Materials and, Manufacture of Chinese Porcelain.—For many centuries after its first appearance Chinese porcelain differed from every other known species of pottery both in its material and its manufacture. While the pottery of all other countries was generallymade of coloured clays mixed only with sand or broken “shards” and fired at a comparatively low temperature, Chinese porcelain was compounded from the purest white clays, sand and fusible rock; it was glazed with fusible rock, and it was so hard fired that the entire mass became vitrified and translucent. The germ of the manufacture lay in the discovery of large masses of primary clay (kaolin) mixed with finely-ground felspathic rock (petuntse), both of which were carefully washed, levigated and purified. The body of Chinese porcelain varied from time to time within wide limits, but, broadly speaking, it always consists of purified kaolin, petuntse and quartz (sand), mixed in various proportions, sometimes with additional ingredients, according to the quality of ware desired. For the glaze the purest and cleanest portions of the felspathic rock (petuntse) were selected and mixed with lime—all being ground to fine powder. The lime causes the glaze to melt at a lower temperature than would be necessary for petuntse alone. The lime also gives the Chinese glazes their luscious softness of aspect and the faint greenish or bluish tone, while it enabled them to receive the later decorations in piled-up enamels, impossible on the harder European porcelain glazes of the 18th century. The finely-prepared glaze was applied to the clay vessels, before they had been fired, either by dipping, by painting, or by insufflation; and then glaze and body were fired together at a very high temperature. For certain glazes—turquoise, purple, &c.—which were not of the felspathic type, the vessels were first fired to the “biscuit” state, and the glazes were then applied and fired at a much lower temperature—the usual practice of the potters of other countries. When painted wares in blue and red were first introduced, the necessary pigments were painted on the pieces before firing, the glaze was applied over them, and then all was finished at one and the same firing. With the later enamel colours the piece was first fired as above described, and the fusible colours were then painted on the glaze, which was of course like glass. A second firing at a lower temperature fused these on-glaze colours to the ware. For information on Chinese materials and methods the reader is referred to the letters of Père d’Entrecolles in the collection of Jesuit letters known asLettres édifiantes et curieuses. The English reader will find reliable translations of the essential parts in Bushell’sOriental Ceramic Art, Dillon’sPorcelain, and Burton’sHistory of Porcelain. Later information will be found in Brongniart’sTraité des arts céramiques, especially in the 3rd edition, 1877; and in an article by G. Vogt,Bulletin de la Société d’encouragement pour l’industrie nationale, April 1900, pp. 530-612.Collections.—The Franks collection in the British Museum; the Victoria and Albert Museum, where the famous collection of Mr George Salting has for years been displayed, together with the collections belonging to the museum. Paris, the Grandidier collection at the Louvre; the collection at the Musée Guimet; the Sèvres Museum. Fontainebleau, the Musée Chinoise. Dresden, the Porcelain Collection—the oldest in Europe. Boston, the Museum of Fine Arts. New York, the Metropolitan Museum containing the Garland and other collections. Washington, the Hippisley collection; as well as magnificent private collections, at the head of which is that of the late W.T. Walters of Baltimore.Literature.—The older European works on Chinese porcelain have been superseded by the later books. The following list contains the best recent books:—S.W. Bushell,Oriental Ceramic Art(New York, 1897; text separately 1899);Chinese Porcelain before the present Dynasty(Pekin, 1886);Chinese Art, vol. ii., Victoria and Albert Museum Handbooks (1906); Brongniart,Traité des arts céramiques(3rd edition, with valuable supplements by Salvétat, 1877); Dillon,Porcelain(1900); Sir A.W. Franks,Catalogue of Oriental Pottery and Porcelain(1878); Grandidier,La Céramique chinoise(1894); Griggs,Examples of Armorial China(1887); Hippisley,Ceramic Arts in China(Smithsonian Institute, Washington, 1890); Hirth,Ancient Chinese Porcelain(Leipzig, 1888); Julien,Histoire et fabrication de la porcelaine chinoise(Paris, 1856); Meyer,Lung-chuan Yao, oder alter Seladon Porzellan(Berlin, 1889); Monkhouse,History of Chinese Porcelain(1901); O. du Sartel,La Porcelaine de Chine(Paris, 1881); Burton,Porcelain(1906); Bushell and Laffan,The Garland Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of New York(1907).
Materials and, Manufacture of Chinese Porcelain.—For many centuries after its first appearance Chinese porcelain differed from every other known species of pottery both in its material and its manufacture. While the pottery of all other countries was generallymade of coloured clays mixed only with sand or broken “shards” and fired at a comparatively low temperature, Chinese porcelain was compounded from the purest white clays, sand and fusible rock; it was glazed with fusible rock, and it was so hard fired that the entire mass became vitrified and translucent. The germ of the manufacture lay in the discovery of large masses of primary clay (kaolin) mixed with finely-ground felspathic rock (petuntse), both of which were carefully washed, levigated and purified. The body of Chinese porcelain varied from time to time within wide limits, but, broadly speaking, it always consists of purified kaolin, petuntse and quartz (sand), mixed in various proportions, sometimes with additional ingredients, according to the quality of ware desired. For the glaze the purest and cleanest portions of the felspathic rock (petuntse) were selected and mixed with lime—all being ground to fine powder. The lime causes the glaze to melt at a lower temperature than would be necessary for petuntse alone. The lime also gives the Chinese glazes their luscious softness of aspect and the faint greenish or bluish tone, while it enabled them to receive the later decorations in piled-up enamels, impossible on the harder European porcelain glazes of the 18th century. The finely-prepared glaze was applied to the clay vessels, before they had been fired, either by dipping, by painting, or by insufflation; and then glaze and body were fired together at a very high temperature. For certain glazes—turquoise, purple, &c.—which were not of the felspathic type, the vessels were first fired to the “biscuit” state, and the glazes were then applied and fired at a much lower temperature—the usual practice of the potters of other countries. When painted wares in blue and red were first introduced, the necessary pigments were painted on the pieces before firing, the glaze was applied over them, and then all was finished at one and the same firing. With the later enamel colours the piece was first fired as above described, and the fusible colours were then painted on the glaze, which was of course like glass. A second firing at a lower temperature fused these on-glaze colours to the ware. For information on Chinese materials and methods the reader is referred to the letters of Père d’Entrecolles in the collection of Jesuit letters known asLettres édifiantes et curieuses. The English reader will find reliable translations of the essential parts in Bushell’sOriental Ceramic Art, Dillon’sPorcelain, and Burton’sHistory of Porcelain. Later information will be found in Brongniart’sTraité des arts céramiques, especially in the 3rd edition, 1877; and in an article by G. Vogt,Bulletin de la Société d’encouragement pour l’industrie nationale, April 1900, pp. 530-612.
