Camp Knife

Cunne Shote by Parsons ca. 1762. Note the upswept design of the blade.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Francis_Parsons_-_Cunne_Shote.jpg[/quote]
Yes - we are all very familiar with the English scalper design. Scalper blades were narrow, long, and period knives were usually 3/32-1/6" in thickness. The knife posted is more indicative of the modern Bushcraft period.

In short, it IS NOT a traditional design....

The posted knife does look more like these than something traditional.

 

[Black Hand]

..period knives were usually 3/32-1/6" in thickness.

My apologies - 1/8"

 

[necchi]

In short, it IS NOT a traditional design....

The posted knife does look more like these than something traditional.

Your both right, everyone else is wrong.
There, Happy?
:dead:

 

[Black Hand]

Your both right, everyone else is wrong.
There, Happy?

It has nothing to do with anyone being correct, rather what is correct/incorrect for the periods which we re-enact. If one isn't interested in staying within established historical parameters, then perhaps one is on the wrong site....?

 

[LRB]

Though "1/3 Tang" and "Half Tang" seems to have been the most common form of both English and French Trade Knives in the 18th century, Full Tang knives were known, just a bit more expensive.

Though I can not document this; I think the 1/3 and Half Tang knives were more commonly traded/sold to both Native Americans and colonists who had to pinch pennies and/or were not as concerned about using the knife for anything other than "kitchen use."

Our dearly departed and much missed forum member LaBonte (aka Chuck Burrows) pointed out that the full tang knives were usually made by welding a cheaper piece of Iron onto the rear of the Steel Tang for these knives. Today we would not do it, but Iron back then was much cheaper than steel and worth doing the labor for a cheaper material than making the whole tang from steel.

Of course when the top and bottom of the full tangs were viewed when new, and because they file finished the blades, it most likely would not have been noticeable to most people, even if they cared.

So bottom line, full tang knives are fine for the period.

You are most welcome.

Gus

You are likely right about the half tangs being a lower price, and sold mostly to common folk and NA's, but do not sell them too short on their strength. Not as strong as a full tang, but quite adequate for normal use and cutting chores, in the woods or the kitchen. File finished blades? No. Both English and French blades were polished. The knife Cunne Shote is shown holding in this famous painting is an English scalper with a ball/pistol grip, having a thin blade of 6" to 7" in length, probably a half tang, and either re-handled or possibly imported with the ball grip. And yes. I use 01 tool steel, stock removal, and heat treat in an electric heat treating oven with computerized controls. I also use electric lights in order to see what I'm doing. Final blade finish is hand polished to a low sheen, which may or may not be lightly aged afterwards.

 

[Artificer]

Yep, I should have typed "file finished the exposed parts of the tangs." Sorry for the confusion.

Gus

 

Your both right, everyone else is wrong.
There, Happy?

It has nothing to do with anyone being correct, rather what is correct/incorrect for the periods which we re-enact. If one isn't interested in staying within established historical parameters, then perhaps one is on the wrong site....?

it's funny how we can talk about what a "hunting shirt" is or isn't, but suggesting that this is a modern design somehow draws criticism?

There are many examples of modern knives with that shaped blade and handle. If this is a traditional design, show us the documentation and we'll stand corrected. That's how we learn.

 

[Gene L]

This knife was not posted in the reenacting forum. Jeez, get a life, you two. Who cares if an exact copy of this knife isn't documented? Who says it isn't "traditional?" Looks good to me. Are you the final word on what can or cannot be posted?

 

[Black Hand]

It was posted in the traditional Craftsman forum, the caption of which CLEARLY states:
The Craftsman
Muzzleloading related things you've made or have questions about making - Knives, Tomahawks, Horns, Clothing, Bags, etc. Traditional Only - no modern designs. Do not post items unrelated to Muzzleloading. This is not a "general craft" category.

Historical evidence, existing examples and study makes it possible to critique the knife and to know it IS NOT traditional in design.

 

[Bagman]

It is a traditional design. It's a very common upswept blade pattern. It's a full tang...and there are numerous citations and extant dug examples. Read the links posted above that respond to the discussion.

