1  

The Martial Saint: Representations of ‘Guan Yu’ through Ming and Qing Dynasty art.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Freddie  Matthews  

   

2  

 

 

“Unrivaled in the latter years of Han, Lord Guan towered high above all men. Bold in arms by dint of godlike might, he knew his letters in a scholar’s right.

Like glare of day, his heart reflected true. His Spring and Autumn honor touched the clouds- a shining spirit to live through history, not just the crowning glory of a world in three.”

Luo Guanzhong, Romance of the Three Kingdoms.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                               1 Luo, Guanzhong. Robert, Moss. Trans. 2004. Three Kingdoms, A Historical Novel: Complete and Unabridged. University of California Press, p. 585.

   

3  

This essay traces and examines depictions of General Guān Yǔ (關羽) throughout Ming and Qing Dynasty

art; illustrating themes, diversities and historical correlations found throughout. Representations are

taken from a variety of different mediums and often united into ‘groups’ for the purpose of illustrating

common styles and techniques. Any reference to ‘Guan Gong’, ‘Guandi’ or ‘Guan Di’ simply refers to Guan

Yu; these names being terms of respect variously ascribed to the same historical figure.

Within all of Chinese history, no figure has attained greater mythical status than that of Guan Yu (ca 175-

219 CE), the military general of the state of Shu Han, who served under the warlord Liu Bei upon the

collapse of the late Eastern Han Dynasty (206 BCE- 220 CE) and dawn of the tumultuous ‘Three Kingdoms’

period (220- 280 CE). After his death, Guan Yu was bestowed with successive titles of prestige and

commemoration, commencing in 260 CE when the son of Liu Bei, Liu Chan bestowed on him the title,

‘Brave and Faithful Marquis.’2 Later when China moved towards unity during the Sui Dynasty (581-618

CE), Emperor Wendi constructed a temple in honour of Guan Yu at Xiezhou, Shanxi province in 589 CE.

Roughly seven hundred years later, this tradition of “showering honours on the long dead hero”3 was once

more revived, and “from the Song onwards the imperial state lavished Guan Yu with successively higher

and more glorious titles.”4 Guan Yu was posthumously awarded the rank of duke by an imperial decree in

1120 CE, which was soon upgraded to that of prince in 1128 CE.5 During the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368 CE),

Guan Yu eclipsed Jiang Tai Gong (姜子牙) as the official god of war, before being promoted again in 1594

CE to the position of, ‘Warrior Prince and Bringer of Civilization’6i; the title which he held until 1615 CE

when the Ming emperor Wan Li conferred upon him the honour; ‘Faithful and Loyal Great Deity (di),

Supporter of Heaven, Protector of the Empire.’7 During the Qing Dynasty, his cult reached its absolute

peak and in 1853 CE during the Taiping rebellion, Guan Yu’s worship was raised to the same level in the

official sacrifices as that of Confucius.”8ii As Prasenjit Duara has commented of this figure’s mythical legacy,

“There is no god who is more identified as a representative of Chinese culture than Guandi.”9

                                                                                                               2 Day, Clarence Burton. 1940. Chinese Peasant Cults. Kelly and Walsh Ltd, Hong Kong, p. 53. 3 Ibid. 4 Duara, Prasenjit. ‘Superscribing Symbols: The Myth of Guandi, Chinese God of War.’ The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Nov., 1988), p. 783. 5 Christies, Anthony. 1983. Chinese Mythology: Revised Edition. Newnes Books, London, p. 110. 6 Ibid., p. 110. 7 Duara, Prasenjit, Op cit. p. 783. 8 Ibid, p. 784. 9 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 786.

   

4  

It was during the periods of the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1911) Dynasties however, that the public

notoriety of Guan Yu ballooned to an unprecedented scale. This was in many ways due to the great

socioeconomic changes of the era which enabled the mass-dissemination of popular culture. Indeed, during

this time social and technological advancements, massive population growth and regional specialization all

contributed to profound realignments in art and culture. Perhaps the most significant of these was the

printing industry, which “attained an unprecedented standard”10 during the Ming. Coupled with a rapidly

expanding literacy rate,11 “hitherto restricted cultural practices”12 such as literature became increasingly

accessible to a wider public and “popular readers, primers, plays and novels were all printed in great

number.”13

To meet this emerging market, “more and more books were published in the vernacular;”14 leading to a

“broad impact on cultural sensibilities.”15 One of the most popular pieces of this kind of literature was ‘The

Romance of the Three Kingdoms’iii (金陵萬卷樓刊本) by Luo Guanzhong, first published in 1320 CE. This

text embodied a highly romanticized reworking of Chen Shou's (more historically accurate) ‘Records of

Three Kingdoms’ (三國志) of the late 3rd century CE, portraying a “pseudo-history of the Three Kingdoms”16

period that could excite the general readers’ imagination and tastes. Pertinently in this text, “the mortal

weaknesses of Guan Yu naturally fell away,”17 as its hero was lyrically sculpted into a 9ft tall, hulk of a man,

boasting “a 60cm long black beard, rose carmine lips, bloodshot eyes and a demeanour which struck terror

into the hearts of all who beheld him.”18iv

To accompany texts such as the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, woodblock prints were often included to

provide even more richness to the narrative. Given the highly competitive printing market at the time, a

fine artistry of illustrated editions was attained, providing the reader with a vivid sense of “fantasy and

illusion”19 whilst drawing on and reflecting “contemporary aesthetic sensibilities.”20 See FIG. 1a-d.

