19th c American A miniature WEIGHT DRIVEN banjo: legit??

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Many of us are familiar with miniature and 2/3 size banjos. They were made by companies like Waltham and Chelsea. Artisans such as Cline and Campos have made them more recently.

In my experience, these always have spring driven movements.

Well, recently I attended an auction with some very nice stuff where I was getting my you know what royally kicked over just about everything. CRAZY prices.

As a consolation prize, I decided that I would bid on a small banjo clock. It was hung rather high on the wall. I really didn't look @ it too closely. I dismissed it as a home handyman special. Kind of thing I like if inexpensive. It was one of the few things @ this auction that was. By the way, the Chelseas in that sale went for absolutely bonkers prices. A T-bridge banjo with cross banded case but with pieces of the tablets broken out, but retained with the clock, went for a hammer price of $15K. Crazy.

Well, upon getting it home and looking more closely, I actually think this may possibly be a legitimate miniature weight driven banjo. I do recall that quite a few years ago, a miniature weight driven banjo was sold through Skinner's. It stimulated quite a bit of debate...and I recall it sold for lots of money.

I thought I would present it here. I am most eager for input, positive and negative. I do fully realize it may be bogus. I do hope that folks will look and comment and it won't be another instantly buried below mounds of threads like "Date my Ridgeway".



I can find no signature anywhere.

The case is constructed from mahogany with pine glue blocks and a pine one piece back board. Cut brads and off center slot screws are used. From what I can tell, that whimpy finial is original. Never had side arms. The throat glass is old. That lower "tablet", if you will, is me trying to be creative with on-line images. When acquired, it came with a photo offset winter scene cut from an old box of Brigham's chocolates. A sign that it may have come from the Boston area??

Here is a pic of this clock with a typical Chelsea 2/3 size and a Waltham miniature. That's a yard stick for reference:



My full-size banjos are all securely bolted into place so I wasn't going to take one down for this group shot. Including finials and without bracket, the full-size ones are about 32 inches.



I believe that the tin baffle is original and it never had a tiedown. There's a nice witness mark behind the pendulum.

This clock has lead something of a tough life with some regluing, general abuse, etc.

There are splits in the back board.

The viewer's upper left glue block is replaced, the others appear to be original. Some ding-dong cut a hole in the original bottom board (retained by small cut nails). I suspect that was done to extend the run time. Based upon oxidation, that was done a long time ago.

Door is a bit "wonky" due to warping and I believe more than one regluing campaign.

Back board has a bunch of holes which I believe were used to secure it to a wall.

The original painted iron dial is made just like a "real" banjo dial:



The dial is retained by 2 j-hooks with 2 alignment pins. Everything lines up as it should. No evidence of another dial.

The paint has nice, real crazing.

I believe that scratch is from when a pliers slipped when attempting to turn the j-hook.

The minute hand is an obvious replacement from a late mantel clock. The hour hand is thicker and to my eyes, hand filed.

Here's the movement:



It attaches with a single screw through the backplate.. I see no evidence of another. A small banjo movement!

Thoughts/comments, please!

I am afraid that I will exceed my picture limit, so I will post something superfluous separately.

RM

 

[bruce linde]

curious as to what Jim DuBois thinks about it...

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Okay, something superfluous.

I am fascinated by folk or outsider art that uses found or discarded objects that in and of themselves have little value but when assembled, they create something wonderful. Typically, these works are unsigned, which surprises people.

Discarded objects related to tobacco and tobacco products were apparently abundant and frequently used. People must have smoked like chimney's and chewed like crazy. This large scale use generated much material for those with a creative bent.

For example, tramp art. Many wonderful objects were made from discarded cigar boxes. Apparently, a lot of those around. I have previously posted a tramp art shelf clock. See this thread:

That's why the clock is a tramp...

I have a soft spot for those one off clocks, some I guess could be considered folk art. Examples of folk art clock cases including a folk marquetry/parquetry example have been previously posted on the MB and may be accessed by clicking here and here . Another form of folk art used to make...

mb.nawcc.org

But all sorts of tobacco related discards were used. For example, I have seen amazing things made from the cloth bands used to bind bundles of cigars. Check out this antique smoking jacket:

No limit to the imagination.

I have previously posted on the Forums a wonderful bit made from discarded chromolithographed cigar bands. Here's a pic:



Well, on that theme.

At one time, tobacco was sold as a coiled roll or brick. To identify the brand, growers, of whom there were many, attached tags to them. Originally from wood, they then changed to small tin tags which could be embossed, chromolithgraphed, etc. From what I could find, they were used up until about 1920.

They were saved and could be redeemed for a premium. People also collected them. Well, someone not only collected them, but them used them to create something I think it pretty impressive:



What's that Jim Carrey exclamation from the movie, "The Mask"? "Ssssmokin'"

RM

 

[J. A. Olson]

There's a special elegance to these old banjo clocks. Whether it's a Waltham, Chelsea, a Willard, Derry or even Herschede's first banjos - something that other manufacturers' later attempts at replicating the design never really captured. A great array of banjos, and well presented.

Date my Ridgeway

 

[Jeremy Woodoff]

I would convince myself that the miniature banjo is period and original, and it wouldn't take much convincing. I'd be happy to own it! I can't, however, believe the finial is original.

Jeremy

 

[Jim DuBois]

curious as to what Jim DuBois thinks about it...

Bruce, thanks for the prod on this timepiece. Bob and I had discussed it a bit via email shortly after he got it. I forgot to toss in some thoughts here as a couple of other projects needed attention. And besides that, the dog ate my homework!

But, to the point; Everything I can see in the photos suggest the clock to be period. The hour hand, the entire movement, the oxidation of the insides of the case, the weight shield, the dial both front and back, on and on, all look period from what I can see.

