Confirmed directly to me by Jeffery Deaver: James Bond's Carte Blanche Rolex is ...

[delldeaton]

... the reference 115200 Oyster Perpetual Date, black dial, domed bezel.

Identification 100% certain. I asked him directly; this is what he told me. More details on my James Bond Watches Blog, if you'd like. (It's also on his Facebook page now.)

With that: We again have a current James Bond Rolex watch!

[Boothroyd]

Q approves! Bond back in a Rolex.

[MonBK]

Do you mean that that's what he decided Bond should wear in Project X?

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by MonBK

Do you mean that that's what he decided Bond should wear in Project X?

Yes.

"Project X" was the working title for what is now called Carte Blanche, which was first published in the United Kingdom on May 26, by Hodder & Stoughton. Simon & Schuster is the US publisher, and will release it here next Tuesday (June 14).

[KarlFr]

But that's not what Bond Will be wearing in the next Bond Movie is it?

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by KarlFr

But that's not what Bond Will be wearing in the next Bond Movie is it?

Short answer: No.

The longer answer, having read Carte Blanche, is even more fascinating. It seems in reading through it that there are numerous examples in the book where it seems to "tweak the nose" of the films, particularly the more recent ones. From the way intelligence-gather setups actually look and work, to the sort of car Bond drives - and would drive.

Recall, for example, the Ford that Agent 007 drives in the 2006 Casino Royale film. Interesting observation of that by the Agent 007 of Carte Blanche, from the driver's seat of his Bentley.

"Rolex" is a lot more than simply a brand reference in Carte Blanche. Citations go further than even Ian Fleming did in On Her Majesty's Secret Service; Jeffery Deaver does a marvelous job of using them, and things about them, to say a lot about his characters.

Beyond the Rolex versus Omega thing that a lot of folks debate on internet forums, it might seem there's a lot one could conclude about a 34mm watch selection in Carte Blanche as it compares to the direction that watch choices (eg, sizes, styles) appear in the movies.

Again: Just like Ian Fleming himself, who put his book Bond in a Rolex Explorer 1016 in the face of Sean Connery wearing a Rolex 6538 on the other side of Jamaica while filming Dr No.

Bigger picture, it's all for the good. No one is gonna "take away" previous choices. So what we really have here is an exciting new one - and something nicely different from so many of the others.

[RodS]

Yeah, right. I got the book from our library, thankfully I didn’t waste money on it. Anyone who can write that “M was driven around by an ex RN corporal” is capable of spouting anything. Lucky Bond didn’t wear a Rolex Seamaster!!

[CaveDiver]

Originally Posted by delldeaton

Again: Just like Ian Fleming himself, who put his book Bond in a Rolex Explorer 1016 in the face of Sean Connery wearing a Rolex 6538 on the other side of Jamaica while filming Dr No.

Dell, Did Fleming say himself that he used his own watch in his book? Maybe I missed it, however I only found this quote:
He also wrote: “Wears Rolex Oyster Perpetual watch.” As you know a submariner is an Oyster Perpetual watch. If Fleming was a stickler to details why would he look down at his wrist and go oh, I will use my watch.. Why reject that he did his research and used a MOD 3-6-9 sub as Jed poses as a possibility. It does beg the question though, would a spy use a MOD issued watch?
Read Jed’s hypotheses here:
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=125082
However, if he was on set and questions the no 3-6-9 and not that the make was wrong, why not think he means:

[AJMarcus]

Well one thing we all can agree on is that the real 007 wore a Rolex and not not an omeegah! If only they would let Daniel Craig wear any one of his personal Rolex watches the movie would be true to the books!

[CaveDiver]

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

Well one thing we all can agree on is that the real 007 wore a Rolex and not not an omeegah! If only they would let Daniel Craig wear any one of his personal Rolex watches the movie would be true to the books!

Money. If Rolex pays, then they would use a Rolex.

[TheDude]

With so many great sports models these days a Datejust huh?

At least Rolex will have the good sense not to release a tarted-up special edition with guns and 007s on it...

[TheDude]

Uhh, did some Google homework.

The reference cited is a -34mm- watch.

Are we sure there isn't a missing numeral? Perhaps it is 1115200 and not 115200?

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by CaveDiver

Dell, Did Fleming say himself that he used his own watch in his book? Maybe I missed it, however I only found this quote:
He also wrote: “Wears Rolex Oyster Perpetual watch.” As you know a submariner is an Oyster Perpetual watch. If Fleming was a stickler to details why would he look down at his wrist and go oh, I will use my watch....

