Every early Staffordshire pottery figure tells a tale, and the tale I am about to recount is one I have told in my books, but I tell it here again because there is new development in the story. A twist in the tale---or is it in the tail of the yarn?

It all began many years ago, when my friend Nick Burton helped me acquire this stunning "Sherratt" figure at auction.

As you see, the figure is titled MENAGERIE, and I was puzzled because, as we well know, a menagerie looks more like this.

Then around midnight one night, I stumbled across a broadside in the National Library of Scotland. Dramatically titled "FEARFUL ACCIDENT! FOUR LIVES LOST," it recounted the gory happenings of February 1834, when the menagerie lion and tiger escaped during the night from Wombwell's menagerie. The animals attacked and killed four people, including a woman with a child in her arms.

Suddenly, the title MENAGERIE on my figure group made sense. This was the tiger who escaped, and the mother and child were its victims. I was so excited with my discovery, but who was there to tell, besides the dogs sleeping at my feet?
The broadside cited the Northumberland Herald as the source of the story, and I could not wait to get to London, where I accessed the British Library's microfilm copies of the newspaper and found the same account, almost word for word.

The news of this bloody animal misadventure spread like lightening across Britain because newspaper after newspaper printed the same account. As the disaster was said to have happened in Worksworth, just a stone's throw from the Potteries, it is not surprising that it inspired Staffordshire's potters to capture the horror of it in clay. And with my new-found knowledge and with the help of those potters, the tale unravelled.
​
​What of the other two victims? The report tells us that one was a young boy, and here he is, again courtesy of "Sherratt".

In the figure group below, we have another depiction of events. This time, the lion is clawing the mother---the very same figure that the tiger is mauling in my MENAGERIE group.

What of the fourth victim? Newspaper reports did not identify the fourth victim, but the figure group below suggests that he was believed to be a black man.

The two Sherratt figure groups below again confirm that the fourth victim was indeed thought to be a black man. Lest you doubt it, the second group is titled THE DEATH OF A NEGRO, but, sadly the man has been lost....or perhaps he is in the beast's tummy. (By the way, don't let the spots distract you. In the early nineteenth century, there was still much confusion and ignorance as to which Big Cat was which!)

Each of these figures is known from only one example. But the joy of collecting is that you just never know what will turn up next. Recently, I was made aware of a large "Sherratt" tiger (on the scale of the tiger in Death of Munrow groups) with a black man in his jaws. That treasure has resided in the Czech Republic for around a century!

Similarly, the joy of researching is that you just never know what will be unearthed. Nowadays, British newspapers are searchable online, so today I would be able to access the story of the menagerie escape in a few minutes--no need to fly to London and spend hours scrutinizing microfilm. And so I decided to research it yet again. Sure enough, the story appears in umpteen publications across Britain in late February/early March 1834.  But fast forward another month or so, here comes the twist in the tale: very brief retractions appear in those same newspapers. 

It seems the story was fake news, a puff piece that the menagerist George Wombwell planted to drum up excitement and boost attendance at his show. Attitudes then were very different from those that prevail today, and animals that had taken four human lives were a drawcard. Add to that, many visitors secretly hoped to witness another gory mishap!

Although the retractions were published with as little research as the original story, I concede that the escapes of 1834 were almost certainly fake news. But the men who captured in clay the lion, the tiger, and their four victims did not know that. The tale fired their imaginations and inspired the creation of a handful of truly fabulous figures groups.

In the lethargy of these lazy lockdown days, I struggle to write anything worth reading. But as Dallas will be besieged by COVID for a good while longer, I must snap out of it!  In my defense, the almost  total disappearance of auctions for many weeks means that little fresh has come to market, but that is gradually changing, and I am finding fodder for thought daily.

Last month, this unusual little figure came up at Woolley and Wallis. Most auction houses would have lumped it into a lot with unremarkable figures, but, to their credit, Woolley and Wallis gave this little lady a lot of her own. She is special because she is a Leeds Pottery figure, and those are almost as rare as hen's teeth today. Although unmarked, bidders recognized her worthiness, and she did rather well.

