Why did American axes end up with state-specific patterns?

F

formicide

Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
6
I've gotten heavily into American axes and can't find ANYTHING about their design.

I wrote to the Yesteryears tools guy, then discovered he's been dead for 8 years.

Anyone have actual historical info on why, let's say, the small coastal states on the Atlantic are so close together, yet all have specific patterns?

Which patterns are older, and which newer? I've seen 18 century American axes, and they have lugs. We can assume Carolina patterns, Kentucky, Rockaway, are possibly older designs than the rest of the standardized patterns.

I'm after specific information and sources, not "that's the timber they were cutting" - tree species overlap across the East of the US. Even though there's generally more hardwoods the further south you go, and southern hardwood patterns tend to be broader, you can find pine, oak, hickory, all across ... Michigan for example had hardwoods in the south and pine in the North. The Michigan pattern I read had rounded corners due to the fact that in the North of Michigan they were cutting large white pine, which would be frozen in the winter.

Any information like this and sources on the origin of various US axe patterns would be most welcome. And good logic would be just as welcome.
 
Last edited:
Good logic tells me these labels, catigorazations have institutional origins. We can think of enterprise, government, scholarship and so on and so on.... I doubt Daniel Boon came up with them. USA axe typologies until now at least that i know of are superficial. Likes been said, a prime area for scholarly research by one outstanding in the field.
 
In some cases we do have specific documented evidence of who came up with certain patterns and how, like the modern Hudson Bay, the Pulaski, the Cedar, the Rockaway, the Tasmanian, etc., but in most cases it was simply a matter of woodsmen going to blacksmiths and saying "I want it more like this" and people in a region gradually adopting the preference for that style based on their region-specific contextual usage. Then as larger firms began to develop, hardware store owners in those regions said to the big makers "hey we'd like ones like [insert regional style here]" and so those large firms went and did so. If you understand how things like edge curvature, bit thickness/depth/breadth, bit-to-eye transition, poll size/shape, and so on all interact to result in a certain set of design advantages and disadvantages you can "read the tool" and understand certain ranges of tasks they might do better at than others.
 
Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me will chip in, but at one time each manufacturer named their own patterns. They didn’t have a universal standard.
I do think that the environment and species cut clearly had an influence on these patterns. The Cedar pattern and the Michigan are two pretty obvious examples.
We also have some pretty fair dates on when some patterns first appeared.

It’s a mouthful to delve into each pattern in a single thread but it’s a worth while topic.
 
Furthermore, manufacturers back in the day borrowed patterns and even branding names from one another all the time. Even sometimes patented features or trademarked names. No two manufacturers made their version of a pattern literally identical to one another. The names were looser then than they are now, but the key features were at least mostly consistent.
 
I think of the Connecticut pattern as a short curvy handle and the wide bit rounded poll more so than just the head shape.Also think the ears on Kentucky’s and Jersey’s might be for shimming and alighning the edge maybe a little.
 
junkenstien said:
I think of the Connecticut pattern as a short curvy handle and the wide bit rounded poll more so than just the head shape.Also think the ears on Kentucky’s and Jersey’s might be for shimming and alighning the edge maybe a little.
Click to expand...
Lugs are for the purpose of increasing contact area for a more secure hang without "using up" more material than necessary that's needed elsewhere in the head for its overall proportions. Since you start with a lump of steel of a given size, "adding" steel to one area means that for a starting mass of a given weight you have less steel available to put towards other parts of the axe.
 
On most woods a 4 pound Jersey with a 5" bit wil perform very similarly to a 4 pound Connecticut with a 5" bit. Steel spared by the phantom bevels is transfered to the lugs. The Connecticut has a naturally deep robust eye.

The thinness of the bit and thickness of the high centerline will determine how the axe performs in a specific wood. Either may excel in a specific wood.

Maybe a better example of a regional pattern is the PS Falling axe. This is an axe made very specifically for the trees of one region.
 
FortyTwoBlades (for the win)
(edit, don’t know what happened- my phone just deletes words ever since the change to BF)

Somewhere I imagine there’s a bunch of deceased Axemen having a good laugh watching humanity categorize the tool they just referred to as “an axe”.

speaking of Old Axemen, anyone seen Bernie ( O Old Axeman ) lately?
 
Last edited:
EngrSorenson said:
FortyTwoBlades

Somewhere I imagine there’s a bunch of deceased Axemen having a good laugh watching humanity categorize the tool they just referred to as “an axe”.

speaking of Old Axemen, anyone seen Bernie ( O Old Axeman ) lately?
Click to expand...

