I have had this English paircase watch for a long time, and have puzzled over the maker's name.

The case was at omne time plated bronze.

Here you can see the plating better.

So, there are no hallmarks, but the case maker's initials seem to be "IB".

It is a small watch, about two inches in diameter.

The name reads, as near as I can tell, "W. Retlaw." In G. H. Baillie's list of watch and clock makers he lists a Walter Retland, of London, 1777. This seems to be consistent with the watch type, but I've also found one maker's name that was spelled backwards in a watch movement elsewhere in Baillie's book. Do you suppose this maker's name was W. Walter?

Steve

Yes it may be. And if Retlaw is Walter backwards
it could be a Walter W(hoknows). Walter as first name. Some watches were signed with first names only.

With the bronze case we have no way to date the watch so it could be made in a time period of 30- 40 years.
The I in this IB mark can stand for any makers name starting with J. To many posbsilities. Think we will never find out.

Regards Dlareg (Gerald

Thanks very much. I guess we can only say it is a "type." One interesting thing about this watch is that the crown wheel has had a tooth broken off, and it was replaced by drilling a hole and screwing a screw into it.

Here is the peg in the crown (left of center).

Steve

nice example

not the high art of horology but...with a certain touch. All those fussee verge watches are individuals. How many of them had been slaugthered and those incredible unique balance cocks became brooches or necklaces?

Happy to see you seems to like them.

Gerald

Steve,

I can find no 'Retlaw', but there is a W.J.Walter, Woolwich (early C19th) listed in Baillies.

The name spelled backwards isn't as far fetched as it may seem to some!
During the period that watch was made, if a watch or clockmaker was not 'Free' of the Clockmakers Company - in other words, a 'Master', it would have been illegal to have signed their name on a movement manufactured within the boundaries of the City of London,
To do so (and get caught) virtually guaranteed a spell in prison!

If it was 'W.Walter' signing his name backwards, he may have been pushing his luck, but he wouldn't 'technically' have been breaking the law!

Certainly presents an interesting theory or two if so!

He may never have completed an apprenticeship, or perhaps completed one that was never formalised by indenture - or kicked out of his Master's employ before his apprenticeship was completed.

He could also equally have been a journeyman watchmaker, and had his 'masterpiece' destroyed in front of him by the examining body of the Clockmakers company as not meeting the required standard, which would mean not only the loss of probably years of work, but also his coveted 'Freedom'.
Neat way of 'taking the Mickey' out of the CC with a bit of slick 'rule bending' if so!

Interesting one is that!

John

Thanks a lot, John! It is fascinating to me to speculate on these questions. I really appreciate your input.

Steve G.