Chapter V: Part II: Pottery Evidence (4)

8. Leg with trifid or cloven foot, from iron pot. Legs of this
type narrow above the foot and spread again towards the point
of junction with the pot base. It was at the narrow midsection
that the illustrated leg broke. The form was common in the 17th
century. T.N. 18.

9. Tapering iron strap of uncertain purpose. Two small nail holes
at the broad end and two larger holes down the length of strap.
T.N. 19.

10. Strap similar to the above. Slightly constricted at midsection
but otherwise without taper; positioning of nail holes as in
no. 9. The strap is bent in opposite directions at either end,
the bend at the right extremity passing through the line of
the nail holes, indicating that the bending occurred when the
object was used for a purpose other than that for which it was
originally intended. T.N. 23.

11. Shoe buckle, iron. Badly decayed, but traces of both iron tines
and back loop remain. The frame sides were probably originally
only 3/16 in. to 1/4 in. wide. T.N. 23. Shoe buckles of iron
are very rarely encountered.

12. Harness ornament, brass. Originally silver-plated or
tin-plated, of shell form; five tangs that protrude from the
back--four in the area of the shell and one at the tail--were
folded over to grip the leather, fragments of which still
survived when the fitting was found. The form was common in the
18th century,[148] but most examples found in Virginia are much
less angular than is this example. T.N. 17.

13. Harness fitting, brass, with rectangular loop at right angles
to the ornamental plate, probably a strap retainer. T.N. 15.

14. Bone tube or nozzle, possibly part of a syringe. Internal bore
spreads from 1/8 in. at the narrow, broken end, to 3/8 in. at
the other end. The increase in bore begins at a point 3/4 in.
from the wide end. The latter terminates on the exterior in a
collar above six encircling grooves, below which the tube is
trumpet-shaped and ornamented with two shallow incised rings.
T.N. 17.

15. Bone tube of uncertain purpose. Trimmed at the narrow end to
fit within a collar or extension; the wider end spreading and
convex, the interior of this end with spiral groove to create
threading to house a screw-ended plug or extension. T.N. 17.

16. Wineglass stem. Heavy and solid inverted baluster with small
fortuitous tear; the lead metal a smoky gray with an almost
frosted appearance resulting from surface decay.[149] The bowl,
though large, was comparatively thin at its junction with the
stem and probably, therefore, was of funnel form. Late 17th
century. T.N. 22.

17. Light wineglass. Pale straw-colored metal;[150] inverted
baluster stem is hollow and gently tooled into quatrefoil form
at its junction with the bowl,[151] the latter setting firmly
into the top of the stem. The conical foot with central pontil
mark is thin and was undoubtedly folded. This is an important
3-piece glass of a type sometimes attributed to Hawley Bishop,
George Ravenscroft's successor at the Henley-on-Thames
glasshouse.[152] About 1680-1700. T.N. 30.

18. Wineglass stem. Sparkling lead metal; the stem comprising a
solid, inverted baluster beneath a massive cushion knop, the
base of the bowl nestling firmly within the latter. Late 17th
century to early 18th century.[153] T.N. 4.

FIGURE 18

ENGLISH DELFTWARE

1. Bowl with everted rim ornamented with crudely overlapping ovals
and diamonds in blue; interior of bowl decorated with rings
of the same color. The conjectural base and foot are derived
from larger bowls of similar form found in excavations at
Williamsburg. The glaze is thick, and very white. Late 17th
century to early 18th century. T.N. 30.

2. Rim sherd from bowl of form similar to the above, but the blue
decoration on the interior of the bowl and the rim plain. T.N.
23.

3. Hemispherical bowl. The foot conjectural, decorated in blue on
the exterior with a stylized foliate border made up almost
entirely from groups of straight lines. There is a trellis
border above the missing foot, and the interior is decorated
with a double blue line at the same height, and with a single
line 5/8 in. below the rim. This last is decorated with red,
imitating the red-brown slipped line that frequently occurs on
Chinese export porcelain. Second quarter of 18th century.
T.N. 17; one sherd from T.N. 16.

4. Drug jar. Flat and slightly everted rim, straight body section,
and spreading base; the bottom slightly domed and the glaze
thin. Ornamented in pale blue with groups of horizontal lines
and a body zone decorated with linked ovals created by the
drawing of two overlapping wavy lines. Probably of London
manufacture and of 17th-century date.[154] T.N. 30.

5. Porringer. Slightly everted rim and handle with heart-shaped
aperture; body slightly bulbous and incurving to a straight
foot; the glaze thick and gray. Probably of London
manufacture.[155] Late 17th century to early 18th century. T.N.
23.

6. Shallow ointment pot or jar. Rim flattened, undercut, and
slightly everted; base markedly domed, thick pinkish-white
glaze. Almost certainly of London manufacture and dating from
latter part of 17th century. T.N. 30.

7. Ointment pot. Thin, slightly everted rim over a bulbous body;
the foot slightly spreading beneath it and slightly conical
beneath; the glaze thick and gray. 18th century. T.N. 23.

