Pontil or smooth base

[J.R. Collector]

These dated John Ryans are I believe known to not be pontiled, and are all considered smooth bases. Here is one that is dated 1859 and so seems pontiled? Figured I would share.

 

[UncleBruce]

I have a bottle with a similar indentation. It sure looks like yours. It appears like my bottle & your bottle have been tumble polished. Possible not done correctly and the unprotected pontil was removed by the process.

 

[J.R. Collector]

I have a bottle with a similar indentation. It sure looks like yours. It appears like my bottle & your bottle have been tumble polished. Possible not done correctly and the unprotected pontil was removed by the process.

Technically there are no known dated pontils in the Russ Butler. I believe this one to be #10-118 in his book. I just found it interesting and the fact you have this same example with the deep pushed up smooth base is interesting.

 

[UnderMiner]

1859 is very near the end of the pontil era. I remember reading that by 1860 the vast majority of bottles were no longer made in this manner, though I can't say for sure if your bottle is or isn't. There's clearly some similarities but it's also more refined and clean looking.

 

[GAjosh]

That mold dates to around 1854, where it is pontiled. I believe union glassworks used the same mold and modified it with the date appearing to be pontiled.

If you look closely at the block letter "J" there is a ghost embossing that appears to be the same as Russ 10-106, blob undated version thats pontiled.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk

 

[saratogadriver]

With just your pictures to go by my eye says that's the remains of an iron pontil with the iron gone. But not easy to tell. Even in person.

jim G

 

[J.R. Collector]

With just your pictures to go by my eye says that's the remains of an iron pontil with the iron gone. But not easy to tell. Even in person.

jim G

There is definitely minor white residue left and surely has a deep or even deeper pontil pushed up as I am comparing to other know iron pontil John Ryans. I do know this was around the same time they where using existing molds and modified them as GAjosh is saying. So it is possible some are actually pontiled

 

[GAjosh]

Heres mine if its any help...

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk

 

[J.R. Collector]

Heres mine if its any help...View attachment 253898View attachment 253899

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk

Sexy looking specimen you have there. Thank you for posting it.

 

[J.R. Collector]

1859 is very near the end of the pontil era. I remember reading that by 1860 the vast majority of bottles were no longer made in this manner, though I can't say for sure if your bottle is or isn't. There's clearly some similarities but it's also more refined and clean looking.

I do have some 1852 dated John Ryans that are smooth based and not pontiled. I was just rereading your post about the end of the pontiled Era. Thought I would share.