ratcheting mechanism on Spanish Navajas

[Chris Evans]

A.G Maisey:

We are in agreement that the ratchet can function as a backup to the main notch. However, it is also undeniable that it impedes silent, fast or inadvertent opening. So here we have three more functions, all related to opening.

Now the question remains which was paramount in the incorporation of the ratchet and why. The Cold Steel Elan and Kudu renditions of a traditional navaja also incorporate a ratchet, but the teeth are rounded and do not positively stop the blade at any one position, only impedes its motion - Clearly it serves a greater role re opening than closing.

This entire question is actually an engineering question. I don't see it as a cultural question, <snip>

When it comes to weapons, engineering considerations very often address legal requirements. What stands in the way of the there being a cultural/legal aspect to this or for that matter any design feature, especially one that is targeted by the law, as locks were?

Forton makes it clear that old Spanish law concentrated on the locking mechanism and navajas with a positive lock were illegal. So now we have a curious situation in which the law declared lockable navajas prohibited weapons, but in many areas they were sort of tolerated. By sort I mean that from time to time the authorities clamped down on their use and at others did nothing.

The Castilla La Mancha area is and was the traditional home of the Spanish cutlery industry and zealous enforcement of the law would have had serious economic consequences; So this accounts for the lax and inconsistent law enforcement.

As a hypothesis, and that is all this is, it is reasonable to posit that the local authorities required the presence a ratchet on all navajas, as suggested by my Spanish contact, to reduce their efficacy as weapons.

Here we have to remember the that the sole reason behind the navaja’s existence was the banning of all effective weapons after the Spanish War Of Succession and the subsequent ascent of the House of Bourbon to the Spanish throne, a French royal house imposed on Spain and one that greatly feared rebellion.

I have an open mind on the subject, though I find the explanation of intimidation by the noise produced hard to accept.

Cheers
Chris

[Gonzalo G]

Hi Chris,

You are correct concerning the Spanish legislation on edged weapons, but it was not privative of the borbonic regime. Carlos III reigned from 1759 to 1788, but before his legislation on this subject (pragmática from April, 1761), there were other laws before him expresly prohibiting all edged weapons to the common people (pragmáticas from 1740, 1751 and 1754), stating that only working knives were allowed, but should have no point whatsoever rounded. Navajas developed as a way to avoid the law, since they have not fixed blade, though the navajas with locking mechanisms did were prohibited. There are diverse myths surrounding this type of navaja, called "de carraca", "de muelle" or "de siete muelles" (for those which had seven notches). In fact, this mechanism was only adopted by reasons of secure handling, and latter were added the myths concerning the initimidation and legal factors. If for legal reasons, the locking mechanism would be an obstacle and not a way to facilitate their use.

You are also right about the fear of rebellion. Authoritarian and unpopular goverments are always fear of rebellion and love prohibitions, specially on weapons. In the New Spain (more o less actual Mexico), only the Spaniards could use weapons and ride horses. And only they could produce knives or swords. But the people always find a way to avoid the prohibitions, and even to disobey them. So, the navajas were tolerated to a certain point as working tools, less dangerous than the fixed blade knives, no matter they grew in time to greater sizes. I am under the impression that the navajas de carraca are a late devolpment, when this legislation was no longer enforced.
Regards

[Chris Evans]

Gonzalo:

Nice to have you back again as I always enjoy reading your valuable contributions.

….but it was not privative of the borbonic regime <snip>

Quoting Forton (freely translated): The first legal proclamation in this matter was made on December 21, 1721 by King Philip V, in Lerma.

As you well know, Philip V was Bourbon and that the whole Spanish War Of Succession was about the virtual annexation of Spain by France/Bourbons altering the balance of power in Europe.

In fact, this mechanism was only adopted by reasons of secure handling, and latter were added the myths concerning the intimidation and legal factors.

The lock was certainly and obviously added for the safety of the wielder, but as for the ratchet we simply do not know. We can all guess, but we do not know. If Forton with all his knowledge shied away from expressing an opinion, then we will all be well served in being equally prudent.

