Are the GI 95 and 97 and the GII 52, historical flasks the oldest made?

[Steve/sewell]

Dr. Dyott tells us he was directly involved in a glass works as early as the war of 1812.

 

[Steve/sewell]

These pages are the words of Helen Mckearin in the book, Bottles Flasks and Dr. Dyott

 

[kungfufighter]

Hold on now Steve. The evidence that you are providing is misleading. Much of what you have scanned are in fact Helen McKearin's words but the image of the Franklin flask and the accompanying text comes from Pepper's book. THESE ARE NOT HELEN McKEARIN'S WORDS OR FINDINGS. In fact, if you are quoting Helen McKearin, she states the following on pages 90 and 91 in "Bottles, Flasks and Dr. Dyott."

"Thus we arrive at the Dyott articles of paramount interest to flask collectors: his historic figured flasks advertised in 1822. Dr. Dyott's were not the first American Figured Flasks: Masonic-Eagle flasks had been produced in the Flint Glass Factory, Marlboro Street, Keene, New Hampshire, by Twitchell & Schoolcraft late in 1815 or early in 1816, and in February 1817 Thomas Matherwas advertising his "figured pocket bottles" suitable for the Southern market, produced in his glassworks in East Hartford, Connecticut. Unfortunately, though Mather gave us a name for flasks with relief designs, he did not give a clue as to the character of the designs. On the other hand, DR. Dyott named his - American Eagle, ship Franklin, Agricultural and Masonic - the last a design combining symbols of agriculture and Masonry. And, excepting the eagle on the reverse of the Keene Masonic flasks, Dr. Dyott's are the earliest identifiable historical designs in the large flask family. These were advertised in 1822."

In fact, Helen McKearin does NOT make the claim that you ascribe to her, as it is clear that she does not believe flasks with historical designs were blown before 1822.

 

[kungfufighter]

Steve,

On the GII-52, 53, and 54. Flag /Eagle flasks I have dug two of these intact and at lease a dozen more broken examples I never really paid attention to exactly what mold I found where. But they show up in Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, and Burlington Nj privies so they were a well distributed flask. I'm sure they would turn up in most mid-atlantic towns. The ones I have found come out of an 1840s context very consistently. I think these flasks are strictly 1840s. And not as early as McKearin thought.

Chris

Hey Chris! Yes, I too believe that the Flag flasks were blown in the 1840s. For what it's worth, I don't believe that McKearin conclusively ascribes an earlier date - she simply states that the flasks were probably first produced between 1836 and 1838 and that it is also probable that the mold accompanied Hay when he left Hammonton after the fire of 1838 and that they were used at Winslow during the next few years. Helen was a VERY careful researcher and unless she had solid documentation to back up her assumptions she would punctuate her comments with commas rather than periods...

 

[earlyglass]

A New England flag flask with 13 stars produced at the New Granite Glass Works, circa late 1850s.

Mike

 

[Steve/sewell]

Good morning Jeff and others.
What I have shown is Dyotts involvement with these early works in New Jersey.Chris and Mike make a good case and I was awhere as you are with what the McKearins stated in regaurds to Coffin and Hay.By the way the Mckearnis are not the be all end all as for all their information as being accurate.I threw this out there yesterday for good debate and it has happened which is good for the hobby.Notice I did ask for others opionons and never said my thoughts were Gods word.However I am sticking to my guns on the Franklin flask as they are not the same mold as Dyott used on his version the GI-96.
I simply showed the timeline in the Dyott book established by Helen.The glass on my Franklin mold is from New Jersey NO DOUBT like you can tell the various shades of New England olives and ambers I have a keen I eye for glass from this area.

The fact that he was involved with these early glassworks long before he became an actual agent and owner of stands to reason that the Franklin mold has a hellva chance as to being from one of these two glassworks.I never tried to mislead anyone I should of added the text in the Franklin photo but it was late 1:30 AM and I didnt.I did mention a few posts up the Glass gaffers source (Pepper) which you ripped me about your words,(LOVE TO SEE A COPY OF THIS)

I did say this up there at the top of this post,(What do the other members that collect these flasks think about my hypothisys)
And Chris and Mike and yourself answered with good unrefuted knowledge.
By the way its easy to comment on other peoples posts and both of you are respected for your glass knowlege and opionons by myself and all others here,and I have openly bragged about your web sites greatness,however I dont see either of you taking the lead with your vast knowledge of glass particularly New England glass and sharing more info with us.I would like to come home from work and see that one time.

You guys can stop hanging your hats on the flag portion of the post you have driven that point pretty well and sold me on the flags longevity.

 

[kungfufighter]

Not an attempt to rip at all Steve - I am sincere in my desire to see the newspaper that you reference, as it would cast new light upon commonly held theories. My word is by no means the last on any subject, especially old bottles. I welcome your posts and enjoy the manner in which you challenge other members to think. I did, however, think it was important to point out that Helen McKearin was not the source of the info attached to the photo of the Franklin flask. You are correct, the McKearins were not the end all be all but they were very careful to make their assessments using sound documentation and as a result, the great majority of their conclusions remain valid.

 

[kungfufighter]

For those looking to read more of my puffery you can find it here[]

http://www.jeffnholantiquebottles.com/webpages/ArticlesHome.html

 

[justanolddigger]

Great info here, thanks guys, I love it. Jeff, I have read your article a couple of times. I do have a hard time understanding everything you say due to my own lack of knowledge, but everytime I read it, I understand a little more. I wish I could hold the glass in my hand as I read the article, I think it would help me relate more. Of course, once I get it in my hands, I might not let it go![]

 

[potstone]

I have read numerous books on the early American glass houses
myself. From what I have read, there seems to be a consistent
dating of pictorial flask that leans to wards the Masonic flask
as being the earliest type manufactured. My personal feeling on
the subject is, the fact that the Masonic lodges and members
had a very strong influence during Colonial times in the New England states. There is strong belief that the event of the Boston tea party was carried out by a group of Masons. I'm sure that many
owners of the Early New England Glass houses were Masons
themselves. To manufacture a flask with the symbolic features
that are consistent on the Masonic flask within that time period
would only stand to reason. An anti-Masonic movement was ignited in 1826 by the mysterious disappearance of a William Morgan. He was Mason who was accused of reveling Masonic secrets. I believe that the production of Masonic flask during
the period of the anti-Masonic movement would have slowed
down considerably. This is only an opinion that I have from information that I have read from multiple resources. I'm
not quoting this as fact. Thanks, Greg