# Silchester plane



## JIJ (21 Jun 2014)

I thought some of you may be interested to see a pic of this plane that's in Reading Museum. It's the earliest known plane in Britain, from the fourth century. I'm sure plenty of you could bring it back to life  





James


----------



## AndyT (21 Jun 2014)

It's brilliant isn't it? All the sophistication of a current model by LN or Veritas, thousands of years ago.

Put back the missing wooden parts and you could pick it up and use it. I visited when I was last in Reading, with an hour or so between trains. 

The Romans had moulding planes too - there's a Roman period Egyptian door in the Bristol museum with stuck mouldings round it which would pass for Victorian.


----------



## RogerP (21 Jun 2014)

It's amazing just what the Romans (and concurrent civilisations) had and achieved. Obvious they didn't have power such as steam, gas, electricity etc. (they had oxen, horses and slaves instead), but their life was in many ways very similar to ours now.

I've just been reading about their marriage, divorce and women's rights laws. It could have been today not 20 centuries ago!


----------



## Harbo (21 Jun 2014)

Living in Hampshire it's a bit annoying that the plane is residing in Reading (Berkshire) as Silchester is a Hampshire village.
But I know that Reading University did most of the excavating. I suppose finders keepers. The land was owned by the Duke of Wellington's estate.

Rod


----------



## Phil Pascoe (21 Jun 2014)

Five minutes on a hollow oilstone and it'll be ready to go.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (21 Jun 2014)

Looks like a Bedrock with a high-angle frog, too. Them Romans knew a thing or two about bench planes....


----------



## JohnPW (21 Jun 2014)

RogerP":k35qc71h said:


> Obvious they didn't have power such as steam, gas, electricity etc. (they had oxen, horses and slaves instead), but their life was in many ways very similar to ours now.



Well, I would say life during that time was very different, but it just shows that a plane is basically a very simple tool that has existed for a long time, much like a hammer, knife, plough etc.


----------



## Vann (21 Jun 2014)

Cheshirechappie":1tbj1e78 said:


> Looks like a Bedrock....


Bedrock :!: Didn't Barney Rubble have one of those? This could pre-date the Romans :mrgreen: 

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## jimi43 (22 Jun 2014)

Some nice box infills and a quick wipe over with citric acid and that would be ready to rock and roll..

I wonder if anyone is interested in doing a repro?

Any takers?

Jimi


----------



## Andy Kev. (22 Jun 2014)

jimi43":sns9z36g said:


> Some nice box infills and a quick wipe over with citric acid and that would be ready to rock and roll..
> 
> *I wonder if anyone is interested in doing a repro?*
> 
> ...


My first thought was why hadn't the museum had a repro made. It would surely be of interest to have an "as new" model standing next to the original.


----------



## AndyT (22 Jun 2014)

I'm sure I've seen pictures of a copy, possibly in an old Woodworker magazine, but can't remember where or find it easily. I agree that a complete copy would help make the exhibit more intelligible to non-woodworkers.

I'm not offering, mind!


----------



## jimi43 (22 Jun 2014)

AndyT":1kwan00m said:


> I'm sure I've seen pictures of a copy, possibly in an old Woodworker magazine, but can't remember where or find it easily. I agree that a complete copy would help make the exhibit more intelligible to non-woodworkers.
> 
> I'm not offering, mind!



Ok...I can see the seeds of a fun project here....

Can we see if we can get some drawings and if a copy was made...I'm sure you can find it Prof!!! 8) 

Jimi


----------



## JimB (22 Jun 2014)

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rogerulrich/t ... ver_72.jpg


----------



## AndyT (22 Jun 2014)

jimi43":2mp0exvt said:


> AndyT":2mp0exvt said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure I've seen pictures of a copy, possibly in an old Woodworker magazine, but can't remember where or find it easily. I agree that a complete copy would help make the exhibit more intelligible to non-woodworkers.
> ...



Ok, here's a little bit more information, easy to find.

