my Albacete Dagger

[Jim McDougall]

Fernando, thank you for your patience in explaining this dilemma in such detail. Semantics indeed play an important part in all of this, and it is amazing to see the literal translation of 'taco' from Spanish =plug.
Naturally as someone who grew up in California with Mexican people, and living now in Texas, the word 'taco' instantly means the fried folded over tortilla with meat and cheese.......a food favorite

Apparently the word itself has numerous meanings in various contexts.

I am adding the pages from Roger Evans' book, and the first two pages of the 'plug bayonets chapter'. It seems that there are of course differences between the peasant knives which in certain degree recall plug bayonet form, but the 'spindle form' as shown by Udo, on p.158 it is noted "..there is no evidence that such knives were ever intended for use as plug bayonets".

This would be in accord with your observation that the Albacete daggers have' nothing to do with plug bayonets'.

However, on this page, Evans notes that TRUE PLUG BAYONETS were made in quantity for hunters by the cutlery trade in Albacete. Production likely began in the 18th century, but peaked in the 1860s and 70s.

It is unclear why these were termed plug bayonets if they were actually daggers, though the spindle grip type obviously could not be used in a gun barrel as Udo has noted. While the Spanish held to their smooth bore miguelet lock guns well through the 19th century, whether they actually used the plug bayonets in original form inserted in the barrel seems unlikely.

[fernando]

Mind you Jim, the subject of hunting bayonets does not run out with the plug system. There was also the socket system, just like military bayonets were. You can find these with princely decorations. I wonder whether this system in hunting bayonets came to life before the plug one, or ran at same time.
From one of my Portuguese books, here are two examples made in France by the end of XVIII century.


.

[Jim McDougall]

That is truly interesting Fernando. I had no idea the bayonet had any part in the hunt, though obviously the hunting sword or knife was a necessary implement. From my understanding of the development of the bayonet, the plug was the initial manner of attaching, however the socket developed later obviously to not impair firing of the gun.

[fernando]

In a way, yes; but not forgeting that hunting and military (and countries) had distinct paths when dealing with such problematic.
In any case, even the military only mount the bayonet when instructed to expressly atack with it... and the sae goes for hunters in their context ...if i am not talking nonsense.


.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

In a way, yes; but not forgeting that hunting and military (and countries) had distinct paths when dealing with such problematic.
In any case, even the military only mount the bayonet when instructed to expressly atack with it... and the sae goes for hunters in their context ...if i am not talking nonsense.


.

That does make sense, as once a gun is fired, it is spent until reloaded, and a wounded animal (if your shot was not true) charging at you would be deadly, your only resource would be a bayonet (as in effect polearm with gun length).

[Interested Party]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

That does make sense, as once a gun is fired, it is spent until reloaded, and a wounded animal (if your shot was not true) charging at you would be deadly, your only resource would be a bayonet (as in effect polearm with gun length).

Or a hunting sword, or knife (the old heavy bladed English type for example). My understanding is that they were both used to finish animals after less than perfect shots. The blade was inserted near where the windpipe meets the heart. Central Americans had a socket dagger that could be mounted to a pole to get more reach. I have even seen late nineteenth century cartridge boar rifles that were designed to use in combination with a hunting sword (an example with Mauser 88 action comes to mind). They had extractors but no ejectors. This made saving your brass to reload easier, but there was no quick second shot. The penalty for bad marksmanship was to wade into the brush after a wounded animal. I always appreciated this ethic. My understanding is boar hunting with dogs uses a very similar wound from a blade to kill the pig. A little off topic but I think still relevant as background to the subject.

[kronckew]

Jim, a plug bayonet grip would fit rifling if the inner bore diameter was less than the grip diameter.

Rifle bores were generally less internal diameter than musket ones. The early UK Baker rifle of 'Sharpe' fame had a 0.625 in. bore. the Brown Bess smooth bore musket of the same era had a .75 in. bore.

As rifles and powder improved, rifle bores got smaller, the American Pennsylvania ((sometimes known as Kentucky) rifle had a bore around .36, and the similar Plains rifle was ~.45. This bore size is getting too small for a stable dagger tang & grip. Even the ubiquitous American Civil War Springfield rifle only has a .577 in. bore for it's Minié ball & cartridge rifles of the mid 19c were trending towards .45 and late 19c to .30. Flimsy Rat tail tangs would be required!