Most visitors online was 1660 , on 12 Dec 2020
New antique clock
- Thread starter wilf
- Start date
Wilf: I see numbers to the left of the bell, but wonder whether there are any markings anywhere else on the movement, particularly behind the bell. I suppose it could well be a boulle clock, but I'll let the experts say definitively.
André-Charles Boulle lived from 11 November 1642 – 28 February 1732 (Wikipedia). I think your clock is clearly later than that, based on the appearance of the movement, pendulum suspension, and through-dial regulation. However, it does not appear that your clock is one of the recent reproductions, but is probably 19th century and of French origin, in the style of Boulle.
It is gorgeous!
It is gorgeous!
Hi all,
There was some renewed intrest in Bulle during the last quarter of the 19th century,the clocks are very similar in appearance to the originals,
however you will probably find a movement with rectangular plates and a suspension spring.The originals(I have been told) had round movements with silk thread suspension.I have one here for restoration-looks similar in design-
Hope this helps.
tom
There was some renewed intrest in Bulle during the last quarter of the 19th century,the clocks are very similar in appearance to the originals,
however you will probably find a movement with rectangular plates and a suspension spring.The originals(I have been told) had round movements with silk thread suspension.I have one here for restoration-looks similar in design-
Hope this helps.
tom
Tom, what you say about 19C reproductions of original (late 17C and early 18C) French Boulle style (réligieuse) clocks is generally correct. However, your information alluding to original 17C/18C clocks having round movements is completely untrue.
The original spring-driven pendulum movements for these clocks from the late 17C and early 18C were square or rectangular in shape. A very small number had curved but not round movement plates. IMO, round movements in such clock cases are almost certainly from the 19C (while the square example from wilf's clock is also almost definitely 19C).
Michael
Last edited:
"Seconde Empire" clock. Some examples can be seen in P.Kjellberg's book on French Pendule clocks.
Timeframe, between Franco-German war of 1870 and WW1. Since the case style is quite ornate I would say somewhere around 1900 give or take 10 years.
The back plate will likely contain a stamp of the Roulant manufacturer (round stamp, below center of backplate) and a pendulum length in French Pouce/Linge notation at the lower edge of the backplate.
Production of the movement is usually France, but in the area of Lenzkirch in Germany similar style and quality movements were made.
The collectability of these clocks is defined by 2 things:
- condition of the gilding (shiny, laquered or dull, dark is the order of most desireable condition to least)
- condition of the Boulle work (ideal = very smooth and flat with no piecies of either wood or brass missing and/or repaired)
Condition and functionality of the movement matters to a much lesser degree than the above points. When in good order it should run and strike for about 14 to 15 days between windings.
Timeframe, between Franco-German war of 1870 and WW1. Since the case style is quite ornate I would say somewhere around 1900 give or take 10 years.
The back plate will likely contain a stamp of the Roulant manufacturer (round stamp, below center of backplate) and a pendulum length in French Pouce/Linge notation at the lower edge of the backplate.
Production of the movement is usually France, but in the area of Lenzkirch in Germany similar style and quality movements were made.
The collectability of these clocks is defined by 2 things:
- condition of the gilding (shiny, laquered or dull, dark is the order of most desireable condition to least)
- condition of the Boulle work (ideal = very smooth and flat with no piecies of either wood or brass missing and/or repaired)
Condition and functionality of the movement matters to a much lesser degree than the above points. When in good order it should run and strike for about 14 to 15 days between windings.
antiekeradio, I think you meant the clock was made around the period of the (French) "Second Empire" and not that it is a clock in the style of "Le Second Empire".
The styling of wilf's clock is "Louis XIV Period" (page 33 in Kjellberg). Judging purely from wilf's photos, I would say the clock appears to have a rather good quality case and its matching bracket is definitely a bonus. French clocks from the 19C focused primarily on casework and French movements were simply of excellent mechanical quality with no attention paid to aesthetics. So the rather pedestrian-looking movement is par for the 19C.
Michael
Hi,
Thank you for the correction on movement shape.I was repeating what I had ben told. Nice to know-maybe my project is an older version(I can hope),but probably not.
tom
Thank you for the correction on movement shape.I was repeating what I had ben told. Nice to know-maybe my project is an older version(I can hope),but probably not.
tom
Tom, you are partially correct in your information on round movements. The early "Clock-makers to the king", were mostly from Neuchâtel in french Switzerland, and the movements shown by Ralph, and those of christian Loutz, show some very nice examples. You will find these in "the Swiss connection" thread.
Wilf, Sometime earlier on the board, a similar rectangular movemented clock appeared in a similar shaped case, (not Boulle / boule / buhl). When you compare the shape of your clock and the one I mention, with the famous standard "Neuchâtel" style clocks, you will see a similarity.
Your clock is of the Louis style, but I'd be more inclined to go for quinze, as opposed to quatorze. The movement I'm inclined to think, puts the clock in the "restoration" period and not "second empire".
As to where it was made: The main problem, is the "grey-area" which involves the inter-trading between the three parts of the Black Forest; German; Swiss; French (Jura). The area is surprizingly small. Antiekeradio, mentions Lenzkirch, and if you look at the map, you will see how close-knit the whole shebang is!
Pictures of the other clock:
Wilf, Sometime earlier on the board, a similar rectangular movemented clock appeared in a similar shaped case, (not Boulle / boule / buhl). When you compare the shape of your clock and the one I mention, with the famous standard "Neuchâtel" style clocks, you will see a similarity.
Your clock is of the Louis style, but I'd be more inclined to go for quinze, as opposed to quatorze. The movement I'm inclined to think, puts the clock in the "restoration" period and not "second empire".
As to where it was made: The main problem, is the "grey-area" which involves the inter-trading between the three parts of the Black Forest; German; Swiss; French (Jura). The area is surprizingly small. Antiekeradio, mentions Lenzkirch, and if you look at the map, you will see how close-knit the whole shebang is!
Pictures of the other clock:
Attachments
Wilf, the Kjellberg book is in French-only.
It covers the many periods of French clocks, with a focus on the earlier ones. It's a nice book with great photos that does a decent job of discussing the appearance of these clocks but it's not very methodical or technical, nothing on movements and is on the painful side as regards costs. There are other books if you are not only interested in French clocks.
Michael
Laprade, I can appreciate your personal opinion as regards the styling period of wilf's clock... Louis XV vs. Louis XIV. Unfortunately, your experience and knowledge of the earlier clocks would appear to be somewhat lacking.
I was only reporting a well-established fact. The styling of wilf's clock is Louis XIV, it preceded the Neuchatel style you alluded to. Louis XV was probably not even born (1710 I believe) when the style was first in use (ca. 1690-1700).
Michael
Michael, of course it preceded the standard Neuchâtel clocks, the Clock-makers to Louis XIV created the genre which lead to their design. You say the style came about in 1690-1700. Louis XIV died in 1715, so the style was still in its infancy. The sun King's influence was well worn by then, and his regime was in tatters, with one of the first nails banged into its coffin by Marlborough at Blenheim (1704). For a style to be really named after a personage, it needs to have flourished in the peak of their reign, not on the deathbed. Besides what I have just said, I am inclined towards Louis XV influence because of the very curvaceous nature, a sort of degenerated Louis XIV, but I think the actual date of making is "restoration", Louis XVIII, maybe even Charles X.
The clock on this thread is not unlike the boulle influenced clock that has been featured on Richard T's thread on Comtoise clocks, and elsewhere. posted by Peterc6
http://www.mb.nawcc.org/showthread.php?t=59332&highlight=comtoise+clocks
The clock on this thread is not unlike the boulle influenced clock that has been featured on Richard T's thread on Comtoise clocks, and elsewhere. posted by Peterc6
http://www.mb.nawcc.org/showthread.php?t=59332&highlight=comtoise+clocks
Honestly Laprade, I don't understand why you insist on your personal opinions as being rules/truth on horological matters. I think some of your comments venture into areas of fancy and meanderings. OTOH, I do buy and collect such clocks so I am not at all interested in personal speculation - I adhere to formal practices in the antiques trade.
I am NOT stating a personal opinion. I am simply trying avoid uninformed readers receiving wrong information and becoming totally misinformed. When people repeat misinformation enough it takes on a life of its own and falsehood becomes established as de facto "truth".
What I stated is what experts have already determined and accepted in the antiques trade long ago. If you wish, you can re-state your opinion as a hypothesis you want to propose but I have nothing to do with it. wilf's clock is in Louis XIV style as it is formally classified by horological and antique experts. All of this would be obvious to you if you have access to proper research material or even auction catalogues from the high-end British auction houses.
This is all I wish to say on this matter - I have far more urgent and important non-horological matters to spend my time on.
Michael
CAUTION: Let's stick to commenting on the horological issue and not on personalities or persons. Disagreements are fine, even expected, but they should not degenerate into pointless attacks on one another, resulting in the clossing of a thread.
Steven, I was actually trying to clarify and be helpful because I felt Laprade's comments were making the discussion confusing. Perhaps you can see it that way. I was stating facts; yes, even when I commented on Laprade's approach. I gave him an honest and valid suggestion. My comments presented no personal attacks - I only commented on what Laprade wrote and not on his character. Laprade (Stephen) and I actually have a healthy respect and liking for one another.
But in any case, let me also say that while I have benefited from some of my involvement with this forum and the NAWCC, after many months of deliberating I must admit I do not fit in and will likely never fit in with its practices. It is getting much too tedious to say things that are objective, truthful and helpful simply because the forum is unable to differentiate between candid objective constructive discussions and personal attacks.
So it is with some regret that I must now bid everyone farewell. I wish you all well. I'm sorry I simply do not fit in here.
Michael
I would agree with Ansomnia that Kjellbergs book has very good aspects (the quality of the pictures and print is very good indeed) but also a number of downsides. It might not be the best choice if you are looking to buy a book with that can provide useful information about the type of clocks you will likely be able to buy in the future. Most of the clocks pictured are in the "museum piece" category and people who buy those are not reliant on one book as their source of information about the clock type.
I'm not sure what I could recommend instead (you might need to go antiquarian, or combine the information from multipe books) so maybe Ansomnia would say some more about this.
Kevin, thank you for your thoughtful sentiment but it's past the time for me to leave. My interests and approach are simply different from the mainstream of this forum. I do not fit in.
Best wishes.
Michael
Michael, I hate to see you leave us. I, for one, have always enjoyed your informative and well researched posts, and certainly don't have any problems with you.
Who will correct laprade with you gone? Bang won't let me pick on him any more, and no one else seems to want to interact with him.
Who will correct laprade with you gone? Bang won't let me pick on him any more, and no one else seems to want to interact with him.
I have composed a reply to the below, and have sent it to Steven T. for his approval.
In the mean time:
For interest, I show a picture from an old thread, which shows a late square clock movement, which was in a bulh case. (I can’t find the other shots, but the case was a simple arched one, and you can see part of it in the shot posted). I can't find the thread, but it involved questions about ebonizing. The fixing is the same as Wilf's clock, i.e. no straps to the back, just front fixings.
In the mean time:
For interest, I show a picture from an old thread, which shows a late square clock movement, which was in a bulh case. (I can’t find the other shots, but the case was a simple arched one, and you can see part of it in the shot posted). I can't find the thread, but it involved questions about ebonizing. The fixing is the same as Wilf's clock, i.e. no straps to the back, just front fixings.
Attachments
Last words on the scaffold, so to speak!
If people look closely at my comments, they will see that I have said "I am inclined to....." and then given my reasons. I have not said "it is......" I have given plausible reasons for my thoughts, and not run amok like some demented firebrand waving the holy book in the air! I have never, as far as I can remember, condemned outright the ideas of another, I have always expressed an opinion, or given a quote.
We are discussing an important point here, and I think that the readers deserve to see the thinking that goes into the settling of the provenance of a style etc. They can then look very closely and compare with other sources. Tom was shot down without a parachute, which was very insensitive, as in fact, he wasn’t entirely wrong.
Anyway, I am surprized at the emotions expressed and a bit dismayed that it has happened, even more so for being blamed for causing it. Michael, I think you need to reconsider, not only to please Harold, but for the readers, who need to see the dissection of the subjects by people who like to look between the lines.
As regards the actual thread’s clock: since the movement in the clock is too late for the actual Louis XIV era, it places the clock outside that period, and into the realms of "repro" (Louis XVIII etc) or a later interpretation of the original Louis XIV style. Only a close examination of the case by a specialist in cabinetry and Bulh work, could say if the movement is a later addition; which is the centre of the discussion on Peterc6's clock.
Generally speaking, styles don’t just appear on a set day or in a tight time-frame. I say generally, because in the instance of the French First Empire and the British Regency, those two styles did suddenly “pop up”, and quickly died when the political climate changed. (With the odd eccentricity of the Biedermeier hanging on in Austria and Germany). Styles evolve and peak, and then degenerate. If one wants to be pedantic and go by the book, then because the Sun King was still reigning, then the style is physically Louis XIV, but spiritually, well not for me! An actual clock made on a certain date, belongs to the date of making, but the style of the clock does not always have to be of the same vintage.
As to the reliability of the published word, be it in books or catalogues:
Remember what was said about relying on "curators", when we were discussing the Danish pieces, and on some other threads, what was said about the top auctioneer of Zurich, and of the Director of the Furtwangen.
If people look closely at my comments, they will see that I have said "I am inclined to....." and then given my reasons. I have not said "it is......" I have given plausible reasons for my thoughts, and not run amok like some demented firebrand waving the holy book in the air! I have never, as far as I can remember, condemned outright the ideas of another, I have always expressed an opinion, or given a quote.
We are discussing an important point here, and I think that the readers deserve to see the thinking that goes into the settling of the provenance of a style etc. They can then look very closely and compare with other sources. Tom was shot down without a parachute, which was very insensitive, as in fact, he wasn’t entirely wrong.
Anyway, I am surprized at the emotions expressed and a bit dismayed that it has happened, even more so for being blamed for causing it. Michael, I think you need to reconsider, not only to please Harold, but for the readers, who need to see the dissection of the subjects by people who like to look between the lines.
As regards the actual thread’s clock: since the movement in the clock is too late for the actual Louis XIV era, it places the clock outside that period, and into the realms of "repro" (Louis XVIII etc) or a later interpretation of the original Louis XIV style. Only a close examination of the case by a specialist in cabinetry and Bulh work, could say if the movement is a later addition; which is the centre of the discussion on Peterc6's clock.
Generally speaking, styles don’t just appear on a set day or in a tight time-frame. I say generally, because in the instance of the French First Empire and the British Regency, those two styles did suddenly “pop up”, and quickly died when the political climate changed. (With the odd eccentricity of the Biedermeier hanging on in Austria and Germany). Styles evolve and peak, and then degenerate. If one wants to be pedantic and go by the book, then because the Sun King was still reigning, then the style is physically Louis XIV, but spiritually, well not for me! An actual clock made on a certain date, belongs to the date of making, but the style of the clock does not always have to be of the same vintage.
As to the reliability of the published word, be it in books or catalogues:
Remember what was said about relying on "curators", when we were discussing the Danish pieces, and on some other threads, what was said about the top auctioneer of Zurich, and of the Director of the Furtwangen.
Know Your NAWCC Forums Rules!
RULES & GUIDELINES
RULES & GUIDELINES
Staff online
-
bruce lindeTechnical Admin
Forum statistics
- Threads
- 162,359
- Messages
- 1,410,039
- Members
- 84,051
- Latest member
- Apaulo11
- Encyclopedia Pages
- 1,101
- Total wiki contributions
- 2,854
- Last edit
- Waltham Watches by Clint Geller