THE CASE OF THE THREE PAINTINGS BY WANG MENG by HELEN WODEHOUSE GRIFFIN B.A., University of British Columbia, 1938 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Fine Arts We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April, 1968 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his represen• tatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Fine Arts The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date April 25, 1968 ABSTRACT The problem in this thesis is to find out which of three of (the Chinese fourteenth Century painter) Wang Meng's paintings in the Palace Collection in Taiwan, is the original or "least-corrupted" and which the copies. They are hanging scrolls, ink and slight colour on paper, approximately four feet by two feet titled Hua-ch'i yuVyin. The aim is to show that by using Western scientific art history analysis^some advance is possible; and the results may help in establishing pivot points, called here "prime objects", necessary for establishing a history of styles for Chinese painting. Materials used were photographs taken by the University of Michigan, Department of History of Art in 1965-6 in Taipei, Taiwan. Methods used were those istamdard^for.;western art historians, adapted for Chinese paintings and now being put into practice by Professor Wen Fong of Princeton. Data was gathered from translations of ancient critics in China by 0. Siren and discussions of these by Sherman Lee, James Cahill, Richard Edwards and others. But most important was a detailed, energetic and time consuming study of the reproductions of the three paintings, and the application of Professor Wen Fong's reasoning to this study. It was found that internal, painting-style, analysis was supported by external, colophon-seal findings, to give a more convincing r result. Results showed that A is most likely to be the original while B is probably a forgery of A and C a "free" copy of B. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 Copies 1 Necessity of establishing "true" works .... 5 Importance of Wang Meng 7 II. THE PROBLEM 11 Description of paintings 11 Previous classifications 13 Aim and approach 15 III. CHOICE OF SUBJECT 18 A Later version 23 IV. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 25 Poems 25 Seals 34 V. INTERNAL EVIDENCE 36 Tracings ' 37 Techniques 38 Ink Tone 38 Space recession 39 Brush stroke 40 Roots 40 CHAPTER rAU£ Rocks 41 Bamboo 41 Thatch 42 Mountains 42 Leafy tree 43 Results: Ch'i Yun 44 VI. CONCLUSION 45 BIBLIOGRAPHY 50 ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 A, YV73 "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by Wang Meng ("Original" ?) Figure 2 B, YV264 "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by Wang Meng ("Copy" ?) Figure 3 c, YV265 "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by Wang Meng ("Free Copy" ?) Figure 4 D, NAlOd "Flower Stream Fisherman Recluse by Wang Meng ("Free Copy" ?) Figure 5 A Detail of lower left side Figure 6 A Detail of lower right side, roots Figure 7 A Detail of lower left side, rock Figure 8 B Detail of lower left side, rock Figure 9 C Detail of lower left side, rock Figure 10 An inscription and seals by Empe ror lung ("Original and Copy") Figure 11 A, B and C Tracings Figure 12 A, B and C Showing composition Figure 13 A, B and C Thatch roofs and tree trunks PREFACE The problem is to show which of three paintings illustrated: Figures 1, 2 and 3, is the most likely to be the original one done by Wang Meng. (13087-1385) The unavoidable weakness is that I have not been able to inspect the originals of these, which are in the National Palace Collection in Taiwan. Nevertheless, this thesis is the ground work which is necessary in preparation for first hand inspection; and I hope to be able to examine the original paintings in the near future. This thesis was possible because' of:J the recent acquisition by the U.B.C. Library, of the National Palace and Central Museums Photo• graphic Archives. These photographs were taken in the National 1 Palace Museum, Shih-lin, Taipei, Taiwan in 1965-6, by the University of Michigan, Department of the History of Art in Ann Arbor. The team responsible included: James Cahill, Richard Edwards, Marvin Eisenberg, and Laurence Sickman. This particular work was ;aided-i' by the kindness of the Director of the Museum in Taipei, Dr. Fu-ts'ung Chiang,who informed me of the existence of these three paintings; two of which, are not in the 1 Now called the Chung Shan Museum. 1 U.B.C. archives. The photographs are exceptionally clear. They allow a close inspection and a good opportunity for comparison, which would be hard to match in any museum. There are coloured slides of details to go with them, from which Figure 5 is taken. I should like to thank my advisor Dr. Mary Morehart for help and encouragement far above and beyond her line of duty. Also I should like to thank Professor Fo-ch'uan Chang, Professor Li Chi and Wai-lam Lee for their help and advice. They are of course, not responsible for the opinions expressed. 1 Hereafter the U.B.C. Collection of the National Palace and Central Museum Photographic Archives is referred to by U.B.C. Archives and the originals of these, as the Palace Collection in Taipei. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION I. Copies Copies, imitations, and downright fakes, partial forgeries, over- restored paintings, and copies of copies are enough to put one off the studying of Chinese painting almost before one begins. However, recent study is making considerable headway. Early in the 6th century Hsieh Ho ^ wrote a treatise on painting, the importance of which can hardly be overestimated both for artist-painters and art critics. His six principles were based on current ideas but mostly on writers before him. The first, the most important, is discussed at the end of Chapter V. The last principle is partly responsible for all these subsequent copies. It is ^^"^ ch'uan muli,.hsieh: "transmit models by copying". Thus every Chinese painter was a potential forger. As the Chinese culture has to a certain degree been built on ancestor worship, copying honoured famous masters. It was not always with the intent to deceive. That came later, when connoisseurs developed eclectic tastes and paintings became a commodity. Before this, and even now, copies were not scorned as they are now in the West. In fact a well made copy was 1 Osvald,Siren, The Chinese on the Art of Painting (Schocken Books, N. Y., 1963), p. 21. 2 something to be proud of, and the greater the number of copies one owned, the greater the boasting: such paintings could, indeed, be of great individual merit, in some cases, even superior to the originals for: . they marked not only the students way of learning but also their deference to some old master or school of painting which had served as their guide or inspiration. 1 So we must be thankful for this attitude even though it is caus• ing art historians so much trouble; because without it, we would undoubtedly know much less about Chinese art. But beside these honest copies^are the many forgeries intended to deceive, hence are done for monetary gain. Forgeries are usually tracings whereby every single element and line is to the last detail, exactly as in the original, or as much as is humanly possible. But as we shall see there are always giveaway, tell-tale signs if we can but find them. "Free" copies use the same frame-work as the original but within that the artist creates in his own way, thereby improving or otherwise, on the original, as he sees fit. Between the "free" copy, the variation on a theme, and the forgery, are all manner of "transmitters of style" as the Chinese call them. And there has been 1 Ibid., p. 151. 3 so much skull-duggery going on down through the ages that the genuine works and forgeries were freely mingled, and people could not tell them apart: "Painting by the end of the Ming had fallen into evil ways. The most corrupt school was that of Chekiang; but even in Wu-men and Yun- chien the works of great masters like Wen (Cheng-ming) and Shen (Chou) and . Tung Ch'i-ch'ang were all confused and muddled by counterfeits. Falsehoods begot further false• hoods, until fraud had spread everywhere". 1 Wu Hsiu, early 19th century, tells a revealing story of forgeries and the sad fate of an original: During Ch1ien-lung"s reign 1736-96 a Suchow studio bought Kao K'o-kung's Morning Clouds in Spring for 400 pieces of gold. A certain Chang bought ts'e-li paper and commissioned Chai Yun-p'ing (died 1804) to make two copies for 10 pieces of gold. Then he had Cheng Hsueh-ch'iao (Cheng Chia) copy the inscription and seals for 10 pieces of gold. The copies were soaked in clear water and laid out flat on a lacquer table.