Ray et al I was a little anxious when this saw arrived with some other pieces of flotsam and jetsam. It was certainly not well displayed or advertised. All I could see from pictures was the possible Williams and the distinctive cast steel. What a relief and pleasant surprise when this cutey was finally in my hands. This distinctive little 6 3/4" brass back saw has what I think reads "Willyams, Cast . Steel London" stamped into a very square heavy brass back. Correct me if I am wrong but it will certainly be a Williams. The beech handle has been messed with at some time in its life with the connectors turned around. It is still an early handle with the traditional egg shape transitioning into a more sharpened front nose. I know Simon says dating saws from a handle is a "mugs game" but this has all the characteristics of a relatively early handle. Williams brothers were to have been around making saws in the 1795 area but I don't I have that sure feeling about this saw being that early. Any of the other Williams makers were either later or from a different location. Does any one else have examples of this maker? Joe S.
Hi Joe, That is an attractive little saw. I don't have nor have I ever seen an example with that mark. It looks to me like the mark does read Williams. I think with that typeface if there was a Y that it would show much more spread at the top, perhaps as much as the bottom of the A, so that's my vote on spelling. If you're thinking it's Edward & Co I agree that you've probably got the right maker in mind, at least from among those available to us in BSSM. The other possible Williamses seemed to all be "T"s. However we only have the one possible start date mentioned for Ed & Co and don't know how much longer he/they continued in business. My feeling is that this handle shape could appear anywhere from beginning to mid 19c and playing the mugs game doesn't provide me any solid clue to an actual date of manufacture. Uncertainty is all. Again. David
Hi Joe, It is a nice little saw. The handle does appear to have a shadow of a chamfer to it but no chamfer stop. I don't mind being a mug, and would put it at the turn of the century-ish on this alone. If it was much later I think that it would have a more pronounced chamfer and a chamfer stop. The cast. certainly puts it in this time frame. As for the "Y in Willyams, I do not know what to make of it. Whatever is there is a lot wider at the top than the "I" before the "LL", and it is not a lot narrower than the base of the "A". What is interesting and relatively inexplicable is the arc that seems to join the top arms of the putative "Y". The only thing that I can think of here is that it was an error in the cutting of the stamp that has been disguised. But what has been disguised?? One of the things wrong with the "Y" notion is that whatever is there has no chunky serifs at the top of the letter on the arms. Which it possibly should have to be in keeping with the rest of the letters. As for "London", could it be an abbreviation of London Spring as opposed to a location? This would allow for either the Williams mentioned above or an as yet unknown one from elsewhere. This WAG, I admit is clutching at straws. Uncertainty may be all, David and in this case it probably is, but speculation is fun. Fred
Not sure I can add anything but more uncertainty: in favour of earliness is the fact that I don't know any candidates for anything later (discounting Thomas W, the butcher's cutler – although maybe one shouldn't). Thinking of similar brass backed saws by eg Shepley & Brain, this Williams handle is out of the same stable, more or less, I'd say, and as I don't have a terminus date for Edward Williams, one could imagine that he went on maybe to 1800 (the putative date of the S&B). I can never remember date of the first use on a London saw of the words Cast Steel – anyone help me? I've been trying to think what it would have been like to try and strike a flat faced letter punch into the brass of this back (pretty soft, it appears), and it seems to me that there might have been considerable difficulty, meaning that the second I of Williams could well not have come out very well. Simon
Ray et al. Ahhhh... the uncertainty of it all. A thanks to all who responded. The consensus seems that it was made in the very late 18th century to the very early 19th century. It was probably not a "y" in the stamp but a miss hit punch on a very soft brass. To further concur with that train of thought it would seem they had difficulty stamping London or we have a new spelling for the city. "Londin". I have had the opportunity to stamp brass lever caps for infills and it can be very nerve wracking. A miss hit means a lot of filing and sanding which would be very costly on the back of a brass spine. I do like that Shepley & Brain Thanks Joe S.
. . . . just arrived is a (later-looking than Joe S' example) open-handle saw, stamped in its heavy brass back: WILLIAMS OXFORD STREET . . . it might read: WILLIAM'S . . . . (the saw is heavily patina'd, despite vendor's abrasives) Crown Street - where Edward & Robert Williams were based from 1800-1808/9 - was at the East/St Giles end of Oxford Street.
Hi - am quite deep into researching the surprising tale of Edward & Robert Williams, of (various) then 102 Wardour Street, Soho; then 22 Crown Street (& #2 Georges Yard) - where Soho met St. Giles-in-the-fields. One of the facts I do not have is to who Robert Williams was bound as 'prentice on 7th June 1787. Does anyone know this, or have a copy of Clifford Webb's v.41 (Blacksmiths) in his series of London Livery Company Apprentice Records, & be kind enough to look it up? (& send me an image) . . . . I cannot obtain a copy. . . . one incidental delight of this research is finding that Williams pere et fils were literally contemporaries & neighbours to Thomas Sheraton - yes, the Thomas Sheraton.
Hey Shoarthing I had no idea such an interesting thing existed. I looked to see where there might be copies in the libraries in Canada but the only copy is 2200 KMs away. Yikes There were more examples in sites in the US so I hope someone might be able to help you out there. Sorry I couldn't of been any more help. Good Luck Joe S
. . . Joe - Hi - that's really kind, & much appreciated effort. Thanks to a chum with London Library membership, we were able to see . . . . . . . that Mr Webb had been unable to transcribe the missing data (the Masters name/address). Humph. I'll have to stagger up to London & consult the original.