David Helmore Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Hi! Quite a long time ago I posted a picture of this concertina on the site. On the label it says Campbells, 103 Trongate - I know from looking at other posts that they were at this address in 1875 (and had moved to a different address by 1890), and that both Jones and Lachenal made concertinas for them. Can anyone shed any light on who might have made this for Campbells? There is nothing else written inside other than the serial number 26910 (throughout). When I did checks on this serial number against Lachenal, it gave an approx date of 1875. So, is it a Lachenal?!...Thanks for your help!! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Read Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 (edited) It looks just like my Jones. My ends have less damage but looking at yours helps me see what's missing on mine. Brittle rosewood seems to be a feature of Jones concertinas! Edited March 27, 2007 by Paul Read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Helmore Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 It looks just like my Jones. My ends have less damage but looking at yours helps me see what's missing on mine. Brittle rosewood seems to be a feature of Jones concertinas! Thanks for the info Paul! Having looked a bit more on the internet it does seem to look more like a Jones. What's confusing me though is the label - from searching through this site I've seen that by 1890 Campbells had moved to 116 Trongate. So the 103 Trongate address would indicate it was before this date (between 1875 and 1890). From looking into serial numbers for Jones, it would seem that this serial number would have been from quite a bit after that date - maybe from around 1900? Is it possible that the serial numbers were put on by Campbells rather than Jones? It would be great to get to the bottom of this mystery!..any help HUGELY appreciated! Thanks for reading folks - another pic attached! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wes williams Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Thanks for reading folks - another pic attached! Dave, That is definitely not a Lachenal action. In terms of serials, we don't know enough about Jones numbering to date from it with anything other than a guess. However, we have had a few reports of strange Jones instruments with numbers around 28000, including a duet, which Jones was said to have hated, suggesting that numbers this high were being allocated at the time he handed over the firm around 1900. So a 26000 series Jones number is not logically impossible around 1875/90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Thanks for the info Paul! Having looked a bit more on the internet it does seem to look more like a Jones. What's confusing me though is the label - from searching through this site I've seen that by 1890 Campbells had moved to 116 Trongate. So the 103 Trongate address would indicate it was before this date (between 1875 and 1890). From looking into serial numbers for Jones, it would seem that this serial number would have been from quite a bit after that date - maybe from around 1900? Is it possible that the serial numbers were put on by Campbells rather than Jones? I'll present an alternate interpretation: What if the "current" estimates of age-vs.-serial number for Jones concertina are significantly off... say by as much as 10 years? The instrument mentioned in this thread has serial #22795, which the estimates in the chart we usually use as a guide would date to about 1895-6. But it's design was patented in 1884, and it's not clear that more than one was ever made. (Others say they have seen such an instrument in the past, but it's not clear to me that they were anything other than multiple sighting of the same instruments at different times in its history.) If Jones considered that keyboard to be a superior design (as his patent implies), I would think he would make one for his own personal use. But if (as I suspect) only one was made and he made it for his own use, why would he wait more than 10 years after producing the design to produce the actual instrument, yet make thousands of other concertinas in the meantime? It makes more sense to me that he would have made the instrument at approximately the same time as he patented it. Dave, your combination of label and serial number also seems to suggest a significant "error" in the dates assigned to Jones serial numbers in Wes' table. I don't know what evidence he used in producing his estimates, though, and it might well be solid enough to disprove my speculation. Wes, can you shed more light on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Dave, your combination of label and serial number also seems to suggest a significant "error" in the dates assigned to Jones serial numbers in Wes' table. I don't know what evidence he used in producing his estimates, though, and it might well be solid enough to disprove my speculation. Wes, can you shed more light on this? And Wes seems to have answered me a minute before my question was posted. In terms of serials, we don't know enough about Jones numbering to date from it with anything other than a guess. However, we have had a few reports of strange Jones instruments with numbers around 28000, including a duet, which Jones was said to have hated, suggesting that numbers this high were being allocated at the time he handed over the firm around 1900. So a 26000 series Jones number is not logically impossible around 1875/90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wes williams Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Dave, your combination of label and serial number also seems to suggest a significant "error" in the dates assigned to Jones serial numbers in Wes' table. I don't know what evidence he used in producing his estimates, though, and it might well be solid enough to disprove my speculation. Wes, can you shed more light on this? Jim, At the top of the tables: I cannot emphasise strongly enough how most of the figures in this table are pure speculation. The table uses the formulae and sources I've quoted above, with some simple interpolation. So the 'evidence' is in the text of the same article, which I'll repeat here, as its fairly short: George Jones detailed his own life story in an account that may be found on the web in Don Nichols Concertina pages. After various jobs in the concertina industry, he went to work for a Mr Austin around 1850. The Horniman has a single item made by Jabez Austin, probably the same person. This is an English, serial no. 161. Jones ended up taking over the company by 1853, which continued until around 1909, although Jones himself retired in 1899, dying in 1919. A more accurate date for the end of the company is 1905, since the company went bankrupt after being left by Jones to his two sons on his retirement. Jones also produced instruments with modified fretwork for other dealers. The highest number Jones I've noted is 27807.So he produced around 500 instruments a year on average.There is also a recorded instrument that may be used as graph improvement point, No 3295 is fitted with 'Broad Steel' reeds, which were introduced by Jones around 1865/70. Although this could have been an earlier instrument, I've used it as an 1865 point in an attempt to quantify Jones's increasing production output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Helmore Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 A huge thankyou to you all - I really appreciate all your information! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Helmore Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 Hi Folks! This one has just ended on ebay - http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...A:IT&ih=011 Ebay 320230161239 This one was sold through Campbells as well and had the original receipt of sale from 1898! I emailed the seller and it seems the receipt was marked 116 Trongate whilst the concertina still had the 103 Trongate label. So, it seems likely the company were using the old labels (certainly up to 1898) even after they had moved to 116. So, the original calculations that Wes did still stand! Anyone here win this one? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marien Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 (edited) No I did not buy it, but, if this is not a Jones (the serial number is 162849), what make is this concertina that already has been sold through Campbell? http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...A:IT&ih=011 edited to correct the typo's I noticed so far. Edited March 27, 2008 by marien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Helmore Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 The one just sold looks like a Lachenal - has the 'English trade mark' on the hand rest. Found out that Campbells sold both Jones and Lachenal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Jowaisas Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 I have a Nickolds 26b with a Campbells 103 Irongate label. Add Nickolds to your list. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Helmore Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 Thanks Greg - that looks a lovely instrument! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingpins Posted March 29, 2008 Share Posted March 29, 2008 My first post so be kind I have a Lachenal & Co concertina produced at 8 Little James St Crays Inn Rd ie 1874 / 1920? The only serial number that I can see is 41402 As can be seen from my photos (if they load properly) the internals are almost the same as my Lachenal Also the name plate is likewise of the same style and even the lettering is similar My impression is that they would both have to have a some connection as to manufacture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now