Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

Ok. As I said price is everything. What was the price as the set is a mixed set. DesperateKingWalk

Ok my bad i took this as a question .

The earliest known chess pieces (chatrang) were found at Afrasaib, near Samarkand in Uzbekistan. What was found were seven pieces consisting of a king, chariot, vizier, horse, elephant, and 2 soldiers. made of ivory. It is dated about 760 AD.https://mexicoonlinepharmacy.org/

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-books-equipment/jaques-antique-chessmen-72879489

MCH818 heres the man with the best Anderssen chess sets .

Amazing how a little "Twerp" continues to try to suck the pleasure out of someone's prized possessions and then goes on to make out like they're so innocent and knowledgeable.

Instead of subtly knocking such a vintage gem,it would be more appropriate to add a few more posters to your room...Perhaps Led Zeppelin and The Rolling Stones could take up more of the crowded walls.You've added everything else...Why not some Classic Rock?

@lighthouse, regarding your note of the c. 1863 Anderssen set from Jacques-lover, I'm seeing a difference in carving between the QN and the KN, the former sporting a more graceful, flowing around the neck versus the latter's more muscular. I suspect this might have been intentional, as I've seen "individualized" knights (if I might use this term) in older sets. Can you elaborate on this topic?

it was  MCH818 who made this point not me ? but yes Jacques do have many kinds of designs with in it own set's , Jacques-lover is a member on here so you could pm him for more details of his many Anderssen sets .

Haven't seen that Chavet pic before. That really throws a fascinating light on how the large scale production of sets was achieved . It suggests that even a completely original set could have several idiosyncratic features.

Jaques employed a number of turners and mass produced pieces in larger batches. One turner made kings, one made queens etc. Knight carvers - just like today - were most likely not employed by a single manufacturer, but worked on a freelance basis for various makers. At least this seems to have been the case in the first half of the 19th century, when you take a look at sets from Calvert, Lund etc. Why should it have been different with Jaques? And there is more: each Master turner had apprentices who worked for him. And occasionally even work from journeymen was bought in. So a significant number of different people potentially worked on the same pieces, which landed in the same batch, just like in the Chavet example above. And sets were then assembled subsequently from these batches. Even though I am convinced that Jaques had a superior quality control compared to others in the 19th century, a certain variation and range was inherent and accepted. However, I am also aware that these arguments were occasionally brought forward by commercial sellers to justify larger variances, which could have been replacements. That is a problematic behaviour. Nevertheless, even original Jaques sets are not in all cases precise for the above reasons. They were not made by robots, but handcrafted by living human beings. I find that quite charming and do not mind seeing that.

Thanks for the input all, I find this is a really interesting and insightful discussion. Also - my comments that follow can only be taken in the context of observation - I have never seen nor held Jaques sets in the flesh.
In the vintage sets that I own, I find the subtle variations within a set and pieces charming but subtle they must be.
What ‘subtle’ means to me may be different from others …. A slightly out of line chisel mark here, some light lathe marks there for example. Or, perhaps one ear is not as hollow as another on a knight or the shape of the mouth or teeth are ever so slightly different.
But I am a ‘collector’ of sorts … so, I prefer the friend/family test… albeit, I am looking at the detail - they are not. So if they see differences - it is bothersome and furthermore, if the variations are so big that I can’t unsee them - it’s frustrating.
Variations that fit into this category are pawns not the same height (so that the beautiful front pawn line is broken by the differential) or different width bases in the same pieces or and more obviously, pieces of different completely different design that are obvious replacement - I had that in two different rooks once and when I noticed it - it bothered me until I gave it away.
And yet, to show my own quirky biases - I like my vintage “Lardy’ish” pieces that have tool marks on top of the royals!
We all have our own tolerances and thus, I don’t believe it is a back and white argument - what some see as a variation that reduces value, others will see as historical markers that they are prepared to pay more for.
As long as it is advertised accurately and people know what they are getting - it’s a transaction between a buyer and a seller to whom both are hopefully happy with their transactions.
This is where modern turned sets are so fraught - often they are advertised as flawless and thus, we expect perfection and yet, perfection in a hand made wooden object it a lofty goal; hard to achieve.
As it was ‘back in the day’ but I couldn’t be happier with my Chavets that have there very subtle kinks … or my Dogfaces … same as I like many of my modern sets that are close to perfection in their carving.
To each their own. 👍

May be you should ask DesperateKingWalk as he seem's to be all knowing on Jacques of London without having any real sets of his own or antique English chess sets ? Going on your photos  MCH818 can not see much different with in the knights designs also check with Jaques-lover as he has the same set .

Lighthouse.....You just made my weekend.

MCH....Don't even give it a second thought! If you're not happy with that gorgeous set(the Knight "thing" is no biggie) you'll be suspicious of almost any authentic vintage gem you are lucky enough to acquire.

Do you remember when desperate retouched powder's maney horse on the armrest in Hermann's knight's on parade thread?

"That is a great looking knight. But the noise in the image was making me deaf. And that knight deserves better."

Powder's photo was a celebration. Desperate's result was an exposure of incredible nit-picking. I gave it a smiley because it is just so disarming. I can't help but embrace it.

