History Podcasts

R-26 SS-103 - History

R-26 SS-103 - History


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

R-26 SS-103

R-26

(Submarine No. 103: dp. 495 (surf.), 576 (subm.); 1. 175'; b. 16'8"; dr. 13'11" (mean); s. 14 k. (surf.), 11 k. (subm.); cpl.29;a. 13",421"tt.;cl. R-21)

R-2ff (Submarine No. 103) was laid down 26 ADril 1917 by the Lake Torpedo Boat Co., Bridgeport, Conn., launched 18 June 1919, sponsored by Mrs. J. Walter Barnett, and commissioned 23 October 1919, Lt. Joseph C. Arnold in command. Homeported ut Coco Solo, C.Z., R-2ff departed New London 26 November 1919 and arrived in the Canal Zone 11 January 1920. Designated SS-103 in July, she spent her entire career operating out of Coco Solo. Interrupting her seryiee in those waters only for overhauls at Balboa and on the east coast, she returned to the United States for inactivation in January 1925. Arriving at Philadelphia 25 January, she was decommissioned 12 June and berthed at League Island until struck from the Navv list in May 1930. Her hull was sold for serapping in July of that year.


BMW R26


The BMW R26 was a single cylinder, four-stroke Classic motorcycle produced by BMW between 1956 and 1960. It could reach a top speed of 80 mph (128 km/h). Claimed horsepower was 14.62 HP (10.9 KW) @ 6400 RPM.

Built to the same exemplary standards as the Bavarian company's famous flat-twins, the single-cylinder BMW first appeared in pre-war days. Indeed, BMW's first new post-war model was a single-cylinder design - the 250cc BMW R24 - which arrived in 1948. In 1956 BMW introduced a completely revamped thumper replacing the BMW R25, the R26 (engine numbers 340 001 – 370 236), with improvements paralleling those introduced at the same time in the boxer twins. The R26 came with an enclosed drive shaft, rear swingarm, and front Earles forks. A new headlight nacelle came with a sliding black plastic over the ignition key, and the “bell-bottom” front fender was dropped along with the mechanics' hand shifter. The engine of the R26 was bolted directly to the frame, and produced 15 hp (11 kW). These machines like other single cylinder BMW's were famous for their reliability, economy, and quiet operation, a very desirable feature when used for law enforcement in metropolitan areas.


Chapter 4

4.7 The amount of time that passes between filing of a charge and trial may be expected to have a disproportionately negative effect, specifically in cases of sexual violence. This is due to the effect of delay on the complainant themselves on their domestic and social circumstances and on the evidence.

Effect of delay on the complainant

4.9 Lengthy periods of time between the alleged incident and the trial itself is also problematic for young complainants because of their age and the proportion of their lives they may spend with criminal proceedings pending. For example, a gap of two years between the incident and trial for a child of six years old amounts to one quarter of that child’s lifetime.

4.12 Reducing the time taken to dispose of all criminal cases is a worthy and ongoing goal. But we do not think that this is a complete answer to the need to deal with cases of sexual violence in a timely manner.

Effect of delay on the complainant’s domestic and social circumstances Top

4.14 As such, delay between the incident itself and the trial affects not only the complainant but also their relationship and contact with the perpetrator, any children they may have, family/w hānau members who know both the victim and the perpetrator and their respective relationships with friends and acquaintances if they move in a common social circle (for instance if the complainant and perpetrator are both at high school or university and share classes or are in the same university accommodation). Reducing delays in sexual violence cases will not only benefit complainants but also defendants and their respective domestic and social circumstances.

Effect of delay on the evidence Top

4.15 The third detriment of delay in sexual violence cases is its effect on the evidence itself. Unsurprisingly, long delays are likely to impact on a complainant&rsquos ability to accurately and comprehensively recall facts. This is the case for all witnesses who are required to recall facts some time after the incident, but for a complainant witness in a sexual violence case, the effect of a failure to do so when questioned at trial may be significant. The complainant is often the sole witness to the alleged offending and their testimony is heavily relied upon. The closer in time to the incident itself that a complainant is able to recount the facts of that incident, the more detailed and more accurate their recall of the facts is likely to be, and therefore the higher the quality of their evidence &ndash which, in sexual violence cases, is likely to be particularly important.

Status quo and options for reducing delay Top

4.17 A key difference is the sheer volume of cases involving sexual violence and the fact that they are criminal matters, in which adjournments and delays may be more common because of criminal-specific pre-trial matters such as disclosure and entry of pleas. Nonetheless, we have considered whether more can be done in this area to reduce the length of time between the filing of charges and the date of trial.

4.18 We have contemplated what might happen in the future if barriers to reporting are addressed and greater numbers of incidents of sexual violence are reported. If that occurs, one can expect to see more cases entering the criminal justice system, which will have a consequential impact on case disposal times. Thought must be given to how sexual violence cases are to be dealt with in a timely manner, and what resources are required to do so both now and in the future, to avoid the risk that complainants will be encouraged to enter the criminal justice system only to wait an unreasonable amount of time for the proceedings to finally be disposed of.

A special list for sex offence cases

4.21 Fast-tracking through the use of a special list may put too much of a burden on the judiciary, and it may not provide a sufficient incentive for participants in the court system to ensure that sexual violence cases are heard in a timely fashion.

Statutory provisions with time limits

4.23 A second possibility is for statutory provisions to set down firm time limits for hearing a case within a certain time period, and for a right of complaint to be extended to victims under the Victims’ Rights Act 2002 (VRA 2002) where a sexual violence case had not been dealt with in as speedy a manner as reasonably possible in the circumstances.

4.27 We have considered whether a statutory requirement would be of benefit in New Zealand and would actually lead to a decrease in disposal times for sex offence cases. On the one hand, simply imposing a statutory requirement will not increase the courts&rsquo capacity to prioritise sexual violence cases, especially when that must be balanced against the need to give priority to other cases, such as ones involving children. Also, if such a limit were introduced, there would need to be sufficient &ldquoslack&rdquo to be able to divert judges to those cases when they came up, in order to ensure statutory time limits were met. Additional judicial resources may be required.

4.28 On the other hand, a legislative time limit puts demonstrable importance on the desirability of prioritising disposal of sexual violence cases. In this manner it provides a clear signal to the courts and the public that, once proceedings are commenced, efforts will be made to bring those to trial as speedily as possible.

What would be the effect of a failure to comply with a statutory time limit?

4.31 In this way, a legislative time limit would clearly signal the need for timely disposal of sexual violence cases and would also facilitate the gathering of examples of cases where those time limits were not met. We recommend that the legislation require that all sex offence cases be set down for hearing within a specified time of the filing of a charge. This should be properly qualified so that exceptions can be made for appropriate cases where more time is required.

  • R1 Legislation should require that, save in exceptional circumstances, all cases involving sexual violence should be set down for hearing within a specified time of the filing of the charge.
  • R2 The Victims’ Rights Act 2002 should include a right for complainants in a case involving sexual violence to have the case disposed of in as speedy a manner as possible, with responsibility for giving effect to the right to lie with the Ministry of Justice.

Pre-recording the evidence of a complainant in sexual violence cases Top

4.33 We have noted that the testimony of a sexual violence complainant is usually heavily relied upon at trial. The private nature of sexual violence creates an imperative for a complainant to retain the facts of the incident in as much detail as possible, so that they can be recalled at trial. As noted earlier, while this is beneficial for trial, it can be detrimental to the long-term recovery of the complainant.

4.34 Minimising the time between the filing of charges and the trial in the ways suggested above will help address this issue. However, we have also considered the possibility of recording the whole of a complainant’s evidence, including cross-examination, at a point in time that is close to the alleged incident and then to replay that evidence at the time of the trial, with the ability to recall the complainant for further questioning at trial if necessary. This would eliminate the detrimental effect of delay on complainants and on the evidence. It would also minimise the stress of giving evidence at trial, because complainants whose evidence is pre-recorded will only have to give evidence in person at trial if they are recalled to do so.

4.35 Pre-recording evidence is not the only way to minimise the stress of giving evidence in court. It is also possible to give one’s evidence while in the courtroom but unable to see the defendant or other specified person (which would normally be done by the use of a physical screen) or from an appropriate place outside the courtroom (which would normally be done by setting the witness up in another room and asking them questions remotely via CCTV or video link). In each case, directions are required to be made by a judge under the Evidence Act 2006.

The options to pre-record the complainant’s evidence in chief under the Evidence Act 2006

4.37 If an order is made for evidence in chief to be given by video record, this would be done by playing a video of the Police interview with the complainant (which is sometimes referred to as the “evidential video interview” or the “EVI”). The video is made at the time the complaint is made to Police. The complainant is asked a series of questions by a member of the Police who is trained in behavioural interviewing.

Pre-recorded evidence in chief: current practice

4.40 As far as we are aware, however, it is usual practice for the EVI to be recorded by Police for investigative purposes, and one might therefore always expect such a video to be available and able to be played at trial if necessary.

(4) In giving directions under subsection (1), the Judge must have regard to&mdash

(i) the fairness of the proceeding and

(ii) in a criminal proceeding, that there is a fair trial and

(b) the views of the witness and&mdash

(i) the need to minimise the stress on the witness and

(ii) in a criminal proceeding, the need to promote the recovery of a complainant from the alleged offence and

(c) any other factor that is relevant to the just determination of the proceeding.

4.45 It may also be that in some areas of the country, defence counsel more rigorously oppose the use of the EVI as evidence in chief than in other areas.