I know this figure from the pair below, photographed from a book or magazine.  I bought the Woolley and Wallis figure and hope some day to find the male figure to make the pair.

I have covered Leeds Pottery figures previously, so if you type LEEDS POTTERY into the search box at the top of this page, you can access those articles. I have three other Leeds figures in my collection, and, if you look at their faces, below, you can't help but notice the strong family resemblance. Those little pinched faces are hard to forget!

Note to self: other points of similarity are the use of dotted dress pattens and watery brown enamels on the bases. Perhaps these will open my eyes to other Leeds figures in the future. No photo can ever adequately convey their delicate  beauty, and they top my list of favorites, just one notch ahead of Neale figures.

There are plenty of other unusual figures surfacing as Britain gets up to speed. John Howard, who never seemed to miss a beat right through the COVID shutdown, added this pair of cows recently. How nice to see these as a true pair.

And if cows aren't your thing, John also has a good-looking pair of dogs.

If animals also don't push your button, what's not to like about this sweet pair portraying  the Sailor's Farewell and the Sailor's Return, now in the stock of Mears & Boyer?  Eye candy, aren't they? It's so unusual to find a pair with their bocages intact and with the original blue enameling to the coats. Too often the blue has flaked, and the restoration is usually jarringly bright.

Does the lovely figure below, in the stock of Andrew Dando, remind you of some other figure form? 

At the low end of the price spectrum, there are some interesting small figures floating around. I have not previously seen this tiny version of a plump, bare-breasted Venus, height 6.5 inches.

The petite version of the Vicar and Moses, below left,  is another that  I have not seen hitherto. Although the vicar has the same facial features as his larger counterpart, Moses is an entirely new creation.

The unusual always sparks my interest, and the decoration on the  base on the deer at the left fits the bill. Similarly, the crude but charming sheep on the right. I can't recall seeing a sheep on a yellow base previously.

This primitive, immodest, and rather striking Virgin Mary caught my eye.

She is decorated in underglaze colors, as are the one or two other examples I have encountered (see http://www.earlystaffordshirefigures.com/107-virgin-mary.html), but here the colors are particularly bright and pretty, and the base is of a different form.

And last but not least among the unusual items I have seen of late  are these three pearlware stoups, all in the stock of Elinor Penna. Very colorful, aren't they?

So, as always, keep your eyes open. You just never know what will turn up next!

Staffordshire figures portraying classical figures are endlessly fascinating, but they can also be rather perplexing. Case in point are these two pearlware beauties,  the only known examples of their kind. Both are around 13 inches tall, and the silver luster is quite exquisite. 

But for the silver luster, I might have dated these figures to around 1800, but as silver lustering was only adopted commercially from 1805, I suspect these figures were made around 1805 or shortly after. They depict Calliope, the muse of epic poetry. The title on the spine of each book confirms this--- "OVID VOL 4" in one case and  "OVID Vol 5" in the other.

​Simple enough so far isn't it? But the plot thickens. The stunningly impressive and unique figure below is almost 15 inches tall. She has changed hands through time described as Metis, who was the goddess of deep thought and wisdom. As the ancients believed Metis to be the wisest of all beings, it is appropriate that she has a large book at her side.

Although there are resemblances between the figures of Metis and Calliope, when I wrote Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840, Volume 4, I included separate chapters for each of the ladies.......but, given their similarities, I now wonder whether the figure of Metis above is  Calliope rather than Metis! 

What of other figures on the subject? My Volume 4 describes the sweet figure bellow as Metis. She is only 6 inches tall and can be attributed to the Brown Base Group The owner had always thought her to be Metis, and perhaps she is...but I can't help noticing that she is pointing to her tome in much the same manner as the figures of Calliope do. Is she not Calliope too?

I recently noted this small figure on the same theme that went through auction. She too is pointing at her book, so I suspect she too is Calliope.

I haven't located an ancient statue of either lady that resembles any of these figures closely enough to have been its design source, so I am fumbling in the dark on this one. If only the figures were titled! But, with hindsight, if I were to do my books again (perish the thought!!), I would probably call ALL these ladies Calliope. In the year 2020, hindsight is 2020.

As the coronavirus pandemic marches on, I trust you are reading this in the comfort and safety of your home. How very privileged we are to be able to shelter in place, to wash our hands! My heart bleeds for the millions of helpless people in the townships of my homeland, South Africa, who lack such necessities. Daily, they scrounge for food and pray for survival.

Of course, the pottery world has ground to a halt, but we collectors have the luxury of savoring the treasures we already own. Digging through the folder of items I intend adding to earlystaffordshirefigures.com, I thought this large pooch and his two unlikely companions particularly unusual.

The group is BIG..a whipping sixteen inches across...and it sold a while ago at Sotheby's New York. The colors are underglaze and the group may have been made in Yorkshire rather than Staffordshire. It previously belonged to the iconic designer Mario Buatta, but I trust that its new owner is very pleased to have been able to give it a new home.

​Also unusual is this impressive figure, which sold at auction in the UK not so long ago.

I have no clue as to her identity, but I have recorded another figure from the same molds (below left) as well as the companion figure (below right). 

I had almost decided that these languidly posed ladies were classical portrayals of something or other, when along came the lady below. I suspect she is from the same pot bank--or, at very least, she was modeled by the same hand--but here the subject oozes domesticity. I have yet to see a classical figure holding a cat!

The companion model is a very English gentleman with the same dog at his side. Each is known only from the example shown here, but wouldn't they look fabulous side by side?

Believe it or not, there is yet another iteration of this theme. The particularly ugly fellow below in a rather unmanly pose probably portrays a theatrical character.

His female companion is very like one of the first females we looked at.

Placed side by side, the columns differ and there are some other obvious differences, but the figures seem to share many common features--perhaps even common molds. Possibly one or both of these ladies portray a theatrical figure. Who knows? But, as always, guessing is part of the fun.

One other mystery item caught my eye: the man on the very pretty plaque below is a real crosspatch. What a grouch! The modeler deliberately and skillfully ensured that anger and irritability oozed out of his every pore. Any idea who he might be?  If you know, please share....and please stay safe!

Last summer, this large pearlware plaque popped onto John Howard's site. I knew at once that I "needed" to buy it (reason to follow!), but, sadly, I am a too-disciplined collector, so before I could allow myself that luxury, I had to understand the plaque, decipher its subject, and attempt to find a design source.

To unravel the mystery, I started with the putto on horseback. He holds a two-faced mask, one face looking forward and the other back. This represents Janus, the god of beginnings and endings----yes, the very person for whom the month of January is appropriately named.

​But I was on the wrong track. I should have instead looked first at the youth sitting beneath a grapevine. This, it turned out, is is the Roman god Bacchus, the god of wine, who was known to the Greeks as Dionysus. He was associated with fertility, ritual madness, and religious ecstasy. ​Dionysus/Bacchus is said to have returned to Greece triumphantly from his travels in India and the East, where he had spread his wine culture. He came to be considered the founder of the triumphal procession, and the Triumph of Bacchus has been depicted in art from ancient times.

​Mystery solved. The plaque portrays the Triumph of Bacchus, and we have the skilled modeler William Hackwood to thank for its design. In 1770, working for Josiah Wedgwood, Hackwood modeled a jasper plaque depicting the Triumph of Bacchus. And Hackwood’s design is the direct source for the pearlware plaque.

​The Hackwood plaque, below, shows Bacchus seated in a horse-drawn chariot with his older companion and tutor, the satyr Silenus at his side.  A putto astride one of the horses carries a two-faced mask symbolic of Janus, whose presence would have marked the end of a journey and a new start. An identical motif is on a rectangular Wedgwood plaque in the Wedgwood Museum (no. 5139) that Wedgwood made at around the same time as the British Museum’s medallion.

The copper luster on the pearlware plaque is unusual for a plaque of this period, and it has  been applied lightly and uneventy over green enamels.  It is more subtle than it appears under the harsh glare of photographic lighting.

I was drawn to the Bacchus plaque because it is a companion to one of the prettiest plaques in our collection. That plaque, shown below, portrays Cybele. It is formed in the same manner, and it too measures 9.2" across the top. 

