Showing posts with label eighteenth century. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eighteenth century. Show all posts

Tuesday, 3 April 2018

The Brockbanks

Currently on offer at Pieces of Time is this beautiful multiple dial verge by Brockbank.  The subsidiary dials provide Hours, Seconds, Moon-age and Day of Month.  This degree of complexity and the case decoration are typical of a watch made in the late eighteenth century for export to the Far East.  From the movement number it is safe to attribute a making date of 1786-90.

 Courtesy of Pieces of Time

The Brockbank business was started by John in 1769 in Old Jewry, London.  He took on his younger brother, Miles as his apprentice that same year.

The lives and work of the Brockbanks – including notable productivity, involvement in the Arnold/Earnshaw dispute, bankruptcy, sons and a nephew aspiring to maintain the name in watchmaking, etc. – are covered in an excellent article by A. D. Stewart, published in Antiquarian Horology, December 2015.


Courtesy of Pieces of Time

Access to this sort of in-depth (19 pages and many illustrations) article underpins the very good value for money provided by membership of the Antiquarian Horological Society.  This is further enhanced by the addition to the resources available to members of the digitised archive of the Horological Journal from its first issue in 1858 to 2000.  It’s well worth a visit to here for details of membership.

Wednesday, 30 November 2016

The Bracebridges

The Bracebridges were watchmakers active in the late eighteenth and throughout the nineteenth centuries.  Traditional horological reference resources – Britten’s , Baillie’s and Loomes – list three makers with this name, but I have identified five, in three generations.

The line begins with Edward.  Britten’s records working dates of 1799–1818, with the address, 8 Red Lion Street, Clerkenwell.  Baillie adds that Edward was in partnership with William Pleace.  There is little more than can be said about Edward.  The earliest possible reference to him is October 1766, when an Edward Bracebridge gave evidence in an Old Bailey trial concerning a larceny in Clerkenwell.  Given the locality and that the profession of a fellow witness, James Upjohn, is given as a watchmaker, it is likely that this is ‘our’ Bracebridge.  Certainly relevant is a Sun Life Insurance record from 1787 which refers to cover for the beer copper of one Alex. Ruff, ‘at Mr Bracebridge’s Watchmaker opp., the small pox hospital in Cold Bath Fields’, (an area close to the Mount Pleasant Royal Mail centre).  The Hospital was demolished and replaced by a prison which opened in 1794.  This institution, incidentally, represents a link to one of Edward’s sons in the early nineteenth century.

I believe Edward had two sons, James and Edward Charles.  James would have been born circa 1788-92 and died circa 1849.  This documentary reference to James is from the Sussex Advertiser, 27 March 1826:

Cornelius Muzzell’s Affairs: Notice is hereby Given, that Cornelius Muzzell, of Horsham, in the county of Sussex, Clock and Silversmith, hath, by indenture bearing date the 5th day of November, 1825, assigned all his Estate and Effects to James Troup, of Cheapside, in the city of London, Silversmith; James Bracebridge of Red Lion Street, Clerkenwell, in the county of Middlesex, Watchmaker and Edward Walker, of Red Lion Street, Clerkenwell aforesaid, Ironmonger, in trust for themselves, and such other Creditors of the said Cornelius Muzzell, as shall, on or before the 5th day of May next, agree to accept the Dividend or Composition arising under the trusts of the said Assignment, in full of their respective debts, - And further Notice is hereby given, that the said Deed of Assignment is left at our Office for the inspection and signature of the Creditors.  Sheppard, Thomas and Lepard.  Cloak Lane, London, 18th March 1826.

Another reference is of much greater horological significance.  When Pierre-Frederick Ingold attempted to set up industrialised watch production in 1842 he encountered staunch opposition from London’s traditional watchmaking trade.  Rather than seeing Ingold’s British Watch & Clock Company as an important element in combating the insurgent Swiss and American industries, the Trade perceived it as a further threat and petitioned Parliament for legislation to deny Ingold’s right to raise capital for the new company.


James took a prominent part in a meeting of the Clockmakers, as reported in Lloyd’s Weekly Newspaper, 2 April 1843.  The previous Tuesday over 2,000 tradespeople met at the Crown and Anchor, “to take into consideration the best means to be adopted in reference to a bill now lying before Parliament to incorporate a new company calling themselves The British Watch & Clock-making Company . . “  He opened the meeting and seconded the resolution, which was to oppose the establishment of the proposed new company – this posture being maintained and Ingold’s initiative eventually defeated.

Edward Charles was born circa 1790, evidenced by a record of admission to St Paul’s School in 1800, his age being shown as ten.  At the age of twenty Edward Charles attained the Freedom of London, a privilege passed on to him by convention as a result of his father’s entitlement to the honour.

