Four digit numbered Hand Potted

This little sweetheart is an unknown miniature shape...





just to show the size I have photographed it next to a shape 64..

This may have been handpotted as there are a couple of ridges on the inside..



and the base..

Hi. I have a question on hand potted.
Somewhere I heard that the 7000 number range in the four digit numbering system, to which Crown Lynn transitioned in 1964, was reserved for hand potted wares. But I also heard that hand potted production had stopped some years before this.
I was wondering if Ev has any information on whether any production of hand potted/hand crafted was carried out in or after 1964?
Below is one of the few pots numbered in the 7000s I have seen. It appears to be hand potted, numbered 7013 and marked with the stamp Crown Lynn used in the early-mid 1960s.
What do you think? Thanks.

Oh wow that is such beautiful artwork on that vase

Yes I did come across a few references to the handpotted 7,000's.
We have 7012 on the site already in the Handpotted Gallery that hon-john found and didn't know what to make of.

I'm going to share what I found in the records -

Hand Thrown Earthenware.

7010 - 2" - 3" Tiny
7011 - 3" - 5" Small
7012 - 5" - 7" Medium
7013 - 7" - 9" Large
7014 - Ashtray [I suggest that this will be the Rhodes brick clay one]
7015 - 8" Rimmed Bowl Coloured
7016 - 8" Flower Pot Coloured
7017 - Stand for 7016
7018 - Approx 4" in brick or pipe clay, flashed inside with clear glaze half way up outside.
7019 - 7" in brick or pipe clay etc as above
7020 - 9" in brick or pipe clay etc as above
7021 - 10" and over in brick or pipe clay etc as above.

Woop woop I think that the planter and saucer that Haselnuss sent us on the weekend is the 7016 and 7017 !!
Actually I think we have all of those shapes on the site .....!

Now my thoughts regarding time frames ....
The fact that these pieces have been given four digit numbers tells me that they must have been made after 1964.
The Rhodes brick or pipe clay hand thrown pieces usually have the Tiki backstamp, but most of the hand thrown has the same stamp as on your piece.

I have found a few references to the hand potted ware in the Decoration Advices:
This entry is straight after the Design Competition 1967 give away pin box ...
Hand thrown Matt - Deco.No.280 - 7010, 7012 & 7013
Just 5 entries later is this one -
Pipe clay vases - Deco.No.280 - Art Pottery
There are other entries also, but it's a bit late to look now.
Hope this helps.

Just want to add that the first time I held a brick clay ashtray, I knew that it was hand potted. I could see the throwing rings and the base had been turned as bits and pieces in the clay were revealed where the clay had been cut off.

Here is a link to hon-john's 7012 -
http://newzealandpottery.forumotion.net/t1814-crown-lynn-7012-handpotted-from-hon-john

Thank you teaandcoffee for bringing this to my attention, as I'm looking forward to adding a Hand Potted Gallery to the Four Digit Gallery, which I had overlooked previously.

Hi Ev.

Thanks so much for all that amazing information. You must have spent quite a bit of time researching it. This does nicely pull the covers back on a less well known bit of the history of Crown Lynn's production of art wares.

Some of the interesting aspects of the records are:

1. The numbers 7010 to 7013 are given as being defined by the height of the vase - not numbered according to individual shapes as with the earlier Shufflebotham handpotted line. Therefore I think it is possible we might find pots numbered 7013 but different in form to the one above. The only requirement for being numbered 7013 would appear to be that the vase is between 7 and 9 inches tall. This is obviously a rationalization of the old handpotted numbering system.

2. All the tiny 'salesmen's sample vases' that we see, have the 1960's stamp. I've always wondered why CL was producing these when it had already discontinued regular production of handpotted. Therefore, I propose we don't call them 'salemen's samples' and instead call them 7010 vases (between 2" and 3" in height).

3. I think you are onto something with the coloured planter and base Ev. These would seem to fit the description for 7016 and 7017.

4. The decoration on the vase above looks to have been done in the same hand as the one that painted the flowers on the Fleurette plates. The flowers are done in almost exactly the same style, which may be a date indicator.

5. What interests me is the reference to production as late as 1967. I would be grateful if you could put the other entries up at some stage.

Thanks again Ev. You are a wonder!

It was only by chance that I noticed these entries yesterday when I was looking for something else, so it was rather easy to locate them again.

As I'm interested too, I checked for every entry referring to the Deco.No.280 which I might add will refer to the Matt White Glaze identification.
There are only 10 entries in total.
The first entry is in 1964 which was when these records began and says -
280 - Hand Thrown Vases and the last is in 1968 and this just says 280 - Matt White.
There is a chance that the last entry refers to 3 digit vases, as there is one entry in 1967 - Matt White McKenzies - Deco.No.280 - Shapes 367, 615, 669.
I think we are very lucky that someone put enough detail in a couple of entries for us to recognise some vital info, as most of these entries are very basic.

Yes, I agree that all of the shapes will be in various forms for most of the 7000's.
There seem to be very few around, or perhaps people don't recognise them to be Crown Lynn due to the unusual number.

A good idea to call the tiny vases by their shape number. I've seen many different shapes in the so called salesmen samples.

The planter needs to be confirmed that it is 8 inches high. Kat & Co had sent one in the same style and shape to the site recently and she says it is around 3 inches high, so that is confusing. When we find one 8 inches high, it can then go into the Gallery as a 7016.

Re your comment on the Fluerette pattern. The painters were painting Fluerette onto dinner ware when the Queen visited in 1963 and I think you may have picked up on something there.

I enjoy researching the old records and finding what they tell us.

Great thread with great information, however just to be quite clear.

The back stamp on the vase shown is stated as 1964 but on both the BS gallery page
2 and in Monk Page 156 this style of BS is stated as from 1955.

I have a tiny hand potted vase with this BS in blue but no number, maybe 'cos there was not enough room, it is just 2" high.

I have a tiny hand potted vase with this BS in blue but no number, maybe 'cos there was not enough room, it is just 2" high. The BS shown is from the gallery but is exactly as the one on my vase.

Hi Jonno
Yes, that's one of the little vases that I think may have been numbered 7010. Most of them seem to be closer to 2" than 3", but the range does allow for a bit of variation.

You might be right about the backstamp - I'm not too certain of the years when they changed over. Some may have been used concurrently or inconsistently.

I understand your pain Jonno

The backstamps give the from date .... but what about the finish date?
Perhaps they used them off and on for a long time as this excerpt from a Crown Lynn Exhibition in 1978 shows :
"Curiously the 1950's Crown Lynn mark occours on some recently vitrified ware."

Bumps this oddity to the top for teaandcoffee to see ..... ?

These are lovely little vases arn't they? And a bit of a mystery I think. Val Monk has some interesting remarks about them:

http://valputaruru.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/summer-treasures.html

They may have had some sort of number attributed to them originally (for tax purposes?). But its hard to know. They were obviously hand thrown, and as Val says, most probably by Daniel Steenstra in the early to mid-1950s.

Here is one I have. Sorry the photo is not so good.



They would look fantastic grouped together - a bit like a grouping of CL egg cups, with which they share exactly the same range of glazes. (I mean the 50's egg cups, not the 40s fractionated ones)

Yes these are fascinating.
These were made by the same potter, as the same style is evident.
I would argue that they have not been made by Daniel Steenstra as I see nothing of his style in the three little vases, unlike the 7013 of yours which screams Steenstra to me.

It would be good to hear if Val remembers anything else about her conversation with Sir Tom Clark about Steenstra and the small vases he threw. I wonder if Clark was referring to the 7010s or this earlier period. If they are not Steenstra, I suppose that leaves Shufflebotham himself? They are the right period. But weren't Shufflebotham and Steenstra at CL concurrently with Shufflebotham leaving earlier?

You are right, the decoration/glaze on these vases is very generic - like the egg cups of the early 1950s and does not indicate Steenstra; but I'm wondering if the hand throwing beneath the glaze - the style and idiosyncrasies like the smooth convex raised bands around the waists of some of these vases in particular - doesn't betray the hand of someone like Steenstra?

Thanks to mumof1 for linking the following thread to this thread:

http://newzealandpottery.forumotion.net/t3056-terracotta-vases-and-ashtray-any-info

As Ev noted somewhere else, the "Rhodes" vases made of pipe clay look to have been designed to compete directly with the studio pottery movement burgeoning in the 1960s - specifically the 'Anglo-Oriental' style. Lets link this information with Val Monk's helpful comment:
"I was told by Tom Clark and others that they never ever let terracotta into the factory machinery because it would have contaminated the white body, which makes sense. So were these vases made elsewhere, or maybe out the back with the brick and pipe dept?"

If, as is likely, they were made somewhere else, the Rhodes would have needed to be lent a Crown Lynn stamp from the main factory. My theory is that they were given the old tiki stamp that had been used in the 50s, but had already been superseded by the crown logo, and was therefore dispensable. This would explain the inconsistency of them being numbered as four digit 1960s vases in the records, yet all bearing what we all think of as a 1950s stamp.

Is this plausible?

All my notes are still packed away - we've just shifted house - but I remember quite a bit of emphasis on the fact that Steenstra made a lot of little items... which seems to fit with these vases. I will be able to provide more detail once I have got office organised - give me a couple of weeks. I will NEVER move house again I swear! ValM

Yes indeed that sounds plausible regarding the old stamp.
My theory is that they made the brick and pipe clay pieces near where they were still making bricks and pipes etc using the brown earthenware that would have been sourced on site probably.
These vases would also have been fired with the bricks and pipes as the kiln temperature would have been the same for vitrification. As Val Monk says Tom Clark wouldn't let any of that clay near the white clay.
I've been trying to find when the brick and pipe Ambrico kilns were finally shut down and can't quite find a date but it appears to be around the early 1970's. If anyone can find this info I would really appreciate it.

Wise words Val re your statement of never moving house again

I need to research exact dates for Shufflebotham and Steenstra which will help pinpoint a good timeframe for these little lovelies. We have so much info on the site - I just have to locate it all. No time for a few days though!!! There were more than these two throwers weren't there? Abernethy or something like that is the only other name that I can think of though ....???? So many of those chappies that came out from England would have been able to throw surely? Also I've seen references to Shufflebotham apprentices .... ? Perhaps the small vases Tom mentioned that Steenstra threw were the so called salesman samples which are seen on a regular basis??? These being as teaandcoffee suggests the 7010's.

This is a great topic and so many of the questions that I have wanted to discuss are being addressed here !!

Ev - maybe it would be good to transfer these images into this thread?:

http://newzealandpottery.forumotion.net/t786-crown-lynn-stamped-miniature#11194

Ev- your suggestion about these being the work of journeyman throwers or apprentices is a good one. They could have been set as practice and then the ones that turned out well, sold? I instinctively feel these wee vases connect with another of the mysteries of Crown Lynn in the early 50's - the question of the eggcups for which no records seem to have survived to confirm which are CL, yet a couple of surviving moulds in the Portage Ceramics Trust collection means that some of them must be. My idea is that these eggcups could have been the work of mould-makers apprentices - sort-of examination pieces.

So many questions...

While digging out my terracotta vases, I came across these beauties again at the back of the shelf. Now I'm not sure if they are part of the 7000 series or not, so will let you see them, and will post to the gallery if so.

This one is in the handpotted gallery as a Hand Thrown Sample with no number, and measures 11 1/2" high

This one I think is a Steenstra and is 6 3/4" high

but does not have a hand potted stamp, just the Crown Lynn, although it definitely is.

This one is a Handwerk vase and measures 8" tall

with this mark

this one is in the hand potted gallery with a height of 9"

with a very light hand potted stamp but no number

and lastly this one is 6" high

with this stamp and no number (gosh just realised after this exercise how many hand potted vases I have!)

this is a group shot of my terracotta hand potted vases

this is the tallest at 8" (strange that the records say 7" or 9")

these ones vary - 6 1/2" 6 3/4" and 7"

and these are all close enough to 4"

My goodness that is an impressive gathering sunny!!!

Gosh that's a great display! I especially like the one with the feathery leaves. As Ev would say, it just oozes Steenstra.

So the question is how to fit these into some sort of chronology.

Tentatively these are a few of the rules I would follow:
1. Any hand thrown vase that is not made of pipe/terracotta clay but that has the tiki stamp, will be 1950s (probably c.1955 or before). This goes for the Carpay Handwork range which (I think) is even more limited within the first half of the 1950s.
2. As far as I can remember, Shufflebotham left CL in 1958. So hand thrown vases that have the old incised shape-based numbering system (or even if unnumbered but of one of the known Shufflebotham shapes and in one of the three standarised sizes) must be 1958 and before.
3. We must remember Steenstra was also potting and decorating through this period
4. This means that vases stamped 'handpotted'/'handcrafted' with the tiki mark must be from the earlier years of Steenstra's employment at CL.
5.The Crown Logo was introduced about 1955, so Steenstra-decorated pots (whether stamped 'handpotted' or 'handcrafted' with the crown mark will be after 1955.
6. The unknown 'inter-regnum' years are from about 1958 to 1964. Sometime between these years Crown Lynn seems to have transitioned from a shape-base numbering system in three standardized sizes for hand thrown, to a much more flexible size-based system where even sizes could be anywhere in a range (for-instance any shaped pot between 7 and 9 inches tall became 7013 after 1964). However, even though the 4 digit numbering system formalized these size bands ('categories' of vase if you like) only in 1964, I think the system was introduced earlier, sometime between 1958 and 1964. Perhaps towards the latter end of this time frame. We just don't know what this revised, more flexible system was called (if anything) in the late 3 digit years.

So very tentatively :

c. 1954 Carpay Handwork vase
c. 1955 Handpotted with black glazed rim and tiki back stamp
c. 1958 'Handthrown sample' stamped 'handcrafted'. ( I say 1958, but its just a guess based on the fact that this is the year Shufflebotham left and I'm theorizing that this might be evidence of CL trying to develop a range to replace his handpotted. The stamp is consistent with this date, and the oversized non-standard size might indicate that sizes hadn't been set in stone yet.)
c. 1960-64 White hand thrown with crown stamp. (it is within the listed range for the later size-based four digit numbering but is not numbered)
c. 1963-64 Steenstra leaves-decorated vase with crown stamp (again not numbered because they probably didn't have a number for it, and of a flexible shape and in the size range consistent with what became 7012 in 1964. I would think these Steenstra leaf and flower-decorated vases without a 'handcrafted' stamp would only have been produced in very limited numbers the early 1960s, perhaps just on either side of the change over to four digit numbers.

How's that for analysis?

I am very prepared to be corrected on any of the above