Options to introduce more consistent use of the EVI as evidence in chief

4.46 There is a strong argument in favour of more consistently using the EVI as the evidence in chief of a complainant in sexual violence cases. This is already the practice for witnesses under 16 years, with good reason, since younger witnesses are more likely to be particularly affected by delays and the potentially intimidating experience of giving their evidence in person at trial. Given that an EVI is made for investigatory Police purposes, and the legislation already provides for its use at trial, it seems logical that it be used wherever possible to minimise the stress on witnesses and to help ensure that good-quality evidence is put before the court.

4.47 One prosecutor noted in correspondence with us that they:

… cannot see any real prejudice to a defendant if a complainant’s EVI is replayed in every trial where one has been recorded. Any inadmissible material can be edited in advance. The EVI [is] closer in time and taken with trained interviewers. I back myself as an asker of questions, but I am not a highly trained interviewer, court is months if not years after the fact, and there is no real basis for creating the mystery of a “previous statement” when the jury could have just watched that for themselves.

A requirement on prosecutors to apply for directions in sexual violence cases

4.48 One way of introducing more consistent use of the EVI as evidence in chief in sexual violence cases might be to require prosecutors, in those cases, to apply to the court for mode of evidence directions. As noted, they are already required to do so in cases involving child witnesses.

An entitlement to use of the EVI as evidence in chief

4.50 Another option is to include an entitlement in legislation so that, wherever a complainant must give evidence in chief in a sexual violence case, that evidence will be given either by playing the pre-recorded EVI at trial or, if the complainant prefers, in the ordinary way or in one of the other alternative ways set out in section 103 of the Evidence Act 2006. Any entitlement needs to encompass all of the possible alternative ways of giving evidence, because not all complainants will want to give their evidence in chief via EVI and should not be required to do so. Some will want to give it in person but, for instance, behind a screen. They should be entitled to do so.

4.52 These clauses reflect a policy decision that child witnesses should be entitled to give their evidence in an alternative way. We are satisfied that there is a solid policy basis for extending this entitlement to complainant witnesses in sexual violence cases, so that they may give their evidence in chief in an alternative means, including by playing the EVI at trial if that is desired. We discuss what we think the position should be for evidence given in cross-examination below.

Conclusion and recommendations on use of the EVI as evidence in chief and other alternative ways of giving evidence

4.55 Prosecutors will need to consult with complainants on modes of evidence if these recommendations are to be given proper effect. Though a complainant may be entitled to give evidence in one of many different ways, such an entitlement is worth little if the complainant does not know that it exists. We therefore recommend that the Evidence Act 2006 should be amended to also include a requirement for prosecutors to consult with complainant witnesses in sexual violence cases on the mode of delivery of evidence in chief.

  • R3 The Evidence Act 2006 should provide that an adult complainant in a sexual violence case is entitled to give their evidence in chief in one or more of the alternative ways set out in section 105 or in the ordinary way set out in section 83.
  • R4 The legislation should include a requirement that prosecutors consult with complainants on the mode in which they prefer to give evidence.

The current options for the mode of giving evidence in cross-examination

4.56 The alternative modes of giving evidence provided for in section 105 of the Evidence Act 2006 apply equally to evidence in chief and to evidence given in cross-examination. Thus, a witness may be cross-examined while shielded from view of the defendant or some other person, or may be asked questions while seated in another room via CCTV or video link.

Pre-recorded cross-examination evidence: current practice

4.59 However, a number of cases in Auckland between 2010 and 2011 successfully used pre-recording for the cross-examination evidence of children.

The experience in Auckland, 2010-2011

I don’t see that there is any drama in connection with the innovation. It’s just another step to ensure that best evidence is put before the court. And there is provision to permit both sides to recall the witness if necessary.

Previous Law Commission work: 1996 and 2013

The position in 2015

We do not accept that pre-trial cross-examination would necessarily infringe such rights. On the other hand, we do accept that fair trial rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights should influence when the jurisdiction to order pre-trial cross-examination is exercised.

The potential benefits and drawbacks of pre-recorded cross-examination

4.69 Pre-recorded cross-examination has a number of potential benefits. One is that it can lighten the burden of holding on to the facts of the incident for later presentation at trial. If the trial occurs some time after filing of the charge, pre-recording would shield the evidence from deterioration by delay, and may also shield the complainant witness against some of the anxiety of waiting for the trial.

4.70 It has also been suggested that pre-recorded cross-examination may reduce the risk of a mistrial by allowing judges to more robustly control questioning in the knowledge that interventions could be edited out. It may also make it easier to give witnesses breaks during the cross-examination process.

4.71 The Court of Appeal in M v R noted its concerns that pre-recording should not take place before full disclosure has been made otherwise, the defence loses the opportunity to question a witness on relevant aspects of the prosecution’s case which are only subsequently disclosed to the defence. This, however, is a practical problem which we think can be addressed in the design and operation of the processes for pre-recording.

Stakeholders’ views

Some factual and reality testing before the courtroom is beneficial. The prosecution may have an opportunity to consider the video-evidence in the light of reality testing and cross-examination. It is sometimes the case that issues raised at trial come as a surprise to the prosecution. These issues can often be answered if time is available. But time is often not. So some trials run aground in a way that could be considered quite unfair but understandable on the current burden of proof method. Early video interview, and cross-examination after charge, may be very beneficial on different levels.

4.75 Some submitters to our Issues Paper opposed the pre-recording of cross-examination on the basis that new matters may come to light or additional disclosure may occur after the pre-recorded hearing has taken place. This might then require the witness to be recalled or might disadvantage the defendant’s case.

Our conclusion and recommendations for reform

4.77 While it will never suit all cases, pre-recording of cross-examination could be of benefit to many complainant witnesses in cases involving sexual violence, as a means of shielding complainants from delay-related harm and with the concomitant benefit of shielding the evidence itself against deterioration by the passage of time.

4.78 Recall of witnesses will sometimes be necessary but, with refined processes, the need to recall should be able to be managed and minimised as much as possible. Any increase in costs may be offset by consequential cost savings in other areas, for instance there might be reduced trial time in some cases because the evidence is captured in advance.

4.79 As framed our proposal should, we suggest, enable countervailing considerations relating to the fair trial rights of defendants to be taken into account. We therefore recommend that the Evidence Act 2006 include a provision to the effect that the starting point for all complainant witnesses in sexual violence cases is that they may pre-record their cross-examination evidence. This would be subject to an order made by a judge that there are good countervailing reasons why cross-examination is required to occur on the day of trial itself. Countervailing reasons should include those that pertain to the fair trial rights of defendants so for instance where the judge is not satisfied that criminal disclosure requirements have been met. They could also include where pre-recording of cross-examination would be impractical or excessively expensive.

4.80 To give operational effect to this recommendation, we suggest that the Ministry of Justice should be responsible for issuing up-to-date memoranda outlining operational processes to be followed where applications to undertake pre-recorded cross-examination are made and granted.

  • R5 The Evidence Act 2006 should include a provision to the effect that complainant witnesses in sexual violence cases may pre-record their cross-examination evidence in a hearing prior to trial, unless a judge makes an order to the contrary.
  • R6 Relevant reasons for making a judicial order should include those that pertain to the fair trial rights of defendants and circumstances where it would be impractical or excessively costly to undertake cross-examination in a pre-recorded hearing before trial.
  • R7 The Ministry of Justice should be responsible for issuing up-to-date memoranda outlining operational processes to be followed where cross-examination is to be done in a pre-recorded hearing before trial.

Early disclosure of defence Top

4.81 An underpinning principle of criminal trial procedure is that a defendant is not required to show their hand (disclose what or how they propose to argue in defence) before trial. This applies equally to sexual violence cases as to all criminal cases. The prosecution, by comparison, must disclose all relevant information to the defence unless there is good reason to withhold it, and is under a number of requirements to disclose certain information about its case.

4.82 The Criminal Disclosure Act 2008 does impose some limited disclosure obligations on the defence relating to evidence relied on where the defence intends to run an alibi defence and when the defendant proposes to call an expert witness. Otherwise, there are no legislative requirements on the defence to identify those aspects of the prosecution case that it intends to challenge or the evidence it intends to lead.

Context to the issue

The issue as it applies in this review

4.85 We considered in the course of this present review whether to reconsider the disclosure obligations on defendants in cases involving sexual violence specifically. The suggestion was made that requiring the defendant to disclose certain information about the defence before the trial might reduce the time to get to trial. Time would not then need to be spent on, for example, setting out a range of facts or matters which may not be contested at trial.

4.86 It was also suggested that introducing disclosure obligations on defendants might have the additional benefit of helping to reduce potential anxiety felt by complainants. This would be because if the defence case was properly advanced then the complainants may be in a better position to give a measured reply to the questions asked in cross-examination.

Consultation and conclusion

4.87 Prosecutors with experience in sexual violence cases were somewhat divided as to whether such a proposal could achieve its aims. Some pointed out that the defence in a sexual violence case usually turns on consent. Requiring the defence to disclose that fact in advance would not, it was suggested, add much of value to pre-trial procedures.

4.88 For similar reasons, nor would it necessarily greatly assist a complainant to know that the defence to be argued is the defence of consent. Usually that will already be clear from the facts of the alleged offence. Questions were also raised as to who would inform the complainant of this, and how it would be explained to them what this actually means for their experience of trial, and whether that would in fact go any way towards improving their experience of trial itself.

4.89 Ultimately, our consultation on this point did not suggest that the proposed disclosure requirements would effectively address the issues of delay or of complainant anxiety about cross-examination. We therefore make no recommendation for specific defence disclosure obligations in cases involving sexual violence. However, we suggest that it would be worthwhile examining how much information is being voluntarily disclosed already in case management discussions under the CPA 2011 specifically in sexual violence cases. There might be a case to formalise some of those disclosures in a way that might expedite pre-trial procedures and help limit the parties to the relevant issues at trial. That might also put the judge in a position to better identify and control irrelevant questions asked in cross-examination, which we discuss below.


