“The produce of the potter’s art is the most interesting, as everyday it is subject to our observation.”

Thomas Webster, The Encyclopedia of Domestic Economy, 1845

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=96

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=96

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=96

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=96

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=96

What's In a Jug? Art, Technology, Culture Copyright © by Ann Smart Martin and Ellen Faletti. All Rights Reserved.

This book was produced using Pressbooks.com.

1

Dedication

Prof. Frank Horlbeck had the vision to assemble a monumental and nationally significant collection of nineteenth-century relief molded jugs. His passion for the beauty and complexity of these humble objects made this exhibition possible.

2

Acknowledgements

The exhibition is the result of the work of the hands and minds of many. Students in the fall of 2017 museum class learned from the ground up to choose objects and write labels to create an exhibition. The class participants were: Adriana Nicole Barrios, Samuel Butcher, Alexandria Dunham, Ellen Faletti, Kerista Fiske, Bailey Green, Laura Margaret Grotian, Gloriann F. Langva, Jennifer Lien, Katie Liu, and Sarah Stankey.

In the spring of 2018, Faletti, Green, Grotjan, Langva, Lien, with the addition of Kendra Greendeer, wrote the catalog and arranged many of the educational events.

Glory Langva brought the artistry and basic technologies of molding in clay from an almost two centuries old abstraction to a reality by molding jugs and sharing that process in a video that ran in the exhibition. This work literally brought the jugs to life. We also offer thanks to the Gladstone Pottery Museum, Stoke-on-Trent, England for permission to use parts of their marvelous documentary of the people and processes of traditional factory pottery making in “The Last Bottle Oven Firing.”

The staff at the Chazen Museum of Art shared their expertise by teaching and doing. These included Ann Sinfield, Brett Stageman, Kate Wanberg, Candie Waterloo, and Jerl Richmond. Amy Gilman, as the new director of the museum, allowed us to push the edges a bit with programming and procedures.

Finally, this catalog would never have reached its completion, let alone with such sophistication, if not for the creativity, skill, and patience of Ellen Falleti.

3

Introduction

Images from the Exhibit

We see water bottles everywhere today. But before the invention of plastic, ceramic jugs were the common vessels used to carry liquids. The stoneware jugs in this exhibition were made with molded deep relief ornament that depicted nature and told stories. Common on many tables in Victorian England, these jugs were made by factory labor using new technologies and represented high design in the applied arts of the mid-nineteenth century.

How were they used? Just like today, they carried liquids and contained clues about art, technology and culture. Available in multiple sizes and easily broken, each household may have owned more than one jug to carry out domestic tasks. Families also probably used them to carry beer home from public houses (pubs). Some jugs were so ornate and three-dimensional that they may never have contained liquids at all, but rested on a mantelpiece or table-top to be admired.

This exhibition is broken into four sections. The first part explores the techniques of making, especially the abundant use of molds to ornament an everyday item. A second section examines Victorian ideas about artful design and its moral benefits, especially for the working class. A third grouping delves into the meanings of molded patterns. Finally, the closing area turns to people, pointing to the harsh conditions for factory workers as well as the joy of the collector of these vessels.

4

The Jugs

Minton
Foxes and Hounds
c. 1831
Grey stoneware
1086.H64

(1) Minton
Foxes and Hounds
c. 1831
Grey stoneware
509.H64

Josiah Wedgwood
Diceware
Late 18th-mid 19th century
Tricolor jasper dip stoneware
1512

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, cobalt enamel, gilt
1344

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome enamel
1328

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome-Tin enamel
2074

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome-Tin-Cobalt enamel, pewter lid
1739

William Ridgway & Co.
Vines in Framework
1846
Buff stoneware
1294

(2) Samuel Alcock & Co.
Distin Family: The Saxhorn Performers
1845
Lavender and white parian
1696

Thomas Cooper of Hanley
Commemorative of Betrothal of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales (the future Edward VII), to Princess Alexandra of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, married at Windsor on 10 March 1863
1863
White stoneware, blue enamel
1774

(13) T.J. & J. Mayer
Convolvulus
19 December 1850
White stoneware, brown and blue enamel
2056

(4) George Baguley
Jug of All Nations
1855
White stoneware
1285

(3) William Ridgway & Co.
Alhambra
1840
White stoneware, blue and orange enamel
1179

William Brownfield & Sons
Hudson No. 12
1878
White stoneware, blue enamel, gilt
1733

Burgess & Leigh
Giraffe
23 March 1864
White stoneware, brown enamel
475.HII167

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Arabian Nights
1845
White parian
182.HII.45

Pinder, Bourne & Co.
Japanese Sprays
7 November 1877
White stoneware, metal lid
814.H196

Thomas Furnival & Co.
Falstaff
c. 1845
Drab stoneware, metal lid
1390

(11) Ridgway & Abington
Slavery
White stoneware, metal lid
1 January 1853
91.H112

Charles Meigh
Bacchanalian Dance
30 September 1844
White stoneware, metal lid
1060.H.48

(6) Minton
Silenus
c. 1831
Green stoneware
116.H38

Copeland & Garrett
The Vintage
c. 1844
White parian
1593

Charles Meigh & Son
Amphitrite
June 1856
White stoneware, blue enamel, silver plate lid
658.H135

(7) Minton & Co.
Putti
1868
White parian, blue enameling
230.H1184

(12) T. & R. Boote
Samuel and Eli
1848
Buff stoneware
1866

(8) Machin & Potts
Robert Burns
c. 1834
Drab stoneware
891.H22

(9)William Ridgway & Co.
Tam O’Shanter
1 October 1835
Blue stoneware
54.H26

William Ridgway & Co.
Tam O’Shanter
1 October 1835
Buff stoneware, Britannia metal lid
122.H26

Minton
Medieval Revelry
July 23, 1852
White ceramic
1322

Unknown
‘The Snuff Taker’ Toby Jug
c. 1820
Buff stoneware, Britannia metal lid
539.HII8

W.T. Copeland
‘The Jolly Toper’ Uncle Toby and a Smoker
c. 1845
Drab stoneware, Britannia metal lid
1258

Edward Walley
Toby Philpot
1830-1839
Blue stoneware
699

(10) JWP & Co. (after William Ridgway & Co.)
Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut
1851
White stoneware
819.H105

Unknown
Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut
c. 1860
White stoneware, blue enamel
949

Staffordshire Potteries
Monkey Jug: ‘Smoking Party’ and ‘Card Party’
c. 1840
Buff stoneware
Unnumbered

William Ridgway & Co.
Chrysanthemum,
c. 1860
Green Stoneware
297H146

Minton
Blue Floral Pattern: Pattern No. 6750/7
1840-1849
White stoneware, blue enamel
1375

F&R Pratt & Co.
Bird in Bamboo
c. 1877
White stoneware, brown enamel, metal lid
389.HII213

Minton
Hops
1848
White stoneware, blue enamel
1209

Minton
Society of Arts Prize Jug: ‘Vintage’
1846
White stoneware, blue enamel
1435

(14) W.T. Copeland
Lily of the Valley
c. 1849
White parian
Unnumbered

Old Hall Earthenware Co. Ltd.
Wedgwood
c. 1870
White stoneware, blue enamel
1574

(5) Samuel Alcock & Co.
Portland Vase
c. 1845
White parian, lavender dip
1448

Charles Meigh
York Minster Apostle Jug
1842
White stoneware
86.H45

Charles Meigh
Gothic Windows
1842
Drab stoneware
1743

The British ceramic industry controlled the commercial production of European decorative and utilitarian ceramics by the middle of the eighteenth century. Relief-molded jugs, popular a century later, are part of that long tradition of innovation in ware type, ornament and production. Borrowing from sculptural techniques, potters used plaster molds which enabled cheaper and more complex decorative patterns. Newer methods and materials coupled with changing class structures and soaring consumer demand created extremely desirable useful wares.

