pottery-msg - 6/21/08 Medieval pottery, kilns. modern equivalents. tiles. NOTE: See also the files: pottery-whels-msg, basketweaving-msg, tiles-art, tools-msg, frescoes-msg, p-bottles-msg, feastgear-msg, p-tableware-msg, pottery-whels-msg, glasswork-msg, ceramics-bib, Ceramics-Intro-art. ************************************************************************ NOTICE - This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday. This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter. The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors. Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s). Thank you, Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous Stefan at florilegium.org ************************************************************************ From: coristew at uoguelph.ca (Cori Stewart) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: period pottery Date: 14 Mar 1995 14:57:23 GMT Organization: University of Guelph I have an ecyclopaedia of craft magazines ... One of the issues shows how to fire pots over a campfire-type-thing. I've also seen this technique explained in two pottery books. It is very simple, yet effective. There is, of course a slightly higher chance that pots will break, so heat conditions must be watched witha careful eye. In another book I saw instructions for what is termed a 'sawdust kiln'. This is actually, a kiln made with loose bricks piled to make a garbage can shape ... there were spaces between the bricks ... in otherwords, a very simple stacked arrangement. The kiln was then filled alternately with sawdust, then pots, covered with sawdust and then with pots and then sawdust, etc... until the kiln was filled (please note, larger pots were placed on the bottom ... as the kiln burns, the sawdust incinerates, and your pots are left on the bottom ... you don't want larger pots settling on top of smaller pots, thereby crushing them). After this, a sack soaked in flamable liquid was buried in the tops and ignited ... slowly slowly, over a day, the sawdust would burn out. It is even safe to leave it over night. eventually, pots are left baked at the bottom of the kiln intact. this is a popular technique and probably can be found with a little research at your library. Good luck ... I'm not a potter by any stretch of the imagination ... but a wide interest base leads to much information :-) Robyn Whystler From: Lisa Carter <zkr26 at ttacs1.ttu.edu> To: ansteorra at eden.com Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 00:47:34 -0600 (CST) On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 Caitrin3 at aol.com wrote: > I have a request and if anyone can help, I would really appreciate it. To > start, I make ceramic feast ware. I use extremely mundane materials and > methods doing this. I have been told by many that molded ceramics are not > period. About a year ago, I met a lady (I don't remember her name or where > she is from, sorry) who said that she read a book that mentioned molded > ceramics found in archealogy digs. Does anyone have any info that could help > me find this? I doubt that I would actually compete in A & S, but I would > like to display my work. I feel uncomfortable though, since I am using > modern molds, paints and firing to make my stuff. > > Lady Catrin Mac Cracken > Caitrin3 at aol.com I belive we talked at TSQ a year ago. I have still been doing a great bit of research on this issue. Molding can be dated back to 3000 b.c. - the famous "Rams Head" cup was a molded/thrown piece. The book Mold making for ceramics by Donald E. Frith has this information. It also explains how to make molds. Another reference source Looking at European Ceramics - by David Harris Cohen and Catherine Hess talks about period molding. After about a year I have finally made a working mold. I'm am also learning how to throw pottery. To create the mold I made a sold piece on the wheel. I then made the mold out of plaster from that piece - then using slip to create the end form. So to make a long answer - yes the greenware you are using is period. Well that is- that is who they did it. I've noted there were certain period forms also. What we think looks like a period item I have discovered is not necessary period. Kayleigh Drake From: SusanKFord at aol.com To: ansteorra at eden.com Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 10:08:16 -0500 There are many Chinese glazes that are period and not poisonous. Celedon comes to mind. It is a clear green glaze that shows up any incised work and texture put into the pot. It is usually put over whiteware and porcelain. I put modern glazes on my pots and explained why in my documentation. Also, before the Roman era, most pots were unglazed, only decorated in colored slips (liquid clay) and then burnished to a sheen with a smooth stone. In this case, you could decorate the outside of the pot the way you want to, and then just glaze the inside with a clear glaze. There were many different colors of clays, depending on the deposits of clay you were using. There was terra cotta, a yellowish-tan, and a lot of black. I believe the black was either a black slip, or it was raku fired. Raku firing is when you take the red hot pot out of the kiln and smother it with sawdust or leaves (today trash cans and shredded newspaper is used). The pot ignites the sawdust, which burns out the oxygen which then turns the clay black. Sigrid Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 13:36:56 -0500 From: Stephanie Howe <olga at icon-stl.net> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: period ceramics This may or may not be right up your alley- I've found it *very* informative, although reading produced raging thirst... Medieval Pottery from Excavations: Studies presented to Gerald Clough Dunning edited by Vera I. Evison, H. Hodges, and J.G. Hurst St. Martin's Press, Inc., 175 Fifth Ave, New York, NY 10010 LoC #74-82134 No color plates, but lots of line drawings with details and cross sections. Each essay has an extensive bibliography, too. Bonus info. on production and distribution, the evolution of kiln types, the social position of potters, etc. Have a pot of coffee ready- heavy-duty academic writing style. Olga Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 12:49:44 -0500 From: Stephanie Howe <olga at icon-stl.net> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: period ceramics DianaFiona at aol.com wrote: (snip) One of them is marvelous--it's a period Italian potters' manual! > It's very detailed, so it's perfect for majolica info. A friend of mine found > out about it and got it through ILL. Once I find them again--it may be That would be "Tre Libri dell'Arte del Vasaio (The Three Books of the Potter's Art)" by Cipriano Piccolpasso? Cool stuff! I've got a copy of the Scholar Press (ISBN 0 85967 452 5) facsimile set. One of the translators, Alan Caiger-Smith, has another couple of books out that you should find really interesting, if you haven't already seen them- "Tin Glazed Pottery", Faber & Faber Ltd, London, 1973, and one on lustre ware. Sorry, I'm working off memory and a bibliographic note from another, closer to hand, book, so I can't quote the really useful publishing info. I don't (yet!) own either of these titles, although they're right at the top of my aquire-as-soon-as-possible lists. If you're interested in tiles, get ahold of "Medieval Craftsmen: English Tilers" by Elizabeth Eames, ISBN 0-8020-7706-4 Informative and accessible, good illustrations, and very thorough. What other books on majolica do you recommend? Olga Belobashnina Cherepanova Barony of Three Rivers, Calontir Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 08:35:34 -0500 (CDT) From: Cindy Morley <cmorley at comp.uark.edu> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: period ceramics On Sat, 30 Aug 1997, Dennis Grace wrote: > I'm looking to find a book (or several?) on period European ceramics. I'd > like to find something that not only has some good color photos and other > illustrations, but discusses period materials and