(These last two points are both sources of disbelief/contempt among modern Markneukirchen/Schönbach craftsmen, who have spent their lives making bows.) I think it important to emphasise that the chart should be regarded as an approximate guide only.
In particular, the practice of using cheaper (nickel) mounts on cheaper bows, as seen on the Continent, was not used in England, which complicates dating, because the English strategy for the lower budget clientele was to dispense with metalwork (and faceplates) altogether, and continue making open trench bows.
Although dating instruments can be problematic, dating bows is infinitely more difficult (still), because bows do not have (dated) labels.
(Mind you, violin labels can be an immensely treacherous subject, if I may veer of at a tangent for just a second.) Most early English bows seem to have been anonymously supplied unbranded to the violin trade, and were often stamped by the violin maker or dealer who retailed them (i.e. In many cases, the period that a violin maker or shop was in business is known, and this is an important aid to rough-dating the bows that they supplied.
Wood blemishes were filled out, grafted and the like.
It was announced that Keith Leak II, Olivia Sui and him were added to the Smosh recurring cast on March 13, 2015.I had often wondered what the bows of the impoverished tutti violinist of the 18th or early 19th centuries might have looked like, never mind the vagabond pub violinist who surely also had a bow.Since I am not aware of a second example anywhere, it is hardly scientific to postulate that this is such a bow, although I suggest it is.I am told by various knowledgeable people that it is made of padauk, commonly known at the time as barwood or camwood.Both barwood [pterocarpus soyauxii] and camwood [baphia nitida] were used as commercial dye woods.