Interesting Spanish Canary Islands Punal

Hotspur · 23rd July 2009, 11:48 PM

Some knives of Argentina that were posted in regard to distiction between facon and chucillo. These were offered by a fellow in Argentina during an internet discussion entitled Dressed To Kill, refered to for a few years as the D2K debate and an article someone was writing (senior moment). Ah, here is the thread.

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=72872

I have in my small ethnic collection just one small punal, or chucillo. Mine was manufactured some time in the 20th century and is marked by a company named AE&Co. I have been unable to determine who that actually is but I run across a good many others with the mark and that of a knotted bugle on the blades.

What I was reading in to some of these discussions was that the facon themselves experienced pretty much the end of general carry during the late 19th century and that the small all metal punal/chucillo of the early and alter 20th century were more of an accessory. My example is of the smaller (10" overall) but I have seen some quite large that some might still refer to as a facon, as the size was truer to what was commonplace in the 19th century. However, the rather large blades of the kitchen chef knife profile were more refered to as a clavado. I guess the main determining factor was facon refered to a weapon, where clavado and chucillo were meant more as tools.

Cheers

Hotspur; I failed loading these yesterday but it might work out ok now

Chris Evans · 24th July 2009, 12:48 AM

Hi Hotspur,

Great post!

The nomenclature associated with gaucho knives will be contentious for ever. The problem is that both the words `gaucho' and `facon' changed constantly from the time they were first used. Worse still, is that we know very little of the halcyon days of the real gauchos, those that lived on the Pampas before 1800. What passes for gaucho history these days pertains to the rapidly changing 19th century Pampas due to commercial cattle grazing, immigration and the mythologization of agricultural workers, in keeping with nationalistic and romantic trends of the mid to late 1800s.

`Gaucho' went from a malingering vagabond, who lived off wild cattle, to a mounted farm labourer and then onto the embodiment of national virtue. And the `facon' from an oversize knife primarily used to hunt and slaughter wild cattle to a weapon (when the wild cattle disappeared) and then a national icon symbolizing masculinity and the warrior spirit. In popular parlance to this day, any reasonably sized knife worn at the small of the back by an Argentinean horseman (gaucho?) is a facon, though my the mid 19th century a facon was seen as a weapon and the `cuchillo' (knife) as a tool. Here, it is worth remembering that `facon' literally means large knife, even though by popular convention it acquired other nuances and meanings. It is also worth remembering that the wild cattle of the Pampas was in severe decline by the early 19th century and with it the life style of the original gauchos - What cattle was left, was fiercely competed for by the rapidly increasing native Indian population; So the gaucho was compelled to become a mounted hired hand, or a soldier for a local warlord and later, the national army.

Collectors and edged weapon historians needed something more precise than and hence the more definitive names associated with gaucho blade ware used nowadays. For unambiguous discussions it is better to stick to the terms favoured by Osornio and later Domenech.

Re Swordforums: That was an interesting thread and Leonardo made many valid points. Unfortunately, English is not his first language and he had difficulty in articulating himself against hostile interlocutors who greatly misunderstood him.

This is now drifting OT, and perhaps we ought to start a new thread on gaucho knives and Pampean culture, if one is needed. I was merely enlarging on Gonzalo's excellent post regarding blade terminology is Spanish (Castillian!) and mentioned facons etc by way of examples.

Cheers
Chris
PS please post a picture of the brand on you knife and perhaps we can help to identify its origins.

Hotspur · 24th July 2009, 02:34 AM

Here is a picture that appears on the clasp of these. Just A&E Co. over the twisted/knotted bugle. As mentioned, I have come across quite similar ones. The blade is also labeled INOX, so we can presume they are not earlier than the beginning of the 20th century.

Cheers

Chris Evans · 24th July 2009, 04:35 AM

Hi Hotspur,

Assuming that the `inox' blade was originally fitted to the furniture, than I doubt if that knife pre-dates the 1960s, but am not entirely sure.

My reference books only address earlier, locally mounted ware.

Up to WWII, trade blades were imported and locally mounted - Then, due to the shortage created by the hostilities, blade manufacturing commenced in Argentina at Tandil in the early 1940s, but as far as I know, was restricted to carbon steel, though this could have changed in later times. As well, that knife could have been made elsewhere, say Brazil, or any other part of the world on special order placed by an importer. Even in the early days, complete knives were made in Europe, in that style, for the Sth American market.

If nobody can improve on my unsatisfactory answer, then perhaps you could put it to Bernard Levine on another forum, who is very well versed in brands and manufacturers.

As a matter of interest, what is the furniture made from? German silver, AKA nickel silver, AKA Alpaca?

Cheers
Chris

Chris Evans · 25th July 2009, 03:04 AM

Hi Hotspur,

Looking at that photo of two "gauchos" about to duel:

The one on the left and the "referee" are wearing expensive full leather boots (botas duras), a luxury and only for the well off, whereas the one on the right, the humble canvas shoes known there as "alpargatas", worn in those days by farm labourers (peons). Before the introduction of the alpargatas, poor gauchos wore a one piece raw-hide boot called "bota de potro", with their naked toes sticking out and fashioned from a one piece horse leg's skin.

What I find even stranger, is that they are all wearing the very old fashioned "chiripas" a diaper like substitute for trousers, whereas by the time that photo would have been taken, the "bombacha" a baggy trouser of military (zouave) origins was worn by horsemen.

Also, both appear to be wielding genuine large facons/dagas, rather than the expected working knife. The one on the left is wielding a rather large specimen, something that would not have been tolerated at a cattle station, especially from a peon, as suggested by his footwear.

So, IMHO, the photo was definitely posed, maybe even from an early movie. In any event, no Capataz (foreman) or Patron (owner of a cattle station) would bother fighting a duel with a mere peon.

Cheers
Chris

celtan · 25th July 2009, 12:52 PM

Hi Guys,

Wow, did this thread move fast in the last couple days!

(And just when I had DSL problems...)

My two cents:

"Secessionism" in Spain is as old (at least!), as the pre-roman celtic migrations. They were in continuous wars against each other. Even today, if you visit the mountain hamlets you'd be surprised at the belligerant attitudes between villages simply because they are located on different mountains, valleys etc.. The excuses are limitless. And yet, when you look at the people, their appearance is similar, often sporting the same surnames et al..!

The only thing maintaining Hispania's cohesion was Roman Military Might, then Visigothic, then Castillian etc... ad nauseum.

The modern usage of the world cuchilla in Spanish refers basically to a flat-bladed pocket knife, folding or not.

As I said before, meanings differ according to location. In fact, sometimes words degenerate in their usage according to geographical differences, and end up having the opposite of their original meaning.

I don't see much difference in the Canarias, Mexican and the Albacete knives mentioned. They are probably off-shoots of the same original Mediterranean concept. Wouldn't surprise me if it came with Greek/Carthaginian colonists to Spain, just like the kopis/falcata.

It's a recurring theme for people from different locations to try to claim their own version of "whatever" is different, prettier and "better", even though all the "whatevers" are basically the same.

Compared to Gonzalo's, my direct experiences with Mexico are limited, but in those areas of Northern Mexico I traveled through, the (adult) people I met invariably adressed their language as being "Mexicano", not Spanish. OTOH, they were mostly peasants and laborers, obviously not well educated, and almost always racially American. That may be the clincher.

Regarding Spain's former leader, Francisco Franco, most people don't realize he was an ardent galleguista, but not to the expense of the Nation. In fact, he spoke fluent galaico-portugues.

Franco revelled in his origins, but he also understood the importance of a central official language. His position regarding same merely evoked those of the advising cognoscenti of his era. I happen to agree with his views on it, just like I believe on the need for an official central language in our good ole' US of A. (This doesn't preclude the concurrent and parallel existence of otherl languages within separate ethnic groups.)

Often times, we commit the error of adscribing to people the cause of historical events, when in fact they were merely their product.

In Spain itself, Castillian refers to the dialect spoken in that area, which has become the central official language of Spain. Outside of the peninsula, as in America, it is correct to use the term "Spanish" instead. A similar situation occurs with Italian, German, Chinese etc...

Regarding the "Academia de la Lengua". It is my opinion that it is mostly a political tool for finding common links between Hispanic-based cultures and Nations, and it's anything but strict or even logical regarding the admittance of new words and usages. Basically, anything goes. Personally, I don't use it as reference. IMHO, languages are living entities that change according to local needs, and trying to encompass all changes is simply illogical.

It is very interesting the comment on the shape of the FS "puñal" handle, so similar to the spanish-mediterranean "cuchillos". I had always felt something familiar about the knife, yet could never actually point out what it was. I guess, I couldn't psychologically relate the relatively small and almost dainty FS to the large and brutish Albacetes...

Best regards y'all

M

Chris Evans · 26th July 2009, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by celtan

Hi Guys,

Wow, did this thread move fast in the last couple days!

Hi Manolo,

Thanks for that very informative post. Didn't know that Franco was a closet `galleguista', but it makes sense, since he was born a `gallego', that is in Galicia. Reminds me a bit of Tito who was a Croat, but upheld Yugoslav unity.

Cheers
Chris

23rd July 2009, 11:48 PM	#1
Hotspur Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nipmuc USA Posts: 522	Some knives of Argentina that were posted in regard to distiction between facon and chucillo. These were offered by a fellow in Argentina during an internet discussion entitled Dressed To Kill, refered to for a few years as the D2K debate and an article someone was writing (senior moment). Ah, here is the thread. http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=72872 I have in my small ethnic collection just one small punal, or chucillo. Mine was manufactured some time in the 20th century and is marked by a company named AE&Co. I have been unable to determine who that actually is but I run across a good many others with the mark and that of a knotted bugle on the blades. What I was reading in to some of these discussions was that the facon themselves experienced pretty much the end of general carry during the late 19th century and that the small all metal punal/chucillo of the early and alter 20th century were more of an accessory. My example is of the smaller (10" overall) but I have seen some quite large that some might still refer to as a facon, as the size was truer to what was commonplace in the 19th century. However, the rather large blades of the kitchen chef knife profile were more refered to as a clavado. I guess the main determining factor was facon refered to a weapon, where clavado and chucillo were meant more as tools. Cheers Hotspur; I failed loading these yesterday but it might work out ok now Attached Images

24th July 2009, 02:34 AM	#3
Hotspur Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nipmuc USA Posts: 522	Here is a picture that appears on the clasp of these. Just A&E Co. over the twisted/knotted bugle. As mentioned, I have come across quite similar ones. The blade is also labeled INOX, so we can presume they are not earlier than the beginning of the 20th century. Cheers Attached Images

25th July 2009, 12:52 PM	#6
celtan Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PR, USA Posts: 679	Hi Guys, Wow, did this thread move fast in the last couple days! (And just when I had DSL problems...) My two cents: "Secessionism" in Spain is as old (at least!), as the pre-roman celtic migrations. They were in continuous wars against each other. Even today, if you visit the mountain hamlets you'd be surprised at the belligerant attitudes between villages simply because they are located on different mountains, valleys etc.. The excuses are limitless. And yet, when you look at the people, their appearance is similar, often sporting the same surnames et al..! The only thing maintaining Hispania's cohesion was Roman Military Might, then Visigothic, then Castillian etc... ad nauseum. The modern usage of the world cuchilla in Spanish refers basically to a flat-bladed pocket knife, folding or not. As I said before, meanings differ according to location. In fact, sometimes words degenerate in their usage according to geographical differences, and end up having the opposite of their original meaning. I don't see much difference in the Canarias, Mexican and the Albacete knives mentioned. They are probably off-shoots of the same original Mediterranean concept. Wouldn't surprise me if it came with Greek/Carthaginian colonists to Spain, just like the kopis/falcata. It's a recurring theme for people from different locations to try to claim their own version of "whatever" is different, prettier and "better", even though all the "whatevers" are basically the same. Compared to Gonzalo's, my direct experiences with Mexico are limited, but in those areas of Northern Mexico I traveled through, the (adult) people I met invariably adressed their language as being "Mexicano", not Spanish. OTOH, they were mostly peasants and laborers, obviously not well educated, and almost always racially American. That may be the clincher. Regarding Spain's former leader, Francisco Franco, most people don't realize he was an ardent galleguista, but not to the expense of the Nation. In fact, he spoke fluent galaico-portugues. Franco revelled in his origins, but he also understood the importance of a central official language. His position regarding same merely evoked those of the advising cognoscenti of his era. I happen to agree with his views on it, just like I believe on the need for an official central language in our good ole' US of A. (This doesn't preclude the concurrent and parallel existence of otherl languages within separate ethnic groups.) Often times, we commit the error of adscribing to people the cause of historical events, when in fact they were merely their product. In Spain itself, Castillian refers to the dialect spoken in that area, which has become the central official language of Spain. Outside of the peninsula, as in America, it is correct to use the term "Spanish" instead. A similar situation occurs with Italian, German, Chinese etc... Regarding the "Academia de la Lengua". It is my opinion that it is mostly a political tool for finding common links between Hispanic-based cultures and Nations, and it's anything but strict or even logical regarding the admittance of new words and usages. Basically, anything goes. Personally, I don't use it as reference. IMHO, languages are living entities that change according to local needs, and trying to encompass all changes is simply illogical. It is very interesting the comment on the shape of the FS "puñal" handle, so similar to the spanish-mediterranean "cuchillos". I had always felt something familiar about the knife, yet could never actually point out what it was. I guess, I couldn't psychologically relate the relatively small and almost dainty FS to the large and brutish Albacetes... Best regards y'all M Last edited by celtan; 25th July 2009 at 01:08 PM.

24th July 2009, 12:48 AM	#2
Chris Evans Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 685	Hi Hotspur, Great post! The nomenclature associated with gaucho knives will be contentious for ever. The problem is that both the words `gaucho' and `facon' changed constantly from the time they were first used. Worse still, is that we know very little of the halcyon days of the real gauchos, those that lived on the Pampas before 1800. What passes for gaucho history these days pertains to the rapidly changing 19th century Pampas due to commercial cattle grazing, immigration and the mythologization of agricultural workers, in keeping with nationalistic and romantic trends of the mid to late 1800s. `Gaucho' went from a malingering vagabond, who lived off wild cattle, to a mounted farm labourer and then onto the embodiment of national virtue. And the `facon' from an oversize knife primarily used to hunt and slaughter wild cattle to a weapon (when the wild cattle disappeared) and then a national icon symbolizing masculinity and the warrior spirit. In popular parlance to this day, any reasonably sized knife worn at the small of the back by an Argentinean horseman (gaucho?) is a facon, though my the mid 19th century a facon was seen as a weapon and the `cuchillo' (knife) as a tool. Here, it is worth remembering that `facon' literally means large knife, even though by popular convention it acquired other nuances and meanings. It is also worth remembering that the wild cattle of the Pampas was in severe decline by the early 19th century and with it the life style of the original gauchos - What cattle was left, was fiercely competed for by the rapidly increasing native Indian population; So the gaucho was compelled to become a mounted hired hand, or a soldier for a local warlord and later, the national army. Collectors and edged weapon historians needed something more precise than and hence the more definitive names associated with gaucho blade ware used nowadays. For unambiguous discussions it is better to stick to the terms favoured by Osornio and later Domenech. Re Swordforums: That was an interesting thread and Leonardo made many valid points. Unfortunately, English is not his first language and he had difficulty in articulating himself against hostile interlocutors who greatly misunderstood him. This is now drifting OT, and perhaps we ought to start a new thread on gaucho knives and Pampean culture, if one is needed. I was merely enlarging on Gonzalo's excellent post regarding blade terminology is Spanish (Castillian!) and mentioned facons etc by way of examples. Cheers Chris PS please post a picture of the brand on you knife and perhaps we can help to identify its origins.

24th July 2009, 04:35 AM	#4
Chris Evans Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 685	Hi Hotspur, Assuming that the `inox' blade was originally fitted to the furniture, than I doubt if that knife pre-dates the 1960s, but am not entirely sure. My reference books only address earlier, locally mounted ware. Up to WWII, trade blades were imported and locally mounted - Then, due to the shortage created by the hostilities, blade manufacturing commenced in Argentina at Tandil in the early 1940s, but as far as I know, was restricted to carbon steel, though this could have changed in later times. As well, that knife could have been made elsewhere, say Brazil, or any other part of the world on special order placed by an importer. Even in the early days, complete knives were made in Europe, in that style, for the Sth American market. If nobody can improve on my unsatisfactory answer, then perhaps you could put it to Bernard Levine on another forum, who is very well versed in brands and manufacturers. As a matter of interest, what is the furniture made from? German silver, AKA nickel silver, AKA Alpaca? Cheers Chris

25th July 2009, 03:04 AM	#5
Chris Evans Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 685	Hi Hotspur, Looking at that photo of two "gauchos" about to duel: The one on the left and the "referee" are wearing expensive full leather boots (botas duras), a luxury and only for the well off, whereas the one on the right, the humble canvas shoes known there as "alpargatas", worn in those days by farm labourers (peons). Before the introduction of the alpargatas, poor gauchos wore a one piece raw-hide boot called "bota de potro", with their naked toes sticking out and fashioned from a one piece horse leg's skin. What I find even stranger, is that they are all wearing the very old fashioned "chiripas" a diaper like substitute for trousers, whereas by the time that photo would have been taken, the "bombacha" a baggy trouser of military (zouave) origins was worn by horsemen. Also, both appear to be wielding genuine large facons/dagas, rather than the expected working knife. The one on the left is wielding a rather large specimen, something that would not have been tolerated at a cattle station, especially from a peon, as suggested by his footwear. So, IMHO, the photo was definitely posed, maybe even from an early movie. In any event, no Capataz (foreman) or Patron (owner of a cattle station) would bother fighting a duel with a mere peon. Cheers Chris