As you say, there are other threads, including those here on TRF, that present all sorts of arguments in favor of Submariner as "the" James Bond watch. I've participated in more of them here than on any other internet forum because of the high regard with which I hold the participants, among whom I consider many to be friends.

Can't imagine what I could possibly say here that would lead this thread to go any differently than those others. My best answers remain in the feature articles I've written on the subject, the two most detailed being available in their entirety online.

"Discovered: James Bond's Rolex," WatchTime, February 2009



"How I Found the Original James Bond Watch," NAWCC Bulletin, June 2009

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

Well one thing we all can agree on is that the real 007 wore a Rolex and not not an omeegah! If only they would let Daniel Craig wear any one of his personal Rolex watches the movie would be true to the books!

As the discussion immediately above illustrates, it turns out that there really isn't some "one thing" on which we all can agree when it comes to James Bond watches (nor, I suspect, anything else regarding the inherently passionate aspects of watch collecting). Would we have Daniel Craig wear a vintage Rolex 6538 Submariner on undersized, striped strap today? Would that really be "Bond"?

Originally Posted by CaveDiver

Money. If Rolex pays, then they would use a Rolex.

Big controversy on this in the mainstream media when it was announced that a third of the financing for Bond 23 would come from product placement. Like my other answers here, I've discussed that many times before, including here, and my position is clear. "Products" inherently appear in films - much less obtrusively than, say "Beer" beer, which Archie Bunker was required to drink to avoid naming a brand on All in the Family.

Today, Omega has stepped up to provide financing of some form or another to bring us every James Bond movie since GoldenEye. I think that's a good thing, not bad.

Is Omega "right" for Bond? Well, as we know, Ian Fleming wrote in 1958 (also discussed in my articles, linked above) that Bond wore invariably cheap, disposable watches.

Good stuff!

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by TheDude

With so many great sports models these days a Datejust huh? ...

It's an Oyster Perpetual Date, not a Datejust.

Originally Posted by TheDude

Uhh, did some Google homework.

The reference cited is a -34mm- watch.

Are we sure there isn't a missing numeral? Perhaps it is 1115200 and not 115200?

It's a reference 115200, as you can see HERE on the Rolex.com website.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by TheDude

With so many great sports models these days a Datejust huh?

Because the DJ is more classy, elegant and refined than the sports. Just like the people who wear them

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by Bananas

Because the DJ is more classy, elegant and refined than the sports. Just like the people who wear them

Although you're obviously joking here a bit, I think the folks on this forum are really going to appreciate Carte Blanche for all that it offers to the WIS point of view. Not just "James Bond," but writing in general.

Jeffery Deaver is fantastic in terms of truly subtle, yet most effective characterization through non-conventional means. Bond's Bentley, for example, is a character in its own right in Carte Blanche.

More specifically, Deaver uses watches in some key instances to flesh out characters. Referring back to my WatchTime article that came up in this thread, Ian Fleming told us all sorts of things about Hugo Drax and Tiffany Case and others based on their watch choices (see sidebar in "Discovered: James Bond's Rolex," also online).

Some examples:

• Bond changes watches in support of his cover disguise
• Hints about M's background come through Deaver's notation about that watch
• One of the Bond girls wears a "demure Baume & Mercer watch"

[TheDude]

Originally Posted by delldeaton

It's an Oyster Perpetual Date, not a Datejust.



It's a reference 115200, as you can see HERE on the Rolex.com website.

I have seen the photos.

Pardon the resolution of my interest and classification with these models (Datejust vs. Perpetual Date). I read the description but figured it was all the same.

[The Joker]

Yep just messing, sticking up for us smaller watch wearers.

All great info Dell, think I might try and read it. You ain't got a spare signed copy you could send us?

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by Bananas

Yep just messing, sticking up for us smaller watch wearers.

All great info Dell, think I might try and read it. You ain't got a spare signed copy you could send us?

Unfortunately, no.

The first Carte Blanche I read, however, is personally signed by Jeffery Deaver. And, at that, on May 26, the day the book was first released to the public (UK edition). Next Tuesday, I'll receive a first-day issue US edition when I attend the Simon & Schuster launch party in New York.

Rest assured, they all read the same - including the same watch references!

As a researcher, I'll also confess it was a bit of a challenge to start my work with a "special" copy. Normally, my books are extensively highlighted in yellow, marked in the margins with notes. And I'm really starting to like various eBook formats: Reading them on either my Kindle 3 or iPad 2, it's beyond value-added to make, organize, and keep records for review with those technologies!



As for the smaller-case watch wearers, believe me, I hear that a lot from James Bond-related collectors. Many have told me that they've chosen some of the vintage Seikos, as opposed to any of the recent Rolex or Omega divers, for just that reason.