                                                                                                               10 Shubao, Luo. Eds. 1998. An Illustrated History of Printing in Ancient China. City University of Hong Kong Press, Hong Kong, p. 15. 11 Hearn, Maxwell K. 1996. Splendors of Imperial China. Treasures from the National Palace Museum, Taipei. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, p. 79. 12 Clunas, Craig. 1997. Art in China. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 181. 13 Shubao, Luo. Eds. Op cit., p. 15. 14 Ebrey, Patricia Buckley. 2010. The Cambridge Illustrated History of China: Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, p. 202. 15 Ibid, p. 203. 16 Stevens, Keith. 1997. Chinese Gods: The Unseen World of Spirits and Demons. Collins & Brown Ltd, London, p. 147. 17 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 782. 18 Stevens, Keith. Op cit., p. 145. 19 Chinese Council for Cultural Planning and Development. 1990. Exhibition of Graphic Art in Printed Books of the Ming Dynasty. National Central Library, Beijing, p. 346. 20 Ibid, p. 345.

   

5  

From left to right: FIG. 1a: ‘Kuan Yu’s Solitary Journey.’ Woodblock print from a Ming edition of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms,. 21 x 13.5 cm. National Central Library, Beijing. FIG. 1b: ‘Guan Yu decapitates Ch'e Chou.’ Woodblock print from a Ming edition of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, 21 x 13.5 cm. National Central Library, Beijing.

From left to right:

   

6  

FIG. 1c: ‘The Oath at the Peach Garden.’ Woodblock print from a Ming edition of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, 1591. Beijing University Library. FIG. 1d: ‘The Oath at the Peach Garden.’ Woodblock print from a Ming edition of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Jian'an, Fujian. 14th century.

In woodblock prints such as these, the narrative action of the scene is emphasized with quasi-theatrical

immediacy, whilst the figures themselves appear somewhat ‘puppet-like’; superimposed in front of more

‘traditional’ landscape scenery.v The compositions attempt to fit as much as possible into the scene, creating

the same spatial distortions achieved in Buddhist and Daoist religious murals from the Tang Dynasty (618-

904 CE) onwards. The final effect is that of a stage, eliciting the illusion and perspective of a contemporary

opera performance.vi Furthermore, these woodblock illustrations marked a revival in figure painting, which

since the Song Dynasty (960-1279 CE) had been “supplanted by landscape paining.”21

The style, subject matter and even artistic technique of such illustrations was not limited solely to common

audiences however. There was sustained admiration of Guan Yu amongst the imperial Ming rulers,vii as is

evident by the imperially commissioned work of court painter Shang Xi, who regally portrayed ‘General

Guan Yu Capturing Pang De’ in a hanging scroll dating to around 1430. See FIG. 2.

                                                                                                               21 Hyland, Alice R.M. 1987. Deities, Emperors, Ladies and Literati: Figure Painting of the Ming and Qing Dynasties. University of Washington Press, Seattle, p. 11.

   

7  

FIG. 2: Shang Xi, General Guan Yu Capturing Pang De. Ming Dynasty. ca. 1430, Hanging scroll, ink and colour on silk, 200 x 237 cm. Palace Museum, Beijing. From Weidner, 2001, p. 125.

Flanked by Zhang Fei (in front to his right) and Liu Bei (behind to his left), the regalviii Guan Yu extends an

indifferent gaze towards his hostage Pang De (then a general of the state of Wei), who reels in pain and

frustration, stripped down to a mere loincloth.ix The playful proportions of the scene are key to its mastery,

with Guan Yu appearing markedly larger than any other figure, despite clearly being seated behind Zhang

Fei and his hostage. Furthermore, the colour and texture of the (somewhat Southern Song, ‘Ma Xia’

inspired) ink-monochrome scenery in the background, contrasts profoundly (yet not disruptively) with the

bright, flat, and notably Tibetan palette of the figures in the foreground.x Interesting also, is the theatrical,

   

8  

‘stage-like’ arrangement of the figures who are projected into the foreground, paralleling the compositional

scheme seen previously in contemporary woodblock illustrations.xi

With imperially commissioned works such as Shang Xi’s, it was clear that there was a deliberate effort by

Ming officials to “appropriate Guan Yu’s symbolism for their own ends.”22 Indeed, the Ming realized the

value of “inexpensive forms of motivation”23 in maintaining their power, and therefore no doubt desired to

harness the widespread potency and popularity of the (now largely literary) Guan Yu myth. Naturally

therefore, official temples for Guan Yu were imperially patronized and nurtured, eventually becoming “the

foundations of the Guandi cult.”24 These included the Yuecheng temple just outside Beijing where Guan Yu

was worshipped as a ‘God of wealth’xii, as well as the ancient Baima temple in Beijing where Guandi

continued to be worshipped as the ‘God of War’.25 Such temples constructed in Guan Yu’s honour (whilst

sometimes Confucian, sometimes Daoist and sometimes Buddhist; though increasingly ‘syncretic’), all

nurtured his popular image as a ‘pan-Chinese’ deity. Nonetheless, in the absence of any prescribed religious

iconographical treatise for his depiction, both Ming and Qing artistic representations were as varied as they

were prolific.

