1. John Earle, Microcosmographie or A Piece of the World Discovered in Essays and Characters (London, 1628) as quoted by Ronald Jessup, Curiosities of British Archaeology (London: Butterworth, 1961), p. 10. 2. Chapman added that “he who collects that he may have the best collection, or a better than his friend’s, is little more than a miser.” 3. Louise Irvine to Ivor Noël Hume, personal communication, January 20, 2002. 4. Colin Roberts, Doulton Ink Wares (London: Bee Publications, 1993), pp. 109–11. 5. See also “Potsherds and Pragmatism: One Collector’s Perspective,” in Ceramics in America, edited by Robert Hunter (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England for the Chipstone Foundation, 2001), pp. 16–17. 6. Christie’s, London, September 25, 2001, Sale no. 9199, lot 18. 7. Doulton began manufacturing stoneware drain pipes at Rowley-Regis near Birmingham before 1877. At Lambeth, Henry Doulton had opened a ceramic pipe factory in 1846. The company’s history by Desmond Eyles, The Story of Royal Doulton 1815–1965 (London: Hutchinson, 1965), p. 15, notes that “If Henry Doulton had never done anything else but help to pioneer the general use of stoneware drainpipes he would have earned a secure place in the social history of the Victorian era.” Doulton’s fine ware production began at Burslem around 1882. 8. The standard lion-topped crown over the Royal Doulton roundel was in general use between 1902 and 1922. Jeffrey A. Godden, Encyclopaedia of British Pottery and Porcelain Marks (New York: Crown Publishers, 1964), p. 215. 9. Robin Hildyard, Browne Muggs, English Brown Stoneware (London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1985), p. 80, nos. 204, 205. 10. Messrs. Doulton and Watts in their 1873 price list offered “Hunting Jugs (Common clay)” in capacities from 1/4 pint to 1 gallon, as well as in “Fine Clay”; Chris Green, John Dwight’s Fulham Pottery, Excavations 1971–79 (London: English Heritage, 1999), p. 367. 11. Old Windsor is a Berkshire village and parish on the River Thames two miles south east of Windsor. 12. Ivor Noël Hume, “A Seventeenth-Century Virginian’s Seal: Detective Story In Glass,” Antiques 72, no. 3 (September 1957): 244–45. 13. This Doulton mark began to be used ca. 1858. 14. Adrian Oswald, R.J.C. Hildyard, and R. G. Hughes, English Brown Stoneware 1670–1900 (London: Faber & Faber, 1982). 15. Nicholas Johnson, “The Man in the Middle: Toby Fillpott as a Sprig on Brown Stoneware,” The Web of Time 4, no. 2 (Internet history magazine <www.theweboftime.com>). 16. Ivor Noël Hume, If These Pots Could Talk: Collecting 2,000 Years of British Household Pottery (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England for the Chipstone Foundation, 2001), p. 424, note 15, cites references demonstrating that in England money boxes in the shape of pigs go back at least to the fifteenth century. According to Webster’s Ninth Collegiate Dictionary, however, in American usage the term “piggy bank” was first applied to money boxes as recently as 1941. The Oxford English Dictionary, on the other hand, leaves no doubt that as early as ca. 1440 the word “pig” was applied to any earthenware pot that lacked any other more specific name. That dictionary does not list “piggy bank” among its definitions. 17. Samuel Briddon was in the stoneware business at Brampton as early as 1834, continuing a tradition established by William Briddon in 1790 (Oswald et al., English Brown Stoneware, p. 164). That source associates Samuel with William Briddon at the Walton Pottery along with the S & H Briddon mark and dates it to ca. 1840–1860. On the other hand, Derek Askey, Stoneware Bottles from Bellarmines to Ginger Beer 1500–1949 (Brighton, U.K.: Bowman Graphics, 1981), p. 164, has Samuel and Henry at an independent factory in 1848 that would be purchased in 1881 to become part of the Barker factory. However, Llewellynn Jewitt, The History of Ceramics Art in Great Britain, 2 vols. (New York: Scribner, Welford, and Armstrong, 1878), 2: 122 had Henry Briddon owning the Barker Pottery prior to 1878, and makes no mention of a partnership between him and Samuel Briddon. Yet another S & H Briddon pig-decorated tobacco jar is in the Glaisher Collection at the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, there cataloged as a “box with Lid” and erroneously attributed to the “Late 19th century.” Bernard Rackham, Catalogue of the Glaisher Collection, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Eng.: The University Press, 1935), 1: 162, no. 1254 (not illustrated). 18. Robin Hildyard, Browne Muggs, p. 113, no. 326, ca. 1840. Finials for Brampton tobacco-jars with pig panels came both in the form of a fleur-de-lis or a bricked chimney stack, and so there is no way of knowing which was used on the illustrated money box. It seems possible that tobacco jars had smoke stacks finials and that versions intended for other purposes did not. 19. One might expect that the two parts of the Briddon money box would have been luted together while in their leather hard state. It appears, however, that they were not joined until after their salt-glazed firing—and then with glue. 20. That phrase is not in the O.E.D., but “to save one’s bacon” was in use by 1691. 21. H. Arthur Klein, Graphic Worlds of Peter Bruegel the Elder (New York: Dover Publications, 1963). “Temperance” (1560), no. 54; “The Ass at School” (1557), no. 30. 22. Ibid., (1567), no. 32. 23. Ian Reed in Medieval Ceramics 16 (1992): 71–72 and p. 69, pl. 2. 24. John Hurst, David S. Neal, and H.J.E. van Beuningen, Pottery Produced and Traded in North-West Europe, 1350–1650 (Holland: Museum of Boymans-van Beuningen, 1986), pp. 197–98, no. 308, illustrate an example found at Raeren-Born in Belgium, its exterior glaze a mottled brown with gray patches, and attributed to the sixteenth century. 25. Jacqueline Pearce, Border Wares (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1992), pp. 32, 66; fig. 37, no. 288. 26. These pots being so small and virtually unbreakable, it is surprising that others have not been reported from English archaeological contexts. 27. H.J.E. van Beuningen, verdraaid goed gedraaid (Rotterdam: Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, 1973), pp. 49–50, no. 287, second half of sixteenth century. Also Hurst, Neal, and van Beuningen, Pottery Produced and Traded in North-West Europe, p. 199, nos. 310–12, ca. 1575–1600. 28. Hume, If These Pots Could Talk, p. 97, fig. V.3.c. 29. Sarah Jennings et al., Eighteen Centuries of Pottery from Norwich, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 13, Norfolk Museums Service, 1981, pp. 113–14, no. 760. Described as “Dark grey fabric; shiny brown glaze on all surfaces.” No mention is made of basal markings. 30. Gisela Reineking-von Bock, Steinzeug (Cologne: Cologne State Museum, 1971), no. 85, n.p.; found at Cologne. 31. E. M. Ch.F. Klijn’s Lead-glazed Earthenwares in The Netherlands (Arnhem: Nederlands Openluchtmuseum, 1995), p. 27, noted: “The material’s value was even so high that the potters of the Middle Ages sometimes tried to mend a waster, so that, after a necessary second firing, it was serviceable again and ready to be sold.” 32. It surely must be a coincidence that a fifteenth-century playing card illustrated in David Gaimster’s German Stoneware 1200–1900 (London: British Museum Press, 1997), pl. 2.1, depicts a woman making Siegburg pots! Nevertheless, the citation allows me to make a correction to If These Pots Could Talk (p. 99, fig. V.5) wherein I illustrated the card and associated it with an example in the collection that I attributed to Siegburg when it should have been to Raeren. 33. North Normandy lies at the southern extremity of the Rhineland stoneware industry, its industrial and pharmaceutical wares reaching America by 1585. Ivor Noël Hume, The Virginia Adventure (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994), p.76. 34. Ivor Noël Hume, Shipwreck! History from the Bermuda Reefs (Hamilton, Bermuda: Capstan Publications, 1995), p.22. 35. Richard Hunter, “Eighteenth-Century Stoneware Kiln of William Richards Found on the Lamberton Waterfront, Trenton, New Jersey,” in Ceramics in America (2001), ed. Robert Hunter, pp. 238–43. 36. Hume, If These Pots Could Talk, pp. 221–22, fig. X.1. 37. Most authorities refer to the central structures as pagodas, a term defined in Webster as “a Far Eastern tower usu. with roofs curving upward at the division of each of several stories and erected as a temple or memorial,” a description far removed from a single-story hut with two chimneys. 38. Northern Ceramic Society Journal 18 (2001): 1–37. 39. There are small differences between the footrings of these plates, one being sharper than the other. But rather than pointing to diagnostically significant variations, they are a further reminder of the fallacy of reading much into little.