Another Kiln: The Pott House, Bedminster, Bristol

A late 18th to mid-19th century redware pottery called The Pott House, was excavated in Boot Lane, Bedminster, Bristol in 2002. 

The closure of Bristol and Region Archaeological Services has been as sad day in the history of archaeology in Bristol. The records are at present being sorted and archived. One of their last publications has been Kai Mason’s report on the Barton Hill Pottery a small 19th-century redware pottery principally making horticultural wares for the local market gardeners and chimney pots (see my earlier posts Archaeologists Excavate the Barton Hill Pottery 4 Feb 2014 and Potter’s Cat Buried with Honour 4 Feb 2014). Although there were quite few redware potteries in Bristol in the 18th and 19th centuries few have been studied or excavated and Barton Hill is unusual nationally in having been fully dug across its whole footprint. 

It reminded me that amongst the BaRAS archive is another small redware pottery excavated in 2002 in Boot Lane, Bedminster and which I helped interpret and write up (the unpublished report is now available online through Know Your Place). The Boot Lane site was much more disturbed than Barton Hill but that is balanced by the remarkable survival of a document entitled the Pott House Day Book for 1788-9, found reused as a baptismal register for St John’s Church, Bedminster in the 1980s. Evidence within it seems to tie it to this site.  I thought the would be a good time to write a few words about the Pott House and its products both to publicise the archaeology and to expand the known range of sources of what I have termed Severnside redwares (Bridgwater Jugs – 19th Century ‘Severnside’ Redwares. 12 Jan 2017).

Above: Boot Lane is top left running south from Bedminster Parade. The Pott House is located the southern corner of the block in the L-shaped building. (Ashmead, 1828). Below, the kiln as excavated and before the removal of parts of its base (Adrian Parry/BaRAS).

Like Barton Hill, the site at Boot Lane was a small pottery with one coal-fired four-firebox updraught bottle kiln. It was tucked in a back street close to the south end of Bedminster Bridge. Bedminster, south of the river has historically been an industrial area dominated by coal and tobacco processing. Once a separate (and older) town it has retained that sense of itself and in terms of development and indeed archaeological investigation has tended to be overlooked. Nonetheless the proximity of its northern edge to the port and the city centre has been an advantage and its economic contribution to the area has been significant. 

The L-shaped building on Ashmead’s 1828 map is the pottery with the kiln in the left hand wing against Boot Lane. The excavations by Adrian Parry covered the south part of the block including a small tenement called Squires Court and about half of the pottery. Redevelopment since the 1850s had reduced the pottery to fragmentary foundations. Just over half the base of a brick built updraught kiln with two out of four fireboxes identifiable was cut by more recent foundations one of which retained the NE side of the kiln as a part of it. The NW firebox was almost complete and the NE one retained an iron support for the fire bars above the ash pit. The ledge at firebox top level indicates the approximate level of the ware-chamber floor. The internal flue structure is missing but the pattern of brickwork suggests that each box had a flue running from it towards the centre with four triangular platforms supporting the floor above. The exact form is difficult to work out – the beginning of an arch beside the SE firebox suggests more flues running parallel to the kiln wall. There is a lot to learn about the development of the firebox and flue structures of updraught kilns in the 18th century and of coal technology. The kiln is set in a rectangular room and it is clear it is a bottle kiln.

The kiln after the excavators had removed the surviving bottom courses of the NE side of the interior exposing the rubble foundations. The central strip is the base of flues running into the centre from the NW and SE fireboxes. The NE box retains an iron cross bar from its grate.  The step in the outer wall at the level of the top of the fireboxes would carry the ware chamber floor. The SW side was completely destroyed by later building. 

Small quantities of redware wasters were found. They included typical late 18th/ 19th century pancheons often with two small lugs pressed onto the rim, a common Bristol/Severnside feature. Jug handles were pressed on rather than pulled on the pot and a round thumb impression made at the base again typical. See English Country Pottery – or is it? Bristol Jugs and Pitchers 3 Mar 2015.

The wasters from Boot Lane (drawing Ann Linge, BaRAS).

