I found the comments of Anita Cohen-Williams on what she has called
"pissware" interesting and curious.  As someone who has done some work on
this ware, I can understand the lack of understanding revealed here.
What is really interesting is that this is coming from an archaeologist
or someone who "does" archaeology, who should really know better.  For
one, mocha ware is really a misnomer for the whole class of this ware.
 
Potters only called objects "mocha" that had the mocha or
dendritic (tree-like) decoration.  They used other terms like "checked,"
"dipped," "marbled" etc. for other decorations.  We really don't know if
the potters had names for all the decorations now considered to make up
the broad classification of "mochaware."  There is some indication that
human urine was a component of some of the recipes used for the dendritic
decoration, and in fact, human urine was a common component of several
textile dies, the staler the better. Yuk!
 
The exhibit at Williamsburg will further establish the very problematic
term "mochaware."  Others, including myself, have suggested different
terms used to classify the ware.  For example, if you wanted to look for
information on "mocha ware" in the archaeological literature, you would
want to look up "annular ware," a term probably introduced by
Ivor Noel Hume in his "Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America."  And for
lack of a better term, it has caught on, especially after being used
by Stanley South in his mean ceramic dating formula.
 
What concerns me about the mochaware exhibit is the fact that Colonial
Williamsburg has allowed a private, active collector a forum to curate
his own collection.  Almost every object in the exhibit is his.  The
price of mocha has sky-rocketed, and even Sothebys recently gave color pages
to about two dozen pieces of what most feel to be rather average mocha. I
have seen objects for sale recently with a sticker stating
"From the Collection of Jonathan Rickard."  Does this make anyone else
feel a little uneasy?  Where was the ceramics curator at Williamsburg on this
major exhibit?  The curator has not even been mentioned in connection
with it.  I would love to hear to some open discussion about this.
 
The lively and frank remarks by Anita Cohen-Williams are appreciated.
Pissware in San Diego, you say?
 
Douglas F. Hawes
Winterthur Program in Early American Culture