Comparative and Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Chinese and Korean Court Documentary Painting in the Eighteenth Century By Sooa McCormick Submitted to the graduate degree program in Art History and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________________ Chairperson Marsha Haufler ________________________________ Amy McNair ________________________________ Sherry Fowler ________________________________ Maya Stiller ________________________________ Daniel Stevenson Date Defended: 04/25/2014 ii The Dissertation Committee for Sooa McCormick certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Comparative and Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Chinese and Korean Court Documentary Painting in the Eighteenth Century ________________________ Chairperson: Marsha Haufler Date approved: 04/25/2014 iii ABSTRACT This dissertation is the fruit of cross-cultural and comparative research on Chinese and Korean court documentary painting, a genre that depicted important state rituals, court ceremonies and political events taking place within and beyond the palace complexes. In spite of the historical and artistic interconnections between these court-documentary traditions, previous scholarship has focused only on one court or the other. Thus, my study aims to identify the distinctive strands of Chinese and Korean pictorial traditions and practices in the production and consumption of court documentary paintings. It also traces intercultural exchanges of ideas, artifacts, and practices and their contributions to the development of new pictorial themes and styles. This investigation concentrates on the reigns of the Kangxi 康熙 (r. 1661-1722), Yongzheng 雍正 (r. 1723-35), and Qianlong 乾隆 (r. 1736-95) emperors of the Qing dynasty of China and those of Kings Yeongjo 영조 (r. 1724-76) and Jeongjo 정조 (r. 1776-1800) of the Joseon kingdom of Korea. Under these eighteenth-century monarchs, both China and Korea enjoyed political stability, economic prosperity, and cultural diversity. With the strong patronage of these rulers, the courts of these early-modern East Asian states became the centers of intellectual and artistic innovation, inspired in part by imported ideas and practices and in part by the existing pictorial traditions of their respective states. Court documentary paintings sponsored by Qing and Joseon rulers developed strikingly similar themes, including the rulers’ ritual activities and outings. The shared themes in eighteenth-century court documentary paintings were far from coincidental. In iv addition to the increasingly frequent exchanges of diplomatic missions and material goods between China and Korea, which existed prior to the eighteenth century, a single, overarching idea contributed to the development of this pictorial genre in the eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon courts. Literally translated as Central Florescence, Zhonghua 中華 (meaning civilization, limited to that of the Han Chinese) was the shared political vision between the Qing and Joseon ruling houses. The desire to claim possession of Zhonghua, or the center of civilization, played a pivotal role in the development of the rulers’ ritual activities and outings and motivated the production of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court-documentary paintings that highlighted those events. Thus, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary painting is a consummate example of an art form that flourished across borders. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Over the course of my graduate work and dissertation writing at the University of Kansas, I have benefited from the insightful advice, editorial prowess, and continuing support of my advisor, Marsha Haufler. Prof. Haufler’s indispensable advice and guidance has been like a Zen Buddhist master’s wise admonitions leading the disciple to follow the path of enlightenment. Prof. Sherry Fowler always encouraged me to explore East Asian art through cross-cultural and comparative perspectives, an emphasis, which has developed into my research specialty. Prof. Amy McNair, my role model as a teacher and researcher, has always been supportive and expressed confidence in my capability to bring this project to completion. I greatly benefited from Prof. Daniel Stevenson’s classes that helped me conceptualize the big picture of my dissertation. I am deeply grateful to Prof. Burglind Jungmann for her valuable insights, especially since my dissertation topic developed directly out of one of the questions she gave me in my doctoral comprehensive examination. Also, I would like to offer my thanks to Prof. Maya Stiller who shared her insights not only on this project but also my professional development. Finally, I want to express my gratitude to my former advisers Profs. Han Jung-hee and Angela F. Howard who planted seeds in my heart to pursue this fascinating field. The Art History department at the University of Kansas has been an incredibly supportive environment for me over the years. Throughout my graduate program, I have been given the opportunity to teach a range of courses, an experience that has allowed me to hone my teaching skills. Mark Olson has been a mentor and friend since I first came to the University of Kansas. His insightful humor often made my day. And I am also vi grateful to Maud Humphrey who patiently provided answers to any and all my questions and joyfully shared her wisdom with me. I wish she could be here to see me completing my dissertation. I also thank Vicky Doll at the East Asian Library for her help in ordering critically important materials for my research. The completion of my dissertation was also facilitated by the Korea Foundation Grant for Graduate Studies, which provided funding for me to focus on dissertation writing for two consecutive years, and the Hall Center Summer Research Award from KU, which enabled me to conduct preliminary research in South Korea and Taiwan. Also, the generous support of the Taiwan Fellowship of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs allowed me to spend an extended period of time in Taipei collecting and reviewing archival materials in the collection at the National Library of Taiwan and the National Palace Museum. I offer my deepest gratitude to Professor Jane Ju from the National Chengchi University for having recommended me for the Taiwan Fellowship and for having introduced me to eminent scholars including Prof. Chen Pao-chen. During my research residency in Taipei, Professors Wang Cheng-hua and Lin Li-chiang both shared their excitement about my project and helped me to make contacts at the National Palace Museum. Also, I would like to thank the Kyujanggak Institute of Korean Studies for inviting me the Korean Studies Summer Workshop. Through dialogues with colleagues I met at this workshop, I gained confidence in the direction of my dissertation research. I want to thank to all the scholars and curators and museum staff at numerous universities and museums who welcomed me and allowed me to study their collections. Many thanks to the National Palace Museum, the National Museum of Korea, Korea vii University Museum, and Gyemyong University Museum for providing me a valuable opportunity to examine works relevant to this project. I want to express my gratitude toward the friends, whom I met and cultivated friendship with at the University of Kansas and Hongik University. My East Asian art history colleagues have always offered sincere moral support and encouragement. In particular, my friend and colleague Lee Hong-joo has generously shared her insights on recent Korean art history research and sent me newest publications relevant to my dissertation. I also offer my special thanks to my friends Yoonmi Nam and Eric Conrad for their loving support and friendship. I thank my mother for having introduced me to the love of art, history and philosophy. Her continuing quest for knowledge has been a true inspiration for me as a scholar and a mother. Also, I would like to thank my parents-in-law who were willing to leave their beautiful home in Montana to spend time with us in Lawrence at many critical moments to help care for my daughter and allow me focus on finishing my dissertation writing. I am blessed to have them in my life. I am thankful for my husband, Evan, his loving encouragement, his willingness to read endless versions of chapter drafts and his courage to edit them, and for being both mother and father to our daughter Yoonji while her Umma (Mom) has been busy. His incredible patience, love, and prayers have helped me to finally bring my dissertation to fruition. Finally, my daughter Yoonji has been the true joy and happiness of my life. Yoonji’s radiant smiles and humor were the engines of this journey and will continue to be so on our many journeys ahead. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. III  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................ V  LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ........................................................................................................ X  INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1   CHAPTER ONE: HISTORY OF COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING  IN CHINA AND KOREA……………………………………………………………………….30 COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING IN THE SONG PERIOD ........................................................... 32  Imperial Processional Paraphernalia Ceremony 大駕鹵簿圖 ............................................. 32  Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 .............................................................................. 39  Welcoming the Imperial Carriage 迎鑾圖 ............................................................................ 44  COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING IN THE YUAN AND MING PERIODS ...................................... 46  Khubilai Khan Hunting 元世祖出獵圖 ................................................................................ 46  Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion 宣宗行樂圖 ............................................................ 49  Xianzong’s Lantern Festival 元宵行樂圖 ............................................................................. 52  Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace 出警入蹕圖 .................................................. 55  COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING IN JOSEON, 1500-1700 ........................................................ 64  Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion서총대친림사연도 .......................... 66  Royal Banquet for Successful Candidates of the State Examination 알성시은영도 ........... 68  Envoys’ Procession to Edo Castle인조십사년통신사입강호성도 .................................... 70  Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress 북새선은도 .......................................................... 72  King’s Personal Governance at the Hall of Flourishing Government 숙종친정계병 ........ 75 CHAPTER TWO:  SUBJECTS OF EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY QING AND JOSEON  COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTINGS .................................................................................. 83  STATE RITUALS .......................................................................................................................... 84  Auspicious Rites 吉禮 ........................................................................................................... 85  Felicitous Rites 嘉禮 ............................................................................................................. 94  Military Rites 軍禮 .............................................................................................................. 108  RULERS’ PUBLIC OUTINGS AS EXPRESSIONS OF SAGEHOOD AND FILIAL PIETY ..................... 117  Kangxi’s Southern Inspection Tour & Yeongjo’s Stream Drainage Project ........................ 118 Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour and King Jeongjo’s Outing to Hwaseong . 123  MANCHU TRADITIONAL RITES AND QING MILITARY CAMPAIGNS .......................................... 131 ix CHAPTER THREE:  RITUALS IN FASHIONING QING AND JOSEON  RULERS’ POLITICAL IDENTITIES ..................................................................................... 141  MANCHU WAY TO THE SON OF HEAVEN .................................................................................. 144  Becoming Sage Rulers ........................................................................................................ 144  Redefining Zhonghua .......................................................................................................... 148  EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY JOSEON’S DUALISTIC MONARCHS .................................................... 156  Saving Zhonghua ................................................................................................................. 157  The Altar of Great Gratitude and the Altar of the South ..................................................... 163 CHAPTER FOUR: COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTINGS AS  HISTORICAL RECORDS, REFERENTIAL GUIDES AND PROPAGANDA ............................................. 184  FORMAT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS REGARDING THE FUNCTIONS OF COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING .................................................................................................................................. 186  On Display ........................................................................................................................... 209  As Gifts and Souvenirs ........................................................................................................ 218 CHAPTER FIVE: IMAGES OF RULERS IN QING AND JOSEON COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING ................................................................................................. 240  QING EMPEROR’S SELF-FASHIONING PORTRAIT IMAGES IN NARRATIVE SCENES .................. 242  JOSEON KINGS AND THEIR SYMBOLIC PRESENCE ................................................................... 254  The Screen of the Five Peaks as the King’s Symbolic Body .............................................. 261 CHAPTER SIX: MODES OF REPRESENTING SPACE IN QING AND JOSEON COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING .................................................................................. 270 THREE MODES OF REPRESENTING SPACE ................................................................................ 271  Diagrammatic Representation of Space .............................................................................. 272  Topographical Representation of Space .............................................................................. 280  IIllusionistic Representation of Space ................................................................................. 285 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND EPILOGUE ..................................................................... 300  BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................... 307  GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................................ 338   x LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS *For the convenience of readers, paintings are listed more than once to correspond to figure references in the text. Chapter One: History of Court Documentary Painting in China and Korea Figure 1-1. Grand Processional Paraphernalia 大駕鹵簿圖 (11th century, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 51.4 x 1481 cm, National Museum of China, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuyuanguan guancang wenwu yanjiu congshu, huihua juan, fengsuhua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 风俗画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2007, pp.16-25) Figure 1-2. Processional Paraphernalia of Jade Carriage 鹵簿玉輅圖 (12th-13th century, handscroll, ink and color on silk, 26.6 x 209.6 cm, Liaoning Provincial Museum, Shenyang) Liang Song hui hua 兩宋繪畫. Vol. 2 of Zhongguo meishu quanjibian 中國美術全集編輯 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1988, pp. 177) Figure 1-3. Part of Grand Processional Paraphernalia 大駕鹵簿圖 (11th century, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 51.4 x 1481 cm, National Museum of China, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuyuanguan guancang wenwu yanjiu congshu, huihua juan, fengsuhua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 风俗画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji Chubanshe, 2007, pp.16-25) Figure 1-4. Grand Processional Paraphernalia 大駕鹵簿圖 (1748, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 48.9 x 1745 cm, Shenyang Palace Museum, Shenyang) Son of Heaven: Imperial Arts of China (Seattle: Son of Heaven Press, 1988, pp. 88-91) Figure 1-5. Envoys’ Procession to Edo Castle 인조십사년통신사입강호성도 xi (1636, handscroll; ink and color on paper, 31 x 595 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae eumak pungsokdo 조선시대 음악 풍속도 (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2004, pp. 80-97) Figure 1-6. The Khitan Liao Send Envoys to Court to Pay Respects 契丹使朝聘 from the Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 (Mid-11th century, handscroll; ink and color on silk; 33.1 x 60 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄. Vol. 17 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1989, pp. 31) Figure 1-7. Banquet and Archery in the Northern Garrison 北寨宴射 from the Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 (Mid-11th century, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 33.1 x 60 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄. Vol. 17 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1989, pp. 30) Figure 1-8. Viewing the Bian Flood from the Imperial Carriage 輿駕觀汴漲 from the Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 (Mid-11th century, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 33.1 x 60 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄. Vol. 17 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1989, pp. 29) Figure 1-9. Viewing Books at the Pavilion of Highest Purity 太清觀書 from the Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 (Mid-11th century, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 33.1 x 60 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) http://www.npm.gov.tw/exhbition/jih0001/maina1.htm Figure 1-10. Welcoming the Imperial Carriage 迎鑾圖 (1142, handscroll; color on silk, 26.7 x 142.2 cm, Shanghai Museum) Zhongguo huihua quanji 中國繪畫全集. Vol. 5 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1997, pp. 68-69) xii Figure 1-11. Khubilai Khan Hunting 元世祖出獵圖 (1280, hanging scroll; color on silk, 182.9 x 104.1 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) http://www.npm.gov.tw/exh96/orientation/ch_b6_2.html Figure 1-12. Qianlong Emperor Hunting a Tiger 刺虎圖 (1736-95, hanging scroll; color on silk, 258.3 x 172 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Splendors of China’s Forbidden City: the Glorious Reign of Emperor Qianlong (New York and London: Merrell, 2004, pp. 106) Figure 1-13. Xuande Emperor Hunting with Bow 宣德射獵圖 (15th century, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 29.5 x 34.6 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368-1644) (Cambridge MA., and London: Harvard University Asia Center, 2008, Fig. 8-2) Figure 1-14. Xuande Emperor on a Riding Excursion 宣德獵騎圖 (15th century, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 39.4 x 60.1 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368-1644) (Cambridge MA., and London: Harvard University Asia Center, 2008, Fig. 8-3) Figure 1-15. Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion 宣宗行樂圖 (15th century, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 221 x 353 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368-1644) (Cambridge MA., and London: Harvard University Asia Center, 2008, Fig. 8-1) Figure 1-16. Scroll Two from Qianlong Emperor’s Eightieth-Birthday Celebration 乾隆萬壽慶典圖 (1797, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 45 x 6347. 5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) xiii China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 106-109) Figure 1-17. Part of The Lantern Festival Pleasure 元宵行樂圖 (1485, handscroll; color on silk, 37 x 624 cm, National Museum of China) Zhongguo guojia bowuyuanguan guancang wenwu yanjiu congshu, huihua juan, fengsuhua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 风俗画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2007, pp. 32-51) Figure 1-18. Part of The Lantern Festival Pleasure 元宵行樂圖 (1485, handscroll; color on silk, 37 x 624 cm, National Museum of China) Zhongguo guojia bowuyuanguan guancang wenwu yanjiu congshu, huihua juan, fengsuhua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 风俗画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2007, pp. 38-43) Figure 1-19. Knickknack Peddler 貨郎圖 by Su Hanchen 蘇漢臣(1094-1172) (12th century, hanging scroll; color on silk, 181.5 x 267.4 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Zhuisuo zhepai 追索浙派 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2008, pp. 104) Figure 1-20. Scroll One from Imperial Outing and Returning to Palace 出驚入蹕圖 (Late 16th century, handscroll; color on silk, 92.1 x 3003.6 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong cang hua daxi 故宮藏畫大系. Vol. 11 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993, pp. 26-49) Figure 1-21. Scroll Two from Imperial Outing and Returning to Palace 出驚入蹕圖 (Late 16th century, handscroll; color on silk, 92.1 x 3003.6 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong cang hua daxi 故宮藏畫大系. Vol. 11 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993, pp. 26-49) Figure 1-22. Detail of Scroll One from Imperial Outing and Returning to Palace xiv Splendors of Imperial China: Treasures from the National Palace Museum, Taipei (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1997, pp. 97) Figure 1-23. Portrait of the Jiajing Emperor (16th century, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 209.7 x 155.2 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Figuere 1-24. Hongzhi Emperor’s Portrait (16th century, hanging scroll; ink and colors on silk, 209.8 x 115 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Figure 1-25. Wanli Emperor’s Portrait (16th-17th century, hanging scroll; ink and colors on silk, 110.7 x 76 cm. National Palace Museum, Taipei) Figure 1-26. Part of the Scroll One from Imperial Outing and Returning to Palace Gugong cang hua daxi 故宮藏畫大系. Vol. 11 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993, pp. 36-37) Figure 1-27. Wanli Emperor’s Helmet from the Tomb of Stability (Dingling Museum, Changping) Dingling 定陵. Vol. 2 of Zhongguo tianye kaogubaogaoji. 中国田野考古报告集. No. 36 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe. Fig. 311-312) Figure 1-28. Part of the Scroll Two from Imperial Outing and Returning to Palace Gugong cang hua daxi 故宮藏畫大系. Vol. 11 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993, pp. 55) Figure 1-29. A Jade Bowl with a Golden Lid from the Tomb of Stability (Jade and gold, 7 cm high, Dingling Museum, Changping) Zhongguo jin yin bo li falangqi quanji 中国金银玻璃法琅器全集. Vol. 3 (Shijiazhuang: Hebei meishu chubanshe, 2004, pp. 135) Figure 1-30. Part of Scroll Two from Imperial Outing and Returning to Palace Gugong cang hua daxi 故宮藏畫大系. Vol. 11 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993, pp. 40-41) xv Figure 1-31. Scroll Twelve from the Kangxi's Southern Inspection Tour 南巡圖 (1691-1695, set of twelve handscroll; color on silk, 67.8 x 2313.5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) De Verboden Stad: Hofcultuur van de Chinese keizers (Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1990, pp.124-129) Figure 1-32. Scroll Two from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇 (18th century, set of two handscrolls; color silk, 61.8 x 442 cm, Musée des arts asiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine : chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des arts asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 84-85) Figure 1-33. Gathering of Scholar-Officials at the Hall of Reading Books 독서당계회도 (1570, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 102 x 57.5 cm, Seoul National University Museum, Seoul) http://www.cha.go.kr/korea/heritage/search/Culresult_Db_View.jsp?mc=KS_01_02_01&VdkVgwKey=12,08670000,11&queryText=* Figure 1-34. Gathering of Government Officials from the Ministry of Finance 호조낭관계회도 (ca. 1550, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 121 x 59 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) http://211.252.141.1/program/relic/relicDetail.jsp?menuID=001005002002&relicID=2012&relicDetailID=8045 Figure 1-35. Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion 서총대 친림사연도 (1560, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 124. 2 x 122.7 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 1) Figure 1-36. Royal Grace Banquet for Successful Candidates of the State Examination 알성시연도 (1580, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 118.5 x 105.6 cm, Yōmei Bunko, Kyōto) xvi Art of the Korean Renaissance, 1400-1600 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009, pp. 2) Figure 1-37. Gathering of State Examination Alumni at Huigyeong Pavilion 휘경루방회도 (1567, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 98.5 x 76. 8 cm, Dongguk University Museum, Seoul) Art of the Korean Renaissance, 1400-1600 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009, pp. 98) Figure 1-38. Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress 북새선은도 (1664, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 62.5 x 338 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 28-31) Figure 1-39. State Examination for the Applicants from Northern Province 북관별과도 (1731, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 57 x 492 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 132-133) Figure 1-40. Military Drill at West General Fort 서장대야조도 from King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 19) Figure 1-41. King Sukjong’s Personal Governance 숙종친정계병 (1691, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 145 x 60 cm, Andong Gwon Family Collection) Park Jeonghyeo, Gungjung girokhwa yeongu 궁중기록화 연구 (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000, Figs. 27-1, 27-2, 27-3) Chapter Two: Subjects of Eighteenth-Century Qing and Joseon Court Documentary Paintings xvii Figure 2-1. Scroll One from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇圖 (18th century, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 61.8 x 467.8 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷繪畫 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, pp. 104-105) Figure 2-2. Scroll Two from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇圖 (18th century, set of two handscrolls; color silk, 61.8 x 442 cm, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 84-85) Figure 2-3. King Yeongjo’s Plowing Ceremony 친경도 (1764, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, location unknown) Fujita Ryōsaku 藤田亮策, “Chōsen Eiso shinkōzu ni tsukite.” 朝鮮英祖親耕圖に就きて Chōsen Nōkai hō 朝鮮農會報 40, no. 6 (1940, pp. 40) Figure 2-4. Scroll One: Visiting the Altar 詣壇 from the Empress Xiaoxian’s Sericulture Ceremony 孝賢皇后親蠶圖 (1744, a set of four handscroll; color on silk, 51x 762.8 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2002, pp. 445-447) Figure 2-5. Scroll Four: Presenting Cocoons 獻繭 from the Empress Xiaoxian’s Sericulture Ceremony 孝賢皇后親蠶圖 (1744, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 51 x 639.7 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄 xviii (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2002, pp. 453-455) Figure 2-6. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Kapyin 갑인친정계첩 (1734, album of two leaves; color on silk, 44.5 x 56.4 cm, Dong-A University Museum, Busan) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 66-67) Figure 2-7. Royal Banquet after King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulmyo을묘친정후선온계병 (1735, six-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 124. 8 x 332.5 cm, Seoul National University Museum, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 68-69) Figure 2-8. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Mushin 무신친정계첩 (1728, album of two leaves; color on paper, 41. 6 x 54. 8 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 64-65) Figure 2-9. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 47.8 x 118 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 7) Figure 2-10. Ceremonial Visit to the Hall of Spiritual Longevity 영수각송 from the Album of Celebratory Gathering of the Year of Gisa (1744, album of eleven leaves; ink and color on silk, 43.5× 67.8 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 92-93) xix Figure 2-11. Royal Banquet for Royal Family Members 종친부사연도 (1744, hanging scroll; color on silk, 134.5 x 64 cm, Seoul National University Museum, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 91) Figure 2-12. Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom을유기로연 경현당 수작연 도병 (1765, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 122.5 x 444.6 cm, Seoul Museum of History, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 94-97) Figure 2-13. Congratulatory Ceremony 진하도 (1783, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 153 x 462. 4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 4) Figure 2-14. Crown Prince Meeting with His Tutors 문효세자 보양청계병 (1784, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 57 x 136. 5 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 6) Figure 2-15. King’s Personal Visitation to a State Examination at the Diligent Governance Hall 친림광화문내 근정전 정시시도병 (1747, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 208.8 x 574.6 cm, Seoul Museum of History, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 73-75) Figure 2-16. Scroll Two from the Kangxi Emperor’s Sixtieth-Birthday Celebration 康熙萬壽慶典圖 (late 18th century, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 45 x 3911 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) xx China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 100-105) Figure 2-17. Scroll Two from the Qianlong Emperor’s Eightieth-Birthday Celebration 乾隆萬壽慶典圖 (1797, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 45 x 6347.5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 106-109) Figure 2-18. Scroll One from the Empress Dowager’s Sixtieth-Birthday Celebration 崇慶皇太后萬壽慶典圖 (1751, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 65 x 2.887 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) De Verboden Stad: Hofcultuur van de Chinese keizers (Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1990, pp. 138-143) Figure 2-19. Empress Dowager’s Seventieth-Birthday Celebration 臚歡薈景图冊 (1761, album of eight leaves; color on silk, 97.5 x 161.2 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Mingqing fengsuhua 明清风俗画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 2008, pp. 122-126) Figure 2-20. Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees 萬樹園賜宴圖 (1754, hanging scroll; color on silk, 221.2 x 419.6 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Splendors of China’ Forbidden City: the Glorious Reign of Emperor Qianlong (New York and London: Merrell, 2004, pp. 92-93) Figure 2-21. Imperial Feast at the Pavilion of Purple Brightness 紫光閣賜宴圖 (1761, handscroll; color on silk, 45.8 x 486. 5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷繪畫 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1992, pp. 156-157) Figure 2-22. Victory Banquet at the Pavilion of Purple Brightness xxi 紫光閣凱宴成功諸將士 from the Album of Pacification of the Two Jinchuan Hills 平定兩金川得勝圖 (50. 5 x 86. 6 cm, Berlin StateLibrary, Berlin) http://www.wdl.org/en/item/7733/ Figure 2-23. Pacification of Annam 平定安南得勝圖 (1790, album of six leaves, engraving, 50.7 x 88 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting banhua 淸代宮廷版画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001, pp. 245-247) Figure 2-24. Scroll Three: Reviewing Battle Formation 閱陣 from Grand Review Ceremony 大閱圖 (1746, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 68 x 1550 cm, a private collection) Xinshijie: Lang Shining yu qinggong xiyangfeng 新視界: 郎世寧與清宮西洋風 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2007, pp. 100-113) Figure 2-25. Part of Scroll Two: Troops in Formation 行陣 from Grand Review Ceremony 大閱圖 (1746, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 72 x 2000 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) La Cité Interdite au Louvre: Empereurs de Chine et Rois de France (Paris: Musée du Louvre, 2011, pp.186-187) Figure 2-26. Offering and Receiving War Captives Ceremonies from The Pacification of the Two Jinchuan Hills 平定兩金川得勝圖 (1760, album of sixteen leaves; color on silk, 55.5 x 91.1cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 清代宮廷繪畫 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, pp. 266) Figure 2-27. Grand Archery Ceremony 대사례도 (1743, handscroll; color on silk, 58. 7 x 257.6 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 xxii (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 2) Figure 2-28. Nighttime Military Exercise at the West Command Post 서장대야조도 from King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 19) Figure 2-29. Ceremonial Archery and Fireworks 득중어사도 from King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 19) Figure 2-30. Guan Yu Captures General Pang De 關羽擒將圖 (ca. 1430, hanging scroll; colors on silk, 198 x 236 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) http://www.dpm.org.cn/www_oldweb/Big5/E/E23/wenwu/30.htm Figure 2-31. Scroll Eleven from the Kangxi's Southern Inspection Tour 南巡圖 (1691-1695, set of twelve handscroll; color on silk, 67.8 x 2313.5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 清代宮廷繪畫 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, pp. 40-51) Figure 2-32. King Yeongjo’s Calligraphy 어제어필 from Album of Gathering for Stream Drainage 준천제명첩 (1760, album of six leaves; ink and color on silk, 34.2 x 22 cm, Busan Museum of Art, Busan) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, fig. 27-1) Figure 2-33. King Yeongjo’s Inspection Visit to the Cheonggye Stream from Album of Stream Drainage from Album of Gathering for Stream xxiii Drainage 준천제명첩 (1760, album of six leaves; ink and color on silk, 34.2 x 22 cm, Busan Museum of Art, Busan) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, fig. 27-2) Figure 2-34. Hong Bong-han’s Epilogue from the Album of Stream Drainage 준천계첩 (1760, album of forteen leaves; color on paper, 27.2 x 39. 5 cm, Asami Collection at the University of California, Berkeley) http://kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/sub6/sub6View.do?base_uci_no=509 Figure 2-35. Scroll Four from Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour 南巡圖 (1770, set of twelve scrolls; color on silk, 68.8 x 1096.17 cm, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/49251 Figure 2-36. Birthday Banquet at the Hall of Longevity 봉수당진찬도 from King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 16) Figure 2-37. Book of Ritual Protocols Summarizing the Outing to the Mausoleum in the Year of Eulmyo 원행을묘정리의궤 園幸乙卯整理儀軌 (1797, woodblock print on paper; 35.1×22.4 cm, Asami Collection at the University of California, Berkeley) http://kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/sub6/sub6View.do?base_uci_no=541 Figure 2-38. Magnificent Record of the Southern Inspection Tour 南巡盛典 (1771, woodblock print on paper) Nanxun shengdian 南巡盛典 Vol. 65 of Jin dai Zhongguo shi liao cong kan 近代中國史料叢刊 (Taipei: Wenhai chubanshe, 1971) Figure 2-39. Portrait of Emperor Kangxi in Formal Martial Attire (18th century, hanging scroll; color on silk, 112. 22 x 71.5 cm, xxiv Palace Museum, Beijing) Emperor Kangxi and Sun King Louis XIV: Sino-Franco Encounters in Arts and Culture (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2010, pp. 34-35) Figure 2-40. Scroll One: Troops on Move 行營 from Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖 (about 1750, set of four handscrolls; 50. 4 x 1600 cm, color on silk, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine : chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des arts asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 194-195) Figure 2-41. Scroll Four: Banquet 筵宴 from Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖: (about 1750, set of four scrolls, 50.4 x 1600 cm, color on silk, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des arts asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 212-213) Figure 2-42. Imperial Poem and Ice Skating 畫御製冰嬉賦圖 (1746, hanging scroll; color on silk, 196 x 94.3 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Qianlong huangdi wenhua day 乾隆皇帝的文化大業 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2007, pp. 24) Figure 2-43. Ice Skating on the Palace Lake 冰嬉圖 (1760s, handscroll; color on silk, 35 x 578.8 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 114-115) Figure 2-44. Dodo’s Victory 多鐸得胜圖 (1645, hanging scroll; color on silk, 142.1 x 112 cm, National Museum of China, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancang wenwu yenjiu congshu: huihua juan, lishihua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 历史画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006, pp. 70-73) Figure 2-45. Cai Yurong’s Southern Expedition 蔡毓榮南征圖 xxv (1670s, handscroll; color on silk, 52. 7 x 1102.6 cm, National Museum of China, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancang wenwu yenjiu congshu: huihua juan, lishihua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 历史画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006, pp. 86-91) Figure 2-46. General Fuyuan’s Western Expedition 撫遠大將軍西征圖 (1720, handscroll; color on silk, 49 x 692 cm, National Museum of China, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancang wenwu yenjiu congshu: huihua juan, lishihua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 历史画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006, pp. 108-115) Figure 2-47. Transferring Troops to the Northern Expedition 北徵督運圖册 (1700s, the 2nd leaf from an album of nineteen leaves [originally 24 leaves], color on silk, National Museum of History, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancang wenwu yenjiu congshu: huihua juan, lishihua 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 历史画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006, pp. 92-97) Figure 2-48. Fragment of the Battle of Qurman 呼爾滿大捷 (1760, mural painting; color on silk, 388 x 366 cm, Museum fur Volkerkinde Hamberg) China on Paper: European and Chinese Works from the Late Sixteenth to the Early Nineteenth Century (Los Angeles: the Getty Research Institute, 2007, pp. 99) Figure 2-49. Pacification of the Dzhungar Mongols and Turkic Muslims 平定準部回部戰圖 (1765, the 3rd leaf from an album of sixteen leaves; engraving, 55.4 x 90.8 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, 183-191) Figure 2-50. Pacification of the Two Jinchuan Hills 平定兩金川得勝圖 (1777-81, album of sixteen leaves, engraving, 51 x 88.5 cm, Palace xxvi Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting banhua 淸代宮廷版画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001, pp. 221-228) Figure 2-51. Pacification of Taiwan 平定台灣得勝圖 (1788-90, album of twelve leaves, engraving, 50.5 x 87.4cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting banhua 淸代宮廷版画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001, pp. 239-244) Figure 2-52. Pacification of Annam 平定安南得勝圖 (1790, album of six leaves, engraving, 50.7 x 88 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting banhua 淸代宮廷版画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001, pp. 245-247) Figure 2-53. Pacification of Gurkhas (1795, album of eight leaves, engraving, 55 x 88 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting banhua 淸代宮廷版画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001, pp. 248-251) Figure 2-54. Pacification of Miao Tribes 平定苗疆得勝圖 (1798) (1798, album of sixteen leaves; engraving, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting banhua 淸代宮廷版画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001, pp. 252-259) Figure 2-55. Offering and Receiving War Captives Ceremonies from Pacification of the Dzungar Mongols and Turkic Muslims 平定準部回部戰圖 (1772, album of sixteen leaves, engraving, National Palace Museum, Beijing) Xinshijie: Lang Shining yu qinggong xiyangfeng 新視界: 郎世寧與清宮西洋風 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2007, pp. 80-81) xxvii Chapter Three: Rituals in Fashioning Qing and Joseon Rulers’ Political Identities Figure 3-1. Scroll Two from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇圖 (18th century, set of two handscrolls; color silk, 61.8 x 442 cm, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des arts asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 84-85) Figure 3-2. A Collection of Auspicious Signs 聚瑞圖 (18th century, hanging scroll; color on silk, 173 x 86.1 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Harmony and Integrity: the Yongzheng Emperor and His Times (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2009, pp. 313-315) Figure 3-3. Scroll Four: Presenting Cocoons 獻繭 from the Empress Xiaoxian’s Sericulture Ceremony 孝賢皇后親蠶圖 (1744, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 51 x 639.7 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2002, pp. 453-455) Figure 3-4. The Altar of Great Gratitude 대보단, from the East Palace 동궐도 (1820s, album of sixteen leaves; color on silk, 273 x 584cm, Korea University Museum, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 266) Chapter Four: Court Documentary Paintings as Historical Records, Referential Guides, Propaganda, and Gifts Figure 4-1. Black Lacquer Box for Scroll Seven of Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour (18th century, black lacquer over wood incised and filled with gold, 17.5 x 78.7 x 19.9 cm, University of Alberta Museums, Mactaggart Art Collection) xxviii Emblems of Empire: Selections from the Mactaggart Art Collection (Edmonton: The University of Alberta Press, 2009, pp. 196-197) Figure 4-2. Black Lacquer Box for Scroll Three of Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour (18th century, black lacquer over wood incised and filled with gold, 17.5 x 78.7 x 19.9 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qing Legacies: The Sumptuous Art of Imperial Packaging (Macau: The Macao Museum of Art, Macau, 2001, Cat. no. 1) Figure 4-3. Red Lacquer Box for Scroll Two of Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour (1770, carved red lacquer over wood, 16.5 x 76 x 17.1 cm, University of Alberta Museums, Mactaggart Art Collection) Emblems of Empire: Selections from the Mactaggart Art Collection (Edmonton: The University of Alberta Press, 2009, pp. 198-199) Figure 4-4. Red Lacquer Box for Victory Banquet in the Western Garden 苑西凱宴 (1749, carved red lacquer over wood, Peabody Essex Museum, Salem) http://www.pem.org/sites/emperor/scroll.html Figure 4-5. Horsemanship 馬術圖 (1754, tieluo; color on silk, 225 x 425.5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 清代宮廷繪畫 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, pp. 166-167) Figure 4-6. Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees 萬樹園賜宴圖 (1754, hanging scroll; color on silk, 221.2 x 419.6 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Splendors of China’ Forbidden City: the Glorious Reign of Emperor Qianlong (New York and London: Merrell, 2004, pp. 92-93) Figure 4-7. Qianlong Emperor Shooting with Bow and Arrow 御容射箭 (1754, hanging screen; oil on paper, 95 x 213. 7 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 xxix (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, 212-213) Figure 4-8. Ten Thousand Dharmas Return as One 萬法歸一圖 (1771, hanging screen; color on silk, 164. 5 x 114. 5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1992, pp. 234) Figure 4-9. Grand Archery Ceremony 대사례도 (1743, handscroll; color on silk, 58. 7 x 257.6 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 2) Figure 4-10. Gathering of Scholar-Officials at the Hall of Reading Books 독서당계회도 (1570, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 102 x 57.5 cm, Seoul National University Museum, Seoul) http://www.cha.go.kr/korea/heritage/search/Culresult_Db_View.jsp?mc=KS_01_02_01&VdkVgwKey=12,08670000,11&queryText=* Figure 4-11. Royal Banquet for Royal Family Members 종친부사연도 (1744, hanging scroll; color on silk, 134.5 x 64 cm, Seoul National University Museum, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 91) Figure 4-12. Album of the Celebratory Gathering of the Year of Gisa 기사경회첩 (1744, album of eleven leaves; ink and color on silk, 43.5× 67.8 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 82-87) Figure 4-13. Gathering for King’s Personal Governance in the Year of Gapyin 갑인친정계첩 xxx (1734, album of two leaves, ink and color on silk, 44.5 x 56.4 cm, Dong-A University Museum, Busan) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 66-67) Figure 4-14. Yi Jeong-bo’s Inscription from the Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom 을유기로연경현당 수작연도병 (1765, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 122.5 x 444.6 cm, Seoul Museum of History, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 95) Figure 4-15. Congratulatory Ceremony 진하도 (1783, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 153 x 462. 4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 4) Figure 4-16. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 47.8 x 118 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 7) Figure 4-17. Scroll Three from Grand Review Ceremony 大閱圖 Xinshijie: Lang Shining yu qinggong xiyangfeng 新視界: 郎世寧與清宮西洋風 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2007, pp. 102-103) Figure 4-18. Great Qing Emperor’s Meritorious Achievement Stele 大淸皇帝功德碑 (or 삼전도비) http://korean.visitkorea.or.kr/kor/inut/where/where_main_search.jsp?cid=231897&out_service=Y xxxi Figure 4-19. Kim Sangbok’s Inscription from the Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 5) Figure 4-20. Two Leaves from the Album of the Gathering of the Year of Gisa 기해기사계첩 (1719-1720, album; ink and color on silk, 52 x 72 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae hyangyeon-gwa uiryeo 조선시대 향연과 의례 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2009, pp. 42-45) Figure 4-21. Crown Prince Meeting with His Tutors 문효세자 보양청계병 (1784, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 57 x 136. 5 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 6) Figure 4-22. Precious Calligraphy and Painting Endowed by the King 내사보묵첩 (1760, an album of five leaves; ink and color on paper, 37.4 x 24.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 3) Figure 4-23. Royal Banquet at the Hall of Reflecting Flower 영화당친림사선도 from the Album of the Gathering for Stream Drainage 준천제명첩 (1760, album of six leaves; color on silk, 34.2 x 22 cm, Busan Museum of Art, Busan) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, fig. 27-3) Figure 4-24. King Yeongjo’s Royal Banquet at the Guest Hall of Cherishing China모화관친림시재도 from Album of the Gathering for Stream Drainage 준천제명첩 (1760, album; color on silk, 27. 5 x 39 cm, Seoul National University Museum, Seoul) xxxii Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, fig. 27-4) Figure 4-25. King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 16-23) Figure 4-26. Book of Protocols Summarizing of the King’s Outing to the Mausoleum in the Year of Eulmyo원행을묘정리의궤 園行乙卯整理儀軌 (1797, woodblock print on paper, 35.1×22.4, Asami Collection at the University of California, Berkeley) http://kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/sub6/sub6View.do?base_uci_no=541 Figure 4-27. Illustration of Summarizing the King’s Outing to the Mausoleum in the Year of Eulmyo 원행을묘정리의궤도 (19th century, color on paper, 62. 2 x 47.3 cm, National Palace Museum, Seoul) Joseonsidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 3 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2012, Plate 3) Figure 4-28. Empress Dowager’s Sixtieth-Birthday Celebration 崇慶皇太后萬壽慶典圖 (1751, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 65 x 2.887 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) De Verboden Stad: Hofcultuur van de Chinese keizers (Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1990, pp. 138-143) Figure 4-29. Empress Dowager’s Seventieth-Birthday Celebration 胪欢荟景图册 (1761, album of eight leaves; color on silk, 97.5 x 161.2 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Mingqing fengsuhua 明清风俗画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 2008, pp. 122-126) xxxiii Figure 4-30. Part of Magnificent Record of the Southern Inspection Tour 南巡盛典 (1771, woodblock print on paper) Nanxun shengdian 南巡盛典 Vol. 65 of Jindai Zhongguo shiliao cong kan 近代中國史料叢刊 (Taipei: Wenhai chubanshe, 1971) Figure 4-31. Procession of the Emperor China (Isidore Stanislas Helman, engraving on paper; 53 x 39 cm, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) From Beijing to Versailles: Artistic Relations between China and France (Hong Kong: The Urban Council of Hong Kong, 1997, pp.251) Figure 4-32. Album of the Narration of Ten Battles 十全敷藻图册 (Late 18th century, album of sixteen leaves; ink and color on paper, 43.4 cm x 64. 3 cm) 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 历史画 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006, pp. 192-199) Chapter Five: Images of Rulers in Qing and Joseon Court Documentary Painting Figure 5-1. Horsemanship 馬術圖 (1754, tieluo; color on silk, 225 x 425.5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷繪畫 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, pp. 166-167) Figure 5-2. Grand Archery Scrolls 대사례도 (1743, handscroll; color on silk, 58. 7 x 257.6 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 2) Figure 5-3. Screen of the Five Peaks with the Sun and the Moon 일월오봉병 (19th-20th century, four-panel folding screen; color on silk, National Palace xxxiv Museum, Seoul) Gungjung seohwa 궁중서화. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Palace Museum, 2012, pp. 16-17) Figure 5-4. Qianlong Emperor as Bodhisattva Manjushri and Grand Lama the Qianlong Emperor (ca. 1758, hanging scroll; color on cloth, 108 x 63 cm, the Palace Museum, Beijing) China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 142) Figure 5-5. Part of Scroll One from Imperial Outing and Returning Procession 出警入蹕圖 (Late 16th century, set of two handscroll; ink and color on silk, 92.1 x 30003.6 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong cang hua daxi 故宮藏畫大系. Vol. 11 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993, pp. 54-55) Figure 5-6. Ten Thousand Dharmas Return as One 萬法歸一圖 (1771, a standing screen; color on silk, 164. 5 x 114.5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1992, pp. 234) Figure 5-7. Deer Hunting Patrol 哨鹿圖 (hanging scroll, color on silk, 267.5 x 319 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Mingqing fengsuhua 明清风俗画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 2008, pp. 155) Figure 5-8. Qianlong Emperor in Ceremonial Armor on Horseback 大閱圖 (1758, hanging scroll [originally tieluo]; ink and color on silk, 322.5 x 232 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 166) xxxv Figure 5-9. Illustration in the Spirit of the Qianlong Emperor’s Poem ‘Congboxing 叢薄行詩意圖 (1758, hanging scroll; color on silk, 424 x 348. 5 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 112) Figure 5-10. Equestrian Portrait of Charles I (1600-1649) by Anthony van Dyck (ca. 1637-38, oil on canvas; 367 x 292.1 cm, National Gallery, London) http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/anthony-van-dyck-equestrian-portrait-of-charles-i Figure 5-11. Equestrian Portrait of Louis XIV Crowned by Victory (1692, oil on canvas; 291 × 228 cm, Chateau de Versailles et de Trianon, France) Louis XIV: L’Homme & Le Roi (Paris: ESEP, 2009, pp. 200) Figure 5-12. Khubilai Khan’s Hunting (13th century or 15th century, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 182.9 x 104.1 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) http://www.npm.gov.tw/exh96/orientation/ch_b6_2.html Figure 5-13. Scroll One: Troops on Move 行營 from Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖 (1750s, set of four handscrolls; 50. 4 x 1600 cm, color on silk, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine : chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des arts asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 194-195) Figure 5-14. Scroll Four: Banquet 筵宴 from Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖: (1750s, set of four scrolls; 50.4 x 1600 cm, color on silk, Musée des Arts Aiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: Chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des Arts Asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 212-213) xxxvi Figure 5-15. Scroll Two from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇圖 (18th century, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 61.8 x 442 cm, Musée des Arts Asiatiques Guimet) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: Chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des Arts Asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 84-85) Figure 5-16. Louis XIV’s Hunting in the Chambord Park (etching) Inventaire du fonds francais. Vol. 13 (Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 2008, p. 105) Figure 5-17. The Coronation of Louis XIV (1654, etching, 63. 1 x 47. 9 cm, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) Tapestry in the Baroque: Threads of Splendor (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008, pp. 106) Figure 5-18. Alliance with the Swiss (ca. 1665-66, series of the History of the King, tapetry; 383 x 585 cm, Mobilier National, Paris) Tapestry in the Baroque: New Aspects of Production and Patronage (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2010, pp. 344) Figure 5-19. Yongzheng Emperor Wearing a French Wig (18th century, framed in wooden panels; ink and color on silk, 52. 3 x 43 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) La Cité Interdite au Louvre: Empereurs de Chine et Rois de France (Paris: Musée du Louvre, 2011, pp. 271) Figure 5-20. Constantine's Battle at the Milvian Bridge (1722, pen and brown ink, gray wash on paper, 33. 2 x 20.1 cm, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) http://metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection- online/search/368567?rpp=30&pg=1&ft=Georg+Philipp+Rugendas%2c+&pos=4 Figure 5-21. Detail of Scroll One from Kangxi Emperor’s Sixtieth-Birthday xxxvii Celebration 康熙萬壽慶典圖 (Late 18th century, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 45 x 3911 cm, the Palace Museum, Beijing) Mingqing fengsuhua 明清风俗画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 2008, pp. 226-227) Figure 5-22. Grand Processional Paraphernalia 大駕鹵簿圖 (1748, handscroll; ink and color on silk, 48.9 x 1745 cm, Shenyang Palace Museum, Shenyang) Son of Heaven: Imperial Arts of China (Seattle: Son of Heaven Press, 1988, pp. 88-91) Figure 5-23. Ice Skating on the Palace Lake 冰嬉圖 (1760s, handscroll; color on silk, 35 x 578.8 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) China: The Three Emperors 1662-1795 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006, pp. 114-115) Figure 5-24. Detail of Imperial Excursion to Jurakutei (Late 16th century, pair of two-panel folding screens; ink and colors, and gold on paper, 144.1 x 115. 6 cm, Sakai City Museum, Sakai) Elizabeth Lillehoj, Art and Palace Politics in Early Modern Japan 1580s- 1680s (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2011, pp. 33) Figure 5-25. Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion 서총대 친림사연도 (1560, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 124. 2 x 122.7 cm, National Museum of Korea) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 1) Figure 5-26. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Mushin 무신친정계첩 (1728, album of two leaves; color on paper, 41. 6 x 54. 8 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 64-65) xxxviii Figure 5-27. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Kapyin 갑인친정계첩 (1734, album of two leaves; color on silk, 44.5 x 56.4 cm, Dong-A University Museum, Busan) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 66-67) Figure 5-28. Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom을유기로연 경현당 수작연 도병 (1765, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 122.5 x 444.6 cm, the Seoul Museum of History, Seoul) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 94-97) Figure 5-29. King Jeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 47.8 x 118 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 7) Figure 5-30. King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 16-23) Figure 5-31. Crown Prince Meeting with His Tutors 문효세자 보양청계병 (1784, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 57 x 136. 5 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 6) Figure 5-32. King Sejo’s Portrait at Haein Monastery 해인사 (1458, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, Haein Monastery, Hapcheon, South Korea) xxxix Yi Seong-mi, Eojin uigwe-wa misulsa: Joseon gukwang chosanghwa-ui jejak-gwa mosa어진의궤와 미술사: 조선국왕 초상화의 제작과 모사 (Seoul: Sowadang, 2012, pp. 35) Figure 5-33. Processional Paraphernalia of Jade Carriage 鹵簿玉輅圖 (12th-13th century, handscroll, ink and color on silk, 26.6 x 209.6 cm, Liaoning Provincial Museum, Shenyang) Liang Song hui hua 兩宋繪畫. Vol. 2 of Zhongguo meishu quanjibian 中國美術全集編輯 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1988, pp. 177) Figure 5-34. Album of Royal Banquet 진연도첩 (1706, album; color on silk, 29 x 41 cm, National Library Collection, Seoul) Park Jeonghyeo, Gungjung girokhwa yeongu 궁중기록화 연구 (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000, pp. 193) Figure 5-35. Hongzhi Emperor’s Portrait (16th century, hanging scroll; ink and colors on silk, 209.8 x 115 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Worshipping the Ancestors: Chinese Commemorative Portraits (Washington D.C.: The Freer Gallery of Art, 2001, pp. 87) Figure 5-36. Joseon King’s Sacrificial Robe of Nine Symbols 九章服, from Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites국조속오례의 http://kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/reader/reader.do?base_uci_no=52&folder=AS_BC_020_002&totPage=279#page/1/mode/2up Chapter 6: Different Modes and Styles of Representing Space Figure 6-1. Scroll One from Emperor Qianlong’s Southern Inspection Tour 乾隆南巡圖 (1770, set of twelve scrolls; color on silk 68. 6 x 1988. 6 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancang wenwu yenjiu congshu: huihua juan, lishihua (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006, pp. 136-145) xl Figure 6-2. Picture of Seating Arrangement at the Hall of Supreme Harmony 太和殿筵宴坐次圖 (ink on paper, 130 X 53 cm, Academia Sinica, Taipei) http://www.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/~mct/img/038315b.jpg Figure 6-3. Picture of Arrangement and Sequence of King Jeongjo’s Procession to the City of Hwaseong 화성원행반차도 (1795, ink and color on paper; handscroll (originally album), 46. 5 x 4.483 cm, National Museum of Korea) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 3 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2012, Plate 1) Figure 6-4. Picture of Arrangment and Sequence 排班圖 from the Veritable Records of Sejong 世宗實錄. http://sillok.history.go.kr/inspection/insp_king.jsp?id=kda_20004008&tabid=k Figure 6-5. Diagram of from Da Qing huidiantu 大清會典圖 Vol. 4 大清會典圖 (1818) https://archive.org/details/02088210.cn Figure 6-6. Scroll One from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇圖 (set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 61.8 x 467.8 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996, 104-105) Figure 6-7. Scroll Three from Grand Review Ceremony 大閱圖 (1746, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 68 x 1757 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Xinshijie: Lang Shining yu qinggong xiyangfeng 新視界: 郎世寧與清宮西洋風 xli (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2007, pp. 100-113) Figure 6-8. Inscription of Grand Review Ceremony 大閱 from Da Qing huidiantu 大清會典圖. Vol. 27 (1818) https://archive.org/stream/02088219.cn#page/n20/mode/2up Figure 6-9. Diagram of Grand Review Ceremony 大閱 from Da Qing huidiantu 大清會典圖. Vol. 27 (1818) https://archive.org/details/02088219.cn Figure 6-10. Detail of Grand Archery Ceremony 대사례도 (1743, handscroll; color on silk, 58. 7 x 257.6 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 2) Figure 6-11. Diagram of Grand Archery Ceremony from the Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites국조속오례의. Vol. 1 乾 http://kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/reader/reader.do?base_uci_no=52&folder=AS_BC_020_001&totPage=277#page/99/mode/2up Figure 6-12. King Yeongjo’s Plowing Ceremony 친경도 (1764, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, location unknown) Fujita Ryōsaku 藤田亮策, “Chōsen Eiso shinkōzu ni tsukite.” 朝鮮英祖親耕圖に就きて Chōsen Nōkai hō 朝鮮農會報 40, no. 6 (1940, pp. 40) Figure 6-13. Diagram of Plowing Ceremony from the Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites국조속오례의. Vol. 1 乾 kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/reader/reader.do?base_uci_no=52&folder=AS_BC_020_001&totPage=277#page/59/mode/2up Figure 6-14. The Royal Banquet at the Hall of Sublime Governance 숭정전 진연도병 (1744, six-panel folding screen; color on silk, 119. 7 x 334. 8 cm, National Museum of Korea) xlii Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 82-87) Figure 6-15. Congratulatory Ceremony 진하도 (1783, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 153 x 462. 4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 4) Figure 6-17. Scroll Two from Yongzheng Emperor’s Offering Sacrifices at the Altar of Agriculture 雍正祭先農壇圖 (18th century, set of two handscrolls; color on silk, 61.8 x 442 cm, Musée des Arts Asiatiques Guimet, Paris) Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796 (Paris: Musée des Arts Asiatiques Guimet, 2006, pp. 84-85) Figure 6-18. Scroll Three from the Empress Xiaoxian’s Sericulture Ceremony 孝賢皇后親蠶圖 (18th century, set of four handscroll; color on silk, 51 x 590.4 cm, National Palace Museum, Taipei) Gugong shuhua tulu 故宮書畫圖錄 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2002, pp. 451-452) Figure 6-19. Detail of Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress 북새선은도 (1664, handscroll; color on silk, 57.9 x 674.1 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 28-31) Figure 6-20. Ceremonial Obeisance at the Hall of Spiritual Longevity영수각송 (1765, album; color on silk, 40.9 x 26.3 cm, Jangseogak Collection, Seongnam, South Korea) Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011, pp. 92-93) Figure 6-21. Royal Banquet for the Celebration of the Recovery of King Yeongjo’s xliii Health영조병술진연도병 (1766, eight-panel folding screen, color on silk, 99. 5 x 49. 8 cm, Samsung-Leeum Museum) Joseon hwawon daejeon 조선화원대전 (Seoul: Samsung misulgwan Leeum, 2011, pp. 44-45) Figure 6-22. King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen, ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 16-23) Figure 6-23. Military Drill at West General Fort 서장대야조도 from the King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen, ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 19) Figure 6-24. Returning Procession 시흥환어행렬도 from the King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen, ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 18) Figure 6-25. Ladies under Wutong Trees 梧蔭仕女圖 (Early 18th century, eight-panel screen; oil on silk, 128. 5 x 326 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Qingdai gongting huihua 清代宫廷绘画 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanche, 1992, pp. 86-87) Figure 6-26. Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees 萬樹園賜宴圖 (1754, hanging scroll; color on silk, 221.2 x 419.6 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Splendors of China’ Forbidden City: the Glorious Reign of Emperor xliv Qianlong (New York and London: Merrell, 2004, pp. 92-93) Figure 6-27. Empress Dowager’s Sixtieth-Birthday Celebration 崇慶皇太后萬壽慶典圖 (1751, set of four handscrolls; color on silk, 65 x 2.887 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) De Verboden Stad: Hofcultuur van de Chinese keizers (Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1990, pp. 138-143) Figure 6-28. The Buddha of Three Ages 삼세여래체탱 (1790, hanging scroll; color on silk, 440 x 350 cm, Monastery of Yongju, Hwaseong, South Korea) Hanguk-ui bulhwa 한국의 불화. Vol. 28 (Yangsan: Seongbo munhwajae yeonguwon, 2003, pp. 11) Figure 6-29. Bookshelf Painting책가도 (19th century, eight-panel folding screen, color on paper, 202 x 438.2 cm, Leeum Art Museum) Korean Arts of the Eighteenth Century (New York: The Asia Society Galleries, 1994, pp. 52-53) Figure 6-30. Crossing the Pontoon Bridge 주교도 from the King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong화성능행도병 (1795, an eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 151. 5 x 66.4 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseonsidae pungsokhwa 조선시대 풍속화 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002, pp. 18) Figure 6-31. Book of Protocols Summarizing of King’s Outing to the Mausoleum in the Year of Eulmyo원행을묘정리의궤 園行乙卯整理儀軌 (1797, woodblock print on paper; 35.1×22.4, Asami Collection at the University of California, Berkeley) http://kostma.korea.ac.kr/riks/sub6/sub6View.do?base_uci_no=541 Figure 6-32. King’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785, eight-panel folding screen; color on silk, 47.8 x 118 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) xlv Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011, Plate 7) Figure 6-33. Royal Banquet at the Hall of Lofty Governance숭정전진연도 (1710, hanging scroll; color on silk, 180 x 142 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 2) Figure 6-34. Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion 서총대 친림사연도 (1560, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 124. 2 x 122.7 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 1) Figure 6-35. Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion 서총대 친림사연도 (1560, hanging scroll; ink and color on silk, 124. 2 x 122.7 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 1) Conclusion: Concluding Marks and Epilogue Figure 7-1. Royal Banquet in the Year of Gichuk 기축진찬도병 (1829, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 2nd-7th panel; 139 x 47.8 cm; 1st and 8th panel; 150. 2 x 54 cm) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 7) Figure 7-2. Celebration for King Heongjong’s Wedding 헌종가례진하도 (1844, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 114.2 x 406 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 7) xlvi Figure 7-3. Ceremonial Banquet in the Year of Musin 무신진찬도 (1848, eight-panel folding screen; ink and color on silk, 139 x 384 cm, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중 행사도. Vol. 1 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010, Plate 9) Figure 7-4. Uigwe of Birthday Banquet in the Year of Gisa기사진표리의궤 (1809, album; ink and color on paper, 47.2 x 33.5 cm, British Library, London) http://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=or_7458_f001r Figure 7-5. Grand Wedding Ceremony 光緒大婚圖冊 (1888, album of nine leave; ink and color on silk, 61 x 111 cm, Palace Museum, Beijing) Mingqing fengsuhua 明清风俗画 (Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 2008, pp. 230-234) 1 INTRODUCTION Definition and Scope In the eighteenth century, the rulers of Qing-period China (1644–1912) and Joseon-period Korea (1392–1910) placed great emphasis on the documentation of the monarchs’ ritual activities and political achievements in the form of texts and images.1 With the strong patronage of these eighteenth-century courts, the genre of court documentary painting—which depicted important state rituals (namely the Five State Rites 五禮), court ceremonies, and political events within and beyond the ruling complexes—reached its artistic climax. For eighteenth-century Qing emperors, court documentary painting was one of the many pictorial genres they commissioned; at times they were personally involved in a painting’s production—supervising the process, selecting the painters, and pointing out mistakes.2 Therefore, this genre provides an excellent glimpse into the emperors’ 1 During the eighteenth-century Qing dynasty, numerous ritual encyclopedic manuals were expanded from earlier versions and newly compiled. Notable examples include the Collected Statutes of the Great Qing 大清會典 (1684, 1732, and 1784), the Comprehensive Rites of the Great Qing 大淸通禮 (1756), and the Comprehensive Compendium of the Empire 皇朝通典 (1786). Eighteenth-century Joseon ritual compendiums are the Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites 국조속오례의, which revised the Manual of the Five State Rites 국조오례의 (1474), the State Wedding Regulation Statues 어제국혼정례 (1749), the Complementary Statues of State Funerary Rituals 어제국조상례보편 (1752), and the Compendium of the Ministry of Rites 춘관통고 (1779). 2 Zhu Jing 朱靜, Yangjiaoshi kanzhongguochaoting 洋敎士看中國朝廷 [Western missionaries looking at the court of China] (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1995). For the Qianlong emperor’s direct involvement in the process of making court documentary paintings, see Deborah Sommer’s translation of Jean-Joseph-Marie Amiot’s letter, Deborah Sommer, “A Letter from a Jesuit Painter in Qianlong’s Court at Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, eds. James A Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark 2 aesthetic tastes as well as their political intentions as manifested in these paintings. In contrast, for eighteenth-century Joseon kings, court documentary painting was the outcome of a highly discreet artistic activity. In the Joseon court, the king’s patronage of art had been often associated with indulgence; thus the collecting and commissioning of art was generally discouraged except for narrarive illustrations with didactic episodes.3 Nonetheless, since court documentary paintings mostly centered on the ritual activities that expressed the king’s devotion to Confucian ideals, the patronage of this genre was not seen in such a light.4 In this study, I define court documentary paintings (K: gungjung girokhwa궁중 기록화; Ch: gongting jiluhua 宮庭記錄畵) as court-commissioned works that illustrate the rulers’ ritual activities and political achievements.5 This term is not how the C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 171-184. 3 Lee Hong-joo 이홍주, “Sipchil shipal segi joseon-ui gongpil chaesaekhwa yinmulhwa yeongu,” 17, 18세기 조선의 공필 채색화 인물화 연구 [Study of color figure painting of 17th and 18th-century Joseon Korea] Misulsahak yeongu 미술사학연구, no. 267 (2010): 11. 7-20. For the role of court paintings as teaching tools for moral cultivation, see Park Jeong-hye 박정혜, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 조선시대 궁중 기록화 연구 [Study of Joseon-period court documentary painting] (Seoul: Ilji-sa, 2000), 34-38. For King Seongjong’s (r. 1457-93) art-collecting activities and court officials’ criticism about it, see Yi Seon-ok 이선옥, “Seongjong-ui seohwa aeho,” 성종의 서화애호 [King Seongjong’s love for art] in Joseon wangsil-ui misul munhwa 조선왕실의 미술 문화 [Visual culture of the Joseon royal court], ed. Yi Seong-mi (Seoul: Daewonsa, 2005), 111-51. 4 For the Confucian view about rituals as the base of political legitimacy, see: Masayuki Sato, The Confucian Quest for Order: The Origin and Formation of the Political Thought of Xun Zi (Leiden: Brill, 2003); Ham Chai-hark, “Ritual and Constitutionalism: Disputing the Ruler's Legitimacy in a Confucian Polity,” The American Journal of Comparative Law 57 (2009): 135-204. 5 The tradition of recording rulers’ political achievements and ceremonial activities in paintings can be found in other Asian courts. For example, around the second half of the sixteenth 3 eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon patrons referred to such works, although those rulers considered them a distinct pictorial genre. Specifically, eighteenth-century Qing emperors treated court documentary paintings as important visual materials of statecraft. The “Illustrations and Charts” 圖譜略 section of the Comprehensive Annals of the Empire 皇朝通志 (1787) includes paintings, illustrations, poems dedicated to paintings, collection catalogues, pictorial maps, and geographical books, which were deemed helpful materials for future emperors. In this section, a series of paintings that documented the Qing emperors’ ritual and political activities, along with brief summaries about the depicted events, is enlisted and the preface to this section proclaims that these paintings were treated as important materials, relevant to political institutions and helpful for the preparation of future rulers. Yet, no special term was employed in referring to these works. Nevertheless, there are examples of court-commissioned paintings portraying ceremonial and political activities of Ming-period (1368–1644) emperors, called xingle tu 行樂圖 or “leisure-activity painting.” In 1815, the Jiaqing emperor (r. 1796–1820) commissioned Hu Jing 胡敬 (1769-1845), his chief compiler, to examine and catalog the portraits and other works in the imperial collection that had been acquired since the completion of these two imperial catalogues: Continuation of Pearl Forest of the Secret century, the Ottoman court commissioned an unprecedented number of paintings that document Sultans’ political and religious activities. See Emine Fetvaci, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2013). Also, under the Akbar reign (r. 1556-1605) and afterward, a numerous book with lavish illustrations that document historical events relevant emperors’ achievements were published. One of the best examples is the Akbarnama or Book of Akbar. For this book, see Susan Stronge, Painting for the Mughal Emperor: the Art of the Book 1560-1660 (London: V&A Publications, 2002). 4 Hall 祕殿珠林續編 (1791-93) and Continuation of Precious Collection of the Stone Moat Pavilion 石渠寶笈續編 (1791-93).6 Besides listing newly acquired works and works not included in the previous catalogues, Hu was also ordered to examine and make a list of works (mainly portrait images from earlier dynasties) in the collection of the Hall of Southern Fragrance 南熏殿. As completing his investigation, Hu compiled a catalogue titled Critique on the Images in the Hall of Southern Fragrance 南薰殿圖像考 (1816).7 In this catalogue, Hu used the term xiang 像 to mean “portrait” and identified specific portraits by adding xiang to the name of an emperor—such as ming taizu xiang 明太祖像 (“portrait of Ming Taizu”)—but he used the term xingle tu to refer to a set of two scrolls, Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace 出警入蹕圖卷,8 which recorded the Wanli emperor’s outing to the Ming imperial mausoleum in the 1580s. According to Cheng-hua Wang, by the mid-Ming period, xingle tu came to be 6 For more information about Qing imperial catalogues of art works, see Yen-Wen Cheng, “Tradition and Transformation: Cataloguing Chinese Art in the Middle and Late Imperial Eras” (PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2010). 7 In 1748, the Qianlong emperor ordered the inspection of the portraits of past emperors, empresses, and officials, which had been preserved in the Hall of Southern Fragrance 南薰殿. Other portraits of sages and meritorious officials previously housed in the Imperial Tea Storehouse 茶庫儲 were also moved to the Hall of Southern Fragrance at that time. The Qianlong emperor ordered that the portraits of past emperors and empresses of China be remounted. The Qianlong emperor wrote the Record of Portraits Stored in the Hall of Southern Fragrance 南薫殿奉藏圖像記 in 1749 to commemorate this historical event. From Hu Jing, Nanxundian tuxiang kao, preface, in Guochao gongshi xubian 國朝宮史序續編, vol. 11, eds. Yu Minzhong 于敏中(1714-79), et al. (Taipei: Taiwan xuesheng shuju, 1965): 19-20, 345-47. 8 Hu Jing, Nanxundian tuxiang kao 南熏殿圖像考 [Study of Portraiture in the Hall of Southern Fragrance], in Zhongguo shuhua quanshu 中國書畫全書 11 [Complete anthology of Chinese calligraphy and painting], ed. Lu Fusheng 魯輔聖 (Shanghai: Shanghai shuhua chubanshe, 2000), 784. 5 recognized as a subgenre of figure painting. Unlike general figure paintings, a xingle tu emphasized the recognizable facial features of the main figure of the painting.9 Being aware of the problematic usage of this term, particularly in regard to works portraying imperial activities, Wang introduced a new term, huangdi xingle tu 皇帝行樂圖, to elucidate that activities of emperors depicted in works like Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace were not leisurely but rather ceremonial and political.10 As a modern scholarly term useful in distinguishing the political implication between general xingle-tu and imperial one, nonetheless it does not reflect pre-modern imperial patrons’ attitude toward this genre. Hui-chi Lo pointed out the problematic usage of the term xingle tu for paintings that depicted the emperor’s image because “the term had been traditionally associated with indulgence and impermanence.”11 According to Lo, it is unlikely that a Ming emperor would have referred to his commissioned paintings as xingle tu or huangdi xingle tu.12 Although Hu Jing referred to Ming court-sponsored works depicting imperial activities as xingle tu—perhaps because he misunderstood the term or because he 9 Cheng-hua Wang, “Material Culture and Emperorship: The Shaping of Imperial Roles at the Court of Xuanzong (r. 1426–1435)” (PhD diss., Yale University, 1998), 218-19. 10 Cheng-hua Wang, 219. Dora Ching adopted the term (and concept) of xingle tu defined by Wang; however, she hypothesized that xingle tu may have functioned as records of events and markers of legitimacy. Dora Ching, “Icons of Rulership: Imperial Portraiture during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2011), 159. 11 Hui-Chi Lo, “Political Advancement and Religious Transcendence: The Yongzheng Emperor’s (1678-1735) Deployment of Portraiture” (PhD diss., Stanford University, 2009), 6-7. 12 Lo argues that the definition of the xingle tu came to refer simply to any portrait genre from the eighteenth century. Ibid., 15. 6 disdained Ming emperors—it highly doubtful that eighteenth-century Qing emperors and their contemporary audiences used the term xingle tu to refer to paintings that recorded the emperors’ important ceremonial and political activities. In the Joseon court of Korea, the term for paintings that recorded state rites and court ceremonies combined the word gye 계/契 (or 稧), meaning “gathering,” with another word for the mounting format: screen 병 屛, album첩 帖, or hanging scroll축 軸. Thus, if a painting of this subject were formatted as a screen, it would be called gyebyeong, meaning “gathering screen.” King Jeongjo (r. 1776-1800) used such a term in the Journal of the Royal Secretariat 승정원일기. [Any vestige] can be recorded, and which is painted, and made into a folding screen, and which lists the name of [event participants], and describes the event on the last [panel of the screen] is what is called a Gathering Folding Screen, which have been made for a long time.13 凡有可以表識之蹟, 作圖又作屛, 姓名題其中, 事實記其尾, 是謂之稧屛, 稧屛之作久矣. A number of extant works even have the term gathering in the titles, such as the Album of Gathering at the Year of Gisa 기해기사계첩 and the Album of Gathering for Stream Drainage Project 준천계첩. Here the term gathering indicates a ceremony attended by the king and court officials to celebrate an important state event. The usage of the word gye reveals the origin of Joseon court documentary paintings. From the sixteenth through the seventeenth century, the aristocrats (mostly 13 An entry dated to the twentieth day of the third lunar month of 1781, from the Record of Self-Reflections 일성록. 7 court officials) held various types of private gatherings or gye: for example, gatherings for those of the same age, for those who passed the state examination in the same year, for current or former coworkers in the same government office, and so forth. These court officials hired professional painters to document their gatherings in multiples so that each participant at a gathering could have his own copy. These works were broadly called “Gathering Painting 계회도, 契會圖.”14 Tapping into this existing popular tradition, eighteenth-century Joseon kings commissioned and distributed copies of documentary paintings as gifts to the court officials who attended events hosted by the monarchs. In my research, I use the term “court documentary painting,” which was first introduced in Korean (gungjung girokhwa 궁중기록화) by an art historian Park Jeong- hye, and is a more accurate term than some others.15 The definition of court can vary with 14 This type of painting is alternatively translated in English, “Commemorative” painting. Hyunsoo Woo, “Screen Paintings of the Joseon Court,” in Treasures from Korea: Arts and Culture of the Joseon Dynasty, 1392-1910 (Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 2014), 29-32. 15 Although scholars have recognized the historicity of Qing court documentary paintings, the terms they have employed do not always reflect it. Some notable terms include history painting 歷史畵 and genre painting 風俗畵; painting of documenting achievements 記功圖 was also used for military campaigns. The term history painting highlights the fact that most of the paintings were created as historical records to document important state and court events and to educate future successors, but the usage of this term was somewhat arbitrary, indicating works that depicted specific historical events as well as those depicting ancient stories as morality tales. Such a case can be seen in an article by Wang Jia, which defines history painting as a pictorial genre that depicts events of importance. However, Wang enlists Qing paintings such as Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour and Kangxi Emperor’s Birthday Celebration Procession as examples of history painting, along with Yan Li-ben’s Painting of the Thirteen Emperors 歷代帝王圖 and Li Gonglin’s Guo Ziyi Receiving the Homage from Barbarian General 免胄圖. Wang Jia 王嘉, “Zhongguo lishi jiqi fazhan,” 中国历史画及其发展 [Development of Chinese history painting] Lilu yanjiu 理论研究 3 (2006): 73. The term genre painting has also been used in Chinese scholarship in order to highlight that this genre depicted the emperors’ and imperial court members’ daily activities. Like xingle-tu, this term trivializes the themes of this genre and is 8 place and circumstance. In this dissertation, first, the court is the institution that served the practical and ideological needs of the Chinese empire or the Korean kingdom. Second, the court indicates the family and retinue of a sovereign. Third, the court is the physical space where the royal family members resided and carried out their cultural and political visions. When the emperors or kings toured their domains, traveling palaces 行宮 served as their temporary courts. The paintings addressed in this study depict court- sponsored ceremonial and political events and were commissioned by court members. The English term documentary that I have chosen to characterize the paintings in my current research is appropriate because the primary function of these paintings was indeed to record the rulers’ events—although documentation was not their only function, as I will explain in Chapter Four. Furthermore, the term documentary has been used both to indicate style and subject in discussions of photography and to effectively convey artists’ views (and at times patrons’ views) about society or promote their patrons’ visions. That the term documentary carries both meanings in fact highlights the duality of court-sponsored paintings: they recorded the Chinese and Korean rulers’ ceremonial and highly misleading about the political significance of its subjects. For example, the genre-painting volume of the catalogue published by the National Museum of China in Beijing includes Imperial Processional-paraphernalia Ceremony 大駕鹵簿圖—a Song handscroll that documents Emperor Renzong’s imperial procession to the Round Mound Altar in the southern suburb of the capital—along with a handscroll by Jing Tingbiao, Illustration of Tribute Bearers 皇清職工圖. In the volume of Ming and Qing genre painting published by the Palace Museum, Beijing, The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour, The Kangxi Emperor’s Sixtieth Birthday Celebration Procession 康熙帝萬壽圖, and Guangxu’s Grand Wedding Ceremony 光緒大婚圖 were treated as genre paintings along with Zhou Kun’s twelve-leaf album, Scenes of Marketplace 村市生涯圖, and Chen Mei’s twelve-leaf album, Imperial Ladies Enjoying the Twelve Months 月曼清遊圖. The misuse of the term genre shows that Chinese scholars lack an understanding of the political implications of depicted ceremonial activities. 9 political activities, and they employed pictorial modes that expressed their patrons’ perspectives and aesthetics. As I will discuss in the following chapters, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings were visual reconstructions of actual events that conveyed their patrons’ views and statements about the events and, by extension, about their rule. In Chapter Five, I will demonstrate that these paintings were formed by the combination of the royal patrons’ distinct aesthetics and the court painters’ pictorial choices. From the particular rituals selected by patrons, to the visual languages employed by designated painters, various decisions were integrated in this genre to present essentially faithful, though perhaps less-than-perfect records of actual events. In addition, choices of pictorial language (e.g., diagrammatic or illusionistic), composition, and mounting (e.g., handscroll, hanging scroll, tieluo, album, or folding screen), which drew upon preexisting constructs or schemas, played important roles in infusing court documentary painting with specific political messages and effects. Thus, in this study, the term “court documentary painting” refers to works that recorded historical, court-sponsored events, were commissioned by court members, and made by painters in the court workshops. Private works without ceremonial, public functions are not included in this study. Therefore, works like the Chinese Elegant Gathering in the Apricot Garden 杏園雅集圖 (1437) are not included in this discussion. Even though this handscroll did record a specific historical event, was commissioned by Yang Rong 楊榮 (1371-1440), who served as the Ming court’s grand secretary for thirty- 10 seven years,16 and was painted by the famous court painter Xie Huan 謝環 (act. 1426- 52), the painting was a private commission for Yang Rong; gatherings that took place there were private, not official court ceremonies. The same restriction applies to the Korean works in this study. Works such as the hanging scroll Gathering of the Royal Athenaeum 독서당계회도 (1570), the eight-panel folding screen Banquet to Celebrate Geon Dae-woon’s Entry to the Club of Elders 권대운 기로 연회도 (1689), and the Album of Gathering of Officials of the Office of State Tribunal 금오계첩 (1777) are not considered court documentary paintings.17 Some of the patrons of these works were court officials, but the events depicted in the paintings were not sponsored or organized by the court. State of the Field Over the past two decades, numerous studies have been made of works that I define as court documentary painting. Research of varying depths and perspectives has been conducted, but one can see noticeable trends in the scholarship on both Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. In discussing Qing examples of the genre, both 16 Shih-Shan Henry Tsai, The Eunuchs in the Ming Dynasty (Albany: State University of New York, 1995), 225. 17 Park Jeong-hye points out that gathering paintings commissioned by bureaucrats were popular from the sixteenth through the seventeenth century but significantly declined in the eighteenth century; at that time, kings began to commission documentary paintings that recorded various court ceremonies including state rites and royal banquets. Park Jeong-hye 박정혜, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 조선시대 궁중기록화 연구 [Study of Joseon-period court documentary painting] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000), 60-78. 11 Chinese and non-Chinese scholars typically have emphasized the political themes of these works in relation to the multiethnic Qing empire and have perceived the paintings as tools for the aggrandizement of the rulers’ political careers, but have not given much attention to these paintings within the court documentary painting traditions of China. Scholars working on Korean examples, on the other hand, have paid more attention to stylistic and thematic developments from the seventeenth through the nineteenth centuries, and only recently have begun to explore the political meanings of eighteenth-century Korean kings’ patronage of documentary paintings. One example of pioneering research that investigated Qing court documentary painting in a historical and political context is a 1979 article by Hou Ching-lang and Michele Pirazzoli-T’Serstevens, respectively an independent scholar from Taiwan and a senior curator of the Musée Guimet.18 Hou and Pirazzoli- T’Serstevens suggested that a set of handscrolls depicts one of the Qianlong emperor’s autumn hunting trips to Mulan, which began in 1741 and continued until 1750. Comparing this work’s style to other works such as the hanging scroll Kazaks Presenting Horses in Tribute (1757), they dated it to sometime in the 1750s.19 Their research provides an excellent model of the essential steps for analyzing Qing court documentary paintings: first, to examine primary textual 18 Hou Ching-lang and Michele Pirazzoli- T’Serstevens, “Les Chasses d’Automne de l’Empereur Qianlong a Mulan,” [The Qianlong emperor’s autumn hunt to Mulan] T’oung Pao 65 (1979): 13-50. 19 Hou Yili suggests that the Mulan scrolls must have been made about the same time as Grand Review scrolls (dated to 1744-47) were completed. Hou Yili 侯怡利, “Guozhi zhongdian: Qianlong simian de dayue yu dayuetu,” 國之重典－: 乾隆四年的大閱與大閱圖 [One of the national canons: grand review ceremony in the fourth year of the Qianlong reign and Grand Review] Tongshi yanjiu jikan 通識研究集刊 12 (2007): 153-78. 12 records in order to identify and date the depicted events; second, to understand the political circumstances that surrounded the events; and third, to compare stylistic features with those of other court documentary paintings in order to assist in the dating of the work and the identification of the painters. More recently, Nie Chongzheng 聂崇正 and Yang Boda 杨伯达, two Palace Museum senior researchers, laid the groundwork for the study of Qing court documentary paintings.20 Both scholars’ works demonstrated that the Archives from the Office of Manufacture of the Imperial Household is the most critical source for the study of these paintings. Their extensive examination and review of this court archive elucidated many important facts about the process behind the paintings. For example, in his 2002 article on the Grand Review handscrolls 大閱圖, Nie revealed that in 1746 the Qianlong emperor reviewed a completed part of the painting, found errors, and ordered that corrections be made.21 20 For Nie Chongzheng’s discussions on Qing court documentary paintings, see: “Lang Shining he tade lishihua,” 郎世宁和他的历史画, 油画作品[Lang Shining and his history painting and oil painting] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 3 (1979): 39-48; Qinggong huihua yu xihua dongjian 请宫绘画与西画东渐 (Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe, 2008); “Liezhen yu yuezhen: gugong neiwai de liang juan Qianlong dayetu,” 列阵与阅阵: 故宫内外的两卷乾隆大阅图 Zijincheng 紫禁城 8 (2009): 86–95. For selected articles by Yang Boda, see: “Wanshuyuan ciyantu kaoxi,” 万树园赐宴图考析 [Research on the Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 4 (1982): 3-25; “Guanyu mashutu ticaide zaikaoding,” 关于马术图题材的再考订 [Reconsidering the themes of horsemanship] Wenwu 文物 no. 7 (1983): 64-67; “Qianlong shejian youhua guaping shukao 乾隆射箭油画挂屏述考,” [Discussion on the hanging oil screen painting of the Qianlong emperor shooting with bow and arrow] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 1 (1991): 26-38. 21 Nie Chongzheng, Qing gong hui hua yu xi hua dong jian 请宫绘画与西画东渐 [Qing court painting and the eastern march of western Painting] (Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe), 103. 13 In a 1988 article that compared and contrasted the Southern Inspection Tour scrolls of the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors, Maxwell K. Hearn, the senior curator of Asian Art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, identified the pictorial languages that characterize each scroll and analyzed them in connection with the differing political purposes of the two emperors’ tours.22 Hearn’s article may be one of the first studies to explore the style of Qing court documentary painting in relation to Qing politics. Hearn’s 1990 dissertation, “The Kangxi Southern Inspection Tour: A Narrative Program by Wang Hui,” focused more on the role of Wang Hui and his usage of earlier pictorial languages in designing the Kangxi emperor’s scrolls.23 Hearn convincingly demonstrated that Wang Hui, the chief painter of the scroll project, borrowed pictorial and iconographic vocabularies from previous dynasties.24 According to Hearn, Wang took artistic inspiration from Northern Song monumental landscapes, Zhang Zeduan’s handscroll Spring Festival on the River 清明上河圖, Southern Song landscape paintings, and woodblock pictorial maps. However, since Hearn did not see pre-Qing works as part of the tradition of court documentary painting, he overlooked important earlier examples, 22 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Portrait: The Southern Tour Paintings of Kangxi and Qianlong,” Phoebus 6, no. 1 (1988): 91-131. 23 For other scholars’ discussions on the Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour, see: Simon B. Heilesen, “Southern Journey,” Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 52 (1980): 89–144; Chin-Sung Chang, “Mountains and Rivers, Pure and Splendid: Wang Hui and the Making of Landscape Panoramas in Early Qing China” (PhD. diss., Yale University, 2004); Nie Chongzheng, Gongting yishu de guanghui: qingdai gongting huihua luncong 宮廷藝術的光輝: 淸代宮廷繪畵論叢 (臺北: 東大圖書公司, 1996), 75-91, 148-156. 24 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour,” in Landscapes Clear and Radiant: The Art of Wang Hui (1623–1717) (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2008), 181. 14 such as Song-period handscroll works of lubu processions or paraphernalia processions or Ming court-sponsored paintings such as Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace. In Chapter One, I rectify this omission with my discussion of Song and Ming court documentary paintings and their styles and pictorial modes as direct prototypes of eighteenth-century Qing works. While the studies mentioned above more or less attempted to prove the historical accuracy of Qing court documentary paintings, Chin-sung Chang’s 2004 dissertation sheds light on the fictional nature of the genre. Chang asserted that the political optimism emanating from the Southern Inspection scrolls—as revealed in the images conveying order, peace, and prosperity—stood in sharp contrast to the realities of the widespread economic depression at that time.25 In describing the multivalent conceptual and pictorial significances of Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour, Chang called it “an interlacing of maps, landscapes, and political narratives.”26 Two other studies, Joanna Waley-Cohen’s 1996 article, “Commemorating War in Eighteenth-Century China,” and Liu Lu’s 2010 article, “Sacrificies at the Altar of the First Farmer and the Yongzheng Emperor’s Politics” 祭先农坛图与雍正帝的统治, investigated two subjects of Qing court documentary paintings—a military rite and a mid-level auspicious rite—in light of the intersection of court documentary painting and 25 Chin-Sung Chang, “Mountains and Rivers, Pure and Splendid: Wang Hui and the Making of Landscape Panoramas in Early Qing China,” 389-90. 26 Ibid., 400. 15 the ritual culture of the eighteenth-century Qing court.27 Finally, in a 2013 article, Chen Pao-chen compared The Kangxi Emperor’s Birthday Celebration Procession scroll to The Qianlong Emperor’s Eightieth-Year Birthday Celebration scroll. Her discussion compared and contrasted the stylistic differences between these two works. Chen concluded that the Kangxi emperor’s scroll has more visually diverse renderings of figures and architecture. In fact, Hearn in his comparative analysis on Kangxi and Qianlong’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls reached a similar conclusion as Chen.28 In Chapter Six, I will argue that the rigid, formalistic and diagrammatic mode of the Qianlong ceremonial paintings can be attributed to the painters’ increasing reliance on the diagrams of ritual manuals. Scholars of Korean art history began researching court documentary painting in the early 1990s, and this dissertation has benefited mostly from Korean scholarship since that decade.29 One pioneering example was Park Jeong-hye’s 1991 article, “A Study of King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Suwon” 수원능행도병연구.30 Her research focused 27 Liu Lu 劉潞. “Zhai xiannongtantu yu yongzhengdi de tongzhi,” 祭先农坛图与雍正帝的统治 [Sacrificial offering at the altar of the first farmer and the Yongzheng emperor’s statecraft] Qingshi yanji 清史研究, no. 3 (2010), 151-156. 28 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and the Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour,” 180. 29 Many exhibition catalogues on this topic were published in the late 2000s. One notable example is Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중행사도 [Joseon-period court event painting], 3 vols. (Seoul: National Museum of Korea). 30 Park Jeong-hye 박정혜, “Suwon neunghaengdobyeong yeongu,” 수원능행도병 연구 [Study of king Jeongjo’s outing to the city of Suwon] Misulsahak yeongu 미술사학연구, no. 189 (1991): 27-68. 16 on determining the significance of an eight-panel folding screen, which depicted King Jeongjo’s 1795 Outing within the context of Korean art history. Park argued that the use of the bird’s-eye view used in a couple of panels from this folding screen became widely adopted in nineteenth-century screens, particularly those documenting royal banquets. As mentioned earlier, Park Jeong-hye introduced the term “court documentary painting” in Korean in her 2000 book, Study of Joseon-period Court Documentary Painting 조선시대 궁중기록화 연구.31 Korean scholars today generally have adopted this term to refer to court-sponsored paintings that document specific court and state ceremonies. In her book, Park addressed various issues in Joseon court documentary paintings, such as their production, circulation, and stylistic developments, focusing on works created from the seventeenth through the nineteenth century. Park’s discovery of primary sources and her thorough textual analysis was the springboard for my research.32 Other studies examine highly specific aspects of court documentary paintings. In a 2003 book chapter titled “Art and Royal Banquets from the Reign of King Injo through 31 In her 1991 article, Park used the term gungjung haengsado 궁중행사도, meaning “court event painting.” Park Jeong-hye, “Suwon neunghaengdobyeong yeongu,” 수원능행도병 연구 [Study of King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Suwon]. In a 1998 article, she used the term yeoksa hwa 역사화, meaning “history painting.” Park Jeong-hye, “Joseon sidae-ui yeoksa hwa,” 조선시대의 역사화 [Joseon-period history painting] Johyeong 조형 20 (1998): 8-36. 32 Park Jeong-hye continued to research this topic and published the following works: “Yeongjo yeongan-ui gungjung girokhwa jejak-gwa juncheon gyecheop,” 영조연간의 궁중 기록화 제작과 준천계첩 [Court documentary painting during King Yeongjo’s reign and the Album of the Gathering for the Stream Drainage Project] Doshi yeoksa munhwa 도시역사문화 no. 2 (2004); Yeongjo-ui goroso haengcha-wa goroso gyecheop 영조의 기로소 행차와 기로소 계첩 [King Yeongjo’s visit to the office of the club of elders and the album of the office of the club of elders] (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon, 2008); and Yeongjo dae-ui janchi geurim 영조 대의 잔치그림 [Banquet painting in king Yeongjo’s reign] (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon, 2013). 17 the Reign of King Yeongjo” 조선 인조, 영조 년간의 궁중 연향과 미술, Seong-mi Yi demonstrated the importance of examining the manual of ritual protocols or uigwe 의궤 in studying about the material culture of court banquets and their relation to court documentary paintings.33 For example, she discovered that silk and paper flowers were used to decorate royal banquets, and thus banquet scenes in Joseon court documentary paintings depicted faux flowers.34 Yi’s findings show that the study of uigwe documents is indispensable in analyzing court documentary paintings. Burglind Jungmann pointed out in a 2007 article that—as evident in an eight-panel folding screen titled Sixtieth Birthday Banquet for Queen Dowager Singjeong at Gyeongbok Palace 무진진찬도병 (1868)—nineteenth-century court documentary paintings served as decorative furnishings as well as historical records.35 In the first part of the article, she discussed this dual role of court documentary paintings as the collision of the worlds of documentation and decoration; she then analyzed the aniconic or emblematic representation of the king and the female court members. Jungmann argued that since the king was traditionally viewed as the sanctified mediator between Heaven and Earth, portraying him in any figural form was not appropriate. According to her, 33 Yi Seong-mi이성미, “Joseon Injo, Yeongjo nyeogan-ui gungjung yeonhyang-gwa misul” 조선 인조, 영조 년간의 궁중 연향과 미술 [Royal banquet and art from the Injo to Yeongjo reigns] in Joseon hugi gungjung yeonhyang munhwa 조선 후기 궁중 연향 문화 [Banquet culture in the late Joseon court], vol. 1 (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2007), 66-134. 34 Ibid., 129. 35 Burglind Jungmann, “Documentary Record Versus Decorative Representation: A Queen’s Birthday Celebration at the Korean Court,” Arts Asiatique 62 (2007): 104-106. 18 “non-figurative representation elevated him into the divine.”36 I agree with Jungmann’s argument that Joseon kings were viewed as sacred mediators between Earth and Heaven, namely as the Son of Heaven, and non-figural representation of a Joseon king certainly created a strong visual sense of hierarchy between the king and court officials. However, I also believe it is important to note a long, persistent tradition of realism and its role in transforming works for the purpose of worshipping, particularly ancestral portraits. My analysis in Chapter Five will demonstrate that non-figurative or emblematic representations of eighteenth-century kings were more directly related to the practical issues of portraying royalty, which involved a complex set of preparatory procedures, and to the consumption of court documentary paintings as rewards, souvenirs, and referential guides. Recent research has delved into the political intentions of commissioning court documentary paintings. Some notable examples include: Yoo Jae-bin’s 2012 article, “The Politics of Celebration: Study of the Painting of the Ceremony of Celebratory Offering” 경축의 정치학: 진하도 연구37; Yoo Jae-bin’s 2013 catalogue essay, “The Politics of Art under King Jeongjo: Exemplified by ‘Events from King Jeongjo’s Visit to Hwaseong in 1795’”38; and Seo Yun-jeong’s 2012 article, “The Andong Kwon Clan, Their Commission 36 Burglind Jungmann, 107. 37 Yoo Jae-bin 유재빈 “Gukrip bakmulgwan sojang jinhado-ui jeongchijeok seonggyeo-gwa uimi,” 국립중앙박물관 소장 진하도의 정치적 성격과 의미 [Political nature and significance of the painting of congratulatory offering in the collection of the national museum of Korea] Dongak misulsahak 동악미술사학 13 (2012): 181-200. 38 Yoo suggests that the sequence of events arranged on the eight panels of King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong reflected Jeongjo’s original plan, not the actual order 19 of Commemorative Painting, and the Politics of Southerners in the Late 17th Century” 17세기 후반 안동 권씨의 기념 회화와 남인의 정치 활동.39 In her Yu Jae-bin’s article, she identified the event illustrated in the folding screen as a congratulatory ceremony, which commemorated the successful completion of a previous ceremony that offered posthumous titles to the crown prince Sado and his wife, the lady Hyegyeong, in 1783. Yu suggested that officials who belonged to the Hall of the Star of Literature offered this congratulatory ceremony to express their collective support of the political restoration of the crown prince.40 Meanwhile, Seo Yun-jeong closely analyzed three folding screens, including Banquet for Celebrating Gwon Dae-wun’s Entry to the Club of Elders 권대운 기로 연회도, in the context of the political purges of members of the Southern faction. My study builds on the work of other scholars, such as those mentioned above, who have addressed Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. Their scholarship has served as the springboard for my current research, which expands on their observations to more thoroughly analyze the artistic, political, and cross-cultural complexities of this topic. Focusing on eighteenth-century court documentary paintings, I will demonstrate of the events, which had to be changed to accommodate his aging mother, the lady Hyegyeong. Yoo Jae-bin, “The Politics of Art under King Jeongjo Exemplified by ‘Events from King Jeongjo’s Visit to Hwaseong in 1795,’” in In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art during the Joseon Dynasty (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013), 90-109. 39 Seo Yun-jeong 서윤정, “Sipchil segi huban andong gweonssi-ui ginyeom hoehwa-wa namyin-ui jeongchi hwangdong,” 17세기 후반 안동 권씨의 기념 회화와 남인의 정치 활동 [The Andong Gwon clan’s patronage of commemorative paintings and the Southerner’s political activities] Andong hak yeongu 안동학연구, no. 11 (2012): 259-94. 40 Yoo Jae-bin, 182-185. 20 the thematic and stylistic links between court documentary traditions in China and Korea as formulated through their cross-cultural interactions and their political intimacy. Primary Sources In my research, primary sources have been crucial, both for identifying the subjects of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings in their historical contexts and for understanding their political and cultural meanings. The most important primary sources for studying eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings are the official records kept by the Office of Manufacture of the Imperial Household 造辦處.41 The Archives from the Office of Manufacture of the Imperial Household 內務附造辦處各作成活計檔 provides much information relevant to the production of Qing court documentary paintings, such as the selection of painters and important dates in the process, from execution to dedication.42 Maxwell K. Hearn and Chin-sung Chang have pointed out that, although The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls took seven years to complete, the paintings were not mentioned in any of the official records such as the Veritable Records 41 The Office of Manufacture of the Imperial Household 造辦處 is located in the Hall of Mental Cultivation 養心殿. There are three main categories divided in the zaobanchu: the mounting work 裱作, the record of historical events 紀事錄, and the clock workshop 自鳴鐘. Yang Boda, “The Development of the Ch’ien-lung Painting Academy,” in Words and Images: Chinese Poetry, Calligraphy, and Painting, eds. Wen C. Fong and Alfreda Murck (New York and Princeton: Metropolitan Museum of Art and Princeton University, 1991), 333. 42 Complete copies of Archives from the Office of Manufacture of the Imperial Household 內務附造辦處各作成活計檔 are available at the library of the National Palace Museum, Taiwan. 21 or the Imperial Diaries. Chang suggests that the scrolls were treated as “secret maps,”43 which contained important geographic information about the Qing domain, and thus they were neither mentioned in court records nor catalogued in any collection archives. However, it was quite normal that the emperors’ comments on court-sponsored paintings were not recorded in official archives. The comments on paintings of the Kangxi emperor’s birthday celebration, the Yongzheng emperor’s sacrifices at the Altar of the First Farmer and his first Plowing ceremony, and the Qianlong emperor’s southern-inspection tour, Grand Review, and Sericulture ceremony were not mentioned in Qing official records. While the subjects of these works may not have been as significant as the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors’ southern inspection tour, they were still politically important state rites. Yet they were not recorded in the court archives. In examining the Comprehensive Annals of the Empire 皇朝通志 (completed in 1787), I found a list of paintings for the dynastic successors.44 As mentioned earlier, in a section titled “Illustration and Charts,” court documentary paintings are listed as important materials for statecraft. Each painting is accompanied by a brief introduction about the depicted event and, in some cases, the names of the painters. In the list of 43 The Complete Collection of Illustrations and Writings from the Earliest to Current Times 古今圖書集成, which included highly detailed geographic information down to the local administrative level, complemented by 216 maps based on the Kangxi atlas, was imported to Korea during Jeongjo’s reign. I disagree that the Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour was treated as a state secret, as suggested by Chin-Sung Chang. Chin-Sung Chang, “Mountains and Rivers, Pure and Splendid: Wang Hui and the Making of Landscape Panoramas in Early Qing China,” 338-345. 44 The text is divided into twenty treatises 略, with an introductory chapter explaining the guidelines of the compilation. 22 paintings considered useful for future rulers, notable examples include the Picture of Preservation of Righteousness 養正圖, the Tales of Virtuous Empresses of Past Dynasties 歷朝賢后故事圖, Auspicious Grains 瑞谷图, Auspicious Vegetables 瑞蔬图, Ten Horses 十駿图, and White Falcon 白鹰图. This record demonstrates that these paintings were considered by their imperial patrons to be worthy references for their successors, who would consult this visual material when they performed similar rituals. The Veritable Records of Qing 清朝實錄, the Court Diaries 起居注, and the Comprehensive Institutions of the Imperial Court 皇朝通典 served as important resources to identify the political meanings of state rites, which became the subjects of court documentary paintings. Based on the Comprehensive Institution of the Qing Dynasty and the Court Diaries, the Yongzheng emperor began to personally conduct an offering at the Altar of the First Farmer in the second year of his reign (1723), and he continued to do so every year through his thirteen-year reign.45 Furthermore, the Yongzheng emperor embarked on an empire-wide program to promote worship at the Altar of the First Farmer along with officials at the local level, and expressed that his participation was a way to pay respect to Heaven and his subjects.46 Liu Lu, who examined the appearance of auspicious omens (started to be reported in the second year of his reign, 1726), recorded in the Veritable Records of the Emperor Shizong and the 45 Huangchao tongdian 皇朝通典 [Comprehensive Institutions of the Imperial Court], vol. 44. 46 Medium-Level Plowing Ceremony of the Ministry of Rites 禮部中祀耕耤 from Daqing huidian shili 大清會典事例 [The Collected Statues of the Qing], vol. 313, quoted in Liu Lu, 4. 23 production of a set of undated scrolls documenting the Yongzheng emperor’s sacrificial worshipping ritual at the Altar of the First Farmer and the plowing ceremony, convincingly suggested that the Yongzheng emperor must have commissioned that set of scrolls in order to frame his ritualistic activities as the direct cause of heavenly responses.47 Finally, the inscriptions (poems, prefaces, and epilogues) on Qing court documentary paintings are important primary sources that provide glimpses of the emperors’ attitudes toward commissioned works. After the works were completed, Qing emperors often inscribed poems and comments on the paintings or elsewhere wrote poems that were related to the works.48 Such texts reveal the thoughts of the emperors, who continued to interact with the paintings, including their intentions for the viewing of these paintings. Texts inscribed on eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings typically including a preface 序, one or more poems 詩, an epilogue 跋文, and a list of the participants and their court positions 座目 provide more, varied types of 47 Many accounts that directly related the emperor’s sacrificial worshipping ritual and plowing ceremony with the appearance of multiple-headed grains can be found in official records such as the Medium-Level Plowing Ceremony of the Ministry of Rites 禮部中祀耕耤 from Daqing huidian shili 大清會典事例 [The Collected Statues of the Qing], vol. 313, quoted in Liu Lu, 4. 48 While the Qianlong emperor commissioned a large painting, The Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of the Ten Thousand Trees, to document a banquet for the Dorbot Mongol leaders in the fifth lunar month of 1755, he also composed many self-congratulatory essays and poems to celebrate the event, stressing that his benevolence and generosity had won the trust and respect of the Mongols. Ren Quiyu, “Imperial Banquet at the Wanshu Yuan” in New Qing History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde (London and New York: Routledge, 2004), 87. 24 information.49 These inscriptions inform us of the paintings’ execution and completion dates and the specific events. Also, since court officials who participated in events were usually requested to write poems and epilogues, the texts on the Joseon court documentary paintings also reveal their viewers’ responses to the paintings. In addition to the inscriptions on paintings and court official records, the personal journals of court officials are important resources. During the eighteenth century, Joseon kings commissioned documentary paintings and gave copies to court officials who attended the ceremonies. Court officials also commissioned documentary paintings in multiple copies so that each official received a copy. In essays, the officials often listed the paintings they commissioned or received from the kings, in some cases including the texts they inscribed on the works. Through analysis of court officials’ comments about documentary paintings, I have discovered their perspectives on these paintings, as well as their thoughts about receiving and commissioning them. Their comments highlight the political nature of these paintings and show that these works were made not only to be given as gifts but also to strengthen political fraternity among court officials and to promulgate the king’s benevolence and sagacious rule. This issue will be discussed at length in Chapter Four. While research on Qing paintings benefits from the Archives from the Office of Manufacture of the Imperial Household, with its details about the execution, completion dates, selection of painters, and review process of court-sponsored paintings, there is no analogous archive that recorded the details about the Joseon painting workshops. Instead, 49 Sometimes texts by family members (including the deceased) were inscribed on the backs of the paintings, which were passed on through the generations in the family collection. 25 official court documents such as the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty 조선왕조실록, the Daily Records of the Royal Secretariat of the Joseon Court 승정원일기, the Record of Daily Reflections 일성록, and the Daily Journal of the Hall of the Star of Literature 내각일력 contain Joseon kings’ comments related to the usage of certain court documentary paintings, revealing the kings’ direct involvement in their production.50 In addition to these official court records, a manual of ritual protocols (uigwe 의궤 儀軌), a distinctively Korean type of record—no equivalent archive existed in the Qing court—provides valuable information about material culture relevant to Joseon state rites and other court ceremonies. Each uigwe was designed to instruct readers in the various administrative and artistic processes of preparing and executing a court ceremony. During the fifty-two-year reign of Yeongjo, 135 uigwe (2.5 per year) were created, and during the twenty-three-year reign of Jeongjo, 47 were created. Thus, uigwe are extremely useful for studying the material culture of eighteenth-century court ceremonies as well as the court documentary paintings that recorded those rituals. For example, the Uigwe of the Personal Plowing 친경의궤 with a few illustrated diagrams, 50 For example, an entry dated to the seventeenth day of the third month in 1797 in the Daily Records of the Court Secretariat and in the Records of Daily Reflections recorded that Jeongjo reviewed the paintings that illustrated the ritual procedures of the ceremonies that would take place in the Shrine of Bright Admiration, the shrine of the crown prince Sado, Jeongjo’s biological father. Another account can be found in the Veritable Record of Jeongjo written on the fifth day of the intercalary fifth month of 1781. In that record, Jeongjo asked if court officials had consulted a folding screen that documented the same ceremony conducted by his grandfather Yeongjo in 1739. An entry dated to the twentieth day of the third month in 1782 from the Daily Records of the Royal Secretariat informs that Jeongjo commissioned folding screens that documented his lecture two days earlier to young scholar-officials 抄啓文臣 enrolled in the education program at the Hall of the Star of Literature, the Kyujanggak. 26 ceremony provides detailed information about King Yeongjo’s performance of the rite in 1767, including the production of folding screens and hanging scrolls in years (1739 and 1764) preceding the ceremony. 51 Comparing the painting’s depiction of human and bovine participants in the illustrative diagrams of the uigwe, it is apparent that the court painters consulted those diagrams as pictorially reconstructed a state rite. Organization Chapter One (“History of Court Documentary Painting in China and Korea”) provides an overview of the development of court documentary painting in Chinese and Korean courts and examines the extent to which stylistic and thematic features of earlier works served as prototypes for eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. Regarding Chinese works, this chapter demonstrates that documentary paintings from the Song and Ming courts served as the prototypes for Qing documentary paintings, which earlier scholarship has rarely addressed. Regarding Korean works, this chapter examines their distinctive thematic and stylistic features and raises the possibility that Song documentary paintings played a role in the development of earlier Joseon court documentary paintings. Chapter Two (“Subjects of Eighteenth-Century Qing and Joseon Court Documentary Paintings”) provides an overview of subjects portrayed in eighteenth-century Chinese and Korean court documentary paintings and examines the comparable 51 An uigwe provided such details as: expenditures; the list of participants in the preparation of a state ritual, from high bureaucrats to lowly court painters; and correspondence between court supervisors and painters or between bureaucrats. 27 favor for certain themes, particularly state rituals and rulers’ outings. I suggest that the convergence of such themes in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary painting may have resulted from the frequent exchanges of envoys, whose diplomatic missions collected information on the activities of each court’s rulers and delivered decrees. A Joseon king, in order to strengthen his authority and promote his role as the Son of Heaven to his court officials, would have purposefully modeled himself after a Qing emperor in terms of utilizing state rites and outings as political tools to legitimize and aggrandize his authority. Chapter Three (“Rituals in Fashioning Qing and Joseon Rulers’ Political Identities”) explores two major questions: what was the common defining political aspiration of the Chinese and Korean ruling houses, and how did that shared political aspiration contribute to the development of documenting the rulers’ activities in texts and images? I argue that legitimizing the ownership of Zhonghua 中華 (literally meaning Central Florescence),52 was an overarching political and cultural goal that drove rulers of both states to emphasize their personal participation in state rituals; it led to the emergence of state rites as the primary theme of documentary paintings, which recorded the rulers’ ritual activities and political events to illustrate their commitment to defend or restore Zhonghua. Chapter Four (“Court Documentary Paintings as Historical Records, Referential Guides and Propaganda”) explores various ways the Qing and Joseon courts commissioned and utilized court documentary paintings. This chapter shows that the 52 The complex historical process of defining and re-defining the term Zhonghua will be explained in Chapter Three. 28 Qing emperors mostly commissioned documentary paintings, while at the Joseon court not only kings but also court officials commissioned documentary paintings. This difference was directly related to the way documentary paintings were consumed. In the Joseon court, the officials initiated the commission of paintings in multiple copies as souvenirs to testify the king’s favor, but the court funded their production. Qing court documentary paintings were used mainly as historical records for posterity and as political propaganda for the contemporary audience. Like the Qing emperors, Joseon kings used documentary paintings both as historical records and as propaganda, but they propagated ideas about their rule differently. While Qing emperors preferred to display some of their documentary paintings in semi-public spaces where they could be viewed by their ranking officials and foreign envoys, Joseon kings distributed documentary paintings in the form of gifts and rewards. In Chapter Five (“Images of Rulers in Qing and Joseon Court Documentary Painting”), I compare two modes of representing the rulers—the lifelike portraits of the Qing emperors and the symbolic representations of the Joseon kings—in relation to their differing attitudes about the use of documentary paintings and to their pictorial traditions. Chapter Six (“Modes of Representing Space in Qing and Joseon Court Documentary Painting”) analyzes three approaches to the portrayal of the settings where eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers conducted state ceremonies or engaged in public activities: diagrammatic representation, which emphasized a descriptive plan of the events; topographical representation, which detailed the events’ environs; and illusionistic representation, which created convincing, three-dimensional pictorial spaces. 29 In the Conclusion, I summarize the implications of this study and offer a brief development of court documentary painting after the eighteenth century. 30 CHAPTER ONE: HISTORY OF COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING IN CHINA AND KOREA Introduction There is a long and rich tradition of documenting the lives and achievements of rulers and political elites in East Asian visual culture. A few scholars have addressed ancient mural paintings—perhaps the earliest form of documentary imagery. Patricia Berger, for example, postulated that the images depicted in the murals of Han-period Chinese tombs were created in order to recognize the achievements of the tomb owners.1 Furthermore, Jessica Rawson suggests that the imagery in portrayals of ceremonies and rites in Han-period tomb murals may have aimed “to educate the viewer about how to correctly prepare meals and perform ceremonies for the appropriate moment of day or for seasonal rites and rituals.” Essentially, Rawson implied that the depicted mural images were the visual documents of ritual protocols rather than mere pictures of daily life.2 Korean Goguryeo kingdom’s mural paintings have also been discussed in such a light by a number of scholars.3 1 Patricia Berger, “Rites and Festivities in the Art of Eastern Han China: Shandong and Kiangsu Provinces” (PhD diss., University of California, 1980), 120. 2 Jessica Rawson’s argument is based on research such as Patricia Berger, “Rites and Festivities in the Art of Eastern Han China: Shandong and Kiangsu Provinces” (PhD diss., University of California, 1980); Wu Hung, “Beyond the ‘Great Boundary’: Funerary Narrative in the Cangshan Tomb,” in Boundaries in China, ed. John Hay (London: Reaktion Books, 1994); and Lydia Thompson, “The Yi’nan Tomb: Narrative and Ritual in Pictorial Art of the Eastern Han (25–220 CE) China” (PhD diss., Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1998). 3 An Hwi-jun discusses Goguryeo murals in the context of the figure painting tradition. He argues that the image of procession was profoundly related to the idea of displaying and commemorating the tomb’ owners’ social and political status. An Hwi-jun 안휘준, Hanguk hoehwasa yeongu 한국회화사 연구 [Study of the history of Korean painting] (Seoul: Sigongsa, 31 Court documentary painting, the topic of this current research is the testament of ruling class’ strong desire to record, commemorate, and transmit illustratious aspects of their lives and moments of glory to their audiences, which had continued since mural paintings in ancient Chinese and Korean tombs. This chapter focuses on a few representative examples from earlier Chinese and Korean court documentary painting, which served as direct prototypes for eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. The following discussion not only provides an overview of the development of this type of court documentary painting, but also sheds light on how their pictorial languages and artistic modes were selectively used in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. 2000), 70-75. 32 Court Documentary Painting in the Song Period Imperial Processional Paraphernalia Ceremony 大駕鹵簿圖 Literally meaning a record of the arrangements of shields,4 the term lubu 鹵簿 was first used in Cai Yong’s 蔡邕 (133-192) Solitary Decisions 獨斷, a handbook on the political institutions and rules of government, where it was used to indicate rulers’ processional paraphernalia ceremonies.5 During Cai Yong’s time, lubu was the subject of paintings, and most of them have survived in the form of mural paintings excavated from Han-period tomb. The surviving examples from the Han Dynasty were tomb murals, nevertheless, one can possible surmise that a variety of lubu imagery was created at that time in order to magnify rulers’ political authority. The pictorial practice of documenting rulers’ lubu ceremonies continued in succeeding dynasties6 and seemed to have flourished during the Song Dynasty (960- 1279). In Southern Song scholar Gao Sisun’s 高似孫 (ca. 1160-ca. 1230) Compilation of the Wei State 緯略, he listed a series of processional paraphernalia paintings created in each dynasty, showing the distinctive processional arrangement and ritual equipage drafted for each dynasty. 4 According to Qianhan 前漢, lu 鹵 means shield. 5 For more information about Cai Yong’s Solitary Decisions, see Enno Giel, Imperial Decision-Making and Communication in Early China: A Study of Cai Yong’s Duduan (Wiesbaden: Warrassowitz, 2006). 6 For the murals of lubu ceremony created in the Northern Wei period, see Yang Zhishui 杨之水, “Cixianwanzhang beichao bihua mulubutu ruogan yizhang,” 磁县湾漳北朝壁画墓卤簿图若干仪仗考 [Research on parphernalia in lubu painting in the murals of the northern Wei tomb at Wanzheng, Cixian] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 2 (2006): 114-157. 33 Ying Shao (140–206 CE) had the Han Officials’ Processional Paraphernalia Painting. The Catalogue of Ancient Secret Paintings and Precious Picture records one scroll of Suburban Sacrifice Imperial Processional Paraphernalia and three scrolls of Grand Imperial Processional Paraphernalia. There is one scroll of Imperial Processional Paraphernalia from the Jin Dynasty. There is one scroll of the Ceremonial Manual of Imperial Processional Paraphernalia from the Qi Dynasty. There are three scrolls of the Ceremonial Manual of Imperial Processional Paraphernalia and one scroll of Imperial Processional Paraphernalia from the Chen Dynasty. The Processional Paraphernalia [made in] the Tang period is [what we are] currently using.7 應劭有漢官鹵簿圖. 古秘畫珍圖目有天地郊祀鹵簿圖一卷, 大駕鹵簿圖三卷. 晉有鹵簿圖一卷, 齊有鹵簿儀一卷, 陳有鹵簿儀三卷, 鹵簿圖一卷. 唐世鹵簿正用. The above list attests to the abundance of imperial paraphernalia paintings created in each dynasty; such examples abound because the cultures in these dynasties viewed the processional paraphernalia ceremony as the manifestation and embodiment of the distinctive political character not only of each dynasty, but also of each reign.8 Only two surviving scrolls portray the imperial processional paraphernalia: Grand Processional Paraphernalia 大駕鹵簿圖 (11th century, handscroll, National Museum of China, Beijing) and Processional Paraphernalia of Jade Carriage 7 This is my translation. Gao Sisun 高似孫, Weilüe 緯略, vol. 1. Wenyuange Siku quanshu dianziban 文淵閣四庫全書電子版. 8 For more information about the development of Processional Paraphernalia and how it differed in each reign or dynasty, see Yu Chu 余出, “Zongguo gudai chewenhua: lubu,” 中国古代车文化: 卤簿 [Ancient Chinese culture of transportation: processional paraphernalia] Anquan yu jiankang 安全与健康 (April 2011): 18-20; “Zongguo gudai chewenhua: lubuzhi zhanxian,” 中国古代车文化: 卤簿之展现 [The emergence of processional paraphernalia ceremony] Anquan yu jiankang 安全与健康 (May 2011): 19-21; “Zhongguo gudai chewenhua: lubudewangqiangmingyun,” 中国古代车文化: 卤簿的顽强命运 [The development of processional paraphernalia ceremony] Anquan yu jiankang 安全与健康 (June 2011): 18-20. 34 鹵簿玉輅圖 (12th to 13th centuries, handscroll, Liaoning Provincial Museum, Shenyang) (figs. 1-1, 1-2).9 By analyzing the usage of the ritual objects and the distinctive arrangement of processions, modern scholars have discerned that the former scroll is datable to the Northern Song period (960-1127) and the latter to the Southern Song (1127-1279).10 In both scrolls, imperial processions consisting of rich and varied ritual paraphernalia are portrayed against an empty background. Although these two works made in different periods, the painters of both scrolls did not portray any spectators or landscape background, but rather provided the detailed depiction of multiple rows of event participants and the ritual objects and imperial carriages that were deployed in the processions, suggesting that the pictorial formula for lubu ceremony had been firmly established. Patricia Ebrey who examined the Northern Song scroll, cited Meng Yuan- 9 Lao Jixiong, a well-known connoisseur indenfied the scroll in the Liaoning Provincial Museum as a genuine Southern Song-period work. Lao Jixiong 勞繼雄, Zhongguo gu dai shu hua jian ding shi lu 中國古代書畫鑑定實錄 [A complete authentication and documentation of classical Chinese calligraphy and paintings], vol. 7 (Shanghai: Dongfang chubanzhongxin, 2011), 3541. 10 In contrast to the scroll in the National Museum of China, the one in the Liaoning Provincial Museum is relatively short, marking the changed formation of the Southern Song imperial processional paraphernalia ceremony. According to Chen, the number of ritual articles used for the imperial processional paraphernalia ceremony was drastically reduced during the Southern Song period. Another major difference between the Liaoning scroll and the one in the National History Museum is the viewing direction. Unlike the standard handscroll format of progressing from right to left, the Liaoning scroll was designed to be viewed from left to right, as evident in the depiction of both the female and male court retinues, who are facing left and seem to pull a string connected to the jade chariot in order to move it. From the left appears an elaborately decorated jade chariot mounted by the emperor. This viewing direction, however, is not an unusual one but rather the standard viewing direction of handscrolls that depict an emperor’s return trip as seen in the second scroll of the set of Imperial Outing and Returning Procession and the last scroll of Kangxi’s and Qianlong’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls. 35 lao’s memoir entitled Dreams of the Splendor of the Eastern Capital 東京夢華錄,11 to prove that many local residents filled the street in order to watch the spectacle of imperial outings. However, the scroll does not show any of those excited spectators like Meng. There was a tradition in which the road along the emperor’s procession path was temporarily transformed into an imperial road, however, during the Song and Ming periods, commoners still rushed in to view the emperor’s spectacular procession. Ebrey argues that the indifference to identifying specific place and time indicates that the scroll was not meant to document any specific imperial outing.12 As Ebrey has suggested, the scroll may have not documented a specific imperial outing. Nevertheless, painters’ painstaking depiction of details of ritual objects and participants outfits strongly indicates that the scroll was meant to document a specific, possibly newly designed imperial processional paraphernalia, if not a specific outing. In this sense, Song lubu scrolls still can be defined as court documentary painting. A record of the scroll dating to the Northern Song period can be found in the Final Sequel of the Precious Collection of the Stone Moat 石渠寶笈三編. At the front there is a separate piece on which is recorded the names and numbers [of officials]. In front is inscribed, “The names and numbers of official figures in the grand imperial processional paraphernalia,” in thirteen characters. The inscription afterward reads: “Compiled and presented by the Hanlin Academy of National History editor, subject Zeng Xunshen in the eighth month of the fifth year in the Yanyou (1318).”13 11 Patricia Ebrey, “Taking Out the Grand Carriage: Imperial Spectacle and the Visual Culture of Northern Song Kaifeng,” Asia Major 12, no. 1 (1999), 37-40. 12 Ibid., 61. 13 This is my translation in consulation with Shu Yun-ho. 36 前别幅録名數目. 前署大駕鹵簿中道官吏人物名數篇十三字. 後款識云延祐五年八月日翰林國史院編修官臣曾巽申纂進. The signature line informs the viewer that the Yuan official Zeng Xunshen 曾巽申 (1282- 1330) submitted the scroll to the throne in 1318. Chen Pencheng, the first modern scholar who thoroughly examined the scroll, argued that Zeng, as an expert of ancient rituals, not only owned a number of texts about the imperial processional paraphernalia ceremony but also imperial processional-paraphernalia paintings, including the scroll in the current discussion. Chen hypothesized that, after making a few alterations, Zeng must have submitted this scroll (created in the Northern Song court) with the hope that the Yuan emperor (at that time the Renzong emperor) would perform the processional-paraphernalia ceremony in the correct manner.14 Based upon a record found in the chapter “Carriage and Clothes 舆服志” from the Collected Administrative Documents from the Song 宋會要, which gives an account of the emperor viewing of a south-pointing chariot 指南車, Chen believed the scroll must have documented one of Song Renzong’s Processional Paraphernalia ceremonies during his reign (1022-63).15 Since a south-pointing chariot—an instrument that always pointed to the south—was a great technological invention, the scroll must have depicted Renzong’s imperial processional paraphernalia, which employed this device for the first 14 Chen Pen-cheng 陈鹅程, “Jiuti dajia lubutushuzhongdao yanjiu,” 旧题大驾卤簿图书中道研究 [Study of the grand processional paraphernalia painting scrolls] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 2 (1996): 81-83. 15 Chen Pen-cheng, 83-84. 37 time. The south-pointing chariot is described in the Song History 宋史 as follows: “The south-pointing chariot was reddish. Both boxes were painted with green dragons and white tigers, with flowers, birds, entertainers, arches, and perfume pouches on the four sides. There was an immortal on top that pointed south whichever direction the chariot traveled. Four horses were secured to one shaft that had a phoenix tip. There were originally eighteen drivers, but they were increased to thirty during the Yong-xi period of Emperor Taizong. During the fifth year of the Tian Sheng period of Emperor Renzong, engineering officer Yan Su began to build a south-pointing chariot… Today, the chariot can be built using the following method. There is a single shaft in the chariot. There is an extra construction on the outer chassis of the chariot. The wooden immortal stands on top and raises its hand to point to the south…16” 指南車, 一曰司南車. 赤質, 兩箱畫青龍, 白虎, 四面畫花鳥, 重臺, 勾闌,鏤拱，四角垂香囊. 上有仙人, 車雖轉而手常南指. 一轅，鳳首, 駕四馬. 駕士舊十八人, 太宗雍熙四年, 增為三十人. 仁宗天聖五年，工部郎中燕肅始造指南車⋯今創意成之. 其法: 用獨轅車, 車箱外籠上有重,立木仙人於上, 引臂南指⋯ Although south-pointing chariots were built for imperial processional paraphernalia prior to the Northern Song period, the first usage of this special chariot for imperial processions began during Song Renzong’s reign. As mentioned in the Song History, Yan Su, an official in the Engineering Office, began a south-pointing chariot project in 1027.17 A cartouche inscribed at the top of the National History Museum scroll provides detailed information about the outstanding mechanical aspects of Yan Su’s south-pointing chariot, revealing that the south-pointing chariot was considered more 16 I adopted Yan Hong-sen’s translation with slight modifications. Yan Hong-sen, Reconstruction Designs of Lost Ancient Chinese Machinery (New York: Springer-Verlag, 2008), 209. 17 Yan Hong-sen, 214. 38 important than any other paraphernalia item (fig. 1-3) because of its novelty. It is difficult to pinpoint which years the imperial processional paraphernalia depicted in the scroll took place; however, it certainly must have been created after 1027, when Yan Su embarked upon his project. Given the fact that Yan Su must have completed his south-pointing chariot by 1040 (the year of his death), it is likely that the scroll was made to commemorate the first usage of a south-pointing chariot in the imperial processional paraphernalia. No known Yuan and Ming-period works, which depicted lubu ceremony, has survived, but the pictorial tradition of Song court lubu painting has. For example, a set of two handscrolls entitled Imperial Outing and Returning the Palace 出警入蹕圖, which depicted a Ming emperor’s trip to the mausoleum seems to have modeled on Song-period lubu paintings. The maker(s) of this Ming-period scroll set meticulously described all the details of equipage; banners, carriages, shields and armors, and rank badges, used in the imperial procession, and paid close attention on to the carefully orchestrated arrangement of that spectacular imperial procession. According to Ray Huang, whenever Ming emperors visited the mausoleum, “local magistrates, elders, and outstanding teachers were ushered in to visit the sovereign,”18 however, none of these groups were portrayed in Imperial Outing and Returning the Palace. This demonstrates that Song-period lubu imagery served as a model for the imperial imagery of later periods. Furthermore, Song-period processional paraphernalia ceremony scrolls might have been models for Qing and Joseon court scrolls that recorded processional- 18 Ray Huang, 1598: A Year of No Significance (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981), 124. 39 paraphernalia ceremonies. One scroll dated to 1748 in the collection of the Shenyang Palace Museum, and another in the collection of the National Museum of Korea, approached the topic in ways similar to the Song period processional-paraphernalia scrolls. The first illustrated the Qianlong emperor’s paraphernalia ceremony as it proceeded toward the Temple of Heaven during the winter solstice in 1748 (fig. 1-4)19; the latter portrayed a Joseon envoy’s procession that carried the Joseon king’s letter to the shogun of Japan in 1636 (fig. 1-5). Although ritual equipage and processional layouts of these two scrolls are certainly different, the mode of depicting the ceremony, the overhead viewpoint, and the treatment of empty background in both scrolls bear a striking resemblance to two surviving Song-period examples, suggesting that certain pictorial features of lubu paintings were inherited by later Chinese and Korean works that dealt with state rituals. Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 The activities painted in Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖, a mid-11th century set of four handscrolls in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, are explained in 19 The Processional Paraphernalia ceremony conducted in 1748 was based on the regulations had been reformed in 1744. Dong Xiaomei 董小梅, “Qingchao tianzi chema liyizhidu chutan,” 清朝天子车马礼仪制度初探 [Analysis on Qing emperor’s processional ritual system] Hubei xingzheng xueyuan xuebao 湖北行政学院学报, no. 52 (2010): 81. After the Qianlong’s 1748 outing to the Temple of Heaven, the emperor commissioned another scroll that depicts only the layout of the Grand Paraphernalia ceremony. Its title is the Grand Processional Paraphernalia Procession to the Southern Suburb 南郊大駕鹵簿圖. For more information about this scroll, see Zhu Min 朱敏, “Qingren dajia lubutu yanjiu,” 清人大驾卤簿图卷研究 [Study of Qing grand processional paraphernalia scrolls] in Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancangwenwu yanjiu congshu 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书 (Shanghai: Shanghai gujishe, 2006): 315-319. 40 their titles: “The Khitan Liao Send Envoys to Court to Pay Respects 契丹使朝聘,” “Banquet and Archery in the Northern Garrison 北寨宴射,” “Viewing the Bian Flood from the Imperial Carriage 輿駕觀汴漲,” and “Viewing Books at the Pavilion of Highest Purity 太清觀書” (figs. 1-6, 1-7, 1-8, 1-9). Rather than fictional representations of Song-Liao relations,20 as Julia Murray proposed, the four scenes seem to document specific historical events that took place between 1005 and 1007.21 Nevertheless, the four events in this set of four scrolls were carefully chosen to glorify the rule of Zhenzong (r. 997–1022). The first scene, “The Khitan Liao Sends Envoys to Court to Pay Respects,” represents an event in or after 1005, in which an emissary from the Liao Dynasty presented birthday blessings to Zhenzong. Under the Treaty of Shanyuan in 1005, the Song Dynasty had to make annual payments of two hundred thousand bolts of silk and one hundred thousand taels of silver to the Liao. Under the terms of the treaty, which stemmed from Zhenzong’s miscalculated military act in 1004, the Southern Song court ended up acknowledging their equal standing with the Khitan and was required to send annual tributes of silver and silk to the Liao court. Yang Liansheng defined the Song Dynasty’s annual payments to the Liao as “tribute in reverse.”22 In addition to these payments, the Song and Liao courts also agreed to 20 Cary Liu, “Sung Dynasty Painting of the T’ai-Ch’ing-lou Library Hall,” in Arts of the Sung and Yüan: Ritual, Ethnicity, and Style in Painting, eds. Cary Y. Liu and Dora C. Y. Ching, (Princeton: The Art Museum, Princeton University, 1999), 99-101. 21 Julia Murray, Mirror of Morality: Chinese Narrative Illustration and Confucian Ideology (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2007), 77-78. 22 Yang Lien-sheng. “Historical Notes on the Chinese World Order,” in The Chinese World Order, ed. John K. Fairbank (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968), 20. 41 exchange diplomatic missions to participate in each other’s various ceremonies and festivals.23 Although the event portrayed in “The Khitan Liao” handscroll documented one of the Khitan ambassadorial visitations after a reciprocal relationship was shaped through the Treaty of Shanyuan, which placed Khitans in the equal standing with the Southern Song, the illustrated scene could easily be mistaken for Khitan’s “tributary” visit to honor the Son of Heaven.24 According to the inscription on the second scene, “Banquet and Archery in the Northern Garrison” depicted an event that took place in 1004, when Zhenzong attended an archery ritual and banquet in that garrison. The year 1004 was a year of significance. The Southern Song court transferred 15,000 troops from the Western Xia front to the Liao border that year. This provoked the Khitan to launch a full-scale war against the Southern Song that winter, which eventually resulted in the Treaty of Shanyuan in 1005.25 Why did the Song Dynasty commission a scroll documenting two episodes that were considered Song military “failures”? Although modern scholars see the Treaty of 23 Morris Rossabi, China Among Equals: The Middle Kingdom and Its Neighbors, 10th-14th Centuries (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1983), 69. 24 Hoyt Cleveland Tillman explains that both the Liao and the Song courts utilized rituals and diplomatic languages that were customized differently for domestic audiences and for their opposing court. According to Tillman, “Liao internal documents referred to Song payments as tribute; however, it wisely did not try to impose such language as dealing with representatives from the Song court. Similarly, Song officials referred to Liao’s envoys’ visits as “tributary,” but did not use the term in their dealings with the Liao.” Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, “The Treaty of Shanyuan from the Perspectives of Western Scholars,” Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies 5, no. 2 (2005): 135-155. 25 The Liao invaded in the winter of 1004 with 200,000 crack soldiers, reaching the outskirts of Kaifeng in two months. Yuan-kang Wang, Harmony and War: Confucian Culture and Chinese Power Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 52. 42 Shanyuan as the result of Song court’s military weakness and faulty political moves, for the Southern Song court, it was a diplomatic and military “success,” one of the successful outcomes of which was to obtain the Guannan area, which had been disputed by the Khitan.26 These two scenes of the album visually shared the same perspective with Song official records, which framed The Treaty of Shanyuan as Zhenzong’s magnificent success. The following example is one of the accounts that defined the treaty in a triumphant event for the Southern Song Dynasty. “In the first year of Jingde (1004), the Qidan invaded Hebei, and Emperor Zhenzong (r. 997-1022) went to Shanzhou (Shanyuan) and killed the Qidan general, Dalan, with an arrow. The Qidan wanted to withdraw their army, and sent Wang Jizhong to negotiate peace with the Song. When the selection of the envoy to the Liao [for the negotiation] was considered, Liyong happened to be there, and was recommended by the Bureau of Military Affairs. Emperor Zhenzong stated: "This is an important matter, no one should be chosen lightly." The next day, after the Military Affairs Commissioner, Wang Jiying, recommended Liyong again, he was granted the titles of Audience Usher and Duty Attendant to carry a letter to the Qidan troops. The Emperor told Liyong: "When the Qidan come south, they would either ask for land or seek gifts. The land south of Guan has long been ours; you must not agree to give it to them. There is a precedent. Han bestowed on Shanyu [the chieftain of the Xiongnu] jade and silk." Liyong was outraged by the Qidan and responded, with a disturbed complexion, to the emperor, "If they were to make any such presumptuous demand, I would not dare to come back alive." The emperor considered his word to be splendid. Liyong went swiftly into the Qidan army, and the mother of Yelu Longxu (i.e., Emperor Shengzong of the Liao) received him in a carriage. A horizontal board was laid over the yoke, and culinary utensils were placed on it. Liyong was asked to have some food with her. Her subjects and attendants sat there in multiple lines. After the meal, the conversation moved expectedly to the issue of the land south of Guan, and Liyong rejected the request.”27 26 Nap-Yin Lau, “Waging War for Peace: The Peace Accord Between the Song and the Liao in AD 1005,” in Warfare in Chinese History, ed. Hans J. Van de Ven (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2000), 181. 27 Translation by Hsingyuan Tsao. http://academic.reed.edu/chinese/chin- 43 In both the scrolls and the official records, this story of “marginal” success, which resulted in the Treaty of Shanyuan, was magnified and embellished, while the story of failure remained untold or deleted. Reconstructed by the Southern Song court, the political memory, heavily imbued with Sinocentrism seems to be the primary subject of this handscroll set. “Viewing the Bian Flood from the Imperial Carriage,” the third scene of this album, brings life to the historical account of the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month of 1006. According to Li Dao’s (1115-1184) Expanded Version of the Continuation of the Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government 續資治通鑒長編, after learning about the flood in the area of the Bian River, Zhenzong was extremely worried and stayed up all night. At dawn the next day, he personally visited the flood site to inspect the damage, and bestowed the officers and soldiers who worked all night to close the breach with gifts.28 Certainly, the inclusion of this event was intended to praise and promulgate Zhenzong’s benevolence toward the commoners and concern for their livelihood. The last scene of the handscroll, which shows Zhenzong “Viewing Books at the Pavilion of Highest Purity,” bears an accompanying inscription explaining that the event took place in the third lunar month of 1007: Zhenzong led a group of officials to view his father Taizong’s calligraphy, as well as newly transcribed texts, possibly referring to hum/materials/shanyuan/shanyuan.html. 28 Li Tao (1115–84), Xu zizhi tongjian changbian 續資治通鑒長編 [Expanded version of the continuation of the comprehensive mirror for aid in government ] (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1992), ch. 63, 1408. 44 Zhenzong’s own project.29 Without a doubt, Zhengzong purposefully chose this scene to illustrate his love for literature and his filial piety, which followed the footsteps of Taizong, who had initiated a project of compiling literary works. The four events depicted in the handscroll undoubtedly documented historical events that took place during Zhenzong’s reign, but they were also carefully chosen in order to celebrate and fabricate the emperor’s successful political leadership, personal benevolence, and devotion to the preservation of imperial cultural legacy. Such politically-driven historical subjects continued to be preferred for court documentary paintings in eighteenth-century China and Korea; when an actual event was painted, so too were the royal patron’s political positions and ideologies propagated. Welcoming the Imperial Carriage 迎鑾圖 Another work that detailed an important historical event and also validated the successful reign of the emperor and praised his personal virtue was a handscroll, now titled Welcoming the Imperial Carriage 迎鑾圖 (12th century, handscroll, Shanghai Museum) (fig. 1-10). It documents the 1142 return of Gaozong’s mother, the empress dowager Wei (1080–1159). Against the recommendation of war advocates in court, Gaozong 高宗 (r. 1127–1162) signed a peace treaty with the Khitan Jin state and was accepted as one of the Jin’s vassals, agreeing to pay annual tribute. In return, the Jin 29 Work on the Wenyuan yinghu collection of literature was continued by Emperor Zhenzong and completed midway through the reign. Emperor Zhenzong also initiated the fourth literary compilation, entitled Tortoise Shells for Divining from the Imperial Archives 冊府元龜, completed in 1013. 45 promised to return the coffins of the deceased Huizong emperor and two empresses and the living empress dowager Wei.30 Yuan-Kang Wang suggests that such an “accommodationist” policy was to highlight Gaozong’s filial piety.31 The Jin returned the empress dowager Wei, along with the coffins of Huizong and two deceased empresses; however, the court painter did not depict the coffins of these imperial family members. Furthermore, while the empress dowager actually travelled by boat; in the scroll, the imperial entourage is shown welcoming her carriage on land. Julia Murray points out that such an “inaccurate representation was intentional in order to evoke the tale of Lady Wen Ji’s overland returning journey,”32 which had became the symbol of filial piety. After a series of examinations and debates conducted after Xu Bangda’s re-identification of the scroll in 1972, Murray examined the unpublished colophons attached to the calligraphy scroll, which had been separated from the Welcoming the Imperial Carriage scroll, and proposed that Emperor Gaozong commissioned the scroll and bestowed it on Cao Xun 曹勛 (1098-1174) as a farewell gift when Cao decided to retire to Mount Tiantai 天台山.33 Since Cao was an instrumental figure in negotiating the 30 Yuan-Kang Wang, 86. 31 Ibid., 87. 32 Julia K. Murray, “A Southern Sung Painting Regains Its Memory: “Welcoming the Imperial Carriage and Its Colophon,” Journal of Song and Yuan Studies 22 (1990-1992): 121. 33 Among those unpublished calligraphy pieces, Cao Gongzhen’s calligraphy identifies the nature of this scroll, which Julia Murray shared in her article. Julia Murray, “A Southern Sung Painting Regains Its Memory: “Welcoming the Imperial Carriage and Its Colophon,” 118. 46 release of Gaozong’s mother and the remains of deceased imperial members, this painting was a perfect gift for showing the emperor’s gratitude to Cao. As Murray noted, this handscroll was not a faithful visual record of the event, but rather the representation of how Gaozong wanted his descendants to understand this historic occurrence. The factual distortion resulting from the addition and omission of small yet significant details shown in this work became a pictorial strategy commonly employed in court documentary paintings of later periods. 34 Court Documentary Painting in the Yuan and Ming Periods Khubilai Khan Hunting 元世祖出獵圖 The Yuan court painters created paintings that depicted state rituals and court ceremonies. However, these paintings do not illustrate actual events that took place during the Yuan period, but rather were copies of Song-court sponsored works. Nonetheless, it is likely that Mongol Yuan emperors’ hunting trips were documented for commemorative purposes. According to Timothy Brook, in the Yuan court, “hunting was more than imperial entertainment: it was a military exercise for Khubilai’s troops, and it gave the emperor an opportunity to display his skills as a Mongol horseman and 34 In 1972, Xu Bangda, a senior curator at the Palace Beijing Museum in Beijing back then, published an article proposing that the scroll illustrated a well-documented event that occurred in 1142. According to Xu, the surviving scroll was a fragment of an original scroll containing seven texts and paintings in alternation. Xu Bangda 徐邦达, “Song renhua renwu gushi yingji yingluantukao,” 宋人畫人物故事應即迎鸞圖考[Thoughts on a Song-period figure painting, possibly titled Welcoming the Imperial Carriage] Wenwu 文物, no. 82 (1972): 61-63. 47 hunter.”35 Thus it is highly possible that multiple hunting paintings were produced to document some of imperial hunting trips. However, we lack textual evidence and few Yuan court paintings confirm this. In Khubilai Khan Hunting (13th century or a later copy, hanging scroll, National Palace Museum, Taipei), attributed to Liu Guandao 劉貫道 (active ca. 1275-1300), Khubilai Khan (1260-1294) and his empress Chabi (1227–1281) are shown riding horses against a backdrop of a northern desert steppe (fig. 1-11).36 On the left lower corner of this hanging scroll is a written inscription reading, “Respectfully painted by the Attendant of the Imperial Clothing Office, Liu Guandao on the second lunar month of the seventh year of Zhiyuan (1280).” According to Marsha Haufler, “The omission of important cosmetic details, such as Khubilai’s distinctive beard and hairstyle, suggests that, the artist did not have firsthand knowledge of the emperor,”37 concluding that the painting was more an imaginary view and a possible modification by the Ming copyist. In this scroll, Khubilai Khan and his empress have stopped their horses and turned their torsos back in order to see one of his men, who is poised to shoot an arrow at one of the geese in the sky above. Rather than showing the emperor as static and unmoving, he was depicted turning toward his retinue. Unlike Ming court-sponsored paintings that 35 Timothy Brook, The Troubled Empire: China in the Yuan and Ming Dynasties (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010), 83. 36 Marsha Weidner (Haufler) provided a convincing stylistic analysis that Liu was not the painter of this work, and raised the possibility that this work was a product of a 15th-century Ming court painter who closely recorded earlier Yuan royal clothing styles. Marsha Weidner, “Painting and Patronage at the Mongol Court, 1260-1368” (PhD diss., University of California, 1982). 37 Marsha Weidner (Haufler), 109. 48 portrayed the emperors as stiff and frozen in stage-like tableaux as if they were impervious to the passage of time, Khubilai and his retinue are shown in this work as embedded in the flow of a fleeting moment. The three men riding horses across from the Khubilai were carefully arranged to clearly show that they were on a hunting trip. For instance, one of the men, with his back directly toward the viewer, has a trained wildcat sitting on the back of the horse; another man, clad in blue, has a falcon—a bird famous for its hunting skills. One man is even clad in clothing depicting an image of a white falcon attacking a white goose or swan.38 Predatory animals (i.e., the trained eagle and the wildcat) and beasts of prey were all described in detail in this painting. Although Khubilai Khan Hunting appears to depict nothing more than a casual hunting scene, the political meaning of its portraiture was far from casual. For Mongol rulers, hunting was an activity that renewed their cultural traditions. According to George Qingzhi Zhao, the interior of Yuan imperial palaces was decorated with hunting themes and encouraged the maintenance of a nomadic lifestyle. Also, in the imperial parks Mongol-style tents were built to host male imperial family members. Additionally, in order to remind his sons of the importance of preserving their cultural heritage, Khubilai assigned his retinue to gather grass and soil from his homeland, the Mongol steppe, for 38 The New Thoughts While Dwelling in the Mountains, a book of miscellaneous jottings of the late Yuan Dynasty, notes that the imperial falconer whose bird downed the first swan of the season received a coveted gold ingot as a prize. Joyce Denney, “Textiles in the Mongol and Yuan Periods,” in The World of Khubilai Khan: Chinese Art in the Yuan Dynasty, ed. James C. Y. Watt (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2010), 252. 49 the altar where he conducted sacrificial offerings.39 The influence of the Yuan Dynasty on Qing court documentary paintings is most visible in the emperors’ hunting scene (fig. 1-12). As evident in Khubilai Khan’s portrait, the mode of portraying an emperor in an informal moment and arrested action was continued in hunting paintings of Ming emperors, particularly those created in the Xuande period (1426-35) (figs. 1-13, 1-14). Early Ming emperors who enjoyed hunting as one of their leisurely activities, commissioned numerous hunting paintings, however, later Ming emperors did not do so with some commitment as their predecessors.40 It was during the Qing period that hunting regained its popularity as a diplomatic venue for Central Asian and Mongol guests, and as an important activity to promote Manchu’s cultural heritage, so naturally hunting paintings were also in vogue. Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion 宣宗行樂圖 Like their dynastic predecessors, early Ming emperors continued to enjoy hunting trips, and a number of hunting paintings attributed to the Ming court have survived. Their participation in hunting can be interpreted in part as the continuance of Eurasian ruling 39 George Qingzhi Zhao, Marriage as Political Strategy and Cultural Expression (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2008), 51. 40 David M. Robinson discusses earlier Ming emperors such as Yongle and Xuande personally enjoyed hunting and also used it as essential part of their statecraft. However, beginning with the Zhengtong (r. 1435-1464), the royal hunt lost its prestigious status in both the emperor’s personal life and politics. However, Robinson points out that the royal hunt briefly gained imperial favor during the Zhengde reign (1505-1521). David M. Robinson, Martial Spectacles of the Ming Court (Cambridge, MA.: The Harvard University Asia Center, 2013), 29-152. 205-277. 50 culture,41 which had been much emphasized by Yuan Mongol emperors, and also in part as the Ming’s restoration of an ancient military ceremony practiced in the Shang and Zhou courts.42 David M. Robinson informs that Taizu (r. 1368-1398), the founder of the Ming Dynasty, in his Ancestral Instructions of 1373, stressed the importance of imperial princes’ regular participation in hunting expeditions because he believed that they had military value.43 Even in the Song period, an era that saw the rise of conservative literati scholars-officials who increasingly disapproved of emperors’ frequent outings, the royal hunt was viewed as an important ceremony evoking the balance of ying and yang energies, as well as a practical military exercise, as evident in the Treaties on Ritual from the Song History 宋史. It says, “one of the field military rituals was described as causing the seasons to be in accord and [keeping] one in good weapons practice.”44 Painted by Shang Xi 商喜 (flourished ca. 1430–40), Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion (15th century, the Palace Museum, Beijing) seems to document one of the emperor’s many hunting excursions to the Southern Marshes 南海子, later called Southern Park 南園, the imperial hunting park (fig. 1-15). During the Yongle reign, this 41 For the discussion on the martial spectacles conducted by Ming emperors in a broader Eurasian cultural context, see David M. Robinson, Martial Spectacles of the Ming Court. 42 According to David M. Robinson, a large amount of Shang-period oracle bones talked about the royal hunt. For the Shang and Zhou ruling classes, the hunt carried tremendous religious and political significance. David M. Robinson, Martial Spectacles of the Ming Court, 30. 43 Thomas T. Allsen, The Royal Hunt in Eurasia History (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006), 214. 44 Marcia Butler, “Reflections of a Military Medium: Ritual and Magic in Eleventh and Twelfth Century Chinese Military Manuals” (PhD diss., Cornell University, 2007), 65. 51 area was enlarged and stock with animals for imperial sacrifices.45 As for the presence of various animals (cranes, black rabbits, two pairs of white deer, and a pair of black deer) in the scroll, Richard Barnhart proposes that the inclusion of animals was intended to evoke auspiciousness.46 Whether his observation is valid or not, he poignantly addresses the dualistic nature of court documentary painting, which simultaneously depicts both reality and fiction. In the upper half of the painting, the Xuande emperor is portrayed riding on a white horse. He wears a yellow, sleeveless, close-fitting riding tunic resembling the Yuan bijia 比甲, and a Mongolian felt hat with a broad rim called a zhanli 氈笠.47 In the lower half of the painting, eunuchs dressed in green, red, yellow, and blue robes ride horses and accompany the emperor. Interestingly, although the emperor is farther from the viewer than the eunuchs are, the emperor is portrayed to appear larger than them. Such a pictorial hierarchy between the emperor and his retinue betrays visual logic, nevertheless Shang Xi still achieved a certain realism or naturalism by capturing some of the emperor’s facial features. This portrayal of the Xuande emperor as a robust hunter with full beard and tanned skin is strikingly similar to his ancestral portrait. 45 Susan Naquin, Peking: Temples and City Life 1400-1900 (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 2000), 135-136. Cheng-hua Wang suggests an alternative location, the Island of Beautiful Stones in the Western Park. Cheng-hua Wang, “Material Culture and Emperorship: The Shaping of Imperial Roles at the Court of Xuanzong (r. 1426–1435)” (PhD diss., Yale University, 1998), 236-37. 46 Richard Barnhart, Painters of the Great Ming: The Imperial Court and the Zhe School, (Dallas: Dallas Museum of Art, 1993), 57. 47 David M. Robinson, “The Ming Court and the Legacy of the Yuan Mongols,” in Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: the Ming Court (1368–1644), Harvard East Asian Monographs 301, ed. David M. Robinson (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008), 387. 52 According to Cheng-hua Wang, the category of xingle tu 行樂圖 or Pleasure Painting, which this work falls, began to take shape and assumed an independent status as a subgenre of figure paintings by the mid-Ming. Unlike general figure paintings, some of which also depict generic people in indoor or outdoor settings, a xingle tu work distinguishes the main figure in the painting by his recognizable facial features.48 Nevertheless, it is important to note that even before the rise of xingle tu around the mid-Ming period, the realistic depiction of emperors already had been established in Yuan court documentary paintings. This was a vast difference from the Song-period works, which concealed the image of emperor, as exemplified in the Four Events of the Jingde Era. As I will discuss further in Chapter Five, although some Qing court paintings emulated this Song-period mode of using furnishings or architectural props to denote the emperor’s presence (figs. 1-9, 1-16), in most Qing court documentary paintings the imperial personages were painted by the best portraitists from the court workshop (often European Jesuit painters), clearly indicating that Qing court painters referenced Yuan and Ming examples, which highlighted the presence of emperors by portraying their likeness. Xianzong’s Lantern Festival 元宵行樂圖 The Lantern Festival Pleasure scroll (1485, handscroll, National Museum of China, Beijing) depicts various ceremonial and sports events, such as fireworks, 48 Cheng-hua Wang, 218-219. 53 acrobatics, and a peddlers’ performance (fig. 1-17).49 The emperor’s inscription, placed in the frontispiece, clarifies that this seemingly lighthearted painting (based on the title given by a late Qing scholar) did not just depict the emperor’s leisurely activity for pleasure. Rather, it was intended to convey the political meaning of the festival under the Ming rulers’ cultural restoration project.50 The Lantern Festival, the beginning of three months of the beauties of spring, the first month, first day, the beginning of a year of beautiful scenery. The spring festival couplets are already changed, a ritual of offering aromatic tea to bid farewell the old year, … A pond moves like a sway, like jade-colored glass. [Envoys from] ten thousand countries paid homage to the court. Congratulated the year of good harvest. Four barbarians submitted obeisance. Praised the time of peace and prosperity. [As] grasshoppers multiply, [may] the succeeding generations of the Son of Heaven enjoy everlasting prosperity. The state is firm and secure. Forever esteem rituals and ceremonies. Forever well-governed reign, and harmony and splendor. Forever enjoy the blessings of peace and prosperity.51 上元嘉節. 九十春光之始. 新正令旦. 一年美景之初. 桃符已換. 醮祭欝荼辭舊歲. 椒觴頻酌. 肆筵鼓樂賀新年. ⋯ 簾燈晃耀. 一池摇動碧玻璃. 萬國來朝. 賀喜豊年稔歳. 49 Xianzong’s Pleasures at Court 顯宗宮中行樂圖 (Palace Museum, Beijing) seems to have been made to pair with the Lantern Festival painting. In this scroll, the emperor is engaged in a number of games such as Shooting Willow Twigs and Shooting Balls. 50 Cheng-hua Wang, 263. 51 This passage is my translation with the help of Shu-yun Ho. 54 四夷賔服. 頌稱海晏河清. 螽斯慶衍.神孫聖子樂榮昌. 宗社奠安. 萬载千秋崇可禮儀. 長瞻化日雍熙. 永享昇平之福. The Lantern Festival activities portrayed in this scroll, such as the Mid-Autumn festival parade and the peddlers’ performance, all used to be performed in the Song court. According to Zhou Mi’s Recollection of Wulin 武林舊事, on the eve of the Lantern Festival, peddlers who were skilled at singing and touting were invited to perform and sell their goods during the imperial festival. “Vendors who were colorful and clean and who were skilled at singing and shouting out their wares [were asked] to wait attentively outside [the arena]. At [a given] point, they jostle to enter, singing and shouting. As they are presented to the emperor, all of the palace women—from consorts, concubines, and on down—also vie with each other to purchase the offerings. In every case, the sellers get several times the normal price. Gold and pearls fall in heaps—some [of these vendors] have become rich in a single evening.”52 In the Xianzong’s Lantern Festival, we can see a group of peddlers selling candies and toys to court ladies and children, just as the Song court used to do during the Lantern Festival (figs. 1-18, 1-19). Since these festival activities had been halted during the period of Mongol rule in China, a series of light-hearted activities illustrated in this scroll were the restored court activities of the Lantern Festival in the Ming court. This political circumstance disapproves the current title Lantern Festival Pleasure Painting given by Qing court 52 Translation by Stephen H. West. Stephen H. West, “Playing with Food: Performance, Food, and the Aesthetics of Artificiality in the Sung and Yuan,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 57, no. 1 (1997): 87. 55 archivist Hu Jing 胡敬 (1769-1845).53 I believe that this scroll was created to commemorate the Ming emperor’s cultural restoration program. Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace 出警入蹕圖 A set of handscrolls entitled Imperial Outing 出警入蹕圖 and Returning to the Palace 入蹕圖, also known as The Emperor’s Procession, are also Ming paintings that document specific historical events, yet the question of which Ming emperor was portrayed still remains unclear (figs. 1-20, 1-21). Since the 1970s, the Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace scrolls have been discussed by scholars Na Chih-liang (1970), Lin Li-na (1993), Zhu Hong (2004), and Wu Mei-feng (2005).54 These investigations, which mainly relied on court archival texts, agreed that the painted event was that of a Ming emperor’s trip to the Ming mausoleum, yet they disagreed on the identity of the emperor. Na identified this set of scrolls as having recorded the Jiajing 53 Hui-Chi Lo, “Political Advancement and Religious Transcendence: The Yongzheng Emperor’s (1678-1735) Deployment of Portraiture” (PhD diss., Stanford University, 2009), 6-7. 54 Studies on this set of paintings are as following. See: Na Chih-liang 那志良, The Emperor’s Procession: Two Scrolls of the Ming Dynasty (Taipei: The National Palace Museum, 1970); Lin Li-na 林莉娜, “Mingren Chujing rubi tu zhi zonghe yanjiu,” 明人出驚入蹕圖之綜合研究 [Comprehensive study of Ming Chujing rubi-tu ] Part 1 and 2 Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 11, no. 127 (1993): 58-77; no. 128; 34-4; Zhu Hong 朱鴻, “Mingren chujing rubi tu yanjiu,” 明人出驚入蹕圖研究 [Study of Ming Imperial Outing and Returning Procession Painting] Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 22, no. 1 (2004): 183-213; Wu Mei-feng 吳美鳳 “Jingqi yao fu wu yun lai bushi qianqiu xi matai: Shitan mingren chujing rubitu yu wanming huajia dingyunpeng zhi guanxi,” 旌旗遙拂五雲來不是千秋戲馬臺: 試探 明人出警入蹕圖 與晚明畫家丁雲鵬之關係 [Preliminary study of the Ming painting Chujing rubi tu and its relationship with the late Ming painter Ding Yunpeng] Gugong xuekan 故宮学刊 2 (2005): 97-131. 56 emperor’s procession to the Ming imperial mausoleum. But Zhu and Wu argued that it was the Wanli emperor’s procession: Wu came up with this conclusion mainly through his stylistic analysis of this scroll with the works by late Ming professional painters, and Zhu postulated the same conclusion through his examination of court official records and burial objects excavated from the Wanli emperor’s tomb (Ding Ling 定陵). Na Chih-liang’s book from 1970 was the first modern scholarly investigation of the Emperor’s Procession scrolls. Na concluded that the scrolls depict the Jiajing emperor and his entourage going to the Ming imperial mausoleum. Na examined the Ming Veritable Records 明實錄 of the Jiajing, Xuande, and Zhengde reigns, and discovered that both the Xuande and Zhengde emperors visited the Ming mausoleum, but they did not return by boat, whereas an image in the Returning to the Palace portrays the emperor aboard a boat.55 According to Na, the Jiajing emperor (r. 1521-1567) made eight visits to the Ming mausoleum (3 times during the fall and 5 times during the spring) and reportedly used a water route for his return trip home in his fifteenth year of rule.56 Based on this information, Na asserted that the Jiajing emperor must have been the emperor portrayed in the scrolls. In addition, Na compared the Jiajing emperor’s formal portrait with the images of the emperor depicted in the scrolls and was convinced that they shared 55 According to the Veritable Record of Wuzong, Zhengde Emperor accompanied the dowager empress’s coffin on June 18, 1519, and he wore a military uniform and rode a horse; however, he did not take the water route because the Tonghui River was not repaired until 1528. Wu Mei-feng, 135. 56 Na Chih-liang, 137. 57 facial characteristics (figs. 1-22, 1-23).57 For more than thirty years after Na published his research in the 1970s, his conclusion that The Emperor’s Procession recorded one of the Jiajing emperor’s trips to the Ming imperial mausoleum was widely accepted by several leading scholars and recent exhibitions. For instance, Craig Clunas explained that the scrolls portrayed the Jiajing emperor in procession to and from the tombs of his parents.58 Dora Ching’s recent dissertation argued that the new imperial portrait paradigm emphasized frontality and symmetry, as seen in the portrait images of the emperor in these two scrolls, and certainly postdated the Hongzhi emperor (r. 1487-1505) (figs. 1-24, 1-25). Ching, however, chose not to join the ongoing controversy over the identity of the emperor. Recently, Zhu Hong and Wu Mei-feng, both from the National Taiwan Normal University, proposed that the scrolls documented the Wanli emperor’s second visit to the Ming mausoleum in 1583, and that Ding Yunpeng was responsible for the overall design and brushwork. Although Zhu and Wu both saw the “distinctive” brushwork employed in this scroll as rebutting the earlier identification, 59 they also placed an equal emphasis on 57 Na Chih-liang, 136. 58 Craig Clunas, Empire of Great Brightness: Visual and Material Culture of Ming China, 1368-1644 (Honolulu: Hawai’i Press, 2007), 168-169; Dora Ching, “Icons of Rulership: Imperial Portraiture during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2011), 199-207. 59 Based on late nineteenth-century Qing scholar Gu Wenbin’s (1811-1889) argument in his essay Guoyunlou shuhua ji 過云樓書畵記 [Record of Paintings and Calligraphy in The Guoyunlou Collection] (Yangzhou: Jiangsugujichubanshe, 1999), Wu believed that Ding created this set of scrolls with other court artists during his more than ten years of residency in Beijing, quoted in Wu Mei-feng, 122. On the other hand, Zhu Hong argued that after Ding successfully created the illustration for Cultivating Rectitude, Illustrated and Explained 養正圖解 (published in 1587 and dedicated to the Wanli Emperor) while he was in Nanjing, he must have received a 58 reviewing official court records such as the Veritable Records of the Shenzong 明神宗實 錄 and the Diary of Activity and Repose of the Wanli Period 萬歷起居注, as well as Ming court officials’ personal essays. Through their textual scrutiny, Zhu and Wu found that the Wanli emperor also made frequent trips to the Ming mausoleum. According to the Veritable Record of the Shenzong Emperor, the Wanli emperor made at least 7 visits to the Ming mausoleum: once in 1580 (spring), twice in 1583 (during the spring and autumn), one time in 1584 (spring), once again in 1585 (autumn) to visit ancestral tombs, one time in 1586, and the final time in 1588, to inspect his own mausoleum and perform sacrificial ancestral offerings.60 One of the entries indicates that the Wanli emperor wore military attire on his visit to the Ming mausoleum in 1586, looking like a military god 武 神 (fig. 1-26).61 The Court Diaries of the Wanli Reign 萬曆起居注, testifies that in 1580 the Wanli emperor returned to the Forbidden City by boat.62 In addition to the Wanli emperor’s seven visits recorded in the official court records, Yu Shenxing 于慎行 (1545- 1608), a well-known court scholar-official active in the late sixteenth century, offered eyewitness testimony verifying the Wanli emperor’s visit to the Ming mausoleum in the second lunar month, during the Qingming Festival in 1584, in his collected essays commission to create the scrolls without going to the court in Beijing. According to Zhu, Ding’s service for the court in Beijing was conducted long distance. Zhu Hong, 204-207. 60 Ray Huang, 123 and 245. 61 “..可知神宗謁陵戎衣騎乘是要展現神武⋯”An entry dated to the twelfth month of the fourteenth reign year from the Veritable Records of Shenzong, quoted in Zhu Hong, 201. 62 An entry dated to the fifth day of the third month of the eighth reign year from Wanli qijuzhu 萬曆起居注 [Court Diaries of the Wanli Reign], quoted in Zhu Hong, 201. 