Bought a grandfather clock by William Barnard, Newark (485)

[jacobsthlm]

I seen a few photos on the net but not looking the same. The painting shows a bird and that bird moves with the pendulum, so it has to be the original painting. Or? The orange/wood on the top part to the right, fell of, but I have it. The only parts that I can see that have been changed is the line, lock and hinges. One of the weights is falling apart under the tape. Under follows a lot of pictures. The text on the door tells that the first owner was born 1699 and died 1775. Then there is a list until our times.

I do have a problem and you can see the picture of the pendulum. For it to work it has to go to the left, more then the brass part allows. I think I know this has to be fixed by bending the arm on the back of the clock, here seen on picture 5? Correct me if I’m wrong.

I have red the two texts that Brian has wrote about the maker (found it online and don’t know Brian but was told he wrote them) and I could see that he found 5 that is older then mine and 37 that is younger. That text say Barnard started making clocks 1733 and made 26 every year. That will make my clock from 1741 if he started on number 200. If it is 300 it’s about 7 years and not 11 (1737). I am in Sweden so that’s perhaps why he didn’t find this one.

Jacob

 

[bruce linde]

when the verge is level... i.e., parallel with the floor... the crutch rod should come straight down (roughly) behind the movement... it's possible the verge has rotated a bit on the arbor.

once it's aligned correctly, the left-to-right pendulum swing will (should) not smack the pendulum bob into the sides of the case. and, you would then make minor bends to the crutch rod to get it exactly in beat.

if i'm understanding your question correctly?

 

[jacobsthlm]

when the verge is level... i.e., parallel with the floor... the crutch rod should come straight down (roughly) behind the movement... it's possible the verge has rotated a bit on the arbor.

once it's aligned correctly, the left-to-right pendulum swing will (should) not smack the pendulum bob into the sides of the case. and, you would then make minor bends to the crutch rod to get it exactly in beat.

if i'm understanding your question correctly?

More or less. The clock is leaning a little bit to the left but I tried to put a very big part under the side so it leaned to the right but the problem remained. It’s not that the pendulum smacks into the side, it’s about that I have to move the rod to the left wall until the second pointer ticks on. With the brass weigh on the pendulum it moves right and left but the seconds don’t tick on, and the bird on the front don’t start in the middle, it starts to the left. I think this tells me I need to bend the crutch rod.

 

[bruce linde]

yes, that’s exactly what I’m talking about.

If you don’t want to pull the movement for the seaboard to get a photo from the back maybe you could get on a step ladder and give us a photo looking down at the back of the movement and crutch rod.

She shouldn’t be that extreme… And, if you start bending the crutch rod you need to make sure the crutch forks are still parallel to the ground and perpendicular to the sides of the case for best results. i usually double check this when I clean a movement on a new clock and it’s easier to see what’s going on.

 

[jacobsthlm]

yes, that’s exactly what I’m talking about.

If you don’t want to pull the movement for the seaboard to get a photo from the back maybe you could get on a step ladder and give us a photo looking down at the back of the movement and crutch rod.

She shouldn’t be that extreme… And, if you start bending the crutch rod you need to make sure the crutch forks are still parallel to the ground and perpendicular to the sides of the case for best results. i usually double check this when I clean a movement on a new clock and it’s easier to see what’s going on.

It was not possible to take a picture from the top. The bell it’s in the way. As you now can see, the bottom of the pendulum inside the case is about one inch to the left. Maybe you can tell something with the two new pictures showing the rod better. The holder for the pendulum feather is bent slightly down. Will this do anything bad you think? I do understand you want to se if the rod is in the middle of the clock and I think it is...

 

[bruce linde]

it only takes loosening and removing one nut to remove the bell, but let's try this to start:

1. remove the weights.

