SH Archive Kulibin's egg-shaped clock presented to Catherine II in 1769

SH.org OP Username
KorbenDallas
SH.org OP Date
2018-03-23 00:29:30
SH.org Reaction Score
15
SH.org Reply Count
12

KD Archive

Not actually KorbenDallas
Active Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2020
Messages
4,691
Reaction score
1,500
Traditional knowledge states: Ivan Petrovich Kulibin (April 21, 1735 – August 11, 1818) was a Russian mechanic and inventor. He was born in Nizhny Novgorod in the family of a trader. From childhood, Kulibin displayed an interest in constructing mechanical tools. Soon, clock mechanisms became a special interest of his. His realizations as well as his prolific imagination inspired the work of many. Additional information available: Wikipedia.

In 1769 Kulibin gave this clock to Catherine II. Well, let us take a look at this clock made some time in the 1760s.

chasykulibina.jpg Kulibin_clock.jpg Kulibin_clock_mechanism.jpg Kulibin_clock_mechanism_2.jpg
This clock is on display at The State Hermitage Museum in Saint-Petersburg, Russia.
So what is so special about this clock ? Let us take a look:
  1. It has 427 parts
  2. It is the size of a goose egg
  3. Indicates time and has a bell for striking the hours
  4. At noon, the clock plays a cantata, dedicated to Catherine and composed by Kulibin himself
  5. It plays strains of music on each quarter-hour
  6. The egg opens and small mechanical figures inside perform the Resurrection scene from the Bible: an angel descended to the Holy Sepulcher, where he surprised and frightened the guards and met The Three Marys
  7. Ornament quality and detail
  8. The only creation of Kulibin to survive the perils of time

The best video I could find appears to be in Russian language. There are quite a few items displayed in that video. Hopefully at some point we will get to reviewing some of those. For right now we are interested in this clock. To save time you can adjust YouTube player to 1:35.


Ok, so now when we established that this is a work of art, let us see the environment and circumstances surrounding the creation of this masterpiece.

According to Russiapedia: Kulibin was born in 1735 into a merchant's family in the town of Nizhny Novgorod. A local psalmist taught him to read, write, and count, and this was the only education he received aside from his own efforts to teach himself. His father, Pyotr Kulibin, wanted him to become a merchant, and accordingly made him work as a vendor, but the young Kulibin was more interested in mechanics and reading than in the family business. He turned his room into a workshop, made mechanical toys and tools for the household and for sale, and dreamed about becoming an engineer.
ivan-kulibin_6-t.jpg
What we get out of this is that Kulibin was taught to read, write and count. He wanted to learn new things and was interested in mechanics and reading. He lived in Nizhny Novgorod. Google Translate of article Development of the culture of the Nizhny Novgorod region in the 17-18th century states that in 1718 a very first local school teaching mathematics was opened. Additionally, in 1721 the Slavic-Greek school was founded, which in 1738 was transformed into a seminary. This is what was available for education to Kulibin. But as it was stated he was schooled by a local psalmist who taught him to read, write, and count. No additional outside education was received. Everything else Kulibin taught himself.

Let us move on to the reading portion. Kulibin enjoyed reading. What books could be available to read in mid-eighteenth century in Russia. Figuring out book availability at the time was not easy. But it appears that books were very rare and only a few were around. Once again Google Translate assisted with an article: How much did the book cost in Russia? I will keep the translation language unchanged: It is clear that very few people could afford to collect the library. Some information on Old Russian libraries has reached us. The largest collections of books in those days were most often with monasteries. The large library was in the Kirillov-Belozersky monastery in the XVII century. There were 473 books. In the Trinity-Sergius Lavra there were 411 books, in the Iosif-Volokolamsky Monastery - 189.

Same source states: In the middle of the 16th century, the first printing house appeared in Moscow. But for a long time, during the 17th and even the 18th century, the copyist's work remained a living, undying profession.

Appears that whatever libraries existed at the time were predominantly monastery based. It is hard to imagine that those libraries maintained extensive collections of books related to engineering, mathematics, physics. Books clearly were very rare and not cheap. So it is very hard to imagine that some boy from a merchant's family would be able to get a hold of the books required to teach him everything required for building complex engineering mechanisms (limited in space).

Let us take a look at what a clock/watch mechanism looks like. Let us not consider this super advanced so-called "ahead of their time" masterpieces of the past. Let us look at a regular clock mechanism from the 18th century.


Clearly there were some much better and more advanced examples of the clocks and watches. But these ones probably represent the most common and less expensive items of those times. They also show a sharp contrast between what was really possible and those "ahead of its time" items.

What existing technology was available to the society at the time? We see too many contrasts. So let us consider government resources. What does every government (let's not bring in the US Federal Reserve controversy here) issues, and maintains, and protects? Correct, it's own money. Well let us take a look at the coins minted in Russia around 1750. While golden and silver coins are clearly of better quality, this is what represents the level of technology available to the most powerful person in Russia (the Empress).


Catherine the Great was probably Great for a reason. Upon seeing Kulibin's egg-clock she probably would have commanded him to fix the quality of her money at the very least. Money is something that everybody has some sort of access to. Those coins had her face on them. The face of the country.

Let us look at the transportation of the 18th century in Russia (and the rest of the world for that matter.) Where is the technology reflected in Kulibin's egg-clock?

15527_original.png ist2.jpg

Well let us move on and look at the egg-clock again. Those parts it consists off are tiny. Tiny and minuscule. Up to the point when the master would need optics to be making them. What tools were available in the 18th century? I will show a few. Some of them are dated 1900s. Even some of those tools are too good to be true, but that we will talk about later.

s-l300.jpg lorch-schmidt-ll-lathe-1900-1920_1024x1024.jpg 130524-72.jpg 2056-antique-watchmakers-topping-tool-for-sale-circa-late-19th-century.full.jpg 47e837373067a30751dabf9fc5490a84--watchmaker-tools-lathe-tools.jpg 1fd84b7a2da684c30df17dcc8d3f1d26.jpg s-l640.jpg

Now tell me. How do you make the below with the above?

Kulibin_clock_mechanism_2.jpg


So what does it take today to become a watch/clock builder? I know nothing about watch making, so I asked Google. One of the schools provided was The British School Of Watchmaking. Let's see.

The WOSTEP 3000 Hour Program

This course is centered upon preparing the students for employment as watch repairers in autonomous roles. Graduates are able to service, adjust (repair) and encase various products (both mechanical and electronic) available on the contemporary market. Watch repairers understand and apply various theoretical knowledge to repair situations where they may not have encountered a certain calibre or type of repair previously. Watch repairers are able to evaluate, adjust or manufacture certain components where necessary in order to resolve repairs.

The delivery strategy is based both on theoretical and practical elements.
  • Courses taking place every two years (e.g. 2018, 2020, 2022 etc.).
  • Internationally recognized by the watch industry.
  • Recognized by the Convention Patronale (CP) as being equivalent to the Swiss CFC 4 years watch repair educational program.
  • 3000 Hours, full time program. The course is taught over two academic years, Monday to Friday 8:30am to 5pm (37.5 hours per week).
  • Courses begin September with applications closing 1st March (2018, 2020, 2022 etc.).
  • Graduates can be expected to be competent in:
  1. Encasing
  2. Movement exchange
  3. Servicing (quartz, manual, automatic and chronograph movements)
  4. Advanced adjustment and regulation techniques
  5. Quality control
  6. Micromechanics
Hmm. The 2 year course prepares the students to become repairers. Does not say watch makers in there. Some other watchmaking school states the following:
Our Certified Watchmaking Course (3,000-Hour WOSTEP Program) begins with eight months of micromechanics. This forms the groundwork upon which you will continue to build a lifetime of learning. Our students learn the basics of filing, sawing, drilling, heat-treating, turning and all other operations necessary to manufacture parts of a watch such as a winding stem and balance staff. Our fully equipped micromechanics lab gives our students the perfect environment to learn and apply advanced machining operations common to our industry. The focus of the micromechanics curricula is to develop enhanced hand, eye, and thinking skills of the ultimate watchmaking tool – the watchmaker!

curriculum.jpg

This awesome word I noticed is Micromechanics:
  • Micromechanics (or, more precisely, micromechanics of materials) is the analysis of composite or heterogeneous materials on the level of the individual constituents that constitute these materials.
Below is the contemporary 21st Century watch mechanism which is impossible to build without the knowledge of micromechanics.

top-mouvements.jpg

But Kulibin self educated himself into building the below prior to 1769. With the only difference that his watch has a theater and actors built into it.

