Hello all, No, not the usual T Turner who is so often found on Ebay. Although when I bought it I could barely make out the name Turner on the photograph and there was no chance at all of working out the initial. ( I have cleaned it up a little). But it was a stamp with a saw tooth border and Cast.Steel and so it had to be worth a go. I think that the best candidate in BSSM is the John Turner from London whose dates are 1832 to 1841, although it is a possibility that it is the James Turner from Sheffield whose sole date is 1841. (A late Cast. if it is). Apart from the stamp, the thing that struck me about this saw is the curious sticky out bit of the handle behind the boss. I like it for being quirky, but I am not so sure about the aesthetic value of the chunkyness (?sp) of it. Fred
Hi Fred, Could it be that the sticky out bit is what remains from a closed handle saw being broken, and having the broken edge smoothed? It appears to have an indication of the tip of a lambs tongue, although not carved in as a separate element, and the lower front horn also appears to have been broken. But my vantage point is only from your photo, so it's a fuzzy guess. Also, although I know that it must be Turner, I keep reading the U as an O, probably because the mark was struck deeper at the bottom than the top. More of my fuzziness. But I think it was certainly worth a go. Thanks for it. And the puzzle. David
Hi David, You may very well be right. I will post a picture tomorrow as I don't have the light tonight to take one. The bottom front "Horn" is very truncated and also very squarely cut off with quite a thick leading edge to it. The horn is also (within 0.35 of a millimetre) the same thickness as the sticky-out bit, although I don't think that I have seen a closed handle on a 9 1/4 inch blade. And if you closed the handle off, it would have a tiny hand hole. And a 9 1/4 inch blade could turn out to be a bit of a problem in itself as it is such an odd size. If the saw has been cut down from the rear (I don't think that it has been cut down from the front) and rehandled then it was done a very long time ago as there is the classic corrosion pattern on saws of a certain age at the bottom rear of the boss. The metal has corroded through for about 1/4 "along the curve of the boss. This saw does not get any easier the more that I look at it. Fred Although with the few closed handle saws that I have at hand, the wood tapers in thickness if not necessarily in width from the handle to what would be a lamb's tongue. This has no trace of a lamb's tongue and the wood would taper in thickness from where the lamb's tongue should be to the handle, were the handle to be closed at any time. Curious. I am giving up for the time being. I shall cogitate upon it but there is something awry here.
Hi Fred, I think it's just beautiful, the handle reminds me of a more ornate handle that's in "The Art of Fine Tools" book. Saw tooth border stamp & fancy handle, its totally cool. If you have the time, would it be possible to post a close up side photo of just the complete handle, the top edge looks interesting too. Regards Mari
Hi both of you, Here are some extra photo's to get a better view of the handle. After cogitating, I have to come down ( on balance, no certainty about it) on the side of it never having been a closed handle. And seeing as my propensity for being right about saw related WAGS is definitely negative, this almost certainly means that the handle was closed. And Mari, that handle is a first for me and is seriously strange. I would want a lot of room between my knuckles and the (effectively) serrated inner front bit. "Ouch" comes to mind. Do you know if it is a manufactured handle, and if so, when was it made, or is it user adapted? Fred
Hi Fred, Thanks for posting the extra photos, that handle is amazing- it shows the creative flair of the maker from all those years ago, one of the best I've seen, its just different! Ok, the caption to the photo that I posted from "The Art of Fine Tools" reads: the exceptionally fancy handle in the foreground is sized & drilled to replace a similarly sized stock handle. (From the collection of Bill Phillips) It's a remarkable saw, do you think that it could be John Turner 1818-25 from BSSM? Regards Mari
Hi , Fred, your new photos have convinced me as well that this handle was never closed, and that it might be slightly uncomfortable to use as well. It sure looks a cousin to the wildly erratic handle that Mari has shown us; an exercise in manic detailing. Still, lots of fun. David
Hi Mari, Thanks for the pointer to the 1818 to 1825 John Turner. I never looked that far into the makers in BSSM as I assumed that when Simon had run out of "J's" on p.593 and moved on to the next letter in the alphabet that was the end of the matter. My mind completely blanked the single line re Turner John, Turner Jonathon and Turner Swifts. (It is not the first time that I have misread BSSM like this). Before I looked for a J Turner in BSSM I was expecting a company with an 1820's date (or before) and when I didn't find one I went with the earliest that I could see. Anyway, I agree that it could well be the above John Turner on the style of the mark, (and I really hope that it is) but I will always have the nagging doubt that it is the London Turner, with a late saw tooth border a la Hill late Howel. Fred
Oh, Fred, I'm glad you got this beauty. I was underbidder on this one and was very upset when missed the opportunity. I'm glad it's in very good hands and you deserve to own it