A HISTORY OF SURREY 



hath not been practised in this our kingdom.' 

 Professor Church's statement that from the 

 preamble of the patent it appears that he had 

 settled at Lambeth is not borne out by a per- 

 usal of the grant itself.' 



The characteristic feature of what is com- 

 monly known as delft ware is its highly en- 

 amelled and opaque surface obtained by the 

 use as a glaze of the white oxide of tin. 

 With this glaze the potters of Europe sought 

 to conceal the natural colour of the clay and 

 to give to their productions the brilliantly 

 glassy and smooth surface of the porcelain of 

 China. The art discovered first in Italy or 

 introduced there from the east was soon de- 

 veloped until it attained perfection and passed 

 through other countries, when somewhat late 

 in its history it reached England from 

 Holland. With us, it has been observed, its 

 successful employment was attended with con- 

 siderable technical difficulty, for the rough 

 and porous clay of a calcareous nature which 

 was so well adapted to receive the stanni- 

 ferous enamel, and was ready to the hand of 

 the Continental potter, does not exist on 

 English soil.' Yet the art became firmly es- 

 tablished, and some of the specimens of Eng- 

 lish work of early date preserved in our 

 museums and in a few private collections may 

 well challenge comparison with the best pro- 

 ductions of Europe. 



Although, as has been already shown, it is 

 expressly stated in van Hamme's patent that 

 the art of manufacturing earthenware after 

 the manner practised in Holland had never 

 been previously exercised in this kingdom, 

 there are in existence a number of dated 

 pieces of delft ware with English lettering and 

 bearing all the characteristics of English 

 workmanship which are considerably earlier 

 than the year 1676. It is usual to label all 

 these pieces as Lambeth ware, and Professor 

 Church gives a list of all the named and 

 dated specimens with which he is acquainted 

 in our museums and in private collections. 

 Exclusive of certain other pieces, which he 

 is inclined to assign to Lambeth, the list con- 

 tains close upon seventy pieces. The date of 

 the earliest specimen is 1 631, and the greater 

 number range from 1641 to 1663. 'All 

 this ware,' he says, ' is of one sort and style, 

 but it occurs in a considerable number of 

 forms. The body' is of a pale bufF tint, 

 and like the Bristol delft of the first half of 

 the eighteenth century, harder, and with less 

 lime than the corresponding Dutch ware • 



< Pat. 28 Chas. II. pt. 2, No. 36. 



' Church, op. cit. 35. 



' Solon, Connoisseur, i. 251. 



the enamel is also generally whiter and more 

 opaque than that of the common foreign 

 specimens. The more decorated or orna- 

 mental pieces of Lambeth delft may be 

 designated as wine-jugs, pill-slabs, large 

 dishes or platters, and posset-pots. Of the 

 wine-jugs a large number of pint and half- 

 pint sizes are extant. Some of these are 

 plain but many are inscribed not only with 

 the name of the wine they were intended to 

 contain but also with the date of their manu- 

 facture (or possibly the date of bottling).' 

 The names of the wines that appear on these 

 jugs are White Wine, Sack and Claret. A 

 mug in Mr. Willett's collection has the sug- 

 gestive name of William Lamboth with the 

 date 1650. Other pieces bear the arms of 

 the city of London or of one or other of the 

 city companies, such as the candlestick with 

 the Fishmongers' arms and the date 1648, 

 and the two pill-slabs with the arms of the 

 Apothecaries' Company. These three latter 

 specimens are all in the Jermyn Street 

 Museum. In the majority of cases the 

 initials only of the maker are inscribed, but 

 in a few cases the name is given in full. 

 These names, which in the hope of evidence 

 being some day forthcoming to identify their 

 owners with Lambeth are here quoted, are, 

 besides the William Lamboth already men- 

 tioned, William and Elizabeth Surges (1631), 

 Elizabeth Handley (1646), George and 

 Elizabeth Stere (1660) and John Leman 

 (1634)-* . 



A solution of the problem how it is that 

 such pieces of delft ware apparently of Eng- 

 lish make exist of a date considerably earlier 

 than the first patent for the manufacture of 

 this class of pottery in England is perhaps to 

 be found in the recent suggestion made by 

 Mr. Solon, who thinks it probable that they 

 were imported in the plain state and decor- 

 ated by English hands to suit special pur- 

 poses." Against this view however may be 

 adduced the passage already quoted from 

 Professor Church, where he sees a distinction 

 to be made both in the body and the enamel 

 of these pieces and those of corresponding 

 foreign specimens. 



The particulars that we now know of 

 John Ariens van Hamme and his work are 

 very scanty and may be briefly recorded. 

 The first mention that we have of him is on 

 26 September 1676, when his petition for 

 the king's Letters Patent to make him a free 

 denizen and also to allow him solely to enjoy 

 the benefit of making tiles, porcelain, and 



Church, op. cit. 36- 

 Connohseur, loc. cit. 



2S4 



