STYLE Staunton chess sets

[r.van.der.veur]

This is thread to use for Staunton chess sets

[houseofstaunton]

Hi Team! If you have any questions about Staunton chessmen or Jaques, are considering a purchase, or simply want some background, please feel free to ask me. I'd be glad to help if I can. Frank fcamaratta@mindsrping.com

[wisetrout]

Hi everybody, Frank Camaratta, who posted ahead of me, has taught be everytning I know about Jaques Staunton chess sets. I starting collecting a few years back and have now moved into restoration as a hobby. Frank has also helped me with restoration questions. I look forward to visiting with everybody. I also love to flyfish, thru my log-in name. Wisetrout Mark Blair Houston, TX

[wisetrout]

Hi everybody, Frank Camaratta, who posted ahead of me, has taught me everytning I know about Jaques Staunton chess sets. I starting collecting a few years back and have now moved into restoration as a hobby. Frank has also helped me with restoration questions. I look forward to visiting with everybody. I also love to flyfish, thru my log-in name. Wisetrout Mark Blair Houston, TX

[wisetrout]

I would like to warn anybody who is bidding on the Marshall 1910 set currently listed on ebay that the set has a major restoration to the top half of the ebony Queen, and this restoration is of some light wood stained black.(It may be boxwood, but I don't think so) Mark

[chesspurr]

i am collecting non jaques staunton type sets. i have a particular interest in unusual knights , like the british chess company sets as an example. if any group member has similar interest in such wooden sets feel free to mail me . guy.lyoms@ntlworld.com

[dancing_with_volves]

Cut & paste from the CHAT thread disphania (196 ) 05/14/07 07:37 AM (#515 of 522) Hi All, I was wondering about Jaques Staunton sets made between 1839 and 1849. I have seen a few references stating Mr. Cook made the design in 1839 but didn't register it until 1849. Do you suppose prototype sets were made during that decade? If so, do any still exist? Opinions and thoughts ? Thanks, Charlie chessspy (2 ) 05/14/07 08:08 AM (#516 of 522) Hi, charlie, You raise an interesting question, and sometimes the questions are more important than the answers, There is a good deal of confusion about who actually is responsible with saddling the chess playing world with this design, Certainly Nat. Cook(e) registered the design, however he was John Jaques brother-in-law, and its possible that with the family connection, that he just got the job of registering it. What is certain is that Howard Staunton was merely the celebrity "talent" employed on commission to promote it. Please ask more of these interesting questions Alan D.

[dancing_with_volves]

computojon (271 ) 05/14/07 12:46 PM (#518 of 522) Frank Camaratta is an acknowledged expert (probably the acknowledged expert) on the whole topic, but I can respond to parts of the question. It is pretty certain that 1849 was the first year of manufacture. As one proof, I am fortunate to have the original Illustrated London News (ILN) newspapers for 1849, and the earliest advertisement for the Staunton chessmen was in the September 29, 1849 edition. (This is all contary to the Jaques website, which lists 1847 as the first year of manufacture. It wasn't.) As for earlier prototypes, I don't know about pre-1849 prototypes, but I do have an early Jaques bone prototype for the Paulsen ivory sets: http://www.crumiller.com/chess/chess_pages/staunton/JaquesBoneStauntonSet.htm ...which doesn't pertain much to the question, but it's interesting anyway. rickofricks (696 ) 05/14/07 02:33 PM (#520 of 522) I've always read 1949 as the Copyright date of the Staunton men, but haven't researched it. Nice relic you've got there -- the first advertisement. cpe1991 (54 ) 05/14/07 02:58 PM (#521 of 522) Jon It is strange that the Jaques site list 1847 when the design lozenge is clearly 1 March 1849. Most websites have a mishmash of misleading information. Michael Mark in his little book on British Chess Sets seems to have an authoritatively researched article. There is a very odd report of contracts between Staunton and Nathaniel Cook in 1852 and a court case involving Jaques in the late 1930's claiming that a Staunton set was in existence 50 years earlier than the registration. http://www.chess-live.com/cp/view.jsp?site=uscf&page=Newsletter%202005-06-24 Alan knight_knight_zzz (80 ) 05/14/07 03:43 PM (#522 of 522) Alan of cpe1991: As a reader of many of these threads, I clicked onto the link you supplied in your response to Jon of computojon. Thank you for the link. Very interesting! The other John - from Vermont.

[chesspurr]

cpe1991 hi alan i note the hammond refrence to the wren ivory set ... which he swore under oath was 150 years old .. in 1940 court case ??? that makes the set 1790s ???? has anyone got a picture of the wren ivory set ?

[cpe1991]

Guy Surprising things happen. There has been much lying under oath in such cases where it is not possible to prove matters. We also know that Staunton hand signed the first sets that were produced in 1849/50 even though the Wren site claims the contract between Jaques and Staunton was in 1852. There are lots of erroneous statements on the websites, which they would correct if they read Frank's site. Alan

[chesspurr]

cpe1991 hi alan lying under oath ? i think you mean economy with the truth ..... ;) it would be mighty interesting to see that set anyway. as one can only learn how the inspiration for the staunton pattern came from. the idea of cook working out the complete pattern from scratch seems rather shaky , when we consider modern sets close to exact copies with minor adjustments ,of the older antique sets. in fact one wonders how many sets are complete origonal creations from zero.

[cpe1991]

Guy It is thought by some that John Jaques was the designer and Cook registered it for him. Jaques was a very experienced ivory turner and knew how to simplify existing designs to make them cheaper to produce. The Elgin marbles were the inspiration for the knights. It is an example of evolution than creation in one go! Alan

[chesspurr]

cpe1991 hi alan i like the idea of asking questions on chess history , even if there are no easy answers. i am intrigued by the staunton design , ...and would love to know if there was an existing set or sets that jaques/cook used for inspiration in creating their masterpiece..... its one of the reasons why i have collected a few non jaques wooden ,bone ,ivory , staunton types ,as i can examine these sets to try and get a handle on understanding pattern evolvement. it would be a very interesting discussion if we could get inputs from the many including experts on how the jaques and the staunton pattern evolved. the knights heads issue is even more interesting when you see non jaques sets as some look completely different but work so well on those sets too. i have st george sets with rooks looking closer to staunton pattern ones than st george in a curious way. the set i am thinking of in my collection is so interesting that i will bring it to bloomsbury for discussion. it has been documanted that the patent only lasted for three years on the jaques staunton design , so what happened with competitors in the 1850s ..... was the design so unknown that it blew the opposition away ? or was staunton so important that his promotion of the set made its success a certainty ? i note the st george sets were in general unweighted , and most jaques are weighted ... did this effect the movement towards this pattern? there is alot to discuss if we want to do so as a group ,and i sure hope this thread becomes as interesting as the regence one was months ago. pictures and links to possible sets that might have influenced the creation of the jaques staunton pattern , might be far more possible today ,due to the internet ,than before.

[cpe1991]

Guy The early smaller and largest selling Jaques boxwood and ebony Jaques, as well as all the ivory, in hinged mahogany/cedar or CP boxes were unweighted. The 4.4" club size were all weighted, but you had to pay extra for weighting the 3.5". The 3.5" sets in the slide lid sets were also generally unweighted throughout the 19th century. But, they are all nicely balanced for playing with because of their wide bases, and they do not get splits in the bases from the lead. Alan

[chesspurr]

cpe1991 hi alan the jaques knights have variations ,not least the drop jaw type , and when one looks at british chess company knights heads too ..... it gets mighty interesting . take a look at the celluloid or zyolite heads on the BCC set i mailed you before and see what you think . is it possible that the elgin marbles idea influenced the BCC makers ? do you know of a link to see the origonal elgin marbles carving ?