Minton
Foxes and Hounds
c. 1831
Grey stoneware
509.H64

Minton
Foxes and Hounds
c. 1831
Grey stoneware
509.H64

Josiah Wedgwood
Diceware
Late 18th-mid 19th century
Tricolor jasper dip stoneware
1512

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, cobalt enamel, gilt
1344

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome enamel
1328

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome-Tin enamel
2074

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome-Tin-Cobalt enamel, pewter lid
1739

Back to the Jugs

The Magic of Molds

Traditionally, the handle would be molded separately and attached later. The 3-part mold is used to make the ceramic jugs. The mother mold is used to make plaster positives to produce many 3-part push molds. A mother mold in the 18th century would have been made out of all plaster and some of them in many parts. The first step in the molding process was to design and create an original 3-D model from clay or plaster. From this model, a block mold maker, often doubling as the designer of the original model, made a negative called the master block mold or mother mold. The mold was then pressed with clay to make copies. Since the master molds were the most precise reproductions of the original model, they were quite valuable.

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=100

Gloriann Langva, MFA-Ceramics Graduate student-demonstrating two contemporary mold replicas, 2-silicon mother molds and a single 3-part slip casting/push mold.

Molding created by Gloriann Langva on display.

A UW-Madison Kaltura MediaSpace element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here: https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=100

Gloriann Langva, MFA-Ceramics Graduate student, demonstrating at the exhibit’s opening at the Chazen Museum of Art on March 1, 2018.

Back to Making and Molding
Back to the Jugs

Foxes and Hounds

Over time, molds would degrade and lose sharpness. In the two Foxes and Hounds by Minton, you can see the jugs were crafted from different molds. One example is smaller with more detail and sharper edges.  We also selected two jugs to make our own models to demonstrate low-relief molding.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=102

Minton
Foxes and Hounds
c. 1831
Grey stoneware
1086.H64

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=102

Minton
Foxes and Hounds
c. 1831
Grey stoneware
509.H64

Back to Making and Molding
Back to the Jugs

International Jug

William Brownfield & Sons. designed this jug in 1862 for the International London exhibition and named the pattern after it. Despite the mass production of wares from William Brownfield & Sons, not much is known about the Staffordshire company. The female figures depicted in the four oval panels represent themes of the exhibition: Art, Music, Science, and Commerce. This jug pattern was still in production in the 1876 William Brownfield & Sons catalog. The design must have been popular. The collector of this jug owns 3 or 4 color variations of this pattern.

William Brownfield & Sons
International Jug
c. 1862
White stoneware, mulberry enamel
838.H161

Back to Making and Molding
Back to the Jugs

Seaweed Jug

The desire to include this particular jug was the James Dudson seaweed or carol design. The image takes on more of an abstract and minimal aesthetics of the 19th century. The collector had many duplicates of this pattern in all size and color variations.  The surface appears to have a brown enamel over a salt glaze exterior, which was a common firing technique in Britain.

Beech & Hancock of Tunstall
Seaweed Jug
c. 1861
White stoneware, brown enamel
73.HW176

Back to Making and Molding
Back to the Jugs

Diceware

The Diceware jug by Wedgwood demonstrates mastery in ceramic technique. The jug was first washed in cobalt blue, then turned and carved to create the checkered pattern then an iron slip brushed crosses. Leaving the spring and handle attachment for last.

How did that work?

Sprig molds were separate and versatile one part open-face molds that produced low relief images added to the surface of the vessels while still wet. Most of the jugs in this collection are examples of relief sprigging technique.

A jigger-jolly was a new tool and labor-saving process. After steam-powered technology was perfected in the 1840’s, the jigger-jolly was adopted to run by steam which further lowered costs. Engine turning, a method of carving a geometric design into the surface of clay worked similarly. Potters mourned in work songs that the new machine took away their jobs.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=115

Josiah Wedgwood
Diceware
Late 18th-mid 19th century
Tricolor jasper dip stoneware
1512

Back to Making and Molding
Back to the Jugs

Shamrock

William Brownfield & Sons, along with many potters, produced jugs in multiple combinations and allowed people to pick their favorite color.

Color

Innovations in ceramic chemistry and processes improved colors and enameling. The early 19th century jugs were dull colors like buff, drab, or pastel greens and blues. A decade or so later decorators enameled background color by hand or dipped in colored glazes. Often the same molded jug would be colored in a variety of ways. This was largely attributed to James Mason and Mary Skerratt Mason, his wife and well-known color chemist worked to create Mason Stains in 1842, which are still be used today and is still owned and operated by the Mason family linage. Quite amazing! Inorganic oxides and carbonates were encapsulated in zirconium crystals and then ground and milled into a fine powder to be mixed into clays, slips, enamels, and glazes. This process helps keep the inorganic chemicals from leeching out of the glaze both during the firing and after during use, making them safer. The inorganic material would be mixtures of cobalt, manganese, chrome-tin pinks, iron, nickel and supporting materials such as calcium oxide and boron.

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, cobalt enamel, gilt
1344

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome enamel
1328

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome-Tin enamel
2074

William Brownfield & Sons
Shamrock
c. 1859
White stoneware, Chrome-Tin-Cobalt enamel, pewter lid
1739

Back to Making and Molding
Back to the Jugs

Can ceramics be moral? People living in Victorian England thought so. Middle class women should create homes filled with furnishings and objects to educate children to the highest moral standards. Outside the home, art and good design served to elevate the working classes by improving their taste and making them better citizens. Finally, Victorian jugs like these reinforced gender roles and defined morality through their elaborate, elegant designs.

William Ridgway & Co.
Vines in Framework
1846
Buff stoneware
1294

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Distin Family: The Saxhorn Performers
1845
Lavender and white parian
1696

Thomas Cooper of Hanley
Commemorative of Betrothal of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales (the future Edward VII), to Princess Alexandra of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, married at Windsor on 10 March 1863
1863
White stoneware, blue enamel
1774

T.J. & J. Mayer
Convolvulus
19 December 1850
White stoneware, brown and blue enamel
2056

George Baguley
Jug of All Nations
1855
White stoneware
1285

Back to the Jugs

Vines in Framework: Design, Taste, and Class

The Art-Union for December 1846 published a drawing of William Ridgway’s design for Vines in Framework.  It effusively praised the “form, proportion and decoration.” The design was not perfect because the ornament of the handle did not fit the naturalism of the body. Nonetheless, “the vine is a successful study of nature, and therefore excellent.”

William Ridgway & Co.
Vines in Framework
1846
Buff stoneware
1294

Back to Design
Back to the Jugs

Distin Family: The Saxhorn Performers

“The making of ugly pottery was one of the most remarkable inventions of our [modern] society.” – William Morris, 1882

Victorians greatly admired the color lavender. Samuel Alcock and Company successfully specialized in vessels with a lavender background, adorned with white ornament like the Distin Family jug seen here.  Popular color choices sometimes surprise our modern taste. Following the high Victorian era, critics described these highly detailed vessels as ugly and outdated. Reaction against such decorative excess began the slow march to modern aesthetics of unadorned surfaces. What objects can you think of that signify good taste today?

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=198

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Distin Family: The Saxhorn Performers
1845
Lavender and white parian
1696

Back to Design
Back to the Jugs

Commemorative of Betrothal of Prince Albert Edward to Princess Alexandra

Manufactured objects such as these jugs were part of a British national conversation about design, taste, and class. Depicting well-known people in ceramics, like figures of royalty, contributed to that conversation as markers of identity and personal taste.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=201

Thomas Cooper of Hanley
Commemorative of Betrothal of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales (the future Edward VII), to Princess Alexandra of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, married at Windsor on 10 March 1863
1863
White stoneware, blue enamel
1774

Back to Design
Back to the Jugs

The Crystal Palace

In 1851 London hosted the Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations. Housed in a structure resplendent with new glass and steel building materials, the exhibition quickly became known as the Crystal Palace. Twenty-five countries competed by offering their best products combining new technologies and artistic designs. Over five million people of the working and middle classes wandered the Great Exhibition and saw the best examples of innovation and design from ancient and modern worlds. Surely such wondrous new materials and technologies creating everyday beauty would bring moral uplift.

The Crystal Palace. Image Source: Wikimedia.Commons; originally from Tallis’ History and Criticism of the Crystal Palace. 1852, www.uh.edu.

Back to Design
Back to the Jugs

Convolvulus

As one of Britain’s pre-eminent industries, ceramics like relief-molded jugs were well-represented at the Crystal Palace. The firm T.J. & J. Mayer’s jug Convolvulus was included in The Art Journal Illustrated Catalogue: The Industry of All Nations 1851.