Recall the recent St.Louis pics of championship players. Fair snap shots, nice ones in between, alongside some of the clumsiest poses around and I totally embrace this.

Now the Frankenstein set ramblings. It is just a different sensibility. Meaning to hammer finesse into us, forgetting about the equilibrium of other guys' sensibilities? Desperate, we are all tuned already, ourselves. Show some more curiosity if you will.. Won't you?

On topic, when I saw your first post, MCH, I was thinking cool, so that is 'Anderssen'. And oh, okay, that seem to be 3+1 knights to me. One of the white knight's has a pointier mane and sits on a stouter block, the 3 others have a different corner of the eye.

So I took it that this was communicated and all good. A guy like desperate of course is underwhelmed and cannot help but bringing up Frankenstein. It is fun, guys! You'd have to embrace 'Frankenstein', if only for the hyperbole! Desperate, this is a super nice set! And it has flaws, but who are we to not take care of them and hold them dearly to our hearts? We need this knight to have the rest of it! A dancing community of chess pieces. Anderssen would laugh! Farthest away from being a monster it's a garden, I hope.

What desperate dose not realize there is members on here who have antique English chess sets be it of the original Jaques kind & others not repros . I put his berating down to jealousy over  MCH818 sets going on his tone . All he has to show up to now, Is his bargain basement sets from amazon it seems along with many digital photos of pasted GM which is out of copyright or maybe not ?

Mate - it’s a beauty. Enjoy it for not only the pieces that are now in your possession but the journey and relationships made to purchase it. It’s now part of the story of the set and indeed, your story when you explain how you purchased it.

I imagine, if it was on display - most people (finicky collectors like us aside) would not notice the differences and if they did - you would explain the story. You may also explain how some people don’t like it for these differences too - and again, that debate is now part of the story….

Of course, we all want wonderful feedback but alas - diversity of thought is part of the human condition - let it ride.
With all the weird and wonderful sets I have purchased - I know many don’t like them and to be honest - there’s numerous I haven’t liked myself … but they are part of the way I am learning about this hobby.
For example, I know people won’t like my Lewis, or believe I paid too much … so be it - I value the relationship I have made with a gent from Ireland who is making them for me, like I value the relationship I made with a gent from France when buying the Chavets and a gent from Germany when buying a Phillipines set…

It is what it is and what is most important is that you enjoy the set and that we, in this virtual world, enjoy seeing them (or not 😊 ).

Cheers for posting and as I always say - if I’m ever in your neck of the woods, or so many others on this forum - I hope we could enjoy game and a chat over a beer or wine or whiskey or water …

It's a beautiful gem of a set and many of you folks have wonderful chess pieces as well.

Myself personally...I have gone a bit overboard with the back & forth with this desperate guy.I never should have done so,but almost everyone on this forum has made an attempt to be complimentary and supportive of one another.When someone pretty much consistently(if you look at a few threads) tries to criticize someone's personal possessions,which may be family heirlooms or gifted by loved ones it just is down right rude! Even if we think someone got ripped off,why open a pandora's box & hurt feelings?

To me,there is a desire to be popular,or have some kind of popularity/credibility here.That "is" really what's at play in this case,imo.

Disagree,or try to let him know he's off base and you get the childish emojis and laughable insults.

That's how I see this particular member....Not a very nice person is the bottom line.OK! Enough of my college psychology major,but I bet I'm not far off.

@magictwanger, I totally agree. Zero sets, zero authority. His only competence seems to be spreading negativity. My advice to everybody here: ignore him.

I feel I want to chip in here with my own 10 cents.

In these days where it sometimes becomes a crime to just speak your mind it's important to stay open for different views. Let's refrain from public flogging. I welcome Desperate to keep posting his own opinions. Let's agree to sometimes disagree. Hopefully while keeping a kind heart.

The way I'm wired,if I got an apology I'd be perfectly fine forgiving whomever, as long as it was heart felt. Too much hate in the world already.

These forums are for "friends who love the game and the various sets,boards,clocks etc"...."Friends" being the operative word!

I have nothing against other opinions, quite the opposite. But I have yet to read a factual argument to support a dissenting opinion. To stay with the specific example, I have only read that the set is not an original, but a Frankenstein set. No argument, no proof. From this I conclude that this is not about opinion at all, but only about sentiment against others. I myself have regular discussions with other collectors. We are often not of the same opinion, but we engage in an exchange of arguments from which everyone benefits. Here I observe the opposite. This is not an exchange of opinions from which anyone benefits. It is only about spreading negativity.

Hey,I understand that too,but to be honest,we don't know what someone's life stresses are and the things that drive one to be rude,on a site where we're all basically strangers.It's very easy to just keyboard whatever one wants to,within reason.No harsh language etc.

Maybe getting out frustrations from work,illness,family issues or whatever leads to what we see here. Personally,I get an apology and I'm good to go. Even in this case and I have been blasted by this fellow in past threads.....One mouse click when I turn off the computer and I forget what goes on here. It's just a fun website.

Why am I so forgiving? Well,The Giants finally won a football game.My favorite teams always improve my state of mind.