HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David Babson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 30 Apr 1999 23:21:50 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
If the jar displayed were a bit taller, I'd say it was an "olive"
(condiment or food) jar; jars of that shape and that aqua metal being
common on 19th century sites, so finding them somewhat earlier would not be
impossible.  That short, however, my best guess would be some sort of
general utility small, but wide-mouth jar.  I would not disagree with the
identifications you've been receiving about the jar having contained boot
blacking, some sort of polish, ointment, tonic, etc.  It's enough of a
generic shape that it could have been used for any/all these products.  It
appears to be either free-formed, or partly blown into a dip mold; neither
manufacture method would be inconsistent with 18th century manufacture.



At 01:54 PM 4/29/99 -0500, you wrote:
>So far the suggestions I have received on the glass vessels visible
>on New South's website (http://www.newsouthassoc.com) are: glue
>bottles, boot black bottles, and some sort of medicine jar.  I have
>gotten some good suggestions for references, but would still
>appreciate more.
>
>Several people have asked for context.  The context of the vessels
>is a ca. 1750-1760 privy in downtown Charleston, SC.  There was
>some 19th Century overburden that was removed with a backhoe,
>although some 19th Century material did end up in the upper level
>of the privy.
>
>Susan Travis

ATOM RSS1 RSS2