This link http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/Pub/ArchCant/Vol.073 - 1959/11/196-201.htm leads to an article by Bill Goodman (a well-known name in the world of planes!) and G Dunning, which describes an Anglo-Saxon plane found at Sarre, in Kent and compares it to other ancient planes, including the Silchester one.

The reproduction I was thinking of is probably this one, which is shown alongside the Sarre plane, in the museum at Maidstone, *handily placed for any woodworkers based in the "Garden of England!"*







The article does also include this line drawing of the Silchester plane as it might have been when complete, which also appears in Goodman's book on the History of Woodworking Tools:






I can't find dimensions on line, but in his book, Goodman argues that the Silchester plane would have only had one hand grip, at the rear, noting that the space between the rear rivets is 3 3/8" whereas at the front there is too small a gap, of only 2 3/4".

He helpfully suggests how the plane could have been made:

"The wooden block is first prepared to size, the mouth cut out, and drilled to take the vertical rivets. This is fixed to the iron sole, and finally the side plates are riveted in position, the handle slotted out, and the whole filed and smoothed to shape."

I expect the Reading museum could provide measurements if they were offered a reproduction to put on display, but I don't think they would have the budget to commission one.

PS - JimB - the Dartmouth link you found is a drawing of another Roman plane found at St Albans, which is of simpler construction without iron side plates, and with room for a hand grip at the front.


----------



## JimB (22 Jun 2014)

Andy, oops saw the Silchester plane on the same page and didn't look too closely.


----------



## JIJ (22 Jun 2014)

The museum also had a tiny display set up showing a model of the plane in use. You have to look through a peephole to view so was difficult to photograph but it may have some clues for you. It was the bench that surprised me. It is similar to one Roy Underhill made, I think it was French, had splayed legs.

James


----------



## JIJ (22 Jun 2014)

There was also this pottery plate in the same collection. I don't know if it's from the same period.

James


----------



## AndyT (22 Jun 2014)

So, James, the Reading Museum already has a replica!

That's one project I can strike off my to do list... not that I was every going to put it on there. :wink:


----------



## JIJ (22 Jun 2014)

It must only be an inch long,I'm sure they'd be very grateful for a full size one....


----------



## AndyT (22 Jun 2014)

Ok!

Here are the dimensions for anyone wanting to have a go:

Silchester (Calleva), plane, iron sole, four rivets, side plates, Reading Museum, inv. 07490. 34 cm long by 5.8 cm wide by 6 cm high; iron 3.8 cm wide, rake 65 degrees.


----------



## jimi43 (22 Jun 2014)

Darn it!!

The game's afoot....

( I totally refuse to work on a Roman plane in foreign units...if they choose to invade our shores....they can damn well adopt our units!). :mrgreen: 

Now...the making of the black stuff!?

Any offers?

Jimi


----------



## rxh (22 Jun 2014)

Tentatively yes - if it is within my capabilities. Do we know how the side plates were attached to the sole? Or were the sides and sole a one piece casting?


----------



## AndyT (23 Jun 2014)

rxh":3iucipzc said:


> Tentatively yes - if it is within my capabilities. Do we know how the side plates were attached to the sole? Or were the sides and sole a one piece casting?


They seem to have just been riveted through the wooden block, without any metal to metal connection to the sole.
Have a look at the Goodman drawing which shows two big transverse rivets and a central pin which holds the wedge.
One of the rivets is visible in James's photo.


----------



## bugbear (23 Jun 2014)

Here's a guy making a Roman plane;

http://lumberjocks.com/YorkshireStewart/blog/4878

It's based on this one

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sow_voigt ... 346646942/



> The Goodmanham Roman Plane
> 
> This unique Roman woodworking plane with a stock made of ivory was found near the village of Goodmanham, East Yorkshire in the summer of 2000, during the excavation of a pipeline for BP Chemicals. It dates to the 4th Century AD. Length is 13" / 330mm.



BugBear


----------



## Bluekingfisher (23 Jun 2014)

What did the Romans ever do for us?


----------



## rxh (23 Jun 2014)

AndyT":131z4p88 said:


> rxh":131z4p88 said:
> 
> 
> > Tentatively yes - if it is within my capabilities. Do we know how the side plates were attached to the sole? Or were the sides and sole a one piece casting?
> ...