8. Saucer. Conjectural reconstruction derived from base and rim
sherds. The base thick; the foot solid and only slightly
raised, but the rim thin and with a much more even finish. The
piece has a thick white glaze with a slight pink cast and is
haphazardly splashed with blue. The technique would appear to
be the reverse of the London copies of Nevers faïence whereon
white dots are splashed over a blue ground.[156] This object
appears to be without parallel in published sources, but may
tentatively be given the same dating as the London white on
blue, i.e., about 1680-1690.[157] T.N. 30.

9. Pedestal base from a small salt. Base conical within; glaze
thick and very white; bowl decorated internally with profile
portrait of a cavalier. This extremely unusual item was, by a
remarkable coincidence, paralleled by an identical fragment
found by the writer on the foreshore of the River Thames at
Queenhithe in London. The two are shown together in figure 11.
About 1660-1680.[158] T.N. 23.

10. Large dish or charger reconstructed on the basis of base and
rim fragments. Diameter approximately 1 ft. 3 in. The rim turns
gently downward beyond the wide marly, and the foot is squat
and slightly spread. The glaze is thick and white, and the rim
decoration takes the form of broad rings of blue enclosing a
marly zone ornamented with an alternating lozenge and diamond
motif created from two rows of interlocking arcs, the upper
painted in orange and the lower in blue. The decoration of the
center of the dish is uncertain, but was painted in the same
two colors, perhaps in a stylized pomegranate design. Such
dishes are frequently decorated on the rim edges with dashes
of blue that give them the name "blue dash chargers,"[159]
but there is sufficient glaze surviving on this example to
indicate that there was no such ornament. Another somewhat
unusual feature is that the back of the dish is tin-glazed;
the majority of such dishes were coated on the reverse with a
thin yellow or yellowish-green lead glaze. Such dishes were
frequently used as wall or dresser ornaments and not for use at
table; consequently, the footrings are generally pierced for
suspension. No suspension holes occur on the small sections of
the footring that survive on this example. The dish is believed
to be of London manufacture on the evidence of wasters found in
the Borough of Southwark,[160] London (see fig. 10), though the
style is clearly of Dutch origin.[161] About 1670-1690. T.N.
30.[162]

11. Rim fragment from plate. The glaze slightly pink, narrow marly
decorated with alternating lozenge and diamond motif in light
blue (see no. 10) bordered by a single and double line of the
same color. At least two concentric circles adorned the floor
of the plate, but no evidence of the central design survives.
Early 18th century. T.N. 23.

12. Pedestal foot and base of salt or cup. The foot conical and
shelved internally; the bowl flat-based and with the rolled
terminal of a small handle at one side; the glaze somewhat
gray. The foot decorated with three somewhat irregularly drawn
rings in light blue; the bowl ornamented with rudimentary
floral devices; and the handle terminal decorated with two
horizontal bars of dark blue, perhaps beneath a vertical,
stalked flower. Late 17th century(?). T.N. 24.

INDIAN POTTERY

13. Bowl with flattened and slightly everted rim.
Colono-Indian[163] pottery, pebble-or stick-burnished, with
pink surface; extensive tool marks on the exterior; the ware
flecked with red ocher and few traces of shell. T.N. 23, T.N.
24.[164]

14. Shallow bowl or pan with flattened and everted rim.
Colono-Indian pottery; the ware buff and heavily shell-tempered
and retaining traces of surface burnishing. T.N. 23.

15. Rim and wall fragment of bowl with roughly flattened and
everted rim. Colono-Indian pottery, the body pale buff and
finely shell-tempered. T.N. 19.

16. Rim sherd from bowl of local Indian pottery. Lip thickened
and slightly incurving; body pink to buff and coarsely
shell-tempered; the exterior stick-burnished. T.N. 19.

17. Rim and wall fragment of cup or small bowl, the rim slightly
everted by tooling beneath it. Colono-Indian pottery; body
pinkish buff with traces of red ocher in the clay; exterior
surface highly burnished. It is possible that the fragment came
from a vessel comparable to that shown in figure 12, which was
found in excavations at Williamsburg.[165] T.N. 23.

BROWN SALT-GLAZED STONEWARES

18. Body and handle terminal fragments from pint (?) tankard.
Mottled purplish-brown exterior and reddish-brown interior;
the rim conjectural and the lower body and basal section
modeled on no. 19. Probably of English manufacture, London or
Bristol.[166] T.N. 1, T.N. 4.

19. Basal and wall fragments of pint (?) tankard. Similar in form
to the above. Two fragments present, one with the beginning of
the red slip that becomes mottled brown in firing, a feature
that normally extends from the midsection upwards to the
rim. The lower body is gray, as is the interior; the foot is
ornamented with a ridge, cordon, and double ridge. T.N. 17.

20. Rim sherd of quart (?) tankard. Burnt; the rim thinned from the
inside and ornamented on the outside with a single groove; dark
purplish-brown mottling on the exterior, a little of the slip
from which extends over the interior of the rim. T.N. 23.

