I saw an example of an agatized glaze on a thinly potted redware sherd on
the web site maintained by Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum, Diagnostic
Artifacts in Maryland, under Astbury-type wares.  Though the text explains
that calling them Astbury-type wares is misleading and should be avoided!

http://www.jefpat.org/diagnostic/Historic_Ceramic_Web_Page/Historic%20Ware%20Descriptions/Astbury.htm

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:53 AM, James Brothers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Darn my fingers, agatized (banded like agate). Sort of a tiger stripe.
> Black-glazed redware works, for some reason I overlooked that one.
>
> On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:50 PM, Patrick Tucker wrote:
>
>  Not sure what you mean by "agitated," but it sounds somewhat like
>> black-glazed redware. This is the archaeological category for the type,
>> not
>> the decorative type listed in pottery manufacturers' records. I have not
>> seen this category in temporal contexts later than the 1830s.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pat Tucker
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James
>> Brothers
>> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 3:10 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Pottery Type
>>
>> I have a pottery fragment from Virginia (late 1700s to end of 19C
>> context). Earthenware, dark red paste. Glaze on one side is lustrous,
>> other side is black and dark brown agitated. I'm pulling a blank, any
>> suggestions?
>> Thanks
>> Jim Brothers
>>
>