# Beehive Peppersauce Bottles, or What?



## Harry Pristis (May 30, 2016)

I have a bottle (two, actually) that I've wondered about. I have no reason to think they're not American-made, but who knows? 

One has a neat blow-pipe (or a crude disc) pontil scar, the other a neat glass-tipped pontil scar. They are likely blown in a 2-piece mold -- possibly the same mold -- but, it's difficult to make out any trace of seams. They seem to be inflated further after removal from the mold, one more than the other.  Lip finish is a simple flare.

I think of these two as early table bottles for vinegar or peppersauce, but I don't know for sure.  Anyone got an idea?

 ​


----------



## botlguy (May 30, 2016)

I've seen this form before but don't know anything about them. NICE !


----------



## Harry Pristis (May 30, 2016)

Thank you, botlguy.  The two are blown from different glass batches, with different lip flares, and with different pontil applications.  I think they are early, but I've never seen another.


----------



## cannibalfromhannibal (May 31, 2016)

My first impression was cologne, but have not seen this type before. Possible Euro import from early 1800's. That's my guess....very cool & crude looking.


----------



## saratogadriver (May 31, 2016)

My WAG is that it's some sort of cologne or toilet water.   But great bottles though.  Early.   If US made, I'd say 1840s, 1850s.

jim G


----------



## RIBottleguy (May 31, 2016)

From a distance they sure look like Mexican specials, I'd have to see them in person to make a final decision.  I don't see any base wear, and the pontils are solid, not open, so judging by style and method of manufacture points to anything but American.


----------



## Harry Pristis (May 31, 2016)

European, maybe.  Mexican, no.  There is a long tradition of this sort of lip finish, starting in the 16th Century.  You can see one on the dust jacket of Willy Van den Bossche's book, with many more inside. 

These two were started in a very elaborate mold, so I like the idea of a dressing table bottle.  But, almost everything else about the bottles, including the flared lip, is askew . . . not decorative, unless that was the standard of the day.  There is no appreciable wear on the bottoms, which befits a dressing table bottle.  But, base wear is not dispositive in any case.

 On the other hand, one British collector doesn't recognize this particular bottle.  He agrees that these are likely to be table bottles for vinegar or sauce.  No label panels suggests to me that these may have been refillable, rather than disposable after a single use. . . . That is, used as an inexpensive cruet.  He guesses 1840s or earlier, also.

The two pontil scars are quite different in appearance.  There is a small, simple glass-tipped pontil scar on one.  Then there is one that is difficult to categorize.  There is a large open area in the center of the scar, yet you can see a heat-altered disc shape of the pontil rod on some of the edge.  Call it what you will; I call it odd.


​I'm glad to have your opinions.  Keep 'em coming.
-----Harry Pristis


----------



## andy volkerts (Jun 1, 2016)

I agree table bottles, could have held oil like olive oil, vinegar, sauce, you name it but I definitely think table bottles, possibly French, or Italian......Andy


----------



## Harry Pristis (Jun 1, 2016)

Thank you, Andy.  I measured the one on the left in the image.  It contains 400 ml or about 13 fluid ounces to the neck.  Not diagnostic, but I was curious.

The British collector I corresponded with described these bottles as "flint glass" and could not rule out a British origin.  The French used colorless or aqua glass early on; but, I am unaware of the 19th Century glass tradition in Italy.  Do you have a source you can share, Andy?
------Harry Pristis


----------



## andy volkerts (Jun 1, 2016)

Not really I have just seen old Roman glass and it was aqua in color so I figured they could be Italian or French, mostly because those two cultures used more sauces and oils than a lot of others......Andy


----------



## andy volkerts (Jun 1, 2016)

I disagree on the Flint Glass as Flint Glass was clear in color almost crystal clear if memory serves me right........Andy


----------



## Harry Pristis (Jun 1, 2016)

Yes, Andy, that has been my understanding too. Less iron in crushed flint than in sand, so less color in the resulting glass.  The Brit was working from images, so color is iffy.

Do you have a source for info on Italian glass?


----------



## andy volkerts (Jun 4, 2016)

Not really, I was in our public library once and saw a book on ancient roman glass, and thought that some of the bottles and glassware shown was pretty darn good for being made many hundreds of years ago, I wish I could remember the books title, seems to me it was  glass blowing techniques of ancient Rome or something similar.....Andy


----------



## Harry Pristis (Jun 7, 2016)

I was curious about "flint" glass, so I checked Wikipedia:
_With respect to glass, the term flint derives from the flint nodules found in the chalk deposits of southeast England that were used as a source of high purity silica by George Ravenscroft, c. 1662, to produce a potash lead glass that was the precursor to English lead crystal.

Traditionally, flint glasses were lead glasses containing around 4–60% lead(II) oxide; however, the manufacture and disposal of these glasses were sources of pollution. In many modern flint glasses, lead oxides are replaced with other metal oxides such as titanium dioxide and zirconium dioxide without significantly altering the optical properties of the glass.
_


----------



## glass man (Jun 8, 2016)

What ever they were used for..they are cool!!! JAMIE


----------

