Some of those strops of that style took four razors in two swing outs."Quote:
Originally Posted by jfk742
Attachment 297335
Good luck!
~Richard
Printable View
Some of those strops of that style took four razors in two swing outs."Quote:
Originally Posted by jfk742
Attachment 297335
Good luck!
~Richard
Fox & Norris, huh? I don’t think I would have ever figured that on my own. Been going in circles for the last 2 hours and hadn’t gotten anywhere.
Thank you ,SG.
Those boxes are in really nice shape. The leather on this one is pretty much completely gone on the base. Unfortunately the name carved into the handle of the box is nearly illegible. The area I found it in dates back to the late 1800’s and is fairly well documented. I need to take some more pictures of it and fool with exposure settings and see if I can’t actually read it. A rubbing maybe a good way too, I think I’ll try that first.
Is there any lettering on the handle of the strop?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer
No, the boxes do not have any markings. They were probably a mass produced item. If you learn more, let e know,please.Quote:
Originally Posted by jfk742
The Norris are relatively easy to find. A French collector has a collection of 7 copies. He found them all in France. Production must have been important. Your box is french
Nice! Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by JOB15
The second one is a George Revil https://historyrazors.wordpress.com/...revill-george/
Well done!
Actually, a Samuel Norris (1745 - 1817), his parents were Matthew Norris and Catherine Fox.Quote:
Originally Posted by jfk742
Catherine Fox was the sister of John Fox, Sheffield, razor-maker (1714 - 1793)
John Fox was one of three brothers, which never married, the mark *P went to Samuel Norris.
Here are 3 razors, the first (with a slight "Dip-at-toe") is a John Fox (see spine). The second
(nice "Dip-at-toe") is a Samuel Norris (not using the *P). The third is a Samuel Norris as well,
using the *P. Since the shape of the razor, it is made around the beginning of the 1800's,
so it must be a Samuel Norris.
Attachment 297353Attachment 297354Attachment 297355
Yours is a bit older, it seems to be made around the end of the 18th century - 1800's.
Your box is marked by the punch of Crenet, Parisian cutler. All the boxes were not marked, but I have already seen. I have a box similar to yours with the punch of Cuvier in Paris.
Thank you for the description. This helped. I understand the thinking to create a "true" wedge, as this was what I was thinking before, though I didn't realize that there were no true wedges made... except through trial and error, and then it stopped. They stopped trying to make true wedges based on their own experience, and or the experiences of others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voidmonster
Even with taping the spine, on a "true" wedge, the problem will not be addressed, as the tape folded down leaving the spine edge will contact before the actual spine edge..
This will not fix the rolling problem that the true wedge has.
You can't escape that problem with tape.
IMHO It would be a mistake to take a beautiful piece of history and destroy it, when the experience of others, experience that literally spans centuries, strongly suggests a different approach.
Perhaps you might take a cheap crappy wedge, like I did, and learn the lesson that way.
I will say though, that I wished that I had read this thread before doing that, and I still had a level of guilt for destroying even a scrappy wedge that could have been saved.
To each his own though, and this is simply my limited opinion.
