1
10
3
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/564121245838168b6045940236531f5d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=iGTkOy769yzHmxBfD21hEhvTVJSQ12aRiM7uyG03pKBVvKno1v7V8VZUKvVTIX03V3Uiy5sfN18jjZdqwB2N7l57ZCLok%7EpRcI22FNGHcHY6rE94wBoQ6cYPqluVzGa75X3Hfnlgic7tRqCGLe3zpRkywasW3f-hLi7u5NctbYgJv1J2t1K7W9jNTD4I8WcMOdt2aKhFAwVEhWNXVtzGrgVs3O7K3kNkvmAfLokPNkBYSqZaFgok8dXU7aIZzMKZ1HN-Itc5uL3KlGoGnf0QUajqfEeE2AHc8t%7EaKdRc3kw8dPdi-LNeJicfaPWOZ60P3PRwS0J6ifaASnrwA3x3Ng__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
42011039c84808c7de24c22e0f99386a
PDF Text
Text
STRAFFORD SQUARE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
ROCHESTER X-A000 (320) NHDOT 14350
ALTERNATIVE MITIGATION REPORT
THE WENTWORTH HOMESTEAD (27-ST-113)
ROCHESTER (STRAFFORD COUNTY), NEW HAMPSHIRE
Prepared by
Ellen Marlatt, MA, RPA,
Jessica Cofelice, MA, RPA
and
Kathleen Wheeler, PhD, RPA,
www.iac-llc.net
IAC #1303
FINAL REPORT
March 26, 2018
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... II
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................... III
LIST OF PLATES ................................................................................................................................... III
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER TWO: CULTURAL CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY.......................................................... 5
Competing Theories of Health and Wellness ....................................................................................... 5
New Hampshire Medical Society ......................................................................................................... 6
Medical Education and Training ........................................................................................................ 7
Pharmacies and Patent Medicines ......................................................................................................... 8
Patent Medicines and Alcohol ............................................................................................................. 9
Marketing and Distribution ................................................................................................................. 9
Impacts of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 ................................................................................ 12
CHAPTER THREE: THE MEDICAL MARKETPLACE AND ROCHESTER’S 19TH-CENTURY
CONSUMER LANDSCAPE .................................................................................................................... 14
Rochester’s Medical lineage ................................................................................................................. 18
Dr. James Farrington ........................................................................................................................ 18
Dr. Farrington’s Medical Lineage .................................................................................................... 20
Dominicus Hanson ............................................................................................................................ 22
Development of Rochester as Commercial Hub................................................................................. 27
Rochester Pharmacies and Consumer Choices .................................................................................. 29
Prescription drugs in Rochester ........................................................................................................ 32
CHAPTER FOUR: OCCUPATION HISTORY OF THE WENTWORTH HOMESTEAD ............ 36
CHAPTER FIVE: PHASE IB/II METHODOLOGY AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS .................. 46
Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 46
Architectural Layout of the Wentworth Homestead ......................................................................... 48
Summary of Results of Phase IB/II Survey ........................................................................................ 54
Artifact Analysis.................................................................................................................................... 60
Ceramics ............................................................................................................................................. 61
Glass ................................................................................................................................................... 62
Personal Items .................................................................................................................................... 65
CHAPTER SIX: HEALTH AND WELLNESS AT THE WENTWORTH SITE BASED ON AN
ANALYSIS OF 44 MEDICINE BOTTLES ........................................................................................... 69
John Wyeth & Bro ................................................................................................................................ 76
Proprietary Medicine ......................................................................................................................... 78
California Fig Syrup ....................................................................................................................... 79
Johnson’s American Anodyne Liniment......................................................................................... 82
Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound ......................................................................................... 84
Mellin’s Infant Food ....................................................................................................................... 86
i
�Phillips Milk of Magnesia ............................................................................................................... 88
Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Disinfectant, Deodorizer, and Germicide .............................................. 89
Paine’s Celery Compound .............................................................................................................. 91
Twitchell Champlin & Co Neuralgic Anodyne .............................................................................. 93
Alcohol as Medicine .............................................................................................................................. 95
Root Beer ............................................................................................................................................... 96
CHAPTER SEVEN: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................. 100
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 106
APPENDIX A: MINIMUM VESSEL COUNT (MVC) FOR ALL GLASS ...................................... 111
APPENDIX B: LIST OF 44 MEDICINAL BOTTLES ....................................................................... 121
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) location illustrated on USGS map. ..................2
Figure 2. Location of the Ezekiel and Elizabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) on proposed project plans. .....3
Figure 3. Location of Rochester’s apothecary and drug stores on the Sanborn (1897) map of Rochester. ................ 17
Figure 4. Farrington-Hanson family tree (physicians highlighted in green; apothecaries in blue). ............................ 19
Figure 5. Location of Dr. Farrington’s House and office illustrated on the Chace (1856) map of Rochester. ........... 20
Figure 6. Dr. Farrington’s medical lineage showing physicians who received training under his tutelage. ................ 21
Figure 7. Hanson’s Apothecary location illustrated on the Hurd (1892) map of Rochester. ...................................... 23
Figure 8. Location of the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) illustrated on the 1856 (Chace)
Map ..................................................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 9. Kimball-Allen family tree with Kimball children outlined in red and heads-of-house highlighted in blue.
............................................................................................................................................................................ 41
Figure 10. Wentworth Homestead and farmland on Stoner (1877) Bird’s Eye View. ............................................... 42
Figure 11. Location of the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) illustrated on the 1892 (Hurd)
Map .................................................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 12. House configuration as illustrated on the 1897 Sanborn Insurance map .................................................. 44
Figure 13. House configuration as illustrated on the 1925 Sanborn Insurance map ................................................... 45
Figure 14. Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) site plan with testhole locations. ..................................................... 47
Figure 15. Wentworth homestead on Stoner (1877) Bird’s Eye Map. ........................................................................ 49
Figure 16. Location of architectural loci in relation to 1897 Sanborn Insurance map. ............................................... 50
Figure 17. Location of architectural loci in relation to 1897 Sanborn Insurance map. ............................................... 51
Figure 18. Phase IB/II site plan showing test pit locations and general artifact distribution. ..................................... 55
Figure 19. Testing in relation to the architectural configuration shown on the 1897 (Sanborn) map. ........................ 56
Figure 20. Testing in relation to the architectural configuration shown on the 1925 (Sanborn) map. ........................ 57
Figure 21. Locus 25 foundation wall plan. ................................................................................................................. 60
Figure 22. Location of Wentworth Homestead in relation to Central Square and Hanson Street, after Hurd (1892). 70
Figure 23. Dorman, Kimball, Allen and Carlisle family tree, showing household members who died between 1880
and 1945 (outlined in red). .................................................................................................................................. 71
ii
�LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. List of physicians and surgeons in Rochester City Directories..................................................................... 14
Table 2. Number of physicians listed in city directories, 1871-1902. ........................................................................ 15
Table 3. Number of apothecaries and druggists, 1871-1902. ..................................................................................... 29
Table 4. List of Rochester apothecary and drug stores between 1871-1902 (Rochester City Directory). .................. 30
Table 5. Title chain of ownership for 2-4 Walnut Street. ........................................................................................... 38
Table 6. Timeline of Households by occupation period. ............................................................................................ 38
Table 7. List of occupants between 1870 and 1940 .................................................................................................... 39
Table 8. Review of fieldwork at the Wentworth Homestead (27-RK-113). ............................................................... 46
Table 9. List of architectural loci associated with the Wentworth Homestead. .......................................................... 48
Table 10. Artifact distribution per testhole. ................................................................................................................ 61
Table 11. Minimum vessel count, all glass. ................................................................................................................ 62
Table 12. Deaths in households between 1880 and 1945. .......................................................................................... 72
Table 13. List of children (0-18 years of age) who resided in the home between 1870 and 1940. ............................. 76
Table 14. Four Wyeth bottles in the Wentworth collection. ....................................................................................... 76
Table 15. List of identifiable proprietary medicine bottles and prices........................................................................ 78
Table 16. Approximate prices for propriety medicines in the Wentworth collection. .............................................. 102
Table 17. Propriety medicines found in the Wentworth collection. ......................................................................... 103
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 1. Advertisements in Rochester Courier, January 23, 1877. .............................................................................. 10
Plate 2. Ad for tonic in Rochester Courier, January 23, 1877. ................................................................................... 11
Plate 3. Masthead for tabloid prepared for local pharmacy featuring Dr. King’s products (NHHS collection). ........ 12
Plate 4. Dr. King’s ads in the Holiday Druggist. ........................................................................................................ 12
Plate 5. Dr. James Farrington, date unknown (McDuffee 1892:345). ........................................................................ 18
Plate 6. Dominicus Hanson, date unknown (McDuffee 1892; 495). .......................................................................... 22
Plate 7. Main Street before 1868, Dominicus Hanson's apothecary (highlighted in yellow), view south. ................. 24
Plate 8. Hanson Apothecary ad in Rochester Courier, January 24, 1873. ................................................................... 24
Plate 9. Corner of Hanson and Main Street, showing Burnham Drug (formerly Dominicus Hanson’s) 1903, view
southeast. ............................................................................................................................................................ 25
Plate 10. Dominicus Hanson/ R. Dewitt Burnham Apothecary in 2017 (highlighted in yellow), view southeast. ..... 25
Plate 11. Ad for R. DeWitt Burnham headache powders in Rochester Courier, March 20, 1896,............................. 26
Plate 12. Central Square, Rochester, New Hampshire circa 1908 postcard, view southeast (artist unknown). .......... 28
Plate 13. Union Station, later renamed the Boston & Main Station (Smith 1996). .................................................... 28
Plate 14. Hanson Street front Central Square in the 1880s (Smith 1996). .................................................................. 29
Plate 15. Cobb Drug Store on North Main Street, established 1900 (Smith 1996)..................................................... 31
Plate 16. Prescription from Emerson & Garland, c. 1882........................................................................................... 32
Plate 17. Prescription pad with advertising for W.H. Schieffelin & Co, c.1890s. ...................................................... 33
Plate 18. Prescription written by Rochester physician James Farrington M. D., 1880s. ............................................ 33
Plate 19 Prescription written by Stephen Young M. D. of East Rochester, 1890s. ..................................................... 34
Plate 20. Prescription written on R. DeWitt Burnham pharmacy pad, 1890s. ............................................................ 34
Plate 21. Scott’s Emulsion package. ........................................................................................................................... 35
Plate 22. Prescription for Scott’s Emulsion, 1884. ..................................................................................................... 35
Plate 23. Overview of the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth house, view south........................................................ 36
Plate 24. Proximity of Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth house to the intersections of Walnut and Washington
Streets, view west. .............................................................................................................................................. 36
Plate 25. N212 E198-200; overview of the Locus 25 foundation wall, view north. ................................................... 52
Plate 26. N212 E198-200; Detail of the Locus 25 foundation wall, view west. .......................................................... 52
Plate 27. N212 E198-200; Overview of the Locus 21/24 foundation wall location in relation to Locus 25, view
south. ................................................................................................................................................................... 53
Plate 28. Carriage house northern foundation wall, N212 E207 plan view. ............................................................... 53
iii
�Plate 29. N217 E206 west wall profile, view west. .................................................................................................... 58
Plate 30. N217 E206 plan view at 1.55 cmbd (5 ft), at OSHA limits of excavation. .................................................. 58
Plate 31. Overview of N212 E198, view west. ........................................................................................................... 59
Plate 32. N212 E198 north wall profile, Locus 23 deposit, view north. ..................................................................... 59
Plate 33. Plates: Vessels 99, 103, 135, 92, 125 & 124, Cup: Vessel 119, Bowl: Vessel 93. ....................................... 62
Plate 34. Vessel 307: Spirits flask, Vessel 303: Mattingly & Moore Whiskey (applied color label). ......................... 63
Plate 35. Above: (L-R) V.23 Hire’s Root Beer Extract for Home Use, V.321 Knapp’s Root Beer Extract, V.225
G.D. Dows & Co. Boston- Jamaica Ginger Cordial. .......................................................................................... 63
Plate 36. Variety of bottles and vials for prescription compounds and pills (from left to right: Vessels 328, 334, 333,
335,331). ............................................................................................................................................................. 64
Plate 37. N217 E206 north wall profile, view north. .................................................................................................. 65
Plate 38. Doll parts and game pieces recovered from the Wentworth site. ................................................................. 66
Plate 39. Sample of marbles recovered from the Wentworth site. .............................................................................. 66
Plate 40. Toy airplane recovered from the Wentworth site. ....................................................................................... 67
Plate 41. Example of paper labels and packaging (sha.org). ...................................................................................... 73
Plate 42. Plain medicine bottles (Vessels #324, 329, and 334) that would have had a paper label affixed to the front
panel. ................................................................................................................................................................... 73
Plate 43. Small vials for prescription compounds (Vessels 326, 328, 330, and 331). ................................................ 74
Plate 44. Bottles with metal screw tops (Vessels 325 and 327). ................................................................................. 74
Plate 45. Wyeth & Bro medicine bottle with dose cap (Vessel #166). ........................................................................ 77
Plate 46. Wyeth & Bro medicine bottles with patent and threaded lip (Vessels #333 and 323). ................................. 78
Plate 47. 1895 advertisement for California Fig Syrup Co. (Wellcome Trust Ltd. 2017). .......................................... 79
Plate 48. California Fig Syrup Company’s “Syrup of Figs” bottle (Vessel #198). ..................................................... 80
Plate 49. Children’s Comfort bottle, front panel (Vessel #316). ................................................................................ 81
Plate 50. Children’s Comfort bottle side panels (Vessel #316). ................................................................................. 81
Plate 51. Packaging for Johnson’s Anodyne Liniment. (National Museum of American History:
http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_715760 ............................................................... 82
Plate 52. Two Johnson’s American Anodyne Liniment Bottles (Vessels #314 and 317). .......................................... 83
Plate 53. Advertisement for Johnson’s Anodyne, Lewiston Saturday Journal, 1907. ................................................ 83
Plate 55. Advertisement for Lydia E. Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound (Stage 1979:149). ...................................... 84
Plate 54. 1881 newspaper ad for Lydia E. .................................................................................................................. 84
Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound (Wikipedia). ........................................................................................................... 84
Plate 56. Fragments of Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable compound bottle (Vessel 204). ................................................. 85
Plate 57. Example of whole Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound bottle. .............................................................. 85
Plate 58. Advertisement and trade card for Mellin’s Food (rareamericana.com). ...................................................... 86
Plate 59. Front and back sides of Mellin’s Infant’s Food Bottle (Vessel 315). .......................................................... 87
Plate 60. Example of glass and cork closure that Vessel 315 would have had (sha.org/bottle/closures). ................... 87
Plate 61. Phillips Milk of Magnesia bottle (Vessel #226). ......................................................................................... 89
Plate 62. Trademark emblem for Phillips Milk of Magnesia in use 1906 and later (Old Glass Bottles and Items of
Antiquity 2017). .................................................................................................................................................. 89
Plate 63. Ad for Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Disinfectant, Deodorizer, and Germicide ................................................ 90
Plate 64. Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Disinfectant (Vessel #224). ................................................................................. 90
Plate 65. Advertisement and testimonial for Paine’s Celery Compound, ................................................................... 91
Daily Northwestern Jan 13, 1900. ............................................................................................................................... 91
Plate 66. Two sides of Paine’s Celery Compound bottle (Vessel #301)..................................................................... 92
Plate 67. Twitchell Champlin & Co Neuralgic Anodyne bottle (Vessel #318). ......................................................... 93
Plate 68. The National Magazine, Vol 24 Issue 4 July 1906. ..................................................................................... 94
Plate 69. Vessel 307: Spirits flask, Vessel 303: Mattingly & Moore Whiskey (applied color label). ......................... 95
Plate 70. Knapp’s Root Beer advertisement dated 1893 (BayBottles.com 2017). ...................................................... 96
Plate 71. Knapp’s Root Beer Extract advertisement, 1893 (Bay Bottles.com 2017). ................................................. 97
Plate 72. Charles E. Hires Co. 1894 chromolithograph advertisement (Yates 2005). ................................................ 97
Plate 73. Root Beer Extract bottles (Vessels#320, 321, 322). .................................................................................... 99
Plate 74. Nearly complete root beer mug (Vessel # 168). .......................................................................................... 99
iv
�CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
In 2015 Independent Archaeological Consulting, LLC (IAC) conducted a Phase IB and Phase II
Determination of Eligibility at the Ezekiel and Elizabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) Homestead
at 2-4 Walnut Street in Rochester (Strafford County), New Hampshire (Figure 1) (Cofelice, Wheeler and
Tumelaire 2017). This project required the demolition of the extant Wentworth house in advance of
intersection improvements at Strafford Square in downtown Rochester (Figure 2). The archaeological
investigations were required as part of the conditions laid out in the City of Rochester’s Memorandum of
Agreement dated July 31, 2012, and authorized under Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act of
1966 (P.L. 89-665), as amended, and as implemented by regulations of the Advisory Council of Historic
Preservation (36 CFR Part 800) (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1999).
Archival records indicate that Ezekiel Wentworth (c.1824-1905) constructed a 1½-story cape fronting
Walnut Street shortly after purchasing the one-acre parcel in 1853 (Strafford County Registry of Deeds
Book 214/272 [hereafter SCD 214/272]). Wentworth shared the home with his wife Elisabeth (born c.
1833) and two young daughters for several years before relocating some time before 1860. After
Wentworth’s short tenure, the home was occupied for nearly eight decades (the 1870s to the 1940s) by
Dr. Nathaniel Dorman and various members of his extended family, primarily the Kimball and Allen
families.
Archaeologists collected more than 7,000 artifacts in 2015, including an abundance of whole bottles
discarded in a mass deposit in the cellar of the carriage house/barn. Two excavation units were densely
packed with domestic glass and ceramics, including 44 medicine bottles. The minimum number of glass
containers (some whole) outnumbered ceramic vessels by more than two to one.
Following the Phase II study, IAC recommended that the Ezekiel and Elizabeth Wentworth Homestead is
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), owing to the sound context of the materials
and the tie between artifacts and documented occupants of the site. Although a data recovery effort was
warranted, the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NHDOT) and the New Hampshire
Division for Historical Resources (NHDHR) agreed that further retrieval of artifacts would be redundant.
Instead of additional excavation, which would add to the high volume of materials already collected and
would not contribute significantly to site interpretation, IAC proposed an alternative mitigation plan that
involved additional research and analysis of the 44 medicine bottles.
Research seeks to identify distinct nineteenth-century perspectives on medicine and health in the region,
and also defines and discusses proprietary medicine vs. locally produced apothecary compounds, its
relative cost, purpose (e.g., cough syrup, or general ailment, or respiratory) and range of use. Although
the focus remains on the Dorman, Kimball, and Allen family, who lived in the Walnut Street residence
between the 1870s and the 1920s, the medicine bottle assemblage provides a glimpse into what was
available to and selected by the Rochester consumer in that same time period.
IAC developed a series of research questions as a framework to discuss the consumer decisions of the
extended Dorman/Kimball/Allen family in residence at 2-4 Walnut Street between the 1870s and the
1920s. Researchers consulted city directories, maps, newspapers and other archival resources, to
reconstruct and identify the local consumer landscape during this period, paying attention to physicians
and apothecaries in the city who may have offered competing medical strategies. Focusing on the
collection of 44 medicine bottles from the Phase IAB/II effort, research addressed regional views of
medicine and health in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and focused on how the Walnut
Street inhabitants participated in (or rejected) common practices based on the archaeological evidence at
the site.
1
�Figure 1. Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) location illustrated on USGS map of
Rochester, New Hampshire.
2
�Figure 2. Location of the Ezekiel and Elizabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) in relation to
proposed project plans.
3
�For the 2017 Wentworth Mitigation, IAC sought to address the following research questions:
1. What were the prevailing theories of health and wellness in Rochester and the region in
the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries?
2. What were the medical choices available to the Rochester consumer?
3. What proprietary medicines were commonly available and how were they marketed and
distributed?
4. What was the impact of the Food and Drug Act of 1906 on consumption patterns in the
region? Which products were outlawed and no longer available
5. What was the relative cost, the range of use, and purpose of the medicine or compounds
(e.g., cough syrup, or general ailment, or respiratory) available in Rochester?
6. Which proprietary medicines did the occupants of the Walnut Street address use? Were
any of these products outlawed by the 1906 Food and Drug Act?
7. How did the inhabitants participate in the growing trend of cheaper, ready-to-sell bottled
compounds such as those offered by the nascent Wyeth pharmaceutical company?
8. Were the residents of 2-4 Walnut Street purchasing locally, through mail order, or
through other means?
The following chapters will address these research questions in no specific order. Chapter Two addresses
Research Questions 1, 2, 3, and 4, discussing the various medical philosophies or “medical discourses”
developed nationally and regionally as well as the development of the 1906 Food and Drug Act. Chapter
Three presents a review of the nineteenth-century medical marketplace in Rochester, and what was
available to the consumer regarding physicians, pharmacies, and medical strategies. This chapter expands
upon Research Questions 2 and 5, drawing from primary sources including city directories, photographs,
archival records and newspapers, Federal census and genealogical data and cartographic resources (Chace
1856; Hurd 1892).
Chapter Four provides the historical framework for many of the research questions and offers the
genealogy of the Dorman, Kimball, Allen, and Carlisle families and the occupational history of the
Wentworth property based on maps, land deeds, and Federal census records. Chapter Five presents a
summary of the results from the Phase IB and II investigations and reviews the archaeological context of
the medicine bottle assemblage. Chapter Six focuses on identifying each of the 44 medicine bottles,
including its common usage, development, cost, and possible use by members of the Dorman or KimballAllen families (Research Questions 6, 7 and 8). The final chapter (Chapter Seven) summarizes the results
of IAC’s analysis and offers conclusions based on that analysis as they relate to the list of research
questions. Overall, the study is illustrative of the range of medicinal products available to the Rochester
consumer, and those used and discarded by the extended family over eight decades.
4
�CHAPTER TWO: CULTURAL CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY
The nineteenth-century Rochester consumer faced a number of choices in the medical marketplace. The
following chapter presents a discussion of therapeutic strategies and opportunities prevalent in New
Hampshire – and in Rochester in particular – in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, and addressing
Research Questions 1, 2, 3 and 4. This section expands upon research conducted by Ellen Marlatt in 1997
for her Master’s thesis, Health, Beauty, and Identity on Account: The Female Consumer and the
Apothecary in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which identified the various medical strategies available to
the consumer during this time period (Marlatt 1997). The research for this project draws from many
scholarly secondary sources (Warner 1986; Estes and Goodwin 1986; Janik 2014) as well as primary
sources housed at the Portsmouth Athenaeum, New Hampshire Historical Society, Rochester Public
Library, Rochester Historical Society, as well as area newspapers (e.g., Rochester Courier, Rochester
Record).
Competing Theories of Health and Wellness
Chief among the medical choices to consumers in the nineteenth century was allopathic or regular
medicine, which, practitioners claimed, was rooted in biology and rigorous scientific study. As this
medical discourse gained authority in the nineteenth century, several other evolving medical strategies
actively competed for acceptance. These included many practices dubbed as irregular, including
herbalists, botanics, hydropaths, homeopaths, Indian root doctors and vendors of patent and proprietary
medicines. The following section discusses the evolution of several of the medical practices offered to
the everyday consumer in Rochester.
Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century conventional medical discourse employed a variety of means to
explain the nature of disease and its treatment. One philosophy identified imbalances in a patient’s body
as the cause of most symptoms. Many subscribed to an ancient medical belief in the four classical
humors of the human body – blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile. Excesses or deficiencies in one
or more of these humors would result in disease and its characteristic symptoms. The theory held that
imbalance was caused or aggravated by external forces (or effluvia) such as miasmas (foul air) or
contagions from contact with other patients. The body reacted to internal imbalance by increasing or
decreasing the levels of four other essential properties – heat, cold, moisture, and dryness. In other words,
humoral imbalance within the body manifested itself by fever, chills, or the over- or under-production of
bodily fluids (Estes and Goodwin 1986:2).
Strategies to combat disease in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century relied heavily on heroic
measures such as bleeding and purging to relieve the body of its burdensome excesses. Doctors regularly
administered cathartics (strong laxatives) and emetics (to produce vomiting) and many drew blood to
reduce the internal pressure caused by overly stressed blood vessels, occasionally bleeding the patient to
unconsciousness (Young 1961:36). Termed “heroic depletive therapy” by historian J. H. Warner, this
approach assumed that most diseases were the result of an over-stimulated condition. Treatment focused
on the reduction of the overexcited patient to a “healthy, natural state” by “draining excess excitement”
from the body (Warner 1986). This approach involved applying treatment that promised to lower levels
of excess bodily fluids with dramatic (although not necessarily health-producing) results
Physicians who believed in heroic therapies employed aggressive intervention in their war on disease.
Using an arsenal of drugs and procedures, Warner (1986) asserts, doctors demonstrated their ability to
diagnose and manage their patients that they were in charge. Heroic treatment produced rapid and highly
visible effects. And this observable reaction reinforced the assumption that the physician was in control
of his patient’s health and well-being. For instance, large doses of calomel (a mercury compound and a
strong cathartic) quickly produced violent purging, opiates reduced pain and produced sleep, and the
5
�removal of large quantities of blood assuredly reduced the patient to a calm and quiet state (Warner
1986).
Although depleting strategies remained a part of the regular physician’s arsenal, many doctors added
procedures based on the theory that disease was also the consequence of debilitated or weakened bodily
fluids and fibers. By the 1840s, doctors regularly treated enfeebling diseases and conditions with
stimulants such as quinine, iron compounds, alcoholic beverages, and a diet high in meat protein (Warner
1986). Tonics promised to strengthen the tone of weak fibers, while sedatives relaxed tense fibers. As
symptoms of disease were explained by more than one medical model, medical treatment became
increasingly complex and elaborate.
Eighteenth-century physicians also drew upon a tradition of using botanical remedies long used around
the world, from Egypt to India. Searches for medicinal herbs in the New World added to the medical
arsenal. Among these were elder bark, wintergreen, and sorrel, recognized by Native Americans for their
healing properties. Doctors made much use of quinine, from Peruvian bark as early as the 1750s
(Putnam 1961). Self-taught herbalist and New Hampshire native Samuel Thomson advanced one of the
most popular alternatives to the regular establishment. Born in rural Alstead, Thomson developed a
therapeutic system that relied on natural botanic elements. Building on the humoral tradition, he
proclaimed that cold was the cause of all disease and promoted ways to restore the body’s heat “with
steam baths and peppermint, and by making the patient vomit.” Although his system depended on
“purging and puking” to regulate the body's imbalances, Thomson substituted natural herbs and extracts
of botanical plants like lobelia (pukeweed) and valerian (lady slipper) for stronger cathartics and emetics
prescribed by allopaths. And he made his system available to and understandable by all who were
interested.
Although not known to be present in Rochester, by 1810 Thomson was marketing his remedies in
Portsmouth. By 1812 he had published a medicinal guide of recipes and instructions for members of his
Friendly Botanic Society. Anyone could become a member by paying one of his agents the $20 fee and
swearing to keep the contents of the 24-page booklet a secret within their families (Estes and Goodman
1986:59-60). He amassed considerable wealth marketing his system; his New Guide to Health; or
Botanic Family Physician, first published in 1825, went through thirteen editions (Haller 1994).
A predominantly male profession (nineteenth-century female physicians were few), regular physicians (or
allopaths) claimed their authority from science and biology. By mid-century, homeopathy offered
another alternative, and gained widespread acceptance, especially in New England. Under the premise
that two diseases cannot coexist in the body, homeopaths promised to drive out sickness by administering
artificially induced milder disease, one that produces the same symptom (the term homeopathy means
same illness) as the one under treatment. Also, these practitioners believed in the effectiveness of dilute
amounts of therapeutic drugs and vigorously opposed the treatment of illness with strong cathartics and
vomitives. Instead, the homeopathic patient received his or her medicine as a drop on a sugar cube.
Homeopathy gained favor, especially among the upper classes. These physicians received more formal
medical training than their eclectic and botanic counterparts, learning homeopathic techniques in addition
to the curriculum of regular medical courses (Estes and Goodman 1986:59).
New Hampshire Medical Society
Increasing efforts to codify medical standards among regular (or allopathic) physicians led to the
establishment of The New Hampshire Medical Society in 1791. Organized by nineteen incorporators and
guided through legislation by Dr. Josiah Bartlett of Kingston, (also the first governor of New Hampshire),
the Acts of Incorporation sought to give the society “full power and authority to examine all candidates
6
�for the practice of Physic and Surgery.” If found acceptable, the Society would confer the “approbation
of the Society in letters testimonial of such examination under the Seal of the Society” (New Hampshire
Medical Society 2016) – or in other words, licensure. New Hampshire was the fourth state to issue
licenses, following the New Jersey (1775), Delaware (1776) and Massachusetts (1782) Medical Societies.
Like their counterpart in other states, the New Hampshire Medical Society sought to raise the status of the
medical profession and confirm a standard for medical care. In Josiah Bartlett’s words (1793),
I have long wished that the practice of medicine in this state… might be put under better
regulation than it has been in times past, and reason to hope that the incorporation of the
New Hampshire Medical Society … will produce effects greatly beneficial to the
community, by encouraging the genius and learning in the medical science and
discouraging ignorant and bold pretenders from practicing an art of which they have no
knowledge (Putnam 1966:13).
A chapter in the New Hampshire Medical Society Laws and Regulations written in 1792 indicates that the
society was divided into two districts – the Eastern District, comprised of Rockingham and Strafford
Counties and the Western District, made up of the remaining counties. Records indicate, however, that
the Strafford District became a separate arm in 1808, publishing its constitution and bylaws in 1814 (Hurd
1882; New Hampshire Medical Society 1911; New Hampshire Medical Society, Strafford District 1814).
Many of Rochester’s physicians touted membership in the “Strafford District Medical Society.”
While medical societies emerged in many states, national reaction to the popularity and variety of
irregular medical approaches became codified in the establishment of the American Medical Association
(AMA) in 1847. Seeking to raise the status of professional and scientific medicine, the AMA barred any
practitioner “whose practice is based on exclusive dogma,” botanics and eclectics were almost always
excluded from enrollment. Concerned that homeopathy too (in its appeal to a wealthier, more cultivated
clientele) might negatively affect the allopath’s economic share, the AMA tightened their criteria for
admittance.
Nearby, Portsmouth’s regular physicians organized the Portsmouth Medical Association in 1879,
following the AMA model. Although nine homeopaths practiced in Portsmouth between 1850 and 1918,
only a few were admitted into the exclusive Association and allowed to function with a minimum of
challenge (Estes and Goodman 1986). Their goal was to provide a forum for medical discussion and
(most importantly) to regulate the medical establishment and isolate irregular practitioners and thereby
minimize competition. By contrast only one homeopathic physician is known to have practiced in
Rochester during the same period – Dr. Robert V. Sweet, who practiced out of the Cocheco Block around
1902 (MacDuffie 1892:611).
Medical Education and Training
Formal medical education was unavailable in the colonies until the middle of the eighteenth century.
Traditionally, medical instruction in the eighteenth-century American colonies passed from established
physician to apprentice, who worked closely with their mentor for one to five years. Doctors were often
in the same family, passing along the profession from father to son, nephew or in-law. Of 3,500
physicians practicing in New Hampshire in the 1770s, only 400 held degrees, these from centers in
London, Edinburgh, Paris, Germany, and Vienna. By the time of the founding the New Hampshire
Medical Society in 1791, only three institutions offered medical instruction – University of Pennsylvania
(1765), Columbia University (1768), and Harvard (1783). In 1797, Dartmouth established a medical
school, and Bowdoin offered instruction by 1821 (Putnam 1961).
7
�Prior to the availability of formal training, the trainee had access to his mentor’s medical library and
would be able to obtain updates on medical advances from European publications. Josiah Bartlett,
himself, was a product of such a tradition, studying with Dr. Nehemiah Ordway (to whom Bartlett was
related) for five years before stepping out on his own. Another doctor (Dr. Amos Gale), related to
Bartlett by marriage, instructed twenty others (Putnam 1961:5). A similar medical lineage can be seen in
Rochester with Dr. James Farrington, his son, and various in-laws who trained a number of doctors as
well.
Pharmacies and Patent Medicines
Pharmacists also competed with physicians for a share of the market. Although doctors traditionally
prepared and apportioned medicinal drugs as part of the patient’s treatment, the pharmacy had also long
served as a medical dispensary. However, with no regulations in place expressly requiring medical
training or outlining formal credentials, the pharmacist was free to prescribe and sell his formulas directly
to the public. And without set guidelines for distribution, the nineteenth-century apothecary routinely
refilled doctors’ prescriptions without his authorization. By the 1880s, this situation so enraged the
regular medical community that one Portsmouth physician outlined the impending danger threatened by
druggists’ actions in a paper before the Portsmouth Medical Association. The doctor claimed that
pharmacists had greatly overstepped their bounds (not to mention cut into the physicians’ profits) by
refilling drug supplies without deference to the professional’s jurisdiction (Estes and Goodman 1986).
Capitalizing on the self-help craze, patent remedy and proprietary medicine vendors provided another
alternative to the physician’s visit. Relying on the buying public’s ability to quickly identify physical
ailments and building on their increasing familiarity with medical rhetoric, advertising for patent
medicines assured a quick and simple fix. And they promised to address an assortment of ills. Many
claimed their product as a cure-all for the troubles of daily life, counting on the consumer’s ability to
identify with at least one of a long list of symptoms. “Take a dose of Schenck’s Mandrake Pills,” reads
Schenck’s Almanac of 1875, “if you have –
• a sick headache,
• bad breath
• your tongue is coated
• you have diarrhea
• your skin is yellow
• your liver is torpid
• you have a pain under your shoulder blade
• if you have been drinking
• for chills or fever
• if you cannot sleep
• if you feel that everything goes wrong
• if you feel dull and heavy
• if you wish a purgative producing the most searching and promptest results
(etc. etc.)” (Schenck 1875:28-30)
Historian J. Worth Estes describes patent medicines as mostly proprietary remedies, manufactured and
sold by their inventors or by proprietors who had purchased the formulas or the commercial rights to the
drugs from their inventors (Estes 1988:3). The first advertisement in the American colonies for a patent
medicine is believed to be for an English remedy called “Daffy’s Elixir Salutis” in the Boston NewsLetter in 1708. Although British patent medicines were available to those of means, American
8
�apothecaries sometimes sold a counterfeit preparation by refilling British bottles with their own
concoction (Janik 2014:184).
Proprietary medicines rose in popularity, particularly during the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
Among the most popular was Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound, a remedy trademarked in 1876.
Although her recipe to address “female weakness” remained secret, its formula followed the philosophy
of Thomsonian healers – using herbs and botanical ingredients, some of which are still recommended by
modern alternative natural medicine (e.g., Black Cohosh for menopausal symptoms) (Janik 2014:188;
Stage 1979).
The cost of proprietary medicines, however, was substantially higher than a preparation ordered by a
regular physician. Account books from the 1870s and 1880s at Thatcher’s Apothecary in Portsmouth
indicates that ready-made patent medicines sold for about $1.00 per bottle, a cost well above the 10 to 40
cents charged for general medicinal ingredients (Marlatt 1997). Records from Farmington and Rochester
pharmacies at the New Hampshire Historical Society (NHHS) indicate a similar cost differential between
proprietary nostrums and compounds ordered by regular physicians.
Patent Medicines and Alcohol
The use of nineteenth-century patent and proprietary medicines has often received pejorative attention
among historians and archaeologists who adopt assumptions about the relatively high percentage of
alcohol in these preparations as the “evidence” of fraudulent claims. Often overlooked, however, is a
long-held belief in the therapeutic value of liquor. By the late 1850s, stimulants of many kinds were the
primary course of medical treatment among regular doctors and given in large and frequent doses.
Historian Erika Janik states, “Alcohol was a medical mainstay of the late nineteenth century for its low
cost and wide availability. Regulars prescribed up to five shots a day and recommended giving children
up to two teaspoons every three hours” (Janik 2014:190).
Although beverage alcohol was not new to a list of therapeutic approaches that included quinine, iron
compounds, and a high protein diet, by the 1860’s alcohol had become the stimulant of choice. Spirits,
along with opiates, were prescribed liberally in military hospitals during the Civil War. Used only
minimally as anesthetics, physicians administered whiskey, wine, and brandy to soldiers suffering from
pneumonia, dysentery, and typhoid fever (Warner 1986:98-99).
Physicians trained on the battlefront explains John Warner, “transferred their experience to private
practice after the war.” Aligned with therapeutic methods widely applied in Britain and France, Warner’s
research illustrates that the therapeutic use of alcohol at Massachusetts General Hospital maintained its
greatest level of use over the following decades. Given along with cod liver oil, quinine, and iron
compounds, he adds, “alcohol most vividly embodied the ethos of heroic stimulation.” Spirits were given
to nearly one-quarter of hospital patients in the 1860’s and 70’s, and it was not uncommon for patients to
relieve a dosage of 8 to 12 ounces per day (Warner 1986:99, 144-145).
Marketing and Distribution
Nostrums were perhaps no more or less effective than a doctor’s cure, but they were decidedly less
unpleasant (Estes and Goodman 1986:71). Advertising emphasized purity and, as the public became
more aware of the dangers of narcotics in the 1860’s, stressed the absence of mercury and morphine.
Allopathic doctors were directed to eschew advertising entirely, prohibiting the practice as “highly
reprehensible in a regular physician” as part of the AMA code of ethics in 1847 (Janik 2014:199).
9
�Although regular doctors were admonished by the AMA code of ethics not to advertise their services
directly, it appears that at least some Rochester physicians ignored that directive. A glimpse at the
Rochester Courier shows Rochester doctors with prominently placed ads, including Drs. Gage and Virgin
who regularly advertised (Plate 1).
Plate 1. Advertisements in Rochester Courier, January 23, 1877.
The Civil War generated a need for new standards of health and sanitation. With this came a heightened
interest in patent medicines, and advertising for these products grew exponentially. James Harvey Young
reasons that the reality of the War brought a craving for news, which increased circulation of newspapers
and printed material. Concurrently, technology for processing wood into paper pulp made significant
breakthroughs, and wood pulp began to replace more costly linen and cotton rag fibers in papermaking.
As a result, the price of paper fell drastically, allowing newspapers to publish in a larger format and
magazines to proliferate. Larger newspaper pages meant more room for advertising, and more “white
space” for creative expression (Young 1961). With the incentive of the war effort, lithographic
techniques improved, making elaborate pictorial illustration feasible. Advertising became a lucrative
profession, and nostrum makers were the first to take advantage of this on a national level.
With the ease of advertising production came a visual change to the landscape. Agents and promoters
attached bills and broadsides to walls and fences, rocks and railroad crossings in rural and urban settings,
drawing criticism for disfiguring and violating the natural beauty of the scenery (Young 1961). Bill
posting became especially prevalent in the shopping district – in store windows, and as part of shop
displays. By the late 1870s and 1880s, shoppers in Rochester encountered these announcements in
newspapers, magazines, directories, almanacs, pamphlets, and leaflets with increasing frequency.
Products marketed by the J. C. Ayer Company of Lowell, Massachusetts, for example (including Ayer’s
Cherry Pectoral, Sarsaparilla, and Cathartic Pills), were a regular feature in the advertising columns.
10
�Lydia Pinkham’s image and ad for her Vegetable Compound, Hostetter Bitters (used extensively in
military camps), and Perry Davis’ Pain Killer (opium suspended in 77% alcohol) also regularly appeared
in print. Rochester’s weekly and daily newspapers carried advertising plugging a wide variety of
proprietary medicines. The Rochester Courier and Rochester Record each regularly carried sizable ads
for nationally distributed brands to catch the reader’s eye (Plate 2).
Plate 2. Ad for tonic in Rochester Courier, January 23, 1877.
Dr. King’s, a nationally distributed brand based in Indiana, marketed their products by printing special
tabloid newspapers for local distribution during the holidays. Published in 1899 for local apothecary
W.W. Roberts in Farmington, New Hampshire, one issue of the Farmington Holiday Druggist (“devoted
to health, business, and science”) featured Christmas stories and advice interspersed with ads for Dr.
King’s projects (Plates 3). These included Dr. King’ New Discovery for Consumption, touted as “The
only sure cure for Consumption in the World” as well as Dr. King’s New Life Pills, “the great liver and
stomach remedy” (Plate 4).
11
�Plate 3. Masthead for tabloid prepared for local pharmacy featuring Dr. King’s products (NHHS
collection).
Plate 4. Dr. King’s ads in the Holiday Druggist.
Impacts of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906
The popularity of beverage alcohol for regular medical use and the high alcohol content of certain
nostrums and proprietary medicines did not go unchallenged. In addition to temperance forces building
around the country, legal action in the early twentieth century culminated in the Pure Food and Drug Act
of 1906. The act is considered “one of the first large-scale attempts of the U.S. federal government to
regulate an entire industry in the name of consumer protection” (Sobel 2000:4). The momentum for legal
action emerged largely in response to the rapid rise of the patent medicine industry especially toward the
end of the nineteenth century when the number of manufacturers doubled almost every ten to fifteen
years. Between 1899 and 1904, for instance, the number of suppliers increased by 30%, to more than
2,200 (Sobel 2000:5). Historian James Harvey Young (1961) claims that these establishments sold
12
�approximately 50,000 different patent medicines just before the 1906 legislation went into effect. The
estimated market value for this industry was $75 million, or $2 billion in 2017 dollars.
In addition to making broad claims as to their effectiveness in curing “everything from asthma to cancer,”
many preparations contained as much as 30% alcohol as well as other compounds known today as highly
addictive (i.e., cocaine, heroin, and opium). Although advertising relied heavily on consumer
testimonials, there were no requirements to disclose ingredients or to label the product and back up claims
properly.
Nascent consumer groups and competing pharmaceutical manufacturers joined forces to challenge and
expose false claims. The American Pharmaceutical Association was one such group, asking in 1893,
Do we not recognize, that this [patent medicine] industry is one of our greatest enemies,
and that there are millions of dollars’ worth sold all over the country, thus diverting
money which rightly belongs to the retail drug trade, in the way of prescriptions and
regular drugs? (Young 1961 in Sobel 2000:6).
Journalists wrote scathing reports on the dangers of patent medicine use, specifically naming products
allegedly high in alcoholic content or narcotic stimulants. Truth, a weekly newspaper published in Salt
Lake City (1901 to 1908) published an article entitled, “The Dangerous Frauds in Patent Medicines,”
which named specific products noting that these “remedies” contained deadly poisons that led to people
becoming “drug-fiends” and alcoholics. These included better known and widely advertised products
such as Lydia Pinkham’s Compound and Paine’s Celery Compound, which the article claims each
contained about 20% alcohol (Truth, October 20, 1906:7). Both of these nostrums are represented among
the 44 bottles that are part of this study.
The patent medicine industry fought back through the Proprietary Association of American, supported by
newspapers that stood to lose substantial advertising revenue if the industry collapsed. Not surprisingly,
the AMA took a strong position in support of the act. One state journal encouraged its members to
“explain to your friends and patients practically every newspaper in the United States is a silent partner in
the nostrum fraud business” (California Medical Association 1906).
The 1906 Act required that ingredients such as alcohol, opium, and similar compounds be listed on the
label. The Act also deemed making any false or misleading statements illegal, including statements
regarding place of origin or manufacture. The legislation led to widespread lawsuits and counterclaims,
as patent medicine manufacturers fought for the right to produce their products.
The impact of the passage of the 1906 Act on the industry was swift and severe. The rapid growth
observed in the early years of the twentieth century immediately ceased. One-third of approximately
3,000 manufacturers nationwide were out of business by 1916. Fully 50% of these ceased to exist by
1926 (Sobel 2000:9). The measure toppled the nation’s most popular proprietary medicine known as
Peruna, introduced in the 1890s by Columbus, Ohio, physician Dr. S. B. Hartman. Marketed as a cure for
“catarrh” (a catch-all phrase for any malady) some claimed the concoction was a 190-proof mixture of
water and “cologne spirits” (aka alcohol) (Adams 1944). Although Lydia Pinkham’s Compound survived
scrutiny by changing its formula (Stage 1979), Paine’s Celery Compound survived at least the early years
after the 1906 Act went into effect although challenged in court (Wells & Richardson Co. v. Abraham et
al. 1906).
13
�CHAPTER THREE:
THE MEDICAL MARKETPLACE AND ROCHESTER’S 19TH-CENTURY CONSUMER
LANDSCAPE
The following chapter offers a glimpse into the specific variety and types of medical choices available in
the Rochester community to paint a picture of the layout and landscape of the medical marketplace.
Expanding on Research Question #2 and addressing Research Question #5, the information in this chapter
draws from a wide range of primary sources including city directories, photographs and newspapers
(Rochester Historical Society), Federal census and genealogical data (ancestry.com), cartographic
resources (Chace 1856; Hurd 1892), and original prescription records at the New Hampshire Historical
Society.
Our research found a clear presence of medical authority in Rochester in the last third of the nineteenth
century. By 1871 the city directory lists six academically-trained male physicians serving a population of
about 4,000, or one doctor per 684 potential patients (Tables 1 and 2). As the city grew, so did the
availability of medical care. By the turn of the century, the number of doctors nearly doubled along with
the general population, keeping the available physicians per capita in the 600+ range.
While many doctors saw patients in their home quarters, others maintained regular hours in offices
separate from but nearby their homes. Sanborn Fire Insurance maps, as well as data gleaned from city
directories, show that most physicians kept offices in and around Central Square, many of which stood
adjacent to or near apothecary shops or pharmacies (Figure 3). By 1902, most doctors advertised hours in
the city directory (e.g., Bass 1902) – usually offering early morning, mid-afternoon, and sometimes
evening hours. It is possible that doctors left the time in between posted hours open for house calls or
hospital visits.
Table 1. List of physicians and surgeons in Rochester City Directories.
Directory Year
1871
Physicians (6)
Enoch Dow
Residence
Wentworth
Homestead
site
Nathaniel Dorman
James Farrington
Isaac Lougee
Betton W. Sargent
Moses Warren
1882
Physicians (8)
F.G. Coffin
James Farrington
E.F. Gage
Isaac Lougee
Thomas J. Sweatt
F.P. Virgin
F.E. Whitney
14
Office Address
Main Street
Hanson Street
Autumn Street
Wakefield Street
Main Street
Central Square
Office Address
Dodge's Block
Grange Building
Main Street
W. Wakefield Street
2 McDuffee Block
Central Square
E. McDuffee Block
�S. Young
East Rochester
Directory Year
1897
Physicians (11)
1902
Office Address
Burt Andrews
Charles Blazo
Robert F. Burleigh
John S. Daniels
Willis B. Downs
Ernest Duval
James Farrington
Main street, next door to
Humphrey's jewelry store
McDuffee Block
3 Summer Street
Hanson's building, Main Street
Cole building
Market Street
11 Wakefield Street
E.T. Hubbard
Dudley Stokes
Frank E. Whitney
Stephen Young
Main Street, opposite M.E.
Church
Wentworth Block
7 Elm Street
8 Mill Street, East Rochester
Physician (13)
Edson M. Abbott
A.S. Annis
John Harold Bates
Charles Blazo
Ernest Duval
James Farrington
Herbert W. James
Forrest L. Keay
John H. Neal
Stephen E. Root
Dudley L. Stokes
Robert V. Sweet
(homeopath)
Frank E. Whitney
Office Address
13 Main St
8 No. Main, Salinger Block
27 Main St
12 Main
59 No. Main Street
Retired physician
41 No. Main, Cocheco Block
21 Main Street
Rooms 9 & 10, 9 Barker Block
2 Leonard Street
19 Railroad Ave
41 No. Main, Cocheco Block
9 McDuffee Block
Table 2. Number of physicians listed in city directories, 1871-1902.
Rochester
population in
Directory
Number of
closest Federal # physicians per
year
physicians listed
Census year
capita
1871
6
4103
684
1882
8
5784
723
1897
11
7396
672
1902
13
8466
651
15
�16
�Figure 3. Location of Rochester’s apothecary and drug stores on the Sanborn (1897) map of Rochester.
17
�Rochester’s Medical lineage
The medical establishment in Rochester seems to follow a pattern consistent with the tradition of
mentorship noted in other parts of the state. Such a medical lineage is a long-held tradition; in the late
1700s, Josiah Bartlett of Kingston and founder of the New Hampshire Medical Society, for instance,
learned his trade through an apprenticeship, and his in-law, Dr. Amos Gale, instructed twenty others
(Putnam 1961:5). Rochester doctors followed a similar pattern; Dr. James Farrington followed this
tradition, serving the Rochester community and training many doctors.
Dr. James Farrington
James Farrington was born in Conway, New Hampshire, on October 1, 1791 (Plate 5) He was the third
son of Jeremiah and Molly (Swan) Farrington (Figure 4). In 1814 Farrington attended Fryeburg
Academy and began his medical study medicine the following year under the tutelage of Dr. Moses
Chandler, a Fryeburg physician. Farrington continued his studies with Dr. Jabez Dow of Dover and was
found competent to practice medicine in 1818 following examination by Drs. Crosby and Prey of the New
Hampshire Medical Society. Dr. Farrington established his practice the following year in Rochester,
where he remained the rest of his life. He was known as a physician and surgeon of superior skill, and a
well respected in the New Hampshire medical community. He was actively involved in the Strafford
District and held the position of censor and counselor in the New Hampshire Medical Society (McDuffee
1892; 345).
