anj a he l l , lut z mi edtank From China to Meissen 300 Years of Blue Onion Pattern me issen porzel lan-st i f tung
Table of Contents 4 Foreword 7 Preface anja hell 12 Background 13 The advent of blue-and-white in Meissen lutz miedtank 20 Genesis of the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern 21 Facts and myths surrounding the earliest Meissen Blue Onion Pattern 29 Prototypes for the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern c. 1730 30 Chinese export porcelains as sources of inspiration 31 Motifs in the Chinese Blue Onion Pattern and their symbolic content 52 East Asian porcelains in the royal collections at Dresden 53 Berlin and Zerbst faiences as sources of inspiration 61 The role played by itinerant painters 62 Early Meissen Blue Onion Pattern 1730 – 1739 78 Blue-painters ciphers 81 Throwers’ and moulders’ ciphers 85 Dish size numbers
85 The Meissen Blue Onion Pattern post-1740 to 1814 93 Imitations and overdecorations of the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern in the 18th century 93 Imitations on faience 94 Imitations on porcelain 100 Meissen Blue Onion Pattern porcelains over-painted by private decorators in the 18th and 19th centuries 103 Concluding summary 105 Acknowledgments anja hell 114 Meissen Blue Onion Pattern from the 19th century to the present day 115 The Blue Onion Pattern and the Manufactory’s economic fortunes under Marcolini 121 Meissen Blue Onion Pattern for (almost) everyone 130 Blue-and-white’s ever-abiding allure 146 Imitations and forgeries Appendix 151 Authors 152 Bibliography 163 Photo credits 164 Publishing details
10
11
12 Background anja hell
13 The advent of blue-and-white in Meissen The history of the Blue Onion Pattern is intertwined with the evolution of blue-and-white decoration and its special visual allure on porcelain. The China craze in Europe was at its height in the early 18th century. Augustus the Strong, Prince Elector of Saxony and King in Poland, was captivated by East Asian porcelains painted in blue. He demanded that his own manufactory produce ware of similar quality with which to decorate his “porcelain castle”, a property in Dresden initially known as a Dutch and subsequently as a Japanese Palace. It was the Elector’s zeal that paved the way for the re-invention of porcelain in Europe. His call for Meissen porcelains on a par with those from East Asia galvanised efforts to master the technique of painting in underglaze cobalt blue. A huge amount of preparatory endeavour was, however, required before the cobalt blue used yielded satisfactory results. From a very early stage, Johann Friedrich Böttger himself (1682 –1719) conducted trials to obtain the blue desired. In a report drafted in 1715, he enumerated a variety of shades of blue and detailed their strengths and weaknesses, though without divulging their composition or achieving the breakthrough hoped for. The first evidence of the technique having been mastered came in around 1717, when David Köhler (1683 –1723) and Samuel Stöltzel (1685 –1737) were able to present the King with a small saucer-dish decorated in underglaze blue.1 By May 1719, more than 700 blue-and-white porcelains were already in stock at the Manufactory and its sales warehouses in Dresden and Leipzig.2 Johann Gregorius Höroldt (1696 –1775) was recruited as a porcelain painter in May 1720 and, soon thereafter, Johann Georg Heintze (1706 [07] – year of death unknown) was taken on as an apprentice. Johann Caspar Ripp (1681 –1726) was also active in Höroldt’s workshop for a short time from September to November 1720. Following a brief stay at Zerbst during which he set up the faience pottery there, Ripp went to the Eggebrecht faience pottery in Dresden early in 1722, whence he returned to Meissen in May of that year. He recommenced his duties as a blue-painter in Höroldt’s workshop but was dismissed in April 1723 for allegedly being a drunkard, whereupon he returned to Zerbst. He protested against his dismissal and, amongst other things, drew up a list of the porcelains he had produced as proof of his industriousness. He painted around 4,806 items3 whilst employed in Höroldt’s workshop, many of them smaller porcelains, but also including large mantelshelf garnitures.4 Ripp was
