A curious cutlass

[Bob A]

On the left side of the blade, near the guard, the photo seems to depict a square-ish mark with rounded corners. It seems to be too deliberate to be an artifact.

On the other hand, I may be hallucinating again. Arrrgh! This native brew is potent stuff!

[Jim McDougall]

Bob, Thank You! so much for answering!!!!! means a lot here these days!

I can barely make out the squarish mark you refer to, not sure what it might be. ....but there is something....I needs some grog! arrrrrrr!

While this cutlass may not be an entirely untouched weapon, whatever modifications seem to be done far after this had been in service originally. The type of blade with triple fullers was quite common through the 18th c. it seems.

What interests me is that curious mark of letters around the triangle. I feel pretty certain that is a later British East India marking which was used toward the end of the Company c.1850s. I cannot yet find the reference but it seems so familiar. Later, the letters became EIG (East India Govt) instead of EIC.
Years ago I was informed by David Harding, who was then writing "Small Arms of the East India Co.", that the EIC did not mark sword blades.

The exceptions were of course with bayonets, which were included with firearms, whose locks were indeed marked.

It seems that refurbished weapons of older vintage in many cases had grips replaced with bone, though otherwise remained intact in original configuration.

The notable activity in the Spanish Main, as mentioned by Mark, indeed lasted far through the 19th century which clearly kept the piracy concept going.
As I noted, this weapon distinctly seems to lean toward India, as noted with the tulwar langet.

Its really hard to forensically assess a weapon through photos, but this cutlass really has character! Again, thank you for responding.

All best regards
Jim

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Bob A

On the left side of the blade, near the guard, the photo seems to depict a square-ish mark with rounded corners. It seems to be too deliberate to be an artifact.

On the other hand, I may be hallucinating again. Arrrgh! This native brew is potent stuff!

I noticed that too, Bob.
Maybe a closer look is called for.

[CutlassCollector]

This is a great cutlass and almost exactly what you picture in your head as a classic cutlass!

I agree it feels like early American but that triangle - it must have a missing letter at the empty point and yes, 'E' keeps trying to sit there but really makes no sense.
I can't make any other letter fit either despite long thought.

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Rick

I noticed that too, Bob.
Maybe a closer look is called for.

Hi, sorry for the hiatus.

The "square mark" is corrosion, dirt.

But there appears to be 3 letters on the left side of the blade about 5" from the guard ...

It is easier to make out when it is in front of you. I see MMA but it is obscure and boarders on being a Rorschach.

[Ed]

The grip ...

The picture shows bone on top and the grip below.

Bone is covered with holes, ivory has striations.

Vote now!!

[M ELEY]

Still lovin' this cutlass. I'll go with bone. While ivory does have striations, yours has the tiny holes and what I perceive to be tiny cracks versus striations. Not to mention that ivory had a tendency to be used on more 'refined' naval pieces, such as midshipman's dirks, officer's grade swords, etc. Bone hilts were the swords for the 'working man', found on numerous cutlasses and hangers. Here's my bone-hilted hanger-