There are 8 parts to today’s story:
- Introduction
- Ode to Ke Ke Lin
- Ren Fu Collection’s archaeological trove is the greatest Zisha Hu archaeological wonder
- Scale of Accuracy of archaeological proofs
- Archaeological proofs of pre-Daoguang Arts collectors
- Even the West get its historical Arts facts wrong
- Can the original owner of Pot No:248 named Zheng Cheng Zu be one of the descendants of Koxinga or Zheng Cheng Gong?
- Ren Fu Collection’s greatest archaeological discoveries are Hui Meng Chen’s revolutionary small Zhuni Hu and Gong Fu tea.
- Pre-Daoguang Teacups
- Pre-Daoguang Tea leaves
INTRODUCTION
A few tea arts scholars and a famous Taiwan tea and Zisha Hu magazine asked Ren Fu Collection to please share more archaeological details and discoveries about Gong Fu tea, Rouchen teacups and Hui MengChen’s small Zhuni Pot so that the tea world especially the Chinese tea culture can learn more about this most important and greatest of tea culture namely Gong Fu tea culture and the revolutionary small Meng Chen Zhuni Pot that inspired or sparked off Gong Fu tea and the Chinoiserie craze in Europe and Japan in the early 18th century.
In 2005, Dr. Robert B. Faltermeier who is based in Singapore and Switzerland received our permission to write an article titled “ Xia/Shang/Zhou Bronzes: Real or Fake “ in the Asia Heritage magazine, using Ren Fu Collection’s Xia/Shang/Zhou Bronzes as proofs and illustrations.
When Ren Fu Collection did it’s first Xia/Shang/Zhou Bronzes exhibition in Nikko Hotel, Kuala Lumpur(now Intercontinental Hotel) in 2005 the same year, a lot of Malaysians were startled and some were even amused that a collection of “old scrap metals” can be so valuable as to be worth a lot of money like our Late Shang(1600-1100 B.C.) Jia costs RMB5 million or Warring States(475-221B.C.) Ti Liang He costs RMB3 million. One Malaysian Malay man asked: Why are these rusty metal objects so valuable and expensive? and another joked, “ I have got a lot of old scrap metal objects in my backyard-maybe some of them are worth a lot of money?” and finally Malaysian Chinese lamented, “ Maybe some people have too much money and do not know what to spend their money on and so collect these old metal?”
Dr. Robert Faltermeier said the Malaysian public are not aware or knowledgeable about Chinese archaic Bronzes like the West and Japanese are. But the best explanation came from Johan Jaafar, the ex-Editor-in-Chief of the Straits Times newspaper in an article many years ago in which he lamented that Malaysians do not have culture and therefore culture has to be instilled in them.
And recently in China President Xi ZiPing emphasizes the importance of archaeological excavations in and outside China to prove and show to the world, China ‘s great history taking for examples the recent Sanxingdui ruins excavations and Black-stone Tang shipwreck.
So in this spirit and context, Ren Fu Collection will do it’s part as a Chinese entity, to share with the world especially the massive Chinese tea culture community, and expand our study and research into Ren Fu Collection’s huge archaeological trove bearing in mind we hope other honest scholars will come forward in due time to write using our archaeological material, discoveries and records in order to replace Tony Ren because he wants to retire.
ODE TO KE KE LIN, AN OLD AND LOYAL TAIWANESE FRIEND
Huang Qian Liang said in the 2004 Clay Teapot Academic Forum held by the Nanjing museum that he is very lucky to see the Pot excavated from Wu Jing’s grave.
I, Ke Ke Lin, say to Huang Qian Liang that I am 300 times luckier than you because I get to see Ren Fu Collection’s 300 Pots excavated from 300 graves.
Not to mention I am the first outside person to see the Pots
Not to mention it’s a once in a lifetime experience
Not to mention it’s the most humbling experience in my Zisha Hu life where I came, I saw and I was shocked beyond belief what laid in front of my eyes……………………and Good Heavens that’s not all I found: Ren Fu Collection has thousands more Pots!