Nonetheless, Guan Yu’s physical description in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms was used largely as a

starting point for artists, who adventurously experimented with new techniques and styles whilst rendering

this highly lucrative subject. One example is a carved wooden statue of Guan Yu dated to the 1490s CE, in

which the artist clearly references Luo Guanzhong’s literary description of Guan Yu, with a face “as ruddy as

dates (and) brows like nestling silkworms.”26 In an exciting bricolage of wood, lacquer, lacquer paste,

leather and horsehair, the artist has attempted to bring the character to life in the form of a true military

man- strong, powerful and with a confident, almost arrogant swagger.

                                                                                                               22 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 783. 23 Ebrey, Patricia Buckley. Op cit., p. 216. 24 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 792. 25 Ibid, p. 783. 26 Luo, Guanzhong. Robert, Moss. Trans. 2004. Three Kingdoms, A Historical Novel: Complete and Unabridged. University of California Press, p. 1026.

   

9  

FIG. 3: Figure of Guan Yu, Wood, lacquer and lacquer paste, leather and hair, polychrome and gilt, 1490s, Ackland Museum, University of North Carolina.

Notably, at this time also, decorative ceramics were becoming increasingly “common among all classes of

society,”27 with more than 10,000 people actively involved in the production of ceramics by 1540 CE.28 It is

unsurprising therefore, that such prolific amounts of ceramic figures of Guan Yu poured out of the various

kilns of Ming China at this time. See FIG. 4a-h.

                                                                                                               27 Li, He. 1996. Chinese Ceramics: The New Standard Guide. Thames & Hudson Ltd, London, p. 208. 28 Ibid, p. 208.

   

10  

From top left to bottom right: FIG. 4a-c: Three figures of Guandi, Ming Dynasty, 16th century AD; stoneware with polychrome glaze; Liebieghaus Museum, Frankfurt. FIG. 4d: A Chinese stoneware Guandi, Ming dynasty (16th-17th century), H: 40.5cm. Gerard Hawthorne Ltd Oriental Art, London. FIG. 4e: Guan Yu seated on a square pedestal. Stoneware with molded and carved decoration, and partial green glaze with overglaze gold. Ming (1368-1644), Zhejiang (Longquan). H: 35.6 cm. Published in Li, He. 1996, pl. 513. FIG. 4f: Earthenware roof tile of Guan Yu riding his horse from a Temple in North China. 1490-1620 CE. The British Museum, London. FIG. 4g: Guandi, Earthenware glazed in turquoise and blue (with European ormolu mount), 1368-1644 CE, H: 35 cm. Victoria and Albert Museum, London. FIG. 4h: A rare blue and white seated figure of Guandi, Ming Dynasty (Wanli Period: 1572-1620). H: 26.5cm. Sold at Bonhams, London: 10/11/2011.

In these statues we find characteristically adventurous usages of new materials and techniques from

regional kilns, such as the well proportioned celadon glazed sculptures of Longquan (龍泉) near Hangzhou,

which became obsolete by the end of the Ming.29 See FIG. 4a-f. In such renderings, the artist has clearly

demonstrated his ability to convey tension and movement, though with a tangible sense of stability. Notably

                                                                                                               29 Ibid, p. 216.

   

11  

also is the ‘royal ease’ posture adopted in the last two statues (See FIG. 4g-h), echoing the regality of

Shang Xi’s earlier masterpiece.

During the violent transition into the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), the new Manchu rulers made a deliberate

political effort not to disrupt or undermine preexisting (Han) tastes, traditions and myths such as the cult

of Guan Yu. On the contrary, “as their predecessors had done, the Qing promoted Guan Yu to ever-higher

status in the official cult.”30 Indeed, during the Qing, more than 1,600 official temples were dedicated to

Guan Yu.31 The Qing rulers believed that the spread of Guan Yu’s image would inspire a spirit of trust and

unity in what was essentially becoming a society of strangers, “whilst also assimilating non-Han peoples on

the frontiers as the empire expanded.”32 At the same time however, the Qing rulers attempted to “police

(cultural) symbols”33 such as Guan Yu, subtly attempting to recast his image, persona and popularity

towards their own political agenda.xiii

One of the first imperial representations of Guan Yu to emerge from the newly settled Qing court showcases

an almost uncanny likeness to Shang Xi’s Ming Dynasty version.xiv Indeed, the inherent similarities

(especially sartorial adornments), of the figures within the two paintings leaves no doubt that Shang Xi’s

version was the model for the later Qing artist, perhaps at once to claim ownership and recognition of the

imperial art collection whilst simultaneously claiming rights over the trajectory of the Guan Yu myth

itself.xv See FIG. 5-6.

