can anyone give me info on this please

[danny1979]

yes there is a board missing on it but its not a problem for a photo as it is open bottom anyway

[sapphire]

I'm not even close to knowledgeable about furniture, but to me that looks to be a replacement seat.  Hard to tell from your other photos, but do I detect two different types of grain on the finished side? Underside looks too new compared to the sides of the 'box' part.  JMO

[danny1979]

think i will clean it down and have a proper look before any more photos

[Sara Finn]

I notice chamfering (whittled or shaved) on the lower o/s edge of the back side of the chair box/frame - in the second photo above.

It's a bit of an unusual place to have wear.

The construction of this chair looks like mid-1800s to me, like D&b stated.

[danny1979]

thr reason for the two types or grain is the boards are missing and it is sat on a pine table to take photos

[KC]

LOL!  I can see that the top is missing now!

That is a very strange area to have wear on the back/underside of the chair!

Does the top of the seat have any wear that you can see that the picture isn't showing?

Agree Jenny Lind style.  But something doesn't quite sit well..........

[waywardangler]

Sara Finn made a good observation.  The corner is also gnawed or whittled away while the turned leg is not.  I think this is a put together or married piece.  The legs have little wear while the box boards have heavy wear.  It makes no sense.

[danny1979]

its the pictures that make them look good there is alot of wear on them that bit you are on about looks like someone has been at it with a pocket knife or something like that it is damage that has been done on purpose

[talesofthesevenseas]

You know, I've seen a lot of old bed headboards/footboards similar to the turned style of this chair. I wonder if it was cobbled together from an old bed and pieces of something like dresser drawer fronts? It definitely looks like two different pieces of furniture to me too.

[talesofthesevenseas]

Wait a sec... old beds have bed rails along the sides like in the photo above. If this were made from an old bed, that might explain the wear on the "box" if it were made from an old bed's side rails. It gets banged by the broom when you sweep underneath, but the spindles do not. Also notice that the wear on the box boards is on the exterior finished side, and the edge on the interior of the box is still sharp. This would be entirely consistent with being bumped over and over by a broom when sweeping underneath a bed.

I'm beginning to think this chair is actually a "recycled" Jenny Lind era bed that was given a new life as a chair!

[waywardangler]

Tales, I think you are right.  If you are not right, then whoever originally designed that chair made one heck of a clunky piece and should have been designing tanks instead of furniture.  Your observations on the wear would be entirely consistent with years of sweeping under the bed side rails or some future boy scout practicing whittling with his pen knife.  I would be less gender specific but we all know girls never whittled on furniture, don't we?

[KC]

I have known quite a few that could whittle!

The wear on the underside is consistent with one sweeping under the chair over the years when the chair is turned back upright! 
I still have to ask...does it appear that it had a bottom on it at some time? (This is one of those I would love to be able to see hands on!)

Just something doesn't sit right! (No pun intended!  Ha!)

[D&b antiques]

I would'nt get to hasty Removeing the patina etc. it takes years of ageing to aquire. a refinish can cost you 50% percent of it's value.

[cogar]

After looking at those new photos in post #15 it is my expert opinion that chair is “original construction” ….. and what it is missing is the actual/original “seat” which rested on and/or was affixed to what you all are thinking is the “seat”.

Looking at an enlargement of the 2nd picture of the lead post there appears to be dark spots on the top of the left, right and front frame or sideboards which indicates something was attached. Also, note the rear frame or sideboard in that picture extends up from the “seat boards” by 2+- inches and with a “center piece” attached. No one would make that fancy of a chair and leave that portion visible.

The height of the original “seat” was probably “mid-way” on that cross-brace between the seat-back spindles and the original seat was assuredly fabric covered w/horsehair stuffing or whatever.   

I wouldn’t touch the finish on it until it was looked at by a “period” expert on such furniture.

[D&b antiques]

Thank you Cogar. that's well spoken advice.