Thanks Andy,
I think I could manage that.


----------



## jimi43 (23 Jun 2014)

rxh":3dpud3x0 said:


> AndyT":3dpud3x0 said:
> 
> 
> > rxh":3dpud3x0 said:
> ...



Sounds like we have a new project then mate!

I need to finish the RichardT infill first though...so how about starting it around early autumn?

We can do all the planning in between......

Jimi


----------



## rxh (23 Jun 2014)

Yes, an interesting challenge.

Early Autumn seems good - I want to try and finish my infill mitre plane first.


----------



## JimB (25 Jun 2014)

Has there been any attempt to analyse the iron/steel of the cutter?


----------



## rxh (27 Jul 2014)

Here is a preliminary drawing. I based this on: the dimensions provided by AndyT, on scaling from the photos and on my own judgement.

The only dimension that doesn’t “fit” is the width of the blade. This is stated to be 38mm (= 1 ½”) whereas I have drawn it as 1 ¾”, which seems more suitable to me.

I propose the following metallic materials:
- Sole: ¼” thick bright mild steel sheet,
- Sides: 3/16” thick bright mild steel sheet,
- Vertical rivets: 3/8” or 10mm dia. coach bolts long enough to cut the threaded ends off and with the square bit under the head machined down to the diameter of the shank.
- Horizontal rivets: 3/8” dia. bright mild steel round bar.
These are all modern materials but I wouldn’t know how to identify and obtain metal of the true historical “recipe”.

I have drawn the blade as 3/16” thick. Can anyone recommend a type of blade to use and where to obtain it?

Also, can anyone recommend what sort of wood to use or say what wood was used for planes then? 

Anyway, the above info. and the drawing are intended as a “starter”. I’ll revise after receiving your comments.


----------



## jimi43 (27 Jul 2014)

Hi rxh

Thanks for the information and the PDF and preliminary discussions.

I agree that we should make one plane each and based on the discussions following the release of your drawing and parts list.

I am really looking forward to the way this will progress...and we are of course reliant on input from the experts on this forum.

Cheers mate

Jimi


----------



## Mr_P (28 Jul 2014)

I MIGHT have a cheap source of infill irons. Currently on route to me from the states are

1 mitre iron 8" - 1- 15/16 wide
*1 chariot iron 7" x 1- 11/16" 
**2 chariot irons 4 -1/4" x 1- 1/4" 
1 infill cap and iron 7 -1/4" x 2 -1/4" 

20 bucks each for the top two and $50 for my big iron and cap, all are 3/16 ths thick.
**$12.50 for the small chariot iron but a stock item.

Not here yet and I'm hoping I don't get stung with import duties.

Happy to lend the irons out for testing by more experienced members but not the planes.

Edit: Yipppeeeee they are here and no import duties, just checked and emails were being sent back and forth late May- mid June but didn't pay until they were complete/ ready on the 8th of July and arrived today 7th August. So not quick but worth the wait.

* Got lost in the sea of emails and I ended up with 2 small chariot irons instead of two different ones. Just checked and I only paid for the smaller 2.


----------



## JIJ (28 Jul 2014)

Looking forward to seeing these planes started. 
Great stuff

James


----------



## rxh (5 Sep 2014)

Well, I've made a start, using some rather rough yew, which I rather like in spite of its imperfections. My left elbow now aches from filing those side plates  

BTW, I've made some progress with my infill mitre plane and also had a setback. A report to follow on that thread soon.


----------



## jimi43 (5 Sep 2014)

WOW...I'm falling behind!!

That is spectacular mate...!!!

=D> =D> =D> =D> 

I shall have to get a move on with mine now...

What is the setback with the mitre....I will keep my eye open for that.

Jimi


----------



## AndyT (6 Sep 2014)

Great progress there! How did you do the shaping on the yew?


----------



## rxh (6 Sep 2014)

Thanks Jimi & Andy,

Jimi - My setback with the mitre plane was I made the rear infill but did a bad job of fitting it so I have had to make a new one. Not a great tragedy but very annoying.

