Can anyone identify this?

[cogar]

To confirm my speculation, Tanda7 will have to tell us if any of those "wheels" will turn on the shaft,

The 4th picture in the 1st post stated; ”Note tight fit of dowel in hole, no sign of frequent removal”, but that could be caused by the humidity in the environment is was stored in.

Or, due to its age, and the way some dowel pins were made years ago, the dowel rod could just have “expanded back” from its “compressed” state.

The “old” method of making a dowel pin was to first drill a “hole” thru a piece of ¼” to ½” thick steel ….. then saw out “square” wood sticks that are slightly larger or thicker than the “hole” you drilled, …. then sharpen one end of the stick just enough to get it started in the drilled “hole”, ….. then “beat” the other end of the stick with a mallet, driving it thru the “hole” …… which will shave the corners off n’ compress the wood …..and a round dowel pin will emerge from the other side.     

I once bought a couple hundred 8” long hard-wood dowel pins at a flea market in Florida, with diameters of 1/8”, ¼” & 3/8”. I quickly learned that about 50% of them were greater in diameter than they were supposed to be. So every time I needed one I would first “check-it” with my drill bit “index”. 

[tanda7]

I agree with KC, and believe it is a “weaving shuttle” that was made to hold two (2) different colors or types of thread or yarn.

Please note via the following picture that:

If the ball-point pen is 5 ½” in length then the “shuttle” is roughly 18” long and 2 ¾” to 2 7/8” in diameter.

And my assuming that it is a shuttle, the following is only my learned opinion on its construction and use, to wit:

To hold the unit together, the dowel pin “axel” would have to be firmly attached to and extend from one “end cap”, thru the divider “partition”, to the other “end cap”.  The wood wheels would be “freely” rotating on the “axel”.

To “load” the shuttle “bobbin” the slats would be removed from the wood wheels and the “weft” thread or yarn wound around the bobbin’s “axel” …. and when the slats were replaced the end of the “weft” thread or yarn would “exit” thru the metal grommet(s).

The only way the thread or yarn could be “unwound” from the bobbin’s “axel” would be to “pull-it” in the direction of either “end cap”, which would permit the “slatted” enclosure to rotate on the “axel”.

Only one (1) of the 4 identical grooves in the “end cone” would have been used to hold the “weft” thread in place, ….. to keep it from unwinding from the bobbin, …. when the shuttle was pushed or pulled between the “warp” threads.  

Weaving is a method of fabric production in which two distinct sets of yarns or threads are interlaced at right angles to form a fabric or cloth.  The longitudinal threads are called the warp and the lateral threads are the weft (woof) or filling (threads). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weaving

Thanks for the input. I will revisit the shuttle theory and pass along your observations to some "experts"
So far everyone contacted about the shuttle theory says it would not work for a number of reasons.  A shuttle must be able to travel smoothly across a plane of yarns or strings and they usually are designed so that one side is flat-ish to keep it situated in a particular way. This object doesn't seem ideal for that. Also, even the more primitive shuttles we've looked at have a spool that will rotate easily, plus we have never seen a photo of one that has all those removable slats which in it's present state fit quite loosely. We have not been able to find a photo of a shuttle remotely like this as a matter of fact. We also have never seen one that is so asymmetrical, they are usually completely symmetric so they behave the same traveling in either direction.

Also the little peg sticking out near the blunt end. Inexplicable for the shuttle theory.
My friend seems pretty convinced that the thing does NOT turn or come apart, but you are correct, wood changes shape and size over time.
Thank you again, we will try to envision your explanation more between us and the "experts".

For what it's worth, my first impression was a multi-thread shuttle also.

ETA;
The end caps and the center disc appear to be milled from a single piece of wood each. The area where the slats attach are NOT separate from the elements adjacent. In other words these elements are comprised of 3 pieces of wood rather than 7, (2 at each end, 3 in the middle)

[tanda7]

More examples to support my toy theory.

Perhaps the grommets are there so it could accommodate hardware for hanging;



Also our device has a few other holes in the slats without grommets, maybe to attach other things like the elements on this one;



and several of the examples I've found have the main gondola located near the front, this could explain the small peg protruding near the blunt end.




Thanks to everyone who is trying help us!

ETA
I don't know if you can tell from the photos in my original post but the slats are shaped as if by a cooper in barrel making. This could have made the thing almost seamless in it's new condition. Some have suggested this could indicate a connection with liquids. I maintain it would give a model zeppelin a more finished, tighter appearance, although there are other areas that don't seem to be as tight, such as the space between the end of the slats and the end caps and center piece. Although that could be explained either by it's age or by the dowels not being fully seated.

[tanda7]

UPDATE

Just got this info from my friend:

" the chest originated in an old home in southwestern Ontario. The object was at the bottom of the chest and that is where the donor found it. The contents of the chest, besides this mystery thing, consisted mostly of women's clothing dating from what the curator estimates to be ca 1850 to pre-WWI (Edwardian, that is). The women's clothing ran the gamut of coats, waist jackets, gloves, corsets, linen sleepwear and undergarments. The men's items were smaller. I saw a collar. There were some men's waistcoats in the chest I was told, but the donor opted to keep those. The curator also pulled out and showed me some smallish textile remnants and an embroidered cover for a small side table.

