Hi all,

This discussion needs a bit of clarification in my view.  It is based on
incomplete information and assumption that is based on that incomplete
information.

In aforementioned article Philip Baker talks about two different Jackson
saws.  One of them is Disston saw, branded Jackson.  The other are a few
saws made by William Jackson of Monroe, NY.  There is no dispute in Phil's
article that Disston's Jackson was lower grade and common saw.  The saws
with Eagle stamps on the spine are the saws made by Jackson of Monroe and to
these saws Phil refers as higher grade saws.  Both saws, Disston's and W.
Jackson's had similar, but not identical stamp on the spine - Jackson.

Regards,

Wiktor A. Kuc 
Albuquerque, NM 
505-401-6020
www.wkTools.com
www.wkFineTools.com
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: oldtools-bounces@r...
[mailto:oldtools-bounces@r...] On Behalf Of Peter Taran
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 3:32 PM
To: oldtools@r...
Subject: [OldTools] Birds on Saws

Galoots,

As Tom writes below, this sort of rationale doesn't make much sense.  I love
Phil to death, but it seems that sometimes he looks for meanings where the
only meaning is there is no meaning.

And Tom, believe it or not, last century of not, I do remember that saw.

Pete (who's planning to come to PATINA this year)

Tom Wrote:

I haven't seen the article you cite, but here are a couple of quick and
informal reactions:
        1)  Since Jackson was a second-tier brand name made by Disston, any
deliberate use of the eagle would be a Disston decision, not necessarily
generic to the world of saws at the time.  But if Jackson was below Disston
in the company's branding policies, why would there be the need to indicate
"better quality" Jackson saws?



        My Jackson backsaw (sharpened for me by Pete Taran back in the
latter years of the 20th century--driveby gloat) has a keystone outlined in
the medallion nut, surrounded by tiny beads but with no
text or other symbols.  On the steel back is stamped         JACKSON
WARRANTED CAST STEEL USA in three lines, with no other symbols.
There is no discernible etch on the blade.
                Tom Holloway,

-- 
Peter Taran
Vintage Saws on the web at:
http://www.vintagesaws.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for providing some of the missing information, Wiktor.  I was  
just bouncing off
Gary Roberts' original posting on the article, which--as I said--I  
had not seen.  The
only Jackson saws I knew about were the Disston-made second line.
	Tom Holloway,
thinking Pete might have an even better recollection of the One Son  
Disston ripsaw
he sharpened in the same batch, both picked up at Bill Gustafson's  
rib BBQ the
evening before the regional MWTCA meet at Hancock Shaker Village.

On Feb 15, 2008, at 6:27 PM, Wiktor A. Kuc wrote:
> This discussion needs a bit of clarification in my view.  It is  
> based on
> incomplete information and assumption that is based on that incomplete
> information.
>
> In aforementioned article Philip Baker talks about two different  
> Jackson
> saws.  One of them is Disston saw, branded Jackson.  The other are  
> a few
> saws made by William Jackson of Monroe, NY.  There is no dispute in  
> Phil's
> article that Disston's Jackson was lower grade and common saw.  The  
> saws
> with Eagle stamps on the spine are the saws made by Jackson of  
> Monroe and to
> these saws Phil refers as higher grade saws.  Both saws, Disston's  
> and W.
> Jackson's had similar, but not identical stamp on the spine - Jackson.

> Galoots,
>
> As Tom writes below, this sort of rationale doesn't make much  
> sense.  I love
> Phil to death, but it seems that sometimes he looks for meanings  
> where the
> only meaning is there is no meaning.
>
> And Tom, believe it or not, last century of not, I do remember that  
> saw.
>
> Pete (who's planning to come to PATINA this year)
>
> Tom Wrote:
>
> I haven't seen the article you cite, but here are a couple of quick  
> and
> informal reactions:
>         1)  Since Jackson was a second-tier brand name made by  
> Disston, any
> deliberate use of the eagle would be a Disston decision, not  
> necessarily
> generic to the world of saws at the time.  But if Jackson was below  
> Disston
> in the company's branding policies, why would there be the need to  
> indicate
> "better quality" Jackson saws?
>
> 
>
>         My Jackson backsaw (sharpened for me by Pete Taran back in the
> latter years of the 20th century--driveby gloat) has a keystone  
> outlined in
> the medallion nut, surrounded by tiny beads but with no
> text or other symbols.  On the steel back is stamped         JACKSON
> WARRANTED CAST STEEL USA in three lines, with no other symbols.
> There is no discernible etch on the blade.
>                 Tom Holloway,
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Taran
> Vintage Saws on the web at:
> http://www.vintagesaws.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Folks

What got me to thinking was the naming of the saws as having been made  
by William Jackson. Not to be a criticism of Phil, but thinking on how  
we arrive at the naming.