ABOUT US

allnurses is a Nursing Career & Support site. Our mission is to Empower, Unite, and Advance every nurse, student, and educator. Our members represent more than 60 professional nursing specialties. Since 1997, allnurses is trusted by nurses around the globe.

allnurses.com, INC, 7900 International Drive #300, Bloomington MN 55425
1-612-816-8773

Join Our Community. Membership is FREE.

allnurses® Copyright © 1997-2021, allnurses.com INC.

By using the site you agree to our Privacy, Cookies, and Terms of Service Policies.


Contents

MS-Mode-S 50/1.3 lens [ edit | edit source ]

MS Optical has (2006) released the first of what is announced as a series of lenses for rangefinder cameras. The MS-Mode-S is a nominally 50mm (in fact 52mm) f/1.3 lens. It has 12 aperture blades, five elements in four groups and is described both by its manufacturer and by others as being of Sonnar type. ΐ]

Picture by Jon Manjiro (Image rights)

Both a Leica thread mount and a Nikon S mount are made for the lens. Caps and hood aside, it comes in either two or three pieces: (i) the main part of the lens barrel (including all the glass), and (ii) a mount and focusing ring for Leica LTM and/or a mount for Nikon S. Somebody who uses both kinds of camera can easily change the mount. When attached to its Leica mount its pinched mid-section makes it appear to be a collapsible lens in extended state, but in fact it is rigid. For users of M mount cameras, an M39-to-M mount adapter is needed. Rangefinder coupling is retained.

Pictures by Jon Manjiro (Image rights)

12 diaphragm blades provide a near-circular shape minimum aperture is f/16. The aperture ring lacks detents for stops. It is therefore stepless and smooth, and is old-fashioned in not having a uniform angle of rotation between stops thus the angle of rotation between f/1.7 and f2 is similar to that between f/2.8 and f/4. Somebody unaccustomed to the lens may confuse the focusing control near the front of the lens with the nearby (clickless) aperture control of course somebody using a Nikon (or Bessa R2S) can instead use the focusing wheel on the camera body, and when fitted with the Leica mount the back of the lens has an additional focusing tab (narrow and uncomfortable at first) for the forefinger of the left hand. Minimum focusing distance is one metre.

Pictures by Jon Manjiro (Image rights)

The lens is 35.7mm long and 51.2mm in diameter, and weighs 136g with Leica mount attached: unusually small and light for such a fast lens. The lens is finished in black and supplied with a large, vented hood. The lens has a 49mm filter thread the hood takes 62mm caps.

Picture by Jon Manjiro (Image rights)

Release of the lens was expected in February 2006 but was delayed until autumn. Two hundred numbered examples were advertised: 100 with both mounts, 50 with (detachable) Leica mount only, 50 with (detachable) Nikon mount only. (Unconfirmed rumors say that only 183-184 were made.) The price is 䂿,000 with Nikon mount, 䃎,000 with Leica mount, and 𨓬,000 with both.

MS-Mode-AH Apoqualia 50/3.5 lens [ edit | edit source ]

In January 2009 MS Optical announced the release in February of the MS-Mode-AH Apoqualia 3.5/50, a compact and light lens of high contrast and resolving power, with the Leica L mount. It is described as of "Heliar type", having five elements in three groups in weighing 90g (115g as a "set", presumably including its hood), and with 30.5mm filter thread. Three hundred would be sold, with a first lot of 170 price would be ¥59,850 including tax. Α]

Super Triplet Perar 35/3.5 lens [ edit | edit source ]

The Super Triplet Perar 3.5/35 is an ultra compact collapsible lens released in 2010. Β] It is based on a triplet formula, and only weighs 75g. Β] Unique about the lens is the high grade Tantalum glass used for the lens, which it's creator claims is superior to Trium and Lanthanum glass in terms of refractive qualities. The lens is only available in Leica M mount, at least outside Japan. Β] Internally, the lens contains a Leica screw mount attached to an adaptor, but removing the adaptor might cause focusing accuracy problems, and can only be done at the factory, calibrating the lens on the intended camera body. Β] The production will be limited to 200 lenses. Β]


Block Optic Green Cone Sugar Bowl

There are three styles of Block Optic sugar bowls, all with similar values. One is a stout mug-like shape, one a footed bowl, and one a taller footed cone. They can be found in green, yellow, white, pink, and clear glass, sometimes with the matching cream pitcher.

This green glass piece is the cone shape. It was made by Hocking Glass Company from around 1929 to 1933. In 2006, eBay sellers were valuing them around $15, and that dropped to $5 or less by 2008. More recently, the sugar bowl alone has been selling for $10 to $20 and in the $30 range with the creamer.


R-26 SS-103 - History

In line with COVID-19 measures for Phase 2 – Heightened Alert,
the Alphonsus Liguori Gift Shop and Reception Office
will be closed between 17 May and 20 June.
For Gift Shop purchases, please visit the online shop at shop.novenachurch.com

NOVENA YOUTH RALLY 2021

After a 2 year hiatus, the annual Novena Youth Rally 2021 is back!
Join us online at 7:30pm (GMT+8) on Friday 18 June 2021!
With the theme of Level Up, power up our faith through an exciting line up in music, arts and knowledge.
An evening of fun and spirit-filled activities await, with crafting your own rosary, learning to caricature, panel discussions, and praise and worship through a Battle of the Bands!

Check out www.novenayouthrally.com for more details,
and follow us @novenayouthrally on Instagram for more updates!

CALLING ALL MIGRANTS

PRAY THE ROSARY ONLINE

We would like to invite those who can speak Mandarin to join us in praying the rosary online.
We have recorded a beautiful Mandarin version of the rosary prayer,
and they are now available online
at major music platforms like Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music and Google Podcast.

NOVENA DEVOTION (English)

Every Saturday, join us online as we pray together,
in honour of Our Mother of Perpetual Help.
Registration and Booking for attending (in-person) Novena Devotion
in Novena Church is available at mycatholic.sg

永援圣母敬礼(中文)

For Novena Devotion (Mandarin), join us every Saturday
at 10:45am online as we pray together,
in honour of Our Mother of Perpetual Help.


Glass Manufacturers’ Marks seen on bottles, fruit jars, tableware and other types of glassware

Note: for introductory and explanatory comments and discussion concerning this alphabetical mark listings section of the website, please click on the “A-B” link below which points to “page one”. Thank you!

  • S (Capital “S”, in graceful cursive script, looks similar to a treble clef symbol as used in written music)………….. seen on the base of tableware: L. E. Smith Glass Company, Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania (1907-2005). This mark was introduced in the 1960s and evidently was used on only a small percentage of their output. The L.E. Smith factory was closed in June, 2004, although Scottish-born Pittsburgh businessman William Kelman purchased the property in 2005 and hoped to revitalize the works, but this evidently did not work out in the long run. Here is an interesting article about their glass lidded turkey dishes which had been made by L.E. Smith since 1943: https://www.post-gazette.com/life/food/2007/11/08/Born-in-W-Pa-glass-gobblers-hold-tradition/stories/200711080317
  • S (on the base of bottles) ………………….In some cases this mark was used by Lyndeboro Glass Company, South Lyndeborough, New Hampshire (1866-1888). The “S” is seen on the bottom of some hand-blown ‘strapside’ liquor flasks (usually in amber or blue-aqua) and certain other bottles which are found in the eastern states. (Thanks to Mark Newton for this info). If the “S’ is on a clear bottle, or on a machine-made bottle, that would indicate another maker. Note: as with the great majority of cases involving soda bottles of the late 19th and early twentieth century, if the bottle base has just a large letter, such as S (or any letter, or initials comprised of 2 or more letters) and this corresponds to the initials of the bottling company name embossed on the side, that would serve as a self-explanatory meaning, and nearly always is not indicating the glass manufacturer. Many such bottles with an initial on the base were purposely made with no glass manufacturer identification.
  • 16S (or with other 2-digit number between 16 and 29)……….in most cases indicates production by the American Bottle Company, at their Streator, Illinois plant location. Mark is seen mostly on the lower heel area on soda and beer bottles. The number usually precedes the letter, but in some cases the order may be reversed. These marks were used by ABCO at least during the 1916-1923 period, and evidence from bottle collectors indicate these date code markings may have been used as early as 1905 (when American Bottle Company was incorporated), all the way up to at least 1929 in some cases. Owens Bottle Company, which purchased the six glass plants of the American Bottle Company in 1916, continued the operation of only two of those ABCO plants (their Newark, OH & Streator, IL locations) under the American Bottle Company name until 1929, and used this type of marking on many of their bottles. See “AB”, “A.B.CO.” and 󈬁N” marks.
  • S in a circle……………….Swindell Bros, Baltimore, Maryland (1869-1959). Reportedly used on machine-made bottles after c. 1920, per Toulouse in “Bottle Makers and their Marks“, 1971. ALSO, a similar mark was used by Sterling Glass Company, Lapel, Indiana (1914-1950). Hand-blown bottles were produced from 1914 to 1918, at which time semi-automatic production was introduced. Sterling operated as the “Sterling Division” of the Warfield Company of Chicago from about 1940 until 1950. Brockway Glass Company bought the Sterling factory in 1950. Also, see next 2 entries.
  • S in a circle………………… Sneath Glass Company, Tiffin, Ohio (1892-1894) and Hartford City, Indiana (1894-1952). This mark is seen on certain types of glassware including canister jars. Sneath operated for a short time in Tiffin but a new plant was built and started glass production in September of 1894. Sneath made a wide variety of types of glassware, including kerosene lamp globes, semaphore signal globes and glass “Hoosier cabinet” jars such as spice jars, coffee and tea jars, salt and pepper sets, etc. The “Hoosier cabinet” jars were especially popular in the 1920s and 1930s. For a much more comprehensive article on Sneath, see the Wikipedia article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneath_Glass_Company
  • S in a circle connecting 4 small raised dots, resembling planets arranged in an orbit………Uncertain. Seen on the base of a handblown light aqua blob beer, c.1890-1920. This mark may be just an “S in a circle” and the raised dots could be merely the effect of four air vent holes positioned in the engraved circle portion of the mold. See above two entries.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • S.A.B.CO……………American Bottle Company, Streator, Illinois plant (1905-1916). Mark was probably used only for a brief time. Not often encountered, usually the mark is “A.B.CO”. See also 󈬀S” mark.
  • Sailboat………………triangular logo vaguely resembling a sailboat with sails unfurled. Please look farther down on this page for the “Triangular Logo” entry: a mark used by American National Can Company.

