Re-hilted Bayonet?

[Chris Evans]

Hi Gonzalo,


1. Re Slaughtering Wild Cattle:

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

I´m sorry to say this, but your spanish seems to be not good enough. On the page 11, Domenech mentions

I never claimed that my Spanish was perfect, though your English appears to be even worse. I referred you to pages 11 and 111, which you obviously did not. As you haven't, I include here the picture that shows how a beast is brought down with a knife. Domenech describes both the methods with the half moon spear and the knife.

2. Re Use of Facons:

From Dagas De Plata pg 61:

“Agricultural labourers (peons) shouldn't be allowed a facón, since it’s useless for work. They must use a knife (cuchillo), and keep it well sharpenned. This precaution could save their lives from the dangers inherent to their job, or that of a fellow worker.” From “Instrucción al Estanciero” by Jose Hernadez (a book filled with advice for land owners, published in 1882) who fought in the civil wars and also against Uruguay. He was intimately familiar with life in rural Argentina and wrote the celebrated story of the gaucho Martín Fierro,

So rather than go on with a dialogue that is becoming too broad and leading nowhere, I rest my case on the above.


3. This thread is about identifying Robert's knife and we are still waiting for pictures or a link to a knife that closely resembles it and is positively known to have been made in Argentina in the 1940-60 period. Until you provide us with such proof, I am afraid that all we are doing is guessing. And please do note that I am not saying that the knife in question wasn't made there, only that we don't know, though I do question the time frame suggested.

3.1 If the hand guard was indeed forged, as you suggest, then the dies would have been used to make many more and a number of such guards would have to be still in circulation on Argentinean knives, as 1940-60 wasn't that long ago. Shouldn't be hard to find on. Perhaps you can put it out one that Argentinean forum and see what they think.

Cheers
Chris

[Gonzalo G]

To begin with, the page 111 shows the killing of a cow by two CRIOLLO cowboys, and it does not correpspond with the description of a single GAUCHO on page 11 killing a cow, which illustrates my argument in the sense that meanwhile cattle or livestock is taken care of by men on horses, namely cowboys or sheperds, the facón was a useful knife and not an updated item. Do you know the difference among "gaucho" and "criollo"? A criollo can be any inhabitant of the land descended from the original settlers and linked to the old traditions. A gaucho is a special kind of man, as described by the Domenech´s article on this forum.

Yes AGRICULTURAL labouresrs didn´r really need a facón, but the cowboys or sheperds did. Domenech´s quote is refering to the fact that the indiscriminated use of the facón by all the population on the countryside only meant the extensive use of this knife as a weapon to duelling, which the estancieros wanted to avoid to all cost, as it was not convenient to their interests.

About Roberto´s facón: yes, of course I did a guess based on my small knowledge of the argentinean knives, with which I have daily contact throught the Armas Blancas forum and argentinean collectors, and of course, my own books and articles. My guess is based on the items I have seem throught my life, and the fact that I have never encountered this geometric hilts and this thin metal separators between the pieces of horn until mid 20th Century. I believe the use of this small metal discs, which appear as metal thin lines, is something that could be alien to the traditional decorative uses in Argentina, although today are very popular, and I can be wrong in this point, but this is the best guess I can honestly make with my actual knowledge without any pretention. I don´t have any illustration on my hand, as I also don´t remember in which specific place I have seen many items, even from this Ethnographic forum. But at least I have a more precise idea of the origins, materials and styles of this weapons, not to be making wild guesses and speculations among countries, continents, materials, methods of production and so on.

The making of this guard is much simpler than the use of a die. Argentineans never used dies to handcraft their knives, and this guard, from Robert´s facón, is a very simple one which requires only to forge and the use of a file. The botones, pommels and handguards on the argentinean, uruguayan and brazilian criollo knives are always made in this way. They make even the most beautiful and precise spiraled adornments with just only files and sandpaper, still today. Just take a look on that forum and see for yourself.

Gonzalo

[trenchwarfare]

This may have already been addressed. Too much to read here. But, Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay, all three issued yataghan style bayonets, from the 1880s till at least 1904. Any of which could have been the donor for the blade that started this thread. M.P.

[Chris Evans]

Hi Gonzalo,

Argentineans never used dies to handcraft their knives,....... The botones, pommels and handguards on the argentinean, uruguayan and brazilian criollo knives are always made in this way.

Please refer to photos taken from Dagas De Plata pg 185 showing the forging of buttons with a mechanical hammer and die in Tandil, Argentina.

I have never encountered this geometric hilts and this thin metal separators between the pieces of horn until mid 20th Century. I believe the use of this small metal discs, which appear as metal thin lines, is something that could be alien to the traditional decorative uses in Argentina,

Wrong!

