James Bond Watches Blog

Shortly after I began this investigation of conflicting ownership claims regarding the George Lazenby James Bond Rolex 6238 Chronograph, this photo was sent to me by a fellow in Europe: He believes that it is the actual wristwatch worn in "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" (1969)

It’s funny how often some watch guys who’d otherwise have no interest or respect for Ian Fleming take refuge in regurgitating the Bond-author’s words when pushed to actually substantiate their claims.

Specifically, arguing the notion that Mr Fleming seriously advocated that any claim made must be unconditionally accepted until proven untrue.

A standard that would allow any online seller to claim that his Omega Speedmaster offered up at auction is, in fact, the Buzz Aldrin moon watch.

“How do you know it isn’t?”

Perhaps a bit more history would be helpful here.

The Ian Fleming citation we’re talking about here refers to a throw-away line he’d included as little more than coloring in an otherwise straightforward time-of-day reference.

“When the big hands of Moscow’s three hundred electric clocks reach the hour of six….”* (Emphasis added.)

Upon contemporaneous review, prior to publication, colleague Robin Kinkead asked him: “How do you know there are three hundred?”

To which Mr Fleming flippantly replied: “How do you know there aren’t?”

Now, seriously: Does anyone actually believe that Ian Fleming intended this as a standard by which all facts should be validated?

For those who do, perhaps it’s a good thing that the United States government has stepped up with oversight “to protect the innocent.” I am not a lawyer. Nor do I play one on TV. But it’s my understanding that “truth in advertising” laws trump cliched misquotes of Ian Fleming when it comes to seller offerings. To wit:

“Advertisers must have evidence to back up their claims.”

Also see Title 15 of the U.S. Code, §1125 continue reading…

Close-up of the serial number reported by officials at Rolex Service Center for Ian Fleming's 1016 Explorer: Same watch, same work order (service) number, but indicating a different serial number

As I wrote on this James Bond Watches Blog last Friday, there’s no question that you wouldn’t want to rely solely upon serial number (case number) listings to definitively identify a vintage Rolex wristwatch.

No less than Ian Fleming’s own Rolex 1016 Explorer, circa 1960 — the literary James Bond watch — proves it.

A few years ago, within the same week, 2 different Rolex Service technicians looked at that same watch.

Each verified it as having a different serial number, based on physical examination of the markings between its lugs.

The first said that 596351 was its serial number.

The second said that 596851 was its serial number.

Above-left is a close-up of the case number reference on the first, “Acknowledgement” paperwork. My December 9, 2011, blog posting here shows a close-up on the later, “Estimate” documentation.

At this point, all experts who’ve examined Ian Fleming’s Rolex agree on one thing: It’s continue reading…

Close-up of the serial number reported by officials at Rolex Service Center for Ian Fleming's 1016 Explorer: Proof that a serial number reference doesn't always absolutely identify a wristwatch

“It should.”

“Maybe.”

“I dunno. Does it?”

As we continue our investigation of conflicting claims of ownership regarding the actual pre-Daytona Rolex 6238 Chronograph watch worn by actor George Lazenby as James Bond in the movie, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969), it’s been suggested that an examination of the serial number (case number) be considered dispositive. I disagree.

Ironically, there’s a direct parallel to this question in Ian Fleming’s own Rolex 1016 Explorer — currently on display at the National Watch & Clock Museum in Columbia, Pennsylvania.

That watch, as researchers and collectors will recall, is the one that I identified for the first time as “the original, literary James Bond watch.” The one specified by Mr Fleming for Agent 007 in his novel, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1963). Those findings were published in the February 2009 issue of WatchTime.

However, I was actually doing a variety of detail fact-checking the summer prior to publication; on June 5, 2008, to be exact. That is when I had pulled an original Rolex Service Center report on the Fleming-Bond watch. That document dated months even earlier still, when the watch was being prepared for its only other public display, at the Imperial War Museum in conjunction with the Ian Fleming Centenary.

Ian Fleming’s Rolex 1016 Explorer I was identified as having “Case No. 596851,” it said.

That was what the “Estimate” said. That was what the final invoice said. As a matter of fact, in preparing for this James Bond Watches Blog article, I’ve pulled true copies of numerous official Rolex papers indicating 596851 as the serial number on the Ian Fleming watch.

Only one document says this is not the correct number continue reading…