To his wife Theodosia: "... two Lotts—lyeing & being in the City of Wmsburgh together with the Dwelling House and other houses thereunto belonging" and also"... a Lott lying behind Cheshire's Lott number 63 in York Town that I bought of Mr. George Reade, with all the Improvements upon it during his life and after his death." ["BehindCheshire's Lott" apparently means Lot 59, next to it. See plat.]"... one certain Tract or Parcel of Land, lying being and adjoining to Mountford's Mill Dam in the County of York commonly called & known by the Name of Tarripin Point.""... the parcel of Land that I bought of MrEdwdSmith except one Chain and that to be laid off at the end next the Lott that I bought of Francis Moss with all the Improvements on it and in case I should dye before I build upon it, I shall leave all the plank & framing stuff together with the window frames & all the other things designed for the House to my Wife and not to be appraised with my Estate and if my Carpenter is not free that he shall not be appraised but serve his time out and with my said Wife." [Francis Morse owned Lot 75, extreme southwest corner. Therefore, this was probably Lot 74.]
To his wife Theodosia: "... two Lotts—lyeing & being in the City of Wmsburgh together with the Dwelling House and other houses thereunto belonging" and also
"... a Lott lying behind Cheshire's Lott number 63 in York Town that I bought of Mr. George Reade, with all the Improvements upon it during his life and after his death." ["BehindCheshire's Lott" apparently means Lot 59, next to it. See plat.]
"... one certain Tract or Parcel of Land, lying being and adjoining to Mountford's Mill Dam in the County of York commonly called & known by the Name of Tarripin Point."
"... the parcel of Land that I bought of MrEdwdSmith except one Chain and that to be laid off at the end next the Lott that I bought of Francis Moss with all the Improvements on it and in case I should dye before I build upon it, I shall leave all the plank & framing stuff together with the window frames & all the other things designed for the House to my Wife and not to be appraised with my Estate and if my Carpenter is not free that he shall not be appraised but serve his time out and with my said Wife." [Francis Morse owned Lot 75, extreme southwest corner. Therefore, this was probably Lot 74.]
To his daughter Susanna Reynolds: "the Lott that I bought of MrFrancis Morse known by the No75 together with the Brickhouse and all other Improvements upon it also one Chain of the Land that I bought of MrEdward Smith to be taken at the end next to the Lott to her & her heirs for Ever in case I dye before the House is done I then leave also bricks enough to finish the house, together wththe window frames & doors and what other framing was design'd for her house...."
64Virginia Wills and Administrations, loc. cit. (footnote 53).
Pursuant to an Order of York Court Dec. the 17th1739 We the Subscribers being first sworn before Wm. Nelson junrGent have appraised the Estate of Capt. Wm. Rogers decd. as followeth Vizt.
Waterford £25 Betty £25 Adam £30 Blackwall £30£110.0.0Nanny £18 Lazarus Son of Nanny £523.0.0Amy Daughter of Nanny £16 Grace Daughter of Nanny 8£24.0.0Barnaby £15 Samson £25 Quaqua £25 Tony £3095.0.0Jo £30 York £25 Jack £25 George £22 Tom 30132.0.0Monmouth £30 London £30 Ben £30 Pritty £30120.0.0Phillis £25 Sarah £30 Harry £25 Lucy £1292.0.0Little Nanny £25 Phoeby £20 Phil son of Phoeby £550.0.0Cato £20 James £18 Peg £1654.0.0Household Goods &c. 1 Clock £6 one Silver hilt Cutting Sword and one pr. Silver Spurrs 4£10.0.01 Tea Pott 5 Spoons 2 pt. Cans and 2 Salts of Silver11.15.0To a parcel China ware £10 a pcl Glasses & Table Stand £1.1011.10.0a pcl books £4 a pcl Sheets Table Linnen and one wt. Quilt 22l26.——1 Silver Salver 1 pt. Can 2 Salts 11 Spoons and one Soop Do14.——1 Silver Watch £4 one horse Colt £4 a Coach & 4 horses £4048.——a Neat Picture of King Charles the Second2.10.01 Marble Table £2 one corner cupboard wth. a glass face 20/3.——1 Looking Glass £1.10 1 pr. Glass Sconces 15/£2.5.01 Chimney Glass wth. a pr. brass arms £2 a japaned corner Cupboard2.15.012 Chairs wth. Walnut frames & Cane bottoms5.