AA&TC Robert Mann Double Bit Axe. 1890s? High Centerline.

Erich9653 · Jul 25, 2022

What do you guys think about this axe? I did some research and it sounds like its from 1890s-early 1900s. Still lots of life left in it too! Although its stamped 3³ it had a cruiser eye so i hung it on a 28in heartwood handle. Found in Canada.

Square_peg · Jul 26, 2022

It looks newer than that to me. Maybe mid-century. And I love that shape! But if you really want to know then give it a vinegar bath (ruining the patina) and see if the bit is inlaid or overlaid. Inlaid is older. I'd wager it's overlaid.

Erich9653 · Jul 26, 2022

Square_peg said:
It looks newer than that to me. Maybe mid-century. And I love that shape! But if you really want to know then give it a vinegar bath (ruining the patina) and see if the bit is inlaid or overlaid. Inlaid is older. I'd wager it's overlaid.

I couldn't ruin the patina, I did a vinegar bath on my first axe and instantly regretted it after seeing how they look.

crbnSteeladdict · Jul 26, 2022

It looks like 3 or 8 in the circle >>>> 1903 maybe 1908

garry3 · Jul 26, 2022

Erich9653 said:
What do you guys think about this axe? I did some research and it sounds like its from 1890s-early 1900s. Still lots of life left in it too! Although its stamped 3³ it had a cruiser eye so i hung it on a 28in heartwood handle. Found in Canada.

It's a beautiful axe. Nice thin eyes that are the norm on them old hand forged axes. Bits that are thin where they should be thin and thick in all the right places.

I don't see the 3-3 stamp, did you weigh the head?

"Joseph in late 1903 purchased the Mill Hall plants from AAT. "

Axe manufacturing in Pennsylvania - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think that means the axe is from 1889-1903? It's in great shape!

In a catalog from the late nineteenth century Robert Mann & Sons were defending their use of overlaid bits.
pdg 53 of American Axes by Kauffman has the text from the catalog.

Erich9653 · Jul 26, 2022

garry3 said:
It's a beautiful axe. Nice thin eyes that are the norm on them old hand forged axes. Bits that are thin where they should be thin and thick in all the right places.

I don't see the 3-3 stamp, did you weigh the head?

"Joseph in late 1903 purchased the Mill Hall plants from AAT. "

Axe manufacturing in Pennsylvania - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think that means the axe is from 1889-1903? It's in great shape!

In a catalog from the late nineteenth century Robert Mann & Sons were defending their use of overlaid bits.
pdg 53 of American Axes by Kauffman has the text from the catalog.

I forgot to weigh it before i hung it but it is stamped 3³. Heres some better pictures of the stamps. Not sure whats up with the grey paint either, not sure if its original or some farm project lol, seems to extend nearly all the way to the bevels end. I dont plan on sharpening this axe, just hanging on the wall.

Robert Mann
Mill Hall PA 5

garry3 · Jul 27, 2022

Erich9653 said:
I forgot to weigh it before i hung it but it is stamped 3³. Heres some better pictures of the stamps. Not sure whats up with the grey paint either, not sure if its original or some farm project lol, seems to extend nearly all the way to the bevels end. I dont plan on sharpening this axe, just hanging on the wall.

Robert Mann
Mill Hall PA 5

Paint thinner or better yet lacquer thinner will probably remove the old paint with out effecting the steel. Them older heads don't always take well to wire brushes with their sometimes real soft wrought bodies, even soft brass brushes. I would just go ahead and assume it's a lead based paint.

It's a used axe and I would use it again, but I can understand if you don't.

I thought maybe it was made with topping in mind because of the eye size but I think it predates high line logging and I'm not sure how much topping was done before that.

Did this axe come from the PNW?

Erich9653 · Jul 27, 2022

garry3 said:
Paint thinner or better yet lacquer thinner will probably remove the old paint with out effecting the steel. Them older heads don't always take well to wire brushes with their sometimes real soft wrought bodies, even soft brass brushes. I would just go ahead and assume it's a lead based paint.

It's a used axe and I would use it again, but I can understand if you don't.

I thought maybe it was made with topping in mind because of the eye size but I think it predates high line logging and I'm not sure how much topping was done before that.

Did this axe come from the PNW?

I thought it was a topping axe aswell. I'd like to get better with an axe and sharpening before i do much more with this one. Being in as good of shape as it is, i wouldn't want to be the guy who ruins it lol. The axe is from BC Canada actually. I wish it could talk, i bet its fot quite the story.

Square_peg · Jul 28, 2022

I bet it’s already been wire brushed by whomever hung it on that new burnt handle.

Erich9653 · Jul 28, 2022

Square_peg said:
I bet it’s already been wire brushed by whomever hung it on that new burnt handle.

I sanded it with 400g wet sand paper and hung it on that handle. When i got it, it was just a rusty head from a bucket. I just use wet sand paper for all my axes. Luckily i have better grits now, at the time thats all i had lol.

Glenn Bailey · Jul 29, 2022

crbnSteeladdict said:
It looks like 3 or 8 in the circle >>>> 1903 maybe 1908

That number references the plant the axe was produced at. Yesteryearstools.com has some good info on that. This thread goes into it a bit as well https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/american-axe-tool-company.1516680/

crbnSteeladdict · Jul 29, 2022

Glenn Bailey said:
That number references the plant the axe was produced at. Yesteryearstools.com has some good info on that. This thread goes into it a bit as well https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/american-axe-tool-company.1516680/

the only thing I could find on Yesteryeartools is : References have been observed that included such plants with the highest number being No. 18.
What does he mean by References have been observed?
Did he mean he spotted numbers in circles stamped on axes, or that there were documents listing manufacturing facilities with corresponding numbers.
I seriously think it was only Lamond interpretation of numbers that he saw stamped on some AA&Tco axes.
I strongly believe that those numbers inside circles or diamonds aren't facility codes but manufacturing dates.

96 inside circle Robert Mann https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/robert-mann-co-mill-hall-pa-1896-3847363544
9 inside circle Robert Mann https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-robert-mann-superior-cast-3931758838
HUB 1895 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-vintage-hub-95-double-diamond-1955453664
Hubbard & Blake 1914 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-hub-1914-double-diamond-stamp-3826671870
H&B this one actually has full date inside diamond https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-1907-hub-double-diamond-1947335405
Let me add that 1918 was the last year of ordinary AA&TCo's operations . That would explain # 18 as the highest number observed by Lamond. By 1919 AA&Tco was bankrupt and Kelly was in the process of taking it over.

Square_peg · Aug 7, 2022

I appreciate your incite, CSA.

crbnSteeladdict · Aug 7, 2022

Square_peg said:
I appreciate your incite, CSA.

I am just trying to find logic in sudden change of marking axes by AA&TCO. There comes year 1900 and customary place for production date stamp becomes spot for facility code. Over the years of searching internet for axe pictures, I have seen many AA&TCo heads marked with dates. I've seen Underhill heads with 5 , 7, 8, 9 numbers inside a circle(production was moved from Nashua to Douglas and that might explain multitude of different codes on Underhill heads)
When it comes to <HUB> I really cannot say if it was Hubbard & co or Hubbard & Blake.
So, yeah I have a lot of questions and waiting for somebody with additional knowledge to step up
and fill the blanks
1899 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-hubbard-blake-axe-west-3902628935
This elongated thin poll (top down view of the eye) does look like classic AA&TCO product 1908 <HUB> https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-hubbard-co-hub-1908-axe-head-4024390395
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/mfg-co-west-waterville-maine-lb-axe-3930978719

Square_peg · Aug 7, 2022

Can’t be sure if whoever posted in o Worthpoint knew which HUB it was, either.

Glenn Bailey · Aug 9, 2022

crbnSteeladdict said:
the only thing I could find on Yesteryeartools is : References have been observed that included such plants with the highest number being No. 18.
What does he mean by References have been observed?
Did he mean he spotted numbers in circles stamped on axes, or that there were documents listing manufacturing facilities with corresponding numbers.
I seriously think it was only Lamond interpretation of numbers that he saw stamped on some AA&Tco axes.
I strongly believe that those numbers inside circles or diamonds aren't facility codes but manufacturing dates.

96 inside circle Robert Mann https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/robert-mann-co-mill-hall-pa-1896-3847363544
9 inside circle Robert Mann https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-robert-mann-superior-cast-3931758838
HUB 1895 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-vintage-hub-95-double-diamond-1955453664
Hubbard & Blake 1914 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-hub-1914-double-diamond-stamp-3826671870
H&B this one actually has full date inside diamond https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-1907-hub-double-diamond-1947335405
Let me add that 1918 was the last year of ordinary AA&TCo's operations . That would explain # 18 as the highest number observed by Lamond. By 1919 AA&Tco was bankrupt and Kelly was in the process of taking it over.

I really appreciate that insight! To be honest, I hadn't thought of that. I trust Lamond but also am a critical thinker. Here is my own bit of self-exploratory (and selfish) research. I'm not suggesting anything conclusive, just what I came up with. Spoiler, I don't think I found anything to contradict Lamond.

Five-ish years ago I had some Underhill boy-ish sized axes. One with the circle, one maybe without? Stamps were kind of different (maybe). And the rabbit hole opened. BTW, I hope I'm not the only one who has spreadsheets of axe info. I certainly singled myself out posting about writing code about chopping a couple of years ago (crickets) https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/axe-geeks-writing-code.1733484/#post-19810822

So, here is a pic of my notes. This was from a search of Worthpoint, every underhill axe (so many hundreds of hits). I only recorded info from those that I was interested in (boy-ish size). Summary is that Underhill boy-ish axes were coded with just a few numbered circles which works with they idea that Underhill equipment was distributed, but they were plant code.

crbnSteeladdict · Aug 9, 2022

Glenn Bailey said:
I really appreciate that insight! To be honest, I hadn't thought of that. I trust Lamond but also am a critical thinker. Here is my own bit of self-exploratory (and selfish) research. I'm not suggesting anything conclusive, just what I came up with. Spoiler, I don't think I found anything to contradict Lamond.

Five-ish years ago I had some Underhill boy-ish sized axes. One with the circle, one maybe without? Stamps were kind of different (maybe). And the rabbit hole opened. BTW, I hope I'm not the only one who has spreadsheets of axe info. I certainly singled myself out posting about writing code about chopping a couple of years ago (crickets) https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/axe-geeks-writing-code.1733484/#post-19810822

So, here is a pic of my notes. This was from a search of Worthpoint, every underhill axe (so many hundreds of hits). I only recorded info from those that I was interested in (boy-ish size). Summary is that Underhill boy-ish axes were coded with just a few numbered circles which works with they idea that Underhill equipment was distributed, but they were plant code.