Essay
The organization of the painting academy within the Ming palace and the duties of court painters, though not equal to that of the Song period, was rather complex. Generally speaking, the painter's rank within the court was designated as belonging to a special unit of the Imperial Bodyguard which translated as the “Embroidered Uniform” (Jin yi wei 錦衣衛) and their assignments of work were generally in the Renzhi Hall 仁智殿, Wenhua Hall 文華殿, and the Wuying Hall 武英殿.
In the Ming dynasty, when a court painter signed a painting, it was common practice to record his rank such as: Jinyi zhenfu 錦衣鎮撫 (Judge in the Imperial Guard)), Jinyi bai hu 錦衣百戶 (Head of a Hundred Households of the Imperial Guard), Jinyi qian hu 錦衣千戶 (Head of a Thousand Households of the Imperial Guard), Jinyi zhihui 錦衣指揮 (Commander of the Imperial Guard), Jinyi du zhihui 錦衣都指揮 (Commander of the Capital Imperial Guards), and so on; others record the place of their duties, for example zhi 直 (serving) in Wenhua, Wuying, or Renzhi Hall.
The signature on this fifteenth-century painting, which reads, Xiezhi Wuying dian jinyi Xiao Haishan xie 偕直武英殿錦衣蕭海山寫(Painted by Xiao Haishan, who served in the Imperial Guard in the Wuying Hall), describes where he was located within the palace, i.e. the Wuying Hall, and his rank as a member of the Imperial Guard. The British Museum collection includes a painting by Xiao Haishan titled Two Cormorants (Er luci) 二鸕鶿, (fig. 1-1). The signature on Two Cormorants Er luci reads Jinyi Xiao Haishan xie 錦衣蕭海山寫 (Painted by Xiao Haishan, who served in the Imperial Guard) (fig. 1-2); in comparing the writing style of the inscription on Two Cormorants and the Seattle painting, there should be no doubt that they come from the same hand.
Two Cormorants, or Er luci, also has the seal Jinmen huashi 金門畫士 (Painter at the Golden Door).Richard M. Barnhart , Painters of the Great Ming: The Imperial Court and the Zhe School (Texas: The Dallas Museum of Art, 1993), 104. The Han dynasty palace gate, called Jin ma men 金馬門, was also known as jin men 金門; the phrase has both the sense of palace gate and court, and so in the end points to a court painter. Similar types of seals are seen on works by other Ming court painters.Another seal that Ming court painters liked to use is Rijin qingguang日近清光, which means that they were close to the emperor. Through their work as painters, they achieved the highest glory. For example, the painting in the National Palace Museum, Taiwan, by Zhou Wenjing周文靖 (active during the Xuande 宣德 reign period, 1426–1435) titled Visiting Dai on a Snowy Evening (Xue ye fang dai)雪夜訪戴, has this seal. In addition there are the paintings by the Ming era painters Ni Duan倪端’s “Bu yu tu” 捕魚圖 (Gugong collection # 000423), and Dai Jin’s 戴進 “Shan shui tu” 山水圖 (Gugong collection #00212).
In the Shanghai Museum collection, another Xiao Haishan painting titled Four Magpies and Pine (Cang song si xi tu 蒼松四喜圖) (fig. 2), which was donated by Liang Tu Xuan 兩塗軒, is similar in style and bears the signature “Haishan 海山”—which resembles the calligraphy on the Seattle painting. In addition, the Shanghai Museum painting has the seal (intaglio) jinyi shijia 錦衣世家 (Generations of the Imperial Guard).For published image and description see Chen Xiejun陳燮君et al. ed., Liang tu xuan zhencang shuhua mulu兩塗軒珍藏書畫目錄 (Shanghai: Shanghai Museum), 37. Thus we know that the Xiao family had multiple generations of professional painters serving the Imperial court. This prompts a recollection of Xiao Zeng’s 蕭增 Bird and Flower (Hua niao 花鳥) (fig. 3). The colors and style clearly reflect those of Lu Ji 呂紀, while the rock jutting out of the water towards the bottom of the painting, with its firm brushwork and ink wash, also matches that of Xiao Haishan. Yet, it is unclear if the seal Jinmen huashi comes from the same clan.
