|
Post by paranger on Feb 21, 2024 7:32:38 GMT -7
I recently acquired a 17th c. French Biscayne axe found in NY. These were originally imported from the Bayonne region, made from iron in the Basque region of Biscay from the very beginning of New France. Largely supplanted by the locally produced "hache de pays" by the 1720s, the last documentary reference to them in New France occurs in 1758 (Gladysz and Hamilton, Mark Miller). Here is my rendering: wrought iron with 1084 bit, hafted in 18" curly hickory.
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Feb 21, 2024 7:49:53 GMT -7
That one looks like it's got some mass in the head.
|
|
|
Biscayne
Feb 21, 2024 9:30:02 GMT -7
via mobile
Post by paranger on Feb 21, 2024 9:30:02 GMT -7
That one looks like it's got some mass in the head. Indeed it does. Pushing 2lb.
|
|
|
Biscayne
Feb 21, 2024 19:40:26 GMT -7
via mobile
Post by brokennock on Feb 21, 2024 19:40:26 GMT -7
Question. I think it's been asked before elsewhere and I don't think I've ever seen a satisfactory answer that wasn't contaminated by supposition and conjecture. Do we know how common maple, especially fancy figured maple, was as a tool handle in the 18th century?
Also, how does it perform amd hold up compared to hickory?
|
|
|
Post by paranger on Feb 22, 2024 4:09:56 GMT -7
Question. I think it's been asked before elsewhere and I don't think I've ever seen a satisfactory answer that wasn't contaminated by supposition and conjecture. Do we know how common maple, especially fancy figured maple, was as a tool handle in the 18th century? Also, how does it perform amd hold up compared to hickory? Nock, as you allude, it is a hard one to quantify. Naturally, most hafts do not survive, and many tools would have been re- hafted - perhaps multiple times - throughout their working lives. I CAN tell you that Biscayne axes appear to have been shipped in tightly packed casks without hafts. Hence, they were hafted in the colonies in local hardwoods. I believe the use of figured maple IS documented by certain gunmakers who turned their hands to pipe tomahawks for the trade. Obviously these were more aesthetically minded pieces than common tools. For my money, hickory and ash are strong, light when properly dried, and normally fairly straight grained, making them go-to materials of choice by tool-makers now - and I suspect - then, too. Maple can be "hard" or "soft" depending on the variety, and both variants can have curl. It doesn't really answer your question in a quantitative sense, but I just don't think adequate documentation is out there to do so in any meaningful way.
|
|
|
Post by bushfire on Feb 22, 2024 15:02:53 GMT -7
I’m not overly familiar with it. Did the styling change between the imported axes and those that were eventually made on the continent or did they more or less stay the same? And was there a transitional period between the styles?
If the latter, are they stamped? If not how do you identify them temporally speaking?
|
|
|
Post by paranger on Feb 22, 2024 15:20:08 GMT -7
I’m not overly familiar with it. Did the styling change between the imported axes and those that were eventually made on the continent or did they more or less stay the same? And was there a transitional period between the styles? If the latter, are they stamped? If not how do you identify them temporally speaking? Bushfire - here's a good intro to Biscayne axes from Mark Miller. His website is a great resource on colonial North American axes: www.furtradetomahawks.com/biscayne-trade-axes---9.htmlHere are some (but not all) common documented period Biscayne marks:
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 22, 2024 17:43:31 GMT -7
Question. I think it's been asked before elsewhere and I don't think I've ever seen a satisfactory answer that wasn't contaminated by supposition and conjecture. Do we know how common maple, especially fancy figured maple, was as a tool handle in the 18th century? Also, how does it perform amd hold up compared to hickory? Nock, as you allude, it is a hard one to quantify. Naturally, most hafts do not survive, and many tools would have been re- hafted - perhaps multiple times...... ......It doesn't really answer your question in a quantitative sense, but I just don't think adequate documentation is out there to do so in any meaningful way. Well,, it sort of does answer it. The answer falls about where I would expect, not enough data. Thus, those trying to side one way or the other in a definitive manner are,,,, putting on airs (to be nice). I would be interested to know from some folks who use their axes, hatchets, and tomahawks a lot,,,, and have used them hafted with both materials,,, how do they compare in use now. My gut says working tools were hafted with hickory, ash, maybe elm(?) and that nice looking maple was for ceremony, gifts, and status symbol show pieces. A tool handle needs to be more than just hard, it must be tough and resilient, it can't be so hard as to be too rigid. But, that is just my gut. My opinion could be swayed....
|
|
|
Post by straekat on Feb 23, 2024 6:49:59 GMT -7
What would get used, may be a function of what type of trees grew in the area, and using what you could get.
Woodworkers in the UK, Europe, and the Americas knew quite a bit about the qualities of their local woods, and what they were best used for. The manufacture of Windsor chairs in the US and the Americans shows how more than one species of wood was selected for seats, other species for the legs, then again others that could be steamed into specific shapes, and lastly, any hardwood that could be carved into crisp shapes. When the chair was done, it often contained at least three different types of wood. Before it left the shop, the maker(s) painted the entire chair.
If you look at the materials used in New England, the Mid-Atlantic region and the southern parts of North Amreica, the tree types are different, or present in different ratios. Chairmakers appear to have used what was easy to get and use, and could be obtained locally.
Someone needing a haft, very likely looked at what they could get locally, and what would not breaking when subjected to heavy use. Also, working wood when it is wet vs dry can be two different experiences. An example is hickory; when wet, it can be cut and shaped without requiring tools to be sharpened more than once or even twice. When dry, it gets very hard, it is far less easy to work and shape.
|
|
|
Post by straekat on Feb 23, 2024 6:58:42 GMT -7
A side thought...
Tiger maple and figured woods can be nice to look at, but I've always been leery of using wood with too much grain or figure in it. The presence of striping and other figuring to wood is the result of different densities and composition of the wood relative to elsewhere in the same piece. That means it does not have the same hardness throughout, and there are hard and weaker zones in the material. Too much figuring in the wrist area of a gunstock has the makings of a break in the future. Figuring and grain on a rock maple haft might look good on a framing hammer, but it might not last a day pounding in 16d/spikes. On furniture, it would be a different story, because the wood is not subjected to heavy stress.
|
|
|
Post by straekat on Feb 23, 2024 15:18:37 GMT -7
Nock,
Found this and it should be of interest to you.
Ancient carpenters' tools, illustrated and explained, together with the implements of the lumberman, joiner and cabinet maker, in use in the eighteenth century, by Henry C. Mercer. It's on-line and full of pictures of period tools, starting with axes. Some are items that were dug uhaftedp, bought by the author while he was in the UK, and he does have one page showing axes he specifically says were rehafted. On the otherhand, one passage in the text says that period helves were frequently hickory, or white oak.
The Mercer Museum in Doylestown, PA opened circa 1904 and is still open to the public. Never been there, however on-line photos show all sorts of technology related items packing the floors.
|
|