Note: Ke Ke Lin is one of the top Zisha Hu Old Hands in Taiwan and he was the one who coined the famous phrase after seeing Ren Fu Collection’s 300 excavated pre-Daoguang Pots for the first time, “ Any Pot that is different from Ren Fu Collection’s Pots must be fake”.
REN FU COLLECTION’S ARCHAEOLOGICAL TROVE IS THE GREATEST ZISHA HU ARCHAEOLOGICAL WONDER IN THE WORLD…………………
It’s not an overstatement to say Ren Fu Collection’s archaeologically excavated teapots and tea wares are considered the greatest Zisha Hu archaeological marvel and one of the great wonders of Chinese archaeological discoveries.( the 2nd and 3rd thousand of teapots are exclusively only for study and research under the discretion of Ren Fu Collection).
Put it another way, imagine what would happened if Ren Fu Collection or it’s thousands of excavated teapots and tea wares do not exist, what is going to happen? Yes, you will go back to the Dark ages of Zisha Hu where the thousands of organized and small-time fraudsters control your learning of Old Zisha Hus in which they mixed guess works with fake stories and lies to sell you their fake Pots. And everyone is helpless to fight fake Pots, fake stories and fraudsters until a tipping point is reached when fake stories, fake facts and fake Pots overwhelmed the Zisha Hu eco-system and destroy Old Zisha Hu. Remember we are in the present or 3rd wave of forgeries, the Mother of all waves of forgeries where the first, second and third waves of forgeries combined to pose the greatest existential threat to the survival of Old Zisha Hu like never before. The Mingguo Shanghainese and 1980s Taiwanese organized fraudsters might be dead now but their fake stories and fake Pots are still around and combining with the present fake Pots and fake stories and the new fake Pots are now.
Therefore this is the big difference between Ren Fu Collection’s archaeological trove and other archaeological discoveries in that Ren Fu Collection’s archaeological materials and discoveries are vital in providing invaluable knowledge and benchmarks which are very necessary to protect Old Zisha Hus and ensure its survival by exposing mounting forgeries and fake facts and stopping them in their tracks which is unlike other archaeological discoveries which do not have to deal with existential threats like Old Zisha Hus face. The excavation of thousands of graves and tombs by Ren Fu Collection is a feat unmatched by any other archaeological excavations and Ren Fu Collection’s archaeological feat stands proudly with other legendary archaeological excavations like the Tang(Black-stone) shipwreck or the Sanxingdui ruins.
SCALE OF ACCURACY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROOFS………………………………………………
In a chaotic Zisha Hu world where conflicting opinions abound about the true identity or origin of a Pot like whether it’s a new fake or an old Pot, authentic or old copy, Mingguo or Early Qing, or other conflicting issues, guess works or unproven opinions are risky tools in the solution of Old Zisha Hu issues or in the study and research of Old Zisha Hus which can end in wrong conclusions.
Yes, one cannot study or research a Pot without documented or archaeological proofs because there are simply too many fake Pots, too many fake stories, too many fake facts and too many fake teachers who sell fake Pots just like the former international Arts writer Sonia Heslop once said, “ In Arts, any undocumented retrospection is an exercise in guess works”.
So what are archaeological proofs and how accurate are they?
One excavated Pot with archaeological records does not always tell the whole story or provide conclusive findings. If we have the gravestone/tombstone epitaph we might know the Niande and if not we use our vast experience of excavating thousands of graves/tombs to date the grave/tomb or in special circumstances we send our excavated artefacts or relics for carbon-dating or thermoluminescence(TL) testing to date the artefacts or relics.(see Certificates of Authenticity)
Yes, one archaeologically excavated Pot with tea wares do not tell the whole story but, we repeat, but with thousands of excavated Pots with archaeological materials and records, we can tell the whole story in most cases. Yes, Ren Fu Collection’s huge collection of excavated teapots with tea wares is like a big trawler net catching all kinds of fishes in the sea….without which we would not have such accurate conclusions. One excavated Pot from a grave with Niande indicated the Pot was made before the death of the owner but the Old Potter could be still making Pots after the owner’s death. Two or three or four excavated Pots of the same kind would give more accurate conclusions like the seven Shi DaBin Pots excavated in mainland China give very accurate Niande of the Old Master Potter and the 7 Shi DaBin Pots even protect Shi DaBin’s legacy from fake stories, fake Shi DaBin Pots and organized fraudsters.