14 evidently a very capable and diligent painter and hence undoubtedly a threat to Höroldt’s undertaking. This may have been one of the reasons for firing him. New information gleaned on Ripp’s time at Meissen has made it necessary to re-assess the datings of underglaze-blue patterns from the early years, and to whom they are to be attributed.5 Amongst the earliest documented examples of underglaze decoration in cobalt blue from Meissen are six saucer-dishes with nautical motifs in the Delft style that have been attributed to Ripp despite being dated to a period during which he definitely was not working in Höroldt’s workshop.6 Lutz Miedtank accordingly posits that the saucer-dishes may have been decorated during Ripp’s first spell at Meissen from September to November 1720. If true, this would indicate very early adoption of the blue Caduceus or whip mark (fig. 1). If these six plates were made in 1721 or early 1722, they may have been the work of blue-painter Johann Christoph Horn (1692 –1760), who is listed as a painter in Höroldt’s workshop in early 1721 after Ripp departed for Zerbst at the end of November 1720.7 The records Köhler kept between 1720 –1722 of his formulae for blue8 are amongst the oldest of their kind and contain a wealth of detail of both historical and technical interest. He lists three paste recipes for “calcareous porcelain”, for instance, incorporating Schnorr’s earth (kaolin from Aue), Colditz clay and alabaster. Köhler was likewise the first to note the use of “stone” as a fluxing agent. His records contain the earliest known reference to the use of feldspar, moreover.9 Köhler tested 20 different cobalt ores from a number of pits in around 1720, with greatly varying degrees of success. He was able to conclude following a great deal of experimentation that the best underglaze blue is achieved on a feldspathic ceramic body. Bolstered by this insight, he recommended admixing earth and kaolinic sand – and that was new. Stöltzel was busy experimenting, too, however. He jotted down diverse paste and glaze formulations he had already trialled in Vienna in his notebook10. By around 1732, he was strongly advocating feldspathic formulations as being the most suitable, partly owing to the workability of the paste. He detailed three procedures for preparing a blue underglaze colour: a) producing cobalt carbonate by chemical reaction, b) smelting cobalt ore, knocking it out and grinding it into coloured powder and c) producing underglaze blue by roasting cobalt ore.11 Stöltzel and Köhler were rivals and each endeavoured in his own way to make progress in perfecting underglaze blue. They were spurred on by a reward of 1,000 Thalers – a minor fortune at the time – offered
15 1 Dish D. 7.72" (19.6 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, “Caduceus” mark, Meissen, attributed to Ripp, thus dateable to 1720, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Porcelain Collection, inv. no. P.E. 2192.
16 to whomever made the breakthrough first.12 A strong case for awarding the prize money to Köhler and Stöltzel was made in a submission to the King. Augustus the Strong eventually decreed that Köhler and Stöltzel should receive equal shares of the reward, but only once they had engaged in an exchange of ideas about their recipes. Each of them received just 300 Thalers in the end.13 Stöltzel continued work on improving the recipe once Köhler had died in 1723. He concluded by recommending separate “firings of blue ware”, thus adapting the firing process to the specific requirements of underglaze cobalt blue.14 The results of firing nevertheless continued to be unsatisfactory in many cases in the years that followed. The colour remained dull, uneven, burnt in places or else slate-grey, and the outlines were often blurred.15 Well-painted pieces gradually grew in number, but so did the rejects. Continuity was in short supply. Manufactory inspector Johann Melchior Steinbrück argued that the poor quality of the kilns was partly responsible.16 Not until the advent of feldspathic porcelain did the proportion of well-fired porcelains rise. Calcareous porcelain was clearly not suitable for underglaze decoration. A start was made on stocking blue ware in around 1728,17 once it had become possible to decorate any type of vessel in blue. Many of the items produced in 1730 for Augustus the Strong’s “porcelain castle”, his Japanese Palace, were painted in blue. In 1731, there no fewer than 2 The pattern’s outlines are pounced onto the porous surface with the aid of a perforated template made of metal foil, a small rag and charcoal.
17 six blue-painters and two apprentices amongst the 29 painters employed overall at Meissen. Johann Gregorius Höroldt got to the bottom of what was causing the shortcomings in underglaze blue ware – incorrect formulation of the paste – by constantly experimenting with the composition of the cobalt blue colour, with fluxing agents, glazes and other pastes and with firing temperatures and the kiln atmosphere.18 By 1737, a total of 259,620 porcelains in the white were already matched by 178,351 in blue. Only when the recipe further improved in 1739 was there a significant drop in complaints concerning ware decorated in underglaze blue. Indeed, experiments with varying blends of paint, pastes and glazes are still carried out today with a view to further enhancing the quality of the decorative detail. Blue-and-white porcelains, and notably Blue Onion Pattern wares, are, and always have been, produced using cobalt blue. Varying intensities of colour are accordingly brought about with the aid of a single colour. Along with the chromium-oxide green used, for instance, in the “Vineleaf” pattern, cobalt blue is the only colour that does not scorch when glost-fired at around 1,400 degrees Centigrade. A basic distinction is made between two types of painting: overglaze and underglaze decoration. Overglaze decoration is applied to porcelain that has been glazed in the white and undergone two firings. It is applied to the glazed surface and subsequently baked at around 900 degrees Centigrade in a process known as enamel firing. Underglaze decoration is applied to the bisque-fired, still porous porcelain after this has undergone initial firing at around 950 degrees Centigrade, after which it is paintable, absorbent and non-water-soluble. It is necessary with both variants to produce an outline drawing of what is to be painted, either free-hand or with the aid of a template. The Blue Onion Pattern is a “fixed” design, i.e. the layout of the various decorative devices is determined by the object involved. This is why painters use perforated templates made of metal foil (fig. 2) into which the pattern’s outlines have been punched by hand as a means of defining the areas to be painted. First the template is placed on the item in question and then charcoal dust is dabbed over it with a small rag, leaving the outlines of the pattern visible on the area to be painted. The blackish cobalt oxide is now combined with a painting medium in preparation for its being applied to the once-fired, still porous porcelain with a variety of brushes. Painters need a sure and steady hand for this, since the paint is immediately absorbed by the porous ceramic body and any mistakes made cannot be rectified. The painted detail is varied with the aid of lines as well as by rendering outlines and
18 5 The glaze loses its opacity following the piece’s second firing at approx. 1,400 degrees Centigrade to reveal a colour that firing has transformed into a luminescent cobalt blue. 3 The pattern’s outlines are applied free-hand to the host surface in a workable blend of cobalt blue. Any mistakes made cannot be rectified. 4 The blue crossed swords have been incorporated into the pattern since 1888.