21. Jug or drinking pot. Bulbous body with good quality tooling at
the shoulder; handle with single groove down the spine; the
base and neck conjectural, but modeled after the forms produced
by Dwight of Fulham in the late 17th century.[167] The ware is
a pale gray and appears white beneath the internal salt glaze.
It is possible that this is an example of the use of the white
salt-glazed body conceived by Dwight, and that it may have
come from his factory. The refined clay enables the ware to be
thinly and finely potted. T.N. 1.

22. Neck, shoulder, and handle-terminal fragments of jug. The neck
ornamented with multiple grooving; the handle terminal pressed
into the body with one finger; the glaze a rich purplish brown,
reddish brown inside.[168] A common form manufactured in London
at the close of the 17th century and made elsewhere, including
Yorktown, certainly through the second quarter of the 18th
century.[169] T.N. 23.

GERMAN SALT-GLAZED STONEWARE

23. Large (Westerwald) tankard, base and lower body sherds only.
Stylized foliate and geometric ornament incised and filled with
cobalt on an extremely pale-gray body; multiple cordons and
grooves above the base; two concave bands filled with blue; the
base slightly rising and scored with haphazard lines before
firing. T.N. 23.

FIGURE 19

COARSE EARTHENWARES

1. Cream pan of Yorktown (?) earthenware.[170] The rim rolled;
spout conjectural, based on others from the same group; base
slightly rising; exterior of body above base displaying potting
rings and knife work; body containing small quantities of
quartz grit, pink-cored and yellow at the edges; exterior
unglazed but orange-pink slipped, and the interior lead-glazed
a ginger brown mottled with iron. T.N. 24.

2. Cream pan. The rim thickened, incurving and undercut; ware as
of no. 1, but the internal glaze a darker brown; approximate
diameter, 14 in. T.N. 18.

3. Cream pan. Similar to no. 1 but with spout (from which the
above was copied), and the exterior slip somewhat more orange
in color. T.N. 23.

4. Cream pan. With spout and rolled rim; the ware red-bodied,
flecked with quartz grit and red ocher; exterior a deep red
to black; internal glaze a dark greenish brown; approximate
diameter, 14-3/4 in. T.N. 23.

5. Cream pan. The rim thickened, incurving, and undercut; body
pale buff; exterior with pale-orange slip; internal glaze a
lustrous purple, presumably somewhat overfired. Fragments with
this colored glaze are among the many possible wasters from
Yorktown. Diameter approximately 14 in. T.N. 23.

6. Cream pan. Unusual, shouldered rim sherd, perhaps intended
to take a cover; red body with ginger-brown glaze; probably
English. T.N. 4.

7. Storage jar, body fragments only. Decorated with medial grooves
and applied trails pressed in piecrust style beneath the
missing rim; the body gray-cored and red at the edges, coated
with a light-brown glaze flecked here and there with pale
green. Presumably English. T.N. 30.

8. Rim fragment from small cup or pot. Hard yellow body coated
with a pale treacly glaze. Probably Staffordshire. T.N. 18.

9. Large cylindrical jar or bowl. The wall vertical, undercut
above the slightly spread foot. Hard yellow body as above,
coated with thick treacly and streaky brown glaze of a color
much later often associated with Bennington. A rim sherd from
the same deposit is slightly everted, but since the glaze is
much lighter the piece may not belong to the same vessel. Base
diameter approximately 10-1/2 in. Probably Staffordshire. An
example recently purchased by Colonial Williamsburg (fig. 9) is
dated 1721. T.N. 30.

10. Storage jar. The rim everted and ridged internally, probably to
seat a lid; gravel tempered, pale-pink earthenware; internal
dark apple-green glaze.[171] West of England manufacture. T.N.
30.

GLASS BOTTLES

11. Wine bottle of early short-necked form. Olive-green metal; flat
string-rim; the mouth everted over rim. About 1680-1700. T.N.
30.

12. Wine bottle with squat body, short and broad neck, and roughly
applied string-rim; olive-green metal. The body type may
normally be dated around 1700, but some examples are 10 or 15
years earlier.[172] T.N. 30.

13. Wine bottle of olive-green metal. Squatter than the above,
but the neck somewhat taller and the shoulder less angular;
probably little variation in date.[173] T.N. 30.

14. Wine bottle of squat form, olive-green metal. The neck taller
than in no. 12 and the string-rim smaller and V-shaped.[174]
Seal, on the shoulder, bears the legend "Richard Burbydge
1701." T.N. 30.

15. Wine bottle of squat form, olive-green metal. Somewhat bulbous
and the shoulder weak, the string-rim broad and flat.[175] A
slightly earlier form than no. 14. The bottle has a seal on its
shoulder with the initials "F I" (Frederick Jones) stamped from
a single matrix.[176] T.N. 30.

16. Wine bottle of somewhat unusual form. The metal thin olive
green has turned black through decay which has almost entirely
destroyed the metal. The body round-shouldered, and bulbous in
the early manner; but the neck tall and the string-rim almost
round-sectioned rather than V-shaped as one might expect of a
bottle of this basic form. Were it not for the soft curve of
the body and the shape of the string-rim this bottle might be
attributed to the third decade of the 18th century. Note brass
wire, still attached to neck, that held cork in place. T.N. 30.

