Lot Essay
The outstanding quality of this sectionally-assembled figure is an indication that it falls clearly within the range of bronze and pottery tomb sculpture associated with the First Emperor of China. Given this similarity, it is very strange that no similar bronze figure appears hitherto to have been published. All the closest comparable models of these sectional military figures appear to be in pottery, and the largest group are those excavated in 1974 at the Mausoleum of the First Emperor, Qin Shi Huangdi, such as the large standing infantryman from the site, pit 1, Lintong county, Shaanxi province, exhibited in Zürich and subsequently at the British Museum, London, Mysteries of Ancient China, Catalogue, no.78, colour illustration. The author, Jessica Rawson, there describes how bronzes from the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng, and bells from another Zeng tomb, were probably made by some sort of mass-production, using both mechanically-decorated moulds and subdivision of labour: "Such contrasting examples - the terracotta and the bronze - illustrate well how the ancient Chinese mobilize large numbers of people to create huge quantities of highly accomplished objects for widely different uses. As important as the skilled labour were the planning and organization of the workshops producing these objects", ibid., no. 78, footnote.
Dr. Rawson particularly draws attention to the way in which the pottery figures were assembled from mass-produced parts. It is interesting to note that the bronze figure is also made in parts, as one would expect, with an elaborate hollow cast structure of this kind. In this respect it compares correctly with the well-known group of massive standing early Han bronze horses, of the type exhibited by a European private collector at the Musée Guimet, Paris, in 1994. These are all assembled from components which, as Dr. Rawson points out, does give the craftsman the opportunity to include an element of individuality in each sculpture. The pottery from the tomb of the First Emperor is notable for the careful detailing of the faces, military hardware and clothing, and it is legitimate to assume that these are in general accurate reproductions of the human prototype. In that case, the infantry soldier offered as the present lot appears to be of higher rank than by far the largest group of pottery infantrymen recovered in and around the Mausoleum site. These almost invariably do not wear official hats, and their clothing is essentially very simple, even though facial details do appear to be incised to at least distinguish one from another, even if they are not (as has been suggested) specific delineations of individuals attached to the Emperor's bodyguard. The hat worn by the infantryman in this lot is not apparently paralleled on pottery figures, which has led to the suggestion that more senior members of the Imperial entourage were recreated in bronze, while the massed ranks of the vanguard and rearguard of the main troops were of pottery. No doubt further excavation on the site will cast light on this probability. It is not clear from literature of the period, or from site and excavation reports in Wenwu and Kaogu, as to how widely outside the new Imperial capital at Xian the burial practice existed of piece-moulding bronze and pottery figures at this early date, or whether this practice was to become more general during the early Western Han period. A more exact dating of the present lot must therefore wait until excavation reports publish similar outstanding bronze figures of this kind. See also Wen Fong, The Great Bronze Age of China, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1980, chapter 10, for a long discussion of the finds from the various pits, and the complex way in which the thousands of warriors were grouped to provide calculated military protection for the deceased Emperor.
In its static monumentality, gravity of expression and novelty of form as an accurate depiction of a secular figure, it is interesting to compare this figure to Sichuan pottery tomb figures, often depicted in a similar stance to the present lot, with comparable facial features, hat and robes. One such figure is in the Musée Guimet, Paris, and is illustrated by J.-P. Desroches, 'The Chinese Art Department's Enrichment Policy', Orientations, May 1991, p.87, fig.10. During the 4th Century B.C., earlier rulers in the Qin undertook a series of military campaigns and one of their first major territorial gains was the rich Sichuan river basin area; it is very likely that elements of local design were at least incorporated into a more general style as the ruthless centralisation of an increasingly large area of China was undertaken by a succession of later Qin rulers, culminating in the defeat of the eastern state of Qi in 221 B.C., when the King of Qin assumed the title of First Emperor.
Dr. Rawson particularly draws attention to the way in which the pottery figures were assembled from mass-produced parts. It is interesting to note that the bronze figure is also made in parts, as one would expect, with an elaborate hollow cast structure of this kind. In this respect it compares correctly with the well-known group of massive standing early Han bronze horses, of the type exhibited by a European private collector at the Musée Guimet, Paris, in 1994. These are all assembled from components which, as Dr. Rawson points out, does give the craftsman the opportunity to include an element of individuality in each sculpture. The pottery from the tomb of the First Emperor is notable for the careful detailing of the faces, military hardware and clothing, and it is legitimate to assume that these are in general accurate reproductions of the human prototype. In that case, the infantry soldier offered as the present lot appears to be of higher rank than by far the largest group of pottery infantrymen recovered in and around the Mausoleum site. These almost invariably do not wear official hats, and their clothing is essentially very simple, even though facial details do appear to be incised to at least distinguish one from another, even if they are not (as has been suggested) specific delineations of individuals attached to the Emperor's bodyguard. The hat worn by the infantryman in this lot is not apparently paralleled on pottery figures, which has led to the suggestion that more senior members of the Imperial entourage were recreated in bronze, while the massed ranks of the vanguard and rearguard of the main troops were of pottery. No doubt further excavation on the site will cast light on this probability. It is not clear from literature of the period, or from site and excavation reports in Wenwu and Kaogu, as to how widely outside the new Imperial capital at Xian the burial practice existed of piece-moulding bronze and pottery figures at this early date, or whether this practice was to become more general during the early Western Han period. A more exact dating of the present lot must therefore wait until excavation reports publish similar outstanding bronze figures of this kind. See also Wen Fong, The Great Bronze Age of China, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1980, chapter 10, for a long discussion of the finds from the various pits, and the complex way in which the thousands of warriors were grouped to provide calculated military protection for the deceased Emperor.
In its static monumentality, gravity of expression and novelty of form as an accurate depiction of a secular figure, it is interesting to compare this figure to Sichuan pottery tomb figures, often depicted in a similar stance to the present lot, with comparable facial features, hat and robes. One such figure is in the Musée Guimet, Paris, and is illustrated by J.-P. Desroches, 'The Chinese Art Department's Enrichment Policy', Orientations, May 1991, p.87, fig.10. During the 4th Century B.C., earlier rulers in the Qin undertook a series of military campaigns and one of their first major territorial gains was the rich Sichuan river basin area; it is very likely that elements of local design were at least incorporated into a more general style as the ruthless centralisation of an increasingly large area of China was undertaken by a succession of later Qin rulers, culminating in the defeat of the eastern state of Qi in 221 B.C., when the King of Qin assumed the title of First Emperor.