Samco………………. several varieties of “Mason” style fruit jars are known with the Samco brand name, including the Samco Genuine Mason, the Samco Super Jar, and the Samco Super Mason. In The Fruit Jar Works, Volume 2 (Alice Creswick, 1987) she credits these jars to date from circa 1930 to 1940. A trademark for the name “Samco” was issued on November 1, 1931 to the Samuel Mallinger Company of Pittsburgh, PA. The company claimed actual use since August 1, 1931. According to Creswick, the Knox Glass Bottle Company, Inc, of Marienville, PA was the primary manufacturer of these jars, but other possible makers included Glenshaw Glass Company, Glenshaw, PA. and the Ball Bros Glass Company, Muncie, IN. (The “Samco Genuine Mason” jars are virtually identical to “Knox Genuine Mason” jars with the word “Samco” [inside the circle] substituted for “Knox”). Some of the Samco jars came with a metal screw band with milkglass insert marked SAMCO.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • S.G.CO ………………………. Several glass factories used this mark (at least four, probably more) . One fairly strong probable user of the mark was Scranton Glass Company, Scranton, Pennsylvania (1881-c.1895) as there are a number of known types of bottles with embossings of local Scranton businesses which carry S.G.CO. , usually on the reverse heel. No proof that Scranton was involved, but perhaps time will tell. Nevertheless, here are listed four companies that I am certain actually did use this mark, at least on some items they produced:
  • ***Seattle Glass Company, Renton, Washington (1905-1907), known for producing amber beer bottles. These are primarily found in the northwestern US.
  • *** Severn Glass Company, Annapolis, Maryland (c.1897-1901). Appears on certain bottles (usually flasks or beer bottles in amber or aqua) found in the Baltimore, Maryland and surrounding area. The mark appears on the heel or the base, and in some cases is accompanied by an anchor. Information uncovered by researcher Tod Von Mechow indicate that ths little-known firm is virtually certain to have been the user of S.G.CO. on these bottles. Several dozen different beer bottle variants from Baltimore and surrounding area are known with this mark.
  • ***Southern Glass Company/Works, Louisville, Kentucky (1877-c.1885) Frequently seen on the base of “JOHN J. SMITH / LOUISVILLE KY” tonic bottles.
  • ***Southern Glass Company, Vernon, California (c.1916-1931) Mostly machine-made bottles, including clear prescription druggist types, mainly found in the western states of the US.
  • S G CO within a segmented parallelogram……….probably Southern Glass Company, Vernon, California (c.1916-1931)
  • S.G.CO.W……………Sydenham Glass Company, Wallaceburg, Ontario, Canada (1894-1913)
  • S.G.CO. with anchor………probably Severn Glass Company, Annapolis, Maryland (c.1897-c.1901). Severn Glass Company was a successor to Annapolis Glass Works, originally incorporated May 12, 1885 in Annapolis. (Per information found by Tod von Mechow).
  • S.G.W………………Southern Glass Works, Louisville, Kentucky (1877-c.1885). Basemark, seen on aqua picnic (“pumpkinseed”) flasks.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • T in an inverted triangle…………..Turner Brothers Company, Terre Haute, Indiana (c.1910-c.1929). This Triangle-T mark was seen on the bottom of a clear glass handled jug, of a type frequently used for vinegar, apple cider, ammonia, etc. Successor to Modes-Turner Glass Company. Turner Bros. was apparently briefly reorganized as Turner Bros. Corporation (c. 1930-1932), later bought by General Glass Corporation (headquartered at Lancaster, OH) with plants at both Terre Haute and Winchester, Indiana. General Glass Corporation lasted until around 1937 (some info from Indiana Glass Factories Notes, Dick Roller, 1994, page 103).
  • T in an inverted triangle……Travis Glass Company, Clarksburg, West Virginia, as seen on milk bottles , circa 1913-1920.
  • T.B. ………………Tibby Brothers, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Sharpsburg, PA (1866-c.1902). The first factory location was in Pittsburgh, and the second one was started up in Sharpsburg somewhat later. Both locations operated simultaneously for many years. The Sharpsburg location was the only plant in operation by the time of Tibby Brothers’ closing, but I am not sure on the exact date Pittsburgh closed and when the Sharpsburg plant opened.
  • TB (placed to right of embossed arrow logo)……..seen on base of clear machine-made WATKINS TRIAL MARK extract/flavoring bottle, circa 1980s-1990s. Uncertain meaning.
  • T.C.W………………See next entry.
  • T.C.W.CO. ………….T.C.Wheaton Glass Company, later “Wheaton Glass Company” , “Wheaton Industries”, Millville, New Jersey (1888-to date). Seen especially on laboratory, chemical and drug bottles. See “W in a circle”and “Wheaton” entries.
  • Teardrops (2 teardrops or water droplets)…… see “Drops / droplets” entry on page two.
  • Temperglas ……………… Brand name used by Brockway Glass Company. Please see “B in a circle” entry.
  • Three Rivers……………..Three Rivers Glass Company, Three Rivers, Texas (1922-1937)
  • Tibby Bros Pitts PA….See “T B”.
  • 3 R “star”………….Three Rivers Glass Company, Three Rivers, TX (1922-1937)
  • 3 Rivers (with “star” emblem)……….Three Rivers Glass Company, Three Rivers, TX (1922-1937). Ball Bros. Glass Company bought this plant in 1937, and operated it for around 10 years before shutting it down.

on the base of soda bottles, such as typical emerald green non-returnable 7-UP or Sprite bottles. Another mark (vaguely resembling two “C’s” or “tin cans” facing each other), was also used by this firm (then named American National Can Company), and according to a post by William Lape (see Comments section of this page), was used from 1988 to 1995. (See “American National Can Company” entry on page one with photo of the other mark). American National Can Company was acquired by Rexam in the year 2000.

ADVERTISEMENT

    Union Glass Works, Phil’A…………..Union Glass Works, Philadelphia, PA (c.1845-c.1876). There were a number of unrelated glass companies known under the name “Union Glass Works”, located in several cities during the 19th century, but this particular firm is best known for having made many blob or “squat” type soda bottles for quite a number of soda bottling companies. Many of those bottles were made in a vibrant cobalt blue color and appear to be typical of the 1850s-1860s era. I have found conflicting info on the timeline this company was in business.


Keban Projesi: Ağın-Kalaycık Höyüğü Kurtarma Kazısının Yeniden Değerlendirilmesi

Keban Projesi kapsamında, 1968-1970 yılları arasında, Elazığ’ın Ağın İlçesi’nde yer alan Kalaycık Höyüğü’nde Prof. Dr. Ümit Serdaroğlu başkanlığında kazılar yapılmıştır (Lev.1)[1] . Keban Baraj Gölü dolmadan önce, Ağın’ın kuş uçumu yaklaşık 8 km. kuzeydoğusunda bulunan höyük, Fırat’ın kollarından olan Karasu’nun doğu kıyısında yer almaktaydı. Yaklaşık 260 metre uzunluğunda ve 180 metre genişliğindeki höyüğün zirvesi, eteklerinden geçen Karasu nehri kıyısından 60-65 metre yükseklikteydi[2] ki bu yüksekliğin yaklaşık yarısı nehrin getirdiği taşıma ile oluşmuştu. Konglomera tabanın altı ise Ağın bölgesinin tümü gibi kalker kayalıklardan oluşmaktaydı [3] .

Höyükte, I. tabaka İslami Dönem’e ait olup hemen altındaki II. ve III. tabakalar Bizans yerleşimidir. III. tabakadan sonra bir boşluk vardır ve IV. tabaka M.Ö. I. binyıla tarihlendirilmiştir. V. tabakada Tunç Çağı çanak çömlekleri karışık halde bulunmuştur[4] , taban ise Erken Tunç Çağı’na tarihlendirilmiştir[5] . Kalkolitik Dönem, höyükte mimari bir tabaka olarak belirlenememiş olsa da bu döneme tarihlenen çanak çömlekler bulunmuştur. Kalaycık Höyüğü’nde Kalkolitik Dönem’den İslami Dönem’e kadar aralıksız yerleşim tespit edilmiştir[6].

Höyüğün güneydoğusundaki kazılar sırasında ağır bir yangınla tahrip edilmiş Orta Tunç Çağı’na tarihlenen bir döşeme bulunmuştur. Yine aynı alanda, Bizans tabakasının altında, güneydoğuda yükselen ana kaya üzerine oturmuş Geç Tunç Çağı tabakası ortaya çıkarılmıştır[7].

Her ne kadar höyükte Demir ve Tunç Çağı mimarisi ile ilgili buluntular yok denecek kadar azsa da höyüğün en üst tabakasında olduğu gibi taş temelli ve kerpiç duvarlı oldukları önerilmiştir[8].

Kalaycık Höyüğü’nün 500 metre kadar batısındaki Hereser Mevki olarak adlandırılan alanda, Hellenistik Dönem’e tarihlenen mezarlar bulunmuştur ancak Kalaycık Höyüğü’nde Hellenistik Dönem’in varlığı tespit edilememiştir[9] .

Kalaycık Höyüğü’nde yapılan kazılar sonucunda ele geçen malzeme, tıpkı Ağın Hoşrik Mevki, Kalecikler Höyüğü ve Kilise Yazısı kazılarında olduğu gibi, Keban Barajı Projesi’nin bitişiyle, yıllık raporlar dışında yayınlanmadan Elazığ Müzesi depolarında kalmıştır. Bugün Elazığ Arkeoloji Müzesi Etütlük Eser Deposu’nda bulunan çanak çömlekler üzerine, buluntu merkezi, çalışma yılı, açması ve derinliği yazılmıştır. Ağın kazılarının Kalkolitik Dönem’den Demir Çağ’a kadar olan çanak çömleklerinin belgelenip değerlendirilmesi çalışmalarının Elazığ Müzesi’nde gerçekleştirilen kısmı iki sezon sürmüş olup, 2017 yılı itibariyle tamamlanmıştır. Tüm malzemenin yayına hazırlık çalışmaları halen devam etmektedir. Aşağıdaki satırlarda bu malzeme grubu hakkında ön-rapor niteliğinde tanıtım ve değerlendirmelerde bulunulmuştur. Erken Tunç Çağı’ndan Orta Demir Çağ’a kadar tüm dönemlerin mal gruplarını temsil edecek biçimde çanak çömlekler kullanılmıştır.

Kalaycık Höyüğü Çanak Çömlek Buluntuları

Erken Tunç Çağı:Bu döneme ait çanak çömlekler içinde farklı mal gruplarına ait örnekler vardır.

Karaz Malları (Lev. 2-5: 1-4): Bu mal grubu içindeki çanak çömlekler, Erken Tunç Çağı boyunca Kafkaslardan Doğu Akdeniz’in güney kıyılarına kadar çok geniş bir coğrafyaya yayılan topluluklarca kullanılmıştır10. Bu durum Yukarı Fırat Havzası için de geçerlidir. Havzaya Erken Transkafkasyalı toplulukların gelişiyle çanak çömlek kültürlerinde keskin değişiklikler olur. Yerleşimlerin sayısında belirgin bir artış yaşanmıştır, kazısı yapılan yerleşimlerin neredeyse tamamında güçlü Erken Tunç Çağ tabakaları vardır. Bu topluluklarla doğrudan ilişkili olan Karaz türü çanak çömlekler çalıştığımız malzeme içinde de sayıca en fazla olanlardır. Yukarı Fırat Havzası’nda, Arslantepe’de VII. Tabakadan[11] itibaren bu tür çanak çömlekler görülmeye başlanır[12].

İncelediğimiz seramiklerin, kremden kahveye ve kiremite değişen hamur renkleri vardır. İnceden kabaya değişen boyutlarda kum ve çoğu zaman da bitki katkılı olup elde yapılmışlardır. Bu mal grubunun en belirgin özelliği pişirilme esnasında bilinçli olarak yapılan renk farklılıklarıdır[13]. İçi ya da dışı siyah görünümlü, çift renkli Karaz kapları (Lev. 2-4) ile beraber Kalaycık kazılarında kiremit astarlı bir örnek (Lev. 5:1) ile iyi veya orta derecede fırınlanmış, içi ve dışı aynı renkte kiremit-kahve mallar da bulunmuştur (Fig.. 5: 2-4). Açkı tüm örneklerde vardır ancak kalitesi farklıdır. Bu mal grubuna ait örneklerin benzerleri tüm Yukarı Fırat Havzası’ndaki kazı ve yüzey araştırmalarında bulunmuştur[14].

Kiremit-Kahve Mal (Lev. 5: 5, 6): Kahve tonlarında hamurları vardır ve hamurlarının renginde astarlıdırlar. Kaba kum, taşçık ve bitki katkılı kaplar orta derecede pişirilmiştir, ikisi de el yapımıdır. Form olarak Plain Simple Ware ile benzerlik gösterir ancak daha kaba hamurları ile yerel karakterlidirler. Yakın benzeri Atatürk Barajı alanında yapılan yüzey araştırmasında bulunmuştur[15].

Elazığ Malatya Boyalıları (Lev. 5: 7, 6, 7: 1-5): Kremden devetüyüne, açık kahverengiden açık yeşile değişen tonlarda hamurları vardır. Oldukça ince hamurludurlar. Orta veya iyi derecede pişirilmişlerdir. Tamamı açkılıdır, açkı kaliteleri farklıdır. Açık zemin üzerine koyu kahve, koyu yeşil ve koyu kiremit tonlarda bezeme yapılmıştır. Birbirini küçük farklılıklar dışında tekrar eden motifl er arasında, ağız kenarında yatay bant (Lev. 5: 7), dalgalı bantlar (Lev. 6: 1), içi çizgilerden oluşan üçgen (Lev. 6: 4, 6-8), dalgalı hat altında içi çizgilerden oluşan üçgen (Lev. 6: 2, 3, 5, 9-12 7:1-2, 4-5) bezemeleri vardır. İki örnekte üçgenlerin bir kısmının içi çizgilerle taranmış, birer üçgen ise tamamen boyanmıştır (Lev. 6: 2, 12). Bir parçada ise üçgenlerin içi tamamen boyanmıştır (Lev. 7: 3). Bu türde boyalılar Elazığ-Malatya Bölgesi’ne özgüdür ve Erken Tunç Çağı II’den itibaren görülmeye başlar[16]. Boyalı çanak çömlekler, Keban Projesi kurtarma kazılarında ETÇ tabakası olan birçok merkezde izlenir[17].

Orta Tunç Çağı:Bu döneme ait çanak çömlekler arasında üç farklı mal grubu bulunmaktadır.

Devetüyü-Krem Mal (Lev. 7: 6-8): Devetüyü ve açık kahve renkte hamurlu ve hamurunun renginde astarlı örnekler orta kum katkılıdırlar ve orta derecede pişirilmişlerdir. Biri açkısız (Lev. 7: 8), diğer ikisi açkılıdır. Her üç parça da çarkta biçimlendirilmiştir. Bu gruptaki örneklerin paralelleri Arslantepe bulunmaktadır[18].

Gri Mal (Lev. 8: 1): Gri renkte hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı bu kaide, orta kum katkılıdır ve kötü pişirilmiştir. Parlak açkılıdır[19] ve çarkta biçimlendirilmiştir. En yakın paraleli Norşuntepe’de vardır[20].

Elazığ Malatya Boyalıları (Lev. 8: 2, 3): İki parça da krem hamurlu ve hamurunun renginde astarlıdır. Oldukça ince hamurlu ve iyi pişirilmişlerdir. Bezemeler koyu kahve tonlarda yapılmıştır. Çizgilerle taranmış üçgen motifi ortasında daire (Lev. 8: 2) ve olasılıkla stilize bir insan fi gürü (Lev. 8: 3) bezeme olarak uygulanmıştır. Boyalıların benzerlerine Yukarı Fırat Havzası’nda rastlanır[21].

Geç Tunç Çağı:İki farklı mal grubuna ait örnekler vardır.

Kiremit-Kahve Mal (Lev. 8: 4-7, 9, 10): Kremden devetüyüne, kahveden kiremite değişen hamur renkleri vardır. Bir kısmı hamurunun renginde astarlanmışken bir kısmının yüzeyine herhangi bir işlem yapılmamıştır. Orta veya kaba ölçüde kum katkılı çanak çömleklerin bir bölümünde bitki katkı vardır. Açkısız örneklerle birlikte büyük çoğunluğu hafi f açkılı seri üretim mallardır[22]. Çoğu orta derecede pişirilmişlerdir. Tamamı çark yapımıdır. Yukarı Fırat Havzası, Hitit İmparatorluğu’nun merkez bölgesi ve yayılım alanlarında benzerleri vardır[23].

Kiremit Astarlı Mal (Lev. 11:1): Bu mal grubu bir çanak parçası ile temsil edilir. Açık kahve hamurlu ve kiremit astarlı parça orta kum katkılı ve orta pişirilmiştir. Parlak açkılıdır ve çark yapımıdır. Benzerleri Norşuntepe ve Yanarlar’da vardır[24].

Erken Demir Çağ (Lev. 11: 2, 3):Her iki çanak parçası da açık kahve tonlarında hamurlu ve kiremit astarlıdır[25]. Orta kum katkılı ve orta derecede pişirilmiş örnekler açkılı ve el yapımıdır. Benzerleri Yukarı Fırat Havzası ve Van Gölü Havzası’nda vardır[26].

Orta Demir Çağ (Lev. 11: 4):Bu dönem gri mala ait bir çanak parçası ile temsil edilir. Gri hamurlu ve hamurunun renginde astarlıdır. Orta kum katkılı ve kötü pişirilmiş parça, parlak açkılı ve çark yapımıdır.

Yukarı Fırat Havzası’nda ilk sistemli yüzey araştırmaları 1967’de, kazılar ise hemen sonrasında 1968’de başlar. Bölgede daha önce gerçekleştirilen çalışmaların neredeyse tamamı Urartular’a yöneliktir. Keban Baraj Alanı kurtarma kazıları, suyun dolmasıyla 1975’te son bulur. Bu dönüşümsüz tahribat öncesinde uluslararası ekiplerce yapılan kazılar sonucunda bölge, Yakındoğu’nun görece en iyi tanınan arkeolojik istasyonlarından biri haline gelmiştir. Bu geniş alanın batısında bulunan Ağın, kuzeyde Kemaliye (Eğin) ile Erzincan Ovası’na, batıda da Arapkir yolu ile Malatya Ovası’na açılan önemli bir alandır. Karasu ile Murat nehirleri, Keban Barajı’nın yapımından önce Ağın’da birleşerek Fırat’ı oluşturuyorlardı. Keban Baraj Gölü’nün doğusundaki verimli Altınova Bölgesi, büyük boyutlu ve merkez karakterli höyükleri ile diğer alanlara göre daha çok araştırılmıştır[27]. Bununla birlikte bölgenin batıya açılan Ağın çevresinde daha sınırlı ölçüde çalışmalar yapılmıştır. Prof. Dr. Ümit Serdaroğlu tarafından yürütülmüş olan kazılara ait çanak çömlek malzemesinin değerlendirilme çabası da bu boşluğun doldurulmasına yöneliktir.

Yukarı Fırat Havzası Erken Kalkolitik Dönem’den itibaren yerleşimlere sahne olmuştur. Kalkolitik Dönem’de daha çok güneyli bağlantılar gösteren bereketli havzada, günümüzden çok da farklı olmayan biçimde tarımcı yerleşik ve aynı zamanda hayvancılıkla geçinen toplulukların yaşadığı düşünülür.

Yukarı Fırat Havzası’nın sosyo-ekonomik yapısı, Erken Transkafkasyalı toplulukların gelişiyle büyük ölçüde değişmiş görünür. Erken Tunç Çağ boyunca kuzeydoğu Anadolu ile beraber Elazığ-Malatya bölgesi de tümüyle bu halkların etkisi altına girer ve güneyle bir önceki dönemde yoğun olan ilişkiler büyük ölçüde kesintiye uğrar. Kırsal karakterdeki yerleşim sayısındaki artış, nüfusun da yoğunlaştığının işaretidir. Erken Tunç Çağ içinde, Erken Transkafkasyalı topluluklara ait olan Karaz türü çanak çömlekler sayıca en fazla olanlardır (Lev. 2, 3, 4, 5: 1-4). Bu tür çanak çömleklerin gelişimi ile ilgili değişik öneriler vardır ve bunlar Erken Tunç Çağı’nda Kafkasya ve Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi’nin tamamında baskın olan mal grubudur[28]. Kiremit-Kahve Mallar (Lev. 5: 5, 6), form olarak Erken Tunç Çağı’nın Elazığ-Malatya Bölgesi’ndeki diğer bir yaygın mal grubu olan Plain Simple Ware ile benzerdir ancak daha kaba hamurları ile yerel görünümlüdür. Elazığ-Malatya Boyalıları olarak adlandırılan çanak çömlekler ise (Lev. 5: 7, 6, 7: 1-5) Altınova Bölgesi’ne özgüdür ve Erken Tunç Çağı II’den itibaren görülmeye başlar.

Orta Tunç Çağı’nda Arslantepe, Yukarı Fırat Havzası için önemli bir referans merkezdir. Çalıştığımız malzeme içinde Kiremit-Kahve Mallar (Lev. 7: 6-8), Gri Mal (Lev. 8: 1) ile Elazığ-Malatya Boyalıları (Lev. 8: 2, 3) vardır. Arslantepe’de Orta Tunç Çağı’nın iki evresi VA1 ve VA2 arasında kiremit astarlı ve siyah mallar, bej ve turuncu mallara doğru dönüşür. İnce bej mallarda geç evrede azalma eğilimi izlenir. Buna karşılık kahve mallar ve boyalılarda yükseliş vardır[29]. Yukarı Fırat Havzası’ndaki buluntu tabakaları göz önünde bulundurulduğunda Gri Malların Orta Tunç Çağı’nın erken evresine, devetüyü ve kahve malların ise geç evresine tarihlendirilmesinin yanlış olmayacağı kanaatindeyiz. Yukarı Fırat Havzası’nda Erken Tunç Çağ’dan Orta Tunç Çağ’a geçişte kültürel bir kesinti yoktur[30]. Di Nocera, Arslantepe Orta Tunç Çağ mallarında Torosların güneyi ile ilişkilerin sınırlı olduğunu ve dağların kültürel bir bariyer oluşturduğunu ifade eder[31].

Erken Tunç Çağı II’den neredeyse Orta Tunç Çağ sonuna kadar izole görünen bölge Geç Tunç Çağ’a gelindiğinde bir krallık merkezi durumundadır ve kısa zaman içinde de neredeyse tüm Anadolu’nun mutlak hakimi olan Hititler’in kontrolü altına girer. Geç Tunç Çağ içinde değerlendirilen çanak çömleklerin baskın çoğunluğu Kiremit-Kahve Mal grubundadır (Lev. 8: 4-7, 9, 10). Kiremit Astarlı Mal (Lev. 11: 1) tek parça ile temsil edilir.

Erken Demir Çağ’da Elazığ bölgesinde yerleşimler Geç Tunç Çağı II’ye oranla artmıştır. Hitit devletinin son bulmasıyla beraber bölge, Doğu Anadolu’nun kuzeyi ve doğusu ile ilişkilenmiş görülür. Yüksek rakımlarda yaşayan ve tamamen yarı göçebe hayvancı aşiretlerden oluşan kuzeyli halklarla yaşam düzeninin ne derece benzediği açık değildir. Fırat ve kollarının oluşturduğu verimli ovalarda ve kuzeydoğuya kıyasla oldukça düşük rakımda, bu bağ belki de yalnızca yivli çanak çömleklerle sınırlıdır[32]. Kalaycık Höyüğü Erken Demir Çağ çanak çömlekleri Kiremit Astarlı Mallar (Lev. 11: 2, 3) içinde değerlendirilmiştir.

Orta Demir Çağ’a gelindiğinde ise Urartu Devleti, doğal batı sınırı olarak Fırat’ı benimsemiş ve bölgeyi eyalet sistemi içine almıştır. Bu döneme ait incelediğimiz malzeme içinde Orta Demir Çağ’ın varlığı Gri Mala (Lev. 11: 4) ait bir örnekle tespit edilmiştir. Kalaycık Höyük kazı raporlarında, M.Ö. I. binyıla tarihlendirilen IV. tabaka çanak çömlekleri içinde “4. Grup” olarak adlandırılan örneklerin Urartu-Bianili malına benzerliği vurgulanmıştır[33]. Yukarı Fırat Havzası Orta Demir Çağ’da yoğun Urartu yerleşimlerine sahne olmuştur[34].

Kalaycık Höyüğü, incelediğimiz çanak çömlekler göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, Elazığ-Malatya bölgesinin tarihsel sürecini paylaşmış görünmektedir. Elazığ Ovası’ndan batıya açılan yolların üzerinde bulunan ve Kalkolitik Dönem’den itibaren yerleşim görmüş bu orta boyutlu höyük, şüphesiz ki bölge arkeolojisi için önemli verilere sahiptir. Özellikle çok sayıdaki Erken Tunç Çağı çanak çömlekleri, höyüğün –tıpkı tüm havzada olduğu gibi- bu dönemde yoğun yerleşime sahip olduğunu belgeler niteliktedir. Orta Tunç Çağ’da yerel karakterli olan çanak çömlekler Geç Tunç Çağ’a gelindiğinde Hitit merkez ve çevre bölgelerde karşılaşılan çanak çömlekler ile tam bir benzerlik içindedir. Erken Demir Çağ’dan itibaren ise kuzeydoğu Anadolu ile ortak bir kültürü paylaştığı anlaşılmaktadır.

1- Açık Kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışta siyaha doğru renk değişimi var, orta kum katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

2- Açık Kahve (7.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

3- Kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı

4- Kahve (5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, el yapımı.

5- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışta siyaha doğru renk değişimi var, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 30 cm.

6- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, ince kum katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

7- Kahve (5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, orta kum katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

8- Açık Kahve (5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı büyük oranda siyah görünümlü, orta kum-taşçık-bol bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, el yapımı.

9- Pembe (2.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı neredeyse tamamen siyah görünümlü, orta kum katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

10- Koyu Kahve (10 YR 4/2) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, orta kum-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 19 cm.

11- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı neredeyse tamamen siyah görünümlü, orta kum-az bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 28 cm.

1- Açık Kahve (5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bol bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, el yapımı. R: 18 cm.

2- Açık Kahve (7.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, orta kum katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

3- Krem (7.5 YR 8/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı büyük oranda siyah görünümlü, orta kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

4- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

5- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, dışı hafi f açkılı, el yapımı.

6- Açık Kahve (5 YR 6/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, el yapımı.

7- Kahve (5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

8- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle içi siyah görünümlü, orta kum-az bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 22 cm.

9- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-az bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

10- Açık kahve (5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

11- Kahve (5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle içi neredeyse tamamen siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

12- Koyu kahve (7.5 YR 4/2) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışta siyaha doğru renk değişimi var, kaba kum-taşçık-bol bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, dışı hafi f açkılı, el yapımı.

1- Kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 24 cm.

2- Açık kahve (10 YR 6/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 28 cm.

3- Kahve (5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık- katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, el yapımı. R: 34 cm.

4- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 19 cm.

5- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 20 cm.

6- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışı siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bol bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 24 cm.

7- Kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle içi siyah görünümlü, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

1- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/4) hamurlu, içi hamurunun renginde, dışı ve ağız kenarının içi kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) astarlı, kaba kum-taşçık-az bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

2- Açık kahve (10 YR 6/2) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kumbol bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, hafi f açkılı, el yapımı. R: 32 cm.

3- Kahve (5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum-taşçık-bol bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, el yapımı. R: 39 cm.

4- Gri (5 YR 5/1) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle açıklı koyulu renk değişimi var, kaba kum-taşçık katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, hafi f açkılı, el yapımı. R: 47 cm.

5- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle açıklı koyulu renk değişimi var, kaba kum-taşçık-bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, el yapımı. R: 26 cm.

6- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı.

7- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, hafif açkılı, el yapımı, kiremit (10 R 5/8) boya bezemeli. R: 33 cm.

1- Açık yeşil (5 Y 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum-az bitki katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, hafif açkılı, el yapımı, koyu yeşil (5 R 4/2) boya bezemeli.

2- Açık yeşil (2.5 Y 8/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, hafi f açkılı, el yapımı, kahve (5 YR 4/4) boya bezemeli.

3- Krem (10 YR 7/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 4/3) boya bezemeli.

4- Krem (10 YR 8/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kiremit (2.5 YR 4/8) boya bezemeli.

5- Krem (10 YR 7/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) boya bezemeli.

6- Krem (10 YR 8/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, kiremit (10 R 4/8) boya bezemeli.

7- Krem (10 YR 8/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 3/4) boya bezemeli.

8- Krem (10 YR 8/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kiremit (2.5 YR 4/6) boya bezemeli.

9- Krem (10 YR 7/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 3/4) boya bezemeli.

10- Krem (10 YR 7/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 4/4) boya bezemeli.

11- Krem (7.5 YR 7/2) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle içte griye doğru renk değişimi var, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, kiremit (2.5 YR 4/6) boya bezemeli.

12- Krem (10 YR 8/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (7.5 YR 4/4) boya bezemeli.

1- Krem (10 YR 8/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (7.5 YR 4/4) boya bezemeli.

2- Krem (7.5 YR 7/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, kiremit (10 R 4/6) boya bezemeli.

3- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 4/4) boya bezemeli.

4- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kumaz bitki katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 4/6) boya bezemeli.

5- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı, koyu kahve (5 YR 3/4) boya bezemeli.

6- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 21 cm.

7- Açık kahve (5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, dışı hafi f açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 19 cm.

8- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, çark yapımı. R: 28 cm.

1- Koyu gri (5 YR 4/1) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle koyuya doğru renk değişimi var, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 12 cm.

2- Krem (10 YR 8/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı, koyu kahve (7.5 YR 3/3) boya bezemeli.

3- Krem (10 YR 8/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı, koyu kahve (7.5 YR 4/4) boya bezemeli.

4- Pembe (2.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, çark yapımı. R: 22 cm.

5- Krem (10 YR 7/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı.

6- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 24 cm.

7- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, ince kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 20 cm.

1- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, iyi pişirilmiş, dışı hafi f açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 25 cm.

2- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 31 cm.

3- Krem (7.5 YR 7/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 32 cm.

4- Kahve (5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum-az bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 32 cm.

5- Açık kahve (5 YR 6/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle siyah alacalanma var, orta kum-az bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı.

6- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle koyuya doğru renk değişimi var, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı.

7- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kumaz bitki katkılı, kötü pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 34 cm.

8- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum-az bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı.

9- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, çark yapımı.

1- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 31 cm.

2- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, dışı hafi f açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 40 cm.

3- Açık kahve (5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, kaba kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 32 cm.

4- Kahve (5 YR 5/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 40 cm.

5- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı.

6- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, çark yapımı. R: 11 cm.

7- Kahve (7.5 YR 5/4) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle dışta koyuya doğru renk değişimi var, kaba kum-az bitki katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, dışı açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 26 cm.

8- Devetüyü (7.5 YR 7/6) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, hafi f açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 33 cm.

9- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/3) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, hafi f açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 28 cm.

1- Açık kahve (7.5 YR 6/4) hamurlu, kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 26 cm.

2- Pembe (2.5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, dışta karın keskinliğinin altı hamurunun renginde, içi ve ağız kenarından karın keskinliğine kadar olan kısmı kiremit (10 R 5/8) astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, el yapımı. R: 21 cm.

3- Açık kahve (5 YR 6/6) hamurlu, kiremit (2.5 YR 5/6) astarlı, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, hafi f açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 29 cm.

4- Koyu gri (Gley 1 3/N) hamurlu, hamurunun renginde astarlı, pişme nedeniyle siyah görünümlü, orta kum katkılı, orta pişirilmiş, açkılı, çark yapımı. R: 18 cm.


SS -- Submarines. Includes SS, SSA, SSAG, SSBN, SSG, SSGN, SSN, SSO, SSP, SSR, AGSS, AOSS, ASSA, ASSP and IXSS plus most SSK Does not include SF, SM, SST and some SSK.

Until July 1920, U.S. Navy Submarines did not officially have 'SS' series hull numbers. They were, however, referred to by 'Submarine Number' (or, more properly, 'Submarine Torpedo Boat Number'), with that number corresponding to the 'SS' number formally assigned in July 1920, or which would have been assigned if the 'boat' had still been on the Navy list. For convenience, all of these submarines are listed below under the appropriate numbers in the 'SS' series.

Beginning in the later 1940s, submariness converted or built for several specialized functions received modified designations, including SSA (cargo submarine), SSAG (miscellaneous auxiliary submarine), SSBN (ballistic missile submarine, nuclear powered), SSG (guided missile submarine), SSGN (guided missile submarine, nuclear powered), SSK (antisubmarine submarine), SSN (submarine, nuclear powered), SSO (submarine oiler), SSP (submarine transport), SSR (radar picket submarine), SSRN (radar picket submarine, nuclear powered), AGSS(miscellaneous auxiliary submarine), AOSS (submarine oiler), ASSA (cargo submarine), ASSP (transport, submarine) and IXSS (unclassified, submarine). With a few exceptions, submarines with these expanded designations were numbered in the original SS series. Many of the special-purpose submarines were redesignated after a few years.

1 Y Sss Reclassified 1y 1971 Gm

Before, during and after World War II, other submarines were given designations that were based on specialized functions within the submarine ('S-') type, but were numbered separately from the SS series and will be treated on other Online Library pages. These included SF (fleet submarine) SM (mine laying submarine) SST (target and training submarine) some SSK (antisubmarine submarine) and a few SSN (submarine, nuclear powered).

This page, and those linked from it, provide the hull numbers of all U.S. Navy submarines numbered in the SS series, with links to those 'boats' with photos available in the Online Library. It also lists in chronological sequence the one submarine that did not have a number.

This page covers submarine hull numbers from SS-1 through SS-199. For coverage of higher 'SS' series numbers, see:

SS -- Submarines, numbered from SS 200 through SS-399
SS -- Submarines, numbered from SS 400 through SSBN-599 and
SS -- Submarines, numbered from SSBN 600 through SSN-777. (Page not yet prepared)

See the list below to locate photographs of individual submarines.

If the submarine you want does not have an active link on this page, contact the Photographic Section concerning other research options.

Left Column -- Unnumbered
Submarines and
Submarines numbered
SS-1 through SS-77:

  • Plunger (built under an 1895 contract, but not accepted for service)
  • SS-1: Holland (1900-1913)
  • SS-2: Plunger (1903-1922),
    renamed A-1 in 1911
  • SS-3: Adder (1903-1922),
    renamed A-2 in 1911
  • SS-4: Grampus (1903-1922),
    renamed A-3 in 1911
  • SS-5: Moccasin (1903-1922),
    renamed A-4 in 1911
  • SS-6: Pike (1903-1922),
    renamed A-5 in 1911
  • SS-7: Porpoise (1903-1922),
    renamed A-6 in 1911
  • SS-8: Shark (1903-1922),
    renamed A-7 in 1911
  • SS-9: Octopus (1908-1920),
    renamed C-1 in 1911
  • SS-10: Viper (1907-1922),
    renamed B-1 in 1911
  • SS-11: Cuttlefish (1907-1922),
    renamed B-2 in 1911
  • SS-12: Tarantula (1907-1922),
    renamed B-3 in 1911
  • SS-13: Stingray (1909-1920),
    renamed C-2 in 1911
  • SS-14: Tarpon (1909-1920),
    renamed C-3 in 1911
  • SS-15: Bonita (1909-1920),
    renamed C-4 in 1911
  • SS-16: Snapper (1910-1920),
    renamed C-5 in 1911
  • SS-17: Narwhal (1909-1922),
    renamed D-1 in 1911
  • SS-18: Grayling (1909-1922),
    renamed D-2 in 1911
  • SS-19: Salmon (1910-1922),
    renamed D-3 in 1911
  • SS-19½: G-1 (1912-1921).
    Originally named Seal. Reclassified SS-20 in 1920
  • SS-20: G-1 (1912-1921).
    Second use of this hull number -- G-1 was reclassified from SS-19½ in 1920
  • SS-20: F-1 (1912-1917).
    Originally named Carp
  • SS-21: F-2 (1912-1922).
    Originally named Barracuda
  • SS-22: F-3 (1912-1922).
    Originally named Pickerel
  • SS-23: F-4 (1913-1915).
    Originally named Skate
  • SSN-21: Seawolf (1997-____)
  • SSN-22: Connecticut (1998-____)
  • SSN-23: Jimmy Carter (2005-____)
  • Note: SSN-21 through SSN-23 were numbered outside of the normal SS series. However, this appears to be a special variation that will not be repeated, so they are included here for convenience.
  • SS-24: E-1 (1912-1922).
    Originally named Skipjack
  • SS-25: E-2 (1912-1922).
    Originally named Sturgeon
  • SS-26: G-4 (1914-1920).
    Originally named Thrasher
  • SS-27: G-2 (1915-1919).
    Originally named Tuna
  • SS-28: H-1 (1913-1920).
    Originally named Seawolf
  • SS-29: H-2 (1913-1931).
    Originally named Nautilus
  • SS-30: H-3 (1914-1931).
    Originally named Garfish
  • SS-31: G-3 (1915-1922).
    Originally named Turbot
  • SS-32: K-1 (1914-1931).
    Originally named Haddock
  • SS-33: K-2 (1914-1931).
    Originally named Cachalot
  • SS-34: K-3 (1914-1931).
    Originally named Orca
  • SS-35: K-4 (1914-1931).
    Originally named Walrus
  • SS-36: K-5 (1914-1931)
  • SS-37: K-6 (1914-1931)
  • SS-38: K-7 (1914-1931)
  • SS-39: K-8 (1914-1931)
  • SS-40: L-1 (1916-1922)
  • SS-41: L-2 (1916-1933)
  • SS-42: L-3 (1916-1933)
  • SS-43: L-4 (1916-1922)
  • SS-44: L-5 (1918-1925)
  • SS-45: L-6 (1917-1925)
  • SS-46: L-7 (1917-1925)
  • SS-47: M-1 (1918-1922)
  • SS-48: L-8 (1917-1926)
  • SS-49: L-9 (1916-1933)
  • SS-50: L-10 (1916-1922)
  • SS-51: L-11 (1916-1933)
  • SS-52: AA-1 (1920-1931).
    Originally named Schley. Renamed T-1 in 1920. Reclassified SF-1 in 1920.
  • SS-53: N-1 (1917-1931)
  • SS-54: N-2 (1917-1931)
  • SS-55: N-3 (1917-1931)
  • SS-56: N-4 (1918-1922)
  • SS-57: N-5 (1918-1922)
  • SS-58: N-6 (1918-1922)
  • SS-59: N-7 (1918-1922)
  • SS-60: T-2 (1922-1931).
    Originally named AA-2. Reclassified SF-2 in 1920.
  • SS-61: T-3 (1920-1931).
    Originally named AA-3. Reclassified SF-3 in 1920.
  • SS-62: O-1 (1918-1938)
  • SS-63: O-2 (1918-1945)
  • SS-64: O-3 (1918-1946)
  • SS-65: O-4 (1918-1946)
  • SS-66: O-5 (1918-1923)
  • SS-67: O-6 (1918-1946)
  • SS-68: O-7 (1918-1946)
  • SS-69: O-8 (1918-1946
  • SS-70: O-9 (1918-1941)
  • SS-71: O-10 (1918-1946)
  • SS-72: O-11 (1918-1930)
  • SS-73: O-12 (1918-1930)
  • SS-74: O-13 (1918-1930)
  • SS-75: O-14 (1918-1930)
  • SS-76: O-15 (1918-1930)
  • SS-77: O-16 (1918-1930)

