64Watch housesProfile details
Bounded primary review combining museum catalogue, current public company/PSC records, maker-estate object account and practitioner-authored paper. Official Frodsham HTML/PDF access failed; personally reviewed indexed excerpts are explicitly distinguished from full text. The named 2018 maker interview supplies primary participant explanations only; no universal invention or independent present performance claim.
- Registered company number
- 00039315
- Registered incorporation
- 1893-07-25
- Kingsley registered significant-control notification
- 2023-01-27
- Whyte registered significant-control notification
- 2016-04-06
- Published wristwatch duration
- 36 hours
- Published wristwatch frequency
- 21600 vibrations per hour
A family name becomes a working workshop
Greenwich’s portrait record for William James Frodsham identifies him as a watchmaker and as the father of Charles Frodsham, who lived from 1810 to 1871. William became a freeman of the Clockmakers’ Company in 1802 and its master in 1836–37. These details place the family in an established London craft community. They are biographical and institutional events, not the incorporation date of today’s company.
Arnold & Son’s retrospective says Charles Frodsham continued the Arnold business after John Roger Arnold died in 1843. That attributed workshop succession helps explain why an Arnold instrument can also bear a Frodsham intervention. It does not prove that the modern companies are one legal entity, or that a historical trade name remained unchanged through every later business transaction.
Evidence: William James Frodsham (1778–1850), BHC2698, Heritage: John Roger Arnold and 1843 business continuation
No. 548 preserves an intervention
The museum’s marine chronometer No. 548, attributed to John Roger Arnold and dated around 1822, makes that relationship concrete. Greenwich records an engraving on the balance cock naming a Charles Frodsham restoration in 1846. Its examination describes conversion from an Arnold escapement to an Earnshaw-type detent as probably undertaken by Frodsham at that time. The word probably is part of the evidence: the physical record supports an interpretation without making every stage certain.
Further layers belong to other dates. The catalogue records a mainspring signature from 1889 and discusses additional alterations and condition. The result is an instrument with a documented working life. A restorer’s name is meaningful precisely because it can identify an intervention rather than the original invention. This is a good starting point for Nour’s service-and-restoration guide, where preservation, repair and replacement need different questions.
Evidence: 548, ZAA0258
The register has a different beginning
Companies House identifies the active private company as Charles Frodsham & Co Limited, number 00039315, incorporated on 25 July 1893. That legal date comes after the historical Charles’s lifetime. The register also records a period under the name C.F. & Co. (Realisations) Limited, between May 1983 and October 1997. These entries belong to the registered entity’s name history; they do not describe every workshop, product or trading arrangement across two centuries.
The register warns that Companies House does not check the accuracy of filed information. It is still a direct public record for the reported company status and dates, provided those claims retain their scope. A history can therefore place the nineteenth-century maker beside a later incorporated company without choosing one date as the answer to all questions about origin.
Evidence: CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: company 00039315, William James Frodsham (1778–1850), BHC2698
Current control is reported in ranges
At this edition’s reading, the public significant-control page lists two active people. Anthony John Kingsley is reported with more than 50% but less than 75% of shares and voting rights; Philip William Tennant Whyte with more than 25% but not more than 50%. The notification dates shown are 27 January 2023 and 6 April 2016 respectively. These are dated notices of registered significant control, rather than independently established acquisition dates.
The thresholds do not reveal an exact complete share table, and older descriptions of who owned the firm should not override the current record. This distinction also keeps a named maker, a workshop collaborator, a director and a controlling shareholder from becoming interchangeable roles.
Evidence: CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: persons with significant control
From the Space Traveller to wristwatch development
The George Daniels legacy site describes the Space Traveller, made around 1982, with his Independent Double Wheel Escapement and both mean-solar and sidereal indications. It is a specific pocket watch with its own design problem. This earlier named work establishes an important reference for reading a modern double-wheel chronometer story; it should not be renamed as a Frodsham calibre or confused with every escapement associated with Daniels.
Derek Pratt’s March 2009 Horological Journal paper, In Breguet’s Footsteps, supplies a contemporary development link. A personally reviewed official index identifies Pratt as author and names a Charles Frodsham wristwatch version of the double-wheel escapement. Full PDF retrieval was unavailable for this edition, so the passage supports that bounded development reference. It does not justify a complete account of the geometry or a universal first-invention claim.
Evidence: The Space Traveller, In Breguet’s Footsteps…
A reconstruction shows the work behind a familiar name
Roger Stevenson’s firsthand workshop account of completing Derek Pratt’s H4 reconstruction gives the collaboration another dimension. Originally published in the Horological Journal in April 2015 and republished with stated permission, it describes the Frodsham team’s work and credits other contributors. The watch was running by January 2014, followed by adjustments before delivery to Greenwich in June. A completed reconstruction is a modern act of making and interpretation, distinct from John Harrison’s original instrument.
The account describes a remontoir recharged every 7.5 seconds and explains difficulties in balancing the springs and power delivery. It also says there was insufficient time for a proper temperature test and reports overcompensation. That candid limit is as instructive as the successful assembly. Neither the interval nor the paper’s bounded workshop timing observations should be transferred to the current wristwatch: they describe the reconstructed H4 and the author’s particular tests.
Evidence: Making the escapement, remontoir and timing for Derek Pratt’s H4 reconstruction, part 3
The Double Impulse Chronometer stays model-specific
The official indexed specification for the Double Impulse Chronometer Wristwatch names a hand-wound, two-train movement with 43 jewels, 21,600 vibrations per hour, a 36-hour duration and stop-seconds. Those are manufacturer statements for this named wristwatch. An alphanumeric calibre designation was not retrieved, so this profile identifies the movement through the model and its published description rather than inventing a code.
The official page’s indexed mechanism language connects the model with Daniels’s double-impulse chronometer escapement. Its first-wristwatch and oil-free claims were not independently verified. Direct page access failed, and no current complete manual or rate certificate was inspected. The evidence can support a named mechanical example and its attributed specifications while leaving exact present operating instructions, detailed geometry and individual performance for further verification.
Evidence: Double Impulse Chronometer Wristwatch
A restrained face can conceal a difficult adjustment
In JX Su’s 2018 firsthand report and named interview, Philip Whyte explained that preserving movement proportions influenced the offset winding-stem position. He also described the tight manufacturing tolerances required when changes affecting one side of a double-wheel escapement can affect the other. These are attributed construction explanations from a participant, read in a dated interview. They illuminate the engineering priorities without establishing that all Frodsham products use this mechanism or that a present example has been independently tested.
The same profile therefore holds several kinds of evidence together: a museum’s record of an old repair, a practitioner’s account of a reconstruction, a registered company and a named wristwatch. Each becomes clearer when its date and subject travel with the claim. The owner’s next questions concern the exact model instructions, service support and timing conditions; Nour’s escapement and standards guides help formulate them without turning a historical reputation into a certificate.
Evidence: A Detailed Look at the Charles Frodsham Double Impulse Chronometer Wristwatch, 548, ZAA0258, Making the escapement, remontoir and timing for Derek Pratt’s H4 reconstruction, part 3, CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: company 00039315, Double Impulse Chronometer Wristwatch
Reader exercise: label the kind of continuity
Make a four-row notebook comparison: No. 548, the Space Traveller, the reconstructed H4 and the Double Impulse Chronometer Wristwatch. For each, write the maker or participant actually named by the source, the dated event, and the mechanism specifically supported. Mark a probable alteration as probable. Mark an indexed-only source as indexed-only, even when its specification sounds precise.
Then compare the two registered control notices with the company’s incorporation date. Ask which describes formation of a legal entity and which records significant control. Do not turn a notification into an acquisition date or a share range into an exact percentage. The exercise is complete when the connections are useful and the unanswered questions remain identifiable; it requires no dismantling, regulation or purchase.
