AN IMPERIAL YELLOW-GROUND KESI ‘TWELVE SYMBOLS’ SEMI-FORMAL ‘DRAGON’ ROBE, JIFU QING DYNASTY, 19TH CENTURY

exquisitely woven with nine gold-thread 'five-clawed' long dragons grasping flaming pearls, four in profile clutching 'flaming pearls' amidst dense blue clouds, and shou characters in three different scripts, finely shaded pink and red bats soaring throughout, all above turbulent waves accented with ruyi heads and auspicious emblems and an undulating lishui stripe in fine shaded tones of red, grey, yellow and blue, the Twelve Symbols of imperial authority arranged in three groups of four starting with the sun, moon, constellation and rock around the neck; the fu symbol, axe head, pair of small dragons and a golden pheasant around the middle of the robe; and the sacrificial vessels, water plant, flames and grain above the wave, set with a dark blue collar and cuffs with further dragons and yellow striped sleeves

Jon Eric Riis, Atlanta, Georgia.

The overall condition is very good. The colours are bright and vibrant and appears to have not faded. There are a few minor loose sections of the textile at the point where the colours of the kesi weave changes - which is expected for kesi. There are a few sections where the splits have been repaired with small stitches. On the lower front right side near the dragon, there is a 15 x 10 cm horizontal patch that has been repaired with another piece of kesi. On the back right side near the opening vent, there is a 4 cm section that has split between the colour change of the kesi. There is also another section that has split in the waves the front right side near the side vent. There is a 1 cm x 3 cm section under the front left armpit that has been patched. There are a few very light stains. The lower sleeve extensions appear to possibly be later replacements (the yellow sleeve extensions have 2 sections - one closer to the shoulders, which is probably original, and one section closer to the cuffs that may be replacements). The weave on the shoulders appear to be in quite good condition with only a few minor loose sections where the colours change. The lining looks possibly later replaced. The buttons and buttonholes might be later replacements from the 19th century.
"In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective, qualified opinion. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."

Longpao: Dragon Robes
John E. Vollmer

Robes decorated with dragons are the quintessential Qing dynasty garments. They are the most collected, best preserved, the subject of numerous exhibitions and publications that discuss their iconography, their social and cultural significance, as well as their dating. They were the dress of imperial government—not its ritual and ceremonial functions, but its civil administration. As a result, they became supreme significant social markers representing access to power. The right to wear such garments was dependent on rank and status.

Throughout history, the Qing Manchus were keenly aware that the image they projected was especially evocative and powerful. From the outset of Manchu ambitions to rule the Chinese empire, dress was an essential tool to communicate legitimacy and heritage. During the early sixteenth century, the Manchus literally wrote themselves into existence by creating origin myths, divine ancestors and by developing a distinctive form of dress. In 1636 the chief of the Aisin Goro clan, who later became emperor of the Qing dynasty, warned the Manchu to avoid adopting the traditional dress of the Han-Chinese and to be vigilant of their heritage as equestrian archers.¹ These principles were reaffirmed in 1650 by the Shunzhi emperor (r. 1644-1661) in a decree concerning the hierarchy of Qing dress.² Distinctive shapes and trimmings embodied Manchu identity, and eventually affected the dress of all populations in the widespread empire.

The source for the Manchu dragon robes can be traced to the rulers of the previous dynasty. Dragon patterns had decorated Chinese imperial dress since at least the tenth century.³ When the Manchu began to unite, threatening China’s northern borders, Ming emperors, using an age-old strategy, attempted to divide and conqueror by making selected Manchu leaders dependents of the Ming court, granting them princely rank and entitlements, including the privilege of wearing dragon-patterned silk fabrics.⁴ However, as the laws concerning such entitlements were poorly enforced, the policy ultimately failed. By the time the Manchu swept across the wall and entered the Forbidden City in 1644, they were organized and ready to govern. Dragon-patterned robes helped transform their image in the eyes of the Han-Chinese people from barbarian chieftains to legitimate rulers of the Chinese state.

The earliest dragon-patterned silk yardages sent to the Manchu contrasted densely patterned areas of dragon designs with undecorated fabric. This style influenced the construction and decoration of Qing lifu, or ritual dress, throughout the dynasty. Once they were in control, however, the Manchu were quick to adopt the style of integrated dragon patterns covering the entire surface of the garment, which came into fashion during the late Ming dynasty, for a new category of semi-formal dress.  It is these designs, emphasizing a unified view of the terrestrial realm over which the emperor held sway that led to the development and popularity of Qing longpao.