The Day Book found by Reg and Philomena Jackson was published by them in 1982 (Jackson, R., Jackson, P. and Price, R., 1982. ‘Bristol Potters and Potteries 1600-1800.’ Journal of Ceramic History, 12. Stoke-on-Trent City Museums. pp. 213-226). Reused as the Baptismal Register for St John’s church in Bedminster, it covers the period from September 1788 to October 1789. Other evidence shows that the pottery was in existence by 1786 and closed in 1851. The Jackson’s named it the Bedminster Pottery. 

The Day Book includes wage bills, clay and transport expenses as well as sales. The pottery employed 5 men and a boy in 1788 increasing to 7 men. The apprentice roles show that Samuel Sheppard was apprenticed to Richard and Mary Room as a potter from 1786-1805 and provides a name for the pottery proprietors. Room in turn had become free as a potter in 1784. Wages varied and two of the men seen to have handled labouring and transport. Although most of the sales are of ‘brown ware’ specific forms mentioned include pans, basins, garden potts, sugar-potts, bread pans, milk pans, a salting pan and a large garden pott. Pans range in price from 1d to 12d and can come in ‘nests’. Clay came from Robert Fricker of Bedminster (an interesting surname associated with the Sugar House Pottery in Westbury-on-Trym). 

The customer list provides an idea of the distribution range of the pottery. Five main traders buy regular stock, all of then operating in the centre of Bristol. Of more than 40 customers the vast majority are in Bristol but the rest are almost entirely in north and central Somerset. Of the rest two are in Gloucestershire and remaining three on the Severn coast in Somerset and South Wales. 

In Matthew’s directory of Bristol for 1824, the pottery in Boot Lane is one of seven redware potteries listed (including Barton Hill and the descendent of the Sugar House Pottery). Making sugar pots, glazed redwares, chimney pots and horticultural wares they served a distinct market within the city and its hinterland. These are urban potteries not country potteries and the model recurs in other cities and as an adjunct to brick and tile industries. The few wasters here are similar to others from the Severnside and Bristol area and contribute to the idea of a regional style which connects with Bristol stonewAre forms. 

Adrian Parry’s full unpublished report for BaRAS  is now available online through Know Your Place.

Latest News from the Newport Medieval Kiln

The redevelopment of the Memorial Hall in Newport, Pembrokeshire has been progressing steadily. The 1920’s building is the subject of a major lottery-funded project to bring it up to date. The unusual factor is that the basement space under the centre of the building is a Scheduled Ancient Monument. A large late medieval pottery kiln in remarkably good condition was found in 1921 and preserved under the stage floor. As part of the new project the kiln is being reexcavated and presented to the public and further archaeological work carried out in the areas of the site affected by the development. 

Structural problems and flooding have slowed progress during the spring and the kiln has been boxed over to allow the insertion of a large viewing window opening and the adaptation of the basement space to make a suitable room to display the kiln. Externally the removal of a Edwardian landscaping beside the building has produced large quantities of redeposited medieval pottery waste.  Below that a loosely built stone structure, seemingly contemporary with the kiln is the subject of much discussion. 

Last weekend with the removal of the boxing, we have been able to continue the excavation and cleaning of the kiln itself and extending the laser-scanning of it and its surrounding.

Above: the kiln in the newly transformed basement, revealed from under the boxing that has protected it during the building work. Below: now that the excavation and cleaning of the interior is completed, the full height of the firebox is revealed along with the slate floor. 

Bill Stebbing setting up the laser scanner to scan the flues and firebox. 

Cleaning and excavating the firebox and flue interiors has made the internal structure clearer. Removal of modern debris and fill from the firebox and the area in front has revealed the lower 20cm or so of the front of the kiln and a huge piece of slate used to form the entire floor of the firebox. Finds included late 20th century electrical cable and below, fragments of rotting mid-century linoleum. 