I am under the impression that the navajas de carraca are a late devolpment, when this legislation was no longer enforced

There are navajas dated to the 18th century with `carraca’ and Forton dates this feature back to the earliest navajas.

A.G. Maisey:

Chris, I do not disagree that that there could be a legal element involved in this matter, and if this is the case then those with an interest in this subject should be able to carry out the requisite research to establish precisely what the law and attached regulations and definitions were.

Firstly, I must declare that I and Gonzalo have an advantage in this discussion because he is a native Spanish speaker and I have a good command of the language, and thus we both have read extensively from many original sources, the principal being the writings of Rafael Martinez del Peral Y Forton, the foremost expert in Spain on the subject. Unfortunately, his works remain untranslated.

Forton's most important work is `La Navaja Española Antigua', mandatory reading for anyone who ventures forth to study this most interesting tool and weapon.

In the 490 pages of this huge work, Forton dedicates a whole chapter to the legal aspects of the navaja. He concluded that the navaja, as we know it, appeared in Spain early in the 18th century and not before, and the historical study or relevant documents pre-dating this era failed to mention its presence because people could own whatever weapons they could afford. Here it is important to note that the Spanish wars of Succession unfolded between 1702 and 1715.

So simply stated we can say that the navaja came into being on account of the weapon bans brought in by the ascent of the Bourbons after the last of the Spanish Hapsburgs, Charles II, failed to establish a successor.

As such, the navaja cannot seriously be studied outside of the laws of the time, which effectively created it. And here we have to remember that the navaja is a very poor weapon compared to a fixed blade knife and it was something that the Spaniards defaulted to rather than what they wanted to have as a sidearm.

Your suggestion of researching the laws of the time is sound and is exactly what Forton did. But what muddies the waters, so to speak is that on the one hand there were the laws and on the other these were inconsistently enforced, mostly at the arbitrary whim of the local authorities who had to take many other factors into consideration. One important contributing factor to all this was the political unrest that troubled Spain throughout the 19th century.

As an aside, the cumulative effects of the punitive and repressive laws, albeit inconsistently applied, in time reduced the once world famous Spanish cutlery industry, in Forton's words, to a mere shadow of itself by the mid 19th century, and by which time millions of navajas made in France flooded into the country - These were both better made and cheaper.

Cheers
Chris

[Gonzalo G]

Hi Chris,

It is nice to "talk" with you again. You are right, I forgot Philip V was enthroned in 1700. My apologies.

I have some doubts about the work of Forton. The locking mechanism "de muelle" (spring loaded) is present since the early "Spanish" navajas, but dating the specific carraca mechanism to so early date gives me some of these doubts. The other, more important point about Forton: navajas were presumably known and used in this area since the Roman times. The original navaja from Albacete is attributed to the muslim culture in its stytilistic features. Albacete was founded by the muslim rulers (the city of Al-Basit), and was famous for its muslim knifemakers since that time.

The Spanish people has been systematically denying and hiding their muslim and jewish heritage since the time of the catholic kings, and moreover since the Franco's dictadorship, but for some architectural and decorative contributions. I believe Forton is no exception. Do you believe that the production of navajas was forgotten completely after the fall of the Roman Empire, and suddenly, after the creation of the Spanish state in the 16th Century, they began producing navajas? and less those navajas from Albacete which does not look "Spanish" at all, but moorish? I know, there are not historic items connecting the Spanish navajas with their ancestors from the muslim rule. But you also cannot find historic muslim cimitarras and alfanjes from that time, in spite that they are abundantly mentioned in the sources as moorish weapons. The few ones I have seen as such are in fact Renacentist Venetian stortas!

I am sorry if this comment on Forton statements became a disgression, but I think it is relevant to a certain point to contextualize the possible bias of this author.
Regards

[Chris Evans]

Gonzalo,

I have some doubts about the work of Forton.

In a post I made some time ago, i did write that his magnum opus is in need of a revison/update, but I believe that Forton is now 87yrs old, so this is unlikely happen.

With that said, I think that until something better comes along, we have to go with his views, even if we entertain some doubts, because otherwise we are left with guesses based on personal fancy.

The locking mechanism "de muelle" (spring loaded) is present since the early "Spanish" navajas, but dating the specific carraca mechanism to so early date gives me some of these doubts.

Dating navajas is problematic, but in his book he shows photos of navajas with carracas that he attributes to the 18th century. Their appearance is certainly more primitive than what became more or less normative in the 19th century. I imagine that there may be paintings or drawings from that century that depict these navajas.

The other, more important point about Forton: navajas were presumably known and used in this area since the Roman times. The original navaja from Albacete is attributed to the muslim culture in its stytilistic features. Albacete was founded by the muslim rulers (the city of Al-Basit), and was famous for its muslim knifemakers since that time.

He deals with the origins of the navaja at some length and concluded that the earliest reliably dated folding clasp knife that has been able to find goes back to 1699, but I have to point out that it is quite unlike what we would call a `navaja'.

Having stated this, he goes on to say that the navaja made its appearance in the 17th century, being mentioned by Cervantes as weapons, but these early references do not describe them with any precision, so all we know is that they were folding knives. Well, my take on this is that barber's razors go back to ancient times and also were used violently at times so....

As you rightly point out, folding knives have been around since Roman times, so the birth of the classical navaja, for lack of a better term, is a matter of arbitrary definition based on typology.

For what it is worth, my guess is that there must have been an evolutionary period commencing around 1600, made possible by metallurgical and lockwork advances of the renaissance, and which was given a major impetus by the banning of weapons in Spain, culminating in the classical navaja.

There are many who speculate on an earlier origin of the classical navaja, but the major obstacle to this is that a) there is no hard substantive evidence, and b) fixed blade knives were in all ways better as both tools and weapons, so why bother with complicated and labor intensive mechanisms?

The major problem with the study of the navaja is that it was an instrument that pertained to the illiterate plebes and was treated with disdain by the upper classes. As such its origins go undocumented and are lost in the mist of time.

Cheers
Chris

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

He deals with the origins of the navaja at some length and concluded that the earliest reliably dated folding clasp knife that has been able to find goes back to 1699, but I have to point out that it is quite unlike what we would call a `navaja'.

Having stated this, he goes on to say that the navaja made its appearance in the 17th century, being mentioned by Cervantes as weapons, but these early references do not describe them with any precision, so all we know is that they were folding knives. Well, my take on this is that barber's razors go back to ancient times and also were used violently at times so....

As you rightly point out, folding knives have been around since Roman times, so the birth of the classical navaja, for lack of a better term, is a matter of arbitrary definition based on typology.
Chris

Chris, although I agree with you in many points, I must add that I still have my doubts about the bias or limitations in Forton's work. Or José Sanchez Ferrer's statements about the origin of the production of knives and navajas in Albacete, since more recent investigations has been made on this matter. About the origins of the navajas and since you mention it, Abel Domenech´s book on this subject, shows in page 3 a drawing of a roman navaja which in general terms has the general features of a modern navaja, though probably in a more primitive form and without a locking mechanism. As I understand, the navaja does not have to have a locking mechanism to be considered a navaja, but this a matter of typology. What calls my attention, is the fact that on the documents of the 13th Century from the city of Alcaraz on the province of Albacete, there are clear mentions on the tax imposed to the commerce of navajas. And they use this specific word, "navajas", well before Cervantes. Please see the book by Aurelio Pretel Marín et al, Alcaraz: Del Islam al Consejo Castellano, published by the Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses “Don Juan Manuel”, Alcaraz, Spain, 2013 (it is for free online). On the page 325, you can see the articles taxed by this city, and the navajas are one of them. The tax apply for a dozen of them. Please see for sourself:

http://pandora.dipualba.es/high.raw?...0000005158.pdf

What does it says to you? To me, it says that the subject is not completely investigated. Maybe because those old items disapeared in time or were destroyed, maybe also because this production ended with the christian conquest, as many other valuable Moorish industries (the production of silk, rugs and weapons made of wootz, as indicated on the sources, but it is the matter for another thread). It must be added this quote about the production of edged weapons in Alcaraz:

"En el campo de la artesanía, pocos vestigios nos han quedado que puedan
arrojar luz, pero son los suficientes para hacer ver que debió desarrollarse en
Alcaraz la orfebrería, al menos a finales de siglo. En 1.401 firman juntos un
documento dos plateros de la villa: Alfonso Vel y Juan Ruíz (262). También se
dió allí una temprana tradición de los trabajos de forja y, sobre todo, de
fabricación de cuchillería y armas, en los que destacaban los mudéjares. Un
fragmento mínimo de carta que conservamos (263 ) nos habla de que los moros huidos antes de 1.382, a causa de la presión fiscal, eran "ferreros e cochilleros". Posiblemente, algunos fueran artesanos establecidos por su cuenta, pero es más probable que, en su mayor parte, estos "oficiales" trabajaran por cuenta ajena. Ello explicaría quizás el hecho de que el patriciado alcaraceño solicitase de la Reina que eximiese de tributos de aljama a estos infieles, para que pudieran volver a su labor. De todas formas, la crisis de la comunidad islámica arrastró también, al parecer, la de la cuchillería y armería local. Sabemos que, en 1.393, algunos alcaraceños compraban en Murcia sus 'fojas de armas" (264)."

Pretel Marín, Aurelio, Una ciudad castellana en los siglos XIV y XV (Alcaraz 1300-1475), Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses "Don Juan Manuel", 1978, pág.61.

In a few words, Alcaraz was a center of production of knives; those associated with this production were charateristically muslims and, this production decayed or completely dissapeared because the muslim knifemakers and blacksmiths didn't want to live anymore in this city (or in Spain, basically due the extreme religious intolerance). This also explains why the production of navajas was an item already contemplated in the taxation system already mentioned from the 13th Century.

Now, what kid of navajas were produced? I don't believe they were barber razors. Muslims and christian alike were not adept to shave, as the Romans and Greeks. This is why I believe that the history of the navaja in Spain is incomplete and that the participation of the musim population in this history has been deliberately ignored by past researchers. And that the stylistic features of many traditional Spanish navaja are in fact muslim. There is more information on the subject, demostrating that in the city of Albacete there were muslim knifemakers even in the 15th Century.

REgards

[Chris Evans]

Gonzalo,

On Forton:

You make valid points and I too have picked up on some things in Forton's books that left me scratching my head. But then, I can pretty much say the same about most books that deal with similar subjects.

Writing about old knives is not of mainstream academic interest, and the task usually befalls upon enthuisasts with limited resources who work for the sheer love of it, for there is no financial reward in such research.

I should add that Forton is a Spaniard, who is university educated and as of recent, had a collection of some 500 pieces, considered by many as the best in the world. And this collection has been acquired by the Albacete cutlery museum, so he was much better positioned than most who did, or would venture to study this subject.

So all in all, with whatever perceived faults his works may have, Forton is the best we have until someone comes along and writes something better. However I do not think that this is likely to happen because he gathered all the readily accessible data and it will be very difficult to improve on this, other than write additional footnotes or make minor corrections. And I should add that all the other serious writers on this subject use his works as the point of departure. Of course, what should have happened years ago was a revision of this book, but so far nothing has come to pass.


On the subject of pre 18th century navajas: As I said in an earlier post, the hard evidence is missing and this pushes us into speculation territory.

There was a thread here some five years ago re a paper discussing navajas found in a 17th century galleon. Unfortunately, the author of the paper did not produce any evidence of what we call these days a navaja. See http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=15626 and http://www.melfisher.org/pdf/Navajas...2_Galleons.pdf

Be that all as it may, I did say in my post #32 of this thread that since folding knives have been around since antiquity, what we consider a `navaja' is a matter of arbitrarily identifying it with a certain typology. So, as things stand at present, if what we call a navaja is a folding knife with a more or less large blade, say 5” plus, which can be locked into the open position, then we cannot regress any further back than the 18th century. With all this said, if we include friction folders, then we can probably go back to Roman times.