T.J. & J. Mayer
Convolvulus
19 December 1850
White stoneware, brown and blue enamel
2056

Back to Design
Back to the Jugs

Jug of All Nations

Is this a jug or is this a wedding cake?  If you had to look twice, you are not alone.  This colossal object was not made for daily use, but for boasting. This three-tiered jug decorated with insignia of nineteen participating nations was displayed at the Paris Exhibition in 1855, celebrating the legacy of the Crystal Palace’s Great Exhibition of 1851.  While it might not function well as a liquid container, this Jug of All Nations speaks for the technology behind its creation and displays Britain’s’ worldly knowledge and superior innovation of ceramics.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=207

George Baguley
Jug of All Nations
1855
White stoneware
1285

Back to Design
Back to the Jugs

Art and iconography from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia increasingly appeared in Victorian British households as the British empire and international trade advanced.  Displaying pieces of art from far-away places implied householders were well traveled or educated. They knew about the exciting and far away lands that were being explored by Europeans. Unfamiliar animals, tropical flowers, and scenes of foreign countries decorate these jugs and represent a growing passion for adventure and the romance of the exotic.

William Ridgway & Co.
Alhambra
1840
White stoneware, blue and orange enamel
1179

William Brownfield & Sons
Hudson No. 12
1878
White stoneware, blue enamel, gilt
1733

Burgess & Leigh
Giraffe
23 March 1864
White stoneware, brown enamel
475.HII167

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Arabian Nights
1845
White parian
182.HII.45

Pinder, Bourne & Co.
Japanese Sprays
7 November 1877
White stoneware, metal lid
814.H196

Back to the Jugs

Alhambra

William Ridgway & Co.
Alhambra
1840
White stoneware, blue and orange enamel
1179

Back to Exoticism
Back to the Jugs

Hudson No. 12

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=324

William Brownfield & Sons
Hudson No. 12
1878
White stoneware, blue enamel, gilt
1733

Back to Exoticism
Back to the Jugs

Giraffe

Burgess & Leigh
Giraffe
23 March 1864
White stoneware, brown enamel
475.HII167

Back to Exoticism
Back to the Jugs

Arabian Nights

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=335

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=335

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Arabian Nights
1845
White parian
182.HII.45

Back to Exoticism
Back to the Jugs

Japanese Sprays

Japonisme

The beauty and mystique of far eastern lands created the phenomena of Japonisme in the west, represented by exotic motifs such as the cherry blossom.

Pinder, Bourne & Co.
Japanese Sprays
7 November 1877
White stoneware, metal lid
814.H196

Back to Exoticism
Back to the Jugs

Thomas Webster observed in 1844 that “the produce of the potter’s art is the most interesting, as everyday it is subject to our observation.” Potters were quick to capitalize on consumer interest and the molded ceramic patterns are a unique window on popular Victorian narratives, interests, and social issues, and expressed deep-rooted ideas about appropriate gendered behavior. The close view of objects handed about and closely viewed brought many larger ideas into the home.

Thomas Furnival & Co.
Falstaff
c. 1845
Drab stoneware, metal lid
1390

Ridgway & Abington
Slavery
White stoneware, metal lid
1 January 1853
91.H112

Charles Meigh
Bacchanalian Dance
30 September 1844
White stoneware, metal lid
1060.H.48

Minton
Silenus
c. 1831
Green stoneware
116.H38

Copeland & Garrett
The Vintage
c. 1844
White parian
1593

Charles Meigh & Son
Amphitrite
June 1856
White stoneware, blue enamel, silver plate lid
658.H135

Minton & Co.
Putti
1868
White parian, blue enameling
230.H1184

T. & R. Boote
Samuel and Eli
1848
Buff stoneware
1866

Machin & Potts
Robert Burns
c. 1834
Drab stoneware
891.H22

William Ridgway & Co.
Tam O’Shanter
1 October 1835
Blue stoneware
54.H26

William Ridgway & Co.
Tam O’Shanter
1 October 1835
Buff stoneware, Britannia metal lid
122.H26

Back to the Jugs

Falstaff

Sir John Falstaff is a popular character from Shakespeare’s Henry IV plays. He leads Prince Hal, the future King, astray in an act of sheer folly and cowardice. In Shakespeare’s plays, Falstaff is a comical character who spends a lot time drinking at the pub. In Falstaff, we see the knight with a jug of beer upon his knee, likely at the pub.

Telling Stories in Clay

Stories are captivating. They are educational, entertaining, and provoking. During the 19th and 20th centuries, stories were often told through material culture. Molded scenes on jugs told age-old mythological or Biblical tales or drew upon the most up-to-date best-sellers, long-popular poems, or current events to attract customers.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=463

Thomas Furnival & Co.
Falstaff
c. 1845
Drab stoneware, metal lid
1390

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Slavery

Uncle Tom’s Cabin

Harriet Beecher Stowe’s 1852 novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin quickly became an international bestseller, igniting sympathy for those victimized by the institution of slavery. The story represented on one side of jug depicts a devastated family forcibly separated at an auction. The reverse depicts the young enslaved girl Eliza escaping across the icy Ohio River to freedom.  The handle is an abstracted grotesque African head. As an object at a tavern or table, this jug would have sparked potentially controversial discussions of the politically charged and distressing story of an American tragedy.

Eliza’s Escape

Illustrated editions of Stowe’s controversial novel were popular, although the author disliked them for their tendency to fetishize the violence of slavery. These illustrated editions feature images nearly identical to those on the jug. These scenes in the novel impacted their viewers and might spark familiarity to to the book and stir conversation.

“Eliza crosses the Ohio on the floating ice. The huge green fragment of ice on which she alighted pitched and creaked as her weight came on it…”

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=131

1852 and c. 1950 Print Editions

Photos courtesy of the Special Collections Library at the University of Wisconsin, Madison from the Cairns Collection of American Women Writers

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=131

Ridgway & Abington
Slavery
White stoneware, metal lid
1 January 1853
91.H112

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Bacchanalian Dance

Classical Mythology

Interest in the design elements of ancient Greek and Rome was not new, but these jugs told stories. Many mythological tales involved the famed Roman god Dionysus who, with his goat-legged friends, drank wine and made merry. One example is Bacchanalian Dance, where Dionysus is depicted dancing with his satyrs and drinking from his own jug as symbol of excess.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=133

Charles Meigh
Bacchanalian Dance
30 September 1844
White stoneware, metal lid
1060.H.48

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Silenus

Following the themes of Bacchanalia, this Minton Silenus was another popular jug. In Greek Mythology, Silenus is an elderly companion of Bacchus.  On this jug, Silenus and a young Bacchus are shown drunk and being held by satyrs.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=239

Minton
Silenus
c. 1831
Green stoneware
116.H38

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

The Vintage

In 1844, the Art Union featured an article titled “The Vintage Jug” which discussed the excellence in craftsmanship and design by Copeland & Garrett. Here is an excerpt from that article:

It is impossible to speak too highly of the talent displayed
in the modeling of the figures: they are in strong relief, and
are so skilfully placed upon the sides of the jug, that each
retains its full importance; while no violent projections occur
to interfere with the general contour of the vessel.[1]

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=242

Copeland & Garrett
The Vintage
c. 1844
White parian
1593

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

1. "The Vintage Jug." The Art Union 74 (1844): 332. ↵

Amphitrite

The central figure draped in cloth is the Greek deity and goddess of the sea, Amphitrite. The blue enamel depicts the sea where Amphitrite reigns with her husband, Neptune. The goddess is surrounded by oceanic plants and mermaids.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=245

Charles Meigh & Son
Amphitrite
June 1856
White stoneware, blue enamel, silver plate lid
658.H135

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Putti

The term “Putti” descries a figure in a work of art that is a chubby, usually naked and winged, male child. Commonly referred as cupid or an angel, the figure can be secular or non-secular. In this jug, the child is surrounded bygrapes and vine leaves, a typical cuisine referenced in Greek mythology.

Minton & Co.
Putti
1868
White parian, blue enameling
230.H1184

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Samuel and Eli

Religion

Biblical verses were often read, told to others, and depicted on objects. In Samuel and Eli, the young boy proclaims to Eli his vision of the Lord. The imagery on the jug reminds the user of salvation through faith – an important prospect in Christianity. It was based on an 1826 print of an earlier painting by John Singleton Copley (1738-1815).

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=137

T. & R. Boote
Samuel and Eli
1848
Buff stoneware
1866

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Robert Burns

Potters in England illustrated scenes from Robert Burns’ popular poems, such as the Tale of Tam O’ Shanter, on jugs.

