Editor’s Note: The following introductory discussion on Chinese Porcelain is primarily extracted from W. G. Gulland’s, Chinese Porcelain written in 1902. The reader should keep in mind the era in which the writing occurred and the view of the World held by Europe, and in particular England, at the time.
Editing of the document has been undertaken by ourselves and any errors as a result of said editing are solely our fault and not that of Gulland.
We trust that you will be able find the studies to follow as fascinating as we did, reading from a manuscript regarding antiques, which in and of itself is now an antique, to draw from this Introduction to Chinese Porcelain salient historical information and facts pertaining to porcelain and porcelain manufacture in ancient China.
Introduction to Chinese Porcelain
The manufacture of porcelain in China is said to have commenced during the Han dynasty (206 B.C. to 25 A.D.), but for all practical purpose, except in the celadon class, we will not be concerning ourselves with anything earlier than the Ming dynasty (1368-1644); and probably it is to the reign of the Tsing emperor, Kang-he (1661-1722), the second of the Tartar dynasty, that we must date most of the old specimens of Chinese porcelain now to be met with. There can be no doubt that China exported porcelain from very early dates; and in 1280 Marco Polo saw it being made, and states it was sent all over the world. We find traces of this early trade in India, Persia, Egypt, the Malay Archipelago, and Zanzibar, while pieces may have reached Europe in this indirect way, but it was through the Portuguese in the sixteenth century that Europe first received consignments of china-ware via the Cape. The celadon cup, given to the New College, Oxford, about 1504-1532, is probably the oldest historical piece in England. In 1640, by the taking of Malacca from the Portuguese, the Dutch obtained supremacy in the far East, and for a time became the chief importers into Europe of Chinese products, to be followed later by our own East India Company.
Sir A. W. Franks says,
“All we know respecting the fabrics of the former country [China] is derived from the valuable history of the manufactory of King-te-chin, prepared by a local magistrate in 1815, from older native documents, and which has been most ably translated and commented upon by Stanislas Julien ; . . . but it will be seen that from of specimens to refer to, and from the inherent obscurity of technical terms when translated into another language, little information is to be derived from it.”
There can be no doubt that the Chinese themselves consider the manufacture of porcelain to have been at its best during the Ming dynasty, and to have reached its height in the Seuen-tik period from 1426 to 1436, but it is just a question how far their veneration for the past, and their love for anything ancient, may have biased them in arriving at this conclusion.
The Ming dynasty commenced in 1368. It is, however, not till the reign of Queen Elizabeth (1558-1603) that we can lay our hands on anything that will enable us to form a judgment of the Ming productions, and the few authentic pieces we possess of this period are certainly not equal to the productions of the Tsing dynasty. Peter the Great’s ambassador wrote in 1692, “The finest china is not exported, or at least very rarely;” and as this probably was the case in earlier times also, we may perhaps have to make some allowance on this score, but the fact remains that we have no tangible proof of the superiority of the Ming wares. The Dresden collection was formed between 1694 and 1702, but as the Ming dynasty came to an end in 1644, the majority of the pieces probably belong to the Kang-he period (1661-1722) ; and, in the absence of any collection formed prior to 1644, we have no sure guide to what really was produced during the Ming period. The history of King-te-chin, already referred to, is divided into seven books, the third of which is devoted to the ” ancient porcelain imitated at King-te-chin,” while Pere d’Entrecolles says the mandarin in charge had reproductions made from yellow earth to imitate the heavy sea-green porcelain (celadon?) of the Ming period, to send as presents to his friends at Court. There is no doubt that during the Kang-he and later periods, very beautiful reproductions of what are known both here and in China as the Ming-styles were manufactured, while there is reason to believe that the date marks may at least be taken as some guide to what the Chinese considered to be the decoration of such pieces at the given period, although not to be depended upon as evidence of the age of the piece itself. This, of course, does not apply to pieces ordered by European traders to be made with “Ming” marks regardless of decoration.
A glance at the chronological table will show that the state of affairs existing prior to the middle of the seventeenth century in Europe and the East would make the importation of chinaware in any large quantities into Europe a matter of impossibility. The Ming dynasty ended previous to 1644, so that before anything like a regular trade of any dimensions had been established with China, the Tsing dynasty was in power, and it was too late to obtain Ming pieces, except second-hand, when private owners parted with their household possessions. We must also remember that a large amount of Ming porcelain must have been destroyed with other property during the disturbed times at the end of the Ming dynasty.
With the accession of the Tsing dynasty in 1644, we arrive at the half-way house in the history of Chinese porcelain, as known to us, although as far as the china we possess is concerned, it may probably be almost the starting-point.
Kang-he, the second emperor, reigned for sixty-one years (1661-1722). He seems to have been a very able man, fond of art and science, willing moreover to avail himself of the assistance of the Jesuit missionaries ; and it was probably their aid that led, as Sir A. W. Franks says, ” to many improvements in the porcelain manufacture, and to the introduction of several new colours.” It is said that two Jesuit lay brothers were at this time employed at the royal factories of King-te-chin. The fourth emperor, Keen-lung, reigned for sixty years (1736-1795), and a large quantity of fine china was made during this period, exhibiting “rich and minute decoration.” The fifth emperor, Kea-king, reigned from 1786 to 1821, and although, as a rule, the production of this and the later reigns show diminished excellence, yet they were still capable of turning out line pieces, as proved by those taken from the Summer Palace.
When porcelain was first introduced into Europe, the only thing they could compare it to was the polished surface of the cowrie shell, or porcellaiia, so called from its curved upper surface being supposed to resemble the rounded back of a Porcella, or little hog, hence the name “porcelain.” This may account for china-ware being sometimes spoken of in Scotland as “pigs.”
