Former Bayonet

[Chris Evans]

Hi Fernando K and Fernando <lol>

I did not miss that caption at the bottom of the illustration which loosely translated reads “….its use was largely restricted to delinquents and militias”.

Now, I am more than happy to agree with the above, but only within the historical time frame, commencing well into the 19th century when the roving gauchos were outlawed and facons, especially caroneros, were no longer approved of, these knives being replaced by smaller and more broad bladed working knives. Actually gauchos were outlawed after the war of independence, but the enforcement of this was only gradual. And facons were considered unsuited for hacienda work, so their possession was severely curtailed, being restricted to senior retainers, hacienda owners and military men.

Be this as it may, the above statement in no way does it mean or imply that a gaucho in possession of a caronero used it only as a weapon and not for other tasks, and as I said in my previous post he ate every day and fought only on the odd occasion. It would be ludicrous to suggest or suppose that if he had such a weapon that he would reach for a shorter knife to carry out the very dangerous task of cutting the rear tendons of a steer. Not so say that it could not be done, but that it would be that much more uncertain. And then also there was the matter of dispatching the crippled animal, which sometimes was done by thrusting with a long knife into the animal from under the throat.

And this consideration applies even more to the halcyon days of the gauchos, before the war of independence, when they could roam the pampas at will, answering to no one and did as they wanted. A gaucho could bring down a steer with a shorter facon, if assisted by a companion, as depicted in the illustration shown. However, if alone, he would have had to disable the steer from horseback first. Sure, he had his “boleadoras” to entangle the legs of the fleeing animal, his first choice, but he could not always rely on those and if he missed, he had to try something else, or else go hungry.

It is worth remembering that the term “gaucho” constantly changed, from a pejorative in the late 18th century to a hacienda hand that rode a horse in the course of the 19th and finally it became conceptually the embodiment of all masculine virtues and more by the 20th. The same changes also applied to the “facon”, the early variants of which we know little about, except that they were large knives. These knives were worn, if possible in the small of the back, in the Spanish fashion, and if too big , pinned under the saddle. Domenech tells that much and is common sense.

Now back to Robert’s knife: It has a 18 3/8” (47cm) which is at the long end of most facons that were worn in the belt, but equally, it could be carried pinned under the saddle. From personal experience, I can confidently say that wearing such a large knife tucked into the back of the back would have been very uncomfortable, so as far as I am concerned, that makes it a caronero, or if we wish, a borderline knife that could fulfill either role. Most probably it would have been pinned under the saddle for mounted use, but once afoot it would have been tucked into the belt.

What I am uncomfortable with is that, as Fernando K says, the blade was made late in the 19th century, well past the age of the roaming gauchos with caroneros. If by that time a caronero or large facon was ordered by someone who could wear it with impunity, meaning a person of high status, it probably would have had silver furnishings. And call me suspicious if you like , but the blade appears to be in too good a condition and neither the handle nor the sheath seem to me what one would expect from an early gaucho knife, especially the plaited leather. All in all, a piece somewhat inconsistent with the history of the pampas.

Of course we must not restrict out inquiry to the Argentinean pampas because gauchos were also living in Southern Brazil and also in what eventually became Uruguay, so this knife could have found legitimate use there.

Robert: If the tang was peened at the end of the handle, have a look for rust. A dead giveaway of modern manufacture or alteration is the absence of rust.

Cheers
Chris

Edit:

1. On the photos provided by Robert, the fourth down, there appear to be two small rotary grind marks of the handle near the ricasso. Robert, could you verify this please?

2. Sorry about the illegibility of the caption under the illustration. A much better version can be found here http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=gaucho

[Chris Evans]

Hi Folks,

According to this description of the Remington 1879 bayonet, these were also used in Uruguay, which widens our scope of inquiry and could possibly explain this unusual piece: http://www.arms2armor.com/Bayonets/arg1879a.htm

Cheers
Chris

[Fernando K]

Hello

The Remington Argentine model 1879 was used with two bayonets: the yathagan model, which was primitively for the Egyptian Remington, and the straight bayonet, which is what was used for this caronero

Fernando K

[Fernando K]

Hello

A series of personal interpretations, from the sources or bibliography, which seems to be fundamentally Domenech. Domenech is an Argentine essayist, and his expressions must submit to criticism.

He maintains that the gauchos were "forbidden" after the war of independence. Exactly the gauchos or criollos were the members of the liberating armies and later, of the fratricidal struggles. The facones, caroneros or no, like all type of knife, continued using, in spite of the real cedulas or the republican decrees.

