1. SAENGER POTTERY WORKS: PRELIMINARY REPORT
By
Elizabeth Ann Bolsen-Long M.A. Student
Texas State University Department of Anthropology
Editor: Emilia Rodriguez M.F.A. Canidate
Texas State University Department of English
May 9, 2016

2. Topic Index
Introduction...………………………………………………..……….…………… p.1
Oral, Written, and Filmed History of Elmendorf……………………………….… p.2
Literature Review…………………………………………………………………. p.5
Georgianna Greer and James Richter…………………………………………… p.6
Bulletin of the University of Texas: Scientific Series…………………………... p.6
Clay Chemistry……………………………………………………………….. p.7
Elmendorf, Bexar/Wilson Counties…………………………………………... p.7
Understanding Pottery Function, James Skibo…………………………………... p.8
American Stonewares: The Art & Craft of Utilitarian Potters, Georgianna Greer..p.9
Throwing Pots, Phil Rodgers…………………………………………………….. p.10
The Pottery and Porcelain of the United States: An Historical Review of Ceramic Art
from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, Edwin Barber……………………. p.10
Standardization, Labor, Investment, Skill, and the Organization of Ceramic Production
in Late Pre-Hispanic Peru, Cathy Costin & Melissa Hagstrum……………….. p.10
Site Description………………………………………………………………….... p.11
1966…………………………………………………………………………….. p.11
2016…………………………………………………………………………….. p.12
Methodology…………………………………………………………………….... p.17
Provenance and Provenience.………...………………………………………... p.20
Size, Form, and Function………………………………………………………. p.20
Glaze Identification……………………………………………………………. p.22

3. 2
Determining Technique and Potter Skill Level……………………………… p.24
Clay Chemistry………………………………………………………………. p.25
Is it a Toilet Base or a Sauerkraut Press………………………………………... p.28
Continuing Work……………………………………………………………….. p.30
Conclusions from the Data……………………………………………………... p.31
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………….. p.32
Refernces………………………………………………………………………. p.33
Figure Index
Figure 1. Map of Elmendorf Texas…………………………………………… p.2
Figure 2. Library and Train Museum…………………………………………. p.13
Figure 3. Satellite Image of Saenger Site……………………………………... p.13
Figure 4. Brick Drying House……………………………………………….... p.14
Figure 5. Unidentified Structure……………………………………………… p.14
Figure 6. Factory Moorings…………………………………………………... p.15
Figure 7. Surface Midden…………………………………………………….. p.15
Figure 8. Surface Midden…………………………………………………….. p.16
Figure 9. Surface Midden…………………………………………………….. p.16
Figure 10. Railroad Mooring…………………………………………………. p.17
Figure 11. Pot Sherd………………………………………………………….. p.20
Figure 12. Historical Pot Sherd………………………………………………. p.21
Figure 13. Pot Sherd………………………………………………………….. p.22
Figure 14. Pot Sherds with Unknown Glaze…………………………………. p.23

4. 3
Figure 15. USGS Map of Clay Pits…………………………………………... p.25
Figure 16. Clay Pipe Sherd…………………………………………………… p.28
Figure 17. Sauerkraut Press Sherd……………………………………………. p.29
Figure 18. Sauerkraut Press, American Stonewares………………………….. p.30
Table Index
Table 1. Sherd Thickness……………………………………………………. p.18
Table 2. Rim Diameter………………………………………………………. p.18
Table 3. Base Diameter…………………………………………………….... p.19
Table 4. Lid Diameter……………………………………………………….. p.19
Table 5. Glaze Percentage…………………………………………………... p.23
Table 6. Comparitive Clay Chemistries…………………………………….. p.27
Appendix A………………………………………………………………… p.36
Site map 1966……………………………………………………………. p.37
Site map 2016……………………………………………………………. p.38

5. 1
Elizabeth Ann Bolsen-Long M.A. Student
Texas State University Department of Anthropology
SAENGER POTTERY WORKS: PRELIMINARY REPORT
Saenger Pottery Works of Elmendorf, Texas (Figure 1) was established in 1885
by Frederick W.M. Saenger. Mr. Saenger was a prolific potter, creating pieces that were
used in everyday activities. Saenger Pottery Works closed in 1915. Not only was Saenger
Pottery Works a studio and shop, but it was also a clay mine, and remains an active clay
mine today. The site of Saenger Pottery Works is no longer under in operation of as
Alamo Clay Company Incorporated closed in 1989. Since then the site has become a
residence, and a library for the people of Elmendorf. The purpose of this study was
investigate the majority size of the ceramics being produced, the majority form being
used, the intended function, and if provenances could be determined.
The original purpose at the beginning of this study was to explore the world of
ceramic analysis. However, the purpose has become something else in entirety. It has
gone far beyond the scope of being a teeth cutting exercise of an undergraduate students
interests. There is a serious interest in this collection of sherds, to actually understand the
connotations of these ceramics and the role that they played in the history of Elmendorf,
and the development Texas. This study tries to understand the lives of the people in
Elmendorf through the pottery being produced. What does the data tell us about the
pottery, the history of the kilns, the history of Elmendorf and its role in the development
of Texas?