2. get the case level how you want it... i typically use a level to check vertical in multiple places to find an average, as older cases are typically no longer true

3. pull the pendulum just enough to pull it out of the crutch slot, and then rehang it so it's NOT through the crutch slot... just hanging down naturally from the suspension spring

4. check to see if it's centered... measure from the center of the pendulum rod to the inside left of the case, and to the inside right of the case... and see if they match

 

[bruce linde]

a couple of other things... in this photo of your suspension spring the base of the top brass piece that allows it to sit in the crutch block should be filed or adjusted so that it seats better... not absolutely essential, but why not?

and, the pendulum block that goes through the crutch slot should not hit the back of the slot... it should only interact with the sides of the crutch slot for least possible friction and drag. if it were mine i would disassemble, clean, get everything more dialed in and then be making adjustments.... at the very least, i would straighten out the crutch rod so there's less going on there... but you can probably just bend the bottom back a bit toward the back plate so that the lower suspension spring block only hits the sides of the slot....

 

[novicetimekeeper]

The other part that has been replaced is the seatboard.

I think the boat is Noah's ark and the bird is the dove that came back with an olive branch.

 

[jacobsthlm]

The other part that has been replaced is the seatboard.

I think the boat is Noah's ark and the bird is the dove that came back with an olive branch.

i Googled what part the seatboard is. Does this inflict the overall value of the clock, you think?

 

[jacobsthlm]

a couple of other things... in this photo of your suspension spring the base of the top brass piece that allows it to sit in the crutch block should be filed or adjusted so that it seats better... not absolutely essential, but why not?

and, the pendulum block that goes through the crutch slot should not hit the back of the slot... it should only interact with the sides of the crutch slot for least possible friction and drag. if it were mine i would disassemble, clean, get everything more dialed in and then be making adjustments.... at the very least, i would straighten out the crutch rod so there's less going on there... but you can probably just bend the bottom back a bit toward the back plate so that the lower suspension spring block only hits the sides of the slot....

View attachment 632658

This can’t be done as it hits the back wall in that case. Rigth now it’s a couple of millimetre from the back wall.

 

[novicetimekeeper]

i Googled what part the seatboard is. Does this inflict the overall value of the clock, you think?

Yes it does, but more so on much earlier clocks. It is a particularly unsympathetic choice of timber, it could be improved with a bit of oak.

 

[jacobsthlm]

Yes it does, but more so on much earlier clocks. It is a particularly unsympathetic choice of timber, it could be improved with a bit of oak.

I don’t buy clocks for making a profit but it feels like I did this time. I know the forum rules but can you, or someone you know, make a proximate value and send me a message? I bought it for £370. It’s really about getting the feeling I did good and now have something of a certain value, then selling it....

I agree that the seatboard is a ugly piece and could be done much better. Maybe this is also why I can’t have the crutch in a position so it doesn’t touch the pendulum or the back wall, as Bruce writes about....

 

[novicetimekeeper]

Clocks with Automata usually sell at a premium, longcase prices are really low at the moment but anything a bit special can get a bit more.

 

[jacobsthlm]

a couple of other things... in this photo of your suspension spring the base of the top brass piece that allows it to sit in the crutch block should be filed or adjusted so that it seats better... not absolutely essential, but why not?

and, the pendulum block that goes through the crutch slot should not hit the back of the slot... it should only interact with the sides of the crutch slot for least possible friction and drag. if it were mine i would disassemble, clean, get everything more dialed in and then be making adjustments.... at the very least, i would straighten out the crutch rod so there's less going on there... but you can probably just bend the bottom back a bit toward the back plate so that the lower suspension spring block only hits the sides of the slot....

View attachment 632658

Yes if I hade the skill to take it apart and then put it back together I would to, but now I don’t. I just bought tools from a watchmaker, so I can start practicing. I guess I should have started this before 60. But hopefully I can get this clock working with a few minor adjustment.

I guess you are the Bruce that wrote those texts about Barnard. I sent a mail on that page. I guess you don’t have to answer that now. I am curious, have you seen a clock with a painting and a bird like mine before? Is the text you wrote accurate and you only found 5 clocks made before this one? Does this makes it more value the later clocks? You don’t happen to know more about William Barrow, London? I can not find much about him....

The pendulum can’t hang better as the holder for it is bent downwards...

 

[JTD]

I know the forum rules but can you, or someone you know, make a proximate value and send me a message?

The rules were changed last year and now we are allowed to discuss values here.

Noah's ark and the moving dove are nice 'extras', as is the list of owners. However, as has already been said, longcase prices are low at present and have been for some time. It's a nice clock and you would likely find a buyer, but I doubt if you will make a lot more than what you paid.