Just as Xiao Haishan used the titled signature of Wuying Hall to note the palace hall where he served, there are many examples of painters from the Imperial Guard Unit recording both their rank and location of duty; for example, see the inscription in Zhou Quan’s 周全 (fl. ca. 1426–1435) Pheasant Hunting (She zhi tu 射雉圖) (fig. 4). This custom seems to have emerged after the Xiaozong 孝宗 (1470–1505) court, toward the end of the middle period of the Ming dynasty. Records about Xiao Haishan and his painting are scarce. As Professor Richard Barnhart states:
“Xiao Haishan was probably Xiao Wan 蕭完, from Changshu, Jiangsu province. Changshu is also called Haiyu, which may be suggested in his signature by the name Haishan. Xiao was active in the Tianshun era (1457-64), and was a follower of a painter named Qu Gao, who is named among Lin Liang disciples. In any case, this still scanty information perfectly fits the painting, which is done in the strong, calligraphic technique of bold, direct ink painting on silk that will come to be associated with Lin Liang above all. It was a style widely practiced from the mid-fifteenth century on.”Richard M. Barnhart, Painters of the Great Ming: The Imperial Court and the Zhe School (Texas: The Dallas Museum of Art, 1993), 103.
Professor Barnhart believes that his signature “Haishan” comes from the place name “Haiyu 海虞.” However, Professor Barnhart’s correlation of Haiyu and Haishan is not based on any of the traditional naming practices in China, where one’s ming is often correlated to one’s zi. For instance, Tang Yin’s 唐寅 (1470–1524) zi “Bohu” 伯虎 is based on the fact that the “yin” 寅 year was associated with “hu,” and that “Bo” referred to his standing among his siblings as the eldest son. Similarly, based on this order of “Bo,” “Zhong仲” and “Ji 季,” Wen Zhengming文徵明 (1470–1559), being the second, was also called “Zhengzhong徵仲”.
It is possible there is another basis for associating Xiao Haishan with Xiao Wan. In both the Haiyu hua yuanlüe 海虞畫苑略 and Ming hua lu 明畫錄, Xiao Wan 蕭完 (dates unknown) is mentioned briefly under the entry for “Qu Gao” 瞿杲, in which Xiao is described as “a devoted disciple” 入室弟子 who “was very capable of imitating [his master]” 頗能彷彿.Yu Yi 魚翼, Hai Yu hua yuan lüe 海虞畫苑略, in Meishu congshu 美術叢書, eds. Deng Shi 鄧實 and Huang Binhong 黃賓虹 (Taibei: Yiwen shuguan, 1975), 3.4.142. Xu Qin 徐沁, Ming hua lu 明畫錄, in Meishu congshu, 3.7.117. In other words, Xiao Wan belonged to the lineage of Lin Liang 林良 (active ca. 1488–1505), who was known for his hawk painting.
In the Seattle painting, sitting atop an ancient Chinese juniper —not a pine—one goshawk has spotted his prey, and starts to spread its wings to attack, while staring with determined intensity at the frightened bird below that is fleeing (it appears to be a type of song bird). Another goshawk is poised by its side.
The ancient Chinese juniper is rugged with broken branches and twisting, angular branches. Its limbs are interspersed with those of a plum tree and bamboo shoots up from below. The hawks are positioned on the upper part of the painting, sitting on the leftward bend of the trunk. The Chinese juniper is brilliantly painted. Despite frost, snow and the passage of time, the aged tree still flourishes; its jagged branches intertwine and its trunk remains solid. The Shanghai Museum painting mentioned previously, Four Magpies and Pine (Cang song si xi 蒼松四喜), shows a pine tree that is similar in style to the juniper in the Seattle painting.
Among Ming era court painters, hawks are a common theme. The well-known bird and flower painters Bian Wenjin 邊文進 (ca. 1356– ca.1428), Lin Liang, Lu Ji 呂紀 (fl. 1477–1497) and other artists all favored this theme.