17. Wine bottle of half-bottle size. The metal as in no. 16;
shoulder angular; neck somewhat writhen with a broad and flat
string-rim of 17th-century character. Without the last feature
(and its context) this bottle might be thought to date as late
as 1725. T.N. 30.

18. Wine bottle, olive-green metal. Short cylindrical body with
conical basal kick, straight neck, and down-tooled string-rim.
Dated examples occur in the late 1730's, but are more common in
the following decade. T.N. 23.

19. Wine-bottle neck of olive-green metal in an advanced state of
decay. Wide mouth with everted lip and large round-sectioned
string-rim of unusual character. The angular shoulder suggests
that the neck comes from a body comparable to that of no. 12.
T.N. 31.

20. Pickle jar, everted-mouth fragments only. Olive-green metal in
an advanced stage of decay, originally with square body in the
manner of the more common case bottles.[177] T.N. 18.

FIGURE 20. MISCELLANEOUS SMALL FINDS

1. Harness ornament, plated brass. (See fig. 17, no. 12.) T.N. 17.

2. Harness fitting, brass. (See fig. 17, no. 13.) T.N. 15.

3. Brass button. Hollow cast; both back and front convex; the back
with two molding holes on either side of the flat-sectioned
brass loop, which spreads directly from the back without any
intermediary shank. Such buttons were common in the second
half of the 17th century and the first quarter of the 18th
century.[178] Diameter, 3/4 in. T.N. 23.

4. Brass curtain ring. The shape cast and then roughly filed flat
on either side. This method of manufacture is typical of the
17th and 18th centuries. Diameter, 1 in. T.N. 24.

5. Ornamental brass band from shaft or hilt of uncertain form. The
band has become flattened and folded, and the condition of the
metal precludes regaining its original shape. However, the
band is almost certainly a truncated cone, ornamented with a
roughly cutout and scored foliate decoration at the narrow end
and plated with a thin band of silver at the other end. Length,
1-3/16 in. T.N. 18.

6. Millefiori or chevron bead of yellow and black glass, almost
certainly Venetian.[179] The bead is flattened on its pierced
axis and has a diameter of 3/8 in. This example is probably
of 17th-century date, but the technique can be traced back to
Roman times. T.N. 30.

7. Chinese export porcelain-cup fragment. Decorated in
underglaze blue, rough chevron ornament below the rim on the
interior. Diameter approximately 3 in. T.N. 23.

8. Lower bowl fragment of lead-glass Romer ornamented with
gadrooning or pillar molding. This is undoubtedly the finest
glass fragment from the site; it would not have been out of
place in the best English household.[180] About 1685. T.N. 30.

9. Indian projectile point of honey-colored quartzite. The edges
slightly serrated, and the base slightly concave; the tip
missing, but total length originally about 43 mm. Holland Type
C.[181] T.N. 16.

10. Indian projectile point of red quartzite. Eared or
corner-notched variety; original length approximately 45 mm.
Holland Type O.[182] This is an unstratified item discovered
on the bared clay surface on the promontory of Tutter's Neck
overlooking the junction of Tutter's Neck and Kingsmill Creeks.

U.S. Government Printing Office: 1966

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402--Price 70 cents

FOOTNOTES:

[57] I am indebted to Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., for permitting the partial excavation of the site, for its generosity in offering to present the bulk of the artifact collection to the United States National Museum, and for its financial assistance in the preparation of this report. I am also much indebted to Audrey Noël Hume and John Dunton who represented the full extent of our field team, and to the latter for his work in the preservation of the iron and other small finds. My gratitude is also extended to A. E. Kendrew, senior vice president of Colonial Williamsburg, and to E. M. Frank, resident architect, the late S. P. Moorehead, architectural consultant, and Paul Buchanan, all of Colonial Williamsburg, for their help in the interpretation of the architectural remains. Further thanks are extended to Thaddeus Tate of the College of William and Mary for his valued council throughout the operation and for reading and commenting on the final report. I also greatly appreciate comments made by C. Malcolm Watkins, curator of cultural history at the Smithsonian Institution, in regard to the European artifacts; the help with the Indian material provided by Ben C. McCary, president of the Archeological Society of Virginia; and suggestions for historical sources made by H. G. Jones, state archivist, North Carolina. Finally, my thanks are extended to Alden Eaton who first found the site and without whose interest another relic of Virginia's colonial past would have been lost.

[58] "_Mesuage_, in Common law, is used for a dwelling-house, with Garden, Courtilage, Orchard, and all other things belonging to it" (E. PHILLIPS, _The New World of Words_, London, 1671).

[59] WILLIAM WALLER HENING, _Statutes at Large ... A Collection of All the Laws of Virginia ..._, vol. 4 (Richmond, 1820), p. 371.

[60] Papers of the Jones Family of Northumberland County, Virginia, 1649-1889 (MSS. Division, Library of Congress), vol. 1.

[61] "Patents Issued During the Royal Government," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (January 1901), ser. 1, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 143. In the 17th century prior to the building of the College of William and Mary, College Creek was known as Archer's Hope Creek, after the settlement of Archer's Hope at its mouth.

[62] There was a patent dated February 6, 1637, to "Humphry Higgenson" for 700 acres "called by the name of Tutteys neck, adj. to Harrop ... E. S. E. upon a gr. swamp parting it from Harrop land, W. S. W. upon a br. of Archers hope Cr. parting it from Kingsmells neck, W. N. W. upon another br. of sd. Cr. parting it from land of Richard Brewsters called by the name of the great neck alias the barren neck & N. N. W into the Maine woods." Richard Brewster's 500 acres were described as beginning "at the great Neck alias the barren neck, adj. to Tutteys Neck a br. of Archers hope Cr. parting the same, S. upon a br. of sd. Cr. parting it from Kingsmells Neck...." _Cavaliers and pioneers. Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants 1623-1800_, abstracted and edited by Neil M. Nugent (Richmond: Dietz Printing Co., 1934), vol. 1, pp. 80, 81.

[63] On July 19, 1646, a patent was granted to Richard Brewster for "750 acres, Land & Marsh, called the great Neck of Barren Neck, next adjoining to lutteyes neck." "Patents Issued ...," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (July 1901), ser. 1, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 94.

[64] "Notes from Records of York County," _Tyler's Quarterly Historical and Genealogical Magazine_ (July 1924), vol. 6, no. 1, p. 61.

[65] "Virginia Gleanings in England," _Virginia Magazine of History and Biography_ (October 1904), vol. 12, no. 2, p. 179.

[66] "List of Colonial Officers," _Virginia Magazine of History and Biography_ (January 1901), vol. 8, no. 3, p. 328; and "Lightfoot Family," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (October 1894), ser. 1, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 104.

[67] "Patents Issued ...," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (January 1904), ser. 1, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 186. For similar spelling see note 7, above.

[68] "Escheat, in Common-law, signifieth lands that fall to a Lord within his Manor, by forfeiture, or the death of his Tenant without Heirs; it cometh from the French word Escheire, to fall" (PHILLIPS, _New World of Words_).

[69] On August 14, 1710, Richard Burbydge was among those who signed a report on the inspection of the vessel _Jamaica Merchant_, lying at anchor in the upper district of the James River, at the precept of Governor Spotswood. The inspectors were sworn by Capt. John Geddes, a justice of the peace for James County. (_Calendar of Virginia State Papers and other Manuscripts, 1652-1781_, edit. Wm. P. Palmer, M.D., Richmond, 1875, vol. 1, p. 141.) This is the only reference to Burbydge that has been found.

[70] L. H. JONES, _Captain Robert Jones of London and Virginia_ (Albany, 1891), p. 34.

[71] "Virginia Quit Rent Rolls, 1704," _Virginia Magazine of History and Biography_, vol. 31, no. 2 (April 1923), p. 157; vol. 31, no. 3 (July 1923), p. 222; vol. 32, no. 1 (January 1924), p. 72.

[72] _Colonial Records of North Carolina_, edit. William L. Saunders (Raleigh 1886), vol. 1, p. 590.

[73] ALONZO T. DILL, "Eighteenth Century New Bern," _North Carolina Historical Review_ (January 1945), vol. 22, no. 1, p. 18.

[74] "Bruton Church," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (January 1895), ser. 1, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 180.

[75] HENING, _Statutes at Large_, vol. 3 (Philadelphia, 1823), p. 431.

[76] Papers of the Jones Family ..., vol. 1.

[77] _Colonial Records of North Carolina_, vol. 1, p. 680.

[78] Ibid., pp. 837, 838.

[79] Ibid., p. 787.

[80] Ibid., p. 866.

[81] Ibid., p. 864.

[82] HUGH T. LEFLER AND ALBERT R. NEWSOME, _The History of a Southern State, North Carolina_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1954), pp. 56-60.

[83] _Colonial Records of North Carolina_, vol. 1, p. 864.

[84] "Notes from the Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1712-1726," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (April 1913), ser. 1, vol. 21, no. 4, p. 249.

[85] HENING, _Statutes at Large_, vol. 4 (Richmond, 1820), p. 371.

[86] Papers of the Jones Family ..., vol. 1.

[87] "Diary of John Blair. Copied from an Almanac for 1751, Preserved in Virginia Historical Society," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (January 1899), ser. 1, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 151, note 2.

[88] CONWAY ROBINSON, "Notes from Council and General Court Records," _Virginia Magazine of History and Biography_ (October 1906), vol. 14, no. 2, p. 188, note 3.

[89] "Bray Family," _William and Mary College Quarterly_ (April 1905), ser. 1, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 266.

[90] Ibid.

[91] HENING, _Statutes at Large_, vol. 4 (Richmond, 1820), p. 371.

[92] "Bray Family," pp. 266-267.

[93] HENING, _Statutes at Large_, vol. 8 (Richmond, 1821), pp. 460-464.

[94] Inventory of William Allen, in Surry County Wills, no. 6, 1830-1834, pp. 341-344.

[95] _Calendar of Virginia State Papers_, vol. 1, p. 39.

[96] The will of Roger Jones is preserved in the Public Records Office in London, but it is published in full in L. H. JONES, _Captain Robert Jones_, pp. 196-200.

