Dear Corey, I said that I do not want to insist, but let’s make a further comment.

Your conclusions are completely wrong, sorry. Please study reliable, well known and worldwide recognized reliable sources, besides the evidence, and not obscure sources that frankly need some effort to find out.

According to your conclusion, then famille rose and other enameled ware are painted on the naked body, i.e. the biscuit? It is evident to anyone that it is not true, come on, how can you believe that? Have you never handled an enameled piece?

What said by Chinadaily, unless they were referring to the biscuit enameled ware, is wrong and ridiculous.

Direct enamel on biscuit is a completely different ware than famille rose, mainly made under Kangxi, but completely different.

It is not necessary to do such search for unreliable sources, simply google for “famille rose” and for “Kangxi enameled biscuit” instead and the difference between them will be evident.

Giovanni

Well, of course there are porcelain with enamels painted on glazed porcelain like for example wucai or doucai porcealain. But I'm talking about falangcai and yangcai porcelain. And even then it is not so important if the enamels were fired onto glazed or unglazed porcelain since the topic of this thread was 'glass white', which is an enamel. Famille rose doesn't really exists in the Kangxi period. Falangcai does as well as doucai and wucai, the latter also known in the west as famille verte. And the original meaning of 'fencei' more correctly corresponds with what we now call 'yangcai'. It is only much later that the term fencei has become the overall Chinese synonyme of the western term famille rose. (There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding the names of these enamelled porcelains.) But you won't find a white ground-colored falangcai porcelain object of the Kangxi period. It first appear in the Yongzheng period where the glass white enamel is invented for porcelain. It had previously only been known from enamelled copper-ware from which the falangcai porcelain evolved. To me it seems I'm right in my conclusion that white ground colored falangcai or yangcai is enamel and not glaze.

Dear Corey,

I stop here, but be sure that what you think is wrong. Ask to any expert.

Have you never handled a Kangxi famille verte vase? You will be astonished by how white it is. And that is just, simply glaze, i.e. melted porcelain on porcelain.

You are talking about falangcai and yangcai and you say that “it is not so important if the enamels were fired onto glazed or unglazed porcelain”. Really? Are you meaning that it is the same, that it doesn’t change? Really?

Have a look at the following much more serious, reliable site. You will see that parts of what you have read elsewhere has been taken from there. But not correctly, I mean just in parts, forgiving the important points.

The firsts sentence tells everything: “There is much confusion over the meaning of the terms Falangcai (珐琅彩), Yangcai (洋彩), fencai (粉彩), famille rose.   In essence, the terms are used to refer to a form of OVERGLAZE enameled wares which can be distinguished by the presence of enamels that are opaque and powdery in nature.”

At the end, it says that during Kangxi they experimented falangcai on biscuit, but with no good success. And be sure that the looking was not the same as that of the known falangcai:

http://koh-antique.com/history/falang.htm

Giovanni

Dear Corey - a slight correction. Famille rose palette does indeed 'exist' in the Kangxi period, although such pieces are exceptional rare. See for example a bowl decorated with flowers of the four seasons, the base with a four character 'Kangxi yu zhi' mark written in blue enamel within a double square, sold Lot 403, Sothebys Hong Kong, 29 April 1997. Another bowl decorated with three large peony blooms, again with the same mark in pink enamel, sold Lot 302, Sothebys HK, 2 November 1998. Another bowl is in the Nation Palace Museum, Taiwan, and another is in the collection of Robert Chang, exhibited in London in 1993. 

Stuart

Thanks to all for this very interesting thread. Lots to see and learn here. Perhaps the glass white referred to by Corey may be the Po Li Bai mentioned in the most recent Koh link provided by Giovanni.

Michael

Dear Michael,

that's right. It is referred to a overglaze enamel.

It is also absolutely impossible to do what Corey supposed, that a bowl has the rim decorated with an enamel and the rest of the bowl with the glaze, for matter of too much different temperatures required.

