Howell G. M. Edwards - Porcelain Analysis and Its Role in the Forensic Attribution of Ceramic Specimens

To whom shall I give this beautiful book just printed, polished and perfect

You used to think that my trifles were worth something.

Now please take this book, the labour of a life, such as it is, and see that it remains for all ages.

Gaius Valerius Catullus (8454 BCE), Carmina I.1.

Arts and science should be mines where the noise of new works and further advances is heard on every side.

Sir Francis Bacon, Lord Verulam, Novum Organum, Book I, XC, 1620 (The New Instrument of Science): proposing that the search for truth and the verification of facts through inductive reasoning should be mandatory before proceeding further, forming the basis of the Scientific Method.

The material for this book arose from research into porcelains which has been carried out by the author over many years, as a collector in appreciation of their artistic beauty, as an analytical chemist in the scientific interrogation of their body paste, enamel pigments and glaze compositions and as a ceramic historian in the assessment of the manufactory foundations and of their appropriate correlation with available documentation, literature and opinions that have been expressed relating to their recipes, formulations and business survival against intense competition from home and abroad. Generally, the attribution of the origin of a porcelain artefact from earliest times has been achieved through the application of several parameters, including its provenance, associated documentation relating to its manufacture, factory marks and upon a stylistic evaluation, whereby the shape, texture and design of the item, its applied enamelling and decorative artistry have been accepted as an exemplary standard and established as such by experts and connoisseurs of the genre. In common with other artworks, the forging or faking of porcelains has been prevalent through the ages and, whereas some of these are manifestly poor reflections of the antique artefacts, others have been well executed and have then proved rather difficult to differentiate from the genuine article. It is then quite difficult for the definitive declaration of the authenticity of an unmarked and potentially rare piece of porcelain to be satisfactorily and unequivocally accomplished by expert opinion alone, especially when other supporting evidential information such as chemical analysis and documentary provenance are totally absent. This leaves a void in which science can make a contribution with hard experimental data derived from the chemical analysis of an artefact, especially of the body paste, pigments and glaze compositions and also of the molecular mineralogy, from which a measured interpretation can be forthcoming as to whether or not these data are consistent with an assignment or attribution of the artefact to a particular factory, and correlating with its recorded recipes and production processes. The vexed question of factory marks also arises here, in that these too have often been imitated profusely through the ages and cleverly transcribed by unscrupulous fakers in an attempt to convince potential purchasers of the authenticity of a seemingly rare and valuable porcelain artwork. In some cases, the presence of a factory mark on a particular artefact has been incorrectly placed or improperly executed and this can be a good indicator of a potential forgery, whereas in others this is not so clearly defined and care should then be taken regarding the acceptance or rejection of factory marks