Question About Shoulderless Grinds with Demarcated Shoulders

Over the years I've noticed a number of Joseph Rodgers razors (from both the 19th and 20th centuries) that have shoulderless grinds, yet also have a thin line etched or stamped across the blade to demarcate a shoulder.

Here's a pic of what I'm talking about:

Attachment 299875

My question is, is this a stylistic quirk unique to the Rodgers firm, or was it something that multiple makers did? In my records the only non-Rodgers razors with this feature are marked with the names of retailers who didn't make cutlery themselves.

Of course, regarding my record keeping, I haven't really been tracking this specific feature, so it's possible I've seen this grind on pieces made by several cutlers but didn't find it worth making note of at the time.

I poked around a bit in the archives here and couldn't find anything on this topic, but if I missed an old thread, please point me in the right direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanlon

Over the years I've noticed a number of Joseph Rodgers razors (from both the 19th and 20th centuries) that have shoulderless grinds, yet also have a thin line etched or stamped across the blade to demarcate a shoulder.

Here's a pic of what I'm talking about:

Attachment 299875

My question is, is this a stylistic quirk unique to the Rodgers firm, or was it something that multiple makers did? In my records the only non-Rodgers razors with this feature are marked with the names of retailers who didn't make cutlery themselves.

Of course, regarding my record keeping, I haven't really been tracking this specific feature, so it's possible I've seen this grind on pieces made by several cutlers but didn't find it worth making note of at the time.

I poked around a bit in the archives here and couldn't find anything on this topic, but if I missed an old thread, please point me in the right direction.

---

Weirdly, I’d never seen it on a Rodgers razor, but I’m very familiar.

It was done in a lot of different ways. Here’s a selection of them, all from wildly different manufacturers:

Attachment 299879

Edit: oops, posted before I’d finished posting because I wanted to look at the preview. :P

All the way on the right is an early 1800’s Tookey razor from London, it’s been lightly groudn and lost part of the scribed line, but it is there. It’s not a shoulderless grind, but pretty clearly a part of the same decorative idea.

Moving left, is a William Dadley from 1800-1830, Stratford-upon-Avon. It’s not the exact same thing — the blade face is ground about half a milimeter deeper than the tang, but it’s the same decorative element.

Next is an 1840’s Wade & Butcher ‘Celebrated Old Army Razor’. Sheffield. Same basic blade pattern as the Dadley, but considerably larger.

Then an 1860’s Wade & Butcher ‘Made Expressly for E. Mullins, Philadelphia’. Much more along the lines of the Rodgers, but still it’s own thing.

T. Morgan comes next, mid 1800’s, almost certainly from somewhere in England. It’s very similar to the Wade & Butcher but also its own thing.

G. Barrett of 144 Fleet Street in London was made by the Ragg brothers in Sheffield and is yet another licensing of Stewart’s Plantangenet Razor (with guard, I took it off for the picture so you could more clearly see it). Roughly 1850’s. Very similar to the Rodgers, but with a much elongated tang.

Joseph Elliot is next, roughly 1840’s, part of their pressed horn scale razors commemorating American cities (this one is New Orleans), and the only example I’ve seen of this pattern from Elliot. It’s not even a shoulderless, but the line is scribed there anyway.

Last up is a rare John Elliot. From the 1850’s. Unusual for a couple of reasons. First, it’s a frameback with a crocus polished blade, second because the tang and part of the blade (as you can see) were originally blued ... To give the same basic effect as that scribed line.

Looking at the lot of them, my guess is that the idea behind it was as a honing aid. For most of these razors, the line indicates where the cutting edge begins. Clearly though, it was also just a decorative element since it serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever on either Elliot razor, and not much of one on the Barrett,

Thanks for that very thorough answer, really appreciate it!

I've got a matched set of three I. Turrill razors c.1830-.c1850 that also have this line. Turrill was a maker of dressing and writing cases, not of razors. For no real reason except the pleasure of detective work, I was kind of hoping I could trace their manufacture back to a specific maker like Rodgers, but you shot that theory all to heck. Guess I'll never know for sure who made them.

Attachment 299883

In those times the bevels were ground freehand. Looks like a indexing mark were the bevel should originate on the heel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voidmonster

Weirdly, I’d never seen it on a Rodgers razor, but I’m very familiar.

