More specifically, Swiss Chronometer or Chronomètre Suisse is the
official name given to a precision time-keeping instrument regulated for various conditions of use (for example: ISO 3159 for mechanical wrist chronometers.)[1]
This is the definition according to NIHS (Swiss watchmaking standards) Chapter 2 section 2.7. Conformity with the definition of "chronometer" is, according to those same standards, approved by the impartial official body which carries out the inspection on the time-keeping instrument or, if necessary, on the movement, and grants an individual ,official attestation (rating certificate). [2] N.B. In 1960, the Chronometer Agencies moved away from individual rating certificates to collective rating certificates indicating the results of a lot of watches. This was due to what was perceived, at the time, as an unmanageable increase in submissions for testing.[3]
According to Von Osterhausen, Wristwatch Chronometers, in watchmaking the term chronometer always referred to precision watches. [4] The first use of the term was by the English watchmaker, Jeromy Thacker in his 1714 abstract on the longitude problem. John Arnold first used Thacker's term in 1782 for pocket watch with a "chronometer escapement." Chronometer escapements were spring detente escapements and pivoted detente escapements. [5] This is corroborated by Brunner The Art of Horological Complications, 2006/7, at page 11.[6]
According to Thys Willemse Switzerland has been officially testing chronometers since 1878.[7] In 1925 the Swiss Association for Chronometry (SSC) defined the Swiss Chronometer as
"a watch which has received a certificate from an astronomical observatory."[8]
This definition was based upon the criteria for a chronometer and not its escapement type. The term "chronometer wrist watch" thereafter appeared in Switzerland and in 1941 the Canton of Neuchâtel, overseer of the Observatory there, instituted a new testing category for "chronometers which are made to be worn on the wrist," category "E".[9]
Until 1951, a definition of chronometer espoused by FHS (an industry trade union) held sway:
"a chronometer is a precision watch, which is regulated in several positions and at different temperatures, and which could have received a certificate from the Bureau Officielle."[10]
This liberal definition permitted a manufacturer to call a watch a chronometer if it fell within the guidelines. However, in 1952, at the June 8 meeting of the Commission Internationale de Coordination des Travaux des Observatories Chronomètriques, at Spiez, the definition was changed again (to some degree under pressure from Rolex and others) to read:
"a chronometer is a precision watch, which is regulated in different positions and at different temperatures and which has received a certificate."[11]
What legal authority this International Commission possessed or if a treaty resulted is unknown to this reporter.
When we speak of chronometers today, we invariably refer to watches with certificates issued by the official Swiss testing agencies, Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres (COSC). COSC tests watches which are made in series for sale, for compliance with certain industry standards. According to Von Osterhausen "testing at the official agencies is strictly voluntary: any watch can be sold without having been tested.[12] However, [as it is often repeated without an authoritative citation] only a watch which had passed these tests could be called a 'chronometer' ; and this was important to some clients to buy a particular watch. "Chronometer" 
usually was printed on the dial, sometimes with additions (such as "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified") and with an inscription on the movement." [emphasis in the original].[13]
Until 1973, the several official testing agencies (Bienne/Biel in the Canton of Bern established 1877; La Chaux-de-Fonds established 1887; St. Imier established 1888; Le Locle established 1901; Le Sentier established 1944; Geneva established 1965 [14] (N.B. the Geneva Seal testing office had existed since 1886) and, Solothurn established 1956)
"were operated independently from one another and each had its own direction. They did, however, work under and follow the same guidelines and in some cases were governed by city governments (as at La Chaux-de-Fonds, LeLocle, Le Sentier and Solothurn) or by the canton (as at Geneva, Bienne and St. Imier) and in each case were associated with the local watchmaker school."[15]
Presently, according to Daniel Favre, Director of the Geneva Watchmaking School responsible for the Geneva Seal, testified for the Rapport de la Commission des finances chargée d'étudier le projet de loi du Conseil d'Etat relative au Laboratoire d'horlogerie et de microtechnique de Genève, December 9, 2008, that the COSC office at Le Locle remains attached to the city and the COSC Office in Bienne remains attached to the canton. [16]According to Paolo Lupo, Administrative Director of the Geneva Department of Public Education, testifying in the same proceeding,
only Geneva kept its link with the watchmaking school because the school is still very active. [17]
As Von Osterhausen recounts, in 1973, these offices were put under one central administration with one director in La Chaux-de-Fonds, with three branches in Bienne, LeLocle and Geneva" and the name was changed to COSC.[18] According to Desmond Guilfoyle, Omega Movements Part 1, (2007), the merger was meant to lend a greater level of consistency and credibility to the Swiss chronometer appellation. It was clearly also an attempt to rationalize a hodgepodge of testing bureaus at a time when the Swiss watch industry was coming under increasing competitive pressure from quartz technology. [19] As Von Osterhausen notes, the threshold testing values were higher than the astronomical observatory standards, which means the standards were lower. But Observatory Chronometers were specially prepared for competition not for regular, retail sales. But, in Omega Movements Part 1, Guilfoyle writes, chronometers do have status over non-Chronometers, as can be seen in the demand and values.[20] One can also survey the annual report on Chronometer certifications issued, publshed by FHS.[21] He adds, the materials and finish of chronometer movements are generally of a higher quality than lower level production watches. But, one can’t help but thinking that some of the premium paid is for value that has been created by Swiss spin doctors who have been highly successful over time in convincing consumers that Swiss is best and chronometers are better.[22]
