# Chatwood - Boston Btl...



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

Ahhhhhhh I do believe I have made my photo smaller! Here goes ~


----------



## div2roty (Dec 29, 2008)

That is a nice looking bottle.  Sadly, I don't know anything about it.  Somebody on here should be able to help you though.


----------



## woody (Dec 29, 2008)

Never seen one, although the color looks real nice.
 Maybe you can post a better picture during daylight so the sun can show the true color.
 A pic of the bottom of the bottle would be nice, also.


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

> ORIGINAL: woody
> 
> Never seen one, although the color looks real nice.
> Maybe you can post a better picture during daylight so the sun can show the true color.
> A pic of the bottom of the bottle would be nice, also.


 Will do ~ I do believe I actually have one that shows the daytime color but it is just as dark ~  Will try to post, Thanks woody


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

Here's the CHATWOOD smaller version 

 I think iv'e finally gotit right! LOL


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

That is a great bottle!  It is a whiskey bottle from the 1860's I believe...  not very common.  The glass is sick but I think it would still do very well at auction.  How much I'm not sure, around 100?  Someone else will know...


----------



## GuntherHess (Dec 29, 2008)

Interesting bottle, would love to see a photo of the bottom.


----------



## appliedlips (Dec 29, 2008)

It should read C.H. Atwood and believe it was a tonic or a bitters.I would guess 1865-75.


----------



## woody (Dec 29, 2008)

Where did you find the bottle???


----------



## Oldtimer (Dec 29, 2008)

Never heard of Atwood's being in such a bottle. I know they came in square for quinine, and 8 sided for jaundice.


----------



## Stardust (Dec 29, 2008)

stop the car i like it!


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

you are too funny!


----------



## GuntherHess (Dec 29, 2008)

> C.H. Atwood


 
 I would agree with Doug. Its C H Atwood Quinine Bitters. Also listed as making tonics. I see them listed in the 1860-1865 period. C H Atwood was dead by the late 1870s. Very nice bottle.
 Kovels lists it as a back bar whiskey but they appear to have omitted any research. 

 Not to be confused with the famous Moses Atwood of Mass. Were they related? Heck if I know...


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

I found your bottle in the Bitters Bottle Supplement by Ring/Ham.  

 Listing# A 111.5  
 The label said "Atwood's Genuine Tonic Bitters, Chas. H. Atwood, Boston"  
 Embossing  is "C H ATWOOD"
 10 x 2 1/2 
 7 x 1 3/4
 Round, green fluted neck, round collar
   The history of Atwoods is long, but to surmise, your bottle was produced in the 1850's.  Should be a rough pontil on that bottle.
 I couldn't find any value for your bottle, sorry.  Nice bottle!!


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

> Not to be confused with the famous Moses Atwood of Mass. Were they related? Heck if I know...


 
 This is another bottle in the long line of Atwood's history. It's an early one.


----------



## GuntherHess (Dec 29, 2008)

cool...


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

Absolutely Awesome!  You rock ~  For two years I have wondered and searched to no prevail

 WOW ~  Thank you so very much!


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

however, the base on this one is exactly 2" 
 very cool and again I thank you!


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

Robo, did you dig that and is it pontiled?


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

Doug your right it a bitters.  It is C H Atwood, but I was told that it is a whiskey by an old timer.  I have a nice yellow one, the embossing is somewhat different though... it only say C H Atwood around the shoulder.  I've only ever seen one other besides mine, it was a green one like yours, but embossed like mine.  I guess then it was meant to be a table bitters?  After looking in the supplement I see Ham lists it with label reading "Atwoods genuine tonic bitters, Chas h Atwood, Boston...  so there it is...

 a varient such as yours is not listed...


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

this is a different Atwoods then the Moses Atwoods bottles...  Mine is not pontiled, and I suspect neither is Robo110's bottle...


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

> a varient such as yours is not listed...


