Twice smitted?

[jdaw1]

Please, what has happened to a bottle that is or has been ‟smitted”?

With context:

The Pipe 1847 is divided in the 4th tier by a plank & each bottle is twice smitted

Maximum resolution available:


Maximum resolution available, extra contrast, and whitened:



Added 15th March: another ‟smitted”, the picture edited to remove the shipper name (buy the book), added contrast, and whitened.

Part of Pipe of [a specific port] second class packed in front tier & twice smitted

Detail, similarly altered, from different photograph of same page:



Added 16th March. The mystery word is likely to be the name of the ship.



Added 17th March.

Twice Smitted from Bin 60

Also added 17th March.

‟Once Smitted”

Also added 17th March, these two pictures being from facing pages in the same bin book.


There are plenty of instances of this merchant blending port, between shippers, between vintages, as well as mixing VP with non-VP. It is likely that the non-apostrophised small numbers are in gallons.


Added 19th March.

Twice Smitted
Sealed Blue

Also added 19th March, these two pictures (as usual with extra contrast and whitened) being from facing pages in the same bin book.

The word you say you can't read appears to say 'unsealed'

So it does. Thank you. In which case the smitted-ness can’t have been done to the seals.

[DRT]

Dr Johnson's Dictionary (Enlarged Edition of 1854) defines "Smite, v. to strike ; kill ; destroy ; blast"

Bottles were often subjected to some sort of procedure to pit the inside of the glass so that the crust would stick. Perhaps "blasted" with something? The more times blasted (smitted?) the better?

[jdaw1]

Smite v. ! Pa. t. smote !, ” smit. Pa. pole. smitten !, smit (arch.), ” smote. [!] 1. To administer a blow to (a person, etc.) with the hand, a stick, ! 2. Of the Deity, in or after biblical use: ! 3. To strike with a weapon, etc., so as to inflict serious injury or death ! 4. a. ! Of hail, lightening, flame ! b. To beat or dash against (something) 1440. c. Of sunlight ! 5. Of diseases ! 6. To infect, imbue, impress, strike suddenly or strongly ! 7. Of the heart, conscience, etc.

4b looks best: ‟To beat or dash against (something) 1440”. My English is late-20C southern, and the source is mid-19C northern, so some mis-fit is possible.

But the ‟twice” is odd. Take a handful of shot, insert into bottle, and shake vigorously. You want extra? Shake vigorously for longer. The quantity of pitting is continuous, whereas ‟twice” suggests a discrete quantity.

Also odd is ‟smitted”, rather than ‟smote”.

So DRT’s suggestion is plausible, but not without defect.

[jdaw1]

smit ! n the. Scot. and northern English dialect. an infection: he’s got the smit.

¿¿Smitted, as in, to have inflicted the pox, as in, to make spots or chips in glass??

The same dictionary has, for smite, only the strong senses of blows and damage.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Can you provide a transcription of the rest of the text you've posted?

[jdaw1]

Can you provide a transcription of the rest of the text you've posted?

The Pipe 1847 is divided in the 4th tier by a plank & each bottle is twice smitted

1. Also added to first post.
2. First picture therein changed to show more context.

[JacobH]

Also odd is ‟smitted”, rather than ‟smote”.

I think, for me at least, ‟smitted” might be a more obvious way to form the past participial of smite than ‟smote” (especially as if we used it as an adjective it would be ‟was twice smoten”, I think...).

I’m not sure I understand the context, either. How is the pipe divided in the 4th tier by a plank? And why would one do that? Is it informing the reader that the pipe was drained to the 4th tier (at which stage a plank was put across to prevent further oxidisation), and that Port used to fill twice-smitted bottles?

[jdaw1]

The Pipe 1847 is divided in the 4th tier by a plank & each bottle is twice smitted

It could be that these are two separate clauses.

First, ‟The Pipe 1847 is divided in the 4th tier by a plank”. So that cellar space was filled back to front, and there is some obstacle in the fourth tier, requiring that it be separated by a plank.

Second, conceptually different, ‟each bottle is twice smitted”. Maybe ‟smitted” refers to the splash of paint the action of adding paint is not so different from the action of ‟smite”.

Maybe.

[Andy Velebil]

Possibly refers to a bottle being "struck" a second time during production where a small circular or oblong piece of glass is added to the outside of the bottle which would bear the producers/negotiants name or trademark???

