| Height | 6 feet 7¼ inches (2010 mm) |
| Case | The case veneered in olivewood oysters inset with floral marquetry panels and ebonized mouldings on an oak carcass. The formerly rising hood with ebonised cornice moulding highlighted with olivewood over a marquetry and stained bone frieze to the front, above the ebonised Solomonic reflective columns, with integral turned capitals and bases, flanking the dial aperture, now cut for a hood door. The trunk with convex throat mouldings, above the trunk door framed by half-round ebonised mouldings and highlighted with a boxwood band, the olivewood oysters inset with marquetry above two conforming panels of an urn of flowers with green stained bone leaves, with a glazed oval pendulum lenticle between, and further parquetry star and quarter-round corners below. The conforming olivewood base with outer banding, a marquetry roundel and quarter-round corners on later bun feet. |
| Dial | The 11 inch square brass dial, large winged cherub and scroll corner spandrels with engraved foliage between and S/N, strike/silent lever at XII. The silvered brass Roman chapter ring with half-hour marks, Arabic minutes numbered every 5 outside the minute ring, signed Edward Bird, Londini Fecit around VI, the matted centre inset with three winding holes, date aperture above VI and engraved with a central Tudor rose, with later pierced and sculpted blued steel hands, the dial fixed with four pinned dial feet. |
| Movement | The substantial rectangular movement plates with eight finned and knopped pillars, latched to the frontplate, and three trains; the going train with anchor escapement, one second pendulum and corresponding pallet cut-out in the backplate; the quarter with rack governance striking on a peel of six bells via a pin-barrel and linked to the rack-and-snail governed hour train striking on the large bell above. All resting on seatboard blocks and held by screws to the outer base pillars, together with a bracket to the backboard. |
| Duration | 8 days |
| Provenance | Raffety & Walwyn, 2003, sold for £95,000; |
| Escapement | Anchor with one second pendulum |
| Strike Type | Early full Grande Sonnerie rack striking with a peal of six quarter bells for all four quarters |
Exhibit № 23. Edward Bird, London, Circa 1680
A good Charles II olivewood oyster, ebonised and floral panelled full Grande Sonnerie longcase clock
£75,000
That Edward Bird was a skilled clockmaker prepared to tackle the latest form of rack and snail strike governance is testified by this full grand sonnerie clock with a strike/silent feature, yet he does not appear in the records of the Clockmakers Company, few clocks survive by him and very little is known about him.
In The Artificial clock=maker, 1996, William Derham spoke of clocks …such as by pulling of a String, &c. do strike the Hour, Quarter, or Minute, at any time of the day and night. These Clocks are a late Invention of one Mr Barlow, of no longer standing than the latter end of K. Charles II. about the year 1676.
The sequential nature of the countwheel does not allow for strike work to repeat, so it was the ‘repeatable’ rack governance system that was critical – in fact Tompion appears to have been the first to apply the rack to a clock, on his initial and extraordinary two-train repeating Grande Sonnerie table clock, The Silver Tompion, which was apparently delivered to Charles II in 1677 (see Innovation & Collaboration, p.295).
The Rev. Edward Barlow (1634 -1716), made claim in 1686 that he was the inventor and petitioned the Clockmakers’ for a patent. This was challenged by Daniel Quare with support from the Clockmakers’ Company, and in the ensuing struggle two watches were made for James II: one to Barlow’s design, said to be by Tompion; the other by Quare. The conclusion finally came at the Court at Whitehall on 2nd March, 1687… Present The Kings most excellent Maj’ty in Councill:
Whereas on the 24th of February last his Maj’ty thought fitt to appoint this day to hear the Master Wardens and Assistants of the Fellowship of the Art or Mistry of Clockmaking of the City of London against Edward Barlow, in whose name a Patent is passing for the sole makeing and manageing all pulling clocks and watches, usually called Repeating clocks…
His Majesty in Councill haveing fully considered what was alleadged on either side, Is pleased to Order and it is hereby ordered That no Patent be granted to the said Edward Barlow or any others for the sole makeing and manageing of pulling clocks and watches as aforesaid, The same being now made by severall Clockmakers, whereof all persons concerned are to take due notice.
Thus the application was denied, and it is said that James II favoured Quare’s watch design as it had just one push-piece rather than Barlow’s two.
It is noteworthy that Barlow made his claim in 1686, so that this earlier full Grande Sonnerie longcase clock by Edward Bird is further testimony that the critical rack striking system was indeed, by this time, widespread.
Product Description
That Edward Bird was a skilled clockmaker prepared to tackle the latest form of rack and snail strike governance is testified by this full grand sonnerie clock with a strike/silent feature, yet he does not appear in the records of the Clockmakers Company, few clocks survive by him and very little is known about him.
In The Artificial clock=maker, 1996, William Derham spoke of clocks …such as by pulling of a String, &c. do strike the Hour, Quarter, or Minute, at any time of the day and night. These Clocks are a late Invention of one Mr Barlow, of no longer standing than the latter end of K. Charles II. about the year 1676.
The sequential nature of the countwheel does not allow for strike work to repeat, so it was the ‘repeatable’ rack governance system that was critical – in fact Tompion appears to have been the first to apply the rack to a clock, on his initial and extraordinary two-train repeating Grande Sonnerie table clock, The Silver Tompion, which was apparently delivered to Charles II in 1677 (see Innovation & Collaboration, p.295).
The Rev. Edward Barlow (1634 -1716), made claim in 1686 that he was the inventor and petitioned the Clockmakers’ for a patent. This was challenged by Daniel Quare with support from the Clockmakers’ Company, and in the ensuing struggle two watches were made for James II: one to Barlow’s design, said to be by Tompion; the other by Quare. The conclusion finally came at the Court at Whitehall on 2nd March, 1687… Present The Kings most excellent Maj’ty in Councill:
Whereas on the 24th of February last his Maj’ty thought fitt to appoint this day to hear the Master Wardens and Assistants of the Fellowship of the Art or Mistry of Clockmaking of the City of London against Edward Barlow, in whose name a Patent is passing for the sole makeing and manageing all pulling clocks and watches, usually called Repeating clocks…
His Majesty in Councill haveing fully considered what was alleadged on either side, Is pleased to Order and it is hereby ordered That no Patent be granted to the said Edward Barlow or any others for the sole makeing and manageing of pulling clocks and watches as aforesaid, The same being now made by severall Clockmakers, whereof all persons concerned are to take due notice.
Thus the application was denied, and it is said that James II favoured Quare’s watch design as it had just one push-piece rather than Barlow’s two.
It is noteworthy that Barlow made his claim in 1686, so that this earlier full Grande Sonnerie longcase clock by Edward Bird is further testimony that the critical rack striking system was indeed, by this time, widespread.
Additional information
| Dimensions | 5827373 cm |
|---|
Related products
-
-
-
-
The Cescinsky Tompion No.534 Circa 1713
Sorry sold