Longpao were classified as jifu, literally “auspicious dress,” that was worn for occasions celebrating the power and authority of the Qing government. The construction of these robes emphasized multiple fabrics and characteristic features: loop and toggle button fastenings, curved front overlap closing to the right, long tapered sleeves with extensions of contrasting fabric, flaring matixiu, or horse hoof cuffs, deep vents front and back for men and at the sides for women that imitated horse-riding garb. A range of conspicuously displayed accessories further identified Manchu dress. Among them, a hat, a surcoat, stiff collar, necklace and the complex of items suspended from a jifudai, or ceremonial court belt, that included pairs of drawstring pouches and ceremonial kerchiefs, as well as a knife, a flint and a case of toothpicks.

While the earliest Qing longpao followed the Ming pattern of a single or a pair of dragons extending the full length of the coat,⁵ from the early-eighteenth century this configuration changed. Manchu dragon robes began displaying a design of nine dragons: four radiating from the neck on the chest, back, and shoulders. These pointed to the direction of the cardinal points on the compass when the wearer was aligned with the strictly north-south orientation of the Forbidden City. Four additional dragons on the skirts—two at the front and two at the back—indicated the intermediate directions. A ninth dragon, unseen, was placed on the inner flap. This organization of elements embodied an ancient concept of ideal land division, as envisioned by Confucius, called jingtian or ‘well-field system’.⁶ The name jingtian derives from the Chinese character for wellhead—written with a pair of horizontal lines crossing a pair of vertical lines. The nine sections delineated by this mark symbolized an idealized relationship between farmers who tilled the land and the lord who owned it. Eight fields protect the ninth by encircling it. The four sections that share adjacent borders with the central field, if viewed as occupying the cardinal points of the compass, establish an orderly balance and provide a first line of defense against external threat. Those fields occupying intermediate points on the compass create a second ring of defense. In Chinese tradition, the number nine holds special meaning. The product of three threes, nine has a long association with the emperor. Courtiers were graded into jiu pin zhong zheng zhi, or nine ranks; the jiu xi, or nine bestowments, were rewards given by the emperor to worthy courtiers and the zhu lian jiu zu, or nine familial punishments, were extracted from capital offenders. 

Of the group of imperial robes offered in this sale, two brocaded silk satin reflect one of the earliest stages in the redesign of Ming iconography affected during the reign of the Kangxi emperor (r. 1661-1722). The generous space devoted to the dragons, differentiated by size, contrasting those facing the viewer with those shown in three-quarter view, gives the salmon-ground robe a dramatic presence (fig. 1, lot 3090). It belongs to a group, numbering 20 to 30 examples in various international museum collections, that were first published in the 1940s by Alan Priest as dating from the Kangxi period.⁷ Despite the pastel tones of some of the backgrounds and the fact that all of these robes are tailored in male style, Priest nonetheless identified them as consort robes. Stylistically, the tailoring and construction of these single fabric dragon robes reflect practices used by the Ming dynasty court.

At the moment we have no clear idea how they were used. The black robe (fig. 2, lot 3087) and at least one other, now in the Museum of Fine Arts Boston collection, are stamped with chops of a theater company on their linings.⁸  Structurally all of these brocaded silk satins employ the same weaving construction.  Many share the same cartoon, but exhibit a range of quality in the actual execution of the weaving, suggesting a limited number of looms or workshops, and perhaps a number of different weavers.  Regardless of individual idiosyncrasies, these fabrics are of remarkable quality and can be compared to early eighteenth century palace furnishings and other textiles ordered by the Imperial Household Department for use by the emperor.

During the first few decades of the eighteenth century, longpao constructions and their dragon decoration underwent a number of significant changes. During the reign of the Yongzheng emperor (r. 1723–1735) cuffs and the facings at the neck and upper edges of the shaped front overlap were most commonly made of fabric in a contrasting colour to the ground fabric of the coat. The discrepancy in size between front-facing and three-quarter view dragons was reduced, then eliminated, creating more space for the cloud-filled firmament, which becomes strewn with additional lucky symbols like the bats and eight Buddhist emblems on the Qianlong-period brown kesi, or silk-tapestry woven, robe in this sale (fig. 5, lot 3086). 

In the second half of the eighteenth century superimposing layers of ornament became a popular decorative strategy. It brought new levels of sophistication to the design and the readings of symbolic content. The entire background of the embroidered blue satin robe features a diaper design of sihe ruyi, or four heads of the wish-granting sceptre, that can be read as “may wishes be granted in the four directions.” (fig. 4, lot 3085). In addition to the five coloured clouds and dragons that are the principal decoration of the robe, there are arrangements of bats (wishes for happiness), flowers of the months (i.e. the whole year) and emblems of the eight Daoist immortals. The lishui, or standing water, border at the hem has also increased in depth as the custom of wearing a three-quarter-length surcoat over the longpao becomes fixed in court etiquette in the 1760s.