Since everything in the chest was textile/clothing related, I don't know if that implies that the object is in some way connected with these things in terms of an associated use.

None of the missing slats or any other wooden parts were in the chest. What I saw and handled is all that there was of that item."

He was not able to handle the item again but when he does, I've asked him to get exact measurements.

A photo of the box it was found in;

[Ipcress]

Chest contents are worth a bob or two !

[KC]

Thanks for the updates!

[cogar]

So far everyone contacted about the shuttle theory says it would not work for a number of reasons.

Tanda, I really don’t have anything to do other than watch the TV or play Solitaire, so I will address the following stated “doubtfulness” in an attempt to give a reasonable explanation of said.
 

A shuttle must be able to travel smoothly across a plane of yarns or strings and they usually are designed so that one side is flat-ish to keep it situated in a particular way. This object doesn't seem ideal for that.

Tanda, most every loom was individually “hand-made” and they ranged in size from small to the really large “barn frame” looms that are so wide that the weaver had to slide the shuttle far enough across the loom between the warp threads to be able to grab hold of it with the other hand, …. or have a helper to grab it and slide it back, ….. that is, ….. iffen they were weaving a really wide piece of material.

But now, many items that were woven were quite narrow in width. For example, my wife has a linen dishtowel that is like 14” wide by 24” long that was woven on a large ”barn frame” loom by her grandmother. She also has a bed-size “red & white” coverlet that was woven in 2 pieces of like 30” in width and was then sewn together in the “center”.  Such narrow width items did not require sliding the shuttle, nor the aid of a helper, because the weaver could pass the shuttle with one hand and grab it with the other.
 
Read this part: Before the flying shuttle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_shuttle

Also, even the more primitive shuttles we've looked at have a spool that will rotate easily, plus we have never seen a photo of one that has all those removable slats which in it's present state fit quite loosely.

Well now, when that shuttle was first “crafted” by someone, its spools probably rotated easily also. And not finding a photo of similar one doesn’t surprise me any….. because it just might be a “one-of-a-kind” or the only one of its “kind” that still exists. Taking all the slats off and putting them back …. just to wind the bobbins …. would have been a tedious task, thus resulting in a “failed” invention. Or it was a “failed” invention from the get-go but the owner saved it anyway. 

We have not been able to find a photo of a shuttle remotely like this as a matter of fact. We also have never seen one that is so asymmetrical, they are usually completely symmetric so they behave the same traveling in either direction.

Well now, “different strokes for different folks (inventors)”. There were no Rules stating how a shuttle “had to be made”. There has always been a few people out that will “try-something-different” and that is why we are now flying around in jet powered aircraft.

Also the little peg sticking out near the blunt end. Inexplicable for the shuttle theory.

That little peg would come in handy when reaching between the warp threads to grab the end of the shuttle and pull it on thru. HA, who knows, it might have been a “revision” to the original design. 

My friend seems pretty convinced that the thing does NOT turn or come apart, but you are correct, wood changes shape and size over time.

Your friend might be 100% correct. I’m pretty sure it doesn’t easily come apart but I can’t actually tell from the pictures whether the bobbin covers were made to rotate or not rotate.

The end caps and the center disc appear to be milled from a single piece of wood each.

Whoever made it surely used a wood lathe and probably “cut” both end caps, center disc and 1 wide wheel out of the same piece of wood. And when done cutting, drilled all the holes “in alignment” in that 1 wide wheel ….. and then with it turning in the lathe again, used a fine-tooth saw blade to “cut” all 7 pieces apart. Then drilled the “center” holes for the “axel” and assembled it. But I’m just guessing, ya know.
Cheers

[tanda7]

You make many good points. Especially the idea that the shuttle could have been "handed" across the weave. That really changes how I view it's viability as a weaving instrument.

Whoever made it surely used a wood lathe and probably “cut” both end caps, center disc and 1 wide wheel out of the same piece of wood. And when done cutting, drilled all the holes “in alignment” in that 1 wide wheel ….. and then with it turning in the lathe again, used a fine-tooth saw blade to “cut” all 7 pieces apart. Then drilled the “center” holes for the “axel” and assembled it. But I’m just guessing, ya know.
Cheers

To be clear, the three sections of the body are each solid, one piece each, for a total of three pieces, not 7.
Your insights are thoughtful and helpful.

[cogar]

To be clear, the three sections of the body are each solid, one piece each, for a total of three pieces, not 7.

If that proves to be the case then I would just call your posted item a “treen whimsy” which was most probably made by a male member of the family as a “woodworking” project and the mother saved it as one of her favorite mementos. 

[bigwull]

Great explanation...some kids make little wooden cars, trains aeroplanes..and then there is this ICBM....it makes sense....