Haley Murtagh
Throughout my time taking part in the field school, Kate has often designated Artifact of the Day to an uncovered item that has caught her eye. So, today I would like to share mine with you. Prior to this class, I would’ve probably said the best item to uncover, or thing I’d most like to find, would be some kind of large or well-preserved animal bone. However, today I am surprising myself by choosing none other than a glass jar to receive my fictional title of Artifact of the Field School. What about this jar, you may ask, is so intriguing that it deserves such a title? Well for one, it is completely intact with the lid on – oh, and did I mention that the jar was full of some sort of jelly or topical cream which has turned a curious shade of green that I can only describe as ‘definitely expired’.
May 13th, 2025 was my first day at the new site BcGn-15. On this morning, Enya, Trinity, and myself laid out our 2×2 meter unit, OA8, that we were to spend the following two weeks excavating and recording. I remember this day was challenging due to the large field stones, brick, and roots densely littered throughout the soil, but I also remember being overjoyed at the sheer amount of cultural material we were able to recover from the first 20 cm of our unit. Besides the jar, we uncovered a large number of glass sherds, primarily belonging to a ‘Pure Springs’ bottle, a metal pipe cover, possibly for a stove, and a porcelain insulator.
As cool as it was to find any of these artifacts and to evaluate why they were present at the site, e.g. the porcelain insulator was likely a part of the electrical work done to the dwelling being evaluated in OA8, none of these items were as revealing as the glass jar. The first thing I noticed about the jar were the seams present around the base, indicating that a mold was used in the glassmaking process. It’s also clear that the glass is machine-made, largely due to it’s symmetry and external threaded cap closure, which would require a standardized screw cap. Unfortunately for the identification of this artifact, glass bottles have been mass produced in such a way for over a century. Luckily for me, the base is embossed with information about the manufacturer and thanks to the glass, which is in great condition with no visible damages, I was able to narrow down the date of the artifact by a factor of 10.
In the image of the jar below, there is a series of symbols and numbers that can be used to not only determine when, but where the glass was made. The first symbol, located in the very centre of the base, is the maker’s mark. With one quick look at the dot enclosed by a diamond, Kate immediately recognized the logo as that of the Dominion Glass Co. located out of Montreal, QC. With a little googling of my own, I was able to confirm two things; the first being that the jar was made by Dominion Glass Co., and the second that Kate’s always right [editorial comment from Kate — I’m not but I am very flattered!] . Although the company is based in Montreal, that doesn’t necessarily mean that that is where the jar was made. The small dot located near the logo is indicative of the location of the factory, which in this case is to the left meaning it was made in Point St. Charles, QC, a neighbourhood of Montreal.
To the left of the manufacturer logo is the month code for the jar. This symbol in particular, shaped like a 4-pane window was used from 1950 to 1969, and reveals the jar was made in the months of November or December. Opposite this logo is a single digit, a 7, representing the last digit of the year in which the jar was made. Unfortunately, this still leaves us with two potential dates, 10 years apart (1957, 1967). The other two series of numbers, located above and below the logo, are in reference to the specific mold used create the jar, largely included for quality assurance purposes. However, beginning in 1945, Dominion Glass Co. included the prefix ‘V’ in the code located above their emblem which they had then slowly phased out of production around the mid 1950s (https://sha.org/bottle/ ). As seen in the image above, this jar does have a ‘V’ above the logo, which along with the ‘7’ and the window symbol would mean that it was most likely made in November-December of 1957.
Although the jar is currently living along with our other artifacts in the archaeology centre, there’s something to be said about holding ~70 year old material in your hands that might not have seen the sun since the day the old dwelling was demolished. There is also something to be said about the fact that I sniffed the green contents, per Kate’s advice, which could possibly be as old as the jar itself. Once again, Kate was right and it wasn’t some moldy and rotting matter, but probably just some really old Vaseline – for those of you wondering, it did smell like petroleum jelly.
Leave a comment