Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: Paul S. on November 25, 2010, 07:56:38 PM
-
Associated with drinking in some way or other - but not sure how. Large ground/polished concave pontil, and with very pronounced wear around the outside of the base - so guess it might be somewhere between 60 and 100 years old. Height is about 3.5/8"/93mm tall. Is something missing from the top hole perhaps? Be interested to hear if anyone does know its intended use, or idea of age - and thanks for looking :)
-
Posset cup,baby feeder or invalid 'tot'? :huh:
-
actually Keith, I also had invalid drinking mug/cup possibility in mind :) I'd go with your 'posset cup' idea - other than the fact that I believe they always had two handles, and whilst originating in the C17 (Ravenscroft), did not (I think) extend to the late C19 or C20 as I believe this does - of course I could be well 'off the wall' with that comment. I also understand that spouts on 'possets' were generally of finer shape and design. Not sure about the baby feeder idea - although I guess that prior to the advent of plastics/Bakelite or whatever, then glass and ceramics were the only materials available, so a possibility maybe.
-
Looks like a 'Spout cup' but no handle? Trawl through medical collection sites if you can bear it, they are invariably hundreds of pages with numbered pagelinks. But good chance you will find it.
-
A couple of thoughts to consider Paul.
The hole in the top could be for two purposes;
one is to fill it (pretty obvious really) and the other is to control the flow:
If you put water in it and the start to pour, then place your thumb over the hole, the flow will stop. We used to use a more refined and modern item like this for irrigating eyes....called an undine.
It could also have been used as an infant feeder and you might like to ask this group of collectors
http://acif.org/
They seem to have every infant feeding bottle known to man!! (or woman!)
Just as a point of interest....I used to be a designer for a baby feeding bottle company (within my nursing remit :srn:) and designed the 'Avent' Baby Feeding Bottle.....it took the company over 10 years to be brave enough to produce it, it was considerered too way out at the time!!
I had a huge collection of old bottles, but never any like this one!
It could well be that it is an invalid feeder.....
-
The feature of the "no-spill" funnel reminds me of Ivo's "Blue Henries" - could it be a sputum collector?
-
http://www.google.nl/images?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&biw=1440&bih=717&gbv=2&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=invalid+cup&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
-
thanks for the replies everyone :)
the more I look at it, it does seem that invalid feeder of some description is highly likely - and Frank's comment re spout cup (but minus handle) a good possibility. The images in the 'Invalid Cup' link, almost all appear to have a handle and the spout appears to start more from the bottom of the cup - whereas this one has a spout some way up the item, and of course no handle. I have yet to try the medical collection sites, but will get around to it later.
rosie - I have tried the links to the USA baby feeder collectors site but they seem presently inactive. Yes, do understand your comments re putting thumb over the hole i.e. air pressure supporting the water and preventing it coming out. Same as the old schoolboy science lab thingy where you place a piece of card over a part filled tumble - invert it quickly, and the watch how the contents stay put. :)
Sue - could be wrong, but can't see it being a spitoon, unless you are a world champion spitter through tiny holes - mind you, I haven't seen Ivo's book so maybe there are some examples similar to this.
But believe eventually it will have an id of invalid feeder of some description. :)
-
Aside from the spout on the side the shape is the same as some old ink wells. (I have never seen a feeder without a handle so I am skeptical of that.) If it is an inkwell I'm wondering about putting the pen in the spout to hold it?
-
We are all trying lateral thinking....that's good!!
I like the inkwell idea, and have looked at hundreds.... this was the nearest I found
http://compare.ebay.com/future/200536472038?var=svip&sort=BestMatch
Also thinking outside the box....John (my inventive hubby) suggested a form of egg separator....the yolk being retained in the top and the white poured out the spout.
Then I thought that the dilemmma of sore or cracked nipples could mean that a nursing Mother might place this to her breast so the nipple entered the hole in the top. Spout pointing downwards with a rubber teat, could mean that the infant feels it is still being breast fed, but affording relief for the poor nursing Mother.....just a thought?