techniques as well. > Aquilanne Any particular time period? For anglo-saxon I would highly recommend: "Anglo-Saxon pottery and the Settlement of England" by Myres. This book has wonderful scale drawings of pots found in digs and a lot of good background info on pottery in england. Another one for Anglo-Saxon is: "The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England" by Wilson. This book has tons of other stuff in it as well besides pottery. Another group of books that I have recently found for later period pottery (discussing mainly majalica {I probibly spelled that wrong}) is "I tre libri dell'Arte del Vasaio, the three books of the potters art". I haven't had much chance to look in depth at them, but from what I have seen, they are very interesting. I think, however, that they were published slightly out of period (but were written in period??). Hope this helps. Christiaen Calontir Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 13:56:14 -0400 (EDT) From: DianaFiona at aol.com To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: period ceramics << That would be "Tre Libri dell'Arte del Vasaio (The Three Books of the Potter's Art)" by Cipriano Piccolpasso? Cool stuff! I've got a copy of the Scholar Press (ISBN 0 85967 452 5) facsimile set. One of the translators, Alan Caiger-Smith, has another couple of books out that you should find really interesting, if you haven't already seen them- "Tin Glazed Pottery", Faber & Faber Ltd, London, 1973, and one on lustre ware. >>> Yes, indeed, that was the one--thanks! I wasn't aware of the other books by the translator, though, so I'll have to go looking. I *do* have one with a similar title that I thought at first might be it--"Tin-glazed Earthenware", by Daphne Carnegy. It is the only one I have the actual book of, rather than just the photocopies. I got lucky and found it at Books-a-Million on the sale table for $11--$12! (And I've seen it there recently, too, so go hunt!) It's very good for translating the period directions into modern materials and equipment. It's even got some of the lovely color pictures the original poster was wanting. But the best one I have for that is "Italian Majolica", by Jirina Vydrova, trans. by Ota Vojtisek. It's not the only one like this out there, though. I've seen a few others in the hands of a friend who at least used to be on this list--Theo, are you still here? She's much more knowledgable on this topic than I am, so maybe she'll pop in with some titles eventually. >>What other books on majolica do you recommend? Olga Belobashnina Cherepanova Barony of Three Rivers, Calontir >>> Hummm.......... Well, as a forrunner to the Italian wares, there's "Medieval Near Eastern Ceramics in the Freer Gallery of Art", by the Smithsonian Institution. The work is overall much more informal than the Italian works were in their heyday, and might be less intimidating for someone just starting to paint ceramics. Another friend of mine has been working a great deal with middle eastern "Majolica", though, and is turning out some lovely things that are quite intricate indeed. Not majolica specifically, but intriging: I found a book, in Spanish, in our university library entitled "Ceramica Medieval Espanola" (No author listed on the title page). It's not all painted wares like the other books, and a number of the items are rather crude, but it's very interesting. There are a number of oil lamps pictured that I would like to try copying someday, and some amusing figures, like a camel, kneeling, that might have been meant as toys. There's an obvious Arabic influence, as you would expect, in a lot of the stuff. Lots of fun! Ldy Diana From: Norman White <gn-white at tamu.edu> To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 13:36:28 -0500 Subject: Re: ANST - New noncombat topic -Reply Trishka Makowski wrote about Marthe de Blenkinsop's comments: "I find it strange that it's not considered period... the Germans have been making Porcelain for at least 500 years... In Dresdin I think.. I'll have to double check. I learned this in my German language class.. It may be late in period, but it was in period. " This is not entirely correct. Although the Chinese had been making porcelain since the 7th century at least, and it had been obtained in Europe by trade since the Crusades, it was not until the end of the 17th century when manufacturing of true porcelain (soft frit porcelain) started in St Cloud, France. The formula for hard porcelain (almost identical to Chinese porcelain) was discovered in 1709 by Johann Friedrich Bottger (umlauts over the o) in Meissen, Saxony where it was kept a closely guarded secret. Prior to this time, Europeans made many only partially successful attempts to reproduce porcelain. Many of these attempts would be very hard for anyone other than an expert to distinguish. I would like to say that it was due to the technological prowess of the Chinese, my persona, that they made it earlier but in truth, my mundane persona as a Ph.D. clay mineralogist makes me say that it was because they had a deposit of a fortuitous composition. Reference: Rada, Pravoslav. 1989. Ceramic techniques, Hamlyn Publ. Group, London. HL Jin Liu Ch'ang a.k.a. Norman White email:gn-white at tamu.edu From: Dennis Grace <amazing at mail.utexas.edu> To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 15:18:39 -0500 Subject: ANST - ceramics Hi all, Aquilanne here. >Trishka Makowski wrote about Marthe de Blenkinsop's comments: >"I find it strange that it's not considered period... the >Germans have been making Porcelain for at least 500 years... In Dresdin I >think.. That's *china*-- Dresdin *china*. I don't remember the specific make-up of the clay used, but it was an attempt at producing a fascimile of porcelain. In fact, if you were to do a piece in any earthenware, then dip it in a white slip, you'd have reproduced a period technique used to simulate the look of oriental porcelain by potters trying to protect their jobs by producing ware that looked like the white porcelain. Like HL Jin Liu Ch'ang points out: >Prior to this time, Europeans made many only partially >successful attempts to reproduce porcelain. Many of >these attempts would be very hard for anyone other >than an expert to distinguish. I would suggest that anyone looking to do period work in porcelain use period Asian ceramics as their sources for artistic style and documentation reference. If one wants to do ceramics in a western European style, then try earthenware or midrange stoneware (it's so much easier to work with than porcelain, anyway; porcelain has no grog, so it's like trying to work with Crisco! ;-> ). Aquilanne From: Martha Lee Nichols <mnichols at tenet.edu> To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 23:07:28 -0500 (CDT) Subject: ANST - porcelain HL Jin Liu Ch'ang, I realize in my period, Europeans neither produced nor purchased Chinese Porcelain. My art form developed in China and many of these pieces still exist in museums today. The Moors in Spain had the knowledge of this type of mineral overglaze and decorated not only porcelain but fine earthenware and tiles as well with them. The next advance occurred in the 14th c. when many attempts were made to reproduce porcelain as fine as that of China. Authorities call the resulting pieces faisence. I believe that this medium was indeed the porcelain dipped earthenware. My artform uses commercially produced porcelain (just as the porcelain artists of Urbino did). Unfortunately, the beautiful, egg shell thin porcelain is very rare. Most china blanks are heavy and clunky. Just like faisence. I have found these faisence plate with ruler's arms in every country in Europe. One had a barnyard chicken! (Louvre) Marthe de Blenkinsop Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 13:22:34 -0500 (CDT) From: Cindy Morley <cmorley at comp.uark.edu> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. On Thu, 2 Oct 1997, Shannon R. Ward wrote: > I've been researching Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman pottery. So