19 washed areas in differing thicknesses and strengths. Blue-painters face the task of applying colour in thicknesses conducive to the best decorative effect despite not being able to see the outcome until the piece has been glazed and fired. The final outcome is crucially dependent on the blend of paint and the first firing. The ceramic body must not be fired too highly, otherwise it will be insufficiently absorbent and the blue will be too pale.19 The porcelain is then glazed, a process in which the porous ceramic body soaks up the liquid glaze and the white coating formed obliterates the decoration in its entirety. Only once subjected to glost firing at around 1,400 degrees Centigrade does the glaze become transparent and reveal the cobalt blue in all its lustrous brilliance. Firing transforms the blackish-grey of cobalt oxide into a dazzling blue colour whilst the porcelain body shrinks in size by about 16 per cent. 1 UAStPMM I A f2 fol. 180. 2 Boltz 1990, p. 137; Weber 2012, vol. II, p. 10. 3 Counting teabowls and saucers separately, the total comes to 6,058, see Lubcke 2018, p. 35. 4 Miedtank 2014, pp. 2. 5 Ibid, p. 3. 6 Ibid, pp. 3. 7 Ibid, pp. 16. On Horn: information kindly provided by Christoph Kirsch on 9. 5. 2014, Langeloh Porcelain, Weinheim. 8 UAStPMM: Köhler’s book of recipes, Pretiosa no. 3. 9 Mields 1960, pp. 329. 10 A number of notebooks, test logs and loose leaves exist – all in all, seven documents in book form by Stöltzel, Köhler, Höroldt, Hoppe, Schubert and others. They cover the secrets or arcana of producing porcelain, colours and glazes. 11 Mields 1960, pp. 349. 12 Steinbrück 1717 (1982), p. 73. 13 Rückert 1990, p. 51. 14 UAStPMM IAa 7 fol. 19, 19b, report dated 12 February 1724. 15 UAStPMM IAa10/323, BA IAa12/334. 16 UAStPMM IAa 1a fol. 187a, submission dated 7 June 1719. 17 UAStPMM IAa 12 f./156. 18 UAStPMM IAa 20/4. 19 Mields/Lauschke 1965, p. 47.
20 Genesis of the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern lutz miedtank
21 Facts and myths surrounding the earliest Meissen Blue Onion Pattern For several decades from the beginning of the 20th century, Meissen scholars were generally agreed that the Blue Onion Pattern originated in Meissen on the basis of a Chinese prototype from the royal collections in Dresden. In his standard work on Meissen porcelain published in 1900, Karl Berling, previously Director of the Museum of Decorative Arts in Dresden, mooted that the pattern had emerged in about 1745. He felt this to be proven by a Meissen plate privately owned in Dresden with “three differing types of fruit pointing inwards on its ledge” and by a possibly no longer extant plate decorated with a Chinese Blue Onion Pattern whose fruit he described as being “Japanese peaches” and “pomegranates” (figs. 1 and 2). He ascribed the blue-painter’s cipher “K” and hence authorship of the first Blue Onion Pattern to the experienced Meissen blue-painter Johann David Kretzschmar.1 Ernst Zimmermann, then Director of the Dresden Porcelain Collection, argued in 1926 that the Blue Onion Pattern must have been conceived in around 1739, since as of that year there was a drop in complaints about the cobalt blue, whose manufacture and application had been causing problems for years.2 It was a year that, for a long time thereafter, was regarded as having ushered in the Blue Onion Pattern. 1 Plate D. 10.24" (26 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, crossedswords mark in underglaze blue and blue-painter’s cipher “K”, Meissen, c. 1740, formerly privately owned in Dresden. Reproduced from: Berling 1900, p. 120.
22 The assumption that the first Meissen Blue Onion Pattern was modelled on a Chinese prototype from the Dresden Porcelain Collection was virtually self-perpetuating. The plates from the Dresden Porcelain Collection cited by Berling and Zimmermann were repeatedly proffered as evidence until quite recently. It didn’t seem to matter that these two items did not form part of the older holdings in the Dresden collection and that no Chinese prototype or Meissen Blue Onion Pattern could be found either in Augustus the Strong’s collections or in the inventories (fig. 3 l. and r.). Numerous Meissen Blue Onion Pattern porcelains produced before 1739 were documented in the meantime, triggering a welter of publications and much lively debate on both the genesis and botanical classification of the plants and fruit in this blue-and-white decoration.3 Proceeding from Berling and Zimmermann’s views on the genesis of Meissen’s Blue Onion Pattern in underglaze blue, most authors went on to posit the existence of a founding Meissen motif based on a Chinese prototype in the Dresden collections and that, hence, the pattern had actually originated at an earlier date, in “c. 1730”. Thus, it was argued, the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern we are familiar with today, with two alternating types of fruit on the ledges of plates, came about through a process of simplification and adaptation, though no material proof of this was furnished. 2 Plate D. 11.26" (28.6 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, thought to be from China, c. 1730– 1740, formerly privately owned in Dresden. Reproduced from: Berling 1900, p. 120.
