Question about 1804 British naval cutlass.

midelburgo · 2nd May 2023, 10:11 PM

I have been offered one of these cutlasses. It looks legit (measurements, weight) except that the inspector die is 12 under crown.

Annis and May say that all 1804s have inspector marks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8.

Does this still stand true?

The sword was with another one marked 8 under crown in a panoply.

Thanks.

Radboud · 2nd May 2023, 10:58 PM

It looks good to me. Can you post a photo of the inspector's mark?

midelburgo · 2nd May 2023, 11:18 PM

I have another picture.

And the other sword.

Radboud · 3rd May 2023, 12:45 AM

It might be that the 12 isn't an inspector's mark. It isn't unusual for these to be unmarked as well.

Maybe it was sold to a merchant ship? Only swords that went through the ordnance board inspection would have been stamped. Although that doesn't necessarily mean that it was Govt property since examples of private purchase cavalry officer swords that also have these stamps exist.

Rules and regulations were a lot more flexible in these times... I wouldn't let that stamp stop me from buying that 1804 all other things being equal. I'd prefer the other one, but more on the quality of the GR mark than anything else.

midelburgo · 3rd May 2023, 04:47 PM

Actually, at the end I am getting the 8 one.

CutlassCollector · 6th May 2023, 12:40 PM

Just caught up with this thread.
Yes I agree both these look good and I have not seen a 12 inspector's mark before either, but it looks like it could be one.

Remember, May and Annis were wading through centuries of paper documents back in 1970 (no web) so the fact that Viewer's Marks for 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8 were recorded as being made in 1788 does not rule out others.
In 1808 another 20,000 1804s were ordered. This order included four new manufacturers and in total there were nine companies recorded as making 1804s with only five of them linked to specific Marks by May and Annis.

It's a pity there is no clear crown above the 12 so we have to wait to see if another turns up. If it does this will be a rare cutlass!

Jim McDougall · 6th May 2023, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CutlassCollector

Just caught up with this thread.
Yes I agree both these look good and I have not seen a 12 inspector's mark before either, but it looks like it could be one.

Remember, May and Annis were wading through centuries of paper documents back in 1970 (no web) so the fact that Viewer's Marks for 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8 were recorded as being made in 1788 does not rule out others.
In 1808 another 20,000 1804s were ordered. This order included four new manufacturers and in total there were nine companies recorded as making 1804s with only five of them linked to specific Marks by May and Annis.

It's a pity there is no clear crown above the 12 so we have to wait to see if another turns up. If it does this will be a rare cutlass!

Brilliant research and data CC!!! Thank you for sharing those insights. There is so much obscure information out there in these venerable old references that are not available to many collectors and these books are expensive when and if you can find them.

midelburgo · 7th May 2023, 05:04 PM

I received the the one marked with an 8 on Friday. A friend of the seller asked to have the one with the 12.
Nice piece. Somebody used sandpaper to clean the sword, and no remnants of black coat are left. The cutlasses were found in Asturias. In July 1810 some 1000 British sailors disembarked in Santoña, and there were other operations by sir Home Popham in the area.

CutlassCollector · 8th May 2023, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Brilliant research and data CC!!! Thank you for sharing those insights. There is so much obscure information out there in these venerable old references that are not available to many collectors and these books are expensive when and if you can find them.

Hi Jim, and yes one of the benefits of the forum is the shared communal library - a good percentage of which probably resides in the bookmobile!

CutlassCollector · 8th May 2023, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by midelburgo

The cutlasses were found in Asturias. In July 1810 some 1000 British sailors disembarked in Santoña, and there were other operations by sir Home Popham in the area.

Hi midelburgo, interesting link to history time and place!

Triarii · 8th May 2023, 06:44 PM

I had a 1796 HCS by Woolley which had a crown / 12 inspection stamp.

CutlassCollector · 8th May 2023, 07:07 PM

Thanks Triarii, great post!

Woolley definitely made 1804s so that confirms the stamp on the cutlass. It may even be the same stamp as the serif at the top of the numeral one is missing or feint on both blades.

Jim McDougall · 8th May 2023, 07:30 PM

While we have been focused on naval references here obviously, this M1796 blade with crown over 12 is interesting so checked Robson (1975).
On p.191:
It is noted that from 1796 + swords from whatever source were inspected for quality at the Tower, and these view marks began to appear, initially a crown over single number, on the 1796 swords it notes these were not always discernible.
In 1820 the govt. view marks added a letter between the crown and inspectors number, i.e. B=Birmingham, E=Enfield,

The example in Robson uses this configuration : crown
E
13
So I wonder if the 12 might suggest later mfg. as the 13 coincides with the 1820 beginning of use of the letter designator.

David, thank you

.....yes, the shocks on the bookmobile are groaning!

midelburgo · 8th May 2023, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CutlassCollector

Hi midelburgo, interesting link to history time and place!

The British squadron was made of frigates Arethusa, Nacissus, Amazone, Medusa and the brig Mahon, under commodore Robert Meds.

They first went to Gijon and then to Santoña. A couple of days later a strong French division arrived and they reembarked. it was October, not July, and the weather was poor.

Carlos Martinez Valverde, La Marina en la Guerra de Independencia, which I do not own. Possibly Julian Corbett has something on this

2nd May 2023, 10:11 PM	#1
midelburgo Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 257	Question about 1804 British naval cutlass. I have been offered one of these cutlasses. It looks legit (measurements, weight) except that the inspector die is 12 under crown. Annis and May say that all 1804s have inspector marks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8. Does this still stand true? The sword was with another one marked 8 under crown in a panoply. Thanks. Attached Images Last edited by midelburgo; 2nd May 2023 at 10:26 PM.

2nd May 2023, 11:18 PM	#3
midelburgo Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 257	I have another picture. And the other sword. Attached Images

7th May 2023, 05:04 PM	#8
midelburgo Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 257	I received the the one marked with an 8 on Friday. A friend of the seller asked to have the one with the 12. Nice piece. Somebody used sandpaper to clean the sword, and no remnants of black coat are left. The cutlasses were found in Asturias. In July 1810 some 1000 British sailors disembarked in Santoña, and there were other operations by sir Home Popham in the area. Last edited by midelburgo; 7th May 2023 at 07:40 PM.

8th May 2023, 06:44 PM	#11
Triarii Member Join Date: Oct 2021 Location: Bristol Posts: 113	I had a 1796 HCS by Woolley which had a crown / 12 inspection stamp. Attached Images

2nd May 2023, 10:58 PM	#2
Radboud Member Join Date: Sep 2021 Location: New Zealand Posts: 261	It looks good to me. Can you post a photo of the inspector's mark?

3rd May 2023, 12:45 AM	#4
Radboud Member Join Date: Sep 2021 Location: New Zealand Posts: 261	It might be that the 12 isn't an inspector's mark. It isn't unusual for these to be unmarked as well. Maybe it was sold to a merchant ship? Only swords that went through the ordnance board inspection would have been stamped. Although that doesn't necessarily mean that it was Govt property since examples of private purchase cavalry officer swords that also have these stamps exist. Rules and regulations were a lot more flexible in these times... I wouldn't let that stamp stop me from buying that 1804 all other things being equal. I'd prefer the other one, but more on the quality of the GR mark than anything else.

3rd May 2023, 04:47 PM	#5
midelburgo Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 257	Actually, at the end I am getting the 8 one.

6th May 2023, 12:40 PM	#6
CutlassCollector Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Scotland Posts: 331	Just caught up with this thread. Yes I agree both these look good and I have not seen a 12 inspector's mark before either, but it looks like it could be one. Remember, May and Annis were wading through centuries of paper documents back in 1970 (no web) so the fact that Viewer's Marks for 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8 were recorded as being made in 1788 does not rule out others. In 1808 another 20,000 1804s were ordered. This order included four new manufacturers and in total there were nine companies recorded as making 1804s with only five of them linked to specific Marks by May and Annis. It's a pity there is no clear crown above the 12 so we have to wait to see if another turns up. If it does this will be a rare cutlass!

8th May 2023, 07:07 PM	#12
CutlassCollector Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Scotland Posts: 331	Thanks Triarii, great post! Woolley definitely made 1804s so that confirms the stamp on the cutlass. It may even be the same stamp as the serif at the top of the numeral one is missing or feint on both blades.

8th May 2023, 07:30 PM	#13
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,957	While we have been focused on naval references here obviously, this M1796 blade with crown over 12 is interesting so checked Robson (1975). On p.191: It is noted that from 1796 + swords from whatever source were inspected for quality at the Tower, and these view marks began to appear, initially a crown over single number, on the 1796 swords it notes these were not always discernible. In 1820 the govt. view marks added a letter between the crown and inspectors number, i.e. B=Birmingham, E=Enfield, The example in Robson uses this configuration : crown E 13 So I wonder if the 12 might suggest later mfg. as the 13 coincides with the 1820 beginning of use of the letter designator. David, thank you .....yes, the shocks on the bookmobile are groaning!