Page:Brinkley - China - Volume 1.djvu/31

 ware which, by being exposed to an unusual degree of temperature in the kiln, often acquired a certain transparency though his pâte remained soft enough to be marked with a knife.

Recently Dr. Hirth discovered two interesting pieces of evidence. The first is a statement by a writer (Tao Yin-chü) who flourished in the early part of the sixth century, to the effect that a substance called pai-ngo was then much used for painting pictures. The second is an assertion in the pharmacopaia of the Tang dynasty (compiled about 650 ) that this same substance had been employed to make keramic ware during recent generations. Now pai-ngo is nothing more or less than kaolin, and Dr. Hirth concludes that the silence of the former writer—a celebrated authority on pharmaceutical and scientific subjects—as to the use of this mineral for keramic purposes, may be taken to prove that it had not yet begun to be thus employed; or, in other words, that the manufacture of true porcelain proper had not yet been commenced. Assuming the correctness of this inference, and combining it with the statement in the Tang pharmacopoeia, it would follow that the first production of porcelain in China dates from the close of the sixth century of the Christian era. In further confirmation of this opinion, the same writer quotes the following passage from an essay on flower-pots by Chang Chien-tê, published about the year 1620:—"In ancient times no vases were made of porcelain. Up to the Tang dynasty (i.e. the beginning of the 7th century) all such vessels (for flowers) were made of copper: it was not till then that pottery came into vogue." But Chang's statement proves nothing as to true porcelain and Dr. Hirth's inferences are not conclusive.