Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland 9781407308784, 9781407338637

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Contents
List of Figures
Preface
Acknowledgments
Dedication
1. INTRODUCTION
2. METHODOLOGY
3. PORTUGUESE FAIENCE STUDIES
4. PORTUGUESE FAIENCE PRODUCTION
5. PRODUCTION SITES
6. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES
7. FORMS AND FUNCTION
8. DECORATION
9. PORTUGUESE FAIENCE CONSUMPTION
10. CHRONO-STYLISTIC EVOLUTION
11. USE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF PORTUGUESE FAIENCE IN ENGLAND AND IRELAND
12. CONCLUSION
13. APPENDICES
REFERENCES

Citation preview

BAR S2301 2011

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

CASIMIRO

Tânia Manuel Casimiro

PORTUGUESE FAIENCE IN ENGLAND AND IRELAND

B A R

BAR International Series 2301 2011

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Tânia Manuel Casimiro

BAR International Series 2301 2011

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 2301 Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland © T Manuel Casimiro and the Publisher 2011 The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781407308784 paperback ISBN 9781407338637 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407308784 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2011. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Contents List of Figures Preface Acknowledgments 1. Introduction 1.1. Objectives 2. Methodology 3. Portuguese Faience Studies 4. Portuguese faience production 4.1. Raw materials 4.2. Production techniques 5. The production sites 5.1. Lisbon 5.2. Coimbra 5.3. Vila Nova 6. Archaeological evidences 6.1 The sites 6.2. The finds England Barnstaple Bideford Bristol Carmarthen Colchester Credinton Exeter Chivenor Dartmouth Exmouth Faversham Great Torrington London Plymouth Poole Southampton Totnes Ireland Carrickfergus Cork Dublin Galway Limerick Londerry Waterford Wexford 7. Forms and Function 8. Decoration Aranhões Beads Lace Small spirals Scales Fine draw Monte Sinai Floral motifs Fruits Flowers and plants Animals Anthropomorphic Buildings

1 2 4 6 10 10 12 18 18 25 30 33 33 34 35 41 41 41 50 50 50 51 55 55 56 56 57 57 80 102 104 105 108 108 117 118 120 121 122 125 126 129 132 134 134 134 135 135 135 136 136 137 137 137 138 138

i

Boats Hearts Legends Dates Coats of arms Geometric 9. Portuguese faience consumption 10. Chrono-stylistic evolution I: 1550-1570 II: 1570-161 III: 1610-1635 IV: 1635-1660 V: 1660-1700 VI: 1700-1766 11. Use and significance of Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland 12. Conclusion 13. Appendices Appendix 1: Lisbon Potter’s regiment (1572) (after Correia, 1926) Appendix 2: Coimbra potters’ regiment (1623) (after Carvalho, 1921) Appendix 3: Coimbra potters and malagueiros’ regiment (1573) (after Carvalho, 1921) Appendix 4: References to the pottery taken from Porto to England and other places by English merchants from the Livros da Portagem do Cabido da Sé do Porto Appendix 5: References to Portuguese productions in English port books References

ii

138 138 138 138 139 140 140 143 144 144 145 146 148 150 152 173 177 177 179 180 181 183 186

List of Figures Fig. 1 – Boxes found in the Largo de Santos excavation in Lisbon (drawing by T. Casimiro). 16 Fig. 2 – Boxes (after Xavier, 1805). 17 Fig. 3 – Map with the production sites location. 18 Fig. 4 – Tin glaze plate found in Largo de Jesus (photo by L. Sebastian). 21 Fig. 5 – Biscuit plate found in Largo de Jesus (photo by L. Sebastian). 21 Fig. 6 – Plate found in Largo de Jesus showing Chinese influence (after Santos, 2005). 21 Fig. 7 – Plates found in Largo de Jesus showing Chinese influence (after Santos 2005). 22 Fig. 8 – Plate decorated with ferns and leafs found in Largo de Jesus (after Santos, 2005). 22 Fig. 9 – Plate decorated with small spirals found in Largo de Jesus (after Santos 2005). 22 Fig. 10 – Plate with small spirals found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro). 22 Fig. 11 – Bowl with Chinese influence decoration found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro). 22 Fig. 12 – Plate decorated with beads outlined in purple found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro). 22 Fig. 13 – Plate decorated with lace found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro). 23 Fig. 14 – Plate decorated with large leafs found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photoby L. Sebastian). 23 Fig. 15 – Plate decorated with the Santiago order sword found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian). 23 Fig. 16 – Plates decorated with large petals found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian). 23 Fig. 17 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian). 24 Fig. 18 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian). 24 Fig. 19 – Plate decorated with large petals found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian). 24 Fig. 20 – Plate decorated with lace found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian). 24 Fig. 21 – Plate decorated with large leafs found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian). 24 Fig. 22 – Plate with aranhões found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 27 Fig. 23 – Bowl with aranhões found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 27 Fig. 24 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 27 Fig. 25 – Plate decorated with half concentric circles found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 28 Fig. 26 – Plate decorated with lace found in Garagem Avenida (photoby L. Sebastian). 28 Fig. 27 – Bowl decorated with lace found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 28 Fig. 28 – Bottle decorated with small spirals found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 28 Fig. 29 – Plate decorated with beads found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 28 Fig. 30 – Plate decorated with large petals found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 28 Fig. 31 – Plate decorated with coat of arm found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 29 Fig. 32 – Plate decorated with coat of arm found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 29 Fig. 33 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 29 Fig. 34 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 29 Fig. 35 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 29 Fig. 36 – Plate decorated with floral motifs and bird found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). 29 Fig. 37 – Bowl decorated in Chinese style found in the excavations of Campo (after Gomes and Botelho, 2001). 31 Fig. 38 – Bowl decorated in Chinese style found in the excavations of Campo (after Gomes and Botelho, 2001). 31 Fig. 39 – Plate decorated with lace found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (after Almeida, Neves and Cavaco, 2001). 31 Fig. 40 – Plate decorated with lace found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian). 32 Fig. 41 – Plate decorated with large petals found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian). 32 Fig. 42 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian). 32 Fig. 43 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (after, Almeida, Neves and Cavaco, 2001). 32 Fig. 44 – Plate decorated with geometrical motifs found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian). 32 Fig. 45 – Graphic with the percentage of portuguese faience finds from England and Ireland 34 Fig. 46 – Map of England and Ireland with the cities where Portuguese Faience was found. 40 Fig. 47 – Plate found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros, Lisbon (photo by Luís Sebastian). 49 Fig. 48 – Sites in Exeter where Portuguese Faience has been recovered. 51 Fig. 49 – Sites in London where Portuguese Faience has been recovered. 57 Fig. 50 – Sites in Plymouth where Portuguese Faience has been recovered. 80 Fig. 51 – Percentage of forms recovered in England and Ireland. 127 Fig. 52 – Number of finds in English cities. 128 Fig. 53 – Number of finds in Irish cities. 129 Fig. 54 – Portuguese faience forms: A-Plate; B-Carinated bowl; C-Hemispheric bowl; D-Cup; E-Charger; F-Covilhete; G-Bootle; H-Jug; I-Albarrada; J-Box; K-Funnel; L-Flower Jar; M-Cylindrical pharmacy jar; N-Spice container; O-Lid; P- Tureen; Q- Holy water stoup; ;R- Barber’s bowl;S-Tea Pot; T- Chamber Pot;

iii

U-Chamber pot. Fig. 55 – Portuguese faience plate with Persian influence (after Sandão, 1965). Fig. 56 – Plate decorated with aranhões (after Trindade, 1994). Fig. 57 – Plate decorated with aranhões (after Trindade, 1994). Fig. 58 – Plate decorated with beads (after Mangucci, 2006). Fig. 59 – Platter decorated with lace from Cabral Moncada Leilões. Fig. 60 – Plate decorated with small spirals (after Moncada, 2008). Fig. 61 – Box decorated with scales (after Calado, 2006). Fig. 62 – Plate decorated with fine draws (after Moncada, 2008). Fig. 63 – Plate decorated with the Monte Sinai technique from Museu Nacional Machado de Castro. Fig. 64 – Plate decorated with baroque garlands (after Mangucci, 2006). Fig. 65 – Plate decorated with ferns found in London (draw by T. Casimiro). Fig. 66 – Plate decorated with large leafs found in London (draw by T. Casimiro). Fig. 67 – Peony. Detail of plate found in London (draw by T. Casimiro). Fig. 68 – Plate with swans from Museu Nacional Machado de Castro (after Santos, 1960). Fig. 69 – Plate with human figure (after Moncada, 2008). Fig. 70 – Bowl from Museu Nacional Machado de Castro (after Santos, 1960). Fig. 71 – Biscuit carinated bowl found in Mata da Machada (photo by T. Casimiro). Fig. 72 – Plate recovered in Carrickfergus (draw by T. Casimiro). Fig. 73 – Plate recovered in Deventer archaeological excavations (after Bartels, 2003). Fig. 74 – Plate recovered in Dordrecht archaeological excavations (after Bartels, 2003). Fig. 75 – Bowl dated 1621 (after Santos, 1960). Figs 76 and 77 – Bottles from the Hamburg museum with the dates 1628 and 1632 (after Pais, 2007). Fig. 78 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles recovered in Rua dos Babalhoeiros (photo L. Sebastian). Fig. 79 – Plate decorated with big leafs recovered in Rua dos Babalhoeiros (photo L. Sebastian). Fig. 80 – Plate with aranhões kept in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga (after Queirós, 1907). Fig 81 – A – Plate found in Lambeth Street in London (draw by T. Casimiro); B – Plate found in Magdalean Street in London (draw by T. casimiro); C – Tureen with the 1648 date (after Pais, 2007); D – Plate dated 1646 kept in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga (after Calado, 2003); E – Bottle dated 1638 from the Câmara Municipal do Porto collection (after Trindade, 1994; F – Bottle dated 1644 kept at the Hamburg museum (after Pais, 2007); G – Plate dated 1649 kept at the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga (after Calado, 2003). Fig. 82 – Lace bowl found in Ferryland (photo by T. Casimiro). Fig. 83 – Plate dated 1767 found in Évora (after Mangucci, 2006). Fig 84 and 85 – Plates found at São João de Tarouca (after Sebastian e Castro, 2009). Figs 86 and 87 – Plates found in the São Vicente de Fora excavations (after Ferreira, 1983). Fig. 88 – Bowls found in England and Ireland. Fig. 89 – Plates found in England and Ireland. Fig. 90 – Bottles found in England and Ireland. Fig. 91 – Graphic showing the distribution of the forms found in England and Ireland. Fig. 92 – Map showing the places where English merchants took Portuguese faience. Fig. 93 – Small spirals from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 94 – Aranhões from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 95 – Floral decoration found in England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 96 – Floral decoration found in England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 97 – Floral decoration from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 98 – Coats of arms found in England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 99 – Letters, legends and dates from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 100 – Geometric figures from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds. Fig. 101 – Lace decoration from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

iv

131 132 134 134 134 135 135 135 136 136 136 137 137 137 137 138 139 144 145 145 145 146 146 147 147 148

149 150 150 151 151 153 154 155 157 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 169 170 171

Preface    

 

This book is part of the author’s PhD dissertation entitled Faiança Portuguesa nas Ilhas Britânicas made in the Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas of Universidade Nova de Lisboa under the supervision of Rosa Varela Gomes. It was submitted in December 2010 and approved with the highest grade (Distinction) on 8th of April 2011. It was sponsored by a FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia) individual doctoral grant. Originally written in Portuguese it was translated with the purpose of being published in English permitting its access to all English speaker investigators with the will of knowing more about Portuguese tin glaze ware. This implied a huge effort and even some structural changes in the original dissertation made for a public with less access to information about English and Irish archaeological sites. Although the doctoral research is now finished the author is always interested in new finds of Portuguese faience in these territories and believes that, with the help of this book, many more will appear in the future.

 

                                                                                                     

Acknowledgments My thanks must go first of all to my supervisor, Dr. Rosa Varela Gomes my mentor and dearest friend, always available to help in any professional and personal queries. Her groundbreaking studies and continuous research in Post-Medieval pottery in Portugal made her the perfect advisor. To Mário Varela Gomes also for his advice and friendship. To both of them for teaching me to become an Archaeologist, almost as good as they are. To John Allan, without his help this book would be impossible. Since we met in 2007 his dedication to the search of Portuguese Faience in England was almost as fruitful as mine, becoming a dear friend. He introduced me to the Society of Post Medieval Archaeology where I met lots of interesting people. Studying Portuguese Faience scattered throughout two countries was not an easy task and only possible due to the work and help of several people. Some of the most helpful were Frank Meddens from Pre-Construct Archaeology and Chris Jarret, pottery specialist at that same company who introduced me to one of the most spectacular sites I have ever seen in Narrow Street, London. In the London Museum my thanks goes to Roy Stephenson, Lyn Blackmore and Jaquie Pierce who made the time to help find Portuguese Faience in their stores. In Exeter I have to thank Thomas Cadbury at the Exeter Museum, Graham Langman of Exeter Archaeology and once again to John Allan. In Plymouth the museum stores’ were open to us by Fiona Pitt. Still in Devon we thank Ruth Spires in Barnstaple. The Bristol finds were made available by Les Good and Kate Iles, in Poole by Catherine Gardiner and in Southampton by Duncan Brown who became a nice friend and introduced me to the Medieval Pottery Research Group where I met amazing people. To Paul Courtney who told me about the tile found in Carmarthen. In Ireland many people helped me such as Roseane Meannen and Clare Macutcheon indicating the places where Portuguese Faience has been found. In Dublin my thanks goes to Nessa O’Connor and Edward Bourke, in Waterford to Rosemary Ryan and in Limerick to Brian Hodkinson. The finds from Northern Ireland were kindly shown by Ruari O’Baoill and Paul Logue in Belfast. This book also counted with the help of many other people in Portugal. In Lisbon our thanks goes to Inês Santos from Era Arqueologia Lda. who showed us the finds from Largo de Santos. The finds from the Rua de Buenos Aires were provided by Nuno Neto from Neoépica Lda. The Largo de Jesus finds were provided by António Marques at the Museu da Cidade. In Coimbra the finds from Garagem Avenida were shown by Helena Moura from the former IPA extension in Pombal. In Vila Nova the artefacts were provided by Maria João from Dryas Arqueologia. I also thank to António Camarão in Barreiro Archaeological Archives for showing the finds from Mata da Machada. This would be a less quality work without the help of Luis Sebastian to who I have no words to thank. Thank you for letting me use your photos. Several archives were visited during this study so my thanks goes to all the people in the Public Records Office in London where I spent months searching for references to Portuguese pottery for their patience and help. To all my friends Paulo, Tânia, Telmo, Joana, Filipe, Sara, Bela, Hugo, Marta, Ana, André, Andreia, Zé, Diana, Luís, Paula, Cláudio and Victor, without any specific order. If I forgot anyone I’m really sorry but many people crossed in my way during these four years. To the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia by funding this project. Without this sponsorship I would never have done it. Finally to my family always the best support.

vi

To my sweet Leonor

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

1 INTRODUCTION keen in contesting the general notion quite popular in such countries that there had never been a Portuguese pottery industry capable of over cross its own frontiers.

The study of Portuguese faience in the British Isles began in 2005 as a Master dissertation in Artefact Studies at the University College of London. During that time, we restricted our studies to the British capital, supervised by Prof. Clive Orton, which were partially published on the London Archaeologist. I chose such subject with the desire to fulfil a work that brought me close to Portuguese Archaeology, even though trough Anglo-Saxon methods, techniques and theories.

In fact, the references regarding Portuguese materials among British or other Anglo-Saxon bibliographies were scarce, so there was a gap in the process of investigating them. Only in the last years of the twentieth century, and in the first of the following century, did some British investigators acknowledge the presence of these materials, failing only in demeaning them in relation to Dutch, French and most of all Italian and Spanish finds. John Hurst and John Allan remain the only ones who have been publishing Portuguese materials for over two decades, and whose notes and help were essential to this book. However, even though they recognized the existence of Portuguese Faience, those investigators never went beyond its recognition, and the importance these finds might have had in certain contexts was never studied. As for Portuguese scholars working overseas, there was frequent news about findings located abroad, mostly after 1988, when Jan Baart exhumed a large collection of Portuguese Faiences from the ground of Amsterdam, inviting Rafael Salinas Calado to participate in such study. Nevertheless, the collaboration between foreign archaeologists and Portuguese investigators ended here.

Throughout the master’s studies, which were geographically confined to London, several informations began to arouse that suggested evidence to the existence of such objects all over England and Ireland, as well as in British colonies. Therefore, the subject of my Phd came easily to mind, suggesting the extension of the investigation. The widening of the study area allowed to fully understand how that city, being the capital of an immense overseas empire, represented the way how Portuguese pots were considered both in the trade and in the political relations between both countries. The presence of Ireland in this work consists in the fact that both countries, now politically and economically independent, were at the time, under that same governance, thus allowing more comprehension on the relations, the dependencies and the autonomies of each territory.

The term faience was only used in Portuguese literature after the second half of the nineteenth century, mostly to describe decorated wares (Vasconcelos, 1875; 1884), having since widespread among art historians and scholars who imported it from French publications. To them, this term meant a body of pottery covered by tin glaze and luxuriously decorated, becoming quite common in Europe from the early sixteenth century. In fact, it’s not possible to know if the word was used by the Portuguese consumers instead of the general designations of louça branca.

In this book there will be references to other regions under British domain like Barbados (Antilles), New England, Newfoundland, since the exportation of Portuguese ware to these locations was made by British merchants. As for Scotland, due to the lack of archaeological evidence of Portuguese tin glaze ware, will only be occasionally mentioned whenever the political, economical and social contextualization demands it. But what is Portuguese Faience? In this book, it is assumed to be all soft-bodied light buff fabric earthenware covered with a lead-tin opaque white glaze, normally painted in blue or bichrome, produced in Portugal, regardless of its shape, produced since the second half of the sixteenth century. The glaze was used in covering not only with aesthetical purposes but mainly for functional ones, as it waterproofs the sherd and increases its resistance.

The word Faiança came surely from the city of Faenza whose merchandise had already been around Europe ever since the fifteenth century, mostly in France, due to its geographical and cultural rapprochement during the Renaissance with Italian cities and artists. However, other terms were used, the most common one being majolica, which designated the Spanish and Italian manufacturing, from the fourteenth century early on. This description originated not from a production centre, as it had done for Faenza, but from the island of Majorca, which served as a trading outpost of this tin ware. Overall, faience or majolica were the general designations of the rich European manufacturing of fully and richly decorated ceramic bodies covered by opaque tin glaze. This was the general designation used by Portuguese authors until the twentieth century (Musacchio, 2004, 14).

Tin glaze ware was produced by traditional methods in Portugal since the mid 16th century until late 18th century when faience starts to be made in factories. This is the time range of this book. However the absence of written information about production techniques for such period motivated the use of several documents and testimonies written in the 19th and even early 20th centuries. In addition to studying the dispersion of Portuguese production throughout the British Isles, I was also

1

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Until recently (Calado, 2003), the more humble shreds were known as malagueiras, the adopted term for Spanish and Portuguese objects that weren’t decorated or that were merely slightly outlined in blue.

centuries. All objects acquired in auctions and afterwards displayed in exhibitions, although artistically and economically valuable, will not contribute to the conclusions presented herein.

The development of ceramic studies in Portugal and recent archaeological works maintained the use of the word faience but it started to designate all tin glazed ware produced in Portugal since the sixteenth century, regardless of its decoration.

The Portuguese origin given to the collected shreds is still not beyond doubt. One often sees Dutch or Italian wares being identified as coming from Portugal, or Portuguese productions being published as being Dutch or German. One of our goals was to clarify this situation pinpointing decorating and technique features. When this study began in 2004 there was many misidentified sherds, labelled as coming from many other European countries, mostly the Netherlands, Italy and Spain.

In English literature the term faience refers only to French tin glaze wares dated from the eighteenth century. For early productions, both Spanish and Italian, majolica is the most commonly used designation. The term delftware is also used but only in reference to Dutch productions, the major production centre being Delft. It also applies to British productions from the 16th and 17th centuries, due to the influence Dutch productions had in British ware. On the other hand, as for archaeological bibliography is concerned, the term tin glaze ware was generalized for it summarizes the glaze technique without referring an origin or dating.

The timeline that borders this book begins in the middle fifteen hundreds, at the start of Portuguese production of such materials. However, we will highlight the seventeen century, concerning the fact that this is the time when the exportation of white and blue ware into the British Isles is registered. This chronology was based on archaeological and documental evidence or, when these lacked, based on the shreds themselves and on the dating of the shape and decoration they could provide.

However, all this vocabulary arose from the nineteenth century bibliography. Earlier records refer to the production of glazed ware as gally ware, galye ware or galley ware, terms represented ever since the sixteenth century (Tyler, Betts and Stephenson, 2008, 3).

The historical and cultural integration of such materials was crucial to this aim. The contexts from where these artefacts were exhumed were analyzed considering their geographical location and their cultural, economical and political importance at the time the sherds entered the archaeological record. All sites were thoroughly analyzed so far as their stratigraphy was concerned, a system that ultimately provided more accurate dating. As for the interventions made twenty years ago and whose finds were preserved in museums, the access to reports, so many times nonexistent, or to the archaeologists who had made such excavations, was frequently very difficult. Therefore, all the available information was examined, despite being insufficient most of the times.

1.1 Objectives To register, analyse, understand and interpret the presence of Portuguese faience in the British Isles are the goals of this study. The search for such purpose went through an archaeological, historical and anthropological interdisciplinarity. The production, consumption and the exportation of faience involved several processes, for which all of them the archaeological record fails in providing all the answers, although it’s essential in a work where trade and economic relation patterns translated in material culture are sought.

A full catalogue of the locations and the materials are presented so that future investigators can indirectly access to those materials, thus complementing or forwarding new theories regarding the presence of Portuguese tin glazed ware in the British Isles.

The purpose was to understand how occasional those exportations were, or if they could well be part of all the regular and immense trade between Portugal, England and Ireland. The exportation of wine, olive oil, fruit, cork and other goods to England and Ireland is all well known but I were interested in knowing how the faience trade was equally important.

The existence of faience in the British Isles will answer several questions that can supply information not only to the study of the importance of this material in a worldwide context but also in explaining how it could have contributed to the Portuguese production while part of the international trade. Therefore, we will assess the type and quality of goods that were exported and its quantity.

England’s southwest proved to be the area with more findings, although recognized a little throughout the entire south. In Ireland there is a larger spreading, having being registered findings from north to south, though only in coastal areas.

It’s also an interest to investigate the nature and purposes of the exportation of this tin glazed ware to England and Ireland. Could it have been just another good amongst the intense and already well documented trading between Portugal and the British Isles? We will sort out who was responsible for its exportation. Was all this traffic in the hands of the Portuguese, who had dwelled into the British market, or were both the English and the Irish who had all

Despite the existence of perfectly preserved Portuguese ware throughout British museums, those will only be briefly mentioned. This study focus only n the Portuguese tin glaze ware exhumed from archaeological contexts that could provide information about its use and everyday importance by the people of the 16th, s17th and 18th

2

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

along been interested in acquiring these goods, bringing them to the Isles? Were they part of an enduring and highly specialized commercial system, thus fulfilling the needs of the British society? Or do we have to consider them as merely a byproduct of the Portuguese and British trade, a number of occasional transactions, whose exchange values were nothing but a small part of the constant commercial relations, where other goods such as sugar, wine or olive oil and dozen others prevailed?

In the present study there are historical and geographical issues that were taken into consideration. The cities where Portuguese faience was recovered were sometimes separated by hundreds of miles. Such urban centres distinguished between themselves according to their economical, social and political levels of importance, and their sometimes differing biographies. These cities offered very distinct archaeological sites with distinct amounts of materials. It will be interpret why some English urban areas provided a larger quantity of materials than others, and why such findings are more frequent in southwest British cities while not even being recognized in the center or in the northern country.

One cannot ignore the assumption that the presence of such materials can go beyond economical transactions. They might have entered the British Isles with other social or political purposes, like gifts destined to families who kept relations with Portugal and its traders.

On a cultural aspect the meaning and importance of these objects on the archaeological sites which provided them is going to be evaluated. Thus, it is imperative to establish the identity of each site, as well its economical, social and cultural dynamics. Having been recognized in such distinct places like houses, warehouses, churches, factories or harbors, what is the meaning of the presence of such objects in these different environments? Most certainly their importance and symbolism was not the same for all cities. Based on the interpretation of the sites thoughts on who was the consumer for these objects concerning their economic importance and social status will be point out. One major goal is to interpret their function regarding their setting. What was their meaning in a house, a castle, a monastery, in a warehouse or in a pottery workshop? And mostly what was the economical and social importance of these objects among the English and Irish people?

It’s also important to recreate the trade routes of these shreds. Where they were produced, how they were transported and from which ports did they sail. The lack of studies regarding tin glazed ware production centres forced the search and analysis of several remains exhumed from contexts that had previously been interpret as pottery workshops, namely Lisbon, Coimbra and Vila Nova (Gaia). Combining the archaeological information to the already existing documentation, it was possible to clarify the production of such centres, its beginnings and the main characteristics of their products. Only after was it possible to establish parallels for the exhumed shreds from English and Irish contexts, their origin, and which of the three production centers the bigger exporter was. During that research several information regarding potters and workshops aroused that although not the main goal of the present work were nevertheless important to unveil. Portuguese Faience has been approached by many authors, mainly in Art History. Assuming that decoration is one of its most important features, it will always be described, as for its origins and influences. One of the chapters of this book is dedicated to this subject and tries to reveal most of the decorations used in Portuguese faience even though sometimes not found among the British Isles finds. Like the decoration the shapes were also taken into consideration. It is not easy to demonstrate all the Portuguese Faience forms and its variations, mostly due to the large quantities of objects found in the recent years. However we will present the known shapes whenever possible, creating form charts and describe their evolution from the sixteen to the eighteen century, when the tradicional pottery production is overpowered by the industrial production. Other major difficulty was the dating of the shreds. Although much has been written concerning this matter, most findings have been generally dated at the 17th century. Since all attempts in dating Portuguese Faience until now were made by Art Historians there was the need to stop dating collection based on the plates kept in museums and combine that information with archaeological evidences. That was also one of the goals of this book, which resulted in the presentation of a chrono stylistic evolution.

3

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

2 METHODOLOGY This book aims to understand the impact of the Portuguese tin glaze ware presence in England and Ireland. A proper methodology was developed to help concluding this task.

Even though decoration is one of the most important features of Portuguese Faience and the first subject to be analyzed in the 19th century there wasn’t a proper name for the motifs used. In this sense it was one of the concerns of this work to define names to call those elements.

Post-Medieval Archaeology and the study of remains that belong to more recent chronologies are very much still in their beginning, despite the developed works in Silves, Palmela, São João da Tarouca or Casa do Infante. This is still however a small sample of the numerous assemblages of pots existing in Portugal that have been recovered on the last few years, and who were without doubt a precious help on the developing of the methodologies used in the present book.

The analysis of objects found in well dated archaeological contexts, not only in the British Isles, but a little around the world permitted to establish a proper chrono-stylistic evolution. Although many authors have tried to define a chronology based on decoration they were never very successful. For the first time archaeological, documental and museum information were gathered searching for this goal.

Although the work made in the last decade was helpful in understanding what type of Portuguese faience was being produced and consumed in 17th century Portugal, the available information was not enough when this investigation started. It was necessary to understand what each production centre was manufacturing. Only then was it possible to clearly determine the origin of the English and Irish finds. This need originated the search for archaeological collections found in production centres, especially in workshop areas trying to define what each production centre was manufacturing, crossing this new archaeological data with documentary evidences. This allowed writing a chapter related to the faience produced in Lisbon, Coimbra and Vila Nova.

Post-Medieval Archaeology benefits from the documents wrote in those centuries which help determining the importance of objects. Several documents were useful in the analysis of the manufacturing process and raw materials but the information was essentially important in the study of exportation. The Portuguese port records of the production cities, namely Lisbon, Figueira da Foz (a sea port for Coimbra) and Porto were completely analysed searching for evidences of faiences taken into England and Ireland. The same was made for the English port records which gave very interesting information. In order to locate and culturally integrate the Portuguese faience finds every archaeological site was considered in its nature, chronology and material culture

The observation of the finds in the three production centres was in fact very helpful since besides the already finished tin glaze ware objects many of them were found in different stages of production. This enriched the chapter concerning the production techniques written with the help of several treaties and other European postmedieval industries which used the same production methods. These were basically the Tre Libri dell arte del Vasaio, wrote in the 16th century by Cipriano Picolpasso and discribing the methods and techiniques of the Castel Durante production, the De plateelbakker of Delftsch aardewerkmaaker of G. Paape, from 1794 describing the Delft industry and two late 18th century books translated into Portuguese in early 19th century in 1804 the Arte do Louceiro and in 1805 the Arte da Louça Vidrada where essential in the understand of European industry.

The information concerning each site where Portuguese Faience has been recovered was obtained through publications, reports and even some conversations with the responsible archaeologists. All the records were made available helping to understand where in the site was the artefact found and even which other finds were also there The majority of the evidences of Portuguese Faience in the British Isles was observed directly. The exceptions were the places where only one or two sherds were found or even if they were already published. The mention to tiles in this book was not planned initially despite the fact they were made using the same techniques, in the same workshops and possibly by the same potters. However a find in Wales forced its introduction.

There is some information about Portuguese workshops and their production in the 17th century, although it only gives news about location and the potters’ names. Concerning the crafts organization there are several documents and books describing the Miragaia, Massarelos and Real Fábrica do Rato factories, producing in Porto and Lisbon since middle 18th century and for at least 100 years. Although the results were different they used the same production techniques.

Most the artefacts presented in this book are kept at local museums in the cities where they were found. Exceptions can however be found in the finds from Londerry and Carrickfergus kept in Belfast. Seventeen locations in England and eight in Ireland have offered 798 objects in Portuguese Faience. In order to find these objects several types of research were made. First

4

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

all the bibliographic references to these artefacts were analyzed creating a list of where they were already recognized. After this all museums, archaeological groups, archaeology companies and some independent archaeologists were contacted by email or letter asking about these wares. Most of them respond as not having any Portuguese Faience in their stores. A small note was published on the Medieval Pottery Research Group Newsletter enquiring about the discovery of this ware. The only contact received was from Steven Pendery, a North American archaeologist that was very helpful in our research. Finally some messages were sent to England and Ireland mailing lists that were quite useful. It is a belief that these efforts to find Portuguese faience have offered us about 85% of all finds in the British Isles. The majority of the identified objects were directly visualised and securely identified as Portuguese. However in the present study the interest was not only on the Portuguese tin glaze objects but also in the contexts where they were found. It was a concern to understand what type of place was the one where they were found, if domestic, commercial or industrial. Equally of great interest was the material culture found in each same site. It was important to understand what the role of Portuguese faience in the place where it was found was. This was also an important help dating the objects, although when this information was not available the date was given based on the objects and not the context, comparing them with other well dated objects. Nine different forms were recognized in Portuguese faience objects in the British Isles: plates; bowls, bottles, jars, pharmacy jars, lids, game markers and a holy water stoup. Although their primary function seems to be the consumption and storage of food in this case it’s believed that they were in almost every case used as decorations items. Chapter thirteen reveals some of the documents used in this book. However these are only the most important. All the other written sources used in this research appear along the text.

5

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

3 PORTUGUESE FAIENCE STUDIES

The study of ceramics in general and faience in particular in Portugal goes back to the 19th century. The first books showing objects and mentioning production techniques appeared in 1804 and 1805, translated from French: the Arte do Louceiro and the Arte da Louça Vidrada, describing manufacturing techniques for coarse ware and tin glaze wares. Despite the publication in Portuguese no reference is made to Portugal´s productions.

As expected other exhibitions took place in diverse Portuguese cities. Still in 1882 Aveiro received the Exposição Districtal de Aveiro, showing the region’s arts and crafts, and in 1884, the Exposição Districtal de Coimbra gathered several works from central Portugal. In the same year, the Exposição Retrospectiva de Arte Ornamental occupied the space of the recently inaugurated National Museum of Fine Arts and Archaeology (Calado, 2005).

The first reference to Portuguese clays appears in France, in 1844. Alexander Brongniard published the Traité des arts ceramiques ou des poitiers, classifying and sorting different ceramic productions mentioning some Portuguese clays from Ílhavo and Estremoz. Faience was divided in hard and soft (depending if they could be iron scratched). Some years later this study received some critics since faience started to be classified more by its glaze and decoration and less by its fabrics. It was however an important influence of the study of Charles Lepierre Estudo chimico e technológico sobre a ceramica portugueza moderna (1898).

In 1888 Lisbon received the Exposição Industrial and published the Catálogo da Exposição Nacional de Indústrias Fabris where Lisbon’s ceramic productions were presented. Five years later, Lisbon received a new Exposição Industrial. In 1895 Joaquim de Vasconcelos organized the Exposição Cerâmica de Aveiro and in 1896 the Exposição Cerâmica de Viana do Castelo focusing on the local industries and oldest productions. In 1898, the Catálogo da Exposição Ornamental do Distrito de Viana do Castelo shows an interesting text from Luís of Figueiredo da Guerra, with an high number of images being therefore one of the first relevant books for pottery studies (Sandão, 1965, 16).

In 1844 the Raczinski count published in the Lettres some information given by the Viconde de Juromenha on tiles. This paper can be considered as the first printing of any information about Portuguese ceramic production despite a complete absence to any techniques or places of production just referring where tile panels could be found. Four decades later a huge interest on Portuguese ceramics appeared.

However the main subject of those exhibitions was not exclusively ceramics but also other old industries such as sculpture, painting, pottery, and furniture, among others. Portuguese faience was a constant presence in all these events. It was classified as a decorative art and many times having a spotlight as it happened in Exposição de Cerâmica do Porto organized in 1882 by the Sociedade de Instrução do Porto.

In 1882 Lisbon received the Arte Ornamental Portuguesa e Espanhola exhibition in the Marquês de Pombal palace, an attempt to imitate the Exhibition of Spanish and Portuguese Ornamental Art in the South Kensigton Museum in London, today Victoria & Albert.

As result of these exhibitions several catalogs were published, ones more illustrated than others where ceramics started to occupy a place among the decorative and ornamental arts. At the same time several news of these events started to appear in newspapers written by people with huge interests in these subjects.

An illustrated catalog was published where the tin glaze Spanish productions and the blue and white Portuguese productions were the most valued. The Lisbon exhibition, according to foreign reports, was a success and in any way inferior to the great European exhibitions of late 19th century (Rosas and Pereira, 1991).

The first man to dedicate his time to the study of Portuguese faience was Joaquim Vasconcelos. Between 1883, the year of the Exposição de Cerâmica Sociedade de Instrução do Porto publication and 1909, when he published the Catálogo da Antiga Colecção de Moreira Cabral, several were the books, news, and exhibitions about Portuguese ceramics from Porto, Lisbon, Gaia, Viana do Castelo and Caldas da Rainha. His groundbreaking activities made Santos Simões call him the father of the Portuguese pottery studies (Simões, 1990, 24). In 1883 he published the Exposição de Cerâmica the first book dedicated exclusively to pottery, followed by A Cerâmica Portuguesa, in 1884 and in 1891 the Fábrica de Faiança das Caldas da Rainha. Curiously, in the same

The aforementioned exhibition appeared as consequence of a European movement trying to value the traditional arts believed to receive little attention during the industrial revolution, promoting the progress and valuing national productions. Portuguese intellectuals were not indifferent and the country gladly received this new influence.

6

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

year, Ramalho Ortigão published a book also called Fábrica de Faiança das Caldas da Rainha.

this book is still useful especially the catalogue of names, dates and marks found in several objects. This was not the only book from this author. In 1913 he published the Olarias do Monte Sinai where a single workshop in Lisbon is identified based on the style of decoration.

One of the cities that benefited from this interest concerning the ceramic productions in Portugal was Coimbra. The intellectuals living and working in the city’s University welcomed the several events concerning ceramic studies. Jose Acúrcio das Neves wrote Variedades sobre Objectos Relativos às Artes, Comércio e Manufacturas in 1814, mentioning several factories in Coimbra among which was the Vandelli productions in an economic and not in an artistic point of view.

In 1915 Virgílio Correia published Azulejos Datados approching the subject of tile production and presenting several dated panels across the country trying to establish a chrono-stylistic evolution. In the following years he published three other important studies Azulejadores e Pintores de Azulejos de Lisboa, olarias de Santa Catarina e Santos and Oleiros e pintores de louça e azulejo, de Lisboa: olarias (Anjos) continuing the study of Lisbon potters started by José Queiróz. Virgilio Correia will only publish ceramic studies again some decades later in the 1950’s.

After the Exposição Distrital de Coimbra an interest about ceramic productions in the city started to grow. This presentation originated diverse publications and reactions, such as papers in Revistas e Conferências and in Revista Ilustrada da Exposição and the catalog Cerâmica na Exposição distrital de Coimbra, by António Augusto Gonçalves. This author was one of the men who most dedicated his time to the Coimbra’s ceramic studies, writing, in 1898, the text “Breve Noção sobre a História da Cerâmica em Coimbra” that can be found in the Charles Lepierre’s book Estudo Chímico e Technológico sobre a Cerâmica Portuguesa Moderna, mentioning the productions of the Rossio de Santa Clara factory, managed by Vandelli. In 1886 the book Apontamentos para a História da Cerâmica em Coimbra by Adelino António das Neves e Melo was published.

In 1921 Joaquim de Carvalho publishes one of the most useful books for ceramic studies in Central Portugal A Cerâmica Coimbrã no século XVI presenting several original documents about crafts organization in the 16th and 17th centuries he found in the Coimbras’s archives. In that same year the book of Carolina Michaelis Vasconcelos Algumas Palavras a Respeito dos Púcaros em Portugal about coarseware cups is very important even though it doesn’t make any reference to faience. From this moment onwards the number of exhibitions and publications concerning pottery decreased, shyly continuing during some years. In 1923, the Documentos para as Biografias dos Artistas de Coimbra are published, by Prudêncio Quintino Garcia, where he refers the name of some potters although most of them were already kown through the Joaquim Carvalho’s book.

Pottery studies were developing at this stage here and in other Portuguese cities. Also in 1886 Gabriel Pereira published in the Estudos Eborenses a note on ceramics, with the 1572 Lisbon Potter’s Regiment. Three years later, Sousa Viterbo wrote Cerâmica Lisbonense nos princípios do século XVII, mentioning the existence of diverse potters in Lisbon’s area of Santos-o-Velho.

In the 1920’s, the book Faianças e Tapeçarias is written by Luis Keil. However the most important contribution of this author would be the 1938 paper Faianças de Hamburgo e as suas analogias com a Cerâmica Portuguesa do século XVII. In this small work he identifies for the first time Portuguese faience outside Portugal and confirms that although published as German since 1894, in the Guide of the Museum of Decorative Arts of Hamburg by Justus Brinckmann, they were in fact Portuguese. Even if presenting German coats of arms and legends the plates and bottles in display at the museum were made in Lisbon in the 17th century possibly ordered to Portuguese potters and taken into this country by some merchant who traded between Lisbon and Hamburg. The confirmation was made by comparing sherds gathered in Lisbon with the fabrics of the Hamburg plates.

In 1898 the aforementioned book of Charles Lepierre is published becoming one of the most complete studies made in Portugal relatively to the ceramic industries, chemically distinguishing some fabrics in different workshops across the country. This was quite an innovation concerning ceramic studies and focusing on raw materials and clay sources for diverse pothouses. This work was far from being just theoretical or documentary. Lepierre states as he was requested by the Manufacture Nationale de Sévres to collect samples of objects and clay used in ceramic production. He offered to the museum of Sévres 250 vessels of Portuguese productions and about 450 clay samples, certified by potters, used in pottery manufacture. For the first time production techniques for several factories and traditional workshops manufacturing faience and coarse ware are described, very useful information in the study of oldest productions.

An important study concerning Portuguese faience will only appear again in 1960 with the book Faiança Portuguesa Séculos XVI e XVII by Reinaldo dos Santos. Before this he had published in the journal Panorama a paper called “A Faiança do século XVI nos primitivos portugueses” where he defended that Portuguese tin glaze ware started to be produced in the 16th century. Although this theory is nowadays archaeologically confirmed in 1956 the author did no present valid reasons to support his arguments.

In 1907 the Cerâmica Portuguesa by José Queiróz one of the most relevant books to the study of Portuguese faience is published gathering almost all information known in the study of this ware. A vast inventory of objects and decorations was presented although no chronological order was given, mixing 17th to 19th century productions. More than a century later much information gathered in

7

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

archaeological contexts. In Portugal some contexts such as the Casa do Infante (Porto), Santa Clara a Velha (Coimbra), Mosteiro São Vicente de Fora (Lisbon) or Mosteiro São João de Tarouca (Lamego) are paradigmatic examples of the amounts of faience recovered (Real et. all., 1992; Corte-Real, 2001; Ferreira, 1983; Castro and Sebastian, 2008).

In the Faiança Portuguesa Séculos XVI e XVII and for the first time the author tries to define a chronological evolution, based on the different decorations considering Chinese influence as the starting trigger of this production gaining European influences along the 17th century. He divides the evolution in four periods corresponding each of them to 25 years. This evolution is based on the dated objects kept in Portuguese and European museums. Although in the 1956 paper he defended that Portuguese faience was already produced in middle 16th century in this book there is no indication to such productions. Ten years later in Oito Séculos de Arte Portuguesa still defends the same evolution. This evolution was used ever since by many art historians and even archaeologists.

Nowadays Portuguese faience studies had a huge development making them a frequent presence in archaeological journals. Some projects are trying to chemically analyze these wares defining chemical signatures and glaze and fabrics characteristics (Castro, 2001; Castro, Dórdio e Teixeira, 2003; Guilherme, Corado and Carvalho, 2009). Unfortunately none of these projects was able to give a cultural background to the provided information.

In 1965 Artur Sandão published Faiança Portuguesa dos séculos XVIII e XIX, synthesizing the available information about Portuguese faience and referring many production centers and factories. In the following years he published “Singularidades da Faiança Portuguesa” and “Cerâmica da Antiga Botica Portuguesa”, both in the journal Colóquio, showing his interest in many aspects of Portuguese tin glaze ware.

The study of Portuguese faience is made mostly by archaeologists but the information provided by art historians shouldn’t be ignored motivated by the stylistic analysis of museum objects with several catalogs and exhibitions very useful to archaeologists. The A Influência Oriental na Cerâmica Portuguesa do século XVII, organized 1994, gathered several objects from public and private collections or the Cerâmica em Coimbra.

The 1970’s and 80’s reveal some change in the way that researchers deal with the study of Portuguese ceramics. Rafael Salinas Calado, curator at the Museu do Azulejo and later at the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga is probably one of the most important names in the study of Portuguese faience. Based on museum collections he tried to develop a more secure chronology especially for 18th century productions. The work he developed together with Ian Baart on the Portuguese faience objects recovered in Amsterdam was the starting point to a fruitful work about this subject. In 1992 he published one of his most recognized books Faiança Portuguesa, sua evolução até ao início do século XX for many years a reference for everyone studying Portuguese faience.

Outside Portugal the first references to Portuguese faience were made in the publication of shipwrecks namely the Santo António de Tanná, found off Kenya (Sansson, 1981) and the Sacramento off Bahia in Brasil (Mello, 1979). As for land discoveries Fort Jesus in Kenya, excavated in 1970’s was one of the first places where it was identified (Kirkman, 1974). In Europe Portuguese faience was mentioned in museum catalogs since early 20th century. However the first archaeological discoveries were made in Amsterdam by Ian Baart in early 1980’s (Baart, 1987). Although John Hurst published some Irish finds some years earlier they were identified as Dutch delftware (Fanning e Hurst, 1979).

In late 1980’s Post-Medieval Archaeology started to gain importance in Portugal. The first published faiences in this country correspond to some finds in Almada, Lisbon and Reguengos de Monsaraz although they are just briefly presented and no study is made about them generally dated from 17th century. Archaeologists timidly start to understand the importance of this ware and its national and international widespread (Barros, 1984; Ferreira, 1983; Gomes et. all., 1991).

The first reference to Portuguese pottery in England dates back to 1855 about red coarse ware decorated with white quartz stones and produced in High Alentejo (Hurst, 2000). John Hurst admitted not to know about this reference when in the 60’s he designated Portuguese coarse ware as Merida-type ware. Although admitting is error years later the name is still used today when describing Portuguese coarse ware (Gutierrez, 2007; Barbosa, Casimiro e Manaia, 2009).

In the 1987 meeting Cerâmica Medieval no Mediterrâneo Ocidental some Post-Medieval collections are presented. The same happens in the Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval de Tondela that in its four sessions was able to gather new information about Portuguese faience with the presentations of finds from Porto, Palmela or Funchal. These first publications only tried to present what was being found not developing any ideas about the social, economical or cultural importance of the faience presence.

In 1984 John Allan published several Portuguese faience finds in Exeter. In 1986 the book Pottery Produced and Traded in North-West Europe. 1350-1650 was published (Hurst, 1986) permitting European archaeologist to identify some Portuguese faience evidences. Despite those efforts some confusion is still made in the identification of Portuguese faience and isn’t rare to see it classified as Dutch or Italian. In Ireland John Hurst is also responsible for the first identification of Portuguese Tin Glaze Ware. For some years it was believed that Portuguese faience was more

Portuguese faience was a massive production during the 17th century as proved by the amount of finds in many

8

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

frequent in this island than in England, although that is not true. Roseanne Meanan is possibly the archaeologist who most studied and identified Iberian production in Ireland participating in the study of finds from Waterford and Galway, among others. One of her papers reveals the location of Portuguese Faience finds in Ireland and still up to date presently (Meanan, 2000).

9

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

4 PORTUGUESE FAIENCE PRODUCTION 4.1. Raw materials The most important raw material in the production of Portuguese faience is clay. Charles Lepierre in his study of Portuguese ceramics, states that most workshops tried to acquire clay with a high percentage of limestone, about 40% (Lepierre, 1898, 11). Nevertheless when this percentage was higher they would mix it with other clays, increasing its plasticity.

During the 18th century the Real Fábrica do Rato used clay taken from a source in Sesimbra of light yellow colour considered appropriate for the production of fine tableware. This factory also explored some clay sources near Campo Pequeno and close to the Colegio dos Nobres, although this raw material would only be used in repairing the kiln damage (Esteves, 2003, 142).

Faience production would imply the mixture of several types of clays. According to Charles Lepierre, the best testimony about the production of tin glaze ware in Portugal, referes about the Coimbra productions that “a pasta é obtida pela mistura de argilas figulinas com areia e margas que introduzem na sua composição o elemento cálcio que, segundo a prática ensina, é indispensável nestas louças. O vidrado é plumbífero e tornado opaco pelo óxido de estanho. No caso especial das faianças portuguesas, uma das características é que são quase sempre pintadas, sendo as cores postas em cru sobre o esmalte.” (Lepierre, 1898, 83) This states that the fabrics is made by the mixture of different clays with sand and marl clay having in its compounds limestone, said to be essential in these productions. The glaze is made of lead and made white with tin oxide. One of the characteristics of Portuguese faience is that its most of the times painted and the colours are put over the glaze, before entering the kiln.

In an 1833 document, describing the factory, it is stated that faience production would use four different clay types from different places in the paste preparation: red clay, Prazeres’ clay, Rena’s clay and clay from Leiria (Esteves, 2003, 143). A few years later the factory from Caldas da Rainha would also use clay from Leiria (Fernandes e Rebelo, 2008, 103). A document from 1620 intituled História da fundação, aumento e progresso da casa de provação da Companhia de Jesus reveals that when the Cotivia’s novice convent (today the building of the Science Museum) was built in 1587 the workers found “pits made by potters to extract clay” (Queirós, 1913, 436). Vila Nova didn’t have white clay in its proximity. The closest clay source was certainly in Caminha used in the 19th century in the Massarelos factory (Lepierre, 1898, 64). The white clay used in Vila Nova’s workshops in the 17th and 18th centuries was bought in Lisbon and probably from Coimbra (Lepierre, 1898, 86). The acquisition of clay by Vila Nova’s potters from Lisbon is registered in Porto’s port records. The oldest cargo on board a ship dates from 1647 when the ship mastered by Manuel Lopes brings white clay from Lisbon to António Fernandes, a Vila Nova potter (ADP/CABIDO/Lv.122/ 1647/fl.97). Despite this reference the 17th century is poor in information about clay imports into Vila Nova, while in the 18th century the news of clay brought from Lisbon is frequent. The Arquivo Municipal do Porto keeps the Livro das Visitações de Saúde since 1700. This book is the record of the health visits made by local authorities to ships from other cities, Portuguese or foreign when it was suspected to carry some illness on board, since most of them came from cities where several plagues would exist. The record is very precise and reveals several aspects of the ships voyage from its original port. In 1709 it reveals that the ship Navio Nossa Senhora do Vale e São Lourenço was captured by French corsairs. Leaving from Lisbon the ship carried clay for several different Vila Nova potters stating that a single ship could bring enough clay for several workshops.

