Abstract

Early Chinese Lacquer Toilet-Boxes Two pieces of outstanding importance from the last of the Eumorfopoulos collection have been presented to the British Museum; one, a Chinese lacquer toilet-box, purchased by the National Art-Collections Fund, and the second, the blue splashed T'ang pottery horse which was the late owner's special favourite, presented by Mrs. G. Eumorfopoulos in memory of her husband (Brit. Mus. Quarterly, 14, 3; 1940). In a description of the two pieces by B. Gray, the lacquer box is stated to be much the most important piece of Early Chinese lacquer to have left the East. It is remarkable for its fine state of preservation and for unique features of its decoration. Judging from finds made by Japanese archæologists in Korea, painted lacquer was the most usual material for articles of luxury in the Han period, after Chinese taste had changed about 600 B.C. from an interest in plastic form to a preference for enrichment of surfaces. In the ‘Hwai-style period” inlay was extensively used to enrich the bronzes; but in the Han period a freer technique of painting came into fashion. Though also tomb furnishings, the lacquer boxes, tables and utensils must certainly have been used by the owners before death. In the tombs of Lo-lang of South Korea, of the considerable number of lacquer objects found, the most important are the toilet-boxes. These are of three main shapes, small oblong, high rectangular with coffered lids, and circular boxes with domed lids. Although several are inscribed as having been made in Szechwan, until lately no piece was known to have been found on Chinese soil. The present example, however, is said to have been found in a tomb at Haichow in the northern part of Kiangsu near the old bed of the Yellow River. It resembles generally the round toilet-boxes found at Lo-lang, but has important differences, and it differs in the style of the painted decoration. In consequence it has been assigned to the third century B.C. This is before the period to which the Korean boxes all appear to belong in the first century A.D. Probably the true date is somewhere between the two.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.