——1 Dutch picture in a guilt frame0.10.07 Cartoons 4 glass Pictures 4 Maps & 3 small Pictures1.5.01 Large walnut Table £1.15 one less Do20/2.15.01 small Table & one Tea board 5/ one Iron back 12/0.17.01 pr. And Irons 20/ one Iron fender 1 pr. Tongs & Shovel fire 7/61.7.61 Iron plate frame 7/6 8 China Pictures in large frames 8/0.15.61 Copper Cistern 13/ 12 Ivory handle knives & forks £1.102.3.011 Eboney Do12/6 12 Desart Dowth. Ivory handles 12/1.4.64 Window Curtains & Vallins £1.10 one small Cherry Table 6/1.16.02 Mares & one Colt £5 a pcl of Carpenters Tools £2.107.10.027 head Cattle £17 Six high back Chairs wth. rush bottoms £1.1018.10.01 Bed Bolster Pillow Bedsted 1 pr. blankets & Quilt3.——2 small pine Tables0.4.01 large Bed Bolster 1 Pillow 1 pr. blankets Bedstead Curtain rod WorktCurtains & Vallins7.1 Bed Bolster 2 pillows 1 pr. blankets 1 Old Quilt old blue Hangings & Bedsted4.——1 Looking Glass 20/. 2 pr. window Curtains 10/ one pr. Sconces 6/1.16.01 pr. large mony Scales & weights 12/6 1 pr. less do5/0.17.61 pr. small do2/6 5 rush bottom Chairs wthblack frames 7/60.10.0A Chimney piece 10/ 52 Pictures in the Hall 10/1.1 Couch Squab and pillow 30/ 1 japand Tea Table 5/1.5.01 Small pine Table 1/ 2 Walnut Stools 3/0.4.01 Chimney Glass 4/ one pr. Sconces 7/6 1 Dressing Table 2/1.09.61 Looking Glass wthDrawers 20/ one Iron back 6/£1.6.01 pr. And Iron 7/6 1 pr. Tongs & fire Shovel 4/0.11.61 brass fender 5/ 1 Case wthDrawers 1.51.10.01 pr. Backgammon Tables 12/6 Tea Chest & Cannisters 6/0.18.61 Dresing Box 5/ 1 Trumpet 5/ 1 large Elbow Chair 7/60.17.6A Dutch Picture in a guilt frame2.01 Bed Bedstead Bolster 2 pillows 1 blanket 1 Quilt Curtains Vallins & Curtain Rod6.0.01 Bedstead wthSacking bottom 1 small Bed & one pillow1.10.01 Dram Case & 6 Bottles 12/6 2 pr. window Curtains 10/1.2.61 Copper preserving pan 10/ 1 pr. large pistols 15/1.5.01 pr. Holsters 5/ 1 pr. holster Caps & housing laced and flowerd with Silver 20/1.5.014 bottles Stoughton's Elixir 14/ 6lChocolate 18/1.12.020 lb Cocanuts £2, 50 Ells Ozn brigs £2.104.10.015½ yds Dorsay 9 Strips twist 2 hh Silk 5 doz Coat and 2 doz. brest buttons2.0.03 Cloth brushes 3/ 28 Maple handle knives 5/100.8.1010 Yarn Caps 2/6 3 horn books 6d3 Baskits 4/0.7.01 Iron back in the work room 5/ 1 Doin the Little Chamber 6/0.11.01 Iron fender 1 prTongs & fire Shovell 5/ 1 prAndirons 2/0.7.05 brass Candle Sticks 2 Tinder boxes & 1 Iron Candle Stick 14/0.14.01 Flasket and a parcel Turners Tools0.18.08 prNegros Shoes £1.4. 72 yds Cantaloon £1.42.8.011 ydsCoarse Stuff 5/6 1 old Desk 20/ 1 Cedar Press 15/2.0.613 Cannisters 3/6 16 Tin patty pans 12 Cake Do2 Bisket Do12 Chocolate Do2 Coffee pots and 1 Funnell 11/60.15.01 Box Iron & 2 heaters 5/ 1 Coffee mill 4/£0.9.01. 2 hour Glass 1/ 5 broad hows 13/ 1 Spining Wheel 5/0.19.02 4lflat Irons 6/ 1 Trooping Saddle blue housing Crooper & Brest plate 20/1.6.0An Ozenbrig Skreen 10/ 1 small pine Chest 2/60.12.61 Walnut Table 12/6 5 Candle Moulds 7/61.——1 Bark Sifter 5/ 10 Pictures 4/ 1 Cold Still 12/61.1.61 prStilliards 7/6 12 New Sickles 12/ 10 old Do2/61.2.02 larger Sieves and 1 Hair Sifter 7/6 1 Case wth. 14 bottles 15/1.2.61 Bell Metal Skillet 12/ 1 prbrass Scales & weights 10/1.2.01 Coffee Roaster 4/ 1 fire Shovell 1 prTongs & 1 Iron fender 3/0.7.06 woodin Chairs and 1 old Cane Do0.8.01 pewter Ink Stand 2/6 1 Tea Kettle 5/0.7.62 Trivets 2 prSheep Sheers and 1 prBellows 5/0.5.01 Warming pan 5/ 20 doz Quart bottles 2£ 1 whip Saw 20/3.5.03 Empty Casks and 2 beer Tubbs 7/60.7.62 Powdering Tubbs and 1 large Cask0.6.0A Meal Binn 3/ 3 Spills 9/ 1 worm Still £2/103.2.04 Wheel barrows 8/ 3 Spades 7/ a Copper Kettle £2.103.5.01 large Iron pott 12/6 1 Iron Kettle 15/ 1 Flasket 1/61.9.01 Iron pott 1/6 1 Bed Bolster Bedsted 1 Rugg & 10 Blanket 1/101.11.61 Bed Bolster Bedsted Blanket and 1 old Quilt17.61 old Table 1/6 6 oxen Ox Cart Yokes & Chains13.——80 lb Ginger 10/ 24 lb. Alspice £1.4 55 lb. Rice 5/1.19.050 lb. Snakeroot £1/5 34 lb. Hops 17/ 124 lb. feathers £5.3.47.5.4a pcl old Sails & riging3.——1 prlarge Scales & weights £2.10 a pcl crakt red ware £2£4.10.0a parcel crakt Stone Do£5 11 pocket bottles 3/85.3.8½ barrel Gun powder £2.10 1 old Sain & ropes £1.104.——1 horse Mill £8 2300 lb. old Iron £9.11.817.11.826 doz qtMugs £5.4 60 doz ptDo7.1012.14.011 doz Milk pans £2.4 9 large Cream potts 4/62.8.69 Midle Sized Do3/ 12 Small Do2/0.5.02 doz red Saucepans 4/ 2 doz porringers 4/0.8.06 Chamber potts 2/ 4 doz bird bottles 12/0.14.03 doz Lamps 9/ 4 doz small stone bottles 6/0.15.04 doz small dishes 8/ 6 doz puding pans 2/0.10.026 Cedar pailes £2.12 40 Bushels Salt £46.12.0104 lb. pewter in Dishes & plates5.4.01 Gallon 1. 