MikeW
>Hi Dave,

I *think* we actually agree. I have only really meant that, using the example I already used from the Dunlap probate, "Handsaws." Like you wrote, these (plural) are lumped together. No way of know what or how many.

Maj. John bought lumber in various thicknesses and widths, veneer from a supplier, etc., for his furniture. I doubt that if he had a rip hand saw it was used for more than I do, that is ripping through the thickness of a board. But whether one of the "Handsaws" was a rip is anyone's guess.

Values used is another thing altogether. I agree it in part depends on who did the valuation. As well as what perceived then-current values of used tools was. So too, was the valuation done during the excessive inflation of the Rev. war and following or had the market value for used tools subsided by 1793 or there abouts? Was the value of used tools ever inflated? Those are things I do not know. And of course, I don't know what I don't know.

fwiw, the Dunlap probate, while having several items on a line, have values for the individual types of items and a total for the line at the right to be carried down. Still, it doesn't help as regards being more specific on number of same items when grouped together.

Too many variables for the noggin. It is fun to read through and attempt to understand as well as I can, though.

Hope all is well with you and yours.

Take care, Mike
back to ordering widgets...