CHINA
differed in some respects from its predecessor, and to which Western interpreters of Chinese history apply the term "porcelain." According to this theory, the manufacture of pottery commenced in China B.C. 2698, and that of porcelain between 202 B.C. and 88 A.D. It is to be observed, however, that among Chinese writers themselves some confusion exists on this subject. Julien reflects their bewilderment. Of four ideographs each translated "porcelain" by him, the first, tao, is used sometimes generically for all keramic wares, sometimes in the sense of pottery alone; the second, yao, signifies anything stoved or fired, and has no more specific signification than "ware;" the third, ki, simply means utensil, and is applicable to stone, iron or pottery; and the fourth, tsu, is written in two ways, the latter of which, according to some scholars (whose dictum is open to much doubt), was originally employed to designate porcelain proper, though both subsequently came to be used in that sense. When the fact is recalled that even among Western authors it is a common habit to employ the word "porcelain" in reference to baked and glazed vessels, whether translucid or opaque, there is no difficulty in supposing that Chinese writers were at least equally inaccurate. As for M. Julien's nomenclature, the impossibility of relying implicitly on its evidence is shown by the fact that, speaking of a so-called "porcelain" manufactured by the elder of two brothers (Chang), who flourished under the Sung dynasty (960-1277), he says that it was made of "une argile brune"; that a variety of the Chûn ware (also of the Sung dynasty) which he equally describes as "porcelain," was of "une argile jaune et sablonneuse;" and that in other instances the pâte of his so-called
6