[97] L. H. JONES, _Captain Robert Jones_, p. 34.

[98] DILL, "Eighteenth Century New Bern," p. 18.

[99] SAMUEL A. ASHE, _History of North Carolina_ (Greensboro: C. L. Van Noppen, 1908), vol. 1, pp. 200-204; and LEFLER and NEWSOME, _History of a Southern State_, pp. 63-64.

[100] _Colonial Records of North Carolina_, vol. 2, p. 472.

[101] Ibid., p. 475.

[102] Text of the will is given in L. H. JONES, _Captain Robert Jones_, pp. 200-205.

[103] HUGH JONES, _The Present State of Virginia_ [1724], edit. Richard L. Morton (Virginia Historical Society, 1956), p. 104.

[104] "The Cocke Family of Virginia," _Virginia Magazine of History and Biography_ (October 1897), vol. 5, no. 2, p. 192.

[105] Two concrete fenceposts have been set up on the north-south axis of the residence, the posts being driven immediately beyond the respective chimney foundations. Two additional posts have been erected on the east-west axis of the kitchen.

[106] As the work progressed, access to the site became increasingly difficult, necessitating the abandoning of transport farther and farther from the scene of operations. However, in the winter of 1960-1961, after all save the last trench had been dug, the Chesapeake Corporation crew drove a new road through the neck, a road which in fact cut right through the middle of the archeological area. By great good fortune the road passed between the two buildings without doing much more damage than had already been done by the earlier bulldozing.

[107] The builders had made use of oystershell mortar. Specimen bricks ranging in color from pale salmon to a purplish red have the following measurements: 8-7/8 in. by 4-1/4 in. by 2-1/4 in. and 8-7/8 in. by 4-1/8 in. by 2-1/2 in.

[108] The "T.N." number in parentheses represents the field number of the Tutter's Neck deposit.

[109] A house of similar character was photographed at Yorktown in 1862; see A. LAWRENCE KOCHER and HOWARD DEARSTYNE, _Shadows in Silver_ (New York: Scribner, 1954), p. 82, fig. 3, no. 17. The Bracken House in Williamsburg also is similar; see MARCUS WHIFFEN, _The Eighteenth-Century Houses of Williamsburg_ (Williamsburg, 1960), p. 57, and figs. 5, 6.

[110] Negroes belonging to the estate of Frederick Jones are listed in Papers of the Jones Family, vol. 1, November 29, 1723.

[111] Oystershell mortar was used. Sample bricks are pale salmon to overfired red and measure 8 in. by 3-7/8 in. by 2-1/2 in. and 8-3/4 in. by 3-3/4 in. by 2-1/2 in.

[112] IVOR NOËL HUME, "The Glass Wine Bottle in Colonial Virginia," _Journal of Glass Studies_ (Corning Museum, 1961), vol. 3, p. 99, fig. 3, type 6.

[113] See F. H. GARNER, _English Delftware_ (London: Faber and Faber, 1948), p. 15 and fig. 30a.

[114] See C. MALCOLM WATKINS, "North Devon Pottery and Its Export to America in the 17th Century" (paper 13 in _Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology: Papers 12-18_, U.S. National Museum Bulletin 225, by various authors; Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1963).

[115] ADRIAN OSWALD, "A Case of Transatlantic Deduction," _Antiques_ (July 1959), vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 59-61.

[116] For an example of comparable shape and date, see figure 6 of IVOR NOËL HUME, "German Stoneware Bellarmines--An Introduction," _Antiques_ (November 1958), vol. 74, no. 5, pp. 439-441.

[117] J. C. HARRINGTON, "Dating Stem Fragments of Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Clay Tobacco Pipes," _Quarterly Bulletin Archeological Society of Virginia_ (September 1954), vol. 9, no. 1, no pagination. AUDREY NOËL HUME, "Clay Tobacco Pipe Dating in the Light of Recent Excavations," ibid. (December 1963), vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 22-25. LEWIS H. BINFORD, "A New Method of Calculating Dates from Kaolin Pipe Stem Samples," _Southeastern Archeological Newsletter_ (June 1962), vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 19-21.

[118] See IVOR NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell, Gloucester County, Virginia, 1957-1959" (paper 18 in _Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology: Papers 12-18_, U.S. National Museum Bulletin 225, by various authors; Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1963), p. 222, fig. 35, no. 7, and p. 220.

[119] ADRIAN OSWALD, "The Archaeology and Economic History of English Clay Tobacco Pipes," _Journal of the British Archaeological Association_ (London, 1960), 3d series, vol. 23, p. 83.

[120] OSWALD, loc. cit. (footnote 59).

[121] NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 220, footnote 96.

[122] See: J. F. BLACKER, _The A B C of English Salt-Glaze Stoneware from Dwight to Doulton_ (London: S. Paul & Co., 1922), p. 34ff.; and IVOR NOËL HUME, "Bellarmines and Mr. Dwight," _Wine and Spirit Trade Record_ (December 17, 1956), pp. 1628-1632.