Please refer to DDP pg 73 cat 1131 for facon with wooden&horn handle and two thin separators; Large dagger pg78 cat 1142 with horn and bone handle and thin separators. Puñal Salteño pg97 with four thin separators; Facon pg128 cat 1152 featuring numerous thin silver separators and horn disks; All of these are antiques.

The use of thin separators in handles by cutlers was almost a universal practice by the 19th century, be it for decoration or else to allow the use of material that was not of sufficient size to permit a one piece construction. The only restriction for this practice was the availability of sheet metal, in this case brass.

What truly distinguishes this handle is that it appears to be uniformly circular in its cross section, something that would suggest a lathe having been used to shape it - Though it is hard to say from the photo. A few measurements with a calliper would throw light on this. Perhaps Robert could help out.

Something else. How is the pommel disk attached? Riveted? Threaded? And was the pommel disk made from sheet or something else, like a slice from a bar, perhaps even a casting? An end on photo would be helpful.

The making of this guard is much simpler than the use of a die.

This guard could have been made in any number of ways. It is very hard to tell from the photos though an actual hands on examination would quickly settle this question. It appears to be of ferrous metal, and Robert could confirm this for us by testing it with a magnet. It also would be helpful to have an end on photo of it, where it meets the blade. The things to look for are the nature of the surface blemishes, file marks, if any, and details of the grooves at the ends of the quillons.

Cheers
Chris

[Robert]

I thank you all for your time and for all your effort on trying to identify this knife/sword. The grip is oval shaped, not round as if turned on a lathe. The tang goes through the grip and is then is peened over. I will post a picture of the end of the hilt and of the guard tomorrow. The overall shape of the hilt is very reminiscent of hilts of Spanish Colonial weapons. Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3404 Again I thank you all for your interest and help in trying to identify this unusual item.

Robert

[Chris Evans]

Hi Robert,

Originally Posted by Robert Coleman

I thank you all for your time and for all your effort on trying to identify this knife/sword. The grip is oval shaped, not round as if turned on a lathe. The tang goes through the grip and is then is peened over. I will post a picture of the end of the hilt and of the guard tomorrow. The overall shape of the hilt is very reminiscent of hilts of Spanish Colonial weapons. Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3404 Again I thank you all for your interest and help in trying to identify this unusual item.

Robert

I think that now we may be getting somewhere. and thanks for that link, a most interesting piece.

Until now I didn't want to drag in the Philippines as a possibility, but some time ago, in Australia, I was shown a double edged sword with a very similar handle and it was said to have originated from there. It is easy to forget that the Hispanic influence was pretty strong there too.

The part that has me most intrigued is the handguard, and would appreciate as much detail as you can spare with your time. Gonzalo could be right in that it may have been entirely hand made, as it definitely could be, but it would be a challenging task to get it all even and so symmetrical. From the photos, it appears to have some surface markings that could give us a clue as to how it was made. One of the quillon ends seems to have been slightly flattened and I wonder how. And how were those grooves cut so evenly? Perhaps you could run a calliper over the quillons and and check them for roundness.

Cheers
Chris

[carlos]

Maybe philippines? a mix between a spanish machete of the Fabrica de Toledo mod. 1881 and a new hilt.
Best regards

[Chris Evans]

Hi Carlos,

Originally Posted by carlos

Maybe philippines? a mix between a spanish machete of the Fabrica de Toledo mod. 1881 and a new hilt.
Best regards

Good point and quite a possibility. Any chance of a pic? What did the hand guard of this model look like?

IMO, a military provenance matches this piece better. We do know that the a large number of machetes were made and issued during the Spanish-American war.

And whilst Gonzalo thinks otherwise, to me the hand guard is more likely to have been made in a factory.

Cheers
Chris

[Gonzalo G]

Chris, I´m talking of hancrafted knives, not of industrial processes, as I clearly stated. The photos from the Tandil manofacture are completely modern and they only make the botones with this dies, and NOT the guards. Neverthless, the fact that a die process can also be used, even by hand, does not make proof that this one was made on a die. And the link provided by Robert, shows another guard made in this way...or, do you think that the other piece was also forged with the use of a die?

The thin separators on this photos are in weapons who´s age is not established on the book, so we cannot say in which period they began to appear. Anyway, I said explicitly a combination on reasons to believe the possible age of Robert´s facón, and I mentioned that the separator feature "could be alien to the traditional decorative uses in Argentina", so it only an idea about the original decorative features on the facón handles, and I am talking explicitly only about the thin separators, as the argentinean knives often have instead wider metal bands, sometimes laminated and chased.

The horn pieces are shaped by hand, as Roberto already said, and I have no doubt that the guard was also made by hand without dies. I see constantly guards made in this way in the actual time by argentinean artisans, even in a more perfect way, this is not something new.

The weapon on the new link, denominated colonial spanish: it is another example of the handwork on the quillons, from the spanish tradition, aready found on the spanish rapiers. The handle clearly is more old in it´s style than the facón on this thread, in my opinion. Looks more traditional. How can this weapon can be validly linked to the Phillipines? On which grounds? I don´t have a background of the wepons made in this style on the Phillipines, and this is the reason of my question. Mexico is independent form 1821. Unless the weapon is dated in a previous period, this is not a colonial spanish mexican weapon. If dated in the beginning of the 20th Century, it is not far from the time proposed for the facón.

My original statement, much discussed without contributions to the ID, and instead, with many unnecesary disgressions, every time with a new irrelevant subject once the last one is refuted, is that this is a facón, and probably form the 1940´s or forward. Please check this information. I can be wrong about the age, as I can´t be sure when certain stylistic features began to appear on the making of this weapons. You can check with a real expert on this kind of weapons (because I´m not and I don´t pretend to be), also, the relevant details of the materials and the possible handmaking of the quillon. I don´t think to be very far in my guess, and I would appreciate if you share with me the opinion given by other persons, as this is also my interest to have a more precise idea about this item.

I also don´t see the reason to continue this discussion, unless new information is found to make more light on this subject.
Regards

Gonzalo

[Robert]

A few new pictures. I hope these help. I could not get a decent picture of the pommel cap where the tang is riveted over. Will try again later when the sun is less bright. The guard is either steel or iron. Hammer marks as well as file marks can be seen on the guard, unfortunately very little shows in the pictures. The quillons have flat spots on both ends and on both sides. Could this guard have possible been cast? You can also see on the one picture where the person that I got this from hit the guard with the wire wheel when he CLEANED the blade. Again let me thank everyone for their help.


Robert

[Gonzalo G]

I don´t think it was cast. Casting over sand in this primitive way could leave some typical imperfections, as pores. And, casting would not be as economic and easier as forging, since the grooves would need filing anyway. A blacksmith can make very cheaply and easily this type of guard on the anvil, and casting iron or steel requires more equipment availavility and expense just to make some guards. The chiselled ir filed decoration and the rough form also suggest a forge work, IMHO.
Regards

Gonzalo

[Chris Evans]

Hi Gonzalo,

The thin separators on this photos are in weapons who´s age is not established on the book, so we cannot say in which period they began to appear

Now you completely perplex me. In the "Catalogo" section, on pg 376 Domenech clearly attributes Cat 1131 to the 19th century and Cat 1152 on pg 380 to late 19th century.

I don´t think it was cast. Casting over sand in this primitive way could leave some typical imperfections, as pores.

Well, for it to be cast, the metal would have to be something non-ferrous, or else cast iron, which is too brittle for a working knife. And Robert tells that it is ferrous. If made in modern times, perhaps SG iron, but that is unlikely. So, I agree with you on this.

A blacksmith can make very cheaply and easily this type of guard on the anvil,....

Having some expertise, in metal work and knife making, I know that I could make a similar guard from either bar-stock or hammer forging a lump of soft iron and then fishing it by filing. But it is quite a complex shape on account of its tapering and curved quillons and would take me a while - Also probably would ruin one or two before ending up with a good one.

Because I do not consider this to be quite as easy a you suggest, I am not at all surprised that I have not seen a single example of a similar complex shaped hand guard on historical Sth American hilted specimens, their being invariably made from a flat strip of metal, either straight or bent to shape.

If it was made by hand, the cutler would have had a lot of practice in getting his sequence and technique right, meaning that he would have had to make quite a number before becoming proficient.

The other possibility is that its rough shape was forged with dies in a factory and afterwards finished by filing, which to me is more likely, though I am not adamant on this point.

It is because of these considerations that I consider the guard so important in identifying this piece.

Cheers
Chris

[Chris Evans]

Hi Robert,

Originally Posted by Robert Coleman

A few new pictures. I hope these help. I could not get a decent picture of the pommel cap where the tang is riveted over. Will try again later when the sun is less bright. The guard is either steel or iron. Hammer marks as well as file marks can be seen on the guard, unfortunately very little shows in the pictures. The quillons have flat spots on both ends and on both sides. Could this guard have possible been cast? You can also see on the one picture where the person that I got this from hit the guard with the wire wheel when he CLEANED the blade. Again let me thank everyone for their help.

The similarity between the two hilts is too strong to ignore, suggesting a common provenance.

I found the post by Carlos very promising.

As for the hand guard, have a good look at the underside, where it meets the blade and look for some tell tale signs that could give us further clues re its manufacture, such as slight hollow surface imperfections, some with metal oxide hammered into them and perhaps traces of a seam where forging dies may have met. I won't repeat here my other thoughts on the guard, which I posted in reply to Gonzalo.

Cheers
Chris