Question about a briquet

M ELEY · 27th August 2010, 11:24 AM

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT

This one is a cleaver fake (or should we say a misrepresentation). It appears to be the Starr m1826 naval cutlass. It's blade is spot-on with curved edge, unstopped fuller, guard with curved outer edge. Gilkerson mentions that reproductions of this sword were made awhile back and are being passed off either on purpose or accident as authentic. Note the wood grip, which appears old, should be ribbed iron for this model and that any of the Starr swords made after 1812 were NOT for private use, so thus would be marked with a "N Starr". Another example of how easy it is to be fooled with this tricky area of collecting-

Ron Anderson · 27th August 2010, 03:16 PM

Hi

I have just been skimming the edges of this conversation but having read the replies in a little more detail can now appreciate what this discussion has been about.

Sidearms aren't really my thing, I must admit. Jim seems to have a good handle on the iron hilted sword and I can't really add much to that, except to say that it is a nice sword.These departmental sidearms seem pretty rare.

Though you seem more interested in naval items, it's not a bad sword in its own right, and just a pity there's no scabbard.

Going back to the briquet (if you'll forgive me) I do believe it is a German briquet. At least the hilt is German. I'm pretty sure of this, as the very last rib is thicker than the others – and only the German pattern, I think M1879, looked like this. I can't recall exactly which German states - I believe most if not all of them.

So the sword may not be a reproduction after all, but as suggested part of Bannerman's handiwork. As it was used until almost the end of the 19th century, the fullered blade is perhaps not that surprising. After all, this briquet was introduced far later than the others (the russian one was introduced in the 1820s, and most of the others also far earlier)

So perhaps this was an American sword imported from Europe after all. It would have been well after the Civil War though, so one has to ask 'why'.

27th August 2010, 11:24 AM	#1
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,165	http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT This one is a cleaver fake (or should we say a misrepresentation). It appears to be the Starr m1826 naval cutlass. It's blade is spot-on with curved edge, unstopped fuller, guard with curved outer edge. Gilkerson mentions that reproductions of this sword were made awhile back and are being passed off either on purpose or accident as authentic. Note the wood grip, which appears old, should be ribbed iron for this model and that any of the Starr swords made after 1812 were NOT for private use, so thus would be marked with a "N Starr". Another example of how easy it is to be fooled with this tricky area of collecting-

27th August 2010, 03:16 PM	#2
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	Hi I have just been skimming the edges of this conversation but having read the replies in a little more detail can now appreciate what this discussion has been about. Sidearms aren't really my thing, I must admit. Jim seems to have a good handle on the iron hilted sword and I can't really add much to that, except to say that it is a nice sword.These departmental sidearms seem pretty rare. Though you seem more interested in naval items, it's not a bad sword in its own right, and just a pity there's no scabbard. Going back to the briquet (if you'll forgive me) I do believe it is a German briquet. At least the hilt is German. I'm pretty sure of this, as the very last rib is thicker than the others – and only the German pattern, I think M1879, looked like this. I can't recall exactly which German states - I believe most if not all of them. So the sword may not be a reproduction after all, but as suggested part of Bannerman's handiwork. As it was used until almost the end of the 19th century, the fullered blade is perhaps not that surprising. After all, this briquet was introduced far later than the others (the russian one was introduced in the 1820s, and most of the others also far earlier) So perhaps this was an American sword imported from Europe after all. It would have been well after the Civil War though, so one has to ask 'why'.