Evidence: 548, ZAA0258, The Space Traveller, Making the escapement, remontoir and timing for Derek Pratt’s H4 reconstruction, part 3, Double Impulse Chronometer Wristwatch, CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: company 00039315, CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: persons with significant control
Sources & reading
- William James Frodsham (1778–1850), BHC2698Royal Museums Greenwich · 2026-10-05
Identifies William as watchmaker, company master in 1836–37, and father of Charles (1810–71). Catalogue of a portrait does not establish modern legal incorporation or complete family business continuity.
- Heritage: John Roger Arnold and 1843 business continuationArnold & Son · 2026-10-05
Arnold house account says Charles Frodsham continued the business after John Roger Arnold died in 1843. This attributed workshop succession is not modern Frodsham incorporation or proof of uninterrupted same-entity trading.
- 548, ZAA0258Royal Museums Greenwich · 2026-10-05
Chronometer John Roger Arnold circa 1822; 1846 Frodsham restoration engraving is recorded. Conversion from Arnold to Earnshaw detent is probable, not certain; later 1889 mainspring and other interventions are separate. No inspection or physical timing performed.
- CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: company 00039315Companies House · 2026-10-05
Read active private-company status and 25 July 1893 incorporation, plus published name history. Companies House warns it does not check accuracy of filed information. Incorporation is not asserted as first workshop foundation or unbroken manufacture; no private addresses copied.
- CHARLES FRODSHAM & CO LIMITED: persons with significant controlCompanies House · 2026-10-05
Two active notified PSCs at reading: Anthony John Kingsley (>50%, <75% shares/votes), Philip William Tennant Whyte (>25%, ≤50%). Notification dates are not independently established acquisition dates. Threshold ranges do not disclose an exact full share table; no birth dates or private addresses copied.
- The Space TravellerGeorge Daniels legacy website · 2026-10-05
Circa 1982 Space Traveller named with Daniels Independent Double Wheel Escapement and mean-solar/sidereal indications. Published precision/rational arithmetic uses inconsistent daily/year units; those figures are not adopted. Distinct object, not Frodsham wristwatch calibre.
- In Breguet’s Footsteps…Derek Pratt / Horological Journal, March 2009 · 2026-10-05
Personally read official PDF index identifying Derek Pratt, March 2009 and a Charles Frodsham wristwatch version of the double-wheel escapement. Full PDF retrieval timed out; no seminar date, exact geometry, complete mechanical analysis or measured performance adopted. A broader unverified Scribd-indexed passage is not evidence for this packet.
- Making the escapement, remontoir and timing for Derek Pratt’s H4 reconstruction, part 3Roger Stevenson / Horological Journal; authorised republication on Quill & Pad · 2026-10-05
Main body credits Roger Stevenson FBHI and states HJ permission. H4 reconstruction, its 7.5-second remontoir and 2014 stages are distinct from Frodsham wristwatch. Author says temperature test incomplete and overcompensation noted; bounded bench results not adopted as universal performance.
- Double Impulse Chronometer WristwatchCharles Frodsham & Co. Ltd. · 2026-10-05
Personally read indexed official data: hand-wound two-train movement, 43 jewels, 21,600 vph, 36-hour duration, stop-seconds. Maker first-wristwatch/oil-free claims not independently verified; no alphanumeric calibre designation or full current manual retrieved.
- A Detailed Look at the Charles Frodsham Double Impulse Chronometer WristwatchJX Su / SJX Watches; named interviewee Philip Whyte · 2026-10-05
Used only for clearly attributed Philip Whyte construction/tolerance explanation and JX Su direct observations at publication. Surrounding retrospective origin, invention and then-ownership assertions are not primary evidence and are not adopted; 2018 ownership descriptions must not replace current PSC record. No exact present availability or wear-rate verification.