Alexander Naysmith, Robert Burns, 1787 Wikimedia Commons contributors, “File:PG 1063Burns Naysmithcrop.jpg,” Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository (accessed April 2, 2018).

Robert Burns is a world-renowned poet that lived in Scotland during the 18th century. Burns’ poems commented on farm life and regional experience, class distinctions, and religious practices in Scotland. As a poet he wrote in the Scots language, as well as in English, reaching a broad audience in England. Robert Burns and his poems were popular during the mid 1800’s, and he is regarded as the National Poet of Scotland.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=492

Machin & Potts
Robert Burns
c. 1834
Drab stoneware
891.H22

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Tam O'Shanter

The Tale of Tam O’Shanter

Tam O’Shanter by Robert Burns in 1790 is a Scottish poem telling of a man who too often drinks hard at the local tavern, drawing his wife’s disapproval. After one long evening, an inebriated Tam rides homeward on his horse. As he travels, he notices a group of witches dancing wildly in a nearby church. His loud remarks attract their attention and they soon race after Tam and his galloping horse. He barely escapes their grasp, but his horse is not as lucky. As we can see on the jugs,the horse’s tail gets snatched by the witches.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=141

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=141

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=141

William Ridgway & Co.
Tam O’Shanter
1 October 1835
Blue stoneware
54.H26

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=141

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=141

William Ridgway & Co.
Tam O’Shanter
1 October 1835
Buff stoneware, Britannia metal lid
122.H26

Back to What Clay can Say
Back to the Jugs

Drinking scenes were a common genre on these vessels. The English public house, or ‘pub’ of Victorian times, was a social center for congregating, eating, drinking, and lodging. Many of these jugs displayed pub behavior based on popular stories where the characters were drunk, out of control, and morally flawed. But they were funny. These jugs depicted a boisterous life filled with heavy drinking, and socializing in a pub may have reflected the lives of their owners.

Minton
Medieval Revelry
July 23, 1852
White ceramic
1322

Unknown
‘The Snuff Taker’ Toby Jug
c. 1820
Buff stoneware, Britannia metal lid
539.HII8

W.T. Copeland
‘The Jolly Toper’ Uncle Toby and a Smoker
c. 1845
Drab stoneware, Britannia metal lid
1258

Edward Walley
Toby Philpot
1830-1839
Blue stoneware
699

JWP & Co. (after William Ridgway & Co.)
Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut
1851
White stoneware
819.H105

Unknown
Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut
c. 1860
White stoneware, blue enamel
949

Staffordshire Potteries
Monkey Jug: ‘Smoking Party’ and ‘Card Party’
c. 1840
Buff stoneware
Unnumbered

Back to the Jugs

Medieval Revelry

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=843

Minton
Medieval Revelry
July 23, 1852
White ceramic
1322

Back to Drinking
Back to the Jugs

‘The Snuff Taker’ Toby Jug

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=837

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=837

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=837

Unknown
‘The Snuff Taker’ Toby Jug
c. 1820
Buff stoneware, Britannia metal lid
539.HII8

Back to Drinking
Back to the Jugs

‘The Jolly Toper’ Uncle Toby and a Smoker

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=848

W.T. Copeland
‘The Jolly Toper’ Uncle Toby and a Smoker
c. 1845
Drab stoneware, Britannia metal lid
1258

Back to Drinking
Back to the Jugs

Toby Philpot

The “Toby Jug”, otherwise known as “Tobias Phillpot” or “Toby Fillpot”, originated and popularized in England during the 19th century. Toby is generally depicted as an overweight, seated male that wears a three-cornered hat on his head, has a jug of beer on his knee, or a pipe in his hand. The character is boisterous and comical, which can be identified through the exaggerated facial features. Can you imagine the character depicted on the jug Toby Philpot enjoying the night at a pub?

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=465

Edward Walley
Toby Philpot
1830-1839
Blue stoneware
699

Back to Drinking
Back to the Jugs

Willie Brew'd a Peck o' Maut

Written by Robert Burns in 1789, Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut was sung after the joyous meeting of Robert Burns, Willie, and Allen. In  Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut we see the  men enjoying a drink in amusement.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=473

JWP & Co. (after William Ridgway & Co.)
Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut
1851
White stoneware
819.H105

Unknown
Willie Brew’d a Peck o’ Maut
c. 1860
White stoneware, blue enamel
949

Back to Drinking
Back to the Jugs

Monkey Jug: 'Smoking Party' and 'Card Party'

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=871

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=871

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=871

Staffordshire Potteries
Monkey Jug: ‘Smoking Party’ and ‘Card Party’
c. 1840
Buff stoneware
Unnumbered

Back to Drinking
Back to the Jugs

Nature as feminine is an ancient idea dating back to Gaia, who was likely the first “mother nature,” in Greek Mythology. The reasons for nature’s association with the feminine are numerous and most likely originate from the symbolic connection between women’s reproductive role and the changing seasons, balance, and rebirth within the natural world.

William Ridgway & Co.
Chrysanthemum,
c. 1860
Green Stoneware
297H146

Minton
Blue Floral Pattern: Pattern No. 6750/7
1840-1849
White stoneware, blue enamel
1375

F&R Pratt & Co.
Bird in Bamboo
c. 1877
White stoneware, brown enamel, metal lid
389.HII213

Minton
Hops
1848
White stoneware, blue enamel
1209

Minton
Society of Arts Prize Jug: ‘Vintage’
1846
White stoneware, blue enamel
1435

W.T. Copeland
Lily of the Valley
c. 1849
White parian
Unnumbered

Back to the Jugs

Chrysanthemum

Women and Nature

Notice how we also refer to the individual parts of these jugs with terms like body, lip, and foot. This anthropomorphizing of the jugs serves as another example of the connection between women, the containment of liquids necessary to life, and the beauty of the natural world.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=876

William Ridgway & Co.
Chrysanthemum,
c. 1860
Green Stoneware
297H146

Back to Mother Nature
Back to the Jugs

Blue Floral Pattern: Pattern No. 6750/7

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=881

Minton
Blue Floral Pattern: Pattern No. 6750/7
1840-1849
White stoneware, blue enamel
1375

Back to Mother Nature
Back to the Jugs

Bird in Bamboo

F&R Pratt & Co.
Bird in Bamboo
c. 1877
White stoneware, brown enamel, metal lid
389.HII213

Back to Mother Nature
Back to the Jugs

Hops

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=889

Minton
Hops
1848
White stoneware, blue enamel
1209

Back to Mother Nature
Back to the Jugs

Society of Arts Prize Jug: 'Vintage'

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=894

Minton
Society of Arts Prize Jug: ‘Vintage’
1846
White stoneware, blue enamel
1435

Back to Mother Nature
Back to the Jugs

Lily of the Valley

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=898

W.T. Copeland
Lily of the Valley
c. 1849
White parian
Unnumbered

Back to Mother Nature
Back to the Jugs

Staffordshire County was home to the lion’s share of potteries that produced jugs in Victorian England. The city of Stoke-on-Trent was the center of it all, commonly known throughout England as “The Potteries.” In the prime of Victorian jug making, the pottery industry boasted as many as 4,000 unique, hand-built bottle ovens, 47 of which still stand today.

The outer part of the oven served as a chimney, removing smoke and creating air flow. Workers placed the vessels in fireclay boxes called ‘saggars’ stacked high inside the oven. An oven was fired once every week for 2-3 days and used 15 tons of coal each time.

Laborers in the Victorian era suffered grueling hours in horrible and deadly conditions. Young potters worked between 12 and 14 hours each day, six days a week. In spite of the harsh conditions, communities formed and towns were made. Taverns and pubs made settlements not to far from the potteries. These places were more than just a bar, they were family restaurants, music venues, Inns and stables. The best and most skilled craftsmen moved up the chain and some even branched off to form their own pottery factory to design for.

