Three years before I was born, in 1974, my grandfather was murdered - executed while sitting at his desk. While I never knew my grandfather, he’s a figure that has loomed large in my family’s life - perhaps especially mine.



Because my grandfather has loomed large in my life, I think, my aunt yesterday turns to me and says, “It’s no fun if you have to wait until *I* die,” and slips off her wrist my grandfather’s 1601 datejust.



My grandfather was wearing the watch when he was killed. It spent almost a year in an evidence locker (at least that’s what family lore holds). My grandfather’s execution remains the oldest known cold case in my home state.

Not being a vintage datejust head, I find myself here asking the forum for any insights or information that might be of interest.

I’ll start with the four main things I *do* know:

(1) My aunt says it was purchased by my grandmother, she thinks, in 1969 or 1968. My sticky-ball has been unable to remove the caseback to chase the serial date from the (certainly) 1570 movement, and that serial dating is something I’ll need to chase.

(2) Also, the watch has obviously been over-polished through the years; the “fluted” bezel being a bit more of a “bumpy” bezel, and the lugs buttery.

(3) I’m not yet certain of the recent service history, but intend to ask my aunt later today and then respond appropriately.

(4) Finally, the watch is priceless.

One known question:

This two-tone datejust, purported to be purchased in 1968-1969, has a “sigma dial.” My understanding is that sigma dials were not “official” with Rolex until 1970, and and they most typically denoted white gold use on dials, but they are known to have been used more rarely by certain dial manufacturers before 1970 (as early as 1968?) and found on two-tones with yellow gold indices.



Otherwise, I welcome any other observations about the watch (bracelet parts especially), and here just to show off my last - and surprise - acquisition of 2021, which immediately becomes my most prized watch “in the box.”

 

The serial number should be between the lugs.
I do like the look of a tt datejust with grey dial.
Priceless indeed, wear in good health!

 

If it was a holdup and he was shot at close range I'm surprised the Rolex wasn't taken in the crime, but maybe they were too focused on the drugs and cash. My wife and I both had steel/gold Datejusts in 1976/77 and they had USA made bracelets (steel and 14k gold) which was common at the time with Rolex, they switched to the Swiss made 18k bracelets around 1980. Your watch has a Swiss made bracelet, did your GF buy it overseas? Or maybe the bracelet is a later add.

 

Very sorry to hear this. A violent death like that leaves a long shadow.

 

It’s a keen observation, and one that gets into some of the deeper issues around the case; in short, the “robbery” was almost certainly staged.

It’s a small wonder, all told, that something like this watch made its way to me.

 

Wow. That’s a terrible story.

Regarding the watch, get the bracelet off and check the serial between the lugs. Also the caseback engraving is wonderful.

Some of the font on the dial looks sloppier than I’d expect and the lume appears very white but it may well be the photo quality.

The bracelet appears to date to 2001.

 

Hard to read that… terrible story.
You’re right, this watch is priceless! And the engraving beautiful. Enjoy it !

 

Thank you

It’s a 152XXXX, which appears to place the case in 1961

So either my aunt’s memory is faulty RE purchase in 1968-69 (likely), or my grandmother purchased it used (also quite possible), it sat unsold for 7 years (eh), or some combination.

I do believe this is photo quality; namely, that I took the photos under rather low light conditions this morning - but I’d certainly be pleased to know if it had been redialed (are these iridescent dials good candidates?).

Thank you - I am guessing but please correct me that it is possible the clasp is from 2001, but not necessarily the bracelet? I would find it hard to believe anyone in my family would have had the wherewithal to deal with a full bracelet replacement, though I could see a replacement clasp being part of a service at some point. Perhaps, no doubt, people forget things like a full bracelet replacement no doubt.

 

I do apologize if the underlying story comes across so grim; perhaps there’s something that happens in a family where such a topic feels a bit more casual to discuss than others are used to.

The post, for me, while containing only some background as to why this watch is ultimately so meaningful to me, had the intended thrust of being not gloomy but instead a mainly a truly heartwarming surprise to receive it.