Roger Moore wore a Seiko Quartz analogue SPD094 as James Bond in the Eon Productions 007 film, A View to a Kill (1985)

Again: This category expansion for James Bond Rolex watches is all to the good. And it doesn't take a thing away from the folks who'd rather have larger watches, old or new, this brand or that. Choice!

[poppydog]

He wears a gold Breitling later in the book, though as part of a cover ID.

[delldeaton]

Originally Posted by poppydog

He wears a gold Breitling later in the book, though as part of a cover ID.

Per Carte Blanche, first edition, first printing, Hodder & Stoughton (UK):

@ page 200:

Whatever his line he must have been successful; a heavy gold bracelet encircled his right wrist and his watch was a flashy Breitling.

@ page 201:

Hydt had deduced that himself; the man's Breitling was worth around five thousand pounds.

@ page 206:

While she'd coached him on facts that a South African mercenary might know, Sergeant Mbalula had gone to the evidence locker and found an incarcerated drug dealer's gaudy Breitling watch, to replace Bond's tasteful Rolex, and gold bracelet for the successful mercenary to wear.

@ page 226:

Bond looked at the Breitling.

@ page 267:

Bond looked at his huge Breitling watch.

If we want to be particular here, that is.

[bondtoys]

Well, the only thing, that we know for sure are:

1. Fleming outfitted Bond With a Rolex Oyster Perpetual
2. He further described it to have luminous numerals - on a flexible metal bracelet.
3. Ian Fleming personally owned an Explorer alongside with many other watches, including other Rolex watches.

Mr. Deaton makes a connection between these well known facts, but as we all are not able to ask Ian Fleming, it's simply speculation, which he's repeating on and on for his sales of iPhone apps, magazine articles and exhibitions that he's making a living from.

Again: There is not a single evidence which proofs his point.

As for the literaric Bond watch, this one also matches every single detail (minus the flexible bracelet - which has originally been with the shown watch).



For further less-biased opinions re. the literaric Bond Rolex have a look here:

[poppydog]

Originally Posted by delldeaton

Per Carte Blanche, first edition, first printing, Hodder & Stoughton (UK):

@ page 200:

Whatever his line he must have been successful; a heavy gold bracelet encircled his right wrist and his watch was a flashy Breitling.

@ page 201:

Hydt had deduced that himself; the man's Breitling was worth around five thousand pounds.

@ page 206:

While she'd coached him on facts that a South African mercenary might know, Sergeant Mbalula had gone to the evidence locker and found an incarcerated drug dealer's gaudy Breitling watch, to replace Bond's tasteful Rolex, and gold bracelet for the successful mercenary to wear.

@ page 226:

Bond looked at the Breitling.

@ page 267:

Bond looked at his huge Breitling watch.

If we want to be particular here, that is.

Not sure what you mean about being 'particular' and yes, I know the references as I finished the book a few days ago. I was simply pointing out that Deaver makes use of another brand as part of his protagonist's development as the plot moves forward.

[Jake B]

Originally Posted by bondtoys.de

For further less-biased opinions re. the literaric Bond Rolex have a look here:

Good read, that...

[bondtoys]

.... as for the small-sized Oyster Date, I am not sure, if the appearing in Carte Blanche is a kind of self-fulfilling thing.

After the Ian Fleming 1016 came up fist at the IWM in London and later at the James Bond watches exhibition and Deaton's constant mentioning it being the "real" Bond Rolex, I wouldn't be surprised, if Deaver came across with it and took it for granted.

One thing leads to another and voila, we have a "new Bond Rolex".

The same thing happened with a 6538, which has been seen on Daniel Craig's wrist 2 years ago: Speculations (especially on Deaton's blog ) came up, that he's gotten further inside info regarding the Dr. No Rolex, or, if he's gotten it from EON productions - all rubbish!
I know, where he (Daniel Craig)'s gotten the watch from and I know, that he was asking several people at London ADs to point him into the correct direction to get the right watch.


On a personal note, I highly doubt, that Bond would go for a 34 mm Date in these days! The boysize watches are very much outdated even for asian men, usually seen on ladie's wrists ( my wife wears one and it looks great on her - I had never considered to wear it myself), so, why should he get such a watch.

Readability is poor, many people would regard it kind of tacky on a gentlemen's wrist, you name some of the reasons.

[poppydog]

Originally Posted by bondtoys.de

Well, the only thing, that we know for sure are:

1. Fleming outfitted Bond With a Rolex Oyster Perpetual
2. He further described it to have luminous numerals - on a flexible metal bracelet.
3. Ian Fleming personally owned an Explorer alongside with many other watches, including other Rolex watches.