23 The sole exception was Otto Walcha, who in 1967 published details of an Blue Onion Pattern plate in underglaze blue from the former collection of Rudolf Just in Prague (fig. 4).4 This plate features the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern with peach, pomegranate and melon on its ledge plus a border band of lotus and other aquatic motifs. Walcha felt that this variant of the Blue Onion Pattern must have originated earlier than in 1730. An archive entry from 1729 appears to corroborate his opinion that, as well as “items of Chinese tableware” from the royal collection, a Chinese Blue Onion Pattern prototype “complete with instructions to imitate it most faithfully” had also been conveyed to Meissen.5 The layout of the fruit on its ledge reveals Walcha’s plate to be an early one-off. The piece can be dated to “pre-September 1739” with reference to the thrower’s cipher impressed into its foot-rim and is likely to have been produced between 1733 –1735. Further Meissen plates with this variant of the pattern that have repeatedly been declared as being prototypes, and are gone into below, have the impressed numbers “14” or “22” as throwers’ ciphers, dating them to around 1740, thus discounting their having played a part in the genesis of the Meissen pattern.6 3 Plate (l.) D. 10.35" (26.3 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, no mark, brown-dressed rim, two stylised branches in underglaze blue on underside of ledge, China 1725–1735, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Porcelain Collection, inv. no. P. O. 7220, purchased 1879. Plate (r.) 10.24" (26 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, crossedswords mark in underglaze blue, blue-painter’s cipher “K”, two stylised branches on underside of ledge, thrower’s/moulder’s cipher “22”, Meissen, c. 1740, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Porcelain Collection, inv. no. P. E. 2270, former Dr Carl Spitzner Collection, purchased 1890.
24 4 Plate D. 8.82" (22.4 cm), decorated in underglaze blue with three differing items of fruit pointing inwards on the ledges of plates, crossed-swords mark and blue-painter’s cipher “three dots in underglaze blue” in foot-rim, two stylised branches on underside of ledge, thrower’s/ moulder’s cipher “five-pointed star” in foot-rim for Peter Geithner sen., Meissen, 1733–1735, Meissen Porcelain Foundation (on loan from private collection, Taucha).
25 Underside of fig. 4 Nothing has been forthcoming to confirm the hypothesis voiced by Hans Sonntag to the effect that European copperplate engravings with East Asian motifs may have served the Meissen Manufactory as role models for the fruit designs in its early Blue Onion Pattern in 1730 or thereabouts. Sonntag reasoned that the fascination with the Blue Onion Pattern in underglaze blue that has continued unabated since the 18th century is due in particular to its handsome compositional structure, a “geometrically configured combination of circle, octagon and square”. He held that the East Asian prototypes of the Blue Onion Pattern symbolised the “Three Abundances” peach, pomegranate and fingered citron and that these had been distilled into two types of fruit in the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern.7 Some scholars8 countered that Meissen’s blue-painters had made a far more proactive contribution to the evolution of the Blue Onion Pattern. They disputed the widely held view that the fruit designs on the ledges of plates in the Blue Onion Pattern had evolved from initially three items of inward-pointing fruit taken from a Chinese prototype – a peach, a pomegranate and an onion-like melon – into four peaches alternating
26 with four onion-like melons on the grounds that variants of the Blue Onion Pattern were already being produced at Meissen before 1735. The following two figures show very early variants of the Blue Onion Pattern that originated between 1730 and 1735. The long-handled saucepan in fig. 5 features only the central motif, while the ledge of the plate in fig. 6 depicts two alternating types of fruit. The two objects also differ in their border decoration (figs. 5 and 6). Ulrich Pietsch, then Director of the Dresden Porcelain Collection, stated during the Meissen Porcelain Manufactory’s tercentenary celebrations in 2010 that “no piece with this pattern was ever admitted to the royal collection in the Japanese Palace in Dresden [...]”. Hence, the Augustean collections did not contain any porcelains decorated with the Blue Onion Pattern from either East Asia or Meissen. He even described the Blue Onion Pattern as one of the “patterns that are believed to be copies of Chinese and Japanese prototypes.” This applied “also to the famous Blue Onion Pattern, which has no Chinese antecedent and, instead, was copied by the Chinese after a Meissen design and only then exported to Europe.” He designated the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern as being “a genuine invention of the Meissen Manufactory”.9 5 Long-handled saucepan H. 3.37" (8.5 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, crossedswords mark in underglaze blue and blue-painter’s cipher “two dots” on unglazed foot-rim, thrower’s/moulder’s cipher “X” on foot-rim for Johann Daniel Rehschuh, Meissen, c. 1735, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Porcelain Collection, inv. no. P. E. 2294. shown in: Exh. cat. Dresden/Hamburg 1989, p. 235. Prov.: Spitzner Coll., purchased 1890.