You can stay calm. Nowhere have I argued that this FONCON CARONERO was made in the 19th century, but that it considered that the reconversion would be of the first half of the 20th century.

The illustration that accompanies your post says just "Shows a Creole hamstring knife" and in the right hand seems to have a knife or a short facon (not a CARONERO), whose pod is seen in the waist, on the back

Fernando K

[RobT]

Hi All,

Thanks to all for the lively debate and the additional information.
Chris, the tang is completely hidden by very fine basketweave. The striations on the metal oval are straight and were probably made by a file. The metal oval appears to be made of heavily patinated brass. It isn't magnetic. I don't agree with your suspicions about authenticity for three reasons. One: All the work on the hilt and sheath are too finely and carefully done for a piece intended for monetary gain. The workmanship clearly shows that the crafting was done either by or for a person who had a high regard for the blade. Two: if an individual had dressed an old blade specifically for profitable sale as a Gaucho facon, wouldn't have been more marketable and less time consuming to use the more typical and expected metal fittings? Three: I got this piece from a dealer who had obtained part of an old collection and I didn't pay more than the cost of dinner for two at a mid price restaurant.
Fernando K, I agree with your belief that the hilt and sheath work was probably done in the early 20th century but I wouldn't rule out something like 1890. The condition of the materials is too good for any earlier date. However, since the bayonet model was originally made in Germany in 1871, the current mounts may not be the first civilian hilt and sheath the blade has seen.

Sincerely,
RobT

[Chris Evans]

Originally Posted by RobT

Hi All,

Thanks to all for the lively debate and the additional information.
Chris, the tang is completely hidden by very fine basketweave. The striations on the metal oval are straight and were probably made by a file. The metal oval appears to be made of heavily patinated brass. It isn't magnetic. I don't agree with your suspicions about authenticity for three reasons. One: All the work on the hilt and sheath are too finely and carefully done for a piece intended for monetary gain. The workmanship clearly shows that the crafting was done either by or for a person who had a high regard for the blade. Two: if an individual had dressed an old blade specifically for profitable sale as a Gaucho facon, wouldn't have been more marketable and less time consuming to use the more typical and expected metal fittings? Three: I got this piece from a dealer who had obtained part of an old collection and I didn't pay more than the cost of dinner for two at a mid price restaurant.
Fernando K, I agree with your belief that the hilt and sheath work was probably done in the early 20th century but I wouldn't rule out something like 1890. The condition of the materials is too good for any earlier date. However, since the bayonet model was originally made in Germany in 1871, the current mounts may not be the first civilian hilt and sheath the blade has seen.

Sincerely,
RobT

We still have to somehow account for a) the excellent state of the blade, and b) who would have had a need for such a large knife by that time.

I agree entirely with Fernando that this knife was made in the 20th century.

Most of the large facons of the later times were ostentatious status symbols and as such fitted with ornate silver furnishings. But yours appears to be more of a working knife - A movie prop perhaps? Just speculating...

Cheers
Chris

[Chris Evans]

Originally Posted by Fernando K

Hello

A series of personal interpretations, from the sources or bibliography, which seems to be fundamentally Domenech. Domenech is an Argentine essayist, and his expressions must submit to criticism.

He maintains that the gauchos were "forbidden" after the war of independence. Exactly the gauchos or criollos were the members of the liberating armies and later, of the fratricidal struggles. The facones, caroneros or no, like all type of knife, continued using, in spite of the real cedulas or the republican decrees.

Fernando K

Doemenech's Dagas de Plata is probably the best book on the subject to date, a vast advance on Osornio’s little book, and an invaluable resource for collectors; But it has its limitations on account of what he could fit into a single volume and thus he could only scratch the surface of the history of the flatlands and thus contextualize the weapons that his work deals with.

As I said in my earlier post, a huge problem for the modern student of the subject is that the "word" gaucho dramatically changed meaning in the course of the 19th and 20th centuries and with it the depiction of the attendant equestrian culture of the pampas, which included weaponry. This has resulted in a very misleading presentation of the related subjects by most writers, and one has to have a good grasp of history to be able to disentangle facts from what are often mere romantic eulogies of a bygone era.

Works like Martin Fierro and Facundo Quiroga will broaden one’s understanding as will works in English like Gauchos & The Vanishing Frontier by Slatta, Argentine Caudillo Juan Manuel De Rosas, and Massacre In The Pampas, 1872, both by Lynch.

The challenge for collectors is to understand the men of the pampas in a rapidly changing cultural environment, as that once barely populated wilderness was settled and transformed into the source of the prosperity that characterized the “bella epoca” by way of commercial grazing. And all this occurred in less than a century, commencing around 1810 and ending by around 1890.

