第34卷第5期1998年10月中国陶瓷CHINACERAMICS.Vol34No.5Oct.1998古陶瓷研究哥窑瓷器初探郭演仪(中国科学院上海硅酸盐研究所)摘要本文通过传世哥窑瓷器与宋官窑、汝官窑、临汝窑、龙泉哥窑及景德镇仿哥窑等相关窑区的瓷器以及典型原料成分的对比,提出了传世哥窑烧造地点的新看法,认为传世哥窑瓷器首先与北宋官窑瓷一起在河南窑区烧造,随后又可能与南宋官窑瓷一起在杭州窑区利用河南引进的部分原料生产制作。同时文中证实了龙泉哥窑应改称为龙泉仿官窑瓷的说法。哥窑为宋代五大名窑之一,就已有资料可将其分为三类,一类为传世哥窑瓷;一类为龙泉哥窑瓷;另一类为仿哥窑瓷。关于传世哥窑瓷的烧造地点,即窑址有多种说法,有人将龙泉黑胎青瓷看成为正统哥窑,则认为哥窑为龙泉烧造;有人从化学分析对比,推测传世哥窑为景德镇烧造。加上文献记载和发掘实物中名词称呼和认识间的差别,使哥窑窑址的说法一直没有定论。本文基于上述几种类型的哥窑的胎、釉和有关瓷器和原料的分析加以对比,从而为找出传世哥窑瓷产地开阔思路和求得依据。元大都发掘和故宫博物院收藏的传世哥窑样品及景德镇仿哥窑样品的胎、釉分析示于表1中。龙泉出土哥窑黑胎青瓷的胎、釉分析示于表2。为了对比将河南汝官和临汝窑及南宋官窑各类青瓷的分析列示表3和表4。为了对比河南汝钧窑区、浙江几个窑区及景德镇瓷区有关原料分析则列于表5中。各表中以方框标出者为特征成分。表1传世哥窑及景德镇仿哥窑瓷器的胎、釉化学成分(1—4)Table1ChemicalcompositionsofGewareshandeddownfromancienttimesandimitatedinJingdezhen来源部位编号Y1SiO263.0458.2358.7265.4763.5461.6663.3766.1864.3366.6269.9662.6172.8671.2269.5171.29Al2O327.0328.7928.9524.1717.3219.2318.6817.8225.9716.4624.0828.5219.3416.8916.3614.25CaO0.110.230.190.388.848.687.376.230.428.380.290.160.053.346.283.30(1-4)化学组成(m%)MgO0.690.440.390.441.361.141.130.920.561.01K2O3.333.793.743.315.244.754.784.402.684.463.012.522.733.493.965.52Na2O0.540.640.600.631.681.351.350.910.741.851.450.581.763.571.962.96Fe2O33.553.533.363.751.041.401.341.833.310.781.214.162.320.641.341.04元大都发掘胎Y2Y3Y4Y1釉Y2SK01胎釉1Ξ备注TiO21.330.820.731.22P2O50.170.070.140.130.450.620.940.60MnO0.010.002传世哥窑微量1.270.04痕量0124故宫博物院釉胎痕量0.530.240.750.410.18痕量0.500.480.260.07痕量景德镇仿哥窑2雍正仿3成化仿23123痕量(CuO0.015%)Ξ收稿日期:1998-01-19;本文为作者在上海博物馆建馆四十周年哥窑瓷器学术座谈会发言稿整理而成?22?中国陶瓷1998年第5期表2龙泉哥窑瓷器的胎、釉化学成分(2)Table2ChemicalcompositionsofLongquanGewares部位编号SiO2LK01LK03LK04LK05LK07LK0964.1263.7963.7758.8163.0764.73Al2O325.6325.5425.4032.0226.0624.77CaO0.570.760.670.690.700.69(2)化学组成(m%)MgO0.440.510.430.350.510.50K2O3.204.344.154.284.004.19Na2O0.350.360.190.330.250.26Fe2O34.614.074.593.534.194.25TiO20.950.630.920.460.730.55MnO0.06备注痕量0.060.060.04胎龙泉黑胎痕量LK01LK03LK04LK05LK07LK0963.1365.6763.3566.