An aristocratic enterprise: the Ginori porcelain manufactory (1735–1896)

Abstract

This study analyses the history of the Ginori porcelain manufactory, from its foundation owing to the entrepreneurial effort of the marquis Carlo Ginori in the 1730s to the merger with the ‘Società Ceramica Richard’ in 1896. The aristocratic entrepreneurship marked the manufactory with some atypical traits in accountancy, administration, succession, and strategic decisions that persisted for all the century and a half during which it remained in the hands of the Ginori family. The history of the Ginori manufactory so highlights a kind of entrepreneurship neglected by historiography.

Keywords:

• Porcelain
• aristocratic entrepreneurship
• Carlo Ginori
• industrialisation
• Tuscany
• XVIII century
• XIX century
• Doccia manufactory

Keywords:

• CLASSIFICATION CODESN13
• N33
• N83

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 The research could be completed thanks to the funding of the Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze and the generous hospitality of the current Marquis Ginori. Thanks are due to Piero Roggi and Simone Fagioli for their relentless support during the research, to Elena Mattioli, secretary and archivist of the Ginori family, for her helpfulness, and to Oliva Rucellai, director of the archive of the Doccia factory in Sesto Fiorentino, for her invaluable expertise and her limitless knowledge on porcelain.

2 The Ginori villa in Doccia had been acquired by Lionardo di Bartolommeo Ginori in 1525. In 1737, Carlo Ginori acquired the nearby villa Buondelmonti to set up his porcelain manufacture. A beautiful landscape of the villa, ‘La villa di Doccia de’ Marchesi Ginori di Firenze, ov’è la loro celebre Fabbrica delle Porcellane’, can be found in Thomas Salmon (1757).

3 On the Portoguese trade in porcelain, see: Varela Santos (2007-2011); Chang (1934).

4 Before 1520, porcelain was almost completely missing from Sino-Portoguese trade. See: Da Ca’ Masser (1845).

5 Archival documents of the VOC testimony the growing trade of imitations of Chinese porcelain from the production facilities in Kubachi, to Gombroon and then Amsterdam between 1652 and 1682. See: Ward, 2008, p.34; Ferrier, 1973, pp. 38-62.

6 An international comparison of the European enterprises that began to produce porcelain, or refined the production of earthenware, in response to the increase in the demand during the 18^th century would vastly exceed the limits of a journal article and even a partial reference to the relevant texts would unnecessarily burden the bibliography. Let me just quote the reference text: Finlay 2010. A business history of porcelain factories is still to be written. An exception, concerning the establishment in Zurich: Bösch 2003. More frequent are social studies focussed on the workforce of porcelain manufactures: Buti 1990, Siebeneicker 2002.

7 For a history of the diffusion of porcelain production in Europe, see: Hofmann (1980); Walcha (1973) 159-167. For the case of the United States, see: Hood, G. (1972).

8 Similar results were obtained in Meissen, where, after the first decade of ghastly losses followed increasing profits. See: Walcha (1973), 87.

9 Johannon de Saint Laurent, who had been born and brought up in Lorraine, collaborated with the Ginori family from 1749 to 1760 when he was sent to Ferrara to act as Regio Imperial Commissario for the administration of the public properties. He was part of that inflow of precious human capital that followed the change in government from the Medici to the Lorena family in 1737. Many a capable administrator arrived in Tuscany in the following years and with them very precise accounting and managing capabilities. There is no doubt that the administration of the Doccia manufactory after 1760 bears the distinctive mark of the efficiency of the Austrian imperial government. See: Ginori Lisci (1964), 69.

10 See: Symposium on the Aristocrat in Business (1953/54); Crandall (1960), 39-41.

11 How important were noblemen as a substitutive factor in the industrialisation of backward countries was one of the most interesting results of the researches coordinated by Fritz Redlich. See, for example: Kellenbenz, 1953, 103-114; Habakkuk, 1953, 92-102; Redlich, 1953a, 69-96; Redlich, 1953b, 141-157; Redlich, 1953c, 231-259; Redlich and Rosovsky, 1956, 161-162; Zak, 1968.

12 The attempt was not successful due to the opposition of the Viennese government. The mercantilism of Ginori was, in the eyes of Vienna, a suspicious try to regain political power and freedom of action on part of the Tuscan aristocracy. The economic mentality that would gain the upper hand at the end of the century would favour agriculture and free trade, shunning the protection and nurturing of local industries (Poettinger 2016b, 65-71).

13 On the peculiar characters of Tuscany’s aristocracy, see: Litchfield 1969, Angiolini 1991, Donati 1988, Aglietti 2015.

14 This the case of the annulment of the feud that had been granted to Carlo Ginori in the territories of Cecina, this the case of the enactment of a company for the East Indian trade with capital from Lorrain and Austria, this the case of the new taxing system, introduced in Tuscany that maintained internal barriers to trade. See: Alimento 2009, 67-75.

15 On the institutional changes introduced in Tuscany by Francesco Lorena and the resistance of the local aristocracy, see: Verga 1990.

16 The uniqueness of Carlo Ginori’s venture can be underlined by comparing it with the porcelain manufactory founded in 1763 by Johann Conrad Heidegger in Zurich (Bösch, 2003). Heidegger held in the local government a similar influence as that of Carlo Ginori. Similar was also the cultural background of Heidegger and the Marquis: enlightenment, mercantilism and an affection for chemistry. Nonetheless, Heidegger founded a company with two nephews to produce porcelain, while the aristocratic marquis just added a factory to his estates.

17 On this interesting topic see Núñez, 1998. An early assessment of the question is to be found in: Buhl, 1929.

18 The same problem encountered the Meissen manufactory were the King himself or one of his functionaries continuously confronted the arcanist, on the one side, and the director of the production on the other (Walcha, 1973: 79-80).

19 The question has been attentively studied in the case of agricultural activities (Biagioli 2000, 235-238), less known the cases, as that of Ginori, of manufacturing enterprises.

20 On the uses of accountancy for purposes tangential to profit calculations and cost management, also in the Ginori manufactory in the 19^th century, see: Antonelli V., Boyns T. and Cerbioni F. (2006), 390.

21 All documents exchanged between Jacopo Fanciullacci and Carlo Ginori can be found in the family archive: Archivio Ginori-Lisci (137, I, 13).

22 For a more precise analysis of the restructuring process and the management skills of Paolo Lorenzini, see: Fagioli & Poettinger (2020): 133-135.

23 Archivio Ginori-Lisci (XV 2, 4, 1-15)

24 Balance sheets of the factory, also drawn up by Paolo Lorenzini, are partially preserved in the Archive of the manufactory in Doccia (Archivio Manifattura Doccia, Relazione sull’Esercizio,1882; 1883; 1884; 1885; 1886; 1887; 1889; 1890; 1891; 1892; 1893).

25 Regolamento della manifattura (1740).

26 All the factory regulations are to be found in Archivio Ginori-Lisci (138, 222 and following).

27 See for example the “Regolamento Agrario della Fattoria di Brolio” written down by Bettino Ricasoli in 1843 (Biagioli, 2000, 468-476).

28 For the room of the painters, for example, the factory guidelines ordered: “Mr. Carlo Ziernfeld will direct the room and will control that at the time he will decide all painters listed in the following will be at work on the pieces that he will assign them and, when he will find their work acceptable he will pay them for every 12 hours of work as specified in the following. The workers with fixed working hours will work assiduously for 12 hours on weekdays under the supervision of their supervisors. If their work should be found lacking, their shortcomings will be deducted from the pay of the supervisors in proportion. The starting and ending of the working time will be sanctioned by Mr. Carlo by ringing a little bell and all supervisors will inspection his subordinates and will personally answer for their work” (Regolamento della manifattura, 1740). Similar precise orders regarded the room where the pieces of porcelain and majolica were moulded and modelled and the process of the preparing the earth mixes and the paints.

29 How the strict control over workers and the routinization of working procedures represented a method to enhance the efficiency of work and at the same time exercise a measure of power over labourers, also in the Ginori manufactory in the 19th century, see: Antonelli V., Boyns T. and Cerbioni F. (2006), 390-391.

30 The tradition of payment in kind for work or otherwise of the selling of foodstuff directly from the landlord to its farmers was again derived from contracts and habits typical of Tuscany’s agriculture of the time (Biagioli, 2000, pp. 164-177).

31 The related documents are to be found in Archivio Ginori-Lisci (XV 2, 1800-1810, 185-297).

32 The furnace designed by Carlo Lopoldo Ginori was depicted and described by the director of Sévres, Alexandre Brongniart, in his famous treatise on pottery (Brongniart, 1844b, planche XII).

33 The same moral sanctions on the life of farmers were introduced by other Tuscan landed proprietors such as Lambruschini and Ricasoli. Written regulations regarded not only working procedures but also life habits of workers and of their families (Biagioli, 2000, 295-297).

34 Historiographic evaluations of the accounting practices of the 18^th century in Tuscany are mixed. While the traditional interpretation opts for a negative judgement, more recent studies point toward the spreading of a scientific approach of accounting that aimed at controlling costs. See: Antonelli, D’Alessio (2011), 107-109. See also: De Roover, R. (1955); Coronella (2010).

35 Most balance sheets are to be found in Archivio Ginori-Lisci (Registri Singoli). For example: Entrata e Uscita Porcellane dal 1752 al 1764 (1764); Spoglio della fabbrica (1799); Spoglio della fabbrica (1791). A comprehensive evaluation of the little that is preserved in the Archive of the manufactory in Doccia is in: Antonelli, Boyns and Cerbioni (2006).

36 Historiography ignored up to know the accounting data and curiously assumed that the entire period of the ownership of Lorenzo Ginori was highly positive for the manufacture (Ginori Lisci 1964, 69-87).

37 Excluded from the management of Doccia by Lorenzo Ginori, his brothers Giuseppe and Bartolomeo asked for the division of the inheritance and with their share of capital founded a factory of porcelain in San Donato that would compete with Doccia. Enraged by their attempt, Lorenzo asked and obtained from the Gran Duke to grant him the exclusive privilege to produce porcelain in Tuscany. His brothers were then obliged to close down the factory in San Donato, selling materials and machines to the newly founded porcelain manufactory in Neaples.

38 All documents on the management of the manufactory in san Donato are to be found in Archivio Ginori-Lisci (36, San Donato).

39 For the factory in San Donato, Sandrucci constructed an accountancy system based on the books reporting cash flows and debts/credits (including paid-in capital). Such data allowed to write down synthetic balance sheets for the manufactory as those made by Giuseppe Marrini for Doccia. Sandrucci also compiled a “Giornale di Cassa”, registering all cash movements. Another set of accounting books regarded the flagship store opened in via de’ Servi in the centre of Florence.

40 Documents on these changes are to be found in Archivio Ginori-Lisci (XV 2, Carteggi, 474-590).

41 An example of this bookkeeping for the year 1811 is to be found in: Antonelli, Boyns and Cerbioni (2006), 380.

42 Assets included: the museum of the manufactory (collecting statues and models of products to present to potential customers); buildings, machines, instruments and furniture; inventory of porcelain pieces held in Doccia and in Florence; semi-finished products, paints and raw materials; timber, woodpiles and wood stacks; mules, baskets and carts of the factory stable; cash and credits (Spoglio della fabbrica,1837; Quaderno Conti di Spese,1837; Spoglio della fabbrica,1830).

43 The strategic decisions regarded the quotas of porcelain, soft porcelain and majolica pieces on the total production. These proportions changed considerably between 1816 and 1836. See: Fagioli, Poettinger (2020): 126.

44 Documents about the litigation are to be found in Archivio Ginori-Lisci (Giuseppe 1752-1808, Corrispondenza varia 1780-1806, 1).

45 See for example the documents in: Archivio Ginori-Lisci (XV 2, 1 Manifattura di Doccia Carlo Leopoldo, gestione pupillare).

46 The scudo was a monetary measure used for accounting. It was subdivided in 7 lire/20 soldi/240 denari. The measure 6837.5.18.8 would so be read: 6837 scudi, 5 lire, 18 soldi and 8 denari.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Monika Poettinger

Monika Poettinger teaches economic history and history of economic thought in Università Luigi Bocconi and the University of Florence. Her research comprises foreign entrepreneurship in Milan and the working of international merchant networks between the 18th and the 20th century. She also studied liberal economic thought in Tuscany, the economist Otto Neurath and the historical philosophy of Amintore Fanfani. Recent researches include the experience of Florence as capital of the Kingdom of Italy and the relationship of Italian with German and Austrian economic thought. Main publications include: Economic Thought and History: An Unresolved Relationship, (with Gianfranco Tusset) Routledge, 2016; Florence Capital of the Kingdom of Italy (1865-1871), (with Piero Roggi) Bloomsbury, London, 2018; Business Cycles in Economic Thought: A History, (with Alain Alcouffe and Bertram Schefold), Routledge, 2017.