Sorry to chime in late in the stream, and I deleted most earlier 
entries, so cannot confirm whether anyone offered this title:
French Faience, by Arthur Lane, Revised edition 1970 of 1946 imprint, 
Praeger Publishers, LC number 75-133087

Rob Mann wrote:
> First, I fail to see how the term tin-enameled can be construed as
> un-scientific, whatever that is. Secondly, it is not as if this term has
> just been "added" to the field.  Over a century ago Edwin A. Barber
> (1907) wrote a book entitled "Tin Enameled Pottery: Majolica, Delft, and
> other Stanniferous Faience," Pennsylvania Museum and School of
> Industrial Art, Philadelphia.  Now, it may well be that Barber was just
> as technically incorrect as others who use the term, but to suggest that
> those who have used the term are "bedeviled by a lack of technical
> understanding" and have simply applied the term because they are
> confused by its similarity to "modern enamel paints" seems to be taking
> it too far.  Barber, after all, wrote several volumes on ceramics and
> was Honorary Curator of the Department of American Pottery and Porcelain
> at the Pennsylvania Museum and School of Industrial Art.  I am all for
> terminological consistency (I always cringe when I see the term kaolin
> pipes) and since, as George noted, the goal of the French Colonial
> Pottery Conference was to foster further discussions of classifying
> French colonial pottery, perhaps this thread can add to these
> discussions and point the way toward better technical understanding and
> terminological consistency.
> 
>  
> 
> Rob
> 
>  
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> Rob Mann, Ph.D.
> 
> Southeast Regional Archaeologist
> 
> Museum of Natural Science
> 
> 119 Foster Hall
> 
> Louisiana State University
> 
> Baton Rouge, LA 70803
> 
> 225.578.6739
> 
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of paul
> courtney
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:25 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Enamels
> 
>  
> 
> Tin-lead glaze would be more accurate but the use of enamel is just 
> 
> adding another confusing and un-scientific term to a field already 
> 
> bedevilled by lack of technical understanding - on analogy to modern 
> 
> enamel paints which look nothing like tin-lead glazes anyway. Enamelling
> 
> 
> is best kept to enamelled metalwares by archaeologists. As Mary pointed 
> 
> out the tin is merely an opacifier in a lead glaze but many glazes are 
> 
> opaque. Must try and get the conference book.
> 
>  
> 
> paul courtney
> 
> Leicester
> 
> UK
> 

-- 
Patrick E. Martin, Ph.D.
Professor of Archaeology
Department of Social Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI  49931
phone 906-487-2070,email [log in to unmask]
www.industrialarchaeology.net