The Paradox of Song Dynasty Porcelain

During the late Qing and early Republican era, Guangzhou collector Xu Shoubai famously declared Chinese porcelain—especially Song Dynasty (960-1279) wares—as the pinnacle of craftsmanship. Modern auction prices reaching hundreds of millions would seem to confirm this view. Yet historical evidence reveals a startling contradiction: in their own time, Song elites considered porcelain embarrassingly low-class for dining tables.

Archaeological finds show Song porcelain bore shockingly modest price markings—merely 30 wen (coins) for exquisite white-glazed lotus-carved bowls, equivalent to just one bushel of wheat in 1009 CE. Court records like Dreams of Splendor of the Eastern Capital meticulously list gold, silver, and lacquerware among imperial tableware but conspicuously omit porcelain. Middle-class households, as described in Records of the Listener, served wine in silver cups atop lacquered trays, avoiding ceramic vessels entirely. Even Kaifeng’s prestigious Wang Family Restaurant reserved porcelain plates for their lowest-tier customers.

The Hierarchy of Song Dining Vessels

Three distinct material hierarchies dominated Song dining culture:

1. Precious Metals – Gold and silver vessels symbolized ultimate luxury but risked appearing ostentatious. A Southern Song official’s banquet might feature silver-gilt wine warmers shaped like phoenixes, their surfaces chased with intricate floral motifs.

2. Exotic Imports – Glassware occupied a fascinating niche. Imported from Islamic lands via maritime trade routes, purple-hued glass cups inspired poetic rhapsodies. When scholar Li Guang received a single glass bowl as gift, he felt compelled to return it, exclaiming such items belonged in treasuries, not dining tables.

3. Humble Porcelain – Despite Ru, Guan, and Ding kilns producing what we now consider masterpieces, contemporaries viewed these as utilitarian objects. Export markets and commoners sustained the ceramic industry—Fujian’s Cizhou kilns produced sturdy brown-glazed vessels expressly for maritime trade to Southeast Asia.

The Sacred Status of Glass

Buddhist scriptures listing glass among the Seven Precious Materials (黄金, 白银, 琉璃, 玻璃, etc.) puzzled later commentators who suggested “glass” actually meant rock crystal. However, archaeological evidence supports the literal interpretation:

– A 10cm-high cobalt glass reliquary bottle excavated from Zhejiang’s Huiguang Pagoda (北宋) features sophisticated mold-blown technique traceable to Sassanian Persia.
– Northern Song trade records document “purple glass” imports from Srivijaya (modern Indonesia), with transparency and color intensity determining value.
– Poet Su Shi’s correspondence mentions Venetian traders offering glassware in Hangzhou markets at prices exceeding同等weight silver.

This explains why Southern Song aristocrats prized a single glass cup more than entire sets of silverware—their rarity created an aura of mystical sophistication porcelain couldn’t match.

Dining Etiquette and Tool Evolution

Song dining rituals followed strict protocols that reflected centuries of utensil evolution:

### From Bronze Age Knives to Song Cutlery
Pre-Qin diners used bronze ge daggers and forked cha utensils to portion undercooked sacrificial meats. By the Tang Dynasty (618-907), these evolved into:

– Bǐ 匕: A hybrid spoon-knife with sharpened edges for portioning and scooping, seen in Sichuan Provincial Museum’s Warring States collection.
– Zhù 箸: Refined chopsticks of sandalwood or ivory, length calibrated to social status (longer = higher rank).

Dunhuang Cave 473’s mural depicts Tang aristocrats using both implements simultaneously—chopsticks transferring morsels from communal dishes, bǐ conveying rice to mouths. Violating this division, like using chopsticks for rice, signaled poor upbringing.

### The Southern Song Hygiene Revolution
Northern Song dining habits troubled fastidious Southern Song scholars. Zhu Xi’s Family Rituals prescribed:

> “When raising the spoon, set down the chopsticks; when raising chopsticks, set down the spoon.”

This spurred innovation in zhizhu (止箸)—exquisitely carved bamboo or jade chopstick rests preventing table contact. Modern reproductions at Hangzhou’s Southern Song Dynasty Museum demonstrate their elegant crescent-shaped design.

Legacy and Modern Misconceptions

The Song material hierarchy inversion—where today’s “priceless” porcelain was yesterday’s commonplace—holds profound lessons:

1. Cultural Valuation Fluidity – The same Ding ware bowl selling for $30 million at Sotheby’s would have been rejected by Song literati as unsuitable for scholarly gatherings.

2. Global Trade’s Transformative Power – Islamic glass and Southeast Asian spices reshaped Chinese aesthetics more profoundly than domestic ceramic development.

3. Tableware as Status Theater – Contemporary “fine china” traditions ironically emulate precisely the Song elite behaviors that excluded porcelain.

At New York’s Metropolitan Museum, a 12th-century Ruyao brush washer displayed beside its original inventory description—”ceramic vessel for studio use, value 50 wen”—powerfully encapsulates this historical irony. The true treasures of Song dining culture weren’t the objects themselves, but the sophisticated social codes they embodied.