Got me new cutlass!

[El Pirata]

Here's the best I can do:

go to:

www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com

click "enter"

click "swords and armor"

under Naval Swords hit "click here for pictures"

my cutlass is the "17th-18th Century Dutch Cutlass."My Webpage

Rock on. Looks great.

[Zorg]

One other thing missed in Naval Hanger discussions is the matter of rope, vis. the half ton of it that falls when two sail vessles contest with cannon. I suspect the naval cutlass, along with boarding axes, got used as much to clear the decks and guns as it did in fighting, which would indicate an edge.

As I said in some other board on here, Ive a cutlass from around 1780 (we think) a crude piece of work, but rusted as it is, the thing will still take your hand off if youre not careful.

Z

[Zorg]

As fer things that goes boom, I recalls there were a lovely flintolock pistol, made in spain during one of the brief British/spanish peacetimes, that were made to fire the same round as the brown bess......that bein .75 calibre.

Boom is right. Must be like being hit by a '57 dodge.

[capnwilliam]

Aye, Zorq: to the one firin' it, as well!

I don't think that cutlasses were intended for clearing rigging; the misnamed boarding axe was better-suited both for chopping through rope, and for hauling it away (the spike).

Deacon, I must look into the issues of matchlock and sword more deeply. I was probably drawing my conclusions from something that I'd read about the Spanish militiamen, in Florida. The Spanish were and are a notoriously conservative lot.

Capt. William

[Hawkyns]

Matchlocks had essentially been dropped from use by mid-17th century, capnwilliam. They were abandoned here even earlier than in Europe. Peterson gives the figures and dates in his Arms and Armor in Colonial America, I believe.

Well, again, yes and no. The last matchlocks were withdrawn from regimental use in the British Army in 1711. Armies being what they are, between the conservative attitude and the increased cost of the firelocks, it took 60 years from the first issues to total replacement. The Royalist armies relied almost entirely on matchlocks, not having access to any of the government armouries. The New Model Army issued firelocks only to dragoons, artillery train guards, and some specialist troops for service in England. The change over was relatively slow, but not a noticeable problem, since armies still lined up and fired at each other, a job for which the matchlock was ideally suited.

The colonies were a completely different story. Firelocks were preferred weapons by all who could afford them. They were the recommended weapon for all the companies bringing colonists over. Some militias were equipped with matchlocks, again due to being issued old stocks and governmental parsimony, but they were relatively useless against fast moving natives and deer.

Colonial militias required a blade of some sort, in addition to the firearm. Swords were common in the early years, and that did last until the War of Rebellion . See Neuman's 'Swords and Blades of the American Revolution'. Frontier militias found the belt axe much more useful, since it was a tool as well as a weapon.

I will check Neuman tonight, and see what he has to say on the subject of sharpening.

Hawkyns

[capnwilliam]

Here's a quote from Warren Moore's WEAPONS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, AND ACCOUTREMENTS, Page 128:

"After the bayonet appeared early in the seventeenth century, the importance of the infantry sword began to decline steadily...Before the war, a colonist serving in the militia had his choice of bayonet, sword, or belt axe, but by the time the Revolution began, many colonies had made the bayonet mandatory. Nevertheless, a number of men from militia units came into the Continental Army with their short cutting swords.

...Some militia units of the individual colonies began replacing the infantry sword with the bayonet, but many required both sword and bayonet throughout the Revolution.

...British enlisted troops, with the exception of sergeants, abandoned the sword during the outbreak of the Revolution. Generally speaking, the sergeants and grenadiers in all the fighting forces were the last enlisted men to stop wearing a sword."

Unfortunately, Moore says precious little about cutlasses, and nothing about sharpening.

Capt. William

[John Maddox Roberts]

Just to remind me shipmates where this thread started: Loyalist Arms of Canada. I recommend them unreservedly. This last year I've been ripped off by two supposed blade merchants, so it's good to deal with ethical people. They carry good stuff, they're fast, they're cooperative and they stay in touch. Beware of the ones who don't answer emails or the telephone. These are good folks.

[Zorg]

Capt Roberts,

So tells us who NOT ta trust, in yr experience.

:)

[capnwilliam]

Aye, Shipmate John; remember that it's not defamatory, if it's true!

Capt. William

[John Maddox Roberts]

Fair enough, mates:

I ordered a cutlass, apparently a fine one as reviewed by other of our mates but bought from other merchants, from Lords Armory. Beware of these scurvy dogs! It is a fraudulent operation. They takes yer doubloons and deliver nothing! And (as I noted above) they don't answer emails and their phone # is no good.

The other I won't call fraudulent yet, since I've had satisfactory service from them before, but weeks ago I ordered a blade from discountknives.com and have received nothing, neither the item ordered nor an answer for my postal query (their email button yields only a blank screen). Should I get the blade I ordered, I'l be happy to print a retraction, but until then, don't order anything from them.

Be warned, mates, there's pirates out there!

Gallowsbait Roberts

[Hawkyns]

OK, fresh from a foray through the library, as promised. It's a bit long and doesn't prove or disprove all statements, but it may give enough further information for people to make a choice.

Neumann doesn't mention sharpening at all, either in 'Swords and Blades of the American Revolution' or in 'Battle Weapons of the American Revolution'. He does give some interesting info, though. Swords were general issue to the British Army until 1768 when a Royal Warrant removed them from all but serjeants, grenadiers and highlanders. France did the same in 1764. While weapons were controlled by Royal Warrant, they were not issued by the army, but purchased by regimental commanders. Most blades were purchased from Germany and hilted and scabbarded locally. England got a homegrown sword cutler industry in Birmingham in the 1730's. France did the same with Kliganthal in the 1720's. Swords carried by militia were either private purchase or family heirlooms.

Goldstein, in 'Socket Bayonets in the British Army, 1687-1783' refers to a couple of sword cutlers, but again states that blades were purchased unfurnished and finished by local craftsmen.

The Royal Warrant of 1768 and the Warrant of 1742 both refer to swords, but neither one says a word about sharpening or lack thereof.

The most information I have found was in'18th Century Weapons of the Royal Welsh Fuziliers from Flixton Hall', also by Erik Goldstein. It details a weapons cache from the period just prior to the 68 Warrant. The swords are of general infantry pattern. Goldstein states "Many specimens have heavily nicked blades.........Others show the old sharpening and repointing mentioned by Neal in 1953". Also of interest are the scabbards. They are of leather over thin wood. Some have hooks, most have brass tips, but none have metal throats.

Finally, I ran across a few mentions of naval cutlasses. There is no corresponding Royal Warrant. Ships were armed with cutlasses at the pleasure of the captain, or in civilian ships, the owner. These would be subject to all the same caveats as infantry swords. So it would seem that cutlasses were likely to have edges well into the 18th century.

Hawkyns

[Zorg]

Good Master Hawkins,

Have ye found any reference among swordsmiths to the making of cutlass? Or are we mostly looking at blacksmith-made hangers bein given that name.

Z

[Deacon Frye]

Neumann doesn't mention sharpening at all, either in 'Swords and Blades of the American Revolution' or in 'Battle Weapons of the American Revolution'. ...

Neumann is a great reference for swords of the period.

In spite of the title, Swords & Blades of the American Revolution, he has examples going back to 1600. His cutlass section has a number of examples dating to the "Golden Age".

He provides three views of each sword, and specifications which are rarely included in other works: Overall length, blade length, and width of the blade at the guard.

But more than this, he provides weights, which is nearly unheard of. People are often surprised when they discover just how light many original swords were.

But unfortunately for the present question, he doesn't supply info on the sharpening.

Thankee, Hawkyns, for doing the search.

[Deacon Frye]

Good Master Hawkins,

Have ye found any reference among swordsmiths to the making of cutlass?  Or are we mostly looking at blacksmith-made hangers bein given that name.

Z

Not Hawkyns, but I think he's already gone a ways toward answering that question.

The answer, of course, depends on what cutlass, what period, and so forth, but I believe that in general they were made from blades manufactured in the sword-making centers of the period. In spite of being fairly utilitarian weapons (at least from 1700 or so forward), they had blades that required a substantial infrastucture to make properly and knowledge that your average blacksmith just didn't have.

As an example, a member on another forum I frequent recently acquired a cutlass, out of the Robert Wheeler collection described as an "American" cutlass, c. 1710-1730. It would make a fine pirate cutlass. It is quite similar to Neumann's 365.S.

It has an "Andria Ferara", which implies that the blade was made in Germany for the British market. (The Ferera blades are perhaps most strongly associated with Scottish basket-hilted broadswords and backswords, but they were quite popular in England as well.)

The sword may have been hilted in America, but then again, it may well have been hilted in England.

[Zorg]

ME suspician has always been that the bulk of these hangers was pretty crude affairs, hammered ta bits with use and disposed of overboard when they served their uses. I've been ta sea enough to know that salt water can even foul gold fittings, let alone carbon steel.

I would purely love, if anyone has sources, some pix of some of the less elegant expressions of personal cutlary, the stuff more likely to be worn to work than to the catillion at the Admiral's

Z

[Deacon Frye]

Zorg, you might want to take a look at the British National Maritime Museum's edged weapons collections. They have an impressive selection of cutlasses, though mostly of a later date than the "Golden Age". Here is the direct address of the edged weapons collection:

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/DisplayCo...Edged%20weapons

They also have a small, but nice, group of hangers. And the "swords" category is well worth checking out.

[capnwilliam]

Aye, Deacon: I'd didn't look through all 50 cutlasses, but it did indeed look like a nice collection of mostly working blades.

Like Zorq, I'm more interested in workaday stuff rather than dress pieces.

The site also had a nice little piece about Thomas Cochrane, said to be the real-life inspiration for Capt. Jack Aubrey, of Master and Commander fame.

:)

Capt. William

[the Royaliste]

"Just got another 'new' one for the rack!..British cutlass, stamped and rack-numbered, briquet style..1838...pretty kewl!...(No sharpened edge, but factory sharpened tip....."

[El Pirata]

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/DisplayCo...Edged%20weapons

Great link.

[Hawkyns]

Wonderful site. Didn't get to see the weapons collection in May, just got to the Elizabeth exhibit due to limited time.

Interesting that just about everything they list as a cutlass is 19th C. That could explain the diference in terminology.

BTW, if anyone is looking to get me a solstice present

try this

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/Collectio....cfm?ID=WPN1430

That is one serious piece of drool steel.

Hawkyns

[capnwilliam]

Aye, Royaliste, yer like me, ye could not resist the 'dig'! At the risk of revealing yer trade secrets...where do ye find all these nice pieces?

Hawkyns, I tried to access that site, but couldn't. I'll try again later.

Capt. William

[Deacon Frye]

The site normally goes down for a while on Sundays. I suspect it's when they do their updating, maintenance, etc.

[John Maddox Roberts]

Hawkyns:

I've been drooling over that one since I first saw it in the Time-Life Seafarers volume "The Pirates." That's an ocean of drool.

[capnwilliam]

That is a beautiful piece indeed, Hawkyns. The blade is exactly what comes to me mind when I think "cutlass". The hilt is great late 17th - early 18th century. :)

Capt. William

[El Pirata]

Wonderful site. Didn't get to see the weapons collection in May, just got to the Elizabeth exhibit due to limited time.

Interesting that just about everything they list as a cutlass is 19th C. That could explain the diference in terminology.

BTW, if anyone is looking to get me a solstice present

try this

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/Collectio....cfm?ID=WPN1430

That is one serious piece of drool steel.

Hawkyns

I don't even want to know what that would run if they were to sell it. I imagine I might have to give up my firstborn...