27 6 Plate D. 8.66" (22 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, blue-painter’s cipher “three dots forming a triangle” above the crossed-swords mark with curved guards, thrower’s/moulder’s cipher “four punched dots forming a square” in foot-rim for Johann Elias Grund, Meissen, 1730–1733, private collection, Taucha. Prov.: Günther auctioneers of Dresden, auction on 8 December 2012, lot 109.
114 Meissen Blue Onion Pattern from the 19th century to the present day anja hell
115 The Blue Onion Pattern and the Manufactory’s economic fortunes under Marcolini The preceding observations have shown that the Blue Onion Pattern enjoyed commodity status and was produced for commercial purposes from the outset. It did not appear on the porcelain tableware used at court during the Augustean age. It was a plain, straightforward, valuefor-money household pattern. Blue Onion Pattern ware was bought in large quantities at various trade fairs and in the Manufactory’s sales warehouses, something Augustus the Strong was already calling for in 1731. Just how great demand for it was is evidenced by the frequency with which it was imitated in the second half of the 18th century, both on faience and on porcelains from manufactories such as those in Berlin (KPM), Copenhagen or Fürstenberg. This kind of decoration in underglaze blue accorded with prevailing tastes and could be produced at reasonable prices owing to its only having to be fired twice, to its being painted in monochrome and, lastly, to its being rendered in a more diagrammatic form from around 1780. The pronounced increase in the sale of porcelains painted in blue, with the exception of the Blue Onion Pattern, in the final quarter of the 18th century was closely bound up with political and social developments, as was the ensuing slump in demand. The period 1763 –1800 witnessed the heyday of the manufactory system in Saxony. Its rapid emergence led, amongst other things, to the formation of a new industrial bourgeoisie – the manufactory proprietors – and class of free wage-earners that included redundant miners, farm labourers, immigrants etc. Even the aristocracy adapted to the altered economic situation and approved the setting-up of manufactories. The craft guilds, by contrast, were highly critical of the trend. They opposed the adoption and extension of new production methods as embodied in manufactories that embraced the division of labour and mechanical means of production and, in so doing, changed the working world and facilitated mass production. The manufactories’ success was also aided by economic policies pursued by the Saxon State such as the monetary and mercantile system or the awarding of premiums and tax concessions. A system of protecting patents and registered designs was likewise introduced. Advances of this kind were what ultimately paved the way for a middle-class society. The State’s objective was to benefit from the financial success of the manufactory process without endangering its own social system, that of the absolutist feudal state.
116 The division-of-labour principle was central to the manufactories’ success. Long working hours and low basic wages that could be raised where needed by means of bonuses and other perks made it possible to garner huge profits. This is clearly reflected in the history of the Meissen Manufactory. From 1765, for instance, women were recruited to performwork for which no qualifications were required as a means of keeping wage levels low. They earned significantly less than their male counterparts.1 Women had little scope for working in public enterprises in the 18th and, indeed, into the 19th century. Their education and upbringing were primarily geared to the needs of their husbands and families, thus public activities of any kind were frowned upon. Blue-and-white decoration, a profession which was not all that highly 1 Meissen Porcelain Manufactory wage statistics for 1778 in: Böhmert 1880, p. 69, reproduction.