So bearing in mind we have to be strict and vigorous with archaeological proofs to produce accurate findings, Ren Fu Collection’s categorization of the accuracy of archaeological proofs, for all intent and purposes, is as follow:
- 100% accurate which is very rare
- Very accurate
- Average accuracy
- Not accurate but remotely possible.
Very few things are 100% accurate just as people say nothing is 100% but in practice nearly 100% can be taken as the authentic or genuine thing like the seven archaeologically excavated Shi DaBin Pots in mainland China even though none was excavated from Shi DaBin’s grave which can then be considered 100% Shi DaBin Pot, So we have to accept that those 7 Pots are the real benchmarks for genuine Shi DaBin Pots. We classify this as the “very accurate” second category. The same can be said for Ren Fu Collection’s conclusions that it’s Pot No:249 out of nine Ren Fu Collection’s pre-Daoguang Chen Ming Yuan Pots, must be a genuine Chen Ming Yuan because that is the earliest archaeologically excavated Early Kangxi Chen Ming Yuan Pot or Ren Fu Collection Pot No:683 out of 8 Pan-Hus, must be the genuine Pan-Hu because that is the earliest archaeologically excavated Early Qian Long/Yongzheng Pan-Hu in the world or Pot No:102 out of 23 SiTing Hus, must be the genuine SiTing Hu because it is the earliest archaeologically excavated Yongzheng SiTingHu( the rest are mostly Qian Long period and a few Jiaqing and Daoguang) just to take a few examples. For Hui Meng Chen’s revolutionary small Zhuni Hu we needed to combine a lot, a lot of archaeological proofs with a bit of science and mathematics to realize the discovery of the famous Hui Meng Chen small Zhuni Pot starting with Shi DaBin’s High Lantern-shaped Zisha Hu to Hui Meng Chen’s Tianqi 7th year High Lantern-shaped Zisha Hu to Zhou GaoQi to Hui Meng Chen’s Shunzhi revolutionary small Zhuni Hu to the beginning of Gong Fu tea in Early Kangxi to Hui YiGong making Pots and Meng Chen Zhuni copies appearing in Late Kangxi to commemoration Qian Long 8th and 13rd Year reign marked small Meng Chen Zhuni Hus to the fact that over 50% or 357 pre-Daoguang Zisha Pots are almost all Meng Chen Zhuni Hus and most pre-Daoguang Gong Fu tea sets contained a small Meng Chen Zhuni Pot. We are very lucky to find Hui Meng Chen’s legendary small Zhuni Hu and it is only possible with the thousands of excavations producing a very high number of Meng Chen Zhuni Pots and which would not have been possible if only one or two or even ten Meng Chen Zhuni Pots were excavated because Hui Meng Chen was so mysterious and his revolutionary and legendary small Zhuni Pot is even more elusive and mysterious that nothing less than thousands of excavated pre-Daoguang Pots can find him.(and the 357 pre-Daoguang Meng Chen copies are not including pre-Daoguang Meng Chen Santoh Zhuni copies). The same is true for the questions of when Gong Fu tea started and who started Gong Fu tea?…which without Ren Fu Collection’s thousands of excavated teapots and tea wares, we would not be able to answer the big questions today.
