Topic: Is this a spittoon or a small chamber pot ...or am I the one that is potty ?!

[Baked_Beans]

This looks quite old and has a yellow tint to the glass. 6.5 inches in diameter and 3.5 inches tall. Any ideas would be much appreciated. Thanks for looking !

[keith]

Considering it's size I doubt it's a chamber pot or even a spittoon,accuracy in both cases would be problematic in the least,as for the glass you'll have to see what the more learned members come up with,keith.

[Baked_Beans]

Thanks Keith ...I love a good mystery ! There isn't a polished pontil ...it seems to have been twisted off and then heat polished. It was puchased from a charity shop in the historic city of Wells in Somerset.

[Bernard C]

It's a chamber pot, no question at all, and it's not a small one.   It was the one glaring omission from the Glass Circle's 1987 Strange & Rare exhibition and exhibition catalogue.   Like most people I was astonished by their small size when I first saw one, but was reassured that their users where much smaller than us, their meat-rich diet produced less waste, and that daily practice rapidly develops the required accuracy.

The handle is known to us today as a strap or pump handle, started at the top and finished at the bottom, used up to about the end of the 19th century.   Hajdamach dates the introduction of the more modern dab handle to about 1867.   There are expert members here who may be able to be more accurate with a date.  

That finishing of the handle is not a pontil mark.   You need to do some basic reading — a visit to your nearest main reference library or to the Broadfield House Glass Museum bookshop would be a good idea.   Also a sensible name would help.   Some members are uncomfortable replying to an anonymous questioner for a variety of reasons.   I always have that nasty feeling that I could be replying to a known forger or copyright thief.   However, on this occasion your pontil mark error establishes your innocence!

Bernard C.  

[oldglassman]

Hi, Firstly i would agree that it is a chamber pot , and would be in the bedside cabinet for night use,secondly re the handle ,
I can only agree with C Hadjemac that the dab handle ,that is being placed on the item from bottom to top is generally accepted to have been introduced in the 1860's or thereabouts ,the late 19thc I fell is a little late for this type being applied from the top to the bottom  with the usuall curl at the bottom ,
 and thirdly I see no comment in the original post that suggested the writer is referring to the handle in mentioning the apparent lack of pontil mark!!!,
 and lastly B C's comment on the posters name I find a little unnecessary it is no stranger or less sensible or anonymous than 'oldglasman' 'pinkspoons' or 'mosquito' or many others used on the forum.

cheers ,
             Peter.

[Bernard C]

Peter — I had intended a date for the chamber pot, not for the handle types.   Apologies for being ambiguous.

...   I see no comment in the original post that suggested the writer is referring to the handle in mentioning the apparent lack of pontil mark!!!   ...

Agreed.   It wasn't in the original post, but in his or her second post.

...   B C's comment on the posters name I find a little unnecessary it is no stranger or less sensible or anonymous than 'oldglasman' 'pinkspoons' or 'mosquito' or many others used on the forum.   ...

The examples you gave aren't anonymous!   oldglassman is Peter, pinkspoons is Nic Wilson, mosquito is Steven.   ... and it's true that some members, like myself, don't like replying to anonymous posters.   I'm also uneasy about replying to posters with unexplained multiple Ids.

Bernard C. 

[johnphilip]

I thought Bernard was just being Grumpy . :chky:

[oldglassman]

lol probably :thup: but i still see nothing that suggests the poster thinks the handle is the pontil mark , here is the second post were the confusion may have arisen,

Thanks Keith ...I love a good mystery ! There isn't a polished pontil ...it seems to have been twisted off and then heat polished. It was puchased from a charity shop in the historic city of Wells in Somerset.

I dont read this as relating to the handle terminal , or is it me ?? :huh:

 cheers ,
           Peter.

[keith]

Once again wrong,then again I've only been collecting for 17 years(and learning in the last 3 months!)Keith.

[Baked_Beans]

Thanks ever so much for all this information.  It really is great. And thanks Bernard for posting your comments. I have changed my profile...I set this account up a while back and did it in a rush and didn't fill in all the fields . I didn't wish to be anonymous.

I should have made it a bit clearer when mentioning the pontil mark to the base. What I meant to say was that there wasn't a polished pontil 'lens' to the base. There is a spiral pattern to the glass on its base which would suggest the rod was turned/twisted before being snapped off and then the scar heated.  

I too am very surpised at the size and I wont be trying it out though fear of overflows ! I'm sure Victoian china chamber pots were much bigger and it seems strange that glass ones should be so much smaller.

Thanks again to all !