2qt1 qt1 pt& 1 ½ ptpewter pott0.16.01 pewter Bed pan 5/ 12 Sheep £33.5.06 Washing Tubbs 12/ 1 Chocolate pott & Mill 6/0.18.06 Tea Spoons & a Childs Spoon of Silver1.——7 Bell Glasses 16/ 1 Kitchen jack 26/2.2.01 prAndirons 15/ 1 large Copper pott & Cover 30/£2.5.01 less Do17/6 1 Marble Mortar 12/61.10.01 Bell Metal Doand Iron Pestle0.10.02 large knives 1 Choping Do1 Basting Ladle 1 Brass Skimer 1 prsmall Tongs and flesh fork0.5.01 Copper Stew pan 1 Copper & 1 Iron frying pan 1 Tin fish Kettle0.14.01 Brass Skillet and 2 Tin Covers0.9.01 Iron Crane and 1 large Pestle0.8.01 Water pail 1/6 1 Iron pott 1 prhooks & 1 Iron Ladle 6/0.7.61 larger Iron pott & hooks 6/ 1 horse Cart & wheels £33.6.01 old whip Saw 10/ 1 Set old Chain harness for 3 horses 20/1.10.01 Set Dofor 3 Horses £4 8 Iron Wedges 12/64.12.61 Bay horse £1.5 1 prwooden Scales 2/ 2 Baskets 2/61.9.61 old horse Cart £1.5 212 bushels wheat a 1/6d£15.18.17.1.0[sic]1 old Boat 10/ a New Sloop Boat Sails Rigging 2 Anchors 2 Cables 1 old Hawser and 1 Grapnell90.0.01 Glass Light 3/ 2 Wyer Sieves 7/60.10.6£1224.5.6[sic]John BallardJohn TrotterIshmael Moody
Ivor Noël Hume
Attention was first drawn to the potential importance of the 18th-century pottery factory at Yorktown in 1956 when an examination of the National Park Service artifacts from the town revealed large quantities of stoneware sagger fragments visually identical to those previously retrieved from a site at Bankside in London.[247]On the assumption that where kiln "furniture" is found there also must be examples of the product, a more careful search of the Yorktown collections was made, yielding numerous fragments of brown salt-glazed stoneware tankards and bottles which, although at first sight appearing to be typically English, were found to have reacted slightly differently to the vagaries of firing than did the average examples found in England.
The largest assemblage of stoneware and sagger fragments came from the vicinity of the restored Swan Tavern, although the actual relationship of the pieces, one to another, was not recorded in the National Park Service's archeological report on the excavations. Nevertheless, the presence on the same lot of fragments of pint tankards adorned with a sprig-molded swan ornament (fig. 3) along with numerous pieces of sagger (fig. 12) seemed positive enough evidence. English tavern mugs of the 18th century were frequently decorated with an applied panel copying the sign which hung outside the hostelry.[248]The Swan Tavern at Yorktown was probably no exception, and to the often illiterate traveler it would have been identified either by a painted sign or perhaps by a swan carved in wood and set above the entrance. The significance of the swan-decorated tankards is simply that the tavern keeper would have been unlikely to have sent to England for such objects when, as the saggers so loudly proclaim, a local potter could supply them as needed and without cost of transportation.
The above reasoning seemed to link the saggers with brown salt-glazed stonewares rather than with products in the Rhenish tradition, which would have been the other obvious possibility.[249]Wasters were thinly represented among the sherds from Yorktown, although many underfired or overburned pieces were initially claimed as such. A more mature study of the Yorktown potter's products has shown that these variations would not have been considered unsalable, nor, in all probability, would they have been marked down as "seconds." Examples exhibiting both extremes of temperature have been found in domestic rubbish pits at Williamsburg, clearly showing that such pieces did find a ready sale. Figure 4 illustrates a mug fragment from Williamsburg with a large, heavily salted roof-dripping lodged above the handle and overflowing the rim, a blemish the presence of which is hard to explain if the mug was fired in a sagger. Such a piece found in the vicinity of a kiln reasonably could be considered a waster. It must be deduced, therefore, that, providing the Yorktown potter's vessels would hold water and stand more or less vertically on a table, they would find a market.