Edward Charles’s name appears on a list of jurors for a very significant London trial in 1820.  His suitability to sit on the jury was successfully challenged by the Crown and he therefore took no part in the proceedings.  However, this trial, (of the ‘Cato Street conspirators’), is of general interest as it resulted in the last instance of men found guilty of treason being subject to an execution in which they were hanged and beheaded, (a diminution of the ‘hanged, drawn and quartered’ punishment which had originated in the reign of Henry III).  They had been confined in the Cold Bath prison mentioned above in connection with Edward.

That Edward Charles – in partnership with brother James - was occupying the familiar Red Lion Street premises is confirmed by an entry in the 1825 issue of Pigot’s Directory.  That he was prospering is perhaps suggested by his having his – and his wife, Philippa’s – portrait painted in 1839 by John Samuel Agar, an artist of moderate repute and for a time President of the Society of Engravers.

The business, styled as Edward Charles Bracebridge & Co is evident in various directories with the dates 1851-81.  The primary address remained 8 Red Lion Street, in 1862 a shop was trading at 119 New Bond Street, managed by Charles Roe.  The family residence was 6 Barnsbury Villas, Liverpool Road, Islington.

Edward Charles and Philippa had two sons, James (James II), circa 1823-92, and Edward Gilbert, 1822-99.  James II proved to be the more high profile outside the family business itself – he served as Treasurer to the Watch and Clockmakers Benevolent Institute and was this body’s representative at the funeral of Charles Frodsham in 1871.

James himself eventually found his health failing and in the 1 August 1891 issue of The Watchmaker, Jeweller and Silversmith it was reported:

. . . Mr. James Bracebridge is retiring from the business which he has carried on for many years as watch manufacturer in Clerkenwell, under the style of E. C. Bracebridge and Co.  Mr. Bracebridge has appointed his nephew, Mr. F. Bracebridge Mills, to settle his affairs. There is, we believe, some likelihood that Mr. T. D. Wright, who for many years has held the post of manager to Mr. Bracebridge, will continue the business, and in this event there is no doubt that the reputation the firm has long enjoyed will be fully maintained in Mr. Wright's hands.

Edward Gilbert’s role in the business is not clear.  One of the few references to him is a record of a donation of £10.10s. to the North London Consumption Hospital in 1896, so one might conclude that he, or a close family member suffered with this condition which was all too prevalent in late nineteenth century London.

Thomas Wright formed a partnership with William Craighead to carry on the business at Red Lion Street from 1891.  Wright became very well known in wider horological circles and it was his proposal for the format of British Summer Time clocks adjustment that we use to this day.

I have traced eleven extant Bracebridge watches.  Attribution to specific members of the family is difficult because of some missing movement numbers, some re-cases and un hallmarked cases.  At least three sets of 4 digit movement numbers seem to have been used, with an apparently relatively consistent range between 1823 - #5882 and 1850 - #8935.  A five digit #38931 is dated to 1865 and another, #12741, is in a silver case hallmarked for 1892.

Perhaps the most attractive is #5882, a repeater in 18ct Gold Case made by Louis Comtesse:


Courtesy of Matthew Barton Ltd


The British Museum holds a Bracebridge movement.  Circa1865, this features a Savage-two-pin lever escapement and utilises a keyless winding mechanism:

© Trustees of the British Museum


Tuesday, 15 December 2015

Of Orbits and Tangents

Tangents are a hazard – actually a great source of pleasure – for anyone researching the history of horology. 

Looking in detail into the Ellicott dynasty, I was especially struck by the beauty of the dial of John Jnr’s Equation of Time watch, circa 1747:
 
© Trustees of the British Museum

Equation of Time ? WHAT is that; I thought I knew, but the dial confused me, so I looked it up:
 
Tangent! 

Two factors cause the true length of a day on Earth to vary: 

·         The path of Earth’s orbit around the Sun is elliptical

·         Earth’s axis is slanted  

As a result, it is sometimes more, and sometimes less, than 24 hours between successive noons.  Surprisingly, it is only exactly 24 hours four times a year: 15 April; 14 June; 1 September; 24 December. 

In considering this, the following terms are used: 

·         Mean Time – time measured by a man-made device and expressed consistently – i.e. a day is always 24 hours long

·         Solar Time – a solar day is the variable length of time between noon on day-one and noon on day-two

·         Sidereal Time – the same principle as solar time, but the measurement is made relative to the position of a specific star on two successive days 

A Solar Time day can be as much as approximately 14 minutes more or less than 24 hours Mean Time. 

The ‘Equation of Time’ on any given day is the value – i.e. number of minutes, plus or minus – to apply to the Mean Time in order to ‘read’ Solar Time. 

A practical benefit – admittedly more relevant in the eighteenth century – is that an Equation of Time clock or watch can be set by reference to a sun dial. 

Because the variances – and the four ’24 hour’ day dates – are the same every year, a mechanical complication can be added to a clock or watch to provide an indication of the Equation of Time.  The indicating hand is driven by a once-a-year revolving cam. 

To me a complication like this is just something to be enjoyed for its technical and aesthetic attributes, although some people seem to be overly concerned with what practical use it might have.  In the eighteenth century, as watches with this feature began to appear, ownership would surely have been a serious status indicator. 

Equally, the capability to make such a watch would have been a powerful achievement to boast, raising the maker’s reputation and ability to command higher prices for his products.  It’s not surprising therefore that John Ellicott Jnr was keen to have his name on Equation of Time watches.  Whilst his father had begun the firm and made it one of high standing, John Jnr greatly enhanced its reputation and profitability through innovation.  For instance, he introduced cylinder escapement watches to the Ellicott catalogue and ensured that it also included repeaters and chronographs.  Alongside his flair for commerciality, John Jnr was also innovative in developing temperature compensation solutions. 

But . . . the question has to be asked: did Ellicott actually have the in-house capability to make an Equation of Time watch? 

Tangent! 

Antiquarian Horology published two extensive surveys of the Ellicott firm:  by R.K. Foulkes, September 1960 and by David Thompson, June/September 1997.  In the latter a list of ‘known’ watches is appended.  At its heading it includes an abbreviation reference of ‘eq’ for an ‘equation watch’.  Interestingly, the list – of no less than 199 watches - does not feature a single one of the ‘eq’ type. 

David Thompson writes that three Ellicott Equation of Time watches are extant.  Further: 

Each of the three watches has a high quality movement with cylinder escapement and all are furnished with bolt and shutter maintaining power.  It is possible they represent the earliest examples of a watch with any form of maintaining power. 

The question of authorship of these watches was the subject of an article by Anthony Turner and Andrew Crisford in Antiquarian Horology in 1977.  The characteristics in the design and construction of the movements leave little doubt that they are the work of Thomas Mudge. 

The Turner/Crisford article relates the story of an Equation of Time watch signed by Ellicott and supplied to Ferdinand VI of Spain which became in need of repair.  When it emerged that the Ellicott firm itself could not undertake this, the King’s clockmaker, Irishman, Michael Smith, identified Thomas Mudge as the actual maker. 

My view of this is that whilst Mudge was the more technically accomplished, Ellicott was the more successful marketeer, able to penetrate niche markets and capture high profile clients.

Wednesday, 25 November 2015

Alexander Hare

Photograph courtesy of Fellows
 
I was outbid recently on this Alexander Hare watch, #218.  Circa 1770, it has the classic later eighteenth century look and is in a shell case.  It seemed a good opportunity to acquire a watch by this superior maker at a reasonable price, since the dial was described as being in poor condition.  It made £520. 

The Britten's entry for Hare is:
 
1770-1821; CChon. f. 1781; 17 Greville st, Hatton Gdn (Bri); 17 Greville st 1791-1821 9dir); watch maker; finely enamelled watch 1782 (Bri); verge metal watch (Guildh. mus.) (Bri)
 
The watch with the Guildhall Museum reference is #439, described: c1790; Gilt-metal pair case. White enamel dial.  Beetle hands. Endstone. Worm set-up. Diams 49 and 42mm.
 
There is another very nice Hare in the Archive of David Penney's Antique Watch Store - http://www.antiquewatchstore.com/archive/1155-alexr-hare-london-no-186.html.  Movement #186, this watch is dated 1769.
 
The style of this Hare watchpaper is notably 'modern' with its grid format, whereas watchmakers generally in this period favoured ornate, figurative designs for their Papers and Trade Cards.
 

 © Trustees of the British Museum

Confirmation that Hare was held in very high regard in his lifetime is seen in an article by Jonathan Betts in Antiquarian Horology, Vol. 30, Issue 1, March 2007.  The article is about John Hyacinth De Magellan, a Portuguese technology entrepreneur.  Hare, alongside Benjamin Vulliamy and Alexander Cumming, was commissioned by De Magellan to produce innovative/high quality watches.  The article includes details of one of Hare's products for De Magellan, #561, circa 1783 - cylinder escapement and unusual main dial, primarily for Minutes, with two subsidiary dials for, 1) Seconds and, 2) Hours.

References to Hare are not easy to find.  Of an unexpected kind is this advertisement copy: "Mr. de Verdion, at Mr. Hare's, no. 17. Greville Street, Hatton Garden, teaches German, French, and English, In the most Expeditious Manner, And Upon the most Reasonable Terms. He also Translates into either of these Languages".

That Alexander Hare and his business remained prosperous towards the end of his life is perhaps evidenced by his having the means to bring a legal action in December 1821 against a neighbour whose building extension work was robbing the rear of Hare's premises of light and air; (there's nothing new under the sun).  (Reported in The Times, 6th December 1821).