The surcoat was a new type of Manchu overgarment. For men this dark blue overcoat was front-opening and extended to just below the knees, exposing the hem area of the robe beneath. Further, it had wrist-length sleeves, which revealed the lower sleeves and the horse hoof cuffs of the longpao and probably accounts for why the sleeve extensions on many of these semiformal robes are made of a different solid coloured fabric. All members of the court from the emperor down to his court officials of lower rank wore insignia badges on the front and back of the upper part of the coat that identified their position at court.

Dragon insignia were assigned to male members of the imperial family according to their status. Dragons with five-claws called “long” were used exclusively for the robes and badges of the emperor. They outranked the five-clawed dragons called “mang”, which were identical in appearance to the long dragon and only distinguished by name. These were assigned to the emperor’s sons, imperial princes of the first rank and his sons, and imperial princes of the second rank. The four-clawed mang dragon was assigned to the emperor’s grandsons, great-grandsons, and great-great-grandsons, also to imperial princes of the third rank down to nobles of the seventh rank. Nobles of the eighth and ninth rank and below, as well as court officials did not wear dragon badges, although their longpao were invariably decorated with five-clawed “mang.”⁹

In 1748 the Qianlong emperor (r. 1736-1795) initiated a review of Qing court dress regulation. The commission was headed by the emperor’s uncle, Prince Zhuang (1695-1767) and included representatives of five of the six government boards, compilers from the Hanlin Academy, a writer and staff of eight copyists and at least four artists. This action followed a long tradition in China of rectifying the imperial wardrobe by a new dynasty. The commission examined all previous Qing dress regulations and developed a strategy for dress and the ceremonial trappings of the court. After a decade of work, the commission presented an illustrated catalogue of all the ceremonial trappings of the imperial court in 1759. Entitled Huangchao liqi tushi, (literally ‘August Dynasty Ritual Vessels Illustrated,’ but usually referred to as The Regulations for the Ceremonial Paraphernalia of the [Qing] Dynasty), these edicts were the most comprehensive sumptuary legislation ever to be issued by the Dragon Throne. Publication of the edict in a woodcut-illustrated edition occurred in 1766.¹⁰

The Regulations brought the cosmic purpose of imperial rule into sharp focus. The force of court coat iconography, with its carefully arranged pattern of dragons amid clouds above the universal ocean washing against the earth mountain, quickly transcended the political and ethnic priorities of imperial government to become universal symbols of the empire. It confirmed the importance of a new type of robe, the jifu or longpao, as semi-formal court wear and stipulated the occasions when the emperor would wear it additionally ornamented with the shier zhangwen, or The Twelve Ancient Symbols of Imperial Authority.

The Regulations reconsidered the issue of the Twelve Symbols that were historically reserved for the emperor's exclusive use. These symbols relate to the sacral role of the emperor and can be traced back to the Han dynasty (206 B.C–A.D. 220). The Shunzhi emperor soundly rebuffed the Han-Chinese official who petitioned the throne to adopt the traditional officiating robes and hats worn for state sacrifices in 1651, as an insult to Manchu national identity.¹¹ However, parts of the set of Twelve Symbols began to appear on imperial robes by the beginning of the eighteenth century.¹²

The review of court dress determined the placement of Twelve Symbols on the emperor’s most formal robes, as well as on his semi-formal attire that were seen by all those who conferred with him on government affairs. The symbols were divided between the upper and lower parts of the garment in a fashion not unlike that practiced since ancient times. Eight were placed on the upper part of the robe. The first four symbols—the sun, moon, constellation, and rock—were placed on the left and right shoulders, chest and back of the dragon robe respectively. These emblems referred to the celestial and terrestrial powers to which the emperor made sacrifice during the year. The sacrificial altars themselves were aligned with the cardinal points of the compass: Heaven (represented by the constellation of three linked stars) to the south, the sun to the east, the moon to the west, and earth (represented by the mountain) to the north. They matched the position of the same four symbols on the emperor’s robe when he stood with his back to the north, facing due south.