6. 2
Figure 1. Current map of the City of Elmendorf, Texas
Oral, Written, and Filmed History of Elmendorf
At this time I have only had the opportunity to speak with three residents from
Elmendorf, Darlene Hicks, President of the Elmendorf Public Library and Train
Museum, Marla Rodriguez, Town Historian and curator of the Train Museum, and
“Bucky” Roberts longtime resident.
Marla tells me that the history of Elmendorf is lost to time, over shadowed by San
Antonio, and that the city is trying to reclaim whatever they can from records, wherever
they can find them. Marla tells me that there is an African American cemetery that has
long since been lost. The headstones bulldozed to the side, and the land is now being used
for cattle grazing. This was verified. As far back as 1935, there was a cemetery on the
town maps that disappeared after 1983. However the maps do not indicate weather this
was an African American cemetery, only that a cemetery did exist in that specific
location.

7. 3
Marla speaks of Elmendorf in its hayday. A time back before the Southern Pacific
Railroad left the town. During this time there were at the least 30 businesses. The ones
she speaks of were the hotel, the town doctor, Saenger Pottery Works, Dickey Pottery
Works, The Old General Store, The Richter Kilns, the Cotton Gin, and a clothier. She
tells me that Elmendorf is named after the first mayor the town, Henry Elmendorf.
Marla speaks of a hydrologic aqueduct system that was used to get water from the
river up to the site of Saenger Pottery Works. There are not any pictures of this aqueduct.
The water would be pumped in to troughs and pushed to the brick factory to make the
pottery and bricks. It is unknown how the aqueduct was powered, and nothing remains
today to verify its presence. The path that the aqueduct took has become overgrown with
trees and built upon by housing.
There are also several different owners of the site producing the same clay products
over a very long period of time. Marla explains to me that there was a merger between
the Richter kilns and Saenger kilns about 1918. At this time one of the Richter sons
married one of the Saenger daughters. It was about 1935 when the site was sold to Star
Brickworks. Sometime after that it was sold to Blue Star Brick Factory, and then to
Alamo Clay Company which closed the production site in 1989. However, it wasn’t until
recently that Alamo Clay sold the property, and the land went into private ownership.
Some of this information has been verified with the Bexar County Tax Assessors office.
There is a gap in possession between Star Bick Works and Blue Star Brick Works. There
is believed to be a Brick Company Called Singer that may have occupied the site. It is
unknown as to the time be there is speculation that this could be the brick company that
existed prior to Saenger. More research is needed on this topic area.

8. 4
Darlene spoke of being a descendent of one of 12 families brought over from the
Canary Islands by Castro in the 1800’s. These were families of mason workers. The
mason workers were brought to construct homes and businesses. She even mentions that
the small town of Castroville is named after a man named Castro that had brought her
family over. At this time records have not been researched to verify this information and
further research needs to be done. Additionally, more conversations with Darlene would
be most helpful.
“Bucky” Roberts was an interesting character to speak with. On the day that I spoke to
him you almost felt like you had time travelled to the late 1950’ or earlier 60’s. Bucky is
an older gentleman; he served in World War II. On the day of our interview, he was
wearing blue jeans, a white t-shirt, his dark brown hair was slicked back. I went to speak
with him about the Saenger Pottery Works, but he had no information. However, his
father was the owner of the Cotton Gin in town. In the field where the new tracks lay
used to be the cotton fields. This new railroad travels to Eagle Ford Shales. The
processing gins are just a couple of blocks down the road. He tells me that there is brick
wall still standing to prevent fires between the Gin and the processing plant. When you
drive by the old factory, which is now converted into someone’s home, you can still see
the brick wall.
Archival research has led to some very interesting and dark history of Elmendorf.
Back in the 1930’s a bootlegger existed named Joe Ball. It was interesting to even find
out that in this small town there was bootlegging, you almost didn’t expect it. Joe was
known as the “Butcher of Elmendorf”. Joe ran the local tavern and employed several of
the local women as barmaids; it was rumored that he had affairs with one or more of

9. 5
them. Several of these women working under his employ subsequently vanished. It is
speculated that he killed them and fed them to the pet alligators, that he kept in a pond
outside of the tavern. Two bodies were recovered, but the rest remain missing even today.
An investigation was led by Bexar County Sheriff's Captain Johnny Clavenhagen.
There is speculation that when he went to Joe's bar to bring him in for questioning, Joe
agreed. However, he asked to get his money bags in order to close his bar. Joe went and
pulled out the gun he kept behind the counter, and shot himself. Joe Ball has been called
the "Bluebeard of South Texas," “The Alligator Man,” and “The Butcher of Elmendorf.”
We may never know the truth about what happened to these women, but the story of the
"Alligator Man" will live on in history and infamy for generations to come, perhaps
changing each time it is told (San Antonio Light "The Butcher of Elmendorf" and KENS
5 Report).
Literature Review
There were not any articles in my search that are directly attributable to research
previously done on this collection. However, there was a significant amount of
Ethnoarchaeological records accessible at the University of Texas at San Antonio’s
Center of Archaeological Research, where this study was conducted. Those records,
meticulously taken, by James Richter and Georgianna Greer in 1966, give valuable
information as to the site condition and surface survey. Additionally, Marla provided me
with all the records she had when I visited the museum.
Additional resources used to understand the conditions of the ceramics and inform
the investigation include: Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, Manuals in Archaeological
Method, Theory, and Technique: Understanding Pottery Function, and Pottery in

10. 6
Archaeology. In addition, the Bulletin of the University of Texas: Scientific series,
Volume 2, Issues 12-17 were used to gather information on flood plain clay composition
and consistency.
James Richter and Georgianna Greer
In 1970 the condition of the site remains as is described in the site notes with few
changes, there is rock water tower, machinery moorings, and building foundations. The
area of occupation is 8-10 acres. The depth of the site is 1-2 inches. Additionally, there
are evidentiary remains of wood, coal, and gas kilns. Major Drainage of the site is to the
Calaveras Creek. The Survey type is surface collection. The typology of surface
collection is Stoneware Sherds, covered in Albany Slip Glaze, Salt Glaze, and Bristol
White Glaze. The salt glaze is an indication of a soda kiln in use at one point at the site.
Bulletin of the University of Texas: Scientific series, Volume 2, Issues 12-17
– Heinrich Ries
Flood Clay Washing Technique
Washing will often improve kaolin, fire clays, and stoneware clays. The only
locality in Texas where its use was observed was at Sanger Pottery Works, Elmendorf.
Two general types of plant are employed for washing purposes. In the one commonly
used for kaolin, the clay is generally disintegrated in a trough in which there revolves a
shaft bearing a series of arms or stirrers; it then passes into a series of troughs of low
pitch and rectangular cross section, along which the water, with suspended material,
passes. Here the sand settles out, while the clay is discharged into the settling tanks.
While the pitch of the troughing is commonly about one inch in twenty feet, still this,
together with the width and depth, may be varied to suit the conditions (p.21). After the

11. 7
clay has settled, the excess of water is drawn off, and the creamy mass at bottom drawn
off by slip pumps and forced into the filter presses, in which the water is forced out. In a
second type the clay is stirred up with water in a circular tank, allowed to stand a few
minutes while the sand settles and the clay and water is then drawn off to a settling tank
(p.22). What this does for the clay, is clear off all the debris that may have been naturally
occurring, or may have fallen into the clay during the harvesting process.
Clay Chemistry
There is significant information on the clay chemistry and glaze use, which will
be further discussed later. The analysis of the raw clay from this bulletin will be
compared to the Ohio State study, to see if the samples, over time have changed in
composition. In addition, there will be an attempted paste analysis discussed from clay
harvested from clay pits in the area to help potentially identify the source clay. However,
I must remain cautious in that this is a preliminary test. The results are not definite and
should not be considered the most conclusive. INAA should be used in further studies to
confirm if the Test tiles and the sherds are actually from the same sources.
Elmendorf, Bexar/ Wilson County, Texas
Wilson County holds an important place in the production of clay products in
Texas. The two types typically produced in the two counties are stoneware and buff-
ware. As evidenced by the sherds from Elmendorf, the most commonly produced in
Wilson and Bexar Counties, by potters, are stoneware goods. Additionally, a significant
amount of clay brick was also being produced and still is today. The clay beds are
lenticular in fashion and are a source for other clay goods production such as pipe, fire-
bricks, and other earthenware produced by other pottery production sites within and

12. 8
outside of Wilson county and the city of Elmendorf (p.305-306).
Understanding Pottery Function, James Skibo
How does understanding the function help us understand the people of the society
that consumed?
Understanding the function of pottery is an integral part of understanding society and
culture as a whole singular unit in time and space. By analyzing the function of pottery,
be it prehistoric, or historic, we can learn about the purchasing power, status, agriculture,
diet, politics, and husbandry within that society. So, it is important to collect as much
background information from written records as possible to understand society, when
possible. This may not be attainable with pre-historic studies as written records are
exceptionally difficult to come by. However, if historic ceramics are being studied, as is
the case with this particular collection, significant background research can be done on
the site, the potters, and the town. What is the bigger picture of Saenger Pottery Works?
How do they affect the local economy? And what are they producing that is needed or
wanted by the people of Elmendorf and the surrounding areas?
Ethnoarchaeological data is crucial in making important connections in historic
ceramics and the surrounding community (p. 1). Essentially, it allows us to the see the
bigger picture of the community from which this pottery emerged. Additionally,
understanding the intended function of these forms can help us make the connection
between the technical choices of the potter and the use function of the consumer (p.2).
Understanding these issues will tell us about the choices of the consumer, economic
status, and the effect on the local economy. Moreover, it will help to answer questions
that we have about what the consumers want and need from the potter,

13. 9
As ceramists, archaeologists, and anthropologists in general, we understand the
role that pottery plays in the community for consumption, processing, storage, and
collection of food goods. It is to our advantage as archaeologists in the commonality of
pottery remains that we must make the links to the lives of the people producing and
using the pottery that we find (p.3-4).
Skibo also discusses addressing all of the sherds as whole vessels and plying MNI
from biological anthropology. This methodology is used to determine the MNV
(minimum number of vessels). While in theory this seems like a good practice for gaining
insight to intended function and use, in practice I think this may be rather difficult for
implementation. He does, however, go on after this to further discuss how technical
choice, like surface treatment, the firing temperature, and morphology can lead us to
inferences about the intended function of the pottery being produced.
American Stonewares: The Art & Craft of Utilitarian Potters – Georgeanna Greer
This book changes the whole analysis. The preliminary analysis presented at
2014 TAS conference at San Marcos was flawed, by large proportions. She has detailed
descriptions of forms from historic American pottery that were not previously considered.
I must admit, this was because the book was not previously used in the study, even
though it was known to me. In fact, this book actually changed the label of one particular
sherd, which will be discussed in a section of this paper in greater detail.
I find this text most helpful for the typology of the historic forms and descriptions
of historic American European styles that developed throughout the United States during
the period of colonization through the industrial revolution. Even today the American
forms of pottery, sculpturally, are ever-changing, but the base forms remain the same.

14. 10
Throwing Pots – Phil Rodgers
This book deals strictly in the technique of throwing pots. There is heavy instruction
on the construction methods. As Skibo has discussed, knowing the techniques used can
help make inferences about the function of the form. Knowing how forms are produced
and why clays are selected for their specific properties such as: plasticity, firing,
temperatures, how quickly they dry, how easily or difficult they throw with, are important
factors when dealing with a community production site such as Saenger Pottery Works.
Knowing the ease or difficulty of which throwing clay performs can inform us about the
productions times of potter and the skill of the potter.
The Pottery and Porcelain of the United State: An Historical Review of American
Ceramic Art from the Earliest Times to the Present Day – Edwin Barber
The content of this book focuses solely on the manufacture and styles of pottery found
in the United States from early Native American to 1901. It covers a variety of regions
and regional styles, typologies, forms, operations of production, manufacture, clay
bodies, and decorative effects. The main purpose of this work is to provide an account of
some of the earlier potteries, historical interest of manufacturing, which have produced
works of originality and artistic merit.
Standardization, Labor Investment, Skill, and the Organization of Ceramic Production in
Late Prehispanic Highland Peru – Cathy Costin, Melissa Hagstum
This is a complicated subject area. There is the making of larger objects that are
found in feasts and in larger households. There is a domestic economy for everyday use
in Elmendorf. There is a context of production which is the special relationship between
the producer and the consumer. There is a constitution to the producer. Who is producing

15. 11
the pottery; factories, workshops, or individuals? Is this being done part time or full time?
It can be hard to talk about because production can be high specialized when accounting
for seasonality, given weather and other types of things that could affect it. The article
also talks about 8 types of specialization in craft production. The one that applies here to
this research would be a community specialization, given that the site was producing
more than just pottery, but also bricks for construction. In addition, the specialization of
indicators of skills will be useful in helping to determine skill of the potters working at
Saenger Pottery Works.
They also purpose that to determine standardization of the ceramics and skill of the
potter you need to be able to assess all the steps in production and the complexity in
addition to time. The authors look at mechanical and intentional standardization. These
are unconscious choices that a potter makes when developing the pot. Skill, training,
supervision, the experience that you have makes a difference. This is mechanical
standardization. When looking at the intention standardization you find the things that are
very purposeful; for example the choice of color or exterior design elements are
unintentional or purposeful. This will be helpful later in assessing the skill of the potter(s)
of Saenger Pottery Works and Brick Factory.
Site Description
1966
The site survey provided by UTSA’s Center for Archaeological Research, compiled
by Georgeanna Greer states: “There are essentially no remains of the old potteries at
Elmendorf – no kilns are standing from the original period and no large sherd heaps,
except some very late white Bristol glazed ware from the Saenger pottery were found.

16. 12
The period dates – 1886 -1915. The Richter or Star Pottery was located under the present
brick works. The Saenger Pottery works was across the street – only a rock water tower
and machinery mountings and foundations remain.” Based on her descriptions, she is
wrong. I hate to call some as respected as Georgeanna Greer wrong, except that she has
her locations backwards.
The site descriptions are correct, but her location names are wrong. According to
land records from the Bexar County Tax Asser’s office, the Richter Kiln property was
across the street, and the site she is describing is the Saenger Pottery works site that
merged with the Richter Kilns following the marriage two of the families. See Appendix
A for site map comparisons.
2016
Currently the site is somewhat overgrown. Where the Sanger house once stood, is
now the town library and train museum, which are consolidated in to one building
(Figure 2); it appears to be constructed from bricks made on site by one of the many brick
factories that were there. It may have once been the offices of many different brick
companies that have occupied the site. On Georgeanna Greer’s site she lists three kilns.
However, when using satellite imaging it is revealed that five kilns actually sat on the
property (Figure 3). There are two large buildings that still stand. One was a drying house
for the massive amounts of bricks that were produced, and it has been updated with a
metal roof (Figure 4).The same goes for the second structure which can be assumed to be
a carriage house and horse stalls given the construction. There is not a picture of the
carriage house as it currently stands as this is someone’s residence and open workshop.
Underneath the drying house sits an old train car on an unconnected track, which can be

17. 13
seen in figure 4. There is an additional unknown structure, which may have been a larger
kiln behind the carriage house which has collapsed and was backfilled. There is one small
stone structure near the center of the property which holds an unknown purpose (Figure
5). The foundations of the factory still remain, in addition to moorings that Georgeanna
described. They are rusted metal lines in the slab foundation Figure 6. There are several
surface middens with remains of brick and pottery found on the site that have remained
untouched for years (Figure 7, 8, and 9). Also the old train track moorings are still
visible, although, through an overgrowth of the native plant life (Figure 10).
Figure 2. Back view of the Library and Train Museum in Elmendorf.
Figure 3. Satellite Imagery of the Saenger Pottery Works Site.

18. 14
Figure 4. The Brick Drying House With Train Car Inside.
Figure 5. Unknown structure still to be identified, near the back center of the
property.

19. 15
Figure 6. Leftover rusted Factory moorings.
Figure 7. A mixture of pot and brick sherds.

20. 16
Figure 8. A mixture of pot and brick sherds, with some wooden debris.
Figure 9. A mixture of pot and brick sherds.

21. 17
Figure 10. The old Southern Pacific Rail Road Mooring Overgrown With Native
Plants.
Methodology
The sample was chosen by random stratigraphic selection. What this means is all
pieces from the collection were laid out on the table and every fifth piece was pulled,
without consideration of size. Of the 347 pieces in the collection 318 pieces were
analyzed for thickness (Table 1), 31 sherds for rim diameter (Table 2), 27 sherds for base
diameter (Table 3), and 9 sherds for lid diameter (Table 4). All sherds were drawn out,
and at this time 111 have been photographed. During this time the pieces were observed
for glaze on the interiors and exteriors (Table 5), observations of technique used to make
the pottery, and which part of the form the piece originated (Table 6). What about
provenance and provenience?

22. 18
Table 1. Sherd Thickness can be Attributed to Skill of the Potter. It can be
assumed with 90% certainty base on the thickness of the 318 sherds selected
that the skill of the potter is that of an advanced level of mastery.
Table 2. Rim Sherd Diameter by Percentage Presentation of Measurement
This percentage presentation of rim measurement can help in indication of
the vessel form, in turn leading to a vessel function identification.
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Thickness
.6mm
.8mm
1mm
1.2mm
1.4mm
1.6mm
1.8mm
2mm
2.2mm
2.4mm
2.6mm
2.8mm
3mm
3.2mm
3.4mm
3.6mm
3.8mm
4mm
4.2mm
4.4mm
4.6mm
4.8mm
5mm
numberofsherds
measurement in milimeters
Sherd Thickness
8.5cm
3%
9cm
10%
9.5cm
6%
10cm
6%
11cm
6%
12cm
22%
12.5cm
13%
13cm
6%
14cm
13%
15cm
6%
19cm
3%
20cm
6%
Rim Diameters by Percentage

23. 19
Table 3. Base Sherd Diameter by Percentage Presentation of Measurement
Analysis of the base diameter by percentage measurement could be indicator of the
average of the vessel size in the collection. This measurement could also be an
indicator of the vessel form, lending to an interpretation of a possible vessel
function.
Table 4. Lid Diameter by Percentage Measurements, which can be an indicator of
the size and form of the vessels of which they were used upon.
11cm
11%
12cm
22%
13cm
26%
13.5cm
3%
14cm
4%
15cm
4%
17cm
11%
18cm
11%
23cm
4%
26cm
4%
Base Diameter by Percentage
10cm
56%12cm
22%
6.4in
11%
7in
11%
Lid Diameter Percentage
Measurements

24. 20
Provenance and Provenience
How did I determine provenance vs. provenience? The first thing I needed to do
was understand the difference between the two. Provenance from the French provenir, "to
come from" refers to the chronology of the ownership, custody or location of a historical
object, whereas provenience is used in related but a subtly different sense to provenance.
We as archaeological researchers use provenience to refer to the three-dimensional
location of an artifact or feature within an archaeological site. Based on the records and
stylistic markers as seen in figure 11, I was able to conclude that the pottery did in fact
originate from the Saenger Pottery Works kilns. I was able to determine the provenience
through records but not the conclusive provenance of the sherds.
Figure 11. Saenger Pottery Works, Bristol White Blaze, with Cobalt Blue
Stamping Makers Mark.
Size, Form, and Function
Determining the overall form of the shards was an interesting task. The sherds
from this collection are all Cylindrical, Ovid, or Bell forms (figure 12) with the exception

25. 21
of the sauerkraut press. The majority of the sherds from this collection are large pieces.
Some sherds are marked with gallon markers. This indicates that they could have been
either milk jugs or water coolers. However, it is likely that they are water coolers, since
some of them have a gallon marker of three or higher which have not yet been digitally
photographed. Other indications of function are the size of the sherds that do not have
gallon markers, but are large enough that it can be inferred from thickness, shape,
ethnoarchaeological data, and intended function that they could be butter-churn sherds,
and the evidence for butter-churn lids is exceptionally present. The sherds with flared a
neck could be identified as spittoons in function, and some of the larger cylindrical vessel
forms could be identified as sauerkraut presses. This portion of the collection that was
sampled yielded no intended function of chicken feeders, fountains, or flowerpots.
Figure 12. Georgianna Greer, Historical Pot Forms Diagram.

26. 22
By looking at the intended vessel forms from the variability in the sherds, the
decoration on the glaze, and the variability in the thickness of the sherds, I concluded the
intended function of the forms in question. What I did with this collection was look at the
glazed decorated sherds, the thickness from the sherds, the types of sherds found, and the
throwing lines as seen in figure 13, to determine what the vessel form it came from was,
the intended use, and the technology used to make it.
Figure 13. Saenger Pottery Works sherd, Interior View, Visible Throwing
Lines.
Glaze Identification
The glazing on sherds has been determined to be Bristol White Glaze.
Comparative analysis was done by examples of previously identified Bristol white glaze,
Cobalt blue underglaze for the makers mark as previously seen in figure 11, and an
unidentified Glaze as seen in figure 14. 346 sherds were used to determine a preliminary

27. 23
% of glaze decoration used at this site (Table 5). What we learn about the site from the
glazes, is the different types of kilns that were present during production and the potters
preference in decoration.
Table 5. Showing the difference in decorated vs. Un-decorated sherds in the
sample.
Figure 14. Unidentified Color of Glaze used on Pottery of Saenger Pottery
Works Collection
Glazed Decorated
11%
No Data
2%
Glazed Un-
Decorated
87%
Percentage of Glaze: Decorated Vs.
Undecorated

28. 24
Bristol White Glaze is very vitreous. The glaze is most commonly used on clays
with color ranges from a white, grayish white, to a gray stoneware paste. The glaze
presents as a shiny surface in white or mustard gold. The application is done with
vertical dipping of the vessel, to produce a two tone effect, with the white to mustard gold
presenting on the tops or bottoms of the vessels (Greer 2005, Hume 2001, FLMNH
2016).
The Bristol glazing technique was developed in the town of Bristol, England in
1835, and as such began being used by American potters. It began to replace the brown
slat glaze stoneware being used by the utilitarian potters (Greer 2005, Hume 2001,
FLMNH 2016).
The Bristol gaze is a felspathic glaze slip requiring the use of zinc oxide, which
allows for a once fire instead of twice firing the wares. Bristol glaze is often referred to as
a double-glazed ware because this type of glaze creates a two tone effect from dipping
the vessel in the glaze twice. This glaze is commonly found on bottle forms at historical
archaeological sites in America and has also been found on many other utilitarian forms
(Greer 2005, Hume 2001, FLMNH 2016).
Determining Technique and Potter Skill Level
The consistency in the size variability measurements yields to results of skilled
potters, who knew how to use the technology they had present. It is unknown as to
whether the potter’s wheels being used was electric or kick, but it is evident in the
analysis of the ceramic pot sherds that a potter’s wheel was being used. The Saenger
Pottery Works collection presented in this research can be said to have been wheel
thrown, soda kiln fired, (unknown gas, wood, electric, or coal), and traditional kiln fired

29. 25
for those without a salt glaze. The potters making the pottery at this particular kiln site
were of advanced potter status, on the basis of consistency in measurement for the sherds.
There is evidence for slip casting with the production of toilets. Why is the variability in
size, form, and function so important if we have all of this background information and
inference available?
Clay Chemistry
The two sources used to gather information on clay chemistry; The Ohio state
study and the University of Texas study indicate that there is a high prevalence of
Calaveras clay in the southeastern area of Bexar County and the norther most regions of
Wilson County where the clay pits were being harvested from. Both the article and the
report give a description of the clay maintaining a yellow color after it is fired. My
informant Marla tells me that all of the kilns in the area were harvesting from the clay
deposits in the area, you can see these pits in figure 15.
Figure 15. USGS Survey map showing local source clay pits.
In a preliminary comparison of clay chemistry analysis from The University of Texas,

