inscription that it was struck off by the Chinese government during the reign of Huing-tsung, an emperor of the Sung Dynasty, also called Nan-sung or Ta-sung, who died C.E. 1125. He was contemporary with our Henry the first.

Lieut. Ralfe, acting engineering at Singapore, discovered this , with several others, digging at the remains of the old wall or mound which surrounded the once populous and large city of Singapore, but of which the only vestige is the wall in question.

The other coins immediately crumbled to dust on being touched after their exposure to the air, but the one at present in Calcutta remains, as we have before stated, uninjured by time, and its are in the highest preservation.

We understand it is to be forwarded to Gen. Hardwicke, of the H.O. Artillery, by who we have no doubt it will be kindly offered to the inspection of the curious in antiquities. (The

Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register 1820: 292)

Except for the above descriptions of Chinese coins found underthe earthen wall, the Asiatic Journal and Monthly Registrar mentioned discoveries, again Chinese coins as well as some ceramics, from Fort Canning Hill at the same time:

Maj.gen. Hardicke laid before the Society an ancient Chinese coin of the Sung, or 19th dynasty of the Chinese emperors, and supposed to have been struck in the reign of

Kwuy-tsung, the eighth emperor of that dynasty.

It was discovered by Lieut. Ralfe, of the Bengal artillery, in clearing an elevated spot in the island of Singapore, the supposed site of a town or bazar. Several other coins were found, and some pieces of broken china-ware, shells, & c. None of the coins except the one now

80

offered stood the of examination, as they crumbled into fragments on handling. (The

Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register 1820: 477)

In 1928, when the old artillery fort in Fort Canning built during the colonial period was demolished, a new reservoir was constructed at the site. Some gold ornaments, including earrings, armlets and a ring, were discovered during the digging.

Except for these gold products, there were no other antique finds reported during the construction project. It is believed that many artefacts from the 14th century have been

thrown down along with the soil to the slope of the hill from the top. Their original

location has been lost since (Miksic 2013: 222).

The above is the summary of artefact findings in the early records before formal

archaeological methodology was introduced to Singapore. In short, they were

accidental small finds and observations of visible structures. Formal archaeological

investigations and excavations commenced in Singapore in January 1984, starting

with Fort Canning Hill. The Royal Dutch Shell Petroleum financially supported the

project at the time.

Dr.John N. Miksic, now holding his professorship at the Department of Southeast

Asian Studies, National University of Singapore, personally participated in nearly all

of the diggings in Singapore since 1984. Amongst these approved excavations, he was

in charge as the leader of the archaeology team for most of them. Unearthed materials

have accumulated over thirty years since the first systematic archaeological

investigation and excavation was conducted in Singapore. The majority of the

81

artefacts are presently stored in the Archaeology Laboratory, National University of

Singapore, and Archaeology Unit, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. With the

devoted activities by archaeologists and a cluster of archaeology enthusiasts, a big

portion of the artefacts has beencleaned and classified in the Archaeology Lab. On the

basis of the scientific recordings of the excavation process and the artefact assemblage,

Dr.Miksic was enabled to construct the archaeological history of Singapore (Miksic

2013). Because he has personally experienced the excavations and witnessed the

whole process, it is possible for him to faithfully and vividly narrate the stories of the

excavations. Without his dedication, many sites might have been destroyed or lost

during Singapore’s modernization process. Actually, quite a few excavations were

conducted in an urgent situation, right before or during the gaps in the construction

schedule.

The archaeological archievements made in Singapore are greatly significant

because no other single port city in Southeast Asia has been studied with such

systematic excavations so far. These valuable records reveal that Singapore serves as a very good sample for research on urbanization and seafaring trade relations.

In Dr.Miksic’s book, he comprehensively listed every meaningful archaeological activity. The chronology of the excavated sites in Singapore is as follows: Fort

Canning since 1984; Duxton Hill, Tanjong Pagar in 1989; Parliament House

Complex from November 1994 to January 1995; Empress Place in January and April to June 1998; Istana Kampung Gelam from 2000 to 2003; Court in 2000;

Bras Basah Park in 2001; Old Parliament House in 2002; Singapore Cricket Club in

82

April 2003; St. Andrew’s Cathedral from September 2003 to March 2004; Fort

Canning Spice Garden in 2010 (Miksic 2013: 224-225).

Among all the diggings so far, seven archaeological sites contain 14th century strata. The seven sites include Fort Canning site, Parliament HouseComplex site,

Empress Place site, Colombo Court site, Old Parliament House site, Singapore

Cricket Club site, and St Andrew’s Cathedral site. In the following section, these seven sites will be briefly reviewed in terms of their locations, excavation process, artefacts and features by chronological order.

A. Fort Canning Hill

One reason why Fort Canning was excavated as the very first archaeological site was because modern construction work threatened to disturb the hill at the moment.

More importantly, according to the former surface finds and observations, Fort

Canning was considered as a site probably containing rich archaeological remains and hence worthy of further investigations.

The preliminary archaeological investigation on Fort Canning confirmed the first excavation location at the southeast part of the hill near Hill Street Fire Station, around a trench about two meters wide and two meters deep.

There was a mound several meters away from the Keramat, which was covered with plants, rubbish and an old shrine. This mound was on a terrace a slightly higher than the Keramat. The excavations were conducted around the mound or in the lawn between the Keramat and the old Christian graveyard wall. There was another excavation site quite close to the service reservoir.

83

Professional staff from the National Museum also joined the archaeology team.

The Singapore government sent a group of National Servicemen as labour support.

Some foreign labourers were also hired. From January 18th to 28th, a total of eight pits

were dug. The duration of excavation was not equally allocated to all the eight

squares due to the rainy weather. Fortunately, the soil of these squares could be

divided into a few archaeological strata vertically, according to different colour and

texture. There were still quite some undisturbed layers from current urban

construction activities.

The excavations revealed that there were indeed a large number of original 14th

century strata in terms of the artefact inclusions, under the modern layers. However,

not all the eight squares have ancient layers. Some squares only contained modern

layers without old remains. Normally, the modern top few layers comprised pebbles,

roots, organic humus, and recent artificial products. For those squares with rich relics,

underneath the modern layers was the ancient layer containing the 14th century

artefacts. These artefacts included earthenware sherds, stoneware sherds, porcelain

sherds, metal pieces, glass products, Chinese coins etc. The result of the excavations

demonstrated that, the ancient relic stratification did not distribute evenly in the eight

squares. The relic stratification was basically dated back to the 14th century.

Thus, an initial conclusion can be drawn that Fort Canning had been occupied

with human activities in the 14th century. The date and provenance of the unearthed

artefacts were analyzed briefly. It can be determined that the majority of the stoneware and porcelain was made in China; only a few pieces were identified as

84

Southeast Asian products. However, the earthenware was locally made or imported from other places in Southeast Asia.

Excavations at the Fort Canning area were resumed in June 1984 and January

1985. There were two pits dug around the Keramat Iskandar Shah and five pits dug at the south end of Fort Canning Hill (Choo 1986). However, this excavation did not quite follow the modern archaeological ways by using proper methods or making scientific records. The excavation reports revealed numerous misinterpretations of the relic remains, as well as the failure to record the original position of some artefacts appropriately. Only three squares at the south western edge of the hill werebetter recorded with the artefacts (Miksic 2013: 229-230). Similar to the earlier excavations at Fort Canning, this project also yielded a great quantity of artefacts with a majority consisting of 14th century ceramics.

In November 1987, more excavations were conducted at Fort Canning, as part of an archaeological workshop series. The workshop also organized archaeological surveys around Singapore and its surrounding islands. During the survey, Kampung

Permatang yielded important relic finds, from older earthen ware to relatively recent colonial British products (Report of the Fourth Intra-ASEAN Archaeological and

Conservation Workshop 1987).

From October to November 1988, Dr.John N. Miksic then teaching at the

Department of History, National University of Singapore, took charge of another round of excavations at Fort Canning. This time, an extensive area was able to be excavated due to the strong support of many organizations and individuals, such as

85

the Foundation, the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Southeast Asian

Ceramic Society, and the Friends of the National Museum etc.

A trench of thirty meters long and two meters wide was dug along the slope between the and the Keramat. The excavation yielded a good quantity of

14th century artefacts. More importantly, 14th century stratum was revealed, although

the stratum did not appear the whole way in the trench.

In March 1990, excavations were conducted again. The year before, however, there were no excavationsat Fort Canning. Rescue excavations were conducted on the north end of the hill. In 1994, another rescue excavation was undertaken on the southern side of the hill. Thereafter, there were several small-scale excavations around

Fort Canning area. I was lucky to be offered a chance to join the excavation at Fort

Canning Spice Garden in the first half of 2010. Rainstorms interrupted the work occasionally, when the archaeology team had to stop working and waited under cover.

Heavy rain led to water ponding in low-lying areas and muddy ground. The excavation relied heavily on the team leader’s rich experiences and wits to cope with obscure stratum lines and complex contexts. The team members also demonstrated striking willpower and enthusiasm in continuously working on site, even though most

of them were volunteers.

B. Parliament House Complex

The archaeological excavations in Parliament House Complex (PHC) were

initiated due to the accidental discoveries of ceramics when modernization work was

conducted beneath the old Parliament House in 1989. The old Parliament House was

86

located along the bank of the Singapore River. It was built in the early 19th century.

The stabilization works for the building’s foundation recovered artefacts, which led to an emergency excavation by the Singapore History Museum. A great quantity of 14th

century artefacts was unearthed.

As for an extended area of Parliament House Complex, initial excavation was

undertaken near the corner of North Bridge Road and High Street. The excavation had

to be carried out as quickly as possible due to a limited time for construction

schedules. The excavation lasted about three months from November 1994 to January

1995, and revealed an intact 14th century stratum and a good quantity of relic remains.

The unearthed artefacts were unexpectedly of rich types. The density of artefacts in

the layer implied that it covered an area of more intensive and varied human activities

than that of Fort Canning.

C. Empress Place

The Empress Place Building is situated near the mouth of Singapore River. In

1989, underground modernization work between Empress Place Building and Victoria

Theatre revealed artefacts and an intact 14th century stratum on the construction

trenches. In 1998, Asian Civilization Museum was expanding to the area of Empress

Place Building, which enabled test excavations to be carried out around the building.

It was determined to conduct the work between the building and Singapore River. The

excavations started in January, and kept on in April. A long trench of forty five meters

length was dug. This site demonstrated complicated stratigraphic relations. Basically,

underneath the 19th century stratum was the 14th century layer.

87

D. Colombo Court

The Colombo Court site drew the archaeologists’ attention also due to modern

construction work. The site was not far away from Parliament House Complex.

Before construction began, a test excavation in July 2000 revealed stratum of similar

texture as PHC’s 14th century layer. Handicapped by the existing modern structure and

its foundation, the excavations could only be carried out around these obstacles. Two

sectors were chosen for excavation in November and December 2000. Even though

the excavations were made within a strictly limited time, some 14th century artefacts were also discovered.

E. Old Parliament House

The Old Parliament Building was located between the Parliament House

Complex and Empress Place Building. As early as 1989, 14th century artefacts were

found when the building was renovated. Construction workers found some artefacts.

However, this site had hardly been excavated and recorded in a proper way, due to the

renovation schedule. Only quite brief diggings were done in the garden. Because of

the somewhat rushed methodology, it was not feasible to record the original

information of the layers and artefacts. Nonetheless, important intact artefacts, such as

small-mouth jars (or “mercury jars”10), were discovered from the site.

10The term of “small-mouth jar” is directly translated from “小口瓶” commonly used by Chinese researchers; whilst “mercury jar” is frequently used by Southeast Asian archaeologists. The two terms refer to the same type of stoneware. The term of“small-mouth jar” emphasizes the shape of the ware’s mouth part. The term of “mercury jar” highlights the suppositional function of the ware. With regard to the usages of this type of stoneware, there have been different opinions, such as container for , sauce, rose water, mercury, and so on. A widely acknowledged view is that this kind of ware is used for containing wine, particularly rice wine in Southern Fujian during the Song to Yuan period. The discovery of two stone grinds dating to Southern Song period at a former government 88

F. Singapore Cricket Club

The chance for a test excavation on the Singapore Cricket Club derived from the archaeological community’s enthusiastic pursuit of the traces of old Singapore city.

Test excavations were allowed to be conducted on the playing fields. From April to

May 2003, the excavation revealed 14th century artefacts including rare finds of glass products and Chinese coins. The artefact assemblage also contained commonly found

14th century ceramics.

G. St. Andrew’s Cathedral

The Cathedral was built in the colonial period around the mid-19th century. The excavations at St. Andrew’s Cathedral were stimulated by modern construction work.

An archaeology team was formed as soon as the excavation plan was approved.

Luckily for this project, there was sufficient time that enabled the execution of a systematic research plan. The site was excavated with a full set of investigations and office site in 1999 became a circumstantial evidence of this view. One of the grinds is inscribed with “酒库造碾，绍兴二十年七月，一样二只公用 (literally means ‘grinds made by storeroom, July of Year 20, two identical pieces for public use’)”. Along with the two grinds, some fragments from small-mouth jars and other ceramic wares for daily use have also been found. The combination of these unearthed artefacts implies the ceramic wares, including the small-mouth jars, should be used for the liquor storeroom. Although the evidence is not direct, the small-mouth jars probably are used as liquor containers. Please refer to Xu Qingquan, Discussions on the date and usage of small-mouth ceramic bottles unearthed from Song ships, Maritime History Studies, 1983, No.1, pp.112-114 (许清泉： 《宋船出土的小口陶瓶年代和用途的探讨》，《海交史研究》，1983 年 ，第 1 期， 页 112-114); Zeng Pingsha, Chen Jianying, “Grinds made by liquor storeroom” and “small-mouth ceramic bottle” at Quanzhou of Southern Song Dynasty, Maritime History Studies, 2005, No.2, pp.113-116 (曾萍莎、陈 健鹰：《南宋泉州“酒库造碾”和“小口陶瓶”》，《海交史研究》，2005 年， 第 2 期， 页 113-116). It is believed the functions of small-mouth jar differ in varied contexts. For instance, remnants of lime have been found in fragments of this kind of jars in Singapore. It is quite reasonable that various substances could be filled in the jars. However, as for the original use of this kind of jars when shipping, containing mercury may take up a large proportion, given the special requirements for transporting mercury for overseas trade. The jars might be reused for other purposes afterward. Please refer to J. N. Miksic, Singapore and the of the Sea, 1300-1800, Singapore: NUS Press, 2013, p.314-321. 89

excavations, in terms of documents review, surface survey, tentative excavation and

full scale excavation.

The excavation was conducted from September 2003 to March 2004. The project area was more than two hundred square meters. It basically covered the construction area. The top layer turned out to contain a good deal of recent colonial-period relics of varied kinds. The lower layers contained ample artefacts of pre-colonial period. One of the most exciting discoveries consisted of intact Chinese stoneware objects, which were the very first intact artefacts within clear stratigraphic context found during the archaeological excavation process in Singapore. As for the artefact assemblage, this site yielded rich types of ceramics of a relatively long time span.

So far, the excavations on St. Andrew’s Cathedral site yielded the largest amount of ceramic assemblage, compared to other archaeological sites.

By conducting systematic work at the seven main sites, all the materials accumulated from the excavations in Singapore have enabled a comprehensive study to reconstruct the history of Singapore. Comparative studies are also available with other contemporary port cities along the maritime silk routes.

3.2 Materials from southeast China and Trowulan

In China, archaeology work has developed and materials accumulated especially since new China was established. In this section, a general overview of the excavation achievements in Southeast China will be provided. National archaeological institutes were in charge of all the investigations and excavations, after the approval by the

90

Cultural Relics Bureau.

This paper will only focus on archaeological discoveries dating back to the Yuan

and Ming Dynasties in three provinces in Southeast China. The archaeological

activities in these provinces will be described in detail respectively in Chapter 4. The

three provinces include Zhejiang, Fujian, and Jiangxi. Guangdong Province will be

excluded from comparison and discussion, although Guangdong Province along the

sea coast of south China was and still is an important region where mass export

ceramics are produced.

By going through the publications related to the investigations and excavations

by the Chinese archaeology institutes, it seems that there were remains of ceramic

sites dating from the all through to the Qing Dynasty. According to official data accumulated by early 1990s, there had been 75 Yuan kiln sites

found in places of Raoping (饶平), Haikang (海康), (罗定), Fogang (佛岗),

Gaozhou (高州), (深圳), Xinfeng (新丰), Suixi (遂溪), Lianjiang (廉江), and so on. There had been 241 Ming kiln sites found in places of (潮州),

Raoping (饶平), Puning (普宁), Chaoyang (潮阳), Chenghai (澄海), Nan’ (南澳),

Huilai (惠来), Jiexi (揭西), Huiyang (惠阳), (惠州), Boluo (博罗), Zijin (紫

金), Heyuan (河源), Huidong (惠东), Haifeng (海丰), Lufeng (陆丰), Lianping (连

平), Heping (和平), (佛山), Sanshui (三水), (中山), Taishan (台

山), Yangchun (阳春), Kaiping (开平), Wuchuan (吴川), Haikang (海康), Lianjiang

(廉江), Suixi (遂溪), Xinxing (新兴), Shixing (始兴), (南雄), Lianping (连

平), Wengyuan (翁源), Panyu (番禺), (茂名), Huazhou (化州),

91

(高州), Meixian (梅县), Dabu (大埔), Jiaoling (蕉岭), Pingyuan (平远), Fengshun

(丰顺), Wuhua (五华), and so on (Zeng Guangyi 1991: 107).

However, these statistical data were obtained on the basis of extensive surveys. In fact, only a small portion of them have been excavated. The published surveys and excavations on Yuan and Ming kilns are summarized as follows (Table 3.2.1):

Tab le 3.2.1 Published surveys and excavations on Guangdong kilns of Yuan and Ming period

Time Institute Location Date Finds

1956 Guangdong Cultural Boluo Mid to late Test excavation on one

Relics Management Jiaodongshan (博 Ming kiln

Board 罗角洞山) Dynasty Whitish wares, blue and

white wares

Bowl, dish, cup, vase

Kiln tools

1960 Guangdong Cultural Huiyang Xin’an Ming Excavation on two kilns

Relics Management Sancun Village Dynasty or Greenish wares, greyish

Board; History (惠阳新安三村) earlier wares, yellowish wares,

Department of (Zeng Guangyi whitish wares

South China Normal 1964: 196-199) Bowl, cup, plate, basin,

College tile etc

Kiln tools

92

1960 Guangdong Cultural Huiyang Ming Survey on three kiln

Relics Management Baimashan (惠阳 Dynasty or complexes

Board; History 白马山) (Zeng earlier Greenish wares, greyish

Department of Guangyi 1962: wares, yellowish wares

South China Normal 414-415, plate 9) Bowl, dish, stem cup, cup

College Kiln tools

1963 Guangdong Cultural Jieyang Hepozhen Mid to late Survey on three kilns

Relics Management Lingxiashan ( 揭 Ming Qingbai wares, greyish

Board; Jieyang 阳河婆镇岭下山) Dynasty wares, whitish wares, blue

Cultural Affairs and white wares

Bureau Bowl, dish, cup, vase, lid

Kiln tools

1964 Guangdong Cultural Chengmai Yuan Survey on five kiln

Relics Management Shankou Village Dynasty complexes

Board; (澄迈山口公社) Greenish wares, greyish

ChengmaiCultural wares, black wares,

Affairs Bureau yellowish black ware, blue

and white wares

Bowl, dish, cup, ewer,

basin

Kiln tools

1986 Guangdong Gongyixu ( 公益 Excavation on two kilns

93

Provincial Museum 圩), Tutangxu (土 Yuan Bowl, dish, plate, incense

etc 塘圩) (Zeng Dynasty burner, vase, ewer etc

Guangyi 1991: Kiln tools

107)

There are indeed several pieces of Yuan Dynasty porcelain found in dated tombs.

For example, intact porcelain wares were found in a Zhiyuan Year 3 (1266 C.E.) tomb.

Now it is commonly believed that during the Yuan dynasty, the ceramic industry in Guangdong was shrinking. One of the main reasons might be due to warfare.

In the Ming Dynasty, the ceramic production expanded again. But it cannot be deduced whether the industry had recovered in the early Ming period or late 14th

century.

It is not surprising to see why the research focus has always been shifted to the

kilns active in the Song Dynasty. The quality and quantity of the products made in these kilns are considered much better than other periods. The kiln complexes were of bigger scale and much more in number. During the Song Dynasty, the Guangdong ceramic industry reached its peak. The Guangzhou Xicun kiln complex is a famous example (Guangzhou Cultural Relics Management Board and Museum of The

Chinese University of Hong Kong 1987). Another representative example is the

Chaozhou kiln complexes which has aroused such great interest that repeated surveys

and excavations have been conducted in this district.

94

Since Chaozhou kiln complexes were discovered by the Guangdong Cultural

Relics Management Board in 1954, the sent professionals to do two more surveys respectively in 1954 and 1956. The investigators collected many ceramic sherds from the surface. By comparison, it was believed the majority were made in the Song Dynasty, more specifically the Northern Song. Only a few coarse pieces were estimated to be Yuan products (Li Huibing 1979: 440-444, 411).

More surveys have been conducted by Guangdong Provincial Museum since. In

1980, Guangdong Provincial Museum and Chaozhou Cultural Affairs Bureau carried out a rescue excavation in the middle part of Bijiashan (笔架山), during which three

Song Dynasty kilns were recovered (Guangdong Provincial Museum 1981).

The overseas discoveries seemingly verify the result of local investigations and excavations. So far, a great amount of Northern Song period Guangdong wares have been discovered or unearthed from overseas countries covering a wide area from

Japan in Far East Asia all the way west to Egypt in Africa. There have been publications introducing these amazing discoveries in their native languages (Wong

Wai Yee 2004b: 109-118, 83). Particularly in Southeast Asia, the known sites scatter in Thailand, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The Xicun wares of

Song Dynasty are quite commonly found in Southeast Asian sites. It could be said that

Guangdong kilns were thriving largely by benefitting from active export trade. A big portion of the kilns were producing specifically for overseas trade but not for the domestic market (Su Jilang 1997: 125-172).

However, Guangdong wares of the Southern Song and Yuan period were rarely

95 reported to have any existence in Southeast Asia. It seems that the overseas market had a new trend for Chinese ceramics. Products made in Zhejiang, Fujian and Jiangxi

Provinces constituted the biggest share (Wong Wai Yee 2004a: 105-108). Scholars have tried to figure out the reasons why Guangdong wares shrank in the overseas market. To answer this question, some scholars have approached from the perspective of migration. Since the Southern Song court set up the Bureau for Foreign Shipping in

Quanzhou, many Quanzhou merchants and craftsmen who had worked in Guangdong returned to their home province. They willingly devoted their capital and craftsmanship to their home town (Ho Chuimei 1992: 1-19). This could be a good reason explaining why Quanzhou port thrived while Guangzhou port was declining in the Southern Song Dynasty.

In fact, the Chinese ceramics unearthed from Singapore include a very big amount of stoneware. The texture of these stoneware objects is much different from that of porcelain and earthenware. The firing temperature of the paste is normally lower than porcelain, at around 1100 degrees centigrade or above. The vitrification level of the paste is not as high as porcelain. But it is much harder and more solid than earthenware. Most of thestonewares are partially glazed on the exterior surface. The glaze is always thin. The glaze colour is either yellowish or greenish. Local archaeologists have done some basic classification, which placed them into two major categories: brittle and buff (Miksic 2006a: 335-346). Initially this kind of stoneware was inferred to be Guangdong products after an earlier classification method was conducted by Eine Moore, a curator from the Museum. From the 1950s to

96

1960s, Eine Moore helped to classify the Chinese ceramics unearthed from Sarawak.

She put these wares into one category and claimed that they were made in Guangdong

kilns (Moore 1970: 1-78). However, the provenance of the stoneware is still a pending

issue. So far, nochemical component test has yet been performed on stoneware, so no

result from chemical analysis could be used for analysis. Singapore archaeologists

have not given any conclusion about the kilns from which the sherds in Singapore

originated. But research has been ongoing with regard to this issue. A preliminary

conjecture is that the stoneware assemblage might be a mixture of Guangdong wares

and Fujian wares (Wong Wai Yee 2011: 80-113). Chinese archaeologists have been

invited to Singapore for academic communication’s purpose constantly. Some of them

have visited the Archaeology Lab, now located on Kent Ridge Road. The storage of

recently unearthed ceramics was shown to ceramic experts. It is pointed out that some

of the stoneware resembling those unearthed from Cizao (磁灶) kiln sites. (Private

communication with Mr. Li Jian’an)

In this paper, the stoneware is not going to be involved as the main thread.

Moreover, there is little Guangdong porcelain identified from the ceramic assemblage.

Therefore, the 14th century Guangdong kiln materials will not be discussed much in

the following sections.

Archaeology work has been carried out in Trowulan since the colonial period.

Chapter 1.5 has provided a concise introduction of the ceramic assemblage and

Chapter 2.2.4 a brief history of surveys and excavations conducted in Trowulan. The artefacts collected by the National Research Centre for Archaeology are still traceable

97

in warehouses. They are first hand resources for researchers. Publications

systematically introducing the ceramics are available as second hand resources.

(Dupoizat and Harkantiningsih 2007) Moreover, personal collections serve as useful

supplementary sources, such as the donations of blue and white porcelain sherds to

NUS and ACM in 2005. (Miksic and Kamei Meitoku 2010) Although these sherds are not stratified materials, they are still meaningful to a certain degree in terms of dating the site and revealing the kingdom’s interactions with overseas countries.

98

Chapter 4: Comparison between Ceramics Unearthed from Singapore and

China in the 14th century

4.1 Previous studies on ceramics unearthed from Singapore

Archaeology work began in Singapore in 1984. In 1985, the official report of the

first excavation was published by the National Museum (Miksic 1985). On the basis

of preliminary analysis of artefacts of different materials and historical documents, the

report discussed the date and nature of early settlement in Singapore.

In the next 30 years, further excavations took place at Fort Canning and the other sites in Singapore. Researchers have conducted some studies of specific categories of artefacts. For instance, organic materials unearthed from Parliament House Complex have been analyzed by Barbara Lewis (Lewis 1996). Shah Alam Mohd Zaini focused on local metal, mainly copper and iron, manufacturing (Shah Alam Zaini 1997). The glass bead research with high-tech analysis results to the conclusion that the vast majority of the beads were imported from China (Miksic 1994: 31-46).

In terms of ceramics, specific research on earthenware (Lim Tse Siang 2012), stoneware (Heng 2004; Ang Si 2009; Won g Wai Yee 2011) and porcelain based on personal classification in the laboratory have been conducted. As a local archaeologist mainly in charge of the excavations, Dr.Miksic identified types of

Chinese porcelain and stoneware, as well as imports from Thailand, Vietnam, Sri

Lanka, and India among the artefacts unearthed from Singapore and the nearby Riau

Islands. (Miksic 1994: 229-250) He also wrote about the issue of reconstructing the

99

relations between Southeast Asia and China, by using ceramics as a major trade

commodity (Miksic 2009: 70-99). The relationship between Chinese ceramics and the formation of early Southeast Asian is discussed as well (Miksic 2006b:

147-153).

The origins of greenwares unearthed from Singapore have also drawn the attention of researchers. Recent experimental tests using EDXRF seem to confirm the previous suspicion that these artefacts may come from three regions, that is Zhejiang

Province, Fujian Province and Guangdong Province (Stulemeijer 2011). The tests conducted in Singapore, were however, unable to yield conclusions about the provenances of individual sherds with a high level of confidence. Local researchers are also interested in the studies of Chinese porcelain unearthed from Singapore.

Discussion with regard to the Chinese blue and white wares has been conducted by a local museum curator (Foo Su Ling 2005).

Many Chinese archaeologists started to visit Singapore in the 1990s, some of

whom are experts on Chinese ceramics. They utilized their expertise to publish

articles in Chinese journals and books based on the research outcomes of their own

classification in Singapore. Li Zhiyan generally discussed the possible provenances of

different kinds of porcelain, mainly the Chinese porcelain unearthed from the Fort

Canning site. By comparing samples of Chinese porcelain excavated in Singapore

with the chronology based on archaeological findings in China and other countries, he

concluded that majority of the Chinese ceramics were made in the late Yuan Dynasty

(Li Zhiyan 2000: 217-228). Dr.Qin Dashu identified several pieces of Longquan Guan

100

type wares from the artefact assemblage of Fort Canning, the estimated political and

religious center of ancient Singapore (Qin Dashu and Shi Wenbo 2005: 28-35).

4.2 Chronology of Chinese ceramics in the 14thcentury

4.2.1 Ceramics produced in kilns in Zhejiang Province

Longquan porcelain wares comprise the largest portion of the unearthed Chinese

ceramics in the 14th century Southeast Asian sites. Archaeological work has been conducted quite early on Longquan kilns. Combined with the discoveries in tombs and hoards, the chronology of Longquan porcelain has been tentatively established.

This section will explicitly introduce the investigations and excavations of Longquan

kiln complexes so far.

Longquan porcelain is one type of porcelain which has drawn researchers’

attention since the early phase of study on glazed Chinese pottery. If we look over

literati’s notes, we discover recordings on Longquan county and Longquan porcelain

in the Southern Song Dynasty. Zhuang Chuo (庄绰) mentions in his notes “Longquan

County in has many good trees...celadon wares are produced and called

‘Mise’. The porcelain tributes paid (to the central court) by the Qian Family probably came from this place.”11Zhuang Chuo was an official who had served both the

Northern Song and Southern Song courts. His notes are considered to be relatively

11“处州龙泉县多佳树，……又出青瓷器，谓之‘秘色’，钱氏所贡，盖取于此。”引自庄绰撰， 萧鲁阳点校，《鸡肋编》，卷上“龙泉佳树与秘色瓷”，北京：中华书局，1983 年， 页 5。Quoted from Zhuang Chuo, Jileibian, “Good trees and Mise porcelain in Longquan” item, Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company, 1983, p.5. 101

reliable, because he was a contemporary author and an eyewitness to the situations he described. This item in his notes has been frequently quoted by researchers. However, archaeologists now still have problems deciphering the relations between “Mise (秘

色)” porcelain and Longquan wares. Although this item is the earliest recording about

Longquan celadon, it is still quite bewildered.

Zhao Yanwei (赵彦卫) of the Southern Song Dynasty wrote that, “People say that

celadon was produced following King Li’s order. It is called ‘Mise’. Some others say

it was produced by King Qian’s order. The celadon now produced in the Longxi area

of the Chu produce a colour of Fenqing (pinkish green). The celadon produced in the

Yue area has a colour of artemisia.”12In this item, Longxi should mean Longquan, while Chu refers to Chouzhou. If we take “Mise” as a term connected to a specific glaze colour, the two items mentioned above would make sense.

However, the definition of “Mise” has never been definitely determined. The word “Mise” is related to porcelain first seen in a late Tang Dynasty poem titled

“Mise Porcelain” by Lu Guimeng. Kiln is the only kiln mentioned in the context of the poem. Therefore, it is safe to say, “Mise” porcelain refers to a kind of Yue wares in this poem.

In the Song Dynasty, however, it seems that the word “Mise” was interpreted in various ways. The opinions of the Chinese literati contradicted each other. Some consider the meaning “Mise” as a “secret and sacred colour” related to the royal

12“青瓷器，皆云出自李王，号秘色，又曰出钱王。今处之龙溪者，色粉青。越乃艾色。”引自 赵彦卫，《云麓漫钞》，《文渊阁四库全书·子部》，影印本，新北：台湾商务印书馆，1983 年，页 235。Quoted from Zhao Yanwei, “Yunlu Manchao”, “Siku Quanshu”series, Philosophers Department, Wenyuange Version, Photocopy, Xinbei: The Commercial Press, 1983, P.235. 102

family. This kind of explanation emphasises the literal meaning of “Mise”.

Meanwhile, some other literati explained “Mise” as “green coloured Yue porcelain” or

“green coloured porcelain”. Mise porcelain was not clearly stated in historical accounts.

Archaeology finds have shed some light on the issue of what is “Mise” porcelain.

The underground palace of revealed a batch of precious artefacts of

Tang Dynasty in 1987, when the temple partially collapsed. The tablet with tally inscriptions has words of “porcelain Mise (瓷秘色)”, which should refer to the Yue green wares conserved in the palace. However, the issue is that the recorded and actual number of green wares did not match.

It is commonly perceived that the written recordings of Longquan celadon could

be found in the notes of no earlier than the Southern Song Dynasty. Longquan celadon

is more frequently mentioned in later historical documents. However, these recordings

have not introduced comprehensively and much detailed about Longquan porcelain

and the kilns. At least, no historical documents have been found to have clearly stated when the Longquan kilns began.

Longquan celadon attracted the interest of scholars and collectors in quite early times. Since the terminal Qing Dynasty, due to high demand from foreign collectors, domestic looting activities on Longquan kiln sites began to be overwhelming.

Modern archaeological survey activities only started in the Longquan area in the

1930s, when the well-known ceramic expert Chen Wanli (陈万里) went to investigate

Longquan kiln sites. His eight visits to Longquan kilns has become a very famous

103

story (Chen Wanli 1997).

After 1949, formal archaeology work began to be conducted in a wide area.

Many surveys have now been conducted. Based on these surveys, systematic excavations, test excavations and salvage excavations have been carried out. In the following section, archaeological activities and achievements will be summarized briefly.

The word “Longquan Porcelain” (龙泉瓷器) was first used and defined as a formal name for a porcelain category made bya kiln complex containing many kiln complexes in the 1930s, after plenty of surveys conducted by the Zhejiang Cultural

Relics Management Board. Numerous kiln sites were discovered in Longquan (龙泉)

County, (丽水) County, Yunhe (云和) County, Suichang (遂昌) County and

Yongjia (永嘉) County etc. The porcelain remains found from these kiln complexes bear some similar features. They could be categorized into the same kiln system products. Amongst these , Longquan County has the densest and most representative kiln complexes. Therefore, the porcelain produced in the kiln complexes of several counties is generally called the “Longquan Porcelain”. During the Yuan period, the huge demand from overseas market stimulated the production quantity, hence the kiln complexes expanded from the initial core area to neighbouring counties.

In 1957, systematic surveys in the area of Longquan County Dayao (大窑)

Village, Xikou (溪口) Village and Qingyuan (庆元) County were conducted. In 1958, surveys were done in the Longquan Eastern Area (龙泉东区, referring to an area

104

between Longquan County and Yunhe County) and Jinshuitan of the Yunhe County

(云和县紧水滩). In 1959, surveys were done in Lishui (丽水) County (Mou

Yongkang 1999: 84-93).

In 1960, the Zhejiang Cultural Relics Management Board organized excavations

in Longquan County Dayao Village kiln complex (Zhu Boqian 1989: 38-67) and

Jincun Village kiln complex (Zhu Boqian and Wang Shilun 1963: 27-40). The

Zhejiang Cultural Relics Management Board organized surveys and test excavations

on Xikou Village kiln complex. Xikou Village is located south of Longquan County.

There are Qin Brook (秦溪) and Duntou Brook (墩头溪), which are located upstream

of (瓯江). The kiln sites are located on both banks of the Duntou Brook.

According to the surveys, there are kilns lasting from Five Dynasties to the Yuan or

Ming Dynasty, kilns lasting from Southern Song to Yuan or Ming Dynasty, and kilns

lasting around the Yuan and Ming Dynasties. Porcelain sherds have been collected and dated. They are not classified and reported by single kiln site, but on the basis of an overall observation. In terms of the Yuan and Ming period wares, they are normally

applied with glaze of dark greenish colour. The shapes include bowl, vase, ewer, and

stem cup (Jin Zuming 1962: 535-538, plate 9).

From the mid-1970s to 1983, repeated surveys and excavations were carried out

in Longquan Eastern Area by Jinshuitan archaeology team, mainly as salvage projects.

A new reservoir was about to be established in this area. Many kilns were located

within the area to be affected according to the blueprint (Zhejiang Provincial Cultural

Relics and Archaeology Institute2005). There were quite a few excavations organized

105

by this provisional archaeology team which was a combination of staff working

respectively in The Archaeology Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,

Palace Museum, National Museum of China, , and Zhejiang

Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute. For example, they conducted formal

excavations on kiln sites in Shangyaner Village of Longquan Eastern Area in 1979 (Li

Zuozhi, Li Zhiyan and Yu Wenrong1986: 43-72). Excavations were also undertaken in

Longquan (山头) kiln sites in 1979 (Li Zhiyan 1981: 36-42). Later examples

included the diggings in an area between Anfu Village (安福村) and Anfukou Village

(安福口村) (Zhejiang Working Group from Institute of Archaeology and Chinese

Academy of Social Sciences1981: 504-510, plate 9-12), an area between Shantou (山

头) and Dabai’an (大白岸) (Jinshuitan Project Archaeology Team of Zhejiang Group

1981: 130-166), and Anrenkou (安仁口) Village (Department of Archaeology of

Shanghai Museum 1986: 102-132). From 1982 to 1983, excavations were conducted

in the Longquan County Linchang (林场) kiln complex.

In 2006, excavations were carried out in Longquan County Dayao Fengdongyan

(枫洞岩) kiln complex. The excavations found clear strata of Yuan to mid Ming period. There were abundant porcelain sherds unearthed. After the excavations, the institutes concerned organized an important colloquium, in which ceramic experts were invited. They proposed many interesting points of view. The colloquium mainly focused on the dating of the unearthed kilns, the features of the porcelain sherds, as well as the targeted customers.

The excavation achievements demonstrated that Longquan system porcelain was

106 still mass produced during the Ming period, which contradicted the previous point of view according to which Longquan system porcelain production declined in the Ming

Dynasty.

Distinctive characteristics of the Longquan porcelain made in the late Yuan and early Ming Dynasty include thick paste, thick glaze, olive greenish colour, giant body shape, and elaborate pattern decoration.

The topic of “Guan type” wares was also discussed. It was commonly believed that Longquan kilns were making products for the court in the late Yuan and early

Ming period. However, it was not determined whether there were kilns specifically producing for the royal family or the court (Shen Yueming, Qin Dashu and Shi Wenbo

2007: 93-96).

The above is a brief summary of the archaeological activities conducted in

Longquan system kiln sites. These activities enabled archaeologists to establish a general chronology of the kiln complexes. The statra were usally dated by comparing with those artefacts unearthed from contexts with clear dates. Indeed, by the 1960s, repeated surveys had already enabled archaeologists to roughly pinpoint the locations of kiln complexes mainly functioning during theYuan Dynasty.

In Longquan County, the Yuan kiln complex locations include Dayao (大窑),

Zhukou (竹口), Fengtang (枫堂), Wutongkou (梧桐口), Xiaobai’an (小白岸),

Yangmeiling (杨梅岭), Shanshikeng (山石坑), Dawangyu (大王屿), Daotai (道太),

Putaoyang (葡萄垟), Qianlai (前赖), Anfukou (安福口), Wanghu (王湖), Anfu (安福),

Ma’ao (马岙), Lingjiao (岭脚), Daqi (大琪), (丁村), Yuankou (源口),

107

Wangzhuang (王庄), etc. In Yunhe County, the Yuan kiln complex locations include

Chishibu (赤石埠). In Lishui County, the Yuan kiln complex locations include

(规溪), (宝定), Gaoxi (高溪), etc. In , the Yuan kiln complex

locations include Jiang’ao (蒋岙), Zhutu (朱塗), etc. According to the data, there are entirely more than one hundred and fifty kiln complexes of Yuan period.

Approximately two out of third of them are located along the banks of Ou River (瓯

江) and Songxi Brook (松溪). (Zhu Boqian and Wang Shilun 1963: 27-40) The locations of the kiln complexes may suggest the transportation of products heavily

relied on waterways to the contemporary ports, such as Quanzhou and Wenzhou, for

further transportatioin to both domestic and overseas markets (The Chinese Ceramic

Society 1982: 336).

So far, the published excavation reports of kiln sites in the Longquan Eastern

Area and Dayao Village provide quite useful materials for comparisons with those discoveries of Chinese ceramics in 14th century Southeast Asia, including origin and

date, because these materials unearthed in China could always be traced back to clear strata.

4.2.2 Ceramics produced in kilns in Fujian Province

Definition of white ceramics

In the first place, the standard method by which Chinese ceramics are classified needs to be clarified. Under normal circumstances, Chinese ceramics are classified

108 primarily on the basis of the color of the glaze into different categories, including celadon, white wares, Qingbai wares and black wares. However, as far as I am concerned, so far there are no standardized principles followed by all of the ceramic researchers to precisely determine the many possible shades of the glaze’s hues. The

Munsell chart commonly used for earthenware ceramics in the Americas is not used in

China or by foreigners working on Chinese porcelain or stoneware. In current studies, researchers (mainly Chinese, but also non-Chinese who work on Chinese wares) often classify ceramics based on their own criteria which are derived directly from their particular background and research agenda, rather than attempting to formulate a universal system with objectively applicable criteria for denoting types by color. This situation results in many confusions and divergences, which are demonstrated in the studies on Fujian ceramics.

There are many kilns scattered in different areas of Fujian Province. The ceramics produced in different kilns and even within the same kiln complexes show great varieties in terms of the raw materials and craftsmanship. By visual observation, it is possible to identify intermediate glaze colors; for example “white” glaze can be subdivided into such groups as transparent white, bluish white, grayish white, greenish white, or creamy white; similarly, green can be subdivided into such colors as greenish yellow, bluish green, brownish green, olive green, etc. It is difficult to achieve consenses between different investigators where the line is which separates these color categories into firmly bounded, mutually exclusive types (Li Jian’an

2009:13). In this thesis, I will try to label the ceramics of neutral colors according to

109

their provenance kiln.

Fujian ceramic wares show great variations in different parts of the province. The

export products made in northern Fujian are mainly produced to meet the demand of

the northeast Asian market. The products made in south Fujian were mainly produced

for export southeastward. This chapter will mainly focus on the materials of south

Fujian ceramic wares.

South Fujian kilns demonstrate diversified ceramic production systems. Dr.Meng

Yuanzhao from Peking University has intensively studied Southern Fujian ceramics

for his PhD thesis. He defined southern Fujian area as a precisely bounded geographic

unit, which contains Quanzhou district and district.13According to his

criteria, the ceramic industriesof Fujian can be generally divided into three relatively separate producing areas, each with its own centre: the Quanzhou coastal area, the inland area centered in Quanzhou, and the inland area centered in Zhangzhou area,in terms of both geographical environment and ceramic production system. (Meng

2009:35) The Quanzhou coastal area is located along the midstream and downstream sectors of the , not far away from the estuary to the sea. The Quanzhou inland area is a mountainous region which includes Anxi, Yongchun, and Dehua counties. The Zhangzhou inland area is situated mainly along the Jiulong River. These ceramic production systems developed relatively independently, each with its own specific features, based on the archaeological analysis of the relics left in kiln sites.

13包括泉州、晋江、南安、惠安、永春、安溪、德化、厦门、同安、漳州、龙海、平和、南靖、 诏安、漳浦、华安、长泰、云霄、东山等。 Including Quanzhou, Jinjiang, Nan’an, ’an, Yongchun, Anxi, Dehua, , ’an, Zhangzhou, Longhai, Pinghe, Nanjing, Zhao’an, Zhangpu, Hua’an, Changtai, Yunxiao, Dongshan etc. 110

The relics of Quanzhou coastal area’s ceramic industry are scattered in Quanzhou,

Jinjiang, Hui’an, Nan’an, Xiamen, and Tong’an, among which the Jinjiang Cizao area

and Nan’an Nankeng area have the densest kilns. During the Yuan Dynasty, Cizao

kiln complex, Nan’an kiln complex and Tong’an kiln complex were the most

representative kiln systems.

The Quanzhou coastal area is best represented by the Cizao kiln complex,

Nankeng kiln complex and Anxi kiln complex. The major ceramic categories of the

Quanzhou coastal area include green wares, black wares, qingbai wares, lead-glazed green wares, lead-glazed yellow wares, and plain wares. The main shapes include bowls, plates, dishes, cups, basins, boxes, jars, lamps, ewers, vases etc.

The relics of the Quanzhou inland area’s ceramic industry are scattered in Dehua,

Yongchun, and Anxi, among which the Dehua and Anxi areas, especially Dehua, have the densest kilns. During the Yuan Dynasty, the scale of kiln complexes expanded considerably. The densest areas are Xunzhong, Sanban, Gaide in Dehua and Kuidou in Anxi.

In the Quanzhou inland area, Dehua kiln complex is the most representative kiln system. The major ceramic categories of the Quanzhou inland area include qingbai wares, white wares14 and black wares. The main shapes include bowls, plates, dishes,

14It is not easy to differentiate qingbai wares from white wares produced in the Quanzhou inland area merely by visual observation. There has been research on the difference in the chemical components of the two kiln complexes. Most of the Qingbai wares have high-calcium glaze, while most of the white wares have medium-calcium glaze or low-calcium glaze. E.g. 张福康，张浦生，何文权，熊樱菲， 《白瓷和青白瓷》，《中国古代白瓷国际学术研讨会论文集》，上海博物馆编，上海：上海书画 出版社，2005 年，页 576-584。Zhang , Zhang Pusheng, He Wenquan, XiongYingfei, White Ceramics and Qingbai Ceramics, International Symposium on Ancient Chinese White Ceramics, Shanghai Museum ed, Shanghai: Shanghai Shuhua Chuban She, 2005, pp.576-584. 111

cups, basins, washers, boxes, jars, lamps, ewers, vass/ kendi etc.

Characteristics of southern Fujian kiln complexes during the Yuan Dynasty

Yuan kiln complexes mostly inherited late Southern Song Dynasty’s production structure, but the total numberof kilns had diminished. The main kiln complex sites included:

Hui’an Yincuowei; Quanzhou Dongmen; Jinjiang Cizao Tuwei’an, Tongzishan,

Zhizhushan; Nan’an Dongtian Nankeng Daba’an, Dachanglun, Tulonghou,

Dagonghou, Dingnanpu, Niulugou, Qiangziling, Wuba, Gaoshan; Xiamen Xinglin

Dongyao, Zhouyao; Tong’an Tingxi around the Quanzhou coastal area.

Anxi Longmen, Kuidou, Hushang; Yongchun Penglai, Jindou, Longshan; Dehua

Gaide Houlongzi, Wanyangkeng Daban, Longxun Shipailing, Houyao, Gongposhan,

Qian’ou, Qudougong, Jiabeishan, Xunzhong Chuxi, Gonghou, Sanban Shangliao,

Qiaonei, Neiban, Dongping, Quidou Wanyao around the Quanzhou inland area.

Zhangpu Zhushushan, Nanmenkeng, Xiandong, Chitu, Shizhai, Wuyuan; Hua’an

Jibeixia; Changtai Wangaishan around the Zhangzhou area.

In sum, the number of kiln complexes during the Yuan and early Ming periods had diminished compared to the previous period. Most of them were scattered in the inland area or “inner” coastal area.

Meng Yuanzhao has worked on the periodization of three independent kiln centers. In his perspective, the ceramic production in Quanzhou coastal area can be divided into four periods: early and mid-Northern Song period; late Northern Song to

112

early Southern Song period; mid- and late Southern Song period; and the Yuan period.

During the Yuan period, Cizao kilns started to produce black and white wares, white

wares, yellow wares, etc. During the Yuan period, Cizao kilns had diminished green

ware production. Instead, they began to produce black and white wares, white wares,

lead glazed green wares, lead glazed yellow wares, etc.

Ceramic production in the Quanzhou inland area can be divided into six periods: late Northern Song and early Southern Song period; mid- and late Southern Song period; Yuan period; early and mid Ming period; late Ming to early Qing period; and mid- and the late Qing period. The Yuan period is the fourth period. Three independent systems of wares can be distinguished according to color: Qingbai ceramics, white ceramics and blue and white ceramics in terms of glaze. Among the three, white ceramics were especially mass-produced in great quantity during the

Yuan period.

Development of south Fujian kiln complexes

The ceramic industry in Fujian Province has a cyclical history from thriving to

declining. During the mid- and late Southern Song period, the ceramic industry reached its peak. During the Yuan Dynasty, the ceramic production gradually began to decline, although partially this area developed the ceramic industry. During early

Ming period, the decline continued.

The main trend of south Fujian’s ceramic industry has been to move from the downstream to upstream areas along the , such as the Jin River, Jiulong River

113

etc. During the mid- and late Southern Song period, there were great quantities of

kilns in the coastal area of southern Fujian and the inland area of Quanzhou. During

the Yuan period, kiln complexes did not expand. But different kiln complexes

achieved various levels of progress, among which the Dehua kiln complex developed

most prominently.

By comparing with the artefact assemblage unearthed from Singapore, there are

mainly three Fujian kiln complexes involved, including the, Dehua Kiln Complex in

the inland area of Quanzhou,the Zhuangbian Kiln Complex in Putian, and Yi Kiln

Complex located in , Fuzhou area.

Dehua kiln complexes

It is difficult or impossible to identify depictions of Dehua ceramics in Song and

Yuan documents. In the later Ming Dynasty, Dehua ceramics were recorded very

briefly in both chronicles and the notes of literati.

The chronicles of provincial or county level often mention local handicraft

industries. Dehua ceramics is briefly mentioned in Bamin (Huang Zhongzhao

1987: 1322) 15and Quanzhou Fuzhi (Yang Siqian et al 1987: 268)16. It is recorded that

15“白磁器，出德化县。”引自黄仲昭，《弘治八闽通志》，卷二十六，明弘治四年（1491 年） 刊本，影印本，台北：台湾学生书局，1987 年，页 1322。 “White porcelain, made in .” Quoted from Huang Zhongzhao, Hongzhi Bamin Tongzhi, Vol. 26, Ming Dynasty Hongzhi Year 4 (1491 C.E.) Version, Photocopy, Taipei: Taiwan Studentbook Print, 1987, p.1322. 16“磁器，出晋江甆灶地方。又有色白、次于饶磁，出安溪崇善、龙兴、龙涓三里。又有白甆器 出德化程寺后山中，洁白可爱。”引自阳思谦修，《万历重修泉州府志》，卷三，明万历四十年 （1612 年）刊本，刘兆祐主编《中国史学丛书三编》（第四辑），台北：台湾学生书局，1987 年，页 268。 114 kilns in Dehua County are producing white ceramics.

As for literati’s notes, Chen Maoren (陈懋仁) wrote in Quannan Zazhi (《泉南杂

志》, literally means “notes about south Quanzhou”) “White ceramics made in Dehua

County, are those Boshan (incence burners) and Buddhist sold in the market...”17This record shows that white ceramic figurines were one of the major ceramic products of Dehua during the Ming period. Chen Maoren was born in

Zhejiang (嘉兴), but assigned to Fujian Quanzhou as a local official. He described detailed about Quanzhou’s lanscapes, ancient ruins, flora and fauna, and local stories occured at the time in Quannan Zazhi.

Chen Liu (陈浏), living in terminal Qing Dynasty, wrote Ya 《陶雅》( , literally means “Pottery Elegence”) which was initially named (《瓷学》, means

“Porcelain Studies”). Chen was ever a government official and lived in Beijing for more than twenty years. He developed an interest of collecting and appreciating exquisite porcelain wares. In the book, Chen introduced his experience on how to

“Porcelain, made in Jinjiang Cizao. There is a kind of porcelain of white colour, less qualified than Rao porcelain. They are made in Chongshan District, Longxing District and Longjuan District in . There is a kind of white porcelain. They are made in the back mountain of Chengsi Temple in Dehua County. (The colour of the products is) pure white and cute.”Quoted from Yang Siqian et al,“Wanli Chongxiu Quanzhou Fuzhi”, Vol. 3, Ming Dynasty Wanli Year 40 (1612 C.E.) Version, Liu Zhaoyou ed, Zhongguo Shixue Congshu Sanbian IV, Taipei: Taiwan Studentbook Print, 1987, p.268. 17“德化县白甆，即今市中博山佛像之类是也。其坯土产程寺后山中，穴而伐之，绠而出之...... 初似贵，今流播多，不甚重矣。” 引自陈懋仁，《泉南杂志》，明万历绣水沈氏刻宝颜堂秘笈 本，影印本，《四库全书存目丛书·史部》，第 247 册，济南：齐鲁书社，1996 年，页 841。 “White ceramics made in Dehua County, are those Boshan (incence burners) and Buddhist figurines sold in the market. Its paste is produced in the back mountain of Chengsi Temple. Burrow to get the earth. Collect the earth by buckets...... They seemed expensive at first. Now that there are many more in the market, they are not that expensive anymore. ” Quoted from Chen Maoren,“Quannan Zazhi”, Ming Dynasty Wanli Xiushui Shenshike Baoyantang Mijiben Version, Photocopy, “Siku Quanshu Cunmu”series, History Department, Book 247, Jinan: Qilu Press, 1996, p.841. 115 appreciate Chinese porcelain as aconnoisseur. This book gives relatively insightful views of the porcelain in terms of the kiln, shape, glaze, paste, decoration, inscription etc. As for Dehua products, Chen Liu mentioned that figurines were produced in Dehua (kilns) include both seated statuettes and standing statuettes, some of them with on the surface.18

Since the founding of the government of the People’s Republic of China, scientific archaeological work has been conducted nationwide. Archaeological investigations have been carried out within a wide area of Dehua kiln complexes, as seen in Table 4.2.2.1:

Table 4.2.2.1 Investigations and excavations of Dehua kiln complexes

Period Kiln Complexes Discoveries Regarding Dehua Ceramics

1954 Dongmen Kiln, Investigations in Kuidougong site, Houyao site,

Dehua Kiln Dongshangyao site, Zulonggong site. White ceramic

sherds, blue and white ceramic sherds discovered. (Song

Boyin 1954: 98-99)

1956 Wanyaoxiang Kiln, Investigations in Xinchang site, Qudougong site, Housou

Cizao Kiln, Tingxi site, Shipaige site etc. A majority of white ceramic sherds

18“观世音有彩画者，有建窑坐像、立像者，有素衣而蓝风兜者。”引自陈浏，《陶雅》，北京： 金城出版社，2011 年，页 215。 “Guanyin is presented in the forms of images with color paintings, Jian type seated or standing statuettes, images dressed with plain robe and blue cloak.”Quoted from Chen Liu, Tao Ya, Beijing: Gold Wall Press, 2011, p.215. Here the Jian type statuettes should refer to products made in Dehua but not Jian kilns. 116

Kiln, Dehua Kiln discovered. (Chen Wanli 1957: 56-59)

1963 Dehua Kiln Investigations in Qudougong site. White ceramic sherds,

qingbai ceramic sherds, blue and white ceramic sherds,

black glazed ceramic sherds discovered. Qudougong site

considered being active during Song Dynasty, Ming

Dynasty and Qing Dynasty. (Anthropology Museum of

Xiamen University 1965: 26-35)

1976 Dehua Kiln More than 100 kiln sites of Song to Qing kiln discovered.

(History Department of and Culture

Institute of Dehua County 1980: 37-58)

1976 Dehua Kiln Investigations in Yangmei site.(Yangmei Group of

Jinjiang Archaeology Survey Team 1980: 58-65)

1976 Dehua Kiln Excavations in Wanpinglun site and Qudougong site, 3

kiln relics of Northern Song, Southern Song and Yuan

Dynasties unearthed separately. Many ceramic sherds

discovered. (Archaeology Excavation Team for Ancient

Ceramic Kilns in Dehua 1979: 51-61; Mei Huaquan

1979: 7-9; Wang Zhenyong 1993: 88-94)

1976 Dehua Kiln Investigations in Tangtou site, Xiyang site, Shangyong

site, Sanban site etc. Many kiln sites of Song Dynasty to

117

Qing Dynasty discovered. (Fujian Jinjiang Archaeology

Survey Team 1980: 127-204)

2001 Dehua Kiln Salvage excavations in Jiabeishan site. 3 kiln relics

discovered. Many ceramic sherds of Yuan and Ming

period discovered. (Li Jian’an 2004: 26-32; Fujian

Provincial Museum, Culture Management Council of

Dehua County and Dehua Ceramic Museum 2006: 1-15)

2004 Dehua Kiln Excavations in Zulonggong site and Xingjiao site. 2 kiln

relics discovered. Many ceramic sherds of Yuan, Ming

and Qing period discovered.

On the basis of the unearthed materials, it has become possible to study Dehua

ceramics in terms of its paste, glaze, shapes, decoration, craftsmanship, dating, usages, and export issues etc (Song Boyin 1955: 55-71; Chen Wanli 1957:

56-59; Li Huibing 1979a: 66-70; Zeng 1979: 62-65; 1982: 245-262; 1990:

136-152). Since 1990s, research on specific issues has greatly improved, including issues of the dating and periodization, export, and craftsmanship etc. (Lin Zhonggan and Zhang ’ao 1992: 559-566; Ye Wencheng 2004: 1-9)

Zhuangbian kiln complexes

Zhuangbian kiln complexes are located in the modern Putian area. Publications

118

regarding the Zhuangbian kiln complexes are not many as those of Dehua. However, it has been acknowledged and investigated at quite an early period (Li Huibing 1979c).

Since the 1980s, local archaeologists conducted investigations repeatedly (Zhang

Zhongchun 1987, Ke Fengmei and Chen 1995). Surface surveys have yielded many ceramic samples.

4.2.3 Ceramics produced in kilns in Jingdezhen, Jiangxi Province

Jingdezhen porcelain wares have drawn the archaeologists’ attention for decades.This interest is ascribed to Jingdezhen’s achievement of producing ceramics of high quality in enormous quantities for centuries, and other rich cultural remains.

Although some of the kiln sites at Jingdezhen are heavily looted or destroyed, plentiful sites are still relatively well preserved. This time, more than 150 well preserved kiln sites within Jingdezhen district have been recorded (Jiang Jianxin 1991:

48).

Archaeological investigations have been carried out many times since 1950s in

Jingdezhen City and the surrounding districts. In the beginning, Chen Wanli from the

(Beijing) Palace Museum carried out a surface survey for Xianghu (湘湖) site, Hutian

(湖田) Site etc (Chen Wanli 1953: 82-87). Jingdezhen local archaeologists continue to carry out surveys and excavations in order to reveal the history of ceramic production in ancient times. Before the 1990s, abundant sites dating from the Five Dynasties to the Qing Dynasty had already been identified, mainly in the surrounding countryside which falls under the administration of Jingdezhen City. Among them, Hutian (湖田),

119

Tangxia (塘下), Nanshijie (南市街), Raonan (绕南), Yuyaochang, (御窑厂) and other kiln sites, were involved in producing ceramics during the Yuan Dynasty or a longer period including the Yuan Dynasty (Jiang Jianxin 1991: 44-50, 79). The Museum of

Jingdezhen Ceramics History carried out investigations and test excavations at the

Hutian kiln complex in the 1970s.They basically concluded that the whole Hutian kiln complex could have covered approximately four hundred thousand square meters.

Many smaller kiln sites constitute the whole Hutian kiln complex. The remains date from the period starting in the Five Dynasties and continue up to the Ming Dynasty.

Kiln remains of each dynasty were excavated. A relatively complete chronology of

Hutian products has been established according to cultural strata (Liu Xinyuan and

Baikun 1980: 39-49, plate 3-5). In 1999, a salvage excavation in Area H of Hutian kiln sitewas conducted by the Jiangxi Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and

Archaeology. Although a few upper lever cultural strata in Area H have been disturbed to a certain extent, there are still a lot of undisturbed strata with ample relics.

The excavation yielded a lot of Qingbai wares, Shufu type wares, black wares, and blue and white wares of the Yuan Dynasty, as well as some blue and white wares of the Ming Dynasty. Numerous kiln tools were also unearthed. This excavation provided scientific information which enabled investigators to establish a chronology of Hutian products from as early as the end of the Song Dynasty to the early Yuan

Dynasty (Jiangxi ProvincialCultural Relics and Archaeology Institute, and Exhibition

Museum of Jingdezhen Hutian Kilns 2000, 73-88, plate 6-8). Since then, frequent excavations have been carried out in Hutian kiln complexby the Jiangxi Provincial

120

Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute ( Jianwen and Xu Huafeng 2009: 80).

So far, a few more excavation reports or newsletters have been published, such as

excavations at Liujiawu (刘家坞) kiln site in 1999 (Xiao Fabiao, Xu Changqing and

Li Fang 2001: 6-14), and at the southern bank of the Nanhe River (南河南岸) kiln site in 2002 and 2003 (Xu Changqing and Yu Jiang’an2004: 48-59).

The local archaeologist Liu Xinyuan also found several more Yuan Dynasty kiln sites within the urban area of old Jingdezhen City, which include Luomaqiao (落马

桥), Zhushan (珠山), Zhongdukou (中渡口), Zengjianong (曾家弄), Fengjinglu (风景

路), etc. These sites were discovered accidentally during construction work. (Liu

Xinyuan 1995: 164-165) Huang Yunpeng and Zhen Li mentioned three more kiln sites located within Jingdezhen urban district: Xuejiawu (薛家坞), Yishucichang (艺术瓷

厂), and Yinshuachang (印刷厂). (Huang Yunpeng and Zhen Li ed, 1994)

Cao Jianwen has also done a lot of investigations and surface collection in

Jingdezhen urban area. In one publication, he mentioned more than ten kiln sites newly revealed during the decade beginning 2000 during construction work in the urban area. He mainly introduced six kiln sites: Xiaogangzui (小港嘴), Luomaqiao

( 落马桥), Diancichang-Liujianong ( 电瓷厂- 刘家弄 ), Daijianong ( 戴家弄),

Xiaohuangjiashangnong-Guihuanong (小黄家上弄-桂花弄), and Situli (四图里)

(Cao Jianwen and Xu Huafeng 2009: 78-88).

Since the 1990s, large-scaleurban renovation and construction work has been undertaken in the old town area, where many Yuan Dynasty kiln relics have been revealed. Unfortunately, due to many reasons, the local archaeology institutes have

121 not be able to preserve or conduct salvage excavations at those exposed kiln remains during construction;they were finally destroyed or looted. Therefore, a lot of relics have lost their original cultural context forever. Actually, some indigenous researchers have kept doing surveys individually for years, which enabled them to introduce some important kiln remains to the public (Cao Jianwen and Xu Huafeng 2009: 80). In the following section, I will briefly summarize basic information on Yuan kiln sites, including those where official excavations have not been conducted, according to information contained in several local researchers’ individual surveys and publications.

Hutian kiln complex is located near Hutian Village, about four kilometers away from Jingdezhen City. Unfortunately, some parts of the complex remains have been destroyed. The surviving relics of the whole complex cover approximately 400 thousand square meters. The collected ceramic sherds indicate that the history of this kiln complex lasts from the Five Dynasties to the Ming Dynasty. At this site, there are green wares, white wares of the Five Dynasties, Qingbai wares and black wares of the

Song Dynasty, Qingbai wares, Shufu wares, black wares, blue and white wares of the

Yuan Dynasty, blue and white wares, and white wares of the Ming Dynasty.

Tangxia kiln complex is located near Tangxia Village. It has been heavily destroyed now. The ceramic sherds discovered here include green wares and white wares of the Five Dynasties, Qingbai wares of the Song Dynasty, and green wares of the early Yuan Dynasty.

Nanshijie kiln complex is situated near Nanshijie Village. The ceramic sherds

122

found here consist of green wares and white wares of the Five Dynasties, Qingbai

wares of the Song Dynasty, and white wares of the Yuan Dynasty.

Raonan kiln complex is about 60 kilometers away from Jingdezhen City. Ceramic

sherds found here include white wares of the Yuan Dynasty, and blue and white wares

and white wares of the Ming Dynasty.

The Yuyaochang (御窑厂) kiln complex is located at the center of Jingdezhen

City, south of Zhu Hill. Yuyaochang literally means the Royal Kiln, which suggests

that the kiln was supposed to provide service for the . In fact, a lot of

ceramic sherds are of the same types as those specially used by the Ming and Qing

royal court or . As for Yuan Dynasty ceramics found from this site, there

are blue and white wares, sapphire blue glaze wares and peacock green glaze wares

(Jiang Jianxin 1991: 44-50, 79).

The Xiaogangzui (小港嘴) kiln complex is situated at the Southern end of

Jingdezhen old town area. Many Yuan blue and white ceramic sherds have been found.

The shapes include bowl, plate, stem cup etc. The motifs include mandarin ducks and

lotus pond, scrolls etc. Shufu type glaze bowls have also been discovered.

The Luomaqiao (落马桥) kiln complexes are located in the southern part of

Jingdezhen old town area. Yuan blue and white ceramic sherds have been found in

large quantity. According to their discoveries, certain kiln sites mostly contain small

objects, while other kiln sites yielded mainly big objects. One group wares of

relatively small shape and thin body. The shapes in this group include bowls, dishes,

stem cups, jarlets, covered boxes, teardrop shaped vases, yi (匜), tripod incense

123 burners, water droppers, figurines etc. The motifs include , mandarin ducks and lotus ponds, , , lotuses, and plum flower, pine and plum tree etc. The second group of wares is of large sizes. The shapes include big plates, big jars, etc. There are varied decoration techniques, such as blue patterns on white backgrounds, white patterns on blue backgrounds, and molded patterns. The motifs are always densely depicted on the exteriorsof the objects. The motifs include double phoenix, mandarin ducks and lotus ponds, auspicious animals, plantain bamboo and rocks, combinations of flowers, peony scrolls, lotus scrolls, grape scrolls etc. The color of the motifs is mostly bright blue with iron spots. Yuan

Qingbai ceramic sherds have been found as well. A small amount of Shufu wares and copper red wares have also been found.

The Diancichang-Liujianong (电瓷厂-刘家弄) kiln complex is situated in the southern part of Jingdezhen old town area. Many Yuan blue and white ceramic sherds have been discovered. The shapes include bowls, plates, yi (匜), stem cups, teardrop shaped vases, type vases (出戟觚), pear shaped ewers, tripod incense burners and etc. The motifs include five-clawed dragons, three-clawed dragons, mandarin ducks and lotus ponds, peony scrolls, plantains, etc.

The Daijianong (戴家弄) kiln complex is located in the southern part of

Jingdezhen old town. This site has revealed a lot of Yuan blue and white ceramic sherds. The shapes include bowls, plates, yi (匜), stem cups, flat kettles (扁壶), tripod incense burners and cup stands etc. The motifs include dragons, kylin, rabbits, egrets, mandarin ducks and lotus ponds, peonies, chrysanthemums, lotus, moon and plum

124

tree, seaweed, plantains, bamboo and rocks, figures, inscriptions etc. The color of the

motifs is mainly light grayish blue, while the color of a small portion of the wares is

bright blue.

The Xiaohuangjiashangnong-Guihuanong (小黄家上弄-桂花弄) kiln complex is located in the central part of Jingdezhen old town. Yuan blue and white ceramic sherds are mainly in shapes of bowls, plates, dishes, stem cups, and jarlets. Stem cups constitute the largest portion. The motifs include fish, chickens, lotus ponds, chrysanthemums, figures, flaming , clouds, poems, auspicious characters, etc.

The motifs are drawn with bright blue. There are iron spots on the .

The Situli (四图里) kiln complex is located in the northern part of Jingdezhen’s old town. Ttwo groups of blue and white wares have been discovered at this site. The first group of wares is made of coarse paste. Their motifs are simply drawn patterns using dark grayish cobalt blue. The shapes include bowls, plates, cups, etc. The motifs include dragons, double phoenix, mandarin ducks and lotus ponds, lotuses, peonies, chrysanthemums, gardenias, ganoderma, bamboo, flaming pearls, clouds, etc. The other group of wares is made of fine paste. Their motifs are more sophisticated and drawn with bright cobalt blue. However, this group of wares only is found in small quantities. The shapes include big bowls and plates.

The Hutian and Jingdezhen urban kiln complexes are the most important kiln

complexes during the Yuan Dynasty in Jingdezhen, in terms of ceramic quality. Its

Shufu type glaze wares represent the highest achievement among all kinds of products

in Jingdezhen kilns during the Yuan Dynasty.

125

The issue of Jingdezhen Guan type wares

There has been much debate about issues regarding “Guan kilns” and “Guan type wares” in Jingdezhen. “Guan” means “bureaucratic” or “official”. Generally, the term

“Guan type wares” refers to certain types of ceramic wares especially used by or meant to be made for the court or bureaucrats but not the ordinary people or communities. Some researchers speculate that there were special Guan kilns which managed the whole porcelain production for the Yuan court and government.

However, some researchers take the contradictory point of view, that there were no

Guan kilns but only Guan type wares produced by private kilns. They infer that

private kilns were supposed to produce wares for the court or certain bureaucrats

when they received orders from the administration.

Researchers first realized that there are some unique motifs on some of the Yuan

Jingdezhen wares, which are quite similar to patterns used to decorate textiles used by

the upper class, such as aristocrats and officials (Liu Xinyuan 1982: 9-20). In fact, the

Yuan court had strict rules that certain kinds of patterns were supposed to be used exclusively by certain classes. Those regulations are found in the Yuan Dianzhang

(《元典章》, Yuan National Decrees and Regulations) and the Yuanshi (《元史》). For

example, an imperial edict recorded in Yuanshi states: “The forbidden or

non-authorized patterns on (common people’s) clothes include: kylin, phoenix, white rabbit, ganoderma, five-clawed dragon with double antlers, eight dragons, nine dragons, ten thousand longevity characters, fortune and longevity characters and deep

126

brownish colored cloth.”19Liu Xinyuan pointed out those pattern templates may have

been created by a national institute, likely the Huaju (Painting Bureaucracy), for the

production of both official textiles and porcelain. Therefore, some patterns separately

on textile and look quite alike. Therefore, indicators of “Guan

type wares” include special decorations, such as the five-clawed dragon pattern which

should be strictly used by the royal families. According to current archaeological finds,

there are blue and white sherds with five-clawed dragon motifs at some kiln sites from

both Jingdezhen old town area and Hutian kiln complex. Another type of indicator is

unique characters, which are more often seen stamped on Shufu type white wares.

Tai xi ( 太禧) for example is probably the abbreviated form of the name

taixizongchuiyuan (太禧宗棰院), which is the national bureau in charge of the holy

affairs of praying to heaven and the gods. If there is an inscription taixi on the ware, it

is probably made for taixizongchuiyuan exclusively. Another instance is shufu (枢府),

which seemingly means shumiyuan (Privy Council, 枢密院). If there is a shufu mark

on the ware, it is possibly made for shumiyuan” specifically. If there is ayu (玉)

written on the ware, it is likely used specially by yuchenyuan (玉宸院), which was an

institute in charge of music for the court (Xiao Fabiao 2001: 73-76).

However, so far, there is no direct archaeological evidence that Guan kilns

existed during the Yuan Dynasty. Researchers mostly agree that during the Yuan

19至元二年（公元 1336 年）夏四月丁亥诏：“禁服麒麟、鸾凤、白兔、灵芝、双角五爪龙、八 龙、九龙、万寿、福寿字、赭黄等服”，引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷三十九，殿本，影印本， 台北：艺文印书馆，1956 年，页 455。The edict was issued in April of Zhiyuan Year 2 (1336 C.E.). The original text is quoted from Song Lian et al, Yuanshi, Vol.39, Wuyingdian Version, Photocopy, Taipei: Yiwen Yinshu Guan, 1956, p.455. 127

Dynasty the Guan type wares’ production was managed by Fuliang Porcelain

Bureaucracy, which was established in Jingdezhen in the Zhiyuan Year 15 (1278C.E.).

If there was demand from the court, Fuliang Porcelain Bureaucracy would assign

some non-governmental kiln workshops to take the orders. If there was no demand,

these kilns could produce porcelain to pursue their own interests. The production of

wares to be offered to the government was intermittent (Jiang Jianxin 2013: 76-86).

4.2.4 Chronological materials from hoards, tombs and shipwrecks

In addition to the materials from kiln sites, other comparative materials are those unearthed from hoards, tombs and even shipwrecks. Kilns normally last for a long time, whereas hoards, tombs and shipwrecks are normally buried at one time. The reasons for hoarding precious objects are always connected to social instability or warfare. Sometimes, there are objects with dated inscriptions buried in hoards, tombs and shipwrecks, which become easy references for dating the sites. More importantly,

the objects are sometimes intact and well preserved till they are dug out. It should be

noted that the time limit provided by “inscription date” could not be presumably used

for dating the production time of the buried objects.

Materials from hoards

The following table is a general summary of the recovered hoards with 14th

century wares of Longquan celadon, Fujian wares, Jingdezhen wares, or a

combination of them. However, the hoards are not listed in the table that include none

128

of the three categories, though they are of a very small proportion. Hoards dating to

Hongwu period have been rarely seen. (Table 4.2.4.1) The materials are all from publications covering a time span from 1949 until now. Table 4.2.4.1 demonstrates

that Longquan celadon and Jingdezhen wares are commonly seen in the ceramic

combination of the hoards. There is a remarkable lack of finds of Fujian wares in the

hoards of Yuan period across mailand China. One possible reason is that a lot of

archaeology reports have put the Fujian products into other kiln system categories.

For example, many kilns in south China produced qingbai glazed ceramics during

Yuan period. The kiln sites in Jiangxi Province include Jingdezhen, (乐平) etc.

The kiln sites in Fujian Province include Zhenghe (政和), Minqing (闽清), Dehua (德

化), Quanzhou (泉州), Tong’an (同安) etc. The kiln sites in Guangdong Province

include Huiyang (惠阳), Zhongshan (中山) etc. (The Chinese Ceramic Society 1982:

337) Fujian qingbai wares may have been identified as products from the more

well-known qingbai ceramics production center-Jingdezhen, generally labelled as

Jingdezhen type products. However, as far as I know, Yuan period ceramic hoards in

Fujian and Guangdong Provinces have not been reported found yet. This might be

another reason why Fujian wares have scarcely be seen in the statistical data. There is

a higher possibility of Fujian wares appearing in local hoards, if any.

129

Table 4.2.4.1 Longquan celadon, Fujian wares and Jingdezhen wares discovered from unearthed hoards of the 14th century

Year Location Dating for the Finds of Other Finds of Finds of

Hoard(s) Ceramics Longquan Jingdezhen

Type Type Wares

Celadon

1958 City (called Yuan Dynasty Brown and white Plate, bowl,

“Lvda City” before) Jin jar with cover, stem cup

County Jinjiagou brown and white

Beidahao (Xu Minggang dish, brown glazed

1966: 96-99, 111, plate dish, white glazed

8) dish

1962 Jiangsu Province Dantu Yuan Dynasty Purplish glazed Bowl, plate, Blue and white

County Dalu Village stem cup, black and dish stem cup, bluish

(Liu Xing 1982: 25-27) white bowl white stem cup,

bluish white

bowl

1964 Hebei Province Baoding Mid Yuan Blue and white

City (Zhao Juchuan and Dynasty with copper red

He Zhigang 1965: jar, blue and

17-18, 22, plate 1-3) white vase, blue

and white ewer,

luanbai plate,

luanbai cup,

blue glazed yi

with gold

painting, blue

glazed cup with

gold painting,

130

blue glazed

plate with gold

painting

1966 Jiangsu Province Yuan Dynasty Blue and white

Changzhou City Jintan (1314 C.E. jar

District (Xiao Menglong inscriptions)

1980: 59-62, plate 6)

1969 Beijing City Fangshan Yuan Dynasty Jun type plate, Jun Qingbai plate

County Liangxiang type jar, Jun type

Town ( Jingdong bo, black and white

1972: 32-34, plate 12) jar, black jar,

greyish white

glazed jar, green

glazed jar, green

glazed mei-,

black glazed

mei-ping, white

glazed mei-ping,

green glazed bowl

1970 Inner Mongolia Mid Yuan Jun type incense Vase

Autonomous Region Dynasty burner, Jun type

Baita Village (Li Zuozhi (inscriptions vase,

1977: 75-77, plate 1) possibly refer to

1309 C.E.)

1970 Beijing City Old Gulou Yuan Dynasty Blue and white

Street (Yuan Dadu ewer, blue and

Archaeology Team white cup with

1972a: 19-28, plate support, qingbai

8-10) bowl, etc

131

1972 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty Green glazed plate, Blue and white

Autonomous Region green glazed jar, plate, blue and

Linxi County brown and white white stem cup,

Meiyaogou Village jar, brown and blue and white

(Wang Gang 2001: white jarlet ewer, luanbai

72-76, 83) stem cup

1972 Hebei Province Yuan Dynasty White glazed plate, Bowl Blue and white

Dingxing County Jun type plate stem cup,

Guangongshe Village luanbai bowl,

(Hebei Provincial luanbai plate,

Cultural Relics Institute luanbai yi,

1986: 89-91, 95, plate 7) bluish white

plate

1974 Guangxi Autonomous Yuan Dynasty Black glazed jar Bowl, plate,

Region County washer, stem

Guiping Town Renmin cup

Road (Yu Fengzhi 2005:

367-377)

1975 Xinjiang Autonomous Yuan Dynasty Bowl, plate, Qingbai bowl,

Region Yili Huocheng dish, stem blue and white

County (Xinjiang cup stem cup,

Museum 1979: 26-31) luanbai plate

1976 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty Bowl

Autonomous (inscriptions

RegionJininglu Ancient possibly refer to

City site (Pan Xingrong 1309 C.E.)

1979: 32-36, plate 5-6)

1977 Anhui Province Anqing Mid to Late Yuan Yellowish glazed Blue and white

City Fanxiu Road (Hu Dynasty plate, yellowish plate, blue and

132

Yueqian 1986: 81-82, glazed cup, light white yi

plate 6) green glazed cup

1977 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty Black and white jar, Washer, Qingbai bowl

Autonomous Region Jun type bo, white incense

Jininglu Ancient City glazed stem cup burner, cup

site (Pan Xingrong support

1979: 32-36, plate 5-6)

1978 Shandong Province After Yuan Ding type white Incense Qingbai

Chiping County Dynasty glazed plate, black burner Bodhisattva

Xiaozhuang and white basin, statuette

Wangcaigua Village black glazed jar,

( Museum black glazed urn

1985: 861-862)

1978 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty White glazed bowl, Bowl, plate Qingbai ewer,

Autonomous Region white glazed plate, blue and white

Chifeng County white glazed vase, stem cup

Dayingzi Hajingou sauce glazed

Village (Tang Hansan, bowl, sauce glazed

Li Fuchen and Zhang plate, black and

Songbai, 1984: 89-93) white jar, black and

white bowl, black

and white plate, Jun

type bowl, green

glazed bowl, green

glazed plate

1979 Shandong Province Yuan Period Black and white jar, Dish Qingbai stem

Chiping County (1271 C.E. black and white cup

Hantungongshe Xitun inscriptions) basin, black glazed

Village (Liu Shanyi bowl

133

1986: 765-767, 761)

1979 Zhejiang Province Yuan Dynasty Jar with lotus Qingbai bowl

Jiaxing City (Chen leaf shaped

Xingyi 2002: 12-13) cover

1980 Inner Mongolia Jin to Yuan Jun type bowl, Jun Bowl, Blue and white

Autonomous Region Dynasty type bo, Jun type washer, plate stem cup,

Hohhot City Baoheshao jar, brown and qingbai plate,

Village (Li Caiping white jar, brown qingbai cup,

1994: 92-96) and white dish, iron spotted

brown and white qingbai ewer

plate, white bowl,

white stem cup,

white dish, Jian

type black glazed

bowl, black glazed

dish, yellow and

green glazed dish,

san- incense

burner

1980 Jiangxi Province Mid to Late Yuan Jizhou type Plate, jar Qingbai bowl

Yongxin County Ancient Dynasty mei-ping, yellowish

City (Yang Houli 1983: glazed mei-ping,

47-49, plate 6) blue glazed jar with

cover, yellowish

glazed vase

1980 Jiangxi Province ’an Mid to Late Yuan Jun type bowl, blue Bowl, plate, Blue and white

County (Liu Yuhei and Dynasty lead glazed dish, washer, jar with cover,

Xiong Lin 1981: 16-22; mei-ping stem cup, jar blue and white

1982: 58-69, plate 6-7) with lotus mei-ping, blue

134

shaped cover and white gu

type vase, blue

and white stem

cup, copper red

jar, copper red

yi, copper red

stem cup,

qingbai bowl,

qingbai stem

cup, qingbai

ewer, luanbai

yuhuchun type

vase, luanbai

stem cup,

luanbai bowl,

luanbai dish

1982 Guangxi Autonomous Yuan Dynasty Bowl, dish

Region Fangcheng City

Tanpeng (Guangxi

Zhuang Autonomous

Region Cultural Relics

Working Team 1985:

810-812, 833, plate 8)

1982 Jiangsu Province Terminal Yuan Black and white Bowl, stem

Huaiyin City Chengnan Dynasty bowl, black and cup, cup

Hanchen Village (Wang white saucer, blue support

Jian 1991: 225-226, glazed basin, black

214) galzed dish, white

glazed cup

135

1982 Province Yuan Dynasty Bowl, plate,

Chengdu City Western washer, stem

Region (Liu Pingand cup

Wang Liming 1985:

108)

1982 Shandong Province Late Yuan Jun glazed plate Plate, washer Qingbai bowl

City Boshan Region Dynasty

(Zhang Guangming and

Bi Siliang 1986: 72-73)

1982 Province Late Yuan Jun type bowl, Plate, cup

Kazuo County Gushanzi Dynasty sauce glazed bowl,

(Fu Zongde and Zhou blue glazed bowl,

Chengxun 1990: black and white jar

382-383)

1982 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty White glazed dish, Dish, stem Qingbai plate,

Autonomous Region green glazed stem cup

Kailu County Sanyijing cup, Jun type bowl,

Desheng Village (Wu white glazed bowl,

Yaqin and Wang black glazed bowl,

Ruiqing 1994) sauce glazed bowl,

blue glazed jar with

cover, black and

white jar with

cover, green glazed

jar, white glazed

mei-ping, black

glazed mei-ping,

black glazed vase,

black glazed jar

136

1982 Anhui Province She Yuan Dynasty Green glazed bowl Blue glazed cup,

County (Ye Hanyun, Xia qingbai cup,

Yuenan and Hu luanbai stem

Cheng’en 1988: 85-88, cup with gold

plate 8) painting, luanbai

ewer, qingbai yi,

luanbai stem

cup, qingbai

stem cup,

qingbai bowl,

qingbai plate,

qingbai incense

burner, qingbai

support for cup,

qingbai plate,

blue and white

stem cup,

qingbai jar

1983 Zhejiang Province Yuan Dynasty Dish, cup,

Taishun County stem cup,

Xiaocun District Nanpu vase, yi,

(Jin Baidong and Xia water

Suixiang 1986: 94-95, dropper

plate 8)

1984 Anhui Province She Late Yuan Luanbai bowl,

County (Ye Hanyun, luanbai plate

Yuenan and Hu

Cheng’en 1988: 85-88,

plate 8)

137

1984 Jiangxi Province Le’an Yuan Dynasty Stem cup, Luanbai bowl,

County (Yu Jiadong and washer luanbai plate

Mei Shaoqiu 1989:

75-78, 17, plate 8)

1984 Zhejiang Province Yuan Dynasty Bowl, plate, Qingbai bowl

Qingtian County Qianlu dish, cup,

Street (Wang Youzhong vase, jar,

2001: 93-96, plate 6-7) incense

burner

1984 Hunan Province Lixian Terminal Yuan to Bowl, plate, Qingbai ewer

County Chengguan Early Ming dish, cup,

Town Hucheng Village Period washer, bo

(Cao Chuansong 1991:

24-29)

1984 Henan Province Yuan Dynasty Jun type plate, Jun Stem cup

Yancheng County type bowl, Jun type

Shiwulidian (Yang jar, black and white

Ailing 1994: 117-120) plate, black and

white jar, black

glazed plate, sauce

glazed jar, white

glazed plate

1985 Liaoning Province Mid Yuan Black and white Plate

Yixian County Yizhou Dynasty dish, white glazed

Town (Li Hongjun and dish, black glazed

Ma Yunhong 1988: bowl

169-172)

1985 Jiangxi Province Yuan Dynasty White glazed bowl, Bowl, plate, Blue and white

Pingxiang City Futian white glazed cup, stem incence burner,

138

Xiashi Village statuette cup blue and white

( Museum vase, blue and

1986: 46-48, 150-151) white dish, blue

and white yi,

blue and white

stem cup

1986 Beijing City Yanqing Yuan Dynasty Black and white jar, Plate

County Liubin black glazed jar

Daguantou Village

(Zhao Guanglin 1989:

180-183)

1986 Hunan Province Yuan Dynasty Qingbai bowl, Bowl, plate,

Taojiang County black glazed dish washer, jar,

Majitang Jingzhu vase, ewer

Village (Zhang Beichao

1987: 21-24)

1986 Sichuan Province Ya’an Terminal Yuan Green glazed bowl Stem cup Qingbai stem

City Wenhua Road (Li Dynasty (1347 cup, qingbai

Zhixiang 1988: 79) C.E. inscription) plate, qingbai jar

with cover

1987 Inner Mogolia Yuan Dynasty Blue glazed jar, Washer

Autonomous Region white glazed jar,

Ulanqab League white glazed stem

Liusumubadi Village cup, white glazed

(Tang Baozhu 2001: dish, brown glazed

59-64, 100) dish, white glazed

vase, yellowish

green glazed jar

1987 Hebei Province Jin to Yuan Period Jun type bowl, Jun Bowl, plate Luanbai bowl

139

Kuancheng County type plate, black

Longxumen (Kuancheng and white plate

County Cultural Relics with blue glazed

Conservation Institute exterior, black

1994: 287-288, 220) glazed bowl, green

glazed jar

1987 Zhejiang Province Mid to Late Yuan White glazed plate, Bowl, plate, Luanbai stem

Hangzhou City (Sang Dynasty white glazed cup, stem cup, cup, copper red

Jianxin 1989: 22-27, 21, blue glazed ewer, vase stem cup, blue

plate 6) mei-ping with glazed

cover, blue glazed jue-shaped cup

jar with cover with gold

painting,

qingbai jar, blue

and white pen

holder with

water dropper

1990 Inner Mogolia Yuan Dynasty Green glazed jar, Washer

Autonomous Region white glazed vase

Ulanqab League

Changheshao Village

(Tang Baozhu 2001:

59-64, 100)

1990 Jiangxi Province Yichun Mid Yuan Brown and white Bowl Qingbai bowl,

City Gaoshi Road (Xie Dynasty (1303 washer, brown and luanbai bowl,

Zhijie and Wang C.E. inscriptions) white incense

Hongguang 1992: 1-7, burner, white

plate 1) glazed plate,

yellowish glazed

140

bowl

1991 Sichuan Province Santai Terminal Yuan Sauce glazed bowl, Bowl, plate,

County (Jing Zhuyou Dynasty sauce glazed dish stem cup

1993: 62-65, 2)

1992 Sichuan Province Santai Terminal Yuan Dish, vase Blue and white

County (Jing Zhuyou Dynasty vase, blue and

1993: 62-65, 2) white incense

burner

1992 Liaoning Province Yuan Dynasty Black and white jar, Bowl, stem

Chaoyang City sauce glazed bowl, cup

(Chaoyang Museum black glazed bowl

1986: 92-93, 95)

1994 Hunan Province Yuan Dynasty Plate, dish,

Hengyang City (Zheng vase

Junsheng 1997:

196-197)

1995 Sichuan Province Terminal Song to White glazed plate, Bowl, plate, Qingbai bowl

Zhongjiang County Early Yuan Period white glazed bowl, cup, stem

Xishan Longhua Village black glazed bowl, cup, incense

(Wang Qipeng and Wu black glazed stem burner, vase

Mei 2005: 26-29, 38, cup, sauce glazed

plate 2-4) stem cup

1995 Jiangxi Province Ganxi Yuan Dynasty Plate Blue and white

County (Zhao Ronghua plate, blue and

2006: 87-89) white stem cup

1998 Region Terminal Song to Black glazed bowl, Bowl, plate,

Zhongba Site (Sichuan Early Yuan Period black glazed dish dish, yi, vase

Cultural Relics and

Archaeology Institute,

141

The

Office of

Chongqing Bureau of

Culture, and Zhongxian

County Cultural Relics

Management Station

2001: 79-80)

2002-2 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty Cizhou type Plate, in Copper red vase,

003 Autonomous Region products, Jun type cense burner, blue and white

Jininglu Ancient City products, Ding type jar with lotus cup, blue and

(Chen Yongzhi 2003: products, Yaozhou leaf shaped white stem cup,

16-25; 2004a: 22-33; type products, cover, stem etc

2004b: 16-17) Huoyao type cup, water

products, Jizhou dropper, etc

type products, Jian

type products

2003 Inner Mongolia Yuan Dynasty White glazed dish, Bowl, dish

Autonomous Region brown and white

Linxi County Xiachang dish, white glazed

(Wang Gang 2005: bowl, black glazed

33-36, plate 8) bowl, green glazed

bowl, light sauce

glazed mei-ping,

brown glazed

mei-ping, white

glazed mei-ping,

white glazed basin,

black glazed bo,

brown and white

142

jar, brown and

white cover, black

glazed vase,

yellowish glazed

vase, yellowish

glazed jar, black

glazed jar

2004 Jiangxi Province Yuan Dynasty Qingbai bowl,

Yongxin County qingbai stem

Hechuan Town (Zhao cup, qingbai

Ronghua 2006: 87-89) plate, luanbai

bowl

2007 Province Dunhua Yuan Dynasty White glazed bowl, Bowl, plate Qingbai stem

City Town white glazed plate, cup, qingbai

Shuangsheng Village white glazed dish, plate

(Research Centre for white glazed bo,

Chinese Frontier white glazed

Archaeology of Jilin mei-ping, white

University and Cultural glazed yu shaped

Relics Management of jar, black and white

Dunhua2008, 438-445, bowl, black and

colour plate 12-16) white plate, black

and white vase,

black and white jar,

green glazed plate,

black glazed bowl,

black glazed urn,

sauce glazed dish,

Jun type bowl, blue

143

glazed jar

Materials from dated tombs

This section will summarize the 14th century dated tombs, which normally

contain ceramic wares of varied kilns (Table 4.2.4.2). Most of the date information

comes from the tomb owner’s epitaph indicating his\her date of death or burial date.

