Learn more about what we do
Bow Porcelain - Talks
A public presentation allows for more personal Q and A
Bow Porcelain - Public Talks
Listed are a number of talks which we are able to deliver relating to Bow porcelains and the birth of the English porcelain industry. Please CONTACT US to negotiate arrangements should any of the topics be of interest.
1. In search of Cherokee clay:
Examines the possible source of Cherokee clay referred to in the 1744 patent. Three potential locations are discussed, the first in Edgecombe County, NC, the second in north east Georgia, and the third in Macon County, NC on the banks of the Little Tennessee River. In the case of the latter, mention is made of Thomas Griffiths, agent for Josiah Wedgwood.
2. The chemistry of Bow first patent porcelains:
n this talk we present the chemical evidence based on body and glaze compositions to demonstrate that the ‘A’-marked group of porcelains is in fact the ‘long-lost’ products of the 1744 patent of Heylyn and Frye. Decorative idioms are also traced from these wares into the Bow second patent phosphatic wares.
3. Composition and decoration of Bow first patent porcelains:
Based on firing of analogue 1744 patent porcelains we discuss aspects of kiln conditions, physical properties of these porcelains, and the decorative idioms derived from London theatre and local engravings, coupled with exotic themes including Chinese blanc de chine, famille vert and famille noir, Japanese Kakiemon, Meissen indianische Blumen, and fables. These eclectic, artistic outpourings of the early-mid 1740s are allied to the skills of Staffordshire mould-makers and slip-cast potters and melded into the brilliant, indigenous, hard-paste output of Bow. This output has set the bench-mark for other British concerns – chronologically, technologically, compositionally, and artistically.
4. A classification of Bow porcelains:
Based on the composition of some 50 Bow porcelain items we erect a classification for the recognised Bow output (hard-paste Si-Al-Ca, phosphatic, and magnesian bodies). This classification is then related to features which are visibly recognisable by both curator and collector.
5. The use of steatite in English porcelains:
Here we examine our current knowledge regarding the use of steatite in English porcelains and we trace the research into steatite by The Royal Society of London commencing in the late 17th century. Evidence to date suggests that Mg-porcelains may have been the first semi-commercial/commercial porcelains produced in Britain dating from the 1730s. Based on our published work and that of Daniels (2007) we conclude that the key area in English ceramics currently in need of more rigorous objective investigation revolves around the attribution of a number of wares relating to Pomona, Limehouse, magnesian-Bow, Lund’s Bristol, early Worcester, William Reid, Chaffers Liverpool, and possibly Vauxhall.
6. Hard-paste porcelain development in England:
This talk investigates the concept of hard-paste porcelain. A history of the manufacture of hard-paste wares dating from the 6th and 7th centuries is presented and a number of criteria, previously used to support the notion of hard-paste, are discussed. It is noted that the Western concept of ‘true hard-paste’ reflects an accident of both geography and timing. Features including mineralogy, use of natural materials, visual appearance, resistance to thermal shock, and refractory body are examined and it is argued that William Cookworthy was not the first to fire hard-paste porcelains in England during the 18th century.
7. Saving English ceramic scholarship from connoisseurship:
Early ceramic practitioners such as Heylyn, Crisp, Wedgwood, and Cookworthy were vitally concerned with composition and ceramic recipes (materials science) and less so with shapes of handles and decorative idioms. In contrast the rise of connoisseurship in the study of English porcelains is essentially a phenomenon of the 19th and 20th centuries. We discuss the contribution made by each approach to our understanding of English porcelains and we conclude that subjective connoisseurship (…..special effects of reflected light on glazed surfaces) needs to be more broadly based in order to sustain ceramic scholarship through the 21st century.
8. New developments in our understanding of English porcelains:
We examine many of the beliefs and notions relating to English porcelains which have been built up over the last 150 years and suggest that our current understanding now requires a major re-examination and re-assessment. We commence with the long-held concept dating back to Nightingale in 1881that Chelsea ……..was incontestably the most important, both artistically and otherwise of any of the English manufactories, and then we examine a number of mind sets and articles of faith that have for many years acted as cornerstones in English ceramic studies.
9. Bow first patent porcelains – Cinderella in English ceramics:
Here we trace the history of this brilliant group of hard-paste porcelains since its recognition as a coherent assemblage in the 1930s and examine the reasons why these stellar porcelains have been so misunderstood and marginalised for the last 70 years. We conclude that English ceramic scholarship can only ‘come of age’ once these “Cinderella” porcelains are recognised, accepted, and factored in to the rich tapestry of British ceramic development and history.
10. The early use of steatite and bone ash in early English porcelains:
As a result of a number of chemical analyses of both body and glaze of early English porcelains (Bow, Limehouse, Lund’s Bristol, and early Warmstry House, Worcester) it is now possible to identify the types of wares made at each concern using steatite and/or bone ash and to recognise technological pathways stemming from Bow. It can be demonstrated that the dogma that Bow made only phosphatic wares commencing around 1748 is incorrect and this has held up our understanding of the development of the English porcelain industry.
Contact Us
Find out more about our public talks