far, all > the examples I've found have all been wheel thrown. Surely there are > surviving examples somewhere of coil built pots in medieval Europe, or so > I thought, but I can't find them. Does anyone have documentation for such? Hey Tatiana, Have you tried looking in "Anglo-Saxon pottery and the Settlement of England" by Myres? This is an excellent book and should give you some very good sources. If you can't find it in your library let me know and I will get it to you next time I see you. (this is the book that I had at Lilies, no I haven't turned it back into the library yet...). C-ya Christiaen ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ cmorley at comp.uark.edu Cindy Morley Shire-March of the Grimfells Christean Jansen Kingdom of Calontir Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 14:33:06 EDT From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy A Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. Good Greetings Tatiana! >I've been researching Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman pottery. So far, all >the examples I've found have all been wheel thrown. Surely there are >surviving examples somewhere of coil built pots in medieval Europe, or so >I thought, but I can't find them. Does anyone have documentation for >such? Yes there are quite a few coil built pieces. In fact most of the thrown work you have seen ARE coil-and- throw. A flat base is made and fat coils are attached. But instead of just thumbing them down, they are also thrown and smoothed... This is a technique used world wide both in Period and Currently. For the cultures and periods you mentioned, that is the primary mode of production, because they were stuck with the "slow wheel", which is essentially just a crude turntable incapable of throwing a good pot from the lump. When you look at those pots, are they decorated with strips of clay with stamped textures? Those strips help hold the pot together. Coiling by itself is a fragile process. Coil and throw helps the coils stay together better (a Good Thing in some of the primative Post Conquest kilns), inproves the strenght of the pot and makes for more desireable surfaces... As to documentations..I would suggest starting with "Medieval Pottery in Britain: AD 900-1600" by McCarthy and Brooks and "Medieval English Pottery" by Bernard Rackham....That would be a good start.. >Yet one more C&I Laurel up to her elbows in clay. :) Cool! Say, here's something to try, and it will give you cross over skills. Teach yourself how to do slip trailling! There are some WONDERFUL end of-and-post-Period examples out there of slip trailed callig and illum...they when NUTZ with extravagant text and images. Very fun! Very querkie....but they scream "Medieval!" I have been teeaching myself this technique, and it has been a ball... Hroar Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 19:13:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Carol at Small Churl Books <scbooks at neca.com> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: reference on Majolica Didn't someone ask about references on European Majolica a while back? _Ceramics of the World: from 4000 B.C. the present_ has 67 pages on it, with color pictures up to 9 x 12. Authors: Lorenzo Camusso & Sandro Bortone; Published by Abrams in the U.S. 1992; 0-8109-3175-3. Lady Carllein Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:51:40 -0500 From: Jenn Carlson <jenn at cliffs.com> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. I also have been doing research on Anglo-Saxon pottery. With a specific search for pre-650 stuff. I have made some pottery stamps to use on the pottery (found lots of cool stuff on those) and now am ready to try my hand at the actual pots. As I understand it (minimal at best), the pots that were made this early were hand-made rather than wheel made and used a coiling method. Am I on the right track? Most of the literature that I can find simply says that they are not wheel made. . . which means pretty much nothing to this non-pottery-literate person. :) Sounded like Meistari Hroar had done some work in this area-- > [Yes there are quite a few coil built pieces. In fact most of the thrown > work you have seen ARE coil-and- throw. A flat base is made and fat coils > are attached. But instead of just thumbing them down, they are also > thrown and smoothed... This is a technique used world wide both in Period > and Currently. For the cultures and periods you mentioned, that is the > primary mode of production, because they were stuck with the "slow > wheel", which is essentially just a crude turntable incapable of throwing > a good pot from the lump. > When you look at those pots, and they are decorated with strips of clay > with stamped textures? Those strips help hold the pot together. Coiling > by itself is a fragile process. Coil and throw helps the coils stay > together better (a Good Thing in some of the primative Post Conquest > kilns), inproves the strenght of the pot and makes for more desireable > surfaces... How much of this applies to the earliest period cremation urns? > As to documentations..I would suggest starting with "Medieval Pottery > in Britain: AD 900-1600" by McCarthy and Brooks and "Medieval English > Pottery" by Bernard Rackham....That would be a good start.. I'm still in search of these, I will have to do an ILL, do they cover the time period that I am looking for? So far, I have found, Briscoe, Teresa. "Anglo-Saxon Pot Stamps," Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History. BAR. British Series 92(1981): pp.1-36. Briscoe, Teresa. "The Use of Brooches and Other Jewelry as Dies on Pagan Anglo-Saxon Pottery," Medieval Archaeology 29(1985): pp. 136-142. Capelle, Torsten. "Animal Stamps and Animal Figures on Anglo-Saxon and Anglian Pottery," Medieval Archaeology 31(1987): pp. 94-96. Eagles, Bruce N. The Anglo-Saxon Settlement of Humberside. BAR. British Series 68 (i and ii), 1979. Green, Barbara, W.F. Miligan, and S.E. West. "The Illington/Lackford Workshop," Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. ed. Vera T. Evison. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. pp. 187-226. Huggett, J.W. "Imported Grave Goods and the Early Anglo-Saxon Economy," Med Arch, 32, 1988. pp. 63-96. (this one is on specifically wheel-thrown imports) Myres, J.N.L. Anglo-Saxon Pottery and the Settlement of England. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969. Myres, J.N.L. "Two Anglo-Saxon Potters=92 Stamps," Antiquaries Journal 50 (1970): p.350. Myres, J.N.L. "Willingham Villa and Romano-Saxon Pottery in Kent," Antiquity XVII (1944): pp. 52-55. (examination of mostly wheel-made pottery from the Roman period) Roberts, William I., IV. Romano-Saxon Pottery. BAR, British Series 106, 1982. Thompson, F.H. "Anglo-Saxon Sites in Lincolnshire," Antiquaries Journal, Vol. XXXVI, 1956. All with some stuff on pottery and pottery stamps in them. But no one who has mentioned anything about the actual creation of the pot (except for a brief reference to the "polishing" process in the Illington/Lackford article). Any assistance offered would be greatly appreciated. Maerwynn of Holme Mag Mor, Calontir jenn at cliffs.com Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 11:02:59 -0500 From: Stephanie Howe <olga at icon-stl.net> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. "Medieval Pottery from Excavations: Studies Presented to Gerald Clough Dunning" edited by Vera I. Evison, H. Hodges, and J.G. Hurst 1974, St. Martin's Press L.of Congress: 74-82134 I've been scanning the essays in this volume for you- several fall into your targeted time/place- but it's pretty much the standard archeologist's analysis of pottery you're already familiar with: catagorization of the form, decoration, fabric (characteristics of the clay itself) and possible use, but very little (if any) speculation on production method beyond "wheel/not wheel". There's a little bit of "fast wheel vs. slow wheel", mostly dependent on the presence of throwing marks on the interiors of