Barton Hill Pottery and the post-medieval redware industry in Bristol

Transcription

1 Post-Medieval Archaeology ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: Barton Hill Pottery and the post-medieval redware industry in Bristol Cai Mason To cite this article: Cai Mason (2017) Barton Hill Pottery and the post-medieval redware industry in Bristol, Post-Medieval Archaeology, 51:1, , DOI: / To link to this article: Published online: 13 Feb Submit your article to this journal Article views: 245 View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

2 Post-Medieval Archaeology 51/1 (2017), Barton Hill Pottery and the post-medieval redware industry in Bristol By CAI MASON SUMMARY: Excavation in advance of a new housing development on the site of the Barton Hill Pottery, Bristol, uncovered the full footprint of a late 19th-century pottery, a large quantity of redware wasters, and a dump of whiteware wasters from another nearby factory, which include examples of Royal Navy mess ware. INTRODUCTION In , Bristol & Region Archaeological Services undertook an archaeological evaluation and excavation on a vacant plot at 34 Queen Ann Road, Barton Hill, Bristol (Figs 1 and 2; centred on NGR ST ). 1 The archaeological work uncovered well-preserved structural remains of the Barton Hill Pottery. This article outlines the findings of the work and highlights the existence of a significant post-medieval redware industry in Bristol. The ceramic wasters and kiln furniture are described; full quantifications and details of the other finds are available in the grey literature reports. 2 For consistency, the present street numbering, which was adopted in 1896, 3 has been used throughout. 1610, by which date a large property known as Tilley s Court had been constructed immediately to the north of the site. 5 During the post-medieval period, the area to the east of the city was cultivated as market gardens and plant nurseries, but by the 18th century glassworks, potteries, brickyards and housing had begun to encroach on the agricultural land; a process that accelerated following the opening of the Feeder Canal and Floating Harbour in Industrialization of the area began in earnest with the opening of the Bristol Iron Works in the 1829, 7 the Great Western Cotton Factory in 1838 and the Great Western Railway in These and other smaller industrial sites provided the impetus for the construction of densely packed terraces of industrial worker s houses, and by the mid 19th century Barton Hill had become a suburb of Bristol. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC BACKGROUND BARTON HILL Barton Hill is an inner-city district, which is situated on a low rise of Triassic sandstone between floodplains of the rivers Frome and Avon, approximately 1km to the east of Bristol s medieval core, and immediately to the north of the industrial suburb of St Philip s Marsh. In 1208, a leper hospital was established in Lawrence Hill, 0.7km to the north of the site, 4 but there is no conclusive evidence of a settlement in Barton Hill until THE REDWARE INDUSTRY IN BRISTOL Bristol was a significant centre of pottery production in the 13th and 14th centuries, but there is little evidence of it in the 15th or 16th century, 9 and by the late 15th century much of the city s utilitarian earthenware was being imported from the Malvern area. This pottery remained common throughout the 16th century, but from c onwards it began to be supplanted by red earthenware from Somerset 10 and, after c. 1650, North Devon. These counties were the main source of utilitarian ceramics in Bristol throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology 2017 DOI: /

3 BARTON HILL POTTERY 109 FIG. 1 Site location plan (illustration by Ann Linge). FIG. 2 General view of the excavation, looking north towards the Rhubarb Tavern and Barton Hill Primary School. During the second half of the 17th century, there was a resurgence of Bristol s indigenous ceramic industry, which began c with the establishment of a tin-glazed ware pottery in Brislington.11 By c. 1700, there were at least three tin-glazed ware potteries and a stoneware manufacturer in the city.12 Bristol subsequently became a major exporter of tin-glazed ware and stoneware, and by the end of the century there was a significant creamware, pearlware and red earthenware (hereafter referred to as redware ) industry in the city. In the early 19th century, creamware and pearlware were gradually replaced by clear-glazed whiteware. Redware is a generic term used to describe red-bodied earthenware, variants of which were produced throughout England during the post-medieval period. In this article, the term redware refers specifically to the glazed and unglazed, wheel-thrown, red-bodied earthenware that was produced in Bristol during the post-medieval period. Pountney has suggested that the Temple Street Pottery, Redcliffe, may have been producing redware (in addition to tin-glazed ware and stoneware) by the end of the 17th century,13 but the earliest conclusive evidence of production in the Bristol area comes from the Sugar House Pottery in Westbury-on-Trym, which existed by 1691, but may have been established considerably earlier. Its products included sugar moulds, flowerpots, chimney pots and utilitarian kitchenware, most of which were sold locally, but some were exported at least as far as

4 110CAI MASON FIG. 3 Location and known operational dates of 18th- and 19th-century redware and transfer-printed whiteware potteries in Bristol (illustration by Ann Linge).

5 BARTON HILL POTTERY 111 Number of potteries All Bristol potteries Bristol potteries producing redware Date FIG. 4 Number of post-medieval potteries in Bristol. Ireland. 14 The Sugar House Pottery is the only known Bristol redware pottery that definitely pre-dates 1749; thereafter, the number of potteries increased steadily until 1800, by which date there were six, four of which were located along Avon Street. 15 This location had the advantage of being equally close to markets, river transportation and clay pits in St Philip s Marsh that were already being exploited for brick and tile production. 16 Large-scale excavations at Cabot Circus, near Bristol city centre, uncovered locally produced, lead-glazed redware in deposits dating from c onwards, which is broadly consistent with the documentary evidence for the appearance of the industry. 17 By 1832 there were least thirteen redware potteries in Bristol, the majority of which were situated in St Philip s or Redcliffe (see Figs 3 and 4). 18 During the period , Bristol s population quadrupled; 19 this provided an expanding market for the produce of local market gardens and plant nurseries, which in turn created a demand for horticultural earthenware. The growth of the city also provided a market for tiles, chimney pots and industrial products such as sugar moulds. However, this market gradually disappeared following the adoption of new sugarrefining processes in the early 19th century. Evidence from the Presentment Books (records of ships cargoes) shows that, in addition to the local trade, several of Bristol s redware potteries exported pottery to Ireland, the Channel Islands and the West Indies. There are numerous records of modest shipments to Cork, Dublin and Waterford in the period , occasional cargoes to Jersey and Guernsey between 1830 and 1863 and two shipments to Jamaica and Barbados. 20 The exported pottery is identified in two instances as flowerpots 21 and sugar moulds. 22 BARTON HILL POTTERY Barton Hill Pottery was established in 1804 by a Bristol-born weaver s son named Josiah Duffett ( ). Instead of following in his father s trade, Duffett served an apprenticeship as a potter, which he completed in 1780, and immediately took over an existing redware pottery on Avon Street, the products of which included sugar moulds, garden pots and chimney pots. 23 By September 1804, Duffett had moved to Tilley s Court in Barton Hill and converted some of the outbuildings for use as a pottery. 24 He continued running the pottery for another five years, but by October 1809 he had passed the business on to his son James Duffett I ( ), 25 who is subsequently recorded as a manufacturer of brown ware. 26 Mr. Duffett s Pottery is depicted on an 1827 plan (Fig. 5) 27 and is described in Fire Insurance Policies of 1821 and 1835 as two houses, one of which was used as a pottery, two kilns therein. 28 In 1828 James Duffett I took over his father-in-law Joseph Gibbs brick kiln in St Philip s Marsh, which he ran until at least Between 1830 and 1838 J. Duffett and Duffett & Co. are recorded as exporters of earthenware (including flowerpots) to Waterford in Ireland. 30 James Duffett I retired c as successful businessman who could afford to donate land for the construction of St Luke s Church 31 near his new home at Barton Hill House. 32 The pottery then passed to his son, James Duffett II ( ), 33 who ran the business throughout the late 1830s and 1840s. During his tenure, the pottery experimented with new forms such as the ceramic dahlia shade that he supplied to Maule & Co. s nursery on Stapleton Road. 34 During the late 1840s, James Duffett II appears to have run into some financial difficulties, which resulted in his bankruptcy in Two years later,

6 112CAI MASON FIG. 5 Mr Duffett s Pottery, depicted on an 1827 plan of St Philip and Jacob. The pink buildings are domestic properties. One or both of the large grey buildings on the north side of the road are the converted outbuildings, in which the first pottery kilns were situated. The site of the later 19th-century extension to the pottery (the excavation site) is highlighted in red on the south side of the road. FIG. 6 Niblett s c extension to the Barton Hill Pottery, depicted on Ashmead s plan of he is recorded as a potter who was living, and presumably working, in Barton Hill. 36 This suggests that the pottery remained active at this date; what is less clear is whether Duffett was still in charge, or merely an employee. He subsequently left the pottery trade, and by 1861 he was working as a clerk. 37 It is unclear who ran the pottery in the early 1850s, but by 1856 an accountant named William FIG. 7 The Barton Hill Pottery, depicted on the 1881 Ordnance Survey 1:500 plan. Hutchings ( ) had acquired it and the Redware Pottery on Pipe Lane. 38 By 1861, Hutchings two potteries had a combined workforce of 20 men and eleven boys; 39 the following year he acquiring his brotherin-law s brick and tile works in St Philip s Marsh. 40 The products of his potteries, which were occasionally shipped to the Channel Islands and Barbados, 41 were described in as red ware, garden and chimney pots. 42 At some point between 1859 and 1866, Hutchings transferred the operation of the pottery to a former employee named Alfred Niblett ( ). 43 The nature of Niblett s tenure in the 1860s is unclear, but by 1871 he was leasing the pottery from the MP Sir Joseph D. Weston ( ). 44 Niblett is subsequently recorded as the owner of the Barton Hill Pottery, 45 where he worked as an earthenware and brown ware potter 46 who employed three men and four boys. 47 He also ran a timber haulage business and was twice convicted of cruelty to horses by working them in an unfit condition. 48 Shortly after October 1871, Niblett purchased a plot of land on the south side of Queen Ann Road that contained a two-storey house (built c. 1862) with a large garden. By 1874, a large industrial building had been built over the garden; 49 this structure (the subject of the archaeological excavation) is identified on the 1881 OS plan (Fig. 7) as the Barton Hill Pottery. 50 Niblett s property, which was probably built c. 1872, is subsequently referred to as part of the Barton Hill Potteries (plural), 51 which suggests that his older kilns continued to be used after the extension was constructed. By 1886, Niblett had handed over the running of the business to a potter named Stephen Hollister

7 BARTON HILL POTTERY 113 ( ), who subsequently advertised his products as every description of red glazed & rustic ware & terra cotta. 52 It is unclear if Hollister s business was a success, but on 26 October 1888 Niblett was declared bankrupt with unsecured debts of 168 and a 650 mortgage secured on the pottery. At a subsequent creditor s meeting, he stated that he began business in 1859 with no capital of his own, that the potteries were worth 900, and that someone had offered to purchase them for It is unknown if this offer was fulfilled, but by the end of 1888 the buildings were being used by the scrap-metal merchant Harris Bros., who remained on the site until at least In 1924, the grocery chain Pybus Bros. converted and extended the existing building for use as a firelighter, candle and polish factory. In the early 1940s, the whole complex was gutted by fire, possibly as a result of enemy action. Some of the buildings were subsequently re-roofed with corrugated iron, 55 and by 1973 the site was being used as a motor engineer s yard. THE EXCAVATION PHASE 1: PRE-POTTERY ACTIVITY The geology of the site is Triassic Redcliffe Sandstone. This type of rock weathers to form soft red sand, which was uncovered at depths of between 10.85m and 11.1m AOD ( m below ground level). The earliest anthropogenic feature was a shallow rectangular pit (not illustrated), which was backfilled with mixture of black sand, clinker and coal ash that contained two sheds of 17th-/18th-century tin-glazed ware and part of a post-1750 flowerpot. The pit was sealed by a 0.4m thick layer of cultivation soil that contained 19th-century ceramics, which included a few redware wasters. The south-west cellar wall and coal chute of 34 Queen Ann Road (Building 1; Fig. 8) was uncovered along the eastern edge of the excavation area. The house was constructed c in Pennant Sandstone rubble, bonded with a soft brown lime mortar. The quoins around the coal chute were brick. It is unclear if the cellar wall cut through, or was abutted by, the adjacent cultivation soil. PHASE 2: CONSTRUCTION OF THE POTTERY The pottery (Fig. 8), built c. 1872, comprised Building 2, which was abutted by Building 3 to the south-west. Access to the rear yard was provided via a clinkersurfaced covered way through Building 2. Room 2 contained the base of a centrally located circular pottery kiln base (Kiln 2), which was surrounded by a floor of roughly laid, re-used, unfrogged red and yellow (refractory) bricks. Kiln 2 (Fig. 9) partially encased and incorporated what appears to have been an unfinished circular kiln base (Kiln 1) in its foundations. Both of the kilns measured c. 4.1m in diameter and survived to a height of 0.65m. Kiln 2 was offset from Kiln 1 by 0.6m. The kilns were constructed using Pennant Sandstone rubble bonded with a grey lime mortar, founded on the surface of the underlying cultivation soil. Kiln 1 had a possible firebox base on its eastern edge, and a deliberately constructed 0.9m wide circular void in the centre of the structure. The function of the void, which was backfilled with loose stone rubble and mortar, is unclear, but there was no evidence of heat or smoke and it does not appear to have been a flue. The possible firebox base had brick quoins on its corners, most of which had been removed prior to the construction of Kiln 2. The fact that both kilns were the same size and used the same construction materials suggests that they are probably near contemporary. This could indicate that there was a design change, or that a mistake was made during their construction. Kiln 2 had five projecting ash- and clinker-filled brick fireboxes around its edge, some of which contained fragments of redware wasters. The form of the kiln suggests that it was a simple updraft bottle kiln; a type that was in widespread use across Britain throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. 56 Kiln 2 is slightly unusual in that its fireboxes project outwards by 0.9m from the main structure rather than being flush, or nearly flush, with its outer face, as is more common in kilns of this date. Similar, but slightly smaller, kilns have been excavated at the Longton Hall porcelain factory 57 and Toynton All Saints. 58 Kiln 2 also bears some similarity to two kilns, constructed c and c. 1830, at the Fulham Pottery. 59 However, these examples probably have flush or near-flush fireboxes. The upper parts of Kiln 2 had been truncated by later activity and there is no direct evidence of the thickness of the kiln walls or its internal dimensions. It is, however, only slightly smaller than the kiln at Boot Lane, which had 0.65m thick walls. 60 If the walls of Kiln 2 were of a similar thickness, then it would have had an internal diameter of c. 2.8m, which is significantly smaller than the kilns at the nearby Albert Pottery (constructed c. 1877). 61 The foundations of Building 2 were constructed with Pennant Sandstone rubble bonded with a grey lime mortar, founded on the underlying natural sand. The design of the foundations is somewhat unusual in that they would have protruded c. 0.8m above their construction cuts; the ground between and around them was then infilled with dumps of soil, mortar, ash, clinker and substantial quantities of redware wasters. Architectural drawings of the Albert Pottery show an identical method of construction. 62 The above-ground walls of Building 2 were 0.23m thick and constructed with unfrogged red bricks bonded with a grey lime mortar in an English

8 114 CAI MASON FIG. 8 Phase 2: c (illustration by Ann Linge).

9 BARTON HILL POTTERY 115 FIG. 9 Kiln 2, looking north-east. Garden Wall bonding pattern. The Goad Fire Insurance Plan of shows that the main building was a two-storey structure with a slate roof. There were no indications of any stairs within the excavated area, which could indicate that they were external, or that they were located in the unexcavated area along the south-west edge of the site. Room 1 had a waterproof asphalt floor with patches of stone and brick cobbles near its north-east and north-west doorways, and there were several metal bolts fixed to the floor, which could indicate the positions of machinery or other fixtures. Similarly, an un-floored area near the centre of the room could indicate the position of a machine, vat or boiler. The floor sloped down toward a drain near the eastern edge of the room, which suggests that the room was used for wet work. The drain gully was constructed with unfrogged red bricks, with a complete redware bowl in its base that served as a silt trap. The gully was connected to a 9in ceramic sewer pipe under the covered way. There were no indications of a floor surface within Room 3, which suggests that it probably had a suspended wooden floor. This room may have been used as an office or store. The walls of Building 3 were robbed out in Phase 3, but fragments of mortared Pennant Sandstone in the base of the construction trench suggest that it was probably stone-built. The internal floors were earthen. Building 3 had very shallow foundations, which suggests that it was probably single-storey. This building may have been a fuel or materials store, or possibly a stable. The east wall of Building 3 was abutted by a substantial, but discrete, dump of whiteware kiln waste, which had been used to create a hard external yard surface. Analysis of this material indicates that it was imported onto the site from another nearby pottery, which is perhaps unsurprising given that pottery waste was widely used in road making and ground consolidation. 63 The waster dump was cut by a brick-lined drain, which is likely to be of a similar date to the adjacent building. PHASE 3: OPERATION OF THE POTTERY Building 3 was demolished between 1874 and Its walls were then robbed and the whole area was levelled up with a m thick dump of clinker, slag and refractory brick rubble, which formed a base

10 116CAI MASON FIG. 10 Phase 3: c (illustration by Ann Linge).

11 BARTON HILL POTTERY 117 FIG. 11 Room 6, showing position of the blunger, looking north-west. for the construction of Building 4 (Fig. 10). Some of the bricks were marked MOBBERLEY & BAYLEY STOURBRIDGE ; this company operated between c and The new building was constructed with very shallow Pennant Sandstone and brick rubble foundations, which suggests that it was single-storey. Room 6 had a 1.7m wide entrance on its south-east side and a floor of Pennant Sandstone flags and re-used red and yellow (refractory) bricks, some of which were marked with the same manufacturer s name as those from the underlying levelling layer. The floor was completely covered with a m thick layer of homogenous sticky grey clay, which suggests that this room was used for processing clay. This type of alluvial clay is the raw material for manufacturing redware. The most notable feature of Room 6 was an un-floored octagonal area (Fig. 11), which probably indicates the position of a wash mill or blunger. This machine comprised an octagonal tank fitted with mixing paddles or harrows mounted on a vertical rotating shaft. It was used to mix raw clay and water together in order to separate the clay particles from any stones, gravel or other impurities, which would settle to the bottom of the tank. The clay component would remain suspended in water, which would then be pumped or drained from the tank, screened to remove any floating organic matter, then left to settle in an open tank or pit. Once it had settled, excess water was drawn off the top. 65 Alternately, the water could be removed by either heating the clay slurry in an evaporation tank or by squeezing it through a cloth filter-press. 66 The resulting moist clay could be hand kneaded, and was then forced through a pug mill to remove air bubbles and mix it to a uniform consistency ready for potting. 67 Room 7 was roughly surfaced with asphalt, and, although there are no clear indications as to the function of the room, a coal store is a possibility. If the octagonal area in the adjacent room were indeed the location of a blunger, then it would have needed mechanical power, probably from a small steam engine, the obvious location for which would have been against the north-east wall of this room. Support for this interpretation is provided by the plans for the Albert Pottery, which depicts three similar-sized rooms labelled boiler, engine and rollers in a similar position towards the rear of the pottery. 68 Dobson s 1850 treatise on the manufacture of bricks suggests that the machinery in a typical brickyard would be powered by

12 118CAI MASON FIG. 12 Phase 4: (illustration by Ann Linge).

13 BARTON HILL POTTERY 119 a five-horsepower steam engine, 69 and it is likely that a similar-sized engine would have provided sufficient power for a small pottery. PHASES 4 5: POST-POTTERY ACTIVITY At some point between 1888 and 1932, the kiln and one of Building 2 s internal walls were demolished and replaced by a row of posts or girders, the presence of which was indicated by four postholes cut into the foundations of the former wall (Fig. 12). The building was then re-floored with a thin layer of concrete, bedded on a 0.3m thick layer of clinker. This phase of activity may be associated with the site s use as a scrap-metal store, or its subsequent use as a candle, firelighter and polish factory. The construction of Queen Ann Road in the 1890s blocked direct access from the road to the rear yard of the former pottery. This may have provided the impetus for widening the functional width 70 of the covered way through Building 2 by blocking Building 1 s coal chute with an inch-thick iron plate supported on a substantial brick base. This arrangement does not appear to have lasted long, and between 1901 and Building 1 and the covered way were demolished, probably to improve access for commercial motor vehicles. TABLE 1 Ceramics quantified by ware type. Ware No. sherds Locally produced redware wasters 774 Refined white earthenware wasters Plain 117 Plain (biscuit-fired) 342 Transfer-printed 347 Transfer-printed (biscuit-fired) 87 Painted and cut-sponge decorated 18 Industrial slipware 20 Kiln furniture Strips and rolls of white china clay and 170 machine-made refractory clay stilts and spurs Saggars 15 Other post-medieval ware types Rockingham-type ware 16 English stoneware 7 Creamware 4 Pearlware 3 Tin-glazed ware 3 Bristol/Staffordshire yellow slipware 3 Somerset redware 2 Glazed black basalt ware 2 Bristol-glazed stoneware 1 Total 1931 THE CERAMICS ASSEMBLAGE INTRODUCTION The ceramics assemblage comprises 1931 sherds (218kg) of pottery and kiln furniture, 83% of which are wasters that were recovered from two distinct dumps dating from the 1870s. The assemblage (Table 1) includes redware wasters from the Barton Hill Pottery and whiteware wasters with associated kiln furniture from another nearby pottery. The other ceramics, which make up only 2% of the assemblage, comprise a range of wares that are typical of 18th- and 19th-century urban deposits in Bristol. Quantification for the two separate dumps has been undertaken by sherd count, not by vessel count. REDWARE This ware type comprises glazed and unglazed wheelthrown red-bodied earthenware produced in Barton Hill (Table 2). Seventy-eight per cent of the redware was recovered from waster dumps associated with the construction of the pottery c. 1872; 14% was recovered from the ash and rubble fills of Kiln 2 s fireboxes. The latter deposits are likely to have been deposited c. 1888, or shortly thereafter. Of the c group, 68% are identifiable to form; of these, 48% are unglazed horticultural vessels, 49% are domestic wares with thick, shiny amber to dark brown lead glaze on the interior; the remaining 3% are unglazed chimney pots. The pottery from the fireboxes is typologically indistinguishable from the earlier material, but it is notable that 98% of the identifiable forms are horticultural wares. DOMESTIC POTTERY The domestic wares comprise a restricted range of utilitarian vessels used in food consumption, preparation and serving, and a single item related to hygiene (Table 2). Jugs The jugs (Fig ) are internally glazed, with large pulled spouts. They have simple oval section handles, with a thumb impression where the lower ends are joined to the body. Some of the jugs have external glaze on the upper part of the vessel. The rim profiles of these jugs are similar to 19th-century examples from the Redware Pottery 72 and the Chandos Glass Cone, 73 all of which appear to be copies of 18th-century forms from Somerset. 74

14 120CAI MASON Bowls Most of the bowls (Fig ) are mm wide with simple bead rims. The form is similar to those from other redware potteries in the region. A smaller conical bowl (Fig. 13.3), measuring 60mm high by 110mm wide at the rim, is similar to a late 18th-/early 19th- century example from Boot Lane 75 and a 19th-/early 20th-century example from the Chandos Glass Cone. 76 Bread crock Bread crocks are represented by a single handle (Fig ), which is a very distinctive regional form that is common in Bristol. These types of handles were thrown on a wheel, cut in half, and then stuck onto the side of the vessel. Kent has suggested that this type of crock may have been made at Barton Hill; 79 this is now confirmed. Pancheons Pancheons (Fig ) are large, internally glazed bowls, used for bread making and separating cream from milk. The pancheons from Barton Hill are mm wide at the rim; examples with full profiles are 250mm high. All of the pancheons have steeply sloping sides, flat bases and thick, rounded rims, often with a slight groove on the interior. Some have similar lug handles to those from the Chandos Glass Cone, Bridgewater, 77 but in general the form can be considered as part of a wider regional tradition, examples of which were produced in Bedminster, Bridgewater, Donyatt and Weston-super-Mare. 78 Washing bowls The washing bowls (Fig. 13.8) have a similar shape and rim profile to the plain bowls, but incorporate an internal soap holder, which has pierced holes for drainage; similar vessels were made at the Donyatt Pottery. 80 HORTICULTURAL WARE Approximately half of the redwares are horticultural vessels, 93% of which are flowerpots; the remainder are blanching pots and seed pans (Table 2). Most of the horticultural wares are unglazed. Salting pans Salting pans are used, as the name implies, for curing meat in salt. The salting pans from Barton Hill (Fig ) are oval in plan, with two lug handles at either end of the thick bead rim. The sides of the vessel are vertical and the base is flat. The lugs are very similar to those on the pancheons. A complete salting pan measuring 410mm by 290mm wide and 140mm high was recovered from a deposit within the covered way. This vessel, which had an over-fired blistered internal glaze, had been used as a coffin for the burial of a cat. Flowerpots Most of the flowerpots, of which six common sizes were identified (Table 3; Fig ), have simple bead rims and straight-sided conical profiles with a single drainage hole in the base. Type 6 pots (Fig ) are double-rimmed; the internal lip was designed to support a bell glass for propagating plants. 81 There were few sherds of much larger flowerpots, though none were complete enough to provide full dimensions. By the mid 19th century, flowerpot forms had become nationally standardized; 82 as a result, parallels for these vessels can be found in many contemporary redware potteries. 83 TABLE 2 Redware from contexts associated with the construction of the pottery (Phase 2; deposited c ) and Kiln 2 s fireboxes (Phase 4; deposited c. 1888), quantified by no. of sherds, form, function and provenance. Form Provenance Function Phase 2 Phase 4 Drink: serving Jug 14 Food: consumption Bowl 10 1 Food: preparation/cooking Pancheon 153 Salting pan 15 Food: storage Bread crock 1 Hygiene Washing bowl with internal soap holder 5 Horticultural Blanching pot 6 28 Blanching pot lid 2 Flowerpot Seed pan 5 Ceramic building material Chimney pot 13 Unidentified Total

15 BARTON HILL POTTERY 121 FIG. 13 Barton Hill redware forms (illustration by Ann Linge). TABLE 3 Flowerpots quantified by size (rounded to the nearest imperial measurements). Type Rim width Height No. sherds 1 3in (75mm) 3½in (90mm) ¾in (95mm) 3½in (90mm) ¼in 4¼in 43 (110mm) (110mm) 4 5¼in 5¼in 35 (135mm) (135mm) 5 5¼in 6in (150mm) 19 (135mm) 6 6¼in 4¾in 5 (160mm) (120mm) Other 49 Total 204 Blanching pots Blanching pots, also known as rhubarb forcers, rhubarb pots or sea-kale pots, are bottomless vessels used to grow rhubarb or sea kale in a light-restricted environment. Purpose-made blanching pots have existed since the late 18th century; 84 these vessels can be conical or bell-shaped. The conical pots (Fig ) from Barton Hill taper from mm wide at the base to mm at the rim. No full profiles survived, so their height remains unknown. Gardeners often use chimney pots as makeshift blanching pots, and it can be difficult to distinguish between sherds of blanching pots and wheel-thrown chimney pots. The blanching pots from Barton Hill were identified on the basis that they generally had thinner walls than the chimney pots and by the fact that the blanching-pot lids (Fig ) fitted snugly into the tops of the bell-shaped pots. Seed pans The seed pans (Fig ) are small and shallow (115 75mm wide by 15 30mm high) with simple bead rims, vertical sides and flat bases, parallels for which can be found in post-1730 contexts from Cabot Circus 85 and 19th-century contexts at Donyatt, where they are described as seed pans, 86 though Currie reserves this term for larger vessels. 87 CHIMNEY POTS The chimney pots (Fig ) taper from 400mm wide at the base to 280mm at the top; no full profiles survive so the height of the pots remains unknown. Two types of

16 122CAI MASON pot were identified: plain-sided with simple bead rims; and decorative pots with a raised rouletted band near the rim; both are common 19th-century forms. The decorated pots are covered with a thin white slip. The presence of the rouletted pots confirms Kent s suggestion that this type of pot may have been a product of the Barton Hill Pottery. 88 TRANSFER-PRINTED AND PAINTED WHITEWARE Whiteware is a term used to describe British whitebodied earthenware with a clear glaze that dates from the turn of the 18th/19th century onwards. 89 The whiteware from Barton Hill was recovered from a waster dump near the southern end of the site that was deposited c (Fig. 8; Table 4). The wasters are all mould-formed; 46% are biscuit-fired, the remainder are glazed. Of the glazed wares, 69% have transfer-printed decoration, 23% are plain, the remaining 8% have either painted, cut-sponge or industrial slip decoration. Most of the industrial slip-decorated vessels are mugs and jugs. A few of the saucers and jugs have relief moulding. Manufacturing transfer-printed and painted whiteware is a very different process to the production of wheelthrown earthenware, and it is very unlikely that whiteware was manufactured on the same site as the redware. Production methods for the manufacture of painted and transfer-printed whiteware have been discussed in detail elsewhere 90 and will not be repeated here. TABLE 4 Refined white earthenware wasters quantified by function and form. Function Form No. sherd Drink: consumptioards Mugs and tank- 30 Saucer 13 Teacup 56 Tyg 7 Drink: serving Jug 33 Teapot 3 Food: consumption Bowl 90 Egg cup 2 Mess bowl 15 Plate 360 Food: serving Dish 48 Drainer (for meat 1 dish) Tureen 4 Food: storage Preserve jar 11 Jar 1 Hygiene Chamberpot 8 Display Figurine (dog) 1 Wall/door plaque 1 Unknown Annular pedestal 1 Unidentified 227 Total 912 Mugs and tankards The mugs/tankards measure mm in diameter and 100mm high. The hand-painted vessels have lines around the rim or mocha industrial slip decoration. Local parallels for mocha wares have been found at the Water Lane Pottery. 91 The transfer-printed wares include examples of the seaweed and Willow pattern. One of the mugs has a transfer-printed image of boys playing with hoops. Tyg All of the tyg sherds are all likely to be part of a single 230mm wide vessel, decorated with blue transfer-print, featuring European ecclesiastical buildings. Pountney & Co. produced mugs with similar designs in the 1880s and 1890s. 92 Tea wares Tea wares include teacups and saucers. The teacups measure 80 5mm wide by 70mm high. Most are plain. All of the decorated cups are transfer-printed in black, green or blue, and include examples of black seaweed pattern and blue Willow pattern. The saucers measure FIG. 14 Cut-sponged whiteware bowl. 150mm in diameter and have relief-moulded floral decoration. A few sherds of biscuit-fired teapots were also recovered. Jugs The jugs include green transfer-printed examples, hand-painted mocha wares, and embossed jugs with basket weave or floral decoration. Direct parallels for

17 BARTON HILL POTTERY 123 this moulding and the jug handles can be found in a Pountney & Co. s 1896 export catalogue. 93 Bowls The bowls are all hemispherical with a shallow foot ring on the base. Most are c. 70mm wide at the base, 190mm at the rim and 100mm high. Some of the bowls are sponge or cut-sponge decorated (Fig. 14); others have hand-painted lines around the rim or a transfer-printed dendritic design in black or blue print. Of note amongst the bowls are several examples of Royal Navy mess ware, which are transfer-printed in black with the words H.M.S. EXCELLENT surrounding a Maltese cross, topped with a crown (Fig. 15). The word MESS is printed below the cross with a hand-painted number next to it. HMS Excellent is a Royal Navy shore base that was established in 1830 as a Naval School of Gunnery. The school was initially based on board the ship HMS Excellent, but in 1853 the Navy purchased two small mud banks (later known as Whale Island) in Portsmouth Harbour for use as a permanent mooring for the school. The first ship to be moored there was HMS Queen Charlotte, which was re-named as HMS Excellent, to reflect its new use. Shortly afterwards Excellent was joined by HMS Calcutta, and from 1864 onwards Whale Island was developed as a permanent shore base: a function that continues to the present day. 94 During the 19th century, each Royal Navy mess of 8 10 men had its own mess gear, comprising a dinner service for the officers and a basic kit of communal bowls and plates for the lower ranks. During the earlier 19th century, seamen were expected to supply their own mess gear, but by the late 19th century Royal Navy victualling yards had taken charge of supply. 95 Mess bowls had mess numbers marked upside-down on the crockery, so that they could be read when inverted. In 1907, the Admiralty took charge of food provision on board ships. This led to the introduction of general messes; 96 as a result, post-1907 mess wares are not marked with a mess number. HMS Excellent was probably supplied by the victualling yard at Royal Clarence Yard, Gosport. Recent excavation at this establishment uncovered an assemblage of early 20th-century mess ware, 97 which included bowls of an identical form to those from Barton Hill. 98 The main, and possibly only, pre-1907 manufacturers of Royal Navy mess wares were Copeland of Stoke-on-Trent, Pountney & Co. of Bristol and the Bovey Pottery Co., which was financially linked to Pountney & Co. 99 Plates Circular mm wide plates are the most common form in the assemblage. Most are plain, but a small FIG. 15 Transfer-printed Royal Navy mess ware bowl. FIG. 16 Transfer-printed whiteware plate. proportion have moulded rims; these are similar to examples from the Water Lane Pottery, Bristol. 100 Most of the decorated plates are transfer-printed, mostly in blue, but there are examples in black, sepia, mauve and green. Willow and Asiatic Pheasants are the most common patterns, which is unsurprising given that these were the most popular designs of the 19th century. The earliest versions of Willow were produced c and the design had become standardized by c The Asiatic Pheasants pattern was being used by Podmore, Walker & Co. in the 1830s, but it did not become common until after c The other transfer-printed designs are a couple seated in

18 124CAI MASON FIG. 17 Transfer-printed whiteware plate. a woodland scene (Fig. 16) and figures standing by a balustrade of an Italianate temple in parkland (Fig. 17). Large dishes The large dishes include large oval meat dishes and circular vessels with raised dots moulded around the rim, some of which have Willow pattern transfer-printed decoration. A single example of a transfer-printed drainer for a meat dish, decorated with the ubiquitous Willow pattern, was also recovered. Other forms The chamber pots are all plain mm wide vessels with rounded slightly everted rims. The preserve jars are plain straight-sided mm wide vessels; this form was very common in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Other forms include a plain white tureen handle, a figurine of a seated dog, a plain eggcup, an annular pedestal (function unknown), preserve jars and an oval wall/door plaque transfer-printed in French with the words ON-COND, L, SEUL FABR[ICANT], F.G, MONT SUR, PRèS. KILN FURNITURE The kiln furniture, which was recovered from the whiteware waster dump, includes saggars and machinemade refractory clay stilts and spurs. Numerous strips and rolls, two cubes and five handmade stilts of white china clay were also recovered from the waster dump. The saggars, which were used to protect the pottery from smoke and direct contact with flames during firing, measure mm in diameter and mm in height. They have a coarse pale yellow fabric with calcareous and red clay pellet inclusions. Some are coated with clear glaze on the interior. In order to prevent glazed vessels for fusing together during firing, they needed to be kept separate using stilts, spurs and various other types of supports and separators. The stilts from Barton Hill come in three sizes, each with three 30 55mm long arms, some of which have up and/or downward pointing projections on their ends. There are five sizes of spur (also known as cockspurs) measuring 20 40mm wide. Some of the stilts and spurs were embossed with a size number and/ or the letters B & Co. Identical objects were recovered from Strongford Mill, Stoke-on-Trent; these have been identified as a probable product of Buller & Co. of Hanley. This company, which was one of the most prolific kiln furniture manufacturers, is listed in trade directories from 1860 onwards as a maker of thimbles, cockspurs, stilts, pins, cup rings, claws, and every sort of placing goods for potters. 103 The exact function of the clay cubes remains unknown, but they may have been used to support vessels during the firing process. The rolls and strips of clay were probably used to seal or provide support for the saggars. DISCUSSION OF THE CERAMICS ASSEMBLAGE The redware from Barton Hill, which predominantly comprises horticultural and utilitarian domestic wares, is very similar to the products of other 18thand 19th-century redware potteries in Bristol, 104 some of which appear to be copies of 18th-century vessels from Somerset. 105 This is particularly evident with the jugs, which are identical to contemporary vessels from the Redware Pottery, on Pipe Lane, which is perhaps unsurprising given that during the early 1860s they were owned by the same proprietor. 106 Most of the kitchenwares are traditional food preparation forms such as large bowls, pancheons and salting pans; vessels that could be found in most post-medieval rural households, where separating milk and cream, bread making and salting meat would have been routine tasks. They would, however, have become increasingly superfluous in a later 19th-century urban setting, due to the absence of domestic livestock and the widespread availability of bread and preserved meat from local retailers. 107 At the beginning of the 19th century, much of the agricultural land to the east of Bristol was used as market gardens and plant nurseries. This provided a ready market for horticultural earthenwares, which is reflected by the fact that approximately half of the

19 BARTON HILL POTTERY 125 c redwares are horticultural vessels. Whilst it is unclear if this is representative of the pottery s output as a whole, the high proportion of horticultural wares is consistent with Brears suggestion 108 that a decline in the market for traditional domestic earthenware during the 19th century led many smaller potteries to refocusing their output towards more mundane products such as chimney pots and flowerpots. This suggestion is supported by the fact that the c assemblage was almost entirely composed of flowerpots and blanching pots. The Barton Hill Pottery also produced wheelthrown chimney pots, though it is unclear if they were a significant product. The growth of the city in the 18th and 19th centuries would have provided a ready market for building materials of all descriptions. However, changes in architectural fashion in the second half of the 19th century towards ornate moulded pots and competition from larger brick and tile works are likely to have had a negative impact on the market for these products. The discovery of a dump of transfer-printed and painted whiteware wasters to the rear of the Barton Hill Pottery was unexpected, as the documentary evidence indicates that it was a redware pottery. Whilst the production of wheel-thrown ceramics is a traditional craft industry, manufacturing transfer-printed whiteware is a fully industrial process that requires factory premises and a large workforce. The archaeological evidence indicates that Barton Hill was a traditional pottery that used local alluvial clay to produce wheel-thrown redware. The whiteware must therefore have been produced elsewhere. There are no maker s marks on any of the whitewares. However, Pountney & Co., who are described in an 1865 advertisement as the manufacturers of all kinds of blue and white earthenware, in toilet, dinner and tea ware and the only blue and white earthenware manufacturer within 90 miles of Bristol, 109 are almost certainly the source of this material. This company is also the only known manufacturer of transfer-printed ware in Bristol, and one of the very few companies that produced Royal Navy mess ware. 110 During the 19th century, Pountney & Co. operated a pottery in Water Lane (also known as the Temple Back or Bristol Pottery), which was established in the late 17th century. The Pountney family s involvement began in 1813 with the formation of a partnership between John Pountney, Henry Carter and Joseph Ring. Pountney acquired sole ownership of the pottery in After his death in 1852, it passed to his widow Charlotte. The name Pountney & Co. was used from 1858 until the company s closure in In 1873, Pountney & Co. acquired the Victoria Pottery (built c. 1865) on Feeder Road, St Philip s, and transferred most of their production to the new factory. The acquisition of the new pottery was undertaken during a period of financial difficulty that eventually led to the company s bankruptcy in This period coincided with a decline in the quality of their products, which became dominated by utilitarian transfer-printed wares. 112 In 1886, Charlotte Pountney was forced to sell the company, and in 1887, the new owners closed the Water Lane Pottery and transferred all production to the Victoria Pottery. In 1905, the company moved to a purpose-built factory in Fishponds, where they remained until the pottery closed in Stratigraphic evidence indicates that the wasters from Barton Hill were deposited in the period c ; they are likely, therefore, to have been made at the Victoria Pottery. In summary, although the whiteware wasters were found at Barton Hill, they were not made there. The presence of Pountney & Co. ceramics on the site does, however, provide an important, and perhaps slightly ironic, reminder of the changing consumption patterns and market forces that were adversely affecting the Barton Hill Pottery s long-term viability at the very moment that Alfred Niblett was investing in the expansion of the business. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The Sugar House or Burfield pottery in Westbury-on- Trym is the only known post-medieval redware pottery in Bristol to have definitely existed in the 17th century. It may have been the only redware pottery in the Bristol area until 1749; thereafter, the number of potteries grew continually until The products of these potteries included tiles, chimney pots and horticultural, industrial and utilitarian domestic ceramics. The proliferation of Bristol redware manufacturers is likely to have had a significant impact on the potteries of Somerset and North Devon, and it may have been a contributory factor to their decline in the later 18th and 19th centuries. 114 Barton Hill was one of the many small potteries that were established on the southern and eastern fringes of the city, locations that provided ready access to clay from St Philip s Marsh, coal from nearby collieries and transport via the river, sea and, after 1839, the rail network. During the 19th century, there was a trend in most industries towards consolidation, which generally occurred at the expense of smaller companies. The ceramic industry was no exception, and it has been suggested that the decline of many small potteries can be directly attributed to competition from mass-produced goods from Stoke-on-Trent and other urban centres, particularly after the development of the rail network from the 1840s onwards. 115 Barton Hill Pottery s last owner, Alfred Niblett, is likely to have been aware of the vulnerability of

20 126CAI MASON his company to competition from larger businesses, and this may have provided the impetus for a major investment in new premises that he undertook in the early 1870s. Unfortunately, his expansion plans, which must have involved a large capital outlay, coincided with the onset of the worst economic slump of the 19th century. This period, known to its contemporaries as the Great Depression, and more recently as the Long Depression, was triggered by a financial crisis in the United Sates that developed into a global recession that lasted from 1873 to In addition to these negative economic conditions, major social changes were underway that were gradually eroding the market for the handmade pottery produced at Barton Hill, one of which was the move away from craft products towards modern industrial goods, that is, the birth of consumer culture. This trend, which is widely recognized by economic historians and archaeologists, 117 was to a large extent driven by industrialization, which, by the late 18th century, had reduced the price of goods, such as refined whitebodied wares, to a level where they became affordable to the masses. 118 As a result, by the beginning of the 19th century, refined whitebodied wares, often decorated with the ubiquitous Willow pattern, 119 had become universally adopted as the standard form of tableware throughout the English cultural sphere. Cheap utilitarian redware did, however, remain an acceptable, and very practical, ceramic for use in kitchens and service areas. Interestingly, Bristol s redware potteries appear to been focused on the production of utilitarian wares from at least the 18th century, 120 whereas the potteries of rural Somerset continued to make tablewares until at least the early 19th century. 121 This disparity, which has been noted in other industrial centres, 122 may be explained by the fact that locally produced tin-glazed ware plates and bowls 123 and stoneware drinking vessels 124 had been available since the 17th century. Utilitarian kitchenwares remained a mainstay of the local redware industry throughout the early to mid 19th century. However, advances in packaging and transportation in the second half of the century led to shop-bought prepared or semi-prepared food products, such as tinned and bottled meats, fruit, preserves, sauces and beverages, becoming a significant element of the urban population s diet. 125 This probably contributed to a decline in the market for the large earthenware crocks used in home preserving, as did the appearance of new types of vessel, such as enamelled metal and robust yellow-ware bowls. The cumulative result of the above trends was the eventual disappearance of the market for domestic redware forms. As the market for domestic ceramics shrank, many redware potteries, including Barton Hill, appear to have re-focused their production towards horticultural ceramics. 126 This change in emphasis can be seen in the composition of the waster assemblage from Barton Hill: in the early 1870s, it was evenly split between domestic and horticultural wares, but, by the time the pottery closed, almost all of the ceramics were horticultural wares. However, by the 1880s, many of the plant nurseries on the east side of Bristol had been lost to urbanization, and with them some of the local market for horticultural earthenwares. This problem was compounded by the fact that Barton Hill Pottery would also have been facing direct competition from mass-produced horticultural earthenware manufacturers such as Richard Sankey and Son Ltd, of Bulwell, Nottinghamshire, 127 and local concerns such as the Albert Pottery, which had larger kilns, possibly of the more fuel-efficient downdraft type. 128 In summary, the Barton Hill Pottery was, by the 1880s, producing an anachronistic product, in an unfavourable market increasingly dominated by large industrial manufacturers. Barton Hill Pottery closed in 1888 following the bankruptcy of its last owner. It is unclear if his insolvency was precipitated by a specific event, or the result of the negative trends outlined above. It can, however, be seen as part of a long-term contraction in the local redware industry which began in the 1830s and ended with the closure of St Silas Pottery in The growth and subsequent decline of Bristol s redware industry broadly mirrors what was occurring in the local ceramic industry as a whole. However, whereas in the stoneware and whiteware industries this could be attributed to local consolidation that eventually created two national companies, 130 the fact that all of the redware potteries were small 131 suggests that the decline of the industry is more likely to have been due to changing consumption habits and competition from mass-produced goods. Barton Hill Pottery was not particularly large and its products were utilitarian and similar to those of numerous other contemporary potteries in the region. 132 It is, however, the only pottery of this date in Bristol, and one of the few in south-west England, to have been fully excavated, and as such it provides valuable information on the layout and products of a typical 19th-century urban redware pottery. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank the Guinness Trust for funding the archaeological work, Bob Jones for his advice and David Dawson and Oliver Kent for sharing their extensive knowledge of kilns and pottery production methods. Thanks are also due to Reg Jackson, whose extensive research into the local ceramic industry has provided much of the data on which the historical background to the site is based. Illustrations were prepared by Ann Linge. The project was managed by John Bryant and Ian Greig.