由柯玫瑰(Rose Kerr)、約翰?蓋爾(John Ayers)所著《中國白——德化白瓷》(Blanc de Chine—porcelain from Dehua)于2002年經新加坡亞洲文明博物館出版，是繼唐納利《中國白——福建德化瓷》之后的一本專門研究德化白瓷的專著，影響甚為深遠。
該書收錄的都為國外研究德化白瓷的知名學者所撰寫德化白瓷研究資料。包括柯玫瑰的“德化器物款識介紹”，海蒂(Heidi Tan)的“鑒賞家探訪”，約翰?蓋爾的“中國白的影響”，何翠媚(Chuimei Ho)的“考古眼光中的中國白”，郭勒遜(Kenson Kwok)的“德化雕塑結構的一點看法”， 埃娃?施特勒伯(Eva Strober)的“德累斯頓的斯特朗大帝收藏的德化瓷”，以及附錄介紹等七個部分，從不同角度介紹了德化白瓷。與此同時，該書收錄的170件德化窯精品，為Hickley家藏，后捐贈給新加坡亞洲文明博物館，是了解、品鑒、研究德化白瓷不可多得的藝術精品。
Blanc de chine: some reflections by John Ayers
The so-called blanc de Chine wares come from a smallish group of kilns that lies somewhat apart from the mainstream of Chinese production. Dehua, a district or xian in the province of Fujian bordering the south-easterly coast of China, has been making these mainly useful wares and decorative figure models for a period of several centuries and, it is worth remarking, the kilns are still working today. Already in the seventeenth century some quantities of Dehua ware had begun coming to Europe, and even in its export varieties, blanc de Chine must be reckoned a very superior kind of porcelain. It was greatly admired here in the eighteenth century-as shown by the extent to which both its forms and the material itself were imitated in our earlier porcelain factories-from Meissen, St Cloud, Vincennes and Chantilly through to Chelsea, Bow, Bristol, and many others. Like most Chinese porcelains -and unlike some of the European imitations-it is a hard paste, yet its often creamy white, somewhat glassy appearance is directly mirrored in a number of the Western products, and was clearly seen as an ideal. As for the term'blanc de Chine, exactly how and when this came into use is not known, but the ware has always been greatly admired and collected in France and the French writers who pioneered the study of Chi nese ceramics in the mid-nineteenth century were well accustomed to its use.
So much we are reminded of by P J. Donnelly, whose major work. Blanc-de-chine published in 1969, is the most exhaustive study yet made of this complex subject and an essential point of departure. It is in some ways a curious work: very long -the longest of all the Faber Ceramic Monographs I think, -and almost prolix: it is packed with information and ingenious theories. No one can have scoured the world more diligently in search of every known blanc de Chine type, or pondered more deeply over its byways； the book positively hums with enthusiastic explanation, and in a field still so underworked and so littered with myths this persuasively argued work represents a remarkable achievement In ceramics studies, the very first principle of wisdom is a long and intimate relationship with the wares themselves and Donnelly was, as we shall see, a major collector. Some twenty years on, however. new information has come in to add to the story, some of it quite striking, and perhaps inevitably various crack have been appearing in his edifice. It is, I think, fair to say that Donnelly was no infallible Judge of quality or style in porcelain, as on occasion the new evidence makes plain； and indeed it would be strange if, in his eagerness to explain everything, he did not sometimes end up in untenable positions. Easier though it may be to appear wise after the event, there is no concealing the need for adjustments.
讓我們想起了P?J唐納利，他的主要作品——1969年出版的《中國白》一書 ，是迄今為止對這一復雜課題最詳盡的研究，也是一個重要的出發點。從某些方面來說，這是一部充滿求知的作品: 篇幅很長——我認為是所有法伯爾陶瓷專著中篇幅最長的——而且幾乎是冗長的: 它包含了豐富的信息和獨創性的理論。沒有人比他更勤奮地在世界各地搜尋每一種已知的“中國白”瓷器，也沒有人比他更深入地思考這些瓷器的風土人情； 這本書充滿了熱誠的解釋，在一個仍然沒有得到充分挖掘、充滿神奇的領域里，這部令人信服的作品代表了陶瓷研究領域的一項杰出成就。在陶瓷研究中充滿智慧的第一要素是與瓷器本身有著長期而親密的關系，我們將看到，唐納利是一位重要的藏家。然而，大約20年過去了，新的信息不斷涌現，其中一些相當引人注目，也許不可避免地沖擊了他的理論。我認為，可以公平地說，唐納利對瓷器的質量和風格并不是絕對正確的判斷，有時新的證據表明了這一點； 事實上，奇怪的是，在他急于解釋一切的過程中，他有時并沒有站住腳跟。雖然事后看起來比較明智，但是并沒有隱藏調整的必要性。
In this paper, I Shall concentrate on areas of the subject illuminated by recent discoveries and discussion. There is much else of a highly interesting and p perhaps controversial nature to be considered, but most of this must be left aside for the present. These reflections gain welcome inspiration from the recent labours of others.
