Long-Case ClockLONG-CASE CLOCK.Maker, Henderson (London).Date, about 1770.Height, 9 ft. Width, 1 ft. 8½ in.Depth, 11 in.
LONG-CASE CLOCK.Maker, Henderson (London).Date, about 1770.Height, 9 ft. Width, 1 ft. 8½ in.Depth, 11 in.
The Stability of the "Grandfather" Clock.—The long-case clock had become a piece of furniture. It was of marquetry decoration, in keeping with contemporarytables and cabinets, or it was lacquered in rich colours in "Chinese taste" to keep touch with the Oriental parlours. But concurrent with the age of marquetry and lacquer was the great walnut period. The delightful veneer of burr-walnut in Queen Anne days in cabinets and chests of drawers and other important pieces of furniture did not neglect the clock-case. The gnarled figure of the walnut was essentially a proper decoration to apply to the clock-case.
The long-case clock had not only become acclimatized, but it had become thoroughly English. The simplicity of its construction, and its proud record as a perfect timekeeper, gave it the supremacy over all other clocks. English clockmakers, with the fine sense of practical utility which governed their employment of mechanism, had reached a point when further inventions became more of scientific use than popular. The "grandfather" clock has no equal within its limits. It runs for eight days. Its construction is so simple that when needing repair it need not be sent to a specialist. It has no delicate parts to confound the provincial maker. Hence it has lasted two centuries and more as a standard English clock. There is, too, a certain lovableness about the "grandfather" clock. The popular term suggests this. It is the heritage of the poor. The "grandfather" clock of the yeomanry has passed down through many generations. Indeed, the love of it as an article of furniture has, in many instances, endowed it with a value far greater than it possesses.
The Burr-walnut Period.—Veneer had become an established technique. Woods with fine figure served as panels laid on wood of lesser rarity or decorative importance. Oak was a good foundation for walnut veneer. Earlier, as we have seen, walnut was laid as a ground on oak and the marquetry design laid on the walnut. But in the burr-walnut period carefully selected walnut sheets were employed to decorate surfaces of bureaus and clock-cases. The age of walnut is synonymous with the days of Hogarth.
Burr-walnut clock-cases are not so frequently found as could be wished. The burr-walnut panels are marked in a series of knot-like rings, obtained from the gnarled roots of the walnut-tree. The peculiar pleasing effect of this and other mottled walnut is heightened by the mellow effect time always gives to these walnut examples, which cannot be produced with any appreciable success by modern imitators.
Thomas Chippendale—The Mahogany Period.—There is no doubt that the name of Thomas Chippendale will always be representative of the mahogany period of English furniture. But there were other makers contemporary with him who did splendid work. The Chippendales, Thomas the father and Thomas the son, picture-frame carver and cabinet-maker at Worcester, migrated together to London in 1729. The son, Thomas, published hisDirectorin 1754. He was the leading cabinet-maker and designer of his day, and his day lasted till about 1780, when his son, Thomas Chippendale the third enteredinto partnership with Haig, and the firm became Chippendale and Haig, who also in turn produced magnificent work. Close upon the heels of the Chippendales was the firm of Hepplewhite. The brothers Adam, architectural designers and creators of furniture suitable for its new classic environment, began to make their impress upon interior decoration and on furniture, as they had upon Princes Street, Edinburgh, the Quays at Dublin, and the Adelphi in London, with their patent stucco mouldings and festoons.
Long-Case ClockLONG-CASE CLOCK.Maker, Thomas Wagstaff (Gracechurch Street, London). Date, about 1780.Height, 8 ft. 2 in. Width, 1 ft. 7½ in. Depth, 10 in.(By courtesy of Percy Webster, Esq.)
LONG-CASE CLOCK.Maker, Thomas Wagstaff (Gracechurch Street, London). Date, about 1780.Height, 8 ft. 2 in. Width, 1 ft. 7½ in. Depth, 10 in.(By courtesy of Percy Webster, Esq.)
Long-Case ClockLONG-CASE CLOCK.Movement by Stephen Rimbault, case by Robert Adam.Date, about 1775.(By courtesy of Messrs. A. B. Daniell & Sons.)
LONG-CASE CLOCK.Movement by Stephen Rimbault, case by Robert Adam.Date, about 1775.(By courtesy of Messrs. A. B. Daniell & Sons.)
Accordingly, the student must bear in mind these great movements taking place during the second half of our Georgian period, viz. from about 1740 to the year 1791, at which date appeared the first edition of Sheraton'sCabinet Maker and Upholsterers Drawing Book, to herald another style, blended with the Adam, but departing from it at important points. In examining clock-cases of this prolific and restless period, it should be of exceptional interest to the connoisseur to show how unnamed cabinet-makers in London and in the provinces attempted to employ, with varying degrees of skill, the designs promulgated broadcast by these great teachers of design and construction in cabinet work.
Innovations of Form.—As exemplifying the variations of the mahogany period clock-case, we illustrate several types showing reflections of the great impulses that were in the air. The clock, illustrated (p.239), has a case of Spanish mahogany with fine figure. The hood is enriched with fretwork, and with elegantly moulded door, and the superstructureas a pediment exhibits the Chinese style. The terminals are mahogany. The dial shows phases of the moon, and the movement is by a provincial maker, E. Cockey, Warminster.
Of the year 1770 is another mahogany clock with handsomely carved frieze and elaborate terminals. The love for architectural ornament is seen in the hood, and in the pillars on the waist below on each side of the panelled door. The base is decorated with a panel, in mahogany of fine figure. The feet are beginning to become more pronounced. The movement of this is by Henderson, of London, and its height is 9 feet (illustrated p.133).
Another clock, by Thomas Wagstaff, in date about 1780, exhibits a less grandiose appearance. The height is less, being only 8 feet 2 inches. The pediment of the hood reverts to types which are often found decorated with lacquer work, and the brass terminals are of similar character to those of an earlier period. It is noticeable that the base continues to show increased ornament in the feet, with an added scroll (illustrated p.137).
As showing another type of clock with magnificent decoration we illustrate (p.143) the hood of a long-case musical clock, attributed to Rimbault, who was especially noteworthy for his musical movements, and his cases were decorated by Zoffany. An examination of this shows the detailed character of the painted work. It is Italian in conception, and quite in keeping with other work of Zoffany.
TOP PORTION OF MUSICAL LONG-CASE CLOCK.TOP PORTION OF MUSICAL LONG-CASE CLOCK.Richly decorated with painting attributed to Zoffany.Maker, no signature, but suggestive of the work of Rimbault.(By courtesy of Messrs. Harris & Sinclair, Dublin.)
TOP PORTION OF MUSICAL LONG-CASE CLOCK.Richly decorated with painting attributed to Zoffany.Maker, no signature, but suggestive of the work of Rimbault.(By courtesy of Messrs. Harris & Sinclair, Dublin.)
Long-Case Clock.LONG-CASE CLOCK.Eight-day movement. Mahogany case inlaid with satinwood shell designs and banding.Maker, James Hatton, London (1800-12).Brick design in base in Chippendale manner.(By courtesy of Messrs. D. Sherratt & Co., Chester.)
LONG-CASE CLOCK.Eight-day movement. Mahogany case inlaid with satinwood shell designs and banding.Maker, James Hatton, London (1800-12).Brick design in base in Chippendale manner.(By courtesy of Messrs. D. Sherratt & Co., Chester.)
Another illustration (p.139) shows the typical classical style. The case was designed by RobertAdam, and is in date about 1775. The dial becomes circular, and owes certain of its decoration to French form, although it is surmounted by a Greek urn, but the flying garlands betray it. The waist becomes tapered, terminating in a base of graceful proportions and reticent ornament. The fluted work and the scroll indicate the design of the architect. One can imagine such a chaste clock finding itself in the cold, un-English environment of Ken Wood, or on the staircase of some learned society, with candelabra of bronze of classic design, with hoofs as feet and with the Roman lamp throwing out its modern flame. The movement of this clock is by Stephen Rimbault, of Great St. Andrew Street, about 1775.
Another example of a clock by James Hatton, London (about 1810), exhibits several new features. Its case is of rich feathered mahogany, inlaid in the Sheraton manner with satinwood shells, banding, and herring-bone stringing. The hood is massive and reverts to an earlier period, and the ornament of the base, in brickwork style, was known to have been employed by Chippendale. The finials are brass. The dial is brass, and in the lunette are painted a ship and a cottage (illustrated p.145).
For the continuation of these styles one must turn to the provincial makers (ChapterVIII), showing a variety of decoration and touches of incongruity in style and anachronism in date—a glorious intermingling of contemporary with bygone features, affording unequalled delight to the collector. In the case of provincial made furniture, whole districts carried on fashions for a quarter of a century or longerafter they had been forgotten in London, and the clock-case is no exception.
Included in this period is the fine clock (illustrated p.149) by Robert Molyneux and Sons, London, 1825, now in the Bristol Museum. It has one main dial recording minutes, and two smaller dials showing hours and seconds respectively. The main dial has two hands, which indicate Greenwich mean time and Bristol time. The type is known as a "regulator" clock, with the twenty-four-hour dial and other additions appertaining to the astronomical clock. The illustration shows the time to be: Greenwich, 11.42 (i.e. 42 minutes past 11 o'clock); Bristol, 11.32 (i.e. 10 minutes difference). The clock has a mercury pendulum. There was a somewhat similar clock constructed by Dell, of Bristol.
Long-Case Regulator Clock.LONG-CASE REGULATOR CLOCK.Movement by Robert Molyneux & Sons, London. 1825. Three dials, one showing hours and one seconds, the great dial showing Greenwich time and Bristol time.Enlargement of Dial.ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.The two hands on large or minute dial show difference of 10 minutes 22 seconds between Greenwich and Bristol time.
Long-Case Regulator Clock.LONG-CASE REGULATOR CLOCK.Movement by Robert Molyneux & Sons, London. 1825. Three dials, one showing hours and one seconds, the great dial showing Greenwich time and Bristol time.
LONG-CASE REGULATOR CLOCK.Movement by Robert Molyneux & Sons, London. 1825. Three dials, one showing hours and one seconds, the great dial showing Greenwich time and Bristol time.
Enlargement of Dial.ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.The two hands on large or minute dial show difference of 10 minutes 22 seconds between Greenwich and Bristol time.
ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.The two hands on large or minute dial show difference of 10 minutes 22 seconds between Greenwich and Bristol time.
(By permission of Bristol Museum and Art Gallery.)
THE EVOLUTION OF THE LONG-CASE CLOCK
Its inception—Its Dutch origin—The changing forms of the hood, the waist, and the base—The dial and its character—The ornamentation of the spandrel—The evolution of the hands.
From1680 to 1850 is a long period of time for a particular style of timepiece to run without interruption or without displacement by any other fashion. It may naturally be supposed that during this period changes have occurred in form, in decoration, and in a score of minor details delightful to the collector and interesting to the student of form in design. The inception of the long case was due to the common use of the seconds pendulum. This required a certain space to swing in, and the pendulum was of a certain length. This undue length does not seem to have been necessary in the wall clock of the so-called "Act of Parliament" type, and as Lord Grimthorpe, the constructor of "Big Ben" at Westminster, says: "Spring clocks are generally resorted to for the purpose of saving length; for as clocks are generally made in England, it is impossible tomake a weight clock capable of going a week, without either a case nearly 4 feet high, or else the weights so heavy as to produce a great friction on the arbour of the great wheel. But this arises from nothing but the heaviness of the wheels and the badness of the pinions used in most English clocks, as is amply proved by the fact that the American and Austrian clocks go a week with smaller weights and much less fall than English ones, and the American ones with no assistance from fine workmanship for the purpose of diminishing friction, as they are remarkable for their want of what is called 'finish' in the machinery, on which so much time and money is wasted in English clock-work."
Its Dutch Origin.—As we have before explained, the marquetry case came straight from Holland. Our "grandfather" was a Dutchman, as far as clock-cases go. The Dutchman Huygens is credited with having been the first to employ the pendulum in the mechanism of the clock. Leonardo da Vinci, that stupendous genius, left notes as to his study of the pendulum (1452-1520), and Galileo came with his later studies (1564-1642). It is a disputed point as to when and where the pendulum came into being. We must accept Huygens (1629-95) as the practical exponent of the pendulum, although not the original discoverer of its properties. But at any rate, the long-case clock may be generally accepted as coincident with the use of the long or seconds pendulum. And to Holland we must look for this habitual usage of the long wooden case to protect the weights and the pendulum.
Among the designs of Marot there are drawings of long-case clocks certainly more ornate than those usually associated with such an early period (this was about 1660 to 1680), and French Louis XIV and Louis XV tall clocks are built on these lines, and Chippendale at a later period found Marot an exceedingly prolific master of design to study.
The Changing Forms of the Hood, the Waist, and the Base.—The evolution of form in one class of object from one period to another is of exceptional interest. In furniture, in china, in glass, and in silver, the progression of forms is so marked as to give practically a date to each piece. The gate-leg table can be traced from three to twelve legs with double gates. The chair, from its straight oaken back and massive arms to the tapering legs and curves of the satinwood period, runs through stages as definitely marked as though the makers had signed the pieces. Now the stretcher is low, next it becomes higher, then it disappears altogether; or the splats in the back are single, then double, with cane panels, and then again upholstered. The top rail of the chair affords similar delectation to the connoisseur of form changing for a definite reason.
The clock-case underwent equal changes in character, not only in its decoration, as we have seen, in marquetry, in lacquer, and in veneers of burr-walnut and mahogany, but its proportions varied. At first, coming as it did in the walnut period, the hood had turned rails, in keeping with the turned rails of the chairs of the time. The hood was square and small, the waist was moreslender, and the base in proportion. During the marquetry and the lacquered periods the hood began to grow larger and more dominant. It had a domed superstructure, and the finials or metal terminals were more ornamental and grew in number (see illustrations, pp.133,117). The massive character of the early mahogany period, culminating with Chippendale, had its effect on the long clock-case. The hood had a pagoda-like edifice in the Chinese style (see illustration, p.239), or it had the woodcarver's adoption of architecture, as in the crest of the hood (see illustrations, pp.145,117). The rail in the hood had become a Corinthian pillar, and later a pilaster. At the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth century it had a new form: when it was turned mahogany it stood away from the case, as an ornament apart, rather than a supporting pillar (see illustration, p.233). This is a noticeable feature in country-made clocks of this period.
At first there was no door in the case. But on the introduction of the door, its panelled form commenced to make its progression in form in accompaniment with the other features of the case. It was square, in simple forms, with square hoods. In 1730 it took the form somewhat similar to the shape of the lowest marquetry panel, as shown in the clock by Jas. Leicester (seeFrontispiece). It really follows the chair-backs of a period of some ten or fifteen years' prior date. It is an instance of the clock-case slightly lagging behind contemporary furniture design. The shapes of these panels resemblethe chair-backs of the James II, William and Mary, and the Queen Anne period. In some instances the simple form becomes taller, terminating in a small semicircle. The Sussex iron fire-backs of the seventeenth century show similar forms of panel.
By 1770 the panel had lost its lunette or semi-circular form at top, and in outline resembled a Chippendale chair-back. The evolution is easily traceable. A similar fashion is observed in tombstones in old country churchyards. By the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, especially in certain North of England type clock-cases, notably Lancashire and Cheshire, these panels are Gothic in character (see illustration, p.231). Following French fashion, in some late examples there is a glass panel (see illustration, p.275).
The base undergoes certain changes, though in a lesser degree. Sometimes plain, sometimes with a plinth, sometimes with feet. Dutch long clock-cases have great wooden balls as feet. In the Chippendale period the plinth has a suggestion of Chinese character. In later types the feet are more pronounced, and the base has an ornamental panel in the Sheraton period with a delicate marquetry inlay of simple character. In Sheraton'sDesign Bookthere are two clocks showing the base further ornamented by turned pillars similar to the hood.
The growing importance of these feet and their frequent use, especially in ornate examples, are shown in the specimens illustrated (pp.133,137).
The Dial and its Character.—When only one hand was in use, it was obviously not necessary todenote the minutes. Later, the minutes were engraved on the dial to meet the use of the minute hand; sometimes these were in a circle inside the hour numerals, and later they were put on the outer edge, outside the hour numerals. The hour numerals are almost invariably of Roman style, and the figure IV has by universal custom been engraved IIII, though there are examples of a late period with IV which are of country make. Similarly, Arabic figures have also been used. The illustration of a fine dial, of eighteenth century period, showing the various phases of the iron industry at Ashburnham, in Sussex, has these figures; this is a country-made clock (p.243).
The dials were brass, and the hour numerals appeared on a circle of brass plated with silver. Iron dials were used later, in the decadent period, and both numerals and floral designs were painted on the enamelled surface in lieu of engraved and ornamental metal-work, and often a landscape or figure subject occupied the lunette.
The lunette form followed the square face, and sometimes the maker put his name in this lunette, and later below the centre of the clock, and later again not at all on the dial. The lunette form no doubt determined the shape of the panel of the door in the case below, to which we have previously alluded. The illustration (p.159) shows these forms. The dial, by Henry Massy (1680), has the name between the numerals VI and VII. The lunette form in a dial by John Draper (1703) hasthe name of the maker in a circular disc above the hour circle.
Brass Dial by Henri MassyBRASS DIAL BY HENRY MASSY, LONDON. ABOUT 1680.Clock with usual eight-day movement.(An enlargement of this dial is illustrated p.163).(By courtesy of Edward Campbell, Esq., Glasgow.)
BRASS DIAL BY HENRY MASSY, LONDON. ABOUT 1680.Clock with usual eight-day movement.(An enlargement of this dial is illustrated p.163).(By courtesy of Edward Campbell, Esq., Glasgow.)
Brass Dial by John DraperBRASS DIAL BY JOHN DRAPER, LONDON. ABOUT 1703.Spandrels exhibiting later floral style of decoration.(At the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.)
BRASS DIAL BY JOHN DRAPER, LONDON. ABOUT 1703.Spandrels exhibiting later floral style of decoration.(At the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.)
Enlargements of the Henry Massy dial and of another by John Bushman show the character of engraving and the position of the maker's name (illustrated p.163).
In regard to the engraving put on the dials of these old clocks, it is not impossible that William Hogarth, when he was an apprentice at Master Ellis Gamble's shop, at the sign of the "Golden Angel" in Cranbourn Street, Leicester Fields, did some of this work. We know that Thomas Bewick engraved clock dials when an apprentice at Newcastle-upon-Tyne (see p.215).
The last form of the long-case dial is circular, an unusual type in vogue during the closing decades of the eighteenth century, belonging to the classic and French styles and in no way diverting the fashion of the main stream of case-makers.
Concerning the use of glass for the protection of the dial in the long-case clock, it was in use in coaches for the first time in 1667. According to Pepys'Diarywe learn: "Another pretty thing was my Lady Ashly's speaking of the bad qualities of the glass coaches, among others the flying open of the doors upon any great shake; but another, my Lady Peterborough, being in her glass coach with the glass up, and seeing a lady pass by in a coach whom she would salute, the glass was so clear that she thought it had been open, and so ran her head through the glass."
At first the hood of the clock lifted off and theglass was fixed; later the glass was framed in a door, and subsequently the hood slid off, which fashion is found in all but the earliest examples.
The term "dial" is a survival of the word "sundial." Like all innovations, there may have been those who preferred the old character, or it may have been left to Charles Lamb, lover of past and faded memories, to ruminate on garden gods in the Temple: "What an antique air had the now almost effaced sundials, with their moral inscriptions, seeming coevals with that Time which they measured, and to take their revelations of its flight immediately from heaven, holding correspondence with the fountain of light.... The shepherd, 'carved it out quaintly in the sun,' and turning philosopher by the very occupation, provided it with mottoes more touching than tombstones." Elia, Shakespearean scholar that he was, could not have forgotten the melancholy Jaques with his:—
I met a fool i' the forest,A motley fool; a miserable world!As I do live by food, I met a fool;Who laid him down and bask'd him in the sun,And rail'd on Lady Fortune in good terms,In good set terms and yet a motley fool."Good morrow, fool," quoth I. "No, sir," quoth he,"Call me not fool till heaven hath sent me fortune":And then he drew a dial from his poke,And, looking on it with lack-lustre eye,Says very wisely: "It is ten o'clock:Thus we may see," quoth he, "how the world wags:'Tis but an hour ago since it was nine,And after one hour more 'twill be eleven;And so, from hour to hour, we ripe and ripe,And then, from hour to hour, we rot and rot;And thereby hangs a tale."
I met a fool i' the forest,A motley fool; a miserable world!As I do live by food, I met a fool;Who laid him down and bask'd him in the sun,And rail'd on Lady Fortune in good terms,In good set terms and yet a motley fool."Good morrow, fool," quoth I. "No, sir," quoth he,"Call me not fool till heaven hath sent me fortune":And then he drew a dial from his poke,And, looking on it with lack-lustre eye,Says very wisely: "It is ten o'clock:Thus we may see," quoth he, "how the world wags:'Tis but an hour ago since it was nine,And after one hour more 'twill be eleven;And so, from hour to hour, we ripe and ripe,And then, from hour to hour, we rot and rot;And thereby hangs a tale."
I met a fool i' the forest,
A motley fool; a miserable world!
As I do live by food, I met a fool;
Who laid him down and bask'd him in the sun,
And rail'd on Lady Fortune in good terms,
In good set terms and yet a motley fool.
"Good morrow, fool," quoth I. "No, sir," quoth he,
"Call me not fool till heaven hath sent me fortune":
And then he drew a dial from his poke,
And, looking on it with lack-lustre eye,
Says very wisely: "It is ten o'clock:
Thus we may see," quoth he, "how the world wags:
'Tis but an hour ago since it was nine,
And after one hour more 'twill be eleven;
And so, from hour to hour, we ripe and ripe,
And then, from hour to hour, we rot and rot;
And thereby hangs a tale."
Enlargement of Dial.ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.Showing maker's name, John Bushman, London. About 1680.From lantern clock illustrated as Frontispiece.
ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.Showing maker's name, John Bushman, London. About 1680.From lantern clock illustrated as Frontispiece.
Enlargement of Dial.ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.Showing maker's name, Hen. Massy, London, and square dial indicating date of month. About 1680.From long-case clock illustrated p.159.
ENLARGEMENT OF DIAL.Showing maker's name, Hen. Massy, London, and square dial indicating date of month. About 1680.From long-case clock illustrated p.159.
It is not probable that the "fool i' the forest" drew from his pocket a sundial; it was, no doubt, a pocket-clock, or, in other words, a watch.
The art of dial-making is a subtle one. It is true that some are pleasing in their balance and others are displeasing, which sets us wondering what rules there are to govern the symmetrical arrangement of circles and figures and their co-related hands. There is an air of solemn grandeur about a fine dial; its dignity is as unruffled as the march of Time itself. The old masters of dial construction had the art of spacing as completely under control as had Caxton the great typographer in the balance of his printed page.
What Lord Grimthorpe has said[3]about the dials of turret clocks applies in its principles to the dials of domestic clocks. "The figures are generally made much too large. People have a pattern dial painted; and if the figures are not as long as one-third of the radius, and therefore occupying, with the minutes, about two-thirds of the area of the dial, they fancy they are not large enough to be read at a distance; whereas the fact is, the more the dial is occupied by figures, the less distinct they are, and the more difficult it is to distinguish the position of the hands, which is what people want to see, and not to read the figures, which may very well be replaced by twelve large spots.... The rule which has been adopted, after various experiments, as the best for the proportions of the dial is this: Divide the radius into three, and leave theinner two-thirds clear and flat, and of some colour forming a strong contrast to the colour of the hands—black or dark blue if they are gilt, and white if they are black. The figures, if there are any, should occupy the next two-thirds of the remaining third, and the minutes be set in the remainder near the edge."
[3]Encyclopædia Britannica(ninth edition), vol. vi.
[3]Encyclopædia Britannica(ninth edition), vol. vi.
The Ornamentation of the Spandrel.—There are some interesting types of ornamentation of the space between the hour circle and the square outlines of the dial. The neat filling of spandrels offered problems to the architect and woodworker long before the clockmaker found similar difficulties. It is not easy exactly to fill a triangle with a design that is pleasing. Some of the best examples are found in Italian lettering, old sixteenth-century woodcuts of the letter L.
In English clocks, the spandrel in the lantern clock about 1670 had a plain cherub head, as simple in character as the fine pearwood carving from a Buckinghamshire church we illustrate of a slightly earlier period, still rich with unimpaired colour (p.167). German clocks had this device of the cherub's head, but not in the spandrel. At the British Museum there is one example with this cherub-head as a base ornament at the foot of the clock, which rests on it. This is in date 1600.
English Wood-Carving.ENGLISH WOOD-CARVING.Painted and gilded. Early seventeenth century.(In collection of author.)
ENGLISH WOOD-CARVING.Painted and gilded. Early seventeenth century.(In collection of author.)
Brass SpandrelBRASS SPANDREL.From dial of clock by Henry Massy (London), 1680, illustrated p.159.
BRASS SPANDREL.From dial of clock by Henry Massy (London), 1680, illustrated p.159.
The design of the cherub with outspread wings was common enough in Italy, where children have served as models since Donatello. It became established as a form and was a favourite embellishment of the English stone-carver in the seventeenthcentury. Horace Walpole protested at its abuse by the contemporaries of Christopher Wren, and it can be found outside St. Paul's Cathedral and in many other London churches and over late Stuart doorways.
It was, therefore, nothing new; it was a pleasing spandrel ornament which appealed to the clockmaker as suitable to clock dials. It naturally received floriated additions, and both in its simpler form and in this later and more elaborate variation it appears on the spandrels of clock dials (see p.167).
It is interesting to find the clockmaker so conservative. Once the cherub found its way on to clocks, there it remained. It is in the clock at Windsor Castle which Henry VIII gave to Anne Boleyn, formerly at Strawberry Hill before Queen Victoria purchased it. In its first form on the spandrel it practically followed the simple woodcarver's design we illustrate, but with this difference: the triangle to be filled by the clockmaker in his spandrels, at each of the four corners of his dial, was exactly opposite to that of the woodcarver or the stone-carver where he made a bracket. The triangle in these cases stood on its apex. The clockmaker's triangle stood on its base. Hence it will be observed that a straight line drawn along the head of the cherub (p.167) finds itself level with the top of the two wings. The clockmaker modified this in his metal spandrel ornaments. He dropped the wings, so that the top of the cherub's head is the apex of the triangle and the tips of the two wings the base.
Later, the head, although still retained, was enveloped in floriated ornament and the cherub became unrecognizable. But the triangle is well filled.
We next come to a most interesting stage, coincident in time with the rebuilding of Hampton Court. The "Glorious Revolution" had become established and James II sent packing. The two cherubs holding up the Protestant crown would seem by its prevalence at this period to be a sort of symbolic record of events that were happening. Huguenot and Dutch metal-workers put their thoughts into form, and we find this William and Mary Protestant emblem on the clock-face (see p.171).
But we also find it on the stretcher of the walnut chair of the period (as illustrated, p.171). Nor is this all. Lambeth and Bristol delft dishes contribute their pæan in honour of the House of Orange. On some a crown is found, with the date 1690, the sole decoration of a plate some 9 inches in diameter. On others a crown is shown on a cushion, with the sceptre and orb beside it. These are all contemporary with other English delft dishes bearing crudely painted portraits of William and Mary crowned.
Cardinal Wolsey's coat of arms, as shown at Hampton Court, was two cherubs supporting a cardinal's hat. One can imagine that Queen Mary, backed by little Christopher Wren, brought Daniel Marot and Grinling Gibbons to put an end to all this. Accordingly, if one pays a pilgrimage to Hampton Court one sees the carved angels triumphantly holding up the Protestant crown to supplantWolsey's former insignia of arrogant splendour under the old religion.
Detail of Stretcher of Walnut ChairDETAIL OF STRETCHER OF WALNUT CHAIR.Of William and Mary period.
DETAIL OF STRETCHER OF WALNUT CHAIR.Of William and Mary period.
Brass Spandrel of Dial of Clock.BRASS SPANDREL OF DIAL OF CLOCK.Showing design of angels supporting crown.
BRASS SPANDREL OF DIAL OF CLOCK.Showing design of angels supporting crown.
In regard to the long continuance of this design, it is interesting to observe that it appears in plates attributed to the Lowestoft factory. As a matter of fact, such plates were made in Holland to the order of some shipmaster. They usually celebrate the wedding of some persons in the district, whose names are still known. They are decorated in blue, and have two cherubs supporting a heart, over which is a crown. There is one dated 1755, inscribed "Henry and Mary Quinton, Yarmouth, Norfolk." Its Dutch origin is proven by the orthography with the two dots over the lettersy, and the misplacing of other letters: "Henrÿ and Marÿ Quinton, Yarmouth, nor ff: olk. 1755."
After the two cherubs on the clock spandrel came further floriated designs minus the cherub's head. This, later, disappeared, and the spandrel had only a matted surface, in contrast to the rest of the dial. This in turn disappeared when the dial departed from its former glory of a silvered hour circle and became a sheet of iron painted according to taste. We give examples of this—the Sussex dial depicting the iron works (p.243) and the provincial style with the lunette painted with a figure subject (p.249). The end of the story is the china dial of the painted Hindeloopen Dutch clocks beloved of our childhood, with weights and chains and other pleasing mechanism. Here the nineteenth century Dutch clock joins hands with the old wall clock of the seventeenth century, Dame Fashionhaving pirouetted round the dial, trifling with all collectors in "the whirligig of time."
The Evolution of the Hands.—The early examples of the long-case clock or of the lantern clock with one hand show a fine rich design in metal-work in the hand itself. It was brass, often gilded, or iron wrought with great skill and beauty. At the advent of the minute hand it was made in character with its fellow. At first the dial had afleur-de-lis, and later a slightly more floriated use of this emblem on the hour circle between each hour. In old examples the hand, when it came opposite this decoration, was in keeping with thefleur-de-lisas though it were part of the design of the hand. It is only a fancy, but, as no design comes by accident, it is very probable that such was the idea of the old dial engraver.
The study of hands is exceptionally interesting; they run through a regular series of styles, as varied as the ornamentation of the cases. Some of the designs are of exquisite balance as specimens of delicate metal-work, in which the English have always been proficient. Their character can be gauged by the expert clockmaker or connoisseur to such a nicety that it can be seen at once if the clock has its original hands or not. Those of my readers who wish to pursue this subject will find the hands adequately treated and well illustrated inEnglish Domestic Clocks, by Mr. Herbert Cesinsky and Mr. Malcolm R. Webster, a volume which no student of clocks should fail to consult as a practical and authoritative work.
In regard to hands, it is curious that the fashion of placing a minute hand to travel around the dial with the hour hand has established a method of reckoning time in a popular manner not in accordance with scientific exactitude. The eye glances at the dial and sees that the minute hand has so many minutes to travelbeforereaching the next hour. We accordingly say, for instance, it is twenty minutes to four or ten minutes to four. On one half of the dial we have acted quite scientifically in saying it is ten minutes past three or half-past three, but the moment the point of the half hour is reached we act in a different manner. We never speak or think of four thirty-five, four forty, or four fifty, unless we have to consult the railway time-table.
This all comes about by reason of the minute hand being placed as it is. In clocks with the minute hand having a separate dial of its own no such unscientific error would have arisen. The second hand in such clocks travels around the dial and points outside the hour numerals.
THE BRACKET CLOCK
The term "bracket clock" a misnomer—The great series of English table or mantel clocks—The evolution of styles—Their competition with French elaboration.
Long-caseclocks came into being when the long or "royal" pendulum required protection by having a wooden case. It was possible to have a short pendulum, and clocks intended for table use had a short pendulum. The long pendulum swings exactly in a second, and for it to do this it must be of a certain length, determined by physical laws followed according to mechanical formulæ by the scientific clockmaker, too complex to be given here in detail. It may be interesting to record that the length of a seconds pendulum—that is, one requiring one second to move from extreme to extreme—is 39.1398 inches in the latitude of Greenwich and is of different lengths in differing latitudes.
The Term "Bracket Clock" a Misnomer.—In the old form of clock—the brass lantern type, weight-driven—it is obvious that when the weights andchains were suspended below the case the clock could not stand on a table. Such clocks had to hang on a wall, as so many old engravings show, or they were placed on a bracket against a wall, with the weights hanging beneath. With the advent of the pendulum new theories were in the air. At its first use as a short pendulum it was placed in front of the dial. When the seconds pendulum was recognized as a scientific regulator, the length precluded clocks in which it was employed being used as table clocks. It was a distinct departure from miniature timepieces as decorative domestic ornaments. Scientific it undoubtedly was, and as such it commenced a new development in the direction of astronomical clocks and scientific regulators of time. The table clock had to pursue another course. It belongs to another school of mechanism. The weight-driven clock strove to arrive at exactitude and scientific accuracy. The other clock, like the watch, attempted economy of space in conjunction with the maximum of exactitude such economy would allow. It essayed to fulfil certain conditions. It was easily portable, it could stand on a table, or more often on the mantelpiece, a place it can almost claim as its own in the English home by tradition. The watch with similar aims taxed the art of the maker to enable it to be easily carried on the person. These two classes of timepiece, the portable clock and more readily portable watch, were spring-driven. The development of this mechanical principle, running parallel with the evolution of the weight-driven clock,arrived at great scientific accuracy, as exemplified by the nautical chronometer and by the modern machine-made watch, whose timekeeping qualities are remarkable. In fact, it may be said that the table or portable clock and the watch together have dethroned the weight-driven clock as a domestic clock.
BRACKET CLOCKS. LATE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
Bracket ClocksMaker, Sam Watson (Coventry). Date, 1687.Height, 12 in. Width, 9¼ in. Depth, 6¾ in.Enlargement of DialMaker, Joseph Knibb (Oxon). Date, 1690.Height, 12 in. Width, 8 in. Depth, 5 in.
Bracket ClocksMaker, Sam Watson (Coventry). Date, 1687.Height, 12 in. Width, 9¼ in. Depth, 6¾ in.
Maker, Sam Watson (Coventry). Date, 1687.Height, 12 in. Width, 9¼ in. Depth, 6¾ in.
Enlargement of DialMaker, Joseph Knibb (Oxon). Date, 1690.Height, 12 in. Width, 8 in. Depth, 5 in.
Maker, Joseph Knibb (Oxon). Date, 1690.Height, 12 in. Width, 8 in. Depth, 5 in.
(By courtesy of Percy Webster, Esq.)
BRACKET CLOCKS. EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.