1 84 
RERAMIC STUDIO 
hree potteries mentioned as exceptions, is quite unlike the 
Meissen, and is much cruder both in paste and finish than 
the German ware. 
The potteries of England, which ranked the highest in 
the l8th century, may be classified for convenience into two 
divisions. The first includes those which closed their doors 
about 1800, and the second, those still existing, in spite of va- 
rious changes of management. According to one's possessions 
an interest is apt to be awakened in either of a dozen different 
potteries. To Lowestoft is ascribed the honor of occupying 
the foremost place in popular favor, of all 18th century por- 
celains and to the innumerable discussions about it we are in- 
debted for much valuable information. 
For our avowed purpose of discussing the comparative 
merits of 18th century porcelain, we will leave unsaid any 
private opinion regarding the historical and geographical 
claims of Lowestoft, and consider it merely from a technical 
standpoint. Through what we choose to call the "Lowestoft 
Gateway" we shall enter upon the subject, and shall endeavor 
to arrange for convenient study the most prominent potte- 
ries of the period. 
Lowestoft. 
English Lowestoft 
Oriental Lowestoft 
Chelsea, 1750 
Bow, 1750 
Derby, 1750 
Longton, i750 
Worcester, 1750 
Minton, 1798 
Spode, 1770 ^\ 
Copeland ^y 
Liverpool 
s* 
. Plymouth, 1 755 
Bristol, 1768 
New Hall, 178 J 
Davenport, 1794 
/i Coalport, 1798^\ 
Caughley, 1772 
y 
Swansea 
Nantgarw 
Pinxton 
There are six of supreme, and half a dozen or more of 
secondary interest. As it was the custom of the time in Eng- 
land to grant protection to those who were trying to produce 
beautiful objects, the efforts of the craftsmen and artists were 
stimulated to an unusual degree during the 18th century. 
When protection was denied, every effort was made to se- 
cure it. 
Consideration of these things is necessary, in attempting 
to form a correct idea of the existence and productions of any 
pottery in the past. Only when we can learn something defi- 
nite about the place, materials used, artists employed, and the 
general history of the pottery, do we find it possible to have 
a personal opinion about wares produced. In order, however, 
not to overburden the mind with non-essentials, it is wise to 
deal with only such facts as are absolutely necessary. 
We look upon the middle of the 18th century as the time 
of the first manufacture of porcelain in England. The fixing 
of this one fact firmly in the mind, will prevent endless mis- 
takes in determining the age of specimens. When a piece is 
unmistakably English, and evidently porcelain, it cannot be 
more than one hundred and fifty years old. Many claim that 
their porcelains are much older than this, if made in England 
they cannot be. The dates of the manufacture in the differ- 
ent potteries of "English porcelain," may be noted in the 
chart. 
Looking into the subject through the Lowestoft gateway, 
we see the potteries are grouped somewhat arbitrarily and en- 
tirely for the convenience of the student, who has not time to 
take up this matter historically and geographically. For ac- 
curate knowledge, however, one must not ignore these two 
most important methods of study. The location of a pot- 
tery, whether near or far from supplies, makes all the difference 
in the world in early productions. 
In considering the matter commercially, we find that the 
method of the time called for an agent in London to dispose 
of wares made in the potteries, for only in this way could a 
market be found. Often this agent, sometimes a tea mer- 
chant, and oftener a general dealer, advanced money to the 
potters whose wares they carried, and would often after first 
carrying the wares, and merely representing the pottery, final- 
ly buy it up, and stand in the history of the art, as founder of 
the works. The agent could make or mar the fate of a new 
venture, and it is generally supposed that bribery was some- 
times practiced, which led to the discontinuance of many of 
the potteries. 
Often in the 18th century the original owner of the works 
would sell out to the foreman or practical head worker or to 
some moneyed man who was desirous of playing the part of 
patron to the art. Removal of workmen, materials, potter- 
ies, moulds, etc., from one place to another, caused a ming- 
ling of styles which is to present day students, perplexing 
and yet at the same time interesting to note. We have for 
instance the original Chelsea patterns, and the original Derby 
patterns. Later we find the influence of Chelsea styles in the 
productions of the Derby factory, with changes in paste and 
glaze also. In the chart may be traced to some extent the 
migrations of the potteries of the 18th century, so that it is 
evident at a glance in which one of the many centers are 
grouped the influences that were felt for a time in one place 
and then in another. Both the Chelsea and Bow factories, 
with that of Longton, sold out to Wm. Duesbury, of Derby. 
The Caughley, Swansea, Nantgarw and Pinxton potteries were 
all bought by John Rose, who had been foreman for Thomas 
Turner, of Caughley, and who started in 1780 his pottery in 
Coalport. 
The Plymouth works, patents, etc., were sold by Wm. 
