Small Ancient Copper Jug??

That's all I could picture too.

 

Will provide another pic and dimensions etc when home on the weekend. See another members comment above which I think is quite insightful. An original lip cut off and recycled to the bottom, maybe to fix an issue underneath? A shame of course but makes sense as the match is pretty good as is the clout type approach.

 

Nah, this example pic is quite different and tourist tacky.

 

Cool, will try that on the weekend.

ool

 

Why in the world would you hack away all around the rim, taking more copper than is needed for the patch & rendering the vessel very difficult to pour from without liquid spilling out all over? Why fix a hole by wrecking the vessel? When you are able to examine it again, will be interested in what, if anything, is on the inside in the area under the patch. I find this area weirdly regular & neat, when the rest looks chewed off by a badger:

 

My speculation about reuse of a rim was meant to suggest a possible explanation for such an artificial fabrication. In no way would it have been a reasonable method of repair for a pitcher in use. I think this piece has been deliberately mauled and "repaired" with rivets to create a faux antique.

 

There are too many things the photos are not showing or the piece was a real mess to start with.The lighting for the photo is too dark,the outside surface has strange texture and the inside is worse. Without having it in hand I don't think anyone can really say much about it.

 

As far as my eye can measure, the 'rivets' are evenly spaced, including right through the 'patch', & on a level line.

 

Meaning all were done at the same time, yes - I have been seeing the whole bottom as a later patch (not just the smaller irregular piece). Vessels such as this were "raised" out of a single piece of metal, not with separate bottoms attached (other than a foot which would be soldered on).
I suppose we could make up a story that, after a long life in service, requiring at least one repair of the base, the pitcher finally became scrap metal for the tinker. But without provenance or other corroboration, it is just a story.

 

The problem is the piece does not look like it was "raised",the outside and inside surfaces do not support that technique.

 

I think it's lovely in it's weathered condition.......
Size may be a factor...that handle is stuck on to stay....& maybe support a good deal of weight..

 

If this were darkened & accessorized...



http://www.antiqueoyster.com/Produc...r-Hand-Made-Hammered-Arts-Crafts&ProductID=65

Handle scrolls the wrong way, otherwise...

 

The handle is just waiting for some weight in order to fall off,it only has one rivet to hold it and the copper is very over work hardened and probably full of stress cracks.

 

In the same family -



http://www.ebay.com/itm/333093725735

 

Are you discounting the one on the right in the first photo because it appears not to have a head?

 

It has a head,but the handle connecting area has been pulled out past the rivet head.

 

Reset.

All initial appearances aside, assume the edge was destroyed by intention by an owner who just didn't care. People do that. take a pair of pliers to the edge and just start tearing away at it b/c they can. So imagine the edge now 'pretty' with a roll. Examine what we see.

First, I still don't see any 'fresh edges' to the breaks. If you rip a piece of copper it leaves a nice unoxidized edge. and u can see the shinyness on the bottom lip of the riveted patch where that curled lip is set on a surface (a high point). so that means the destruction was done at the same time as the rest of the patina, i.e., the torn edges don't just oxidize overnight to match the rest. You can even see around some of the rivets the verdigris, or polish residue that got trapped. So, some edges do oxidize. And we see that the patina can be 'worn' away on the high points. And the inside is oxidized more than the outside, you can see it in the pics. So why is the inside so much more oxidized? use as a water pitcher might be logical. But if hasn't been used for 150 years to allow the patina to equal out around the edges, how come the inside is not the same as the outside then?

Second, I looked for 19th C riveted copperware. Most I found was Craftsman style 20th c. And the ones that were riveted from the 19th C were detailed, hiqh quality work. https://divine-style-french-antique...century-copper-artisanal-jug-pitcher-riveted/
https://www.loveantiques.com/antiqu...eorgian-riveted-copper-coal-log-bucket-115591

none of these are riveted
https://www.varagesale.com/i/bwvscrts-antique-copper-pitcher
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Antique-...ered-Hand-Raised-Copper-Pitcher-/360441679097 and None look "ancient" enough. but if we give the sellers the benefit of all doubts, we are still at 100 yo. This next one is getting more primitive and distressed, but even the edges on that are 'clean' and not "needlessly crude". https://www.ebay.com/itm/ANTIQUE-PRIMITIVE-COPPER-WATER-PITCHER-8-1-4-BY-8-3-4-/201523441221

Ok, so assume the artisan was in hurry to finish... crude is fine in a pinch. Customer didn't pay the bill so the work stopped. We'll go with that. It was a first practice pitcher by an apprentice, so very very crude. But original to the period, to be established, whatever that may be.

What else can we see? a 'patch riveted around the bottom, why? was the metal brittle and leaking? Again, everything looks the same age from the pics on the outside. Patina on the patch the same as the body, and the crennulation.

And now, if we just bury the thing for years and years 'in an ash pit', we are getting to 'antiquities' - if its not 19th C, or 20th C. what else to matches? The rare Persian or Turkish ewer? There's a saying in the law: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Nothing seems to add up between styles, manufacturing techniques, surfaces, etc. But, nobody knows everything, so it's just my opinion.

 

This one says "antique",but judging from the construction it could have been made 20 years ago in a number of countries.

 

This seems to be the consensus among all who have given their opinion, other than the OP, that there are too many inconsistencies.

 

I know you know metalworking, @Hollyblue, so this puzzles me. Raised (as opposed to spun) vessels are hammered, and this one appears to have a hammered surface.