|
Post by Tricia on Apr 18, 2006 11:05:54 GMT -6
Leyton: I also saw the Bismarck Roadshow with the Elgin Watch maker. As a side note: I'm surprised there wasn't (isn't) much on frontier artifacts, either soldier, Indian, civilian from Bismarck. I know there were several episodes taped in Bismarck so it was a little disappointing not seeing any Indian-Military artifacts. Crzhrs-- I was mightily disappointed, so here's hoping for next week's episode ... what was funny is that I felt like I was watching characters out of the movie, "Fargo!" Ja! Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 11:17:35 GMT -6
I have researched the watch case maker and have not found any of the symbols as his hallmark. His name only, is his hallmark. I have a copy of his patent for the watch case and I have searched through the watch identification guide authored by Shugart & Gilbert. If you have other information I would be very interested in seeing it or knowing where to find it. Thanks,,,,,, Gary
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 18, 2006 11:18:10 GMT -6
Yeah . . . lots of Swedes and others from Scandinavia . . . Most of the Dakotas was not settled until after the Sioux were forced out and probably well after 1890.
The funny thing is that more and more people are leaving the Dakotas because of the extremes in weather, poor farming, and other economic factors. Children who do not want to be farmers or ranchers and are looking for more opportunities are turning away from the traditional ways.
I've heard of a number of scientists and biologists who want to create a huge "Buffalo Commons" and return much of the northern Plains to what it was before white settlement . . . I think it's still in the works and maybe something will come of it.
PS: I believe the explorer Jackson (of the Grand Canyon) petitioned Congress in the 1860s-70s to create a huge national park in the Plains and set it aside for scientific research, wildlife habitat, and allow the Indians an opportunity to retain some of their culture.
Of course the Congress shot that down.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Apr 18, 2006 11:26:17 GMT -6
Gary, If you haven't checked the Elgin Collectors site, you may find help there: elginwatches.org/index.html. Among its many resources is a database of Elgin serial numbers. From a cursory glance at the site, it seems that the number on the mechanism is the key to dating it. There is also a collector's forum where you can have fellow enthusiasts help you. Good luck and please keep us posted. Diane
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 11:39:27 GMT -6
Thanks,,,,, I didnt know about their site! I will take a look!
I did search the watch serial number and it dates to the 1869 or 1870 time period.
Thanks,,,,,,,,, Gary
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 12:11:10 GMT -6
As a museum professional, I would sure like to have you take a look at this watch personally. We will be traveling through your state in June. Would it be possible to stop by, with the watch? Which town and museum can you be located in? Thanks Gary I can tell one thing as a museum professional and not as a Custer historian (which I am not), and that is that it would be very unusual for an inscription of that period to merely say 'General Custer'. Most every inscription of that period (mid 19th century) would use the first two initials--far more common than even using a first name. Thus a genuine inscription would more likely read 'Gen. G.A. Custer'. I would be very suspicious of something that simply uses rank and only a last name. I am only basing this on the appearance of the artifact itself and having examined many, many 19th century inscriptions.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Apr 18, 2006 12:27:12 GMT -6
I have researched the watch case maker and have not found any of the symbols as his hallmark. His name only, is his hallmark. I have a copy of his patent for the watch case and I have searched through the watch identification guide authored by Shugart & Gilbert. If you have other information I would be very interested in seeing it or knowing where to find it. Thanks,,,,,, Gary I found the information on Google. If it is not Charles Thiery's hallmark, then fine, but there have been several watches (cases done by him) with the exact iconography as yours which have been registered with various auction houses across the United States. In other words, there is nothing about the Indian and eagle on the purported GAC watch that would identify it--specifically--as a watch that once belonged to Custer. My biggest problem is still--and will remain--with the phraseology of the Custer battle cry. It's off by a long shot. Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 12:44:19 GMT -6
You kinda lost me. Are you saying there are other watch cases designed by Thiery that have an indian an eagle an all seeing eye and the star?
Thanks,,,,,,,, Gary
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Apr 18, 2006 12:53:39 GMT -6
You kinda lost me. Are you saying there are other watch cases designed by Thiery that have an indian an eagle an all seeing eye and the star? Thanks,,,,,,,, Gary The Indian and eagle? Yes, there are others.
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 12:58:34 GMT -6
Would you please point me to the Google site that has this information?
Thanks,,,,, Gary
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 14:17:45 GMT -6
Boy! How soon I forget! I'm getting older and do seem to forget more as time goes by! My wife just pointed out that we had, had two experts from the Sotheby's appraisal staff (1992) look our watch over and one of them commented about the inscription, "that is awesome". NO WE DO NOT WANT TO SELL THE WATCH! All we want is to document it. It's going to the Smithsonian!!! We also have had a jeweler that is active in appraising Civil War Relics look at the watch and he thought it "incredible" AND, that the inscription was proper for that time period. This doesn't prove anything, but it is just some of the other opinions that people have had and it is also part of the research information that we have come across over the years. Thanks,,,,,,,, Gary
|
|
Gary
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by Gary on Apr 18, 2006 14:31:23 GMT -6
As far as the inscription goes "To General Custer, From The Michigan Brigade, Ride You Wolverines", is it not possible that General Sheridan gave the watch to Custer as a statement to him and his brother, brother in-law and nephew,,,,, meaning, go get them! I know it's far fetched, but sorta like in the movie "They Died With Their Boots On" I know, I know, the movie is far from being accurate, but, MAYBE!!! Please don't be "too brutal" to me on this one!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Apr 18, 2006 14:56:13 GMT -6
Well, the only other Custer brother in the ACW was Tom--and until his older brother became a general, Tom served with an Ohio volunteer unit (and even then, he lied about his age). Maggie and James Calhoun didn't marry until the 1870s and Autie Reed was but eighteen in 1876 ... What was striking about the "come on, you Wolverines," was that it sounded less a command than an entreaty to battle (or so some say). A specialness about GAC was that, during the ACW, he asked nothing of his volunteers that he would not do himself, so his battle cry reflected the request and the nature of his command.
Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by George Armstrong Custer on Apr 18, 2006 15:10:08 GMT -6
OK, I'd dropped out of this thread, but now that we have images of the 'Custer watch' courtesy of Diane, here's my final take on this for what it's worth. Jas. Watson's appraisal, from the point of view of a museum professional very familiar with inscriptions on artefacts of the period, I take very seriously. James, man, your raising of doubts over this piece based upon sound reasoning which you reference and presented in an unsensational manner, is exactly the kind of scholarly approach which this forum has justifiably built its reputation upon - and I just love to see this kind of contribution here (particularly after the looney toons of recent weeks! ). My experience of such 19th-century inscriptions is not nearly as extensive as yours, is confined largely to military pieces, and has not been built up in a professional capacity. Nonetheless my own limited knowledge leads me to concur entirely with your conclusions: I would expect the recipients christian name initials to appear on such an inscription - as you note, this seems to be even more representative of the period than to give the full christian name. I would also suggest (perhaps you can confirm this from your own experience James?) that one would also expect a presentation piece from the period to give a more specific reference as to who was presenting the piece, and the fact that it was a presentation. For example, rather than the stark 'From The Michigan Brigade', I'd have expected some thing along the lines of " Presented by the Officers of the Michigan Brigade......", or "Presented by the Officers and Men of the Michigan Brigade...." Further, I'd have expected perhaps (though this is perhaps less hard and fast) some reference to the occasion or event for which the presentation was being made. And I'd almost certainly have expected to find the date of the presentation at some point in the dedication. What think you James? As an undoubtedly genuine Custer presentation piece, the magnificent Tiffany sabre pictured in Glenwood J. Swanson's superlative book G. A. Custer: His Life and Times has an inscription which ticks all the above boxes: 'Presented to Gen'l. G. A. Custer By Commissioned Officers of the Staff June 22, 1863' (BTW - get a copy of the Swanson book while you can: it's stunning!) We now move on to Leyton's well-researched comments (another example of just how good this forum can be in action!). There is no doubt in my mind that the real Michigan Brigade would not have misquoted their leader's inspiring battle call to them on a presentation to him. Even more damningly for the watch under discussion here, however, is Leyton's discovery that the 'eagle' and 'indian' marks are common currency on this line of watches. And Diane added the exellent point that it would have been prescient beyond belief for the Michigan Brigade to have added an Indian to a watch for Custer as a symbol of what was to come at LBH! A final strike against the watch being genuine is the information contained in the editorial comments of Don Schwarck which accompany the images of the watch posted by Diane. These note that the back of the case is stamped 'patented Nov. 9 1869 & Jan. 18 1870. So if the casing style or movement type of this watch was patented in 1869/70, then this particular example was manufactured and purchased some time from 1870 on. Why would the long-disbanded Michigan Brigade be presenting such a watch (more traditionally representative of a leaving or retirement gift) to Custer at such a late date? If the Brigade ever did present a watch to Custer (for which there appears no evidence whatsoever outside of They Died With Their Boots On), then the glaringly obvious time for such a presentation was the occasion of Custer's departure from the Brigade for comand of the Third Division in the fall of 1864. For all of the above reasons, my personal conclusions on the watch put before us here is that it is not genuine - even the style of engraving on it looks cheap for such a supposed inmportant presentation piece (if a real one had existed it would probably have been ordered from Tiffany's, a la the saber pictured above, and the Michigan Brigade insignia designed and ordered by Custer himself - the Brigade were regular customers there!) My own view is that the watch discussed here was probably mocked up on the basis of the Foote collection watch and that of They Died With Their Boots On. As someone rightly said when this saga began, most of us here would love to have Custer's watch surface with a cast-iron provenance. But I think we'd be equally loathe to let a mock up (for which any provenance as to where it even came from to its current owner has been conspicuous by its absence), lay some claim to authenticity via a series of extremely tenuous suggestions on this august forum. Because the owner has been so unforthcoming on anything but the obscure points which he chooses to make, I cannot make up my mind whether he has been duped into purchasing the watch as Custer's or whether he has anything to do with its creation himself - I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and hope it's not the latter. A final word of friendly advice to Gary - if you're paying for a safety deposit box for that watch pictured here, save yourself some money and cancel.......... With some relief, I now bid adieu to this thread! Ciao, GAC
|
|
|
Post by Jas. Watson on Apr 18, 2006 15:16:16 GMT -6
>>>As a museum professional, I would sure like to have you take a look at this watch personally. We will be traveling through your state in June. Would it be possible to stop by, with the watch? Which town and museum can you be located in?<<<
Gary, I would be happy to look at it and can be reached at the North Carolina State Museum of History in Raleigh where I am the chief objects conservator. I am not an expert on time pieces, but can direct you to a curator who would be. However; I can examine the engraving and possibly determine if it is of the period or not (there are ways to tell). However; before you decide to make the trip I would caution you that you might be able to find as much information (or more) about the watch itself on the various sites and horological organizations than you would a State History Museum. Our curators would have to research out any unusual specifics just as you would. If you still wish to have me take a peek at it, PM me.
I would assume that the watch is in fact a period piece--if one were to fake up something like that, they would certainly go to the effort to obtain such a one--they are not expensive. And too, I imagine the engraving would be hand done in the old manner...the only thing we might be able to tell is how long that engraving has been there--whether it was put on while the watch was new (which as a presentation piece it must certainly be), or whether it was added to an 'old watch' at a much later date. Outside of that, only what I said before regarding the name is all I could add.
None of this is fool proof, but the unfortunate thing is that the burden of proof falls on the watch to prove it IS, rather than anyone else to prove that it ISN'T. I am also on the State Museum's aquisition commitee, and I can tell you that as it stands, we wouldn't take something like that (presuming it fell within our mission--which it doesn't without a NC connection) without a lot more substantiation than you are likely to ever get.
I don't know what else to say.
|
|