 
 Tigue, I agree with you, it's not listed with the lettering *in the circle*. 
 It is listed in green, but the listing has your embossing, and no circle .  What I noticed is that your bottle is not listed regarding the color. Looks to me like you both have rare varients.  Yours for color, his for embossing.  Cool!!


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

The lip on my bottle looks different from yours Ti ~


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

I was really surprised when I took a good look a the pic of the embossing, and saw it was different.  I had to go dig mine out!  Robo, my lip is actually just like yours, it didnt come out well in the pic though.  Mine came from the big dig...  maybe yours did too?!  lol


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

It's seems to be an applied sqaure band type


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

> this is a different Atwoods then the Moses Atwoods bottles... Mine is not pontiled, and I suspect neither is Robo110's bottle...


 
 Tigue, doesn't it list in the supplement under the history of Atwoods Bitters this very bottle and no other Atwoods bottles are listed?  To me, that says that they are including this under the Atwoods legacy.    Am I off base here?  Or are they being inconclusive and mysterious? Maybe they didn't really know, but hey sure seem to hint heavy at it.


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

its actually listed separate from the Atwoods history, just after it.  If you read the history there is no mention of C H Atwood.


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

> its actually listed separate from the Atwoods history, just after it. If you read the history there is no mention of C H Atwood.


 
 I did read it and you're right, but it just seemed to me like it was connected. Why would they give the entire Atwood's history and then list an Atwoods bottle if it wasn't related?  They didn't list any other Atwoods in the supplement.   It seems like an odd way to write a reference book.  Maybe they weren't thinking too clearly, or they omitted something by mistake. Do you see what I mean?  I wonder if they meant to put the Atwood's history article in the first book and it ended up in the supplement by default.   It sure would've been appropriate in the first book.


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

yeah, it is a little confusing there.  Possibly it was omitted from the first book or there had been a mistake so it was reprinted in the supplement, (the atwood history that is), not sure!  

 To be honest although it is the best book yet put together on bitters and I find no fault nor do I mean to criticize I do feel often that it leaves me in want of more...  of information that is available...  I guess to put together all the information available on every bitters out there would take a couple lifetimes!


----------



## tigue710 (Dec 29, 2008)

> ORIGINAL:  Robo110
> 
> It's seems to be an applied sqaure band type


 
 I do not see it, yours is square?  it looks rounded like mine...


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 29, 2008)

> I do feel often that it leaves me in want of more... of information that is available...


 
 Amen to that!  You gotta admit , though, folks on this forum pump out a lot of info !!  What we can't get from books, we can look for in here.  Love the forum.


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

Hi Ti,   Nope I think we have the same tops  took some photos to better help:


----------



## Robo110 (Dec 29, 2008)

INDEED, and much quicker Plus it's a blast Yakkin and finding things out~
 Lovin' it!

 Be chatting soon as tomorrow's another day! Ughhhhhh been at it all day now


----------



## kungfufighter (Dec 30, 2008)

Have bought and sold quite a number of these over the years - they come in two sizes and a variety of pretty colors.  Yours appears to me to be the smaller bottle.  Very good looking bottle - it has been a while but I've sold mint examples of this size/color variation in the $85 to $115 range...


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 30, 2008)

> Have bought and sold quite a number of these over the years - they come in two sizes and a variety of pretty colors. Yours appears to me to be the smaller bottle. Very good looking bottle - it has been a while but I've sold mint examples of this size/color variation in the $85 to $115 range...


 

 Jeff, out of curiosity, what's your opinion on whether or not this is part of the Atwood's legacy?  Ring's supplement book seemed misleading.  Thanks, Paul


----------



## kungfufighter (Dec 31, 2008)

For what ever it's worth I'm not aware of any connection Paul...


----------



## beendiggin (Dec 31, 2008)

Thanks, Jeff.  Just wondering.  Like I said, the Bitters supplement seemed to imply a connection.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jan 3, 2009)

Not sure if this has been posted, didn't re-read the thread..
 Kovel's has this listed as a backbar whiskey...


----------

