CHAPTER I.

TECHNOLOGY.

Confusion in Use of Terms.--Porcelain as an Instance.--Derivation of Ceramic.--Pottery.--Faience.--Majolica.--Mezza-Majolica.--Composition of Porcelain.--Origin of Word.--Where first made.--When introduced into Europe.--Hard and Soft Paste.--Soft Porcelain of Venice, Florence, England, France.--Hard Porcelain invented at Meissen by Böttcher.--Vienna.--Discovery of Kaolin in France.--Biscuit.

[Illustration: Fig. 20.--Blue-glazed Pottery. Egyptian.]

It will be necessary as we proceed to make use of certain terms, the meaning of which should be defined with as much exactness as possible. It may be premised that considerable confusion exists in the nomenclature of the art. This has arisen partly from the want of precision in the language employed by writers, and partly from diversity of usage. As an illustration, the word “porcelain” may be adduced. The material to which the Egyptians applied a glaze, and which was very largely used in making ornaments and small images, has been called, and is constantly spoken of, as Egyptian porcelain (Fig. 20). In reality the substance is not porcelain, having neither the transparency nor the hardness of that ware, but a compound between porcelain and earthen-ware. The word was also used by the Italians in the sixteenth century, to designate their finer qualities of majolica. An equally incongruous application of it is made in the case of Lambeth faience, which is described by the manufacturers as a “kind of porcelain.” Such words as faience, hard and soft porcelain, majolica, stone-ware, etc., are in continual use by writers upon ceramic art, and a few of the more important will now be defined.

Allusion has already been made to the derivation of the word “ceramic.” Viewing the subject more prosaically, the name κεραμος was applied by the Greeks to pottery in general, and also to a large jar; and several derivatives were used for the designation of different vessels. The potter himself was called κεραμευς, and the pot-market κεραμεικος. Although the matter has been differently viewed, it appears probable that the root of all the above words is κερας, a horn. The horn was used at a very early period as a drinking-cup, and a more decided air of probability is thus given to the above assumption, since Bacchus was the reputed parent of κεραμος, or Ceramus. However philologists may ultimately settle this matter, the word “ceramic” is now employed to designate the potter’s art and its productions.

The word “pottery” is variously used. Its root is the Latin _potum_, a drinking-vessel. It is applied, according to general English usage, to all wares distinguished by their opacity from translucent porcelain. The French word _poterie_, on the other hand, is applied to all vessels, including those made of porcelain. The latter fact has led to a slight confusion in the use of the English word. One writer makes the assertion in one place, that the words “earthen-ware” and “pottery” have limited and distinctive meanings, the former applying only to vessels of the coarser qualities, the latter to the finest products of the fictile art, “including even porcelain.” In another place, he draws a distinction between pottery and porcelain, and in the latter course he is followed by the present writer.

Faience, fayence, or fayance, is a French word applied to every kind of glazed earthen-ware. According to the earlier French usage, the term included porcelain, but more lately it has been applied only to pottery.

The word “majolica,” as now employed, has almost the same meaning as faience. A more limited signification is attached to it by some. The writer of the article on pottery in “Appleton’s Cyclopædia” says it is used “to signify all faience of Italian manufacture. Lately the word has been used as almost, if not quite, synonymous with faience.” A more recent writer has said, “In its now common acceptation, the word is applied to all kinds of decorated pottery made in Italy, or made in colors and styles imitating the old Italian work. But when you read a book on pottery written during the present century by an expert, you will do well to remember that the word in that book means exclusively Italian decorated pottery of the fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, in the old Italian styles. It does not include Italian vases made in imitation of German, French, Dutch, or English wares.”

The changing meaning of this word is a good illustration of the careless use of the terms employed in treating of ceramic art. Originally, majolica, or maiolica, had a meaning different from any of those given above. The name is derived from Majorca, the largest of the Balearic Islands, between which and Italy intercourse is known to have taken place in the twelfth century; and two hundred years later, the commercial transactions of Majorca were of a very extensive kind. The evidence in favor of the above derivation of the word is conclusive. Scaliger says distinctly that the Italian pottery derived its name of majolica from Majorca, where the pottery was most excellent. Ferrari believes that “the use of majolica, as well as the name, came from Majorca, which the ancient writers called Majolica.” The “Dictionary della Crusca” adds weight to these authorities. Such being the case, it seems probable that the Italians derived part of their knowledge of making majolica from the place which gives it its name. Even admitting that the Saracens who settled in Sicily, and the Moors expelled from Spain who settled in Italy, initiated the Italians in the art, nothing is thereby detracted from the importance of Majorca. The fact is left unaffected that the intercourse with the Balearic group enabled the Italians to find a name for the ware they admired so much. On trying to imitate it, the ware called “mezza-majolica” was produced. The red clay was first thinly coated with white earth, upon which the colors were laid. After a partial firing, lead glaze was applied, and lustre pigments gave the ware the iridescence characteristic of real majolica. It was after this that tin enamel was used in place of a white slip; and the lustre pigments being applied as before, fine majolica was produced. It will thus be seen that the words “mezza-majolica” and “majolica” were originally applied only to wares showing the _reflet métallique_, or lustre. This limited use of the word was observed down to the middle of the sixteenth century. Piccolpasso, writing in 1548, in no case applies the name to the painted and glazed wares of his own production. All the glazed earthen-ware of Italy was thereafter called majolica; and the application of the word has been growing wider ever since. Mr. Fortnum says, “We think, with M. Jacquemart, M. Darcel, Mr. J. C. Robinson, and others, that the word ‘maiolica’ should be again restricted to lustred wares.” Any such attempt must necessarily end in failure. The popular employment of a word is not to be controlled by its scientific application. The tendency is in the opposite direction--toward the establishment of a universal usage by which faience and majolica will become convertible terms.

