HOME    SEARCH   ALL TOPICS

Early brickmaking and pottery around London

Before potters and brickmakers settled in permanent accommodation with permanent kilns, they moved from place to place digging up its clay and firing it in temporary arrangements. This page explains the work in some detail and comments on the Cole potters concerned

____

by the webmaster from research

At the end of the 18th century, London was rapidly expanding, and a great deal of building material was needed. Since there was no local stone and not yet any railways to bring stone in, and since wooden buildings had been outlawed in London since the Great Fire, bricks had to be made from local clay. Fortunately, London had suitable clay in abundance.

I believe that my Cole ancestors must have been heavily involved in the production of bricks and tiles for the London building industry at the time, although I have no actual evidence of it. This page is about what could have been their involvement in north London, then Middlesex.

Research into the Islington potteries/brickworks

My first step to find out more was to visit the Islington Archives. Why Islington? The Cole Potteries and the Tile Kilns were both in the general area of north London, with the earlier Tile Kilns being the further out of the two. So Islington, further out still seemed a good place to start.

I learnt from various old maps that in the period concerned (the late 1790s to early 1800s, that there were few roads in the area. Kilns of a sort were in the open fields with simple tracks running up to them. The main one was later named Tile Kilns Road and then renamed Tile Yard Road in 1897. It still exists as Tileyard Road, as documented in 'Streets with a story: the Book of Islington', E. Willats, 1987, but of course is thoroughly built-up now.

I also consulted various old books on the area, in particular William Pink's 'History of Clerkenwell' (1881, later reprinted), and 'A Victorian History of the County of Middlesex: Volume VIII' (1985).

All the books made the link between the use of bricks, the lack of natural London stone, the lack of railways and the outlawing of wood for main construction following the great fire of 1666. So the clay from clay sites around London was used to make bricks, and temporary kilns were a common sight, with their smoke and pollution dominating in every direction.

As the production of bricks moved ever outwards from the expanding London, digging clay by hand for temporary kilns

A temporary kiln built with the bricks to be fired

The archives provide no evidence of any owners or workers in these early times. 'A Victorian History' notes that in the 1770s the nearby area of Maiden Lane was made unattractive by its proximity to the Fleet River (now subterranean) and the trades that had gathered there, including a pottery. The Victorian History implies that the original Maiden Lane was quite long.

The current Maiden Lane is a very small off-shoot of the original which was renamed York Way around 1850 when the street layout altered with the coming of the railway. There was a Randall's kiln works in the area, but I haven't researched it. However, I understand from John Green that the workers' cottages, Randell's [sic] Cottages, in Maiden Row, off Maiden Lane, were built before 1841. (John Green was looking for William Brown born about 1808 in Hertfordshire and resident at the cottages in 1845. William was not there in 1841).

Names stick across the years

Randall's kiln works gave their name to Randell's Road which is just south of Tileyard Road.

Interestingly, too, is that there is a road called Brandon Road just north of Tileyard Road. Brandon is a Cole family name. Elizabeth Brandon married E.G. Cole and the name was then perpetuated in the given name of their son, Sidney Brandon Cole. According to A History of the County of Middlesex (1985), the road was so named after a Samuel Brandon who owned land there as well as elsewhere in England. There was probably a connection between him and Elizabeth Brandon. There is a story there for anyone who wants to research it.

Who came before?

For many years, I had thought that Daniel Cole (1772-1840) was the earliest Cole who could be traced back in my Cole Pottery line. Then all that changed with the discovery by Bruce Bennett of the 1805 will of a Thomas Cole. Bruce recognised its significance and did more research. What follows is due to him.

Thomas Cole who must have been born c 1710 was a wealthy merchant. The main beneficiaries of his will were his children, among whom was a Daniel Cole born c1738, who clearly died before Thomas, because the will named that Danie's two sons as beneficiaries instead: a Daniel born c1772 and a John born c1776. Further research showed that this Daniel, the one born in c1772 was the one associated with the Cole Pottery.

Setting up or buying potteries cost a great deal of money, and I had often wondered where the money came from. Bruce’s research provided the answer to this question and more.

The set-up money for the London Cole Potteries

It must have been the money from Daniel's inheritance that enabled his son John Cole to set up the Cole Pottery in Tottenham. It is known from Daniel’s grandson E.G.Cole that the wider family owned other potteries at one time. Perhaps Daniel oversaw their purchase or perhaps he left it to his children. Either way, the family must have been fairly close and Daniel must have been generous with his inheritance.

sources

webmaster

contact

what visitors say

cookie policy    privacy policy

Text and images are copyright

If you can add anything to this page or provide a photo, please contact me.