Clover Pontil ?

[epackage]

ORIGINAL: AntiqueMeds

It must have been slightly conical to hit the center and the sides. I cant imagine they would take the time to exactly line up a four lobed pontil device. That doesnt seen consistent with fast mass production. Time wasted is money lost.

Matt or Jeff can you tell me how such a rod would have made these 4 distinct angles creating 4 seperate panels on the bottom, I'm just not grasping what it would have looked like to you? I'm just thinking if it were round how did these panels get so defined instead opposed to the whole base just pushing up as on a typical pontil, didn't something have to define those angled panels? Thanks my friend...

 

[kungfufighter]

ORIGINAL: epackage

ORIGINAL: AntiqueMeds

It must have been slightly conical to hit the center and the sides. I cant imagine they would take the time to exactly line up a four lobed pontil device. That doesnt seen consistent with fast mass production. Time wasted is money lost.

Matt or Jeff can you tell me how such a rod would have made these 4 distinct angles creating 4 seperate panels on the bottom, I'm just not grasping what it would have looked like to you? I'm just thinking if it were round how did these panels get so defined instead opposed to the whole base just pushing up as on a typical pontil, didn't something have to define those angled panels? Thanks my friend...

The four panels are part of the mold design. They were created before the pontil rod was attached to the base.

 

[kungfufighter]

ORIGINAL: tigue710

ORIGINAL: kungfufighter

ORIGINAL: tigue710

That cross hatched example is very cool! Yes, they are like a signature, no two rods would be exactly alike. This is what is so exciting about them is that they will help us indisputably attribute certain bottles to a certain glass house and possibly even certain dates. So far a few have been found to have been used at Stoddard, that being the type of clover I've posted, and an 8 piece star type, or more like a pie, cut into 8 pieces. All I have seen look to have been made by cutting into the head of the punty rod.

Partially true but remember, these glassblowers moved from Glass House to Glass House and brought their tools with them.

True true, good point Jeff. Still a lot can be told with these individual marks...

Agreed Matt - there is much to be told but we need to wary of making specific attributions when the entire process was in constant flux.

 

[epackage]

Thanks Jeff, I knew someone with more experience regarding pontils would know, it's appreciated...Jim

 

[AntiqueMeds]

correct, the base of the sarsaparilla mold had angled panels.
I believe the end of the pontil rod was not the typical spherical iron pontil. I think they used one that was modified to be a bit more conical in shape. This allowed getting a good contact in the center without deforming the nice flat panels. But it did touch slightly at the closest points on the flat panels. I doubt this was a very good scheme and it was probably a pain to dislodge the rod. All we know for sure is it was seldomly used (which often indicates its wasnt a great idea[]).

 

[kungfufighter]

ORIGINAL: AntiqueMeds

correct, the base of the sarsaparilla mold had angled panels.
I believe the end of the pontil rod was not the typical spherical iron pontil. I think they used one that was modified to be a bit more conical in shape. This allowed getting a good contact in the center without deforming the nice flat panels. But it did touch slightly at the closest points on the flat panels. I doubt this was a very good scheme and it was probably a pain to dislodge the rod. All we know for sure is it was seldomly used (which often indicates its wasnt a great idea[]).

I disagree with this statement in its entirety.

Or not.

The one thing I might say (not to disagree with you but rather to expand upon your thoughts) is that the INTENT was to create a base profile that in theory made it easier to remove the pontil rod - rather than touching at all points it would in this instance only touch on some points, lessening the potential for damaging the bottle while removing the pontil rod.

Thanks much for describing the process in greater detail than I Matt. Funny, I've been on here for several years now and I've never disagreed with anything you have said about glass manufacturing. It's your politics I can't stand

And for those without a sarcasm meter, that's a joke.

 

[kungfufighter]

ORIGINAL: epackage

Thanks Jeff, I knew someone with more experience regarding pontils would know, it's appreciated...Jim

No worries Jim - as another Jim said earlier, it's the simple answers that are usually the best answers (paraphrased).

 

[AntiqueMeds]

That's an interesting way to think about it. I wasnt there so everthing I say is conjecture.
Whatever their intent , I have to conclude it wasnt very successful or it wouldnt be so rare.

 

[kungfufighter]

ORIGINAL: AntiqueMeds

That's an interesting way to think about it. I wasnt there so everthing I say is conjecture.
Whatever their intent , I have to conclude it wasnt very successful or it wouldnt be so rare.

This is similar to my thinking about the molette - a tool used to push up the base so that the entire blowpipe or pontil rod would not stick to the base (resulting in a "tube" pontil scar) but rather a process in which only the outer edges touched the base so that it was easier to remove the rod. My sense is that these indented bases were created at or about the time or commensurate with the creation of the snap case. For that reason I am not sure that they are as rare as they are short lived. I was not there either of course so this is just my .02.

 

[AntiqueMeds]

what I find odd about the snap-case is it was around for a long time but only apparently sprang into widespread use around the early 1860s. Was it due to the culture of optimized manufacturing that was required during the Civil War period?
The snap-case was obviously a great improvement in bottle production but did it take a war for everyone to see the light?[]