The photo of the saggars was from a 1936 trade Brochure of Parrott & Co who occupied the Albert Street Works

Old Hall Earthenware Co. Ltd.
Wedgwood
c. 1870
White stoneware, blue enamel
1574

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Portland Vase
c. 1845
White parian, lavender dip
1448

Charles Meigh
York Minster Apostle Jug
1842
White stoneware
86.H45

Charles Meigh
Gothic Windows
1842
Drab stoneware
1743

Back to the Jugs

Wedgwood

A Pottery Superstar

Potter Josiah Wedgwood began his craft at the age of 9 and progressed through the stations of pottery-making to eventually establish his own factory, becoming world-renowned for his cream-colored earthenware, referred to as ‘Queen’s Ware’ due to its endorsement by Queen Charlotte. The Portland Vase was one of his early masterpieces and was copied by several Victorian factories.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=187

Old Hall Earthenware Co. Ltd.
Wedgwood
c. 1870
White stoneware, blue enamel
1574

Back to People Behind the Pots
Back to the Jugs

Portland Vase

The original Portland Vase, an ancient Greek artifact, was bought by the English Duke of Portland. The design became popularized in contemporary jugs, such as this one by Samuel Alcock & Co. Wedgwood created an contemporary replica of the piece, imitating the style of the jug and depicting the classical scene.

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=191

Samuel Alcock & Co.
Portland Vase
c. 1845
White parian, lavender dip
1448

Back to People Behind the Pots
Back to the Jugs

York Minster Apostle Jug

The Collector’s Story

Department of Art History Emeritus Professor Frank Horlbeck believes Victorian molded jugs are beautiful and fascinating. When he was a student, gathering visual materials for research, seeing Gothic jugs like the York Minster Apostle’s sparked his fervor for collecting. Jugs are utilitarian, and jugs in 19th-century Britain were mass-produced, but came in a variety of sizes and colors and a multitude of designs. Professor Horlbeck takes pleasure in collecting the whole array of jugs from this era and yearns to know the stories behind the people who designed, molded, fired, painted, and used them. What drinking vessels in your life tell your stories? Professor Horlbeck believes that every day, utilitarian things can be valuable.

Will the milk jug in your fridge one day be in an art museum?

Will your favorite mug appear in someone’s cabinet of curiosities? What beauty do you see in your everyday objects?

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=179

Charles Meigh
York Minster Apostle Jug
1842
White stoneware
86.H45

Back to People Behind the Pots
Back to the Jugs

Gothic Windows

Although not quite as popular as jugs depicting classical scenes, Gothic Windows was Charles Meigh’s “attempt to profit from the early nineteenth century popularity of the revived Gothic Style.”[1]

Charles Meigh
Gothic Windows
1842
Drab stoneware
1743

Back to People Behind the Pots
Back to the Jugs

1. Henrywood, R.K. Relief-Moulded Jugs: 1820-1900. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collectors' Club, 1984 ↵

Essay: Industrialization, Ornamentation, and Taste: Relief-Molded Jugs, 1830-1880

Ann Smart Martin

2018

“Art is invested with a sublime prerogative, when it can thus raise and elevate the common round of daily life” wrote the anonymous author of “The New Crockery Shop” in 1849. The tale’s narrator grandly continued “that in every cup, jug, dish, glass, basin, knife, fork, spoon, chair, table, clock, fender fabricated on principal, a power or germ may be set … {to} elevate the moral being of the population.”[i]

Today, the author of the above passage sounds both prescient (objects can prescribe human behavior) and old-fashioned (everyday things can promote morality). Thus, art was not only found in a museum or elite private home, but also in commodities that poured from new machines in new factories. Arts and industry in manufacturing consumer goods were thus inexorably intertwined. The burgeoning middle class had a vast array of choices to fill their homes. Critics disparaged the explosion of goods as bad design, whether overly ornamented or, replicating old design, or using inauthentic materials. They fretted that the burgeoning numbers of middle class consumers who were purchasing them were displaying bad taste. Britain, the greatest nation on earth, should do better to educate their citizens

This material culture analysis draws upon this larger debate of mid-nineteenth century Britain to examine stoneware jugs found on many household tables. Designed and ornamented with high relief molding, these jugs of multiple sizes were immensely popular in Britain from about 1830 to 1870. The vessels were the product of a near perfect alignment of materials, technologies and popular taste. Made for a market, their designs were praised and critiqued in significant Victorian publications such as the Journal of the Society of Arts (1852-1908) or the Art Journal (1839-1904, different names). At their best, these vessels, reached some of the pinnacles of decorative art. Studying the popular designs of these wares give insights into Victorian art and design, ornament drawn from popular culture (heroic myth, literature, history, and botanica), and improving technologies of molding.[ii]

Ornamentation of utilitarian objects was part of a groundswell of discussion of mid Victorian-era manufacturing, design, and ornament. These debates emerged from several directions, but all could come together in an object like a lamp. The first is that objects of arts in the home of the laboring poor would help contain tensions flaring in the rising power of a factory culture. Manufacturing power was the new engine of the economy, but its uncontained blast might lead to dissatisfaction of class position. The second is to improve the taste of manufacturers and makers by an educational system that recognized design is important and must be taught. There was quite objective “good” design and “bad” design that brooked no dissent. Third, the consumer could best develop good taste by seeing and relating to the great art design of the ancients. Finally, the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth century religiosity in which morality is linked to plain living must be modified. The middle class needed a way to accept a factory’s flood of consumer goods without challenging accepted codes of morality. By the second quarter of the nineteenth-century, the final link of the chain was forged when manufactured household goods themselves could be the progenitors of morality that could help raise the morals of a consumer.

USE

Ceramic jugs have held and dispensed liquids for thousands of years. Their essential form—a handle for hands to move the vessel from vertical toward horizontal, a spout to guide liquid, and often a bulbous shape that comfortably rests body or surface—was made in a wide variety of wares and sizes. This type of vessels had many uses and thus was made in multiple sizes and with varying decorations. During the nineteenth century in Britain, their materials ranged from inexpensive earthenware to luxury metals. Well-decorated and medium priced wares like relief-molded stoneware jugs fell in the middle price spectrum

What did the jugs contain? These vessels were used for serving, carrying, moving, and storing of liquids. Common nineteenth-century drinks included water, beer, cider, juice, milk, and a few specialized alcoholic libations. But particular evidence of the jug’s contents is thin. The smallest size was appropriate for table serving. Merchants sold some vessels as creamers or milk jugs.[iii] Other smaller sizes had internal strainers to block particles in liquids from exiting the spout. These could be popular alcoholic mixtures like punches or toddies, or medicinal formulations like paps, or foods in a soft gruel for babies or invalids. One critic used the pattern of a jug to link to its use: a bulrush design was presumably used for “tee-totallers because of the watery character of its ornament” and a design displaying hops was “most appropriate for libations of Bass and Allsop’s pale ales.”[iv]

The larger sizes had multiple more prosaic uses, from washing hands to carrying gallons. A principal utility was moving liquids from one place to another, whether within the household or to and from public places. In 1849, the Art Journal identified the manufacturers Ridgway & Abington as “famous for their manufacture of water and beer jugs.”[v] Carrying water was an obvious use, as close access to drinkable clean water–“desirable for the health and cleanliness” of the population– was variable. [vi] One contemporary report estimated that a minimum of twelve gallons was needed for a “cleanly man of a fairly clean household.” A large ceramic bowl and pitcher was most likely used for personal hygiene; five gallons was needed just for a daily sponge bath. The rest of the water was needed for washing up, drinking, and cooking. The report’s authors estimated that poor households were estimated to use between five and 7 ½ gallons per person per day.[vii] The vessels used may have been of differing materials but carrying liquids for family use was imperative.

Transporting beer from public house to home was a particular public use of these vessels. Many jugs had attached Britannia metal lids that could be raised or lowered promoting cleanliness and ease of carrying when full. Other specialized uses were noted in either the names of jugs or in documented orders for “beer jugs”[viii]The minutes of Evidence Taken before the Select Committee appointed to inquire into Drunkenness in 1834 confirmed that beer was carried in “jugs, or pint or quart pots.”[ix] Social reformers measured drinking decadence in its highest form as children transporting beer from public houses, or especially spirits from “gin shops.” Inexpensive prints depicted cheaply decorated establishments filled with dissolute adult customers drinking spirits while small children handled or drank from jugs.

Naturally, any such jugs had multiple uses and utilities.   Their decorative molding was just that– decorative—and the beauty of these jugs was to be admired. The residents of many Victorian homes displayed cherished ceramic items, whether fine vases or small figurines, on mantelpieces. A choice location over the fire enabled close study and the flickering flames brought out variation through shadowing and highlighting molding patterns.

