Isaac Soret - Is this real?

[pocket2100]

I feel I purchased this from a reputable dealer. Was very informative and provided excellent service. But the question is - is this a genuine Isaac Soret?

Posting a few pics, would love to hear your thoughts on it. I think it's a beautiful watch, but no markings on the case which I believe was not uncommon for watches crafted outside of England at the time.

 

[gmorse]

Hi pocket2100,

But the question is - is this a genuine Isaac Soret?

Loomes has Isaac Soret, born 1673, died 1760, working in Geneva, so that matches the general style. An arcaded dial, so possibly intended for the Dutch market.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Incroyable]

Were such ruby endstones typical of that period?

 

[gmorse]

Hi Jeffery,

Were such ruby endstones typical of that period?

It depends on which period; if it's the period suggested by the style, then no, but if it's the period of actual manufacture, yes, sometimes. The endstone is clearly part of the design of the cock, but these were often not functional.

Regards,

Graham

 

[VinSer]

It does not help much for knowing if it is original or not, but maybe it is of interest.

Patrizzi in the Dictionnaire des Horlogers Genevois reports the same dates given by Loomes, and adds that he was the son of Bartelemy Isaac and the first of a family of watchmakers that for three generations made the same calibres of movements. From 1760 active as Soret Isaac & Fils.

The son was Soret David and the the nephew was Soret Jean Robert.

Patrizzi also reports that in 1820 Isaac Soret was mentioned as a brand of Vacheron & Constantin.

Ciao

 

[tick talk]

Patrizzi also reports that in 1820 Isaac Soret was mentioned as a brand of Vacheron & Constantin.

This is translated from correspondence sent by François Constantin, then travelling in Rome, back to V&C in January of 1820:

"It is important for us to make our great watches known in this city, the difficult thing is to gain a foothold with the watchmakers who have certain sales, especially overwhelmed as they are with offers and goods. However, on our side, the moment is favourable. They all complain of pieces from Switzerland whose verges and pivots have the defect of easily rusting. Ours being less subject to it, I will try to take advantage of this for the benefit of our manufacture, but we have to fight against the preference of private individuals for the names Dubois, Meuron, Courvoisier & Cie.

The name Isaac Soret is in veneration: this house did a lot of business here, it made good pieces. We could try for my first trip here to do a dozen repeaters and two dozen simple watches. This does not present any unfavourable chance, since they are also sold elsewhere, and perhaps this will be a useful beginning. Take good care so that they are faithful and the buyer will be satisfied with them. It would be the Désart watches and Vacheron-Girod repeaters that would bear the name Isaac Soret à Genève".

This is the only reference to Soret, with no mention of how they acquired the rights to the name. Frères Désart was introduced in 1819 as a second-quality line. Vacheron-Girod was the company name from 1786 but, with a change of partnership in 1816 it was put into hibernation until revived in 1819 as another 2nd quality name.

 

[zedric]

I note the date of this correspondence is 1820, and wonder if the Swiss watch industry by that time actually cared if they had "acquired the rights to the name" or whether they, as was the earlier practice, simply decided to use a well known name on their goods.

The way the translation reads, it appears that Constantin found out that the name Soret was well known for quality goods, and simply instructed the factory to use that name. The reputation probably came from the maker of watches of that name from earlier, and since he was no longer around, no need to "acquire the rights", just use the name..

 

[gmorse]

Hi zedric,

The way the translation reads, it appears that Constantin found out that the name Soret was well known for quality goods, and simply instructed the factory to use that name. The reputation probably came from the maker of watches of that name from earlier, and since he was no longer around, no need to "acquire the rights", just use the name..

Certain sections of the Swiss industry don't seem to have been shy of using English watchmakers' names to which they had no rights, so your theory sounds very plausible to me.

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Certain sections of the Swiss industry don't seem to have been shy of using English watchmakers' names to which they had no rights

To be fair ...

Certain sections of the Swiss industry don't seem to have been shy of using English watchmakers' names to which they had no rights. English makers were no less guilty of inventing names and locations for marketing advantage.

John

 

[pocket2100]

Very interesting history behind this name, and other well-known ones. Do you feel this is a genuine Soret from the 18th c or does it appear to be a more modern watch from the 19th?

As we have discussed in another thread, I would assume if they were imitating a name, they would use it to create a watch with modern features. This watch does not appear to have 19th century features that people of the time would have been looking for.

 

[eric the bully]

To be fair ...

Certain sections of the Swiss industry don't seem to have been shy of using English watchmakers' names to which they had no rights. English makers were no less guilty of inventing names and locations for marketing advantage.

John

Not only Swiss industry, but also the Germans used illustrious surnames of English watchmakers, others added London or spelled the name backwards.
Regards enrico

 

[John Matthews]

Not only Swiss industry, but also the Germans used illustrious surnames of English watchmakers, others added London or spelled the name backwards.

One of the features that may be of significance is the 'clam decoration' at the foot of the cock table. This is not a feature that I have seen on a verge that I am certain is of English making. I am aware that it is found in examples that are described in the papers mentioned earlier in this thread discussing Continental made watches attempting to deceive an English origin. A number of examples have similar designs. The feature is described as being present in examples made both in Switzerland and in Freiburg.

I am not saying it is not found in genuine English items, just that I have no recollection of one.

John

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

I am not saying it is not found in genuine English items, just that I have no recollection of one.

Looking through my records I can find only one, on a quarter repeater signed for Girod London, with a balance cock design similar to the subject of this thread. I haven't been able to tie down which of the listed Girods in London this was, and there are some other features which may suggest a continental origin, notably a silver cap with an unusual sliding catch.



Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Graham - interesting that does look remarkable like those examples illustrated in the publications.

John

 

[pocket2100]

Graham - thank you for the picture, that looks very similar. From your understanding of the process these manufacturers followed when creating their watches, would you say it's a common thing to mass-produce certain parts by a 3rd party, allowing the watch designer to pull from a bin of common parts?

I'm sure the higher end you go on these watches the less common parts, but I could see where even in those years, they were buying 500 cock tables at a time from their parts supplier to save on cost. Or place a order for a large number of a particular part with some specifics on what they needed.

 

[gmorse]

Hi pocket2100,

From your understanding of the process these manufacturers followed when creating their watches, would you say it's a common thing to mass-produce certain parts by a 3rd party, allowing the watch designer to pull from a bin of common parts?

There were certainly workers who only made specific parts but I wouldn't necessarily describe what they did as mass production in any modern sense. During the 18th and much of the 19th centuries they would have been either individuals or small groups of workers in small workshops. In the specific case of balance cocks, although there are similarities in design which evolved over time, so that it's possible to date a watch, at least approximately, from its balance cock, finding two completely identical cocks is most unusual because of the highly manual nature of their manufacture.

There was considerable resistance in the watchmaking trade to any attempt to introduce machinery, for instance Pierre Frédéric Ingold's unsuccessful scheme to make watches by his patented machines in London in the 1840s and 50s. He was seen as a threat to the traditional hand workers' livelihoods. Even as late as the 1880s when the Lancashire Watch Company was formed in Prescot by Thomas Peter Hewitt and John Wycherly amongst others to try and counter the inroads being made by the Swiss and American factories, there was still much opposition to their factory system and it ended in bankruptcy in 1911.

Regards,

Graham

 

[pocket2100]

One other things I've noticed in every other Isaac Soret watch is they use "& Fils" (and Sons). This watch does not appear to have that. If it's a porcelain face, they always seem to include the "& Fils", but I think it was kinda optional on the movement itself. (have seen both in other examples)

Every other Isaac Soret watch is porcelain that I have found - this is the only one I have seen with a silver face. When did porcelain begin to take over the watch trade as the preferred face style? Mid 1700's?

 

[gmorse]

Hi pocket2100,

Every other Isaac Soret watch is porcelain that I have found - this is the only one I have seen with a silver face. When did porcelain begin to take over the watch trade as the preferred face style? Mid 1700's?