As scholars have pointed out, the meaning of this motif changed over time. During the Yuan era hawks were regularly used to symbolize a predator or recluse. By the early Ming, based on inscriptions from paintings of the period, the meaning of the hawk had shifted to suggest hero, champion, or royalty. Examples include the “phonetic” (xieyin 諧音) pairings of “hawk and bear” (heroic) and “hawk pursuing the pheasant” (hero seizing the brocade).Regarding the most recent research on the background meaning of hawk paintings see Hou-mei Sung, Decoded Messages: The Symbolic Language of Chinese Animal Painting (London: Yale University, 2009), 7-28.
Various interpretations of the Seattle painting are possible. The proud and majestic pair of hawks and the old tree—described by powerful brushstrokes—on which the pair of hawks rest, may have been employed to praise the ruler or perhaps the determined demeanor of the troops of the imperial guard. It may also simply have been the dramatic theme of surprise which appealed to the painter. In any event, the painting has compelling visual qualities which speak to and are accessible to all types of viewers.
Related to this hawk painting is a Ming dynasty work attributed to Lin Liang, titled Hawks (Hua ying 畫鷹) (fig. 5), also in the Seattle Art Museum collection. In this painting as well, there is a pair of hawks resting on a branch, but in a dead tree. The painter has positioned the hawks in a complementary fashion: the one on the right has its back facing the viewer and the one on the left has its breast facing the viewer; one is looking toward the left and the other is looking to the right.
If we compare the Seattle so-called “Lin Liang” painting with a work of the same title by Lin Liang in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, there is a similarity in the arrangement of the pair of hawks and the tree trunks (fig. 6). The brush quality of the National Palace Museum work is bold, while the Seattle painting is not. The Seattle “Lin Liang” painting is a later copy, which the signature makes clear—the two characters “Lin Liang” 林良 being written by an artist who did not measure up to Lin Liang. Moreover, if the seal is compared to reliable Lin Liang seals, it is clearly a copy, probably from the eighteenth century.
Whether the Seattle work, attributed to Lin Liang (fig. 5), is authentic or not does not affect our discussion of hawk painting. In the genre of hawk painting, Lin Liang is recognized for having developed new techniques in ink painting. Regarding Lin Liang, the Tuhui bao jian xubian 圖繪寶鑒續編 records:
“Lin Liang, zi Yishan, was from Guangdong. He reached the rank ofCommander of the Imperial Guard. His application of color to flowers, fruits, birds and beasts was extremely delicate and skilled. His uninhibited brushwork renders birds and trees in ink with such force that it was like cursive script. Although people cannot reach his level, they felt that his carefree style lacked refinement.”Han Yang韓昂, Tuhui bao jian xubian圖繪寶鑒續編, SKQS, 7.
林良，字以善，廣東人。歷升錦衣指揮。著色花果翎毛，皆極精巧。其放筆作水墨禽鳥樹木，猶勁如草書，雖人之所不及，亦覺潦草欠工耳。
There is one more entry; this one is by Bian Rong卞榮 (1418–1487), who wrote a poetic colophon to Lin Liang’s Two Hawks (Shuang ying tu 雙鷹圖):
During the Xuanzong reign period (1426–1436) Bian Jingzhao (dates unknown),
[was said] to reign supreme in painting colorful birds and beasts.
Recently Lin Liang uses ink monochrome,
repeatedly wielding his brush with the greatest of natural beauty.Cited in Kong Liuqing孔六慶, Xuwangkailai: Mingdai yuanti hua niao hua 繼往開來-明代院體花鳥畫 (Nanjing: Nanjing daxue chubanshe, 2008), 163.
宣廟年間邊景昭，五色翎毛稱獨步。近日林良用水墨，落筆往往皆天趣。
These texts point out that he was particularly known, on the one hand, for “ink monochrome” and, on the other hand, for painting “with such force that it was like cursive script.”
Regarding the National Palace Museum’s work by Lin Liang (fig. 6), his use of brush and ink is visibly akin to cursive script—for example, in the strokes of the hawk’s wings, tree leaves and branches. As the texts above make clear, Lin Liang brilliantly used the painting techniques of “ink wash” and “uninhibited brushwork.”