117 regarded in any case, was one of the tasks commonly performed by women at the Manufactory. Both the status and pay of blue-painters were invariably inferior to those of the “overglaze decorators”. Whether male or female, their job was seen as being to produce straightforward utilitarian porcelains for general sale (figs. 1 and 2). The continental blockade imposed by Napoleon (1806 –1813) enabled production to be further increased due to the absence of competing wares from Britain. This upturn was brief, however, and was in any case eclipsed by factors such as the contraction of Saxony’s domestic market after the country was forced to cede territory to Prussia at the Congress of Vienna (1814 –1815) or the passing of the Prussian Customs Act in 1818, which hindered the importation of goods from Saxony. 2 Staff statistics in: Böhmert 1880, p. 80, reproduction.
118 Though the Kingdom of Saxony made every effort to steer clear of France’s belligerent dealings with the remaining European States for a good many years, it did eventually have to commit itself one way or the other. It first fought alongside Prussia against France, a war that was lost, leading to a peace treaty under which Saxony was compelled by the French to join the Confederation of the Rhine. Then, as France’s ally, Saxony shared that country’s heavy losses in the Russian campaign and had to surrender almost half its territory to Prussia. Various wars that were fought led to key markets such as those with Turkey or Russia falling into limbo, with dire consequences for a Manufactory that had focused far too greatly hitherto on servicing these two major national clients. Russia ordered huge quantities at the Leipzig Fair from 1796 onwards: “Coffee and tea services glazed yellowish and brown [i.e. with gilt enamels] and at the same time painted in blue, preferably cups, additionally floral patterns and, although in comparably lower quantities, plates decorated in brown”.2 Trade with Turkey was likewise at an all-time high in around 1787. Despite its then being brought to a virtual standstill by the travails of war, Russia was able to compensate for the losses incurred in this case. The Meissen Manufactory’s takings fell by more than half, however, after Russia invoked a ban on the importation of all foreign porcelains in 1806. Competition from cheaper foreign, factory-produced wares only served to compound the issue, moreover. The then Director Camillo Count Marcolini (1739 –1814) failed to pay serious attention to rival products thrusting their way onto the market from, for instance, France in regard either to how much they cost or to how artistically innovative they were. He likewise failed to register the many technical achievements being made at the time. The manufactory system had exhausted its productive potential by the turn of the century. In the interests of cost-effectiveness, the highly-skilled, finely-detailed system of working should have made way, to an extent at least, for technical, machine-based progress. Instead, Marcolini sought to cut costs by reducing workforce numbers and confining output to a clutch of tried and tested products. He continued production for the Russian and Turkish markets without clear knowledge of whether these porcelains would ever be sold. His management policies resulted in the Manufactory being shut down briefly in 1814, the year he resigned.3 Table porcelains from the “Marcolini era” stand out by dint of their simplified styling. As little relief-moulded decoration as possible was
119 3 Plate D. 9.25" (23.5 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, crossedswords mark, star beneath the crossed swords, Meissen, c. 1780, Meissen Porcelain Foundation.
120 5 (top r.) Sugar caster with “Children à la Raphael” pattern D. 3.15" (8 cm), H. 6.69" (17 cm), decorated in underglaze blue, crossed-swords mark, Meissen, c. 1765, Meissen Porcelain Foundation. 4 (top l.) Plate D. 9.65" (24.5 cm), “Strawflower pattern”, decorated in underglaze blue, crossedswords mark, Meissen, c. 1760, Meissen Porcelain Foundation. 6 Basin D. 12" (30.5 cm), H. 6.5" (16.5 cm), “Blue German Flowers”, decorated in underglaze blue, crossedswords mark, Meissen, c. 1780, Meissen Porcelain Foundation.