Mr. Deaton makes a connection between these well known facts, but as we all are not able to ask Ian Fleming, it's simply speculation, which he's repeating on and on for his sales of iPhone apps, magazine articles and exhibitions that he's making a living from.

Again: There is not a single evidence which proofs his point.

As for the literaric Bond watch, this one also matches every single detail (minus the flexible bracelet - which has originally been with the shown watch).



For further less-biased opinions re. the literaric Bond Rolex have a look here:

Yes, there's an awful lot of what can only ever be speculation, since the focal point is a fiction. It's an interesting debate, though I find real-world military issue timepieces more so. For example, the Royal Navy's Diving Manual BR2806, HMSO 1972, refers to "the diver's watch, 'Rolex' or 'Omega'" 3-19, indicating an historical reference to the respective models available at the time.

[bondtoys]

Originally Posted by poppydog

Yes, there's an awful lot of what can only ever be speculation, ....

Totally agree.
And to me, it's important to label speculation correctly and not to pass it over being fact.....

[buke45]

Thanks for the Info!!

[delldeaton]

More than once now here on TRF, I've seen James Bond threads, um, "diverted" to make the case for alternative James Bond watch theories.

To the extent that such things call me out by name, however, I do try to step in and correct the record, time permitting. Those of us who've participated here on TRF over the years have been subject to some bad eggs who'd exploit this place to renew grudges otherwise squeezed dry in other forums (recall the guy whose claims of wanting a "sparing partner" in posts invariably degenerating to unmasked pettiness, escalating to attacks on TRF Moderators).

Not interested. Take those games elsewhere.

That said, a few things for this thread.

1. Claims that I somehow stand alone in my conclusion that Ian Fleming owned just one Rolex and that that Rolex 1016 Explorer, IV 1960, was his basis for the James Bond watch(es) he wrote onto James Bond's wrist in 1962 for On Her Majesty's Secret Service (published a year later) either carelessly or consciously hide the fact that I've cited Ian Fleming family members who share that conclusion.

Further to this accountability is, in fact, the "Bond Watches, James Bond Watches" exhibit that I guest curated for the National Watch & Clock Museum in Columbia, Pennsylvania. There again, Ian Fleming's family validated his 1016 Explorer as the only Rolex he'd owned, and as his basis for the original literary James Bond watch. Documentation in support of this was available for public scrutiny there. I was on hand, accessible and accountable to folks from this Forum on several occasions there.

Entry to "Bond Watches, James Bond Watches" exhibit, National Watch & Clock Museum, June 18, 2011

I also remember spending a great deal of time there during the September 2010, "Bond Enthusiasts Weekend," with Justin Valentine. Recall that he owns a 1016 Rolex that he is not shy about reminding me has a closer serial number to the Fleming-Bond watch than mine.



That is my personal accountability, independently-verifiable information. And I think it more than overcomes objections. Yeah, okay: You're never gonna satisfy everyone. But it clearly satisfied the editors of WatchTime (twice) ...

... Chronos, and the Journal of the NAWCC. That means subjected to review by 100,000+ readers worldwide.

2. When I first walked up to Jeffery Deaver at the Simon & Schuster publisher's launch party for Carte Blanche in New York (June 14), he tapped my watch (the Rolex 1016 Explorer) and said, "that's the one." Yes, Ian Fleming's choice influenced his Rolex selection for James Bond in the new novel. We talked about his not having chosen an Explorer: With the new case size, it's too big for the contrast that he needed vis-a-vis the Breitling James Bond was to wear as part of his disguise cover.

Dell Deaton with James Bond author Jeffery Deaver at Carte Blanche publisher's VIP launch party, New York City, June 14, 2011

He knows a lot about watches, well beyond anything related to James Bond. Worked closely with the Ian Fleming family, which licensed his writing of this continuation book. I'm not sure how the inference that the family believes there was only one Rolex, that that Rolex was Ian Fleming's basis for the 1963 On Her Majesty's Secret Service Bond watch invalidates anything I've reported.



3. Far from making a living off my strictly volunteer contributions as guest curator for two James Bond watches-themed exhibits and the NAWCC convention presentation and display I did in Grand Rapids in 2009, I've been generous well-beyond the point of personal out-of-pocket expense. With little or no prospect of personal return.

Here and elsewhere, you've seen the extensive images posted by frogman4me taken at the "Bond Watches, James Bond Watches" exhibit, for example. Without giving away important security information, one does not take such pictures without multiple levels of Museum personnel being aware of it. The "no pictures" rule was requested first by the Lilly Library, which had both concerns about flash-illumination damaging the documents and also copyright concerns (forums and blogs less scrupulous than this have published Ian Fleming-related images in blatant disregard for copyright - spoiling things for everyone else).