Collections.—The Franks collection in the British Museum; the Victoria and Albert Museum, where the famous collection of Mr George Salting has for years been displayed, together with the collections belonging to the museum. Paris, the Grandidier collection at the Louvre; the collection at the Musée Guimet; the Sèvres Museum. Fontainebleau, the Musée Chinoise. Dresden, the Porcelain Collection—the oldest in Europe. Boston, the Museum of Fine Arts. New York, the Metropolitan Museum containing the Garland and other collections. Washington, the Hippisley collection; as well as magnificent private collections, at the head of which is that of the late W.T. Walters of Baltimore.
Literature.—The older European works on Chinese porcelain have been superseded by the later books. The following list contains the best recent books:—S.W. Bushell,Oriental Ceramic Art(New York, 1897; text separately 1899);Chinese Porcelain before the present Dynasty(Pekin, 1886);Chinese Art, vol. ii., Victoria and Albert Museum Handbooks (1906); Brongniart,Traité des arts céramiques(3rd edition, with valuable supplements by Salvétat, 1877); Dillon,Porcelain(1900); Sir A.W. Franks,Catalogue of Oriental Pottery and Porcelain(1878); Grandidier,La Céramique chinoise(1894); Griggs,Examples of Armorial China(1887); Hippisley,Ceramic Arts in China(Smithsonian Institute, Washington, 1890); Hirth,Ancient Chinese Porcelain(Leipzig, 1888); Julien,Histoire et fabrication de la porcelaine chinoise(Paris, 1856); Meyer,Lung-chuan Yao, oder alter Seladon Porzellan(Berlin, 1889); Monkhouse,History of Chinese Porcelain(1901); O. du Sartel,La Porcelaine de Chine(Paris, 1881); Burton,Porcelain(1906); Bushell and Laffan,The Garland Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of New York(1907).
(W. B.*)
European Porcelain to the end of the 18th Century
Europe can claim no share in the discovery of porcelain, the white and translucent potterypar excellence, for when the first specimens of Chinese porcelain were brought to Europe, perhaps as early as the 11th or 12th century, they excited the greatest wonder and admiration. Cairo was at this time the great mart for the exchange of the products of East and West, and from this centre porcelains were sent into Europe. Nasir i Khosrau, the Persian traveller, who visited Old Cairo ina.d.1035-1042, was evidently acquainted with Chinese porcelain, and he also speaks of a translucent ware made at Fostat (Old Cairo) which may well have been the progenitor of the glassy porcelains of Persia, as well as of those made in Italy during the 15th and 16th centuries. Ina.d.1171 the famous Saladin sent from Cairo a present of forty pieces of Chinese porcelain to the sultan of Babylon; and from that time onwards we have frequent records of pieces of this exotic pottery finding their way into the treasuries of European princes. With the renewed attention paid to the potter’s art in Europe after the 14th century, it was but natural that efforts should be made to imitate a material so mysterious and beautiful. But knowledge of Chinese materials and methods wasnil, and for a further two centuries all that Europe manufactured in the shape of translucent pottery was the artificial porcelain made with glass, which can only be looked upon as a substitute for true porcelain. In Italy during the 16th century, and in France during the century from 1670 to 1770 roughly, this artificial porcelain was made and developed. At Meissen in Saxony the famous Böttger made a true porcelain from materials analogous to the Chinese about 1710-1712, and this manufacture was pursued in Germany, Austria and elsewhere in Europe (even in France, the home of the artificial glassy porcelain, after 1770), so that by the end of the 18th century, when Chinese porcelain had reached and passed its zenith, the manufacture of a similar material was well established in Europe, and the glassy porcelains had been generally abandoned. The only country which offered any departure from this general rule was England. The earliest English porcelains were derived from the French, and, like them, owed their translucence to the use of glass. Efforts were made at Plymouth and at Bristol (1758-1781) to introduce the manufacture of porcelain, like the Chinese and its German counterparts, but these failed and the English potters finally invented a third kind of porcelain, in which calcined ox-bones were added to the clay and ground rock to give a white translucent porcelain capable of receiving any form of decoration. This distinctively English porcelain, perfected about 1800, is not only the principal kind made in England in our own times, but its manufacture has been adopted, to some extent in France, Germany and Sweden, as well as in the United States.
It is impossible to describe these various efforts of European potters without a certain amount of overlapping, for during the 18th century all the three kinds of European porcelain were struggling for supremacy. It is advisable, therefore, to keep clearly in mind which kind of porcelain is in question, for many problems of manufacture and decoration are absolutely determined by the nature of the materials.
If we could trust to documentary evidence alone, the earliest European porcelains were made at Venice in 1470, and again in 1519; while we also read of its manufacture at Ferrara in 1561.34Unfortunately, documentary evidence alone is not conclusive, and the first European porcelain, known from actual specimens as well as by documentary evidence, was that made at Florence in the laboratory of Francesco de’ Medici, between 1575 and 1585. Specimens of this rare porcelain are to be found only in great museums and private collections, where they rank among our chief ceramic treasures. They show clearly that the Florentine potters never fully mastered their difficult material, for the ware is always imperfect and compares indifferently in whiteness and translucence with fine porcelain, while the glaze is neither smoothly melted nor free from defects. Obviously the effect of Chinese blue and white porcelain was aimed at, the decorations, reminiscent of the style of the Persian pot-painters, being executed in cobalt blue alone. These rare and interesting pieces bear distinctive marks; for at their period the use of painters’ marks or monograms had become fairly general on artistic pottery in Europe. One of the best known marks is the “palle” or balls of the arms of the Medici family, bearing the letters “F M M E D II.” for “Franciscus Medici Magnus Etruriae Dux II.”; while other pieces have a rude representation of the Great Dome of Florence and the letter “F.”
Plate VIII.
Fortunately, too, besides the few specimens of Florentine porcelain that have survived to our day a manuscript has beenfound in the Magliabechian Library at Florence which states that the paste was composed of 24 parts of sand, 16 of a glass (powdered rock crystal 10 and soda 8), and 12 parts white earth of Faenza. To 12 parts of this mixture 3 parts of the kaolinic clay of Vicenza were to be added, and the pieces glazed with a lead glaze, or sometimes with the tin-enamel of the Italian faience maker. We are in the presence, therefore, of a material unlike Chinese porcelain in every respect, the Florentine porcelain being the first of a long line of European porcelains the artistic qualities of which were obtained by mixing a large quantity of glass with a small quantity of clay, so that they may almost be regarded as a species of glazed and painted glass. The technical methods used in their manufacture and decoration, however, were those of the potter and not of the glass maker.
