So, did I get it Adam? Rambling musings.

Some ideas hidden there, maybe, also rambles

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Some of these ideas aren't exclusive to the 18th century, since they're still good practices today, but I think Adam was cleverly talking about efficient practices as much as anything:

1. Always use the tool in hand for as many things as you can before you put it down to pick up another one.

2. See every tool as if you were seeing it for the first time and needed to ask, "what's this for?" Then use it for all those uses.

3. Since good layout = quality, think about how to use your tools to increase the precision of your measurements, rather than relying on faulty tools like eyes and rulers.

4. Understand your material.

Re: So, did I get it Adam?

Adam Cherubini

>David,

I think you're writing about what I would call 'Experimental Archeology". It certainly attracts me and has that thrill of discovery. And if you got that from the aricle, that's great.

And if you got the sense that there's more to the striking knife than making marks and more to the article than technique, you're on the right track.

Perhaps the nicest thing about period woodworking is that it's not well understood so its a constant learning experience. I guess that's why I'm thankful for the WC community (do Europeans snicker when we write such things?). I come here to learn and be inspired just like you.

I hope you find my next article just as interesting. Chris and I have certainly worked very hard on it.

Adam

one fact hit me ...

Clay C in Miami

>One bit that struck me in the article was the note that, during the entire 18th century, what's thought of as the zenith of fine furniture, there was not a single reference book published with cabinetmaking techniques. Given the breadth of 18th C publishing otherwise, and granting me the assumption that publishers' avaricious nature has not changed much in the intervening years, this single, little fact does seem to speak volumes.

Let me just join the chorus of thanks Adam, I am very appreciative. I'll look forward to the next article - and, if I hadn't already subscribed as a result of Chris' good work, your articles would have driven me to do so. (Though not - never - with one of those little flyaway cards in the magazines. I fear that any use of those only encourages them ...)

Yours,

Clay

Re: one fact hit me ...

Joel

>Actually the single greatest cabinetmaking book of all time was published in the 18th century.

Roubo's "ARt of the aAbinetmaker"

(there is also Plumier (sp?) on Turning from the same period

it's just before the French Revolution, and England was still too poor a country to justify really top class work in any quantity. THe English books of the time are mostly pricing guides and pattern books but Roubo is methodolgy. IT's amazing what's in there.

At the time most English cabinetmakers would have been illierate. Except for the odd gentleman (George 3 was not a bad ornamental turner) hobby woodworking was not done. and the richer, more successfull cabinet shops in places like London would have had people who at the very least spoke French. Educated people would have always read and spoken French too.

I wish I could read French just so I could understand more than the pictures.

For the record:

Adam Cherubini, NJ

>Joel,

I believe I included the qualifier "in the English language", so as to exclude Roubo.

I agree Roubo is a gold mine, and I too wish I could read it. When is someone going to translate that thing?

But I don't agree with a few details:

it's just before the French Revolution

Well, 20 years or so before.

and England was still too poor a country to justify really top class work in any quantity.

In my opinion, England's industrial revolution began with the building boom following the Great Fire of London. England was so busy, they reduced the allowable age of apprentices (London Rules). Following the fire, English tradesmen remained busy supplying England's many colonies including America.

At the time most English cabinetmakers would have been illierate.

I don't think there is any evidence of this and plenty of evidence to the contrary. English farmers, like French or American farmers may have been less literate then the whole of society. But part of an English apprenticeship included learning to read and write and learning some pretty high level mathematics. These were middle class people in many cases.

Except for the odd gentleman (George 3 was not a bad ornamental turner) hobby woodworking was not done.

Hobby or at least non-professional woodworking was probably pretty common in England. Special "gentleman's" toolchests were made and marketed directly to this community. I think the term "Gentleman" as in "Gent's" saw doesn't so much imply a social ranking than it does a non-professional or occasional user. That said, the boxes Jay Gaynor has written about were expensive. But period estate inventories often include a few woodworking tools beyond the ubiquitous whip saws.

That said there is a difference between French and English society including trades. I don't know exactly what the differences are, let alone why they exist. It could be that the French tradesmen supplied France's comparitively larger aristocratic community while England and her colonies' rising middle class were the focus of English tradesmen.

The reason for the lack of English language versions of Roubo escapes me. There may have been one that has been lost. Moxon may have been sufficient. Or the Guilds may have simply prevented one from being published. Whatever the reason, the illiteracy of English tradesmen, the unsophisticated nature of their work, and their general lack of industrialization are neither true nor causal.

I hope this didn't sound too disagreeable, Joel. These are fine points worthy or debate and beer both of which I hope to share with you soon. BTW, I have your chisel. I'm very impressed but I would like to sharpen it. May I?

Adam

Re: one fact hit me ...

paul womack

>At the time most English cabinetmakers would have been illiterate.

Yeah - the people that could DO cabinet work couldn't write, and the people that could WRITE didn't know (or care, I suspect) about woodwork.

In any case, anyone that wanted to learn about woodwork knew exactly what to do; find a Master.

