• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Penny Knife for Patches?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Please note how similar the blade looks to so many of the archeology blades referenced above.

Actually, I note how DISSIMILAR the blade looks to archaeological finds. Frankly, beyond simply being a knife blade, it bears no resemblance whatsoever to anything found in 18th (or 19th) century North America. This is something that I run into all the time with all kinds of subjects. The inability of so many people to discern detail. To tell the difference between one somewhat similar thing and another.
 
I've been using a folder for some time which serves me very well, and if it would fit your area of interest, I can recommend it. I started using it when I was working up tow wadding loads for my smoothbore, because of this:

Journal of Arthur Harris of Bridgewater militia, requirements for Massachusetts militia in 1775:

“Each soldier to provide himself with/ A Good Fire Arm/ A Steel or Iron Ram Rod and Spring for Same/ a Worm Priming Wire and Brush/ A Bayonet fitted to his Gun/ A Scabard & Belt Therefor/ A Cuting Sword or Tomahawk or Hatchet/ A Pouch Containing a Cartridge Box that will Hold fifteen Rounds of Cartridges at Least/ A Hundred Buck Shot/ A Jack Knife & Tow for Wadding/ Six flints, one Pound of Powder/ forty Leaden Balls fitted to the Gun/ A Knapsack & Blanket/ A Canteen or Wood Bottle to hold 1 Quart.”

I found good use for it last deer season.

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/colonial-jack-knife.108302/

jackknifeA.jpg
jackknifeD.jpg

Spence
 
These are French clasp knives. Friction folding knives (they also made similarly styled springback folders, but outside of Diderot's encyclopedia, I have yet to see one). These are the CLOSEST thing I have seen to the Taschenfeitel being used in 18th or 19th century North America (and it ain't that close).

1305670431-clasp-knife-quebec-1700s.jpg

This one has a poured pewter thingy on the end of the handle. Someone else posted a picture of archaeological finds, and on one of the knives you can see where the handle was rotted away, but the poured pewter remains. Most don't have that, of course.

These are found in large quantities in Canada and around the Great Lakes. There are different blade shapes: spear points, long clips, sheepsfoot. These all have a little cross tab on the blade that stops the blade against the handle when open. Handles would be horn and possibly wood, though I'm not sure I've seen an existing original wood handle so far. Sometimes the handles were "horn shaped" as above, other times carved into a sort of ball-butt design.
Eustache_(couteau).JPG


If you were a Frenchman or an Indian that traded with the French, you would no doubt have one of these. An English settler in Virginia? I'm thinking probably not so much. So far, all I have seen of folding knives in areas away from French trade have been spring back knives, generally of the Barlow variety (NOT the modern straight handle Barlow variety) or the basic style posted by Spence above.

In the early 19th century, things get a little more varied, and styles began changing. Outside of Barlow knives, I have little to offer as to what style is appropriate 1800-1840, as it's definitely not my time period of interest. The only way to find out is to research yourself. ;) My guess though, is that if you can find any folding knife with iron bolsters instead of brass or the ubiquitous nickel, that will be about as close as you'll ever get to an authentic early 19th century folding knife without having a custom knife made.
 
Last edited:
Well I’m thinking that if you rusted and nicked one and removed just the blade and threw it with blades from a dig no one would pick it out as a fake from a black and white photo. So to me it look like them.
I’m thinking if your evidence counts but mine doesn’t it makes it easy for you to win an argument. So rejecting the Clark house knife with out reason other then it doesn’t fit your narrative becomes a logical step.
Me, well I don’t own one, and wouldn’t use it to cut patches if I did. Should I see some one useing it he’s welcome in my camp.
Should one want to put together a nineteenth century out fit of an individual living and shooting in America useing only things of nineteenth century style and would have been available to THAT individual then THAT person can use that knife. Should a person wish to compleate a group think outfit a uniform Frontiesmen American West type 1bravo one each, then don’t use the knife.
 