A gravy/fat separator was a further thought, but I think you would need a handle if the gravy was hot.
Anyway....back to the detective work....... :wsh:
-
I've seen the same shape inkwells before on ebay but now that I'm trying to find one none are currently listed. I did see the "tea kettle" inkwells but that's not exactly what I was thinking of.
-
Do try the USA baby site again Paul, it is just very slow to load and looks as though you won't get the picture, but after a few seconds they suddenly come up.
There is a LHS scroll feature to access the collections.....have another go....I have just had a look and it all seems to be working.....use the same link I originally gave.....goood luck!! :X:
-
have just spent some minutes typing the comments below - so, whilst I appreciate you have both posted comments very recently, indulge me in letting me not waste my thoughts. thanks :)
""thanks julie - think the spout too narrow to accommodate a pen, and it really is a proper drinking/pouring spout shape. However, do take your point about the shape and slightly concave top being reminiscent of an inkwell - but the missing handle is a mystery. Would agree with you that feeders do have handles, normally - but I guess there are exceptions to all rules. The spout lip has now become, with the passing of time, damaged slightly - and you really would not want to put your lips on what might be a sharp edge. Looking carefully, it does appear that originally the spout edges were ground and slightly bevelled.
rosie - I'm warming to the idea of dicussing nipples ;) but seriously thanks for the inkwells link - really fascinating when you look at their history. Perhaps now that Ivo has finished writing about 'cuspidors' he might like to start a volume on inkwells.
When I saw the large ground/polished concave pontil mark, I assumed this might be perhaps even pre 1914 - but maybe not really quite so old. I'm also wondering if there might originally have been some kind of rubber stopper/valve inserted into the hole after filling with a liquid - thus preventing any spillage even if the object was dropped or laid down. All those with handles have large openings and thus need a handle to hold and steady them. If this example had a completely closed top then spillage would not be a problem, and a handle might be dispensed with"".
-
Hi Paul, don't dismiss th 'irrigator' route....It could have been used to wash out wounds, or indeed, a nasal irrigator...a surprisingly popular item, even today!
http://www.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&expIds=17259,27463,27585,27817&xhr=t&q=nasal+irrigator&cp=15&wrapid=tljp1290802652307014&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=982&bih=420
Back on the case............like to leave you with something to ponder on other than n!pples :hi:
-
rosie -thanks for all your links. I did manage eventually to view the US infant feeder collectors pics., although images quite often too small to determine pieces accurately, so may send them a pic. of my example for an opinion. :)
-
I think a posset cup is out as the spout should come from the base so the curdled milk on top doesn't get stuck in the spout or worse in your mouth :-X
-
Any progress to report on this enigma Paul? :huh: I am particularly interested because as a nurse, it looks like the sort of item I should know more about!! :srn:
I wondered if you had any joy from the people on the American site??
-
I'm no further forward at the moment rosie. By coincidence I was trawling thru one of my books and was reminded of something unusual and which I have in fact never seen in the flesh, but which made me think of this object. There were/are pieces called 'toddy lifters', and although this is certainly not one, the fact that my example has a similar finger hole in the top, made me think that pouring from it would be similar to the action of a 'toddy lifter' i.e. the container is filled and will only pour for the duration that the finger/thumb is removed from the hole in the top. I believe we did discuss something vaguely similar earlier in the thread. I don't believe that the spout would be placed in the mouth, as the edges are too sharp (unlike ceramics) - so really only use would be to pour a controlled volume of liquid into another container. However, at the weekend I sent pics. and some suggestions to the V. & A. in London, asking for their help. Apparently, they are presently experiencing a high volume of requests for help, and have suggested a 20 day lapse before answering. I haven't contacted the States at present, and will wait first of all to see what the V. & A. have to say. (I have a similar request out with a Finnish institution - so hope I don't get a bad name for pesting the authorities ;))
-
If your experience at the V&A is anything like mine with the Rackow Library at Corning this year you may have to wait a lot longer than 20 days... I have been waiting over 2 months for the Rackow to get back to me about a simple document enquiry,
Robert(bOBA)
-
Paul, I am still thinking along the medical irrigator theory. :srn:
I mentioned a glass flask used to irrigate eyes, called an 'Undine' earlier on in this thread, but I am now looking at an item called a 'Neti'. It is a nasal irrigator, used to wash out the nasal sinuses. (hope you aren't having your tea, or are of a delicate constitution!) :mrgreen:
There is another thought.....could this have been used to place a leech onto a specific place on the body withouf handling the leech?? Or am I just trying to invent a use for it!? :o :X:
-
There are glass leech tubes to place leeches on the body but that isn't one of them. There are some leech tubes on this page towards the bottom http://www.phisick.com/zphleb.htm.
-
A fascinating site Juli3.....
Is it worth asking them if they would have a look at your pictures Paul?
There ia a vague similarity with the very old Islamic one http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cupping_glass_Louvre_MAOS705.jpg but it is too easy to get side tracked. :wsh:
-
Yea, I saw that. It is similar to the mystery object but I'm not sure it is a cupping glass. I've never seen one like it and I don't know how that could work. Cupping is about creating a vacuum and that has 2 different holes in it.
-
really do appreciate the suggestions and lines of thought girls, but I'm going to discount both the leech and cupping ideas for the time being, thanks for the links ju1i3. I am convinced this spout is for pouring a liquid, not placing in the mouth - although whether the top hole (plus thumb) is meant to perform the task of creating a vacuum I'm unsure.........tho I have a strong feeling it does. The lack of a handle might indicate that the object is not meant to be held for any appreciable time - just very briefly to perfom its task. Sorry to seem dismissive rosie, but I'm having trouble going with the medical irrigation theory - again wouldn't a handle be a requisite? I've racked my brains over this and achieved almost nothing, so will give it a rest for a while, and fingers crossed the V. & A. might come up with the answer - although by all means please continue looking - I do appreciate your keeness - and not foregetting help from ju1i3 :)
-
OK Paul, but don't totally dismiss the irrigator route.....after all, an undine doesn't have a handle, but does have a spout and a control hole......
-
While visiting the medical and pharmaceutical museum in Delft yesterday I discovered a whole lot of lookalikes. These are breast relievers, used in lactation. Some are flat, some are round, some have a manual pump attached, some are entirely made in glass and some in a combination of glass and rubber. The museum had around 20 different ones, all in glass.
http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1895/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1895-24740.jpg
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/mhWcjg2DXBSEkccQ2lNpHA
-
Absolutely fascinating. (Ivo, perhaps glass paraphernalia for breast milk is your next book in-the-making?)
-
If your experience at the V&A is anything like mine with the Rackow Library at Corning this year you may have to wait a lot longer than 20 days... I have been waiting over 2 months for the Rackow to get back to me about a simple document enquiry, ...
Robert — I heard that the Rackow was installing new racking / shelving earlier this year. They may still be involved in the end of that major operation.
Bernard C. 8)
-
Some are flat, some are round, some have a manual pump attached, some are entirely made in glass and some in a combination of glass and rubber.
Speaking from experience, they would almost certainly all have had some sort of suction device attached to them if they are not just nipple shields. Otherwise there is no point to them.
-
Christine, couldn't this object been used to catch milk that was manually extracted (i.e. squeezed by hand) from the breast?
-
Christine you seem to know about breast pumps but not about relievers. Don't make me explain the difference. :srn:
-
I had thought about an infant feeding / expressed breast milk (EBM) device earlier in the thread:
Then I thought that the dilemmma of sore or cracked nipples could mean that a nursing Mother might place this to her breast so the nipple entered the hole in the top. Spout pointing downwards with a rubber teat, could mean that the infant feels it is still being breast fed, but affording relief for the poor nursing Mother.....just a thought?
Paul seemed reluctant to persue the issue....can't imagine why, I was wearing my :srn:'s hat at the time!!
