![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Leiden, NL
Posts: 589
|
![]()
It seems somewhat odd that maritime users in particular would choose a rust-prone steel grip as opposed to brass, particularly since the guard is brass. Was that a matter of cost, taste, or something else?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,459
|
![]()
It was easy to make, cheap and heavily japanned (painted black). Brass was of course also easy to cast and even more durable as far as rusting issues.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,184
|
![]() Quote:
As Jim pointed out, these swords seem to have made the rounds! In Annis' 'Naval Swords', we see that East India Dock Co sword with the corrugated iron grip just like these other examples. It makes sense that these para-military type swords would have appealed to the maritime market (i.e. private purchase), as they were cheap to make and simple in their construction. I wouldn't mind adding one to my collection if it at least had a tentative possible use of being naval (as the example I listed above, with the straight-bladed m1804 blade). Radboud, thanks for posting that weapons locker. That was indeed the one shown in Gilkerson's volume. Last edited by M ELEY; 18th December 2022 at 11:46 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|