These Braces possess the following points of superiority: The Sweep is made from Steel; the Jaws are forged from Steel; the Wood Handle has brass rings inserted in each end so it cannot split off; the Chuck has a hardened Steel antifriction washer between the two sockets, thus reducing the wear. The Head has a bearing of steel balls, running on hard steel plates, so no wear can take place, as the friction is reduced to the minimum. The Brace is heavily nickel-plated and warranted in every particular. We endeavor to make these goods as nearly perfection as is possible in durability, quality of material and workmanship, and fineness and beauty of finish.[27]
These Braces possess the following points of superiority: The Sweep is made from Steel; the Jaws are forged from Steel; the Wood Handle has brass rings inserted in each end so it cannot split off; the Chuck has a hardened Steel antifriction washer between the two sockets, thus reducing the wear. The Head has a bearing of steel balls, running on hard steel plates, so no wear can take place, as the friction is reduced to the minimum. The Brace is heavily nickel-plated and warranted in every particular. We endeavor to make these goods as nearly perfection as is possible in durability, quality of material and workmanship, and fineness and beauty of finish.[27]
Figure 65.Figure 65.—1900: American planemakershad been cited at the Philadelphia Centennial as having introduced a dramatic change in the nature of the tool. Although wood-bodied planes continued to be used, they were outdated and in fact anachronistic by the close of the 19th century. From the 1870's forward, it was the iron-bodied plane, most frequently Bailey's, that enlivened the trade literature. (Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian photo 55798.)
Figure 66.Figure 66.—1900: Few tools suggest more clearlythe influence of modern industrial society upon the design and construction of traditional implements than Barber's ratchet brace. It is not without interest that as the tools of the wood craftsman became crisply efficient, his work declined correspondingly in individuality and character. The brace and the plane, as followed from Moxon through the trade literature of the late 19th century, achieved perfection in form and operation at a time when their basic functions had been usurped by machines. (Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian photo 56626.)
The description of Barber's brace documents a major technical change: wood to steel, leather washers to ball bearings, and natural patina to nickel plate. It is also an explanation for the appearance and shape of craftmen's tools, either hand forged or mass produced. In each case, the sought-after result in the form of a finished product has been an implement of "fineness and beauty." This quest motivated three centuries of toolmakers and brought vitality to hand-tool design. Moxon had advised:
He that will a good Edge win,Must Forge thick and Grind thin.[28]
He that will a good Edge win,Must Forge thick and Grind thin.[28]
If heeded, the result would be an edge tool that assured its owner "ease and delight."[29]Throughout the period considered here, the most praiseworthy remarks made about edge tools were variations of either "unsurpassed in quality, finish, and beauty of style" or, more simply, commendation for "excellent design and superior workmanship."[30]The hand tool thus provoked the same value words in the 19th as in the 17th century.
The aesthetics of industrial art, whether propounded by Moxon or by an official at the Philadelphia Centennial, proved the standard measure by which quality could be judged. Today these values are particularly valid when applied to a class of artifacts that changed slowly and have as their prime characteristics anonymity of maker and date. With such objects the origin, transition, and variation of shape are of primary interest. Consider the common auger whose "Office" Moxon declared "is to make great round holes" and whose importance was so clearly stressed at Philadelphia in 1876.[31]Neither its purpose nor its gross appearance (a T-handled boring tool) had changed. The tool did, however, develop qualitatively through 200 years, from a pod or shell to a spiral bit, from a blunt to a gimlet point, and from a hand-fashioned to a geometrically exact, factory-made implement: innovations associated with Cooke (1770), L'Hommedieu (1809), and Jennings (1850's). In each instance the tool was improved—a double spiral facilitated the discharge of shavings, a gimlet point allowed the direct insertion of the auger, and machine precision brought mathematical accuracy to the degree of twist. Still, overall appearance did not change. At the Centennial, Moxon would have recognized an auger, and, further, his lecture on its uses would have been singularly current. The large-bore spiral auger still denoted a mortise, tenon, and trenail mode of building in a wood-based technology; at the same time its near cousin, the wheelwright's reamer, suggested the reliance upon a transport dependent upon wooden hubs. The auger in its perfected form—fine steel, perfectly machined, and highly finished—contrasted with an auger of earlier vintage will clearly show the advance from forge to factory, but will indicate little new in its method of use or its intended purpose.
Persons neither skilled in the use of tools nor interested in technical history will find that there is another response to the common auger, as there was to the upholsterer's hammer, the 18th-century brace, or the saw with the custom-fitted grip. This is a subjective reaction to a pleasing form. It is the same reaction that prompted artists to use tools as vehicles to help convey lessons in perspective, a frequent practice in 19th-century art manuals. The harmony of related parts—the balance of shaft and handle or the geometry of the twist—makes the auger a decorative object. This is not to say that the ancient woodworker's tool is not a document attesting a society's technical proficiency—ingenuity, craftsmanship, and productivity. It is only to suggest again that it is something more; a survival of the past whose intrinsic qualities permit it to stand alone as a bridge between the craftsman's hand and his work; an object of considerable appeal in which integrity of line and form is not dimmed by the skill of the user nor by the quality of the object produced by it.
In America, this integrity of design is derived from three centuries of experience: one of heterogeneous character, the mid-17th to the mid-18th; one of predominately English influence, from 1750 to 1850; and one that saw the perfection of basic tools, by native innovators, between 1850 and the early 20th century. In the two earlier periods, the woodworking tool and the products it finished had a natural affinity owing largely to the harmony of line that both the tool and finished product shared. The later period, however, presents a striking contrast. Hand-tool design, with few exceptions, continued vigorous and functional amidst the confusion of an eclectic architecture, a flurry of rival styles, the horrors of the jigsaw, and the excesses of Victorian taste. In conclusion, it would seem that whether seeking some continuous thread in the evolution of a national style, or whether appraising American contributions to technology, such a search must rest, at least in part, upon the character and quality of the hand tools the society has made and used, because they offer a continuity largely unknown to other classes of material survivals.
FOOTNOTES:[1]W.M. Flinders Petrie, "History in Tools,"Annual Report Smithsonian Institution, 1918, pp. 563–572 [reprint].[2]Johann Amos Comenius,Orbis Sensualium Pictus, transl. Charles Hoole (London, 1685), pp. 130, 143.[3]Joseph Moxon,Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of Handy-Works, 3rd. ed. (London, 1703), pp. 63, 119.[4]Martin,Circle of the Mechanical Arts(1813), p. 123.[5]Peter Nicholson,The Mechanic's Companion(Philadelphia, 1832), pp. 31, 89–90.[6]Catalog, Book 87, Cutler and Co., Castle Hill Works, Sheffield [in the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London]; andIllustrated Supplement to the Catalogue of Bench Planes, Arrowmammett Works (Middletown, Conn., 1857) [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].[7]York County Records, Virginia Deeds, Orders, and Wills, no. 13 (1706–1710), p. 248; and the inventory of Amasa Thompson inLawrence B. Romaine, "A Yankee Carpenter and His Tools,"The Chronicleof the Early American Industries Association (July 1953), vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 33–34.[8]Reports by the Juries: Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations, 1851(London, 1852), p. 485.[9]U.S. patent specifications cited in this paragraph may be found at the U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C.[10]In 1865 George Parr in his application for an improved screwdriver stated categorically that the scalloped blade served no purpose other than decoration. See U.S. patent 45,854, dated January 10, 1865.[11]Francis A. Walker, ed.,United States Centennial Commission, International Exhibition, 1876, Reports and Awards, Group XV(Philadelphia, 1877), p. 5.[12]Ibid., p. 6.[13]Ibid., pp. 9–10.[14]Ibid., pp. 11–12.[15]Ibid., pp. 14, 44, 5.[16]Ibid., p. 13.[17]Restored patent 4,859X, August 24, 1827, National Archives, Washington, D.C.[18]U.S. pat. 16,889, U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C. The numbered specifications that follow may be found in the same place.[19]Walker, ed.,Reports and Awards, group 15, p. 13.[20]Ibid.[21]Tools(Boston, 1884), p. 54 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].[22]Tools and Supplies(June 1900), no. 85 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].[23]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.[24]Tools for All Trades(New York, 1896), item 75 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].[25]SeeBaldwin, Robbins & Co.: Illustrated Catalogue(Boston, 1894), pp. 954, 993 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].[26]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.[27]Tools and Supplies, op. cit. (footnote 22).[28]Mechanick Exercise..., p. 62.[29]Ibid., p. 95.[30]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 31–49.[31]Mechanick Exercises..., p. 94.
[1]W.M. Flinders Petrie, "History in Tools,"Annual Report Smithsonian Institution, 1918, pp. 563–572 [reprint].
[1]W.M. Flinders Petrie, "History in Tools,"Annual Report Smithsonian Institution, 1918, pp. 563–572 [reprint].
[2]Johann Amos Comenius,Orbis Sensualium Pictus, transl. Charles Hoole (London, 1685), pp. 130, 143.
[2]Johann Amos Comenius,Orbis Sensualium Pictus, transl. Charles Hoole (London, 1685), pp. 130, 143.
[3]Joseph Moxon,Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of Handy-Works, 3rd. ed. (London, 1703), pp. 63, 119.
[3]Joseph Moxon,Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of Handy-Works, 3rd. ed. (London, 1703), pp. 63, 119.
[4]Martin,Circle of the Mechanical Arts(1813), p. 123.
[4]Martin,Circle of the Mechanical Arts(1813), p. 123.
[5]Peter Nicholson,The Mechanic's Companion(Philadelphia, 1832), pp. 31, 89–90.
[5]Peter Nicholson,The Mechanic's Companion(Philadelphia, 1832), pp. 31, 89–90.
[6]Catalog, Book 87, Cutler and Co., Castle Hill Works, Sheffield [in the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London]; andIllustrated Supplement to the Catalogue of Bench Planes, Arrowmammett Works (Middletown, Conn., 1857) [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[6]Catalog, Book 87, Cutler and Co., Castle Hill Works, Sheffield [in the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London]; andIllustrated Supplement to the Catalogue of Bench Planes, Arrowmammett Works (Middletown, Conn., 1857) [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[7]York County Records, Virginia Deeds, Orders, and Wills, no. 13 (1706–1710), p. 248; and the inventory of Amasa Thompson inLawrence B. Romaine, "A Yankee Carpenter and His Tools,"The Chronicleof the Early American Industries Association (July 1953), vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 33–34.
[7]York County Records, Virginia Deeds, Orders, and Wills, no. 13 (1706–1710), p. 248; and the inventory of Amasa Thompson inLawrence B. Romaine, "A Yankee Carpenter and His Tools,"The Chronicleof the Early American Industries Association (July 1953), vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 33–34.
[8]Reports by the Juries: Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations, 1851(London, 1852), p. 485.
[8]Reports by the Juries: Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations, 1851(London, 1852), p. 485.
[9]U.S. patent specifications cited in this paragraph may be found at the U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C.
[9]U.S. patent specifications cited in this paragraph may be found at the U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C.
[10]In 1865 George Parr in his application for an improved screwdriver stated categorically that the scalloped blade served no purpose other than decoration. See U.S. patent 45,854, dated January 10, 1865.
[10]In 1865 George Parr in his application for an improved screwdriver stated categorically that the scalloped blade served no purpose other than decoration. See U.S. patent 45,854, dated January 10, 1865.
[11]Francis A. Walker, ed.,United States Centennial Commission, International Exhibition, 1876, Reports and Awards, Group XV(Philadelphia, 1877), p. 5.
[11]Francis A. Walker, ed.,United States Centennial Commission, International Exhibition, 1876, Reports and Awards, Group XV(Philadelphia, 1877), p. 5.
[12]Ibid., p. 6.
[12]Ibid., p. 6.
[13]Ibid., pp. 9–10.
[13]Ibid., pp. 9–10.
[14]Ibid., pp. 11–12.
[14]Ibid., pp. 11–12.
[15]Ibid., pp. 14, 44, 5.
[15]Ibid., pp. 14, 44, 5.
[16]Ibid., p. 13.
[16]Ibid., p. 13.
[17]Restored patent 4,859X, August 24, 1827, National Archives, Washington, D.C.
[17]Restored patent 4,859X, August 24, 1827, National Archives, Washington, D.C.
[18]U.S. pat. 16,889, U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C. The numbered specifications that follow may be found in the same place.
[18]U.S. pat. 16,889, U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C. The numbered specifications that follow may be found in the same place.
[19]Walker, ed.,Reports and Awards, group 15, p. 13.
[19]Walker, ed.,Reports and Awards, group 15, p. 13.
[20]Ibid.
[20]Ibid.
[21]Tools(Boston, 1884), p. 54 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[21]Tools(Boston, 1884), p. 54 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[22]Tools and Supplies(June 1900), no. 85 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[22]Tools and Supplies(June 1900), no. 85 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[23]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
[23]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
[24]Tools for All Trades(New York, 1896), item 75 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[24]Tools for All Trades(New York, 1896), item 75 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[25]SeeBaldwin, Robbins & Co.: Illustrated Catalogue(Boston, 1894), pp. 954, 993 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[25]SeeBaldwin, Robbins & Co.: Illustrated Catalogue(Boston, 1894), pp. 954, 993 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
[26]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
[26]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
[27]Tools and Supplies, op. cit. (footnote 22).
[27]Tools and Supplies, op. cit. (footnote 22).
[28]Mechanick Exercise..., p. 62.
[28]Mechanick Exercise..., p. 62.
[29]Ibid., p. 95.
[29]Ibid., p. 95.
[30]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 31–49.
[30]Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 31–49.
[31]Mechanick Exercises..., p. 94.
[31]Mechanick Exercises..., p. 94.
Book of trades, or library of the useful arts.1st Amer. ed. Whitehall, N.Y., 1807.Boy's book of trades.London, 1866.The cabinetmaker in eighteenth-century Williamsburg.(Williamsburg Craft Series.)Williamsburg, Va., 1963.Comenius, Johann Amos.Orbis sensualium pictus.Transl. Charles Hoole. London,1664, 1685, 1777, et al.Cotter, John L.Archeological excavations at Jamestown, Virginia.(No. 4 in ArcheologicalResearch Series.) Washington: National Park Service, 1958.Diderot, Denis.L'encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers.Paris, 1751–1765.Early American Industries Association.Chronicle.Williamsburg, Va., 1933+.Gillispie, Charles Coulston, ed.A Diderot pictorial encyclopedia of trades and industry.New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1959.Goodman, W.L.The history of woodworking tools.London: G. Bell and Sons, Ltd.,1964.Holtzapffel, Charles.Turning and mechanical manipulations.London [1846].Knight, Edward Henry.Knight's American mechanical dictionary.New York, 1874–1876.Martin, Thomas.The circle of the mechanical arts.London, 1813.Mercer, Henry C.Ancient carpenters' tools.Doylestown, Pennsylvania: The BucksCounty Historical Society, 1951.Moxon, Joseph.Mechanick exercises.3rd ed. London, 1703.Nicholson, Peter.The mechanic's companion.Philadelphia, 1832.Petersen, Eugene T.Gentlemen on the frontier: A pictorial record of the culture of Michilimackinac.Mackinac Island, Mich., 1964.Petrie, Sir William Matthew Flinders.Tools and weapons illustrated by the Egyptiancollection in University College, London.London, 1917.Roubo, André-Jacob.L'art du menuisier.(In Henri-Louis Duhamel du Monceau,Descriptions des arts et métiers.) Paris, 1761–1788.Sachs, Hans.Das Ständebuch: 114 Holzschnitte von Jost Amman, mit Reimen von HansSachs.Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1934.Singer, Charles, et al.A history of technology.5 vols. New York and London:Oxford University Press, 1954–1958.Sloane, Eric.A museum of early American tools.New York: Wilfred Funk, Inc.,1964.Tomlinson, Charles.Illustrations of trades.2nd ed. London, 1867.Welsh, Peter C."The Decorative Appeal of Hand Tools,"Antiques, vol. 87, no. 2,February 1965, pp. 204–207.---- U.S. patents, 1790–1870: New uses for old ideas. Paper 48 inContributionsfrom the Museum of History and Technology:Papers 45–53 (U.S. NationalMuseum Bulletin 241), by various authors; Washington: Smithsonian Institution,1965.Wildung, Frank H.Woodworking tools at Shelburne Museum.(No. 3 in MuseumPamphlet Series.) Shelburne, Vermont: The Shelburne Museum, 1957.
U.S. Government Printing Office: 1966For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing OfficeWashington, D.C., 20402—Price 70 cents
Paper 51, pages 178–228, fromUNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN
CONTRIBUTIONS FROMTHE MUSEUM OF HISTORYAND TECHNOLOGYSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION · WASHINGTON, D.C.