One of the very hardest traits to duplicate/make look right is that of patina/oxidized raw wood, just as we see throughout the interior of this case. And it looks entirely correct in these photos. As do the other features I mentioned previously. So, I like it and agree with Jeremy that the clock would be welcomed here as period and original.

It does prompt the quizzical and perhaps rhetorical question as to WHY? And to that point I can't even offer any scholastically-based thoughts or even any wild speculation. It tends to defy conventional wisdom in my thinking. The movement gearing is not in keeping with other examples of other style clocks of the period, and let us say the period we need consider is 1825-1850? The rounded top of the movement plates suggest earlier in the period, not later. The columns on the movement provide no additional clues, The teeth on the wheels and the wheels themselves all suggest conventional work, most likely earlier in the period I chose to define. The movement was not hacked out in the basement of Uncle Fix-it circa 1920. Looks like a production effort in everything I can see. Does it keep time with the pendulum it has? The smaller plate size is also of interest as compared to other period banjos.

One of my "concerns", and it is a small concern, is why is the lower box of the clock so oversized and out of scale as compared to the rest of the clock? Almost like it was scaled to fit the tablet with little or no concern as to scale with the rest of the effort? That seems most strange when the builder was able to execute the movement and the rest of the effort all so well.

And just to contribute to my propensity, and Bobs, to go off-topic, how many of us have ever seen an Ives 8-day roller pinion wood works tall clock movement that is key wind, versus a pull-up?

 

[Jeremy Woodoff]

Interesting thought about the lower box being out of scale. If you look at the picture of the back of the clock, it seems less out of scale, and that picture appears to be centered on the middle of the clock. Most or all of the pictures of the front seem to be centered towards the bottom, a perspective that makes the top look smaller in relation to the bottom. Also, I think a better sized finial would help the balance.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Bruce, thanks for the prod on this timepiece. Bob and I had discussed it a bit via email shortly after he got it. I forgot to toss in some thoughts here as a couple of other projects needed attention. And besides that, the dog ate my homework!

But, to the point; Everything I can see in the photos suggest the clock to be period. The hour hand, the entire movement, the oxidation of the insides of the case, the weight shield, the dial both front and back, on and on, all look period from what I can see.

One of the very hardest traits to duplicate/make look right is that of patina/oxidized raw wood, just as we see throughout the interior of this case. And it looks entirely correct in these photos. As do the other features I mentioned previously. So, I like it and agree with Jeremy that the clock would be welcomed here as period and original.

It does prompt the quizzical and perhaps rhetorical question as to WHY? And to that point I can't even offer any scholastically-based thoughts or even any wild speculation. It tends to defy conventional wisdom in my thinking. The movement gearing is not in keeping with other examples of other style clocks of the period, and let us say the period we need consider is 1825-1850? The rounded top of the movement plates suggest earlier in the period, not later. The columns on the movement provide no additional clues, The teeth on the wheels and the wheels themselves all suggest conventional work, most likely earlier in the period I chose to define. The movement was not hacked out in the basement of Uncle Fix-it circa 1920. Looks like a production effort in everything I can see. Does it keep time with the pendulum it has? The smaller plate size is also of interest as compared to other period banjos.

One of my "concerns", and it is a small concern, is why is the lower box of the clock so oversized and out of scale as compared to the rest of the clock? Almost like it was scaled to fit the tablet with little or no concern as to scale with the rest of the effort? That seems most strange when the builder was able to execute the movement and the rest of the effort all so well.

And just to contribute to my propensity, and Bobs, to go off-topic, how many of us have ever seen an Ives 8-day roller pinion wood works tall clock movement that is key wind, versus a pull-up?

View attachment 764744

Thanks so much for you input!

I see what you mean about the scale of the lower "box". In person, not quite as blatant. Actually, it is more or less in similar proportion to the head as one would find in full sized ones. I can see no evidence of alteration.

I have found that when some clock styles are miniaturized, the proportions may be thrown off some. The best efforts are ones which look like a full sized example that was hit by a shrink ray and the proportions are perfect.

Re: the movement. One other feature I will mention is that the crutch is brass, not steel.

I can't keep the clock running continuously. But it's really dirty and appears to have some less than great repairs. I do believe the pendulum "assembly" to be original.

There's that apocryphal story about the Harvard philosophy professor who gave his class a final examination with just one question. Why? One student's answer was, why not? They got the A. Horological history is full of the why's. Look at some of the efforts of the likes of Ives, S.B. Terry and so on.

I know there was another similar one that sold through Skinner's years ago. Anyone remember?? I'm also positive that I have the catalog stashed either in my basement or garage. In both locations, buried. In fact, I tried to clear a path to the catalogs in the garage in a futile attempt to find it. I keep empty derelict cases stored there for parts. Stacked like a Jenga game. One fell and whacked me on the head. Had to get the laceration epoxied @ the local ED. They don't do sutures anymore. Forget that!

Interesting! I have not seen an 8 day Ives key wind ww tall case movement with rolling pinions. I have a Thomas and Hoadley 8 day key wind (posted on Facebook).

Glad that I have been a bad influence. Always feel free to go off on tangents, including on my threads.

RM

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Re: the movement. One other feature I will mention is that the crutch is brass, not steel.

RM

I was re-reading this. I made a mistake. The crutch is steel, not brass. Don't know how I got that revered.

RM

 

[Dick C]

The bottom glass reminds me of "little miss muffett". Is there a spider showing?

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

The bottom glass reminds me of "little miss muffett". Is there a spider showing?

Actually, it's an image from a genuine original tablet from a period banjo I found online which I appropriated.

I do believe that's who it is.

No, no arachnids present. Remember, when they show up, they scared Little Miss Muffet away so, the depiction is prearachnid.

RM