An important element of the production, it should be noted, was the use of moulds to press out parts which were assembled together-a practice that has distinguished the Dehua manufacturer from its earliest days； it apples to the shaping of useful wares and figures alike and was no doubt adopted for its economical use of skilled labour. The main parts of the tigures were first cast in two-part moulds and all projecting parts such as the arms, accesso ries, etc were prepared separately: heads and hands were plugged into the neck and arms.
值得注意的是，生產的一個重要組成部分是使用模具壓出組裝在一起的部分——這種做法使得德化制造商與其早期的時代有所不同； 它能同樣地塑造有用的器皿和人物，毫無疑問，采用這種方法是為了節約使用熟練的勞動力。瓷塑的主要部分首先用兩部分的模具鑄造，所有的伸出部分，如手臂、裝飾等都是分開制作的: 頭部和手部被置入頸部和手臂。
(Pamela Hickley at home with her collection, Stevens Road, Singapore, 1998。帕梅拉·希克利在家里和她的收藏，新加坡史蒂文斯路，1998年。)
For all their mass-produced quality the material of this export group has much similar- ity to that of the better Dehua products, the paste being pure, even, and sometimes cream- white, although at this date more often a milky white colour. It is exceptionally translucent even when thick, compared to Jingdezhen ware, while the glaze is glossy and brilliant and perfectly fused to the body. Occasional stresses or pulls in the material show up where it has been imperfectly mixed, but in general both clay and glaze are remarkably fr ee from faults.
This class of blanc de Chine is to be found throughout Europe even today, notably in older country house collections throughout England: at Burghley House, for instance, where some items were recently identified in inventories of as early as 1688 and 1690, or at Hampton Court, where a porcelain collection dating almost entirely from the seventeenth century would appear to represent the residue of that formerly owned by Queen Mary II prior to her death in 1694. To this belongs the wine ewer in Figure 2, which is also-as it happens -recorded as "No 1'in the inventory of" white tea things'begun at Dresden in 1721. It is clear from Donnelly's analysis of the Dresden inventories, as well as from the East India Company records cited recently by Goddon, that the early years of the eigthteenth century witnessed a flood of imported vessels, figures and other little models, and these familiar types provided m much of the source material upon which students worked in the past. But that is not the sum total of the Dehua story, and outside these limits the evidence has been thin: even to say how this trade fared thoughout the eighteenth century, for instance, is by no means easy. There is some indication that the bulk of imports arrived well before the middle of the century； for the nineteenth century, however-that is, before the growth of the trade in antiques-there is still very little information and without doubt we have much to learn also about the twentieth century.
即使在今天的歐洲，也能找到這種級別的中國白瓷器，尤其是在整個英格蘭古老的鄉村別墅收藏中: 例如，在伯利莊園，一些物品最近在1688年和1690年的庫存中被發現；或者在漢普頓莊園，那里一個幾乎完全可以追溯到17世紀的瓷器收藏，似乎代表了瑪麗女王二世在1694年去世前所擁有的遺物。這個屬于圖2中的葡萄酒壺，它也被記錄為1721年在德累斯頓開始的“白色茶物品”清單中的“第一”。從唐納利對德累斯頓船舶庫存的分析，以及戈登最近引用的東印度公司記錄，可以清楚地看出，在19世紀初期，進口船舶、人物和其他小型船舶如潮水般涌入，這些熟悉的船型提供了大量學生過去工作所需的原始材料。但這并不是德化故事的全部，在這些限制之外，證據很少: 即使說這種貿易在18世紀是如何發展的，例如，也絕非易事。有跡象顯示，大部分進口貨物是在本世紀中葉之前到達的，但在十九世紀，即古董貿易增長之前，仍然沒有多少資料，而且毫無疑問，我們對二十世紀在某些方面還有很多需要了解的地方。
(Figure 2: Wine-pot with figure reliefs. Height 21 cm.1650-90. Hampton Court Palace.圖2: 帶有圖形浮雕的酒壺。高度21厘米1650-90。漢普敦宮。)
In some ways, of even greater interest is the earlier history of Dehua ware. This is an area where I confess to finding Donnelly's position far from satisfactory. He was aware that Chinese archaeologists had recently investigated the kiln areas, studying a whole series of sites ranging in date from the Song dynasty (960-1279)to the Qing(1644-1911), and the reports are discussed in the book. However, he took the view that these precurso wares are different to, and distinct from, later blanc de Chine: "Dehua was making a pure white porcelain by 1400, he writes, "while it suddenly sprang to fame in late Ming with an entirely different white ware from that made anywhere else. "But the distinction drawn here is not clearly elaborated and, as I see it, his viewpoint takes insufficient account of the elements of continuity in this production, setting aside too readily the still obscure history of the kilns through the Ming period (1368-1644).