These dials aren't porcelain, they're vitreous enamel on a copper or gold substrate. The substance is fused glass powder applied in several layers and fired, and was popularised by George Graham in the 1720s, although a few were being made earlier. True porcelain dials, made from a ceramic containing china clay and some other additives, fired at very high temperatures, were very rare.

Regards,

Graham

 

[pocket2100]

Thanks for the details, Graham.

When did the silver style face fall out of favor?

Adam

 

[gmorse]

Hi Adam,

The metal champlevé dials carried on into the 1730s and 40s but were going out of fashion; enamel dials were taking over and carried on being fitted on the bulk of pocket watches until the early years of the 20th century. Engine turned and engraved silver or gold dials had a share of the market from time to time but only a relatively minor one.

Regards,

Graham

 

[pocket2100]

The metal champlevé dials carried on into the 1730s and 40s but were going out of fashion

Would it be safe to say this watch, whether genuine or imitation, would likely have come from around 1740's or 1750's?

Whether created by Soret's shop, or by someone else, I assume they wouldn't have invested in these champlevé dials as they likely wouldn't have sold too many.

I do understand there is no certainty when it comes to things this old, and that is part of the thrill in collecting, but I like to try and portray the most likely of history in my mind.

Thanks,
Adam

 

[gmorse]

Hi Adam,

Would it be safe to say this watch, whether genuine or imitation, would likely have come from around 1740's or 1750's?
Whether created by Soret's shop, or by someone else, I assume they wouldn't have invested in these champlevé dials as they likely wouldn't have sold too many.

The style of the movement suggests a date a little earlier, perhaps the 1730s, at least it would in an English watch, and there was certainly some interchange of styles and ideas back and forth across the Channel.

The champlevé dials were made in two parts, the central reserve with the signature is separate, or should be, which allowed an 'off the shelf' dial to be easily customised. If on dismantling it you were to find that the whole dial is in one piece, that, together with the rather strange texturing of the dial background, would raise a doubt that this might be a cast replica.

Regards,

Graham

 

[aucaj]

I am not saying it is not found in genuine English items, just that I have no recollection of one.

Hi John, I have an interest in this question as well. From a old thread, Allan C. Purcell provided this photo of a Tompion with a scallop shell.

https://mb.nawcc.org/threads/evidence-of-fake-or-feature-of-english-design.184673/

 

[John Matthews]

Chris - you were right to remind me of this thread and my post ...

Chris - a clam shell at the neck of the cock table is found on English watches of that period. I found two in a matter of minutes.

• Daniel Quare repeater #769 [~1715] - The movement has a signed dust cap and the top plate is signed and numbered 'Dan Quare London 769'. The cock table, which has a diamond endstone, is pierced and foliate engraved with a shell at the neck, while the foot is unpierced but similarly engraved .... (English Watch p.166)
• Tompion & Banger #3866 [~1704] similar without the endstone but with a pierced foot.

An unreliable non-definitive indicator of continental origin. In my opinion it would be unwise to use any one single feature of movement design to definitively identify provenance.

Clearly I had seen examples my recollection had passed into mists of time.

The only saving grace I have is ...

"In my opinion it would be unwise to use any one single feature of movement design to definitively identify provenance."​

It would appear that there were examples of the clam on English watches from the early C18th, and that the 'clam motif' may have been copied by those wishing to deceive.

John

 

[VinSer]

... The style of the movement suggests a date a little earlier, perhaps the 1730s, at least it would in an English watch, and there was certainly some interchange of styles and ideas back and forth across the Channel. ....

Good morning Graham,

Still trying to learn, and hence need to ask :

aren't the pillars of the so-called "square balauster " type? If yes, according to Cedric Jagger, they were used in the latter part of the 18th century together with a more interesting potence.

About the coq, it seems a mix of two styles: the shape of the neck, the foot's side angle of 90°, the streamers are typical of the baroque style, say early 1700; but, in my view, the style of the design is rococo, which would push the coq to after 1740, when at least the foot's side angle had already reduced to around 45° (source: the English-style watch cock Re-examined by Vincent C. Cherico Jr., NAWCC Bullettin 451). The mix of the two styles makes it for me difficult to date.

As you indicated the dial has an arcade, and this is typical of dutch watches, or of watches for the dutch market produced in the second half/late 18th century.

All together I would be more for somewhere around 1780. Or I am completely off?

Ciao





In other words

 

[John Matthews]

Before attempting to date a movement by its characteristics you need to be certain of its provenance and authenticity.

In my experience the dates assigned to certain movement characteristics as described are only a approximate guide. Dates need to be verified by comparison with as many examples as possible. As an example the square baluster pillars were being used by Windmills in the first half of the C18th - e.g.#9339 hallmarked London 1738/39. The shape of the cock, in my opinion, would not look out of place on a movement from the same period.

John

 

[gmorse]

Hi Luigi,

aren't the pillars of the so-called "square balauster " type? If yes, according to Cedric Jagger, they were used in the latter part of the 18th century together with a more interesting potence.

Jagger is rather vague about square pillars, in page 132 he illustrates several examples, including an ornate version of the square pillar, dating it to the 1780s, but on page 56 he mentions the square baluster pillar being adopted not too long after the beginning of the 18th century, replacing the more complex tulip and Egyptian styles. I believe the square pillars to have been in common use from then until the 1770s when they fell from favour and were usually replaced by the plainer round barrel types.

Regards,

Graham

 

[eric the bully]

But should distinguish the evolution of English watchmaking from the Continental one.
Regards enrico

 

[VinSer]

Hi Luigi,


Jagger is rather vague about square pillars, in page 132 he illustrates several examples, including an ornate version of the square pillar, dating it to the 1780s, but on page 56 he mentions the square baluster pillar being adopted not too long after the beginning of the 18th century, replacing the more complex tulip and Egyptian styles. I believe the square pillars to have been in common use from then until the 1770s when they fell from favour and were usually replaced by the plainer round barrel types.

Regards,

Graham

Thanks Graham, you are right (as usual ): on page 56 Jagger says "... It was not long, however, before the square baluster pillar became fashionable ... " and on page 133 " ... The only decorative pillar from the latter part of the eighteen century to become really popular is seen in the penultimate illustration. Usually called "square baluster" ..." followed by an example of 1780.

My brain only remembered the more precise indication

Ciao

 

[VinSer]

Before attempting to date a movement by its characteristics you need to be certain of its provenance and authenticity.

In my experience the dates assigned to certain movement characteristics as described are only a approximate guide. Dates need to be verified by comparison with as many examples as possible. As an example the square baluster pillars were being used by Windmills in the first half of the C18th - e.g.#9339 hallmarked London 1738/39. The shape of the cock, in my opinion, would not look out of place on a movement from the same period.

John

Thanks John. Sure the history of the watchmaker/watch needs to be taken into account.

And since this is a watch made for the tastes of a foreign market, it would have tried to copy the dominating the fashions/trends of that market; or at least the last known ones (information/fashions travelled slower ).

So is the watch of the Windmills an individual approach or part of the dominating trend around 1740? I mean, I am sure that with the creativity explosion that took place in the English watch manufacturing in the first half of the 18th century, any style of pillar can be found at least once

The shape of the cock for me remains antiquate for 1740, but again my knowledge is not extensive (yet).

Ciao

 

[gmorse]

Hi Enrico,

But should distinguish the evolution of English watchmaking from the Continental one.

Yes indeed, although there was probably more cross-fertilisation than we realise.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Incroyable]

Do you see any significant difference in the quality and style of engraving in English versus Continental watches?

 

[eric the bully]

pocket2100 found some info on a Swiss book, I will send PM
Regards enrico

 

[pocket2100]

pocket2100 found some info on a Swiss book, I will send PM
Regards enrico

Thanks, I also went ahead and ordered the book, The Artistry of the English Watch. Looking forward to some good reading when it shows up.

Adam