Review by George H. Lukacs
Early Potters and Potteries of Delaware: Historical and Commercial Perspectives, 1760–1890

James R. Koterski. Early Potters and Potteries of Delaware: Historical and Commercial Perspectives, 1760–1890. Wilmington, Del.: Cedar Tree Books, 2005. vii + 208 pp.; bw illus., bibliography, index. $30.00 (hardcover).

To give this book a fair and honest review was just one reason that I felt obligated to read it from cover to cover. Before reading, I was surprised to find how little has been written about Delaware ceramics history. The only information that I found in my library consists of brief mentions in two books by Bill Ketchum. The reference from 1971 states that “Delaware had at least one kiln. Abner Marshall of Hockessin advertised both Rockingham and yellow ware between 1859–1866.”^[1] The 1983 book refers to William Hare operating as a redware and stoneware manufacturer in Wilmington, Delaware, from 1857 to 1887.^[2]

My second rationale for careful reading was my curiosity about how Delaware pottery production could be significant enough to warrant an entire book. In stark contrast to previous authors, Koterski identifies more than eighty individuals who were connected with Delaware’s pottery industry, and he provides a checklist of these names in chapter 11. Near the end of his book he theorizes, “it is difficult to approximate the number of pieces of ceramics that were crafted in Delaware’s potteries over this 130 year period, though it must have been several million” (p. 183).

This brings us to the third reason for my interest in scrutinizing this book, namely, how did Koterski come up with so much information—especially about short-lived attempts to produce porcelain products in Wilmington—that others had failed to discover? The answer is as complex as the vast variety of sources he used.

Koterski honed his research skills while obtaining a doctorate in organic chemistry and in manufacturing, marketing, and research and development positions at DuPont. He describes at great length the source of the clay that was used and the different chemical compositions chosen depending on the type of ceramic desired. Chapter by chapter he enumerates in detail the eleven pottery locations, the potters, their families, owners, and output. In little more than two years of research he uncovered population and manufacturing censuses, land deeds, tax records, records of indentures, newspapers, city directories, account books, wills and estate inventories, minutes from Friends meetings, invoices, family Bibles, maps, photographs, local histories, and numerous other obscure references. Despite his meticulous attention to every detail, Koterski admits that he was unable to find, throughout Delaware’s long history of ceramics production, many surviving examples that were marked by their makers. Limited archaeological excavations have been conducted on only three sites. The small number of redware and stoneware fragments that were found has done little to help attribute unsigned examples in local collections. Because of the paucity of material evidence, the author had to rely on documents in historical archives and state records.

Mathew Crips is identified as the earliest “potter who turned clay into ceramic wares in Delaware” (p. 20), beginning in 1760. Using land indentures and a business ledger, Koterski attempts to provide a more complete history of this potter, including discovering the type of ware he produced and the types of glazes he used. Koterski compares the prices of pottery made at different points in Crips’s business history and estimates that “nearly 500,000 saleable pieces of pottery were likely manufactured by Mathew during his lifetime” (p. 25). The author further identifies the distribution of Crips’s earthenware to six states, discusses how the American Revolution affected pottery prices, and describes who the probable employees were. Meticulous details include the types of wood burned in the kiln, Crips’s business practices, and his relative wealth.

In outlining the property ownership of the pottery on Water Street in Wilmington by John Jones, who ran the pottery from 1783 to 1825, Koterski identifies other activities that some potters engaged in for their community. “Jones was the first in a line of potters to play a role in the city’s fire protection. No doubt they felt a sense of duty since their kilns provided ignition sources in their neighborhoods” (p. 48). The minutiae about this early potter’s life are unfortunately coupled with the statement that “no examples of pottery attributed to Jones’s factory are known to exist today” (p. 45), a refrain repeated for most of Delaware’s potteries.

Even by 1862, when the partnership of Ziegler and Neumayer was advertising the manufacture of earthenware and Rockingham ware, Koterski has to admit that “as with most other Delaware potters, no wares attributed to them are known today” (p. 57). Even Branch Green, who Koterski mentions as having marked stoneware from Philadelphia before leaving to go to Wilmington, is not known to have left any marked pottery from Delaware. This lack of identifiable ware would tend to discourage most researchers and collectors from acknowledging Delaware’s place in ceramics history. While Koterski’s book attempts to detail and document the existence of these potteries, his enthusiastic research skills may not generate enough interest in collecting Delaware ceramics. Unless more pottery sites are discovered with fragments that help to identify typical Delaware forms or a greater number of marked ware comes to light, this research will be limited in its relevance to collectors and material culture specialists.

The genealogical information Koterski has assembled would be valuable to local historians primarily in Delaware and parts of New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Some of the information for the average ceramics collector or researcher might seem unimportant and tedious, especially when various family members who had no direct contact with ceramics operations are fully documented as to occupation and movements later in life. Using primary and secondary sources Koterski attempts to establish the various potters’ birth places and occupations before and after they had worked in Delaware as potters. In one reference to Thomas Hayhurst’s former occupation, he states, “Patricia C. O’Donnell, a Friends library staff member, suggested Thomas may have been a teacher, since frequent movements such as these were a characteristic of a Quaker of that profession” (p. 71). While this is not exactly documentary evidence, Koterski does confirm that Thomas was a schoolteacher at a Friends School in Wilmington in 1830–1831. Examples of Koterski filling in the blanks in his research usually consist of his thinking of possible explanations, presenting the limited documentary evidence, and then postulating the most logical answer. Limitations of the available documentary evidence make such speculation unsatisfying.

William Hare, who not only ran Delaware’s longest operating pottery (1839–1885) but also marked his wares, has a chapter of his own. “William Hare left a distinctive mark on Delaware’s pottery industry by impressing his own mark on numerous pieces of surviving stoneware” (p. 76), Koterski tells us. Using manufacturing statistics, Koterski calculates, “on the assumption then that he averaged three pounds of clay for each piece, a kiln burn would have produced nearly 4,500 pots” (p. 90). While he admits that this calculation might be a bit high, he still concludes, “Hare must have produced well over 500,000 pieces” (p. 90). For stoneware forms he believes “probably well over 95 percent was what the potter described as an air-tight preserve jar” (p. 96), and thus undecorated. Hare’s decorated examples that are illustrated in this book are sparsely ornamented with cobalt blue.

Chapter 9 really sparked my interest as a political science major and economic historian. The discussion of economic depressions, foreign competition, and marketing strategies that affected pottery operations is extremely insightful. Koterski weaves a detailed story of potting history with everyday events in the potters’ lives and manages to bring into focus the economic forces that determined the success or failure of a pottery.

Unfortunately, production values of this self publication are limited. The photographs of the ceramics that are depicted are small, rather dark, and lack sharp detail. Even the maps, documents, and charts appear darkened and bleak. Even though Koterski makes a valiant attempt to produce a complete story about Delaware’s ceramics history, these defects will adversely affect book sales.

I can appreciate the time and effort the author spent in producing this work. His results in both genealogy and local pottery history are a valuable addition to the libraries of avid researchers and ceramic historians. Beginning with a dozen (possibly mundane by collector standards) examples of Hare-marked stoneware, Koterski has produced a book that transports the reader back in time to Delaware’s elusive potters and their utilitarian wares.

George H. Lukacs, Author, Poughkeepsie Potters and the Plague