The COSC is today accredited by METAS, the Swiss Meteorological Service, for the accuracy of COSC's time-measuring/testing equipment. METAS does not enforce the HIHS 95-11 Standard (ISO 3159). [23]It appears that the Bienne/Biel office of COSC is overseen by the Directorate of Public Economy of the Canton of Bern, just how is not yet clear.[24]
According to the Director of the Geneva Watchmaking School, COSC does not have a true legal status. See, Rapport de la Commission des finances chargée d'étudier le projet de loi du Conseil d'Etat relative au Laboratoire d'horlogerie et de microtechnique de Genève, December 9, 2008.[25] Moreover, there is no indication that the definition(s) of chronometer were ever, even to this day, more than voluntary industry standard. There does not appear to be any enforcement power to interdict non-conforming use of the word chronometer on watches even though COSC states on its web site the aims of the COSC include undertaking any necessary action in matters relating to marketing, communication a
nd defense of the chronometer in the broadest sense of the term and promoting the chronometer and undertaking any legal action aimed at defending and protecting this title internationally. Case in point, the use of the word Chronomètre à Resonance or Chronomètre Souverain by F.P. Journe, which brand admits its movements are not COSC certified yet carry the name "chronometer". There does not appear to be a trademark for the phrase Chronomètre à Resonance, which describes the mechanism of the escapement, nor Chronomètre Souverain.
There does appear to be a Statute of the Association for the official Swiss control of chronometers of June 29, 2007[26]; and a Compact among the Official Authorities of the Control Offices of Bienne, Geneva and Locle, which came into effect on January 1, 2008. [27] Their contents and import are not yet known to this reporter. It is unclear whether these are federal acts or otherwise.
Notwithstanding, neither the term nor the definition(s) seem to constitute a legal standard (or a legally enforceable standard) as is the case with the Swiss laws defining: a watch movement; a Swiss watch movement; a Swiss Made watch or; the minimum thickness of gold watch ca
ses. In fact, there is no registered trademark for the word "chronometer", except in the following unique combinations: "Chronomètre Royal" a trademark registered to Vacheron-Constantine as trademark No. P-351910 and noticed in SOGC no.89 (April 21, 1989) for chronometers and movements from Geneva[28], and "Chronometer Star" a trademark registered to Rolex and noticed in SOGC no. 201 August 28, 1980, as trademark No. P-305125 for chronometers and their parts.[29] There is no registered trademark found for "Superlative Chronometer".
In strange contrast, the "word mark" or phase "Swiss Made" [presumably a geographic origin] is a registered trademark of FHS.[30] The only trademark owned by Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres is trademark No. 513097 published in SOGC no.152 (August 8, 2003), depicting COSC's stylized symbol with Swiss Cross. [31] Although one would presume that the exclusive use of the word "chronometer" could not justifiably be claimed by any entity. Under Swiss law, one is not supposed to be able to trademark overly simple, common marks, geographical origins, object descriptions or descriptive adjectives, marks which are offensive to the public, deceptive, misleading or illegal. Among other things, chronometer would appear to be an object description and therefore open to use by anyone, hence no violation by F.P. Journe. But, then again, Seiko was purportedly prevented from using the term on their watches based upon the elusive Chronometer Appeal of 1966 although COSC only determined to certify only watches meeting the Swiss Made Standard in 2003.[32]
Notes:
[1][2] NIHS Standards
[3] Revue Internationale de l'horlogerie, La Chaux de Fonds, Sept. 1960 by Roger Defossez
[4][5] Von Osterhausen, Wristwatch Chronometers pp. 9~41
[6]Brunner, The Art of Horological Complications 2006/7, Wempe, Hamburg 2005
[7] Thys Willemse
[8] SSC
[9]-[15] Von Osterhausen
[16][17] Rapport de la Commission des finances chargée d'étudier le projet de loi du Conseil d'Etat relative au Laboratoire d'horlogerie et de microtechnique de Genève, December 9, 2008,
[18] Von Osterhausen
[19][20]Desmond Guilfoyle, Omega Movements Part 1, (2007)
[21] FHS
[22]Guilfoyle
[23] METAS
[24] Directorate of Public Economy of the Canton of Bern
[25]Rapport de la Commission des finances chargée d'étudier le projet de loi du Conseil d'Etat relative au Laboratoire d'horlogerie et demicrotechnique de Genève, December 9, 2008
[26]-[27] See Loi relative au Laboratoire d'horlogerie et de microtechnique de Genève
[28] P-351910
[29] P-305125
[30] 513097
[31] 513097
[32]The Chronometer Appeal of 1966 is sometimes mentioned but no documentation concerning it has yet been found.
As enthusiasts of wrist watches and other time keeping apparatus, we invariable amass literature and materials on very many aspects of our hobby. When the material has outlived its usefulness to you consider donating it to a Horological Library. A library will preserve the material as well as make it available for the edification of others. If you do not have a favorite library, please allow us to suggest:
