| Author |
Message |
D. Austin
Industry Professional
Location: Melbourne, Australia Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 208
|
 Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 2:03 am Post subject: Shiver me timbers |
 |
|
Hi all.
I was wondering if someone could help me identify this sword. I like to think of it as a pirate sword, and my 6 year old daughter likes this idea too. I searched for it on oldswords.com once and found a similar one which was, if my memory serves me correctly, a british naval cutlass from the 1860s. This piece has a brass plaque with the number 2 on the guard which did not appear on the one shown on oldswords. It has a 660mm (26") blade with a false edge for about a third of it. It is well balanced and very comfortable to hold, with a nice distal taper.
If anyone can explain to me why this sword would be numbered or any other details regarding this type of blade I would be most appreciative (and so would she).
Darren.
 Attachment: 13.89 KB
Attachment: 16.14 KB
|
|
  |
 |
D. Austin
Industry Professional
Location: Melbourne, Australia Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
More pics:
Attachment: 22.71 KB
Attachment: 15.29 KB
|
|
|
|
|
Arne Focke
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
To me it looks like a naval blade from the early 19th century (and probably later). As for the number: If it is indeed a naval blade, than a number would appear to be normal. Even in modern military weapons from "the hold" are carrying numbers to identify them.
So schön und inhaltsreich der Beruf eines Archäologen ist, so hart ist auch seine Arbeit, die keinen Achtstundentag kennt! (Wolfgang Kimmig in: Die Heuneburg an der oberen Donau, Stuttgart 1983)
|
|
 |
|
|
Risto Rautiainen
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Looks a lot like this:
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=7096
But your lacks the thrusting tip reinforcement. I am probably wrong because my screen is so dark that I can't see the hilt details properly.
|
|
|
|
|
D. Austin
Industry Professional
Location: Melbourne, Australia Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, it is a very similar shape. I'd imagine it's from the same era, and you're right, it doesn't have the thrusting tip reinforcement as show on the other sword. The guard is slightly different and mine also doesn't have a ricasso.
Arne, your explaination for the number makes sense. I guess this indicates that it was most likely a communal weapon as opposed to one issued to a particular individual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gene Davis
Location: Long Island, NY Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I checked Wm. Gilkerson's book Boarder's Away and an illustration on p. 85 identifies it as a British Naval cutless ca. 1845. I would also agree with Arne about the "No. 2" plaque as being a ship's arsenal inventory number. Historically most navies of the period frowned on personal weapons being in the possession of common seamen for fear of mutiny, and stored cutlasses, pistols, etc. in racks to be issued out when the need arose.
Attachment: 15.38 KB
|
|
 |
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The one in the drawing also has the thrusting reinforcement. Strange how the one at the top of the thread does not.
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
   |
|
|
Jonathan Hopkins
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It does look like a P1845/58 cutlass. Are there any maker marks or names on the blade? How about government acceptance marks? Lead cutting swords are often mistaken for cutlasses as they shared the same basic design. If your sword weighs two pounds, there is a chance that the two in the guard in fact indicates the lead cutter weight rather than a rack or locker number. Lead cutting swords came in several different weights (I believe it was 1, 2, 3, and 4 pounds) and were intended for men of different sizes/strengths. They were used to cut lead bars for the purpose of strengthening the sword arm and learning proper cutting technique.
Of course it could just be a cutlass, but I thought it would be fun to mention the lead cutters. 
Jonathan
ADDED: Lead cutter links
http://forums.swordforum.com/attachment.php?a...1043238613
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s...ight=sheep
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t...light=lead
|
|
|
|
|
D. Austin
Industry Professional
Location: Melbourne, Australia Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm... lead cutter hey? Sounds interesting. I'll weigh it when I get home tonight. If it is two pounds then I'd be rather inclined to go with this as the most likely explaination.
Unfortunately I can't find any markings at all on the blade, the number 2 being the only clue.
Given that both explainations for the number displayed on the guard seem totally plausible, I am determined to get to the bottom of this. I might have to search the state library for books that could help. I thought that the relative who gave me the sword might be able to assist with some clues as to it's background but all he could tell me was that it was Japanese. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Hopkins
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Mar, 2008 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It may not be British, although I think it might be--it is missing government stamps and the pommel is not bulbous as on other British cutlasses. Naval swords are definitely not my forte. You may get a more exact answer in teh Antique & Military Sword section at SFI.
Jonathan
|
|
|
|
|
D. Austin
Industry Professional
Location: Melbourne, Australia Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Tue 11 Mar, 2008 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I weighed it and it came in at 1172g, or 2.58lb. Given that this is closer to the three pound weight than the two, I'm leaning further towards the inventory number explanation. I still love the lead cutter idea though.
I may just take your advice Jonathan and check at SFI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic