Saggar Works At Caughley 2004

Project No 12

The Saggar works at Caughley

EXCAVATION OF THE WORKS Autumn 2004

Chris Robinson

Table of figures...................................................................................................................2 Location of the Saggar works ........................................Error! Bookmark not defined. Summary .........................................................................................................................4 Aim..................................................................................................................................4 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................4 Historical Background........................................................................................................5 Geology ...............................................................................................................................5 Topography .........................................................................................................................6 The WAG team...................................................................................................................6 Archaeology........................................................................................................................7 Methodology...................................................................................................................7 Excavations .........................................................................................................................8 The Context layers........................................................................................................... 15

Table of figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12

Location of the Saggar works……………………………….4 Plan 1……………………………………………………….10 Plan 2……………………………………………………….12 Site Plan…………………………………………………….13 Caughley and Swinney 1790 …………………………….14 Threshold and north wall ………………………………….20 North wall…………………………………………… …….20 Tee brick foundation-East…………..………………………21 Tee brick foundation-West..………………………………..21 Buttress on south wall ……………………………………...22 South wall ………………………………………22 Interpretation of Geophysical results……………………….23 Thomas Bryan 1780………………………………………...24

WAG Caughley Report 2004

2

Figure 1 Location of the Saggar Works.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

3

The Saggar works at Caughley 2004 Excavation at an early industrial site Summary A successful investigation of the Saggar works. North and south wall foundations were revealed. This provides good evidence of the manufactory where saggars were produced prior to firing. The results provide a good basis for continuing with a further investigation, to discover the location of a second kiln and further remains of the associated buildings. Introduction These excavations follow three previous reports into the area. The 1988 report by the Ironbridge Institute, the 2002 report by Wolverhampton Archaeology Group looking at geophysics and the excavation report carried out in July 2003.

Aim To produce a detailed study of the works, and provide good evidence of the operation of the works and any previous use. Acknowledgements These excavations were undertaken with the kind permission of Lady Forester during November 2004. Thanks to Phillip Morris for permission to uncover various amounts of turf within his tenancy, and for the unrestricted access to the fields around the site. Thanks also to Nigel Williams of Parkhill for use of the secure car park, site survey and maps freely provided. To Robin Morris of Ibstock Bricks for his help in getting the equipment to the area and his in depth knowledge of the area. To Roger Edmondson for his help and input before and during the three investigations.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

4

Historical Background It is thought a Pottery may have existed at Caughley as early as 1754. The works was run by Ambrose Gallimore, who had taken leases from the Caughley estate owned by Edward Browne. This pottery is thought to have manufactured functional wares, but there is no evidence to support this. The Caughley Porcelain Manufactory was built between 1772 and 1775. Gallimore and Thomas Turner were co – proprietors of the Caughley Manufactory, although Turner would later become "sole master". Turner was apprenticed to his Father as a writing master and is known to have dealt in Worcester porcelain. He adapted the works for the manufacture of soft paste porcelain. The site was well supplied with coal and fireclay. The River Severn was close by and easy access was gained for Soapstone and China clay to be brought from Cornwall. Leases were owned in Cornwall at Gewgraze and later at Predannack Wollas. The local clays were used for the production of saggars, which were an essential part of Porcelain manufacture. A saggar was a Fireclay container that protected the delicate porcelain from the direct heat and smoke of the kiln. The name is a corruption of "safe guard". A map of 1780 by Thomas Bryan (SRO1224/1/47) shows the existence of a saggar works approximately a quarter of a mile south of the site of the Porcelain works.

Geology The Lower Coal Measures outcrop from east to west across the investigation area. The strata dips down towards the north. Ganey coal outcrops across the southern boundary of the quarry currently being worked. The sequence of coals and clays is as follows: Ganey, Clunch, Two foots, Best and Randles, Clod and finally Little Flint. The Little Flint Coal has been previously exploited, the 2002 win of clay revealed a gallery or tunnel during excavation. The Caughley mine was worked in the pillar and stall method, with working sites as low as 45cm in parts of the revealed gallery. Siliceous sandstone known as YFM (Yellow Firing Material) forms lenses between the sequences of strata. Dense Little Flint rock outcrops at the surface near the eastern boundary of the investigation area, due to uplifting known as the Symon fault. The clays are all usable and were probably exploited for brick and tile as well as for Saggar production.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

5

Topography The study site is in the Parish of Barrow, near Broseley, Shropshire. The site is bounded to the south by a small tributary of the River Severn known as the Dean Brook and to the north and west by the Parkhill quarry. The eastern boundary consists of a poor field of grass and scrub, known locally as the "pig run". There is dense coniferation in the east and some ancient woodland beyond. The study area falls steeply to the south towards the brook. In this area lies the deserted hamlet of Darley. There is one derelict cottage called the "Honey pot" and several ruined outbuildings.

The WAG team CHRIS ROBINSON MARTIN HOLLAND JAN HOLLAND SUE FOSTER CLIVE WESTWOOD EMMA HUGHES MIKE DURRANT ANDY PEARSALL PAUL HADFIELD

WAG Caughley Report 2004

6

Archaeology Methodology The new phase of work involved using the existing site grid, within which the previous excavations were carried out. A temporary bench mark was also designated for the area, from which all heights were recorded. This was 100m. The bench mark is at point 369205E299540N. This point is derived from measurement on a map (Parkhill 2003, CY/D044/21), and not measured at the site using a known O.S. benchmark. The grid was 20m by 15m , the south west point designated 100E,100N an arbitrary figure for use within this document.(369184E299520N)

Map work During summer 2003-2 0 0 4 e v i d e n c e h a s b e e n g a t h e r e d t h r o u g h a s e r i e s o f excavations. From this physical evidence the known features were drawn onto a raw geophysics plot (Figure 11). Brickwork shows up due to its low porosity and fired composition. The brick abutment to the south, the kiln base to the east, the threshold, and the brick foundations to the north can be identified. A series of sandstone walls encase the whole works and are 0.60m thick. It is suggested that these walls are retaining water and are not detected due to low porosity and therefore low resistance. The twenty metre grid was divided into smaller blocks of five metres. By measuring the eastern wall on the ground and the resistivity plot at five metres, scaling down and taking measurement of Bryan’s map of 1780, it was found that five metres on the plot equals two millimetres on Bryan’s map. From th e measurements it is possible to predict the extent of the saggar works and the site of the second kiln. This is shown as a hachured area.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

7

Excavations Discussion of Bro 04/A1/T4 Plan 1

North wall of the saggar works.

Previous excavation in 2003 had revealed features that were interpreted as the gable of the manufactory building. There was a logical progression to be made to prove or disprove this theory. Relocation of the previous trench 3 was made at a point 110E110N. Turf removal was carried out in a westerly direction. The foundation of a wall was revealed 114. Its construction is of Red Sandstone blocks but only survives to one course high. At an angle to the red sandstone is a course of red bricks heading in a north east direction for approximately 4 metres. It is a double wall with one and two courses remaining in situ designated context 127. At 4 metres west from this wall there are two bricks laid at the same angle from the sandstone foundation. This gives good evidence for the Tee extension shown the Thomas Bryan map of 1780.(SRO1224/1/47). The scale of the works as drawn in 1780 is now called into question. If the extension is proved to be accurate then the operation was considerably smaller than previously thought. The most striking feature of this trench is the area of bricks laid as paving110E109N. It represents the entrance of the building in one corner. The paving made good a heavy traffic route between the works and kiln. The internal surface of the works is soft grey clay 123 which at the time would have been a hard beaten clay surface. If this area was made wet by ingress of rain or water then a harder surface would be required to prevent bogging down of wheel barrows or persons. Paving was the durable solution. An area of roof tiles spreads across the area 108E112N. It is thought that these tiles would have slipped from the roof after closure of the works but before demolition. There is good evidence for this at various ruined buildings around the vicinity, where this is taking place in real time and tiles are accumulating in the same way.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

8

104E 112N

Figure 2 Drawn by E.Hughes

RS

Scale 1:20 KEY

127 Brick Tile Mortar

FB Firebrick S

Saggar Frags .

Limit of excavation Contexts 114

Foundation of works.

122

Area of brick paving Possible entrance to works area. Area of grey clay with tile and brick frags. Possible internal surface. Soft clay with mortar frags. Roof tiles from slippage of roof after disuse. Extension of works.

123

124

127

N + Figure 2 BRO 04/A1/T2 Plan 1 North wall of Saggar works

WAG Caughley Report 2004

9

Discussion of Bro 04/A1/T4 Plan 5

South wall of the saggar works.

The discovery of the north wall led to another logical conclusion. If the north wall was a foundation of a building then the building must have a south wall. Since the dressed faces of the Sandstone blocks were laid facing north then the building must lie south of this point. The same procedure was used again. Relocate a known feature, in this case, the head of the drain in trench 2. (Bro 03/A1/T2 Plan 4). A parallel line was then laid to the north wall. A new trench was opened along this alignment from a point 106E104N. Another Red Sandstone block was discovered. The wall 114 was then chased to a point 100E106.50N. The most noticeable difference between the walls was the large amount of mortar still bonded to the Sandstone foundation. The remains of a possible brick buttress 126 were excavated at 102E105N. The existence of this feature would suggest reinforcement of the wall a point where the land surface dips steeply to the south. Equally it suggests that a return wall may have existed at this point and the buttress countered the downhill forces of a heavy wall in two directions. There is also the possibility of support of an upper storey. The Sandstone alignment ends at this point. There are tile and brick fragments beyond. This suggests a scatter of material similar to the north wall i.e. outside the former structure. The soil to the south of this foundation 120 are a sandy clay similar to sub soil found across the whole area where natural deposits exist.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

10

N

+

100.0E 106.5N

125

Figure 3 126

Drawn by E. Hughes

Scale 1:20 1m 114

KEY

RS Brick Tile Mortar

Limit of excavation

RS RS 120

Contexts 114

+105E 105N

Red sandstone

120 125

120 126

Foundation wall of manufactory. Orange sandy clay similar to subsoil across whole area. Soft grey silt possible run off from site. Brick buttress. Bricks laid at 45 degree angle to perps.

+106E 104N

Figure 3 BRO 04/A1/T2

WAG Caughley Report 2004

Plan 2 South wall of Saggar works

11

1m

Figure 4 BRO 04 Site Plan Current extent of excavation

WAG Caughley Report 2004

12

Figure 5 Caughley and Swinney

WAG Caughley Report 2004

13

Conclusion This excavation has proved exciting. There is now little doubt as to the location of the manufactory. The scale of the operation as represented in the Thomas Bryan map is now called into question. It would appear to be smaller if the Tee extension to the north proves to be that drawn by Bryan. The existence of the brick extension suggests a later phase of the works. The earlier building is of Sandstone foundation. Local readily available stone. It can be seen in the remains of houses in the vicinity. Once a kiln is established then bricks become available on site and at little cost to the works, the raw material is in the adjacent quarry. The extension must be later and represent expansion of the works, possibly as the Caughley porcelain works opens and creates a big demand for Saggars.. There is still a second kiln to find. It seems unlikely that there was only one kiln at the works. All of the excavation so far have proved Bryan’s drawing to be accurate, if not to scale. Figure11 shows the actual size of the works uncovered applied to the resistivity plot. The hachured area represents a forecast based on Bryan’s map in relation to known findings. Less exciting are the few finds. Iron nails have been found, but as in the 2003 excavation there have been no finds in a sealed context that would conclusively date the commencement of the operation. A further campaign is required subject to the approval of Lady Forester.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

14

The Context layers Each level of the excavation has been designated a context number. This enables similar layers to be identified as continuous within an area. This may define shape or depth of the area. Context will also define changes in layers as depths change, which is essential when any dating evidence is found.

Context 100 Topsoil 101 Hard compact floor surface. Clay imbedded with waste burnt material and coal. 102 Kiln hearth bricks laid in radial pattern with an infill of brick paving laid in the opposite direction. 103 Clay layer overlying the hearth surface 104 Loose hardcore layer 105 Hard surface heavily compacted with Coal and clay and similar to 101 106 Spare 107 Light brown soil containing poorly fired Coal. Some saggar wasters. Tree roots prevalent. 108 Grey soil, saggars and coal. Very soft and contains bricks.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

15

109 Crushed bricks and ash from hearth. 110 Sandstone cover of possible drain channel 111 Drain channel. 112 Firing point of the kiln or air intake. 113 Drain walls in brick. 114 Foundation of works building 115 Grey soil and compact saggars. Coal and nodules of natural clay. Red and yellow in colour. 116 Natural clay 117 Wall to the north of possible building. Bricks laid in a single course. 118 Sondage. Sub surface of kiln hearth, clay and fine particles of fired materials. 119 Drain fill. Grey clay with Coal fragments 120 Subsoil. Sandy orange natural material found in the present quarry operation.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

16

121 Corner of foundation. Bricks laid over Red sandstone. 122 Area of bricks laid into paving. Firebricks and red bricks possible entrance of building. 123 Area of soft grey clay with frags. of brick and tile possible internal surface. Soft now due to exposure but would have been a hard beaten dry surface when the works was roofed. 124 Soft grey clay and mortar frags. Heavy with tiles possibly from roof slippage after disuse of the building but prior to demolition when all reusable materials would have been recovered. 125 Soft grey silt possible water run off from site. 126 Buttress on south wall supporting return of the building. 127 Possible Tee extension of the works.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

17

Appendix 1

WAG Caughley Report 2004

Pictures

18

Figure 6 Threshold and North wall. Arrows indicate brick projection of Tee

Figure 7 North wall

WAG Caughley Report 2004

19

N

Figure 8 Tee brick foundation - East

N

WAG Caughley Report 2004

20

Figure 9 Tee brick foundation West

N

Figure 9:

Buttress on south wall

N

Figure 10: South wall WAG Caughley Report 2004

21

WAG Caughley Report 2004

22

TRACKWAY INTO SITE

YARDS

Figure 11:

Interpretation of Geophysical results.

WAG Caughley Report 2004

23

Figure 12: Thomas Bryan. 1780

WAG Caughley Report 2004

24