Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Clock Discussions' started by bangster, Apr 20, 2014.
Can y'all give me a date, and maybe a model, for this nice Adamantine ST mantel clock?
I found no pre-xact match in Tran, but the Chandos from the 1904 catalogue is close. Mahogany adamantine finish; half-hour strike on cup bell, hour on cathedral bell. 5" dial; 11" high, 17" long at base. Different incising, different bases and pediment for the columns. No date stamp on the bottom, I presume?
I wrote the above and then noticed what might be the remains of a model name at the top of the label, "ECT." Anything else to be gleaned from that?
On the other hand (the left, and not the right), check out these links, one said to be the Shasta (on what basis, I cannot say) and one said to be the Black Hussar (so why ain't it black, like it seems to be in Tran? And I guess we might as well include the Prince, 1904 catalogue in Tran. It has a very similar case - again shown as black, it seems.
Oh, and forget the ECT - it's DIRECTIONS, a very suspect model name.
MIGHTY close. "Shasta" and "Black Hussar" seem identical. Maybe 'black' because the style is 'black mantel', regardless of color?
Mine differs from those two only in the upper spandrel incisings. Is that enuf to make a difference in Model?
And Date. Is '04 as close as we can come?
I wouldn't sweat the incisings myself. Details can change from model year to model year, I suppose. And I'm not convinced that the clocks I linked to actually are the models they are called. They may be, but I don't know why they are called those models. As for date, I can't myself do much better. Probably pretty close, particularly since Tran shows a couple with the same basic case from that catalogue year. Like I said, I presume you checked the bottom of the case for a date code, such as 4091 C, or the like.
I hadn't but I have now. Here's what I see on the bottom. Can you make anything out of them?
Not really. All I see appear to be scratchings of some sort. What I would expect to see as a date code would be more like the attached, which can just be made out as 8881 E, May 1888. But you don't always find the date, and at some point ST stopped using it.
Ok, thanks much.
I just aquired a very similar clock except in Black, the etching in the wood is similar but slightly more geometric and the base that the columns rest on has a faux marble finish, the only marking I have found is 4 1/2 stamped in the brass support when you open the back door. it looks like it had a date stamp but is illegible. I read on another post that the paper label changed in 1906 to the style you pictured here with the pocket watch shown. Seth Thomas stopped making Pocket Watches in 1915 so I would have to guess that mine, and probably this one is made between 1906 and 1915. If anyone knows of any other way to date this without the stamp please let me konw. Thanks
I can tell you it is not a Shasta if that helps. I have a ST Larkin which is VERY similar to the Shasta.. has the rounded center and the 4 posts.
It seems to me I have seen that one before and it was very near the same time frame. Mine is dated 1907..
For what it's worth..
The pic didn't post.. sorry
Here is one that is close. Same lions, basic structure of the case.
Different movement and the inscribing is somewhat different. This is a completed auction.
SETH THOMAS ADAMANTINE PETREL MANTLE CLOCK - Feb 25, 2018 | Charleston Estate Auctions in SC
Reference the previous...I was editing the post and when I went to Save, gave me an error stating that the 30 minute time frame expired...
So, I do not believe it is a Petrel as shown in Tran's book. However, if one focuses on just the inscribing there are a number of adamantine clocks that were from 1906 to 1915.
An example is the Hull, circa 1915.
Might help with dating.