Andy - to shape the yew I marked the profile on sides, top and end. Then I drilled two 1" holes to form the ends of the cutout and removed the waste in between using a powered fretsaw (scrollsaw). After that I removed as much waste as I could by sawing and then completed the shaping using paring chisel, gouges, chip carving knives and abrasive paper.

Today I have rounded the edges of the sides, riveted them on and trimmed the wood level with them. Next jobs are to make the rivetted ends flush with the sides and level the underside. After that comes making and fitting the sole.


----------



## Corneel (7 Sep 2014)

Great effort! I love those rivets.

Now I am curious of course how the plane works, in comparison with more modern planes. Do you think you could take a good guess about the size and thickness of these stee plates? The weight of a plane is a factor in how it works.


----------



## jimi43 (7 Sep 2014)

WOW! Air Traffic Control of the vise squadron!! That is so cool!

"Permission to land Woden Air 186B Heavy....runway 1A...." :mrgreen: 

This is a seriously impressive project my friend...and I can't wait for the next episode...

I have a feeling I will have to start mine when you've finished...otherwise things may get a tad confusing....plus I can cheat! :mrgreen: 

Great update!


----------



## Shrubby (7 Sep 2014)

Excellent thread guys
You might find a plane in Christian Peglow's collection of interest 
google - hobelaxt tyrol 1800

Matt


----------



## rxh (7 Sep 2014)

Corneel":1aluq7yd said:


> Now I am curious of course how the plane works, in comparison with more modern planes. Do you think you could take a good guess about the size and thickness of these stee plates? The weight of a plane is a factor in how it works.


.

Corneel,
For dimensions, please see my earlier post of 27th July in this thread. I think it is going to weigh at least as much as a Bailey No.5 or even a 5 1/2.



jimi43":1aluq7yd said:


> WOW! Air Traffic Control of the vise squadron!! That is so cool!
> 
> "Permission to land Woden Air 186B Heavy....runway 1A...."
> 
> ...



Jimi,
The vice stack-up gets the workpiece to a convenient height for me to work on where I can see it without glasses and not bend my back too much  Those are two of the reasons why I am pleased to have a Moxon vice for woodwork.
Yes, it might be a good idea to start yours later  . One pitfall to avoid is using a light coloured wood like yew. Today I flattened the underside of my plane and made the rivets flush with the sides (the holes in the sides were taper-reamed to retain the rivets without heads). In doing all this the wood has become very grubby with marking blue and steel dust and I don't think it will clean up completely so my plane will start its life looking a bit shopsoiled. I think this style of plane will accept various blades so it will be interesting to try out any we can find. As a "starter" I have made one of 1/8" thick O1 steel - see pic below (the iroko wedge is not intended to be the permanent one). I'm waiting for delivery of the sole material so there may not be much more action before next weekend.



Shrubby":1aluq7yd said:


> xcellent thread guys
> You might find a plane in Christian Peglow's collection of interest
> google - hobelaxt tyrol 1800



Thanks, Matt. That is a very interesting site.


----------



## jimi43 (8 Sep 2014)

Yup...I had the very same problem with the boxwood when I did the Scottish infill smoother BUT...don't worry...it does clean up. If you want to do much more "dirty" work with the plane as a whole...sand off the crud now and put a layer of button polish on it and then take that off when you finish.

The resultant picture with the iron looks very impressive indeed and it's a lovely plane mate...it's going to be a stunner.

I think I might use that wonderful piece of English walnut Douglas gave me...it's been waiting for that special moment and like yew...it would have been native and around in those days. Plus...I haven't done anything in walnut yet.

So that's cheat number one for me...I'm sure there will be more as we go along! 8) :mrgreen: 

I have a feeling that you will be very surprised at how well this old lady cuts! It has all the ingredients.

Jimi


----------



## Sheffield Tony (8 Sep 2014)

I wonder at the ergonomics of the rear handle. How comfortable was it to use with the grip 90° out from all the planes we use today. Looks like it might be hard on the wrist. There's a reason to make a replica, you can find out !


----------



## JimB (8 Sep 2014)

Sheffield Tony":2010ecfq said:


> I wonder at the ergonomics of the rear handle. How comfortable was it to use with the grip 90° out from all the planes we use today. Looks like it might be hard on the wrist. There's a reason to make a replica, you can find out !


I wonder if it were pushed from behind the handle in use? There's going to be quite a learning curve at first.


----------



## AndyT (8 Sep 2014)

Sheffield Tony":3jjc5s1y said:


> I wonder at the ergonomics of the rear handle. How comfortable was it to use with the grip 90° out from all the planes we use today. Looks like it might be hard on the wrist. There's a reason to make a replica, you can find out !



Agreed. As Shrubby has pointed out, that style of grip remained in use for a long time so it can't be all bad.

Anyone wanting to read more about Roman Woodworking might be interested in this book by Roger Ulrich. The Yale site says it's out of print but links to Google Books preview which lets you read quite a lot of it:

http://books.google.co.uk/books/yup?vid=ISBN9780300103410&redir_esc=y


----------



## Bedrock (8 Sep 2014)

Might the ergonomics have something to do with the height of the bench or whatever at which the user was working? If you are working at floor level or close, viz. Japan, then you are more likely to be working much more from above, than at a bench height more usual for contemporary woodworkers? If that were the case, the horizontal loop handle might be more comfortable. Japanese planes don't ever seem to have had a vertical grip, and they worked at a low level or on an inclined beam.
Mike


----------



## Sheffield Tony (8 Sep 2014)

Have you seen the Roman infant's crib from Herculaneum ? It was at the Pompeii and Herculaneum exhibition at the British Museum about a year ago. Can't think you would do much differently construction wise if you made one today.


----------



## AndyT (8 Sep 2014)

Sheffield Tony":4rgxqvfz said:


> Have you seen the Roman infant's crib from Herculaneum ? It was at the Pompeii and Herculaneum exhibition at the British Museum about a year ago. Can't think you would do much differently construction wise if you made one today.



I think you must mean this one






(image from the BBC at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21897925)

... but does that imply that you are planning to make a Roman style compass plane for those nice curved rockers? :wink:


----------



## AndyT (8 Sep 2014)

I've just noticed a subtle difference.

Looking back at the earlier discussion, this is the picture I posted, drawn by Bill Goodman, showing how he thought the plane would have originally looked, made from a single piece of wood, clad in iron:






Compare this with RXH's version:






in which the two wooden parts are separate blocks, united by the metal sole and side plates.

I reckon that Bill Goodman may have been influenced by looking at other Roman or Anglo-Saxon planes in which a single block of wood has a mortice excavated in it and is then protected by adding a metal sole. Planes like this one






or this one (as spotted by JimB and included in Ulrich's book)






The point I am trying to make is that, once you add the structural side plates, there is no need to do the difficult job of cutting the big sloping mortice for the mouth. It makes much more sense to use two separate blocks, sawn with the suitable angles at their ends, exactly as RXH has done. I'm perfectly happy to think that the Romans would have seen the sense of that.

To me, (unless there is some other evidence, only visible if you can get the original out of its glass case) this shows that _actually cutting up the materials and making the thing _ is always going to be better than drawing as a means of reconstructing the past. 

Bravo!

PS - Further evidence in RXH's favour - looking at the dimensions given in Goodman's book, the overall width of the plane is 50mm and the width of the iron is 38mm. So, the maximum total thickness for the cheeks either side of the iron would be 6mm each. Even after making allowances for quite a lot of thickening up from flaxy rust, that's not enough to include a wooden part on either side, which would have had to be so thin as to be structurally redundant.

