北京故宫有宫无宝！两岸故宫谁更“正统”？真正答案可不是文物数量，听完彻底明白！#台北故宫 #北京故宫 #两岸差异 #文物 #故宫 #台湾 #北京 #马未都 #历史 #文化 #博物馆 #观复嘟嘟

两岸故宫谁更“正统”？答案不在文物数量 马未都从北京故宫的建筑礼制与登景山俯瞰的宏伟格局切入，系统对比了北京与台北两座故宫在建筑本质与藏品结构上的差异，深情回顾了抗战时期故宫文物南迁数万里而无损毁的物流奇迹与琉璃厂打包技艺。随后，他结合一件被磨去款识的雍正粉彩牡丹盘与纽约跳蚤市场三美元定窑碗的拍卖传奇，揭示了文物流转背后的沧桑国难与国际市场审美变迁。最后，节目详尽考证了宋代定窑的历史沿革、铁元素发色奥秘、宋仁宗怒碎红定典故，并辨析了定瓷“尚食局”与“官”字款作为古代公物标识的历史真实。 北京故宫与台北故宫在建制与藏品上各有侧重：北京故宫是具备600年原貌的皇家建筑群本身，而台北故宫则是1949年后新建的展馆，主要依托抗战及内战时期迁台的2972箱精选宫廷珍宝。 (3:00) 故宫文物南迁历时十余年，共迁运19557箱文物，南下经上海、南京、贵州及四川腹地，在战争炮火与恶劣路况下未有一件损毁丢失，被誉为世界文化遗产迁移史上的奇迹。 (11:25) 故宫文物的包装奇迹得益于琉璃厂古董商的传统经验，采用纸层防蚀、棉絮填充及在草绳缝隙撒水生芽锁紧瓷器的民间智慧，实现了长达数千公里的防震运输。 (20:30) 定窑作为宋代五大名窑中唯一的白瓷体系，起源于河北曲阳，其胎釉铁含量降至1%以下，并受当地石雕传统影响衍生出独特的薄釉刻划花与印花工艺。 (50:01)

马未都指出，两岸故宫的差异根植于建筑与藏品的不同历史演变，而战火中的文物南迁更是一场依靠严密技艺与高度道德自律造就的奇迹；同时，定窑作为宋代五大名窑之首，其白瓷技术、装饰体系与特殊铭文见证了古代工艺与社会制度的变迁。 两岸故宫的定位差异与南迁奇迹 (3:00) 马未都认为，北京故宫与台北故宫的核心体验截然不同：北京故宫是承载明清历史的六百年古建筑群，参访重点在于其等级森严的宫殿建筑；台北故宫则是迁台后新建的现代展馆，以密集展示撤退时运走的高精器物为主。1933年至1949年间，故宫文物历经南迁与战乱转移，历时十五年、辗转数万公里。由于琉璃厂古董匠人传授的精细包装技法（如纸裹、稻草紧扎以及喷水使谷粒膨胀锁紧等避震措施），加上押运人员严守道德底线与职责，上万箱文物在水陆转运中未遭偷盗与损毁。最终运往台湾的仅2972箱，多为体积小巧的精细重器，而包括沉重宫廷家具在内的大部分文物仍留在大陆。 大众文博认知的演进与市场审美变迁 (4:26) 以往部分观众参观博物馆时常局限于材质或金钱价值，台北故宫中备受追捧的“翠玉白菜”与“肉形石”便体现了大众对尺寸与具象逼真度的偏好；近年来，随着传统文化教育的普及，青年群体开始注重艺术内涵，推动北京、上海等主要博物馆参观人数以超30%的年增速爆发。在艺术品拍卖市场上，审美取向同样经历了剧烈流动。1971年日本古董商坂本五郎以不到5万英镑拍下的宋代定窑盌，在2014年以1.468亿港元天价成交；当年其价格相当于近四只明成化斗彩鸡缸杯。马未都分析，国际藏界早期青睐内敛高雅的高古瓷，近年来随着大量新富买家入场，市场更偏向直观明艳的明清彩瓷等品类。 定窑的制瓷技术突围与装饰演进 (50:01) 在宋代五大名窑中，汝、官、哥、钧皆属青瓷系统，唯独定窑属于白瓷系统。定窑窑址位于河北曲阳，在邢窑影响下兴起，通过将胎釉中的铁元素含量严格控制在1%以下，成功烧制出纯正白瓷，打破了以青瓷为主的格局。除白定外，定窑还烧造黑定、紫定与红定等珍罕名品，明代曹昭《格古要论》便记载墨定“色黑如漆，土俱白，其价高于白定”；北宋邵伯温《邵氏闻见录》亦记载了宋仁宗因外戚王拱辰私赠张贵妃珍稀红定而怒碎瓷器的典故。在装饰上，定窑瓷工将曲阳汉白玉石雕手法移植于胎体，凭借薄而均匀的釉质，发展出浮雕、刻花与划花，并在宋末金代为应对产量需求普及了模印工艺。 定窑铭文考辨：制度特供与公物界定 (59:54) 与其他宋代名窑不同，定窑在入窑烧造前便刻有丰富的机构铭文。器底划刻的“尚食局”与“尚药局”对应了《宋史》记载的宫廷六局，因定窑白瓷洁净美观，专供皇室膳食与医疗体系。针对民间与学界常将“官”或“新官”字款附会为“官窑”的观点，马未都明确反驳，指出宋代与明清帝王年号款规制不同，“官”字实指“公物”或“国有财产”，性质类似于早年公用脸盆上印制的“公用”标识，主要供定州地方官署或驿站接待使用以防公物私流，罕见的“新官”款同样属于公用范畴。 无论是两岸故宫藏品的流转分合，还是定窑等传世名瓷的工艺演变，文物的命运始终与时代变迁紧密交织；而文献中频频提及的“定州白瓷有芒，不堪用”并导致宋室弃定用汝的历史缘由，至今仍是陶瓷史上一段耐人寻味的未解公案。

马未都指出，北京故宫与台北故宫的核心差异在于前者兼具六百年古建本体与海量宫廷藏品，而后者以迁台的精品器物为主；两岸故宫藏品的流转与定窑等名窑文物的历史演进，共同折射了中国物质文化在战乱迁徙、技术演变与审美趣味中的流变。 建筑实体与流散珍宝的定位差异 (0:01) 北京故宫不仅是一座博物馆，其本身即是六百年的明清宫廷建筑遗产。马未都强调，参观北京故宫的核心价值在于欣赏其宏伟的建筑规制，例如太和殿采用的最高等级庑殿顶与重檐结构；登景山俯瞰则是理解其全貌的最佳视角。相对而言，台北故宫是国民党迁台后新建的仿古建筑，其核心吸引力在于集中展示了战时南迁的精选器物。大众在台北往往追捧翠玉白菜与肉形石等通俗逼真的器物，而台北实际藏有堪称全球最多的21件传世汝窑。2009年两岸举办雍正大展时，台北故宫尚需向北京借调清帝画像及龙袍等织绣藏品，体现出两馆在藏品品类上的互补性。 万箱国宝南迁的运输传奇与技术保障 (6:54) 自1931年九一八事变至1933年，故宫开启了文物南迁历程，包括古物陈列所藏品在内共计转运19,557箱。在战火纷飞的十余年间，文物辗转于上海、南京、贵阳安顺洞、四川乐山及峨眉等地，更在1935年由英国皇家海军“萨福克号”军舰护航，赴伦敦成功展出千余件珍品。国共内战末期，国民党原计划分七批运台，最终仅成行三批共2,972箱，约占总箱数的七分之一至八分之一，多为体积小、价值极高的便携“细软”，约万箱文物最终重归北京，另有2,800余箱至今留存于南京库房。整个迁徙历程中数以万计的箱件奇迹般无一损毁或丢失，关键在于吸纳了北京琉璃厂古董商的包装绝技：器物先以软纸包裹防磨蚀，外以稻草捆扎填入麦谷并洒水使其发芽膨胀锁死器身。唯在迁台后，台中的四库全书曾因连日暴雨导致九册受潮，致使多名主管引咎辞职，展现了严苛的职业操守与内心道德约束。 定窑的历史地位及其技术工艺突破 (50:01) 在宋代“汝、官、哥、钧、定”五大名窑中，定窑窑址位于河北曲阳灵山镇，烧造年代与遗址范围最为明确且起始最早。五大名窑中汝、官、哥、钧皆属青瓷体系，唯独定窑在邢窑影响下突围为白瓷系统。陶瓷釉色的关键在于控制铁（Fe）元素含量：黑瓷含铁量高达8%左右，青瓷在还原气氛下含铁1%至3%，而白瓷必须将铁杂质降低至1%以下。定窑除以白瓷闻名外，文献如明初曹昭《格古要论》亦记载了身价更高的黑定与紫定，北宋邵伯温《邵氏闻见录》还记录了宋仁宗因防范外戚王拱辰借重器讨好而怒碎张贵妃所获红定瓷器的典故。依托曲阳汉白玉石雕底蕴，定窑发展出高浮雕、精细刻划花及金代模印花工艺，其均匀薄釉能极好地凸显纹饰线条，与钧窑依赖厚釉流淌的审美截然不同。 款识性质辨析与古董拍卖审美演进 (45:54) 学术界与古玩界常将定窑底部的“尚食局”、“尚药局”、“官”与“新官”字款过度拔高。马未都结合宋代宫廷掌管饮馔医药的“六局”制度指出，定窑入窑前刻款反映了特定宫廷部门的特供需求；而单字“官”及不足1%的“新官”款，其性质等同于古代衙署、地方官府或驿站的“公用公物”标识，旨在防止国有财产流失，绝非后世皇帝专用的御制“官窑”年号款。与此同时，艺术品拍卖市场的价值取向亦历经演变。1971年日本古董商坂本五郎在伦敦苏富比以不到5万英镑购入北宋定窑划花八棱大盌，该金额在当时足以购买近四只成化斗彩鸡缸杯；而在2014年香港苏富比春拍中，该定窑大盌拍出1.468亿港元，鸡缸杯则已飙升至2.8亿港元天价。这种悬殊走势反映出藏界审美逐渐由含蓄内敛的高古瓷转向直观明丽的明清彩瓷。 无论是跨越海峡的文物流转还是宋代名瓷的沉浮，历史的遗存始终承载着文明印记；而古籍中关于定窑白瓷“有芒不堪用”并促使宋廷弃定用汝的公案，仍是陶瓷史上一段有待持续探究的学术悬案。

[45:54] 马未都: 近年因为暴发户越来越多，暴发户买东西是凭直觉，看着简单的、漂亮的他就喜欢，所以在国际市场上这些年卖得很贵的，都是通俗讲最漂亮的、一般人都能看懂的漂亮。 [61:48] 马未都: We should discuss history in its own context; looking at history means not projecting today's affairs onto the past, nor using Qing dynasty customs to explain the Ming, or Ming customs to explain the Song. [23:06] 马未都: Morality governs the heart, while the law governs your behavior. [0:01] 马未都: If you go into the Palace Museum and don't care about the architecture, I think that's a real shame. [34:12] 马未都: Regardless of individual motives, when you visit a museum, you are inevitably influenced by Chinese culture. [4:26] 马未都: In the past, our culture was not a required course; when I was young, culture was only used for criticism.

[0:01] Not everyone has the opportunity to [0:03] visit the Forbidden City; even some [0:05] Beijing residents have lived their [0:07] entire lives without ever stepping [0:08] inside, as visiting the Forbidden City [0:10] is always a major undertaking. When you [0:12] visit the Forbidden City, you must find [0:14] a way to climb Jingshan Hill. Even [0:18] though Jingshan Park and the Forbidden [0:19] City are managed separately today—in [0:21] other words, you have to buy two [0:23] separate tickets—Most people enter [0:24] the Forbidden City from the south and [0:26] exit from the north. When you come out [0:30] the north gate, you are right in front [0:32] of Jingshan. So, if you go a little out [0:35] of your way and buy another ticket to [0:37] enter, provided you are fit enough, you [0:38] should climb it. Only when you look [0:43] down from Jingshan Hill at the [0:45] Forbidden City’s complex do you truly [0:47] understand its scale. I don't know how [0:51] many times I've climbed Jingshan; I [0:53] even climbed it a couple of years ago. [0:56] Because among all mountain climbing [0:58] activities, this is the lowest hill of [1:00] all; if you feel you can't even climb [1:02] Jingshan, then don't even talk about [1:03] climbing mountains. When you stand on [1:06] Jingshan and look down, the most [1:08] prominent things you see are the roofs [1:10] of all the buildings in the Forbidden [1:11] City. Glistening in gold and green. [1:15] What do you go to the Forbidden City to [1:17] see? You should look at the building [1:18] complex. You aren't there to press your [1:21] face against glass windows, looking at [1:23] how the emperor slept or how pretty a [1:25] cup is; that's not the point. You need [1:27] to look at the architectural complex. [1:31] The buildings of the Palace Museum are [1:32] strictly graded; the most important [1:34] buildings are the grandest. The [1:38] technical term is "double-eaved." It [1:42] means two layers of eaves. Ordinary [1:45] houses for common folk only need one [1:47] layer; why have two? Having two [1:50] represents status. Historically, we [1:53] even have triple-eaved structures. What [1:56] does a "hip roof" actually mean? It is [1:58] the highest grade in our architecture. [2:00] Just look at the Hall of Supreme [2:01] Harmony and you'll understand. It [2:04] features a slope coming from four [2:06] directions. Toward the highest point, [2:09] the ridge at the very top. Converging [2:13] together. If you are willing to learn [2:16] something about architecture while you [2:17] are there, start by looking at the [2:19] roofs. The roof, as I mentioned, has [2:22] the hip roof as the highest grade, [2:24] followed by gable roofs, hip-and-gable [2:26] roofs, and hard-gable roofs, and so on. [2:29] If you go into the Palace Museum and [2:31] don't care about the architecture, I [2:33] think that's a real shame. Because the [2:37] most worthy thing to see in the Palace [2:39] Museum is the architecture built 600 [2:41] years ago. Although many buildings are [2:45] not the original structures—for [2:47] example, they were destroyed by [2:48] lightning and fires, and our three main [2:50] halls were all burnt down and rebuilt [2:52] —the overall majesty remains. I...The [3:00] visitor traffic at both Palace Museums [3:02] has reached the level of world-class [3:04] institutions, like the Louvre in France [3:06] , the British Museum in the UK, the [3:08] Metropolitan Museum of Art in the US, [3:10] and the Hermitage in Russia. These are [3:15] all major global museums that are [3:17] always crowded no matter when you visit [3:19] . They differ from other museums [3:28] because, apart from the Beijing Palace [3:30] Museum and some others like the British [3:32] Museum or the Met which were built [3:34] later, many iconic sites like the [3:35] Palace of Versailles or Fontainebleau [3:37] are historical ancient structures [3:39] themselves. The Taipei Palace Museum is [3:48] different; it is not the same concept [3:50] as Beijing's. The Taipei museum is a [3:54] building constructed from scratch after [3:56] the Kuomintang retreated to Taiwan. It [4:02] was only when they had the resources [4:03] that they decided to build such a [4:05] palace, so when you go to the Taipei [4:07] Palace Museum, you are undoubtedly [4:08] there for the artifacts. While the [4:13] architecture has its own [4:14] characteristics, it is not worth [4:16] visiting for that reason alone. The [4:18] Beijing Palace Museum is different; if [4:20] you come here, you can specifically [4:21] focus on the architecture, which is [4:23] more than enough to keep you occupied. [4:26] In the past, the museums we ran in [4:28] China were primarily focused on our own [4:30] culture. However, in recent years, [4:33] thanks to reform and opening up and a [4:35] broader perspective, both the Beijing [4:37] and Taipei Palace Museums have started [4:39] hosting exhibitions on civilizations [4:41] from other countries. For instance, [4:44] cultures from Europe, the Middle East, [4:46] Afghanistan, and India can now be seen [4:48] on display in our Palace Museums. For [4:54] most Chinese people, these exhibitions [4:56] are quite novel, as many of us still [4:57] find it challenging to fully understand [4:59] our own culture. Why is that? It is [5:04] because, in the past, our museum [5:06] education was relatively weak. Most [5:09] people go to museums just to join the [5:11] crowd and see what’s popular. Years [5:13] ago, when I visited museums and [5:14] observed others, I paid special [5:16] attention to people’s reactions to [5:18] the exhibits. Many visitors would [5:22] immediately ask how much something was [5:24] worth, or remark on how much gold was [5:25] used to make it; they judged the museum [5:27] entirely from a material perspective. [5:33] They do not look at it from a spiritual [5:35] angle, wondering why it was made that [5:37] way or what kind of inspiration it [5:39] offers; they are not really concerned [5:40] with that. They care about the material [5:44] aspects, often saying, "My goodness, [5:46] how did the Emperor have so many fine [5:48] things?" This is the initial impression [5:50] most people have when they first visit [5:52] a museum. In recent years, because we [5:57] have started to respect, learn about, [5:59] and disseminate our culture, we now [6:01] treat our own culture as a required [6:03] course. In the past, our culture was [6:07] not a required course; when I was young [6:09] , culture was only used for criticism. [6:13] Today, as we begin to learn our [6:15] traditional culture, more and more [6:16] people are visiting museums. I’ve [6:24] felt this myself; the number of [6:25] visitors to our museums, whether in [6:27] Beijing or Shanghai, is increasing [6:29] every year, and by over 30 percent at [6:31] that. This was something unseen in the [6:36] past. Just think, I have worked in [6:38] museums for over 20 years. In the early [6:41] days, the annual visitor numbers didn't [6:43] change much, but these past few years [6:44] ......they have been constantly [6:46] increasing, with a great many young [6:48] people, and many of them have developed [6:50] a genuine interest in artifacts, which [6:51] was unheard of before. Now, since the [6:54] Palace Museum was established quite [6:56] early, in another seven or eight years, [6:58] it will reach its centennial. To [7:03] describe the Palace Museum using a [7:04] Chinese idiom, its destiny has been [7:06] rather turbulent. It was established in [7:13] the early years of the Republic; only a [7:15] dozen or so years into the Republic, [7:17] the Palace Museum was founded. [7:23] Afterward, society during the [7:25] Republican era was quite unstable, [7:27] marked by warlord conflicts and, [7:29] subsequently, a prolonged war against [7:31] Japan. Therefore, to escape the flames [7:38] of war, the Palace Museum, through the [7:40] selection of top scholars at the time, [7:42] established a committee for the [7:43] southward relocation of the palace [7:45] collections. The experts at the time [7:50] were all top-tier; everyone involved [7:52] was a scholar and a person of profound [7:54] understanding. The southward relocation [8:00] was initiated because, while we used to [8:02] date the start of the War of Resistance [8:04] to the Lugou Bridge Incident on July 7, [8:07] 1937, we now trace it back to 1931. You [8:13] see, there were six years between 1931 [8:15] and 1937, and the scale of the Japanese [8:18] invasion of China was growing ever [8:20] larger. During this period, many people [8:23] , especially scholars, worried that the [8:25] Palace Museum must not be destroyed by [8:27] the war, so what could be done? They [8:30] had to select the finest artifacts. And [8:33] find a way to move them to a safe place [8:35] . It is a traditional Chinese belief [8:38] that the south is safer than the north, [8:40] as the south is considered the [8:41] hinterland of China. To move all these [8:46] items, many standard crates were made; [8:48] while most were standard, some [8:49] oversized crates were also built [8:51] because some artifacts simply wouldn't [8:53] fit in a standard one. The selection [8:56] process was rigorous and lasted for [8:58] several years, taking a very long time. [9:03] It wasn't a snap decision made in a few [9:05] days; it took many years to carefully [9:07] select this collection, which is truly [9:09] excellent. Much of it can be seen today [9:14] at the Palace Museum in Taipei. The [9:17] Palace Museum in Taipei holds a very [9:19] high status on the international stage. [9:23] If we are talking about quantity, there [9:25] is no question that the collection at [9:27] the Beijing Palace Museum is much [9:28] larger than that of Taipei. However, [9:33] when it comes to cultural relics, their [9:35] value can never be judged solely by [9:37] quantity. If you say we should judge by [9:40] quality, sometimes that is incomparable [9:42] . For example, you can't compare [9:44] bronzes with jades, jades with books, [9:46] or books with ceramics. Thus, we cannot [9:48] compare them by quantity or by quality. [9:51] So, what are the advantages of the [9:53] Beijing Palace Museum over the one in [9:55] Taipei? There are several areas. First [9:58] is furniture. During the southward [10:02] relocation, furniture was too heavy to [10:04] transport. Furthermore, in the eyes of [10:11] older scholars, furniture was [10:12] functional and therefore deemed to have [10:14] less historical value, so it was left [10:16] behind. Second is clothing. Qing [10:24] dynasty apparel and portraits of Qing [10:25] emperors were not taken to Taipei [10:27] because the Republican government at [10:29] the time held deep resentment toward [10:31] the Qing dynasty. Consequently, they [10:35] had no interest in imperial portraits [10:37] or royal attire, and these items were [10:39] not taken. That is why today, these [10:42] items are not in the Taipei Palace [10:44] Museum. The southward relocation of the [10:49] artifacts followed a zigzagging route: [10:51] first from Beijing to Shanghai and [10:53] Nanjing, then to Chongqing, back to [10:55] Nanjing, and finally to Taichung and [10:57] Taipei. How many years did it take? It [11:02] took 15 years. Covering tens of [11:04] thousands of kilometers, it became a [11:06] monumental feat in the history of human [11:08] artifact relocation. What makes it a [11:10] monumental feat? Not a single piece was [11:12] lost. It is unimaginable that tens of [11:16] thousands of crates of artifacts [11:18] suffered no loss or damage despite such [11:20] harsh conditions. Since the Mukden [11:25] Incident of 1931, and especially by [11:28] 1933 as Sino-Japanese relations [11:29] deteriorated, artifacts from the Palace [11:32] Museum were transported by rail from [11:34] Beijing through Nanjing to Shanghai. [11:39] Including those from the Exhibition [11:41] Office, how many items were there in [11:42] total? There is a precise figure: [11:47] 19,557 crates, not individual pieces. [11:55] During the time these Palace Museum [11:57] artifacts were being relocated, [11:59] interestingly enough, the museum also [12:01] managed to hold its first overseas [12:02] exhibition. Once these artifacts [12:12] arrived in Shanghai, European scholars [12:14] and collectors proposed—through the [12:16] Chinese Embassy in the UK—that the [12:17] collection be invited to Britain for an [12:19] exhibition. When the exhibition was [12:26] being planned, everyone asked: who [12:28] would insure it? Insurance companies [12:30] wouldn't take it, saying the items were [12:32] too valuable to cover. It exceeded [12:34] their capacity, and they were afraid [12:36] that if something went wrong, the [12:37] company would go bankrupt. So the [12:40] British side said, "Fine, for the sake [12:42] of security, we will use a warship to [12:44] escort them." Thus, a British Royal [12:48] Navy cruiser named HMS Suffolk sailed [12:50] from Hong Kong to Shanghai. The [12:55] exhibition committee began organizing [12:56] the shipment from Shanghai. King George [13:03] V of Britain and Lin Sen, the Chairman [13:05] of the Nationalist Government, served [13:07] as the patrons. How many artifacts were [13:13] selected? Over a thousand pieces were [13:16] chosen. You know, "over a thousand" is [13:19] an abstract concept; how many items [13:21] that really is depends on what they are [13:23] and how you count them. If the [13:26] artifacts are small, like coins or [13:28] snuff bottles, that's not much—you [13:30] could just grab two bags and go. But if [13:34] you're talking about bronzes or large [13:35] porcelain pieces, you don't even need a [13:37] thousand; a hundred would be enough to [13:39] keep you busy. So, those thousand-plus [13:43] pieces represented a very large-scale [13:45] exhibition. Anything reaching 1,000 [13:48] pieces is definitely a major exhibition [13:50] . Usually, 200 or 300 pieces make for a [13:53] small-to-medium exhibition, and 300- [13:56] plus is medium-sized. So, when did this [13:58] happen? In 1935, the collection arrived [14:01] safely in the UK. How long was the [14:03] exhibition? It ran for three months, [14:05] exactly three months. It was a great [14:07] success. Just imagine that. During [14:12] those turbulent times, scholars [14:13] organized teams to protect cultural [14:15] relics from danger while simultaneously [14:17] planning exhibitions, reflecting the [14:19] profound attachment people felt toward [14:21] these treasures back then. In 1937, [14:25] after the Lugou Bridge Incident broke [14:27] out and the Japanese forces began [14:29] closing in on Shanghai, the 80 boxes of [14:31] cultural artifacts intended for [14:33] exhibition were evacuated through [14:35] Hankou, Wuhan, and Changsha in Hubei. [14:38] But where were they sent? They were [14:40] evacuated to Guiyang, Guizhou. I just [14:42] returned from Guiyang a couple of days [14:44] ago; the traditional description of [14:46] Guiyang is: "not three days of clear [14:48] skies, nor three miles of flat land," [14:49] as it is entirely mountainous. So, they [14:52] were hidden in Guiyang. Two years later [14:56] , in 1939, they were placed on the [14:58] outskirts of Guiyang. In a place called [15:02] the Anshun Caves. Just imagine. Guiyang [15:07] was already remote enough, and then [15:09] they moved them further to the suburbs, [15:10] where they stayed for a very long time. [15:16] Years later, in 1944, these items were [15:18] moved to a remote rural area in Sichuan [15:20] , a village known for its difficult, [15:22] mountainous terrain. To seek refuge. [15:27] Then there was another batch of items [15:29] —the artifacts were divided into [15:32] several groups—and in 1937, another [15:34] 9,331 boxes were sent by waterway. [15:38] Moving artifacts by water was a last [15:40] resort. If a shipwreck occurred while [15:44] transporting artifacts by water, [15:46] everything would be utterly destroyed [15:48] and submerged. So at that time, you [15:52] have to consider this specific point in [15:54] 1937. Traveling upstream along the [15:59] Yangtze River, they were temporarily [16:01] housed in Chongqing for a while, and [16:04] two years later, in 1939, they were [16:05] moved again by water to Leshan, in [16:07] Sichuan. Now, as for land transport, it [16:12] had one advantage: despite the high [16:14] risks, water transport could carry much [16:16] more; you know, a ship's capacity is [16:18] far greater than that of a vehicle. [16:21] Think of a giant container ship today [16:22] —if you tried to move that cargo by [16:24] train, you'd need so many, and if you [16:26] used trucks, it would completely [16:28] exhaust them. So, how many boxes were [16:32] moved by land? There were 7,280 boxes; [16:35] they were moved from Nanjing to Xuzhou, [16:38] and then reached Baoji in Shaanxi. Look [16:42] at all this tossing and turning. If you [16:46] were to map it out, it would basically [16:47] cover the whole page, but they couldn't [16:49] stay there; Shaanxi couldn't hold them, [16:51] so they went by land again and returned [16:53] to Meishan, Sichuan. So, by the time [16:56] the Japanese surrendered in 1945, the [16:58] artifacts evacuated to Baxian and [17:00] Leshan in Sichuan were all temporarily [17:03] gathered in Chongqing. Then they [17:08] traveled by water, down the Yangtze [17:10] River, and returned to Nanjing in 1946. [17:12] After all this turmoil, Chinese [17:14] artifacts proved truly resilient; [17:16] despite the war-torn environment and [17:18] such long-distance land and water [17:20] transport, nothing went wrong. Nothing [17:25] was lost, and nothing was damaged. [17:27] Later, over 2,800 crates were left in a [17:30] warehouse in Nanjing. To this day, [17:32] these items remain in the Nanjing [17:34] warehouse, untouched and unopened. It [17:37] is said that the year before last, with [17:39] state approval, a few crates were [17:41] opened for inspection and then sealed [17:42] up again; they cannot be moved. If this [17:48] collection were opened today, I believe [17:50] it would be more than enough to fill [17:51] eight to ten museums. Back then, we [17:56] were especially looking forward to [17:58] their return. These artifacts had been [18:00] away since the 1930 s—from 1933 until [18:03] 1949, a span of just 16 years. If they [18:07] could have returned smoothly to our [18:08] Forbidden City, that would have been [18:09] the best thing possible. However, we [18:17] are all very clear about this period of [18:19] history; after the War of Resistance [18:21] against Japan ended, the displaced [18:22] Palace Museum artifacts were originally [18:24] intended to be shipped to Taiwan in [18:26] seven batches. After the Nationalist [18:33] government was defeated, they retreated [18:35] and fled to Taiwan, intending to ship [18:37] the items in several stages. But it [18:40] wasn't that easy; you need enough time. [18:43] In the end, only three batches were [18:45] shipped. How much did they transport in [18:47] total? They shipped 2,972 crates, which [18:51] was roughly out of the 19,000-plus [18:53] crates originally transported. That [18:57] accounts for about one-seventh or [18:58] one-eighth of them. At that time, they [19:02] used warships and merchant vessels to [19:04] transport these national treasure-level [19:06] artifacts across the Taiwan Strait. [19:14] When I think about this, it's about how [19:16] we took so many important artifacts and [19:18] , due to the war—and then the civil [19:20] war after the victory over Japan— [19:21] risked so much to ship them to Taiwan. [19:29] Transporting them by ship at a time [19:31] when the war had not yet ceased meant [19:32] there could still be sea mines drifting [19:34] in the water. If a ship had hit a mine [19:40] or been attacked, the artifacts would [19:41] have been destroyed. That would have [19:46] been a cultural catastrophe for the [19:47] Chinese nation. The remainder, about [19:50] 10,000 crates, was shipped back to [19:52] Beijing. Of course, when the [19:54] Nationalist government was shipping [19:55] these artifacts, they undoubtedly [19:57] prioritized the best pieces first. [19:59] Everyone thinks the same way: if I [20:01] can't take everything, I'll at least [20:03] take my own valuables. In the past, [20:05] when war broke out and you had to pack [20:07] your bags and run, you would definitely [20:09] pack up your family's valuables first. [20:11] Why does the Chinese language have the [20:13] term "valuable portable items"? It [20:15] means taking high-value items with you [20:17] when you flee. In the strict sense, [20:23] every artifact in the Palace Museum is [20:25] a national treasure, and their [20:27] evacuation during wartime is a miracle [20:28] in the history of human cultural [20:30] heritage migration. So, how did this [20:35] miracle come about? It had a lot to do [20:39] with the people at the time. A large [20:42] number of staff at the Palace Museum [20:44] had to pack these items. Packing is a [20:49] real skill; you can't just do it [20:50] because you're patient. Packing [20:54] artifacts, in particular, requires [20:56] expertise. Since the Palace Museum [21:00] staff were scholars and researchers, [21:02] they weren't very familiar with [21:04] commercial packing. So, they turned to [21:10] Beijing's Liulichang, where the antique [21:12] industry was highly developed during [21:14] the late Qing and early Republic eras. [21:20] They hired experienced antique dealers [21:22] to demonstrate how to pack porcelain, [21:24] jade, and bronze. Right, were there [21:28] specific things to keep in mind [21:29] regarding binding methods or padding [21:31] techniques? So every national treasure [21:34] had to be wrapped in paper first. If [21:37] you ever have the chance to buy [21:38] artifacts abroad, notice that the first [21:40] thing foreigners do when packing them [21:42] is to use paper. They use a type of [21:45] soft paper to wrap the item. In the [21:48] past, they would bind it tightly with [21:50] straw ropes, but today, they don't even [21:52] need elaborate boxes; stuffing them [21:54] with cotton is enough before sealing [21:56] them. Why is paper used to wrap [22:00] everything—be it porcelain, jade, or [22:03] bronze—first? It is to prevent any [22:08] direct reaction between the artifact [22:09] and the packing material. For some [22:13] artifacts, if you apply packing [22:15] materials directly and they happen to [22:17] be corrosive, it could damage the [22:18] artifact, so they place clean paper in [22:20] between. Packing is a real technique; [22:22] if you ever get the chance, look at how [22:24] fine china was packed in the past. I [22:27] have seen the primitive packing method: [22:29] they would bundle it with straw, [22:30] scatter rice grains inside, and tie it [22:32] tight with rope. Once sprayed with [22:35] water, the grain would sprout and [22:37] expand, locking everything in place. A [22:40] bowl packed in that straw bundle could [22:42] be thrown around and wouldn't break. [22:44] Now, that is a real skill. Due to the [22:49] meticulous efforts of the staff and the [22:51] guidance of professionals, there were [22:53] no issues with the packaging process [22:54] throughout the entire transportation [22:56] journey. Over the more than 11 years of [23:00] the Palace Museum treasures 'southward [23:02] migration, hundreds of thousands of [23:03] artifacts faced numerous hardships yet [23:05] remained almost entirely undamaged. [23:06] After the victory in the War of [23:08] Resistance, the government compiled [23:10] statistics showing that China suffered [23:12] heavy losses of cultural relics during [23:14] the Japanese invasion; because [23:15] everything was disregarded during the [23:17] war, only the Palace Museum collection [23:19] saw minimal losses. In this legendary [23:25] migration of artifacts, the Palace [23:26] Museum staff and everyone in the places [23:28] these items passed through made [23:30] indelible contributions to preserving [23:32] these national treasures. These vast [23:38] numbers of artifacts were displaced and [23:40] scattered across many locations, such [23:42] as Anshun and Mount Emei, as we [23:44] mentioned earlier. They were all [23:47] dispersed and only finally brought back [23:49] together at the end. So, did any [23:52] problems occur during this time? There [23:56] was a minor incident involving the Siku [23:58] Quanshu. As we know, the Siku Quanshu [24:01] is a vital treasure of Chinese culture. [24:05] When it was transported to the Palace [24:07] Museum in Taiwan, it was stored in a [24:10] cave in Taichung—a place called [24:11] Beigou, I believe. It was actually an [24:15] old building at first, not a cave; they [24:17] were only moved into the cave later on. [24:21] Since Taiwan experiences frequent and [24:23] heavy downpours, during a routine [24:25] inspection in 1974, it was discovered [24:27] that some ancient books had water [24:29] stains. Upon opening the crates for [24:36] inspection, it was found that nine [24:37] volumes of the Siku Quanshu in one of [24:39] the crates had been soaked by rainwater [24:41] . Although restoration experts can [24:47] easily restore such ancient books [24:48] through professional mending, after all [24:50] , this is the Siku Quanshu, China's [24:52] most important collection of ancient [24:54] texts. Therefore, this was considered a [24:58] significant blow and a major loss at [25:00] the time. Many staff members were [25:03] deeply distressed, and in the end, some [25:05] even resigned to take responsibility. [25:09] Today, when we discuss the two Palace [25:11] Museums, we cannot avoid talking about [25:13] this southward migration. The reason [25:20] this southward migration of artifacts [25:22] left such a significant mark on the [25:24] history of the Chinese nation and its [25:26] cultural relics—ensuring so many [25:27] items remained undamaged during the [25:29] move—is: what did it rely on? What it [25:36] relied on is something of great [25:38] importance. First and foremost, it [25:42] relied on the morality that we have [25:44] nurtured internally since the Zhou [25:46] Dynasty. The Chinese moral system was [25:51] once very powerful; it served primarily [25:53] as an internal constraint. Morality [25:56] governs the heart, while the law [25:58] governs your behavior. The law is the [26:02] bottom line—you cannot touch or move [26:04] it—but morality prevents you from [26:05] even wanting to be greedy. If people [26:09] back then had been greedy, they would [26:11] have found every possible way to siphon [26:13] off these items along the journey, [26:14] right? If I were tasked with escorting [26:16] national treasures, not to mention [26:18] anything else, I could get rich just by [26:20] skimming off a tiny bit, but nobody [26:21] thought that way. So, what is the [26:23] second condition we rely on? It is the [26:25] sense of responsibility and duty of all [26:27] participating personnel. We talk about [26:29] responsibility all the time today, but [26:31] what exactly is it? It is a feeling; if [26:34] you fail to do a task well, and you [26:36] feel the weight of that responsibility, [26:38] only then can you do it right. If you [26:42] feel you haven't done it well, that is [26:44] a reflection of your inner self. Can we [26:50] imagine today, if we had so many long [26:52] routes and so many cultural relics that [26:54] still needed to be relocated, do we [26:56] think the events of the past could [26:58] happen again? Today, when we go to the [27:07] Palace Museum, whether in Beijing or [27:09] Taipei, we all want to see some [27:11] important artifacts. At the Taipei [27:18] Palace Museum, two supposedly minor [27:20] artifacts have become popular national [27:22] treasures; everyone who visits wants to [27:24] see them. Every time I go to the Taipei [27:27] Palace Museum, I am always amazed. [27:29] There is a huge crowd around them. Tour [27:32] groups and guides with little flags are [27:33] calling out. "Go see the Pork Belly, go [27:36] see the Pork Belly, go see the Jade [27:38] Cabbage, go see the Jade Cabbage." [27:40] Everyone rushes over to take a look, [27:41] and upon seeing the cabbage—the jade. [27:43] Looking at this cabbage, they say, "Oh, [27:46] why is this thing so small? How is it [27:48] so tiny?" Then, when they get to the [27:51] Pork Belly and see it, they say, "Oh, [27:53] it looks so real!" You see, their [27:57] judgment of art is nothing more than [27:59] size and how lifelike it appears. Today [28:03] , if we want to go to the Forbidden [28:04] City, we just buy a ticket at the gate [28:06] and walk in. It's even more convenient [28:09] now, as you can buy tickets online. But [28:12] less than a hundred years ago, the [28:14] Forbidden City was off-limits. The [28:17] Beijing Palace Museum officially opened [28:20] to the public on October 10, 1925. [28:22] Newspapers at the time reported that " [28:24] ten thousand people emptied the streets [28:27] ." Why did they empty the streets? [28:30] Because everyone wanted to go and see [28:32] it. Before that day, as an ordinary [28:35] person, you had no chance to enter the [28:37] Forbidden City. You couldn't get in, [28:41] right? You weren't allowed inside. [28:43] Other than the Emperor and his [28:45] associates, no one else could enter. [28:48] But on October 10, 1925, the Forbidden [28:50] City was renamed the Palace Museum and [28:52] opened to the public. So, how many [28:55] people went? They predicted that [28:57] 100,000 people would visit over those [28:59] two days. Even today, 100,000 is a huge [29:01] number, so back in the Republican era, [29:03] that was incredible—the crowds were [29:05] simply overwhelming. Over 20,000 people [29:07] went in on the first day, and over [29:09] 30,000 on the second, totaling more [29:11] than 50,000 visitors. After the Palace [29:13] Museum opened, Chiang Kai-shek even [29:15] went inside. After Chiang Kai-shek went [29:17] in, he became the first individual to [29:19] donate to the museum. Once Chiang [29:21] Kai-shek was inside, Yi Peiji, who was [29:23] accompanying him, heard him ask why the [29:25] museum looked so dilapidated. Yi then [29:29] explained that it hadn't been repaired [29:31] for years and the palaces needed [29:32] maintenance, but there was no money. [29:36] Chiang then said, "I'll donate some." [29:39] When he said he would donate, he [29:41] immediately offered 100,000 silver [29:43] dollars. Then, as the museum director, [29:49] Yi didn't take it as just an offhand [29:51] remark; he took it seriously and went [29:53] straight to Chiang's residence at [29:54] Houyuan Temple to collect it. He told [29:59] the secretary that the Chairman wanted [30:01] to donate 100,000 silver dollars. The [30:04] steward replied, "The Chairman doesn't [30:06] have that much money; why would he say [30:08] that? There's only 40,000 left in the [30:10] account." Yi Peiji said, "40,000 is [30:13] fine, just give me what you have." That [30:15] is how Chiang Kai-shek became the first [30:17] person to donate to the Palace Museum. [30:20] You know, the Palace Museum has been [30:23] established for over 90 years; in seven [30:25] years, it will be 100. There will [30:27] surely be big events for the centenary. [30:32] In these nearly 100 years, there have [30:34] been some interesting milestones. The [30:39] first is the Xinhai Revolution; we all [30:41] know the imperial system was overthrown [30:43] after that. So, what is the second [30:48] milestone? It was October 10, 1925, [30:51] when it opened to the public as a [30:53] museum, and it has remained open ever [30:56] since. The third milestone, strictly [31:03] speaking, is October 1, 1949. After the [31:06] founding of the People's Republic of [31:08] China, the new government continued to [31:10] recognize and accept the history of the [31:13] Palace Museum. There were many things [31:19] they didn't accept, but they uniquely [31:21] accepted the existence of the Palace [31:23] Museum. Between the two Palace Museums, [31:25] I have certainly visited the one in [31:27] Beijing more often. How many times have [31:29] I been to the Beijing Palace Museum? I [31:31] honestly can't remember. I’ve been [31:34] going since I was very young; there was [31:36] even a period when I went two or three [31:38] times a week. The best thing about [31:41] going to the Beijing Palace Museum back [31:43] then was that there were very few [31:44] people. The Palace Museum gets more [31:47] crowded year by year. When I was young, [31:50] I loved photography. With my camera in [31:54] hand, I especially liked visiting the [31:56] Palace Museum when there were fewer [31:58] people. When I first started visiting [32:00] the Palace Museum, tickets were only [32:02] two or five mao; I can't quite remember [32:04] now. Back then, even that small amount [32:05] felt like something I didn't want to [32:06] spend, so I’d look for people I knew. [32:08] People would ask, "How do you have so [32:09] many acquaintances?" Let me tell you. [32:11] It’s simple—strangers become [32:12] acquaintances, and acquaintances become [32:14] friends. If you just chat with people, [32:16] don't you get to know them? Once we [32:17] were on good terms, I knew people in [32:19] many departments at the Palace Museum. [32:21] I’d go and look for them. Once I [32:22] mentioned who I was visiting, I’d [32:24] fill out a visitor slip at the entrance [32:25] , and then I’d get in—though I [32:27] wouldn't actually go find that person. [32:30] At first, I’d wander around the [32:31] Palace Museum, find my acquaintance to [32:33] sign the slip, and then leave. Later, I [32:36] realized I could forge the signature [32:38] myself, so I'd just walk around and [32:40] sign it on my own before heading out. [32:44] Back then, since there were so few [32:46] visitors to the Palace Museum, the [32:47] management was quite loose. I remember [32:52] I usually went in the afternoon. When I [32:56] entered at that time, many of the [32:58] places I wanted to see were completely [33:00] empty. I’ve mentioned this before; [33:05] for instance, in the bronzeware or jade [33:07] galleries, there would be nobody else [33:08] there—just me. The lighting wasn't [33:12] very bright, unlike the great display [33:13] effects they have now, which at least [33:15] create an atmosphere. There wasn't any [33:17] atmosphere back then; the lights were [33:19] just flickering on and off. Some lights [33:22] would just blink away, which was [33:24] annoying, but I couldn't stop. I loved [33:28] those objects, so I would stare at each [33:30] one intently, forcing myself to train [33:32] my memory. When you look at something [33:36] and consciously try to remember it, and [33:38] then when you leave and find your [33:40] memory a bit fuzzy, the next time you [33:41] go back, you look at those specific [33:43] details again. Eventually, you become [33:47] very familiar with many of them. So, [33:51] those years are long gone, and at my [33:53] age now, I realize I was truly young [33:55] back then. I could spend a whole day in [34:00] the Palace Museum and be so happy, [34:01] staying until they kicked me out. I’d [34:05] sit in some quiet corner, looking at [34:07] the entire palace and just soaking in [34:09] that atmosphere. When there’s no one [34:12] in the Palace Museum, sitting there [34:14] alone, you can truly communicate with [34:15] the ancients. But Taipei’s Palace [34:18] Museum is different; when you go there, [34:20] it goes without saying that people are [34:22] going specifically for the artifacts. [34:24] They aren't going for the artifacts [34:26] themselves; they are going to see the [34:27] artifacts. Going for the artifacts is [34:29] problematic. For example, when they [34:32] display Ru ware, we know that the [34:34] Taipei Palace Museum has the largest [34:36] collection of Ru ware in the world—21 [34:38] pieces. They are all concentrated there [34:41] , with a clear provenance, and they [34:43] look truly extraordinary. For the [34:46] average tourist, the best part of the [34:48] Taipei Palace Museum is definitely [34:49] their shop. First, it’s quite large, [34:53] and second, the service is very [34:55] thorough; they even provide shopping [34:57] baskets like those in a supermarket, so [34:59] crowds of people go and pick out all [35:01] sorts of little goods and souvenirs. [35:05] What sells the best, you ask? It’s [35:08] that tape, the adhesive tape. Why that, [35:11] I don’t know. I really don’t know [35:14] why these people buy so much tape. Do [35:16] they have that many things to glue at [35:18] home? I have no idea what they're [35:20] sticking together. Regardless of [35:23] individual motives, when you visit a [35:25] museum, you are inevitably influenced [35:27] by Chinese culture. We know that Taiwan [35:31] is an inseparable part of our [35:32] motherland's territory. When you have [35:35] the chance to visit the Palace Museums [35:37] on both sides of the strait, the [35:38] feelings you get are quite different. [35:46] We have a small wish: we hope the two [35:48] Palace Museums will hold a joint [35:49] exhibition every year, allowing us to [35:51] see how these scattered "brothers" feel [35:53] when they are together. We’ve talked [36:01] for a while now, and we should see what [36:03] kind of cultural relic we can use to [36:05] embody the connection between the two [36:06] museums. In 2009, there was a [36:13] collaboration between the two sides, [36:15] which was a grand exhibition of the [36:17] Qing Dynasty's Shizong, Emperor [36:19] Yongzheng, commonly known as the " [36:21] Yongzheng Exhibition." For that [36:27] exhibition, a very beautiful vase from [36:29] the Beijing Palace Museum was [36:30] transported to the Taipei Palace Museum [36:32] . The painting on that vase was done by [36:39] the same hand as the painting on this [36:41] plate. Then you might ask me, "Hey, you [36:46] weren't alive back then, how do you [36:48] know it was done by the same person?" [36:51] Well, let me ask you this: if you have [36:53] two letters and you weren't there to [36:54] see them written, how do you know they [36:56] were written by the same person? It’s [36:59] because the brushwork is the same. [37:01] Painting also has brushwork, so at a [37:02] glance, you can tell that both pieces [37:04] were created by the same person. Back [37:10] then, when the artifacts were moved [37:11] south to the Taipei Palace Museum, they [37:13] looked down upon the portraits of Qing [37:15] emperors, so we had to borrow portraits [37:17] of Yongzheng, including his dragon [37:19] robes, from the Beijing Palace Museum, [37:21] as we didn't have any. There are many [37:27] important artifacts there, and one of [37:28] them is a seal, which is engraved with [37:30] the character "Wei." He was saying, " [37:34] Don't think your lives are the only [37:36] ones that are hard, worrying every day [37:38] about your basic necessities; I am a [37:40] monarch, yet my life is even harder [37:42] than yours, so I made myself a seal [37:44] that says' The Monarch's Difficulty '." [37:46] He would stamp it everywhere, using it [37:48] as a constant reminder of how difficult [37:50] his job was. Now, we can look at this [37:56] Yongzheng famille-rose piece—or " [37:58] Yangcai" as it was called back then—a [38:00] porcelain plate with peony patterns. An [38:06] expert can tell at a glance that this [38:08] is from the Yongzheng period. It is [38:13] painted so exquisitely that it’s [38:15] impossible to describe. When we Chinese [38:20] can't find words to describe how well a [38:22] painter has captured something, we use [38:24] four rather blunt words: "subtle and [38:26] marvelous." There is nothing subtle or [38:30] marvelous about it; it’s simply vivid [38:32] , actually looking quite different from [38:34] the peonies you see in real life. We [38:38] will provide you with details on the [38:39] texture of the leaves and the two [38:41] colors, as well as the painting [38:42] techniques for the peony blossoms. If [38:44] you look at the painting technique on [38:46] the vase from the Yongzheng exhibition, [38:48] you can see that every detail is [38:49] exactly the same. You might look at [38:54] this plate and say it looks different [38:56] from the olive vase in the museum [38:57] because the layout seems distinct, but [38:59] if you look closely, the layouts are [39:01] identical. Look at the layout; it [39:06] leaves a space blank here, and the vase [39:08] leaves a blank space in the [39:09] corresponding position, which is what [39:11] Chinese painting is all about. If you [39:15] want to learn more about this knowledge [39:17] , go ahead and download the Guan App. [39:20] There are many opportunities for [39:22] learning and participation on the Guan [39:23] App; once you get involved, you will [39:25] find endless joy. This piece has a [39:29] rather painful history. What do I mean [39:33] by a painful history? Turn it over and [39:35] you will see. Let us show you the back. [39:41] It’s quite tragic. Originally, there [39:47] were six characters here reading "Made [39:48] in the Yongzheng Period of the Great [39:50] Qing," but those six characters have [39:52] been ground off. How do I know they [39:54] were ground off? Because I am an expert [39:57] , and I can tell it was ground off at a [39:59] single glance. Because when porcelain [40:03] is fired, whether it is glazed or not, [40:05] once you grind it, it will show fine, [40:07] dense pores. This part was ground off. [40:12] When was it ground off? Why would [40:14] someone with nothing better to do grind [40:16] it down? I once told the story of the " [40:18] troubled official kilns." When the [40:22] Eight-Nation Alliance entered Beijing [40:24] in 1900, Empress Dowager Cixi fled to [40:26] the west. At that time, a large amount [40:31] of porcelain was lost from the [40:32] Forbidden City; officials, ministers, [40:35] eunuchs, and subordinates all took [40:36] advantage of the national crisis to [40:38] profit, leading to the loss of many [40:40] artifacts. After Empress Dowager Cixi [40:45] returned, she was very angry and [40:46] ordered an investigation to find the [40:48] items and bring them back. Some [40:51] ministers told her that it wouldn't [40:53] work, that people definitely wouldn't [40:54] return them, and the only way was to [40:56] redeem them by spending money to buy [40:58] them back. But some people were still [41:01] unwilling to return the official kiln [41:03] pieces they had obtained, so what could [41:05] they do? They simply ground off the [41:07] markings. With no evidence left, it’s [41:10] a bit like tearing up your own passport [41:12] , so no one knows which country you're [41:14] from. It took a lot of effort to grind [41:18] off this mark back then because the [41:19] porcelain is very thin. You couldn't [41:23] rush it, or you'd break it; they didn't [41:25] have modern power tools, it was all [41:27] done by hand. So this piece had its [41:32] identity erased 100 years ago and then [41:35] traveled across the sea to Japan. This [41:41] piece was bought back from Japan. This [41:44] period of history is truly unbearable [41:46] to look back on. But history that is [41:48] unbearable to look back on is still [41:49] history. We had a series discussing the [41:52] five famous kilns of the Song Dynasty, [41:54] which are actually the five famous [41:56] kilns of ancient China. We have [41:59] successively discussed Ru, Guan, Ge, [42:02] and Jun; today is the final episode, [42:04] which is Ding. In the past, there have [42:07] been various ways to rank these five [42:09] famous kilns, but I am more used to [42:11] saying Ru, Guan, Ge, Jun, and Ding. [42:14] That is why Ding is left for last. [42:18] Compared to the previous kilns, Ding [42:20] kiln is relatively easier to discuss. A [42:24] few years ago, about five years ago, I [42:27] think. Sotheby's in New York auctioned [42:30] a small bowl. It was 13.4 centimeters, [42:35] just about this big. Inside that box is [42:38] a small Ding kiln bowl; it’s less [42:40] than two centimeters larger than that [42:43] 13.4-centimeter bowl. That one is 15.3; [42:45] you'll see how big it is in a moment. [42:48] What was the estimated price at the [42:49] time? It was 200,000 US dollars. As a [42:53] result, this small Ding kiln piece was [42:55] finally bought by the largest antique [42:57] dealer in Europe five years ago for [42:59] 225,000 US dollars. This is quite a [43:05] remarkable story. Five years ago, a man [43:08] bought this at a New York flea market [43:10] for three dollars. After buying it, he [43:13] kept it on display at home for five [43:15] years. Because the international market [43:18] for Chinese antiques was booming, [43:20] setting world records day after day a [43:22] couple of years ago. The owner couldn't [43:27] suppress his curiosity, so he sent the [43:29] bowl to Sotheby's to try his luck. You [43:34] might ask, what does it mean to have a [43:36] stroke of good fortune in life? I [43:38] reckon if you asked this guy, he could [43:40] tell you exactly what it means, since [43:42] he bought something for three dollars. [43:45] It eventually sold for 225,000 dollars. [43:51] That amount could buy a very nice [43:52] apartment in New York. So we ask, how [43:57] can such an ordinary white bowl today [43:59] be worth so much? Why is it so [44:02] expensive? I'll tell you: it's because [44:07] a thousand years ago, it represented [44:08] the pinnacle of global technology. Back [44:15] then, both the emperor and commoners [44:17] could use such pristine white bowls. In [44:22] Europe, they didn't have such fine [44:24] natural ceramic glazes—we mean [44:26] ceramics fired to that quality. Do you [44:31] know why Europeans love to wipe their [44:33] plates with bread when you dine with [44:34] them? Originally, bread served as their [44:38] plates; they'd put food on it, and [44:40] after eating, they'd finish the "plate" [44:43] itself. Their tableware wasn't up to [44:45] par back then; Europeans have only had [44:47] a 300-year history of truly firing [44:49] porcelain. Ding ware is not uncommon in [44:53] the antiques market; there is actually [44:55] quite a lot of it. The reproductions [45:00] are also very well made, so many people [45:02] are wary and afraid to buy, seeing how [45:04] identical the fakes are. So today, many [45:08] Ding pieces on the market are a gamble. [45:12] They are difficult to authenticate and [45:14] are perhaps the hardest among the five [45:16] famous kilns. Our society is obsessed [45:19] with all sorts of gossip. You take a [45:22] small bowl that was already valued high [45:24] , only for it to sell for over ten [45:26] times that amount, with all these [45:28] legendary tales attached. These things [45:31] really just add a bit of spice to our [45:33] lives. What is the truth behind it all? [45:37] We don't really know. Maybe it's a [45:40] happy occasion for the seller, but for [45:42] the buyer, it might be a bitter one. [45:45] Why bitter? Because they overpaid, [45:48] right? Got a bit carried away in the [45:51] moment and bid too high. But how do the [45:54] bystanders feel? Onlookers feel neither [45:57] sweet nor bitter; most of them just [45:59] feel sour. Many in this industry say, " [46:02] Oh, that was bought too expensively, [46:04] it’s not worth it." That’s a very [46:07] sour sentiment. As for the auction [46:11] houses, their feelings are more complex [46:13] ; it’s a bitterness mixed with [46:14] sweetness. What is the bitterness? [46:19] Auction houses have to chase payments [46:20] from both sides. First, they struggle [46:23] to find items, and after selling them, [46:25] they struggle to get people to pay. [46:27] Once paid...They then pass the bulk of [46:29] the money to the seller. So, auction [46:31] houses find joy in bitterness. It’s [46:33] what you might call bittersweet. It has [46:35] that sourness. That slippery feeling, [46:37] like "We put in so much effort to sell [46:39] it for such a high price, but the main [46:41] beneficiaries are the sellers." Or is [46:44] it that auctions are just a " [46:45] get-rich-quick" scheme? They don't [46:48] invest money, just handle items and [46:50] take cuts from both ends—there’s no [46:52] better business under the sun. Later, I [46:55] became curious and gossipy about this, [46:57] so I started asking around. When I [47:01] asked, people said the story sounds [47:03] moving, but it’s not how it happened [47:05] at all. The story has a kernel of truth [47:08] , but it was embellished along the way [47:11] until it became "true." People would [47:14] rather believe this "false truth" than [47:16] the actual reality. Now, let’s talk [47:19] about whether there are real stories in [47:21] auctions. There are real stories, [47:24] plenty of them. Some records are very [47:26] clear. For example, in the 2014 [47:28] Sotheby’s spring auction, Japanese [47:30] antiques dealer Saburo Sakamoto [47:32] auctioned off a Ding ware bowl with a [47:34] flower design. How much did this bowl [47:36] sell for? It might make you dizzy. It [47:39] sold for 146.8 million HKD—146.8 [47:42] million HKD, a massive figure. At the [47:48] time, this price was second only to [47:50] that Ru ware piece that was sold, that [47:52] high-end antique porcelain. Among [47:56] antique porcelains, others like Guan [47:58] ware or Ge ware couldn't compare to [48:00] that. So, where did Saburo Sakamoto get [48:04] this bowl? He certainly didn't fire it [48:07] himself. Back in 1971, during our [48:11] Cultural Revolution—let me think back [48:13] —I had just returned from Northeast [48:15] China. I was 16, wandering around at [48:20] home and preparing to join the army. In [48:25] those days, Sakamoto bought it at [48:27] Sotheby’s in London for 40,000 pounds [48:29] , just a little under 50,000 pounds. [48:35] Enough. 50,000 pounds. You might hear " [48:37] 50,000 pounds" now and think, isn't [48:39] that just a small amount of money? So [48:41] 500,000, 500,000 isn't expensive. You [48:45] know, 40-some years ago, this amount in [48:52] pounds was an astronomical figure. Back [48:54] then, I think it would have been hard [48:56] for the national bank to even produce [48:57] that kind of money. At the time of the [49:00] auction, there was also a Ming Dynasty [49:02] Chenghua doucai chicken cup—we've [49:04] talked about chicken cups before—that [49:06] sold for 21.8 million; back then, that [49:08] chicken cup only sold for 14,000 pounds [49:10] . In other words, the bowl bought by [49:14] Banban Wulang could have bought nearly [49:16] four of those doucai chicken cups. This [49:22] shows the changes in the international [49:24] art market and aesthetic trends over [49:25] these decades. Aesthetics years ago— [49:30] that is, decades ago—international [49:32] standards for art were high-level. [49:35] Aesthetics of high taste. In recent [49:37] years, because there are more and more [49:39] nouveau riche, these wealthy buyers [49:40] purchase based on intuition. They see [49:43] things as simple and pretty, and they [49:45] like simple and pretty. Therefore, in [49:48] the international market these years, [49:50] the prettiest things—what is commonly [49:52] called the prettiest, the kind of [49:53] beauty that ordinary people can [49:55] understand—will sell for a lot. [50:01] China's five great ancient kilns, like [50:03] Ru, Guan, Ge, Jun, and Ding—these [50:05] famous kilns all have various issues, [50:08] for example, some kiln sites haven't [50:10] been discovered. Some have [50:15] controversial firing dates. However, [50:19] the least controversial one is Ding, [50:21] because both the kiln site and firing [50:23] date of Ding are undisputed. Where is [50:27] the Ding kiln site? It is in today's [50:29] Quyang, Hebei. Lingshan Town in Quyang, [50:32] Hebei. Quyang is also the hometown of [50:34] stone carving. Because Quyang was under [50:37] the administration of Dingzhou during [50:39] the Tang Dynasty, the Five Dynasties, [50:41] and the Northern Song Dynasty, it was [50:43] called Ding Kiln. Our ancient kilns of [50:47] the Tang and Song periods were [50:48] generally named after prefectures. For [50:51] example, what we call Ding Kiln can be [50:53] fully referred to as Dingzhou Kiln. The [50:56] kiln name is just the full name. For [50:58] instance, Yue Kiln can also be called [51:00] Yuezhou Kiln, and Xing can also be [51:02] called Xingzhou Kiln; that is what it [51:04] means. So, the firing of Ding certainly [51:06] started in the late Tang Dynasty, then [51:08] went through the Five Dynasties to [51:10] reach prosperity in the Northern Song, [51:12] and gradually declined after the Yuan [51:14] Dynasty. Why did it decline? It was [51:17] because Jingdezhen rose up. The use of [51:21] kaolin meant other porcelains...from a [51:23] chronological perspective, Ding Kiln is [51:25] earlier than the other four famous [51:27] kilns we mentioned, like Ru and Jun; it [51:29] is the eldest. Ding ware isn't just [51:34] limited to white porcelain; it also [51:36] includes black, brown, and patterned [51:38] varieties. Kilns like Ru, Guan, Ge, and [51:41] Jun are essentially based on celadon [51:44] glazes, but Ding ware belongs to the [51:46] white porcelain tradition. White [51:50] porcelain represents a major milestone [51:52] in Chinese ceramic history; firing [51:54] ceramics to be white was the primary [51:56] goal our ancestors pursued, and during [51:58] the Tang Dynasty, Xing ware was the [52:00] benchmark. As the saying goes, " [52:04] Southern celadon, Northern white," with [52:06] the northern white porcelain produced [52:08] by the Xing kilns. It was truly [52:12] world-renowned. What about Ding, then? [52:15] It was actually influenced by Xing ware [52:17] , as both were fired in Hebei, with the [52:20] kiln sites less than 200 kilometers [52:21] apart. Consequently, there is a [52:25] category of white porcelain— [52:26] especially from the Five Dynasties [52:28] period—where it is difficult to [52:30] distinguish between Xing and Ding. Why [52:34] is it hard to tell them apart? Because [52:36] they are both white porcelain. To a [52:39] layperson, there is no difference, but [52:41] an expert can clearly see the distinct [52:43] characteristics of Xing and Ding. [52:46] However, some pieces possess a blend of [52:48] features from both kilns. So even the [52:51] most renowned experts find them [52:52] difficult to judge. White porcelain [52:55] involves advanced technology, largely [52:57] because its visual appeal is so [52:59] significant. We use white bowls to eat [53:02] today and don't think much of it, but [53:03] if I asked you to eat from a black bowl [53:05] , you’d appreciate the white one much [53:07] more. Ding was the most important kiln [53:10] in the north during the Five Dynasties [53:12] and early Northern Song, representing [53:13] the highest level of quality. Later, [53:18] because of Ding ware's unshakeable [53:20] status, various imitations began to [53:22] emerge. For instance, there is Southern [53:29] Ding, Fendin (powdered Ding), and other [53:31] local kilns that were not Ding, such as [53:33] Cizhou ware, which also fired white [53:35] bowls. Of course, Yaozhou also produced [53:39] white porcelain; they all did. " [53:41] Southern Ding" refers to Ding-style [53:42] porcelain imitated by potters in the [53:44] south, south of the Yangtze River. [53:47] There were quite a few of these, [53:48] including imitations from Jingdezhen [53:50] and kilns in Anhui, which all saw the [53:52] emergence of white porcelain. They [53:55] strived to fire them as white as [53:56] possible. It wasn't that they couldn't [53:58] fire them into that shadow-blue celadon [53:59] , but they wanted to make them white [54:01] because white porcelain was more [54:02] valuable. Actually, these white, [54:04] celadon, and black porcelains—all the [54:06] colored ones I've mentioned—use [54:07] metals as coloring agents. These white, [54:09] celadon, and black porcelains all [54:11] contain iron, just in different [54:13] compositions. For white porcelain, the [54:16] iron content in the clay and glaze must [54:18] be reduced to below 1%; notice how [54:20] thicker, glazed areas often have a [54:22] greenish tint, which is due to trace [54:24] iron. Celadon typically has an iron [54:29] content between 1%and 3%. The higher [54:32] the content, the darker the color. [54:33] Black porcelain reaches an iron content [54:36] as high as 8%, causing it to turn black [54:38] . So, simply put, all these porcelains [54:41] are related to iron, as iron is a very [54:43] common metallic element. It is even [54:45] more prevalent in the south; if you [54:47] look at the soil in the south, it's all [54:49] red. Why is it red? It contains iron. [54:51] Ding ware, in addition to firing white [54:54] porcelain, also fired black, brown, and [54:56] green varieties, though these were [54:58] rarer. Black and brown are both [55:00] recorded in literature quite clearly, [55:02] such as "black Ding" and "ink Ding"— [55:04] black and ink are the same thing—as [55:07] well as red Ding and purple Ding. Red [55:11] Ding and purple Ding generally refer to [55:13] brownish-red colors, though some [55:15] believe purple Ding is truly purple; [55:17] regardless of the type, it simply comes [55:19] in various colors. The earliest book on [55:22] antiques we've discussed is the "Ge Yao [55:24] Lun," written by Cao Zhao at the [55:26] beginning of the Hongwu era in the Ming [55:28] Dynasty. Cao Zhao lived during the [55:29] transition from the Yuan to the Ming, [55:31] so much of what he recorded relates to [55:33] the Yuan Dynasty. He stated there is [55:35] purple Ding and ink Ding, which is as [55:37] black as lacquer with pure white clay, [55:39] priced higher than white Ding, and [55:40] originating from Dingzhou. He stated [55:43] very clearly that for purple or ink [55:45] Ding, regardless of the type, the body [55:47] clay is always white. At that time, in [55:52] the early Ming Dynasty, the price was [55:54] already higher than standard white Ding [55:56] . He mentioned it originated from [56:01] Dingzhou, which means these wares [56:03] weren't only valued in the Ming Dynasty [56:05] ; they were actually highly prized as [56:06] early as the Song Dynasty. A Northern [56:10] Song figure named Shao Wen recorded [56:12] this in his "Shao Shi Wen Jian Lu." [56:14] Records of Northern Song affairs by a [56:16] Northern Song person are quite [56:17] authentic; he mentioned that during the [56:19] reign of Emperor Renzong of Song—the [56:21] same Renzong from the "Civet Cat for [56:22] Crown Prince" legend. The fourth [56:24] emperor of the Song Dynasty, Emperor [56:26] Renzong, was known for being very [56:28] frugal among the Song emperors. One [56:31] time, while visiting his favorite [56:33] consort, Lady Zhang, he saw a Ding ware [56:35] porcelain piece and asked, "Where did [56:37] you get this?" She told him it was a [56:40] gift from an official named Wang [56:41] Gongchen. The Emperor became unhappy [56:44] and said, "I have often told you not to [56:46] accept gifts from officials. Do you [56:48] know why he gave it to you?""He isn't [56:50] trying to please you; he is trying to [56:52] please me!" He said, "Why don't you [56:53] listen to what I say?" and he grabbed a [56:56] candle holder and smashed the porcelain [56:58] piece. Just imagine that scene. When he [57:01] smashed it, the Consort would surely [57:03] have been terrified, wouldn't she? His [57:08] point in smashing the piece wasn't that [57:09] he didn't care about the porcelain; it [57:11] was to warn her. Lady Zhang felt very [57:15] guilty. Although Emperor Renzong doted [57:20] on her, he demanded that his high [57:22] standards for the court must start with [57:23] those closest to him, not with others. [57:29] This hints at a broader issue, which is [57:31] that red Ding—or what some call Ding [57:33] ware—was highly valued. It was [57:36] expensive at the time and difficult to [57:38] fire, otherwise the Emperor wouldn't [57:40] have gotten so angry and lost his [57:41] temper. Since this account comes from a [57:45] Northern Song record, it is relatively [57:46] authentic. So, when we look at Ding [57:50] ware, we ask: what kind of decorations [57:53] does it have? Beyond its white color, [57:55] does it have any ornamentation? The [58:00] four famous kilns—Ru, Guan, Ge, and [58:02] Jun—rely primarily on their glazes [58:05] and colors to win the public's favor. [58:10] Ding ware is not just about the glaze; [58:12] it also features patterns. It has [58:14] incised and printed designs. In early [58:17] Ding ware, specifically from the Five [58:19] Dynasties period, you can see raised [58:21] patterns, which are known as relief. [58:25] Why does it feature relief? I believe [58:29] it was influenced by the stone carving [58:30] traditions in the Quyang region at that [58:32] time. Quyang produces white marble— [58:39] the marble used for the Monument to the [58:41] People's Heroes in Tiananmen Square [58:43] came from Quyang craftsmen—and the [58:45] initial form of Ding ware's decoration [58:47] was directly related to its very thin [58:49] glaze. You know, with this glaze, its [58:55] coverage is quite uniform everywhere, [58:57] so its patterns are relatively easy to [58:59] display. Take Jun ware, for instance; [59:01] it’s thick, and at the curves and [59:03] corners, the glaze accumulates, so any [59:05] carved patterns would be obscured. [59:07] That’s why Jun ware is generally not [59:09] carved, except for the occasional messy [59:11] carving by Yuan Dynasty craftsmen; [59:13] usually, it’s left plain. So, Ding [59:15] ware is not only beautiful for its [59:17] glaze color but also for its decorative [59:19] beauty. Later, in the late Song Dynasty [59:24] , and especially during the Jin Dynasty [59:26] , due to a massive increase in demand [59:28] for Ding ware, molding techniques were [59:30] used to boost production. Now we can [59:35] see that the origin, firing time, and [59:37] products of Ding ware are all very [59:39] clear, right? Everything is very clear, [59:41] as if there are no unsolved mysteries [59:43] at all. Actually, history is always [59:47] full of mysteries; we often say these [59:49] historical puzzles can't be cleared up, [59:51] but we try our best to explain them. [59:54] Ding ware, in particular, exhibits a [59:56] very unique phenomenon. Unlike other [59:59] kilns, it has a large number of pieces [60:01] with engraved patterns. We’ve [60:03] discussed Ru, Guan, and Ge wares; aside [60:05] from rare exceptions, most of the [60:07] characters on them were carved later. [60:09] Many of the numbers one, two, three, [60:11] and four on Jun ware were also carved [60:14] later. The content is relatively simple [60:16] . Ge ware rarely has carvings, and any [60:18] characters found on Guan or Ge wares [60:19] were mostly carved by the Qianlong [60:21] Emperor, which doesn't count. Only Ding [60:23] ware frequently features carved [60:24] characters. What do they say? For [60:27] example, there are "Shangshiju" and " [60:29] Shangyaoju," which were part of the six [60:31] imperial offices within the Song [60:33] Dynasty palace. The History of Song [60:36] records this clearly, stating that [60:38] among the six offices, the Shangshi is [60:39] in charge of food and beverages, and [60:41] the Shangyao is in charge of medicine [60:43] and the health of the Emperor and [60:45] Empress. What does that mean? Simply [60:49] put, the Shangshi Bureau managed your [60:51] meals, while the Shangyao Bureau [60:52] managed your medicine and medical [60:54] treatments. For example, a few years [60:57] ago, we loved watching those Korean [60:59] historical dramas. For instance, the [61:02] one that had the biggest impact at the [61:04] time—I even watched a few episodes— [61:06] was*Dae Jang Geum*. The actress in*Dae [61:08] Jang Geum*was really quite pretty. In [61:10] those shows, there are references to " [61:12] Shang-gong" everywhere. For example, [61:15] the Han Shanggong or Cui Shanggong— [61:17] Cui Shanggong seems to be a rather [61:19] malicious figure—these Shanggong [61:21] positions correspond to the Shangshi [61:23] Bureau or Shangyao Bureau; they are [61:25] simply specific job titles. In the [61:31] white porcelain of Ding ware, pieces [61:33] specifically commissioned for the [61:35] imperial court's culinary or medicinal [61:37] needs were inscribed directly with fine [61:39] tools, featuring characters like " [61:41] Shangshi Ju" or "Shang Ju." What we see [61:48] most commonly today is something else, [61:50] what is it? It’s inscribed with "Guan [61:52] ," just the single character for " [61:54] official." There are also those [61:56] inscribed with "Xin Guan"; I have seen [61:58] pieces with both "Guan" and "Xin Guan." [62:00] Most people would interpret this as " [62:02] Guan"(official) kiln ware. They say [62:04] that, just as Tang dynasty official [62:06] kilns inscribed one character, or the [62:08] Baibao Dayin Treasury marked Song [62:10] dynasty official wares with a "Guan," [62:12] others followed suit. But this is [62:14] problematic; some call these local " [62:16] official kilns." What does a local [62:19] official kiln even mean? Some also say [62:21] it refers to official status, but in [62:23] reality, this "Guan" character didn't [62:24] have such a clear-cut concept back then [62:26] . We should discuss history in its own [62:28] context; looking at history means not [62:30] projecting today's affairs onto the [62:31] past, nor using Qing dynasty customs to [62:33] explain the Ming, or Ming customs to [62:35] explain the Song. The marks on the [62:36] bottom of Ming and Qing dynasty [62:38] official kiln wares primarily state the [62:39] reign year. Right? "Made in the Xuande [62:41] reign of the Great Ming,""Made in the [62:43] Chenghua reign of the Great Ming,""Made [62:44] in the Kangxi reign of the Great Qing," [62:46] "Made in the Qianlong reign of the [62:47] Great Qing." They all follow this [62:49] format of inscribing the reign title. [62:51] So, what does it mean to just write " [62:53] Guan"? This "Guan"(official) is [62:54] relative to "Min"(civilian). Yes. Why [62:57] didn't they write "Min"(civilian) on [62:59] them instead of "Guan"(official)? [63:03] According to our modern understanding, [63:05] this "Guan" means public, or [63:07] state-owned. In years past, at least in [63:13] my youth, wherever you went in any [63:15] county town, the guest houses would all [63:17] be marked "for public use." Thermoses [63:22] in workplaces were also labeled "for [63:24] public use." This is actually how we [63:27] should understand "Guan"—it means [63:29] official or for public use, and has [63:31] nothing to do with an "official kiln." [63:33] So when you see a large number of [63:35] pieces inscribed with "Guan" today, [63:37] such as "Xin Guan," what does "Xin Guan [63:40] " mean? Right? "Xin Guan" surely [63:42] doesn't mean you'd call this kiln a " [63:43] New Official Kiln," does it? That's not [63:45] it either; it's still just for public [63:47] use. The interpretation of "Xin-Guan" [63:49] remains somewhat vague. To this day, we [63:52] lack a definitive explanation. Compared [63:55] to all ceramics bearing the "Guan"( [63:57] official) mark, these "Xin-Guan" pieces [63:59] likely account for less than 1%, [64:01] certainly a very small amount. Some [64:05] pieces have inscriptions like "Dingzhou [64:07] " written on them, which is quite clear [64:09] —they were for public use, likely by [64:11] the Dingzhou prefectural government for [64:13] everyone to use. You can find such [64:16] ceramics in museums. In ancient China, [64:21] a key feature of the official system [64:23] was the courier station—a place for [64:25] delivering official mail and goods, [64:27] much like our modern logistics system. [64:32] These courier stations were part of the [64:33] official system. The items used within [64:35] this network were not related to the [64:37] imperial court, but rather to the [64:39] government administration. Therefore, " [64:41] Guan" simply means official. The [64:43] official system was vast, just as it is [64:45] today. Since the ancient bureaucratic [64:49] system was also quite extensive, [64:50] looking at it from this perspective [64:52] helps explain why there are so many [64:54] ceramics marked with "Guan." Right? In [64:59] recent years, quite a few "Guan"-marked [65:01] ceramics have been unearthed, sometimes [65:03] found in entire batches featuring the " [65:05] Guan" inscription. For instance, in [65:08] Xi'an a couple of years ago, several [65:10] dozen pieces were excavated in the [65:12] suburbs, many of which bore the "Guan" [65:14] mark, and some even had "Xin-Guan" [65:16] written on them. The discovery of these [65:19] ceramics in such large batches [65:20] highlights the importance of these [65:22] items at the time. As we’ve discussed [65:25] , why would people bury them? This is [65:27] what we call a "hoard." Ah, it’s not [65:29] the kind used for burial objects. They [65:31] are often found in large jars—I have [65:33] seen this more than once—just a [65:35] simple earthen jar. The jar itself is [65:37] not particularly special, also dating [65:38] from that era, but it is packed full of [65:40] ceramics. If you have the chance, visit [65:42] the Shaanxi History Museum. Look at the [65:45] Hejiacun hoard; those two large vessels [65:47] held over a thousand items. You [65:50] wouldn't think it possible for them to [65:52] fit, yet they did. So, whenever these [65:55] ancient hoards are discovered, they are [65:57] massive in quantity and often of [65:59] excellent quality. Now, there is still [66:02] one issue to resolve regarding these " [66:04] Ding" vessels, which is also a [66:06] historical... "Ding vessels have flaws [66:10] and are not fit for use." That is why [66:13] many historical documents mention this [66:15] phrase.