I'm delighted that something useful has arisen from this - if only the
opportunity to reaffirm that 'pearlware' dating has indeed been pushed back
into the mid 1770s as George Miller has stated.

However, Carl, I think that the John Bartlam 'china glaze' sherds may prove to
be a red herring and certainly need to be reassessed.

You are quite right Carl - so-called experts realyy should get their act
together and provide the revised basic inofrmation that's need. Perhaps if we
spent less time yacking on email, but then...

Of course the internet has tremendous potential in this regard, as Ellen says,
and I hope that we at Stoke shall soon be joining others in this field. How
about neat web sites? I'm new to this technology, but have already found, for
example, the Port Royal (UTexas) site of interest. We can go much further at
low cost and increasingly the profession has access to this medium.

On the other hand, I couldn't agree more with Ned Heite about the need to
include detailed ceramic [& other artefact] information in archaeological
journals. This doesn't seem to be very fashionable in the States, although over
here we get criticised for an over-emphasis in journals on typologies and finds
lists. Much as I'd like to visit collections world-wide, it is something of a
necessity if I am to learn precisely what is going on over the water, and in my
position I do need this information.

I am sure that there will be more of this, but for now I must do something to
earn my crust.

David Barker