Some come from inscriptions on a certain offering in the tomb. Production of the

ceramics must be earlier than the tomb’s date information.

Table 4.2.4.2 Longquan celadon, Fujian wares and Jingdezhen wares discovered from

dated tombs of the 14th century

Year Location Dating Finds of Finds of Finds of

According to Other Longquan Jingdezhen

Inscriptions in Ceramics Type Type Wares

the Tomb(s) Celadon

1982 Jiangxi Province Zhiyuan Year Brown Qingbai dish

City Xibao Village, Ms. 18 buried (1281 glazed jar,

Zhang’s tomb (Huang C.E.); Zhiyuan brown

Dongmei 1996: 12-14) Year 29 glazed bowl

relocated (1292

C.E.)

1991 Jiangxi Province Zhangshu Zhiyuan Year Brown Qingbai

144

City, ’s tomb (Huang 20 (1283 C.E.) glazed dish incense

Dongmei 1996: 12-14) burner,

qingbai jar

with pasting

ornaments

1972 Jiangxi Province Zhangshu Zhiyuan Year Qingbai

City (Huang Dongmei 1996: 30 (1293 C.E.) bowl

12-14)

? Jiangxi Province Guixi Zhiyuan Year Vase, plate,

County Chenjia Village, 30 (1293 C.E.) bowl

Zhang Tianshi’s tomb

(Anonymity 1951: 143-181)

1986 Shanxi Province City Dade Year 2 Jun type Qingbai stem

(Jiao Qiang, Li Jianzhong and (1298 C.E.) bowl, green cup

Zhou Xuesong 1993: 17-24, glazed dish,

82, plate 3-4) black glazed

vase

1975 Jiangxi Province Boyang Dade Year 3 Qingbai jar

County Modaoshi Village (Wu (1299 C.E.) with pasting

Zhihong and Fan Fengmei ornaments

1983:64-68)

1991 Jiangxi Province Dade Year 3 Qingbai jar

145

County ( Liping and (1299 C.E.) with pasting

Renfu 1993: 25-27) ornaments,

qingbai bowl

1989 Zhejiang Province Hangzhou Dade Year 6 Vase,

City Xianyu Shu’s tomb (1302 C.E.) incense

(Zhang Yulan 1990: 22-25) burner

1972 Beijing City Chaoyang Dade Year 9 Black and Jarlet Qingbai dish,

District Xiaohong Gate Zhang (1305 C.E.) white vase luanbai

Honggang’s tomb (Yu Zhen incense

and Huang Xiuchun 1986: burner

95-114, plate 15-20)

1980 Jiangxi Province Dade Year 11 Qingbai

County Tangnan Village (Wu (1307 C.E.) bowl

Zhihong and Fan Fengmei

1983:64-68)

1962 Beijing City Chongwen Huangqing Year Jun type Bowl,

District Lvjiayao Village Tie 2 (1313 C.E.) incense washer, jar,

Ke’s tomb (Yu Zhen and burner, vase

Huang Xiuchun 1986: 95-114, brown

plate 15-20) glazed vase

1963 Jiangxi Province Nanchang Yanyou Year 2 Qingbai jar

City Zhuguqiao ( (1315 C.E.) with pasting

146

Yuanwei 1963: 576, 572) ornaments,

qingbai barn

miniature

1971 Jiangxi Province Yongfeng Yanyou Year 6 Jizhou type Qingbai

County Zuolong Village (1319 C.E.) colour-paint incense

(Yang Houli 1987: 85-87) ed lid, burner,

creamy qingbai jar

glazed small with pasting

jar ornaments,

qingbai small

jar with lotus

leaf shaped

cover

1972 Jiangxi Province Wannian Taiding Year 1 Qingbai

County Shizhen Village (Tang (1324 C.E.) mei-ping

Changpu 1977: 72-73, 22, with

plate 9) lion-knob

cover

1984 Jiangxi Province Gao’an Tianli Year 2 Qingbai jar

County Kengkou Village, joint (1329 C.E.) with pasting

burial tomb of Xu Dezhai and ornaments,

his wife Ms. Luo (Chen qingbai box

147

Xingyi 1987: 246-249)

2009 Jiangxi Province Yanshan (Latter)Zhiyuan Qingbai jars

County Bashuiyuan Village Year 2 (1336 with pasting

Wailong Hill, Zhao Mingbao’s C.E.) ornaments,

tomb (Li Yuyuan and Zhong qingbai bowl

Wenliang 2012: 6-10)

1979 Unearthed in Jiangxi Province (Latter)Zhiyuan Jar, barn

Jingdezhen County; collected Year 4 (1338 miniature,

in Jiangxi Province C.E.) statuette of

Fengcheng County (Yang blue and

Houli and Liangtian white with

1981: 72-74, plate 1 ) copper red

(qinghua

youlihong)

1983 Jiangxi Province Fuzhou Ms. Wei buried White Qingbai jar

County Taiwu Village, joint in Tianli Year 2 glazed with pasting

tomb of Chen Zhongming and (1329 C.E.); bowl, white ornaments

his wife Ms. Wei (Xue Qiao Chen glazed

and Liu Jinfeng 1987: 62-64) Zhongming dishe, white

buried in (latter) glazed

Zhiyuan Year 5 incense

(1339 C.E.) burner,

148

glazed barn

miniature

2002 Hebei Province Li Yi buried in Brown and Qingbai stem

City Huayang Road joint Zhishun Year 2 white plate, cup

tomb of Li Yi and his wife (1331 C.E.); the sauce

Ms.Fang (Xu Haifeng, Liu wife buried in glazed jar

Lianqiang, Li Wenlong and (latter) Zhiyuan

Yang Weidong 2004: 42-60) Year 5 (1339

C.E.)

1963 Jiangxi Province Fuzhou City, The wife buried Green

Fu Xiyan’s tomb in Zhizheng glazed vase,

(Cheng Yinglin and Year 3 (1343 whitish

Shifan 1964: 370-372, plate C.E.); Fu Xiyan glazed

10) buried in bowl,

Zhizheng Year non-glazed

8 (1348 C.E.) jar

1986 Jiangxi Province Zhangshu Zhizheng Year Incense

City Zhangjia Village (Huang 3 (1353 C.E.) burner

Dongmei 1996: 12-14)

1952 Shanghai City Qingpu County Taiding Year 4 Guan type Bowl, Luanbai stem

Gaojiatai Village, Renfa’s (1327 C.E.); vase, Guan incense cup, luanbai

family tomb, original context (Latter) type incense burner bowl, luanbai

149

lost, epigraphs and burial Zhiyuan Year 4 burner vase, luanbai

offerings retrieved (Shen (1338 C.E.); incense

Lingxin and Xu Yongxiang Zhizheng Year burner,

1982: 54-60, plate 4-5) 5 (1345 C.E.); luanbai

Zhizheng Year pedestal

8 (1348 C.E.);

Zhizheng Year

11 (1351 C.E.);

Zhizheng Year

13 (1353 C.E.)

1970 Jiangsu Province Nanjing Hongwu Year 4 Celadon Blue and

City, Wang Xingzu’s tomb (Li (1371 C.E.) plate white stem

Weiran 1972: 31-33, 23, plate (Southern cup

6) Song

period?)

1983 Jiangsu Province Nanjing City Hongwu Year Grayish

Gangzi Village, ’s 12 (1379 C.E.) white

tomb (Zhu Lanxia 1986: glazed

35-41) mei-ping

1974 Jiangsu Province Nanjing City Hongwu Year Green

Jiangwangmiao, Xue Xian’s 20 (1387 C.E.) glazed bowl

tomb (Gu Suning 2001: 6-13)

150

1965 Jiangsu Province Nanjing City Hongwu Year Greyish

Baima Village, Qiu Cheng’s 21 (1388 C.E.) white

tomb (Shao Lei 2014: 46-57, glazed

colour plate) mei-ping

1978-1979 Jiangsu Province Nanjing City Hongwu Year Black and Mei-ping Blue and

Qijia Hill, Ms. Yu’s tomb (Jia 21 (1388 C.E.) white vase white vase

Weiyong and Ma Tao 1999:

18-26, plate 3)

1970-1971 Shandong Province Zouxian Hongwu Year Qingbai jar,

County, Zhu Tan’s tomb 22 (1389 C.E.) qingbai vase,

(Shandong Museum 1972: qingbai plate

25-36, plate 2-4.)

1978-1979 Jiangsu Province Nanjing City Hongwu Year Black and Qingbai

Qijia Hill, Yu Tongyuan’s 22 (1389 C.E.) white vase, plate, qingbai

tomb (Jia Weiyong and Ma jar bowl

Tao 1999: 18-26, plate 3)

1973 Anhui Province Hongwu Year White Blue and

County, Tanghe’s tomb 28 (1395 C.E.) glazed small white jar

(Bengbu Museum 1977: jar with

35-39, plate 4.) lotus leaf

shaped

cover

151

Materials from dated shipwreck(s)

Shipwrecks clearly dating to the 14th century have rarely been seen so far. As far

as we know, the Sinan shipwreck is the only one that could be traced back to the first

half of 14th century. There are inscriptions of Year 3 (1323 C.E.) on wooden

slips unearthed from the wreck. The shipwreck has yielded more than 20,000 pieces

of objects. Archaeologists have probed into the provenances of the ceramic cargo.

Many Chinese kilns have been identified so far, including Zhejiang Longquan kilns,

Zhejiang Tiedian kilns, Zhejiang Laohudong kilns, Jiangxi Jingdezhen kilns, Jiangxi

Jizhou kilns, Jiangxi Qilizhen kilns, Fujian Jian kilns, Fujian Minqing Yi kilns, Fujian

Cizao kilns, Fujian Hongtang kilns, Guangdong Shiwan kilns, Hebei Cizhou kilns,

Jiangsu kilns etc. Longquan celadon take up almost 60% of all the excavated ceramic wares. (Jin Yingmei 2012:20-31)

It could be seen so far that the identified kiln sites scatter across an area involved

Zhejiang Province, Fujian Province, Guangdong Province, Hebei Province and

Jiangsu Province. Although the ceramic kinds could cover a substantial proportion of the contemporary ceramic categories made in south China, the famed Yuan blue and white wares are absent from the cargo. It is strange enough given that many Yuan blue and white wares have been discovered from ancient sites in East Asia, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East situated along maritime Silk Routes, such as Singapore and

Trowulan discussed in this paper. There is a remarkable lack of Dehua wares, Putian wares and Jingdezhen copper red wares as well, which comprise an important portion

152

of the ceramic combination in Singapore and Trowulan.

As summarized in Table 4.2.4.2, archaeologists have collected four qingbai glazed wares with cobalt blue and copper red paitings in Fengcheng County, Jiangxi

Province. They were actually unearthed in Jingdezhen. There are date inscriptions both on the covered jar and the bar miniature. The date indicated by the inscriptions is

(latter) Zhiyuan Year 4 (1338 C.E.). (Yang Houli and Wan Liangtian 1981: 72-74, plate 1) The discovery of the four wares is significant. They are the earliest dated qingbai glazed wares with cobalt blue and copper red paintings so far. This may imply that techniques for underglazed cobalt blue and copper red in early 14th century were

not mature enough for the demand of maritime trade. Besides, there are white glazed

plates with brown paintings in the cargo. The brown paintings are quite pictorial

designs depicting peony branch and buffalo etc. Some reseachers suggest this type of

white glazed wares with brown paintings might be the prototype of blue and white

wares.

The lack of Dehua and Putian wares could be another story. They may be shipped

mainly southwards but not northward to and Japan in the 14th century. Given

the fact that they are scarcely any discoveries from the hoards and tombs analyzed in the above sections, it could be reasonably inferred that they could have been produced mostly for export in the 14th century. Similar situation occurs on the Changsha wares of Tang Dynasty. Changsha sherds have been found almost merely in the kiln complex, cities along water courses and coastal port cities (e.g. the ancient Wuchang,

Yangzhou and Qingpu in Shanghai) in China. (Quan Jinyun 1986: 1126-1132, 1145,

153 plate 5; Municipal Museum 1973: 70-72; Zhou Lijuan 2003: 63-65) But they are found in many sites in Southeast Asia.

The Sinan Shipwreck cargo has been considered as quite an important source for completing the chronology of ceramics of the time, especially of the majority of green glazed wares. However, it should be noted that the ceramic cargo could not be assumed as a simultaneous products assemblage. The ceramic wares were generally but not necessarily produced within a short time span before the ship sank. For example, there are approximately 40 Jian cups unearthed from the wreck. These cups bear characteristic features of Song wares made in Jian kilns. They also have some signs of wear along the rims. (Feng Xianming 1985: 116) According to the present achievements of kiln excavations, production of the specially termed “Jian cup (Jian

Zhan, 建盏)” was terminated at around terminal Southern Song or early Yuan

Dynasty. (Li Jian’an 2001: 102)

4.3 Comparisons of Chinese ceramics in China and Singapore

4.3.1 Longquan celadon and Guan type wares

As a result of recent archaeological excavations, huge quantities of Longquan celadon sherds have been reported to be discovered in many places, including countries in both mainland and maritime Southeast Asia. The published materials indicate that the Longquan celadon discovered from these sites can bedated to a period from Southern Song to mid Ming Dynasty, which is contemporary with the

154

Longquan kilns’ heyday. This historical distribution is also the result of China’s

energetic maritime and economic policies during that period.

Since 1984, numerous archaeological excavations have been conducted in

Singapore. Chinese ceramics constitute the largest portion (by weight) among the

artefacts unearthed. Specifically in the category of Chinese porcelain, Longquan

celadon sherds represent the most common type. As an important trading item,

abundant Longquan celadon was produced for exporting from Song through Ming

Dynasties. As a settlement along the maritime trading routes, Singapore’s short term

boom was highly likely spurred by the trading activities in which the archaeological

data indicate that Longquan celadon played an important role. Therefore, it is

essential to probe the implications of the large quantities of Longquan celadon sherds

discovered from Singapore in order to obtain a deeper understanding of the

socio-economic conditions of Singapore and related sites during this period.

Longquan celadon unearthed from Singapore

With regard to the Longquan celadon unearthed from Singapore, some researchers have particularly discussed issues with typology methods (Miksic 1994:

229-250; Li Zhiyan 2000: 217-228); some Chinese researchers have taken

Singapore’s discoveries as part of the big picture of exporting Longquan celadon worldwide, and conjecturing the functions and nature of the exporting products based on indigenous materials (Qin Dashu and Shi Wenbo 2005: 28-35).

On the basis of archaeological investigations and excavations in China in the

155 recent decade, new materials have been published, leading to a clearer understanding of Longquan celadon’s production. This section will compare Longquan celadon sherds unearthed from Singapore and the surrounding water with those found at the kiln sites in China. Due to the lack of historical accounts and materials for exact dating, these products unearthed from relevant strata of the kiln sites form a good reference group for dating Singapore settlement. In view of the nature of the

Singapore sites as part of a settlement, intact ceramic objects are rarely preserved.

In the following part, I will select some samples of rims or bases with relatively obvious features found in Singapore, in order to make comparisons with datable materials in China. Longquan celadon products found from Singapore consist of various shapes, including bowls, plates, jarlets, washers, -shaped washers, boxes, incense burners, etc. The main techniques for decorating are appliqué, stamping, puncturing and incising. The appliqué decorations are basically applied on the inner base of bowls or plates, with usual plum blossoms or fish motif. The stamped and punctured decorations are also commonly applied on the inner base of bowls or plates, such as , lotus and peony branch. The incised decorations are mainly simple floral motifs on interior or exterior wall of a certain ware. There are many plain wares with no decoration on the surface as well. The samples indicate that most of the Longquan products were made during the middle and late Yuan Dynasty. Products of early Yuan Dynasty are scarce. Products of the early Ming Dynasty are also less numerous than those of middle and late Yuan

Dynasty, butmore of them are of good quality.

156

Products of the middle Yuan Dynasty

A, Bowl

Sorting by rimforms, there are straight-rimmed bowls, wide-open rim bowls, and floral shaped rim bowls. (Table 4.3.1.1)

B, Plate

Sorting by rim forms, there are folded-rim plates, flexuose folded rim plates, and plate-shaped rim plates. Common features include incised chrysanthemum petal decoration on the interior wall and lotus petal decoration on the exterior wall. (Table

4.3.1.2)

C, Washer

Double fish washers, the base of which is the commonly preserved part, with appliqué or incised or stamped double fish decoration at the center of the inner surface.

Sugarcane-shaped washers, a type very typical among the products of middle and late Yuan Dynasty in Fengdongyan, Dayao kiln site (Xu Jun 2005: 12), but rare in the

Singapore settlement.

D, Jarlet

Small-mouth Jarlets, commonly found in Singapore. Sherds of rim, body and base are all found. The shape usually has straight mouth, wide shoulder, bulbous body and flat base with or without lugs on the shoulder.

Covered jarlet with drum nails and appliqué decoration, there is one sample with

157

inner curved rim, and drum nails and part of the appliqué decoration on the exterior

upper wall. The overall shape of this sample should be similar to those covered jarlets

with appliqué peony motif of middle and late Yuan Dynasty found at the Dayao kiln site.

Covered Jar, of which only lower parts of a lotus petal jar are found. (Table

4.3.1.3)

E, Goblet-shaped incense burner

Rim parts are commonly found, which are curved inward.

Products of early Ming Dynasty

A small amount of early Ming Dynasty Longquan celadon products have been

discovered at Singapore archaeological sites. In the Fort Canning site, a celadon jar

and a celadon plate are conjectured to have been Guan type products (Qin Dashu and

Shi Wenbo34-35, plate 9-11).

The 14th century shipwreck and the cargo

In the surrounding waters, the oldest ancient shipwreck near Singapore (close to

Batam Island) is Pulau Nipah. Unfortunately, no report was ever published yet, and

the site has never been properly excavated. There were 14th century objects on board.

A few finds from Pulau Nipah are in the National Heritage Boards collection and presently kept in the Heritage Conservation Centre. (Communication with Dr. Miksic)

According to the published underwater archaeology reports, shipwrecks of the

158

13th to 14th centuries discovered from the waters in Southeast Asia are scarce20.

Fortunately, a shipwreck, named the Turiang shipwreck, of approximately the 14th

century was unearthed from the waters not far away from Singapore (Brown and

Sjostrand 2000). Because the location of the shipwreck is close to the coast, the site had been heavily damaged. The shipwreck had fallen apart. Part of the cargo was missing. Analysis of the structure of the shipwreck indicates that it was made in China.

Sawankhalok and Sukhothai ceramics constituted the largest proportion of the cargo.

The Chinese ceramics have two major provenances: one is Guangdong-made brown glazed bowls, plates, jarlets, boxes etc; the other is Longquan-made celadon plates and covered jars. Although it is reported that the Turiang shipwreck sank during the

Yuan Dynasty, a certain celadon covered jar demonstrates some early Ming features21.

In terms of the decoration, the upper exterior wall of the jar consists of a deeply

incised peony motif with two parallel lines decorated at both top and bottom of the

peony motif separately. Under the main peony motif, there are narrow lotus petals

incised at the lower part of the body. Unfortunately, this jar’s exterior base is not

illustrated in the report. There is also an illustration of Guan type plate with peony

20Recently, Dr. Michael Flecker reported the discovery of a Southeast Asian ship off the coast of , northeast Bornjeo. The shipwreck is named Jade Dragon. Although part of the cargo has been looted, it still can be seen that the whole cargo is Longquan celadon. According to the published pictures, the shapes include bowls, appliqué dragon plates, appliqué double fish plates, and small-mouth jarlets. Dr. Flecker considers that this shipwreck may have sunk between late 13th through 14th centuries, on the basis of the porcelain. http://www.maritime-explorations.com/jade%20dragon.htm 21The report considers Turiang shipwreck can be dated earlier than Ming Dynasty. However, one of the main authors for the report, Roxanna M. Brown, contradicted this opinion in her later research paper. She illustrates one covered jar from Turiang shipwreck in her PhD thesis, which has a similar shape with the sample selected in this section. The flower motif is slightly different. She considers that covered jar as Guan type ware. 159

motif along with clear exterior base in the report. This celadon plate has some early

Ming features as well—the spur mark on the exterior base is wide and relatively far

away from the inner foot wall. (Table 4.3.1.4)

Since the Turiang shipwreck is located at anunusual site, it is suggested that its

destination was supposed to be southwest Borneo or south Sulawesi, but not heading

west through the Straits of Melaka. Although this shipwreck is the nearest one of

pre-colonial period to Singapore, it is still uncertain whether it had trading relations with Singapore. Regarding the artefact combination, Sawankhalok and Sukhothai

ceramics constitute 57% of the total ceramic amount, with 35% Chinese ceramics and

8% Vietnamese ceramics. Most surprisingly, qingbai wares are not found among the

Chinese ceramics. Nevertheless, in Singapore sites, which is not far away from the

shipwreck, the proportion of Chinese ceramicscould reach 83% among the whole unearthed ceramics of ancient times in terms of weight (Miksic 2006b: 147-153).

We must note that statistics by weight should be differentiated from that from

quantities of sherds or vessels when making comparisons. Inthe excavation at Fort

Canningin 1877, 8756 porcelain sherds in total were recovered, of which 5862 pieces

were celadon. The proportion of the celadon sherds in terms of numbers of sherds is

67% (Miksic 1989: 34-56). The above statistics are not complete, because

classification of artefacts from archaeological sites in Singapore is still ongoing.

However, as far as can be inferred from preliminary observation, there is little doubt

that Chinese ceramics constitute the largest portion. Of the Chinese wares, celadon

forms the largest category by number, then white wares (combination of qingbai

160

wares and white wares) has less portion, while blue and white wares forms the

smallest portion among the three Chinese porcelain types. In Singapore’s

archaeological sites, Sawankhalok ceramics and Vietnamese blue and white wares are

also found in very small quantities, while Vietnamese blue and white wares are found

just in one site (Miksic 1998).

The above comparisons demonstrate that the combination of varied ceramic types

shows a big difference between the shipwreck and the settlement sites. If the

shipwreck sank in the early Ming Dynasty, then the Chinese ceramics’ proportion is

decreased significantly compared with the shipwrecks of the previous period. The

maritime trading ban in effect since the reign of the Hongwu emperor could be taken

into account in accounting for the decline of Chinese export ceramics. The decrease of

early Ming Chinese porcelains discovered in Singapore settlement sitescould also be

attributed to the same reason. However, the proportion of late 14th century Southeast

Asian porcelains is not distinctly higher than that of Chinese porcelain in the

Singapore settlement. One possible explanation could be that the status of Singapore

as an entrepot declined before Thai and Vietnamese ceramics became the main trading

items to share Southeast Asian market, during the Hongwu reign.

Summary

The origins of Longquan celadon discovered in Singapore can be traced to several kiln sites in the Longquan area, such as the Eastern District and Dayao. This region yielded many different ceramic types of varied qualities. Most of them were

161

domestic porcelain for daily use. Tomb remains of the pre-colonial period have never been found. These ceramics could not have functioned in Singapore as burial offerings.

Although Singapore was not a major ceremonial center, a recent discovery of a qingbai Buddhist suggests that Buddhist rituals or worshipping activities were conducted. Some of the porcelain, such as the incense burner found at Fort

Canning, may have been used for sacrificing.

The celadon products discovered in Singapore can be dated from early to late of

14th century, which is the heyday of trading activities in Singapore.

162

Tab le 4.3.1.1 Comparison between bowl sherds unearthed from Singapore and those from Longquan area

Location

Bowl rims discovered form Bowl bases discovered from Kiln sites in Eastern Kiln sites in

Ware Singapore Singapore District, Longquan Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Longquan

Dating

Type 6I Late to the end of Yuan Stage 3, the 7th Period Dynasty Excavation Report for Kiln

Sites in Eastern District,

Longquan

163

Type III

Late to terminal Yuan Stage 3, the 7th Period Dynasty Excavation Report for Kiln

Sites in Eastern District,

Longquan

Late to terminal Yuan

Dynasty

Stage 3, the 7th Period

Excavation Report for Kiln

164

Sites in Eastern District,

Longquan

Late to terminal Yuan

Dynasty

Stage 3, the 7th Period

Excavation Report for Kiln

Sites in Eastern District,

Longquan

165

Tab le 4.3.1.2 Comparison between plate sherds unearthed from Singapore and those from Longquan area

Location

Plates rims Plates bases discovered form Kiln sites in Kiln sites in Fengdongyan,

Ware discovered form Singapore Eastern District, Dayao, Longquan

Singapore Longquan

Dating

Middle and late Yuan Dynasty

plate with incised peony motif

Porcelain Unearthed from Kiln

Sites in Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Longquan

166

Stage 3, the

Late to terminal Yuan Dynasty 7thPeriod

Excavation Report

for Kiln Sites in

Eastern District,

Longquan

Early Yuan Dyansty

167

plate with appliqué double fish

motif

Porcelain Unearthed from Kiln

Sites in Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Longquan

Middle and late Yuan Dynasty

hidden ring-foot plate

Porcelain Unearthed from Kiln

Sites in Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Longquan

168

Tab le 4.3.1.3 Comparison between jar sherds unearthed from Singapore and those from Longquan area

Location

Ware Base sherds discovered in Singapore Body sherds discovered in Singapore Kiln sites in Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Dating Longquan

Middle and late Yuan

Dynasty

covered jar with lotus petal motif

Porcelain Unearthed from Kiln Sites in

Fengdongyan, Dayao, Longquan

169

Tab le 4.3.1.4 Comparison between celadon unearthed from the Turiang shipwreck and those from the Longquan area

Location Turiang shipwreck Kiln sites in Fengdongyan,

Ware Dayao, Longquan

Name

Covered jar jar with incised peony motif jar with incised peony motif

Porcelain Unearthed from Kiln

Sites in Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Longquan

Big plate

plate with peony motif big plate

Porcelain Unearthed from Kiln

Sites in Fengdongyan, Dayao,

Longquan

4.3.2 Fujian wares

Differing characteristics of the ceramics sherds’ shapes, pastes, glazes, 170

decorations and craftsmanship, enable scholars to distinguish three main provenance categories of Fujian wares ceramic production: Dehua kiln complex, Zhuangbian kiln complex, and Yi kiln complex. This section will make comparisons between the wares unearthed from Singapore, and the similar ones found in China.

A. Dehua wares

By shape, the main categories of Dehua wares in Singapore are washers, boxes, jarlets, etc. (Table 4.3.2.1) a.Washer

The Dehua kind of washer normally has a shallow body, square rim, relatively straight wall, wide inner bottom, foot. The paste is normally of relatively loose quality, that is, the paste is not well vitrified. The color of the paste is grayish white or creamy white. The glaze is of transparently white color or Qingbai color. It is normally cracked heavily. Glaze is thinly applied on both sides. However, there is no glaze on either inner or outer side of the rim part. Paste and glaze are not cemented well enough, which normally results in glaze exfoliation. The exterior wall is either plain or decorated with molded lotus petals. b.Box

Both the paste and glaze of this kind of box are basically the same with those of the above mentioned washer. They are either plain or decorated with molded floral . The upper and lower parts of the box were made separately. c.Jarlet

171

Not many examples of this kind of jarlet have been found in Singapore yet. A

relatively complete one was discovered at the Fort Canning Hill site (Miksic 2004: 49, plate 17). The mouth part of it is missing. Onlybody and foot have been found. The body is in globular shape. It is clear that the body was formed by joining separately-made upper and lower section, which is a very typical characteristic of

Dehua craftsmanship.22 The foot is in trumpet shape. White glaze is applied on its

exterior wall. There is molded lotus petal decoration on its outer side.

Table 4.3.2.1 Similarity illustration between Dehua wares found in Singapore and

China

Location Singapore Dehua Kilns

Ware

Washer

FTC Qudougong kiln complex

Box

STA 5

22Personal communication with Mr. Li Jian’an. 172

Qudougong kiln complex

Jarlet

Wanpinglun kiln complex FTC

B. Zhuangbian wares

According to samples from surface collections, local researchers have generally comprehended the characteristics of Zhuangbian wares (Ke Fengmei and Chen Hao

1995: 606). In terms of the paste, the quality is relatively coarse. It is less vitrified and solid than Longquan green wares. In color it is normally whitish gray or yellowish gray.

Glaze is applied thinly on both side of the wall. But normally the lower part of the exterior wall and the foot are unglazed, due to the way the glaze is applied. The foot of the dried biscuit is held by hand, while the upper part of the biscuit is dipped into the glaze liquid. The inner bottom of some of the bowls, plates, dishes, etc has an unglazed ring circle, which is specially made to prevent the lower vessel becoming cemented to the upper one placed on it when fired in the kiln. The color of the glaze often appears transparently greenish, sometimes bluish green or yellowish green. 173

Most of the products are made by fast wheel or by molding. The traces from the

fast wheel still could be seen on the lower part of the exterior wall. The outer edge of

the foot is intentionally cut. The center part of the foot always bulges, because the

rotary forming process was hastily done.

It is quite popular to decorate the vessels with incised or stamped motifs. Plain

products are also quite common.

Not many types of Zhuangbian wares are found in Singapore. The great majority

of them are probably bowls.

C. Yi wares

The Yi kiln complex is located in Minqing County, under the administration of

Fuzhou. No excavations have been conducted at this kiln complex. Surface collections have been made by local archaeological institutes. According to local researchers, there are no great distinctions observable between the products of the

Zhuangbian kiln complex and the Yi kiln complex. However, generally speaking, the foot of the Yi bowls has a more regular shape than that of Zhuangbian bowls. The outer edge of the Zhuangbian bowl foot is cut for some reason. But this technique is not applied to Yi products. The outer base of the Yi bowl foot is normally flat, without any convex tip at the center like the Zhuangbian bowl foot.23A certain quantity of Yi

wares has also been found in Singapore.

23Personal communication with Mr.LiJian’an from Fujian Museum. 174

4.3.3 Jingdezhen wares

There are basically three categories of Jingdezhen wares found in Singapore: blue and white wares, Qingbai wares, and copper red wares.

Blue and white wares:

The common definition of blue and white porcelain is a certain kind of white porcelain with underglaze cobalt blue motifs on the surface. The motifs are drawn with cobalt dye on the paste. Transparent or qingbai glaze is applied on top of the cobalt paintings. Blue and white porcelain requires high temperature when fired in the kiln, but it is not very sensitive to the kiln atmosphere (in other words, the amount of in the kiln has little influence on the glaze color).

Blue and white porcelain was not inventedin Jingdezhen. However, during the

Yuan Dynasty, Jingdezhen kilns became a very important blue and white porcelain producer. So far, several kiln complexes producing blue and white wares in Yuan

Dynasty have been found: Jingdezhen in Jiangxi Province, Jizhou in Jiangxi Province,

Jiangshan County in Zhejiang Province, and Yuxi County in Yunnan Province (The

Chinese Ceramic Society 1982: 338). Each kiln complex used its own sources, materials, recipes and crafts to make products.

According to observation of the finds in Singapore, it seems most of them came from Jingdezhen kiln complexes. Therefore, in this section, it is necessary to introduce a detailed description of Jingdezhen blue and white products in order toisolate the similar characteristics of those unearthed from Singapore and Jingdezhen.

175

(Table 4.3.3.1)

So far, the blue and white products made in Jingdezhen from other kiln complexes cannot be distinguished by observation only. However, if the blue and white ware is applied with Shufu type qingbai glaze, it is basically safe to say that it is a Jingdezhen product.

Generally, two groups of blue and white wares have been unearthed in Singapore.

The characteristics of one group are as follows: most of them are of good quality with thick body. The paste is highly vitrified. The color of the paste is white. The glaze is smoothly applied on the biscuit. It is more like the Shufu type qingbai glaze. Glaze degradation is generally not seen. The color of the cobalt motifs is bright blue. Motifs look delicate and well-drawn, including lotus and otherfloral patterns. In terms of shape, there are bowls, ewers, etc. Only a few pieces of this kind have been discovered from Fort Canning Hill site so far.

The characteristics of the other group are quite different. Normally they are of small size with thin body. The paste is slightly less exquisite than the former group. It is also highly vitrified but not as solid as the former group. The glaze is not as good as the former group either. Degradation occurs quite often. Moreover, it is not cemented well enough with the paste. It peels off sometimes after being buried underground for a long time. The color of the cobalt motifs is dark blue. Motifs are different kinds of flowers, such as scrolled chrysanthemum, lotus etc. In terms of shapes, there are bowls, cups, and stem cups.

By comparing this group of blue and white products with those discovered in

176 different kiln sites of Jingdezhen, it could be concluded that they are a kind of products likely made by the Situlikilns and Luomaqiaokilns located in Jingdezhen old town area.

Table 4.3.3.1 Similarity illustration between blue and white wares found in Singapore and China

Location Singapore Sites Jingdezhen Kilns

Ware

Bowl

FTC

FTC

Situli kiln site, Jingdezhen old town area

177

Plate

Situli kiln site, Jingdezhen old town area EMP

Cup

STA 23 Luomaqiao Hongguang kiln site, Jingdezhen old

town area

Qingbai wares:

Many qingbai sherds have been unearthed from Singapore. In terms of shapes,

there are bowls, body-angled bowls, plates, dishes, stem cups etc. The size varies from small to big. Normally, big wares have thick bodies; small wares have thin bodies. The biggest piece ever found is a stand or foot possibly from a container,

unearthed from the Fort Canning Hill site. The paste is usually exquisite and of pure

white. The glaze is quite smoothly applied. It is cemented quite well with the paste, so

that it hardly exfoliates from the biscuit.

There are both high quality examples and ordinary ones. A big portion of qingbai

178

sherds are of Shufu type or eggshell-white porcelain, which are considered as good quality ones. Glaze is applied quite smoothly on both sides; but there is no glaze on the foot except for the outer foot wall. Normally the glaze is not shiny or glassy. Glaze degradation is rarely encountered. There are always molded motifs on the whole inner side of a ware, which cannot be clearly observed. The other group of ordinary vessels

is covered with relatively transparent glaze, which is mostly cracked and looks glassy.

Glaze degradation happens sometimes.

Shufu type wares are a kind of special products made in Jingdezhen Kilns. From current discoveries in China, it seems that the shufu type wares were produced for different hierarchies or groups of people: the royal court, feudal governments, elites and aristocrats, religious groups, citizens. According to historical resources, it could

be concluded that products with special character marks should be used for certain

class or groups of people. For instance, wares with taixi, shufu, etc character marks

were likely used for bureaucrats.

There are also a few other characters, such as wang (王), de (德), Jiangxia (江夏), guoyong (国用) etc marked on some wares. Lastly, there is a huge amount of products intentionally made for commercial sale. Many wares of this kind have been found in urban sites, such as Khanbaliq (literally “Magnificent Capital of the Yuan Empire”,

元大都) in Beijing (Fang Hui 2011: 30-32).

Copper red wares:

A small quantity of copper red sherds was found in Singapore. Compared with

179 other Jingdezhen wares, the quantity of this kind of porcelain is quite rare. Most of the sherds come from jarlets or teardrop-shaped vases. The paste is of good quality with pure white color. The glaze is of qingbai color. Normally it is well cemented with the paste. The motif is basically composed of very simple lines of floral scroll painted with copper colorant.

Copper red is a kind of underglaze red using copper element in the dye as its colorant. After drawing patterns on the dry paste, transparent glaze is applied on top.

The firing condition required for copper red wares is a reducing atmosphere with high temperature. In the early phase of production, it was very difficult to make successful products of this type because the copper red’s pigment needs a strictly controlled firing temperature to yield the desired color. It is so sensitive to the temperature in the kiln that its through put ratio is especially low, which also made it a valuable merchandise in the Yuan Dynasty. Copper red wares were initially produced in the

Yuan Dynasty. The earliest and the only products with date inscriptions known so far are qinghua youlihong (青花釉里红, a term specially used to refer to the porcelain with underglaze patterns made of both cobalt blue and copper red) covered jar and aqinghua youlihong pavilion miniature found in Jiangxi Province (Yang Houli and

Wan Liangtian 1981: 72-74, plate 1). Although they are not unearthed from tombs, inscriptions painted on them with cobalt dye indicate they were funeral offerings made for a specific tomb owner. The contemporary emperor’s reign title zhiyuanwuyin (至元戊寅) is written on both of them, which suggests the production year is1338 C.E., around the mid-Yuan Dynasty.

180

In mainland China, only a few pieces of Yuan Dynasty copper red wares have

been unearthed. They are found in Beijing, Hebei Province, and Jingdezhen. A pair of

intact qinghua youlihong covered jars was unearthed from a hoard site in Baoding

City, Hebei Province (Hebei Provincial Museum 1965: plate 1). A small amount of

copper red sherds and a few complete pieces have been unearthed from both the urban

site of Beijing and Hutian kiln site of Jingdezhen.

4.3.4 Guangdong wares

According to Roeland Stulemeijer’s chemical test on green ware sherds unearthed

from Empress Place and Singapore Cricket Club, a certain quantity of green wares

unearthed from Singapore was produced in Guangdong kilns (Stulemeijer 2011).

However, for his test, only random samples from Singapore were tested. No sherds

unearthed from China have been involved in the experiments as control groups. His

chemical test demonstrated that there are mainly three provenances for green wares

yielded from Singapore. The “objective and subjective”comparative analysis, that is

the chemical test and observation, also suggests that experienced researchers could be able to accurately identify artefacts of different origins. However, this could not provide sufficient evidence that the three main provenances are necessarily Zhejiang kilns, Fujian kilns and Guangdong kilns.

In the opinion of the present author, it is very difficult to identify green wares produced in Guangdong. It is commonly recognized that during the Yuan Dynasty

Guangdong was not a major ceramic production center. Archaeological survey also

181 demonstrated that Yuan kilns in Guangdong Province declined. In terms of quality, the products of the Guangdong Yuan kilns are far inferior to those of the Song Dynasty kilns of Chaozhou, Huizhou, and Xicun (Zeng Guangyi 1991: 105-108, 84).

182

Chapter 5: Chinese Ceramics from Trowulan and Singapore

5.1 Historical sources on Yuan and Ming relations with Java

5.1.1 Narratives of the warfare between Yuan and Java

Before the establishment of the kingdom of Majapahit, the prior Javanese

Kingdom Singosari had political interaction with the Yuan court. There are different records about Kertanagara, the king of Singosari in the late 13th century, in the

Nagarakrtagama (or “Desawarnana”, written in 1365 C.E.) and the Pararaton

(“Book of Kings”, written sometime between 1481 C.E. and 1600 C.E.). In 1930s, N.J.

Krom agreed that the Nagarakrtagama’s record about Kertanagara’s reign is probably

accurate. Although later other scholars, such as C.C. Burger, presented different

perspectives on King Kertanagara’s methods and achievements of expanding the

kingdom’s territory, now it is generally accepted by scholars that Kertanagara ruled

the kingdom till 1292 C.E. Kertanagara made arduous efforts to extend the kingdom’s

political influence over the surrounding regions of Bali, West Java and Sumatra.

However, Kertanagara’s political ambitions were thwarted on account of the civil

rebellion initiated by .

The Chinese account Yuanshi records a military expedition to Java. Although the

expedition failed to achieve its objectives in the Yuan emperor’s opinion, it

unexpectedly facilitated the establishment of Majapahit Kingdom. In 1279 C.E. and

1280 C.E., the Yuan court sent missions to Singosari. In return, Singosari sent

183

missions to the Yuan court in 1280 C.E. and 1286 C.E. However, was

not contented to see that the king of Singosari himself was not in the mission. When

Kublai Khan sent a mission to Java in 1292 C.E., the emperor’s request was conveyed

to the king of Singosari that Kertanagara was supposed to pay homage to the Yuan

court in person. Kertanagara was outraged by the request; he ordered the Yuan

ambassador’s face to be branded, after which he was expelled. This rude action badly

undermined the Yuan ruler’s authority. Thus, the relationship between Singosari and

Yuan became tense. Kublai Khan quickly sent a military force to conquer Singosari at the end of 1292 C.E. According to Yuanshi, when General Yiheimishi and his were about to take leave for Java, “the emperor said: ‘When you arrive on Java, make clear statement to their soldiers and citizens. Initially, Yuan and Java sent missions to each other, and we were in a good relationship. But later, the Ambassador Prime

Minister Mr. Meng’s face was branded. Therefore, we send a punitive expedition against (Singosari) for this time’”.24

Before the arrival of the Yuan military force, Jayakatwang, the governor of

Wurawari, rebelled and attacked Tumapel, the contemporary capital of Singosari.

Kertanagara sent his son-in-law Raden Wijaya and Ardharaja to resist the enemy.

While Kertanagara’s force confronted the hostile troops on ,

Jayakatwang’s other troops raided the capital from another direction. Kertanagara and

many officials were taken by surprise and killed. Raden Wijaya also lost the battle and

24“帝曰：卿等至爪哇，明告其国军民。朝廷初与爪哇通使，往来交好。后刺诏使孟右丞之面， 以此进讨。”引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷二百十，“爪哇”条，《四部备要·史部》，影印本，上 海：中华书局，1935 年，页 1425。Quoted from Song Lian et al, “Yuanshi”, Vol.210, “Java” item, “Sibu Beiyao” series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1425. 184

an away. Thus, Jayakatwang seized the throne of Singosari. Later, Raden Wijaya came

back to Java and reconciled with Jayakatwang. With the king’s permission, he

established his own territory in Tarik along the Brantas River. In 1293 C.E., Raden

Wijaya created a local administration in order to recover his family’s domination over

the kingdom. In early 1294 C.E., the Yuan military reached Java Island. Raden Wijaya

saw an opportunity to overthrow Jayakatwang’s rule by cooperating with the Yuan

military. According to the item “Shi Bi” in Yuanshi, “When (Raden Wijaya) heard that

Shi Bi and the force had arrived, he sent an envoy along with his own territories and household register, as well as the map of Wurawari (to admit Yuan as its suzerain).”25In the item “Java”, there is a similar record about the affair which states that “The Java King’s son-in-law Raden Wijaya and his subjects would like to

surrender. Raden Wijaya could not leave his army. He asked Yang Zi, Ganzhoubuhua,

Quan Zhongzu to introduce his prime minister etc., more than fifty officials (to the

Yuan general).”26In item “Java”, there is a general recording about how Raden Wijaya asked for military support from the Yuan force when Jayakatwang was attacking

Majapahit. The Yuan force helped Raden Wijaya out of the crisis. Jayakatwang had to retreat to his capital. At last, Jayakatwangwas defeated by the allied forces of Yua n

25“闻弼等至，遣使以其国山川户口及葛郎国地图迎降。”引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷一百六十 二，《四部备要·史部》，影印本，上海：中华书局，1935 年，页 1154。Quoted from Song Lian et al, “Yuanshi”, Vol.162, “Sibu Beiyao” series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1154. 26“爪哇主壻土罕必阇耶举国纳降。土罕必阇耶不能离军，先令杨梓、甘州不花、全忠祖引其引 其宰相昔剌难答吒耶等五十余人来迎。引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷二百十，“爪哇”条，《四部 备要·史部》，影印本，上海：中华书局，1935 年，页 1426。Quoted from Song Lian et al, “Yuanshi”, Vol.210, “Java”item, “Sibu Beiyao” series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1426. 185

and Raden Wijaya.27

As mentioned in the items of “Shi Bi”, “Gao Xing” and “Java” in Yuanshi,

Jayakatwang had to surrender and give up the capital city. His family and the officials of Wurawari were all captured. They were going to be sent to the Yuan court. The

three items also mentioned how the Yuan force was counterattacked by RadenWijaya.

As says in the item “Shi Bi”, “(After the battle), Raden Wijaya requested (the Yuan general) to go back to his own territory and prepare the declaration of surrender as well as his treasure collectionsin order to offer them to the Yuan emperor as tribute.

Shi Bi and Yiheimishi unsuspectingly approved his request. They then sent

Danzhibuding, Ganzhoubuhua with two hundred soldiers to escort Raden Wijaya back.

Raden Wijaya defected by killing the two commanders duringthe journey.”28Raden

Wijaya reunited his troops to attack the Yuan army. Finally, the Yuan army was fatally

defeated by Raden Wijaya’s troops and lost the battle. They had to sail back to

Quanzhou hastily.