I believe this plaque was intended to portray the Triumph of Cybele. While I can find no specific tale of triumph for Cybele, she too is depicted, at least from the Renaissance, riding trumphantly in a chariot pulled by lions, the beasts traditionally associated with her. When Hackwood modeled his Triumph of Bacchus plaque, he also modeled another  depicting the  the Triumph of Cybele. Hackwood was well-versed in the classics and would have been aware of the many parallels between the two deities and their cults. Both were worshipped ecstatically with strong wine and wild dancing bordering on insanity. And both were associated with nature and ferocious animals. Lions typically pull Cybele’s chariot, while leopards or panthers usually draw Bacchus’s.   
​
Unfortunately, Hackwood's Triumph of Cybele, shown below, is not the design source for the pearlware plaque on that theme, so my search for this continues.

Notably, my Cybele plaque is modeled in high relief and is very prettily painted.

From the reverse, the Cybele plaque is formed in the same manner as the Bacchus plaque.

Both the Cybele and Bacchus plaques are almost certainly from the same pot bank as another pair of plaques in our collection, bought very many years ago from John Howard.

The figures portray the unfortunate Princess Charlotte, who died in childbirth, and her husband, Prince Leopold. The plaques are in astonishingly high relief, and the rims are gilded, perhaps as a nod to the importance of their royal subjects. I believe all the plaques shown here were made in the 1800-1820 period.

In the internet age, auctioneers have become hybrid retailers-wholesalers. Recently, Sotheby's took a step into what is definitely retail space with its new direct selling platform, Sotheby's Home. You can access it at Sotheby'shome.com.

Good news: the Sotheby's Home site has just added a selection of early figures from a private American collection. Searching "Staffordshire" or "pearlware" will pull them up. Pricing is aggressive, and offers are accepted. Plus there is an additional discount of 15%.

I welcome Sotheby's Home as space for selling good figures that don't quite make the price cut-off for single lots at auction---and don't we all hate it when multiple figures are bunched into a lot just to make that minimum?  

Another big positive: condition reports. In my experience, Sotheby's condition reports are the best. I have not yet been disappointed in one, and I certainly cannot say the same about condition reports from most other auction houses or most dealers. 

This January, Sotheby's auctioned the property of legendary decorator Mario Buatta. Known as the Prince of Chintz, Buatta inspired the "English Country house look" of the 1980s. His lavish interiors stuffed with beautiful objects reflected the age of excess--and an era when  "antiques" had not yet become a dirty word! But afficianados of beautiful objects still survive, and Sotheby's catalog---two fat volumes--sold out before the sale commenced.

Dealers in early Staffordshire pottery repeatedly bemoan the fact that their customers only want to buy "special" figures. Well, if you wanted something special, this beauty at the Buatta sale may have been just up your alley.

Made circa 1820 of undecorated pearlware, the bust portrays Queen Caroline, wife of King George IV. Her goings-on make today's royal family look like monks and nuns! In Caroline's day, there was no divorce law, so her husband, then the Prince Regent, tried to get a special divorce bill through Parliament. He failed, but in the process he aired a ton of dirty laundry--much in the spirit of Bill Clinton and that infamous blue dress.

The bust of Queen Caroline is reminiscent of the bust below, which portrays her daughter, the ill-fated Princess Charlotte. I suspect that both busts were modeled by the same hand. Some might think that the Sotheby's bust is also Charlotte, but I believe it has been correctly catalogued as Queen Caroline.

Also in Mears and Boyer's stock is another particularly early figure. The Hay Maker shown below left was made by Ralph Wood circa 1785 and is impressed "33". Amazingly, traces of original gilding remain. The figure was special enough in its day to have that gilding added, and it remains special, by my standards. I  took the image below for inclusion in Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840. Why do I not buy the figure? Again, I already have a similar hay maker, shown below right. My example is impressed "33" and was made by Ralph Wood in the same period. Ralph Wood designed his lady Hay Maker to stand with a gentleman Mower, but I have yet to see a Ralph Wood pair. In short, a single is a very respectable purchase, and a lovely addition to any collection.