59 Brushed Notes of Gushan 榖山筆麈. He described the emperor as wearing armor and accompanied by two wives, leading the way on a horse in front of the two palanquins.63 In addition to their mutually shared methodologies (textual scrutiny and stylistic analysis), Zhu examined luxury objects buried in the Wanli emperor’s tomb—such as a silver water jar, a jade wine vase, and a jade cup with a golden lid—that were painted in the scrolls. Zhu demonstrates that the painted objects and burial objects are perfectly identical. For example, the Wanli emperor’s helmet, featuring images of the Buddhist guardian excavated from the Tomb of Stability 定陵, resembles the one worn by the emperor in the Imperial Outing (fig. 1-27). It is not a generic image, like the one in the Collected Illustrations of the Three Realms 三才圖會, a woodblock encyclopedia published in 1607. In Returning to the Palace, a jade bowl with a golden lid and stand, placed on the table in the boat where the emperor is seated, resembles the one excavated from the Wanli emperor’s tomb (figs. 1-28, 1-29).64 Such a striking visual resemblance between the objects painted in the scrolls and those found in the Wanli emperor’s tomb indicates the painter worked from observation. Whoever was in charge of painting the objects in the scrolls, many of which had been used daily by the Wanli emperor and were destined to accompany the emperor, must have seen these objects in person. I believe that Zhu’s finding makes a strong case that the Wanli emperor’s frequent visits to the Ming 63 Yu Shenxing 于慎行, Gushanbizhu 榖山筆麈 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1984), 111. 64 I believe these objects also reveal distinctive material culture of the Wanli emperor’s reign. For example, the dragon medallion embroidered on the robe of the emperor (as he sits on the boat) is a typical Wanli-period dragon, featuring white horns, a white spiky beard and eyebrows, white claws, and rainbow-colored hair, facing directly forward. In contrast, the dragon on the medallion of the Jiajing emperor’s robe in his ancestral portrait faces the side. 60 Mausoleum were profoundly related to the emperor’s desire to find an auspicious site for his tomb and to personally supervise its construction in the 1580s, and those visits directly inspired the creation of this set of scrolls.65 Nevertheless, what is lacking in Zhu’s and Wu’s analysis that re-identified the protagonist of the scroll from the Jiajing to Wanli emperor is the political context surrounding the production of this scroll. I believe the scrolls probably were created around the 1580s, the first decade that the Wanli emperor actually exercised his rule independent of his former grand secretary, Zhang Juzheng 張居正 (1525-1582).66 Even Ray Huang, who is particularly critical of the Wanli emperor, admitted that the emperor, during the early years of his reign, was interested in the welfare of the populace and was concerned about officials’ corruption and the defenses of the frontier.67 Throughout the 1580s, the Wanli emperor publically asserted his military leadership and authority. In fact, his frequent journeys to the imperial mausoleum were part of martial spectacles to demonstrate the emperor’s military leadership. Located thirty miles north of Beijing, the area around the mausoleum was considered to be dangerous. 65 “The spirit tablet bearing the names and titles of the deceased and the imperial paraphernalia were assembled. The offerings presented before burial included the burning of the deceased’s personal possessions, including clothing, furniture, utensils, and so forth—all the things the deceased person might need in the next life.” Evelyn S. Rawski, “The Imperial Way of Death: Ming and Ch’ing Emperors and Death Ritual,” in Death Ritual in Late Imperial and Modern China, eds. James L. Watson and Evelyn S. Rawski (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 242. 66 Zhang Juzheng became the most powerful man in China on August 4, 1572. On that date, Zhang began to direct affairs of state on behalf of the Wanli emperor. For further reading about Zhang Juzheng, see Harry Miller, State Versus Gentry in Late Ming Dynasty China, 1572-1644 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 31-54. 67 Ray Huang, 514. 61 This explains why the emperor in the Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace wore armor and rode a horse. The view that imperial trips to the imperial mausoleum was an act of bolstering imperial military authority and concerns about commoners’ life, in fact, had already been forged in the Longqing reign (r. 1567-1572), immediately preceding the Wanli period. 68 According to Kenneth M. Swope, the Wanli emperor never participated in any battles, but he expressed enthusiasm in doing so on at least one occasion.” 69 Furthermore, he often bestowed the ceremonial double-edged sword on military generals,70 in part to recognize their services and in part possibly to fashion his public persona as a strong military ruler. Wanli’s interests in military affairs were also ritually expressed. On the fourth month of 1581, following a ritual directive 儀註 submitted by the Ministry of Rites, the Wanli emperor performed the Grand Review 大閱禮 ceremony, undoubtedly aiming to forge his image as a strong military ruler. Three months after the ceremony, Zhang Juzheng presented a painting documenting the military ritual, along with a eulogistic poem. The emperor was so pleased that he granted Zhang two hundred taels of gold, as well as two taels of silver to each of the soldiers who participated in the Grand 68 David M. Robinson, 259-261. 69 Kenneth M. Swope, “Bestowing the Double-edged Sword,” in Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: the Ming Court (1368–1644), Harvard East Asian Monographs 301, ed. David M. Robinson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008), 71. 70 Kenneth M. Swope, A Dragon’s Head and A Serpent’s Tail: Ming China and the First Great East Asian War, 1592-1598 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2009), 22. 62 Review ceremony.71 Although this painting is now lost, one can still conclude that the Wanli emperor’s program of fashioning himself as a powerful military ruler was documented in pictorial media. I believe that the period of time depicted in Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace illustrates the most exciting years for the young Wanli emperor, who had just gained full political freedom and found the auspicious site for his eternal resting palace. Dora Ching argued that although Ming court paintings portraying rulers’ ritualistic activities were produced to preserve a historical record of the emperor’s activities, and that “the emperor’s act of commissioning a painting itself was an act of making a declaration or a political statement about his rule.”72 I believe that 1580s was the decade that the Wanli emperor wished to be remembered and commemorated for posterity. Although the emperor’s frequent outings to the mausoleum were perhaps driven by his personal desire to find the “perfect” resting place for his soul 魄, the manner this set of scrolls was hoped or expected to be viewed by later generations was certainly as a visual testimony of the emperor’s filial piety toward his ancestors and political authority. In sum, Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace documented that “significant” decade for the Wanli emperor. In the development of Chinese court documentary painting, the Imperial Outing and Returning the Palace scrolls are extremely significant, not only for providing a rare glimpse into the Wanli emperor’s earlier political activity before he sought refuge deep 71 An entry dated to the third month of 1581 from the Veritable Records of Shenzhong. 72 Dora Ching, 165. 63 within the Forbidden City, but also for its role in bridging the earlier lubu painting traditions with late Qing court documentary paintings. Nevertheless, its art historical significance has not been fully recognized. For example, David M. Robinson asserts that “this pair of scrolls is the only known example of this genre from the Ming; whether it was sui generis, a one-off with no precedents and no successors, remains an open question.”73 In the discussion on the Southern Inspection Tours, Maxwell K. Hearn did not mention the artistic impact of this set of scrolls, although the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors’ returning procession to the Forbidden City must have been directly modeled on this work. Furthermore, certain pictorial elements, which characterize these two scrolls, for example, detailed topographical features in the surrounding environment (such as the Forbidden City and the Stone Archway on the paved road to the Ming Mausoleum) served to enhance the scrolls’ informative quality (fig. 1-20). In Chapter Five, I will argue that the inclusion of specific landscapes and cityscapes were intended not only to provide information about the location of depicted events, but also to celebrate the Qing emperors’ continuing patronage of architecture and urban planning. Furthermore, some fictional elements, such as white clouds appearing at the beginning and end of the scrolls, and vibrant blue-and-green palette (figs. 1-30) were pictorial devices, often used in auspicious omen paintings or Buddhist paintings to evoke the idea of auspiciousness and paradise. They became established as apparent stylistic norms in eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings (figs. 1-31, 1-32). Court documentary paintings from the Song through the Ming periods featured 73 David M. Robinson, Martial Spectacles of the Ming Court, 23. 64 pictorial languages distinctive to the visual cultures of each court. They recorded specific historical events that rulers of the time considered important. Song court documentary painting paid a great deal of attention to depicting the appearance of ritual objects and the layout of rituals, as well as to choosing subjects that directly represented the emperor’s virtue. It is certain that Qing court painters studied them for their own works. Although only a few Yuan-period court documentary paintings have survived, their particular mode of emphasizing emperors’ images caught in moment was continued in Qing court documentary paintings. In particular, the inclusion of lifelike portraits of emperors, which was absent in Song works, was a new element in the tradition of court documentary painting that started in the Yuan period and was further developed in the Ming. Court Documentary Painting in Joseon, 1500-1700 In contrast with Chinese court documentary paintings, which primarily featured imperial activities, Korean court documentary paintings were predominantly centered on state events and court ceremonies. A large number of the works dealt with royal banquets. Compared to China, where the emperor was the primary patron of paintings documenting court events, in Korea, both kings and court officials were involved in the production of court documentary paintings. Court officials who attended state rituals initiated the idea of creating paintings to commemorate these events, and with only a few exceptions, the court funded the production of multiple copies of each painting, usually according to the number of event participants. Depending on its mounted format, Joseon court documentary paintings were called hanging scrolls of gye, albums of gye, and screens of gye. The word “gye” literally 65 means “gathering.” From the sixteenth through seventeenth centuries, the aristocrats, most of them court officials, held various types of private gatherings called “gye” such as gatherings for those who were the same age, gatherings for those who passed state examinations in a given year, gatherings for those who worked or used to work together in the same government office, etc. For these gatherings, they hired professional painters to document their activities in multiple copies so that each of the participants could have their own copy. These paintings were broadly called “Gathering Painting 계회도, 契會圖 (figs. 1-33, 1-34).”74 By the early seventeenth century, Joseon court officials who had often commissioned paintings of their private gatherings with other officials or aristocrats, started commissioning multiple copies of paintings recording official court ceremonies in order to share them with the participants. Those who worked for the Office of Superintendence 도감, which was temporarily installed to oversee a state rite, had begun commissioning paintings collectively to document state rites they were charged with preparing or royal banquets they attended; each commissioning official would receive 74 For gathering paintings, see An Hwi-jun 안휘준, “Koryo mit Choson wangjo-ui munin gyehoe-wa gyehoedo,” 고려및 조선 왕조의 문인계회와 계회도 [Literati gathering and gathering painting in Goryeo and Joseon dynasties] Gomunhwa 고문화 20 (1982): 3-13; An Hwi-jun, “Hanguk-ui munin gyeohoe-wa gyehoedo,” 한국의 문인 계회와 계회도 [Literati gatherings and gathering paintings in Korea] in Hanguk hoehwa-ui jeontong 한국회화의 전통 [Tradition of Korean paintings] (Seoul: Munyeo chulpansa, 1988): 368-392; Yun Chin-yeong 윤진영, “Joseon sidae gyeohoedo yeongu” 조선시대 계회도 연구 [Study of Joseon-period gathering paintings] (Ph. D. diss., Academy of Korean Studies, 2004). For paintings commissioned by bureaucratic officials to document their gatherings, see Yun Chin-yeong, “Sinchamgryeo-wa gyeohoedo,” 신참례와 계회도 [Ceremony of welcoming newly appointed officials and gathering painting] Yeosa minsokhak 역사 민속학, no.18: 135-164. 66 one copy of the painting.75 While the attendees of private gatherings paid for the paintings out of their own pockets, the court officials used state funds and hired court painter(s). The examples in the following section were commissioned by court officials and painted by court painter(s). It is important to note that although the Joseon king was the host of the court ceremonies painted in those works, he did not receive copies of the paintings—he was satisfied with his role of sponsoring the artistic activities of court officials. Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion서총대친림사연도 The royal banquet was one of the most frequently performed ceremonies in the Joseon court held to celebrate special occasions (particularly state rites such as investiture ceremonies, weddings, personal governance, etc.) and to promote a harmonious relationship between the king and officials.76 The event in the Royal Banquet at the Terrace of the Auspicious Scallion (1564, hanging scroll, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) was a small-scale music banquet 곡연 hosted by King Myeongjong (r. 1545-1567) (fig. 1-35).77 75 The practice called Gathering of Elderly Literati 耆老會, widely popularized in the Song period, was common in Korea from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century. 76 Among the ceremonial banquets 禮宴, the Submitting Feast 進宴, a banquet offered by court officials to the king, was the most prevalent in the eighteenth century. The Banquet for Nourishing Elders 養老宴 was temporarily paused during the Japanese invasion (1592-1598), but it was restored during King Yeongjo’s reign (1724-1776). 77 The name of the terrace originated from a scallion with nine heads that sprung in the 67 Multiple copies of this scroll have survived in different collections.78 The compositions of these copies are more or less the same, in spite of some discrepancies in brushwork quality. Occupying the center of the painting, flanked by large pine trees on both sides, is the tent that housed the banquet. Toward the north, the royal throne faces south, where one row of musicians and one row of court officials are seated, facing the throne. In this work, a white canopy covers the royal throne so that the king’s portrait image did not need to be painted. Similar to the Song period’s Four Events of the Jingde Era discussed earlier in this chapter, the rulers’ portrait image was concealed through architectural props, raising the possibility that Goryeo court painters emulated the mode of Song court documentary painting. In fact, it is important to differentiate concealing the king with architectural props—a mode prevalent in pre-eighteenth-century works—and replacing the king with symbolic objects, which became dominant in eighteenth-century works. The king’s concealed image through canopy or architectural elements in Joseon court documentary paintings produced prior to the eighteenth century was probably inspired by Song court documentary paintings. Although court documentary paintings, particularly in China, were not intended for circulation outside the court, after the collapse of the Song Dynasty, some of the imperial collections might have entered Korea during the Goryeo period (918-1392) in the form of gifts from the Yuan court. Thus, one can speculate that Song- garden at the Palace of Prosperous Virtue 昌德宮during King Seongjong’s reign (1469-1495). Later, it was renamed Spring Pond Terrace 春塘臺. 78 There is one copy in the Sosu Academy (Gyeongsang Province), Korea University Museum (Seoul) and Haenam Yun Family Collection (Jeolla Province). The title of these works is slightly different. Park Jeong-hyeo, 104. 68 period court documentary paintings ended up in Goryeo royal court collections, and the Goryeo court created its own court documentary paintings by emulating the style of Song court productions. The following account confirms this possibility I just raised. According to the Veritable Records of Sejong, King Sejong ordered court painters to refer to processional-paraphernalia painting(s) preserved in the house of Kim Cheom 김첨 (1354-1418), a former Goryeo civil official who also served the newly established Joseon Dynasty.79 One can conjecture that the paintings Kim Cheom owned must have been similar to Song processional-paraphernalia paintings, and possibly other types of Goryeo court documentary paintings, which emulated the Song-period works. 80 Given the flourishing exchange of gifts between the courts between China and Korea, one can understand why earlier works such as Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion shared similar stylistic elements, such as a diagrammatic approach to the subject and the absence of the ruler’s portrait image (even though he attended the event), with Song court documentary paintings. Royal Banquet for Successful Candidates of the State Examination 알성시은영도 Royal Banquet for Successful Candidates of the State Examination 79 An entry dated to the nineteenth day of the seventh lunar month in 1431 from the Veritable Record of Sejong. 80 An Gyeon 안견 (15th century), the painter of The Journey to Peach Blossom Spring, was asked to create a set of lesser and grander processional-paraphernalia paintings, which reflected newly updated regulations. An entry dated to the fifth day of the third lunar month in 1448 from the Veritable Record of Sejong. 69 (1580, hanging scroll, the Yōmei Bunko, Kyoto) documented a banquet held for successful candidates who passed a special examination, which was only offered after the king visited the Temple of Confucius located at Seonggyungwan 성균관, the official Confucian academy (fig. 1-36).81 The painting portrays six court officials accompanied by dancers in the pavilion of the State Council 의정부, which occupies the upper part of the scroll. A wine jar is on a cinnabar table on the south side of the pavilion. Outside the pavilion, seated on the right are those who passed the civil exam, and on the left, those who passed the military exam sit in rows. A special seat in the front row is reserved for the highest scoring individual, whose place is shaded by a white tent. Between the civil- and military-exam passers, a group of acrobatic performers add a festive mood to the scene. Similar to Ming and Qing court documentary paintings, a series of white cumulus clouds, which obscure the rooftop of the pavilion, are depicted in order to accentuate the auspiciousness of the event. The highly detailed and refined rendition of architectural elements attests that the painter must have belonged to the court-painting bureau and was experienced in the ruled-line technique. Other privately commissioned works created more or less during the same period, such as Gathering of State Examination Alumni at Huigyeong Pavilion 휘경루방회도 (1567, hanging scroll, ink and color on silk, the Dongguk University Museum, Seoul), focused on the depiction of the surrounding landscape through highly expressive brushstrokes (fig. 1-37). The painter of Royal Banquet for Successful 81 The scroll has been in the collection of the Konoe family, a prominent noble family in Kyoto, since the time of Iehiro (1667–1736) of the twenty-first generation. Soyoung Lee, Art of the Korean Renaissance, 1400-1600 (New Haven: Yale University Press), 93. 70 Candidates of the State Examination boldly eliminated the surrounding scenery and instead paid more attention to the building where the event took place. No text testifies that the court was directly involved in the production of this work. Nevertheless, its highly refined and meticulous brushwork strongly suggests that court painters created this work, and possibly, that its production was funded by the court.82 Envoys’ Procession to Edo Castle인조십사년통신사입강호성도 Diplomatic missions to China and Japan were also frequently documented in Korean paintings.83 A number of court-commissioned as well as privately commissioned works documented the Ming envoys’ visits to the Joseon court. Of the works that have survived, all were privately commissioned, so they are not included in this current discussion.84 82 The Royal Banquet for Exam Passers and Officials of the Royal Decree Office 예문관사연도 (1460), which is now lost, was created on King Sejo’s direct order. Choe Hang 최항 (1409-1474), Taeheojeongjip 太虛亭集, vol. 1, quoted in Park Jeong-hyeo 박정혜, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 조선시대 궁중기록화 연구 [Study of Joseon-period court documentary painting] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000), 100. 83 Except for this scroll, all the extant works that depicted Joseon envoys’ procession to the Edo Castle are painted by Edo period Japanese painters. Among them, four works are in South Korea: three in the collection of National Institute of Korean History 국사 편찬위원회 and one in the collection of the National Library of Korea. About Japanese Edo-period painters’ works relating to Joseon envoys’ procession to the Edo Castle, see Tashiro Kazui 田代和生, “Chōsen tsūshinshi emaki no kenkyū gyōretsu,” 朝鮮通信使行列繪卷の研究 [Study of the Joseon envoys’ procession scroll] Chōsen gakuhō 朝鮮學報 137 (1990): 1-46. 84 Many paintings were commissioned by bureaucratic officials who worked in the Special Preparation Office; their duties ranged from welcoming Ming envoys to accommodating various needs of the envoys during their visitation. The painting Welcoming Envoys at the Office of Righteous Obeisance is one notable example. According to the Veritable Records, the Ming envoys asked the Joseon court to create paintings that documented the events they attended as 71 Joseon envoys’ visit to China and Japan also were documented in paintings.85 For instance, King Sejo (r. 1455–68) who had overthrown King Danjong (r. 1452-55), made a personal visit to the Ming court in order to receive the Ming emperor’s approval of his military coup. According to the Veritable Records of Sejo, a folding screen entitled Having an Audience with the Emperor 朝天圖 was displayed behind the royal throne.86 The Joseon envoys’ diplomatic missions to Japan also carried great value in claiming Korea’s status as the secondary center of civilization in the East Asian political geography. A handscroll titled Envoys’ Procession to Edo Castle (1636, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) recorded the mission bearing King Injo’s letter to the shogun in 1636 (fig. 1-5). According to Saito Magoto, who viewed this screen and wrote the inscription on the back, this work is attributed to Kim Myeong-guk 김명국 (1600-?), a prominent court farewell gifts. During the Jungjong reign, on the seventh day of the fourth month in 1537, a Ming envoy named Gong Yongqing 龔用卿 (1500–1563) requested the Joseon court to document his attendance in a royal banquet at the Hall of Diligent Governance 勤政殿. Prior to this event, Gong also expressed his hope to receive two scrolls that documented a welcoming ceremony and the scenery at Pyongyang; this was recorded on the third day of the third month in 1537. For detailed information about these paintings, which depicted Ming envoys’ visits, see Jeong Eun-joo 정은주, Joseon sidae sahaeng girokhwa 조선시대 사행기록화 [Documentary paintings of ambassadorial missions] (Seoul: Saheo pyeongron, 2012). 85 Joseon envoys’ diplomatic activities to the Ming court were also documented in paintings. One notable example is the album Sailing to the Ming Court 항해조천도, consisting of twenty-five scenes depicting the ambassadorial mission of 1624 to request the Ming court’s approval of King Injo’s succeeding the royal throne. Multiple versions of this album survive in the National Library of Korea, the National Museum of Korea, the Korea Army Museum, and private collections. However, it is not certain whether this album was intended to be archived in the court as reference or to be distributed as a souvenir among those diplomats who participated in the mission. 86 An entry dated to the fifth day of the fourth lunar month in 1456 from the Veritable Records of Sejo. 72 painter who twice (in 1636 and 1643) accompanied the Joseon ambassadorial entourage to Japan. Following the Picture of Sequence and Arrangement of an uigwe, a manual of ritual protocols, the focus of this handscroll is the procession, which carries King Injo’s royal letter. Since the king’s letter was considered to be equivalent to the king’s presence, as depicted in this scroll, envoys’ procession equipped with various ritual regalia was organized according to the prescribed regulations of a processional paraphernalia ceremony. According to the bakufu’s orders to the Edo residents in 1711, the street had to be neatly prepared; however, spectators were still allowed to view the spectacular procession of foreign guests.87 The surrounding cityscape and spectators in this scroll, nevertheless, are not shown. I believe that the void background is a pictorial element originally formulated by Song court lubu paintings, and Joseon court painters followed it as reconstructing royal and state processions. Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress 북새선은도 A handscroll entitled The Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress (1664, handscroll, National Museum of Korea, Seoul) portrays a state examination given for the first time in that remote northeastern province (fig. 1-38).88 Kim Su-hang 김수항 (1629- 1689), a Six State Councilor who supervised this historical examination, and Min Jeong- 87 Tsūkō ichiran 通航一覽 (Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai, 1912), 476-477. 88 Although Hamgyeong Province was where the founder of the Joseon Dynasty was born, it had been discriminated against due to its geographic location, along with northern Pyongyang. 73 jung 민정중 (1628-1692), the magistrate of Hamgyeong Province 함경도, commissioned Han Si-gak 한시각 (1621-?), a prominent court painter, to illustrate that historical event.89 Given its careful design, refined brushwork, and use of expensive mineral pigments on silk,90 Han Si-gak probably sketched the event and completed it after coming back to the court in Hanyang (modern-day Seoul).91 The first section of the scroll depicts military-service candidates on horseback in a courtyard set against the city wall, above which are hills and mountains painted in bright blue and green mineral pigments, recalling the paradisiacal connotation of Tang-period blue-and-green landscape paintings. The second section of the scroll features a scene of civil-service candidates waiting to receive the results of their examination. Elsewhere in the scroll, musicians play music, creating a festive mood for this historical event. As if viewed from the high vantage point of the bird’s-eye view, the elevated perspective gives 89 By examining a stamp left on the scroll, we know that Han Si-gak is its painter. Han participated twenty-two times in the production of uigwe, book of ritual protocols; in 1655 he was an official painter who accompanied the ambassadorial entourage to Edo, and in 1682 he joined the tributary entourage to Beijing. 90 Mineral pigments used in this work include malachite and azurite. Both of them were extremely expensive pigments. Cheongrok sansu, nakwon-eul geurida 청록산수, 낙원을 그리다 [Blue-and-green landscape painting, portraying paradise] (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2006), 31. 91 There are a number of studies of this work. Notable examples include Yi Tae-ho 이태호, “Han si-gak-ui buksaeseoneundo-wa buggwansilgyeongdo,” 한시각의 북새선은도와 북관실경도 [Han Si-gak’s Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress and the True-View of Bukgwan] Jeongsinmunhwa yeongu 정신문화연구 34 (1988): 207-235; Yi Geon-sang 이건상, “Buksaeseoneundo-wa bukgwansuchangrok,” 북새선은도와 북관수창록 [The Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress and the Compilation of Poems on Bukgwan] Misul jaryeo 미술자료 52 (1993): 129-167; Yi Gyeong-hwa 이경화, “Buksaeseoneundo yeongu,” 북새선은도 연구 [Study of the Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress] Misulsahak yeongu 미술사학연구, no. 254 (2007): 41-70. 74 a sense of depth to the depiction of the event and its surrounding scenery. Also, this viewpoint was ideal to magnify the political significance of this state event. Prior to Han’s Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress, there were a few instances where the Joseon king commissioned paintings representing state examinations. In 1563, King Myeongjong (r. 1545-1567) commissioned twenty-three hanging scrolls that depicted various types of state examinations, distributed them among court officials, and asked the officials to compose poems about the importance of state examinations. King Myeongjong used those paintings in order to emphasize the role of state examinations in Confucian statecraft. In this sense, the depiction of the state examination in the Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress was not new, but the depiction of a specific state examination was unprecedented.92 It is not certain under what circumstances this painting was originally viewed or who the intended viewers were. Given that this painting was completed by Han Si-gak, one of the most prominent court painters of the time, and that it was commissioned by two leading politicians of the Old Doctrine Faction 노론, which was the dominant political party at that time, one can infer that the painting was created to fulfill certain political functions. This work was presented to the king as a visual report of the first historical state examination in the remote Hamgyeong Province and was probably stored in one of the royal archives and viewed by court officials and painters. The basis of this argument is an eighteenth-century scroll entitled The Special State Examination for the Applicants from Hamgyeong Province북관별과도 (1731, 75 hanging scroll, the National Museum of Korea, Seoul), which documents a special state examination at Hamgyeong Province in 1731, during Yeongjo’s reign. It is strikingly similar to Han Si-gak’s work (fig. 1-39), not only in terms of choosing the same scenes (military-service candidates displaying their martial skills in a courtyard in the first half, civil-service candidates waiting to receive the results of the examination in the other half of the hanging scroll), but also the usage of aerial perspective and oblique view, and the treatment of landscape in blue and green pigments. It is highly likely that Han’s work was commissioned not as a work of art for private viewing but rather as a public archive for court officials to access. Even makers of the eight-panel folding screen King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen, the National Museum of Korea, Seoul), seem to have referenced elements of Han Si-gak’s style, such as the inclusion of detailed topographic features of the surrounding environment of the event, the combination of bird’s-eye and oblique-angle views, and the green-blue palette (fig. 1-40). King’s Personal Governance at the Hall of Flourishing Government 숙종친정계병 During King Sukjong’s reign (1674-1720), a number of folding screens were made to document his Personal Governance ceremony 親政 친정, a symbolic ritual that served to promulgate a king’s first governing act free from regency.93 It was also a 93 At least three of King Sukjong’s Personal Governance ceremonies (in 1687, 1691, and 1703) were documented on folding screens, and editions of the paintings were distributed among the bureaucratic officials who participated in these rituals. 76 practical administrative ceremony in which the king announced the promotion of bureaucratic officials and the relocation of bureaucrats based on their work evaluation. Prior to Sukjong, kings did not frequently conduct the Personal Governance ceremony. However, after the performance of this ritual in his second year of rule, Sukjong performed it on five additional occasions. Compared to the frequency of royal banquets as a topic of court documentary painting, the King’s Personal Governance ceremony was a relatively new ritual and did not seem to have been painted prior to Sukjong’s reign. During Sukjong’s reign, however, three major purges of the state occurred (The Purge of the Year of 1680, the Purge of the Year of 1689, and the Purge of the Year of 1694), which completely removed the losing political faction. The king’s subsequent appointment of bureaucratic officials indeed mirrored the king’s favor as well as that of the dominant faction. According to Yi Hyeon-il 이현일 (1627-1704), the Second Minister of the Ministry of Personnel, who attended that banquet, the folding screen under discussion was created early in the third lunar month in 1691 about two months after the event; those who attended the royal feast contributed painting pigments and silk in order to create copies of the folding screens. 94 As Yi testified, the event participants paid part of the expense of making the screens, and I believe the state facilitated hiring court painters and 94 A record (the Record of the Screen of the Personal Governance at the Hall of Flourishing Governance 흥정당친정시화병기) explaining the circumstances in which this screen was created is inscribed on the back of this screen. This record, which was originally from Yi Hyeon-il’s 이현일 (1627-1704) Galamjip 葛庵集, vol. 12, was added in 1844 by Kim Hui-su 김희수 (1700-1788), Park Jeong-hyeo, 124. 77 took care of the remaining payment.95 King Sukjong’s Personal Governance ceremony which took place at the Hall of Flourishing Government 興政堂 in the Palace of Celebratory Splendor 慶煕宮 in 1691, is depicted on the eight-panel folding screen (fig. 1-41).96 The ceremony is painted on the first panel of the eight-panel screen, and a royal feast, which took place one day after the ceremony, is documented on the eighth panel.97 The second through the seventh panels comprise a continuous blue-green landscape, which often symbolizes an air of peace and prosperity in the tradition of East Asian landscape painting. Flatness permeates the entire panel, which is without any sense of depth. Court painter(s) who designed this screen did not show much interest in creating a believable sense of three-dimensionality, but rather placed maximum emphasis on informing the viewer about the layout of the events. This “conservative” mode of depicting an actual event without desiring to enhance lifelikeness became a persistent style in eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings. In addition to these few surviving works, the titles or dedicatory inscriptions of a large number of court documentary paintings have survived, either in official court 95 The screen under discussion is currently in the collection of the Uiseong Kim family. 96 According to Oh Do-il 오도일, a folding screen documenting King Sukjong’s Personal Governance ceremony, which took place on the twenty-fifth day of the twelfth month in 1687, was created. Oh Do-il 오도일, Seopajip 西坡集, vol. 17, quoted in Park Jeong-hyeo, 123. 97 For more information of this screen and its political implications, see Seo Yun-jeong 서윤정, “Sipchil segi huban andong gweonssi-ui ginyeom hoehwa-wa namyin-ui jeongchi hwangdong,” 17세기 후반 안동 권씨의 기념 회화와 남인의 정치 활동 [The Andong Gwon clan’s patronage of commemorative paintings and the southerner’s political activities] Andong hak yeongu 안동학연구 11 (2012): 259-294. 78 documents or personal essays, which attest that many more court documentary paintings were created under a variety of circumstances and patrons. According to Park Jeong-hyeo, during the seventeenth century, officials who belonged to state offices such as Royal Secretariat 승정원, Capital Government Office 한성부, Ministry of History 사조, Ministry of Military 병조, Ministry of Rites 예조, Ministry of Taxation 호조, Ministry of Punishment 형조, Office of Senior Officials 기로소, Office of Royal Family Members 종친부, Office of Royal Attire 상의원, Office of Royal Transformation 태복시 collectively commissioned paintings that documented state events and rites they had attended or organized.98 In many cases, court officials collectively took care of expenses needed in the production of paintings, but in most cases, they used the state fund for the production of paintings, and hiring court painters to execute their commission.99 In addition to these permanent administrative offices, officials who worked at the Office of Superintendence 도감 都監, a temporay administrative office for special state rites, also commissioned paintings to document events they prepared or royal banquets 98 Park Jeong-hyeo 박정혜, “Hyeongjong jeongmi Onyang onhaeng gyebyeong,” 현종정미온양온행계병 [King Hyeongjong’s outing to Onyuang in the year of jeongmi] Misulsa nondan 미술사논단, no. 29 (2009): 99. 99 Some works commissioned by the officials of the Office of Superintendence depict either popular landscape themes, such as the Eight Views of Xio and Xiang Rivers 소상팔경 or the Nine-Bend Stream of Mount Wuyi 무의구곡, or Daoist themes, such as the Banquet at the Mother of the West 서왕모생일잔치. For example, officials who worked for the Office of Superintendence, which prepared the crown prince’s investiture ceremony in 1690, commissioned an eight-panel folding screen 왕세자책례도감계병, which depicted figures in landscapes. Also, those officials who worked at the Office of Superintendence, which oversaw the reconstruction of the Queen Dan’gyeong’s tomb (1487-1557) in 1739, ordered the depiction of the Nine-Bend Stream of Mount Wuyi 무이구곡도. Park Jeong-hyeo, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa, 72-73. 79 they attended after state rites.100 For instance, Nam Yong-ik 남용익 (1628-1692) testified in his journal that as he worked at the Office of Superintendence to oversee the process of copying King Taejo’s portrait in 1677, he and other court officials used leftover materials to create folding screens. Although it is not known what scenes were painted on those folding screens, a royal banquet held by the king as a rewarding event and a blue-and-green landscape scenery, could have been featured.101 Although court officials initiated the commission of paintings marking important state rites or court events and distributed them among themselves, by the early seventeenth century it seems that most expenses were covered by the court and sometimes this practice was criticized by officials of the Censor-General 사간원 for wasting state funds.102 Although it was uncommon for kings to be directly involved in the commission of documentary paintings prior to the eighteenth century, there was at least one instance where the king directly commissioned paintings and gave them to officials. According to Choe Rip’s 최립 (1539-1612) preface dedicated to the Album of the Office of Superintendence of Pacifying Rebels 평난도감계첩 recorded in his Compiled Essay of Simplicity and Easiness 簡易集, King Seonjo (r. 1567-1608) had the Office of Superintendence create albums depicting a royal banquet he hosted for officials who 100 Park Jeong-hyeo, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa, 70. 101 Nam Yong-ik 남용익, Hogok-jip 壺谷集, vol. 15. 102 For the Office of the Censor-General’s critique about the production of screens and hanging scrolls by court officials who worked at the Office of Superintendence, see an entry dated to the twelfth day of the third leap month in 1610 of the Diaries of Prince Gwanghae. 80 helped to pacify a rebellion in 1589.103 The king’s direct involvement in the production of documentary paintings, which had been rare, became a norm in the eighteen century. 103 This episode is recorded in the preface of Choe Rip’s Ganyijip 簡易集, vol. 3. 81 Conclusion In this chapter, I have discussed how rulers in both China and Korea were actively involved in documenting their ritual activities in paintings. These paintings served to communicate their political activities and accentuate their political legitimacy and virtuous rule for their contemporaries and for posterity. One of the major differences between Chinese and Korean court documentary painting is their choice of subjects. While Korean court documentary paintings primarily depicted state rituals, and predominantly royal banquets, their Chinese counterparts focused on the emperors’ private activities such as hunting and seasonal festivals. But The Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion and The Xianzong Emperor’s Lantern Festival, which seemingly documented the emperors’ private activities, actually aimed display the emperors’ political values and visions to imperial successors, reinforcing messages about their political values and visions resonated throughout official court records. Further contrasts between Chinese and Korean court documentary painting are found in the ways these works were produced and consumed. In the Chinese court, the emperor was the primary producer and consumer, but in the Korean Joseon court, both the king and bureaucratic officials were involved in the production of court documentary paintings, and bureaucratic officials were the only consumers. The court provided funds to hire court painters, who belonged to the Ministry of Rites, and covered other necessary expenses, but the king did not intend to own any of these paintings. This type of indirect patronage changed in the eighteenth century, a period that saw the rise of powerful rulers 82 who wished to strengthen kingly authority over bureaucratic officials. The changed pattern of production and consumption of art works in the eighteenth-century Joseon court will be addressed in Chapter Four. In terms of pictorial vocabularies, Chinese and Korean court documentary paintings followed different artistic paths, yet these paths sometimes converged in the interconnected court culture. For example, Song court documentary paintings that recorded imperial processional paraphernalia and emperors’ activities did not contain the emperor’s portrait image, although the emperor was the host of those events. The Song practice of not showing rulers’ portraits in documentary works did not continue in the Ming Dynasty, but did persist in the Joseon court. Many researchers have demonstrated that Ming visual culture, including imperial portraiture, was profoundly influenced by Tibetan Buddhist art, and consequently the Ming approach to imperial portraiture differed greatly from that of the Song. Ming emperors were depicted more and more frequently as iconic images for worship, and thus their images in court documentary paintings became more realistic and iconic. Joseon court documentary painting, in contrast, maintained the older Song mode, which tended to pay more attention to the layout of a ritual event and the appearance of ritual objects than to the realistic portrayal of human figures. As I will discuss in Chapter Six, the style of Joseon court documentary painting remained more or less the same as earlier works, so I have characterized it as a “conservative” style valued for its “timeless” quality. 83 CHAPTER TWO: SUBJECTS OF EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY QING AND JOSEON COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTINGS Introduction From the Song through the Ming Dynasties in China, the emperors’ private, yet highly political activities and achievements were the predominant topics of documentary painting. Prior to the eighteenth century, Joseon court documentary paintings focused less on kings’ political achievements, and more on celebratory events such as royal banquets, which were attended by the king and court officials. Also documented were state-sponsored events such as state examinations for selecting bureaucratic officials and diplomatic missions. In particular, paintings depicting royal banquets were created with multiple copies in order to give one to each court official who attended. Chinese and Korean court documentary paintings, which traditionally had followed different thematic paths, started dealing with similar themes at the dawn of the eighteenth century, namely the rulers’ performances of state rites and their public activities during their trips. This chapter provides an overview of subjects portrayed in eighteenth-century Chinese and Korean court documentary paintings, and examines why certain themes were favored and vice versa. I suggest the likelihood that the convergence of themes in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary painting resulted not only from these two ruling houses’ frequent exchange of diplomatic missions and material goods, but also Manchu and Korean rulers’ increased awareness of using spectacular rituals and public events as political tools to legitimize their rule and to fashion their political persona as a sage ruler, an ideal title for the leader of a Confucian state. 84 State Rituals In dynastic Korea, the state rituals comprised five types: Auspicious Rituals 吉禮, Felicitous Rituals 嘉禮, Military Rituals 軍禮, Funerary Rituals 凶禮, and Guest Rituals 賓禮. Three of these types—Auspicious, Felicitous, and Military—became the subjects of eighteenth-century Joseon and Qing court documentary paintings. The rise of these themes demonstrates two important facts about eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers and their statecraft. First, it shows that the rulers in both courts highly valued their own participation in these rituals to cast themselves as Confucian sage rulers. As discussed further in Chapter Four, both ruling houses perceived the documentation of ritual activities as political achievements, and expected these records to be used as examples of ideal rule for their dynastic successors. Second, it implies that eighteenth-century Joseon kings might have emulated Qing emperors, who had been successfully recognized as the Son of Heaven by the Han majority by means of state rites, not military forces. Frequent imperial edicts and letters from Qing envoys, as well as oral and textual reports of Joseon envoys, who had regularly traveled to Beijing with tributary missions, often mentioned Qing emperors’ ceremonial and political activities. The observations of these envoys may have inspired eighteenth-century Joseon kings to reenact certain types of Auspicious Rites and Military Rites, which had not been performed in Korea for a long time. 85 Auspicious Rites 吉禮 Auspicious Rites were sacrificial offerings to gods, spirits, and select historical figures. They were categorized into three levels: Grand Offerings 大祀, Medium Offerings 中祀, and Lesser Offerings 小祀. In the Qing court, there were a total of 129 Auspicious ceremonies, including the Grand Offerings to Heaven, the Earth, Imperial Ancestors, Land and Grain, Harvest, Rain, and Confucius; Medium Offerings to the Sun, the Moon, the Year Star, the First Farmer, and Emperors of Previous Dynasties; and Lesser Offerings to the God of Literature, the God of the Northern Star, and the Eastern Peak.1 In the Joseon court, there were a total of 89 Auspicious ceremonies. These ceremonies included Grand Offerings to Royal Ancestors, the State, the Earth, and Land and Grain; Medium Offerings to the First Farmer and the God of Literature; and Lesser Offerings to the God of Wind, the God of Rain, the God of Thunder, the Star of Longevity, and the Sacred Mountains.2 Among the Auspicious Rites, the offering to the First Farmer was followed by the Plowing ceremony 耕禮 is recorded in a set of two long handscrolls titled Sacrificial Offerings at the Altar of First Farmer 祭先農壇圖 (the Palace Museum in Beijing and the Musée Guimet in Paris).3 This set depicts the Yongzheng emperor’s personal 1 Evelyn S. Rawski, The Last Emperors: A Social History of Qing Imperial Institutions (Berkeley: University of California, 2001), 200. 2 JaHyun Kim Haboush, The Confucian Kingship in Korea (New York: Columbia University, 2001), 36. 3 “雍正五年正月二十九日, 六品官阿蘭泰為畫親耕圖等畫, 傳做打木正子五十二幅,高凳十二條, 手卷正子四個.” This record is written on the Jishilu 記事錄 [Records of Events] 86 performance of this set of state rituals, most likely in 1726.4 The scroll in the Palace Museum illustrates the Yongzheng emperor’s entry to the sacred area through the east gate and his procession toward the Altar of the First Farmer, which was located inside the Gate of Perpetual Stability 永定門 in the Forbidden City (fig. 2-1). The Guimet handscroll depicts the Yongzheng emperor performing the Plowing ceremony at the Sacred Field 藉田, where grain for state sacrifices was grown (fig. 2-2). Throughout Chinese history, the imperial offering of rites dedicated to the First Farmer 先農 at the Altar of the First Farmer were not always included to the category of Auspicious Rites.5 During the Ming dynasty, the Plowing ceremony as a minor ritual was only sporadically performed.6 Qing Manchu emperors reintroduced the practice of venerating the First Farmer, which had been occasionally performed during the Ming dynasty,7 as an important part of Auspicious Rites in Shenyang in 1644. The Shunzhi from Zaobanchu gezuo chengzuo huoji qing dang 造辦處各作成作活計清檔 [Archives of the Workshop of the Imperial Household Department], quoted in Liu Lu 劉潞“Ji xiannong, gengjitian yu xiannongtantu: Yongzheng huangdi zhongyao de zhengzhi shouduan,” 祭先農. 耕耤田與祭先農壇圖: 雍正皇帝重要的政治手段 [Performing Xiannong and ploughing ceremony and the worshipping at the altar of the first farmer painting: Yongzheng’s important political tool] (paper presented at Liangan gugong diyi jie xueshu yantaohui 兩岸故宮第一屆學術研討會 (2009), 6. 4 Ibid., 7. 5 For the history of imperial plowing, see Derk Bodde, Festival in Classical China: New Year and Other Annual Observances during the Han Dynasty 206 B.C.-A.D. 220 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975), 223-241. 6 This ceremony was abandoned during the Yuan dynasty, and revived by the Hongzhi emperor. John D. Langlois JR. “The Hung-wu reign, 1368-1398,” in the Cambridge History of China, vol. 7, eds. Frederick W. Mote, Denis Witchett, John k. Fairback (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 116. 7 Emperor Hongwu performed the Plowing ceremony in 1369 as a symbolic gesture to 87 emperor (r. 1644-61) routinized annual worship at the Altar of the First Farmer in 1655; however, the emperor delegated a high court official to conduct the rite rather than conducting it himself, and his successor, the Kangxi emperor (r. 1661-1722) also sent a court official to carry out the ceremony in 1672 and 1711.8 The Yongzheng emperor, however, personally conducted the offering at the Altar of the First Farmer in the second year of his reign (1723), and continued to do so every year throughout his thirteen-year reign.9 In the Court Diaries of Yongzheng Reign 雍正朝 起居注冊, it is noted that the Yongzheng emperor embarked on a state program to promote worship at the Altar of the First Farmer among officials at the local level explaining that their participation in the agriculture ritual was a way to pay respect to farmers and to heaven. I desire local governors to perform the plowing ceremony without exception in order to be aware of the difficulty of plowing and harvesting, and of the hardship of farmers’ work. And [I hope that local governors] keep track of rainy and sunny days, and examine the degree of fertility of the land. If this is done, officials will always respect the mind of farming class and absolutely have no habit of laziness…10 眹意欲令地方守土之官, 俱行耕稓之禮, 使知稼穡之艱, 悉農夫之作苦. proclaim the newly established dynasty’s cultural restoration. Under the Mongol rule, the Plowing ceremony was not performed. John D. Langlois, “The Hong-wu reign 1368-1398,” in Cambridge History of China Vol. 7: the Ming Dynasty 1368-1644, eds. Fredrick W. Mote and Denis Twitchett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 116. 8 Liu Lu, 3. 9 “Libu 禮部,” in Qing huidian shili 清會典事例 [Collected statutes of the Qing], vol. 43 10 Yongzheng chao qiju zhuce 雍正朝起居註冊 [Diaries of activity and repose of the Yongzheng emperor], vol. 1 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1993), 749-752. 88 量天時之晴雨, 察地力之肥磽. 如比, 則凡為官者, 皆時存重農課稼之心. 而凡為農者, 而斷無剞茍安怠情之習⋯ Liu Lu points out that the Yongzheng emperor’s nation-wide promotion of this ritual was part of a political program to proclaim the legitimacy of his succession, which had been seriously questioned throughout his reign.11 In Joseon Korea, King Yeongjo laid much emphasis upon personally performing the Plowing ceremony, just as the Yongzheng emperor had. After first conducting the ceremony in 1739, Yeongjo performed it three more times, in 1753, 1764, and 1767.12 In his edict to court officials in 1767, Yeongjo proudly announced that he was the one who restored this ancient ceremony, which had been forgotten for hundreds of years. After completing the Five Furrows at the East Altar, I then performed the Ritual of Picking Five Mulberry Leaves at the Northern Garden. It was the grand event, which has not been performed for three hundred years, and correctly revived this ritual of antiquity of a few thousand years.13 11 Lu Liu, 18. 12 King Yeongjo performed the Scything ceremony in 1747, 1762, and 1765 and performed in 1767. In 1767, he and his consort performed a whole set of rites related to agriculture and sericulture; Plowing 親耕, Scything 觀刈, Storing Grains 藏種, Offering Grains 獻種, Sericulture 親蠶, Gathering Cocoons 採桑, and Reeling-off Silk from Cocoons 收繭. Gukyeok Chingyeong chinjam uigwe 국역친경, 친잠의궤 [Book of personal plowing and personal sericulture] (Seoul: Minjok monhwa chujinhoe, 2006), 55. For further information about the queen’s personal Sericulture ceremony, see Lim Hye-ryun 임혜, “Joseon yeongjodae chinjamrye sihaeng-gwa uiui,” 조선영조대친잠례 시행과 의의 [Significance of sericulture ceremony during king Yeongjo’s reign] Jangseogak 장서각 25 (2011): 111-135; Han Hyeong-ju 한형주, Batganeun yeongjowa nuechineun jeongsunwanghu 밭가는 영조와 누에치는 정순왕후 [King Yeongjo plowing and queen Jeongsun raising silkworms] (Seongnam: Hangukhak jungwang yeonguwon, 2013) 13 This is English translation is based on Korean translation provided in Gukyeok Chingyeong chinjam uigwe, 125. 89 In this same edict, Yeongjo publicly linked his personal performance of the Plowing ceremony with Yao 堯 and Shun 舜, the mythological Chinese rulers of antiquity. In actuality, Yeongjo must have been inspired by the Yongzheng emperor’s first Plowing ceremony (1723), which had taken place sixteen years before Yeongjo’s first performance of the ceremony in 1739. Kim Gyeong-rok examined in diplomatic letters sent from the Qing court and envoys’ reports, and demonstrated that a large portion of them was dedicated to Qing emperors’ ritual activities.14 Thus, it is very likely that Yeongjo was directly inspired by Yongzheng’s performance of the ritual. Nevertheless, since strong anti-Qing sentiments were still prevalent among court officials at that time and since even Yeongjo drew on anti-Qing sentiments in dealing with domestic political affairs, Yeongjo could not possibly have publicly admitted that his decision of reenacting the Plowing ceremony had been inspired by the Yongzheng emperor. I believe that Yeongjo imitated his Qing counterpart, although his motivation of emulation was ironically to claim to be superior to his “barbarian” Son of Heaven by framing himself as a contemporary sage king comparable to Yao and Shun. After completing the Plowing ceremonies, Yeongjo commissioned paintings in various formats for commemoration. According to the Book of Personal Plowing and 14 Kim Gyeong-rok introduced that one of the main activities done by Joseon diplomats during their visits to the Forbidden City was to copy Qing official documents that described ritual procedures. Kim Gyeong-rok 김경록, “Joseon sidae daejungguk oegyo munseo-wa oegyojeongbo-ui sujip,” 조선시대 대중국 외교문서와 외교정보의 수집, 보존 체계 [Diplomatic documents relations with China and the diplomatic information gather-preservation system in the Joseon Dynasty] Dongbuka yeosa nonchong 동북아 역사논총, no. 25 (2009): 307-311. 90 Personal Sericulture 親耕親蠶儀軌, which documents the details of Yeongjo’s 1767 Plowing ceremony, his first (1739) and third (1764) plowing ceremonies were chronicled respectively in folding screens and hanging scrolls. The record reads as follows: In the year of Gimi (1739), the Plowing Ceremony folding screen and the Book of Ritual Protocols were created under the supervision of the Ministry of Rites. In the year of Gapsin (1764), following the royal edicts, hanging scrolls were created. What should be done this time? The king answered, “Don’t make it this time.”15 The folding screens documenting Yeongjo’s first Plowing ceremony, created in 1739, seem to have been lost. However, hanging scrolls made in 1764 survived until at least the Japanese colonial period (1910–45), although their current location is unknown.16 Fujita Ryōsaku 藤田亮策 (1892–1960), a leading scholar of ancient Korean archeology,17 in his article in the Report of the Joseon Agricultural Society 朝鮮農會報 (1940) introduced a hanging scroll that portrays Yeongjo plowing the Sacred Field (fig. 2-3).18 According to Fujita, Yasuoka Sōzō 安岡壯藏, a member of the Society, donated the hanging scroll to 15 My English translation was based on Korean translation provided in Gukyeok Chingyeong chinjam uigwe, 55. 16 Kim Ji-yeong discovered the published image of a hanging scroll depicting Yeongjo’s Plowing ceremony, in Fujita Ryōsaku 藤田亮策, “Chōsen Eiso shinkōzu ni tsukite,” 朝鮮英祖親耕圖に就きて [About King Yeongjo’s plowing painting] Chōsen Nōkai hō 朝鮮農會報 40, no. 6 (1940): 2-8. 17 Fujita Ryōsaku, 2-8. 18 Sponsored by the Japanese colonial government, the Joseon Agricultural Society was organized in 1926 and dissembled in 1952. For more information about the Joseon Agricultural Society, see Kim Yong-dal 김영달, Iljae-ui nongeop jeongcheok-gwa Joseon nonghoe 일제의 농업정책과 조선농회 [Japanese colonial government’s agricultural policy and Joseon agricultural society] (Seoul: Hyeoan, 2003). 91 the organization.19 Unfortunately, the provenance of this hanging scroll is currently unknown. King Jeongjo (r. 1776-1800), who accompanied his grandfather Yeongjo in various ceremonial events while he was the heir apparent, continued to cherish performing auspicious rites. King Jeongjo did not himself conduct the Plowing ceremony, but he did perform another Auspicious rite, the Scything ceremony 觀乂, on the fifth day of the intercalary fifth lunar month of 1781. According to Kim Jong-su 김종수 (1728-1799) in his essay compilation, the Compilation of Dreamy Paulownia 夢 梧集, and Yi Bok-won’s writing (1719-1792) in the Records of Daily Affairs in the Hall of the Star of Literature 內閣日記, Jeongjo commissioned an eight-panel folding screen detailing this event, but the location of this screen is not known.20 Another Auspicious rite selected as a theme of Qing court-documentary painting is the Sericulture ceremony. After the 1742 construction of a new shrine dedicated to the First Sericulturalist, Lei Zu 嫘祖 (the wife of the Yellow emperor), the Empress Xiaoxian (1712-1748), or her delegates conducted annual offerings at this shrine. The empress personally conducted the Sericulture ceremony in 1744 and the Qianlong had that 19 Fujita Ryōsaku, 2. 20 According to the entry dated to the fifth day of the fifth lunar month in 1781 of the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. Jeongjo ordered the ritual directives 儀註, regulations 節目, and musical texts 樂章 pertaining to the Scything ceremony, and a list of participants to be documented in the Records of Daily Affairs in the Hall of the Star of Literature 內閣日記 for future reference. 92 ceremony painted in 1748 right after the death of the empress.21 A set of four handscrolls from 1744, preserved in the National Palace Museum in Taipei, documents Empress Xiaoxian’s first performance of the ceremony in 1744 and highlights four important ritual procedures. Each scroll bears a different title: Visiting the Altar 詣壇, Sacrifices at the Altar 祭壇, Picking Mulberry Leaves 採桑, and Presenting Cocoons 獻繭. Completed in 1751, three years after its first commission, these scrolls must have been made not only to commemorate Empress Xiaoxian’s first Sericulture ceremony but also to reflect her pious Confucian values (figs. 2-4, 2-5).22 The reenactment of the Sericulture ceremony under the Qianlong court was also profoundly related to the emperor’s intention to promulgate the authority of the empress to court officials. According to Hieh Bao-hua in the discussion of the Ming-period Sericulture ceremony, “the complexity of the ritual activities and the frequency of their practices corresponded to the strength or weakness of the empress’ political role at that 21 Although the empress’s Sericulture ceremony parallels the emperor’s Plowing ceremony, the official sacrificial ceremony in honor of the First Sericulturalist was only conducted sporadically in the twelfth and sixteenth centuries. Dieter Khun, Science and Civilization in China 9 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 248. Tong Wen-e discovered that this sericulture ceremony scroll was created after the death of the empress, see Tong Wen-e 童文娥, “Qingyuanben qincantude yanjiu,” 清院本親蠶圖的研究 [Study of the Qing copy of the sericulture painting] Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 278 (2006): 70-78. 22 In the third scroll, Picking Mulberry Leaves, the Qianlong added an inscription and a poem expressing his sorrow over the death of the empress. Besides of its documentary function, this scroll seemed to have served as a personal token of memory for the Qianlong emperor. For Qianlong’s poem, see Chen Pao-Chen, “An Analytical Reading of Portraits of Emperor Qianlong and His Consorts,” in Bridges to Heaven: Essays on East Asian Art in Honor of Professor Wen C. Feng, vol. 1 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011), 353-355. 93 time.”23 Hieh’s observation even can explain why Yeongjo restored the Sericulture ceremony. In 1767 Queen Jeongsun 정순왕후 (1745-1805), the consort of King Yeongjo, performed the Sericulture ceremony, a state ritual attended by the crown prince, court ladies, female royal family members, and the wives of high ranking officials.24 Having married to Yeongjo at the age of fifteen, Queen Jeongsun instantly became the head of court ladies. Thus, it is very likely that Yeongjo used the Sericulture ceremony to strengthen his wife’s authority among the court ladies and officials. 25 In fact, Queen Jeongsun came to wield tremendous political influence over the second half of the nineteenth century while she acted as a regent dowager for a young king Sunjo (r. 1800-1834). Although there is no official Joseon court record mentioning the Qing empress’s personal performance of Sericulture ceremonies (1744 and 1751), as was the case in the Plowing ceremony, Queen Jeongsun’s ceremony seems to have been inspired by that of Qing Empress Xiaoxian. Uigwe of Personal Sericulture Ceremony 친잠의궤 was compiled to document and commemorate her ritual performance, however, no painting was created. To briefly review, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers simultaneously restored the Plowing and Sericulture ceremonies. This strongly attests that both performing and documentation of their ritual activities were seen to be essential to 23 Hieh Bao-hua, “Empress’ Grove: Ritual and Life in the Ming Palace,” Research on Women in Modern Chinese History, 11 (2003): 138. 24 Han Yeong-wu 한영우, Joseon wangjo uigwe: gukga girok-gwa geu girok 조선왕조의궤: 국가 의례와 그 기록 [Joseon dynasty uigwe: state rites and their records] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2005), 336. 25 Han Hyeong-ju, 118-119. 94 legitimize their rule. For Qing emperors, their main political motivation in conducting Auspicious rites was to justify their newly given role as the Son of Heaven, the privileged title generated only through the Mandate of Heaven. Since Auspicious rites symbolized the Son of Heaven’s sanctified communication with Heaven, Manchu Qing rulers, who had been traditionally considered to be “barbarians,” exploited this particular category of state rites to promulgate their rightful ownership of the title of the Son of Heaven. Eighteenth-century Joseon kings’ political intentions were seemingly more complex. On one hand, they strove to strengthen their autocratic power to overcome court officials’ chronic political and factional struggles by reenacting rituals of antiquity that displayed their adherence to central Confucian values, thus proclaiming their authority to rule to Neo-Confucian officials who saw the king’s diligent ritual performances as the measure of rightful kingship. On the other hand, their performance of Auspicious rites was possibly the outcome of their keen awareness of their contemporary Qing emperors’ political activities. In order to maintain their self-proclaimed identity as the sole caretakers of Confucian civilization, eighteenth-century Joseon kings conducted Auspicious Rites, which had been forgotten for more than two hundred years, and subsequently made relevant again by Qing emperors. Felicitous Rites 嘉禮 While Auspicious Rites were sacrifices to gods in a higher realm, Felicitous Rites were ceremonies concerning secular affairs of the court. In the Qing court, there were 74 Felicitous ceremonies, including Accession, Imperial Audience, Reception of Embassies, 95 Imperial Banquet, Imperial Marriage, and State Exam ceremonies.26 In the Joseon court, there were 80 Felicitous ceremonies, including Royal Marriage, King’s Personal Governance, King’s Entry into the Club of Elders, Conferring the Title of Crown Prince, Royal Banquet, and Conferring Honorary Titles.27 In Joseon Korea, the most frequently painted Felicitous Rites included the King’s Personal Governance ceremony, the King’s Entry to the Club of Elders ceremony, the Royal Banquet, the Congratulatory Offering ceremony, and the Conferring the Title of Crown Prince ceremony. That these state rites were chosen as subjects of visual records vividly illustrates how documentary painting mirrored Joseon rulers’ political intentions. As discussed in Chapter One, the King’s Personal Governance ceremony 친정 親政, which became increasingly more frequently conducted during Sukjong’s reign (r. 1674-1720), continued to be performed during Yeongjo’s (r. 1724-1776) and Jeongjo’s (r. 1776-1800) reigns at regular intervals.28 Four works that documented this state ritual 26 Evelyn S. Rawski, 200. 27 In the Joseon court, either the king’s or the crown prince’s marriage ceremony was considered to be the most important Felicitous Rite. However, only the king’s processional ceremony, called Personal Welcoming 親迎, in which the king escorts the queen-to-be from a separate palace 別宮 to the court, was illustrated as a visual appendix in an uigwe, a book of ritual protocols, but not in any independent pictorial formats such as folding screens or hanging scrolls. According to Liji 禮記, the Welcoming the Bride ceremony established that the superiority of men over women was similar to the relationship between Heaven and Earth and between the strong and the soft. Jang Byeong-in 장병인, “Joseon sidae gukwang-ui honryeo hyeongtae,” 조선시대 국왕의 혼례형태 [The forms of Joseon king’s wedding ceremony] Yeoksa-wa Hyeonsil 역사와 현실 58 (2005), 156. 28 The King’s Personal Governance ceremony took place over two days. On the first day, the king received the names of bureaucratic officials listed according to their years of service and their work evaluation, and announced his selections for either promotion or relocation. On the next day, the king offered a royal banquet for those who participated in the event the day before. 96 performed during Yeongjo’s and Jeongjo’s periods have survived: Album of King Yeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony in the Year of Mushin 무신친정계첩 (1728), Album of King Yeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony in the Year of Kapyin 갑인친정계첩 (1734) (fig. 2-6), Screen of Royal Banquet after King Yeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony in the Year of Eulmyo 을묘친정후선온계병 (1735) (fig. 2-7), and Screen of King Jeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony in the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785). Although ritual procedures remained the same throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the political significance of these rituals changed from a means to suppress strong factionalism (during Sukjong’s reign) to a venue promulgating the king’s autocratic power. The Personal Governance ceremonies performed during Yeongjo’s and Jeongjo’s reigns were events celebrating their Grand Harmony Policy, which aimed to suppress factionalism. The Album of King Yeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony in the Year of Mushin 무신친정계첩 (1728) shows that ceremony conducted at the Hall of Fish and Water 魚水堂 at the Prosperous Virtue Palace 昌德宮 on the seventh day of the seventh lunar month of 1728 (fig. 2-8)—only four months after the Yi In-jwa Rebellion (which broke out during the third month and was suppressed one month later).29 At that time, Yeongjo distributed his own poems to court officials in the Personnel and Military ministries, encouraging them to abandon their personal feelings in favor of the fair 29 Yi Su-mi 이수미 and Min Gil-hong 민길홍, Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 궁중행사도 [Joseon-period court event painting], vol. 2 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011), 150. 97 selection of government personnel.30 King Jeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785) is a folding screen that documented Jeongjo’s ceremony of selecting bureaucratic officials at the Hall of Lofty Splendor 重熙堂 at the Prosperous Virtue Palace on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth lunar month of 1785 (fig. 2-9). The first panel of the screen lists poems by court officials; each poem rhymes with words in the king’s poem. According to a daily entry in the Veritable Records of Jeongjo written on the same day, Jeongjo emphasized the importance of the king’s own judgment over court officials’ open discussions, which typically turned into battlegrounds for the political factions.31 Another important Felicitous ceremony performed on a regular basis in the eighteenth-century Joseon court was the King’s Entry to the Club of Elders 耆老所. This ceremony originated from the Chinese Han Dynasty court’s (206 BCE-220 CE) Spring and Autumn ceremonies and was conducted to honor the elders and to pray for their health.32 In Korea, it was first performed in the Goryeo court (918-1392) and continuously performed throughout the Joseon Dynasty. Scholar officials more than seventy years old were able to join the Club of Elders. The court offered an annual 30 The king’s poem reads as following: “…此堂開政, 意非偶然. 當今急務, 擇守爲先. 祛私克己, 公必在前. 丁寧此敎, 卿其愼旃一飭西銓詩曰. 親政此堂, 卿必體也. 毋曰久勤. 在予淸雅. 武弁朋黨, 係關宗社. 不東不西, 莫上莫下.” A daily entry dated to the seventh day of the seventh lunar month in the Veritable Records of Yeongjo. 31 The daily entry dated to the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth lunar month of 1785 in the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 32 Derk Boode, 362. 98 banquet twice a year—once in spring and once in autumn—and the king presented each new member of the club with a cane and a chair.33 Further, the ruling Joseon king joined the club not only to seek the wisdom of senior court officials but also to foster relationships with them, as they continued to influence politics.34 Yeongjo commissioned the Album of the Celebratory Gathering in the Year of Gisa 기사경회첩 (1744) to commemorate his entry into the club at the age of fifty-one, much earlier than any of his predecessors (fig. 2-10).35 This album documents Yeongjo’s entry into the Club of Elders and the relevant events on the ninth and tenth days of the ninth lunar month of 1744. In this album, the five ritual sequels to the King’s Entry into the Club of Elders are recorded: Royal Visitation at the Hall of Longevity 靈夀閣, Congratulatory Offering Ceremony at the Hall of Sublime Governance 崇政殿, Royal Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom 景賢堂, Granting Music on Behalf of Elderly Court Officials’ Returning Procession, and Royal Banquet at the Office of Elders. In addition to these five scenes, the portraits of ten aged officials who attended the 33 Ranking senior officials often commissioned paintings that depicted a scene they were bestowed with these royal gifts: a chair and a cane. 34 Taejo, the founder of the Joseon dynasty, joined the club at the age of sixty (1394), Sukjong at the age of fifty-nine (1719), Yeongjo at fifty-one (1744), and Gojong at fifty-one (1902). 35 The Record of the Office of Elderly Court Officials 國朝耆老所題名記 was compiled in 1719 in commemoration of Sukjong’s entry to the Club of Elders in the same year. Jeongjo ordered Seo Myeong-Eung 서명응 (1716–1787) to compile the list of elder court officials who joined the club and their poems. The Record of Celebratory Gathering of the Elderly Officials 耆社慶會曆 was compiled in 1787. 99 ceremony were also included in the album.36 The various royal banquets that followed state rites (anywhere from immediately after to a few months after) were also a theme of court documentary paintings in the Joseon court. A hanging scroll entitled Royal Banquet for Royal Family Members 종친부사연도 (1744) documents a banquet offered by Yeongjo for royal family members that took place a month after the ceremony commemorating Yeongjo’s entry to the Club of Elders in 1744 (fig. 2-11).37 In one case, two royal banquets celebrating different occasions were represented in the same eight-panel folding screen. In the screen entitled Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom을유기로연 경현당 수작연 도병 (1765), the first panel contains a preface explaining the theme (fig. 2-12).38 The second, third, and fourth panels depict a banquet presented to the king to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of his accession to the throne (on the twenty-eighth day of the eighth month of 1765). The fifth, sixth, and seventh panels feature a royal banquet bestowed upon court officials in the Club of Elders in celebration of Yeongjo’s seventy-first birthday (the seventy-first birthday is often 36 For further information about this album, see Park Jeong-hyeo 박정혜, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 궁중 기록화 연구 [Study of court documentary painting] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000). 37 Gyebyeong deungrok 稧屛謄錄 [The Registered Record of Gathering Painting] records detailed information about folding screens and hanging scrolls that depicted the same event. It is in the collection of the Kyujanggak at the Seoul National University. 38 For the thorough analysis on this screen, see Kim Yang-gyun 김양균, “Yeongjo eulyu giroyeon gyeonghyeodang sujakyeondobyeong-ui jejak baegyeong-gwa jakga,” 영조을유기로연·경현당수작연도병의 제작배경과 작가 [The production and painter of the Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom] Munhwajae bojon yeongu 문화재보존연구 no. 4 (2007): 72-95. 100 called mangpal [望八] meaning “looking ahead to eighty,” a symbolic age of longevity). Finally, the eighth panel bears a list of the names of banquet participants, which was the same for both events. Congratulatory Offering, a ceremony for court officials to express compliments to the king or royal family members, was another Felicitous Rite often performed in the Joseon court.39 A folding screen made in 1783진하도 portrays this ceremony (fig. 2-13). On it, an inscription by Yu Eon-ho 유언호 (1730–1796), the head of the Hall of the Star of Literature 奎章閣, the Royal Library at that time, indicates that twelve scholars attended this banquet; however, it did not specify for what occasion this group of court officials performed the Congratulatory Offering.40 Yoo Jae-bin raised the possibility that the Congratulatory Offering in 1783 might have followed the Conferring Honorary Titles ceremony 上尊號禮 상존호례 for the lady Hyegyeong and the crown prince Sado (King Jeongjo’s biological parents, performed on the eighth day of the third lunar month and on the first day of the fourth lunar month. Since the young scholar-officials of the Hall of the Star of Literature were trained directly by Jeongjo as his political allies, the Congratulatory Offering ceremony was designed to express their support for Jeongjo’s political decision to restore his parents’ status in the court via the Conferring Honorary 39 The Congratulatory Offering ceremony was performed for special occasions, but it was also performed on the king’s birthday and the winter solstice. 40 According to the 1786 Chogye munsinjae myeongrok 抄啓文臣題名錄 [List of chogye civil officials], the officials who attended this ritual were: Yi Hyeon-do, Jeong Man-si, Yi Myeon-geung, Kim Gyae-rak, Kim Hi-jo, Yi Gon-su, Yun Haeng-im, Seong Jong-in, Yi Ik-jin, Sim Jin-hyeon, Seo Hyeong-su, Sin Bok, Yi Yu-su, and Kang Se-ryun. 101 Titles ceremony.41 Aside from the state rites attended by and held for the king, those for the crown prince—the heir apparent—were also conducted frequently in the Joseon court and documented in paintings. Some notable examples include as the Prince Munhyo’s Meeting with the Tutors of Nourishment and Protection 보양청계병 (1784) and The Prince Munhyo Investiture Ritual 문효세자 책례계병 (1784).42 The Crown Prince Meeting with his Teachers, an eight-fold screen, depicts Jeongjo’s first son, the prince Munhyo (1782-1786), meeting his tutors from the Office of Assistance and Nourishment 輔養廳, which educated young princes until the age of three, in the first month of 1784.43 In his Posthumous Manuscript of Double Creeks 雙溪遺稿, Yi Bok-won 이복원 41 Yoo Jae-bin 유재빈, “Gukrip bakmulgwan sojang jinhado-ui jeongchijeok seonggyeo-gwa uimi,” 국립중앙박물관 소장 진하도의 정치적 성격과 의미 [Political nature and significance of the painting of congratulatory offering in the collection of the national museum of Korea] Dongak misulsahak 동악미술사학 13 (2012): 181-200. 42 For further reading on the Prince Munhyo Investiture Ritual Screens, see Park Jeong-hye, “Court Painting on the Crown Princes of the Joseon Dynasty,” The International Journal of Korean Art and Archaeology, 2 (2008): 128-165. Two eight-panel folding screens were made to celebrate the Crown Prince Investiture Ritual, which took place in 1800 (one screen in the Gyeonggi Provincial Museum and the other in the Seoul Museum of History). These two examples, however, do not portray the ceremonial event but rather the Queen Mother of the West’s birthday feast. 43 The Office of Assistance and Nourishment was formally established in 1689, but the detailed job descriptions and regulations were finalized during the Jeongjo reign. Regulations regarding that court ceremony were included in a book entitled Record of the Office of Assistance and Nourishment 侍講院志, completed in the ninth month of 1784. U Gyeong-seop 우경섭, “Jeongjodae sigangwonji pyeonchan-gwa gue uiui,” 정조시대 시강원 편찬과 그 의의 [The significance of the compilation of the record of the office of royal tutoring during king Jeongjo’s reign] Daedong gojeon yeongu 대동고전 연구 26 (2010): 87-120. For the education of the crown prince, see Yuk Su-hwa 육수화, Joseon sidae wangsil gyoyuk 조선시대 왕실교육 (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2008) 102 (1719–1792), an official of the Office of Assistance and Nourishment who attended that 1784 ceremonial meeting with the crown prince, testified that King Jeongjo himself commissioned a folding screen documenting the crown prince’s ceremonial meeting ceremony in eight copies (fig. 2-14). [The king] called a court painter to depict this event in eight-panel folding screens. The folding screens were distributed among seven people, and one was to be placed in the Office of Assistance and Nourishment. I was asked to write this preface by all court officials. The poem alone would not be enough so it had to be painted, but the painting would be still not enough, so [I] writes this record [preface] so that [this event] can be transmitted as a treasure from generation to generation.44 ⋯召工繪其事爲八屛. 分諸七人. 一留輔養廳. 諸公屬福源爲序. 詩之不足又繪焉. 繪之不足又序焉. 所以志三慶而寶百世也. The Prince Munhyo Investiture Ceremony is an eight-panel folding screen that illustrates the prince receiving the title of Crown Prince on the second day of the eighth lunar month of 1784.45 The first panel contains a preface and the last one contains a list of 44 This is my translation in consultation with the Korean translation provided by Min Gil-hong. Min Gil-hong 민길홍, “Cheonchilbaek palsipsa-nyeo Munhyo seja-wa boyanggwan-ui sanggyeonryae haengsa,” 1784년 문효세자와 보양관의 상견례 행사 [The crown prince Munhyo’s ceremonial meeting with the tutors of the office of assistance and nourishment in the year of 1784] Misul jaryo 미술자료 80 (2011): 97-109. 45 The Investiture ceremony endowed an official title to a royal family member. The Investiture ceremony for appointing the king’s eldest son as the crown prince was considered the most important of such ceremonies. There were ceremonies to give royal titles to the king’s consort, brother, and grandson. Even a deceased royal family member would receive an official Investiture ceremony, particularly as an effort to restore that person’s status. There were eleven kinds of uigwe (book of ritual protocols) regarding this ceremony in the seventeenth century, nine kinds in the eighteenth century, four kinds in the nineteenth century, and six kinds in the twentieth century. Park Yeon-hyeo 박연혜, “Joseon sidae chaekryeo dogam-ui hoehwasajeok yeongu,” 조선시대 책례도감의궤의 회화사적 연구[Arthistorical approach to the uigwe of the Investiture Ceremony] Hanguk munhwa 한국문화 13 (1993), 526. 103 the twenty-five participants in the event. Panels two through seven depict the ceremonial bestowing of a letter of admonition and a jade seal used to inscribe his official title. In the Joseon court, state examinations also were documented in paintings. King Yeongjo paid close attention to state examination and sometimes supervised them.46 Notable examples include a folding screen depicting the state examination of 1747, which took place at the former site of the Diligent Governance Hall 勤政殿 at the Palace of Great Blessing 경복궁, a site that burned down during the Japanese invasion (1592- 1598). During Yeongjo’s reign, a total of 17 state examinations took place at that site, the 1747 examination being the first. The event itself is painted only on the first panel of the screen (fig. 2-15), and the remaining panels contain court officials’ poems based a topic selected by the king, “Establishing [a New Kingdom] and Making it Revived for Ten Thousand Generations (創業中興萬世法).” As discussed in Chapter One, the tradition of documenting state examinations had already been established in early Joseon period, and continued in the eighteenth century. Felicitous ceremonies documented in eighteenth-century Qing court paintings included the Emperor’s and Empress Dowager’s Birthday Procession, Ceremonial Lecture, Victory Banquets, and Banquets for Foreign Guests. Unlike their Korean 46 In 1774, the King Yeongjo personally attended a special examination called the Examination of Ascending to the Superior 登俊試. This examination was designed to give existing officials with an opportunity to be promoted. Yeongjo ordered the creation of an album that contains the portraits of successful candidates in three copies: one for the royal chamber, one for the Office of Rites, and finally one for the Office of Military. For an album that contains the portraits of military officials, see Chang Jina 장진아, “Deungjunsimugwa dosangcheop-ui gongsin dosanggeok seonggyeok,” 등준시무과도상첩의 공신도상적 성격 [The album of the deungjunsi military examination and its function as the portraits of meritorious officials], Misul jaryo 미술자료 78 (2009): 61-93. 104 counterparts, Qing courts did not have any state ceremonies related to the crown prince because the heir apparent was not appointed beforehand but via secret letter, which was to be opened after the death of the emperor. The emperor’s birthday, New Year’s Day, and the winter solstice were the three great festivals in the Qing calendar. Foreign envoys from vassal states were dispatched to attend the Qing emperors’ birthday ceremonies. Traditionally, people outside the imperial circle were forbidden to view the emperor’s birthday celebration but in the spring of 1713, the Kangxi emperor permitted the citizens of Beijing to view the imperial processions of fifteen kilometers from his suburban villa, the Garden of Eternal Spring 長春園, to the Forbidden City. A set of two scrolls documents his sixtieth birthday procession (the copy of the original set dated to the Qianlong or early Jiaqing reign) (fig. 2-16).47 In 1790, on his eightieth birthday, the Qianlong emperor emulated his grandfather’s procession and had it documented in a set of two handscrolls (1797) (fig. 2-17). The Dowager Empress Chongqing’s sixtieth birthday festival was held in 1751. A series of four handscroll paintings illustrate her procession, starting at the Garden of 47 The artist Wang Yuanqi prepared a draft of the scroll in 1714. After Wang’s death, Leng Mei (ca. 1677–ca. 1742) and his assistants completed the scroll in 1717. Woodcut prints were later made from the scroll in 1718 and named the Magnificent Record of the Emperor’s Birthday. The original scrolls were lost; thus, the present set is a replacement made during either the Qianlong or early Jiaqing era based on the woodblock printed book. Maxwell K. Hearn, “Document and Portrait: the Southern Tour Paintings of Kangxi and Qianlong,” Phoebus 6, no. 1 (1988), 98. For the use of European pictorial techniques, see Ellen Uitzinger, “For the Man Who Has Everything: Western-Style Exotica in Birthday Celebration at the Court of Ch’ien-lung,” in Conflict and Accommodation in Early Modern East Asia: Essays in Honor of Erik Zürcher, ed., Leonard Bluseé and Harriet T. Zurdorfer (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 216-239. 105 Nurtured Harmony 頤和園 (a summer palace in a north-western suburb of Beijing), and ending at the Forbidden City (fig. 2-18).48 An album titled Grand Celebrative Scenery (1761), portrays various festival events during the empress dowager’s seventieth birthday festival in 1761 (fig. 2-19). It consists of eight leafs, titled: Ten Thousand Lands Coming to Pay Tributes to the Court, Pearls of Chinese and Foreign Combination, Hui People Offering Performance, Cining Palace in Joyous Mood, Traveling Together in the Universe of Longevity, Nine Elder Men and Women Making Friends with Each Other, Extended Sanskrit, and Thousands of Incense-Burning Ceremony. In Cining Palace in Joyous Mood, the empress dowager is shown receiving homage from the Qianlong emperor, her pious son. Other Felicitous Rites routinely documented in eighteenth-century Qing court-documentary paintings were imperial banquets hosted by the Qianlong emperor in the Great Imperial Yurt. These banquets were held both for foreign guests such as Mongolian and Central Asian tribal leaders, and as victory banquets held after successful military campaigns.49 Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees 萬樹園賜宴圖 (1754), the Four Activities of Frontier Banquet 塞宴四事图 (1735-1766), and the Imperial Feast at the Hall of Purple Brightness 紫光閣賜宴圖 (1761) are three excellent works exemplifying the political significance of Qing imperial banquets. In this regard, 48 De Verboden Stad: the Forbidden City (Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1990), 144-145. 49 Renqiu Yu, “Imperial Banquets in the Wanshu yuan,” in New Qing Imperial History: the Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, eds. James A. Milward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 86. 106 they differ greatly from Joseon banquet paintings. The first two banquet paintings were held to create a strong bond with the Mongol and the Central Asian allies, and the last one was a reward for generals who successfully led military campaigns. Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees chronicles an event at the imperial summer villa 避暑山莊 in Chengde 承德 on the fifth day of the seventh lunar month of 1754, which commemorated the Qianlong emperor’s recognition of a group of Oirats as his subjects (fig. 2-20).50 The work depicts the moment when the emperor makes his entrance in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees 萬樹園, where foreign guests seated in a line, awaiting the emperor’s arrival. Imperial Feast at Ziguang Pavilion by Yao Wenhan 姚文瀚 (1761) is one of many examples documenting victory banquets after successful military campaigns (fig. 2-21). This scroll portrays a banquet that took place on the third day of the second lunar month of 1761.51 While celebrating the successful conquest of the Dzungars and the Central Asian Muslims, the Qianlong emperor hosted this banquet outside the Hall of Purple Brightness 紫光閣, a building located on the west bank of the Central Lake in the Western Park in the Forbidden City. Victory banquets attended by the emperor were also 50 Deborah Sommer, “The Art and Politics of Painting Qianlong at Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde (New York: Routledge Curzon, 2004), 137-138. For the Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees, see Yang Boda 杨伯达,“Wanshuyuan ciyantu kaoxi,” 万树园赐宴图考析 [Research on the ceremonial banquet in the garden of ten thousand trees] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 4 (1982): 3-25. 51 Tsang, Ka Bo. “Portraits of Meritorious Officials: Eight Examples from the First Set Commissioned by the Qianlong Emperor,” Arts Asiatiques, no. 1 (1992): 70-71. 107 featured in albums that recorded Qianlong’s so-called ten successful military campaigns. For instance, albums documenting military campaigns against rebels in the Jinchuan (1771-76), Taiwan (1787-88), Vietnam (1788-89) and against Gurkha rebels (1788-93) all bear a final album leaf commemorating the Victory Banquet for the Distinguished Officers and Soldiers, a ritual that concluded each military campaign (figs. 2-22, 2-23). As introduced above, Joseon court documentary paintings, which depicted events directly related to the authority of the king and his dynastic future successor, such as the Personal Governance and Investiture ceremonies, were highly valued. The Royal banquets that followed after these rites were also painted frequently. Echoing the purpose of banquets at the royal court as the venue to illustrate the idea of justice and harmony between ruler and subject defined in the Book of Rites 禮記,52 the banquets that were represented in eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings celebrated as an avenue to celebrate the king’s benevolence and to promulgate a harmonious relationship between rulers and their subjects. As for Qing court documentary paintings, no ceremonies pertaining to the crown prince were recorded in paintings, simply because eighteenth-century Qing rulers did not officially announce the heir apparent until their death. One of the Felicitous Rites most often painted in the Qing court was the depiction of imperial family members’ sumptuous birthday festival processions. These paintings illustrated the spectacular, ostentatious nature of the processions and the wealth that was spent. Additionally, banquets, some of 52 The Li Chi or Book of Rites, Part II, trans. James Legge (Hong Kong: Forgotten Books), 292. 108 great importance, were held often and documented in paintings. The banquets that were painted directly related to the eighteenth-century Qing appeasement policy toward Mongols and the Central Asian tribes, as well as their aggressive military policy toward the same groups. Military Rites 軍禮 In the Qing court, there were 81 military ceremonies, including such events as the Victorious Return of Imperial Troops, the Arrival of a Victorious Message, Offering and Receiving War Captives, the Grand Inspection, and the Imperial Hunt.53 In the Joseon court, there were 10 military ceremonies, including Archery, Ground Formation Exercise, Grand Review, Hunting, and Exorcism. In contrast to the Joseon court, the eighteenth-century Qing court performed a great number of military ceremonies. This reflects the militaristic nature of the Qing Empire, which was dedicated to expanding its territory via military campaigns. Military Rites such as the Grand Review and Offering/Receiving War Captives, those rites Qing emperors regularly participated in, were all documented in paintings. The Grand Review 大閱 ceremony first appeared in the Spring and Autumn Annals 春秋 and it was later added as a military rite to the system of the Five State Rites.54 For example, as documented in the Song History, originally the Grand Review 53 Jian-fei Zhu, Chinese Spatial Strategies: Imperial Beijing 1420–1911 (London: Routledge, 2012), 200. 54 Chang Heng’s (78-139) Rhapsody on the Eastern Capital recorded the Grand Review 109 was a wine-sharing ceremony and later became a banquet where a king and court officials enjoyed music and dancing.55 Since the Hongwu reign (1368–98), Ming emperors performed the ceremony and continued to be conducted to the end of the Ming dynasty.56 In the Veritable Records of Shenzong, the Grand Review ceremony took place on the fifth day of the forth month, 1581. At that time, the Wanli emperor delegated several court ministers to conduct and inspect the ceremony.57 In the eighteenth-century Qing court, the Grand Review was considered to be the most important military ceremony, giving these periodic, peacetime troop reviews greater prominence than they previously had.58 According to Joanna Waley-Cohen, the Grand Review became increasingly formalized toward the late seventeenth century. She reasoned that in part Manchu emperors no longer participated in battlefields, and in part the Grand Review was regarded more like an educational venue for court officials and eight-bannermen to learn that the martial prowess was the essential foundation of the ceremony. Derk Bodde, 351. 55 Marcia Butler, “Reflections of a Military Medium: Ritual and Magic in Eleventh and Twelfth Century Chinese Military Manuals” (PhD diss., Cornell University, 2007), 64. 56 Hou I-li 侯怡利, “Guozhi zhongdian: Qianlong siniande dayue yu dayuetu,” 國之重典乾隆四年的大閱與大閱圖 [Important State Rite: Grand Review Ceremony in the Fourth Year of the Qianlong Reign and Grand Review] Tongshi yanjiu jikan 通識研究集刊 12 (2007): 153-184. 57 After the ceremony, the Wanli emperor granted the officials three-day break from the morning audience and gave the soldiers ten-day break from military training. Foon-Ming Liew, The Treatises on Military Affairs of the Ming Dynastic History, 1368–1644: An Annotated Translation of the Treatises on Military Affairs 1 (Hamburg: Gesellschaft für Natur-und Völkerkunde Ostasiens, 1998), 153. 58 Joanna Waley-Cohen, 71. 110 Qing Empire.59 Hong Taiji (r. 1592–1643) first performed this ceremony in 1633 as a Manchu ruler.60 The Kangxi emperor first performed it in 1685 in South Park 南苑, a hunting preserve located south of Beijing, and he proposed that the ceremony be performed annually.61 During the Yongzheng reign, ritual regulations were reviewed, and paintings or diagrams that depicted military formations for the Grand Review were presented for imperial viewing.62 Yongzheng, nevertheless, did not conduct this military rite. During the Qianlong reign, the relevant regulations were reviewed in 1752, 1755, and 1774, and the emperor personally conducted the ceremony in 1739 and 1758.63 A set of four handscrolls titled Grand Review 大閱圖(1739-1744) documenting the Qianlong emperor’s 1739 Grand Review ceremony has survived and is dispersed 59 Waley-Cohen, “Military Ritual,” 68. 60 Qing shi gao 清史稿 [The Draft of Qing Dynastic History], vol. 2 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1996), 43-45. 61 The Kangxi emperor eventually called for triennial performances of the Grand Review ceremony. He performed it in 1673, 1677, 1680, 1685, 1687, 1691, 1692, 1693, 1695, and 1703. Shengxu benji 聖祖本紀 [Biography of the Sheng-zu emperor], in Qing shi gao, vols. 6-8, 184,194, 202, 218, 221, 232, 236, 238, 242, 264. 62 Dayue guizhi 大閱規制 [The Regulation of Grand Review Ceremony] in Da Qing huidian shili 大清會典事例 [Collected Statutes of the Great Qing with Supplementary Precedents and Regulations], vol. 18 (Taipei: Qiwen chubanshe, 1963) 63 Nie Chongzheng 聂崇正, “Liezhen yu yuezhen: gugong neiwei de liangjuan Qianlong dayuetu,”列阵与阅阵: 故宫内外的两卷乾隆大阅图 [Troops in Formation and Inspection of Formation: The two scrolls of the Qianlong emperor’s Grand Review ceremony in the collection of the Palace Museum] Zijincheng 紫禁城 8 (2009): 86-95; Hou Yili 侯怡利, “Dayue disantu yuezhen Qianlong sinian yuebingdian lijishi,” 大閱第三圖閱陣－乾隆四年閱兵典禮紀實 [Scroll Three: Reviewing Troops－Reviewing Troops Ceremony in the Fourth Year of the Qianlong Reign and its Record] Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 2, no. 95 (2007): 16-23. 111 across different collections (figs. 2-24, 2-25): Encampment 幸營(location unknown), Troops in Formation 列陣 (Palace Museum, Beijing), Reviewing Troops 閱陣 (private collection), and Marching Troops 行陣 (location unknown).64 The event took place in 1739, but was commissioned in 1744.65 Documenting the Grand Review was not unprecedented. As introduced above, it is said that the Grand Review conducted during the Wanli period (1581) was painted.66 This work seems to have been lost, but it is possible that the Wanli emperor’s work inspired the Qianlong emperor to have his Grand Review ceremony painted in scrolls. The twin rites of Offering/Receiving War Captives 獻俘－受俘 had been institutionalized in the Song Dynasty and continued to be performed throughout the Ming Dynasty. 67 Oliver Moore informs that ever since the establishment of directives for the Offering War Captives ceremony in 1406 (during the Ming Yongle reign), the ritual was conducted six times (twice in 1407; once each in 1414, 1416, 1420, and 1422) and may 64 This set of scrolls is recorded in the Chapter 35 of Midian zhulin Shiqu baoji xubian 石渠寶笈續編 [Sequel to the Precious Collection of the Stone Canal Pavilion] (1793). 65 This account is found on the Jishilu 記事錄 [Records of Events] from Zaobanchu gezuo chengzuo huoji qing dang 造辦處各作成作活計清檔 [Archives of the Workshop of the Imperial Household Department] dated to the twenty-third day of the seventh lunar month of the ninth year of the Qianlong reign. 66 After the ceremony, the Wanli emperor granted the officials three-day break from the morning audience and gave the soldiers ten-day break from military training. Foon-Ming Liew, The Treatises on Military Affairs of the Ming Dynastic History, 1368–1644: An Annotated Translation of the Treatises on Military Affairs 1 (Hamburg: Gesellschaft für Natur-und Völkerkunde Ostasiens, 1998), 153. 67 According to the section, “Military Ritual” in the “Treatise on Ritual” from the Song History, the Receiving Surrender and Offering War Captives rituals took place at the Imperial Shrine. The text included the detailed protocols of the rites. Marcia Butler, 12-32, 64-65. 112 have been performed until the end of the Ming Dynasty, although there were no official records of it after Yongle’s reign (1402-1424).68 Throughout the Qing Dynasty, the Offering/Receiving War Captives ceremonies were held in connection with the protracted wars in Central Asia during the reigns of the Kangxi, Yongzheng, and Qianlong emperors; the last time was in 1828. Xu Yang’s handscroll (1760) documents the Offering and Receiving War Captives ceremonies that took place in front of the Meridian Gate in the first month of 1760 (fig. 2-26). In this ritual, General Zhao Hui (1708–1764) officially offered the Muslim captives—as well as the head of Khozi Khan—to the emperor.69 According to ritual protocol, “the two ceremonies routinely followed Welcoming a Victorious Army Upon Return 郊勞 and a formal banquet was then held for the victorious army, succeeding one another within twenty-four hours.”70 As with all rites, each participant’s placement and movement within the Offering and Receiving War Captives ceremonies was strictly prescribed. On the day appointed for the Offering War Captives rite, officials of the Ministry of War offered the war captives through the right-hand entrance of the Chang’an Gate to the Tian’an Gate. At that time, the captives whose necks were fastened with a white silken cord were presented to the emperor seated in a 68 Before the directives were established, the Offering War Captives rite had been performed in 1384 and 1392. Oliver Moore, “Violence Un-scrolled: Cultic and Ritual Emphasis in Painting Guan Yu,” Arts Asiatiques 58 (2003): 95. 69 Ka Bo Tsang, 70. 70 Waley-Cohen, 80. 113 throne in the terrace surmounted by the Meridian Gate.71 Xu Yang’s work captured that very moment when those captives were offered to the Qianlong emperor. Prior to the eighteenth century, military ceremonies were rarely painted in the Joseon court; during the eighteenth century, however, they came to be painted in Joseon court documentary paintings. Yeongjo performed the ceremony at the Official Confucian Academy 成均館 in 1743 and 1764. The 1743 ceremony, held on the seventh day of the fourth Intercalary lunar month of that year, was painted as a large handscroll in multiple editions.72 The handscroll consists of texts and images: a record of the ceremony (fig. 2-27), including a participant list, a preface, and three scenes depicting highlights of the event. In the first scene, the king conducts the Grand Archery ceremony 대사례; in the second, royal family members and court officials demonstrate their archery skills; and in the third, the king bestows rewards or punishments based on their scores. There are two supplementary pages, one informing the viewer of the king’s archery score and the other showing the scores of the other participants. In contrast to the Qing, eighteenth-century Joseon did not engage in any military campaigns, thus Yeongjo’s motivation for performing this archaic military ceremony was to display his benevolence and virtue, which would inspire the amicable relationship among scholar-officials, military officials, and royal family members. 71 Waley-Cohen, 81. 72 Currently, the extant multiple copies of this work are stored in various collections; the National Museum of Korea, Korea University Museum, Yeonsei University Museum, and Ehwa University Museum. The large handscroll is a rare format not only for court-documentary painting but also traditional Joseon painting. The handscroll of Yeongjo’s Grand Archery ritual (Korea University Museum) is 40 cm wide and 60.4 cm high. 114 Although King Jeongjo enjoyed archery as part of the Hunting ceremony, the Grand Archery ceremony was not performed during his reign. Unlike Yeongjo, who utilized the Grand Archery ceremony to cultivate his political persona as a Confucian sage king, Jeongjo used them to display the military power of his palace guards, whom he had been training and expanding in number since his enthronement. During his reign, the Comprehensive Military Study 兵學通 병학통 (1785) and the Comprehensive Illustrated Manual of Martial Arts 武藝圖譜通志 무예도보통지 (1795) were published, reflecting Jeongjo’s enthusiasm for strengthening the military. King Jeongjo’s emphasis on strengthening his authority via military power seems to have been based on the Qianlong emperor’s model, particularly in conducting the Grand Review ceremony. In the Veritable Records of Jeongjo, a number of accounts regarding the performance of Jeongjo’s Grand Review ceremony can be found. These accounts further testify to his emphasis on military ritual activity. On the twenty-ninth day of the eighth lunar month, 1778, Jeongjo performed the Grand Review at the Platform of Spring Pond 春塘臺 춘당대,73 and in the second day of the ninth lunar month, 1778, he again performed the ceremony at the Noryang Ford. On the latter occasion, King Jeongjo rode in a sedan chair, decked out in military attire.74 None of 73 A daily entry dated to the twenty-ninth day of the eighth lunar month, 1778 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. In this entry, King Jeongjo announced that his Grand Review ceremony was to honor the one conducted by King Sukjong. 74 A daily entry dated to the second day of the ninth lunar month of 1778 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 115 these Grand Review ceremonies were documented in painting, but military drills were.75 The Nighttime Military Exercise at the West Command Post and the Ceremonial Archery and Fireworks are included among the eight panels of a screen titled King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong, which have survived in multiple copies (figs. 2-28, 2-29). These works are the only Joseon court documentary paintings that recorded military drills that the king directly supervised. Since Jeongjo was interested in strengthening the military and strove to find various means to realize and display this resolve, Jeongjo probably emulated the Qianlong emperor’s personal performance of the Grand Review ceremony. During his first year of rule (1776), Jeongjo received an imperial edict from the Qianlong emperor that primarily reported on successful military campaigns against central Asian and Mongol “barbarians invaders” and gave detailed directions relevant to military organization in the central and local governments.76 In that edict, the Qianlong emperor’s Grand Review ceremony was not directly mentioned, but King Jeongjo must have been aware of it as an important part of the Qianlong emperor’s ritual routine, as this particular ceremony was performed with greater frequency during King Jeongjo’s reign. To sum up the foregoing observations, the Qing emperors’ performance of the Grand Inspection ceremony was not unprecedented, but rather was a continuation and expansion of this longstanding ritual. As described in the Song History, the Grand 75 In the collection of the National Palace Museum (Seoul), are several folding screens that depict various forms of military formations drawn from Byeonghak jinam 乒學指南 (1787). 76 A daily entry dated to the twenty-seventh day of the tenth lunar month of 1776 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 116 Inspection ceremony was a celebratory event designed to encourage military generals and commend them on their achievements; during the Ming Dynasty, it became more of a military exercise. Two other military rituals, the Offering and Receiving War Captives ceremonies, were institutionalized in the Song Dynasty and performed throughout the Ming Dynasty. According to Oliver Moore, Shang Xi’s Guan Yu Captures General Pang De (ca. 1430, hanging scroll, colors on silk) is a rhetorical portrayal of the Offering and Receiving War Captives ceremonies (fig. 2-30).77 In part, Qing emperors’ performance of military rituals was the continuation of preceding Chinese dynasties’ traditions; they also served to remind the Manchu ruling class and eight-banner men that their successful rule in China depended on military power more than anything else. Prior to the eighteenth century, Joseon kings performed military rituals, but none of them became the subject of paintings. Depictions of King Yeongjo and Jeongjo’s participation in military rituals and drills were thus new to Korean art history. The Grand Archery ceremony (performed in 1477, 1534, 1743, and 1764 in the Joseon court) served as a venue for encouraging the harmony between the king and court officials, and exemplifying the balance between civil and military virtues. King Yeongjo’s Grand Archery ceremony of 1743, the subject of the Grand Archery scrolls, was performed in such fashion. However, King Jeongjo did not care for the ceremonial aspects of military rituals. For him, military ceremonies were the practical means to improve the military system and to strengthen his own power. Among those Grand Review ceremonies 77 Ming sources suggest that Shang Xi knew a great deal about ceremonies for offering prisoners. The Ming Statutes 大明會典 state that the sentries during the proceedings were the Brocade Dress Guards, none other than Shang Xi's own corps. Oliver Moore, 94-95. 117 Jeongjo personally attended, the ones performed during Jeongjo’s eight-day lodging in Hwaseong in 1795 were illustrated in King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong. King Jeongjo’s usage of military rites as political tools to strengthen his authority was most likely inspired by Qing emperors who successfully built their unchallengeable authority, primarily through military power. Rulers’ Public Outings as Expressions of Sagehood and Filial Piety In East Asia and throughout Central Asia, the Imperial Inspection tour was an ancient ritual that served as one of the ceremonial forms the ruler utilized to assume symbolic possession of his realm. In China, imperial tours took place as far back as the Zhou Dynasty (c. 1046–256 BCE) and were perceived as public venues to express rulers’ benevolence.78 However, according to Michael Chang, by the Southern Song period, the era that saw a drastic decline in the imperial authority and the rise of Neo-Confucian scholar-bureaucrats, “imperial tours of inspection had become virtually synonymous with political disorder.79” Unlike earlier Ming emperors, who deployed inspection tours as important activities in public politics, late Ming rulers such as the Wanli emperor no 78 For the historical precedents of the imperial tour as a form of governance and its association with state rites, see Michael G. Chang, A Court on Horseback: Imperial Touring and the Construction of Qing Rule, 1680-1785 (Cambridge and London: the Harvard University Asia Center, 2007): 34-71. 79 Ibid., 53. 118 longer conducted imperial tours because of their association with non-Han “barbaric” states such as the Khitan Liao, the Jurchen Jin, and the Mongol Yuan.80 Kangxi’s Southern Inspection Tour & Yeongjo’s Stream Drainage Project In the eighteenth-century, the Qing court revived emperors’ inspection tours, and they became one of the most frequently witnessed public spectacles by residents of Beijing metropolitan areas. For Qing emperors, inspection tours served multiple purposes: they expressed the just benevolence of Yao and Shun kings; they proclaimed Qing possession of China; they displayed filial piety toward ancestors (the Qianlong’s tours were particularly framed in this rhetoric); and they celebrated their nomadic Manchu origins. Between 1681 and his death in 1722, the Kangxi emperor embarked on a total of 128 imperial tours, averaging two or three per year.81 The Qianlong emperor embarked on over 150 imperial tours, also averaging two or three per year. These tours included: the “western tours 西巡” to Wutai (Five Terraces) Mountain 五台山; the “eastern tours 東巡 ” to the secondary Qing capital, Shengjing (Mukden in Manchu, present-day Shenyang); to the sacred peak of Mount Tai (Tai Shan) and the Confucian Temple at Qufu, both in Shandong province; and the “northern tours 北巡” to the palace complex at Chengde. 82 To legitimize imperial tours, the Qianlong emperor had his court secretaries and ministers 80 The Ming emperor Yongle was also known for his frequent outings. Ibid., 65-70. 81 Ibid., 73. 82 Michael G. Chang, 72. 119 compile historical precedents. The Magnificent Record of the Southern Tours 南巡盛典 is a record of the emperor’s first four tours, containing 6,700 illustrated pages of famous places,83 and its preface provides a detailed historiography of the imperial inspection tour. Contemporary Joseon kings also made numerous outings to the outskirts of Hanyang; commoners regularly saw these processions. Yeongjo made 119 outings, while Jeongjo completed 64.84 The large number of processional outings by Joseon kings sharply contrasted with their predecessors, who rarely stepped out of the palace.85 Although rulers’ outings were not necessarily perceived in a negative light in Joseon politics, they were not a great part of Joseon kings’ political routine prior to the eighteenth century. This pattern changed drastically in the eighteenth century. Evidence suggests that the Kangxi and Qianlong tours probably inspired the frequent outings of Kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo.86 In their edicts and letters to the Joseon court, Qing 83 Patricia Berger, Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2003), 128. 84 King Injo (r.1623-1649), who had to perform the full kowtow ritual 三跪九叩頭禮 to Hong Taiji 洪台吉 (r. 1626–43) at Samjeon-do 삼전도 (located in modern-day Samjeon-dong, Seoul) in 1637 to acknowledge the Manchu ruler as the Son of Heaven, conducted only four visits (1625, 1628, 1637, and 1640) to the Royal Ancestral Shrine 宗廟 throughout his twenty-nine-year reign. Ji-yeong Kim, “Joseon hugi gukwang heangcha-e daehan yeongu” 조선후기 국왕 행차에 대한 연구[Study of Late Joseon-period King’s Outings] (PhD diss., Seoul National University, 2005), 113. 86 Eighteenth-century Joseon rulers were informed of the Qing emperors’ incessant outings by Joseon envoys returning from tributary visits. In a 1780 report to Jeongjo, for example, Hwang In-jeom 황인점 presented a few episodes related to the Qianlong emperor’s southern inspection tour. See for one of those reports, a daily entry dated to the fourth day of the forth lunar month of 1780 from Records of Daily Reflection. 120 emperors advocated outings, which often involved in rulers’ public activities, which likely inspired Joseon kings to do the same. The following section discusses this further. The Kangxi emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour and King Yeongjo’s Stream Drainage Project Many factors motivated the Kangxi emperor to embark on six Southern Inspection tours. One of his primary missions, at least in the way these tours were framed in official court documents was to control the Yellow River. 87 Following severe flooding in 1676, the emperor dispatched Jin Fu靳輔 (1633-1692) to take charge of managing the river, and in 1684 Kangxi undertook his first inspection trip to check the progress of the hydraulic works in the chronically flooded area where the Yellow and Huai rivers converged, threatening the Grand Canal. While various efforts to solve that issue had not been successful,88 in 1691 Wang Hui was summoned to Beijing to participate in the project of depicting Kangxi emperor’s second Southern Inspection Tour, which already had been conducted in 1689; he completed the set of twelve scrolls in 1695 (fig. 2-31).89 87 Michael Chang pointed out there is a tendency of previous scholarship that mainly focused on relating the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors’ Southern Inspection Tour with the water control in the area of the Yellow River. He questioned this overall scholarly perspective in his following article. Michael Chang, “Fathoming Qianlong: Imperial Activism, the Southern Tours, and the Politics of Water Control, 1736-1765,” Late Imperial China 24, no. 2 (2003): 51-108. 88 For more information about the history of flooding in the Grand Canal region, see Robert B. Marks, China: Its Environment and History (New York, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2011): 236-244. 89 Of the Kangxi emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls, scrolls One, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, and Twelve are in the Palace Museum, Beijing; scrolls Two and Four are in the Musée Guimet, Paris; Scroll Three is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Scroll Six (fragmentary) is in a private collection in Phoenix; and Scroll Seven is in the Mactaggart Art Collection, University of Alberta Museums, Edmonton. 121 The Kangxi’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls, mostly vividly shown in the Scroll Four, focused on magnifying the emperor’s unflagging diligence and profound concern for the lives of commoners in the southern region. The same message as the scrolls was in fact delivered to its Confucian suzerain states like Joseon. An imperial posthumous edict of the Kangxi emperor sent to the Joseon King Gyeongjong in 1722 portrayed the Kangxi emperor’s inspection tours in terms of his dedication and diligence to his empire, and portrayed his supervision of the water control projects on the Huai and Yellow Rivers as the major goal of his trip.90 After the short reign of King Gyeongjong (r. 1720-1724), his successor, King Yeongjo, made outings with unprecedented frequency (119 total outings during his reign). Many of these including his visits to the Cheonggye Stream 청계천 where the construction of a flood control system was going to take place. Originally formed by a stream flowing down from the mountains that surrounded the Hanyang (modern-day Seoul), the Cheonggye Stream made the city vulnerable to flooding when heavy rains filled the stream beyond its capacity. To prevent such flooding, Yeongjo decided to dig up the bottom of the stream and build stone banks alongside it, altering its flow and creating a straight path. In comparison to earlier drainage constructions during the reigns of King Taejong (r. 1400-1418) and Sejong (r. 1418-1450), whose purpose was more to create a better geomancy evoking auspicious heavenly responses to their rule, King Yeongjo’s inspection outing to the drainage project at the Cheonggye Stream centered on 90 A daily entry dated to the sixteenth day of the twelfth lunar month of 1722 from the Veritable Records of Gyeongjong. 122 directly improving public welfare, akin to the purpose of the Kangxi emperor’s tours to the South.91 In 1760, Yeongjo had Hong Gyeo-hui 홍계희 (1703–1771) compile the Record of Stream Dredging 濬川事實 and established the Office of Stream Dredging 濬川司 to preserve this project as an exemplary model for posterity. In his autobiography, Yeongjo affirmed his belief that the Cheonggye Stream drainage project (in process from the eighteenth day of the second month through the fifth day of the fourth month of 1760) was one of the six greatest achievements of his reign. According to an epilogue included in the Album of Stream Drainage 준천계첩, which consists of calligraphy by King Yeongjo, four paintings, a participant list, and an epilogue by Hong Bong-han 홍봉한 (1713–1778), the director of the temporary Office of Stream Dredging (figs. 2-32, 2-33, 2-34). According to Hong’s epilogue, Yeongjo directly commissioned an album depicting the king’s activities related to the Cheonggye Stream project.92 Although only one of the four album leafs documents Yeongjo’s inspection visit to the construction site, this portrayal is significant to the history of Joseon court documentary paintings because it was the first painting that depicted a Joseon king’s inspection tour pertaining to the promotion of public welfare. Commissioned by King Yeongjo, this album was made in multiple copies as gifts to court officials with the aim 91 Jo Gwang-gwon 조광권, “Joseon hugi juncheon gwajeong-e natanan uimindamron bunseok,” 조선후기 준천과정에 나타난 위민담론 분석 [Study of the issues of public welfare in the project of stream drainage in the late Joseon period] Dongyang jeongchi sasangsa 동양정치사상사 4, no. 1 (2005): 87-97. 92 Park Jeong-hyeo, 284-285. 123 of promoting King Yeongjo’s benevolence toward his subjects. Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour and King Jeongjo’s Outing to Hwaseong While the Kangxi emperor’s Southern Inspection Tours was primarily framed as the emperor’s commitment to solve immediate issues such as the frequent floods in the areas around the Yellow River, the Qianlong emperor’s Southern Inspection Tours were mostly framed as the emperor’s expression of his profound filial piety toward his mother and benevolence. Van J. Symons pointed out that “the Qianlong emperor’s first Southern Tour, which took place in 1751, was delayed two years so that it would coincide with the sixtieth birthday of the empress dowager.”93 This 1751 trip was painted in a set of twelve scrolls and published in prints (fig. 2-35).94 The prints of the same subject published in multiple copies were possibly gifted to prominent ranking officials and imperial family members including the empress dowager. Also, the emperor set a date of 1761 for a third trip to Jiangsu, which also coincided with the Empress Dowager’s seventieth birthday.95 In the Magnificent Records of the Southern Inspection Tour 南巡盛典 as well as edicts, the Qianlong emperor explained his southern inspection tours as venues to express his 93 Van J. Symons, “Qianlong on the Road: the Imperial Tours to Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: the Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, eds. James A. Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliot, and Philippe Forět (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 62-63. 94 Of the Qianlong emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour, scrolls One, Seven, Eight, and Eleven (all paper versions) are in the National Museum of History, Beijing; Scroll Two is in the Mactaggart Art Collection, University of Alberta Museums, Edmonton; Scroll Three is in the Musée des Beaux Arts, Nice; scrolls Four and Six are in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; and scrolls Nine and Twelve are in the Palace Museum, Beijing. 95 Michael G. Chang, “Fathoming Qianlong: Imperial Activism, the Southern Tours, and the Politics of Water Control, 1736-1765,” 94. 124 profound filial piety to his mother and to honor her exemplary virtues. 96 The empress dowager’s letter sent to King Jeongjo in 1777 (the entire content is documented in the Jeongjo’s Veritable Records) shows that the empress dowager herself publicized the Qianlong emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour in terms of filial piety. Although my virtue was shallow, I [the empress dowager] gave a birth to the emperor with the blessings of successive imperial ancestors and raised the emperor to continue the successive legacy. The current emperor is benevolent and filial, thus with his all pleasure, he fulfilled my wishes and treated me with utmost respect. He never skipped morning and evening visitations to my residence. On every tour, [he] took me in an imperial carriage and all the subjects calling out the Ten Thousand Longevity as witnessing him paying homage to me, thus it is certainly natural that all the countries were happy about it… I am already eighty-six years old and have been respected as the mother of the state for forty-two years. Due to my contribution to turn things to beauty, the emperor offered me three honorary titles and performed three Felicitous ceremonies for three of my birthdays. 97 ⋯曰予以薄德, 祗膺昊蒼眷佑, 列聖篤祥, 誕育帝躬, 丕紹鴻緖. 今皇帝性秉仁孝, 承歡養志, 克敬克誠, 視膳問安, 晨夕靡間。 每當巡幸, 所至必掖輦同行, 親見億兆, 呼嵩尊親, 幷篤合萬國歡⋯予壽已八十有六, 母儀尊養四十二年. 因集勳歸美, 而三晉徽稱, 遇萬壽祝釐, 而三擧慶典⋯ This letter, along with many similar diplomatic documents, might have prompted King Jeongjo to take Lady Hyegyeong to the city of Hwaseong in order to celebrate her sixtieth birthday or at least promoted him to justify it in such terms. Although there is no textual evidence connecting King Jeongjo’s outing to Hwaseong with the Qianlong 96 Michael G. Chang, A Court on Horseback, 333-335. 97 A daily entry dated to the seventh day of the third lunar month of 1777 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. This is my translation in consultation with the Korean translation provided by the Database of the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty. 125 emperor’s Southern Inspection tours, it is likely that King Jeongjo emulated Qianlong’s political tactic that had framed his southern inspection tours as part of the festival program to celebrate the queen dowager’s birthday. King Jeongjo’s real political motives may have been to visit his father’s tomb, which had been relocated to Hwaseong, and to restore his father’s royal status in a publicly visible and spectacular manner,98 but in order to avoid possible political conflicts with his political rivals.99 Although his 1795 trip was profoundly imbued with his political intent to restore his father’s royal status, Jeongjo chose not to frame his trip at least publicly in association with his father, who tragically died in 1762 as the victim of political factionalism. This explains why his visit to the tomb of the Crown Prince Sado (took place on the first day of the Jeongjo’s 1795 trip) was not depicted in a folding screen titled King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병, which depicted eight important events during that outing: Birthday Banquet at the Hall of Wishing for Longevity, Royal Visitation to a Confucian Shrine, Award Ceremony for Successful Candidates of the Special State Examination, Military Review Ceremony, Archery Ceremony, Returning Procession, and Crossing the Pontoon Bridge. Lady Hyeongyeong in her 1795 Memoir describes how emotional Jeongjo was during his visit to the tomb of his father. 98 For the discussion of Hwaseong in relation to Jeongjo’s filial piety toward his father, see Hong-nam Kim, Tragedy and Art at the Eighteenth-Century Chosŏn Court.” Orientations 25, no. 2 (1994): 28-37. 99 King Jeongjo’s political rivals include court officials who belonged to the Old Doctrine Party of Principle 노론벽파 and Queen Jeongsun. 126 …Despite my limitless sorrow, I could not but admire his dedication. On this occasion the King grieved much. The tears he shed wet he grass beneath him. So sharp was the unrequited pain he carried hidden in his heart. I then recalled my alarm on hearing that the King, on his last visit her, had been so overwhelmed by emotion that he was in a feeble state for many hours and that the officials in attendance had been quite troubled by it. I grew alarmed that this might recur. The King also checked his grief for the sake of this old mother. Mother and son consoled each other and, in our concern for each other, completed our visit to the Prince’s tomb without incident…”100 As vividly narrated in this memoir, Jeongjo’s visit to his father’s tomb was a very personal and emotional event. Thus, it was too personal to be portrayed in court documentary paintings, which were created as official historical records as well as royal gifts. Yoo Jae-bin suggests that Jeongjo’s “version” of his 1795 trip to Hwaseong seems to have been manifested in the eight-panel folding screen titled King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong in the way of the eight themes were selected and arranged. 101 According to Yoo, the arrangement of the panels, which does not correspond to the sequence in which the events were actually conducted, places the birthday celebration for Jeongjo’s mother, Lady Hyegyeong (which actually took place on the fourth day due to her exhaustion from the journey) on the first panel (fig. 2-36). This demonstrates how King Jeongjo wished his contemporary and future audiences to understand and remember 100 The translation is done by JaHyun Kim Haboush, The Memoirs of Lady Hyegyŏng: The Autobiographical Writings of a Crown Princess of Eighteenth-Century Korea, trans. JaHyun Kim Haboush (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1996), 113. 101 Yoo Jae-bin 유재빈, The Politics of Art under King Jeongjo: Exemplified by “Events from King Jeongjo’s Visit to Hwaseong in 1795,” in In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art During the Joseon Dynasty (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013), 108-109. 127 that 1795 trip primarily as the celebration for his mother’s sixtieth birthday.102 I agree Yoo’s insightful reading King Jeongjo’s intent, nevertheless, since the arrangement of the eight panels of King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong in the collection of the National Museum of Korea, which placed the banquet scene on the first panel, was done in 1977,103 we cannot be sure if that arrangement reflects King Jeongjo’s political intention. Furthermore, according to the Record of the Painting of Outing to the City of Hwaseong 華城幸行圖記 by Hong Gyeong-mo 홍경모 (1774-1851), a family member of the Lady Hyegyeong, which enlists the names of eleven scenes relevant to the 1795 outing, the birthday banquet scene seems to have been placed on the third panel, not the first one.104 Thus, one can conclude that the placement of the banquet scene onto the first panel is not necessarily the original eighteenth-century arrangement. Another lesson King Jeongjo may have learned from the Kangxi and Qianlong Southern Inspection tours was that both rulers used their expensive trips as venues to display their benevolence. An imperial letter sent from the Qing court to the Joseon court in 1799 exemplifies how the Qianlong emperor conducted his southern inspection tours as part of his concern for public welfare of the subjects. 102 The folding screen currently in the collection of the National Museum of Korea entered the collection in 1908 in the form of eight separate hanging scrolls. In 1977, these hanging scrolls were remounted to the form of folding screen. At that time, the Birthday Banquet at the Hall of Wising for Longevity was placed on the first panel. 103 Park Hae-hun 박해훈, Min Gil-hong 민길홍, and Gwon Hyeo-eun 권혜은 introduced Hong Gyeong-mo’s record. Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중행사도 [Joseon-period court event painting], vol. 3 (Seoul: the National Museum of Korea, 2012), 252. 104 Ibid., 254. 128 …The concerns about whether it rained enough or not, good harvest or poor harvest in each province, occupied my mind. [Thus] I made six trips to Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces to visit the construction sites of building a sea embankment in the Yellow River region…And for those who encountered flood or drought, [I] frequently reduced taxes and provided aids, which was less than a billion taels. [I] only hoped people become rich and my rule reached to a higher level. [Then] thanks to heavenly ancestors, the universe within the four seas become peaceful and the territory widened.105 各省雨暘豐歉, 却縈懷抱。 凡六巡江、浙, 相度河工海塘⋯間遇水旱偏災, 蠲賑頻施, 不下億萬萬。 惟期藏富小民, 治臻上理。 仰賴天祖, 眷貽海宇, 昇平版圖式擴.. Although this letter was sent five years after King Jeongjo’s outing to Hwaseong, there is no doubt that Qianlong’s Southern Inspection tours had already been publicized in such a light to the Joseon court. Just as the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors met commoners as well as Jiangnan scholars during their tours, Jeongjo during his outings to Hwaseong (conducted about 30 times in total) listened to commoners’ complaints about the local government and economic difficulties and attempted to resolve them. Among the 4,427 cases Jeongjo received from commoners, 3,335 cases were submitted to him while on these outings.106 This statistic shows that Jeongjo’s outings not only served to make his kingship more visible but also helped him gain popularity and recognition from the population at large, and helped him better understand the needs of his subjects. 105 This is my translation in consultation with the Korean translation provided by the Database of the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty. A daily entry dated to the second day of the third lunar month of 1799 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 106 Park Hyeon-mo 박현모, Jeongjo sahu yuksipsamnyeon: sedo jeongchigi-ui Guknaeoe jeongchi yeongu 정조 사후 63년: 세도정치기 (1800-63)의 국내외 정치 연구 [Sixty-three years after the death of Jeongjo: study of the domestic and foreign politics during the period of royal-in-law family] (Seoul: Changbi, 2011), 68. 129 Many scholars suggest that Jeongjo’s effort to listen to opinions directly from commoners were related to his intent to emulate such ancient Chinese sage-kings as Yao and Shun,107 but I believe that King Jeongjo’s frequent outings and direct contacts with commoners may have been inspired by Qing emperors. King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong is the first painting that recorded a Joseon king’s outing and activities on such a grand scale. Although there were no official reports made to King Jeongjo about those scrolls that portrayed Qing emperors’ Southern Inspection tours, it is still possible that King Jeongjo knew about them. In fact, Zhang Geng’s 張庚 (1685-1760) Recorded Evidence about Paintings of Our Dynasty 國朝畵徵錄, which mentioned the Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection by Wang Hui, was widely circulated among eighteenth-century scholars and painters.108 Thus, it is highly possible that King Jeongjo heard about it and decided to commission a painting that recorded his 1795 outing to Hwaseong. Jeongjo’s effort to learn Qing China is in fact evident by the enormous size of his collection of books and maps mostly purchased from Beijing.109 107 Park Hyeon-mo, 413. 108 Sipchil, sipal segi joseon-ui oegukseojeok suyonggwa dokseosiltae 17, 18세기 조선의 외국서적 수용과 독서실태: 목록과 해제 [The importation of foreign books and reading in the seventeenth and eighteenth-century Joseon] (Seoul: Hye’an, 2006), 19. Yi Hak-gyu 이학교 (1770-1835) in the compilation of his essays titled Nakhaseong jip 洛下生集 commented on the Recorded Evidence about Paintings of Our Dynasty. 109 Books published in China in the collection of the Hall of Star of Literature 규장각 are approximately 20,000. The list of these Chinese books is recorded in Kyujangchongmok 규장총목 [The Comprehensive List in the Collection of the Hall of Star of Literature]. For more discussion on Kyujangchongmok, see Han Yeong-wu 한영우, Munhwa jeongchi-ui sansil: Kyujaggak 문화정치의 산실: 규장각 [Incubator of cultural politics: Kyujanggak] (Seoul: Jisiksaneopsa, 2008), 25-128. 130 In addition to the production of multiple copies of an eight-panel folding screen, King Jeongjo also commissioned the Book of Ritual Protocols Summarizing the Outing to the Mausoleum in the Year of Eulmyo 원행을묘정리의궤 in woodblock prints in approximately two hundred copies, and distributed them to court officials and royal family members (fig. 2-37). Recognized as the first uigwe, or book of ritual protocols, published in woodblock prints in multiple copies, the Book of Ritual Protocols Summarizing the Outing to the Mausoleum in the Year of Eulmyo seems to have been modeled on the Qianlong emperor’s Magnificent Record of the Southern Tours 南巡盛典, a document published to detail the first four Southern Inspection tours in 6,700 illustrated pages (fig. 2-38). The foregoing examples show that both Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings dealt with the depiction of rulers’ outings and public activities on a grand scale. Qing emperors’ inspection tours, particularly to the South, were publicized as expressions of benevolence and filial piety and relayed in such light to the contemporary Joseon court. Imperial letters and edicts, which were sent to the Joseon court, informed them of Qing emperors’ inspection tours in great detail and explained their motivations in a light of benevolence and filial piety. Although it was believed that inspection tours had been initiated by sagacious Yao and Shun kings, they had never been part of Joseon rulers’ practice. However, Kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo instituted this practice as part of their statecraft, in contrast with their predecessors, and used it to strengthen their position over court officials who questioned their legitimacy and challenged their authority. In terms of 131 legitimizing their political moves including frequent outings and the re-enactment of rituals of antiquity, Joseon kings borrowed the old rhetoric that linked their footsteps with sage rulers like Yao and Shun to gain their court officials’ supports. Nevertheless, it is likely that they were inspired by Qing emperors, who successfully used outings and public activities as political tools to build powerful authority. Thus, the subject of rulers’ outings and public activities in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings demonstrated the intimate interconnectivity between the two courts. Manchu Traditional Rites and Qing Military Campaigns Imperial hunts were frequently documented in eighteenth-century Qing paintings.110 Throughout Chinese history up to the Qing Dynasty, hunting was not only an important royal sport but also served as useful training for warfare. Han emperors conducted annual visits to the imperial park, which was collected with a great variety of both exotic and ordinary animals.111 Annual royal hunts continued during the Tang and 110 Some notable examples that document the Qianlong emperor’s hunting trips to Mulan include Trooting for Deer (1741), The Qianlong Emperor Shooting a Deer (1742), The Qianlong Emperor Hunting Hare (1755), and Illustration in the Spirit of the Qianlong Emperor’s Poem ‘Congboxing’ (1758). For the works that depicted hunting and horsemanship, see: Hou Ching-lang and Michele Pirazzoli- T’Serstevens, “Les Chasses d’Automne de l’Empereur Qianlong a Mulan,” [The Qianlong emperor’s autumn hunt to Mulan] T’oung Pao 65 (1979): 13-50; Yang Boda, Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 4 (1982): 3-25; “Guanyu mashutu ticaide zaikaoding,” 关于马术图题材的再考订 [Reconsidering the themes of horsemanship] Wenwu 文物 no. 7 (1983): 64-67; “Qianlong shejian youhua guaping shukao,” 乾隆射箭油画挂屏述考 [Discussion on the hanging oil screen painting of the Qianlong emperor shooting with bow and arrow] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 1 (1991): 26-38. 111 Edward H. Schafer, “Hunting Parks and Animal Enclosures in Ancient China,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 11 (1968): 336. 132 Song dynasties and were institutionalized as military rituals.112 As mentioned in Chapter One, Yuan and early Ming emperors continued to enjoy hunting trips, and some of these were translated into paintings. As early as the Han and Tang periods, this imperial sport was also mixed with diplomacy. In the Han Dynasty, imperial hunts served as venues for Chinese emperors to entertain and impress guests from Central Asia, whom the Chinese considered barbarians and against whom they often fought wars.113 And this practice continued on as one of the military rites classified in the Tang Kaiyuan Ritual Code during the Tang Dynasty (618-907). Skaff informs that Taizong (r. 626-649) often conducted hunts to entertain Central Asian guests.114 However, its association with “barbaric” nomads’ practice formulated around the later Song period, 115imperial hunting was no longer conducted on a regular basis, and finally became excluded from the system of the Five State Rites during the Ming dynasty. During the Qing dynasty, Manchu emperors, who viewed hunting to preserve Manchu heritage as well as to show filial piety to their ancestors, re-classified imperial hunting as an Inner Asian rite (but did not including it to the system of Five State 112 The Imperial Hunt was included in the Tang Kaiyuan Ritual Code as a military ritual. Jonathan Karam Skaff, Sui and Tang China and Its Turko-Mongol Neighbors: Culture, Power and Connections 580–800 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 147. 113 Bodde, 381. 114 Skaff, 147. 115 Field hunting 田獵 was still categorized as a military rite in the Song History 宋史. Marcia Marcia Butler, 65. 133 Rites).116 In 1681, the Kangxi emperor implemented the hunt at Mulan 木蘭, the imperial hunting ground northwest of Chengde 承德 (then Rehe, 熱河), and hunted there annually, except when on campaign, until his death in 1722. Numerous paintings portraying the Kangxi emperor in armor, holding arrows and bows, document the emperor’s personal passion for hunting as well as preserving Manchu nomadic tradition (fig. 2-39). After a hiatus during Yongzheng’s reign, in 1741 the Qianlong emperor reinstituted the Imperial Hunting ceremony and conducted it annually as a showcase of his Manchu nomadic valor and as a diplomatic event for Mongol and Central Asian guests. Over the course of his long reign, the Qianlong emperor held more than forty hunts at Mulan.117 The Qianlong emperor’s first hunting trip to Mulan in 1741 is chronicled in a set of four handscrolls collectively called Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖 (about 1750). The titles of the four long scrolls are Troops on Move 行營, Encampment 下營, Banquet 筵宴, and Encirclement 合圍 (figs. 2-40, 2-41). Also documented in paintings was ice skating 冰嬉, a component of Manchu traditional military culture as well as one of the frequently performed spectacles for foreign envoys. Three handscrolls represent the Ice Skating ceremony: Imperial Poem 116 Waley-Cohen, 83. 117 Usually, the emperor and his imperial entourage stayed there for more or less one month (September) and attended in a series of nomadic sports shared among Mongols and Central Asians, such as hunt, horse riding, archery contest, and so on to promote the political ties between the Qing and its nomadic suzerain states. Mark C. Elliott, Emperor Qianlong: Son of Heaven, Man of the World (Pearson Education, 2010), 64 134 and Ice Skating (1746, in the National Palace Museum, Taipei) (fig. 2-42); Ice Skating on the Palace Lake (1760s, in the Palace Museum, Beijing) by Jin Kun, Cheng Zhidao, and Fu Longan (fig. 2-43); and Ice Skating on the Palace Lake (1740s-60s, in the Palace Museum, Beijing) by Yao Wenhan and Zhang Weibang. Ever since the first Qing Emperor Nurhaci (1559-1626) established the Ice Skating ceremony as an official component of martial exercises, the Ice Skating ceremony was regularly performed as both a military exercise and a spectacular entertainment for foreign guests. Although this traditional Manchu custom was not formally included in a military rite, a footnote to the Qianlong emperor’s poem frames that the Eight Banners’ ice skating was as a military exercise as well as a venue to express Manchuness: “The ice of Tai Yi Pool was very thick every winter, and the Eighth Banner and Third Banner armies of the royal court are ordered to practice ice-sports. The skaters are divided into groups and throw a colored ball at a target on a flagged door. The emperor inspects the result and awards prizes according to merit… The skating ceremony is a tradition in our nation. The skaters line up and wear colored clothes and shoes with teeth.”118 Military campaigns emerged as an important theme of eighteenth-century Qing court painting as early as Shunzhi’s reign (r. 1644-61) and were prevalent until the end of Kangxi’s reign (r. 1661-1722). The documentation of battles and large military campaigns started in the early eighteenth century. Some works include Duoduo’s Victory 多鐸得胜圖 (1645, National Museum of History, Beijing) (fig. 2-44), Cai Yurong’s 118 Translation by Wu Wen-chung. Wu Wen-chung, Selections of Historical Literature and Illustrations of Physical Activities in Chinese Culture (Taipei: Hanwon Bookstore, 1975), 69. 135 Southern Expedition 蔡毓榮南征圖 (National Museum of History, Beijing) (fig. 2-45), The Great General Fuyuan’s Western Expedition 撫遠大將軍西征圖 (1720, National Museum of History, Beijing), and Transferring Troops to the Northern Expedition 北征督運圖 (after 1697, National Museum of History, Beijing). According to the inscription on The Great General Fuyuan’s Western Expedition, the Kangxi emperor ordered the production of this scroll (fig. 2-46). It depicts the successful attacks of Yinti (1688-1756), the emperor’s fourteenth son and a strong general in Gansu and Mongolia, in the fourth month of 1720 to deter Tsewang Rabdan.119 Transferring Troops to the Northern Expedition, which originally comprised twenty-four album leaves but currently nineteen, does not bear an inscription testifying to the emperor’s commission (fig. 2-47). Nonetheless, it is likely that either the Kangxi emperor or Yinti, the protagonist of this campaign commissioned it because the painter of this album, Yu Zhiding 禹之鼎 (1647-1709), one of the most celebrated professional painters, temporarily served in the Qing court during the Kangxi reign.120 Most likely, these paintings were the direct inspiration for a series of military-campaign paintings commissioned by the Qianlong emperor, who liked to be called the “Old Man of Ten Victorious Campaigns 十全老人.” A series of wars during the Qianlong period, often called the Ten Victorious Campaigns, are represented in various 119 Peter C. Perdue, China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia (Cambridge and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2005), 222-223. 120 For more information about Yu Zhiding’s interactions with high-ranking Qing officials, see James Cahill, Pictures for Use and Pleasure: Vernacular Painting in High Qing China (Berkeley, Los Angles, and London: University of California Press, 2010), 37-38. 136 painting formats (murals, hanging scrolls, and albums) and prints.121 Large hanging scroll paintings such as The Battle of Qurman (1760) were memorialized in the form of hanging scrolls for display in the Hall of Purple Brightness along with one hundred portraits commemorating the heroes of the military campaigns (fig. 2-48).122 Further, at least six military campaigns were reproduced in albums of prints. Sixteen plates were dedicated for Pacification of the Dzungar Mongols and Turkic Muslims 平定準部回部戰圖 (1765) (fig. 2-49), the same number for Pacification of the Two Jinchuan Hills 平定兩金川得勝圖 (1777–81) (fig. 2-50), twelve for Pacification of Taiwan 平定台灣得勝圖 (1788–90) (fig. 2-51), six for Pacification of Annam 平定安南 得勝圖 (1790) (fig. 2-52), eight for Pacification of Gurkhas 平定喎尔喀得勝圖 (1795) (fig. 2-53), and four for Pacification of Miao Tribes 平定苗疆得勝圖 (1798) (fig. 2-54). These prints focused on battles, but depictions of the corresponding victory banquets offered by the Qianlong emperor for the generals and the Offering and Receiving War Captives ceremonies, which I previously introduced in the context of Felicitous and 121 The Ten Victorious Campaigns involved the pacification of disturbances in Dzungaria (1755, 1756-75), Eastern Turkestan (1758-59), Jinchuan (1747-49, 1771-76), Taiwan (1787-88), Burma (1766-70), Annam (1788-89), and Nepal (1790, 1791). The full record of these conquests was written and engraved on stone stele to be housed in the Imperial Academy of Learning. Individual accounts of major battles were also engraved on stone steles to be installed at various sites in Eastern Turkestan. Kao Bo Tsang, 71. For the prints of battles against Zunghar tribes, see: Laura Newby, “Copper Plates for the Qianlong Emperor: from Paris to Peking via Canton,” Journal of Early Modern History 16 (2012): 161-199; Nie Chongzheng 聂崇正 “Pingding zhunhuibu zhantu tongbanhua yuanban bushi,” 平定准部回部战图铜版画原版补识 [Original copperplates of Pacification of Dzungars and the Turkic Muslim Tribes] Yishushu yanjiu 艺术史研究 11 (2011): 83-87. 122 Richard E. Strassberg, “War and Peace: Four Intercultural Landscapes,” in China on Paper: European and Chinese Works from the Late Sixteenth to the Early Nineteenth Century, eds. Marcia Reed and Paola Demattè (Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 2011), 97. 137 Military Rites, were often included in each album (fig. 2-55) As discussed in Chapter One, emperors’ hunting was a popular theme for court documentary paintings in the Yuan and Ming dynasties. Consequently, Qing court documentary paintings that recorded emperors’ hunting trips and relevant events are a continuation of the earlier tradition. Similar to Yuan rulers, Qing emperors viewed hunting as a ritual of displaying their nomadic identity, and similar to Tang rulers, Manchu emperor utilized imperial hunting as a diplomatic venue to promote a strong alliance between the Qing ruling house and Central Asian and Mongol leaders. It is important to note that during the Kangxi reign military campaigns already had been frequently painted, mostly in the form of hanging scrolls and album. During the Qianlong reign, they also became the topics of various types of imagery from mural paintings to prints. Via Auspicious and Felicitous Rites, Qing emperors strove to fashion their sagehood to legitimize their role as the Son of Heaven, however, a large number of paintings that recorded battle scenes attest that in actuality the base of their authority was firmly rooted in their military prowess, and they were created to promote Manchu emperor’s fiercely face, which would be revealed to those who challenged their authority. 138 Conclusion In this chapter, I have argued how state rites were a defining, common thread that connected Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. Simultaneously, I scrutinized which of the five state rituals were performed more frequently and documented in painting in both the Qing and Joseon courts. The thematic discrepancies in each court’s emphasis on different state rituals reflect the distinctive international and domestic challenges that each ruling house had to confront. In the tradition of Chinese court documentary paintings prior to the eighteenth century, state rituals had not been documented regularly. Auspicious, Felicitous, Guest, and Military Rites, however, became some of the primary topics of eighteenth-century Qing court-documentary paintings. I believe the rise of these rites as the themes of paintings was closely related to the Qing rulers’ recognition of ritual as an effective tool to proclaim their legitimacy. The political motivation of performing state rites and documenting them in text and image will be further examined in Chapter Three. As examined in Chapter One, the tradition of documenting state rituals had already flourished prior to the eighteenth century. However, only Felicitous Rites (mostly banquets) were documented, to the exclusion of other state rites. Auspicious Rites had never been painted before Yeongjo’s period. Yeongjo restored Auspicious Rites relating to agriculture and sericulture, the fundamental economic bases of an ideal Confucian kingdom, and he was the first to have his participation in these rites painted. In all likelihood, King Yeongjo’s reenactment of the forgotten Auspicious Rites was inspired by the Yongzheng emperor’s Plowing ceremony. There are no comments on 139 Yongzheng emperor’s Personal Plowing ceremony or the Empress Xiaoxian’s Sericulture ceremony found in any official records. However, the lack of textual evidence does not mean that King Yeongjo was not aware of those ceremonies. Joseon envoys who visited the Qing court annually to pay tributes and to attend important Qing imperial events served as Joseon kings’ ears and eyes, and frequent imperial edicts and letters from the Qing court probably informed the Qing emperors’ enthusiastic engagement in reenacting Auspicious Rites. Although Yeongjo intentionally linked his Personal Plowing ceremony with ancient sage kings Yao and Shun, it is possible that Yeongjo decided to emulate the Yongzheng’s ritual paths, because for Yeongjo, the enactment of Auspicious Rites was also extremely useful to cultivate his political identity as a sagacious ruler. Another new theme that emerged in the eighteenth-century was Qing and Joseon rulers’ public outings. They were documented in paintings for the first time in the history of both Chinese and Korean court documentary painting. Through their frequent outings, both Qing and Joseon rulers aimed to develop their political personas as sage rulers and filial descendants. Qing emperors’ outings, which had already begun in the late seventeenth century, were portrayed as the emblem of rulers’ diligence and filial piety in imperial edicts and letters sent to the Joseon court. Thus, Kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo, who aspired to be more powerful monarchs than their predecessors, likely emulated Qing rulers’ frequent outings. Whether eighteenth-century Joseon kings or modern scholars of Korea wished to admit it or not, there was a strong political interconnectivity between Joseon and Qing courts. Since eighteenth-century Joseon kings wished to claim their legitimacy as caretakers of civilization, rhetorically called Zhonghua or Central 140 Florescence, they had to be keep their eyes on Qing emperors’ political moves, and if necessary, were ready to emulate Qing emperors. This view allows us to see eighteenth-century Joseon kings and their political actions within the context of the wider international sphere. Finally, military campaigns and Manchu traditional rites can be found only in eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings. Although I did not delve deeply into this topic in my research, my brief discussion on this theme still provides a glimpse into the distinctive nature of eighteenth-century Qing authority in international politics and the dynasty’s military emphasis. Although military exploits were traditionally viewed as acts of barbarity in Confucian teachings, the Qing rulers justified their military actions and glorified these campaigns in paintings not only to emphasize their unique Manchu heritage, but also to illustrate their devotion to defend China and its splendid civilization by defeating or “pacifying” non-Confucian “barbarians.” 141 CHAPTER THREE: RITUALS IN FASHIONING QING AND JOSEON RULERS’ POLITICAL IDENTITIES Introduction This chapter explores why eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers simultaneously became the major patrons of court documentary painting, and what overarching ideology drove their enthusiastic participation in performing rituals. Answers to these questions will allow us to understand why the Five State Rites 五禮, a traditional Chinese institution, became a major topic of eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings and to understand their political significance in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon visual culture. In the discussion of Qing court documentary paintings, the rise of the Five State Rites as an important painting theme reflects the fact that eighteenth-century Manchu rulers deployed these rituals at an unprecedented frequency, mirroring each emperor’s aspiration to legitimize his political persona as the Son of Heaven and his rule over not only his Han Chinese subjects, but also the Confucian vassal or tributary states like Joseon (Korea), Annam (Vietnam), and Ryūkyū (Okinawa).1 Qing rulers placed tremendous emphasis on ritual 禮 li, exceeding its dynastic predecessors in ceremonial exuberance. Furthermore, they published an unprecedented number of ritual compendia 1 The hierarchical relationship between China, the paternal state, and non-Chinese states, or vassal states is based on the traditional concept of Huayi 華夷 (civilization and barbarity). These vassal states were expected to show their loyalty and filial piety toward the Chinese state by sending tributary offerings. Shogo Suzuki, Civilization and Empire: China and Japan’s Encounter with European International Society (London and New York: Routledge, 2009), 38-41. 142 and treatises, which recorded the complex procedures and regulations, attesting to the Manchu rulers’ active participation in various state rituals. In the following discussion, I will suggest that the Qing emperors’ enthusiasm for performing rituals in person, rather than delegating such tasks to high officials, reveals that rituals were utilized to justify the Manchu rulers’ command of China and its rich Confucian civilization, often termed as Zhonghua 中華, literally meaning “Central Florescence.”2 In Joseon, the Five State Rites had served as important political ceremonies since its founding years. However, by the late seventeenth century, state rituals gained a new political mission: not only to identify Joseon’s role as a state that preserved Confucian civilization but also to help Joseon claim its spiritual and cultural superiority to the Qing. From its formative years, Joseon called its land and culture the Small Central Florescence 小中華 and continued to do so throughout the eighteenth century, yet its political implication did not remain the same. In pre-Qing context, this term indicated the smaller size of the Korean peninsula as well as Joseon’s “inferior” civilization in comparison to Ming China. Nonetheless, after the Ming Dynasty collapsed under the Manchus, it came to assert that Joseon was the one remaining place of civilization because China, the origin of civilization, was believed to have been forever lost to the “barbarian” Manchus. Thus ritual, the core value 2 Zhonghua is translated in various ways. Some of the frequently used terms are Sino-centrism, Flower in the Middle, and Central Flower Kingdom. Sino-centrism seems to be the most commonly used term. In this research, I have chosen “Central Florescence” since it is closest to the literal meaning of Zhonghua. China’s self-image as the center of the world is a false idea in modern geographical terms; however, the idea of China’s centrality was universally accepted in the East Asian Confucian community, which included Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, and the Ryūkyū Islands. 143 of civilization became the topic of scholarly study, and a political tool, which Joseon rulers increasingly relied on in order to express their political visions and opinions.3 In the following discussion, I will propose that eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers saw their diligent participation in rituals as pivotal not only to gaining reputations as sage rulers, but, more importantly, to justify their claim of true ownership of Zhonghua to their domestic and international audiences. Their patronage of textual and visual materials recording their ritual activities was intended to further magnify their participation in these rituals and was targeted to both contemporary and future viewers. 3 Following discussions shares this view. See: Kim Moon-sik 김문식. “Joseon sidae gukgajeonryeoseo-ui pyeonchan yangsang,” 조선시대 국가전례서의 편찬과 양상 [Trends of Editing State Rituals in the Joseon Dynasty] Kyujanggak 규장각 21, no. 4 (2009): 79-104; Jeong Ok-ja 정옥자, “Kyujanggak-ui jisik giban sahoejeok uiui-wa dongasia munhwa,” 규장작의 지식기반 사회적 의의와 동아시아 문화 [Social Significance of Kyujanggak and East Asian Culture] in Joseon sidae munhwa-sa: munmul-ui jeongbi-wa wangsil munhwa 조선시대 문화사: 문물의 정비와 왕실문화 [Cultural History of the Joseon Period: Reenactment of Culture and Court Culture] vol. 1 (Seoul: Iljisa, 2007), 388-414; JaHyun Kim Haboush, “The Ritual Controversy and the Search for a New Identity,” in Culture and the State in Late Choson Korea, eds. JaHyun Kim Haboush and Martina Deuchler (Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2002), 46-90. 144 Manchu Way to the Son of Heaven Becoming Sage Rulers Amid military campaigns that continued after the collapse of the Ming Dynasty (1644), the Shunzhi emperor 順治 (r. 1644-61) launched a series of political programs that displayed his commitment to a Confucian way of rule to his newly acquired subjects, the majority of whom were ethnically Han Chinese. In the second year of the Qing Dynasty, the Shunzhi emperor conferred the eminent title of “Ultimate Sage, King Wenxuanwang, and Fore Master” on Confucius.4 In 1651, he also constructed a Confucian temple in the Imperial Academy and placed portraits of the four Confucian sages and ten Confucian masters in the temple.5 Additionally, he established a tradition of Qing emperors’ participation in the Ceremonial Lecture on the Classics 經筵 in 1657.6 In 1701, the Kangxi emperor (r. 1662-1722) ordered the official edition of the Complete Book of Master Zhu 朱子全書, and in 1711, he decreed that Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130–1200), the Southern Song founder of Neo-Confucianism, be included in the Confucian temple to receive imperial homage. Zhengyuan Fu points out that “official Confucianism, especially Zhu Xi’s Neo-Confucian version, was promulgated to the 4 Zhengyuan Fu, Autocratic Tradition and Chinese Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 61. 5 Ibid., 61. 6 According to Harry Miller, the Shunzhi emperor attended the Ceremonial Lecture on the Classics “to reinvent himself as an enlightened monarch.” Harry Miller, State Versus Gentry in Early Qing Dynasty China, 1644-1699 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013), 68. 145 populace as the ultimate moral standard.”7 As part of the Manchu political program to cast the emperor as a Confucian ruler to the wider population, in 1724 the Yongzheng emperor emperor (r. 1722-1735) issued an expanded version of the Sixteen Imperial Decrees 聖諭十六條 with explanatory comments, which the Kangxi emperor had announced it in 1667. In 1729, the emperor ordered provincial and local governors to teach the decrees to the populace and extended this order in 1730 to the region’s ethnic minorities.8 The Yongzheng emperor, who diligently participated thirteen times in the Ceremonial Lecture on the Classics—more than any other Qing emperor—frankly professed the usefulness of learning Confucian classics to apply to his statecraft. “If the ruler does not know how to venerate Confucius, how can he build supreme authority at the top?…The people only know that the teachings of Confucius explain normative order, differentiate human relationships, rectify human minds, and correct social custom. Do they also know…the one who ultimately benefits the most is the ruler himself?”9 If his devoted participation in the Ceremonial Lecture targeted Han Chinese court officials, the Yongzheng emperor’s annual performance of at the Altar of the First Farmer 先農壇, and the First Furrow at the sacred field (more commonly referred to as the Plowing ceremony 親耕) concerned a larger public audience. In conjunction with these offerings, he performed the Plowing ritual, in which the emperor himself set hand to the 7 Zhengyuan Fu, 61. 8 Yim Gyeo-sun 임계순, Cheongsa 청사 [History of Qing] (Seoul: Sinseowon, 2000), 99. 9 The Veritable Records of Yongzheng, ch. 59, quoted in Zhengyuan Fu, 61. 146 plow, along with a few selected elderly farmers, and he encouraged local governors to carry out the Plowing ritual as well.10 Immediately following the Yongzheng emperor’s first few performances of this set of rituals,11 official court records and local gazetteers from all over the provinces reported the appearance of auspicious grain, as if they were heavenly responses to the emperor’s sincere participation in the ceremony.12 According to a series of local reports compiled in the Compilation of the Hall of Mental Cultivation, multi-headed stalks of mulberry or wheat appeared in numerous local provinces.13 Li Zongyang from the Ancient Book Office in the Interior Cabinet presented fifteen stalks of auspicious grain from Henan province, twenty-one stalks of auspicious grain from Shaanxi province, and sixteen stalks of auspicious grain from the Altar of the First Farmer.14 10 Peter Zarrow, After Empire: The Conceptual Transformation of the Chinese State, 1885–1924 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 2012), 13. 11 Lu Liu 劉潞, “Jixiangnong genjitian yu jixian’nongtan tu: yongzheng huangdi zhongyao de zhengzhi shouduan,” 祭先農耕耤田與祭先農壇圖: 雍正皇帝重要的政治手段 [Performing Xiannong and ploughing ceremony and the worshipping at the altar of the first farmer painting: Yongzheng’s important political tool] Liang’an gugong diyijiexueshu yantaohui: weijunnan yongzheng qiren,qishi, jiqi shidai 兩岸故宮第一屆學術研討會: 為君難－雍正其人其事及其時代 [Complexities and challenges of rulership: emperor Yongzheng and his an accomplishment in his time] (2009), 5. 12 According to Hu De-sheng, the Yongzheng emperor was more interested in the appearance of auspicious omens than the Kangxi emperor, who was highly skeptical of such omens, particularly astronomical events. Hu Desheng 胡德胜, “Qingdai de xiangrui,” 清代的祥瑞 [Auspicious omens of the Qing period] Zijincheng 紫禁城, no. 90, 164. 13 In the Ming Hongwu reign, a stalk with multiple melons was considered to be a good omen. As regards the phenomena of auspicious omens during the Hongwu reign, see Sarah Schneewind, A Tale of Two Melons: Emperor and Subject in Ming China (Indianapolis and Cambridge, MA.: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2006), 8-11. 14 The original text is from Yangxindian zaobanchushiliaojilan 養心殿造辦處史料輯覽 [Historical materials relating to the imperial workshops in the hall of mental cultivation] (Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe, 2003), 190. For the production of paintings during the Yongzheng reign, 147 内閣典籍廳李宗揚持來河南省進瑞糓十五本, 陝西省進瑞糓二十一本, 先農壇進瑞糓十六本. Along with a set of handscrolls that recorded one of the Yongzheng emperor’s annual performances (fig. 3-1), a series of paintings was created that defined the multi-headed stalks of grain as heavenly responses to the Yongzheng emperor’s sincere veneration of the First Farmer. A hanging scroll entitled A Collection of Auspicious Signs 聚瑞圖 bears an inscription in the upper-right corner saying, “[This] sketches a vase and flowers in order to record the auspicious response (寫甁花以記祥應) (fig. 3-2).”15 In this context, the Yongzheng emperor’s Offering at the Altar of the First Farmer and his performance of the Plowing ceremony were intended to be interpreted as the cause of auspicious omens. Following in his father’s footsteps, the Qianlong emperor regularly performed offerings at the Altar of the First Farmer and the Plowing ritual. Further, in 1744 his main consort Xiaoxian conducted the Sericulture ceremony, a parallel to the Plowing ritual. And four years later, a set of four handscrolls illustrating her 1744 Sericulture ceremony was commissioned (fig. 3-3). Since agriculture had always been promoted as the foundation of a Confucian kingdom, the Qianlong emperor’s reenactment of the see Lin Lina 林莉娜, “Conghuojidang kanyongzhengchaode gongtinghuihua huodong,” 從活計檔看雍正朝的宮廷繪畫活動 [Looking at the production of paintings during the Yongzheng Reign through examining documents of imperial workshop] Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊, no. 319 (2009): 40-51. 15 Lin Lina 林莉娜, “Yongzhengcao zhi xiangrui fuying,” 雍正朝之祥瑞符應 [Auspicious response during the Yongzheng reign] in Yongzheng: Qing Shizong wen wu da zhan 雍正清世宗文物大展, ed. Feng Mingzhu 馮明珠 (Taipei: the National Palace Museum, 2009), 374-399. 148 Sericulture ceremony, which had been halted during the Ming Dynasty, was certainly to project the Qing ruling house as an ideal Confucian institution and to legitimize their rule in China.16 Redefining Zhonghua The term Zhonghua is a composite term comprised of two characters: 中 and 華. Zhong means the center of the four directions, and Hua originated from Huaxia 華夏, people that resided around the Yellow River.17 And they were believed to be the forefathers of Chinese civilization.18 Zhonghua became the autonym of Han-Chinese people, their land and culture, yet it soon came to indicate the superiority of Han-Chinese people, their land, and their culture. In the Zuo Commentary 左傳, Confucius clearly stated the following: “裔不謀夏, 夷不亂華 (Those distant people have nothing to do with our great land; those wild tribes 16 Cixi (1835–1908) restored the Altar to Sericulture and conducted the Sericulture ritual during her regency. Susan Naquin, Peking: Temples and City Life, 1400-1900 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000), 348. 17 “中央, 四方之中也.” from the Records of Regulated Calendar 律歷志, a section from the History of Han Dynasty 前漢. http://www.zdic.net/z/15/kx/4E2D.htm. Chen Liankai argues that the term Zhonghua is a linguistic combination of Zhongguo and Huaxia. On the origins of Zhonghua, see Chen Lian-kai 陈连开, Zhonghua minzu yanjiu chudan 中华民族硏究初探 [Preliminary research on the zhonghua minzu] (Beijing: Zhishi Chubanshe, 1994), 59-69. 18 During the Republican Era (1911-1949), Sun Yat-sen first used this term Zhonghua minzu in referring to the Chinese race or nation. James Patrick Leibold, “Constructing the Zhonghua Minzu: The Frontier and National Questions in Early 20th Century China” (PhD diss., University of Southern California, 2002), 30. 149 must not be permitted to create disorder among our flowery).”19 In this, hua 華 and yi 夷 were the fundamental terms used to distinguish the “self” from the “other.” Here, the “self” and “center” referred to Han Chinese, and the “other” and “periphery,” non-Han Chinese. For Han-ethnic Chinese states such as the Zhou, Han, Song and Ming dynasties, Zhonghua was their people, land, and culture; in foreign states such as the Northern Wei, Jin, Yuan and Qing dynasties, Zhonghua was more of a sanctified title to legitimize their rule in China and its Han Chinese subjects. In the Annals of Rites 禮志 from the Book of Wei 魏書, one can find a passage arguing that if a foreign state occupies Zhonghua (here is referring to the land), and the virtue of the throne is meager and shallow, and that land no longer is entitled to be called Zhonghua, implying the barometer of Zhonghua was not fixed to a specific place or a particular ethnic group, but rather more of a mobile entity that referred to wherever Chinese civilization flourished. In this interpretation, if the foreign rulers follow Confucian ideals, their land and people (although it is not China proper) can be converted into the civilized.20 The interpretation of Zhonghua favored by foreign rulers seems to have been inspired by Confucius’ comments found in the Analects, where he argued that “barbarians 19 Translation by James Legge. James Legge, The Chinese Classics, vol. 5 (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960), 777. 20 “… 二家之論，大略如此. 臣等謹共參論, 伏惟皇魏世王玄朔, 下迄魏, 晉, 趙, 秦, 二燕雖地據中華, 德祚微淺，並獲推敘，於理未愜…” Lizhi 禮志 [Annals of Rites] from Weishu 魏書 [Book of Wei]. 150 could always be transformed by the influence of a virtuous ruler.”21 Similar to their non-Chinese dynastic predecessors, Manchu rulers’ efforts to legitimize their right to rule China were conducted by challenging the traditional definitions of Zhonghua, which equaled Han Chinese and their culture with the “civilized 華” and non-Chinese with the “barbarity 夷.” An eighteenth-century book entitled A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion 大義覺迷錄 (1726) is an example of these efforts. It recounted the Yongzheng emperor’s lengthy rebuttal to Zeng Jing 曾靜 (1679–1736), a Ming loyalist scholar from the Hunan Province who was brought to Beijing to account for his rebellious plot. After numerous conversations with the Ming loyalist, the emperor sent an “awakened Zeng” safely back home, proving his benevolence. In the book, the emperor argues that culture (ritual propriety, benevolence, and loyalty) were the true barometer in distinguishing the civilized and the barbarity,22 and challenged the rigid distinction between the “civilized” and the “barbarian,” a common view among many Han Chinese loyalists like Zeng, who had been heavily influenced by Zhu Xi (1130-1200), a Southern Song Neo-Confucian scholar.23 21 Confucius, The Analects, trans. D.C. Lau (London: Penguin Classics, 1979), 67. 22 “逆書云: 夷狄異類，詈如禽獸. 夫人之所以異于禽獸者幾希？以其存心也. 君子以仁存心，以義存心. 若僻處深山曠野之夷狄番苗，不識綱維，不知禮法，蠢然漠然，或可加之以禽獸無異之名⋯” Emperor Yongzheng 雍正, Dayi juemi lu 大義覺迷錄 [Record of how true virtue led to an awakening from delusion] in Jindai Zhongguo shiliao congkan, vol. 1 (Taipei: Wenhai, 1969), 351-352. 23 Kent Guy suggests that the Confucian Chengzhu school, led by Southern Song Neo-Confucian such scholars as Zhu Xi 朱熹, lost the Qing emperors’ favor because of its rigid conceptualization of the civilized and the barbarian. Eighteenth-century Qing emperors began to noticeably favor pre-Zhu Confucian texts. Kent Guy, Emperor’s Four Treasures: Scholars and 151 The Yongzheng emperor used his discussion with Zeng as an opportunity to propagate his revised definition of Zhonghua as well as Manchu rulers’ worldview, which treated everyone equally under their rulership.24 Furthermore, by sparing Zeng’s life and publishing A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion and distributing its multiple copies to government officials and students in Confucian schools the Yongzheng emperor aimed to promulgate not only his benevolence but also the redefined concept of Zhonghua.25 This book was even circulated among Joseon contemporary intellectuals. Kim Yi-an 김이안 (1722-1791) who claimed to have only taken a glimpse to this book, defined Yongzheng’s discussion with Zeng as an outrageously “dangerous” example of the “barbarian” Manchu’s attempt to transform themselves into the owners of Zhonghua.26 the State in the Late Ch’ien-lung Era (Cambridge: Harvard East Asian Monographs, 1987), 16. 24 Yongzheng 雍正 in Dayi juemi lu also said “Everyone under the heaven is one family and everything has one source (天下一家，萬物一原). Prior to the Qing period, there were similar interpretations of Zhonghua as Yongzheng. For example, Chen An 陳黯 (ca. 860), a late Tang-period scholar in his book entitled Hua Mind 華心 that the mind is the barometer that distinguishing the civilized from the barbarity. As regards Chen An’s comments, see Sufen Sophia Lai, “Racial Discourse and Utopian Visions,” in Race and Racism in Modern East Asia: Western and Eastern Constructions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 329. 25 After the Yongzheng emperor’s death, the Qianlong emperor, rescinded the book and destroyed copies in circulation. Jiang Wu, Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 177. 26 Although most late Joseon-period scholars shared a similar opinion with Kim Yi-an, it is important to note that not all Joseon scholars debunked Yongzheng’s interpretation of Zhonghua. In fact, Yi Yik 이익 (1681-1763), a renown figure of the Southerners 남인 who thoroughly read A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion, saw it in a quite positive light. Like the Yongzheng emperor, Yi Yi also believed that the barometer that distinguishes the civilized from the barbarous should be based on the adaptation of Confucian ideals. For late Joseon-period intellectuals’ discussion on A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion, see Kim Hong-baek 김홍백, “Daeyigakmirok-gwa joseon hugi 152 Kim wrote a lengthy article rejecting Yongzheng’s attemp and at the same time explaining the reason why Joseon was the one and only possessor of Zhonghua. Interestingly, late Joseon intellectuals including Kim Yi-an favored the culture-centered definition of Zhonghua, rather than the ethnic-centered one as Yongzheng had advocated in his rebuttal to Zeng;27 however, in order to maintain the argument that Joseon was the one and only Zhonghua, they re-employed the matter of ethnicity to deny the possibility of “barbarian” Manchu’s transformation into the “civilized.”28 As William T. Rowe puts it, for Yongzheng, “the term Manchu was only a native-place designation…not a racial marker.”29 However, for Qianlong, Manchuness is a component of civilization 文. As Peter Bol said, in discussing the Jin Dynasty (1115– 1234): “Jurchens could be civilized without becoming Han.”30 The Qianlong emperor hwayiron,” 대의각미론과 조선후기 화이론 [A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion and discourse on the distinction between civilization and barbarity in the late Joseon period] Hanguk munhwa 한국문화, no. 56 (2011): 47-77. 27 For more information about Zhonghua and its political implications in the late Joseon period, see Huh Tae-yong 허태용, “Joseon hugi junghwa uisik-ui gyeoseung-gwa byeonyong,”조선후기 중화의식의 계승과 변용 [Succession and variation of sino-Centrism in late Joseon dynasty] in Junggug eupneun junghwa 중국 없는 중화 [Zhonghua without China] (Incheon: Inha University Press, 2009), 279-320. 28 For example, Han Won-jin 한원진 (1682-1751) argued that the reason why Joseon was able to become Zhonghua was its location to the east, where Yang energy was ample, but Manchus, who were originally from the northwest, could not possibly be transformed into upholders of Zhonghua because the northwest was full of Yin energy. Han Won-jin 한원진, Namdangjip 南塘集, vol. 6, quoted in Huh Tae-yong, 181. 29 William T. Rowe, China’s Last Empire: The Great Qing (Cambridge and London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009), 70. 30 Peter Bol, “Seeking Common Ground: Han Literati Under Jurchen Rule,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 47, no. 2 (1987): 492. 153 made the same argument. For him, preserving and correctly performing traditional Manchu rituals and customs did not conflict with claiming both ownership of China and the title of Son of Heaven. In the Funerary Rites section from the Comprehensive Rites of the Great Qing 大清通禮, for example, a specific prohibition against shaving the scalp during the state mourning period, a traditional Manchu custom, was included as an expression of filial piety.31 Norman Kutcher interpreted the Qianlong emperor’s “fear of a loss of Manchu identity,” precipitated the “1748 Shaving Scandal,” an incident, which punished court officials who did not observe this prohibition during the mourning period for the empress Xiaoxian.32 I believe that this scandal also reflects Qianlong’s efforts to remind court officials that shaving the scalp was not a “barbaric” practice, but a “civilized” expression of filial piety, the quintessential Confucian relational value. The following footnote attached to the emperor’s poem about ice skating 冰嬉 reflects his definition of civilization and explains that eighteenth-century Qing rulers continued promoting the Manchu tradition of ice skating because it cultivated benevolence 德, which was a core value of Confucianism. “According to the state rules, as the ice of Tai Yi Pool becomes frozen every winter, the Eight Banners and Third Banner armies of the royal court were ordered to practice skills on the lake surface. The skaters were divided into groups and competed with each other to throw a colored ball at a target on a flagged door. The emperor inspects the result and judges the throwing competition. The emperor composed an ice skating poem and awarded prizes to the best soldiers. The 31 Norman Kutcher, “The Death of the Xiaoxian Empress: Bureaucratic Betrayals and the Crisis of Eighteenth-Century Chinese Rule,” The Journal of Asian Studies 56, no. 3 (1997): 716. 