                                                                                                               30 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 784. 31 Christies, Anthony. Op cit., p. 110. 32 Rawski S, Evelyn. ‘Research Themes in Ming-Qing Socioeconomic History--The State of the Field.’ The Journal of Asian Studies , Vol. 50, No. 1 (Feb., 1991), p. 97. 33 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 791.

   

12  

FIG. 5: Emperor Guan, Unidentified Artist, Qing dynasty, ca. 1700, Hanging scroll; ink, color, and gold on silk, (173 x 42.6 cm), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Gold inscription on upper right reads: “Overseer of the Gate, Sage-Emperor Lord Guan.” FIG. 6: Detail of Shang Xi, General Guan Yu Capturing Pang De, ca. 1430.

Notably, whilst Shang Xi’s work characterizes the severe lack of tolerance early Ming imperial rulers

exhibited for dissenters, the Qing Dynasty version reflects a massively expanded empire still unsure of its

own cultural identity. Whilst its subject matter is distinctly Chinese, its style, composition and palette (itself

lavish in mineral pigments) is again profoundly Tibetan- only this time Tibetan throughout, inclusive of the

Lamaistic ‘cloud-scape’ upon which the figures stand. xvi

   

13  

The white porcelain figures of Guan Yu that emerged from the Dehua (德化) kilns of Fujian at the dawn of

the Qing Dynasty also appeared to subtly herald the new Manchu rulers,xvii being largely for the first time

seated on horseback.xviii This simultaneously signified both the technical advancements of the Dehua kilns

themselves, as well as a possible move towards Manchu sensibilities; horseback warfare being a Manchu

skill par excellence.34 See FIG. 7a-f.

FIG. 7a: Guandi on horseback, Dehua Porcelain, Qing dynasty (impressed seal mark), H: 44.7 cm. Nagel Asian Art, Stuttgart.

                                                                                                               34 Oxnam, Robert b. 1975. Ruling from Horseback: Manchu Politics in the Oboi Regency, 1661-1669. University of Chicago Press. P1.

   

14  

FIG. 7b: Guan Yu on horseback, Dehua Porcelain, Kangxi period, (gilt bronze mount added Paris, circa 1740), H: 38 cm. Richard Redding Antiques Ltd, Zurich. FIG. 7c: Guan Yu on horseback, Dehua Porcelain, 1675-1725 CE, H: 23cm. In Donnelly, 1969, pl. 97b. FIG. 7d: Guan Yu on horseback, Dehua Porcelain, ca 1650 CE, H: 20cm. In Donnelly, 1969, pl. 97c.

At the same time however, the Qing administration was commencing a cultural campaign to subtly

rebalance the deeper conflicts between ‘wu’ (martial affairs), and ‘wen’ (civil affairs), xix at large not only

within the Guan Yu myth, but in Chinese society as a whole. To these ends the Kangxi Emperor (r. 1661-

1722 CE) reformed the military examination system by replacing traditional military classics such as the

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (孫子兵法) and The Methods of Sima (司馬法), with Confucian classics such as

The Analects (論語).35xx Furthermore, an official Qing version of Guan Yu’s hagiography was later published

in 1693 CE; the Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji (‘A complete collection of the writings and illustrations

concerning the holy deeds of Guandi’; 关帝圣迹图志全集五卷), which above all else, “represented a massive

effort to Confucianize Guandi.”36

Indeed, whilst simultaneously functioning as the official war mascot for the bloody expansionist exercises

the imperial court was commencing upon, Guan Yu also became officially portrayed as the model Confucian

statesman. As Meir Shahar comments, this was an attempt by the state bureaucracy to “mitigate the

rebellious aspects of Guan Yu’s personality (by promoting him) as a filial son, well versed in the Confucian

                                                                                                               35 Di Cosmo, Nicola. 2009. Military Culture in Imperial China. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts, p. 18-19. 36 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 784.

