I said "2% or less".  I hope these postings are not coming through
garbled again.  By way of further explanation, the collections I'm
referring to were small, sherd collections from northern sites, subject
to frost damage, etc.  Collections of this sort can, of course, suffer
increase in a very rare type through in-ground fragmentation of one
"original" sherd.  My point was to say that I've seen this dyed ware,
but I agree with it's rarity--if Mark has seen more of it, from better
and larger collections, I would not disagree with an 0.01% presence.

D. Babson.

-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
[log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 12:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Blue-bodied earthenware


Guys,

This is NOT classic unglazed, matte-finished Jasperware.  This is, if
you must, Jasperware with a clear, interior/exterior glaze, but in this
case the monochrome paste is a sky blue color, a "brighter" blue than
classic Wedgwood blue ....  Although it may be technologically related
to classic Jasperware, this is something different, much more akin to
the clear-glazed "Canewares" of the mid-nineteenth century.

Alasdair, the problem that you are having describing this ware, and the
apparent problem of the listening audience in understanding what you are
describing, is clearly a function of its rarity on American sites.
Babson's description of a 5% presence is way over the top ...  I would
put it more likely at .01% or less, probably closer to .001%;  this is
very rare.  I have only seen one or two sherds amongst several hundred
site assemblages.

Mark C. Branstner

Great Lakes Research, Inc.
210 E. Sherwood Road
Williamston, MI 48895

1.517.347.4793 / [log in to unmask]