AN EXTREMELY RARE AND LARGE PAIR OF BRONZE FIGURES OF DAOIST OFFICIALS, MING DYNASTY, 16TH / 17TH CENTURY

Collection of Vilhelm Meyer (1878-1934).

Collection of William Boyce Thompson (1869-1930), acquired in Beijing, 1917, and thence by descent.

來源

偉賀慕•馬易爾 (1878-1934) 收藏

William Boyce Thompson (1869-1930) 收藏，1917年得於北京，此後家族傳承

It is extremely rare to find such life-size standing figures in bronze, particularly Ming dynasty (1368-1644) bronze figures of officials. Bronze statues are more commonly known in a religious context and are then of much smaller size and often in a seated position. The present figures are also exceptional for their sculptural excellence and naturalistic portrayal. The sculptor artfully conveyed their spirit of benevolence and serenity, especially noticeable in the modeling of the softened features and dignified expressions. The skill of the sculptor is further patent in the way the clothing is depicted. There is a sense of movement in the drapery of the long flowing robes and voluminous sleeves, while the rich texture of the cloth is fully palpable as a result of the exquisite rendering of the embroidered motifs.

Such attire represented the typical dress code for civil officials of high rank. Following the sumptuary laws of 1391, which regulated Ming dynasty dress, the classical Chinese clothing traditions of the Tang (618-907) and Song (960-1279) dynasties were revived. Tang and Song official costumes themselves can be traced even further back, to the Han dynasty (206 BC-AD 220). The long robe with wide sleeves, the sash embellished with beaded jewelry, the rectangular office plaque across the chest and the hand-carried tabula or hu were all part of Han dynasty court apparel. One can, therefore, find a close similarity between traditional attires of Chinese court officials over many centuries. Nowhere can this be observed as clearly as on the larger-than-life stone figures of civil officials lining the spirit roads leading to their emperors’ mausoleums. Despite their stylistic differences, the figures look very much alike, see Ann Paludan, The Chinese Spirit Road, New Haven and London, 1991, pl. 142 a Tang example, pls 167- 8; two Song examples, pls 202, 205, 213, 228 and 230; several Ming examples. The last Ming example is probably the one illustrated in full length in Zhongguo meishu quanji: Diaosu bian [Complete series on Chinese art: Sculpture section], 6: Yuan Ming Qing diaosu [Yuan, Ming and Qing sculptures], Beijing, 1988, pl. 128, together with another example of a Ming civil servant, pls 124-5.

The hu or tabula, now missing in the hands of the present figures, symbolized high office and were often made out of ivory. The specific function is explained in the Former Han dynasty Book of Rites (Liji) as an official tool for writing down the emperor’s orders during audiences.

Only one closely related bronze figure, attributed to the Ming dynasty, appears to be recorded. It is of the same size and stands in a similar frontal position, but holds both hands differently and lacks the lifelike facial expression of the present examples, see the exhibition catalogue The Crucible of Compassion and Wisdom. Jin tong fo zaoxiang tezhan tulu / Special Exhibition Catalog of the Buddhist Bronzes from the Nitta Group Collection at the National Palace Museum, Taipei, 1987, pl. 122. Compare also a standing bronze figure of smaller size representing the Duke of Zhou (r. 1042 BC-1035 BC), similarly attributed to the Ming dynasty, included in the exhibition Guan miao guan jiao. Shanxishengguan cang daojiao wenwu / Ancient Taoist Art from Shanxi Province, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 2003, cat. no. 32.

Similar headdresses to those worn by the present figures can be seen in paintings of famous Ming officials, see the exhibition catalogue Confucius. A l’aube de l’humanisme Chinois, Musée Guimet, Paris 2003, cat. nos 55-58, together with a related bonnet, found in the tomb of Zhu Tan (1370-89), son of the Hongwu emperor (r. 1368-1398), at Jiulongshan, and now in the Shandong Provincial Museum at Jinan, cat. no. 83.

Vilhelm Meyer (1878-1934) was born in Denmark and settled in Shanghai in 1902. He was a founding partner of Andersen, Meyer & Co., a Danish engineering firm that imported Western technology as a means to encourage industrial development in 1900s China. The company’s success was assured in 1907 when it gained exclusive rights to represent General Electric in China. Meyer and his wife Kristen Bramsen were great admirers of Chinese art and culture, amassing a varied and impressive collection.

明代大型銅製人物造像非常稀少，如真人大小一般的例子更實屬難得。銅像多以宗教人物為題材，大多尺寸較小，並多見坐像。此對文官立像尺寸巨大，風格自然寫實，盡展工匠技術純熟。其人物面部表情刻畫柔和莊重，自然流露出仁慈內斂、寧靜平和的神韻。觀其人物服飾，上著褐，下著裙，外罩帔，長裙大袖，衣擺層次分明，以系帶系結，頭戴玄冠，足穿靴，以細節體現工匠精湛技藝。

此類衣著風格當屬典型明朝高級文官服飾。明洪武十六年，始定冠冕制度，至洪武二十六年時又做過補充修改。明制取法唐宋，唐宋則源襲於漢。長服寬袖，佩綬，持笏，戴冠冕，皆屬漢朝官服制式。中國冠冕之制，自漢代以來歷代沿襲，源遠流長。參考歷代皇陵神道兩側之文官石像，如見一唐例，錄安•帕盧丹，《The Chinese Spirit Road》，紐黑文及倫敦，1991年，圖版142；另見兩宋例，圖版167-8；以及數明例，圖版202、205、213、228及230。上述最後之明例應同錄於《中國美術全集•雕塑編6：元明清雕塑》，北京，1988年，圖版128，同書另見一明例，圖版124-5。

本品兩尊人物像原手持笏板，現已遺失。《禮記》有記載，笏板為君臣朝廷上紀錄君命或旨意之用，按品第分別用玉、象牙或竹製成。

相類明代巨型銅文官像目前應僅見一極近例，尺寸及姿態皆與本品相同，唯手勢不同，面部表情亦不如本品精細，錄《金銅佛造像特展圖錄》，國立故宮博物院，台北，1987年，圖版122。另比一明代銅周公立像，尺寸略小，錄《觀妙觀徼：山西省館藏道敎文物》，香港大學美術館，香港，2003年，編號32。

相似頭冠亦可見於明代文官畫像，例見展覽圖錄《Confucius. A l'aube de l'humanisme Chinois》，吉美博物館，巴黎，2003年，編號55-58，同書另見一類似頭冠，出土於九龍山洪武帝之子朱檀之墓，現藏山東省博物館，編號83。

偉賀慕•馬易爾（1878-1934）出生於丹麥，後於1902年遷居上海。馬易爾先生為安德生-馬易爾公司（慎昌洋行）的創始合夥人之一。該公司在1900年代將西方工程技術引進中國，為中國帶來了科技上的進步。1907年，該公司取得通用電氣在中國的獨家代理權，於中國市場取得了巨大的成功。馬易爾先生與太太吉斯騰•白慕申均醉心於中國藝術及文化，所蒐集的中國藝術品不僅品類多元且精美稀珍，實屬難得。