[mosesbotbol]

Just like the last plague of Exudus; Smiting of the first born Egyptians.

[jdaw1]

Another picture added to first post.

[Alex Bridgeman]

The "dividing in the fourth tier by a plank" I took to mean that when you are stacking bottles in an arched cellar, you often place a piece of wood across a layer of bottles so as to spread more evenly the weight of the bottles above the divider and to offer some protection to the higher bottles in the event that one of the lower bottles collapsed. The implication for me was that 3/4 of the bottles lay below the plank and 1/4 above.

I was also wondering whether the smitting action might be the addition of the splash of white paint to indicate the upper side of the bottle. However, this is only speculation.

[JacobH]

The "dividing in the fourth tier by a plank" I took to mean that when you are stacking bottles in an arched cellar, you often place a piece of wood across a layer of bottles so as to spread more evenly the weight of the bottles above the divider and to offer some protection to the higher bottles in the event that one of the lower bottles collapsed. The implication for me was that 3/4 of the bottles lay below the plank and 1/4 above.

Yes, that would make sense. My uncertainty was that it says ‟the Pipe 1847”, not ‟the Bin 1847”, nor makes any explicit reference to bottling the pipe, but then I suppose the second clause wouldn’t make sense without some bottling.

[uncle tom]

Difficult one this..

..my first thought is that if this refers to one of the dictionary definitions, it would be twice smitten, not smitted; which makes me suspect that this might be an industry specific piece of jargon, possibly a corruption of a Portuguese term.

Perhaps one of the industry's elder statesmen could shed some light on this..

Tom

[jdaw1]

Another picture added to first post.

[jdaw1]

Another picture added to first post.

[jdaw1]

Another picture added to first post, but only ‟Once Smitted”.

[jdaw1]

Another two pictures added to first post, from facing pages in the same bin book, one once and the other twice smitted.

[Roy Hersh]

In terms of the 4th tier/plank - I had a similar thought as did Alex except with pipes instead of bottles. On a ship, stacking pipes in the hold was fraught with peril during storms and a plank to help secure the 4th tier might have been used to prevent pipes from toppling.

As to "once" or "twice smitted" it seems like improper grammar if we are correct in assuming these are not ship names. It will be interesting to find out what this could have meant back in that epoch.

[JacobH]

Could these be shipping terms rather than Port / wine terms?

[Andy Velebil]

I wonder if it's a blending or racking term. Once smitted would be blended or racked off once, etc.

What is interesting, at least so far, is there is no Thrice Smitted...unless JDAW is holding out on us

[jdaw1]

What is interesting, at least so far, is there is no Thrice Smitted...unless JDAW is holding out on us

I am not ‘holding out’, but nor have I finished this batch of pictures.

[DRT]

Could these be shipping terms rather than Port / wine terms?

I wonder if it's a blending or racking term. Once smitted would be blended or racked off once, etc.

If you look back to the first picture it says "each bottle is twice smitted", so I think the term relates to the bottle rather than the ship or the blend.

[uncle tom]

I suppose one has to view this from a logical perspective - what might, in those distant days, have been sometimes done once to a bottle, and sometimes twice..?

Multiple capsules are a relatively recent phenomenon, and the practice of pitting the glass with shot would either have been done once, or not at all. Moreover, it is hard to see how such a term could refer to the packaging of the product.

Which leaves us looking at the bottle markings..

Might a once smitted bottle have an embossed capsule, and a twice smitted a label as well? (- or vice versa..)

It's hard to think what else it might refer to..

Tom

[jdaw1]

The two pictures ‟Also added 17th March”, ‟from facing pages in the same bin book”, are of two blends, seemingly made on the same day of the same ingredients, in different ratios. That contradicts hypotheses about shipping, port, pipes, or storage of pipes. The marking of bottles is plausible.

Could it be the paint? If a thin brush had been used to mark the bottles, say ¼″ thin, then bottles could have received single or multiple stripes. And that would have been recorded in the bin book, perhaps in a manner like this.

[DRT]

smit (Scots) to stain, infect > SMITS, SMITTING, SMITTED.

[Andy Velebil]

The two pictures ‟Also added 17th March”, ‟from facing pages in the same bin book”, are of two blends, seemingly made on the same day of the same ingredients, in different ratios. That contradicts hypotheses about shipping, port, pipes, or storage of pipes. The marking of bottles is plausible.

