Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
dimensions of 5 ins (127 mm) in blade width. Typically 12 ins (306 mm) in over-
all axe length, a round central grip of 4½ ins (115 mm) and a weight around
3 lbs. (1.36 kg). The size and weight of the brick axe varies and Richard Filmer
(2007) of the Tool and Trades History Society (TATHS), who has several in a
private collection (Fig. 15), discusses this:
Whilst most of the smaller brick axes are roughly a similar pattern, there does
seem to be a significant variation in the size and weight, which is perhaps surpris-
ing, inasmuch as generally the size of the brick was reasonably standard. Perhaps
it was the texture or composition of the brick that influenced the size?
This is possible, though given the nature of the soft textured bricks used for cut
and rubbed work this might not have been the main influence size and weight.
It is more likely that most brick axes were bespoke-made, by blacksmiths (and
to varying standards of quality dependent on their materials and skills) so that
the length, blade width and overall weight suited the individual craftsmen.
The brick axe appears to have come into England with the craftsmen from
the Low Countries where it was termed a 'bikijzer' (brick iron/blade) ( Janse,
1998, 41). The brick axe was used for roughing-out or chopping away waste
brick and/or working a surface flat. Also, where necessary, it might be used for
finishing, or dressing, the brick surface and in this respect the tool resembles a
form of chisel as much an axe.
In his work on the significance of cut and rubbed brickwork on Tudor
chimneys, Smith (1999, 3-8) describes evidence of post-fired working of the
face of the brick using a brick axe. Gleaned from studying a salvaged original
cut-moulded brick from an ornate chimney of a demolished Tudor Palace at
Bridewell, London (1515-23), now in the Museum of London, he comments:
The brick itself… shows tool marks which 'indicate that the brick was shaped by
cutting rather than moulding'. These tool marks are somewhat coarse in their
execution… suggesting the use of a brick-axe…. and from the dimensions that
the shaped brick was cut from one of the standard bricks used for the palace….
Even more significant are the scribe-lines on both bedfaces of the Bridewell brick.
The cutting or carving of brick chimneys could have been done either by shaping
the individual units and then laying them or by carving them in situ. It is likely, in
fact, that a combination of both techniques was used….
Reference to the possibility of carving the intricate shaft mouldings
in situ
on
Tudor chimney stacks is also sometimes touched on by other commentators
as well as Wight (1992, 100). It is suggested it could never have occurred. The
slow hardening and relatively weak set of a lime mortar, binding many small and
essentially lightweight bricks into tall slender shafts, make it both impractical