Cheers
Chris

[A. G. Maisey]

Chris, I do not disagree that that there could be a legal element involved in this matter, and if this is the case then those with an interest in this subject should be able to carry out the requisite research to establish precisely what the law and attached regulations and definitions were. After all, we're dealing with a European power here surely the sources are there to be found.

If a legal element is involved, the whole matter becomes much more interesting.

However, considered in light of what is actually known about this knife form, what we do have in front of us is a reasonably simple engineering problem that was solved by a reasonably simple engineering application. Perhaps that engineering solution was applied because of some presently unknown, or at least indefinite, legal requirements, perhaps it was applied because users got sick of losing fingers. But there is no doubt at all that the ratchet does serve an engineering based function.

As you point out, the noise hypothesis is rather dubious.

The legal requirement hypothesis is very spongy and seems to rely on unauthenticated hearsay.

The risk control hypothesis is at least demonstrably practical.

I've got no stake in this matter at all, somewhere between little interest and no interest at all in navajas, and precious little knowledge of any of the cultural background. One could say I'm on the outside looking in, and what I see through the window is a tool (weapons are tools made for killing) that originally had a design defect that was remedied by application of engineering principles.
Perhaps there is a legal element that needs to be researched, but right now that relevant data does not seem to be available. When it does become available and legal or social reasons can be effectively argued, I might well change my mind, but right now all I can see is plain old fashioned practicality and common sense:- the blade flops open : lets fix it.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

...We are in agreement that the ratchet can function as a backup to the main notch. However, it is also undeniable that it impedes silent, fast or inadvertent opening. So here we have three more functions, all related to opening...
Now the question remains which was paramount in the incorporation of the ratchet and why...
... As a hypothesis, and that is all this is, it is reasonable to posit that the local authorities required the presence a ratchet on all navajas, as suggested by my Spanish contact, to reduce their efficacy as weapons...
... I have an open mind on the subject, though I find the explanation of intimidation by the noise produced hard to accept...

No doubt the ratchet purpose is the one million dollar question, Chris. Personally, while in absence of hard evidence, i fail to digest that the multiple crack is a back up to the main notch; why would you have four, five or six back ups all in a row ?. On the other hand i can easily accept that, the knives with one only notch are those for domestic utility, while those with multiple cracks have a lethal vocation. And then we go on the ratchet purpose; the version i fancy is that related with the noise produced, not with safety ... and saying that, i would realize that such noise is made to warn the victim (?) that a navaja atack is iminent ... be it a law enforcement or some consuetudinary code of ethics.

[Chris Evans]

Fernando,

Originally Posted by fernando

No doubt the ratchet purpose is the one million dollar question, Chris. Personally, while in absence of hard evidence, i fail to digest that the multiple crack is a back up to the main notch; why would you have four, five or six back ups all in a row ?. On the other hand i can easily accept that, the knives with one only notch are those for domestic utility, while those with multiple cracks have a lethal vocation. And then we go on the ratchet purpose; the version i fancy is that related with the noise produced, not with safety ... and saying that, i would realize that such noise is made to warn the victim (?) that a navaja atack is iminent ... be it a law enforcement or some consuetudinary code of ethics.

You raise some perplexing questions, and I'll rank them alongside another one; Why were so many navajas of the 20th century inscribed with the ubiquitous `TOLEDO' inscription, when they were actually being made in Albacete and Santa Cruz De Mudela? A common guess is that the tourists wanted to buy a piece of famous Toledo steel. So it may well be the same with the carraca.

What i find puzzling about the ratchets is that many navajas, not just Spanish but also Italian had this feature, yet so many had only three teeth, which came into play only at the final phases of opening or at the early stages of closure.

I think that we have to treat this mystery in the same way as we treat the equally mysterious notch at the heel of Nepalese Kukris, which also defies explanation.

Cheers
Chris

[kronckew]

just for devilment, the okapi ring pull knife comes from so. africa where they were made under license from solingen, where they are no longer made. the CS 'kudu' is a modernised version of the okapi (both in my photo earlier) a solingen version is also there. someone once told me more people die in so. africa by okapi than any other non-firearm related cause. the ratcheting noise doesn't stop anything from happening...

the levers on the navajas used to lift the lock out of engagement are not that easy to use in the best of circumstances, under pressure of an engagement with another trying to do the same to you would be rather difficult, if not impossible. might be a bit easier on a ring pull, but still....

[Chris Evans]

kronckew

just for devilment, the okapi ring pull knife comes from so. africa where they were made under license from solingen, where they are no longer made. the CS 'kudu' is a modernised version of the okapi (both in my photo earlier) a solingen version is also there. someone once told me more people die in so. africa by okapi than any other non-firearm related cause. the ratcheting noise doesn't stop anything from happening....

I have a 6.5" bladed South African specimen in my collection and also two Cold Steels. The Okapi does not have a carraca like feature and the two Cold Steels, one a Kudu and the other an Elan. do have a ratchet, but not in the manner of the Spanish and Italian navajas, as their four and five`teeth' respectively are rounded so as to slow down the opening/closing but do not stop the blade at any one position nor do they emit a strong noise, hardly audible in fact.

Cheers
Chris

[mariusgmioc]

We can speculate ad nausea about the primary role of the "carraca" mechanism but technically there is a clear reason for it: SAFETY. More exactly to ensure a controlled closure of the blade all the way.

While for a small or "normal" size pocket knife controlling the closure of the blade is not a problem, for a 30 cm (12") blade (quite common size for the fighting navajas) the accidental closure from an incomplete opened position can be disatrous for the owner's fingers. Hence, the necessity to provide the knife with additional safety.

All this said, there might also be the dramatic (whether intimidating, warning or simply flashy) effect of the "carraca" sound when opening the navaja.

[Lee]

Thank you Chris for your attribution of my navaja. The blade is fairly thin (0.06 inch ~ 1.52 mm). The end of the blade first engages the spring at about half open (90 degrees).

- - - - -

Lew had an old 'pull-ring to unlock' clasp knife that he regarded as French, 19th Century. It has been burnished up, but traces of age remain in the crevices. This blade is thicker and the fulcrum more robust, but with just the one stop (it may be seen sticking out in the closed photos below).

Lew must have really liked this style of knife as he also had several variations of the Okapis (both German and South African made) as well as having Kudu knock-offs.

[Chris Evans]

Mariusgmioc,

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

We can speculate ad nausea about the primary role of the "carraca" mechanism but technically there is a clear reason for it: SAFETY. More exactly to ensure a controlled closure of the blade all the way.

While for a small or "normal" size pocket knife controlling the closure of the blade is not a problem, for a 30 cm (12") blade (quite common size for the fighting navajas) the accidental closure from an incomplete opened position can be disatrous for the owner's fingers. Hence, the necessity to provide the knife with additional safety.

All this said, there might also be the dramatic (whether intimidating, warning or simply flashy) effect of the "carraca" sound when opening the navaja.

You may well be right, but the French lockable clasp knives did not have them, except those made specifically for the Spanish market, es exemplified by Giordias.

In fact most large French `navajas' exported to Spain in the 19th century did not even have a positive lock, sporting only a robust variation of what we call the slipjoint and which I call a demi-lock.

Also Italians had ratchets on their variations of the large `navaja' but by the late 19th century the `teat' lock took over and the ratchet disappeared.

So what are we to make out off all this? Did safety suddenly become superfluous? And why did some old Spanish navajas have 15 teeth and others only three?

And here's something else to consider: With the old piclock and the later ring lock, the fingers were not threatened when intentionally closing the clasp knife. This danger only materialized with the introduction of the lever release on Spanish knives at the end of the 19th century.

Cheers
Chris