   

15  

classics,”37 in order to showcase “his loyalty to established authority”38; therefore disarming his semiotic

cultural threat to the state. Indeed, under the Kangxi Emperor, Guan Yu’s status as the “holy warrior”

(Wusheng; 武 圣), became increasingly intertwined with that of the “holy man of letters” (文 圣;

Wensheng).xxi

This reconfiguration of Guan Yu as a dual embodiment of wu and wen, is epitomized in a 25cm tall,

soapstone figure dating to the Kangxi period. See FIG. 8. Here, not only does the military general wear a

scholar’s headscarf, but his long handled sword has been replaced by what seems to be a copy of the ‘Spring

and Autumn Annals’ (Chunqiu; 春秋). As Guan Yu’s Qing Dynasty hagiography noted of his alleged passion

for Confucian classics; “people have always spoken of his courage and have not known of his knowledge of li

(principle). Guandi liked to read the Spring and Autumn Annals. When on horseback, his one free hand

would always hold a volume.”39

FIG. 8: Soapstone figure of Guandi. Kangxi period (1662 – 1722), H: 25 cm. A & J Speelman, London. Carved from a mottled ivory stone with deep crimson areas (that match up well with the general’s “ruddy”

complexion described three centuries earlier by Luo Guanzhong), this Kangxi era ‘Confucianized’ Guan Yu,

                                                                                                               37 Shahar, Meir. 1998. Chinese Religion and Popular Literature. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts. 38 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 786. 39 ‘Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji’, in Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 784.

   

16  

sits upon a tiger pelt draped over a horseshoe backed armchair; itself typical of a Kangxi-era scholar’s

study. His raised right hand delicately fondles his beard whilst he peruses his literature with a tangible look

of contentment. At the same time, his thick armour and military boots are all the while evident beneath his

long flowing robe, reminding the spectator of Guan Yu’s new dual embodiment of wu and wen; a dualism

which was increasingly becoming the pinnacle of social aspiration for the Qing imperial subject. Notable

also is the exaggerated ‘cut’ of Guan Yu’s contours and facial features, recalling the depth of cut achieved in

contemporary woodblock carving.

Another Kangxi-era statue of Guan Yu (although this time in enameled porcelain), adopts an almost

identical pose, whilst showcasing one of the many new ceramic styles of the period; Kangxi wucai

(康熙五彩), or ‘famille verte’ as it became popularly known as in the West. See FIG. 9.

FIG. 9: A famille verte enamelled porcelain figure of Guan Yu. Kangxi Period, H: 32.5cm. Sold at Bonhams, San Francisco: 29/06/2009.

   

17  

Whilst remaining faithful to Guan Yu’s ‘Confucianized’ state-image, this statue demonstrates the “broad

repertoire of design styles and functions”40produced at the imperial kilns of Jingdezhen. By this time

porcelain wares such as this were being increasingly commissioned not only for domestic markets, but for

foreign markets also.xxii Perhaps the most profound stylistic change exemplified in this statue therefore, is a

faithful coupling of archaism with an exotic usage of colour. The leaf green, black, yellow and aubergine

enamels are translucent, iridescent and clean and magnify the full (yet rhythmically integrated) patterns of

Guan Yu’s dragon robe.xxiii The artist also boasts new advancements in ceramic technique and technology,

by rendering Guan Yu’s armour not in carved relief, but with exceptionally fine brush strokes.

As Hearn has commented of the vibrant and colourful art of the high-Qing era; “in place of the sensitive

palette of early Ming ceramics, strong colors were used extensively, not only in porcelain decoration but

also in lacquer, color printing, and textiles.”41 Indeed, colour printing during the Qing marked another

paradigm shift in its artistic trajectory. By the dawn of the 18th century, definitive manuals on colour

printing enjoyed widespread publication, and soon the taobanxxiv (‘set of blocks’) printing method was

practiced at countless regional printers across China.42 At this point, illustrated popular literature not only

gained renewed popularity,xxv but prints of Guan Yu (offering auspiciousness and protection when placed

on front doors, especially at New Year) became widespread also;xxvi as can be seen in an 18th century

‘nianhua’ (New Year) print of Guan Yu from Sichuan. See FIG. 10.

                                                                                                               40 Pierson, Stacey. 2009. Chinese Ceramics: A Design History. V&A Publishing, London, p. 97. 41 Hearn, Maxwell K. Op cit., p. 81. 42 Shubao, Luo. Eds. Op cit., p. 19.

   

18  

FIG. 10: General Guan Yu, New Year Woodblock Print. 18th Century. Mianzhu, Sichuan. British Museum, London.

In this brightly coloured (almost fluorescent) image, Guan Yu stands chivalrously in a posture that echoes

European portraiture of the period. His weaponry has been updated to the (Qing favoured) long-handled

axe and he reaches for an arrow out of his quiver. Indeed as one can see, Emperor Kangxi’s efforts to

‘Confucianize’ Guan Yu had not been entirely successful, being jointly met by privately commissioned works

that reverted to his ‘warrior-like’ image of earlier years; whilst also inevitably adding new visual creativity,

innovation and reinterpretation to his myth.

By the end of the 18th century, underground ‘secret societies’ such as the ‘Heaven and Earth Society’

(Tiandihui; 天地會), and later the ‘Triads’ (Sanhehui; 三合會), had adopted Guan Yu as their own personal

   

19  

mascot.xxvii Indeed, the oath of loyalty that Guan Yu upheld to his companions in the Peach Garden scene of

Romance of the Three Kingdoms, had earned his image unprecedented salience within these bandit gangs;

becoming a symbol of trust, unity and allegiance amongst its members.xxviii For these rootless renegades

whose rebellions famously “sapped the imperial coffers”43 throughout the 19th century, Guan Yu became

“the patron god” 44 of antigovernment enterprise. Gilt bronze statues of Guan Yu such as those seen in FIG.