Figures made by Neale & Co. in the 1780s are all really special, by my definition of that word. They typically sport the finest enamels, and I never miss an opportunity to acquire one. So I am puzzled that no collector has snapped up the little Neale & Co. figure of Apollo offered by Pickle Herring Antiques at a modest price.

Again, I would have bought this small gem if I did not already own one. Apollo was designed to stand alongside a similarly sized figure of Ceres, and I have examples of both. I first acquired Ceres and then waited for Apollo to turn up. It took a little patience, but collecting in this way is so interesting and rewarding.  Collectors who only want big/important/expensive figures have really lost the plot!

Andrew Dando has an array of delightful figures to fit every budget. In particular, he has a small pair of Turks that I would have snapped up if I did not already own a similar pair, which I assembled at a greater price than Andrew is asking. 

​I have only recorded one other example of this musician on this base--in that instance, the base was blue, so not particularly pretty. You may never find this gentleman's companion female figure, but so what? This example stands very well on its own, and it is special, to my way of thinking.

I shan't work my way through every dealer's stock, but I assure you each has special figures that are modestly (often too modestly) priced. In particular, John Howard, our very own Prince of Pottery, has figures that I deem special even though they do not cost a lot of money or require a chunk of shelf space.

When I started collecting, I wanted to acquire examples of figures I had seen in the few books then available. These were all impressive figures of the sort that today's collectors deem "special."  Then, I had a life-changing experience. I visited a UK collection that housed many such "special" figures....but scattered generously throughout  were many others. That collection was a living entity. Its owner had imbued it with his intellectual curiosity---and it inspired my collecting journey.

I correspond with several collectors who have assembled really interesting collections of figures in all price ranges---some bought for their sheer beauty, others because of their superb quality, or simply because they are interesting for one reason or another ( a maker's mark, a rare or unusual model, an attribution, or a reflection of history). I relish seeing these collections grow, and could spend hours perusing their contents.  If your collection is all "big hat and no cattle," you are missing out--but it's never too late to set that right. 

To kick off the new decade, the third edition of Obsession is now available on the BOOKS menu at the top of this page. Because of its size, it is formatted for free download in three volumes, each distinguished by its cover. I welcome feedback, good or bad. 

The year 2020 starts with yet one more early Staffordshire figure mystery. This month, auctioneers Bearnes, Hampton, & Littlewood, will be offering the very unusual figure shown below. The maiden is, I must admit, far from beautiful,.....yet her very ugliness is mesmerizingly attractive. The mystery lies in her identity. The auction house suggests she may be Herodias holding the head of John the Baptist, That's a nice guess but I think it's a long shot. In my experience, figures of this kind are classical rather than biblical in nature.

In researching our mystery maiden, I learned that Herodias is depicted in Renaissance art clutching the head of John the Baptist. To add to my confusion, the same painting occurs titled "Herodias with the head of John the Baptist" and "Salome with the head of John the Baptist". Seems artists weren't sure whether to credit mother or daughter with with the gory deed. In any event, I just don't think this biblical yarn inspired our mystery figure.

Having eliminated Judith and Herodias as inspiration for the mystery maiden, I suggest that she may be Melpomene, the muse of tragedy, who traditionally is portrayed holding a mask.

The figure of Melpomene, shown below, is decorated in pretty enamel colors. Other versions of this figure also occur.

As you have no doubt observed, our mystery maiden--rightly or wrongly henceforth dubbed Melpomene--- is decorated in a muddy and rather limited palette. That's because the colors are oxides that have been applied UNDER the glaze rather than on top of it, and the result is that typical Pratt ware appearance.

I have seen our Melpomene previously, but in a somewhat altered form. Here she stands alongside a figure portraying the earth mother, Cybele. Notice the similarities? Clearly, the figures share many common body parts.

All these figures are sizable. Melpomene, the smallest, is over 10" tall (26 cms), but Cybele and Ceres, because of their candleholders, are even taller. 

​I have recorded but one example of Cybele and a companion Ceres decorated in pretty enamel colors. Unfortunately, I only have a black and white image of these beauties, and it was published 55 years ago.

To add yet another mystery to the mix, this enamel-painted pair is Inscribed "John Cartledge at the Lodge in the plantation COWBRIDGE 1800." There is no other record of this maker's work....or perhaps there is and we have yet to find it? There is no telling what 2020 will bring. Most importantly, I hope it brings each of you whatever you wish for yourselves. Happy new year!

PS: Another mystery: I remain puzzled as to why Melpomene's feet are painted brown. They look more like paws. A mistake....or am I missing something here?

Browsing the web recently, an unusual Staffordshire pottery bust, shown below, caught my eye. The caption read "Bust of Mary Queen of Scots c. 1815." Mary Queen of Scots? That threw me. I failed to see any resemblance, any basis for that identification, but, wanting to learn, I dug deeper.

The bust belongs to a well-known American museum, but the museum's record for it makes me want to weep. Quoting from correspondence with "a Staffordshire ceramics expert," it reads,

"the figure may very well be Mary Queen of Scots, but canny potters often left the names off figures so that the subject matter did not deter customers... I have seen the same large full-length figure untitled, but variously described as St. Paul Preaching at Athens, Eloquence, and Demosthenes."
​
​What utter nonsense!  Where do I start to pull this opinion apart?

Admittedly, the bust "may very well be" any one of a number of women, but she is not Mary Queen of Scots, who is invariably portrayed clothed in a manner befitting a sixteenth-century monarch, as shown in her portrait alongside. A plunging neckline, a simple headband and curls dangling on the forehead were definitely not that monarch's style!

Why add to our collective ignorance by speculating wildly as to the identity of the bust? Why not simply leave it as unidentified?




​The "Staffordshire ceramics expert" is misguided on yet another issue: NOTHING supports her statement that "canny potters often left the names off figures so that the subject matter did not deter customers." Why would potters have made figures that they thought might deter their customers? Rather, I suggest that potters simply didn't bother titling figures when they thought the identity was obvious.

And what of the same untitled figure being "variously described as St. Paul Preaching at Athens, Eloquence, and Demosthenes"?  

I can almost hear some snarky comments from UK readers about American ignorance, but hold it right there. The "Staffordshire ceramics expert" quoted above is British. And UK museums can be just as foolish. 

​Recently, a UK collector contacted me about a  large, important pearlware figure, made circa 1810. Its look-alike---and the only other example on record--is in Brighton Museum's Willett Collection. Not knowing what he had, he took his figure to a UK museum that houses one of the most important collections of Staffordshire pottery in the world. After examining it, the curator informed him that he had looked in the Harding books on Victorian figures, could not find anything similar, and concluded that the figure might be continental!!  Read that again, please. A pearlware figure oozing with all the features of a pre-Victorian English figure is taken to a British museum and is considered to be continental!  To add insult to injury, the Willett figures is pictured in my Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840, which I donated to that museum, and it is also in Stella Beddoe's A Potted History, which should be in that museum's library. 

I am a bitterly disillusioned collector. I retain faith in one museum curator, and perhaps two or three auctions houses. I am as disillusioned with the trade, where various degrees of stupidity and dishonesty routinely rub shoulders. But none of that spoils my enjoyment of early figures.

​Last month, I managed to complete a pair of "Sherratt" London Cryers. It has only taken me fifteen years to achieve this!  My path, of course, was convoluted. I started with a female figure in 2004, and many years later I found a male to keep her company. The problem with this pairing, as you see, is that the female was made with a bocage, and the male without, so they were rather an odd couple.

This summer, I found a lady made without bocage to pair with my man. The result is as good an assembled pair as I can hope to find.

Of course, my task is not done because my lady with a bocage is now a singleton. If you have her mate and would like to buy/sell, do let me know because it would be so rewarding to complete another pair.

I know of only one other pair of London Cryers. They belong to a friend and are shown in Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840 Volume 2, chapter 30. 

As you see, my friend's male figure differs from my male figure. It seems "Sherratt" made two versions of the male figure. Does that mean that there were also two versions of the female figure? Yet another unsolved riddle! As always, I have more questions than answers.