The Wanzenried Manufactory during the Loder & Schweizer period (1919-1925).
Pottery from the Wanzenried Manufactory in CERAMICA CH
Information on “Thun majolica”
Andreas Heege, 2022
The history of the Wanzenried Manufactory and Thun majolica
(research still ongoing)
In the late 18th and 19th centuries, the Heimberg/Steffisburg region was the most important for pottery making within the Canton of Bern. In c. 1850, up to 80 potters’ workshops were in operation on the road between Bern and Thun, in the former administrative district of Thun, and in a series of neighbouring municipalities that belonged to the district of Konolfingen – Jaberg, Kiesen, Oppligen, Diessbach, Wichtrach and Münsingen (Werder 1962). In 1764, Heimberg had 234 inhabitants in 47 households, while Steffisburg right next to it had 924 inhabitants in 184 households. By 1856, the numbers in Heimberg alone had risen to 234 households with 1217 inhabitants. In 1880, Heimberg recorded 1149 inhabitants and Steffisburg 3898 (Buchs 1969, 31; Buchs 1988, fn. 9; Buchs 1995, 36–38; Schwab 1921, 103. The published figures do not always tally.)
Although an economic downturn was experienced in the period around 1850/70, the Heimberg potters still had an invaluable store of local expertise which, in the final third of the 19th century, became the basis for the development of a rather unusual but very popular type of pottery known as “Thun majolica”. In consequence, we can only understand Thun majolica if we first turn our attention to the development and exploration of Heimberg pottery.
In a paper published in 1991, Barbara Messerli-Bolliger wrote in detail about the alleged stylistic and qualitative “decline” of Heimberg pottery in the mid-19th century, particularly in comparison to the contemporary manufactory wares being exhibited at the various National and World Exhibitions. Only the products created by a small number of innovative and open-minded potters in the Heimberg/Steffisburg region ran contrary to this trend. A variety of attempts were made to counteract this by offering drawing classes and setting up schools of ceramics or vocational schools and by introducing new designs and shapes that were considered modern or contemporary, but these had little success to begin with for the majority of Heimberg potters (Messerli Bolliger 1991, 43–78). Various institutions and private individuals hoped to “improve the quality of the artisanship” by introducing “art pottery”. This is the context within which the development and production of Thun majolica must be viewed. From the outset, Thun majolica was highly controversial, though unjustifiably so, among ethnographers and representatives of the Swiss Heimatstil movement (a historicist style of art and architecture) in terms of its quality of craftsmanship and artistic design, particularly in comparison to the earlier Heimberg products from the beginning of the 19th century (“products of genuinely contemporary culture”) (“The 1880s were the most abominable period in terms of shape, colour and decoration”: Hoffmann-Krayer 1914, 100; De Praetere 1907; see also Messerli Bolliger 1991, 70).
When the “external”, arts-and-crafts influence on the Heimberg-Steffisburg potters first took hold, cannot be ascertained definitively. The Thun city archivist Karl Huber, in a 1906 newspaper report (Huber 1906, 278), was the only person to recount the following story, which has so far never been verified by any other source:
“In the ‘60s, a Paris antiques dealer called Boban, became aware of these products [author’s note: pottery from Heimberg-Steffisburg], bought up old pieces, found a ready market for them and encouraged the potters Wyttenbach and Küenzi, to produce similar pieces to his designs. These luxury goods, which were now being ordered from and supplied to Paris, were labelled “Paris ware” and the name is still in use today for pieces with better-quality decorations.”
The Parisian antiques dealer in question may have been the “notorious” Eugène Boban (1834–1908), whose main trade was in Latin American antiquities and who has since been accused of forging the so-called “crystal skulls” (on Boban and his activities see: Riviale 2001; Mac Laren Walsh 2008; MacLaren Walsh/Hunt 2013). We cannot ascertain at this moment in time, whether the pottery orders were, in fact, placed in the 1860s, a period when Boban spent a considerable amount of time in Mexico, or whether this was only after he opened his business in Paris in c. 1870.
As Huber appears to have believed or known in 1906 based on Heimberg accounts, the constantly growing demand for such “Paris ware” prompted the Thun ceramics dealer Friedrich Wunderlich to encourage Heimberg potters to fundamentally change the styles and shapes of their wares in the winter of 1873/74, and this in turn would lead to the development of the so-called “Thun majolica” in the late 1870s. He provided the Heimberg potters Eyer and Tschanz with drawings of “Greek vases” to model their new wares on, and these were then decorated by local paintresses in the rather traditional style on a coat of black-brown slip (Huber 1906, 278; Buchs 1988, 33).
Another source of inspiration, though quite a controversial one, appears to have come from the pottery and decorative designs of a German engineer called Franz Keller-Leuzinger (1835–1890), who spent time in Heimberg between 1874 and 1876. Various potters (e.g. Samuel Mürner, Eduard Berger and Gottfried Tschanz) used his designs to produce ceramics which Keller-Leuzinger then exhibited under his own name, and for which he won a medal at the 1876 Exhibition of Arts and Crafts in Munich. It seems that this led to considerable hostility towards him in Heimberg (Jaennicke 1879, 833; Gmelin 1891). Apparently, various unmarked designs by Keller-Leuzinger were also on show at the 1878 World Exposition in Paris, where the Heimberg potters Christian Eyer, Benedikt Künzi and J. Schenk-Trachsel exhibited their wares to phenomenal success (Huber 1906, 297; on the controversy surrounding Keller Leuzinger cf. Messerli Bolliger 1991, 53–57; extant products V&A Inv. 712-1878 to 717-1878 as well as 736-1878 and 737-1878). A workshop by the name of Glatz from Villingen in the Black Forest region also manufactured ceramic wares for Keller-Leuzinger which closely resembled the Thun majolica wares (Gmelin 1891, 24; Mehlstäubler 2021). The pieces that were exhibited in Paris in 1878 also included the earliest examples of “Chrutmuster” herbal pattern, also known as “Alt-Thun” [Old Thun] pattern, which would later become an important line of production (V&A Inv. 736-1878. See also: Heege/Kistler 2017, 489–500, Fig. 168). The pattern was developed in the 1860s on the basis of local floral motifs from Heimberg, though it is not known who exactly was involved in its creation. It was part of the repertoire of various workshops and all manufactories in the region up until the end of the 20th century but can only be attributed to specific workshops or manufacturers if the object bears a mark.
From 1878, Johann Wanzenried’s newly founded manufactory (Buchs 1980; Messerli Bolliger 1991, 69–74) in Steffisburg also began to create pottery with shapes and decorations that emulated Greek, Etruscan and Oriental models. In the following years, production was supplemented with designs by the architect and professor of arts and crafts Leopold Gmelin (1847–1916), the heraldist Christian Bühler (1825–1898), the painter and draughtsman Rolf Münger (1862–1929), the arts and crafts instructor Paul Wyss (1875–1952) and the ceramicist Friedrich Ernst Frank (1862–1920).
It is mainly the products from this manufactory, which also regularly hired other potters to produce wares, that we now associate with the term “Thun majolica”. The Wanzenried Manufactory featured prominently at the National Exhibition in Zurich in 1883, alongside pottery dealer Schoch-Laederach, who also used the label “Musée Céramique” (Messerli Bolliger 1991, Pl. 17).
National Exhibition in Zurich in 1883.
Over the next twenty years, the manufactory was managed very successfully by Maria Luise Wanzenried-Ingold (1849–1929) (Buchs 1980).
Before the outbreak of the First World War, the great boom in Thun majolica, which was largely due to international Alpine tourism and to products being sold in France, gradually petered out. In 1911, Maria Luise Wanzenried-Ingold (1849–1929), the widow of Johann Wanzenried (1847–1895), passed the company on to her son-in-law, the teacher Alfred Gertsch, who in turn sold it on to the merchant Emil Lengacher from Aeschi in 1912. After Lengacher died unexpectedly in December 1914, Maria Luise Wanzenried once again took over the running of the business on 20th May 1915 (SOGC 29, No. 206, 18/8/1911; SOGC 30, No. 140, 31/5/1912; SOGC 30, No. 149, 13/6.1912; SOGC 33, No. 199, 26/8/1915; SOGC 33, No. 252, 25/10/1915; see also the land register GB Thun, Beleg II, 775 dated 17/3/1919). At that stage she probably felt she needed a experienced managing director and head of the potter’s workshop, and she found the ideal candidate in Emil Loder (1890–1971) from Steffisburg. We have just little information about the Wanzenried Manufactory production over the next three years.
The next document refers to 11th December 1918 and tells us that Adolf Schweizer (1893–1967) and Emil Loder (1890–1971) purchased the manufactory property from the widow Wanzenried for 18,000 Swiss francs and took over the company including all its assets and liabilities on 2nd April 1919 (Land register GB Thun, Beleg II, 775 dated 17/3/1919). The Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce announced the founding of the Loder & Schweizer partnership as of 1st March 1919 (SOGC 37, No. 59, 8th March 1919). Adolf Schweizer had been an apprentice with Wanzenried and was managing director of the DESA company in Steffisburg at the time of the purchase.
Apparently, the collaboration between Adolf Schweizer and Emil Loder did not run entirely smoothly. According to the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce dated 17th June 1925, the Steffisburg Partnership “Loder & Schweizer, Art Pottery”, was dissolved and the company including all its assets and liabilities was taken over by Adolf Schweizer on 1st March 1925 (SOGC 43, 1925, 1062. See also GB Thun Belege II, 7151).
Despite the phenomenal commercial success of Thun majolica and its unique position within the Swiss pottery landscape, no attempt has been made up to now to compile a comprehensive record of the many objects that are kept in museums and private collections. We have no clear picture of the shapes and decorative motifs used by the individual manufacturers nor do we know much about the designs created by the graphic designers, artists and painters mentioned. As a consequence, the stylistic evolution from 1860s pottery making to the end of Wanzenried Manufactory production after the First World War also remains unclear.
Translation Sandy Haemmerle
References:
Buchs 1969
Hermann Buchs, Heimberg. Aus der Geschichte der Gemeinde, Heimberg 1969.
Buchs 1980
Hermann Buchs, Die Thuner Majolika des Johannes Wanzenried und des Zeichners Friedrich Ernst Frank, in: Jahresbericht Historisches Museum Schloss Thun, 1980, 5-43.
Buchs 1988
Hermann Buchs, Vom Heimberger Geschirr zur Thuner Majolika, Thun 1988.
Buchs 1995
Hermann Buchs, Das Hafnergewerbe im Heimberg, in: Einwohnergemeinde Heimberg (Hrsg.), 850 Jahre Heimberg 1146-1996, Heimberg 1995, 50-60.
De Praetere 1907
Jules De Praetere, Schweizerische Volkskunst. Die Töpferei in Heimberg und Langnau, in: Heimatschutz. Zeitschrift der Schweizer. Vereinigung für Heimatschutz 1907, 1907, Heft 11, 81-85.
Gmelin 1891
Leopold Gmelin, Franz Keller-Leuzinger, Nekrolog, in: Zeitschrift des Bayerischen Kunstgewerbe-Vereins zu München, Monatshefte für die gesammte dekorative Kunst, 1891, 24-27.
Heege/Kistler 2017
Andreas Heege/Andreas Kistler, Poteries décorées de Suisse alémanique, 17e-19e siècles – Collections du Musée Ariana, Genève – Keramik der Deutschschweiz, 17.-19. Jahrhundert – Die Sammlung des Musée Ariana, Genf, Mailand 2017.
Hoffmann-Krayer 1914
Eduard Hoffmann-Krayer, Heimberger Keramik, in: Schweizerisches Archiv für Volkskunde 18, 1914, 94-100.
Huber 1906
Karl Huber, Thuner Majolika, in: Illustriertes Fremdenblatt von Thun und Umgebung, 1906, 258-259, 278-279, 294-296.
Jaennicke 1879
Friedrich Jaennicke, Grundriss der Keramik in Bezug auf das Kunstgewerbe, Stuttgart 1879.
Mac Laren Walsh 2008
Jane Mac Laren Walsh, Legend of the Crystal Skulls, in: Archaeology 61, 2008, 36-41.
MacLaren Walsh/Hunt 2013
Jane MacLaren Walsh/David Hunt, The Fourth Skull: A Tale of Authenticity and Fraud, in: The Appendix, Illusions 1, 2013, Heft 2, 28-44.
Messerli Bolliger 1991
Barbara E. Messerli Bolliger, Der dekorative Entwurf in der Schweizer Keramik im 19. Jahrhundert, zwei Beispiele: Das Töpfereigebiet Heimberg-Steffisburg-Thun und die Tonwarenfabrik Ziegler in Schaffhausen, in: Keramik-Freunde der Schweiz, Mitteilungsblatt 106, 1991, 5-100.
Riviale 2001
Pascal Riviale, Eugène Boban ou les aventures d’un antiquaire au pays des américanistes, in: Journal de la Société des Americanistes 87, 2001, 351-362.
Schwab 1921
Fernand Schwab, Beitrag zur Geschichte der bernischen Geschirrindustrie (Schweizer Industrie- und Handelsstudien 7), Weinfelden/Konstanz 1921.
Werder 1962
Ernst Werder, Die Entwicklung des Gewerbes im Amt Konolfingen, in: Archiv des Historischen Vereins des Kantons Bern 46, 1962, Heft 2, 349-454.