11a-b, were often placed on the altars of these secret societies, in front of which members would conduct

rites and rituals, such as initiations, oaths and punishments.45xxix  

 

FIG. 11a: Gilt Bronze Statue of Guandi. 18th -19th century. H: 18 cm. Sold at Christie’s Paris: 15/12/2010. FIG. 11b: Gilt Bronze Figure of Guangong. 19th century, H: 20cm (estimate). Asian Civilizations Museum, Singapore.

Notably, the style, technique and iconography of these two particular statues draws on the many disparate

interpretations of Guan Yu that the myth had divided into by the early 19th century. The intricate use of gilt

bronze echoes the Tibetan influence in Chinese Buddhist art of the era, although lacking any notable

features or iconography that would allow one to place it to a Buddhist context.

                                                                                                               43 Welch, Patricia. 2008. Chinese Art: A Guide to Motifs and Visual Imagery. Tuttle Publishing, Vermont, p. 252. 44 Rawski S, Evelyn. Op cit.., p. 97. 45 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 782.

   

20  

By this time also, all three of the major religions in China had adopted Guan Yu as their own, and alongside

the countless literary, popular and official interpretations of his myth, his function and importance had

become as varied and piecemeal as his artistic representation. Furthermore, by this time, Guan Yu was also

variously referred to as, ‘Guan Gong’ and ‘Guan Di’, whilst simultaneously revered as ‘God of War’, ‘God of

Literature’, and ‘God of Wealth.’xxx With such a complex variety of embedded meaning therefore, Guan Yu

came to epitomize the popular, ‘syncretic’ religious landscape that was crystallizing in late imperial China.

This is embodied in a nianhua (‘New Year’) print of the late 19th century where we find the “ruddy faced”46

Guan Yu featured amongst an eclectic pantheon of Chinese Buddhist, Confucian, Daoist as well as folk gods

and deities. See FIG. 12.

                                                                                                               46 Luo, Guanzhong. Robert, Moss. Trans. Op cit., p. 629.

   

21  

FIG. 12: The Gods of the Three Teachings. New Year Woodblock Print. Ink on Paper, late 19th Century, 100 x 85 cm. State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg.

   

22  

The twentieth century in China marked the denouement of the artistic portrayal of Guan Yu, when his

mythic legacy began to wane, along with popular religion itself. Whilst Republican officials initially

condoned the worship of a select handful of religious figures, including Confucius, the Bodhisattva Guan Yu

and indeed Guan Di,47 the formation of the People’s Republic of China dispensed a devastating blow to

Guan Yu’s presence in 20th century art. Today however, modern artistic depictions of Guan Yu are gradually

reemerging in China, offering the same degree of semiotic salience as they carried during the Ming and

Qing Dynasties; as figural personifications of China itself- a veritable montage of tradition, cultural

heterogeneity and periodical reinvention, constantly reassigning itself its own shared myths and sacred

images.

As this essay has examined, Guan Yu is an exceptional topic in the history of ‘religious’ art in China, when

during the Ming and Qing Dynasties, artistic interpretations of his image were a major source of

momentum for the largely literary myth itself. Whilst jointly a historical figure and revered religious deity,

though with an absence of any solid iconographic treatise for artists to adhere to, Ming and Qing Dynasty

portrayals of Guan Yu were as multifarious as they were prolific, harnessing a culturally potent visual

subject to demonstrate the increasingly innovative technical advancements of the late imperial era.

                                                                                                               47 Duara, Prasenjit. Op cit., p. 779.  

   

23  

Bibliography

Barnhart, Richard M, et al. 1997. Three Thousand Years of Chinese Painting. Yale University Press. Chang, Michael G. 2001. A Court on Horseback : constructing Manchu ethno-dynastic rule in China, 1751-1784. University of California, San Diego. Ching, Julia. 1993. Chinese Religions. Palgrave Macmillan Press, New York. Christies, Anthony. 1983. Chinese Mythology: Revised Edition. Newnes Books, London.

Fung Ping Shan Museum. 1990. Dehua Wares. University of Hong Kong Press. Chinese Council for Cultural Planning and Development. 1990. Exhibition of Graphic Art in Printed Books of the Ming Dynasty. National Central Library, Beijing. Clunas, Craig. 1997. Art in China. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Day, Clarence Burton. 1940. Chinese Peasant Cults. Kelly and Walsh Ltd, Hong Kong. Di Cosmo, Nicola. 2009. Military Culture in Imperial China. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts. Donnelly, P.J. 1969. Blanc de Chine: the Porcelain of Têhua in Fukien. Faber and Faber, London. Ebrey, Patricia Buckley. 2010. The Cambridge Illustrated History of China: Second Edition. Cambridge University Press. Feuchtwang, Stephan. 2001. Popular Religion in China: The Imperial Metapor. Routledge Press, London. Hausmann, Ulrich and Goedhuis. Chinese and Japanese Bronzes AD 1100-1900. Hawthorne, Gerard. 1999. Gods and Mortals. Gerard Hawthorne Ltd Oriental Art, London. Hearn, Maxwell K. 1996. Splendors of Imperial China. Treasures from the National Palace Museum, Taipei. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Hyland, Alice R.M. 1987. Deities, Emperors, Ladies and Literati: Figure Painting of the Ming and Qing Dynasties. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Hucker, Charles O. 1994. China's Imperial Past: An Introduction to Chinese History and Culture. Stanford University Press.