32 Ibid., 722. 154 emperor used the rules of virtue to make people observe the right path.”33 等謹按國朝定例每歲冬冬太液冰堅令八旗與內府三旗簡習冰嬉之技分 棚擲彩毬互程趫.捷並設旌門懸的.演射校閱行賞御製冰嬉賦以示旌勇均賜而歸本於觀德之義. Even while controlling Mongol and Central Asian chieftains who defected to the Qing, Manchu rulers effectively borrowed the system of Confucian ritual codes for new purposes.34 For those foreign guests or allies who visited the Summer Villa 避暑山莊, the Qing court established a series of ritual procedures: the ceremonies of Submission 朝覲, Imperial Hunt 圍獵, and Tribute 朝貢. They were were all organized and supervised by the Ministry of Colonial Affairs 理藩院.35 Although those rituals had non-Confucian origins, establishing hierarchic relationships between the Qing Empire and foreign states via rituals was profoundly embedded in the Confucian notion of dichotomizing center and periphery, and civilized and barbarian.36 As Charles Hucker remarked, “Anyone who works extensively with Ming 33 The translation is by Wu Wen-chung. Wu Wen-chung, Selections of Historical Literature and Illustrations of Physical Activities in Chinese Culture (Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University, 1975), 69. 34 Sabine Dabringhaus, “The Monarch and Inner-Outer Court Dualism,” in Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires, eds. Jeroen Duindam, Tülay Artan, and Metin Kunt (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2011), 279. 35 Ning Xia, “The Lifanyuan and the Inner Asian Rituals in the Early Qing (1644-1795),” Late Imperial China 14 (1993), 61. 36 Peter Purdue argues that Qing Manchu emperors’ policy toward their multi-cultural empire was much more in line with Turco-Mongol traditions than Sinocentric tradition. However, I believe that the great emphasis on ritualistic aspects of their political events was deeply rooted in Confucian ritual culture that emphasized determining the civilized from the “barbarous” via the sophistication of rituals. Peter Purdue, China Marches West: the Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2005). 155 documents cannot avoid the conclusion that proper government in the Ming was largely a matter of performing the proper rituals.”37 Although the ruler’s attendance at state rituals was traditionally considered to be a sign of his morality and political success, rulers toward the end of the Ming period placed less emphasis on performing rituals to the extent that some Ming emperors became symbols of indolence due to their lack of interest in state rituals and court ceremonies.38 As much as Ming emperors saw their obligation to perform state rituals as burdensome, these rituals quickly lost their political value. At the same time, the “barbarian” Qing emperor diligently participated in the performance of state rituals; thereby, the same ritualistic institutions became their source of inspiration and power. For Qing emperors, rituals were the most public and spectacular venue to display their commitment to a Confucian way of rule and to portray themselves as ideal Confucian rulers, comparable to the mythical Yao and Shun kings, and to legitimize their claim to ownership of Zhonghua. As foreign rulers who conquered China, Qing Manchu emperors’ particular enthusiasm in rituals was certainly not unprecedented. The rulers of the Northern Wei Dynasty (386-535) strove to redefine the prevalent understanding of Zhonghua and 37 Charles Hucker, The Traditional Chinese State in Ming Times (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1961), 67-68. 38 In one of the best examples of how a ruler’s name could be stigmatized, the Ming Wanli emperor became a symbol of laziness because of his negligence of ritual requirements, in spite of his political achievements throughout his reign. As regards Wanli’s indifferent attitude toward politics, see Ray Huang, 1598: A Year of No Significance (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981). 156 religiously followed the Rites of Zhou to overcome their stigmatic title of “barbarians.”39 Thus, Qing emperors’ diligent participation in state rituals and reenactment of certain archaic ceremonies such as the Auspicious Rites and the Plowing and Sericulture ceremonies can be seen in a long tradition of foreign “barbarian” rulers’ popular political tactics to gain high recognition from their Han Chinese subjects. Eighteenth-Century Joseon’s Dualistic Monarchs Since its early years, the Joseon state called itself the Small Zhonghua 小中華 소중화, celebrating its long history of Confucian culture; the modifier of “Small” indicated the smaller size of the Korean peninsula as well as Joseon’s subordinate status in relation to Ming China.40 Nonetheless, after the Ming Dynasty collapsed in 1644 at the 39 Mark Elliot, “Hushuo: The Northern Other and the Naming of the Han Chinese,” in Critical Han Studies: The History, Representation, and Identity of China’s Majority, eds. Thomas S. Mullaney, James Leibold, Stéphane Gros, and Eric Vanden Bussche (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 2012), 181. 40 Some of the notable research on the idea of Joseon becoming the caretaker of Zhonghua in the late Joseon period are as follows: Jang Hyeon-geun 장현근, “Hangug-eseo deajunggukgwan’nyeom-ui byeonhwa: junghwa ju’ui, sojunghwaju’ui, taljunghwaju’ui,” 한국에서 대중국관념의 변화: 중화주의, 소중화주의, 탈중화주의 [Change of Korea’s attitude toward China: Zhonghua, small Zhonghua, and beyond Zhonghua] Atae yeongu 아태연구 18, no. 2 (2011): 97-123; Huh Tae-yeong 허태용, Joseon hugi junghwaron-gwa yeoksa insik 조선후기 중화론과 역사인식 [Discourse on Zhonghua in the late Joseon period] (Seoul: Acanet, 2009); U Gyeong-seop 우경섭, “Song Si-yeol-ui hwayiron-gwa joseon junghwaju’ui seongrip,” 송시열의 화이론과 조선중화주의 성립 [Song Si-yeol’s theory about the “civilized” and the “barbarity,” and the establishment of Joseon Zhonghua] Jindan hakbo 진단학보, no. 101 (2006): 257-290; Jeong Ok-ja 정옥자, Joseon hugi Joseon junghwa sasang yeongu 조선후기 조선중화사상 연구 [Study of the late Joseon-period Joseon zhonghua] (Seoul: Iljisa, 1998); Yi Tae-jin 이태진, “Joseon hugi daemyeonguiriron-ui byeoncheon,” 조선후기 對明義理論의 변천 [Development of a discourse on loyalty to the Ming Dynasty in the late Joseon period] Asia munhwa 아시아문화 10 (1994): 5-26. 157 hands of the Manchus, this same term began to imply that Joseon was the one remaining bastion of civilization because China, the “forbearer” of civilization, was forever lost to the Manchus, who were considered “barbarians.” Submission under the Manchus, who had unrightfully seized the cradle of civilization, kindled an aspiration among eighteenth-century Joseon kings to obtain Zhonghua; this was the reason why they had to acquire sagehood. Saving Zhonghua A so-called culture-centered definition of Zhonghua (Kr. Junghwa 중화), which had been advocated by foreign dynasties that came to rule China, was also adopted by Joseon’s ruling class during the eighteenth century. Although the Joseon ruling class and intellectuals referred to Joseon as the “Small Zhonghua” (as did their predecessors), Joseon’s definition of this term was not the same. Small Zhonghua simply referred to the geographic size of Joseon, not to its cultural inferiority.41 Elite scholar-officials also joined the ardent effort of the Joseon court to lay claim on the title of Zhonghua. Song Si-yeol 송시열 (1607-89), who led anti-Qing movements, argued that Zhonghua existed wherever civilization flourished.42 Another scholar-official Hwang Gyeong-won 황경원 (1709-1787) dismissed the ethnicity-centered Zhonghua: 41 Japan’s self-appointment as the “Center” had already started in the Edo period. For this, see Ronald P. Toby, “Contesting the Centre: International Sources of Japanese National Identity,” The International History Review, 7, no. 3 (1985): 347-363. 42 “…我東雖曰東夷高麗之時朱子語類稱之曰高麗風俗好高麗之世夷俗未變...而我東獨宗朱子之學可謂周禮在魯矣⋯” Song Si-yeol 송시열, Songja deajeon 宋子大全, vol. 131. 158 What is the so called the Middle Kingdom? It is only founded on the degree of rituals. If the understanding of rituals is bright, “barbarians” can be the Middle Kingdom, and if not, the Middle Kingdom can be “barbarians.43 ⋯夫所謂中國者何也禮義而已矣禮義明則戒狄可以爲中國禮義不明則中國可義爲戒狄⋯ Kim Yi-an 김이안 (1722-1791) also debunked the conventional concept of Zhonghua being based solely on geographical location. …In ancient times, the “civilized” and the “barbarians” differed on the basis of the location of land. If that land is located to the east, it is the eastern “barbarians,” to the west, the western “barbarians,” to the south, the southern “barbarians,” and to the north, the northern “barbarians,” and the central ground gained its name as the Central Kingdom. Therefore, we were labeled with the name of barbarians. However, right now barbarians have entered the Central Kingdom and the people of the Central Kingdom have recognized them as their lord, followed their custom, married with them and finally became mingled with them. For this reason, the land cannot be a sufficient reason, but the people is. If we do not belong to Zhonghua, who will ?...44 古者以地辨華夷.其某地之東曰東夷.某地之西曰西夷.某地之南北曰南北夷. 中曰中國.各有界限.無相踰也.故我得爲夷也.今也戎狄入中國.中國之民君其君俗其俗婚嫁相媾種類相化.於是地不足辨之而論其人也.然則當今之世. 不歸我中華而誰也⋯ As introduced above, scholar-officials mainly argued that Confucian decorum and rituals, not geographical location, distinguished the holders of Zhonghua from “barbarians,” and Joseon was the only surviving successor of Confucian civilization. In order to lay claim on the land, people, and culture of Joseon as the one and 43 Hwang Gyeong-won 황경원, Ganghanjip 江漢集, vol. 5. 44 Kim Yi-an 김이안, “Hwayi byeon ha,” 華夷辨下 [Distinction between the civilized and the barbarity] in Samsan jaejip 三山齋集, vol. 10, quoted in Huh Tae-yong, 182-183. 159 only surviving Zhonghua, the Joseon court promoted the legend of Gija 箕子(C. Jizi), who was believed to have had illustrious ties to the court of the Shang Dynasty (1556 B.C.E-1046 B.C.E),45 and to have established a kingdom named Gija Joseon기자조선 with its capital in Pyongyang, as the foremost ancestor of people in Korean peninsula. Yi Seong-gye 이성계 (r.1392-1398), the founder of the Joseon Dynasty (1392-1897), made Gija the ancestral god of the Yi 李 clan, and Yi Seong-gye’s successors financed festivals commemorating Gija and erected shrines and steles to him. In 1761, Yeongjo ordered a state sacrifice for Gija, proclaiming the tomb of Gija “a place that gives a rise to mysterious wonder.”46 The eighteenth-century Joseon court’s attempts to transform Joseon’s land into the land of Zhonghua were expressed in many state-sponsored rites and publication projects. For example, King Jeongjo posthumously honored two Joseon military heroes: Yi Sun-shin 이순신 (1545-1598), who led crucial victories over Japanese during the Imjin War (1592-98), and Yim Gyeong-eop 임경업 (1594-1646), who led anti-Qing military campaigns with the remaining Ming military. In 1792, Jeongjo invited the descendants of the two heroes to participate in a royal sacrifice at the Altar of Great Gratitude 대보단.47 The eighteenth-century Joseon court endowed these two great 45 Hyung Il Pai, Constructing “Korean” Origins: A Critical Review of Archaeology, Historiography, and Racial Myth in Korean State Formation Theories (Harvard University Asia Center, 2000), 116. 46 This account is recorded on an entry dated to the nineteenth day of the twelfth lunar month of 1761 from the Veritable Records of King Yeongjo. 47 King Yeongjo established a shrine named Loyal Martyr Temple for the General Yim 160 Korean generals with new roles as the protectors of Zhonghua, and further claimed that the Korean peninsula was the land where local heroes as brave as Guan Yu 關羽 arose to protect the Confucian world. In addition to their efforts to transform Joseon into the land entitled to lay claim to Zhonghua, Kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo were also profoundly committed to forming their own images as sage kings so they could rightfully lay claim to the title of Zhonghua for their own state. A formula Yeongjo and Jeongjo followed in hope of becoming the caretakers of Zhonghua was through their diligent and proper performance of rituals, just like their Qing counterparts. The importance of rituals in Joseon politics emerged right after the Manchus’ rise to power in the Chinese heartland in the late seventeenth century. JaHyun Kim Haboush argues that two incidents of ritual controversy in 1660 and 1674, over the dowager queen Jaeui’s mourning period and her funerary costume, were embedded in the Joseon court’s anxiety over its national identity and its political role after the fall of the Ming Dynasty and the rise of the Manchu Qing Dynasty.48 Scholar officials like Yun Hyu 윤휴 (1617-1680), who advocated the Northern Expedition 北伐, a military campaign against the Qing, renewed the rulers’ commitment to the Confucian classics, such as the Rites of Zhou, with the conviction that Joseon faced a hostile world Gyeong-eop, in 1726; also, King Jeongjo wrote a eulogy for him and ordered a commemorative stele erected in his honor in 1791. Huh Tae-yong, 125. 48 JaHyun Kim Haboush, “The Ritual Controversy and the Search for a New Identity,” in Culture and the State in Late Choson Korea, eds. JaHyun Kim Haboush and Martina Deuchler (Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2002), 67. 161 and that confirming their cultural identity was imperative for survival.49 According to Kim Mun-sik, the “Discourse on Esteeming Zhou” or Jeonju-lon 尊周論, which was advocated by late seventeenth-century scholar officials as a sort of political slogan,50 inspired the development of the study of rituals among scholars and turned matters regarding ritual propriety into a topic of heated political discourse.51 Originating in the Spring and Autumn period, “Esteeming Zhou” refers to “bringing the barbarians to submission by venerating the Zhou court,” which was known for its dedication to rituals.52 This concept also indicates a realization among the late-Joseon ruling class that, although physically defeating Manchu “barbarians” was impossible, they could still “defeat” them by becoming culturally and morally superior to them. I believe that the idea of “Discourse on Respecting Zhou” was translated into the 49 For renewed interest in the Rites of Zhou in the late seventeenth century, see JaHyun Kim Haboush, “Yun Hyu and the Search for Dominance: A Seventeenth-Century Korean Reading of the Offices of Zhou and the Rituals of Zhou,” in Statecraft and Classical Learning: The Rituals of Zhou in East Asian History, eds. Benjamin A. Elman and Martin Kern (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010), 309-29. 50 This slogan was derived from Zhu Xi’s interpretation of Spring and Autumn Annals. JaHyun Kim Haboush, “The Ritual Controversy and the Search for a New Identity,” in Culture and the State in Late Choson Korea, 78. Huh Tae-yong argues that the popularly of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries was closely related to the “Discourse on Esteeming Zhou.” Huh Tae-yong 허태용, “Sipchilsegi mal sipalsegi cho jonjuron-ui ganghwa-wa samgukjiyeonui yuhaeng,” 17 세기 말 18 세기 초 존주론의 강화와 삼국지연의의 유행 [Discourse on Esteeming Zhou and the Popularity of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms] Hanguk sahakbo 한국사학보, no. 15 (2003): 131-157. 51 Kim Moon-sik 김문식, “Joseon hugi jisikin-ui dae insik,” 조선후기 지식인의 대외인식 [Late Joseon-period intellectuals’ world view] in Jung’guk eopneun junghwa 중국없는 중화 [Zhonghwa with no China] (Incheon: Inha Deahakgyo Chulpanbu, 2009), 220-221. 52 Kim Moon-sik, 220. 162 form of rituals in the eighteenth century. Yeongjo performed the Plowing ceremony four times (in 1739, 1753, 1764, and 1767), the Scything ceremony five times (in 1747, 1762, 1765, 1767, and 1769), and the Grand Archery ceremony two times (in 1743 and 1764).53 These restored rituals, which particularly pertained to agriculture, do not necessarily reflect the full picture of the Joseon economy at that time because government-owned and privately-owned markets flourished more than ever before, more farmers became merchants, and the Joseon court enjoyed more tax revenues. In this sense, King Yeongjo’s reenactment of the Plowing and Sericulture ceremonies were about cultivating his public image as a sage ruler. Yeongjo’s reenactment of the rituals of antiquity was certainly part of the Joseon political agenda, with the intent of strengthening his authority by associating himself with sage rulers, and was rooted in the idea of “Esteeming the Zhou Dynasty.” At the same time, it is worth speculating whether King Yeongjo’s reenactment of these rituals was triggered or inspired by Qing emperors who had established the rituals as part of their annual routine. The combination of resentment of Qing for the fall of the Ming Dynasty and the establishment of a Manchu “barbarian” as the Son of Heaven and a sort of rivalry with the Manchu Dynasty, particularly in claiming Zhonghua, might have inspired King Yeongjo to restore the rituals of antiquity, which had been forgotten in Korea for more than two hundred years before he rose to power. 53 Prior to Yeongjo’s reign, the Plowing ritual was performed ten times (in 1475, 1488, 1493, 1504, 1513, 1523, 1553, 1572, 1612, and 1620), and the Grand Archery ritual performed only four times (in 1477, 1502, 1512, and 1534). The Scything ritual was not performed at all before Yeongjo’s reign. 163 In sum, after realizing the impossibility of physically removing Manchus from the Chinese heartland, eighteenth-century Joseon kings and scholar-officials instead chose to move it to the Korean peninsula, and called the Joseon Dynasty “Small Zhonghua.” Previously, this concept was used to position the Joseon Dynasty as secondary to the Ming Dynasty, but in the eighteenth century it was used to celebrate the Joseon Dynasty’s aspiration for spiritual and cultural supremacy. Accordingly, Korean court visual culture of the time, particularly the court documentary paintings depicting the Five State Rituals, promulgated this re-conceptualization and relocation of Zhonghua in Korea. The Altar of Great Gratitude and the Altar of the South While being a part of the tributary system headed by the Qing Empire and serving Manchu emperors as their Son of Heaven, eighteenth-century Joseon rulers continued to be loyal to the fallen Ming Dynasty and declared themselves as the one and only caretaker of Zhonghua. This loyalty to the Ming is especially visible in two architectural sites: the Ten Thousand East Shrine 萬東廟 and the Altar of Great Gratitude 大寶壇.54 The former was established by followers of Noron, the Old Doctrine faction, and 54 Ten Thousand East Shrine is located in Hwayang-dong, North Chungcheong Province, and the Altar of Great Gratitude used to be located in the Palace of Prosperous Virtue (Changdeok-gung Palace). For the Altar of Great Gratitude and Joseon ruling class’ understanding of Zhonghua, see: Kyeo Seung-beom 계승범, “Joseon sok-ui myeongnara: deabodan-eul tonghaeseo bon joseon jibaecheung-ui junghwa insik,” 조선 속의 명나라: 대보단을 통해서 본 조선 지배층의 중화 인식 [The altar of great gratitude: Joseon elites’ adoration for Ming China under Manchu dominance] Myeongcheongsa yeongu 명청사연구, no. 35 (2011): 153-185; Yi Wook 이욱, “Joseon hugi jeongjeang-ui gieok-gwa deabodan jehyang,” 조선후기 전쟁의 기억과 대보단 제향 [Memory of Two Wars and the Sacrifice at the altar of great gratitude in the Late Joseon Period] Jonggyeo yeongu 宗敎硏究 42 (2006): 127-163. 164 composed of the right wing of eighteenth-century Joseon politics, and the latter was established by the Yi royal house. At these sites, annual offerings were made to the Ming Wanli emperor 萬曆 (r. 1527-1620), who sent troops to assist Joseon during the Japanese invasion (1592-98). For the Yi royal house, however, the Altar of Great Gratitude was more than a commemorative monument (fig. 3-4). It served to forge an ancestral relationship between the Joseon and Ming courts, and with this, eighteenth-century Joseon rulers gained a theoretical foundation to strengthen their authority as well as to claim their role as the Son of Heaven.55 In 1686, King Sukjong reminded scholar-officials who participated in a royal banquet in Office of the Censor-General 弘文館 that the Qing Empire had occupied the Middle Kingdom for more than fifty years, and lamented that revenge against the Manchus seemed impossible. In his concluding remarks, the king suggested constructing the Altar of Great Gratitude 大寶壇 to commemorate the Ming emperors on the sexagenary anniversary of the fall of Ming Dynasty.56 55 Kang Mun-sik argues that Kings Sukjong, Yeongjo and Jeongjo paid special emphasis on sacrificial offerings at the Altar of Soil and Grain 社稷壇 because this ceremony had been considered to be an Auspicious Rite, a ritual that directly communicated with Heaven. Thus, Joseon kings used this ceremony in order to claim their being the Son of Heaven. Kang Mun-sik 강문식, “Sukjong-Jeongjodae sajik jaedo jeongbi-wa sajikseo uigwe pyeonchan: Kyujanggak sojang sajikseo uigwe-reul jungsim-euro,” 숙종, 정조대 사직제도 정비와 사직서의궤 편찬: 규장각 소장 사직서의궤를 중심으로 [Reenactment of the offerings at the altar of soil and grain and the compilation of uigwe of offerings at the altar of soil and grain: the uigwe of offerings at the altar of soil and grain in the collection of Kyujanggak] in Joseon sidae munhwa-sa: munmul-ui jeongbi-wa wangsil munhwa 조선시대 문화사: 문물의 정비와 왕실문화 [Cultural History of the Joseon Period: Reenactment of Culture and Court Culture], vol. 1 (Seoul: Iljisa, 2007), 178-205. 56 During the month of March in his 31st reign year, King Sukjong performed an ancestral ritual to Ming emperors and read the letter of invocation. This is recorded in the Veritable 165 During Yeongjo’s reign, the Altar was enlarged to accommodate two more spirit tablets for the first and last rulers of the Ming Dynasty: the Hongwu 洪武 (r. 1368-98) and the Chongzhen 崇禎 (r. 1627-44) emperors.57 Court officials strongly opposed Yeongjo’s idea as an obvious attempt to model his rule after the Hongwu emperor, who was well known for his autocratic power, but the plan was carried out nonetheless.58 After expanding the size of the altar to accommodate the Hongwu emperor’s spirit tablet, Yeongjo placed more emphasis on annual offerings at the altar to Hongwu, rather than the Wanli emperor.59 Jeongjo (r. 1776-1800), Yeongjo’s immediate royal successor, continued to use the altar as a site that ritualized the role of the Yi royal house as the successor of the Ming Dynasty and forged the rulers’ authority. In addition to conducting sacrificial offerings at the Altar of Great Gratitude, Jeongjo performed annual rituals at the Altar of the South, which he considered analogous to the Temple of Heaven in Beijing, the Chinese capital, where the Son of Records of Sukjong. 57 Haboush, The Confucian Kingship in Korea: Yŏngjo and the Politics of Sagacity, 44. After expanding the Altar of Great Gratitude in the fourth lunar month of 1749, Yeongjo wrote his thoughts about this event and later had them inscribed on a wooden tablet. Three pieces of this kind have survived in the collection of the National Palace Museum, Seoul. For more information, see Yeongjo daewang geul, geulssi 영조대왕: 글,글씨 [King Yeongjo the great: his writing and calligraphy] (Seoul: Misul munhwa, 2001). 58 Kye Seong-beom 계승범, “Daebodan jeongchijeok hamui,” 대보단의 정치적 함의 [Political implications of the altar of great gratitude] Yeoksa wa hyeonsil 역사와 현실 75 (2010): 175. 59 Kye Seong-beom, 178-86. 166 Heaven was privileged to perform sacrificial offerings directly to Heaven.60 The following account recorded in the Royal Edicts of Questions and Discourse on the Ritual Protocols of the Altar of the South 南壇儀節問議大臣綸音 (1792) clearly shows that Jeongjo sought to ritualize his role as the Son of Heaven. According to ritual regulations, regular bureaucrats and secondary sons are forbidden from performing the Five Rites, ministers are forbidden from making offerings at the Altar of Earth and Grain, and a king of a vassal state is forbidden from performing rituals directly to Heaven. The only reason that Ki, Song, and Lu, being the kings of vassal states, were able to make offerings to Heaven was that they were the descendants of big states, or wished to express their gratitude for Confucius’s merit. Today’s Altar of the South [takes the place of] the Circular Mound Altar, where offerings were made directly to Heaven. Dangun established this state for the first time, and according to history, descended from Heaven; he built a mound of stones and performed an offering to Heaven… If offerings are made out of utmost sincerity, whether [the place] is called the Circular Mound Altar or the Altar of the South, how does a name make much difference? 禮, 士庶不得祭五祀, 大夫不得祭社稷, 諸侯不得祭天地, 惟杞, 宋, 魯以諸侯而祭之者, 或因大國之後, 或酬元聖之功也. 我東建邦, 創自檀君, 而史稱自天而降, 壘石行祭天之禮, 則後皆因之者, 以其不受大國之分茅, 而不至於大僭逼也.至于我朝, 嚴於別嫌明微之義, 以圜壇之禮⋯若乃致敬, 致潔之誠, 豈或以圜壇, 南壇之殊, 稱異制而有所間然也哉? In 1792, Jeongjo ordered that the ritual protocols of the sacrificial rites at the Altar of the South be updated to fit the altar’s elevated liturgical status. He had the royal secretary Seo Yeong-bo 서영보 (1759-1816) examine the size of the altar, the ranks of the ritual specialists, the ritual objects, and the guide of ritual procedures; then, the 60 In 1616, King Gwanghae attempted to perform an offering to Heaven at the Altar of the South. However, the Office of the Censor-General 弘文館 opposed the king’s plan, reasoning that the offering at the southern altar was a ritual exclusively prescribed to the Son of Heaven and that it would cause an awkward diplomatic problem if Gwanghae’s offering was known by the Ming court. In the end, Gwanghae decided not to proceed with his original plan. 167 Ministry of Rites updated the royal processional-paraphernalia protocols.61 The Altar of Great Gratitude and the Altar of the South were the sites where Kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo strove to transform Joseon’s status as Small Zhonghua into Great Zhonghua by forging familial relationships with the Ming imperial court at the Altar of Great Gratitude, as well as by upgrading ritual regulations to the level of those of the Son of Heaven at the Altar of the South. This transformation, however, was temporary and directed only to their domestic audience. The Joseon ruling house did not want their real intention of offering sacrifices at these two altars to be discovered by the Qing court, and concocted fictitious explanations, saying that the Altar of Great Gratitude was only the place to express their gratitude to the Ming Dynasty for sending military aid during the Japanese invasions; their explanation for the Altar of the South was a simple renovation. They wished to retain their title as the most loyal vassal state to the Qing Empire, and Qing emperors in fact continued to regard Joseon as such. In sum, in spite of great differences in their domestic and international milieu, for both Qing and Joseon rulers, claiming Zhonghua (that is, claiming to be the upholder of Chinese civilization) was a highly important political issue. To claim their legitimate rule in China, eighteenth-century Qing rulers re-enacted the Sacrificial Rites at the Altar of Farmer, the Plowing ceremony, and the Sericulture ceremony. Although these Auspicious Rites were mid-level ceremonies, their significance was far greater than that of Grand- 61 In 1895, King Gojong renamed the Altar of the South as the Circular Mound Altar. In 1897, Gojong declared himself as the emperor and the Joseon Dynasty as the Great Han Empire, and he rebuilt the Circular Mound Altar at the South Division Palace 南別宮, where Joseon kings received Qing envoys. The relocation of the Circular Mound Altar was intended to accentuate that Joseon was no longer one of the Qing’s vassal states. 168 level ceremonies because they directly demonstrated the rulers’ concern for the welfare of the commoners. It was Qing emperors who reinstated this set of rituals; soon thereafter, eighteenth-century Joseon kings followed their path. Joseon’s choice to emulate Qing emperors, however, far from accepting the Qing emperor as their Son of Heaven, constituted an endeavor to surpass the Qing in adherence to ritual code and thus illustrate, even if only to themselves, their stronger connection with the foundations of Chinese civilization. Politics of Rituals, or Rituals of Politics Norbert Elias has argued that the elaborate rituals of court society, especially its “clockwork-like precision and symbolic character, made the regimentation and centralizing power of the modern state possible.”62 Much like the contemporary Qing and Joseon courts, the court of Louis XIV at Versailles elevated courtly manners and rituals to a higher intensity than any previous or contemporary European royal court. Louis XIV, in fact, claimed “ritual made his kingship ‘more august, more inviolable, and more holy.’”63 While ritual in European courts in the eighteenth century was still a relatively new practice, ritual in both China and Korea had long played a critical role in establishing hierarchies, promoting social harmony, and strengthening a ruler’s authority. From the earliest times in China, ritual was not only a moral foundation but also an essential 62 Edward Muir, Ritual in Early Modern Europe (Chicago: Northwestern University, 2005), 281-82. 63 Peter Burke, The Fabrication of Louis XIV (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), 42-43. 169 political tool. Xunzi’s essay on self-cultivation clearly reveals that the proper observance of ritual was critical to building and maintaining an orderly society. “If all matters pertaining to temperament, will, and understanding proceed according to ritual (li), they will be ordered and successful; if not, they will be perverse and violent or slovenly and rude. If matters pertaining to food and drink, dress, domicile, and living habits proceed according to ritual, they will be harmonious and well regulated; if not, they will end in missteps, excesses, and sickness. If matters pertaining to deportment, attitude, manner of movement, and walk proceed according to ritual, they will be refined; if not, they will be arrogant and uncouth, common and countrified. Therefore a man without ritual cannot come to completion; a state without ritual cannot attain peace.”64 In spite of their differing domestic and international situations, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon courts both enjoyed remarkable economic prosperity and political stability. During this flourishing period, claiming the titles of most sagacious ruler and Zhonghua converged conveniently with the rulers’ desire to be recognized publicly as the source of economic prosperity and political stability. Thus, they could claim that their prosperity was the outcome of the ruler’s faithful ritual observance. Further, these favorable circumstances meant more time and resources were available to these rulers to invest in painstaking ritualistic preparations. Unlike their dynastic predecessors, both ruling houses intertwined their ritualistic activities with political purposes in a more spectacular and public manner, engaging a large audience for glorifying their authority and morality, and documenting their ritualistic activities in both text and image for future viewers. In this regard, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings developed within court cultures that were becoming increasingly ritualized and visually 64 Translation by Burton Watson. Burton Watson, Hsun Tzu: Basic Writings (New York: Columbia University Press, 1963), 25. 170 oriented. Ritual as an Art of Propaganda The most public form of promulgating a Qing ruler as a sagacious ruler and the Son of Heaven was the Southern Inspection Tour, which took place six times each during the Kangxi and Qianlong reigns. Maxwell K. Hearn argues that “the Kangxi emperor made every effort to play the role of a traditional Confucian monarch and to make gestures of reconciliation toward Ming loyalists. In Nanjing, he personally offered libations at the tomb of the Hongwu emperor (r. 1368-98), the first ruler of the Ming Dynasty.”65 The emperor’s such ritualistic activities are vividly documented in the Southern Inspection Tour scrolls. For example, in Scroll Three, the emperor is shown visiting Mount Tai where he performed the Feng and Shan ceremonies. Although it is not possible to know in what degree commoners were allowed to watch the emperor’s ritual performance first hand, they probably was not completely banned from observing it. The Kangxi emperor’s diligence and love for his subjects were also promulgated to foreign rulers. Various forms of correspondence, much of which reported on Qing emperors’ ritualistic activities such as imperial decrees, edicts, posthumous edicts, and letters from the Ministry of Rites, were sent from the Qing court to the Joseon court. In 1784, a letter from the Ministry of Rites of the Qing court requested that the Joseon court send senior court officials so they could attend the Thousand Longevity Banquet, 65 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour,” in Landscapes Clear and Radiant: the Art of Wang Hui (1632-1717), ed. Maxwell K. Hearn (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2008), 132. 171 emphasizing the duty of exemplary Confucian states to honor seniors. …Joseon is originally regarded as loyal, and often comparable to my retinues. Thus, its court officials must come and attend the banquet…One or two senior officials who are more than sixty years old, must attend this year’s grant feast and enjoy the glory, thus my blessing can be reached far away, and [see] my will to treat senior people with the utmost respect...66 以朝鮮素稱恭順,比於內臣.其陪臣亦應一體入宴⋯ 年在六十以上者一二員來言, 俾得預玆盛宴, 共沐光榮, 以示朕加惠遠邦, 優禮耆年之至意⋯ Joseon envoys’ oral and textual reports were other important sources that reported on the Qing emperor’s dedication to state rituals.67 Addressing the Ministry of Ritual, the emperor said, ‘I personally conducted the Grand Sacrifices at the outskirts of Beijing and Imperial Shrine. Although they were Mid-Level Sacrifices, I also personally conducted them. However, thanks to the heavenly blessing and the care of imperial ancestors, I am now already eighty years old, thus it is natural to take care of my body better. Thus, I started to send court officials to conduct the Mid-Level sacrifices to delegate me, and depending on my health, I personally conduct seasonal sacrifices in the Imperial Ancestral Temple and the Altar of Land and Grain to highlight the importance of the canon of these sacrifices. In addition, I preached the Ceremonial Lecture, which invigorated my mind. By comparing the age of the Duke of Wu of Wei State, I am still ten years younger so, before I retire, I will continue to follow the canon of state rituals and conduct them.68 66 An entry is dated to the eighth day of the tenth lunar month of 1784 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 67 Between 1637 and 1881, Korea sent 435 special ambassadorial missions to the Qing court—an average of almost 1.5 mission per year. David C. Kang, East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute (New York: Columbia University Press, 2012), 59. For analytical research on Joseon envoys’ journals about their trips to Beijing, see: Yim Gi-jung 임기중, Yeonhaengrok yeongu 연행록 연구 [Study of envoys’ journals ] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2002); Choe So-ja 최소자, Jeong Hyeo-jung 정혜중 and Song Mi-ryeong 송미령, Sip’palsegi yeonhaengrok gwa jungguk sahoe 18세기 연행록과 중국사회 [Eighteenth-century envoys’ journals and Chinese society] (Seoul: Hye’an, 2007). 68 This entry is dated to the twenty-seventh day of the third lunar month of 1790 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 172 諭禮部曰:“郊廟大祀, 朕無不祗肅躬行, 雖中祀之禮, 亦嘗親詣.今荷上蒼眷侑, 列聖垂庥, 已屆八旬, 理宜保養. 嗣後凡遇中祀, 遣官行禮, 若太廟、社稷時享, 候朕酌量親詣, 用昭祀典. 經筵講學, 原不勞神, 較衛武之年, 尙少十歲, 歸政以前, 照例擧行. JaHyun Kim Haboush argues that eighteenth-century Joseon diplomats were highly impressed by Qing achievements, which they perceived to be performed in “a recognizably Confucian manner,” and started to garnish higher esteem toward the Qing court.69 Increasingly positive opinions of the Qing ruling house that developed among late eighteenth-century Joseon officials were also due in part to Qing court officials’ special attention to envoys from Confucian kingdoms including Joseon, Ryukyu, and Annam.70 An account from the twenty-seventh day of the second lunar month of 1794, which contains a report from the chief envoy Hwang In-jeonm 황인점 (died 1802) and Yi Jae-hak 이재학 (1745–1802), the assistant envoy to King Jeongjo, exemplifies this. According to Hwang’s and Yi’s joint report, the Qing Ministry of Rites requested the envoys from Ryukyu and Joseon to go to the Meridian Gate to witness the emperor’s departure to conduct an offering at the Imperial Ancestral Temple as well as to attend the 69 JaHyun Kim Haboush, The Confucian Kingship in Korea: Yŏngjo and the Politics of Sagacity (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), 26. Ye Xiaoqing argues that ritual dramas performed in front of foreign envoys focused on the topic that emphasizes the hierarchical relationship between China and tributary states. Ye Xiaoqing, “Ascendant Peace in the Four Seas: Tributary Drama and the Macartney Mission of 1793,” Late Imperial China 26, no. 2 (2005): 89-113. 70 Many late eighteenth-century Joseon envoys who saw the commercial and cultural development of the Qing Empire were quite impressed. And some of them even contested the distinction between the civilized and the barbarity. Hong Dae-yong was one of those young intellectual who shared this view. For more discussion on late Joseon-period envoys’ changed views about the Qing Empire, see Jung Jae-hoon, “Meeting the World through Eighteenth-Century Yŏnghaeng,” Seoul Journal of Korean Studies 23, no. 1 (2010): 51-69. 173 procession upon the emperor’s return.71 Another account demonstrates that Qing court officials ensured that Joseon envoys heard about the Manchu rulers’ dedication to state rituals so they could deliver that news to the Joseon king. In a report from an officer named Song Jeon 송전 (1741- 1814) to Jeongjo, Qing officials told Song about the Qianlong emperor’s personal performance of the Plowing ritual, which had taken place the year before Song’s visit. The following passage, quoting the emperor, is part of Song’s report: My energy is still strong, so I am still able to plow by myself. Imperial princes are supposed to accompany me and observe the ritual of the plowing and learn the meaning of making the effort to follow the basic principle. 精力康强尙能推耟諸.皇子亦當隨侍觀禮俾知務本之意.72 News of the Manchu emperors’ diligent participation in the Plowing ceremony, which Joseon envoys either witnessed firsthand or heard about from others, certainly inspired Joseon kings to perform the same ceremony. Further, these reports convinced some late-eighteenth-century scholar-officials who visited Beijing on ambassadorial missions that Manchu rulers were not simply barbarians.73 Reflecting this change in attitude, late-eighteenth-and nineteenth-century Joseon folding screens depicted images of the Manchu 71 An entry dated to the twenty-second day of the second lunar month in 1794 from the Records of Daily Reflection. 72 An entry dated to the twenty-seventh day of the third lunar month of 1786 from the Records of Daily Reflection. 73 The group of the Northern Study 北學 advocated the idea of learning from the Qing. Park Je-ga 박제가 (1750-1815) and Park Ji-won 박지원 (1737-1805) were Northern Study scholars. 174 Eight Banner members and their hunting activities, as well as popular themes including luxurious European imports from the Qing, such as paintings and clocks.74 The Qing court’s use of rites as propaganda was also directed to non-Confucian audiences. Zhao Yi 趙翼 (1727-1814), a high ranking Qing official who was chosen to accompany the Qianlong emperor four times to the Mulan hunting grounds (a primary site for welcoming Tibetan and Mongolian guests) commented, “The emperor annually conducted autumn hunting trips not merely to have the Eight Banner members do military exercises but also to control and militarily overwhelm the Mongol tribes, so that they would not consider revolt and would submit themselves to the emperor.”75 One of the Qing court officials who accompanied the ambassador George Macartney and his entourage in 1793 reported that the Mongol kings were impressed by the spectacle of the military formation ritual, which involved eighty thousand soldiers and twelve thousand court officials; it took place on the first day of the Qianlong emperor’s birthday and honored him as a god.76 74 Chin-sung Chang argued the importance of Joseon envoys’ visual experiences in Beijing and Edo, and their stimulation of curiosity about foreign cultures. In his discussion on the Manchu soldiers’ hunting scene depicted on a twelve-panel folding screen in the collection of Leeum Museum, Seoul, Chang points out that Joseon people began to perceive Manchu people not merely as barbarians but also as brave nomads. Chin-sung Chang, “Joseon hugi hoehwa-wa hogisim-ui munhwa,” 조선후기 회화와 호기심의 문화 [Late Joseon painting and the culture of curiosity] Misulsa nondan 미술사논단 32, no. 6 (2011), 170. 75“…上每歲行獮，非特使旗兵肄武習勞, 實以駕馭諸蒙古, 使之畏威懷德, 弭首帖伏而不敢生心也⋯” Zhao Yi 趙翼 Yanpuzaji 檐曝雜記 [Miscellaneous Records on the Eaves] (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1982), 114. 76 Xiao Yishan 蕭一山 Qingdai tongshi 清代通史 [Comprehensive History of the Qing Dynasty] (Taipei: Taiwan shangwuyinshu guan, 1962), 801-804. 175 Just as the restoration of rituals had benefitted the Qing, so too did Yeongjo’s restoration of the Plowing, Scything, and Grand Archery rituals serve as a political tool to promote himself as a virtuous and sagacious ruler to the wider population. Heo Mok 허목 (1595–1682), the third state councilor 우의정 during Sukjong’s reign, asserted that the Plowing ritual could serve as good education for commoners.77 However, this ceremony never took place during Sukjong’s reign. In 1739, Yeongjo performed his first Plowing ritual along with elderly farmers selected from the metropolitan area and allowed the crowd, who rushed to the field, to view the event.78 After conducting the ritual in 1767, Yeongjo offered a banquet for elders and farmers and allowed them to take home the leftover food.79 Unlike Yeongjo, Jeongjo did not personally perform the Plowing ceremony but delegated high-ranking officials to perform it for him.80 Nonetheless, when 77 The first court official who proposed that Sukjong perform the Plowing ritual seemed to have been the chief state councilor Oh Jeong-chang 오정창 (1634-1680); soon after, other high court officials agreed with Oh’s idea. Even after heavy rain canceled the Plowing ritual on the twenty-seventh day of the second lunar month in 1677, Heo Mok continued to encourage Sukjong to conduct the Plowing ritual for educational purposes. 78 The uigwe containing the information about the Plowing ritual of 1739 was made in an edition of five copies and distributed to different locations: the Crown Prince’s Palace, the History Archives, the Office of the State Council, the Office of the Ministry of Rites, and the Office of Sacrificial Ritual. The surviving copies are now in the collection of the Hall of the Star of Literature. The uigwe made after the 1767 Plowing ritual was made in an edition of seven copies. 79 Han Yeong-wu 한영우, Joseon wangjo uigwe: gukga girok-gwa geu girok 조선왕조의궤: 국가 의례와 그 기록 [Joseon dynasty uigwe: state rites and their records] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2005), 335. 80 According to an daily entry written on the first day of the first lunar month of 1781 in the Veritable Records of King Jeongjo, Jeongjo said, “Although it became routine for the king to personally perform the Plowing ritual at the Sacred East Field 東籍田, recently it became an expensive and unpractical ritual which wasted so much state money. What I only hope for is a good harvest; so that the preparations for the Plowing ritual may be stopped.” 176 Jeongjo performed his only Scything ceremony in 1781, he ordered his court herald not to keep commoners away, but to let the crowd watch the ritual from behind a temporary barrier. Furthermore, on Jeongjo’s order, a folding screen depicting his personal performance of the Scything ceremony was made (possibly in multiple copies to be distributed among court officials).81 Another account also shows that Jeongjo hoped his performance of state rituals would be seen by many. For example, in the Veritable Records of Jeongjo, in 1778, Jeongjo fired one palace guard who prevented court officials and palace retinues from viewing his personal performance of the Grand Inspection ceremony.82 These episodes strongly suggest Jeongjo was keenly aware of the visual aspects of rituals he performed as effective propaganda tools. In his 1795 outing to the city of Hwaseong, Jeongjo held a feast for senior residents in Hwaseong a day after his mother’s birthday ceremony. In this feast for elders, King Jeongjo invited 385 local seniors and their male family members in addition to fifteen high-ranking senior officials.83 It was not a common practice in Joseon for a king to offer a feast for local elders; it is possible that by doing this, Jeongjo emulated Qianlong, who held a Ten Thousand Longevity feast for selected seniors from the 81 This account is recorded in an entry dated to the eleventh day of the tenth lunar month of 1781 from the Daily Journal of the Hall of the Star of Literature. 82 An entry dated to the fourth day of the ninth lunar month in 1778 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 83 Yoo Jae-bin suggested that in contrast to the people in the upper register, who had canes gifted by King Jeongjo, the people occupied in the lower register of the folding screen did not have canes, suggesting that they were male family members who accompanied their elders. Yoo Jae-bin, “The Politics of Art under King Jeongjo,” in In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art during the Joseon Dynasty (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013), 95. 177 metropolitan area of Beijing for his eightieth birthday. Most of the rituals addressed above were deployed to burnish the reputation of the rulers and the court, and they appeared as a major theme in eighteenth-century court documentary paintings. For Qing emperors, rituals played an important role in embodying and asserting the ruler’s role as the Son of Heaven, who had the ultimate obligation and privilege of preserving and restoring Confucian civilization. Even Manchu nomadic rituals adopted a new Confucian tenor to display a more refined notion of military valor. Seeing themselves as the caretakers of Zhonghua, eighteenth-century Joseon kings re-enacted these rituals to display their commitment to maintaining Confucian civilization, and also to gain support from powerful Neo-Confucian officials, who saw the king’s diligent ritual performance as the measure of rightful kingship. This tendency to display their ritualistic activities to a wider audience might explain why so many paintings were created to document these activities—this was another way to display them, both to their contemporary audience and to future audiences as well. Rituals as the Subject of Documentation Just as performing the Five State Rites became essential to shaping the Confucian political identity of Qing and Joseon rulers, editing and compiling ritual manuals was equally important, because the rulers’ correct performance of rituals, facilitated by these manuals, was believed to confirm political legitimacy.84 84 Compiling ritual protocols was not unique to Chinese and Korean rulers. For example, in Renaissance Venice, officials kept a record, the Libro Ceremoniale, of the exact ceremonies performed for each visiting dignitary so that future guests could be received with the precise 178 A number of passages in the texts of Confucius point to the diligent preservation and correct performance of rituals as being among the most essential aspects of statecraft. In the following passage from the Book of Rites 禮記, Confucius emphasizes the correct use of ritual as the most proper way to legitimize one’s rule. Yu, Tang, Wen, Wu, Cheng, and the Duke of Zhou were selected because of this. These six rulers were always attentive to ritual, thereby making manifest their propriety, thereby examining their trustworthiness, making manifest when there were transgressions, making the punishments humane and expositions yielding, showing constancy to the populace. 寓湯文武成王由此其選也. 此六君子者未有不謹於禮者也. 以著其義以考其信著有仁講讓示民有常.85 Eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon ruling houses enthusiastically sponsored the compilation of ritual manuals codifying the Five State Rites. Notable examples include the Collected Statutes of the Great Qing 大清會典 (1684, 1732, and 1784), the Comprehensive Rites of the Great Qing 大淸通禮 (1756), and the Comprehensive Compendium of the Empire 皇朝通典 (1786); all of these detailed the regulations for each part of every ritual and were used in various departments that handled state and ritual elaboration due them. David I. Kertzer, Ritual, Politics and Power (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 105. During the Byzantine period, a number of book that compiled ritual codes. See Averil Cameron, “The Construction of Court Ritual: the Byzantine Book of Ceremonies,” in Ritual of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies, eds. David Cannadine and Simon Price (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). 85 Translation by Michael Puett. Michael Puett, “Centering the Realm: Wang Mang, the Zhouli, and Early Chinese Statecraft,” in Statecraft and Classical Learning: The Rituals of Zhou in East Asian History (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010), 34. 179 court rituals under the Ministry of Rites.86 Besides helping Manchu rulers correctly perform court rituals, these manuals and encyclopedias were intended to shape a ruler’s Confucian political persona.87 Angela Zito notes that the Comprehensive Rites of the Great Qing, which highlighted the textual aspect of the Grand Sacrifice, not only celebrated the Manchu monarchy but also fashioned the Qing emperor as clearly echoing the notion of sage kings.88 In addition to the ritual compendia, the Examples Attached to Assembled Canon of the Qing 大清會典則例 (1748) chronologically recorded each ruler’s ritual performance. Further, several official records were compiled, which comprehensively documented the details of specific rites. The Kangxi emperor’s sixtieth birthday procession is recorded in the Magnificent Record of Longevity 萬壽盛典, which is comprised of 120 chapters, and the Qianlong emperor’s first four Southern Tours (1751, 1757, 1762, 1765), are in the Magnificent Record of the Southern Tours 南巡盛典, which also contains 120 chapters. Both works include extensive woodblock illustrations.89 86 As regards administrative departments under the Ministry of Rites, see Richard J. Smith, Mapping China and Managing the World: Culture, Cartography and Cosmology in Late Imperial Times (New York: Routledge, 2013), 98-99. 87 Kai-wing Chow, The Rise of Confucian Ritualism in Late Imperial China: Ethics, Classics, and Lineage Discourse (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994), 130. 88 Angela Zito, Of Body and Brush: Grand Sacrifices as Text/Performance in Eighteenth-Century China (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 92. 89 Maxwell K. Hearn suggests that the Qianlong’s Magnificent Record of the Southern Tours may have been modeled on Kangxi’s Magnificent Record of Longevity. Maxwell K. Hearn, “Document and Portrait: the Southern Tour Paintings of Kangxi and Qianlong,” Phoebus 6, no. 1 (1988): 97. 180 Following in the footsteps of their predecessors, eighteenth-century Joseon kings continued to sponsor the revision, compilation, and publishing of compendia of court rituals. Kim Moon-sik points out that the Korean rulers’ feelings of cultural superiority over the Qing emperors motivated them to sponsor this work.90 In 1744, Yeongjo published the Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites 국조속오례의 by revising the Manual of the Five State Rites 국조오례의 (1474). Upon his enthronement in 1776, Jeongjo ordered that the compilation of the accounts of the Five State Rites be organized by the Ministry of Rites into a text which, when completed in 1779, was called the Compendium of the Ministry of Rites 춘관통고. And Yeongjo, who performed the Personal Welcome of the Bride ritual, about which Zhu Xi stressed the importance in his Family Ritual, ordered the Royally Commissioned State Wedding Regulation Statues 어제국혼정례 in 1749, his twenty-fifth year of reign.91 In addition to encyclopedic ritual compendia, Yeongjo published the Royally Commissioned Complimentary Compendia of State Funerary Rites어제국조상례보편 to refurbish some details of the old Funerary ritual; it was completed in 1752 and transferred to woodblocks for printing in 1758.92 During Yeongjo’s reign, the Precious 90 The protocols of eighteenth-century Joseon court compendia were based on those of the Da Ming Jili 大明集禮 [Collected Rites of the Great Ming] and Da Ming Huidian 大明會典 [Collected Statutes of the Great Ming]. Kim Moon-sik, “Joseon sidae gukgajeonryeoseo ui pyeonchan yangsang,” 조선시대 국가전례서의 편찬과 양상 [Trend of editing state rituals in the Joseon dynasty] Kyujanggak 규장각 21, no. 4 (2009): 81. 91 Park Moon-su 박문수 (1691–1756) served as the chief editor of this compendia. 92 For the translation of the Royally Commissioned State Funerary Rites, see Gukyeok gukjosangryeobopyeon 국역 국조상례보편 [Translation of the complimentary compendia of 181 Mirror for Succeeding Reigns국조보감, a book about previous kings’ exemplary statecraft, which in the past had been recorded only sporadically, was regularly compiled. One of the main acts this book deemed exemplary was a king’s ritual activity. In addition to these encyclopedic ritual manuals, which recorded complex regulations in detail, uigwe의궤 儀軌, or manuals of ritual protocols, were compiled to inform the reader of the various administrative and artistic processes involved in preparing and executing each ritual.93 Thus, in terms of recording specific state events, uigwe are similar to the Qing’s Magnificent Records of Longevity or the Magnificent Records of Southern Inspection Tour. However, if the Qing magnificent records were more about commemorating those events, each uigwe was made specifically for future reference about the performance and preparation of the ritual. During the fifty-two-year reign of Yeongjo, 135 uigwe were created, and during the twenty-three-year reign of Jeongjo, 47 were created. According to Yi Seong-mi, this increased number of uigwe reflects the eighteenth-century Joseon court’s renewed recognition of the importance of documenting rituals and its procedures.94 In Chapter Six, I will discuss the court painters’ practice of referencing diagrams of ritual compendia and how such practices affected the pictorial features of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. state funerary rites] (Seoul: Minsokwon, 2008). 93 Uigwe provided such detailed information as: expenditures; the list of participants in the preparation of a state ritual, from high bureaucrats to lowly court painters; and letters, such as those between court supervisors and painters or between bureaucrats. 94 Yi Seong-mi 이성미, Yeongjo sidae Uigwe-wa sigak munhwa 영조시대 의궤와 시각문화 [Uigwe and visual culture during the Yeongjo period], 180. 182 Conclusion This chapter explored four major questions: What was the common defining political aspiration shared by both ruling houses in China and Korea; what did rituals mean to both Qing and Joseon rulers; why did they feel compelled to conduct their rituals in semi-public or public spaces; and finally why were rulers’ activities documented in the form of texts and images? Answering these questions helps explain why the development of court documentary painting flourished in both Qing and Joseon courts in the eighteenth century in a broader political context. I propose that the quest to lay claim onto Zhonghua, the desire to sanctify their legitimacy, and the aspiration to endow themselves with sagehood were the overarching political strands in both the Qing and Joseon courts during the eighteenth century. As examined in various official diplomatic correspondences, Qing emperors strove to portray themselves as ideal Confucian monarchs in their relations with Joseon (as contrasted with their interactions with Central Asian, Mongols, and Tibetan peoples both within and outside the empire). The grand presentation of the visual and material culture of Confucian rituals vividly projected the Qing’s successful transformation into a great Confucian kingdom to not only domestic Han population, but also the international community of its neighboring Confucian kingdoms such as Joseon. Qing emperors’ use of the visual and material culture of Confucian rituals to communicate with its Confucian domestic and international audiences creates a significant analogy with the Qianlong’s use of Tibetan Buddhist art to Tibetan and Mongolian ruling classes as part of the Qing’s political strategy to control multiple ethnic 183 domestic and international subjects. Although there were no definitive comments about eighteenth-century Joseon kings’ admiration of Qing emperors, their increased public activities, particularly outings, and the re-enactment of rituals of antiquity strongly imply that Qing emperors finally gained respect and recognition from the Joseon ruling class and, in a way, successfully erased their persistent stigma as “barbarians.” Just as their Qing counterparts, eighteenth-century Joseon kings sought to cultivate their image as sage rulers and to fashion themselves as the sole caretakers of Zhonghua in relations with their domestic political rivals (court officials). Without having to deal with each other’s presence or negotiating their political identities in relationship with each other, these two early modern ruling houses’ efforts to restore rituals and religiously perform them may not have been as zealous, or may not have lasted as long. Perhaps, then, rulers’ devotion to performing state rituals may not have emerged as the primary theme in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon documentary paintings. Court documentary paintings that depicted the Five State Rituals were not mere visual archives, but were an active agency in the realm of visual politics. In this regard, the Qing and Joseon courts’ vigorous patronage of compiling ritual manuals and producing documentary paintings can be interpreted as a product of the confluential political and cultural ecosystem that both the Qing and Joseon courts shared. 184 CHAPTER FOUR: COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTINGS AS HISTORICAL RECORDS, REFERENTIAL GUIDES AND PROPAGANDA Introduction In the study of Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings, the scholarly consensus is that by and large, these works were intended for future viewers—particularly the successors of the king and court officials. Thus, the dynamic relationship between court documentary painting and their contemporary audiences, including their patrons, remains mostly unexplored. From the moment of their creation to their consumption as gifts, pieces on display and heirlooms handed down from one generation to the next, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings had a ‘social life’ (borrowing the phrase from Arjun Appadurai). 1 As historical records, these paintings were expected to be viewed and used as didactic materials for both contemporary and future viewers. As ritual manuals, their accurate depiction of the arrangement of ritual objects and participants helped the viewers better understand the complex layout of ritual paraphernalia. In the Joseon court, officials consulted these documentary paintings as they prepared state rites, while in the Qing court emperors reviewed them prior to their participation in state rites. As propaganda, Qing court documentary paintings were displayed in places where imperial feasts for court officials and foreign envoys were commonly held. In Korea, however, rulers 1 Arjun Appadurai, The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology, 1986). Craig Clunas is one of the few East Asian art historians who successfully used anthropological methods in his analysis of Chinese works of art. Craig Clunas, Superfluous Things: Material Culture and Social Status in Early Modern China (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2004). 185 preferred awarding documentary paintings to ranking officials as royal gifts, expecting the artistic rendering of their ritual performances and public outings to promulgate their sanctified authority. These functions were neither mutually exclusive nor completely fixed, but rather overlapped and fluctuated. For example, Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong folding screens were originally created to function as both historical records and royal gifts, but later having entered the collections of individual court officials or royal family members as gifts from the king. Copies of this screen served as a token of political alliance between the king and gift recipients, and at the same time, as a precious treasure to celebrate the family’s prestigious ties with the king. In the following discussion, I explore how court documentary paintings shaped and recorded the political identities that eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers desired to project via different means of production and consumption. 186 Format and its Implications Regarding the Functions of Court Documentary Painting Format and its associated connotations are related to the usage of court documentary painting in China and Korea. There are two predominant formats of Qing court documentary paintings: handscrolls 卷 and tieluo 貼落 paintings, which were done on paper or silk and pasted directly onto walls. For Joseon court documentary paintings, either albums 帖 or hanging scrolls 軸 were common in the early eighteenth century; toward the latter half of that century, six- or eight-panel folding screens 屛 became the favored format. The preferred layout of court documentary paintings differed in both the Qing and Joseon courts, and these differences correlated with how their patrons interacted with the commissioned works. The Qing court tended to prefer handscroll court documentary paintings. Some examples include Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour, Grand Review, First Announcement of Victory in Pacifying Jinchuan, and Hunting at Mulan. Because of its physical nature, a court documentary painting arranged in the narrow and long format of a handscroll only required one person to handle it, unrolling it section by section, in a process that was conducive to conveying a sense of narrative progression. Therefore, the handscroll format itself was ideal for Qing court documentary paintings, which depicted a sequel of time, space and their interactions with the emperor, the primary viewer of these works. Even though the imperial visage depicted in handscrolls bore a close resemblance to the emperor in most court documentary paintings, it is unlikely the handscrolls were 187 used in any imperial ancestral rituals. Rather than being displayed in any type of worship ritual, court documentary paintings mounted as handscrolls were kept in a delicately carved cinnabar lacquer or a black-and-gold lacquer boxes. For example, Scroll Seven from Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour (Mactaggart Art Collection at the University of Alberta Museum) is stored in its original storage box. The box is engraved with a pattern of dragons rising amid clouds against the background of mountains and waves delineated in gold lines. The box itself is all coated in a glossy black lacquer (fig. 4-1). On the lid of the box is a cartouche marked “Pictures of the Southern Inspection Tour, Scroll Seven, second lunar month, 1689, and Respectfully Stored Object of the Heavenly Precinct.”2 Scrolls Three (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) and Ten (Palace Museum, Beijing) from the Kangxi Inspection Tour set are also preserved in a black-and-gold lacquer box embellished with the same pattern as the Mactaggart Art Collection. The box at the collection of the Palace Museum has a weathered label affixed that reads “Kangxi ye”康熙爺 (Grandfather Kangxi), implying that these boxes were not made when the set of scrolls was complete, but rather were commissioned later by the Qianlong emperor (fig. 4-2).3 For Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls, a carved, red lacquer box was used (fig. 4-3).4 Other works, such as the Victory Banquet 2 John E. Vollmer and Jacqueline Simcox, Emblems of Empire: Selections from the Mactaggart Art Collection (Edmonton: University of Alberta Museums, 2009), 196. 3 Qing Legacies: The Sumptuous Art of Imperial Packaging ed., Chan Hou Seong. (Macao: The Macao Museum of Art, Macau, 2001). 4 John E. Vollmer and Jacqueline Simcox, 174. 188 at Western Garden scroll from a set of four scrolls entitled the First Announcement of Victory in Pacifying Jinchuan (Peabody Essex Museum) (fig. 4-4) and a set of four Grand Review scrolls were preserved in a delicately carved cinnabar lacquer box. A box for a set of four scrolls used four numeric characters, (representing the four virtues of the Book of Changes): yuan 元, heng 亨, li 利, zhen 貞; a box for a set of twelve scrolls used sequential numerals from the twelve zodiac symbols: zi 子, chou 丑, yin 寅, mao 卯, chen 辰, si 巳, wu 午, wei 未, shen 申, you 酉, xu 戌, and hai 亥.5 The usage of eleboratly crafted box filed with a serial number reveals a clear intent to preserve the scrolls as precious historical treasures. The second most preferred format for Qing court documentary painting was the tieluo, or “apply-and-remove” hanging painting.6 Kristina Kleutghen describes that “tieluo paintings were simply pasted flat onto walls, sometimes but not always bound around the edges with a strip of fabric or paper, and displayed continuously for long periods of time until replaced with new paintings or moved to another location.”7 Qing 5 Nie Chongzheng 聂崇正, Qing gong hui hua yu xi hua dong jian 清宮绘画与西画东渐 [Qing court painting and the eastern march of western painting] (Beijing: Zijincheng chuban she, 2008) 6 There are a few different English translations. See: Kristina Kleutghen translated tieluo as “affixed hangings.” Kristina Kleutghen, “One or Two, Repictured,” Archives of Asian Arts 62 (2012): 25-46; Deborah Sommer translated it as “paste-on lift-off” paintings. Deborah Sommer, “The Art and Politics of Painting Qianlong at Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, eds. James A. Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt (New York: Routledge Curson, 2004), 137; Zhu Jiajin used the term“appliqué.” Zhu Jiajin, Castiglione’s Tieluo Painting,” Orientations 19, no. 11. (1988): 80-83. 7 Kristina Kleutghen, “The Qianlong Emperor’s Perspective: Illusionistic Painting in Eighteenth-Century China” (PhD diss., Harvard University 2010), 128. 189 documentary paintings mounted in this format include Horsemanship 馬術圖 (1754, color on silk, 225 x 425.5 cm) and the Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees (1754, color on silk, 221.2 x 419. 6 cm). These works were commissioned together to hang opposite one another in the Hall of Scenic Winding Hills 卷阿胜境殿 at the Imperial Summer Villa, Chengde (figs. 4-5, 4-6).8 A few works were designed as single panel screens 挂屏. Small and portable, the emperor could carry single panel screens with him wherever he went; also, the portable composition allowed more viewers to see the work. Qianlong Emperor Shooting with Bow and Arrow 御容射箭掛屏(1754, a single-panel screen, known as a guaping 挂屏) and Ten Thousand Dharma Return as One 萬法歸一圖 (single-panel screen) were both known to have been placed behind the emperor while he received foreign envoys in his yurt at Chengde (figs. 4-7, 4-8).9 The latter documents the 1771 lecture by the third Jebtsundamba Khutuktu (1758-73) of Outer Mongolia at the dedication ceremony at the Hall of Ten Thousand Dharma Return 萬法歸一殿, the main assembly hall of 8 Deborah Sommer, “The Art and Politics of Painting Qianlong at Chengde,” 141. Zhu Jiajin who examined Accounts of the Past Heard in the Precincts of the Sun 日下舊聞考 (1774), The Qianlong Emperor Reviewing the Troops (322.5 x 232 cm, 1758) was originally displayed on the central wall of the rear hall of the New Court Retreat Palace 新衙門行宮 from 1758 until 1914. Zhu Jiajin, 82. 9 According to Jean-Denis Attiret’s words recorded in a letter (dated to 1754) by Jean-Joseph-Marie Amiot, the Qianlong emperor sent Attiret to the garden where he wanted to be depicted shooting an arrow. The scene depicted in this single-panel screen was probably made or at least sketched by Attiret during his residency in Chengde. Deborah Sommer, “A Letter from a Jesuit Painter in Qianlong’s Court at Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: the Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, eds. James A Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 182. 190 Putuzongcheng Temple 普陀宗乘之庙. There the emperor addressed a group of Torghut Mongols to celebrate their so-called “return,” or submission, to the Qing Empire.10 Placed directly behind the emperor, who was seated on a cushion rather than a throne in the imperial yurt, the hanging screen served as a perfect propaganda piece to elicit respect from the Mongols, since Jebtsundamba Khutuktu, the spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism in Mongolia was portrayed advocating submission to the Qing empire.11 In contrast to Qing court documentary paintings, eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings were rarely produced as handscrolls. The only extant eighteenth-century work in a handscroll format is the Grand Archery scroll 대사례도 (1743, color on silk, 58.7 x 257.6 cm) (fig. 4-9). Hanging scrolls and albums, which had been a prevalent format in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Gathering paintings계회도 that documented private aristocrats’ or court officials’ banquets, continued to be favored as the format of court documentary paintings, but soon gave way to large folding screens (often comprised of as many as six to eight panels) toward the late eighteenth century. Hanging scrolls from the period include Royal Banquet at the Hall of Lofty Governance숭정전진연도 (1710), Special State Examination in the Northern Province 북관별과도 (1731), Royal Banquet at the Office of Royal Family Members 종친부 사연도 (1744), and Bestowing a Royal Banquet and Horses at the Office of Royal Meals 10 A reproduction of the Potala inner temple, the Wanfa Guiyi Dian, was brought from Chengde for the 1933 World’s Fair, “A Century of Progress International Exposition,” in Chicago. Philippe Forêt, Mapping Chengde (Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 2000), 161. 11 Patricia Berger, “Religion,” in China: The Three Emperors 1662–1795, eds. Evelyn S. Rawski and Jessica Rawson (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2006), 133. 191 사옹원 선온사마도(1770). Royal Banquet at the Office of Royal Family Members (color on silk, 134. 5 x 64 cm) closely followed the standard composition style of Gathering Paintings 계회도: the title was written across the top, followed by a depiction of the event, a brief introduction about the event, and a list of participants at the bottom of the scroll (figs. 4-10, 4-11). Small-scale albums, being eminently portable, lent themselves to wide circulation, thus were the most preferred format for the first half of eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings. These works include the Album of Gathering for Stream Drainage 준천계첩 (1744, album of five leaves, 44 x 33 cm), the Album of the Celebratory Gathering in the Year of Gisa 기사경회첩 (1744, album of eleven leaves, ink and color on silk, 43. 5 x 67.8 cm) (fig. 4-12), the Album of the Gathering for King’s Personal Governance in the Year of Mushin 무신친정계첩 (1728, album of two leaves, color on paper, 41. 6 x 54. 8 cm) and the Album of the Gathering for King’s Personal Governance in the Year of Kapyin 갑인친정계첩 (1734, album of two leaves, color on silk, 1734, 44.5 x 56.4 cm) (figs. 4-12, 4-13). Despite the expense, court documentary paintings were made into large-scale folding screens and produced in multiple copies as royal gifts in the late eighteenth century. Some examples include King’s Personal Visitation to a State Examination at the Diligent Governance Hall친림광화문내 근정전 정시시도병 (1747, eight-panel folding screen, color on silk, 208.8 x 574.6 cm), Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom을유기로연 경현당 수작연 도병 (1765, 192 eight-panel folding screen, color on silk, 122.5 x 444.6 cm), King Jeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa 을사친정계병 (1785, eight-panel folding screen, color on silk, 47.8 x 118 cm), Congratulatory Ceremony 진하도 (1783, eight- panel folding screen, color on silk, 153 x 462. 4 cm), and King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795, eight-panel folding screen, ink and color on silk, 151.5 x 66.4 cm) (figs. 4-14, 4-15, 4-16). One of the reasons why folding screens became a preferred format for late eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings was due to their physical nature, which allowed multiple people to view the work simultaneously. Given by the Joseon king as a token of his favor, folding screen court documentary paintings likely were placed in the home study of recipients or displayed on special occasions such as birthday feasts and wedding ceremonies. Since only a limited number of court officials were able to attend state rites or royal banquets hosted by the king—where the king gifted these screens to their recipients—these folding screens were not merely decorative furnishing, but also an object that highlighted an individual’s political success. For the part of Joseon kings, who gifted court documentary paintings to court officials, folding screens displayed in the house of ranking court officials’ study or garden for special occasions were the perfect medium to propagandize their sagacious rule to a wider audience. Court Documentary Paintings as Historical Records Sima Qian (c. 145 or 135 BCE–86 BCE), author of the Records of the Great 193 Historian 史記, valued the writing of history because “events of the past, if not forgotten, teach about the future.”12 His claim does not merely represent an ancient Chinese historian’s perspective on historical writings. Didacticism was a primary function of many official historical records, including: Veritable Records 大清實錄, Comprehensive Annals of the Empire 皇朝通志, Records of the Grand Secretariat 清代內閣秘本檔, and Diary of Rest and Repose 大清起居注 in the Qing court; Veritable Records 朝鮮王朝實錄, Diary of the Royal Secretariat 承政院日記, and Diary of Self- Examination 日省錄 in the Joseon court.13 As Qing and Joseon rulers used official court histories to record events for teaching posterity, so too did they use documentary paintings as visual forms of historical records. A preface for Scroll Seven of The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour reveals the greatest concern was not the scroll’s pictorial qualities such as composition, brushstrokes, and colors, but rather the accurate depiction of the event: “The seventh scroll respectfully depicts His Majesty’s journey from Wuxi through Hushuguan to the Chang Gate from Suzhou where, seeing the throngs of people crowding the streets, and narrow waterway, he specially reduced the numbers of the honor guard into the city. Officials, gentry, commoners, and even white-haired old men and small children, all were moved by the emperor’s great favor; happily beating drums, burning incense, and hanging up bunting, they prostrated themselves on both sides 12 Sima Qian, Records of the Grand Historian: Qin Dynasty, trans. Burton Watson, 3rd ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995), 236. 13 According to On Cho Ng and Q. Edward Wang, “historiography, the cultural and political manifestation of the Confucian vision of polity and society, took center stage in the intellectual world supported by the Qing court, which strove to build and consolidate a highly Confucianized imperium.” On Cho Ng, and Q. Edward Wang, Mirroring the Past: The Writing and Use of History in Imperial China (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005), 223. 194 of the streets to welcome him…”14 Qing emperors’ inscriptions on other court documentary paintings expressed more or less the same attitude. The Qianlong emperor’s poem inscribed on the last of a set of four scrolls entitled Jinchuan Victory Banquet 金川出師奏凱圖 (1748), which commemorated the victory of a military campaign (1747-48) in the Jinchuan area northwest of Chengdu in western Sichuan Province. His poem describes the event portrayed in the scroll, but also contains a highly self-praising message targeting the intended viewers, the high-ranking officials or imperial family members who received copies of the prints formatted in hanging scrolls: Troops who accomplished tasks in Kasa have returned, the glory of the victory banquet is as beautiful and bright as the sunlight. [On] the two platforms Gan and Yu are [dancing] to honor the ceremony of Shun reign, the six pitches of musical notes are playing the poem of “Picking the Vetches,” Clear dew is the auspicious response to award the high palace, sweet rain joyfully descends throughout the spring capital. Preserver wealth and conserve prosperity to all our peers, how is disbanding troops and attending to civilian affairs an awe-inspiring imperial order?”15 卡撒功成振旅歸, 升平凱宴麗晴暉. 两階乾羽欽虞典, 六律宮商奏採薇. 湛露應教頒幕殿, 甘膏更喜遍春畿. 持盈保泰咨同德, 偃武修文凛敕幾. 14 Translation by Maxwell K. Hearn. Maxwell K. Hearn, “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour,” in Landscapes Clear and Radiant: The Art of Wang Hui (1623–1717) (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2008), 213. 15 This is my translation. “Picking the Vetches,” is an poem from the Book of Poem 詩經. According to Ulrike Middenorf, this poem was sung when sending off troops to defend a state from invasions. Thus, it came to symbolize painful separation. Ulrike Middenorf, “Ecstasis, Recession, and Pain,” in From Skin to Heart: Perceptions of Emotions and Bodily Sensations in Traditional Chinese Culture (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2006), 97. 195 In the preface on the woodblock print of the Pacification of the Dzungar Mongols and Turkic Muslims, the Qianlong emperor expressed how highly he valued having documented military successes in imagery in terms of evoking a vivid image of battles and moral messages. The sixteen paintings on the right begin with the surrender of the Dzungars and end with the offering of Dzungar war prisoners. Every general and soldier destroyed [the enemy’s] base as if thunder swept them away, so all the evil thieves were dispersed as if [they were] startled deer running away…Since antiquity, there have been few cases displaying military achievements, and not yet in any [painting] scrolls. Each [scroll or album leaf] bears an imperial poem, which records victories and military achievements. Ten pieces recorded what actually happened and the six complementary pieces record the space [these events] took place. Already the album was mounted and the emperor personally wrote a preface on the album and then court officials, who received the imperial order, wrote as well…About fifty meritorious officials’ portraits were painted in the Hall of Purple Brightness, and eulogies were written on them to distinguish them from others, and the next fifty court officials’ [portraits] were also painted. The left and right of each sides are decorated with the paintings of pacifying Dzunghar and Uyghur rebels…Looking at [the paintings] with [one’s] eyes and remembering [the events] is the same as leading the battles and respecting Heaven is the same as fearing the moon waxing. This preface aims to narrate that essential event in details…[This is an overview of] what was commanded by the king who was ten thousand miles away, and sitting and looking at these paintings without missing anything thus allows us to understand the victory and detail of military campaigns, as if shedding light on the darkness and seeing through everything.16 右圖十有六帧, 始扵伊犁受降, 訖扵回部獻俘. 凡我將士劘壘斫陣. 16 This is my English translation based on the Korean translation provided by Park Hyo-eun. Park Hyo-eun 박효은, “Cheongdae dongpanhwa pyeongjeong seojang jeondo balmun-gwa pyeongjeong yanggeumcheon jeondo,” 청대 동판화 평정서장전도 발문과 평정양금천전도 [Qing Engraved Prints: Epilogue to the Battle of Pacifying Rebellions at Xinjiang and the Battle of Pacifying Rebellions at Jinchuan] Hanguk gidokgyo bakmulgwaji 한국 기독교 박물관지, no. 5 (2009): 106-114. 196 霆奮席卷之勢. 與夫賊眾披靡潰竄. 麖奔鹿駭之狀. 靡不摹寫畢肖. ⋯為千古臚陣戰功者. 所未有帧端.各系以御製詩. 成扵奏凱 錄功. 即事紀實者十. 追叙時地補圖補詠者六. 既裝潢成冊. 親製序文冠扵冊首. 並命臣等恭識其後. 伏惟西陲＊之役⋯至若五十功臣則. 繪像紫光閣. 題替以寵異之.又繪其次者五十人徠臣等. 提貢同弈而閣壁左右. 則繪平定伊犁回部圖⋯若夫目擊心存. 如指揮扵折衡禦侮之際. 與所為欽天眷而凜月盈者.則序文又已舉其緊要而詔示永久焉⋯聖明指授萬里之外. 坐照靡遺茲圖. 所繪戰勝形勢.固皆密勿機宜. 所燭如燃犀. 料如聚米者⋯? This inscription also reveals why Jesuits were commissioned to make court documentary paintings. Here Jesuit painters’ ability to transform the static past into a lifelike presence through illusionistic pictorial techniques such as chiaroscuro and linear perspective was believed to inspire the viewer to learn from the past and live up to the legacy of successful ancestors. Realism and naturalism featured in eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings, highly effective in narrating stories, however, were not considered to be high artistic qualities that deserved inclusion in imperial collection catalogues. Only a few Qing court documentary paintings were recorded in imperial art collection eighteenth- century catalogues such as the Pearl Forest of the Secret Hall 祕殿珠林 (completed in 1744), Sequel of the Pearl Forest of the Secret Hall 祕殿珠林續編 (completed in 1793), the Precious Collection of the Stone Moat 石渠寶笈 (completed in 1745), and Sequel to Precious Collection of the Stone Moat 石渠寶笈續編 (completed in 1793), which graded the catalogued works according to their originality, brushwork, and other technical and 197 artistic qualities.17 Even the scrolls that documented the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors’ historical southern inspection tours were never catalogued in any imperial art collections.18 After being mounted on the twenty-fourth day of the twelfth month of the Qianlong emperor’s forty-second year (1777), Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls were sent to the Hall of Tranquil Longevity 寧壽宮, the emperor’s retirement palace, and were stored there until his death. After the Qianlong emperor passed away, the set was transferred to the Hall of Sovereign Longevity 壽皇殿.19 A set of four scrolls entitled Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖, which had been preserved in one of the imperial buildings at Chengde, was transferred to the Palace of Tranquil Longevity.20 The Ceremonial Banquet in the Ten Thousand Tree Garden, a painting that hung in one of the imperial residences in Chengde during the Qianlong emperor’s reign, was also transferred to the Hall of 17 The Pearl Forest of the Secret Hall records Buddhist and Taoist paintings and calligraphic items in the imperial collection. Although most of the works deal with religious subjects, the Pearl Forest of the Secret Hall valued brushwork as the most important feature in works of art. Yenwen Cheng, “Tradition and Transformation: Cataloguing Chinese Art in the Middle and Late Imperial Era” (PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2010), 126. 18 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour,” in Landscapes Clear and Radiant: The Art of Wang Hui (1623–1717), 135. 19 Chin-Sung Chang 장진성, “Cheonha taepyeong-ui yisang-gwa hyeonsil: ganghuije nansundogwo-ui jeongchijeok songgyeok,” 천하태평의 이상과 현실: 강희제 남순도권의 정치적 성격 [The thematic map of the emperor Kangxi’s southern inspection tour Scrolls: the ideals and realities of his grand peace politics] Misul sahak 미술사학, no. 22 (2008): 264. 20 Hou Ching-lang and Michele Pirazzoli- T’Serstevens, “Les Chasses d’Automne de l’Empereur Qianlong a Mulan,” [The Qianlong Emperor’s autumn hunt to Mulan] T’oung Pao 65 (1979): 13-50. 198 Sovereign Longevity after his death.21 This pattern found in these cases suggests that many court documentary paintings were preserved where stayed with the emperor in his residence and were later transferred to the Hall of Sovereign Longevity with other imperial ancestral portraits.22 While in the emperors’ private residence hall, court documentary paintings served as personal memoirs for emperors, who used them to reminisce on their lives in action, but once they were transferred to the Hall, they were treated as precious imperial family treasures to preserve, as well as historical records of glorious predecessors. Instead of being recorded in imperial art collection catalogues, a list of Qing court documentary paintings and prints, created from the Kangxi throughout the Qianlong reigns, is in an official court history entitled Comprehensive Annals of the Empire 皇朝通志 (1787). The section “Illustration and Charts 圖譜略” contains a list of paintings, illustrations, poems dedicated to paintings, collection catalogues, pictorial maps, and geographical books, which were considered to be helpful complementary tools 21 Yang Boda, “Wanshuyuan ciyantu kaoxi,” 万树园赐宴图考析 [Research on the ceremonial banquet at the garden of ten thousand trees] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 4 (1982): 3-25. 22 A number of eighteenth-century Qing court Documentary paintings such as The Yongzheng Emperor’s Plowing Ceremony and The Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour scroll set are currently in collections in France. French soldiers most likely looted them during the Allied occupation of Beijing from 1900 to 1901. Numerous records survive in which Allied soldiers describe cartloads of delicate treasures being taken from the Forbidden City; one example is George Ernest Morrison’s book An Australian in China (London: H. Cox, 1895), as found in Wen-Hsin Yeh, “Living with Art,” in Collecting China: The World, China, and a Short History of Collecting, ed. Vimalin Rujivacharakul (Newark: University of Delaware, 2011), 179. 199 for future emperors.23 In this section, there is a series of paintings that illustrate Qing emperors’ ritual and political activities, along with a brief summary about the depicted events. Some notable examples include Southern Inspection Tour 南巡圖, Birthday Celebration 萬壽圖, Empress Xiaoxun’s Sericulture Ceremony 親蠶圖, Qianlong Emperor’s Deer Hunting 哨鹿圖, and Pacification of the Dzungar Mongols and Turkic Muslims 平定準部回部戰圖.24 As for Empress Xiaoxun’s Sericulture Ceremony, its accompanying explanation explains this painting was created to demonstrate the importance of silkwarm farming.25 Regarding the Southern Inspection Tour, it explains that the Kangxi emperor went to Southern China to inspect the Grand Canal and to check the livelihood of commoners, implying that the painting was created to commemorate the emperor’s benevolence.26 In contrast to their predecessors, who paid for paintings but rarely initiated the commissions, eighteenth-century Joseon Kings Yeongjo (r. 1724-76) and Jeongjo (r. 1776-1800) often directly commissioned numerous works documenting their performance in or attendance at state ceremonies, and gifted them to their court officials. 23 “皇上敕監臣増補圖説為後編十卷葢璿衡齊政之術至是愈精密矣⋯,” from Huangchao Tongzhi 皇朝通志, vol. 113. 24 I plan to further my discussion on the list of the Comprehensive Annals of the Empire in a future research. 25 “謹按是圖恭紀孝賢皇后親蠶之典藏諸蠶館用以昭農桑並重之至意,” from Huangchao Tongzhi 皇朝通志, vol. 113. 26 “謹按江浙兩省濵於河海一切隄防實闗民生至計聖祖仁皇帝翠華南幸,” from Huangchao Tongzhi 皇朝通志, vol. 113. 200 However, neither writings inscribed on works or official court records tell us how these Korean kings personally felt about the documentary paintings they comissioned. Some works such as the Album of Gathering for Stream Drainage and the Album of the Celebratory Gathering in the Year of Gisa contain King Yeongjo’s calligraphy, nevertheless, his calligraphic inscriptions do not share his thoughts about the paintings themselves. However, the king’s calligraphy itself (regardless its content) included in such albums must have been conveyed how profoundly the king cared about those events since calligraphy works traditionally were considered to be highly personal gifts.27 In spite of the dearth of writings by royal patrons about the paintings, one can still hypothesize about how Korean kings regarded the documentary paintings they commissioned by analyzing repositories where these works were stored. A large number of calligraphy pieces and paintings were collected in the Hall of Revering Royal Master Plan 奉謨堂 and the Office of Great Letters 弘文館. The first mainly kept the writings, calligraphy works, and paintings by successive kings; the latter stored Chinese paintings. The Comprehensive List of Royal Calligraphy and Paintings Dedicated at the Hall of Revering Royal Master Plan봉모당봉안어안어서총목, which is believed to have compiled the collection of the Hall of Revering Royal Master Plan in the late eighteenth century, included mostly King Yeongjo’s calligraphy and paintings.28 However, no court 27 The emperor’s calligraphy work was often treated as his visage. Jonathan Hay, “Kangxi Emperor’s Brush-Traces: Calligraphy, Writing and the Art of Imperial Authority,” in Body and Face in Chinese Visual Culture, eds. Wu Hung and Katherine Tsiang Mino (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004), 313. 