It was done in a lot of different ways. Here’s a selection of them, all from wildly different manufacturers:

Attachment 299879

,

---

Thank you for your awesome research and exhaustive efforts to bring it forward so that we can all enjoy!
I really appreciate and will never grow tired if reading it.
Such a small detail could present such a puzzling question..
I really like that W&B 3rd from right. And the Elliot at the end. Very cool!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanlon

Attachment 299883

---

This pinwork, does anyone know the name of the art method? I've read it before and can't remember.
When I first saw it years ago I thought "meh, no big deal".
Upon closer inspection, it seems to have taken serious effort to do right, to do it well, it also has a unique style it seems, besides the unique method! Now I'm a big fan of it.
Does anyone have a timeframe it was being made?
...tiny little holes drilled and then metal pins inserted and filed flush. The work must've been time consuming!
Can I get a pic of the full scale?
Thank you!
:chapeau

What makes this site so great and worth sticking with? The fact that one can ask for info on just about anything dealing with a straight razor and someone will freely chime in with all the info they have just to help out and share.....really warms the heart!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanlon

Thanks for that very thorough answer, really appreciate it!

I've got a matched set of three I. Turrill razors c.1830-.c1850 that also have this line. Turrill was a maker of dressing and writing cases, not of razors. For no real reason except the pleasure of detective work, I was kind of hoping I could trace their manufacture back to a specific maker like Rodgers, but you shot that theory all to heck. Guess I'll never know for sure who made them.

Attachment 299883

---

The whole 'who made that' question is one I've chased a lot, myself. I did a big writeup on it here.

The short version is that the tang stamp only tells you who put in the work order, not where it was made. Those Rodgers razors could've been made at Marshes & Shepherd's workshops, or the Butcher brothers, or the Raggs. There isn't really any way of knowing who actually made them unless they're from a tiny number of very small, historically identifiable manufacturers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownCork

In those times the bevels were ground freehand. Looks like a indexing mark were the bevel should originate on the heel

---

While I've definitely come across one or two that were honed that way, it was not the accepted norm.

Here's Ebenezer Rhodes, Sheffield manufacturer & Master Cutler on the subject in 1822:

Attachment 299957

And here's Benjamin Kingsbury, an influential London -- the edition was most recently updated around the same time as Rhodes, but it was first published in the late 1700's.

Attachment 299958

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeT

This pinwork, does anyone know the name of the art method? I've read it before and can't remember.
When I first saw it years ago I thought "meh, no big deal".
Upon closer inspection, it seems to have taken serious effort to do right, to do it well, it also has a unique style it seems, besides the unique method! Now I'm a big fan of it.
Does anyone have a timeframe it was being made?
...tiny little holes drilled and then metal pins inserted and filed flush. The work must've been time consuming!
Can I get a pic of the full scale?
Thank you!
:chapeau

---

It's called pique work, because very early on English manufacturers realized they could charge more for French words.

They did it exactly that way. I've seen maybe as many as 4 different gauges of wire used. Ideally, each pin would be very delicately hammered to make it more snugly fit, then ground flat. It worked best on ivory or bone, but I've also seen it in tortoise and very occasionally horn.

I can only guess at how accurate this wikipedia page is, but I don't have any real reason to doubt the dates it gives. Razor scales as ornate as what's shown there are very rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeT

Can I get a pic of the full scale?
Thank you!
:chapeau

---

Hanlon’s looks to be fancier than any of the ones I’ve got, but here’s a range of them from my collection — all from the 1830’s.

Attachment 299959

The simplest is the John Webster in bone scales. Pretty indifferently done, IMHO.

In the middle is a very nicely done ornate ivory version from John Barber

And the fanciest is the Edward Allison at the top, also in bone scales. One of these days I’m gonna restore it and replace that one missing disk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeT

Can I get a pic of the full scale?
Thank you!
:chapeau

---

Sure thing. I snapped these kinda hastily, so sorry for the reflections in the blades.

First up a pic of the set of three together. At one time there was a 4th. The plate of one razor is etched "No.1". The reverse scales of the others are inscribed respectively with the numbers 3 and 4. By the time this set came to me, razor #2 and the dressing case that they all originally came in were long gone. Shame, as that must have been an incredibly well appointed and stunning dressing case.

Attachment 299960

Up next is a closer shot of the pin inlay. A while back out of curiosity I opened a macro shot in Photoshop and counted the pins, crossing out each one as I went so as not to miss or double count any. There are 614 pins in each of the handles. It's also kind of fun having the three identical examples side by side because it makes clear the use of a stencil to execute the pattern. There are a couple of spots where one pin is just slightly out of line with the others, and those little blips reoccur in the exact same place on all three handles.