Li, He. 1996. Chinese Ceramics: The New Standard Guide. Thames & Hudson Ltd, London.

Liangyan Ge. 2001. Out of the margins: the rise of Chinese vernacular fiction. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

Luo, Guanzhong. Robert, Moss. Trans. 2004. Three Kingdoms, A Historical Novel: Complete and Unabridged. University of California Press.  

Moss, Paul and Hawthorn, Gerard. 1991. The Second Bronze Age: Later Chinese Metalwork. Sydney L. Moss Ltd, London.

Oxnam, Robert b. 1975. Ruling from Horseback: Manchu Politics in the Oboi Regency, 1661-1669. University of Chicago Press.

Pierson, Stacey. 2009. Chinese Ceramics: A Design History. V&A Publishing, London

   

24  

Rawson, Jessica. Eds. 1992. The British Museum Book of Chinese Art. British Museum Press, London.

Rudova, Maria. 1988. Chinese Popular Prints. Aurora Art Publishers, Saint Petersburg.

Ruhlmann, Robert. 1960. Traditional heroes in Chinese popular fiction. Stanford University Press.

Seiwert, Hubert. 2003. Popular Religious Movements and Heterodox sects in Chinese History. Brill Press, Boston. Shahar, Meir and Weller, Robert P. Eds. 1996. Unruly Gods: Divinity and Society in China. University of Hawaii Press, Honululu. Shahar, Meir. 1998. Chinese Religion and Popular Literature. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts. Shih, Hsio Yen. 1958. On Ming Dynasty Book Illustration. University of Chicago Press, Illinois. Shubao, Luo. Eds. 1998. An Illustrated History of Printing in Ancient China. City University of Hong Kong Press, Hong Kong. Shucan, Wang. 1992. Paper Joss: Deity Worship Through Folk Prints. New World Press, Beijing. Stevens, Keith. 1997. Chinese Gods: The Unseen World of Spirits and Demons. Collins & Brown Ltd, London. Thompson, Laurence G. 1996. Chinese Religion: An Introduction. Wasdworth Publishing Company, California.

Wang, Edward. 2005. Mirroring the past: the writing and use of history in imperial China. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

Weidner, Marsha. 2001. Cultural Intersections in Later Chinese Buddhism. University of Hawaii Press, Honululu.

Welch, Patricia. 2008. Chinese Art: A Guide to Motifs and Visual Imagery. Tuttle Publishing, Vermont.

Weller, Robert P. 1987. Unities and Diversities in Chinese Religion. Macmillan Press Ltd, London. Xin, Yang; Chongzheng, Nie; Shaojun, Lang. 1997. The Culture and Civilization of China. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Articles

Duara, Prasenjit. ‘Superscribing Symbols: The Myth of Guandi, Chinese God of War.’ The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Nov., 1988), pp. 778-795 Published by: Association for Asian Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057852 Duara, Prasenjit. ‘Knowledge and Power in the Discourse of Modernity: The Campaigns Against Popular Religion in Early Twentieth-Century China.’ (Journal of Asian Studies 50/1 (1991.2): 67–83), 79. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057476 Priest, Alan. ‘A Note on Kuan Ti.’ The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, Vol. 25, No. 12, Part 1 (Dec., 1930), pp. 271-273

   

25  

Published by: The Metropolitan Museum of Art Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3255993 Shiyu Li, Thomas and Naquin, Susan. ‘The Baoming Temple: Religion and The Throne in Ming and Qing China.’ Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies , Vol. 48, No. 1 (Jun., 1988), pp. 131-188 Published by: Harvard-Yenching Institute Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2719275 Chan, Selina Ching ‘Temple-Building and Heritage in China.’ Ethnology , Vol. 44, No. 1 (Winter, 2005), pp. 65-79 Published by: University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3773960 Di Cosmo, Nicola. ‘Qing Colonial Administration in Inner Asia.’ The International History Review, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Jun., 1998), pp. 287-309 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40108222 Rawski S, Evelyn. ‘Research Themes in Ming-Qing Socioeconomic History--The State of the Field.’ The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 50, No. 1 (Feb., 1991), pp. 84-111 Published by: Association for Asian Studies Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057477

 

   