In Chinese painting, there is a basic division between “fine, detailed painting” (gongbi 工筆) and “spontaneous expression” (xieyi 寫意). The gongbi painter starts by delineating the forms with fine lines and then adds color. By contrast, for the xieyi painter, the outlines are secondary, the ink or color being the primary mode of expression. A number of famous examples of hawk painting demonstrate these two basic types of painting.
Examples of gongbi hawk painting:
• The mural from the tomb of Li Chongrun 李重潤 (683–701).
• The hawk painting on the four-string pipa, Shosoin collection.
• Hawk paintings attributed to Song Emperor Huizong 宋徽宗, National Palace Museum.
• The painting The Hawk Pursuing the Pheasant (Ying zhu zhi) 鷹逐雉, (fig. 7) by Li Anzhong 李安忠 (fl. 1119–1162), Seattle Art Museum collection, Southern Song, painted ochre color surface.
• The hawk in the painting titled Tiger (Hua hu) 畫虎, attributed to the Yuan dynasty painter Gui Lizhen 歸厲真 (dates unknown) in the National Palace Museum collection, Taipei, Southern Song, painted on an ochre color surface.
• The painting The Hawk Pursuing the Melodious Laughing Thrush (Ying zhu huamei 鷹逐畫眉), by the early Yuan painter Wang Yuan 王淵 (fl. 1299–1366).
• The painting Hawk (Ying 鷹) by the Yuan painter Xue Jieweng 雪界翁 (ca. 14th century) and Zhang Shunzi 張舜咨 (fl. ca. mid-14th century) in the Palace Museum, Beijing, collection.
On the other hand, Lin Liang’s ink paintings of hawks were made by dipping a large brush into ink and painting the body and wings, a technique which was not seen earlier at the Yuan court or previously. If we compare Lin to Ming dynasty court painters’ flower-and-bird painting style, before Lin there was Bian Jingzhao 邊景昭, and after Lin Liang there was Lu Ji, who also used a carefree, uninhibited style to paint hawks. Lin Liang fits in between these two.
Returning to Xiao Haishan’s Two Hawks on a Juniper, Professor Richard Barnhart has argued, “In any case, this still scanty information perfectly fits the painting, which is done in the strong, calligraphic technique of bold, direct ink painting on silk that will come to be associated with Lin Liang. It was a style widely practiced from the mid-fifteenth century on.”Painters of the Great Ming: The Imperial Court and the Zhe School, 103. This “strong, calligraphic technique of bold, direct ink painting on silk” describes the Seattle painting perfectly. The plumage of the hawk is described by thin brushstrokes, and these outlines were later filled with color and thus are very close to the techniques common to the Yuan era. On the other hand, the small song bird in flight at the bottom of the painting is painted in a relatively simpler style. If we compare Xiao's small bird to a similar bird in Lin Liang’s well known painting Birds in Shrubs (Guanmu ji qin tujuan 灌木集禽圖卷) (fig. 8), they are similar. However, the quality of Lin Liang’s painting is superior to Xiao Haishan's.
From these examples it is clear that Xiao Haishan painted in the style of the Zhe school. More specifically, we are reminded of Lin Liang’s style—characterized as “with such force that it was like cursive script” and “free brushwork”—except that in Xiao’s painting this description applies to the juniper tree rather than the hawk. As for negative criticisms of the Zhe school of painting, the Ming dynasty critic Zhu Mouyin 朱謀垔 (dates unknown) summed them up in an entry titled Unorthodox Studies (Xie xue 邪學), in his Hua shi hui yao 畫史會要:
“Such painters as Zheng Dianxian (dates unknown), Zhang Fuyang (ca.1403–1490), Zhong Qinli (fl. 1465–1487), Jiang Sansong (dates unknown), Zhang Pingshan (1464–1538), Wang Haiyun (dates unknown), in every case are painters who are unorthodox. Their disciples display a crazy attitude, and are worthless.”Zhu Mouyin朱謀垔, Hua shi hui yao畫史會要, SKQS, 5.43b-44a.
