A monumental Imperial exceptionally rare cast gilt-bronze ritual butter lamp


Early Ming Dynasty, circa first half 15th century, cast Jingtai six-character markThe massive gilt-bronze Buddhist ritual vessel superbly and thickly cast in two main sections, covered in rich gilt around the exterior and inner section of the rim, the bowl with flared sides rising to the wide flattened rim, accentuated by the raised central stepped rib around the bowl, the convex underside with a further lipped rib crowning and slotting into the narrow cylindrical stem similarly cast with a raised central rib, all above the generously proportioned bell-shaped lower section with double everted cascading sides emphasised by lipped rims, the bowl cast with the six-character reign mark. 102.6cm (40 3/8in) high, 102.1cm (40 1/8in) diam. of bowl, 88.8cm (35in) diam. of foot, approx. 335kg
|明初 十五世紀前半葉 御製銅鎏金大油燈陽鑄「大明景泰年製」楷書橫款Provenance:Spink & Son, Ltd., LondonAn English private collection, LondonChristie's London, 15 December 1983, lot 374Compagnie de la Chine et des Indes, Mike Winter – Rousset, Paris, 1984 - 1990A European private collection, circa 1990 – 2014The Bodhimanda FoundationPublished and Illustrated:M.Henss, Buddhist Art in Tibet: New Insights on Ancient Treasures: A Study of Paintings and Sculptures from the 8th to 18th Century, Ulm, 2008, p.266M.Henss, Orientations, 'Sacred Spaces and Secret Visions: Tibetan Buddhist Art from The Bodhimanda Foundation', 43(1), pp.66-72, pp.66 and 68.E.Bruijn, Tibet-China & Japan: Catalogue on Masterpieces from the Ethnographic Collections in the Wereldmuseum Rotterdam, Part II, Rotterdam, 2011Exhibited:Wereldmuseum, Rotterdam, 4 June 2006 – 7 February 200720 September 2010 – 1 June 2015, as part of the permanent exhibition of The Bodhimanda Collections in the Wereldmuseum, Rotterdam來源：約於1960至1970年代其間由倫敦古董商Spink & Son, Ltd. 所藏倫敦私人收藏1983年12月15日於倫敦佳士得拍賣，拍品374號1983年12月至1990年其間由巴黎古董商Compagnie de la Chine et des Indes公司Mike Winter-Rousset先生所藏約於1990至2014年其間由歐洲私人收藏2014年至今由菩提曼拏羅基金會收藏 出版：M.Henss著，《Buddhist Art in Tibet:New Insights on Ancient Treasures: A Study of Paintings and Sculptures from the 8th to 18th Century》，烏爾姆，2008年，頁266M.Henss著，「Sacred Spaces and Secret Visions: Tibetan Buddhist Art from the Bodimanda Foundation」，《Orientations》雜誌，43(1)，頁66至72、66及68E.Brujin著，《Tibet-China & Japan: Catalogue on Masterpieces from the Ethnographic Collections in the Wereldmuseum Rotterdam, PartII》，鹿特丹，2011年 展覽：2006年6月4日至2007年2月7日期間借展予鹿特丹世界博物館2010年9月20日至2015年6月1日期間作為菩提曼拏羅基金會藏品於鹿特丹世界博物館長期展出The monumental gilt-bronze butter lamp is an exceptionally rare, important and unique Imperial devotional relic of the Ming dynasty, dating to circa first half of the 15th century, during the reigns of the Yongle to the Jingtai Emperors (1403 - 1457). A ritual object of such colossal proportions and immense weight would have been very costly to produce. Bearing a Ming dynasty Imperial reign mark, it could have only been made by Imperial order and probably by the Imperial Workshops. The butter lamp would have been bestowed upon an Imperial temple or as Imperial patronage of a favoured Buddhist monastery or a diplomatic gift to a Tibetan hierarch, similar to other gifts presented by the Yongle and Xuande Emperors. Compare with a closely related large gilt-bronze altar vase, hu, cast Xuande six-character reign mark reading from left to right Da Ming Xuande nian shi and of the period, and on the other side with a cast Tibetan inscription, measuring 79.2cm high, from Qutan Monastery, now in the collection of the Qinghai Museum, Xining, illustrated in the Palace Museum, Beijing exhibition catalogue Splendors from the Yongle (1403-1424) and Xuande (1426-1435) Reigns of China's Ming Dynasty: Selected Artifacts, Beijing, 2010, p.298, no.150. The qinghai fangzhi ziliao lei bian (Qinghai Gazetteers of categorised information) records that the construction of the Longguo Hall of the Qutan Monastery began in the 2nd year of Xuande (1427), with a large quantity of ritual vessels gifted [by the Imperial Court], including vases, incense burners, incense holders, all of the finest quality of the Xuande reign. It is likely that the aforementioned vase belongs to this important group.The butter lamp, also called 'The Dharma Light', symbolises awakening and offering one's spirit and aspirations. It is an essential element in the offering practices of Tibetan Buddhism and represents the offering of light to enlightened beings. The lamp would have been prominently displayed beside a temple altar and kept burning as a perpetual flame, fed by offerings of yak butter or oil from the faithful and carefully tended to by the monks. The light emanating from the lamp would have illuminated the dimly lit temple, and a colossal lamp such as the present one would have contained enough butter to burn for many days, emphasising the potency of the blessings bestowed by the Emperor and upon the Emperor.Early Ming China and Tibetan BuddhismEmperors during the early Ming dynasty lavishly patronised Buddhism. The Hongwu Emperor was a monk between the ages of about seventeen and twenty-four, and the Yongle and Xuande Emperors continued to promote Tibetan Buddhism, also as means of extending their power and sphere of influence. The Yongle Emperor welcomed Tibetan guests with great ceremony and gifts, and sent Imperial delegations to Tibet, as early as 1403. In doing so he was recalling Kublai Khan's famous patron-priest relationship with his Tibetan Imperial Preceptor ʼPhags-pa (1235-1280), casting himself in the role of the Mongol Khan's spiritual heir and inheritor of Mongol political hegemony. Artisans from Tibet are believed to have remained in Beijing after the fall of the Yuan dynasty and continued to serve in the Ming Imperial Workshops, with frequent exchanges of sculptures and gifts between the Ming Court and Tibetan hierarchs and monasteries. Such exchanges were mutually beneficial. Often, they included so-called tribute by the Tibetan monks of horses, essential for the early Ming military which was devoid of such resources from Mongolia, in exchange for other goods and political and military support for monasteries, which also extended the Ming influence across the region. Furthermore, the receipt of favourable omens and portents from Tibetan lamas and their blessings, served to strengthen the legitimacy of the Ming rule and its Mandate from Heaven. This was particularly the case for the Yongle Emperor, who usurped the throne, and his successors, who benefited from reinforcing their ancestor's legacy and legitimacy.This relationship manifested in patronising Tibetan religious leaders and Buddhist monasteries, as far as the periphery of the Empire, as is well demonstrated in the Guatama Monastery (known as the Qutan Monastery, Gro tshang rdo rje 'chang), Ledu County, Qinghai Province. In 1393 Sanggyé Trashi (d.1414), travelled to Nanjing to request the Hongwu Emperor to extend Imperial protection and favour to the temple. The monk succeeded in his mission and the temple received support by Imperial edict. Subsequent Emperors, notably Yongle, as well as the Hongxi and Xuande Emperors, continued to patronise the monastery. The height of the Imperial support for the monastery occurred during the Yongle reign, transforming the small-scale group of buildings to an official Ming architectural style resulting in a magnificent monastery of palatial splendour comparable to the grandest monasteries in the Ming capital. The Court sent craftsmen and a great number of precious objects produced in the Imperial Workshops, including as mentioned above ritual vessels which closely relate to the present butter lamp; for a detailed discussion regarding the Gautama Monastery and its patronage by early Ming Emperors see A.Campbell, Architecture and Empire in the Reign of Yongle, 1402-1424 (in progress), chapter 4. Strong influence was exerted by the monk Daoyan (Yao Guangxiao) (1335-1418), who met Prince Yan, the future Yongle Emperor, at the funeral of his mother the Empress in Nanjing, and then travelled with him to his fiefdom in Beijing. Later he became a key military, political and religious adviser for the future Yongle Emperor. Daoyan's influence continued in assisting Prince Yan to capture the throne from the Jianwen Emperor in 1402, and in 1407, at the order of the future Hongxi Emperor, instructed the future Xuande Emperor.Important Tibetan leaders were invited to the Ming Court. Two such hierarchs were the leader of the Kagyü order, the Fifth Karmapa, Deshin Shekpa (1384-1415), who stayed in Nanjing from 1407 to 1408 and was followed by the head of the Sakya order, Künga Trashi (1349-1425), who stayed in the Ming capital from 1413 to 1414. They aided the legitimacy of the Yongle Emperor's rule by providing him with portents and omens demonstrating Heaven's favour of the Yongle Emperor. See C.Clunas and J.Harrision-Hall, eds., Ming: 50 Years that Changed China, London, 2014, pp.232-247. Another influential monk was Shakya Yeshe (1354-1435) of the Géluk order, who came as a substitute for his teacher Tsongkhapa, who himself declined the personal invitation of the Emperor. He first travelled to Nanjing in 1415, where he was bestowed with the title of Grand National Preceptor by the Yongle Emperor. In 1431, following the invitation of the Xuande Emperor, he arrived in Beijing and probably stayed in the Great Ci'en (Compassion and Grace) Monastery. By 1435 he was recognised as the Great Compassion Dharma King. Other important monks included Huijin (1355 - 1436), who was summoned by the Yongle Emperor to lecture the Śūraṃgama-sūtra. He was conferred the honour of a purple robe indicating his elevation to Eminent Monk and was ordered to reside in Tianjie si (Heavenly Realm Temple) in Nanjing. In 1426 the Xuande Emperor awarded him the title of Elder of the State, and on the occasion of his death in 1436, the Zhengtong Emperor ordered that a fountain be installed at the Ten Thousand Buddha Temple to honour him. Palden Tashi (1377 – after 1452), was another prominent figure associated with the Court, serving as translator, envoy and priest, and involved with a number of key monasteries, such as Da Chongjiao (Great Revered Teachings) Monastery in Qinghai Province, which was richly furnished with Imperial gifts during the Xuande period, and the Da Longshan Monastery in Beijing. Another monastery known today as the Five Pagoda Temple in Beijing, was built on the ruins of the Yuan site monastery of Da Huguo Renwang, and was only completed in 1473. Eunuchs were also instrumental in the building of monasteries, both working on behalf of the Imperial family and hoping for security in this life and next. For example, Li Tong (d.1453) was the main benefactor of Fahai Monastery, which was built between 1439 – 1443 in west Beijing, and Wang Zhen was the patron of Zhihua Monastery, during the Zhengtong period.Imperial patronage of Tibetan Buddhism continued during the Zhengtong period, as exemplified in the following message delivered by order of the Emperor to the Great Treasure Prince of Dharma, the Karmapa:'Out of compassion, Buddha taught people to be good and persuaded them to embrace his doctrines. You, who live in the remote Western Region, have inherited the true Buddhist doctrines. I am deeply impressed not only by the compassion with which you preach among the people in your region for their enlightenment, but also by your respect for the wishes of Heaven and your devotion to the Court. I am very pleased that you have sent bSod-nams-nyi-ma and other Tibetan monks here bringing with them statues of Buddha, horses and other specialties as tributes to the court'; see 西藏歷史檔案薈粹: A Collection of Historical Archives of Tibet, vol.2, Beijing, 1995.The Jingtai Emperor's interest in Buddhism is evident from his wish in 1453 to have a full-scale visit to the Longfusi (Abundant Blessings) temple, which was newly constructed at Imperial expense near the Forbidden City. See S.Naquin, Peking: Temples and City Life 1400 – 1900, Berkeley, 2001, pp.29-31, 152. However, due to objections from the Ministry of Rites, the visit did not take place. It is also interesting to note that what appears to be a very similar pair of butter lamps is recorded in a photograph of the main temple in Tashilhünpo Monastery, taken during the Tucci Expedition in 1939; see D.Klimburg-Salter, ed., Discovering Tibet: The Tucci Expeditions and Tibetan Paintings, Milan, 2015, p.51, pl.17. The monastery was founded in 1447 by Gendün Drubpa (1391-1474) (posthumously) the first Dalai Lama, near the fort of Shigatse, the capital of Tsang region and became the seat of the Panchen Lamas. Tibetan Buddhism therefore greatly influenced the religious culture of the early Ming Court, firstly as a continuation from the Yuan period and assertion of its Mandate from Heaven, and secondly, out of religious and political motives in asserting and