They're old stoneware containers, usually found with a white glaze. Once a common site here, the primitive ones like that are getting scarcer, because they're more desireable for collecting. What are you seeing to make you say they're 'individually' made? They can be thrown on wheels, or slip cast and your's may be hand thrown. Yes, other views would be appreciated.

calliope, thanks! Interesting -- I wasn't even sure they were fired. If they were, it must have been at a very low heat. They're thick and *heavy*. And the coloring doesn't seem to me to be like a glaze -- it's more like a paint. That could be related to the extremely-low-fire, though, maybe?

The main thing that I was talking about wrt the "indivdually made" as opposed to, say, factory produced, is the seams on the sides that suggest to me that the body was made from a sheet that was decorated and then rolled together, maybe? You can see on one of the pics the seams on two of the jars where the patterns don't line up perfectly. The sand and unevenness inside are really puzzling, though, because if they were made from a horizontally-worked sheet, you'd think the insides would be smoother, but they're so rough. Another aspect of the handmade appearance: the coloring on the outside is also extremely uneven -- seems blue in parts, some white, etc.

What views would be helpful?

Thanks again for sharing all this.

A followup question: do you have any idea where I could find pics of more stoneware like this? I'm googling "primitive stoneware jar" and not seeing anything similar yet...

They look a little like something middle eastern. I don't live in the midst of Ohio stonewear country like calliope does, but I have spent a lot of years looking at American stonewear and never seen anything that looks quite like that.
If they have a seam, plainly they are cast, not thrown.
Try googling palestenian stonewear or north African covered pot.

Frankly they almost look like replicas of canopic jers.
Linda C

My Mama used to collect them. She had several and gave one of them to my daughter. They're extremely gritty and heavy compared to the more modern (but still old) ones. And not finished looking at all. You can even see grains in the mix. I have seen a couple of them on antique road show, and it went for an amazing amount of money, because it was signed by a slave artisan. You do not see them much at all anymore here, save in antique shops. When I was a little girl, people used to use them outside, because they were coarse looking, compared to ones usually used in kitchens.

They can be cast and not show seams, it's not like glassware where you see the seams from cast compared to blown. The seaming is mudded and smoothed before firing, Linda, or buffed down smooth before the glazing. I used to work at Nelson McCoy pottery myself, and I have a lot of their 'cast' wear and you will not see a seam on any of them. I also handled thousands of pieces because I worked in the finishing end of it.

It's old stoneware. I'm positive. Yes, the finish looks like paint. It was applied after the initial and often only fireing in the very old pieces, and it's not at all unusual to see it flake off, and you can sometimes scratch it off with your fingers.

That's why I'm thinking this is an old piece. In modern manufacture it is applied before the final firing. It's a utility crock or urn. The ware is also 'softer' and heavier than new pieces, and the tops typically look like that from wear and losing what little finish they ever had. When they get weathered, they tend to get gritty and wear away leaving almost a sandy finish to them and the bottoms were seldom finished off well, and never glazed.

lindac & calliope, this is fascinating. I also asked on the Home Decorating board, since that's one I frequent, and a poster there said she thought it was Aztec. (and lindac, I'm so there with you on the canopic jar thing -- they've definitely got that shape! Maybe that's why I had the "funerary urn" vibe :))

On one side, someone thought enough of these to put the little felt things under them, and they were involved in maybe consignment at some point, and they're *so* roughly made--almost too rough to be tourist trade stuff, iykwim. And calliope's invocation of your mom and all the details you offer -- those are strong arguments.

On the other side, there are *three* of them--I can't believe that three jars would have traveled through decades and stayed together.

Are there any particular details you'd like to see, calliope? I can try to get photos tonight. And any ideas on books to consult etc. would be *so* helpful--I went to Antiques Roadshow and nothing similar came up under "primitive stoneware" -- should I be searching under something else?

Love a mystery, even if it ends up that they're Mexican tourist trade product! (which I'm not saying they are, calliope, not at all -- I just don't want to let myself believe what you're saying because it would be too cool :) -- although I *did* find a rather valuable Artists Proof by a prominent Indian artist (as in from India) who has been reviewed in the NYT a couple of weeks ago, so anything can happen :))

A thought, calliope: do you mean perhaps *earthenware*? Or is it definitely stoneware?

Keeping looking...

Stoneware is a form of earthenware, as is all pottery or ceramic. How large are these things? Some dimensions would help. So would a side view. I went back and looked at it, and really, I don't think the picture rules out old stoneware, and neither does the description. And I know that Linda's comments about cast pottery showing seams is not accurate.......but I really would like to see a better picture of it before I am going to swear it is definitely old stoneware pottery. That's what some of them look like for sure, but that one picture isn't convincing me now.