The site of Rogers' kilns in or near Yorktown has not been found, nor have his waster tips and pits been located. In the absence of such concrete evidence, a study of his wares may be thought premature. But, while numerous questions obviously remain to be answered, sufficient data have now been gathered toidentify a considerable range of brown stoneware as being of Tidewater Virginia manufacture. There is, of course, good reason to suppose that much, if not all, of it is a product of the Rogers factory, although until that site is dug one cannot be certain. It can be argued, perhaps, that if there was one more or less clandestine stoneware potter at work in the area, there might well be others. It could also be added that two earthenware-pottery-making sites have been discovered in the Jamestown-Williamsburg area for which no documentary evidence has been found. The very fact that such enterprise was officially discouraged reduces the value of the negative evidence to be derived from the absence of documentation.
The most convincing evidence for the identification of Rogers' stoneware comes from the already mentioned Swan Tavern mugs and from a quantity of sherds found in a 4-to 7-inch layer beneath Yorktown's Main Street in front of the Digges House in the spring of 1957. This material was exposed during the laying of utilities beside the modern roadway. So tightly packed were the fragments of saggers and pottery vessels that they appeared to have been deliberately laid down as metaling for the colonial street. Several years later Mr. Watkins discovered that in 1734 William Rogers had been appointed "Surveyor of the Landings, Streets; and Cosways in York Town." It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that Rogers disposed of his kiln waste by using it for hard core to make good the roads under his jurisdiction. Such a use of potters' refuse has ample precedent in that the wasters and sagger fragments from the 17th-century-London delftware kilns were dumped on the foreshore of the river Thames to serve the same purpose. Similarly, stoneware waste from the presumed Bankside factory[250]was used there to line the bottoms of trenches for wooden drains.
The pottery fragments found in the Yorktown road metaling comprised unglazed, coarse-earthenware pans and bowls; pieces of badly fired, brown, salt-glazed stoneware jars and bottles; and numerous sagger fragments.
In the years since interest first was shown in the products of the Yorktown factory, a useful range of examples has been gathered from excavations in Williamsburg and in neighboring counties. The single most significant item was recovered from another kiln site in James City County (known as the Challis site) on the bank of the James River. This object, a pint mug (fig. 5), is the best preserved specimen yet found. It is impressed on the upper wall, opposite the handle, with a pseudo-official capacity stamp[251]comprising the initials W R beneath a crown (William III Rex) which, perhaps, might have led to an intentional misinterpretation as the mark of William Rogers' factory. The official English marks generally were incuse or stamped in relief with the cypher and crown within a borderless oval. They were always placed close to the rim, just left of the handle. Rogers' stamp was set in a much more pretentious position and was enclosed within a rectangle marking the edges of the matrix (fig. 6).
The Challis site mug was a key piece of evidence, being the first example found that illustrated the position of the W R stamp, and it was sufficiently intact for a drawing to be made, its capacity measured, and its variations of firing studied. The association of the Challis mug with the Rogers factory is based on the fact that there is an identical stamp among the Park Service's artifacts from Yorktown (fig. 7), along with another pseudo W R stamp which had been applied to thebaseof a tankard.
A measured drawing of the Challis mug was given to Mr. James E. Maloney of the Williamsburg Pottery,[252]who kindly agreed to undertake a series of experiments to reproduce the piece in his own stoneware kiln, using local Tidewater clay. The results of the first trials were extremely successful, and they showed that it would be possible to reproduce exact copies of the Yorktown wares from this clay (fig. 8). Thus any doubt as to the supply source was dispelled.
The conditions of firing at the Williamsburg Pottery, however, are somewhat different from those that would have prevailed in the 18th century. Mr. Maloney's kiln is fired by oil rather than wood, so that the localized variations of color resulting from the reducing effects of wood smoke have been eliminated. In addition, Mr. Maloney's pots are fired without the use of saggers, thus providing more uniform atmospheric and salting conditions than would have been possible with the 18th-century method of stacking the kilns.
Figure 3.—Pint and quart mugsof brown salt-glazed stoneware made for the Swan Tavern at Yorktown. Each mug is decorated with an applied swan in high relief.
Figure 3.—Pint and quart mugsof brown salt-glazed stoneware made for the Swan Tavern at Yorktown. Each mug is decorated with an applied swan in high relief.
