Dent Watch Serial Numbers

[gmorse]

Hi Montrealgpf1,

I notice that the pendant has a date letter of 'd' in Old English, which is certainly for 1859/60, although pendants were frequently made by workers other than the case maker, so could show a different year. However, James Thickbroom may have made this pendant himself, as he's listed as a specialist pendant maker.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Montrealgpf1]

I believe this will be clear enough. Thanks for your help.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Montrealgpf1,

...I believe this will be clear enough...

The date, sterling and London marks are clear, but the 'JT' is rather rubbed; the marks inside the dome are often less rubbed, so could you post a picture of those marks please? I believe I can see a faint oval cartouche, which would mean that the mark isn't for James Thickbroom, (who isn't recorded as ever registering a mark in an oval cartouche), but for a different maker, according to Priestley.

[Edit] Looking again, is it possible that the mark isn't 'JT' but 'JI'? If so, and it's confirmed as being in an oval cartouche, it could be for John Irvine, trading as McMillan & Irvine, first registered in 1861.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Montrealgpf1]

I still think it is IT, but here goes. Do you depend on the case maker to date the watch?

 

[Montrealgpf1]

Strike my last question. I had missed your second pos of Oct 10.

 

[Montrealgpf1]

Its service history is unknown, but the amazing thing is it keeps time perfectly, losing only 30 seconds per day.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Montrealgpf1,

Yes, I agree, it's certainly 'IT'. The shape of the cartouche, if any, and the style of font are important in differentiating makers with the same initials who were registered at the same time. This does look to be incuse, and without a full stop, which would probably place it back with James Thickbroom, although James appears to have registered several punches with this particular format, as the extract indicates. Having said that, the source is wrong on the 1855 date, because although Thickbroom did register a mark in 1855, it was 'I.T', not 'IT'; the full stop is significant!

Do you depend on the case maker to date the watch?

Only if the date letter is ambiguous, missing or there are no other clues in any of the marks, such as whether the London leopard's head is wearing a crown.

Regards,

Graham

 

[S.Humphrey]

Hello,

Can anyone explain for me why this serial number is so low?
#3044, 1862/3?

Regards,
Steve

 

[Bernhard J.]

Hi,

For that year I would indeed expect the number to be around 26000.

The signature looks different from the signatures in my Dent watches of this time. Here an example, the other ones the same.

Cheers, Bernhard

 

[Dr. Jon]

There have been several Dents who are not of the famous firm. The ones I have seen were run by people named Dent.

 

[Durruti]

Dent, 33 Cockspur St, London.split-seconds chronograph. Warrant medaillons both for the Queen and for the Emperor of Russia.
S#28264 with matching serial number within case and to dial.
Kind regards
Peter

 

[S.Humphrey]

Hi,

For that year I would indeed expect the number to be around 26000.

The signature looks different from the signatures in my Dent watches of this time. Here an example, the other ones the same.

Cheers, Bernhard

View attachment 709941

Thank you, Sir!

 

[Bernhard J.]

Hallmark 1856

 

[Bernhard J.]

27074, Hallmarked 1872, split seconds chronograph, see here https://mb.nawcc.org/threads/nicole-capt-for-dent-split-seconds-chronograph.192853/

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

According to the pocket watch records in Vaudrey Merer´s book, there is no record of 3044. These watches were given out in runs for finishing, for example,
2946-2948. Badollet
2975-2579. Badollet
3161-3167 Badollet
You will see there are gaps in these lists. From what I have seen the missing numbers were used for pocket Chronometers.
For example. 3044 (40900) can be seen on page 686. Finisher T & C Webster Nelson, the balance maker was H. Glover and the springing.

Hope this helps.

Allan.

PS; The Badollet watches are dated between 1845-1849.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

27074, Hallmarked 1872, split-seconds chronograph, see here https://mb.nawcc.org/threads/nicole-capt-for-dent-split-seconds-chronograph.192853/

Hi Bernard,
While searching for those Dent numbers I had stuck in the book a thread from the NAWCC board in 2009. It was published by TONYWATCH.
Mar. 20. 2009. There is a small piece on Dent, though there is some very good information on Nicole Nielsen. Thought you could use it.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Found it. Thanks to Tony watch. There was another on Mar 2009, but not able to reach it.

 

[Bernhard J.]

Hi Allan,

Great information, many thanks. This confirms that 27074 indeed is a very early rattrapante chronograph, made just one year after this was developed.

Cheers, Bernhard

 

[John Matthews]

Search for Nicole posts by Tony here.

John