the vessels, but no discussion at all on handbuilding techniques. Sorry. Olga Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 13:28:15 EDT From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy A Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. Greeings! >I also have been doing research on Anglo-Saxon pottery. With a specific >search for pre-650 stuff. I have made some pottery stamps to use on the >pottery (found lots of cool stuff on those) [Arn't stamps great? Both in the making and the using? I love stamps...when I get bored, i make stamps...] and now am ready to try my >hand at the actual pots. As I understand it (minimal at best), the pots >that were made this early were hand-made rather than wheel made and used >a coiling method. Am I on the right track? Most of the literature that I >can find simply says that they are not wheel made. . . which means >pretty much nothing to this non-pottery-literate person. :) [Well, this is both true and not true. Most Anglo-Saxon pots WERE done via a coil-building method. And many left it at that. HOWEVER, some were done via coil and throw, which is coil building the pot while it is on a turntable (the "slow-wheel"). In this method, the coils are laid and attached and then the turn table is turn and the coil is thrown to straighten the walls, then them and assure the coil is securly attached..] >Sounded like Meistari Hroar had done some work in this area-- >> [Yes there are quite a few coil built pieces. In fact most of the thrown >> work you have seen ARE coil-and- throw. A flat base is made and fat coils >> are attached. But instead of just thumbing them down, they are also >> thrown and smoothed... This is a technique used world wide both in Period >> and Currently. For the cultures and periods you mentioned, that is the >> primary mode of production, because they were stuck with the "slow >> wheel", which is essentially just a crude turntable incapable of throwing >> a good pot from the lump. >> When you look at those pots, and they are decorated with strips of clay >> with stamped textures? Those strips help hold the pot together. Coiling >> by itself is a fragile process. Coil and throw helps the coils stay >> together better (a Good Thing in some of the primative Post Conquest >> kilns), inproves the strenght of the pot and makes for more desireable >> surfaces... > >How much of this applies to the earliest period cremation urns? [It applies directly and a great deal...keep in mind that pottery is perhaps one of the most conservative of the crafts. Some of the tools have changed, and some dramatically, BUT the techniques used to make pots then are essentially the same as now. Making a coil pot today is done just the same way as then...the answers to expretion don't necessarily all lie in technique; the answers lies in WHAT the potters then were reacting to....what Forces influenced the potters then to make what they did in the manner they did. And you will learn that by looking at WHY they made the pots, what materials were available and to a lesser degree, the tech available.....So examine the pots, or the pictures of the pots extensively...look closely and carefully and imagine HOW and WHY they were made...] >So far, I have found, > >Briscoe, Teresa. "Anglo-Saxon Pot Stamps," Anglo-Saxon Studies in >Archaeology and History. BAR. British Series 92(1981): pp.1-36. <snip> >Thompson, F.H. "Anglo-Saxon Sites in Lincolnshire," Antiquaries >Journal, >Vol. XXXVI, 1956.=20 [Looks to me that you have found a healthy number of sources! Way to go!] >All with some stuff on pottery and pottery stamps in them. But no one >who has mentioned anything about the actual creation of the pot (except >for a brief reference to the "polishing" process in the >Illington/Lackford article). [And you probably won't find anything like that.....technique is less important than stylistic considerations, in the archeologists world..they are trying to place a pot "properly" in time.] >Any assistance offered would be greatly appreciated. > >Maerwynn of Holme >Mag Mor, Calontir You probably arn't gonna like this...but I will suggest you look up coil building in current books....what you learn there will be exactly what you need to know to make coil pots....the technique has not changed over 1000's of years.....the more critical thing is to learn just what it is that separates Anglo Saxon pottery from other cultures. Once you have THAT, then you need to internalize it and make "Original" Anglo-Saxon pottery. What I would suggest is get your clay and start making coil pots make your "pancake" base, roll the coils out and learn how to attach them so they won't come apart. Learn how, by the subtle placement of the coils, to make your pot either swell out or draw in. One of the most important things to learn is when to stop! Stop so that your clay will dry enough to support further coils; this means that you need to learn drying rates of your clay, and what the clay feels like at various stages.....I really wish I could be there to help you over time... A further suggestion.....in all those books, find the photos of the pots you like best and xerox them. Enlarge the xeroxes and pin them up in the area where you do your clay work...in time you will find that they will help you "become" an Anglo-Saxon potter! Learn how they lived, their social station, what they wore, what they ate...all this will help you make good pots of the Period you are interested in. And if you have questions, PLEASE ask me; together we can probably work it out... Meistari Hroar Stormgengr; APF, CSO, OL Shire of Shadowed Stars Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 16:49:41 EDT From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy A Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. >So, do the books listed here also contain things like glaze recipes, firing >temperatures, type of heat source in the kiln, and all those other details >that I can never keep straight? > >Alban The books that Maerwyn mention on Anglo-Saxon pottery I couldn't say; but probably not. They might give clues, if you read carefully......There is brief mention of such things in the two Books I mentioned ("Medieval pottery in Britain:900-1600AD" and "Medieval English Pottery"), There is a facsimile of an Italian mss on end of Period italian pottery called "3 Books of the Potters Art" by Piccolopasso (sp?) q738.2 p591t...but remember, this is *Italian* and what was happening in the Mediterranean basin doesn't parallel what was occuring in the rest of Europe. Cross overs are not necessarily there..... What I would suggest is that you obtain a copy of "Clay and Glazes for the Potter" by Daniel Rhodes. This is a very detailed book on ceramic chemistry, physics and all that other good stuff that describes ceramic materials in-process. Then, sit down with whatever book on Medieval pottery that you have AND the Rhodes book, and use it as a cross reference when you find nuggets of info in the medieval book...for instance, in the Rackham book ("Medieval English Pottery") he describes the dusting of galena ore onto raw, wet pottery as a glazing technique [DO NOT DO THIS!!!! VERY VERY HAZARDOUS!!!}...well, look up galena in the Rhodes book...and if you know that galena is a form of lead and sulfer, look those up too...that will tell you that they melt at a low temp, and are used as earthen ware glaze constituents (and that sulpher is not good for the glaze or clay...)