The Role of Visual Evidence in a New Perspective on Chinese Art History: A Study of Ōmura Seigai’s Two Histories of Chinese Art

The Formation of Chinese Painting History and Reception of Chinese Painting in Japan A systematic history of Chinese painting was first established at the beginning of the modern era in Japan. Considering the long history of Sino–Japan relations, this was effectively the first time Japan changed its role from being a receiver to an originator of intellectual discourse. Japan’s modern era also marked a turning point in the country’s reception of Chinese painting. In considering the relationship between these two phenomena, the role of Japanese art historian Omura Seigai 大 村西崖 (1868–1927) is particularly interesting. As a graduate of the inaugural year at the Tokyo School of Fine Arts, Omura had studied art history from Ernest Fenollosa (1853–1908) and Okakura Tenshin 岡倉天心 (n e Okakura Kakuz o 覚三, 1863–1913). He would go on to become an art historian who applied the principles he learnt from the modern discipline of art history to his research on the history of ‘Oriental’ 東洋 (t oy o) or Asian art (in which ‘Asia’ primarily comprised China and Japan). Omura authored two volumes on the history of Chinese painting. Published fifteen years apart, these two histories illustrate a shift that occurred in the perception of Chinese painting, which impacted its reception in modern Japan. It is necessary to first explain the close and complex relationship between studies of Chinese painting history by Chinese and Japanese researchers. When it comes to Chinese art history in the modern sense of the term, whether relating to painting or sculpture, the work of Japanese researchers, in fact, initially preceded and influenced that of their Chinese peers. Moreover, among the Japanese publications, Omura’s can be considered pioneering. One significant reason that a