Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:37:32 -0700 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
oops...I'm too often a literalist....and get frustrated with all the
exceptions there are...in bottle markings, etc. But...being a
detail-oriented person...I make an effort to leave no stone
unturned...trying to find (online at least) all I can about an
item...before describing it....making conclusions, etc.
I sure wish I could find that webpage with the cobalt bottle on it. I thot
it was the antiquebottles forum...that Kris suggested...but I cant find it
on there now. :o(
I get your point Matt, but (being a literalist)...I still dont know why a
company named Brunswick Pharmacal Co...would have used a plate with an '&'
in it to label their bottle (or rather, accepted such marked bottles from
the manufacturer)...when there isnt one in their company name. What, the
engraver was drunk...and they excused him his oversight...that one
time? ha ha.
Thanks for your comments.
At 02:04 PM 7/1/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>Carol,
>
>I think your friend David summed it up well in the second paragraph of his
>introduction to that portion of his website. Variations in the presentation
>of either the manufacturer information, or in some cases the contents
>information, are not uncommon. For any particular order or run, multiple
>molds might be formed by various craftsman. Compound this by a form that
>might be used for a number of years and variations in the presentation of
>the information is not that surprising (as stated [I believe correctly] on
>the web site). Don't forget that the companies would often change the style
>of their own marks as well.
>
>All I was trying to get across is that an analyst cannot afford to be a
>"literalist" when looking at historical-period material culture. Only after
>analyzing all of the clues can we put forward our best guess!
>
>mas
|
|
|