-
A little research has revealed that they are all breast relievers but not all breast relievers are breast pumps.
they would almost certainly all have had some sort of suction device attached to them
Suction is required to provide relief, even if it is the mother applying it by mouth herself, otherwise it won't do anything. Catching the drips is useful but not enough!
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/broughttolife/objects/display.aspx?id=92531
Christine, couldn't this object been used to catch milk that was manually extracted (i.e. squeezed by hand) from the breast?
No because of the way you express; something with a wide mouth that wasn't held on the breast would be more suitable
-
Oh. :pb:
You see, in my imagination, this piece wasn't held to the breast -- it was placed on a surface, and the woman bent over it and expressed her milk by hand. The 'collapse' at the top and the small hole would allow the milk in, and keep flies (or whatever else might spoil the milk) out. The spout would be used to pour the milk into a feeder.
Perhaps not very logical. :usd:
-
I'm OUT of here. I gave the correct answer on good authority and now get discredited ? Shame on you! :wsh:
-
It would require a very good aim Anik!
I'm not quite sure how I've discredited you Ivo. :huh: I'm just applying personal experience.
-
wasn't trying to be dismissive rosie - just that I have other issues in life vieing for my attenton at the moment. My knowledge of the expressing/pump matters inadequate to make it worth commenting, although appreciate the concave top might suggest catching a dropping liquid, and think only point of certainty is that the spout is for pouring. Will have to adjourn for the time being, but thanks again. :)
-
Sorry Paul, didn't intend to appear pressing on this matter....hope all is well with you.
-
My first thought on seeing this was that it once held a filter of some sort. Just some more lateral thinking.
It seems more like a pour spout than one you'd drink from.
-
Have just received the following reply from the V. & A. in London.........
""Dear Paul Sterling
Thank you for your email.
Your object appears to be a breast-glass, for expressing milk. It is likely to be 19th-century and possibly of British manufacture. It is likely that the spout would have originally been longer.
I do hope this information is helpful.
Yours sincerely
Ruth Gilmore
Ceramics and Glass""
My sincere thanks to the V. & A. for their time and trouble, and despite a lack of faith in a prompt reply from some quarters, full marks to them for a response in something like two weeks :)
I am not sure quite why the spount may have been longer, but guess that we should give the prize to Ivo. :)
-
Great that you have that one sorted Paul, so you were right Ivo, well done....... but in fairness, Anik and I did get pretty close with out breat milk catchers, and I had just found this when I realised you had the V&A reply.
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/broughttolife/objects/display.aspx?id=92498
Yours is superior in that it has the spout to empty it, but otherwise very very similar.
Isn't it great when the mystery is solved!
-
Adding to the V&A answer and the excellent info from the science museum, I can now confirm that an identical to the one which started this thread has been found in the catalogue of the Altare glass museum - so not of British manufacture. Strange enough, Altare have it misdescribed as an invalid cup...
-
How do you validate a cup? :wsh: :ooh:
Carolyn
-
I came across this picture yesterday in The Victorian Chemist and Druggist. What he calls "unusual spouted measure" reminded me of the object here.
-
thanks ju1i3 - very interesting picture - however, I have lost the plot a little here...........was it decided that the nipple was placed into the container, or not. :-\ or was it the case that the object simply caught drips? The top left example shown in your picture has a rather large top opening - does that indicate massive nipples or just an over-lactating woman :ooh:
Carolyn - sorry, I wasn't sure if you were joking, or being serious - my apologies. :pb:
-
Sorry I should have included this text from the book: "An unusual type of hand-made glass measure had a spout and was particularly useful for administering medicine to patients who were unable to sit up". W A Jackson, the author, certainly seems to know his stuff. It wouldn't be the first time the V and A (or any museum) didn't get things right (the curator of the Royal College of Physicians museum did not appreciate me pointing out the difference between cupping glasses and leech pots and the V+A has a leech pot which they just call a "bowl").
best, Julie
PS agree with Christine's comments, you need suction for a pump/reliever (see p. 28 of Jackson's book) whether through a pump/rubber bulb or the long glass tube that the mother could suck on herself (as in the Science Museum image) otherwise if you're just doing a bit by hand a regular cup is more suitable
-
you might have noticed the difference between the concave breast reliever and the convex "measure". And re the function of a breast reliever vs. breast pump, ask a doctor. :hat:
-
Perhaps ask a mother with breastfeeding experience. Breasts are more or less leak proof; the few drips that do leak will not offer any relief from pain or provide enough milk to feed an infant. The letdown reflex has to be stimulated in some way, generally by suction or manual stimulation (a hot bath or merely thinking about baby feeding work infrequently). Mere generalised pressure or popping a nipple in a cup do not work.
