Hello Jim and great to hear from you! I had sent you a PM awhile back to see how you were doing. I was hoping you would come in on this. I hope others might as well. Just a few comments on your excellent and thorough essay-
-Excellent point about Maynard's crew. I hadn't thought of it in that way. Of course some of his crew would have been local, and considering that there is a strong Scot population in NC. Likewise, information on that Bahamas wreck with a broadsword type is most interesting. I'll look into that one...
-Gilkerson's comment-Wow, totally missed that one in my copy. Must have been hurrying as always. That single statement might be all we have to grasp at for now, but it does lend to the argument that said swords did go to sea.
-No naval markings on said swords to prove naval provenance. This is so typical that I don't even flinch to hear it anymore. For every sword with a naval mark, it would seem that there were far more unmarked. Given that so many generic types were produced for both the army and navy in later centuries, it stands to reason that this practice came from previous centuries. Remember that lion-pommel officer's sword I posted recently? Carried by officers of both the army and navy. I likewise have found that with the merchant fleets and private purchase of weapons, you had unmarked/non-govt issue types.
-Bummer about the shipwrecks not yielding any examples of cup-hilt, but the sailors had to have carried something. It is one thing if other rusted relics of other sword types had been found, but it sounds like no edged weapons have been recovered. The Spanish were always being set upon by pirates. They were always facing the boarding parties of the English and Dutch. Likewise, when they reached their destination, the Portuguese and Spanish sent out scouting parties of soldiers, rounded up slaves, etc. There had to be some type of weapon carried. Perhaps some will turn up on a well-preserved wreck one of these days...