[123] C. MALCOLM WATKINS and IVOR NOËL HUME, "The 'Poor Potter' of Yorktown" (paper 54 in _Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology_, U.S. National Museum Bulletin 249, by various authors), Washington: Smithsonian Institution, in press.

[124] The earliest known importation is indicated in _Boston News-Letter_ of January 17, 1724 (G. F. Dow, _The Arts and Crafts in New England, 1704-1775_, Topsfield, Massachusetts: The Wayside Press, 1927, p. 82).

[125] The common term "wine bottle" is used here for the sake of convenience, though it should be realized that bottles were not specifically shaped to contain wine but were used for any and all liquids from beer to oil.

[126] ADRIAN OSWALD, "English Clay Tobacco Pipes," _Archeological News Letter_ (April 1951), vol. 3, no. 10, p. 158. The type is attributed to the period about 1700-1750, with the distribution mainly in the southwest of England.

[127] See NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 220, footnote 96.

[128] See J. C. HARRINGTON, "Tobacco Pipes from Jamestown," _Quarterly Bulletin Archeological Society of Virginia_ (June 1951), vol. 5, no. 4, no pagination.

[129] See J. F. HAYWARD, _English Cutlery_ (London: Victoria and Albert Museum handbook, 1956), pp. 15-16, pl. 13b.

[130] Ibid., p. 16, pl. 17c.

[131] For a similar example, see J. PAUL HUDSON, _New Discoveries at Jamestown_ (Washington: National Park Service, 1957), p. 34, second knife from bottom.

[132] The 18th-century shanks tend to be bulbous either below the shoulder or at the midsection.

[133] A complete spoon with this type terminal was found in excavations at Green Spring Plantation near Jamestown; see LOUIS R. CAYWOOD, _Excavations at Green Spring Plantation_ (Yorktown, Virginia: Colonial National Historical Park, 1955), pl. 11, "G.S. 153." For a Scottish silver spoon with this type terminal see _The Connoisseur_ (April 1910), vol. 26, no. 104, and _Catalogue of the Guildhall Museum_ (London, 1908), pl. 81, no. 16.

[134] A spoon handle with a shaft of similar type was found at Jamestown. It bears the mark of Joseph Copeland, a pewterer of Chuckatuck, Virginia, in 1675. See JOHN L. COTTER, _Archeological Excavations at Jamestown, Virginia_ (Washington: National Park Service, 1958), pl. 87, fig. at right.

[135] See _Catalogue of the Guildhall Museum_, pl. 71, fig. 3 (for bowl shape) and fig. 5 (for mark).

[136] As the 18th century progressed, loops tended to be more round-sectioned. By the end of the colonial period most loops display their greatest width on the same plane as that of the blade. See NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 198, fig. 21, no. 13.

[137] For a similar example see HUDSON, _New Discoveries at Jamestown_, p. 57.

[138] See H. C. MERCER, _Ancient Carpenters' Tools_ (Doylestown, Pa.: Bucks County Historical Society, 1951), p. 182.

[139] See NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 198, fig. 21, no. 14.

[140] Both the baglike shape of the lock and the hinged keyhole cover are indicative of a date in the late 17th century or early 18th century.

[141] HUDSON, _New Discoveries at Jamestown_, p. 26.

[142] A similarly headed object, but slotted at the other end to hold a linchpin, was found at Jamestown and considered to be an item of marine hardware. HUDSON, _New Discoveries at Jamestown_, p. 85.

[143] For similar example see NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 224, no. 8.

[144] For similar example see HUDSON, _New Discoveries at Jamestown_, p. 20, fig. at top left.

[145] Another example with similar frame, but with a broader tang and no ornamental ridge, was found in the same context.

[146] See NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 224, no. 10, and _Archaeology in Britain_ (London: Foyle, 1953), p. 107, fig. 23, no. 17.

[147] It is possible that this leg originally spread out into a foot in the style of no. 6. See HUDSON, _New Discoveries at Jamestown_, p. 30, fig. at left.

[148] For similar examples, see NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 200, fig. 22, nos. 6, 7.

[149] For a parallel of the stem form only, see GEORGE BERNARD HUGHES, _English, Scottish and Irish Table Glass from the Sixteenth Century to 1820_ (London: Batsford, 1956), fig. 35, no. 1. A rather similar baluster shape, about 1695, is shown in E. M. ELVILLE, "Starting a Collection of Glass," _Country Life_ (June 11, 1959), vol. 125, no. 3256, p. 1329, fig. 1. A tavern glass, attributed to the period 1685-1690, whose baluster has a large tear, but which otherwise is a good parallel, is shown in _The Antique Dealer and Collector's Guide_ (April 1954), p. 29, fig. at left.

[150] The metal was tested for lead with positive results.

[151] A slightly larger stem from a glass of similar form was found outside the kitchen in deposit T.N. 1; not illustrated.

[152] For a glass of comparable form, but of soda metal, see G. B. HUGHES, "Old English Ale Glasses," _Wine and Spirit Trade Record_ (April 15, 1954), p. 428 and fig. 1.

[153] For a similar stem shape attributed to the last decade of the 17th century see A. HARTSHORNE, _Old English Glasses_ (London, 1897), p. 245, pl. 34.

[154] The association of color and style of decoration coupled with the relationship of diameter to height as displayed here is generally indicative of early date. In the 18th century, jars of this diameter tended to be taller, less spread at the base, and with the blue decoration much darker.

[155] Waste products from London delftware kilns were used to build up the north foreshore of the River Thames between Queenhithe and Dowgate in the City of London. Among the many fragments recovered from this source were biscuit porringer handles of a type similar to the Tutter's Neck example. The manner in which the rim is folded over the handle seems to be a London characteristic, Bristol examples more often being luted straight to the rim. The Thames material was deposited in the late 17th century and probably came from a pottery on the Bankside on the south side of the river.

[156] A very small porringer rim sherd of this ware was found at Tutter's Neck in context T.N. 24; not illustrated.

[157] See GARNER, _English Delftware_, p. 15, fig. 30a.

[158] Dating based on the Carolian appearance of the figure.

[159] E. A. DOWMAN, _Blue Dash Chargers and other Early English Tin Enamel Circular Dishes_ (London: T. Werner Laurie Ltd., 1919).

[160] From a kiln site found during building operations for Hay's Wharf between Toolley Street and Pickelherring Street in 1958.

[161] See ERNST GROHNE, _Tongefässe in Bremen seit dem Mittelalter_ (Bremen: Arthur Geist, 1949), p. 120, Abb. 78, Abb. 80a.

[162] The smaller base fragment was found in stratum T.N. 17, a much later context than the rest. If this fragment does come from the same dish, it must be assumed that the fragments were scattered and that the sherd was moved in fill dug from an earlier deposit.

[163] A name coined to describe pottery made by the Pamunkey Indians and others in the 18th century that was copied from English forms and sold to the colonists, presumably for use by those who could not afford European wares. See IVOR NOËL HUME, "An Indian Wave of the Colonial Period," _Quarterly Bulletin of the Archeological Society of Virginia_ (September 1962), vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 2-14.

[164] The bowl was important in that the presence of its fragments deep in both T.N. 23 and T.N. 24 indicated that both Pits D and E were filled at approximately the same time.

[165] Colonial Williamsburg archeological collection, 10C-58-10B.

[166] Brown stonewares similar to those commonly attributed to Fulham, but more correctly called London, were manufactured at Yorktown by William Rogers in the second quarter of the 18th century. See footnote 67.

[167] A comparable vessel, ornamented with medallion containing Tudor rose and initials of Charles II, is illustrated in BLACKER, _The A B C of English Salt-Glaze Stoneware_, p. 35.

[168] A similar example from a context of 1763-1772 is illustrated by NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," fig. 29, no. 1.

[169] ADRIAN OSWALD, "A London Stoneware Pottery, Recent Excavations at Bankside," _The Connoisseur_ (January 1951), vol. 126, no. 519, pp. 183-185.

[170] Op. cit. (footnote 67).

[171] A close parallel that was found at Lewes, Delaware, is illustrated in WATKINS, "North Devon Pottery," p. 45, fig. 25.

[172] See SHEELAH RUGGLES-BRISE, _Sealed Bottles_ (London: Country Life, 1949), pl. 4, fig. at lower left, and W. A. THORPE, "The Evolution of the Decanter," _The Connoisseur_ (April 1929), vol. 83, no. 332, p. 197, fig. 2.

[173] Another example is illustrated by NOËL HUME, "The Glass Wine Bottle," op. cit. (footnote 56), fig. 3, type 3.

[174] Ibid., fig. 3, type 6, illustrates a similar example.

[175] Ibid., fig. 3, type 5, shows another example.

[176] All other Jones seals from T.N. 30 and T.N. 31 were stamped from combinations of single-letter matrices. See fig. 6.

[177] A similar though slightly smaller neck came from T.N. 16, and a square base, probably from an ordinary case bottle, was among the surface finds. Another example is illustrated in NOËL HUME, "Excavations at Rosewell," p. 181, fig. 11, no. 13.

[178] NOËL HUME, _Archaeology in Britain_, p. 108.

[179] Colorful beads of this character were frequently used as Indian trade goods and are found in Indian graves in Virginia and elsewhere. A long-established legend that beads were manufactured at the Jamestown glasshouse is without archeological evidence. Although many beads have been found on the shores of the James River near Jamestown, there is reason to suppose that all those of European form were imported.

[180] See Hughes, _English, Scottish and Irish Table Glass_, p. 195 and fig. 134.

[181] C. G. HOLLAND, "An Analysis of Projectile Points and Large Blades," appendix to CLIFFORD EVANS, _A Ceramic Study of Virginia Archeology_ (Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 160, Washington, 1955), p. 167.

[182] Ibid., p. 171.

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM

THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY:

PAPER 54

THE "POOR POTTER" OF YORKTOWN

_C. Malcolm Watkins_ and _Ivor Noël Hume_

PART I: DOCUMENTARY RECORD--_C. Malcolm Watkins_ 75

THE CROWN AND COLONIAL MANUFACTURE 76

THE "POOR POTTER" AND HIS WARES 79

APPENDIXES 86