The Yorktown mugs were hand thrown, but a template was used to shape the ornamental cordoning. It was first assumed that a single template had served to fashion both the cordons at the base and the groove below the lip. We had such a tool made of aluminum, copying the Challis mug's ornament, and proportionately enlarged to allow for shrinkage in firing. But in using this template Mr. Maloney discovered that it was impossible to shape the whole exterior of the vessel in one movement without the tools "chattering" against the wall. Since none of the Yorktown sherds nor, indeed, any of the brown-stoneware mugs I have studied in England exhibitthis feature, it is clear that the potters used only a small template which molded the base cordoning alone, a technique in marked contrast to that of the German Westerwald potters of the same period, whose mass-produced tankards and chamberpots invariably exhibit considerable "chattering." Shaping the lip of the Yorktown tankards appears to have been accomplished entirely by hand as was the application of the encircling groove below it. Because the clay used in the manufacture of these brown stonewares is relatively coarse, it does not lend itself readily to the thin potting so characteristic of English white salt-glaze or the refined Nottingham and Burslem brown stonewares. Consequently, it was necessary to pare down the mouths of the mugs to make them acceptable to the lips of the toper. This interior tooling, extending about half an inch below the rim, is found on all the Yorktown and English brown stonewares of this class. The technique is the reverse of that used by the Westerwald potters, whose mugs are thinned from the outside, leaving the straight edge on the interior.[253]Having imbibed from both types of tankard, I believe that the English (and Yorktown) technique is distinctly preferable. One's upper lip does most of the work; the paring of the inside of the vessel shapes the rim away from that lip and carries the ale smoothly into the mouth.
Figure 4.—Yorktown stoneware mug fragmentmarred by kiln drippings lodged above the handle. The fragment was found in Williamsburg. Height of sherd 4 centimeters.
Figure 4.—Yorktown stoneware mug fragmentmarred by kiln drippings lodged above the handle. The fragment was found in Williamsburg. Height of sherd 4 centimeters.
The treatment of the single-reeded handle on the Challis site mug equals the best English examples, being thin and of sufficient size to accommodate three fingers, with the top of its curve remaining below the edge of the rim so that the thumb cannot slip over it. In addition, the lower terminal is folded back on itself and impressed. While it has often been said that the signature of a potter is found in the shaping of his rims and his handles, we must remember that in a large commercial pottery the person who applies the handles often is not the same workman as he who throws the pot. This explains the considerable variety among the handles of supposed Yorktown tankards, some of them very skillfully fashioned and applied, others appallingly crude. It is inconceivable that all can be the work of a single craftsman.
Figure 5.—Yorktown stoneware mug, found in James City County, which was discarded about 1730. Height 12.5 centimeters; capacity 17 fluid ounces.
Figure 5.—Yorktown stoneware mug, found in James City County, which was discarded about 1730. Height 12.5 centimeters; capacity 17 fluid ounces.
The iron-oxide slip into which the upper part of the body and handle of the Challis site mug was dipped provided the vessel with a pleasing purplish-to-green mottling when struck by the salt, but, compared to its English prototypes, the variations of color and the unevenness of the size of the mottling label it a product of inferior firing. Nevertheless, in criticizing the Yorktown stoneware, we might remember Dr. Johnson's comment on women preachers,whom he likened to a dog walking on its hind legs, saying: "It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."
Figure 6.—Silver reproductionof the matrix used by the Yorktown potter to apply unofficial excise stamps. Height 1.45 centimeters.
Figure 6.—Silver reproductionof the matrix used by the Yorktown potter to apply unofficial excise stamps. Height 1.45 centimeters.
Figure 7.—Examples of W.R. stampson Yorktown stoneware mugs. Right, from below the rim; left, on the underside of the base. Enlarged.
Figure 7.—Examples of W.R. stampson Yorktown stoneware mugs. Right, from below the rim; left, on the underside of the base. Enlarged.
On the evidence of the many fragments of Yorktown mugs found in Williamsburg excavations, it may be supposed that the Challis example was of above-average quality. Many of the Williamsburg sherds are both badly overfired and poorly mottled, owing either to inadequate salting or to the use of a slip of the wrong consistency. The much-restored specimen shown in figure 9 was found in a mid-18th-century rubbish deposit[254]and apparently had belonged to John Coke, who kept tavern in Williamsburg east of the Public Gaol. In this example, the intended mottled effect has become a solid band of purple, and the body color below has turned dark gray. I had long supposed that both were the result of overfiring. Experiments by Mr. Maloney, however, clearly showed that the gray body may result from a reducing atmosphere as readily as by excessive temperature, while the purple zone could be due to the slip's beingtoo thick. Two test mugs fired side by side at a temperature of 2300° F., using thick and thin slips of iron oxide, produced the solid-purple band and the brown mottle respectively.
Figure 8.—Reproduction of a Yorktownsalt-glazed stoneware mug made from local clay at the Williamsburg pottery. Height 12.8 centimeters.
Figure 8.—Reproduction of a Yorktownsalt-glazed stoneware mug made from local clay at the Williamsburg pottery. Height 12.8 centimeters.
Figure 9.—Poor-quality mugof probable local stoneware, discarded in the mid-18th century. Found in Williamsburg. Height 13.4 centimeters; capacity 23 fluid ounces.
Figure 9.—Poor-quality mugof probable local stoneware, discarded in the mid-18th century. Found in Williamsburg. Height 13.4 centimeters; capacity 23 fluid ounces.
