Skip to main content

Case Studies II: Analytical Data Which Have Revealed that Significant Revision Is Required to the Perceived Historical Knowledge of Porcelain Factories (Part A)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Porcelain Analysis and Its Role in the Forensic Attribution of Ceramic Specimens

Part of the book series: Cultural Heritage Science ((CUHESC))

  • 349 Accesses

Abstract

The second chapter of case study exemplars reveals a selection of case studies wherein the inclusion of analytical evidence recommends serious consideration should be given to the perceived historical knowledge about porcelain manufactories relating to the attribution of specimens. Firstly, the long-held assumption that the Nantgarw China Works made highly phosphatic soft paste porcelain exclusively is demonstrated to be incorrect form recent analytical data which indicate clearly the presence of highly siliceous shards from the factory site befitting a hard paste porcelain body . Secondly , the marine excavation of porcelain shards from the wrecks of Portuguese carracks which foundered off the Cape of Good Hope in the early seventeenth century on the way home to Europe from China with cargoes of Ming Dynasty Chinese porcelains, reveal analytically the presence of anatase (a twenty century pigment !) and also soft paste bodied porcelain. Thirdly, there is now overwhelming analytical evidence that the porcelains attributed for many years to either Bow or the unknown Factory A dating from around 1745–1750 are in fact now to be considered one and the same.

“Detection is an exact science and should be treated in the same cold and unemotional manner”.

Sherlock Holmes, The Sign of Four.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, 1890.

“You see but you do not observe. The distinction is clear”.

Sherlock Holmes, A Scandal in Bohemia.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, 1891.

“Never trust to general impressions but concentrate yourself upon details”.

Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, 1892.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

References for Section 7.1

  • J. A. Anderson, Derby Porcelain and the Early English Fine Ceramics Industry, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leicester, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Colomban, H.G.M. Edwards and C. Fountain, “Raman spectroscopic and SEM/EDAXS analyses of highly translucent Nantgarw soft-paste porcelain”, Journal of the European Ceramic Society, 40, pp. 4664–4675, 2020.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • L.W. Dillwyn, Notes and Workbooks of Recipes at the Swansea China Works, 1815–1817, reproduced in H. Eccles & B. Rackham, Analysed Specimens of English Porcelain, 1922, and in Edwards, Nantgarw and Swansea Porcelains; An Analytical Perspective, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Eccles and B. Rackham, Analysed Specimens of English Porcelain in the Victoria and Albert Museum Collection, Victoria and Albert Museum Publications, South Kensington,: London, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  • H.G.M. Edwards, Swansea and Nantgarw Porcelains: A Scientific Reappraisal, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2017.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • H.G.M. Edwards, Nantgarw and Swansea Porcelains:An Analytical Perspective, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2018.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • H.G.M. Edwards, Porcelain to Silica Bricks: The Extreme Ceramics of William Weston Young (1776–1847), Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2019.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • W.B. Honey, Old English Porcelain, 3rd Edition, Faber & Faber, London, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Jewitt, The Ceramic Art of Great Britain from the Prehistoric Times Down to the Present Day, Vols. I and II, Virtue & Co. Ltd., Paternoster Row, London, 1878.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.D. John, Nantgarw Porcelain, The Ceramic Book Company, Newport, 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.D. John, G.J. Coombes and K. Coombes, The Nantgarw Porcelain Album, The Ceramic Book Company, Newport, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • A.E. McGrath, Bridge Building: Creative Christian Apologetics, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, UK, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Morton Nance, The Pottery and Porcelain of Swansea and Nantgarw, B.T. Batsford Ltd., London, 1942.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.V. Owen, J.O. Wilstead, R.W. Williams and T.E. Day, “A tale of two cities: compositional characteristics of some Nantgarw and Swansea porcelains and their implications for kiln wastage”, J. Archaeological Sciences, 25, pp.359–375, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.V. Owen, M.L. Morrison, “Sagged phosphatic Nantgarw porcelain (ca. 1813–1820): Casualty of overfiring or a fertile paste?”, Geoarchaeology, 14, pp.313–332, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Taylor, The Complete Practical Potter, Shelton, Stoke-upon-Trent, 1847.