I mean, it did matter and stuff, just mostly to industry. Folks in certain regions wanted axes that looked a certain way, in part because it was traditional for their part of the US. But usually the original patterns came about either because of production-end reasons (as in it was easier to make them that way) or as an innovation/variation thought up by one of that small handful of people who cared a whole lot about the tool. Those individuals weren't always correct, mind you, but most true innovations in axe design were the result of people who understood how the variables of the tool affected one another, had a context of use in mind, and then used those principles to arrive at a design optimized for their local conditions and uses. Everyone else just bought and used them and went "hey this is a great axe!"
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
I mean, it did matter and stuff, just mostly to industry.
Click to expand...
Yeah, agreed- if you sell someone a Jersey axe they’d be real upset if it was a Maine wedge that they received. Definitions definitely matter, I just can’t help but imagine there was a time before the pattern standardization where an axe was an axe. I guess if we’re discussing patterns we’re still referring to a subset of axes, already, since I don’t think “splitting axe” or “broad axe” are terms referring to a pattern.

by the way, not sure why my phone in this browser deleted some text before I posted, but I’ve seen that happening a lot lately. Edited accordingly.
 
USA is a vast country,and long ago,before the modern transport,even those "closely packed Atlantic states" were a fair ride/regional difference away from one another.
Americans didn't just suddenly spring out of nowhere,either,and ethnic and cultural differences among geographic regions were of course vast also.

Before organised transport,larger companies competing and offering products through catalog and mail,the smaller forges specialized by necessity:Customer did Not have much choice,the forge produced a certain pattern or two for whatever reason,and would frown at a request for an odd,for the locale,pattern.

Later,with the rise of mechanization,and intense competitiveness among the increasingly larger manufacturers,the assortment of all these different patterns must've formed almost a necessity,in serving such vast and diverse markets,each used to their own-more or less different-patterns.

(does that make sense?...i've only a moment to type before rushing off to work...good discussion though,lots of valid thoughts...)
 
jake pogg said:
USA is a vast country,and long ago,before the modern transport,even those "closely packed Atlantic states" were a fair ride/regional difference away from one another.
Americans didn't just suddenly spring out of nowhere,either,and ethnic and cultural differences among geographic regions were of course vast also.

Before organised transport,larger companies competing and offering products through catalog and mail,the smaller forges specialized by necessity:Customer did Not have much choice,the forge produced a certain pattern or two for whatever reason,and would frown at a request for an odd,for the locale,pattern.

Later,with the rise of mechanization,and intense competitiveness among the increasingly larger manufacturers,the assortment of all these different patterns must've formed almost a necessity,in serving such vast and diverse markets,each used to their own-more or less different-patterns.

(does that make sense?...i've only a moment to type before rushing off to work...good discussion though,lots of valid thoughts...)
Click to expand...
Generally individual smiths did have a certain personal style (as is normally the case) but took on custom requests fairly frequently. This was also the case for the larger manufacturers, later on, although you're looking at batch orders from hardware stores at that point. If you needed a specific pattern, or came up with one of your own to meet your requirements, and you didn't mind ordering a few dozen of 'em, they'd gladly produce them for you. The labor model was different back then than it is today. Skilled labor with open die forgings meant adapting their production at the drop of a hat was comparatively simple.
 
My takeaway has always been that the different types of trees being logged in each state prompted local woodsman to come up with a pattern they felt ideal for their work.

Take for example this California peeling pattern, it has decently broad bits and a 4lb head which would have been great for taking down the giant sequoias out here , and of course it brings the advantages of any double bit axe for felling.

However I'm sure just about any region could appreciate a well balanced 4lb axe with a decent centerline and relatively thin 5" wide bits.
This axe isn't terribly old though, and an even older example or different make might be better or worse.
 
Last edited:
I think one of the larger sources of confusion for a lot of folks with regard to pattern development revolves around the question "Why did they need pattern X? Couldn't they have used pattern Y or Z?" and often the answer is yes they could have. The question with most patterns is not if the axe in question is *capable* of doing the the job, but whether or not it's *optimized* for the job. The small differences make a big difference when engaged in a set of prioritized tasks professionally, and time/energy saved quickly starts to add up.
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
I think one of the larger sources of confusion for a lot of folks with regard to pattern development revolves around the question "Why did they need pattern X? Couldn't they have used pattern Y or Z?" and often the answer is yes they could have. The question with most patterns is not if the axe in question is *capable* of doing the the job, but whether or not it's *optimized* for the job. The small differences make a big difference when engaged in a set of prioritized tasks professionally, and time/energy saved quickly starts to add up.
Click to expand...
For instance my preference for Vaughan rigging axes over other brands. Unless you used the tool day in and day out you probably wouldn't notice that the poll is bigger and set closer to the eye in Vaughans. Such small details make a difference.

We stand no chance of really understanding some of these patterns, we can't.
 
garry3 said:
Wasn't the peeling pattern used to chamfer the ends of logs to aid in skidding?

And down the rabbit hole we go....
Click to expand...
Maybe, I just assumed it was another felling pattern.
I never thought of a double bit having a specialized purpose.
2 bits have benefits for general trail work and felling, but I wonder if those benefits still exist if just uses for 1 specific purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top