30. 26
we learn that there are variations in clay chemistry used in the area. When you compare
the clay used in Elmendorf to the clay used in nearby Saspamco, you can see the variance
in the formulas used by the kilns. Please keep in mind the Saspamco and Elmendorf Clay
Chemistry is of fired clay, and the Chemistry of the Calaveras Clay is raw un- Fired Clay.
The slight chemical variation in the comparison is caused by the firing of the clay. When
clay is fired is loses some of the chemical water and oxygen that is attached to the
molecules that make up the chemical compositions in the clay.
This could help in determining provenance with 50% certainty (Table 6). Until
INAA analysis is done on the collection sherds and compared to sherds found on site,
then and only then can provenance be determined with a 90% certainty. However, given
the wide range of use of the single clay body as researched, it may prove to be more
difficult to provenance based on clay body, and other methods such as glaze typology
may need to be used. That being said, given the prevalence of specific glazes being used
in the period this may also prove some difficulty. Until clay body and glaze chemistry
can be matched to specific kilns and potters the provenances will remain elusive.
In preliminary study of the sherd forms there is a pipe sherd as seen in figure 16.
According to the literature pipe was made in Saspamco, not in Elmendorf. According to
an interview Dr. Heinrich conducted with Mr. Saenger, of Elmendorf, there is clay out
crops two miles east of Calaveras, and the samples used from Dr. Heinrich do come from
along the aforementioned creek in table 6 ( Heinrich 1901). In order to determine with
90% percent or greater provenance of the entire collection all sherds from this collection
will need to be subjected to INAA analysis to determine the source clay in area, and glaze
chemistry of all associated potters producing in Bexar and Wilson Counties.

31. 27
Additionally, there will need to be site sample sherds from the other kilns in the vicinity.
At this time this is not probable. However, in the future this analysis may be plausible.
Elmendorf Saspamco Calaveras Clay
Silica (SO4) 68.3% 64.92% 70.5%
Alumina
(Al2O2)
20.1% 22.70% 18.3%
Ferric Oxide
(Fe2O2)
1.0 % 0.80% 1.8%
Lime (CaO2) Tr. 0.10% Tr.
Magnesia
(MgO)
2.4% 0.74% 0.9%
Soda (Na2O) 0.6% 0.71% 0.2%
Potash (K2O) Tr. 0.12% Tr.
Titanic Acid
(TiO2)
1.2 % 1.40% 1.2%
Water (H2O) 6.6% 7.00% 5.5%
Total 100.2% 98.49 98.4%
Table 6. Comparison of Clay chemistry Elmendorf , Saspamco, and Calaveras
Creek Clay Bexar County (Heinrich, 1901).

32. 28
Figure 16. Pipe sherd from the Saenger Pottery Works site surface collection that
may have come from the Saspamco kilns.
Is It a Toilet Base or a Sauerkraut Press?
I remember in my Introduction to Archaeology class my instructor using a
metaphor about future archeologists digging at a reclaimed garbage pit. While they are
digging they find a toilet seat. These archaeologists don’t know what it is. It is not
attached to a toilet. They use something far from what we call a toilet to go to the
facilities in their time. These archaeologists have no context for this artifact, other than
they have found it in a large trash midden. They immediately call it a hat. Our instructor
warns us of falling into, what he explains as, the toilet seat hat trap. So why am I telling
you this story about a toilet seat called at hat? Well, that is exactly what I did in the initial
classification of the artifact see in figure 17.

33. 29
Figure 17. Sauerkraut Press, Saenger Pottery Works Collection.
How did this happen? Initially it was compared to toilet base, and it was assumed
that the holes were for screw placement to hold the base of the toilet to the ground. This
is an entirely incorrect analysis and assumption. I had always has my suspicions that this
was an incorrect analysis. What led me to the conclusion that this was a Sauerkraut press
was, when I was researching through Georgeanna Greer’s American Stoneware, I came
across an image of a complete sauerkraut press. My suspicions were confirmed that the
analysis and assumptions in regards to this artifact were indeed incorrect. As you can see
in the image (figure 18) the holes and form are identical to the artifact in the collection.
There is no doubt that these artifacts that present with this shape and particular
formations in the shape are sauerkraut presses. It is also clear that the presses were being
made at Saenger Pottery Works in Elmendorf by W.M. Saenger. However, it must said
further research is needed to be done to understand if any other potters were making this

34. 30
particular item.
Figure 18. Sauerkraut Press from Saenger Pottery Works c.a. 1900, American
Stonewares p.133 Georgeanna Greer.
Continuing Work
There is further work to be done with this site. As mentioned previously an
INAA comparative study needs to be performed on the clay paste of the sherds collected
from test pits on the actual site, sherds in the collection, and samples from the clay pits.
More extensive historical data needs to be collected on the area. Although with the lack
of archival records this time, may prove to be somewhat difficult. More records may be
found elsewhere outside of Bexar County. More Collective analysis on the actual sherd
forms needs to be done as prehistoric forms are significantly different from those of
colonial historical American utilitarian pottery wares. There are plans to continue
research on this area. There are several other historical kilns that need to be investigated.
Among this there could be significant information on early historical trade routes