The above is basically the narrative of the Yuan expedition to Java as recorded in

Chinese accounts. Nonetheless, the Pararaton has provided another version of the

reason why Raden Wijaya counterattacked the Yuan force. According to the

Pararaton, the Yuan force intended to take Kertanagara’s daughters to China as war

27宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷二百十，《四部备要·史部》，影印本，上海：中华书局，1935 年， 页 1426。Song Lian et al, “Yuanshi”, Vol.210, “Sibu Beiyao”series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1426. 28“土罕必阇耶乞归易降表，及所藏珍宝入朝。弼与亦黑迷失许之，遣万户担只不丁、甘州不花， 以兵二百人护之还国。土罕必阇耶于道杀二人以叛。”引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷一百六十二， 《四部备要·史部》，影印本，上海：中华书局，1935 年，页 1154。Quoted from Song Lian et al, “Yuanshi”, Vol.162, “Sibu Beiyao”series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1154. 186

trophies. Indonesian accounts also give more information about how Raden Wijaya

managed to carry out his clever strategies of raiding the Yuan force systematically,

which compelled the Yuan forces to retreat and finally depart.

This is the only expedition that Yuan Empire ever sent to Java. Singosari is also

the most distant overseas kingdom to which the Yuan court ever sent expeditions.

Yuanshistates “Kublai Khan conquered the barbaric peoples in surrounding areas by

arms. The warfare between Yuan and Java should be the biggest one among those

between Yuan and overseas states.”29After this war, Raden Wijaya was enthroned as

the king of Majapahit. He was titled “Kertarajasa”. The kingdom was politically centered in East Java.

5.1.2 Trade relations between China and Majapahit

The recordings related to Java could be seen in accounts of Chinese literati written in the Yuan and Ming periods, such as the notes of the well-known trader

Wang Dayuan, Daoyi Zhilue. Wang’s account of “Java” is as follows:

Java once was called “Shepo” in former times. Majapahit port was where its administration is located. The governmental buildings and palaces are imposing and magnificent. The vast territory is densely populated. It really is the foremost among the barbaric vassal states in Eastern Seas. According to the local legendary stories, the first king

29“世祖抚有四夷，其出师海外诸蕃者，惟爪哇之役为大。”引自宋濂等撰，《元史》，卷二百 十，“爪哇”条，《四部备要·史部》，影印本，上海：中华书局，1935 年，页 1425。Quoted from Song Lian et al, “Yuanshi”, Vol.210, “Java” item, “Sibu Beiyao” series, History Department, Photocopy, Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company, 1935, p.1425. 187 was born out of a rock, which was struck by lightning. By his order, the chief of each tribe was granted to a female. The kingdom has fertile fields and level land, which produce multiple more rice than other countries. The people do not steal or pick up the lost things on roads. This is why there is a saying “the peaceful Shepo Kingdom”. Their customs tend to be plain and simple. The males tie their hair up in a knot and wrap themselves with da-bu

(translator: it could be some kind of cloth). Only the chiefs wear their hair long and loose.

During the Emperor Dade’s Reign, Yiheimishi, Ping- Bi and Gao Xing went to the country and ordered it to submitto (theYuan Empire) and send tributes, to establish government offices and laws, and to set military posts for transmitting official dispatches.

(The local people) implement common laws and tax ofsalt. (They) use copper coins. (They) are used to casting coins, which mix silver, tin, lead and copper. They are the size of a spiral shell. They are called silver , in exchange for copper coins in business transactions. (They) can produce salt by solar evaporation. Pepper can produce ten thousand catties every year.

(They can also produce) coloured printed cloth of very fine and strong quality, sheep, parrots etc. All the drugs are imported from other countries. The goods (sold by Chinese traders) are saltpetre beads, gold, silver, blue , coloured , blue and white porcelain bowls, iron objects and the like. (Its) vassal states include Wulun, Xiling, Sandaban, Jidan,

Sunlaetc.Theseplaces have no special products, so they are merely noted here.30

30This paragraph is interpreted by the author according to the version annotated by Su Jiqing. 汪大渊， 苏继庼校释，《岛夷志略校释》，北京：中华书局，1981 年， 页 159-160。Wang Dayuan, annotated by Su Jiqing, Daoyi Zhilue Jiaoshi, Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company, 1981, pp.156-160. There are also translations made by William Woodville Rockhill, “Notes on the Relations and Trade of China with the Eastern Archipelago and the Coast of the Indian Ocean during the Fourteenth Century Part II”, T’oungPao, Vol.16, No.2, 1915, pp.236-238. 188

The toponym “Shepo (阇婆)” also referring to Java is found in certain Chinese

accounts written before the Yuan Dynasty. “Shepo” appears in Yuanjia Qijuzhu

(literally meaning “Emperor Yuanjia’s daily life logs”) and Songshu (literally meaning

“ Dynasty”) compiled in the Northern and Southern Dynasties. After that time, “Shepo” was used in historical accounts, although not always referring to

“Java”. Scholars have debated interpretations about the use of this toponym before the

Song Dynasty. In the Song, “Shepo” seems to have become the appellation for modern “Java”. For instance, Zhufan Zhi written during the Southern Song has

“Shepo” indicating West and Central Java, while “Da Shepo (means great or big

Shepo)” is used for East Java. This, though, could infer Java Island was not a at the time. By literal meaning, East Java was supposed to be more powerful that West and Central Java. In the latter Yuan Dynasty, Dade Nanhai Zhi only mentions “Shepo”. The Yuanshi composed in the early Ming has both “Shepo” and

“Java” as alias for each other.

Zhao Rugua’s Zhufan Zhi was composed in the Southern Song Dynasty. Its section on “Shepo”, contains notes about Song Chinese trading activities with

Javanese merchants. “This state has pepper gathered together. ships make profits of several times (of its cost). (So they) always break bans and secretly load

(copper coins) in exchange for pepper. (The Song) court has prohibited selling

(pepper) many times. Foreign merchants are practicing deceit. (They) changed name of the place of origin to Sukadana.” (Zhao Rugua 2000: 55) In the section on

“Pepper”, he even evaluates pepper’s quality levels according to place of production,

189

“Pepper is produced in Sukadana, Daban, Baihuayuan, Madong and Rongyalu

(Janggala) of Shepo. Pepper produced in Xintuo (possibly Sunda) is the best; that

produced in Dabanis in secondary class.” (Zhao Rugua 2000: 195) These records

show that Javanese pepper had already become an important commodity inthe

Chinese market. Much pepper in the Chinese market was considered to come from

certain places in Java. In fact, Zhou Qufei in his Lingwai Daida in earlier times also stated that “(Shepo) locally produces pepper, sandalwood, clove, bai--kou, rou-dou-kou, agilawood.” (Zhou Qufei 1999: 88-89)The high profits generated from the pepper business spurred merchants to take risks. Similarly, other exotic commodities, such as incense and herbs, were imported to meet the demand of the

Chinese market. The descriptions of Zhufan Zhi demonstrate that Java had become important in trade relations with China in the Song Dynasty, in terms of the pepper business. Java was not the only foreign country providing pepper for the Chinese market. Srivijaya sent tribute, including pepper, to the Song court. Some of the tributes were recorded in Chinese official archives. For instance, records that Srivijaya offered pepper of 1550 catties (“斤”, a traditional unit of weight in China, equivalent to around 1⅓ pound avoirdupois) to the Song court in 1178 C.E.

(Xu Song ed, 1957: 7867) Normally, the missions to China were not only designed to offer tribute, but also for trading commodities in the market. Srivijaya was also a source of pepper in the Song period.

Along with the flourishing overseas trade in China, copper coins kept going to

overseas countries. However, a “cash shortage” developed in the Song Dynasty,

190

especially in the area of southeast China. There were many reasons leading to the

“cash shortage”. Overseas trade was one of them, for it directly resulted in the loss of

Chinese currency and precious metal to foreign countries. The Song court had to

forbid copper coins as a medium of exchange. In 1219 C.E., the policy was issued that all foreign commodities should be exchanged for silk, damask, ceramics, wares etc. Stimulated by the policy, many more Chinese ceramics were exported to foreign countries than before.

In Chinese historical sources, there was only one military operation against the

Javanese polity by the Yuan court as mentioned in the above context. After Kublai

Khan passed away, Raden Wijaya sent envoys along with tribute to the Yuan court in order to reconcile with China. From then on till the end of Yuan regime, Majapahit and the Yuan court implemented a policy of mutual non-interference; Majapahit sent missions with tribute to imperial China’s court every few years. The tributes were recorded in Yuan’s official archives. The Javanese polity’s name was not rendered exactly; it was only referred to as only “Java” or “Shepo”. These documents show that

Java sent tribute to China 11 times. The tributes included a gold pagoda, wen-leopard, white ape, and white parrots. In return, the Yuan emperor granted “Java/Shepo” a tiger shaped tally with two pearls and gilt (Yu Changsen 1994: 85).

In the Yuan Dynasty, Java continued to serve as one of the biggest sources of pepper for China. Marco Polo mentioned that places of origin of pepper included Java,

Coilum, Eli, Melibar and Gozurat. As for pepper’s place of origin, Wang Dayuan’s

Daoyi Zhilue refers to Martuma, Tavoy, Java, Pulau Aur, Calicut, Dongdanmiao,

191

Somnath, Fandaraina, and Quiron.31As could be seen, Java and Malabar Coast were two of the most important sources. Marco Polo realized that pepper had become one of the commonest daily consumption goods in southeast China. He had been to

Quanzhou and seen booming pepper trade activities there.

Majapahit continuously send missions with tribute to China since it first

established diplomatic relations with the Yuan court to the very terminal of the Yuan

reign. According to Ming Shilu, in 1369 C.E., Majapahit’s envoy, ever sent on a

diplomatic mission to the Yuan court, returned to the new Hongwu Emperor’s capital

Nanjing on his way back to Java, when he heard the news that the Yuan reign was just overthrown. At the same time, an awkward situation happened to Champa’ envoy

Huduman (in Chinese records as“虎都蛮”). He was supposed to send tribute to the

Yuan court, whereas the Yuan Dynasty terminated before he was able to reach the

capital. He had to redirect his way and finally arrived at Nanjing in lunar February,

Hongwu Year 2. Actually in lunar January, Hongwu Emperor had already sent envoys to Japan, Champa, Majapahit etc to proclaim the establishment of Ming regime in

China. In order to further eliminate the impacts derived from the previous Yuan court and gain acknowlegements from overseas polities, in lunar February Hongwu

Emperor sent special ambassadors to accompany the envoys of Champa, Java and

Japan etc back to their homelands. The Chinese ambassadors also took Datong

Calendar (大统历), imperial edict, etc as awards granted by the Ming emperor. They conveyed Hongwu Emperor’s words that “I have governed China

31The English toponyms are following Su Jiqing’s annotations, which have been concluded based on many former researchers’ studies. 192

following the heavenly destiny. In case people from far and near have not known the

situation, I hereby send ambassadors to inform the king.”32 Soon after, the foreign countries sent missions to the Ming court and acknowledged the legitimacy of the

Ming regime. The Javanese king even returned the “enfeoffment edict” issued by the

former Yuan court, to declare the stand of disengagement from the relationship with

the Yuan court.

Majapahit had frequent interactions with the Ming court. There are many

accounts of Majapahit’s relations with the Ming court. As mentioned above, private

martime trade was banned since the very beginning of the Ming Dynasty. The ban

lasted for a long time till Longqing reign in late Ming. However, the Ming court took

a positive attitude toward “tribute trade”, which generally means the foreign missions

were allowed to conduct trade activities with the goverment or its agencies legally in

China while paying tributes to the Ming court.

Majapahit had been sending tributes to the Ming court quite often as early as the

Hongwu Reign. In Hongwu Year 10 (1377 C.E.), the new king of Srivijaya was

enthroned. Envoy was sent to the Ming court for “enfeoffment edict”. The plea was

immediately agreed by Hongwu Emperor. The Ming court soon sent a mission to

Srivijaya to confer titles on the new king. Majapahit was dissatisfied and slayed the

Ming mission. After that, Majapahit sent envoys to China to detect the Ming’s attitude.

32“朕奉天命已主中国，恐遐迩未闻，故专使报王知之。”引自《钞本明实录》，第 1 册，卷三十 九，“洪武二年二月丙寅朔”条，红格本，影印本，北京：线装书局，2005 年， 页 212。Quoted from Chaoben Ming Shilu, Book 1, Vol.39, “Hongwu Year 2 Feburary” item, Hongge Version, Photocopy, Beijing: Thread-Binding Books Publishing House, 2005, p.212. With regard to the historical stories mentioned in this paragraph, please also refer to Volume 39 of the Ming Taizu Shilu. 193

Hongwu Emperor imprisoned them first but released them in Hongwu Year 12. The

next year, Java sent envoys to China only then did Hongwu Emperor know Majapahit had slaughtered the Ming mission. Hongwu Emperor was wrathful but did not take

revengeful actions. He repatriated the Javanese envoys and officially warned the king

of Majapahit. In Hongwu Year 14 and 15, Majapahit sent large-scale tributes and even hundreds of black slaves to the Ming cour, perhaps intending to normalise relations with Ming. Hongwu Emperor was pleased to see it and generously rewarded the envoys. Therefore, the relationship between the two countries was repaired. After

Hayam Wuruk died in 1389 C.E., his son and son-in-law contended for the majesty and splitted politically. The two self-claimed kings of Majapahit seperately sent missions to the Ming court. China distinguished them as “Eastern King” and “Western

King” respectively. In Yongle Year 4 (1406 C.E.), Eastern King was defeated while the Ming mission passed by Java. Western King’s people mistakenly killed a few

Chinese soldiers who happened to be in the local market. The Western King immediately sent envoys to apologize to . Yongle Emperor declared the Western King guilty and punished him with large indemnity. But the Western King was not able to pay enough compensation. Yongle Emperor recognized he was sincerely repairing the two countries’ relationship and then remitted the indemnity.

Western King was grateful and sent more missions to the Ming court since. Somtimes, missions were sent more than once a year. (Nie Dening 1992:92) Because receiving foreign tribute missions caused Ming much financial pressure, the Ming court notified the foreign countries to just pay tribute once every three years. Since 1446 C.E., the

194

frequency of Majapahit’s tribute missions was lessened. Its final recorded tribute

mission was conducted in 1499 C.E. (Groeneveldt 1960:38) In sum, trade activities in

the form of “tribute trade” are conducted through the early and mid Ming Dynasty.

The historical records have demonstrated that Java and China sustained trade relations

in 14th and 15th centuries. The material evidence regarding the trade between Java and

China which survives is mostly ceramics, which can be preserved above ground or

underground for a long time. Abundant relics of Chinese ceramics have been found

and unearthed in varied sites of Java.

5.2 Archaeology work and Chinese ceramics discovered in Trowulan

In the Majapahit period, trade activities were flourishing according to archival

sources. Archaeological finds have verified these documentary sources. Surveys have revealed a general picture of archaeological sites in Java. During the colonial period,

excavations were conducted in Trowulan. For instance, Wardenaar tried to find

Majapahit’s palace as early as in 1815. (Verbeek 1889: 1-15)

Thereafter, the Indonesian National Research Centre for Archaeology, or the

Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi Nasional, continued archaeological work on the site. From

1976 to 1990, the National Research Centre for Archaeology carried out a series of

official archaeological projects at Trowulan, including both surface investigations and

excavations. In the first place, Trowulan was envisaged as a functional urban system

constituting several cultural units. Following this concept, surface surveys were first conducted in order to locate the different patterns of cultural units. The surveys

195 covered an area of approximately 100 square kilometres. Within the surveyed area, archaeological finds were abundant. The whole area was then divided into several smaller sectors, according to the density and classification of relic remains. Every sector was considered relatively independent in terms of its functions in community.

After the surveys, excavations were carried out in different sectors, such as the

Pendopo Agung, Pandan Sili, Klinterejo, Sentonorejo, Nglinguk, Sumur Upas,

Kejagan, Kedaton, Batok Palung, Wringin Lawang, and Blendren.

The Pendopo Agung Sector yielded a wide variety of artefacts made of different materials. Besides earthenware, stoneware and porcelain products made in China,

Thailand and Vietnam had been found. The ceramics, metal objects, dietary remains and structure foundations indicate that this sector could have been densely populated for centuries (National Research Centre for Archaeology, Republic of Indonesia 1995:

20-21).

Sentonorejo Sector yielded stone pillar bases. The excavators had also unearthed a lot of earthenware, stoneware, porcelain, metal wares and organic remains.

Unfortunately no studies of these artefacts have been published.

Nglinguk Sector yielded brick structures and many artefacts for daily use, which suggests this sector may have functioned as a residential quarter. The discovery of high quality Chinese porcelain wares indicates this might have been a living quarter for social elites.

Batok Palung Sector is located east of the Nglinguk Sector. Archaeological excavations were conducted there in the 1980s. A thick stratum of faunal remains had

196

been unearthed overa wide area.The remains consisted of varied species for

residents’ consumptions, on the basis of investigating boiled or roasted bones.

Ceramic sherds were scattered among these faunal remains. This assemblage suggests

this area functioned as a place for discarding food remains and other household

wastes.

Kejagan Sector yielded a large number of earthenware sherds and terracotta

figurines. It is concluded that this area was used as a ceremonial centre, due to the

discovery of miniaturearchitectural models.

Blendren Sector is situated in Wates Umpak Village. There was an artificial pool

as well as the mouth of an underground channel. The pool and channel were supposed

to be used for , bathing and washing.33

The above is a brief summary of the excavations conducted in different sectors of

Trowulan site from 1970s to 1990s. Different areas of Trowulan demonstrate different features in terms of artefact assemblages. The excavations have yielded rich artefacts including a good quantity of Chinese ceramic sherds. Unfortunately, the excavations have not been published.

The unearthed ceramics have been stored in warehouses. Systematic research on the unearthed ceramics, especially the Chinese ceramics, has been published by local researchers only over the past decade. Relatively intact ceramic wares have been

33The data of Sentonorejo Sector, Nglinguk Sector, BatokPalung Sector, Kejagan Sector and Blendren Sector is quoted from the paper of “Research on the Majapahit City at the Site of Trowulan”. National Research Centre for Archaeology, Republic of Indonesia, Research on the Majapahit City at the Site of Trowulan, East Java, The Legacy of Majapahit, Miksic J.N., Endang Sri HardiatiSoekatno eds., Singapore: National Heritage Board, 1995, pp.19-28. 197

illustrated according to their provenances. Some simple statistic data has been

recorded. According to the analysis outcome, Chinese ceramics share 81% of the

entire 12684 ceramic sherds, while Southeast Asian wares share 17%. The whole

ceramic assemblage comes from a long time span from as early as 9th century to

colonial period. The ceramic sherds of 9th to mid 12th centuries are in small number,

which suggests some human activities before Majapahit period. The ceramics of late

13th century to 16th century increase remarkably. Most of them are products of the

kilns in southeast mainland China.

Amongst the Chinese ones, ordinary-quality green glazed wares are probably

products of Fujian kilns. They share 33% of the entire Chinese ceramics of this period.

The major vessel shape is bowl. The Longquan celadon wares, including shapes of

bowl, plate, jar, etc, share 29%. The vessel shapes of Dehua wares include washer,

jarlet, box, incense burner, etc. The shapes of Jingdezhen qingbai wares include jarlet,

vase, statuette, etc. The shapes of blue and white wares include bowl, cup, jarlet, vase,

etc. The shapes of copper red wares include vase etc. The shapes of iron spotted wares

include jarlet etc. Moreover, stoneware jars and small-mouth jars take up approximately 27%. There is quite a small quantity of ceramics from other kilns. Take for example, Cizhou type blue glazed wares, Cizhou type black and white wares, saucer glazed wares and black glazed wares from south China. Table 5.2.1 demonstrates the number of sherd count for each ceramic category. Among the

Southeast Asian ceramics, Vietnamese wares make up more than 78%, while Thai wares share about 22%. However, the percentage of more precisely periodized

198

ceramic categories has not been established yet by the research. (Dupoizat and

Harkantiningsih 2007)

Table 5.2.1 Main types of Chinese ceramics and Southeast Asian ceramics of the

Majapahit period (adapted from Dupoizat and Harkantiningsih 2007: 15-16)

Categories Chinese ceramics Vietnamese ceramics

Celadon Green Dehua Qingbai Yuan Jar Monochrome Iron- Blue Sukhothai Sawankhalok Jar

glazed ware ware blue black/ and

ware and Early white

Storage locales white blue

Puslit Arkenas. 1903 2193 307 170 129 1773 470 239 177 75 190 48

Trowulan

Puslit Arkenas. 890 1052 54 42 28 1091 437 176 109 72 44 40

Jakarta

In Dupoizat and Harkantiningsih’s analysis, Chinese blue and white ceramics

present a small percentage. The blue and white porcelain collections in NUS and

ACM draw quite another picture. As for Kamei’s analysis on the blue and white

sherds of around 8000 pieces preserved at NUS, there are only sherds of wares made

in China and Vietnam. Amongst, the Yuan Zhizheng type wares constitute the majority.

The early Ming type wares are lesser. The wares dated back to late 15th century

through early are of very small quantity. Table 5.2.2 visually

199

demonstrates the composition of the major vessel shapes of the Zhizheng type wares.

Amongst, large plates and jars are predominantly numerous. Besides, there are also a

smaller number of cups, dishes, spouted bowls, incense burners, pedestals etc. (Kamei

Meitoku 2010)

Table 5.2.2 Proportional comparison of Zhizheng type blue and white wares found in

Trowulan (adapted from Kamei Meitoku 2010: 18)

Vessel shapes Restorable pieces Sherd count

Jar Meiping Vase Large Large Small Others Jar Meiping Vase Large Large Small Others

Provenance plate bowl bowl plate bowl bowl

Chinese blue 32 29 4 46 11 34 71 2904 1075 690 1022 74 166 201 and white wares

Vietnamese 39 7 4 432 80 53 9 11 46 blue and white wares

5.3 General illustration of Chinese ceramics found in Trowulan and Singapore

The Chinese porcelain sherds involved here are of varied provenances, by

contrast with those reported from sites in China. There are generally three

provenances sherds: Longquan, Fujian and Jingdezhen. The following table will

illustrate the criteria for classification. In order to facilitate the comparison of sherds

200

between sites in China, Chinese archaeologists assign similar criteria to specific

provenances, and to date them. Therefore, these criteria are also used here to

distinguish their own features. (Table 5.3.1)

In the following section, the materials will be introduced by their provenances or origins of production. For the ware depiction, the colour description for either the

paste or the glaze is based on Munsell Soil-Color Charts, a standard archaeological

reference. Given the case that glaze colour is normally darker where it is thicker, such

as in grooves for example, the glaze colour depiction refers to the colour of an area

with even glaze. As for the colour of the paste, the depiction refers to the colour of the

sherd interior profile.

201

Tab le 5.3.1 Criteria for classifing Chinese ceramics found in Singapore and Trowulan

Ceramic Feature Vessel Shape Paste Decorative Motif Decorative Technique

Ceramic Category

Longquan Plain celadon Bowl; Plate; High-Very high Lotus petal; Chrysanthemum petal; Parallel Appliqué; Incise;

Washer; Saucer; vitrification concave lines; Double-fish; Lotus branch; Stamp; Mould

Bo; Jarlet; Jar; level Chrysanthemum branch; Twined

Incense burner Chrysanthemum; Twined Lotus;

Watermelon stripe

Iron spotted Jarlet; Lid High-Very high Iron spot

celadon vitrification

level

Fujian Dehua Transparent Bowl; Washer; Medium Lotus petal; Floral scroll Mould

white Box; Jarlet; Lid vitrification

202

level

Putian Greyish white Bowl; Plate; Relatively high Lotus petal; Lotus branch Incise; Stamp

Zhuangiban Jarlet; Lid vitrification

levle-High

vitrification

level

Yi Greyish white Bowl Relatively high

vitrification

levle-High

vitrification

level

Jingdezhen Transparent Bowl; Plate; Cup; High-Very high Twined chrysanthemum Mould

qingbai Washer; Jar; vitrification

203

Jarlet; Lid; level

Incense Burner;

Pillow; Figurine

Luanbai Bowl; Plate; Cup; Very high Twined floral vine; Protruding lines Mould

Washer; Stem vitrification

Cup level

Blue & white Bowl; Cup; Medium Floral scroll; Thunder; Lotus petal; Palm Drawing

Jarlet; Lid; Stem vitrification Leaf; Chrysanthemum Branch; Twined

Cup; Vase; Ewer level-very high Chrysanthemum; Lotus Branch; Twined

vitrification Lotus; Floral bouquet; Duck & lotus pond;

level Chinese character; Dragon

Copper red Vase Relatively Lotus petal; Floral scroll Drawing

high-high

204

vitrification

level

Iron spotted Bowl; Saucer; Very high Iron spot; Figurine Appliqué qingbai Lid vitrification

level

205

5.3.1 Chinese ceramic sherds from Trowulan

In order to investigate the Chinese ceramics unearthed from Trowulan, I conducted a fieldtrip to Trowulan Village in Mojokerto district in 2011 and did some classification work with the ceramic sherds unearthed from archaeological sites in the vicinity.34 The materials partially reveal the nature of the remnants of life here during

the Majapahit era. So far, there has not been any report published on these sherds.

There were three boxes of ceramic sherds in the storeroom then. I could not be able to

record all of them within one month. Therefore, I only chose some examples of the

feature part (rim, base, handle etc), in order to identify their provenances with more

certainty.The ceramic sherds that I dealt with are relatively small fragments unearthed

from excavations. Many more sherds have been recovered from surface surveys.

The Chinese ceramic products discovered in Trowulan have demonstrated three

general provenances: Longquan Kiln Complex in Zhejiang Province, Fujian Kilns in

Fujian Province and Jingdezhen Kiln Complex in Jiangxi Province. The following

section will illustrate somesherd samples, which have been selected from the

unearthed artefacts. These artefacts are yielded from undisturbed strata of Situs (Site)

Segaran III, Segaran IV, Segaran V, Tanpa Keterangan III, Ayakan and Kayakan.The

majority of them are from sectors of Situs Segaran.

1. Longquan kilns

34I did this research in 2011. Acknowledgements must be given to both Drs. Soviyani Aris and Dr. J.N. Miksic. I would like to thank Drs. Soviyani, who gave me permission to study these sherds for a month in Trowulan Museum. This opportunity really enabled me collect useful materials from the storeroom of the Ceramic Office. 206

(1) Plain celadon

A. Bowl

1, Celadon bowl, rim. The weight is 58.8cm. The sherd thickness is 0.6-1.6cm. The

minimum vessel height is 4.2cm.

Plate:

Fig 1 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 1

2, Celadon bowl, round lip, wide-open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white

(5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, with

few minor air pockets. The glaze colour is greyish green (5GY 5/2). Both interior and

exterior walls are glazed evenly and thickly. There are incensed line patterns on the

exterior wall of the sherd. The weight is 12g. The sherd thickness is 0.5cm. The

diameter of the mouth is 14cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.4cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

207

Fig 2 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 2

3, Celadon bowl, rim, round lip, wide-open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY1 8/1 10GY). The glaze is applied on both interior and exterior walls evenly and thickly.The glaze is slightly crackled. The weight is 23.7g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.9cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.5cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 3 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 3

4, Celadon bowl, wide-open mouth. The colour of the paste is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine with minimal air pockets.

The colour of the glaze is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). Both interior and exterior walls are glazed evenly. The exterior wall is decorated with incised lotus petal patterns. The weight is 10g. The sherd thickness is 0.55cm. The external diameter is

20cm. The internal diameter is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is 3cm. Yuan

Dynasty.

208

Plate:

Fig 4 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 4

5, Celadon bowl, open mouth. The colour of the paste is light gray (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine. The paste is well levigated. The colour of the glaze is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). There are some white spots on the glaze surface. The glaze is applied evenly and thickly onboth exterior and interior walls. There are incised vine patterns and spray patterns on both exterior and interior walls. The weight is 11g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.6cm. The external diameter is

20cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.7cm.

Plate: the left piece

Drawing:

Fig 5 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 5

6, Celadon bowl, open mouth. The colour of the paste is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification, very dense and fine, with minor air pockets. The colour of the glaze is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1). The glaze is applied evenly and thickly

209 on both exterior and interior walls. The glaze surface is smooth, but slightly scratched.

The weight is 14g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.6cm. The minimum vessel height is

4cm.

Plate: middle

Drawing:

Fig 6 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 6

7, Celadon bowl rim. The weight is 16.2g. The sherd thickness is 0.5cm. The external diameter is 16cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.2cm.

Plate: the left piece

Fig 7 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 7

8, Celadon bowl, relatively sharp lip, wide-open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is pale brown (2.5Y 7/3). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1

5GY). The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls evenly. The glaze is crackled. The weight is 11.7g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.5cm. The diameter of the

210 mouth is 8cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.9cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 8 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 8

9, Celadon bowl, body, white paste (5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification, dense and fine with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish green

(GLEY1 7/1). Interior and exterior are both glazed evenly and thickly. It has smooth surface. The glaze crackles heavily. The interior wall is decorated with bas-relief motif patterns. The weight is 12g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.6cm. The sherd length is 4.8cm.

Plate:

Fig 9 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 9

10, Celadon bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (GLEY1 7/N). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and a little coarse, with some white 211 impurities. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The glaze shrinks in a small portion. The glaze is crackled. The weight is 230g. The sherd thickness is

0.3-1.1cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6.4cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 5.2cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.9cm. A red tint (Huo Shi Hong) appears on the unglazed portions of the surface (called “biscuit” in ceramic terminology).

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 10 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 10

11, Celadon bowl, foot. The weight is 190.8g. The sherd thickness is 0.6-2.4cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 4.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.5cm.

Plate:

Fig 11 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 11 212

12, Celadon bowl, foot. The weight is 208.1g. The sherd thickness is 0.6-0.8cm. The external diameter is 5.8cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 4.8cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.3cm.

Plate:

Fig 12 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 12

13, Celadon bowl, foot. The weight is 82.9g. The external diameter is 5.4cm. The internal diameter is 4cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.6cm.

Plate:

Fig 13 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 13

14, Celadon bowl foot. The exterior wall is decorated with incised lotus petal patterns.

The weight is 79.8g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.6cm. The external diameter is 5cm.

The internal diameter is 4cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.9cm.

Plate:

213

Fig 14 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 14

15, Celadon vessel, ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of medium-high vitrification level, very dense and fine, with minor air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. It lacks glaze within the rim of foot.The glaze is heavily crackled.

The weight is 28g. The sherd thickness is 0.8-1.2cm. The minimum vessel height is

3cm.

Plate: the right piece

Drawing:

Fig 15 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 15

16, Celadon bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (GLEY1 7/N). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine, with many small air pockets. The colour of the glaze is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1). The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. It lacks glaze within the rim of foot. The weight is 120g.

The sherd thickness is 0.7-1cm. The external diameter is 5.3cm. The internal diameter is 4.5cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.3cm.

Plate:

214

Drawing:

Fig 16 Trowulan plain celadon bowl 16

B. Plate

1, Celadon plate. Round lip, plate mouth, curved body, flat base, ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (GLEY1 7/N). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1

10Y). The glaze is applied on both interior and exterior walls thickly. The interior wall is glazed fully. There are incised spray chrysanthemum petal patterns on interior wall. The weight is 248.3g. The sherd thickness is 0.6-1.9cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 28cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 27cm. The external diameter of the foot is 10cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 9cm. The vessel height is 6.3cm.

Plate:

Fig 17 Trowulan plain celadon plate 1 215

2, Celadon plate, round lip, plate mouth. The paste colour is light grey (GLEY1 7/N).

The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated.

The colour of the glaze is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1 5GY). The glaze is applied

evenly and thickly on both exterior and interior walls. There are mould spray

chrysanthemum petal patterns on interior wall. The weight is 28g. The sherd thickness

is 0.6-0.9cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 30cm. The internal diameter of

the mouth is 29cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.5cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 18 Trowulan plain celadon plate 2

3, Celadon plate, thick lip, floral shaped mouth, curved body. The paste colour is light grey (GLAY1 7/N). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very

fine, with some minor air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2).

The glaze is applied on both interior and exterior walls evenly. The weight is 18.2g.

The sherd thickness is 0.6-1cm. The sherd length is 4.4cm.

Plate:

216

Fig 19 Trowulan plain celadon plate 3

4, Celadon plate, ring foot, flat base. The paste colour is grey (5Y 6/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine, with minor air pockets. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1 10Y). The glaze is applied unevenly on both exterior and interior walls. The glaze surface is crackled. The weight is 100g. The sherd thickness is 0.7-1.8cm. The external diameter of the foot is 8cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 6.5cm. The minimum vessel height is 3cm. The centre of the foot is unglazed and has a red tint (Huo Shi Hong).

Plate: the left piece

Drawing:

Fig 20 Trowulan plain celadon plate 4

5, Celadon plate, regularly made ring foot, flat base. The colour of the paste is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level. The paste is very dense with some minor pockets. The colour of the glaze is light greyish green (5GY 6/2).

The glaze is applied evenly and thickly on both interior and exterior walls. The weight 217 is 70g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.9cm. The external diameter is 10.5cm. The internal diameter is 10cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.2cm. The plate was probably made in the Longquan region. There is a red tin on the surface near the base of foot (Huo Shi Hong) on both interior and exterior walls.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 21 Trowulan plain celadon plate 5

6, Celadon plate, ring foot. There are incised peony patterns on centre of the interior base. The weight is 98.9g. The sherd length is 10.1cm.

Plate:

Fig 22 Trowulan plain celadon plate 6

C. Washer

1, Celadon washer, round lip, foliated edge. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). 218

The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated.

The colour of the glaze is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1 10Y). The glaze is applied

evenly and thickly on both exterior and interior walls. There are mould spray

chrysanthemum patterns on the exterior wall. The weight is 3g. The sherd thickness is

0.3-0.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.5cm.

Plate: the middle piece

Drawing:

Fig 23 Trowulan plain celadon washer 1

D. Jarlet

1, Celadon jarlet, rim. The weight is 34.4g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.7cm. The sherd length is 6.6cm. Yuan Dynasty.

Plate:

Fig 24 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 1

2, Celadon jarlet, round lip, straight mouth, round shoulder, only one circled ear left, 219

white paste (GLEY1 8/). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and

very fine. The paste is well levigated. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY

6/2). The exterior glaze is thicker than interior. The glaze is even and glossy. The surface is smooth. The decoration is mould patterns on exterior wall. The weight is

10g. The thickness is 0.4-0.6cm. The external diameter is 2cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.7cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 25 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 2

3, Celadon jarlet, reeled thick lip, short straight neck, round shoulder. The paste

colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and

very fine, with minor air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY 62).

The glaze is applied on both interior and exterior walls evenly and thickly. The

exterior wall is decorated with stamped flower patterns. The weight is 22g. The sherd

thickness is 0.6-0.7cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 3.8cm. The internal

diameter of the mouth is 2.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.7cm.

Plate: (the left piece)

220

Drawing:

Fig 26 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 3

4, Celadon jarlet, cuspidal lip, short straight neck, spherical shoulder. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine. The paste is well levigated. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1). The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. Red tint (Huo Shi Hong) appears on the surface of the rim where the glaze is extremely thin. There are parallel vertical bass relief lines, or “watermelon stripes” pattern, on exterior walls. The weight is 9g.

The wall thickness is 0.3-0.5cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 4cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 3.8cm. The minimum vessel height is 3cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 27 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 4 221

5, Celadon jarlet, handle/ear. The weight is 1.9g. The sherd length is 2.2cm.

Plate:

Fig 28 Trowulan plain celadon jarlet 5

E. Incense Burner

1, Celadon, cylindrical tripod incense burner. The shape is cylindrical. The exterior

wall is decorated with wide string patterns. The weight is 12.2g. The sherd length is

4.3cm.

Plate:

Fig 29 Trowulan plain celadon incense burner 1

(2) Iron spotted celadon

A. Jarlet

1, Iron spotted celadon jarlet, rim. The weight is 5.7g. The sherd length is 3.8cm.

Plate:

222

Fig 30 Trowulan iron spotted celadon jarlet 1

2. Fujian kilns

(1) Dehua type wares

A. Bowl

1, White bowl.Round rim, open mouth, curved body, biscuit foot. The paste colour is

creamy white. The paste is medium vitrification level, relatively dense, with some air

pockets. The glaze colour is transparent. The glaze is evenly applied on both exterior

and interior walls. There is one horizontal concave line near the inner base. The

weight is 24g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.9cm. The external diameter of the mouth is

12cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 11.8cm. The external diameter of the foot is 4cm. The vessel height is 2.7cm.

Plate: 4605-4607 (left)

Drawing:

Fig 31 Trowulan Dehua type bowl 1

B. Washer 223

1, White washer, triangle lip, curved body, shallow ring foot.The paste is of medium vitrification level, dense and fine, with some small air pockets. Translucent creamy glaze is applied on both exterior and interior sides. The lip and the foot are not glazed.

The glaze is heavily crackled. The exterior wall is decorated with mould spray lotus petal pattern. The weight is 10.7g. The external diameter is 9cm. The internal diameter is 6cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.5cm.

Plate:

Fig 32 Trowulan Dehua type washer 1

2, White washer. Square lip, straight mouth, curved body, ring foot. The paste colour is creamy white. The paste is of medium vitrification level, dense and fine, with some small air pockets. The colour of the glaze is transparent. The glaze is unevenly applied on both exterior and interior walls. The rim and foot are not glazed. The glaze is heavily crackled. There is decoration in the form of a convex horizontal line on the upper part of the exterior wall. The weight is 19g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.9cm.

The external diameter of the mouth is 10cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is

9cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is

5.6cm. The vessel height is 3cm.

Plate: 15-06, 4605-4607 (the right piece)

224

Drawing:

Fig 33 Trowulan Dehua type washer 2

3, White washer, shallow ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of

very high vitrification level, dense and fine. The glaze colour is white. The interior

wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is partially glazed. The glaze is heavily crackled.

There is mould spray lotus petal pattern on the exterior wall. The weight is 22.3g. The

sherd thickness is 0.5-1cm. The external diameter of the foot is 8cm. The minimum vessel height is 3cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 34 Trowulan Dehua type washer 3

4, Dehua white washer, foot, white paste (5Y 8/1). The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, dense and relatively fine. The paste is buff with some small air

225 pockets. The glaze colour is white. The interior is fully glazed. There is no glaze on the exterior of the sherd. The glaze is crackled. The exterior wall is decorated with mould spray lotus petal pattern. The weight is 11.5g. The sherd thickness is 0.5cm.

The external diameter is 7cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.4cm.

Plate:

Fig 35 Trowulan Dehua type washer 4

C. Box

1, White lid, upper part of a box. The weight is 17.5g. The sherd thickness is

0.2-0.7cm. The vessel height is 1.6cm.

Plate:

Fig 36 Trowulan Dehua type box 1

2, White box, lower part of a covered box, indented lip, straight mouth, curved body.

The paste colour is white. The paste is of high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The colour of the glaze is white. The glaze is evenly applied on both exterior and interior walls. The exterior wall is decorated with mould floral scroll patterns in between two horizontal lines. The weight is 10g. The sherd thickness is

226

0.3-0.5cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 10cm. The internal diameter of the

mouth is 8.6cm. The vessel height is 2.5cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 37 Trowulan Dehua type box 2

D. Lid

1, White ware, lid of a jarlet. The paste colour is white. The paste is of very high vitrification, very dense and very fine, some small air pockets. The glaze colour is white. The exterior wall is fully glazed. The interior wall has unglazed patches. The glaze is crackled and thin. The weight is 11.1g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.9cm. The

external diameter of the mouth is 4.6cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 3cm.

The minimum vessel height is 2.1cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

227

Fig 38 Trowulan Dehua type lid 1

(2) Putian Zhuangbian type wares

A. Bowl

1, White bowl, rim, curved body, ring foot. The weight is 97.3g. The external diameter of the mouth is 14cm. The external diameter of the ring foot is 7cm. The internal diameter is 6cm. The vessel height is 6cm.

Plate:

Fig 39 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 1

2, White bowl, rim. The weight is 105.6g. The external diameter of the mouth is 14cm.

The external diameter of the ring foot is 7cm. The internal diameter of the ring foot is

6cm. The vessel height is 4.3cm.

Plate:

Fig 40 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 2

3, White bowl, rim. The weight is 82.3g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-1.4cm. The vessel

228 height is 3.1cm.

Plate:

Fig 41 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 3

4, White bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1 10Y). The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. There is a circle without glaze above the inner base. There is no glaze on the inside of the ring foot. The glaze is crackled. There are indentations on the glaze surface. There is a sloped cut around external part of the foot ring. The weight is 70g.

The sherd thickness is 0.4-1.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 6.1cm.

Plate: the right piece

Drawing:

Fig 42 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 4

229

5, White bowl, round lip, curved body, ring foot. The outer edge of the foot is cut away. There are stamped spray chrysanthemum petal patterns on both exterior and interior walls. The inner base is decorated with stamped flower branch patterns. There is a sloped cut around external part of the foot ring. The weight is 76.2g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-1.3cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 16cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 15.2cm. The external diameter of the foot is 8cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 6.4cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.8cm.

Plate:

Fig 43 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 5

6, White bowl, round lip.The paste colour is gray paste (5Y 6/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, very dense and fine. The glaze colour is greenish gray (GLEY1

6/1). Interior and exterior are both glazed evenly and thinly. Smooth surface, transparent and clear glaze. The decoration is a concaved line circle at the neck. The weight is 5g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.45cm. The sherd length is 3.6cm.

Plate:

Fig 44 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 6

230

7, White bowl, round lip, oblique straight wall. The weight is 8.1g. The sherd

thickness is 0.4-0.5cm. The external diameter is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is

2.7cm.

Plate: the middle piece

Fig 45 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 7

8, White bowl, ring foot. The weight is 88.5g. The external diameter is 5.4cm. The

internal diameter is 4.5cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.8cm.

Plate:

Fig 46 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 8

9, White bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is grey (5Y 6/1). The paste is of high

vitrification level, very dense and very fine, with minor air pockets. The glaze colour

is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1 5G_/1). The interior wall is fully glazed. The

exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The weight is 30g. The sherd

thickness is 0.5-1.5cm. The external diameter is 6cm. The internal diameter is 4.5cm.

The minimum vessel height is 2.3cm.

Plate:

231

Drawing:

Fig 47 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 9

10, White bowl, ring foot, grey and white paste. The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine with many small air pockets. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1 10Y). Glaze is applied on both interior and exterior walls. There is a circle without glaze on the inner base. There is no glaze on the surface of the foot.

The inner base is decorated with moulded flower pattern. The weight is 33.7g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-1cm. The external diameter is 8cm. The internal diameter is

6cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.7cm.

Plate:

Fig 48 Trowulan Zhuangbian type bowl 10

B. Jarlet

1,White jarlet, hidden ring foot. The weight is 15.8g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.7cm.

The external diameter of the foot is 4cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.2cm. The

232 glaze is greyish green.

Plate: the right piece

Fig 49 Trowulan Zhuangbian type jarlet 1

2, White jarlet, slightly uneven flat base. The inner base is slightly elevated. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, with minor air pockets. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1

10Y). The interior wall is fully and evenly glazed. The exterior wall is unglazed. The glaze is crackled. The weight is 40g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.5cm. The external diameter of the foot is 3.5cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 3cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.7cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 50 Trowulan Zhuangbian type jarlet 2

C. Lid

233

1, White lid, round lip, flat flange, curved body, slightly concave at centre of the lid.The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1 10Y). The glaze is applied evenly and thickly. There are darkened lines along the rim.The glaze is crackled. The weight is 13g. The sherd thickness is

0.4-0.6cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 10cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 8.2cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.9cm.

Plate: the left piece

Drawing:

Fig 51 Trowulan Zhuangbian type lid 1

(3) Yellowish wares

A. Bowl

1, Yellowish bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is light brownish grey (2.5Y 6/2). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and fine, with minor air pockets.

The glaze colour is light olive grey (5Y 6/2). The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The weight is 90g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-2cm. The external diameter of the foot is 8cm. The internal diameter 234 of the foot is 6.8cm. The minimum vessel height is 3cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 52 Trowulan yellowish bowl 1

2, Yellowish bowl, neatly-made ring foot.The interior side is glazed, except for awide unglazed circle area in the inner base. The weight is 83.8cm. The external diameter is

5.5cm. The internal diameter is 4.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.1cm.

Plate:

Fig 53 Trowulanyellowish bowl 2

B. Jarlet

1, Yellowish jarlet, curved body, biscuit foot. The paste colour is pale brown (2.5Y

8/2). The paste is of high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated.

