MASON'S 1858 - XX Base - odd whittle?

[DavidW]

Hi group, I am just a teeny bit perplexed by this thread. The thread started back on November 15, 2009 with an older-looking crude 1858-type Mason's Patent jar with an "XX" on the base. It looks very crude, whittled and the lip is ground. In the reply by "Red Matthews" from November 16, 2009, he said it was a jar made on an Automatic Bottle Machine. Did he know something that we missed? It looks like Red last posted on this site in 2016 so I am guessing maybe he has since passed away?

In any case, now a second jar (by "miker") has been posted on this thread, and it looks similar, maybe not as crude. But both jars shown appear to be old, handmade, crude-looking jars with ground lips that were not made on a machine (even a semi-automatic machine) I don't think, anyway (???)

Can someone who is an expert on these jars enlighten us? I'm assuming the "XX" is a mold identifier number, and has no meaning in itself other than identifying a mold used at the factory.

The other weird mark on the bottom just looks like a random swirl or "oyster" mark in the glass as it was filling the inside of the mold, not any kind of machine-made "Valve mark" (Bruce was that the phrase you were trying to remember?), definitely not a pontil mark.

The jar looks like it would date from the 1870s or 1880s to me. Feedback???

 

[jarsnstuff]

There are threads that start years ago and get revived for one reason or another. I think that's what happened here. 2. Agreed, the jar has a ground lip & is crude - not machine made as Red's comment suggests. No one ever took him to task for that apparently b/c Red was pretty knowledgeable regarding the bottle making process. 3. Agree, the XX is most likely a mold identifier as in Redbook 1900-1, X on base. It does state that other Roman Numerals exist and that should cover the XX as well. TBH, I'm not a big Mason's Patent collector, so I probably added to the confusion b/c I took someone else's word about "other roman numeral bases" and didn't actually look it up until just now. 4. Agree the weird mark on the bottom is just a weird mark - not a pontil and not a valve mark. 5. Your 1870s - 1880s dates are reasonable, I don't think anyone posted anything to the contrary there.

The other question, which no one has really addressed is the "weird" whittle. I'm thinking it could just be horizontal striations in the mold that forced the whittle into somewhat even horizontal lines instead of the random patterns we are accustomed to. Just conjecture on my part that has nothing to do with being an authority on the subject.

 

[DavidW]

jarsnstuff, I totally agree. About the odd whittle, I can just barely make out what the OP was referring to, but I would just call it an effect from when the mold was originally fabricated/machined. I don't understand the process of manufacturing molds enough, especially in the "olden days", to make a meaningful comment on that!

 

[miker]

THANK YOU JARSNSTUFF FROM MIKER.