Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

but only the black pieces weighted?  Wouldn't that be a bit odd?  one side weighted and one not.

Ivory pieces would never be weighted. Ivory is pretty dense and feels heavier than wood, so the weight of the two sides may not be that far apart.

That being said, I'm really puzzled by this set. Never seen anything like it, don't know what to make of it...

Hi Greg,

You get to the point as usual.

I had I suppose, occasional, wondered why Staunton sets were never made of ivory and wood as Ebony (for example) is perfect for the dark side and Ivory (rather obviously) for the light side.

European sets in wood (dark side) and bone or ivory (light side) are not uncommon and of course the design of these (due in part to the restrictions of the shapes easily made from bone) were not suitable for weighting, so the problem of whether or not to weight the pieces did not arise. 

So, was the wood side of this set made to match the ivory pieces at some later date? What happened to the red ivory side? 

I did come across half sets in Portobello Road occasionally.  We called them 'divorce settlement' sets, as divorce was the only reason we could come up with for half sets.

So let us assume that this ivory half set was such. A fairly competent turner made the wood side at some later date. Not a professional chess set turner, as he would have chosen a more suitable wood (probably boxwood stained, as boxwood is common in England and on the continent) He was clearly a good wood turner, and someone made a good attempt at the knights too. 

Why Oak? I cannot even begin to guess at a reasonable answer. Did the customer (owner) of the half set of ivories think that Oak would be a similar weight? If so then why weight the wood side? Perhaps the wood side was made and then discovered to be too light. I would think about weighting the set first, or at least drilling out for the lead blanks first at the roughing out stage as gripping the finished blank is almost certain to damage the finish (ask me how I know).

Why not chose one of the many woods with a similar specific gravity to ivory? Anything heavier than 1 (sinks in water) would be better than Oak (lead wood for example is almost 2, (twice as heavy as water)), although not easy to turn.

There are many different varieties of wood lumped under the general heading of 'ebony' all dark and almost all with an SP of 1+ (Just as there are over 500 varieties called 'Rosewood').

It is a bit of a mystery. The seller is unlikely to know the history of the set or perhaps unwilling to admit to that knowledge.

Hey Alan, one of the pics shows the weight in one of the oak pieces, and it appears to have the the marks that I always thought were specific to Jaques. Is there a flaw in my knowledge?

Well Matt,

You got me there for sure.

Yes, I would be prepared to swear that is a Jaques weight.

So all my supposes were wrong then.

Maybe the maker got hold of some Jaques weights. As unlikely as that sounds, it seems more likely than Jaques making some oak pieces that no-one here has seen before 

Matt, 

Much as I would like to think that, I see from the picture that the weight has been trued up in situ just as Jaques turners did.

Beats me.

Just as an Idea. Leonardo da Vinci was known to have many apprentices who studied under "The Master", indeed many versions of the Mona Lisa are known to exist. and it is thought originally some of these copies were created by the apprentices.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2095047/Mona-Lisa-copy-painted-Leonardo-da-Vincis-student-unveiled-Madrid.html

So lets take this one step further: Did Jaques have apprentices who studied under him?? As part of their "exam" they had to create 1/2 of an Ebony and Ivory set, but due to cost constraints they used a cheaper wood -- black oak. The fact that it does not bear the Jaques of London -- a set created by the Master himself -- indicates that this set was created by an apprentice. This theory would also explain why the set looks very much like a genuine Jaques set, because for all intensive purposes it is in fact a Jaques set, but rather one created by an apprentice who created it as part of their final exam.

Just an idea. 

Some sort of prototype or trial is also a possibility I suppose.

With regards to the White pieces - I know next to nothing about ivory, but these appear very white to me, I thought antique ivory would be more yellowed.

Hi Matt,

I agree that ivory does normally yellow with age. It is often a little translucent due to it loosing it's oils. This caused me problems when restoring these sets as even though I was using old stock sourced in the antique markets in various European countries. (this is pre-ban of course and I do not work in ivory now BTW).

I think, on looking at these pieces that they are made by Jaques. With the proviso that all the wood piece are similarly weighted to the one shown. 

I brought the marks on the weights in Jaques sets to Prof Sir Alan Fersht's attention  when he was writing his book on Jaques sets, so although it is a known thing and possible to fake them up I personally doubt this is the case here.

Not only that of course but the carving and turning look 'right'. So I am going to volte-face and say that in my opinion and even though the WK is not stamped it is probably a Jaques set. 

Hello All , Thank you all for your deep insight & input , this really a is a strange chess set ?

Yes it would seem so. What's it worth though? What do you think it'll sell for?

Anybody's guess as to value.

Sometimes a thing can be too rare (if that is the case here) If no one has seen one like it there is no way to ascertain it's street value (so to speak) That is to say there will be no old auction records of sales and the like.

It also has the drawback of not being stamped JAQUES LONDON under the white king. So although it looks like a Jaques set it cannot be verified as such. (Although I think it probably is).

It has also got the (now) drawback of having ivory in it and will not be easy to ship into the US or out of whatever country it is in.

We bought the only known stamped Jaques bone set. We paid about $1400 with fees and postage etc. it has 5 pawns from a different set but I will fix that in time. I thought we got a bargain but we bought it at open auction so the price is the price.

The carton Pierre box is worth somewhere between $500 and $1k The set about the same, unless two wealthy collectors want it. So I am going to say $2k + or- 20%

If a bidding war starts then the sky is the limit.

Also the seller looks a bit sus. Only one sale.

Member from March 18 only and the only feedback is from a commercial pet supplier.

 Regarding Mt Katz's suggestions about Apprentices using cheaper woods and so on.

Although JJ1 was a wood turner, by 1849 the firm had move on from a hands on shop floor type operation and was largely run by a manager. I think they probably either outsourced their chess work or employed turners from the very large pool of experienced workers available in London.

This scenario would at least offer some explanation why the style of knight carving changed so often. If they were subcontracting the carving work out to other firms at (no doubt) the lowest price this would mean they did not have to cover the cost of employing a fill time carver for a probably intermittent work load.

As the firm became more successful (by the turn of the 20th c) The Jaques family were spending a good deal of time swanning about in the Med in a yacht ( This according to JJ5 the present CEO in conversation with me several years ago at the factory in Edenbridge). Although that was not exactly how he put it.

We will probably never know the full story.

Jaques were supposed to be writing a book entitled ' How we taught  the world to play' (they are nothing if not modest  ) However I wonder first if this project will ever be started/finished and what if anything they know of the history of the actual day to day running of the firm during it's early days. Remembering that the old factory and offices in London Town was bombed and burnt during WW2 which was before they relocated to South London (and then eventually to Edenbridge from there.

We can't be certain that it isn't stamped "JAQUES LONDON" on the base, since there is baize on the bases of the ivory pieces - baize that has been applied slightly off centre...

Bidding has reached £869, 3 days to go ...

Are we taking bets on the final price?

I'll go with £1500