You said your paid £370 - did you buy it in UK or Sweden? I cannot really comment on what price you might get in Sweden.

JTD

 

[novicetimekeeper]

Prices in Denmark for English clocks are supposed to be low, I don't know about Sweden. Having been involved with some from there recently I think they are reasonably low there too.

 

[jacobsthlm]

The rules were changed last year and now we are allowed to discuss values here.

Noah's ark and the moving dove are nice 'extras', as is the list of owners. However, as has already been said, longcase prices are low at present and have been for some time. It's a nice clock and you would likely find a buyer, but I doubt if you will make a lot more than what you paid.

You said your paid £370 - did you buy it in UK or Sweden? I cannot really comment on what price you might get in Sweden.

JTD

Im interested in the UK market. I bought it in Sweden. I have not found any been sold in Sweden. I have another 1720-1730 clock be Wialliam Barrow, London but not with the original case so it’s value are not so high, but the case still is at least 180 years old. This maker is sold in Sweden but as the case is missing, finding a good case without the clock feels very hard and unlikely.

 

[jacobsthlm]

it only takes loosening and removing one nut to remove the bell, but let's try this to start:

1. remove the weights.

2. get the case level how you want it... i typically use a level to check vertical in multiple places to find an average, as older cases are typically no longer true

3. pull the pendulum just enough to pull it out of the crutch slot, and then rehang it so it's NOT through the crutch slot... just hanging down naturally from the suspension spring

4. check to see if it's centered... measure from the center of the pendulum rod to the inside left of the case, and to the inside right of the case... and see if they match

I did that and it was 1-1,5 inches. I then tried to put it back in the crunch slot and tried to put something under the case, and also moved the clock itself a few millimetres toward the middle. But that didn’t help, I still have to move the pendulum without the brass further to the left then possible with it, and very close to the side wall before it ticks on. Is there another way of fixing this then bend the rod? Should I consider handle it to a store for fixing? This can probably double the costs for the clock....

 

[jmclaugh]

William Barnard was apprenticed in 1724 so by 1731 he would have served his indenture and be in a position to establish himself in his own right, he died in 1785. Loomes lists quite a few numbers seen on the front of the dial, the lowest being 248 and the highest seems to be 1216. Of those he lists 696 is the only one dated, to 1769. Looms also says some of his earlier clocks were unsigned on the front of dial but signed on the back of the dial and numbered on the back of the movement.

 

[jacobsthlm]

William Barnard was apprenticed in 1724 so by 1731 he would have served his indenture and be in a position to establish himself in his own right, he died in 1785. Loomes lists quite a few numbers seen on the front of the dial, the lowest being 248 and the highest seems to be 1216. Of those he lists 696 is the only one dated, to 1769. Looms also says some of his earlier clocks were unsigned on the front of dial but signed on the back of the dial and numbered on the back of the movement.

I am not the expert here but if he was born 1708 and started his 7 years of practice at 14, should been 1729 but yes Bruce wrote both 1708, 7 years, 14 and 1724 so I guess he needs to bring clarity to this. If I got this right was the 200 numbers before he opened his shop and then stated on 300...?

 

[novicetimekeeper]

I am not the expert here but if he was born 1708 and started his 7 years of practice at 14, should been 1729 but yes Bruce wrote both 1708, 7 years, 14 and 1724 so I guess he needs to bring clarity to this. If I got this right was the 200 numbers before he opened his shop and then stated on 300...?

The article I linked above gives a full explanation of his thoughts on that and the options based on likely output rates for dates.

 

[jmclaugh]

Ah I missed that the reference to Brian in the OP is Loomes and an article on Barnard by him. My above post is a summary of the entry for Barnard in Loomes' big red book. The clock dated to 1769 in the article is numbered 969 whereas it is 696 in the big red book.