So between a too-small pool of potential writers, and in any case, a too-small market place of readers, I can't see publishers falling over themselves to fill the non-existent market niche. I don't think it was (solely) a case of keeping trade secrets.

BugBear

Re: For the record: (long)

joel

>"I believe I included the qualifier "in the English language", so as to exclude Roubo. "

Okay but certainly anyone rich enough or interested enough to buy a book that thick in England would have also read french. And in the places where high end work would have been done this would have been much more common too. So limiting the Language to english isn't really a fair way of representing what was going on in England or the colonies at the time.

"I agree Roubo is a gold mine, and I too wish I could read it. When is someone going to translate that thing? "

It's not only in French - it's in 18th century French. Schoolyard French doesn't cut it and even for a French person unless they really know the subject it's very very hard. The public Library has an 18th Century French English dictionary (modern book) but it doesn't a have the technical words in it. It would be a wonderful project but it would take years.

"But I don't agree with a few details:

it's just before the French Revolution

Well, 20 years or so before. "

French Revolution: 1789

publication: 1769- 1782

it was printed in stages I don't know when and how - but the real point is that 20 year before the revolution or 10 was the height of the aristocracy and when you look at the kind of work that was being done in France at the time at the very high end (which is what Roubo is about) you start understanding why they had a revolution. and the type of customers who patronized the work presented in the book.

"In my opinion, England's industrial revolution began with the building boom following the Great Fire of London. England was so busy, they reduced the allowable age of apprentices (London Rules). Following the fire, English tradesmen remained busy supplying England's many colonies including America. "

Look at the furniture. England was certainly rapidly developing that entire century but the real fancier and more complicated style of furniture are later in the century and in the early 19th century.

Looking at English furniture in the musuem you see a real rise in fanciness and luxury in the last quarter of the 18th century. Fancy English MArquetry that I have seen is all post revolution (by frenchman living in the UK or Englishman trained in France. ) and this is what Roubo is about - not the plainer more general stuff.

"At the time most English cabinetmakers would have been illierate. "

"I don't think there is any evidence of this and plenty of evidence to the contrary. English farmers, like French or American farmers may have been less literate then the whole of society. But part of an English apprenticeship included learning to read and write and learning some pretty high level mathematics. These were middle class people in many cases. "

I think I would have to recant and agree with you here on the higher end. On the low end the workman were illerate but woodworkers in general were more educated than average - but the concept of general reading for the masses (newpapers, libraries etc) started in the 18th century - THere also wasn't much to read - but again anyone with a serious education at all would have wanted to learn french and would have been expected to - after all France was the technical center of the western world at the time.

Except for the odd gentleman (George 3 was not a bad ornamental turner) hobby woodworking was not done.

"Hobby or at least non-professional woodworking was probably pretty common in England. "

I believe these tools were for home repair - not for hobbiest type stuff like we do today. I am not aware of documentation of the averge middle class person having the time let along the inclination to purse such a hobby like woodworking. If you have any reference material I would be most grateful for the information.

"The reason for the lack of English language versions of Roubo escapes me. "

I don't know how many copies of Roubo were originally printed. I can't image there were a lot and it certainly wasn't a casual purchase. Also the type of work he describes really only applies to very high class work which wasn't really relavant for most woodwork being done outside the major centers of wealth in France, and less so German and England for a very small number of clients.

This is speculation but I can't beleive the book made any money in France, let along having a wide enough market to justify a translation - escpecially as I have mentioned before the customer who could afford it - would have also been able to read French.

"These are fine points worthy or debate and beer both of which I hope to share with you soon"

That would be most excellent! You are welcome anytime!!!

Jole, A question...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Is the book still available?

I�d like to see it, sounds very interesting, and my wife knows French too�

Sorry Joel, Can't spell today

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>

Re: Jole, A question...

joel

>I was very lucky - I was at an auction where nobody wanted it - too heavy - so I got a reprint for very little money ($290).

The reprint of this edition goes for about 1500 - 2000. An original edition 5000 and up.

THere is also a late 19th century reprint reduced size which if you can find a good copy might be the most cost effective.

Re: one fact hit me ...

George Makowski

>Joel, To jump in on tradesmans' literacy in XVIIIc. England; Literacy studies of England show that by the mid-1500s many common people far below the level of master tradesman were literate. Boys, in particular, often had 2-4 years of simple literacy instruction even in villages. While few wrote well, they could read. By 1600, informational material on the trades is being published and by a century later was apparently widespread. These, if I recall, were not gentlemens' manuals or encyclopedias of the trades but actual books for tradesmen to use for information on popular styles, proportions, ornaments in building. In fact literacy and information exchange by print among common people is seen as one of the key elements of English economic success an political liberalization.

Good reading,

George in AL

Yowzaaaaaaaaaa!

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>That's one pricey book...

Thank you.

Re: Jole, A question...

