View Single Post
Old 6th October 2023, 12:24 PM   #13
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,940
Default

Thank you guys for all these responses!
C4RL, I very much appreciate your valuable insights on this, and of course you are well situated being in Spain and in this collecting field to have unique expertise in these forms of 'hatchet'.
As I mentioned earlier, I am entirely a novice as far as these 'items' (hatchet, axe, tomahawk, tool,weapon etc.) and it is important to me to have all views in discussion of them to better evaluate the most likely origin of the example In have posted.

In most of my reading on these hatchets, it does seem well noted that the Basque areas of Northern Spain were key to metalwork from local iron resources which included tools, weapons and iron items. The iron shackles with bar and lock used to hold prisoners and unfortunately slaves were known as 'bilbo's, referring to the city and port of Bilbao where iron products were produced and often exported. The well known Spanish arming swords of the 18th century often hilted there also gave them the colloquial term 'bilbo' (in English) due to these origins.

In research on the Spanish colonial 'espada ancha', I discovered that these familiar short swords were actually termed 'machete' in Spanish and in the periods of their development and use in the Spanish colonial frontiers.
These shorter swords with typically frontier blacksmith forged blades, while of course in the form of that 'weapon' actually were more commonly used as a 'tool' for brushing trails, chopping vegetation much as the modern machete is.

On the vessels coming to the New World, the hangers/cutlasses used aboard these ships were the prototypes for the espada ancha/machete. It seems the 'cutlass' term was more maritime in colloquial application, while the same weapons ashore used inn utilitarian functions were termed 'machete', despite the 'hanger' term which seems more military oriented.

On these vessels, as noted, were often barrels full of axe/hatchet heads for colonial use and trade, as well of course as being used aboard by the sailors and men on these vessels for the purposes required. Boarding axes, while used as weapons, were most commonly employed in the mundane chores that were always at hand in the daily functions at sea, and often ashore, just like the 'cutlasses'.

In colonial New Spain, it is well known that Basques, and their wares were profoundly present . These 'hatchets/axes' were thoroughly ubiquitous from the arrival ports and entrepots and the trade networks, where the Basque term became quite collectively used to describe the similar forms.

Having said all this, it does seem that the general form of my axe, in round poll character, retains what appears to be a quite traditional type of 'hatchet/camp axe etc.' and of course from a long tradition of these from Basque regions.

From what I have understood, the 'round' eye gave way to the more 'tear drop?' shaped type later, so if I understand correctly, this style was still being produced in the 20th century in Spain? (100 years ago was of course 1920s).
So the 'clean' lines etc. of my example could not have been produced in the profoundly skilled and highly regarded iron working centers in Basque country in the earlier period noted (early to mid 19th c.)?

The reason I brought up the case of the machete/cutlass/hanger etc. is to point out that the specious debate of tool vs. weapon is, as well noted, pretty well moot, as virtually most of these can be used (and were) interchangeably. Straining the matter further is the term 'tomahawk' , which is again, broadly applied to various forms of these smaller (than woodsman axes) axes used as weapons, in the American Indian manner......which of course lends to the notably strained 'name game'. Shakespeare said it best,
..a rose by any other name....is still a rose'.

As always, my entries become longer than intended, but I wanted to express my take on these aspects not to dispute anything in particular, but to encourage further discussion on these 'axe' type forms and recognizing the character in proper age identifying.

Thanks again to all here for these great responses! The more I learn here (thanks to you guys) the more intrigued I become in this field! Oh Oh!!
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote