The BackstampPottery and porcelain marks, traced to the reference that records them.

Kutani

Kutani, province of Kanga (Kaga), north-west Nipon, Japan · Porcelain · also recorded as Kutani-Yaki, Kanga, Kaga

Transcribed by Igor Kukolj from Chaffers, William. Marks and Monograms on European and Oriental Pottery and Porcelain, 1891, Reeves & Turner, London, p.396. Scan: archive.org/details/marksmonogramson00chaf (leaf n415). Checked 22 August 2026.

Marks

Plate I🔗

The The Kanga (Kaga) province character mark as engraved in Chaffers 1891, page 396
The Kanga (Kaga) province character · painted · engraved in the sourceChaffers 1891, p.396

A province mark, not a workshop mark. Chaffers engraves it against the province heading rather than against any individual maker.

What the source records

Why this differs from other listings

Kutani and Satsuma are constantly confused and Chaffers gives a physical test that separates them: Kutani is porcelain with a compact fracture and a glaze that is seldom crackled, Satsuma is a soft porous fayence covered in minute cracks. He also explains WHY the painting differs — porcelain fires hotter, so the artist has less freedom of touch than on fayence. And the two wares share an origin: the same Corean potters brought over in 1650 ended at Nawashirogawa making Satsuma.

The source page

Page 396 of Chaffers 1891, the source for this entry
Chaffers 1891, p.396 — public domain, from archive.org/details/marksmonogramson00chaf (leaf n415). Check the transcription against it.

What this entry does not establish

Questions

What marks does Chaffers 1891 record for Kutani?

1 on p.396: The Kanga (Kaga) province character. 1 of them are engraved in the source and are reproduced above; the rest are described in words only.

What dates does the source give?

None. Chaffers dates no mark on this page, so this entry gives no date either.

Where was Kutani?

Kutani, province of Kanga (Kaga), north-west Nipon, Japan. The source also records the name as Kutani-Yaki, Kanga, Kaga.

Can this page tell me what my piece is worth?

No. This site reports what one nineteenth-century reference recorded, and cites the page so you can check it. It does not authenticate objects, value them, or offer an opinion on a specific piece.

Marks like this one