Attachment 299962

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanlon

Sure thing. I snapped these kinda hastily, so sorry for the reflections in the blades.

First up a pic of the set of three together. At one time there was a 4th. The plate of one razor is etched "No.1". The reverse scales of the others are inscribed respectively with the numbers 3 and 4. By the time this set came to me, razor #2 and the dressing case that they all originally came in were long gone. Shame, as that must have been an incredibly well appointed and stunning dressing case.

Attachment 299960

Up next is a closer shot of the pin inlay. A while back out of curiosity I opened a macro shot in Photoshop and counted the pins, crossing out each one as I went so as not to miss or double count any. There are 614 pins in each of the handles. It's also kind of fun having the three identical examples side by side because it makes clear the use of a stencil to execute the pattern. There are a couple of spots where one pin is just slightly out of line with the others, and those little blips reoccur in the exact same place on all three handles.

Attachment 299962

---

Those're lovely!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voidmonster

The whole 'who made that' question is one I've chased a lot, myself. I did a big writeup on it here.

The short version is that the tang stamp only tells you who put in the work order, not where it was made. Those Rodgers razors could've been made at Marshes & Shepherd's workshops, or the Butcher brothers, or the Raggs. There isn't really any way of knowing who actually made them unless they're from a tiny number of very small, historically identifiable manufacturers.

---

Thanks for the write up in the link. Really good stuff in there.

Holy s#!+ those are museum pieces!
Both of you guys have some serious works of art.
As far as the number of pins.. Wow! Even with some kind of stencil or jig pattern ... Had to be crazy time consuming.
Now my questions are:
-Are there any records of the methods used for this art form?
-Can we do the same?
Those pins, errr uh wire?, very thin.. Drill hole first and then insert? Hammer it in? Driven in with speed?
I assume a tiny drill, but then I second guess that thought.
There's a kind of unique style to it, very cool!

Thanks for the pics! Very much appreciated.

All I can say with regards to method is: it would take someone with a lot better eyesight and fingers a lot more nimble than mine. (And probably with more patience too).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeT

Holy s#!+ those are museum pieces!
Both of you guys have some serious works of art.
As far as the number of pins.. Wow! Even with some kind of stencil or jig pattern ... Had to be crazy time consuming.
Now my questions are:
-Are there any records of the methods used for this art form?
-Can we do the same?
Those pins, errr uh wire?, very thin.. Drill hole first and then insert? Hammer it in? Driven in with speed?
I assume a tiny drill, but then I second guess that thought.
There's a kind of unique style to it, very cool!

Thanks for the pics! Very much appreciated.

---

Technically, I believe even the 1/16th rod we use for pinning razors counts as wire, but the stuff used in pique work is a good deal smaller. I'm planning on doing a set of scales using the technique in the near future and I'll fully document it for the forum.

ScienceGuy has done a set in black horn.

When I do it, I'll be using a slab of tortoiseshell and two gauges of silver & gold wire. I'll lock my drill press down so it only penetrates about 0.5mm into the material and I'll use masking tape with a template on it. Once all the holes are drilled, the idea is to insert wire, snip with flush-cutters, then do the next one until they're all filled in. Then I'll use a watchmakers hammer with a polished peening head to get them all snug (gently), then a file to get them flat, then micromesh to get everything polished.

There are almost certainly records of how it was done. It's possible glue was used in the holes originally, something like cascamite, but it all seems relatively straight forward to me -- just very fidgety.

I have some blades with pique work. One I just happen to photograph the other day.

The blade has a slight frown.

Attachment 299992

Attachment 299991

Thanks Zak! I'll be doing it some day, though there are some epic projects that are ahead on the list.
For now my right hand is as steady as a surgeon's. Hopefully it stays that way.
That description is about what comes up when I imagine the method would be.
Probably use various thicknesses of wire. Seems glue is a good idea, but maybe no need, I'd just hate for those pins to ever come out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JOB15

I have some blades with pique work. One I just happen to photograph the other day.

The blade has a slight frown.

Attachment 299992

Attachment 299991

---

Oh, that should buff right out!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeT

Thanks Zak! I'll be doing it some day, though there are some epic projects that are ahead on the list.
For now my right hand is as steady as a surgeon's. Hopefully it stays that way.
That description is about what comes up when I imagine the method would be.
Probably use various thicknesses of wire. Seems glue is a good idea, but maybe no need, I'd just hate for those pins to ever come out.

---

Based on all the examples I've seen, it's not at all unusual for the pins to fall out over time. Only the John Barber has all of them.