Most visitors online was 1990 , on 7 Feb 2022
It is a nice find. It was the best watch that American Watch Co. made at the time. Here is the basic sn lookup http://nawccinfo.nawcc.org/LookupSN.php?serial=40119&sernumin=
This is the list of all the runs except one tht was entered as "thin model" http://nawccinfo.nawcc.org/LookupSN.php?serial=40119&sernumin=
Don't know, probably dropped or thrown there, junk pile at base of wall, kids also sometimes take items from houses and drop or throw them around, so I wouldn't think it was hidden there, found with front cover open, no glass or bezel ring. Dial was covered in looks like spider juice. I am an avid metal detectorist, and find all kinds of artifacts. I'm not really commenting on this thread, as I don't know all the rules, and compassion for the item, is just to let people view it. Hoping to have restored one day, parts free moving. The discovery was all just in a days adventure, and hopeful people will enjoy just looking at the piece , and the best way is just to admire.So. What do we reckon this fine collectors piece was doing hidden in (a) stone wall, and how long do we suppose it had been there for?
Rick, there may be a very few 17 jewel AWCo grade Model 1859 movements around, but the great majority have 19 jewels, not 17. Many of the jewel counts in the hand-transcribed AWCo records are in error [based on subsequent discussion, it might have been better to say "misleading," rather than "in error"], and this is one of those errors [i.e., misleading entries]. AWCo grade Model 1872s are similarly described as 17 jewel in these records, but almost all have either 18 or 21 jewels. Various Internet websites simply propagate these old mistakes.So this is a 17 jewel, model 1859 made in November of 1860. Only 260 of this grade produced? Seems like an important find. A quick internet search revealed one sold a while back that is a few serial numbers away from this one. Only one observation on Tom's database.
I can't imagine many American manufacturers putting out a 17 jewel watch at this time. Looking at one of Tom's pictures I don't see any cap jewels, so assuming the center is jeweled to make 17?
No, Rob. I think it is safe to assume that all of the AWCo grade Model 1859 movements shown on this thread have 19 jewels, and I would call all of these movements "very scarce." There are hole and cap jewels on both sides of the pallet arbor, and hole jewels on both sides of the center wheel arbor. The upper center hole jewel is just hidden by the dust cup.So it's actually a very scarce watch being 17j and few made.
Rob, I'm sorry I'm not making myself understood. I don't think any of the watches shown here are missing any jewels. I think they all have 19 jewels. The OP was just misled by some inaccurate Internet information.All in all I think it was a fantastic Waltham model 1859 Metal Detector find.
If it is a 19j missing some jewels(if I understand Clint's post above)
then it can possibly be repaired. I have seen ton's of watches found similarly
over the years but this is in the best shape of all of them.
Rusted hands and all.
Among others, yes. But the watches don't lie. They almost all have 19 jewels. Perhaps I can persuade my watchmaker to disassemble his example, so everyone can see the jeweling.
I would never take anything away from the very hard work that went intoBut let us not lose sight of the fact that the NAWCC's Waltham lookup utility is a very useful tool and we should be grateful to its creators. I use it all the time. Few data sources are perfect, and certainly none of my own.
Of course, the PWD has the same error, and without any redeeming period context at all. I was actually thinking of the PWD when I made my original post.I would never take anything away from the very hard work that went into
creating the database in the first place but databases can be updated.
The PWD is a fantastic example of this.
My sentiments as well. Reasonable people may differ over certain choices that were made, but the value of the work speaks louder than any disagreement.Tom McIntyre, there is absolutely no need to defend yourself for all the
hard work, and important decisions, and philosophy of how
you wanted to create your database 23 years ago. It has been an
invaluable source for the community. There are always discussions of procedure
in hindsight, like we are doing now. I never meant to disrespect any of your
Royal E. Robbins was the Treasurer and principal owner of the American Watch Company. His jewelry firm, Robbins & Appleton, which was based in New York City, sold many kinds of watches. I have pictures of an 1850's era 23 jewel English movement by James Hoddell of Coventry. It is in an 18K gold, swing-out R&A case that was carried by Confederate Colonel Lewis Thompson Woodruff, who was the C.O. of the 36th Alabama Infantry. Robbins & Appleton was also the principal sales agency for the AWCo in the period we are discussing. R&A sold both uncased Waltham movements to other retailers, and complete cased Waltham watches to anyone who wanted to buy them. So many early Walthams, but by no means all early Walthams, are to be found in R&A cases. These cases were made in R&A's own case shop in NY City. Many other early Walthams were put in cases that other retailers may have procured from a wide variety of sources.Would anyone know if the Robbins & Appleton Case is american, and is there another movement in existence with this same case, but not english...