When a potter found a clay source that he thought worth exploring he would continuously explore the location avoiding changes in the clay preparation. Sometimes there were other sources, even closer, with better quality for the production of tin glaze, but potters tend to use and exhaust the ones they know. The fidelity to raw materials could sometimes provoke urban problems. In a Coimbra’s law from the 16th century there is a document forbidding the exploitation of clay from Olival since it caused damage to people and agriculture (Carvalho, 1921). On the other hand when these clay sources were located in areas of urban development, the potter was obliged to stuff the mines where clay was taken has recorded in Lisbon’s legal determinations for the 17th century (Langhans, 1943). The potters always look at the closer clay sources, reducing exploration and transport expenses instead of looking at the clay quality. In Lisbon the major clay area was located between Prazeres and Estrela and was explored at least, from early 17th century. However there is news of other places where clay was acquired, namely in Calçada do Combro (Mangucci, 1996, 155) and in Calçada de São Gens (Farinha, 1932, 13) even if the documents are not very explicit if these were white or red clays.

In 1732 the potter António Francisco, married to Teresa Maria dos Reis asked 202 000 reais to the cooper Domingos de Paiva. In this text it can be read lhe mandara vir da corte e cidade de Lisboa quantidade de

10

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

barro de oleyro para elles travalharem o dito officio (the cooper bought him from Lisbon potter’s clay so he could do some pottery). Coppers had many business with Lisbon related to wine trade (Leão, 1999, 26).

production of Portuguese faience but in the kiln of red coarseware, less careful, any type of wood was used such as tojo, esteva, palha and caruma (Lepierre, 1898, 56).

In Coimbra the clay sources were in Quarto with clay marls, Cruz da Misericórdia, Póvoa, Cioga, Cucos, Nazaré da Ribeira, Trouxemil and Engote (Lepierre, 1898, 98). These mines were in used since the 16th century (Carvalho, 1921). However other raw materials were used in faience production. As important as clay was water leading to the presence of several tanks and even some wells. After the dilute of the clay in tanks and during the process of creasing the paste receives inclusions that changed some of the clay characteristics, becoming more or less malleable and increasing the hardness and resistance to thermal variations. They also permit to control the fabrics contraction during the drying period avoiding cracks.

In 1704 there is a plaint to the Lisbon’s city wall made by potters complaining of the royal officers that although knowing the need for wood to fire the kilns would complicate the access to the raw material: Dizem os Juises e mais offeciais de todo o offiçio de Oleiro desta Cidade que sendo precizo e necessario a seu offiçio para cozerem louça o valeremsse de lenha de Toijo e Pinho e padecendo alguas faltas sempre agora de próximo há mais de hum mês a esta parte Chegarão a extremos sendo a causa de lhes impedirem os Almotaceis das Execuções o tirarem Toijo do cais disendo absolutamente que não hão de permitir que os offeçiais de Oleiro levem lenha alguma (Langhans, 1943, 345). The supply problems were clearly frequent since most of the workshops had a special room to store wood know as “casa do mato” (house of wood).

One of the most frequent inclusions is quartz, this is, silica. This could be obtained directly from rocks and then crushed, although the most common situation would be through sand avoiding the hard and heavy grinding stones work. Although almost every type of sand could be used the river sands would be the most desirable since the current water would keep them clean. This raw material was easily accessible to all production centres near the rivers Tejo, Mondego and Douro. Its usage is mostly to decrease the shrinkage of the vessel when it’s drying but also increasing its thermal resistance during the kiln firing since silica resists to high temperatures.

The raw materials necessary to produce biscuit are clay, water, inclusions and wood. However, Portuguese faience is tin glazed. To do this potters needed lead, tin, silica and salt or potash. In the Coimbra’s 16th century documents the lead oxides used in pottery production are known as alcanfor (Carvalho, 1921). In the 19th century the documents surviving from the Miragaia, Massarelos Rato and Caldas da Rainha factories reveal terms such as “mina de chumbo”, “cal de chumbo”, “zarcão”, “mínio”, “litargírio”, “chumbo rubro”, “verniz”, “chumbo vermelho”, “cinzas de chumbo”, “fezes de ouro”, “massicote” and “chumbo” (Esteves, 2003; Fernandes, 2008a, Fernandes e Rebelo, 2008).

Frequently found in Portuguese faience fabrics, especially in Coimbra is grog most likely made by pots broken in firing accidents. However inclusions of different colours are found in Portuguese faience which reveals that many types of ceramics could be grind together. The use of ceramic inclusions increased the thermal chock resistance having the same behaviour as the vessels being fired.

There are no certainties where the lead was acquired in the 16th and 17th century. However in the 19th century factories it was obtain in small amounts from the Sever do Vouga and Vila Pouca de Aguiar mines and in larger amounts from England. Its price was high so potters would use every single little piece in the production (Lepierre, 1898).

It is impossible to fire clay without a kiln heated by firewood, needed in huge amounts. The use of wood, in late 19th century, would be between 3500 and 3600 kilograms, in the Coimbra kilns (Lepierre, 1898). There were many varieties and qualities of wood, depending of the place where the workshop was located and the money available to acquire wood. The most frequent term when referring to wood used in kilns is mato (small wood) so it’s impossible to know to which species of tree or bush it refers to. Near Bragança potters would use oak due to its availability, in Abrantes and Coimbra kilns were fired with pine and in Porto the heath and chamiça although the Miragaia factory used carqueja (Lepierre, 1898, 37, 49 e 87).

Tin is a frequent mineral in Portugal in the areas of Guarda, Belmonte, Viseu and Bragança. However in the 19th century faience production it was bought directly from England (Lepierre, 1898). There were large amounts of tin imported into Porto during the 17th and 18th centuries. It’s not possible to know if it was all used by potters but some of it was destined to local workshops (Leão, 1999, 27). The sand or silica was used as an inclusion in pastes but also as a glaze component. This raw material after submitted to high temperatures usually vitrifies forming the glaze. When combined with lead and tin oxides it smelts creating a white glaze. The sources of the sand used in pottery workshops in essentially river banks. In Lisbon they were acquired in the south bank of the river Tagus, near Coina, still in use until late 19th century in the Real Fábrica do Rato.

The availability of wood could influence the production. Charles Lepierre mentions that in the area of Foz Côa potters manufactured coarseware vessels by no roof tiles due to the lack of proper wood not existing in enough amounts to fire a large kiln (Lepierre, 1898, 38). In Lisbon kilns were fired with mato and pine in the

There is no information concerning the Vila Nova use of sand during the 17th and 18th centuries. However in the

11

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

19th century it was imported from Lisbon, together wit the clay. In Coimbra they were taken from the Mondego River or at the beach in Figueira da Foz (Lepierre, 1898; Fernandes, 2008).

Later documents, wrote in the 19th century, and related to the industrial and traditional productions were also used. The principle organizing the chaine operatoire was the same during these four centuries from the clay source to the kiln. Written evidences were crossed with data from production sites.

Although these are the three major raw materials needed in glaze production, the fusion temperature for silica is very high, around 1800ºC. If a clay body was submitted to these temperatures it would collapse so potters added potassium or soda to the glaze reducing the fusion temperature to about 1200ºC.

The manufacture of Portuguese faience starts outside the workshop in the clay mines. The first stage of production is made here. Not all clays were indicated to produce faience so the place where it was explored had to be choose in advance. Sometimes the choice was more depended on the availability than in the quality which every now and then led to defective productions and constant breakage (Carvalho, 1921). When a proper clay source was found it would be intensively explored by specialized workers using several instruments such as shovels and hoes.

After the glaze cover the object had to be painted. To make the necessary colours oxides from different minerals were needed. The most frequent colour in faience production was blue, followed by purple, yellow and green. Cobalt is the chemical element responsible for the preparation of blue. It’s not known where this raw material was acquired although it is likely that it came from southern Spain and not from the Middle East as it happened during the Muslim period (Rubio Navas, 2003). Yellow was made through antimonium, also used in the production of Orange. This existed in Portugal but in the 19th century it was bought from England (Lepierre, 1898, 108). In Miragaia in the production of yellow they also used iron oxide, brick powder and zinc oxides, possibly making it darker (Esteves, 2008a, 53). The purple and brown were made with manganese oxide, quite frequent in Portuguese mines. In Miragaia it was designated as morado, the Spanish name (Esteves, 2008a, 56). Green was acquired through copper oxide although is not a frequent colour until the late 18th century. From this moment when faience starts to be made in industrial factories the variety of colours increases with the introduction of red, black and orange obtained with other minerals (Esteves, 2008a).

In Portugal the exploration of clay was made in underground mines or in open ditches. These could go as deep as five metres and ladders would help bringing up baskets and buckets full of clay (Lepierre, 1998). After this it was carried in cars pulled by donkeys or oxen as it happened until early 20th century in Caldas da Rainha (Fernandes e Rebelo, 2008, 103). There is no record of the size of these vehicles but they were certainly pulled by a single animal so the clay had to be taken a few times a week. The most important clay source in Portugal was in Lisbon in Prazeres where several wagons should circulate everyday. It’s not known how the city hall would control such activities however in 1610 there is a Lisbon law that forbids potters to explore clay from Calçada do Combro since the holes on the ground were creating mobility problems. Nevertheless it does not specify if the activities were supervised by local authorities. Anyway the city hall should be aware of the clay exploration although potters were free to take as much clay as they needed, possibly paying some tax.

Although many of the workshops produced their own inks it is likely that some of them could buy the finished product. The Porto port books mention several times tintas para oleiros, this is potter’s inks (Leão, 1999, 27). Some potters were also involved in this trade. In 1686, Domingos Jorge, a Lisbon potter refers that Manuel João, a potter from Vila Nova owed him 40$250 of clay and blue that he had send for his workshop (Leão, 1999, 27).

In Coimbra the local authorities seem to have better control over the potters’ activities. In the 26th of May 1569 the potters’ regiment states that the clay would be sold by measured baskets and at a price defined by the craft judges. Every potter had to obey to these determinations or it would pay a fine (Carvalho, 1921, 21).

4.2. Production techniques

The responsible for the clay extraction, a connoisseur of the raw material could work for the potter or on its own, selling the clay to the workshop. In Évora in the 19th century there was special workers exploring the clay sources but it’s not known if they worked for potters or sell them the clay (Ribeiro, 1984). In Paredes, near Porto, in late 19th century, for the production of black pottery all the potters joined together some days a week to explore and divide the clay (Lepierre, 1898, 25).

Historical, documentary and archaeological aspects have to be crossed to explain the manufacturing process of Portuguese faience. The absence of Portuguese treaties, made in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries the acme of this production made the search for information go to other European production centres, using similar techniques that could be identifiable in the vessels found in archaeological sites. From Italy the book by Cipriano Picolpasso, Le Tri Libri del Arte del Vasaio (1556), is already a classic and needs no presentations. From the Low Countries the De plateelbakker of Delftsch aardewerkmaaker (1794) describes the Delft production. They used the same techniques as Portuguese faience.

The inexistence of white clay near Vila Nova made potters buy clay from Lisbon. The number of people involved in this trade is not known but this was sent to the north by Lisbon potters considering that in the testament

12

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

of Domingos Jorge, potter in the Santa Catarina area in Lisbon it is said that Manuel João, a potter in Vila Nova owed him 40$250 of clay and blue (Queirós, 1907).

being used (Carvalho, 1921). However Portuguese potters ignored chemistry and did not know why accidents happened. When a mixture worked they would used it until a clay souce exhausted. In Portugal pastes were very variable between workshops sometimes using the same clay sources (Lepierre, 1898, 3).

Most of the times it was collected dry since its primary nature does not put them near to water streams. When reaching the workshop it could be taken directly into the water tanks or to be crushed. Although that’s not a current practice in faience production some potters could have done it, especially if the workshop’s tanks were not that large. The activity was recorded in the late 19th century faience factory of Caldas da Rainha so it’s possible it happened in the 17th century as well (Fernandes e Rebelo, 2008, 117).

According to Charles Lepierre even the best potters would prepare the pastes randomly not thinking about chemical characteristics and sometimes using them without cleaning them, as nature offered them (Lepierre, 1898, 4 e 11). After the clay mixture was ready it was necessary to smash it. This process, depending on the amounts of clay was made over a bench or on the floor. This seems to be the normal procedure in the preparation of clay in European workshops with references to this technique in the A Arte do Louceiro and in Arte da Louça Vidrada (Silva, 1804: Xavier, 1805). In a document from 1823 from the Real Fábrica do rato potters ask for the repair tank protection where “se continua a pisar o barro de forma antiga, estando exposto a receber a terra, as pedras que vão pegadas aos pés dos trabalhadores empregados naquele laboratório” (they continued to smash clay with their feet receiving unwanted inclusions) (Esteves, 2003, 146). This techinique, called pisadura was possibly used in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries.

After being crushed the clay was soaked in water inside tanks. The clay would dilute and loose part of its impurities that could cause fire accidents. It’s not well known how long this process would take but some information says it could take as long as four months if needed. It was believed that the longuest the clay stayed the better it would be for the finished vessels since it would be cleaner from all impurities. During that time (known in potter’s slang as remolha) the clay was mixtured and mashed several times with hoes, shovles, sticks and sickles, cutting it (Girão, 1905). With the major dirt’s out the remaining would be eliminated when the clay was filtered since every unwantable inclusion would remain in the sieve. Such operation used large colanders that in the Dutch delft industry were made from copper, ceramics or wood and passed clay from a tank to another. In Portugal it was known as gamela although there isn’t any information about its material. In one of the Picolpasso’s drawings this process is made in the place where the clay was explored. It would save time and spaces to clean the clay before take it to the workshop.

The inclusions used in Portuguese faience production were essentially quartz, micas and grog. Many of them could be naturally present in clay without the need to put them later, although many where intentionally added. The purpose was to reduce the plasticity of clay and the shrinkage of the clay body during its drying and mostly during the first kiln fire. The presence of inclusions that don’t change their characteristics at 800ºC helps to maintain the form of the vessel (Rice, 1987, 74). Its use in pottery manufacture implies they had to be grind to small particles using large mortars and grinding stones moved with animal force, although some of them could me moved by hydraulic force (Amouric e Thiriot, 1995). In the Picolpasso’s treaty there is the representation of grinding stones and in a description of the Miragaia Factory in 1801 it’s mentioned the existence of a house, separated from the factory main building, where some grinding stones were that grind inclusions and oxides for the glaze. The presence of several of these stones was archaeologically confirmed during the excavations of the building (Fernandes, 2008, 18). In the 17th century workshops the grinding stones would be similar to the Picolpasso’s representation although possibly moved by human force. In fact, from all the information we know about pottery production centres there is only one reference to two very badly treated donkeys in the Pé de Ferro pothouses, in Lisbon (Mangucci, 1996, 166). In the excavations of the Rua Cândido dos Reis in Gaia a much eroded circular grinding stones were found (Almeida, Neves e Cavaco, 2001).

After the cleaning the clay was left to dry. The evaporation of the water made clay particles join together strengthening the crystalline structure. Inside the tanks the clay would acquire different densities. The finest stayed at the top used to make fine tableware, while the other was used to make more rough vessels. The drying process, depending on the temperature and humidity could last from a month (Lepierre, 1898, 99) to eight months (Fernandes e Rebelo, 2008, 117). The mixture of different clays could happen in the tank as it did in Delft (Jonge, 1979, 11) or in London delftware industry where they were mixed “in a pond or sestron where it is stired and wrought together till it becomes like tick water (…) then it’s put though a fine haire sive and runs into a shallow place like a seastron, where it sattles into a bed and the water dryes from it, after which it is carried into the House and wrought up by treading”, or when the past was mashed (Tyler, Betts, Stephenson, 2008, 17). The mixture of clays is related with the need of having a paste that resists to two fires. This was a major concern in Coimbra and the local authorities provided information on the amounts of each type of clay

After smashed the clay was divided in medium size chunks (known as pélas) and punched with wood paddles

13

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

retrieving any air bubbles inside. After this it would be left to dry (Fernandes, 2008, 26).

jars and the handles put later. More complex shapes, namely some types of square boxes and bottles and even some plates with moulded decoration were made using plaster or wood moulds. The clay was extended using a rolling pin and then applied to the mould using a wet sponge. In the Real Fábrica do Rato this technique was known as lastra. In very complex shapes the potter could use the barbotina technique where liquid clay filled a mould.

The best description in Portugal about the production of white tin glaze ware can be found in the Charles Lepierre book O Estado da Indústria Cerâmica em Portugal, describing the Coimbra manufacture: “Introduz-se a mistura dos barros num tanque cavado na terra, de cerca de um metro de profundidade, variando a largura e o comprimento em 3 a 4 metros. As paredes são feitas de tijolo; um operário mistura as argilas com água por meio de uma enxada; depois quando a mistura está considerada homogénea, tira-se, para um balde, sobre um peneiro de tela metálica (latão) que retém as partes grosseiras que acompanham a argila; esta manobra efectua-se por meio do sistema muito conhecido chamado de cegonha. As argilas desfeitas e peneiradas são recebidas em tanques colocados à mesma altura mas mais profundos (2 metros em média). Deixa-se depois depositar a pasta. Sob influência do calor atmosférico a evaporação da água opera-se em 3 ou 4 meses. Como o peneiro, acima indicado, se acha num dos cantos do tanque, as partes mais próximas do peneiro são as mais grosseiras por se terem depositado em primeiro lugar; as partes mais finas, ao contrário, ficando em suspensão, depositam-se mais acima. Utilizam-se as pastas mais grosseiras para o fabrico de faianças mais ordinárias, a que se dá o nome de ratinhas. Retiram-se as pastas ainda húmidas e submetem-se a uma última pisadura.” (Lepierre, 1898, 99). The tecnhique in late 19th century was similar to what happen in late 17th century.

Less common are the shapes sculpted in clay. They represent mostly religious figures and in some case ladies figures and bells with human shapes as the examples found in Santa Clara a Velha near Coimbra (Côrte-Real, 2000). Some objects could join together both techniques as a bottle made in the wheel having a moulded handle. After the construction the objects would be left to dry in a table (tábua) at least during an entire day, varying according to the size of the vessels and the temperature of the room. Although is not known if faience workshops used such technique some pothouses used sunny days to dry pottery, outside the building. It’s likely to have happened since in 1862 in the last years of the Rua das Madres workshop in Lisbon, existing since 1638, there was a lawsuit against the owner, Maria de Jesus Mó for complicating the circulation of people and vehicles by putting clay vessels to dry outside (Mangucci, 2003, 426). Although by this time the place only produced red wares the tradition may be older. After drying for a few hours some vessels were put back on the wheel correcting imperfections and thinning its walls by lopped them with a spatula.

The next step was the construction of the vessel body. In the Real Fábrica do Rato documents there is a description of the process stating that after the paste is prepared the objects are made, by hand, on the wheel or in proper moulds. After being done they need to be smoothed so they go back to the wheel and are burnished with steel objects: preparada e pronta a massa, seguem-se outras operações antes que a massa se faça obra, e vem a ser amassar de novo sobre as mesas com as mãos o barro, batê-lo com pedaços de pau, formá-lo em porções de tamanho preciso para as diferentes peças. Tudo isto se faz para que o barro fique bem unido, igual em toda a parte com a devida consistência, e sem ar intermédio. Feito isto fazem-se as peças, ou à mão, ou em roda, ou moldando em formas próprias. Depois de feitas estas cumpre alizá-las com todo o cuidado, e melinde, para o que se levam depois de secas outra vez à roda, e com instrumentos de aço brunem a superfície, e avivam os traços (Esteves, 2003, 148).

Although no evidence of slip has been found in Portuguese faience it’s possible that some objects were submitted to that treatment, a current practice in other European tin glaze ware workshops (Xavier, 1905). After drying the object would be fired for the first time, in a process known as chacota, reaching a temperature around 800ºC. It would last for 12 to 20 hours with the kiln being gradually heaten and controlled by a man (forneiro) based on the colour of flames. The purpose of this first fire was to create a strong ceramic body able to receive a glaze without break in the next fire. It’s known that some small clay objects were put inside the kiln, in strategic places and took during the fire to see how well fired was the pottery. These experiences were known as cubijas and were recovered in the Rua de Buenos Aires and Rua Candido dos Reis excavations. The biscuit objects would take the same time to cool inside the kiln. In Coimbra a production known as Ratinha was glazed without being fired. However that made the object less fine and resistant and increased the number of discarded vessels (Lepierre, 1898, 99).

The potter’s wheel, moved with the foot would be in a special room. The chunk of clay was puted on top of the wheel and the potter would shape it with his hands. The wheel used in Portugal was very similar to the one used in the rest of Europe. It was composed by the head or wheel plate where the chunk of clay was put connected to a larger rolling wheel that the potter moved with his foot by an axis (Fernandes, 2008, 27).

The next step was the glaze and the object was dipped in a solution of water, sand, salt or potash, lead and tin oxides inside large tanks (Xavier, 1805, 23). The lead and sand were the base of the glaze, the tin made it opaque and the salt or potash were used to decrease the fusion point of

Here were made open and closed shapes such as plates, bowls, pharmacy jars and even some types of bottles and

14

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

In the Arte da Louça Vidrada the processes are also described but in less detail (Xavier, 1805).

these elements. One of the most important steps was to calcinate the metals creating the oxides. These were put in smaller kilns (forninhos) (Xavier, 1804, 94) although in case of a smaller production the potter could use the master kiln to do it when pottery was being fired. In Caldas da Rainha this procedure would take about 18 hours (Fernandes e Rebelo, 2008) while in Alcobaça this could be done in only 5 or 6 hours (Bernarda, 2001), although there is no reference to the amount of oxides produced. The metals were put inside crucibles. The oxides were grind in grinding stones together with some sand and then sifted.

There were many ways of oxidise metals. Most workshops would start by outing the lead on the kiln, followed by tin while other would mix everything inside crucibles. To increase the oxide production metals were constantly stirred releasing the oxide. To the mixture of the different ingredients was added water creating a dense solution in which the vessels were dipped. Before being dipped they should be cleaned of any dust on their surface.

The precise amount of each component of glaze is difficult to infer during the 16th and 17th centuries however the ratio should be of 80%-20% for lead and tin. By late 18th century in Coimbra the mixture would be from 100 kg of lead with 25 kg of tin, 37,5 kg of salt and 125 kg of white sand for everyday wares and in more delicate wares 100 kg of lead and 7 kg of tin (Lepierre, 1898, 101 e 43). But glaze composition was very variable between different workshops always trying to spare tin, the most expandable raw material. The mixture of lead, tin, silica and salt would vitrify around 1200ºC as described in L’art de fabriquer la faience (1828).

According to the Coimbra’s city laws every object, before being glazed was submitted to a rigorous observation by the craft judges separating the imperfect vessels. Although discarding large amounts of pottery this would increase production since they would break less (Carvalho, 1921). Less gifted artisans could buy already made biscuit vessels and glaze and paint them. If the goal was to produce a white vessel it was ready to go to the kiln. However Portuguese faience is known for its intense decoration. The colours were made using different mineral oxides obtained in a similar process used for lead and tin, although they could go to the kiln for three times. A very fine powder was obtained by the grinding of such oxides mixture with sand, lead and water. The proportions of oxide were however quite small. For blue the percentage of cobalt was only 2%, for purple the manganese was about 6%, for yellow the antimony was 10% and for green the copper was 5% (Esteves, 2008a, 53).

It has survived until today the glaze and colour recipe book from the Miragaia factory. Although these documents refer the middle 19th century industry the same techniques were used during the 17th century. The proportions of lead and tin used here were of eight and two out of ten. The mixture was known as queima joined to the massico made with salt and sand (Esteves, 2008a, 51). After the mixture was made it was once again put in the kiln inside clay crucibles (cadilhos).

Although in Delft industry there were special houses making only ink in Portugal that never happened (Jonge, 1969). Each workshop or factory produced its own inks although sometimes they could sell the finished product. In the middle 17th century arrives in Porto a boat carrying tintas para oleiros (potters’ ink) and another with azul de oleiros (potters’ blue) possibly referring to already made colours (Leão, 1999, 27).

In the Arte do Louceiro published in Portugal in 1804 the process is described like this “Querendo-se que o esmalte seja branco misturam-se cinco partes de estanho com vinte de chumbo. Fazem-se calcinar em um vaso e barro no forno de calcinação. A fornalha se deve esquentar algumas horas antes de se lançar nela o chumbo, e a chama deve sempre dar sobre o chumbo, para isto deve ser o forno de reverbero. Deve-se mover o metal com uma espátula de ferro até ele se reduzir em cinzas. Então se lança o estanho e se move do mesmo modo, até que este também se converta em cinzas. Aumenta-se o fogo até que as cinzas estejam abrasadas, então se diminui o fogo e se deixam esfriar, movendo-as sempre com a espátula. Misturam-se estas cinzas com igual porção de sal, e de areia. Põe-se tudo em vaso descoberto, e se põe nesta segunda calcinação, todo o sal se evapora, e o peso diminui; porém o sal se ajunta para facilitar a fusão. Pisa-se a matéria calcinada em um gral de ferro, e se liviga cuidadosamente em uma pedra, com uma quantidade de água suficiente para a tornar de uma consistência líquida. Caindo sobre o verniz qualquer bocado de gordura, por pouca que seja, desmancha todo o trabalho, porque os metais tornam a tomar a sua primeira forma e o verniz desaparece de cima dos vasos em que se tinha aplicado. O pó, caindo sobre o verniz, faz no esmalte uns pequenos buracos” (Silva, 1804, 93-94).

Paintings could be made in a free style clearly used in less complex situations although more complex drawing would use transfer printing. The transfer would be made in thick paper waterproofed with linseed oil and the drawings cut with scissors (Rosen, 1995). This transfer was put over the plate with the help of grain charcoal blown over the object. After this operation the drawing would be painted using paint brushs. French and Dutch painters used ear oxen fur to do their brushes. The painters’ craft was as important as the potters’ craft. Each painter would use its own brushes and other objects. Although 18th and 19th centuries industries were better organized it is possible that the ink recipients found in the Meillonas factory, in France with the colour name on the outside and even the artisans’ initials would also exist in 17th century workshops (Rosen, 1995).

15

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

that purpose (…) the widness is according to what they have to fill it with, and made about one foot and a half high without a bottom, and little holes in the sides, through which holes they put, three square pegs, upon which the fine ware rests (Tyler, Betts, Stephenson, 2008, 18).

After the drawings made and dry the objects would be once again fired. The second time the objects were fired was inside pottery saggars (casetas or caixas). These vessels were refractory pottery recipients with the ability to resist to high temperatures without breaking (the fabrics usually had more silica and limestone) while the pottery inside would only be submitted to a maximum of 1200ºC.

This fire demanded more skills in temperature control since glaze and paints had to fuse together. It would reach a maximum temperature of 1200ºC and it would last about 17 to 20 hours. It would cool for about 40 hours inside the kiln (Lepierre, 1898).

Although not recognized until quite recently they have been recovered in every faience production site archaeological excavation in Lisbon, although not yet recognized elsewhere. In Delft industry they were about 24 cm wide, although in Portuguese industry they appear in very variable size between 14 cm and 30 cm with a medium wall size around 1 cm. They have an open bottom that it’s believed to permit a faster entrance of the heat from the kiln, fastening the firing process. Such open bottom is not frequent in Delft Dutch industry but it was also identified in London Delft industry (Tyler, Betts, Stephenson, 2008).

The kiln was filled with different stage of production objects and in some cases is quite possible that the kiln chamber was physically divided by a brick wall as probably happened in Mata da Machada, separating the hottest area from other reaching smaller temperatures (Torres, s.d.). However the most probable was that the kiln was packed carefully and giving attention to the hottest areas where boxes were put and the less hot where biscuit was fired. The boxes would stay at the bottom closer to the fire while the biscuit would stay on top. The kiln was always filled at its maximum capacity increasing the profit of its use. According to Charles Lepierre the Coimbra kilns could fire up to 1200 dozens plates and bowls; this is about 14000 objects each time they were used. It is quite possible that the 17th century kilns were smaller as the kiln found in the Garagem Avenida excavation firing up to 5000 objects each time. Firing accidents would be quite frequent sometimes ruining almost the entire production. They could be caused by kiln temperature, badly prepared pastes or even wet clay. Kiln temperature was controlled by expert workers (forneiros) that could control it through observing the flames or by small controlling objects (cubijas). They would start by a slow fire about 400ºC for five hours completing the drying of the objects. This would be achieved by heavy wood producing heat but just a few flames. After this period they would reduce the size of the wood increasing the flames and heat. Faience kilns permit the circulation of oxygen. Ideally the workshop would have at least two kilns, one to produce the biscuit and another to glaze the objects, but that was rarely the case. The most common was that when the kiln was used it would produce biscuit and glazed artefacts, however is still possible that the kiln could have been used twice a week, first producing biscuit and later the glazed and painted objects.

Fig. 1 – Saggars found in the Largo de Santos excavation in Lisbon (drawing by T. Casimiro).

The boxes present several triangular holes in their walls to put the cravilhos working as separators so the objects did not touch one another avoiding fused glazes. Although only circular boxes were found in Portuguese industry is quite possible that square or rectangular boxes also existed. They were covered with unglazed plates. The boxes, filled with vessels were put on top of each other filling the kiln. In1698, John Dwight describes this type of fire: Lastly the smale ware such as tea, chocolate and coffe cupps with such like, is not burnt or set in the Kiln singly by themselves, but they are put in the case made for

16

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 2 – Saggars (after Xavier, 1805).

17th century written evidences, crossed with the instructions left during the 19th century about how did a kiln was used and packed makes us believe that kilns were fired at least once a week, firing about 50 times a year except for Christmas and Easter.

17

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

5 PRODUCTION SITES its importance was understood since the country was producing, consuming and certainly exporting what archaeologists though to be Spanish productions. Tin glaze ware was produced in the Santos-o-Velho and Santa Catarina areas. The location of the workshops in these areas is related to the proximity of the clay sources and the river since it was helpful to send pottery to other regions. Although there were preferable clay sources this raw material was certainly acquired wherever available. There are several documental evidences to clay holes left in the ground. Clay was taken from Principe Real, Calçada do Combro (forbidden in 1610) and near the Castle (forbidden in 1563), but also near Monte de São Gens (Farinha, 1936, 15) and Campo de Santa Clara. In 1671 “os Juises do Offiçio de Oleiro desta Cidade que elles suplicantes exercitão com todos os mais offeçiais do dito offiçio varias obras de Barro e para isso se valião do Campo da forca donde sempre o tirarão e nessa posse estão e porque hora lhe impedem os Almotaçeis o dito exercissio e tirada do barro do dito Sitio e não há outro Citio em que se ache daquella calidade para se poder obrar com ele e com esta falta resultava ao povo grande prejuiso e do mesmo modo ao offíçio pello que pedem a vossa Senhoria lhe faça merçe ordenar que não seija perdida a posse da tirada do dito barro de que sempre usarão visto o prejuiso do povo e o offiçio que se conçidera” (Langhans, 1943, 342).

Fig. 3 – Map with the production sites location.

5.1. Lisbon Lisbon was the first city in Portugal where faience started to be made going back to the middle 16th century. This new production was imitating southern Spanish wares and is frequently found in Lisbon contexts. In 1500 faience was not yet made in Lisbon. In the Lisbon’s charter given by Manuel I in the chapter relative to malagas e azulejos all the wares would enter the city by land or by sea and no reference is made to its production while red coarsewares and glazed coarsewares have references to being produced in the city. In 1501 the workshops were located far from the city centre located in the arreualde novo da mouraria, homde estão os olleiros, at least since the 12th century, after the Islamic tradition (Farinha, 1932, 12).

The most important clay source was in the vicinity of Estrela and Prazeres. Although written evidences about this extraction are only available since late 18th century, archaeological evidences revealed that clay was explored since the 17th century. The archaeological company Neoépica Lda excavated a site in Rua de Buenos Aires in January 2010 with three trenches in which evidences of tin glaze ware production was found. Vessels and tiles as well as several saggars inside of which ceramics were fired were recovered. There were workshops dumpsters full of debris since potters were forced to fill the holes they opened when extracting clay. In December 11th 1671 the city halls determines that no potter could open a new clay hole without filling the previous: “não levarão carga de Barros sem deitarem outra de emtulhos no mesmo lugar” (Langhams, 1943, p. 342).

In 1551 a reference is made to the Olaria de Cima and Olaria de Baixo streets, Lagares das Olarias and Travessa do Forno, in Santa Justa near Anjos. The traditional location of the Lisbon workshops was maintained till the 16th century (Farinha, 1932, 13). In 1568, 34 red coarseware potters lived in the Lombarda street and in 1637, 120 potters lived in the Anjos area (Farinha, 1932, p. 15). The production of white tin glaze is archaeologically documented since 1550 in the Tagus south bench and this must have been the moment when it also started in Lisbon. The high percentage of tin glaze ware bowls and plates found in Lisbon’s early post-medieval archaeological sites suggested for many years that the country must have been producing these artefacts on its own and not importing such quantity from southern Spain. Despite the three decades since the Barreiro’s kiln excavation just recently

18

The first production of tin glaze wares possibly made for everyday use was never mentioned in documents. In 1552 the book Grandeza e Abastança da Cidade de Lisboa by João Brandão referes that Lisbon had 60 pottery kilns with coarse ware and glazed wares. At this time tin glaze ware was already being produced in Lisbon and surrounding areas. However its simplicity and daily use, far from the beauty acquired some years later, made the author believe that it wasn’t worth of a proper reference and just a mentioned it as glaze pottery. In the same book the references are made to white Malaga from Seville and

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Talavera as well as from other Castille cities referring that the annual trade amount could go up to 11500 cruzados. Although faience production already existed it was not enough to support the market and not replacing the demand for Spanish imports (Brandão, 1992).

which people could pass; the two pedestals of its pillars bore the images of Saint Justa and Saint Rufina, the patron saints of the craft, holding coarse red earthenware vessels in their hands. Both sides of the arch were decorated. On the right was a female personification of Nature, crowned with flowers and holding a red vessel and a figure of a man modelled in clay. On the left was a female figure representing Art; she rested her left hand on a potter’s wheel, and in her right held a ‘porcelain vase made in Lisbon in perfect imitation of the Chinese’ and the words: “Here our soveraign and beloved king, does the new craft offers, made in the Portuguese kingdom, what so expensive was brought from China”. Above, a small panel depicted a ship arriving from India, unloading Chinese porcelain.

The first document that refers the existence of this industry is from 1554 Sumario em que brevemente contam algumas cousas assi eclesiasticas como seculares que ha na cidade de Lisboa by Cristóvão Rodrigues de Oliveira stating the existence of 46 designers and 76 pottery paintors. This document states also that there were 60 kilns in the city fired up to three times a month (Oliveira, 1938). In 1565 the book Livro do Lançamento e Serviço que a Cidade de Lisboa Fez a El Rei Nosso Senhor no ano de 1565 refers the first potters living in the area of Santos and Santa Catarina some of them Portuguese and others Flemish such as João de Góis, Roberto Jacome and Filipe de Góis. Despite the creation of this new area of production red coarse ware continued to be made in the Anjos area where it was since the Middle Ages. In 1584 Duarte de Semedo wrote that there was a church in Nossa Senhora do Monte were there are many pottery workshops making pots with Lisbon’s clay: “uma egreja dedicada a N. Senhora do Monte e a cujas raízes há muitas olarias que trabalham com muita perfeição loiça de barro por ser o de Lisboa muito bom para tais obras” (Farinha, 1932, 15).

In the same scene, several foreign ships loaded Portuguese blue-on-white pottery, whilst other boats, already full, set sail. Below the panel could be read ‘Et nostra perrant’ (And ours go to vario us regions): há hua pequena praça, na qual vem parar a padaria, Rua por dõde sua Magestade subio para a See, ao pee da mesma Padaria sae a Rua da Misericordia, em cuja entrada fizerão os Oleiros sua representação; era de hum Arco pelo qual se servia a Rua entre dous altos, & largos pedestaes, sobre os quaes em duas peanhas estavão as Imagens de vulto das Santas Justa & Rufina, mui bem ornadas cõ seus vasos de barro nas mãos, & entre elas levantada hua torre sobre o Arco, insígnia que com as Santas tem a bandeira destes officiaes; nas ameas do primeiro andar da torre havia hua traja sostentada de dous mininos, na qual estava escrita esta oitava fallando com sua Magestade: Inda que tem de barro os fundamentos/ Esta torre alterosa, E levantada/ Não teme a força de contrarios ventos/ Por vos nestas colunas sustentada/ Obra que arrima à vos os pensamentos/ Não pode facilmente ser quebrada/ E o forte mais soberbo, E mais bizarro/ Contra vosso poder será de barro. Em dous quadros que ficava, nos pedestais, no da mão dereita estava pintada a Natureza coroada de flores; tinha em hua mão hu vaso de barro vermelho, & da outra lhe pegava hum home meio saído da terra, que significava i barro, no pee estava este quarteto: Para demonstração de mor grandeza/ Na perfeição da terra que pisais/ Até o barro humilde dá sinais/ De quanto quis honrar a natureza. Encima deste quadro avia outro pequeno com hum Emblema cujo corpo era duas maõs cheas de agoa aludiendo à que o rústico lavrador offerecceo nellas a Xerxes, dizia a letra: ET TIBI PVRIOR, ET PVULCHRIOR. Para vos mais pura, & mais fermosa. No outro quadro da mão esquerda estava pintada a Arte, à seus pees vários instrumentos mecânicos & entre eles hua roda de Oleiro, na qual ella tinha posta a mão esquerda, & na dereita hu vaso de porcelana da que se faz em Lisboa contrafeita da China, ao pee desta figura avia estoutro quarteto: Aqui monarca excelso soberano/ Vos offerece a Arte peregrina/ Fabricado no Reino Lusitano/ O que antes nos vendeu tam caro a China. Encima no quadro pequeno avia outro Emblema, era hua Nao da India da qual se descarregavão barcas de porcelana da China, & outros navios estrangeiros que carregavão da nossa, & outros que já carregados della, saião do Porto; era a letra deste Emblema: ET NOSTRA PERERRANT,

The first written evidence which permits us to clearly assert the production of tin glaze ware in Lisbon is the Potters’ Regiment of 1572. The document refers the production of Talavera white ware (louça branca de talaveira) and the manufacture of new shapes such as pharmacy jars and pots (almofias de boticário and panelas de botica) large plates (galinheiros), jars (albarradas), bottles (redomas) and pots (boiões). Attending to the existing documents is understood that the beginning of Portuguese faience has more Spanish than Chinese influences. Nevertheless, Chinese influence soon reached Portuguese workshops. In 1618 among the list made by the Inquisition of the belongings of canon Baltasar Estaço there are a dozen Indian and Portuguese porcelains: uma dúzia de porcelanas da Índia e de Lisboa (Baião, 1936, 81). 1619 is the year of one of the most well known references to faience production in Lisbon. Philippe III visited this city during the week of the Corpus Christi procession. Besides de diverse religious activities one of the day’s highlights was a parade were all of the city’s crafts would be organized under flags and a patron saint. The event, recorded by João Baptista Lavanha, had several commemoration arches made but merchants, English, Germans, Flemish, Italians, showing the several people living in Lisbon, but also shoemakers, rope makers and potters. This last group made its presentation at the entrance to the Misericórdia street. It took the form of an arch through

19

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Também as nossas vão a várias regiões. Rematavase a torre com hua estatua de hum Anjo, que tinha na mão o escudo das armas de Portugal (Calado, 2003). This news is quite important since it states how the potters looked at their own productions. In 1619 there was a clear intent to imitate Chinese porcelain. This document made many researchers believe that Portuguese faience had developed in the 16th century trying to imitate China ware, ignoring that European influences were there first (Calado, 1992). The representation of ships taking Portuguese faience to other nations demonstrates the huge production made in Lisbon, enough to support an international trade system. The industry described by João Baptista Lavanha reveals a well organized craft something that would only be possible by some decades of production.

competir as perçolanas de Lisboa com as do Oriente; e imitandoo outros oficiaies, cresceo a mercadoria de maneira, que não somente está o reino cheyo desta louça; mas vay muita de carregaçaõ para fora da Barra” (Calaldo, 2003). Every archaeological excavation made in Lisbon has offered Portuguese Faience. However the evidences for workshops were not so easy to find. Luis Keil refers the thousands of fragments recovered by Vergilio Correia in the eastern part of Lisbon (“provenientes de peças quebradas ou defeituosas, refugos de fornos recolhidos nas colinas da parte oriental de Lisboa” (Keil, 1938, 45). Lisbon productions were exported all over the country having more rough productions known as “louça ordenaria ou grossa”, the most common used in daily activities and the fine ware known as louça fina. There was also a designation for the objects sent overseas known as louça de carregação (Mangucci, 1996).

In 1620 Frei Nicolau de Sousa in the book Livro das Grandezas de Lisboa, mentions 8 kilns of glazed wares, 28 of Venice wares and 49 of red coarse ware but also 13 kilns of tiles, although many of them were fired in the Venice ware kilns since they used the same technique (Oliveira, 1620, 97). In 1621 António de Vasconcelos confirms these numbers in the book Descripção de Portugal refering the exestance of 8 fornos de louça vidrada, 28 de louça de Veneza, 49 de barro vermelho e 13 de azulejo (Calado, 2003).

Lisbon has a very well recognized production clearly identifiable in Portugal and in other countries. In the inventory made in 1700 of the belongings of D. Ana Oliveira Leite, wife of Rodrigo Machado Carvalhal, there is the reference to 20 plates of fine Lisbon ware (Sequeira, 1967, 71). In the North American Probate Inventories there are references to Lisbon ware, Lizbon ware and Lisborn ware (Willcoxen, 1999). Such references are quite understandable especially attending to the amounts of Portuguese faience recovered in American sites and even the references from Portuguese port books referring the export of such wares towards those colonies (Pendery, 1999).

The few archaeological evidences that prove that tiles and pots were fired together were found in the Rua de Buenos Aires site where both biscuit forms appeared together. These books show that around 1620 white tin glaze ware was known as Venice ware and was produced in large quantities. The designation is still today discussed. It’s believed that Venice majolica with its blue colours had some resemblance to Portuguese faience. Luis de Oliveira believes that this designation was not adopted based on the production but in the kiln architecture. They were called Venice kilns since the construction techniques were the same used in Italy and in Venice (Oliveira, 1916a).

In 1672 there were 11 workshops in the Santos-o-Velho area (Mangucci, 1996). The increase of production made this ware, initially destined to wealthy people, became accessible to everyone democratizing its consumption. Initially it was compared with Talavera, Venice and Chinese productions destined to rich people but from around 1635 it becomes quite frequent as it reaches every social class from palaces to hospitals, houses and taverns.

Some authors did the maths about how many Portuguese faience vessels would 28 kilns produce in one year. The result was much higher than the amounts the city and its surrounding areas could consume. Although some of them were sent to southern and northern Portugal large amounts were sent overseas.

At this moment it’s not yet possible to credit specific potters for specific productions. In fact Lisbon pothouses were producing very similar objects. The attempt to distinguish some productions was made by João Pedro Monteiro defending that the pots with the coat of arms of João IV and Luisa de Gusmão were made in Luis de Moura’s workshop in Santos-o-Velho considering that the potter was the Royal Potter for tiles and painted wares since 1641 (Monteiro, 2002, 59). Although this theory is quite tempting there is no written or material evidence that can support it to be true.

In 1655 the book Notícias de Portugal by Manuel Severim de Faria, according to its author written 30 years earlier, states that a potter came from Talavera to Lisbon and seeing the quality of the clay started to make white tin glaze ware similar to Talavera and Chinese productions. They were in fact so beautiful that Lisbon porcelain could compete with Chinese porcelain. Other potters followed and soon the production was so intense that Portugal was full of them and many were sent to other nations: “poucos anos há que um oleiro, que veio de Talaveira a Lisboa, vendo a bondade do barro da terra, começou a lavrar louça vidrada branca, não só como a de Talaveira; mas como da China; porque na fermusura, e perfeição podiam

Only recently through archaeological finds it has been possible to determine the physical characteristics of the three production centres. These conclusions were taken from the direct analysis of several objects found in production areas.

20

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

In Lisbon three places with evidences of faience production were found: Largo de Jesus, Largo de Santos and Rua de Buenos Aires. Until the discovery if these places the characterization of the Lisbon faiences was made based upon finds in the city and surrounding urban centres (Sabrosa e Santo, 1992; Fernandes e Carvalho, 2003). The tin glaze ware found in these three sites is exactly what was expected from the Lisbon wares. The fabrics are white buff yellowish, especially in the fine quality wares and somewhat pinkish in less quality items. Its quite homogenous and compact and the number of inclusions quite small. Those are mostly very small quartz and micas most of them naturally existing in the clay, although quartz could be added as sand helping to reduce the amount of water in the clay. In a few occasions small bits of red grog appear in Lisbon’s production so they must be accidental.

Fig. 5 – Biscuit plate found in Largo de Jesus (photo by L. Sebastian).

The glaze is of an excellent quality with a high percentage of tin increasing the whiteness and shine. These are usually quite thick and very strong. There are some examples with a less quality glaze, however none of these artefacts was recovered in the British Isles and are usually found in more modest household contexts. As for the colours the percentage of oxides was probably a little less than in Coimbra or Vila Nova since tends to be a little bit lighter than the other productions. However the same vessels can in fact present different shades of blue so the same objects could receive several layers of ink. The first site where an evidence of faience workshops was identified in Lisbon was in largo de Jesus, near Calçada do Combro, found in 2005. No structures were found that could be directly related to a pottery production site but several fragments of a kiln’s grid were recovered (Santos, 2007). The ceramic evidence reveals several types of productions with evidences of red coarse ware, biscuit and tin glaze ware as well as saggars to fire the objects.

Fig. 6 – Plate found in Largo de Jesus showing Chinese influence (after Santos, 2005).

The objects found are mostly plates and bowls. These are the shapes commonly found in Lisbon’s sites. Decorations are mostly of Chinese inspiration with a divided ledge, geometrical crossed decorations and chrysanthemums and the bottom with central landscapes, large leafs and ferns.

Fig. 7 – Plates found in Largo de Jesus showing Chinese influence (after Santos 2005).

Several ceramic containers were recovered inside of which tin glaze pottery was fired by the second time.

Fig. 4 – Tin glaze plate found in Largo de Jesus (photo by L. Sebastian).

21

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 8 – Plate decorated with ferns and leafs found in Largo de Jesus (after Santos, 2005).

Fig. 10 – Plate with small spirals found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro).

Fig. 9 – Plate decorated with small spirals found in Largo de Jesus (after Santos, 2005).

The proximity of the Largo de Santos with the major faience production area in Lisbon was a clear indicator that something would have to appear in an excavation. The area revealed to be an amount of debris from a close pottery production workshop from late 17th century with several examples of broken biscuit and ceramic boxes. The faience found in this site, despite its enormous breakage revealed a late 17th century or early 18th century site with several sherds decorated in purple and a preponderance of beads and baroque decoration. Floral decoration is made of large petals and ferns and some examples of lace. The Chinese influence is quite rare with just two or three examples. The shapes are plates, bowls and bottles.

Fig. 11 – Bowl with Chinese influence decoration found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro).

In early 2010 an excavation was made in Rua de Buenos Aires where remains of workshop debris were found inside an extraction clay mine. This was found in the Prazeres area where documents reveal that the major extraction of the raw material was made. Potters were forced to fill the holes with the remains of production avoiding accidents by leaving them opened. Fragments of biscuit, tin glaze ware, saggars and kiln furniture were found in this site.

Fig. 12 – Plate decorated with beads outlined in purple found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro).

22

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 13 – Plate decorated with lace found in Largo de Santos (photo by T. Casimiro).

Fig. 14 – Plate decorated with large leafs found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian).

The majority of the finds was in biscuit so this could be a moment when a large quantity of accidents happened inside the kiln. The second firing should be less aggressive since objects were fired inside boxes or ‘saggars’. The majority of the finds are plates and hemispheric bowls both with low ring foots. One example of a tall foot plate was identified decorated with anthropomorphic designs. A large amount of biscuit tiles was also identified at this site so these are probably the remains of one of the 28 tin glaze ware kilns in Lisbon where pots and tiles were produced together as reported in the book Grandeza e Abastança da Cidade de Lisboa from 1620. The objects present a low quality glaze and a very standardized decoration suggesting the production of everyday wares made to supply the Lisbon and regional market. There is no evidence of high quality goods destined to be sent abroad. The time range for this collection attending to the decoration and the absence of purple decorations suggests 1650 and 1670.

Fig. 15 – Plate decorated with the Santiago order sword found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian).

There is a high percentage of plates decorated with half concentric circles, large petals and the Santiago cross very frequent in this period and very similar to other Lisbon and overseas finds. The floral decoration presents large petals together with chrysanthemums although not inspired in the Chinese motifs anymore but following a more European style, as found in the Rua dos Bacalhoeiros. This context was excavated in 2006 by the city’s museum archaeologists and objects very similar to the Rua de Buenos Aires were recovered (Fernandes, Marques, Filipe e Calado, 2006). Only a single sherd with lace decoration was found in the Buenos Aires excavation and no evidence of aranhões. This was a very frequent decoration in the first half of the 17th century but less and less demanded since 1660. However there is the possibility of craft specialization in decorations, so each workshop could produce a proper style of faience.

Fig. 16 –Plates decorated with large petals found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian).

23

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 17 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles found in Rua de Buenos Aires (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 20 – Plate decorated with lace found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 18 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 21 – Plate decorated with large leafs found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian).

Although all archaeological evidences have reveal that Lisbon’s faience workshops existed only in the Western part of Lisbon, there are some documents refereeing the existence of white pottery painters in the Eastern part where the red coarse ware workshops were located (Sebastian, 2011). However it’s impossible to infer if these men worked in this area of Lisbon or simply lived there together with other potters, probably members of their families working in areas such as Santa Catarina, a half an hour to forty minutes walk.

Fig. 19 – Plate decorated with large petals found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros (photo by L. Sebastian).

24

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

5.2. Coimbra fazer verdade ao povo no dito officio no dito dia mês ano. Bras Miguel” (Carvalho, 1921, 56).

Pottery production in this city is documented since 1203 with the reference to workshops near to one of the city wall’s doors close to the river Mondego (Tavares, 1982). In the Middle Ages the potters’ neighbourhood was in the São João de Santa Cruz area essentially in the Rua da Moeda, Rua da Madalena, Rua de Estevão Nogueira and Terreiro das Olarias, as mentioned in the book Livro da Repartição das sisas do ramo desta cidade de Coimbra para 1567 referring several crafts across the city (Carvalho, 1921, 58). Contrarily to what happened in Lisbon where red coarse ware and tin glaze ware were produced in different areas in Coimbra it was all made in the same city’s quarter (Tavares, 1982, 14).

This white glaze pottery should have been white clay glazed with lead oxide. In the 1571 regiment (just a year before the Lisbon regiment where white pottery from Talavera was being produced) it’s mentioned that the clay used in pottery should be obtained in Póvoa and Trouxemil, two white clay sources: o barro para a louça vidrada fosse uma mistura de duas partes de barro da Póvoa e uma de barro de Treixomil (Carvalho, 1921, 53). In 1559 the same is said in another document: lousa vidrada fosse primeiro cosida em branquo que fosse vidrada a qual louca farião e lavrariam dos baros dos sítios de treixomill e da povoa do bordallo misturando o dito baro tanto de huu como de outro (Carvalho, 1921, XXXI). These clay sources were still in use in late 19th century (Lepierre, 1898, 99).

The craft was well organized. It’s the only city in Portugal where a document has survived explaining that no craftsmen, including potters, could open a workshop without a proper licence from the city hall signed by the craft judges and valid for a lifetime: perpetuo em dias da vida de cada huu oficial e não serão obrigados a pedir nehua outra licença Em qumto uzare seus officios (Carvalho, 1921). However there is news of some potters working in Coimbra that had acquired their licence in Lisbon and would still work in the Mondego’s city.

However the first clear reference to tin glaze ware only occurs in early 17th century. In aforementioned 160 document states that white wares (louça branca) could only be sold by potters. In the flowing years several examination letters were passed to white ware potters and pottery painters so the industry must have quickly developed. The first letter is from 1608 certifying Pêro Fernandes for the craft of white ware from Talavera (malga branca de talaveira). In this time Coimbra’s white ware potters were the abovementioned Pêro Fernandes, Manuel Bernardes (malagueiro de louça branca), Jerónimo Gomes, (oleiro de louça branca), António Gomes, (oleiro de louça branca vidrada e pintada), Diogo Simões, (malegro de Málaga branca) and Diogo da Silva, (oleiro de louça branca), among others (Carvalho, 1921).

Such as in Lisbon coarse ware potters and tin glaze ware potters were different crafts with their proper judges although, according to some examination letters, the same person could have both functions. The first of this letters referring the production of faience is from 1608 when Pedro Fernandes receives a letter to produce white pottery from Talavera (malga branca de Talaveira), although probably this was already produced for some years at this time (Carvalho, 1921, 125). Teixeira Carvalho mentions in his book how he came across a 1603 document where faience production is mentioned has a common manufacture in Coimbra, however he did not identified where was kept (Carvalho, 1921, 128). It is believed to be a document where the city hall tried to establish some rules for the sale of pottery when a clear distinction is made between red and white glazed ware (ninguém vendesse lousa vidrada nem de baro nem branqua senão os próprios donos e oleyros e malegejros suas molheres que a lavravam e faziam). In that same year there is a letter from a pottery painter giving up his craft so this was already a very common production (Carvalho, 1921, XXVI).

The reference to pottery painters also starts in early 17th century and in 1644 Manuel Gomes receives a letter of examination to produce painted white tin glaze: “carta de Malagreiro de lloussa branca e pintada de Manuel Gomes desta Cidade”. Just a few years later in 1647 António Gomes receives a similar document: “Carta de Examinasão a António Gomes malageiro oleiro de loussa braqua vidrada e pintada por passe de Tiotonyo da Motta e André Vas oleiros malegeiros juízes e exeninadores dos obreiros do dito ofício e seu termo” (Carvalho, 1921, 130). However, even that potters could paint their pottery the faience craft was usually made by potters who constructed the object and painters who decorated it.

The glazed pottery craft was regulated since mid 16th century and white glazed pottery should have been produced at least since 1584. In December of that same year the examination letter of Brás Miguel states his specialization in the production of yellow and green glazed pottery giving the idea that other glazed pottery was already made: Aos vymte e huu de Dezembro foy passada carta de examynação a Brás Miguel morador nesta cidade para seruir o officio de malegueiro das obras que pertencem ao dito officio por qoanto foy examinado e isto de malega verde e amarela. E jurou

References to the production of white tin glaze ware increase along the first decades of the 17th century. Nevertheless it’s in the 1623 potter’s regiment that is possible to realize how well organized was the production of tin glaze ware in Coimbra. The first paragraph states that for each pottery type, coarse ware, tin glaze ware and lead glaze ware from that moment on each of them should have their own judges: “assim como há três officios de ollaria, s. de louça branca, verde e amarela, e de barro singello, que d’hora em diante haja em cada um destes officios seu juiz para examinar”. Such as in the Lisbon’s

25

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

pottery in the city increased immensely in early 17th century and in 1603 a law obliges all potters to build chimneys in their kilns above the houses roofs. Even in late 19th century kilns had a square plant. In 1898 the kiln described by Charles Lepierre had 2,90 by 3 metres and 2,15 metres high, a grid, a chamber and a door to introduce wood: “a fornalha interior abobadada e com uma porta para introdução da lenha”. The door was closed with bricks when the kiln was being fired. Still according to Lepierre each workshops had two kilns, one for biscuit and the other for glaze that could fire up to one thousand dozens of plates and bowls. The fire would last about 22 hours and would consume something like 3500 kilograms of pine wood (Lepierre, 1898, 104).

regiment, written some fifty years before, this document also determines which objects should be made for potters demanding an examination letter. The Lisbon document seems a little more demanding although in Coimbra potters were asked to produce all the objects used in a pharmacy: “uma botica com todas as peças que n’ella se requerem”. This document is still important since it gives many more information about the potter’s craft including some of the objects the potters should use in their workshops: “moinho, fornalhas, colheres, pisões” (Apendix 2). Coimbra is the city where more documents exist that can help to understand the organization of the potters’ craft, especially for the 16th century.

One of the major problems of this city was the illegal pottery trade. The first document to report these troubles dates back to March 15th 1556. In March 21st 1579 it is said that all the women forbidden to sell pottery in the street could sell it until Easter without paying any fee. In 1583 a new law determines that illegal pottery trade could result in three months in jail. In August 31st 1584 another document says that the fee by selling pottery in the street was ten cruzados (Carvalho, 1921, 23). In the following year another document states that pottery could only be sold in workshops since all the other stores and shops were necessary to sell other commodities (Carvalho, 1921, 24). The income resulting of this street sell was so profitable that in February of 1556 it is said that many people leaved their crafts and jobs to sell pottery in the streets since it was much more expensive than in workshops (Carvalho, 1921, 37).

Although white clay exists in Coimbra’s surroundings this did not have the quality requested for the production of high quality faience objects. In fact its characteristics led to a frequent breakage of vessels. The problem was so severe that local authorities together with the craft judges even determined the quality and amounts of clay used. People that did not obey would pay elevated fees. In March 21st 1556 the malagueiros’ regiment says all the cooking pots produced in Coimbra should be made from two portions of red clay and one of raw clay and that the clay used in fine wares was a mixture of equal portions of clay from Truxemil and from Póvoa: “toda a louça que houvesse de servir ao fogo fosse feita com uma mistura de duas partes de barro vermelho e uma de barro áspero; que o barro branco empregado na louça fosse uma mistura de partes iguais do de Troixomil e da Póvoa; que os juízes do ofício assistissem ao desenformar da louça depois da primeira cozedura, verificassem se as misturas dos barros eram feitas como mandava o regimento, obrigassem a cozer a peças que achavam mal cozidas, não deixassem vidrar as peças em que a mistura dos barros não tivesse sido feita conforme o regimento, ou estivessem mal cozidas” (Carvalho, 1921, 19). The same law is still in use in 1571.

The cost of vessels was predetermined by a list of prices. This was very frequent, not only for potter but in many other crafts and goods. If anyone did not respect the established prices would pay a fee up to one thousand reais and would go to jail (Carvalho, 1921, 22). The prices should be established based on the production of one single potter probably a judge and all the others should sell their pottery at the same price. In November 16th of 1583 each glazed bowl and chamber pot were priced based on the production of Jorge Fernandes. Not obeying to this determination would result on a fee of one thousand reais or even public shame (Carvalho, 1921, 25). The prices were determined based on the price of food and raw materials (Carvalho, 1921, 35).

The development of the faience industry in Lisbon in late 16th century made that some potters migrated to other Portuguese cities taking their new knowledge with them. Trying to supply the demand for painted wares they will open their own workshops. In the 1573 list of prices for pottery objects are mentioned yellow and green glazed bowls, large glazed flared bowls, cooking pots but also bowls in the shape of porcelain, although it is not mentioned if they are tin or lead glazed: “maleguas vidradas por dentro e por fora de feição de porçolanas dellguada da borda a sinquo reis o par” (Carvalho, 1921, IX).

In the last decade several excavations have been made in the Mondego´s waterfront were the workshops were located in the 17th century. Unfortunately the major part of the developed area did not have a proper archaeological evaluation so the information is mostly provided by some archaeologist who visited the sites and some evaluation trenches. The area known as Bota-aBaixo revealed the remains of several workshops, mostly for the 18th and 19th century but most of those materials were not analyzed. However there are some sites were made available, namely the Garagem Avenida in 2003. The archaeologists only arrived at the site after the construction started and it is estimated that about ¼ of the site was destroyed. This was an area of the dumpsters of several workshops with large thousands of fragments in

The Coimbra kilns were, as in Lisbon, made in Italian style, rectangular or square, similar to the one found in the Garagem Avenida excavations (Cruz, 2003). They would certainly exist in different sizes considering that in 1608 a law states that every small kiln would be deactivated and potters would have to build larger kilns. The reason was that small kilns could not reach the necessary temperatures to properly fire pottery increasing its breakage (Carvalho, 1921, XXX). The production of

26

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

biscuit and already glazed. This site has also offered the base of a square kiln, which the report puts in the same stratigraphical sequence as 17th century finds inside a backyard (Cruz, 2003).

some workshops could try to produce finer objects for wealthy people.

Until this place was discovered the identification of Coimbra’s faience was made based on the finds in other places of the city, namely in Santa Clara a Velha. The finds are essentially Coimbras’s productions although a high number of Lisbon ware was also found. When compared with the Lisbon production the pottery produced in the Mondego´s city is rougher. While in Lisbon and Vila Nova the fabrics are white, in Coimbra they are pinkish or reddish. This is related with the low quantity of white clay available only in Trouxemil and in Póvoa, some kilometres away making potters add red clays to the mixture. Inclusions are very frequent, sometimes in large size with the existence of quartz and ceramic grog. The glaze presents a low percentage of tin making it more thin and less white and shiny.

Fig. 22 – Plate with aranhões found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Coimbra’s blue is darker and with less variable shades that the objects from Lisbon and Vila Nova. The reason is clearly the paint and its production techniques. No evidences of yellow were found in the workshops archaeological excavations, although there are some authors who believe that the yellow in this production centre should be darker, almost orange (Pais, Pacheco and Coroado, 2008). This theory is yet to confirm considering that these illations were taken after the observation of the plates kept at the Museu Nacional de Castro and there is no evidence that they were produced in Coimbra. Lisbon and Vila Nova productions attending to the fact they were all produced with the same clay are easy to confuse but Coimbra’s production has very proper characteristics. The archaeological excavation known as Garagem Avenida has provided many evidences of the faience production in this city. The evidences can be dated in its majority between 1630 and 1700 although some residual evidences of oldest and more recent productions were also found.

Fig. 23 – Bowl with aranhões found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Plates and bowls are the more frequent finds, although some bottles, jars, boxes and lids were also found. The decoration found in such objects is quite similar to the one made in Lisbon and Vila Nova, although the drawings reveal a more naïf method. Aranhões and chrysanthemums follow the Lisbon style searching a Chinese inspiration but far from the beauty achieved in the capital’s workshops. Coats of arms are equally frequent. Half concentric circles, beads and lace appear with very peculiar characteristics. There are some types of floral decoration that have not yet been found elsewhere except in Coimbra and in the places this production centre would supply. Although not frequent among the finds some higher quality vessels were recovered essentially following a Chinese style clearly made in Coimbra. It is possible that

Fig. 24 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

27

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 25 – Plate decorated with half concentric circles found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 28 – Bottle decorated with small spirals found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 26 – Plate decorated with lace found in Garagem Avenida (photoby L. Sebastian).

Fig. 29 – Plate decorated with beads found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 27 – Bowl decorated with lace found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 30 – Plate decorated with large petals found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

28

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 34 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian). Fig. 31 – Plate decorated with coat of arm found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 32 – Plate decorated with coat of arm found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 35 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 33 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 36 – Plate decorated with floral motifs and bird found in Garagem Avenida (photo by L. Sebastian).

29

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

5.3. Vila Nova Although it’s likely that Porto produced some pottery in post-medieval times, especially coarse ware the production of faience is going to be made in the south bench of Douro in Vila Nova, nowadays Gaia. This suburb was an economic satellite of Porto with its own industry producing essentially to supply the northern region. Potters were located in the area of Santa Marinha, Mafamude, Oliveira do Douro and Valadares. The first reference to pottery production occurs in the 15th century. In December 20th 1460 appears in Porto’s city hall the potter Martim Gonçalves from aalém (the other side) that claims to be called as a crossbow man when due to his craft he was free from that obligation (Cruz, 1942, 7).

Every potter that appears in written evidences lived in the Santa Marinha parish. Although already very populated Vila Nova was the best choice for the location of this new pottery industry. The river was so close that permited the import of raw materials and the export of the finished product. The distance from Porto was perfect since this was a dirty craft and the smoke and garbage would not disturb political and social elites. There is no white clay in Porto. Vila Nova was in a privileged location to receive it by boat, especially from Lisbon. In 1647 a boat arrives from the capital with clay for white ware potters: “pera oleiros de lousa branca”, but the shipments are quite frequent in the 17th and 18th centuries (Leão, 1995, 41). A prosperous industry is also confirmed by other imports such as lead. In 1647 Manuel Rosa and Manuel João, o Mudo, potters and Domingas Luís, Fabiana Almeida and Marinha Antónia, potters’ widows face a quarrel against João Clavet and João Martins, foreign merchants living in Porto about a sum of lead they ought to the potters: “sobre hua partida de chumbo que dizem lhes estão deuendo”. It is also frequent the entrance of blue stone for potters or paints for potters: “pedra azul pera oleiros or tinta pera oleiros” (Leão, 1995, 42).

However, and despite the fragment news of pottery production in Vila Nova it will be from late 16th century onwards that the industry will grow, essentially based on the production of fine tin glaze table ware. It’s normally believed that the industry grew based on potters from other regions, namely Lisbon and Coimbra that in seeing the demand of faience from this northern city moved from their home towns into this area of the country bringing new techniques. Crispim dos Santos and Manuel Simões, potters from Vila Nova in 1670 and 1657 are both from Coimbra where they probably learned the craft (Leão, 1999, 47).

Such as in Lisbon and Coimbra it is still not possible to say exactly when the production of tin glaze ware started in Vila Nova. The first reference to a kiln in this area goes back to 1605 when Cristovão Fonseca sells to Manuel Gonçalves a house and a potter’s kiln: “hu assento de cazas e o seu quintal p’ra trás dellas q estyão citas neste lugar da povoação noua na Rua direita della que se chama assento do oleyro e resto de hu forno de oleiro no dito quintal o que tudo he propriedade do mosteiro das donas de São Domingos de Vila Nova” (Leão, 1995, 42). According to Manuel Leão in late 16th century each workshop would have its own kiln, probably already producing faience (Leão, 1999, 63). In this period tin glaze ware was already being produced. In 1605 an order is made to the potter Sebastião Ribeiro, o Velho, receiving 4$500 reis for 908 azulejos que fez para o altar do pátio (tiles he made for the altar), paid by the Misericórdia. This man who died in 1637 is equally mentioned as potter so it’s believed he produced tiles and vessels.

The potters are going to place their workshops in the most important street the Rua Direita or Coimbrã, today Rua Cândido dos Reis and in its surroundings, namely in Travessa da Barroca. The presence of potters’ houses is stated at least since 1604 when Domingos Gonçalves rents a house which was a potter’s workshop with a kiln to fire fine wares: “Era uma temda de oleiro e o seu alpendre e reçio e hu forno de cozer lousa que esta tudo sito na travessa da barroqua que dava aos deste lugar para o mostrº da Serra a qual temda pte da banda do mar cõ cazas de Ana Jorge entre as quaes cazas e a ditta teda esta hua seruentia que vai para p quintal de Joam Valadares carneiro pêra a dita travessa da barroqua e o corredor por cima das paredes da dita seruentia te entestar na parede da cada do dita Ana Jorge e delle domingos gonçalves e da banda do monte que he da nascente p te com outra temda de olaria que elle domingos gonçalves deu a sua filha Barbara que ella renunciou sua vida nas mãos do senhorio e elle a deu a bastião Ribeiro oleiro a hora da pesue (…)” Two of the neighbours were Manuel Ribeiro and Pascoal Pereira, both potters (Leão, 1993, 50). In 1640 António Sobrinha rents to Manuel Fernandes o Gago in the same street a house with a potter’s kiln: “ na rua Coimbram, hua morada de cazas e hu sobrado e hu forno de oleiro na viella q vai para o mosteiro da Serra iunto a Cruz do Sacramento” (Leão, 1993, 50). In 1660 Miguel de Castro de Sousa rents a two floor house with a backyard and a kiln: “casa da fornalha em que se coze louça sitas no lugar de villa nova na trauessa que vay para a igreja de Santa Marinha”. The curious about this contract is that the payment was made in money (8800 reais) and one dozen of fine ware with six bowls and six plates: “hua dúzia de louça fina seis pratos e seis tigellas”.

Such as in Lisbon also in Vila Nova the same workshops and kilns could be used to produce tiles and vessels. The potter José de Almeida and his son Manuel João, o Mudo, white pottery potters were also producing tiles. In late 17th century these men were sending hundreds of dozens of faience vessels to Brazil but equally supplying thousands of tiles for the Porto and Vila Nova churches ordered by the Misericórdia (Vila, 1986, 23). Although tile production was very strong in Vila Nova its quality should have been somehow inferior to the Lisbon productions since many northern and even Porto institutions ordered tiles to Lisbon (Leão, 1991, 23). In 1643 the Confraria de Nossa Senhora da Piedade ordered

30

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

duas dúzias de pratos duas dúzias de pires e hua dúzia de covilhetes, e meia dúzia de pratos de meya cozinha tudo louça branca da mais fina que neste lugar se fabrica” (Leão, 1999). Archaeological investigation enriched this information by showing other forms such as bottles, jars and some figurines.

tiles from Lisbon but the ship where they were being transported wrecked. Also Lisbon vessels were appreciated in the north and Porto merchants received orders to bring things from the capital. Gaspar Fernando Lopes receives an order from Baiona (Spain) for 12 dozens Lisbon crown bowls: “tigellas de coroas de Lisboa”. On the other hand among the dowry of the daughter of Pedro van Justeren, Flemish merchant living in Porto were Lisbon wares (Leão, 1991, 23).

Porto did not have white clay in its vicinities so all the raw material was brought from Lisbon. This means that the fabrics are very similar to the capital productions, very homogenous and hard with some natural quartz and micaceous inclusions and some added quartz inclusions through sand and white ceramic grog.

Although faience was clearly produced in Vila Nova since early 17th century the first written evidence that clearly states this production only occurs in 1619 when Baltasar Fonseca is called fine white ware potter. In 1621 Sebastião Ribeiro is called white painted pottery manufacturer and in 1637 the same designation is given to Sebastião Jorge. Manuel Roiz, pottery painter is arrested in Porto by the demand of Sebastião Jorge who has a workshop of painted pottery. References are quite frequent in this period and in 1716 Manuel Carneiros dos Santos white ware potter rents a house in Vila Nova “Manuel Carneiro dos Santos, mestre do lousa branca e sua molher Tomasia Maria, moradores na rua direita “(Leão, 1999, 55).

The glaze is of very fine quality with a high percentage of tin, very thick, white and shiny. Although for some reason the glaze presents in many objects a dense craquelet.

Until quite recently only written evidences could support the ideia that Vila Nova produced faience in the 17th century. However in 2002 an excavation revealed the remains of a workshop in Rua Cândido dos Reis dated from the second half of the 17th century. A house was identified and associated to a kiln, dumpster, tanks and an area to smash the clay. Among the finds several eroded grinding stones were also found possibly used to grind oxides. The found pottery debris were essentially biscuit and other already finished forms all of them already bronken (Almeida, Neves e Cavaco, 2001).

Fig. 37 – Bowl decorated in Chinese style found in the excavations of Campo (after Gomes and Botelho, 2001).

Although the site does not have a proper report the material was made accessible by the archaeological company Dryas which allowed understanding what type of artefacts were being produced at the site. This workshop was producing the type of pottery found in the area of Porto, namely in Casa do Infante but also in some overseas contexts namely in England and in Newfoundland (Dórdio et. all., 2001; KIllock and Meddens, 2006; Stoddart, 2001).

Fig. 38 – Bowl decorated in Chinese style found in the excavations of Campo (after Gomes and Botelho, 2001).

The decoration was a clear imitation of what was being produced in Lisbon with the same style and motifs. However if there were some decoration which clearly succeeded or even became better (such as lace) others were very inferior, namely zoomorphic and anthropomorphic motifs. The production in Vila Nova was very variable with several different forms. In a rent of a house in Rua Direita in 1723, Manuel Carneiros dos Santos will give to the landlord 28000 reis plus two dozens of large plates, two dozens of small plates, one dozen of small bowls and half a dozen ½ kitchen plates: “huas cazas sobradadas de dois sobrados com sua loge e forno de cozer louça. Ficou contratado que elles cazeiros pagarião mais a elle senhorio de foro cada anno alem dos vinte e oito mil reis

Fig. 39 – Plate decorated with lace found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (after Almeida, Neves and Cavaco, 2001).

31

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 40 – Plate decorated with lace found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian).

Fig. 42 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian).

Concerning the colours yellow is not very frequent in Vila Nova productions, but the blue tends to be a little darker than the one from Lisbon or Coimbra which may imply different ways of producing such objects or even the kiln temperature.

Fig. 43 – Plate decorated with floral motifs found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (after, Almeida, Neves and Cavaco, 2001).

Fig. 41 – Plate decorated with large petals found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian).

One of the most recurrent decorations is lace. These present an excelente aesthetical quality and craft specialization different from the Lisbon and Coimbra’s lace. These were made in blue and in purple. However there are other decorations such as the Chinese inspiration patterns with the ledge divided into panels filled by aranhões and chrysanthemums and the central bottom decorated with landscapes with peoples and animals, especially rabbits. Foral motifs are also frequent with large petals and large leafs such as the motifs used in Lisbon and many objects decorated with geometrical patterns.

Fig. 44 – Plate decorated with geometrical motifs found in the Rua Cândido dos Reis excavation (photo by L. Sebastian).

32

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES This chapter aims to present the sites where Portuguese faience has been found. Although it would be quite interesting to discuss all the archaeology performed in each of them this is not the purpose. They are only mentioned in order to create a framework to contextualize the finds of tin glaze ware produced in Portugal. 6.1 The sites Eighty seven excavations have provided Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland. The majority of them have been considered in this study and most of the finds has been seen and analyzed personally. In fact, except for the discoveries from Galway, kept somewhere in the immense Dublin archaeological archive and difficult to access, Dunboy Castle, Cork, Ballyack Castle, Chester and Colchester all the finds from all the other sites were seen and drawn personally. These contexts are listed in table nr 1 for England and table nr 2 for Ireland. This information was provided by local museums and archaeologists who gave us the access to reports and finds. In this work the sites were methodologically divided into domestic, commercial and industrial according to its nature. A domestic site is settled when the remains from a household are deposited. These can be cess pits, dumpsters or even the house itself. A commercial site is interpreted as a site where Portuguese faience appears when circulating as an object with a proper value, destined to enter trade routes and finally an industrial site is a place which produced pottery.

Spitalfields, Bishopgate, West Tenter Street and Magdalean Street where an open air sewer was discovered. Castle Street in Plymouth is one of the most interesting sites since it was interpreted as the city’s general dumpster and the site where the highest number of Portuguese faience vessels was recovered. The possible explanations for this will be discussed further ahead. As for Ireland these larger sites for domestic garbage were found in Carrickfergus, filling one of the city’s walls trenches, Limerick and Galway. The Carrickfergus finds are actually quite interesting since they seem to be one of the oldest collections found in the Islands. Recovered in a context dated early 17th century, if one agrees that these artefacts should be used for at least 20 years, they were clearly produced in late 16th century. This argument is even more valid since they were all discarded at the same time, possibly going out of fashion or simply kept inside a closet that could have collaped. However there are places where Portuguese faience should have been in use when discarded since it was found inside of houses in places such as Barnstaple, Bediford, Bristol (Almshouses), Colchester, Paul Street and Holloway Street in Exeter, Exmouth, in Tobacco Dock in London, inside a kitchen, the Kitto Institute in Plymouth and in Dunboy Castle, Skiddy’s Castle and the High Street in Waterford, all in Ireland. Although no structure has been found in the sites excavated in Mermaid Yard, Albany Road, High Street (Exeter), Great Torrington and Ballyack Castle the archaeological remains suggest that all the artefacts found were used in household activities.

Domestic contexts These are by far the most abundant contexts and were identified in every city where Portuguese faience has been found. Most of them are in fact cess pits or dumpsters where Portuguese faience was discarded and thrown away. This was registered in Exeter at Trichay Street, North Street, Queen Street, Princesshay, and Goldsmith Street all of them filled with several pottery imports and other rich artefacts. In London they were identified in Monument House, King Street, Lambeth Street, Royal Naval College, St John’s Square, Spitalfields Market and Spital Square, in Orchard Car Park in Poole, in Southampton at the High Street Excavation, in Dublin Castle and in Limerick also related to other rich material culture elements. These artefacts were discarded when broken.

Most of these sites were associated to merchants’ houses or neighbourhoods. In fact these seem to be the people who had the best knowledge of what was being produced in Europe and in the world. Nevertheless there are some sites such as Berry Pomeroy Castle, Ballyack Castle, Dublin Castle and Dartington Hall where noble people used to live, some of them very well connected to the Royal family. In the Bermondsey Abbey site in London the house of Thomas Pope was identified and in St James Passage the excavated building belonged to the Duke of Norfolk. Could the Portuguese faience found in these sites have been used by these noble people and the knowledge of it overcome the merchant class? The excavation of Narrow Street in London must be discussed apart. This site has offered a large amount of Portuguese faience found not only in cess pits but also inside houses. In fact it has provided one of the most important post-medieval pottery collections found in England with the percentage of pottery imports being sometimes larger than the English wares. However this excavation was also unique due to the archaeologists’

However there are also several sites were Portuguese faience was discarded although cannot be identified has a proper house since they received the disposals of several streets. This happened in London in sites such as

33

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

interpretation of how was this pottery acquired. The social structure in this neighbourhood suggests that pirates and privateers would have plundered it during their travelling throught the world justifying the presence of pots from all over the world and even a Caribeean sherd (Killock and Meddens, 2005).

6.2. The finds Although the majority of the evidences of Portuguese Faience found in the British Isles are presented in this book it would be impossible to draw all the vessels especially the ones which size was so small that would not make any sense. However it is assumed that at least five or six drawings that were in my plans are missing since time requests did not permitted it. This is for example the case of some sherds from Plymouth’s Castle Street or Narrow Street which I still plan to draw and publish in a near future.

Although almost every faience object found in England and Ireland are associated with houses belonguing to merchants and nobles in Bristol in the excavation of the Greyfriars Building a plate was associated with a Franciscan Friary, in London the excavation of the St. Katherine church also provided a large plate and in Cork a sherd was found inside the Christ Church. The only tile found in England was excavated in Aberglasney house in Camarthen in the garden and it is impossible to say if it decorated some wall inside or outside the building. Commercial Contexts The sites designated as commercial are the ones where Portuguese Faience appears when circulating as an object with a proper value, destined to enter trade routes. In London waterfront sites where ships unloaded their cargos sherds were identified in Wood Wharf, Borthwick and Paynes Wharf, Bombay Wharf and Jacob’s Island. In Plymouth, Dung Quay, Shepard’s Wharf, Stonehouse Street and North Quay also offered many sherds of Portuguese Faience associated to piers structures. Also in Bristol two of these sites were identified in Narrow Quay and in Quakers Friars North. Although the theory is that Portuguese Faience was discarded when arriving to the city it is although possible that it did not arrived in these cities with the purpose of being sold but probably offered or used by the ship’s owner.

Fig. 45 – Graphic with the percentage of portuguese faience finds from England and Ireland.

Large buildings interpreted as storehouses were identified in London at Borough High Street, Southampton, Wolster Street in Plymouth and in Faversham and although only a few sherds were found inside each of them it is quite possible this was stored for the purpose of a commercial transaction. The most paradigmatic example of a commercial site where Portuguese faience has been found was in the Costums house in Exeter the place where all the cargos entering the city were recorded and sometimes kept and dated around 1680. Industrial contexts By industrial are defined the places where pottery was produced. In Queensborough House (ABK00) and Platform Wharf (PW86) buildings, kilns and dumps were identified as places where tin glaze ware, known as London Delftware, was produced.

34

35 Post 1700

TCHST NST SNP QST CTC CTCS

Middleborough

Parish Church

Trichay Street

North Street

St Nicholas Priory

Queen Street

Cathedral Close

Cathedral Cloisters

Credinton

Exeter

PCH

AF15

1680-1700

1660-1680

1680-1690

1650-1660

1650-1700

1680-1700

-

Colchester

CHIV

Royal Base

-

Chivenor

ABG

-

Aberglasney

MBQ05

Quakers Friars North

1650-1700

1625-1660

1580-1650

1635-1660

-

-

-

-

-

1640-1700

Context date

Carmarthen

GFLM

Greyfriars Building Lewin’s Mead

NQY

Narrow Quay

ND150

Green Lane

STN

ND102

Holland Street

St Nicholas

ND101

Joy Street

Bristol

ND100

Castle Green

NWS

B ST98

The Strand

New Street

ND28

Site code

65-68 High Street

Site

Bideford

Barnstaple

City

-

1

1

-

1

1

-

1

1

-

3

1

3

10

1

1

-

-

2

1

-

Plates

-

-

-

1

2

2

-

-

-

-

-

-

7

12

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Bowls

England

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

5

-

-

-

-

-

-

Bottles and jugs 1

Forms

-

-

1

-

-

-

1

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Other objects -

1

2

2

2

Uniden tified

1

1

2

1

3

3

1

1

1

1

3

1

12

27

1

1

2

2

4

1

2

nr of vessels

-

-

45, 46

-

44, 49, 50

43, 47, 48

42

41

57

40

38-39

37

27-36

4-26

3

-

-

-

-

-

1-2

Nr drawings

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

Allan, Passmore and Reed, 2011 Allan, 1984

Cotter, 2000

Blockley and Halfpenny, 2002

Good, 1987

Barton, 1984

Lovatt, 1989

Farrel, 1985

References

36

Belvedere Feeds

Castle Hill

Queensborough House, 19 Albert Embankment Bermondsey Abbey, Abbey Street

Faversham

Great Torrington

London

Former York Clinic, 117 Borough High Street Old Billingsgate Fish Market, Lorry Park Monument House, 30-35 Botolph Lane Borthwick and Paynes Wharf, Borthwick Street Spitalfields, Providence Row

3-5- Lower Fore Street

Exmouth

1630-1670 1630-1660 1640-1665 1700-1800 -

BIG83 BPL95 BPZ06 CPN03

1640-1660

BA84 BHB00

1620-1720

-

1685-1705

1620-1650

ABK00

CTH

KFBR

LFST

-

1642-1660

Halloway Street

Bus Depot

1640-1660

Rack Street

Dartmouth

1705-1725

Friernhay Street

HLST

1660-1680

Cricklepit Mill

1

3

1

2

1

1

-

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

-

1

1

1

17th century

1660-1720

-

Magdalen Street

ALR

Albany Road

1660-1680

1

1

1

GSST

Goldsmith Street

1640-1660

1640-1660

1

-

PST

Paul Street

EHST

MYD

Mermaid Yard

1680-1720

1

High Street

CTH

Costums House

1660-1680

-

-

PCSH

Princesshay

-

Shooting Marsh Stile

CST

Cowick Street

-

-

-

1

-

1

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3

2

3

-

7

-

8

-

-

-

1

1

3

1

3

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

3

3

4

1

8

1

9

1

1

3

1

70

71

69

66-68

65

62,64

63

61

60

59

58

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

54

-

53

56

51, 52, 55

-

Maloney, 2007

Blair and Sankey, 2006

Gaimster, Margeson and Barry, 1989

Tyler, 2004

Weddel, 1989

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

Allan, 1984

37

Plymouth

1640-1666 1640-1660 1680-1720 1670-1680 1630-1650

1600-1680 1638-1663

JAC95 KIG95 LAS01 LCM04 LMD97 MGS96 MIR84 NHU99 PW86

12-14 Mitre Street

43-53 Narrow Street, Limehouse Basin Platform Wharf, Rotherhithe

1650-1700 1650-1720

KTI PDQ PSW

50, Palace Street, former Kitto Institute. Dung Quay

Shepherd’s Wharf.

1650-1700

1630-1660

WST

1660-1670

WSN00

Woolster Street

1670-1690

TOC02

1600-1650

1680-1700

STE95

CST

1620-1640

SRP98

1600-1630

SJU99 1600-1630

1650-1680

RNP99

SQU94

1660-1690

RHE01

1680-1720

Castle Street

Spital Square, Lamb Street, Nantes Passage Spitalfields Market (former), Spitalfields Residential 250 Bishopgate, Steward Street (car park) Tobacco Dock, 130-162 The Highway 25, West Tenter Street

Bombay Wharf, Ceylon Wharf, East India Wharf Royal Naval College: Pepys Building 48 St John’s Square

1640-1700

HOF04

Wood Wharf, Horseferry Place, Thames Street Jacob’s Island, Bermondsey Wall West 15-17 King Street, 42-46 Gresham Street Anchor Iron Wharf, Lassel Street, Hoskins Street, SE10 Former London City Mission Paradise Street Lambeth Bridge House, Lambeth Road, London 26 Magdalen Street

1660-1670

FCC95

Lloyd’s Register of Shipping

1590-1620

DUK77

St James Passage Subway.

7

2

-

7

113

1

2

1

1

2

-

-

2

2

40

1

1

1

2

1

1

-

13

1

1

3

2

1

3

29

-

-

-

-

-

1

1

-

-

25

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

4

-

-

1

-

-

-

3

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

8

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

3

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

19

4

-

-

20

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

8

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

31

8

1

10

1168

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

81

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

18

1

1

227

-

225

215-224

132-214

131

128, 129

126

130

125,127

124

123

121-122

-

100-120

99

98

97

95, 96

94

93

92

74-91

73

72

Stead, 2003

Allan and Barber, 1992

Brown, 1986

Brown, 1986

Pearce, 2007

Stephenson, 1999

Killock and Medens, 2005

Pearce and Schofield, 1998

Chew and Pearce, 1999

Jarret, 2002

Blair, 2005

Blackmore, 2005

Divers, 2004

Maloney and Harding, 1979 Brigham and Nielsen, 2006

38

Total

BPC

Berry Pomeroy Castle. -

-

-

DTH

Dartington Hall

1650-1700 -

TLS08

1610-1630

-

1650-1680

1640-1680

1650-1700

287

1

1

9

8

-

-

-

-

5

2

1

17th century -

1

4

1660-1680

1620-1650

Surface recovery

Totnes Lamb South

FST

SOU 29

Madisson Street.

29, Fore Street.

SOU123

Upper Bugle Street

Totnes

SOU105

61 - 64 High Street

Southampton

ORC

PFG89

Friars Good

Old Orchard

PES05

Ebrington Street

Poole

PNQ95

SDS

North Quay

Stonehouse Durnford Street

124

3

4

5

1

-

-

-

6

-

-

3

2

24

-

-

1

-

-

1

1

-

-

-

-

-

1

11

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

-

-

-

-

-

92

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

10

538

4

1

14

13

1

1

1

2

11

2

1

4

17

-

-

254

-

247-253

246

245

244

242, 243

231-241

-

-

226

228-230

and

Brown, 1996

Griffiths 1984

Brown, 2002

Brown, 2002

Brown, 2002

Horsey, 1992

Gardiner, 2000

Griffiths,

39

Ballyhack Castle.

Wexford

Total

High Street.

Waterford BLC

E289

BIST99

ODS

Old Dominic Street

Bishop Street

KJC

BLN

QST

King Jonh’s Castle

Londerry

Limerick

Barrack Lane

Quay Street

Galway

CCH

Christ Church, South Main Street DCT

SCT

Skiddy’s Castle, North Main Street

Dublin Castle

DNBC

CF26

17, Lancasterian Street

Dunboy Castle.

CF22

Albert Road

Site code CF20

Site

Essex Street

Dublin

Cork

Carrickfergus

City

1640-1680

1650-1700

1680-1690

1660-1700

1640-1700

1620-1640

1630-1660

1640-1680

-

1640-1660

1650-1680

1600-1650

1600-1650

1600-1630

Context date

126

1

7

13

2

2

4

8

3

1

3

82

Plates

66

2

-

2

1

-

1

-

4

1

1

-

-

-

54

Bowls

Ireland

8

-

1

2

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

Bottles and jugs 4

Forms

2

-

1

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Other objects -

58

-

-

-

-

-

7

4

-

-

-

-

-

-

Uniden tified 47

260

3

9

18

1

2

10

9

12

1

1

3

1

3

187

nr of vessels

337-339

328-336

309-327

308

306- 307

303-305

302

292-301

-

291

288-290

-

-

255-287

Nr inventory

and

and

Hurley, Scully and McCutcheon, 1997 Fanning and Hurst, 1975

Logue and O’Neill, 2006

Hodkinson, 1999

Fitzpatrick, O’Brien and Walsh, 2004 Fitzpatrick, O’Brien and Walsh, 2004 Hodkinson, 1999

Cleary, Hurley Twohig, 1997 Cleary, Hurley Twohig, 1997

Gowen, 1978

O’Boaill, 1993

O’Boaill, 1993

O’Boaill, 1993

Published

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 46 – Map of England and Ireland with the cities where Portuguese Faience was found.

40

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

England Barnstaple

1

Bideford

2

3 Bristol

4

5

41

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

6

7

8

9

10

11

42

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

12

13

14

43

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

15

16

17

44

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

18

19

20

21

45

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

22

23

24

25

26

46

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

27

28

29

47

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

30

31

33

35

48

32

34

36

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

37 Plate found in Greyfriars Building, Bristol (photo by Tânia Casimiro).

Fig. 47 – Plate found in Rua dos Bacalhoeiros, Lisbon (photo by Luís Sebastian).

38

39

49

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Carmarthen

40

Colchester

41

Credinton

42

50

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Exeter

Fig. 48 – Sites in Exeter where Portuguese Faience has been recovered.

43

44

45

51

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

46

47

48

49

52

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

50

51

53

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

52

53

54

54

55

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

56 Chivenor

57

Dartmouth

58

55

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Exmouth

59

Faversham

60

56

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Great Torrington

61

London

Fig. 49 – Sites in London where Portuguese Faience has been recovered.

57

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

62

63

64

65

66

58

67

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

68

69

70

71

59

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

72

60

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

73

74

61

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

75

76

77

78

79

80

62

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

81

82

83

84

63

85

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

86

87

88

64

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

89

90

65

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

91

66

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

92

93

67

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

94

.

95

96

97

68

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

98

99

100

69

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

101

102

104

105 103

106

70

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

108

107

110

111 109

71

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

112

72

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

113

73

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

114

115

116

74

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

117

118

75

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

119

120

121

76

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

122

123

124

125

126

77

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

127

128

129

78

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

131

79

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

130 Plymouth

Fig. 50 – Sites in Plymouth where Portuguese Faience has been recovered.

80

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

132

133

134

135

137

81

136

138

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

139

140

141

142

143

82

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

144

145

146

147

83

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

148

149

150

84

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

151

155

152

153

154

156

85

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

157

158

159

160

86

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

161

162

163

87

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

164

165

166

167

88

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

168

169

170

89

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

171

172

173

90

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

174

175

176

91

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

177

178

92

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

179

93

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

180

181

182

183

184

94

185

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

186

187

188

189

95

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

190

191

192

193

96

194

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

195

196

197

198

199

201

200

202

204

203

205

97

206

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

207

208

210

209

211

213

212

214

215

98

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

216

217

218

99

219

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

100

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

227

228

229

101

230

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Poole

231

232

102

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

233

234

235

236

237

103

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

238

239

240

241 Southampton

242

244

243

245

104

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Totnes

246

247

105

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

249

250

248

251

252

106

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

253

254

107

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Ireland Carrickfergus

256 255

257

258

108

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

259

260

109

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

261

262

110

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

263

264

265

111

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

266

267

268

112

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

269

270

271

273

272

274

275 276

113

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

277

278

279

280

281

114

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

282

283

284

115

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

285

286

287

116

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Cork Dunboy Castle.

288

289

290 Cork

291

117

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Dublin

292

293

294

295

296

297

118

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

298

299

300

301

119

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Galway

302

120

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

303

304

305 Limerick

306

121

307

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

308 Londerry

309

310

122

311

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

313

312

315 314

316

123

317

318

319

320

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

321

323

322

324

325

326

327

124

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Waterford

328

329

330

331

332

334

335

125

333

336

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Wexford

337

338

126

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

339

Fig. 51 – Percentage of forms recovered in England and Ireland.

127

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 52 – Number of finds in English cities.

Fig. 53 – Number of finds in Irish cities.

128

7

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

FORMS AND FUNCTION There aren’t that many forms produced in Portuguese faience in the 16th to early 18th century. The variability was essentially in the style and decoration and not in the shape. The first faience objects produced in Portugal were plates and bowls following the southern Spanish style. At the moment no other forms are known, although there are strong believes that jars, bottles and candlesticks were also among these first productions. Soon other exogenous influences shaped the forms of Portuguese faience vessels, namely from China. The 1573 potter’s regiment made in Coimbra mentions the manufacture of bowls made in the shape of porcelains: “de feição de porçolanas dellguada da borda” (Carvalho, 1921). In late 16th century fashion goes towards the imitation of Italian and Chinese dishes with subtroncoconical forms, hemispheric bowls and pear shaped bottles. Certain vessels even have the outline of animals important to the Eastern mythology such as a water container in Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga representing a carp (Calado, 1992). Nevertheless closed shapes are going to be dominated by European influences with several bottles and jars. Related to shape is always the function. Inside a household the same shapes could serve different uses. This is especially true in coarse ware but the same could happen in faience. Tin glaze ware objects would serve essentially at the table, personal hygiene and in pharmacies with the predominance of plates and bowls. In the second half of the 17th century archaeological records show that many vessels with the same decoration appear together sometimes like a complete table set. Still far from the large variety of shapes that will characterize the table sets made in 18th century industrial factories, bowls, plates and platters appear with the same decoration certainly used at the table during meals. However there are certain vessels that due to its physical and ornamental decoration were not used in daily activities but in the decoration of the home. The objects found in abroad destinations, especially in Northern Europe and in English colonies are always of a fine quality and would certainly decorate the domestic environment. In North American Probate Inventories the Portuguese faience objects referred as Lisbon Ware are found inside closets together with pewter and other ceramic objects (Willcoxen, 1999). For many years the Portuguese faience vessels kept in museums were the only clues to determine what shapes were made and used during the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. However, recent archaeological excavations

have revealed that the number of shapes and decorations is way bigger than initially expected. The 1572 potter’s regiment reveals the production of many forms such as cylindrical pharmacy jars, plates of variable sizes, pots and jars. These were forms the potters would have to do in order to obtain a license to open their own workshop. Other shapes are equally known that are not mentioned in the document such as plates, pots, jars, bottles, boxes, lids, handled bowls, cups, chamber pots, barbers bowls… among many others. The following list of shapes has considered all the forms in display in Portuguese and foreign museums as well as the shapes found in archaeological excavations and mentioned in 17th and 18th century documents. However one should not consider it as a finished roll considering that everyday new shapes are apperaring: Albarrada (flower pot) – closed shape, similar to a pot with two handles destined to contain water. In tiles this name describes the representation of a flower pot. Almofia (Charger) – mentioned in the 1572 potters regiment it refers a large plate used in a pharmacy Almotolia (Small bottle) – close shapes with a large body and narrow neck with a handle destined to serve olive oil at the table Aquamanil (Aquamanile) – closed vessels made to keep and serve water. When made in Portuguese faience usually present the shape of animals. Arredoma (Bottle) – closed shape made to serve liquids. In the 1572 potter’s regiment is said to be use in a pharmacy. Bacia (Basin) – open shape used to put water to wash hands and face. Bacia de barba (Barbers bowl) – open shape, similar to a plate but with a cut ledge where a man can put is neck while shaving. Bacio /Vaso de Quarto (Chamber pot) – closed shape destined to serve as a sanitary pot with one or two handles. Bilha (Pitcher) – closed shape with a globular body and tall neck and one handle destined to contain water. Boião de botica (Pharmacy pot) – closed shape mentioned in the 1572 potter’s regiment probably used to keep herbs or oils. Bule (Tea Pot) – closed vessel with a globular shape, an opening with a lid at their top, where the tea and water are added, a handle and a spout through which the tea is served.

129

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Caixa (Box) – close shape with a big variety of forms from square to hemispherical or hexagonal used to keep things inside and covered with a lid.

Púcaro (cup) – closed vessel of very small dimensions, with one handle used in the individual consumption of liquids, especially water.

Campainha (Hand bell) – open form bell shaped, inside of which a pendant was hanged.

Taça or Tigela (bowl) – open shape usually hemispherical or carinated with a ring foot used in the individual consumption of food.

Cântaro (Pitcher) – close shape with globular body and tall neck and one handle destined to keep water. Although existing in faience are more frequent in coarse ware since it maintained the water fresher. Covilhete (Small sweets bowl) – open shape similar to a shallow bowl used to serve a specific type of milk desert with the same name. Escudela (Handled bowl) – open shape similar to a hemispherical bowl, but with two small handles. Especieiro (Spice container) – open shape of very small dimensions used to serve spice and slat at the table. Estatuária (Figurines) – shapes of people or animals made from a chunk of clay, normally with a religious connotation.

Tampa (Lid) – usually it has a handle on top and it appears in very variable dimensions and shapes, destined to cover boxes, pots, and pitchers, among other vessels. Terrina (Tureen) – close shape destined to serve liquid food, such as soup. It was always covered with a lid. Tinteiro (Inkstand) – close shape with variable forms destined to keep ink to write. Travessa (Platter) – open shape destined to serve food at the table Xaropeira (Syrup pot) – closed recipients with a stoup destined to minister medicine to ill people.

Fruteiras (Fruit Bowls) – open shape, similar to a plate but with a very high foot. Funil (Funnel) – open shape with a wide mouth and a narrow stem used to pour liquids into containers with a small opening such as bottles. Galinheiros (Large plates) – mentioned in the 1572 potter’s regment these are open shapes similar to plates. Garrafa (Bottle) – closed shape with very variable body forms and a tall neck used to serve liquids at the table. Jarro (Jug) – close shape with and hemispherical or globular body and one handle used to serve liquids. Marca de jogo (Game markers) – circular pieces used as marks in games. Panela de botica (Cylindrical pharmacy jars) – mentioned in the 1572 potter’s regiment it was a closed shape used in pharmacies to contain herbs or drugs. Pia de água benta (stoup) – A basin or fountain for holy water used in private houses, convents and churches. Pichel (Pitcher) – closed shape with one handle used to serve liquids, especially wine, at the table. Pote (Pot) – close shape, hemispherical or globular destined to keep thinks inside and usually covered with a lid. Pratos (Plates) – open shape subtroncoconical with a ring foot used to consume food at the table.

130

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 54 – Portuguese faience forms: A-Plate; B-Carinated bowl; C-Hemispheric bowl; D-Cup; E-Charger; F-Covilhete; G-Bootle; H-Jug; IAlbarrada; J-Box; K-Funnel; L-Flower Jar; M-Cylindrical pharmacy jar; N-Spice container; O-Lid; P- Tureen; Q- Holy water stoup; ;RBarber’s bowl;S-Tea Pot; T- Chamber Pot; U-Chamber pot;.

131

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

8 DECORATION One of the most important characteristics of Portuguese Faience is its decoration reflecting the taste and demand of Portuguese and European society during the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. Foreign influences are registered from the first moments of production. For its geographical and cultural closeness, the inspiration obtained from Spanish pottery was the first to be absorbed, especially in its shapes but also in some decorations, going back to mid 16th century. It’s possible that most of these influences were brought by Spanish potters moving to Lisbon when production started to increase. In his book Notícias de Lisboa, Manuel Severim Faria, states that a potter from Talavera came to Lisbon to make tin glaze ware, very similar to Spanish and Chinese productions. That potter should have been only one among many coming to Lisbon and bringing Spanish techniques and styles. Other documents refer the existence of Flemish potters.

Portuguese presence in the Far East and the role of porcelain in everyday life, during the 16th and 17th centuries made this ware one of the most important influences in faience. Chinese porcelain occupied an important role in Portuguese domestic environments, not only in wealthy houses such as palaces ans convents but also in more modest locations (Gomes and Gomes, 2007; Sabrosa, 2008; Casimiro, 2011). This predominance of China ware is not strange in Portugal since in 1522, king João III ordered that all the ships from India would bring 1/ 3 of its cargo in porcelain. The number of objects reaching Lisbon every year would supply the demand of elites and other people (Monteiro, 1993, 18). Portuguese were the first Europeans to bring large amounts of porcelain into Europe. The importance of this ware in Portugal can be seen through special orders for porcelain with symbols of important families (Calado, 1993, 77).

Valencia through the Paterna and Manises workshops, Barcelona, Seville, Malaga and Teruel clearly gave an impulse to Portuguese Faience decorations. These were constant artefacts in Portuguese wealthy homes so the potter’s inspiration is quite comprehensible. The first faiences produced in Portugal were clearly an imitation of the Seville productions, especially with plain white carinated bowls and plates or just with a blue line or two. This imitation was so faithful to the original that until quite recently all these types of wares found in Portugal were identified as Spanish. But influences go beyond shape and start to appear in decoration. Small spirals, inside geometrical panels are possible the most common Spanish inspired decoration. The same decoration had already been used in Nasari Islamic pottery and transported by potters to Valencia workshops. However, other motifs were used such as some geometrical or circular elements, quite common in Spain. Also from Italy, especially Montelupo, Ligurua and Deruta the imported wares, very common in Portugal, brought some external influences. It should not be forgotten that initially Portuguese faience was known as Venice ware, most likely due to the similarity of the kilns from both countries. The decorations in the central part of plates with mythological images such as Venus and Fortunes, running naked through the fiels, shows the Italian influence, but also other motifs such as scales and lace. Despite the European influence the most important was certainly from China, present since late 16th century. The

Fig. 55 – Portuguese faience plate with Persian influence (after Sandão, 1965).

Porcelain quickly became an item of everyday use, especially among wealthy people. In 1563 during the Braga’s Archbishop visit to Rome, in the Trent meeting, he stayed at the home of the Portuguese Ambassador, between 2 and 9 of October. For the duration of that stay he had dinner with Pope Pius IV and noticed that a large amount of the Pope’s table service was made of silver. So he recommended a “different type of clay tableware much better than any silver in beauty and cleanness that he would recommend to all princes not to use any other, not even silver, on their tables. In Portugal we call it porcelain. They come from India and are made in China. The Pope asked the Archebishop when back in Portugal could he say to the Cardeal Infante his friend to send him some of those porcelains and as soon as he had them he would give up on silver” (Sousa, 1984, 256-257). Although in this moment Lisbon was already producing tin glaze wares this conversation was clearly about porcelain, although some authors have wrote that it should be Portuguese faience, many times referred has porcelain (Calado, 2003, 7).

132

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

The use of Chinese patterns in Portuguese Faience is related with the great amounts of porcelain that Portuguese consumers were used to in their everyday life. Was the reproduction of Chinese symbols trying to take “porcelain” to everyone? Although most of the faience recovered in Portuguese homes is of daily use and these oriental characteristics coexist with other decorations in overseas contexts the majority of Portuguese tin glaze ware is decorated with Chinese influence symbols. They present an excellent quality that could complement domestic environments where porcelain was not very frequent, especially in late 16th and early 17th century when the Chinese ware was not so frequent. Chinese decoration is more common on exported vessels. Despite the fact that Chinese influence is the most remarkable in Portuguese faience it should not be assumed that Portuguese faience survived by the imitation of eastern patterns since the production soon adopted a proper style. As João Pedro Monteiro defended, the vessels made and decorated with such techniques “are not just the results of an attempt to reproduce exotic items but the adjustment of those items to a cultural and catholic Portuguese substructure” (Monteiro, 1999, 45). The Lisbon potters knew that Chinese Wanli patterns were wanted in Europe. This was confirmed in the 1619 potters’ arch where the artisans assume this imitation. The purpose was to satisfy the internal and external market in the search for out of the ordinary items. The influence was so evident that it was frequent for people to call porcelain to tin glaze ware. In 1582 Filipe II of Spain comes to Lisbon were he mentions “new manner porcelains” in a letter to his daughters, clearly the Lisbon ware. However most of the documents before this date refer to faience as Malaga, Talavera and Venice wares and not porcelain making us believe that the first influences were European and not Chinese. It’s impossible to say when did Portuguese faience started to use Chinese motifs as a major decoration. Nevertheless somewhere in the last two decades of the 16th century, even before the decline of the Portuguese presence in the East Indies at the end of the Wanli reign (1573-1619). This date, although always trying to bear in mind Portuguese finds at archaeological sites, was mostly established base on finds in other countries, especially the Low Countries (Bartels, 2003). These regions were always a big consumer of Portuguese faience during late 16th century and the first half of the 17th century, before the development of the Delft factories. Portuguese potters discovered a way, although not perfect, to imitate Chinese porcelain with a very proper style. Chinese porcelain was clearly the most wanted clay objects in Portugal and in Europe, especially by wealthy people. It is believed that between 1604 and 1657 the Dutch VOC alone brought more than three million porcelain objects from China, supplying northern Europe (Matos, 1992, 109). The amount of vessels entering the European market allowed reducing its price, although not

enough to be consumed by everyone. However the mass production of these wares led to a decrease on its quality with a poorer glaze and a standardized decoration, known as kraak porcelain (Matos, 1992, 109). When Portugal starts to produce faience consumers recognize the imitation of Chinese porcelain. Filipe II mentions new way porcelains and Charles II of England refers the pottery imports into his country when passing the customs without paying taxes as porcelains of all sorts asking merchants to declare them. On the other hand in late 18th century when Gerrit Paape wrote his treaty about Delft pottery De Plateelbakker of Delftch Aaadewerk Maaker (1794) he starts by writing that this is “a type of porcelain invented in the Low Countries in mid last century” (Jonge, 1969). One of the most symbolic decorations following Chinese influence is the ledge divided into panels. In the late 16th century productions these were filled with chrysanthemums and fruits such as peaches and pomegranates. The separation of these panels was made mostly by bows although some variants are known. Around 1610 one of the most typical decorations of Portuguese faience, the aranhões starts to be used. In Chinese porcelain the Artemisia leafs, fans, gourds, sounding stones and paper rolls are always surrounded by strings ending in tassels that will be a great influence in the Portuguese aranhões, changing its original meaning and adapting them to a new European style. Chinese influence does not end in the ledge. The central parts of plates are decorated by landscapes with mountains, rocks, pools and water streams, animals such as gazelles, hares, ducks, insects, and birds, among many others. These elements were surrounded by camellias, peonies, chrysanthemums, water flowers, fruits, Buddhist symbols and precious objects. Soon these scenes are mixed with European motifs. As a result many European human figures will appear in Eastern landscapes. Chinese and European influences coexisted in Portuguese faience production. The relation between faience and porcelain is so strong that the Portuguese ware is going to follow all the major changes in porcelain decoration. Late 16th century Portuguese faiences are going to reveal very careful productions similar to the beautiful vessels reaching Portugal in this chronology. In the 17th century the increase presence of kraak porcelain in Europe will make faience decoration more standardized and imitating the kraak motifs. This is especially true for the presence of aranhões, absent from late 16th century faience but present in every collection from 1610 onwards, about the same time that kraak brings that fashion into Europe. Chinese porcelain was an inspiration for Portuguese faience at least since 1580, however it is possible that due to its reduced quantity potters wanted to produce a ware that could somehow complete the lack of abundant porcelain.

133

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Since the first publications in late 19th century many designations were given to the motifs which decorate faience. The first attempt to categorize decorations was made by Rafael Salinas Calado when he divided faience decorations into “families” in which he included aranhões, beads, spirals and geometrics, baroque and lace (Calado, 1992). These names were maintained in the present book; however this author was an art historian and had few contacts with the vast amount of discoveries made in archaeological contexts. The absence of precise designations to some decoratitons made me provide some names to the motifs never designated by any author.

They are generally painted on the ledge of plates and the walls of bowls inside panels, although around 1660 they appear without any framing and together with peaches and chrysanthemums.

The following list of decorations is based in every decorative element that is known in Portuguese faience. Museums, private collections and archaeological contexts (most of them published) were all taken in consideration. The large variability of the motifs did not allow to present every variant. Human representation when mention could not have been divided into gender or even social category and coats of harms present hundreds of different families and religious institutions. Aranhões Is the most emblematic decoration of Portuguese faience shown by the first time in late 19th century by Joaquim de Vasconcelos (Vasconcelos, 1898). The idea was to imitate similar decorations found in Chinese porcelain namely paper rolls, books, Artemisia leafs and fans. Nevertheless while in China such motifs had very specific meanings this is going to be changed when painted in Portuguese Faience.

Fig. 57 – Plate decorated with aranhões (after Trindade, 1994).

Beads This element is usually identified as a very stylized representation of the ruyi head, a Chinese symbol very frequent in porcelain, meaning a long and prosperous life (Matos, 1996, 279). In early 17th century Portuguese faience reproduced the ruyi head as one can see in the plate found in Duke’s Place (London). At the same time beads were already timidly appearing although they only start to be frequently used in late six hundreds. They appear in groups of three or six beads outlined in very dark blue or purple and filled with a light blue ink. It’s one of the most lasting decorations since they appear in mid 17th century and are still in use about hundred and fifty years later.

Fig. 56 – Plate decorated with aranhões (after Trindade, 1994).

When they start to appear in Portuguese faience decorating plates and bowls they are very faithful to the original drawing and paper rolls, books and gourds are easily identifiable. However somehow around 1640 they start to be standardized and represent leafs where the potter paints several “legs” that in certain way remember spiders.

Fig. 58 – Plate decorated with beads (after Mangucci, 2006).

Lace This name was given to this decoration since they are similar to a type of lace (bilros) made in Portugal since late 17th century, exactly at the same time this decoration

134

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

starts to appear in faience and tiles. Although presenting some differences among them they were made in the three production centres.

Fig. 59 – Platter decorated with lace from Cabral Moncada Leilões.

Fig. 60 – Plate decorated with small spirals (after Moncada, 2008).

The name was given by art historians and supported by Santos Simões and Reinaldo dos Santos in their books about faience and adopted by other researchers (Calado, 1992; Monteiro, 2007). However, this designation can lead to a mistake since it’s likely that these motifs were not inspired in lace patterns but instead in the peacock th feathers used to decorate Italian maiolica in late 16 century. This resemblance was noted for the first time by Virgílio Correia in the book Azulejos Datados when he states to have seen such decorations in Italy (Correia, 1918). In this sense it’s not yet possible to determined where were Portuguese potters inspired, if in the Italian wares or if in the common lace work much in vogue in th late 17 century (Monteiro, 2007). Small spirals This decoration was named by Rafael Salinas Calado and corresponds to a decorative solution made from several small spirals grouped inside geometrical panels (Calado, 1992). Portuguese faience potters were inspired by the Spanish productions of Valencia where this decoration was quite common. ~ This is one of the first decorations to be made in Portuguese faience and is found in archaeological th contexts since 1580 (Bartels, 2003) up to late 17 century. Scales It’s very difficult to determine where Portuguese potters were inspired to decorate their vessels with scales, since this is a common decoration both in Chinese and European ceramics, especially in the ledge of plates and the neck of bottles.

Fig. 61 – Box decorated with scales (after Calado, 2006).

Fine draw Around 1640 and during the stylization of the Chinese patterns known as aranhões a new type of decoration appears, baptized by Rafael Salinas Calado as desenho miúdo (fine draw) (Calado, 1992). Using very fine paint brushes very small elements such as human figures, animals, threes, flowers, rivers, buildings, among others were outlined in purple or dark blue and filled in a light blue colour. The scenes are clearly of Chinese inspiration, although in some examples European anthropomorphic figures or some castles have been recorded usually telling a story.

135

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 63 – Plate decorated with the Monte Sinai technique from Museu Nacional Machado de Castro.

Fig. 62 – Plate decorated with fine draws (after Moncada, 2008).

This is a very delicate production, possibly made for wealthy people. While faience became more available to everyone the potters created a new type of decoration that would only be acquired by reach people. It’s not very frequent in overseas contexts and is believed to be exclusively produced in Lisbon. Monte Sinai This decoration is not a motif but a style supposed to be produced in a single workshop in Lisbon from late 17th century to early 18th century. The designation was given by José de Queirós in 1913 when he compared the decorative motifs of this type of objects with the decoration of the tiles from the Santa Catarina do Monte Sinai parish and founding some similarities. He immediately believed that this type of pottery could only be produced here. However, and despite the fact that faience potters were in fact working in that area of the city the existence of tiles with the same decoration in one church cannot prove such theory. Documentary evidences clearly state that potters did not produce tiles and pottery exclusively to be used in their parish and these circulated around the country. On the other hand recent excavations in Largo de Jesus, located in this area, did not reveal any fragment of Monte Sinai productions what would be expected if this was in fact its area of production (Queirós, 1913). Queirós generalized this production to the second half of the 17th century, nevertheless its production seems to only have started around 1680 and lasted up till 1720, more or less. It’s a very fine production and considering what was being made at that time in Lisbon this was probably one of the best quality items being made in Portugal. Although easy to identify they are not that frequent in archaeological contexts, appearing mostly in palaces and convents which indicates that probably only wealthy people could access this production.

The decoration can be distinguished from other productions since it presents a darker blue and a hazy drawing and a very thick, white and shiny glaze. The decoration still follows some Chinese influence especially the presence of chrysanthemums inside panels although the central bottoms offers European characters and landscapes. Floral motifs Although there are many floral representations in Portuguese Faience, some of them were used during many years creating proper decorations. This seems to be the case of the acanthus leafs. Appearing isolated in the first half of the 17th century around 1660 they start to appear in garlands decorating the ledge of plates in a decoration known as baroque strip mentioned for the first time by José de Queirós (1907, 60).

Fig. 64 – Plate decorated with baroque garlands (after Mangucci, 2006).

Ferns were also largely used inth the decoration of faience plates from 1640 until late 17 century mostly in plates

136

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

and bowls. This is the same moment when large leafs are also use in the decoration of the same objects.

as well. It was one of the symbols of Lan Caihe, one of the eight immortals and the patron of gardeners. Camellias are also frequently and represent beauty and health (Matos, 1996, 273). Although carnations are not that recurrent they are known in one or two examples of Portuguese faience. Chrysanthemums are the most recurrent plant used in Portuguese faience decoration since earliest times and identified since around 1580 up to 1750. Other flowers appear such as daisies, peonies, a symbol of luck and fortune and tulips in a mixture of eastern and western influences.

Fig. 65 – Plate decorated with ferns found in London (draw by T. Casimiro).

Trees are also frequent, especially small bushes and palm trees decorating more exotic environments.

Fig. 67 – Peony. Detail of plate found in London (draw by T. Casimiro).

Fig. 66 – Plate decorated with large leafs found in London (draw by T. Casimiro).

Fruits The variety of fruits used in the decoration of Portuguese Faience is quite interesting especially because most of them were used trying to reproduce some decoration present in Chinese porcelain. In China a gourd due to the fact that can be conserved by many years and it’s used to keep water is a symbol of long life and related to one of the eight immortals Li Tieguai and it will be used in the decoration of the Portuguese ware (Matos, 1996, 278). Peaches are one of the most frequent decorations and it’s a clear imitation of Chinese porcelain where it represented marriage and immortality (Matos, 1996, 278). Flowers and plants These are definitely the most frequent decoration in Portuguese faience and follow not only Chinese influences but even create decorations exclusive to Portuguese wares. One of the most interesting decorations is the use of petals to decorate the ledge of plates while the central bottom works as a capitulum much in use in the second half of the 17th century. Jars and baskets of flowers are very common representation in Wanli porcelains and are going to be used in Portuguese faience

Animals The presence of animals also reveals a large mixture of styles and influences. Flying birds are a clear Chinese imitation where they represent the ability to reach the sky and a higher power. But other birds were represented such as storks, swans, gooses, herons, howls, roosters, ducks, parrots, and peacocks symbols of birth, immortality, knowledge, luck, marriage, happiness, faith and beauty.

Fig. 68 – Plate with swans from Museu Nacional Machado de Castro (after Santos, 1960).

137

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Insects are largely reproduced in Portuguese faience with butterflies, bees and dragonflies originally symbols of passion, souls, organization and happiness (Matos, 1996, 275). Snails, a symbol of regeneration In Chinese culture are known in one or two vessels (Matos, 1996, 276). The representation of several mammals is equally frequent once again with eastern ans western influences. Oxen represent work and strength, dogs are loyal, a horse is a symbol of royalty, deer and does are pure and gentle and suggest a long living life, lions represent strength and power, goats are a symbol of domestic environment, hedgehogs and boars are wild and strong, camels and dromedaries are resistant, elephants are symbols of exotic travelling and rabbits and hares represent long life and breeding. Fish are a constant presence in Portuguese faience with the representation of carps influenced by Chinese porcelain where they are a symbol of richness, happiness and knowledge (Matos, 1996, 274). However not only real animals are represented and the illustration of dragons, a symbol of the Chinese emperor and happiness, grifs and centaurs are frequent. Anthropomorphic Human representations are quite common and can be divided in western and eastern. European people appear performing all sorts of daily activities. Although all social classes are represented wealthy people are more frequent with very fine ladies playing music instruments, knights, soldiers, nobles but also farmers. Mythological figures are also very abundant especially the female representations of Fortune, Justice and Venus and even some biblical representation such as, for example the Abraham sacrifice. Although these are the most regular once in a while eastern representations of people appear creating scenes, some of them related to mythological Chinese stories.

Buildings European castles, city walls, churches, houses, and bridges are frequent decorations in Portuguese Faience included in landscapes occupying the central part of plates. However many eastern style houses are also represented. Boats Portugal’s relation with the sea and the fact that a large part of the population was related to sea activities from merchants to sailors made boats a common representation in Portuguese Faience. Hearts These appear quite frequently in Portuguese Faience representing love with winged hearts crossed by two arrows. This decoration becomes more frequent in late 17th century due to the diffusion of the cult Sacred Heart of Jesus around 1673-1675. Legends Most of them represent people’s names and were certainly used by those people such as D. Thereza Ma, Soror Mariana or Abreu. Sometimes instead of the name only the initials can be represented like S.K. or L.F. Family names are also frequent like the PAS family found in Amsterdam. Religious orders were also identified Portuguese faience and it’s very frequent to find the initials S.D. for the São Domingos order. Entire sets were made using the initials. In Ferryland (Newfoundland) at least a dozen vessels appeared with the initials S.K. found in the house of the son of Lady Sarah Kirke. However there are other legends used in Portuguese Faience decoration that may indicate the vessel’s function with SANGRIA or BARBA or love messages with AMOR or NÃO QUERO NADA DO AMOR. It’s possible that some of them could indicate the existence of an entire set. There is a plate with the word VER (to see) that maybe a part of a five senses table set or the word VERÃO (summer) that could be a part of a four seasons table set. Dates The vessels decorated with dates are not very frequent in Portuguese faience so it’s believed that they were made only when ordered possibly representing important moment for their owners. The reason for this assumption is based on the fact that only high quality vessels are known to present such decoration and they were not easily acquired by poor people. Many of them for example appear in the same vessels as the Portuguese royal arms and have symbolic dates such as 1641 (the year after the Restoration), 1655 (when a peace treaty is signed between Portugal and France), and 1665 (the battle of Montes Claros). Some dated vessels were also identified abroad some of them also with coats of arms, possible representing an important moment for any European family.

Fig. 69 – Plate with human figure (after Moncada, 2008).

138

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Coats of arms Portuguese faience started as an elite’s commodity so it was frequent for noble and wealthy families to have their coats of arms painted in plates, bowls and bottles, somehow similar to what happen in Spanish and Italian wares. This was true not only for Portuguese families but also for foreign families and cities, such as the city of Hamburg in an example kept in the city’s museum. Religious orders also ordered that their symbols were present in tin glaze ware so it’s not uncommon to found the Cross of Santiago, the Franciscans, Carmelitas, among others.

Geometric Circles, crossed lines, zig zags and spirals are frequent in Portuguese faience usually represented together with other decorations. Half concentric circles it’s one of the most frequent decorations in Portuguese Faience from about 1640, used essentially in everyday wares such as bowls and plates. First productions tend to be finer while in late 17th century they became less delicate.

These objects would certainly be a symbol of social status apart from the ceramics used by less wealthy people. These were clearly appreciated in different countries considering that in the 17th century the merchant Gaspar Fernandes Lopes receives an order from Baiona asking for ten or twelve dozens crown bowls from Lisbon: “tigellas de coroas de Lisboa” (Leão, 1991, 23). Initially these armed plates and bowls should have been of an exclusive use by noble families. Nevertheless when consumption increases and opens to everyone even poor people gain access to faience objects and middle class people could afford to have these noble objects at their tables. In the second half of the 17th century these noble symbols start to appear in all archaeological contexts not only in Portugal but also in overseas contexts. In the book Depois do Terramoto, Matos Sequeira transcribes a document that he states to have found in the Conde de Ameal’s library where someone wrote about a meating Jupiter did in mount Olimpo, receinving several crafts. When the potters came they were being accused by several families to have reproduced their coats of arms and send it to taverns: “acusados de muitas famílias ilustres de que eles lhes sevandijavão as suas armas, pondo-lh’as na louça, as quaes se viam pelas tavernas e pedião licenºça para tomarem todos os pratos por perdidos em que se visse as suas armas. Júpiter lhes dice que não se afrontassem por que antes isto lhes servia de credito por mostrar mais domínios das suas casas” (Sequeira, 1967, 47). The most represented motif was the lion a symbol of numerous families not only in Portugal but also abroad.

Fig. 70 – Bowl from Museu Nacional Machado de Castro (after Santos, 1960).

139

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

9

PORTUGUESE FAIENCE CONSUMPTION Talk about the consumption of Portuguese Faience in Portugal isn’t easy. The study of Post-Medieval pottery is quite recent and just in recent times it started to produce results about which types of forms and decorations were used in different contexts. As aforementioned the first Portuguese faience objects were inspired in Spanish tin glaze ware forms used in everyday activities. Such objects started to replace the Seville imports used in food consuming in Portuguese homes. It’s frequent to find, at the bottom, some marks believed to be property marks. These are mostly crosses, although a “P” has been found in a household context in Aveiro (Barbosa, Casimiro e Manaia, 2009). Changes in the ways of medieval populations which progressively stopped using collective vessels to consume food and started to use individual plates, bowls and cups could have been an incentive to the faience production. New habits in food consumption also led to the development on an industry that could supply individual objects. The use of tea, coffee and even chocolate demanded the use of new vessels fine but heat resistant. It hasn’t be tested if Portuguese faience would resist to heat variations as well as porcelain, however the existence of tea pots supports this idea. Portugal always had a market for tin glaze ware productions. In 1500 the Lisbon charter refers the louça de mallega & de vallença e de outra de barro que aqui fazem que levam para fora do termo por mar e por terra (Malaga and Valencia white wares and other clay coarse wares that they do in the city and is taken by sea and by land) paying taxes just once (Calado, 1992). The inventory of the goods of the Queen D. Beatriz, mother of Manuel I, in 1507, reveals several imported tin glaze wares. Among the pharmacy vessels are refered “búrneas de mallega, bacios de mallega de Valença, tanfores de mallega, panellas de Valença, craveiro de Valença, potes de malega de Castela, altemias e almofias de Vallença, salsinhas e pratos de Mallega de Valença… arredomas, almotolias verdes, potes de conserva, salsinhas de bordas, bacios de bordas e chãos, azados, alguidares”. The reference is for several vessels from Malaga and Valencia, but also from Rhodes and Pisa (Sequeira, 1967, 12). A 1522 treaty mentions that the annual trade of white wares from Seville was evaluated in ten thousand cruzados. From Talavera three hundred shipments every year had a value of three to four thousand reis each one,

reaching a total of 2500 cruzados every year (Brandão, 1992). The first tin glaze wares produced in Portugal, from middle 16th century, has been found in wealthy contexts. This is not surprising since the first time a new product is produced it tends to be very expensive and demanded by wealthy elites. Although the mid 16th productions were largely consumed by Portuguese people the new style developed around 1580 is known better outside Portugal than in this country. One of the reasons is the lack of archaeological sites from this chronology properly excavated. The few where information could be taken present productions still inspired in Spanish productions while in Europe the same chronologies have offered very fine and well produced vessels. Could this mean that the first Portuguese faience productions inspired in a Chinese and Italian style were made to be exported instead of consumed in this country? The excavations at the Corte-Real palace in Lisbon provided several vessels of tin glaze ware based in a Seville style much in use in late 16th century (Sabrosa, 2008). In the Aljube prison, also in Lisbon, again a rich context, the same style was used at least until 1590. Although they appear in urban centres the highest percentage of finds in late 16th and early 17th century is from wealthy environments such as Santa Clara a Velha (Coimbra), Tarouca (Lamego) or Casa do Infante (Porto), (Corte-Real, 2000; Castro and Sebastian, 2008 ; Real et all.1992). In northern Europe, in similar chronologies, the recovered Portuguese artefacts are far from the simple productions found in Portugal (Bartels, 2003). Instead they are finely decorated. They were prestige vessels. This is the only explanation for the rich families and cities coats of arms in jars and bottles found in Hamburg, for example. The presence of dates in those objects may indicate a special celebration of that family in a certain year. There is no evidence about how the orders were made to Lisbon workshops. It’s likely that they were made directly to Portuguese or even foreign merchants. It’s not believable that such rich artefacts in Portugal or abroad were used in everyday activities except in very rich houses. Initially the production should have been made only by some potters who had the technique. The beauty of some vessels is quite impressive still today and would be one of the best European productions at least till mid 17th century. No other European country would produce Chinese influenced pottery with such craft specialization. The increasing demand over the 17th century led to an increase in quantity but a decrease in quality. Several potters started to produce such wares, divided in about thirty

140

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

workshops just in Lisbon. These less able men produced cheaper pottery. Many people still today believe that the major role of Portuguese faience was to imitate Chinese porcelain which decreased in Portuguese contexts in early 17th century. However faience existed even before this reduction in consume and porcelain did not disappear, simply it was not available in the desirable amounts. In 1620 there were just in Lisbon seventeen merchants of porcelains and other Indian commodities (mercadores de porçolanas e outras cousas da Índia) (Oliveira, 1620). In spite of the rarity of Portuguese faience in archaeological contexts from early 17th century from about 1635 onwards the amounts increase largely. Monasteries, convents and palaces continue to be large consumers, nevertheless such production starts to appear in more modest contexts such as households and hospitals. In fact there isn’t any mid 17th century Portuguese site that doesn’t have some faience. The consumption is now general and everyone has it. However elites would not want to use the same items as communers, so it’s easy to distinguish between high quality vessels possibly used at rich tables and less careful products used by all the others. It was used essentially in everyday activities such as eating, serving and storing, replacing coarse wares. In some contexts the number of faience vessels is even larger than the red wares (Sebastian and Castro, 2009). The production increases in a way that these vessels were certainly acquired at very low prices and a house could have dozens. In an archaeological site at Martim Moniz, Lisbon, a house was identified, dated around 1755 where numerous pots were recovered (Casimiro, 2011). Among the different vessels many of them corresponded to kitchen ware with cooking pots and costrels but also to tableware with several examples of Portuguese faience with numerous plates, bowls and bottles. The context revealed that the house was occupied by very modest people. The preparation and storing was made in red coarseware but the food was consumed in tin glaze ware vessels. The habit of consuming food in faience seems to be general to the entire country. According to Luis Sebastian and Ana Castro the same happen in the Mosteiro of São João de Tarouca where large amounts of plates and bowls were recovered, corresponding to entire table sets (Sebastian e Castro, 2009). Rich people continued to prefer imported ceramics. The inspirations of faience in Chinese porcelain did not satisfy who preferred the original wares. The consumption of foreign pots was a mark on the status quo of rich people and the imports of Spanish and Italian wares are quite frequent since they were rarer and more expensive. From Spain Portuguese people acquired goods in Valencia, Seville, Teruel and Talavera, among others. From Italy the evidences point imports from Montelupo, Liguaria and Deruta. In the D. Beatriz, mother of king Manuel I inventory of goods are mentioned vessels from Pisa, the sea port for Montelupo (Calado, 1992). In the Rua Nova dos Ferros, in Lisbon Luis de Oliveira mentions the sale

of Venice wares (Oliveira, 1916). Less frequent in Portuguese archaeological sites are Dutch wares. Several stoneware vessels, a northern European production have also been registered. On the 21st of November 1584, it was determined in Coimbra that nobody could sell pottery from Talavera or of another quality except the people who brought it from abroad so its importation was common not only in Lisbon, but also in other places of Portugal. Only recently did publications concerning what was being used by rich and poor people in Post-Medieval Portugal started to appear (Gomes and Gomes, 2007; Fernandes and Carvalho, 2003). Such papers indicate that different social groups were consuming different artefacts and upper class people had access to more delicate and fine tableware. This distinction is even more identifiable from early 17th century onwards with the increase of production and consumption of many ceramic wares with different quality fabrics and glazes. This happens mostly after 1635 when production starts to have to types of production: the everyday wares and the luxurious wares. The best quality objects have been found abroad since the export of Portuguese Faience was destined to wealthy people. The first document referring the exportation of Portuguese faience is the record of king Philippe’s visit to Lisbon in 1619. However the archaeological records put Portuguese faience in foreign countries since 1580, especially in northern Europe in countries such as Holland, Germany and the British Isles. Such countries traded with Portugal since the middle Ages and were the appropriate markets for this new ware. On the other hand those three countries were where a major part of the Portuguese Jews went after being expel in late 15th century. Many of those men were related to trading activities and even international trade and despite living in other countries they continued to maintain their economical relations with Portuguese cities. This trade was confirmed by English Port Books since many of the names of the merchants taking commodities into England from Portugal were actually of Jewish origin. In this sense they were aware of the ceramics being produced in Portugal and would use it in their homes. This was the case of the plate found in Mitre Street in London but essentially the finds in Amsterdam. The presence of Portuguese Faience in the Low Countries has to be highlighted not only because it was one of the first places outside Portugal and its colonies where Portuguese Faience was identified and studied but also due to the high number of vessels found. Two quarters with dozens of houses were identified in the Vlooyenburch neighbourhood and excavated between 1981 and 1982 (Baart, 1988). That area of town was known as the home of Portuguese and Spanish Jews. The absence of detailed publications at the time made Ian Baart to contact Portuguese museums in order to create a proper collaboration which he did with Rafael Salinas Calado.

141

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

The presence of Portuguese Faience in the Low Countries was also proved through documentary evidence. In the home of Samuel Cardoso who lived in Vlooyenburch in 1651 there were 20 vessels of jars and plates made in Portugal: 20 stucx cannen als potten van Portegael oertgemerckt. In the inventory of Abraham Henriques Julião who changed his name to Diego Diaz del Campo and who lived in the fruit and vegetable market of the Jews, near the catholic church there was in 1718 a box with Portuguese pottery at the attic worthing six guilders, so it was not being used at that moment: een kist met portugaals aardewerck so heel als gebroke f 6. The presence of this ware both in rich and poor contexts indicates that not only the rich merchant class would have access to it (Baart, 1988), although that seems to true for all the other sites in Europe. The Low Countries, due to the constant presence of Portuguese Jews is a very peculiar case in the study of Portuguese faience abroad. This ware was found in Amsterdam but also in Graft, where Ian Baart claims to have recovered 45 vessels from three backyards, in Hoorn, Roterdam, Velsen, Haarkem, Vlissigen and Deventer (Baart, 1988; Bartels, 2003). The vessels recovered in this country are essentially Lisbon productions and high quality vessels which were exported between 1580 and 1660. The end of the pottery trade between Portugal and the Low Countries is usually related with the development of the Delft industry which could perfectly replace the role of Portuguese Faience (Bartels, 2003, 71). Other countries were also importing considerable amounts of Portuguese faience during the 17th century. In Germany, although archaeological evidences are not so frequent as in Holland several examples have been found in Hamburg, Lubeck, Wismar, Rostock, Stralsund, among others (Samariter, 2006), confirming that these were used by locals. One should not forget that Germany was also the destiny of many of Portuguese Jews in late middle Ages. A community of about 600 Jews would live in Hamburg in the 17th century and they would certainly live with several Portuguese commodities (Koj, 1993). Portuguese faience was a much appreciated ware otherwise it would have not survived in German museums for several centuries. Despite the frequent presence in European countries, Portuguese faience had other overseas markets. Archaeological excavations have revealed that this was a frequent ware in North American English colonies. Such presence should not be consider strange. English planters would like to maintain a similar life style to what they had in their home country. In this sense they would import every commodity which allows the maintenance of their social status, namely furniture, textiles, pottery and even food (Pendery, 1999; Willcoxen, 1999).

Portuguese colonies were obviously the major consumer of Portuguese ceramics since they have to be considered as an extension of Portugal’s territory. Portuguese faience has been found in all colonial sites in Brazil, the biggest colony. To reproduce a European life style implied that everything had to be imported from everyday wares to high quality fancy pottery. The Galeão Sacramento has been found off Bahia in the 1970’s and its faiences mentioned in several publications (Mello, 1979; Brancante, 1981). However the studies made so far have not reveal if the pottery found in here was to use onboard or to take into land. Excavations in Vila Flor and Bahia offered large sets of faience as expected (Albuquerque, 2008; Etchevarne, 2007). In these sites, contrarily to what happens in European trade partners and its colonies faience does not have the high quality registered in Europe but instead is very similar to what was being used in Portugal. It is possible that leaving Portugal and reaching places such as Salvador, in Bahia, faience vessels was overvalued and used as a prestige commodity kept at home for many years (Etchevarne 2007, 119). According to Éldino Bracante a Chinese porcelain plate reaching Brazil between 1600 and 1635 would cost 220 reis while a plate made in Lisbon or Portugal would cost 50 reis. Between 1616 and 1635 two inventories registered twenty three plates from Lisbon with a variable price between 40 and 80 reis. Between 1619 and 1635 other three inventories register 38 vessels from Portugal valued between 40 and 60 reis (Bracante, 1981, 257). In 1648 a Libon’s nun convent spent in one month 990 reis in white plain wares to use in the kichen and 980 in painted wares: Gastousse este mez em panellas vidradas,360; em louça pintada p.a serviço da Roda 580; em louça br.ca para a cozinha, 990; em louça da maja e tijellas de Real, 980 (Correia, 1956, 133). In late 17th century a dozen of Lisbon bowls cost 200 reis (Mangucci, 2006), so Portuguese faience was reaching Brazil at higher prices destined to wealthy settlers (Etchevarne, 2007, 120). Recent studies are being made in other Portuguese colonies such as Cape Verde and at the moment the evidences show the same that happened in Brazil should occur here as well since the majority of the faience found does not offer any special characteristics. It was the everyday ware in Portugal.

Other European colonies were also acquiring Portuguese faience and it has been found in New York, during the Dutch presence, in Placentia (a French colony) and in Buenos Aires under the Spanish rule.

142

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

10 CHRONO-STYLISTIC EVOLUTION Dating Portuguese faience was always one of the most important purposes of researchers since late 19th century. However, the chronological attributions would generalize vessels to the 17th and 18th centuries. The first attempt for a chrono-stylistic evolution was made by Reynaldo dos Santos in 1960. The author divided the evolution of Portuguese Faience in four moments, each of them corresponding to 25 years of the 17th century, supporting his theories on dated artefacts from museums and private collections. The work of Reynaldo dos Santos helped archaeologists and art historians for more than 40 years, still in use until quite recently (Calado, 1987; 1992; 2003; Monteiro, 1994; 2002; Pais, 2007). The first moment of Reynaldo dos Santos corresponds to the first 25 years of the 17th century. He defended that Portuguese Faience was an imitation of Chinese porcelain (Santos, 1960, 25). The oldest dated object of Portuguese Faience existing in Portugal is a large bowl, today in display at the Museu Nacional de Castro, dated 1621 at the external bottom. The decoration is mostly of Chinese influence with flowers. This was in fact the type that Reynaldo dos Santos believed to represent all the productions of this period. The second moment is characterized by the introduction of Portuguese elements, creating a mixture of styles called “golden period” by dos Santos. He believed that this was the moment when the purple and yellow were introduced. The oriental style, more stylized, was exclusively at the ledge of plates since the central part was dedicated to European subjects such as mythological figures and coats of arms of Portuguese and foreign noble families with the most famous being the Silva family and its standing lion. This is the moment when several decorations related with the Restoration appear (when the Iberian crowns are again separated) showing many soldiers and royal coats of arms (Santos, 1960, 47). By trying to put every Chinese influence in the first half of the 17th century, dos Santos ignored that those motifs continue to be produced until late in that century. For him it was the most creative moment in Portuguese Faience (Santos, 1960, 77). In his third period, dos Santos suggests that the decoration has lost its initial beauty using in its majority purple outlines filled in blue or yellow. The Chinese motifs are now less frequent and quite different from the original pattern. The central part of plates continues to present coats of arms, animals and landscapes (Santos, 1960, 47). The fourth and last period corresponds to last 25 years of the 17th century and presents a complete absence of

oriental motifs with several baroques, beads, lady’s heads and lace (Santos, 1960, 47). Despite the fact that this evolution, in use for about 40 years, is now out of date, Reynaldo dos Santos, without any archaeological information was able to understand which the oldest artefacts were. However, through his chronology it’s impossible to date everyday wares and only the superb vessels in display in Portuguese museums. Post-Medieval archaeology didn’t exist in late 1950’s and was impossible go further. The last two decades have provided an enormous amount of information, especially through the results obtain in Portuguese and overseas archaeological sites. Based in publish evidences and museum collections it was possible to rigorously define the key moments in Portuguese Faience production, dividing it in six moments, corresponding to its evolution. As Rafael Salinas Calado, an authority in the museum studies of Portuguese faience, used to say it’s up to archaeologists to refine the chronologies established by art historians based on dated artefacts. It’s not always possible to recognize a political or cultural moment to mark the start or end of a stylistic moment. The formal and decorative choices of potters and painters were clearly influenced by internal and external stimulus, especially in the use of new decorations. Nevertheless it cannot be ignored that some decorations may have born from the imagination of some artists and not from external influences. Based on the vessels found in the British Isles, together with Portuguese and foreign publications of archaeological sites where Portuguese faience has been found, as well as information given by other archaeologists about sites not yet published it was possible to establish a chrono-stylistic evolution. It was difficult to find Portuguese sites fully published in which Portuguese faience was well dated. Publications presenting tin glaze wares make a general attribution to 17th century or, if trying to present a rigorous date they use the evolution of Reynaldo dos Santos. In this sense, huge collections like the ones from Palmela, Almada or even Lisbon were not very helpful (Fernandes and Carvalho, 1995: Sabrosa and Santos, 1992; Silva and Guinote, 1998). On the other hand other sites were very useful such as Tarouca, Porto or Funchal (Sebastian and Castro, 2009; Gomes and Gomes, 1995). The Portuguese archaeological sites were important in this study however a great deal of information was taken from overseas sites where chronologies seem to be more precise, especially due to the amounts of other imports found in most locations.

143

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Although the six moments are defined by dates these are not watertight. A plate produced in 1636 can still have the same characteristics of the previous period. These moments mark production trends when certain decorations are more common than others. This evolution does not close the identification of new shapes and decoration that can still surprises us in the future since some decorations seem to be made during a long period of time. It’s curious to note that most moments correspond to about 25 to 30 years, what can be seen as a generation. In this sense it is not illogical to think that each of these production moments could be related to an age bracket of new potters occupying the place of its masters (normally the father or close relatives). Family relations are essential in craft organizations reproducing the social organization is Post-Medieval Portugal so it should not be ignored in the evolution of faience. I: 1550-1570 It is the first moment in the production of Portuguese tin glaze wares in Post-Medieval times. The first date is given based on the information provided by the excavation of the Mata da Machada kiln, the oldest and only evidence of faience in Portugal in the 16th century. Although archaeological information reveal an activity in 1520’s I believe that the kiln, although could have produced pottery earlier, namely the sugar cones and biscuit plates only started to manufacture tin glaze wares about twenty years later (Torres, s.d). This statement is based on the amounts of pottery recovered in Lisbon and other nearby cities in early 16th century. If this workshop was already producing in this chronology its artefacts would be very common in the archaeological sites when in fact they aren’t, something that only happens around 1560’s.

Fig. 71 – Biscuit carinated bowl found in Mata da Machada (photo T. Casimiro).

White tin glaze ware was being made in the south bench of the Tagus River and, according to written sources also in Lisbon, at least from 1565 onwards. These first objects should have been made for the wealthiest people and production was clearly low. One of the leading characteristics of Portuguese sites between 1550 and 1600

is the preponderance of red coarse wares used in food preparation and consume. This prevalence happens in wealth and poor contexts. Very few vessels were recovered in Lisbon archaeological sites from the first half of the 16th century, namely in the 1531 earthquake dumps where red coarseware is the majority of finds (Diogo and Trindade 2000). In the palace of Corpo Santo, occupied by the Corte Real family till late 16th century there is a high percentage of pottery recovered (Sabrosa, 2008) but still small when compared with other finds. Similar artefacts were also recovered in the second half of the 16th century in other sites such as the Casa do Infante, in Porto, although it’s not possible to know if they were all produced in Portugal or in southern Spain. The shapes recognized at this moment are plates and carinated bowls, very similar to Seville productions, although many other such as jars and candlesticks may have existed. The high request of this ware produced in Spain may have originated the development of Portuguese production. The end date of this period was chosen based on written evidences. In 1565 the Livro do Lançamento mentions the existence of several white malaga potters in several parts of the city and in 1572 the Lisbon potters’ regiment refers the existence of Talavera pottery made in the city. In late 16th century Talavera was already producing blue on white tin glaze ware, different from the southern production from Seville. II: 1570-1610 It’s the first moment of blue on white decorated pottery believed to have started around 1570 since archaeologically speaking the first evidences only appear around 1580. The objects from this period are inspired in Spanish, Italian and Ming Chinese ceramics reaching Portugal during the 16th and early 17th centuries. It’s impossible to know what triggered this start however is commonly accepted that the demand for exotic pottery, way above the offer could in fact be responsible for the development of tin glaze ware in post-medieval Portugal. The oldest objects found in archaeological sites, inspired in high valued objects consumed by the elites, make us believe that these new artefacts were made for the same people. Just some decades later did faience started to be consumed by everyone. This consumption system seems to be a current practice in other European productions, such as Italian, Dutch and English wares (Tyler, Betts and Stephenson, 2008, 11). The foreign decorations may have been brought by potters from other country who settled in Lisbon, namely Spanish and Flemish. They were, for example Filipe de Góis, Flemish, living in Pampulha, where an important production centre developed in the 17th century (Monteiro, 2002, 54).

144

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Portuguese Faience in the 17th century. Concerning the European influence decorations the first attempts for peacock feathers are registered, very frequent in Italian and Spanish tin glaze wares, especially from Talavera de la Reina. Also of Spanish influence emerge the small spirals. This decoration was initially present in objects produced in the Granada kingdom in southern Spain where it seems that lustre ware Valencia production got their inspiration, and probably so did Portuguese potters.

Fig. 72 – Plate recovered in Carrickfergus (draw by T. Casimiro).

Fig. 74 – Plate recovered in Dordrecht archaeological excavations (after Bartels, 2003).

Very nice examples from this period were found in Deventer and Dordrecht in the Low Countries in contexts dated from around 1580 by Michiel Bartels (Bartels, 2003, 75) or in Carrickfergus where the collection should be dated around 1610. Curiously the objects produced in this period seem to be more frequent in overseas sites than in Portugal what can in fact indicate that this first moment of production was more focused in outside markets, which were able to pay more.

Fig. 73 – Plate recovered in Deventer archaeological excavations (after Bartels, 2003).

In these first years the general tendency was for plates and bowls. The shapes were no longer imitating Spanish production but following Chinese and Italian styles. The decoration reflects several external influences. The oriental style is present through landscapes in the central part of plates very similar to what was being imported from China in the second half of the 16th century. The ledges are divided and decorated with flowers and fruits. These wares present extreme careful in the outline of motifs, quite different from the stylization of the next moments. One of the most important characteristics from this period is the complete absence of aranhões, one of the most important decorations and a trade mark of

III: 1610-1635 It’s the moment when production strengthens this is, the time when beautiful objects, destined to specific wealthy groups are produced. This is in fact the golden age of Portuguese faience, as Reynaldo dos Santos called it, although in a previous moment. The most frequent shapes continue to be bowls and plates, although very large jars and bottles start to be produced, once again known more outside Portugal than inside. Aesthetically it is the moment when the Chinese models are faithfully reproduced. The central part of plates present bucolic landscapes with several animals and different characters. The ledges are divided into compartments or panels inside of which are painted the first aranhões, inspired in paper roles, artemis leafs, fans and gourds, rigorously imitated. Inside the panels there are flowers like chrysanthemums, fruits such as peaches and pomegranates and zoomorphic representations where many animals are represented although birds are the most frequent. The European influenced decoration which

145

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

appeared for the first time in the previous period continues to be frequently used with a huge expression of coats of arms, since most of these vessels would be consumed by noble and rich families. This is the moment when several styles start to be mixture. The blue on white faience begins to be a little more frequent in Portuguese archaeological sites although essentially recovered in wealthy environments such as palaces, convents and rich noble houses. The objects recovered in the D2 context at Casa do Infante, in Porto, dated around 1628 show this were in one of the most important site of post-medieval times in that city.

Recovered in an archaeological excavation in Naestved, in a context dated 1600 to 1630 a bottle with a coat of arms and decorated with Chinese inspiration motifs with chrysanthemums and a very naturalistic butterfly. Its neck presents a decoration very similar to a bottle kept in the Hamburg museum and dated 1632 with the coat of arms of Bartel Kunrat. In his paper about Portuguese pottery found in the Low Countries Michiel Bartels publishes two plates that he defends belong to a moment before 1624, recovered in an harbour area where huge constructions were undertaken in that specific year. Their decoration suggests they were made between 1620 and 1635. In this paper there are other vessels that the author proposes being discarded about 1625, but we are sure they were made a little bit later, even because Bartels does not point a well dated context (Bartels, 2003, 76-77).

Fig. 75 – Bowl dated 1621 (after Santos, 1960).

The preponderance goes to geometrical and floral decoration with several examples of small spirals. They show high production quality with compact and homogeneous fabrics and shiny thick glazes with a very well performed decoration (Barreira, Dórdio and Teixeira, 1995, 153). However they are just a small percentage when compared with the amounts recovered in the D3 context from the same site, dated between 1656 and 1677. One of the most emblematic vessels from this period belongs to the Museu Nacional Soares dos Reis. Decorated with four panels of Chinese influence it presents at the exterior bottom the 1621 date, making it the oldest dated object in Portuguese Faience. A small cup with similar decoration was recovered in Cupids (Newfoundland) and was dated between 1620 and 1630. Two bottles, one at the Copenhagen museum and other at the Hamburg museum are clearly from this period (Pais, 2007, 45-46). They present European style decoration, namely the coat of arms of lieutenant Andresen and a scene where a man kills a horse, associated to the words Jacob Semmelhacke, the people to whom they were made for. The bottle from the Copenhagen museum is dated 1624 and presents in its body a Chinese influence decoration very similar to a platter from the Cabral Moncada’s collection with Persian influenced decoration where two gazelles look at each other. The bottle from the Hamburg museum is dated 1628 and has a crossed decoration at the neck.

Figs 76 and 77 – Bottles from the Hamburg museum with the dates 1628 and 1632 (after Pais, 2007).

IV: 1635-1660 It’s the time of the creative explosion on Portuguese faience but equally of the lost of some of its decorative refinement. This phenomenon is explained by the consumption democratization. This expansion has to be seen in the mercantilist logic invading Europe from the 17th century onwards. With the increase of a commercial world the consumers’ attitude changed. At this moment even the less wealthy people felt they could consume the objects that in the past were associated to the elites and to a specific social status. In this sense the production of vessels destined to be used by everyone starts to increase. It is in this period that the three production centres, Lisbon, Coimbra and Vila Nova produce intensely not only to supply the country but also its colonies. The archaeological sites with this chronology offer huge amounts of this ware which sometimes overcomes the amounts of coarse ware. The increasing consumption and demand originate a decrease of quality especially in fabrics and glazes. The decoration refinement is also lost although the variety of decorative

146

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

motifs increases even with new designs. This is the moment when the vertical stripes and concentric half circles appear for the first time just like the ones found in the Pentagoet I site, occupied between 1635 and 1654 (Pendery, 1993, 73). This type of decoration is going to be used for a long time, continuing in the next period, although a little roughest. The floral decoration, such as big leafs and petals are common to almost every archaeological site in Portugal and abroad.

1999). The small spiral family continues to appear, but in smaller amounts. The decoration mostly of Chinese inspiration it’s not reproducing faithfully the oriental patterns becoming more stylized. In this sense, the ledge of plates, although still divided in panels present very simple chrysanthemums, far for the detailed flowers of the previous periods. These alternate with aranhões that don’t imitate Chinese symbols but almost exclusively artemis leafs now that paper rolls are almost inexistent. A plate, kept in the museum of Hamburg, dated 1637, shows a very stylized Chinese type decoration, very similar to what has been found in some London sites chronologically dated between 1640 and 1660 such as Lambeth Street and Magdalean Street. By late this period the purple starts to appear shyly and only in the outline of some very fine objects. In fact when it appears, around 1640, it’s only in very few objects.

Fig. 78 – Bowl decorated with half concentric circles recovered in Rua dos Babalhoeiros (photo L. Sebastian).

Although the Chinese influenced decoration loses some of its detail, this lost seems to be compensate by the appearance of the finely draw (desenho miúdo) decoration. This new technique presents very delicate figures outlined in purple or blue and painted in blue. The small amounts of this decoration in archaeological contexts and its conservation in museums makes us believe that this was possibly the production of a single workshop and destined to wealthy people like an alternative to compensate the widespread consumption of previous decorations, now in use by everyone. The central part of the plates presents more European patterns with mythological representations of Venus and Fortunes running naked through the fields, covered only by a veil. The anthropomorphic representations are diverse with ladies and gentlemen in its best clothes in daily and playful scenes such as hunts, games and music. The political event of the Restoration, in 1640, when Portugal become independent once again is very represented in Portuguese faience with several soldiers and battles. A plate, already studied by João Pedro Monteiro and kept at the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga represents a noble man with a baton that the author believes id the representation of John IV of Portugal, the king in power at the Restoration. That central figure, clearly Portuguese, is surrounded by a ledge of oriental style with very stylized motifs (Monteiro, 2002).

Fig. 79 – Plate decorated with big leafs recovered in Rua dos Babalhoeiros (photo L. Sebastian).

Late in this period appear the first lace decorations, inspired in the Italian majolica peacock feathers. This motive may have appear for the first time around 1645, although its great diffusion only occurred from 1655 onwards and until 1680. In Jamestown, Virginia, a plate with this decoration and a fatherly pierced heart at the centre was exhumed in a 1650-1665 context (Willcoxen

A probable propaganda to the Portuguese power the representations of the royal arms would be used in everyday noble house activities but also exported. This is the case of a beautiful plate found in Hoorn (Low Countries) in a context dated 1650-1660 or in Charlestown (Massachusetts) in a site with the same chronology (Baart, 2007, 121; Pendery, 1999). These coats of arms are sometimes associated with dates that can be seen as very important dates at that time representing battles or events. The high productive quality of these plates and bottles suggest they Countries) n a

147

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

context dated 1650-1660 or in Charlestown, Massachusetts in the same chronology (Baart, 2007, 121; Pendery, 1999). These coats of arms are sometimes were used by wealthy people, possible the noble families involved in the fight against Spain. The D3 context of the Casa do Infante (Porto) corresponds to pit quarry opened during the house reconstruction between 1656 and 1677. The recovered vessels present geometrical decoration, small spirals and floral motifs, such as petals and leafs and even some zoomorphic representations and a few lace plates (Barreira, Dordio and Teixeira, 1995, 154).

identified in several cess pits in Narrow Street. In Ferryland (Newfoundland) an interesting collection of plates and bowls, made in Vila Nova and decorated with lace was recovered. Besides the lace it presents the letters S.K. at the bottom and, for the first time of Portuguese Faience studies in can be related with a specific person, Lady Sarah Kirke who lived in that settlement.

In the house of João Esmeraldo (Funchal-Madeira), the finds in the unit 3 of the well had vessels from this chronology where floral decorations with leafs, ferns and petals were found and also some very stylized oriental patterns with chrysanthemums and artemis leafs. Less frequent is the recovered bottle quite similar to the pots found in Credinton and Goldsmith Street (Exeter) (Gomes and Gomes, 1995). This is a moment of a huge export towards different countries around the world, although a large percentage of the vessels sell overseas decreases about 1660. V: 1660-1700 The decoration stylization beginning in the previous period is going to increase and the patterns are going to lose any resemblance to the original Chinese or European motifs. This decrease in quality is also registered in fabrics and glazes less thick and shiny. The purple colour is now present in all archaeological contexts coarsely outlining the motifs filled in blue. The aranhões which originally were inspired in paper rolls are now exclusively the representations of leafs and the fruits are essentially peaches. A big plate bearing the Silva’s coat of arms and dated 1677 is kept at the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga showing this new decoration (Queirós, 1907, 52). The blue aranhões, frequent in the previous moment progressively disappear, although there is a plate in the Museu Nacional de Castro dated 1692 which still has them (Pais, Pacheco and Coroado, 2007, 40). A new motif known as beads appears decorating the ledge of plates, and the walls of bowls and pots that it’s believed to be an inspiration of the ruiy heads, so frequent in Chinese porcelain during the first half of the 17th century. It’s however possible that our inspiration was taken from the Dutch production that from 1650 onwards started to perfectly imitate Chinese porcelain. Also in plate ledges and pot walls start to appear “faixas barrocas” (baroque strips). This designation refers to several lined acanthus leafs forming a garland around the vessel. Some ladies’ heads, somewhat funny and grotesque are also frequent. Lace decoration gains new colours especially in purple and blue, although a few examples are known using yellow, mostly in contexts between 1660 and 1680,

Fig. 80 – Plate with aranhões kept in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga (after Queirós, 1907).

Blue on white vessels continue to be made, especially in more modest productions used in everyday activities. Concentric half circles, simple blue stripes and the Order of Santiago sword are some of the decorations found in this chronology. High quality vessels destined to be sent abroad are less frequent. However one should not ignore that they continued to exist. In the Stuttgart museum there is a jar dated 1666 that confirms this theory. The use of the finely drawn technique appeared around 1645 but was still in use about twenty years later, although in very small amounts and not with enough expression among other styles. From this period is the decoration known as Monte Sinai. The designation was made for the first time by José de Queirós and it remained until today, although we are almost certain that the workshop in question was not located in the area of Santa Catarina do Monte Sinai. He compared the decoration from plates and pots with the tiles of churches from this quarter of the city and found them very similar. However this does not mean anything since tiles and vessels travelled long distances and they could have been made anywhere in the city. This was one of the best wares made in Portugal at this time and is usually found in wealthy contexts such as palaces and convents. This was clearly the work of a single workshop that we believed to have produced for 25 to 30 years. One of the most recent finds in New England is in Pemaquid (Maine) in a context dated between 1650 and 1675 where a plate with two peaches, outlined in purple was recovered (Pendery, 1999, 72). Similar vessel was found in London in SQU99.

148

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

C

A

B

E

D

F

G

Fig 81 – A – Plate found in Lambeth Street in London (draw by T. Casimiro); B – Plate found in Magdalean Street in London (draw by T. casimiro); C – Tureen with the 1648 date (after Pais, 2007); D – Plate dated 1646 kept in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga (after Calado, 2003); E – Bottle dated 1638 from the Câmara Municipal do Porto collection (after Trindade, 1994; F – Bottle dated 1644 kept at the Hamburg museum (after Pais, 2007); G – Plate dated 1649 kept at the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga (after Calado, 2003).

149

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

of this period namely in São João de Tarouca (Sebastian and Castro, 2009). While in other places like churches the decoration becomes very sumptuous, pottery it’s the antithesis of that movement. A spotlight has to be given to the plate recovered in the excavations of the Santa Catarina de Sena convent, in 1990. It is decorated with beads and at the centre presents the date 1767 celebrating the end of the reconstruction of the building after the earthquake. This date is also very emblematic since it is the year of the opening of the Real Fábrica do Rato one of the first industrial pottery factories in Portugal, which started its production by imitating French wares, namely from Ruen. These new production places led to a decline of the traditional workshops where this 1767 plate was still made (Mangucci, 2006).

Fig. 82 – Lace bowl found in Ferryland (photo by T. Casimiro).

This period marks the end of the Portuguese faience exportations. They start to diminish around 1660 and seem to stop around 1680 although some of them have survived until latter and are recovered in later contexts. One of the best contexts of this period is the Santo António de Tanná (1697) and the Sacramento (1669), two shipwrecks where lots of Portuguese tin glaze ware was recovered. The plates, bowls and pots correspond to what has been stated here by very stylized aranhões, beads and baroque stripes, all outlined in purple. The central part of plates presents floral motifs, animals and ladies’ heads (Sansoon, 1981; Pernambucano de Mello, 1979).

In Coimbra the same happens and production quality starts to decline. A new type of popular production, known as Brioso is identified after the potter Manuel da Costa Briso, an important member of a big potter’s family and that signed some of its work. This less carefully made artefacts start to appear quite frequently in archaeological contexts.

VI: 1700-1766 This period marks the end of the beautiful and ostentatious decorations. Although a few motifs from the previous moment continue, namely the beads and baroque stripes the drift is to a simplification. It’s wrong to say that the high quality production have completely disappeared since until the creation of the first industrial production factory in 1766 the elites continued to need good productions to use, even if some of them were already imported from France. An important part of the production becomes completely white or decorated with one or two concentric lines and a simple floral motif at the bottom. Convents and monasteries are the most important consumers so the majority of the production is directed to them. In this sense there is a large amount of vessels with the name of the convent, religious order and even the name of some nuns and friars (Moncada, 2008, 33). These institutions left a great deal of documents that helps us to understand the consumption of pottery. Celso Mangucci analyzed the bills of the São Salvador convent in Évora, and from the last decade of the 17th century the demands of pottery from Lisbon were all of white bowls and just a few jars (Mangucci, 2006). The most typical vessels from this period are found in the 1755’s earthquake contexts in use at that specific moment. The majority of the finds is of everyday objects, plain and simple with very few decorated objects (Casimiro, 2011). Similar vessels have been recovered in other excavations

Fig. 83 – Plate dated 1767 found in Évora (after Mangucci, 2006).

In the Casa do Infante (Porto) a context dated between 1725 and 1775 has offered objects of less quality and some of them with pseudo-epigraphs, a decoration that only exists in this period (Moncada, 2008) and sometimes related to Spanish influences from Valencia produced around the middle 16th century. However this long distance of time makes us believe that the Portuguese production does not imitate the Spanish ones and are just a stylised set of spirals. In late 18th century archaeological contexts it’s frequent to find traditional objects together with the new production from factories. Poor people continued to use the pottery made in the old workshops while the elites, in their search for social distinction use the new production. In this sense the 1766 date does not mark the end of the last traditional tin glaze ware workshop, since there is no idea when that happened but the opening of the first pottery factory, in Massarelos (Porto).

150

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig 84 and 85 – Plates found at São João de Tarouca (after Sebastian e Castro, 2009).

Figs 86 and 87 – Plates found in the São Vicente de Fora excavations (after Ferreira, 1983).

151

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

11

USE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF PORTUGUESE FAIENCE IN ENGLAND AND IRELAND The study of Portuguese faience in the British Isles has recorded 798 vessels. The distribution of those evidences is not consistent considering that some cities present a larger number of evidences than others. Curiously enough, although London is the city where most sites have been identified with Portuguese faience it was not the one with larger number of artefacts, exceeded by Plymouth in the Southwest and Carrickfergus in Northern Ireland. The faience was recovered in coastal cities historically connected to international trade not only with southern Europe but also with the New World and the Far East. These cities were the most important and populous urban centres in England and Ireland during the 17th century. The exception was made by two sites in Devon, Great Torrington and Credinton where two plates and a small pot where recovered. From the 798 evidences, 413 are plates and 190 bowls corresponding to every open shape and the most frequent form usually found, not only in the British Isles but in every site where Portuguese faience has been recovered since these were the most frequent forms made by potters. Bottles and jars count 32 examples, followed by four pots, three pharmacy jars and two lids. Two game pieces were also recovered, both of them in Ireland. A single example of a holy water stoup and a barber’s bowl were found in Plymouth. The remaining 160 objects are just small sherds impossible to provide a form. The shapes are very similar from late 16th to early 18th century stating that the formal typology did not change that much over more than a century. The bowls are hemispherical or troncoconical, inspired by Chinese and Italian shapes. The plates are mostly sub troncoconical with a ring foot base, much like the Chinese examples, although other forms were recognized, with flat or curved bottoms. These are in fact very similar to middle 15th century Spanish forms and can, in fact, sometimes be confused with them. In Portugal these were produced from 1550’s till middle 17th century, especially in Coimbra, confirmed by its lace decoration. This production centre maintained the tradition of producing such shapes, the same happening with the carinated bowls. Such examples have been found in Poole. Almost every site has offered vessels with glaze and fabrics of excellent quality. In truth these artefacts are of higher quality than the ones found in Portugal, believing that we came across what was called carregaçam pottery, this is, pottery made with the purpose of being sent overseas. Such objects, once entering the European trade system would have to compete with the very fine Italian, Spanish and Dutch productions. These types of evidences

are rare in Portuguese archaeological contexts, only appearing in noble and religious sites, where people could buy them, although frequent in museums and private collections. London was the city with the highest number of sites with Portuguese Faience: 134 vessels distributed by 27 sites. Most of the places have given one or two objects although places such as Narrow Street and Wood Warf gave larger amounts. As in all other places most of the objects are plates and bowls and its decoration is mostly of Chinese inspiration with aranhões and chrysanthemums inside panels. London was the city where the study of Portuguese Faience in the British Isles started and it was possible to infer that the importance given by its habitants was exported to other places in the British Isles. Such conclusion was to be expected considering London was the head of the reign where the elites would live and the other regions would like to reproduce their ways of live. The majority of sites offering Portuguese Faience were identified as domestic environments. The cess pits, destine to receive the houses daily rubbish where the most profitable contexts. Nevertheless, in three cases, Tobacco Dock (TOC02), Former York Clinic (BHB00) and Narrow Street (NHU99) the Portuguese vessels were found inside the house, relating to several other objects uses in those contexts, namely English coarse and glazed wares and other imports. During the 17th century domestic garbage was deposited in cess pits, open on the floor, usually in the backyard of the house. In this sense, the Portuguese Faience sherds found inside such structures would be deposited when broken, together with the other domestic residues. The analysis of the finds from all these contexts showed the importance of Portuguese Faience in London 17th century houses. All the material culture found shows the economical, social and cultural potential of its owners. Looking at the place where these houses were located these were the scenes where the rich merchants and dealers would live. Booth’s Poverty Map, made in late 19th century geographically records where different social layers groups lived in London. Although almost two centuries later, the places where Portuguese Faience was recovered were still marked in red, corresponding to a well-to-do middle class or in yellow with a wealthy upper-middle and upper classes. Most of the merchants were involved in international trade with close relations to southern Europe, Far East and New World colonies. It’s not easy to discover who where the owners of those houses, however and considering the relations these people had with different countries in

152

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

1580

1580

1630 1630

1650

1650

1680

1680

Fig. 88 – Bowls found in England and Ireland.

153

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

1580

1600

1640

1660

Fig. 89 – Plates found in England and Ireland.

154

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

1630

1650

Europe the idea that the Portuguese Faience vessels were acquired directly from Portuguese workshops should not be forgotten. Despite this way of acquiring Portuguese ceramics it’s also believed that they could be sold in shops and potteries across the city. In fact, some vessels have been found associated to production sites (Stephensom, 1999). Subtroncoconical plates and hemispherical bowls are the most frequent forms. The decoration is mostly of Chinese influence with several examples of aranhões and flowers. That was certainly the most requested decoration from a society used to eastern commodities such as porcelain, carpets, silks and spices among other things. Observing fabrics, glazes and decoration one realizes the most important production centre from the London finds was Lisbon, although some northern examples, from Vila Nova, were also found. Large plates found in West Tenter Street (WSN00) and Fenchurch Street (FCC95) are two of the most impressive objects found in the British Isles and outside Portugal, clearly destined to very rich people. The oldest vessel was recovered in St James Passage Subway (DUK77) in a context dated around 1600. The simplicity of its decoration is clearly datable from this period, although this is not very common in Portuguese archaeological sites. The most recent sherds were found in Borthwick and Paynes Wharf (BPZ06), in a context dated 1720. This plate, decorated with blue and purple lace, presents a good glaze, but its decoration is far from the aesthetical beauty of lace between 1650 and 1680.

1680

Fig. 90 – Bottles found in England and Ireland.

It’s not possible to talk about Portuguese Faience in England without mentioning the excavation performed in Narrow Street, London, by Pre-Construct Archaeology and where 81 vessels where identified. This site for its nature and number of vessels deserves to be taken under consideration. First due to the people who lived there, directly related to sea activities such as trade but also privateering. The usual image of the rude people we associate with piracy and privateer could not be placed in this neighbourhood once the material culture was analyzed considering that these man were consuming their food and drinks using the best ceramics produced in Europe and even the world. The name of some of its habitants is known to have made their fortune overseas such as Thomas Harrison and John Limery. This site has offered enormous quantities of Chinese porcelain and pottery from Persia, Turkey (Iznik), Italy, France, Low Countries, Germany, Spain and Portugal. Considering the professional occupation of its habitants it was believed, from the moment archaeologists where excavating that the majority of these objects was not obtained by licit manners but instead in the many expeditions and plunders to cities and ships. There is no written evidence that allows confirming this theory, nevertheless, the variety of pottery recovered shows that the people in this area of London had great knowledge and ability to acquire and use the best pottery productions in the world (Killock and Meddens, 2005).

155

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Many of the Portuguese Faience finds were recovered directly from the floor of houses corresponding to commodities used when the house was abandoned. However most of the sherds were found inside cess pits, just like most of the examples in London. The Narrow Street contexts with Portuguese Faience were dated between 1600 and 1680. Just like all other places, plates and bowls are the most frequent, although four jars and a bottle have also been recovered. Despite none of vessels found on the other sites in London has revealed ware marks, the same does not happen in Narrow Street where almost every plate and bowl presents some erosion at the base and rim showing that they were used in everyday life, most likely as food recipients at the table. Such erosion was also found in Plymouth. While all the other London finds are of an excellent quality, the Narrow Street site has given vessels that we can consider less proper for exportation and usually consumed in Portuguese daily activities in houses, ships and even the colonies. Narrow Street is still the only site in the British Isles where we can identify for sure the presence of vessels produced in Vila Nova. About half the collection presents tick and shiny glaze, craquelet and decoration similar to the wares of that production centre. Parallels were gathered at the Rua Cândido dos Reis site, where potteries were found (Almeida, Neves and Cavaco, 2001). The decoration is mostly lace, with several bowls and plates almost like a complete table set. The plates have this motif in their ledge and the bottom shows several motifs such as plants, letters and even the Cross of the Malta Order. The bowls have lace in their exterior walls and the bottom is mostly white although some examples have floral decoration and one of them even the word “SOL”, meaning sun. Only one plate has purple decoration, although the chronology of the site refers to a moment when this colour is already frequent in Portuguese faience. Attending to the site characteristics is possible that this would not fulfil the taste of its consumers or, if one believes the theory of plunder, would not be available in the places where it was taken. All the other vessels were made in Lisbon recognized by its high quality glaze and careful decoration. In this site similar to what happens in all other sites in England and Ireland the decoration is mostly of Chinese influence. However several examples of floral decoration with large leafs and ferns, but also an example of a plate with small spirals, of European influence were recovered. The dates given to the different cess pits where Portuguese faience has been recovered correspond to the IV period of my chrono-stylistic evolution, between 1635 and 1660, although some contexts are dated till 1680. This discrepancy corresponds to the life time of objects since they could easily be discarded twenty years after being made. Although domestic environments were the ones giving the larger number of vessels other places have offered Portuguese faience. Those were interpreted as industrial and commercial. By industrial are defined the places where pottery was produced. In Queensborough House

(ABK00) and Platform Wharf (PW86) buildings, kilns and dumps were identified as places where tin glaze ware, known as London Delftware, was produced. The first site gave a small bowl with floral decoration of Chinese inspiration and in Platform Wharf two large plates. One of them presents Chinese decoration with the ledge decorated with aranhões and chrysanthemums and at the bottom a landscape with a bird, very similar to several examples of Portuguese Faience. The other plate shows lace decoration and, at the centre, a heart pierced with two arrows (Stephenson , 1999). The presence of these objects in production sites could have several interpretations. It is common for potters, not only in Portugal, but in several European production centres to acquire vessels from different shapes, sizes and provenances, using them as models for possible imitations. This was the way to make sure their productions were similar to what was being made elsewhere in Europe, increasing its business. This idea is in fact quite appealing when one thinks about the production of London delftware. The factory located in Platform Wharf worked between 1638 and 1663 corresponding to the chronology of the two Portuguese plates found there, moment in which the London tin glaze pottery production was trying to follow the subjects of Chinese porcelain and some European faience, possibly Portuguese (Stephenson, 1999). On the other hand, we should not ignore that ethno-archaeological studies show that almost all European potteries had their own shop (in Portugal was known as “tenda”) destined to sell its production. Could these sell, together with their own production, European imports, complementing its business? In Platform Warf and Queensborough House German stoneware’s, Italian majolica’s, Dutch and Spanish tin glaze were also found, supporting this theory. The sites designated as commercial are the ones where Portuguese Faience appears when circulating as an object with a proper value, destined to enter trade routes. Wood Wharf (HOF04), Borthwick and Paynes Wharf (BPZ06) and Jacob’s Island (JAC96) were included in this designation. The first two sites were interpreted as wood piers and channels where ships from the East Indian Company would come and go from other world destinations. Among those woods several examples of Portuguese faience and Portuguese red coarseware were recovered together with pottery from other countries. The presence of Portuguese faience in these contexts shows that they should have enter the archaeological record when arriving in London, on board ships coming from Portugal, loaded with the boxes and chests of pottery revealed by different Port Books. For some reason clearly related to the impossibility of selling it, possible due to a certain breakage on board and thrown overboard. th Jacob’s Island was used during the 17 century for the construction of warehouses where the shipments of the Eastern Indian Company were stored. The bowl recovered at that site, although in a superficial layer was found inside one of these buildings.

156

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Fig. 91 – Graphic showing the distribution of the forms found in England and Ireland.

The majority of the recovered objects from these commercial sites was decorated with Chinese inspiration motifs, excepting two with lace decoration and the rim of a pharmacy jar. Most of the plates present the characteristic decoration of aranhões and chrysanthemums, inside panels, surrounding bucolic landscapes. These were the objects which would enter London to be sold in shops. A plate with a coat of arms with a lion, usually designated as the Silva family arms, was recovered. Such objects for its relation to noble families would certainly be required by several people. The lion is a frequent representation in the coat of arms of several families, easily obtained by different individuals. In Maryland (United States) a plate with the same decoration was recovered in a context related to the Lloyd’s family which had a similar coat of arms (Pendery, 1999). The same could have happen in London. The English capital received several boats bringing different commodities from Portugal that would be taken to smaller inland locations. Nevertheless when these cities had the ability to receive large ships they would import their own ceramics. A small city nowadays, during the 17th century Faversham was an important port, especially due to its proximity to the continent. Several merchants, dealing with French ports would live there. The plate recovered in this city, showing a typical aranhão, corresponds to the type of decoration found a little bit across the British Isles, and possibly satisfying the demand for chinoiserie of any rich merchant family living there. The same can be said about the plate recovered in a cess pit in Colchester. The site was located in the centre of the city and in an area where rich merchants had their houses. During the 16th century this city grew in size and importance due to the number Dutch who lived there trading wool and cloth.

Throughout this time they are responsible for intensifying the commercial contacts with northern Europe, increasing the number of pottery imports satisfying the demand of its habitants. Unfortunately the Portuguese plate is in a poor conservation state losing almost completely its glaze but still showing to be decorated with wan-li inspiration patterns (Cotter, 2000). Plymouth was the English city where the highest number of Portuguese Faience vessels was found. Although the finds came from nine distinct sites most of them are from Castle Street, interpreted has the city’s general dumpster during the 17th century. The amounts of pottery, glass and food remains can in fact have that explanation. Excavated back in the 1960’s, the will to find the medieval walls of Plymouth led the team of archaeologist not to realize the great importance of such place. The site was dated between 1600 and 1650 based on the finds. The Portuguese faience found there corresponds to this chronology. Among the more than hundred sherds only six of them have a date range that can be classified has being produced after 1650. Five of them present lace and only one plate, with two fragments, had purple decoration. Originally identified has Italian, this is an interesting find not only for being the only one with such colour but mostly due to the letters “VO” at the reverse, certainly the part of the name of its owner. Most of the collection can be dated between 1620 and 1650. The interest in this site is not only the number of sherds, but especially the fact that most of them can be classified has daily wares. Differently from what happens in every site in the British Isles, except for Narrow Street, where Portuguese Faience reveals to have an excellent production quality, in Castle Street one finds what in Portugal would be the objects used in the daily activities of any household. Most of the vessels were produced in Lisbon in the first half of the 17th century with very secure

157

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

parallels in Portuguese cities such as Funchal or Palmela. However the Coimbra workshops are also represented. The pinkish fabrics, the low quality glazes and the decoration is similar to the pottery found in the Garagem Avenida site, where a manufacture area was recognized. Similar productions have been discovered in São João de Tarouca, with a middle 17th century chronology (Castro and Sebastian, 2008). The decoration is quite common and mostly floral with large leafs and flowers on the ledge of plates and on the walls of bowls. These motifs are combined with geometrical designs such as crossed lines and half circles. Less common in this site, although one of the most frequent decorations in the remaining places is the Chinese inspiration decorations with just a few examples of aranhões and chrysanthemums. Although the majority of the collection was produced in Lisbon’s workshops there are quite a few sherds from Coimbra, a less important centre producing mostly to supply the Portuguese market. It is not easy to explain way this site has offered less quality objects; nonetheless we should not ignore the hypothesis of being used by a Portuguese community living in the city. This idea is supported by several evidences. It is well known the presence of Portuguese people residing in Plymouth, especially Jews, dealing in the international trade. There is even a street called Madeira Road near to the site. It’s quite possible that the Portuguese community living there was using daily objects bought in Portugal. Confirming this theory are the hundreds of fragments of Portuguese coarse ware, found in the same site. These were imported as containers for Portuguese commodities such as marmalade or ink but also as recipients for household activities such as cooking, eating, drinking and storing. Cooking pots, large flared bowls, plates, cups, bowl, jars, bottles and costrels are the recorded forms. These forms would certainly exist in local potteries so why would English people living in Plymouth acquire them in their everyday home activities? The most accurate explanation is the fact that some of them could be Portuguese. This seems to be confirmed by the presence of a holy water stoup among the finds. These would certainly be used in a Christian house, most likely at the home of any foreign living there, considering the Protestant majority of Plymouth’s habitants.. The Portuguese Port books reveal the presence of several boats, originally from Plymouth that would acquire several products in cities such as Lisbon, Porto and Coimbra not only to take back to their home town, but also to take to other destinations especially the North America colonies. Although none of such documents has confirmed the entrance of Portuguese faience in Plymouth, its merchants were aware of its existence. In its study of the Vila Flor (Brazil) finds, Paulo Tadeu de Albuquerque has determined the existence of two types of Portuguese Faience. One of them used in daily activities and that could be found in Brazilian colonial and Portuguese sites, and the wares destined to be send abroad

and only used by the elites in Portugal and its colonies (Albuquerque, 2008). It’s possible the same happened in English and Irish contexts. Portuguese communities living there would use less quality vessels, similar to the ones used in Portugal while English and Irish elites would use high quality objects identified in all other sites in the British Isles. Plymouth has other sites where Portuguese faience was identified revealing, just like the majority of the sites high quality items. In Woolster Street ten plates and bowls were recovered in a context dated around 1660 to 1680. In Shepard’s Wharf a beautiful barbers bowl, decorated with aranhões was certainly produced between 1650 and 1680, recovered inside a large building, possibly a warehouse. Although believing that a Portuguese community was consuming most of these wares it’s possible that English or even other nationality people would consume them as well. Plymouth is the English city where most objects of Portuguese faience were recovered. In fact Devon is the county where nine places offered this ware. As identified in London, most sites were related to domestic environments in places where merchants would live, especially the ones involved in the international trade, or rich people with other activities. In Exeter twenty sites with Portuguese Faience were recognized, nine of which related with the homes of rich people. Each of these sites offered one, two or three objects so the amount of finds in this city is not as high as in other places. All the objects present high quality with very fine and homogeneous fabrics, thick and shiny glaze as similar to the Lisbon productions. The decoration is essentially of Chinese inspiration with several plates and bowls with aranhões and central landscapes with flowers and birds. Two of the plates show the small spirals of European influence. Only one place in Exeter was of a different nature identified as a commercial site. The excavation of two square metres in the Customs house offered together with some regional and local productions a big plate of Portuguese faience. The decoration presents floral motifs, with ferns, quite different from the other finds in the city. Considering that the building wasn´t used as home for none of its employees and exclusively to keep and register the entrance of commodities in the city it’s safe to say that the Portuguese wares entered that city with the purpose of being sell, although is small amounts. Exeter is one of the few cities in England, together with London and Bristol, were port records mention the entrance of Portuguese earthenware in 1646 and 1655. Although several other places in Devon have offered Portuguese Faience Exeter is the place where the objects present higher quality and biggest size. The reason can be the good life style and wealth of its inhabitants, most of them related to the international trade systems trading wool during the middle Ages and from the 17th century onwards trading with the English colonies of the New World, bringing large amounts of cod into Europe. On the other hand, the people living in these cities always wanted to reproduce the modus vivendi of the richest and noble people. This

158

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

made them acquire high quality and imported items, especially ceramics and glass, but also textiles, spices and fruits, some of them produced in Portugal. Devon is one of the parts of England that in the 17th century establishes world contacts with new markets all over the world. These contacts permit the acquisition of an enormous variety of products such as ceramics. Portuguese Faiences were recovered in Exmouth, Bideford, Barnstaple, Great Torrington, Dartmouth, Credinton and Totnes. Most of the sites where Portuguese Faience was found were related to rich merchants and nobility houses with some economical or political power. Sometimes is even possible to identify some of the families living in those buildings at the time the objects in Portuguese faience were acquired. In Dartington Hall a large fragment of a plate, decorated with small spirals was in use during the permanence of the Champernowne family, owners since the 16th century. The same has happened in Berry Pomeroy Castle owned by the Seymour family, relatives of Henry VIII third wife, owning it until 1688. The Lisbon workshops exported large amounts to Devon supplying different locations. Two similar pots were found in Exeter Goldsmith Street and in Credinton, sites separated by 10 km. The formal and decorative resemblance between both objects shows they were produced in the same workshop and decorated by the same artist and possibly imported in the same shipment. Most of the places where Portuguese Faience was identified are located in coastal areas. However, in Devon, Great Torrington and Credinton are situated inside the county as far as 10 km away from the sea shore and served by small rivers permitting the access to small boats. Its location and reduce accessibility made them smaller ports unable to support a large scale international trade. In this sense rich merchants were never attracted to establish their business in such inland towns. Those centres flourished due to the wool production, trading with cities such as Exeter, Bideford and Barnstaple. In Credinton a small pot produced in Lisbon was recovered in an area where it is believed that the wealthiest people would live. In Great Torrington one of the most beautiful examples of Portuguese faience was recovered. This small town, located about six km from the sea was also a small inland port supplying wool to some coastal cities. We are not aware of the existence of any rich wealthy and important family living in that city so it’s not easy to infer why one of the most extraordinary examples of Portuguese faience found in England has been found there. It’s possible that in Devon Portuguese faience was a recognized production and wanted by most people with the economic capacity to acquire imports disseminated through an internal distribution network based on the wool trade. The decoration is mostly of Chinese inspiration showing that it was obtained to satisfy the demand for exotic items in vogue in the 17th century.

Bristol was one of the major English cities during the 17th century with commercial relations with several European countries as well as the North American English colonies. The presence of several boats from this city is frequent in Portuguese port books taking back to that city a large variety of commodities such as wine, salt, fruits, sugar and ceramics. The records from the Livro da Portagem do Cabido da Sé do Porto registered in May 24th of 1668 the Santa Ana, mastered by John Many, weighed anchor towards Bristol. In its cargo was salt, pottery and sugar: “oito moyos de sal e vinte/ e cinco dúzias de louza e uma caixa de assucar Branco” (ADP/ CABIDO / Lv.152 / 1668 /fl.24v.), dispatched by Thomas Mally, clearly an English resident in Porto. In the following year arrives in Bristol the ship Isabella, coming from Lisbon with “17 cashes o oyle at 7th 900 milvees and iiiic plates” (E190/1137/2/fl.12v.). Although written evidences show that Bristol was receiving pottery from Lisbon and Vila Nova, archaeologically only evidences of Lisbon productions were found. The excavation in Saint Nicholas found a house inside of which an interesting collection of Portuguese wares, from the middle 17th century, was recovered. The bowls and plates, hemispherical and subtroncoconical present, in their majority, decoration based in Wan-li patterns with several aranhões and flowers. A handled bowl is perfect in showing the confluence of styles where a European shape presents oriental decoration. The plates reveal a little more variety with the presence of small spirals and floral motifs such as ferns. This small site gave four bottles in Portuguese Faience, a very high number for only one excavation. One of them is clearly one of the most interesting finds in the British Isles considering it’s the only Portuguese pottery find with a date. Dated vessels are not that frequent in Portuguese contexts and it is very interesting to verify how the 1652 corresponds to the context chronology, confirmed by some coins and other finds. It is decorated with a small coat of arms. Other sherd, from a jar or bottle, equally presents a coat of arms; nevertheless it’s not possible to identify it. The heraldic decoration present in both vessels is completely different from the representations of Portuguese arms but similar to others found in Portuguese vessels representing north European families. Although the crossed field is not very frequent in England a few families can be related to this coat of arms such as the Brough or the Bathon, in Devon or even some English cities such as Plymouth or Knustford, near Chester. This can equally represent other European families from other countries, namely the Low Countries or Germany were Portuguese faience was clearly being used by important social groups. It’s impossible to know to which family this was intended however this is the proof that Lisbon workshops were producing faience especially for the European market. Such conclusions had already been made by analyzing Portuguese faience vessels in European museums (Keil, 1938) they are however rare in archaeological contexts.

159

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Those bottles may have been part of a specific order celebrating a special year in the life of a family, using those heraldic representations or simply produced and shipped to England where several noble families could acquire them since the arms were very similar to their owns. The insignia was clearly a symbol of social distinction of the highest society and isn’t our belief that these vessels were used by anyone but only with people with the economical ability to acquire them. The Portuguese tin glaze ware vessels recovered in this excavation were acquired in two different moments. In one of them the Chinese inspiration plates and bowls were purchased, possibly the same moment when the bottles were acquired. In a second moment someone received the plates with floral motifs. This conclusion was made based not only in the decoration of the objects, but mostly when we join those motifs with the production techniques. In truth the vessels present two types of production, despite all of them present homogeneous fabrics the glaze is thicker in the plates and bowls with Chinese inspiration motifs, the plate with small spirals and the bottles. The remaining objects with floral designs present a thinner glaze. It’s our believe that the people living in that house may have acquired them in two separated moments although not very apart, probably just a year or two, produced in different workshops. The pottery recovered in Narrow Quay (Bristol) is very well dated. Allied to a good stratigraphic sequence there is several information about the 17th century reconstruction of the site. Although with less quantity than the Saint Nicholas collection is very similar when comparing its forms and decorations with several plates, bowls and a bottle with Wan-li patterns and floral motifs such as large leafs and some ferns. In Quakers Friars North another quay was identified also presenting some sherds of Portuguese Faience following oriental designs. However these lack the beauty and quality of the objects recovered in other Bristol sites. Although only offering one single plate in Portuguese Faience, the excavation in Greyfriars Building Lewin’s Mead, a Franciscan Friary, is quite interesting since it was possible to date the sewer from 1650 onwards, corresponding quite accurately to the date of the Portuguese Faience plate found there. It was recovered together with imports from all over Europe from the Low Countries to Germany, France, Italy and Spain meaning that the Portuguese plate was also considered an exotic item, sharing the same context. It presents lace decoration in the ledge and a feathery pierced heart. Is always curious to see how a Franciscan monastery, which should be poor, had such a huge collection of imports. Although merchants and nobles were in fact the biggest consumers of imported luxurious wares one should not forget the clerics. Southampton only offered four sherds of Portuguese Faience which we hoped to be much more since news of finds in this city were mentioned by Rafael Salinas

Calado in one of his books (Calado, 1992). The reason for such absence in a commercial city was probably due to the fact that most of its merchants maintained contact with northern France and Italy, instead of the Iberian Peninsula leading to a huge percentage of French and Italian wares. However this theory doesn’t seem to explain why in Upper Bugle Street, inside a huge building, probably a warehouse, hundreds of fragments of Portuguese coarseware were recovered. In that context only a small fragment of a Portuguese Faience bottle was located. That collection presents a large variety of forms from bowls to cooking pots, large flared bowls and costrels (Gutierrez, 2007). There is no explanation why in a city where Portuguese faience finds are so rare, coarse ware is so frequent. There is always the possibility of being part of a single shipment trying to enter the local market and by a reason of taste was never sold. However is also possible that most of them were used as containers, carrying goods from Portugal. Eleven objects were recovered from the Orchard Car Park excavation in Poole. The site was identified as the dumpster of a merchant neighbourhood with several cess pits, one of which provided the Portuguese artefacts, probably used in the same house. Curiously, the same cess pit provided other fragments of Portuguese coarse ware. Only three fragments can be identified has Lisbon productions, one of them a big plate, finely decorated which can be interpreted has one of the best quality objects of Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland. It presents a chrysanthemum flower and by its typology it can be inferred that the rest of the decoration would be of aranhões of Chinese influence. The other plate presents similar decoration and the bowl some ferns and big leafs. The remaining objects were all produced in Coimbra with plates and bowls decorated with lace patterns, except for two bowls, one of them with floral motifs and the other just with two concentric lines by the rim. Although produced in Coimbra, where the general quality of production is inferior these can be considered as very nice quality productions. The fabrics, although not that homogeneous are very hard and light pink. The glazes are thick but not very shiny and the blue is dark and not very rich in shades. Although Lisbon and Vila Nova stopped producing concave bottoms at late 16th century, adopting the ring foot, Coimbra continued this production until late 17th century as well as carinated bowls. The study of Portuguese Faience in England would not be conclude without discussing the find in Aberglasney Abbey, Wales, where the only evidence of Portuguese tiles was found. The site, sold to pay some debts, was occupied by the Rudd family until 1710, people of great influence at court with an import member of the clergy, the bishop Rudd. Several remodels were made during the 17th century. The Portuguese tile is part of a type of enclosure with floral decoration quite common in Portugal between 1630 and 1650, corresponding to the B62 classification of Santos Simões (Simões, 1997, 186). At the centre is common to have a geometrical pattern know as “carpet”. These were the most frequent

160

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

production of Portuguese workshops until around 1670 when the use of colourful tiles starts to disappear giving their place to white and blue landscapes. The Aberglasney Abbey tile was found in the garden in a revolved context probably a result of some reconstruction in late 17th century. In this sense is not possible to say if the Portuguese tiles were fixed in the garden, inside the house or even the church. Although its location is not known its presence in the house of a clergy member should not be ignored. The high social status of this family shows that Portuguese tiles should not have been imported to be used in the house of common people but in the palaces and churches of rich and important members of society. Although only one tile was found in England, London port books reveal that several ships from Portugal took this material into the English capital during the second half of the 17th century. It’s possible that Portuguese tiles decorated the interior of several homes, churches and Garden in London and surrounding cities, yet to identify. A carpet pattern shows that the Portuguese potteries were not producing especially for the English market, although such idea is possible. If they were producing bottles with north European coats of arms why not panels with designs made for specific families? The analysis of the objects recovered in Ireland has to be made attending to the places where they were recovered, usually inside the houses of English people, nobles or merchants. Those people despite being geographically apart from their home land wanted to maintained the English life style accessing similar commodities such as food, clothes, furniture and ceramics. Their houses corresponded to the models of the English homes not only architectonically but also in its decoration. This is why together with Portuguese faience Spanish, French, Italian and Dutch ceramics were also recovered. The Irish finds present an excellent quality similar to the ones found in England. Their location is exclusively port cities. At the moment no evidences were identify in inland sites. It was a general belief for many years that Portuguese Faience finds were more frequent in Ireland than in England (Meenean, 1992). This idea resulted from the fact that the first evidences were found in Irish ground, namely in Wexford and Dunboy Castle near Cork. However this book showa that the idea is wrong and England has offered way more Portuguese Faience than Ireland. Many merchants living in Ireland, mainly in cities such as Waterford and Galway, maintained permanent relation with Iberian Peninsula and with Portugal. The Wadding family in Waterford sent one of his sons to study in Portugal becoming a member of the Portuguese clergy (Byrne, 2009). Though this man never returned back to Ireland it’s possible that he continued the good relations with the members of his family, transmitting several Portuguese habits and introducing them to our material culture.

In Galway extraordinary vessels were recovered not only with a high production quality but also finely decorated. One of the most impressive objects is a bottle very similar in form and decoration to the bottles at display in the Hamburg Museum which, for many years, where considered to be German productions due to the coats of arms of noble German families. It shows an excellent quality, clearly destined to be sent abroad. At the centre of its body where should be the heraldic representation there is the remains of a dragon. The presence of this animal, a symbol of the Chinese emperor may have several interpretations. Was it made for a rich merchant family without a coat of arms or destined to supply a specific demand for an exotic decoration? Such object was obviously in display at some rich house where fine form, shiny glaze, deep blue and artistic decoration, would attract everyone’s attention. Other very interesting object is the bottom of a plate decorated with the letters “…ANDA” which is believed to be the last letters of the name “FERNANDA”, a very common name for Portuguese women. It’s impossible to know if this plate was used by someone with this name or if it was acquired only by its aesthetical appearance. Nevertheless and considering the presence of several Iberian merchants living in this city is easy to presume the first hypothesis. It was always believed that these names represented the name of its owner however, until recently this was yet to be proved. In recent excavations in Ferryland (Newfoundland) several plates and bowls with the letters S.K. were found. The doubt could persist if we didn’t know that one of most influent women of that settlement was Lady Sarah Kirke. For the first time it was possible to establish a direct relation between a Portuguese Faience object and its owner making us believe that most of the names found in plates, bowls and bottles actually represent the people who acquired them. However there is a less probable possibility that those letters may correspond to the last four of the name IRLANDA. This interpretation is not so common since there are no evidences of the name of countries or cities in Portuguese faience; however this idea should not be completely ignored. That island appears in Portuguese 17th century documents as “Reino da Irlanda”. The objects found in Galway, all of them produced in Lisbon are all of an excellent quality and used by the merchant elites. The collection recovered in Carrickfergus has to be analysed with some careful. First because is a late 16th early 17th century contexts and also because is one of the two sites where the highest number of vessels of Portuguese Faience was recovered. These archaeological evidences permit to reach some conclusion about the first exports. The vessels recovered in Carrickfergus reveal an excellent quality with thick white and shiny glaze and white buff fabrics. The blue is strong and consistent without any trace of yellow or purple, typical of the first times of production. The vessels were all made in Lisbon and due to its similarity probably in the same workshop. However even in Lisbon it’s rare to find such high quality

161

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

objects for late 16th and early 17th since they were destined only to very rich people or to be exported. Coimbra and Vila Nova were starting their productions at this time and unable to produce such quality items. The decoration presents Chinese inspiration patterns such as the central landscapes, the peaches and the divided ledges with flowers in a very naturalistic look, a characteristic of the first productive times. The complete absence of aranhões confirms we are dealing with one of the first moments of manufacture where the paper rolls and the Artemisia leafs, that kraak porcelain will generalize in Europe, are not yet a fashion that Portuguese faience potters would like to reproduce. We also see crossed lines, zigzags and small spirals of Spanish influence. This collection is quite important in the comprehension of the first Portuguese productions. We should also notice that Portuguese Faience represents almost 90% of the total of tin glaze ware recovered in that context while the other 10% are of English manufacturing. This predominance of Portuguese wares is another indicator of the moment since in late 16th and early 17th century the English production was still giving its first steps. Nevertheless it’s impossible to know why someone in Carrickfergus decided to acquire Portuguese Faience instead of other European wares. This can be related to taste, since the people who acquired might had a taste for Chinese inspiration patterns or even availability since it could be some merchant trading with Lisbon. One should remember that in the first half of the 17th century Carrickfergus is an important commercial city, responsible for part of the trade of Northern Ireland and Ulster. Although an important collection the context where they were recovered is a trench made during the reconstruction of the city walls so it’s impossible to relate them to a home or user. However the fact of being found together states that they all occupied the same environment at the same time. Could this be the home of a merchant or a box of earthenware from Portugal that never reach its destination? In Northern Ireland only in Londerry, besides Carrickfergus, was Portuguese Faience found. If the first site offered one of the most ancient collections, the sherds recovered in this second place are some of the most recent, dated between 1670 and 1690, corresponding to what has been found in late 17th century contexts in Portugal. The decoration is mostly made of half concentric circles and floral motifs such as ferns. Nevertheless other decorations are present like the Chinese inspiration motifs with aranhões and flowers. These can be dated a little bit earlier between 1635 and 1660. There is also a plate which has, at the centre a coat of arms, although it’s not possible to identify the represented family. In this sense it’s impossible to know if this was a specific order from an English or Irish family or if could represent a Portuguese coat of arms used by an English family with similar arms. Excavations in the Dublin Castle have identified twelve objects in Portuguese Faience. All of them offer excellent

productive quality a characteristic of the Lisbon workshops. The decoration is mostly of Chinese influence with several aranhões and chrysanthemums with central landscapes formed by flowers and birds, but also with two examples of half concentric circles. The vessels found here are quite similar to the other finds across Ireland. The Dublin finds were clearly acquired during the Wentworth permanence, which represented the English crown although probably belonged to one of the rich families living at that time inside the Castle. Limerick was also an important city during the 17th century. Physically it was divided into the Englishtown and the Irishtown where English and Irish people would live, separately. At the centre of the city it was King John’s Castle where the English king was represented by an administrator. Most of the rich people and merchants living there were English. It was in the English quarter and in the castle that the Portuguese ceramics were found. These were produced in Lisbon and followed the Chinese style. Although most Portuguese ceramics have been identified in urban contexts the fortification known as Dunboy Castle offered four fragments of Portuguese Faience. Its location in the Beara peninsula served the purpose of controlling the import and export with Europe from that natural harbour, as well as, the recovery of taxed from Irish fisherman. The vessels are decorated with Chinese inspiration motifs and one plate with half concentric circles, corresponding to second moment of occupation in that small fortification, starting in 1650 (Gowen, 1978). The closest major city is Cork, an important economical centre during the 17th century. Only two objects were recovered, presenting floral decoration similar to what was being produced around 1650’s. One of them was recovered in a church and the other inside a merchant’s house known as Skiddy’s Castle, belonging to an English family with the same name (Cleary, Hurley e Twohig, 1997). Close to the Waterford bay, next to Wexford is the Ballyhack Castle. This landlord house was occupied by Sir Osborne Itchingham until mid 17th century when taken by Irish troops. During the first half of the century two plates and a bowl made in Portuguese faience were used in that house. Those are of an excellent quality, made in Lisbon, and its decoration shows they were produced somewhere between 1630 and 1650. Curiously they present European decorations with small spirals and some big leafs. The central decoration of the plates is a fern and a fatherly pierced heart (Fanning e Hurst, 1979). In all the evidences of Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland the premier quality items are two plates, recovered in Great Torrington and Poole and a bottle found in Galway. Both plates present a subtroncoconical shape and 0,324 m of diameter at the rim and 0,228 m at the bottom. Their dimension and decorations set them in the best quality items recovered in England, even better than the plates kept nowadays in Portuguese museums, surviving

162

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

due to its quality and beauty. The Great Torrington find is a plate with the remains of floral designs with a big leaf and can be dated around the mid 17th century when Portuguese Faience, although maintaining the quality of the first productions starts to use more European decorations, some of them exclusively Portuguese. Curiously this plate was recovered in a small interior town, known not by its economical importance but due to a battle during the English Civil war where no very important family was known to have lived. As for the Poole plate it’s a big object decorated I a Chinese style with aranhões and chrysanthemums. This object can also be included in the period IV of the chrono-stylistic evolution dated, as well as the Great Torrington plate, between 1635 and 1660. As for the bottle recovered in Galway, its characteristics put it in the best quality artefacts found in these isles. However its quality is not only in manufacture but also in decoration, especially due to the large dragon it bears in its body, very comparable to the animals found in Chinese porcelain. This bottle combines a European shape with oriental decoration possibly made in 1620’s. It’s believable that these vessels lasted at least a generation until being discarded and entering the archaeological record. Its “cycle of life” was about 20 or 30 years, unless some accident broke it. In this sense we should always have in mind the context chronology because it’s not always possible to give an accurate date of production.

Fig. 92 – Map showing the places where English merchants took Portuguese faience.

These men, connected to the international trade were the ones with best knowledge of what was being produced in other countries, some of them frequently visited. On the other hand merchants are a group of great political influence since the reign of Elisabeth I, occupying very important positions, mostly due to its economical influence. They develop a wealthy life style in their homes creating a proper architectural style, furniture, textiles, ceramics and food, among other things (King, 2009).

In Portuguese sites such vessels are not so frequent and found essentially in convents and palaces where wealthy people could acquire them. Plates and bottles with such attributes were found in Amsterdam and Hoorn (Low Countries) and Copenhagen archaeological excavations, and are in display at the Hamburg Museum, the British Museum and the Victoria & Albert Museum (Bartels, 2003). These were vessels made exclusively for exportation since they are not very common in Portugal and would be much appreciated abroad, competing with other European productions.

The Portuguese ceramics found in different homes were imported and used as decorative elements. Ware marks were only found in Narrow Street (London) and Castle Street (Plymouth) as aforementioned two special contexts. Only in these two sites was Portuguese Faience used as an everyday object since for all the other they were exotic items inside the home. The vessels should be interpreted not only in its useful and aesthetical function but also as a symbolic object (Deetz, 1977, 50). The material culture would help maintaining the noble and bourgeois status quo.

It’s impossible to ignore that the cities where the majority of the objects were found are the ones that in the 17th century had intense contact with North American English colonies. Merchants from London, Bristol, Topsham and Plymouth are a constant presence in Portuguese port books and the responsible for taking thousands of Portuguese pottery objects to the New World. Archaeological excavations in these colonies have found large amounts of Portuguese faience and coarseware, confirming the documentary information from several ports.

It’s curious to understand the role of Portuguese Faience in the daily activities of the homes where it was recovered. The best clues are given by iconographical representations. This exercise was also made by O. J. Kent in his dissertation Pots in Use to see the importance of painted tin glaze in northern European homes (Kent, 2005). The paintings Fat Kitchen and Poor Kitchen by Jan Havicksz Steen, painted between 1660 and 1680 can in fact reveal the importance of Portuguese Faience in these homes. In the Poor Kitchen we see a deprived environment with the complete absence of tin glaze wares and in fact very few examples of coarse ware and with several objects made in wood. The Fat Kitchen presents a prosperous environment with three examples of tin glazed dishes. One of them, completely white is at the floor where a cat licks the remains of a meal. The other two, decorated in white and blue are in display over the mantelpiece, serving a decorative purpose. This clearly indicates that there were two types of tin glazed wares in use in north European homes. One of lower quality used

The Portuguese objects recovered in the islands, when combined with European productions, would fulfil the needs of wealthy people able to acquire exotic commodities with several examples of Chinese porcelain, one of the most expensive imports. Despite the fact that some of the sites where Portuguese faience has been found in noble family houses most sites correspond to merchants houses.

163

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

BLC

BHB00

CST

BRL

STN

DTH

Fig. 93 –Small spirals from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

in everyday activities and certainly a local or regional production and another of higher quality possibly imported and used to decorate the household. The same relation of value existed in the consume of tin glaze ware in Portugal where imported objects were seen as luxury items and used in decoration while some Portuguese productions were used daily. The faience recovered in England and Ireland presents a huge diversity however most of it follows Chinese patterns with plates showing central landscapes at the centre and aranhões and chrysanthemums in the ledge divided into panels with several examples in London, Faversham and Exeter. It’s not believable that in England these pots were intended to replace porcelain as Portuguese potters believed and tried to do Related to Portuguese pottery were ceramics from other European nations, Chinese porcelain, furniture, textiles, carpets and ivory, some of it bought in Lisbon, creating an exotic environment? To the material culture one must had colours, senses of perfumes, food and spices that would enter English houses. It is usually said that the use of Chinese symbols by Portuguese potters would retrieve their meaning. However, it’s our believe that that destitution was only of the original meaning acquiring a new connotation related to an oriental world and with the presence of exotic symbols in their European homes not only through Chinese porcelain but through a new production from Portugal. The Portuguese productions are so fine that in some way they could compete with Chinese porcelain. The plate from North Street and the bowl from Trichay

CST

PCSH

Street, both sites in Exeter show excellent Portuguese productions. Some authors defend that the Chinese inspiration symbols could be related to a political message reflecting the presence of Portuguese in East Indies (Monteiro, 2006). Although that idea can be true to the pottery made and used in Portugal the message would not pass abroad. The Portuguese faience transmits the idea of China but without any political ideology, especially in countries sailing the Indic as well. Nevertheless Portuguese faience does not present exclusively Chinese inspiration decoration. Although less frequent in the British Isles the decoration of plates with small spirals is commonly found. Retrieved from its original meaning they are somehow exotics, possibly identified with the Spanish lustre ware productions from Valencia a presence in English and Irish homes and found in the same contexts as Portuguese faience. This happens for example in King Street and Magdalean Street, both in London. The Islamic societies of southern Europe always fascinated the northern populations, even before the Chinese culture, due to its refinement material culture. Chronologically the Portuguese faience vessels recovered in England and Ireland can be inserted in contexts dated between 1590 and 1720, diminishing from 1680 onwards. This cut in the export of Portuguese wares towards other nations seems to be a general phenomenon from late 17th century with evidences in Amsterdam and Newfoundland. The reasons for this fall and the disappearing of Portuguese wares are still to be found but internal and external factors have to be consider and will be discussed further ahead.

164

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

DCT

FST

NST

BIG82

HOF04

STN

LMD97

RHE01

WSN00

SRP98

NST

JAC96

HOF04

STN

MSG96

NHU99

STN

KFBR

STN

HOF04

SJU99

Fig. 94 – Aranhões from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

165

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

LMD97

DCT

BIST

SRP98

CF20

LMD97

DCT

NQY

CST

NST

CF20

NST

NHU99

TCHST

CF20

KIG95

Fig. 95 – Floral decoration from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

166

NHU99

LMD97

STN

CF20

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

NHU99

BLC

NHU99

NHU99

NHU99

CF20

HOF04

STE95

CF20

DUK77

CST

CST

NQY

BLC

CST

CF20

WST

CST

NHU99

NHU99

SQU94

NQY

Fig. 96 – Floral decoration from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

167

CST

QST

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

CST

WSN01

HOF04

HOF04

WST

WST

NQY

NHU99

BIST

NQY

FCC95

NHU99

Fig. 97 – Floral decoration from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

168

CST

HOF04

HOF04

CST

NST

CST

CST

OCP

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

BIST

STN

HOF04

NHU99

Fig. 98 – Coats of arms found in England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

Although small spirals are frequent, lace decoration is equally one of the most abundant and one of the most recurrent in after 1650’s contexts. They appear quite commonly in England with examples in London, Bristol and Plymouth. This European inspiration motif is inspired in the peacock feathers of Italian majolica. Although none of the contexts where Portuguese faience has been recovered has given any Italian vase with peacock feathers the vast amounts of Italian wares shows they were probably more appreciated than Portuguese wares. However Portuguese faience decoration is not exclusively of foreign influence. It develops a very proper style with

NHU99

BRL

in Rua de Buenos Aires and Largo de Santos’ archaeological excavations, clearly workshops evidences. Vessels produced in Coimbra workshops were recovered in less quantity and only in Plymouth and Poole. Its identification was made by comparing the English finds with finds from Garagem Avenida were remains of several workshops were found. They present pinkish fabrics, less homogeneous but quite compact with large inclusions. The glaze is very thin and without shine. The decoration is crude with the predominance of floral motifs and lace. Concerning the Vila Nova productions they were for sure

CST

STN

NHU99

Fig. 99 – Letters, legends and dates from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

proper elements especially floral. The big petals, leafs and ferns, are exclusive of Portuguese productions. In Irish and English finds we can still find some examples with geometrical decorations, predominantly crossed lines and concentric half circles, one of the most recurrent decorations in Portugal and its colonies. Only a small fragment of finely drawn motifs was recovered in London. The absence of this type of decoration from foreign sites is probably related with the production chronology. At the moment they start to appear in Portuguese archaeological contexts, around 1650 other European countries are producing very fine Chinese inspiration motifs. Pottery made in Portugal’s three production centres was recovered. Lisbon was the city which manufactured the most to send to the British Isles, showing better quality productions. About 90% of the vessels found in England and Ireland were made in Lisbon. These wares have more homogeneous fabrics with ticker, whiter and shinier glazes. Concerning decoration they are more refined than the other Portuguese workshops. Similar shapes and decorations to the ones found in England were discovered

recovered only in London at Narrow Street. This site, related to the presence of privateers and traders has offered one of the largest collections of Portuguese Faience in England. Among several vessels were identified some plates and bowls with lace decoration very similar to the finds recovered in the excavation of Rua Cândido dos Reis in Vila Nova where vessels with the same features were found characterized by thick and shiny glazes. Lisbon is the city from where more Portuguese Faience left towards the British Isles. This production centre supplied most of the country but also a huge part of the international trade in ceramics. It is possible however that the three production centres had different markets; some of them more specialized in the colonies and others in other countries. While Coimbra and Vila Nova would export for the Portuguese colonies, Lisbon would send it to northern Europe. Several documents were analysed in the attempt of finding written information that could confirm the exportation and help in the interpretation of the objects found in England and Ireland. The first approach was to the Portuguese archives, namely in the three production centres. Lisbon, the largest pottery production centre in post-medieval Portugal was actually the poorest in

169

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

BIST99

CTS

SQU94

DUK77

CST

CST

CST

NHU99

SOU

CF20

CF20

CF20

Fig. 100 – Geometric figures from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

documents. The Livro do marco dos navios which registered all the entrances and exits of merchant ships in the city and created in the 15th century by João II has disappeared completely until 1769. Figueira da Foz is a city in the Mondego’s river mouth which served as a sea port for Coimbra. The customs records are deposited at the local archive. Although lots of pottery is registered, especially towards Galicia we did not find any reference of pots sent to England. The disappearance of some books can be related to this absence of information. In 1954 in the publication of the book Materiais para a História da Figueira nos séculos XVII e XVIII Santos Rocha refers the existence of a book where a small amount of pottery is taken to England (Rocha, 1954, 63). However this book is not at the archive and we could not confirm this reference. The Livros da Portagem do Cabido da Sé do Porto are kept at the Porto archives. These books recorded, at least since the late 16th century until the 19th century all the ships carrying wine outside the port. Although only this commodity was taxed every item on board was mentioned in the record. The records state the name of the ship and its master, the home port, where the ship was going and eventually if it stopped anywhere. This information is followed by the name of the dispatcher, the cargo and the taxes. In the 24th of May 1668 a ship leaves to Bristol taking five dozens of earthenware vessels together with other goods such as sugar and salt (ADP/CABIDO /Lv.152/1668/fl. 24v). In the 14th of July 1670 another ship leaves towards Cornwalll with eighty dozens of vessels from Vila Nova, once again, together with other goods such as olive oil, hams and a car of red coarseware 25v).

from Aveiro: Em 14 de julho/ despacho do pataxo per nome gisaidei/sva de que he mestre João Vitão vizinho/de ghenac que vaj pera a cornoalha com a/ carga seguinte/ Nicolau Trancalhão vinte e quatro/ pipas e meã de azeite e oitenta du/zias de louca de vila nova e des arrobas/ de presuntos e hūu carro de louca ver/melha davejro/ jurou o mestre nam levar mais nada/ e assinou/John Vithbar” (ADP/CABIDO/Lv.155/1670/fl. This reference shows that the documents would specify what type of pottery would leave towards other countries and this was not only tin glaze ware from Vila Nova but also red wares. Confirming this in 8th of December 1685 goes to England a chest of northern ware (ADP/CABIDO/Lv.172/1685/fl.52) that no one knows where it was produced. In 1687 leaves from Porto towards Topsham, in southwest England and the sea port of Exeter a ship taking, among other things, a large box with pottery from Estremoz in central Portugal. In the same year but in June 23rd leaves to London another ship also with a box of Estremoz pottery. The ships and merchants dealing with pottery from Porto to England are all English from the cities were they came. As for the dispatchers, this is, the responsible people for buying the cargo in Portugal and load it on the ship seem to be equally English living in Porto. Their names, Thomas Mally, Nicolau Trancalhão, Corin Benlarast, Nataniel Roland e Jon Lel show their British origin. These men should have moved to Porto where they could ship all types of merchandise towards England and the English colonies. Pottery stops being sent in the 18th century, however during the 19th century shipments restart with an intense trade of clay figurines towards cities such as Bristol, Liverpool and London (Leão, 2007).

170

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

HOF04

NHU99

NHU99

WST

WST

OCP

Fig. 101 – Lace decoration from England and Ireland’s Portuguese Faience finds.

Despite the rich data provided by the Portuguese records it did not provide the necessary information about the trade of pottery from Portugal towards England. So it was decided to read the English port books trying to find news about such exports. The Port Books recorded all the movement of English ports from the 14th to the 19th century. The documents are clear about the cities which exported Portuguese pottery towards England. Lisbon, Figueira da Foz and Porto were the three places were earthenware and tiles were acquired in Portugal. Lisbon is the city where more ships arrived from Portugal carrying pottery and taking it towards London, Bristol and Exeter, the only three cities where we could find written evidences. The documents are not as informative as the Portuguese but the name of the captain, ship and port of origin are mentioned, followed by the cargo and the customs tax. The earliest reference goes back to 1637, even before the separation of the Portuguese and Spanish crowns when England and Spain were at war. It’s usually defended by researchers that English port books reflect the political tensions in Europe so it is very rare to find records in times of war. These are 200 plates imported from Porto, although no tax is charged (E190/40/6). We have no idea to what type of pottery this refers to considering that the designation plate is quite generalist. However it is believed that these should be faience plates, produced in Vila Nova, since that was the most recurrent shape produced by Portuguese workshops. According to the records, Portuguese faience was not imported as a container but as an object with proper value. Food and other goods would be taken into the British Isles inside coarseware pots. In February 12th 1682 it’s imported from Lisbon to London “ij chests iiij pots of marmelade cx succads, vij cheeses iiij gallons Orange flower water j busholer, vi wax candles, vc chocolat xiij dozen little cups and vj cups with paint”. The enormous amounts of Portuguese coarse ware found in England and Ireland should be considered at this point since it is found in larger amounts than faience. Wrongly designated as Merida type ware it was believed that they were produced in that area of the Iberian Peninsula. Until recently English authors still defended that this type of pottery was exclusively made in North Alentejo workshops, a specific area from Portugal when, in fact, they were being made all over the country (Hurst, 2000). It has been recovered in several post-medieval contexts, even in places where Portuguese faience does not appear, namely in Southampton where hundreds of fragments were found

and only a small sherd of tin glaze ware (Gutierrez, 2007). Coarseware should be sometimes imported has a container, however documents reveal that some cups were used as drinking vessels as they were used in Portugal. Although the documents refer the price that merchandised paid when arriving in London it’s impossible to determine the value of these goods when being bought and sold in English and Irish cities. The pottery on board the Nash Gromthom from Lisbon, arriving in London in the 12th of June 1678 were iij chest 20c plates (E190/75-1/fl.135) and paid the same tax of xvij pounds as the faience on board the Dorandos, also from Lisbon and arriving on the 1st of March 1681 bringing 6 ch. earthen ware (E190/1021/fl.40). In true it’s possible they transported the same amount of pottery since the three chests in the first ship containing two hundred plates could transport two times more pottery of the six chests in the second ship. It’s mostly likely that pottery paid taxes based on its nature and not in the amounts imported. Portuguese faience was recognized in the English market, especially by merchants confirmed by the names given to Portuguese imports. The most recurrent designation was earthenware (E190/ 56/1/fl.44), earthen dishes (E 190/52/5) or earthen pots (E190/69/1/fl.229), which was a general way of designating tin glazed ware. However other even more interesting designations appear in documents, namely the designation of white plates that, in 1666, enter London from Porto (E190/51-9/fl.44) dishes in the 27th of August 1681 (E190/102-1) and a chest of ½ single plates” (E190/75/1/fl.135), suggesting smaller vessels or simply white ware that in 1671 arrives in London from Lisbon. Clearly identified as Portuguese productions are the imports of portugall white ware (E190/85-1/fl.184), in 1677 and two chests of portuguese earthenware in the 30th of January 1674, from Lisbon (E190/64-1/fl.55). One of the most interesting references happened in the 5th of April 1683 from Porto when a ship brings to London 76 harmed plates. This suggests armorial plates (E190/114-7/fl.24) as the ones found in London, Bristol and Londerry. When the imported ware was not tin glaze the most recurrent designation was cups (púcaros) entering London in 12th February 1682 with xiij dozen little cups (E190/114-8) or the entrance of 48 vases from Porto which we believe being coarseware (E190/131-1).

171

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Concerning tiles, although archaeologically its existence was only recorded in Wales, the documents show us that many were imported, not only from Lisbon, but equally from Porto and Coimbra. The first reference is on the 27th of January 1666 with the entrance of xxxc pantiles from Lisbon (E190/51-8). In the 31st of January of 1677 enter that city from Porto one box fifty five pantiles” (E190/78/1). In January 28th of 1687 from Figueira da Foz arrived “lx pantiles” (E190/90/1). The amounts entering the British Isles suggest wall panels .A curious entrance happened in the 29th of January of 1684 when the port book mentions “x chests foot gally tyles (E190/131/1) indicating that not only wall tiles were being exported, although no archaeological evidence can confirm this. They would be transported in boxes or chests, possibly the best way of transporting them and counted by the dozen. One should not forget that we are dealing with a type of pottery which circulated in the world as a sub-product of the Portuguese mercantilism. There were other more important products but pottery was present and generating wealth for the merchants who transported it. This secondary economical role says they were transported in ships, together with other products. The documents talk about commodities such as wine, sugar, olive oil and fruits but equally more exotic items such as elephant teeth or carpets. The London port books are divided. For each year there are two books for imports, one for denizens and other for aliens and all the other ones registering exists that don’t matter here. The denizen books register the trade of the London habitants not only the natural born and raised but also the people who had declared residence. On the other hand, aliens are foreign people from other countries that would get there with their ships selling their cargos. During our research we realized that most of the denizens dealing with the trade between Portugal and England are English with names such as Simon Coon, Richard Can our John Ashby. However the majority of names are Antonio Goodin /E190/40-6) Michael Levy (E190/51-8), Isac Alvares (E190/52-5) our Samuel Miro (E190/56-1) which suggest a Jewish background. If we consider a little bit more the commercial relations between Portugal and England during the 17th century we realize that most of them were in the hands of Jews with Portuguese families moving to England during the 16th century when they are expelled from our country. It is likely that these men with their perfect knowledge of Portuguese wares would trade pottery. Curiously it’s known that many of these men had family relations with other Jews with a Portuguese origin living in other north European cities such as Amsterdam and Hamburg where several examples of Portuguese faience have been recovered (Woolf, 1975). One of the sites where Portuguese faience has been recovered in Mitre Street (MIR84) was clearly a family of Jews. A plate in London delftware with the word “milk” was found in Hebraic. We have no idea if that was the home of a Portuguese Jew or other nationality, but, as in other European cities also in London the Jewish community is related to the presence of Portuguese tin glaze ware.

Regarding foreign people bringing pottery into London there are some Portuguese like Domingues Francia (E190/102-1), Manuel Ricardo or Timoteo de Faria (E190/114-7) and names like Jan Eyros, possibly Dutch (E190/90-1). It would be suspected that Portuguese merchants, taking all types of products towards England, would complement their cargos with pottery. Summing up all the references to Portuguese ceramics in English port books and comparing them with the references of pottery brought to the isles from other European countries such as Germany, Low Countries, Spain or Italy, we realize that although a frequent product its amounts were not sufficient to compete with the imports from other European countries. The most abundant wares are from the Low Countries followed by Germany paying smaller taxes than Portuguese wares. Despite the fact that archaeological sites register more Italian and Spanish pottery than Portuguese port books record more Portuguese wares. English port records mention the entrance of hundreds of dozens of Portuguese pottery in the country. However written evidences disappear when an evaluation of the importance of Portuguese pottery in English daily life is needed. Lots of work has been made concerning Probate Inventories, this is, a description of goods at the time of death. These documents are very helpful in the knowledge of what existed inside the houses even establishing how rich its habitants were. However, never any of them has provided information about the presence of Portuguese faience in the British Isles. The only reference to Portuguese ceramics is in the will of John Norton in 1658 that had, in his home at Southampton A green pancheon made in Portugal (Brown, 1995, 432). The lack of documents does not permit to know how Portuguese faience was designated in England and Ireland. In the American colonies of Massachusetts according to the probate inventories was certainly know has Lisbon Ware, found inside cabinets in kitchens. However in England there was a huge offer of European goods so it is difficult to know if the people who used it had any idea of its origins. It is our believe that once entering the English 17th century homes Portuguese faience is related to the reproduction of symbols associated to wealth and economical power. The vessels with its quality and decorations associated to the contexts where they were found, together with the best European and Chinese productions show they were important in the support and propaganda of the social status of its owners. Its use was not daily and ware marks are very rare. Objects with similar features have been recovered in other overseas sites, namely in the Low Countries, Poland and Germany. These resemblances between ceramics recovered in some north European countries make us believe in similar trade patterns, possibly intended to similar social groups especially bourgeoisie and nobles.

172

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

12 CONCLUSION The purpose of this study was to identify, analyze and interpret every find of Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland. 798 vessels were recognized scattered by twenty five cities and eighty four sites. This number corresponds to the majority of the finds ever found in the British Isles. Nevertheless, only recently, has Portuguese tin glaze ware started to be correctly identified and stopped being misjudged by Italian and Dutch wares and it is probable that evidences taken from some excavations more than twenty years ago may have missed this work, kept in some museum archive with the designation of Dutch of simply tin glaze ware. The exportation of Portuguese tin glaze ware towards England and Ireland begin around 1580 or even earlier, although its peak occurred between 1600 and 1665, slightly increasing after 1640, with the separation of the two Iberian crowns. These finds were essential in the construction of the chrono-stylistic evolution. The attribution of specific dates to pottery productions gathers, for the first time, information recovered from archaeological sites and museum information. The fine chronology of English and Irish sites was precious in this dissertation, permitting to establish correct dates. As verified the faience production in Portugal started around 1550 with very similar imitations of Spanish productions, mostly from the Seville area with carinated bowls and plates. The possibility of some of the pottery being exported to the British Isles should not be ignored, however, English and Irish archaeologists, and even some Portuguese, have always consider them as Spanish what may have led to some inaccuracies. Its identification is still today complex and probably only be solved with provenance studies and analysis. The attribution of the vessels to one of the production centres was made based on the direct observation of fabrics and decorations of sherds and vases recovered in Lisbon, Coimbra and Vila Nova. These parallels are, for now, the best way of identification even that, in a near future, the project Portuguese Faience in the World (16th to 18th centuries) with its provenance studies and ICP analysis may help us confirm such origins. The anglo-portuguese relations and alliances permitted that among the cargo of ships, at least from the 14th century onwards, together with other commodities would travel some pottery. On the other hand, several treaties of trade and friendship permitting the establishment of Portuguese merchants in England could have increased the pottery business. The British Isles were the ideal destination for the Portuguese faience, home to a society with wealthy life style and economical ability to buy all sorts of Portuguese commodities.

The evidences of Portuguese tin glaze ware were all recovered in port cities where the majority of its inhabitants were involved in international trade systems. In truth it was identified in the most important urban centres of England and Ireland during the 17th century. Those maintained frequent contacts with the Iberian Peninsula, Atlantic Islands, Newfoundland and the East Indies. Inside the cities one should mention that most sites offering Portuguese Faience were near the sea or rivers water front where piers, warehouses and the homes of merchants were located. If we look at England and Ireland map we can still see that the finds are mostly located in the south and south-western part of England and all around Ireland. In England Devon was the county where most Portuguese Faience was recovered. This amount is not strange considering the numerous contacts between its cities and Portugal. It was the only area of the country were Portuguese faience was recovered inside the territory in places about 10 km away from the sea shore. This absence in inner cities is curious since some luxury objects would sometimes travel more than 50 km inland. The sites where Portuguese faience was recovered correspond mostly to the homes of high status families. One of the wealthiest groups in England during the 17th century was certainly the merchants and their homes had Portuguese faience. Its function was without doubt decorative since most of them have no ware marks. These were homes where its inhabitants would have a privilege access to Portuguese productions, possibly acquired during some business trip to Portugal. The vessels present an exceptional physical and aesthetical quality, the best of what was being made in Portugal at the time. A study made by Lorn Weatherill (1988) stated that sea merchant communities spent more money in pottery, glass and books than nobility. There are no reasons for this to happen but clearly this was why merchants’ homes had more of these commodities than in the palaces occupied by nobles. Even in Ireland, the evidences for faience were mostly recovered in English homes. This absence of traditional Irish contexts can be related with the attempt of reproducing social and cultural patterns used by the English society. Even apart from the political and cultural centres the English people living in Ireland tried to live a similar life style. The only two places where ware marks were identified in the British Isles was in Narrow Street in London and Castle Street in Plymouth. These exceptions are related, as aforementioned with very specific characteristics of the sites and the people who lived there that, in the first case would have a direct access to foreign pottery, plundering it and in the second case could in fact be Portuguese communities, living there.

173

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

In truth there is no idea how people would acquire these vessels in England or in Ireland. The documents show enormous amounts of Portuguese earthenware in English ports. Nevertheless it’s not yet known if they arrived to people’s home through a special delivery or if they were being sell in shops and pothouses. Considering the recovery of some sherds in buildings identified as warehouses it is possible that Portuguese faience vessels were sold in shops. In the Samuel Scott’s painting of Convent Garden there is a wooden bench where several vessels of tin glaze ware decorated in blue are standing. Although the objects in the painting present every characteristics of London productions, this does not mean that imports would be sell the same way. Portuguese faience was present in commercial itineraries, in ships and warehouses, although no one knows to what price. The documents have revealed quite helpful. It was possible to establish that the English market acquired large amounts of Portuguese pottery, not only faience but tiles and coarseware as well. They got to the British Isles especially on board English ships with very few Portuguese merchants involved, although many of them were clearly of Portuguese Jewish families. Considering that most objects were used in the decoration of houses, inside cabinets or over table, shelves and mantelpieces the decoration would be one of the most important aspects. The majority presents Chinese style decoration with aranhões and chrysanthemums in a divided ledge with central landscapes with very fine examples in London, Faversham, Poole and Exeter. There are also several examples of floral decoration such as ferns, large petals and leafs, a typical Portuguese decoration. Lace and small spirals, following European models are also a frequent presence. Its blue on white decoration made them a part of a larger group of objects produced in other European countries and in China where those colours excelled. The 17th century marks a moment in English society, as well as in the rest of Europe, when a taste for eccentric and exotic items starts to grow. Although pottery is the most visible evidence in archaeological sites its presence was complemented with furniture, textiles, ivory, smells and food. One of the most frequent imports in Post-Medieval sites in England is Chinese porcelain. Due to its fineness and beauty it was frequently required in several homes. The remaining productions worked as a complement to the eastern productions, filling a demand for exotic items, satisfying a taste for chinoiserie. Contrarily to what some authors defend Portuguese faience didn’t intended to replace Chinese porcelain. It’s impossible to compare both productions. However, Portuguese potters realized that although porcelain was abundant in Europe it was not sufficient to satisfy every demand, especially in the less wealthy people.

Nevertheless and considering the high quality characteristics of the British Isles finds Portuguese faience was not reaching the isles at cheap prices, especially until 1635 when the production grows and its consuming increases. The vessels found in England and Ireland offer a quality that could not be compared to other European productions. In fact, except for Italian wares it would be difficult to find in pre 1640 Europe similar artefacts. They were objects of a high value. As stated by Isabel Maria Fernandes “Portuguese faience, just like other furniture, jewelry, clothes and others was the trade mark of its owners”( Fernandes, 1999, 13). There is almost a complete lack of purple decorated objects with just a few examples in London, Plymouth and Londerry. This absence is related with the time when they were imported. The purple outline starts to be frequently used about 1660 when Portuguese faience decreases its exportation. On the other hand the colour was not so appreciate as blue and did not correspond to what was wanted by English society. Although every site is singular and it had its own interpretation some general conclusion may be outlined. All of them present a very rich material culture that indicated the wealth of its users. In fact in the few cases where it’s possible to identify the family who lived in those contexts they are always noble like the cases of Pomeroy Castle or Dublin Castle with very privilege relation with court and king. In this sense, Portuguese Faience, just like other pottery and objects was a decorative element, confirming the social status of its owners. They were clearly prestige symbols that would facilitate the preservation of the European cultural environments. It’s complicated to evaluate the importance of Portuguese Faience in English and Irish societies. The material culture is so diversified that the Portuguese production could not have occupied a spotlight role and was just another complement. However it is possible that its owners knew their place of origin and would call them portugall white ware as in the London port books. The possibility of Portuguese faience being used as a model for London delftware is another option one should consider analyzing the vessels recovered in industrial contexts and certainly reproduced by English potters. In this case, despite the fact that Portuguese faience was not a frequent find in English homes its influence was there through English tin glaze ware. These are prestigious items and were probably kept for at least one generation. It’s not weird that forms and decorations that we know to have been produced in a specific moment appear only ten or twenty years later in the archaeological record. It’s undeniable that English Jews from Portuguese ancestry were involved in the trade of pottery. It is even possible that they were big consumers. The Portuguese Jewish neighbourhoods in England are yet to identify and

174

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

excavate, but the only place securely Jewish in London (MIR84) gave a Portuguese tin glaze ware dish. There are evidences from the three production centres. This means that all of them, not only Lisbon, were producing ceramics of a better quality, destined to the European market revealing craft and specialization of Portuguese potters. Even the Coimbra and Vila Nova productions found in England offer a better quality than the ones found in Portuguese contexts, expect in palaces and convents. This evaluation of the place of origin was only possible after visiting and observing the sites and collections from workshop contexts. Lisbon was in fact the major centre of production and exportation. This conclusion was taken based on the high amounts of pottery found in the British Isles but also due to the evidences found in English port books stating Lisbon as the primary centre of production, followed by Vila Nova and Coimbra. The study of Portuguese Faience in the British Isles revealed that although Portuguese Faience was a common export, constantly present in ships this ware was not exported in large amounts. In fact, based on the archaeological and documentary evidences it is possible to say that it was less frequent than Dutch, Italian and Chinese. It was probably consumed by people with a perfect knowledge of what was being made in Portugal directly through voyages or indirectly through some family or other social relations. This is the reason why they are only found in coastal cities. Portuguese faience would complement the regular trade of other products daily leaving Portugal towards the British Isles such as wine, aquavit, sugar, olive oil, fruits, cork, among other commodities. However this economical fulfil was not exclusive of Portuguese wares. In Exeter, John Allan didn’t identify any type of pottery that, by its own would fill a ship. On the contrary, all sorts of pottery and even stoneware, the most frequent import, would only occupy a part of the ship’s hold, rarely identifying any shipment taking more than hundred vessels (Allan, 1983). Nevertheless we cannot ignore the hypothesis of some of these faiences entering the English and Irish space not trough trade but through some personal relations. How can it be explained the presence of a dish such as the one found in Great Torrington in a place with no wealthy family to acquire it? Could this be a gift? The political and social relations between both countries would certainly create the background for these types of relations. As referred Portugal send pottery to the British Isles from late 16th century to early 18th century. Nevertheless and just like in other countries where Portuguese Faience has been recovered, such as the Low Countries or Newfoundland the volume of imports decreases hugely from 1665 onwards almost stopping around 1680. It’s not easy to understand the reasons for this phenomenon, however internal and external motifs have to be analyzed.

The protection laws know as Navigation Acts were passed in 1651 and 1673 trying to promote English production by reducing the imports and enlarging the exports. Those measures, concerning pottery tried to stop almost every import. However, as C. Willcoxen stated the Navigation acts were “loosely administrated or wholly evaded” (Willcoxen, 1999) and lots of pottery continued to enter English ports as one can see n the port books. On the other hand, from middle 17th century onwards the English and the Dutch production of tin glaze ware will know a huge increment. The purpose fulfilled by Portuguese Faience was now being accomplished by English and Delft productions, certainly cheaper. The decrease of Chinese imports between 1650 and 1680, due to some political problems inside China made the north European workshops more productive imitating Chinese porcelain, just like Portugal a few years before. Nevertheless, the highest break in the consuming of Portuguese Faience in Europe was related to a change in the taste of European society. When the trade with China was recovered in early 18th century, the traditional blue on white porcelain, although still in use started to be replaced by colourful wares. The Portuguese workshops weren’t able to imitate such wares continuing to produce blue and white and purple. The only markets were now the Portuguese colonies and the internal consumers. Portuguese faience shows a decline in the quality of vessels, not only in the ones produced to be send abroad but in internal consuming as well. Would this happen if we were dealing only with external tribulations? Some authors think that the end of the Spanish occupation in 1640 may have cut the access to some markets and consumers. However, the end of the trade with the places under Spanish domination was replaced by the opening of others such as northern Europe, so this does not seem a plausible reason. On the other hand European society is facing the consequences of a Religious Reformation, adopting a less ostentatious life style. Pottery starts to be simple, almost plain white, with very few decorative elements what can in fact reveal that convents and monasteries, reservoirs of the religious life would dictate fashion and taste, completely different from the previous demand made by elites and nobles. Despite all the arguments presented its impossible to infer beyond the data provided by archaeological and documentary evidences and the Portuguese Faience in the British Isles was just another commodity from Portuguese mercantilism. England and Ireland were important markets for Portuguese potteries, especially for the ones producing for other countries. However the amounts discovered in both countries, at the moment, say that the export towards the British Isles was not essential to the maintenance of Portuguese productions centres. There were other important markets such as our or other European colonies where thousands of fragments were

175

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

recovered. It seems that in the English colonies in North America faience was an everyday item, vary valued inside the houses as stated in Probate Inventories. It was important to contribute to the study of Portuguese wares and its impact in British Isles. As Orser said: “Part of the goal of modern-world archaeology is to provided localizated (micro) historical and cultural information about the process of globalization (macro), illustrating and interpreting its material dimensions” (Orser, 2006, 283). It’s undeniable that Portuguese Faience is found all over the world, in every place where Portuguese people were traveling with merchants and sailors, leaving a testimony of its presence.

176

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

13 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Lisbon Potter’s regiment (1572) (after Correia, 1926) 1º - No mes de Janeiro de Cada hū anno os officiaes do officio dos oleiros assi de louça vermelha como de vidrada, e telheiros serão chamados pelo mordomo de seu officio e se ajuntarão em cada hūa casa que elles para isso ordenarem e os juízes que então acabão cõ seu escrivão darão juramento dos Santos Evangelhos a todos os que presentes forem que bem e verdadeiramente sem odio nem affeição dee cadaū hsua voz a dous homes que aquelle anno hão de servir de juízes e examinadores do dito officio. E tendo assi dado juramento aos ditos officiaes os ditos Juizes com o seu Escrivão se apartarão para hū cabo da dita casa onde ter ão posta hūa mesa, e ahy perguntarão a cada ūh dos ditos officiaes per si sob cargo do dito Juramento que receberão a quaes dão a sua voz para aquelle anno vindouro de juízes e examinadores do dito officio e o q. cada hū disser em segredo o escrivão o escreverá. E pela mesma manr.ª elegerão hū Juiz do officio de louça verde vidrada e outra de louça branca vidrada para aquelle anno, outrossi servirem de examinadores dos ditos officios, e assi elegerão Juiz do Corpo dos telheiros para examinador do dito officio. E acabado assi de perguntar os ditos officiaes elles Juizes alimparão a pauta cõ o dito escrivão. E em outro papel poerão per letra aquelles officiaes que mais votos tiveram para aquelle ano servirem de Juizes e examinadores dos ditos officios. 2º - E pela mesma maneira e no dito dia q. elegerem os ditos Juizes e examinadores elegerão outro official do corpo dos oleiros de louça vermelha por escrivão para servir aquelle anno cõ os Juizes. E depois de os ditos Juizes e escrivão serem eleitos irão a Camara para lhe ser dado Juramento dos Sanctos Evangelhos que be e verdadeiramente sirvão seus cargos, e para os assentarem no livro da Camara como he costume. E aquelles Juizes examinadores e escrivão q cõ esta solenidade não forem eleitos não usarão dos ditos cargos sob pena de qualqr que o cõtr.º fizer do tronco pagar mil rs a metade para as obras da cidade e a outra para quem o accusar. 3º - E os officiaes que sairem por examinadores hū anno não servirão o mesmo cargo dahi a três annos cõtados do dia em q acabare seu anno salvo se no offiçio dos vidreiros e telheiros houver tão poucos offiçiaes que seja necessário fazer se delles eleição antes do dito tempo. E pela mesma maneira o que sair por escrivão salvo não havendo outra pessoa do dito offiçio que saiba escrever por que então poderaa servir ate outra eleição em q o aja. 4º - E nenhua pessoa assi natural como estrangeiro que dos ditos offiçios quiser usar e poer tenda o poderaa fazer sem primº ser examinado pelos examinadores que para isso são eleitos. O qual exame se faraa em casa do Juiz do

offiçio de que o exame se faz a que elles serão presentes, para que vejão se o tal offiçial faz obra conveniente per que mereça ser aprovado. E sendo o examinado de louça vidrada seraa presente o Juiz do seu officio cõ os dous da louça vermelha. E sendo telheiro pela mesma maneira. 5º - E o official que se examinar quizer de louça vermelha saberaa muj bem lavrar e temperar o barro e conservalo cõ sua area segundo convem a qualquer lavor. Item saberaa enfornar de todo e cozer a louça, como deve para desengano do pouo. Item saberaa muj bem fazer talhas de agoa que serão Igoaes da grossura do barro e tenhão bôos fundos e cheos. Item saberaa fazer cantaros e potes para ter agoa de meo almude e atenores e quartões que será tudo muito bem feito e acabado e como cumpre saber qualqr bõo official. Item saberaa fazer quaesquer panelas e azados que lhe forem demandados. Item saberaa fazer muj bem almotalias pucaros e candieiros e quasquer outras cousas meudas que lhe forem demandadas. 6º - E o que se quiser examinar de louça vidrada verde saberaa fazer alguidares grandes e pequenos e frigideiras e tijellas de fogo. Item panellas de mea arroba cada hua. Item panellas mais pequenas e de toda a sorte Item almotolias grandes e pequenas. Item saberaa fazer tachos. Item enfusas de toda a sorte Item pratos de toda a sorte. Item faraa canos para telhados de cinco palmos. Item faraa hu feruidor. Item faraa malegas grandes que chamão vermelha. Item faraa escudelas de feição de porcelana Item saberaa enfornar, vidrar, e cozer. Item saberaa fundir o chumbo en hua fornalha de modo que se faça em poo muito meudo e se pineire. Item saberaa moer a area que se lhe bota e peneirala. Item saberaa deitar lhe o cobre por seu peso. 7º - E o que se quiser examinar de louça branca de talaueira saberaa fazer hū almofia de boticairo que leve meo lquere de qualquer cousa que lhe botarem. Item faraa outra almofia grande de pee. Item faraa hū prato grande que se chama galinheiro. Item hūa albarrada de canada de agoa. Item toda hua botica cõ suas arredomas e botões e panellas que levem ate arroba. Item saberá enfornar, vidrar e cozer. 8º - E o que houver de examinar de telheiro e tijoleiro saberaa lavrar e cozer e tomar fogo como cumpre a hu bõo offiçial.

177

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

9º - E aos que forem examinados na maneira sobredita e forem havidos por habiles e pertencetes para poerem tenda lhes passarão sua carta de examinação assinada por todos os examinadores e feita pelo escrivão de seu cargo. A qual leuarão da Camara para laa ser vista e confirmada e se registar no livro en q as tas cartas se registrão. 10º - Da qual se examinação o offiçial que assi examinar pagaraa trezentos rs. E sendo estrangeiro seisçentos rs de que serão as duas partes para as desp.as do dito offiçio e a terça parte para os examinadores e o escrivão levaraa da carta dez rs. 11º - E qualquer official dos ditos officios que daqui em diante tenda poser sem primr.º ser examinado da manr.ª sobredita seraa preso e da cadea onde jaraa quinze dias pagaraa dous mil rs a metade para a cidade e a outra para quem o accusar. E a mesma penna hauera qualqr offiçial não sendo examinado que tomar obra dos ditos offiçios para fazer fora da tenda do offiçial examinado. 12º - E quando algu offiçial dos ditos offiçios se poser a examinar se não souber fazer as sobreditas peças os ditos examinadores o não examinarão e lhe mandarão que vaa aprender e do dia que se poser a tal examinação a seis meses o não tornarão a examinar. E passados os ditos seis meses então se poderaa poer outra vez aa examinação. E sendo apto lhe passarão sua carta e não o sendo o tornarão outra vez a mandar aprender outros seis mezes. E assi o farão tantas vezes quantas acharem que não sabe fazer como deve as peças da sua examinação. E os examinadores que o assi não fezerem e antes do dito tpo o tornarem a examinar pagarão dous mil rs a metade para as obras da Cidade e a outra a quem o accusar. 13º - E sendo caso que os ditos examinadores fauoravelmente ou por peita ou por qualqr respeito ou maliçia derem por sufficientes aquelles que o não forem e lhes derem lugar q ponhão tenda, da cadea onde estarão trinta dias pagaraa cada hū quatro mil a metade para as obras da Cidade e a outra para quem os accusar. 14º - E os examinadores dos ditos offiçios não examinarão seus filhos, parentes cunhados ou criados. E quando qualquer dos sobreditos se quizer examinar faraa a petição aa Camara para lhe ser ddo hu dos Juizes do anno passado qual a cidade bem parecer para o examinar em lugar do examinador suspeito. E qualquer dos examinadores que o contr.º fezer pagaraa dous mil rs. a metade para a Cidade e a outra metade para quem o accusar, e a tal examinação não será valiosa. 15º - E serão avisados os ditos examinadores que nenhu per si soo examine offiçial algu senão sendo ambos juntos, sob a mesma pena. 16º - E mandão que nenhū oleiro seiaãot ousado q desenforne forno algū de louça nem de bula cõ elle tanto que for cozido sem primeiro Ir chamar os ditos Juizes do offiçio para elles Irem ver o tal forno se a louça é feita desenganadamente como lhe manda seu regimento por serem Informados que os ditos oleiros muitas vezes faze a

louça de maneira que tanto que a poem no fogo estala assi por ser mal cosida como por ter pouca areia. E da louça que os ditos Juizes acharem que he feita como não deue e mal cozida farão auto e o trarão a câmara para se mandar o que for Justiça e qualquer dos ditos oleiros que abrir forno sem ir chamar ao menos hū dos ditos Juizes do tronco onde estaraa cinco dias pagaraa dous mil rs a metade para as obras da Cidade e a outra metade para quem o accusar. Assi por desenfornar sem o fazer a saber como por lhe ser achada louça feita contra ser regimento em prejuízo do pouo. E sob a mesma pena os mesmos Juizes farão esta diligencia ttantas vezes quantas souberem que os fornos da louça são cozidos, ou os vierem chamar para os verem, e assi buscarão as casas dos oleiros para verem se tem louça escondida que seja como não deue. 17º - Item mandão que nenhua pessoa q louça vender a venda no resio desta cidade saluo nos dias de feira, e en as tres festas do anno – SS natal, pascoa, e Pentecostes, porq nos dous dias antes de cada hua das ditas festas e poderão vender no dito resio e fazendo o contrario serão presos e da Cadeia pagarão mil rs a metade para a Cidade e a outra para quem o accusar. 18º - Item mandão que todo o oleiro que fezer louça vidrada se a não exacotar lhe seja quebrada a obra que lhe for achada e do tronco pague mil rs a metade para a Cidade e a outra para quem o accusar. 19º - Item Mandão que nenhum telheiro assi desta cidade como do termo que tijolo fizer faça em cada fornada mais tijolo rebatido que a terça parte delle, e a demasia seraa daluenaria e forcado, sob pena de qualquer que fezer mais tijolo rebatido que a terça parte da cadea onde estaraa dez dias pagar dous mil rs a metade para as obras da Cidade e a outra para quem o acusar. 20º - Item Mandão que o tijolo daluenaria seia de palmo e quarto de craveira e a sua anchura per meada. E o tijolo mazaril seja de palmo e meo e sua anchura per meada e o tijolo de portal Seia de palmo e quatro dedos de craueira de longo e hu palmo de ancho, e que a grossura de todo o tijolo Seia pela marca e vitola que estaa na Camara desta Cidade, e que o contr.º fezer da cadea pagaraa vinte cruzados a matade para a Cidade e a outra metade para quem o acusar. 21º - E sob a mesma pena mandão que toda a telha que se fezer Seia de dous palmos e meio de longo e hum palmo em boca comforme ao padrão da cidade. 22º - Item mandão que nenhum official Seia ousado fazer telha ou tijolo amassado cõ agoa salgada nem o traga a vender a esta cidade, e o que contrario fezer da cadea pagaraa a mesma pena de vinte cruzados a metade para as obras da Cidade e a outra para quem o accusar, por não ser obra durauel e ser grande engano po pouo, e a mesma pena havera quem fezer telha ou tijolo cõ agoa dos tanques.

178

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

23º - Item Mandão que nenhum obreiro dos ditos officios laure por peças ssomente por Jornal como sempre se costumou, porque doutra maneira he prejuizo do pouo, e qualquer obreiro que lhe for prouado que fez o contrario e laurou por peças, e não por Jornal pagara quinhentos rs e os mestres das tendas que nellas consentirem laurar os ditos obreiros por peças encorrerão em pena de mil rs, e os Juizes do dito officio pagarão outros mil rs sendo lhes prouado q o souberão e não acudirão a isso. E mandão os ditos Juizes que quando examinarem algum official lhe dem Juramento dos sanctos evangelhos que usem deste cargos como se nelle contem. 24º - Item mandão aos telheiros que cada anno facao entre si mordomo q teraa o Cuidado de arrecadar por seu officio o que cada hū for taxado para despesa da festa do Corpo de Deos, e assi de quaesquer outra pessoas que pelo tempo em diante occorrere. E o dinheiro que assi arrecadarem entregarão aos mordomos dos oleiros como a cabeça do offiçio, e os que forem examinados se Irão assentar no liuro do dito offiçio dos oleiros, e esto cõprirão sob pena de dous mil rs para as obras da cidade. 25º - E declarão que os oleiros não seruirão, no dia de corpo de deos mais que cõ doze castellos, e cõ seus oir nossa Snora de Agosto como he costume nos outros offiçios. 26º - E os juizes dos oleiros terão cargo de trinta em trinta dias vizitar as tendas dos offiçiaes e fazer correição cõ o escrivão e assi todas as mais vezes que lhes parecer e visitarão outrosi cõ cada hum dos Juizes da louça vidrada e branca e dos telheiros os offiçiaes dos ditos offiçios, e as obras que acharem que não são feitas como deuem tomarão e leuarão aos almotacees para se fazer nisso o que for Justiça e se dar o castigo ao official cõforme aa culpa que lhe for achada. E esta diligencia farão sem odio nem affeição nem outro algu modo ou espécie de maliçia. E os Juizes que nas ditas obras engano e falsidade achare e a dissimularem per qualquer via que Seia e não fezerem diligencia para se fazer a dita execução cõtra os culpados pagarão dez cruzados a metade para as obras da cidade e a outra para quem o accusar. 27º - E mandão aos offiçiaes dos ditos offiçios que quando quer que os ditos Juizes chegarem as suas tendas para lhas visitarem lhes obedeção e lhes mostrem as obras de seus offiçios que quiserem para verem se há alguas malfeitas e como não deuem para se fazer nellas execução sob pena de qualquer que desobediete for a cidade lhe dar por isso o castigo que lhe bem parcer da desobediençia que o tal official cometter cõtra os ditos Juizes ou qualquer delles o dito escrivão faraa auto e leuara a Camara para regimeto lhes acudão cõ diligencia, e fação nisso justiça. 28º - E qualquer official que for chamado per parte dos ditos Juizes e examinadores para algū ajuntamento ou para ver alguas obras sobre que aja diferença e for revel e não vier não tendo licita excusa de impedimento pagaraa duzentos rs a metade para a cidade e a outra para as despesas do offiçio os quais officiaes serão chamados e

requeridos pelo mordomo que seruir no tal tempo como he costume no dito offiçio. E o mordomo que deixar algu official por chamar pagaraa cinquoenta rs por cada hu. e qualqr porteiro do concelho que for requerido pelos ditos Juizes para fazer algua oenhora sobre a execução das ditas penas o faraa cõ diligencia sob pena de ser castigado. 29º - E nenhu offiçial dos ditos offiçios seraa tão ousado q tome he recolha em sua casa aprendiz nem obreiro que estiver cõ outro official em quanto durar o tempo que o tal obreiro ou aprendiz for obrigado a estar cõ o seu amo nem lhe fallaraa nem mandara fallar per outrem. Sob pena de qualqr que o contr.º fazer pagar dous mil rs a metade para a cidade e a outra para quem o accusar e o tal obreiro ou aprendiz tornaraa para casa do seu amo. 30º - E per este mandão aos almotacees das execuções meirinho da cidade e alcaides della que hora são e ao diante forem que sendo requeridos pelos ditos Juizes por algua cousa que seia necessaria para comprimento e execução do que toca a este regimeto lhes acudão cõ deligencia, e fação nisso Justiça. 31º - E mandão outrosi a qualquer porteiro do concelho e homes dos alcaides desta cidade que sendo requeridos pelos ditos examinadores para fazerem algua execução de sença ou mandado de almotaçees ou qualquer outra cousa que outrosi toque a cõprimento e execução deste regimento o cumprão e lhes seião obedientes. E não o fazendo assi a cidade lhes daraa por isso o castigo que merecerem. Appendix 2 Coimbra potters’ regiment (1623) (after Carvalho, 1921). Aos oito dias do mez de Julho de mil seiscentos e vinte e tres annos n’esta cidade de Coimbra e torre de camara d’ella aonde estavam juntos Jorge d’Andrade Correa, Juiz de Fora com alçada por sua Magestade n’esta cidade e termos, Francisco de Moraes e João Ferraz Velho vereadores e Lopo d’Andrade procurador geral da cidade e Francisco de Mariz um dos mesteres da meza todos juntos fizeram vereação e ouviram partes. Diogo de Carvalho Pinto o escrevi. N’esta camara se fez um regimento para os olleiros e malegueiros estando os mais d’elles presentes, que o aceitaram e o theor d’elle irá lançado n’este livro. Andrade Moraes, Ferraz Velho, Francisco de Maris, Andrade. Primeiramente assentaram que assim como há tres officios de ollaria, s. de louça branca, verde e amarella, e de barro singello, que d’hora em deante haja em cada um dos ditos officios seu juiz para examinar com algum adjunto cada um em seu officio, como se costuma e que n’estes exames sennão entremettam de um officio para outro. Que todos os aprendizes para se examinarem tenham seis annos inteiros aprendido com official aprovado e mostrem certidão d’elle na forma costumada, e antes pedirá licneça

179

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

à camara para o examinarem, e o juiz que sem ella o fizer pagará seis mil reis para a camara e accusador e de cada exame levará duzentos reis e o escrivão um tostão.

Appendix 3 Coimbra potters and malagueiros’ regiment (1573) (after Carvalho, 1921).

Quando alguem se examinar fará as peças seguintes, s. no officio de olleiro um cantaro, uma talha, um alguidar de sacco de pão, em presença do juiz, e as mais peças que elle ordenar; no officio de verde e amarelo fará uma fornada, em que irão um alguidar grande, e um tenor de almude; e no de branco fará uma botica com todas as peças que n’ella se requerem.

Aos vimte E seis dias do mes de majo de mill quinhentos sassenta E nove Anos em esta cidade De Coimbra E tore de vação della omde estavão Diogo de Castilho vereador e Juiz pela ordenação e Jorge Barbosa E Antº Ltam E o Dtor Pº Barbosa vereadores E Simão Trauacos procurador Da cidade estamdo presentes Jmo Frco e Pº Pdores dos vimte e quatro dos mesteres e estado asi todos Juntos fizerão vação e ouuyrão ptes Po cabrall o spvj.

Que ninguem possa pôr tenda sem ter as alfaias necessárias para o seu officio, s. no de louça branca, verde e amarella terão moinho, fornalhas, colheres, pisões e mais as peças necessarias em cada um dos officios de olleiros. Nos officios de vidrado se lançará a cada arroba de vidro seis arrates de areia, antes mais que menos, e quando algum se examinar o juiz estará presente a ver-lhe para a tempera do vidro e os terá preparados sem lhe faltar nada. Para louça singella o barro será terçado com areia, e não se colherá senão em Antezude ou em Alcarraques. Que de São Martinho não venha barro para louça alguma vidrada branca nem vermelha. Que ninguem possa coser louça na caldeira; e os que fizerem telha e tijollo o farão de muito bom barro e a ca quatro carros de barro se ha de misturar um de lodo, não mais: e serão obrigados a ter formas de têlha e tijôlo de alvenaria e forcado e a aferil-as cada anno com o aferidor da cidade. Que não possam cozer louça em forninho pequeno sem licença do juiz do officio. Que ninguem poderá desenfornar fornada alguma sem primeiro chamar o juiz do seu officio, o qual verá se a louça esta cosida como convem, e achando que o não está o fará coser quanto for necessario. Quando os juizes novos tomarem juramento, que os velhos lhe leam o regimento de seus officios; quando algum se examinar tomará juramento de guardar este regimento alem do mais que no velho se contem. Quando ficar de algum dos ditos officiais molher viúva, que d’hoje em deante não possa ter tenda aberta sem ter n’ella official examinado e approvado no officio que usar. Que ninguém faça louça com agoa suja, nem da runa, nem do charco e que tudo cumprirão com pena de seis mi, réis, metade para o accusador e outra para a cidade.

Regimento acerqua de como os oLeyros e malegros hão J nesta câmara pratiquarão que jha grande Dissolução Amtre os oLejros e malegros na louça que lavravão a quall logo quebraua. como a punha em quallquer seruiço das casas Do que todo o pouo se queixava por a muita perda que nisto Recebia cada huu em sua casa E querendo acudir a jso tomarão enformacão a maneira E Regimento que se teria para que a dita Lousa não quebrasse E avida enformacão deste caso p pás que bem emtenDião este negocio acharão que a dita lousa quebrava por jncõvenientes que nyso avia de que vsavão os Ditos oLejros e malegros e para boõ Regimento do povo e proveito delle asentarão e mãoDarão que do pregão deste em diamte nenhuu olejro nem malegro com pena de dez cruzados E da cadea lavre obra Allgua de lousa cõ ho baro do sitio e barejras de são Martinho do bispo por que este tall não presta pêra outro Efeito nem seruico se não pêra a telha E tijolo e sob a dita pena os ditos olejros nem malegros ho levarão nem mandarão leuar a dentro a suas casas senão aos Resios e lugares pcos onde costumão fazer e lavrar a dita telha e tijolo nem os carejros E outras partes lhe levarão o dito baro do ditio sitio se não Aos lugares omde fazem o dito tijollo e não a suas casas nem Aos ditos olejros lhes sera achado Dentro em suas casas o dito baro pêra que não tenhão ocasião de ho misturarem cõ baro do sitio dallquaraques de que se lavra a lousa sob pena de quem o contro fizer ou se lhe provar quallquer cousas Do sobredito paguar a dita pena. Item E asi mamdarão que toda a lousa vidrada fosse primeiro cosida em branquo que fosse vidrada aquell louca farião e lavrarião Dos baros dos sítios de treixomill e da povoa do bordallo misturamdo o dito baro tamto de huu como do outro por que por o exame que Era feito no dito baro de mistura tinhão enformacão que se temperava huu cõ o outro e Cõ isso serja o povo mjlhor seruido Sob pena de que o contrario fizer encore na dita pena. Item mandarão mais sob a dita pena que nenhum malegro nem outra quallquer pêra que niso tratar enforne fornada De lousa Despois De A ter vidrado Antes que ha meta no forno sem primeiro ser vista pello juiz do officio pêra ver E examinar Se estaa vidrada em cru o quall exame será assi feito peramte huu dos allmotaceis Da cidade cõ ho scripvão da almotacaria della os quaes lhes verão as casas pêra verem se tem outra louca mais que posão vidrar.

180

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Item que nenhuu olejro nem outra parte sob a dita pena lavre nem faca lousa allgua Senão cõ baro dallquaraques misturado cõ ho baro Dademea .ss. duas caradas de baro vermelho Dallquaraques ou dantoSede cõ hua carada de baro branquo Dademea. Item todo o olejro quamdo amassar baro pêra lavrar lousa o mostrara ao Juiz do officio pêra ver e examinar se leva Mistura allgua do baro do sitio de São Martinho que não serve senão pêra tijolo como Atras se cotem. Item mandarão mais sob as ditas penas que os officiais do dito officio venhão eleger Juizes para os ditos officios servirem em cada huu Anos os quaes virão eleger nesta câmara pera nella lhes ser tomados seus votos e se eleger sem sobornos Juizes de boas cõsciencias e Autos pera o tall cargo. Item E asi mais mandarão que Sob a dita pena nenhuu carejro que caretar o dito baro ho tragua senão pêra o vender per medida o quall venderão por cestos que sejão marquados e o preso per que o dito baro se haa de vender os Juizes do dito officio cõ os allmotaceis escrivão dallmotacaria lhes porão seus presos Justos E por os ditos presos de almotacaria venderão o dito baro sob pena de quem o cõtrario fizer encorrerem nas ditas penas de que mandarão fazer estas declarasõys de Acordos digo estas declarasõis De Acordos que asinarão Po carall o screvi cõ A Antrelinha em cru pás e nos Riscados bem cosida Antre Pº caral escrevi. Appendix 4 References to the pottery taken from Porto to England and other places by English merchants from the Livros da Portagem do Cabido da Sé do Porto. ADP/CABIDO/Lv.152/1668/fl. 24v. Em 24 de maio Despacho do navio per nome Santa/ Anna mestre João Mees de Bristol/ para donde vaj com a carga seguintte/ Thomas mally oito moyos de sal e vinte/ e cinco dúzias de louza e uma caixa de assucar Branco/ jurou o dito mestre não levar mais carga e sinou/ John Many ADP/CABIDO/Lv.155/1670/fl. 25v. Em 14 de julho/ despacho do pataxo per nome gisaidei/sva de que he mestre João Vitão vizinho/ de ghenac que vaj pera a cornoalha com a/ carga seguinte Nicolau Trancalhão vinte e quatro/ pipas e meã de azeite e oitenta du/zias de louca de vila nova e des arrobas/ de presuntos e hūu carro de louca ver/melha d avejro/ jurou o mestre nam levar mais nada/ e assinou John Vithbar ADP/CABIDO/Lv.172/1685/fl. 52 Em 8 de dezembro/ Despacho do na/vio per nome/ maria mestre João /Lho inglês que/ vaj pera a mesma tera Corim Benlarast dois milhei/ros de adualha e hūa canastra /de louça do norte/

Jurou o meste não levar mais /nada John Larapon ADP/CABIDO/Lv.174/1687/fl. 19v. Em 13 de março/ Despacho do Pataxo Sanfim/ mestre Guilherme Goden/ veio de Tapsham para a mesma com o seguinte Nataniel Roland e Companhia vinte e oito caixas/ de cera com setecentos e vinte arrobas /trinta pipas de azeite, quinze sacos de sumagre/ com cento e cinte arrobas três almudes de azeite com dezoito/ botijas doze presuntos dous barris com oito almudes/ de vinho quatro caixas de assucar branco hūu/ caixom de lou ça de stremos, dez caixas de doce de doce (sic) com quarenta arrates/ seis pipas de vinho maduro com setenta barris oito millheiros/ de limão cinco milheiros de laranja azeda/ pagou da malatosta do vinho setenta reais Jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e sinou/ William Godden ADP/CABIDO/Lv.174/1687/fl. 34 Em 23 de junho/ Despacho da pinaça Jonas mestre guilherme vivian/ veio de Londres pera o mesmo porto/ com o seguinte Joam Lel cento e sessenta milheiros de limam com/ trezentos e trinta e hūu caixoens e hūu caixam/ de lou ça de stremos, hūa pipa de vinho maduro com nove/ barris e seis barris de ghado/ Jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e assinou/ William Vivian ADP/CABIDO/Lv.136/1655/fl.9 Em 24 de Março/ Despacho do navio per nome a’/pra de que he mestre Daniel ginchy/ ingres pera as Barbadas com/ o seguinte/ Gualter maynostte setentta pipas de uinho de que deo de ma/latostas oitocentos e quarenta/ reais e duas pipas d azeite e dois/ caixoens de presuntos com 90 arrobas e seis caixas com 320 vaj de pano de linho/ e hua barqua de louça vermelha d Ovar e quinhentas/ formas e hua trouxinha/ ao Comoros e sehuas e duas pipas de alhos/ jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e signou/ Daniel gyychy ADP/CABIDO/Lv.136/1655/fl.9 Despacho do navio Per nome Pen/ba de que he mestre João Darrete/ que vaj pera as Barbadas com ho/ seguinte Bacharte PAxay sincoenta e coatro pipas de vinho de que deu/ de malatostas de que deu mil reais e vinte/ e duas pipas de azejte em boti/jas e dois moios de sal e duas/ caixas de pano de linho com/ 2v 250 varas dois caixoens de pre/suntos com 25 arrobas dois caixoens de/alhos e seis caixoens de louca ver/melha e vinte dúzias de lou/ca Branca e mais dojs caixas/ de louca vermelha de lasco que/ deu seiscentos e sincoenta reais. jurou o ditto mestre nam levar mais nada e hasinou John Bartholomew ADP/CABIDO/Lv.139/1656/fl.2 Em 8 de janeiro/ Despacho do navio per nome/ prehança de que he mestre dieguo/ smite inglês para as Barbadas/ com o seguinte/

181

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Burgaste Pixy trinta e sete/ pipas de vinho digi quarenta/ com vaj de que deu de malatostas quinhentos reais e duas/ pipas de azeite hūu moio de sal/ des milheiros de louca/ jurou o dito mestre não levar/ mais nada e assinou Robert Pampista Smyth ADP/CABIDO/Lv.139/1656/fl.4v. Em 20 de março/ Despacho do navio Per nome/ apreads de Cornby de que he mestre António Mayhonostre pera as Barbadas/ Burgaste Pixy sinco caixas com 50 arrobas de/presuntos seis pacotes/ com 560 varas de pano de linho/ goalter majnastre onze moios/ de sal ojtenta e seis pipas de vinho/ de que deu de malatostas mil/ e trinta reais e cento e trinta e sete/ arrobas de presuntos e trezentas varas de pano de linho baixo seis pipas/ de Azeite em botijas sinco/ carros de alhos seis canastras/ de louca vermelha de avejro/ seis caixoens de louca de villa/ nova com cem dúzias mais/ nove arrobas de presuntos/ jurou o dito mestre nao/ levar mais nada e asinou Anthony Maynorts ADP/CABIDO/Lv.165/1680/fl.31v. Em 8 de Agosto/ Despacho do navio Ramo de Thira mestre João Brun/ que vejo de Tapasão e vai pera a terra nova com a carga seguinte/ Item Leadepio de esquinha (…) cinco moyos/ de sal e cinco pipas de vinho e treze pipas d azeite e trinta duzeas de louca e duas caixas de branco/ jurou o mestre nam levar mais nada e signou/ John Brown ADP/CABIDO/Lv.165/1680/fl. 41 Em 25 de outubro/ Despacho da sumaqua per nome Del/fim mestre Samuel Testo que vejo de su/ga da terra nova que vai para a terra nova com o seguinte/ Guilherme Adão dois moyos de sal/ e meio milheiro d arcos e seis caixoens de louca e dois carros de louca verme/lha e hūa pipa d azeite e hūa/ caixa de assucar branco Jurou o meste não levar mais nada e asinou/ Samuell Test ADP/CABIDO/Lv.166/1681/fl. 33v Despacho do navio Raquel de que é mestre/ Roberto Curo de Samallo que vai pera a terra nova/ leva o seguinte Pêro Goldeu trinta e oito moyos/ de sal e duas pipas d azeite hūa pipa de vinho e hūa caixa d acucar/ branco e dois caixoins de louca e dous pacotes de pregos Jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e sinou/ Robert Court ADP/CABIDO/Lv.166/1681/fl. 38v Despacho da fragata fidelidade mestre/ Jorge Lou que vejo da terra nova para donde/ vai com a carga seguinte/ Guilherme Adão dezasseis moyos de sal e des carros/ de louca d aveyro e sete pipas d azeite e desasseis caixoens de louca branca/ e cinco caixas d açúcar branco e cinco arrobas de groselhas/ Jurou o mestre não levar mais nada he sinou/

George Loard ADP/CABIDO/Lv.170/1682/fl. 35 Despacho do Pataxo ventureiro mestre Roberto/ Glaque veyo de Inglaterra que vai pera a terra nova/ com escala pela ilha da madeira e leva o seguinte/ Guilherme Adão trinta pipas de vinho/ e tres pipas d azeite em cinco barris e desasseis carros de louça/ e quatro pacotes de pano de linho (…) ADP/CABIDO/Lv.172/1685/fl. 31 Despacho da sumaca renovação mestre Guilherme Ray/ vejo de Londres pera a terra nova com o seguinte/ João Esteves vinte e sete moios de sal quinze pipas de vinho duas caixas/ de assucar branco com dezoito arrobas de presuntos/ e três canastras, dous caixoens e cento e vinte dúzias de louça branca e duas pipas de azeite com/ duzentas e cincoenta botijas pagou malatostas das pipas de vinho trezentos e sessenta reais/ Henrique vintag pagou de malatostas do anno passado centro e trinta reais/ Jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e sinou/ William Ray ADP/CABIDO/Lv.179/1691/fl.19 Em 27 de abril Despacho do navio Santiago mestre nicolao Bardin veio de Londres pera a terra nova e leva o seguinte Roim Vander dorso e Companhia Requim sessenta e sete moios de sal, duas pipas de vinagre tres canastras com duzentos pares de çapatos e dous alqueires de cortiça e quatro arrobas de presuntos duas caixas de branco quatro barris com setenta e cinco alqueires de feijam e quarenta de bico do preto, dous carros de louça branca grossa.

ADP/CABIDO/Lv.183/1695/fl.47 Despacho do navio/ per nome esperança/ mestre Ricardo Corge/ veio de Londres e vai pera/ Inglaterra a nova com/ a carga seguinte Carlos Malome e Companhia des pipas de azeite e sete caixas de assucar branco/ cem dúzias de louça de Vila nova/ Jurou o mestre não levar/ mais carga e sinou Richard Younger Junior ADP/CABIDO/Lv. 155/1670/fl. 38 v Despacho do navio […] de que é mestre J[…] vizinho de Londres que/ vai pera a ilha da madeira com a carga seguinte/ Nicolau Tas[…]lham quatro carros de louca d Aveiro dezoito caixas/ de louca branca de Vila nova com quatrocentas/ dúzias e hūa pipa de azeite/ jurou o mestre nam levar mais nada e sinou/ John Syant ADP/CABIDO/Lv.156/1673/fl.24v. Em 25 de dezembro

182

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Despacho do navio per nome Saint/ James de he mestre Ricardo ond/ vejo de ingalaterra e vai pera a ilha da/ madeira leva a carga seguinte Nicolau bravalhão cem carros de louça de aveyro e duas mil formas de barro/ e vinte e cinco pipas de azeite e quatro/ milheiros de arcos e dezoito caixoens de louça branca com trezentas e trinta/ dúzias (…) jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e sinou Richard Hond ADP/CABIDO/Lv. 165/1680/fl.41 Despacho do Pataxo per nome Reca/dacam mestre Artur Smite vejo de/ Londres vaj pera a Ilha da ma/deira com o seguinte/ Guilherme Adão vinte carros de louça vermelha e des caixoens/ de louca branca com quatrocentas dúzias e trezentas dúzias de chapeos de boga e hūu fardo com pano de linho e hūu fondo com presuntos e dous milheiros de doces/ jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e asinou Artur Smith ADP/CABIDO/Lv.170/1682/fl.44 Despacho do Pataxo Flor do Mam mestre bernardo/ Convento veio de Londres para a ilha da madeira com o seguinte/ David Botsloi e Companhia sete milheiros e meio d arcos/ e três caixoens de louca e cincoenta dúzias de louça branca de villa nova Jurou o mestre não levar mais nada e signou Bernard Convent ADP/CABIDO/Lv.185/1699-1700/fl.8v Despacho da fragata Lellos mestre cristovam monz/ veio de Inglaterra nova e vai para a ilha da madeira com o seguinte/ Timóteo Ayres e Companhia mil e duzentos alqueires/ de sal e três carros de louça vermelha de Avey/ro trinta arrobas de presuntos e hūa pipa de vinho e cem/ varas de pano de linho de malatostas doze reais/ Jurou o mestre não levar mais carga algūa e assinou/ Christopher Monk ADP/CABIDO/Lv.170/1682/fl.34 Em 20 de iulho Despacho do navio saudade/ mestre Samuel hille veyo de Lon/dres e vai pera a ilha do faial/com o seguinte/ guilherme Adão corenta/ mojos de sal e dês pipas/ d azeite com quinhentas boti/jas e oito bar/ris e cinco carros de louca com des caixoens/ com quinhentas dúzias e cinco pipas e três canas/tras com desasseis e des e sessenta e dous milheiros d arcos pagou malalostas duzentas e quarenta reais/ nataniel manuell duas caixas de louca branca com sessenta dúzias pagou pello mestre setenta e duas reais. pero baldim oito carros de louca jurou o mestre não levar mais nada he sinou Samuel Lyu ADP/CABIDO/Lv.182/1685/fl. 229

Despacho do navio a Bragista, inglês que vai desta cidade pera a ilha terceira António Francisco cinco mil novecentos e oitenta moios de sal, quarenra/ e dous carros de louca bermelha d Aveiro, oitenta dúzias de louca Bran/ca de villa nova. Appendix 5 References to Portuguese productions in English port books London E190/40/6 London vj Aprill 1637 In the Christo Maior master a Porto António Goodin ijc plates E190/51/8 fl 5 London xvii January 1666 Andrew murfad in Lisbon 2. xxxc pantiles - - - - - - - - X E 190/51/8 fl. 44 Michael Levy per Lemos a Port clxij onions and White plates - - - - - - -- - viijc - - ij E190/52/4 Xxij May 1669 Simon Coon in navo sua a St Anto 8. iiij fflandres tiles E190/52/5 Primo September 1668 Isac Alvares in James at in Jno Johnsom a Lisbon 6. 1 box oh earthen dishes E190/56/1 fl. 32 London xx January 1671 John Ashby in Ruho partindge a Lisbon (…) xx boxes china ware (…) E190/56/1 fl. 44 London xi febbruary 1671 Richard Can in navo sua a Lisbon 18. ij chests of Eartehn ware at xx - - - - - - xx - - - - - xx E190/56/1 fl. 94 London xxvj March 1671 Stephen Boanaft in Rich Women a Lisbon 2. j chest White ware xiic chests White sugar - - - - - xvj - - -iiij E 190/56/1 fl. 99 v London xxix March 1671 Theodore Carrow in Ruth Warner a Lisbon 75. 1 box of Earthen Ware at lc - - - - - - iijc - - - - - - - xij c E190/56/1 fl. 134 London xxv Aprill 1671 Samuel Miro in John Simond a Lisbon 23. 1 chest of Earthenware at vij - - - - - - x - - - - -vij E 190/64/1 fl. 18v

183

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

London viij January 1675 Theodore Rnoenos Master in Fran Witham a Lisbon 53. ij chests buckets and Earthenware j box aweet matts ij boxes origines j box oyle iij gallons liquor j case bottle sweet water free for Lord Troter

London xx August 1680 Theodore Cluttor boosle in Peter Sucher a Lisbon Earthen ware val at iii &

E 190/64/1 fl. 55 London xxx January 1675 Richard March in ffrances Wilthow a Lixboa 48. ij chests Port. Earthenware at ij - - - - - x- - - - - -iij

E 190/93/1 xxiij february 1679 Albert Williams in Vond Doncalf ab oPorto j pantiles

E190/65/1 Jar Lunds Maggis in Captain Wills Raw a Lixboa 53. ij Chests Bodnastts Earthen Wares v Boxes Sweets/ Mdatos vj Sunº Box ij Box as Oringos j barr oyle ij / Bottolles or jarrs of Lignon j Lilloll of sweet Wallors / 1 ffardoll q xx dyards Hourd Cloath all fardo of Costom / per White Tres Water Datois

E190/102/1 Primo march 1681 Domingues ffrancia in navo Dorandos a Lisbon 15. & ch. earthen ware al xvij

E190/69/1 fl. 178 v London xxiij May 1677 John Graves in Chan cotton dollar a Lixboa 47. 1 box Earthen ware at iijc - - - - - - iijc - - - - -- - - -xc

Lxxxx & flower brasco at xxij ps Earthenware at xxx ½ ton bacon

xxvij august 1681 William Birclain Captain Trolacony a Lisbon 22. j box ap ix doz dishes White port poms London xxiiij December 1681 In Hoathen in William Dorandos a Lisbon Earthen ware at iij

E190/69/1 fl. 229 London xxº July 1677 Rheenos Matio Master Captain Salmon a Lisbon 100. iiij chests earthen pots viij boxes sweet meets iij lamos a box of bacon iiij Bond sausages ij tons if cheese ic café bottles. Free for Lord Trereso Wart

E190/114/7 London iv Aprill 1683 Timoteo De Faria in Nash Wakeman a Lixboa 5. 1 chest Earthen ware at vc - - - - - - viij - - - - j (…) Manuel Ricardo Luna ad in Walter Lyle a Lixboa 12. ij chests Earthenware at x - - - - -xij - - - - - - iiij

E190/75/1 fl. 135 London 29th April 1678 Robert Whiting in Robert Eduylor a porto j chest ½ single plates - - - - - v - - - - - viij ob

London v Aprill 1683 Manuel Ricardo Luna in Walter Lyle a Lisbon Damian predict Lxxvj harmed plates - - - - - -x - - - - - - xij

London 12 Junii 1678 Cco Alcon in Nash Gromthom a Lixa 8. iij chests 20c plates - - - - - - iij - - - - - xvij

E190/114/8 London xii ffebruary 1682 Port Enbaissador in Edmund Dawson a Lisbon ij chests iiij pots xlvj marmelada cx succads, vij cheeses iiij gallons Orange flower water j busholer, vi wax candles, vc chocolat xiij dozen little cups and vj cups with paint at xviijc - - - - - - xviij - - - - x

E190/78/1 fl. 60 London xxxj January 1677 William Unberland im William Seal a Porto 25. One box qt fifty five pantiles E190/85/1 fl. 184 George Willowghby in ffrances Appolby a Lisbone ij brushols pease figs, i chest portigall white ware at ijc iiij bund matts at xc subsidy xbij: ic E190/90/1 xxiiij january 1687 Jan Eyros in Jnº footchor a ffigueira lx ix p ixiii pantiles E190/92/1 London iij June 1680 José Dolli in Theodoro foramore a Lisbon

E190/131/1 xxix january 1684 Allan Aesworth in Geo Littlefame a ffigueira 53. 1 box Earthenware at ij - - - iij - - - x Samuel Sale out of Lisbon 54. x chests foot gally tyles London iij May 1685 Jno Southern in ffrances Ravo a Port 68. xii Cash swroring Earth xiit London vij May 1685 Pholl Hublon in navo sua a Port 64. Ij Chests xlviij vazes E190/143/1

184

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

London xj ffebruary 1685 Thimothy Fernand In Jacobs Sand a St. Maria 4. j box j barrel of Earthenware vallued at xxxc E190/158/1 – fl 340 v London xxv September 1696 John Tyler in navo sua a Lisbon 1 chest 25 baskets White sugar j chest Earthenware vala t iij - - - - - viij - - - - - x Bristol E190/1137/2 fl 12v In the Isabella of Bristol from Lisbon 1. Jon Waweu 17 cashes o oyle at 7th 900 milvees iiii plates Exeter E 190/953/1 fl. 9 v v April 1655 In the Hoston of Sivonray William Boaven master and merchant Ffifteen dozenn of earthen ware twenty busholl of Portugall salt Xxv May 1655 In the Hopewalt bagland Hepon Oliver John Boel Thirty busholle of Portugal Salt double wine and ffifteen dozen of Earthenware.

185

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

REFERENCES ALARCÃO, J. (1997) – Sobre a variabilidade da cultura material, Almadan, II série, nº 6, pp. 69-71. ALBUQUERQUE, M.; LUCENA, V. (2008) – O estudo da cerâmica arqueológica, in: Actas das 4as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 355-366. ALBUQUERQUE, P. (2008) – A Faiança Portuguesa – demarcador cronológico na arqueologia brasileira, in: Actas das 4as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e PósMedieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 221-270. ALLAN, J. (1983) – Some post-medieval documentary evidence for the trade in ceramics. In P. Davey e R. Hodges. Ceramics and Trade: the production and distribution of later medieval pottery in north-west Europe: papers derived from the proceedings of the Medieval Pottery Research Group’s annual conference at Hull, 1980. Sheffield: Department of Prehistory and Archaeology – University of Sheffield. ALLAN, J. (1984) – Medieval and Post Medieval Finds from Exeter, 1971-1980. Exeter: Exeter City Council. ALLAN, J. (1994) – Imported Pottery in South-West England, c. 1350-1550, Medieval Ceramics, 18, pp. 45-50. ALLAN, J.; BARBER, J. (1992) – A Seventeenth century pottery group from Kitto Institut, Plymouth. In. D. Gaimster e M. Redknap. Everyday and Exotic Pottery from Europe, c.650-1900, Studies in Honor of John G. Hurst. Exeter: Oxbow Books. pp. 225-247. ALMEIDA, M.; NEVES, M.; CAVACO, S. (2001) – Uma Oficina de Produção de Faiança em Gaia nos séculos XVII e XVIII. In Itinerário da Faiança de Porto e de Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp. 144-145. ALVES, M. (1953) – Estudo sobre a cerâmica popular de Estremoz. Lisboa: s.n. AMORIM, I. (1998) – A olaria de Aveiro, no séc. XVIII: continuidade e desenvolvimento. Olaria. 2. Barcelos. Museu de Olaria, pp. 70-80. AMOURIC, H; THIRIOT, J. (1995) – Les Moulins dans l’atelier du poitier, in: Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 369-383.

ANDREWS, R. (1985) – Trade, Plunder, and Settlement: Maritime Enterprise and the Genesis of the British Empire, 1480–1630. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ANTÓNIO, J. (2006) – Intervenção Arqueológica no Castelo de Alcobaça. Campanhas de 2002-2004. Almadan. 14. Almada, pp. 23-32. APPADURAI, A. (1986) – Commodities and the politics of value. In The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3-63. ARRUDA, A.; HENRIQUE, P. (2004) – António Capucho: retrato do homem através da colecção: cerâmica portuguesa do século XVI ao século XX, Porto: Civilização. AZINHAL, A. (1964) – Memórias sobre os barros de Estremoz. Lisboa: Panorama. BAART, J. (1987) – Faiança Portuguesa Escavada no Solo de Amesterdão, In Faiança Portuguesa 1600-1660. Amesterdão: s.n. BAART, J. (1988) – Faiança Portuguesa, 1600-1660. Um estudo sobre achados e colecções de museus, in: Portugueses em Amesterdão 1600-1680. Amesterdão: De Bataafsche Leeuw. BAART, J. (1990) – Ceramic Consumption and supply in early modddern Amsterdam: local production and long distance trade, in: Work in Towns. 850-1850, Leicester: Leicester University Press, pp. 74-85. BAART, J. (1992) – Terra Sigilatta from Estremoz Portugal, in: Everyday and Exotic Pottery from Europe, c.650-1900, Studies in Honor of John G. Hurst. Exeter: Oxbow Books, pp. 273-278. BAART, J. (1994) – Dutch Redwares. Medieval Ceramics. 18, pp. 19-27. BAART, J (2007) – Een Portugese fruitschaal, in: Hoogteputen uit Hoornse Bodem, Hoorn: Uniepers Uitgevers. BAIÃO, A. (1936) – Episódios dramáticos da inquisição portuguesa, Lisboa: Seara Nova. BARBOSA, T.; CASIMIRO, T. e MANAIA, R. (2009) – A household pottery group from Aveiro (Portugal). Medieval Ceramics, 37, pp. BARRADAS, J. (1952) – Manuel Cargaleiro: exposição de cerâmica. Lisboa: Secretariado Nacional de Informação.

186

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

Place/Thames Street, Greenwich (HOF04), Compass Archaeology rep.

BARREIRA, P.; DÓRDIO, P.; TEIXEIRA, R. (1995) – 200 anos de cerâmica na Casa do Infante: do século XVI a meados do século XVIII, in: Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 145-184.

BLAIR, I. (2005) – Roman and medieval buildings, an assemblage of rare 18th-century glass, and other finds from 15-17 King Street, London EC2, London Archaeologist, vol. 10, pp. 264-270.

BARROS, L. (1984) – Trabalhos arqueológicos nos Paços do Concelho de Almada, Almadan, 1ª série, nº 3, pp. 2527.

BLOCKLEY, K.; HALFPENNY, I. (2002) – Aberglasney House and Gardens, archaeology, history and architecture. Oxford: B.A.R. British Series.

BARROS, L.; HENRIQUES, F. (2003) – Rua da Judiaria: um Celeiro nos arrabaldes da vila, in: Actas das 3as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 135-144.

BOUZA ALVAREZ, F. (1999) – Cartas para duas infantas meninas: Portugal na correspondência de D. Filipe I para as suas filhas (1581-1583), Lisboa: Dom Quixote.

BARROS, L.; CARDOSO, G. e GONZALEZ, A. (1999) – Primeira notícia do forno de Santo António da Charneca – Barreiro, in 1as Jornadas Arqueológicas e do património da Corda Ribeirinha Sul. Barreiro: Câmara Municipal do Barreiro. BARROS, L.; CARDOSO, G.; GONZALEZ, A. (2003) – Primeira notícia do forno da Quinta de Santo António da Charneca, in: Actas das 3as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 295-310. BARTELS, M. (2003) – A cerâmica portuguesa nos países baixos (1525-1650) : uma análise sócio-económica baseada nos achados arqueológicos, Estudos/Património. nº 5, pp. 70-82 BARTON, K. J. (1984) – The excavation of a Medieval Bastion at St. Nicholas’s Almshouses, King Street, Bristol, Medieval Archaeology, vol. 8, p. 181- 212. BASTO, J. (1934) – A cerâmica portuguesa: conferência realizada na Sociedade de Geografia em 20 de Dezembro de 1934 por convite da Associação Industrial Portuguesa. Lisboa: Tipographia da Emp. do Anuário Comercial.

BOUZA ALVAREZ, F. (2000) – Portugal no tempo dos Filipes: política, cultura, representações (1580-1668). Lisboa: Cosmos. BOWSHER, J. (2007) – 30-35 Botolph Lane, 29-31 Monument Street, London EC3, Londres: Published by Museum of London BRACANTE, E., (1981) – O Brasil e a Cerâmica Antiga. São Paulo: s.n. BRANDÃO, J. (1990) – Grandeza e Abastança da Cidade de Lisboa em 1552, Lisboa: Livros Horizonte. BRIGHAM, B.; NIELSEN, R. (2006) – Roman and later development east of the forum and Cornhill: Excavations at Lloyd's Register, 71 Fenchurch Street, City of London, MoLAS Monograph 30, London: Museum of London Archaeology Service. BRITO, A. (1950) – Estudo sobre a Indústria de Cerâmica. Boletim da Direcção Geral dos Serviços Industriais. BRITTON, F. (1987) – London Delftware. London: Museum of London.

BEIRANTE, A. (1995) – Évora na Idade Média, Lisboa: Gulbenkian.

BROWN, C. G. (1986) – Plymouth Excavations: The Medieval Waterfront of Woolster Street and Castle Street: Finds Catalogue, Plymouth Museum Archaeological Series 3.

BERNARDA, J. da (2001) – A louça de Alcobaça, Lisboa: Asa.

BROWN, D. (1993) – The imported pottery of late medieval Southampton. Medieval Ceramics. 17, pp. 77-81.

BINCHY, D. (1921) – An Irish Ambassador at the Spanish Court, 1569-1574, Irish Quartely Revue, vol. 14, nº 53, pp. 102-119.

BROWN, D. (1995) – Documentary sources as evidence for the exchange and consumption of pottery in 15th century Southampton, in: Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 429-433.

BLACKMORE, L. (1994) – Pottery, the port and the populace: the imported pottery of London 1300-1600 (Part 1). Medieval Ceramics. 18, pp. 29-44. Blackmore, L. (2005) – Assessment of the Pottery and Kiln Furniture from Wood Wharf, Horseferry

BROWN, D. (2002) – Pottery in Medieval Southampton c. 1070-1530. Bootham: Council for British Archaeology.

187

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

BROWN, S. (1996) - Berry Pomeroy Castle, Proceedings Devon Archaeological Society, nº 56.

Caminhos da Porcelana. Dinastias Ming e Quing, Calvão. (1999) – Lisboa: Fundação Oriente.

BROWN, S. (1997) – Berry Pomeroy Castle (guidebook). London: English Heritage.

CASSON, L.; COWAN, C. (1999) – 48 St John's Square, London: MOLAS (texto policopiado).

BURKE, T. (1940) – The Streets of London Through the Centuries. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd.

CAPELA, J. (1996) – A produção de cerâmica do Norte (séc. XII-XX). Olaria. 1. Barcelos. Museu de Olaria, pp. 3-10.

BYRNE, N. (4 Janeiro de 2008) – The Life and Times of Luke Wadding. The Munster Express. CAETANO, M. (1959) – A história da organização dos mesteres na cidade de Lisboa, SCIENTIA IVTIDICA, t. VIII, nº 39 (4), pp. 3-15. CALADO, R. (1980) – Azulejos. Cinco Séculos do Azulejo em Portugal. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. CALADO, R. (1987) – Aspectos da Faiança Portuguesa do século XVII e alguns antecedentes históricos In Faiança Portuguesa 1600-1660. Amesterdão: s.n. CALADO, R. (1988) – Catálogo da Exposição do Simpósio Internacional de Cerâmica – Alcobaça – 87. Lisboa: Fundação Gulbenkian. CALADO, R. (1992) – Faiança Portuguesa, sua evolução até ao início do século XX. Lisboa: Correios de Portugal. CALADO, R. (1992a) – O conhecimento da porcelana da China e o início da produção de faiança portuguesa In Do Tejo aos Mares da China, uma Epopeia Portuguesa. Queluz: Palácio Nacional de Queluz/ Museé dês Arts Asiatiques – Guimet. CALADO, R. (1993) – A porcelana da China como fonte de inspiração da decoração da faiança portuguesa no século XVII. Oceanos. nº 14. CALADO, R. (2001) – Breve história da faiança em Portugal, In Itinerário da Faiança em Porto e Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp. 13-26. CALADO, R. (2003) Faiança Portuguesa da Casa Museu Guerra Junqueiro, Séculos XVII-XVIII. Porto: Câmara Municipal do Porto. CALADO, R. (2005) – Faiança Portuguesa. Roteiro Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga. Lisboa: Instituto Português dos Museus.

CARDOSO, G. (2007) – Sondagens arqueológicas no Convento de Nossa Senhora das Neves (Serra de Montejunto, Cadaval) in Actas do 1º Encontro de Cultura e Património do Cadaval, Cadaval: Câmara Municipal do Cadaval, pp. 43-82. CARDOSO, G.; RODRIGUES, S. (1991) – Alguns tipos de cerâmica dos séculos XI a XVI encontradas em Cascais. In Actas do IV Congresso Internacional de Cerâmica Medieval no Mediterrâneo Ocidental. Mértola: Campo Arqueológico de Mértola, pp. 45-62. CARDOSO, G., e RODRIGUES S. (1999) – Tipologia e cronologia de cerâmicas do século XVI, XVII e XVIII encontradas em Cascais. Arqueologia Medieval. 7. Mértola. Campo Arqueológico de Mértola. pp. 193-212. CARDOSO, N. (1932) – Ceramica e Tapeçaria. Lisboa : N. C. Cardoso CARNEIRO, E. (1962) – Donde vem a confusão entre as louças do Prado e as louças de Barcelos. Jornal de Barcelos. Barcelos. nº 646. CARMONA, R.; SANTOS, C. (2005) – Olaria da Mata da Machada. Cerâmicas dos Séculos XV-XVI. Barreiro: Câmara Municipal do Barreiro. CARNEIRO, E. (1969) – O Museu de Cerâmica Popular Portuguesa: será uma realidade porque era e é de facto desejado. Barcelos: Museu de Cerâmica Popular Portuguesa. CARVALHO, F. (1910) – Algumas horas na minha livraria: artigos, notas e apontamentos: colligidos por Francisco Augusto Martins de Carvalho. Coimbra: Tipographia. Nacional. CARVALHO, J. (1921) – A Cerâmica Coimbrã no século XVI, Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade. CARVALHO, J. (1926) – Notas de arte e crítica. Porto: Moreira-Editores

CALADO, R.; FERNANDES, I.; REBELO, E.; RAMOSHORTA, C. (2008) - A Fábrica de Faianças das Caldas da Rainha. De Bordalo Pinheiro à actualidade: a sua história. Lisboa: Civilização Editora.

CASIMIRO, T.M. (2004) – As cerâmicas modernas da encosta de Sant’ana (Lisboa), Lisboa: Universidade Nova de Lisboa (texto policopiado).

CALLIXTO, T. (1972) – Cerâmica de Alcobaça. Paris: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

CASIMIRO, T.M. (2006) – Portuguese faience in London, London Archaeologist, Volume 11, No 5, pp. 115-121.

188

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

CASIMIRO, T.M. (2009) – A Faiança Portuguesa nas Ilhas Britânicas: um projecto de investigação. Almadan. 2ª série. nº 16. Adenda electrónica, p. VIII. CASIMIRO, T.M. (2011) – Portuguese Faience, in: PASSMORE, A., REED, S. e ALLAN, J. Archaeological Investigations around Crediton Parish Church 19842007, Proceedings Devon Archaeological Society, 68.

Catálogo da exposição de cerâmica ulissiponense: dos fins do século XVI aos princípios do século XIX (1936). Lisboa: Câmara Municipal. Catálogo da Exposição de Documentos e Obras de Arte Relativos à História de Lisboa. (1947). Lisboa: Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga.

CASIMIRO. T.M. (forthcoming) – Portuguese faience in the South-West Country, in: West Country Households. Exeter: Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology.

Catálogo illustrado da Exposição Retrospectiva de Arte Ornamental Portugueza e Hespanhol. (1882) – Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional.

CASIMIRO, T. M.; SANTOS, I. (2010) – Faianças no Largo de Santos. (http://www.niaera.org/component/option,com_myblog/show,0203--Faiancas-do-Largo-de-Santos.html/Itemid,57/).

CATARINO, H. (1992) – Cerâmicas tardomedievais/modernas do Alto Alentejo: a escavação de um silo na Vila do Crato. In Actas das 1as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 129-136.

CASTELO-BRANCO, F. (1990) – Lisboa Seiscentista. Lisboa: Livros Horizonte. CASTRO, A.; SEBASTIAN, L. (2002) – “Mosteiro de S. João de Tarouca: 700 anos de História da cerâmica”. Estudos / Património. Lisboa: IPPAR - Departamento de Estudos. 3 p, 165-177. CASTRO, A.; SEBASTIAN, L. (2003) – “A Componente de Desenho Cerâmico na Intervenção Arqueológica no Mosteiro de S. João de Tarouca”. Revista Portuguesa de Arqueologia. Lisboa: Instituto Português de Arqueologia. 6 (2): 545-560. CASTRO, A.; SEBASTIAN, L. (2003a) – “A Faiança de Revestimento dos Séculos XVII e XVIII no Mosteiro de S. João de Tarouca (Intervenção Arqueológica 1998-2001)”. Estudos / Património. Lisboa: IPPAR - Departamento de Estudos. 4: 168-179. CASTRO, A.; SEBASTIAN, L. (2008) – Faiança dos séculos XVII e XVIII no Mosteiro de São João de Tarouca, in: Actas das 4as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 325-334. CASTRO, F. (2001) – Caracterização química e microestrutural de faianças portuguesas. In Itinerário da Faiança de Porto e de Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp. 167-178. CASTRO, F. (2004) – Bases de dados analíticos sobre cerâmicas abtigas portuguesas interesse para a investigação arqueológica. Olaria. Estudos Arqueológicos, Históricos e Etnográficos, 3, pp. 105-110. CASTRO, F.: GOMES, P.; TEIXEIRA, F. (2003) – 200 anos de cerâmica na Casa do Infante – Porto (século XVI a meados do século XVIII): identificação visual e química dos fabricos, in Actas das 3as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 223-230.

CHAVES, L. (1925) – Os barristas portugueses: (nas escolas e no povo). Coimbra: Impressa da Universidade. CHEW, S.; PEARCE, J (1999) – A pottery assemblage from a 17th-century revetted channel at 12-26 Magdalen Street. Southwark, London Archaeologist, vol.9 (1) pp. 22-29. CLEARY, R. M.; HURLEY, M. F.; TWOHIG, E. S. (1997) – Skiddy’s Castle and Christ Church, Cork. Excavations 1974-77 by D.C. Twohig. Cork: Cork Corporation. CORREIA, M.R. (2001) – Colecções de faiança do Porto e Gaia in Itinerário da Faiança do Porto e Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp.183-240. CORREIA, M (2005) – Um forno de época moderna em Alcochete, Almadan, II série, nº 13, p. 139. CORREIA, M. (2005a) – Um forno de produção cerâmica dos séculos XV e XVI, em Alcochete. Revista Musa. 2, pp. 67-73. CORREIA, V. (1918) – Oleiros e Pintores de Louça e Azulejo de Lisboa Olarias (Anjos). Atlântida. nº 29, p.531-50. CORREIA, V. (1918) – Azulejadores e pintores de azulejos de Lisboa, olarias de Santa Catarina e Santos. Águia. 2ª série, vol. XIII, nº 77-78. CORREIA, V. (1919) – Oleiros Quinhentistas de Lisboa. Porto: Tipographia da Renascença. CORREIA, V. (1922) – Azulejos datados. Lisboa: Imprensa Libanio da Silva. CORREIA, V. (1926) – Livro dos Regimentos dos officiaes mecanicos da mui nobre e sempre leal cidade de Lixboa (1572). Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade.

189

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

CORREIA, V. (1956) – As primeiras faianças e azulejos lisos em Lisboa. In: Azulejos, London: The Connoisseur. CÔRTE-REAL, A. (2001) - Mosteiro de Santa Clara-aVelha de Coimbra: novos dados para o seu conhecimento: operação arqueológica 1995-1999, Coimbra: Universidade de Coimbra (texto policopiado). COSTELLO, P. (1999) – Dublin Castle in the life of the Irish Nation. Dublin: Wolfhound Press Ltd. COTTER, J. (2000) – Post-Roman Pottery from Excavations in Colchester, 1971-85. CRUZ, A. (1943) – Oleiros do Porto e Além Rio: subsídios para a história da cerâmica portuense. Boletim Cultura da Câmara Municipal do Porto. vol. 5. Porto. Câmara Municipal do Porto, pp. 5-14. CRUZ, A (1942a) – Oleiros do Porto e Vila Nova. Boletim Cultura da Câmara Municipal do Porto. vol. 5. Porto. Câmara Municipal do Porto, pp. 135-144. CRUZ, M. (2003) – Projecto Garagem Avenida Coimbra. Relatório de Acompanhamento e Escavação arqueológica (texto policopiado). CULLINGFORD, C. (1988) – A History of Poole, Poole: Phillimore & Co Ltd. CUNHA, F. (1932) – Notas etnográficas sobre Barcelos CUNHA, R. (2006) – O sítio e a arquitectura de uma casa quinhentista na Ribeira Santarém: ensaio tipológico das casas urbanas de frente estreita, Revista da Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, nº 18, pp. 13-36. DEAGAN, K. (1987) – Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500-1800, vol. 1, Ceramics, Glassware and Beads, Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. DEFOE, W. (1959) - A tour through England and Wales, London: J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd.

D’INTINO, R. (1998) – Objectos do Quotidiano. In Nossa Senhora dos Mártires: a Última Viagem. Lisboa: Verbo. DIOGO, A.; TRINDADE, L. (1992) – Cerâmicas de Lisboa provenientes de contextos datados. Materiais de uma lareira destruída pelo terramoto de 1755. In Actas das 1as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 163-170. DIOGO, A.; TRINDADE, L. (1995a) – Cerâmicas da época do terramoto de 1755 provenientes de Lisboa. In Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e PósMedieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 349-354. DIOGO, A.; TRINDADE, L. (1995b) – Duas intervenções arqueológicas em Lisboa (Rua da Madalena e Rua do Ouro. Revista de Arqueologia da Assembleia Distrital de Lisboa. Lisboa. Assembleia Distrital de Lisboa, pp. 63-74. DIOGO, A.; TRINDADE, L. (1995c) – Intervenção arqueológica na Rua João do Outeiro, nº 36-44, na Mouraria em Lisboa. In Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 257-266. DIOGO, A.; TRINDADE, L. (2001) – Intervenção arqueológica de emergência na Rua dos Correeiros em Lisboa. As sondagens 2,6,7, 9 e 10. Revista Portuguesa de Arqueologia. Lisboa. Instituto Português de Arqueologia, pp. 63-74. DIVERS, D. (2004) – Excavations at Deptford in the Site of the East India Company dockyards at the Trinity almshouses, London. Post-Medieval Archaeology. 38, pp. 17-132.

DELDERFIEL, E. (1952) – The North Devon Story, Exmouth: Raleigh Press.

DÓRDIO, P.; TEIXEIRA, R.; SÁ, A. (2001) – Faianças do Porto e Gaia: o recente contributo da arqueologia. In Itinerário da Faiança do Porto e Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp. 117-166.

DELHOYO, J. ELLIOT, A.; SARGATAL, J. (1997) – Handbook of Birds of the World, 14 vols, Barcelona: Lynx Edicions.

DOUGLAS, A. (2002) – Tobacco Dock, 130-162 The Highway. Archaeological report, Londres: Pre-construct Archaeology (texto policopiado).

DESROCHES, J. (1998) – Cerâmicas orientais e porcelanas. In Naufrágio da Nossa Senhora dos Mártires. Lisboa: Expo 98.

DREY, R. (1984) – Les pots de pharmacie du mond entier. Faiences et porcelaines pharmaceutiques. 11501850. Paris: Vilo-la port vert.

DIDEROT, D.; D'ALEMBERT, J. B. (1759) – Encyclopédie ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, par une societé de gens de lettres .

EDGELER, A. (1990) – The Art Potters of Barnstaple, Alton: Nimrod Press.

DIETZ, B. (1986) – Overseas trade and metropolitan growth. In London 1500-1700: The Making of the Metropolis. London: Longman, pp. 115-140.

ESTEVES, L. (2003) – A Tecnologia de uma Fábrica: materiais e produtos na Real Fábrica de Louça, in: Real Fábrica de Louça ao Rato, Lisboa: Instituto Português dos Museus, pp. 142-165.

190

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

ETCHEVARNE, C. (2007) – A faiança portuguesa do século XVII na Bahia, Património Estudos, nº 10, pp. 118-124. Exposição de cerâmica antiga europeia e oriental: catálogo (1956), Évora. s.n. Exposição cerâmica para o Natal: do estúdio de cerâmica de arte (1954), Lisboa: SNI. Exposição de Faianças Portuguesas de Farmácia (1972), Lisboa, XXXII, Congresso Internacional de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Lisboa, Biblioteca Nacional de Lisboa. Exposição Retrospectiva de Arte Ornamental Portuguesa e Hespanhola celebrada em Lisboa em 1882 sob a protecção de Sua Majestade el-Rei o Senhor D. Fernando II (1882), Lisboa: Impr. Nacional. Faianças artísticas, tapeçarias de Arraiolos e arqueologia. Museu Municipal de Portalegre (1952). Coimbra: Tipografia Casa Minerva. Faiança Portuguesa: catalogo-guia, Museu Nacional Soares dos Reis (1949) 2ª ed. Porto: Tipografia Moderna. FALCÃO, J. (1992) – O Prato de Faiança Seiscentista Portuguesa do Museu Nacional de Cerâmica de Valência (Espanha). Santiago do Cacém Valência: Real Sociedade Arqueológica Lusitana. Ministério da Cultura de España. FALK, A. (2007) – Portugiesische Fayencen in Lubeck, in: Archaologie der fruhen Neuzeit, pp. 93-100. FANNING, T.; HURST, J. (1975) – A mid seventeenth century pottery group and other objects from Ballyhack, Co. Wexford. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. vol. 75, pp. 103-121.

e Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp.2951. FERNANDES, I; REBELO, E. (2008) – Modos de fazer faiança caldense: desde a extracção da argila à comercialização da louça, in: A Fábrica de Faianças das Caldas da Rainha. De Bordalo Pinheiro à actualidade: a sua história. Lisboa: Civilização Editora, pp. 91-175. FERNANDES, I. C.; CARVALHO, A. (1995) – Conjuntos cerâmicos pós-medievais de Palmela. In Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 211-256. FERNANDES, I. C.; CARVALHO, A. (2003) – A loiça seiscentista do Convento de São Francisco de Alferrara (Palmela). In Actas das 3as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 231-252. FERNANDES, I. M. (2008) – A Fábrica de louça: análise espacial, processos de fabrico e conspecto social, in: Fábrica de Louça de Miragaia, Lisboa: IMC, pp. 17-48. FERNANDES, I. M. (2008a) – O livro de receitas da fábrica de Miragaia: um mundo colorido, in: Fábrica de Louça de Miragaia, Lisboa: IMC, pp. 49-68. FERNANDES, L.; MARQUES, A.; FILIPE, V.; CALADO, M. (2006) - Intervenção Arqueológica na Rua dos Bacalhoeiros, Almadan, 2ª série, nº 14, pp. 60-65. FERRÃO, J. (1933) – Rafael Bordalo e a faiança das Caldas. Gaia: Pátria. FERRÃO, J. (1944) – A Faiança Portuguesa no Museu Soares dos Reis. Uma bilha das Caldas da Rainha. Museu, III.

FARINHA, A. (1932) – Noticia Histórica do Bairro das Olarias (Lisboa). Cucujães: Escola Tipográfica do Colégio das Missões.

FERREIRA, F. E. (1983) – Escavação do ossário de S. Vicente de Fora : seu relacionamento com a história de Lisboa. Revista Municipal. C.M.L., 2ª série, nº 4, p. 5-36.

FARREL, A. (1985) – A salvage excavation at 30, High Street, Barnstaple, Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological Society, 43.

FERREIRA, F. E. (1994) - Escavação arqueológica da botica do mosteiro de S. Vicente de Fora. In A botica de S. Vicente de Fora. Lisboa: Associação Nacional das Farmácias, p. 26-32.

FERNANDES, I. (1995) – Da importância das fontes escritas para o conhecimento das produções cerâmicas, in: Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e PósMedieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 475-477. FERNANDES, I. (1999) – O comer e o beber em louça de barro (do uso das peças: diversa utilização da loiça de barro). In Actas do IV Congresso de Olaria Tradicional de Matosinhos – olaria e gastronomia. Matosinhos: Câmara Municipal de Matosinhos, pp. 12-29. FERNANDES, I. (2001) – Formas e funções da Faiança Portuense Oitocentista, in: Itinerário da Faiança do Porto

FERREIRA, M. (2000) – Habitação urbana corrente no Norte de Portugal medievo, Media Aetas, nº ¾, pp. 13-47 FIELDER, D. (1985) – History of Bideford, Chichester: Phillimore. FITZPATRICK, E.; O’BRIEN, M; WALSH, P. (2004) – Archaeological Investigations in Galway City, 1987-1998. Dublin: Wordwell. FREEMAN, J. (2000) – Rattenbury's Great House Shepherd's Wharf, Sutton Road, Plymouth, Devon: An Archaeological Excavation, Exeter: Exeter Archaeology.

191

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

FRITZE, R.; ROBISON, W. (1996) – Historical Dictionary of Stuart England, Londres: Greenwood Press. GAIMSTER, D; MARGESON, S.; BARRY, T. (1989) – Medieval Britain and Ireland in 1988 Medieval Archaeology Vol:XXXIII

GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V. (1996a) – Cerâmicas vidradas e esmaltadas dos séculos IV a XVI do poço cisterna de Silves. Xelb – Silves nos Descobrimentos. 3. Silves. Museu Nacional de Arqueologia: Câmara Municipal de Silves, pp. 143-206.

GARDINER, J. (ed.) (2000) – Resurgam!: archaeology at Stonehouse, Mount Batten, and Mount Wise Regeneration areas, Plymouth, Plymouth: Plymouth Occasional Papper, nº 5, Museum of Plymouth.

GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V. (1996b) – Faianças do tipo «Santo Domingo Blue on White» do Funchal e de Silves. Xelb – Silves nos Descobrimentos. 3. Silves. Museu Nacional de Arqueologia. Câmara Municipal de Silves, pp. 269-284.

GIRÂO, L. F. (1905) – Estudo sobre o estado actual da industria ceramica na 2ª Circumscripção dos Serviços Technicos da Industria, Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional.

GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V. (2007) – Escavações arqueológicas no Convento de Santana, em Lisboa. Resultados preliminares, Olisipo, nº 27, II série, pp. 75-92.

GOGGIN, J. (1968) – Spanish Majolica in the New World, Yale: Department od Anthropology of Yale University. GOMES, C. F. (1988) – Argilas: o que são e para que servem, Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V.; CARDOSO, J.L. (1996) – Aspectos do quotidiano de uma casa em Silves durante o século XV. Xelb – Silves nos Descobrimentos. 3. Silves. Museu Nacional de Arqueologia. Câmara Municipal de Silves, pp. 33-78.

GOMES, P.; MELO, M.; OSÓRIO, M.; SILVA, A.; TEIXEIRA, R. (2004) – Cerâmicas tardo-medievais e modernas de importação na cidade do Porto, Olaria. Estudos Arqueológicos, Históricos e Etnográficos, 3, pp. 89-96.

GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V.; CORREIA. J.; SERPA, F. (1991) – Escavações na primitiva igreja de Nossa Senhora da Orada – Reguengos de Monsaraz. In Actas das IV Jornadas Arqueológicas. Lisboa: Associação dos Arqueólogos Portugueses, pp. 415-423.

GOMES, J; VASCONCELOS, J. (1883) – Exposição Districtal de Aveiro em 1882: relíquias da arte nacional. Aveiro: Grémio Moderno.

GOMES, P. D. (1996) – O Livro de cozinha da Infanta Dona Maria, Olaria, nº 1, pp. 93-104.

GOMES, L.; BOTELHO, I. (2001) – Faianças do século XVII num arrabalde do Porto, in: Itinerário da Faiança do Porto e Gaia. Porto: Museu Nacional de Soares dos Reis, pp. 148-149. GOMES, M. V. (2008) – Dois fornos de cerâmica de Silves (séculos XVI-XVII) – notícia preliminar, in: Actas das 4as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 271-292. GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V. (1984) – Cerâmicas importadas dos séculos XV e XVI encontradas no poço cisterna árabe de Silves In Actas do 3º Congresso do Algarve. vol.1 Silves: Racal Clube, pp. 35-44. GOMES, M. V.; GOMES R. V. (1991) . Cerâmicas vidradas e esmaltadas dos séculos XIV, XV e XVI do poço-cisterna de Silves, in: Cerâmica medieval no Mediterrâneo Ocidental, Mértola: Campo Arqueológico de Mértola, pp. 457-490. GOMES, M.V.; GOMES, R.V. (1995) – Cerâmicas dos séculos XV e XVII da Praça Cristóvão Colombo no Funchal in: Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 315-348.

GOMES, P.; MELO, M.; OSÓRIO, M.; SILVA, A., TEIXEIRA, R. (2004) – Cerâmicas tardo-medievais e modernas de importação na cidade do Porto. Olaria.3. Barcelos. Museu de Olaria, pp. 89-96. GOMES, R. V.; CASIMIRO, T. M. (no prelo) – Post Medieval Archaeology in Portugal. Journal of Post Medieval Archaeology. GOMEZ-CENTURION JIMENEZ, C., 1988, Felipe II, la empresa de Inglaterra y el comercio septentrional, 15661609, Madrid, Naval. GONÇALVES, A. A. (1884) –A cerâmica na exposição distrital de Coimbra, Coimbra: s.n. GOOD, G.L. (1987) – The excavation of two docks at Narrow Quay, Bristol, 1978-9. Post-Medieval Archaeology. 21, 25-126. GOOD, G. (1989) – An excavation at the corner of St Thomas Street and Portwall lane, Bristol, 1989. Bristol and Avon Archaeology. vol. 8, p. 20-29. GOWEN, M. (1978) – Dunboy Castle, Co. Cork. Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, pp. 148. GRADIM, A. (2005) – Um conjunto de faianças da Vila de Alcoutim, Portugalia, Nova Série, vol. XXVI, pp. 175-205.

192

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

HURST, J. (1985) – Poole Imports. General Comments. Old Orchard Car Park excavation Report. Poole: Poole Museum.

GRANT, A. (1983) – North Devon Pottery: The 17th century, Exeter: University of Exeter. GRIFFITHS D.; GRIFFITHS, F. (1984) – An excavation at 39 Fore Street, Totnes. Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological Society. 42 GUILHERME, A.; CORADO, J.; CARVALHO, M.L. (2009) – Chemical and mineralogical characterization on glazes of ceramics from Coimbra from sixteenth to nineteenth centuries. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, vol. 395, nr 7. GUILLAUMIN, A.; MOREAU, F.; MOREAU, F. (1979) – O mundo das plantas, Lisboa: Verbo. GUTIERREZ, A., (2000) – Mediterranean Pottery in Wessex Households (13th to 17th century), BAR British Series, 306, Oxford, BAR Publishing. GUTIERREZ, A. (2007) – Portuguese coarsewares in early modern England: reflections in an exceptional pottery assemblage from Southampton. Post-Medieval Archaeology. 41(1), pp. 64-79. HANSON, N. (2002) – The Great Fire of London: In That Apocalyptic Year, 1666, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons. Assessment of an HASLAM, A. (2004) – archaeological evaluation, excavation and watching brief at Belvedere Road, Faversham, Kent, London: PreConstruct Archaeology (texto policopiado). HESPANHA, A. (1993) – Carne de uma só carne: para a compreensão dos fundamentos histórico antropológicos da família em época moderna. Análise Social. vol. 28, pp. 951-973.

HURST, J. (1986) Pottery Produced and Traded in North-West Europe. 1350-1650. Rotterdam Papers. VI. Rotterdam: Foundation ‘Dutch Domestic Utensils’. Museum Boymans-van Beuningen. HURST, J. (2000) Imported ceramics studies in Britain. Medieval Ceramics. 24, pp. 23-30. ISIDRO, S.; SIMAS, F. (1996) – Dicionário de Marcas de Faiança e Porcelanas Portuguesas. Lisboa: Estar. JARRET, C. (2002) – Some domestic ceramics from the site of Henry Doulton’s Drain Pipe factory at Lambeth Bridge House, Lambeth Road, Lambeth, London, SE1. Medieval Ceramics. vol. 26. JONES, R. (1986) – Excavations in Redcliffe 1983-5: survey and excavation at 95-97 Redcliff Street. Bristol: City of Bristol Museum and Art Gallery. JONGE, C. H. (1969) – Delft Ceramics, Londres: Pall Mall. KEIL, L. (1919) – Faianças e tapeçarias: dissertações de concurso ao lugar de conservador do Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga. Elvas: Tipografia Progresso. KEIL, L. (1938) – A faiança de Hamburgo e as suas analogias com a cerâmica portuguesa. Boletim da Academia Nacional de Belas Artes. Lisboa: Academia Nacional de Belas Artes. KEIL, L.; PESSANHA, D. (1947) – Exposição de Faianças Artísticas Portuguesas (cópias de originais dos séculos XVII a XIX). Lisboa: Imp. Barreiro.

HESPANHA, A.(coord.) (1998) – História de Portugal. O Antigo Regime. Lisboa: Editorial Estampa.

KELSO, W. (1979) – Rescue archaeology on the James. Early Virginia country life. Archaeology, 32, pp. 15-25.

HODKINSON, B. J. (1999) – Summary report on two sites in the medieval town of Limerick. North Munster Antiquitary Journal. vol. 39, pp. 13-76.

KENT, O. (2005) – Pots in Use: Ceramics, behavior and change in the early modern period, 1580-1700. Phd Thesis, Staffordshire University (texto policopiado).

HORSEY, I. (1992) – Excavations in Poole 1973-1983. Dorchester: Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society.

KILFEATHER, T. (1967) – Ireland. Graveyard of the Spanish Armada, Dublin: Anvil Books Ltd.

HOSKINS, W. G. (1956) – English Provincial Towns in the Early Sixteenth Century, Transcriptions of the Republic Historical Society, série 5, nº 6, pp. 1-9. HURLEY, M.; SCULLY, O.; McCUTCHEON, S. (1997) – Late Viking Age and Medieval Waterford. Excavations 1986-1992. Waterford: Waterford Corporation. HURST, J. (1977) – Spanish imported pottery into Medieval Britain. Medieval Archaeology. 21, pp. 68-105.

KILLOCK, D.; MEDDENS, F. (2005), Pottery as Plunder, a 17th century maritime site in Limehouse, London. PostMedieval Archaeology, 36, pp. KING, C. (2009) – The interpretation of urban buildings: power, memory and appropriation in Norwich merchants’ houses, c. 1400-1660, World Archaeology, vol. 41 (3), pp. 471-488. KIRKMAN, J. (1974) – Fort Jesus. A Portuguese Fortress on the East African Coast. Oxford: University Press.

193

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

KOJ, P. (1993) – A bagagem dos primeiros portugueses vindos para Hamburgo, in: Actas do 4º Congresso da Associação Internacional de Lusitanistas, Hamburgo: Universidade de Hamburgo, pp. 1023-1029. KOWALESKI, M. (1992) – The port towns of fourteenthcentury Devon. In The New Maritime History of Devon; Volume 1: From early times to the late eighteenth century, London: Conway Maritime Press. LACEY, B. (1988) – The Development of Derry, 6001600, in Keimelia: Studies in Medieval Archaeology and History in Memory of Tom Delaney, Galway, pp. 378–96. LAHAUSSOIS, C. (2008) – Delft – Faience, Paris: Reunion des musées nationaux. LANGHAM, G. (2006) – Excavations at 25, Fore Street, Totnes. Exeter: Exeter Archaeology (texto policopiado). LANGHANS, F-P. (1942) – As antigas corporações dos ofícios mecânicos e a Câmara de Lisboa, Lisboa: Câmara .Municipal de Lisboa LANGHANS, F-P (1943) – As Corporações dos ofícios mecânicos: subsídios para a sua história, Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional. LAVANHA, J.B. (1622) – Viagem da catolica real magestade del rei D. Filipe II. N. S. ao reino de Portugal e relação do solene recebimento que nele se lhe fes S. Majestade, Madrid: Tomas Junti. LEAL, C. C; FERREIRA, M. A. (2007) – Cuidados de higiene e de saúde em uma comunidade monástica do século XVII: o caso do Mosteiro de Santa Clara-a-Velha de Coimbra. Portugália, Nova série, vol. XXVIII. LEÃO, M. (1991) – Notas sobre a Olaria Gaiense no século XVII. Boletim do Grupo de Amigos de Gaia. 36. Gaia, p.21-24. LEÃO, M. (1995) – A Olaria Vilanovence no século XVII. Boletim do Grupo de Amigos de Gaia. 40. Gaia, p.37-48. LEÃO, M. (1993) – Oleiros Quinhentistas de Vila Nova. Boletim do Grupo de Amigos de Gaia. 46. Gaia, p.47-52 LEÃO, M. (1999) – A Cerâmica em Vila Nova de Gaia. Vila Nova de Gaia: Fundação Manuel Leão. LEÃO, M. (2004) – A louça de Ovar e Aveiro na Barra do Douro. Olaria. 3. Barcelos. Museu de Olaria, pp. 3140. LEÃO, M. (2007) – Cerâmica saída da barra do Douro no século XIX, Vila Nova de Gaia: Fundação Manuel Leão.

LEPIERRE, C. (1899) – Estudo chimico e technologico sobre a cerâmica portuguesa moderna. Lisboa: Impressa Nacional. LIMA, A. (1995) – Representação de objectos cerâmicos na pintura medieval e moderna, in: Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 473-474. LIMA, T. (2008) – O significado social da louça doméstica no Brasil Império (século XIX) e no Brasil Colónia (séculos XVII e XVIII): algumas possibilidades e muitos limites, in: Actas das 4as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 292-324. LOGUE, P.; O’NEILL, J. (2006) – Excavations at Bishop's Street Without: 17th Century Conflict Archaeology in Derry City. Journal of Conflit Archaeology. vol. 2, pp. 49-75 LOPES, S. (1939) – Cerâmica Brasonada. Boletim dos Museus Nacionais de Arte Antiga. LOUREIRO, J. (1937) – A Casa dos Vinte e Quatro de Coimbra: subsídios para a sua história, Coimbra: Biblioteca Municipal. LOVATT, A. (1989) – Excavation of a medieval and later features at New Street, Bideford. Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological Society. 47. LUCENA, J. (1933) – A cerâmica na história. Cerâmica e Edificação, 50. MANGUCCI, A. (1996) – Olarias de louça e azulejo da freguesia de Santos-o-Velho dos meados dos séculos XVI aos meados do século XVIII. Almadan. Almada. Centro de Arqueologia de Almada, pp. 155-168. MANGUCCI, A. (2003) – A pesquisa e a análise de documentos como contributo para o estudo das olarias de Lisboa, in: Actas das 3as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 425-436. MANGUCCI, C. (2003a) – A Estratégia de Bartolomeu Antunes, mestre ladrilhador do Paço (1688-1753), Almadan, II série, nº 12, pp. 135-141. MANGUCCI, A. (2006) – Da louça ordinária e não tão ordinária que se fazia em Lisboa em 1767. Cenáculo. Boletim on-line do Museu de Évora, p.1-8. MALONEY, C. (2007) – Fieldwork roundup. London Archaeologist Supplement, pp. 56 – 85.

LEITE, C. (1993) – Hospital Real de Todos os Santos. Séculos XV a XVIII. Lisboa, Museu da Cidade.

194

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

MALONEY, J; HARDING, C. (1979) – Dukes Place and Houndsditch: the medieval defences, London Archaeologist Vol: 3 Issue13. MARKEN, M. (1994) – Pottery from Spanish Shipwrecks, 1500-1800, Gainesville: University Press of Florida. MARQUES, A.; FERNANDES, L. (2006) – Palácio dos Marqueses de Marialva. Intervenção arqueológica. Património Estudos, nº 9, pp. 195-206. MARTIN, C. (1979) – Spanish Armada Pottery. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology and Underwater Exploration. 8, pp. 279-302. MARTINÉZ-CAVIRÓ, B. (1984) – Cerâmica de Talavera. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones cientificas instituto Diego Valazquez. MARTINÉZ-CAVIRÓ, B. (1991) – Cerâmica Hispanomusulmana Andalusi e Mudéjar. Madrid: Editiones El Viso. MATOS, A. (1933) – Cerâmica Armoriada. Cerâmica e Edificação, 50 MATOS, M. (1992) – Kraakporselein,. In Do Tejo aos Mares da China, uma epopeia portuguesa. Queluz: Palácio Nacional de Queluz/ Museé dês Arts Asiatiques. MATOS, M. (1994) – A porcelana chinesa: referência essencial na faiança portuguesa de seiscentos. In A Influência Oriental na Cerâmica Portuguesa do século XVII. Lisboa: Museu Nacional do Azulejo. MATOS, M. (1996) – Cerâmica Chinesa da Casa Museu Dr. Anastácio Gonçalves. Lisboa: Instituto Português dos Museus. MATTOSO, J. (1994) - História de Portugal - No Alvorecer da Modernidade - Vol. III (1480 - 1620), Lisboa: Editorial Estampa. MEENAN, R. (1992) – A survey of late medieval and early post-medieval Iberian pottery from Ireland. In Everyday and Exotic Pottery from Europe, c.650-1900, Studies in Honor of John G. Hurst. Exeter: Oxbow Books, pp. 186-193.

MELLO, U. (1979) – The shipwreck of the galleon Sacramento – 1668 of Brazil. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology and Underwater Exploration. vol. 8, pp. 211-228. MESQUIDA GARCIA, M. (2002) – La cerámica de Paterna Reflejos del Mediterrâneo. Valencia: Museo de Bellas Artes de Valencia. MESQUIDA GARCIA, M. (2005) – Paterna centro productor de cerámica dorada en la Idad Media, in Actas del VI Congreso Iberico de Arqueometria, Girona: Universidad de Girona, pp. 7-20. MOITA, I. (1992) - V Centenário do Hospital de Todos os Santos, Lisboa: Correios de Portugal. MONCADA, M. (2008) - Faiança Portuguesa século XVI a século XVIII, Lisboa: Scribe. MONTEIRO, J. (1994) – A influência oriental na cerâmica portuguesa do século XVII. In A Influência Oriental na Cerâmica Portuguesa do século XVII. Lisboa: Museu Nacional do Azulejo. MONTEIRO, J. (2002) – Um prato da Restauração e a opção pelo Oriente na faiança portuguesa do século XVII, Oceanos, 7, pp. 54-64. MONTEIRO, P. (2007) – Rendas de cobalto, motivo decorativo na faiança do século XVII, Revista de Artes Decorativas, nº 1, Porto: Citar, pp. 183-192. MOREIRA, R.; CURVELO, A. (1998) – A circulação das formas. Artes portáteis, arquitectura e urbanismo. In História da Expansão Portuguesa (Do Indico ao Atlântico 1570-1697., vol. II. Lisboa: Círculo de Leitores, pp. 532-550. MONTE, G. (1984) – A olaria eborense: séculos XIV a XIX. Évora: Gráfica Eborense. MULLINS, P. (2007) – Ideology, Power, and Capitalism: The Historical Archaeology of Consumption. In A Companion to Social Archaeology. London: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 195-211.

MECO, J. (1989) – O Azulejo em Portugal, Lisboa: Alfa.

MUSACCHIO, J. (2004) – Marvels of Maiolica. Italian Renaissance Ceramics from the Corcoran Gallery of Art Collection, Charlestown, Bunker Hill.

MEIRA, A. (1953) – Cerâmica Portuguesa. Bibliografia e notas. Douro Litoral, Boletim da Comissão Provincial de Etnografia e História. 5ª série. V-VI, pp. 50-79.

NABAIS A.; RAMOS, P. (1991) – Referências históricas do Porto de Lisboa, Lisboa: Administração do Porto de Lisboa.

MEIRA, J. M. (2001) – Argilas: o que são, suas propriedades e classificações, in: Comunicações Técnicas. Lisboa: Visa Consultores.

NEVES, M. J.; ALMEIDA, M.; BASÍLIO, L.; DIAS, G.; FERREIRA, M. T.; GONÇALVES, F. (2006) – “Casa do Mosteiro” (Celas, Coimbra). Almadan. 14. Almada, pp. 38-47.

MELO, A. (1886) – Apontamentos para a história da cerâmica em Coimbra. Coimbra, Portugália.

195

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

NOLAN, W; POWER, T. (1992) - Waterford History & Society: Interdisciplinary Essays on the History of an Irish County, Waterford: Geography Publications. O’BOAILL, R. (1993) – Recent excavations in Medieval Carrickfergus. Carrickfergus and District Historical Journal. vol. 7, pp. 54-62. O’BOAILL, R. (1998) – Further excavations in Medieval Carrickfergus. Carrickfergus and District Historical Journal. vol. 9, pp. 25-32.

PAIS, A.; MONTEIRO, J.; HENRIQUE, P. (2003) – Real Fábrica de Louça ao Rato, Lisboa: Instituto Português dos Museus. PAIS, A.; PACHECO, A.; COROADO, J. (2007) – Cerâmica de Coimbra. Do século XVI-XX. Coimbra: Edições Inapa.

O’BOAILL, R. (2007) – Carrickfergus Castle. Historic Monument. Belfast: Environment & Heritage Servisse.

PARTHESIUS, R.; MILLAR, K.; JEFFERY, B. (2005) Preliminary Report on the Excavation of the 17th-Century Anglo-Dutch East-Indiaman Avondster in Bay of Galle, Sri Lanka. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology. vol. 34 (2), p. 216 .

O’BRIEN, M. C. e O’BRIEN, C. C. (1972) – A Concise History of Ireland. Norwich: Jarrold and Sons Limited.

PARVAUX, S. (1968) – La Céramique Populaire du Haut Alentejo. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.

OLIVEIRA, C. R (1938) – Sumario em que brevemente se contem Algumas Cousas (assim Eclesiáticas como Seculares) que há na Cidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, 3ªa ed. Org. por Austo Vieira da Silva.

PEARCE, J. (2007) – An assemblage of 17th-century pottery from Bombay Wharf, Rotherhithe, London SE16, Post Medieval Archaeology, 41 (1), pp. 80-99.

OLIVEIRA, F. N. (1620) – Livro de Grandezas de Lisboa. Lisboa: Impressão Régia OLIVEIRA, L. (1916) – Subsídios para a historia ceramica portugueza: considerações sobre a escola azulejos dos noviços no Convento das Freiras de Thiago de Palmella. Porto: Officinas do Convento Porto.

da de S. do

OLIVEIRA, L. (1916a) – Considerações sobre as primitivas faianças portuguesas: faianças lisbonenses dos séculos XVI e XVII. Lisboa : Imprensa Comercial. OLIVEIRA, L. (1920) – Exposição retrospectiva de ceramica nacional em Vianna do Castello no anno de 1915. Porto: "O Commercio do Porto". ORSER, C. (2006) – The Archaeologies of Recente History: Historical, Post Medieval and Modern World. In A Companion to Archaeology. London: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 272-290. ORTIGÃO, R. (1891) – A fábrica das Caldas da Rainha, Porto, Tipografia Ocidental. ORTON, C. (1988) – Post-Roman Pottery. In Excavations in Southwark 1973-76, Lambeth 1973-79. London: Museum of London. Department of Greater London Archaeology, pp. 295-364. ORTON, C; TYERS, P.; VINCE, A. (2003) – Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. PAIS, A. (2007) – A policromia na faiança portuguesa de exportação do século XVII, Revista de Artes Decorativas, nº 1, Porto: Citar, pp. 33-64. PAIS, A.; MONTEIRO, J. (2003) – Faiança Portuguesa na Fundação Carmona e Costa. Lisboa: Assírio & Alvim.

PEARCE, J. e SCHOFIELD, J. (1998) – A rare delftware Hebrew plate and associated assemblage from an excavation in Mitre Street, City of London. PostMedieval Archaeology, 32. PEIXOTO, R. (1900) – As olarias de Prado. Porto: Imprensa Moderna. PENDERY, S. (1999) – Portuguese tin-glazed earthenware in seventeenth century New England: a preliminary study. Historical Archaeology. 33, pp. 58-77. PEREIRA. G. (1886) – Estudos Eborenses. Evora: Minerva Eborense PEREIRA, P. (1993) – Hospital Real de Todos os Santos: séculos XV a XVIII: catálogo. Lisboa: Câmara Municipal. PICCOLPASSO, C. (2006) – Les trois livres de l'art du potier: qui traitent non seulement de la pratique mais aussi brièvement de tous ses secrets, matière toujours tenue cachée jusqu'à aujourd'hui, , Casteldurante, Revue de la céramique et du verre, trad. Jean Marie Lhôte. PICKARD, C. (2000) – Former York Clinic, 117 Borough High Street and Nag’s Head Yard Workshop. Archaeological report, Londres: Pre-construct Archaeology (texto policopiado). PIERCY, R. (1998) – A escavação do Santo António de Tanna, um navio português naufragado no porto de Mombaça. Almadan. II série. nº 7, pp. 135-140. PONSFORD, M.W. (1973) – Greyfriars Building Lewin’s Mead – excavation report. Bristol Museum. PONTE, S.; MIRANDA, J. (2002) – Tomar arqueológica: o sonho e a realidade. In Actas do 3º Encontro de Arqueologia Urbana. Almada: Câmara Municipal de Almada, pp. 37-43.

196

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

POPE, P. (2004) – Fish into Wine: The Newfoundland Plantation in the Seventeenth Century, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. PORTUGAL, M. (1939) – As Letras Portuguesas na Nossa Faiança. Lisboa: s.n. POWER, P (1933) – A short history of County Waterford, Waterford: Waterford News. PROSTES, P. (1907) – Indústria Cerâmica, Lisboa: Bibliotheca de Instrucção e Educação Profissional. QUEIROZ, J. (1907) Cerâmica Portuguesa. Lisboa: Typografia do Anuário Commercial. QUEIROZ, J. (1913) Olarias do Monte Sinai. Lisboa: Typografia Castro Irmão. QUEIROZ, J. (1948) – Cerâmica Portuguesa e outros Estudos. Lisboa: Editorial Presença. RAPOSO, M. (1985) – A Representação de Objectos de Uso Doméstico na Pintura da Primeira Metade do Século XVI em Portugal, Dissertação de Mestrado em História de Arte na Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas – Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas (texto policopiado). Lisboa. RAU, V. (1954) – Subsídios para o estudo do movimento dos portos de Faro e Lisboa durante o século XVII. Anais. II série. vol. 5. Lisboa, p. 199-268. RAU, V. (1961) – Fontes para o Estudo da Economia Marítima Portuguesa, In: Estudos de História Económica. Lisboa: Edições Ática, p.65-87. RAU, V. (1984) – Estudos sobre História Económica e Social do Antigo Regime, Lisboa: Editorial Presença. REAL, M.; REIMÃO, R. (1996) – As origens da produção de faiança na cidade do Porto. Olaria. 1. Barcelos. Museu de Olaria, pp. 79-86. REAL, M.; GOMES, P.; TEIXEIRA, R.; MELO, R. (1995) – Conjuntos cerâmicos da intervenção arqueológica na Casa do Infante: Porto. Elementos para uma sequência longa – séculos XIV a XIX In Actas das 1as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 171-186.

RIBEIRO, E. (1927) – Anatomia da cerâmica portuguesa. Coimbra: Impressa da Universidade. RIBEIRO, V. (1911) – Ceramistas no século XVIII. Archivo historico portuguez, Vol. IX. Lisboa RICE, P. (1987) – Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. RIGBY, J. (2006) – Princesshay-Exeter, Exeter: Exeter City Council. ROCHA, A. S. (1954) – História, topografia e etnografia: materiais para a história da Figueira nos séculos XVII e XVIII. Figueira da Foz: s.n. ROSAS, L.; PEREIRA, M. (1991) – Arte e Nacionalidade – Uma proposta de Yriarte a propósito da Exposição de Arte Ornamental Portuguesa e Espanhola de 1882, Revista da Faculdade de Letras, nº 8, pp. 327-338. ROSEN, J. (1995) – La Faience en France. Du XIVe au XIXe siècle. Histoire et Technique. Paris : Editions errance. ROTH, C. (1978) – History of Jews in England, Oxford: Oxford University Press. RUBIO NAVAS, J. (2003) – Monografia sobre recursos minerales de cobalto en España, Madrid: Instituto Geologico y Minero de Espanã. SABROSA, A. (2008) – As Faianças da Casa Côrte-Real, Largo do Corpo Santo, Lisboa, In Actas das 4as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela pp. 109-142. SABROSA, A.; CARVALHO, E.; JULIÃO, T. (2003) – Um forno medieval no Palácio da Vila (Sintra), Almadan, II série, nº 12, pp. 196-197. SABROSA, A. e SANTO, P. (1992) – Almada medieval/moderna – um projecto de investigação. Almadan. nº 1. 2ª série. Almada. Centro de Arqueologia de Almada, pp. 5-12. SAMPAIO, A. (1931) – - Cerâmica portuguesa, Lisboa: Empreza do Diário de Notícias. SAMPAIO, J.; SOICASAUX, A. (1927) – Barcelos: resenha histórica-pitoresca-artística.

REGO, M.; MACIAS, S. (1994) – Cerâmicas do século XVII do Convento de Santa Clara (Moura). Arqueologia Medieval. 3. pp. 171-186.

SAMUEL, E. (1958) – Portuguese Jews in Jacobean London. Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of Engand. vol. XVIII, pp. 32-54.

REIMÃO, R. (1998) – 1808: produção e comércio de cerâmica no Porto e em Gaia. Olaria. 2. Barcelos. Museu de Olaria, pp. 63-69.

SAMUEL, E. (1961) – The First Fifty Years, in Three Centuries of Anglo-Jewish History. London: Vivian D. Dipman.

197

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

SANCHÉZ PACHECO, T. (1993) – Summa Artis: Ceramica Española, 42, Madrid:

SEQUEIRA, A. (1921) – Collections "Comte de Ameal": catalogue descriptif. - Lisbonne: Empresa de Móveis.

SANDÃO, A. (1965) – Faiança Portuguesa dos séculos XVIII e XIX. Lisboa: Civilização. SANDÃO, A. (1966) – Singularidades da Faiança Portuguesa. Colóquio, nº 37, pp. 42-46.

SEQUEIRA, M. (1967) – Subsídios da Faiança nacional como prolegómenos à Real Fábrica de Louça. In: Depois do terramoto: subsídios para a história dos bairros ocidentais de Lisboa. Lisboa: Academia das Ciências de Lisboa.

SANDÃO, A. (1967) Cerâmica da Antiga Botica Portuguesa. Colóquio, nº 45, pp. 10-14.

SERRÃO, J. (1994) – O tempo dos Filipes em Portugal e no Brasil: 1580-1668: estudos históricos. Lisboa: Colibri.

SANTOS, A. V. (1951) – A cerâmica em Portugal. 1951.

SERRÃO, J. (1990) – O Quadro Económico. In História de Portugal. O Antigo Regime, Lisboa: Editorial Estampa, pp. 67-112.

SANTOS, M. (2005) – Sondagens arqueológicas no Largo de Jesus (freguesia das Mercês, Lisboa). Relatório Final (texto policopiado). SANTOS, M. (2007) – Largo de Jesus. Contributo para a História Incógnita de Lisboa Antiga. Revista Portuguesa de Arqueologia, vol. 10(1), pp. 381-399. SANTOS, R. (1956) – A Faiança do século XVI nos primitivos portugueses. Panorama. 4. SANTOS, R. (1960) – Faiança Portuguesa, Séculos XVI e XVII. Porto: Galaica.

SHAW, L. (1989) – Trade, Inquisition and the English Nation in Portugal, 1650-1690. Manchester: Carcanet. SHAW, L. (1998) – The Anglo-Portuguese Alliance and the English Merchants in Portugal. 1654-1810. Aldershot: Ashgate. SHILLINGTON, V.; CHAPMAN, A. (1907) – The Commmercial Relations of England and Portugal. London: George Routledge & Sons Ltd.

SANTOS, R. (1970) – Oito séculos de arte portuguesa, Lisboa: Empresa Nacional de Publicidade.

SIDERI, S. (1970) – Trade and Power. Informal Colonialism in Anglo-Portuguese Relations. Rotherdam: Rotherdam University Press.

SANTOS, V. (2006) – Copa e área de serviço do Palácio dos Marqueses de Marialva, Património Estudos, nº 9, pp. 207-212.

SILVA, J. F. (1804) – Arte do louceiro, ou tratado sobre o modo de fazer as louças de barro mais grossas: traduzido do francez, Lisboa: Impressão Régia.

SASSON, H. (1981) – Ceramics from the wreck of the portuguese ship at Mombassa. Azania. nº 16, pp. 97-130.

SILVA, M. (1950) – Elementos para o estudo da influência oriental na decoração da cerâmica portuguesa (séculos XVI-XVIII) In XIII Congresso Luso-Espanhol para o Progresso das Ciências. tomo VIII. 7ª secção. Lisboa: Ciências Históricas e Filosóficas.

SAXBY, D. (2010) – Jacob's Island, bounded by Mill Street, George Row, Jacob Street and Bermondsey Wall West, SE1, Londres: MOLAS. SAYER, K. (2004) – Former London City Mission, Paradise Street, SE16, Archaeological report, Londres: Pre-construct Archaeology. SCHOFIELD, J. (2002) – London Waterfront Tenements, Londres: Museum of London. SCHOFIELD, H.; LEA, R. (2005) – Holy Trinity Priory, Aldgate, City of London, MOLAS Monograph 24, Londres: MOLAS. SEBASTIAN, L.; e CASTRO, A. S. (2009) A Faiança Portuguesa no Mosteiro de S. João de Tarouca: metodologia e resultados preliminares. Almadan. 2ª série. nº 16. Adenda electrónica, p. IX. SEIJO ALONSO, F. (1977) – Cerámica Popular en la Región Valenciana. Alicante: Villa.

SILVA, M. (1998) – Faianças Portuguesas: Colecção António Espírito Santo. Lisboa: Fundação Ricardo Espírito Santo Silva. SILVA, R. e GUINOTE, P. (1998) – O Quotidiano de Lisboa dos Descobrimentos – Roteiro Arqueológico e Documental dos Espaços e Objectos. Lisboa: Grupo de Trabalho do Ministério da Educação para as Comemorações dos Descobrimentos Portugueses. SIMÕES, J. S. (1971) – Cerâmica decorativa moderna portuguesa. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. SIMÕES, J. S. (1997) – Azulejaria em Portugal no século XVII. 2 vols. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Simpósio Internacional de Cerâmica: Alcobaça 87. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. SIMPSON, M.; DICKSON, A. (1981) – Excavations in Carrickfergus, County Antrim, 1972-79: A summary

198

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

report on the excavations directed by the late T.G. Delaney, Medieval Archaeology 25, pp. 78-89. SMITH, D. (1998) – A History of the Modern British Isles, 1603-1707, London: Blackwell. SMITH, T. (1906) – Itinerary of John Leland. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. SOMBART, W. (1967) – The Quintessence of Capitalism: A Study of the History and Psychology of the Modern Business Man. New York: Howard Fertig. SOUSA, F. L. (1984) – A Vida de D. Frei Bartolomeu dos Mártires, Lisboa, ed. mod. SOUSA, J. (1976) – A propósito da cerâmica armoriada. Armas e Troféus. nº 2. Braga: Oficina Gráfica Livreira Cruz. SOUSA, J.; SÃOPAYO, M. (1962) – Louça Brasonada, Subsídios para a sua História. Porto: Livraria Fernando Machado. STAPF, S. (1997) – Faiança Portuguesa, Faiança de Estremoz. Toledo. STEAD, P. M. (2003) – Excavation of the Medieval and Later Waterfront at Dung Quay, Plymouth. Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological Society. 61. STEVENSON, R. (1999) – Platform Wharf imported pottery: potters’ inspiration or stock-in-trade?. Medieval Ceramics. vol.23, pp. 152-153. STEVENSON, R. (2001) – A find of terra sigilatta at Pier Head, Blackwall, London. Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology Newsletter. STODDART, E. (2001) – Picking up the pieces: seventeeth century tin glaze earthenware from Ferryland, Newfoundland. In A Collection of Papers presented in the 33rd annual meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association. Ontario: Ontario Archaeological Society, pp. 1-7.

TEIXEIRA, R.; DORDIO, P. (1998) – Como por ordem em 500 000 fragmentos de cerâmica? Ou discussão da metodologia de estudo da cerâmica na intervenção arqueológica da Casa do Infante (Porto). Olaria. Barcelos. 2. Museu de Olaria, pp. 115-124. THOMAS, C. (1994) - Spitalfields Market (former), Spitalfields Residential Development, Spital Square, Lamb Street, Nantes Passage, Folgate Street, E1, Archaeological report, London: MOLAS (texto policopiado). THOMAS, C. (2004) - Spitalfields (Ramp), Spital Square, 280 Bishopgate, E1. Archaeological report, Londres, MOLAS (texto policopiado). THOMSON, J. (1994) - Victorian London Street Life in Historic Photographs, London: Dover Publications. TORRES, C. (s.d.) – Um forno cerâmico dos séculos XV e XVI na Cintura de Lisboa. Mata da Machada – Barreiro. Barreiro: Câmara Municipal do Barreiro. TORRES, C. (1985) – A cintura industrial da Lisboa de quatrocentos. Uma abordagem arqueológica. In 1383-85 e a Crise Geral dos séculos XIV e XV. TRINDADE, L.; DIOGO, D. (1997) – Intervenção arqueológica na Travessa da Madalena, nº 18 (Lisboa). Revista de Arqueologia da Assembleia Distrital de Lisboa. 3. Lisboa. Assembleia Distrital de Lisboa, pp. 67-80. TYLER, H. (2004) - Two centuries of rubbish: excavations at an 18th and 19th century site at 12–18 Albert Embankment, Lambeth, Surrey Archaeological Collections, 91, pp. 105–136. TYLER, K; BETTS, I; E STEPHENSON, R. (2008) – London’s Delftware Industry. The tin-glazed pottery industries of Southwark and Lambeth, Molas Monagraph, 40, London: Museum of London. VALENTE, V. (1931) – Jerónimo Rossi: fidalgo ceramista. Gaia: Pátria

SWEETMAN, P. (1980) – Archaeological excavations at King John’s Castle, Limerick. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. vol. 80, pp. 217-227.

VALENTE, V. (1936) – Uma dinastia de ceramistas: elementos para a história das fábricas de loiça de Massarelos, Miragaia, Cavaquinho e Santo António do Vale de Piedade. Porto: Impressa Moderna.

TAVARES, P. (1982) – A cerâmica Coimbrã no século XVII. In A cerâmica em Coimbra. Coimbra: Comissão de Coordenação da Região Centro.

VALENTE, V. (1949) – Cerâmica Artística Portuense dos séculos XVIII e XIX. Porto: Livraria Fernando Machado.

TEICHNER, F. (1995) – A ocupação do centro de Évora da época romana à contemporânea. Primeiros resultados da intervenção do Instituto Arqueológico Alemão (Lisboa). In Actas das 2as Jornadas de Cerâmica Medieval e Pós-Medieval, Métodos e Resultados para o seu Estudo. Tondela: Câmara Municipal de Tondela, pp. 17-32.

VASCONCELOS, C. (1921) – Algumas palavras a respeito dos púcaros de Portugal. Coimbra: Impressa da Universidade. VASCONCELOS, J. (1875) – Conde de Rcazynski (Athanasivs): esboço biographico, Porto: Imp. Portugueza.

199

Portuguese Faience in England and Ireland

VASCONCELOS, J. (1883) – Exposição de Cerâmica. Sociedade de Instrução do Porto. Porto: Sociedade de Instrução do Porto. VASCONCELOS, J. (1883) – História de Arte em Portugal. Porto: Typographia Elzeviriana. VASCONCELOS, J. (1884) – Cerâmica Portugueza: série III. Porto: Typographia Elzeviriana. VASCONCELOS, J. (1907) – Indústria de Cerâmica. Lisboa: Livraria Aillaud e Bertrand. VASCONCELOS, J. (1907) – Catálogo de cerâmica portuguesa: antiga colecção A. M. Cabral, Porto: Typografia Universal. VASCONCELOS, J. (1924) – A Fábrica da Vista Alegre: apêndice ao livro do seu centenário, 1824-1924. Lisboa: Fábrica da Vista Alegre. VEECKMAN, J. (1994) – Iberian Unglazed Pottery from Antwerp (Belgium). Medieval Ceramics. 18, pp. 9-18. VENN, T. (1955) – “An Introduction to Crediton”. Report & Transactions of the Devonshire Association, 87, pp. 2529. VILA, R. (1986) – Vila Nova de Gaia – Centro de Azulejaria. Boletim do Grupo de Amigos de Gaia. 22. Gaia, p.21-24. VINCE, A. (1984) – A note on the petrology of the Spanish and Portuguese tin-glazed wares. In Medieval and Post Medieval Finds from Exeter, 1971-1980. Exeter: Exeter City Council. VINCE, A. G. (1985) – The processing and analysis of the medieval pottery from Billingsgate Lorry Park 1982, in Herteig, A E (ed) Bergen 1983, Conference on Waterfront Archaeology in North European Towns 2, 157-68, Historisk Museum, Bergen. VINCE, A. (1995) – Trade in pottery around the northern sea. Medieval Ceramics. 19, pp. 3-9. VITERBO, J. (1865) – Elucidário das palavras, termos e frases que em Portugal antigamente se usaram e que hoje regularmente se ignoram: obra indispensável para entender sem erro os documentos mais raros e preciosos que entre nós se conservam, Lisboa: A. J. Fernandes Lopes. VITERBO, F. (1922) – A cerâmica lisbonense nos princípios do século XVII. Arqueologia e História. I, pp. 7-10. VITERBO, F. (1988) – Dicionário histórico e documental dos arquitectos engenheiros e construtores portugueses ou a serviço de Portugal, Lisboa: INCM.

VITORINO, P. (1930) – Cerâmica portuense. Gaia: Apolonio. WEATHERILL, L, (1983) – The growth of the pottery industry in England, 1660-1815, Post Medieval Archaeology, 17, pp. 15-46. WEATHERILL, L, (1983) – Consumer Behavior and Material Culture in Britain, 1660-1760, London: Routledge. WEATHERILL, L; EDWARDS, R. (1971) –Pottery making in London and Whitehaven in the late 17th century, Post Medieval Archaeology, 5, pp. 160-181. WEDDELL, P. (1980) – Excavations at 3-5 Lower Fore Street, Exmouth. Proceedings of Devon Archaeological Society, nº 38, pp. 91-115. WIGGINS, K. (2000) – Anatomy of a Siege. King John’s Castle. Limerick: Wordwell. WILCOXEN, Charlotte (1999) – Seventeenth-century Portuguese Faiança and its Presence in Colonial America, Northeast Historical Archaeology. Society for Historical Archaeology. 28: 1-20. WILLIAM, N. (1955) – The London port books. Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society. vol. 18, pp. 13-26. WILSON, C. (1979) – England’s apprenticeship. 16031763. London: Longman. WOOD, M. (2010) – The Story of England, London: Viking. WOODWARD, E. (1979) – A History of England. Londres: Methuen Co Ltd WOOLF, M. (1975) – Foreign trade of London Jews in the seventeenth century. Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England. vol. XXIV, pp. 38-58. XAVIER, A. V. (1805) – Arte da louça vidrada, Lisboa : Impressão Régia. YOUNGS, S. (1985) – Medieval Britain and Ireland in 1984. Medieval Archaeology. vol. 29, p. 161. Web sites London Archaeological Archive and Research Centre http://www.museumoflondonarchaeology.org.uk/English/ ArchiveResearch/ Pre Construct Archaeology http://www.pre-construct.com/ Cabral Moncada Leilões http://www.cml.pt/

200