Monday 28 October 2013

Monday.

Time for me to provide answers about yesterday's Mystery Object; and both Rog and Crowbard spotted straight away that he is a small clock jack. Rog got quite near geographically (though I think South Germany/ possible North Italy might be a bit nearer that Dutch), but didn't attempt a date, so that I think Crowbard's date of 16th century (but not Japanese !) puts him marginally nearer the correct answer. I can quite see what fogged Crowbard, so I'm going to have to do a little explaining. This little jack is from a complicated domestic clock; which probably had up to four jacks - a large one to strike the hours, two smaller ones to strike the quarters (of which this is probably one), and possibly a fourth to strike an alarm train. There was a fashion in the late 16th century for these jacks to represent stylistically the four continents, and I think this chap is supposed to represent Asia.  Mechanically he strikes by swivelling from his waist (a rod runs up  inside his right leg). His head does not swing with his trunk, but stays looking forward. It does however (his head that is) lift up as he begins his back swing, as though to focus on the bell that would have been above him, then down again as he delivers his blow.  If you examine the second and third picture you will see his head in the two positions.  I think this would have given his striking action a rather more realistic appearance. I think the clock was probably scrapped sometime in the early nineteenth century, but someone thought this jack worth keeping. I wonder what happened to the other jacks; although, it is of course perfectly possible that this one was the only jack, and therefore striking the hours. Since then, again probably in the nineteenth century he has been mounted on a green marble column.  When I first came into possession of him, I made him the hammer that he still clutches.
I think I'd better explain how I came into possession of him :-     I bought him at an oak and early metalware auction at Sotheby's  about twenty five years ago. He qualified to be in the sale, because he is, of course, early metalware, but I've always thought that he would have been more appreciated had Sotheby's entered him in an antique clock and watch sale.  He was described in the catalogue as a small bronze statuette, nicely gilded, continental and of late 16th century date. All the evidence of his mechanical past was ignored.  Still, who am I to criticise Sotheby's shortcomings of description.  I'm not complaining!

P.s. I hope I've made this all quite clear without being tooooo technical.  I'll try and answer any questions if I've not  made things clear.

P.p.s.  I think you'll agree that he's an attractive little object, which is why we've kept him all this time.

1 comment:

Crowbard said...

There you go Z, you were right, that swiveling mechanism makes him ideal as a rotisserie for evenly browning the toast!