Other possibilities on the Eagle stamp:

1. The eagle stamps were too fragile to use on steel backs
2. The manufacturer supported the Federalist move to independent  
statehood that answered to a central government, with limits.
3. The manufacturer wanted to state that this tool was of US  
manufacture instead of overseas imports (an early Buy American campaign)
4. Some worker had a few too many to drink during lunch and got  
carried away each day, stamping and stamping
5. The eagle stamps looked good so the more the merrier

The Jackson Stamp:

1. The stamp had been used so many times that the cutting edges had  
worn, losing parts of the font serifs as well as creating a thicker  
letter (lettering on stamps usually have a sloped base. As they wear,  
the letter gets thicker and less distinct)
2. Some people stamped 'warranted' and 'cast steel' in one place, and  
some stamped them in others
3. The same drinker had a problem reading after a few too many  
lunchtime mugs
4. The stamper was illiterate and had no idea what looked correct and  
what didn't

Basically, without some hard evidence from the manufacturer, it's all  
guesswork based upon not a whole lot of information. We really want  
something to be unique or of importance, so we pick apart every mark  
and part in hopes of assigning meaning. But our assumptions really  
don't have much basis in fact unless we can prove them somehow. For  
all we know, a single Star on a saw medallion might refer to the  
maker's first born.

Gary

Gary Roberts
toolemera@m...
http://toolemerablog.typepad.com/
http://toolemera.com/

On Feb 16, 2008, at 1:30 AM, T&J Holloway wrote:

Thanks for providing some of the missing information, Wiktor.  I was  
just bouncing off
Gary Roberts' original posting on the article, which--as I said--I had  
not seen.  The
only Jackson saws I knew about were the Disston-made second line.
	Tom Holloway,
thinking Pete might have an even better recollection of the One Son  
Disston ripsaw
he sharpened in the same batch, both picked up at Bill Gustafson's rib  
BBQ the
evening before the regional MWTCA meet at Hancock Shaker Village.

On Feb 15, 2008, at 6:27 PM, Wiktor A. Kuc wrote:
> This discussion needs a bit of clarification in my view.  It is  
> based on
> incomplete information and assumption that is based on that incomplete
> information.
>
> In aforementioned article Philip Baker talks about two different  
> Jackson
> saws.  One of them is Disston saw, branded Jackson.  The other are a  
> few
> saws made by William Jackson of Monroe, NY.  There is no dispute in  
> Phil's
> article that Disston's Jackson was lower grade and common saw.  The  
> saws
> with Eagle stamps on the spine are the saws made by Jackson of  
> Monroe and to
> these saws Phil refers as higher grade saws.  Both saws, Disston's  
> and W.
> Jackson's had similar, but not identical stamp on the spine - Jackson.

> Galoots,
>
> As Tom writes below, this sort of rationale doesn't make much  
> sense.  I love
> Phil to death, but it seems that sometimes he looks for meanings  
> where the
> only meaning is there is no meaning.
>
> And Tom, believe it or not, last century of not, I do remember that  
> saw.
>
> Pete (who's planning to come to PATINA this year)
>
> Tom Wrote:
>
> I haven't seen the article you cite, but here are a couple of quick  
> and
> informal reactions:
>        1)  Since Jackson was a second-tier brand name made by  
> Disston, any
> deliberate use of the eagle would be a Disston decision, not  
> necessarily
> generic to the world of saws at the time.  But if Jackson was below  
> Disston
> in the company's branding policies, why would there be the need to  
> indicate
> "better quality" Jackson saws?
>
> 
>
>        My Jackson backsaw (sharpened for me by Pete Taran back in the
> latter years of the 20th century--driveby gloat) has a keystone  
> outlined in
> the medallion nut, surrounded by tiny beads but with no
> text or other symbols.  On the steel back is stamped         JACKSON
> WARRANTED CAST STEEL USA in three lines, with no other symbols.
> There is no discernible etch on the blade.
>                Tom Holloway,
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Taran
> Vintage Saws on the web at:
> http://www.vintagesaws.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

	Speaking of Disston-made Jackson saws, do we know why they chose that 
name for their saws?