Yes, Tom. I have wondered quite a bit about that, and both my AT&Co grade movements have setting screws around the center arbor, but I bought both of my examples from the same person, a mutual friend of ours, at different times, and he never expressed confidence that the center wheel pinion hole on either watch was jewelled. John Wilson, who has examined quite a few AT&Co grade Model 1859 movements over the years, could not remember ever seeing a 16 jewel AT&Co grade Model 1859 either. So whereas they may well exist, I'm guessing they are likely not very common. Of course, as I recall, you own the only known 17 jewel AWCo grade Model 1859, and I own one of at most two known 21 jewel KW20's, so I've learned to never say never when it comes to these things.Clint, I noticed in the ledgers that the early 1859 runs alternated between AWCo and ATCo. The ATCo runs are noted 4 1/2 prs jeweled. They would be 16 jewels and might mean that many, most or all of them had jeweled center wheels under the dial. The early 1857 model ATCo also included runs of 4 1/2 prs with the same jeweling.
The jewel in the center under the dial has always been a mystery to me. After this earliest period 4 1/2 prs was used when the top plate was jeweled in the center as in the 1872 American Grade.
We definitely need to get to the bottom of this.I have not had one I could exmine, but my understanding was that the center jewel was a plain sleeve bearing and, if you looked at it, it was likely to break. If it broke, it was "easily" replaced by a cylinder of metal.
I have no documentation on that, but I thought I heard it from Bill, who can no longer confirm it.
There are a fair number of 1857 model ATCo with 16 jewels. It would be nice if someone could show a picture of the dial side of the pillar plate stripped down to the bearing from one of those.
Does anyone know about the 1859 model with the vibrating hiarspring stud that Peter Isles once had?
One of the wonderful things about the Forums is that you need not own one of these watches to enjoy them, if money gets in your way.
Wondering if clues as to who owned this watch, could be under the dial, and how many jewels are actually in it, being its been a long time since it's been serviced.Just have to wait until I find the right watchmaker that I can be present when serviced.Not really just frustrsted...lol
I know of no owners who signed the undersides of their watch dials, Bill. One or two eccentric persons might have done that, but it wasn't a normal thing that people did. There was a dial painter named Josiah Moorhouse who often signed the backs of the dials he painted, and he was at Waltham when your dial was made, but there is no indication that he painted your particular dial. Besides, any watchmaker who worked on your watch could snap a picture of the back of your dial with his cell phone for you. You wouldn't need to be there. As for the jeweling, I'd be very surprised if your watch had anything other than 19 jewels. Probably only one American Watch Company grade Model 1859 movement is known that does not have 19 jewels, and most collectors probably would prefer to have a 19 jewel example, anyway. I know I would.Wondering if clues as to who owned this watch, could be under the dial, and how many jewels are actually in it, being its been a long time since it's been serviced.Just have to wait until I find the right watchmaker that I can be present when serviced.
Ok, Clint...You have a Nice holiday, it all sounds about right, and I'll pick back up on this after Jan 1. Thank You for your knowledge...BillI know of no owners who signed the undersides of their watch dials, Bill. One or two eccentric persons might have done that, but it wasn't a normal thing that people did. There was a dial painter named Josiah Moorhouse who often signed the backs of the dials he painted, and he was at Waltham when your dial was made, but there is no indication that he painted your particular dial. Besides, any watchmaker who worked on your watch could snap a picture of the back of your dial with his cell phone for you. You wouldn't need to be there. As for the jeweling, I'd be very surprised if your watch had anything other than 19 jewels. Probably only one American Watch Company grade Model 1859 movement is known that does not have 19 jewels, and most collectors probably would prefer to have a 19 jewel example, anyway. I know I would.
I also forgot, actually just discovered on case 2 capital letter H stamps on either side of eagle, any idea on that...Ok, Clint...You have a Nice holiday, it all sounds about right, and I'll pick back up on this after Jan 1. Thank You for your knowledge...Bill
Watchmakers often scribed faint marks inside the rear lid of a watch case as a service history record for themselves. Without seeing a picture, it is tough to know what you are looking at.Look either side eagle, I haven't cleaned case, but can see H H either side eagle, not cleaning case as of yet, leaving it as found for now.
Hi Clint...these are stamped, on either side of eagle 2 capital H's. They are hard to see in picture because I haven't cleaned hut can see under a loupe....refer to eagle Casemark Pic on this thread...Watchmakers often scribed faint marks inside the rear lid of a watch case as a service history record for themselves. Without seeing a picture, it is tough to know what you are looking at.
Yes, I agree. I don't recall seeing those marks before, but that doesn't mean that I haven't.