Cheers
Chris

[thinreadline]

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

Hi Fernando K and Fernando <lol>

I did not miss that caption at the bottom of the illustration which loosely translated reads “….its use was largely restricted to delinquents and militias”.

Now, I am more than happy to agree with the above, but only within the historical time frame, commencing well into the 19th century when the roving gauchos were outlawed and facons, especially caroneros, were no longer approved of, these knives being replaced by smaller and more broad bladed working knives. Actually gauchos were outlawed after the war of independence, but the enforcement of this was only gradual. And facons were considered unsuited for hacienda work, so their possession was severely curtailed, being restricted to senior retainers, hacienda owners and military men.

Be this as it may, the above statement in no way does it mean or imply that a gaucho in possession of a caronero used it only as a weapon and not for other tasks, and as I said in my previous post he ate every day and fought only on the odd occasion. It would be ludicrous to suggest or suppose that if he had such a weapon that he would reach for a shorter knife to carry out the very dangerous task of cutting the rear tendons of a steer. Not so say that it could not be done, but that it would be that much more uncertain. And then also there was the matter of dispatching the crippled animal, which sometimes was done by thrusting with a long knife into the animal from under the throat.

And this consideration applies even more to the halcyon days of the gauchos, before the war of independence, when they could roam the pampas at will, answering to no one and did as they wanted. A gaucho could bring down a steer with a shorter facon, if assisted by a companion, as depicted in the illustration shown. However, if alone, he would have had to disable the steer from horseback first. Sure, he had his “boleadoras” to entangle the legs of the fleeing animal, his first choice, but he could not always rely on those and if he missed, he had to try something else, or else go hungry.

It is worth remembering that the term “gaucho” constantly changed, from a pejorative in the late 18th century to a hacienda hand that rode a horse in the course of the 19th and finally it became conceptually the embodiment of all masculine virtues and more by the 20th. The same changes also applied to the “facon”, the early variants of which we know little about, except that they were large knives. These knives were worn, if possible in the small of the back, in the Spanish fashion, and if too big , pinned under the saddle. Domenech tells that much and is common sense.

Now back to Robert’s knife: It has a 18 3/8” (47cm) which is at the long end of most facons that were worn in the belt, but equally, it could be carried pinned under the saddle. From personal experience, I can confidently say that wearing such a large knife tucked into the back of the back would have been very uncomfortable, so as far as I am concerned, that makes it a caronero, or if we wish, a borderline knife that could fulfill either role. Most probably it would have been pinned under the saddle for mounted use, but once afoot it would have been tucked into the belt.

What I am uncomfortable with is that, as Fernando K says, the blade was made late in the 19th century, well past the age of the roaming gauchos with caroneros. If by that time a caronero or large facon was ordered by someone who could wear it with impunity, meaning a person of high status, it probably would have had silver furnishings. And call me suspicious if you like , but the blade appears to be in too good a condition and neither the handle nor the sheath seem to me what one would expect from an early gaucho knife, especially the plaited leather. All in all, a piece somewhat inconsistent with the history of the pampas.

Of course we must not restrict out inquiry to the Argentinean pampas because gauchos were also living in Southern Brazil and also in what eventually became Uruguay, so this knife could have found legitimate use there.

Robert: If the tang was peened at the end of the handle, have a look for rust. A dead giveaway of modern manufacture or alteration is the absence of rust.

Cheers
Chris

Edit:

1. On the photos provided by Robert, the fourth down, there appear to be two small rotary grind marks of the handle near the ricasso. Robert, could you verify this please?

2. Sorry about the illegibility of the caption under the illustration. A much better version can be found here http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=gaucho

Absolutely Chris , obsolete bayonets are continually refashioned into sidearms or knives, both in near contemporary times and much later ... often by those who have a need for these objects but also by modern hobbyists ... this is a sidearm made from a German Seitengewehr bayonet by a friend of mine 40 years ago ! If it passed into the hands of a less than scrupulous dealer , then dont doubt it would acquire a 'cock and bull' story to enhance its value !

[Chris Evans]

Originally Posted by thinreadline

Absolutely Chris , obsolete bayonets are continually refashioned into sidearms or knives, both in near contemporary times and much later ... often by those who have a need for these objects but also by modern hobbyists ... this is a sidearm made from a German Seitengewehr bayonet by a friend of mine 40 years ago ! If it passed into the hands of a less than scrupulous dealer , then dont doubt it would acquire a 'cock and bull' story to enhance its value !