Collecting Antique Clocks: William Barnard and the First Newark Clockmakers

 

[P.Hageman]

Interesting clock, interesting maker as well. He numbered most of his clocks. Engraved on the dial plate and scratched or engraved into the frontplate of the movement.
Here are a few clocks by him. Firs, number 341, then 1205, then my 619, the an unknown number and 586. Yes William Barnhard did attract my attention

 

[jacobsthlm]

Interesting clock, interesting maker as well. He numbered most of his clocks. Engraved on the dial plate and scratched or engraved into the frontplate of the movement.
Here are a few clocks by him. Firs, number 341, then 1205, then my 619, the an unknown number and 586. Yes William Barnhard did attract my attention

So you haven’t seen any other with the text placed like mine and with a painting and/or moving part? Is there a name when a clock has that extra piece and not just end like a squar? It most be rather unusual that his clocks end up in other countries. So he used a chain on he’s later models and not string? What type of original sting was used back then? Also interesting to see that he made both two and one pointer though the years and not started with using one and later changed that to two. I also see that the arm that holds the pendulum feather is slightly bent on more the mine. I thought that was something wrong with mine....

 

[jacobsthlm]

Today I saw a very interesting thing. You can see for yourself...

 

[JTD]

Yes, that is interesting indeed. At the moment I cannot think of a plausible explanation, but perhaps one of our long case experts can.

JTD

 

[novicetimekeeper]

very odd

 

[jacobsthlm]

a couple of other things...

Your the expert here. Please look at my last two pictures. I got two numbers on my clock 485 and 495

 

[jacobsthlm]

Interesting clock, interesting maker as well. He numbered most of his clocks. Engraved on the dial plate and scratched or engraved into the frontplate of the movement.
Here are a few clocks by him. Firs, number 341, then 1205, then my 619, the an unknown number and 586. Yes William Barnhard did attract my attention

My clock has two numbers, 485 and 495. My last two pictures...

 

[bruce linde]

My clock has two numbers, 485 and 495. My last two pictures...

weird... i would be curious to see the back of the dial...

 

[zedric]

I don't know you'll ever know the reason for that. I would think it unlikely that he had ten clocks in the shop on the go at any time and simply used the wrong one, but it's quite possible to imagine scenarios such as the engraver misreading the number to be engraved, and the clockmaker not noticing the error until he had paid the engraver.. However it happened, I wouldn't think it affects the originality of the clock in any way, and it adds a "mystery" factor to what is already a nice clock.

 

[P.Hageman]

Hmm, thats very odd indeed. Looks like the engraver had a bad day. Its quite possible there is a number on the frontplate of the movement, I bet if there is, its 485. Love to see the back of the dialplate.

 

[jmclaugh]

Just a thought but perhaps when being assembled the wrong seconds dial was used.

 

[novicetimekeeper]

Just a thought but perhaps when being assembled the wrong seconds dial was used.

I think Zedric's point covers that, clocks would have been made to order, and there would have been months between these two numbers, very unlikely stock would be kept like that.

 

[jacobsthlm]

weird... i would be curious to see the back of the dial...

The back of the dial don’t show much.

 

[jacobsthlm]

Ops...sorry. How do I delete this. Thought wrong, wrote wrong....

 

[JTD]

Ops...sorry. How do I delete this. Thought wrong, wrote wrong....

You click on 'Edit' at the bottom of you post and you can change it. But you must be quick, the edit option can only be used for a limited time after posting.

JTD

 

[bruce linde]

the only way to really tell if all of the pieces are original (or even what's there) is total disassembly..

some people start there with new acquisitions, others don't.

i think in your case what we see is what we get... and you're not really going to learn more.

 

[jacobsthlm]

the only way to really tell if all of the pieces are original (or even what's there) is total disassembly..

some people start there with new acquisitions, others don't.

i think in your case what we see is what we get... and you're not really going to learn more.

It’s up and running now. I feel satisfied with that. If I would take it apart I would not be able to put it back

 

[P.Hageman]

I think, from what I can see from the pictures, its safe to say, the arch has been put on by the clockmaker himselve and looks perfectly original. The way the lever of the "rocking" bird is connected to the anchor arbor looks original as well. To be completely sure and to see if there is another number on the frontplate of the movement, the dial should be removed.

 

[jacobsthlm]

I think, from what I can see from the pictures, its safe to say, the arch has been put on by the clockmaker himselve and looks perfectly original. The way the lever of the "rocking" bird is connected to the anchor arbor looks original as well. To be completely sure and to see if there is another number on the frontplate of the movement, the dial should be removed.

Yea but I’m a novice and don’t want to if I don’t have to. So we will have to not know about a number or not. Thanks to everybody who wrote in this thread!