26  

Appendix: Endnotes

                                                                                                                iii The novel is among the most beloved works of literature in East Asia, and was arguably the most widely read historical novel in late imperial China. iv Furthermore, Luo Guanzhong imagined Guan Yu with a face “ruddy as dates, eyes like the crimson-faced phoenix’s, brows like nestling silkworms, (with a) beautiful beard in three strands (that) moved delicately.” Upon his skin Luo Guanzhong’s Guan Yu wore, “a green brocade battle gown” and “metal armour,” and rode “a tawny mount” (“his glorious steed, ‘Red Hare’”) whilst wielding, “a green-dragon blade.” His character often appeared in the text in dramatic and theatrical ways such as in, “swirls of mist.” Luo Guanzhong. (Robert, Moss. Trans). 2004. p. 1026, p. 722, p. 585, p. 629. v Notably, vernacular puppet theatre was becoming increasingly popular in this era also. See 1996, p. 192. vi Opera was another art form taking on vernacular forms at this stage. Alongside literature, some fifty or sixty Yuan and early Ming plays about the Three Kingdoms are known to have existed. See Roberts 1991, pp. 958-9. vii Not since about 1127 CE had a native, Han Chinese dynasty ruled over the entire empire. It was therefore natural that Imperial rulers of the Ming Dynasty sought to celebrate heroes of Han Chinese history such as Guan Yu. viii It has been noted that this image resembles portraits of the Yongle and other Ming rulers. (See Weidner, 2001, p. 124). Essentially therefore, this painting combines an imperially commissioned cult image with that of imperial portraiture. ix The Ming Emperors were renowned for the harsh tortures they inflicted upon anyone who antagonized them, usually carried out on their behalf by their imperial bodyguard, of whom Shang Xi was himself an honoury official. Therefore whilst ostensibly depicting a historical event, the ‘historicity’ of this painting may be read on multiple levels by modern art historians. x Craig Clunas believes that, although the scroll is anonymous, the likelihood is that more than one specialist artist was employed on this painting, explaining its stylistic contrasts. See Clunas, 1997. P. 70. xii For merchants, trading increasingly in distant, unknown, and unprotected regions, “Guan Yu inspired trust and loyalty (to contract) and gradually became the very source of wealth.” Duara, 1988, p. 782. xiii It should be noted that the historical Guan Yu was a righteous outlaw, but an outlaw nonetheless. It was therefore necessary for any court (especially a foreign one such as the Manchu) to confront the insurmountable fame of the Guan Yu myth with a version tapered to its own imperial agenda. xiv In the lower right of the painting, an inscription reads: "Respectfully commissioned by the imperial prince Zhuang," attesting to the fact that the painting was the product of the imperial workshop. xvi The painting itself is said to have originally been used in the Buddhist “water and land” (shuilu) rituals, which were popular with the Qing Buddhist rulers. xviii Upon his trusty charger ‘Red Hare’, mentioned in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms; “Behind the ruddy face, a ruby heart- Lord Guan astride Red Hare outrode the wind.” (Description from Luo Guanzhong. Robert, Moss. Trans. 2004. P. 585.) xix In traditional Chinese theory, wu, that is, martiality, the military principle, corresponds to the dark, female side, while wen, as civilization, corresponds to the bright, masculine side. See Di Cosmo, 2009. p. 293. xxi At this stage, artistic representations of Guan Yu were understandably being confused with those of Wenchang Wang (文昌王), the popular Chinese God of Literature. At the same tine however, Guan Yu was simultaneously viewed as the God of Literature himself. xxiii It is thought that these new palettes and styles were brought about partly by Western influence; simultaneously by the Jesuit presence within China, and export styles demanded from abroad. Indeed, as Pierson notes, the clothing pattern echoes the armorials, or ‘coats of arms’ that were being produced on European export ceramics at this time. See Pierson, 2009, p.97. xxiv Although this technique had been used in the Yuan for the printing of classical commentaries, the technique was not fully perfected until the early Qing. Up to ten blocks, each for a different colour, might be required for a single illustrations. See Rawson, 1992, p. 123. xxv Although the cultural and social circumstances that had supported the market for fine printed book illustrations during the Ming Dynasty changed dramatically. As Rawson has noted; “under the strict

   

27  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Confucian orthodoxy of the Qing administration it was no longer deemed respectable for scholars to be interested in works of fictions.” (Rawson, 1992, p. 124). The highly learned Qian Daxin even went so far as to condemn vernacular novels as the main threat to Confucian orthodoxy. (See Ebrey, 2010, p. 229). xxvi During the high-Qing era, 1,000 artists in more than 300 workshops produced as many as 12 million woodprints a year and the pictures were sold in many parts of the country. Shubao, 1998, p. 21. xxvii As did numerous other secret societies such as the Boxers. See Shahar, 1996, p. 205. xxviii The phrase the three brothers made during the oath; “Though not born on the same day of the same month in the same year, we hope to die so,” has also become popular among present-day secret society members. xxix Considering that the Triads were later “the main organizationally force in maintaining national unity amongst Chinese communities abroad” (Ebrey, 2010, p. 229.), the emotional potency and cultural significance of statues such as these would have been further intensified on foreign soil.