Faneuil Hall and "New-Boston" Pottery part 4

The earliest European settlers are believed not to have brought any form of ceramic to America in those first years. It is thought that ceramics were not recommended as a top priority for the earliest Europeans traveling and settling. There was more of an importance for other necessities.

Lura Woodside Watkins wrote in her book, "Early New England Potters and Their Wares," that Edward Drinker was the first known potter in the Boston and Charlestown areas before 1670. He began in Charlestown, but soon after left Charlestown for religious reasons and he began working on Boston's waterfront.

In 1665, Samuel Kettle apprenticed under Drinker and he began producing pottery as early as that same year. Samuel was the first generation of a family of Kettle potters that worked in Boston, Charlestown and Salem, Massachusetts, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

Slip decoration was not a common use or decoration before 1680, where there was a greater demand for manufacturing vessels rather than flatware. The use of flatware grew after 1680, which indicated more earthenware use in service and daily household necessities. At the turn of the eighteenth century and the years following, the use of slip decoration became extremely popular. It is evident in Boston and Charlestown - and further north in Newburyport, Massachusetts and Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

Research and archaeological reports have indicated that the production of redware grew in the eighteenth century. From a 1730s archaeological site found in one of the districts excavated in Charlestown, a circular formed pit was discovered. The pit contained an extensive amount of artifacts, much of which were ceramics. Of those ceramics, it was estimated that nearly three-quarters were made of red earthenware, or today referred to as redware - and it appears roughly half of the redware was intended for kitchen use.

As previously discussed, the names Kettell, Parker, Symmes, Edes, Manning, Ingalls, Duche, Harris, Larkin, Powers, Penney, Standley and Runey have all been identified as the last names of Charlestown potters. From these reported potters, there was one by the name of Grace whom belonged to the Parker Family. I indicated in a previous post that Grace may have been a female.

The truth is, Grace Parker was in-fact, a female potter. While I will not get into the details of her work - I will tell you she did operate the Parker Pottery on Town Dock in Charlestown. Her husband, Isaac was a second-generation Charlestown potter. Isaac, unfortunately died in 1742. Grace at this point had two options; did she want to remarry or operate the Parker Pottery business? She chose the business. She ran the pottery with her son, John for many years. John was also involved with other area potters' businesses. The Parker business under Grace, did not see much success as war ran its toll on the pottery. King George and the French and Indian War made it hard for the Parker's to operate successfully. Grace Parker passed away in 1755 and her son, John in 1765 - with that, so did the Parker Pottery.

Grace Parker is a very important name in the history of New England ceramics. She is the "only" reported female potter to run and operate a potter's business prior to the Arts and Crafts Movement. 

As I move forward with my study into the lives of Boston and Charlestown's eighteenth century potters, I continue to come across the everyday struggles that developed from wars within the area's pottery industry. It is going to be interesting seeing this develop more with research - as to how much of an impact there really was as a result from war is yet to be determined.

At some-point during the day or night of June 17, 1775, Charlestown's Carey House burned to the ground. Found in the basement during archaeological excavations of this house, was a large collection of redware storage vessels. It is believed that at the very least the jars were used as a means of storage. I was going through the artifacts of the Faneuil Hall sites yesterday and I came across this very unique and large formed vessel. It appears it may have been used for some-kind of storage. The site predates 1743. The vessel does not appear to be wheel-turned, but rather hand formed - but of course, I could be wrong. It is unique, as I have never seen anything like it. If there are any opinions, comments, attributions - I would love to hear them (email). I am not making any connections between this vessel pictured and those found in the Carey House.

Yesterday like I wrote, I did go through the vessels found during the archaeological excavation from sections of Faneuil Hall. The site dates from the early-to-mid eighteenth century. In fact, the particular site that I examined dates before 1743 - and before anything else, let's define what Faneuil Hall's importance was in a historical context. 

Faneuil Hall, from the seventeenth thru nineteenth centuries was known as, "Merchant's Row." This was the location of much commercial trade - that also included shipping during the nineteenth century in Boston. As previously discussed, King Street's location is within this district. and it purportedly has ties to Benjamin Leigh, Jonathan Allman and both imported English Delftware and possibly the wholesaler of the liquidated "New-Boston" Pottery tortoise-shell ware that I have been researching

All of the following artifacts were found in eighteenth century area wasters or privies within the Faneuil Hall archaeological district. I personally believe the majority of the following artifacts to be made domestically.

The polychrome redware handle (pictured right) is fascinating. It very-well could be Charlestown made, but that has not yet been determined. It has an interesting glaze that from my observations is unusual for the period. The slip decorated redware shard (pictured middle) is likely English. The Staffordshire redware teapot lid (pictured left) is wonderful. It just may be my favorite artifact thus far. Imagine if you can, what the rest of the teapot resembled. Based on the size of the lid, I assume this was a single cup teapot.

All three redware shards could possibly be locally made - and possibly within the city limits of Charlestown. The majority of Charlestown's eighteenth century redware was manufactured at or near Town Dock. The advantages of this location included the plentiful Mystic River clay beds and easy access to water transportation.

This is a manganese decorated redware jar. It very-well may have been a large pitcher. This too, has the potential for a local manufacturer.

These are unglazed redware jars of some-form. My guess would be flower pots, but they both may be from a mixing bowl or another form of kitchenware.

The redware shard on the left is glazed on the inside, while the exterior is exposed red clay and unglazed. It may have been a mixing bowl or a form of kitchenware at one point. The form on the right resembles the remnants of a redware mug. The mug may have a link to a local tavern, but that is currently unknown. Both may have been produced domestically.

There are many unglazed redware shards found within the Faneuil Hall district. These are a few of those examples.

As I mentioned above, the Faneuil Hall site predates 1743 and King Street is a part of this district. This advertisement (previously mentioned) ran in the Boston New-Letter on April 12, 1770, advertising the sale of a "New-Boston" Pottery made tortoise-shell ware thru a King Street merchant.

"Nathaniel Cudworth, informs his customers and others he has removed from a store on King-Street, to a Shop at the South-End, three Doors above the Sign of the Lamb, Where he has to sell", among other listed articles of merchandise, "A good assortment of Tortoise and Agat colour'd Earthen Ware, made in BOSTON, by Leigh and Allman." 


Thomas Whieldon's English tortoise-shell wares were relatively rare for the Boston market of this period, but it is likely there may have been some examples residing in Boston-area homes.

Thomas Whieldon Tortoise Shell Plates, England

Photo Courtesy: Skinner, Inc. - Boston

"New-Boston" Pottery was reportedly manufactured during 1769 to 1770 (despite no known attributed examples) by Benjamin Leigh, Jonathan Allman and possibly a handful of apprentices. It was made to imitate Whieldon ware of England. King Street was within the "Merchant's Row" district and despite the site dating prior to 1743 - the merchant's location who sold "New-Boston" Pottery was relatively close. These shards were cataloged in the Faneuil Hall archaeological boxes - and an origin has yet to be determined. This could be very exciting!

More research to come....