I’m thinking if your evidence counts but mine doesn’t it makes it easy for you to win an argument. So rejecting the Clark house knife with out reason other then it doesn’t fit your narrative becomes a logical step.
No one is saying your evidence doesn't count - I am saying it isn't evidence (but it could be). There isn't anything to back up the claim made by the interpretive center and I am unwilling to accept it as it is currently presented. On the other hand, if some documentation could be found giving the historical/archaeological context with a date when it was found, then we might be on to something (though a single example is still orphaned).
 
Even the Clark house people won't say it belonged to Clark. They also don't say who found it or when. That is not very good evidence, in my opinion. If there was anything else to back it up, I would find the claim more credible.

There are lots of claims about lots of things out there. Many things repeated enough over time that people accept them as Gospel... despite it being nothing more than old collector's tales.

If I may address a different aspect of the situation here... There has always seemed to be a great amount of hostility among some towards others who seek to be as historical as possible. They seem to take it as a personal attack when someone says that this or that is not historically accurate.... even when it clearly is not. And no one has told them that they can't carry, use, or do whatever it is that is in question, just that there is no evidence of it being used or done in that period. Personally, I don't care if someone uses a penny knife or not. Use it and enjoy it, however, I do think it is wrong to claim that it is something that was used (even common) in colonial America. Whether it's this knife or any number of other reenactorisms that are out there.

If the question is "is this knife historically accurate?", then we have to look at and analyze the evidence. And not be afraid to question claims, no matter how "authoritative" those persons may be who make the claims.
 
Then that’s an outlook, an opinion. In absence of a compelling reason to doubt the display I will take it at face value. Yes I know a lot of things I’ve seen in museums that have been incorrect. I’ve heard things in presentations that were wrong, I’ve read wrong things in otherwise well done history books.
However until I know of evidence contrary to a display in a well acreadited museum or a well acreadited historian, for that matter, I give the them the benifit of the doubt.
Penny knifes were known in Central Europe in that shape. There are so many reasonable paths that knife could have got in to the hands of an American rifleman it’s absurd to dismiss it. The evidence of knifes found digs at forts and villages presents a predator trap. The people in those places,especially forts would tend to be more uniform. To export those result a population at large is just a tad bit of results bias.
 
Then that’s an outlook, an opinion. In absence of a compelling reason to doubt the display I will take it at face value. Yes I know a lot of things I’ve seen in museums that have been incorrect. I’ve heard things in presentations that were wrong, I’ve read wrong things in otherwise well done history books.
However until I know of evidence contrary to a display in a well acreadited museum or a well acreadited historian, for that matter, I give the them the benifit of the doubt.
This approach is completely backwards of how it should be - accepting something without supporting evidence is asking for trouble. And even the supporting evidence should be carefully scrutinized...
 
I don't need a compelling reason to doubt a claim... I need a compelling reason to believe it.

And if you're waiting for someone to come along and "disprove" this claim, well, rest assured, no one can. As has been stated, you can't "disprove" this type of assertion. I can't prove that they weren't all carrying samurai swords either....they obviously just didn't write this fact down, you see... If one has convinced themselves of something without evidence, then no evidence can be provided to disprove it to them.

And what, exactly, are those "reasonable paths that knife could have got in to the hands of an American rifleman"? Can you provide any evidence of those "reasonable paths"? Not speculation....evidence. I don't give anyone the benefit of the doubt...
 
I don't need a compelling reason to doubt a claim... I need a compelling reason to believe it.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence." - David Hume
"The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness." - Laplace
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
 
I’m trying to see
This approach is completely backwards of how it should be - accepting something without supporting evidence is asking for trouble. And even the supporting evidence should be carefully scrutinized...
Not so backwards. None of us have the time to do all of our own research on any subject and have to trust accredited sources. The above pictures blades from digs, we trust that they are in fact the material found and not a fake paper. Ever been to Troy, I haven’t. However I trust acreadited sites and research that a late Bronze Age city existed there.
Is there life on Mars? Plenty of sites avalible say so. However I trust the acreadited Nasa and doubt that as yet evidence of life has been found. No I have been unable to do all the research myself. So I trust acreadited sites.
To use the above example of samari swords
There is no believabl to me, pathway to get
A samari sword to America, until after Japan was opened up. However a pathway for a Central European poor mans knife is too easy. However I don’t use one. And my kit ain’t much different then yours.
 
