Messages

1

Antique Questions Forum / Re: Mantel Clock (1780) silver + gold engraver: Thomas 'antiquity' Smith, London.

« on: August 07, 2012, 10:36:11 am »

Hello Sir,

For a labtest they advised me to travel to amsterdam.
6 jewellers have tested it with acid. it isa at least 22k.
I just received email with a sorry from one jeweller. He heard I am invited for a national tv show:
http://cultuurgids.avro.nl/front/indextkk.html

I cant find an objective clock specialist because of the golden ornament.

I acutally closed the gold item and my next is the engraviongs. as soon a a professional supprts me with FACTS I can forward myzelf again to Christies and or Sotheby's .

They all ASSUME its not real

I think I will visit the tv shor on the 5th of september and let themn figure it all out. All kind of specialsits are there. (Clock, engravings, 18th century arts, metals)

I thank you alot for your reply!

Henri,

I'm a little confused. You say, "they advised me to travel to Amsterdam". For what? Or are you saying that you DID travel to Amsterdam, where 6 jewelers tested your metal? If so, my next question would be, did you take the entire metal item for testing? Or just a small piece that you managed to break/scrape/cut away? Seriously, I'm very curious.

Next up:

You say, "I actually closed the gold item and my next is the engravings". What do you mean by "closed the gold item"

Also, I'm wondering if all of your six jewelers have only "acid tested". Did any of them use an electronic/digital gold tester? It seems odd, in today's world of technology that your jewelers would "acid test". I don't know one jeweler in my smaller city, nowadays, that relies on acid testing. I myself am not even a jeweler, and I own three different electronic testers. All of which would inexpensively tell you the exact gold content of your item/s. And very ACCURATELY, compared to the acid test. What I'm saying here is that an acid test will very likely NOT tell you the exact gold content of a piece. An electronic tester CERTAINLY will.

VGB     

2

Antique Questions Forum / Re: Mantel Clock (1780) silver + gold engraver: Thomas 'antiquity' Smith, London.

« on: August 07, 2012, 01:37:06 am »

--------

I did NOT post this to proof anything I am here for advice..

This whole last week was pretty annoying, When I make a claim I do that when I am 100% sure.

Engraver was even in the link you gave.
If these are the reactions I can expect I will take it offline.
Newbee dont like much yet here..


 At the end of three years he gave up engraving and found employment in making topographical drawings of London for Mr. Crowle
I am just invited for a tv show on national tv. hour ago.
[/quote]


................... ................... ................... ................


You got the WRONG "Thomas Smith", and that's an easy mistake. Here's some more info/"advice" you might find helpful so that so you don't go around wasting your time:

First off, the "Thomas Smith" your clock has on its face refers to a real clockmaker named, yep, Thomas Smith. (Smith Thomas Market Place Ashbourne Watch & clockmaker 1846 H.G.D.D.) You can find his name at this list here:

http://www.clock-works.clara.net/wcmuk/sdcm/s.htm

The "John Thomas Smith" you refer to being the "engraver" of your clock, has NOTHING to do with your clock. You must realize how many Thomas Smith/John Thomas Smiths there are, and have resided in London, right?

Now, here's where things get tricky:

Some companies starting early 1900's-on began mass producing reproductions of older clocks. One such company by the name of "WUBA" (John Warmink) started in The Netherlands around 1920. Pretty much dedicated to manufacturing reproductions of much older clocks. In the beginning, apparently, this company even made their own movements, but then contracted out to other clock makers, then STRICTLY made cases from then on. Back in these times, competition was FIERCE! Anything to sell a damn clock, right? So scrawling in a "famous", and pretty much VERY COMMON name, might just boost sales, and be a safe bet if you chose the right name. Now, in some cases, there was a certain amount of truth to the "USE" of this famous (long past) clock makers, or engravers name. Because maybe a certain motion or design was borrowed - these details would be difficult to verify exactly, but you can be certain that WUBA-Warmink partially made their living by using the name "Thomas Smith London" on their clocks. Now, considering that this clockmaker "Thomas Smith" was in business in 1846, while WUBA started in the 1920's? It was probably a safe bet to use his name on WUBA clocks, BUT!!! It's also certain that this clockmaker, and also YOUR ENGRAVER, had no play whatsoever in the clock case building, movement, engraving, or freaking any part. Why? ---------------------> Because your clock was probably built sometime way after even 1930. Just look at it: The dial is terrible, and machine made. I dare say that there's NO PART of your clock that is truly engraved. I mean, look at the surface of your dial here:

http://www.collectorsweekly.com/assets/stories/-rzjKLKjRBxfA3uWWetN5w.jpg

It is immediately recognizable as something mass produced and very poorly finished.

You say in a comment here that you'll "post it on my other page,  they appreciate old stuff". WE DO TOO. But your stuff ain't old. Well, it's from the last century, but it ain't no 1780!!! It just isn't, man.

You say you don't want advice, and you've gotten some VERY GOOD ADVICE from everyone in this thread. But then you're so worked up about value and authenticity of your clock, that you are UNWILLING to hear this good advice. Would you prefer that everyone just showers you with KUDOS on what a great/old clock you have? Even though its less than impressive? 

Adios.

VGB

ps, I do have one more question for you:

Have you gone in to have your "gold" tested? I don't care where anyone lives, there's gotta be someone around to test gold for you. You say that some of your ornaments are "21.6k". Has someone done a true test on this metal? I would be curious to know the answer to this because it would be INCREDIBLY UNUSUAL for the pieces you say to be almost pure gold. If I were a betting man, I'd bet all my chips on them being plated/gilded AT BEST. They look like heavily polished brass in your pictures.

Hope this helps.