DONNINGTON PRIORY 90 90 Poppe (Johann Heinrich Moritz) AUSFÜRLICHE GESCHICHTE DER THEORETISCH-PRAKTISCHEN UHRMACHERKUNST, FIRST EDITION, errata leaf at end, a little browned, contemporary note in ink on rear free endpaper, contemporary half calf, spine gilt, rubbed, [Abeler p.489; Bromley 710; Tardy p.201], Leipzig, Koch, 1801. £150-200 91 91 PORTRAIT OF UNKNOWN FRENCHMAN (PRESUMABLY AN HOROLOGIST), colour pastel portrait, within oval mount c.265 x 215mm., slight wear to background at right hand side, framed and glazed, [c.1790]. £80-120 92 Queen’s Watch (The).- Otto (Heinrich, watchmaker) CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MR. A.H. DYSONTHAMES STREET, WINDSOR AND MYSELF. ORIGINAL LETTERS AND COPIES OF MY LETTERS [RELATING TO THE REPAIR OF THE QUEEN’S WATCH], letters, photographs, drawings etc., tipped in to a modern album, 1930-31; and a small quantity of others, including a copy of Otto’s incorrect drawing of the Queen’s Watch (framed and glazed) and material relating to Thomas Mudge, v.s., v.d. (qty). *** THE QUEEN’S WATCH. In 1769 Thomas Mudge made a watch for George III who presented it to Queen Charlotte and the watch has since been known as the ‘Queen’s Watch’. “The timepiece was of such importance because it was the first example of a pocket watch with Mudge’s monumentally important invention, the lever escapement... this watch is one of the most important horological objects in existence. The watch had been sent by the Royal household to A.H. Dyson, the watchmaker at Windsor who the Royal Family used to look after the watches and clocks in the Castle and, unknown to the Royal household, Dyson had subcontracted the repair work outside the shop. [Heinrich] Otto had been called in, confidentially, to study it, purely out of interest. Naturally, without the permission of the Royal household, Otto could not publish any description, and seeking permission would mean disclosing that Dyson had allowed it off the premises.” In 1924 “Gould’s American friend Paul Chamberlain was working on a book about the lever escapement. Knowing Otto had inspected the Queen’s watch, Chamberlain visited him and asked for information. Otto was as courteous as he could be, but refused to give him the data, explaining that he intended to publish his own description of the watch.” Chamberlain persevered and eventually was given permission by the Royal household to dismantle the watch and study it. “Otto, now desperate to forestall Chamberlain’s publication, rushed into print with a series of six articles in the Horological Journal, beginning in November 1929. The second of these, in December 1929, proudly presented Otto’s illustration of the escapement. But then things started to go wrong. There was in fact a rather serious error in his beautifully produced and published technical drawing of the Queen’s watch escapement. The number of teeth embraced by the pallets, the most basic of escapement criteria, was shown as 5½ instead of the correct 4½, a fundamental and misleading mistake to have made.” Further problems were incurred when the watch began losing time and the lower balance spring was found to have extensive rusting. This time Dyson took it to Otto who took the opportunity to dismantle the watch and photograph it. Dyson was concerned as once again the watch was meant to stay in his possession and now Queen Mary was expected at the end of the week and Dyson was frantic to get the watch back. “Of, course the watch was nowhere near completion, but somehow Dyson managed to keep the watch’s absence from the Queen and the Inspector at Windsor a secret. Dyson was now desperate to get the watch back. After fitting a succession of experimental new balance springs, supplied by the specialist maker Ganeval and Callard on City Road, Otto finally completed the restoration that weekend and the watch was duly returned to Dyson early the following week, as demanded.” - Jonathan Betts, Time Restored: the Harrison timekeepers and RT Gould, the man who knew (almost) everything, OUP, 2006. £300-400 30 www.dnfa.com tel. +44 (0) 1635 553 553
92 DONNINGTON PRIORY 31