Plate 5. Dr. James Farrington, date unknown (McDuffee 1892:345).
18
�Figure 4. Farrington-Hanson family tree (physicians highlighted in green; apothecaries in blue).
19
�On March 8, 1827, Dr. Farrington married Mary D. Hanson, daughter of Rochester merchant Joseph
Hanson and sister of apothecary owner Dominicus Hanson (see Figure 4). Dr. and Mary Farrington
established a home on South Main Street a few doors down from Hanson’s Apothecary and also set up a
separate office next door for Dr. Farrington’s practice (Figure 5). The couple had four children - three
sons and one daughter. Dr. Farrington practiced medicine in Rochester for five decades and served as a
mentor for several apprenticing physicians. He died in Rochester on October 9, 1859, at the age of 68.
Figure 5. Location of Dr. Farrington’s House and office illustrated on the Chace (1856) map of
Rochester.
Dr. Farrington’s Medical Lineage
Dr. Farrington trained many doctors including his son, James B. Farrington, his nephew, James F.
Farrington, a brother-in-law, Joseph H. Smith, and his son-in-law, Bretton Sargent, as well as two others,
Timothy and Alfred Upham (Figure 6). Born in Conway on June 10, 1822, James F. Farrington followed
in his uncle’s footsteps, attending Fryeburg Academy and serving as his apprentice before graduating
from the University of New York’s medical department in 1847. Upon graduation, he joined his uncle's
practice in Rochester, and the two men ran a successful practice together until the elder Dr. Farrington's
death in 1859. Following his uncle's death, Dr. James F. Farrington continued to practice medicine in
Rochester, although he relocated his Central Square office to the Granger's Block on North Main Street.
20
�Figure 6. Dr. Farrington’s medical lineage showing physicians who received training under his tutelage.
21
�Dominicus Hanson
The Hanson-Farrington family dominated the medical sphere in nineteenth-century Rochester.
Dominicus Hanson (1813-1907) (Plate 6) is purported to be Rochester's first and most prominent
nineteenth-century apothecary owner (McDuffee 1892). Hanson was the third child of Rochester
shopkeeper Joseph Hanson and his wife Charity (Dame) Hanson (see Figure 4). Three of the Hanson
brothers were druggists, two of the sister's married doctors (Mary Dame Hanson married Dr. James
Farrington, and Meribah Hanson married Dr. Joseph H. Smith).
Plate 6. Dominicus Hanson, date unknown (McDuffee 1892; 495).
In the early nineteenth century, Hanson's eldest brother Humphrey Hanson kept an assortment of roots,
herbs and "a few drugs" in his father's dry goods store located on Central Square at 10 Main Street
(Figure 7; Plate 7). As business increased, he opened Rochester's first drug store in a space adjoining his
father's shop. After Humphrey Hanson's untimely death in 1824, his brother Joseph served as the druggist
for a short time until his death at the age of 25. The business was sold to their brother-in-law, Dr. Joseph
Smith, who employed young Dominicus Hanson as a clerk and later as an apprentice. After two years,
Hanson left for Hopkinton Academy to further his education, but returned in 1832 to purchase the shop
from Dr. Smith. After the store burned to the ground in 1837, Hanson built a new brick store with what
was referred to as "the finest front and the largest panes of glass of any in the county" and was reputed to
be “packed from cellar to roof with almost everything nameable in the drug line” (McDuffee 1892).
Hanson regularly advertised in the Rochester Courier, describing himself as a dealer in “Drugs,
Medicines, and Chemicals” (Plate 8). In addition, Hanson sold fine toiletries, wines and liquors, surgical
instruments, books and stationery, and “choice family groceries.” A note at the bottom of these
advertisements notes the availability of patent medicines as well.
22
�Figure 7. Hanson’s Apothecary location illustrated on the Hurd (1892) map of Rochester.
23
�Plate 7. Main Street before 1868, Dominicus Hanson's apothecary (highlighted in yellow), view south.
Plate 8. Hanson Apothecary ad in Rochester Courier, January 24, 1873.
24
�After a second fire in 1880, Hanson rebuilt and leased the store to R. Dewitt Burnham who ran the store
for three decades (Plate 9). Around 1917, Arthur H. Ainslie purchased the R. Dewitt Burnham pharmacy
and renamed the establishment “Ainslie’s Drug Store.” The former apothecary-drug store building is still
standing today (Plate 10).
Plate 9. Corner of Hanson and Main Street, showing Burnham Drug (formerly Dominicus Hanson’s)
1903, view southeast.
Plate 10. Dominicus Hanson/ R. Dewitt Burnham Apothecary in 2017 (highlighted in yellow), view
southeast.
25
�By the 1890s, Burnham also marketed his own proprietary formula under the name, "DeWitt's Headache
Powders" (Plate 11). The text of the ad reflects the active competition to gain a share of the medical
marketplace. The ad admonishes the consumer not to be deceived by imitations, citing that:
we are told, from authentic and reliable sources, that certain druggists in this city are
putting out a Headache Powder and telling people that “They are just the same powders
as Burnham’s and made after the same formula.” This statement we pronounce as
patently false as we are ready to prove it so and defy any druggist in the city to give the
formula of the Headache Powders… They do this to sell their own and profit by the
reputation that ours has justly earned.
Plate 11. Ad for R. DeWitt Burnham headache powders in Rochester Courier, March 20, 1896,
26
�Development of Rochester as Commercial Hub
Located approximately 20 miles northwest of Portsmouth, Rochester had developed into a sizable
commercial hub by the 1820s, taking advantage of the waterpower from the Salmon Falls and Cocheco
Rivers. Industrial development grew from sawmills and gristmills to include sizable woolen and textile
mills, resulting in a rise in population and infrastructure. Central Square became the focal point of this
core, built around the intersection of four of Rochester's primary streets – North and South Main Street,
Wakefield Street, and Hanson Street (see Figure 3; Plate 12).
The introduction and growth of stage lines and the railroad had a direct impact on Rochester's consumer
landscape as the transportation systems ensured the continued growth of manufacturing pursuits. As a
result, Rochester became a transportation hub for southeastern New Hampshire. Beginning in the early
nineteenth century, stage lines from northern New Hampshire and Vermont converged in Central Square,
and later four main branches of the Boston & Maine Railroad intersected in Rochester near the eastern
terminus of Hanson Street, just a few blocks from Central Square (see Figure 3). By the last decades of
the nineteenth century, forty trains transporting both passengers and freight stopped in Rochester daily,
ten of which originated in Boston (Brevoort 1981; Smith 1996:23) (Plate 13). The growth of these modes
of transportation spurred the expansion of Rochester's commercial and industrial development,
particularly textile and shoe manufacturing. Moreover, this expansion fostered the increase of population
and diversity of supporting commercial ventures.
By 1870 Rochester's population reached just over 4,000, supporting a wide range of industries including
an ax handle manufactory, shoe factory, door, sash and blind factory, a tannery, lumber mills and
numerous blacksmith, carpenter, shoemakers, tine and various mechanical shops. Central Square featured
three churches, a bank, two hotels, several eating houses, various offices for lawyers and physicians, as
well as nearly 40 stores and shops, including apothecaries and drug stores (Fogg 1874).
Apothecary owner Dominicus Hanson, in what seems to have been a forward-thinking manner,
recognized that the railroad would play an instrumental role in the commercial and industrial development
of Rochester. In 1849 Hanson commissioned the construction of a road through his property to link the
railroad depot to Central Square. Named Hanson Street, by the 1880s the road became a primary
commercial street in downtown Rochester, lined with commercial buildings (Plate 14). Numerous
businesses stood along Hanson Street, including a livery stable, blacksmith shop, boot and shoe
blackening rooms, a photographer's studio, grocery and fruit stores, and real estate, dentist, doctor and
lawyer's offices (Wright 1914).
27
�Plate 12. Central Square, Rochester, New Hampshire circa 1908 postcard, view southeast (artist
unknown).
Plate 13. Union Station, later renamed the Boston & Main Station (Smith 1996).
28
�Plate 14. Hanson Street at Central Square in the 1880s (Smith 1996).
Rochester Pharmacies and Consumer Choices
Consumers in nineteenth-century Rochester had many apothecaries or drug stores from which to choose.
A review of the Rochester City Directories between 1871 and 1902 revealed the number of apothecaries
and druggists fluctuated between four and eleven (Table 3; Table 4). Some, like B. F. Rackle who
advertised as a “wholesale and retail druggist," listed their businesses under both the druggist and
apothecary category. Most had prominent window displays as seen in the photograph of Cobb Drug Store
on Main Street (Plate 15). Most apothecaries and drugstores clustered along Main and North Main
Streets and were often located adjacent or near physicians' offices (see Figure 3).
Table 3. Number of apothecaries and druggists, 1871-1902.
Rochester
Number of
population in
Directory Apothecaries/
closest Federal
# druggists
Year
Druggists
Census year
per capita
4103
1871
11
373
5784
1882
4
1446
7396
1897
5
1479
8466
1902
8
1058
29
�Table 4. List of Rochester apothecary and drug stores between 1871-1902 (Rochester City Directory).
Directory
Year
Listing
Address
1871
Patent Medicine Dealer (1)
Dominicus Hanson
Central Square
Druggist (6)
B. F. Rackley; "wholesale and retail druggist"
Franklin Square
Thomas L. Smith
Central, corner of Washington
James H. Wheeler; physician and druggist
1 Pleasant Street
C. M. Jones & Co. Druggist and Apothecary
1 Central Buildings
William W. Nason
High Street
Walter F. Farrington
McDuffee Block
Apothecaries (6)
1882
1897
1902
Dominicus Hanson
Central Square
B. F. Rackley; "wholesale and retail druggist"
Franklin Square
Charles A. Tuft
Central Square
William H. Vickery
21 Central Street
Jeremiah Wingate
1 Pleasant Street
Charles A. Tuft
Central Square
Apothecaries (4)
Address
Dominicus Hanson
Central Square
R. C. Howe
McDuffee Block
S. F. Shorey
Main, E. Rochester
S. F. Sanderson
Hayes' Block
Druggist (3)
Address
R. De Witt Burnham
Unknown
William C. Sanborn
Unknown
George W. Shaw
Unknown
Druggists (7)
Address
Burnham R. DeWitt
Unknown
E. F. Cobb
108 Main Street
Cobb, Hayes & Co.
Grange Blk; 59 No. Main
C. D. Coleman
No Main Street
30
�S. S. Forsaith
John O'Donnell
62 Hanson Street
2 Autumn Street, East
Rochester
Purrington & Beaudoin
62 East Rochester Street
11 Main Street
Patent Medicines Dealers (3)
Burnham R. DeWitt
Cobb, Hayes & Co.
108 Main Street
Purrington & Beaudoin
No Main Street
Plate 15. Cobb Drug Store on North Main Street, established 1900 (Smith 1996).
31
�Prescription drugs in Rochester
As part of our research efforts, IAC was not able to locate records from Rochester apothecaries.
However, we did have access to a collection of prescriptions from pharmacies in Farmington, New
Hampshire, at the New Hampshire Historical Society (NHHS) which revealed clues regarding the types
of medical formulas offered to consumers in the general area. The collection is made up of hand-written
prescriptions pasted into large volumes in roughly chronological order. While the scripts are mostly from
Farmington pharmacies, several Rochester druggists represented. The prescription slips are written on
preprinted perforated forms with the apothecary's name, address, and title or description of services (Plate
16). The list of Farmington establishments includes:
Emerson & Garland
Druggist & Apothecaries
36 Main St. Farmington, N.H.
R.B. Foss & Co.
Druggists
Curtis Block, Farmington, N.H.
Nute & Blake
Druggist & Apothecaries
No. 15 Central, Farmington, N.H.
Roberts & Peavey
Druggists
Farmington, N.H.
G.W. Shaw & Co., Pharmacists
Farmington, N. H.
Plate 16. Prescription from Emerson &
Garland, c. 1882.
Most prescriptions list the ingredients to be compounded and a physician's signature or printed name. A
small sample includes such ingredients Sulph Quinine, Zinci Sulph, Pulv[erized] Borax, Carb Potash,
Iodine, and Camphor. Some prescription pads list distinctive features of the druggist. G.W. Shaw & Co.,
for instance, touted "Physicians prescriptions a Specialty," and Nute & Blake advertised "Prescriptions
carefully compounded at all hours of the day or night."
In multiple instances, physicians used a generic prescription pad imprinted with the name of a preparation
called "W. H. Schieffelin & Co. Soluble Pills" and the tagline, "Preferred when not otherwise specified"
(Plate 17). W. H. Schieffelin & Co. served as a wholesaler to druggist's shops, supplying raw materials to
physicians and druggists. The company had its roots in the Colonial period when Jacob Schieffelin, a
German immigrant settled in Philadelphia. In 1793, he bought out his brother-in-law, John B. Lawrence,
who was a drug merchant in New York, and the company was known as Lawrence & Schieffelin. The
young company emerged at the beginning of the pharmaceutical industry, gaining traction as the first
college of pharmacy was founded in 1821. The business eventually went to four Schieffelin brothers and
later renamed W. H. Schieffelin & Co in 1865. The company became the nation's leading pharmaceutical
wholesaler, still going strong at the end of the twentieth century (Brown-Forman et al. 2017).
32
�Plate 17. Prescription pad with advertising for W.H. Schieffelin & Co, c.1890s.
The NHHS collection also includes a few prescriptions signed by Rochester physicians. One document
from the 1880s (Plate 18) filled by Farmington druggists Emerson & Garland for "Fluid Extract
Belladonna and simple syrup" was signed by Rochester physician Dr. James Farrington. Stephen Young,
M. D. of East Rochester, who is listed in both the 1882 and 1897 Rochester City Directories (Dudley
1882; Bass 1898) wrote out several prescriptions in the collection, although the pharmacy that filled them
is unknown (Plate 19). Dr. I. W. Lougee joined Dr. Farrington’s practice in 1868 and used his own
imprinted Rx pad that also lists the Rochester pharmacy, S. F. Sanderson.
Plate 18. Prescription written by Rochester physician James Farrington M. D., 1880s.
33
�Plate 19 Prescription written by Stephen Young M. D. of East Rochester, 1890s.
Scripts on imprinted forms from Rochester pharmacists practicing between 1882 and 1917 are also
represented in the collection. These include:
G.W. Shaw, Apothecary
Rochester, N. H.
John O’Donnell
Druggist and Pharmacist
East Rochester, N. H.
I. A. Percy
Registered Pharmacist
Hayes Block
Rochester, N.H.
Howe’s Pharmacy
Barker’s Block, Main Street
Rochester, N. H.
R. DeWitt Burnham
Prescription Druggist
Central Square
Rochester, N. H.
Plate 20. Prescription written on R. DeWitt Burnham pharmacy
pad, 1890s.
R. DeWitt Burnham took over Dominicus Hanson’s Central Square pharmacy in the 1880s and remained
in operation for three decades. In 1917 Arthur H. Ainslie purchased the shop and ran “Ainslie’s Drug
Store” for several decades. It appears that several Rochester doctors used an R. DeWitt Burnham
prescription pad (Plate 20); the collection includes examples with J. H. Neal, M. D.; A. S. Wallace, M. D.
as well as one from a veterinarian, F. I. Smith, for a compound that includes carbolic acid. Dr. Smith’s
directives were filled at several other Rochester pharmacies as well.
34
�In most instances, the cost of the prescription is written in pencil on the slip itself. Charges ranged from
15 to 60 cents, depending, it appears, on the number of ingredients, their cost to the druggist and/or the
complexity of the compound. A prescription for a bismuth (or antacid) compound given by Dr. Young,
for instance (see Plate 19) cost 30 cents, and the R. DeWitt Burnham pharmacist filled Dr. Wallace’s
prescription for 35 cents (see Plate 20). The prices of these compounds are consistent with those in
Portsmouth of about the same period, where Thatcher’s Apothecary account books record similar charges
for the filling of doctor’s orders.
Also consistent with Portsmouth charges is the substantial difference between the cost of compounded
medicines and patent or proprietary medicines ready for sale. The Farmington account books at NHHS
include one entry dated 1884 in which a doctor, W. P. Blake, M. D., ordered “Scott’s Emulsion” to be
taken as directed (presumably written on the bottle’s label) (Plates 21 and 22). The charge was $1.00.
Claimed to be the first emulsified version of cod liver oil, Scott’s Emulsion was marketed as early as
1873 and is still available today, apparently having survived the challenges of the 1906 Food and Drug
Act (Scott’s 2015).
Plate 22. Prescription for Scott’s Emulsion, 1884.
‘
Plate 21. Scott’s Emulsion package.
35
�CHAPTER FOUR: OCCUPATION HISTORY OF THE WENTWORTH HOMESTEAD
The Ezekiel and Elizabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) is a standing structure located at 2-4
Walnut Street in Rochester (Strafford County), New Hampshire (see Figure 1; Plate 23). The house sits
on a 0.22-acre manicured lot at the northwest intersection of Walnut and Washington Streets,
approximately ½-mile west of Strafford Square. Presently, the home is a multi-unit residential complex
with concrete paths leading from the Rochester city sidewalks to each of four apartments (Plate 24).
Plate 23. Overview of the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth house, view south.
Plate 24. Proximity of Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth house to the intersections of Walnut and
Washington Streets, view west.
36
�The 1856 (Chace) map of Rochester illustrates the house as the "E. Wentworth" (Figure 8). Ezekiel
Wentworth (c.1824-1905) constructed a 1½-story cape on a one-acre parcel at the intersection of Walnut
and Washington Streets shortly after purchasing the property in 1853 (Strafford County Deeds [hereafter
SCD] 214/272). Here, Ezekiel made his home with wife Elisabeth (born c. 1833) and two young
daughters, Sarah (born 1853) and Eliza (born 1859).
Figure 8. Location of the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) illustrated on the
1856 (Chace) map of Rochester, New Hampshire.
By 1860 the Wentworth family moved to Dover where Ezekiel found work as a stone cutter. In 1867
Wentworth sold the house and land to Nathaniel Dorman (c.1805-1893), an Alton physician, for $1,650
(SCD 240/424) (Table 5). Although Wentworth maintained ownership of the Rochester property until
1867, the 1860 U. S. Federal Population Census lists no one living at the location, suggesting the house
was left vacant between the Wentworth and Dorman occupation phases (Table 6 and 7).
37
�Table 5. Title chain of ownership for 2-4 Walnut Street.
Richard Kimball
SCD 214/272
to
1854
Ezekiel Wentworth
SCD 240/424
to
1867
Nathaniel Dorman
SCD 274/181
to
1882
John S. Kimball
SCD 394/71
to
1920
SCD 628/280
Isaac and Mary Allen
to
Ethel Allen
to
Burt R. and Lillian Cooper
to
SCD 865/459
Albert J. and Gladys
Carignan
to
1969
SCD 1200/566
Alvin and Dorothy Sheldon
to
1985
Inherited
"became co-owners"
1945
1953
1954
George C. and Cheryl D.
Sheldon
Table 6. Timeline of Households by occupation period.
Head of Household
Address
Occupation Period
Ezekiel Wentworth
2-4 Walnut Street
1853 - 1860
Vacant?
2-4 Walnut Street
1860 - 1867
Dr. Nathaniel Dorman
2-4 Walnut Street
1867 - c.1883
John S. Kimball
2-4 Walnut Street
1883 - 1920
Isaac B. Allen
2 Walnut Street
1910 - 1945
William Blair
4 Walnut Street
1910 - 1920
John R. Allen
4 Walnut Street
1920 – 1938
Ethel C. Allen
4 Walnut Street
1938 - 1953
38
�Table 7. List of occupants between 1870 and 1940
Decade
1870
Age
Occupation
Place
of birth
Nathaniel Dorman
Sarah W. Dorman
Charles Kimball
John S. Kimball
Arthur D. Kimball
65
61
13
10
7
Farmer
Keeping House
At Home
At Home
At Home
ME
ME
NH
NH
NH
1880
Nathaniel Dorman
Charles Kimball
John S. Kimball
Arthur D. Kimball
76
24
20
17
Retired Doctor
Farmer
House Painter
At School
ME
NH
NH
NH
1900
John S. Kimball
40
Post Office
NH
Fredric Turner
23
Fancy Goods
Salesman
MA
Augusta Turner
22
1910
2 Walnut Street
I. Belmont Allen
Mary A. Allen
John R. Allen
37
39
15
John S. Kimball
50
4 Walnut Street
Wm. J. Blair
Mary Blair
Flora M. Blair
Robert Blair
30
37
4
1
Real
Estate/Personal
Estate
RE $2000/PE
$500
PE $500
[wife of Fredric
Turner]
[illegible]
Rochester Post
Office
Teamster
1920
39
NH
Ireland
NH
NH
Ireland
Ireland
NH
NH
�2 Walnut Street
I. Belmont Allen
Mary A. Allen
John S. Kimball
39
49
60
4 Walnut Street
John R. Allen
Ethel Allen
John Allen
25
27
1
Post Office
Janitor
Insurance Agent
Insurance Agent
NH
Ireland
NH
NH
ME
NH
1930
2 Walnut Street
I. Belmont Allen
Mary A. Allen
John S. Kimball
59
60
70
4 Walnut Street
John R. Allen
Ethel C. Allen
John Carlisle Allen
Robert K. Allen
35
38
11
7
1940
2 Walnut Street
I. Belmont Allen
John S. Kimball
70
80
4 Walnut Street
Ethel C. Allen
John C. Allen
Robert K. Allen
Albert L. Carlisle
Clara Carlisle
48
21
17
79
76
Post Office
Janitor
Insurance Agent
Insurance Agent
NH
Ireland
NH
NH
ME
NH
NH
NH
NH
Stenographer
Insurance Agent
[father]
[mother]
NH
NH
NH
ME
Canada
After purchasing the property in 1867, Nathaniel Dorman and his wife Sarah W. (1809-1880) moved
from Alton to Rochester, residing at 2-4 Walnut Street and practicing medicine out of an office on
Hanson Street until the 1870s (Dudley 1871). Hanson Street lies approximately ½ mile east of the
Wentworth house – within walking distance of Dorman’s residence – in downtown Rochester. The
couple shared their home with Nathaniel Dorman’s adopted great nephews – Charles Kimball (b. 1856),
John S. Kimball (b. 1859) and Arthur D. Kimball (b. 1862) (Figure 9).
40
�The boys’ mother, Lucy Kimball, and her sisters were Nathaniel Dorman’s nieces and may have spent a
portion of their childhood in their uncle’s household (McDuffee 1892: 439). The Woodford (1860) map
of Alton shows the Dorman and Kimball families lived next door to one another, and Nathaniel Dorman
is listed as the attending physician on Lucy’s son Charles Kimball’s birth certificate. The Dormans took
in the three boys after their parents Joseph and Lucy [Freeman] Kimball died in 1863 within a month of
one another. Lucy died of “typhoid fever” at the age of 29, leaving behind baby Arthur (age one), fouryear-old John S. and seven-year-old Charles. Their father, Joseph Freeman, was just 30 years old when
he died, and although IAC could not locate a death certificate to ascertain a cause of death, it is likely he
succumbed to the same illness that took his wife just weeks later.
Figure 9. Kimball-Allen family tree with Kimball children outlined in red and heads-of-house
highlighted in blue.
41
�The 1877 “Bird’s Eye” view of Rochester shows the home on the periphery of Rochester adjacent to
agricultural land when it was owned by Dr. Dorman (Figure 10). The main house stood fronting Walnut
Street with a short ell along Washington Street connected to a large barn. By the 1880s, Dorman's
property grew to include 105 acres, consisting of 45 acres of woodland, 40 acres of orchards and 20 acres
of cultivated land. According to the 1880 Agricultural Census, Dorman grew corn, oats, potatoes, and
apples and kept cows, oxen, pigs and chickens.
Figure 10. Wentworth Homestead and farmland on Stoner (1877) Bird’s Eye View.
In 1880, Sarah Dorman died, leaving Nathaniel Dorman to care for the Kimball boys who were in their
late teens and early twenties. Two years after his wife's death, Nathaniel Dorman married Martha A.
Hussey, and the couple moved to Grove Street in Rochester. About 1883 Nathaniel Dorman deeded the
property to the middle of the three brothers, John S. Kimball, who worked both as a house painter and a
farmer (Monroe and Davis 2005). After acquiring the property, John married Flora S. (Marden) Allen
(1854-1899), a young widow with two sons: Isaac Belmont Allen (1873-1945) and Fred M. Allen (see
Figure 9). Shortly thereafter, in 1885, Charles Kimball, the eldest of the three brothers committed suicide
at the age of 28. That same year, Arthur, the youngest brother left home to train as a minister only to die
of peritonitis a few months later at age 22. Their brother John continued to serve as head of house at 2-4
Walnut Street into the 1890s; the Hurd (1892) map identifies the property as J. S. Kimball” (Figure 11).