The glaze colour is pale olive (5Y 6/3). The interior wall is fully glazed with minor indentations. The exterior wall is glazed to near foot. The glaze is crackled. The

235

weight is 10.9g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.7cm. The diameter of the foot is 3cm.

The minimum vessel height is 2.1cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 54 Trowulan yellowish jarlet 1

3. Jingdezhen kilns

(1) Qingbai wares

A. Bowl

1, Bluish white, bowl. The weight is 19.2g. The external diameter of the mouth is

13cm. The external diameter of the ring foot is 5.2cm. The internal diameter of the ring foot is 4.4cm. The vessel height is 5.9cm.

Plate:

Fig 55 Trowulan qingbai bowl 1

236

2, Bluish white, bowl, rim. The weight is 3.4g. The sherd length is 3.2cm. Yuan

Dynasty.

Plate:

Fig 56 Trowulan qingbai bowl 2

3, Bluish white, bowl, folded body, ring foot. The weight is 9g. The sherd length is

4.5cm.

Plate:

Fig 57 Trowulan qingbai bowl 3

4, Bluish white bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of

extremely high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze

colour is bluish white. Both interior and exterior walls are evenly glazed. The foot is

not glazed except for the outer wall. The weight is 12.5g. The sherd thickness is

0.6-1.2cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.8cm.

Plate:

Fig 58 Trowulan qingbai bowl 4 237

B. Plate

1, Bluish white plate, ring foot. The paste colour is pale brown (2.5Y 8/2). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze colour is bluish white. The interior side is fully glazed. The exterior side is unglazed.

There are clay nails (a kind of kiln ware) on interior base. The glaze is crackled. The weight is 25.9g. The sherd thickness is 0.6-1.5cm. The external diameter of the foot is

10cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 8cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.8cm.

Plate:

Fig 59 Trowulan qingbai plate 1

C. Cup

1, Bluish white cup, rim, square lip, contracted mouth, flat base. The weight is 10.4g.

The sherd length is 4.6cm.

Plate:

Fig 60 Trowulan qingbai cup 1

238

D.Washer

1, White washer, square lip, straight mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white

(5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well

levigated. The colour of the glaze is white. The glaze is applied on both exterior and

interior walls. There is no glaze around the lip. The glaze is crackled. The exterior

wall is decorated with incised lotus petal patterns. The weight is 13g. The sherd

thickness is 0.4-0.5cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 20cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 19cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.3cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 61 Trowulan qingbai washer 1

E. Jar

1, Bluish white jar, foot, shallow ring foot, flat base. The paste colour is white (5Y

8/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense, with small air pockets. The glaze

colour is bluish white. The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is unglazed.

The glaze is crackled. The weight is 93g. The sherd thickness is 0.95- 1.45cm. The

external diameter of the foot is 26cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 22.4cm. The

239 minimum vessel height is 2cm.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 62 Trowulan qingbai jar 1

F. L id

1, Bluish white lid (or lower part of a washer), square lip, straight mouth, white paste

(5Y 8/1). The paste is of extremely high vitrification level, very dense and very fine.

The paste is well levigated. The glaze colour is bluish white. There is no glaze on the top of the lip and the inner side of the lip. The interior and exterior are both glazed thinly. There are some fine sands stuck to the exterior wall. The weight is 6.8g. The sherd thickness is 0.3cm. The external diameter is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.2cm.

Plate:

Fig 63 Trowulan qingbai lid 1

240

(2) Blue and white wares

A. Bowl

1, Blue and white bowl, rim. The exterior wall of the rim is decorated with chrysanthemum patterns. The weight is 1.5g. The sherd length is 2.8cm. Yuan Dynasty.

It resembles some sherds unearthed from Singapore.

Plate:

Fig 64 Trowulan blue and white bowl 1

2, Blue and white, bowl, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of very high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. Both interior and exterior walls are glazed evenly. There are floral patterns on the exterior wall and thunder scroll patterns on inner side of the rim. The weight is 7.4g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.5cm. The sherd length is 3.9cm.

Plate:

Fig 65 Trowulan blue and white bowl 2

5.3.2 Chinese ceramic sherds from Singapore

1, Longquan kilns

241

(1) Plain celadon

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, round lip, wide-open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is grey (5Y 6/1).

The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, very dense, not fine, with numerous minor white spots. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). Both interior and exterior walls are glazed evenly and thickly. The glaze on the interior side of the wall fades severely. Much of the glaze around the rim has fallen off. There are four parallel

concave circles under the rim on the exterior. The weight is 24g. The sherd thickness

is 0.4cm. The diameter of the mouth is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.5cm.

From STA 16, Layer III.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 66 Singapore plain celadon bowl 1

2, Bowl, floral shaped mouth, wide open mouth, curved body, and relatively flat base,

neatly made ring foot. The paste colour is white (GLEY 1 8/N). The paste is highly

vitrified level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The interior wall is fully

242 glazed. The exterior wall is glazed down to the foot wall. The interior wall is decorated with a pattern of moulded relief floral branches. The external side of the rim is decorated with four parallel horizontal concave lines. There are interval patterns of three dots between the lines. There are incised abstract floral patterns on the exterior wall. The weight is 204g. The mouth diameter is 16.4cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 5cm. The vessel height is 7cm. Yuan

Dynasty. From FTC. Code: 15613 vs 23105

Plate:

Drawing35:

Fig 67 Singapore plain celadon bowl 2

3, Bowl, rim, round lip, open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1).

The paste is very highly vitrified, dense and fine, with plenty of small air pockets. The glaze colour is greyish green (5GY 5/2). The glaze is applied both on exterior and interior walls. The glaze has thick layer and smooth surface. The exterior wall is decorated with incised spray lotus petal patterns. The weight is 80g. The sherd thickness is 0.2-0.9cm. The mouth diameter is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is

35 The profile drawing is produced by Dr. Goh Geok Yian. 243

7.5cm. From STA 5, Layer II Level I.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 68 Singapore plain celadon bowl 3

4, Bowl, round lip, open mouth, curved body, ring foot, flat inner base, slightly

convex outer base, a circle of sloped cut around the outer edge of the foot. The

interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed to the exterior wall of the foot.

The glaze is degraded and reveals slightly matt white colour. There are some tiny

holes on the glaze surface. The glaze is partially contracted. The weight is 202g. The

sherd thickness is 0.3-1.7cm. The mouth diameter is 20cm. The foot diameter is 6cm.

The vessel height is 8.2cm. From STA 5, Layer II Level I &Layer II Level II &Layer

II.

Plate:

Drawing: 244

Fig 69 Singapore plain celadon bowl 4

5, Bowl, rim, round lip, wide open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is light grey

(5Y 7/1). The paste is relatively highly vitrified, level, dense and fine, with a few small air pockets. The glaze colour is light olive grey (5Y 6/2). The glaze is slightly crackled, degraded, and faded. The glaze around the rim is exfoliated. The exterior wall is decorated with moulded spray chrysanthemum petals. The weight is 18g. The sherd thickness is 0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 14cm. The minimum vessel height is

3.3cm. From STA 5, Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 70 Singapore plain celadon bowl 5

6, Bowl, rim, round lip, open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is light grey (5Y

7/1). The paste is very highly vitrified, levigated, dense and fine. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). The glaze is applied evenly both on exterior and interior walls. The rim has thinner glaze layer. The glaze is thick and shiny. There is a

245 circle of very narrow concave line under the rim on the exterior wall. The weight is 5g.

The sherd thickness is 0.2-0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 12cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.5cm. From STA 5, Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 71 Singapore plain celadon bowl 6

7, Bowl, rim, sharp lip, wide open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is light grey

(5Y 7/1). The paste is very highly vitrified, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY 1 10GY). The interior and exterior are both glazed evenly and thickly. The surface is smooth. The glaze is crackled heavily. The weight is 23g. The sherd thickness is 0.5g. The mouth diameter is 21cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.9cm. From STA 18A, Layer III.

Plate:

Drawing:

246

Fig 72 Singapore plain celadon bowl 7

8, Bowl, round lip, wide open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is light grey (5Y

7/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze has faded away and yellowish due to degradation. Both interior and exterior walls are glazed evenly. The surface is smooth. The glaze is crackled heavily and exfoliated a little. The weight is 25g. The sherd thickness is 0.4cm. The mouth diameter is 19cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.1cm. From STA 18A, Layer

III.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 73 Singapore plain celadon bowl 8

9, Bowl, open mouth, inverted neck, curved body, ring foot, convex outer base. The paste colour is white (GLEY 1 8/N). The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze comes in two shades due to uneven thickness. The colour of the relatively thick layer area is greyish olive (10Y/2 5/2). The colour of the relatively thin layer area is light greyish olive (10Y/2 6/2). Both the interior and 247

exterior walls are glazed. The glaze surface is crackled with tiny holes. The exterior

wall is decorated with incised elongated lotus petals n. The interior wall is decorated

with incised geometric patterns. The weight is 520g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-1cm.

The mouth diameter is 18cm. The external diameter of the foot is 5.5cm. The internal

diameter of the foot is 4.4cm. The vessel height is 8.7cm. From FTC. Code: 15159

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 74 Singapore plain celadon bowl 9

10, Bowl, ring foot. The paste colour is grey (5Y 6/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense, fine, with a few air pockets. The foot is neatly made. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). Both exterior and interior walls are glazed evenly and thinly. The foot is not glazed except for the exterior side of the foot wall. The glaze looks of great glass texture. The glaze is of smooth surface and crackled a bit. There are still some unidentified incised patterns left on the exterior wall. The weight is 95g. The sherd thickness is 0.6-1.6cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 5cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.5cm. From STA 16, Layer III. Yuan Dynasty. 248

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 75 Singapore plain celadon bowl 10

11, Bowl, foot, curved body, wide and flat inner base, ring foot, a circle of sloped cut around the outer edge of the foot, scrape and cut traces on the outer base. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/2). The paste is highly vitrified level, dense and fine. The glaze has plenty of small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY

6/2). The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The relatively thinner part is degraded and faded. The inner base is decorated with a stamped lotus pattern. The weight is 139g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-1cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6.4cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 5.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 5.2cm. From STA 5, Layer II Level II.

Plate:

Drawing: 249

Fig 76 Singapore plain celadon bowl 11

12, Bowl, foot, curved body, flat base, ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (5Y

7/2). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze has thick layer. The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The glaze is degraded and reveals white matt colour. There are some tiny holes on the glaze surface. The exterior wall is decorated with incised spray chrysanthemum petals. The weight is 175g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.8cm. The external diameter of the foot is 5.6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 4.2cm. The minimum vessel height is 6.1cm. From STA 5, Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 77 Singapore plain celadon bowl 12

250

13, Bowl, foot, ring foot, a circle of slight sloped cut around the outer edge of the foot, swirling wheel traces on the inner base. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1). The glaze is slightly degraded and matt. The glaze is thin and crackled. The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The weight is 88g. The sherd thickness is 0.8-1cm. The external diameter is 5.6cm. The internal diameter is 4.3cm. The minimum vessel height is

2.6cm. From STA 5, 50-80cmbd.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 78 Singapore plain celadon bowl 13

14, Bowl, foot, flat inner base, shallow ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1).

The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour fades away a little and turns white. The exterior wall is full glazed. The interior wall is glazed down to the outer foot wall. The weight is 74g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.7cm. The external diameter of the foot is 5cm. The internal

251 diameter of the foot is 4cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.7cm. From STA 59,

Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 79 Singapore plain celadon bowl 14

B. Plate

1, Plate, Guan type celadon plate, plate shaped mouth, curved body, flat inner base with slightly protruding centre, ring foot. The paste colour is white (GLEY 1 8/N).

The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze is applied both on the exterior and interior sides. The outer base has an unglazed circle.

The inner side of the rim is decorated with a circle of thunder pattern. There are abstract floral patterns on the internal wall. The inner base is decorated with stamped relief floral branch motif pattern. The weight is 1270g. The mouth diameter is 34cm.

The external diameter of the foot is 15.4cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 14cm.

The vessel height is 7.8cm. From FTC. Code: 6755

252

Plate:

Drawing36:

Fig 80 Singapore plain celadon plate 1

2, Plate, round rim, plate shaped mouth, curved body. The paste colour is light grey

(2.5Y 7/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and fine. There are a few air

pockets. The glaze colour is emulsible light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The glaze is

applied on both exterior and interior walls evenly and thickly. The glaze on the rim is

partially exfoliated. The exterior glaze is crackled partly. The interior wall is

decorated with stamped spray chrysanthemum petals. The weight is 46g. The sherd

thickness is 0.3-0.6cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 34cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 29cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.9cm. From STA 42,

Layer III&IV.

Plate:

36The profile drawings are produced by Dr. Goh Geok Yian. 253

Drawing:

Fig 81 Singapore plain celadon plate 2

3, Plate, round lip, plate shaped mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y

8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). The glaze is applied evenly and thickly on both exterior and interior walls. The glaze has smooth surface. There are traces of use before it was discarded on the rim. The interior wall is decorated with stamped spray chrysanthemum petals. The weight is 252g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.8cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 34cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 25cm.

The minimum vessel height is 6.4cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 82 Singapore plain celadon plate 3 254

4, Plate, rim, square lip, lotus shaped mouth, wide and flat rim. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, dense and fine, with a few tiny air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The glaze is severely degraded and matt. The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. The weight is 9g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-0.6cm. The sherd length is 3.8cm. From STA

5, Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 83 Singapore plain celadon plate 4

5, Plate, rim, thick lip, lotus shaped mouth, slightly sloped wide rim, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1 5GY). Both the interior and exterior walls are glazed evenly and thickly. The surface is smooth. The undulating rim has turned whitish due to abrasion. A big part of glaze is contracted.

The interior wall is decorated with moulded spray chrysanthemum petals pattern. The exterior wall is decorated with convex moulded spray lotus petals. The weight is 59g.

The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.7cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 28cm. The 255 internal diameter of the mouth is 24cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.5cm. From

STA 9, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 84 Singapore plain celadon plate 5

6, Plate, ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (2.5Y 7/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). Both the interior and exterior walls are glazed evenly and thickly. The surface is smooth. The exterior wall is decorated with moulded spray lotus petals. The interior wall is decorated with moulded spray chrysanthemum petals. The weight is 114g. The sherd thickness is 0.5-1.6cm. The external diameter of the foot is 18cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 16cm. The minimum vessel height is 5.2cm. From STA 9, Layer V.

Plate:

256

Drawing:

Fig 85 Singapore plain celadon plate 6

7, Plate, foot, an unglazed circle quite close to the internal wall of the foot on the

outer base. The inner base is decorated with a pattern of stamped relief peony

branches. The weight is 198g. From FTC. Code: 22126

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 86 Singapore plain celadon plate 7

8, Plate, hidden ring foot, flat base. The paste colour is grey (5Y 6/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, very dense and fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greenish olive (10Y 6/2). The glaze is applied evenly on both exterior and interior. It seems there is an unglazed circle on the outer base. The glaze layer is

257 quite thick. The inner base has traces of use before it was discarded. The weight is

91g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-1.2cm. The foot diameter is 12cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.4cm. From STA 5, Layer II Level I&Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 87 Singapore plain celadon plate 8

C. Washer

1, Washer, slightly sloped wide rim, bulb body. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1).

The paste is of extremely high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, levigated.

The glaze colour is greyish olive (10Y 5/2) and slightly clear. The interior and exterior walls are both glazed evenly and thickly. The surface is smooth. The exterior wall is decorated with incised spray lotus petals. The weight is 8g. The sherd thickness is

0.2-0.5cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 14cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 12cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.8cm. From STA 59, Layer V.

Plate:

258

Drawing:

Fig 88 Singapore plain celadon washer 1

2, Sugarcane shaped washer, round lip, straight mouth. The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. The exterior wall is decorated with incised spray vertical lines and protruding horizontal lines, resembling sugarcane (or bamboo). The interior wall is decorated with moulded spray chrysanthemum petals. The weight is 12g. From

FTC. Code: 29020

Plate:

Fig 89 Singapore plain celadon washer 2

D. Saucer

1, Saucer, rim, round lip, open mouth. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/2). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and fine, with a few small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The glaze is applied evenly on both

259

exterior and interior walls. The glaze surface is smooth and crackled. The weigh is 5g.

The sherd thickness is 0.2-0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 10cm. The minimum vessel

height is 2.4cm. From STA 5, Layer II Level II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 90 Singapore plain celadon saucer 1

E. Bo (钵, a kind of bowl)

1, Bo, rim, sharp lip, slightly contracted mouth, deep vessel. The paste colour is pale

yellow (5Y 8/2). The paste is of high vitrification level, well levigated, dense and

relatively fine. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The glaze is applied

thinly on both exterior and interior walls. The glaze is crackled. There are five parallel

concave lines under the mouth on the upper exterior wall. The weight is 6g. The sherd

thickness is 0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 12cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.3cm.

From STA 5, Layer II. Longquan East Area.

Plate:

260

Drawing:

Fig 91 Singapore plain celadon Bo 1

2, Bo (a kind of bowl), rim, sharp lip, straight mouth. The paste colour is pale yellow

(5Y 8/2). The paste is of high vitrification level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The glaze is applied both on exterior and interior walls. The glaze is crackled. The weight is 5g. The sherd thickness is 0.4cm.

The sherd length is 4.3cm. From STA 5, Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 92 Singapore plain celadon Bo 2

261

F. Jarlet

1, Jarlet, rim, round lip, straight mouth, short neck, bulb shoulder. The paste colour is light grey (10YR 7/2). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish olive (10Y 6/2). The interior and exterior walls are both glazed evenly and thickly. The surface is smooth. The glaze is crackled heavily, and partially contracted. The weight is 16g. The sherd thickness is 0.15-0.5cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 3cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 2cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.9cm. From STA 18A,

Layer III.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 93 Singapore plain celadon jarlet 1

2, Jarlet, curved body, slightly concaved outer base, swirling traces of wheel marks on inner base. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and relatively fine, with plenty of small air pockets. The glaze colour is

262 light greyish green (5GY 6/2). The glaze has even and thick layer. The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed near to the foot. There are floral patterns of molded lines. The weight is 32g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.5cm. The foot diameter is 3cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.1cm. From STA 5, Layer 2 Level 1& 90-100 cmbd.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 94 Singapore plain celadon jarlet 2

G. Jar

1, Watermelon striped jar, hidden high ring foot, thick body wall. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The colour of the thicker glaze layer is greenish grey (GLEY

1 6/1 5GY). The colour of the thinner glaze layer is greenish grey (GLEY 1 5/1 5GY).

The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. The edge of the foot is not glazed. The exterior wall is carved with relief spray vertical lines all round the surface.

The body and the base were separately made and luted together. The weight is 258g. 263

The body wall’s thickness is 0.6-1.2cm. The base’s thickness is 0.5cm. The external diameter of the foot is 10cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 9cm. The minimum vessel height is 12.5cm. From FTC. Code: 15772

Plate:

Fig 95 Singapore plain celadon jar 1

2, Jar, Guan type jar, curved thick body, hidden ring foot, a circle of sloped cut around the outer edge of the foot. The paste colour is white (GLEY 1 8/N). The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The colour of the thicker glaze layer is greyish olive (10Y/2 5/2). The colour of the thinner glaze layer is light greyish olive (10Y/2 6/2). The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. The foot edge is not glazed. There is an 8cm width circle of ripples on the lower part of the exterior wall. The body and the base were separately made and luted together. The weight is 1030g. The body wall’s thickness is 0.8-2.5cm. The base’s thickness is 0.4cm. The external diameter of the foot is 18cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 15.4cm. The minimum vessel height is 10.5cm. From FTC. Code:6754

Plate:

264

Drawing37:

Fig 96 Singapore plain celadon jar 2

3, Jar, foot, curved body, hidden ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The

paste is highly vitrified level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The exterior glaze colour is greenish grey (GLEY 1 6/1 5GY). The interior glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY 1 7/1 10GY). The interior wall is glazed thinly. The exterior wall is glazed thickly. The surface is smooth. There edge of the foot is not glazed. The

weight is 58g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-1.1cm. The external diameter of the foot is

6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 5cm. The minimum vessel height is 5.8cm.

From STA 9, Layer IV.

Plate:

Drawing:

37The profile drawings are produced by Yap Lucille. 265

Fig 97 Singapore plain celadon jar 3

(2) Iron Spotted Celadon

A. Jarlet

1, Jarlet, round lip, straight mouth, short neck, bulb shoulder. There are dark brown iron spots on the exterior wall. From FTC.

Plate38:

Fig 98 Singapore iron spotted celadon jarlet 1

B. Lid

1, Lid, hat shaped lid. There are brownish iron spots on the exterior side. From EMP.

Code: 75120021

Plate39:

38The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 39The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 266

Fig 99 Singapore iron spotted celadon lid 1

2, Fujian kilns

(1) Dehua type wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, foot, curved body, ring foot. The paste colour is pale brown (2.5Y 8/2). The

paste is of medium vitrification level. The buffer paste is of fine texture with some air

pockets. The glaze colour has faded because of corrosion. There is a wide unglazed

circle area on the inner base. The exterior wall is glazed to the lower part. The glaze is

thin and heavily crackled. The weight is 119g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.8cm. The

external diameter of the foot is 10cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 9cm. The

minimum vessel height is 4.2cm. From STA 51, Layer VI.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 100 Singapore Dehua type bowl 1

267

B. Washer

1, Washer, unglazed rim. The paste is of relatively high vitrification level. The paste

colour is quite whitish. The inner rim is not glazed. The exterior wall is glazed down

to the foot outer wall. The exterior wall is decorated with moulded lotus petals pattern.

The weight is 64g. From FTC. Code: 19331, 12190, 12188, 12589, 31744

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 101 Singapore Dehua type washer 1

2, Washer, rim, square lip of inward slope, wide open mouth. The paste colour is pale

brown (2.5Y 8/2). The paste is well levigated, of medium vitrification level, relatively

dense and relatively fine. The glaze colour fades a little. The glaze is crackled and

partially exfoliated. There is a circle of convex string pattern down the exterior rim.

The exterior wall is decorated with stamped spray lotus petals. The weight is 2g. The

sherd thickness is 0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 11cm. The minimum vessel height is

1.7cm. From STA 50, Layer IV.

Plate:

268

Drawing:

Fig 102 Singapore Dehua type washer 2

C. Box

1, Covered box, dented mouth, straight sloped body, slightly convex inner base. The

paste colour is pale yellow (5Y 8/2). The paste is of medium vitrification level, well

levigated, dense and relatively fine. The glaze is applied on the inner base as well as

the exterior wall. The glaze is thin and crackled. The weight is 17g. The sherd

thickness is 0.1-0.5cm. The external diameter of the mouth is 8.4cm. The internal

diameter of the mouth is 7.4cm. The foot diameter is 6.6cm. The vessel height is

1.7cm. From STA 5, two pieces from Layer II Level I& one piece from Layer II &

two pieces from 110-120cmbd.

Plate:

Drawing:

269

Fig 103 Singapore Dehua type box 1

2, Box, foot, curved body, ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is

of medium vitrification level, dense and relatively fine, with a few air pockets. The

interior wall is fully glazed. The glaze is degraded severely. The glaze is thin and

crackled. There are a few tiny holes on the glaze surface. The glaze is matt. The

exterior wall is decorated with moulded patterns of convex lines. The weight is 6g.

The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.8cm. The foot diameter is 6.4cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.5cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 104 Singapore Dehua type box 2

D. Jarlet

1, Wide mouth jarlet. The exterior body is decorated with four circles of upward relief

270 lotus petal pattern. The exterior side of the foot is decorated with a circle of downward relief lotus petal pattern. This type was at one time called “Marco Polo

Ware”. From FTC.

Drawing40:

Fig 105 Singapore Dehua type jarlet 1

(2) Putian Zhuangbian type wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, round lip, open mouth, straight sloped body, and shallow ring foot. The colour of the body paste is light grey (GLEY 1 7/N). The colour of the base paste is pink, (7.5YR 7/3). The paste is of high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour has faded and turned whitish due to degradation. The glaze seems a bit greyish. The glaze is applied both on the top half of the exterior and interior walls. The glaze is thin. There are relatively bigger tiny

40The profile is drawn by Erika Leinsdorf. The drawing is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 271

holes on the glaze surface. The weight is 85g. The sherd thickness is 0.2-1cm. The

mouth diameter is 18cm. The external diameter of the foot is 8cm. The internal

diameter of the foot is 6cm. The vessel height is 6cm. From STA 9, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 106 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 1

2, Bowl, round lip, open mouth, relatively straight sloped body, thin wall. There is an

unglazed ring on the inner base. The exterior wall is glazed down near to the foot. The

weight is 92g. From FTC. Code: 21876, 12678

Plate:

Drawing:

272

Fig 107 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 2

3, Bowl, foot, curved body, flat inner base, a circle of concave string pattern on the periphery of the inner base, neatly made ring foot. The paste colour is light grey (5Y

7/1). The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, dense and relatively fine. There are a few air pockets. The glaze colour is light greyish green (5GY 6/2). The glaze is applied thinly and evenly on both exterior and interior walls. The foot is not glazed except for its exterior wall. The glaze is of quite glass texture and crackled heavily.

The exterior wall is decorated with shallow incised patterns. The weight is 86g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-0.9cm. The external diameter of the foot is 5.7cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 4.5cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.2cm. From STA 50,

Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 108 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 3

4, Bowl, foot, curved body, ring foot, a circle of sloped cut around the outer edge of 273 the foot. The weight is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, relatively fine texture, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1). The interior wall is glazed except for the inner base part.

The exterior wall is glazed down near to the foot. The glaze is thin and crackled. The weight is 48g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-0.8cm. The external diameter of the foot is

10cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 8.6cm. The minimum vessel height is

3.6cm. From STA 5, 80-90cmbd.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 109 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 4

5, Bowl, curved body, ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is a kind of transparent light greyish green. The glaze is very thin. There is a wide unglazed circle on the inner base. The exterior wall is glazed nearly to the foot. The glaze is crackled heavily. The weight is 70g. The sherd thickness is 0.4-1.5cm. The external diameter of the foot is 9cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 7.4cm. The minimum vessel height is 5cm. From STA 59, Layer V.

274

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 110 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 5

6, Bowl, ring foot, neatly made foot, narrow foot edge, a concave circle on the inner base, quite thin base wall. There is an unglazed circle on the inner base. The exterior wall is glazed down near to the foot. The weight is 70g.

From FTC. Code: 32278

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 111 Singapore Zhuangbian type bowl 6

B. Plate 275

1, Plate, foot, curved body, ring foot, sloped cut around the outer edge of the foot underside. The paste colour is grey (5Y 6/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and relatively fine, with a few air pockets. The glaze colour is greyish green

(5GY 5/2). The glaze is of glass texture. The interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed nearly to the foot. The glaze has smooth surface. There is an unglazed circle on the inner base. The weight is 63g. The sherd thickness is 0.3-1.2cm. The external diameter of the foot is 10cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 8.5cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.4cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 112 Singapore Zhuangbian type plate 1

2, Plate, foot, relatively flat inner base, ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1).

The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and fine, with some small air pockets.

The glaze colour is light greenish grey (GLEY1 7/1). The interior wall is fully glazed.

The exterior wall is glazed to the outer wall of the foot. The glaze is of glass texture and relatively transparent. The glaze is a bit degraded and crackled. The weight is 61g.

The shard thickness is 0.3cm. The foot diameter is 7cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.2cm. From STA 5, 110-120cmbd. 276

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 113 Singapore Zhuangbian type plate 2

(3) Yi type wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, ring foot, neatly made foot, no sloped cut around the foot outer edge, very thin body. There is an unglazed area (probably where a stacking ring once was) on the inner base. The exterior wall is glazed down near to the foot. The weight is 40g. Yuan

Dynasty. From FTC. Code: 37170

Plate:

Drawing:

277

Fig 114Singapore Yi type bowl 1

3, Jingdezhen kilns

(1) Qingbai wares

①Transparent qingbai wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, rim, sharp lip, open mouth. The paste colour is pale brown (2.5Y 8/2). The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, dense and relatively fine, with a few air pockets. The glaze is degraded severely. The glaze is applied evenly on both exterior and interior walls. There is no glaze on the rim part. The glaze is crackled. There are some tiny holes on the surface. Some of the glaze is exfoliated. There is a protruding ridge on the upper part of the exterior wall. The weight is 12g. The shard thickness is

0.4cm. The mouth diameter is 20cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.2cm. From STA

50, Layer VI.

Plate:

Drawing:

278

Fig 115 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 1

2, Bowl, rim, round lip, wide open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y

8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze is

applied evenly on both exterior and interior walls. There are a few tiny holes on the

glaze surface. There are traces of use before it was discarded on both sides. Soil stains are visible on the surface. There are stamped patterns on the interior wall. The weight is 10g. The shard thickness is 0.2-0.45cm. The mouth diameter is 17cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.7cm. STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 116 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 2

3, Bowl, rim, round lip, wide open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y

8/1). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and relatively fine. There are a few

air pockets. The glaze is degraded and severely exfoliated. The glaze colour has faded

greatly. The glaze surface is matt. The weight is 10g. The shard thickness is 0.2-0.4cm.

The mouth diameter is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is 4.5cm. From STA 50,

Layer V.

279

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 117 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 3

4, Bowl, floral shaped mouth, wide open mouth, piecrust rim. There are moulded protruding vertical lines on the interior wall. The weight is 10g. From FTC. Code:

29742

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 118 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 4

5, Bowl, high ring foot, slight protruding on the centre of the inner base, flat outer

base. The paste colour is pale brown (2.5Y 8/2). The paste is of high vitrification level, dense and fine, with a few air pockets. The glaze is applied on both sides, except for 280 the very bottom of the foot. The glaze colour is slightly faded. The glaze has small cracklings. The weight is 118g. The shard thickness is 0.7cm. The external diameter of the foot is 8cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 6.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.2cm. From STA 50, Layer IV.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 119 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 5

6, Bowl, foot, slightly concave inner base, ring foot, neatly made foot. The paste colour is light grey (5Y 7/1). The paste is of extremely high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, with some small air pockets. The glaze colour is hard to identify.

The glaze is exfoliated heavily due to its corrosion. Both interior and exterior walls are glazed, except for the foot edge and outer base. There are vague incised floral scroll patterns on the interior wall and the inner base. The weight is 41g. The shard thickness is 0.3-0.7cm. The external diameter of the foot is 5.4cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 4.4cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.8cm. From STA 52,

Layer III.

Plate:

281

Drawing:

Fig 120 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 6

7, Bowl, foot, deep vessel, ring foot. There are moulded floral patterns on the interior wall. The weight is 212g.

From FTC. Code: 10686, 9562, 9365, 10683, 10488

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 121 Singapore transparent qingbai bowl 7

B. Plate

1, Plate, unglazed rim, curved body, shallow vessel. The interior is fully glazed. The exterior is glazed down near to the bottom. There is no decoration. From FTC. Code:

29030 282

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 122 Singapore transparent qingbai plate 1

2, Plate, foot, flat inner base, neatly made ring foot. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1).

The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze colour is

greenish grey (GLEY1 6/1). The glaze is applied thinly and evenly on both exterior

and interior walls. The foot is not glazed except for its exterior wall. The glaze is of

quite glassy texture and partially exfoliated. The unglazed part reveals pinkish white

colour (5YR 8/2). The weight is 20g. The shard thickness is 0.2-0.4cm. The foot

diameter is 8cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.4cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 123 Singapore transparent qingbai plate 2

283

C. Jarlet

1, Jarlet, round lip, straight mouth, bulb shoulder. The upper part and lower part are made independently and combined as a whole. The paste colour is light brownish grey

(10Y 6/2). The paste is of relatively high vitrification level, dense and fine. There are

some air pockets. The glaze is applied evenly on both exterior and interior sides. The

glaze corrodes severely. The weight is 22g. The shard thickness is 0.4cm. The external

diameter of the mouth is 3cm. The internal diameter of the mouth is 2.5cm. The

minimum vessel height is 3.1cm. From STA 16, Layer III. Yuan Dynasty.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 124 Singapore transparent qingbai jarlet 1

D. Lid

1, Lid, rim, square lip. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is of extremely

high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The interior fringe of

the rim is not glazed. The surface displays some soil stains. There are a few tiny holes

in the glaze. The weight is 2g. The shard thickness is 0.2cm. The mouth diameter is 284

14cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.6cm. From STA 55, Layer III.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 125 Singapore transparent qingbai lid 1

E. Incense Burner

1, Square incense burner, thick wall, vertically folded foot. The glaze is thinly applied on the external wall. The interior is unglazed. The external wall is decorated with a moulded floral pattern. The foot is decorated with floral scroll lines. The weight is

708g. From FTC. No code.

Plate:

Fig 126 Singapore transparent qingbai incense burner 1

F. Pillow

1, Figurines from a pillow. From FTC. 285

Plate41:

Fig 127 Singapore transparent qingbai pillow 1

G. Figurine

1, Bodhisattva statuette. From Victoria Concert Hall.

Plate42:

Fig 128 Singapore transparent qingbai Bodhisattva statuette 1

②Luanbai (egg whitish) wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, floral shaped rim. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is well

levigated, highly vitrified, very dense and very fine. The glaze is applied evenly on

both exterior and interior walls. The surface is quite smooth with some soil stains. The

weight is 5g. The shard thickness is 0.25cm. The external diameter of the mouth is

12cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.1cm. From STA 42, Layer IV.

41The photo is provided by Dr. J. N. Miksic. 42The photo is provided by Mr. Lim Chen Sian. 286

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 129 Singapore luanbai bowl 1

2, Thin-body bowl, rim, floral shaped everted mouth. The paste colour is white (5Y

8/1). The paste is of extremely high vitrification level, very dense and very fine, well levigated. The interior and exterior walls are both glazed evenly. The surface is

smooth. The weight is 4g. The shard thickness is 0.2cm. The mouth diameter is 12cm.

The minimum vessel height is 2.4cm. From STA 59, Layer IV.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 130 Singapore luanbai bowl 2

3, Bowl, thin body, floral shaped mouth, everted, pie-crust rim. The weight of the two

pieces is 2g. From FTC. Code: 34057, 34074

287

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 131 Singapore luanbai bowl 3

4, Bowl, rim, sharp lip, wide open mouth, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y

8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, dense and fine. The glaze is applied evenly on

both exterior and interior walls. The glaze surface is quite smooth with a few tiny

holes. There are traces of use before it was discarded. The weight is 6g. The shard

thickness is 0.1-0.4cm. The mouth diameter is 15cm. The minimum vessel height is

2.4cm. From STA 50, Layer IV.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 132 Singapore luanbai bowl 4

5, Bowl, rim, round lip, wide open mouth. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The

288

paste is of extremely high vitrification level, well levigated, very dense and very fine.

The interior and exterior walls are both glazed evenly. The glaze surface is smooth.

The glaze is slightly pooled on the exterior rim. The glaze surface has slight soil stains.

The interior wall is decorated with moulded floral patterns.There is a wideconvex line

under the mouth on the exterior wall. The weight is 11g. The shard thickness is 0.2cm.

The mouth diameter is 12cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.5cm. From STA 51,

Layer VI.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 133 Singapore luanbai bowl 5

6, Bowl, rim, narrow and flat lip, open mouth. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze is emulsible.

The glaze is applied evenly on both exterior and interior walls. There are traces of being use before it was discarded. There is a convex arris motif under the mouth on the exterior wall. The weight is 4g. The shard thickness is 0.1-0.2cm. The mouth diameter is 12cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.6cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

289

Drawing:

Fig 134 Singapore luanbai bowl 6

7, Bowl, rim, sharp lip, wide open mouth. There is a concave line under the rim on the exterior wall. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls.

The glaze colour is emulsible. There are traces of being used before it was discarded on both walls. The weight is 4g. The shard thickness is 0.1-0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 18cm. The minimum vessel height is 1.4cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Drawing:

Fig 135 Singapore luanbai bowl 7

8, Bowl, rim, round lip, big wide open mouth. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls. The glaze is degraded and matt. The weight is 2g. The shard thickness is 0.2cm. The shard length is 3cm. From STA 5, Layer II.

Plate:

290

Drawing:

Fig 136 Singapore luanbai bowl 8

9, Luanbai bowl, angled body, open mouth, small vessel. There are moulded floral

patterns on the interior wall. The weight is 50g.

From FTC. Code: 9386, 9142

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 137 Singapore luanbai bowl 9

10, Bowl, wide open mouth, deep vessel. The weight is 40g. From FTC. Code: 805,

1010, 5098, 23804, 1038

Plate:

291

Drawing:

Fig 138 Singapore luanbai bowl 10

11, Bowl, foot, straight inclined body, neatly made ring foot. The paste colour is white

(5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The

interior wall is fully glazed. The exterior wall is glazed all the way down to the

exterior wall of the foot. The glaze layer is thick and looks emulsible. The glaze is

crackled partially. There are traces of use before it was discarded on the inner base.

The weight is 56g. The shard thickness is 0.5-1.6cm. The external diameter of the foot is 4cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 3.4cm. The minimum vessel height is

1.9cm.

From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

292

Fig 139 Singapore luanbai bowl 11

12, Bowl, foot, curved body, neatly made ring foot. The interior wall is decorated with moulded floral patterns. The weight is 84g. From FTC. Code: 10453, 7919, 15738,

8837

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 140 Singapore luanbai bowl 12

13, Luanbai bowl, ring foot. There are low relief molded spray vertical lines on the

inner base. The weight is 80g. From FTC. Code: 23773

Plate:

Drawing:

293

Fig 141 Singapore luanbai bowl 13

14, Bowl, biscuit foot. The weight is 48g. From FTC. Code: 19482

Drawing:

Fig 142 Singapore luanbai bowl 14

B. Plate

1, Plate, floral shaped rim, round lip, piecrust rim, everted mouth. The emulsible glaze is applied on both exterior and interior walls evenly. The interior wall is decorated with slight spray protruding lines. There are many traces of use before it was discarded on the exterior wall. There are soil stains on the glaze. The weight is 8g.

The shard thickness is 0.2-0.5cm. The mouth diameter is 16cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.6cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

294

Fig 143 Singapore luanbai plate 1

2, Shallow bowl, rim, round lip, curved body. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The

paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze is applied on

both exterior and interior walls. There are many traces of use before it was discarded.

The interior wall is decorated with moulded patterns. The weight is 3g. The shard thickness is 0.2cm. The shard length is 3.7cm. From STA 5, Layer II.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 144 Singapore luanbai plate 2

3, Luanbai plate, straight mouth, curved body, relatively deep vessel. There is a wide circle of moulded twined lotus patterns on the interior wall. The weight is 18g. From

FTC. No code.

Plate:

295

Drawing:

Fig 145 Singapore luanbai plate 3

4, Plate, straight mouth, curved body, relatively shallow vessel. There are convex spray vertical lines on the inner base. The weight is 8g. From FTC. Code: 38765

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 146 Singapore luanbai plate 4

C. Cup

1, Cup, rim, round lip, wide open mouth. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The glaze is applied both on exterior and interior walls. The glaze is degraded severelyand matt. The weight is

2g. The shard thickness is 0.15-0.2cm. The mouth diameter is 8cm. The minimum 296

vessel height is 2.1cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 147 Singapore luanbai cup 1

2, Cup, rim, floral shaped mouth, everted piecrust rim, small angled body. The paste

colour is white(5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and

fine. The glaze is applied evenly both on exterior and interior walls. There are slight

traces of use before it was discarded. The weight is 11g. The shard thickness is

0.1-0.5cm. The mouth diameter is 7.6cm. The minimum vessel height is 3.7cm. From

STA 5, Layer II Level I.

Plate:

Drawing:

297

Fig 148 Singapore luanbai cup 2

3, Cup, round lip, everted rim, deep vessel, neatly made ring foot. The interior side is fully glazed. The exterior side is glazed to the external foot wall. The weight is 42g.

From FTC. Code: Nil

Plate:

Fig 149 Singapore luanbai cup 3

4, Shufu cup, thin body, square lip with a slightly protruding flange, straight mouth, deep vessel. The rim is not glazed. The weight is 4g. From FTC. Code: 20442

Drawing:

Fig 150 Singapore luanbai cup 4

5, Cup, thin body, wide open mouth, deep vessel. There are moulded floral patterns on the interior wall. The weight is 2g. From FTC. Code: 22580

Plate:

298

Drawing:

Fig 151 Singapore luanbai cup 5

6, Luanbai cup. The weight is 24g. There are moulded convex spray vertical lines on the interior wall. From FTC. Code: 5761, 5762

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 152 Singapore luanbai cup 6

D. Washer

1, Washer, vertical mouth, curved body, shallow vessel. There are moulded floral patterns on the interior wall. The weight is 2g. From FTC. Code: 20172 299

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 153 Singapore luanbai washer 1

E. Stem cup

1, Stem cup, wide open mouth. The weight is 10g. From FTC. Code: F0001

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 154 Singapore luanbai stem cup 1

2, Stem cup, square lip, straight mouth, deep vessel. The rim part is not glazed. From

FTC. Code: 29031

Plate:

300

Drawing:

Fig 155 Singapore luanbai stem cup 2

(2) Blue and white wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, curved body, wide inner base, neatly made ring foot, a circle of sloped cut around the outer foot edge. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, very dense, well levigated. Both the exterior and interior walls are glazed. The foot is not glazed except for its external wall. The glaze surface is quite smooth with a few tiny holes. The inner base is decorated with abstract floral patterns.

The lower part of the exterior wall is decorated with a circle of upward lotus petals pattern. The weight is 82g. The shard thickness is 0.4-1.4cm. The external diameter of the foot is 6cm. The internal diameter of the foot is 4cm. The minimum vessel height is 5cm. Yuan Dynasty. From FTC. Code: 2835

Plate:

301

Drawing43:

Fig 156 Singapore blue and white bowl 1

2, Bowl, curved body, wide inner base, ring foot. A lotus and duck pond pattern decorates the inner base. The middle part of the exterior wall is decorated with a circle of vertical wide lotus petals. From FTC. Code: 3816, 7623

Plate44:

Fig 157 Singapore blue and white bowl 2

3, Bowl, wide open mouth, curved body, wide inner base, neatly made ring foot. The rim’s internal side is decorated with a narrow circle of floral scroll pattern. The inner base is decorated with motif blue paintings of lotus bouquet with bowknot. The rim’s external side is decorated with a circle of twined floral pattern. The lower middle part of the external wall is decorated with a circle of vertical wide lotus petals. From FTC.

43The profile drawing is produced by Dr. Goh Geok Yian. 44The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 302

Plate45:

Fig 158 Singapore blue and white bowl 3

4, Bowl, curved body, wide inner base, ring foot. The inner base is decorated with a simple lotus bouquet with bowknot. The cobalt painting is of dark blue colour. From

FTC.

Plate46:

Fig 159 Singapore blue and white bowl 4

5, Bowl, curved body, wide inner base, neatly made ring foot. The inner base is decorated with quite a rough painting of a lotus. The lower middle part of the exterior wall is decorated with a circle of upward wide lotus petals pattern. The cobalt painting is dark blue. From FTC. Code: 25488, 25491

Plate47:

45The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 46The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 47The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 303

Fig 160 Singapore blue and white bowl 5

B. Plate

1, Plate, thick body wall, ring foot. There is a lotus motif pattern on the centre of the inner base. From EMP. Code: 74350017

Plate48:

Fig 161 Singapore blue and white plate 1

C. Cup

1, Cup, curved body, neatly made ring foot. The inner base is decorated with a chrysanthemum stem motif. The middle part of the exterior wall is decorated with a circle of twined floral pattern. From FTC. Code: 34485

Plate49:

48The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 49The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 304

Fig 162 Singapore blue and white cup 1

2, Cup, round lip, wide open mouth, curved body, deep vessel. The paste colour is

white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The

glaze is applied both on exterior and interior walls. The glaze surface is smooth. The

glaze is of glass texture with soil stains. There are dark blue vague sketches. The rim’s interior side is decorated with a circle of floral patterns. The upper exterior wall is decorated with a circle of floral vine patterns. The weight is 4g. The shard thickness is

0.1-0.3cm. The mouth diameter is 9cm. The minimum vessel height is 2.4cm. From

STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 163 Singapore blue and white cup 2

3, Cup, round lip, wide open mouth, curved body, deep vessel. The paste colour is white (5Y 8/1). The paste is highly vitrified level, well levigated, dense and fine. The

305 glaze is applied evenly on both exterior and interior walls. The glaze is of glossy texture. The exterior wall has traces of use before it was discarded. The surface displays soil stains. There are indistinct dark blue motifs on the exterior of the body.

The rim’s interior side is decorated with a circle of floral patterns. The upper exterior wall is decorated with a circle of floral and vine patterns. The weight is 6g. The shard thickness is 0.1-0.6cm. The mouth diameter is 8cm. The minimum vessel height is

3.3cm. From STA 50, Layer V.