If it shows seams it is not hand thrown. It a piece does not show seams it may be thrown or molded and skillfully finished.
Stoneware is fired at a high temperature and partially vitrified, pottery is lower fired and not vitrified.
An intact stoneware piece, "rings' when struck, a pottery piece does not.
The type of decoration on your jars precludes hand throwing....and the fact that there are 3 alike strongly contradicts the premise that they are very old
I think they are tourist stuff...or made by a hobbyist.
Stoneware does not get crumbly with age. Shards from pre-revolutionary potteries are very much intact. The excavations at Williamgburg and other sites show that.
I know of no area of this country where utilitarian pottery shows such designs.That doesn't mean there aren't such designs,but in a lot of years of looking at and observing and knowing several potters who emulate the old designs and methods, I don't know of such raised decorations.
Linda C

They're not Meso American (Aztec, Olmec, Toltec). I think Linda's right with either hobbyist (I think hippy 70s potter) or maybe mid-East tourist art. They're certainly decorative, but I doubt there's much antiquity. Since they're made in graduated sizes, I think they're more modern.

The slave-made and early American stuff wasn't decorated in bas-relief like this is--sgriffito was more usual.

idee, when I looked at newhome's suggestion, I didn't really see a compelling connection beyond some "eh" similarities, once I studied them. I'm thinking hobbyist too, esp. since I'm in the PNW, home of lots of ceramicists and definitely some of the hippy 70s kind :) ...I'll take some more pics tomorrow morning just so we can lay this to rest. Thanks all for weighing in :)

As a person who does pottery I can tell you they are slab pottery meaning the clay is rolled out and then formed. Beyond that I'd have to see them in person to get a clue. Even Pier One Imports have slab pieces that are made in third world countries but one never knows until you do more research.

yayagal: Do you think the slabs were rolled/pressed into a mold of some sort to get the bas-relief decoration? That was my first thought when I saw them. I think that the graduated sizes argue for relatively modern production, too. They strike me as having been made for display as a grouping, probably in some third world country for the export market.

Annie

Slab! That's the word I was trying to think of. I kept saying "sheet" but I knew that wasn't right. Yes, I see folks on the local Arts show (Oregon ArtBeat -- a great PBS show) doing slab pottery, but the bottoms usually look more like the cut-off end of a cylinder than these.

I thought more about hobbyist and it didn't seem similar to other non-professional work I've seen at my favorite gallery (Goodwill :)) -- I could now think it more like what damascusannie is saying, labor-intensive/low-paid handwork done for somewhere like Pier 1 (to work in yayagirl's idea too).

More photos coming...after I do some *long* overdue garden upkeep on this very nice day :)

I have been a collector of early American colonial stoneware from the 1790-1835 period for several decades. I can tell you that your jars are not representative of anything made in the colonies during that time frame. Some names to watch for are Crolius, Fenton, & Carpenter.

Here's a link to a nice selection of Early American Stoneware typical of New England through New York.

A bit later, in the southern part of the country, stoneware was also made & it is, in general, much plainer in decoration although some have a beautiful high-gloss green slip. Again though, nothing like yours.

So, I'm fairly confident in saying they were not made in America during the colonial period. I am not familar with Ohio stoneware so can't offer an opinion if calliope's assessment is accurate.

IMO, I agree with lindac that they look very Aztec or Inca inspired. I do not believe they are Native American.

I love stoneware so I'll be watching this thread to see if a positive ID can be made??? Whatever they are...they are fun pieces!

Here's another link showing shards of Early American Stoneware. As lindac has noted, the vitrified glaze remains bright & glossy even buried for centuries.

http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/cityhallpark/potters.html

/tricia

Here is a link that might be useful: Early American Stoneware

Inspired would be the key word with anything Meso-American. The Aztecs destroyed all househouse objects evey 52 years. How's that for a spending incentive! But most of their pottery was painted, not sculpted.

Here is a link that might be useful: Aztec Pottery

You know, I'm thinking that they have to be just some sort of third-world/export product, since they're in a set of 3. That seems to be the most compelling aspect of them. Don't know what inspired them; nothing I've seen yet seems really to hit me just right--but anyway... They're cool looking, but not at all useful except maybe to hold dry grasses LOL since I'm pretty sure they're extremely porous. Thanks for all your input on this and I don't want to take up anyone else's time with more photos unless you're really interested just for the fun of it; otherwise we'll call this case closed, I guess. :)

More pix please....if you are willing to post them, I am willing to look.
Linda C