Cambridge Springs 1904 chess set

Who can identify the clock in the photograph of Jacques Mieses at Cambridge Springs in 1904 and state its height conclusively?

if you are questioning the size of the King used in the tournament, believe me, I saw the real set last Thursday and it is 3 3/4". Don't have to bang it up with the clock. 

I am trying to determine the height of the king in the set(s) seen in front of David Janowski and Jacques Mieses in the photographs of them allegedly taken at the Cambridge Springs tournament in 1904, which does not absolutely mean that they are of the set used at the tournament, just overwhelmingly likely that it is. How could one definitely know that a set seen in 2018 is the same as one that was elsewhere 114 years earlier?

The evidence is circumstantial, partially based on the style of the pieces and the fact that the Knight uppers are an exact match.  The standard Knights for that set were a completely different style (see post #31 and #40 of this thread).  The height of the Waterbury clock from the bottom of the wooden base to the top of the front clock face is 4.75".  Looking at the Mieses photo in post #108, it would appear that the height of the King is significantly smaller than the height of the clock, although I would leave it to each individual to make his or her own assessment.

On the main page of this site: http://cs1904.com/ there is a cropped photo showing the Schlechter-Lasker game along with a back view of the clock.  The height of the back of the clock from the bottom of the wooden base to the top of the circular clock frame is just under 5 inches.  Again, this may help assess the height of the pieces in the picture.

 Photographs are taken from the Walter Penn Shipley collection who documented the tournament along with Hermann Helms and Hartwig Cassell for the American Chess Bulletin, so we know these were the chessmen used in Cambridge Springs 1904 in the images.  Are they the same sets that are in the recent pictures?  Well, the likelihood is very high based on the style of chessmen and the information TenaciousE mentions about the Knights themselves.

It is known that the 8 sets of chessmen, boards, clocks and signatures of all the participants were sold as souvenirs.   Information to date has supported these as being the only known sets from the tournament as best that can be determined. 

Any information otherwise or in support of this research would be welcomed.

You might want to consider the chess board square size as a relative measure although you would guess the squares to be about 2",  it would still be difficult to know exactly.

You may be interested in the ACB v7 1910 that included a supplement to the Rice Gambit

https://books.google.com/books?id=MqBJAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=true

Prof. Isaac L. Rice was a major promoter for Cambridge Springs 1904 and many other events.

The Cambridge set looks really nice. Tempted to buy a set 

Mike, do you think the knights in post #17 in my last image look like those in this stock photo with Marshall?  If so, I would place my set around 1907 based on the image.

Did you get yours yet?  And how do you like the set?

You obviously are clueless about why this thread was started. INot only ia it historic but an original set sells for much more than a Jaques set,  So please do not say more nonsensical comments about this set.  I would take an original 1904 Cambridge Springs set because of the history behind the set. any day over a Jaques set. The last Cambridge Springs set on eBay went for over $1800. I think 8 to 10 sets were made for the tournament. 

Although I can understand your dislike for the rough shapes of the Knights seen in many of the sets marketed through the American Chess Company, these Knights were not used during the tournament and evidence shows the uppers were probably based on a cheaper grade of Jaques chessmen.  As for the angular and other Knight designs seen in the thread, these chessmen started appearing around 1860 and were sold until 1915 (well over 50 years) and became less popular than the Staunton style chessmen.   It's still unknown where these were carved.  One can see an evolution in the variations of the Knights, likely to compete with higher grade and more popular sets of the time as the Staunton style was adopted as standard.

Of course everyone has a different opinion, but I personally find these sets enchanting and the chessmen thought to have been used in the tournament, would simply be priceless.   

If you have evidence for these being patterned after cheaper French Staunton style chessmen, please present it for discussion.  As for Chess Bazaar's reproduction, it has sold out at least twice and currently on backorder, with a well received introduction for interested buyers.

Vintage Jaques is no doubt the standard for collectors, but these sets are desirable for their moment in time.   

You mean these:

https://www.chessbazaar.com/review/product/list/id/1363/category/117/

I guess the attraction is the historical significance.

As are most reproductions.  Note that these are back in stock.