....look up earthenware, etc...and that tells you more and more.... like, what the clay was like, how effiecient (or not) the kilns were, etc. etc. Look for other things that might not be directly mentioned in the Medieval pottery books.For instance, it struck me how many (a LOT!!) of English pots were green, of some hue or other. This doesn't get mentioned much. But if you know that copper compounds make green, as do some forms of firing...that tell ya a lot about materials availability and aesthetic preferences. If you have trouble remembering the "factoids" [and I sure do!! That Rhodes book of mine is well worn...8-)], you might try stating a small spiral bound journal to keep such info separated from the bulk of info available, and right to hand...and after using it often, you probably will start to remember it. I really am not trying to discourage folks...far from it! I am thrilled that so many are even interested in the field. I am just trying to say that you are not going to get all the info you need from one book...especially the books written by archeologists. They arn't interested in actually making the pots, just putting them where they belong in history. You are probably going to have to cross reference a lot, keeping in mind that with pottery, somethings are eternal. Glazes ALWAYS are made of a flux, a refractory and a glass former; the forming techniques are the same now as then, and clay is always composed of silica, alumina and water. I do apologize for rambling on so very much, and possibly repeating myself....i just find this field so very exciting!!! Meistari Hroar Stormgengr; APF, CSO, OL Shire of Shadowed Stars Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 17:08:36 -0500 From: Tim Weitzel <wcrobert at blue.weeg.uiowa.edu> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. Ok, I was going to go home and find my bibliography on this subject, but... I know there are numerous archaeological reports on the subject. As Olga eluded to, these do discuss the nature of the clay as well as the decoration. Since archaeologists primarily date pottery by decoration, a lot of detail will go into that area. This means its really easy to read four or so books and get a very good idea on what the decoration was for a given area at given time. No need to make it up, its there. Similarly, the more detailed archaeological reports will talk about manufacturing techniques and shapes of vessels found or reconstructed, Firing technology, types of glazes, etc. There is at least one book out there, and its titled something like Corpus of Anglo Saxon pottery ... from graves or cemeteries or something like that. Anyway, I did read several of these a few years ago. Another detail archaeologists study is the type of clay used in pots and where it came from. This helps to show how pots are moving around and by extension, the people carrying them. I do remember a pretty detailed discussion of clay and where it might have come from right down to the percentages of each type found on various sites. All of this can be boring in detail. Its how archaeologists think, sorry, and its what you do when you are using written descriptions. The conclusions are the fun part: Basically, this is what they have found: Pagan English pots are hand built. Probably by coils, since that is the most common method used in hand building pots world wide. I don't remember, but that may be addressed somewhere under techniques of manufacture. Later on, the wheel comes into use, probably slow wheel at first, and then later still the kick wheel. There is a dramatic and distinct change in pottery at about the same time that the types of burials and kinds of burial goods are changing. It seems to be linked to the changes in belief system as the early English became Christianized. Anyway, Look for open hearth or pit fires instead of kilns for the early stuff, with lots of stamped decoration and hand built pots. Later you will find the kiln structures to fire pots as well as brick and tile. Glazes are occasionally but rarely used in the middle Anglo Saxon period but more so latter in the actual Middle Ages period of English history. If I remember correctly, the early use of glaze was mostly in Kent and was something like an affectation of the Jutes and their descendents. The Saxons, Angles, etc. didn't seem to use glazes, at first, anyway. The color of the post was based on the clay body and the kiln atmosphere may have been intentional but it is harder to prove. I remember a discussion of what the glazes were made from so if you took that information and looked at some of the books Hroar is referencing , you can make a glaze to have the appearance of what you read in the reports but is still safe by modern standards. Earthenware of especially buff color, but also red, or black were used. Some of the final color has to do with the firing atmosphere: oxidizing or reducing. A cautionary note: stoneware is not used at all in early period. Its a German thing as is salt firing. Porcelain is out too. It is Asian and only shows up in Delft ware, post 1600. Tryffin ap Myrddin Shire of Shadowdale, Calontir Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 13:25:43 -0500 From: Stephanie Howe <olga at icon-stl.net> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. Another common technique used in handbuilding is paddling: a relatively thick coil of clay added to the growing form is worked with one hand supporting the wall from the inside, often using a bit of broken pot or a wooden knob as an anvil, and paddled from the outside with a wooden bat. Sometimes the bat was wrapped with cord, or carved with a pattern that left distinctive marks on the outside of the pot- usually noted by archeologists ;)- but when the anvil and bat method was used for forming, then smoothed by scraping or wiping or even a coating of slip, the only way to determine it is by microscopic examination of the clay itself, looking for the orientation of the particles. Likely as not, some Anglo Saxon potters used this method, too. Olga Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 15:30:19 EDT From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy A Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: ceramics-coil building doc. >Another common technique used in handbuilding is paddling: a relatively >thick coil of clay added to the growing form is worked with one hand >supporting the wall from the inside, often using a bit of broken pot or >a wooden knob as an anvil, and paddled from the outside with a wooden >bat. <snip> >Olga This is an excellent point; one that slipped my mind. I could see this as the technique for the A-S funerary pots, the ones with the faces on them? (that book is buried around here somewhere..need an archaeologist to separate the layers..] The possibilities for a really swelling form are good with this technique.... Hroar Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 01:43:15 EST From: DianaFiona <DianaFiona at aol.com> Subject: Re: SC - Period Pottery - WARNING << I would like to point out that if anyone finds a pottery item that is or has YELLOW GLAZE that they should call the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) and the closest HAZMAT team IMMEDIATELY. It is my understanding that yellow glaze is period, but can only be made by the use of Uranium nuclear material. Correct me if I am wrong, but when I took a pottery class, I was told this by the instructor. >> Ummmm, no. There are many yellow glazes on the market today. They not only are not radioactive, quite a number are even food safe! Perhaps you are thinking (Or the instuctor was?) of lead content? Period glazes, including at least one light yellow I know of, often did have lead as an ingredient......... Ldy Diana, a frustrated wanna-be potter Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 17:14:51 -0400 From: renfrow at skylands.net (Cindy Renfrow) Subject: Re: SC - Period Pottery - WARNING ><< > I would like to point out that if anyone finds a pottery item that is or > has YELLOW GLAZE that they should call the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory > Commission) and the closest HAZMAT team IMMEDIATELY. It is my > understanding that yellow glaze is period, but can only be made by the > use of Uranium nuclear material. Correct me if I am wrong, but when I > took a pottery class, I was told this by the instructor. > >> > Ummmm, no. There are many yellow glazes on the market today. They not only >are not radioactive, quite a number are even food safe! Perhaps you are >thinking (Or the instuctor was?) of lead content? Period glazes, including at >least one light yellow I know of , often did have lead as an >ingredient......... > > Ldy Diana, a frustrated wanna-be potter Hello! The gentleman is partially correct. There was a glaze produced from radioactive materials. (I believe it was at the turn of this century, but don't quote me.) The china produced with this glaze is pale yellow with a slight greenish cast, & will glow in the dark. If you wish to see some, visit the glass museum at Corning, NY, or Wheaton Village's Museum of American Glass, at Millville, NJ. There is no need to panic. Cindy/Sincgiefu renfrow at skylands.net Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 20:42:04 -0400 From: renfrow at skylands.net (Cindy Renfrow) Subject: Re: SC - Period Pottery - WARNING <snip> Hello again! Must have been out in this gorgeous sunshine too long. What I meant to say was that I've seen yellow/green *glass* dishes made in part from radioactive materials. They're on display in those 2 museums. Cindy/Sincgiefu renfrow at skylands.net Subject: Re: A Pottery Website.... Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 00:02:08 +0000 From: Karen at stierbach.atlantia.sca.org (Larsdatter, Karen ) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Found another pottery website that some of you might find interesting: http://www.bawue.de/~wmwerner/essling/english/karmel05.html It shows some pictures of some pottery found while excavating a Carmelite friary in Esslingen, Germany. The friary was founded at the end of the thirteenth century. Not *too* informative but it does give you some general shapes ... Yours in Service to the Dream, Karen Larsdatter Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 11:20:00 -0400 From: "Peters, Rise J." <PetersR at spiegel.becltd.com> Subject: Re: SC - Period Pottery - WARNING In a message dated 98-03-29 20:33:56 EST, Diana wrote: >> <snip> >> Hello again! Must have been out in this gorgeous sunshine too long. What >> I meant to say was that I've seen yellow/green *glass* dishes made in part >> from radioactive materials. They're on display in those 2 museums. >> Cindy/Sincgiefu >> renfrow at skylands.net >> > (Grin) Having spent the majority of the day outside, first at fighter >practice, then gardening, I can certainly sympathise! But my ponders still >hold--whether someone was *trying* for glowing dishes, and how they effected >the health of the makers/users.............. My guess would be they were just trying for a bright clear yellow. I have a chart that shows the different shades of yellow and red glass that have been made over the last several hundred years. The earlier shades of yellow were all a little dull -- starting out with a fairly golden-yellow and then moving to a slightly brighter shade. Yellow glass made with uranium is a nice bright clear shade. (It approaches what we'd now call a neon yellow.) Uranium was just another mineral in the pre-atomic age. And the danger may not have been apparent -- remember, the ladies who used to paint the radium on glow-in-the-dark watch dials pointed their brushes with their tongues at first. Caitlin Cheannlaidir Medieval glassworkers list is up and running! Send "subscribe" message to <compagnia-request at phosphor-ink.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 98 00:30:49 -0500 From: Dottie Elliott <difirenze at usa.net> Subject: Re: SC - feastware question >I just got through looking at a site that has beautiful late anglo-saxon >reproduction pottery on it. If this is a web site, I would love to see the address. As someone who has been studying medieval pottery (and learning to make pottery) for a while now I will try to answer this. First of all, our knowledge of the middle ages is based on what archeologist have found, and drawings, paintings and writings or the period. Its my opinon that its impossible to tell from an illuminated manuscript or painting whether an item is metal, pottery or wood. Plates in England aren't found until the late fifteen hundreds and those were square and made of wood. Now, they did have silver plates before that. It was an ostentatious show of wealth and was used as such. Often such plates (and even the more beautiful pottery) was displayed during feasts rather than used as another show of wealth (you have so much you don't need to use it all). Most of the pottery that survives from England are pots, jugs, pitchers, pans and later cups, bowls and so on. Pottery in England in the 10th & 11th centuries was mostly rather simple (well compared to Italy). It was crudely made and decorated possibly not all. Pottery was mostly very functional. Cups of the time are mostly wood (bowls) or metal. Things got better as time went on. I have read that the pottery industry in England collapsed when Rome withdrew and that explains why their pottery was crude early on. Certainly, it was not nearly as finished looking nor as highly decorated as Italy's pottery. Also, let me say that of the cups, bowls and plates I am making, plates are the hardest. You must be careful to leave enough clay for the bottom to be able to use the item but if you leave too much it will warp on drying and be too heavy. My teacher agress that they are one of the harder items to make. Its my personal opinion that poorer folks used simple wood bowls in their own homes because they would have been eating bread (not using it as a plate and throwing/giving it away). This was something they could make themselves as well. Wood doesn't break as easily as pottery either. Please also remember that at feasts folks shared food containers. How many people you might share with depended on your social rank. The type of bread and amount and type of food was dictated by this as well. The trencher was a place to put your portion that you removed from a communal bowl. There is a whole realm of ettiquette on how to share food (like its bad manners to eat the trencher), share cups, etc. Its my opinion that when serving large groups of people, bread trenchers were the only way to give that many folks their own 'plate'. I started learning about pottery with the single intent of making period looking items for displaying my food in A&S contests. I was sadly disappointed to find that for England and France, bread trenchers are what I must use. For Italy, at least, I can do plates & bowls. Clarissa Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:43:48 -0500 From: Helen <him at gte.net> Subject: Re: SC - Pottery link Hi hope this helps. http://www.ftech.net/~regia/bodgbend.htm Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:32:09 -0600 From: Helen <him at gte.net> Subject: Re: SC - medieval pottery http://www.hillside.co.uk/arch/longmarket/pottery.html I thought some people would like to read this very interesting site. Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 06:14:06 -0500 From: Melanie Wilson <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> To: LIST SCA arts <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Pottery book Not one I've heard of before: Jennings, Sarah - Medieval Pottery in the Yorkshire Museum. 