28 Hwang Jeong-yeon 황정연, Joseon sidae seohwa sujang yeongu 조선시대 서화수장연구 [Study of painting collections in the Joseon period] (Seoul: Singu munhwasa, 2012), 426- 201 documentary paintings were included in this collection catalogue. In some cases, inscriptions written on Joseon court documentary paintings inform us where Joseon court documentary paintings were stored, allowing us to speculate how royal patrons wanted these works to be used and viewed. Many of them were designated to be stored in the Crown Prince’s Palace 동궁, various administrative offices that prepared state rituals, such as the Office of Senior Officials 기로소, the Office of Assistance and Nourishment 보양청, and the Hall of Star of Literature 규장각. Those paintings kept in the Crown Prince’s Palace 동궁 were undoubtedly intended to instruct the heir apparent in the political importance of conducting state ceremonies and to reinforce what he would have learned from official historical records. Works stored in the Crown Prince’s Palace included a pair of folding screens portraying King Yeongjo’s Plowing ceremony performed on the twenty-seventh day of the first month of 1739.29 Yi Jeong-bo’s 이정보 (1693–1766) inscription on the first panel of an eight-panel folding screen영조 을유기로연Ÿ 경현당수작연도병, which depicted ceremonies in honor of Yeongjo’s second entry to the Club of Elders in 1765, mentions that Yeongjo ordered the creation of three albums documenting his visit that year with the crown prince to the Hall of Spiritual Longevity (fig. 4-16). Each album was designated to be stored in each of these three locations: the king’s residence, the Crown 427. 29 Park Jeong-hyeo 박정혜, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 조선시대 궁중 기록화 연구[Study of Joseon-period court documentary painting] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000), 57. 202 Prince’s Palace, and the Office of Senior Officials.30 Currently in the collection of Jangseogak, at the Academy of Korean Studies, two nearly identical albums with different titles—Ceremonial Obeisance at the Hall of Spiritual Longevity and King’s Personal Attendance at the Royal Banquet—perhaps two of these three copies made to document the events on the twenty-eighth day of the eighth month of 1765.31 It is very likely that the one preserved in the Office Senior Officials was expected to evoke the idea of loyalty between a king and his officials, the one in the Crown Prince’s Palace, to serve as educational material, and finally the one in the king’s residence and to be treasured as his personal memoir. Following in Yeongjo’s footsteps, Jeongjo also regarded documentary paintings as an excellent means of recording historical events as well as asserting his political philosophy; thus, numerous works were created and stored in various palace buildings. On the twentieth day of the third month in 1781, Jeongjo commissioned folding screens portraying his lecture two days earlier to young scholar-officials 抄啓文臣 who had enrolled in the education program at the Hall of the Star of Literature, Kyujanggak: [Any vestige] is recordable, and which is painted, and made into a folding screen, and which lists the name of [event participants], and describes the event on the last [panel of the screen] is what is called a Gathering Folding 30 Kim Yang-gyun 김양균, “Yeongjo eulyu giroyeon gyeonghyeodang sujakyeondobyeong-ui jejak baegyeong-gwa jakga,” 영조을유기로연·경현당수작연도병의 제작배경과 작가 [The production and painter of the Banquet for Elders in the Year of Eulyu and Receiving Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom] Munhwajae bojon yeongu 문화재보존연구 no. 4 (2007): 48. 31 As regards these albums, see Yeongsugaksong-gwa chinrimseonondo 영수각송과 친림선온도 [Ceremonial visitation to the hall of spirit longevity and king’s personal attendance in royal banquet] (Seongnam: Academy of Korean Studies, 2008). 203 Screen, which have been made for a long time. Holding a lecture at the Haengwon (the Kyujanggak) on the previous day was one of the rare chances to meet, thus it is obligatory to paint as well as write about that occasion. Following the early tradition of making a Gathering Folding Screen, immediately had court painters paint the lecture at the Kyujanggak and also had the former Grand Counselor Seo Myeong-eung write an epilogue and those officials of the Kyujanggak who attended the lecture, compose one ancient Han-style poem, and one Tang-style poem, and present it to the [king], and write a list of their names on the back of the screen. 32 凡有可以表識之蹟, 作圖又作屛, 姓名題其中, 事實記其尾, 是謂之稧屛, 稧屛之作久矣.日昨幸院講會, 卽千一晠際, 況是設院後初有之事, 不可無圖, 又不可無文. 依稧屛故事, 卽令畫工, 畫出閣會, 仍令前大提學徐命膺撰跋, 參筵閣臣,各賦近古體中詩一首以進之, 屛後列書升堂諸臣姓名. It is not unclear whether or not this screen was created in multiple copies, but it is certain that Jeongjo arranged the folding screen, which carries pictorial images and inscriptions pertaining to his lecture to be stored in the Hall of the Star of Literature and to be regularly viewed by young scholar-officials who studied at the education program in the Hall of the Star of Literature.33 32 This is my translation in consultation with the Korean translation provided in the Database of the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty. This passage is found in Jeongjo’s Secret Note 備忘記 recorded in the Daily Records of the Royal Secretariat on the twentieth day of the third month in 1782. The preface written by Seo MyeongEung is included in his essay compilation The Pavilion of Preserving Evening 保晚齋集. According to this preface, the title of the folding screen is Painting of Lecture at the Lecture Hall 幸院會講圖屛. Seo’s preface was also included in Yi Yu-won’s 이유원 (1814-88) late nineteenth-century Yimhasupil 林下筆記, suggesting this folding screen must have been made in multiple copies and circulated. 33 Jeongjo ran an education program at the Hall of the Star of Literature from 1781 to 1800. He chose young, elite scholar-officials under the age of thirty-seven to study for three years. Shin Byeong-joo 신병주 “ Kyujanggak-gwa girokmunhwa” 규장각과 기록문화 [The Hall of the star of literature and documentation culture] Hanguk daehak bakmulgwan hyeophoe 한국 대학박물관 협회 (2008): 37. 204 Eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings were dynamic narrations of history that drew their intended audiences into dialogues of perpetual commemoration that cast the rulers as exemplary monarchs, which then became the aspiration of later dynastic successors. Qing emperor’s various types of inscriptions written on the documentary paintings they commissioned, vividly demonstrate that the emperors highly valued the role of paintings as historical records complementary to textual forms of official records. Furthermore, the Comprehensive Annals of the Empire, in particular, shows that the Qianlong emperor certainly perceived the imagery that recorded emperors’ activities as an important method of instructing and inspiring future successors. Court Documentary Paintings as Ritual Manuals In some cases, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings served as instructional manuals to facilitate the correct performance of state and court ceremonies. Before personally conducting the Scything ceremony 觀乂, which was scheduled on the fifth day of the intercalary fifth month in 1781, King Jeongjo asked if court officials had consulted a folding screen that documented the same ceremony conducted by his grandfather Yeongjo in 1739. [I have commanded] the Bureau of Music to perform drumming and blowing music, which were conducted as such in the year of 1739 (the fifteenth year of King Yeongjo) and in the year of 1747 (the twenty-third year of King Yeongjo), each of which was recorded on the Plowing Ceremony Screen and the Scything Ceremony Screen. Is the ceremony this time going to be performed based on these [examples]? Recently the Herald Officials were unaware of these examples, so I ordered [them to consult the screen]. Can these examples be the models for future Plowing 205 and Scything Ceremonies? 34 掌樂院鼓吹合吹, 旣載己未·丁卯等各年親耕觀刈圖屛, 今亦照此遵行乎? 近來宣傳官輩, 未諳事例, 故如是提敎矣. 此後耕刈擧動, 作爲定式擧行,可也. In addition to ordering the consultation of this eight-panel folding screen, Jeongjo also ordered the ritual directives, regulations, musical notations, and other matters pertaining to the Scything ceremony to be recorded in the Records of Daily Affairs Kept by the Hall of the Star of Literature 內閣日記 so that future court officials could conduct the same state ceremony based on the ritual details Jeongjo had formulated or approved.35 During Jeongjo’s reign, the folding screen became the preferred format for recording ritual instructions. Entries in both the Daily Records of the Court Secretariat and the Records of Self-Examination written on the seventeenth day of the third lunar month in 1797 indicate that Jeongjo himself reviewed the paintings that illustrated the ritual procedures of the ceremonies that would take place in the Hall of Bright Admiration 景慕宮, the shrine of Crown Prince Sado, Jeongjo’s biological father. On today’s offering, [I] will personally take a look at newly created folding screens of Ceremonial Obeisance. How many folding screens have been made? Nak-su answered, “Two silk ones and two paper ones, thus four pieces in total.” I commanded these screens be brought in and scrutinized them one by one, and I said, “Offer [me] an explanation about the painting and ritual directives [recorded] according the sequence in details, starting from the first panel.” Nak-su answered, “The folding 34 This is my translation in consultation with the Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics. An entry dated to the fifth day of the intercalary fifth month of 1781 from the Veritable Record of Jeongjo recorded that Yeongjo’s Scything ceremony of 1747 was also painted on a folding screen. 35 An entry dated to the fifth day of the intercalary fifth month of 1781 from the Veritable Record of Jeongjo. 206 screen is composed of eight panels, which is divided into two parts: an illustration of a ceremony in the upper register and [its corresponding] ritual directives in the lower register. The first panel contains an illustration of the overview of the palace in the upper register, and a text that details the location of the Main Offering Hall location and the structure of the hall, and regulations concerning sacrificial offerings. In the second panel, there is an illustration of the Sacrificial Offering Ceremony in the upper register, and musical scores, musical instruments, ritual costume, and the names of ritual objects in the lower register. In the third panel, there is an illustration of the Grand Sacrificial Offering Ceremony and that of Arranged Ritual Vessels in the upper register, and the regulations for setting up ritual vessels in order, and the names of ritual vessels and food offerings. In the fourth panel, there is an illustration, which portrays the king supervising the preparation of the Grand Sacrificial Offering Ceremony, in the upper register, and its corresponding ritual directives. In the fifth panel, there is an illustration, which depicts [the king] rehearsing the Grand Sacrificial Offering Ceremony, in the upper register, and its corresponding ritual directives, to provide some additional regulations for the king’s personal performance, because the Grand Sacrificial Offering had been often delegated to court officials. Since there are so many ritual directives for the king’s personal performance of the Grand Sacrificial Offering, the fourth and fifth panels both bear that information. In the sixth panel, there is an illustration of the Offering Wine Ceremony in the upper register, and the corresponding ritual directives of the Offering Wine Ceremony, the Spring and Autumn Visitation Ceremony, which starts with passing through the Gate of Ilcheom. In the seventh panel, there is an illustration of the Sacrificial Offering Ceremony during Secular Festivals, and one of the Sacrificial Offering Ceremony on the First Day of the First Lunar Year, in the upper register, and each of these ceremonies’ ritual directives and the ritual directive of the Offering Newly Harvested Agricultural Products Ceremony in the lower register. In the eighth panel, there is an illustration of the king personally offering a jade book and a golden seal in the upper register, and its corresponding ritual directives, and [in addition] musical notation, are also included as appendix…”36 今日展拜爲親審新造享儀圖屛屛凡爲幾坐乎樂綏曰綃本二坐紙本二坐凡四坐矣命持入以次展審予曰自第一帖圖與儀分排次序一一詳達也樂綏曰屛凡八帖每帖作二層上圖而下儀第一帖上載本宮全圖下載本宮正 36 This is my translation in consultation with the Institute for the Translation of Korean Classics. An entry dated to the seventeenth day of the third month of 1797 from the Daily Records of Royal Secretariat. 207 殿以下位置間架及奉安規制也第二帖上載享儀班次圖下載樂章樂器祭服名物也第三帖上載五享親祭設饌圖下載設饌次序祭器名物果品式例也第四帖上載親行省牲省器圖下載五享親祭儀也第五帖上載親祭肄儀圖下載五享親祭儀附五享攝儀而親祭儀節最多故連書於第四第五帖也第六帖上載酌獻禮圖下載酌獻禮儀春秋展謁儀由日瞻門展拜儀也第七帖上載俗節朔望祭圖下載俗節朔望儀薦新儀也第八帖上載親上册寶圖下載親上册寶儀附上册樂章也⋯ After examining these screens, Jeongjo ordered them to be placed in four different places, where sacrificial ceremonies for Crown Prince Sado were to be performed.37 Without a doubt, these folding screens were installed as referential guides for court officials who were charged with preparing for the ceremonies. Furthermore, as part of the King Jeongjo’s political program that restored the Crown Prince Sado’s royal status, this screen also functioned as political propaganda, attesting that a court documentary painting served more than one function.38 Some Qing court documentary paintings may have also served as visual guides for the correct performance of state rituals. As the Yongzheng emperor reviewed the ritual procedures of the Grand Review ceremony 大閱 in 1728, it is said that he examined a 37 The four locations in the Hall of Bright Admiration compound are the Offering Hall 齋殿, the Offering Room 齋室, the Department of Preparing Offerings 典祀廳, and the Office of Ritual Specialists 宮司直所. 38 After the first initial construction of the Shrine of Bright Admiration was completed in 1776, Jeongjo made his official visit there and offered the posthomus title Jangheon 莊獻, which replaced Sado 思悼 and offered a jade seal that contains that new title. Although it is customary to offer a silver seal to the crown prince, but Jeongjo did not follow this regulation in order to elevate his father’s status. For more information about Jeongjo’s program to restore his father’s royal status, see Jeong Hyeo-deuk 정혜득, “Sadoseja gukwang chusung-ui jeongae gwajeong-gaw geu seonggyeok,” 사도세자 국왕추숭의 전개과정과 그 성격 [Process of elevating the crown prince Sado and its political nature] in Sadeo Seja-ui Saenge-wa hwaldong 사도세자 생애와 활동 [Life and activity of the crown prince Sado] (Hwaseong: Hwaseong Museum, 2012), 99-133. 208 processional-paraphernalia handscroll to confirm that all the necessary ritual objects were adequately prepared.39 Court officials, who were charged with preparing this sumptuous ceremony, probably used the paper version of the same scroll set for consultation, while the silk version was only for the emperor’s viewing. Besides the series of processional-paraphernalia paintings, works such as a set of four Grand Review scrolls 大閱圖 may have helped the Qianlong emperor to familiarize himself with the complex military formations prior to the event. Although the scroll set was not utilized for rehearsing the first Grand Review ceremony in 1739, the Qianlong emperor most likely used it as a visual reference when he performed it in 1758 (fig. 4-17). It is not a coincidence that the Grand Review scrolls share similar pictorial features, such as bird’s-eye perspective and strict symmetry, with the diagrams in ritual manuals: this type of painting was designed to help the imperial viewer better understand the complex procedures typically involved in important state ceremonies. As discussed in Chapter Three, eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers not only placed more emphasis on their personal involvement in state rites but also commissioned the compilation of various ritual manuals, which provided detailed information in text and images about the procedures of state and court ceremonies. The similarities between diagrammatic illustrations of ritual manuals and the pictorial languages of some eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings strongly suggest that court painters consulted the diagrams. The extensive usage of bird’s-eye view and diagrammatic rendering of space in the paintings and their relationship with the 39 Da qing huidian 大清會典 [Collected Statues of the Qing] 704, 768-69. 209 diagrammatic illustrations of ritual manuals will be discussed further in Chapter Six. Court Documentary Painting as Propaganda On Display The role of art as propaganda, rather than solely providing distinctive aesthetic experiences, dates from the Roman Empire (27 BCE– 476 CE). Beginning with Augustus (63 BCE–14 CE), Roman emperors installed sculptural monuments in public spaces in order to glorify their cultural and political achievements. Trajan’s Column (Colonna Traiana) and the Altar of Augustan Peace (Ara Pacis Augustae) are two such examples of Roman emperors commemorating their great military victories.40 Similarly in China, the tradition of erecting monuments such as stone steles to publicize military triumphs had existed since ancient times and flourished through the Qing period. During the Qianlong emperor’s reign, monumental steles were built to commemorate the successes of multiple military campaigns at the borders of China and its neighboring states. Joanna Waley-Cohen argues that the erection of stone steles inscribed with multiple languages aimed to forge “a sense of national community.”41 One of the earlier examples of war memorials is the 1639 Great Qing Emperor’s Meritorious Achievement Stele 大淸皇帝功德碑, colloquially called the Stele of Samjeondo 삼전도비, in Samjeon, Korea (present-day Samjeon-dong, Seoul) (fig. 4-18). 40 Penelope J.E Davies, “The Politics of Perpetuation: Trajan’s Column and the Art of Commemoration,” American Journal of Archaeology 101, no. 1 (1997): 41-65. 41 Joanna Waley-Cohen, The Culture of War in China: Empire and the Military Under the Qing Dynasty (London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2006), 37. 210 Erected on the same spot where King Injo (r. 1623-1649) performed a full kowtow three years earlier, this stele differed in significance for the Joseon and Qing courts: for the Joseon, it was understood as a symbol of national humiliation; for the Qing, it symbolized conquest and power and thus became a frequent tourist stop for their envoys.42 The following poem by Yi Gyeong-seok 이경석 (1595–1671) is written in Mongolian and Manchurian on the front and in classical Chinese on the back of the stele:43 The emperor is unconditionally generous, and bestowed (us) the words of grace. Ten lines are clear words, and solemn, yet warm. At first (we) did not understand, thus we ourselves brought sorrow. The emperor gave [us] bright commands, like awakening from deep sleep. Our lord lowly obeys and leads others to return. It is not out of fear, only relies on virtue. The emperor felt pity for this, his grace is abundant and ritual is superior… There is a majestic stone at the head of the big river. For ten thousand years, the emperor will leave Three Han states (referring to Korea) in peace.44 皇帝孔仁, 誕降恩言, 42 The Samjeondo stele became a symbol of the ebb and flow of political power. After the Sino-Japanese War (1894–95), as the Qing Empire became weak, the stele was thrown into the river. In 1913, during the Japanese colonial period (1910–45), the stele was re-erected to cast the Joseon kingdom as a submissive state. It was then buried in 1956. After a flood in 1963, the stele was unearthed and re-erected once more. 43 Yi Eun-sun 이은선, “ Yi Gyeong-seok-ui jeongchijeok saengae-wa samjeondobimun sibi,” 이경석의 정치적 생애와 삼전도비문 시비 [Yi Gyeong Seok’s Political life and the Controversy over the Inscription of the Samjeondo Stele] Hanguksa yeongu 한국사 연구 60 (1986): 74-75. 44 A daily entry dated to the eighth day of the second lunar month of 1638 in the Veritable Records of Injo. This English translation is based on the Korean translation provided by Yi Eun-sun. Even after the completion of the stele, the Qing court complained that the upper part of the stele was too small and demanded it to be remade. There are several records regarding the re-erection of the stele. For further information about such instances, see documents of the crown prince Simyang janggyae 심양장계: 심양에서 온 편지 [Sohyeon’s Letters from Shenyang] (Seoul: Changbi, 2008), 314 and 344. 211 十行昭回, 旣嚴且溫, 始迷不知, 自貽伊慼, 帝有明命, 如寐之覺, 我后祗服, 相率以歸, 匪惟怛威, 惟德之依, 皇帝嘉之, 澤洽禮優, ⋯ 有石巍然, 大江之頭, 萬載三韓,皇帝之休. Although few Joseon people understood Mongolian and Manchurian written languages, the Samjeondo Stele written in multiple languages certainly demonstrated the Qing’s public announcement of Joseon’s inclusion in the Qing multi-ethnic “community,” borrowing Waley-Cohen’s expression. In addition to building war memorials in major cities such as Beijing and Chengde, as well as conquered regions throughout the Qing empire,45 the eighteenth-century Manchu rulers employed European Jesuit painters, whose pictorial skills of illusionistic realism the Qing found particularly desirable, to create paintings illustrating the Qing emperors’ ritual and political activities. These paintings were meant to be displayed in places that allowed “public” access, such as banquet halls where Qing court officials and foreign guests often attended feasts. A number of paintings portraying the Qianlong emperor’s ritual and political activities were exhibited at Chengde, where the emperor held ceremonial events—such as banquets and hunting, horsemanship, and martial contests—for Mongol and Central Asian dignitaries. Examples of paintings displayed inside halls within the summer villa include: Horsemanship and Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees, 45 For more information about war memorials, see Waley-Cohen, 26-38. 212 which depicts a tent encampment in the plains area and records a 1754 audience for, and bestowal of honors on, Mongol allies.46 Yang Boda argues that, according to Archives of the Workshop of the Imperial Household Department, two of these paintings, Horsemanship and Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees, were completed on the twenty-sixth day of the sixth month, mounted on the tenth day of the seventh lunar month, and taken to Chengde on the eleventh day of the same month. 47 Thereafter, they were displayed the Hall of Scenic Winding Hills 卷阿胜境殿, one of the imperial residences inside the southern walls of the mountain villa. In 1754, the Qianlong emperor hosted a series of banquets in the Hall of Scenic Winding Hills for Mongol leaders to celebrate the acceptance of the Western Mongol leaders who defected from the Dzunghars) into the Manchu overlordship and to celebrate military victories in northern Xinjiang (known also as Yili 伊梨).48 The Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees was hung at the east end of the hall, Horsemanship on the west, and both served to demonstrate the emperor’s military prowess to his domestic and foreign guests.49 According to Yang, the paintings were 46 According to the Archives of the Workshop of the Imperial Household Department, the original title of Horsemanship and the Ceremonial Banquet at the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees is 御容画宴筵大画. Yang Boda 杨伯达, “Wanshouyuan ciyan tu kaoxi,” 万寿园 赐宴图 考析 [Analysis of ceremonial banquet painting] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan, no. 1 (1979): 65. 47 Yang Boda, “Guanyu Mashutu ticai de zai kaoding,” 关于马术图题材的再考订[Further examination of the subject matter of the horsemanship painting] Wenwu, no. 7 (1983): 64-67. 48 Deborah Sommer, “The Art and Politics of Painting Qianlong at Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, 143. 49 Yang Boda, “Wanshouyuan ciyan tu kaoxi,” 万寿园 赐宴图 考析 [Analysis of ceremonial banquet painting] 7-10. Liu Di points out many Buddhist thangkas and works painted 213 displayed there for almost forty-five years before being transferred to Beijing.50 This type of monumental-sized tieluo hung in the wall of various imperial residential halls and temporary meeting spaces (such as yurts) has been mostly discussed in terms of Qing emperors’ aspiration to consolidate political and cultural bonds with Mongols and Central Asians. Another nuanced yet significant message indirectly conveyed by these works was to glorify Qing emperors’ benevolence as so immense that it was capable of transforming the “barbarian” leaders into loyal and “civilized” subjects of the Qing Empire. Some of the Qianlong emperor’s poems compiled in Gazetteer of Rehe 熱河志 addressed such a transformation. “To pacify the land, our land is more than generous As they have come from afar, [The guests’] improper performance can be forgiven. Their first time at the imperial ceremony, They don’t know how to move. But very happy they are, as new princes.”51 The emperor’s poem, which was composed after the first few banquets, expressed his contentment with the quick transformation of his foreign guests. In this poem, the emperor announced that his foreign guests, “seemed to have learned how to perform by both the Qianlong emperor and court officials were also displayed in the summer villa at Chengde. Liu Di, 清乾隆朝内府书画收藏 [The collection of paintings and calligraphy in the imperial court of Qianlong reign] (PhD diss., Nankai University, 2010), 126. 50 Yang Boda “Wanshouyuan ciyan tu kaoxi,” 14-16. 51 Translation by Renqiu Yu. Renqiu Yu, “Imperial Banquets in the Wanshu yuan,” New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde. eds. James A. Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt (New York: Routledge Curson, 2004), 88. 214 ceremony.”52 The relationship between the topic of this work and the emperor’s transformative benevolence became even clearer in the careful selection of the hall where the painting was displayed. Deborah Sommer suggested that the Qianlong’s decision to display Ceremonial Banquet and Horsemanship in the Hall of Scenic Winding Hills was very calculated. According to her, these two paintings visually express the verse “Winding Hills” from the Book of Odes 詩經, which praises a virtuous sovereign of Chinese antiquity.53 The “barbarian” guests who are portrayed seated in orderly lines (although the banquet was quite chaotic according to Attiret’s testimony), waiting for the emperor’s entry to the garden, are highlighted in the painting as examples of transformed “barbarians,” thanks to Qianlong’s benevolence. This same painting was then displayed to the same guests depicted in the painting on their subsequent visits Chengde, reminding them of their loyalty to the Qing emperors. On the contrary, mural paintings in the Pavilion of Purple Brightness 紫光閣, located in the northwest corner of the West Garden of the Forbidden City in Beijing, highlighted the “barbaric” and brutal side of the nomadic tribes. The same Central Asian tribes who were portrayed as important political allies in the works in the summer villa in Chengde, were shown as barbaric rebels who challenged the rule of the Son of Heaven in murals in the Pavilion of Purple Brightness. Paintings of a strong Qing army, which successfully expanded the imperial territory by following the emperors’ commitment to 52 Renqiu Yu, 88. 53 Deborah Sommer, “The Art and Politics of Painting Qianlong at Chengde,” 144. 215 destroying such barbarians, were viewed not only by Qing court members—Han and Manchu court officials and imperial family members—but also by foreign envoys who regularly visited Beijing to pay annual tributes. Designating particular palace buildings to exhibit the ruler’s newly conquered territory was a practice that existed since the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE).54 In 1760, the Qianlong emperor restored the Pavilion of Purple Brightness, which had been a venue for the Ming emperors to watch archery contests and examine martial feats, for displaying military art and trophies as well as for receiving tributaries.55 The pavilion’s four walls displayed one hundred portraits, all depicting military generals who had defeated Dzunghar and Uighur rebels.56 Along with these portraits of meritorious officials and generals, sixteen paintings of battles were also hung as well as the weapons 54 According to the Book of Later Han and the Records of the Grand Historian, portraits of meritorious officials appeared on murals on palace walls or official buildings. One of the examples is the Unicorn Pavilion 騏驎閣. Wu Hung, The Wu Liang Shrine: The Ideology of Early Chinese Pictorial Art (Stanford: Stanford University, 1989), 192. 55 The Qianlong emperor referred to himself as the “Old Man of the Ten Complete Victories.” The Ten Complete Victories are a series of ten wars of pacifying rebellions on the borders of the Qing empire: the Dzungar, Yili, and Muslim campaigns (1755–59), two Jinchuan wars at the borderlands of Sichuan and Tibet (1747-49), a war in Burma (1766–70), a war in Vietnam (1788-89), a war in Taiwan (1787-88), and two wars against Gurkhas in Tibet and Nepal (1790-92). 56 In 1762, Giuseppe Castiglione and three of his colleagues—Jean-Denis Attiret, Giovanni Damasceno, and Ignatius Sichebart—were instructed to produce sixteen sketches based on the painted scenes; these would be the drafts of the designs for the engravings. Of the original sixteen, two were executed by Castiglione, three by Attiret, seven by Damasceno, and one by Sichelbarth. The remaining designs are unattributed. In the summer of 1765, the emperor ordered that the first four completed designs be dispatched to Canton and from there to Europe to be engraved on copper plates and printed. Paul Pelliot, “Les Conquêtes de l'Empereur de la Chine,” [The conquests of the emperor of China] T'oung Pao 20 (1921): 198. 216 captured.57 Among the many foreign guests who visited the Pavilion of Purple Brightness, Joseon envoys recorded the details of their visit. Seo Ho-su 서호수 (1736–99), dispatched to Beijing in 1790 as a vice-chief envoy, left the following record: In the early years of the Qianlong reign, Tibet was conquered. Using the example of the Cloud Terrace, the images of meritorious officials were displayed at the Hall of Purple Brightness. Each image contains an inscription composed by the emperor. From the Grand Counselor Fu He, there are fifty officials’ [portrait images].58 乾隆初. 平定西番. 用雲臺凌烟閣古事. 圖畫功臣於紫光閣. 各系御製.自太學士忠勇公傅恒以下. 五十人. In his Compiled Works of Yeongyeongjae 연경재전집, Seong Hye-eung 성해응 (1760-1839) listed the names of the generals whose portraits were hung in the Pavilion of Purple Brightness and noted that they were by Western painters: On the Xinsi year of the Qianlong reign, western painters worked [for the paintings] of the Hall of Purple Brightness. They painted all fifty meritorious officials and battle paintings. The Grand Scholars first grade is the loyal and brave Fu Heng.59 乾隆辛巳. 西師蕆功. 成紫光閣. 寫功臣及戰圖功臣凡五十人.大學士一等忠勇公傅恒. 57 By the end of the Qianlong reign, the total number of portraits of meritorious officials was about 280. Nie Chongzheng, “Nie chongzheng xiansheng tan ziguang ge gongchen xiang,” 聂崇正先生谈紫光阁功臣像 [Mr. Nie Chongzheng’s discussion on the portraits of meritorious officials at the hall of purple brightness] Zijincheng 紫禁城 156 (2008): 141. 58 This is my translation. Seo went to Beijing in 1790 and purchased the Complete Collection of Pictures and Books of Old and Modern Times 古今圖書集成. Seo Ho-su 서호수, Yeonhaenggi 燕行紀 [Journal of trip to Beijing], vol. 3. 59 This is my translation. Seong Hae-eung 성해응, Yeongyeongjae jeonjip 硏經齋全集, vol. 69. 217 Interestingly, Seong’s record was based not on personal experience, but rather on information from his close friends who visited Beijing. As a librarian at the Hall of the Star of Literature during Jeongjo’s reign, Seong was befriended by prominent scholars such as Yi Deok-moo 이덕무 (1741–93), Park Jae-ga 박제가 (1750–1805), and Yu Deuk-gong 유득공 (1748–1807), who advocated the idea of learning from the Qing. Seong’s knowledge about portraits at the Pavilion of Purple Brightness certainly derived from his associations with these scholars, who visited Beijing as part of ambassadorial entourages. As evidenced by Seong’s records, the Qing’s recent military campaigns must have been widely known to the Joseon aristocracy, even among those who had not visited Beijing. In contrast to the Qing court, few Joseon court documentary paintings were made for “public” display. One of the few examples is a hanging scroll documenting Yeongjo’s personal Plowing ceremony in 1739 that may have been intended for viewing by court officials. After the ceremony, Yeongjo ordered the agricultural tools he had used in the ritual to be placed at the Crown Prince’s Palace and a hanging scroll, which documented him plowing, to be stored at the Education Institute for the Crown Prince 시강원. The scroll was likely displayed on special occasions.60 Park Jeong-hyeo postulates that this hanging scroll depicting the Plowing ceremony did not aim merely to commemorate the king’s ritual performance, but also to propagate the king’s conviction to rule via the of the 60 Park Jeong-hyeo, 272-73. 218 sage rulers of antiquity.61 As demonstrated in the next section, Joseon kings propagated their political achievements through the existing gift-giving practice originally rooted in aristocrats’ Gathering Culture rather than through public display. As Gifts and Souvenirs Gift giving is an intriguing, universal behavior that has yet to be explored fully by historians of East Asian art. Ever since Marcel Mauss’ groundbreaking anthropological work in 1924,62 the practice of giving gifts has been studied as a form of socio-economic exchange and an expression of human relationships.63 In her exploration of the practice of giving and receiving gifts as an expression of human relationships, Marianne Neisser argues that “gift giving reflects the perceptions of the donors and the recipients regarding the identity of self and other.”64 Regarding the content of gift item and its political 61 Ibid., 273. 62 Marcel Mauss, “Essai sur la Don, Forme Archaique de l'Echange” [Essay on the Gift, Archaic Form of Exchange], Année Sociologique, nouvelle série, fasc. 1(1924): 30–186. Craig Clunas is one of the few East Asian art historians who successfully used anthropological methods in his analysis on Chinese works of art. For the usage of gift-giving theory in the analysis on Ming-period works of art, see Craig Clunas, Superfluous Things: Material Culture and Social Status in Early Modern China (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2004). 63 Some anthropological works that deal with the practice of gift giving include: Darly Feil, “From Pigs to Pearlshells: The Transformation of a New Guinea Highlands Exchange Economy,” American Ethnologist 9, no. 2 (1982): 291–306; C. L. Johnson, “Gift Giving and Reciprocity among Japanese-Americans in Honolulu,” American Ethnologist 1, no. 2 (1974): 295-308. 64 Studies exploring gift giving in relation to the perception of self and others include: Pamela Shurmer, “The Gift Game,” New Society 18 (1971): 1242–44; Marianne Neisser, “The Sense of Self Expressed through Giving and Receiving,” Social Casework 54, no. 5 (1973): 294-301. 219 symbolism, Russell Belk asserts that “the projection of an ideal self-concept takes precedence over the actual self-concept and the perceptions of the recipient, in both gift selection and symbolic encoding of the gift by the giver”.65 These key ideas from existing studies prompt a few questions. First, why did eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers start to use court documentary paintings as gifts? Second, how does eighteenth-century court documentary painting reflect the relationship between the giver and the recipient? Third, in what manner were eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings given as gifts? Finally, how did the act of giving help the royal or imperial patrons (the givers) fashion and publicize their political personae? The eighteenth-century Joseon court emerged as the primary center in Korea where documentary paintings were produced and consumed as gifts and souvenirs. The following discussion introduces two commissioning patterns that were simultaneously prevalent in the eighteenth-century Joseon court. In the first pattern, court officials commissioned a painting in multiple copies to commemorate a ceremony they had attended, and they distributed the copies among themselves. The state or court provided most of the necessary funding including the payment for the court painter(s) who would be charge of that painting project, even though the king was not a recipient of the paintings.66 This was the most prevalent method of producing and consuming court 65 Russell Belk, “It’s the Thought that Counts: A Signed Digraph Analysis of Gift Giving,” Journal of Consumer Research 3 (1976): 155–162; “Gift-Giving Behavior,” Research in Marketing, vol. 2, ed. Jagdish Sheth (Greenwich: JAI, 1979), 95-126. 66 This suggests that officials who had long served the court often owned more than one 220 documentary paintings prior to the eighteenth century. However, during the eighteenth century, commissioning and distributing the copies among themselves was no longer a means of court officials to promote their friendship or fraternity, but rather an expression of their loyalty to the king. As one variation of the first commissioning pattern, bureaucratic officials collectively commissioned documentary paintings but donated one copy to the state or court. In some cases, the kings ordered their court officials to do so. The second pattern is direct commissions from the king. Beginning with Yeongjo, kings started commissioning documentary paintings and bestowed one copy on each bureaucratic official who attended the state or court events the king hosted or performed. The rise of this new pattern demonstrates that Joseon kings in the eighteenth century saw documentary paintings as important political tools to magnify their authority and to help improve political relationship with court officials. The first pattern prevalent particualry in the first half of the eighteenth century refers to court officials’ practice of commissioning paintings to document events they attended and distributing the copies among themselves. It was not a new phenomenon, but it was borrowed from the literati practice of creating gathering paintings 계회도. Nonetheless, eighteenth-century bureaucrats’ patronage of documentary paintings was not an extension of their cultural habitus to the court, but rather as an affirmative act of expressing their loyalty to the monarch. 67 commemorative folding screen or album. These paintings document these ranking court officials’ political lives. 67 The term habitus in contemporary social studies was introduced by Marcel Mauss and elaborated by Pierre Bourdieu. Mauss defined habitus as “those aspects of culture that are 221 Inscriptions written on documentary paintings demonstrate that the officials strove to frame their act of commissioning documentary paintings as an act of expressing their gratitude. An inscription written by Yi Deok-su 이덕수 (1673-1744) on the third panel of a six-panel folding screen entitled Royal Banquet after King Yeongjo’s Personal Governance in the Year of Eulmyo 을묘친정후선온계병, which depicts a royal banquet for court officials who attended the King’s Personal Governance ceremony in (1735), presents one example:68 [When] there is any occasion at the court, (one) must make a folding screen with a title as a record so that the event will not be forgotten…. This folding screen is not only meant to remember this grand event, but also can serve as [one’s] maxim.69 在官而有事必有題名之屛所以識也, 識之所以不忘也, ⋯此屛之作不亶為識盛事而已, 雖以替座右之銘可也. The reason Yi considered the painting to be a personal maxim was probably related to the king’s Grand Harmony Policy 蕩平策, which enforced the fair selection of factional party members to the royal cabinet. Yi’s words indicate the painting commissions were public and political statements rather than the private, leisurely activity of a few court anchored in the body or daily practices of individuals, groups, societies, and nations.” Ruth Wodak, The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual (Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2009), 11. For Pierre Bourdieu, habitus refers to socialized human behavior heavily dependent on history, social class, memory and aesthetic tastes. 68 Among the six panels, only one panel depicts a royal banquet scene. The other five panels are filled with court officials’ poems in response to the king’s poem. 69 For this translation, I consulted Jin Joon-hyeon 진준현, “Yeongjo sinjangyeonhwa yukcheop byeongpung-e daehan yeongu,” 영조신장연화 육첩병풍에 대한 연구 [About Yeongjo shinjang yeohwa Six-panel Folding Screen] Seoul Daehakgyo Bakmulgwan Yeonbo 서울대학교 박물관 연보 5 (1993): 39-41. 222 officials. A handscroll portraying Yeongjo’s first performance of the Grand Archery ceremony is another example that suggests the political motivation of court officials to commemorate and document the kings’ ritual events. In 1743, Yeongjo decided to perform the Grand Archery ceremony to celebrate a long-awaited rain after a severe drought. According to official court records, Yeongjo ordered three copies of the manual of ritual protocols for the ceremony to be stored in the Hall of Writing Skills 藝文館, the Hall of Annals Compilation 春秋館, and the Royal Confucian Academy 成均館. Curiously, Yeongjo commissioned neither hanging scrolls nor folding screens to commemorate this ceremony. Instead, the court officials who attended the ceremony commissioned an unusually large handscroll (fig. 4-9). Yeongjo probably had court officials initiate the commission, rather than commissioning the paintings and bestowing them on the attendees himself. Perhaps the king thought a direct commission from himself was too self-serving, thus it would be better if court officials initiated the creation of paintings. The inscription on this large handscroll depicting the Grand Archery ceremony quotes Yeongjo’s words about the amicable relationship between the officials of learning and those of the military. In this regard, the officials’ act of commissioning the paintings was more an expression of gratitude toward the king, who restored the Grand Archery ceremony, and was Yeongjo’s admonition to remind court officials of the 223 importance of harmonious relationship among court members.70 Although court officials initiated the commission of this hand scroll, they did it on behalf of Yeongjo. Like earlier cases, this handscroll was made in multiple copies in the form of souvenir for court officials. However, the true intent behind its production was intended to serve as propaganda to celebrate Yeongjo who conducted rituals to educate his court officials and furthermore to rule his kingdom similar to sagacious ruler like the pre-dynastic rulers Yao and Shun. On a set of two panels (called 景賢堂受爵圖記), which must have been separated from a folding screen (probably an eight-panel one) that illustrates a royal banquet in 1765 at the Palace of Serene Harmony 경희궁, celebrating Yeongjo’s fourth reign year and his seventy-first birthday,71 Kim Sang-bok’s 김상복 (1714-1782) inscription explicitly demonstrates that court officials equated the act of commissioning documentary paintings as expressions of their gratitude for royal grace (fig. 4-19).72 70 Currently, multiple copies of this work are stored in various collections: National Museum of Korea, Korea University Museum, Yeonsei University Museum, and Ehwa University Museum. Such a large handscroll is a rare format for not only court documentary paintings but also Joseon paintings in general: the handscroll in the Korea University Museum is 40 cm wide and 60.4 cm high. For the full Korean translation of the preface inscribed on this handscroll, see Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 조선시대 궁중행사도, vol. 2 [Joseon-period court event painting] (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011), 157-158. 71 For more information about these two panels, see Gyeonghyeondang sujakdogi 景賢堂受爵圖記 [The Record of Royal Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom, quoted in Oh Ju-seok 오주석, Tansin ibyeokosip junyeon ginyeom teukbyeoljeon nongojip 탄신 250주년 기념 특별전 논고집 단원 김홍도 (Seoul: Samsung Cultural Foundation, 1995). According to Oh, Kang Gwan-sik first discovered this record and introduced it to Oh. 72 According to Kim’s inscription, Kim Hong-do (1749-?), the most celebrated court painter during the Jeongjo period, made two copies of the folding screen. These two panels, which contained Kim’s inscription, were separated from one of these two folding screens. 224 ...On that day, the king attended [the banquet] in such a lofty manner, and we servants standing in a row, holding food, and [later] sang the ten thousand [years of] longevity [song] to the king and danced. If we did not paint [it], there would not be any way to express this grand event. And our infinite wish is: that such a felicitous event continues every year and can be found in this picture and allow us to feel overwhelming joy. This is the reason why the painting must exist. Even further, since there is this type of felicitous event, there have been many cases to create folding screens and the paintings is an example…[I] Kim Sang-bok composed this record, and the person who painted is the court painter Kim Hong-do, and written by the calligrapher Hong Seong-won.73 ⋯於其日寶餠儼臨於上而簪紳列侍於下飮食宴樂崇乎蹈舞之儀非繪而畵之莫可以形容盛事而顧惟臣子無窮之情長原歲歲而此慶者有時寓目於尺素之間而炒然如卽日事則此又繪畵之不可無者也況國有吉慶輒屛而圖之有例者乎⋯臣金相福謹記畵者畵員金弘道書者寫官洪聖源. The following case confirms this relationship even clearer. After Jeongjo gave a lecture at the Hall of the Star of Literature in 1781, one of the lecture attendees, named Seo Myeong-Eung 서명응 (1716-1787) informs that King Jeongjo expressed his intent to commission folding screens that recorded on that lecture in multiple copies for distribution among the lecture attendees.74 However, according to Yu Eon-ho 유언호 (1730–96) who actually was ordered to write an epilogue on that screen,75 the lecture participants, however, felt that the king’s direct involvement in making the folding screens would be too much of a chore for the king, thus they decided to take care of it 73 This is my English translation based on Oh Ju-seok’s Korean translation. 74 Seo Myeong-eung 서명응, Bomanjae jip 保晩齋集, vol. 7 75 Jeongjo lectured on Zhu Xi’s Reflections on Things at Hand 近思錄 in the tenth of the third lunar month of 1781. 225 themselves in order to express their gratitude and loyalty. 76 According to Yoo Jae-bin, lecture attendees at that time must have used the official fund allocated to the Hall of the Start of Literature.77 As a variation on the first pattern, court officials commissioned paintings mainly for their own use, but they also offered one copy to the state or court. It seems this practice became prevalent by Sukjong’s reign (1674-1720) and continued afterward. During Sukjong’s reign, court officials commissioned one extra copy of the Album of the Gathering of the Year of Gisa, which documents the king’s entry to the Club of Elders in 1719, to be presented at the Hall of Spiritual Longevity 靈壽閣, where royal writings and poems were stored, so that successors could view it. An entry in the Daily Records of the Royal Secretariat, written on the twenty-sixth day of the tenth month in 1756, records that Yeongjo viewed the Album of the Gathering of the Year of Gisa (fig. 4-20). The King said, “Have the secretary go out and bring the album from the Office of Elders. If Yun Deong-seung and Nangcheong already came and are waiting, [have them] come in together.” Ha-jin went out and brought the album together with Yun Deong-seung and Jo Jeong of the Board of Military, and the Nangcheong Yu Seo from Seonghyeo Office, and all bowed ... The king ordered the secretary to bring in the Album of the Club of Elders, and said at the Ancestral Hall, “I want to view it again here.” The king ordered the secretary to read the preface of the Album, which had been composed by the king, and he personally examined the album and discussed if the portraits [of each court official] resembled them or 76“…凡所以侈上之恩者. 皆宜自致. 而前後所承寵光. 與天無極.以至於志喜之具.亦煩上念.吾等何所寓其情也. 遂私相與謀. 別爲契屛以分藏. 可見其歡忻慶祝之至⋯ Yu Eon-ho 유언호, Yeonseok 燕石, vol. 1, quoted in Yoo Jae-bin 유재빈 “Gukrip bakmulgwan sojang jinhado-ui jeongchijeok seonggyeo-gwa uimi” 국립중앙박물관 소장 진하도의 정치적 성격과 의미 [The political nature and significance of the painting of congratulatory offering in the collection of the national museum of Korea], Dongak misulsahak 동악미술사학 13 (2012): 194. 77 Ibid., 194. 226 not. 78 上曰, 注書出去, 耆老所畫帖持來, 而尹東昇·久任郞廳, 如已來待, 偕入可也. 華鎭出去持畫帖, 與尹東昇·戶曹正郞趙晸· 宣惠廳郞廳柳恕, 偕入進伏⋯上命承旨, 進耆社畫像帖曰, 前日下敎, 在於齋室, 故欲更見於此處矣. 仍命承旨, 讀奏御製序文後, 親覽畫像, 論其肖不肖. A 1744 hanging scroll entitled the Royal Banquet at the Office of Royal Family Members (Seoul National University Museum) (fig. 4-11) proves that this practice continued in Yeongjo’s reign; it documents a banquet offered to royal family members at the Hall of Exalted Government 崇政殿 on the seventh day of the tenth month.79 According to the Registered Record of Gathering Folding Screens at the Year of Gapja 갑자년계병등록, the Office of Royal Family Members commissioned four folding screens and thirty-six hanging scrolls to document the royal banquet; three screens were gifted to the three Ascendable Officials 堂上官, one screen was given to the Office of Royal Family Members, and the scrolls were distributed among the banquet participants and the male royal family members.80 78 This is my translation in consultation with the Korean translation provided by the Database of the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty. An entry dated to the twenty-sixth day of the tenth month of 1756 from the Daily Records of Royal Secretariat. 79 The Office of Royal Family Members was charged with storing the royal genealogy book and the kings’ portraits and with preserving the king’s and queen’s official robes. It also helped solve problems among the family members. 80 An epilogue in the Registered Record of Gathering Folding Screen at the Year of Gapja lists the court painters, calligraphers, and craftsmen. Han Se-wi and No Si-bin were appointed to paint folding screens. The epilogue was written late in the third month of 1745; since the event took place during the eleventh month of 1744, it took four months to create the four folding screens and thirty-six hanging scrolls. Park Jeong-hyeo, 166. 227 Sometimes court officials asked if the king wanted the administrative office that hosted the state ceremony to take charge of commissioning paintings. In 1774, Yeongjo personally conducted a state examination at the Hall of Diligent Governance 勤政殿. After the event, court officials asked whether Yeongjo wanted the Office of Royal Secretariat to present one copy to him, and Yeongjo agreed to this. Park Jeong-hyeo argues that with such a proposal, court officials responded to Yeongjo’s great interest in commissioning and collecting court documentary paintings.81 The practice of creating an extra copy and placing it in one of the palace buildings continued through Jeongjo’s reign. An eight-panel folding screen documents Prince Munhyo meeting with his tutors in the Office of Assistance and Nourishment on the fifteenth day of the first month in 1784 at the Hall of Respecting Grace 戴恩院. Yi Bok- won’s 이복원 (1719–92) preface testifies that eight folding screens were created: one was donated to the Office of Assistance and Nourishment, which, as the host of the event, was expected to store one copy; and seven were distributed among the ceremony participants (fig. 4-21).82 The second pattern involved the king’s direct commissioning of documentary paintings. This practice was almost non-existent prior to the eighteenth century but became increasingly frequent during the reigns of Yeongjo and Jeongjo.83 In 1720, 81 Park Jeong-hyeo, 272. 82 Yi Bok-won was one of the tutors of the Office of Assistance and Nourishment. His essay compilation, Manuscript of Double Streams 雙溪遺稿, also contains the preface he inscribed on the folding screen. 83 Park Jeong-hyeo, 271. 228 Yeongjo bestowed an album documenting a banquet to each attendant, plus one for the court.84 Following Hong Nak-seong’s suggestion, Yeongjo ordered a chair and a walking stick to be painted in the album, which were traditional gifts for new members of the Club of Elders. The items depicted in the Album of Naesa 내사보묵첩 in the National Museum of Korea exactly match Yeongjo’s instructions (fig. 4-22). In 1760, Yeongjo attended a banquet at the Moon Terrace at the Hall of Bright Governance 明政殿月臺 for Ascendable Officials of the Office of Elders and the meritorious officials. For this, he composed a poem and distributed it to the banquet participants and later had an album made, which included the painted banquet scene. Yeongjo’s banquet poem was transcribed on the front page of the album.85 The Album of Gathering for Stream Drainage, which documents Yeongjo’s visit to the site of the Cheonggye Stream drainage project, exemplifies the political motivations behind the king’s direct commissioning of documentary paintings. In an epilogue in the album, Hong Bong-han 홍봉한 (1713–78), who took charge of the drainage project, reveals that Yeongjo initiated the production of the album. [Our king] has accomplished the task, which has never been dared…[We] were bowing to each other after having received the king’s calligraphy twice and felt too overwhelmed [by the king’s grace]. We must share and contemplate this treasure, precious as a round jade. Respectfully [we] 84 A daily entry dated to the twentieth day of the first lunar month from the Veritable Records of Yeongjo. 85 On the seventh day of the seventh month of 1728, Yeongjo conducted the Personal Governance ceremony at the Pavilion of Fish and Water 魚水堂 at the Palace of Prospering Virtue 昌德宮. At that time, he bestowed upon both scholar-officials and military officials copies of his poem. Often, when Yeongjo bestowed his poems, he also had an album made, including the poem and an album leaf to document the event. 229 copied and printed the king’s three sacred ceremonial performances and a royal banquet, and painted them and made it in an album and wrote the list of our names at the end [of the album]. We presented one copy and each attendee shared one copy. This followed the king’s order.86 The drainage of the stream was a long awaited public welfare project, which had been attempted several times prior to Yeongjo’s reign. Thus, it became one of the king’s six self-proclaimed achievements, and his direct commission of multiple copies of the album for distribution should be interpreted as a highly political act to publicize his achievement and benevolence. A few examples of albums bestowed upon court officials under Yeongjo’s direct order have survived and are stored in collections in South Korea and abroad (figs. 4-23, 4-24). Following in his grandfather’s footsteps, Jeongjo himself commissioned documentary paintings and gifted them to court officials and royal family members. One example is Bestowing Chair and Cane to Prince Hakseong 鶴城君賜几杖圖. According to an entry in the Record of Daily Reflections written on the sixth day of the ninth month of 1784, the king ordered Seo Yu-bang to select a court painter to document a ceremony in which he presented the prince with a walking stick and a chair. In the preface about this event recorded in the Complete Compilation of Hongjae 弘齋全書, Jeongjo announced that he wanted this ceremony to take place the day before the crown prince’s birthday, not only to celebrate his birthday but also the longevity of Prince Hakseong, the eldest member of the royal family, as this would encourage intergenerational royal bonds. 86 This is my English translation based on the Korean translation by Park Jeong-hyeo. Park Jeong-hyeo, 284-285. 230 According to an entry in the Records of Daily Reflection written on the twenty-third day of the ninth lunar month, Jeongjo asked court officials to bring a draft of this painting for him to view.87 It is highly likely that Jeongjo’s intention behind this commission was not only to promote the strong generational bonds among royal family members, but also to express his gratitude toward Prince Hakseong, the eldest royal family member who continued to show support for Jeongjo. An eight-panel folding screen depicting Jeongjo’s outing to the city of Hwaseong in 1795 also demonstrates how the king initiated the production of documentary paintings in multiple copies to distribute to court officials and royal family members (fig. 4-25).88 The officials, who over the period of one year had prepared for Jeongjo’s outing and his eight-day lodging in Hwaseong, each received a screen as a token of appreciation for their hard work.89 According to Park Jeong-hyeo, there are two types of folding screens that depicted the eight events during the Jeongjo’s visit to Hwaseong. The first type was made for the usage of the royal court, while the other was intended to be distributed 87 This painting is verly likely to have been modeled on earlier works such as the Album of Bestowing Chair and Cane to Yi Won-yik 이원익사궤장도첩 (1623, color on silk, 46. 8 x 62.5 cm, the National Museum of Korea), the Album of Bestowing Chair and Cane to Yi Gyeong-seok이경석사궤장도첩 (1668, color on silk, 55.5 x 37 cm, the Korea University Museum). For more information about paintings that deal with this topic, see Park Jeong-hyeo 박정혜, “Joseon sidae sagwejangdocheop-gwa yeonsidocheop,” 조선시대 사궤장도첩과 연시도첩 [Joseon-period album of a ceremony of bestowing chair and walking stick and a ceremony of bestowing a posthumous title] Misulsahak yeongu, no. 231 (2001): 41-75. 88 6 copies were distributed to royal family members and 15 copies were bestowed to court officials. Park Jeong-hye, 274-279. 89 The National Museum of Korea, Leeum Museum, and National Palace Museum each has one complete eight-panel folding screen on this event. According to Park’s examination, the one at the National Palace Museum must be a later copy, not one of the original works, which had been first commissioned in 1795 and completed in 1796. Ibid., 295. 231 among bureaucrats who made preparations for this outing, as an award to recognize their hard work. It is known that the screens were called by a few different names depending on who the recipients were: Outing to Hwaseong 華城幸行圖, Gathering Screen of Viewing Hwaseong Produced at the Office of Summarizing the Event 觀華圖整理所屛 (probably gifted to those who worked in the Office of Superintendence), Royal Banquet Screen 進饌圖屛 (probably gifted to royal family members).90 Park suggests that Royal Banquet Screen is a merely title given to those screens offered to the court, while Kang Gwan-sik argues that there was a separately made screen titled Royal Banquet Screen that exclusively depicted the Lady Hyeongyeong’s birthday feast.91 It is not known how many types of screens were made to document and celebrate the outing of the year of 1795, but it is important to recognize that there were different gift recipients, receiving different versions of this screen. In addition to the folding screen, the uigwe or manual of ritual protocols was printed in multiple copies and presented to court members. The manual, the Summary of King’s Outing in the Year of Eulmyo 원행을묘정리의궤, was completed on the tenth day of the fourth lunar month, 1797; 31 copies were given to royal family members, including the Dowager Queen Hyegyeong (Jeongjo’s biological mother); 38 copies went to court 90 Kang Gwan-sik, however, suggested the title Royal Banquet Screen must have indicated to a different folding screen that depicted only the Birthday Banquet for the Lady Hyeonggyeong at the Hall of Longevity. Kang Gwan-sik 강관식, “Jingyeong sidae hugi hwawonhwa-ui sigakjeok sasilseong,” 진경시대 후기 화원화의 시각적 사실성 Gansong Munhwa 간송문화 49 (1995): 58-60. 91 Park Jeong-hyeo, 305. 232 officials, and 38 more copies were sent to central and local government offices (fig. 4-26).92 Shin Byeong-joo asserts that the uigwe was intended to disseminate the knowledge of this event to a wider audience.93 The dissemination of knowledge through this woodblock uigwe continued in a different from as some of the recipients of this woodblock uigwe hired court painters to copy as paintings. There is one nineteenth-century album, a painted copy of the illustration of this uigwe (fig. 4-27). One of the characteristic elements about this album is that both Chinese and Korean were inscribed on it, strongly suggesting that it was directed to an audience who felt more comfortable reading Korean than Chinese characters, possibly court ladies.94 This nineteenth-century hand painted album informs us that Jeongjo’s 1795 outing continued to be remembered as an unforgettable historical event and was circulated as a luxurious commodity among the ruling classes. This predominant manner of consuming court documentary paintings as gifts and souvenirs required court painters to devise a way to depict a symbolic version of the king in order to meet state regulations, which supervised the production and use of royal portraits in the Joseon period. Basically, any type of paintings that bear the royal visage 92 Yi Hyeo-gyeong 이혜경, “Jeongjo sidae gwanpanbon panhwa yeongu,” 정조시대 관판본 판화 연구 [Study of the Jeongjo-period court commissioned prints] Misulsa Yeongu 미술사 연구 20 (2006): 248. 93 Shin Byeong-joo 신병주 “Joseon sidae uigwe pyeongchan-ui yeoksa,” 조선시대 의궤 편찬의 역사 [History of Joseon-period uigwe compilations] Joseonsidaesa hakbo 조선시대사 학보 54 (2010): 290. 94 Min Gil-hong 민길홍, Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado 궁중기록행사도 [Court event painting], vol. 3 (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2012), 266. 233 could not be taken and circulated outside the palace. Thus, the emblematic portrayal of Korean kings, which characterizes Joseon court documentary paintings, should be seen as court painters’ artistic negotiation with state regulations over the usage of royal imagery. In the Qing court, the practice of giving court documentary paintings was less prevalent compared to the Joseon court. This is because, compared to their Joseon counterparts, Qing emperors were usually the only commissioners and the primary consumers of court documentary paintings. Nevertheless, by timing the completion of paintings at special occasions, some of the court documentary paintings were dedicated to Qing emperors as gifts. This was the case with the Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour scrolls. Commissioned in 1764, the finished scrolls of the Qianlong’s Southern Inspection Tour were submitted to the Qianlong emperor in the fifth lunar month of 1770, the year of the emperor’s sixtieth birthday celebration.95 Other such imperial gifts include a set of handscrolls recording the Dowager Empress Chongqing’s sixtieth birthday festival in 1751, and an album documenting various celebrations performed during the Dowager Empress Chongqing’s seventieth birthday festival in 1761 (figs. 4-28, 4-29). Instead of giving paintings, the Qianlong emperor commissioned prints, which translated paintings, and gifted them to imperial family members and high-ranking court officials. For example, the woodblock printed versions of Qing court documentary paintings, such as Magnificent Record of the Kangxi Emperor’s Birthday Celebration 萬壽盛典 (first published in 1717), which gives a pictorial depiction of the imperial 95 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Document and Portrait: the Southern Tour Paintings of Kangxi and Qianlong,” Phoebus 6, no. 1 (1988), 99. 234 procession and enlists the name of attendants and gifts, and contains congratulatory poems, and the Magnificent Record of the Southern Inspection Tour 南巡盛典 (1771) (fig. 4-30), which provides the depiction of famous scenic sights on the inspection tour route, and the emperor’s own writings about the tour, was in multiple copies and was probably gifted to ranking officials. These printed books, which testify to the spectacular pomp of the events, served to promulgate the emperor’s authority to bestow gifts. Qing emperors’ spectacular public outings became known even to international audiences outside China. For example, in 1786 Isidore Stanislas Helman (1743-1806 or 1809) published a series of engraving works. One of his works depicts the Kangxi Emperor’s Birthday Procession (fig. 4-31). In the inscription placed at the bottom of the print, Helman explains that the print was a reproduction of a Chinese painting (dated to 1717) owned by Henri Leonard Bertin (1720-92), a minister of Louis XVI. The same inscription also indicates that prior to Bertin’s possession, the Chinese painting belonged to Lai Dou 賴都.96 Lai Dou served as the minister of the Board of Rites and of the Finance during the Kangxi reign. Although it is not specifically known how a handscroll commissioned by Lai Dou ended up entering the French minister’s collection, given the active interactions between Qing officials and French Jesuits throughout the eighteenth century, Bertin’s possession of this Chinese handscroll is not surprising. Probably, Lai Dou made a few copies based on the Magnificent of the Kangxi Emperor’s Birthday Celebration and gifted them to his family members as well as foreign guests. 96 Francis Macouin, From Beijing to Versailles: Artistic Relations between China and France (Hong Kong: the Urban Council of Hong Kong, 1997), 251. 235 For the Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspction Tour, four of the leading Western artists at the court in Beijing—the missionaries Giuseppe Castiglione (1688-1766), Jean-Denis Attiret (1702-1768), Giovanni Damasceno (died 1781), and Ignatius Sichebart (1708-1780)—were selected in 1765 to create small-scale versions of the battle paintings, which had hung in the Pavilion of Purple Brightness as preparatory designs. Their drawings were sent to Paris to be translated into engraving prints.97 Out of 200 prints created in Paris, the Qianlong emperor presented 81 copies to imperial relatives and his favorite court officials. Laura Newby explains that ten sets of prints were mounted in the form of an album accompanying the emperor’s poems (at the top of the prints), and gifted to court officials, including those who had served in the campaign in Xinjiang and their descendants, such as the sons of Shu Hede 舒赫德 (1710- 77), Liu Tongxun 劉統勳 (1698–1773), and Zhao Hui 兆惠 (1708-64), and the grandson of Ban Di 班第 (died 1755).98 Later, the emperor ordered that more sets be sent to temporary imperial palaces 行宮 and Buddhist temples throughout the empire.99 In the 97 Richard E. Strassberg, China on Paper: European and Chinese Works from the Late Sixteenth to the Early Nineteenth Century, eds. Marcia Reed and Paola Demattè (Los Angeles: Getty Center, 2007), 97. 98 Laura Newby, “Copper Plates for the Qianlong Emperor: From Paris to Peking via Canton,” Journal of Early Modern History 16 (2012): 161–199. 99 Nie Chongzheng, “Qianlong pinding zhunbu huibu zhantu he qing daide tongbanhua,”乾隆平定准部回部战图 和清代的铜版画 [The Qianlong emperor’s battle paintings of suppressing the Dzungar and Turkic muslims and Qing copper plate engraving] Wenwu 文物 no. 4 (1980): 63-64. Zhuang Jifa 莊吉發, Qing Gaozong shi quan wu gong yan jiu 清高宗十全武功研究 [Study of the Qianlong emperor’s ten complete battles] (Taipei: Guoli gugong bowuyuan, 1982), 527-28. 236 description of Qianlong’s intent in the dissemination of engraving prints of battles, Laura Newby describes, “The Qianlong emperor was interested less in prints than in power, and more specifically in the art of rulership.”100 The distribution of prints of Qing victories was an efficient and effective method of promulgating Qing military supremacy, and of expressing Qing emperors’ dedication to protect China and its civilization from “barbarians.” Some officials who received the emperor’s battle prints made copies of them in the form of paintings. One such work is the Narration of Ten Battles 十全敷藻图册, in the National History Museum of China), an album by Wang Chengxu (died 1805), who was an official of the Ministry of War as well as a court painter (fig. 4-32).101 This album was meant to visually present the Qianlong emperor’s military achievements to his descendants. Among the recipients of the battle prints were foreign guests including Joseon envoys. According to the official report by Yi Seong-won 이성원 (1720-1790) and Jo Jong-hyeon 조종현 (1731-1800), who attended the Winter Solstice Festival in 1790, a pair of battle paintings was bestowed on them by the Qianlong emperor’s direct order at a banquet at the Pavilion of Purple Brightness. Winter Solstice Chief Envoy Yi Seong-won and Vice Chief Envoy Jo Jong-hyeon reported… On the sixth day, we attended a New Year banquet at the Hall of Purple Brightness. On the tenth day, officials from the 100 Laura Newby, 196. 101 Wang Youdun (1692-1758), the grand councilor from 1745 to 1758, and editor of the emperor’s poetry collection, was Wang Chengxu’s father. 237 Ministry of Rites led us to the Gate of Sovereign Purity. There, military officials such as Agui, Wang Jie, and Fu Chang-an standing on the east to the table, gave us an imperial letter and two hanging scrolls of battle paintings. We kneeled down and received them, and put them in a yellow container and brought [them] back to our place. Previously, the Ministry of Rites had given us an imperial letter; this year court officials stood up at the entrance of the imperial chamber hall, and handed them over to us with the yellow container. The order must be given directly by the emperor. A battle painting is composed of sixteen panels, and a poem was inscribed on the top of each of the sixteen hanging scrolls. After the emperor pacified [the rebels] at Xinjiang and Sichuan, he had engraved paintings made to depict those battle and defeating scenes. And he composed poems and displayed those who made military achievements. 冬至正使李性源, 副使趙宗鉉馳啓言: ⋯初六日, 參歲初宴於紫光閣. 初十日, 禮部引臣等, 至乾淸門, 軍機大臣阿柱,王杰, 福長安, 列立於皇卓之東, 授詔書一度, 戰圖二軸, 臣等跪受, 安于黃亭中, 奉到館所. 曾前順付詔勑, 皆自禮部頒給, 而今年則大臣成班於寢殿正門外, 具黃亭頒發者, 似出皇旨. 戰圖則圖十六幅, 詩十六幅, 又圖十六幅, 題詩上端. 皇帝曾於乙亥以後, 討平伊梨地方及回子與大, 小金川後, 鏤畫其戰伐, 納降之狀, 繫以詩章, 鋪張武功者也.102 There is no official record of where the set of prints were preserved, but they were possibly archived in the collection of the Star of Literature.103 The purpose of this gift to 102 An entry dated to the twentieth day of the second month of 1790 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 103 As discussed in Chapter Two, there are no eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings that deal with battles scenes, simply because the eighteenth-century Joseon dynasty neither engaged in any military campaigns nor encountered large-scale rebellions. Nevertheless, there is one hanging scroll (currently entitled The Troops of Hong Gyeong-rae 洪景來陣圖, 167.5× 54.5cm ) in the collection of Kyujanggak (Seoul National University) depicting state soldiers fighting against the army of farmers who followed Hong Gyeong-rae 홍경래 (1780-1812) in revolt. Although a large number of battle paintings were created during the eighteenth century, they deal mostly with famous battles of the past, particularly the Japanese invasion (1592-98). The idea of depicting contemporary battles in paintings was quite new. Further examination of brushwork and composition are needed to determine if this work was commissioned by the nineteenth-century Joseon court, but it is still possible to speculate that the idea of depicting the state army’s victory over a contemporary military insurgency was inspired by battle prints gifted by the Qianlong emperor. Possibly military officials who were involved in that event might have commissioned a court painter(s) to create a folding screen in multiple 238 the Joseon court is an obvious one. Shoring up their recent military success was necessary for Qing emperors to foster the loyalty of Joseon kings’ because they knew that the fearsome martial prowess behind their Confucian façade was the very reason why Joseon submitted itself to the Qing Empire in the first place.104 In sum, in the eighteenth century Qing and Joseon courts, documentary paintings (and their print versions) were selected as gifts and souvenirs largely because of their subjects that dealt with historically specific events marking rulers’ important political careers. More than any other gifts, court documentary paintings directly and vividly project their royal and imperial patron’s ideal self-concept (borrowing Belk’s term and concept). For both Qing and Joseon rulers, a Confucian sage ruler who employed rituals was their ideal self-concept. And for Qing emperors, the imagery of battles was used to project both their military power and sincere dedication to defend China, the land of civilization. copies to commemorate their successful pacification over Hong Gyeong-rae’s revolt. For the illustration of this work, see Kyujanggak and the Cultural History of Books (Seoul: Acanet, 2010), 105-107. 104 There is one print image mounted in a hanging scroll format that depicted the battles at Jinchuan in the collection of Sungsil University Museum (Seoul, South Korea). However, one cannot be sure if this print image was the one gifted by the Qianlong emperor in 1790. For more information about this print in the Sungsil University Museum and its accompanying mismatched inscription, see Park Hyo-eun 박효은, “Cheongdae dongpanhwa pyeongjeong seojang jeondo balmun-gwa pyeongjeong yanggeumcheon jeondo,” 청대 동판화 평정서장전도 발문과 평정양금천전도 [Qing engravings: epilogue to Pacificaiton of Dzhungars and Turkic Muslims and Pacification of the Two Jinchuan Hills] Hanguk gidokgyo bakmulgwaji, no. 5 (2009): 106-114. 239 Conclusion This chapter has explored how the political dynamics of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon ruling classes were channeled through the medium of court documentary paintings, and gives an impetus toward a reconsideration of this pictorial genre. In addition to their traditional function as visual historical records, the paintings served various roles, such as ritual instruction manuals, propaganda, and gifts and souvenirs, that displayed the rulers’ political visions and promoted their political achievements to both contemporary and future audiences within and outside their courts. Documentary paintings (and their print versions), which dealt with historically specific events marking rulers’ important political careers, were increasingly exploited as gifts and souvenirs because they directly project their royal and imperial patron’s self-fashioned ideal personae. Both Qing and Joseon rulers both aspired to be recognized as a Confucian sage ruler from their contemporary and future, domestic and international audiences. And a large number of court documentary paintings they commissioned portray them in such a light. For Qing emperors, the imagery of battles was served to project both their undefeatable military power and sincere dedication to defend China, Zhonghua. By contextualizing eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary painting, we can understand a wide range of meanings given to them. Reconsideration of this genre beyond its prescribed function (historical record) allows us to be sensitive to distinct cultural and political factors that impacted the production and consumption of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings. 240 CHAPTER FIVE: IMAGES OF RULERS IN QING AND JOSEON COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING Introduction In the large tieluo painting Horsemanship 馬術圖 (1754), the Qianlong emperor (r. 1735-99) appears with a group of Dzungar leaders at a site where a banquet is to take place (fig. 5-1). From horseback he watches the Manchu Eighth Banner’s horsemanship performance. Although the emperor neither occupies the center of the picture nor looks directly at the viewer, the lifelike equestrian portrait by the Jesuit painter Giuseppe Castiglione highlights the emperor’s majestic presence in his role as the chieftain of nomadic tribes at diplomatic banquets held for Central Asian guests. Meanwhile a Korean scroll set documents Yeongjo 영조 (r. 1724–76) performing the Grand Archery ceremony 대사례 in 1743, in the presence of a large number of court officials and royal family members; this ritual had not been performed for nearly two centuries. Nevertheless, the king’s portrait cannot be found in anywhere in the Grand Archery Scrolls 대사례도 (1743) (fig. 5-2). In place of his royal image, a folding screen depicting a mountain with the five prominent peaks, the sun and the moon, generally called the Screen of the Five Peaks (五峰屛 /오봉병) symbolized the king’s presence at that event (fig. 5-3). This chapter compares two contrasting modes of representing rulers: the life-like mode (in various degrees) of portraying Manchu Qing emperors and the symbolic mode of representing Korean Joseon kings. I will argue that these contrasting modes mirror 241 each ruling house’s pictorial traditions as well as specific attitudes about producing and utilizing documentary paintings. Just as Qing emperors’ portraits were used to fashion their various political personas, so their lifelike portrait imagery was used in the narrative context of documentary paintings. Similar to their Qing counterparts, yet in contrast to their predecessors, eighteenth-century Joseon kings began to commission a large number of their own portraits and displayed them to their officials to proclaim their authority. This change meant that Joseon royal portraits were no longer confined to ancestral ritual settings. However, such lifelike portraits or figural representations of the kings remained absent from court documentary paintings. In place of the king’s image, the screen of the Five Peaks served as a metonymic device to represent the king’s presence at ceremonial events in the paintings. The aniconic representation of eighteenth-century Joseon kings will be discussed in relation to the distinctive usage of court documentary paintings in Korea. 242 Qing Emperor’s Self-Fashioning Portrait Images in Narrative Scenes The ubiquity of emperors’ portraits in Qing court documentary paintings is directly related to the functions of such paintings and of the various types of portraits. Hui-Chi Lo argues that the tactical use of portraiture “to subtly communicate messages to a variety of audiences was already prevalent during the Kangxi reign.”1 For example, the Kangxi emperor commissioned a number of works in which he was portrayed as a scholar holding a brush, in order to glorify him as an educated Confucian ruler to his Han Chinese subjects. In contrast, many paintings portrayed him as a warrior and hunter for two audiences: to assert his Manchu identity to the Manchu audience, and to impress his martial supremacy on the Han audience. Continuing the usage of imperial portraits as tools of self-fashioning and self-promotion, the Qianlong and Yongzheng emperors were portrayed as Tibetan deities to inflate their identities for Tibetan and Mongolian audiences.2 An excellent example is a mid-eighteenth-century thangka painting entitled The Qianlong Emperor as Bodhisattva Manjushri and Grand Lama, which was created in multiple copies (fig. 5-4).3 In this portrait, the Qianlong emperor appears as a Tibetan 1 Hui-Chi Lo, “Political Advancement and Religious Transcendence: The Yongzheng Emperor’s (1678–1735) Deployment of Portraiture” (PhD diss., Stanford University, 2009), 74. 2 The term “self-fashioning” was first used by Stephen Greenblatt in his book Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980). 3 For more information about multiple copies of this portrait, see: Patricia Burger, Empire of Emptiness (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2003); Michael Henss, “The Bodhisattva-Emperor: Tibeto-Chinese Portraits of Sacred and Secular Rule in the Qing Dynasty," Oriental Art 47, no. 3 (2001). And for the formulation of Qing emperor’s divine kinship evident in textual records, see David M. Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva in the Governance of the Ch’ing Empire,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 38, no. 1 (1978) 243 lama sitting on a diamond throne (vajrasana), with his right hand in the teaching gesture (vatarka mudra) and his left hand holding the wheel of law (dharmacakra). Such a depiction is profoundly related to Qing emperors’ political desire to promote their divine emperorship.4 In contrast to Yuan and Ming court documentary paintings that pictured emperors in fairly limited settings (hunting, procession, and New Year Festival),5 yet just as their imperial portraits, Qing emperors in court documentary paintings were portrayed engaged in various ceremonial and public events, acting and reacting to other figures. Instead of distracting the viewer from focusing on the emperor, narrative elements serve to bring the viewer into the current and affirming political realities of eighteenth-century Qing multi-ethnic imperium, which emperors hoped to maintain and to flourish. The life-like, yet iconic images in Qing court documentary paintings are directly modeled on Ming court documentary paintings as evident in such works as The Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion and Imperial Outing and Returning Procession (fig. 5-5). In these examples, the emperor is portrayed much larger than other figures, set apart from other figures, or directly facing the viewer, without any sense of movement. In regard to 4 According to Pamela Crossley, the Qianlong emperor is portrayed in this painting as a wheel-turner to show him as leading a multiethnic empire and its subjects to salvation. Pamela Kyle Crossley, A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology (Berkeley: University of California, 2002), 242. 5 Regarding the “Emperor’s Pleasure Painting,” see Cheng-hua Wang, “Material Culture and Emperorship: The Shaping of Imperial Power at the Court of Xuanzong (r. 1425-1435)” (PhD diss., Yale University, 1998) and Dora Ching, “Icons of Rulership: Imperial Portraiture during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2011). Wang and Ching both argue that imperial portraits reveal much about Chinese emperors’ perspectives about themselves, as well as their statecraft. 244 Ming imperial portraits, Wen Fong wrote: “the emperor had become a ritual vessel; devoid of personality…the ultimate embodiment of the absolutist state.” 6 In seeking to explain the rise of iconic poses in Ming imperial portraits, other researchers have pinpointed the impact of Tibetan Buddhist art on Ming imperial portraits. Dora Ching, for example, argues that the frequent interactions between Ming emperors and Tibetan hierarchs, which involved in the frequent exchanges of visual materials and the production of imperially sponsored Tibetan-style objects might have contributed to god-like Ming imperial portraits.7 I believe this is the case even in documentary paintings. The screen painting Ten Thousand Dharmas Return as One 萬法歸一圖 (1771) is one of the Qing court documentary paintings that followed the Ming precedents. In this work, the Qianlong emperor is painted much larger than other figures even though he is positioned farther away than them (fig. 5-6) Additionally, his head is disproportionally larger than the rest of his body. Having adopted the distinctly traditional Chinese imperial position, a hieratic view, which had been firmly established in mid-and-late Ming court documentary paintings, the emperor’s image here inspires a sense of devotion and respect. This stylistic mode, which places emphasis on formal and static poses, was even 6 Wen C. Feng, “Imperial Portraiture in the Song, Yuan and Ming Periods,” Ars Orientalis 25 (1995): 58. Jan Stuart and Evelyn S. Rawski pointed out that the frontal pose had been already been established as a conventional norm for ancestral portraits as evident in Han dynasty mural paintings, Jan Stuart and Evelyn S. Rawski, Worshipping the Ancestors: Chinese Commemorative Portraits (Washington D.C.: The Freer Gallery of Art and the Arthur M. Sackler Gllery, 2001), 84-85. 7 Dora Ching, 130. 245 adopted by European Jesuit painters. For example, in Deer Hunting Patrol 哨鹿圖 (1741, hanging scroll, ink and colors on silk), which recorded the emperor’s first hunting trip in 1741 to the Mulan Hunting Ground at Chengde, the Qianlong emperor is portrayed facing directly forward, yet without making eye contact with the viewers (fig. 5-7). This mode of representing the emperor had already been tried in Xuande Emperor’s Hunting Excursion, and Imperial Outing and Returning to the Palace. In these Ming-period works, the emperor’s direct yet non-interactive gaze, conflated with his disproportionally large head, evokes a sense of admiration and hierarchy (fig. 5-5). However, unlike Ming-period court painters, Giuseppe Castiglione, the painter of this work, did not follow such pictorial conventions. Rather, he rendered the emperor’s proportions in a more naturalistic manner. Castiglione, however, did not approach realism only in order to achieve naturalistic life-likeness, but also to use its optical illusionistic effects to evoke the idea of otherworldly beauty, which only the Qing emperor (titled as the Son of Heaven and the Universal Monarch) was entitled to enjoy and possess. To enhance the supra-mundane quality of Qing emperors’ images in court documentary paintings, even an iconographic convention of European royal portraits was also deployed. Created by Jesuit painters, works such as Horsemanship (1754, attributed to Giuseppe Castiglione), Qianlong Emperor in Ceremonial Armor on Horseback 大閱圖 (1758, Giuseppe Castiglione) (fig. 5-8), and Illustration in the Spirit of the Qianlong Emperor’s Poem ‘Congboxing 叢薄行詩意圖 (1758, Giuseppe Castiglione) (fig. 5-9) show the emperor in profile seated still on the back of a white horse. These portraits of the Qianlong emperor in these works echo the equestrian portraits of famous European 246 monarchs—Charles V, the Holy Roman emperor (1500–58), Charles I of England (1600–49), and Louis XIV of France (1638–1715) (figs. 5-10, 5-11) —which were all modeled on the statue of Marcus Aurelius.8 As the Statue of Marcus Aurelius, a ubiquitous icon of royal authority and triumph was an ideal iconographic model for the portraits of European rulers, and was chosen by Jesuit artists to celebrate the Qianlong emperor and his successful military campaigns. Although links to Ming images can be found, the representation of emperors in most Qing documentary paintings was quite different from Ming precedents. The most discernible element that distinguishes Qing court documentary paintings from earlier works is the dynamic portrayal of the emperor. Qing emperors in a number of works are shown involved and engaged in events, acting and reacting to other figures. There are two possible prototypes that might have brought about this new mode of representing the emperors’ activities; one from Yuan court painting traditions and one from European sources. Yuan dynasty works that portrayed the emperor dynamically caught in the moment must have served as prototypes for Qing works that depicted the emperors’ horse riding and hunting. Since Qing emperors often publicly claimed to be descended from Khubilai Khan (r. 1260–94), the founder of the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368) (fig. 5-12),9 8 Roy Strong, Van Dyck: Charles I on Horseback, (New York City: Viking Press, 1972), 49. For the usage of equestrian portraits by European monarchs, see Paul Kleber Monod, The Power of Kings: Monarchy and Religion in Europe, 1589-1715 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001), 317-328. 9 Lord Macartney who visited the Qing court in 1793, was told that the Qianlong emperor was descended from Kublai Khan. James L. Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual 247 and since hunting had again been recognized as an important military rite, which effectively facilitated the renewal of Manchu cultural heritage and was an important diplomatic venue for negotiating with Central Asian and Mongol guests, it was natural that Qing court painters emulated Yuan-period emperor’s hunting paintings to evoke the profound ancestral and political connections between Manchu and Mongol rulers. In works such as Four Activities of the Banquet 塞宴四事圖, Hunting at Mulan 木蘭圖 (about 1750), and Horsemanship, the Qianlong emperor is shown engaged in various equestrian activities. In the Mulan Hunting Trip scrolls (Journey, Encampment, Banquet, and Encirclement), the emperor watches Mongol wrestling, views the harnessing of a horse, shoots an arrow, and rides a horse (figs. 5-13, 5-14). His portrayal in these scrolls differs greatly from the typical approaches of imperial images characterized by stasis, frontality, and symmetry; the emperor is not easily detected at first glance because he is completely immersed in the depicted event and interacts with other figures. This particular mode, of depicting emperors in action, was not confined to hunting themes. Sacrificial Ceremony at the Altar of the First Farmer 祭先農壇圖, a pair of long handscrolls from between 1723 and 1735, depicts the Yongzheng emperor in procession with a group of officials going to the Altar of the First Farmer 神農壇 as well as his first Plowing ceremony, conducted with princes, officials, and senior farmers selected from the metropolitan area of Beijing (fig. 5-15). Here the emperor is an icon reminiscent of a and the Macartney Embassy of 1793 (Durham: Duke University Press, 1995), 108. 