The second firebox of the kiln is unexcavated and hidden under the rear wall of the room, directly opposite the exposed one. It and its two flues are more of less clear of debris and sitting there quietly unseen.  We have investigated by directing lights down the openings in the kiln floor and using an iPhone on a selfie-stick as a camera. The photo below is difficult to read but… The mass on the left is the drum supporting the kiln floor. The flues curve round it in a U shape meeting the firebox at the base of the U. The camera is in the left-hand arm of the U looking across to the right hand one (its outer wall lit by a torch). To the right of centre the shadowy form of the roof of the firebox can be seen extending off to the right. It was very exciting seeing these images for the first time. Disappointingly there do not appear to be any complete pots, gold coins or sarcophagi hidden inside. 

Outside the NW corner of the building a fragment of loosely bonded masonry has caused some excitement, particularly given that a second kiln was found and demolished in 1921. Sadly it is not a kiln but it incorporates kiln waste and is likely to be part of a contemporary structure. 

                
Stay tuned. 

Archaeological watching brief, Nick Tavener (Nick Tavener Archaeological Services). Specialist evaluation, excavation and interpretation Oliver Kent and David Dawson/Bickley Ceramics Project with Nick Dawson of Archaeology South West. Laser scanning by Bill Stebbing of Scan to PLAN. Funded by CADW through the Newport Memorial Hall Medieval Kiln Project. 

Earlier posts: 
Feb 2016 The Newport Medieval Kiln, Pembrokeshire

Dec 2016 (Re)excavating the Medieval Kiln at Newport Pembrokeshire

Feb 2017 Pottery from the Medieval Kiln in Newport, Pembrokeshire

All things plastic: a visit to the Bakelite Museum

We have been meaning to visit the Bakelite Museum in Williton in Somerset for absolutely ages. Rumours that it may be about to close its doors finally got us there this week.it is a wonderfully eccentric place and you can enjoy it in a variety of different ways. The fact that it is housed in a more or less intact disused watermill is one, that nostalgia factor is big and then there are the plastic objects themselves – not just Bakelite but a wide range of earlier and later materials. 

Every surface in the building is crowded with products made of plastic from toys to radios and televisions and a huge variety of tablewares. Nothing found has been rejected it seems. Broken pieces nestle alongside ones in a better state and duplicates are celebrated. Seven Bush DAC90 radios sit in an arc on one of the huge wooden mill-gears. Numerous thermos flasks decorate another. There are rows of picnic sets and hoards of egg-cups. 

It is cold and curiously still and silent. You want the radios to crackle into action and the hair-dryers to buzz.  The atmosphere is relieved by Patrick Cook the proprietor’s transistor radio on the cafe table outside and the sounds of visitors conversations. 

Outdoors the theme changes to transport and the car park includes a yellow Trabant and Reliant and two splendid caravans. The smaller fibreglass van is charming and fully kitted out with plastic accessories. 

A selection of other design icons and curiosities include two Itera plastic bicycles. These were a Volvo project designed by Claes Nordenstam and produced from 1982-5. Sadly, they didn’t take off – the colour probably didn’t help? 

1930s Echo radios by Misha Black, Serge Chermayeff and Wells Coates plus a Braun Atelier 1-81 designed by Deiter Rams in 1960.

Pottery from the medieval kiln in Newport, Pembrokeshire

Building work on the Memorial Hall in Newport is beginning now and the removal of soil outside the north west corner of the building is producing large quantities of medieval pottery and kiln debris. These are some samples of the finds. 
For more on the origins and earlier stages of the project see my earlier posts from February and December last year.  Essentially the site was first excavated in 1921, revealing two late medieval pottery kilns. One kiln was recorded and destroyed and the other was preserved beneath the building in an underfloor space, scheduled and more of less forgotten. A recent Lottery funded project to recondition the hall has brought the whole site back into the light and the preserved kiln will be made accessible to the public eventually. The degree of preservation is remarkable and it is a rare opportunity to study this kind of site in so much detail.

. 

A large candlestick or chafing-dish base.

All of this is dumping from the original construction of the hall in 1921, mainly into the foundation trenches and includes Edwardian china as well as 15th/16th century pottery. Nonetheless it is giving us a good idea of the range of shapes and types of ware and also some evidence of the way they were packed in the kiln. There is a lot of washing and sorting to do at oresent but the picture so far is of a small range of shapes, principally jugs, deep bowls (sometimes with handles) and range tiles. Alongside those there are signs of jar shapes and one large, heavy base that may be a candlestick – seeming very exotic here. There are no signs of decoration and glaze is used very sparingly which helps to explain why the kiln is so clean. 

Fragments of shale including quite large flat weathered pebbles have oxidised impressions of vessels on them and patches of glaze. One at least has clearly been used to separate two levels of pots, having the impression of a pot on the upper surface and of two more on the bottom. Others may have been used to protect the kiln floor and discarded regularly. There are no signs so far of ceramic kiln furniture. As during the excavation of the kiln, pieces of fired clay with finger impressions are common, looking like discarded pieces of pointing. 

 

The pottery belongs to the family known as Dyfed Gravel-Tempered Ware which is found up and down the Welsh coast but is most common in Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire. The Newport pottery could have supplied a wide area through the harbour but it is likely that there are other production centres nearby. Two complete pots found nearby in Newport Castle in the 19th century are examples of Dyfed GTW and are reasonably consistent with the pottery we have seen so far. 

            
For more on the origins and the initial re-excavation stage of the project see my earlier posts from February (The Newport Medieval Kiln, Pembrokeshire) and  December (Excavating the Medieval Kiln at Newport, Pembrokeshire) last year.  

Bridgwater Jugs – 19th Century ‘Severnside’ Redwares

On Facebook’s British Country Pottery Collectors group page recently a number of people have been sharing and discussing a particular group of 19th of early 20th century redware jugs. They are typical of the broad family of shapes made around the Severn Estuary and most closely resemble those from Bridgwater and Bristol. A key issue with the wares is their relationship with the industrial stonewares produced in the 19th century particularly in Bristol – see my earlier post English Country Pottery – or is it?  What follows is a personal view and very much open for discussion. Severnside is my term and not obligatory but seems useful.

 

‘Severnside’ jugs from Somerset and South Wales. Top: My own selection of pots that I would suggest are from Bridgwater. Below: Jugs from South Wales illustrated by Andrew McGarva in his book Country Pottery. Left: Ewenny; Right: Large jug at rear from Bargoed near Cardiff and bottom right, South Wales (the other two are from Devon). (with apologies to AM/A&C Black for copying photos from their book). Bottom: Severnside jug possibly from Bristol (Lizzie Induni).

The family of shapes are distinct from the North Devon wares, typically more angular, often have handbuilt or applied handles and decoration is very rare. The clay bodies are varied but often pale – orange to pink – and fairly coarse. Nothing like the smooth Fremington clays. A particular quality that has been discussed before is their close relationship to industrial stoneware forms of the kind being made in Bristol in particular. The makers of these wares seem to be defined by the estuary rather than the Bristol Channel and the potteries are often closely associated with the extensive coastal brick and tile industries and in Bristol with the collieries. A range might run from Minehead/Dunster to the south, up river by Bridgwater, Burnham-on-Sea, Weston-super-Mare, Clevedon to Bristol and Kingswood then across the Severn and down the Welsh shore taking in Newport, Bridgend, Ewenny and Cardiff. By the time you get to Ewenny the influence of North Devon is becoming strong especially through slip and sgraffito decoration.

The pots and particularly the jugs share a range of characteristics. The clay is generally paler than North Devon wares and fires to an orange or straw colour rather than a terracotta red. The lead glaze is also often orange-brown rather than honey and a pale straw coloured edge is not unusual. The glaze is usually dipped to the shoulder which is marked by a single or double incised line. The shapes are characterised by almost vertical necks which step sharply away from the shoulder and relatively short bodies. The rims are either pinched to create a groove just below the edge or formed with a rib to give a very round everted shape. Handles are either pulled-on-the-pot with a single thumb impression at the base or quite commonly extruded, coiled or pulled, and pressed onto the body. The latter is unusual in Britain and rarely seen on ‘country’ pottery outside this area.

The particular group of pots under discussion were these.

The two Severnside/Bridgwater jugs that started the discussion. (Wren Franklin).

   Sevenside/Bridgwater jugs from Doug and Hannah Fitch’s collection. 

Severnside/Bridgwater jug belonging to Lizzie Induni.

Severnside/Bridgwater jug in the collection of the Somerset County Museum. (Photo: O Kent)

I would like to suggest that this particular group come from Bridgwater because they are clearly related to a collection of wasters and pots from the Chandos Glass Cone in Bridgwater, excavated in 1976-7. The glassworks closed in 1733 and the cone was reused for various purposes afterwards. From around 1827-1939 it became a redware pottery latterly as Browne’s Pottery and Deal Yard and the Somerset Trading Company, both closely associated with the brick and tile industry in Bridgwater. Kilns seems to have been built inside the cone – finally demolished in 1943. The precise manufacturer or date is uncertain and some pots like the slipware dishes look so much like Donyatt that you wonder if all the pottery was manufactured on site – some perhaps retailed from elsewhere.

 

Pottery from excavations at the Chandos Glass Cone, Bridgwater. Probably Browne’s Pottery/Somerset Trading Company, 1840s-1939. Bore, E. and Pearson, T., 2009. ‘Red Earthenware Pottery from the Chandos Glass Cone, Bridgwater.’ Proc. Somerset Archaeology and Natural History, 153. 131-150. (Available online).

The jugs, bottles and other shapes march well the pieces in my photo at the top of the page and in the hand the clay and glaze colours are right. The only big difference is the handle form. All the jugs have applied handles and not pulled-on-the-pot ones. This matters and our pots are perhaps either from a later period than the excavated ones or from a related pottery in the nearby area. The use of this kind of handle and the very vertical necks of the Severnside pots are key characteristics for me in linking these redware to industrial and urban production. Many of these potteries are closely tied to the brick and tile industry along the Severn shore and a somewhat industrial aesthetic seems to me apparent – perhaps the potters themselves trained in the big stoneware potteries and acquired techniques from that. If must also be about competition.

For more discussion see my earlier post English Country Pottery – or is it? Bristol Jugs and Pitchers. 

With thanks to Wren Frankin, Doug and Hannah Fitch, Lizzie Induni, Tim Bartell and Tim Bowen Antiques.

(Re) Excavating the Medieval Kiln at Newport, Pembrokeshire

Work on the Memorial Hall in Newport, near Fishguard in Pembrokeshire has moved on another stage as we have been able to begin re-excavating and recording the medieval kiln in the basement. 

Having got the appropriate permissions, the aim has been to clear away 95 years of dust and debris and reveal the top of the kiln, its flues and floor. This will then allow the next stage of conservation and preservation to proceed. As I explained earlier ((The Medieval Kiln at Newport, Pembrokeshire, posted 7 Feb 2016), two kilns were found in 1920 during the construction of the hall and after examination and recording by Sir Mortimer Wheeler, one was preserved under the floor of the stage. Wheeler published a plan and elevation in 1923 which showed the complete firebox, underfloor flue structure and warechamber floor of a round single-firebox kiln. Current dating would be late 15th or early 16th century. The preserved kiln was scheduled as an ancient monument but became more or less forgotten despite the republication of Wheeler’s drawing in the 1970s. 

It has only been with the current project to renovate the hall that the kiln and its history has resurfaced. The Hall Committee and local people have been keen to celebrate the kiln and their own history and make it better known. A team of specialists including David Dawson and myself have begun to help them achieve that. 

As it stands before we work on it the kiln consists of a clearly visible firebox and a central plinth supporting a flat area with a few punctures in an arc to one side. This seemed likely to be the kiln floor with some of its flues rising from the large ones visible beyond the firebox below. A survey by Karen Slade suggested that the flue structure was closed off about half way across the area and that a small opening at the rear seemed to indicate a second set of flues and by implication a second firebox hidden under the unexcavated area of the basement and a light cross wall.

What follows is a quick summary of our investigation:

Initial clearing of the north side revealed a triangular pit containing rubble, blue and white China, a clay-pipe stem and a leather boot sole. It bottomed out where it hit big chunks of slate and the inner face of the plinth. Tidied up, it had a flat face on the centre line of the firebox and therefore appeared to be an attempt to cross-section the interior of the kiln by archaeologists. The surprise beyond it was that the rest of the top seemed to be hard packed and devoid of modern artefacts as if the excavation had progressed no further. The exception being the openings into the flues on the north side (where Bill is poking his selfie-stick) and a small one on the south. 

As the north side was exposed the flues began to be revealed. The hard packed material in the centre seemed to overlie flat slate slabs leaving a narrow channel supported by the corbelling and bars below. The selfie-stick quickly confirmed that the second firebox was present (under the cross-wall and the photographer’s feet). The centre of the kiln looked worryingly empty but the biggest surprise was the arc of the kiln wall which suggested an oval kiln rather than a round one. It seemed that Mortimer Wheeler’s drawing was a very crude thumbnail tidied up for publication.

Trowelling revealed the slate rim of the floor and the flue channel and openings but the inner floor was elusive. The elyptical shape of the kiln became more evident, pushing further back and disappearing below the shallow cross-wall. Also more apparent was the thickness of the kiln walls – the narrow areas either side of the firebox seem to be the result of the intrusion of the foundation trenches for the hall above. Odd things began to appear above the firebox. 

This is the point we decided to stop. The kiln chamber is 2m x 2.5m, its floor corbelled out from a central slate and rubble drum. The two fireboxes (one invisible but complete and empty of debris) feed two u-shaped flues closed off from each other that open into the chamber through holes around the edge of the floor. The floor proper is missing except around the excavated firebox. Here it consists of fired compacted clay and two of the flue openings are shaped from modelled clay (there is another modelled vent at the other end). This indicates that the upper levels of external stonework are the lowest part of the ware-chamber. The notch in the wall and the large slabs above the firebox are interesting.

There are various thoughts growing out of this. The kiln is much bigger than the Mortimer Wheeler report suggested and although structurally similar, very different. It seems to have received only brief archaeological attention in 1921 and the most plausible conclusion has to be that this is not the kiln recorded by Wheeler but the second unrecorded one.

The whole structure is being laser scanned as we go along by Bill Stebbing (Scan to Plan). Below are some screen-shots. The first shows the area above the west firebox and the fired clay flues and floor. The other is a cross-section of the main flue showing the central drum corbelled out towards the outer wall to support the floor. For more go to Pembrokeshire Kiln on YouTube. 

  

Laser scans of the Newport medieval kiln. Copyright Scan to Plan 2016

More news as we go along. For more information on the project as a whole see the Newport Memorial Hall website 

Puzzle Jugs and Puzzling Jugs

When is a puzzle jug not a puzzle jug ? Amongst folk and country potters from the early 17th century onwards and the makers of delftware and later stonewares in England, the puzzle-jug has been a popular form for gifts and commemorative pieces. Drinking novelties, if ever actually used, they aim to confuse the user and spill drink over their victims. On some, inscriptions dare the drinker on pain of a forfeit. Their complexity varies, the ones from Donyatt in Somerset being the simplest. As special pieces they have survived disproportionately well and they are represented in many museum and private collections.

Puzzle Jug dated 1877. Yorkshire, probably Burton-in-Lonsdale.

Puzzle Jug. Donyatt, Somerset. 1852.

The reader may query my start date for these pieces. Surely the puzzle jug is a much earlier phenomenon. Are there not many medieval examples in museums and amongst archaeological assemblages?

The answer is no. What there are are labels.  There a range of  ceramic objects made in the later Middle Ages and the early modern period that are characterised by the incorporation of tubes in one way or another. These are often attached to the vessel wall and sometimes involve concealment by incorporation into decoration or hollow handles. The function of these pieces puzzled antiquarians and nineteenth century collectors and resulting in a generic classification as puzzle jugs alongside their more familiar cousins. No link was made to posset pots although these too sometimes included tubes. Posset pots were classified as cup forms and their function was not seen as mysterious in any way. The tube (or tubes) simply allowed the user access to the lower part of the contents without disturbing the upper part. A general link was made to drinking and parties.

The best known medieval pot of this kind is the magnificent and exotic late 13th century  Saintonge jug in the Royal Albert Memorial Museum in Exeter. Less familiar but still pretty impressive is the Redcliffe jug in Bristol City Museum. Both are catalogued as puzzle jugs but they are actually structurally quite different and represent two distinct vessel types. The common ground is that they are for pouring liquids, they have spouts and handles and their structure incorporates a tube.

The Exeter ‘Puzzle Jug.’ Saintonge, France. 1250-1300AD. Royal Albert Museum Exeter.

The Exeter jug is visually very similar to the familiar post-medieval pots in having a tubular handle linking bottom and top and a pierced neck between shoulder and rim. The neck is an ornate galleried tower whose windows are populated with musicians. There is no doubt that this is a table piece meant to attract attention. As reconstructed, the jug has two chambers, the lower part of the body is fully enclosed with two openings, one from the base of the holow handle and the other into the tubular spout. Above the pierced neck the upper chamber is an open, vertical sided bowl which has a small hole in its lower edge which opens into the top of the hollow handle. The spout, which has a modelled animal head, rises from the lower chamber up to the level of the base of the upper one.

The Redcliffe ‘puzzle Jug’ Redcliffe, Bristol. Bristol City Museum and Art Gallery.

The Bristol jug is large and imposing with three spouts at its rim each modelled as a male head. The two on the flanks of the jug are bridge spouts opening directly into the vessel. Each has a body drawn below it with applied coils. The spout at the front has no opening through the rim but sits at the top of a tube which runs down the front of the vessel to an opening near the base of the interior. Over the tube is modelled a full figure with a head like those on the spouts and gripping a ring between two hands.

Neither jug imcorporates any trick or subtlety to confuse or amuse. The Exeter jug has an open bowl at the top as an access point to fill or with liquid, an enclosed storage chamber at the bottom and a spout to pour with. The Bristol one is a normal jug form with two spouts on the sides of the rim that provide the means to pour from the top and a third at h front supplied by a tube that allows the user to pour from the bottom.

The latter is clearly similar in function to the kinds of objects usually labelled posset pots. These are most commonly seen as tin-glazed earthenware/delftware but there is a long tradition of large lidded pieces in lead-glazed earthenware too with some splendid ones from Wales and the Midlands. The spouts cannot be used to pour but must be sucked. Nonetheless, the basic principle is the same except that the Redcliffe Jug is best suited to serving rather than direct consumption.

The Exeter jug is similarly best suited to a serving role. It is important to remember that this pot comes from Southern France. There is an extensive range of drinking and serving vessels from all around the Mediterranean and the old Ottoman Empire to which this pot seems to me to belong.  In France the gargoulette and in Spain the botijo are enclosed pouring forms that perform both drinking and table functions. There are a lot of variations across the wider area but the essential idea is consistent. In the east particularly a hollow handle is a common feature.

Botijos. Left, late 19th century. Antonio Fernandez, Rambla. Spain. Right, 19th/early 20th century, Spain or Portugal.

The two examples above are different in form to the Exeter jug but very similar in their mechanics and their functions. A filling point is provided by adding a small thrown ring or vessel. The one on the right has a pierced filter. The neck can be lightly plugged with textile to filter the water of whatever else going into it. Both are everted to take a cloth of paper cover tied over them. Opposite is a narrow spout. The main chamber is fully enclosed from the elements. Botijos are generally associated with water or wine but they are can be used to store and pour a variety of things including particularly oils. The Exeter jug is particularly effective as a storage vessel for oils because the two tubes allow only a minimal surface area to oxidise as long as it it kept full. In use the top would ideally be covered as is often the cas with botijos.

There are a range of other puzzling pots in museums and collections worth scrutinising. There are lots of interesting folk/traditional pots across Europe and the Mediterranean for comparison – and of course not just pots. Anyway enough.