A jug’s owner may also have displayed rather than used one of these vessels to insure against breakage. The more complex the molding in sculptural realism, the more likely that protruding noses on animals or outstretched hands of cherubs would be shattered. One critic suggested that the most extraordinary heavily-molded, graceful patterns were not for daily use but seemed “intended for use in the drawing-room.”[x] (See Jug 1).

Technologies:

By the 1840s, relief-molded jugs were highly successful and fashionable products. Made of a thin highly vitrified stoneware with molding covering whole bodies, including handles and spouts, their success was based on the steady innovations of eighteenth-century Staffordshire potters to make dependable long-lasting molds and to improve body, color and glazing.

Potters perfected the fine easily-molded stoneware material two decades before the perfection of these widely popular jugs. Deep molding of vessels created problems with glazing, a process used to keep surfaces clean and to seal porous materials. Traditionally workers had dipped a vessel in a lead glaze. Another technique was to fire stoneware clay vessels at an extremely high temperature and throw in salt that fused to create a glassy coating. Both of these methods unfortunately produced thick surface layers that made seeing fine lines of detail difficult.

As early as 1780, innovations in firing and changing methods of glazing helped solve this problem. At a certain temperature in the firing, a mix of materials (including lead and salt) was placed within the closed containers (saggars) where vessels were stacked during firing. The resulting fusion with ceramic surfaces “smeared” the jugs with thin glaze that helped seal the ceramic without becoming so heavy that detail was obscured. This was accomplished at lower heats and hence reduced costs of production. This method of producing sheen was improved and widely adopted by the 1830s on relief-molded jugs.[xi]

Potters’ efforts to produce and control uniform color bodies and surfaces on ceramic wares proved difficult. Coarse stone wares were often a variegated brown in color, such color effects made by iron in the clay being brought to the surfaces by the high heat of salt-glazing. Writing in 1860 in his paper, “On Stoneware” published in the Journal of the Society of Arts, Edwin Goodard reported that “the more fastidious taste or recent years” meant that variegated brown colors were no longer acceptable.[xii]

Part of the popularity of these jugs was no doubt due to their uniform surface colors. Drawing upon Josiah Wedgwood’s breakthrough body coloring from the century before, factory workers stained or painted these jugs to form an even color background. Commonly produced colors changed over the long popularity of these vessels. Potters used blue, pale green, olive green, tan, and later lavender and brown colors before returning to more uniform plain white wares at mid-century. Pottery workers (usually women) highlighted particular details by over-painting or added gilding (See Jug 2).

Finally, it was the sheer complexity and variety of overall molded shape and ornament that popularized these vessels over other contemporary wares. The technique of ceramic molding itself was not new. Miriam Goodby points to successful modelling of ceramic bodies by the Elers brother in Staffordshire early in the eighteenth century to copy Yixing wares from
China. After the formulation of plaster of Paris in 1745, complex molded vessels became much easier to make and use. Manufacturers were keen to use molds to fashion ceramic vessels. The practice made ceramic production faster and reduced the need for extra creative skill in the factory. The artistry and design of these vessels lay in the making of the original mold, and good designers were necessary to craft the three-dimensional model and resulting master molds from which vessels could be formed. Potters quickly took advantage of making sprigs (small molded decorated elements) or overall body molding. Flat and hollow wares in two-part molds in the middle of the eighteenth-century molds when fine white stoneware was pressed as a clay slab into a mold or poured as liquid clay(slip) into a hollow pattern.[xiii] The more complicated the vessel, the greater the number of molds a potter needed.

But these variations and technologies would not completely converge until improved machine production could implement all in the second quarter of the nineteenth century.   Goodard listed a number of important improvements in the quarter century before his writing; including mechanical improvements to turning the potters’ wheel which enabled workmen to make more articles at a cheaper price, the use of molds which allowed the production of bottles to be more perfectly made to measure compared turning them on the wheel; and the use of a turning lathe, which treated stiff clay like soft wood. Using the lathe produced sharp outlines and “running ornaments that could be thrown up with clearness and precision.”[xiv]

In all, the innovations that led to the successful production of these jugs had been ongoing for more than a century. Small improvements and modernizations, new machines, talented artist-artisans, and less hand production, all converged in the second quarter of the nineteenth century.

Finally, despite the vessels’ improvements, there is no escaping the sobering reality that workers in the potteries suffered horrific conditions often leading to early death. Children were employed in mines and manufactories throughout Britain and Parliament asked for a number of investigations in 1840. The report “Employment of Children and Young Persons in the District of the North Staffordshire Potteries and on the Actual State, Conditions and Treatment of Such Children and Young Persons” demonstrated that children were at work in the potteries usually by the age of 8, performing less skilled but onerous tasks for seventy-two hours a week. [xv]

Potbanks and Factories

We know a great deal about the companies that made molded jugs. First, unlike many other less expensive or more common ceramics, potters often marked these jugs with their firm’s name. This practice marked the vessel as a claim of superior quality, beauty and artistic ownership. The Copyright Design Acts of 1842 meant that an original design could be patented with that information included on a coded stamp on the vessel’s base. Patents were originally for only twelve years and copies were common. But this procedure allows a basic framework of designs that their makers deemed important and considered most likely to be profitable. So too competition was high among the major manufacturers or important heritage ceramic firms and the smaller firms who often tried to cut cost. Finally, these ceramics were part of a large Victorian conversation about design qualities and jugs from specific companies were discussed in leading arts journals of the day. Nonetheless, the number of extant jugs containing no marks, including those from the great firm Herbert Minton, leaves much room for speculation

Richard Henrywood identified several dozen firms that made molded jugs and he particularly highlights seven that were design leaders or large producers. Based on known marked pots, Kathy Hughes names more than fifty firms. Some were different businesses grouped around the same potter, as firms changed because of death or economic loss. Some were families with long ties to the potteries’ famous names like William Copeland whose family partnered with Jonas Spode.

This exhibition included jugs from sixteen known firms, six of which Henrywood deemed especially significant in terms of design, production and output. These included Herbert Minton and Company (usually known just as Minton), William Ridgway, Charles Meigh, Jonas Copeland, and Samuel Alcock. While not an original goal, the jugs chosen for this exhibition mirrored the date range of the jugs themselves. A few very early and important vessels were produced in the 1830s. A huge peak in quantity occurred in the 1840s, along with a slow decline in each decade until 1880.

Taste and Morality

Can an everyday household object be moral? Today we might imagine several possibilities: perhaps if it is too expensive (silver or porcelain), of a material associated today with offensive labor practices (“sweatshop” labor), material extraction (“diamond”) or lack of sustainability (toxic metals) practices. In the middle of the nineteenth century, a large part of public and academic debate swirled around the problem of the new factories, their products, and their workers. Social divisions seemed to grate as class hierarchy seemed troubled and uneasy.

But can an object be immoral if it is in poor taste? Victorian social critics thought so. William Morris, one of the most significant innovators in design at the height of the Victorian period, dryly observed that “industrial ceramics” across Europe were a “most woeful set of works of art with Staffordshire “making the stupidest.”[xvi] Designs deemed to be in good taste published in the Journal of Arts and Design and Journal of the Society of Arts were heralded as proof that Britain’s superior manufacturing and design teaching allowed art to be so successfully applied to everyday household wares.(Appendix k: Jennifer)

The molded jugs in this exhibition give ample room for discussion of taste, both for us and for contemporaries.   For many modern Americans they may appear overwrought and fussy. Ceramic scholar Griselda Lewis writes that the design of these jugs shows “all the vulgarity and verve and gusto of the nineteenth century.”[xvii] One of the key elements of good design was that an object should be of material and design that is appropriate, i.e. natural rather than false. New technological advances meant that a precious surface could be replicated in a much cheaper way, like plating an object with a thin layer of silver rather than creating an entire object of silver. The ability to stamp metal surfaces meant that many kinds of particular decorative details could be employed.   But critics fumed: just because you can ornament it, doesn’t mean that you should (See Jug 3).

These notions of taste show Victorian consumers mediating between old ideas of the sins of excess and the piety of forbearance of plainness. If good taste could be morally uplifting, argues Deborah Cohen, household goods, when placed in the correct household setting, could be purchased with gusto.[xviii] As the author in Eliza Cook’sJournal urged, a “germ” might be planted.