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Turner, The Ceramics of Swansea and Nantgarw, Bemrose & Sons, Old Bailey, London, 1897.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • J. Twitchett, Derby Porcelain: 1748–1848, Antique Collectors Club, Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.J. Williams, The Nantgarw Pottery and its Products: An Examination of the Site, The National Museum of Wales and the Press Board of the University of Wales, Cardiff, 1932a.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.J. Williams, “The Nantgarw Pottery and its products: an examination of the site”, Archaeologica Cambrensis, 87, pp.108–143, 1932b.

    Google Scholar 

  • I. Williams, A Guide to the Collection of Welsh Pottery and Porcelain (Swansea and Nantgarw ) in the National Museum of Wales, National Museum of Wales Publishing/Humphrey Milford, Cardiff and London, 1931.

    Google Scholar 

References for Section 7.2

  • E.A. Carter, M.L. Wood, D. de Waal and H.G.M. Edwards, “Porcelain shards from Portuguese wrecks: Raman spectroscopic analysis of archaeological ceramics”, Heritage Science, 5:17, pp. 1–8, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-017-0130-9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • D.L.A. de Faria and H.G.M. Edwards, Pitfalls in Raman Spectroscopy Applied to Art and Archaeology: A Practical Survival Guide for Non-Specialists, in Raman Spectroscopy in Archaeology and Art History, eds. P. Vandenabeele and H.G.M. Edwards, Chapter 20, Royal Society of Chemistry Publishing, Cambridge, pp. 314–344, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • D. de Waal, “Raman investigation of ceramics from 16th and 17th Century Portuguese shipwrecks”, Journal of Raman Spectroscopy, 35, pp. 646–649, 2004a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D. de Waal, “Raman identification of pigment in blue and white Ming porcelain shards”, Asian Chemistry Letters, 8, pp. 57–65, 2004b.

    Google Scholar 

  • D. de Waal, “Micro-Raman and portable Raman spectroscopic investigation of blue pigments in selected Delft plates”, J Raman Spectroscopy, 40, pp. 2162–2170, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • H.G.M. Edwards, N.F. Nikhassan and P.S. Middleton, “Anatase: A pigment in ancient artworks or a modern usurper”, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 384, pp.1356–1365, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • R.L. Gettens and G.L. Stout, Painting Materials: A Short Encyclopaedia, D. Van Nostrand, New York, and Chapman & Hall, London, 1942.

    Google Scholar 

  • D.A.H. Hanaor and C.C. Sorrell, “Review of the anatase to rutile phase transformation”, Journal of Materials Science, 46, pp. 855–874, 2011.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • C. Jorg and P. Wilson, Chinese Porcelain in the Collection of the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam: The Ming and Qing Dynasties, The Rijksmueum, Amsterdam, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • L.-G. Lui and T.P. Mernagh, “Phase transitions and Raman spectroscopy of anatase and rutile at high pressures and room temperature”, European Mineralogical Journal, 4, pp. 45–52, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • C Rei, Turning Points in Leadership: Shipping Technology in the Portuguese and Dutch Merchant Empires, Working Paper No. 11-W23, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA, November 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Zuo, C. Xu, C. Wang and Z. Yushi “Identification of the pigment in painted pottery from the Xishan site by Raman microscopy”, Journal of Raman Spectroscopy, 30, pp. 1053–1055, 1999.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

References for Section 7.3

  • J.W. Anthony, R.A. Bideaux, K.W. Bladh and M.C. Nichols, eds., Handbook of Mineralogy, Volume 2, Silica and Silicates, Mineralogical Society of America, Chantilly, Virginia, USA, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Burton, A History and Description of English Porcelain, Cassell & Co. Ltd., 1st Edition reprinted by Wakefield EP Publishing Ltd., 1902.

