TALL- LONG CASE / GRANDFATHER CLOCK: CASE STYLES: PRE 1860: A study.

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
I offer the following clock case for discussion with this group. I bring this to the group’s attention as I believe it to be very early, how early is subject for further discussion. I also find it quite interesting to dig into these sorts of things, offer a hypothesis or two, and see what the learned group might suggest. This is an American clock and my general points of discussion are directly relevant to American clocks only. My area of interest is primarily American clocks prior to 1850.

I suspect most of us are well aware that during the period of American tall clocks, 17th through the first quarter 19th century, clock mechanisms were built by clock makers, and case were built by joiners or wood workers functioning perhaps under other names, such as cabinet makers, carpenters, and so on. We know far more of clockmakers than we do of joiners et ‘al of the earliest periods in the Americas. This particular clock case was purchased in upper central Massachusetts (Andover) by me perhaps 20 years ago. There was no history other than it came out of a local farm auction for not much money. It had a very obviously wrong 30 hr production wood works movement and dial in it, made by Riley Whiting, circa 1820+/- a bit. Besides being out of period for the case, its dial was entirely too large for the door and its seatboard did not position the movement and dial properly in the door dial aperture.

The case itself is of American northern pine, and has been stripped many years ago of its original paint/surface. It appears that red and black pigments remain in places in the crevices of the case, so one might assume it was grain painted originally. The pine used in its construction is approximately 1” thick in most of the case, save the trunk sides which are approximately ¾”. The upper door is fit with cast brass “H” hinges which may or may not be the original pair (doubtful they are original but are quite old in any event). The trunk door is fit with “snipe hinges” or “cotter pin” hinges, see detail photo. The latch on the trunk door is later than the case. There is a hole where a twist latch was originally fit, that may well be the first latch. The latch on the hood is a wire hook, similar in materials to the snipe hinges, but it appears a bit too new to be original to the case…just conjecture on that point.

The size of the glass door suggests this clock would have originally been fit with a brass dial 10”x13”, a frequent size for earlier brass dialed clocks. The hood is quite thick (deep) at 10” from the backboard of the case to the inside of the glass. This in itself tells us a bit. And that would be the thickness of the movement would likely be greater than most late 18th early 19th century movements. Candidates requiring a deep case include birdcage movements such as made by some very early American makers such as Caleb Shaw, or Richard Blasdell, or some very early wood works movements made by the Cheney’s or a couple of early makers such as the Chandee’s from the Connecticut North Shore area. They collectively made some extremely large wood works with 10” dials. But I digress from case makers to movement makers and should not…..

As we look further into the case we find the backboard is 2 pieces, in that it is “stepped” at a height of about 42”, which appears to have been done to allow the top of the case to rest against the wall while the lower portion of the case rested against a paneled portion of wall. This would be entirely consistent with 18th century houses in New England, but not a “feature” seen in many clocks.

The case itself is a bit of an enigma, in that is very primitive but built by a well skilled craftsman. The construction techniques used are well executed, includes miters in the moldings, with half lap work in other places. The upper door is mortise and tendon construction with pegs holding all together, very well done. The half columns are turned out of a hardwood, could be cherry or maple, difficult to tell without prying one loose, which I am loath to do. The columns are affixed with small hand wrought nails. Larger nails in the case, only a few are used, are rose head and quite early. The turnings are nicely done, and the blind pegged mortise and tennons are very well executed.

The narrow trunk door indicates a 30 hr movement in my experience, which is also in keeping with being a birdcage or large wood works. There are no “view” ports in the sides of the hood as is often found in brass works clocks, but only seldom in wood works clocks, and when found in WW it should be cause for closer scrutiny. The wood has a significant amount of hand plane marks on the sides; with the front case wood being better finished (where it shows more).

The base of the clock is certainly “short” in appearance. I would expect it could have lost height over the years and perhaps a molding off the base also. Closer inspection has not revealed nail holes or outlines of earlier attachments however. The clock is 6’11” tall, as is, so it has not lost much height. The photos of the base suggest if it was cut, it was done a very long time ago….there are other American clocks from the first half of the 18th century which have similar proportions and a very short base….food for thought and further consideration and inspection I think.

My hypothesis: a very early example and given the depth and style of the case, the narrow trunk door, the lack of view ports, the size of the dial, the wood used, the primitive style of the case, the rose head nails, snipe hinges, all suggest to me an effort predating the Revolutionary War. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Further thoughts: The half columns seen on the bonnet door in this form are not common on American clocks. Use of this form in furniture is most often associated with “pilgrim period” or 2nd half 17th century, say 1665 to about 1705. I don’t believe this case to be that early, but I do think it can date to the 1st half of the 18th century, 1735-1755 +/- a few years. I would also suggest this was the efforts of a reasonably rural joiner. He was skilled but he certainly had never seen Thomas Chippendale’s Style Book…..

And in closing, the case today houses a very large wooden works movement and inked paper dial by Abiel Lincoln, Norton Mass, made in 1789. And that looks OK but I think it would look better with a brass dial wood works in it….maybe a Cheney, or maybe an early Shaw/Blasdell posted birdcage brass dial brass and iron movement.
 

Attachments

Ralph

NAWCC Member
Sponsor
Jan 22, 2002
5,463
402
83
Country
Ralph: a very nice clock, beautiful graining work. Have you any provenance for it?
It came down through a family from Maine and ended up in the Midwest.. I suspect the clock is from New Hampshire.

Some pictures attached of the unrestored movement.

Ralph
 

Attachments

rmarkowitz1_cee4a1

NAWCC Member
Nov 26, 2009
6,322
1,530
113
Country
I offer the following clock case for discussion with this group. I bring this to the group’s attention as I believe it to be very early, how early is subject for further discussion. I also find it quite interesting to dig into these sorts of things, offer a hypothesis or two, and see what the learned group might suggest. This is an American clock and my general points of discussion are directly relevant to American clocks only. My area of interest is primarily American clocks prior to 1850.

I suspect most of us are well aware that during the period of American tall clocks, 17th through the first quarter 19th century, clock mechanisms were built by clock makers, and case were built by joiners or wood workers functioning perhaps under other names, such as cabinet makers, carpenters, and so on. We know far more of clockmakers than we do of joiners et ‘al of the earliest periods in the Americas. This particular clock case was purchased in upper central Massachusetts (Andover) by me perhaps 20 years ago. There was no history other than it came out of a local farm auction for not much money. It had a very obviously wrong 30 hr production wood works movement and dial in it, made by Riley Whiting, circa 1820+/- a bit. Besides being out of period for the case, its dial was entirely too large for the door and its seatboard did not position the movement and dial properly in the door dial aperture.

The case itself is of American northern pine, and has been stripped many years ago of its original paint/surface. It appears that red and black pigments remain in places in the crevices of the case, so one might assume it was grain painted originally. The pine used in its construction is approximately 1” thick in most of the case, save the trunk sides which are approximately ¾”. The upper door is fit with cast brass “H” hinges which may or may not be the original pair (doubtful they are original but are quite old in any event). The trunk door is fit with “snipe hinges” or “cotter pin” hinges, see detail photo. The latch on the trunk door is later than the case. There is a hole where a twist latch was originally fit, that may well be the first latch. The latch on the hood is a wire hook, similar in materials to the snipe hinges, but it appears a bit too new to be original to the case…just conjecture on that point.

The size of the glass door suggests this clock would have originally been fit with a brass dial 10”x13”, a frequent size for earlier brass dialed clocks. The hood is quite thick (deep) at 10” from the backboard of the case to the inside of the glass. This in itself tells us a bit. And that would be the thickness of the movement would likely be greater than most late 18th early 19th century movements. Candidates requiring a deep case include birdcage movements such as made by some very early American makers such as Caleb Shaw, or Richard Blasdell, or some very early wood works movements made by the Cheney’s or a couple of early makers such as the Chandee’s from the Connecticut North Shore area. They collectively made some extremely large wood works with 10” dials. But I digress from case makers to movement makers and should not…..

As we look further into the case we find the backboard is 2 pieces, in that it is “stepped” at a height of about 42”, which appears to have been done to allow the top of the case to rest against the wall while the lower portion of the case rested against a paneled portion of wall. This would be entirely consistent with 18th century houses in New England, but not a “feature” seen in many clocks.

The case itself is a bit of an enigma, in that is very primitive but built by a well skilled craftsman. The construction techniques used are well executed, includes miters in the moldings, with half lap work in other places. The upper door is mortise and tendon construction with pegs holding all together, very well done. The half columns are turned out of a hardwood, could be cherry or maple, difficult to tell without prying one loose, which I am loath to do. The columns are affixed with small hand wrought nails. Larger nails in the case, only a few are used, are rose head and quite early. The turnings are nicely done, and the blind pegged mortise and tennons are very well executed.

The narrow trunk door indicates a 30 hr movement in my experience, which is also in keeping with being a birdcage or large wood works. There are no “view” ports in the sides of the hood as is often found in brass works clocks, but only seldom in wood works clocks, and when found in WW it should be cause for closer scrutiny. The wood has a significant amount of hand plane marks on the sides; with the front case wood being better finished (where it shows more).

The base of the clock is certainly “short” in appearance. I would expect it could have lost height over the years and perhaps a molding off the base also. Closer inspection has not revealed nail holes or outlines of earlier attachments however. The clock is 6’11” tall, as is, so it has not lost much height. The photos of the base suggest if it was cut, it was done a very long time ago….there are other American clocks from the first half of the 18th century which have similar proportions and a very short base….food for thought and further consideration and inspection I think.

My hypothesis: a very early example and given the depth and style of the case, the narrow trunk door, the lack of view ports, the size of the dial, the wood used, the primitive style of the case, the rose head nails, snipe hinges, all suggest to me an effort predating the Revolutionary War. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Further thoughts: The half columns seen on the bonnet door in this form are not common on American clocks. Use of this form in furniture is most often associated with “pilgrim period” or 2nd half 17th century, say 1665 to about 1705. I don’t believe this case to be that early, but I do think it can date to the 1st half of the 18th century, 1735-1755 +/- a few years. I would also suggest this was the efforts of a reasonably rural joiner. He was skilled but he certainly had never seen Thomas Chippendale’s Style Book…..

And in closing, the case today houses a very large wooden works movement and inked paper dial by Abiel Lincoln, Norton Mass, made in 1789. And that looks OK but I think it would look better with a brass dial wood works in it….maybe a Cheney, or maybe an early Shaw/Blasdell posted birdcage brass dial brass and iron movement.
From your pictures and thorough excellent analysis, I can't find anything to refute your conclusion that this is an 18th century tall case, possibly from the the first 1/2 of that century. The overall style, proportions, trunk door, short base, snipe hinges, rose head nails, etc, etc would be consistent.

The applied 1/2 spindles to the hood are a bit unusual, no? I tend to associate that type of applied decoration with 17th century furniture (blanket chests, "court cupboards") as you yourself have pointed out. However, rural craftspeople were conservative and catered to a conservative clientel. So older styles tended to persist for longer periods of time, beyond when they might have been too old fashioned for more urban areas. For example, I own pairs of "country" Queen Anne and Chippendale chairs whose time of production went well beyond those periods.

The case sort of looks like the type of clocks that came out of S. NH, Amesbury, MA, Newbury, MA (Balch?). But I ain't no "expoit".

One question. Fairly clear difference in color between everything above the hood door and the rest of the clock. What do you think that's attributable too?

RM

PS: just put a Hermle chime movement in and forget about it?
 

Jeremy Woodoff

NAWCC Member
Jun 30, 2002
4,242
137
63
Brooklyn
Country
Region
It is possible to accurately date timber and thus the clock case using dendrochronology. This compares the ring patterns of the wood to a database of historic patterns of wood of the same species from the same geographic area. I don't know how difficult or expensive it is to do, but it may be worth looking into.
 

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
The applied 1/2 spindles to the hood are a bit unusual, no? I tend to associate that type of applied decoration with 17th century furniture (blanket chests, "court cupboards") as you yourself have pointed out. However, rural craftspeople were conservative and catered to a conservative clientel. So older styles tended to persist for longer periods of time, beyond when they might have been too old fashioned for more urban areas. For example, I own pairs of "country" Queen Anne and Chippendale chairs whose time of production went well beyond those periods. I fully agree with this observation and came to similar conclusions regarding the decorations being more 17th century, but more likely a hold over stylistically speaking, done a bit later. It is not uncommon for rural furniture to lag by 50 years or so more urban styles IMO.

The case sort of looks like the type of clocks that came out of S. NH, Amesbury, MA, Newbury, MA (Balch?). But I ain't no "expoit". I am not thinking there are too many "expoits" on this period.:)

One question. Fairly clear difference in color between everything above the hood door and the rest of the clock. What do you think that's attributable too? My original thoughts were the door must have come from something else and been married to this case. That thought however doesn't really hold up under close inspection of the wood of both the case and that of the door. The grain patterns as well as the oxidized colors of the wood on the inside of the door as well as the inside of the hood suggests the wood of both are from the same tree and have been exposed to the same environments for the same periods of time. I am aware this could be ascertained with 100% certainty, or not, by a lab, but the one time I needed to prove a wood was American, not European, the lab charge was greater than the value of this clock case!

RM

PS: just put a Hermle chime movement in and forget about it? RM. you have allways been a man of great taste and good recommendations. Where could I get such a Hermle clock movement, and where do you recommend I rent a belt sander so I can clean up this ugly case? Properly done I bet I could make it look just like a piece of knotty pine done up in blond wood finish! Should I use 40 grit or 36 grit belts? :eek:
Jeremy, understand the methodology, but very honestly the fairly modest case does not demand any real proof of age or origin. This is more an
endeavor of armchair investigation than an exhaustive effort on my part. Laprade suggested we more completely analyze some of the submissions we make and this was one of my efforts to do so...
 
Last edited:

rmarkowitz1_cee4a1

NAWCC Member
Nov 26, 2009
6,322
1,530
113
Country
"RM. you have allways been a man of great taste and good recommendations. Where could I get such a Hermle clock movement, and where do you recommend I rent a belt sander so I can clean up this ugly case? Properly done I bet I could make it look just like a piece of knotty pine done up in blond wood finish! Should I use 40 grit or 36 grit belts? :eek:"

The grittier the better, I say.

Make sure to use a nice shiney polyurethane finish, too.

Okay, enough of my sarcasm.

RM
 

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
"RM. you have allways been a man of great taste and good recommendations. Where could I get such a Hermle clock movement, and where do you recommend I rent a belt sander so I can clean up this ugly case? Properly done I bet I could make it look just like a piece of knotty pine done up in blond wood finish! Should I use 40 grit or 36 grit belts? :eek:"

The grittier the better, I say.

Make sure to use a nice shiney polyurethane finish, too.

Okay, enough of my sarcasm.

RM
RM I am greatly offended by your comment regarding "polyurethane". You know I only use the best 2 part epoxy for my fine restorations....:D end of my sarcasm too!
 

laprade

Registered User
If you look at the selection of old English oak flat tops, you will see that the majority use "pilasters attached to the hood door", so I find no real fault with the clock Jim has posted, and given us a fine description of. I also like the extension of the pilasters onto the top of the hood façade. It avoids the use of a cock bead or mould to frame the top section. The continuation of the pilasters solves a cabinetry problem.

The base seems to have an over large applied "skirting board". Do you think that at some time it was moved up, to allow the main body of the case to also rest on the floor. Maybe at some stage it became loose and was repositioned incorrectly.

The "H" hinges are contemporary of that early period, and it was common to have them outside and visible. Most corner cabinets and presses (Irish for any sort of cupboard) at that time, had that arrangement.

A nice clock, Jim, and thanks for your trouble and detail.
 

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
If you look at the selection of old English oak flat tops, you will see that the majority use "pilasters attached to the hood door", It is less common in American clocks so I find no real fault with the clock Jim has posted, and given us a fine description of. I also like the extension of the pilasters onto the top of the hood façade. It avoids the use of a cock bead or mould to frame the top section. The continuation of the pilasters solves a cabinetry problem.

The base seems to have an over large applied "skirting board". Do you think that at some time it was moved up, to allow the main body of the case to also rest on the floor. Maybe at some stage it became loose and was repositioned incorrectly. I think that is certainly possible. Since the case sides are extended to the bottom of the case that alone lends credence to that possibility. That said I have had a few American tall clocks done that way originally, usually "country clocks", so I would not take it as an absolute. Also, one of the indicators of a relocated base would be the spacing of the trunk door in relation to the under hood cove molding and the upper base cove molding. In this case it is pretty much symmetrical whcih would suggest the base perhaps was not relocated. While exceptions to the symetrical rule certainly exist (see the Dominy's clocks of New York) it is a reasonable good indicator in American clocks of base relocations. Pulling a side off the base should answer that question....but a very good point laprade

The "H" hinges are contemporary of that early period, and it was common to have them outside and visible. Most corner cabinets and presses (Irish for any sort of cupboard) at that time, had that arrangement. Brass "H" higes are much less common in the States, most period H hinges in the US are of wrought iron. Brass was heavily taxed by our English friends for at least 50 years, and some of what generated the Revolutionary War....

A nice clock, Jim, and thanks for your trouble and detail.
Glad to offer something of interest laprade....
 

Peter A. Nunes

Moderator
Staff member
NAWCC Fellow
NAWCC Member
Sponsor
Mar 3, 2006
1,672
39
48
Rhode Island
www.cogcounters.org
Country
Region
I offer the following clock case for discussion with this group. I bring this to the group’s attention as I believe it to be very early, how early is subject for further discussion. I also find it quite interesting to dig into these sorts of things, offer a hypothesis or two, and see what the learned group might suggest. This is an American clock and my general points of discussion are directly relevant to American clocks only. My area of interest is primarily American clocks prior to 1850.


Here is a clock movement from my collection that is an example of a posted frame movement that Mr. Dubois mentioned. The maker is Richard Manning, of Ipswich, Massachusetts. The dial is the correct size for the door opening in Mr. Dubois's case, and the movement is likely from about the same period, as Manning's years of production are given as 1748-67 in Spittlers and Bailey, although there is an extant example dated 1773. There is a very similar example shown in "The American Clock", by Battison & Kane, pp. 62-65, this one by Aaron Smith, also of Ipswich. It is a little later, c. 1793, and has a cord pull-up weight driven movement, instead of a continuous rope drive with one weight, which is how my example is outfitted. Still, construction details, dial mounting scheme, etc., are very similar, although the dial is a bit bigger, at 15" x 11". Another Richard Manning clock is shown in Volume Two of John Robey's "The Longcase Clock", p. 714, with a brief description on page 712.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

laprade

Registered User
Peter, a lovely old piece, a "widow" so to speak, looking for a suitable marriage partner!

I don't want to drag the thread off into the realms of the movements, (another thread should be started for that), but I am curious about the hands arrangements of the American lantern movements (birdcage: posted). In the UK, any such clocks that I have come across had only one hand. I was surprized to see yours having two.
 

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
Peter, a lovely old piece, a "widow" so to speak, looking for a suitable marriage partner!

I don't want to drag the thread off into the realms of the movements, (another thread should be started for that), but I am curious about the hands arrangements of the American lantern movements (birdcage: posted). In the UK, any such clocks that I have come across had only one hand. I was surprized to see yours having two.
laprade, posted movement single hand tall clocks are quite rare in American makers. Over the last 45 years or so I can recall having seen very few, maybe 2. Attached is a photo of a Blasdel clock and movement, which Blasdel is not entirely clear as there were two or 3 generations of the family that built these, commencing about 1740 through the late 18th century. Sorry for the poor quality photos, they are all I have of this clock. This would also be pre revolutionary war most likely, and it does have 2 hands and a calender. Why I have no good photos of the dial is not clear to me 20 years later:???:?

This clock is also a pine case which was stripped sometime in the last 100 years, long enough ago the replacement finish was crackled and worn. The tea caddy top is very uncommon stateside. While this one has had finials on the corners the rest of this top I believe original and unmolested, with original finish.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
It came down through a family from Maine and ended up in the Midwest.. I suspect the clock is from New Hampshire.

Some pictures attached of the unrestored movement.

Ralph
Nice! I like the case a lot, and the grain paint is remarkable. Regards NH origin, very possible. As you know I spent 10 years in NH and most of that time was spent on clocks of the area.... Your movement and dial could be the work of a number of NH clockmakers. Unfortunately, even given the massive effort by Charles Parsons it is not always clear who was just a clock maker and who was just a retailer, and who was both, or neither. Nice clarification on my part huh? I have seen signed examples with very similar movements by James Cole, by T. Chandler, by John Gains, BC Gillman, Abel Hutchins, William Fitz, and perhaps some others. Parsons tends to call these movements "Hutchens style" so maybe it best we leave it at that? I would tend to think your clockcase was made and sold more in the costal area of NH, say Portsmouth just due to the style and the fine faux mahogany paint. The more inland made cases seem to be more wide, less graceful, and less conforming to urban styles...just an opinion no basis in fact...

Here is an outrageous actual inlay Samuel Foster Amherst NH clock just FYI, and this would be a fairly common case style of central NH, san the inlays....a country Roxbury style....
 

Attachments

Peter A. Nunes

Moderator
Staff member
NAWCC Fellow
NAWCC Member
Sponsor
Mar 3, 2006
1,672
39
48
Rhode Island
www.cogcounters.org
Country
Region
Peter, a lovely old piece, a "widow" so to speak, looking for a suitable marriage partner!

I don't want to drag the thread off into the realms of the movements, (another thread should be started for that), but I am curious about the hands arrangements of the American lantern movements (birdcage: posted). In the UK, any such clocks that I have come across had only one hand. I was surprized to see yours having two.
These hand wrought steel hands seem to be unique to Mr. Manning... see "The Clock Book", by Wallace Nutting, Plate 165 for another example, this one cased as a wag-on-the-wall. The hands are nearly identical to my example, shown here.
 

Attachments

rmarkowitz1_cee4a1

NAWCC Member
Nov 26, 2009
6,322
1,530
113
Country
Nice! I like the case a lot, and the grain paint is remarkable. Regards NH origin, very possible. As you know I spent 10 years in NH and most of that time was spent on clocks of the area.... Your movement and dial could be the work of a number of NH clockmakers. Unfortunately, even given the massive effort by Charles Parsons it is not always clear who was just a clock maker and who was just a retailer, and who was both, or neither. Nice clarification on my part huh? I have seen signed examples with very similar movements by James Cole, by T. Chandler, by John Gains, BC Gillman, Abel Hutchins, William Fitz, and perhaps some others. Parsons tends to call these movements "Hutchens style" so maybe it best we leave it at that? I would tend to think your clockcase was made and sold more in the costal area of NH, say Portsmouth just due to the style and the fine faux mahogany paint. The more inland made cases seem to be more wide, less graceful, and less conforming to urban styles...just an opinion no basis in fact...

Here is an outrageous actual inlay Samuel Foster Amherst NH clock just FYI, and this would be a fairly common case style of central NH, san the inlays....a country Roxbury style....
Both Jim and Ralph have posted very nice clocks.

Interesting thoughts about Portsmouth.

A good book about Portsmouth furniture is Portsmouth Furniture:Masterworks from the New Hampshire Seacost edited by Brock Jobe. A quick perusal doesn't show a clock identical to Ralph's, but there are illustrated some highboys, secretaries, etc. where the overall outline of the broken arch creast is quite similar.

Would also consider other more rural communities up river or across the Piscataqua (spelling??) from Portsmouth, too.

RM
 

laprade

Registered User
Jim, a very colourful clock. One or two questions, as I can't see some points even when magnified. What are the woods? are the quartered columns reeded or fluted? and are the broad inlays crossbanded or long grain?

In keeping with the ethos of the thread, a description is needed for the readers to note. I must stress that it is important to have a check list of points to spot, when looking at a clock case. People do it for movements, but forget about the cases. It is no use phoning up from an auction house, shop, or private house sale, and not being able to describe a clock properly, if you are looking for money to buy it!!

So those who haven't seen the clock yet, read this description, and then go back and find the clock!

The clock is of a "pale wood", which I can't identify. Could be ash, maple, or blond oak. The hood has a broken arched crown, with a simple large curvetto mould capped with a small convex mould. It has three tall rectangular finial pedestals, with brass ball and spire finials, inter spaced with fine fretwork. The hood door fits closely into the hood crown mould. The hood pillars are free standing, fluted or reeded, (I can't tell), but plain straight, no mid bulge. Brass caps and bases in Doric style. The door has pegged mortises, and an ivory escutcheon plate with flat sides and concave top and bottom. There is no inlay on the hood.

The trunk has a medium length door with freeze and dado panels. The door is inlaid in a dark wood, with a wide band inlay (cross-banded?) near the outer edge, and a single string within. The escutcheon plate for the door catch, is the same as that of the hood, and is the same width as the wide banding, within which it is placed. The trunk has quartered reeded or fluted columns of a darker wood, which is probably the same as the inlay, and has Doric caps and bases in brass. The columns are the same length as the door. The mortise joints of the trunk, are also pegged.

The trunk moulds are again curvetto with stepped edges. The base panel is inlaid with a medium string inlay, set in from the edge, and with a horizontal oval marquetry lozenge, which has fan section alternate inlays, with convex ends. The side panels of the base, also have a band inlay set in from the edge.

The feet are external brackets, with a strong connecting mould.

The hood style of the clock is very like that of Essex and Kent in the UK.

(If you go back to the first post of the thread, and you will see clocks, which are very similar. Two have long doors and one has a late short door.)
 

RickB

Registered User
May 28, 2010
436
4
0
A Cave in Pennsylvania
Country
Region
I was asked to post these pictures of two Jacob Hugus tall clocks. Made late 1700's 0 early 1800's by Jacob Hugus near Greensburg(h) PA.

One is owned by a friend (Number 54) and the other is in a local antique shop.

I will be able to obtain better pivtures of #54 when I work on it sometime in the future.

Most these that I looked at or read about are rope or chain driven, the one in the antique shop has new looking brass cables. The door was locked so I couldn't get a picture of them or get a shop of the movement in it.
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
The pictures in the previous post give us a unique opportunity to compare two clocks by the same maker. This of course could pose the question: are the cases right?

The first clock is of a "grand style" and has some very interesting features. Imagine you are ringing a fellow collector, or customer:

It's a painted arched dial clock: 30hr. It has a very long slim door with a broken arched top. In the top arch is a carving of a scallop, a bit like the symbol of the pilgrims to Santiago de Compostela in Spain. Below the carving is another semi religious symbol with garlands, which I think are painted and not inlaid. This is repeated at the base of the door, which also has a bull's eye in the middle. There is a plain freeze area above the door and a dado panel below, and the trunk sides have fluted quartered columns with carved versions of what you see top and bottom of a masons-mitre mould.

The hood is quite exceptional and has a high crown with swan necks above a broken arched mould, which has returns which also have broken arches. Under the returns are glass windows which also have broken arched tops. Oh yeh, the hood has no pillars, the door has cabinet hinges, and there is a really large shelf on top of the upper trunk mould, you could put your pint on it! The mould underneath is like a squashed ogee, to make up for the width of the shelf!. Oh yeh, I almost forgot, the swans have rosettes with the same symbol which is on the door, these look to be brass.

Ah, sorry, I didn't remember to look at the feet. I'd say it is a mahogany case. The back-board looks to be one piece of knotty pine. Oh yeh, the hood door has small pegs in the joints.

The second clock is a light wood and very plain. The hood has squat swans with wood finials on square posts, and there is a centre finial. There are simple turned pillars either side of the door and also at the back. The door hinges are "H" style. There is no moulding between the door and the swans, but the swan mould projects on the returns, where it connects with the front and back pillars. The door has pegged joints.

The trunk is very plain with a door that has a fielded panel, and also has pegged joints. Either side of the door there are slightly raised sections, a sort of pilaster, but very simple, and there is quite a large freeze section above the door, no, no dado panel.

The bottom trunk mould is a simple curvetto. The top one is more complicated! No, I forgot to look at the feet.

At first glance, there seems to be a huge difference in the age of the two clocks: they are miles apart!
 

Attachments

Jim DuBois

Gibbs Literary Award
NAWCC Member
Jun 14, 2008
3,747
1,284
113
Magnolia, TX
Country
Region
Just a couple of casual thoughts:

Firstly, casemakers and movement makers were not necessarily tightly integrated in this country.

Secondly, to make any valid assumptions about any clock it does need be based on first hand and very careful observation/inspection by knowledgable and unbiased parties.

That said, The first case is suspect in that the pendulum bob does not appear to line up with the bulls eye in the door. While we have discussed in this thread out of "period" construction details, the bulleye is usually an earlier clock feature, and in this country more often associated with brass dials than painted dials. The style of the case is one more of a pre painted dial period (and yes there are a fair number of exceptions in Penn clocks) IME so I would not condem this clock on that point....the position of the bullseye is very troublesome to me and would demand some very close inspection for signs of a significant rework of the case or a possible marriage of later movement to earlier case. But, it could be 100% right, and we will never know looking at photos....but, nice clocks in and event and thanks for bringing them to the fray, so to speak....
 

laprade

Registered User
Jim, I did notice the diference in positions of the eye and the bob, and thought that maybe the cabinet maker made a mistake.

Rick, I think we need to have a closer look at the symbol on the swan rosettes and the door.

Don't forget the feet, if you have some time.
 

laprade

Registered User
Thanks Rick: now that looks like a Hugus!

I've enhanced the pictures a bit to be able to see a bit more. Incidentally: those of you who use Vista or a photo program, you can lighten the pictures after loading them into the computer. In vista, just open the picture-large size- and from the top menu, select "correct" or "alter" (mine's french and says "corriger") a menu will appear on the right of your screen, and one of the choices allows you to change the "contrast" and "brightness")

back to topic. I have stitched the pictures together so as we can see the differences.

No 42 has the "Saint-Jacques" type symbol on the door, and also has the quartered columns. The trunk door is longer and has no dado panel below it. I see that the base has an applied panel, and seems to have bracket feet: could be ogee. (I can't improve the picture)

The hood has baluster turned pillars, with elongated bases, and suggests that maybe No 54 had them at one time. I like the tall elegant finials: does anyone know how original they are? Also note that the scallop symbol is also above the hood door.

As Jim surmized, the case may have been altered. It is possible that there was a larger freeze above the trunk door, and a bigger top mould: that would account for the misalignment of the bob and eye. I don't think that the position of the movement could help much, as the "one second beat" pendulum is a constant length.

I am convinced that the third lighter case, is a marriage, conducted by some antique trader, who didn't know enough about cabinetry and styling.

I forgot to mention a couple of points. The last three pictures show some details that are important, when examining a clock case.

Picture 3/ shows the nice ornate strap hinge on No 54, pic 4/ shows the trunk door lock: original.

Picture 5/ shows (badly) the replacement lock on the trunk door of No 42.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

laprade

Registered User
CATCHING UP

Mike Hudders has sent in the pictures of his clock feet. Pictures 1/ & 2/ show his Lincolnshire clock, and it has external brackets.

Pictures 3/ & 4/ show his Odiham, flat-top, and here is a big surprize! It has french feet.


Also note the position of the bull's eye in the hood door, and think back to the Hugus clock with the wrongly placed eye.
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
David Hay has lent us his clock first featured on the thread linked below;

http://www.mb.nawcc.org/showthread.php?t=63920

He posted some pictures of the case I had asked for, but in the wrong thread. I have copied them here for convenience.

The clock case is a very attractive short door, which had a marriage movement from a different era.

However the case is worth mentioning, and comparing with two other cases which purport to come from Lincolnshire. One is also in the previous post, and has also been discussed in another thread some months ago, to do with the dial.

The comparison picture shows; long door; medium door: short door.

David's clock is of oak with mahogany veneers, cross-banding, and fine boxwood stringing.

The hood has plain turned pillars, with Corinthian caps. The swans have brass rosettes. The crown has stringing, as does the door, in box wood. The hood has no key-lock: there is a small turned wooden knob.

The trunk has freeze and dado panels of fine "flame" mahogany framed with boxwood strings. The dado panel is twice the depth of the freeze. The door is a very short one, about half the trunk length, with three curved points on the top, and a broad mahogany mitred band, framing a centre field. The escutcheon plate is of ivory, and diamond shaped. The sides of the trunk have "masons mitre" with lamb's tongue tops and bottoms, about two thirds the length of the door, with string-bounded panels above and below. The main part of the mould is grooved.

The base has quite short french feet, joined by a crinolin skirt, with a string of boxwood taking the place of a cross mould. The outer edge of the base is cross-banded in mahogany, the inner edged of which has a band bounded with two strings. The centre of the base is of oak, but again there is a mahogany band framing an inner oak area.

The trunk moulds are a flattish "ogee".

The back of the clock is of pine and more than one board, which is normal for a late case.


As I said in the other thread, this is one of the nicest short-door cases, I have ever seen.
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
Just a quick note about "door locks"

The sketch shows two types found on long-case trunk doors. The sketches aren't precise, as I have no examples on hand: they just show the basic principle.

The traditional lock is enclosed and has a "return" in the metalwork, through which the "keeper" moves.

The other lock is what is now sold as "wardrobe locks" and found on modern flat-pack type furniture. The plate is fastened to the woodwork, with the keeper visible and "external".

Most of the original locks are of steel, but you will come across the odd brass one.

The metal fixture into which the keeper locks is called a "striking plate".

The original type have a "post" which fits into a centre hole in the key. The modern cheap lock keys have no tube or hollow centre.
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
I just remembered I have two examples of "continental" locks, as opposed to UK types.

One is an early version of a modern wardrobe lock. This does have a key with a "tube shaft". I couldn't get the lock off to photo the inside, as it was nailed to the door!

The other lock is a "rim-lock". Rimlocks are "raised" and have a "box", which is traditionally fixed with dome-head japanned screws.

The rim-lock walls are 3mm thick, and you can see the quality. It is from a 19th c sideboard (buffet). The key (missing) has no tube, but an extended post, which protrudes through the outside of the lock box. Note the extra length of the face of the lock: a common feature of rim-locks. larger versions for house doors etc, have screw holes in this extended face.
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
ANOTHER LINCOLNSHIRE CLOCK

Having recently (two posts back) looked at some Lincolnshire clocks, I was reminded of another that had appeared some time ago, when an old thread was resurrected yesterday. The clock was posted by Simone Sanders and there are two reasonable shots of the case. The face is a stove enamelled painted one and reasonably early. (the hands are repro)

We have to assume that the case is the right one, well we have to hope it is.

I have had to brighten the pics, and as a result, the face is burnt out of the image.

Interesting points are as follows. The hood door and side pillars are one piece, as was seen in many of the early flat-tops shown a short while back. There is no hood door lock slot in the face framing, and because the pillars are attached, there is no “cabinet lock”. The pillars are of the classical type, with Doric influence. There is a strong broken-arch mould above the hood door. The swan necks are quite "neat" and compact, with a central finial pedestal.

The trunk door is arched with an applied moulding around its edge, and the trunk mouldings are plain curvetto with small steps. The keyhole escutcheon is an applied brass one, which I suspect is a replacement.

We have no shot of the feet.

The case is heavily varnished with a stained varnish, and if you magnify the picture, you will see strong graining above the trunk door, which could be oak or ash, maybe even elm. The staining is of a sort of mahogany hue, but the case is not mahogany. The shot of the provenance label, shows how thick the varnish is. (tragic)

I suspect that the hood finials are from a vienna clock.
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
BACK TO THE SUBJECT OF TRUNK DOOR LOCKS

I have been sent some good pictures of a lock taken from a UK clock, and asked about how to get it working: there is no key. This gives us a good closeup view of an old lock.

First: Find a blank or old key, that will fit over the post: then cut the flag so it can fit into the keyhole: then cut it ,so as it can turn. You have to make a groove cut before it will turn, if there guides.

The images show a flat plate lock with no 'return". The key enters through the back plate and subsequently the innards of the lock are open to view. (in normal lock procedure there would be a "striking plate" to receive the keeper, but in this instance, the keeper goes past the back edge of the case.

The lock, as you will see, was mounted on the door the wrong way round: the end spring and keeper end are being used to engage the case frame. For the lock to work properly, it would have to be upside down. It is just a case of having a lock with the "wrong hand".

The lock in question has a post that fits inside the key shaft, and I show some sketches as to how you can make a replacement key.

The hardest part is locating any guides, that require a groove in the key's flag.

Three pictures of the lock in question, and two others showing a lock with a "plate return", in situ (not taken off).

The last image has been brightened to show what looks to be a guide.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

laprade

Registered User
AN UPDATE ON THE LOCK

Ros has sent me a picture of the door without the lock, and you can see that it had been moved so as the keyhole was upright. The picture shows the discrepancy in the spacing. The case maker put it on upside down, probably because he ordered the wrong hand, or was out of stock.

Some time ago it was taken off, the original nails, discarded and new screws used to put it back, as the owner thought it should be. However to be upright, it had to be backwards!

Note the parallel grooving either side of the keyhole: looks like someone "rocked" a chisel blade to make room for the riveting on the plate.
-> posts merged by system <-
I forgot to put the reverse of the lock to show the keyhole! I don't know how, if at all, I can remove the first image! The second picture clearly shows the original problem: not uncommon, I might add, to find upside down key holes and locks.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

JB

NAWCC Member
Dec 27, 2006
913
19
18
Country
Region
Perhaps Laprade you could offer up some discussion on pillars and the use of brass piping I revealed after cleaning this case. If I'm interpreting the scribble found on the back of the dial plate correctly, this clock was made in London 1766. Which would be in keeping with the time period of the maker.

In a previous post you mention pillars were not found on Flat tops very often.

I'd also be interested in your thoughts as to the flat top found on this case as I find the moldings not to be projecting beyond the body of the hood. All others I've seen the flat top moldings make for the widest part of the hood. At first this bothered me. But whilst continuing to look at it from a distance it seems to 'work' in keeping the lines of the clock elegant.
 

Attachments

JB

NAWCC Member
Dec 27, 2006
913
19
18
Country
Region
That's a really nice clock Fred! I'll trade you :). A friend of mine has a clock similar to that. He built his house to fit the clock. At 86 he had a tough time removing the movement to service it. How may tunes does it play and on how many bells and hammers?
 

Fred Bricker

Registered User
Sep 4, 2010
74
0
0
no its not i was ask too look at it. its in university of Notre Dame
i wish lol :D
-> posts merged by system <-
That's a really nice clock Fred! I'll trade you :). A friend of mine has a clock similar to that. He built his house to fit the clock. At 86 he had a tough time removing the movement to service it. How may tunes does it play and on how many bells and hammers?
im sorry JB dont no when i look in it it has bells on the side and bells on the back of the movement and some chime rods in it barley can see the movement
 

laprade

Registered User
Fred, I'll reply to Joe first, so as not to confuse.

Joe (JB); What I said was that a lot of flat tops had pillars fixed to the door, and the free standing pillars took over, more or less, with the advent of mahogany cases.

I was on the point of asking you to post your clock here, as it has some interesting points. I was curious to see if the trunk pillars had the brass inlay.
This is a sign of a top quality case, and if you trawl the GF sites (dealers) you will see that most of them show this feature mostly on London and Home-Counties cases.

Because your case is made of made of mahogany, it can be given an earliest date, of around 1740, when mahogany started to be used in cabinetmaking. "Google historians" give a vague date of "the beginning of the 19th) for the introduction of blade cut veneers. However, one of the Chippendales used "laminates" for the tops of pianoforté and other musical instruments. (my cabinetmaker in 75, showed me a book that dealt with the subject) Your case still has the styling of the 18th c: long door and the old fashioned "flat top" (as opposed to the Bristol and Scots clocks shown earlier), so it should have hand sawn veneers. Generally speaking, the name on the dials are used to date most clocks, and in your case, it should point to being reasonably early. I'm saying this, as the case shows some signs of slightly late styling: you will have to trawl the sites and make comparisons, to be 100% sure of campatibility of maker and case.

Most of the oak basewood long-cases that were veneered, were done in walnut, as it was imported from france: thus was expensive and used sparingly as veneers. The Wars of the Spanish Succession, stopped the import of walnut, early in the 18th c, and if we are to believe the historians, mahogany was being shipped over the pond as "ballast" and was being used for construction. It was seen to be a good wood to work with, and the cabinet makers started to use it. I suppose, when the shippers realized that it had a fancy use, they put the price up, causing the cabinetmakers to be ecconomical with it. Also, I suppose, the surplus "ballast" was used up, which would have added to the story: causing more widespread use of mahogany veneer. You will come across solid mahogany cases, and some with a plain grade, as base wood, with rarer flame and other types, veneered over. Pine then became used extensively as a base for mahogany veneer, in the later 18th c, and any very late "solid mahogany" cases, probably were specified by wealthy clients.

Maybe someone familiar with the American shelf clocks etc, produced with what appears to be "blade cut" veneers, can give a date for its introduction. Do any of the early American Ogees and Pillar and Scrolls, have sawn veneers? I remember reading in a book in 74, which I think was called "the old American clock", which gave all the statistics of the American industry, amongst which, was the amount of veneers: the amount of sq yardage is quite staggering. The book also said that the circular saw was invented by the American clock makers.

What I ommitted to say, on JB's other "oyens" thread, was that blade cutting was also done from a flat surface. It has been some years since I spoke on the subject, and it slipped my mind.
 

laprade

Registered User
Fred; I first came across this style of clock in one of Ernest L Edwardes books. It is over twenty years since I last read it (stolen), and if my memory serves me well, or at all!, I think he called the early type "pillar clocks", as they often took the shape of a very fancy table / bracket clock, standing on a pillar.
SSPX0052.jpg
If the historians are to be believed, the use of the "broken pediment", was introduced into European styling, primarily in England, by the Adam Brothers, some time in the mid 18th c: Robert being the most famous. Some claim it was as early as 1740, others say 1760. It all hinges on his involvement with the Chippendale family. How this relates to the Dutch scene, is outside my knowledge.

It is generally accepted that the UK clock industry got its impetus from Holland, and many of the London makers were directly descended from there, and influenced English styling, until the advent of the Queen Anne period, when Chinese ideas appeared, followed by a form of Neoclassicism, culminating in the adoption of the "broken pediment", which is still the most popular style used for the tops of hoods.

When you get the chance, try and get some provenance on the clock, like a signature on the dial: for example, is it a Dutch clock, or an English one, made to a Dutch taste.

don't fall off the stepladder!

(I just realized, that I forgot to spellcheck the last post: I'm away from home on a friend's machine)
 

antiekeradio

Registered User
Mar 1, 2010
508
1
0
Netherlands
www.clockshop.nl
Country
Region
The styling of the figures on top, and the surround of the trunk door glass, suggest this is a Dutch clock.

As far as I know, the clock trade between Amsterdam and London was mainly production in Amsterdam, marketed in London.

It would be great to have some focussed, unblurred pictures of the dial without the reflection of the glass.

What I can see on the pictures is that it is a quarter-striking carrillon clock, with moonphase, month, date and day of the week indication.

the small dials in the top left and top right corner could be for the selection of the carrillon melody and a strike-silent setting.
 

laprade

Registered User
wrong thread: the board is playing tricks today: there is a national strike and everyone is at home playing with google! So the web is overloaded! This post was meant for another thread, and I can't remove the picture. As it happens, it has some relevance to this thread. I posted it to show the real thing with respect to "repoussée", and mentioned machine pressed clock surrounds, being described as "repoussée".

The picture shows a silver beaker which is also part chased and engraves as well as repoussée-planished.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Fred Bricker

Registered User
Sep 4, 2010
74
0
0
Laprade Thank for your info in this clock. Nice to know i was amaze seeing it
and say omg that is big
 

JB

NAWCC Member
Dec 27, 2006
913
19
18
Country
Region
Fred, I'll reply to Joe first, so as not to confuse.

Joe (JB); What I said was that a lot of flat tops had pillars fixed to the door, and the free standing pillars took over, more or less, with the advent of mahogany cases.

I was on the point of asking you to post your clock here, as it has some interesting points. I was curious to see if the trunk pillars had the brass inlay.
This is a sign of a top quality case, and if you trawl the GF sites (dealers) you will see that most of them show this feature mostly on London and Home-Counties cases.

Because your case is made of made of mahogany, it can be given an earliest date, of around 1740, when mahogany started to be used in cabinetmaking. "Google historians" give a vague date of "the beginning of the 19th) for the introduction of blade cut veneers. However, one of the Chippendales used "laminates" for the tops of pianoforté and other musical instruments. (my cabinetmaker in 75, showed me a book that dealt with the subject) Your case still has the styling of the 18th c: long door and the old fashioned "flat top" (as opposed to the Bristol and Scots clocks shown earlier), so it should have hand sawn veneers. Generally speaking, the name on the dials are used to date most clocks, and in your case, it should point to being reasonably early. I'm saying this, as the case shows some signs of slightly late styling: you will have to trawl the sites and make comparisons, to be 100% sure of campatibility of maker and case.

Most of the oak basewood long-cases that were veneered, were done in walnut, as it was imported from france: thus was expensive and used sparingly as veneers. The Wars of the Spanish Succession, stopped the import of walnut, early in the 18th c, and if we are to believe the historians, mahogany was being shipped over the pond as "ballast" and was being used for construction. It was seen to be a good wood to work with, and the cabinet makers started to use it. I suppose, when the shippers realized that it had a fancy use, they put the price up, causing the cabinetmakers to be ecconomical with it. Also, I suppose, the surplus "ballast" was used up, which would have added to the story: causing more widespread use of mahogany veneer. You will come across solid mahogany cases, and some with a plain grade, as base wood, with rarer flame and other types, veneered over. Pine then became used extensively as a base for mahogany veneer, in the later 18th c, and any very late "solid mahogany" cases, probably were specified by wealthy clients.

Maybe someone familiar with the American shelf clocks etc, produced with what appears to be "blade cut" veneers, can give a date for its introduction. Do any of the early American Ogees and Pillar and Scrolls, have sawn veneers? I remember reading in a book in 74, which I think was called "the old American clock", which gave all the statistics of the American industry, amongst which, was the amount of veneers: the amount of sq yardage is quite staggering. The book also said that the circular saw was invented by the American clock makers.

What I ommitted to say, on JB's other "oyens" thread, was that blade cutting was also done from a flat surface. It has been some years since I spoke on the subject, and it slipped my mind.
My initial reaction was that the base and door was walnut veneers. But I guess it to be flamed mahogany. Would they ever have combined walnut and mahogany veneers?
Checking inside the case. Itl looks to be all of mahogany. However the hood looks to be of pine with mahogany veneer.

Have not heard of Home-Counties cases.
 

laprade

Registered User
Joe,
I have seen seen combinations of mahogany and walnut in cabinet work, and have spent many an hour, discussing with others, whether a piece was mahogany or a form of walnut, and in certain instances, we had to make a secret cut in the wood, to see the colour underneath. Walnuts tend to have a grey-purple tone, whereas mahoganies are quite pink-red.

The "Home Counties" are a group of counties near to London; google.

With respect to the Netherlands clock, I came across a clock from Belgium, some time ago, in some papers by Prof Eric Groessens, of the Belgian Royal Institute, which he sent to me. They show a marble longcase clock at the museum in Namur, which has certain similar characteristics. It is dated 1759, and has a version of the "broken pediment". (The pictures are scanned from a photocopy of the Prof's paper, he had no spare originals). (they are in the NAWCC library, courtesy of Bill Ward and the Prof)
 

Attachments

Bear

New User
Feb 18, 2010
4
0
0
I am new to this forum and would like to find out more about a clock belonging to my parents. All they know is that it's old (George II, I think), it has a 30 hour movement and a single hand.

I've attached pictures, but please let me know if other details would be needed. We're interested in the age, manufacturer, place of origin, any interesting or unusual features.

I understand values aren't discussed on the forum, but I would be grateful if someone could point me in the right direction as far as this is concerned.

The inscription on the dial appears to be "Jos'n, Fordham, Bocking"
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
Ed, thanks for posting your clock. I have enhanced the pictures you sent me with the emails, so as to get a better look at some of the case details.

The only Bocking, I could find, is in Essex, near to Braintree and Colchester, (Bodica's one time fortress). As I said, I don't have any books any more, but I'm sure someone else will be able to get details of the maker.

The "Pagoda" style came from contact with China, as did the "Tea Caddy" style along with other things such as claw an ball feet, and Queen Anne legs. So the date of an early George would be right, but the maker's dates will clarify the issue.

It is hard to know if the ebonized finish is original or a later "improvement", and it would be interesting to see more clearly the decoration on the hood. Is it molded gesso, carving or even repoussée work. It has gesso / gilt finials, as was the case with Klokwiz's clock from earlier in the thread. I've just remembered that one of the first clocks to be posted, also had gesso / gilt finials, and was also an "Essex" clock.

I see form the picture of the open door, that the back boards are of oak. Can you tell us what the inside of the rest of the case looks to be.
 

Attachments

zepernick

Deceased
Aug 8, 2004
2,602
13
0
Country
Region
Bear,

A little Googling turns up quite a bit on the Joseph Fordhams of Bocking and Braintree. There's information about the locations. There are several auction house records. And for instance there are references to and even photographs of plaques. There were also queries about clocks made by JF in the Horological Journal in 1967 and Antiquarian Horology in 1972.

There's a local museum which has in its collections "Clockmaker's tools and clocks, watches and instruments of local significance, including 18th century clocks by Joseph Fordham and Joseph Fordham Jnr..." The Braintree District Museum has a website: http://www.braintree.gov.uk. One might trust that the Museum has more information about the pair than, as they say, "all of the above." :)

Regards
Zep
 
Last edited:

zepernick

Deceased
Aug 8, 2004
2,602
13
0
Country
Region
And forgot to note that -- also via Googling -- an entry in Dennis Moore's British Clockmakers & Watchmakers Apprentice Records 1710-1810 (below) indicates that Joseph Fordham of Bocking -- JF junior? -- was alive in 1775.
 

Attachments

laumeg

Registered User
Jan 22, 2011
573
8
18
Houston, Texas
Country
Region
Hi. I have decided to add my clock to this study on tall clock cases. I will have to let the pictures do much of the talking since I am quite new at this. I will describe what I see. The clock was thought to be of Scottish origin, but that openion may be changing. I will have to let the style of case help decide.
The clock has a flat top design with arched face. The clock unit is English. The cabinet seems to be made of a base wood of walnut and faced with a Mahogany vanier. The front is made with flame mahogany with areas of inlayed woods. The door is long. It stands on a flat base with no feet. (no evidence that feet were removed.) The inlayed section on top of the bonnet includes alternating pieces of ebony and satinwood. The case is signed on the back bottom, WT, Style JIU, No 4313
Hope that this can add to the study. Charles
 

Attachments

laprade

Registered User
Charles; Thanks for your post. The case is definitely a scots case, and I know from your own thread that the maker on the dial might not be scots. This is quite possible, as cases were often intentionally : unintentionally swapped!

The base has had its feet removed, as you can see that the border cross-banding of the base panel, has a moulded bead covering the bottom strip. Having a cross-banded panel, indicates that the feet were either applied brackets or turned.

IMG_1668.jpg

The inlays on the hood are of fine quality, and the interwoven strings and dental frieze are not a common feature on this type of case, though border strings are often found.
IMG_1695.jpg

The back boarding is interesting, as it seems that the original was cross-boarded, with a recent repair on the top section.
IMG_1688.jpg

As the open door shows, the main fabric is, in fact, a plain mahogany. UK furniture and cabinetry stopped using walnut from quite early in the 18th c, due to an embargo from France, and never got back to using it again, as mahogany from across the Atlantic was in plentiful supply and much cheaper, even when the political situation between France and England had stabilized.

IMG_1672.jpg

The only other aspect that needs clarifying is the presence of any signs that the top of the hood had any swan necks. In this style scots clock they were often just applied above the top moulding, and were either damaged or removed.

The flame veneers are exceptional and quite stunning!
 

laumeg

Registered User
Jan 22, 2011
573
8
18
Houston, Texas
Country
Region
(The only other aspect that needs clarifying is the presence of any signs that the top of the hood had any swan necks. In this style scots clock they were often just applied above the top moulding, and were either damaged or removed.)

Thanks Laprade for your evaluation. I fortunately took other pictures that I did not post and 2 of these are of the top and bottom of the hood. Picture is attached, but do not see evidence of any attachments.
Thanks I really appreciate all the feedback :pCharles
 

Attachments

Forum statistics

Threads
174,412
Messages
1,524,077
Members
52,195
Latest member
Codozalator
Encyclopedia Pages
1,063
Total wiki contributions
2,971
Last page
Hard Life for Wristwatches by Roy Gardner