The 3rd category of accuracy of archaeological proofs are excavated Pots belonging to the rest of the 34 Old Famous and Old unknown Potters like Chen Ruo Si, Liu Pei Suan, Liu Pei Zheng, Junde, Wang Nan Ning, Dan Ran Zhai, Shao DaHern and so forth where one or two Pots belonging to them was/were excavated. Other example of the third category of accuracy is like the Ming Yuan Zhuni Pot excavated in mainland China from the grave of Lan Guo Wei dated the 23rd year of Emperor Qian Long reign(1726 AD) in Qianyuan Village, Chiling Town, Zhangpuxian County, Fujian Province in 1990 which does not prove when Chen Ming Yuan or when Gong Fu tea started even though it’s an archaeologically excavated Qian Long Chen Ming Yuan copy with a set of Gong Fu teacups and dish.
The fourth category of accuracy involves remotely possible events or claims like for example was the original owner of Ren Fu Collection’s Pot No:248 named Zheng Cheng Zu a descendant of Koxinga(Zheng Cheng Gong), who fled from Taiwan to the Nanyang when Kangxi’s Qing army invaded Taiwan in 1683 immediately after the death of Koxinga? Find out more about Pot No:248’s link to a possible descendant of Koxinga in Part 7.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROOFS OF PRE-DAOGUANG ARTS COLLECTORS…………………………….
今天的故事有八个部分：
1） 介绍
2） 柯克林颂诗
3） 任富收藏的考古宝藏是紫砂壶最大的考古奇迹
4） 考古证据的准确度
5） 道光以前艺术收藏家的考古证据
6） 就连西方也错误地理解了其历史艺术事实
7） 名为郑生祖的第248号壶的原始所有者是否可能是Koxiga或郑成功的后代之一？
8） 任富收藏中最伟大的考古发现是惠孟臣的革命小朱泥壶和工夫茶
9） 道光以前的茶杯
10） 道光以前的茶叶
介绍
几位茶艺学者和一本著名的台湾《茶艺》杂志请任富收藏分享更多关于工夫茶的考古细节和发现，让茶的世界，特别是中国茶文化，能够更多地了解这一最重要、最伟大的茶文化，即工夫茶文化和革命的小孟臣朱泥壶，这种壶在18世纪早期激发了在欧洲和日本的工夫茶和中国风热潮。
2005年，总部位于新加坡和瑞士的Dr Robert B.Faltermeier博士获得我们的许可，在《亚洲遗产》杂志上发表了一篇题为“夏/商/周青铜器：真的还是假的”的文章，使用热门任富收藏的夏/商/周青铜器作为证据和插图。