PPS - Even more evidence - the next picture in Goodman's book is of a better preserved Roman plane found at Cologne. In this one the central iron 'box' for the cutter and wedge clearly leaves no room for any wood, and what would have been there underneath the two fancy tops would have been two separate blocks - making it one of the first infill planes.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (8 Sep 2014)

The Roman way of making the metal claddings would likely have been by blacksmithing the pieces - they didn't have rolling mills. Beating thin stuff out with a hammer and anvil is tricky, because it's hard to get the metal to 'hold the heat' for long enough to work it much. That lends credence to the idea of making the claddings and sole from thicker stuff. Whilst 1/4" may be a tad heavy, much less than 3/16" would have been difficult to forge out and leave enough to finish to flatness by filing. So that makes the idea of 50mm overall width, 4 to 5 mm sides and 38mm iron width (allowing a mm or so each side for lateral adjustment) seem very plausible.


----------



## Sheffield Tony (8 Sep 2014)

So the Romans perhaps made their planes Krenov style. Well I never ... :lol:


----------



## jimi43 (8 Sep 2014)

Oooooh!

This thread is SO exciting...amazing stuff guys!

And rxh...you are on the right road I'm sure.

Ground breaking!

=D> 

Jimi


----------



## JIJ (8 Sep 2014)

Wow!

It's completely different to how I imagined from looking at the original plane. I think it's because of the way the side plates have corroded at an angle. 
Have you let the museum know that it's in progress? I bet they'd be interested in having a photo to display.

It's looking great, can't wait to hear what it's like to use. Could it hold it's own with a more modern infil? 

James


----------



## rxh (8 Sep 2014)

Really interesting comments from all contributors.



jimi43":b5v4cxvq said:


> I think I might use that wonderful piece of English walnut Douglas gave me...it's been waiting for that special moment and like yew...it would have been native and around in those days. Plus...I haven't done anything in walnut yet.


I think walnut would look very good. BTW, one change I made from the drawing was to reduce the size of the rearmost hole in the side plates to 5/16" so as to leave the wood thicker there.



Sheffield Tony":b5v4cxvq said:


> I wonder at the ergonomics of the rear handle. How comfortable was it to use with the grip 90° out from all the planes we use today. Looks like it might be hard on the wrist. There's a reason to make a replica, you can find out !


Well, it'll be interesting to find out. I think the best way to hold it may be to grip the sides of the plane between thumb and first finger, and grasp the "handle" with the other three fingers.



AndyT":b5v4cxvq said:


> I've just noticed a subtle difference.


Well spotted, Andy - I admit I didn't notice this  . However, I agree there would seem to be no point in fitting iron side plates to a "conventional" woodie.



JIJ":b5v4cxvq said:


> It's looking great, can't wait to hear what it's like to use. Could it hold it's own with a more modern infil?


It will be fun to find out - I have written to a certain "test pilot" to see if he might like to give the finished article a trial run


----------



## JimB (9 Sep 2014)

Has there ever been any analyses of the steel the Romans used for plane irons and chisels?
I assume apprentices made their own tools - wooden parts anyway and by the time they'd finished they'd have learned to live with the ergonomics of their own tools.


----------



## rxh (20 Sep 2014)

Here we have the sole attached. The next jobs will be to make the sole flush with the plane and the rivets flush with the sole.


----------



## rileytoolworks (20 Sep 2014)

Wow, this is coming along really well Richard. 
Are you going to David Stanleys next week? If so, I for one would love to see the plane in the flesh.

Adam.


----------



## jimi43 (20 Sep 2014)

Stunning work....really impressed!

=D> =D> 

Jimi


----------



## bugbear (20 Sep 2014)

Here's an old thread (1994) about a more recent plane - Saxon;

http://www.florilegium.org/?http%3A//ww ... e-art.html

BugBear


----------



## rxh (20 Sep 2014)

rileytoolworks":2xrz0ubm said:


> Wow, this is coming along really well Richard.
> Are you going to David Stanleys next week? If so, I for one would love to see the plane in the flesh.


Thanks Adam, I probably can't go to David Stanley owing to a family occasion but there is a chance.



jimi43":2xrz0ubm said:


> Stunning work....really impressed!


Thanks Jimi,
I cut the mouth the Richard T way with saws and files but I may resort to milling to get the sole flush with the sides to give my poor elbow a break  



bugbear":2xrz0ubm said:


> Here's an old thread (1994) about a more recent plane - Saxon;


Thanks BB, a really interesting thread.


----------



## lanemaux (21 Sep 2014)

Vulcan and Faunus would be well pleased I think . Looks great amigo , hope to see it at work soon.


----------



## rxh (27 Sep 2014)

lanemaux":16s5fnk1 said:


> Vulcan and Faunus would be well pleased I think . Looks great amigo , hope to see it at work soon.


Thanks Mike,

Some more progress: I've made the rivets and sole flush with the sole and sides respectively. I milled/ground down as far as I dared, then finished with scraper and files. I made a scraper from an old file by grinding the teeth off the the end of one side - it worked well. The next jobs are to make a nicer wedge and heat treat the blade.

One advantage of this style of plane is it should be possible to use various widths and thicknesses of blade so I intend to try several.


----------



## AndyT (27 Sep 2014)

That's looking absolutely fantastic!
What I really want to know is how it performs in practice, with its combination of unusual design features - the central mouth, the steep pitch, the hand grip and the heavy weight. But I do think you've done a great job of proving that the construction technique works.


----------



## jimi43 (27 Sep 2014)

Indeed! It is fabulous!

Now...get ye down to the forum and show Shavius Minimus! :mrgreen: 

Brilliant mate...

=D> =D> =D> 

Jimi


----------



## rxh (28 Sep 2014)

Thanks Andy & Jimi,

It will be a few weeks before I get a "forge" up and running so I couldn't resist giving the plane a quick try this morning on a piece of sawn ash using a QS No.3 blade. At the height of my bench the most comfortable hold seemed to be having the rounded back end resting in the palm. Next I need to get the blade good and sharp then try on more demanding wood but I think it is a promising start.


----------



## JIJ (28 Sep 2014)

Cracking job. Great to see some shavings.

James


----------



## JIJ (28 Sep 2014)

Do you think the weight of the plane explains the rear handle? A sticky up one looks more comfortable to me. I don't imagine it would have been difficult to add one if it was wanted. 

James


----------



## lanemaux (28 Sep 2014)

Hi James, I seem to recall that the height of Roman benches was fairly low and that the plane was almost leaned on if that is so. That handle design would then be very feasible.


----------



## JIJ (28 Sep 2014)

Ah, Makes more sense now. Thanks Mike


----------



## Corneel (28 Sep 2014)

Roman style workbench:


----------



## rxh (29 Sep 2014)

JIJ":2m637iep said:


> Cracking job. Great to see some shavings.


Thanks James and thanks for starting this thread in the first place - it has been an education  



lanemaux":2m637iep said:


> Hi James, I seem to recall that the height of Roman benches was fairly low and that the plane was almost leaned on if that is so. That handle design would then be very feasible.





Corneel":2m637iep said:


> Roman style workbench:


Thanks Mike and Corneel. Now we need to find or make a Roman bench ....  

Tonight I went ahead and hardened the blade and did the same to the blade for my infill mitre plane too. Tempering will be the next task.


----------



## jimi43 (30 Sep 2014)

Nice bit of hardening and great photos!!

Now all you have to do is have a Roman Sunday lunch and you're back in temper! :mrgreen: 

I think that since you have gone this far you need to make a facsimile of that bench.

I did a double take on the iron picture...thinking there was a guy called Norrisus Adjusticus but then I read your post properly!! DOH! (homer) 

Once you've done the bench...I think it only fitting that you wear a Toga and treat us to a re enactment...what d'ya think? :shock: :mrgreen: 

Wonderful stuff...the stuff that kids need to be shown so that they can not only see a static image but how it was possibly made.

Very impressed....think I will just get on with my mitre infill now! :wink: 

Cheers for the update

Jimi


----------



## JimB (1 Oct 2014)

A great thread.


----------



## rxh (4 Oct 2014)

Thanks Jimi and JimB,

Gaudeamus fratres! Runcina perfecta est. Habemus ramenta!  *

_* Let us rejoice brothers! The plane is complete. We have shavings._
I can't vouch for the grammatical accuracy - it's more than 45 years since Latin was beaten into me  

I tempered the blade in the oven (only slight domestic displeasure incurred), sharpened it and fitted it. I couldn't find any more yew to make a wedge so made one from ash, which was presumably a type of wood found here in Roman times. I don't have a Roman bench or a toga but I have been practicing planing leaning over the plane using an "overhand" grip and it seems to work quite well. Ready for a test drive by an independent expert.


----------



## jimi43 (4 Oct 2014)

Exsultemus, et fratres Mei; Planum est perfecta . Habemus fomite

....I think! :mrgreen: 

Don't know what the logistics are but I could probably find time to test with ALFIUS! 8) 

Surely though there is someone within chariot distance?  

I do have some more yew if you want to complete the plane in keeping with the rest.

Thanks for sharing and awaiting the testing...

Jimi

p.s. Si non habuerit toga uti linteo


----------



## G S Haydon (4 Oct 2014)

Smashing stuff! I was so interested to see how this one worked the wood! Now if we could do a passaround on this one :lol:


----------



## AndyT (4 Oct 2014)

Well, that's definitely another addition to the list of things the Romans did for us - designing effective and practical woodworking tools!

And thanks again RXH for a really fascinating and enlightening build.


----------



## JIJ (5 Oct 2014)

Brilliant,. Thanks for taking the time to post and with so many great photos.
I hope it becomes a regular user for you.

James


----------



## condeesteso (25 Oct 2014)

(sorry been absent a while, busy n all that)
Happened to need to drop a thing off to RX this afternoon, so got to try this plane out (we should have done some pics)
I really like the build, the look and feel of it. It's hefty of course, but feels quite petite. I'd expect the handle to pose challenges on a Western style bench (around 32").
On a first look I felt the cut was a bit much, so did a quick adjustment - pleasingly fast to set up for thin ribbons off the central 2/3rds of iron (v slight camber).
Richard had some oak, mahogany and maple to play with so I went straight to the reverse grain - surely what a plane of this pitch would relish.
It's a cracker - excellent finish on reverse grain anything. Use it's mass forward and let its own weight produce the cut. The ergonomics are fine and it holds nicely.
If you get the chance you need to try it (maybe at Mac 30 November). I was surprised how quick it was to set up and then 'learn' The steep pitch (around 65??) is far higher than anything I use and I expected it to be a bit of a struggle... not at all. Well done Richard!

[re the drop off thing... maybe more later :wink: ]


----------



## bridger (25 Oct 2014)

The high pitch, the horizontal handle, the low bench.... all point to planing practice involving leaning on the plane.


----------



## JimB (27 Oct 2014)

A few comments or remnants of memories from Latin lessons nearly sixty years ago. The Romans were short. Caesar was meant to be tall and he was supposed to be about 5' 8" which makes low benches sensible I suppose. Roman soldiers were strong carrying up to 80lb weight at times on marches. These were the blokes who did the fighting, built the roads and bridges.
Can't guarantee the above figures and the teacher is probably long gone.
It's been a marvellous thread and I don't know if you've considered donating the plane(s) to a museum. It would bring the history to life.


----------



## jimi43 (27 Oct 2014)

Echo your sentiments about a "museum" Jim...but in a slightly different way.

I foresee a time where virtual interaction such as this forum will be intertwined with physical interaction in such a way as to be a "living" museum where all can see online...no matter where they are in the world...classic items like this can be spread by interest around the world and events such as MAC Timbers and hopefully others can be set up where interested parties can then actually touch and play with the plane.

I think this type of education far outweighs the traditional concept of shelves and displays in public buildings...

Jim


----------



## JimB (27 Oct 2014)

jimi43":1d55rgb7 said:


> Echo your sentiments about a "museum" Jim...but in a slightly different way.
> 
> I foresee a time where virtual interaction such as this forum will be intertwined with physical interaction in such a way as to be a "living" museum where all can see online...no matter where they are in the world...classic items like this can be spread by interest around the world and events such as MAC Timbers and hopefully others can be set up where interested parties can then actually touch and play with the plane.
> 
> ...


Sounds good to me Jim.


----------

