18th c & cutting dovetails on drawers

[greg Forster]

I get to see very little 18th c. furniture upclose.Does anyone have any evidence that the dovetails on drawer sides were cut in pairs (2 sides clamped together and then dovetails cut). I'm curious if this method was used often, very little or can't really tell. Do any of you use this method now and what are your thoughts?

[Rob Millard]

Greg,
I have no way of knowing if period cabinetmakers stack cut dovetails, but I’d be surprised if they didn’t. They looked for any way to work more efficiently.

I stack cut my dovetails whenever possible.

Rob Millard

[Tim Sproul]

Yes, you can saw tails by stacking multiple pieces together. Can't do it for pins. Was it done in the past? Definitely. Was is it done often? I don't think anyone could definitively give an answer either way.

[greg Forster]

Thanks Rob and Tim for your replies.

What I'm curious about,in examining early furniture, do drawer sides often/seldom appear to be such "mirror images" that they must have been cut together.

I realize this thread may be "really out there", but in trying to understand the 18th c cabinet-maker -"leave no board un-turned"

[James Mittlefehldt]

Don't know where you are Greg but here in sunny Southern Ontario you don't see a lot of 18th century furniture either.

One thing I have noticed on older furniture, that is early 19th century, which seems to be somewhat abundent, is that often as not the rear of the drawers do not appear to be cut by the same person. The front half hidden ones are often, though not always, precise whereas the rear ones seem to be less so.

I figure either the master or journeyman cut the fronts wheras the rear ones which would not be seen much anyway were done in a hurry or by an advanced apprentice.

It always surprises me, I am easily amused, that you often see where the cabinet maker has cut past the line on the front pins of the half hidden ones, either by accident or deliberatly to get better purchase to chop out the waste.

I should also add that when viewing the famous upstairs built in's at the Canterbury Shaker village last summer, when seeing the dovetails up close and personal they were not any better than what I have seen locally on any furniture of that era.

[greg Forster]

From what I've read and photos in books, greatly overcutting the half-blind dovetails (3/4-1 ") was the norm early on, and refined in the 1790s on. As you say ,probably to speed the chisel work. The rougher back dovetails need futher investigation. Was this common? Was it the work of an apprentice? Do many pieces show this characteristic? Could it be the same person using a quicker, rougher cutting saw?(the SASH SAW in action?)Do these appear to be sawn as a pair? Before I moved to my "the buck stops here" position, I spent many years as a carpenter and some things need to be "done pretty" and some things just need to get done. Looking for in-put folks.


Greg- from the sunny and still green south shore of Lake Ontario

[James Mittlefehldt]

Well normally the sides and back were secondary woods, in this area often white pine, so they would look a bit rougher anyway. I never thought to check to see if they appeared to be cut in mutiples as opposed to singly though I bet that was the case, as you say some stuff you do for show and some you just do.

I don't mean to say the backs were poorly done just seemingly with less finesse. Something else for those who agonize over their dovetail joints, I have seen a lot of flat to wall cupboards (dish dressers to some), made by country craftsman with dovetails that frankly don't look real pretty but after a hundred and some years are still holding well, whereas when I see old dovetails fail it is often the factory made jig cut variety from the latter part of the same century.