With the death of Francesco de’ Medici in 1587 it seems probable that this wonderful innovation came to an untimely end, and we hear no more of porcelain in Italy for more than a century. During this century (1587-1687) there can be no doubt that efforts were made all over Europe to discover the secret of porcelain manufacture; but the first reliable date we can point to is 1673, when Louis Poterat, a faience maker of Rouen, obtained a privilege from the French king for the manufacture of porcelain in that town. The Rouen porcelain in turn ceased with the death of Poterat in 1696. Authentic specimens are extant in the shape of salt-cellars, mustard pots and some few vases, the latter of considerable size. The pieces are usually decorated in blue with patterns in the Rouen style and were evidently painted by an expert faience painter. In composition, the porcelain of Rouen, like that of Florence, was of the artificial or glassy type, and shortly afterwards a similar ware made its appearance at the faience works of St Cloud near Paris, and at various works in the city of Paris. Well-known pieces, bearing the marks here shown, formerly supposed to be the earliest specimens of French porcelain and the work of Poterat at Rouen, are probably experimental pieces made in Paris after the date of Poterat’s discovery, as they differ in important particulars from his ware.
Once firmly established in France, this manufacture, under the patronage of the French court or of some great French noble, rapidly assumed a position of importance. The works at St Cloud received letters-patent from Louis XIV. in 1696, and the manufacture was continued there down to 1773. The appearance of the St Cloud porcelain is very characteristic, for though the paste has a yellowish tinge it is of fine quality with a clear and brilliant glaze. The first efforts appear to have consisted in frank imitations of the much-prized Oriental wares, and white pieces decorated only with branches of flowering plum in relief, or pieces modelled with imbricated or scale pattern or with delicate flutings, were made. The earliest colour decoration was naturally in under-glaze blue, and while quasi-oriental designs were largely used, the commonest feature is the prevalence of painted borders like those used on the faience of Rouen and St Cloud. At a later date decoration in over-glaze colours and gilding was also employed, and though the ware never reached to such a pitch of excellence as that of the Royal Manufactory at Sèvres, the St Cloud porcelain is one of the most distinctive French porcelains of the 18th century.
German Porcelains.—While the glassy porcelains of France were being developed at St Cloud, success of a more permanent order was reached in Germany. Augustus the Strong, elector of Saxony (1670-1733), had formed an extensive collection of Chinese and Japanese porcelains, still to be seen in the Dresden Museum, and he had established experimental pottery works, bringing skilled potters from Holland and elsewhere. His chief investigators appear to have been Tschirnhaus and Böttger, both alchemists, and it was the glory of the latter to be the first European to produce a porcelain like the Chinese, both in the nature of its materials, and in the appearance of its paste and glaze. It may be surmised that Böttger was guided toward this momentous discovery by information brought from China, though such an idea is always stoutly denied by German authorities, who, with pardonable pride, claim that Böttger at the age of twenty-four succeeded where all other European experimenters had failed. He was certainly working at the problems offered by the exotic wares of China, for his first production was an extremely hard redstone-ware—often erroneously called “Böttger’s red porcelain”—resembling the Chinese “boccaros” or red teapots of the Yi-hsing potteries. He had been anticipated in this direction by Dwight of Fulham, but the red pottery of Böttger was so intensely fired that it became dense enough to be cut and polished by the lapidary as if it were a piece of jasper or carnelian. It was first offered for sale at the Leipzig fair of 1710, and for many years it enjoyed great popularity, as well as the undesirable honour of wide imitation. At the same time (1710) Böttger exhibited a few crude specimens of greyish-white porcelain. Imperfect pieces were on sale in 1713, and by 1716 its manufacture was definitely established, though the pieces were still far from perfect. Böttger died in 1719, having had the rare fortune, in his short and eventful life, to establish in Europe the manufacture of true porcelain.
The life of Böttger reads like a page of romance, and the story of the subsequent development of porcelain manufacture throughout the German empire is hardly less romantic. When the importance of Böttger’s discovery was recognized, he and his workmen were removed from Dresden to the Albrechtsburg, a fortress situated at Meissen some 16 m. away, so that the manufacture could be conducted with the greatest secrecy. All concerned were practically state prisoners, and this extreme rigour doubtless defeated the end in view, for workmen escaped from time to time, and professing, more or less truthfully, a knowledge of the manufacture, found patrons among the German princes all eager to gain reputation as experimenters in the new art of porcelain. Some of these wandering “Arcanists,” like Ringler and Hunger, and the men who learnt from them, travelled all over the empire, and the following list of dates will show how porcelain factories sprang up from the parent factory at Meissen:—
Meissen.—Although the factory which was founded at Meissen as a result of Böttger’s discovery remained on its old site until 1863, the porcelain made there has been commonly known as Dresden porcelain; probably because Dresden was the seat of the Saxon court, and the enterprise was conducted at the expense of the electors of Saxony. So jealously were the secrets of this factory guarded that when Napoleon, the master of Europe, sent Brongniart to investigate the methods in use at Meissen in 1812, the elector of Saxony had to release Steinauer, the director, from his oath of secrecy before he would explain the processes. Meissen porcelain, therefore, affords us the best example by which we may follow the changes of fashion and taste that governed the styles of porcelain decoration in Europe during the 18th century. The early Meissen porcelain was made from the kaolin found at Aue, near Schneeberg, and while there is no mention of any other material, we may be sure that clay and felspathic rock, analogous to the Chinesekaolinandpetuntse, were obtained from the same quarries, and were used together. Until after the death of Böttger in 1719 it cannot be said that the venture was more than asuccès d’estime. The specimens preserved in the Dresden Museum show that the pieces were generally thick in substance and clumsy in shape, being often made from the moulds that had been designed for Böttger’s red-stoneware. Naturally enough these early examples were inspired by Chinese models, both in shape and decoration. As at St Cloud, white pieces with modelled decoration were common. Unlike the contemporary French glassy porcelains, the decorations in under-glaze blue were very imperfect, theblue colour being much run and blistered; and when attempts were made at decoration in enamel colours (i.e.colours fired on the finished glaze) the result was unsatisfactory, as, owing to the refractory nature of the hard felspathic material, these colours frequently scaled off. The later success of the Meissen factory must be attributed to Herold or Höroldt (who joined the staff in 1720 as a colour maker and painter), and