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
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 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.
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.