Yes, it is a shame that bayonets of historical significance are destroyed in this manner.

This was given a good airing in an Argentine forum a few years ago and disaproved of.

Cheers
Chris

[RobT]

Chris,

I have and have seen many 100+ year old blades in as good or better condition. Although I mentioned the superb condition of the blade in my initial post, I clearly stated that I considered the condition of the hilt and sheath to be the extraordinary issue and I reiterated this in my first response to Fernando K. His surmise that the hilt and sheath were actually created in the early 20th century could be a likely explanation for the excellent condition of those components. The blade condition isn't remarkable because, although the model is designated as 1871, the blade in question may have been made some years after that and may have sat in military storage for many years before it was sold as surplus or stolen. I would have to disagree that this piece was a working knife. The type of craftsmanship on the hilt and sheath is only seen on prestige/fighting weapons that are never used for labor which would quite quickly degrade the dress. As for who might have had use for such a large knife, perhaps it was worn as a symbol of authority/macho by a ranch owner or foreman who was channeling romantic notions of the Gaucho glory days. The blade could have even originally belonged to a deceased relative and thus, for sentimental reasons, be deemed worthy of fine dress. Whatever the explanation, nobody would put all that work into a movie prop.

Sincerely,
RobT

[Chris Evans]

Hi,

If I were restricted to a single book to understand the Pampean culture, it would be Richard W. Slata’s well researched and scholarly work, Gauchos and the Vanishing Frontier.

To better understand the current portrayal of gaucho lore, here’s a quote from Slatta’s introduction to the 1992 edition:

Faced with rapid socioeconomic changes, Argentina’s intelligentsia experienced a sense of loss and fear. The flood tide of foreigners seemed to imperil Argentinidad, the essential Argentine national character. Nationalists resurrected and rehabilitated the once maligned gaucho. He became a symbol, and ideological weapon, used by the ruling elite against the threatening demands of immigrant workers.

As the historical gaucho receded into the endless pampa horizon, a new “sanitized”, romanticized version appeared in the nation’s culture and politics. The ruling elite that successfully subdued the gaucho now enshrined him in national mythology.

In the chapter titled Who was the Gaucho? Slatta writes:

It seems likely that gauchos first appeared along the Argentine bank of the Rio de la Plata as wild cattle hunters seeking livestock that spread along the river from Asuncion, Paraguay, during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.

And

In Argentina, the term first appeared in a complaint of 1774 by government officials of gauchos or cattle thieves operating in the Banda Oriental – a wild, largely ungoverned frontier region.

And:

During the nineteenth century, the term gaucho became generalized to refer to all native rural workers.

From the above we can see that the halcyon days of the gauchos preceded the 19th century, yet that century forms the focal point of nearly all the extant literature on the subject, a period of immense and rapid change that made this legendary wild horseman’s lifestyle untenable. Also, that the primary preoccupation of gauchos was hunting wild cattle and horses, and not the incidental fighting that receives so much attention nowadays.

The other sources that I listed in my earlier post enlarge on what Slatta wrote, and are essentially in agreement.

Cheers
Chris

[Chris Evans]

Originally Posted by RobT

Chris,

I have and have seen many 100+ year old blades in as good or better condition. Although I mentioned the superb condition of the blade in my initial post, I clearly stated that I considered the condition of the hilt and sheath to be the extraordinary issue and I reiterated this in my first response to Fernando K. His surmise that the hilt and sheath were actually created in the early 20th century could be a likely explanation for the excellent condition of those components. The blade condition isn't remarkable because, although the model is designated as 1871, the blade in question may have been made some years after that and may have sat in military storage for many years before it was sold as surplus or stolen. I would have to disagree that this piece was a working knife. The type of craftsmanship on the hilt and sheath is only seen on prestige/fighting weapons that are never used for labor which would quite quickly degrade the dress. As for who might have had use for such a large knife, perhaps it was worn as a symbol of authority/macho by a ranch owner or foreman who was channeling romantic notions of the Gaucho glory days. The blade could have even originally belonged to a deceased relative and thus, for sentimental reasons, be deemed worthy of fine dress. Whatever the explanation, nobody would put all that work into a movie prop.

Sincerely,
RobT

I take your observations as valid value because it is not possible for readers like me to judge the quality of a weapon like this from mere photographs.

Re your other points, all I can say is that all the late and modern large facons that I have seen had ornate silver or the much cheaper alpaca (German silver) furnishings, and I haven't seen anything like yours.