Being a sentimental about my grandfather as well as a being a vintage watch fan, I couldn’t have hoped for a better gift!

 

It’s a ‘D link’ bracelet rather than ‘oval link’ so not original to the watch. Service clasps are also stamped with an ‘S’.

 

Great looker. Get it serviced!

 

Don’t be sorry, you don’t have to
I totally get that it carries a family story, that makes it unique to you. And you’re totally right about it.

 

Yes Vintage Rolex FG also states ‘66/67 for 1.5m serial.

 

thanks for this! I’m not sure what chart I was referencing, then!

 

Yes serial is from 1966/67, the sigma dial is from the early 1970s, and the bracelet is later.

 

Don’t be sorry thanks for sharing that’s a very powerful story you shared and sometimes you give a little relief to people who have experienced similar tragedy but have a harder time bringing it up. I know nothing about Rolex, well I don’t know too much about anything really but what I see is a priceless watch that will forever have deep meaning for you. The fact it’s a Rolex certainly makes a sparkle a bit more but I know many of us have watches that belonged to family members of lesser make that are priceless in our eyes. Just sad it had to come about the way it did but I’m sure the fact it’s giving you some joy now would make the owner who left in such a tragic way smile, if indeed such things happen when we leave here, we will all find out someday.

 

Thanks, Dan.

Do you happen to know of any considered discussions around proving up the timing of the sigma dials? I found several brief discussions that asserted 1970 as the beginning (based largely on a trademark filed by the relevant association), but a couple of longer and more concerted discussions that said Rolex only made the sigma indication official and widespread in 1970, but that some of the Rolex dial makers were using the sigma a few years previous.







The only focused discussion claiming that sigma without question did not appear on Rolex dials was a Hodinkee article, that was on its face rather persuasive and unequivocal in its assertion. But then in the comments, the author faces a commenter asserting to have a known unaltered watch from prior to 1970 and the author basically betrays that he’d made a judgment call to ignore “outlier” dials from before 1970.



Not terribly satisfying information for or against either, from the google-net that is

 

I find the documentation associated with the APIOR initiative to be convincing. It wasn't just Rolex, but several manufacturers and the timing of the Swiss initiative is well established. There are even some OF threads showing sigma dial Omegas from the early 1970s. All the actual documentation points to 1971 as the start for Rolex sigma dials, including a relatively small number of leftover 1970 cases that weren't assembled into watches until 1971. And the known examples overwhelming conform to this timeline. The earliest serials are around 2.4M, but actually very few before 2.8M. The vast majority are between the late 2 millions and the mid 4 millions. If someone told me he was the original owner of a 2.0M watch with a sigma dial, I wouldn't necessarily disbelieve him, but it would definitely be a major outlier. And you know how memory fades. The other week, someone showed me his Speedmaster 145.012-67 with a DN90 bezel and service crown, and he was swearing it was all original. He really believed it, just didn't remember that the parts had been swapped.

The stories claiming earlier sigma dials are just anecdotes as far as I can tell, and of course there will inevitably be earlier cases with sigma dials because it was very common in those days for people to swap DJ dials, it was the thing to do. Someone who bought a watch in 1968 or 1969 goes into the AD in 1973 and the salesperson shows them the beautiful new dials that are available, and he buys one. It was a standard revenue stream. Then 50 years later the person who owns that watch puts a comment after a Hodinkee article or posts on a forum claiming that he has an original 1968 watch with a sigma dial. But I don't know of a single documented example.

 

Great heirloom and thanks for sharing the story.

It’s important to remember that, back then, jewellers that sold Rolex would commonly offer their customers dial swaps — both when they bought the watch, and then afterwards during service or even if their customer just wandered in for a chat or to buy jewellery.

So it’s certainly possible that your grandfather added the Sigma dial later, for a new look.

Whatever the case that is a great looking watch. Obviously cherished.

EDIT: Dan beat me to it….