Broaden your focus. The forum dateline extends to the civil war. Not all folks here are working within the 18th century timeline. Forum rules allow for more then the first half of the 19th century.

 

[pondoro]

I'd prefer to hear specific features of the knife criticized as not correct. "Looks modern" is pretty indefinite and we all seem to agree that modern chef's knives and ancient chef's knives and scalpers had the same shape. Obviously carbon fiber grips and stainless steel are inappropriate. But for a specific knife we'd all learn the most if specific features were criticized as "never seen before 1870", or whatever.

"Seen, but were not common" is also a valid critique. That specific critique caused me to make a knife that looked like it was imported from England versus a rustic stag-handled knife.

 

[Bagman]

Though "1/3 Tang" and "Half Tang" seems to have been the most common form of both English and French Trade Knives in the 18th century, Full Tang knives were known, just a bit more expensive.

Though I can not document this; I think the 1/3 and Half Tang knives were more commonly traded/sold to both Native Americans and colonists who had to pinch pennies and/or were not as concerned about using the knife for anything other than "kitchen use."

Our dearly departed and much missed forum member LaBonte (aka Chuck Burrows) pointed out that the full tang knives were usually made by welding a cheaper piece of Iron onto the rear of the Steel Tang for these knives. Today we would not do it, but Iron back then was much cheaper than steel and worth doing the labor for a cheaper material than making the whole tang from steel.

Of course when the top and bottom of the full tangs were viewed when new, and because they file finished the blades, it most likely would not have been noticeable to most people, even if they cared.

So bottom line, full tang knives are fine for the period.

You are most welcome.

Gus

You are likely right about the half tangs being a lower price, and sold mostly to common folk and NA's, but do not sell them too short on their strength. Not as strong as a full tang, but quite adequate for normal use and cutting chores, in the woods or the kitchen. File finished blades? No. Both English and French blades were polished. The knife Cunne Shote is shown holding in this famous painting is an English scalper with a ball/pistol grip, having a thin blade of 6" to 7" in length, probably a half tang, and either re-handled or possibly imported with the ball grip. And yes. I use 01 tool steel, stock removal, and heat treat in an electric heat treating oven with computerized controls. I also use electric lights in order to see what I'm doing. Final blade finish is hand polished to a low sheen, which may or may not be lightly aged afterwards.

It's all good Wicke. I have a great deal of respect for your work. Been following your work for a decade. Your a true artisan and knowledgeable historian. I asked because I did not know if you hand forged.

To be fair... I built a 2 burner propane Forge to do my work. :wink:

 

[Gene L]

It was posted in the traditional Craftsman forum, the caption of which CLEARLY states:
The Craftsman
Muzzleloading related things you've made or have questions about making - Knives, Tomahawks, Horns, Clothing, Bags, etc. Traditional Only - no modern designs. Do not post items unrelated to Muzzleloading. This is not a "general craft" category.

Historical evidence, existing examples and study makes it possible to critique the knife and to know it IS NOT traditional in design.

"I'm holier than thou." Bet you were the kid who told the teacher who was talking when the teacher left the room.

Personally, I think you're didactic to a fault. You take a perfectly fine knife and find a niggling fault, or what you think is a fault. I'm not sure why you're an expert on knives of the previous centuries. There must have been hundreds if not thousands of variations.

 

It is a traditional design. It's a very common upswept blade pattern. It's a full tang...and there are numerous citations and extant dug examples. Read the links posted above that respond to the discussion.

Can anyone provide a sketch or photo of a "dug" item?
Written descriptions like, "upswept blade" or "full tang" offer nothing to validate your design.

It's not about being right or wrong, it's about education. We all take your word that it can be documented. Please show us a "dug example" to help educate us on this knife design.

 

I'd prefer to hear specific features of the knife criticized as not correct. "Looks modern" is pretty indefinite and we all seem to agree that modern chef's knives and ancient chef's knives and scalpers had the same shape. Obviously carbon fiber grips and stainless steel are inappropriate. But for a specific knife we'd all learn the most if specific features were criticized as "never seen before 1870", or whatever.

Since no one can prove something did not exist, the burden of proof is always on the person claiming that it is historically accurate.