Could it be the paint? If a thin brush had been used to mark the bottles, say ¼″ thin, then bottles could have received single or multiple stripes. And that would have been recorded in the bin book, perhaps in a manner like this.

Very possible it refers to how many times it was passed through a filter of some sort prior to being bottled.

The last pictures from facing pages would seem to support that theory, one was filtered only once, the other was filtered twice (or through two layers of membranes whereas the first was only through one membrane)

[jdaw1]

Three pictures added to first post.

[uncle tom]

The word you say you can't read appears to say 'unsealed'

[jdaw1]

That batch of photos has been examined, with examples posted.

[RAYC]

After a few google searches, I'm going to throw my lot in with the white paint (or marking of some sort):

"For the benefit of south-country readers it may be necessary to explain that "smitten" is the Cumberland
word for marked. The sheep belonging to each farmer have a certain mark put upon them, usually with tar, as a
'means of recognising them in case they stray away. This is called " smitting," or marking them, and many of these
marks differ very little in appearance."

(from: http://www.archive.org/stream/oldtimepa ... c_djvu.txt)

See also the "Survey of English Dialects":

smit: "to mark sheep with colour to indicate ownership"; "to mark sheep in some unspecified way"

(from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=FeAO ... ep&f=false)

and also, for an archive of Westmorland and Cumberland smit marks: http://www.geog.port.ac.uk/webmap/thela ... itfram.htm

[DRT]

That is very convincing.

[rjet1]

OED, http://www.oed.co.uk/view/Entry/182636 s.v. _smit_ sense 1(a) "To stain or mark in some way; to colour or tinge; to smut"; and 1(d) "To mark (sheep) with smit or ruddle." All of which seems to concur with the white paint theory.

Er, hello, everyone, by the way.
Rupert.

[jdaw1]

Rob and Rupert have settled it: white paint it is. Thank you both. Would sir like one splash or two?

(I didn’t find it in the OED, but I went via Google. Note to self: OED might be blocking Google.)

[Andy Velebil]

Then the question becomes, what was the difference between one paint mark and two? Which there has to be or else why go through the trouble to carefully record in a ledger how many times someone put a little bit of white paint on a bottle.

[jdaw1]

Then the question becomes, what was the difference between one paint mark and two?

If a thin brush had been used to mark the bottles, say ¼″ thin, then bottles could have received single or multiple stripes.

[DRT]

Then the question becomes, what was the difference between one paint mark and two?

If a thin brush had been used to mark the bottles, say ¼″ thin, then bottles could have received single or multiple stripes.

I'm convinced by the theory that "smitted" means to mark the bottle in some way but less than convinced by jdaw1's follow-on theory.

It was very typical for wine merchants, including this one, to use different coloured wax capsules and embossed stamps to distinguish between one wine and another but, apart from proper stencil labeling, I have never seen any paint marks on a bottle that could be construed as an identifying mark.

Given that this merchant had many different ports in stock at any given time, why only 1 or 2 smits?

[Andy Velebil]

Then the question becomes, what was the difference between one paint mark and two?

If a thin brush had been used to mark the bottles, say ¼″ thin, then bottles could have received single or multiple stripes.

I'm convinced by the theory that "smitted" means to mark the bottle in some way but less than convinced by jdaw1's follow-on theory.

It was very typical for wine merchants, including this one, to use different coloured wax capsules and embossed stamps to distinguish between one wine and another but, apart from proper stencil labeling, I have never seen any paint marks on a bottle that could be construed as an identifying mark.

Given that this merchant had many different ports in stock at any given time, why only 1 or 2 smits?

My question precisely, which Jdaw1's theory hasn't addressed.

[jdaw1]

There are multiple markings:
• Bin number;
• For those sealed, the capsules;
• Labels;
• Perhaps neck tags.

Additionally, not sufficient of itself but not harmful:
• Smitted-ness.
It isn’t enough to uniquely identify a Port, but can help distinguish two otherwise similar Ports.

[uncle tom]

This thread was discussed at the Factory House luncheon last Wednesday, where it provoked as much puzzlement as it has here..

Tom

[jdaw1]

The same question, linking to this thread, has been asked at the BritishBottleForum.co.uk.