Taste was, nonetheless, hardly absolute, but varied by class. One mid-century critic used food metaphors for his complaint. He wished the lower class would choose fine neoclassically styled Wedgwood for its discriminating taste would serve as “caviar for the masses.” He similarly distained contemporary molded wares, in this case Parian, a kind of faux marble, molded statuettes were “little sugar men” for the middling class.[xix]

Crystal Palace

The swelling of national interest in the “artful and useful” led to regional design schools and ultimately to one of the greatest public events of the nineteenth century. The Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations held in the summer and fall of 1851 was the first gathering of international products meant to display well-designed products of industry. Proposed by a leading design scholar and supported by Prince Albert, the consort of Queen Victoria, this prodigious gathering of goods was housed in a building dubbed the Crystal Palace because of its stunning large glass building (a design marvel in itself). Six million visitors saw the offerings from twenty-five nations to demonstrate inventiveness and quality of production. A towering multi-tiered relief-molded jug made in both plain white stoneware and with multi-colored painting honored the participating nations (See Jug 4). It was displayed at the Paris Exhibition in 1855.

Such exhibitions were later held throughout Europe and America. They taught, passing on knowledge to their visitors that would provide moral uplift. Seeing such fine design would promote better craftsmanship. Finally, the actual act of visitation was a form of leisure that differed from “debasing sports” and the horrid time spent in drunkenness at “tavern and gin-shop.” [xx]

Speaking through Clay

Finally, and most importantly, the success of these vessels was based on the connection of consumer scenes that these jugs could display. Popularity of molded ornament drawn from popular culture (heroic myth, literature, history, and botanica) demonstrate a finely tuned dance of market and consumer.

Mythology

The art and design of the ancient world was an extremely popular source for jug ornamentation. “The Portland vase,” averred Goddard in 1860 is “the patrician progenitor of the present pitcher”[xxi] Potters could hence draw upon a heritage pottery innovation from a century before as a model idea of taste for new jug design (See Jug 5). Making that connection of taste from ancient to Victorian times was a major thread that continued to run through Victorian culture, particularly in the ideal of Grecian statuary as the essence of beauty. The Crystal Palace exhibition made that goal even more explicit in the Greek rooms filled with statuary. [xxii]

Knowledge of Greek mythology brought such scenes to life. One of the earliest examples appearing on these jugs is Pan made by William Ridgway and Company with Bacchus gracing two sides and the figure of Pan (with his flute) making up the handle. “Silenus” (Minton, c.1831 and later others) is a thoroughly dimensional swirl of muscular bodies, named for Silenus the god of wine-making and teacher of Bacchus (See Jug 6). Hence, potters used symbolism and storytelling of mythology to animate jugs. Other uses of classical elements included more generic putti (See Jug 7). In all these elements, consumers could demonstrate an aura of taste and knowledge.

Literary

The extraordinary talent of manufacturers to make detailed molds enabled the depiction of particular scenes telling well-known stories. These included characters from Shakespeare and the Bible, but most common were stories of popular culture.

Crossing over with the popularity of drinking scenes on these jugs was the tale of Tam O’Shanter. Written by Robert Burns (1759-1796), many literary scholars consider it to be one of the greatest narrative poems in the Scottish language (See Jug 8). Burns published it more than a half-century before the popularity of its depiction on relief-molded jugs, and the poem itself was a nostalgic look backward at beliefs in witchcraft in previous generations (See Jug 9).

The narrative describes a country man at the local tavern. He drank too often and too much and had earned his wife’s disapproval. After one long night of inebriation, he begins riding home on his horse, only to see a scene of loud witch debauchery. Drawn too close by his curiosity, the witches glimpse him and take chase. He furiously rides home, evading their capture by crossing a river. His horse was not so lucky as the witches grabbed off his tail. The jugs depict these two critical scenes as the consequence of drunkenness and absence from the domestic hearth. They were made by multiple potteries in multiple sizes and colors. A comparable story of intemperate drinking was “Wee Willy.” (See Jug 10).

Following the growing anti-slavery and abolition feelings in mid-nineteenth-century Britain and America, designers turned to the best-selling novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin: or, Life Among the Lowly. Written by Harriet Beecher Stowe and published in America in March 1852 and in London a few months later, it was a smash hit. It was reputed that more than 1.5 million inexpensive copies of the book—some pirated–were sold in Britain in the year after American publication.[xxiii]

The printed plates from the novel were ripe for copying in a jug form. One side of the vessel depicted the scene of a slave auction, and the other detailed little Eva’s flight across the frozen Ohio River to freedom. A caricature of a Negroid head was molded on the jug’s handle.

Stowe embarked on a long speaking tour in Britain in 1853 to address the passionate legion of anti-slavery advocates. The “Slavery” jug (See Jug 11) was designed and sold only a year later. In producing the design, manufacturers assumed the subject and scenes would attract a large market of consumers with a strong passion for abolition, as well as those moved by Stowe’s novel. Designing molded jugs that directly referenced such political issues was rare, but many decorative arts in the home reflected social causes.

The Bible

Perhaps because of the ignoble use of these jugs in everyday household activities and drinking of alcohol, sacred scenes were uncommon. Biblical verses were often read, told to others, and depicted on objects. In Samuel and Eli, the young boy proclaims to Eli his vision of the Lord (See Jug 12). The imagery on the jug reminds the user of salvation through faith – an important prospect in Christianity. It was based on an 1826 print of an earlier painting by John Singleton Copley (1738-1815).

Nonetheless the presence of jugs with scenes of lesser known Biblical characters demonstrates a common a penchant for religious piety and indicates that the stories and their morals were known. Manufacturers often used scenes of everyday men and women found in the Bible that metaphorically resonate in contemporary Victorian piety. Women from the Old Testament were especially important as they connected with Victorian women’s traditional roles. One relief molded jug, for example, depicts Naomi, an older woman whose husband and sons died, but was aided by her daughter-in-law Ruth. Another depicts the young Rebeka carrying a water jug to the well where she demonstrates her kindness by sharing water and thus gains an auspicious marriage. The connection of Biblical water jugs and Victorian ones was clear.

Drunkenness:

If there was doubt of either the British love for beer or the use of the jugs in carrying libations, the prevalence of designs including drinking scenes is additional proof. There is a double play of what is depicted and of what these jugs may have been used for, i.e. sharing and drinking alcohol.

The designs fell into several categories. First, the prevalence of mythological figures whose fates were tied to their status as bon vivants or to downfallen gods.   Pan and Bacchus were prevalent and their metaphorical reminders of excess and ruin fit a Victorian public morality. Second, popular stories like Tam O’Shanter or Wee Willie were popular shared tales of men drinking to excess that provided a successful foil to accepted social mores, often found in the role of disapproving wives. These figures were not contemporary Victorian ruffians; artists depicted them in established tropes like poor country drunks or rural public officials from a century before. These were men in the public house with mugs in hands, whether singing, telling yarns or playing games. They were themselves jokes. Third, the number of scenes that included hops, vines, or grapes told of a plentiful harvest but remained popular signifiers of beer, wine, and spirits.

Nature and naturalism:

By far the most common decorative motifs were drawn from nature. This wish for natural settings was part of the impetus of naturalism, so abundant in late nineteenth-century arts and design. As the British population urbanized and factories sullied what seemed to be undefiled nature, the longing for outdoors charm intensified. (Appendix, Kendra Greendeer).

The success of molding flowers and foliage were evaluated in three pottery jugs in The Journal of Design and Manufacture in 1849. The author commended them for their natural foliage, which in itself was better than “the art of past times.” But he cautioned that ornament in its highest form was not merely the replication of nature, but the creation of something new that captured the “spirit” of nature. The jug form and ornament must be a graceful combination, and the author pointed to the success of T.and J. Mayer’s jug “Convulvus” (See Jug 13) as an early patented design.[xxiv] In only two years it would be an award winner depicted in the Art Journal Catalogof the Great Exhibition.

The earliest depictions of nature demonstrated how a skillful modeler could capture nature with running patterns of leaves and vines. Later designs were more schematic, perhaps showing particular flowers. For one, lilies-of-the-valley (Copeland and other factories) were a beautiful form on the swelling bodies of jugs, large and small (See Jug 14). It was the greatness of Britain that labor-saving machines could so deftly bring good design and social improvement.