248 sage-king, conveying the Confucian view of agriculture as the economic foundation of the state and encouraging his subjects to engage in the essential activity of farming.10 While the Yongzheng emperor aimed to promote his sacred authority as a Confucian sage-king through the performance of these ceremonies, the mode of depicting him (although he is still unrealistically bigger than other figures) in a more natural, three-quarter view rather than a stiffer, frontal view certainly emphasized realism and naturalism, which had been lacking from Ming court documentary paintings. The other likely visual sources that promoted dynamic portrayals of Qing emperors were European history paintings and portraits, in the ennobling style known as the Grand Manner. First applied to history painting, considered the most elevated genre of Western painting, with grandiose themes such as heroic battles and religious struggles, the Grand Manner later became associated with royal portrait paintings, particularly those of French Louis XIV, who frequently exchanged gifts and letters with the Kangxi emperor.11 Beginning with five Jesuits appointed by the Louis XIV and sent to the Qing 10 Liu Lu 劉潞, “Zhai xiannongtantu yu yongzhengdi de tongzhi,” 祭先农坛图与雍正帝的统治, [Sacrificial offering at the altar of the first farmer and the Yongzheng emperor’s statecraft] Qingshi yanji 清史研究 no. 3 (2010): 151-56; Yi Yun-seok 이윤석, “Wongjeongjae- wa cheongdae gukga jesa: yeje-ui cheukmyeon-eseo bon Yongzheng tongchi,” 옹정제와 청대 국가제사: 예제의 측면에서 본 옹정 통치 [The emperor Yongzheng and Qing state sacrifice: Yongzheng’s rule examined through the ritual system] Myeongcheongsa yeongu 명청사연구, no. 25 (2003): 171-211. 11 Louis XIV deeply involved Jesuits’ activities in China. He personally offered them with a number of books bound in the French royal coat of arms. These books were expected to be shown to Chinese audiences. Noël Golvers, Libraries of Western Learning for China: Circulation of Western Books between Europe and China in the Jesuit Mission (ca. 1650-1750) (Leuven: Ferdinand Verbiest Institute, 2012), 344-345. 249 court in 1685, French Jesuits actively became engaged in the fields of science and art.12 Notable seventeenth-century examples are prints and tapestries that feature Louis XIV’s portrait in historical narratives (figs. 5-16, 5-17, 5-18).13 Even though Qing emperors and their court painters did not have chance to view French tapestries depicting the life of Louis XIV in their original form, it is highly possible that they still saw similar European royal imageries published in engravings and almanacs.14 Louis Pfilster, a nineteenth-century Jesuit priest (1833-1891), for example, testified to this fact when he stated that he saw portraits of European rulers, including images of Louis XIV and Spanish and English kings in the North Church 北堂 in Beijing.15 The Yongzheng 12 For French Jesuits’ activities, see: Liam Matthew Brocky, Journey to the East: The Jesuit Mission to China, 1579-1724 (Cambridge, MA and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2007), Benjamin A. Elman, “The Jesuit Role as Experts in High Qing Cartography and Technology,” in On Their Own Terms: Science in China, 1550-1900 (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 2005). For Ferdinand Verbiest (1623-1688) who played an essential role in bridging French and Chinese courts in the seventeenth century, see Ferdinand Verbiest (1623-1688): Jesuit Missionary, Scientist, Engineer and Diplomat, ed. John W Witek, S.J (Sankt Augustin and Leuven: Institut Monumenta Sinica and Ferdinand Verbiest Foundation, 1994). 13 For more information about the Louis XIV’s self-fashioning project through portraiture, historical narratives, and ceremonial spectacles, see: Peter Burke, The Fabrication of Louis XIV (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994); Georgia J. Cowart, The Triumph of Pleasure: Louis XIV and the Politics of Spectacles (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008). 14 European ruling classes also were exposed to Asian rulers’ ritualistic and festival activities through engravings. Some of images of engravings were compiled in the form of books. Bernard Picart’s Cérémonies et Coutumes Religieuses de tous les Peuples du Monde is one example. For a scholarly discussion on Picart’s book, see Lynn Hunt and Margaret C. Jacob, and Wijnand Mijinhardt, The Book That Changed Europe: Picart and Bernard's Religious Ceremonies of the World (Cambridge, MA.: Belknap Press, 2010). For the image of Louis XIX in almanacs, see Nicolas Milovanovic, “Les Almanachs de Louis XIV,” in Louis XIV: L’Homme & Le Roi (Paris: ESFP, 2009), 370-374. 15 Louis Pfister, Zai hua yesuhuishi liezhuan ji shumu 在华耶稣会士列传及书目[The Booklist and the Historical Biography of Jesuits in China], trans. Chengjun Feng 冯承钧(Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1995). 250 emperor’s familiarity with French royal portraits, possibly in the form of prints, can be seen in an oil painting of the emperor where he wears a French robe within a European-style. In all probability Louis XIV’s printed portraits were direct models for Yongzheng’s portrait (fig. 5-19).16 In addition to European royal imagery, engravings of battles, festivals, gardens and palaces are also believed to have been viewed by Qing emperors.17 As part of their proselytizing strategy, in addition to religious art, Jesuits used secular themes with a certain “spectacular value” such as battles, which were considered to effective propaganda materials to attract Chinese audiences.18 Noël Glovers argue that a large number of engravings of battle scenes, which were custom-made for the Chinese market, 16 Various scholars have attempted to find the source of artistic inspiration for Qing emperors’ self-fashioning in portraiture. Wu Hung has suggested that it is related to European practice of “masquerade” portrait, and James Cahill argues that it grew out of a Chinese tradition of guise portraits that existed since the late Ming dynasty, however, Hui Shu-li’s demonstrates that the guise portrait of emperor had been created as early as the Southern Song dynasty. For example, Emperor Lizong had himself painted as Fu Xi and other Confucian sages and worthies. Hui-shu Li, “Western Lake and the Mapping of Southern Song Art,” in Exquisite Moment: West Lake and Southern Song Art (New York: China Institute, 2001), 50-51. Although I agree that there was a tradition of pictorial self-fashioning in China and continued on to the eighteenth century, I believe that one of the three portrait albums, which the Yongzheng himself commissioned must have been directly inspired by the Louis XIV’s portraits which depict the king as Hercules, Apollo, a Roman emperor, Alexander the Great, and the Good Shepherd. In the album, Yongzheng is depicted as various figures evoking mythological, historical and religions figures of different cultures such as an Arabic hunter, a Tibetan monk, an immortal and so on. The connection between Qing imperial portraits and European allegorical portraits will be address in my future studies. 17 It is also important not to lose the sight that a number of prints that deal with Qing emperors’ activities besides their military campaigns became popular in France. For example, one of a series of 24 prints by Isidore-Stanislas Helman (1743-1806 or 1809) shows the Qing emperor conducting the Plowing ceremony. This print series is in the collection of the Musée Guimet. 18 Noël Golver, François de Rougemont, S.J., Missionary in Ch’ang-Shu (Chiang-Nan) Study of the Account Book (1674-1676) and the Elogium (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1999), 475. 251 were widely circulated in China.19 In fact, it is said that the Qianlong emperor saw engravings of battle scenes by the German artist Georg Philipp Rugendas I (1666-1742) and then commissioned Jesuit painters to create a series of engravings to document the Xinjiang campaigns (fig. 5-20).20 Joanna Waley-Cohen suggested the Qianlong emperor might have been inspired by battle paintings displayed at Versailles in France and at El Escorial and Buen Retiro in Spain to display mural paintings that recorded his military campaigns on the walls of the Hall of Purple Brightness.21 Most eighteenth-century court documentary paintings that include portraits of Qing emperors accentuate not only their physical presence but also their active roles in the depicted ceremonial and political events. In some works, however, the emperor’s presence is implied but his image is absent. For instance, in the Kangxi’s Sixtieth Birthday Celebration Procession 康熙皇帝萬壽圖 (late eighteenth century, handscroll, color on silk), the emperor is concealed inside his imperial palanquin (fig. 5-21).22 19 Noël Golver, Building Hamnistic Libraries in Late Imperial China (Rome: Edizionie Nuova Cultura, 2011), 143-144. 20 Paul Pelliot, “Les Conquetes de L’Empereur de la Chine,” T’oung Pao 20 (1921): 270-71. According to Michel Benoist (1715-1774), a French Jesuit who described in his letters that that the Qianlong emperor made comments such as “There are a number of European prints that represent military victories won by your sovereigns. Who are they defeating? What enemies have they had to fight?” Joanna Waley-Cohen, The Sextants of Beijing: Global Currents in Chinese History (New York and London: W.W. Norton and Company), 115. 21 Joanna Waley-Cohen, The Culture of War in China: Empire and the Military under the Qing Dynasty (London: I. B. Tauris, 2006), 41. 22 For stylistic analysis of the Kangxi and Qianlong emperors’ birthday scrolls, see Chen Pao-chen陳葆真, “Kangxihuangdi wanshoutu yu Qianlong baxunwangshoutude bijiaoyanjiu,” 康熙皇帝 萬壽圖與乾隆皇帝 八旬萬壽圖的比較研究 [Comparative analysis on the Kang emperor’s birthday scrolls and Qianlong emperor’s birthday scrolls] Gugong xueshu jikan故宮學 252 However, Matteo Ripa (1682–1746), who served in the Kangxi court from 1711 to 1723, testified that in the actual procession, the emperor was seated on a horse, allowing his visage to be seen by thousands of street viewers. …Upon this celebration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Emperor’s birth, the [lane] openings were not stopped nor the doors shut, nor were the people driven away [as usual]. The streets and roads were now crowded with countless multitudes desirous of beholding their sovereign. He rode on horseback, wearing a robe covered with dragons, magnificently embroidered in gold… He was preceded by about two thousand horse-soldiers… A vast number of aged but healthy men had been sent to [Beijing] from all the provinces. They were in companies, bearing the banners of their respective provinces. They also carried various other symbols and trophies, and being symmetrically drawn up along the streets through which the Emperor was to pass, they presented a very beautiful and uncommon appearance…23 The manner of concealing the emperor’s visage using furnishing or architectural props seemed to have emulated Song court documentary paintings such as a handscroll Four Events of the Jingde Era 景德四圖 (mid-11th century). Although the Zhengzong emperor was the protagonist of these four politically important events, in that Song-period scroll, architectural props were used to conceal the emperor’s image. In a few Qing court documentary paintings from the Qianlong reign: Grand Processional Paraphernalia Ceremony 大駕鹵簿圖 (1748), Ice Skating on the Palace Lake 冰嬉圖 (1760s) (fig. 5-22), and Qianlong Emperor’s Eightieth-Birthday Celebration 乾隆萬壽慶典圖 (1797, the second scroll of a set of two handscrolls, color on silk, 術季刊 30, no. 3 (2013): 45-122. 23 Matteo Ripa, Memoirs of Father Ripa During the Thirteen Years’ Residence at the Court of Peking in the Service of the Emperor of China: With an Account of the Foundation of the College for the Education of Young Chinese at Naples (New York, J. Wiley: 1849), 86. 253 Palace Museum, Beijing), no image of the Qianlong emperor can be found. The absence of the imperial visage, which had been first used in Kangxi Emperor’s Sixtieth-Birthday Celebration was adopted in Qianlong Emperor’s Eightieth-Birthday Celebration, as if seeking to formulating a pictorial lineage on the theme of the emperor’s birthday. During his eightieth-birthday procession in 1791, the Qianlong emperor is said to have opened the front palanquin curtain so that the street viewers were able to see him (at least partially), however, in the scroll, the emperor is completely hidden inside his imperial palanquin.24 Ice Skating on the Palace Lake 冰嬉圖 (1760s) depicts the emperor’s inspection of the Banner ice-skating teams drills on the Middle Lake of the Western Park (fig. 5-23). Here, the imperial boat drawn to the middle of the frozen lake is the only suggestion of the emperor’s presence, but no actual image of the emperor is shown. The works discussed above emulated the mode of concealing the emperor with architectural and furnishing elements, a convention, which had begun in the Song court. The idea of keeping the emperor concealed, however, can be traced to the Warring States period (ca. 475-221 BCE) and was exemplified by the First Emperor of Qin (259-210 BCE). According to Patricia Ebrey, elevated the walkways were intentionally built in order to keep people from identifying the emperor’s path of movements. 25 One can speculate that the idea of representing the imperial visage for other purposes (except for 24 Lillian M. Li, Beijing: From Imperial Capital to Olympic City (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008), 68. 25 Patricia Ebery, Emperor Huizong (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013) 513. 254 ancestral portraits) was still probably regarded as a taboo in the Song period and was applied to Song court documentary paintings. The image of a concealed emperor was found in Momoyama and Edo-period screen paintings (fig. 5-24). In regard to this Japanese case, Elizabeth Lillehoj suggests that the an imperial palanquin, which symbolized the emperor’s presence, embodied “the mystique of a hidden, august being and served as a significant metonymic device.”26 While Qing emperors were depicted in this manner only in the limited cases I have discussed above, the use of metonymic devices that represent the king’s physical body and face, and to symbolize his authority, became an established norm of court documentary painting in Joseon Korea until the end of the nineteenth century. To sum up, most Qing court documentary paintings contained images of Qing emperors. The inclusion of these imperial images certainly followed Ming traditions that clearly depicted the emperors in recognizable form and appearance. However, the mode of portraying Qing emperors in action must have been based on Yuan works that tended to portray emperors in the act of hunting and horse riding. In addition, European royal imagery, which was largely permeated by the Grand Manner Style, seemed to have reinforced the Qing emperors’ preference for dynamic imperial portraits. Joseon Kings and Their Symbolic Presence In contrast to the lifelike portraits of emperors in the Qing narrative scenes, there were no figural portrayals of Korean kings in any eighteenth-century Joseon court 26 Elizabeth Lillehoj, Art and Palace Politics in Early Modern Japan 1580s-1680s (Leiden and Boson: Brill, 2011), 34-35. 255 documentary paintings; the rulers were represented symbolically, that is, by objects that represented their presence. This practice persisted until the end of the nineteenth century. Thus, the aniconic representation of kings is often considered be one of the distinctive and persistent pictorial conventions of Joseon court documentary painting. In Royal Banquet at the Terrace of Auspicious Scallion 서총대친림사연도 (1564), one of the earliest Korean court documentary paintings, only the royal throne suggests the king’s presence at the banquet (fig. 5-25). Typically, as in the example above, an empty throne or chair set before a screen of the Five Peaks symbolized the presence of a Joseon king. In a series of court documentary paintings depicting state rites and created during Yeongjo’s reign, for instance, a screen of the Five Peaks situated behind an empty throne indicates the king’s presence and authority at state events: Album of the Gathering for the King’s Personal Governance in the Year of Mushin (1728; fig. 5-26); Album of the Gathering for the King’s Personal Governance in the Year of Gapyin (1734; fig. 5-27); a six-panel folding screen of the Gathering for the Royal Banquet after the King’s Personal Governance in the Year of Eulmyo (1735); Painting of the Grand Archery Ceremony (1743); Album of the Gathering for the King’s Entry to the Club of Elders in the Year of Gyeonghoe (1744); Album of the Gathering for Stream Drainage (1760); an eight-panel folding screen of the Royal Banquet for Elderly Officials and the Congratulatory Banquet for the Fortieth Anniversary of the King’s Reign at the Hall of Bright Wisdom (1765; fig. 5-28). The aniconic representation of kings continued during Jeongjo’s reign (r. 1776–1800). In eight-panel folding screens depicting the Congratulatory Offering ceremony of 256 1783 and the Personal Governance ceremony of 1785, a screen of the Five Peaks was used to signal the presence of Jeongjo (fig. 5-29).27 In the eight-panel folding screen that recorded Jeongjo’s trip to the city of Hwaseong in 1795, a royal parasol and an empty horse stood for the king’s presence in the procession (fig. 5-30). A number of scholars have agreed that the aniconic depiction of Korean kings was related to the sacred nature of the kings’ roles in state rites. Burglind Jungmann suggests that “Non-figurative representation elevated him to the divine.”28 Connecting the Korean kings’ sacredness and the symbolic depiction of their persons, In-soo Cho compares the aniconic representation of Joseon kings in court documentary paintings to the empty chair, wheel, and footprints of the Buddha in early Buddhist art.29 Although both Jungmann and Cho rightly define the Korean kings’ revered status in both sacred and secular realms, their arguments do not apply to Chinese examples—who played comparable roles in such events—were almost always depicted as human figures rather than as symbolic objects. Furthermore, there was no record to testify that Joseon people perceived non- 27 In limited cases, kings’ portraits were set before folding screens with different themes. In 1791, Yeongjo was going to set his portrait in front of a screen of the Ten Longevities 십장생도 as he installed it at the Palace of Bright Admiration, 창덕궁, at his father’s spiritual shrine called the Shrine of Bright Admiration 경모궁. But later the screen was changed to that of the Five Peaks. 28 Burglind Jungmann, “Documentary Record Versus Decorative Representation: A Queen’s Birthday Celebration at the Korean Court,” Arts Asiatiques 62 (2007), 107. 29 Cho In-Su 조인수, Wangui chosang: gyeongigoen gwa taejo Yi Seong-gye 왕의 초상: 경기전과 태조 이성계 [The king’s portrait: the hall of gyeonggi and Yi Seong-gye, the founder of the Joseon dynasty] (National Museum of Jeonju: 2005), 275. 257 figural representation to be more divine than figural representation of sacred figures. To the contrary, eighteenth-century Joseon kings increasingly commissioned their portraits in order to fashion their powerful secular and sacred authority. While the portraits of Joseon kings were considered as sacred as the kings themselves, it was not taboo to view their portrait images. By the eighteenth century, royal portraits were not just housed in memorial halls but also often distributed to various palace buildings, where royal family members and court officials viewed them frequently.30 According to the official record, Precious Mirror for the Succeeding Reign국조보감, in 1763 Yeongjo had two portraits of himself hung in the east wall of the Hall of Bright Wisdom 경현당 so that his grandson (the heir apparent, Jeongjo) and court officials could view them. 31 Royal banquets frequently took place in the Hall of Bright Wisdom, which gave court officials and royal family members regular opportunities to view Yeongjo’s portraits. The tradition of displaying royal portraits in palace buildings continued throughout the reign of Jeongjo. In 1781, Jeongjo showed his newly made portrait to court officials and had it 30 Using portraits as political tools was not limited only to royal portraits, Kang Gwan-sik researched the portraits of a powerful politician named Yun Jeung’s in the context of political factions in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Kang Gwan-sik 강관식, “Myeongjae Yun Jeung chosang ui jejak gwajeong gwa jeongchigeok hamgui,”명재 윤증 초상의 제작 과정과 정치적 함의 [The Process of Making Yun Jeung’s Portrait and Political Implications] Misulsa hakbo 미술사학보 34 (2010): 265-300; “Myeongjae Yun Jeung yusang yimosang ui johyeongjeok, jeuijeok, jeongchijeok haeseok,” 明齋 尹拯 (1629-1714) 遺像 移摹史의 造形的, 祭儀的, 政治的 解釋 [Pictorial, Ritual and Political Meanings of Yun Jeung’s Commemorative Portraits] Gangjwa misulsa 강좌미술사 35 (2010): 181-213. 31 An account of the year of 1763 from the Precious Mirror for Succeeding Reign Vol. 65. 258 displayed in the Hall of the Star of Literature 규장각.32 Placing his portrait there was a highly political decision since the hall housed Jeongjo’s education program that trained young, elite scholar-officials to be his supporters.33 During Jeongjo’s reign, ceremonies that exhibited his portrait were frequently held at that hall, and young scholars enrolled in the program were expected to attend. In spite of the Joseon kings’ increased openness about the making and exhibiting of their portraits and court officials’ frequent opportunities to view the kings’ painted visages, court documentary paintings still lacked images of the Joseon kings. Also, the depictions of event participants were not individualized, revealing that Joseon dynasty patrons were more concerned about the representation of an event’s organization and seating arrangements than a realistic portrayal of the persons present. Hence, in most of the works, the figures were rendered in a highly schematic, cursory manner. Often even their faces remained blank. In some late eighteenth-century works, however, such as 32 The accounts regarding the installation and display of a series of King Jeongjo’s portraits are found in an entry dated to the twenty-sixth day of the eighth lunar month and the first day of the ninth lunar month from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. At that time, Kim Hong-do 김홍도 (1745-?), Han Jongyu 한종유 (1737-?), and Shin Han-pyeong 신한평 (1726-?), court paitners who were good at drawing portraits, were called in to portray Jeongjo’s face. Two days later, Jeongjo appointed Kang Se-hwang 강세황 (1713-1791) to oversee these three candidates’ drawings, particularly in terms of depicting royal regalia. About a week later (the third day of the ninth lunar month), Kim Hong-do who had been selected as the final candidate for making Jeongjo’s portrait presented his final draft and several court officials were invited to examine the portrait. 33 The officials who worked at the Hall of the Star of Literature were charged with dusting and airing the portrait every five days. All the members of the Hall of the Star of Literature were required to attend the Offering and Reviewing Ceremony in the first, fourth, seventh and tenth months, when the king’s portrait was scheduled to be displayed. The regulations and procedures regarding the preservation and display of King Jeongjo’s portrait at the Hall of the Star Literature were recorded in an entry dated to the nineteenth day of the ninth lunar month in 1781 from the Veritable Records of Jeongjo. 259 Prince Munhyo’s Meeting with the Tutors of Nourishment and Protection 보양청계병 of 1783 (eight-panel folding screens, ink and colors on silk) (fig. 5-31), court painters actually did pay attention to facial features and even applying white pigment to the back of the silk support to give a sense of dimension, a technique traditionally used for Korean portraits as well as Buddhist paintings.34 But nevertheless, the faces remained generic. If such paintings were stored within the palace to be used as references for later performances of the same ceremonies, there was no great need for individualized portraits of event participants or for images of the king. Although these works were for internal court use, the king’s figural image was prohibited because royal portraits in the Joseon court were almost always intended for ritual veneration. The restricted use of the king’s portrait becomes even clearer considering that documentary paintings were given as souvenirs to court officials who attended state events. The recipients took them outside the palace, exhibited them as tokens of the king’s favor on special occasions, and handed them as family treasures down the generations. Such pictures could not include images of the king because the display and viewing of a king’s portrait was strictly confined to the palace. The Veritable Records tell us that a king’s portrait could not be made without the king’s direct order, and it was forbidden to take the portraits out of the palace. When a Japanese envoy presented a portrait of Sejo—which a Buddhist temple in Hakada 博多 in Fukuoka Prefecture had 34 Min Kil-hong 민길홍, “Cheonchilbaeknyeon ui munhyo sejawa boyang’gwan ui sang’gyeonryeo heangsa,” 1784 년의 문효세자와 보양관의 상견례행사 [The prince Munhyo’s meeting ceremony with the tutors of the office of nourishment and protection in the year 1784] Misul charyo 미술자료 80 (2012): 106. 260 enshrined—to the Joseon court as a token of his loyalty, he was told: 35 According to our law, whoever randomly painted the king’s visage is supposed to be punished. If you are Korean, you cannot be forgiven. However, since you did not know the grand meaning (of this law), so you are not going to be punished, but rather will be rewarded in response to your sincerity.36 …然凡人爲君王不得寫容, 犯之者罪重. 在我國人, 則不可赦也; 汝則不知大義, 故不責而反賞之, 以答汝誠… Furthermore, in books concerning the production of royal portraits, such as the Book of Painting Royal Portraits 御眞圖寫都監儀軌 and the Book of Copying of Royal Portraits 影幀模寫都監儀軌, Seong-mi Yi discovered that rejected drafts of royal portraits were supposed to be destroyed. Yi explains that this was done to prevent the royal images from being taken out of the palace.37 As I have demonstrated in Chapter Four in regard to the prevalent usage of court documentary paintings as gifts and souvenirs in the Joseon court, this prohibition is probably the main explanation for the absence of images of the kings in documentary paintings, which often were distributed as gift items and taken out of the palace complex.38 35 Cho Seon-mi 조선미, Wang-ui eolgul 왕의 얼굴 [King’s face] (Seoul: Saheopyeongron, 2012), 93-94. 36 This account is recorded in a daily entry dated to the sixth day of the sixth month in 1472 from the Veritable Records of King Seongjong. 37 Yi Song-mi 이성미, Eojin uigwe wa misulsa: Joseon gukwang chosanghwa ui jejak gwa mosa 어진의궤와 미술사: 조선국왕 초상화의 제작과 모사 [Art history and uigwe of making royal portraits: Joseon kings’ portraits and their making and copying practice] (Seoul: Sohwadang, 2012), 43. 38 The presence of females in court events was also symbolized by empty chairs and screens set behind them, depicting themes ranging from landscapes and peonies to the Ten 261 The Screen of the Five Peaks as the King’s Symbolic Body Despite the symbolic association between the king’s physical presence and the screen of the Five Peaks, there are no historical documents that explain how and why the Five Peaks became the exclusive symbol of the Korean kings. A number of scholarly attempts to solve this issue have been made, but none are completely satisfactory.39 For example, Jo Yong-jin suggests that the iconography of the Screen of the Five Peaks might be found in “Heaven Protects 天保,” a poem from the Book of Poetry 詩經. 40 However, the most crucial iconographic element of the Five Peaks does not appear anywhere in the poem. Kim Hong-nam has suggested that Jeong Do-jeon 정도전 (1337-1398), who was Longevities 십장생도 and the Han Palace 한궁도. Burglind Jungmann argues that the emblematic portrayal of female members of the royal family was closely related to conservative Neo-Confucianism that emphasized patriarchal values. Burglind Jungmann, “Documentary Record Versus Decorative Representation: A Queen’s Birthday Celebration at the Korean Court,” Arts Asiatique 62 (2007): 104-106. Kang Myeong-gwan 강명관points out that privately commissioned documentary paintings; the Album of Cerebrating Longevity Feast 경수연도첩 (1605, Seoul Museum of History) and the Album of Longevity Feast Attended by Court Officials during the Seonjo Reign 선묘조제재경수연도첩, which depict a celebrating longevity feast 慶夀宴 to honor an elderly mother in the early seventeenth century, portray the anthropomorphic image of female participants, but those paintings crated toward the seventeenth century and onward; the Cerebrating Longevity Feast for Seven Grand Ladies 칠태부인경수연도 (1691, Basan Museum), no longer figurally depict the image of women or hide their presence with architectural props. Kang Myeong-gwan, Geurim-euro ikneun Joseon yeoseong-ui yeoksa 그림으로 읽는 조선여성의 역사[Reading the history of Joseon-period women via paintings] (Seoul: Humanist, 2012), 151-172. 39 Yi Song-mi summarizes various discussions on the iconography of the screen of the Five Peaks in her article, “The Screen of the Five Peaks of the Chŏson Dynasty,” in Joseon wangshil ui misul munhwa 조선왕실의 미술문화 [The visual culture of the Joseon royal court] (Seoul: Daewonsa, 2005), 466-519. 40Jo Yong-jin 조용진, Donyanghwa igneubeob 동양화읽는법 [How to read East Asian traditional painting] (Seoul: Jipmundang, 1989). For the poem, see Arthur Waley, The Book of Songs: the Ancient Chinese Classic of Poetry (New York City: Grove Press, 1996), 138-139. 262 instrumental in establishing the Joseon dynasty, might have been responsible for the design of the Five Peaks screen because he composed the overall iconographic scheme for the palace architecture and its interior decoration.41 While it is true that Jeong played such a role, there is no evidence to support the claim that he was involved in the iconographic inventions of the screen of the Five Peaks. Furthermore, from historical records such as Uigwe 의궤, or manuals of ritual protocols, it appears that the combination of the Five Peaks with the sun and moon discs was not formulated until the early seventeenth century.42 The earliest depiction of the Five Peaks with the sun and moon discs is found in the portrait of the king Sejo (dated to 1458) at Haein Monastery 해인사. In this painting, Sejo (r. 1455–68) is portrayed seated on a throne in front of a screen depicting the Five Peaks (fig. 5-32). The sun and the moon discs do not appear on the screen; they appear instead on fans held by flanking attendants.43 From this we can conclude that the sun and the moon served as royal symbols and were for this reason added later to the design of 41 Kim Hong-nam 김홍남, “Ilwol obongbyeong gwa Jeong Do-Jeon,” 일월오봉병과 정도전 [Screen of the five mountains with the sun and the moon and Jeong Do-jeon] in Jung’guk Han’guk Misulsa 중국 한국 미술사 [Chinese and Korean art history] (Seoul: Hakgojae, 2009), 458-467. 42 Myeong Se-na first argued that the sun and moon discs were not painted but rather were mirrors set on either side of the screen. Myeong Se-na 명세나, “Joseon sidae obongbyeong- ui yeongu: hyungryeo dogam uigwe girok-eul jungshim euro,” 조선시대 오봉병의 연구: 흉례도감의궤 기록을 중심으로 [Study of the screen of the five peaks by analyzing the uigwe of funerary rites] (master’s thesis, Ehwa Women’s University, 2007). 43 According to the inscription written on the back of this portrait, by the king’s order in the fall of 1458, Yun Sa-ro 윤사로 (1423–63) and Cho Seok-moon 조석문 (1413–77) installed the king’s portrait at the Haein-sa Temple. 263 the screen of the Five Peaks. Scholars have often discussed the Five Peaks in a Daoist context, explaining that they may represent the Five Agents 五行—wood, fire, earth, metal, and water—the fundamental components of the universe. In making this connection, scholars often overlook the fact that the Five Peaks constituted one of the oldest royal symbols. According to James Robson, the Five Sacred Peaks 五岳 had been mentioned in a chapter of the Book of Zhou 周禮, “Great Master of Sacrificial Rites” 大宗伯, which may date to the mid-second century BCE or slightly earlier. In fact, the Zhou court performed offering sacrifices to the Five Sacred Peaks along with the Altar of the Earth, the Altar of Grain, and the Five Household Deities. According to Robson, “by the Zhou dynasty, the Five Sacred Peaks symbolically marked the reach of the empire and were venerated as powerful entities that contributed to successful harvests and imperial power.”44 Similarly, the sun and moon discs—whether first spawned in a Daoist context or elsewhere—were among the oldest of royal emblems, representing the privilege of the Son of Heaven.45 Confucian classics such as the Book of Rites 禮記 and the Book of Etiquette and Decorum 儀禮 mention that Chinese kings carried flags with figures of the sun and the moon on their way to perform sacrifices to Heaven. The following passage is from the Book of Rites. 44 James Robson, Power of Place: The Religious Landscape of the Southern Sacred Park in Medieval China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2009), 41. 45 The sun and moon discs are depicted on top of a T-shape banner, excavated from the tomb of Marquise of Dai at Mawangdui in Hunan Province. In that work, the sun and the moon, each accompanied by a crow and a toad, symbolized that the Marquise entered the celestial realm. 264 Thus it was that the rulers of Lu, in the first month of spring, rode in a grand carriage to the fringes of their metropolis, displaying the banner suspended from its bow-like arm, with the twelve streamers, and the sun and the moon emblazoned on it, to sacrifice to Heaven…46 是以魯君，孟春乘大路，載弧韣；旗十有二旒，日月之章；祀帝于郊 One of Cai Jing’s 蔡京 (1047-1126) poems was written in response to Huizong’s poem about his preparation of outing to the Suburban Sacrifice. In this poem, Cai Jing borrows the imagery of some of ritual objects often used in imperial processional paraphernalia ceremonies.47 In dragon robe and scarlet shoes, at the central staircase he faces south. By the great carriage, the phoenix calls and the imperial guards are solemn. The Jade carriage quickly turns and the conjunction of the son and moon is set. As the golden crow [the sun] begins to rise, the white clouds brighten. By the Five Gates [to the palace] the early morning breezes make the flags and banners flutter…48 In a Southern Song processional paraphernalia scroll 大駕玉輅圖, in the collection of the Liaoning Provincial Museum (fig. 5-33), the sun and the moon, which Cai Jing used for his poem, are depicted on ceremonial fans carried over the heads of royalty, strongly suggesting that the sun and the moon discs were the part of regalia for the Son of the Heaven. Since the Korean Goryeo court (918–1392) had adopted ritual regalia from the 46 Translation by James Legge. Li Chi: Book of Rites, Part II, trans. James Legge (Hong Kong: Forgotten Books), 19. 47 Patricia Ebrey, Emperor Huizong (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013), 291. 48 Ibid., 291. 265 Song court, it is likely that the sun and moon discs had already been regarded as the symbols of the Son of Heaven in the Goryeo court and used in paraphernalia processions. Nevertheless, it is not known when the Five Peaks and the sun and the moon became joined symbols, but the scheme seems to have been established about the early eighteenth century, interestingly corresponding when Joseon kings started to claim to be the only legitimate caretaker of Zhonghua. The earliest known appearance of the Five Peaks with the sun and the moon is found in the Album of Royal Banquet진연도첩 (1706) (fig. 5-34).49 Furthermore, it is important to note that these three motifs—the Five Peaks, the sun, and the moon—were among the twelve insignias that adorned a Chinese emperor’s ritual robe. Since the Zhou dynasty (ca. 1050–256 BCE), the Twelve Symbols—sun disc, moon disc, seven stars of the Big Dipper, mountain, dragon, pheasant, sacrificial goblet, water weed, grains of millet, flames, axe, and fu or fortune symbol—were the most important motifs, and their usage was strictly confined to the emperor.50 Representing the concept of universal sovereignty, the sun and moon discs were primary symbols of Heaven and were placed on the shoulders of the emperor’s ceremonial robe. The Hongwu emperor 洪武帝 (r. 1368–98), the founder of the Ming dynasty, bestowed the sacrificial nine-insignia robes 九章服 on the first king of the Joseon 49 Yi Seong-mi 이성미, Eojin uigwe-wa misulsa: joseon gukwang chosanghwa-ui jeojak-wa mosa 어진의궤와 미술사: 조선국왕 초상화의 제작과 모사 [Uigwe of royal portraits and art history: production and copying of Joseon-period royal portraits] (Seoul: Sowadang, 2012), 316. 50 For more information about the twelve insignia, see Valery Garrett, Chinese Dress: From the Qing Dynasty to the Present (North Clarendon: Tuttle Publishing, 2008). 266 dynasty; from that time, as feudal subordinates of the Ming, Joseon kings were only allowed to use nine of the twelve royal insignias (fig. 5-35).51 The three insignias not allowed on the robes of Joseon kings—reserved only for the Son of Heaven, the emperor in China—were the Big Dipper, the sun, and the moon (fig. 5-36). It cannot be coincidental that the sun and moon discs were painted on the either side of the Five Peaks screen: the discs are situated more or less directly above the shoulders of the Joseon king as he sits on the throne.52 The sun and moon depicted on the screen of the Five Peaks behind the throne and the nine insignias on the robe of the king combine to complete the twelve-symbol scheme of the Chinese imperial robe. The screen and the robe, seen together, suggest the Korean king’s status was nearly that of the Son of the Heaven, without literally violating the Ming regulations.53 If the twelve royal insignias on a robe symbolically protected a 51All twelve appeared for the first time on the robe of the Hongwu emperor (r. 1368–98) after he established the Imperial Costume Code of 1383. King Taejo (r. 1392–98), the founder of the Joseon dynasty, twice received a nine-insignia robe, in his second and third reign years; the Veritable Records of King Taejo, vols. 3 and 6. The analysis on ritual regulations in the Collected Rites of the Great Ming shows that Joseon kings were treated equally or slightly higher than imperial princes. Jeong Dong-hun 정동훈, “Myeongdae-ui yejae-e natanan joseon wang-ui uisang,” 명대의 예제에 나타난 조선 왕의 위상 [Status of Joseon kings in the Ming-period ritual system] Yeoksa wa hyeongsil 역사와 현실, no. 84 (2012): 251–92. 52 Kim Hong-nam briefly commented on a possible relation between the Joseon king’s nine-insignia robe and the sun and the moon motifs of the Five Peaks screen. However, her commentary did not develop beyond the expression of cursory impressions about them. Kim Hong-nam 김홍남, “Joseon sidae ilwol obyeong-e daehan dosanghaeseokhakjeok yeongu,” 조선시대 일월오봉병에 대한 도상해석학적 연구 [Iconographic analysis on the Joseon-period screen of the five peaks with the sun and the moon] in Jungguk hanguk misulsa 중국 한국미술사 [Chinese and Korean art history] (Seoul: Hakgojae, 2009), 446-447. 53 Remco E. Breuker points out that, despite the persistent inclination to conflate the emperor and the Son of Heaven, Chinese political philosophy makes a fundamental distinction between these two concepts. The fact that the Chinese Son of Heaven also happened to be the 267 Chinese emperor, the nine insignias on a robe plus the sun and moon on the screen of the Five Peaks did the same for a Korean king and conveyed the king’s role as the Son of Heaven for the Korean land and people.54 emperor should not obscure this distinction. Early Chinese Sons of Heaven, for instance, were referred to as kings 王 and not as emperors. Remco E. Breuker, “Koryo as an Independent Realm: The Emperor’s Clothes?,” Korean Studies 27 (2003): 51. 54 For a discussion of the screen of the Five Peaks with the sun and moon discs in relation to the blue-and-green landscape tradition, see Cheongrok sansu nakwon eul geurida 청록산수 낙원을 그리다 [Blue and green landscape painting as depiction of paradise] (Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2006). 268 Conclusion Following the tactical use of imperial portraits, the lifelike images of Qing emperors in court documentary paintings were intended to illustrate the emperors’ various identities that were required to successfully rule a multiethnic empire: a Confucian sage-king, a Manchu nomadic chieftain, and a Buddhist universal ruler, or chakravartin. Showing the emperors’ diverse political identities in the narrative context of documentary paintings had precedents. As demonstrated in Chapter Four, Qing court documentary paintings, particularly those mounted in handscrolls were treated as visual forms of historical records useful for statecraft. The inclusion of the emperor’s image in these works was imperative because it showed him as the protagonist of important events as well as a narrator unfolding the story of his political achievements. The usage of multiple styles and modes of representation, which had drawn on past artistic traditions in eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings seems to resonate Qing emperors’ instructions about the importance of the diverse cultural resources from the past and the present to successfully rule their multi-ethnic empire, which encompassed a wide range of religious, cultural and political values. Similar to their Qing counterparts, yet in contrast with their predecessors, eighteenth-century Joseon kings commissioned a large number of portraits of themselves and displayed them to their officials. Although most of these portraits were destroyed during the Korean War (1950-1953), ample official court records indicate that “life-like” royal images were favored and thus chosen as the official royal portrait. However, kings 269 were never figurally depicted in Joseon court documentary paintings and were only symbolically represented. I proposed that the king’s life-like image was not included in Joseon court documentary paintings because these paintings were often created for distribution as gifts and souvenirs and since the circulation of the king’s portrait outside the palace was prohibited at that time, it was imperative that the king was not depicted in them. The Screen of the Five Peaks with the Sun and the Moon, which was often depicted in place of the king as a royal symbol in Joseon court documentary paintings demonstrates eighteenth-century Joseon kings’ negotiation of their political and cultural identity with the emperors of China, and demonstrates how profoundly the visual culture of the Joseon court was embedded in that of the successive imperial courts in China. 270 CHAPTER SIX: MODES OF REPRESENTING SPACE IN QING AND JOSEON COURT DOCUMENTARY PAINTING Introduction This chapter will analyze three approaches to the portrayal of settings where eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers conducted state ceremonies or otherwise engaged in public activities: diagrammatic descriptions that emphasize the placement of the depicted events; topographical representations that detail the surrounding landscape or cityscape; and illusionistic representations that aim for a three-dimensional pictorial space. Via the high vantage point of bird’s-eye view, diagrammatic space provides a complete overview of the ceremonial spectacle, made up of human participants and ritual objects. In topographic descriptions, the inclusion of background scenery informs the viewer about the environment surrounding the ceremony, while the extensive usage of the blue-and-green palette was intended to convey the successful governance that had brought prosperity to the domain. Finally, illusionistic representations with linear perspective and chiaroscuro are used in order to create a three-dimensional space. Its geometric spatial treatment also was used to evoke the orderly and logical approach that ideal rulers would take toward governing. 271 Three Modes of Representing Space Three modes of representing space were employed in both Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings: diagrammatic, topographical, and illusionistic. To varying degrees, these three modes were used together; however, in some cases, artists used one mode exclusively. The choice of mode was closely related to each court’s pictorial traditions, preferred formats, and expectations of the functions of these paintings. At the Qing court, the preferred formats for documentary paintings were large tieluo paintings and handscrolls. Within long, horizontal handscrolls, court painters extensively utilized bird’s-eye views to create extended panoramas. The events and their ceremonial spectacles are set in a larger, seemingly infinite landscape. Combined with a diagrammatic treatment of the event, the bird’s-eye view served to present a map-like display of the ritual formation. The high vantage point in particular allowed the viewer to examine topographical features of the landscape or cityscape surrounding the ceremonial or political events. Within the large, rectangular areas of a detachable mural painting, Qing painters often employed linear perspective along with bird’s-eye views to create the illusion of depth. The imperial throne was often located in front of the point where all the receding lines appeared to converge. As discussed in Chapter Four, eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings were mostly formatted as albums and folding screens, with the exception of a few hanging scrolls. Regardless of the format, the court painters designed pictorial spaces in a highly diagrammatic and hierarchical manner borrowed from illustrated ritual manuals. Bird’s-eye view was employed in a few cases and implied diagonal lines may 272 lead the viewer to the focal point of the event, but efforts to create the optical illusion of three-dimensional space are rare. Unlike Qing examples, the royal throne is almost always is positioned on the top of the picture plane, not only visually evoking the idea that the king is positioned at the top of the royal hierarchy, but also indicating a specific ritual protocol that the king is supposed to face the south. Diagrammatic Representation of Space Maxwell K. Hearn insightfully points out that in The Qianlong Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour, the “figures appear like rigidly posed mannequins—recalling those in many European rococo paintings, in which protagonists appear to be stiffly frozen within static, stagelike tableaux.”1 In fact, other paintings, particularly those produced during the Qianlong reign, share a similar rigidness in the representation of space and figures (fig. 6-1). I believe that some of this rigidity may be related to the increasingly prescribed nature of court ceremonies and to the Qing. As discussed in Chapter Three, a large number of ritual manuals were produced in the eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon courts. Illustrations were included in those manuals to enhance the understanding of textual prescriptions for ritual procedures. These illustrations were referred to by various terms, in Chinese as zuoci tu 坐次圖 (picture of seating sequence), tushuo 圖說 (pictorial explanation), tushi 圖式 (pictorial diagram), and in Korean as bancha-do 班次圖 (picture 1 Maxwell K. Hearn, “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and the Kangxi emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour,” in Landscapes Clear and Radiant: The Art of Wang Hui (1632–1717) (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2008), 180. 273 of arrangement and sequence) and baeban-do 排班圖 (picture of arrangement) (figs. 6-2, 6-3, 6-4, 6-5).2 Via bird’s-eye view, these diagrams provide a complete overview of ceremonial spectacles, made up of human participants and ritual objects. Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings are visual records of state rites and court ceremonies, where various social and political classes participated and interacted with each other, yet carried out different duties. The diagrammatic approach of flattening, yet showing everything was a layout is an ideal one in terms of informing the arrangement of ritual space and both human participants and ritual objects. A number of eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings followed such a distinctive hierarchical mode of reconstructing a pictorial space. The Yongzheng Emperor’s Sacrifice at the Altar of the First Farmer (Scroll One in the collection of Palace Museum, Beijing) is an excellent example (fig. 6-6). In the scroll, the space the emperor temporarily occupies is marked by palace guards arranged in a half circle, and the passage through which the emperor will soon march is lined by a series of red lanterns, leading to the altar. On either side of the stairs leading to the altar, groups of palace musicians await the appearance of the emperor. The visual elements correspond to the sequence of ritual events.3 Due to the horizontal orientation of handscrolls, the 2 For various uses of diagrams, see Graphics and Text in the Production of Technical Knowledge in China: The Warp and the Weft, eds. Francesca Bray, Vera Dorofeeva-Lichtmann, and Georges Métailié (Leiden: Brill, 2007). 3 Anita Chung argues that jiehua 界畫, a line-drawing technique, was used to create a hierarchical pictorial space in Qing court documentary paintings. Anita Chung, Drawing Boundaries: Architectural Images in Qing China (Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 2004), 77-78. 274 emperor is not positioned higher than other figures, nevertheless, his space is demarcated by a half circle formed by palace guards demonstrating the hierarchy that permeates throughout the scroll. The landscape and architectural elements mainly serve to compartmentalize and hierarchize the pictorial space in accordance with the solemnity of this state rite rather than to enhance a sense of depth. Grand Review 大閱圖 is another excellent example of a documentary painting that diagrammatized pictorial space (fig. 6-7). The Scroll Two, Troops in Formation 列陣, documents a meticulously choreographed performance of one of the most important military ceremonies, which involved twenty thousand troops.4 The inscription provides a detailed record of the troop formations of the Eight Banners: Following the regulation of the troop formation; The Left Flank—consisting of four banners: Bordered Yellow, Plain White, Bordered White, and Plain Blue—was arrayed by rank with the west side being in forward position. The Right Flank—consisting of four banners: Plain White, Plain Red, Bordered Red, and Bordered Blue—was arrayed by rank with the east side being in forward position, each banner forming a unit under its flag. At the forefront were the Chinese-army firearms brigade, the Manchu-guard firearms brigade, and the Manchu-cavalry firearms brigade, each arrayed in separate units. Placed in front of the Chinese-army firearms brigade were twenty racks of deer antlers that musketeer foot soldiers were leaning against, as well as eighty men carrying deer antlers on poles, and four men holding ropes.5 列阵之制, 左翼四旗曰镶黄,曰正白,曰镶白,曰正蓝, 以 4 The third scroll is almost identical to the second scroll, but has no depiction of the emperor. 5 Nie Chongzheng 聂崇正, “Liezheng yu yuezhen: Gugong neiwei de liangjuan Qianlong dayuetu,” 列阵与阅阵: 故宫内外的两卷乾隆大阅图 [Troops in Formation and Inspection of Formation: The two scrolls of the Qianlong emperor’s grand review ceremony in the collection of the Palace Museum] Zijincheng 紫禁城, no. 8 (2009): 86-95. 275 次而东, 西上右翼四旗曰正黄,曰正红,曰镶红,曰镶蓝; 以次 而西, 东上各按旗为队图之. 最前者曰汉军火器营,曰满洲护 军火器营,曰满洲晓骑火器营, 并列而各别其队汉军火器营前 设鹿角二十具, 鸟枪步军依鹿角而立, 弃鹿角者八十人, 引绳 者四人. This inscription was, in fact, directly quoted from volume 11 of the Collected Statutes of the Great Qing 大清會典 (fig. 6-8), and the diagrammatic image on the scroll itself seems to have been inspired by the illustration that accompanies the text (fig. 6-9). According to the Archives of the Workshop of the Imperial Household Department 造辦處各作成作活計清檔, when the Qianlong emperor saw a completed part of Grand Review in 1746, he found aspects that did not match the ritual diagrams and ordered corrections to be made.6 Jin Kun 金昆, the head painter of Grand Review scrolls, only received half of his salary until he corrected his mistakes.7 This episode vividly illustrates how Qing emperors expected court painters to painstakingly document the detailed appearance of ritual objects and the layout of state rites according to the textual and visual description provided by ritual manuals. As evident in the composition of the Grand Review scrolls, the bird’s-eye view allowed for a visual survey of ritual formations. In her discussion on Qing architectural paintings, which include most documentary paintings, Anita Chung suggests that the 6 This account is found on a record called Jishilu 記事錄 [Records of Events] from Zaobanchu gezuo chengzuo huoji qing dang 造辦處各作成作活計清檔 [Archives of the Workshop of the Imperial Household Department] dated to the twenty-second day of the third lunar month of the eleventh year of the Qianlong reign. 7 This account is found on the Jishilu dated to the twenty-seventh day of the third lunar month of the eleventh year of the Qianlong reign. 276 frequent usage of panoramic views reflected the Qing’ emperor’s totalizing perspective. “The trend of representing broad panoramic views of Chinese cities might reveal the interest of the Qing emperors—who were in their high position—to inspect the empire from a height and to assert their acquisitive power. If this trend of development started incidentally in the pictorial document Kangxi Southern Inspection Tour (because an expansive treatment of a city is suitable for the theme of inspection), then the continuity of an expansive style in almost all kinds of cityscape renditions was certainly not the result of coincidence. The continuity of theme and style further suggests the symbolic significance of expansive views of cityscape to the royal patrons, especially to the Qianlong Emperor, who repeatedly demanded works displaying a broad panoramic view of a city, no matter whether it was an actual Qing city.”8 However, according to Giuliana Bruno, the bird’s-eye-view was “often mistaken as ‘cognitive mapping’ from a superior eye.” Rather than a totalizing perspective, as Bruno put it, it was meant as “a view from ‘nowhere’ to ‘now here’.” An aerial perspective offered “a fabricated mode of observation that opened the narrative space.”9 The panoramic representation of space in the Grand Review is a prime example. In these scrolls, the painter’s use of the bird’s-eye view combined with the action of unrolling the scroll, would have allowed the imperial viewer to virtually inspect the scene and observe the unfolding narrative, simultaneously. Although the diagrammatic approach to depicting pictorial space became more noticeable in eighteenth-century Qing works than in paintings of the Song and Ming periods, it was not the dominant spatial mode used by Qing painters. It was, however, 8 Anita Chung, Drawing Boundaries, 96-97. 9 Giuliana Bruno, Atlas of Emotion: Journeys in Art, Architecture, and Film (New York: Verso, 2002), 177. 277 ubiquitous in eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings. Park Jeong-hye demonstrates that Joseon paintings designated space in a manner that was remarkably similar to the diagrams of ritual manuals and bancha-do, the pictures of arrangement and sequence.10 As Park points out, Joseon painters constructed pictorial space in a highly diagrammatic manner from the time court documentary paintings first appeared in the sixteenth century, and that some of the works are almost identical to the diagrams of ritual manuals. The pictorial space in each of the three handscrolls that depict Yeongjo’s Grand Archery ceremony is strictly compartmentalized into three spaces: foreground, middle ground, and background, much like that of ritual diagrams. In these paintings, the royal throne always occupies the upper region of each scroll, which corresponds to the north (fig. 6-10). This placement certainly followed a ritual norm that dictated the position of Joseon kings in the royal palace as always seated in the north and facing south. Also, this throne placement put the king at the highest position in the ceremony and the furthest point from the viewer. One scene depicts an archery target and a group of eunuchs recording the archery results in the foreground, the lowest register. This layout is almost identical to a ritual diagram for the performance of the Grand Archery ceremony in the Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites 국조속오례의 (fig. 6-11). A 1764 hanging scroll that depicts Yeongjo’s fifth performance of the Plowing ceremony 친경도 also shares its composition with that ritual’s diagram in the 10 Park Jeong-hye 박정혜, Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 조선시대 궁중기록화 연구[Study of Joseon-period court documentary painting] (Seoul: Iljisa, 2000), 263. 278 Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites (figs. 6-12, 6-13). In both the diagram and the painting, the king is seated on the royal throne on the Plowing Observation Platform 觀耕台, located at the northernmost position and facing south. Characters written below the throne indicate the sacred field where the king would perform the Plowing ceremony. Indicated to the west are the positions of royal family members, court officials, and cows, which would pull the plow. Their visual affinity to the ritual diagrams suggests that Joseon painters directly referred to the manuals to translate actual ceremonies into imageries.11 Although a large number of personnel, including about two hundred farmers, participated in the ceremony at various levels, the painting does not show any of them but rather focuses on the ritual plan and a few representative participants: court officials and selected farmers.12 Based on this example, one can also conjecture that most eighteenth-century paintings documenting rituals, including a lost eight-panel folding screen depicting Jeongjo’s Scything ceremony, would have had the same compositions as the associated diagrams in ritual manuals. The diagrammatic depiction of space in Joseon folding-screen paintings is not much different from that in the albums or hanging scrolls. The only element unique to 11 Kim Ji-yeong discovered a photograph of a hanging scroll that depicts Yeongjo’s Plowing ceremony in Fujita Ryōsaku 藤田亮策, “Chōsen Eiso shinkōzu ni tsukite,” 朝鮮英祖親耕圖に就きて [About King Yeongjo’s Plowing Painting] Chōsen Nōkai hō 朝鮮農會報 40, no. 6 (1940), and discussed it in her article “Yeongjodae chingyeonguisik-ui goheang-gwa chingyeong uigwe,”영조대 친경의식의 거행과 친경의궤 [Plowing ceremony during the reign of King Yeongjo and the uigwe of plowing ceremony] Hanguk hakbo 한국학보 28, no. 2 (2002): 55-86. 12 About one to two thousand people participated at various levels in the king’s Plowing Ceremony. Han Hyeong-ju 한형주, Bat ganeun yeongjo-wa nuechineun jeongsun wanghu 밭가는 영조와 누에치는 정순왕후 [Yeongjo plowing and queen Jeongsun rearing silkworms] (Seongnam: The Academy of Korean Studies, 2013): 98-99. 279 folding-screen paintings is the addition of architectural elements around the main building of the event, which emulated Joseon maps that depicted mountains around cities and tomb sites. In The Royal Banquet at the Hall of Sublime Governance 숭정전 진연도병 (1744; fig. 6-14), The Royal Banquet for Senior Officials in the Year of Eulyu and the Royal Banquet at the Hall of Bright Wisdom 영조을유기로연· 경현당수작연도병 (1765), The Ceremony of Offering Congratulations 진하도 (1783; fig. 6-15), and The Prince Meeting with His Tutors 보양청계병 (1784), the floors of the palace rooms are tilted so the viewer can see the positions of ritual objects and event participants. Similar to albums and hanging scrolls, the depictions of royal banquets on folding screens were also modeled after diagrams in ritual manuals such as the Supplementary Manual of the Five State Rites. The diagrammatic approach to space, which primarily concerns the arrangement of human and non-human elements of rituals is omnipresent in eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary painting. It attests to eighteenth-century Joseon court painters’ emulation of illustrations in ritual manuals as they created court documentary paintings.13 In fact, this style contrasts sharply with the style of documentary paintings produced and 13 For Joseon painters’ workshop practices and collaboration, see: Park Jeong-hye 박정혜, “Uigwe-reul tonghaeseo bon joseon sidae-ui hwawon,” 의궤를 통해서 본 조선시대의 화원 [Study of Joseon-period court painters through analysis of uigwe] Misulsa yeong’gu 미술사연구 9 (1995): 203-90; Kang Gwan-sik 강관식, “Joseon-ui gukwang-gwa gungjung hwawon,” 조선의 국왕과 궁중화원 [Joseon kings and court painters], in Joseon wangsil ui misul munhwa 조선왕실의 미술문화 [Visual culture in the Joseon royal court] (Seoul: Daewonsa, 2005); Hwang Jeong-yeon 황정연, “Joseon sidae hwawon-gwa gungjung hoehwa,” 조선시대 화원과 궁중회화 [Court painters and court art] in Wang-ui hwagadeul 왕의 화가들 [The king’s painters] (Seoul: Dolbaegae, 2012). 280 circulated outside the court. Such works, privately commissioned by court officials to commemorate their own family festivals, show no concern for schematic ritual settings but rather focus on capturing the festive mood of the events (fig. 6-16).14 The text of ritual manuals prescribing the correct sequence of words for the flawless performance and the pictorial structure of court paintings documenting rituals both formally express the ideal order of the ritual realm.15 As explicated above, a number of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings utilized a style that echoed the sense of space and the observation of details seen in the diagrams of ritual manuals. The intention of the manuals and the paintings was to depict the elements of the ritual scene, and to inform how these elements (human and non-human elements) were supposed to have been positioned and interact with one another. A diagrammatized ritual scene in Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings is a microcosmic chart of a pre-modern Chinese and Korean society where everything followed the principle of hierarchy. Topographical Representation of Space In most Joseon court documentary paintings and a few Qing examples, notably 14 Documentary paintings continued to be created outside the court. These works include the Album of the Sixtieth Wedding Anniversary Celebration 회혼례첩 (18th c.) and the Album of the Centennial Birthday Banquet 선묘조 제재경수연도 (18th-c. copy of a 17th-c. work). These works depict male and female banquet attendees in a relatively detailed manner. 15 For the textual structure of ritual manuals, see Joachim Gentz, “The Ritual Meaning of Textual Forms: Evidence from Early Commentaries of the Historiographic and Ritual Traditions,” in Text and Ritual in Early China, ed. Martin Kern (Seattle: University of Washington, 2005), 124-48. 281 those examined above, the bird’s-eye view was used to create panoramic surveys of ritual formations that appear flattened within encompassing views of the ritual settings. In this diagrammatic treatment of pictorial space, topographical information is minimal. However, in more topographical treatments of ritual settings, the bird’s-eye view creates semi-panoramic landscapes and architectural environments. Court painters included topographic features surrounding ceremonial or political events to increase a sense of realism, and also paid close attention to the depiction of new or expanded court-sponsored buildings or famous local sites, possibly to celebrate the rulers’ continuing development of their domain. For example, in a set of scrolls that documents the Yongzheng emperor’s sacrifice at the Altar of the First Farmer and his first Plowing ceremony at the sacred field, the bird’s-eye view shows the topographic features of the altar complex. The first structure in the scroll is the Hall of Court Clothing 具服殿, where the emperor prepared for the ceremony; it is followed by the Plowing Observation Platform 觀耕台, where the imperial throne is located (fig. 6-17). Also, in a set of four handscrolls—Visiting the Altar 詣壇, Sacrifices at the Altar 祭壇, Picking Mulberry Leaves 採桑, and Presenting Cocoons 獻繭, which document the Empress Xiaoxian Chun’s first performance of the Sericulture ceremony in 1744, semi-panoramic views indicate the surrounding architectural features (fig. 6-18). For example, Picking Mulberry Leaves begins with the image of the White Pagoda 白塔 on Jade Flower Island 琼華島 in the Beihai (Northern Sea) Park, northwest of the Forbidden City, one of the most famous sites in Beijing. Since 282 the Silkworm Altar 先蠶壇 was located in Beihai Park, the White Pagoda served as an identifying landmark. The blue-and-green palette was extensively used in topographical depictions of eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings. Traditionally, the blue-and-green landscape painting, which had been developed during the Tang dynasty (618–907), had been associated with paradise because the Tang Dynasty was generally considered to be the golden age of Chinese civilization, thus it was exploited as a pictorial rhetoric of paradise, peace, and prosperity. Furthermore, blue and green mineral pigments such as malachite and azurite were extremely expensive, so only rich patrons like emperors and high ministers could afford them. About the usage of blue-and-green palette in the Kangxi emperor’s southern inspection scrolls, Maxwell Hearn argues that “the pictorial elements are there to ennoble and enhance the importance and legitimizing function of the trip.”16 In Korea, Han Si-gak’s Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress 북새선은도 of 1664 is a pioneering work that depicts topographic features using a combination of bird’s-eye and oblique-angle views (fig. 6-19). In the first section of the scroll, military-service candidates on horseback are depicted within a walled courtyard with Jangbaek Mountain 장백산, a red archery gate, and an altar dedicated to gods of earth and grains— in the background. In the second section of the scroll, civil-service candidates await the 16 Maxwell K. Hearn, Interview by Meredith Hindley, “Imperial Scrolls of China,” Humanities 30, no. 6 (2009). http://www.neh.gov/humanities/2009/novemberdecember/feature/imperial-scrolls-china 283 results of their examination; the Pavilion of Rejoicing People 낙민정 and a bridge called Ten Thousand Years 만세교 are also depicted.17 Yi Gyeong-hwa points out that such detailed depictions of the surrounding topography were intended to convey the vast territory of the Joseon king.18 As in the Qing examples, the blue-and-green style was extensively used to connote the Joseon king’s successful rule that brought prosperity and peace even to such a remote area. However, as seen earlier, the dominant mode of pictorial space in eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings was diagrammatic. Thus, topographic information about the environs of ceremonial events was limited. The bird’s-eye view was frequently used for informing topographic features of pictorial maps, which the Joseon court often commissioned19; however, it was not commonly used in documentary painting until the late eighteenth century. As evident in most eighteenth-century works, including the album Ceremonial Obeisance at the Hall of Spiritual Longevity 영수각송 (1765; fig. 6-20) and the screen King Yeongjo’s Royal Banquet of the Year of Byeongsul 영조병술진연도병 (1766; fig. 6-21), buildings served as unremarkable stages for the depicted events. In these works, the buildings have little architectural distinctions, and the 17 Yi Gyeong-hwa이경화, “Buksae seongeundo yeongu,” 북새선은도 연구 [Study of the scrolls of royal grace over the northern fortress] Misulsahak yeongu 미술사학연구 no. 254 (2007): 51-53. 18 Ibid., 54-55. 19 Park Jeong-ae 박정애, “Sippal sipgu segi giseong byeongpung yeongu,” 18-19 세기 기성도 병풍 연구[Study of the screen painting of Gija castle in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries] Gomunhwa 고문화, no. 74 (2009): 5-41. 284 treatment of the surrounding landscape is also cursory. Often a few pine trees are depicted behind or on either side of the king’s throne, mostly likely since they were symbols of longevity and royalty. The style of topographical depiction seen in a limited number of earlier works was splendidly revived in a late-eighteenth-century folding screen composition depicting King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong 화성능행도병 (1795; fig. 6-22). In particular, three of the screen’s eight panels—Returning Procession 환어행렬, Crossing the Pontoon Bridge 노량주교도섭, and the nighttime scene Military Drill at West General Fort서장대야조—show that court painters paid a great deal of attention to the topographic features of the events’ locations. Interestingly, in the scene at West General Fort (fig. 6-23), the Hwaseong fortress is depicted as if complete; in truth, the building was not finished at the time Jeongjo visited. 20 This demonstrates that topographical features were subject to pictorial fabrication in order to glorify the king’s activities. The bird’s-eye view is effectively used in these three panels to survey the distinctive topographic features of the locations of spectacular events. For example, in the Crossing the Pontoon Bridge scene, the southern part of the Han River between the Noryang and Gwannaru crossings dramatically intersects the panel; in the Military Drill at West General Fort scene, the Hwaseong Traveling Palace is portrayed from the viewpoint of West General Fort, located on the top of Mount Paldal 팔달산; and in the 20 Yoo Jae-bin, “The Politics of Art under King Jeongjo: Exemplified by ‘Events from King Jeongjo’s Visit to Hwaseong in 1795,’” in In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art during the Joseon Dynasty (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013), 98. 285 Returning Procession scene, Jeongjo’s procession passes through mountains and architectural structures including the Siheung Traveling Palace 시흥행궁. Also depicted is the newly constructed road Jeongjo took for his return trip (fig. 6-24).21 The inclusion of newly built or renovated buildings and roads in this folding screen aimed to celebrate Jeongjo’s vision for the city of Hwaseong, which was expected to be the secondary capital, to serve as the military and economic foundation of the state. There is no doubt that Jeongjo was directly involved in selecting the sites for the events. The bird’s-eye view is effectively employed to both inform and magnify the image of Hwaseong, where Jeongjo relocated his father’s tomb and planned to use as an auxiliary city. Both eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings used topographic elements to increase the sense of realism and blue-and-green landscape to evoke ancient court traditions. Nevertheless, these elements did not just function as backdrop, but also added another dimension of narrative by underscoring the prosperity of a realm under virtuous emperors or kings, the protagonist of the events. IIllusionistic Representation of Space By the eighteenth century, painters in the Qing court regularly employed the European techniques of linear perspective and chiaroscuro. Though these techniques had been introduced earlier, they had not been widely adopted and were used in only a few imperially commissioned works. They were used in eighteenth-century court 21 Yoo Jae-bin, 106. 286 documentary paintings in order to more vividly show the emperors’ activities and achievements as well as to entertain viewers by creating optical illusions.22 Unlike their Qing counterparts, few Joseon paintings employed these Western techniques; overall, Joseon court documentary paintings remained highly conservative in style. The Joseon court favored diagrammatic pictures, and the application of European styles to court documentary paintings was limited. The Qing was the first Chinese dynasty to embrace European pictorial techniques.23 The Kangxi emperor not only appreciated European art but also encouraged 22 For the usage of European artistic techniques in Qing art and architecture, see: Michael Sullivan, “Some Possible Sources of European Influence on Late Ming and Early Ch’ing Paintings,” in Proceedings of the International Symposium of Chinese Painting, National Palace Museum, Taipei, Taiwan; 18-24 June 1970 (Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1972); Kao Mayching, “European Influences in Chinese Art, Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries,” in China and Europe: Images and Influence from the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, ed. Thomas H. C. Lee (Hong Kong: Chinese University, 1991); Elisabetta Corsi, La Fábrica de las Ilusiones: Los Jesuitas y la Difusión de la Perspectiva Lineal en China, 1698-1766 (Mexico City: El Colegio de Mexico, 2004); Hui Zou, “The Jing of Line-Method: A Perspective Garden in the Garden of Round Brightness” (PhD diss., McGill University, 2005). Notable research on Jesuit artists and their works are as follows: John C. Ferguson, “Painters among Catholic Missionaries and Their Helpers in Peking,” Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 65 (1934): 20–35; George R. Loehr, “Missionary Artists at the Manchu Court,” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society (London) 34 (1962–63): 51–67; Liu Naiyi, Lang Shining xiushi nianpu 郎世寧修士年譜 [A year-by-year biography of Brother Giuseppe Castiglione] (Shanghai: Zikawei, 1944); Ishida Mikinosuke, “A Biographical Study of Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shi-ning), a Jesuit Painter in the Court of Peking under the Ch’ing Dynasty,” Memoirs of the Research Department of the Tōyō Bunko 19 (1960): 79–121; Harrie Vanderstappen, “Chinese Art and the Jesuits in Peking,” in East Meets West: The Jesuits in China, 1582–1773, eds. Charles E. Ronan and Bonnie B. C. Oh (Chicago: Loyola University, 1988); Gauvin Alexander Bailey, Art on the Jesuit Missions in Asia and Latin America, 1542–1773 (Toronto: University of Toronto, 1999); Marco Musillo, “Reconciling Two Careers: The Jesuit Memoir of Giuseppe Castiglione, Lay Brother and Qing Imperial Painter,” Eighteenth Century Studies 42, no. 1 (2008): 45-59. 23 Although a large amount of European art was introduced to the Ming court, few paintings of that court demonstrate the use of European pictorial techniques. In 1579, Michel Ruggieri (1543–1607), an Italian Jesuit priest, presented a series of gifts to the Wanli emperor. The items included two images of Jesus Christ, one prayer book, one cross of mother-of-pearl, two clocks, and one world map. Chung Hyeong-min 정형민 and Kim Yeong-sik 김영식, Joseon 287 his court painters to learn European methods. In fact, the Kangxi emperor was so fascinated by European pictures that he even asked Jesuits to send some experts on perspective painting and enameling to his court.24 A number of painters arrived in response to his request, but it was not until the Jesuit lay brother Giovanni Gherardini (1655–1723) arrived in 1699 that European painting began to have a noticeable impact on Qing court art and architecture.25 Gherardini’s Portrait of the Kangxi Emperor Reading, a hanging scroll in ink and color on silk, and Ladies under Wutong Trees 梧蔭仕女圖, an oil painting mounted on a wooden screen, are notable examples that employ strong chiaroscuro and European style linear perspective (fig. 6-25). The space depicted in such works, which was created by groups of court painters, often including Jesuit missionaries, is highly three-dimensional. A huge horizontal hanging scroll Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of the Ten Thousand Trees 萬樹園賜宴 圖 (fig. 6-26) is one of the few examples that successfully used linear perspective. In this work, guests are seated in rows along sight lines that converge on a high, invisible horizon beyond the slightly off-center gigantic imperial yurt, the anticipated point of hugi ui gisuldo 조선후기의 기술도 [Illustration of technology in the late Joseon period] (Seoul: Seoul National University, 2007), 67. Philip II sent gifts and a letter to the Wanli emperor; see Carmen Y. Hsu, “Writing on Behalf of a Christian Empire: Gifts, Dissemination, and Politics in the Letters of Philip II of Spain to Wanli of China,” Hispanic Review 78 (2010): 323-44. 24 Michael Sullivan, The Meeting of Eastern and Western Art (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989), 54. 25 The first European painter to arrive at the Chinese court was said to be the Austrian Jesuit Johann Grueber (1623–80), followed by Cristoforo Fiori (b. 1672), a Jesuit lay brother who arrived in 1694. None of Grueber’s or Fiori’s works are extant. See D. E. Mungello, The Great Encounter of China and the West, 1500–1800, 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), 60–61; Cecile and Michel Beurdeley, Giuseppe Castiglione: A Jesuit Painter at the Court of the Chinese Emperors (Rutland: C. E. Tuttle, 1971), 28. 288 arrival of the procession bearing the Qianlong emperor’s sedan chair approaching from the left.26 Regarding the usage of European style linear perspective, which was applied to asymmetrical composition, rather than a more typical symmetrical composition in The Ceremonial Banquet, Anita Chung suggests that the asymmetrical composition might have been used, “to divert the viewer’s attention from the great ceremonial yurt… and emphasize the Qianlong emperor is the symbolic center and the focus of attention of this narrative painting.”27 Rather than reinforcing the principle of symmetry, linear perspective in this asymmetrical work was used to create a sense of orderly and harmonic atmosphere to the painted scene. According to Jean-Denis Attiret’s words recorded in a letter by Jean-Joseph-Marie Amiot, the scene was quite chaotic. “…The march of the prince, as he envisioned it, inspired picturesque images, but he admitted that, if he were painting an army in disarray, he would have had an excellent model before his eyes. He did not distinguish in any fashion that majesty, that economy, that order that characterized all Chinese ceremonies. He saw nothing but a confused mass of people of all ranks going hither and thither, pushing, shoving, running, some dispatching orders and others executing them; some searching for masters they had lost in the crowd; some looking for their section or going to join the ranks of the Emperor, from whom they become separated. All that he saw seemed a tumult, a confusion, an obstruction; there were only pitiful, lamentable, and tragic creatures that inspired in him fear, horror, and compassion…”28 26 Lucia Tripodes, “Painting and Diplomacy at the Qianlong Court: A Commemorative Painting by Wang Zhicheng,” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics, no. 35 (1999): 197. 27 Anita Chung, 81. For more about the process of making this work, see Deborah Sommer, “A Letter from a Jesuit Painter in Qianlong’s Court at Chengde,” in New Qing Imperial History: the Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, eds. James A Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 171-184. 28 Translation by Deborah Sommer, Deborah Sommer, 175. 289 Attiret’s words above testify that this work dealt with an actual historical event, but the combination of the royal patrons’ distinct aesthetics and the court painters’ pictorial choices played important roles in infusing court documentary painting with specific political messages. In this case, European style perspective was used to evoke the idea of order, hierarchy, and harmony, which were non-existent in the actual event. In Qing court documentary paintings formatted as handscrolls, linear perspective is evident in sections rather than in the overall design. In the Birthday Celebration of the Empress Dowager Chongqing, the use of perspective creates a dynamic interplay of concave and convex forms in the scroll as seen in the three-dimensional illustration of the shops and buildings along the road (fig. 6-27).29 This technique, still novel at the time, was grandly employed in this scroll to delight the imperial viewers, making it more than a routine documentary record or commemorative gift. European pictorial techniques were introduced to the Joseon court with increasing frequency during the eighteenth century by Korean envoys, who regularly visited Beijing on diplomatic missions.30 In their free time, envoys visited Catholic churches in Beijing 29 For the usage of illusionistic effects depicting European-style buildings in Qing paintings, see Ellen Uitzinger, “For the Man Who Has Everything: Western-Style Exotica in Birthday Celebrations at the Court of Ch’ien-Lung,” in Conflict and Accommodation in Early Modern East Asia: Essays in Honor of Erik Zürcher, eds. Leonard Blussé and Harriet T. Zurndorfer (Leiden and Boson: Brill, 1993), 216-39. 30 For the introduction of European visual culture to the late Joseon dynasty via the Qing, see; Choe Gyeong-won 최경원, “Joseon hugi daecheong hoehwa gyoryu-wa cheonghoehwa yangshik-ui suyong,” 조선 후기 대청 회화교류와 청 회화양식의 수용 [Artistic interactions between late Joseon and Qing art scenes and the adaptation of Qing artistic languages] (master’s thesis, Hongik University, 1996); Park Eun-soon 박은순, “Joseon hubangi daejung hoehwagyoseop-ui jogeon-gwa yangsang, geurigo song’gwa,” 조선 후반기 대중 회화교섭의 조 290 and were impressed by the murals and ceiling paintings employing linear perspective, chiaroscuro, and trompe l’oeil effects.31 They also purchased European prints and paintings in Beijing, possibly from the art shops on the street called Liulichang (“glazed- tile factory” 琉璃廠), and took these items back to Korea. For instance, in his compilation of journals titled Seongho’s Miscellaneous Talks 성호사설, Yi Yik 이익 (1681–1763) noted the influx of European visual culture into late eighteenth-century Korea: “Those who came back from Beijing brought European paintings and displayed them in their guest rooms.”32 Another envoy, Hong Dea-yong 홍대용 (1731–83), went to Beijing as part of the winter-solstice mission in 1765 and brought paintings and prints in European styles back to Korea.33 After this, linear perspective and chiaroscuro began to appear in eighteenth-century paintings sponsored by the Joseon court.34 For example, a work demonstrating 건과 양상, 그리고 성과 [Condition, development and consequence of late Joseon-period artistic interactions between Korea and China] in Joseon hubangi misul ui dae’oae gyoseop 조선 후반기 미술의 대외교섭 [Artistic interactions in the late Joseon period] (Seoul: Yeogyeong, 2007), 9-82; Jeong Eun-joo 정은주, Joseon sidae sahaeng girokhwa 조선시대 사행기록화 [Documentary paintings of ambassadorial missions] (Seoul: Sahoepyeongron, 2012). 31 For more information about places that Joseon envoys frequently visited during their residency in Beijing, see Won Jae-yeon 원재연, “Sipchil sipgu segi yeonhaengsa-ui bukgyeong hwaldong gong’gan yeongu,” 17-19 세기 연행사의 북경활동 공간 연구 [Study of the places where Joseon envoys visited Beijing] Dongbuk’a yeongu nonchong 동북아연구논총 26 (2009): 205-62. 32 Yi Yik 이익, Seongho saseol星湖僿說, vol. 4. 33 Yi Seong-mi suggested that Hong might have brought European prints. Yi Seong-mi 이성미, Joseon sidae geurim sok-ui soyanghwabeop, 조선시대 그림 속의 서양화법 [Western pictorial languages in Joseon-period paintings] (Seoul: Daewonsa, 2000), 88. 34 For the usage of European pictorial techniques in late Joseon paintings, see Yi Jung-hui 291 strong use of chiaroscuro is found in a Buddhist mural sponsored by Jeongjo and created under the direction of Kim Hong-do and Yi Myeong-gi for the main worship hall at Yongju Monastery 용주사 (fig. 6-28).35 Kim and Yi were invited to participate in the winter-solstice mission to Beijing on the fourteenth day of the eighth month of 1789.36 It is not known whether or not they actually went to Beijing or what they saw if they did go, but the mural is evidence of their familiarity with European pictorial techniques.37 Furthermore, the so-called bookshelf paintings 책가도 (better known as Chaekkori 책거리) (fig. 6-29),38 which used dramatic linear perspective, were produced in and 이중희, Han jung il-ui chogi seyanghwa doyip bigyoron 한, 중, 일의 초기 서양화 도입 비교론 [Comparative analysis of the adaptation of western-style paintings and their languages] (Seoul: Eol gwa al, 2003). 35 About this mural, one group of scholars; Yi Dong-joo 이동주, Choe Wan-su 최완수, Yu Hong-jun 유홍준, Oh Ju-seok 오주석, and Kang Gwan-shik 강관식 believed that Kim Hong-do and Yi Myeong-gi employed European-style shading effects, and the other group of scholars; Hong Yun-shik 홍윤식 and Mun Myeong-dae 문명대 believed that the shading effects present in the mural was added in the twentieth century by Buddhist painters. Hong Seon-pyo who summarized these two groups of scholars’ opinions, believed that Kim and Yi were the one who employed European shading effects, but twentieth-century Buddhist painters painted some parts of the mural for a restoration purpose. Hong Seon-pyo 홍선표, “Kim Hong-do saenge-ui jaeguseong,” 김홍도 생애의 재구성 [Reconstruction of the life of Kim Hong-do] Misulsa nondan, no. 34 (2012): 124-125. 36 According to the Record of Daily Reflection, Yi Seong-won (1725-90) asked Kim Hong-do and Yi Myeong-gi to go on this diplomatic trip. However, some scholars still question if these two court painters actually joined the 1789 ambassadorial entourage. 37 Kang Kwan-sik 강관식, “Yongjusa hubultaeng-gwa joseon hugi gungjung hoehwa,” 용주사 후불탱과 조선후기 궁중회화 [The mural paintings of Yongjusa Temple and late Joseon court painting] Misulsa hakbo 미술사 학보, no. 31 (2008): 42-46. 38 For bookshelf paintings or chaekkori, see: Yi Hyeon-gyeong 이현경, “Chaegado-wa chaekkeori-e ttareun gonggan haeseok,”책가도와 책거리의 시점에 따른 공간해석 [Spatial interpretation in bookshelf or chaekkori paintings] Minsokhak yeongu 민속학 연구, no. 20 (2007): 145-167; Kay E. Black and Edward W. Wagner, “Ch’aekkŏri Paintings: A Korean Jigsaw 292 outside of the court during Jeongjo’s reign, testifying that late eighteenth-century Joseon ruling class and nouveau riches had become increasingly indulged with a new mode of depicting the world. Nevertheless, only a small number of Joseon court documentary paintings used these Western techniques. King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong (1795) is among the very few examples of Joseon court documentary painting that successfully employs both linear perspective and bird’s-eye view. The seven painters who participated in making this folding screen—Choe Deuk-hyeon 최득현, Kim Deuk-shin 김득신 , Yi Myeong-gyu 이명규, Jang Han-jong 장한종, Yun Seok-guen 윤석근, Heo Yeon 허식, and Yi Yin-moon 이인문—were all court-painters-in-waiting 자비대령화원 who worked under the direct supervision of the king. As court-painters-in-waiting, they must have sharpened their knowledge of European pictorial techniques, and Jeongjo encouraged them to employ these techniques in this painting that recorded the king’s historic outing.39 Two of the panels, Returning Procession and Crossing the Pontoon Bridge (figs. 6-24, 6-30), are notable examples of the use of figures of diminishing size within the bird’s-eye view. In both panels, the people and houses around the procession decrease in size as they recede from the foreground. Traditionally in Joseon court documentary Puzzle,” Archives of Asian Art 46 (1993): 63-75. 39 Jang Han-jong 장한종(1768–1815) produced a number of bookshelf folding screens 책가도병; Yi Myeong-gi 이명기(act. mid- to late 18th century) used linear perspective for the ground treatment and figures in his portrait paintings. 