	I was using one last week and it confirms my opinion that Disston 
never made a bad saw.  Jacksons are second rate in finish only, mostly 
due to the beech handle.  I actually prefer them to the Disston No. 4 
due to the thinner steel plate.  It's like a laser through butter.  
Jackson backsaws are great users.

Regards,
Steve - who will be doing a pre-PATINA saw sharpening session this 
afternoon with Charlie and the Sawnut

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Galoots,

As Tom writes below, this sort of rationale doesn't make much sense.  I
love Phil to death, but it seems that sometimes he looks for meanings
where the only meaning is there is no meaning.

And Tom, believe it or not, last century of not, I do remember that saw.

Pete (who's planning to come to PATINA this year)

Tom Wrote:

I haven't seen the article you cite, but here are a couple of quick
and informal reactions:
        1)  Since Jackson was a second-tier brand name made by Disston, any
deliberate use of the eagle would be a Disston decision, not
necessarily generic to the world of saws at the time.  But if Jackson
was below Disston in the company's branding policies, why would there
be the need to indicate "better quality" Jackson saws?



        My Jackson backsaw (sharpened for me by Pete Taran back in the
latter years of the 20th century--driveby gloat) has a keystone
outlined in the medallion nut, surrounded by tiny beads but with no
text or other symbols.  On the steel back is stamped         JACKSON
WARRANTED CAST STEEL USA in three lines, with no other symbols.
There is no discernible etch on the blade.
                Tom Holloway,

-- 
Peter Taran
Vintage Saws on the web at:
http://www.vintagesaws.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friends:

Must say up front that I don't know why any particular maker put an eagle
stamp on any particular tool.  However, I can shed some light on the eagle
from another direction.  I was once the President of a state-wide
association of collectors of historical artifacts and archival material here
in Texas.  Have also through other connections, spent a lot of time not just
in museums, but with white gloves on in their vaults.  And I have a modest
collection of cavalry-related artifacts myself.  Here are a few
observations:

1)  That is very clearly a 19th century American eagle.  The 18th century
version was a bit more graceful and bent differently, and the 20th century
versions were first straighter and then more stylized

2)  That eagle was used all over the place on things with no connection at
all to tools.  I think it was just a patriotic expression of no special
significance beyond that

3) The federalism debate had pretty much been settled in the constitutional
convention, although other issues of states rights were not settled and
flared up again in the Late Unpleasantness of the 1860s and bubbled right
through the 1960s

4) As the federal government itself used that eagle or versions thereof, and
lots of other folks did, too, it is very unlikely that the eagle symbolized
any particular position in a political debate

5) Pure conjecture here, but it seems unlikely that a businessman would
intentionally mark his product with a symbol that could alienate part of his
prospective base of customers.   

Joseph Sullivan

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joseph

I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of the ubiquitous Eagle. It  
looked good, was accepted as a symbol and so found it's way into all  
kinds of products and signage. I lean towards it's use, and even the  
number of stamps per tool, as a function of 'hey if it looks good  
once, why not do a few more?'

Gary

Gary Roberts
toolemera@m...
http://toolemerablog.typepad.com/
http://toolemera.com/

On Feb 16, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Joseph Sullivan wrote:

Friends:

Must say up front that I don't know why any particular maker put an  
eagle
stamp on any particular tool.  However, I can shed some light on the  
eagle
from another direction.  I was once the President of a state-wide
association of collectors of historical artifacts and archival  
material here
in Texas.  Have also through other connections, spent a lot of time  
not just
in museums, but with white gloves on in their vaults.  And I have a  
modest
collection of cavalry-related artifacts myself.  Here are a few
observations:

1)  That is very clearly a 19th century American eagle.  The 18th  
century
version was a bit more graceful and bent differently, and the 20th  
century
versions were first straighter and then more stylized

2)  That eagle was used all over the place on things with no  
connection at
all to tools.  I think it was just a patriotic expression of no special
significance beyond that

3) The federalism debate had pretty much been settled in the  
constitutional
convention, although other issues of states rights were not settled and
flared up again in the Late Unpleasantness of the 1860s and bubbled  
right
through the 1960s

4) As the federal government itself used that eagle or versions  
thereof, and
lots of other folks did, too, it is very unlikely that the eagle  
symbolized
any particular position in a political debate

5) Pure conjecture here, but it seems unlikely that a businessman would
intentionally mark his product with a symbol that could alienate part  
of his
prospective base of customers.

Joseph Sullivan

------------------------------------------------------------------------