121 applied and, where it was used, took the form of neo-Classicist beading, key-fret bands, acanthus friezes and openwork egg-and-dart or bead-and-reel ornamentation. The painting was executed more rudimentarily and was often sloppy. In the sphere of underglaze decoration, patterns such as “Children à la Raphael”, “Blue Onion”, “Strawflower” or “Blue German Flowers” were singled out for mass production in an attempt to accommodate new customers and fashions (figs. 4 – 6). But, by the 1790s, the Blue Onion Pattern had already been deleted from the Manufactory’s price-lists and was thenceforth only available to special order. With the Napoleonic wars raging, demand dwindled accordingly. Blue-on-white wares were particularly badly hit and now came to be produced in increasingly small quantities, to the point where they were shelved altogether for a time in the early 19th century. Meissen Blue Onion Patterns for (almost) everyone Urgently needed modernisation measures were finally taken when Carl Wilhelm von Oppel (1767 –1833) was appointed Director in 1814. Heinrich Gottlob Kühn (1788 –1870), the new inspector and supervisor for the technical department, who took up his post at the same time as von Oppel, introduced circular multi-level kilns that considerably enhanced firing output, ran them on coal and installed the first steam engine. His grasp of chemistry enabled him to make advances in the making of paints. He invented chromium-oxide green as a new underglaze colour in 1817, for instance, and in 1830 bright gold. Both likewise led to reductions in the cost of painting and firing, since bright gold did not need to be burnished once fired. He produced the blueprint, finally, for the new Manufactory building in the Triebisch Valley, one of the most modern factories of its age that allowed work processes to be further rationalised. The new premises paid for themselves within around 20 years and the Manufactory was largely self-supporting. Germany had yet to become a single sovereign state in the early 19th century and was, instead, a haphazard conglomeration of smaller nations loosely conjoined under the umbrella of the German Federation. There was no uniform trade and transport legislation in place, nor was there any uniform system of weights, measures or currency. The customs barriers each of the states imposed were a considerable hindrance to intra-German trade. The setting-up of the German Customs Union in 1834 and the lifting of intra-German customs barriers
SAND ST E I N The Blue Onion Pattern is almost as old as the European invention of porcelain itself! But what is so special about it? Why has it fascinated us for three hundred years? What role did the Onion Pattern play in 18th- century Chinese export porcelain in underglaze blue and famille rose? The history of the Blue Onion Pattern is intertwined with the history of blue-and-white porcelain painting itself. Anja Hell sheds light on the beginnings of Meissen underglaze blue painting until the year 1739, and later covers the range from the 19th century to the present. She examines the artistic development of blue-and-white painting and the associated economic implications for the Meissen Manufactory. Lutz Miedtank cogently presents the results of his many years of research on the early period of the Blue Onion Pattern. Inspired by Chinese export porcelain and underglaze blue decorated faience, Meissen’s blue painters created their own Meissen Blue Onion Pattern on hard paste porcelain around 1730. Hitherto unpublished Chinese export and early Meissen porcelain with “Blue Onion” designs including several over- decorations that were re-dated using XRF data, as well as numerous imitations of the pattern on 18th century European porcelain and faience are shown. They provide important evidence for new and surprising insights into the genesis of the Meissen Blue Onion Pattern. This English edition is based on the revised 2023 German edition of Von China nach Meissen. 300 Jahre Zwiebelmuster published in open access. It features an Introduction by Prof. Dr. Ulrich Pietsch, Director emeritus of the Dresden Porcelain Collection. A large number of previously unpublished porcelain objects, copious comments and annotations, and a comprehensive list of primary sources render this book an indispensable reference work for collectors, art dealers, historians, and friends of the Blue Onion Pattern. 9 783954 987221
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTMyNjA1