Topic: information request on flared rim clear pot.

[Paul S.]

don't really know how else to describe this one.    Fairly thin, blown, glass - handle might indicate a date prior to about 1850/60, but no pontil mark so could be deceiving.   Base is quite largely inset, giving 'kick/mound' to the inside, and fair amount of wear on the underside.    Has very small amount of what appear to be limescale rings on the lower parts of the inside of the bowl, so had liquid of some sort at some time.     No grinding/bevelling to the rim, and the large bubbles are apparent in the flared part of the rim only.   No manganese green showing under the u.v. torch, and in daylight the whole piece has this tendency to a slight citrine colour (might this be the effect of a different sort of decolourizer?)    some black seeds in the glass, and a fair number of small bubbles.      Poor quality and poor manufacture  -  might it have been a 'frigger' possibly?   Has the most dull 'ding' you can imagine, so presumably no lead - might it be soda glass?         Apart from the obvious - and it's way too small for that  -  anyone have an idea of possible date and use, as without a spout I can't think what it might be used for.  Diameter is about 5"/130mm

[Ivo]

dare i suggest spittoon? Not that I know anything of those, of course...

[Paul S.]

well, you are the expert Ivo  -  I certainly hadn't thought in that direction - guess I never see any spitoons.   So the liquid marks around the inside aren't exactly water  

[antiquerose123]

well, you are the expert Ivo  -  I certainly hadn't thought in that direction - guess I never see any spitoons.   So the liquid marks around the inside aren't exactly water  

I think it is too small for a Kids *Glass Potty* and then those liquid marks could be even worse.  :24:  :spls2:

Here is something (kinda) the same but a cut glass one.  Idea is similar:
http://bid.showtimeauctions.com/ABP-Cut-Glass-Hand-Held-Spittoon_i5839831

...and maybe not your every day Spittoon, maybe this is an Older DENTAL Spittoon.....as a suggestion, and maybe worth checking into.

 

[Paul S.]

the shape is similar to your link rose, thanks, although whenever I go to the dentist he always asks me to spit into a sink!   I wonder if Ivo is prepared to offer a suggestion for a manufacturing date for my example.

[Ivo]

any time before 1888 when it became painfully clear that spitting in a potty was NOT a good idea.

[Paul S.]

very many thanks Ivo

[ju1i3]

Your "spittoon" looks similar to this "flame cup" 230613317959 (I don't think there is such a thing - he's putting two unrelated items together). It is smaller and I don't know if they are for the same purpose but it did remind me of yours.

[Paul S.]

thanks for the link.         I don't have Ivo's book, so unable to comment on the size range of spittoons, although it may well be that they were made this small......... but guess with this one you didn't dare spit from too great a distance .    Regret I am equally ignorant of the 'flame cups' (I notice that Wikipedia do use the expression 'fire cupping' although most references are simply to 'cupping').    This cup is, perhaps, a little more ornate with its finial, although maybe most are just plain 'cup' shaped.     Looking at these two pieces, might there be a chance, do you think, that a small source of heat cud be placed in the lower part - thus providing some heat to the 'cup' - which is then ready for use on the body, but you may well be correct in that these pieces are indeed unrelated.     Remarkable how you can collect older glass for several years and still not see examples of some pieces which for perhaps a couple of hundred years or more must have been used quite commonly.        You buy Ivo's book, and then you can tell us all about the size range of spittoons.

[ju1i3]

The cup did not need "warming", it needed the oxygen removed. It had a flame (from a candle or rush light I assume) put inside the cup to have the flame use up the oxygen in the cup so that when it made contact with the body there'd be a vacuum. I think the flame in a separate item as shown would be less effective to do that but I guess if the two were put together eventually it would.