35. 31
involving the early settlers of the area. In reference to the African American cemetery
that was destroyed and is now being used as graze land for farm animals, there could be
important information on the slave trade in Texas and segregation tied to the area that
also needs further investigation. I would recommend that this include a forensic
biological analysis of those remains for familial identification purposes so that the
families of the decedents can claim them. Additionally, studies investigating the stress
related issues of the skeletal remains of the slave trade and segregation in this sample
could be addressed. This also requires an archival research to find the records from the
cemetery to identify the exact location of the plots. Elmendorf is a site that is more than
just about pottery. I believe that with the significant amount of water resources in the
area, and the identification of prehistoric projectile points by Dr. Hard and Dr. Bousman
in 1998, that there may be sites of significance in the area of occupation by Native
American groups dating pre- Columbian. I also recommend that research be done in the
area by some of this expertise.
Conclusions from the Data
The size, form, and function variability can tell us a great deal about the pottery
being produced, the techniques they used, and what forms were preferred over others.
This information tells us about the people who were making the pottery and their skill
level. In addition it provides us information about who was buying it, and what forms
were important to them. It helps us understand the people making the pottery and the
people who were buying. It tells us about the culture at the time it was being produced.
The pottery sherds collected from the site can be dated based on makers’ marks
and stylistic attributes, in addition to knowing the years of operation of the kiln. This

36. 32
collection date c.a.1886 through 1915 C.E. Saenger Pottery Works was in operation from
c.a.1885 through 1915 C.E. The owner of the site in the records from Ms. Greer at the
time of her research (1966 C.E.) was Alamo Clay Co. Inc.
The collection section studied is un-provenienced, and not part of the larger
Greer collection stored at The UTSA Center for Archaeological Research. The sherds can
be given provenience, but not provenance. The types of stoneware produced there cannot
at this time be determined with accuracy.
This portion of the Saenger Pottery Works Collection is attributed by markings on
the pottery that indicate that it is from Sanger Pottery Works sites in Elmendorf. Saenger
Pottery Works was established in 1885 by Frederick W.M. Saenger. It is the only location
in Texas to use the flood plain clay washing technique. The intended function tells us
what the producers of the pottery had intended for their work when it was finished. The
variability here suggests that the primary production from this particular kiln site may
have been meant to be primarily as storage vessel construction and sale as well clay
brick.
Acknowledgments:
This article would not have happened without the encouragement of Dr. Robert
Hard of UTSA, Dr. F. Kent Reilly of Texas State University. Both of these accomplished
archaeologists have played significant roles in the making of this research study and
article composition. Special thanks belong to Marybeth Tomka, Dr. Steven Tomka, and
Dr. Cindy Munoz for granting access to the ceramics while being studied at UTSA’s
Center for Archaeological Research. I would also like to acknowledge the people of

37. 33
Elmendorf, who have graciously and excitedly welcomed into their community.
Specifically Marla, the Town Historian, Darlene the Library President, and Shawn the
resident of the site for granting me access. I look forward to working with everyone in
the town in helping to reconstruct the history through the pottery that was made there.
References
Costin, C., Hagstrum B.H.
1995, Standardization, Labor Investment, Skill, and the Organization of Ceramic
Production in Late Prehispanic Highland Peru. American Antiquity vol. 60, 4: 619-
639
Greer, Georgeanna H.
2005, American Stonewares: The Art & Craft of Utilitarian Potters, 4th Ed. Schiffer
Publishing, Pennsylvania
Hard, R., Bousman, B.
1998, An Archaeological Survey of a Pipeline Right-of-way along Loop 1604 from
IH-37 to the San Antonio River, Southeast Bexar County, Texas, Center for
Archaeological Research The University of Texas at San Antonio Archaeological
Survey Report, No. 273
Hume I, Noël
2001, A Guide to the Artifacts of Colonial America, University of Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Press.
Kens 5 Report,
N.D. "The Butcher of Elmendorf "

38. 34
Lang, W.B. et.al.
1940, Clay Investigations in the Southern States 1934-35, U.S. Department of
Interior, Bulletin 901, United States Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Mattison, Steve
2003, The Complete Potter, Quarto Publishing, London
Orton, Clive
2013, Pottery in Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, New York
Prudence, Rice
1987, Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and
London
Reis, Heinrich
1901. Bulletin of the University of Texas: Scientific series, Volume 2, Issues 12-17
p.21-22
Rodgers, Phil
2007, Throwing Pots, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia
Skibo, James
2013, Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory, and Technique: Understanding
Pottery Function
Sinopoli, Clara
1991, Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics, Plenum Press, New York and
London
Tuner, Allen
1981, "The Butcher of Elmendorf", San Antonio Light

39. 35
Uknown, Author
1927, Elmendorf has Big Clay Plants, San Antonio Express, San Antonio
N.D. Stoneware, Bristol Glaze, Ginger beer bottle – Type Index, Historical
Archaeology at The Florida Museum of Natural History
http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/gallery_types/type_index_display.asp?type_na
me=STONEWARE,%20BRISTOL%20GLAZE%20GINGER%20BEER%20BO
TTLE accession date: April 20, 2016
UTSA Center for Archaeological Research
1966, Archived records: Saenger and Richter Kilns

40. 36
Appendix A:
Site Maps 1966

41. 37
Site Map 2016

42. 38

43. 39

44. 40