42
�Figure 11. Location of the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) illustrated on the
1892 (Hurd) map of Rochester, New Hampshire.
A review of twentieth-century Sanborn Insurance maps shows that the house underwent a series of
modifications in the first two decades of the twentieth century, perhaps reflecting significant changes in
the household demographics. The first of these occurred when Nathaniel Dorman ceased farming his land
and no longer needed the barn illustrated on the 1877 Bird’s Eye map (see Figure 10) to house livestock
or for crop and equipment storage. This change in occupation occurred after the death of his wife Sarah
in 1880, when he was in his 70s and may be linked to his subsequent marriage in 1882 to Martha A.
Hussey, a woman in excess of 20 years younger. Dr. Dorman and his new wife moved to Grove Street
about 1883, transferring ownership of the property to his remaining adopted son, John S. Kimball who
married a young widow with two children in 1883. At the time, John S. Kimball served as the assistant
post-master to the City of Rochester. IAC speculates the barn demolition, and carriage house
construction either coincided with John S. Kimball's 1883 acquisition or shortly thereafter, as the
architectural layout of the homestead was no longer predicated by agricultural land use (Figure 12).
Around 1893 John S. Kimball’s step-son Isaac B. Allen married Mary A. Blair. The following year,
Mary gave birth to a son, John R. Allen (1894-1938) (see Figure 9) and by 1898 the Allen family had
moved elsewhere. In 1899, John S. Kimball’s wife Flora died of myelitis at the age of 45. After her
death, Kimball briefly rented out rooms to a young couple, Fredric and Augusta Turner.
43
�Figure 12. House configuration as illustrated on the 1897 Sanborn Insurance map (note house is 1 ½
story dwelling).
The second major renovation phase occurred during the 1910s, likely to accommodate the return of Isaac
and Mary Allen, and their extended family including Isaac and Mary’s adult son John R. Allen, his wife
Ethel and their young son John C. Allen. Renovations at this time included the addition of upper story
full-width dormers on both the front and rear facades to expand and raise the house from a 1 ½ story
house to a full two stories. Kimball also added a second ell to the rear of the house, constructed a porch
along the eastern façade and converted the carriage house to an automobile garage (Monroe and Davis
2005) (Figure 13). After the expansion/sub-division of the home, John S. Kimball, and Isaac Allen and
his wife Mary resided in the apartment at #2 Walnut Street, while John Allen and his family occupied #4
Walnut Street (Monroe and Davis 2005).
During the 1920s John S. Kimball and his step-grandson John R. Allen opened “Kimball & Allen”
Insurance Agency. The firm first operated out of an office located at 42 North Main (Manning 1924,
1928, 1933) but later occupied apartment #4 at the Wentworth House (Manning 1947).
After nearly 80 years of occupation by the extended Dorman-Kimball-Allen family, their tenure ended.
The property changed hands several times in the 1940, accommodating various tenant households until
Albert and Gladys Carrigans purchased the property in 1954. The final alteration occurred in the 1950s
when the Carrigans removed the carriage house and converted the main house to a five-unit apartment
building. This same floor plan and layout are observable today (Monroe and Davis 2005).
44
�Figure 13. House configuration as illustrated on the 1925 Sanborn Insurance map (Note: new ell added to
create a two-story dwelling).
45
�CHAPTER FIVE: PHASE IB/II METHODOLOGY AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS
IAC conducted the Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) Phase IB Intensive Archaeological Survey and
Phase II Determination of Eligibility (Cofelice, Wheeler and Tumelaire 2017) according to the standards
set forth by NHDHR and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended. IAC conducted
Phase IB and Phase II fieldwork over the course of six days in May and June 2015. Dr. Kathleen Wheeler
served as Principal Investigator for the project and designed the Phase II testing strategy. IAC completed
the survey work in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for
Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716, September 29, 1993).
Methodology
For the Phase IB survey in May 2015, IAC excavated 11 STPs and one 1.0-m-x-1.0-m test unit (TU) and
recovered 3,354 artifacts (Table 8; Figure 14). The archaeologists encountered dense nineteenth-century
domestic artifact deposits and intact wall segments associated with the nineteenth-century portion of the
house which was demolished in the 1950s. IAC recommended a Phase II survey to further expose wall
features and collect additional artifact samples. Crews returned in June 2015 for the Phase II survey and
excavated an additional 5.5m² including three 1.0-m-x-1.0-m TUs, one 0.5-m-x-1.0-m TU and one 2.0-mx-1.0-m for a combined Phase IB and II total excavated area of 9.25 m². The Phase II effort resulted in
the recovery of an additional 3,665 artifacts, for a total of 7,019 for both phases of work.
Table 8. Review of fieldwork at the Wentworth Homestead (27-RK-113).
Site Summary for Wentworth Homestead (27-RK-113)
Phase IB:
Phase II:
11 STPs
1 TU (1-m-x-1-m)
Euroamerican Artifacts: 3,354
Pre-Contact Artifacts:
0
Total Artifacts: 3,354
3 TUs (1-m-x-1-m)
1 TU (1-m-x-0.5-m)
1 EU (2-m-x-1-m)
Phase I/II Totals:
Total Excavated Area:
Total Euroamerican Artifacts:
Total Pre-Contact Artifacts:
Total # Artifacts:
Euroamerican Artifacts: 3,665
Pre-Contact Artifacts:
0
Total Artifacts:
3,665
11 STPs, 5 TU, 1 EU
9.25 m²
7,019
0
7,019
46
�Figure 14. Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) site plan with testhole locations.
47
�IAC used the “locus recording system” to record horizontal layers (“strata” or soil horizons) and downcutting features within a single format (Lance 1978). The combined Phase IB and Phase II resulted in the
identification of 40 loci associated with the Wentworth Homestead. The locus recording system is a
method of recording distinct archaeological deposits at sites that have complicated stratigraphic profiles,
crosscutting features, or are subject to dynamic natural processes such as alluvial erosion and deposition.
Traditional recording systems often use Roman numerals to represent soil strata (e.g. Stratum I) and
Arabic numerals for cultural features (e.g., Feature 1), however, the locus system does not differentiate
between horizontal and vertical deposits to promote more comprehensive analysis between and among
deposits. In addition, the locus recording system applies to both surface features (road beds, stone walls,
cellar holes) and subsurface soil anomalies (natural soil horizons, pits, postholes, construction trenches).
Under the locus system, each distinct deposit is given a separate number.
All artifacts and documentation were returned to IAC's archaeology laboratory in Portsmouth, New
Hampshire for processing and analysis. IAC cleaned, identified, and cataloged artifacts using a Microsoft
Access© Database and performed a minimum vessel count (MVC) for ceramic and glass vessel
assemblage. This analytic method allows IAC to establish meaningful units of behavior such as the
number of individual plates, cups, glasses, and bottles within the collection. IAC assigned cross-mending
and matching sherds to a single vessel number and recorded provenience information on individual vessel
forms. IAC then assigned vessels to a “primary context” based on the location of the largest number of
sherds. For example, Vessel 1 consisted of 29 sherds, of which 16 derived from T2-2. This location was
designated as its “primary context” and represents where the vessel was originally discarded. Because this
report focuses on glass bottles, the MVC table for glass is included in Appendix A).
Architectural Layout of the Wentworth Homestead
The Wentworth house was originally a 1½-story cape and has stood on the lot since about 1853. Over the
course of a century, the house was significantly modified and eventually converted to a multi-family
complex of four rental units. Stoner’s 1877 Bird’s Eye map illustrates the house as a connected complex
including a main house, rear ell and a large attached barn (Figure 15). By 1897 Sanborn Insurance maps
indicate that the barn was replaced by a carriage house (Figure 16). By 1925, the carriage house was
converted to an auto garage and an additional ell house added to expand the house into two units, #2 and
#4 Walnut Street (Figure 17). The auto garage was demolished in the 1950s when the house underwent
major renovations to create the current house layout of five apartments.
As a result of the 2015 excavations, IAC identified four architectural loci associated with the nineteenth
century house configuration (Table 9; see Figures 16 and 17). IAC identified all four loci as architectural
features related to the late nineteenth-century carriage house attached to the western façade of the
house/ell. Crews encountered the southern (Locus 21/24) and western (Locus 25) carriage house
foundation walls in N212 E200 and N212 E119.5 and the northern wall (Locus 32) in N217 E206 Plates
25--28). IAC identified a builder’s trench (Locus 38) for the Locus 25 foundation wall in TU N212
E198.5. Based on the thick layers of fill encountered in N217 E206 within the carriage house footprint,
IAC speculates the carriage house, or at least the northern half of the carriage house, had a shallow cellar.
Table 9. List of architectural loci associated with the Wentworth Homestead.
Locus #
21/24
25
32
38
Description/Identity
Slumped E-W Foundation Wall
Slumped N-S Foundation Wall
Stone - Possible Foundation
Builder's Trench for Locus 25
48
Location
N212 E200 & E199.5
N212 E200 & E199.5
N217 E206
N212 E198.5
�Figure 15. Wentworth homestead on Stoner (1877) Bird’s Eye Map.
49
�Figure 16. Location of architectural loci in relation to 1897 Sanborn Insurance map.
50
�Figure 17. Location of architectural loci in relation to 1897 Sanborn Insurance map.
51
�Plate 25. N212 E198-200; overview of the Locus 25 foundation wall, view north.
Plate 26. N212 E198-200; Detail of the Locus 25 foundation wall, view west.
52
�Locus 25 wall
Locus 21/24 wall
Plate 27. N212 E198-200; Overview of the Locus 21/24 foundation wall location in relation to Locus 25,
view south.
Locus 32 wall
Plate 28. Carriage house northern foundation wall, N212 E207 plan view.
53
�Summary of Results of Phase IB/II Survey
The combined Phase I/II excavations resulted in the identification of 28 loci, which IAC defines as
individual deposits or features raging from horizontal layers to downcutting features. Analysis of artifact
distributions by loci revealed two areas of dense artifact concentration in the back yard (Figure 18). IAC
recovered 1,885 artifacts consisting of predominantly domestic material from a 2.0-m-x-1.0-m test unit at
N217 E206. Similarly, archaeologists encountered artifact-rich domestic deposits in N212 E198 where
crews excavated a 3.5-m-x-1.0-m unit. From this excavation block, archaeologists collected a total of
1,541 artifacts, many of which were whole or reconstructable bottles and ceramic vessels.
A review of the archaeological site plan in relation to the carriage house as shown on the Sanborn (1897)
map, which later became an auto garage by 1925 (Sanborn 1925) show that both of the dense artifact
concentrations (N212 E198 and N217 E206) fall within the carriage house /garage architectural footprint
(Figures 19 and 20). The archaeologists also noted that the carriage house/garage had an excavated cellar,
later backfilled with domestic artifacts and coal ash. Due to OSHA safety regulations, crews terminated
excavations at a depth of 1.55 m (5 ft) below datum in the 2-m-x-1-m test unit located at N217 E206
without reaching the base of the artifact-rich deposit (Locus 13; Plates 29-30). In N212 E198
archaeologists encountered thickly stratified cultural deposits extending 1.6 m (5.2 ft) below datum (Plate
31). The vast majority of the cultural material originated from Locus 23, east of the Locus 25 foundation
wall, in the interior of the carriage house cellar (Plate 32; Figure 21).
The abundance of whole bottles from the carriage house cellar is consistent with what Michael Schiffer
calls provisional discard (Schiffer 1996:99). This depositional process occurs during the habitation
phase, whereby broken, worn-out, or functionally obsolete items are not thrown away (discarded) but
retained with the expectation that the items will later serve a useful purpose (LaMotta and Schiffer 1999:
21-22). LaMotta and Schiffer note further:
One needs to look no further than one’s own garage or attic to find convenient examples
of provisional discard. These examples also demonstrate the generality of an observation
made by Hayden and Cannon (1983), that provisionally discarded objects are frequently
cached in out-of-the-way places – not in the middle of activity area. For this reason,
provisionally discarded items left in domestic structures are like to comprise only a small
fraction of floor assemblages, usually forming clusters along walls or under features such
as beds or tables. This spatial patterning provides archaeologists with one tool for
distinguishing provisionally discarded objects from abandonment refuse, secondary
reuse, and other deposits of broken objects.
While the authors are describing a context of Pre-Contact Southwestern house floor assemblages, the
concept can be applied to the Wentworth carriage house, where a high volume of paint cans, bottles, and
other serviceable objects occurred along the foundation walls of the cellar. This suggests provisional
discard – or movement of these items out of the house, to be cached in the more out-of-the-way carriage
shed. The presence of these materials in proximity to the foundation walls suggests they may have been
stored on shelves or along walls, as described above.
54
�Figure 18. Phase IB/II site plan showing test pit locations and general artifact distribution.
55
�Figure 19. Testing in relation to the architectural configuration shown on the 1897 (Sanborn) map.
56
�Figure 20. Testing in relation to the architectural configuration shown on the 1925 (Sanborn) map.
57
�Locus 13
Plate 29. N217 E206 west wall profile, view west.
Plate 30. N217 E206 plan view at 1.55 cmbd (5 ft), at OSHA limits of excavation.
58
�Plate 31. Overview of N212 E198, view west.
Locus 23
Plate 32. N212 E198 north wall profile, Locus 23 deposit, view north.
59
�Figure 21. Locus 25 foundation wall plan.
Artifact Analysis
IAC archaeologists collected a total of 7,019 artifacts from the Phase IB and Phase II excavations at the
Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (Table 10). Overall, domestic goods such as ceramics, food
waste (faunal bone) and bottle glass account for 64% of the collected material (n = 4,479). Architectural
debris – brick, nails and window glass – represents 26% of the assemblage (n = 1,847), although this
number may be underrepresented since archaeologists collected only samples of architectural material in
the field. Throughout the excavation IAC encountered high volumes of brick, window glass and slag.
Due to the non-diagnostic nature of the items, crews sampled 10% sample of brick and slag and 20% of
the window glass. IAC also did not collect items considered to be potentially hazardous such as asbestos
and cans containing lead paint. Crews encountered both of these items in the 3.5-m-x-1-m trench at N212
E198) as well as a large bail of rusty barbed wire in N217 E206.
60
�31%
41%
50%
70%
25%
67%
60%
83%
69%
68%
17%
71%
75%
72%
12%
19%
17%
64%
61%
45%
32%
26%
42%
23%
34%
10%
21%
29%
76%
17%
17%
19%
63%
73%
66%
26%
% Other
8
71
60
8
49
15
15
26
84
8
10
18
46
150
24
7
5
604
% Personal
1
12
7
2
0
1
0
26
12
2
0
0
4
20
1
1
0
89
%
Architectural
63
283
117
68
64
38
75
76
211
83
101
26
119
364
63
77
19
1847
% Domestic
32
259
185
179
38
109
133
619
698
198
22
106
513
1351
12
20
5
4479
Other
Architectural
104
625
369
257
151
163
223
747
1005
291
133
150
682
1885
100
105
29
7019
Personal
Domestic
N204 E200
N204 E201
N206 E200
N212 E198
N212 E198.5
N212 E199.5
N212 E200
N212 E200.5
N212 E204
N212 E208
N216 E200
N216 E204
N216 E208
N217 E206
N224 E199.5
N224 E208
N232 E200
Total
Artifact Total
Test Unit
Table 10. Artifact distribution per testhole.
1%
2%
2%
1%
0%
1%
0%
3%
1%
1%
0%
0%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
8%
11%
16%
3%
32%
9%
7%
3%
8%
3%
8%
12%
7%
8%
24%
7%
17%
9%
As part of the artifact analysis, IAC conducted a glass minimum vessel count (MVC) of glass and ceramic
vessels. Ceramic tableware and teawares bear significant time stamps for archaeologists, in that their
paste and surface decoration can be dated within narrow limits, sometimes to the decade. Glass bottle
manufacture similarly has a well documented record of technological and decorative innovations, which
permit the archaeologist to pinpoint the dates of consumption and use. Bottles also served as containers
for a variety of liquids – spirits, condiments, medical products – that can shed light on consumer
behavior.
Ceramics
The ceramic MVC identified a minimum of 157 individual ceramic plates, bowls, cups, or saucers. White
Granite tablewares represented 41% of the collection (n = 64), followed by whiteware (n – 44 [28%]).
Lesser amounts of American stoneware and redware appear in the overall collection. These wares were
commonly used from to the last quarter of the nineteenth century into the first few decades of the
twentieth century and are consistent with the occupation of the extended Dorman-Kimball-Allen family.
Many of the sturdy White Granite vessels were recovered nearly whole from the area of artifact
concentration at 2-0-m-x-1-m unit N217 E206 (see Figure 18; Plate 33). These may be representative of
the Dr. Dorman and Kimball occupation in the latter years of the nineteenth century.
61
�Plate 33. Plates: Vessels 99, 103, 135, 92, 125 & 124, Cup: Vessel 119, Bowl: Vessel 93.
Glass
IAC enumerated 337 individual glass vessels and containers from all excavation units. Of these, 20% (n
= 69) held alcohol or spirits of some kind, such as beer, whisky, champagne, and wine (Table 11; Plate
34). Food products and extracts accounted for almost the same percentage (19% [n = 63]) and include
such products as root beer and fruit flavor extracts, condiments, and various food jars primarily dating to
the first decades of the twentieth century (Plate 35), although a few jars (such as food jars bearing a patent
of 1858) may have been discarded well before 1900.
Table 11. Minimum vessel count, all glass.
Glass Vessel Type
No. of Vessels
Percentage
Beer/spirits/wine
69
20%
Extract/food
63
19%
Medicine
44
13%
Tableware
49
15%
Household
4
1%
Soda/Milk
26
8%
Cosmetic/Perfume
8
2%
Unid
74
22%
Total
337
100%
62
�Plate 34. Vessel 307: Spirits flask, Vessel 303: Mattingly & Moore Whiskey (applied color label).
Plate 35. Above: (L-R) V.23 Hire’s Root Beer Extract for Home Use, V.321 Knapp’s Root Beer Extract,
V.225 G.D. Dows & Co. Boston- Jamaica Ginger Cordial.
Medicine bottles and vials account for 13% of the entire assemblage (n = 44), which will be discussed in
detail in Chapter Six (see Appendix B). These consist of a number of unembossed or plain bottles, which
would have been filled by a local apothecary or doctor with instructions to the patient (Plate 36).
63
�Plate 36. Variety of bottles and vials for prescription compounds and pills (from left to right: Vessels
328, 334, 333, 335,331).
Archaeologists collected eight (Vessel #s 51, 63, 64, 80, 83, 86, 112 and 330) of the 44 medicine bottles
from N217 E206 (see Figure 18). The test unit measures 2 m by 1 m and is located within the footprint of
the carriage house, just inside the northern foundation wall. The majority (n = 5) of the N217 E206
bottles originated from Locus 13, a thick fill stratum encountered at 40 cmbd (16 inches). Nearly 74% (n
= 1,351) of the N217 E206 artifacts originated from Locus 13. Temporally diagnostic artifacts from
Locus 13 include a light bulb base, pieces of a plastic container, early-20th-century whiskey bottles
(Schenley’s Mayflower Rye and Mattingly & Moore Whiskey) and an extract patented in 1915 suggest
the fill layer post dates the occupation phases of the Dorman-Kimball families.
IAC recovered 32 of the 44 medicine bottles from Locus 23 in N212 E198, a 3.5-m-x-1-m trench located
perpendicular to the western foundation wall of the carriage house (see Figure 18; Plate 37). Similar to
Locus 13 in N217 E206, the artifact rich Locus 23 coal ash strata is identified as a fill layer within the
footprint of the carriage house interior. IAC speculates the material recovered from both Locus 13 in
N217 E206 and Locus 23 in N212 E198 was stock piled in the carriage house and deposited en masse
along with fill in the 1950s when the structure was demolished.
64
�Locus 13
Plate 37. N217 E206 north wall profile, view north.
Personal Items
Although personal items represent just 1% (n = 89) of the assemblage, the collection is diverse and
includes a number of items related to child’s play and personal adornment (clothing and shoes). These
include several doll parts, a tea cup, seven marbles, a wooden toy carved into the shape of a “gift box”
and a metal airplane (Plates 38-40). Records show that many children (mostly boys) grew up in the home
during the Dorman-Kimball-Allen tenure. The Blair sisters (Flora M. Blair, born 1906, and Ellenor R.
Blair, born 1911), whose parents were briefly tenants in Apartment #4 during the 1910s, are the only two
girls who are known to have lived in the home between 1870 and 1940. While the doll parts and tea cup
fragments recovered from the Wentworth yard were likely toys used by the Blair girls, other toys, such as
marbles and the toy airplane may have entertained any of the children who occupied the house in the early
to mid-twentieth century.
65
�Plate 38. Doll parts and game pieces recovered from the Wentworth site.
Plate 39. Sample of marbles recovered from the Wentworth site.
66
�Plate 40. Toy airplane recovered from the Wentworth site.
Artifacts related to clothing and personal adornment include buttons (metal and ceramic – in a number of
colors, shapes and sizes), belt buckles, dress clips and clasps and several shoe or boot parts (heals, soles,
laces and eyelets) (Plate 41). Miscellaneous personal items include bullet casings, coins (three pennies –
two American coins [one with an illegible date and one 1973 from an upper stratum]; and a Danish coin
minted in 1935. Archaeologists also recovered eyeglasses lenses, a plastic comb, a copper pin, pipe
bowls/stems, a pocket watch, a bone-handled pocket knife and a tube of Griffin Lotion Cream, a shoe
polish.
67
�Plate 41. Range of personal items recovered – comb, pipe stem, buckles, eyeglass lens, pocket watch,
buttons, pins, pocket knife.
68
�CHAPTER SIX:
HEALTH AND WELLNESS AT THE WENTWORTH SITE BASED ON AN ANALYSIS OF
44 MEDICINE BOTTLES
This chapter discusses the use of medical products by the Walnut Street residents based on the
archaeological evidence recovered at the site. IAC identified 44 medicine bottles following a minimum
vessel count analysis for glass vessels (Appendices A and B). Present in the assemblage are bottles that
held both proprietary and prescription medications, suggesting the household occupants sought out a
variety of remedies to treat illness and alleviate pain and discomfort. Research for this section focuses on
identifying each of the 44 medicine bottles, including its common usage, development, cost, and possible
use by members of the Dorman or Kimball-Allen families (Research Questions 6, 7 and 8). Through
genealogical research as well as a review of census data and birth and death records, IAC has been able to
compile a list of family members and health issues that may have informed the family’s medical choices.
The following discussion attempts to merge these lines of evidence to offer an interpretation as to how the
families may have used these products discarded beneath the carriage house a century later.
Possible Medicinal Use within the Dorman-Kimball-Allen Households
For nearly three decades, Dr. Nathaniel Dorman (1805-1893) occupied the home at 2-4 Walnut Street
along with his wife Sarah and their three adopted children. Until his retirement in the 1870s, Dr. Dorman
practiced medicine out of an office on Hanson Street in Rochester’s downtown village, located a short
distance (one-half mile) from his Walnut Street home (Rochester City Directory 1871; Figure 22).
Dr. Dorman’s office on Hanson Street stood just around the corner from Rochester’s first drugstore,
owned and operated by the Hanson family since the 1830s (McDuffee 1892). One historian (McDuffee
1892: 396) described the prominent two-story shop as having the “finest front and the largest panes of
glass of any in the county” and was said to be “packed from cellar to roof with almost everything
nameable in the drug line.” The Hanson apothecary was closest to the Wentworth house and Dr.
Dorman’s office, although there were several other apothecaries or drugstores to choose from in
downtown Rochester. Although we may never know their exact usage, many of the proprietary or
prescription medications found in the collection of 44 medicine bottles examined for this study may have
been purchased or filled at the Hanson apothecary by Dr. Dorman or members of his extended family.
Between 1870 and the 1940s, five generations of the extended Dorman family occupied the Wentworth
house. Except for two sets of tenants, this Dorman-Kimball-Allen extended family included at least 18
individuals living on site. Records indicate that eight family members died during this time (Figure 23;
Table 12), six of whom died of either acute or long-term illness. It seems plausible that the family sought
out remedies and treatments from the medical marketplace to alleviate discomfort or pain.
For instance, Dr. Nathaniel Dorman’s wife, Sarah, succumbed to cancer in 1880 at the age of 71, and Dr.
Dorman most likely had a hand in her treatment and in making her comfortable in her last years by
prescribing medications, even after his retirement in the 1870s. Sarah Dorman’s death left her husband to
care for their three adopted sons – Charles, John, and Arthur Kimball. Two of the Kimball brothers died
in 1885; Charles committed suicide in May, and just a few months later, his younger brother Arthur died
at the age of 22 shortly after leaving home to train as a minister. Records list his cause of death as
“peritonitis,” and it is uncertain if the illness was acute or the result of a chronic digestive condition (New
Hampshire Death and Disinterment Records).
