Would this fit into fur trader era, or is it more French Indian War?

[Dan99]

 

[DiMarco_Mercantile]

My two cents..

I would say possibly, leaning toward yes. In Carl P. Russel’s book, Firearms, Traps, and Tools of the Mountain Men, there are examples of knives all including separate features of your knife. There’s examples of antler handles, cross guards, and an example of a trade knife with that same blade shape. Just not an example including all the above combined into one.

Your knife also appears to have been made from a file or rasp, and that was quite a common occurrence on homesteads and in small towns. If you were isolated, you’d utilize everything you had, including broken files! My interpretation of your knife would be one that was made on a homestead and brought along to the fur fields.

 

[Dan99]

My two cents..

I would say possibly, leaning toward yes. In Carl P. Russel’s book, Firearms, Traps, and Tools of the Mountain Men, there are examples of knives all including separate features of your knife. There’s examples of antler handles, cross guards, and an example of a trade knife with that same blade shape. Just not an example including all the above combined into one.

Your knife also appears to have been made from a file or rasp, and that was quite a common occurrence on homesteads and in small towns. If you were isolated, you’d utilize everything you had, including broken files! My interpretation of your knife would be one that was made on a homestead and brought along to the fur fields.

Cool, thank you. I’ll have to look up the book you mentioned. Have a great night, thank you for taking time to comment!

 

[LRB]

19th c.

 

[FlinterNick]

Nope, clip point blades were not a thing in the 18th century.

F&I blades were crude dirk like knives and daggers.

 

[LRB]

Nope, clip point blades were not a thing in the 18th century.

F&I blades were crude dirk like knives and daggers.

Thats a joke, right?

 

[FlinterNick]

Thats a joke, right?

No i was told wrong i suppose. Jokes on me.

 

[Brokennock]

Nope, clip point blades were not a thing in the 18th century.

F&I blades were crude dirk like knives and daggers.

 

[Brokennock]

Thats a joke, right?

Somehow, I doubt it.
The tide is rolling in,,,, is it worth it to pick up the shovel once again.......

 

[Dan99]

No i was told wrong i suppose. Jokes on me.

Don’t sweat it, we’ve all had our thoughts or interpretations corrected here, some just do it with more grit than necessary.
Without being there or a history professor I think it’s difficult to know what’s the correct information when doing research…

 

[FlinterNick]

Don’t sweat it, we’ve all had our thoughts or interpretations corrected here, some just do it with more grit than necessary.
Without being there or a history professor I think it’s difficult to know what’s the correct information when doing research…

Ive had a few issues with knives at re-enactments for Rev and. F&I War and was lectured on antler handles and clip point bowie like blades. No antler handles because deer were over hunted in the region and no Bowie or clip point blades. The few books I have read on knives really focuses on shapes that very much dirk and dagger like and broken off sword blades, which is the interpretation that many I’ve worked with try to follow. If I’m wrong I’m wrong, i actually chose to leaves the knives at home, it’s either an argument in the field or online lol.

 

[Belleville]

Your approach is wrong. Do your research first, then buy or make what your research indicates.

 

[Dan99]

Your approach is wrong. Do your research first, then buy or make what your research indicates.

The problem is sometimes the information available is not accurate.
For instance, I was at Brandywine Battlefield, they have a locking folding knife on display claiming it’s from Revolutionary War, months later after speaking to an expert on knives of that period that knife is from much later, museum will not change display…

 

[Jaeger]

I agree with LRB: 19th century , but I would add "to 20th-21st century".

 

[Cruzatte]

Without being there or a history professor I think it’s difficult to know what’s the correct information when doing research…

Maybe not. There is a wealth of information available on trade knives, both English and French that, as I understand it, were shipped to the New World in vast numbers, available at your local general store, or nearest fur trading post. Here are some articles I have found.

1. French Knives in North America, Part I
2. French Knives in North America Part II
   French Knives in North America Part III

And that's just three of my favorite articles. With a little time spent on a rainy day, I'm certain Google will turn up more articles on English trade knives.

 

[Dan99]

Maybe not. There is a wealth of information available on trade knives, both English and French that, as I understand it, were shipped to the New World in vast numbers, available at your local general store, or nearest fur trading post. Here are some articles I have found.

1. French Knives in North America, Part I
2. French Knives in North America Part II
   French Knives in North America Part III

And that's just three of my favorite articles. With a little time spent on a rainy day, I'm certain Google will turn up more articles on English trade knives.

Great, thank you

 

[Belleville]

The problem is sometimes the information available is not accurate.
For instance, I was at Brandywine Battlefield, they have a locking folding knife on display claiming it’s from Revolutionary War, months later after speaking to an expert on knives of that period that knife is from much later, museum will not change display…

Yes I have also ran into museums who have things wrong and are not interested in correcting it.

Using only one source for documentation is not the best idea and primary sources usually provide the best results. Coming up with a garage sale item and asking someone to document it is not the way to go. Folks need do their own research

 

[Brokennock]

The problem is sometimes the information available is not accurate.
For instance, I was at Brandywine Battlefield, they have a locking folding knife on display claiming it’s from Revolutionary War, months later after speaking to an expert on knives of that period that knife is from much later, museum will not change display…

Often times what was accurate no longer is. Information and ideas that were once thought correct have proven out over time not to be. Books that were thought to be spot on 50 or 60 years ago, and have not had revisions, aren't so accurate anymore. More research has been done, more articles written and reviewed, more artifacts found, more paintings and drawings made available to the public. More sharing of views on, and discussion of, those paintings and artifacts has happened.
Unfortunate, there are many who read those early books, spoke with those early writers and researchers, who will not change their tune and keep passing on inaccurate information.

 

[tenngun]

Knifes is tough. And to get an accurate copy of a French or English eighteenth century knife one almost has to go to a private maker
I don’t own a knife that’s proper to any of the times I do.
And the most of us are gun nuts, and want out knife to look good beside our gun. Back in the day they mostly weren’t to good looking. Plain, thin, with cheap painted bass wood handles
I have to say, my eyes cross when I start a study of knifes.
Firearms traps and tools of the fur trade devotes almost a third of the book to knifes. And by the forth page they all look the same.
I can look at an historic old rusted blade and exclaim ‘Bowie’ to be told no, Sax, then I see another I go ‘Sax?’ No Dummy that’s a Bowie, geez don’t look nothing like a sax.
Next knife ‘Bowie? No you idiot that’s an HBC camp knife, how could you confuse that with a Bowie? You ain’t very smart are ya boy?
I get the same look on my face as my wife has when I try to explain why this smooth rifle is differnt than my fusil and my musket.

 

[Dan99]

Often times what was accurate no longer is. Information and ideas that were once thought correct have proven out over time not to be. Books that were thought to be spot on 50 or 60 years ago, and have not had revisions, aren't so accurate anymore. More research has been done, more articles written and reviewed, more artifacts found, more paintings and drawings made available to the public. More sharing of views on, and discussion of, those paintings and artifacts has happened.
Unfortunate, there are many who read those early books, spoke with those early writers and researchers, who will not change their tune and keep passing on inaccurate information.

I understand, but in the grey areas I thought this was the place to ask questions or get additional information or opinions. Then you have people complaining about “do your own research” as if it’s some top secret homework assignment. My thought is if you don’t want to share your most treasured researched information then don’t.

PS
If I haven’t expressed it already, I’m very thankful for the information and additional resources people here have shared and offered.