Kulibin_clock_mechanism_2.jpg Kulibin_clock_mechanism.jpg
If you have a watch/clock making friend, ask him or her what it would take today (with contemporary tools, optics, education, resources) in 2018 to match Kulibin's creation? You might be very surprised.

Summary of my endeavors here: while there are quite a few highly advanced and very old items available for our inspection in various museums of the worlds, there is a reason why those items are considered to be made "ahead of their time". There is a reason why they are being kept in those museums and why they are being valued and treasured. Those are abnormality. And they are clearly explained by the contemporary historians as achievements. Their existence means that they were made. We don't really know how, but if they exist it was achievable with our technology.

I strongly disagree with this. Were such items built 250 years ago? Quite possible they were. But they were built by the people who had institutional knowledge of constructing things like this. They had proper tools and adequate education for building items of comparable qualities. They were fairly comparably advanced human civilization which was annihilated a few hundred years ago. In some areas hey might have been even more advanced than ours. I will keep on providing circumstantial evidence of the existence of such a civilization.

Did Kulibin build this clock? If he did, he belonged to that civilization. Or may be his assignment in history is to be the creator of this beautiful masterpiece.
Note: This OP was recovered from the Maxine archive.
Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: MoonWatcher
Date: 2018-07-18 12:02:38
Reaction Score: 5
Perhaps Kulibin didn't make the clock. Maybe it was left over from a prior civilization, and he just passed it off as his own creation
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: LordAverage
Date: 2018-08-06 18:30:19
Reaction Score: 1
Tartanian relic ;)
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2018-08-06 20:10:11
Reaction Score: 7
Whoever made it, this clock is a fine example of what the regular technology was in a not so distant past. Makes you wonder what else we don't get to see.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: 0harris0
Date: 2019-01-05 14:55:28
Reaction Score: 3
not 100% on topic... but how old and worn/ damaged is that cobble street? especially between the rails!! and those lines must've been constructed fairly contemporarily with when the photo was taken, right?!? :p
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ScottFreeman
Date: 2019-01-07 06:01:21
Reaction Score: 5
Although the thread is a bit older I thought this might give some comparison to how difficult the above mechanism might have been. Some time back I'd seen a recreation attempt (so far unfinished as far as I know)


There are about 8ish episodes of him working through layers and parts and when I first watched it I was pretty impressed. Then I remembered from some engineer the opinion that a civilization's advancement can be measured in the tolerances of it's engineering. Adding another zero to a tolerance of .1 suddenly becomes .01, so how advanced were the people who reduced the Antikythera Mechanism(effectively) to the size of a goose egg?

Plus, if you're like me, you'll enjoy watching all this work done by hand by someone who obviously enjoys it.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Timeshifter
Date: 2019-01-12 10:22:19
Reaction Score: 6
So Kulibin was a master...

Draughtsman
Architect
Mechanic
Metalurgist
Craftsman
Musician
Engineer
Etc

Isn't it strange that all of these historical genius people are masters of so many trades?

Best guess? Either he was part of the hidden hand, or it is a discovered artifact from a previous time & he has passed it off as his own (he isn't the 1st to do so).

Always makes me laugh when we are believed as being techologically advanced these days. I believe we do things the hardest way possible, previous civilizations new the easy 'natural' ways of creating & doing seemingly complex things.

I belive we are dumb, we simply cannot figure out what our most recent ansestors could :)
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ScottFreeman
Date: 2019-01-12 16:20:33
Reaction Score: 6
I'm not so sure about 'dumb'. I've felt that if we could start students on the material of the 1800s and early 1900s we could skip Einstein and go right back to Schauberger and Tesla...maybe some of this could come back out rather than having it all dribbled back to us slowly over 200 years with the always included 'rent' of the technology.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Bemused
Date: 2019-12-18 00:11:50
Reaction Score: 12
That is a beautiful work of art. It's complexity is a pleasure to see. I am a goldsmith and know how difficult it would be to make. Over the years I have noticed that most jewellery stores are run by the watch repairers, not the goldsmiths. It is getting more and more difficult to find someone who can fix an old clock. I was under the impression that in about 1760 there was a competition to create a reliable time piece that would work on a boat so mariners could accurately calculate longitude when at sea. Seafaring was revolutionized by the British clock-maker who invented the first practical marine chronometer.

1576627810156.png

This fiction is coincidentally the same time frame. I look at all the beautiful art and architecture from the past and am amazed how far we have fallen. It is like the recent reset is the creation of money. Nothing is made well because no one can spend a long time making things anymore. Everyone, except a very rich few, can afford to take that time and still be able to live and eat and pay taxes. They do not make art. They buy it as an investment to make more money. This is my first post. I hope it works.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: EUAFU
Date: 2019-12-28 14:54:01
Reaction Score: 3
How many watches did he make of this type? Probably zero. How many he found, probably just this one.

The truth is that if he had created this watch there would be others to show. Let's assume this was his Magnus Opus. Where are your previous creations and where are the later creations?
Okay, some people can spend their lives creating one piece, but this is unusual.
And no, I do not doubt that a human being is capable of doing wonderful things, but this only happens with proper tools and training and I do not need to talk about the time it takes to reach a high level in any activity. And from what the topic shows he had none of that available.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: igneous
Date: 2020-05-26 11:11:51
Reaction Score: 6
IVAN P. KUBLIN
Annotation 2020-05-26 062742.jpgAnnotation 2020-05-26 062334.jpgAnnotation 2020-05-26 062305.jpg

This guy! The son of a flour merchant who seemingly invented: clocks, optical telegraph, wheelchair, self-propelling boat, elevator screw, bridges, The Egg Thing, spotlight . . . and a bunch of other things! In addition, there is one documented incident of "needing an honest person" for a court case so they brought in Ivan to be a lawyer. Ivan made a microscope and an electric car - things already around but he improved them for his own personal use. He did some accounting for the king in his spare time. He fixed the famed "Golden Peacock Clock" that was brought to him by Potemkin to fix. Where did Potemkin get it? The Byzantines!!

Ivan has an asteroid named after him. He didn't smoke, didn't drink, was married three times and had 12 children. He was a terrible speller! He wrote poetry and dressed like he was from another world. (!) At the end of his career he had been fired and lived in poverty. This was due in part to the death of his benefactor, Catharine the Great. Apparently her heir felt threatened by the autodidact and genius.

Somewhere in the sources it says he created his first watch parts using a pocketknife. ! ! !

Annotation 2020-05-26 063413.jpg 1590489810620.png Annotation 2020-05-26 063341.jpgAnnotation 2020-05-26 063245.jpgAnnotation 2020-05-26 063014.jpg Annotation 2020-05-26 062525.jpg 1590489621609.png

". . . In 1801 Kulibin was fired from the academy and returned to Nizhny Novgorod, where he designed a method of sailing upstream and built a ship which he had started to design back in 1782. Tests indicated that such ships were indeed feasible, but they were never used. During the same time, Kulibin had projects on using steam engines to move cargo ships, on creating salt mining machines, different kinds of mills, pianos and other projects. Kulibin died in 1818 after spending his last years in poverty. "

Ivan Kulibin - Alchetron, The Free Social Encyclopedia

". . . Kulibin came up with the idea of how to make barges move without ox, horse or human haulers. His idea was to use two wheels with blades. The current, rotating the wheels, transmitted energy to the shaft - the anchor rope was wound, and the vessel pulled itself to the anchor using the energy of the water.

In 1782, loaded with almost 65 tons of sand, it proved reliable and much quicker than a vessel drawn by oxen or barge haulers.

In 1804 Kulibin built a second version, which was twice fast. Nevertheless, the Department of Water Communications under Alexander I rejected the idea and banned funding - the barges were never distributed. Much later ships that pulled themselves to the anchor, using steam engines appeared in Europe and the U.S."

