Sword Identification?

Radboud · 22nd June 2024, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi,
It looks like someone has cleaned an area to reveal the numbers and in doing so has rubbed part of the peen. The peen does have an area of patina left so I still don't think the assembly is too recent.
Regards,
Norman.

It’s something that bothered me about the peen earlier. The area around the end of the knuckle guard should exhibit less pitting than the rest of the guard. Since it would originally have been covered by the pommel cap and less exposed to the elements. Now that I look closer, it does look like the metal is marginally cleaner than the rest. However the bad lighting on the picture makes it difficult to be conclusive.

At least the pitting inside the No. 13 appears to be consistent with the surrounding metal so it is likely original to the blade, re-enforcing that it’s a manufacturers’ mark.

I agree with Werecow, the peen is significantly brighter than the surrounding area (as is the brass insert) and I don’t see any signs of polishing around it to suggest the area has received any additional cleaning.

Norman McCormick · 23rd June 2024, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radboud

I
I agree with Werecow, the peen is significantly brighter than the surrounding area (as is the brass insert) and I don’t see any signs of polishing around it to suggest the area has received any additional cleaning.

Hi,
I still think someone has tried to reveal the the numbers more clearly by cleaning as the proud areas around the numbers have lost their patina but I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Perhaps the poster could clarify as to whether they got the piece like this or they attempted to see the number better. Where the tang button is slightly below the level of the backstop it still has patina. It seems obvious that this sword has been constructed from disparate elements but whether to deceive or to use is anyones guess. I reckon though that if assembled to deceive it was a poor choice of guard. Many of the German states used this type of guard throughout the 19thC and into the 20thC for Artillery/Cavalry swords etc., although the later ones almost always seem to have plenty of stamps for I.D. To choose a recognisable guard style that does not match the period of the blade seems odd if to deceive was indeed the aim so perhaps it was cobbled together for use, who knows.
My Regards,
Norman.

Jim McDougall · 23rd June 2024, 03:56 PM

I think you guys have carried out a remarkable forensics discussion and observations on this interesting sword, and am inclined to follow Norman's take on its character and obvious disparate assembly.

These kinds of ersatz weapons were notoriously known in colonial regions and trade entrepot's due to the maritime presence which of course prevailed for supply. As trade vessels were of course privately owned and syndicated, the arms aboard were invariably privately purchased, and given those circumstances were often assembled from component parts which had become available through many situations.
The notion of all 'cutlasses' having stout curved blades, shell guards and of course the entire shipboard melee are mostly products of embellished pirate lore have naturally led to the virtually cliche' visions often followed by the general public.

The reason I brought up piracy in the first place was to recognize the 'historic' maritime character of the later German colonized areas I personally was considering as possible region for this sword. ...and the MUCH earlier history there only toward the clearly present interest of the lady posting.
The point was that heavy maritime activity and trade still prevailed there and the character of the sword components aligned accordingly.

I recently acquired a 'cutlass' which was of components of an apparent British regulation cutlass blade (c. 1815) and a mid 18th century British hanger guard (with shell) and seems to be associated with the British presence in the Spanish Caribbean c. 1820-30, and of course PRIVATEERS, which of course are often collectively incorporated into pirate themes.
Simply another example of the assembled weapons often found in maritime context and in colonial regions.

23rd June 2024, 03:56 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,814	I think you guys have carried out a remarkable forensics discussion and observations on this interesting sword, and am inclined to follow Norman's take on its character and obvious disparate assembly. These kinds of ersatz weapons were notoriously known in colonial regions and trade entrepot's due to the maritime presence which of course prevailed for supply. As trade vessels were of course privately owned and syndicated, the arms aboard were invariably privately purchased, and given those circumstances were often assembled from component parts which had become available through many situations. The notion of all 'cutlasses' having stout curved blades, shell guards and of course the entire shipboard melee are mostly products of embellished pirate lore have naturally led to the virtually cliche' visions often followed by the general public. The reason I brought up piracy in the first place was to recognize the 'historic' maritime character of the later German colonized areas I personally was considering as possible region for this sword. ...and the MUCH earlier history there only toward the clearly present interest of the lady posting. The point was that heavy maritime activity and trade still prevailed there and the character of the sword components aligned accordingly. I recently acquired a 'cutlass' which was of components of an apparent British regulation cutlass blade (c. 1815) and a mid 18th century British hanger guard (with shell) and seems to be associated with the British presence in the Spanish Caribbean c. 1820-30, and of course PRIVATEERS, which of course are often collectively incorporated into pirate themes. Simply another example of the assembled weapons often found in maritime context and in colonial regions.