匠心獨具：十四世紀螺鈿漆器研究

Abstract

1970年代，北京房山後英房元大都遺址出土一螺鈿漆器殘片，因共伴出土「內府」款之梅瓶，而被視為相對年代為十四世紀的重要標本。自發現以來，旋即引起學界對於這一時期螺鈿漆器風格的關注，遂為後續風格斷代研究的起點。就此議題，日本學界的研究極具代表性。早期材料匱乏，岡田讓借鑒元青花的研究框架，結合個別傳世器作的觀察，初步提出「元代」與「元末明初」之分期架構；西岡康宏雖一度主張以世紀為單位，最終亦效仿岡田讓的作法，沿用至今。惟此一分期模式，在現存文獻、考古材料與紀年件皆不完備的情形下，其實質作用和意義，猶待商榷。

有鑒於斯，本文一方面檢視前人研究成果，斟酌其中未竟之處；一方面擬以元大都出土標本留下的豐富圖像為觀察起點，由點及面、由局部至整體，循序漸進地框構十四世紀螺鈿漆器之風格特徵，並探析這一時期最具代表性的樓閣人物圖像與幾何紋飾群的圖紋來源。

研究結果顯示，螺鈿漆器上樓閣人物圖像的個別母題、空間表現手法和線性語彙或與同時期版畫有關；至於蔚然成風，數量可觀的幾何紋飾，其中若干圖樣可與《營造法式》所載相參，部分則見諸於瓷器及其他工藝媒材。另有一類來源不明，然就觀察所及，具有重複單元拼組的特徵，因而衍生出形式多變的樣式。為釐清其生成邏輯，本文轉由物質面向析其脈絡，認為隨工藝技術日益成熟，紋飾單位亦隨之轉變，尺寸愈形細密，對於幾何紋飾之構成產生深刻的影響。析解數例，觀其形構，並參以《營造法式》，推判是時漆工手有所本，並在既有圖樣基礎上進行調整與轉化。此一發現表明，螺鈿漆器上的幾何紋飾並非單純挪用，而是經由有意識的解構與重組而成。是以，十四世紀螺鈿漆器幾何紋飾多樣性，除與工藝造詣的提升以及技術的進展密切相關外，漆工在製作過程中更是扮演關鍵的角色；這與海外研究者援引模組化的理論所作的解釋存在本質的差異。本文認為，這一時期幾何紋飾的多樣性，不僅出於內部動因，亦受外在條件影響，實為多重因素交織的結果。

In the 1970s, a fragment of mother-of-pearl inlaid lacquerware was unearthed from the Yuan dynasty capital site at Houyingfang in Fangshan, Beijing. Discovered alongside a meiping bearing the Neifu (Imperial Household) mark, it has since been recognized as a significant specimen datable to the fourteenth century. Its discovery immediately drew scholarly attention to the stylistic characteristics of lacquerware from this period and became a foundational reference for subsequent chronological studies based on style. In this regard, Japanese scholarship has played a particularly prominent role. Faced with a scarcity of material, Okada Yuzuru adopted a framework modeled on studies of Yuan blue-and-white porcelain, combining it with observations of selected extant pieces to propose a two-part periodization: “Yuan” and “late Yuan to early Ming.” Nishioka Yasuhiro, though initially advocating a century-based division, ultimately followed Okada’s model—a framework that continues to influence the field. However, given the limited availability of textual, archaeological, and dated materials, the practical validity and significance of this periodization remain open to debate.

In response, this study pursues two main objectives: first, to examine previous research and assess its limitations; second, to take the richly illustrated specimen from Dadu as a point of departure, analyzing its motifs from detail to whole in order to reconstruct the stylistic features of fourteenth-century mother-of-pearl lacquerware. Particular emphasis is placed on two representative visual categories of the period: the “Figures in Pavilions” motif and groups of geometric ornament.

Findings indicate that the spatial articulation, linear vocabulary, and individual motifs within pavilion scenes may relate to contemporary woodblock prints. As for the flourishing and prolific geometric designs, some patterns correspond to those recorded in the Yingzao Fashi (Treatise on Architectural Methods), while others are found on ceramics and other craft media. A further group of geometric patterns lacks identifiable sources; however, close analysis reveals that these designs consist of repeatable units, which can be recombined to generate diverse formal variations. To clarify the logic behind such compositions, this study turns to the material dimension of production. It argues that as technical expertise developed, the decorative units became increasingly refined and minute, significantly shaping the structure of geometric ornament.

Through case analyses and comparison with diagrams in the Yingzao Fashi, this study suggests that artisans were not merely copying existing motifs, but actively selecting, adapting, and reorganizing them. This finding demonstrates that the patterns on lacquerware were not simply appropriated, but consciously deconstructed and reassembled. Thus, the diversity of geometric motifs in fourteenth-century lacquerware is not only closely linked to advances in technical skill and craftsmanship, but also reflects the central role of artisans in the creative process. This stands in fundamental contrast to interpretations proposed by overseas scholars who have applied the theory of modularity to explain such designs.

This study contends that the variety of geometric motifs during this period was driven not only by internal dynamics—such as technological and formal development—but also by external influences. The formation of ornamental vocabularies was, in effect, shaped by a complex interplay of multiple internal and external factors.