My father-in-law passed away earlier in the year. Since then we have been cleaning up his house. He had a myriad of coffee tins in the basement full of this and that collected over a lifetime. Some of the coolest things he had were a bunch of small packets of woodscrews. Likely they are from the 1970s or 80s. Quite a few are from Hercules Products Co. from Montreal. I couldn’t find anything on the company, but the brass wood screws are made in Japan. The other cool thing was the small packs from Spar-Pak, whose claim to fame may have been the containers – on the back it says “Squeeze ends to open anti-litter reusable workshop containers”. The company who made them was Spar Group Inc. circa 1990 (the company changed names numerous times, and now is Spectrum Brands Canada, Inc. but no longer make fasteners).
Roofing is one of those oft overlooked features of a modern house. In North America, many roofs are made of synthetic asphalt-based roof tiles – not made to last any great length of time, and subsequently thrown in a landfill. Historically there have been many greener alternatives, and in Norway you can find examples of some of the more classic ones. I sometimes wonder why we don’t make sustainable, long-lasting roofs, and instead opt for short term solutions.
One of the more interesting roof types is the wooden plank roof, found across Nordic countries. Unlike wooden shingles, these roofs use thick, overlapping planks that follow the fall of the roof. They are typically 1” thick and made of pine (the most common board dimensions for these types of roofs is 22×145mm). The lower planks have 2-3 grooves to allow any water that seeps through to be channelled down the plank. The roof is constructed so that the space between them becomes almost watertight when they bow (installed heartwood side up). Constructing a roof in this manner allows for adequate ventilation, and moisture to run-off. The roof is then typically covered with pine tar. The average board roof last about 30 years if properly maintained.
Plank roof
Wood shingles
The form of shingles found on structures such as stave churches is vastly different from the “typical” shake or shingle found on small structures. These are also treated with pine tar.
Next are turf roofs. There is nothing new about green roofs, they have been used for thousands of years to provide a long lasting roof. These roofs are constructed of several layers with broad sheets of birch bark laid upon a roof surface made of wooden planks. Two layers of sod, often containing a diverse set of meadow plant species, are then laid on the birch bark sheets. The first layer is laid back up to the dead grass so it can serve as drainage. The second layer is laid on this first layer. These roofs were quite inexpensive, materials sourced from the local environment.
Turf roof
Slate roof
Finally there are slate roofs, but not tiny slate, huge sheets of it. There were slate quarries in Hordaland, most in Hardanger, Fusa, Kvinnherad, Sveio and Voss. Voss slate is ideally suited to roof slates as it characteristically splits into thin plates.
Further Reading:
Jerri Holan, Norwegian Wood : A Tradition of Building (1990)
I found this bench in Josef M. Greber’s Die Geschichte des Hobels (The Story of Planes) on page 133. It is a piece of inlay work by Italian carver Agostino De Marchi from Crema (1435-1502). de Marchi came from a family of carvers active in Bologna in the 15th and 16th centuries. He created a series of intarsia panels (a form of wood laying) for the choir of San Petronio in Bologna between 1468 and 1477. The panel shows a workbench, a frame saw, five planes, and a toolbox (there might be a sixth plane atop the toolbox).
The workshop panel
The workbench ca. 1470
What is interesting here is the scale of the workbench. The artist has either made the decision to reduce the scale of the workbench in relation to the other tools, or this bench is a more of a low-bench. Some might argue that it could not be a low-bench because there is a plane on it, but there is nothing to say that the low-bench could not be used for some planing tasks. The bench seems to have splayed legs, with no work holding devices, except for possibly a small planing stop on the left-front top of the bench. As it turns out, looking at another piece of artwork will help clarify things.
Below is Novella del Grasso Legnaiuolo, a woodcut from January 1554. Here the workbench is depicted as a heavy-built knee-high bench used for planing and cutting. In reality these low-benches were little different to those found in Roman times as described in Christopher Schwarz’s books, The Anarchist’s Workbench and Ingenious Mechanicks.