L. Hanson

>Here's a Canadian store that lists the 5 sections of Roubo's book separately, with prices ranging from $30 to $50 or so:

Books by Roubo

I believe it was originally published as 5 or 6 separate editions - the separate editions being related to the trades:

CABINETMAKER

FURNITURE

BUILDING

CARRIAGE-BUILDER

GARDENS

HTH

Leif

NorseWoodsmith.com

Nicholson

Jeff Schmidt (KY)

>Peter Nicholson wrote a plethora of volumes (27) on various aspects of the building trades. His Mechanical Exercises (later titled Mechanic's Companion) first published in 1811 is probably the most often referenced. It covers carpentry, joinery, bricklaying, masonry, slating, plastering, painting, smithing and turning. Prior to this book, and in the late 18th century, he had already published The Carpenter's New Guide (which continued to be re-published in the first half of the 18th century), Student's Instructor and Joiner's Assistant. He also penned a volume titled Practical Carpentry, Joinery, and Cabinetmaking. The earliest version of this book I have seen listed was 1826.

Early in his career, he spent 4 years as a cabinetmaker's apprentice in London before he entered into the building and architectural fields (and later, mathematics, engineering and finally, teaching) so he some hands-on experience with furniture.

I have never seen any of these volumes so I can't speak to what they contain but I surprised that Dover or Astragal have not re-published some of them.

To the question of the demand for such practical volumes in the late 18th and early 19th century, the following quote about Nicholson is telling.

"The works of Peter Nicholson, while they have contributed to the advancement of knowledge, have tended to raise the English mechanic to that pre-eminence he has attained over the other artificers of Europe; and while they have been honoured with the proudest marks of distinction by the various learned societies of this kingdom, have yet failed to produce to their author those benefits which are necessary for his existence; and it must ever be a source of regret that an individual who, having devoted his best energies to the advancement of science, should be left at the close of a long and laborious life, and in his seventy-third year, to struggle in penury and want."

Another long bit of misc. .

Joel

>As you can see by my last post I have mostly recanted on the literacy front. But what we determine as "literate" today was a lot more literate than someone back then who could sign their name and recite from the Bible. Books were very expensive. And of course the candles to read at night were too. During the day people worked.

THe modern idea that if you studied something you also got a few textbooks - I don't buy for a second. Moxon is a great window to 17th century woodworking, but it is certainly far to basic a book to be worth studing as an apprentice. I am sure - although I don't know this for a fact - the main customers of Moxon and other "How to writers" was of the gentlemen and Merchant classes who were interested in learning about industrial stuff but not specifically that they planned to do any work themselves. (Think of Samuel Pepys, who collected books, was the owner of the oldest surviving bookcase ever built specifically for books, Was a customer of Moxon and really thrilled in the fact that he could talk inteligently with his cabinetmaker (Simon the Joyner) And if I recall he did the occasioanal repair around the house but he certainly didn't have a hobby of woodworking. History does not record whay Sumon the Joyner thought of HIM as a customer)

THe important English woodworking books of the 18th century for the trade would be patternbooks and price guides.

It is known that in the shipyards scale models were used instead of blueprints because 1- blueprints hadn't really been invented - and enough of the workman were illiterate so a model of what they should build was more useful.

Incidently in woodworking magazine for amatures up to - let's say 1940 or so - articles on technique are few and far between. You get tones of articles on making this or that, building tools, furniture archtecture, etc but almost nothing on specific useages of tools. Also no tool reviews of any kind and I cannot recall a single article in any of the old magazines I have read on sharpening. And this is 20th century - and we know the magazines were targeted at hobbyists. I think it was just a different senseibilty.

Re: Jole, A question...

Joel

>YEs- I have heard of that edition but never seen it.

My copy is in three volumes covering the four original volumes - My guess is that this edition has the same content and the price is better.

Great info - Thanks!

Clay C in Miami

>Thanks for that link, Leif. And, as an unexpected bonus, the site says the prices at Archambault are in Canadian dollars. I bought the repro of the 'ebeniste' (cabinetmaker) volume, and including shipping to Miami, the total was under US$36. I am sure that Joel is right about Old French, and it will be a slow tough slog, but if I manage to translate any pearls, I'll pass 'em along.

And, let me say to Joel and Adam (and the others) how much I appreciate both the devotion of time and effort to enlightening us in this thread and the utter absence, not just of acrimony, but of the slightest scent of anything other than eager pursuit of the facts.

I don't think Adam's point regarding trade secrets even requires any absence of published works to support it, as the 'methods of work'-type information which seems to be the focus was certainly primarily in the oral tradition of the masters and their apprentices.

I found this all fascinating, and hope that, to the extent this thread has sent either or both of you off in a quest for more information, you will share it with us as it turns up.

Clay

Archambault

Don Thompson - Cutler Ridge, Florida

>FWIW, I have bought from them, and had no problems.

Bookmarks

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Every time I get a magazine, I save one of the blown-in cards as a bookmark. The rest go back to be melted down and made into more paper (I HOPE with actual useful words on it, rather than more solicitations to subscribe).