![]()  | 
	
| 
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#1 | 
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
			Join Date: Dec 2004 
				Location: NC, U.S.A. 
				
				
					Posts: 2,206
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			I have a confession to make and I'm not proud of it (  
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	  ), but the reason I know its brass is because I used a chemical to pickle its color black to match the rest of the sword. The brass was old and yellowed with age when I got it, but contrasted so smartly with the rest of the dark sword and looked like a wad of gum holding the blade in place, so...I altered it to look more appealing. No trickery on my part, just wanted to have a less ugly appearance. So the surface of the brass now looks "off". Unfortunately, I don't know what to do about returning it to its former state. I'm afraid I'll wash away the patina and then it really will look like a "put-together" sword, which I truly don't believe it is.Does anyone have a suggestion of what I might do to remove the pickling to the brass??  | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#2 | |
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
				
			
			Join Date: Jun 2008 
				Location: The Sharp end 
				
				
					Posts: 2,928
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
  | 
|
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#3 | 
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
			Join Date: Dec 2004 
				Location: NC, U.S.A. 
				
				
					Posts: 2,206
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			I used a commercial product I bought off the net. I can't remember its name, but it does work nicely. The less you leave it on, the lighter the patina. I used it to also darken a copper-wired small sword hilt (original sword, new wrap). 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	Yes, this piece has always troubled me in a way. Unfortunately, though, there might still be no closure on its exact origin due to its classification. Privateer swords, axes, pikes, etc, were often prinitive affairs and like espada ancha, were sometimes made from spare parts, older blades, etc. This can be seen again and again in naval pieces. If we assume it was a repair, was it one to fix the blade in modern times? Was it an old repair? Was it made this way from the start as a "one off"? Or is it a fake put together to deceive? I regret staining the brass nuw, because perhaps I might have considered chipping away the old brass to see if it truly held this anomolous blade in place at the guard or if its tang inserts into the hollowed guard and then filled with brass. Still, I welcome your opinions and need to see more pics of examples of "electric weld" to understand what they look like. Did they use brass for this process? I would think brass has a higher melting point than what they used to weld with??  | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#4 | 
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
				
			
			Join Date: Mar 2006 
				Location: Room 101, Glos. UK 
				
				
					Posts: 4,259
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			brazing happens at a lower temp. than welding. the brass filler metal melts at a significantly lower temp than the steel being joined. when used to produce a fillet where two surfaces meet at right angles it can look a bit like a proper weld. if you know someone who welds, he can probably tell by looking at it, the photos are a bit hard to tell. brazing is essentially like soldering where the filler melts and wets the joined metals which may be dissimilar to each other as well as the filler. 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	the much higher temp of an electric arc weld not only melts the filler but the base metal being joined it requires the filler as well as the two parts to be joined to be similar (ie. all 3 steel) and would seriously affect the heat treatment hardening/temper of a blade. the temp. used to braze while lower is also high enough to affect the temper. i've not heard of tangs being held into iron grips by melted and poured brass, i suspect if anything they would have used lead. cutlers cement (tar or rosin mixed with brick dust and occasionally a fibrous material) was used for similar purposes at even lower temperatures. this site has info on arc welding, as well as brazing and other welding/brazing methods. as everything is covered up by the brass, an xray may be the only way to tell what is underneath. the xray will likely cost more that the item did tho. or you could take it and give it a good whack against a tree & see what it looks like when it breaks loose tho this somewhat detracts from it's appearence until you get it unbent and re-brazed anyway  .modern electric welders like MIG and TIG types can also braze with a brass based filler, again at lower temp.  | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#5 | |
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
				
			
			Join Date: Jun 2008 
				Location: The Sharp end 
				
				
					Posts: 2,928
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 Difficult to say what'll remove it best, but I'd try something that's mild and wet, rather than just scraping or using a paste. I'd say that a wet metal-polishing wadding like 'duraglit' or that cheap version (which is a freaking godsend for lots of aplications) called 'Duzzit metal polish wadding' which is by '151 products ltd'. That stuff is to mild to really touch steel but will take all kinds of crap off of brass/bronze without abrading it.  | 
|
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#6 | 
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
			Join Date: Dec 2004 
				Location: NC, U.S.A. 
				
				
					Posts: 2,206
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			Thanks for all your suggestions, gents. I don't know if I'm up to wacking it against a tree just yet!  
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	   I will try to get that product Atlantia mentioned and perhaps I'll use a drummel tool to scrape away the brass. I'll write back if I find out any more. Thanks again...
		 | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#7 | 
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
			Join Date: Dec 2004 
				Location: NC, U.S.A. 
				
				
					Posts: 2,206
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			Finally removed the stain from the brass at the throat of the blade...and brass it is. A magnet didn't stick to it and it has an older yellowed patina to it. I'm still convinced on holding this one that it is legit. Worked on and repaired, yes, but a modern forgery with slapped-on blade, I don't believe so. IF it is real (  
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	  ), when would someone have had the technology to simply forge the knuckle guard to the grip without a peined tang? Wouldn't this still be an easy process that could have been done pretty early?
		 | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#8 | 
| 
			
			 Arms Historian 
			
			
			
				
			
			Join Date: Dec 2004 
				Location: Route 66 
				
				
					Posts: 10,670
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			While the examination of construction on this piece truly is interesting, as well as the husbandry observations and tips, what interests me most is trying to figure out more on identifying it.  
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	William Gilkerson ("Boarders Away", R.I. 1991, p. 84) notes, "...there are extant numbers of unmarked M1804 cutlass derivatives awaiting identification by some future scholar, and also various hilt and blades anomalies. I think that Mark, in his tenacity in pursuing all things maritime, is probably just that figure, as he always finds unusual and often surprisingly linked items that cause us to rethink the set boundaries of the weapons and materials used in this sector of collecting. The period of the famed M1804 'double disc' hilt cutlasses does seem to have had 'wide berth' as there were many of the familiar names producing them, as well as numbers of lesser known and even entirely unmarked productions. Obviously during the Napoleonic Wars, there was considerable emphasis on naval power, and Gilkerson notes "...a flurry of activity in cutlass matters" just before the end of these conflicts c.1814 (op.cit. p.85). While there is mention of a defined type by Tatham & Egg, it seems plausible that this 'flurry' may have produced a number of other contenders. This unusual sheet steel guard is unique in the diamond shaped cutout pierced in the steel, clearly deviating from the double discs. It is worthy of note to refer to the presence of the diamond shape in the vertical pierced guard in the brass hilted, ebony grip sabre Mark also has....obviously in reference this is free association, but tempting to do so. Clearly there is not a naval symbolism here that I have heard of, but perhaps a period geometric fashion of the time. More unusual is the curiously upturned point blade, a characteristic indeed seen on espada ancha blades of about this period, and not suggesting this may be Spanish, but again, worthy of note. The ribbed grip seems more in line with the more cylindrical type used later in the M1841 style British cutlasses. After 1815, the British navy was basically somewhat in decline, with ships decommisioned and no more cutlasses were sought. In this time, it stands to reason that the focus on war would have shifted dramatically to trade, and militarily unmarked private purchase cutlasses would still have been sought by merchant shipping. One potentially likely suggestion that seems likely to be advanced might be the mysterious 'lead cutter' swords, and I would like to address that here as well. In Gilkerson (p.85) he mentions these and thier 'heavy blades', and suggests M1804 disc type guards, citing Flayderman and Annis claiming being puzzled by thier purpose. First, these are well described in Robson ("Swords of the British Army", London, 1975, pp.176-177, fig. 185) and these are believed to have been for some type of cutting exercise to strengthen wrists perhaps. They were not officially introduced until an order in 1870 (1 Sept. 1870), which appeared along with the method prescribed for casting lead moulds. These had nothing to do with M1804 hilts, nor the confusion which seems to have come into play with cutlasses at times. These are clearly marked 'lead cutter' and are typically included with gymnasia or practice swords. This then may be excluded with any prospective suggestions of lead cutting swords; may well be one of the hilt and blade anomalies suggested by Gilkerson, or among the 'flurry' of cutlass activity c.1814. It does seem to be a cutlass which shows evidence of the innovative activity of these times toward improving edged weapons, and could be either a prototype, or of a small private contract which may have ended up in merchant use. All best regards, Jim  | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
![]()  | 
	
	
		
  | 
	
		
  |