Modern carving is typified by an abundance of high quality tools of varying shapes. But few would be able to produce the intricacy of the carvings found in places like Norway from 1000 years ago (given the primitive tools used). One of the most interesting carvings is a relief found on the Urnes Stave Church, dating from approximately 1030-1060AD. The current church on that location is from about AD1130 however it is predated by at least one church from AD1030. It is decorated with animal motifs and is representative of the last forms of Viking art. The carvings exist on the north wall of the existing church. The forms in the carving represent two animals – a lion being attacked by a series of serpents (or wingless dragons). The animals were portrayed with long, intertwined limbs or snakes, deeply carved and in figure-8 patterns. The lion typically symbolizes Christ, whereas the serpents evil.
An intricate carving from the Urnes Stave Church.
“It is a slender creature, its body and limbs tapering to almost thread-like extremities, with large spirals marking its shoulder and hip. The breast is the thickest part of the body; the neck bending in a tense curve upwards and back, joins the head without any demarcation. Three curious curls which form the mane hang down from the neck, while the ears are short and curved upwards. The animal’s head is elongated, with a long almond-shaped eye pointing forward. The snout terminates in a lip-lappet which then curves round, crossing the upper jaw, to end in a little scroll in the open gap between the upper and lower jaws. And from these jaws protrude two terrible pointed tusks.”
Peter Anker, The Art of Scandinavia (1970, pp.213)
A close-up of the lion’s head.
And the serpents?
“The animal which attacks the great quadruped from above, fiercely snapping at its throat, can be defined at best as a wingless dragon. It has a snake-like, immensely long body, as well as a foreleg and a hindleg. Seen from above, its head and eyes are of the same elongated shape as those of the big quadruped, but the lip-lappet is missing. The majority of animals belong to the serpent like species of dragons, curving and winding in great loops around the arch and on either side of the door. But in between appear real snakes of thread-like slimness, carved with such precision that they stand up from the background with the sharpness of a knife-edge.”
Peter Anker, The Art of Scandinavia (1970, pp.213-214)
Basic bench planes have changed very little since the late 1800s. It isn’t that often that you see reproduction planes or any sort, largely because it is somewhat of an expensive process. It would be great to see someone reproduce some of Bailey’s early block planes, but alas that will likely never happen. One of the few reproductions out there is Lee Valley’s “Little Victor” plane, modelled on the original No.51.
The patent for the basic features was issued on Oct. 16, 1877 (No.196,068), with the heading “Improvement in bench-planes”. The patent suggests that the improvements were “designed for a class of work exemplified by stake-pointing and whip-stock manufacture”. The patent described a simple method of locking the iron into the plane – the cutting iron was inserted below a lug cast into each side of the plane and locked into place using the pressure of a screw from below, effectively eliminating the need for a cap iron.
There were five models of the plane offered between 1880 and 1884.
No.50 – japanned body, adjustable cutter, hollowed side finger grips.
No.50½ – nickel-plated body and adjustable cutter, hollowed side finger grips.
No.51½ – nickel-plated body, non-adjustable, hollowed side finger grips, screw-fastening.
No.52 – economy model, japanned body, non-adjustable (small screw eye machine screw to wedge cutter in place)
The snippet below is from the 1883 catalog from Stanley Rule & Level Company.
Both the No.50 and No.50½ had a knurled sleeve below the adjusting mechanism which when turned counter-clockwise forced the blade adjusting mechanism up, locking it in place. The No.51 and No.51½ held the blade in place using pressure from the underside provided by a round head screw attached to a star-shaped cogwheel. They were sold to the likes of instrument and pattern makers, and hobbyists.
Strangely enough many of the pictures of No.50 planes available on the net do not seem to have any form of adjustment mechanism, as cited in the patent, rather the simple mechanism of the No.51 (nor does the blade have grooves).
It is the ideal plane for people making miniatures, or models, where precision is still required, but one does not need a large black plane. The Veritas reproduction has an investment-cast steel (based on lost-wax casting,) body, a 45° bed angle and a fixed mouth. It is an exercise in simplicity, and the sort of plane you can carry in your apron for some small task. Why a reproduction and not the real thing? Well in reality these planes were only made during a small window of time. They are hard to find, and honestly expensive.
