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:
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 22 May 2008 22:06:18 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
Patricia,
 
The best British ceramics were retained for local markets and the cheap  mass 
produced were used for trade. Out along the western Pacific Coast, who  would 
know good from cheap ceramics? But even the Mexican factories practiced  this 
distinction and shipped the "amarillo" or common tin-glaze wares to distant  
colonies. Way out here in 19th century Mexican California, most of the early  
British ceramics were either un-marked or factory seconds. 
 
Ron May
Legacy 106, Inc.
 
 
In a message dated 5/22/2008 12:12:19 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[log in to unmask] writes:

Hi,
I  need some help with some English XIXth century wares coming from  
archaeologycal excavations in Buenos Aires, Argentine. I have noticed that  most of 
the objets do not have marks; Creamware, Pearlware, Whiteware, etc..  Anybody 
knows why?. I suppose that little factorys or second class production  arrived 
at this far away city. If so, I would need bibliografy to justfy.  Surely, 
there had been a lot of reasons why this happened.
Thank you very  much for any help!

Patricia Frazzi (Buenos Aires,  Argentina)
[log in to unmask]




**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with 
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2