A sword for comments

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I think a lot of misunderstanding exists in trying to establish not only types of swords as forms ... Carlos III and IV, whose markings are most often seen on these military arming swords, who seem collectively termed 'bilbo's'...

Here i go (again) Jim, with my crusade over the "BILBO" ambiguity.

(Quoting a source that i reputed as reliable at the time; i regret i don't recall whom).

"Bilbo" is an English catch-all word used to very generally refer to the Spanish "Utilitarian" cup-hilt swords, so often found all over America. They usually had a wide, _relatively_ short sturdy and well tempered blades, very practical and unadorned. The grip was more often than not wood, sometimes covered with wire.

The term comes from the Spanish Basque city of Bilbao, where a significant number of them were made and exported to the New World. In Basque that name is actually "Bilbo", although there's also a basque town by that name. I understand these swords were also sold to merchants of every european nation, including England.

The type was very popular aboard ships, where it was used on a similar role as the cutlass was among other nations. Needless to say, this sword was also used in Europe, but curiously, seem to have survived better in America. Probably because in the colonies these were better taken care of, since they were more difficult to acquire, and thus more valuable.

"Bilbo" if often misused by neophytes to refer to *any* spanish sword.