2005年，任富收藏在吉隆坡日航酒店（现为intercontinental洲际酒店）举办了第一届夏/商/周青铜器展，当时许多马来西亚人都感到震惊，有些人甚至觉得有趣的是，一批“旧废金属”可以像我们已故的商（公元前1600-1100年）一样值钱花了500万元，战国（公元前475-221年）的提粱壶花了300万元。一位马来西亚马来人问：为什么这些生锈的金属物品如此贵重？另一位开玩笑说：“我后院里有很多旧的废金属物品，也许其中有些值钱？”最后马来西亚华人感叹道，“也许有些人太有钱了，不知道该把钱花在什么地方，所以就收集这些旧金属？”
Dr Robert Faltermaier博士说，马来西亚公众不像西方和日本民众那样了解中国古代青铜器。但最好的解释来自《海峡时报》前主编约翰·贾法尔（Johan Jaafar），他在多年前的一篇文章中哀叹马来西亚人没有中华文化，因此必须向他们灌输和培养让他们多了解中华文化。
最近在中国，习近平总统强调了中国内外考古发掘的重要性，向世界展示和展示中国的伟大历史，以最近三星堆遗址发掘和唐代黑石号沉船为例。
因此，在这种精神和背景下，任富收藏将作为一个中国实体，与世界特别是广大的中国茶文化社区分享它的一部分，我们希望其他诚实的学者能及时站出来，利用我们的考古材料、发现和记录撰写文章，以取代任汤尼，因为他想退休。
歌颂忠诚的台湾老朋友柯克林。
黄健亮在南京博物馆举办的2004年陶制茶壶学术论坛上说，他非常幸运地看到了吴经墓出土的茶壶。
一、 柯克林对黄健亮说，我比你幸运300倍，因为我看到了任富收藏的从300个坟墓中挖掘出来的300个壶和茶具。
更不用说我是第一个看到这些壶的人，
更不用说这是一生难得的经历了，
更不用说这是我在紫砂壶生活中最卑微的经历了，我看到了眼前发生的一切，我感到难以置信的震惊…………天哪，我发现的还不止这些：任富收藏还有数千个壶！
注：柯克林是台湾紫砂壶老手中的佼佼者之一，他是第一次看到任富收藏的300件道光之前出土的陶器后，创造了这句名言的人：“任何与任富收藏的老壶不同的老壶都必须是仿造的”。
任富收藏的考古宝藏是世界上最大的紫砂壶考古奇观…………………
可以毫不夸张地说，任富收藏的考古发掘茶壶和茶具被认为是紫砂壶最大的考古奇迹和中国考古发现的奇迹之一。（第二、三千只茶壶仅供任富收藏自行研究）。
换一种说法，想象一下，如果没有任富收藏或数千个挖掘出来的茶壶和茶具，会发生什么？是的，你会回到紫砂壶的黑暗时代，在那里，成千上万有组织的小欺诈者控制着你对紫砂壶的学习，他们在紫砂壶中混合猜测假故事和谎言向你推销他们的仿造壶。每个人都无法与假壶、假故事和骗子进行斗争，直到达到一个临界点，假故事、假事实和假壶淹没了紫砂壶生态系统，摧毁了旧紫砂壶。记住，我们正处在当前或第三波伪造浪潮中，是所有伪造浪潮第一波、第二波和第三波造假浪潮对紫砂壶的生存构成了前所未有的最大威胁。民国上海人和八十年代台湾有组织的骗子现在可能已经死了，但他们的假故事和假壶仍然存在，并且与现在的假壶和假故事结合在一起，新的假壶现在正在消失。
因此，任富收藏的考古藏品与其他考古发现之间的巨大区别在于，任富收藏的考古材料和发现对于提供宝贵的知识和基准至关重要，这些知识和基准对于保护旧紫砂壶并通过暴露的方式确保其生存是非常必要的与其他考古发现不同的是，这些考古发现不需要处理像紫砂壶老手这样的生存威胁。任富收藏发掘了数千座坟墓和坟墓，这是任何其他考古发掘和任富收藏的考古所无法比拟的壮举这一考古壮举与其他具有传奇色彩的考古发掘项目（如唐（黑石）沉船或三星堆遗址）并驾齐驱。
考古证据的准确度等级………………………………………………
在一个混乱的紫砂壶世界里，关于一个壶的真实身份或起源的各种不同观点比比皆是，比如是新的假的还是旧的壶，是真的还是旧的复制品，是明国还是清初，或者其他相互冲突的问题，猜测作品或未经证实的观点是解决旧紫砂壶问题或研究旧紫砂壶的危险工具，可能导致错误结论。
是的，没有文献或考古证据，人们无法研究或研究一个壶，因为有太多的假壶，太多的假故事，太多的假事实，太多的假教师出售假壶，就像前国际艺术作家索尼娅·赫斯洛普曾经说过的那样，“在艺术中，任何未记录的回顾都是猜测作品中的练习”。
