# a rather odd georgian longcase clock



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

First of all I would like to apologize for possible grammar mistakes.

English is a foreign language for me.

I am also not quite sure if this is a correct forum since it seems to be mostly specialized on wrist and pocket watches,

But maybe you can also help me with a grandfather clock?

There is this clock I recently got and I'm quite perplexed if it is what it would like to be, or maybe something completely different?

1: The case seems to be carved oak. Not as excessively carved as often seen, but I think the carving is quite good quality.

The screws seems to be mostly handmade, but some appear to be either modern or at least later made.

I do not see any circular saw traces on the rear board, but maybe it's just me?



































https://i.imgur.com/A3ht2orl.jpg/img]

The glass of the round window is agglutinated to the frame and looking from a certain side it is very wavy.



















2: the dial plate is what made me curious in the first place. Is I think a genuine Richard France of Warrington plate, who died 1740.










This would make it a rather early clock. Being of carved oak would also match to production in the 18th century.

However, the way the dial + the clockwork are attached to the wooden front plate of the crown appear quite odd to me.

These four modern looking screws and screw nuts just do not look like they were supposed to be there!



















Round shaped dial frames used with 18th cases I saw a few , still I think they came into vogue much later, in the first quarter of the 19th century.

So there is also a possibility of a dial married with a case and maybe even with a clockwork.

I am especially suspicious of the front door. The carving is not bad, but if I was looking at the door only, I'd be like 99,9% sure it something from the 1890-1900s, Historism with a good touch of Art Nouveau.










On the other hand, the pair pictured there would make it a good wedding symbol. The man holding a seedling, the woman obviously pregnant and some family crest below them.

Well, now I really hope you can help me identifying this odd piece of history.

Pity, I hoped the pictures will become links to the actual uploade photo in full resolution, but they are not...and I think I cannot even edit the topic in order to change them to large pics.

Thus here a list of all the preview pics in full res.



http://imgur.com/IEKjEfz




http://imgur.com/TwNfT5y




http://imgur.com/2rqqVec




http://imgur.com/0qp6grP




http://imgur.com/A3ht2or




http://imgur.com/HX6qDbj




http://imgur.com/IDGfx2H




http://imgur.com/UN4iGGg




http://imgur.com/if7aWzt


----------



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

No clock experts here?  Or nobody interested?

Could you probably name a forum where my topic would better suitable for?


----------



## vinn (Jun 14, 2015)

don't worry about gramer ! i have forgot how to spell. "hang in there". vin


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Nvntivs said:


> No clock experts here?  Or nobody interested?
> 
> Could you probably name a forum where my topic would better suitable for?


 It is quite a specialised area, especially the case so be patient!

I am no expert on Georgian clocks but agree with you that the case looks later and may itself be made up from more than one case. The dial and movement have been quite crudely fitted by the looks of it.


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

Dear @Nvntivs, in my opinion, the case is almost certainly a late 19th century carved oak item and it has evidently been married to the dial and movement. Whether or not the movement and the dial were originally together, I cannot say for sure, but note the lack of a hand or even a central boss in the running seconds register. Here are pictures of two genuine Richard France of Warrington longcase clocks - the top example with a silvered brass dial, day feature and a "rocking galleon" (pics from sellingantiques.co.uk):


----------



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

> Dear @Nvntivs, in my opinion, the case is almost certainly a late 19th century carved oak item and it has evidently been married to the dial and movement. Whether or not the movement and the dial were originally together, I cannot say for sure, but note the lack of a hand or even a central boss in the running seconds register. Here are pictures of two genuine Richard France of Warrington longcase clocks - the top example with a silvered brass dial, day feature and a "rocking galleon" (pics from sellingantiques.co.uk):


 Well, thanks for the feedback everyone. Today I spent a lot of time searching for clues… Well, what I found is that interestingly enough, the dial and the wooden plate are not that mismatching as I initially thought. When I unscrewed the bolts from the front panel I discovered that while 3 of them were mere brass discs like those you can buy in every hardware store, one was a different one, with some decoration matching the black line running square on the wooden front.



Behind it there are two holes in a way that I assume there maybe was something different, more decorative used to hold the dial attached.



here is how the dial looks behind the plate, I do not see any traces of previous decorations.







Here are some pics of the clockwork itself...









and here are some details of the construction. To be honest it looks older than like 120-130 years. The oak is of a very dark brown colour...









Another odd detail. I actually thought the hands are replacements. It is a very common form and especially the blunt tip of the minutes hand looks like something made in the 20th century.

On the other hand - it has been repaired! Soldered in a quite decent way.. Don't think anybody would bother to do it. In 20th Ct. and even in the end of the 19th it would be much easier to replace the hands.



one more thing. The way the glass is attached to the frame - this is not like they would have done it around 1890, would they?



In furniture this would date a piece to not younger than 1840/50


----------



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

btw. here a picture of them in one piece… This does not look to me like something from 1890...except for the door… Especially the crown is like 100% neoclassical. With the two roman myth water dragons and a head which look like Serapis.

I'd tend to say the door is maybe a separate replacement… If the clock was presented as a gift for a wedding for example (reasons for this idea -see above)


----------



## stdape (Mar 9, 2018)

i think its a Frankenstein Clock, parts added at different dates. Nevertheless a nice clock


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

A interesting thread, we could do with an expert in carpentry!


----------



## vinn (Jun 14, 2015)

sending some pic's to an antique dealer might be your best bet.


----------



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

stdape said:


> i think its a Frankenstein Clock, parts added at different dates. Nevertheless a nice clock


 Well, could be…

Which parts belong together do you think and which not? ( i have my own idea but would like to hear someone elses first)


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

Blimey, this is one of those problem pieces where the sum of the parts doesn't quite add up to the whole (solution).

I agree with John that an expert in (historical) carpentry might be useful in the context of your clock. However, I must remind you that method of manufacture does not automatically dictate the date of construction, and if your oak clock case and hood was made in the late 19th century, as I suspect, we are then into the Arts and Crafts period where older forms of style and carpentry were reinvigorated.

I would also like to know if the clock movement is original to the dial or is it later - are there no maker's marks on the back plate of the movement?

Whether or not firm conclusions can ever be reached about this clock is moot, but it is a "lively" and interesting timepiece; thanks for showing it.


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

> Blimey, this is one of those problem pieces where the sum of the parts doesn't quite add up to the whole (solution).
> 
> I agree with John that an expert in (historical) carpentry might be useful in the context of your clock. However, I must remind you that method of manufacture does not automatically dictate the date of construction, and if your oak clock case and hood was made in the late 19th century, as I suspect, we are then into the Arts and Crafts period where older forms of style and carpentry were reinvigorated.
> 
> ...


 It's also possible some of the wood was reused and is older than the construction

It's a conundrum!

Purely a personal view but the case doesn't look coherent, it looks like it has been put together piecemeal


----------



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

> Blimey, this is one of those problem pieces where the sum of the parts doesn't quite add up to the whole (solution).
> 
> I agree with John that an expert in (historical) carpentry might be useful in the context of your clock. However, I must remind you that method of manufacture does not automatically dictate the date of construction, and if your oak clock case and hood was made in the late 19th century, as I suspect, we are then into the Arts and Crafts period where older forms of style and carpentry were reinvigorated.
> 
> ...


 You know, the longer I look at this clock the more I am perplexed. I discovered that the door was initially attached the other way round. Opening as they mostly do, from the left to the right, not like here. I think it was likely done by simply turning the door 180° I also found that there were different hinge probably attached.

See here 

and that inside there are some metal elbows with modern screws attached. For whatever reason…



Furthermore, the base is reinforced inside by a board (and probably also the wooden frame) looking much younger than the the dark side boards



Regarding the clockwork. A guy who used to repair them told me on a German forum, that the clockwork was already repaired once. The damage which cause the repair in the area of the minutes hand shaft usually appears after a very long running time though he said:

See the lower marking on this pic


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

Please rescue me!! Tell me when it's all over and I can rest easy, knowing the problems are all resolved. :laugh:


----------



## harryblakes7 (Oct 1, 2010)

Hmmmmmmmm................ the clock repairer who did this was a bodger! ?He has hit around the area of the worn hole with a punch to close the hole, whereas the correct method is to cut the hole round again and insert a brass bush then file flat, you would not even see the repair then!! Its also an 8 day movement and not a 30 hour one

The movement is of a very good quality with tapered brass pins supporting the plates

The dial is quite old, brass as well, not been silver plated, i would hazzard to say 1850. The carved case is unusual, the case overall has been carved and the corinthian columns are fluted, someone has spent a lot of time doing this up, it certainly looks like a wedding present, or at the harvest time

Well thats 2p worth!!


----------



## eezy (Apr 13, 2018)

The untreated parts of oak looks like French Oak to me. French Oak has a sort of ''aged'' patina to it as opposed to English and American which has more of a bleached look.

I have some furniture in French Oak which I made while living in France.


----------



## Nvntivs (Apr 4, 2019)

eezy said:


> The untreated parts of oak looks like French Oak to me. French Oak has a sort of ''aged'' patina to it as opposed to English and American which has more of a bleached look.
> 
> I have some furniture in French Oak which I made while living in France.


 Which parts exactly do you mean? The ones inside? Btw. it is still a mystery. I wasn't able to find any more clues to determine if the clockwork is the original one to the face and if the head was constructed from different parts and so on.

Odd is, that I wasn't able to find ANY handmade screws in the clocks case BUT in the hinge of the front door which is likely the youngest part! There I found two I was able to get out - the oldest one I've seen. With handmade thread and head… The two remaining have a head looking just the same but will rather break than be pulled out... On the other hand I found for instance in the top ornament two huge screws likely modern and not having any purpose at all.





I unscrewed them and the gable is as stable as it was when they were in.


----------