Veritas also makes two squirrel-tailed palm planes in the same design, one with a curved and the other with a flat body. The planes are a little larger with a 3-3/8″ (L) × 1-3/8″ sole.
Specs:
Size: 3-1/8″ (L) × 1-1/4″ Weight: 142 grams Material: investment-cast steel Bed angle: 45° Mouth: fixed Lever-cap: machine-screw with cogwheel below the blade
Further Reading:
You can read a review of the Veritas “Little Victor” by Derek Cohen.
André J. Roubo’s description of a bench in L’art du Menuisier in the late 18th century may be one of the most comprehensive descriptions ever written. The bench is simple, yet extremely robust. It is composed of a stout frame with four legs and stretchers upon which sits a bench-top hewn out of a single large block of wood. This is effectively four legs, four stretchers, a top, and twelve joints.
Fig.1: Roubo’s workbench from Vol.1, Plate 11
There is no tail vise, a vague sequence of holes for hold-fasts, and no build in front vise. Wood holding mechanisms include a single large planing (or bench) stop, and a wooden hook (crochet de bois) screwed to the left front edge of the bench. An “optional” leg vise or “presse” is described, but one wonders how often this would be used considering it makes no appearance in the picture of the joiners shop in the top half of the same plate (Fig.2). All work holding seems to be accomplished by pushing the work-piece into the maw of the crochet (e.g. doors), pushed against the planing stop (for planing), or secured to the front or top off the bench using iron holdfasts, which often had a diameter of 1-1/16 to 1-3/16”, and a length of 18-24 inches.
Having said that the picture does show a specific type of joinery, related to architectural work. They would have focused solely on doors, windows, panelling, staircases etc. for internal outfitting of houses in a time before drywall. So for this reason, the use of a bench vise may have been superfluous. The modified set-up which allowed for use of a leg-vise may then have been more for cabinet, or furniture makers. In all reality Roubo likely did not invent this bench, and may have actually borrowed some of the accoutrements, e.g. leg vise, from others. The colossal size of Roubo’s workbench does not really lend itself to the work of the cabinetmaker – it was a joiners’s bench made to construct large items. It was not designed to make intricate dovetail joints for chests or other household furniture.
A more realistic cabinetmakers already existed in the guise of the cabinetmakers bench in Volume 3 (Plate 279), a bench which is likely of German origin. It is not surprising that some German woodworking techniques were absorbed by the French. Pierre Verlet found that in the 18th century one third of cabinet makers in Paris were German [1]. Artisans from many countries surrounding France were drawn their due to the dominance of French culture. By the late 1700s some of Paris’s luxury furniture workshops were owned by Germans.
Fig.2: Plate 11: Interior view of a joiner’s shop. Five men are working at their benches: The first is laying a groove in a piece of wood using a chisel and mallet; two are sawing, and the last two are planing.Two apprentices are sharpening tools and retrieving hot glue.
Roubo’s description and illustrations are deemed valid because he was a master joiner, unlike Diderot, or Moxon. He began work on his four volumes at the age of 29, after 18 years of woodworking. Roubo’s specialty was architectural woodworking (doors, windows, staircases, panelling etc.), so there is little surprise that the workshop depicted in Plate 11 is involved with this art. There are seven workers, and eight large benches, ideally suited to the task of woodworking for house interiors. In fact the depiction is based on first-hand experience, as described in the inventory of goods drawn up after the death of Roubo’s second wife in 1772 [2]. Roubo intended his book for his fellow craftsmen, hence the descriptive detail of processes and tools, but likely few could afford it.
Further reading:
Pierre Verlet, L’art du meuble à Paris au XVIIIe siècle (1958)
Inventory by de La Frenaye, notary, 23 September 1772, A.N., Minutier central, ET/XLIX/806.
Belhoste, B., “A Parisian Craftsman Among the Savants: The Joiner André-Jacob Roubo (1739–1791) and his Works”, Annals of Science (2012)
Thamer, Hans-Ulrich, “L’Art du Menuisier. Work practices of French joiners and cabinet-makers in the eighteenth century”, EUI Working Paper No.85/171, European University Institute (1985)
sole.
working by hand 