Animal studies on Chinese export wares
C.A. Gibson-Hill, the Raffles Museum’s long-serving naturalist, published this concise study in 1955 examining the zoological accuracy of animal motifs on Chinese export porcelain held in Malayan collections. His central finding is that despite these wares being manufactured for the Southeast Asian market, the animals depicted are almost exclusively species native to the coastal provinces of southern and eastern China, reflecting the artists’ direct observation of local fauna rather than any accommodation to consumer demand.
Summary
Gibson-Hill begins by noting the well-documented practice of incorporating foreign elements—such as Arabic or Persian script—into Chinese export wares to suit the markets they served, and by the existence of forms like the kendi water vessel that appear to have been shaped specifically for export. He then turns to the animal motifs on blue and white wares, asking whether similar market-driven adaptation occurred in this domain. His answer, based on examination of pieces and sherds in the Raffles Museum and other Malayan collections, is a qualified no: the artists appear to have been “unwilling, or unable, to represent species not found in southern and eastern China” (p. 178). The animals are selected, as Sotherby had suggested, for their positions in Chinese mythology and folklore rather than for their relevance to the intended buyers.
The bulk of the article is a taxonomic inventory of the birds and mammals identifiable on the wares. Gibson-Hill demonstrates that the quality of rendering varies from highly stylised to “portraits of undoubted veracity,” and that in the best examples the forms are generic rather than species-specific, a limitation imposed by the economy of line and monochrome medium. He singles out two mammals for extended discussion: the tree-shrew (Tupaia glis), whose presence on a Raffles Museum dish is puzzling given its extremely limited range in China proper (Yunnan, Kwangsi, Hainan), and the apparently “tailless” monkey, which he identifies as most probably a captive Rhesus Macaque (Macaca mulatta) with its tail amputated—a practice well attested in Chinese sources and analogous to the docking of Kera tails in Malaya.
The article thus functions as a small but precise piece of art-historical zoology, using the naturalist’s taxonomic eye to resolve questions about the working methods of Chinese potters and the degree to which export production was responsive to foreign taste.
Key Findings
- The birds depicted on the wares include storks, egrets, herons, cranes, ducks, an eagle, small passerines (thrushes, finches, flycatchers, pipits, wagtails, nightingale), a white ibis, a cormorant, a pelican, the Ring-necked Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), the Swan Goose (Cygnopsis cygnoides), and a Brown Shrike—all typical of eastern Chinese avifauna (p. 178).
- The most frequently represented mammal is the Sika deer (Cervus sp.), to which may be added the tiger, a large-horned sheep, the beaver, a hare, one or more horse forms, a monkey or gibbon, and a tree-shrew of the genus Tupaia (pp. 178–179).
- No peacock, no pig (wild or domestic), and no certain dog or cat have been identified on any of the pieces examined (p. 180).
- The tree-shrew (Tupaia glis) depicted on a Raffles Museum dish is notable because the species penetrates China only as far north as Yunnan, southwestern Kwangsi, and Hainan Island, making its selection as a decorative motif unexplained by any known mythological or medicinal association (pp. 181–182).
- The “tailless” monkey, found on only two pieces (one from the Johore Lama trove, one from Kota Tinggi), is identified as most likely a Rhesus Macaque (Macaca mulatta) with a docked tail, the amputation being a documented Chinese practice for captive monkeys (pp. 182–183).
- The Eastern Peacock (Pavo muticus), though popular with Chinese artists in other media, does not appear to have been reproduced on export porcelain, despite its range extending from Burma through Siam to the Malay Peninsula (p. 179, n. 6).
Conclusion
Gibson-Hill’s definitive takeaway is that Chinese export potters, while accommodating foreign markets in certain respects (script, vessel form), maintained a firm commitment to depicting the animals of their own environment with a precision derived from direct observation. The absence of Southeast Asian species on wares destined for Southeast Asia is, in his view, the more striking and informative fact, revealing the limits of commercial adaptation in the artistic domain.
Context
- The study draws primarily on the Raffles Museum (National Museum of Singapore) collection and the Johore Lama trove, with references to the Kota Tinggi sherd collection.
- The article contributes to the small body of work applying natural-historical identification to Chinese export porcelain, complementing Sotherby’s earlier observations on the mythological significance of animal motifs.