expanding its influence over Tibet and followers of Tibetan Buddhism. Later relations with Tibetan religious leaders were more fraught, with the Wanli Emperor attempting to re-establish Sino-Tibetan relations after 1578, a further indication of an early Ming date for the present lamp. Emperors demonstrated their favour and support of temples and monasteries in funding buildings, as well as impressive ritual vessels, such as the Qutan Monastery's Xuande period hu, and the pair of butter lamps from the Tashilhünpo Monastery, all of which closely relate to the present butter lamp.Cast Jingtai six-character markThe butter lamp is cast with a six-character reign mark reading from right to left: 'Da Ming Jingtai Nian Zhi' (made in the great Ming dynasty Jingtai reign). The three characters Jing tai and zhi are separately cast, but would appear to bear the same thick gilding as the rest of the surface and other characters, which poses several possibilities, which will be further explored.The first possibility is that the vessel and the mark are contemporaneous to the Jingtai period, i.e. Jingtai mark and of the period (1449 - 1457). This could be the case if there were casting flaws or complications in the more complex characters including a larger number of strokes, which may have required special casting. The gilding applied to the surface would have been thick and would have disguised any border lines, as indeed can be often seen on gilt-bronze figures originally repaired with rectangular 'patches', which over the years are often exposed. This explanation is reinforced by a closely related example of a large gilt-bronze ritual vase, hu, cast Xuande six-character mark and of the period, from the Qutan Monastery, which also bears a cast Tibetan inscription, which was exhibited in the Palace Museum, Beijing and is illustrated in Splendors from the Yongle (1403-1424) and Xuande (1426 – 1435) Reigns of China's Ming Dynasty: Selected Artifacts, Beijing, 2010, p.298, no.150. It is clear the Tibetan inscription was cast separately in a rectangular form and then integrated into the vase; similarly, the shi character in the Xuande inscription seems to have been separately cast and inserted – both corresponding to the casting technique of the present butter lamp. This option is further strengthened by the lack of a convincing explanation for replacing the last character zhi. Imperial reign marks have three possible endings: zhi, zao (both meaning 'made'), and shi (meaning 'bestowed'). If the present last character is a replacement, it could have only replaced a zao or a shi. There would be no apparent reason to alter a zao to a zhi, as these would appear to be interchangeable in meaning (although the different use of the characters on inscriptions on the Xuande cloisonné enamel 'dragon' jars in the British Museum and the Rietberg Museum from the Uldry Collection, would indicate that zao was used by the Imperial Workshops). Would there be any reason to modify a shi character to a zao? The former can be seen frequently used on Buddhist gilt-bronze figures of the Yongle and Xuande periods, but no known example of such modification would appear to have been published. Furthermore, there would not seem to be any apparent reason to change the last characters. Therefore, it would seem that the present reign mark is of the period.The second possibility is that the butter lamp was made before the Jingtai period, but that the Jingtai and zhi characters were cast during the Jingtai period, replacing an earlier Imperial reign mark, possibly of the Yongle, Xuande or Zhengtong periods. It should be noted that the present inscription is written from right to left. Yongle and Xuande reign marks on Buddhist bronzes are, however, typically inscribed left to right, following the direction of the Tibetan script. However, in both periods, inscriptions on other vessels are written from right to left, as can be seen on large stone basins, presently in the Yuanmingyuan, inscribed Da Ming Yongle nian zao, and on Xuande mark and period Imperial porcelain. Still, it is not clear why, if the lamp was made prior to the Jingtai reign, was it deemed necessary to replace the zao or shi character to a zhi, as discussed above. A third possibility is that the Jingtai and zhi characters