to Kandler, a sculptor, who came to the works in 1731. In the hands of these two men the forms and decorations, still largely based on Chinese and Japanese models, assumed a definitely European style, while the composition of the body and the glaze, and the application of colours and gold, were brought to perfection. Herold was appointed director of the works a few years after 1720, and retained that post until 1765, while Kandler was chief modeller from 1731 to 1775. The years from 1730 (when the work definitely emerged from its experimental stage) to 1775 (when Kandler died) mark the most distinctive period of the Meissen porcelain. In the estimation of collectors also the Meissen porcelain of this period is the most valuable, and genuine examples ofAlt-Meissencommand high prices in the sale rooms, especially in Germany. This appreciation was quite as apparent in the 18th century, for by 1740 Meissen porcelain had won the greatest renown in Europe, and was actually exported by way of Constantinople over the Mahommedan countries of the Nearer East. It is frequently described by contemporary writers as being far superior to the porcelain of China, and so great was its vogue between 1740 and 1750 that as many as 700 workmen—a large number for those days—were employed, and the industry brought large profits as well as great reputation to the Saxon court. Each year saw some fresh departure from the original inspiration of the work, some fresh innovation of European style in design. After 1730 the rude reproductions of Chinese forms and decorations in white or blue and white were replaced by imitations of the Imari porcelains, especially those decorated in the style of Kakiemon. Here Meissen was running a race with Chantilly in setting the fashion for the dainty decorations in red and green and gold which spread in time to all the porcelain factories of Europe. Gradually Europeanmotifsbecame predominant. The simple oriental forms were replaced by distinctively European shapes with architectural mouldings, handles and feet. Instead of the dainty Japanese patterns, we perceive the gradual introduction of “Rococo” scroll-work (as interpreted by the Germans) to form a framework or border for miniature-like paintings of landscapes, ruins, figure-subjects, hunting scenes, &c., executed in the limited palette of on-glaze colours then available. Further evidence of the departure from oriental influence is to be found in the numerous “armorial” services produced between 1730 and 1740; and at the same period we find the first appearance of a style of decoration that has persisted to our own times, as a means of passing off pieces with small flaws in body or glaze, by hiding them among sprays of naturalistic flowers, with an occasional fly or some other winged creature thrown with seeming artlessness over the surface of the piece. This idea, though it seems to have been first used at Meissen, was so useful to the potter that it became general, and a device originally adopted to cover faults of manufacture was elevated into a distinct style of decoration by later European factories (e.g.Strassburg, Niederviller, &c.).
The talents of Kandler were applied in ambitious but unsatisfactory attempts to produce life-sized figures of the twelve apostles, an equestrian statue of Augustus the Strong of heroic proportions, and many models of animals intended for the decoration of the Japanese palace at Dresden. Many of these latter are to be seen in the Dresden Museum, and create an unfavourable impression of the taste of their period. The fame of Kandler is better perpetuated (see example, Plate IX.) by the little statuettes and groups of figures and animals that flowed in a steady stream from his facile hand; for though these figures have prettiness rather than grace, andflairrather than style, they are instinct with the spirit of the middle 18th century, and were eagerly imitated or boldly copied at every factory in Europe. Only in thebiscuitporcelain figures of Sèvres, and in some few of the portrait figures of Derby, do we find anything artistically superior. These Meissen statuettes look their best when they are simply in white; many are grotesque and ugly, and the colour decorations are usually in very poor taste, the harsh, shining colours contrasting unpleasantly with the pronounced white of the porcelain.
Mention must be made of the use of modelled flowers at Meissen. Originating in the simple application of modelled branches of prunus, &c. in imitation of the white porcelains of Fu-kien, the method developed until we get not only the characteristic “May-flower” decoration (see example, Plate IX.), but also independent sprays and bouquets modelled in porcelain and coloured with the utmost mechanical precision. It is not quite clear whether this production of porcelain flowers was first perfected at Meissen or at Vincennes,35but it was largely practised at both places.
Toward the end of this period, vases, candelabra, mirror-frames and clock cases were modelled in the mostoutrérococo forms with applied scrolls, shells and flowers. These pieces had their modelled details picked out in gold and colours, while the success of the French styles of decoration is still further shown by the copies of Watteau figures and groups on the more important vases, dishes and plates. Frederick the Great made sad havoc with the prosperity of Meissen during the Seven Years’ War. He looted the factory both in 1759 and 1761, and is said on the latter occasion to have carried away to Berlin both models, working moulds and many workmen. This misfortune marks the end of the most distinctive Meissen porcelain, for after this time Sèvres became the most important porcelain factory in Europe, and the later productions of Meissen were, for the most part, German versions of the styles initiated at the French royal factory. From 1764 to 1774 Dietrich, a painter, was at the head of affairs, while a Frenchman named Acier succeeded Kandler. They introduced the neo-classical style, which was spreading like a blight all over Europe, and this departure was perfected under the directorship of Count Marcolini (1774-1814), when Meissen, fallen from its high estate, was content to follow the lead of Sèvres.
After the Marcolini period there is nothing to be said of Meissen. The old productions of the factory had become valuable, and the custom of reproducing them, marks included, was adopted. Such a practice was not likely to lead to further progress, and, though the factory was removed from its old site in the Albrechtsburg in 1863, it cannot be said to have added anything to the progress of European porcelain during the 19th century.
During the initiatory period the “Dresden” pieces bore the monogram “A.R.” interlaced (Augustus Rex), and between 1712 and 1716 pieces intended for sale and not for the use of the court were marked with the sign of Aesculapius (a snake twining round a staff). From about 1720 two crossed swords, painted in blue under the glaze, with or without accompanying stars, crosses, &c., formed the general mark, but the mark has been so often used on other porcelains that, in itself, it is of slight value as a means of identification.
During the initiatory period the “Dresden” pieces bore the monogram “A.R.” interlaced (Augustus Rex), and between 1712 and 1716 pieces intended for sale and not for the use of the court were marked with the sign of Aesculapius (a snake twining round a staff). From about 1720 two crossed swords, painted in blue under the glaze, with or without accompanying stars, crosses, &c., formed the general mark, but the mark has been so often used on other porcelains that, in itself, it is of slight value as a means of identification.