Plate:

Drawing:

Fig 164 Singapore blue and white cup 3

4, Cup, round lip, everted rim, curved body, deep vessel, ring foot. The outer base and the interior foot wall are not glazed. The top half of the exterior wall is decorated with a circle of twined chrysanthemum vines. The internal side of the rim is decorated with a circle of floral scrolls pattern. There is a Chinese character of “壽”

(means “longevity”) drawn in the centre of the inner base. The weight is 38g. From

STA 23, Layer III.

Plate: 306

Fig 165 Singapore blue and white cup 4

5, Cup, round lip, everted rim, curved body, deep vessel. Both the exterior and the interior walls are glazed. The exterior wall is decorated with a dragon pattern. The internal side of the rim is decorated with a circle of floral scrolls. The weight is 18g.

From STA 1004A, Layer III.

Plate:

Fig 166 Singapore blue and white cup 5

D. Jarlet

1, Jarlet, square lip, short neck, round shoulder. The shoulder part is decorated with twined chrysanthemum vines. The lower part of the exterior wall is decorated with downward abstract lotus petals. The two decorative panels are divided by two parallel lines. From Colombo Court Square 21 Spit 9 Layer I.

Plate50:

50The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 307

Fig 167 Singapore blue and white jarlet 1

E. Lid

1, Meiping lid, bell shaped body. The top side is decorated with a circle of floral scroll pattern. The exterior wall of the body is decorated with a circle of big vertical lotus petals. From FTC.

Plate51:

Fig 168 Singapore blue and white lid 1

F. Stem cup

1, Stem cup, round lip, rim, shallow body. The upper part of the exterior wall is

decorated with a wide circle of twined chrysanthemum vines. The rim’s internal side

is decorated with a narrow circle of floral scrolls. From FTC. Code: 7241

Plate52:

51The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 52The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 308

Fig 169 Singapore blue and white stem cup 1

2, Stem cup, high ring foot. The inner base is decorated with chrysanthemum vines.

From FTC. Code: 5781, 5764, 5749

Plate53:

Fig 170 Singapore blue and white stem cup 2

G. Vase

1, Octagonal-mouth vase, square lip, octagonal angled mouth and neck. Both exterior and interior walls are glazed. There are blue lines along the inner side of the rim.

There is one blue leaf decorated on each of the eight edges. There are blue drawings on the external wall as well. From FTC. Code: 7252

Plate:

53The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 309

Fig 171 Singapore blue and white vase 1

2, Vase, round lip, wide straight mouth, long neck. The external side of the mouth is

decorated with a circle of thunder pattern. The exterior wall of the neck is decorated

with upward palm leaves pattern. From PHC.

Plate54:

Fig 172 Singapore blue and white vase 2

3, Quadrangle vase, body shard. The neck and the body were made separately. The paste colour is dark yellowish grey. The paste is of medium vitrification level. The neck is decorated with downward lotus petals pattern. The weight is 6g. From STA 7,

Layer II.

Plate:

Fig 173 Singapore blue and white vase 3

4, Vase. Three body shards. The exterior wall is decorated with floral vines. From

FTC.

Plate55:

54The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 55The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 310

Fig 174 Singapore blue and white vase 4

H. Ewer

1, Ewer handle. The external side is decorated with floral scroll pattern. From FTC.

Plate56:

Fig 175 Singapore blue and white ewer 1

2, Monk’s Cap ewer. From PHC. Code: 60

Plate57:

Fig 176 Singapore blue and white ewer 2

3, Ewer, small mouth, pear shaped body. There is a narrow circle of floral scroll pattern under the rim on the exterior wall. There are twined floral patterns under the floral scroll. The paintings are of dark blue colour. From PHC. Code: PHC 1④.

Plate58:

56The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 57The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 311

Fig 177 Singapore blue and white ewer 3

(3) Copper red wares

A. Vase

1, Copper red vase, curved body. The exterior side is glazed. The interior is unglazed.

There are floral patterns drew with copper red lines. From PHC. Code: PHC 3-2

Plate59:

Fig 178 Singapore copper red vase 1

(4) Iron spotted qingbai wares

A. Bowl

1, Bowl, ring foot. The interior wall is decorated with moulded floral patterns. There are small or big iron spots randomly scattered on the surface. The weight is 54g. From

FTC. Code: 8923

Plate:

58The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 59The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 312

Drawing:

Fig 179 Singapore iron spotted qingbai bowl 1

B. Saucer

1, Saucer, flat base. There is molded appliqué decoration of boys playing lotus on the

internal side. From PHC.

Plate60:

Fig 180 Singapore iron spotted qingbai saucer 1

C. Lid

1, Lotus leaf shaped lid. The exterior wall is glazed. The interior wall is not glazed.

Several iron spots appear on the external side. Code: PHC 3-2.

Plate61:

60The photo is provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 61The photos are provided by Dr. John N. Miksic. 313

Fig 181 Singapore iron spotted qingbai lid 1

314

Chapter 6: Trading Networks: 14th Century Southeast Asia

6.1 Urbanization process in China

This section begins with discussions on the urbanization process in China. By

comparison, it will demonstrate that different factors spurred the formation of cities in

Southeast Asia. The topic on “urbanization” has been debated by many scholars in various disciplines. When it comes to social transitions and geographical changes, the ancient cities cannot be neglected as important clues to decipher history. The research on cities is closely linked with political and economical transitions. In the field of archaeology, the study of ancient cities is always connected with the discovery of foundation remains, road remains, and remains etc. These remains become irresistible motivations for archaeologists to reconstruct the layout of the whole city.

In the case of China, the long history of agricultural civilization has greatly enriched the historyof urban development. The earliest urban site known in China so far could be traced to the Erlitou (二里头) site of early which

although is still quite debatable for the dating. There is a palace foundation ruin located at the centre of the site. This has been considered as the earliest palace found in China. Around the palace foundation, there are foundation ruins of varied sizes, residential foundation ruins, well ruins, pebble pavements, ceramic drainage pipes, tombs, etc. Plenty of artefacts, including bronze wares, jade wares, earthen wares etc have also been unearthed. ( Archaeology Team of

315

Archaeology Institute, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 1961, 1965, Erlitou

Archaeology Team of Archaeology Institute, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

1974, 1975, 1983) Scholars hold contradictive views on the issue whether the Erlitou layers of latter times could be late as early Shang period. Arguments also focus on the issue whether the late strata of Erlitou site is early Shang Dynasty’s capital established by the first emperor Chengtang. Erlitou site becomes very important for the research on late Xia and early Shang period. The elements of varied relics in the settlement make it a good example for studying the origins of urban development in China.

Not far away from Erlitou site, there is an important site called “

Shangcheng” (meaning a Shang Dynasty City in Zhengzhou) in Henan Province. The

Zhengzhou Shangcheng has been determined to be an urban site of early Shang

Dynasty, based on clear strata relations. Compared to Erlitou site, Zhengzhou

Shangcheng has been discovered with clear boundaries of walls. The urban layout has been greatly reconstructed with the ruins of structure foundations, workshops, tombs, etc. A good quantity of artefacts of the time has been unearthed as well. (Zhang

Jianzhong 1955, Zhao Quangu, Han Weizhou, Mingxiang, An Jinhuai 1957,

Henan Provincial Museum 1974, 1975, Henan Provincial Museum and Zhengzhou

Museum 1977) Archaeologists take Zhengzhou Shangcheng as an important urban site with little doubt. But, so far, there is not accurate evidence to convince all the scholars that it is the capital city. A lot of urban sites of later period have already been revealed and conducted with archaeology work.

Since systematic archaeology work has yielded quite a few historical urban

316

settlement sites, archaeological finds begin to be treated as a very important source for

studying “pre-modern cities”, besides official documents and notes of the literati.

Before probing into the presence of urban centres, it is necessary to briefly introduce the social structure at a macro level, reconstructed by scholars of the previous generations. There was a quite influential perception that, the period from the Han Dynasty to Southern Song Dynasty is a hugely transforming era. Economic growth and social change transformed the closed and hierarchical Chinese society into an open and commercialized one. The shifting of people’s position from one tier of the social hierarchy to another had become (Hugh 1911). This perspective has been developed by subsequent scholars. The theory has been employed in the discussion of social changes in the individual time span within this era. Mark Elvin considered this time span a most evolutional period in China’s history (Elvin 1973).

As for the period from the late Tang onwards, social transitions seems to have

moved onto the fast lane. Scholars tend to believe that noticeable social transitions

happenedin a shorter time of period, such as from late Tang to Northern Song, from

Northern Song to Southern Song, from Song-Yuan to Ming-Qing etc (Bol1992, Smith

and Richard von Glahn 2003). Each scholar has his/her own criteria when conducting

historical periodization. However, at present, it seems commonly believed that the

Southern Song period had a substantial social transition compared with previous time.

It should be safe to say that commercial activities had played an important rolein the

social transition. The emergence of new urban centres should be one of the obvious

features of the social transition.

317

The Yuan Dynasty existed for a relatively short period of time. It should not be denied that the Yuan policies had a deep influence with its administrative district planning on the later Chinese governments. However, compared with the Southern

Song Dynasty, it seems the urban centres did not shift much during the Yuan Dynasty, specifically in the area of southern China. The distribution of major urban centres in the Southern Song Dynasty had basically continued during the Yuan Dynasty. The scale of some of the urban centres was even extended in the Yuan Dynasty.

Formal archaeological excavations have revealed a good amount of urban sites dating as early as the Shang Dynasty. The design of city’s layout has been discussed as an important topic for Chinese urban studies. It is acknowledged that early capitals were established with certain traceable etc (Wright 1977). Scholars have as well realized the transitions of the urban sites from different eras, in terms of the city layout, functions etc aspects.

Take the functional aspect for instance, in general, urban centres are designed with more political and cosmological considerations, in early imperial times. The presence of administrations and signify the political function of the city.

In late imperial times, the functions of the city changed. Generally speaking, some newly emerged cities had obvious changes reflected by the locales and the city layout.

The changes signify the commercial function of the city. For example, many wall cities were situated around the river estuaries or road intersections for easier transportation, especially in southern China. Water was supposed to be the most influential factor for a wall city’s location. A good water system could provide quite

318

favourable conditions for transportation, defense, water supply, and food supply. It is

quite obvious for the cities located around the Yangzi River basin (Chang Sen-dou

1995: 75-100). As for some new urban centres, the city layout was more naturally

developed rather than designed. In the meanwhile, political function oriented urban

centres still took up a big proportion.

The archaeological discoveries related to the 14th century urban sites in southeast

China have been introduced in previous sections (Please refer to Chapter 2.2.2-2.2.3).

Based on the materials unearthed within modern China’s boundaries, Chinese

archaeologists have tried to use the typological method to classify the Song to Ming

period urban sites, in terms of the city layout combined with street types. Thus the

involved materials were much more numerous than those quoted by this dissertation.

In this innovative study, the urban sites were put into four basic categories. The first

category included those with square city layout and axial street system (normally in the shape of “+”). The second category included those with square or rectangular city layout and “T” shaped street system. The third category included those with rectangular city layout, and a North-to-South main road(s) system connected with a lot of small parallel East-to-West streets. The fourth category included those with irregular shaped city layout (Xu Pingfang 1986a: 486-492). The urban centres existing in the 14th century will be overviewed in the following section. Urban sites discovered

across the whole country will be generally discussed, in order giving a full view of the

contemporary situation.

In , research on the Yuan’s main capital city called “Da ”, located

319

basically within the current Beijing’s boundaries, has been conducted with quite

elaborate archaeological surveys and excavations. From 1960s to 1970s, a special

archaeology team termed “Yuan Da Du Archaeology Team” was formed. The team

surveyed many relics dating to the Yuan period, including the walls enclosing the

Yuan capital, structure foundations, street system, river system, city gates, drainage

system etc (Khanbaliq Archaeology Team 1972a: 19-28, plate 8-10). Large areas of residential districts had been discovered (Khanbaliq Archaeology Team 1972b: 2-11, plate 1-8). Archaeological reports were soon published, which enabled scholars to recover the layout of the Yuan capital based on these materials.

The Yuan’s main capital city kept being used till nowadays. This is quite common for many cities to function for several dynasties in China. On the other hand, there is another kind of cities which were used for a short term and then abandoned forever.

Another important city, Yuan’s first or old capital called “Yuan Shang Du”, could fall into this category. The old capital was situated in the now Xilin Gol League of Inner

Mongolia and established before the main capital. The establishment and

abandonment of this city are recorded clearly in the official accounts. After being

abandoned, the old capital was well preserved. Last century, research at the site was

conducted with several archaeology surveys and excavations (Jia Zhoujie 1977: 65-74,

plate 5; Ye Xinmin 1987: 33-40). Plenty of structure foundations have been detected,

including remains of walls, palaces, temples, residential houses, warehouses etc. The

city layout is able to be recovered to a large extent by referring to both archaeological

materials and historical archives.

320

Besides the two important capital cities, the other cities developed during the

Yuan period had demonstrated surprising varieties. Firstly, the archaeology teams in

Inner Mongolia have had fruitful achievements. It is well-reasoned there are

numerous Yuan period relic debris in this area left by the powerful regime.

In the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region, many sites of urban centres were found to be newly established or renovated during the Yuan Dynasty. The north China, especially the present Inner Mongolian area was the base of the Yuan court. Therefore, the Yuan court had put great effort into the administration of this area. It is not surprising to see that this area has yielded abundant urban sites dating to the Yuan

Dynasty. Chinese scholars have probed into the features of these Yuan period urban sites. From the aspect of the city layout, the sites could be put into three patterns. The first pattern is cities inherited from the previous times. In other words, the city layout stayed the same as before. The second pattern is expanded cities on the basis of the former ones. The third pattern is entirely new cities. These cities functioned according to a hierarchal system (Li Yiyou 1988: 143-152). It is noteworthy that the Mongols did not built cities before the Yuan court was founded, due to their nomadic customs.

The design was much influenced by the Chinese cities (Ma Yaoqi and Ji Faxi 1980:

124-137).

In other places out of Inner Mongolia, Liao and Jin regimes had reigned in north

China for quite a long time. The strong political powers also put effort into the development of urban centres. Ruins of capital cities dating to Liao and Jin in north

China have been largely found. A lot of non-capital city sites are discovered as well.

321

In south China, the territory was generally controlled by Northern Song and the

succeeding Southern Song courts. Cities were largely developed especially after the

Southern Song court was established. In northwest and southwest of China, certain

parts of the territory was ruled by indigenous regimes, as counterparts of the Chinese

courts. They are ancestors of the current ethnic minorities. Archaeological discoveries

are abundant in these areas, including urban centre remains. After great reunion of the

Yuan Empire, many old cities kept being used indeed. The well-known examples include Quanzhou City and Guangzhou City etc. However, in terms of practical archaeology work, it is not easy to entirely reveal the city’s layout of each different era.

The above section has generally reviewed the urban sites of Yuan Dynasty found within the territory of current China. It could be seen that the urban centres demonstrate diverse characteristics in terms of their establishment and functions. The change of regimes and policies should be one important reason. This dissertation will not probe into the city types across the entire Yuan China, but only some port cities along the southeast coastal lines. It is going to elaborate the achievements on reconstructions of the Yuan period Quanzhou, especially as the contrasted group with those in Southeast Asia.

6.2 Comparisons between Singapore, Quanzhou, and Trowulan

In the first section, the city layout of the 14th century Singapore will be

reconstructed from the materials yielded from archaeological excavations conducted

322 by Dr.Miksic. The reconstruction of Singapore could not rely on accurate historical accounts like those of medieval Chinese urban sites.

In the first place, as discussed before, there has so far been plenty of formal archaeological work conducted in Singapore. Both rescue and planned excavations have yielded a lot of scientific data. Archaeologists from Singapore have dedicated a lot to reconstructing the city’s layout based on the data. In the following part, I will also examine some of the latest conclusions. In this part, the reconstruction of the 14th century Singapore’s functional districts mainly refers to Dr.Miksic’s archaeology reports and analysis.

The earthen wall and Singapore River are basically considered as the boundaries defining the ancient town of Singapore. Within the boundaries, many sites have demonstrated varied features (Map 6.2.1), which could suggest that Singapore might have been divided into small functional areas in the 14th century. Each small area should be used for distinctive activities. The main four representative sites dating back to the 14th century will be introduced and analyzed.

First of all, the Fort Canning site should be seen as a complex of many excavated sites distributed on Fort Canning Hill. Old legendary stories have been attached to the hill. It was believed that there was once a palace on the hill. Archaeological excavations have yielded construction remains, such as and , which seems verify the existence of the palace or structures. Large artefact assemblage includes numerous products of varied materials. The most remarkable artefacts are the valuables, such as the gold and glass products. The luxury objects, such as the gold

323 ornaments, may suggest an elite or upper class life style. In terms of the ceramic finds, some large to medium sized porcelain wares are more frequently or even uniquely found at FTC, such as the Guan type Longquan celadon plate discussed in Chapter

4.3.1. Foo also identified some big blue and white vases etc from FTC as higher valued wares compared to the smaller wares from sites around the Singapore River

(Foo Su Ling 2005).

The Fort Canning Hill was supposed to be of very high hierarchy. It might be a ritual or political centre. Besides, more than 6,000 glass beads and about 1,500 glass globules have been discovered. In terms of quantity, FTC yielded the largest proportion compared with those unearthed from other sites. The origins of these glass objects have been traced by chemical tests. The overwhelming majority of these glass objects were of Chinese origin. However, from current research, there have not been any identical or similar shaped glass products found in China yet. It would make sense that the glass products found in Singapore were reshaped locally. Some glass globules were found stuck to pot fragments, which should suggest a small scale glass recycling craft industrial centre located within the FTC area. Although, it could not confirm that all the discovered glass beads etc finished products were made by the local industry.

In sum, FTC could be a high status centre politically or religiously. There may be a royal palace or religious structure centred in the area. Artisans might be working nearby for a glass recycling craft industry. If FTC was the royal centre for the whole

Singapore, the abandonment of the centre may occur at the same time when Singapore

324

met its decline due to warfare.

Secondly, the Parliament House Complex site has yielded an artefact assemblage of various materials. It is believed that this area was used for commercial activities as well as metal craft industries. The obvious evidence is more than one hundred

Chinese coins discovered from PHC. Other sites have yielded much fewer coins. Most

of the coins date to the Northern Song period. A few of them date back to Tang

Dynasty or Southern Song Dynasty.

PHC also yielded numerous copper or bronze objects. A big quantity is pure

copper wire fragments. Most of the bronze objects are fishhooks. Other forms of the

copper or bronze artefacts include bells, bars etc. It seems the wires were leaders for

fishhooks, for there is an example of a match of the two attached together. Iron

objects are also found. Besides, there are by-products of metal working process, such

as slag. These finds suggest PHC was supposed to be a district with metal craft

workshops.

Thirdly, the artefact assemblages unearthed from Empress Place site and St.

Andrew’s Cathedral site have not been comprehensively analyzed. EMP site is located

on the edge of the river bank. Its location suggests the function of the area was of a

high probability to discard wastes. As for the case of STA site, the artefact assemblage

consists of a wide range of types. Nearly all artefact types found in other sites were

also found in STA. Organic remains, such as faunal bones, were found. Architecture

components, such as fragments of bricks and tiles, were found as well. It suggests that

STA might be a place for the disposal of food remains and other wastes.

325

In terms of the time span, it seems the FTC site did not last as long as other sites.

It may only exist from late 13th century to the late 14th century. This is suggested from

the evidence of a few Chinese ceramics dating to a period from the 14th century to the

colonial era. They are found in other sites but not in FTC. It makes sense that the

existence of the reign centre lasted shorter than other places, if the reign was

overthrown by military interference from foreign powers.

In sum, the 14th century Singapore seems to occupy an area of about 85 hectares

(Miksic 2006b:147). It had established a mature functional community. It had a political centre, commercial district, and areas for craft industries. The huge quantity of artefacts, especially the Chinese ceramics, demonstrated that Singapore had amazing consuming capabilities. The daily use objects constituted a big proportion in the artefact assemblage, compared to sparse religious objects and luxury objects. This suggests that Singapore should have been an economy-driven polity rather than a religion-driven polity. The inhabitants in Singapore probably had religious belief(s).

Buddhism could be a prevalent faith. A white Bodhisattva statuette dating to the Yuan period provides valuable evidence. The statuette has only a fragment of the torso found. From the dressing and necklace, it is similar to the Dehua Guanyin statuettes found in China. However, the architectural remains at FTC have not been confirmed to have any religious usage. But it is not necessary to establish magnificent construction for public activities. Common people could perform rituals individually.

The Bodhisattva was unearthed from the area near Victoria Concert Hall.

From the big picture of the functional districts of old Singapore, this area was not

326

supposed to be a residential area. This area locates near the estuary of Singapore River.

People visiting this area include not only the indigenous but also the foreign. There is

another possibility that the Bodhisattva statue might belong to a foreigner (including

sailors, traders, travellers, etc), who carried the statue as an amulet for safe travelling.

The owner of the statue could not be determined in the original layer context.

Finally in this part, Melaka will be viewed here of great importance during the

15th century, as the neareast port city to Singapore. It is commonly believed Melaka

was the successor of 14th century Singapore. The establishment of Melaka has been

touched on briefly in Chapter 1.3.2. Melaka could have become the most comparable urban site for Singapore. However, archaeology work has not been carried out much

in Melaka. Excavation on the site of Melaka Fort is the only official archaeology

work conducted by the Department of National Heritage since 2006. The Melaka Fort

was built in the 15th century, when the Sultanate’s administrative center and royal

residences were located there. In 2008, the revealed structure of the Fort, basically

wall and foundation relics of red bricks, was open to the public. Now it has become a

popular open-air tourist spot. But there is no proper excavation report published yet.

The lack of archaeology work in Melaka made it infeasible to reconstruct the city

layout of the 15th century, let alone the links between Melaka and Singapore from the

perspective of archaeology.

Chinese porcelain has been found in Melaka. There are some collections of

ceramics, including Chinese wares, Thai wares, Indonesian wares etc, in the local

Stadhuis Museum and Cheng Ho Museum. The sites yielding these wares are labelled

327

out, though not precisely enough. The sherds seem to have been collected quite

randomly. The Chinese porcelain displayed in the collections includes a majority of blue and white wares and a few Longquan celadon wares. The shapes basically involve bowl, plate, jar, vase, etc. The date of most of them could be traced back to the mid 15th century onwards. Since there has not been any archaeological report, it is

impossible to make statistical comparisons.

328

Map 6.2.1 Archaeological sites within the ancient town of Singapore (Miksic 2013:

213)

In the second section, the ancient Quanzhou’s city layout will be reconstructed.

First of all, the location of Quanzhou is very important. It is situated at the estuary of the Jin River along the coast of southern Fujian (Map 6.2.2). Scholars have discussed 329 the relations between its location and its booming and decline. As an international port, the booming of Quanzhou benefited much from its excellent natural harbour for giant ships of maritime trade. When the harbour became too shallow and narrow for giant ships due to sediment deposition or the movement of the coast line, Quanzhou’s maritime activities were inevitably affected. The change of topographic conditions could be one of the important reasons leading to Quanzhou port’s decline after the

14th century (Li Zhongjun and Wang Genyuan 1984:157-163).

Actually, the issue of reconstructing Song Quanzhou has been touched on since last century. Su Jilang’s research has developed substantial knowledge on the city layout of the Song Dynasty (Su Jilang 1991). His research has heavily relied on historical accounts, but rarely on archaeological materials. The city boundaries and the distribution of buildings were explicitly examined. It could be conceded that archaeology work has not fully been conducted in all the districts of Quanzhou.

However, the ancient city plan still could be traced from the current city layout. It is because the city layout did not change too much since its decline after Yuan period.

The nearly standstill economic situation afterwards had helped conserve the old

Quanzhou’s urban landscape. According to the surveys by local researchers, many relic debris and buildings could date back to the Song to Yuan period. Their surveys greatly helped with the confirmation of the functional districts and boundaries of the ancient Quanzhou (Chen Yundun 1980:1-13; Zhuang Weiji 1980: 14-28; Zhuang

Jinghui 1988: 118-126). By combing the surveys and historical accounts, the city layout could be able to be revealed to a large extent. The earliest available local

330

chronicle of Quanzhou city is Quanzhou Fuzhi 《泉州府志》( ), which was compiled in l612 C.E. Besides, there are also a few relevant recordings in other official archives and individuals’ notes. Su has tried to recover the Quanzhou layout in terms of four divisions: 1, city walls; 2, distribution of important buildings; 3, distribution of central commercial districts and handicraft industry districts; 4, local elites’ residential areas etc (Map 6.2.4).

Su’s achievement has been quite comprehensive and systematic. The current archaeological finds could not add more materials to amend Su’s recovery of the city plan, such as the excavation of Dejimen or Deji Gate (德济门) site. In 2001, a rescue excavation conducted at Dejimen site in front of the current Tienhou Temple or

Temple of the Queen of Heaven (天后宫). The Dejimen site has archaeological strata of Song, Yuan and Ming periods. The excavation yielded not only the city wall relics but also a lot of carved stone components (Tang Hongjie 2003: 76-80, 99). In the following part, Song Quanzhou’s city layout will be briefly introduced. The city already had four enclosure walls for the Yuan period Quanzhou (Map 6.2.3). However, the four walls were established in different periods. Three walls were built before

Song Dynasty. The most inner wall was the one enclosing the highest-level

administrative office, called Yacheng (亚城). In the outer area, there were two more enclosure walls, respectively called Zicheng (子城, means “sub-city”) and Luocheng

(罗城, means “extensive city”). During most of the Song Dynasty, Luocheng

functioned as the main city wall. Only in the terminal Song period (1230 C.E.), a

section of new flank wall (翼城) was built between the southern Luocheng wall and

331

Jin River, to protect the commerce conducted in the area. The recordings of

constructing this new flank wall could be seen in local chronicles of different periods,

such as the Wanli Quanzhou Fuzhi (《万历泉州府志》), Qianlong Quanzhou Fuzhi

《乾隆泉州府志》( ), etc. In the Yuan Dynasty, this flank wall was extended and finally linked with the Luocheng wall, and became the most peripheral wall of the city’s

southern part.

In terms of the functional areas, as mentioned above, the local top rank governing

offices, in this case the “zhou (州)” level administrative centre was enclosed by the

Yacheng wall. It was located in the northern part of Zicheng. The lower rank

government agency, in this case the “xian (县)” level administrative centre was

adjacent to the “zhou” level units. They were also located in the northern part of

Zicheng. The surrounding area, where these two government centres were situated, is

considered as the core administrative district.

Except for these two administrative centres, other specialized government

agencies were mostly scattered within the Luocheng. However, there were still some

located outside the old “Luocheng”. Take Shibosi (The Mercantile Shipping and

Transportation Bureau) for example, it was coping with the maritime trade affairs. It

was located outside the old Luocheng wall, but enclosed by the flank wall. This area

is supposed to be the district for commercial activities according to chronicle

recordings.

Because Quanzhou was an international city, the question where foreign

communities dwelled is always an interesting issue. Historical accounts have

332

recordings that, by Yuan period, there was a foreign residential area, termed as “fan

fang” (蕃坊, literally means “ward for the foreigners”) in Chinese. The “fan fang” was located in the southern part. In Yuan period, the governmental management was quite systematic by appointing a supervisor for the foreign communities. However, it is still a debatable issue whether Quanzhou already had “fan fang” in Song period,

although there is explicit recording from Pingzhou Ketan 《萍州可谈》( ) that the Song

Guangzhou City had set up “fan fang”. ( 1984: 109)

So far, there has not been systematic archaeology excavations conducted to reveal the city layout. Thus, it is not feasible yet to reconstruct “fan fang” from an archaeological perspective. Fortunately, quite a few cultural relics in relation to the foreigners have been collected by local museums by means of archaeology surveys and personal donations. Amongst, the Quanzhou Maritime Museum has collected large quantities of artefacts. Relics of exotic styles form a very big collection in the

museum. There is a long term exhibition “Quanzhou Religious Stone Carving Hall”

that contains a good quantity of stone , stone tablets, and carved stone components from foreign religiousstructures. In addition, private collectors also keep some religion related artefacts. Currently, the artefacts are kept in various places.

Discoveries of artefacts have been reported since the 1930s. Some were found buried underground within or outside the current Quanzhou City. Some are recycled and still used in the present-day buildings. Fortunately, there are publications which try to

gather information on these artefacts. The published materials include relics from

ancient religious structures and tombs. Many religions involved, such as ancient ,

333

Hinduism, , Daoism, , indigenous religions, etc (Wu Wenliang

2005). These materials are of great value to scholars interested in the study of

Quanzhou. Inscriptions and pattern designs could help to identify the communities that existed in Quanzhou. However, it is problematic to trace their original context.

The artefacts have drawn researchers’ interests. For example, there have been studies focused on certain kind of religion related artefacts, such as Hindu carved stones (Yu

2007).

Besides the foreign residential quarters, Su also tried to recover the locations of other kind of residential areas. He examined the recordings of commemorative erected in the Song Dynasty from local chronicles, and then fixed the location of these arches. These arches were constructed upon government orders to commemorate remarkable figures near their residencies. These people were praised for various reasons, such as the official rank, scholarly honour, virtuous deed etc. According to

Su’s statistic analysis of the arches, people with high scholarly honour resided in the southern part of the city. Royal clan families were residing mostly in the southwestern part of the city. People with contributions to commercial activities resided in the commercial district that is the area between Luocheng wall and the flank wall. The above reconstruction results are inferred by the distribution of commemorative arches.

There are no archaeology excavations done in these areas yet.

Su’s research also confirmed the locations of many religious structures, which he placed under four major categories: Chinese , Daoism, Buddhism and exotic religions. Most of them were scattered within the boundaries of Luocheng and

334 the flank wall.

In sum, the Song-Yuan period Quanzhou was an urban community with multiple functions. Given the large area of its commercial district, numerous docks, and the location of The Mercantile Shipping and Transportation Bureau, it can be inferred that

Quanzhou was a commerce-driven economy. The commercial district mainly functioned as an area for trading activities. But the handicraft industries were not located within the urban boundaries. The ceramic kilns were located in the mountain areas, much further away from coastal lines. From the fact that foreigners had their own residential quarters, known as the “fan fang”, this tells us that permanent foreign residents had integrated into the local community in terms of their economic pursuit.

There is no doubt that they still kept their own religion beliefs, which could be seen from the distribution of exotic religious structures. It suggests that Quanzhou adopted an open policy towards various forms of religions.

335

Map 6.2.2 Quanzhou’s location in southern Fujian (Pearson, Li Min and Li Guo 2002:

23-59)

336

Map 6.2.3 Song Quanzhou’s four walls (Pearson, Li Min and Li Guo 2002: 23-59)

337

Map 6.2.4 Structures in Song Dynasty Quanzhou (adapted from Su Jilang 1991: 105)

In the third section, Trowulan’s city layout will be examined. Trowulan is located in the hinterland of East Java (Map 6.2.5). It covered a huge area of nearly a hundred square kilometres. Archaeological surveys have been conducted from 1991 to 1993. 338

In terms of macroscopic city plan, discoveries include well-organized canal system, reservoirs, and brick structures (Map 6.2.6). Surveys also yielded quantities of artefacts, including Southeast Asian ceramics, Chinese ceramics, Chinese coins, metal objects, terracotta , gold ornaments etc.

Map 6.2.5 The location of Trowulan in East Java (Dupoizat and Harkantiningsih 2007:

12)

According to the archaeological finds, preliminary research has been done in

terms of dating the sites, reconstructing the city layout, recovering the origins of the

artefacts etc. It is believed that, before Majapahit phase, this area was shortly

occupied between the 9th and early 12th centuries, which had been inferred by the

unearthed Chinese ceramic sherds. Discoveries of these ceramics sherds have come

from either excavations or surface collections in certain areas of Trowulan. For 339

instance, some Chinese ceramic sherds collected from the dumped soil by

brick-making industries, including some Yue type green wares and Guangdong wares,

could date to as early as the nine century (Dupoizat and Harkantiningsih 2004: 11-15).

Chinese ceramics of the 9th through early 12th centuries have so far been found in the

places near Candi Brah, Candi Gentong and Candi Tikus etc. Since Trowulan has not

been entirely revealed by archaeology excavations, there is no way to find clear strata

relations between these places. Therefore, it would be dangerous to take the whole

Trowulan site as a continuous existence in this period. In other words, different areas within the current Trowulan territory may have unbalanced development at the time.

Unlike Singapore in the 14th century, there are some historical records regarding

Majapahit in both Chinese and old Javanese. There is no doubt that the capital of

Majapahit’s establishment was elaborately planned with political stimulus. Both

Nagarakretagama and Yingya Shenglan have general descriptions of Majapahit’s

palace. Archaeologists have tried to locate Majapahit’s palace. Tentative excavations

yielded interesting results in Menak Jingga. The stone structure from the bottom

stratum may indicate the location of the palace. (Soejatmi Satari 1995: 35) Ruins of

magnificent buildings, such as the candis, could be found within the area. Numerous

statues and candis above ground imply that Trowulan functioned as a religious centre as well.

Trading activities might be quite developed, for there have been a great deal of

Chinese coins discovered. It is recorded that Chinese coinage were used as the official currency of Majapahit (Groeneveldt 1960: 47). According to Nagarakrtagama, many

340 foreign merchants came to Trowulan for business. But from current archaeological work or historical accounts, there is no direct evidence of defined foreigners’ residential quarters.

Map 6.2.6 The distribution of cultural relics in the Trowulan area62

Summary

From the above comparisions, the three cities have demonstrated both similarities

62The map is published in the item “Trowulan” in Wikipedia. Please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trowulan. 341

and differences. All three have shown strong vitality in the 14th century, especially

from the aspect of commercial activities, in spite of the fact that they were located in

different cultural zones.

All of them were quite open to merchants. Quanzhou was a cosmopolis with no

doubt. Foreigners were long term residents in the city. A number of foreign religious

temples convince us that several foreign communities were living in the town.

Thriving commerce activities urged the town’s expansion. Ceramics were transported

to Quanzhou continuously from hinterland by waterways. By virtue of its location

along the coastal lines, Quanzhou became one of the most important international

ports in southeast China. Quanzhou also benefitted greatly from Yuan’s maritime policy. Unfortunately, extensive excavations on Quanzhou have yet to be conducted, which makes it difficult to plot the city layout.

However, there were fewer records on Singapore in the 14th century, compared to

the written accounts on Quanzhou. But more systematic work has been conducted in

the last three decades, which have yielded a large amount of artefacts. The big

proposion of Chinese ceramics indicates that the 14th century Singapore had such high

consumption ablity, despite the fact that it was only a small territory. The city layout

could not be reconstructed as clearly as Quanzhou. This could be attibuted to the local

structure traditions. The city plan could not be retrieved by simply piecing together

the foundations of buildings. But the unearthed ceramics suggest that the local

economy was hugely driven by trade. The iron products and glass products imply that

the local could process semi-finished products, which might be done on purpose of

342 exchange for foreign goods.

Trowulan is believed to be the capital of Majapahit kingdom. With regard to

Majapahit, there are some descriptions in existing accounts. But the exact location is vaguely dipicted. Archaeologists have tried to look for clues to decipher its history.

Unfortunately, some of the layers are disturbed by mordern human activities, such as construction, , etc. By examining the parallels of the Chinese ceramic assemblages found in Trowulan and Singapore, we can tell that the combinations of the same period are indeed quite similar between the two in terms of provenance. Apparently, the Trowulan group demonstrates more diversity in terms of the shapes and motif decorations on the ceramics. It can be assumed that good quality

Chinese ceramics could be purchased by people from any place.

343

Chapter 7: Conclusions

The study of Southeast Asia has always been an interesting area that has drawn

the attention of scholars. Scholars from different disciplines have conducted studies to

illuminate the characteristics of the society in this region. The author will reiterate the

principal purpose for this paper—to reconstruct the history of the 14th century in

Southeast Asia using the archaeological method.

7.1 Retrospect: the documented history of Southeast Asia—China relations

There are more clues about the relationship between Southeast Asia and China in

both Chinese historical sources and archaeological data.

In terms of cultural influences, overseas Chinese communities, as the best-known carrier, formed in a quite late period, at least in the historical records.

is a segment of the relationship that least impacted Southeast Asia. The relationship had greater effects in the form of commercial activities.

As early as the Han Dynasty, Chinese merchants already appeared in Vietnam.

However, trade was restricted when Confucian became the basic ideology of the

empire. The development of trade with foreign countries was severely hindered due to

restrictions on the contact with foreigners and cultural prejudices against trade.

Therefore, Chinese sailors and traders began to be actively involved in the maritime

trade very late. Neither can we find many early historical records on the subject. Until

the 9th century, numerous Chinese export wares were loaded by non-Chinese ships.

344

The extant literature suggests that most of the rarities favored by the Chinese upper

class were not acquired by commercial activities but through diplomatic exchanges by

sending abroad ambassadors or receiving tributes. Aside from the governmental

exchanging activities, trading activities with foreigners existed, as can be seen in

some of non-official descriptions. The famous Buddhist monk, , returned to

China by sea after he finished his study in India and sailed to Guangzhou on a

merchant ship in the early .

From the 7th to the early 10th centuries, trade with Nanhai was further expanded;

Chinese consumers purchased foreign spices and medicines. Southeast Asian

countries, such as Champa, Srivijaya, Jambi and Cambodia, sent missions to China. A

famous Chinese Buddhist monk wrote about Chinese pilgrims going to India

via sea routes. Many of them called at Palembang or Java, where they would stay for

months waiting for the northeast monsoon to take them to Sri Lanka and then India.

At that time, the powerful Srivijaya prohibited all other ports in the Straits of Melaka

from trading or conducting diplomatic exchanges with China.

The composition of early traders in the South China Sea cannot be clearly known

due to the lack of data. According to the excavated shipwrecks, Arabic and Persian

traders may already frequently have gone back and forth to the region. Take the

Belitung shipwreck for example, the cargo containing large quantities of

Chinese ceramics came from the (Flecker 2000).This was the time when

China began to mass produce export ceramics. By the 11th century, several trading ports were formed along the shores of the Straits, taking advantage of the strategic

345

location of the waterway between the seas. However, great changes occurred from the

11th century onwards, when the Song court was established in China.

In 960 C.E., the Song Dynasty reunified China after a long period of civil war.

The new court began to concern itself with the administration of economic and diplomatic relations with the polities of Southeast Asia. Initially, Srivijaya was

privileged as the only Malay kingdom recognized by China, which contributed to the

port’s prosperous trade with China during the Song reign. The Song rulers declared a government monopoly on foreign trade and established bureaucratic departments for regulating maritime trade at the ports of southeastern and southern China, including

Hangzhou, Mingzhou and Guangzhou ports. Foreign trade was limited to those who conducted trade at the state level. China’s trading partners sent missions to China and presented tributes. In return, the Song court gave the missions Chinese products according to a specific set of customary exchange equivalencies. The aim of this was to meet the demands of the ruling class for exotica. Private overseas trading voyages were banned. However, the Song court gradually changed its policies of maritime trade. Some kinds of products began to be permitted to be freely traded instead of being subject to the total monopoly policy to meet the requirements of the Chinese folk. Policies were constantly altered according to the fiscal situation. The liberalization policy became an essential factor that influenced China’s maritime economy.

After an invasion by Jurchen troops in 1126 C.E., the Song court moved south and established its new capital at the port city of Hangzhou located in Zhejiang, in

346

1127 C.E. The Southern Song court was forced to deal with political and economic stresses, since the fertile agricultural and commercial hinterland in the north of the

Yellow River was lost. Under this circumstance, the court was forced to look southward for its sources of state revenue, of which international maritime trade was one important source. After a series of changes in attitude and administration, the

court officially encouraged large scale private maritime trade. Foreign and Chinese

traders could be conferred official ranks if they succeeded in encouraging foreigners

to import foreign products worth a certain value. Consequently, not only did the court

gain huge economic benefits, the manufacturing and value added industries catering

to the demand of the foreign markets thrived, such as the production of silk, ceramics and so on. In return, foreign products such as the aromatic and medicinal products sourced at or transshipped by Southeast Asia, were popular in the Chinese market.

(Lin Tianwei 1959) The Southern Song court rarely placed any restrictions on foreign shipping. Under the positive policy by the government, Chinese private and foreign maritime shipping played an essential role in increasing the state revenue. It was only during the Southern Song Dynasty that private trading activities became prosperous.

According to Wolters, “By the twelfth century no Malay port depended for its fortunes on the Chinese tributary trade” (Wolters 1975). Therefore, the maritime trade system in the South Seas changed fundamentally. The decline of the old tribute system resulted in political changes in Southeast Asia. Many new ports thrived from their contact with China. Archaeological finds have demonstrated that Chinese ceramic sherds were distributed in more ports from the onwards.

347

In 1279 C.E., the Yuan rulers took over the rule of China. During the first few

years of the Yuan Dynasty, the administration of China’s maritime trade in southern

China remained largely the same as the late Southern Song period. However, the length of a ship voyaging outside China was no longer restricted as before. Both

Marco Polo and Ibn Battuta noted that the Chinese ships predominantly sailed between India, Southeast Asia and China. However, the Yuan court began to gain benefits by monopolizing Chinese shipping in 1284 C.E.

At the same time, private maritime trade was banned with harsh sanctions. This policy, however, was intermittent throughout the Yuan period. It is after the ban was lifted in 1323 C.E. for the last time that private Chinese trade got official permission till the end of the Yuan Dynasty. During the Yuan period, in order to monopolize maritime trading, official participation established mercantile shipping superintendencies at designated ports. The Song court also had mercantile shipping superintendencies which were in charge of specific administrative departments. The difference for the Yuan administrations was that they were responsible for assigning traders with ships and capital to launch on behalf of the Yuan government. Finally, private trade was allowed from 1323 C.E. until the early Ming when tributary trade with a proactive foreign policy started.

In the early Ming, the founding Emperor Hongwu ordered a ban on private maritime trade. Only tribute trade was allowed and strictly controlled by the government. After Hongwu’s reign, maritime trade policy was not consistent. Huge profits stimulated contraband private maritime trade, which also triggered a series of

348

social problems in coastal areas. This situation forced the Ming government to change

the relevant policies from time to time. In Yongle’s reign, the renowned ’s voyages to the west indicates the emperor has great concerns on maritime interactions with overseas countries. Private maritime trade was still forbidden. Tribute trade was encouraged. Mercantile shipping superintendences set up in Zhejiang, Fujian and

Guangdong Provinces took charge of tribute trade issues, such as receiving foreign missions, transporting tributes, etc.

In general, the encouragement of tribute trade was effective. Kings from different countries, including of Melaka, met Yongle Emperor during the period of Zheng He’s voyages. However, the expenses on receiving frequent tribute missions were costly. Financial pressure eventually led to a restrictive policy that each country could only send missions once every three years since 1443 C.E. The Ming ban on private maritime trade has long been connected with the discussions on the issue of

“Ming gap” in archaeologists’ circles. The term has never been precisely defined. The

popular meaning of the term “Ming gap” has been much different from when it was initially proposed. Generally speaking, it informally refers to a shortage of Chinese blue and white wares in Southeast Asia during early and mid Ming period. It is naturally assumed the shortage of Chinese export wares should be attributed to the

Ming ban.

R.M. Brown used “Ming gap” as a trigger for her study on Thai trade wares, especially from the shipwreck cargos. The 15th century statistics demonstrate a general shortage of Chinese ceramics whose percentage was decreasing gradually in

349

the cargos from early Ming till Hongzhi reign. Amongst ceramic categories, the blue

and white wares were of severe shortage all through. Ceramics made in Thailand,

Vietnam and began to take up remarkable market shares. (Brown 2009)

Brown’s reseach is of great importance. It is a big step forward for the studies of

ceramic trade in the 15th century Southeast Asia. However, Brown’s data base for this

study is merely materials from shipwreck cargos but not overland site materials.

7.2 Ceramic trade and maritime links

The overland Silk Road has appealed to scholars and the public for centuries. It is not difficult to enumerate stories of well-known explorers. The Tang Dynasty Chinese

monk went to via Central Asia. He arrived in Turfan in 630 C.E.

and was cordially received by the King of . The contemporary Gaochang

King was a pious Buddhist who then issued letters of introduction to him as well as

considerable valuables as funds for further travel. Sir Marc Aurel Stein was a

legendary British explorer, who was primarily known for his famous discoveries in

Dunhuang. Another famous Swedish explorer Sven Hedin was also famous for his

expeditions to Central Asia. The natural environment of the in Central

Asia serves as excellent conditions for preservation. The remarkable discoveries by

recent explorers have made Central Asia an extremely fascinating place. Therefore,

the overland Silk Road has been a major focus for the study of the communications

between the East and the West.