Probably the most celebrated of all early Dehua wares is the so-called ' Marco Polo'jar in the Treasury of St Marks in Venice (F1g. 3). Tradition alone supports the association of this piece with the great merchant traveller and author and we are bound to look at it critically； nevertheless, nothing specifically disqualifies it from being a product of the late thirteenth century when Polo was in China, and indeed visited Fujian province. Some years ago in Venice, I had a fortunate opportunity to handle and examine this relic. It has a hard, white body, somewhat coarse in texture, and a glaze that is closely adhering and brilliant: this is most evident now on the upper parts, and lower down the glaze is crazed and the body stained. The shape is more complex that at first appears, for the sides are lobed. both the vase itself and its decoration were moulded. The piece deserves to be called a porcelain； and, Marco Polo or not, it is also very possibly the oldest surviving piece of Chinese ceramics to have come to Europe.
(Figure 3: So-called ‘Marco Polo’ vase； porcelain with relief decoration. Height 12cm.13-14 century. Treasury of St. Mark, Venice.圖3：所謂的“馬可波羅”花瓶； 浮雕裝飾的瓷器。身高12厘米，13-14世紀。威尼斯圣馬克基金。)
Nowadays, a whole class of export wares found in southeast Asia is familiarly known after this vase as 'Marco Polo ware and is widely recognised as being the product of Fujian kilns. But many pieces are of softer and less refined material, while the glazes often adhere poorly and are yellowish in tone. The kendi drinking-vessel shown in Figure 4 is a typical example, with its glaze partly coming away, no doubt as a result of burial in damp ground. The threadlike relief scrolls are typical of the moulded decoration style. The defects of pieces like these are due more to materials and manufacture than mischance in the firing alone, it seems there were distinct levels of production quality in these wares from an early stage. So-called ' Marco Polo wares are characterised by their limited, if distinctive, range of forms, their special material, and their moulding technique. Much of the decoration con sists of linear outline motifs of leaves, petals, etc, done in a simplified manner. The variations of style and design provide evidence both of technical ingenuity and of chronological development. The factories' dependence on the moulding process is very notable and one consequence is that even the bases of the pieces are quite unlike those of Jingdezhen. Archaeology has shown the wares were made at various sites in Fujian province, includingDehua, and in many respects the link with later blanc de Chine is close.
(Figure 4: Kendi, whitsh stoneware with relief scrollwork.14 century. 圖4：軍持，白色粗陶器帶漩渦形浮雕裝飾，14世紀。)
Many wares of this kind have been unearthed in Southeast Asia and from the former Dutch East Indies have come quantities of pieces, such as a small series of boxes published by Volker, one of which is shown in Figure 5. He describes the range of these as being thinly potted of a rather fine-grained, hard, white porcelain clay high-fired and dense which in its fired state has a peculiar aspect, a curdled look like that of a cheese dried up too soon It Is nevertheless a ware markedly superior to that of the kendi. Another feature is the absence of any brownish tinge due to iron as usually seen, for example, on the bases of contemporary yingying(shadow-blue) ware. The transparent glaze is thin and meant to be colourless. All the bases are unglazed. Unusually, this particular box has a moulded inscription naming the maker. According to the Peking museum authorities consulted by Volker it dates from the late Song or Yuan -i.e. thirteenth to fourteenth century. A second box discussed by Volker is decorated all over with relief scrollwork of the kind associated with so-called guri lacquers. He puts this somewhat later, for reasons not fully explained, as perhaps fifteenth century； while a third piece receives a much later date, late Ming or early ing, sixteenth to seventeenth century. Some authorities might place this rather earlier； however, it is interesting to note that the Hatcher wreck of the 1640s included a lot of rather inferior boxes of basically this kind: providing further evidence of the ware’s long continuity.
(Figure 5: Box, porcelain with relief lotus design. Diameter 15.2cm. 13-14 century. Private Collection, Holland. 圖5：盒，浮雕蓮花設計的瓷器。直徑15.2厘米。13-14世紀。私人收藏，荷蘭。)