Right Column --
Destroyers numbered
SS-78 through SS-199:

  • SS-78: R-1 (1918-1946)
  • SS-79: R-2 (1919-1945)
  • SS-80: R-3 (1919-1941)
  • SS-81: R-4 (1919-1946)
  • SS-82: R-5 (1919-1946)
  • SS-83: R-6 (1919-1946)
  • SS-84: R-7 (1919-1946)
  • SS-85: R-8 (1919-1936)
  • SS-86: R-9 (1919-1946)
  • SS-87: R-10 (1919-1946)
  • SS-88: R-11 (1919-1946)
  • SS-89: R-12 (1919-1943)
  • SS-90: R-13 (1919-1946)
  • SS-91: R-14 (1919-1945)
  • SS-92: R-15 (1918-1946)
  • SS-93: R-16 (1918-1946)
  • SS-94: R-17 (1918-1942)
  • SS-95: R-18 (1918-1946)
  • SS-96: R-19 (1918-1942)
  • SS-97: R-20 (1918-1946)
  • SS-98: R-21 (1919-1930)
  • SS-99: R-22 (1919-1930)
  • SS-100: R-23 (1919-1930)
  • SS-101: R-24 (1919-1930)
  • SS-102: R-25 (1919-1930)
  • SS-103: R-26 (1919-1930)
  • SS-104: R-27 (1919-1930)
  • SS-105: S-1 (1920-1942)
  • SS-106: S-2 (1920-1931)
  • SS-107: S-3 (1919-1937)
  • SS-108: unnamed (construction cancelled)
  • SS-109: S-4 (1919-1936)
  • SS-110: S-5 (1920-1920)
  • SS-111: S-6 (1920-1937)
  • SS-112: S-7 (1920-1937)
  • SS-113: S-8 (1920-1937)
  • SS-114: S-9 (1921-1937)
  • SS-115: S-10 (1922-1936)
  • SS-116: S-11 (1923-1945)
  • SS-117: S-12 (1923-1945)
  • SS-118: S-13 (1923-1945)
  • SS-119: S-14 (1921-1945)
  • SS-120: S-15 (1921-1946)
  • SS-121: S-16 (1920-1945)
  • SS-122: S-17 (1921-1945)
  • SS-123: S-18 (1924-1946)
  • SS-124: S-19 (1921-1938)
  • SS-125: S-20 (1922-1946)
  • SS-126: S-21 (1921-1942)
  • SS-127: S-22 (1924-1942, 1944-1945)
  • SS-128: S-23 (1923-1946)
  • SS-129: S-24 (1923-1942)
  • SS-130: S-25 (1923-1941)
  • SS-131: S-26 (1923-1942)
  • SS-132: S-27 (1924-1942)
  • SS-133: S-28 (1923-1944)
  • SS-134: S-29 (1924-1942)
  • SS-135: S-30 (1920-1946)
  • SS-136: S-31 (1922-1946)
  • SS-137: S-32 (1922-1946)
  • SS-138: S-33 (1922-1946)
  • SS-139: S-34 (1922-1946)
  • SS-140: S-35 (1922-1946)
  • SS-141: S-36 (1923-1942)
  • SS-142: S-37 (1923-1945)
  • SS-143: S-38 (1923-1945)
  • SS-144: S-39 (1923-1942)
  • SS-145: S-40 (1923-1946)
  • SS-146: S-41 (1924-1946)
  • SS-147: H-4 (1918-1931)
  • SS-148: H-5 (1918-1933)
  • SS-149: H-6 (1918-1933)
  • SS-150: H-7 (1918-1933)
  • SS-151: H-8 (1918-1933)
  • SS-152: H-9 (1918-1933)
  • SS-153: S-42 (1924-1946)
  • SS-154: S-43 (1924-1946)
  • SS-155: S-44 (1925-1943)
  • SS-156: S-45 (1925-1946)
  • SS-157: S-46 (1925-1946)
  • SS-158: S-47 (1925-1946)
  • SS-159: S-48 (1922-1946)
  • SS-160: S-49 (1922-1931)
  • SS-161: S-50 (1922-1931)
  • SS-162: S-51 (1922-1925)
  • SS-163: Barracuda (1924-1945).
    Originally named V-1 (SF-4)
  • SS-164: Bass (1925-1945).
    Originally named V-2 (SF-5)
  • SS-165: Bonita (1926-1945).
    Originally named V-3 (SF-6)
  • SS-166: Argonaut (1928-1943).
    Originally named V-4 (SM-1). Later redesignated APS-1.
    Note: Argonaut was never formally designated SS-166, but that hull number was reserved for her.
  • SS-167: Narwhal (1930-1945).
    Originally named V-5 (SC-1)
  • SS-168: Nautilus (1930-1945).
    Originally named V-6 (SC-2)
  • SS-169: Dolphin (1932-1946)
  • SS-170: Cachalot (1933-1947)
  • SS-171: Cuttlefish (1934-1947)
  • SS-172: Porpoise (1935-1957)
  • SS-173: Pike (1935-1957)
  • SS-174: Shark (1936-1942)
  • SS-175: Tarpon (1936-1957)
  • SS-176: Perch (1936-1942)
  • SS-177: Pickerel (1937-1943)
  • SS-178: Permit (1937-1958)
  • SS-179: Plunger (1936-1957)
  • SS-180: Pollack (1937-1947)
  • SS-181: Pompano (1937-1943)
  • SS-182: Salmon (1938-1946)
  • SS-183: Seal (1938-1957)
  • SS-184: Skipjack (1938-1948)
  • SS-185: Snapper (1937-1948)
  • SS-186: Stingray (1938-1947)
  • SS-187: Sturgeon (1938-1948)
  • SS-188: Sargo (1939-1947)
  • SS-189: Saury (1939-1947)
  • SS-190: Spearfish (1939-1947)
  • SS-191: Sculpin (1939-1943)
  • SS-192: Squalus (1939-1948).
    Renamed Sailfish, 1940.
  • SS-193: Swordfish (1939-1945)
  • SS-194: Seadragon (1939-1948)
  • SS-195: Sealion (1939-1941)
  • SS-196: Searaven (1939-1948)
  • SS-197: Seawolf (1939-1944)
  • SS-198: Tambor (1940-1959)
  • SS-199: Tautog (1940-1959)

This page covers submarine hull numbers from SS-1 through SS-199. For coverage of higher 'SS' series numbers, see:

SS -- Submarines, numbered from SS 200 through SS-399
SS -- Submarines, numbered from SS 400 through SSBN-599 and
SS -- Submarines, numbered from SSBN 600 through SSN-777. (Page not yet prepared)


Watch the video: DOES SHE LIKE THE CAMERA? SHE STEALS THE SHOW ON THE RIVER. BOAT ZONE (July 2022).


Comments:

  1. Kalar

    I am of the same opinion.

  2. Plaise

    Agree, this wonderful idea is just about

  3. Yozshugami

    Simply Shine

  4. Lynford

    It's the simply incomparable topic :)

  5. Shamuro

    wonderfully, very good message

  6. Mwaka

    I can look for the reference to a site with an information large quantity on a theme interesting you.



Write a message