By contrast, the maritime shipping routes linking the East and the West began to

350

draw scholars’ attention at a much later period (Mikami Tsugio 1969). As a

counterpart of the “overland Silk Road”, the concept of “” has

been proposed. But silk or textile products are not the most representative physical

remains found in the sites along seafaring routes. Instead, ceramic remains constitute

the major assemblage. Therefore, the concept of “maritime Ceramic Road” is also commonly expressed.

This dissertation only investigates conditions in a short time span. In fact, ceramics were an important commodity during a much longer period.

Chinese export ceramics became an important commodity in the 9th century.

Changsha ceramics produced in Hunan Province during the late Tang Dynasty have

been excavated in many ports along the maritime routes from China through

Southeast Asia to as far west as in Egypt. In the waters between India and

China, the sailors of Southeast Asia, followed by Indians, Arabs and , were

the first to develop the nautical expertise for regular trading voyages. (Miksic 2008)

This dissertation has demonstrated the significance of ceramic trade between

Southeast Asia and China. The author has investigated the ceramic remains in 14th

century Southeast Asia. These huge ceramic remains have proven to be an important

commodity along the “maritime Ceramic Road”. Due to the scope of the dissertation,

the author only highlighted a short time span from the late 13th century to early 15th

century. Chinese porcelain discovered from the Southeast Asian sites has been

classified. By comparing the ceramic types found in Southeast Asia with those found

in southeast China, the provenance of the sherds in Southeast Asia has been confirmed.

351

Because the study of dating porcelain has greatly advanced based on abundant materials yielded from investigations and excavations, Chinese porcelain has been established with a relatively accurate chronology. Hence, the sites in Southeast Asia could be dated. This is quite an important issue, since written accounts are sparse in relation to historical Southeast Asia. In the case of Singapore and Trowulan, both of them demonstrated a terrific capacity to absorb Chinese ceramics. The unearthed

Chinese ceramic assemblage contains products of the kilns in Zhejiang Longquan area, southern Fujian, and Jiangxi Jingdezhen. This implies that the origins of the shipping routes should be certain ports located in Zhejiang and Fujian. It is a pity that archaeological excavations in the ancient ports and docks of these areas have not yet succeeded in providing enough materials to locate the exact ports. The trading ships might have loaded ceramic commodities from the most northern port and sailed down southwards to the neighbouring one for the second loading.

7.3 Chinese trade and the evolution of port cities in Southeast Asia

During the 14th century, the urbanization process was demonstrated by the emergence of a series of port cities. This process reflects the huge expansion of commercial activities.

This dissertation has made comparisons between Singapore, Quanzhou and

Trowulan. As seen from the earlier discussion, Singapore, Quanzhou and Guangzhou could be categorized as “port cities”. However, Singapore was an independent entity

(although it paid tribute to both Siamese and Javanese polities), while Quanzhou and

352

Guangzhou are local administrative districts within the territory of an integrated polity under China. The prosperity of the port city in China was more dependent on the central government’s policy. This view could well be illustrated by the fact that the thriving of Quanzhou and decline of Guangzhou occurred nearly simultaneously. The policy inclination could influence the development of a city to a great extent.

However, Singapore was in a totally different situation. Geographically, it is neither the centre of a big polity, nor an administrative region under the reign of a big polity. Politically, it is independent despite its occasional vassal position. The ruling class of Singapore could implement favourable policies to improve the economy.

Given the unearthed artefact assemblage and structure foundations, the remains related to religious usage take up a very small portion. But products for daily use and commodities form the majority. It implies that contemporary Singapore may not have functioned as an important religious centre or political centre. The fact that the settlement was established near the river mouth may indicate that the whole city’s economy heavily relied on maritime trade. It should be safe to say that Singapore in the 14th century was successful as a commercial intermediary. Singapore met the basic requirements of a successful entrepot: natural deepwater port and ideal geographical location along on the arterialshipping routes between the exporting country and the country of consumption. This indicated that Singapore dealt not only with pure entrepot trade but also processing entrepot trade. Archaeological finds suggest that handicraft industries were also established in Singapore. The lack of natural resources forced Singapore to import raw materials for making end products, such as iron

353

products and glass products.

Trowulan’s situation is different from Singapore or the Chinese port cities. It is

now commonly acknowledged that Trowulan was the capital city of Majapahit. Ample

temple relics and structure foundation remains indicate that Trowulan was a religious

and political centre. As the capital of a strong archipelago state, it is quite reasonable

to conclude that Trowulan had a great capacity to consume Chinese products. The

artefact assemblage found there verifies this conclusion.

In conclusion, the urbanization process in 14th century Southeast Asia is driven by two forces: political force and economical force. The political force is manifested by the establishment of administrative urban centres. One reflection of the economical force is the emergence of port cities.

So far, if Wang Dayuan’s description in the “Long-ya-men” item is regarded as a serious recording,63 we can infer that Singapore was a settlement with Chinese residents in the 14th century. Trowulan was culturally and religiously more influenced by Indian aspects rather than Chinese aspects. However, as mentioned in the item of “Java” in Yingya Shenglan, there were Chinese residents living in port cities along the coast of East Java, such as Tuban, Gresik and Surabaya. These Chinese came mostly from Guangdong, Zhangzhou and Quanzhou areas. But Ma Huan did not make it clear whether there were Chinese residents in Majapahit the capital or not. Ma

Huan’s description suggests that Chinese people were already dwelling in the main

63“Chinese people are living with the locals side by side.” Please refer to the previous translated text in Chapter 2.1.1. 354 ports since the early 15th century.64 Quanzhou appears to be a cosmopolitan port city.

Different ethnic groups were living in Quanzhou. The majority of the foreign residents were merchants. Multiple religions were allowed to co-exist. Every religion was respected and freely developed, which is reflected by the simultaneous religious monuments.

From the historical perspective, Quanzhou has a much longer history as an urban centre. Thus, it could be concluded that there was an ongoing expansion of the city’s boundaries. Trowulan was established in the 13th century. One obvious indicator of the city’s growth is the establishment of new candis. For the case of Singapore, there is no apparent indication for the city’s expansion, possibly due to the very short time span of the city’s prosperity.

64“其国有四，皆无城郭。初入杜板，次入厮村，次入苏鲁马益，次入满者伯夷，王都也。…… 市易用中国铜钱。杜板者曰睹斑，地名也。约以千余家，主以二酋，间有流寓。多广东人也、漳 州人也。……又东行半日，至厮村，曰革儿昔者，故沽滩地，中国人客此而成聚落，遂名新村。 约千余家，村主广东人也……二十余里始至苏鲁马益，曰苏儿把牙，约十余家，亦有首领，间有 中国人。人有三等……唐人，如广东、漳、泉人流寓者，食用鲜华，率尚回回教，持斋受戒。” 引自马欢，《瀛涯胜览集》，《纪录汇编》，影印本，上海：涵芬楼，1938 年，页 4-7。 “The country has four (cities) without enclosures. First to Duban (Tuban), next to Sicun (Gresik), next to Sulumayi (Surabaya), next to Manzheboyi (Majapahit)—the kingdom’s capital...Chinese copper coins are used for market exchange. Duban (杜板) is also called Duban (睹斑), a toponym. There are more than a thousand households led by two chiefs. There are also some foreign residents, most of who are and Zhangzhou people...Sicun could be reach after half day’s travelling eastward. It is also called Ge’erxi, ever a beach area. Chinese came to reside here and established a settlement. So it is called Xincun (literally meaning“new village”). There are more than a thousand households, the head of who is Cantonese. Sulumayi, also called Suerbaya, could be reached after more than twenty miles’ travelling. There are more than ten households, including some Chinese, also led by the chief...There are three types of people...The Chinese, such as the Cantonese, Zhang people and Quan people staying here, eat fresh and beautiful food, practise Islam, keep fast and Islamic regulations.”Quoted from Ma Huan, “Shenglan Compile”, Jilu Huibian, Photocopy, Shanghai: Han Fen Press, 1938, pp.4-7. 355

Bibliography

Abu Rhido.1983. “Ceramic analysis result, Trowulan site, Stage VII”, SP A

Journal, Final Report, Cebu, 59-73.

Ang Si Min. 2009. 14th Century Chinese Stoneware from the St. Andrew’s Cathedral

Excavation. Proceedings of the Undergraduate Research Experience on

Campus Project. Unpublished Manuscripts. Nanyang Technological University,

Singapore.

Anonymity. 1951.“ Reports on domestic library and archaeology work progress 国内

圕(宀博)文物工作报道.” Cultural Relics 文物参考资料 8:143-181.

Anthropology Museum of Xiamen University 厦门大学人类博物馆. 1965.

“Investigations and discoveries of Dehua Qudougong kiln sites 德化屈斗宫窑

址的调查发现.”Cultural Relics 文物 2: 26-35.

Archaeology Excavation Team for Ancient Ceramic Kilns in Dehua 德化古瓷窑址考

古发掘工作队. 1979.“Excavation newsletter of Qudougong kiln sites in

Dehua County, Fujian Province 福建德化屈斗宫窑址发掘简报.” Cultural

Relics 文物 5: 51-61.

Barnes,W. D. 1911.“Singapore old straits and new harbour”, Journal of the Straits

Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society60: 25-34.

Bengbu Museum 蚌埠市博物展览馆. 1977. “Brief excavation report on ’s

tomb of Ming Dynasty 明汤和墓清理简报.” Cultural Relics 文物 2: 35-39, plate

4.

356

Bol, P. K. 1992. “This Culture of Ours”: Intellectual Transitions in T’ang and Sung

China. California: Stanford University Press.

Braddell, R.1950.“Lung-Ya-Men and Tan-Ma-Hsi.”Journal of the Malayan Branch

of the Royal Asiatic Society23, 1: 37-51.

Brown, R. M. and S. Sjostrand. 2000.Turiang:A Fourteenth-Century Shipwreck in

Southeast Asian Waters, Pasadena. California: Pacific Asia Museum.

Brown, C. C. 1952. “Sejarah Melayu or ‘Malay Annals’: a translation of Raffles MS

18.”Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society25, 2-3: 12-204.

Brown, R. M. 2009. The Ming Gap and Shipwreck Ceramics in Southeast Asia:

Towards a Chronology of Thai Trade Ware. Bangkok: The Siam Society.

Blagden, C.O.1909. “Notes on Malay history.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society

(S.B.) 53: 139-162.

Cai Xiaohui 蔡小辉. 2010.“A study of the Longquan ware uncovered from the

hoards of Song and Yuan periods 窖藏出土宋元时期龙泉窑青瓷的相关研究.”

Cultural Relics of the East 东方博物 35:39-50.

Cao Chuansong 曹传松.1991. “A batch of hoarded copper objects and porcelain

unearthed in Hunan Lixian 湖南澧县出土的一批窖藏铜、瓷器.”Archaeology

and Cultural Relics 考古与文物 2:24-29.

Cao Jianwen, Xu Huafeng 曹建文，徐华峰.2009. “Surveys and research on the Yuan

Dynasty blue-and-white kilns at Jingdezhen over recent years 近年来景德镇元

代青花窑址调查与研究.”Palace Museum Journal 故宫博物院院刊 6: 78-88.

Chang Sen-dou. 1995. “The morphology of walled capitals.”The City in Late

357

Imperial China, ed. G. W. Skinner. Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc, 75-100.

Chaoyang Museum 朝阳市博物馆.1986. “Hoarded Yuan Dynasty porcelain found in

Chaoyang City 朝阳市发现元代窖藏瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物 1:92-93, 95.

Chen Kaijun 陈开俊, et al. 1981.The Travels of Marco Polo 马可波罗游记. Fuzhou:

Fujian Science and Technology Publishing House.

Chen Liu 陈浏. 2011. Tao Ya 陶雅. Beijing: Gold Wall Press 金城出版社.

Chen Maoren 陈懋仁. 1996. “Quannan Zazhi 泉南杂志.” Ming Wanli Xiushui

Shenshike Baoyantang Mijiben Version 明万历绣水沈氏刻宝颜堂秘笈本,

Photocopy 影印本. In Siku Quanshu Cunmu Series 四库全书存目丛书. Jinan:

Qilu Press 齐鲁书社.

Chen Taimin 陈台民. 1985.The China-Africa Relation and Overseas Chinese in the

Philippines 中非关系与菲律宾华侨. Hong Kong: Chao Yang Chubanshe 朝阳

出版社.

Chen Wanli 陈万里.1953. “Investigations on several ancient kiln sites in

Jingdezhen 景德镇几个古代窑址的调查.”Cultural Relics 文物参考资料 9:

82-87.

————. 1957. “Notes of investigations on southern Fujian ancient kiln sites 调查

闽南古代窑址小记.”Cultural Relics 文物参考资料 9: 56-59.

————. 1997.Anthology of Chen Wanli's Ceramic ArchaeologicalResearch 陈万

里陶瓷考古文集. Beijing: Press 紫禁城出版社.

Chen Xingyi 陈行一. 1987. “Tianli Year 2 tomb of Yuan Dynasty found in Gao’an

County, Jiangxi 江西高安县发现元代天历二年纪年墓.” Archaeology 考古

358

3:246-249.

————.2002. “Yuan Dynasty porcelain hoard in Zhejiang Jiaxing Tianguan Pailou

浙江嘉兴天官牌楼元瓷窖藏.”Cultural Relics in Southern China 南方文物 2:

12-13.

Chen Yongzhi 陈永志.2003. “Several thousands of porcelain of nine kiln systems

excavated in market hoards at Jininglu ancient city 集宁路古城发掘集市窖藏

几千件瓷器囊括元代九大窑系.”Cultural Relics Wor ld 文物天地 11:16-25.

————. 2004a. “Excavations on Yuan Dynasty urban site and the third batch of

hoardsin Jininglu 发掘集宁路元代城址及第三批窖藏.”Cultural Relics World

文物天地 3: 22-33.

————.2004b. Porcelain Unearthed from Jininglu Ancient City Site inInner

Mongolia 内蒙古集宁路古城遗址出土瓷器. Beijing: Cultural Relics

Press.

Chen Yundun 陈允敦.1980. “Brief survey report on the urban site of ancient

Quanzhou 泉州古城址踏堪纪要.”Quanzhou Culture and History 泉州文史

2&3: 1-13.

Cheng Yinglin and Peng Shifan 程应麟、彭适凡. 1964. “A joint burial tomb of Yuan

Dynasty found in Fuzhou, Jiangxi 江西撫州发现元代合葬墓.” Archaeology 考

古 7: 370-372, plate 10.

Choo, A.A. 1986.Report on the excavation at Fort Canning Hill, Singapore.

Singapore: National Museum.

Choo, A.A. and J. Puranananda. 1987. Archaeology:A Guide to the Collections

359

National Museum Singapore. Singapore: National Museum.

Colless and E.Brian. 1969. “The of Singapore”, Journal of Southeast

Asian History 10, 1: 1-11.

Collings, H.D. 1948.“Postscript.”Journal of the South Seas Society, Vol. 5, Pt. 2.

Crawfurd, J. 1967.Journal of an Embassy from the Governor General of India to the

Courts of Siam and Cochin China: Exhibiting a View of the Actual State of those

Kingdoms, Kuala Lumpur: . Reprint of the 1828 edition.

————. 1828.Journal of an Embassy from the Governor-General of India to the

Courts of Siam and Cochin China. London: Samuel Bentley, 68-70.

Department of Archaeology of Shanghai Museum 上海博物馆考古部. 1986.“A

report on the excavation of an ancient kiln site at Anren Kou in Longquan,

Zhejiang Province 浙江龙泉安仁口古瓷窑址发掘报告.”The Shanghai Museum

Journal 上海博物馆集刊 3:102-132.

Dupoizat, M-F. and N. Harkantiningsih. 2004. “Les plus anciennes céramiques

chinoises du site de Trowulan.” Archipel 67: 11-15.

————. 2007. Catalogue of the Chinese Style Ceramics of Majapahit—Tentative

Inventory. Paris: Association Archipel. Cahiers d’ Archipel 36.

Edwards McKinnon, E. 1981. “Tengku LuckmanSinar, a note on Pulau Kompei in

Aru Bay, Northeastern Sumatra.”Indonesia 32: 48-73.

————.1984.Kota Cina: Its Context and Meaning in the Trade of Southeast

Asia in the Twelfth to Fourteenth Centuries. PhD Thesis, Cornell University,

Ithaca, NY.

360

————.1985.“Early polities in southern Sumatra: some preliminary observations

based on archaeological evidence.”Indonesia40: 1-36.

Edwards McKinnon, E. and Tengku Luckman Sinar.1981. “A note on Pulau

Kompei in Aru Bay, Northeastern Sumatra.”Indonesia 32: 48-73.

Elvin, M. 1973.The Pattern of the Chinese Past: A Social and Economic

Interpretation. Stanford:Stanford University Press.

Erlitou Archaeology Team of Archaeology Institute, Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences 中国科学院考古研究所二里头工作队. 1974. “Brief Report of Henan

Yanshi Erlitou Palace Site of Early Shang Dynasty 河南偃师二里头早商宫殿遗

址发掘简报.” Archaeology 考古 4: 234-248, plate 2-5.

————. 1975.“Excavation Report of Area Three - Area Eight of Henan Yanshi

Erlitou Site 河南偃师二里头遗址三-八区发掘简报.”Archaeology 考古 5:

302-309, 294, plate 8-9.

————. 1983. “Excavation Report of Henan Yanshi Erlitou Site in the Fall of 1980

1980 年秋河南偃师二里头遗址发掘简报.”Archaeology 考古 3: 199-205, 219.

Fang Hui 方晖.2011. “Appreciating qualified Shufu porcelain discovered from a

hoard site in Xi County, Anhui Province 安徽歙县窖藏枢府瓷精品鉴赏.”East

Collections 东方收藏 9: 30-32.

Feng Chengjun 冯承钧, trans. 1936. The Travels of Marco Polo 马可波罗行记.

Shanghai: Commercial Press.

Feng Kuan 奉宽. 1929. “Research on the old town of Yenching 燕京故城考.”Yen

Ching Journal of Chinese Studies 燕京学报 5:883-912.

361

Feng Xianming 冯先铭. 1985. “Discussions on the Sinan Shipwreck and

its ceramic cargo 南朝鲜新安沉船及瓷器问题探讨.”Palace Museum Journal 故

宫博物院院刊 3: 112-118, 121.

Flecker, M. 2002. The Archaeological Excavation of the Intan

Shipwreck. Oxford: Archaeopress, BAR International Series 1047.

Foo Su Ling. 2005. A Study of 14th Century Blue and White Ceramics Excavated in

Singapore. Independent Study Module Exercise Southeast Asian Studies

Programme. National University of Singapore.

Fu Zongde and Zhou Chengxun 傅宗德、周成训.1990. “A batch of Yuan Dynasty

objects unearthed in Liaoning Kazuo County Gushanzi 辽宁喀左县孤山子出土

一批元代器物.”Archaeology 考古 4: 382-383.

Fujian Jinjiang Archaeology Survey Team 福建省晋江地区文物普查工作队. 1980.

“Archaeology survey newsletter on Dehua ancient kiln sites (draft)德化县古

瓷窑址普查工作简报（草稿）.” InHistorical Records of Dehua Ceramics, 德化

瓷器史料汇编（上册）,ed. Ye Wencheng and Xu Benzhang 叶文程、徐本章.

Xiamen: History Department of Xiamen University 厦门大学历史系; Dehua:

DehuaCounty Science and Technology Accociation 德化县科学技术协会, Dehua

County Culture Board 德化县文化舘, 127-204.

Fujian Provincial Museum andQuanzhou Cultural Relics Bureau 福建博物院、泉州

市文物局.2003. “Excavation report of Quanzhou Deji Gate site 泉州德济门遗

址发掘报告.”Fujian Cultural Relics 福建文博 2: 14-40.

Fujian Provincial Museum,Culture Management Council of Dehua Countyand

362

Dehua Ceramic Museum 福建博物院、德化县文物管理委员会、德化陶瓷博物

馆. 2006. “Excavation newsletter of Ming kiln sites in Jiabeishan, Dehua

County 德化明代甲杯山窑址发掘简报.”Fujian Cultural Relics 福建文博 2:1-

15.

Ge Dinghua 葛定华. 1933. Graphic Studies on Jinling’s Ming Royal Palace 金陵明故

宫图考.Nanjing: National Central University Publishing House 国立中央大学出

版组.

Gibson-Hill, C.A. 1954.“Singapore: notes on the history of the old strait,

1580-1850.”Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 27,

1:163-214.

Gomperts, A., A. Haag and P. Carey. 2008. “Stutterheim’s Enigma: The Mystery of

His Mapping of the Majapahit Kraton at Trowulan in 1941.” Bijdragen tot de

Taal-,Land- en Volkenkunde 164, 4:411-430.

————. 2012. “Mapping Majapahit: Wardenaar’s archaeological survey at

Trowulan in 1815.” Indonesia 93, 1: 177-196.

Gong Liang and Wu Jianmin 龚良、吴建民. 1998.“Excavations on Song Dynasty site

at Zhenjiang City Huancheng Eastern Road, Jiangsu Province 江苏镇江市环城

东路宋代遗存的发掘.”Archaeology 考古 12:53-57.

Groeneveldt, W.P.1960.Historical Notes on Indonesia and Malaya Compiled from

Chinese Sources. Djakarta: Bhratara.

Gu Suning 顾苏宁. 2001. “Brief excavation report on two in Nanjing

City 南京市两座明墓的清理简报.” Archaeology 华夏考古 2: 6-13.

363

Guangdong Provincial Museum 广东省博物馆. 1981.Excavation Report on Song

Kilns at Chaozhou Bijiashan 潮州笔架山宋代窑址发掘报告. Beijing: Cultural

Relics Press.

Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Cultural Relics Working Team 广西壮族自治

区文物工作队. 1985.“Tang, Yuan and Ming period cultural relics unearthed

from Guangxi Fangcheng Tanpeng 广西防城潭蓬出土唐、元、明代文物.”

Archaeology 考古 9: 810-812, 833, plate 8.

Guangzhou Cultural Relics Management Board, and Art Museum of The Chinese

University of Hong Kong. 1987.Guangzhou Xicun Kilns 广州西村窑.Hong

Kong:Center for Chinese Archaeology and Art of The Chinese University of

Hong Kong.

Guo Yuanwei 郭远谓. 1963. “A Yuan tomb at Zhuguqiao, Nanchang, Jiangxi 江西南

昌朱姑桥元墓.” Archaeology 考古 10: 576, 572.

Han Wai Toon.1948. “A study on Johore .”Journal of the South Seas Society,

Vol.5, Pt.2:17-35.

Harada Yoshito and Komai Kazuchika 原田淑人、驹井和爱. 1941. “Shangdu 上都”,

Archaologia Orientalis, Serie B, Tome II 东方考古学丛刊（乙种第二册）,ed.

Society for East Asian Archaeology 东亚考古学会.

Hebei Provincial Cultural Relics Institute 河北省文物研究所.1986.“Hoarded

cultural relics in Hebei Dingxing 河北定兴元代窖藏文物.”Cultural Relics 文物

1: 89-91, 95, plate 7.

Hebei Provincial Museum 河北省博物馆.1965.“Some Yuan Dynasty porcelain

364

discovered from Baoding City 保定市发现一批元代瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物

2: 17-18, 22, plate 1-3.

Henan Provincial Museum 河南省博物馆. 1974.“Shang Dynasty Rammed Earth

Foundation and Slaves’Skulls Found in Zhengzhou Shangcheng Site 郑州商城

遗址内发现商代夯土台基和奴隶头骨.”Cultural Relics 文物 9: 1-2.

————. 1975.“Early Shang Dynasty Big BronzeDing Vessel Newly Unearthed

from Zhengzhou 郑州新出土的商代前期大铜鼎.”Cultural Relics 文物 6:

64-68,plate 1.

Henan Provincial Museum and Zhengzhou Museum 河南省博物馆、郑州市博物馆.

1977. “Brief Report of the Test Excavation at Shang Dynasty Urban Site in

Zhengzhou 郑州商代城址试掘简报.”Cultural Relics 文物 1: 21-31, plate 2.

Heng, D.T.S. 2004. “Classification of coarse stoneware ceramic sherds: Empress

Place Site Excavation 1998.”Unpublished Report on File at Fort Canning

Archaeology Laboratory.

Hirth F. and W.W. Rockhill. 1911. Chau Ju-kua: His Work on the Chinese and Arab

Trade in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, entitled Chu-fan-chi.St.

Petersburg: Imperial Academy of Science.

History Department of Xiamen University and Culture Institute of Dehua County 厦

门大学历史系考古专业、德化县文化馆.1980.“New ancient ceramic kiln sites

discovered in Dehua 德化新近发现的一批古瓷窑址.” In Historical Records of

Dehua Ceramics 德化瓷器史料汇编（上册）,ed. Ye Wencheng and Xu Benzhang

叶文程、徐本章.Xiamen: History Department of Xiamen University 厦门大学历

365

史系; Dehua: Dehua County Science and Technology Accociation 德化县科学技

术协会, Dehua County Culture Board 德化县文化馆,37-58.

Ho Chuimei. 1992.“The Chaozhou ceramic complex of 8th-12th century China: a

regional approach.”The Ceramic Ecology Panel, 91st Annual Meeting, San

Francisco: American Anthropological Association, 1-19.

Hou Renzhi 侯仁之. 1946.“Investigations on Jinshui River 北平金水河考.”Yen

Ching Journal of Chinese Studies 燕京学报 30: 107-134.

————.1955.“The issues on water resources during the transformation of

BeijingCity 北京都市发展过程中的水源问题.” Journal of Peking University

(Philosophy and Social Sciences)北京大学学报（哲学社会科学版）1:142-168.

Hu Yueqian 胡悦谦.1986. “A few porcelain wares unearthed in Anqing City 安庆市

出土的几件瓷器.” Cultural Relics 文物 6: 81-82, plate 6.

Huang Dongmei 黄冬梅. 1996. “Relics unearthed from dated tombs of Yuan Dynasty

in Zhangshu, Jiangxi Province 江西樟树元纪年墓出土文物.”Cultural Relics in

Southern China 南方文物 4:12-14.

Huang Gangzheng 黄纲正 et al. 1996.Transformations of Xiangcheng 湘城沧桑之

变. Changsha: Yuelu Shuyuan 岳麓书院.

Huang Yunpeng and Zhen Li 黄云鹏、甄励 ed. 1983. Blue and WhitePorcelain Made

inJingdezhen Folk Kilns 景德镇民间青花瓷器.Shanghai: Shanghai People’s

FineArts Publishing House; :美乃美.

HuangYuzhi and Yang Shaoxiang 黄玉质，杨少祥. 1983.“Song porcelain kilns at

Guangdong Chaozhou Bijiashan 广东潮州笔架山宋代瓷窑.”Archaeology 考古

366

6:517-525, plate 4 - 5.

Huang Zhongzhao 黄仲昭.1987. Hongzhi Bamin Tongzhi 弘治八闽通志. Ming

Hongzhi Year 4 (1491C.E.) Version 弘治四年刊本, Photocopy 影印本. Taipei:

Taiwan Studentbook Print 台湾学生书局印行.

Huang Zisheng. 1984.“China-Africa relations before 1570s 十六世纪七

十年代以前的中非关系.” Jinan Xuebao 济南学报 2: 32.

Hugh, R. C. 1911.Community, Trade, and Networks: Southern Fujian Province from

the Third to Thirteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hujita Toyohachi 藤田丰八. 1915. “Annotations on Daoyi Zhilue 岛夷志略校注.一

卷.” In Xuetang Congke 雪堂丛刻. Book 10 第 10 册. Reprinted in Congshu

Jicheng Xubian 丛书集成续编. Book 65 第 65 册. 1994. Shanghai: Shanghai

Shudian 上海书店,651-709.

Hsu Yun-Ts’iao.1948. “Notes on the Malay Peninsula in ancient voyages.”Journal

of the South Seas Society 10, 5, 2: 1-16.

————.1972. “Singapore in the remote past.”Journal of the Malaysian Branch of

theRoyal Asiatic Society 45, 1: 1-9.

Inner Mongolia Archaeology Team 内蒙古文物工作队.1961.“Excavation report of

Yuan Dynasty Jininglu site 元代集宁路遗址清理记.”Cultural Relics 文物 9:

52-57.

Inner Mongolia Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute 内蒙古文物考古研究所, et

al. 1987.“Brief report of excavations on Heicheng Sste, Inner Mongolia 内蒙古

黑城考古发掘纪要.”Cultural Relics 文物 7:1-23, plate 1-5.

367

Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 中央硏究院历史语言硏究所.

1962. Ming Taizu Shilu 明太祖实录•附校勘记. Taipei: Institute of History and

Philology, Academia Sinica.

Jia Weiyong and Ma Tao 贾维勇、马涛. 1999. “Brief excavation report on Ming

tombs at Qijia Hill of Nanjing City, Jiangsu 江苏南京市戚家山明墓发掘简报.”

Archaeology 考古 10: 18-26, plate 3.

Jia Zhoujie 贾洲杰.1977.“Investigation report on Yuan Shangdu 元上都调查报告.”

Cultural Relics 文物 5: 65-74, plate 5.

Jiang Jianxin 江建新.1991. “Brief report of investigations on Jingdezhen kiln

remains 景德镇窑业遗存考察述要.”Relics from Jiangxi 江西文物 3: 44-50, 79.

————. 2013.“Yuan Dynasty blue-and-white, Fuliang Porcelain Factory and its

kilns 元青花与浮梁磁局及其窑场.”Journal of National Museum of China 中国

国家博物馆馆刊 6: 76-86.

Jiangxi Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute, Exhibition Museum of

Jingdezhen Hutian Kilns 江西省文物考古研究所、景德镇湖田窑陈列馆.2000.

“Excavation in Area H of the Hutian kiln-site in Jiangxi 江西湖田窑址 H 区发

掘简报.”Archaeology 考古 12: 73-88, plate 6-8.

Jiao Qiang, Li Jianzhong and Zhou Xuesong 焦强、李建中、周雪松.1993. “A Yua n

Dynasty tomb with paintings in Datong 大同元代壁画墓.”World of

Antiquity 文物季刊 2: 17-24, 82, plate 3-4.

Jin Baidong and Xia Suixiang 金柏东、夏碎香.1986. “Yuan Dynasty hoarded

porcelain in Zhejiang Taishun 浙江泰顺元代窖藏瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物

368

1:94-95, plate 8.

Jin Yingmei 金英美. 2012. “Sinan Shipwreck and Maritime Silk Road 新安沉船与海

上丝绸之路.” In Sailing from the Great Yuan Dynasty—Relics Excavated from

the Sinan Shipwreck 大元帆影——韩国新安沉船出水文物精华, ed. Shen

Qionghua 沈琼华. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 20-31.

Jin Zuming 金祖明. 1962.“Investigations on Longquan Xikou celadon kiln sites 龙

泉溪口青瓷窑址调查纪略.”Archaeology 考古 10:535-538, plate 9.

Jing Zhuyou 景竹友. 1993.“Yuan Dynasty hoards unearthed in Santai 三台出土元

代窖藏.”Sichuan Cultural Relics 四川文物 6: 62-65, 2.

Jinshuitan Project Archaeology Team of Zhejiang Group 紧水滩工程考古队浙江组.

1981. “Shantou kiln and Dabai’an—excavation report on Longquan Eastern

Area I 山头窑与大白岸——龙泉东区窑址发掘报告之一.” InZhejiang

Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute Journal 浙江省文物考古研

究所学刊, ed. Zhejiang Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute.

Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 130-166.

Junker, L.L. 1999. Raiding, Trading and Feasting—the Political Economy of

Philippine Chiefdoms. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Kamei Meitoku. 2010. “Ceramics discovered at the Trowulan site (Summary).”In

Research on Ceramics Discovered at the Trowulan Site in Indonesia,

ed.J.N.Miksic and Kamei Meitoku. Tokyo: 専修大学アジア考古学チーム,

17-19.

Ke Fengmei and Chen Hao 柯凤梅、陈豪.1995. “Fujian Putian ancient kiln sites 福

369

建莆田古窑址.”Archaeology 考古 7, 606-613.

Kuancheng County Cultural Relics Conservation Institute 宽城县文保所. 1994.

“Porcelain hoard found in Hebei Kuancheng County 河北宽城县发现瓷器窖

藏.” Archaeology 考古 3:287-288, 220.

Kuwata Rokuro 桑田六郎.“New annotations on Daoyi Zhilue 岛夷志略新证.”

Journal of East Asian Studies 東洋學報 52, 3: 1-21.

Kwa Chong Guan.1985.“Records and notices of early Singapore.”In

Archaeological Research on the “Forbidden Hill” of Singapore: Excavations at

Fort Canning, 1984, ed. J.N. Miksic. Singapore: National Museum, 100-143.

Kwee H.-K. 1997. Yi Zhi Lue as a Maritime Traders’ Guidebook. National

University of Singapore, Honors Thesis.

Leeds, A. 1961. “The port-of-trade in pre-European India as an ecological and

evolutional type.” In Symposium: Patterns of Land Utilization and Other Papers,

ed. V.E. Garfield. Seattle: American Ethnological Society, 26-48.

Lewis, B. A. 1996. The Singapore Parliament House Complex Organic Material.

Unpublished Manuscript.

Li Caiping 李彩萍.1994. “Hoarded Jin to Yuan period porcelain unearthed in

Baoheshao, eastern of Hohhot 呼和浩特东郊保合少出土窖藏金元瓷

器.” Steppe Cultural Relics 内蒙古文物考古 1: 92-96.

Li Hongjun and Ma Yunhong 李红军、马云洪.1988.“A batch of porcelain unearthed

in Liaoning Yixian County 辽宁义县出土的一批瓷器.”Archaeology 考古 2: 169-

172.

370

Li Huibing 李辉柄.1979a. “My study on Dehua Qudougong kilns 关于德化屈斗宫

窑的我见.”Cultural Relics 文物 5: 66-70.

————.1979b. “Surveys on Guangdong Chaozhou ancient porcelain kiln sites 广

东潮州古瓷窑址调查.”Archaeology 考古 5: 440-444, 411.

————. 1979c. “Primary study on Putian kilns 莆田窑址初探.”Cultural Relics 文

物 12: 37-42, plate 6.

Li Jian’an 栗建安.2001.“Perspectives on the export of ancient Fujian wares from

discoveries of the underwater archaeology 从水下考古的发现看福建古代瓷器

的外销.”Maritime History Studies 海交史研究 1:98-106.

————.2004. “Excavations and findings of Ming kiln sites in Jiabeishan, Dehua

County 德化甲杯山明代窑址的发掘与收获.”FujianCultural Relics 福建文博 4:

26-32.

————. 2009. “Defining the categories of Chinese white Wares, celadon and

qingbai wares 关于中国的白瓷、青瓷、青白瓷的分类概念.” InStudy of

Trade Ceramics and the Beginning of Relations between the Ryūkyūs and Fujian

in the 13th-14thCentury13-14 世紀の琉球と福建 : 13-14 世紀海上貿易からみ

た琉球国成立要因の実証的研究:中国福建省を中心に, ed. Kinoshita Naoko

木下尚子. Kumamoto: Kumamoto University Faculty of Humanities, 13.

Li Jinming 李金明. 1990. History of Maritime Trade in Ming Dynasty 明代海外贸易

史. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.

Li Weiran 李蔚然. 1972. “Brief excavation report on Wang Xingzu’s tomb of Ming

Dynasty in Nanjing 南京明汪兴祖墓清理简报.”Archaeology 考古 4: 31-33, 23,

371

plate 6.

Li Yiyou 李逸友. 1961. “Investigation report of Yuan Dynasty Yingchanglu urban

site 元应昌路故城调查记.”Archaeology 考古 10: 531-533, 554.

————.1979.“ tablet inscriptions on tens of thousands of

Avatamsaka tower in Hohhot 呼和浩特市万部华严经塔的金代碑铭.”

Archaeology 考古 4: 365-374.

————. 1981. “Archaeology discoveries at Togtoh City, Inner Mongolia 内蒙古

托克托城的考古发现.” Series of Cultural Relics Data 文物资料丛刊 4:

210-217.

————. 1988. “City regime reflected from the Yuan Dynasty urban sitesin Inner

Mongolia 内蒙古元代城址所见城市制度.”InProceedings of the Fifth

Annual Conference of Society for Chinese Archaeology 中国考古学会第五次年

会论文集, ed. Society for Chinese Archaeology 中国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural

Relics Press, 143-152.

Li Yuyuan and Zhong Wenliang 李育远、钟文良. 2012. “Excavation report of Yua n

Dynasty dated tomb at Yanshan 江西铅山元代纪年墓发掘简报.”Journal of

National Museum of China 中国国家博物馆馆刊 4: 6-10.

Li Zhixiang 李直祥.1988. “Hoarded Yuan Dynasty porcelain found in Ya’an City 雅

安市发现元代窖藏瓷器.”Sichuan Cultural Relics 四川文物 5: 79.

Li Zhiyan 李知宴.1981. “Main achievements of the Zhejiang Longquan Shantou

celadon kiln excavations 浙江龙泉青瓷山头窑发掘的主要收获.”Cultural Relics

文物 10: 36-42.

372

————.2000. “Studies on Chinese porcelain unearthed from Singapore.论新加

坡出土的中国瓷器.”Collected Essays by the Department of Archaeology

National Museum of Chinese History 中国历史博物馆考古部纪念文集, ed.

National Museum of Chinese History 中国历史博物馆考古部. Beijing: Science

Press, 217-228.

Li Zhongjun and Wang Genyuan 李仲均、王根元. 1984.“The change of coast-line

of the Jin river mouth and the declination of Quanzhou port 晋江口海岸线变迁

与泉州港的衰落.”Earth Science-Journal of College of 地球科

学——武汉地质学院学报 3: 157-163.

Li Zuozhi 李作智.1977. “A few Yuan Dynasty porcelain unearthed from the eastern

suburb of Hohhot City 呼和浩特市东郊出土的几件元代瓷器.”Cultural Relics

文物 5: 75-77, plate 1.

Li Zuozhi, Li Zhiyan and Yu Wenrong 李作智、李知宴、于文荣. 1986.“Excavation

report on Zhejiang Longquan Shangyaner village celadon kiln sites 浙江龙泉青

瓷上严儿村窑址发掘报告.”Journal of National Museum of China 中国历史文

物, 43-72.

Liaocheng Museum 聊城地区博物馆. 1985. “A Yuan Dynasty hoard found in

Shandong Chiping County 山东茌平县发现一处元代窖藏.”Archaeology 考古 9:

861-862.

Lim Tse Siang. 2012.14thCentury Singapore: The Temasek Paradigm. MA Thesis,

National University of Singapore, Singapore.

Lin Tianwei 林天蔚. 1960. Historical Studies on the Trade of Incense and Medicine

373

in Song Dynasty 宋代香药贸易史稿. Hong Kong: Zhongguo Xueshe 中国学社.

Lin Zhonggan and Zhang Wenyin 林忠干、张文崟. 1992.“Dating and periodization

for Dehua kilns of Song and Yuan period 宋元德化窑的分期断代.”Archaeology

考古 6: 559-566.

Linehan. W. 1947. “The kings of 14th century Singapore.”Journal of the Malayan

Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 20, 2: 117-127.

Liu Ping and Wang Liming 刘平、王黎明.1985. “A batch of Yuan Dynasty porcelain

found in 成都发现一批元代瓷器.”Archaeology and Cultural Relics 考

古与文物 6:108.

Liu Shanyi 刘善沂.1986. “A batch of Jin to Yuan period objects unearthed in

Shandong Chiping Xitun 山东茌平郗屯出土一批金元器物.”Archaeology 考古

8: 765-767, 761.

Liu Xing 刘兴.1982. “Porcelain in Yuan Dynasty hoard found from Jiangsu Dantu

江苏丹徒元代窖藏瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物 2: 25-27.

Liu Xinyuan 刘新园. 1982. “Research on the Yuan blue and white wares with

unique patterns decoration, Fuliang Porcelain Bureau and Huaju Bureau 元青花

特异纹饰和将作院所属浮梁磁局与画局.”Journal of Jingdezhen Ceramic

Institute 景德镇陶瓷学院学报 1: 9-20.

————.1995. “Porcelain found in early Jingdezhen tombs and official

kiln relics unearthed from Zhushan 景德镇早期墓葬中发现的瓷器与珠山出土

的元、明官窑遗物.” In Imperial Porcelain—Recent Discoveries of Jingdezhen

War e 皇帝の磁器——新発見の景徳鎮官窯, ed. The Museum of Oriental

374

Ceramics, Osaka 大阪市立東洋陶磁美術館. Tokyo: Idemitsu Museum of ,

164-165.

Liu Xinyuan and Baikun 刘新园、白焜. 1980. “Brief report of investigations on

Hutian kiln complex in Jingdezhen 景德镇湖田窑考察纪要.”Cultural Relics 文

物 11: 39-49, plate 3-5.

Liu Yuhei and Xiong Lin 刘裕黑、熊琳. 1981. “A batch of Yuan Dynasty hoarded

porcelain found in Gao’an County 高安县发现一批元代窖藏瓷器.”Cultual

Relics in Southern China 江西历史文物 4: 16-22.

————. 1982. “Yuan Dynasty blue and white wares and copper red wares hoard

found in Gao'an County of Jiangxi Province 江西高安县发现元青花、釉里红等

瓷器窖藏.”Cultural Relics 文物 4: 58-69, plate 6-7.

Lu Junling 陆峻岭.2000. “Foreword for Yiyu Zhi 异域志•前言.”InZhenla Fengtu

Ji, Xiyou Lu and Yiyu Zhi 真腊风土记校注•西游录•异域志. Beijing: Zhonghua

Book Company,1-4.

Luoyang Archaeology Team of Archaeology Institute, Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences 中国科学院考古研究所洛阳发掘队. 1961. “Brief Report of the Test

Excavation at Henan Province Yanshi Erlitou Site in 1959 1959 年河南偃师二里

头试掘简报.”Archaeology 考古 2: 82-85, 81.

————. 1965. “Excavation Report on Yanshi Erlitou Site in Henan Province 河南

偃师二里头遗址发掘简报.”Archaeology 考古 5: 215-224, plate 1-5.

Ma Jinpeng 马金鹏, trans. 1985.The Journey of Ibn Battuta 伊本•白图泰游记.

Yinchuan: People’s Publishing House.

375

Ma Huan 马欢.1938. “Yingya Shenglan Compile 瀛涯胜览集.” In Jilu Huibian 纪录

汇编. Photocopy 影印本. Shanghai: Han Fen Lou Press 涵芬楼, 4-7.

Ma, L. J-C. 1971. Commercial Development and Urban Change in Sung China. PhD

Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Ma Yaoqi and Ji Faxi 马耀圻、吉发习. 1980. “Primary study on Yuan Dynasty urban

sites in Inner Mongolia 内蒙古境内的元代城址初探.”Inner Mongolia Social

Sciences 内蒙古社会科学 1:124-137.

Mao Yuanyi 茅元仪. 1984. Wubei Zhi 武备志. Taipei: Huashi Chubanshe 华世出版

社.

Mei Huaquan 梅华全.1979. “New discoveries of archaeology excavations in Dehua

kiln sites 德化窑考古发掘的新收获.”Fujian Cultural Relics 福建文博 1: 7-9.

Meng Yuanzhao 孟元召. 2009.The Research on the Archaeological Remains of the

Ceramic Industry in Minnan Area from the Song to the Qing Period 闽南地区宋

至清代制瓷手工业遗存研究. PhD Thesis, Peking University, Beijing.

Mengungkap Kejayaan. 1995.Majapahit, Kegiatan Penelitian Arkeologi Situs

Trowulan. Jakarta: Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi Nasional.

Miao Fenglin 缪凤林. 1929. “Excavations at Nanjing’s Ming royal palace 南京明故

宫发掘古物记.”History Studies Journal 史学杂志 1:6.

Mikami Tsugio 三上次男. 1969.Ceramic Road 陶磁の道—東西文明の接点をたず

ねて.Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten Publisher.

Miksic, J.N. 1979. Archaeology, Trade and Society in Northeast Sumatra. PhD

Thesis, Cornell University, Ann Arbor.

376

————. 1982. Cultural Relics and Kiln Sites of Ancient China- Recent Finds of

Pottery and Porcelain. The Oriental Ceramic Society.

————.1985. Archaeological Research on the “Forbidden Hill” of Singapore:

Excavations at Fort Canning, 1984, Singapore: National Museum.

————.1989. “Beyond the grave: excavations north of the Keramat Iskandar

Syah, 1988.” Heritage 10: 34-56.

————.1994. “Recently discovered Chinese green glazed wares of the

thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in Singapore and the .”In New

Light on Chinese Yue and Longquan Wares: Archaeological Ceramics Found in

Eastern and Southern Asia, A.D. 800-1400, ed. Ho Chuimen.Hong Kong: The

University of Hong Kong Press, 229-250.

————.1995. “Introduction.” In The Legacy of Majapahit, ed.John N.Miksic and

Endang Sri Hardiati Soekatno. Singapore: National Heritage Board, 13-17.