It may be worth your while to write to Abel Domenech, the foremost expert on this subject who is fluent in English, and ask for his opinion. He has answered such queries in the past, and can be contacted at dagasdeplata@yahoo.com - His website is http://www.domenech.com.ar/

Cheers
Chris

[Fernando K]

Hello everyone

All right. Here it has been a weapon used in Argentina and Argentina not only includes the pampa but also the mountains, the mountain, the jungle, the mountain range. In all these regions the knife was used in its different variants.

So we must separate the context, otherwise we would end up in a sociological and ethnographic discussion.

The work of Domenech "Daggers of Silver" has been cited. In the first word, in the Introduction, he uses Pampa, thus limiting the appearance of the gaucho character (whatever he wants to call him: gauderio, camilucho, changador) to the pampa.

The gaucho was born of the mixture of two bloods, the Spanish and the Indian, and the introduction of the horse and the cattle.

It says somewhere that the first gaucho types appeared in the eighteenth century. He does not know the mention of Hernandarias, he describes it at the beginning of the 17th century. The same for Aguirre, who places it in the province of Tucuman, for the same time.

The same goes for Slatta, which qualifies him as a hunter of wild cattle, horses and cattle. It is true that it occurred in a certain place and time, but you can not take this characteristic as a definition.

As for the state of the sheet, nothing can be said. Perhaps he has taken care of his previous or previous owner, and maybe he has cleaned himself up. The same goes for leather work on the handle and the sheath. Known is that artisans (the sogueros) like perfection, however humble the material

Sorry for the translator

affectionately. Fernando K

[Chris Evans]

Hola Fernando K,

Originally Posted by Fernando K

Hello everyone

All right. Here it has been a weapon used in Argentina and Argentina not only includes the pampa but also the mountains, the mountain, the jungle, the mountain range. In all these regions the knife was used in its different variants.

Yes, that is so, knives are found all over the world. However, certain typologies are bound to certain regions and differ from other knives because of their specialized and distinctive features.

So we must separate the context, otherwise we would end up in a sociological and ethnographic discussion.

To establish the context in which these ethnographic weapons were used, at least a superficial understanding of the then prevailing social, ethnographic and environmental conditions is required.

The work of Domenech "Daggers of Silver" has been cited. In the first word, in the Introduction, he uses Pampa, thus limiting the appearance of the gaucho character (whatever he wants to call him: gauderio, camilucho, changador) to the pampa.

Yes.

The gaucho was born of the mixture of two bloods, the Spanish and the Indian, and the introduction of the horse and the cattle.

Agree, though most scholars would add the grassy flatlands where the cattle and wild horses abounded. And it is in these terms that gauchos became recognizable as a distinct social group with its own equestrian culture.

It says somewhere that the first gaucho types appeared in the eighteenth century. He does not know the mention of Hernandarias, he describes it at the beginning of the 17th century. The same for Aguirre, who places it in the province of Tucuman, for the same time.

Although there is no certainty, for lack of records, roving men who lived off the wild cattle and horses, would have appeared soon after white settlement, sometime in the 17th century, maybe earlier. The regional birthplace of the gaucho has been a subject of debate and opinions differ. Paul Grousac opined that it was in the Banda Oriental (present Uruguay) and E.R Coni thought that it was Santa Fe, and so on.

The same goes for Slatta, which qualifies him as a hunter of wild cattle, horses and cattle. It is true that it occurred in a certain place and time, but you can not take this characteristic as a definition.

Why not? After all, you yourself said above that the gaucho was born as a result of the introduction of the horse and cattle.

However, we have already established that in the course of the 19th century the term “ gaucho” came to include all rural workers and eventually in the in the 20th even an advertising slogan, “una marca gaucha” which, being a nuanced idiomatic expression that cannot be literally translated, means the brand of a good and reliable commercial product.

A final comment: The facon and its variants made for a very poor weapon, and as such it only served in brawls.

As we know, the universal weapon of the mounted warrior was the sabre and the pistol. In the pampas, those who could, availed themselves of firearms and swords, but access to these was severely curtailed. Blunderbusses were popular and the large property owners, police and military were equipped with firearms and sabres, the later even with cuirasses. Gauchos were destitute vagabonds who had to do with meagre resources and this included their tools and weapons; The only real weapon that the gaucho could lay his hands on was a lance made from cane (caña tacuara) with his knife tied to its end.

I think that we have given this subject as much attention as it requires in relation to Rob’s facon. If you would like to continue this discussion, I will be happy to oblige with PMs, and if you prefer we could do so in Spanish.

Con un Abrazo Cordial
Chris