The different kinds of ware, such as Lucca della Robbia, Palissy, Doulton, and Limoges, will be found described under the countries to which they belong.

Porcelain is composed of two ingredients, one of which--kaolin--is infusible, and the other--petuntse--vitrifies, and envelops the kaolin. It is translucid, and therein differs from pottery, which is opaque. As to the origin of the word, we have already seen that it was, in its Italian form, applied to majolica in the sixteenth century; and the word “pourcelaine” occurs two centuries earlier. It was used to designate Oriental china in the fifteenth century. Mr. J. F. Davis, in his work on the Chinese (1840), quotes Marsden to the effect that the word “porcelain,” or _porcellana_, was applied by Europeans to the ware of China, from the resemblance of its fine polished surface to that of the univalve-shell so named; while the shell itself derived its appellation from the curved or gibbous shape of its upper surface, which was thought to resemble the raised back of a _porcella_, or little hog. When porcelain was first invented in China is not exactly known. The combination was discovered in the province of Honan about eighteen hundred years ago; but the date cannot be more specifically fixed. From China it was introduced into Persia, Egypt, and Barbary, at a very early period, and was thence imported into Europe, where, however, it was not generally known until 1518. The first specimens of Oriental porcelain known to have reached England were given by Philip of Austria to Sir Thomas Trenchard, of Wolverton, in 1506.

To continue its history in Europe, it is necessary to observe that there are two kinds of porcelain--the natural, or _pate dure_, and the artificial, or _pate tendre_. The latter cannot stand so high a temperature as the former, and can be scratched with a knife, which the hard porcelain resists. The soft-paste was the first to be discovered in Europe. Chemists, struck with the beauty of the Chinese porcelain, and impelled by a desire to imitate, began to experiment in the sixteenth century; and the first success, of which substantial evidences now exist, was gained at Florence in 1580. It is said that a Venetian potter made porcelain sixty or seventy years earlier; but no specimen known to be his is now in existence. After that of Florence, the next discovery was made by Dr. Dwight, of Fulham, England, in 1671; and in 1695 the secret was penetrated by M. Chicanneau, at St. Cloud, France. By that time the Florentine porcelain and process had been forgotten, and the English and French ceramists pursued perfectly independent investigations.

The problem of making a hard-paste porcelain resembling that of the Orient still remained unsolved. No chemistry could avail the experimenters so long as the materials were wanting. To the accidental discovery of a bed of kaolin, Europe owed its first hard porcelain. This important event took place about the year 1709, and the circumstances leading to it are full of interest.

John Frederic Böttger, or Böttcher, was a chemist’s assistant in Berlin, and having fallen under suspicion as an alchemist, he took refuge in Saxony, which was then under the electorate of Augustus II. The elector, having questioned him as to his researches in the forbidden science, placed him in the laboratory of a chemist who was in search of the philosopher’s stone. While working to that end, Böttcher surprised himself by producing something akin to Chinese porcelain. The course of his experiments was turned at once from the channel in which it had run. The king gave him every facility for continuing his experiments and working out his secret. He was first established at Meissen, then at Königstein, and last at Dresden. The first results were comparatively rude; then came a reddish stone-ware, and afterward a dull white porcelain. How long his experiments might have been continued, or what might have been their ultimate result, cannot be estimated, had not an accidental discovery brought the object at which he was aiming suddenly within his reach. John Schnorr, a wealthy iron-founder, riding one day in the vicinity of Aue, near Schneeberg, Saxony, noticed that his horse lifted his feet with difficulty. On examination he found that the clay was very white and peculiarly adhesive. Schnorr, although rich, would gladly be richer, and avarice made him ingenious. Why not use this white earth in the making of hair-powder? was the question which occurred to him. The commodity was dear, and clay was a cheap substitute. He took a quantity with him, made the new hair-powder, and was successful in his venture. In due course, the new powder reached Böttcher, and he, in turn, found an original use for the white earth. Inquiring into the nature of the powder, he found it was earthy, and at once tried it in his laboratory. The powder was kaolin, and hard porcelain was discovered. A manufactory was established at Meissen, of which Böttcher was director until his death, in 1719.

In 1720, the manufacture was begun at Vienna, whither the secret was carried by an escaped foreman from Böttcher’s works at Meissen.

It is very curious to note that the first manufacture of hard porcelain in France was due to a chance discovery almost identical with that made in Germany. Kaolin had been found at Alençon, but the porcelain made from it was not pure in color. In 1765, the wife of a surgeon found near St. Yrieix a peculiarly soft earth of great whiteness. Being poor, Madame Darnet was also economical. Unlike Schnorr, her thoughts turned in the direction rather of keeping down household expenses than of adding to her income. The earth had a soft, oily touch, and the good lady thought that it might answer all the purposes of soap. Her husband sent a sample to a chemist, and it was soon afterward decided to be kaolin. The manufacture of hard porcelain was begun at Sèvres in 1769, the quarries of St. Yrieix supplying both the kaolin and petuntse. As illustrating the ingratitude of the world, it may be mentioned that the humble instrument by whose aid France reached its lofty eminence in the manufacture of porcelain was, for about sixty years, left unrewarded. In 1825, Madame Darnet, spending her old age in poverty, received a pension from Louis XVIII.

Biscuit is the technical term applied to both pottery and porcelain before they are enamelled or glazed. In this condition, porcelain is of a dead white, and is not very well suited to receive decoration in colors which require a glaze to bring out their full beauty.