Page 76 - buvkeramika

76
raw bricks that had been placed for drying. The various footprints / paw prints are not specially selected
by masters but they are evidence of the diversity of domestic animals kept by the kiln’s craftsman or his
neighbours.
Marks and various impressions on bricks
On medieval bricks sometimes also marks of human origin are found. On some Turaida bricks
impressions of one or several fingers are seen, which have been accidentally left by the maker in the
wet clay. Occasionally the craftsman has deliberately drawn lines with fingers lengthwise the bricks
widest surface, thus creating shallow corrugation. This was not exposed in the masonry wall – just
on the contrary. Mortar having stuck into the finger-corrugated surface of bricks found in Turaida is
evidence of the fact that this surface had been laid inside the wall. Probably the uneven corrugation was
meant exactly for the mortar to be better stuck into it and so the masonry wall would become more
durable.
Special marks as makers’ marks or production trademarks on bricks have been left very rarely.
Investigations have shown that in Europe one of the earliest examples is the Middle Elbe region where
brick marking appeared in the 14th–15th centuries (Holst 1999, 219). In Estonia separate bricks with
makers’ marks were found in the Pirita Convent and in Tartu St. John’s Church (Tamm 1991, 212).
In Riga, in the Blackheads’ House, 11 various brick marks were registered (Ārends 1943, 45), but their
belonging and dating have not been studied. One of the marks depict a key containing letters SP which
is an indication of the brick-kiln of Lübeck, and thus, also of an imported article. The St. Peter’s brick-
kiln of Lübeck started operation in the 16th century, but the abovementioned mark was impressed only
starting with the late 17th century (Möller 2007, 464. Reisnert 1999, 502).
Alongside the trademarks of brick-kilns there can be also different occasionally or intentionally drawn
marks and impressions on bricks. Perhaps, a separate group can be the so-called house marks or makers’
trademarks use to denote a set of products. During the investigation of Turaida Castle, in the brickwork
where some window opening was bricked up, a 31 × 14.5 × 8 cm brick with a cross drawn in a circle was
found (Jansons 2007, 71). Also, a fragmentary brick was found on the widest surface of which three circles
are impressed one over another, but another fragment is covered by chequering (Graudonis 2005, II,
Table 59). These marks hardly were brick-kiln trademarks, but possibly some of these had a special
meaning during the time of their creation. Perhaps this was a mark to denote a set of bricks produced for
a particular building. But the impression of fabric seen on a brick found in 1979 could originate during
the time of its making when a just-shaped wet brick touched a piece of fabric. Maybe the cloth was used
to carry the brick to the place for drying.
A brick of Turaida with a graffiti depicting a male figure deserves a special mention (Fig. 10; No
22 in catalogue). In 1997, in the debris of the residential apartments of the castle in the north-eastern
corner of the core of the castle a particular find of building ceramics was obtained – a 30 × 14 × 8 cm
brick with a primitive, even a grotesque image scratched on its widest surface. It depicts a standing male
with a threateningly squinted right eye and raised hands. The image had been created before burning
of the brick – plain lines were drawn using a sharp wooden or iron stylus into the wet clay. The finder
Ieva Ose. Building ceramics of Turaida Castle in the 13th–17th centuries