lo/enge paltcrns. This patiern woukl appear to 

 be in the "Nipt diamond waies" tradition of the 

 late 17th century."' Fl. 



4. Bowl fragment close to flaring rim. Perhaps from 

 dwarf ale or jelly glass; clear lead metal;'^^ molded 

 decoration of small, highly ridged lozenges. No 

 earlier than about 1730. B2. 



5. Rim fragment, possibly from wide-mouthed jelly 

 glass, lead metal, molded diamond decoration. 

 No earlier than about 1730. 02. 



6. Basal fragment from tumbler or cup, clear lead 

 glass, the wall decorated with molded fluting or 

 ribbing. 18th century. Dl. 



7. Rim fragment. Probably from jelly glass; brilliant 

 lead metal; molded diamond decoration; rim 

 slightly angled where the molded lines touch it. 

 No earlier than about 1730. 02. 



8. Fragment. Probably from iiody of perfume flask; 

 pale blue-green glass with some lead content; 

 ornamented with molded lozenges. Possibly from 

 a bottle in the same class as no. 11 in fig. 33. 

 Surface. 



9. Bottle or decanter stopper. .Solid lead glass; 

 rectangular knob: the body ground below the 

 shoulder; Ijottom diameter '■, inch. 18th centurv. 

 E2. 



10. Knob from buttle or decanter stopper. Solid 

 lead glass; o\-al form. 18th century. K2, 



Figurt 35 



1, Tobacco-pipe bowl. Clay; of English manufac- 

 ture; cylindrical bowl terminating at the base in a 

 flat heel; stem-hole diameter ^64 inch. This item 

 may be compared to Adrian Oswald's Type 7a. '^ 

 although it lacks the slight in-cur\e al)o\e the fore- 

 edge of the heel, Oswald dates the type to the 

 period about 1670-1710; however, this writer has 

 found numerous examples in deljris from the Great 

 Fire of London in 1666, but few in contexts dating 

 much later than about 1680, Whatever the true 

 date of the Ro.sewell specimen, there is no douljt 



'^ A possible parallel for the style of the Rcsewell fragment 

 appears in Country Life, January 25, 1946, p, 169, no. 7. This 

 fragment is attributed to about 1685; however, it is unlikely 

 that the Rcsewell fragment is as early, 



'■'* Haynes (op. dl. footnote 89) stated that some examples of 

 mold-ornamented jelly glasses are of soda metal. All the 

 Rcsewell fragments were tested for lead and ga\e positive 

 results. 



^^ Arc/if ological JVews Lei li-r, .\piil 1951, vol. 3, no. 10. 



that it is a stray in the present context. .Around 

 1660-1680. C2. 



2. Tobacco-pipe bowl. Clay; of English manufac- 

 ture; thin-walled; small heel; stem-hole diameter 

 %i inch. First half of 18th century. K3. 



3. Tobacco-pipe bowl. C:iay; of English manufac- 

 ture; small heel; walls thicker than in no. 2 and 

 the bowl with slightly more thrust on the fore-edge 

 of the rim; stem-hole diameter ^64 inch. Second or 

 third quarter of 18th century. F2. 



4. Tobacco-pipe bowl. Clay; of English manufac- 

 ture; wall 3 mm. thick; pronounced heel with 

 maker's initials "I.D," (the 'T" is considerably 

 smaller than the "D" and could perhaps be read 

 as "T"); stem-hole diameter %i inch. Two ex- 

 amples from this mold were reco\'ered, i)oth from 

 the primary filling in area E, Second or third 

 quarter of 18th centur\-, 



5. Tobacco-pipe bowl. C'.la> : of English manufac- 

 ture; wall approximately 2 mm. thick at rear but 

 appreciaijly thinner at the fore-edge; .somewhat 

 squat heel with maker's large initials "A.S."; 

 stem-hole diameter %, inch. Second or third 

 quarter of 18th centur\-. E4 (another example 

 from C2). 



6. Tobacco-pipe heel and stem fragment. Clay; of 

 Irish manufacture (?); narrow heel with crowned 

 harp molded on either side in place of the more 

 common maker's initials; stem-hold diameter ^^4 

 inch. Probably third quarter of 18th century, K2 

 (another example from Jl), 



7. Tobacco-pipe bowl and section of stem, CUay; of 

 English manufacture; bowl wall 2,5 mm, thick; 

 the heel long and of small diameter; maker's 

 initials "R,M.,'' molded on either side, are thick 

 and cleanly cut. though weak in the first stroke of 

 the "M"; stem-hole diameter ;'64 inch. Prol^ably 

 third quarter of the 18th century. E2, G2, 



8. Tobacco-pipe bowl. Clay; of English manufac- 

 ture; neither heel nor spur;'"' wall of somewhat un- 



"'' It has been suggested that these pipes were specially 

 manufactured for the American colonies, for examples without 

 heel or spur are extremely rare in England but are common on 

 American sites. Howe%'er, the explanation that pipes with 

 these plain bowls were less liable to be damaged in shipping 

 does not bear scrutiny, for a pipe rarely breaks at the heel. 

 It might, however, be suggested that pipes were made in this 

 style to parallel the forms made and used by the Indians. 

 A painting (in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania) by 

 Gustavus Hesselius in 1735 of the Indian chief Tishcohan 

 (He-who-never-blackens-himself) shows one of these pipes 



220 



BULLETIN 22.S: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 