那么什么是考古证据？它们的准确程度如何？
一个挖掘出来的有考古记录的壶并不总是能说明整个故事或提供结论性的发现。如果我们有墓碑/墓碑墓志铭，我们可能知道年代，如果没有，我们利用我们挖掘数千座墓碑/墓穴的丰富经验来确定墓碑/墓穴的年代，或者在特殊情况下，我们会发送我们挖掘出来的文物或用于测定人工制品或文物的碳年代或热释光（TL-Thermoluminescience）的测试来确定人工制品或文物的年代。（见真品证书）。
是的，一个出土茶具的茶壶并不能说明全部情况，但是，我们重复一遍，但是有数千个出土茶壶的考古资料和记录，我们在大多数情况下都可以说明全部情况。是的，任富收藏的大量出土茶具茶壶就像一个大拖网，捕捉着各种各样大海中的鱼……如果没有这些，我们就不会有如此准确的结论。从一个有年代的坟墓中挖掘出来的一个壶表明，这个老壶是在主人死前制作的，但在主人死后，老陶工可能还在制作壶。两个或三个或四个同样类型的挖掘出来的壶会给出像中国大陆出土的七个时大彬壶非常准确地给出了老陶艺大师的年代，这七个时大彬壶甚至保护他的遗产不受虚假故事、伪造时大彬壶和有组织欺诈者的影响。
因此，考虑到我们必须严格且严格地使用考古证据以产生准确的发现，任富收藏对考古证据准确性的分类如下：
1） 百分百准确，这是非常罕见的
2） 非常准确
3） 平均精度
4） 不准确，但有点可能。
很少有东西是百分百准确的，就像人们说什么东西都不是完美一样，但实际上，几乎百分百完全可以被视为真实或真实的东西，就像中国大陆考古发掘的七个时大彬壶一样，尽管没有一个是从时大彬他的坟墓中挖掘出来的，这可以被认为是百分百的时大彬壶，因此，我们不得不承认，这七个壶是真正的时大彬壶的真正基准。我们将其归类为“非常准确”的第二类。任富收藏的结论也是如此，在任富收藏道光之前的陈鸣远九个壶中，有249壶号，一定是真正的陈鸣远，因为这是康熙早期考古发掘的最早的陈鸣远壶，或者说，任富收藏壶号683，在八个潘壶中，必须是真正的潘壶，因为它是世界上最早的考古发掘的乾隆早期/雍正潘壶，或23个思亭中的102号壶，必须是真正的思亭，因为它是最早的考古发掘的雍正思亭（其余大部分是乾隆时期和少数嘉庆和道光时期）举几个例子。对于惠孟臣的革命小朱泥，我们需要结合很多，大量的考古证据，加上一点科学和数学知识，实现了著名的惠孟臣小朱泥壶的发现，从时大彬的高灯笼状紫砂壶到惠孟臣的天启七年高灯笼状紫砂壶到周高启到惠孟臣的顺治革命小朱泥壶康熙初年至惠逸公制壶之初的工夫茶，以及康熙末年为纪念乾隆八年和十三年而出现的孟臣朱泥复制品，标志着小孟臣朱泥壶，即道光前紫砂壶超过50%或357个，几乎都是孟臣朱泥壶，大多数道光前的功夫茶具中都有一个小孟臣朱泥壶。我们很幸运地发现了惠孟臣的传说中的小朱泥壶，这只有在数千次挖掘中才有可能产生大量的孟臣朱泥壶，而这是不可能的，因为惠孟臣是如此的神秘和他的革命而传说中的小朱泥壶更是难以捉摸，神秘莫测，至少有几千个出土的道光前壶可以找到他。（而357个道光前孟臣复制品不包括道光前孟臣汕头朱泥复制品）。“工夫茶是什么时候开始的，谁开始的？”这一问题也是如此……如果没有任富收藏的数千个出土茶壶和茶具，我们今天就无法回答这些重大问题。
第三类考古证据的准确性是属于其余34位著名和不知名的老陶艺家（如陈若思、留佩轩、留佩镇、君德、王南林、澹燃斋、邵大亨等）的出土陶器，其中有一个或两个属于他们的陶器。第三类精度的另一个例子是中国大陆福建从乾隆二十三年（公元1726年）在漳浦县赤岭镇前园村蓝国威墓中出土的鸣远朱泥壶，1990年的福建省，没有证明陈鸣远或工夫茶是什么时候开始的，尽管这是唯一一个考古发掘的乾隆陈鸣远的复制品，带有一套工夫茶杯和盘子。
第四类准确度涉及一些极有可能发生的事件或声称，例如任富收藏第248号壶的原始所有者郑成功是康熙清军于1683年在康熙清军入侵台湾时，在郑成功死后立即从台湾逃到南洋？在第七部分中，了解更多关于壶号248与可能的Koxinga郑成功后裔的联系。