Modernism:

Ultimately the popularity of Victorian surface ornament began the slow march to modernism, as visual simplicity gained the aesthetic and moral summit. The Arts and Crafts movement decried the loss of the value of craft and promoted the look of natural materials and detailed signatures of the hand of the artisan. Still later—a half-century after the heyday of ebullient molding on jugs–the discussion of appropriate ornament was over. No ornamentation was the goal. Just as Victorians equated good taste and great design knowledge as a distillation of morality, popular taste would be inverted.  Architectural critic Alfred Loos, for one, equated ornament with cultural decline. In his 1908 essay “Ornament and Crime”, Loos proposed that “the evolution of culture marches with the elimination of ornament from useful objects.” He thus heralded the greatness of his age that had “outgrown ornament” and championed how “we have fought our way through to freedom from ornament.”[xxv]

Conclusion

By the middle of the nineteenth century, Staffordshire potteries had become global leaders in providing fine table wares and handsome everyday vessels. Scholars remain puzzled, but these jugs may not have reached as broad an international audience as other table wares, many easier to pack and ship, and many blazoned with their own printed story. Only a limited number have been found archaeologically in the United States. Some attribute the competition to fledgling American factories, such as Rockingham Pottery where British potters themselves had re-located and produced their own relief-molded jugs. Whatever the case, these vessels are filled with art, technology and culture, and each can tell a story.

Relief-molded jugs could be simple with limited three-dimensional form or glorious in deep sculptured lines, but what’s in a jug?

[i] “The New Crockery Shop,” Eliza Cook’s Journal, no. 1 (London: John Owen Clarke, 1849), 36.

2 No one has written more ably than R.K. Henrywood in Relief-Moulded Jugs, 1820-1900 (Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Antique Collectors Club, 1984.) For describing and identifying forms, see: Kathy Hughes, A Collector’s Guide to Nineteenth-Century Jugs (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985) A Collector’s Guide to Nineteenth-Century Jugs, Volume II. Dallas: Taylor Publishing Company1 991). A more recent resource is Patricia Samford,” Relief Molded Stoneware Jugs” in “Diagnostic Artifacts in Maryland, Jefferson-Patterson Park”, http://www.jefpat.org/diagnostic/Post-Colonial%20Ceramics/Less%20Commonly%20Found/Relief%20Molded%20Stoneware%20Jugs/relief%20molded%20stoneware%20jugs.htm

[iii] Edward Goddard, “On Stoneware,” Journal of the Society of Arts VII, no. 386 (April 13, 1860), 386.

[iv] Anonymous, {The Review of Patterns} “On Pottery: Jugs,” Journal of Design and Manufacturers I, (1849), 17.

[v] Henrywood, 61.

[vi] Simeon Shaw, History of the Staffordshire Potteries; and the Rise and Progress of the Manufacture of Pottery and Porcelain: with References to Genuine Specimens, and Notices of Eminent Potters. (Hanlety: G. Jackson, Printer and Bookseller, Market-Place, 182). Electronic download, June 12;2018

[vii] In addition, washing and cleaning up required three gallons. Another gallon was necessary for eating and drinking. Vanessa Taylor and Frank Trentman, “Liquid Politics: Water and the Politics of Everyday Life in the Modern City,” Past & Present, no. 211 (2011): 199 -241. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.wisc.edu/stable/23014815.

[viii] Henrywood, 88, 91.

[ix] James Silk Buckingham. Evidence on drunkenness, presented to the House of Commons, by the select committee appointed by the House to inquire into this subject, and report the minutes of evidence, with their opinions thereupon… (London: Bagster, 1834), 2

[x] Anonymous, “On Pottery: Jugs,” 16.

[xi] G. W. Elliott, “Stoneware: Some aspects of Manufacturing Technique and Development,” in Stonewares & Stone China of Northern England to 1851, 9-13. The Fourth Exhibition from the Northern Ceramics Society. City Museum and Art Gallery, Stoke-on-Trent, 1982, p. 12.

[xii] Goddard, 386.

[xiii] Miranda Goodby. “Molds and Modellers in the Early Eighteenth-Century Staffordshire Potteries, English Ceramic Circle Transactions.” 17 no. 2 (2000), 216-228.

[xiv] Goodard, 386.

[xv] For some details, see Miranda Goodby “Children in Staffordshire Potteries” “http://www.bbc.co.uk/legacies/work/england/stoke_staffs/article_2.shtml

[xvi] Garth Clark, The Potters’ Art: A Complete History of Pottery in England (New York: Phaidon Press, 1995), 89.

[xvii] Griselda Lewis, A Collector’s History of British Pottery (Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Antique Collector’s Club 1987), p. 183.

[xviii] Deborah Cohen, Household Gods: The British and their Possessions (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006).

[xix] Martina Droth, Jason Edwards, and Michael Hatt, Sculpture Victorious: Art in an Age of Invention, 1837-1901 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014), 41.

[xx] Droth, Edwards, and Hatt, 31.

[xxi] Goddard, 386.

[xxii] Kate Nichols, Greece and Rome at the Crystal Palace: Classical Sculpture and Modern Britain, 1854-1936, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015) pp. 127-163.

[xxiii] Marianne Holohan, “British Illustrated Editions of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”: Race, Working- Class Literacy and Transatlantic Printing in the 1850s.” Resources for American Literary Study 36 (2011): 27-65.

[xxiv] Anonymous, “On Pottery,” 16.

[xxv] Alfred Loos “Ornament and Crime”, in Programs and Manifestoes of 20th-century Architecture, ed. Ulrich Conras, 19-24 (Boston: MIT Press, 1975), 20.

1

Scavenger Hunt

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=942

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=942

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=942

Back to the Jugs

2

Make and Take Event

On March 15, 2018, the student curators held a Make and Take Event  at the Chazen Museum of Art. People lined up to decorate their own personalized mugs and enjoy hot chocolate. By the end of the night, there were no mugs left!

An interactive or media element has been excluded from this version of the text. You can view it online here:
https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/whatsinajug/?p=1111

3

Radio Chipstone

Radio Chipstone examines material culture in Wisconsin. Gianofer Fields, curator of Radio Chipstone, interviewed Gloriann Langva and Ellen Faletti about their experiences curating What’s in a Jug?. Listen as the two students discuss with Gianofer the collection, material culture, and the impact material culture has in their own fields.

4

Suggested Reading

“The New Crockery Shop,” Eliza Cook’s Journal, no. 1, 20-25, 36-38. London: John Owen Clarke, 1849.

Clark, Garth. “The Reform Era: The Great Exhibition and Beyond.” In The Potter’s Art: A Complete History of Pottery in Britain, 86-103. London ; New York: Phaidon Press, 1995.

Goodby, Miranda. “Children in the Staffordshire Potteries.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/legacies/work/england/stoke_staffs/article_3.shtml

Goodby, Miranda. “Molds and Modellers in the Early Eighteenth-Century Staffordshire Potteries.” English Ceramic Circle Transactions 17, no 2. (2000): 216-228

Henrywood, R.K. Jugs. Buckinghamshire, UK: Shire Publications, 1992.

Wakefield, Hugh. “Decorative Jugs”, “Pottery Figures.” In Victorian Pottery, 37-71. New York: Universe Books, 1970.

Knight, Charles. “A Day at the Staffordshire Potteries.” In The Penny Magazine of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, 201-208. London: Charles Knight, 1832.

Marcus, George H. “Fitness for Purpose.” In Functionalist Design: An Ongoing History, 33-46. New York: Prestel, 1995.

Nichols, Kate. “Greek Sculpture and Nineteenth-Century Progress.” In Greece and Rome at the Crystal Palace: Classical Sculpture and Modern Britain, 1854-1936, 127-163. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Rawson, Philip. “Analogy and Metaphor in Ceramic Art.” In The Ceramics Reader, edited by Andrew Livingstone and Kevin Petrie, 55-63. London; New York, NY: Bloomsbury, 2017.

Smart Martin, Ann. “Magical, Mythical, Practical and Sublime: the Meanings and Uses of Ceramics in America.” Ceramics in America 1, no. 1 (2001): 29-46.

Smith, Kate. “Introduction and Chapter 1.” In Material Goods, Moving Hands: Perceiving Production in England, 1700-1830, 1-48. Manchester, UK; New York, NY: Manchester University Press, 2014.

Wilson, Ian. “Appreciating Ceramics or so Much More Than Just an Egg Cup or a Milk Jug.” In The Ceramics Reader, edited by Andrew Livingstone and Kevin Petrie, 21-24. London; New York, NY: Bloomsbury, 2017.