Vienna.—The first mention of the manufacture of porcelain in Vienna occurs in 1718, when a Dutchman, Claude du Paquier, was granted a patent. He had secured two runaways from Meissen, Stölzel and Hunger, yet little progress was made until after 1744, when the factory was bought by the empress Maria Theresa. At first the traditional styles of Meissen were continued, but the characteristic Viennese porcelain was produced after 1785. In this ware figure-painting, rich ground colours and elaborate gilding are associated in an unmistakeable manner. Leithner, who was chemist and colour maker at this period, succeeded in producing a more extensive and brilliant palette of colours than was in use at any other European porcelain factory in the last quarter of the 18th century; and the gildingwas rich and elaborate. Apart from its technical merits the ware has nothing to recommend it, for the styles of decoration showed pronounced neo-classical influence, and lacked the saving merits of the French work in the same style. The works was closed in 1864, on account of the heavy expenses, and collectors should be reminded that many spurious imitations, the product of small Viennese factories, are to be found on the market.
Berlin.—The first Berlin porcelain was made by W. Casper Wegeli, aided by workmen from other German factories, as early as 1750. This business was unsuccessful and came to an end in 1757, but its productions are highly prized on account of their rarity. Success only came when Frederick the Great brought workmen, moulds and materials from Meissen in 1761, and, becoming proprietor of the works in 1763, founded the Royal Berlin Porcelain Manufactory. Though Meissen workmen and methods had been imported, and the Meissen style governed the earliest productions, Frederick’s well-knownpenchantfor French art was doubtless responsible for the fact that the rococo style of decoration was more determinedly followed here than elsewhere in Germany. The colour schemes of this ware are unusually simple, pieces being seldom decorated in more than three colours, while a rose-coloured enamel, a favourite colour with the great Frederick, is quite characteristic. The Royal Berlin Factory passed under a cloud in the troubled condition of the Prussian monarchy during the early years of the 19th century, and down to 1870 it was content to follow in the wake of Sèvres like most of the other European factories. Since about the year 1880, however, it has developed into the most scientific of European porcelain works, and it was here that Seger manufactured his special porcelain, made to reproduce the qualities of the finest Japanese wares. In spite of this scientific success it must be remarked that the late Berlin porcelain is artistically disappointing, being too exuberant for our taste and recalling anything rather than porcelain in its treatment.
Minor German Factories.—It is unnecessary to describe the productions of all the German porcelain works of the 18th century, for not only is there a strong family likeness, but all the works aimed at producing pieces comparable with those of Meissen, Vienna or Berlin. In every case the industry was established under the patronage or at the direct charge of princes or great nobles, anxious to emulate the success of the elector of Saxony or the king of Prussia, and generally the enterprise came to an end with the death of a patron or from his unwillingness to sustain the continued drains upon his purse.The factory at Höchst was started about 1720 by wanderers from Meissen, but it was only carried to a successful issue through the patronage of the archbishop-elector of Mainz after 1746. The general style of Höchst is a palpable imitation of the contemporary wares of Meissen, but this factory was noted for its excellent figures and groups, especially those modelled by Melchior (1770-1780). He modelled, at Höchst, more than three hundred figures, as well as many portrait medallions. The works came to an untimely end during the French invasion of 1794.Frankenthal had a porcelain factory (founded by the Hannongs of Strassburg) in 1756, and patronized by Karl Theodor, elector palatine from 1762 to 1795, when the French invasion put an end to its activities. Melchior, the sculptor, came here from Höchst after 1780, and elaborate pieces in the current styles of Sèvres and Dresden were made.Nymphenburg, near Munich, had a factory which was made a royal factory in 1758 by Max Joseph III. of Bavaria. The ware was of fine quality, but without special distinction. Melchior came on here about 1800, remaining till his death in 1825; his Nymphenburg figures are as highly esteemed as those he modelled at Höchst and Frankenthal. In the early years of the 19th century elaborate painting became the rule here, as at the other royal factories, and copies were made on porcelain of some of the famous paintings in the Munich galleries. The works is still in existence, in the hands of a private company, who unfortunately sell many reproductions of the 18th-century wares.Ludwigsburg, some 9 m. from Stuttgart, had a porcelain factory from 1758 to 1824, liberally subsidized by the dukes of Württemberg. Highly-finished painting was the rule at this factory, and because the ware bore a crown as one of its marks, it has rather foolishly been called “Kronenberg” porcelain.Fürstenberg was the factory patronized by the dukes of Brunswick. Experiments were made as early as 1746, but little ware was produced before 1770. Fürstenberg set itself to imitate all the best-known styles of the day, and its only distinctive productions are its “biscuit” statuettes and medallions. The factory remained in operation until 1888, but as the moulds were then sold by auction, imitations of the old pieces are now common.Other 18th-century German factories were those of Fulda, Bayreuth, Cassel, Ansbach, Kloster-Veilsdorf, Wallendorf and Limbach.Mention must also be made of the work of certain famous decorators, like Bottengruber and Preussler, who decorated both German and oriental pieces; while Busch, the canon of Hildesheim, produced effects like fine engraving by etching the glaze with a diamond and rubbing black colour into the lines.
Minor German Factories.—It is unnecessary to describe the productions of all the German porcelain works of the 18th century, for not only is there a strong family likeness, but all the works aimed at producing pieces comparable with those of Meissen, Vienna or Berlin. In every case the industry was established under the patronage or at the direct charge of princes or great nobles, anxious to emulate the success of the elector of Saxony or the king of Prussia, and generally the enterprise came to an end with the death of a patron or from his unwillingness to sustain the continued drains upon his purse.
The factory at Höchst was started about 1720 by wanderers from Meissen, but it was only carried to a successful issue through the patronage of the archbishop-elector of Mainz after 1746. The general style of Höchst is a palpable imitation of the contemporary wares of Meissen, but this factory was noted for its excellent figures and groups, especially those modelled by Melchior (1770-1780). He modelled, at Höchst, more than three hundred figures, as well as many portrait medallions. The works came to an untimely end during the French invasion of 1794.
Frankenthal had a porcelain factory (founded by the Hannongs of Strassburg) in 1756, and patronized by Karl Theodor, elector palatine from 1762 to 1795, when the French invasion put an end to its activities. Melchior, the sculptor, came here from Höchst after 1780, and elaborate pieces in the current styles of Sèvres and Dresden were made.
Nymphenburg, near Munich, had a factory which was made a royal factory in 1758 by Max Joseph III. of Bavaria. The ware was of fine quality, but without special distinction. Melchior came on here about 1800, remaining till his death in 1825; his Nymphenburg figures are as highly esteemed as those he modelled at Höchst and Frankenthal. In the early years of the 19th century elaborate painting became the rule here, as at the other royal factories, and copies were made on porcelain of some of the famous paintings in the Munich galleries. The works is still in existence, in the hands of a private company, who unfortunately sell many reproductions of the 18th-century wares.
Ludwigsburg, some 9 m. from Stuttgart, had a porcelain factory from 1758 to 1824, liberally subsidized by the dukes of Württemberg. Highly-finished painting was the rule at this factory, and because the ware bore a crown as one of its marks, it has rather foolishly been called “Kronenberg” porcelain.
Fürstenberg was the factory patronized by the dukes of Brunswick. Experiments were made as early as 1746, but little ware was produced before 1770. Fürstenberg set itself to imitate all the best-known styles of the day, and its only distinctive productions are its “biscuit” statuettes and medallions. The factory remained in operation until 1888, but as the moulds were then sold by auction, imitations of the old pieces are now common.
Other 18th-century German factories were those of Fulda, Bayreuth, Cassel, Ansbach, Kloster-Veilsdorf, Wallendorf and Limbach.
Mention must also be made of the work of certain famous decorators, like Bottengruber and Preussler, who decorated both German and oriental pieces; while Busch, the canon of Hildesheim, produced effects like fine engraving by etching the glaze with a diamond and rubbing black colour into the lines.
While France and Germany were each developing their own particular type of porcelain, it was only natural that the kings and princes of other countries should strive to emulate them in the manufacture of this still rare and highly esteemed form of pottery. Naturally, perhaps, the countries to the north and east seem to have been influenced most by German methods, whilst those to the south and west followed the French example.
Holland.—The earliest Dutch factories were started as early as 1704, first at Weesp near Amsterdam, and afterwards at Oude Loosdrecht. The mark of this factory occurs as M: O.L., or M.o.L. After 1782 the works was removed to Nieuwe Amstel, but the “Amstel” porcelain came to an end with the French invasion. The ware resembled the German both in material and decoration. The best porcelain made in Holland was produced at a factory at the Hague, founded some time after 1775. There is a choice collection of this ware in the Gemeente Museum at the Hague. No porcelain appears to have been made in Holland after about 1810 until 1890 or later.Denmark.—It has been stated that porcelain of the German type was made in Copenhagen as early as 1731, but there is no definite record of the production of true porcelain until about 1772, when potters, modellers and painters from some of the German works founded the enterprise which was taken over by King Christian VII. in 1779 and converted into a royal factory. Fostered by the king’s patronage, fine porcelain of pronouncedly German style was largely made down to the end of the 18th century. The collection in the castle of Rosenburg contains many examples of the work of this period. In the early years of the 19th century the Empire style of decoration was adopted, and the artistic influence of Sèvres became paramount. Large sums of money were continually required from the crown to maintain the establishment until, in 1867, it was sold into private hands to get rid of an encumbrance. The subsequent new-birth of the existing royal Copenhagen porcelain works must be noted in the next section.Sweden.—The history of Swedish porcelain in the 18th century is connected with the factories at Rörstrand and Marieberg, both in the environs of Stockholm. Tentative experiments were made at both these places before 1760, but these came to an end by the close of the 18th century, though the Rörstrand works was reopened some fifty years ago and will be subsequently referred to. The Swedish porcelains were of two kinds, one a true felspathic porcelain like the German, and the other a glassy porcelain resembling that made at Mennecy in France. It is interesting to note that the decorative styles in both cases are distinctly French in character.Russia.—Peter the Great is said to have projected a porcelain factory at the suggestion of his ally Augustus the Third of Saxony, but the scheme was not carried into execution until the days of the empress Elizabeth. Catherine II. subsidized the work in prodigal fashion, but although she brought over French artists, the Russian porcelain more closely resembles its German than its French prototype. In the early years of the 19th century the imperial Russian factory followed the example of Sèvres in producing costly dinner services and extravagant vases of large dimensions.Small independent factories were started in the neighbourhood of Moscow: one by an Englishman named Gardner about 1780, and another by A. Popoff. Besides producing ordinary table ware these Moscow factories sent forth a considerable number of statuettes, the most interesting being those representing Russian peasant types.Hungary.—The one Hungarian porcelain factory of note is that at Herend, which was founded about 1830 by Moritz Fischer. At this factory copies of oriental porcelain were made that have deceived many collectors, though the pieces are usually impressed with the word “Herend” in the paste.Switzerland.—Little porcelain has been produced in Switzerland, and considering the geographical position of the country it seems natural that porcelain of the German type should have been made at Zurich and of the French type at Nyon on the lake of Geneva, but these productions are of no particular importance.
Holland.—The earliest Dutch factories were started as early as 1704, first at Weesp near Amsterdam, and afterwards at Oude Loosdrecht. The mark of this factory occurs as M: O.L., or M.o.L. After 1782 the works was removed to Nieuwe Amstel, but the “Amstel” porcelain came to an end with the French invasion. The ware resembled the German both in material and decoration. The best porcelain made in Holland was produced at a factory at the Hague, founded some time after 1775. There is a choice collection of this ware in the Gemeente Museum at the Hague. No porcelain appears to have been made in Holland after about 1810 until 1890 or later.
Denmark.—It has been stated that porcelain of the German type was made in Copenhagen as early as 1731, but there is no definite record of the production of true porcelain until about 1772, when potters, modellers and painters from some of the German works founded the enterprise which was taken over by King Christian VII. in 1779 and converted into a royal factory. Fostered by the king’s patronage, fine porcelain of pronouncedly German style was largely made down to the end of the 18th century. The collection in the castle of Rosenburg contains many examples of the work of this period. In the early years of the 19th century the Empire style of decoration was adopted, and the artistic influence of Sèvres became paramount. Large sums of money were continually required from the crown to maintain the establishment until, in 1867, it was sold into private hands to get rid of an encumbrance. The subsequent new-birth of the existing royal Copenhagen porcelain works must be noted in the next section.
Sweden.—The history of Swedish porcelain in the 18th century is connected with the factories at Rörstrand and Marieberg, both in the environs of Stockholm. Tentative experiments were made at both these places before 1760, but these came to an end by the close of the 18th century, though the Rörstrand works was reopened some fifty years ago and will be subsequently referred to. The Swedish porcelains were of two kinds, one a true felspathic porcelain like the German, and the other a glassy porcelain resembling that made at Mennecy in France. It is interesting to note that the decorative styles in both cases are distinctly French in character.