More fundamentally, from the standpoint of the Museum, and underwriters such as our TRF friend Bob Ridley of Watchmakers International, and Revolution magazine, which helped make the exhibit possible through partial sponsorships (just the cost of transporting the Ian Fleming watch was, um, "a lot"), it's really not fair to have folks taking pictures, giving the possible impression, "why go in person when you can see it just as well on the internet?"

The Museum and I relaxed that rule, although without publicizing it, in March. So, how am I here just to serve my own interests, as some angry watch guys have claimed above, by giving away photos which I had previously enjoyed exclusive opportunity to take, rather than metering them out on my website as a traffic draw?

4. My "James Bond Watch Docket" offers exclusive information on its title subject matter, optimized for smartphone reading. It's no different from "Tapatalk," which Rolex Forums uses to similarly optimize the experience from here.

I know a number of the folks here already check it out regularly (including some who've deliberately mischaracterized it above). So you know that I regularly drive traffic to TRF from there. And, for that matter, a variety of sources I think are helpful to folks interested in James Bond watches, and sometimes even just one or the other. Yes, and even sources with which I may disagree, but still believe their arguments should be heard.

It'll come up on your regular computer, too. I see that on the first page, which I just checked, there's something even now linked to TRF. Good discussion thread.

100% FREE

5. Yes, I've published a book available through Amazon.com on the Kindle platform called "The James Bond Watches Price Guide." Yes, I do charge for that.

Where it seemed applicable, I've unobtrusively linked to it here on TRF. I've thought about issuing a press release on it for larger coverage here, because I really think it could help both buyers and sellers of watch models that I've tracked (insofar as they relate to James Bond). But I haven't. Neither have I created a screen name here, and elsewhere, designed to drive traffic to that website - or any of my other James Bond watches websites. Several people on here have watch-related interests, work for companies and authorized dealers; some are more overt in reminding us in their posts that that's their point of view. Some are more candid in using their own names in addition to that.

So the implication that I am doing something that's somehow different, or improper is something that needs to be addressed here. As I said at the outset of this post, I sense that we're seeing the manifestation of something more than transparent discussion of the subject at hand. Issues are coming in from elsewhere, and that is being indulged. Donald Grant has been banned, and now we've got his surrogate. After a handful of posts to establish pseudo-credibility elsewhere, some users' presence is exposed for what is really nothing more than the same old chase and attack others.

Rather than post links to your bash-Dell posts elsewhere (curiously, on sites far-too-indulgent of watch-sale information that would not be permitted for open discussion on TRF under the rules here), why not post photos and links to articles that substantiate all this so-called evidence that abounds in favor of Fleming wearing multiple watches and seeing Subs as the horological choice of his literary 007?

Personally, I think the Rolex Submariner is one of the finest watches ever made. That's what I'm wearing in the photo with the TRF guys above; I prefer it to any Explorer I own or have owned. We showed a Connery-era Rolex 6538 at the "Bond Watches" exhibit. If you think that's "the" James Bond watch, I'm not going to try and change your mind.

But I've seen a concerning increase of "gotcha" posting here on TRF that make this not only a less pleasant place to come, but a place less likely to host the sort of "go to" information that it used to be.

It's unfortunate that so few can spoil so much for so many. Welcome back, Donald Grant.

To those who I count among my friends here, thanks for considering these thoughts.

[valentine]

Well said, Dell. After spending time PERSONALLY with Mr Deaton and hearing the first hand stories of how much time and ...well, other things, were sacrificed to get Mr Flemings personal 1016 here stateside for everyone to enjoy...I have NO DOUBT that Dell has nothing to gain and simply is passionate about this subject..as we all are about watches. Imwont go into detail as to what Dell has done to allow us all to enjoy and appreciate the history and rarest of rare artifacts of the bond world IN PERSON because well...those are his memories..and his special moments...however I will say this...a man who sat down to dinner with the Fleming family...knows quite a bit more than perhaps we are giving him credit for. I personally am thrilled to see bond and rolex reunited! And a 34mm watch makes perfect sense,,,just as the 1016 did ...small...maybe..but certainly perfect for maneuvering as a spy should...and IMO a sub would have been to bulky for bond and to difficult to remove with it's clasp to be used as a weapon, etc...and it's moving bezel could creat sounds that would give the agent away...hence fixed bezel on the 1016 and OP date...and yes Dell...mine is closer! Hahaha...all in good fun of course!