由柯玫瑰(Rose Kerr)、约翰•盖尔(John Ayers)所著《中国白——德化白瓷》(Blanc de Chine—porcelain from Dehua)于2002年经新加坡亚洲文明博物馆出版，是继唐纳利《中国白——福建德化瓷》之后的一本专门研究德化白瓷的专著，影响甚为深远。
该书收录的都为国外研究德化白瓷的知名学者所撰写德化白瓷研究资料。包括柯玫瑰的“德化器物款识介绍”，海蒂(Heidi Tan)的“鉴赏家探访”，约翰•盖尔的“中国白的影响”，何翠媚(Chuimei Ho)的“考古眼光中的中国白”，郭勒逊(Kenson Kwok)的“德化雕塑结构的一点看法”， 埃娃•施特勒伯(Eva Strober)的“德累斯顿的斯特朗大帝收藏的德化瓷”，以及附录介绍等七个部分，从不同角度介绍了德化白瓷。与此同时，该书收录的170件德化窑精品，为Hickley家藏，后捐赠给新加坡亚洲文明博物馆，是了解、品鉴、研究德化白瓷不可多得的艺术精品。
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.
让我们想起了P•J唐纳利，他的主要作品——1969年出版的《中国白》一书 ，是迄今为止对这一复杂课题最详尽的研究，也是一个重要的出发点。从某些方面来说，这是一部充满求知的作品: 篇幅很长——我认为是所有法伯尔陶瓷专著中篇幅最长的——而且几乎是冗长的: 它包含了丰富的信息和独创性的理论。没有人比他更勤奋地在世界各地搜寻每一种已知的“中国白”瓷器，也没有人比他更深入地思考这些瓷器的风土人情； 这本书充满了热诚的解释，在一个仍然没有得到充分挖掘、充满神奇的领域里，这部令人信服的作品代表了陶瓷研究领域的一项杰出成就。在陶瓷研究中充满智慧的第一要素是与瓷器本身有着长期而亲密的关系，我们将看到，唐纳利是一位重要的藏家。然而，大约20年过去了，新的信息不断涌现，其中一些相当引人注目，也许不可避免地冲击了他的理论。我认为，可以公平地说，唐纳利对瓷器的质量和风格并不是绝对正确的判断，有时新的证据表明了这一点； 事实上，奇怪的是，在他急于解释一切的过程中，他有时并没有站住脚跟。虽然事后看起来比较明智，但是并没有隐藏调整的必要性。
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，生产的一个重要组成部分是使用模具压出组装在一起的部分——这种做法使得德化制造商与其早期的时代有所不同； 它能同样地塑造有用的器皿和人物，毫无疑问，采用这种方法是为了节约使用熟练的劳动力。瓷塑的主要部分首先用两部分的模具铸造，所有的伸出部分，如手臂、装饰等都是分开制作的: 头部和手部被置入颈部和手臂。
(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.
即使在今天的欧洲，也能找到这种级别的中国白瓷器，尤其是在整个英格兰古老的乡村别墅收藏中: 例如，在伯利庄园，一些物品最近在1688年和1690年的库存中被发现；或者在汉普顿庄园，那里一个几乎完全可以追溯到17世纪的瓷器收藏，似乎代表了玛丽女王二世在1694年去世前所拥有的遗物。这个属于图2中的葡萄酒壶，它也被记录为1721年在德累斯顿开始的“白色茶物品”清单中的“第一”。从唐纳利对德累斯顿船舶库存的分析，以及戈登最近引用的东印度公司记录，可以清楚地看出，在19世纪初期，进口船舶、人物和其他小型船舶如潮水般涌入，这些熟悉的船型提供了大量学生过去工作所需的原始材料。但这并不是德化故事的全部，在这些限制之外，证据很少: 即使说这种贸易在18世纪是如何发展的，例如，也绝非易事。有迹象显示，大部分进口货物是在本世纪中叶之前到达的，但在十九世纪，即古董贸易增长之前，仍然没有多少资料，而且毫无疑问，我们对二十世纪在某些方面还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.图2: 带有图形浮雕的酒壶。高度21厘米1650-90。汉普敦宫。)
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.图3：所谓的“马可波罗”花瓶； 浮雕装饰的瓷器。身高12厘米，13-14世纪。威尼斯圣马克基金。)
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. 图4：军持，白色粗陶器带漩涡形浮雕装饰，14世纪。)
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. 图5：盒，浮雕莲花设计的瓷器。直径15.2厘米。13-14世纪。私人收藏，荷兰。)