Russia.—Peter the Great is said to have projected a porcelain factory at the suggestion of his ally Augustus the Third of Saxony, but the scheme was not carried into execution until the days of the empress Elizabeth. Catherine II. subsidized the work in prodigal fashion, but although she brought over French artists, the Russian porcelain more closely resembles its German than its French prototype. In the early years of the 19th century the imperial Russian factory followed the example of Sèvres in producing costly dinner services and extravagant vases of large dimensions.
Small independent factories were started in the neighbourhood of Moscow: one by an Englishman named Gardner about 1780, and another by A. Popoff. Besides producing ordinary table ware these Moscow factories sent forth a considerable number of statuettes, the most interesting being those representing Russian peasant types.
Hungary.—The one Hungarian porcelain factory of note is that at Herend, which was founded about 1830 by Moritz Fischer. At this factory copies of oriental porcelain were made that have deceived many collectors, though the pieces are usually impressed with the word “Herend” in the paste.
Switzerland.—Little porcelain has been produced in Switzerland, and considering the geographical position of the country it seems natural that porcelain of the German type should have been made at Zurich and of the French type at Nyon on the lake of Geneva, but these productions are of no particular importance.
French Porcelains.—The beginnings of French porcelain at Rouen and St Cloud have already been mentioned, as they preceded Böttger’s discovery of true porcelain; but as nothing was known in France of the methods and materials used by the German porcelain makers, the artificial or glassy porcelain held sway in France through the greater part of the 18th century.The next important factory after St Cloud was that founded at Chantilly about 1725 under the patronage of the Prince de Condé, an enthusiastic collector of Chinese and Japanese porcelains. One distinctive feature of the Chantilly porcelain is its imitation of the Japanese Imari wares of the 17th century, especially those bearing delicate patterns in the Kakiemon style. This imitation was not confined to the decoration alone, but great efforts were made to reproduce the delicious tender whiteness of the original ware, by covering the body of the soft porcelain with a coating of the tin-enamel used by the French faience makers. Similar imitation of the Kakiemon style of decoration became the rage all over Europe, and was largely followed at Meissen and in England as well as in France; but no European imitations equalled those of the famous Chantilly ware.
Other porcelain factories were started at Mennecy-Villeroy and at Lille, but the most important French factory was that founded at Vincennes about 1740, not only because of the many beautiful pieces produced there, but also because the works was taken under the direct patronage of the king in 1753 and was transferred to Sèvres in 1756, becoming ultimately the most important porcelain factory in Europe.
Fortunately we have documentary information of the exact composition of the artificial porcelain (pâte tendre) of Sèvres, and a brief account of its manufacture will serve to explain how all the glassy porcelains of Europe were made. The potter commenced by preparing a glass or frit, melting together pure sand, alum, sea-salt, gypsum, soda and nitre. The clear portions of this frit were powdered and washed with boiling water, and the working clay was compounded by adding to such powdered frit a small quantity of chalky clay or marl and sometimes pure chalk as well. This mixture was ground in water until the fluid was as fine as cream, and it was then boiled to a thick paste which was so little plastic in itself that black soap or parchment size was added to it to give it enough plasticity for the workman to be able to shape it. Vases and other pieces were made from this paste by pressing cakes of it in plaster moulds of considerable thickness. After pressing, the pieces were dried and were then either turned on a lathe or rubbed down with sand-paper to reduce them to sufficient thinness; while handles, spouts or other ornaments in relief were applied with a lute of slip, as is customary with every other species of pottery. The fragile objects were then fired into what is known as the “biscuit” condition; the most difficult part of the whole process. During this firing the pieces frequently went out of shape because of the excessive shrinkage of the material and its tendency to soften as it approached the melting point of the frit. Consequently an elaborate system of “propping” the pieces had to be resorted to, and even then a very large proportion became deformed. When the porcelain was drawn from the oven after the first firing, the supports were removed and the pieces were rubbed with sand to clean the surface, and were then coated with glaze by sprinkling with a brush; the glaze being a fusible glass very rich in lead. The glaze coat was melted by refiring the piece at a lower temperature; and it was frequently necessary to repeat this process several times in order to get a perfectly even and brilliant result. The difficulties of such a process were enormous, and it was only by the financial support of wealthy patrons, or of the state, that such a method of manufacture was ever carried on for any length of time. At its best the material is an exceedingly beautiful one, lending itself especially to decoration in on-glaze colours, and the pieces produced at Vincennes and at Sèvres, between 1745 and 1770 or thereabouts, form a distinct class by themselves. Skilful chemists like Hellot and Macquer were employed to direct the operations, and many beautiful ground colours, such as the famousgros-bleu, bleu de roi, rose Pompadour, pea-green and apple-green were invented.
Fortunately we have documentary information of the exact composition of the artificial porcelain (pâte tendre) of Sèvres, and a brief account of its manufacture will serve to explain how all the glassy porcelains of Europe were made. The potter commenced by preparing a glass or frit, melting together pure sand, alum, sea-salt, gypsum, soda and nitre. The clear portions of this frit were powdered and washed with boiling water, and the working clay was compounded by adding to such powdered frit a small quantity of chalky clay or marl and sometimes pure chalk as well. This mixture was ground in water until the fluid was as fine as cream, and it was then boiled to a thick paste which was so little plastic in itself that black soap or parchment size was added to it to give it enough plasticity for the workman to be able to shape it. Vases and other pieces were made from this paste by pressing cakes of it in plaster moulds of considerable thickness. After pressing, the pieces were dried and were then either turned on a lathe or rubbed down with sand-paper to reduce them to sufficient thinness; while handles, spouts or other ornaments in relief were applied with a lute of slip, as is customary with every other species of pottery. The fragile objects were then fired into what is known as the “biscuit” condition; the most difficult part of the whole process. During this firing the pieces frequently went out of shape because of the excessive shrinkage of the material and its tendency to soften as it approached the melting point of the frit. Consequently an elaborate system of “propping” the pieces had to be resorted to, and even then a very large proportion became deformed. When the porcelain was drawn from the oven after the first firing, the supports were removed and the pieces were rubbed with sand to clean the surface, and were then coated with glaze by sprinkling with a brush; the glaze being a fusible glass very rich in lead. The glaze coat was melted by refiring the piece at a lower temperature; and it was frequently necessary to repeat this process several times in order to get a perfectly even and brilliant result. The difficulties of such a process were enormous, and it was only by the financial support of wealthy patrons, or of the state, that such a method of manufacture was ever carried on for any length of time. At its best the material is an exceedingly beautiful one, lending itself especially to decoration in on-glaze colours, and the pieces produced at Vincennes and at Sèvres, between 1745 and 1770 or thereabouts, form a distinct class by themselves. Skilful chemists like Hellot and Macquer were employed to direct the operations, and many beautiful ground colours, such as the famousgros-bleu, bleu de roi, rose Pompadour, pea-green and apple-green were invented.