如鄭顛仙、張復陽、鍾欽禮、蔣三松、張平山、汪海雲軰，皆畫家邪學，徒逞狂態者也，俱無足取。
How are we to interpret the two characters “kuang tai 狂態” (“crazy attitude”) as it applies to later Ming court paintings and Zhe school paintings? While all the examples cited by Zhu Mouyin are landscape paintings, in Two Hawks on a Juniper, is there anything in the depiction of the juniper that could be called a “crazy attitude”? In Chinese painting and calligraphy, the brush was used for the practical execution of dots and lines, and kuang—from the perspective of calligraphy—should be easy to understand as the abandonment of such constraints. Huaisu 懷素 (725–785), in his Autobiography (Zi xu tie 自敘帖), described his state of mind during the creative process: “When I am in a crazed state, I am free of worldly limits, when intoxicated I obtain Tathata.狂來輕世界；醉裏得真如.”Huaisu’s Autobiography is available at http://www.npm.gov.tw/zhtw/collection/selections_02.htm?docno=119&catno=17. Describing the moment when he sets his brush to paper he explains: “I suddenly give a quick shout three to five times, filling a wall from edge to edge with myriad on myriad of characters 忽然絕叫三五聲, 滿壁縱橫千萬字.” While shouting out, he cannot but be seen as crazy (kuang). He writes with such speed that he is able to make a multitude of characters.
Regarding this sort of extremely rapid writing, what was the stroke quality like? The Autobiography cites Dai Shulun 戴叔倫 (732–789), who also noted, “When the brush loaded with ink suddenly raced like galloping horses, the audience was speechless and could not track its movement 馳豪驟墨劇奔駟，滿座失聲看不及.” The sense of speed awed the viewer.
Returning to the Seattle scroll Two Hawks on a Juniper, when Xiao Haishan painted the branches and trunk, even the patterns of the bark and the contour lines exhibit a fast-paced rhythm. The intertwined branches dynamically appear to be moving and turning. The leaves at the tips of the branches also seem to quiver and shake. The bamboo branches, plum blossoms, and brambles here and there also seem to move in the wind.
This ability to express the ephemeral moment of movement is exactly what Zhang Libu 張禮部 (dates unknown) said of Huaisu: “[The characters demonstrate] the quickness of a snake and the powerful movement of a serpent, as though they are moving towards us; the sound of swirling winds and pouring rains [of their arrival] fill the hall 奔蛇走虺勢入座，驟雨旋風聲滿堂.”
The form of the old juniper tree in the Seattle scroll also gives this impression of movement, characteristic of the Zhe school painter. Moreover, the rock formation is composed of small “axe-cut” strokes to depict the uneven surface of the rocks. The strong contrast between dark ink washes and lighter sections of the rock formations is very similar to the rock formation at the bottom of Wang E’s 王諤 (fl. ca. 1488–1505) Leading the Donkey on the Bridge across a Stream (Xi qiao ce jian 溪橋策蹇), (fig. 9). Later painters, such as Yin Hong 殷宏 (dates unknown), Jiang Gao 蔣嵩 (fl. ca. 1465–1521), and Wang Zhao 汪肇 (fl. ca. between 15th and 16th centuries), also used such painting methods. Therefore, the Seattle painting also exhibits the feeling that has been said to describe the Zhe school in its later years “reveling in the curious and indulging in the strange; using the brush fearlessly and ink with force 好奇逞怪, 筆悍墨霸".
In conclusion, the Seattle painting can be dated securely to the latter half of the fifteenth century, as it is a vivid example of the stylistic transition from Lin Liang to later Zhe school painters. Interestingly, this application of bold brushwork seems to echo the duty of the Imperial Guard. Whether or not this style should be praised or denigrated as “crazy attitude,” its impact on later generations cannot be denied.
© 2013 by the Seattle Art Museum
Questions for thought
Answers
| Add an answerAdd Answer:
overview
Xiao Haishan
Quick Facts about the Artist
inscriptions and seals
essay
The organization of the painting academy within the Ming palace and the duties of court painters, though not equal to that of the Song period, was rather complex. Generally speaking, the painter's rank within the court was designated as belonging to a special unit of the Imperial Bodyguard which translated as the “Embroidered Uniform” (Jin yi wei 錦衣衛) and their assignments of work were generally in the Renzhi Hall 仁智殿, Wenhua Hall 文華殿, and the Wuying Hall 武英殿.