293 paintings, the king’s throne was almost always placed at the top and depicted much larger than anything else in the picture. This convention, however, was finally challenged in the Returning Procession scene. In order to indicate that the royal throne was located much further from the viewer than the commoners around the procession, the throne was portrayed significantly smaller than the commoners in the foreground. Here, court painters did not use European style linear perspective, but chose systematic diminution of figures to create a sense of reality and dynamism. Interestingly, the designer(s) of the illustration for the Summary of the King’s Outing in the Year of Eulmyo 원행을묘정리의궤, which compiled all the affairs relevant to the same event, chose a more progressive approach to the spatial composition. For example, the birthday banquet scene is drawn along two parallel lines to create a sense of depth, sharply contrasting with the same scene in the screen (fig. 6-31). The effort to achieve a sense of spatial depth, which had almost been nonexistent in earlier documentary paintings, makes this eight-panel screen and its accompanying uigwe illustration a precursor of a new style much preferred in nineteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings. In terms of the usage of European style shading effects termed chiaroscuro, there are not many good examples of eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings, although a number of portraits created around the late eighteenth century started to use chiaroscuro. An eight-panel folding screen Personal Governance Ceremony in the Year of Eulsa (1785) is one of the very few examples that show signs of the use of shading effects. Black ink was applied to the building’s columns in an attempt at modeling. 294 Diagonal lines were extensively used on the subsidiary buildings on both sides of the Hall of Solemn Prosperity 重熙堂, suggesting that court painters had only begun to experiment with European pictorial techniques; overall, the space remained as flat as if it were a paper-doll house (fig. 6-32). As discussed above, Western perspective techniques and chiaroscuro were basic pictorial components of eighteenth-century Qing paintings. The extensive usage of such European techniques reflects in part the Qing emperors’ personal tastes, which favored eclectic styles, and in part the collaborative work between Jesuit and Chinese painters. These pictorial languages not only endowed court documentary painting with greater realism but also made the viewing experience more entertaining. Although European techniques had been introduced to Korea and a large amount of European imagery had been imported, Joseon court painters used Western pictorial techniques to a much lesser extent than their Qing counterparts. The fact that eighteenth-century Joseon painters continued to cling to older styles reveals that their royal patrons perceived the genre of court documentary paintings as an artistic legacy to be preserved. This attitude echoes the Confucian view that changes in ritual and propriety signaled the beginning of decay and chaos. 295 Conclusion In this chapter, I have explored three major modes: diagrammatic, topographical and illusionistic modes that dominate the composition of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings, and demonstrated that Qing and Joseon court painters employed these three modes in different frequencies and levels, mirroring each court’s distinctive visual culture as well as its ruling classes’ political visions and world view. I have pointed out that Qing court documentary paintings created toward the end of the eighteenth century came to emphasize diagrammatic composition, although European linear perspective and chiaroscuro were simultaneously employed creating a certain sense of pictorial naturalism. I have suggested that the rigid, diagrammatic mode increasingly noticeable in those works created during the Qianlong reign, could be attributed to the painters’ increasing reliance on the diagrams of ritual manuals. For the tradition of Joseon court documentary paintings, the diagrammatic mode was dominant throughout the eighteenth century. The works discussed above from the mid- and late eighteenth century used the same diagrammatic mode as paintings from the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century. This stylistic stasis is evident in the hanging scroll Royal Banquet at the Hall of Sungjeon (숭정전진연도; 1710; fig. 6-33) and in King Jeongjo’s Personal Governance Ceremony of the Year of Eulsa (1785; fig. 6-34). These works look alike in terms of the organization of the picture and the use of perspective. In spite of the painters’ knowledge of European pictorial techniques, they did not aim to create a three-dimensional space like that of the Royal Banquet at the Terrace 296 of Auspicious Scallion (1560; fig. 6-35), made more than one hundred years earlier. The painters’ conservative emulation of illustrations in ritual manuals mirrors the conservative policy undertaken by the kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo. Both revived rituals that had been discontinued two hundred years earlier, such as the Plowing and the Scything ceremonies, in order to present themselves as Confucian sage-kings dedicated to older and purer ritual forms. I believe that this conservative ideology was interpreted in the styles used for the rituals’ documentary paintings. The timeless nature of ritual was translated visually as the timeless, conservative painting style of the eighteenth-century Joseon court. The conservative style of eighteenth-century Joseon court documentary painting matched Jeongjo’s conservative cultural policy. Although Jeongjo was credited with eliminating a number of social problems, including the system of slavery, his intention was not to create a civil society but in fact to revitalize the state as an ideal Confucian kingdom.40 For Jeongjo (and his predecessor Yeongjo), the legendary, pre-dynastic kings Yao and Shun were the ideal Confucian rulers because they governed their states solely through their virtue and appropriate rituals.41 In an incident called the 40 In the Veritable Records of Sunjo, Jeongjo was referred to as the direct successor of the two pre-dynastic rulers: Yao and Shun. For more on this claim, see the logs recorded on the 2nd day of the 9th month and the 3rd day of the 12th month of the 1st reign year of Sunjo, and the 7th day of the 12th month of the 25th reign year of Sunjo. 41 For Yeongjo’s and Jeongjo’s association with the Yao and Shun, see Kim Baek-chul 김백철, “Yeongjo-ui uirimyeongbeonseo cheonuisogam pyeonchan-gwa jeong’gukbyeonhwa: yosun ui dugaji eolgul, tangpyeong gunju and jeonje gunju ui gyeong’gye,” 영조의 의명변서 천의소감 편찬과 정국변화: 요순의 두 가지 얼굴, 탕평군주와 전제군주의 경계 [Compilation of Cheonuisogam and political situation during King Yeongjo period: Dual aspects of Yao and Shun: Boundary between impartial monarch and despotic monarch] Jeongshin munhwa yeongu 정신문화연구 33, no. 4 (2010): 7-40. 297 Literary Redress 文體反正, Jeongjo dismissed officials who read Chinese vernacular novels and stopped the importation of such books—and later went so far as to ban the importation of any books from China.42 Yu Bong-hak argues that Jeongjo aspired to spread his ideas through art and culture to proclaim the Joseon kingdom as the true caretaker of Confucian civilization.43 In contrast to their Joseon counterparts, eighteenth-century Qing court documentary paintings varied in style according to theme, function, and period. Ju-hsi Chou points out that the institution of Qing painting was a “melting pot, much like the Qing empire itself.” 44 In it, various styles of paintings were mingled, amalgamated, and merged. This was not simply the result of the court painters’ collaborations in the Qing court. Since many official records testify to the Qing emperors’ frequent visits to the painting workshops and their inquiries about their portraits and documentary paintings, it is not an exaggeration to say that the hybrid painting styles mirrored the Qing emperors’ personal and political styles.45 Just as the Qing political model permitted diverse cultures 42 Park Hyeon-mo 박현모, Jengchiga Jeongjo 정치가 정조 [Politician king Jeongjo] (Seoul: Purunyeoksa, 2005), 162. 43 Yu bong-hak 유봉학 Gaehyeok-gwa galdeun-ui sidae: jeongjo-wa sipgu segi 개혁과 갈등의 시대: 정조와 19세기 [The period of reforms and conflicts] (Seoul: Singu munhwasa, 2009), 46. 44 Ju-hsi Chou, “The Elegant Brush: Chinese Painting under the Qianlong Emperor, 1735–1795,” in The Elegant Brush: Chinese Painting under the Qianlong Emperor, 1735–1795 (Phoenix: Phoenix Art Museum, 1986), 3. 45 Yang Boda 楊伯達, Qingdai huayuan淸代畵院 [Qing-period court painting workshop] (Beijing: Zijiancheng chubanshe, 1993), 49. The Qianlong emperor also made frequent suggestions to make Buddhist paintings and sculptures. Wang Ji-peng王家鵬, “Zhongzhengdian yu qinggong zangchuan forjiao,” 中正殿與淸宮藏傳佛敎 [The hall of central uprightness and the buddhist 298 to coexist in the empire, the styles that depicted the empire were also made of different visual modes from diverse cultures. The Manchu emperors’ openness to foreign visual and material culture was intimately connected to their exposure to multiple languages and cultures from an early age, in both private and public spheres. As a child, the Qianlong emperor learned Manchu and Chinese at the same time and was able to speak several different languages. The Qing emperors often consulted Tibetan monks as gurus, and sometimes, close friends, and they went on hunting trips with their Central Asian and Mongol allies and subjects. These diverse cultural experiences contributed to the Qing emperors’ aesthetic tastes, giving them a greater appreciation for different styles and experimental works than that possessed by many of their court officials. Among the pictorial devices, European linear perspective and chiaroscuro were extensively employed in Qing court documentary paintings not only to enhance their realistic qualities but also possibly to celebrate the Manchu rulers’ broad cultural and political capacities, which embraced Europeans as loyal subjects. In contrast, eighteenth-century Korean kings and court officials, the major patrons of court documentary paintings, considered Confucian learning as the only intellectual and cultural asset—which was essential to study and to apply to politics—and denounced other philosophical and religious systems such as Buddhism and Catholicism as heterodox. This conservative worldview was translated into the style of their documentary works of art. Nevertheless, as observed in King Jeongjo’s Outing to the City art in the Qing palace] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宮博物院院刊 no. 3 (1991): 59. 299 of Hwaseong, Joseon court painters started to experiment with pictorial languages from the outside world, paralleling Jeongjo’s ambivalent attitude toward foreign influences and his ruling style, which adopted new ideas and information from the Qing dynasty, even Qing emperors’ usage of certain state rites, yet framed them in Classical Confucian values. The styles employed in eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings were not simply reproductions of what came before but rather deliberate constructions achieved through selection and omission. For eighteenth-century Joseon kings, the conservative style, transmitted from one generation of painters to the next, stood for timelessness and resulted in a highly static stylistic canon. Timelessness was a particularly important political theme for the eighteenth-century Joseon ruling class because it symbolized the ideal Confucian past before the presumably barbaric Manchus seized control of China. The hybrid styles of the Qing court reflected the emperors’ multiethnic domain, serving as visual statements about their styles of statecraft and highlighting the interactions between various ethnic cultures and values. 300 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND EPILOGUE The cross-cultural and comparative analysis I have employed as the primary methodology for this study was instrumental in shedding light on the intercultural and historical contexts that surrounded the development of eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon court documentary paintings and on the various meanings the objects held for their owners and viewers. First, this analysis of court documentary painting yielded information on the subtle yet strong competition to lay claim to the tradition of Central Florescence, or Zhonghua, by the ruling houses of China and Korea. By no means was the Joseon kingdom a political rival to the Qing Empire, but to the Joseon court, the Qing was its rival in claiming possession of Zhonghua; after the fall of the Ming dynasty, the Joseon kingdom’s mission was to guard the idea of Zhonghua. Eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers, despite differing domestic and international situations, were strikingly similar in terms of cultivating their political images through acts of ritual. I believe that Zhonghua played an overarching political concept, which drove these two eighteenth-century states to place a high emphasis on rituals. The cultural and political symbolism of the rulers’ performances of state rituals and court ceremonies reveal that rituals were not empty spectacles but rather crucial tools that shaped their political personae as sage rulers of Zhonghua, which in turn helped to legitimize and augment their authority. Second, a comparative perspective allows us to reconsider the development of certain pictorial languages within Chinese and Korean traditions and to suggest that active cross-cultural exchange shaped new themes and modes of depicting court 301 ceremonies. Eighteenth-century Qing and Joseon rulers’ restorations of the Plowing and Sericulture ceremonies and frequent public outings became some of the major subjects of their sponsored paintings. I have proposed that Yeongjo and Jeongjo emulated the Qing emperors in this regard. Although official court records do not describe their ritual choices as similar to those of the emperors, the Joseon kings’ attention to the activities of Qing emperors and their great interest in importing ideas and information from China suggest that their restoration of certain rituals was not an indigenous idea but rather one inspired by the Manchu Son of Heaven. In relation to the mode of portraying an emperor in a profile pose or interacting with other figures, I raised the possibility that European royal imagery might have been a model for such works. In my discussion of the pictorial styles of the sixteenth through the late eighteenth century, I proposed that Song court documentary paintings of processional paraphernalia must have been the prototypes for Joseon court documentary paintings of the same theme. In Joseon paintings prior to the eighteenth century, the use of canopies or architectural elements as symbolic images of the king was probably inspired by Song court documentary paintings. Chinese documentary paintings were not intended for circulation outside of the court, but after the collapse of the Song dynasty, Song imperial treasures passed into the hands of the Mongols of the Yuan dynasty, and some passed from the Yuan to the Goryeo because of the close connection between the two ruling houses. Moreover, given that the Song dynasty, particularly the Southern Song, endured humiliating invasion and dominion by the Jurchen “barbarians” before falling to the Mongols, we might further imagine that the eighteenth-century Joseon court clung in 302 imagined solidarity to the style of Song court documentary painting as representative of the Han Chinese culture of timeless antiquity. Thirdly, my comparative analysis was instrumental in describing the Chinese and Korean ruling houses’ distinctive views about their domains and the surrounding world. Although the lifelike portrayal of Qing emperors in narrative scenes certainly followed the tradition of Ming court documentary paintings, the mode of depicting emperors on a similar scale and as interacting with other figures was new. I have argued that the Qing rulers’ multicultural educational and linguistic backgrounds were essential for their reception of new visual methods, including the tradition of European monarch portraits. Finally, this study has demonstrated that while court documentary paintings recorded specific historical events, their pictorial techniques, styles, modes, and formats were designed to appeal to the political and cultural visions of their royal or imperial patrons and audience. These works, hence, were not completely truthful depictions of actual events but rather presentations of ideal performances and exemplary domains. Epilogue: Nineteenth-Century Qing and Joseon Court Documentary Paintings Court documentary paintings in China and Korea continued to be created and used on various occasions throughout the nineteenth century. However, the major patrons and the political circumstances that surrounded the paintings’ production and consumption changed. Toward the later half of the nineteenth century, after an age of powerful rulers, the Kangxi, Yongzheng, and Qianlong emperors of the Qing and the Joseon kings Yeongjo and Jeongjo, female court members became major political players 303 in both China and Korea and the new patrons of court documentary paintings. Whereas in of the first half of the nineteenth century the Joseon court produced a number of eight-panel folding screens that celebrated important occasions related to the kings’ personal and public lives, such as the Royal Banquet in the Year of Gichuk 기축진찬도병 (1829) (fig. 7-1) and Celebration for King Heongjong’s Wedding 헌종가례진하도 (1844) (fig. 7-2), in the second half of the century paintings recorded banquets for female court members like the queen-mother Sunwon 순원왕후 (1789- 1857) and the queen Sinjeong 신정왕후 (1809-90). Notable examples include Ceremonial Banquet in the Year of Musin 무신진찬도 (1848) (fig. 7-3),46 Ceremonial Banquet in the Year of Musin 무신진찬도 (1868), and Ceremonial Banquet in the Year of Jeonghae 정해진찬도 (1887). Although King Cheoljong 철종 (r. 1849-63) ruled during the same period, no large folding screens commemorated his ritual or political acts. King Gonjong 고종 (r. 1852–1919) acquired the throne in an unorthodox manner,47 and he held eight grand banquets for the queen-mother Sinjeong to secure her continuing support.48 In contrast to a common association between the peak of a ruler’s power and the heights of art and culture, court documentary paintings produced in the nineteenth- 46There are five copies of this screen set depicting the 1848 birthday feast: three are intact, with all eight panels; one retains five panels; and one has only one panel remaining. 47 King Cheoljong died without a proper successor; thus the queen mother Sinjeong adopted the son of Yi Ha-Eung 이하응 (1820-98) as her own. 48 Hyonjeong Kim Han, “Beyond Birthday Banquets: Celebrations, Arts and Politics of Queens in Nineteenth-Century Korea,” in In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art during the Joseon Dynasty (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013), 160. 304 century Joseon court were in fact more grand than those of the eighteenth century in scale and in the progressive adoption of European pictorial techniques. Diagrammatic renditions of pictorial space, which strongly persisted from the sixteenth through the eighteenth century, gave way to optical illusions achieved through linear perspective and Western-style shading. The same embrace of European pictorial techniques can be found in the illustrated diagrams in the uigwe, manuals of ritual protocols. For example, linear perspective was extensively used to depict the main event in the uigwe of the royal banquet in the year of Gisa 기사진표리의궤 (1809): court painters used linear perspective with a bird’s-eye view in order to create a sense of recession (fig. 7-4). The pictorial space no longer appeared to be tilted toward the viewer as had been typical in earlier times. A more realistic rendering of events had already been noted in the eight-panel folding screen Jeongjo’s Outing to the City of Hwaseong. Thus, the extensive usage of European pictorial techniques in nineteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings should be seen as a continuation of artistic innovation that had just emerged in the late eighteenth century under Jeongjo’s reign. In the case of nineteenth-century China, military campaigns and rituals continued to be the subjects of Qing court documentary paintings. For example, the Daoguang emperor’s attendance at the Offering and Receiving War Captives ceremonies (1828) was painted in a manner similar to Xu Yang’s work that depicted the same ceremonies in 1760, and a series of hanging-scroll sets depicted military campaigns against various rebellions in a style similar to eighteenth-century works. However, a new subject of 305 Chinese court documentary painting, that of emperors’ wedding ceremonies, appeared in the nineteenth century. Although the Kangxi emperor was married after his enthronement, his wedding ceremony was not painted. In contrast, the wedding of the Guangxu emperor (r. 1875-1908), who was forced to marry to the empress dowager Cixi’s niece, was painted in great detail in the album Grand Wedding Ceremony 光緒大婚圖冊 (1888) (fig. 7-5). This album did not commemorate the emperor’s power but rather that of the empress dowager who wielded power as his regent when he was put on the throne at the age of four. Although the artistic and cultural vitality of imperial China decreased somewhat in the late eighteenth century, cZ oinciding with the country’s initial decline in economic, political, and military strength as well as its anti-foreign sentiments, the court documentary paintings made in this period were still visually splendid. European pictorial devices that characterized eighteenth-century paintings were still employed but in a highly formulaic and mechanical manner. As imperial portraits in the nineteenth century repeated the formulas established in the eighteenth century, the style of court documentary paintings fell into mannerism (figs. 7-6, 7-7). As evident in the Comprehensive Annals of the Empire, the eighteenth-century Qing emperors hoped their court documentary paintings would be visual materials with which their dynastic successors could use to build their authority and images of impeccable morality, nevertheless, their successors ironically had little opportunity to do so. Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter Four, Qing court documentary paintings developed more or less solely in response to the emperors’ wishes. After those powerful 306 emperors passed away, court documentary tradition rapidly lost its artistic vitality. But this argument cannot be made for nineteenth-century Joseon court documentary painting with the same degree of certainty. When Yeongjo and Jeongjo were major patrons, the themes of paintings became more diverse, with more works centering on state rites that sanctified their authority. However, eighteenth-century court documentary paintings more or less continued earlier modes, and painting styles remained conservative in the nineteenth century. The subjects of nineteenth-century Joseon court documentary paintings no longer recorded the kings’ rituals in support of their political authority and for the welfare of the state; the only paintings subjects were lavish royal banquets, as if the nineteenth century was free of any political or economic concerns. The truth was otherwise: the nineteenth century saw the beginning of the Joseon kingdom’s long, torturous decline. One reason for the lingering of artistic styles inherited from the late eighteenth century was that the patronage of court documentary paintings did not depend only on the kings. Ranking court officials remained powerful patrons, perhaps even more powerful than they had been during the previous century. 307 BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources: Chinese Da Ming Huidian Wanli chao chong xiu ben. 大明會典 [Collected Statutes of the Great Ming, Wanli Edition] Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1989. Da Qing Huidian Shili. 大清會典事例 [Collected Statutes of the Great Qing with Supplementary Precedents and Regulations] Electronic resource http://lib.ku.edu/siku/ . Da Qing Huidian. 大清會典 [Collected Statues of the Qing] from文淵閣四庫全書電子版， Electronic resource http://lib.ku.edu/siku/ . Huangchao Tongzhi. 皇朝通志 [Comprehensive History of the Empire] from文淵閣四庫全書電子版 Electronic resource http://lib.ku.edu/siku/. Qianlong Yuzhishi Chuji. 乾隆御制詩初集 [The Compilation of Qianlong’s Poems] In Qinggaozong yuzhi shiwen quanji. 清高宗御制詩文全集 [Complete Compilation of Qing Gazong Poetic Writings] Vol. 24. Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue chubanshe, 1993. Qing Shizong Shilu Xuanji. 清世宗實錄選輯 [The Selection of Veritable Records of Yongzheng] Nantou: Taiwan yinhang jingjiyanjiu shi, 1997. Qingshigao. 清史稿 [Draft History of Qing] Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1996. Shengxu benji. 聖祖本紀 [Biography of the Sheng-zu Emperor] Shenzong Shilu. 神宗實錄 [Veritable Records of Shenzhong]. Reprint. Mingshenzong shilu jiaokanji. 明神宗实录校勘记 Edited by Huang Zhangjian. Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo 中央研究院历史语言研究所, 1967. Duxiu.com Yangxindian Zaobanchu Shiliao Jilan. 養心殿造辦處史料輯覽 Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe 紫禁城出版社, 2003. Yongzheng chao qiju zhuce. 雍正朝起居註冊 [Diaries of Activity and Repose of the Yongzheng Emperor] Vol. 1. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1993. Hu, Jing 胡敬. “Nanxundian tuxiang kao 南薰殿圖像考.” [Study of portraiture in the Hall of Southern Fragrance] In Zhongguo shuhua quanshu 中國書畫全書 11 [Complete 308 Anthology of Chinese Calligraphy and Painting] Edited by Lu Fusheng 魯輔聖. Shanghai: Shanghai shuhua chubanshe, 2000. Pfister, Louis. Zai hua yesuhuishi liezhuan ji shumu 在華耶穌會士列傳及書目 [The Booklist and the Historical Biography of Jesuits in China]. Translated by Feng Chengjun 冯承钧. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1995. Zhang, Geng 張庚. “Guochao huazheng lu.” 國朝畫徵錄 [Collected Notes on the Painting of Our Dynasty] In Qingdai zhuanjicongkan. 清代傳記叢刊 [Qing Dynasty Biographies] Vol. 71. Taipei: Mingwen shuju, 1986. Korean Jeongjo Silok. 정조실록 [Veritable Records of Jeongjo] Electronic resource http://sillok.history.go.kr/main/main.jsp. Yeongjo Silok. 영조실록[Vertitable Records of Yeongjo] Electronic resource http://sillok.history.go.kr/main/main.jsp. Ilseong rok.일성록 [Records of Daily Reflection] Electronic resource http://www.itkc.or.kr/itkc/Index.jsp. Seungjeongwon ilgi. 승정원일기 [The Daily Records of Royal Secretariat of Joseon Dynasty] Electornic resource http://sjw.history.go.kr/main/main.jsp. Naegak yilreok. 내각일력 [Daily Journal of the Hall of the Star of Literature] Electornic resource http://kyujanggak.snu.ac.kr/sub_index.jsp?ID=NGK. Choe, Hang 최항. Taeheojeong-jip. 太虛亭集 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Choe, Rip 최립. Ganyi-jip. 簡易集 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Nam, Yong-ik 남용익. Hogok-jip. 壺谷集 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Park, Ji-won 박지원. Yeolha ilgi 熱河日記 Electronic resource http://www.krpia.co.kr.www2.lib.ku.edu:2048. Seo, Myeong-eung서명응. Bomanjae-jip 保晚齋集 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Seo, Ho-su 서호수. Yeonhaenggi 燕行紀, Electronic resource 309 http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Seong, Dea-jung 성대중. Cheongseong-jip. 靑城集 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Seong, Hae-eung 성해응. Yeongyeongjae jeonjip. 硏經齋全集 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Yi, Bok-won 이원복. Ssanggye yugo. 雙溪遺稿 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Yi, Yik 이익. Seongho saseol. 星湖僿說 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Yi, Yu-won 이유원. Yimha pilgi. 林下筆記 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Yu, Eon-ho 유언호. Yeonseok. 燕石 Electronic resource http://db.itkc.or.kr/itkcdb/mainIndexIframe.jsp. Secondary Sources: Allsen, Thomas T. The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006. An Hwi-jun 안휘준. Hangug heohwasa yeongu 한국 회화사 연구 [Study of the History of Korean Painting] Seoul: Sigongsa, 2000. ______. “Hanguk-ui munin gyeohoe-wa gyehoedo.” 한국의 문인 계회와 계회도 [Literati Gatherings and Gathering Paintings in Korea] In Hanguk hoehwa-ui jeontong 한국회화의 전통 [Tradition of Korean Paintings] Seoul: Munyeo chulpansa, 1988. ______. "Koryo mit Choson wangjo-ui munin gyehoe-wa gyehoedo.” 고려및 조선 왕조의 문인계회와 계회도 [Literati Gathering and Gathering Painting in Goryeo and Joseon Dynasties] Gomunhwa 고문화 20 (1982): 3-13. Appadurai, Arjun. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology, 1986. Bailey, Gauvin Alexander. Art on the Jesuit Missions in Asia and Latin America, 1542-1773. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Bartholomew, Terese Tse. “Textile and Costumes.” In Power and Glory: Court Arts of China. Edited by Li He and Michael Knight. San Francisco: Asian Art Museum of San 310 Francisco, 2008. Belk, Russell. “Gift-Giving Behavior.” In Research in Marketing, 2nd ed. Edited by Jagdish Sheth. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1979. Belk, Russell. “It’s the Thought that Counts: A Signed Digraph Analysis of Gift Giving.” Journal of Consumer Research 3 (1976): 155-162. Berger, Patricia. “Religion.” In China: The Three Emperors 1662–1795. Edited by Evelyn S. Rawski and Jessica Rawson. London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2005. _____. Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2003. _____.“Rites and Festivities in the Art of Eastern Han China: Shandong and Kiangsu Provinces.” PhD diss., University of California, 1980. Beurdeley, Cecile and Michel. Giuseppe Castiglione: A Jesuit Painter at the Court of the Chinese Emperors. Rutland: C.E. Tuttle and Co., 1971. Bodde, Derk. Festivals in Classical China: New Year and Other Annual Observances during the Han Dynasty 206 B.C-A.D 220. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975. Bol, Peter. “Seeking Common Ground: Han Literati Under Jurchen Rule.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 47, no. 2 (1987): 461-538. Breuker, Remco E. “Koryo as an Independent Realm: The Emperor’s Clothes?” Korean Studies 27 (2003): 48-84. Brook, Timothy. The Troubled Empire: China in the Yuan and Ming Dynasties. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010. Bruno, Giuliana. Atlas of Emotion: Journeys in Art, Architecture, and Film. New York: Verso, 2002. Burke, Peter. The Fabrication of Louis XIV. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994. Butler, Marcia. “Reflections of a Military Medium: Ritual and Magic in Eleventh and Twelfth Century Chinese Military Manuals.” PhD diss., Cornell University, 2007. Cahill, James. Pictures for Use and Pleasure: Vernacular Painting in High Qing China. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010. ______. The Distant Mountains: Chinese Painting of the Late Ming Dynasty, 1570–1644. New York and Tokyo: Weatherhill, 1982. 311 Cameron, Averil. “The Construction of Court Ritual: the Byzantine Book of Ceremonies.” In Ritual of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies. Edited by David Cannadine and Simon Price. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Cao, Tian-cheng 曹天成. “Lang Shining yu tade zhongguo hezuozhe.” 郎世宁与他的中国合作者 [Giuseppe Castiglione and His Chinese Collaborators] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊 161, no.3 (2012): 88-98. Chadwick, Owen. The Popes and European Revolution. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981. Chang, Chin-sung 장진성. “Joseon hugi hoehwa-wa hogisim-ui munhwa.” 조선후기 회화와 호기심의 문화 [Late Joseon Painting and the Culture of Curiosity] Misulsa nondan 미술사 논단 32, no. 6 (2011): 163-189. ______. “Cheonha taepyeong-ui yisang-gwa hyeonsil: ganghuije nansundogwo-ui jeongchijeok songgyeok.” 천하태평의 이상과 현실: 강희제 남순도권의 정치적 성격 [The Thematic Map of The Emperor Kangxi’s Southern Inspection Tour Scrolls: The Ideals and Realities of His Grand Peace Politics] Misul sahak 미술사학, no. 22 (2008): 259-293. _____. “Mountains and Rivers, Pure and Splendid: Wang Hui and the Making of Landscape Panoramas in Early Qing China.” PhD diss., Yale University, 2004. Chang, Jina 장진아, “Deungjunsimugwa dosangcheop-ui gongsin dosanggeok seonggyeok.” 등준시무과도상첩의 공신도상적 성격 [The album of the deungjunsi military examination and its function as the portraits of meritorious officials] Misul jaryo 미술자료 78 (2009): 61-93. Chang, Michael G. “Fathoming Qianlong: Imperial Activism, the Southern Tours, and the Politics of Water Control, 1736-1765.” Late Imperial China 24, no. 2 (2003): 51-108. Chang, Michael. A Court of Horseback: Imperial Touring and the Construction of Qing Rule, 1680-1785. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2007. Chen, Pao-chen 陳葆真, “Kangxihuangdi wanshoutu yu Qianlong baxunwangshoutude bijiaoyanjiu.” 康熙皇帝 萬壽圖與乾隆皇帝 八旬萬壽圖的比較研究 [Comparative Analysis on the Kang Emperor’s Birthday Scrolls and Qianlong Emperor’s Birthday Scrolls] Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 30, no.3 (2013): 45-122. _____. “An Analytical Reading of the Portraits of Emperor Qianlong and His Consorts.” In Bridges to Heaven: Essays on East Asian Art in Honor of Professor Wen C. Fong. Edited by Jerome Silbergeld, Dora C. Y. Ching, Judith G. Smith & Alfreda Murck. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011. 312 Chen, Lian-kai 陈连开, Zhonghua minzu yanjiu chudan.中华民族硏究初探 [Preliminary Research on the Zhonghua minzu] Beijing: Zhishi Chubanshe, 1994. Chen, Pen-cheng 陈鹅程. “Jiuti dajia lubu tushu zhong dao yanjiu.” 旧题 大驾卤簿图书中道 研究 [Study of the Grand Processional Paraphernalia Painting Scrolls] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 2 (1996): 76-85. Cheng, Yenwen. “Tradition and Transformation: Cataloguing Chinese Art in the Middle and Late Imperial Era.” PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2010. Ching, Dora. “Icons of Rulership: Imperial Portraiture during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644).” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2011. Cho, In-Su 조인수. Wang-ui chosang: gyeongigoen-gwa taejo Yi Seong-gye왕의 초상: 경기전과 태조 이성계 [The King’s Portrait: The Hall of Gyeonggi and Yi Seong-gye, the Founder of the Joseon Dynasty] Jeonju: National Museum of Jeonju: 2005. Cho, Seon-mi 조선미. Wang-ui eolgul. 왕의 얼굴 [King’s Face] Seoul: Saheopyeongron, 2012. Choe, Gyeong-won 최경원. “Joseon hugi daecheong hoehwa gyoryu-wa cheonghoehwa yangshik-ui suyong.” 조선 후기 대청 회화교류와 청 회화양식의 수용 [Artistic Interactions between Late Joseon and Qing Art Scenes, and the Adaptation of Qing Artistic Languages] Master’s Thesis, Hongik University, 1996. Choe, So-ja 최소자. Sip’palsegi yeonhaengrok-gwa jungguk sahoe 18세기 연행록과 중국사회 [Eighteenth-Century Envoys’ Journal and Chinese Society] Seoul: Hye’an, 2007. Chou, Ju-hsi and Claudia Brown. The Elegant Brush: Chinese Painting Under the Qianlong. Emperor, 1735-1795. Phoenix: The Phoenix Art Museum, 1985. Chow, Kai-wing. The Rise of Confucian Ritualism in Late Imperial China: Ethics, Classics, and Lineage Discourse. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994. Chung, Anita. Drawing Boundaries: Architectural Images in Qing China. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2004. Chung, Hyeong-min and Kim Yeong-sik 정형민, 김영식. Joseon hugi ui gisuldo조선후기의 기술도 [Illustration of Technology in the Late Joseon Period] Seoul: Seoul National University Press, 2007. Clunas, Craig. Empire of Great Brightness: Visual and Material Culture of Ming China, 1368-1644. Honolulu: Hawai’i Press, 2007. _____. Superfluous Things: Material Cultures and Social Status in Early Modern China. 313 Honolulu: Hawai’i Press, 2004. Corsi, Elisabetta. La Fábrica de las Ilusiones: Los Jesuitas y la Difusión de la Perspectiva Lineal en China, 1698-1766. Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico, 2004. Cowart, Georgia J. The Triumph of Pleasure: Louis XIV and the Politics of Spectacles. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008. Crossley, Pamela Kyle. A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 2002. Dabringhaus, Sabine. “The Monarch and Inner-Outer Court Dualism.” In Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires. Edited by Jeroen Frans Jozef Duindam. Leiden: Brill, 2011. De Verboden Stad: the Forbidden City. Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1990. Denney, Joyce. “Textiles in the Mongol and Yuan Periods.” In The World of Khubilai Khan: Chinese Art in the Yuan Dynasty. Edited by James C. Y. Watt. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2010. Di Cosmo, Nicola. “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court.” In State and Court Ritual in China. Edited by Joseph P. McDermott. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Dingling 定陵. Vol. 2 of Zhongguo tianye kaogubaogaoji. 中国田野考古报告集. no. 36 Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe. Dong, Xiaomei 董小梅. “Qingchao tianzi chema liyizhidu chutan.” 清朝天子车马礼仪制度初探 [Analysis of Qing Emperor’s Processional Ritual System] Hubei xingzheng xueyuan xuebao 湖北行政学院学报, no. 52 (2010): 79-83. Ebrey, Patricia. Emperor Huizong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013. _____.“Taking Out the Grand Carriage: Imperial Spectacle and the Visual Culture of Northern Song Kaifeng.” Asia Major 12, no. 1 (1999): 33-65. Elias, Norbert. Court Society, trans. Edmund Jephcott. New York: Pantheon, 1983. Elliott, Mark C. Emperor Qianlong: Son of Heaven, Man of the World. New York: Pearson Education, 2010. _____. “Hushuo: The Northern Other and the Naming of the Han Chinese.” In Critical Han Studies: The History, Representation, and Identity of China’s Majority. Edited by Thomas S. Mullaney, James Leibold, Stéphane Gros, and Eric Vanden Bussche. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 2012. 314 Elman, Benjamin A. On Their Own Terms: Science in China, 1550-1900. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 2005. Elverskog, Johan. Our Great Qing: The Mongols, Buddhism, and the State in Late Imperial China. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i, 2006. Emperor Kangxi and Sun King Louis XIV: Sino-Franco Encounters in Arts and Culture. Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2010. Falkenhausen, Lothar Von. “Chapter 7: The Waning of the Bronze Age: Material Culture and Social Developments, 770-841 B.C.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C. Edited by Michael Loewe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Feil, Darly. “From Pigs to Pearlshells: The Transformation of a New Guinea Highlands Exchange Economy.” American Ethnologist 9, no. 2 (1982): 291-306. Ferguson, John C. “Painters Among Catholic Missionaries and Their Helpers in Peking.” Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 65 (1934): 20-35. Fetvaci, Emine. Picturing History at the Ottoman Court. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2013 Forêt, Philippe. Mapping Chengde. Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 2000. From Beijing to Versailles: Artistic Relations between China and France. Hong Kong: The Urban Council of Hong Kong, 1997. Fu, Zhengyuan. Autocratic Tradition and Chinese Politics.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Fujita, Ryōsaku 藤田亮策. “Chōsen Eiso shinkōzu ni tsukite.” 朝鮮英祖親耕圖に就きて [About the king Yeongjo’s plowing painting] Chōsen Nōkai hō 朝鮮農會報 40, no. 6 (1940): 2-8. Garrett, Valery. Chinese Dress: From the Qing Dynasty to the Present. North Clarendon: Tuttle Publishing, 2008. Geertz, Clifford. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books, 1985. Gentz, Joachim. “The Ritual Meaning of Textual Forms: Evidence from Early Commentaries of the Historiographic and Ritual Traditions.” In Text and Ritual in Early China. Edited by Martin Kern. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2005. 315 Giel, Enno. Imperial Decision-Making and Communication in Early China: A Study of Cai Yong’s Duduan. Wiesbaden: Warrassowitz, 2006. Golvers, Noel. Building Humanistic Libraries in Late Imperial China. Rome: Edizioni Nuova, 2011. Greenblatt, Stephen. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. Gu, Wenbin 顾文彬. Guo yun lou shuhua ji 過云樓書畵記. Yangzhou: Jiangsu guji chubanshe, 1999. Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua. 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 [Qing Court Painting in the Collection of the Palace Museum] Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 1996. Gugong bowuyuancang Qingdai gongting huihua. 故宮博物院藏清代宮廷绘画 [Qing Court Painting in the Collection of the Palace Museum] Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1992, Gugong shuhua tulu. 故宮書畫圖錄 [Compilation of Calligraphy and Painting in the Colleciton of the Palace Museum] Vol. 1. Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1989. Gugong shuhua tulu. 故宮書畫圖錄 [Compilation of Calligraphy and Painting in the Colleciton of the Palace Museum] Vol. 17. Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1989. Gukyeok chingyeong chinjam Uigwe. 국역친경, 친잠의궤 [Book of Personal Plowing and Personal Sericulture] Seoul: Minjok monhwa chujinhoe, 2006. Gugong cang hua daxi. 故宮藏畫大系 [Compendia of the Collection of Palace Museum] Vol. 11. Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1993. Gungjung seohwa. 궁중서화 [Royal Calligraphy and Painting] Vol. 1. Seoul: National Palace Museum, 2012. Guy, Kent. Emperor’s Four Treasures: Scholars and the State in the Late Ch’ien-lung Era. Cambridge: Harvard East Asian Monographs, 1987. Haboush, JaHyun Kim. “Yun Hyu and the Search for Dominance: A Seventeenth-Century Korean Reading of the Offices of Zhou and the Rituals of Zhou.” In Statecraft and Classical Learning: The Rituals of Zhou in East Asian History. Edited by Benjamin A Elman and Martin Kern. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010. _____. “The Ritual Controversy and the Search for a New Identity in Seventeenth-Century Korea.” In Culture and the State in Late Choson Korea. Edited by JaHyun Kim Haboush 316 and Martina Deuchler. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2002. _____. The Confucian Kingship in Korea: Yeongjo and the Politics of Sagacity. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001. Han, Hyeong-ju 한형주. Bat ganeun yeongjo-wa nuechineun jeongsun wanghu. 밭가는 영조와 누에치는 정순왕후 [King Yeongjo Plowing and Queen Jeongsun Rearing Silkworms] Seongnam: The Academy of Korean Studies, 2013. Han, Hyonjeong Kim. “Beyond Birthday Banquets: Celebrations, Arts and Politics of Queens in Nineteenth-Century Korea.” In In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art during the Joseon Dynasty. San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013. Han, Yeong-wu 한영우. Munhwa jeongchi-ui sansil: Kyujaggak. 문화정치의 산실: 규장각 [Incubator of Cultural Politics: Kyujanggak]. Seoul: Jisiksaneopsa, 2008. _____. Joseon wangjo uigwe: gukga girok-gwa geu girok. 조선왕조의궤: 국가 의례와 그 기록 [Joseon Dynasty Uigwe: State Rites and Their Records] Seoul: Iljisa, 2005. Hanguk-ui bulhwa. 한국의 불화 [Buddhist Paintings of Korea] Vol. 28 Yangsan: Seongbo munhwajae yeonguwon, 2003. Haufler (Weidner), Marsha. “Painting and Patronage at the Mongol Court, 1260-1368.” PhD diss., University of California, 1982. Hay, Jonathan. “Kangxi Emperor’s Brush-Traces: Calligraphy, Writing and the Art of Imperial Authority.” In Body and Face in Chinese Visual Culture. Edited by Wu Hung and Katherine Tsiang Mino. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004. Hearn, Maxwell K. “Art Creates History: Wang Hui and the Kangxi Emperor’s Southern Inspection Tour.” In Landscape Clear and Radiant: The Art of Wang Hui (1632-1717), edited by Maxwell K Hearn. New York City: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2008. ______. “Document and Portrait: The Southern Tour Paintings of Kangxi and Qianlong.” Phoebus 6, no.1 (1988): 91-131. Henss, Michael. “The Bodhisattva-Emperor: Tibeto-Chinese Portraits of Sacred and Secular Rule in the Qing Dynasty.” Oriental Art 47, no. 3 (2001): 2-16. Hong, Seon-pyo 홍선표. “Kim Hong-do saenge-ui jaeguseong.” 김홍도 생애의 재구성 [Reconstruction of the Life of Kim Hong-do] Misulsa nondan 미술사논단, no. 34 (2012): 105-139. Hostetler, Laura. Qing Colonial Enterprise: Ethnography and Cargography in Early Modern China. Chicago: The University Chicago Press, 2001. 317 Hou, Ching-Lang and Michèle Pirazzoli. “Les Chasses D’Automne De L’Empereur Qianlong A Mulan.” T’oung Pao, 65 no. 1-3 (1979): 13-50. Hou, Yili 侯怡利. “Guo zhi zhongdian yi: Qianlong sinian de dayue yu dayuetu.” 国之重典一: 乾隆四年的大阅與大阅图 [One of the National Canons: Grand Review Ceremony in the Fourth Year of the Qianlong Reign and Grand Review] Tongshi yanjiu jikan 通識研究集刊 12 (2007): 153-178. Hsu, Carmen Y. “Writing on Behalf of a Christian Empire: Gifts, Dissemination, and Politics in the Letters of Philip II of Spain to Wanli of China.” Hispanic Review 78 (2010): 323-344. Hsu, Immanuel C. Y. The Rise of Modern China. New York: Oxford University Press, 1970. Hu, Desheng 胡德生. “Qingdai de xiangrui.” 清代的祥瑞 [Auspicious Omens of the Qing Period] Zijincheng 紫禁城 9 (2008): 88-103. Huang, Ray. 1587: A Year of No Significance. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981. Hucker, Charles. The Traditional Chinese State in Ming Times. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1961. Huh, Tae-yong 허태용. “Joseon hugi junghwa uisik-ui gyeoseung-gwa byeonyong.” 조선후기 중화의식의 계승과 변용 [Succession and Variation of Sino-Centrism in Late Joseon Dynasty] In Junggug eupneun junghwa 중국 없는 중화 [Zhonghua without China]. Incheon: Inha University Press, 2009. ______. “Sipchilsegi mal sipalsegi cho jonjuron-ui ganghwa-wa samgukjiyeonui yuhaeng.” 17세기 말 18세기 초 존주론의 강화와 삼국지연의의 유행 [Discourse on Esteeming Zhou and the Popularity of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms] Hanguk sahakbo 한국사학보, no. 15 (2003): 131-157. Hui, Zou. “The Jing of Line-Method: A Perspective Garden in the Garden of Round Brightness.” PhD diss., McGill University, 2005. Hwang, Jeong-yeon 황정연. “Joseon sidae hwawon gwa gungjung hoehwa.” 조선시대 화원과 궁중회화 [Court Painters and Court Art] In Wang-ui hwagadeul. 왕의 화가들 [The King’s Painters] Seoul: Dolbaegae, 2012. _____. Joseon sidae seohwa sujang yeongu. 조선시대 서화수장연구 [Study of Painting Collections in the Joseon Period] Seoul: Singu munhwasa, 2012. Hyegyeong gung. The Memoirs of Lady Hyegyŏng: The Autobiographical Writings of a Crown Princess of Eighteenth-Century Korea. Translated by JaHyun Kim Haboush. Berkeley, 318 Los Angeles, and London: Univeristy of California Press, 1996. Im, Bo-yeon 임부연. “Yugyo uiryehwa-ui jeongchihak mandongmyo-wa daebodan-eul jungsim-euro.” 유교 의례화의 정치학 만동묘와대보단을 중심으로 [Confucian Politics of Ritualization] Jong’gyo munhwa bipyeong 종교문화비평 15 (2009): 159-84. Jang, Hyeon-geun 장현근. “Hangug-eseo deajunggukgwan’nyeom-ui byeonhwa: junghwa ju’ui, sojunghwaju’ui, taljunghwaju’ui.” 한국에서 대중국관념의 변화: 중화주의, 소중화주의, 탈중화주의 [The Change of Korea’s Attitude Toward China: Zhonghua, Junior Zhonghua, and Beyond Zhonghua] Ataeyeongu 아태연구 18, no. 2 (2011): 97-123. Jeong, Eun-joo 정은주. Joseon sidae sahaeng girokhwa. 조선시대 사행기록화 [Documentary Paintings of Ambassadorial Missions] Seoul: Sahoepyeongron, 2012. _____. “Kang se-hwang ui yeonheanghwaldong gwa heohwa: gapjin yeonheang sihwacheop eul jungsimeuro.”강세황의 연행활동과 회화: 갑진연행시화첩을 중심으로 [Kang Se-hwang’s Activities during his Trip to Beijing and his Paintings: The Album of Painting and Poems about the Trip to Beijing in the Year of Gapjin] Misulsahak yeongu미술사학연구 259, no. 9 (2008): 41-78. Jeong, Dong-hun 정동훈. “Myeongdae-ui yejae-e natanan joseon wang-ui uisang.” 명대의 예제에 나타난 조선 왕의 위상 [Status of Joseon Kings in the Ming-Period Ritual System] Yeoksa-wa hyeongsil 역사와 현실, no. 84 (2012): 251-292. Jeong, Ok-ja 정옥자. “Kyujanggak-ui jisik giban sahoejeok uiui-wa dongasia munhwa.” 규장작의 지식기반 사회적 의의와 동아시아 문화 [Social Significance of Kyujanggak and East Asian Culture] In Joseon sidae munhwa-sa: munmul-ui jeongbi-wa wangsil munhwa. 조선시대 문화사: 문물의 정비와 왕실문화 [Cultural History of the Joseon Period: Reenactment of Culture and Court Culture] Vol. 1. Seoul: Iljisa, 2007. _____. Joseon hugi joseon junghwa sasang yeongu. 조선후기 조선중화사상 연구 [Study of the Late Joseon-Period Joseon Zhonghua] Seoul: Iljisa, 1998. Jin, Joon-hyeon 진준현. “Yeongjo shinjang yeohwa yukcheop byeongpung-e daehan yeongu.” 영조신장연화 육첩병풍에 대한 연구 [Research on the Six-Panel Folding Screen of King Yeongjo Sinjang Yeonhwa] Seoul Daehakgyo Bakmulgwan Yeonbo 서울대학교 박물관 연보 5 (1993): 39-41. Jo, Gwanggwon 조광권, “Joseon hugi juncheon gwajeong-e natanan weemindamron bunseok.” 조선후기 준천과정에 나타난 위민담론 분석 [Study of the Issues of Public Welfare in the Project of Stream Drainage in the Late Joseon Period] Doyang jeongchi sasangsa 동양정치사상사 4, no. 1 (2005): 67-109. 319 Johnson, C. L. “Gift Giving and Reciprocity among Japanese-Americans in Honolulu.” American Ethnologist 1, no. 2 (1974): 295–308. Joseon sidae eumak pungsokdo. 조선시대 음악 풍속도 [Joseon-Period Paintings of Musical Events] Seoul: Minsokwon, 2004. Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado. 조선시대 궁중행사도 [Joseon-Period Court Event Painting] Vol. 3. Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2012. Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado. 조선시대 궁중행사도 [Joseon-Period Court Event Painting] Vol. 2. Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2011. Joseon sidae gungjung haengsado. 조선시대 궁중 행사도 [Joseon-Period Court Event Painting] Vol. 1 Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2010. Joseonsidae pungsokhwa. 조선시대 풍속화 [Joseon-Period Genre Painting] Seoul: National Museum of Korea, 2002. Jungmann, Burglind. “Documentary Record Versus Decorative Representation: A Queen’s Birthday Celebration at the Korean Court.” Arts Asiatiques 62 (2007): 95-111. Kang, David C. East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. Kang, Gwan-sik 강관식. “Joseon ui gukwang gwa gungjung hwawon.” 조선의 국왕과 궁중화원 [Joseon Kings and Court Painters] In Joseon wangsil ui misul munhwa 조선왕실의 미술문화 [Visual Culture in the Joseon Royal Court] Seoul: Daewonsa, 2005. _____.“Yongjusa hubultaeng gwa joseon hugi gungjung hoehwa.” 용주사 후불탱과 조선후기 궁중회화 [The Mural Paintings of Yongjusa Temple and Late Joseon Court Painting] Misulsa hakbo미술사 학보, no. 31 (2008): 5-62. _____. “Myeongjae Yun Jeung chosang ui jejak gwajeong gwa jeongchigeok hamgui.” 명재 윤증 초상의 제작 과정과 정치적 함의 [The Drawing Process of Yunjeung’s Portrait and its Political Implications] Misulsa hakbo미술사학보, no. 34 (2010): 265-300. _____. “Myeongjae Yun Jeung yusang yimosang ui johyeongjeok, jeuijeok, jeongchijeok.” haeseok 明齋 尹拯 (1629-1714) 遺像 移摹史의 造形的, 祭儀的, 政治的 解釋 [Pictorial, Ritual and Political Meanings of Yun Jeung’s Commemorative Portraits] Kangjwa misulsa 강좌미술사, no. 35 (2010): 181-213. Kang, Mun-sik 강문식. “Sukjong-Jeongjodae sajik jaedo jeongbi-wa sajikseo uigwe pyeonchan: 320 Kyujanggak sojang sajikseo uigwe-reul jungsim-euro.” 숙종, 정조대 사직제도 정비와 사직서의궤 편찬: 규장각 소장 사직서의궤를 중심으로 [Reenactment of the Offerings at the Altar of Soil and Grain and the Compilation of Uigwe of Offerings at the Altar of Soil and Grain: the Uigwe of Offerings at the Altar of Soil and Grain in the Collection of Kyujanggak] In Joseon sidae munhwa-sa: munmul-ui jeongbi-wa wangsil munhwa 조선시대 문화사: 문물의 정비와 왕실문화 [Cultural History of the Joseon Period: Reenactment of Culture and Court Culture] Vol. 1. Seoul: Iljisa, 2007. Kang, Myeong-gwan 강명관. Geurim-euro ikneun Joseon yeoseong-ui yeoksa. 그림으로 읽는 조선여성의 역사 [Reading the History of Joseon-Period Women via Paintings] Seoul: Humanist, 2012. Kao, Mayching. “European Influences in Chinese Art, Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries.” In China and Europe: Images and Influence in Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries. Edited by Thomas H. C. Lee, 251-81. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 1991. Kertzer, David I. Ritual, Politics and Power. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Khun, Dieter. Science and Civilization in China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Kim, Baek-chul 김백철. “Yeongjo ui uirimyeongbeonseo cheonuisogam pyeonchan gwa jeong’gukbyeonhwa: yosun ui dugaji eolgul, tangpyeong gunju and jeonje gunju ui gyeong’gye.” 영조의 존의명변서 천의소감 편찬과 정국변화: 요순의 두 가지 얼굴, 탕평군주와 전제군주의 경계 [Compilation of Cheonuisogam and Political Situation during the King Yeongjo period: Dual Aspects of Yao and Shun: Boundary between Impartial Monarch and Despotic Monarch] Jeongshin munhwa yeongu 정신문화연구 33, no. 4 (2010): 7-40. Kim, Hong-baek 김홍백. “Daeyigakmirok-gwa joseon hugi hwayiron.” 대의각미론과 조선후기 화이론 [A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion and Discourse on the Distinction Between Civilization and Barbarity in the Late Joseon Period] Hanguk munhwa 한국문화, no. 56 (2011): 47-77. Kim, Hong-nam 김홍남. “Ilwol obongbyeong gwa Jeong Do-Jeon 일월오봉병과 정도전 [Screen of the Five Peaks with the Sun and the Moon, and Jeong Do-jeon].” In Jungguk hanguk misulsa중국 한국 미술사 [Chinese and Korean Art History] Seoul: Hakgojae, 2009. _____. “Joseon sidae ilwol obyeong-e daehan dosanghaeseokhakjeok yeongu” 조선시대 일월오봉병에 대한 도상해석학적 연구 [Iconographic Analysis on the Joseon-Period Screen of the Five Peaks with the Sun and the Moon] In Jungguk hanguk misulsa 중국 한국미술사 [Chinese and Korean art history] Seoul: Hakgojae, 2009. 321 _____. “Tragedy and Art at the Eighteenth-Century Chosŏn Court.” Orientations 25, no. 2 (1994): 28-37. Kim, Ji-yeong 김지영. “Chingyeong uisik-ui gohaeng-gwa chingyeon uigwe.”친경의식의 거행과 친경의궤 [Performance of Plowing Ceremoney and Book of Ritual Protocols of Plowing Ceremony] Hanguk hakbo한국학보 28, no. 2 (2002): 55-86. _____. “Joseonhugi gugwang haengcha-e daehan yeongu 조선후기 국왕 행차에 대한 연구 [Study of Late Joseon-period King’s Outings].” PhD diss., Seoul National University, 2005. Kim, Moon-sik 김문식. “Joseon sidae gukgajeonryeoseo-ui pyeonchan yangsang.” 조선시대 국가전례서의 편찬과 양상 [Trends of Editing State Rituals in the Joseon Dynasty] Kyujanggak 규장각 21, no. 4 (2009): 79-104. _____. “Joseon hugi jisikin-ui dae insik.” 조선후기 지식인의 대외인식 [Late Joseon-Period Intellectuals’ World View] In Junggug eupneun junghwa 중국 없는 중화 [Zhonghua without China] Incheon: Inha University Press, 2009. Kim, Yang-gyun 김양균. “Yeongjo ulyu giroyeon, gyeonghyeondang sujakyeondobyeong-ui jejak baegyeong-gwa jakga.” 영조을유기로연: 경현당수작연도병의 제작 배경과 작가 [The Background and Painter of the Folding Screen of Gathering of Elders at the Hall of Gyeonghyeon in the Year of Eulyu] Munhwajae Bojonyeongu 문화재보존연구 4 (2007): 44-71. Kim, Yong-dal 김영달. Iljae-ui nongeop jeongcheok-gwa Joseon nonghoe. 일제의 농업정책과 조선농회 [Japanese Colonial Government’s Agricultural Policy and Joseon Agricultural Society] Seoul: Hyeoan, 2003. Kleutghen, Kristina. “One or Two, Repictured.” Archives of Asian Arts 62 (2012): 25-46. _____. “The Qianlong Emperor’s Perspective: Illusionistic Painting in Eighteenth-Century China.” PhD diss., Harvard University, 2010. Korean Arts of the Eighteenth Century. New York: The Asia Society Galleries, 1994. Kutcher, Norman. “The Death of the Xiaoxian Empress: Bureaucratic Betrayals and the Crisis of Eighteenth-Century Chinese Rule.” The Journal of Asian Studies 56, no. 3 (1997): 708- 725. Kye, Seong-beom 계승범. “Joseon sok-ui myeongnara: deabodan-eul tonghaeseo bon joseon jibaecheung-ui junghwa insik.” 조선 속의 명나라: 대보단을 통해서 본 조선 지배층의 중화 인식 [The Altar of Great Gratitude: Korean Elites’ Adoration of Ming China under 322 Manchu Dominance] Myeongcheongsa yeongu 명청사연구, no. 35 (2011): 153-185. _____. “Huddling under the Imperial Umbrella: A Korean Approach to Ming China in the Early 1500s.” Journal of Korean Studies 15, no. 1 (2010): 41-66. _____. “Daebodan-ui jeongchijeok hamui.” 대보단의 정치적 함의 [The Altar of Great Gratitude (Taebodan): Its Political and Cultural Aspects in Late Chosŏn Korea] Yeoksa-wa hyeonsil 역사와 현실 75 (2010): 165-200. La Cité Interdite au Louvre: Empereurs de Chine et Rois de France. Paris: Musée du Louvre, 2011. Langlois, John D. “The Hong-wu reign 1368-1398.” In Cambridge History of China Vol. 7: The Ming Dynasty 1368-1644. Edited by Fredrick W. Mote and Denis Twitchett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Lai, Sufen Sophia. “Racial Discourse and Utopian Visions.” in Race and Racism in Modern East Asia: Western and Eastern Constructions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Lao, Jixiong 勞繼雄. Zhongguo gudai shuhua jianding shilu 中國古代書畫鑑定實錄 [A complete authentication and documentation of classical Chinese calligraphy and paintings] Vol. 7. Shanghai: Dong fang chubanzhongxin, 2011. Lau, Nap-Yin. “Waging War for Peace: The Peace Accord Between the Song and the Liao in AD 1005.” In Warfare in Chinese History. Edited by Hans J. Van de Ven. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2000. Lee, Hong-joo 이홍주. “Sipchil shipal segi joseon-ui gongpil chaesaekhwa yinmulhwa yeongu.” 17, 18세기 조선의 공필 채색화 인물화 연구 [Study of Color Figure Painting of 17th and 18th-century Joseon Korea] Misulsahak yeongu 미술사학연구, no. 267 (2010): 5-47. Lee, Jeong-Mi. “Cultural Expressions of Tokugawa Japan and Chŏson Korea: An Analysis of the Korean Embassies in the Eighteenth Century.” PhD diss., University of Toronto, 2008. Lee, Soyoung, ed. Art of the Korean Renaissance, 1400-1600. New Haven: Yale University Press. Legge, James. The Chinese Classics. Vol. 5. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960. Les très riches heures de la cour de Chine: Chefs d’oeuvre de la peinture impériale des Qing, 1662-1796. Paris: Musée des Arts Asiatiques Guimet, 2006. Leibold, James Patrick. “Constructing the Zhonghua Minzu: The Frontier and National Questions in Early 20th Century China.” PhD diss., University of Southern California, 2002. 323 Li, Dao 李燾. Xu zizhi tongjian changbian. 續資治通鑒長編 [Expanded Version of the Continuation of the Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government] Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1992. Li, Hui-shu. “Western Lake and the Mapping of Southern Song Art.” In Exquisite Moment: West Lake and Southern Song Art. New York: China Institute, 2001. Liew, Foon-Ming. The Treatises on Military Affairs of the Ming Dynastic History, 1368–1644: An Annotated Translation of the Treatises on Military Affairs 1. Hamburg: Gesellschaft für Natur-und Völkerkunde Ostasiens, 1998. Lim, Hye-ryeon 임혜련. “Joseon yeongjodae chinjamrye sihaeng-gwa uiui.” 조선영조대친잠례 시행과 의의 [Significance of Sericulture Ceremony during King Yeongjo’s Reign] Jangseogak 장서각 25 (2011): 111-135. Lin, Li-na 林莉娜. “Conghuojidang kanyongzhengchaode gongtinghuihua huodong.” 從活計檔 看雍正朝的宮廷繪畫活動 [Looking at the production of paintings during the Yongzheng Reign through examining documents of imperial workshop] Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊, no. 319 (2009): 40-51. ______.“Mingren Chujing rubi tu zhi zonghe yanjiu.” 明人出驚入蹕圖之綜合研究 [Comprehensive Study of Ming Chujing rubi-tu] Part 1 and 2. Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 11, no. 127 (1993), 58-77; no. 128: 34-41. Liu, Naiyi 劉迺義. Lang Shining xiushi nianpu 郎世寧修士年譜 [A Year-by-Year Biography of Brother Giuseppe Castiglione]. Shanghai: Zikawei, 1944. Liu, Cary. “Sung Dynasty Painting of the T’ai-Ch’ing-lou Library Hall.” In Arts of the Sung and Yüan: Ritual, Ethnicity, and Style in Painting, edited by Cary Y. Liu and Dora C. Y. Ching. Princeton: The Art Museum, Princeton University, 1999. Liu, Di 刘迪. “Qing Qianlong chao neifu shuhua shoucang 清乾隆朝内府书画收藏 [The Collection of Paintings and Calligraphy in the Imperial Court of Qianlong Reign]. PhD diss., Nankai University, 2010. Liu, Lu 劉潞. “Zhai xiannongtantu yu yongzhengdi de tongzhi.” 祭先农坛图与雍正帝的统治 [Sacrificial Offering at the Altar of the First Farmer and the Yongzheng Emperor’s Statecraft] Qingshi yanji 清史研究, no. 3 (2010): 151-156. _____. “Ji Xiannong, gengjitian yu xiannongtantu: Yongzheng huangdi zhongyao de zhengzhi shouduan.” 祭先農. 耕耤田與祭先農壇圖: 雍正皇帝重要的政治手段 [Performing Xiannong and Ploughing Ceremony and the Worshipping at the Altar of the First Farmer Painting: Yongzheng’s Important Political Tool] Liang’an gugong diyi jie xueshu yantao 324 兩岸故宮第一屆學術研討會 (2009): 1-9. Lo, Hui-Chi. “Political Advancement and Religious Transcendence: The Yongzheng Emperor’s (1678-1735) Deployment of Portraiture.” PhD diss, Stanford University, 2009. Loehr, George R. “Missionary Artists at the Manchu Court.” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society 34 (1962-63): 51-67. Louis XIV: L’Homme & Le Roi. Paris: ESEP, 2009. Macao Museum of Art. Qing Legacies: The Sumptuous Art of Imperial Packaging. Macao: The Macao Museum of Art, 2000. Mauss, Marcel. “Essai sur la Don, Forme Archaique de l'Echange [Essay on the Gift, Archaic Form of Exchange].” Année Sociologique, nouvelle série, fasc. 1(1924): 30-186. McMullen, David. “Bureaucrats and Cosmology: the Ritual Code of T’ang China.” In Ritual of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies. Edited by David Cannadine and Simon Price. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Mikinosuke, Ishida. “A Biographical Study of Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shi-ning), a Jesuit Painter in the Court of Peking under the Ch’ing Dynasty.” Memoirs of the Research Department of the Tōyō Bunko 19 (1960), 79-121. Miller, Harry. State Versus Gentry in Late Ming Dynasty China, 1572-1644. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Mingqing fengsuhua 明清风俗画 [Ming and Qing Dynasty Genre Painting] Xianggang: Shang wu yin shu guan Xianggang gu fen you xian gong si, 2008. Min, Kil-hong 민길홍. “Cheonchilbaeknyeon ui munhyo sejawa boyang’gwan ui sang’gyeonryeo heangsa.” 1784년의 문효세자와 보양관의 상견례행사 [The Prince Munhyo’s Meeting Ceremony with the Tutors of the Office of Nourishment and Protection in the Year 1784] Misul charyo 미술자료 80 (2012): 97-109. Monod, Paul Kleber. The Power of Kings: Monarchy and Religion in Europe, 1589-1715. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001. Moore, Oliver. “Violence Un-scrolled: Cultic and Ritual Emphasis in Painting Guan Yu.” Arts Asiatiques 58 (2003): 86-97. Muir, Edward. Ritual in Early Modern Europe. Chicago: Northwestern University, 2005. Mungello, D.E. The Great Encounter of China and the West, 1500-1800. 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2005. 325 Murray, Julia K. Mirror of Morality: Chinese Narrative Illustration and Confucian Ideology. Honolulu: Hawai’i Press, 2007. _____. “Didactic Illustrations in Printed Books.” In Printing and Book Culture in Late Imperial China. Edited by Cynthia J. Brokaw and Kai-wing Chow. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. _____.“A Southern Sung Painting Regain Its Memory: Welcoming the Imperial Carriage and Its Colophon.” Journal of Song and Yuan Studies 22 (1990-1992): 109-124. Musillo, Marco. “Reconciling Two Careers: The Jesuit Memoir of Giuseppe Castiglione Lay Brother and Qing Imperial Painter.” Eighteenth Century Studies 42, no.1 (2008): 45-59. Myeong, Se-na 명세나. “Joseon sidae obongbyeong-ui yeongu: hyungryeo dogam uigwe girok eul jungshim euro.” 조선시대 오봉병의 연구: 흉례도감의궤 기록을 중심으로 [Study of the Screen of the Five Peaks by Analyzing the Book of Ritual Protocols of Funerary Rites] Master’s Thesis, Ehwa Women’s University, 2007. Na, Chih-liang 那志良. The Emperor’s Procession: Two Scrolls of the Ming Dynasty. Taipei: The National Palace Museum, 1970. Naquin, Susan and Evelyn S. Rawski. Chinese Society in the Eighteenth Century. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1987. Naquin, Susan. Peking: Temples and City Life 1400–1900. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 2000. Neisser, Marianne. “The Sense of Self Expressed through Giving and Receiving.” Social Casework 54, no. 5 (1973): 294-301. Newby, Laura. “Copper Plates for the Qianlong Emperor: From Paris to Peking via Canton.” Journal of Early Modern History 16 (2012): 161-199. Ng, Cho and Q. Edward Wang. Mirroring the Past: The Writing and Use of History in Imperial China. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005. Nie, Chong-zheng 聂崇正.“Liezheng yu yuezhen: Gugong neiwei de liangjuan Qianlong dayuetu.” 列阵与阅阵: 故宫内外的两卷乾隆大阅图 [Troops in Formation and Inspection of Formation: The Two Scrolls of the Qianlong Emperor’s Grand Review Ceremony in the Collection of the Palace Museum] Zijincheng 紫禁城 no. 8 (2009): 86-95. _____. Qing gong hui hua yu xi hua dong jian. 清宮绘画与西画东渐 [Qing Court Painting and the Eastern March of Western Painting] Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe, 2008. 326 _____. “Nie chongzheng xiansheng tan ziguang ge gongchen xiang.” 聂崇正先生谈紫光阁功臣像 [Mr. Nie’s Discussion of the Portraits of Meritorious Officials at the Hall of Purple Brightness] Zijincheng 紫禁城 156 (2008): 138-169. _____. “Qing Dynasty Court Painting.” In China: The Three Emperors 1662–1795, edited by Evelyn S. Rawski and Jessica Rawson, 76-115. London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2005. _____. Gongting yishu de guanghui: qingdai gongting huihua luncong. 宮廷藝術的光輝: 淸代宮廷繪畵論叢 [The Glories of Qing Court Art: Essays on Qing Court Painting] Taipei: Dongdai tusliu, 1996. Nie, Hui 聂卉. “Tieluohua jiqi zai Qingdai gongting jianzhu zhong de shiyong.” 贴落画及其在清代宫廷建筑中的使用 [The Usage of Tieluo Paintings inside the Qing Palace Buildings] Wenwu 文物 11 (2006): 86-94. Pai, Hyung Il. Constructing “Korean” Origins: A Critical Review of Archaeology, Historiography, and Racial Myth in Korean State Formation Theories. Harvard University Asia Center, 2000. Park, Eun-soon 박은순. “Joseon hubangi daejung hoehwagyoseop ui jogeon gwa yangsang, geurigo song’gwa.” 조선 후반기 대중 회화교섭의 조건과 양상, 그리고 성과 [Condition, Development and Consequence of Late Joseon-Period Artistic Interactions between Korea and China] In Joseon hubangi misul ui dae’oae gyoseop 조선 후반기 미술의 대외교섭 [Aritistic Interactions in the Late Joseon Period] Seoul: Yeogyeong, 2007. Park, Hyeon-mo박현모. Jeongjo sahu 63nyeon: sedojeongchigi-ui (1800-63) gungnaeoe jeongchi yeongu정조 사후 63년: 세도정치기 (1800-63) 의 국내외 정치 연구 [Sixty-three Years After the Death of Jeongjo: Study of the Domestic and Foreign Politics During the Period of Royal-In-Law Family] Seoul: Changbi, 2011. _____. Jengchiga Jeongjo. 정치가 정조 [Politician the King Jeongjo] Seoul: Purunyeoksa, 2001. Park, Jeong-ae박정애. “Sippal sipgu segi giseong byeongpung yeongu.” 18-19세기 기성도 병풍 연구 [Study of the Screen Painting of Gija Castle in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries] Gomunhwa 고문화 no. 74 (2009): 5-41. Park, Jeong-hye 박정혜. “Hyeongjong jeongmi Onyang onhaeng gyebyeong.” 현종정미온양온행계병 [King Hyeongjong’s Outing to Onyuang in the Year of Jeongmi] Misulsa nondan 미술사논단, no. 29 (2009): 97-127. _____. “Court Painting on the Crown Princes of the Joseon Dynasty.” The International Journal 327 of Korean Art and Archaeology 2 (2008): 128-165. _____. Yeongsugaksong-gwa chinrimseonondo 영수각송과 친림선온도 [The Ceremonial Visitation to the Hall of Spirit Longevity and King’s Personal Attendance in Royal Banquet]. Seongnam: Academy of Korean Studies, 2008. _____. Joseon sidae gungjung girokhwa yeongu 조선시대 궁중 기록화 연구[Study of Joseon-period Court Documentary Painting]. Seoul: Iljisa, 2000. _____. “Uigwe reul tonghaeseo bon joseon sidae ui hwawon.” 의궤를 통해서 본 조선시대의 화원 [Study of Joseon-Period Court Painters through the Analysis of Uigwe] Misulsa yeongu 미술사연구, no. 9 (1995): 203-290. Park, Hyo-eun 박효은. “Cheongdae dongpanhwa pyeongjeong seojang jeondo balmun-gwa pyeongjeong yanggeumcheon jeondo.” 청대 동판화 평정서장전도 발문과 평정양금천전도 [Qing Engravings: Epilogue to the Battle of Pacifying Rebellions at Xinjiang and the Battle of Pacifying Rebellions at Jinchuan] Hanguk gidokgyo bakmulgwaji 한국 기독교박물관지, no. 5 (2009): 106-114. Park, Yeon-hyeo 박연혜. “Joseon sidae chaekryeo dogam-ui hoehwasajeok yeongu.” 조선시대 책례도감의궤의 회화사적 연구 [Art Historical Approach to the Uigwe of the Investiture Ceremony] Hanguk munhwa 한국문화, no. 13 (1993): 521-551. Pee, Christian De. The Writing of Weddings in Middle-Period China: Text and Ritual Practice in the Eighth Through Fourteenth Centuries. Albany: State University of New York, 2007. Pelliot, Paul. “Les Conquetes de L’Empereur de la Chine,” T’oung Pao 20 (1921): 183-274. Perdue, Peter C. China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2005. Puett, Michael. “Centering the Realm: Wang Mang, the Zhouli, and Early Chinese Statecraft.” In Statecraft and Classical Learning: The Rituals of Zhou in East Asian History, edited by Benjamin A. Elman and Martin Kern. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010. Qing Legacies: The Sumptuous Art of Imperial Packaging. Macau: The Macao Museum of Art, Macau, 2001 Qingdai gongting banhua. 淸代宮廷版画 [Qing Court Prints] Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2001. Qingdai gongting huihua. 清代宫廷绘画 [Qing Court Painting] Beijing: Wenwu chubanche, 1992. Rawski, Evelyn S. The Last Emperors: A Social History of Qing Imperial Institutions. Berkeley: 328 University of California, 2001. _____. “The Imperial Way of Death: Ming and Ch’ing Emperors and Death Ritual.” In Death Ritual in Late Imperial and Modern China, edited by James L. Watson and Evelyn S. Rawski. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987. Ripa, Matteo. Memoirs of Father Ripa During the Thirteen Years’ Residence at the Court of Peking in the Service of the Emperor of China: With an Account of the Foundation of the College for the Education of Young Chinese at Naples. New York, J. Wiley: 1849. Rogers, Howard. “For Love of God: Castiglione at the Qing Imperial Court.” Phoebus 6 no.1 (1991): 141-160. _____. “Court Painting Under the Qianlong Emperor.” In The Elegant Brush: Chinese Painting Under the Qianlong Emperor (1735-1796). Edited by Chou Ju-hsi and Claudia Brown. Phoenix: Phoenix Art Museum, 1985. Robinson, David M. “The Ming Court and the Legacy of the Yuan Mongols.” In Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368–1644). Edited by David M. Robinson, 365-411. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008. ______. Martial Spectacles of the Ming Court. Cambridge, MA., and London: Harvard University Asia Center, 2013. Robson, James. Power of Place: The Religious Landscape of the Southern Sacred Park in Medieval China. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2009. Rossabi, Morris. China Among Equals: The Middle Kingdom and Its Neighbors, 10th-14th Centuries. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1983. Rowe, William T. China’s Last Empire: The Great Qing. Cambridge, MA.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Schaberg, David. A Patterned Past: Forms and Thought in Early Chinese Historiography. Cambridge and London: The Harvard University Asia Center, 2001. Schafer, Edward H. “Hunting Parks and Animal Enclosures in Ancient China.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 11 (1991): 318-43. Schneewind, Sarah. A Tale of Two Melons: Emperor and Subject in Ming China. Indianapolis and Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2006. Seo, Yun-jeong 서윤정. “Sipchil segi huban andong gweonssi-ui ginyeom hoehwa-wa namyin-ui jeongchi hwangdong.” 17세기 후반 안동 권씨의 기념 회화와 남인의 정치 활동 [Andong Gwon Clan’s Patronage of Commemorative Paintings and the Southerner’s 329 Political Activities] Andong hak yeongu 안동학연구 11 (2012): 259-294. Shin, Byeong-joo 신병주. “Joseonsidae uigwe pyeonchan-ui yeoksa.” 조선시대 의궤 편찬의 역사 [History of Joseon-period Uigwe Compilations] Joseonsidaesa hakbo 조선 시대사 학보 54 (2010): 269-300. _____. “Kyujanggak-gwa girokmunhwa.” 규장각과 기록문화 [The Hall of Kyujanggak and Documentation Culture] Hanguk daehak bakmulgwan hyeophoe 한국 대학박물관 협회 (2008): 35-61. Sima Guang. Zizhitongjian. 資治通鑑 [Comprehensive Mirror for the Aid of Government] Vol. 193. Beijing, Zhonghua Shuju, 1956. Sima, Qian. Records of the Grand Historian: Qin Dynasty. 3rd ed. Translated by Burton Watson. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995. Siu, Victoria. “Castiglione and the Yuanming Yuan Collections.” Orientations 19 no.11 (1988): 72-79. Sipchil, sipal segi joseon-ui oegukseojeok suyonggwa dokseosiltae. 17, 18세기 조선의 외국서적 수용과 독서실태: 목록과 해제 [The Importation of Foreign Books and Reading in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth-Century Joseon] Seoul: Hye’an, 2006. Skaff, Jonathan Karam. Sui and Tang China and Its Turko-Mongol Neighbors: Culture, Power and Connections 580–800. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Smith, Richard J. Mapping China and Managing the World: Culture, Cartography and Cosmology in Late Imperial Times. New York: Routledge, 2013. Sommer, Debora. “The Art and Politics of Painting Qianlong at Chengde.” In New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde. Edited by James A. Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Forêt. New York: Routledge Curzon, 2004. ______. “A Letter from a Jesuit Painter in Qianlong’s Court at Chengde.” In New Qing Imperial History: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde. Edited by James A. Millward, Ruth W. Dunnell, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Foret. New York: Routledge Curzon, 2004. Spence, Jonathan D. Treason by the Book. New York: Viking, 2001. Splendors of China’ Forbidden City: the Glorious Reign of Emperor Qianlong. New York and London: Merrell, 2004. 330 Strassberg, Richard E. “War and Peace: Four Intercultural Landscapes.” In China on Paper: European and Chinese Works from the Late Sixteenth to the Early Nineteenth Century. Edited by Marcia Reed and Paola Demattè, 88-137. Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 2007. Strong, Roy. Van Dyck: Charles I on Horseback. New York City: Viking Press, 1972. Stuart, Jan, and Evelyn Sakakida Rawski. Worshiping the Ancestors: Chinese Commemorative Portraits. Washington, DC: Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, 2001. Sullivan, Michael. “Some Possible Sources of European Influence on Late Ming and Early Ch’ing Paintings.” In Proceedings of the International Symposium of Chinese Painting, National Palace Museum, Taipei, Taiwan; 18-24 June, 1970. Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1972. ______. The Meeting of Eastern and Western Art. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. Suzuki, Shogo. Civilization and Empire: China and Japan’s Encounter with European International Society. London and New York: Routledge, 2009. Swope, Kenneth M. “Bestowing the Double-edged Sword: Wanli as Supreme Military Commander.” In Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368–1644). Edited by David M. Robinson. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008. Swope, Kenneth M. A Dragon’s Head and a Serpent’s Tail: Ming China and the First Great East Asian War 1592–1598. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2009. Tashiro, Kazui 田代和生. “Chōsen tsūshinshi emaki no kenkyū gyōretsu.” 朝鮮通信使行列繪卷の研究 [Study of the Joseon Envoys’ Procession Scroll] Chōsen gakuhō 朝鮮學報 137 (1990): 1-46. Thomas, Greg M. “Yuanming Yuan/Versailles: Intercultural Interactions Between Chinese and European Palaces Cultures.” Art History 32. no.1 (2009): 115-143. Tong ,Wen-e 童文娥. “Qingyuanben qincantude yanjiu.” 清院本親蠶圖的研究 [Study of the Qing Copy of the Sericulture Painting] Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 278 (2006): 70-78. Torbert, Preston. The Ch’ing Imperial Household Department: A Study of its Organizations and Principal Functions, 1662-1796. Cambridge: Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University, 1977. Thompson, Lydia. “The Yi’nan Tomb: Narrative and Ritual in Pictorial Art of the Eastern Han (25–220 CE) China.” PhD diss., Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1998. 331 Thorp, Robert L. Son of Heaven: Imperial Arts of China. Seattle: Son of Heaven Press, 1988. Tripodes, Lucia. “Painting and Diplomacy at the Qianlong Court: A Commemorative Painting by Wang Zhicheng.” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics, no. 35 (1999): 185-199. Tsang, Ka Bo. “Portraits of Meritorious Officials: Eight Examples from the First Set Commissioned by the Qianlong Emperor.” Arts Asiatiques 47, no. 1 (1992): 69-88. U, Gyeong-seop 우경섭. “Jeongjodae sigangwonji pyeonchan-gwa gue uiui.” 정조시대 시강원 편찬과 그 의의 [Significance of the Compilation of the Record of the Office of Royal Tutoring during King Jeongjo’s Reign] Taedong gojeon yeongu 대동고전 연구 26 (2010): 87-120. _____. “Song Si-yeol-ui hwayiron-gwa joseon junghwaju’ui seongrip.” 송시열의 화이론과 조선중화주의 성립 [Song Si-yeol’s Theory about the “Civilized” and the “Barbarity,” and the Establishment of Joseon Zhonghua] Jindan hakbo 진단학보 101 (2006): 257-289. Uitzinger, Ellen. “For the Man Who Has Everything Western-Style Exotica in Birthday Celebrations at the Court of Ch’ien-Lung.” In Conflict and Accommodation in Early Modern East Asia: Essays in Honor of Erik Zürcher. Edited by Leonard Blussé and Harriet T. Zurndorfer. Leiden, New York and Köln: Brill, 1993. Vanderstappen, Harrie. “Chinese Art and the Jesuits in Peking.” In East Meets West: The Jesuits in China, 1582-1773. Edited by Charles E. Ronan and Bonnie B.C. Oh, 103-26. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1988. Vollmer, John E. and Jacqueline Simcox. Emblems of Empire: Selections from the Mactaggart Art Collection. Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta Press, 2009. Waley-Cohen, Joanna. The Culture of War in China: Empire and the Military Under the Qing Dynasty. London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2006. ______. The Sextants of Beijing: Global Currents in Chinese History. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999. Waley, Arthur. The Book of Songs: The Ancient Chinese Classic of Poetry. New York City: Grove Press, 1996. Wang, Ji-peng 王家鵬. “Zhongzhengdian yu qinggong zangchuan forjiao.”中正殿與淸宮藏傳佛敎 [The Hall of Central Uprightness and Tibetan Buddhism in the Qing Palace] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宮博物院院刊, no. 3 (1991): 58-71. Wang, Cheng-hua. “Material Culture and Emperorship: The Shaping of Imperial Roles at the Court of Xuanzong (r. 1426–1435).” PhD diss., Yale University, 1998. 332 Wang, Rongsheng 王戎笙, ed. Qingdai quanshi di er juan. 清代全史第二卷 [Complete History of the Qing Dynasty] Vol. 2. Shenyang: Liaoning renmin chubanshe, 1991. Wang, Yuan-kang. Harmony and War: Confucian Culture and Chinese Power Politics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2011. Weidner, Marsha Smith. “Painting and Patronage at the Mongol Court of China, 1260-1368.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Berkeley, 1982. Watson, Burton. Hsun Tzu: Basic Writings. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963. West, Stephen H. “Playing with Food: Performance, Food, and the Aesthetics of Artificiality in the Sung and Yuan.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 57, no. 1 (1997): 67-106. Won, Jae-yeon원재연. “Sipchil sipgu segi yeonhaengsa ui bukgyeong hwaldong gong’gan yeongu.” 17-19세기 연행사의 북경활동 공간 연구 [Study of the Places Where Joseon Envoys Visited Beijing] Dongbuk’a yeongu nonchong 동북아연구논총 26 (2009): 205-262. Woo, Hyunsoo. “Screen Paintings of the Joseon Court.” In Trasures from Korea: Arts and Culture of the Joseon Dynasty, 1392-1910. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 2014. Wu, Hung. Double Screen: Medium and Representation in Chinese Painting. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1997. _____.“Beyond the ‘Great Boundary’: Funerary Narrative in the Cangshan Tomb.” In Boundaries in China. Edited by John Hay. London: Reaktion Books, 1994. ______. The Wu Liang Shrine: The Ideology of Early Chinese Pictorial Art. Stanford: Stanford University, 1989. Wu, Jiang. Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Wu, Mei-feng 吳美鳳. “Jingqi yao fu wu yun lai bushi qianqiu xi matai: Shitan mingren chujing rubitu yu wanming huajia dingyunpeng zhi guanxi.” 旌旗遙拂五雲來不是千秋戲馬臺: 試探 明人出警入蹕圖 與晚明畫家丁雲鵬之關係 [A Preliminary Study of the Ming Painting Chujing rubi tu and its Relationship with the Late Ming Painter Ding Yunpeng] Gugong xuekan 故宮學刊 2 (2005): 97-131. Wu, Wen-chung. Selections of Historical Literature and Illustrations of Physical Activities in Chinese Culture. Taipei: Hanwon Bookstore, 1975. Xia, Ning. “The Lifanyuan and the Inner Asian Rituals in the Early Qing (1644-1795).” Late 333 Imperial China 14 (1993): 60-92. Xinshijie: Lang Shining yu qinggong xiyangfeng 新視界: 郎世寧與清宮西洋風 [New Vision: Lang Shining and Qing Western Style] Taipei: National Palace Museum, 2007. Xu, Bang-da 徐邦达. “Songren hua renwu gushi ying ji yingluantukao.”宋人畫人物故事應即迎鸞圖考 [Thoughts on a Song-Period Figure Painting, Possibly Titled Welcoming the Imperial Carriage ] Wenwu 文物, no. 82 (1972): 61-63. Yang, Boda 楊伯達. Qingdai huayuan. 淸代畵院 [Qing-Period Court Painting Workshop] Beijing: Zijiancheng Publication, 1993. _____. “Qianlong shejian youhua guaping shukao.” 乾隆射箭油画挂屏述考 [Discussion on the Hanging Oil Screen Painting of the Qianlong Emperor Shooting with Bow and Arrow] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 1 (1991): 26-38. _____. “Castiglione at the Qing Court – An Important Artistic Contribution.” Orientations 19 no.11 (1988): 44-51. ______. “Guanyu mashutu ticaide zaikaoding.” 关于马术图题材的再考订 [Reconsidering the Themes of Horsemanship] Wenwu 文物, no. 7 (1983): 64-67. _____. “Wanshuyuan ciyantu kaoxi.” 万树园赐宴图考析 [Research on the Ceremonial Banquet in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 4 (1982): 3-25. Yan, Hong-sen. Reconstruction Designs of Lost Ancient Chinese Machinery. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2008. Yang, Zhishui 杨之水. “Cixianwanzhang beichao bihua mulubutu ruogan yizhang.” 磁县湾漳北朝壁画墓卤簿图若干仪仗考 [Research on Parphernalia in lubu painting in the murals of the northern Wei tomb at Wanzheng, Cixian] Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宫博物院院刊, no. 2 (2006): 114-157. Yeh, Wen-Hsin. “Living with Art.” In Collecting China: The World, China, and a Short History of Collecting. Edited by Vimalin Rujivacharakul. Newark: University of Delaware, 2011. Yeongjo Daewang 영조대왕 [Yeongjo the Great] Seongnam: Hangukhak jungang yeonguwon chulpanbu, 2011 Yeongjo daewang geul, geulssi. 영조 대왕 글, 글씨 [King Yeongjo the Great: His Writing and Calligraphy] Seoul: Misul munhwa, 2001. 334 Yi, Eun-sun 이은선. “Yi Gyeong-seok-ui jeongchijeok saengae-wa samjeondobimun sibi.” 이경석의 정치적 생애와 삼전도비문 시비 [Yi Gyeong Seok’s Political life and the Controversy over the Inscription of the Samjeondo Stele] Hanguksa yeongu 한국사 연구 60 (1986): 74-75. Yi, Geon-sang 이건상. “Buksaeseoneundo-wa bukgwansuchangrok.” 북새선은도와 북관수창록 [The Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress and the Compilation of Poems on Bukgwan] Misul charyo 미술자료 52 (1993): 129-167. Yi, Gyeong-hwa 이경화. “Buksaeseoneundo yeongu.” 북새선은도 연구 [Study of the Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress] Misulsahak yeongu 미술사학연구 254 (2007): 41-70. Yi, Hyeo-gyeong 이혜경. “Jeongjosidae gwanpanbon panhwa yeongu.” 정조시대 관판본 판화 연구 [Study of the Jeongjo-period Court Commissioned Prints] Misulsa Yeongu 미술사 연구 20 (2006): 237-272. Yi, Jung-hui 이중희. Han jung il ui chogi seyang hwabeop ui doyip bigyoron 한, 중, 일의 초기 서양화 도입 비교론 [Comparative Analysis of the Adaptation of Western-Style Paintings and their Pictorial Languages] Seoul: Eol gwa al, 2003. Yi, Seong-mi 이성미. “Yeongjo sidae uigwe-wa misul munhwa.” 영조시대 의궤와 미술문화 [Uigwe and Vusual Culture during the Yeongjo Period] (2011), 177-217. ______. Eojin uigwe-wa misulsa: Joseon gukwang chosanghwa-ui jejak-gwa mosa 어진의궤와 미술사: 조선국왕 초상화의 제작과 모사 [Art History and Uigwe of Making Royal Portraits: Production and Copying of Joseon King’s Portraits] Seoul: Sohwadang, 2012. _____. “The Screen of the Five Peaks of the Chŏson Dynasty.” In Joseon wangshil ui misul munhwa 조선왕실의 미술문화 [The Visual Culture of the Joseon Royal Court] Seoul: Daewonsa, 2005. ______. Joseon sidae ui geurim sok ui seoyanghwabeop. 조선시대 그림 속의 서양화법 [Western Pictorial Languages in Joseon-period Paintings] Seoul: Daewonsa, 2000. Yi, Tae-ho 이태호. “Han si-gak-ui buksaeseoneundo-wa buggwansilgyeongdo.” 한시각의 북새선은도와 북관실경도 [Han Si-gak’s Royal Grace over the Northern Fortress and the True-View of Bukgwan] Jeongsinmunhwa yeongu 정신문화연구 34 (1988): 207-235. Yi, Tae-jin 이태진. “Joseon hugi daemyeonguiriron-ui byeoncheon.” 조선후기 對明義理論의 변천 [The Development of A Discourse on Loyalty to the Ming Dynasty in the Late Joseon Period] Asia munhwa 아시아문화 10 (1994): 5-26. 335 Yi, Wook 이욱. “Joseonhugi jeonjaengui gieokgwa daebodan jehyang.” 조선후기 전쟁의 기억과 대보단 제향 [Memory of Two Wars and the Sacrifice at the Alar of Great Gratitude in the Late Joseon Period] Jonggyo yeongu 宗敎硏究 42 (2006): 127-63. Yi, Yun-seok 이윤석. “Wongjeongjae-wa cheongdae gukga jesa.” 옹정제와 청대 국가제사: 예제의 측면에서 본 옹정 통치 [The Emperor Yongzheng and Qing State Sacrifice] Myeongcheongsa yeongu 명청사연구, no. 25 (2003): 171-211. Yim, Gi-jung 임기중. Yeonhaengrok yeongu. 연행록 연구 [Study of Envoys’ Journals] Seoul: Iljisa, 2002. Yim, Gyeo-sun 임계순. Cheongsa. 청사 [History of Qing] Seoul: Sinseowon, 2000. Yoo, Jae-bin 유재빈. “Gukrip bakmulgwan sojang jinchado-ui jeongchijeok seonggyek-wa uimi.” 국립박물관 소장 진하도의 정치적 성격과 의미 [Politics of Celebration: A Study of Congratulatory Ceremony Offered to the King] Dongak misul sahak 동악미술사학 13 (2012): 181-200. _______. “The Politics of Art under King Jeongjo: Exemplified by ‘Events from King Jeongjo’s Visit to Hwaseong in 1795.’” In In Grand Style: Celebrations in Korean Art During the Joseon Dynasty. San Francisco: Asian Art Museum, 2013. Yu, Bong-hak 유봉학. Gaehyeokg-wa galdeung-ui sidae: jeongjo-wa sipgu segi개혁과 갈등의 시대: 정조와 19세기 [The Period of Reforms and Conflicts] Seoul: Singu munhwasa, 2009. Yu, Chu 余出. “Zhongguo gudai che wenhua: lubu.” 中国古代车文化: 卤簿 [Ancient Chinese Culture of Transportation: Processional Paraphernalia] Anquan yu jiankang 安全与健康 April (2011): 18-20. _____. “Zhongguo gudai che wenhua: lubuzhi zhanxian.” 中国古代车文化: 卤簿之展现 [The Emergence of Processional Paraphernalia Ceremony] Anquan yu jiankang 安全与健康 May (2011): 19-21. ______. “Zhongguo gudai che wenhua: lubude wangqiang mingyun.” 中国古代车文化: 卤簿的顽强命运 [The Development of the Processional Paraphernalia Ceremony] Anquan yu jiankang 安全与健康 May (2011): 18-20. Yu, Hui. “Naturalism in Qing Imperial Group Portraiture.” Orientations 7 (1995): 42-50. Yu, Renqiu. “Imperial Banquet in the Wanshu yuan.” In New Qing History: the Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing Chengde, edited James A. Millward, Ruth W. Dunnel, Mark C. Elliott, and Philippe Foret. London and New York: Routledge Curzon, 2004. 336 Yu, Shenxing 于慎行. Gushanbizhu 穀山筆麈. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1984. Yuk, Su-hwa 육수화, Joseon sidae wangsil gyoyuk. 조선시대 왕실교육 [Joseon-Period Royal Education] Seoul: Minsokwon, 2008. Yun, Chin-yeong윤진영. “Joseonsidae gwallyosaho eui Sinchamgryeo-wa gyeohoedo.” 조선시대 관료사회의 新參禮와 契會圖 [Ceremony of Welcoming Newly Appointed Officials and Gathering Painting] Yeosa minsokhak 역사 민속학 18 (2004): 135-164. ______.“Joseonsidae gyehoedo yeongu” 조선시대 계회도 연구[Study of Joseon-Period Gathering Paintings] PhD diss., Academy of Korean Studies, 2004. Zarrow, Peter. After Empire: The Conceptual Transformation of the Chinese State, 1885–1924. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 2012. Zhao, George Qingzhi. Marriage as Political Strategy and Cultural Expression. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2008. Zhongguo guojia bowuyuanguan guancang wenwu yanjiu congshu, huihua juan. fengsuhua.中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 风俗画 [Series of Research on Relics in the Collection of the National Museum of China: Painting Volume – Genre Painting] Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2007, Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancang wenwu yenjiu congshu: huihua juan, lishihua.中国国家 博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书: 绘画卷, 历史画 [Series of Research on Relics in the Collection of the National Museum of China: Painting Volume-History Painting] Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006. Zhongguo jin yin bo li falangqi quanji.中国金银玻璃法琅器全集 [The Collection of Chinese Gold, Silver, Glass, and Enamel Artifacts] Vol. 3. Shijiazhuang: Hebei meishu chubanshe, 2004. Zhu, Hong 朱鴻. “Mingren chujing rubi tu yanjiu.” 明人出驚入蹕圖研究 [Study of the Ming Inspection Outing and Returning Procession Painting] Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 22, no. 1 (2004): 183-213. Zhu, Jiajin. “Castiglione’s Tieluo Paintings.” Orientations 19, no. 11 (1988): 80-83. Zhu, Jian-fei. Chinese Spatial Strategies: Imperial Beijing 1420–1911. London: Routledge, 2012. Zhu, Jing 朱靜. Yangjiaoshi kanzhongguochaoting. 洋敎士看中國朝廷 [Western Missionaries Looking at the Court of China] Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1995. 337 Zhu, Min 朱敏. “Qingren dajia lubutu yanjiu.” 清人大驾卤簿图卷研究 [Study of Qing Grand Processional Paraphernalia Scrolls] In Zhongguo guojia bowuguan guancangwenwu yanjiu congshu 中国国家博物馆馆藏文物研究丛书, 315-319. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe 上海古籍出版社, 2006. Zhuang, Jifa 莊吉發. Qing Gaozong shiquan wugong yanjiu. 清高宗十全武功研究 [Study of the Qianlong Emperor’s Ten Complete Battles] Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1982. Zou, Hui. “The Jing of Line-Method: A Perspective Garden in the Garden of Round Brightness.” PhD diss., McGill University, 2005. ______. “Jesuit Perspective in China.” Architectura 31 (2001): 145-168. Zito, Angela. Of Body and Brush: Grand Sacrifices as Text/Performance in Eighteenth-Century China. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997. 338 GLOSSARY Altar of the First Farmer: 先農壇, 선농단 Auspicious Rituals: 吉禮, 길례 Conferring Honorary Titles Ceremony: 상존호례, 上尊號禮 Congratulatory Offering: 진하례, 陳賀禮 Club of Elders: 기로소, 耆老所 Felicitous Rituals:嘉禮, 가례 Funerary Rituals: 凶禮, 흉례 Gathering Painting: Gyeohoe do 계회도, 契會圖 Grand Review Ceremony: 大閱, 대열 Grand Archery Ceremony: 대사례, 大射禮 Guest Rituals:賓禮, 빈례 Hall of the Star of Literature: Kujanggak규장각, 奎章閣 Personal Plowing Ceremony: 親耕禮, 친경례 Investiture Ceremony: 책례, 冊禮 Military Rituals: 軍禮, 군례 Office of Superintendence: Dogam도감, 都監 Offering and Receiving War Captives Ceremony: 獻俘—受俘 Personal Governance Ceremony: 친정, 親政 Lubu 鹵簿: Processional Paraphernalia Ceremony Scything Ceremony: 관예, 觀乂 Screen of the Five Peaks with the Sun and the Moon: 일월오봉병, 日月五峰屛 Tieluo 貼落 : apply-and-remove painting (there are alternative English translations; affixed and appliqué) Uigwe 儀軌: Book of Ritual Protocols Welcoming a Victorious Army Upon Return Ceremony: 郊勞 339 Xingle tu 行樂圖: Pleasure Painting Zhonghua 中華, 중화: Central Florescence