1992. Mel Subject: Your Chamber Pots Date: Wed, 28 Oct 98 20:45:21 MST From: rmhowe <magnusm at ncsu.edu> To: stefan at texas.net, "Mark.S Harris (rsve60)" <rsve60 at email.sps.mot.com> European Ceramics Robin Hildyard March 1999 144pp 270x220mm 170 col 30 b/w HB 1 85177 259 6 25.00 W This 4th volume in the V&A Decorative Arts Series traces the story of European ceramics from the Middle Ages to the present day, highlighting key developments, techniques, discoveries and styles. Looking at Medieval earthenware and stoneware, tin-glaze and Dutch tiles, and the invention and uses of porcelain, Robin Hildyard then turns to the impact of industrialization on ceramics, with its radical changes in methods of working and new techniques, such as transfer-printing. The Empire period and the Great Exhibition are shown to be a great stimulus to ceramic production, while the 20th century is characterized by the separation of the designer, manufacturer and artist, reflected in the modernism of the Bauhaus style and the influence of Art Deco. European Ceramics will be an indispensable reference work for students, collectors and all those interested in this versatile material. Victoria and Albert Museum Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 21:11:22 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: Cavalier things On Mon, 23 Nov 1998 19:55:53 EST styrbjorn at juno.com (Skip Wilder) writes: >Does anyone know of good books or web sites on the Cavalier period >that focus on the things rather than the history? I'm looking for >info on: ceramics, wooden furniture, buildings, weapons, and >costuming. > >Styrbjorn Ulfhamr Here are a few books I might suggest: "English Slipware Dishes; 1650-1850" Ronald G. Cooper 738.37 C78e "English Pottery" Bernard Rackham 738.R11m 'The English Country Pottery' Peter C.D. Brears 738.3 B74e These should help you get an idea about pottery in the time frame you are interested in...At least in England any way. Hroar Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 02:43:46 -0500 From: Melanie Wilson <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu" <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Craftmanship/Pottery >Would this somewhat like what I saw on your webpage? I rather fancied >those, btw... Yes I put up the everyday stuff on purpose, as the stuff in books tends to be too pretty and rich for most people.(ie in period not now !) I think it is attractive in its useful own way. I like to think of it as their tupperware. Why spend time making a pot looking good for everyday use that will probably get smahed before too long ? AS [Anglo-Saxon] pots are particulary bad! I've seen better from schoolkids, a photo can't really show how wobberly they are :) Then again maybe the kids DID make the everyday pots! It should also be born in mind that with their (probable) method of firing there were a lot of casualties so time spent making pots look really good was wasted. You also see different clays in one pot eg black & red, the burnishing looks nice too. There is a clay here that is red and turns black with firing, you see a lot of pots from that clay, it is a coarse clay which is pretty resistant to direct heat. Mel Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:31:45 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: Craftmanship/Pottery <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> writes: > It should also be born in mind that with their >(probably) method of fireing the were alot of casualties so time spent >making pots look really good was wasted, you also see different clays >in one pot eg black & red, [this is more due to the firing technique, where the reduction and oxidation and flashing in the clamp kiln is so patchy...the black is a certain amount of carbonization, the red is the iron in the clay being reduced..] M. Hroar Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:32:02 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: Pottery SNIPPED >> >Pretty sure it was straight from the ground >> > >> >Mel >> >> It sounds very interesting....not nice to make a Peer drool! 8-) >> Wish I could be there..sigh.. >> Hroar > >Do you suppose that this clay might have a greasy composition, much >as the "Black Earth" found at various sites of long occupation? >That is, that there might be a long history of organic refuse in it, >thus giving it it's peculiar color? It figures if it was locally dug, >it wouldn't be carried or shipped that far... >Magnus It might have an effect on the color of the clay in situ, but since this is caused by an organic, it will fire out and have no effect on the fired color of the clay. (But it CAN affect the plasticity of the clay!) The fired colors of the clay are due to the various forms of iron predominately, manganese and copper secondarily, that are picked up as the clay is moved about geologically. If the clay fires white, then it has not been moved about due to the forces of erosion. It can be very disappointing, when one sees a lovely color of clay in a road cut, such a blue or yellow, and you KNOW it won't be that color after firing. 8-(... Hroar Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:32:02 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: Pottery <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> writes: >>Do you suppose that this clay might have a greasy composition, much >as the "Black Earth" found at various sites of long occupation? >That is, that there might be a long history of organic refuse in it, >thus giving it it's peculiar color? It figures if it was locally dug, >it wouldn't be carried or shipped that far... > >There tends to be alot of organic matter in early pots I believe again >helps with reducing the thermal shock caused by pit fireing (I'm >talking early here 5th C) [True, and depending on the particulate size, organics can add working strength to the clay (as does sand and shell particles] The thermal shock resistance is due to the creation of space between clay particles. The more space, up to a point, the looser, more "open" the clay and the more flexible it is. The smaller the clay particle size and the less room between said particles, the more rigid the clay and more likely it is to shatter when subjected to heat. The clay needs to be able to "move" while firing.] >But I think the Moira clay come out red and fires Black [Which makes this so unusaul and intriquing..usually it is just the opposite. Clays can come out of the ground in a variety of colors, but almost always fire in some shade of red or white/cream.] >Mel Hroar Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:57:05 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-middle at dnaco.net, sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: A baluster jug... Just a little factoid for you out there, since it is a slow day. In our copy of "The Hours of Catherine of Cleves", in the Thursday hours of the sacrement=compline, the page entitled "Israelites Eating the Passover Lamb and Unleavened Bread" there is a woman in the margin who is carrying a baluster jug, which must be heavier than it looks as she is a bit hunched over. The jug is nicely detailed, especially the ruffled foot-rim... Pottery is *everywhere*! Hroar Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 09:58:53 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: aquamaniles? On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 02:28:11 -0800 styrbjorn at juno.com (Skip Wilder) writes: >< Hroar made me a lovely unicorn aquamanile and just after he handed >it to me, it decided to go into glaze stess and crack >along its backside (poor baby). I really love it, but am terrified of >lifting it by the handle that attaches to that cracked backside <grin> > > Consult with Hroar for his advise, but I have a lot of success >repairing my ceramics with epoxy and a product called porc-a-filler. > >Styrbjorn Ulfhamr This would indeed work, and I recommend it; but I am honor-bound to make my Cousin as perfect an aquamanile as I am able... Hroar Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 22:09:04 EST From: freyja1 at juno.com (Timothy a Whitcomb) To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: aquamaniles? >Were these used in the 12th c. in England? [AS to clay ones, I am (tentatively) not finding any before 13th century England..but this is after a very cursory look-through.] >And, whereabouts in Pennsic are you usually located? [For the past 6 years I have been in Bazaar #2, across from the bathhouse and the camp store...And I am hoping to be there this year too. 8-)] > Also, I have another pottery question, if you >don't mind. My lord and I use beaker style ceramic cups, [As a side note, might I suggest Cistercian ware style tygs, 15th-16th century...many have a tall flaired beaker like body, but with two thin handles?] >but in the bit >of research I did a while back, I couldn't find any ceramic examples, >only metal and some glass -- although the ones in one illumination I >saw could have been ceramic -- hard to tell. [You should be able to find very nice beakers for pre-period...but strictly drinking vessels as a whole class become problematic until the 13-14th Century..there was too much competition from wood and leather vessels...] [snip] >Elwynne Hroar Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:55:22 -0500 From: Melanie Wilson <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> To: LIST SCA arts <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Slow Wheel Found a ref to some AS pagan pottery that may have been made on the wheel, these are found only in Kent, it states by rather unskilled hands. These are bottle shaped vases , never with bosses or handles. There are also some refs to continental pots wheel made in the Romanized areas and those that mimic thrown Roman pots again in Romanised areas. The Arts in Early England by Baldwin-Brown Still interested if someone else has other info Mel Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 02:46:21 -0500 From: Melanie Wilson <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> To: LIST SCA arts <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Anglo Saxon Wheel thrown pottery There is a book called Wheel Thrown Pottery in Anglo Saxon Graves by Vera Evison, that those interested in pottery/AS might like to look at. It is very acedemic and the overall conclusion is that it was very very rare. More common in the South and probably imports. (not read it myself this was from an archeologist friend of mine) Mel Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 14:08:20 EST From: Timothy a Whitcomb <freyja1 at juno.com> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: "Slow Wheels, Coil and Throw & A.S. Pottery.." Some time back, Mel, I believe it was, asked about slow wheels and coil and throw methods. As to slow wheeels, they are refered to in Rackhams "Medieval English Pottery" and McCarthy and Brooks "Medieval Pottery in Britain AD 900 to 1000". Basically, they are a turntable. One hand keeps it in motion, while the other manipulates the clay as it turns. This works best with coil and throw and with refining the rims of strictly coil built pots. (my understading is that antler tools were carved into templates to form uniform rims.) Coil and throw is a technique, similar to straight coil building, whereby, as a thick coil is added to the growing pot, it is wetted and pulled up and thinned. Further coils are added and manipulated thus. This technique works best on a kickwell, but is done also on a slow wheel, as practiced by many Native American potters of the desert south west. Modifying my stance, it seems that most AS pots were strictly coil built, but a good number had templated rims, {which really can only be done with the pot rotating in some fashion] and a smaller number they just aren't sure about, due to the finishing processes employed erasing forming techiques (unless thin sections were analysed, and inclusion patterns observed.) Now as to the various types of drinking vessels, according to the McCarthy and Brooks, it would seem that one would see many more wood, leather, glass and metal drinking vessels than clay ones until the 14th-15th Century in England. The pottery ones existed, but in smaller numbers. Hroar Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 02:45:28 -0500 From: Melanie Wilson <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu" <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Handles >A number of drinking items I'm finding out did not have handles, for >instance the leather jacks mentioned earlier, I believe. And I seem >to remember some mention of many of the poorer pottery mugs not haveing >handles. Mel, you mentioned some (alot?) of pottery recoveries? Any >ideas? Well I can say nothing in pagan AS had handles, Romans did I think. 13th C some did others didn't, the drinking vessels are more like little jugs of the time , but without spouts. 14th 15th, are more recognisably mug shaped, generally with 1 or 2 handles & often with faces. There are several variations from region to region, in technological sophistication as well as design. I would imagine much of the handle appearence depended on the sopistication & fireing type etc. I think a handle is a potential weak point and needs a greater level of care than a sraight pot ? To be honest I wasn't looking at mugs last time I saw the collection of pottery in Leicester, but I'll see if I can get down & take some more photos sometime. The stuff in the backrooms is best as it tends to be the more common ware, and not the pretty stuff :) Mel Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 02:30:24 -0500 From: Warren & Meredith Harmon <ravenleaf at juno.com> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: clam shells & pottery >There's also using the shells in pottery...if there is texture on the shell, >that would look so neat pressed in! Or even squished into the clay and fire >it, to see what happens. I don't think it would melt out...though it >might at VERY high fires. Not sure really. A friend of mine is a master potter, and he went crazy when he found out I was going to the shore. He made me bring back a double handful of shells, mostly clams and oysters, with some scallops thrown in. He uses them as "ribs" - the things that are used to smooth the clay out as it's spinning. His schtick is: "Ribs are called that, because that's what the first ones were made of...beef rib, sheep rib, occasional Englishman...whatever you had hanging around the castle." His persona's Irish to the bone..er, no pun intended... He says, though, that a high fire would destroy a shell on no time. A low fire, though, would be just fine. We got into the discussion because he wanted to use gemstones and crystals in his high-fire drinking mugs and goblets (period shapes, with dragons draped around the mugs), but the only two things that would survive the process are diamond and corundum (ruby and sapphire). Sigh... -Caro Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 23:26:47 -0500 From: rmhowe <magnusm at ncsu.edu> To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Hey Potters. German Stoneware 1200-1900 Archaeology and Cultural History by David Gaimster, 1997, 488pp 40 colour 425 black and white illustrations. ISBN 0 7141 0571 6 Cased 45.00 British Museum Press Subject: Re: ANST - Terracotta Sculpture (long) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 14:09:22 MST From: "Ace" <aslyn at onramp.net> To: <ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG> >"Nathan W. Jones" wrote: >> David St.David wrote: >> {snip} > >Gio, {snip} >What separated della Robbia was a new method of glazing. >Majolica, a lead based glaze at the time, was well know, but was >unpredictable in results and produced a dull color and finish. Sometime >around 1430, Luca della Robbia began substituting tin which gave >predictable results and a high color finish. My lord: I enjoyed your post, but I must address the statement above. While the della Robbia family made great contributions to the enhancement of majolica, a much richer history of majolica and\or tin glazed pottery exists: In my opinion and research, majolica has its roots (and some would argue beginnings) as far back as the ancient Middle East, and was propogated by the Babylonians. Ancient Egyptians were noted to make pottery of coarse clay and cover it with an opaque tin-oxide glaze, which was later known in Italy as Faience. Molded pieces with lead glaze and lusterware fragments have been noted in Hellinistic Greece. Artisans of 9th Centruy Islam later perfected the technique of tin-glzed ware. Most notably, Samarrakind pottery of the Abbasid caliphs (made between 836 adn 883) was some of the most brilliantly colored pottery of this kind, and they employed this technique. During the 10th to 12th centuries, the Egyptian Fatimids and Iranian potters guided an even higher standard of the production of lustreware. The technique transferred into Europe, where Spain and then Italy became chief production cente