Unknown! - Unknowable?

Hello all,

This is probably a gamble that has gone wrong (including postage from the USA). And gamble it was because I was never convinced of its age from first seeing it, but I couldn't not go for it - just on the off chance.

The seller described it as an 18th century "looking" saw - quotation marks mine. And he is somewhere near right. It could be late 18th century, but I don't think that it is.

It is unfortunately not named at all, not even the shadow of one and against my better judgement I cleaned the back quite harshly in the hope of finding one under the rust and crud. I even took the surface rust, (this time very lightly) off the blade to see if there was a stamp on that, but again - no. (I haven't cleaned the reverse of the saw but I am pretty sure that there is not a name there either).

The rounded handle looks original and untampered with, and the heads of the rivets could be somewhere near "right", but on the back of the handle it looks like one of the washers beneath the peened over rivet head is a brass split nut. Which does not necessarily disbar it as an early saw but for me it puts a lot of doubt into the equation. The rivet heads also look to me as though they sit in sockets designed for brass saw screws.

The handle for me is the real problem. I have some very cheap late 19th century saws which have very thin handles and this feels just like one of those, the rest of the saw being light as well.

So, is it late 18th, 100(+) years later or anywhere in between.

It is 14" long.

Now I don't know who saw this on Ebay, but I do know that some users of this site bid on a saw from the same seller that finished only one minute after this one did and so I am assuming that you may have seen it and discarded it as a purchase.

I would love to hear from anyone, but especially anyone who saw it listed.

Fred

 

Hey Fred
hahahaha....I was one of the other bidders on your saw and I am happy to see it went to a good home. I too thought it looked early but it seems the seller was quite knowledgeable about tools and if he didn't see a name, there probably wasn't. I decided not to take a flyer on it. I think it may be a little later than the 18th century but not late.
I'm only guessing here, but I wonder if it is an early saw that was assembled in the States and not marked. Simon mentioned that this happened a lot.
Great buy though Fred of an early saw.
Joe S.

 

Hi Joe,

Your post is the more valuable for you having bid than those who may have seen it but didn't.

Now it may well be that I have more money than sense, but if this is the case then my paucity of material wealth must mean that I am exceptionally intellectually challenged.

Which is probably why I went for it.

I did not know at the time about "Simon's" self assembly, unmarked (presumably) cheapies. I don't think that it would have made any difference to the bid that got this saw, but my maximum would have been reduced considerably.

In the current circumstances of Simon's (apparently and hopefully temporary) self imposed exile, could you hazard a date range for it. I don't remember him mentioning anything on this site about it. Perhaps somewhere else??

Thanks.

Fred

 

Hey Fred
I think it might have been you mentioning in the Barber-Genn discussion, which might lead one to some interesting ideas.

"In one topic I seem to remember Simon or someone saying that blades were packed separately from handles (if any) to keep the transport costs down, ie. less bulk and more saws per barrel. Could the blades and backs only have been exported to keep the costs down and the handles vary so much because they were made by or for different bulk recipients in North America."

Hard to say if the eventual final resting location of the States had anything to do with the the "WAG" but it might be another posssibility. The fasteners may not be original but they sure look old. Don't put your name on it you might not be all that worried about finishing quality and therefore reputation.
I think it is still an early saw, just nameless.
Joe S.

 

Sorry Joe,

I completely misunderstood you. I thought that you were referring to a specific category of saws and time-frame for them when you mentioned the separate handles/blades and unnamed backs.

I always have in the back of my mind Simon's comments about separate handles/blades for packing/storage purposes but I didn't connect the two.

Fred

 

Unknown -unknowable?

This could be seriously early, Fred.

Have you been over the blade in case there is a name somewhere on it? There was a phase of marking names on the blades of backsaws that went on until maybe 1770-80 - mainly Birmingham makers. And - grandmothers and eggs here, so apologies in advance - could there be a name that has almost completely missed the bottom edge of the back?
Example herewith.


I'd love to have this one in my hand one day!!

 

Thanks for the replies Simon and Ray,

I am still not convinced that this is very old as it looks like the rivets have been put into holes destined for split nuts,and which may possibly put it early but not exceptionally so. What I think that I will do is to get some garnet paper (I have been meaning to do so for ages) and have a go at cleaning the blade up and possibly even the back on the reverse if I can do it without abraiding it too much.

Sorry Ray, I daren't mess around with this, and so if there is a name slipped under the back it will remain there for the foreseeable future.

Fred