Perhaps Ivo would tell us what he considers to be the difference between a breast reliever and a breast pump (apart from a means of applying mechanical suction).
-
I don't need to ask a doctor about breastfeeding. I have breastfed two children. Aside from personal experience I have just read W A Jackson's book The Victorian Chemist and Druggist (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VhWyEOivWpoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=jackson+Victorian+chemist+and+druggist&source=bl&ots=eSIWoG2nM4&sig=lN2T3zHqPJhhI2BwvQkWoeLTukw&hl=en&ei=QkMTTfTrB4OohAfw_OG3Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&sqi=2&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false) see page 28.
Yes Ivo do tell us what you think the difference is between a reliever and a pump.
-
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/broughttolife/objects/display.aspx?id=92498
If it still is not clear - go ask a doctor.
-
The method described there will NOT work. That's a man's description and does not describe the difference between a breast reliever and a breast pump. That item merely a device for catching milk produced by manual stimulation. I've also breastfed two children and used a breast pump and manual stimulation. When you do an Internet search for breast reliever, all sorts of devices come up including breast pumps. As I said earlier breast pumps are breast relievers but not all breast relievers are breast pumps.
-
agree Christine :)
-
Carolyn - sorry, I wasn't sure if you were joking, or being serious - my apologies. :pb:
When in doubt, Paul, go with being silly. It's my usual default setting :ho:
Carolyn
-
Looks to me like there's a hole on the rim, right side, in the Science Museum photo. Perhaps that's where the suction devise attached to the cup.
To me the description reads as if breast reliever and breast pumps are synonymous. "Mothers used breast pumps, or relievers, to remove their milk. " If there were no commas in this sentence, the implication would be that pumps are distinct from relievers, but with the commas it says they're the same. I think. In American anyway; perhaps British English is different?
I had that same thought - that description was written by a man!
I suppose originally the spout arched on Paul's, with a removable hand pump on the end, like a curved turkey baster.
How much does it hold?
-
Perhaps ask a mother with breastfeeding experience. Breasts are more or less leak proof; the few drips that do leak will not offer any relief from pain or provide enough milk to feed an infant.
It might depend on the mother... I'm embarrassed to mention it, but the combination of small breasts and a huge supply meant that my let down could travel about 3 metres, and would go off at the sight of a pram or a distant baby's cry. Breast pads used to disintegrate within about 30 minutes. I felt sorry for the kids: it must have been like trying to latch onto a fire hose. However, I take it this wasn't normal experience. Perhaps these were for other mothers with similar issues?
-
Cathy B......you were not alone!!!
Believe me!
I was going to duck out of this thread until I saw your comment.....I felt you needed to be absolved of your embarrasment.
Happy Boxing Day!!
Rosieposie. x
-
:rn: :24: Too much Christmas Cheer perhaps - I'm wondering whether that was a case of too much information... :-[
-
Not at all, it's relevant to the usage of these items :)
I have heard of other women who've had that experience as well. Personally I needed the suction of a breast pump to get anything out artificially and even then it didn't work that well.
-
thanks to all of these ladies for sharing experiences of their mammary glands - and in reply to krsilber in Minnesota - and just to show that I'm trying to keep abreast of this thread - the capacity is approximately a little over 7 fluid ounces/ a little more than 200 ml. From memory, when my sons were that age, these figures seem a little less that the average teated baby bottle - but I could well be wrong. :fc:
-
Spot on Paul......as always. :thup:
Happy Boxing day to one of the 'Naughty Boys'! >:D
rosieposie. :angel:
-
While trying to find something on hyacinth vases, I found this (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Wy-bqQBDM_cJ:biber-team.eu/fundort-kloake/upload/PDF/Milchpumpe.pdf+%22Olufsen+Weyse%22&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjEqIKtGnAwGDdNi7HEX4k6kkMXYIZeDjWwnaLYPBHWaWxP661Uil1oyDKCdajLb2lw0Abbjz4yDZrkEFDJknTdv7ChtpxyUNoBO4kQfLRxNTn5IrhvLQhGnShjasOfS1LRYT0Z&sig=AHIEtbSZa4Zcd8_mSzn14ahDhPWKIR476A) with its helpful second page illustration
Hopefully the link will work
-
It certainly makes it clear how they were used :)
-
'do-it-yourself' expressing - and very ingenious indeed. We used to syphon petrol from the car a bit like that. However, I can't quite fathom what is going on in woood cut No. 6 - and the German is beyond me. Looks like someone is presenting some milk to a mother perhaps, or is the seated woman (she's the one holding up the magnifying glass) giving away some milk. I can see words like Kindes and Mutterleib which look as though they are self-explanatory. Anyway, some of them have been to a party, because they are still playing their instruments. thanks to Lustrousstone for sharing this interesting tit-bit ;)
-
Great link, and very interesting prints and article. The one Paul refers to says, "Shown here is the celebration of the baby's first movement. From the 'book of the art, through which worldly man may become spiritual.'" Not sure what mom's holding - a mirror? There's an interesting illustration of baby bottle-type things near the middle of the article - vessels with claspable tops and tubes sticking out.
-
thanks for your translation Kristi - and I have looked again at the illustration, although don't think I'm a lot wiser as to what exactly is going on. The entire article looks very interesting - just a shame I can't read German. However, it was for the second page illustration/explanation re the use of these pieces, that Lustrousstone's contribution was very helpful.
-
Yes, it is indeed interesting! A detailed account of pregnancy, birth, and breast feeding in the middle ages, from the mixtures of herbs used in various stages, to where they cut the cord and what it was tied with, to the relative mortality of infants under the care of a wet nurse in the child's home vs. with her family. You find the dangedest things looking for info on hyacinth vases.
-
I didn't think it was that detailed. To read it in English just copy it into Google Translate.
-
thanks very much ju1i3 - I am indeed ignorant of the ways of the www - such wonders of the modern age never cease to amaze me...........alternatively, of course, perhaps I just need to spend more time in front of the screen :) I take it that they have a translator on hand for most of the day and night ;)
-
I tried Google Translate (that's a new one to me! No idea there was such a tool), and it said the doc was too large. It is indeed detailed. Even tells the methods and implements midwives used to get a stillborn fetus out. I found it especially interesting that they knew of the benefits of breast milk in making the baby strong and resistant to disease. Apparently they also knew the importance of the bond developed through breastfeeding, though it didn't stop some families from getting wet nurses. Children were nursed until they were 2.
-
sorry, that was probably more graphic than anyone needed. Not to mention off topic.
-
Hi Kristi, you can use Google translate for large documents by splitting it into paragraphs or sentences......as each bit is translated, copy and paste into 'Word' or whatever your document program is....I'm lazy and just use a blank page on Outlook.
I'm still searching for a definative ID for your mystery drinking object Paul......as I don't think we have really had one that has been satisfactorily identified.
-
no problem Kristi - and thanks Rosie - appreciate your continued enthusiasm :)
-
Thanks, Rosie, I'll have to play around with that. All I found was a place to copy a web address to, but I wasn't looking too hard since I'd read the article already. Great to know about though!
I thought the range of evidence made it clear that it's a breast reliever with the long tube (probably broken then) cut off. Is there still a question of that?
-
Not certain myself, I still think it is a flow control cup of sorts.......it would be very difficult to clean milk out of don't you think?
-
Yes, but no more so than the other breast relievers we've seen.