Old bottles of rum 1789

Welcome to our Antique Bottle community

Be a part of something great, join today!

saratogadriver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
250
Points
83
Location
Vermont
View attachment 189105View attachment 189106View attachment 189107

The bottle construction is reasonable for the 1789 date. The three I've illustrated below are squat cylinders, but tall cylinders (such as the bottles in question) were contemporary. The important feature here is the lip finish.
View attachment 189103 View attachment 189104



The three bottle's lip finish most closely matches the one for 1790-1800. The question is how much room for error is there in that chart? Was that lip made beyond 1800? Older Bottle making techniques often continued long after technology changed.

The bottle itself isn't 1787, the RUM would have been distilled in 1789, probably keg aged, then bottled. But the bottle could most certainly be 1800 or earlier.

pretty cool stuff for us US folk who so rarely see anything that early.

Jim G
 

Harry Pristis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2003
Messages
1,358
Reaction score
984
Points
113
Location
Northcentral Florida
The three bottle's lip finish most closely matches the one for 1790-1800. The question is how much room for error is there in that chart? Was that lip made beyond 1800? Older Bottle making techniques often continued long after technology changed.

The bottle itself isn't 1787, the RUM would have been distilled in 1789, probably keg aged, then bottled. But the bottle could most certainly be 1800 or earlier.

pretty cool stuff for us US folk who so rarely see anything that early.

Jim G

One reason that hand-finished bottle are preferred by collectors is that every bottle is different, even bottles produced on the same day by the same gaffer. The line-drawings are a generalized guide to form by date.

The bottles I've illustrated are far more likely to have contained WINE rather than rum. Note that the line-drawings are taken from a book about wine bottles. But, no doubt a few of these bottles were recycled to contain rum for local use. Caribbean rum was exported in casks. Most rums continue today to be bottled directly from the still rather than be aged in barrels. The vast number of such bottles found in former Caribbean colonies is a reflection of the of the scarcity of potable water, I suspect. Wine was safe to drink.

I can't agree with your assessment of the later date of the three bottles in question. In fact, the bottles look to me to be earlier than the 1789 date. The lips of these bottles went from being FLARED to being mushroomed into a BROAD COLLAR over a 50-year period to about 1800. You can see that progression in the image below. The lips on the three bottles of rum look to me like they fit somewhere in the middle of that period.


blackglassmallet3.jpg




 

david1977

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Many thanks guys, if it can help, i can do some more detail photos from the 3 bottles, but the majority seems to be good from 1789 :D
 

saratogadriver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
250
Points
83
Location
Vermont
I bow to your extensive knowledge of bottles of that age Harry. Sure isn't my area of knowledge, not much out there for inks that old. I was just saying that the bottle, if new at the time of use, would be newer than 1789. I didn't know that most rum doesn't get a barrel finish. I'm more of a scotch guy myself.

Awesome bottles and awesome age no matter what.

Jim G
 

Harry Pristis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2003
Messages
1,358
Reaction score
984
Points
113
Location
Northcentral Florida
I bow to your extensive knowledge of bottles of that age Harry. Sure isn't my area of knowledge, not much out there for inks that old. I was just saying that the bottle, if new at the time of use, would be newer than 1789. I didn't know that most rum doesn't get a barrel finish. I'm more of a scotch guy myself.

Awesome bottles and awesome age no matter what.

Jim G


I do understand your argument, Jim. You are making two assumptions:

1) The labels "1789" are original, applied in 1789 or thereabouts.
2) The contents were decanted (from a cask) into brand-new bottles months or even years after the putative 1789 date.

I, on the other hand, am looking at the construction of the bottle lip finish to conclude that the bottles appear "reasonable" for a 1789 date.

1) I do not rely on paper labels which could have been attached much later, after the distill date was lost.
2) I do not rely on the paper label to say anything about when the bottles were blown. As I suggested, the lip finishes could be a few years earlier than the 1789 date. Re-filling these bottles is not uncommon.

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to sort this out in my thinking.
 

Members online

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
83,216
Messages
742,899
Members
24,229
Latest member
TracyPecora
Top