Gongchun pot
Traditional 供春壺Also called 树瘿壶
A naturalistic Yixing teapot form with an uneven, bark-like surface associated with the name Gongchun. The tree-burl appearance distinguishes it from smooth geometric pots. Stories about its early origin and the attribution of surviving examples are separate questions.
On this page
The illustration is under review.
Form#
- Body
- On C81.393 the rounded belly has small hollows and raised knots.No. 61 · p. 174 · PDF 178
- Spout
- A short spout rises from the shoulder.
- Handle
- The rounded loop handle carries the same rough texture as the body.
- Lid
- A low, unevenly modelled cover sits on the shoulder.
Working volume#
Use the volume to the intended fill level, rather than the exterior dimensions or shape name. Leave room for the leaves and lid, and choose cups or a serving pitcher that can receive a complete infusion. Two pots of the same named form may have very different working capacities.
Variants and sub-types#
On the Hong Kong pot C81.393 the rough, knotted surface continues onto the handle. The catalogue calls it a nineteenth-century interpretation of the Gongchun form and records two names, the seal 玉麟 (Yulin) and the cut inscription 供春 (Gongchun). The latter names the older model evoked by this pot. The catalogue dates this example to the second half of the nineteenth century.No. 61 · p. 174 · PDF 178
History#
Accounts of Gongchun’s early activity and the later history of pots bearing his name should be kept separate. A surviving pot’s inscription, replacement lid and chain of ownership need object-specific documentation; they do not by themselves establish the original maker.
Sources#
- 陈宗懋 主编《中国茶叶大辞典》(2000)
- 徐秀棠、顾景舟《宜兴紫砂茶具概述》(1994)
- 张浦生《明清紫砂茶具概述》(1994)
- 周高起《陽羨茗壺系》 (Ming, 1640s), Wikisource edition ↗
- The Art of the Yixing Potter: The K.S. Lo Collection
Status and editorial notes sources cited
Sources are listed below. Their presence does not certify every claim; source-specific interpretations and unresolved questions are identified in the text. This page has not received independent expert approval.