Giovanni

Well, actually it is William Chak who claims that the Yongzheng period yangcai coral-ground 'floral' bowl has 'glass white' on the rim. Under normal circumstances I would think that the highest ranking dealer in Hong Kong knows what he talks about, not to mention the British professor, but that was before I learned about the razor-sharp experts on this forum.

@ Michael. Spot on! How did you guess that. I'm really impressed. Yes! Po li Bai is the 'glass white' I reffered to, and it is even a white enamel based on lead arsenate. It is actually also explained in at least two of the links I have posted in this thread. Do I really have to post the exact same two links again eventually followed by quotes of the sentences where the Chinese term Po Li Bai certainly also is mentioned?

Would the glass white enamel used to cover the white areas be prone to chipping and crazing as the other enamels would ? If so would it not be easy enough to find an 18th century example with damage to the glass white areas?

Or am i totally lost?

Carl

Dear Carl,

I am not sure if I have understood what you mean.

Anyway, it is not uncommon to see problems of adherence between enamels and the underneath glaze during Yongzheng.

Here you can see the overglaze white on a Yongzheng charger that I have (it is published). Within the encircled area, you can see through some loss of the enamel the glaze under it.

Giovanni

Dear Giovanni 

I am a little lost on where the argument is to be honest , i will have to re-read the whole thread to see if i can get back up to speed, Thank you for posting the image of white enamel chipping.

Carl

The point i was trying to make is this , If the white ground on 18th century enamelled porcelain was covered in enamel and not glaze surely we could fine some images of crazing or flaking revealing the biscuit underneath?

Carl

Dear Carl,

it is not necessary to look through crazing for understanding if it is an overglaze enamel or an enamel on biscuit.

The reason is that the look is very different. When you look at a decorated biscuit of Kangxi, you immediately see that it is directly enameled on the biscuit.

What I do not know is that such evident difference is due to the lack of the glaze underneath, or if the enamels are somehow different in composition, or if their state changes differently during firing.

Giovanni

Giovanni 

Is it at all possible that during the 18th century they developed a new hybrid style of glaze which what harder and whiter like an enamel but still a glaze , after all they are both made from similar ingredients .

You would have far more experience holding these pieces than me so would you say there is any difference between the glaze on a regular piece of porcelain than on the mentioned enamelled type of the 18th century?

Carl

I think I might have solved the mystery after close reading the lot essays provide by sotheby's for their sales of Kangxi period falangcai pieces. Qoute from the sale of  lot 101, a Kangxi period ruby ground falangcai bowl: 

"European Jesuit priests had, among many other things, brought European enamel wares as gifts to the court, with the ulterior motif to gain access to the Emperor through foreign novelties. As the Emperor was keen to have them reproduced by the Imperial palace workshops, European enamelling specialists as well as the enamels themselves were sent from Europe. The new colours were first used on copper vessels where, like in Europe, they were applied overall to completely hide the metal body underneath, their floral designs contrasting with brightly coloured backgrounds (see, for example, a bowl in the British Museum, London, in Hugh Moss, By Imperial Command. An Introduction to Ch’ing Imperial Painted Enamels, Hong Kong, 1976, pl. 10; our fig. 1).

The first ceramics enamelled in Beijing closely followed these enamelled metal wares in style and colouration. The same enamels as used for decorating copper were applied to brown Yixing stonewares and white Jingdezhen porcelains. Although at Jingdezhen enamels had long been applied onto fully glazed and fired porcelain vessels, these Chinese predecessors do not seem to have been taken as models. The first enamellers in Beijing – perhaps Westerners – may have considered the shiny porcelain glaze an unsuitable surface for the enamels to adhere, so that porcelains partly or fully unglazed and left in the biscuit were specially created at Jingdezhen and supplied to the court for this new imperial adventure. A unique vase in the Palace Museum, Beijing, and a tripod incense burner in the Au Bakling collection, both with a similar puce background, were provided as blank biscuit vessels, without any glaze (the former illustrated in Kangxi, Yongzheng, Qianlong. Qing Porcelain from the Palace Museum Collection, Hong Kong, 1989, p. 98, pl. 81; the latter on the cover of Chinese Ceramics. Selected Articles from Orientations 1983-2003, Hong Kong, 2004; our fig. 2). For bowls and dishes peculiar orders must have gone out to Jingdezhen to provide specimens with a glazed interior and base, and an unglazed exterior. The unglazed parts were then fully covered with enamel, just like on a copper vessel. Background colours may also have been deemed desirable to create smooth surfaces rather than designs raised in slight relief, since even some Yixing wares are covered in dark brown enamel, of the same tone as the original stoneware, applied as background colour around the design."

http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/2013/so-alice-cheng-hk0481.html

And from the sale of the H. M. Knight falangcai bowl: 

Copper, glass and porcelain were enamelled side by side in the enamelling workshops, and although the porcelain painters of Jingdezhen in Jiangxi province had long mastered the technique of enamel painting on porcelain, the Beijing workshops went a different route. The first enamellers there – probably Westerners who had never worked with porcelain, which had only just begun to be made in Europe – apparently considered the shiny porcelain glaze an unsuitable surface for the enamels to adhere. Besides experimenting with Yixing stonewares, they ordered custom-made porcelains partly or fully unglazed and left in the biscuit to be made in Jingdezhen and sent to Beijing for this new imperial adventure. For bowls like the present example, very specific orders must have gone out, to provide specimens with a glazed interior, rim, base and inside of the foot, and an unglazed exterior and outside of the foot.

"Enamels sent from Europe or custom-made at the imperial glass factory in Beijing provided a range of enamels very different from the wucai or famille verte palette in use at the same time at Jingdezhen. The main innovations were the European introduction of gold-ruby enamel, a transparent, deep purplish-red colour derived from colloidal gold; and the impasto use of a white enamel derived from lead-arsenate, that had been made in the glass workshops for some time, for use on cloisonné enamel wares, but only now was found to be highly effective on porcelains where, mixed with other enamels, it added a whole new range of opaque, pastel tones.

Among the earliest porcelains successfully decorated in Beijing using a gold-based ruby colour may be a vase in the Palace Museum, Beijing, and a tripod incense burner in the Au Bakling collection, both supplied by Jingdezhen as fully unglazed biscuit vessels, the former with an engraved reign mark, the latter a blue enamel mark on the unglazed base; the vase is illustrated in Kangxi, Yongzheng, Qianlong. Qing Porcelain from the Palace Museum Collection, Hong Kong, 1989, p. 98, pl. 81; the censer was sold in our London rooms, 6th July 1976, lot 170 and is illustrated on the cover of Chinese Ceramics. Selected Articles from Orientations 1983-2003, Hong Kong, 2004.2."

http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/2018/imperial-alchemy-hm-knight-falangcai-bowl-hk0797.html

So from these notes we can conclude two things. 1: In the Kangxi period in enamelling was done directly on the unglazed bisquit. 2: The white color of the interior and base is glaze - not enamel.

At Koh Antiques site, which I know is a reliable source of information, it is stated that:  "During Yongzheng period, more varieties of decorations were introduced.  The decoration is drawn on glazed surfaced instead of the unglaze surface during Kangxi period."

This sets the quote from the book A Peranakan Legacy  by Peter Wee in to a new perspective. 

""famille rose uses an overglaze technique. It is made by drawing a scetch on the shaped clay, which is then covered with 'glassy white' (bo li bai), an opaque white enamel (lead arsenate), and painted in detail with the mixture of pigment and oil, before firing."

It must simply mean that it is only the sketched areas drawn on the clay (at least from the Yongzheng period and onwards) that is covered with the glassy white enamel. This also makes since since the ability the glassy white enamel is noted for its ability to blend with other colored enamels to create different tones, shades and depths.

So after all white ground color on falangcai and yangcai is glaze and not enamel. Hopefully I got it right this time.