Susan,



Your impressed mark probably is so that the presser who made the vessel
could be credited with it after the vessel came out of the kiln.  Up until
1872 the pottery pressers, throwers, painters, printers etc were only paid
for what they produced if the vessels made it through the final firing in
the glaze kiln.  This was a system know as “Goods from Oven.”  In 1872, the
Staffordshire pottery unions were able to get rid of that system so that
they were paid “Goods from hand.”  This system is described in Robert
Copeland’s book *Spode & Copeland Marks and other relevant intelligence*,
in the section titled “Makers’ Marks”, pages 88-91.  Robert has a couple of
pages of presser’s, painter’s and printer’s marks found on Spode and
Copeland wares.



When a presser produced a plate, he would not get paid for it unless it
came out perfect in the final firing process.  Thus the failure of the
plate could be from the person who painted or printed it, or from a failure
in the firing process.  Any failure of the plate in the production process
meant that all of those who worked on it did not get paid for that
particular vessel.  If there was only one presser making the shell edged
plates, then there would not be a need for his tally mark, however if more
that one presser was producing the same plate, the individual tally marks
would be needed to know who received credit and the pay for producing those
plates that came out in good condition.  Sometimes the identifying mark was
a number, and in other cases an impressed die mark.  Copeland shows an
impressed mark with six small triangles in a circle on page 89.  The
workers in the potteries were up for rehiring at an annual hiring fair, and
perhaps some workers owned their marking tools, so the same impressed mark
might be found on the products of different potters.  Robert Copland’s book
has the best description of these marks.



Peace,

George L. Miller






On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Susan Walter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> April 17, 2013
>
> Hello All,
>
> In my dear old Chaffers MARKS & MONOGRAMS on European and Oriental Pottery
> and Porcelain edited by Frederick Litchfield, 14th revised edition, page
> 699, is pictured an impressed mark, consisting of 9 tiny triangles arranged
> in a circle.
>
> Confusingly, it is described as "especially upon wares made by E. Mayer"
> but identified in the caption as by "Joseph Mayer & Co." and further
> described as "probably used as an ornament by other makers."
>
> Does anyone have further insights on this little mark?  I'm working on
> stuff from the 1820s.
>
> Many thanks,
> S. Walter
>