English Naval Cutlass or English Lead Cutter

[adrian]

Move that to bayonets where there are tens of thousands then a low serial number would be even rarer.

Approaching this logically no ship would have carried many hundreds of sea service muskets and bayonets and the chances of finding a low rack number on a sea service small arm in fact would be rather high as there were so many ships and craft of smaller size, carrying small numbers of small arms; many engaged in anti smuggling duties, etc. Below is such a bayonet with a low number:

[CutlassCollector]

Originally Posted by adrian

Move that to bayonets where there are tens of thousands then a low serial number would be even rarer.

Approaching this logically no ship would have carried many hundreds of sea service muskets and bayonets and the chances of finding a low rack number on a sea service small arm in fact would be rather high as there were so many ships and craft of smaller size, carrying small numbers of small arms; many engaged in anti smuggling duties, etc. Below is such a bayonet with a low number:

Yes, of course, but I meant serial numbers instead of rack numbers for bayonets.

[David R]

A very nice item and some interesting and informative replies. My money was on a lead-cutter til I made my way down the thread... the spring clip clinched it and removed all doubt. Private purchase cutlass for certain. Congratulations.

[adrian]

Yes, of course, but I meant serial numbers instead of rack numbers for bayonets.

Well you have me perplexed then - what is a 'serial number' on a sea service socket bayonet of the period under discussion?

[Peter Hudson]

I was a bit baffled by this terminology but I get it now... Wikipedia states Quote.
"The lead cutter sword was a weapon modelled on the cutlass, designed for use in shows and demonstrations of swordsmanship in the late Victorian era. Wilkinson Sword made these swords in four sizes, no. 1 to no. 4, of increasing weight to suit the strength of the user. The lead cutter was so named because in demonstrations it was used to cut a lead bar in half. Wilkinson included a mould for the lead bar with each purchase of their swords".Unquote.
Peter Hudson.

[Peter Hudson]

The web provides us with a considerable load of facts on Royal Navy weapons...I hesitate to use the term Cutlasses ...because that term never really caught on until very lately.
Anyway here is the website which I am pleased to see does mention The Cutlass... ...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Navy_cutlasses I was surprised to see that these weapons werent issued to Royal Marines who were issued with those incredibly long bayonets ...

I am by chance just refurbishing my Royal Marines artefacts and today I picked up a good Scabbard and sword knot...and I have located a Wilkinson Sword that will fit with the plan. Reading the exploits of Mad Jack Churchill I noted that not only did he use a longbow but during the Normandy landings was armed with a Royal Marines Officers Sword.
Peter Hudson.

[adrian]

I hesitate to use the term Cutlasses ...because that term never really caught on until very lately.
During this period the term 'cutlass' was absolutely the description used.

I was surprised to see that these weapons werent issued to Royal Marines who were issued with those incredibly long bayonets ...

That web based article is misleading and neglects to explain that the P/1859 Cutlass was fitted to the P/1858 Naval Short Rifle, it was not for the Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle, as that article claims, nor does it even fit to that arm. In the late 1850s the Royal Marines were armed with the Altered Pattern 1842 Rifled Musket and transitioning to the Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle, both arms had 39-inch-long barrels which employed a regular socket bayonet with a 17-inch blade (ref: British Ordnance Muskets of the 1830s & 1840s) followed by the Snider with the same bayonet. I am confused by your description of 'incredibly long bayonets'..... the RMLI did not have a longer bayonet than that issued to regular infantry.

I would recommend applying caution when relying upon web-based articles as so often, but not always, there are, at best misleading and at worst erroneous, 'facts' contained within, making it difficult therefore to discern fact from fiction.