Before dismissing the John Coke mug as merely an example of wrong slip consistency, it should be noted that this piece has none of the characteristics of the Challis mug; the handle is quite different in both size and shape and is applied without the folded terminal, the proportions are poor, and the template used for the base cordoning is so worn on its bottom edge that the wide upper cordon is more pronounced than the base itself, thus giving the whole vessel a feeling of stubby instability. In addition, the body appears to have been scraped round after the slip had been applied, possibly to remove the excess. All in all, it is a miserable mug, and we may be forgiven for wondering whether it is really a product of William Rogers' operation. Some of his tankards may have been made by apprentice potters, which would account for somewhat varying shapes. But the handle is not an inept creation as handles go; it is simply an entirely different type from that used on the English stoneware that Rogers copied. Even more curious is the question of the template, which should have been discarded long before. While the throwing variations of Rogers' potters may have been overlooked, little can be said for a master craftsman who would allow the use of tools so worn as to mar the esthetic quality of every mug produced. We may wonder whether there was another stoneware potter at work in Virginia in the mid-18th century or whether, after Rogers' death, his factory's standards were allowed to deteriorate to the level of the John Coke mug.
Although the tavern tankards are the most informative of the Yorktown products, numerous other stoneware forms were produced. These are well represented in the National Park Service and Colonial Williamsburg collections. The most simple and at the same time the most attractive of these is a group of hemispherical bowls (fig. 10), two of which were found in the same deposit as the Coke mug.[255]One, which had been dipped into an iron-oxide slip in the samemanner as were the tankards, has a pale gray body with a narrow band of brown mottling below the rim. The other Coke bowl has a dirty greenish-gray body, while the slipped band is a heavy purplish-brown with little mottling. The entire bowl is too heavily salted, an infirmity which often may have afflicted these pieces. A fragment of a slightly smaller and even more heavily salted bowl was found in 1961 by Mrs. P. G. Harrison in her flower bed at Yorktown,[256]thus seeming to confirm the Yorktown origin of the Coke bowls.
Figure 10.—Hemispherical bowlsof Yorktown stoneware, discarded in the mid-18th century. Found in Williamsburg. Rim diameter of both 17.15 centimeters.
Figure 10.—Hemispherical bowlsof Yorktown stoneware, discarded in the mid-18th century. Found in Williamsburg. Rim diameter of both 17.15 centimeters.
There is no doubt that bottles and jars, some of considerable size, were among the Yorktown factory's principal products, but this does not mean necessarily that all such items found in the vicinity of Yorktown or Williamsburg are Rogers' pieces. Just as the tavern tankards were copies of English mugs, so the bottles and jars had their prototypes among the wares of English, brown-stoneware potters. The difference is simply that the kitchen vessels have rarely attracted the attention of collectors and therefore are poorly represented in English museums. Consequently we have little opportunity to study them and to determine how such pieces differ from those made at Yorktown. At this stage it is possible to be sure only of the Virginia origin of those examples whose clay is clearly of the local variety. Such an identification can be made only when the piece is markedly underfired and retains the coloring and impurities characteristic of earthenwares of proven Virginia manufacture. Fortunately, the large bottles are small mouthed and neither slipped nor glazed on the inside, thus ensuring that, if the piece is underfired the earthenware characteristics will be readily discernible. Fragments of underfired stoneware bottles were among the most common sherds recovered from the colonial roadway at Yorktown, providing invaluable evidence to aid the identification of the Rogers stoneware body composition and color. It must be reiterated, however, that this guide is confined to underfired products and that those correctly burned cannot be distinguished as yet from others of English manufacture.
The globular bottle shown in figure 11 is underfired and consequently not a true "stoneware," but from the outside it bears all the characteristics of a good quality product. This undoubtedly local and almost certainly Yorktown example was found on the John Coke site in Williamsburg[257]in a context of about 1765. The body is evenly potted, the cordoning below the mouth neatly tooled, and the broad straphandle rugged and tidily shaped into a finger-impressed rat-tail terminal. The handle can, perhaps, be faulted, in that it will accommodate only two fingers with comfort, and it is a little wider in proportion to its size than any I have seen in England. The iron-oxide slip which extends to the midsection of the body is well mottled and predominantly of good color. Ignoring the under-firing, this bottle may be classed as a very creditable piece of potting, seemingly quite as good as most such vessels turned out by English potters in the mid-18th century.[258]
Figure 11.—An underfired Yorktown"stoneware" bottle, discarded about 1765. Found in Williamsburg. Surviving height 24.77 centimeters.
Figure 11.—An underfired Yorktown"stoneware" bottle, discarded about 1765. Found in Williamsburg. Surviving height 24.77 centimeters.
Globular-bodied jars with everted collar-like mouths can be proved to have been made at Yorktown on the evidence of a few small under-and over-fired sherds recovered from the old road metaling in front of the Digges House. The best example recovered from a dated archeological context in Virginia is a jar found in a rubbish deposit of about 1763-1772 at the plantation of Rosewell in Gloucester County.[259]But like the well-fired bottles, its Yorktown provenance cannot yet be proved.
The last major category of kitchen stoneware believed to have been made at the Yorktown potteryis a group of pipkins (fig. 13, no. 7). These were often overburned and improperly salted, turning the body a greenish gray and the iron-oxide slip to a coarse brown mottling with a similar greenish hue. The bodies of these vessels are generally bag-shaped and are broader toward the base than at the rim, which is slightly everted and tooled into a rounded lip over a cordon of comparable width. The handles were made separately in solid rolls that were pierced longitudinally with a stick or metal rod to avoid warping in firing or heat retention in use. They possess pestle-like terminals that were luted to the body after shaping. No definite evidence has yet been found to identify these vessels as Yorktown products, but they do exhibit color characteristics, particularly when overfired, comparable to those of one of the Coke hemispherical bowls as well as to some of the tankard fragments.
Figure 12.—An incomplete saggerand lid for quart tankards, with a Swan Tavern pint mug seated in it. Found at Yorktown.
Figure 12.—An incomplete saggerand lid for quart tankards, with a Swan Tavern pint mug seated in it. Found at Yorktown.
Figure 13.—Yorktown stoneware bottle and pipkin, and characteristic earthenware rim forms.
Figure 13.—Yorktown stoneware bottle and pipkin, and characteristic earthenware rim forms.
Figure 13
1. Creampan, rim sherd of typical Yorktown form, slightly flaring externally and incurving within, hard red earthenware with grey-to-pink surface and one spot of dark-brown glaze on the outside; presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter approximately 10¼ inches. Found at Yorktown along with other similar rims beneath the roadway south of the Digges House. Colonial Williamsburg collection.2. Creampan, section from rim to base, a typical example of the "rolled-rim" technique, the body poorly fired, pink earthenware flecked with ocher, presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. The sherd is badly twisted and is an undoubted waster. Diameter approximately 16 inches. National Park Service collection from Yorktown. No recorded context.3. Creampan, rim and wall fragment, rim technique similar to no. 2, but heavier and the body thicker; pale pink earthenware flecked with ocher. Presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter uncertain. National Park Service collection from Yorktown. No recorded provenance.4. Creampan, rim and wall fragment, the rim form a variant on the everted and rolled technique, seemingly having been turned out and then rolled back toward the interior. The body orange-to-pink earthenware flecked with ocher, presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter approximately 10-1/8 inches. National Park Service collection from Yorktown. No recorded provenance. Fragments of three pans of this type were present in the as-yet-unpublished group of artifacts from the Challis site in James City County whence came the key Rogers stoneware tankard (fig. 3), all of which were buried around 1730.5. Funnel, lower rim fragment, lead-glazed pale pink-bodied earthenware similar to the two examples illustrated in figure 15; the rim everted and tooled beneath, a technique paralleled by those on numerous bowls found at Yorktown and Williamsburg. A rim sherd of this form was among the pieces found in front of the Digges House. The funnel is thin walled, well potted, and coated with a ginger-to-yellow mottled glaze both inside and out. National Park Service collection from Yorktown; no recorded context. The comparable funnels cited above were discarded in the mid-18th century.6. Porringer, small rim fragment only, but bearing traces of handle luting which thus identifies the vessel; the rim everted and flattened on the top, pale pink-bodied earthenware, presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter approximately 6-1/8 inches. National Park Service collection from Yorktown; no recorded provenance.7. Pipkin, brown salt-glazed stoneware, bag-shaped body with slightly rising base, the rim thickened, slightly everted, with a tooled cordon beneath. The handle (not part of this example) was made as a solid roll and when soft pierced longitudinally with a stick. The glaze is well mottled and a purplish green. The body was thrown away in the mid-18th century, but the handle is unstratified. Colonial Williamsburg archeological collection (body) E. R. 140.27A, (handle) 30B. Other fragments from Williamsburg show that the rim usually was drawn slightly outward at a point at right angles to the handle to create a simple spout. Excavated examples of these pipkins range in rim diameter from 4-1/8 to at least 5-5/8 inches.8. Bottle, brown salt-glazed stoneware, neck and handle fragment only, the body dark gray and the oxide slip a deep purple to yellow as a result of overfiring. Glazing also occurs on the fractures, identifying this piece as a waster and therefore of considerable importance. Other blemishes include roof drippings on the handle and body which indicate that the bottle was fired without the protection of a sagger. The cordoning on the neck is well proportioned, and the handle terminates in a neatly fingered rat-tail. National Park Service collection from the Swan Tavern site at Yorktown; unstratified. S. T. 213.
1. Creampan, rim sherd of typical Yorktown form, slightly flaring externally and incurving within, hard red earthenware with grey-to-pink surface and one spot of dark-brown glaze on the outside; presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter approximately 10¼ inches. Found at Yorktown along with other similar rims beneath the roadway south of the Digges House. Colonial Williamsburg collection.
2. Creampan, section from rim to base, a typical example of the "rolled-rim" technique, the body poorly fired, pink earthenware flecked with ocher, presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. The sherd is badly twisted and is an undoubted waster. Diameter approximately 16 inches. National Park Service collection from Yorktown. No recorded context.
3. Creampan, rim and wall fragment, rim technique similar to no. 2, but heavier and the body thicker; pale pink earthenware flecked with ocher. Presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter uncertain. National Park Service collection from Yorktown. No recorded provenance.
4. Creampan, rim and wall fragment, the rim form a variant on the everted and rolled technique, seemingly having been turned out and then rolled back toward the interior. The body orange-to-pink earthenware flecked with ocher, presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter approximately 10-1/8 inches. National Park Service collection from Yorktown. No recorded provenance. Fragments of three pans of this type were present in the as-yet-unpublished group of artifacts from the Challis site in James City County whence came the key Rogers stoneware tankard (fig. 3), all of which were buried around 1730.
5. Funnel, lower rim fragment, lead-glazed pale pink-bodied earthenware similar to the two examples illustrated in figure 15; the rim everted and tooled beneath, a technique paralleled by those on numerous bowls found at Yorktown and Williamsburg. A rim sherd of this form was among the pieces found in front of the Digges House. The funnel is thin walled, well potted, and coated with a ginger-to-yellow mottled glaze both inside and out. National Park Service collection from Yorktown; no recorded context. The comparable funnels cited above were discarded in the mid-18th century.
6. Porringer, small rim fragment only, but bearing traces of handle luting which thus identifies the vessel; the rim everted and flattened on the top, pale pink-bodied earthenware, presumably biscuit and rejected before glazing. Diameter approximately 6-1/8 inches. National Park Service collection from Yorktown; no recorded provenance.
7. Pipkin, brown salt-glazed stoneware, bag-shaped body with slightly rising base, the rim thickened, slightly everted, with a tooled cordon beneath. The handle (not part of this example) was made as a solid roll and when soft pierced longitudinally with a stick. The glaze is well mottled and a purplish green. The body was thrown away in the mid-18th century, but the handle is unstratified. Colonial Williamsburg archeological collection (body) E. R. 140.27A, (handle) 30B. Other fragments from Williamsburg show that the rim usually was drawn slightly outward at a point at right angles to the handle to create a simple spout. Excavated examples of these pipkins range in rim diameter from 4-1/8 to at least 5-5/8 inches.
8. Bottle, brown salt-glazed stoneware, neck and handle fragment only, the body dark gray and the oxide slip a deep purple to yellow as a result of overfiring. Glazing also occurs on the fractures, identifying this piece as a waster and therefore of considerable importance. Other blemishes include roof drippings on the handle and body which indicate that the bottle was fired without the protection of a sagger. The cordoning on the neck is well proportioned, and the handle terminates in a neatly fingered rat-tail. National Park Service collection from the Swan Tavern site at Yorktown; unstratified. S. T. 213.
Figure 14.—Brown lead-glazed earthenware creampanof typical Yorktown type, probably dating from the second quarter of the 18th century. Found in Williamsburg. Rim diameter 35.56 centimeters.
Figure 14.—Brown lead-glazed earthenware creampanof typical Yorktown type, probably dating from the second quarter of the 18th century. Found in Williamsburg. Rim diameter 35.56 centimeters.
The types of kiln used by the Yorktown potters as well as their techniques of manufacture will not be known until the factory site is located and carefully excavated. Until that time, the Yorktown stonewares raise more questions than they answer. The most important of these is the shape of the kilns and how they were fired. The wares run the gamut from such under-burning that the iron-oxide slip has evolved no further than a zone of bright-red coloring, to overfiring which has turned the slip a deep purple and the body to almost the hardness and color of granite. Do these differences result from a lack of control over entire batches, or do they stem from temperature variations inherent in different parts of the kiln? Mr. Maloney's experiments, made without the use of saggers, have shown that close proximity to the firebox can unexpectedly and dramatically affect the wares.
Thus, one mug of his first test series was placed much closer to the direct heat than were the rest, with the result that it emerged with an overall dark, highly glossed surface somewhat reminiscent of Burslem brown stoneware.
The only real evidence of the Yorktown manufacturing process comes from the many sagger fragments that have been found around the town. The largest single assemblage was discovered on the Swan Tavern site, but another group of large pieces was recovered from beneath the Archer Cottage at the foot of the colonial roadway leading down to the river frontage. In neither instance is it likely that the sherds were serving any practical purpose, and so it is hard to imagine why they would have been taken to these widely distant locations.
The Park Service Yorktown collection includessections through three saggers of different sizes, one for holding quart tankards (fig. 12), another for pint mugs, and a third which might have served for the bowls, the last being 5¾ inches in height and having an interior base diameter of approximately 8 inches, with walls ½ inch thick and side apertures 5½ inches apart.[260]These apertures are pear shaped and are common to all the Yorktown saggers, as they are also to the examples excavated at Bankside in London.[261]The tankard saggers have three such holes plus a vertical slit which extends from the top to the bottom to house the handles, but it is not known whether the wide and shallow example described above would have possessed this feature. If this example was intended only for bowls, a slot would not have been needed and an extra aperture probably would have been substituted: but were it also used for pipkins, a handle opening would have been essential. The purpose of the pear-shaped apertures was to enable the salt fumes to percolate freely around the vessels being fired. For the same reason sagger lids sometimes were jacked up on small pads of clay, or the sagger rim scooped out here and there to let the fumes enter from the top. A careful examination of some of the Yorktown vessels shows that those closest to the salting holes received excessive fuming through the sagger apertures, the outlines of which were transferred to the pots in patches or stripes of heavy greenish mottling.