5 inventions of the ‘Russian Archimedes’ Ivan Kulibin that changed the world

". . . Despite the workload, Kulibin always found time to study serious inventions. In 1791, he designed the original four-wheeled and three-wheeled “scooter” designs. Their length was assumed to be about 3 meters, travel speeds up to 30 kilometers per hour. Some of their parts were very original. Indeed, none of the descriptions of the eighteenth-century “wheelbarrow” contain such details as a flywheel for eliminating uneven travel, disc bearings, a gearbox that allows you to change the travel speed. For unknown reasons, the master destroyed his invention, there are only ten drawings made in 1784-1786. In addition, there are twenty-two sheets of drawings entitled “Lifting Chair”. This "elevator" for the aged empress Kulibin made in 1795, it was set in motion by the work of the screw. "

Russian nugget. Ivan Petrovich Kulibin

". . . He created "mechanical leg" for the officer who lost limb in Ochakov assault, will form the basis of the current prostheses. The same applies to the definition of string polygon method, without which there would be no such openwork and a very strong modern bridges. And even more — the basis for the construction of Beijing's famous stadium "Bird's Nest", which today are competing Olympians, the ideas expressed in the XIX century Kulibin. But construction machinery, transport, communications, agriculture and other industries hold great evidence of his work. Widely known wonderful designs IP Kulibin in bridge construction, far ahead of all that was known to the world practice of his day. "

A talented self-taught for the benefit of Russia — Encyclopedia of safety


". . . Great inventor died on August 11, 1818 in utter poverty because he spent everything he had on futile attempts to invent a perpetual motion machine. "

Ivan Kulibin – Russian inventor - Russian Personalities


1590491066436.png

http://oaji.net/articles/2017/4586-1513287129.pdf

1590491012636.png 1590491139794.png 1590491194363.png

IN SUMMATION: Was Kulibin a Russian Leonardo Da Vinci? Merely a talented individual? Perhaps!!

But this research brings up the connection between the Byzantine inventors and the Russians. I'm not sure that it means anything but it sure was interesting looking up this guy. He was seemingly limitless in his ability to perceive and solve problems. He is recognized now for his genius and, like all important people, has his face on a postage stamp.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: wild heretic
Date: 2020-05-26 12:28:44
Reaction Score: 1
Bingo. Thats it. Nobody makes one amazing clock without practice and doing lots of others. There are only two possibilities here i can think of.
1. Witchcraft, magic, summoning, automatic writing etc. He got instructions directly to his brain to make that through a spell. Hence all his other socalled expertise in other areas.
2. He was a merchant (ie pawnbroker) so naturally he was sold this clock by someone who had inherited it or found it or bought it or even made it etc. He passed it off as his own work to the empress to get title and land.

Number 2 is probably more likely imo.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: igneous
Date: 2020-05-26 12:40:36
Reaction Score: 1
Given the extensive public breadth and width of his documented inventions (see my post above), I think we are dealing closer with number 1? Some of the stuff he did was small and not as public, but just as clever - like inventing a chair-lift for the elderly Catharine so she could retire in her palatial master bedroom.

There is definitely a common theme emerging: Unknown person of humble upbringing and station that exhibits some crazy skill out of the blue with no documented reasons or even speculation (which is even weirder to me).

Let's say it is "instructions to the brain" . . .. who wrote the instructions?
 
<br/>
Isn't it strange that all of these historical genius people are masters of so many trades?<br/>
<br/>
Best guess? Either he was part of the hidden hand, or it is a discovered artifact from a previous time &amp; he has passed it off as his own (he isn't the 1st to do so).<br/>

I strongly agree. someone on this forum recently shared a link to a Russian blog that is one of the best resources I've ever encountered, other than SH, for the way the masons have falsified history. This is one of his posts on Egypt/Napoleon and the faking of the Sphinx:

Египетский морок. Часть 4. В египетскую кампанию Наполеона Великие пирамиды еще строились

I believe it's pertinent to the thread as they employ the same method to the present day, i.e. fake an entire history, documentation, artefacts etc etc then simply backdate them.

I personally find the apparent ease with which they can do so, as detailed here and on the Russian blog, to be breathtaking. The gall!! It's too sinister for words.

The fact such items ^^ could have been manufactured later than stated is at least a possibility in some cases. Not trying to detract from such items as this or the Droz dolls; they are superbly exquisite. I believe the Jacquet Droz dolls are as old as stated.

I would just like to wonder how/why this possibility can be taken off the table so quickly in certain instances. As with some of the most famous artworks in history, there often seems to be no provenance whatsoever, or suspicious centuries-long gaps that defy probability, or just a muddy sort of 'expert' concensus that one is not supposed to question.

Thank you to whoever shared the Gorojanin blog link also.

tl;dr
how can one know this item wasn't manufactured far later than stated
 
Tips
Tips
Please respect our Posting Rules.
Back
Top