 

[pondoro]

I'd prefer to hear specific features of the knife criticized as not correct. "Looks modern" is pretty indefinite and we all seem to agree that modern chef's knives and ancient chef's knives and scalpers had the same shape. Obviously carbon fiber grips and stainless steel are inappropriate. But for a specific knife we'd all learn the most if specific features were criticized as "never seen before 1870", or whatever.

Since no one can prove something did not exist, the burden of proof is always on the person claiming that it is historically accurate.

My point was that criticizing a specific feature is helpful, and debatable. For example the debate about full versus half tangs. That is helpful and informative. The statement that pins were always iron, not brass, was helpful. Just saying a knife is modern does nothing, teaches nothing, and can't even be rationally answered.

 

[Bagman]

It is a traditional design. It's a very common upswept blade pattern. It's a full tang...and there are numerous citations and extant dug examples. Read the links posted above that respond to the discussion.

Can anyone provide a sketch or photo of a "dug" item?
Written descriptions like, "upswept blade" or "full tang" offer nothing to validate your design.



It's not about being right or wrong, it's about education. We all take your word that it can be documented. Please show us a "dug example" to help educate us on this knife design.

It's already been done in this thread...several times. Go back through the postings.

 

[Artificer]

Back in the 70’s, a LOT of things we thought were correct for some periods or the period of this forum ”“ actually turned out to be wrong, thanks to more research materials coming out later and of course the information/forums available on the internet today. Many of us were trying to be as authentic as possible, back then, it was just we did not know better.

Consider this from a guy who showed up the first time at the Primitive Range in Friendship, IN in the Spring of 1974 with split cowhide “skins” that were machine sewn on Okinawa, a personal made Shot Pouch that folded up into itself and was very difficult to use, one of those God Awful Cowhide hats Dixie used to sell, and at least I knew enough not to bring my TC Hawken. The only saving graces for me were the hand sewn moccasins I made and the Tack Leather belt sheath I made for my Green River knife, which was also too late for the period I was doing then. I often cringe when I look back on that time. However, enough of those on the primitive range realized I was trying and offered advice and help because “my heart was in the right place.” One of the guys who just looked at me and “Harrumphed” before he walked off, turned out to be an excellent friend and mentor in later months/years, after he needed to borrow my Tack Leather Sheath a day later.

With these things in mind, here are a few thoughts I would offer as polite and constructive criticism for the time period of our forum.

I am personally not familiar with a knife in our time period where the blade drops so much from the top line of the back strap of the tang. There may be some, it is just that I have never seen or heard of one. This looks too modern to me. It would help if you could cite a reference for this.

Not sure, but it looks like you used brass pins. In the later years of our forum period, brass rod was available to make grip pins, but it was not often used except in higher quality knives. For a knife blade left rough from the forge, Iron pins would be much more correct. Of course I would not bother trying to get real/period Iron, plain steel would work well nowadays.

Personally I don’t care for leaving the blade rough forged, but that is a matter of personal preference. A person back in the period and who forged his own blade/s could certainly have left the blade that way.

Did you begin with flat stock before you forged the blade? That is fine for a period knife made from/cut out of say a wagon spring, saw blade, etc.

Did you hollow grind the edge of the blade? I really can’t tell as there seems to be a shadow on it? Hollow grinding the edge is fine, but every period grinding wheel I have ever seen in real life (I have looked at many original ones) or in period illustrations are larger than many, if not most modern grinding wheels.

The reason I posted some links to period blades is to give you an idea of what more period blade shapes looked like. It’s true these are primarily 18th and early 19th century and does not reflect the end of our forum time period. However, I have never seen a knife with that overall shape, near or at the end of our period.

The last thing I wish to do is discourage you as I see some “heart” in this knife you made.

Gus

 

[Gene L]

Since no one can prove something did not exist, the burden of proof is always on the person claiming that it is historically accurate.

And yet you're asserting this design did not exist.

 

[BillinOregon]

Gents, let us quit the p*** fest and move on.
Bagman made a very nice knife. I don't care if its exact likeness has not been dug. If he can make a knife this nice, he can make one that looks exactly like a French or English scalper. I just enjoy seeing the skills other forum members have. I find it inspiring.