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 Location of the Saggar works……………………………….4

Figure 2 Plan 1……………………………………………………….10
Figure 3 Plan 2……………………………………………………….12
Figure 4 Site Plan…………………………………………………….13
Figure 4 Caughley and Swinney 1790 …………………………….14
Figure 5 Threshold and north wall ………………………………….20
Figure 6 North wall…………………………………………… …….20
Figure 7 Tee brick foundation-East…………..………………………21
Figure 8 Tee brick foundation-West..………………………………..21
Figure 9 Buttress on south wall ……………………………………...22
Figure 10 South wall ………………………………………22
Figure 11 Interpretation of Geophysical results……………………….23
Figure 12 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.
123 Area of grey clay with
tile and brick frags.
Possible internal
surface.
124 Soft clay with mortar
frags. Roof tiles from
slippage of roof after
disuse.
127 Extension of works.

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 Red sandstone
120
Contexts

114 Foundation wall of

+105E manufactory.
105N 120 Orange sandy clay similar to
subsoil across whole area.
125 Soft grey silt possible run off
120 from site.
126 Brick buttress. Bricks laid at
45 degree angle to perps.

+106E
104N

Figure 3 BRO 04/A1/T2 Plan 2 South wall of Saggar works

WAG Caughley Report 2004 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 Pictures

WAG Caughley Report 2004 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

WAG Caughley Report 2004 20

Figure 9 Tee brick foundation -
West

Figure 9: Buttress on south wall

Figure 10: South wall

WAG Caughley Report 2004 21

WAG Caughley Report 2004 22
 TRACK-
WAY INTO
SITE

YARDS

Figure 11: Interpretation of Geophysical results.

WAG Caughley Report 2004 23

Figure 12: Thomas Bryan. 1780

WAG Caughley Report 2004 24