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Chaffers, Marks and Monograms on Pottery and Porcelain with Historical Notes on Each Manufactory, 1863, J. Davy & Sons, London, Kessinger Legacy Reprints, Kessinger Publishing, Whitefish Montana USA, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • R.J. Charleston and J.V.G. Mallet, “ A problematical group of Eighteenth Century porcelains” Transactions of the English Ceramics Circle, 8(1), pp. 80–121, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sir A.H. Church, W.Y. Fletcher, J. Starkie Gardner, A Hartshorne and C.H. Read, Some Minor Arts Practised in England, Seeley and Co., London, p.33, 1894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sir A.H. Church, Cantor Lectures: Lecture IV, “Soft paste porcelains, European and Oriental”, Journal of the Society of Arts, January 14th, pp.126–129, London, 1881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sir A.H. Church, English Porcelain: A Handbook to the China Made in England During the 18th Century as Ilustrated by Specimens Chiefly in the National Collection, A South Kensington Museum Handbook, Chapman & Hall Ltd., London, 1885 and 1894.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.V.G. Mallet, “The A-marked porcelains revisited”, Transactions of the English Ceramics Circle, 15(2), 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.V. Owen and N.G. Panes, “Bow and Factory-A marked porcelains: A tangible link from the Stratford (East London) factory site”, English Ceramic Circle Transactions, 23, pp.153–162, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.V. Owen, “Double corona structures in 18th Century (1st patent Bow, London, ca. 1744–1749): A record of partial melting and subsolidus reaction”, Canadian Mineralogist, 50, pp.1255–1264, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay, A. Gabszwewicz and E.G. Ramsay, “Unaker or Cherokee clay and its relationship to the Bow porcelain manufactory”, Transactions of the English Ceramics Circle, 17, pp. 474–499, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay, A. Gabzsewicz and E.G. Ramsay, “The chemistry of “A”- marked porcelains and their relationship to the Heylyn and Frye patent of 1744”, Transactions of the English -Ceramics Circle, 18, pp. 264–283, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay, G.R. Hill and E.G. Ramsay, “Re-creation of the 1744 Heylyn and Frye ceramic patent wares using Cherokee clay: implications for raw materials, kiln conditions and the earliest English porcelain production”, Geoarchaeology, 19, pp. 635 – 655, 2004a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay, J. Hansen and E.G. Ramsay, “An “A”-marked covered porcelain bowl, Cherokee clay and colonial America’s contribution to the English porcelain industry “, in R.Hunter, ed., Ceramics in America, Chipstone Foundation, pp. 60–77, 2004b.

    Google Scholar 

  • E.G. Ramsay and W.R.H. Ramsay, “ An A-marked porcelain tea canister. Implications for early English porcelain production”, World of Antiques and Art, August 2005 – January 2006, Andre Jaku Publishing, New South Wales, Australia, pp. 76–79, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • E.G. Ramsay and W.R. H. Ramsay, “Bow First Patent porcelain: new discoveries in science and art”, The Antiques Magazine, Brant Publications, New York, September issue, pp. 122–127, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay, F.A. Davenport and E.G. Ramsay, “The 1744 ceramic patent of Heylyn and Frye: Unworkable UNAKER formula or landmark document in the history of English ceramics ?”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 118(1), pp.11–34, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • E.G. Ramsay and W.R.H. Ramsay, Bow: Britain’s Pioneering Porcelain Manufactory of the Eighteenth Century”, The International Ceramics Fair and Seminar, Park Lane, London, 16pp., 2007a.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay and E.G. Ramsay, “A classification of Bow porcelain from First Patent to closure, 1743–1774”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 119, pp.1–68, 2007b.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay and E.G. Ramsay, “A case for the production of the earliest commercial hard paste porcelains in the English-speaking world by Edward Heylyn and Thomas Frye in about 1743”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 120, pp. 236–256, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.R.H. Ramsay and E.G. Ramsay, “The Evolution and Compositional Development of English Porcelains from the 16th Century to Lund’s Bristol c. 1750 and Worcester c. 1752- the Golden Chain”, Invercargill Press, New Zealand, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • B.H. Sajaro and A.D. Nurhayati, “The changes in the chemical and physical properties of fibric peat following burning”, Journal Tanah dan Lingkungan, 5, pp. 1–6, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • B. Watney, English Blue and White Porcelain of the 18th Century, Faber & Faber, London, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Edwards, H.G.M. (2022). Case Studies II: Analytical Data Which Have Revealed that Significant Revision Is Required to the Perceived Historical Knowledge of Porcelain Factories (Part A). In: Porcelain Analysis and Its Role in the Forensic Attribution of Ceramic Specimens. Cultural Heritage Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80952-2_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics