HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"George L. Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 9 Mar 2001 17:00:59 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Roberta,

     Transfer printed wares took a fair amount of time to decline in price.
The earliest price data I have is from 1795.  Printed cups and saucers at
that time were 4.09 times the cost of plain creamware.  This price fell to
three times the cost of creamware after the War of 1812, and remained close
to that level until the 1840s when the continued to fall.  By 1855, printed
plates were only 1.5 times more expensive than plain creamware.  This data
can be found in "A Revised Set of CC Index Values for Classification and
Economic Scaling of English Ceramics from 1787 to 1880."  Historical
Archaeology  Volume 25, no.1,  pages 1-25.

     In your posting you state that the amount of printed wares is small
compared to creamware and pearlware.  Given that transfer printing was on
pearlware, you have not chosen your categories very well.  Printed wares
should be compared to undecorated creamware, edged, painted, dipt, and
edged categories.   When comparing the ratios of wares, you will get a more
meaningful result if you first separate the tea wares from the tablewares.
If you do that, then you will probably see that printed wares are more
common in tea than tableware.  If you control for time, my guess is that
you would see an increase in the use of printed wares which probably is to
some extent the results of falling prices.

George L. Miller

ATOM RSS1 RSS2