Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathey
Hi Guys
From what I can find thus far these cutlasses were contracted at the same time as the 1859 Sword Cutlass bayonet. There are records of the cutlass bayonet being issued but none on the cutlass’s also ordered at the same time. On page 91, Volume 1 Swords for sea service there is a reference to cutlasses produced at the same times as the cutlass bayonet but not adopted. This might explain why this cutlass has no issue marks and may have been repurposed for training use.
The first cutlass I posted has a 26 ¾” spear point blade, but I have other one identical other than that the blade is 27” spear point blade which is 1 ½” wide at the hilt. These blades are not blunted as you might expect in a training sword. I have attached the picture from Volume 2 of Swords for sea service as apart from the rack plate on the guard it is identical to the two that I have acquired recently. The reinforced plate on the inside of the guard and again on the outside is more prominent in this second example and this outside plate is missing on the first one.
I have found references to cutlasses and sometimes just the blades in 1858 being produced by Liege makers as well as German makers. It might be the mark I am trying to trace is that of a Liege Belgium maker not German.
Cheers Cathey
|
That is an excellent suggestion Cathey! Liege has been the 'X factor' in so many anomalous weapons, and their use of the 'Moors' head which had not been used since Solingen c. 1705 (as I earlier noted) would be a great mark to use. I dont know offhand of any listings of Belgian (Liege) makers but possibly these were relatively uncontrolled anyway given the numbers of 'private orders' . Other 1858's seem to have the Kirschbaum knights head or the Kings Head of Wundes, so the 'head' theme would seem to be in good company.