Pitkin Glass Works Eagle Cornucopia Flask - Manchester, CT
Circa 1783-1830
Photo Courtesy: Norman Heckler Auctions - Woodstock, Valley, CT
Pitkin Glass Works Type Flask - Manchester, CT
Circa 1783-1830
Photo Courtesy: Norman Heckler Auctions - Woodstock, Valley, CT
Pitkin Glass Works Type Flask - Manchester, CT
Circa 1783-1830
Photo Courtesy: Norman Heckler Auctions - Woodstock, Valley, CT
Pitkin Glass Works Type Inkwell - Manchester, CT
Circa 1783-1830
Photo Courtesy: Norman Heckler Auctions - Woodstock, Valley, CT
Circa 1783-1830
Photo Courtesy: Norman Heckler Auctions - Woodstock, Valley, CT
In the 1980's, students from Central Connecticut State University made a preliminary archaeological dig (at the Pitkin site) finding shards of glass - and, pottery was also uncovered."
Excavations at the Pitkin Glass Works in Manchester, CT
Photo Courtesy: Dana Charlton-Zarro
The idea of pottery sherds having been discovered at the Pitkin site immediately piqued my interest - and, an obvious question came to mind. Did the Pitkin Glass Works also produce pottery? If so, this was definitely news to me. I had never heard of such an operation before.
I turned to social media yesterday afternoon, in hopes, that I may obtain some information about this subject. I was fortunate, too because there was a group of people, who were very helpful; Dana Charleton-Zarro, John Martinelli and Rick Ciralli really provided some wonderful insight into this subject.
According to Dana Charleton-Zarro, there was an article published a few years ago in the magazine, 'Antique Bottle and Glass Collector' written by John Dobozy that touched upon this subject, "Dozens of late-eighteenth and nineteenth century pottery sherds were found (at the site of the Pitkin Glass Works). The majority were either unglazed red clay (earthenware) or salt glazed stoneware with a red interior slip. A few pieces with a deep brownish glaze were also encountered. All of the pieces seemed to be bowls, plates or common drinking vessels. No design or distinguishing mark was found on any piece that I examined. The presence of so many pottery sherds may indicate that this was the site of Manchester's first working pottery (and possibly only working pottery). Perhaps it was located in an outbuilding and shared the raw materials of the Glass Works for fuel and glaze or perhaps it was co-joined and shared the Glass Works intense heat to 'fire' the pottery. We may never know for sure."
Massachusetts author, Lura Woodside Watkins (1873-1982) gave plenty of insight into this subject in her book, 'Early New England Potters and Their Wares,' "Richard Pitkin, brother of William and Elisha, who built the famous glass works in Manchester, a few miles east of Hartford, made an attempt to establish a stoneware pottery there also. Little is known about it, except that Pitkin ran it with his son-in-law Dudley Woodbridge (1782-1844). As Woodbridge did not marry Elizabeth Pitkin until 1800, the pottery must have been a nineteenth-century venture.
The Pitkins were an influential family at the time of the Revolution and they owned large tracts of land between Manchester Centre and Manchester Green, about one mile to the east. Richard Pitkin had his home at the Green, which was then the trading center of the town. The store and tavern and the glass house were in this vicinity. The pottery stood a short distance northwest of the glass works. Albert Pitkin, in a conversation with Ralph Cone, whose wife was a daughter of Dudley Woodbridge was told that the family made stoneware, and he obtained from Cone a salt glazed stoneware jar that had been handed down to Mrs. Cone by her mother as a product of the Pitkin shop. He says, however, that the clay was dug on the 'Pitkins' land about one-quarter mile east of Aaron Cook, Jr.'s house - a lot known as the 'clay hole piece.' This would indicate earthenware (redware) manufacture. Although the pottery boasted only one kiln, it is possible that both redware and stoneware were made. Pitkin asserts that jugs, jars, churns, and barrel-shaped stoneware bottles were part of the output. As twelve men were employed, the enterprise must have been organized on a fairly large scale. The history of this pottery would bear further investigation."
There are a small group of known stoneware forms bearing the (East) Manchester, Connecticut name today that are also impressed with the maker's name, 'Woodbridge and Bidwell;' however, I am not positive if this production is related to the Pitkin operation - or, if it was a spin-off of Woodbridge's production at the Pitkin factory. I also have not been able to determine Woodbridge's involvement with the potter's industry prior to his work at the Pitkin factory. Although, it should also be noted that a book published by the Manchester Historical Society in 1924, titled, 'History of Manchester, Connecticut' does not make mention of any type of pottery production in Manchester, but it does reference the monopoly the Pitkin family owned in the state's glass industry. The book also mentions that the Pitkin family was involved with more than only glass - it references a cotton business and a snuff business also owned by the Pitkins.
Regardless, it seems that Pitkin may have desired to embody the work similar to some of the potters, who were employed about ten-miles to the east in the Hartford, Connecticut-area, where they manufactured both red earthenware and stoneware at some businesses in the early-nineteenth-century. The Seymour and Goodwin families are especially known for this practice today; however, Richard Pitkin may have been in a class all by himself in the early-1800's, if he truly, was successful at producing glass, red earthenware and stoneware simultaneously before his death in 1822.
To my knowledge, there is no red earthenware properly attributed to this business today. I also do not know of any stoneware that is marked with the 'Woodbridge,' 'Pitkin' or 'Woodbridge and Pitkin' names in any museum holdings or even private collections.
I hope to continue my research into this subject - and, bring more information about Richard Pitkin's possible production of utilitarian pottery at another time. I think this is a very important subject.
Please Stay Tuned...Much More to Come...
According to Dana Charleton-Zarro, there was an article published a few years ago in the magazine, 'Antique Bottle and Glass Collector' written by John Dobozy that touched upon this subject, "Dozens of late-eighteenth and nineteenth century pottery sherds were found (at the site of the Pitkin Glass Works). The majority were either unglazed red clay (earthenware) or salt glazed stoneware with a red interior slip. A few pieces with a deep brownish glaze were also encountered. All of the pieces seemed to be bowls, plates or common drinking vessels. No design or distinguishing mark was found on any piece that I examined. The presence of so many pottery sherds may indicate that this was the site of Manchester's first working pottery (and possibly only working pottery). Perhaps it was located in an outbuilding and shared the raw materials of the Glass Works for fuel and glaze or perhaps it was co-joined and shared the Glass Works intense heat to 'fire' the pottery. We may never know for sure."
Massachusetts author, Lura Woodside Watkins (1873-1982) gave plenty of insight into this subject in her book, 'Early New England Potters and Their Wares,' "Richard Pitkin, brother of William and Elisha, who built the famous glass works in Manchester, a few miles east of Hartford, made an attempt to establish a stoneware pottery there also. Little is known about it, except that Pitkin ran it with his son-in-law Dudley Woodbridge (1782-1844). As Woodbridge did not marry Elizabeth Pitkin until 1800, the pottery must have been a nineteenth-century venture.
The Pitkins were an influential family at the time of the Revolution and they owned large tracts of land between Manchester Centre and Manchester Green, about one mile to the east. Richard Pitkin had his home at the Green, which was then the trading center of the town. The store and tavern and the glass house were in this vicinity. The pottery stood a short distance northwest of the glass works. Albert Pitkin, in a conversation with Ralph Cone, whose wife was a daughter of Dudley Woodbridge was told that the family made stoneware, and he obtained from Cone a salt glazed stoneware jar that had been handed down to Mrs. Cone by her mother as a product of the Pitkin shop. He says, however, that the clay was dug on the 'Pitkins' land about one-quarter mile east of Aaron Cook, Jr.'s house - a lot known as the 'clay hole piece.' This would indicate earthenware (redware) manufacture. Although the pottery boasted only one kiln, it is possible that both redware and stoneware were made. Pitkin asserts that jugs, jars, churns, and barrel-shaped stoneware bottles were part of the output. As twelve men were employed, the enterprise must have been organized on a fairly large scale. The history of this pottery would bear further investigation."
There are a small group of known stoneware forms bearing the (East) Manchester, Connecticut name today that are also impressed with the maker's name, 'Woodbridge and Bidwell;' however, I am not positive if this production is related to the Pitkin operation - or, if it was a spin-off of Woodbridge's production at the Pitkin factory. I also have not been able to determine Woodbridge's involvement with the potter's industry prior to his work at the Pitkin factory. Although, it should also be noted that a book published by the Manchester Historical Society in 1924, titled, 'History of Manchester, Connecticut' does not make mention of any type of pottery production in Manchester, but it does reference the monopoly the Pitkin family owned in the state's glass industry. The book also mentions that the Pitkin family was involved with more than only glass - it references a cotton business and a snuff business also owned by the Pitkins.
Regardless, it seems that Pitkin may have desired to embody the work similar to some of the potters, who were employed about ten-miles to the east in the Hartford, Connecticut-area, where they manufactured both red earthenware and stoneware at some businesses in the early-nineteenth-century. The Seymour and Goodwin families are especially known for this practice today; however, Richard Pitkin may have been in a class all by himself in the early-1800's, if he truly, was successful at producing glass, red earthenware and stoneware simultaneously before his death in 1822.
To my knowledge, there is no red earthenware properly attributed to this business today. I also do not know of any stoneware that is marked with the 'Woodbridge,' 'Pitkin' or 'Woodbridge and Pitkin' names in any museum holdings or even private collections.
I hope to continue my research into this subject - and, bring more information about Richard Pitkin's possible production of utilitarian pottery at another time. I think this is a very important subject.
Please Stay Tuned...Much More to Come...
2 comments:
Hello Justin, back in February & March, 2011, I wrote a two part article that appeared in the Antique Bottle & Glass Collector magazine titled; "Pitkin's Early Efforts Reveal Great Glass...and just a hint of Connecticut stoneware". It dealt with the very subject covered in your report, the identification of stoneware produced by Pitkin at the glasswork's. Stoneware marked Woodbridge / Bidwell / & Co." was made there and proven. I also identified the famous "J.P.F" flask produced there and cited the makers name. Answers may of your questions. David Graci
Thanks, Dave! That clears it up!
Post a Comment