Sèvres Porcelains.—The forms of the Sèvres porcelain are exceedingly varied. Many of the older shapes were designed by Duplessis, the king’s silversmith, and, as is perhaps natural, are more proper to metal than to pottery; but the French glassy porcelain is such an artificial material in every respect that such a point should not be strained too far. Owing to the want of plasticity in the paste the pieces were always made in moulds of plaster of Paris, while in many cases they were moulded in separate parts and these united together with metal screws or mounted in bands of chased ormolu. Table services made for actual use were usually painted on a plain white ground with the full palette of on-glaze colours (or enamels) and much rich gilding. The decorative pieces such as vases, candelabra, jardinières, &c., were decorated in a much more sumptuous fashion by covering the greater part of the piece with a ground of one of the rich enamel colours previously mentioned, reserving only panels in white on which delicate miniature-like decorations of the most varied kind were subsequently painted and fired (see fig. 52; and examples of Sèvres, Plate IX.). Such collections as the Wallace at Hertford House, or the Jones Bequest in the Victoria and Albert Museum, show at once the variety and perfection to which the work attained.
This Sèvres porcelain is entirely devoid of the broad decorative treatment and rich full colour of any of the great kinds of fine pottery or porcelain. Artistically considered, it has no place beside the triumphs of the Chinese or Persian potters, or of the Italian majolists. Its shapes are too formal, and are not sufficiently imbued with a sense of the qualities of the material. The ground colours defy every natural tendency of pottery colour for they are even, flawless and mechanical, with none of the palpitating richness that comes so naturally from the potter’s processes. The paintings, whether of flowers, birds or figure-subjects, are extraordinarily skilful regarded as miniatures, but as examples of pottery decoration they cannot be compared to the swift, apparently careless, brushwork of the great masters of earlier times. So pronounced was the demand of the period for smooth even finish that such ground colours asgros-bleuandbleu de roi, where the colour naturally came varied and uneven, were subsequently decorated with small diapers or lines of gold in the form ofœil de perdrixorvermicelle, so as to produce a more regular and even effect. The most elaborate and costly of all the varieties of old Sèvres is what is known as “jewelled Sèvres,” which is richly sown with imitation jewels, such as turquoises, pearls and rubies, closely resembling the real stones. These imitation jewels were in every case set in beautifully chased mountings of gold, and in the museum at Sevres are to be found examples of the punches and other tools used in making these mounts. On account of the enormous expense involved in the production of such costly triumphs of skill, examples of jewelled Sèvres are rare even in the best collections, but the English student is fortunate in the fact that the Wallace collection contains a considerable number of them.
Many reasons—the prestige attaching to a Royal Manufactory, the knowledge that the porcelain was produced regardless of cost, the mechanical perfection of its colours, gilding and decoration, as well as the fact that the glassy porcelain was abandoned as too costly and risky after about 1780—have all conspired to raise the prices which modern collectors are prepared to pay for fine examples ofvieux Sèvres. It is doubtful whether even the prices paid for paintings by old masters have advanced so rapidly as those paid for Sèvres porcelain of the best period. In the ’seventies of the 19th century it was deemed worthy of remark that a sum of £10,000 should have been paid at public auction for three old Sèvres vases; thirty years later one such piece would probably fetch the same price. It should be added that the extravagant prices now paid for Sèvres porcelain, which is much more a triumph of technical than of artistic skill, have ledto an extensive system of “faking” and even forging specimens which are purchased at high prices by amateurs.
Beautiful as the old Sèvres porcelain was, those who were responsible for its manufacture could not fail to recognize that the porcelain made at Meissen and other German factories was both harder and whiter in substance, more truly resembling the oriental porcelain in every respect. It was also known that these German porcelains were not so difficult, and therefore so costly to manufacture as the French, and all these causes combined to make the directorate of Sèvres unremitting in their efforts to discover in France natural materials analogous to those used by the German and Chinese potters. Père d’Entrecolles, the famous Jesuit missionary, had forwarded to France long before an account of the methods used by the Chinese, as well as samples of the materials they employed; and after many years’ research Millot and Macquer discovered the precious materials at St Yrieix near Limoges (see Auscher,History of French Porcelain, pp. 77-81). The first experimental pieces of this French porcelain, similar in material to the German and Chinese, appear to have been made about 1769; but it was some years after this before the manufacture of the new product was firmly established, and then to the end of the 18th century more and more of the hard porcelain and less of the glassy porcelain was made at Sèvres. Speaking broadly, we might say that after 1780 comparatively little of the original French porcelain was made in France; and from that time to this practically all French porcelain has been of the same type as the German porcelain, viz. made with china clay and felspathic rock. This technical change in the nature of the materials had a profound influence on the artistic qualities of French porcelain, and the change was doubtless accentuated by the neo-classical rage which followed on the discovery of Herculaneum and Pompeii. The influence of antique vase shapes and of modern renderings of Greek motives in design spread over Europe like a plague, and whether in France, Germany or England the last quarter of the 18th and the first quarter of the 19th century mark a definite period in pottery design and decoration. The introduction of hard-paste porcelain rendered the manufacture of large vases and other pieces possible; and after 1780 we find the manufactory at Sèvres engaged in the production of enormous vases 5 or 6 ft. in height, a manufacture which has been continued there to this day. About the same time, too, we find the first production of large plaques or slabs of porcelain on which copies of well-known pictures were painted in enamel colours. The earliest of these slabs were in soft-paste porcelain, but in this material it was only possible to make them of quite modest dimensions; with the introduction of hard-paste porcelain very large slabs were manufactured, and a series of these are to be seen in the museum at Sèvres.
The most artistic of all the productions of Sèvres are undoubtedly the “biscuit” figures and groups. These were modelled with great skill by many of the best French sculptors of the day, such as Pajou, Pigalle, Clodion, La Rue, Caffieri, Falconet, Boizot, Julien, Le Riche, &c. The best of these Sèvres “biscuits” have a real artistic value which places them in a class quite apart from the German porcelain figures made at Meissen, Frankenthal and Höchst.