Featured Chinese shallow bowl

Grabbed this today from the shop that never seems to have anything decent in it, in my local town centre. I mean they never seem to even have anything like wedgwood, royal Albert, Ainsley, Coalport etc. I'm sure they must be syphoning it all off. Anyway, to the point. I have been aware of this style of Chinese porcelain for a while, as I found a similar lidded sugar bowl a few years ago. It's a shallow bowl and I'm not sure how to describe it. I have seen a few descriptions such as famille verte, cabbage ware etc. Can tell it's late 19th century or later because it says China on it. Other than that I don't know. Ø = 20.5cm. Any good key words please?

 

I searched "bok choy butterfly" on Google Images and found similar.

 

Yes I've seen it called bok choi too. Thanks. Maybe I should just call it a mixture of all available descriptions

 

That's quite the mashup, but for some reason I kind of quite like it. Suspect that one is 2nd quarter 20th century.

 

Okay thanks. This is the sugar bowl I found a few years ago

 

From my experience seeing the 'Made in' part is generally from 1930's onwards. I don't think I've ever seen decent evidence for it pre 1900 despite so many people shouting McKinley.

 

Thanks for your wisdom. I'm guessing Mckinley is the American equivalent of Victorian?

 

McKinley Tariff Act, 1890

From Gothberg.com:

... in 1891 in response to the U.S. McKinley Tariff Act, which forbade the import of items that weren't "plainly marked, stamped, branded, or labeled in legible English words."

https://gotheborg.com/glossary/nippon.shtml

 

Yes, I have had many items post 1891 which do not in theory meet the requirements of this act. For example items with paper labels, one or two washes and they would have gone. I even had a boarded case which had 'legally compliant' marking, the pieces inside did not. The law may had passed, but compliance was not in any way universal.

 

Ah. I was aware of the legislation but not the name. Cheers.

 

It was a U.S. law, so it didn't need to apply elsewhere, and it was subject to interpretation. According to that link, Nippon was acceptable to U.S. customs right up to 1921.

 

Yes, it did become quite universal though didn't it. I guess if they were going to label goods up for the world's largest market, they might as well have done it for all their exporlrted goods. It's unusual to see ceramic goods from the last 100 years over here as well.

 

Was the U.S. the largest market in the 1890s? And what about all the other countries that don't speak English.

 

Europe probably outweighed the US by some way at the time, England adopted a similar premise at the time - the requirement became 'England - Made in England was 20th century from most accounts, but actual date of compliance is disputed and not certain between manufacturers, accounts vary.

The trade between US>UK>Japan>Holland at the period seems most prevalent due to UK & Dutch prominence at of import during the late 19th century.

 

In the 1890s the largest market for Chinese and Japanese items was probably the rest of Asia, with a trade history of thousands of years and a huge population. Those items also ended up in the West, through migration from former European colonies, for instance.

Second was probably Europe.
Every Dutch middle class household owned a few pieces or sets of Chinese porcelain, a trend that could be seen to a lesser extent in other European countries.

 

Yes, I feel the same. It's appealing even though not top quality.

 

Not sure to be honest with you. Just an assumption on my behalf.

 

That law is funny have you noticed porcelain made for export only has it? & few figurine of course roc made tons of copy with that china mark. I have so many pre 1890 ware with no china mark & still made it to usa or same painting porcelain with china or no china, I have noticed few things about that law,