Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 5th February 2014, 06:01 PM   #1
weapons 27
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 422
Default sword for id

I think has a french bording cutlass
can you give me your opinion
Attached Images
       
weapons 27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 06:31 PM   #2
Fernando K
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 424
Default

Hello

Decorative piece?

Fernando K
Fernando K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 06:46 PM   #3
fernando
Lead Moderator European Armoury
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 6,410
Default

Most probably, yes
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 06:57 PM   #4
VANDOO
(deceased)
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: OKLAHOMA, USA
Posts: 3,140
Thumbs up

I DON'T KNOW WHAT SMALL FEATURES SEPARATE THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES WHO USED THIS FORM OF CUTLASS PERHAPS WE HAVE A MEMBER WITH THAT KNOWLEGE (COME IN JIM! ).
I HAD A 1870 MODEL USA CUTLASS THAT HAD THE BEST FEEL IN HAND OF ANY SWORD I OWN. UNFORTUNATELY I LET A FRIEND BUY IT TO PUT IN HIS PIRATE MUSEUM. I BOUGHT A FANCY WELL MADE NEWER VERSION TO WAVE AROUND, THOUGH IT LOOKED BETTER THAN MY ORIGINAL THE FEEL WAS MORE LIKE A FIREPLACE POKER THAN A SWORD.
WHAT YOU HAVE WOULD LIKELY HAVE BELONGED TO A CAPITAN OR HIGHER RANKING OFFICER OR COULD BE A REPLICA. TRY THE FEEL IN HAND AND SEE IF IT HAS AN EDGE THAT SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING. THE CONDITION SHOWS LITTLE WEAR OR USE BUT THOSE USED BY HIGHER RANKING OFFICERS USUALLY DID NOT AND WERE WORN MOSTLY FOR DRESS ON FORMAL OCCASIONS NOT FOR EVERYDAY USE. MOST OF THE TIME THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN STORED AWAY IN THE SEA CHEST AND WELL MAINTAINED BY THE OFFICERS MAN.
THE SCABBARD SHOWS AGE AND TYPICAL DETEORIATION FOR AN OLDER ITEM SO IF ORIGINAL TO THE SWORD IS A GOOD SIGN. VICTORIAN REPLICAS WERE MADE AND OFTEN EMBELLISHED SIMULAR TO YOUR SWORD. I DON'T KNOW IF THESE REPLICAS WERE MADE BY THE SAME SWORD MAKERS AS THE STANDARD MILITARY GRADE OR NOT BUT LOOK FOR A MAKERS MARK AND IF IT MATCHES PERHAPS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND OF OFFICER GRADE SWORDS AS WELL AS STANDARD ISSUE. I LIKE IT EITHER WAY AS IT IS A BEAUTIFUL EXAMPLE OF ONE OF MY ALL TIME FAVORITE SWORDS. GOOD LUCK
VANDOO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 09:10 PM   #5
CutlassCollector
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Scotland
Posts: 181
Default

That's an interesting cutlass and I've never seen one like that.
It has features of both the French 1833 especially the grip and of the US 1860 (riveted brass bowl) which was itself copied from the earlier French model. It's hard to tell from the pictures but I think it's a standard 1833 that has been prettied up and had the iron bowl cut out and replaced with the decorated brass one.
Both these cutlasses had fullered blades and while this blade is approx the right proportions and shape for the 1833 it looks flat. As Vandoo says it appears authentic and well matched to the scabbard. Could be a one of made for an officer or for presentation or an old blade re-hilted. I don't think replica but it's always a possibility.
Regards, CC.
CutlassCollector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 09:41 PM   #6
fernando
Lead Moderator European Armoury
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 6,410
Default

If this were a genuine piece, so good for weapons 27.
Considering comparison with French boarding cutlasses, one expected to see inspector poinçons, manufacture marks etc. Also it doesn't look like the normaly French models, which guards have a more crude look; which wouldn't surprise us, once these are sailors (royal or pirate) battle weapons. I would guess (guess) boarding cutlasses do not include (embelished) officer versions. I have seconded Fernando K's opinion in that the guard looks a bit too exhuberant, an attribute usually seen in decoration pieces. The scabbard, on the other hand, contributes to genuinity, but this could have been from another sword, such one surely old.
Personaly i am a enthusiast of genuine examples; i can't help feeling frustrated when a piece is a replica ... specially if i am not aware.
In any case my knowledge is rather limited; my opinion must be secondarized.
I sincerly hope i am wrong and this sword is the real thing.
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 09:49 PM   #7
fernando
Lead Moderator European Armoury
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 6,410
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CutlassCollector
... It's hard to tell from the pictures but I think it's a standard 1833 that has been prettied up and had the iron bowl cut out and replaced with the decorated brass one...

Good and wise point but ... to become an ornament or an officer equipment ?
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 09:55 PM   #8
fernando
Lead Moderator European Armoury
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 6,410
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CutlassCollector
... and while this blade is approx the right proportions and shape for the 1833 it looks flat...

Sorry my ignorance; could it be the blade of a "Briquet" ?
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2014, 10:13 PM   #9
CutlassCollector
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Scotland
Posts: 181
Default

Good point, Fernando, perhaps you are right why go to the effort of embellishing a cutlass when you can have a fancy sword for an officer!

Perhaps with the blade cleaned up there may be some clues with markings. As you say these blades were usually well marked by the manufacturer on the spine and inspection marks on both the guard and ricasso. And usually some trace remains even on well worn blades.
Perhaps I am too optimistic and it is a a replica after all!
Regards, CC.
CutlassCollector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2014, 04:48 AM   #10
Jim McDougall
EAA Research Consultant
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 6,684
Default

Thank you Vandoo!
As Fernando has astutely observed, this does appear to be a briquette blade, and this cutlass appears to be a pastiche, and extremely nicely done .
As CC has well noted there appears to be elements of the French M1833 cutlass and the brass bowl of the US M1860 might well be in use as well.

What is curious is that the pommel cap is not in the shape of the regular M1833 French, it is straight and angled , where the original is curved (Gilkerson , 1991, p.79, "Boarders Away".
The M1833 developed from the M1801 'sabre de bord' which was apparently japanned black rather than brass with the bowl guard, and this is typically mounted off the knuckleguard and not butted to the grip and pommel .

Since this bowl guard cutlass, the French M1801/33, was very popular it was used by virtually every European country's naval forces, so perhaps there may have been variants, but the anchor embellishment on the guard does not seem likely for a weapon for rack issue.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2014, 05:43 AM   #11
weapons 27
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 422
Default

I'll cleaned the blade and watch if I see markings...
the shell of the sword was painted black, the person that I bought this saber has removed the painting, we see even a few black marks
weapons 27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2014, 03:37 PM   #12
weapons 27
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 422
Default

I found no markings...
the blade is old and thick 4mm, very sharp
weapons 27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd July 2014, 05:46 AM   #13
Shakethetrees
Member
 
Shakethetrees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 364
Default

Hello, all, I've been lurking on this forum for a while and recently joined. I collect a wide variety of things that I feel would be of interest here, and have been collecting for probably forty years. I have been in the silversmithing/restoration field since 1979 as a practicing professional. I hope I can add value to this forum!

I need to check my 1833. It's packed away now as I am in the process of a move. As I recall, though, the guard is iron, as are the pommel and grip. The "soup ladle" is also iron, unadorned, except for some edge thickening, and no rivets. It was brazed in place. The manufacture date and place should be etched in script on the back of the blade close to the guard.

It's also probably one that I would choose if I had to use it to defend myself. The balance is superb, the blade is sharp enough to do damage but not so sharp that the edge is delicate. It's of a good, manageable length, and because of the nicely defined shape, gets attention!
Shakethetrees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2014, 05:00 PM   #14
Shakethetrees
Member
 
Shakethetrees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 364
Default Cutlass

I checked my cutlass finally and I think your blade is NOT a briquette blade. The width to length proportions are correct for the 1833 French cutlass. A briquette blade is slimmer. The brass guard on yours has what appears to be an extra flange to accommodate the rivets, something the iron mounted example that I have does not posses. I have examined maybe a dozen over the years, all virtually identical in blade length/width, the manner of assembly, etc.

Yours could be an of the period officer's version, private purchase, etc. but without actually seeing it in person, it's hard to tell the age, so, with that in mind, I would be careful.

The US 1860 cutlass is also much slimmer and overall lighter build than its French counterpart. A friend turned up an 1860 at a show years back and everything was "right" as far as the manner of assembly, and measurements. But, the grip wire was still in place, something that is a little odd for the 1860. The Ames mark, very lightly stamped on the originals was too even and perfect even though the font type and size was. Spot on. Most that I have seen seem to have had the wire deliberately removed at some point. Possibly due to verdigris forming and the impossibility of cleaning it to Naval standards of the time.

But for some reason it just didn't pass the smell test, not just by my reasoning, but also to several other long time collectors present as well. When compared side by side with a couple of others that had been on collections for a very long time, the differences stood out like a sore thumb! The rivets securing the shell to the guard were different in number by maybe two. The originals had exactly the same number and layout, whereas the piece now seen to be a copy had a different number and layout. Shell thickness was another issue. The color of the brass was more of an orange, where the old ones were much more yellow.

The point of this diatribe is to note that there are some very good copies out there that might stand on their own merits at face value. But when compared side to side with a piece that is unquestionably right, the credibility falls apart.

So, in the probably unlikely possibility that you are ever able to compare it to another, keep an open mind, and hope for the best!

It's a great looking cutlass, and I hope the best for you!
Shakethetrees is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.