The second set of four symbols were positioned on the chest and back of the just above the waist area of the robe: at the front were the fu, or a pair of mirror image characters, and an axe head; in corresponding positions on the back, a pair of long dragons, and the ‘flowery creature,’ which is usually shown as a golden pheasant. These four symbols relate to the four major astronomical events of the year: the fu symbol, sometimes translated as ‘symbol of distinction’, can also be linked to the homophone character for ‘return,’ a term used in connection with the Winter Solstice, when days begin to grow longer. The paired dragons are placed diametrically opposite the fu symbol. The two dragons represent the two nodes of the moon’s orbit where it crosses the path of the sun and the ‘turning’ of the year at the Summer Solstice, when days start to grow shorter. If viewed from above, the axe head and golden pheasant are located equidistant from the markers of the solstices. The axe, traditionally the symbol of the emperor’s power over life and death, occupies the position of the Autumn Equinox, when in ancient times all executions took place. The golden pheasant marks spring, sometimes called the Vernal Equinox, linked to the appearance of the Red Bird Constellation in the late spring night sky. Four more symbols appear just above the border near the hem. At the front are the temple cups and aquatic grass; at the back, grains of millet and flames, which correlate with four of the elements of wuxing, Five Phases:¹³ metal, water, wood, and fire. These symbols align with the four symbols on the upper part of the garment. Temple cups below the axe head are linked to the Autumn Equinox; aquatic grass represent the ascendant element water during the Winter Solstice and relate to the fu symbol. Grains of millet, symbolizing spring and wood, align with the golden pheasant of the Vernal Equinox; and flames representing fire, are related to the dragons marking the Summer Solstice.¹⁴ The mountain at the back of the neck symbolizing earth, the fifth element, as the centre of the compass, was the ideal formulated by the Confucian philosopher Mencius (370–290 B.C.). The emperor was to “stand at the center and stabilize the four quarters.”¹⁵

The yellow-ground tapestry-woven silk and metal-wrapped thread emperor’s robe dating from the late Qianlong period (1736-1795) emphasized the Twelve Symbols by using full colour on what is a very restrained yellow, blue, red and gold palette for the body of the robe (fig. 5, lot 3086). Tiny bats in shades of red and shou, or long life, characters in blue and red carry intimate wishes for happiness and long life. The lishui border at the hem is work in “five colours” as stipulated by the Regulations.

In contrast, the pattern of the blue ground emperor’s robe of the Jiaqing period (1796-1820) is worked entirely in couched gold- and silver-wrapped threads, following a style initiated during the reign of the Jiaqing emperor’s father (fig. 6, lot 3089). While somewhat at odds with the Regulations that stipulate colours for the robe’s decoration, this garment was undoubtedly commissioned for a specific use in a state ritual. The annual cycle of sacrifices at altars outside with walls of the Forbidden City required the emperor to wear ritual attire of an assigned colour. He wore blue robes at Temple Heaven and its open air Round Mound to mark the Winter Solstice, and in the spring when offering prayers at the Hall of Prayer for Good Harvests and again when making offering for rain in the summer. Each of these ceremonies required three days of abstinence and fasting before the day of the sacrifice.¹⁶ During the fasting period, the emperor wore semi-formal dress of the same colour as the sacrificial robe. The blue Twelve Symbol jifu in this sale has a silk lining of the type used in the spring and would have been appropriate for the fast preceding ceremonies at The Hall of Prayer for Good Harvest.

Until the end of the Qing dynasty in 1911, the Regulations remained the standard on which all court attire was based. The embroidered blue robe dates from the Guangxu period (1875-1908) (fig. 7, lot 3091). The lishui is realized as a series of straight diagonal bands, without the refinement of undulating contours seen in other robes of the period. The field is embellished with bats carrying beribboned wan, or 10,000, characters symbolizing endless happiness and cranes and gold shou characters symbolizing long life.  In addition, there are emblems of the eight Daoist immortals, some of which have been partially obscured by a side seam that changes the original designed flared of the coat. The blue colour, the official Qing dynastic colour, would have been appropriate for all who were entitled to wear a dragon robe. The dragons are depicted reaching for the pearl of wisdom, as opposed to grasping it as the case for the emperor’s robes. 

By the end of the Qing dynasty, clothes made for Han, Manchu or other nationalities within the empire were made like Manchu style robes with loop and toggle fastenings and a front overlap. In turn Han-Chinese aesthetics influenced the making of these robes. So ingrained were these robes to the identity of Qing China that they in fact continue to signal "Chineseness." The lasting success of the Manchu imperial enterprise rested on a series of deliberate and decisive actions that first remade the Manchu people into a unified, disciplined military society that could focus its energies on conquest, initially in northern Asia, and later the vast Ming dynasty empire.

The principal Manchu clan group consciously crafted a multilingual and multinational state to counteract assimilation by overwhelming numbers of Han Chinese that had defeated all alien conquerors in the past. Initially they recruited Mongol tribesmen, Koreans and Han Chinese settlers from their own homeland on the Liaoning peninsula and adjacent regions north of the Great Wall. Eventually Inner Asian Mongols, Turkestan Muslims, Tibetan, northern Asian tribal groups, as well as Han Chinese and its minorities were brought under the control of the Qing imperial government. By the eighteenth century, Qing emperors ruled over the largest land mass ever controlled by an imperial government.

Although the old Chinese imperial system passed into history in 1911, the legacy of Manchu notions of nationality and ethnicity embodied in the longpao continue to affect our perceptions and reactions of China in the twenty-first century.

 

¹ Zong Fengying, Unpublished lecture given at Christie’s New York, 17th March 2008.
² Many scholars have this interpreted incident to explain why early Qing dynasty emperor’s robes do not display the ancient Twelve Symbols of Imperial Authority. See: Schuyler V.R. Cammann, China’s Dragon Robes, New York, 1952, pp. 87. Shizu Zhang huangdi shilu, 54.18b. cited in Wakeman, The Great Enterprise: The Manchu Reconstruction of Imperial Order in Seventeenth-Century China, Berkeley, 1975, vol. 2, p. 75.
³ James C.Y. Watt and Anne E. Wardwell, When Silk was Gold: Central Asian and Chinese Textiles, New York, 1997, pp. 116-117.
⁴ Bosen Wu, Guoxiang Li, and Chang Yang, Ming shi lu lei zuan, Wuhan Shi, 1992, 12.14b and 36.5b. Cited by Cammann, op.cit., pp. 23-24.
⁵ John E. Vollmer, Ruling from the Dragon Throne: Costume of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), Berkeley, 2002, pp. 94-96.
⁶ Jingtian, or the well-field system is described by Mengzi (372-289 BC), known in the West as Mencius, See Book of Mencius, book 3, part 1, chapter 3. In James Legge, trans. The Confucian Classics, Hong Kong, 1960, vol. 2, pp. 243-245. For historical context see Cho-yun Hsu, ‘The Spring and Autumn Period’, The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 BC, Loewe, Michael and Edward L. Shaughnessy, eds., 2nd edition, Cambridge, 1999, pp. 576-580. As an interpretation for Manchu court dress see Vollmer, op.cit., pp. 103-107.
⁷ Alan Priest, Costumes from the Forbidden City, New York, 1945, pp. 6-9.
⁸ See Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, accession number 02.48 constructed of comparable brocade on a light blue satin ground, and probably later in date because of its contrasting facings and cuffs. This object was purchased from Yamanaka and Co., who reportedly acquired it in China from a source that reported this and some five other robes in the collection came from the imperial chapel and were of the Qianlong period.
⁹ The distinction between types of dragons used on imperil robes is frequently an issue of semantics and causes great confusion. Five-clawed dragons called ‘long’ were reserved for the highest-ranking members of the imperial clan. All others who were entitled to wear dragons used ‘mang.’ This dragon is frequently identified as having four-claws on each foot; however for ranking members of the imperial clan, such as imperial princes, the mang were depicted with five-claws, making them indistinguishable from ‘long’ save for the name. See Cammann, op.cit., pp. 15, 17, 31-2; Zong Fengying, Heavenly Splendour: The Edrina Collection of Ming and Qing Imperial Costumes, Hong Kong, 2008, pp. 1-9. 
¹⁰ Margaret Medley, The Illustrated Regulations for Ceremonial Parphernalia of the Ch’ing Dynasty, London, 1982; Gary Dickinson and Linda Wrigglesworth, Imperial Wardrobe, Berkeley, 2002, pp. 14-30.
¹¹ See footnote 2, above.
¹² Palace Museum, Beijing, accession number Gu45187. See, Yan and Fang, The Splendors of Imperial Costume: Qing Court Attire from the Beijing Palace Museum [Tianchao yiguan: Gugong bowuyuan cang Qingdai gongting fushi jingpinzhan], Beijing, 2008, no. 28, pp. 52-53.
¹³ Peng Yoke Ho, Li, Qi and Shu: An Introduction to Science and Civilization in China, New York, 2000, p.16.
¹⁴ This discussion is adapted from the work of Jacqueline Simcox as cited in John E. Vollmer and Jacqueline Simcox, Emblems of Empire: Selections from the Mactaggart Art Collection, Edmonton, 2009, pp. 9-10, 21.
¹⁵ Mencius, Menzi [Discourses of Mencius], In The Chinese Classics II: The Works of Mencius. James Legge, trans., Oxford, 1893-95. (Reprint New York, 1970), Book 7, ch. XXV.7, p. 482.
¹⁶ Yan and Fang, op.cit., no. 18, p. 40.