And my kit ain’t much different then yours.
Another assumption on your part. Having only seen a very small part of my kit, you can't confirm this in any way....
And accepting things without good evidence (or any evidence at all) is the very definition of gullibility.

With respect to NASA - you are trusting in the quality of the evidence collected and interpreted by scientists and vetted by other scientists that have experience/knowledge on the relevant topic(s). You aren't trusting NASA (the organization)...
 
Last edited:
Black Hand, do you have any specific knife recommendations that I would be best served with? I’d prefer a folder but if not, a fixed blade would do.

Over the years I have gathered up several folding knives that could work. Obviously the Opinel knife really isn't one of the historically correct knives.
IMG_4499.JPG
IMG_4501.JPG

I won't say too much about the Opinel other than it is a very good knife.
The Antler handled knife is by Scott Summerville. Very fine knife, but not necessarily the most correct of the lot.
The bone handled knife was purchased in a small hardware store in Sardinia. Great story there!
The Wood handled knife is a modern French knife of old pattern.
The second wood handled knife is a reproduction of an early French folder. It's a very cheap knife, but I find I use this one most often. It is the easiest to open one handed. One of my requirements for a knife that I will use for a patch knife is that I can open it one handed.
The white and black bone handled folders are a reproduction of a colonial pattern. (Steel quality is poor so I don't recommend one of those.

Note that three of the folders have a metal tab used as a stop for the folding blade.

As a British Grenadier of the Seven Years War, I am not allowed to carry a belt knife other than my bayonet and my hangar. So, I carry a folding knife to cut up my rations and whatever other small items need cutting. I have teeth to tear open the cartridges, no need for a knife there.

I also have several belt knives for the times when the folder is less accessible and I need to cut something.
 
Another assumption on your part. Having only seen a very small part of my kit, you can't confirm this in any way....
And accepting things without good evidence (or any evidence at all) is the very definition of gullibility.

With respect to NASA - you are trusting in the quality of the evidence collected and interpreted by scientists and vetted by other scientists that have experience/knowledge on the relevant topic(s). You aren't trusting NASA (the organization)...
I based my stament on your kit on photos of it you posted under trekking. Of course I haven’t done the direct research but I credit you on telling the truth about it.With respect to nasa I’m trusting an acreadited site.
Im not going toget one of these knifes, I’m not going to start cutting patches on the muzzle. I am going to think German immigrants could have stuck knifes in their pockets on the way to America.
 
"prove to me they didn't use it" is one very short step away from "if they'd a had it, they'd a used it".... actually, it may even be a step or two past...

The large majority of German immigrants to America were from the southwestern regions of the German lands (though as time went on, there were more and more from different regions). Not so much from present-day Austria. The major exception is the Salzburger Exulanten, Lutherans escaping forced expulsion by the Catholic authorities of Salzburg (not really that close at all to Trattenbach). Most went to Prussia and Holland, but a contingent of them decided to emigrate further to Georgia in 1734.

I couldn't prove that any one of these 300 souls didn't carry the "penny knife" in question, any more than I could prove that they didn't also have those Chinese razors...

This is really good information for the OP who asked about whether the Penny Knife is HCPC for the period. This provides a possible location for where such knives MIGHT have been used in the period, though in a very limited geographical context. Even so, it only documents the possibility of these knives being used in that area and no other.

This discussion sort of reminds me of whether Scottish Dirks and Broadswords were used in the American Colonies in the 18th century. We have documented evidence that Georgia Governor Oglethorpe of Georgia also recruited Highland Scots in this same period and they used those Dirks and Swords as well as Highland "Playeds." Yet outside Georgia in this period, there is no documentation for other American Settlers who had these items, at least as far as I know.

Gus
 

Latest posts

Back
Top