were altered after the Jingtai period. This would appear to be an unlikely option. Firstly, it would still be unclear why the last character has been replaced. Secondly, whilst there are apocryphal Jingtai marks, these would appear to be arguably exclusive to cloisonné enamel works of art, and most often added during the 17th and 18th century. It seems unlikely that later in the Ming period an apocryphal Jingtai mark would be made to replace an earlier Ming Imperial reign mark, and even less likely and far-fetched that a vessel of such importance would be produced in the Qing period with an apocryphal cast Ming mark which was then later changed to Jingtai. In conclusion, the most likely possibility is that the Jingtai and zhi characters are original to the casting of the vessel and their borders would have originally been covered with gilt which has since worn.The Jingtai EmperorThe Jingtai Emperor, Zhu Qiyu (b.1428 – d.1457; reigned 1449-1457), was the second son of the Xuande Emperor and replaced his brother the Zhengtong Emperor on the throne when the latter was captured by the Oyrat Mongols following the defeat in the Battle of the Tumu Fort in 1449. When the Zhengtong Emperor was released in 1450 he was granted the title of Emperor Emeritus. However, when the Jingtai Emperor's death was imminent, the Emperor Emeritus deposed him and took the throne under the reign name of the Tianshun Emperor. The Jingtai Emperor's interest in Buddhism is evident from his wish in 1453 to have a full-scale visit to the Longfusi (Abundant Blessings) temple, which was newly constructed at Imperial expense near the Forbidden City. See S.Naquin, Peking: Temples and City Life 1400 – 1900, Berkeley, 2001, pp.29-31, 152. However, due to objections from the Ministry of Rites, the visit did not take place. It is also possible to draw a comparison from the case of the Yongle Emperor who supported the legitimacy of his rule and Mandate from Heaven, having usurped the throne from the Jianwen Emperor, by inviting Tibetan Buddhist monks such as Deshin Shekpa, who provided him with portents and omens demonstrating Heaven's favour. The Jingtai Emperor faced a comparable situation, when he chose to remain on the throne despite the release of the Zhengtong Emperor from captivity in 1450, having placed the now Emperor Emeritus in house arrest, until the former's imminent death in 1457, when the Emperor Emeritus staged a coup and regained the throne as the Tianshun Emperor.Furthermore, the death of Jingtai's son, Zhu Jianji, the declared heir apparent, in March 1453, who was made heir, deposing Zhengtong's infant son Zhu Jianshen, was interpreted as evidence of Heaven's displeasure. Additionally, China experienced famine between 1450-1455, coinciding with the majority of the Jingtai reign, which likely also contributed to a loss of faith in the Emperor's mandate to rule. One official said to the Jingtai Emperor in 1454: "Restore the Prince's [Zhu Jianshen] status as heir apparent; secure the great foundation of the realm. If this is done, then gentle weather will fill the realm and the disasters will end of their own accord." The Emperor ordered the man to be executed but when the next day a sandstorm shrouded the capital, fearing that this was Heaven's rebuke, he revoked his order. See T.Brook, The Troubled Empire: China in the Yuan and Ming Dynasties, Cambridge MA., 2010, p.97. The traumatic event of a capture of an Emperor could have led to the toppling of the Ming Empire. The enthronement of the Zhengtong Emperor's half-brother as the Jingtai Emperor (preferring him over Zhengtong's infant son), and his continuous rule even after Zhengtong's release, would have cast doubts over his Mandate from Heaven to rule. The death of the Jingtai Emperor's heir apparent, was interpreted as loss of Heaven's favour, as was the famine. Each of these were key events - easily interpreted as evidence of loss of Mandate from Heaven to rule - emphasising the importance of reinforcing the perception of maintaining Heaven's favour. As in the case of the Yongle Emperor, the Jingtai Emperor could have equally demonstrated Heaven's favour by religious patronage and Imperial gifts to important monasteries and temples, uniquely represented in this important Imperial monumental Buddhist butter lamp.