69
�Figure 22. Location of Wentworth Homestead in relation to Central Square and Hanson Street, after Hurd (1892).
70
�Figure 23. Dorman, Kimball, Allen and Carlisle family tree, showing household members who died
between 1880 and 1945 (outlined in red).
71
�Name
Sarah W. Dorman
Charles Kimball
Table 12. Deaths in households between 1880 and 1945.
Death Date
Cause of Death Age
Notes
January 13, 1880 Cancer
71
May 30, 1885
Suicide
28
Arthur Kimball
Nathaniel Dorman
Flora S. (Allen)
Kimball
August 13, 1885
1893
Peritonitis
Old Age
22
88
1899
Myelitis
45
Mary A. (Blair) Allen
January 1, 1936
Cancer
66
John R. Allen
July 6, 1938
Bronchiectasis/
Pneumonia
44
Albert L. Carlisle
August 3, 1940
Prostate Cancer/
Septicemia
76
John C. Allen
June 6, 1945
Tuberculosis,
Osteomyelitis
27
Died shortly after leaving home to
train as a minister in Marlow, NH
Breast cancer -1 year; Stomach
cancer - 6 months
Peritonitis is described as an inflammation of the peritoneum or the tissues lining the inner wall of the
abdomen. The condition is thought to be caused by infection from either bacteria or fungi. It can also
develop after an injury to the abdomen, such as a perforation (webmd.com). In rare cases, it can develop
in people who suffer from cirrhosis of the liver, chronic digestive diseases (for example Crohn’s Disease
or diverticulitis) or kidney failure. Symptoms of peritonitis include abdominal tenderness, chills, fever,
extreme thirst, vomiting, difficulty passing urine and constipation.
The collection of 44 medicine vessels includes 29 unmarked glass bottles and vials (66% of the entire
assemblage) that are of a type that would have been filled by a local apothecary or doctor and affixed with
a paper label. These bottles may also have been packaged with paper wrappers or boxes that have long
been discarded. In contrast to embossed proprietary medicine bottles, these glass containers bear no
embossing or other identifying characteristics that might identify the product contents. Although
embossed letters of the manufacturing company (e.g., Buck Glass Company [Vessel #329] and Industrial
Glass Co. [Vessel #326]) are sometimes visible on the bottom or side panels of these bottles, these
markings do not offer any indication of the bottle contents. Available in various sizes, these bottles were
closed with stoppers or corks and sported a paper label identifying the contents, directions, and other
information (Plate 41). Some bottles exhibit faint traces where a paper label was once affixed (Plate 42).
Some bottles or vials are quite small, although still variable in size and shape as seen in Plate 43. Small
vials were frequently used for prescription medications or other proprietary formulas prepared by a
pharmacist. Other bottles had threaded lips to accommodate a metal screw top (Plate 44). Medicines
were offered in paste form, cream or salves, or pills, packed into the container and closed with a cork or
glass stopper (Fike 1987). Although the original contents are unknown, the presence of these small
vessels in the archaeological assemblage indicates some reliance on the established medical community to
treat the family's ills.
72
�Plate 41. Example of paper labels and packaging (sha.org).
Plate 42. Plain medicine bottles (Vessels #324, 329, and 334) that would have had a paper label affixed
to the front panel.
73
�Plate 43. Small vials for prescription compounds (Vessels 326, 328, 330, and 331).
Plate 44. Bottles with metal screw tops (Vessels 325 and 327).
74
�Other members of Dormans’ extended family succumbed to illness while in the household. These include
Flora (Allen) Kimball, wife of Nathaniel and Sarah Dorman’s adopted son, John Kimball, died of
“myelitis” in 1899 at the age of 45 (New Hampshire Death and Disinterment Record; see Table 12).
Myelitis is characterized by signs of neurological dysfunction, and in the early stages, the afflicted would
experience weakness in the arms/legs, sensory symptoms such as numbness or tingling sensations,
pain/discomfort and bladder and/or bowel dysfunction (webmd.com). The disease is caused by
inflammation of the spinal cord, either a result of infection or a preexisting condition such as multiple
sclerosis or lupus. Although Dr. Dorman would not have had a hand in Flora Kimball’s treatment in her
later years (he predeceased her by six years), she or other members of the family would be in a position to
purchase medicinal preparations to ease her distress.
The family experienced four additional losses in less than a decade beginning in 1936 when Mary A.
(Blair) Allen (Flora Kimball's daughter-in-law) died following a one-year battle with breast cancer and
stomach cancer (see Table 12). Mary Allen's son, John R. Allen died two years later of acute pneumonia
after suffering for several years from a degenerative lung disease known as “bronchiectasis.” Although
the exact cause of bronchiectasis is unknown, whooping cough, measles, tuberculosis or fungal infections
are a common cause. Two more deaths occurred shortly after John R. Allen's death; both proceeded by
long-term illnesses. His father-in-law, Albert L. Carlisle died in 1940 of a septicemia infection associated
with prostate cancer and, in 1945, his eldest son, John Carlisle Allen died of an osteomyelitis infection.
Although osteomyelitis is an acute infection resulting from bone trauma, such as a fracture, his death
certificate lists tuberculosis and peritonitis as attributing factors.
The occupants of 2-4 Walnut Street included a number of children during the 70 years between 1880 and
1945. At least 12 children were either born during this time or resided in one or both of the rental units
(Table 13). In addition to the three Kimball brothers (Charles, Arthur, and John S.) raised by Nathaniel
and Sarah Dorman beginning in 1863, subsequent generations of children spent all or parts of their youth
at the Walnut Street address.
Interestingly, the connection between these children and the Kimball line is through John S. Kimball’s
stepson, Isaac Belmont Allen. Isaac Allen and his younger brother, Fred were eleven and ten years old,
respectively, when they came into the household upon their mother's death in 1882.
The Allen family had one young son, John R. Allen (born 1894) and while living in the apartment at 4
Walnut Street, Mary Blair gave birth to three children between 1906 and 1911. These young children
lived in the two apartments between 1894 and 1911. IAC recovered artifacts associated with children and
play within the Wentworth assemblage, including seven “toys” (a metal airplane, a ceramic teacup rim,
and five doll parts), as well as two glass and five clay marbles (see Chapter Five, Plates 38-40).
75
�Table 13. List of children (0-18 years of age) who resided in the home between 1870 and 1940.
Birth
Date
1856
Dates in Walnut St.
household as child
1863-1874 (age 7-18)
Arthur D. Kimball
John S. Kimball
Isaac Belmont
Allen
1862
1859
1863 - 1880 (age 1-18)
1863-1877 (age 4-18)
1870
1882 - 1889 (age 11-18)
Fred M. Allen
John R. Allen
1872
1894
1882 - 1890 (age 10-18)
1894-1912 (age 0-18)
Flora M. Blair
1906
1906-1919 (age 0-13)
Robert Blair
1909
1909-1919 (age 0-10)
Ellenor R. Blair
Belmont Allen
Blair
John C. Allen
Robert K. Allen
1911
1911-1919 (age 0-8)
1915
1919
1923
1915-1919 (age 0-5)
1919-1937 (age 0-18)
1923-1941 (age 0-18)
Name
Charles Kimball
Notes
adopted son of Nathaniel and Sarah Dorman
adopted son of Nathaniel and Sarah Dorman;
died of peritonitis in 1885 at age 22
adopted son of Nathaniel and Sarah Dorman
son from Flora S. Allen's first marriage;
stepson of John S. Kimball
son from Flora S. Allen's first marriage;
stepson of John S. Kimball
Son of Isaac and Mary (Blair) Allen
daughter of William J. and Mary Blair; niece
of Isaac and Mary (Blair) Allen
son of William J. and Mary Blair; nephew of
Isaac and Mary (Blair) Allen
daughter of William J. and Mary Blair; niece
of Isaac and Mary (Blair) Allen
son of William J. and Mary Blair; nephew of
Isaac and Mary (Blair) Allen
son of John R. and Ethel Allen
son of John R. and Ethel Allen
John Wyeth & Bro
While Dr. Dorman may have arranged to have medicines compounded locally using generic medicine
bottles and vials such as those noted above, he may also have participated in the growing trend of
obtaining common medications from a larger distributor such as Wyeth & Bro. Four of the bottles in the
Wentworth collection (Table 14) are identified with John Wyeth & Brother, a company established in
1860 in Philadelphia and the forerunner of Wyeth, one of the nation's major pharmaceutical companies,
recently (2009) purchased by Pfizer. The company's name changed to American Home Products in 1926
but reverted to Wyeth in 2002.
Vessel #
323 & 333
166 & 188
Table 14. Four Wyeth bottles in the Wentworth collection.
Approx
Approx
Proprietary Medicine Name
Date
cost/bottle
John Wyeth & Bro
1872-1907
variable
Wyeth & Bro. with dose cap
1899+
variable
John Wyeth & Bro mixed and sold commonly prescribed drugs, pills, elixirs, salts and suppositories for
wide distribution. Historian Jessica Griffin states that “The shop’s key innovation was to mix medicinal
compounds in advance, in large batches, allowing the Wyeth Brothers to sell commonly-prescribed drugs
at a lower price than competitors. Wyeth’s main success, however, came from a government contract
during the American Civil War to deliver medicines and beef extract to the Union Army” (Griffin 2013).
76
�In 1872, the company invented a pill-making machine that facilitated mass production of pre-measured
dosages. The company also made a variety of home products such as hair dyes and cosmetics.
The Wentworth collection contains two square-shaped cobalt blue bottles with fitted glass dose caps
(Vessels #166 and 188), a form patented by John Wyeth & Bro in 1899 (Griffenhagen. and Bogard 1999).
Standing about 16 cm (6 in) tall, the machine-made bottle with straight-sided lip, Vessel #166 has the
words, “WYETH & BRO.” embossed on one side (the piece with the word, “JOHN” is missing) and the
words (Plate 45), “TAKE NEXT DOSE AT ” are also embossed on a platform around the base of the
lip that holds the dosage cap. A metal ring allows for a tighter fit for the cap. The top of the dose cap
itself has raised letters reading, “THIS CUP HOLDS A DOSE” along with numbers 1 through 12 around
the outside rim of the cup indicating the hour of the next scheduled dose when lined up with the arrow at
the bottle lip. The bottle most likely had a paper label describing contents and directions for use.
Two additional bottles (Vessels 323 and 333) display the John Wyeth & Bro brand (Plate 46). Both are
small colorless and cylindrical and measure about 8 cm (3 in) in height. These two bottles were
manufactured between 1872 and the 1890s, a period that overlaps with the Dr. Dorman medical practice.
Both bottles are embossed, “JOHN WYETH & BRO PHILADELPHIA” in two lines on the side. One
bottle (Vessel #333) has a patent lip that would have been closed with a cork, and the other (Vessel #323)
has a threaded finish for a screw top. These bottles may have held tablets or pills.
Plate 45. Wyeth & Bro medicine bottle with dose cap (Vessel #166).
77
�Plate 46. Wyeth & Bro medicine bottles with patent and threaded lip (Vessels #333 and 323).
Proprietary Medicine
The medicinal bottle assemblage contains 11 proprietary or patent medicine bottles (Table 15), which
held preparations popular in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. These nostrums offered a
quick and reliable fix for a wide variety of ills from indigestion to “consumption” (tuberculosis);
headache, fatigue and symptoms associated with “female weakness.” These are indicative of medical
strategies employed to promote the health and wellbeing of children as well as the elderly in the
household; these strategies are reflected in the medicinal bottle assemblage as discussed below.
Proprietary medicines generally cost much more than prescriptions compounded locally by a pharmacist.
Depending on the preparation, prices could be as little as 25 cents for a small bottle of Johnson's
American Anodyne Liniment or Twitchell Champlin’s Neuralgic Anodyne to $2 for a pint-size bottle of
Dr. Hubbard's Vegetable Disinfectant (see Table 15). Lydia Pinkham's Vegetable Compound sold for $1
per bottle as did a large bottle of California Fig Syrup.
Table 15. List of identifiable proprietary medicine bottles and prices.
Approx
Approx
Vessel #
Proprietary Medicine Name
Date
cost/bottle
California Fig Syrup Co. San
198
Francisco, CA
1880-1890
50 cents - $1
Children's Comfort / George E.
316
Fairbanks Worcester, Mass1890s
Johnson's American Anodyne
314 & 317 Liniment
1810-1930s
25-35 cents
Lydia E. Pinkham's Vegetable
204
Compound
1876-1920
$1
Mellin's Infant's Food- Doliber
315
Goodale Co., Boston
Post 1880
75 cents
226
Milk of Magnesia
Post 1906
50 cents
209 & 224 Dr. Hubbard's Vegetable Disinfectant 1895+
$1-$2
301
318
Paine's Celery Compound
Twitchell Champlin & Co- Neuralgic
Anodyne
78
Post 1882
60 cents
1883-1930s
25 cents
�California Fig Syrup
Based in San Francisco, the California Fig Company produced a product which claimed to contain the
“laxative and nutritious elements of the figs of California.” Invented in 1879 by Richard E. Queen, this
nostrum was widely advertised in the late 1800s with colorful romantic images (Plate 47). The product
cost 50 cents or $1 per bottle, had a 6% alcohol content and was produced in San Francisco CA,
Louisville, KY, and New York.
Plate 47. 1895 advertisement for California Fig Syrup Co. (Wellcome Trust Ltd. 2017).
A lawsuit brought against the company in 1897 for making false representations to the public, noting that
the company described its product as “a certain medical preparation or remedy for constipation and to act
upon the kidneys, liver, stomach, and bowels, which medical compound is a combination in solution of
plants known to be beneficial to the human system, forming an agreeable and effective laxative to cure
habitual constipation and many ills, depending upon a weak and inactive condition of the liver, kidneys,
stomach, and bowels.” The lawsuit focused on trademark infringement and the use of the Fig Syrup
name, and in 1899 the ninth circuit court ruled that the California Fig Company may not make, sell, or
offer to sell any liquid laxative medicine or preparation under the name of “Syrup of Figs” or “Fig
Syrup.” The U. S. Supreme Court upheld the decision in 1903 (Worden v. California Fig Syrup Co.
187 U.S. 516 [1903]).
Because we can assume that the distribution of this product preceded this ruling, any bottles with the
California Fig Syrup name must predate about 1900. The Wentworth artifact assemblage contains five
pieces of one such bottle (Vessel #198; Plate 48), a colorless, machine-made, rectangular bottle originally
about 18 cm (7 in) tall with a flat lip or finish (also known as a patent or extract lip). The patent finish is
very common on proprietary medicine bottles made from about 1850 to well after the turn of the century,
and the bottle would have been sealed with a cork. The words, “CALIFORNIA SYRUP CO SAN
FRANCISCO, CAL” are embossed in raised letters on one side of the bottle and the remnants of the
words, “SYRUP OF FIGS” can be seen on the two indented side panels.
79
�Plate 48. California Fig Syrup Company’s “Syrup of Figs” bottle (Vessel #198).
Since this product was generally available only between 1880 and 1890, it is possible that Nathaniel
Dorman used this product in his later years as did adopted sons Charles, Arthur, and John Kimball in their
adulthood. John Kimball’s stepsons Fred and Isaac Allen may also have taken this elixir when they were
children, along with their mother, Flora Allen Kimball.
Children’s Comfort
“Children’s Comfort” was manufactured and distributed by George E. Fairbanks, sole proprietor, of
Worcester, Massachusetts in the 1890s. Advertisements claimed the elixir to be a “safe and reliable
remedy for all ailments of children and a sure prevention of Cholera” (Parsons 1893). Although
researchers found little information about the company, it seems that product was only in use until
sometime in the first decade of the twentieth century when it investigators targeted the product as a
dangerous nostrum leading to the 1906 Food and Drug Act. The annual report of the State Board of
Health for New Hampshire reported in 1910 that Children’s Comfort made no claims to contain alcohol
or morphine, stating that “It is a concentrated food” and “It does away with dangerous narcotics.” The
company appealed to mothers directly, saying that “your children will grow healthy and strong by its
use.” The State of Health, however, rigorously disagreed, stating that the sample did, in fact, contain
morphine and that “these claims are not only untrue but most vicious” (State Board of Health 1910:211212).
The Wentworth collection includes one complete bottle (Vessel #316; Plates 49 and 50) – a small
rectangular light aqua colored bottle about 13 cm (5 in) tall with a patent lip. The words, “GEO. E.
FAIRBANKS, SOLE PROPRIETOR WORCESTER, MASS” are embossed in raised letters on one side
of the bottle and the words, “CHILDREN’S COMFORT” and “CHARLES GIGAULT” appear on either
of the two indented side panels.
Of the known children living in the household, only one - John R. Allen, born in 1894 to Isaac Belmont
and Mary Allen - lived in the home during this time period, making it probable that the Allen’s purchased
the medication for their son.
80
�Plate 49. Children’s Comfort bottle, front panel (Vessel #316).
Plate 50. Children’s Comfort bottle side panels (Vessel #316).
81
�Johnson’s American Anodyne Liniment
Abner Johnson (1786-1847), a Waterford, Maine, physician, is credited with creating Johnson’s Anodyne
Liniment in 1810. Formulated as a painkilling medication, the two main ingredients of the liniment were
morphine and alcohol. Johnson moved to Bangor, Maine, and passed the business on to his son Isaac
Samuel Johnson. By the 1870s, the company had moved to Boston, where it became the I. S. Johnson &
Company. Johnson’s Anodyne Liniment was advertised and distributed nationally (Gould 2013).
The product claimed to address a variety of ailments and could be “used both externally and internally.”
The bottles were sold in a paper wrapper listing the indications or uses for this product: “For coughs,
colds, grippy cold, colic, asthmatic distress, bronchial colds, nasal catarrh, cholera morbus, cramps,
diarrhea, bruises, common sore throat, burns and scalds, chaps and chafing, chilblains, frost bites,
muscular rheumatism, soreness, sprains and strains.” The packaging prominently lists “ether (alcoholic
derivative)” as its main ingredient and cautions the user that the bottle “must be kept well corked” (Plate
51). Other possible ingredients include opium, camphor, and chloroform (Marlatt 1997).
Plate 51. Packaging for Johnson’s Anodyne Liniment. (National Museum of American History:
http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_715760
Archaeologists recovered two whole Johnson’s Anodyne Liniment bottles (Vessels #314 and 317; Plate
52) during excavation. Both are small cylindrical pale aqua colored bottles with a double ring lip and
measuring about 11 cm (4 1/2 in) tall. The four words, “JOHNSON’S AMERICAN ANODYNE
LINIMENT” are embossed in raised letters, spread out around the four sides of the bottle. The two
bottles are nearly identical. On February 16, 1907, an advertisement in the Lewiston Saturday Journal
listed the product for sale for 25 cents or three times as much for 50 cents (Plate 53).
With such an extended period of availability stretching well into the twentieth century, any number of
inhabitants of the Walnut Street address might have used the liniment for a variety of reasons.
82
�Plate 52. Two Johnson’s American Anodyne Liniment Bottles (Vessels #314 and 317).
Plate 53. Advertisement for Johnson’s Anodyne, Lewiston Saturday Journal, 1907.
83
�Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound
Lydia Pinkham’s “Vegetable Compound,” was among the most popular nationally advertised remedies in
the last quarter of the nineteenth century. Trademarked in 1876 by Lydia E. Pinkham (1819-1883) of
Lynn, Massachusetts, the remedy for “female complaints” was purported to relieve menstrual cramps and
symptoms of menopause. Pinkham used her own herbal remedy, suspending the preparation in 15
percent alcohol (Plate 54). The tonic, which sold for about $1 per bottle, also addressed the pervasive
“problem” of female debility and nervousness. By the 1890s, advertising for the product emphasized its
general use in addressing the “delicate female organism” and claiming that “headaches, backaches,
torturing bearing down pains and dragging sensations make women nervous and hysterical” (Plate 55)
(Carson 1961; Stage 1979).
Plate 55. Advertisement for Lydia E. Pinkham’s
Vegetable Compound (Stage 1979:149).
Plate 54. 1881 newspaper ad for Lydia E.
Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound (Wikipedia).
84
�Pinkham's company survived the scrutiny brought on by the 1906 Food & Drug Act, and flourished after
some adjustment to new regulations. After Lydia's death in 1883, the company continued under family
control until the 1930s, and a version of the compound is still produced today (Stage 1979).
Archaeologists recovered fragments of one broken bottle of the Vegetable Compound from the
Wentworth homestead excavations (Vessel #204; Plates 56 and 57). The ovoid, machine-made bottle is
pale aqua in color. Although incomplete, the bottle was about 9 cm wide (3 ½ in) and probably stood
about 20 cm (8 in) tall. Letters from the words, “VEGETABLE COMPOUND” are embossed in raised
letters on the front panel.
Plate 56. Fragments of Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable compound bottle (Vessel 204).
Plate 57. Example of whole Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound bottle.
Marketed extensively between 1876 and the 1920s, Lydia Pinkham's Compound may have been taken by
any of the adult female residents of the Wentworth house including, but not limited to, Flora (Allen)
Kimball, Mary Blair Allen or her sister-in-law Mary Blair.
85
�Mellin’s Infant Food
Mellin's Food was one of several high-protein products offered as an easily digestible liquid food for
infants and invalids. Aggressively marketed to new mothers, these companies sponsored advice on
childrearing and assumed the role as the new “experts” (Green 1983:40-42; Bentley 2001).
The
company was founded in 1866 by London chemist Gustav Mellin who developed a powdered infant
formula that could be diluted with cow's milk and water. Although not a total nutritional supplement, the
dry powder consisting of maltose, dextrins, proteins and salts was advertised with the slogan: “Mellin's
Food for Infants and Invalids: The only perfect substitute for Mother's Milk” (Wolf 2001). First marketed
by Theodore Metcalf of Boston, the company was taken over by two of Metcalf's employees, Thomas
Doliber and Thomas Goodale in 1880 and moved to Central Wharf (Rosenberg, 2007: 123).
Colorful advertisements, posters, trade cards and pamphlets showed happy mothers and children (Plate
58). Mellin’s Food Company also published extensive booklets on child care, such as “The Home
Modification of Cow's Milk” (1899) and “The Care and Feeding of Infants and Diet after the First Year.”
(1912). Records from a Portsmouth apothecary indicate that a bottle of Mellin’s Food cost about 75 cents
in 1890 (Marlatt 1997:165).
Plate 58. Advertisement and trade card for Mellin’s Food (rareamericana.com).
Archaeologists recovered a complete “Mellin's Infant Food” bottle (Vessel 315; Plate 59) from the
artifact-rich Locus 23 deposit in N212 E200.5. The aqua colored cylindrical mold-made container
measured about 16 cm (6 in) tall and has a cap seat opening, which would allow for a glass and cord
closure as seen in Plate 61. The words, “MELLIN’S INFANT’S FOOD DOLIBER-GOODALE CO.
BOSTON” are embossed in raised letters on one side of the bottle, and the words, “LARGE SIZE” are on
the opposite shoulder. Remnants of a paper label with printed text outlining indications and directions for
use are visible on one side of the bottle as well (see Plate 59).
86
�Plate 59. Front and back sides of Mellin’s
Infant’s Food Bottle (Vessel 315).
Plate 60. Example of glass and cork closure that Vessel 315 would have had
(sha.org/bottle/closures).
87
�Records indicate that four very young children resided in the two apartments between 1894 and 1911
when Mellin’s Food was readily available beginning in the 1880s, (see Table 13). The Allen family had
one young son; John R. Allen (born 1894) while living in the apartment at 4 Walnut Street, and Mary
Blair gave birth to three children between 1906 and 1911. It seems plausible that the Mellin's Food vessel
noted in the Wentworth collection is the discarded container from these children's' first year of life.
Conversely; the food may have been used by infirm members of the family, especially in their last years.
These may have included Dr. Nathaniel Dorman himself, or Flora (Allen) Kimball. The formula was not
inexpensive – costing about 75 cents per bottle. Although the powder was diluted with water or milk, the
container could provide only a limited number of meals.
Phillips Milk of Magnesia
Invented by Charles H. Phillips in 1873, “Milk of Magnesia” is a laxative named for its milky appearance.
The preparation is consists of hydrate of magnesium in water and was manufactured and distributed
through the Chas. H. Phillips Chemical Company in Stamford, Connecticut, between 1880 and 1976
(Stamford Historical Society 1941; Old Glass Bottles and Items of Antiquity 2017). Milk of Magnesia is
still marketed and sold today.
Archaeologists recovered fragments of one cobalt blue Phillips Milk of Magnesia bottle from the
Wentworth excavations (Vessel #226; Plate 61). The ovoid, machine-made bottle with a patent lip is
incomplete but would have stood about 19 cm (7 1/2 in) tall. Letters from the words, “PHILLIPS MILK
OF MAGNESIA” are embossed in raised letters on the front panel as well as a circular emblem
surrounding a shield with scroll design. According to bottle collector websites, the embossed trademark
(Plate 62) was added to the bottle beginning in 1906 when it was patented (Old Glass Bottles and Items of
Antiquity 2017).
At 50 cents per bottle, Vessel #226 could have been purchased and/or used by any number of people who
lived in the household after 1906 including members of the Allen, Blair, and Carlisle families.
88
�Plate 62. Trademark emblem for Phillips
Milk of Magnesia in use 1906 and later
(Old Glass Bottles and Items of Antiquity
2017).
Plate 61. Phillips Milk of Magnesia bottle (Vessel #226).
Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Disinfectant, Deodorizer, and Germicide
This antiseptic spray was first marketed in the 1880s as a powerful disinfectant against germs and
bacteria, at a time when “germ theory” was actively promoted in the scientific literature (Plate 63).
Popular Science (June 1899) endorsed this product stating, “It is used successfully for the cure of catarrh
and other throat troubles. One U. S. government board described the product thusly in 1914:
“Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Germicide. 85% alcohol. Antiseptic, disinfectant and
deodorizer. Is a germ destroyer and preventative agent. Useful in the treatment of
throat, nose and troubles of the catarrhal nature. An antiseptic spray or lotion for cuts,
wounds, burns, bites of insects, etc. An agreeable deodorant. It should be sprayed
freely on the clothing and about the room when contagious diseases are prevalent”
(Hayward 1914).
J. Hubbard & Co. Manufacturers & Proprietors of Boston, Massachusetts manufactured the product. It
was available with an atomizer, which sold for $1.25, or without atomizer in the half-pint size for $1.00.
One-pint bottles sold for $2.00 in 1914.
89
�Plate 63. Ad for Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Disinfectant, Deodorizer, and Germicide
http://www.antiquemedicines.com/MedicineNexus/H/Hf-Hz.htm
The Wentworth assemblage contains fragments of two bottles that once contained Dr. Hubbard’s
disinfectant (Vessels 224 and 209; Plate 64). Although neither bottle has an atomizer, the ovoid,
machine-made aqua-colored bottles held eight ounces of liquid and probably stood about 17 cm (7 in) tall.
The bottle has a patent lip, and one of the bottles has the original cork in it. The embossed letters on the
flat surface of one bottle read, “DR. HUBBARD’S VEGETABLE DISINFECTANT DEODORIZER & GERMICIDE
BOSTON, MASS USA” The initials, “O.G.R.” are embossed on each bottle base along with the number “8”
(the bottle size – presumably 8 oz). The initials stand for O. Gordon Rankine, who patented the bottle
shape in 1895 (www.google.ch/patents/USD25023). Although the disinfectant spray was promoted in
the 1880s, these particular bottles postdate 1895 and may have been used and discarded by any of the
household members in residence after that date.
Plate 64. Dr. Hubbard’s Vegetable Disinfectant (Vessel #224).
90
�Paine’s Celery Compound
Milton K. Paine, a pharmacist in Windsor, Vermont, is credited with formulating his “Celery Compound”
as early as the 1840's and began bottling the product in 1882. By the late 1880's, Wells, Richardson and
Company of Burlington, Vermont, marketed the product and became the sole proprietors. The main
ingredients were celery seed, red cinchona, orange peel, coriander seed lemon peel, hydrochloric acid,
glycerin, simple syrup, water and alcohol (Plate 65). Ads claimed that the product could be used to treat
dyspepsia, neuralgia, rheumatism and also for female complaints. Another ad states that “Celery
Compound Cures Disease of the Nerves, Kidneys, Liver, Stomach, and Bowels, and acts as a Blood
Purifier and Tonic to the Central System” (MaryFran 2017). A bottle cost about 60 cents.
Plate 65. Advertisement and testimonial for Paine’s Celery Compound,
Daily Northwestern Jan 13, 1900.
Well known individuals gave testimonials as to the product’s effectiveness. In 1896, the wife of a United
States Senator offered the following:
I was persuaded to try your Paine's celery compound in the early spring, when in a very
run-down condition. The duties devolving upon the wife of an official in public life are
naturally very exhausting, and I was tired out and nervous when I commenced using the
remedy. I take pleasure in testifying to the great benefit I received from its use, and can
91
�truthfully say that I am in almost perfect health again. If I ever find myself running down
again I shall certainly give it another trial and will in the meantime recommend it to
everyone needing it. Birmingham State Herald, September 19, 1896.
The typical bottle of Paine’s Celery Compound had a distinctive square shape and came in amber and
aqua bottle. The example in the Wentworth assemblage is a single whole amber bottle (Vessel #301;
Plate 66). The chamfer-cornered rectangular shaped bottle with indented panels stands about 25 cm (10
in) tall and has a tapered lip with a ring (also known as a wine or brandy lip). Embossed letters appear on
two of the four sides – “PAINE'S” on one side and “CELERY COMPOUND” on the opposite side.
Plate 66. Two sides of Paine’s Celery Compound bottle (Vessel #301).
Because of its wide distribution and availability, it is difficult to know who in the extended DormanKimball-Allen-Blair-Carlisle households may have tested the healing claims of Paine’s Celery
Compound.
92
�Twitchell Champlin & Co Neuralgic Anodyne
IAC recovered a “Twitchell Champlin & Company Neuralgic Anodyne” bottle (Vessel 318; Plate 67)
from artifact-rich deposits at the site. Patented in Portland, Maine, and manufactured from 1883 until the
1930s, the product was advertised as an analgesic medicine to relieve pain. Twitchell Champlin & Co
was a wholesale grocer on Merrill’s Wharf in Portland, Maine, founded by John Q. Twitchell and James
P. Champlin (www.mainememory.net). Although best known for their extensive canning business, the
company also produced essences and extracts including their neuralgic anodyne, first introduced in 1881
and patented in 1883 (Drabick 2016).
Plate 67. Twitchell Champlin & Co Neuralgic Anodyne bottle (Vessel #318).
A 1906 advertisement (Plate 68) claims, “It stops pain if taken internally or applied as a liniment.”
“Quickly stops all pain and relieves the pain-racked sufferer. The family medicine chest should never be
without it. It is an invaluable remedy in case of sudden need.” “25 Years of success proves its worth.”
(National Magazine Vol 24/4 July 1906). A bottle of the product cost 25 cents.
93
�Plate 68. The National Magazine, Vol 24 Issue 4 July 1906.
The Wentworth assemblage contains one whole bottle of Neuralgic Anodyne (Vessel #318; see Plate 67).
The colorless rectangular machine-made bottle has an extract lip and is about 16 cm (6 1/2 in) tall. The
two indented side panels are embossed with the words, “NEURALGIC ANODYNE” on one side and
TWITCHELL CHAMPLIN & CO” on the other. The flat surface of the bottle most likely sported a paper
label as seen in the advertisement in Plate 68. The interior of the bottle is stained, possibly with residue
of the original liquid.
Although the product potentially available to anyone living in the household between 1883 and the 1930s,
Flora Allen Kimball may have used the neuralgic anodyne to alleviate her discomfort from muscle pain or
contractions from myelitis (see Table 12), especially if she suffered from the condition for any length of
time.
94
�Alcohol as Medicine
While today we might consider evidence of alcohol use entirely recreational, its use in the nineteenth
century had long been touted as a viable strategy in the nineteenth century. Beverage alcohol, in fact, was
among the many kinds of stimulants prescribed by regular doctors and given in large and frequent doses.
Alcohol was readily available at low cost (Janik 2014:190), and the evidence of its use is apparent in the
Wentworth bottle assemblage. Even by the 1860's alcohol had become the “stimulant of choice.”
Medical staff in military hospitals liberally prescribed spirits (along with opiates) during the Civil War.
Physicians often administered whiskey, wine, and brandy to soldiers suffering from pneumonia,
dysentery, and typhoid fever (Warner 1986:98-99). Following the war, physicians transferred their
experience to private practice, adding beverage alcohol to the other regimens and strategies at relatively
high doses. Spirits were given to nearly one-quarter of hospital patients in the 1860's and 70's, and it was
not uncommon for patients to receive a dosage of 8 to 12 ounces per day (Warner 1986:99, 144-145).
Although not represented as part of the collection of 44 medicine bottles, the vessels are abundant. IAC
enumerated 337 individual glass vessels and containers from all excavation units. Of these, 20% (n = 69)
held alcohol or spirits of some kind, such as beer, whiskey, champagne, and wine (Plate 69). While we
will never know whether household residents or their visitors imbibed alcoholic spirits for social or
therapeutic reasons, the abundance of alcohol bottles in addition to the 44 medicinal bottles suggests the
popularity and regularity of the practice.
Plate 69. Vessel 307: Spirits flask, Vessel 303: Mattingly & Moore Whiskey (applied color label).
95
�Root Beer
Although root beer is known today as a popular soft drink, the beverage had its beginnings in the Colonial
era (Funderburg 2002). Nineteenth-century entrepreneurs, however, came up with their own recipes and
marketed these versions alongside increasingly popular proprietary medicines. These recipes employed
sassafras, commonly used as an ingredient in tonics and “blood purifiers” to treat a number of ailments
such as urinary tract disorders, syphilis, bronchitis, high blood pressure, gout, arthritis and skin problems
as well. One such entrepreneur was New York druggist P. B. Knapp, who made and marketed “Knapp’s
Extract of Roots” beginning in the 1840s. An advertisement in 1859 claims that the beverage was
manufactured for the purpose of “cleansing and purifying the blood,” making it “an excellent table drink”
as well as “good for invalids” (BayBottles.com 2017; Plate 70).
Sold along with proprietary medicines, later advertisements marketed “Knapp’s Root Beer Extract” as a
healthy product for home use by virtue of being nonalcoholic. An 1893 advertisement described the
product as “the great family temperance drink” (Plate 71). A bottle of the extract cost 25 cents, and by
adding sugar, yeast and water was enough to make 48 pints of the root beer, a recipe touted as highly
economical and healthier than ice water. Eventually, under the control of the Knapp's Extract Co., the
product was discontinued by 1912, and the company seems to have gone out of business by 1914 (Bay
Bottles.com 2017).
Plate 70. Knapp’s Root Beer advertisement dated 1893 (BayBottles.com 2017).
96
�Plate 71. Knapp’s Root Beer Extract advertisement, 1893 (Bay Bottles.com 2017).
While P. B. Knapp produced his root beer formula out of New York offices, by 1876, Charles E. Hires
made and marketed his own root beer recipe in Philadelphia. Hires expanded his market beginning in
1884 when he introduced a liquid form of root beer extract sold in barrels to soda fountains and dispensed
with his “Hires Automatic Munimaker.” The Charles E. Hires Company incorporated in 1890 and began
bottling the soft drink in 1893 ((Yates 2005).
Hires advertisements also stressed the temperate and healthy aspects of the drink, featuring rosy-cheeked
children (Plate 72). Although the recipe changed over time, Hires Root Beer is still commercially
available today.
Plate 72. Charles E. Hires Co. 1894 chromolithograph advertisement (Yates 2005).
97
�Archaeologists identified 12 root beer extract bottles including two complete Knapp’s Root Beer Extract
bottles and one complete Hires Root Beer Company (Vessels #320, 321 and 322; Plate 73). The
collection also includes eight root beer mug fragments and a nearly complete paneled glass mug (Vessel #
168) (Plate 74). The notion of serving the beverage chilled in “cold, frosty mugs” emerged after Roy
Allen of Lodi, California, introduced his recipe (later known as A & W Root Beer) in 1919 (Smith 2012).
The presence of these extract bottles and mugs indicates the household occupants made the soft drink at
home. Because the product was readily available throughout the period of the Dorman-Kimball-AllenCarlisle families’ residency, it is difficult to assign its consumption to any particular household. The
inhabitants may or may not have imbibed the beverage hoping to benefit from its medicinal effects.
98
�Plate 73. Root Beer Extract bottles (Vessels#320, 321, 322).
Plate 74. Nearly complete root beer mug (Vessel # 168).
99
�CHAPTER SEVEN: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Phase IB/II fieldwork from the Ezekiel and Elisabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113) at
Strafford Square in downtown Rochester revealed rich archaeological deposits especially within the cellar
the former carriage house/barn. Crews recovered 7,019 artifacts including a sizable number of medicine
and other bottles, presumably having been provisionally discarded out of the main activity areas in the
house (i. e, kitchen or pantry). As LaMotta and Schiffer note, “(o)ne needs to look no further than one’s
garage or attic to find convenient examples of provisional discard (1999: 22).” In nineteenth- and
twentieth-century Rochester, one could similarly take advantage of a barn or carriage house to cache
items that are may be “functionally obsolete,” but could serve a useful purpose later. The reader is urged
to consider that some bottles may have been set aside in the carriage shed to be reused in the production
of root beer or retained for sentimental reasons not clear to archaeologists.
Although the site was found eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and would typically
require a Phase III data recovery, no additional excavation was performed given the abundance of
redundant late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century material and considering that the collection of
more artifacts would not contribute significantly to site interpretation. Instead, IAC conducted an
alternative mitigation plan focusing on 44 medicine bottles in the collection, offering a discussion of how
the Walnut Street inhabitants participated in (or rejected) common medical practices popular in the region
between the 1870s and the 1920s.
IAC developed a series of research questions as a framework to discuss the consumer decisions of the
extended Dorman/Kimball/Allen family in residence at 2-4 Walnut Street between the 1870s and the
1920s. Although we address each of these questions in some detail in the previous chapters, the
following summarizes the results of our research and offers concluding thoughts.
1. What were the prevailing theories of health and wellness in Rochester and the region in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries?
The Civil War precipitated drastic changes in the study and practice of sanitation, health, and medicine,
which culminated in great foment of competing theories through the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
Regular or allopathic medical strategies, purported to be rooted in the hard sciences vied with irregular or
alternative theories, such as homeopathy and botanical medicine, for a foothold in the consumer
marketplace. By the middle of the nineteenth century, the American Medical Association (AMA) had
established itself as the prime authority on medical standards and training and sought to regulate
physicians through licensure. By and large, regular doctors adhered to the philosophies of the AMA and
more locally, the New Hampshire Medical Association, both organizations that specifically excluded and
rigorously opposed increasingly popular irregular medical approaches which threatened to undermine
their authority and influence.
Allopathic physicians generally employed aggressive heroic strategies to treat disease, using an arsenal of
drugs and procedures. These include prescribing large doses of drugs and stimulants considered
dangerous today, such as mercury and opiates, and bleeding patients of large quantities of blood to calm
his or her symptoms. By contrast, irregular medicinal approaches offered alternatives. Homeopathy, for
example, relied on a very different belief than administering a milder form of a specific disease will drive
out the same disease as the one under treatment (the term homeopathy means same illness). Also,
homeopathic practitioners were vigorously opposed to the treatment of illness with strong cathartics and
vomitives, and instead administered their remedy as a drop on a sugar cube. Botanical medicine, another
alternative to allopathic care, attempted to restore health by regulating body temperature with natural
herbs and extracts. These natural herbs and extracts of botanical plants, such as like lobelia (pukeweed)
and valerian (lady slipper), were allegedly gentler than strong cathartics and emetics prescribed by
100
�allopaths. This medical strategy utilized compounds available without a prescription and offered
instruction to the consumer for use at home.
Although pharmacies compounded and dispensed drugs prescribed by local doctors, apothecaries were
also free to sell their own formulas directly to the public since no formal credentials or medical training
were required to prohibit the practice. By the middle of the nineteenth century, consumers could also
choose from a wide variety of pre-packaged patent medicines, remedies, and tonics that offered a quick
and simple fix to an assortment of ills.
2. What were the medical choices available to the Rochester consumer?
Although both regular and irregular strategies were available to residents in southeastern New Hampshire,
the City of Rochester seems to have followed a more conservative track than its near neighbor,
Portsmouth. Research showed that Rochester residents supported a higher percentage of allopathic or
regular physicians who aligned themselves with AMA philosophies. Most were members of the New
Hampshire Medical Association, and many trained in the medical lineage of prominent physician, Dr.
James Farrington. By and large, Rochester residents could purchase prescribed compounds and other
medical necessities at pharmacies located near physicians' offices in and around Central Square.
Only one irregular practitioner, a homeopath, Dr. Robert V. Sweet, is documented as practicing in the city
in the early 1900s (MacDuffie 1892:611). By contrast, homeopaths, botanical and “eclectic” doctors
(who combined a number of strategies) were more numerous in Portsmouth, culminating in the
establishment of the Portsmouth Medical Society in 1879 which rigorously opposed such practices (see
Estes and Goodman 1986). With fewer irregular practitioners in the city, regular physicians in Rochester,
it seems, saw no need to organize in a similar way.
3. What proprietary medicines were commonly available and how were they marketed and
distributed?
Rochester’s weekly and daily newspapers carried advertising plugging a wide variety of proprietary
medicines. Many of these preparations were advertised and distributed nationally, including Ayer’s
Cherry Pectoral, Sarsaparilla, and Cathartic Pills, Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound, Hostetter
Bitters, Perry Davis’ Pain Killer; and Dr. King’ New Discovery for Consumption, touted as “The only
sure cure for Consumption in the World” as well as Dr. King’s New Life Pills, “the great liver and
stomach remedy.” The Rochester Courier and Rochester Record regularly carried sizable ads for
nationally distributed brands to catch the reader’s eye.
The Rochester consumer encountered advertising for these preparations in newspapers, magazines,
directories, almanacs, pamphlets, and leaflets with increasing frequency toward the end of the nineteenth
century. Local pharmacies, such as Hanson’s Apothecary, advertised these preparations in newspapers
and shop displays as well, taking advantage of their increased popularity to bring the consumer through
their doors.
4. What was the impact of the Food and Drug Act of 1906 on consumption patterns in the region?
Which products were outlawed and no longer available?
The Food and Drug Act of 1906 challenged manufacturers of proprietary medicines, tonics, remedies, and
compounds to list their ingredients on the label and made it illegal to make any false or misleading
statements about their product. Although the process took decades to fully implement and involved a
101
�long series of lawsuits and counterclaims, the impact of the passage of the 1906 Act on the industry was
swift and severe. The rapid growth observed in the early years of the twentieth century immediately
ceased once the Act was passed. More than 1,000 manufacturers (about one-third of those nationwide)
were out of business by 1916. Half were no longer in production by 1926 (Sobel 2000:9). Although
taking years to refine and implement, the measure eliminated many of the nation’s most popular remedies
that contained opium, morphine, laudanum, or had a high alcohol content. Nationally distributed
products that folded include such brands as Dr. S. B. Hartman’s Peruna (purported to contain 95%
alcohol), and Mrs. Winslow’s Soothing Syrup (whose main ingredient was morphine). Others, such as
Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound (targeted for containing alcohol) and Paine’s Celery Compound
(which allegedly contained traces of cocaine), survived scrutiny by changing their formulas, to stay in
compliance with the new law (Stage 1979).
5. What was the relative cost, the range of use, and purpose of the medicine or compounds (e.g.,
cough syrup, or general ailment, or respiratory) available in Rochester?
Proprietary medicines generally cost much more than prescriptions compounded locally by a pharmacist.
Prices for compounded formulas prescribed by a physician and prepared by a pharmacist ranged from 10
to 40 cents. In today’s dollars, a 15-cent prescription would be the equivalent of $3.87. Proprietary and
patent medicines, remedies, and other prepackaged nationally distributed preparations could cost
significantly more. Many sold for one dollar ($25.50 in today’s currency), more than twice as much as a
doctor’s prescription. Lydia Pinkham's Vegetable Compound sold for $1 per bottle as did a large bottle
of California Fig Syrup. Depending on the preparation, prices cost as little as 25 cents for a small bottle
of Johnson's American Anodyne Liniment or Twitchell Champlin’s Neuralgic Anodyne to $2 for a pintsize bottle of Dr. Hubbard's Vegetable Disinfectant (Table 16). A bottle of Mellin’s Food was not
inexpensive – costing about 75 cents per bottle. Although the powder was diluted with water or milk, the
container could provide only a limited number of meals.
The use of patent medicines did not require consultation with a physician and allowed the consumer
greater control of his or her medical health. These preparations were costlier, however, requiring a
certain amount of economic comfort. The fact that archaeologists encountered a number of discarded
patent medicine bottles is evidence that the Dorman-Kimball-Allen families found a way to afford these
preparations and considered them useful to have (or at least try) as part of their medical tool kit.
Table 16. Approximate prices for propriety medicines in the Wentworth collection.
Approx
Proprietary Medicine Name
cost/bottle
California Fig Syrup Co. San Francisco, CA
Johnson's American Anodyne Liniment
Lydia E. Pinkham's Vegetable Compound
Mellin's Infant's Food- Doliber Goodale Co.,
Boston
Milk of Magnesia
Dr. Hubbard's Vegetable Disinfectant
Paine's Celery Compound
Twitchell Champlin & Co- Neuralgic
Anodyne
102
50 cents - $1
25-35 cents
$1
75 cents
50 cents
$1-$2
60 cents
25 cents
�6. Which proprietary medicines did the occupants of the Walnut Street address use? Were any of
these products outlawed by the 1906 Food and Drug Act?
IAC identified 15 individual bottles from 13 different preparations in the medicinal bottle assemblage
(Table 17). These nostrums offered ready relief from physical discomfort or promoted general health
and wellbeing to family members of all ages. Some, such as Johnson’s American Anodyne Liniment
promised to ease both external and internal discomfort from a variety of ills including coughs, colds,
asthma, cramps, diarrhea, bruises, sprains and soreness. Johnson’s preparation was marketed and sold
for most of the nineteenth century, surviving the scrutiny of the 1906 Food and Drug Act until about
1930. Archaeologists found evidence of two bottles of the remedy in the collection, suggesting that any
number of inhabitants of the Walnut Street address might have used the liniment for a variety of reasons.
Twitchell Champlin & Co Neuralgic Anodyne was also marketed as an analgesic medicine to relieve pain.
Based in Portland, Maine, this company made their product available between 1883 and the 1930s.
Although we have no proof, it is possible that Flora Allen Kimball may have used the neuralgic anodyne
to alleviate her discomfort from muscle pain or contractions from myelitis.
The collection includes preparations made for children’s use, especially Children’s Comfort, and Mellin’s
Infant Food. Advertised as safe and reliable by the Worcester, Massachusetts, manufacturer, Children’s
Comfort contained no narcotics and promoted healthy growth to children of all ages. Popular in the
1890s, this preparation might have been given to John R. Allen (born in 1894) who is the only child
identified during our research as living in the household during this time period. John's parents may also
have been fed him Mellin’s Food, also available during his first years. Mellin’s Food could also be given
to elderly or infirm members of the family, perhaps Nathaniel Dorman or Flora (Allen) Kimball.
Table 17. Propriety medicines found in the Wentworth collection.
Approx
Approx
Vessel #
Proprietary Medicine Name
Date
cost/bottle
California Fig Syrup Co. San
198
Francisco, CA
1880-1890
50 cents - $1
Children's Comfort / George E.
316
Fairbanks Worcester, Mass1890s
Johnson's American Anodyne
314 & 317 Liniment
1880-1930s
25-35 cents
Lydia Pinkham's Vegetable
204
Compound
1876-1920
$1
Mellin's Infant’s Food- Doliber
315
Goodale Co., Boston
Post 1880
75 cents
226
Milk of Magnesia
Post 1906
50 cents
209 & 224 Dr. Hubbard's Vegetable Disinfectant 1895+
$1-$2
301
Paine's Celery Compound
Twitchell Champlin & Co- Neuralgic
Anodyne
Post 1882
60 cents
1883-1930s
25 cents
323 & 333
John Wyeth & Bro
1872-1907
variable
166 & 188
Wyeth & Bro. with dose cap
1899+
variable
318
103
�Several products promised to promote general health. California Fig Syrup claimed to contain natural
ingredients to alleviate constipation and strengthen internal organs. Lydia Pinkham's Vegetable
Compound, marketed primarily to women as a remedy for "female complaints" also offered a natural
recipe made up of assorted herbs. Although initially containing 15% alcohol, the Lydia Pinkham
Company modified their formula in response to the 1906 Food and Drug Act and reduced the alcoholic
content to remain in compliance with the new guidelines. The company stayed in business until the late
1920s. Although the California Fig Syrup company produced a product with about 6% alcohol, their
demise in the early 1900s was a result of a lawsuit claiming copyright infringement and not due to the
content of their tonic.
Archaeologists recovered evidence that the Walnut Street inhabitants used Paine’s Celery Compound, a
preparation marketed as a cure-all for diseases of “the Nerves, Kidneys, Liver, Stomach, and Bowels, and
acts as a Blood Purifier and Tonic to the Central System” (MaryFran 2017). The remedy was widely
distributed and readily available and may have been used by any adult member of the extended family in
the 1880s or later. Allegedly containing traces of cocaine, Paine’s Celery Compound, survived changes
brought on by the 1906 Act by changing its formula to align with the new laws.
There is also evidence that the household took stock in germ theory and made an effort to reduce
infectious agents in the home. IAC recovered two bottles of Dr. Hubbard's Vegetable Disinfectant, an
antiseptic spray first marketed in the 1880s as a powerful disinfectant. Please see Chapter Six for a more
detailed discussion of each of these proprietary remedies and agents.
7. How did the inhabitants participate in the growing trend of cheaper, ready-to-sell bottled
compounds such as those offered by the nascent Wyeth pharmaceutical company?
IAC recovered evidence of four bottles related to the Wyeth & Bro, a growing pharmaceutical supply
company founded in the 1860s in response to the medical needs of the Civil War (see Table 17). John
Wyeth & Bro mixed and sold commonly prescribed drugs, pills, elixirs, salts and suppositories for wide
distribution. Although our research was not able to determine the price of these pre-packaged products in
comparison to products compounded by a local pharmacist, the fact that four bottles (10%) from the same
company were among the 44 in the collection suggests the families place value in these prepackaged
products.
8. Were the residents of 2-4 Walnut Street purchasing locally, through mail order, or through
other means?
Local drugstores advertised their wares liberally, announcing the availability of proprietary medicines or
their own preparations (such as DeWitt's headache powders) in newspapers, directories, pamphlets, and
broadsides. Although consumers may have procured their wares through mail order, it seems just as likely
that the Walnut Street inhabitants purchased these items directly from the local drug store. Although our
initial hope was to link specific Dorman-Kimball-Allen family members to specific medical supply
purchases by looking at account books from Rochester apothecaries, IAC was not able to locate such
records.
Concluding Remarks
The review of the 44 medicinal bottles provides evidence of the medical strategies employed by the
Wentworth site residents to ease pain, care for children, and provide comfort for family members in their
last years of life. Beginning in 1867, Dr. Nathaniel Dorman and members of his extended family –
104
�primarily the Kimball and Allen families – lived in the house for the next eight decades. IAC’s analysis
draws additional links between the material culture and the individuals identified through the
documentary record to gain a clearer understanding of the medical strategies and consumer choices of the
extended household.
In 1864 when Dr. Nathaniel Dorman relocated his family from Alton to Rochester, the city boasted a
thriving commercial district and served as a regional center of commerce. By the turn of the twentiethcentury, eleven apothecaries or pharmacies in Rochester provided a wide range of proprietary and
prescription medications. Although we cannot link any particular compound to a specific person in the
Walnut Street household, the presence of both proprietary and prescription medicine suggests the
residents used a range of approaches to treat illness and alleviate symptoms between the 1870s and 1920s.
105
�REFERENCES
Anonymous
1908 Central Square, Rochester, New Hampshire. Reproduced from an original postcard published by
G.W. Morris, Portland, Maine.
1906
The Dangerous Frauds in Patent Medicines. Truth October 20, 1906.
Adams, Samuel Hopkins
1944 The Great American Fraud, A Series of Articles on the Patent Medicine Evil. Reprinted from
Collier’s Weekly, 1905
Baldwin, Joseph K.
1973 Patent and Proprietary Medicine Bottles of the Nineteenth Century. Thomas Nelson, Inc., New
York
Bass & Company
1898, 1902
Bass & Company’s Diver, Somersworth, Rochester and Strafford County, N.H.,
Directory 1902. Bass & Company, compilers and publishers, Dover, NH. Accessed through
ancestry.com
BayBottles.com
2017 “Knapp’s Root Beer Extract” Mike’s Glass Bottle Collection and their History.
https://baybottles.com/2017/02/03/knapps-root-beer-extract/ Accessed January 23, 2018
Bentley, Amy
2001 Inventing Baby Food: Taste, Health, and the Industrialization of the American Diet. University
of California Press.
Brevoort, Roger
1981 “Rochester Commercial and Industrial Historic District” National Park Service Nomination Form
(https://npgallery.nps.gov/GetAsset/c8c2d2c8-454c-400f-bd9f-339335e505e5)
California Medical Association
1906 California State Journal of Medicine 4(4):137. BMJ Publishing
(www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles), accessed May 8, 2017
Carson, Gerald
1961 One for a Man, Two for a Horse. Doubleday & Company, Inc. Garden City, NY.
Cofelice, Jessica, Kathleen Wheeler, and Jacob Tumelaire
2017 Results of Phase IB Intensive Archaeological Investigation and Phase II Determination of
Eligibility, Strafford Square Intersection Improvements, Rochester X-A000 (320); NHDOT
14350: The Ezekiel and Elizabeth Wentworth Homestead (27-ST-113)
Chace, J., Jr.
1856 Map of Strafford County, New Hampshire. Smith and Bartlett Company, Philadelphia.
Dudley, Dean
1871, 1882
Dover, Great Falls, and Rochester Directory. Dean Dudley & Co., Boston
106
�Drabick, Frances
2016 “Bottle: Twitchell-Champlin Co.’s: Neuralgic Anodyne (Started Anodyne In 1881)”
http://www.francesdrabickwritesit.com. Accessed June 20, 2017.
Estes, J. Worth
1988 The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines. Pharmacy in History 30:1
Estes, J. Worth and David M. Goodwin,
1986 The Changing Humors of Portsmouth: The Medical Biography of an American Town, 1623-1983.
The Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine, Boston
Fike, Richard E.
1987 The Bottle Book: A Comprehensive Guide to Historic Embossed Medicine Bottles. Gibbs M.
Smith, Inc., Peregrine Smith Books, Salt Lake City.
Fogg, Alonzo J.
1874 The Statistics and Gazetteer of New Hampshire. D. L. Guernsey, Concord, New Hampshire.
Foster’s Daily Democrat
2014 Tri-Cities Memories: The Early Years. Foster’s Daily Democrat, Dover, NH.
Funderburg, Anne Cooper
2002 Sundae Best: A History of Soda Fountain. Bowling Green State University Popular Press,
Bowling Green, Ohio.
Green, Harvey
1983 Light of the Home. Pantheon Books, New York
Haller, John S., Jr,
1994 Medical Protestants: The Eclectics in American Medicine, 1825-1939. Southern Illinois Press
Carbondale, Illinois.
Hanson, Dominicus
1854 Dominicus Hanson’s Catalogue of Apothecary, Book and Variety Store, Rochester, New
Hampshire. Dover Gazette Power-Press, Dover, New Hampshire.
(https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ien.35558005376955;view=1up;seq=3)
Haywood, J.K., chairman
1914 U.S. Department of Agriculture Insecticide and Fungicide Board Service and Regulatory
Announcements. Washington, D.C.
Hechlinger, Adelaide,
1970 The Great Patent Medicine Era, Madison Square Press New York.
Hoolihan, Christopher
2001
Social Medicine in the United States, 1717-1917. University of Rochester Press.
Hurd, D. H.
1882 History of Rockingham and Strafford Counties, New Hampshire. J. W. Lewis and Company,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
1892 Town and City Atlas of the State of New Hampshire. D. H. Hurd, Boston.
107
�Gould, Deb
2013 “Johnson's Anodyne Liniment” http://debgould.blogspot.com. Accessed Jun 15, 2017.
Griffin, Jessica D.
2013 “John Wyeth & Bro., Philadelphia, PA.” Old Main Artifacts. WordPress.com. Accessed June 21,
2017.
Griffenhagen, George B. and Mary Bogard
1999 History of Drug Containers and Their Labels. American Institute of the History of Pharmacy,
Madison, Wisconsin.
Janik, Erika
2014 Marketplace of the Marvelous: The Strange Origins of Modern Medicine. Beacon Press, Boston.
LaMotta, Vincent M., and Michael B. Schiffer
1999 Formation processes of house floor assemblages. In The Archaeology of Household Activities,
edited by Penelope M. Allison, pp. 19-29. Routledge, London and New York.
Lance, H. Darrell
1978 The Field Recording System. In A Manual of Field Excavation: Handbook for Field
Archaeologists, edited by William G. Dever and H. Darrel Lance, pp. 74-97. Hebrew Union
College – Jewish Institute of Religion, Cincinnati, New York, Los Angeles, Jerusalem.
Maclean, D., M.D., editor
1904 California Medical Journal, Vol. 25, No. 1. California Medical Collage, San Francisco,
California.
Manning, H. A.
1924 Dover, Somersworth, Rochester, Farmington, Durham (New Hampshire, Berwick (Maine)
Directory. H.A. Manning & Co., Springfield, MA
1928, 1933, 1947
Manning’s Dover, Somersworth, Rochester, Farmington, Durham (New Hampshire, Berwick
(Maine) Directory. H.A. Manning & Co., Springfield, MA
Marlatt, Ellen W.
1997 Health, Beauty, and Identity on Account: The Female Consumer and the Apothecary in
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 1870-1890. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Southern
Maine, American and New England Studies.
MaryFran
2017 MaryFran’s Muse. Paine’s Celery Compound. www.maryfransmuse.weebly.com/paines-celerycompound.html. Accessed September 9, 2017.
McDuffee, Frank.
1892 History of the Town of Rochester, New Hampshire, from 1722 to 1860, Volume 1.
J.B. Clarke Company, Manchester, New Hampshire.
108
�New Hampshire Medical Society
1911 Records of the New Hampshire Medical Society form its organization in 1791 to 1854. Rumford
Printing Company, Concord, NH
New Hampshire Medical Society, Strafford District
1814 Constitution and Bye-laws of the Strafford District of the New Hampshire Medical Society.
John Mann, printer, Dover, NH
New Hampshire Medical Society
2016 “Medical Society Origins” New Hampshire Medical Society website.
https://www.nhms.org/medical-society-origins, accessed April 28, 2017
Old Glass Bottles and Items of Antiquity
2017 “Old Glass Bottles and Items of Antiquity: An Ongoing Effort to Old Glass Bottles and Other
Such Treasures.” http://productmanufacturers.blogspot.com. Blog accessed June 19, 2017.
Parsons, Charles W.
1893 The Pharmaceutical Era, Volume 9. D.O. Haynes & Company, Detroit, Michigan.
Putman, Hamilton S.
1966 The New Hampshire Medical Society, A History. Prepared and printed on the occasion of the
Society’s one hundred and seventy-fifth anniversary, 1791-1966. Cabinet Press, Milford, NH
Rosenberg, Chaim M.
2007 Goods for Sale: Products and Advertising in the Massachusetts Industrial Age. University of
Massachusetts Press.
Scales, John
1911 Some Descendants of Deacon John Dam of Dover, New Hampshire, 1633. Press of David Clapp
& Son, Boston, Massachusetts.
Schenck, Dr. J.H. & Son
1875
Schenck's Almanac. Philadelphia.
Brown-Forman Corp., Allied Domecq PLC, Remy Amerique, Inc.
2017 Schieffelin & Somerset Co. History. http://www.fundinguniverse.com/companyhistories/schieffelin-somerset-co-history/. Accessed May 29, 2017
Schiffer, Michael B.
1996 Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
(originally published in 1987 by University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque).
Scott
2015
“About Scott’s, Our Story.” https://www.scottskids.com/ph/our-story.html. Accessed May 29,
2017.
Smith, Andrew
2012 The Oxford Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America. Oxford University Press, United States
of America.
109
�Smith, Florence Horne
1996 Images of America: Rochester. Acadia Publishing, Dover, NH.
Sobel, Russel S.
2000 “Public Health and the Placebo: The Legacy of the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act.” Paper
published for the West Virginia University Department of Economics, Morgantown, West
Virginia. Draft, September 29, 2000. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/ accessed February 21, 2017
Stage, Sarah
1979 Female Complaints: Lydia Pinkham and the Business of Women’s Medicine. W. W. Norton &
Company, New York
Stamford Historical Society
1941 “The Charles H. Phillips Chemical Co.” The Tercentenary Edition, Stamford Advocate
State Board of Health
1910 Twenty-first report (Eighth Biannual) of the State Board of Heath of the State of New Hampshire
for the Fiscal Period Ending August 31, 1910. Parson B. Cogswell, printer Concord, NH.
Stearns, Ezra, editor
1908 Genealogical and Family History of the State of New Hampshire, Vol. IV. Lewis Publishing
Company, New York. pp. 1824-1825
Warner, John Harley
1986 The Therapeutic Perspective: Medical Practice, Knowledge, and Identity in America, 1820-1885
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Wicker, Frank
2016 Bottle Pickers. http://www.bottlepickers.com/database_medicine3.htm
accessed February 21, 2017.
The Wellcome Trust, Ltd.
2017 https://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/obf_images/2e/3c/79c22f65a6a01355834d25d855b7.jpg.
Accessed June 15, 2017.
Wolf, Jacqueline H.
2001 Don't Kill Your Baby: Public Health and the Decline of Breastfeeding in the Nineteenth and
Twentieth Centuries. Ohio State University Press.
Yates, Don
2005 Charles E. Hires Company 1870 – Present Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Bottles and Extras.
https://www.fohbc.org/PDF_Files/HiresRootBeer_DonYates.pdf. accessed December 15, 2017.
Young, James Harvey
1961 Toadstool Millionaires: A Social History of Patent Medicines in America Before Federal
Regulation. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Federal Writers Project
1938 New Hampshire: A Guide to the Granite State: A Guide to the Silver State.
110
�APPENDIX A: MINIMUM VESSEL COUNT (MVC) FOR ALL GLASS
Vessel
No
1
2
3
4
5
Vessel
Form
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Beer
Beer
Beer
Beer
Unid Alcohol
Stubby Quart
Stubby Quart
Stubby Quart
Stubby Quart
Circular base
Stippled
Stippled
Stippled
Stippled
None
Manufacturing
Technique
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
6
Jar
Food
Cylindrical
None
Machine-made
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Bottle
Tableware
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Tableware
Bottle
Jar
Jar
Unid Alcohol
Tumbler
Milk
Extract
Unid Alcohol
Cup
Food
Food
Food
Stippled
Stippled
None
None
None
Pressed
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
16
Bottle
Food
None
Machine-made
1920-1937
22
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Unid
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Jar
Unid
Tableware
Jar
Tableware
Tableware
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Soda
Soda
Unid
Soda
Unid
Beer
Extract
Champagne
Food
Unid
Cup
Food
Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid Alcohol
Extract
Beer
Stippled
Stippled
None
Stippled
Frosted
None
Embossed
None
None
None
Paneled
None
Molded
Etched
None
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
1940-1947
1940-1947
Post 1905
1923-1950
Indeterminate
Post 1910
post 1900
1900-1920
20th c
1840s-1930s
Mid 20th c
Indeterminate
Mid 20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
20th c
Post 1900
Indeterminate
15
29
3
40
2
3
18
4
5
4
2
12
2
1
8
21
13
1
35
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
None
Machine-made
1935-1960
12
36
37
38
Jar
Unid
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Mug
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Tapered
Rectangular
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Stubby Quart
Stubby Quart
Tapered
Stubby Quart
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Tapered
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Circular base
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Tapered
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Post 1923
Post 1923
Post 1923
Post 1923
1919-1920
Patent April
1st, 1900
1923-1940
1923-1940
1905-1930
1905-1930
1905-1920
Post 1930
1905-1920
1905-1920
Indeterminate
Pressed
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
20th C
20th c
5
11
6
Form Subtype
Shape
111
Decoration
Approx Date
Total
sherds
10
10
11
24
16
21
16
8
2
12
16
3
16
9
5
�39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Jar
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Tableware
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Jar
Jar
Tableware
Vial
Food
Condiment
Extract
Unid
Bowl
Extract
Beer
Beer
Beer
Food
Food
Cup
Medicine
52
Jar
Food
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
Unid
Tableware
Tableware
Bottle
Unid
Tableware
Unid
Unid
Vase
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Tableware
Tableware
Vase
Jar
Tableware
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Unid
Bottle
Unid
Unid
Unid
Cup
Pitcher
Wine
Unid
Cup
Unid
Unid
None
Extract
Medicine
Medicine
Unid Alcohol
Unid
Decanter
Decorative
Food
Stemware
Unid
Beer
Unid
Extract
Unid
Beer
Unid
Unid
79
Unid
Unid
80
Vial
Medicine
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Round
Rectangular
Stubby Quart
Stubby Quart
Stubby Quart
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Round w/ flat
sides
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Tapered
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Rectangular
Rectangular
Rectangular
Tapered
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Globular
Cylindrical
Round
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Indeterminate
Stubby Quart
Rectangular
Indeterminate
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Stippled
None
None
None
Gilded
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
20th c
1925-1930
20th C
20th C
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Post 1905
1923-1940
1923-1950
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
2
2
1
1
1
7
19
4
3
17
9
1
2
None
Machine-made
Indeterminate
5
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
1840s-1930s
1910s
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
20th C
1905-1930
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1923-1950
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1
1
4
3
1
8
10
1
1
10
8
2
13
1
6
1
9
1
3
9
10
5
2
7
1
1
Unid
Indeterminate
1
Machine-made
Indeterminate
2
Pressed
Paneled
Pressed
None
None
Paneled
None
Unid
Pressed
None
None
None
None
Pressed
None
None
None
None
None
None
Stippled
None
None
Stippled
Embossed
Pressed
Applied
Indeterminate Color
Label
Cylindrical
Paneled
112
�81
82
83
84
Unid
Jar
Bottle
Bottle
Unid
Food
Medicine
Condiment
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Flat
Octagonal
None
None
Paneled
Paneled
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
8
17
8
3
85
Tableware Mug
None
Machine-made
Indeterminate
1
86
Bottle
Medicine
Cylindrical
None
19th c
6
Unid Alcohol
Cup
Food
Extract
Food
Soda/Mineral
Water
Cup
Bowl
Beer
Soda/Mineral
Water
Unid
Condiment
Mug
Mug
Soda/Mineral
Water
Beer
Food/Milk
Food
Unid
Unid Alcohol
Soda/Mineral
Water
Unid
Unid
Food
Unid
Medicine/Extract
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Water
Cup
Unid
Unid
Food
Extract
Tapered
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
None
None
None
None
None
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
87
88
89
90
91
Bottle
Tableware
Jar
Bottle
Jar
20th c
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1
4
6
3
1
92
Bottle
Cylindrical
None
Machine-made
20th c
4
93
94
95
Tableware
Tableware
Bottle
Cylindrical
Round
Stubby Quart
None
Pressed
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
1890-1910s
1905-1950
1
9
3
96
Bottle
Stubby Quart
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
13
97
98
99
100
Tableware
Bottle
Tableware
Tableware
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Pressed
None
None
Paneled
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
1890-1910s
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1
2
1
1
101
Bottle
Cylindrical
None
Machine-made
Indeterminate
7
102
103
104
105
106
Bottle
Bottle
Jar
Unid
Bottle
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
None
None
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
1905-1950
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
9
1
1
2
9
107
Bottle
Stubby Quart
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
9
108
109
110
111
112
113
Unid
Unid
Jar
Bottle
Bottle
Unid
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Rectangular
Indeterminate
None
None
None
None
None
None
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Unid
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1890-1910
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1840s-1930s
2
1
1
4
1
1
114
Bottle
Cylindrical
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
1
115
116
117
118
119
Tableware
Unid
Jar
Bottle
Bottle
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Rectangular
None
Paneled
Pressed
Paneled
None
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid Mold-
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
13
15
1
1
29
113
�made
120
Tableware Cup
Cylindrical
Pressed
Indeterminate
13
1870-1925
62
None
None
Pressed
None
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
121
Bottle
Rectangular
None
122
123
124
125
Bottle
Bottle
Tableware
Bottle
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Stubby Quart
127
Unid
Condiment
Pitcher or Mug
Beer
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Tableware Stemware
Indeterminate
1919-1929
20th c
1905-1950
10
7
1
35
Stubby Quart
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
57
Wine Glass
Pressed
20th c
2
Wine
Tapered
None
Indeterminate
1
Bottle
Jar
Unid
Medicine
Food
Unid
Rectangular
None
Cylindrical
None
Indeterminate None
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
7
24
2
132
Bottle
Spirits
Rectangular
None
Indeterminate
7
133
Bottle
Cylindrical
None
Indeterminate
24
Cylindrical
None
Machine-made
1905-1950
18
135
136
137
138
139
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Tableware Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid
Bottle
Beer
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
128
Bottle
129
130
131
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Stubby Quart
Pressed
None
None
None
Stippled
Indeterminate
1840s-1880s
1840s-1930s
Indeterminate
1923-1950
1
1
1
5
14
140
Bottle
Wine
Tapered
None
Indeterminate
3
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
Bottle
Jar
Tableware
Jar
Unid
Bottle
Bottle
Jar
Tableware
Bottle
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Rectangular
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Globular
Indeterminate
None
None
Pressed
None
None
None
None
None
Red Block
None
1935-1960
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1910s
Indeterminate
20th c
20th c
20th c
Post 1898
20th c
3
2
1
5
2
3
32
1
1
12
151
Bottle
Spirits
Cosmetic/Perfume
Unid
Food
Unid
Unid Alcohol
Unid Alcohol
Food
Goblet
Beer
Soda/Mineral
Water
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Tapered
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
4
152
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Cylindrical
None
Indeterminate
8
153
Bottle
Cylindrical
None
Indeterminate
5
154
Bottle
Tapered
Embossed
Machine-made
1952-1958
12
155
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Soda/Mineral
Water
Wine
Unid Moldmade
Unid
Tapered
None
Unid
Indeterminate
2
126
134
Extract
114
�156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Bottle
Unid
Unid
Bottle
Bottle
Unid
Vial
Flask
Tableware
Tableware
Bottle
Jar
Tableware
Jar
Bottle
Bottle
Food
Unid
Unid
Wine
Beer
Unid
Unid
Unid Alcohol
Stemware
Cup
Medicine
Food
Mug
Food
Medicine
Milk
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Tapered
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
None
Frosted
None
None
Stippled
None
None
None
None
Red Block
None
None
Paneled
None
None
None
Brandy/Liqueur
Square base
None
Jar
Food
Cylindrical
None
175
Bottle
Extract
Ovoid
None
176
Bottle
Brandy/Liqueur
Cylindrical
None
177
Bottle
Extract
Ovoid
None
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
Vase
Bottle
Bottle
Tableware
Tableware
Bottle
Unid
Decorative
Champagne
Unid Alcohol
Stemware
Stemware
Champagne
Unid
Concave
Tapered
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Tapered
Indeterminate
Pressed
None
None
None
None
None
Pressed
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Two-piece
mold
Two-piece
separate base
Two-piece
separate base
Machine-made
Two-piece
mold
Machine-made
Post-bottom
Mold
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
172
Bottle
Medicine
172
Bottle
Medicine
173
Bottle
174
185
Tableware Plate
Round
Pressed
Machine-made
186
Jar
Cosmetic/Perfume Cylindrical
None
Machine-made
187
188
Bottle
Bottle
Medicine/Extract
Medicine
Rectangular
Rectangular
None
None
189
Bottle
Unid
Cylindrical
None
190
Bottle
191
192
Jar
Bottle
Soda/Mineral
Water
Food
Food
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1923-1950
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Post 1898
1890s
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
3
3
1
5
1
4
1
22
2
3
9
10
1
10
5
3
1880-1910
6
1880-1910
3
1880-1910
16
Post 1882
11
1850-1910
19
20th c
15
1850-1890
8
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
1880sPresent
20th c
3
6
10
4
1
13
1
Machine-made
Machine-made
Two-piece
mold
20th c
1890s
33
3
Indeterminate
9
Indeterminate Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
1
Cylindrical
Ovoid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Post 1922
20th c
4
8
115
None
None
None
None
4
1
�193
194
195
196
Jar
Tableware
Jar
Bottle
Food
Stemware
Food
Unid
Cylindrical
Concave
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
None
None
None
None
197
Bottle
Brandy/Liqueur
Cylindrical
None
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
204
205
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Tableware
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Medicine
Spirits
Extract
Medicine
Mug
Wine
Extract
Medicine
Medicine/Extract
Rectangular
Rectangular
Indeterminate
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Tapered
Ovoid
Ovoid
Rectangular
None
None
None
None
Paneled
None
None
None
None
206
Bottle
Extract
Rectangular
None
207
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Cylindrical
None
208
Bottle
Milk
Ovoid
None
209
Bottle
Medicine
Ovoid
None
210
Jar
Food
Cylindrical
211
Bottle
Medicine
211
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
212
213
214
216
217
Tableware Unid
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Cup
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Bottle
Medicine
Unid
Unid
218
Bottle
219
220
Unid
Bottle
215
221
222
223
224
225
226
Medicine
Unid
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Tableware Stemware
Jar
Cosmetic/Perfume
Bottle
Medicine
Bottle
Extract
Bottle
Medicine
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Three-Piece
Mold
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Unid Moldmade
Two-piece
separate base
Unid
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
1858-1920
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
71
7
6
1
1820-1890
7
1880-1890
1900
20th c
1929-1960
20th c
20th c
1876-Present
1876-Present
Indeterminate
5
24
1
5
1
1
3
4
2
Post 1839
5
Indeterminate
1
Post 1883
27
1880s-1890s
9
Early 20th c
5
Machine-made
Post 1934
1
Machine-made
Post 1934
2
20th c
20th c
20th c
5
7
3
1890-1905
1
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
8
1
1880s-1910s
4
Indeterminate None
Indeterminate None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Unid
Cup-bottom
Mold
Unid
Unid
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1
1
Indeterminate None
Machine-made
20th c
1
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Ovoid
Rectangular
Ovoid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
20th c
1880s-1890s
1870s-1910s
Post 1906
1
1
2
6
16
None
Applied
Ovoid
Color
Label
Applied
Ovoid
Color
Label
Indeterminate None
Indeterminate None
Cylindrical
Pressed
Tapered
None
Ovoid
None
Indeterminate None
Ovoid
None
116
Pressed
None
None
None
None
�227
228
229
230
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Indeterminate
Ovoid
Indeterminate
Ovoid
Stippled
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
1923-1950
Early 20th c
1921-1971
20th c
9
62
10
6
Stubby Quart
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
5
Jar
Unid
Unid
Beer
Medicine
Unid
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Water
Food
Unid
Unid
231
Bottle
232
233
234
Cylindrical
None
Indeterminate None
Indeterminate Colored
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1
1
1
235
Bottle
Extract
Rectangular
None
1870-1925
1
236
237
238
239
240
Unid
Bottle
Unid
Jar
Jar
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
None
None
None
Pressed
None
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Unid Moldmade
Unid
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
20th c
20th c
1
1
4
1
4
Stubby Quart
Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1950
21
Tapered
Cylindrical
Stubby Quart
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Tapered
Indeterminate
Globular
Rectangular
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
None
Paneled
None
None
None
None
Pressed
Pressed
None
None
None
Pressed
None
Pressed
20th c
20th c
1905-1950
1919-1929
20th c
20th c
20th c
20th c
20th c
1919-1929
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
9
72
40
30
9
58
1
1
44
31
7
1
4
1
Indeterminate
1
1935-1947
19
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid
Cosmetic/Perfume
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Cup
Bottle
Beer
Bottle
Unid
Bottle
Medicine
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Unid
Unid
Tableware Unid
Bottle
Condiment
Bottle
Extract
Jar
Food
Unid
Unid
Bottle
Unid
Unid
Unid
256
Bottle
Cosmetic/Perfume Square base
None
257
Bottle
Beer
Stippled
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Two-piece
separate base
Machine-made
258
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
None
Machine-made
20th c
10
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
Jar
Tableware
Unid
Bottle
Unid
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Unid
Cup
Unid
Condiment
Unid
Unid
Unid Alcohol
Unid
Unid Alcohol
None
Pressed
None
Paneled
None
None
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
Indterminate
Indterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
20th c
61
1
1
44
1
18
5
5
46
241
Indeterminate
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
117
�268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
Soda/Mineral
Water
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Cup
Unid
Unid
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Unid
Bottle
Cosmetic/Perfume
Bottle
Unid
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Bottle
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Bottle
281
Bottle
282
283
Unid
Bottle
Soda/Mineral
Water
Stubby Quart
Stippled
Machine-made
1926-1960
1
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Ovoid
Rectangular
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
None
None
None
None
None
Pressed
Ribbed
None
Stippled
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
20th c
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
20th c
1919-1929
20th c
1929-1960
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
9
3
2
2
1
1
1
15
10
1
1
Indeterminate Stippled
Machine-made
1929-1960
8
Machine-made
Post 1934
7
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
20th c
2
17
Indeterminate Stippled
Machine-made
20th c
1
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Stubby Quart
Indeterminate
Cylindrical
Globular
Indeterminate
Ribbed
None
None
None
None
None
Pressed
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
20th c
20th c
20th c
1905-1950
20th c
20th c
20th c
Indeterminate
2
2
19
1
1
1
1
1
Indeterminate Stippled
Machine-made
1923-1959
2
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Tapered
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Round
Indeterminate
Chamfercornered
Square
None
None
None
None
None
Pressed
None
Machine-made
Unid
Unid
Unid
Unid
Machine-made
Unid
1905-1950
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
1830-1920
Indeterminate
20th c
Indeterminate
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
None
Key Mold
Post 1882
1
Applied
Color
Label
Indeterminate Frosted
Indeterminate None
Cylindrical
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
Unid
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Unid
Unid
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Unid
Bottle
Beer
Bottle
Beer
Jar
Unid
Tableware Bowl
Bottle
Unid
Soda/Mineral
Bottle
Water
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Bottle
Unid
Bottle
Wine
Bottle
Unid Alcohol
Bottle
Unid
Tableware Dish
Bottle
Unid
301
Bottle
Medicine
302
Bottle
Wine
Tapered
None
Snap Case
Mold
1880-1890
1
303
Bottle
Spirits
Ovoid
Applied
Color
Label
Machine-made
1934-1960
1
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
118
�304
Bottle
Spirits
Ovoid
305
Bottle
Spirits
Ovoid
306
Bottle
Spirits
Ovoid
307
Flask
Ovoid
308
Bottle
Tapered
309
310
Bottle
Bottle
Spirits
Soda/Mineral
Water
Household
Cosmetic/Perfume
Applied
Color
Label
Applied
Color
Label
Applied
Color
Label
None
Cylindrical
Ovoid
311
Bottle
Glue
Cylindrical
312
Bottle
Extract
313
Bottle
314
315
Machine-made
1934-1960
1
Machine-made
Post 1934
1
Machine-made
1934-1960
1
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
Machine-made
1927
1
None
None
Applied
Color
Label
Machine-made
Machine-made
1924-1940
20th c
1
1
Machine-made
Post 1934
1
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
Shoe Polish
Cylindrical
None
Indeterminate
1
Bottle
Medicine
Cylindrical
None
1890s
1
Bottle
Food
Cylindrical
Enamel
Post 1890
1
316
Bottle
Medicine
317
318
319
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Medicine
Medicine
Extract
320
Bottle
Extract
321
Bottle
Extract
322
Bottle
Extract
323
Bottle
Medicine
324
Bottle
Medicine
325
Bottle
Medicine
326
Bottle
Medicine
327
Bottle
Medicine
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Rectangular
Chamfercornered
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Cylindrical
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Cylindrical
119
Two-piece
separate base
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
None
Unid Moldmade
1890s
1
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
1890s
1883-1930s
1929-1960
1
1
1
None
Machine-made
1870-1975
1
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
Machine-made
1872-1907
1
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
Machine-made
1892-1996
1
None
Machine-made
Post 1910
1
�328
329
330
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
331
Bottle
332
333
Bottle
Bottle
334
Bottle
335
Bottle
336
Bottle
337
Bottle
Medicine
Medicine
Medicine
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
ChamferMedicine
cornered
Square
Medicine
Ovoid
Medicine
Cylindrical
ChamferMedicine
cornered
Rectangle
ChamferHousehold
cornered
Rectangle
ChamferMedicine
cornered
Rectangle
Cosmetic/Perfume Indeterminate
120
None
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
1928-1961
20th c
1
1
1
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
None
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
1872-1907
1
1
None
Machine-made
20th c
1
None
Machine-made
Post 1920
1
None
Machine-made
Indeterminate
1
None
Machine-made
Post 1879
1
�APPENDIX B: LIST OF 44 MEDICINAL BOTTLES
Vessel
#
51
63
64
80
83
Vessel
Form
Vial
Bottle
Bottle
Vial
Bottle
Shape
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Aqua
Colorless
Cobalt
Blue
Colorless
Bottle
Bottle
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
188
Colorless
Cobalt
Blue
Rectangular
Rectangular
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Bottle
198
201
Colorless
Colorless
204
Aqua
86
129
166
170
172
Color
Colorless
Colorless
Colorless
Colorless
Colorless
Commercial Mark
Vessel Form: Vial
Indeterminate
Manufacturing
Technique
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Machine-made
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Approx Date
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
Finish/Rim
Type
Locus Whole?
Flared
13
No
Patent Lip
30
No
Indeterminate
30
No
Threaded
13
No
Indeterminate
13
No
19th c
Double Ring
Indeterminate Patent Lip
13
13
No
No
Machine-made
Machine-made
Two-piece
mold
post 1899
20th c
Straight
Flared
23
23
No
No
1880-1910
Flared
23
No
Rectangular
Wyeth & Bro. with dose
cap
Machine-made
post 1899
Straight
23
No
Bottle
Bottle
Rectangular
Rectangular
California Fig Syrup Co.
San Francisco, CA
Owens-Illinios
Machine-made
Machine-made
1880-1890
1929-1960
Patent Lip
Patent Lip
23
23
No
No
Bottle
Ovoid
Lydia E. Pinkham's
Vegetable Compound
Machine-made
1876-1920
Indeterminate
17
No
after 1895
Bead
Post 1934
Patent Lip
Indeterminate Prescription
17
23
17
No
No
No
1880s-1910s
40
No
209
211
216
Aqua
Aqua
Colorless
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Ovoid
Ovoid
Ovoid
218
Colorless
Bottle
Ovoid
Wyeth & Bro. with dose
cap
O. Gordon Rankine- Dr.
Hubbard's Vegetable
Disinfectant
Indeterminate
121
Unid Moldmade
Machine-made
Machine-made
Cup-bottom
Mold
Indeterminate
�Vessel
#
Color
Vessel
Form
Shape
Commercial Mark
Bottle
Ovoid
226
Aqua
Cobalt
Blue
O. Gordon Rankine- Dr.
Hubbard's Vegetable
Disinfectant
Bottle
Ovoid
Milk of Magnesia
228
246
Colorless
Colorless
Bottle
Bottle
301
Amber
Bottle
Ovoid
Rectangular
Chamfercornered
Square
314
Aqua
Bottle
Cylindrical
315
Aqua
Bottle
Cylindrical
Johnson's American
Anodyne Liniment
Mellin's Infant's Food Large
Bottle
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
George E. Fairbanks
Worcester, MassChildren's Comfort
224
316
Aqua
Paine's Celery Compound
317
Aqua
Bottle
Cylindrical
318
323
Colorless
Colorless
Bottle
Bottle
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Johnson's American
Anodyne Liniment
Twitchell Champlin &
Co- Neuralgic Anodyne
John Wyeth & Bro
324
Colorless
Bottle
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
John Wyeth & Bro
325
Colorless
Bottle
326
Colorless
Bottle
Ovoid w/ flat
sides
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Industrial Glass Co.
122
Manufacturing
Technique
Approx Date
Finish/Rim
Type
Locus Whole?
Machine-made
post 1895
Patent Lip
23
No
Machine-made
Post 1906
17
No
Machine-made
Machine-made
Early 20th c
20th c
Patent Lip
Collared
Ring
Flared
3
4
No
No
Key Mold
Post 1882
Wine/Brandy
17
Yes
Machine-made
1880-1930s
Double Ring
23
Yes
Machine-made
post 1880
Patent Lip
23
Yes
Unid Moldmade
1890s
Patent Lip
23
Yes
Machine-made
1880-1930s
Double Ring
23
Yes
Machine-made
Machine-made
1883-1930s
1872-1907
Extract Lip
Threaded
20
Yes
Yes
Machine-made
1872-1907
Prescription
Lip
17
Yes
Machine-made
20th c
Threaded
13
Yes
Machine-made
1892-1996
Sheared
17
Yes
�Vessel
#
327
328
329
330
Color
Aqua
Colorless
Colorless
Colorless
Vessel
Form
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
331
332
333
Amber
Colorless
Colorless
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
334
Colorless
Bottle
Shape
Cylindrical
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Cylindrical
Chamfercornered
Square
Ovoid
Cylindrical
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Bottle
Bottle
Bottle
Chamfercornered
Rectangle
Rectangular
Rectangular
Bottle
Rectangular
336
112
187
205
Colorless
Colorless
Colorless
Cobalt
Blue
Manufacturing
Technique
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
Approx Date
Post 1910
20th c
1928-1961
20th c
Finish/Rim
Type
Threaded
Prescription
Prescription
Threaded
Machine-made
Machine-made
Machine-made
20th c
20th c
1872-1907
Bead
Patent Lip
Patent Lip
23
23
23
Yes
Yes
Yes
Machine-made
20th c
Prescription
23
Yes
Indeterminate
Machine-made
Unid
Machine-made
Indeterminate Patent Lip
Indeterminate Indeterminate
20th c
Patent Lip
23
31
22
Yes
No
No
Indeterminate
Unid
Indeterminate Indeterminate
23
No
Commercial Mark
Buck Glass Company
John Wyeth & Bro
123
Locus Whole?
Yes
23
Yes
Yes
13
Yes
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Documents, Papers, & Articles
Digital File
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
1899 Local Apothecary W.W. Roberts Farmington, New Hampshire Information
Description
An account of the resource
Information on the 1899 apothecary W.W. Roberts in Farmington, New Hampshire. Information is located on pages 11 and 12. <br /><br />The information reads: <span class="markedContent" id="page74R_mcid6"><br /><br /></span><em>Dr. King’s, a nationally distributed brand based in Indiana, marketed their products by printing special</em><br /><em>tabloid newspapers for local distribution during the holidays. Published in 1899 for local apothecary</em><br /><em>W.W. Roberts in Farmington, New Hampshire, one issue of the Farmington Holiday Druggist (“devoted</em><br /><em>to health, business, and science”) featured Christmas stories and advice interspersed with ads for Dr.</em><br /><em>King’s projects (Plates 3). These included Dr. King’ New Discovery for Consumption, touted as “The</em><br /><em>only sure cure for Consumption in the World” as well as Dr. King’s New Life Pills, “the great liver and</em><br /><em>stomach remedy” (Plate 4).<br /><br /></em>In addditon this document conains general infrmation about <br /><br />FHS-Kyle Leach
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Prepared by
Ellen Marlatt, MA, RPA,
Jessica Cofelice, MA, RPA
and
Kathleen Wheeler, PhD, RPA,
www.iac-llc.net
IAC #1303
FINAL REPORT
March 26, 2018
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Late 1800's
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2018
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
STRAFFORD SQUARE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
ROCHESTER X-A000 (320) NHDOT 14350
ALTERNATIVE MITIGATION REPORT
THE WENTWORTH HOMESTEAD (27-ST-113)
ROCHESTER (STRAFFORD COUNTY), NEW HAMPSHIRE
apothecary
medical
medicine
pharmacy
Roberts
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/d0292d97f9dd4458657e4cc5d0d2c5e8.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=IVZVm87HE5XB1eB0MvCgeqJqJh78xRtOFF5j6EgIxI89Sz%7EA5Z5JzCeVt2RB8ylIa2PXwj9dGDyoB2ehnR0LVLKW1sUmveRe%7EZ6klG9AUXodzLVd82Z%7EIQ2ToRMDeOsbINBMzHsiSKHlzTq%7Ei-%7Ec91pF3NWjIOjOAtKzAGrpOD6-bYSHNNnIPUJArvbgkDKeT62XIWRm-T8hr2br8erUZ%7EgGY6xIlxz%7EV2-4ULaaa9fvpB4JRuOy4maE9pJ%7EeJGdh7gFAoplcrUSGDkSns%7EO6Yq3I7OLHBHL5pYMu9WvRfUkQPs9AsJU0tmoSuFdgYmNy-qr8FidO1ZLvGV481NuTQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
546adb8140e1e905f3bf716d17a1a5fa
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/3f107c6deafd37651ea34245bd31c605.png?Expires=1712793600&Signature=RUh1ZZwO4%7ERmspyXgiknxnMZ0Sv6GCRV58xeNITFHA%7EGDDXrxrsM8PytHzi6zhgqQfscb7PlLLVyTP3XkJRI3kavf7V%7Ek%7EjrcVDFGcfR77BTXudycpTBZYIhkDNoD7UNi61ffXoYX%7E4isvtkTjtWEJH891mCM29%7E6OtiPjE4J9nuVbT3mfx1NUvOt6o99o0V4Lta4OfZ5GeeMIJY-GHHBU6QeiqPP9U3kxZq35nA4Lgnzl0wB%7EXvRozs%7ET33LTsMh3Y5xb61u1u0QHiJUVfhe4qs5PytCSsUOI-XOrB4MU-WcYK7%7E%7E2DSHv63HE2Mvq4XuyxWws0NrtSe2Ymn6ef6Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
01d9416941c58aabe88e9378438c740e
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/52a0371c4a8bd54a118f3d5afb829536.png?Expires=1712793600&Signature=NHKFwjARVxVrJClpRiLJWqlAlzzrarsS-W1d1Vqf6StGLX6yvk%7EcUJJ%7EyUy0iuSzULwN1-Y9vVNM1PQerz9a87jKBTzU8s1SrgKPgBzHurG66WHz0U0WM5LFugFGTYuDl1U7ILEPby0YPH2aosADE7PBC2U49cuteIGOxMGsQXlAH8bynoabZ3rG0zNAFQu%7E2rtUwZMxjsxgkYzIITi96Y-JFKgNnlX0jrCI8KoQMF9mKDkzA2B3%7Ec-4dTHpk7R4o1isTru7VLxF27nmvfDJKmWeoj2Fj4oJ5KK5PkgyhtYrTNmynBdKGBeJ-ICkNO%7ES9Q6dhqSqeftuh3Zv4ALWmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
bc8b9ff23266d4f8d21ccbc43963a68b
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/cf7b6dbfe5022b41f3b99435362f03e1.png?Expires=1712793600&Signature=wFf4j9Yr293zgAaZO8a3rK9IqOE-MlQHDsBz5932V7AMT9OGJ5x%7EMjnwfmVDzwnpwzJmWRi2-0zRZJ-AKeHha3UAgkkSFlQuCcIls5Nww9-BvQ99ZfYEEMbt1ZiFX3Q%7Er5trDQSQrIjvxWM8YpTT4FJPZY4Ryur6sbij8OJJAgJ7qSM7ZhiNfaguyG0Ob9Xbl0PwB1NyUD8fv5ZVm-HQlhOOTm90wE2HU7bxBTfkUnHiUZQcVi96CFx%7EjbzLQnsAQEIQmnqUIAE6BEI40iXYZsjPPjzuBufzlllp2k6-9atFYGlU-vFts6DBEzjZUEqqd3ML5bGZtcDDaIdZz2I8gQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
11063d749be38ea28544df3b0416ba19
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Glass Tableware, Glass Memorabilia, Glass Objects, & Glass decor
Description
An account of the resource
This collection focuses on items made from glass: glass tableware, glass memorabilia, glass objects, glass decor that are mostly made or embellished with large amounts of glass. Earthenware, stoneware, & porcelain are in a separate collection of their own.
Object
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Small Collection Main Street 1880-1890's Glass Bottles
Description
An account of the resource
A small collection, from Main Street Farmington, of 1880-1890's glass bottles. Found discarded under soil. One bottle is made for a local pharmacy in Farmington .
A clear medicine bottle that is a blown in mold and dates to 1880's to 1890's: parkers. Parker's Pharmacy, which was oat7 Main street in Farmington. Bold embossing, and base embossed with DF & CO.
Size: 4.5" x by 1.25" with a hand tooled lip, a little neck swirl,
Condition: Good. Lip edge nick and some inside haze.
A clear medicine bottle that appears to be a blown in mold bold with embossing S.F. Sanderson Apothecary & Stationer from Rochester, NH.
Size: 3.5" x 1.25
Condition: Good. One fifth of lip edge gone and some inside haze.
Tall 1890's clear inknk bottle with green glow, that appears to be blown in mold. Bold embossing "Perine Guyot & Cie."
Size: 2.75" x 1.25"
Condition: Very good condition. Small bottom edge nick and some inside haze.
FHS- Kyle Leach
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Circa 1880-1890
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
Circa 1880-1890
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Donated by Brandon Reid
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Various
Parker's Pharmacy
S.F. Sanderson Apothecary & Stationer
Perine Guyot & Cie
apothecary
bottle
glass
main street
medecine
medical
Parker
pharmacy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/194ac7873702954f9cff93284bc1145a.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=NONYrWi9mizBOiI1aHE-ST15b8AXS%7E8NR7NStZyfIweRnSto%7EhwqLBhr76mkncEjIErw-6x1JxH70j6Ez%7E%7EXeF6oQJ0IEQVvIC-4Rf%7Elgizt-mokR-DWsjopId9qm%7EQ3nUu4anzjRVKV9A0wUCsZy-GyIkCowywGbsf9-6ZEklTMvyjy%7Eg6dt7mOXToUlMnutv2bwlAUpI5Jz%7EfUiFw9VOx6YDfAl3lLl0BmsIQS7iOkMl9ASVvRfa1bAap3QdPNJXdFAOIaoW%7EwvLz20ThxXR1QjisdaQy0FARV1qXk7vCYF2BIE93d3gYx1Z7ZhQlv2zkZGJJtTjFieB5B0MR-sA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f61953e91613ba5e9c1ad5b9cb3c9203
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/c5320c4b479256cf6e5444658182673c.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=CKAXp3JWIKsPndx8kZ2DyUkVy8kZ8EIk2toIr2OH9CmwmNiWq8OnZoXq%7EH8mJ%7EL0qR7U0L6UcUdOKeapKqNzRjyR4bjhiyAf9zEvvX4gSB1Rbqj-dJqnblQXvZU-5nbGjPIjovdcmwAoQ1XFmAuLus1Pb%7Ei9BSBA3j6gk8Nk8K1jcc-1DLogbbkBmsmU7VhF-fwSTYoRHC2RIZ2QOBctvG4d9to7fMZkNtWq522lk0YOBq6cpFKkldubgOA8%7EB4ZhdxsKYfpQu-xu1uG6tIp4GJ8UDOITZpy51Vr0mGesgK1JLJBR1so3oL6pi1oWPsmqMJ1QwqinG-gA6TAwB8s3A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
3e9abdf764f0511aa7d88758fdf29ded
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/12165/archive/files/b96c534584da4c90afc74576b93448dd.jpg?Expires=1712793600&Signature=RUd4THYS0iOrAopqbyi3X9oztK6Ie6Bw%7E%7EUfxl4KDI1rPkQg0F5TuR5wWjjj-5u0UENe5UFWsnaS4akj3gCQSm8swmoHC9%7EJUyu3OqwuImICsdTC-K-6Bpwx6E5Wtih0wFNpSP3jaVSMlheVuzYLWIt24QIw18rmc1RonnR6zA30nmoW0NHSTdR6G9OIAW2QprzDXWFN9cvgWcslhnnLtGHO2Dem8SDmqJ0EOZM9sZoHXQqerMmnYaEXErkC3aL1I9prGwFcTxbhXFoIsoDFZZmT3KMVdoVUTq7AqHLmGvCJ7sa-ZjFTZeRVU5pHmRNYjkE8RELYrJpNjX9gDiJn0A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a0486a8a17899da3d5458de1a3796fd4
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Photography & Streographs
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Photos Garnet House, Inc Residential Care Facility Puddledock Press Issue June 1986
Description
An account of the resource
From the Puddledock Press article with the photos in June issue 1986:<br /><br />"It's time personal care became personal again-" So states Garnet House Inc.'s President, Donald MacVane- Located at 115 Central Street, Garnet House has been standing behind these words for four years. <br /><br />Garnet House Inc. is a residential care facility offering four programs to meet the needs of the elderly: <br /><br />RESPITE CARE - 2^ hour supervised care for individuals enroute home, post-op, or recuperating from an illness and anticipating surgery. <br /><br />PERMANENT RESIDENCY - Independent living for those clients who re-quire supervised care on a permanent basis- <br /><br />TEMPORARY RESIDENCY - Accommodations for the elderly during a pe-riod awaiting permanent arrangements or to enable those who nor¬mally supervise their affairs to vacation or rest. <br /><br />PRE-EXAMINATION CARE - Care for those requiring assistance prior to hospital out-patient tests or between treatment as an in-pa¬tient at a hospital for an illness - <br /><br />Currently expanding, Garnet House Inc- will have five extra bed¬rooms on the first floor. The expansion is interior only, there will be no major changes to the home-neighborhood environment. Garnet House is licensed and certified, and their full-time staff membership boasts two EMT'S. The staff is well trained to meet the individual's needs and requirements.<br /><br />These photos are stored together. They are from different periods of time. Last pulled together for possible use in May 1986.<br /><br />RKL-FHS
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Charlie Doke
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986
1986
buildings
business
care
elders
medical
people