————.1998. “Recent archaeological excavations in Singapore: a comparison

of three fourteenth-century sites.” Paperpresented at the 16th Conference of the

Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association, Melaka.

————.2004. “14th century Singapore: a port of trade.” In Early Singapore

1300s-1819, Evidence in Maps, Text and Artefacts, ed. J. N. Miksicand Low M.

G. Singapore: Singapore History Museum, 41-54, plate 17.

————.2006a. “Intrasite analysis of 14th century Singapore.” InUncovering

Southeast Asia's Past: Selected Papers from the10th International Conference of

the European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, ed. E. A. Bacus, I.

377

C. Glover and V. C. Pigott. Singapore: NUS Press, 335-346.

————.2006b. “Chinese ceramics and the economics of early Southeast Asian

urbanization, 14th to 16th centuries.” Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association

Bulletin 26: 147-153.

————.2009. “Research on ceramic trade, within Southeast Asia and between

Southeast Asia and China.” InSoutheast Asian Ceramics——New Light on Old

Pottery, ed. J.N. Miksic. Singapore: Southeast Asian Ceramic Society, 70-99.

————.2010. “Chinese ceramics in Majapahit.”In Research on Ceramics

Discovered at the Trowulan Site in Indonesia, ed.J.N.Miksic and Kamei Meitoku.

Tokyo: 専修大学アジア考古学チーム, 1-16.

————.2013.Singapore and the Silk Road of the Sea, 1300-1800, Singapore:

NUS Press.

————.The Contribution of Singapore to the Study of the Chinese Ceramic

Trade, Unpublished Manuscript.

Miksic, J. N. and Lim Chen Sian. 2006.Archaeological Research on the Padang and

in the St. Andrew’s Cathedral Churchyard: St. Andrew’s Cathedral

ArchaeologicalResearch Project Progress Report Summary, September

2003-June 2004.Singapore: Asia Research Institute, National University of

Singapore.

Miksic, J.N. and Kamei Meitoku. 2010. Research on Ceramics Discovered at the

Trowulan Site in Indonesia. Tokyo: 専修大学アジア考古学チーム.

Miksic, J. N., C.T. Yap and Hua Younan, 1994. “Archaeology and early Chinese

378

glass trade in Southeast Asia.”Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 25, 1: 31-46.

Moore, Eine.1970. “A suggested classification of of Martabani type.”

SarawakMuseum Journal 18: 1-78.

Mou Yongkang 牟永抗.1999. “Some stories of the investigations and excavations on

Longquan kilns 龙泉窑调查发掘的若干往事.”Cultural Relics of the East 东方

博物 3: 84-93.

Nanjing Museum 南京博物院. 1965.“Some Tang to Yuan dynasties artefacts found

at ‘LianCheng’site, Fengtai, Anhui 安徽凤台“连城”遗址内发现一批唐—元

时代的文物.”Cultural Relics 文物 10: 46-56.

National Research Centre for Archaeology, Republic of Indonesia. 1995. “Research

on the Majapahit City at the site of Trowulan, East Java.”The Legacy of

Majapahit, ed.John N.Miksic and Endang Sri Hardiati Soekatno. Singapore:

National Heritage Board, 19-29.

Nie Dening 聂德宁. 1992. “The communication relationship between Ming Dynasty

and Majapahit Kingdom 明朝与满者伯夷王朝的交往关系.” Southeast Asian

Affairs 南洋问题研究 3:91-99.

Ningbo Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute 宁波市文物考古研究所.2002.

“Excavation on the sub-city site of Tang and Song Mingzhou City in present-day

Ningbo City, Zhejiang 浙江宁波市唐宋子城遗址.”Archaeology 考古 3: 46-62,

plate 5-8.

Ningbo Heritage Board 宁波市文物管理委员会.1981. “Excavation report of a port

site at east gate of Ningbo City 宁波东门口码头遗址发掘报告.”In Zhejiang

379

Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute Journal 浙江省文物考古所

学刊, ed. Zhejiang Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute 浙江省

文物考古所.Beijing: Cultural RelicsPress, 105-129.

Pan Xingrong 潘行荣.1979. “Hoarded textiles and other remains unearthed in

Yuan Dynasty Jininglu ancient city 元集宁路故城出土的窖藏丝织物及其他.”

Cultural Relics 文物 8:32-36, plate 5-6.

Pelliot, M. P. 1904.“Deux Itineraires de Chine a l’Inde a la Fin du VIIIe siècle.”

Bulletin de l'École française d'Extrême-Orient 4: 131-413.

Pearson, R., Li Min and Li Guo. 2001. “Port, city, and hinterlands: archaeological

perspectives on Quanzhou and its overseas trade.” In The Emporium of the

World:Maritime Quanzhou, 1000-1400, ed. A. Schottenhammer. Sinica

Leidensia XLIX.Leiden: Brill, 177-236.

————.2002. “Quanzhou archaeology: abrief review.” International Journal of

Historical Archaeology 6, 1: 23-59.

Pingxiang Museum 萍乡市博物馆.1986. “Hoarded Yuan Dynasty blue and white

porcelain and other cultural relics found in Pingxiang City 萍乡市发现元代青

花瓷器等窖藏文物.”Cultural Relics in Southern China 江西历史文物 1: 46-48,

150-151.

Ptak, R. 1995. “Images of maritime Asia in two Yuan texts: Daoyi Zhilue and Yiyu

Zhi.” Journal of Song-Yuan Studies 25: 47-75.

————. 1996. “Glosses on Wang Dayuan’s Daoyi Zhilue (1349/50).” In Récits de

voyage des Asiatiques-Genres, mentalités, conception de l'espace. Actes du

380

colloque EFEO-EHESS de décembre 1994. Édités par Claudine Salmon. Paris:

École française d’Extrême-Orient, 127-142.

————.1998. “Ming maritime trade in Southeast Asia, 1368-1567: visions of a

‘system’.” In From the Mediterranean to the China Sea: Miscellaneous Notes,

ed.C. Guillot, D. Lombard, and R. Ptak. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag,

157-191.

————. 2001. “Quanzhou: at the northern edge of a Southeast Asian

‘Mediterranean.’” In The Emporium of the World: Maritime Quanzhou,

1000-1400, ed. A. Schottenhammer. Sinica Leidensia XLIX. Leiden:Brill,

395-428.

Qin Dashu and Shi Wenbo 秦大树，施文博.2005. “Historical records of Longquan

kilns and its relevant production issues during early Ming Dynasty 龙泉窑记载

与明初生产状况的若干问题.” InPorcelain Unearthed from Dayao

Fengdongyan Kiln Site, Longquan 龙泉大窑枫洞岩窑址出土瓷器, ed. Zhejiang

Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute, School of Archaeology and

Museology of Peking University, and Longquan Celadon Museum 浙江省文物考

古研究所、北京大学考古文博学院、龙泉青瓷博物馆. Beijing: Cultural Relics

Press, 28-35.

Qu Liping and Ni Renfu 曲利平、倪任福. 1993. “Dated tombs of Yuan Dynasty found

in Yingtan, Jiangxi 江西鹰潭发现纪年元墓.”Cultural Relics in Southern China

南方文物 4:25-27.

Quan Jinyun 全锦云.1986. “Tongguan ceramics found in Tang tombs at Wuchang and

381

some related issues 武昌唐墓所见铜官窑瓷器及其相关问题.”Archaeology 考古

12: 1126-1132, 1145, plate 5.

Reid,A.R. 1988. Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce 1450-1680. Volume 1: “The

Lands below the Winds.” New Haven: Yale University Press.

————.1993.Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce 1450-1680. Volume2:

“Expansionand Crisis.” New Haven: Yale University Press.

Remote Sensing and Aerophotography Archaeology Center of National Museum of

China, and Inner Mongolia Municipality Cultural Relics and Archaeology

Institute 中国历史博物馆遥感与航空摄影考古中心、内蒙古自治区文物考古

研究所.2002. Collected Reports of Aerophotography Archaeology in Southeast

Inner Mongolia 内蒙古东南部航空摄影考古报告集. Beijing: Science Press.

Research Centre for Chinese Frontier Archaeology of Jilin University and Cultural

Relics Management of Dunhua 吉林大学边疆考古研究中心、敦化市文物管理

所.2008.“Yuan period porcelain hoard in Shuang-, Dunhua, Jilin Province

吉林省敦化市双胜村元代窖藏.”Research of China's Frontier Archaeology 边疆

考古研究, 438-445, colour plate 12-16.

Rigg J. 1849. “Tour from Sourabaya, through Kediri, Blitar, Antang, Malang and

Pasuruan, back to Sourabaya (part 1).” Journal of the Indian Archipelago 3,

75-89.

Rockhill, W.W.1914, “Notes on the relations and trade of China with the Eastern

Archipelago and the coast of the Indian Ocean during the fourteenth century.”

T’oung Pao 15, 419-447.

382

————.1915. “Notes on the relations and trade of China with the eastern

archipelago and the coast of the Indian Ocean during the fourteenth century”

T'oung Pao 16, 61-159, 236-271, 374-392, 435-467, 604-626.

Roolvink, R.1967, “The variant versions of the Malay Annals.”Bijdragen tot de

Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 123: 302-324.

Rouffaer, G.P. 1921. “Was Malaka emporium voor 1400 A.D. genaamd Malajoer? En

waar lag Woerawari, Ma-Hasin, Langka, Batoesawar?”Bijdragen tot de Taal-,

Land-en Volkenkund van Nederlandsch-Indie 77, 1:1-174, 359-600.

Sang Jianxin 桑坚信. 1989. “Yuan Dynasty porcelain hoard found in Hangzhou City

杭州市发现的元代瓷器窖藏.”Cultural Relics 文物 11: 22-27, 21, plate 6.

Shah Alam Zaini. 1997. Metal Finds and Metal-Working at the Parliament House

Complex, Singapore, MA Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Shandong Museum 山东省博物馆. 1972. “Reporting the excavation of Zhu Tan’s

tomb of Ming Dynasty 发掘明朱檀墓纪实.”Cultural Relics 文物 5: 25-36, plate

2-4.

Shao Lei 邵磊. 2014. “The excavation of Qiu Cheng’s tomb of the Ming Dynasty at

Baima Village in Nanjing, Jiangsu 江苏南京白马村明代仇成墓发掘简报.”

Cultural Relics 文物 9: 46-57, colour plate.

Shen Lingxin and Xu Yongxiang 沈令昕、许勇翔. 1982. “Reports on the Ren’s family

tombs of Yuan Dynasty in Qingpu County, Shanghai City.”Cultural Relics 文物 7:

54-60, plate 4-5.

Shen Yueming, Qin Dashu and Shi Wenbo 沈岳明、秦大树、施文博.2007.

383

“Colloquium of the archaeological excavation on Longquan Fengdongyan kiln

site 龙泉窑枫洞岩窑址考古发掘学术座谈会纪要.”Cultural Relics 文物 5:

93-96.

Shen Zengzhi 沈曾植.1912. “Daoyi Zhilue with annotations 岛夷志略广证二卷.”In

History Studies Journal 古学汇刊, ed. Miao Quansun and Deng Shi 缪荃孙、邓

实. Shanghai: Guocui Xuebao She 国粹学报社. The journal is reprinted at

1964. Taipei: Liehen Book Company 力行书局, 553-631.

Sichuan Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute, The Three Gorges Office of

Chongqing Bureau of Culture, and Zhongxian County Cultural Relics

Management Station 四川省文物考古研究所、重庆市文化局三峡办、忠县文

物管理所. 2001.“Excavation report on Song Dynasty porcelain hoard of

Zhongba site in Zhongxian County 忠县中坝遗址宋代瓷器窖藏发掘简报.”

Sichuan Cultural Relics 四川文物 2: 79-80.

Smith, P. J. and Richard von Glahn, ed. 2003. The Song-Yuan-Ming Transition in

Chinese History. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Soejatmi Satari.1995. “Some data on a former city of Majapahit.” InThe Legacy of

Majapahit: Catalogue of an Exhibition at the National Museum of Singapore, 10

November 1994-26 March 1995, ed. J.N.Miksic and Endang Sri Hardiati

Soekatno, Singapore: National Heritage Board, 31-41.

Song Boyin 宋伯胤.1954. “Investigations on Jinjiang and Dehua ancient kiln sites

by Fujian group of Huadong Archaeology Team 华东文物工作队福建组调查晋

江、德化等处古窑址.”Cultural Relics 文物参考资料 5: 98-99.

384

————.1955. “Research on Dehua Kiln 谈德化窑.”Cultural Relics 文物

参考资料 4: 55-71.

Song Lian 宋濂 et al.1935. “Yuanshi 元史.” In Sibu Beiyao 四部备要. Photocopy 影

印本. Shanghai: Zhonghua Book Company.

————.1956. Yuanshi 元史. Wuyingdian Version 殿本, Photocopy 影印本. Taipei:

Yiwen Yinshu Guan 艺文印书馆.

————. 1962. Yuanshi 元史. Wuyingdian Version 殿本, Photocopy 影印本. Taipei:

Qiming Press 啓明书局.

Stulemeijer, R. 2011. “Provenance research on 14thcentury greenwares found in

Singapore.”-Sriwijaya Center Working Paper Series 9, ed.

Nalanda-Sriwijaya Center, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

Su Bai 宿白. 1990. “Preliminary studies on Sui and Tang period urban site patterns

(outline) 隋唐城址类型初探（提纲）.” InFestschrift of the 30th Anniversary of

Archaeology Program of Peking University, 1952-1982 纪念北京大学考古专业

三十周年论文集， 1952-1982, ed. ArchaeologyDepartment, Peking University

北京大学考古系. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 279-285.

————.1998.“Archaeological work done at Xuanhua 宣化考古三题——宣化古

建筑•宣化城沿革•下八里辽墓群.”Cultural Relics 文物 1: 45-63.

————.1999. “Some remarks on the city of Qingzhou 青州城考略——青州城

与龙兴寺之一.”Cultural Relics 文物 8: 47-56.

————. 2001. “Exploring ancient city in modern city 现代城市中古代城址的初

步考查.”Cultural Relics 文物 1: 56-63.

385

Su Jilang 苏基朗. 1991a. “Pu Shougeng’s surrender to Yuan court and the Quanzhou

local power 论蒲寿庚降元与泉州地方势力的关系.” In Papers on the

Historical of Quanzhou in Southern Fujian of the Tang and Song

Periods 唐宋时代闽南泉州史地论稿. Taipei: The Commercial Press, 1-35.

————.1991b. “Reconstructing the layout and functions of Song Dynasty

Quanzhou City 论宋代泉州城的都市形态.” In Papers on the Historical

Geography of Quanzhou in Southern Fujian of the Tang and Song Periods 唐宋

时代闽南泉州史地论稿. Taipei: The Commercial Press, 95-131.

————.1997. “A comparative analysis on the industrial space model of exporting

ceramics in southern Fujian and Guangdongduring Northern Song and Southern

Song Dynasties 两宋闽南广东外贸瓷产业空间模式的一个比较分析.”

Collected Papers forChina’s Maritime History 6 中国海洋发展史论文集 (第六

辑). Research Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences of Academia Sinica

Book Series 40 中央研究院中山人文社会科学研究所专书（40）.Taipei:

ResearchCentre for Humanities and Social Sciences of Academia Sinica,

125-172.

Su Jiqing 苏继庼. 1981. Daoyi Zhilue with Annotations 岛夷志略校释. Beijing:

Zhonghua Book Company.

Tan Qixiang 谭其骧.1994. “Research on Qizhouyang 七洲洋考.” InContinuation of

Changshui Compiles《长水集》续编. Beijing: People’s Publishing House,

156-162. This paper was firstly published on 1979. Trends of Recent Researches

on the 中国史研究动态 6: 5-9.

386

Tang Baozhu 汤宝珠.2001.“Yuan Dynasty hoard in Zhuozishan County 卓资山县元

代窖藏.” Steppe Cultural Relics 内蒙古文物考古 2: 59-64, 100.

Tang Changpu 唐昌朴. 1977. “Introduction on several porcelain unearthed in Jiangxi

介绍江西出土的几件瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物 4:72-73, 22, plate 9.

Tang Hansan, Li Fuchen, and Zhang Songbai 唐汉三、李福臣、张松柏.1984. “Yua n

Dynasty porcelain hoard in Inner Mongolia Dayingzi 内蒙赤峰大营子

元代瓷器窖藏.” Cultural Relics 文物 5: 89-93.

Tang Hongjie 唐宏杰.2003. “A preliminary study on the unearthed religious carved

stone structures from Quanzhou Dejimen site 泉州德济门出土宗教石刻浅析.”

Maritime History Studies 海交史研究 1: 76-80, 99.

The Chinese Ceramic Society 中国硅酸盐协会.1982. History of Chinese Ceramics

中国陶瓷史. Beijing: Cultural Relic Press.

Tian Jingdong 田敬东. 1972. “A Yuan Dynasty hoard found in Liangxiang, Beijing 北

京良乡发现的一处元代窖藏.” Archaeology 考古 6: 32-34, plate 12.

Verbeek, R.D.M.1889. De oudheden van Madjapahit in 1815 en 1887, Tijdschrift van

het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen 33, 1-15.

Wang Biwen 王璧文.1936.“On the city and streets of Ta-tu, capital of the Yuan

Dynasty.元大都城坊考.”Bulletin of the Society for Research in Chinese

Architecture 中国营造学社汇刊 6, 3: 69-120.

————. 1937. “A tabulated chronology of the building of temples in Ta-tu, capital

of the Yuan Dynasty 元大都寺观庙宇建制沿革表.”Bulletin of the Society for

Research in 中国营造学社汇刊 6, 4:130-161.

387

Wang Dayuan 汪大渊. 1892.Daoyi Zhilue 岛夷志略, Zhifuzhai Series 知服斋丛书.

————. 1981.Daoyi Zhilue Jiaoshi 岛夷志略校释, Annotated by SuJiqing 苏继

庼. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.

Wang Gang 王刚. 2001.“Hoarded Porcelain of the Yuan Dynasty Discovered at Linxi,

Inner Mongolia 内蒙古林西县元代瓷器窖藏.” Cultural Relics 文物 8: 72-76, 83.

————. 2005. “Yuan Dynasty ceramics hoards in Inner Mongolia Linxi County 内

蒙古林西县元代陶瓷器窖藏.”Steppe Cultural Relics 内蒙古文物考古 2: 33-36,

plate 8.

Wang Jian 王剑. 1991. “Yuan Dynasty porcelain hoard found in Huaiyin City

Hanchen 淮阴市韩城发现元代瓷器窖藏.”Southeast Culture 东南文化 3&4:

225-226, 214.

Wang Qipeng and Wu Mei 王启鹏、吴梅. 2005.“Song to Yuan period hoard

unearthed in Sichuan Province Zhongjiang County 四川省中江县出土宋元窖

藏.”Sichuan Cultural Relics 四川文物 2:26-29, 38, plate 2-4.

Wang Youquan 王有泉.1994.“City walls of Yuan Dadu 元大都城墙.” InChinese

Archaeology Almanac—1992 中国考古学年鉴•1992 年,ed. Society for Chinese

Archaeology 中国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 151.

Wang Youzhong 王友忠.2001. “Yuan Dynasty hoard at Zhejiang

Qianlu Street浙江青田县前路街元代窖藏.”Archaeology考古5:93-96, plate 6-7.

Wang Zhenyong 王振镛.1993. “Archaeology findings of Dehua kiln of Song Yuan

period 宋元德化窑考古的收获.”Fujian Cultural Relics 福建文博 1&2: 88-94.

Wei Jian and Li Xingsheng 魏坚、李兴盛. 1998. “Buzi urban site and tombs in

388

Siziwang Banner City 四子王旗城卜子古城及墓葬.” InChinese Archaeology

Almanac—1996 中国考古学年鉴•1996, ed. Society for Chinese Archaeology 中

国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 117-118.

Wei Jian and Yin Chunlei 魏坚、尹春雷. 1998. “ Sanchahe urban site

with tombs of the to Yuan Period 乌审旗三岔河西夏至元代古城和

墓葬.”Chinese Archaeology Almanac—1996 中国考古学年鉴•1996.Beijing:

Cultural Relics Press, 116-117.

Wei Jian and Li Xingsheng 魏坚、李兴盛. 1998. “Yuan Dynasty Guangyilong urban

site in Chahar Right Middle Banner 察右中旗广益隆元代古城.”Chinese

Archaeology Almanac—1996 中国考古学年鉴•1996, ed. Society for Chinese

Archaeology 中国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 118-119.

Wei Yi 魏易, trans. 1913. The Travels of Yuan Guest Official Marco Polo 元代客卿马

哥博罗游记. Beijing: Zhengmeng Yinshuju 正蒙印书局.

Wheatley, P. 1961.The Golden Khersonese: Studies in the Historical Geography of

the Malay Penninsula before A. D. 1500. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya

Press.

Winstedt, R. O. 1922.“The early history of Singapore, Johore and : an

outline of a paper by G.P.Rouffaer.” Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal

Asiatic Society 86: 257-260.

————.1928. “Gold ornaments dug up at Fort Canning, Singapore.”Journal of

the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 6, 4: 1-4.Reprinted in 1969.

“Singapore 150th Anniversary Commemorative Issue.”Journal of the Malaysian

389

Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 42, 1: 49-52.

————.1938. “The Malay Annals or Sejarah Melayu.” Journal of the Malayan

Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society16, 3:1-226.

————. 1964. “A note on the founding of Singapore.”Journal of Southeast Asian

History 5, 2: 15-16.

Wolters, O.W. 1970. The Fall of Srivijaya in Malay History. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford

University Press.

Wong Wai Yee 黄慧怡.2004a. “Export issues of Guangdong porcelain in Tang and

Song Dynasties 唐宋广东生产瓷器的外销.”Journal of Maritime History

Studies 海交史研究 1: 105-108.

————. 2004b. “Statistical table for overseas discoveries of Tang and Song

period Guangdong porcelain 海外发现广东唐宋时期生产瓷器统计表.” Journal

of Maritime History Studies 海交史研究 1: 109-118, 83.

————.2011. “‘Kwantung Jar’ sherds with stamped potters’ marks found in the

14th century Fort Canning archaeological site, Singapore and related problems

about some ceramic vessels of shipwrecks and their cargoes 新加坡福康宁遗

址出土 14 世纪“广东罐”上的戳印纹饰与沉船货物盛载容器的几个问题.” In

Navigation: Trace of Civilization 航海——文明之迹, ed. China Maritime

Museum 上海中国航海博物馆. Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press 上海古籍出版

社, 80-113.

Wright, A. F. 1977. “The Cosmology of the Chinese City.” In The City in Late

Imperial China, ed. G. W. Skinner. California: Stanford University Press, 33-74.

390

Wu Wenliang 吴文良. 2005. Quanzhou Religious Stone Carvings (Revised and

Enlarged Edition) 泉州宗教石刻（增订本）. Beijing: Science Press.

Wu Yaqin and Wang Ruiqing 武亚芹、王瑞青. 1997. “Porcelain Hoard of the Yuan

Period at Sanyijing, 开鲁县三义井元代瓷器窖藏.” In Papers on

Cultural Relics and Archaeology in Inner Mongolia (II)内蒙古文物考古文集（第

二辑）, ed. Wei Jian 魏坚. Beijing: of China Publishing House,

735-742.

Wu Zhihong and Fan Fengmei 吴志红、范凤妹. 1983. “Introduction on some Yuan

bluish white porcelain of Jiangxi 介绍一批江西元代青白瓷器.” Cultural Relics

in Southern China 江西历史文物 2:64-68.

Xiao Fabiao 肖发标.2001. “Yuan eggshell-white stem cups with “Yu” character

marks discovered at Hutian kiln complex 湖田窑发现元代“玉”字款卵白瓷高

足杯.”Cultural Relics in Southern China 南方文物 2: 73-76.

Xiao Fabiao, Xu Changqing and Li Fang 肖发标、徐长青、李放.2001. “Excavation

report on ‘Shufu kilns’at Hutian Liujiawu site 湖田刘家坞“枢府窑”清理报告.”

Cultural Relics in Southern China 南方文物 2: 6-14.

Xiao Menglong 肖梦龙. 1980. “A hoard of blue and white jar with cloud and dragon

motifs in Jintan, Jiangsu 江苏金坛元代青花云龙罐窖藏.” Cultural Relics 文物

1: 59-62, plate 6.

Xie Zhijie and Wang Hongguang 谢志杰、王虹光.1992. “Brief excavation report on

a Yuan Dynasty hoard in Jiangxi Yichun City 江西宜春市元代窖藏清理简报.”

Cultural Relics in Southern China 南方文物 2: 1-7, plate 1.

391

Xinjiang Museum 新疆博物馆. 1979. “Yuan Dynasty blue and white porcelain and

other cultural relics unearthed in Xinjiang Yili Region Huocheng County 新疆

伊犁地区霍城县出土的元青花瓷等文物.”Cultural Relics 文物 8: 26-31.

Xu Changqing and Yu Jiang’an 徐长青、余江安.2004. “New archaeological

discoveries at the Hutian kiln 湖田窑考古新收获.”Palace Museum Journal 故

宫博物院院刊 2: 48-59.

Xu Haifeng, Liu Lianqiang, Li Wenlong and Yang Weidong 徐海峰、刘连强、李文

龙、杨卫东. 2004. “Excavation of a Yuan tomb with mural at Zhuozhou, Hebei

河北涿州元代壁画墓.” Cultural Relics 文物 3: 42-60.

Xu Jun 徐军. 2005. “A preliminary periodization and characteristic analysis on Yuan

and Ming Longquan celadon unearthed from Fengdongyan kiln site 从枫洞岩窑

址的发掘试析元明龙泉青瓷分期和特征.” In Porcelain Unearthed from Dayao

Fengdongyan Kiln Site 龙泉大窑枫洞岩窑址出土瓷器, ed. Zhejiang Provincial

Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute, School of Archaeology and Museology

of Peking University and Longquan Celadon Museum 浙江省文物考古研究所、

北京大学考古文博学院、龙泉青瓷博物馆. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press,

11-18.

Xu Junming 徐俊鸣.1979. “The effect of overseas traffic and trade on Guangzhou

City development in ancient China 我国古代海外交通和贸易对于广州城市发

展的影响.”Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Sunyatseni 中山大学学报

（自然科学版）4: 90-100.

Xu Minggang 许明纲. 1966. “Cultural relics of Jin to Yuan period found in Lvda

392

City 旅大市发现金元时期文物.” Archaeology 考古 2: 96-99, 111, plate 8.

Xu Pingfang 徐苹芳.1986a. “Song, Yuan and Ming period archaeology 宋元明考

古.”InEncyclopedia of China—Archaeology 中国大百科全书•考古学, ed. Xia

Nai 夏鼐 et al. Beijing: Encyclopedia of China Publishing House, 486-492.

————. 1986b. “Yuan Dadu archaeological site 元大都遗址.”Encyclopedia of

China—Archaeology 中国大百科全书•考古学, ed. Xia Nai 夏鼐 et al.Beijing:

Encyclopedia of China Publishing House, 629-631.

————. 1995. “The investigations and excavations of Yuan Dadu 元大都的勘察与

发掘.” InZhongguo Lishi Kaoguxue Luncong 中国历史考古学论丛. Taipei:

Asian Culture Company Limited 允晨文化实业股份有限公司.

————.1998. “Ancient urban ruins in modern cities 现代城市中的古代城市遗

痕.”In Yuanwang Ji—Festschrift for the Fortieth Anniversary of Shanxi

Provincial Archaeology Institute 远望集——陕西省考古研究所华诞四十周年

纪念文集（下）. Xi’an: Shanxi Renmin Meishu Chubanshe 陕西人民美术出版

社,695-699.

————. 2001. “Ancient city in Beijing 论历史文化名城北京的古代城市规划及

其保护.”Cultural Relics 文物 1: 64-73.

Xu Qingquan 许清泉. 1983. “Discussions on the date and usage of small-mouth

ceramic bottles unearthed from Song ships 宋船出土的小口陶瓶年代和用途的

探讨.” Maritime History Studies 海交史研究 1:112-114.

Xu Song 徐松, ed. 1957. Songhuiyao Jigao 宋会要辑稿. Photocopy 影印本. Beiping:

National Beiping Library 国立北平图书馆, 1936 年. Reprinted by Beijing:

393

Zhonghua Book Company.

Xu Wenpeng 徐文鹏. 2014. A Chronological Study of Yuan Ceramics of Hongguang

Kiln Site at Luomaqiao, Jingdezhen. MA Thesis, Peking University.

Xue Qiao and Liu Jinfeng 薛翘、刘劲峰. 1987. “Unglazed-rim porcelain unearthed

from a dated tomb of Yuan Dynasty in the suburb of Fuzhou City 抚州市郊元代

纪年墓出土的芒口瓷.” Cultural Relics in Southern China 江西历史文物 2:

62-64.

Yang Ailing 杨爱玲.1994. “Yuan Dynasty hoarded porcelain found in

County 郾城县发现的元代窖藏瓷器.”Relic from Central Plain 中原文物 4:

117-120.

Yang Houli 杨后礼. 1983.“Yuan Dynasty hoarded porcelain found in Jiangxi

Yongxin 江西永新发现元代窖藏瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物 4: 47-49, plate 6.

————.1987. “Yanyou Year 6 tomb of Yuan Dynasty in , Jiangxi

江西永丰县元代延祐六年墓.”Cultural Relics 文物 7: 85-87.

Yang Houli and Wan Liangtian 杨后礼、万良田.1981. “Yuan Dynasty dated qinghua

youlihong porcelain discovered from Fengcheng County, Jiangxi Province 江西

丰城县发现元代纪年青花釉里红瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文物 11: 72-74, plate 1.

Yang Siqian 阳思谦 et al. 1987. “Wanl i Chongxiu Quanzhou Fuzhi 万历重修泉州府

志.”Ming Wanli Year 40 (1612 C.E.)Version 明万历四十年刊本, Photocopy 影印

本. In Zhongguo Shixue Congshu Sanbian 中国史学丛书三编（第四辑） ed. Liu

Zhaoyou 刘兆祐. Taipei: Taiwan Studentbook Print 台湾学生书局印行.

Yangmei Group of Jinjiang Archaeology Survey Team 晋江地区文物普查队杨梅组.

394

1980. “Investigation report on ancient kiln sites of Yangmei Commune, Dehua

County 德化县杨梅公社古瓷窑址调查报告.” In Historical Records of Dehua

Ceramics 德化瓷器史料汇编（上册）, ed. Ye Wencheng and Xu Benzhang 叶

文程、徐本章. Xiamen: History Department of Xiamen University 厦门大学历

史系; Dehua: Dehua County Science and Technology Accociation 德化县科学技

术协会,Dehua County Culture Board 德化县文化舘,58-65.

Yangzhou Municipal Museum 扬州市博物馆. 1973. “Two tombs of Tang Dynasty

found in Yangzhou 扬州发现两座唐墓.” Cultural Relics 文物 5: 70-72.

Ye Hanyun, Xia Yuenan and Hu Cheng’en 叶涵鋆、夏跃南、胡承恩. 1988. “Two

batches of hoarded precious porcelain of Yuan Dynasty unearthed in She County

歙县出土两批窖藏元瓷珍品.” Cultural Relics 文物 5: 85-88, plate 8.

Ye Wencheng 叶文程.2004. “A primary study on the production and exporting of

Dehua ancient ceramics 略论德化古代陶瓷的生产与外销.”Fujian Cultural

Relics 福建文博 4: 1-9.

Ye Xinmin 叶新民.1987.“Research on palaces and pavilions in Yuan Shangdu 元上

都宫殿楼阁考.”Journal of Inner Mongolia University (Humanities and Social

Sciences)内蒙古大学学报（哲学社会科学版）3: 33-40.

Yi Xing and Jiazhen 易行、孙嘉镇 ed. 2005. Chaoben Ming Shilu 钞本明实录.

Hongge Version 红格本, Photocopy 影印本. Beijing: Thread-Binding Books

Publishing House 线装书局.

Yu, David. 2007. “A Comparative Art Study of the Hindu Sculptures in Quanzhou 泉

州印度教石刻艺术的比较研究.”Maritime History Studies 海交史研究 1: 1-57.

395

Yu Changsen 喻常森.1994. Oversea Trade in Yuan Dynasty 元代海外贸易. Xi’an:

Northwest University Press.

Yu Fengzhi 于风芝. 2005. “Discussions on Yuan Dynasty porcelain unearthed in

Guangxi 广西出土元代瓷器探讨.” In Ancient Chinese Ceramics Studies 中国

古陶瓷研究 11, ed. Ancient Chinese Ceramics Society 中国古陶瓷学会.Beijing:

Forbidden City Press 紫禁城出版社, 367-377.

Yu Jiadong and Mei Shaoqiu 余家栋、梅绍裘.1989. “Yuan Dynasty porcelain hoard

found in Jiangxi Le’an 江西乐安发现元代瓷器窖藏.”Cultural Relics 文物 1:

75-78, 17, plate 8.

Yu Tian and Zhao Da 雨田、赵达.“Yuan Dynasty hoard found in 朔州发

现元代窖藏.”China Cultural Relics News 中国文物报, 1992, August 23rd, Page

1.

Yu Zhen and Huang Xiuchun 喻震、黄秀纯.1986. “The tombs of Tie Ke, his farther

and Zhang Honggang 元铁可父子墓和张弘纲墓.” Acta Archaeologia Sinica 考

古学报 1: 95-114, plate 15-20.

Yuan Dadu Archaeology Team 元大都考古队. 1972a.“The investigations and

excavations of Yuan Dadu 元大都的勘察和发掘.”Archaeology 考古 1: 19-28,

plate 8-10.

————.1972b. “Yuan Dynasty residential site at Houyingfang, Beijing 北京后英

房元代居住遗址.” Archaeology 考古 6: 2-11, plate 1-8.

————. 1973. “Yuan Dynasty residential sites at Xitao Alleyway and

Houtaoyuan, Beijing 北京西绦胡同和后桃园的元代居住遗址.”Archaeology 考

396

古 5: 279-285, plate 5-8.

Zeng Guangyi 曾广亿. 1962. “Investigation report on ancient porcelain kilns at

Guangdong Huiyang Baimashan 广东惠阳白马山古瓷窑调查记.”Archaeology

考古 8: 414-415, plate 9.

————.1964.“Excavation report on ancient porcelain kilns at Guangdong

Huiyang Xin'an Sancun Village 广东惠阳新庵三村古瓷窑发掘简报.”

Archaeology 考古 4:196-199.

————.1991. “Archaeological overview of Guangdong ceramic kiln sites 广东

瓷窑遗址考古概要.”Relics from Jiangxi 江西文物 4: 105-108, 84.

Zeng Fan 曾凡.1979. “Some issues on Dehua Qudougong kilns 关于德化屈斗宫窑

的几个问题.”Cultural Relics 文物 5: 62-65.

————.1982. “Some issues on Dehua kilns 关于德化窑的几个问题.”Ancient

Chinese Ceramics Conference Proceedings 中国古陶瓷论文集, ed. The Chinese

Ceramic Society 中国硅酸盐学会. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 245-262.

————.1990. “Further research on the issues of Dehua kilns 再谈关于德化窑的

问题.” InDehua Kilns 德化窑, ed. Fujian Provincial Museum 福建省博物馆.

Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 136-152.

Zeng Pingsha and Chen Jianying 曾萍莎、陈健鹰. 2005. “‘Grinds made by liquor

storeroom’ and ‘small-mouth ceramic bottle’ at Quanzhou of Southern Song

Dynasty 南宋泉州“酒库造碾”和“小口陶瓶”.” Maritime History Studies 海

交史研究 2:113-116.

Zhang Beichao 张北超.1987. “Longquan porcelain hoard found in Hunan Taojiang

397

湖南桃江发现龙泉窑瓷器窖藏.”Cultural Relics 文物 9: 21-24.

Zhang Fukang, Zhang Pusheng, He Wenquan and Xiong Yingfei 张福康，张浦生，何

文权，熊樱菲.2005. “White ceramics and qingbai ceramics 白瓷和青白瓷.” In

International Symposium on Ancient Chinese White Ceramics 中国古代白瓷国

际学术研讨会论文集, ed. Shanghai Museum 上海博物馆. Shanghai: Shanghai

Shuhua Chubanshe 上海书画出版社, 576-584.

Zhang Guangming and Bi Siliang 张光明、毕思梁.1986.“Yuan Dynasty hoarded

porcelain unearthed in Shandong Zibo 山东淄博出土元代窖藏瓷器.”Cultural

Relics 文物 12: 72-73.

Zhang Jianzhong 张建中. 1955. “Brief Excavation Report of Shang Dynasty Tombs

in Zhengzhou Baijiazhuang 郑州市白家庄商代墓葬发掘简报.”Cultural Relics

文物参考资料 10: 24-42.

Zhang Xiang 张翔.1989. “Investigations and excavations on Longquan Jincun

ancient porcelain kiln sites 龙泉金村古瓷窑址调查发掘报告.”Research on

Longquan Celadon 龙泉青瓷研究, ed. Zhejiang Provincial Light Industry Board

浙江省轻工业厅. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 68-91.

Zhang Xinglang 张星烺, trans.1929. The Travels of Marco Polo 马可孛罗游记.

Beijing: Library.

————. 1937. The Travels of Marco Polo 马哥孛罗游记. Shanghai: Commercial

Press.

Zhang Yuhuan 张驭寰.1962. “Yuan Jininglu urban site and construction relics 元集

宁路故城与建筑遗物.”Archaeology 考古 11: 585-587.

398

Zhang Yulan 张玉兰. 1990. “Xianyu Shu’s tomb of Yuan Dynasty found in Hangzhou

杭州市发现元代鲜于枢墓.”Cultural Relics 文物 9:22-25.

Zhang Zhongchun 张仲淳.1987. “Investigations on Zhuangbian ancient ceramic

kilns, Putian, Fujian 福建莆田庄边古瓷窑调查.”Fujian Cultural Relics 福建文

博 2:51-55, 38.

Zhao Guanglin 赵光林. 1989. “A batch of ancient sites and hoarded cultural relics

found in Beijing 北京市发现一批古遗址和窖藏文物.” Archaeology 考古 2:

180-183.

Zhao Juchuan and He Zhigang 赵巨川、何直刚. 1965. “A batch of Yuan Dynasty

Porcelain found in Baoding City 保定市发现一批元代瓷器.”Cultural Relics 文

物 2: 17-18, 22, plate 1-3.

Zhao Quangu, Han Weizhou, Pei Mingxiang and An Jinhuai 赵全古、韩维周、裴明

相、安金槐. 1957. “The Excavations of Zhengzhou Shang Dynasty Site 郑州商

代遗址的发掘.”The Chinese Journal of Archaeology 考古学报 1: 53-73, plate

1-8.

Zhao Ronghua 赵荣华.2006. “Investigations on the newly discovered Yuan

porcelain 探访新发现的元瓷.”Cultural Relics World 文物天地 9: 87-89.

Zhao Rugua 赵汝适. 2000. Zhufan Zhi Jiaoshi 诸藩志校释, Annotated by Yang

Bowen 杨博文. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.

Zhao Yanwei 赵彦卫. 1983. “Yunlu Manchao 云麓漫钞.” In Siku Quanshu 四库全书.

Wenyuange Version 文渊阁, Photocopy 影印本. Xinbei: The Commercial Press

台湾商务印书馆.

399

Zhao Yonghong 赵永洪. 1999. “Xiaocheng urban site of Song to Yuan Dynasties in

Guanxian County 冠县肖城宋至元代城址.”Chinese Archaeology

Almanac—1997 中国考古学年鉴•1997, ed. Society for Chinese Archaeology 中

国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 161-162.

Zhao Zhengzhi 赵正之. 1979. “Studies of reconstructing Yuan Dadu’s layout 元大都

平面规划复原研究.” InHistory of Science and Technology Corpus2 科技史文集

（第二辑）, ed. Zhang Yuhuan 张驭寰. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and

Technical Publishers, 14-27.

Zhejiang Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Institute 浙江省文物考古研究

所. 2005.Excavation Report on Longquan Eastern Area Kiln Sites 龙泉东区窑址

发掘报告. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press.

Zhejiang Working Group from Institute of Archaeology,Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences 中国社会科学院考古研究所浙江工作队.1981. “Excavation report on

Anfu Longquan type kiln sites in Zhejiang Longquan County 浙江龙泉县安福

龙泉窑址发掘简报.”Archaeology 考古 6:504-510, plate 9-12.

Zheng Junsheng 郑均生.1997. “Longquan porcelain hoard in City 衡阳市

龙泉窑瓷器窖藏.” InChinese Archaeology Almanac—1995 中国考古学年

鉴·1995, ed. Society for Chinese Archaeology 中国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural

Relics Press, 196-197.

Zheng Long 郑隆.1957.“Investigations on Yuan Dynasty Jingzhoulu urban site 元代

净州路古城的调查.”Archaeology 考古通讯 1: 65-67.

Zhou Lijuan 周丽娟. 2003. “Changsha ewers excavated in Qingpu District of

400

Shanghai 青浦出土长沙窑执壶.”ShangHai WenBo 上海文博 4:63-65.

Zhou Qufei 周去非.1999.Lingwai Daida Jiaozhu 岭外代答校注, Annotated by Yang

Wuquan 杨武泉. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.

Zhou and Huang Zhongzhao 周瑛、黄仲昭. 2007. Chongkan Xinghua Fuzhi 重

刊兴化府志, Annotated by Cai Jinyao 蔡金耀. Qing Tongzhi Year Ten Reprint 清

同治十年（1871）重刊. Fuzhou: Fujian People’s Publishing House 福建人民出

版社.

Zhu Boqian 朱伯谦.1989. “Excavation report on Longquan Dayao ancient kiln site

龙泉大窑古瓷窑址发掘报告.”Research on Longquan Celadon 龙泉青瓷研究,

ed. Zhejiang Provincial Light Industry Board 浙江省輕工业厅. Beijing: Cultural

Relics Press, 38-67.

Zhu Boqian and Wang Shilun 朱伯谦、汪士伦.1963. “Main achievements of

investigations and excavations on Zhejiang Longquan celadon kiln sites 浙江省

龙泉青瓷窑址调查发掘的主要收获.”Cultural Relics 文物 1: 27-40.

Zhu Lanxia 朱兰霞. 1986. “Brief excavation report on Wuzhen’s tomb of Ming

Dynasty in Nanjing 南京明代吴祯墓发掘简报.”Cultural Relics 文物 9: 35-41.

Zhu Xie 朱偰. 1936a.Graphic Studies on Jinling’s Historic Sites 金陵古迹图考.

Shanghai: The Commercial Press.

————.1936b.Graphic Studies on Yuan Dadu Palaces (Ancient Capital

Festschrift Series I)元大都宫殿图考（故都纪念集第一种）. Shanghai: The

Commercial Press.

————. 1947.Graphic Studies on Ming and Qing Dynasties Palaces (Ancient

401

Capital Festschrift Series II)明清两代宫苑建置延革图考（故都纪念集第二

种）. Shanghai: The Commercial Press.

Zhu Yu 朱彧. 1984. “Pingzhou Ketan 萍洲可谈·三卷附校勘记、提要.”Congshu

Jicheng Xinbian 丛书集成新编. Vol. 117 第 117 册. Taipei: Xin Wen Feng Press

新文丰出版公司, 104-117.

Zhu Zijiang and Kan Duo 朱紫江、阚铎. 1930. “A treatise on the plans of palaces

and parks of the capital of Yuan Dynasty 元大都宫苑图考.” Bulletin of the

Society for Research in Chinese Architecture 中国营造学社汇刊 1, 2:1-118.

Zhuang Chuo 庄绰.1983. Jileibian 鸡肋编, Annotated by Xiao Luyang 萧鲁阳.

Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.

Zhuang Jinghui 庄景辉. 1987. “Research on Quanzhou’s sub-city site 泉州子城址

考.”Fujian Cultural Relics 福建文博 2: 159-164.

————.1988. “Examining Quanzhou's Luo Cheng 泉州罗城考辨.” Maritime

History Studies 海交史研究 2: 118-126.

————.1996. “Research on Quanzhou’s extensive city site 泉州罗城址考.” In

Research on Maritime Transportation Relics 海外交通史迹研究.

Xiamen: Xiamen University Press,19-36.

Zhuang Weiji 庄为玑.1979. “Research on the urban sites in Quanzhou 泉州历代城

址的探索.”In Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of Society for

ChineseArchaeology 中国考古学会第一次年会论文集, ed. Society for Chinese

Archaeology 中国考古学会. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press, 367-379.

————.1980. “Exploring the Quanzhou urban site of different eras 泉州历代城址

402

的探索.”Quanzhou Culture and History 泉州文史 2&3: 14-28.

Resources from Website: http://www.maritime-explorations.com/jade%20dragon.htm

403