Musso Bowie Knife

[LRB]

Mike, I totally respect your opinion in this, and can disagree with very little of what you say, however the brass in the guard contains traces of phosphorous, and bauxide, both common in the area of Washington Arkansas, and in the sand that would have been used in the casting. How common would that be in a fake? I don't know, I'm asking. In the 1855 memoirs of S. Houston is a sketch done by the cousin of a friend of Houston's showing Houston using a Bowie of the nearly exact design. I do realize that a faker could have seen this illustration and used it to design a fake. Again I don't know. Lab analysis of the blade show it to be of shear steel, charcoal forged. Why would a faker go that far, and how many people even knew how to forge shear steel before Bill Moran revived it in the early seventies. I know that in Europe, what many call damascus, was still being done on a limited scale, but again, why would a faker go that far? I think it would be interesting to have an independent lab do some fresh testing, but I doubt that will happen. It might also be interesting to have a wood sample carbon dated. The sample could be taken from inside the grip with no damage to the appearance of the knife, but that ain't gunna happen either, without Musso's cooperation. He has stated that such a sample would require a half inch piece, but with todays technology, I believe it could be done with much less. A last, although minor point probably, the butt cap, or plug is missing, and the nut screwed on the tang appears to be sort of quick fix, old, but not as old as the knife is supposed to be. Another, why bother to carry a fake that far.
And that post a ways above this one, wanted to know what is the controversy about! If he continues to read, he will certainly learn. I find myself more in the middle of the pro, and con, with more questions than answers, but I would hesitate to call it a fake, based on the examples I've offered, and many others I did not. A good post Mike.

 

Wick,

I was wondering how they could lab-date either wood or metal to a specific year. Radiocarbon dating would be hard pressed to get closer than 50 and won't work for metal. Nonetheless, you did a spectacular job on that knife.

Sean

 

[LRB]

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that the newer a sample is, the closer it can be dated. But even if it were pinpointed, a faker could have used wood known to be of that time. I don't know of any test that would be conclusive. I just find it hard to believe a faker would be so meticulous in producing such a thing to the point that two different labs could not find something to verify it as a fake. Unless the answer is in the wood, or something else has been overlooked. Even the patina of the steel was considered to be formed over a long time period, rather than at any one time period. Until proven one way, or the other, it is wise to be skeptical, but with an open mind. Technology may one day decide the issue for sure.

 

[50cal.cliff]

Wick, I like that knife! :bow: :bow: :bow:
That is just awsome work, awsome work!
As for the controversy about wheter the origional was a fake, your well thought out and well stated postion seems to give the origional alot of support! If your trying to fake something you usually would not see that much effort put into it.
But alas, I don't have time to let my opinion run my mouth! :shake:
Hey Wick did I tell you I really like that knife!!! :rotf: :rotf: :thumbsup: :hatsoff:

 

[Johnny Tremain]

"Now thats a knife mate"

about time someone showed the fine craftsmanship of the 1800s.

 

Yes-- I do not want to take away from your knife, it is a beautiful job. Many makers have made 'fantasy' Bowies as part of their inventory such as the Iron Mistress movie Bowie [also a figment of someone's head]--which Musso also owns. Fact is, you cannot date metal and especially cannot date it to 1830 as he says. The type of steel is an old type--that does not date the knife, nor associate it with Black. There is no phosphorous or bauxite around Washington, Ark to my knowledge [and I have personally written and published reports on the geology of that state, including a soon to be released Geology of Hot Springs]. There is bauxite in Benton near Little Rock, but it was not mined until later--it was a major source of Aluminum for the WWII effort. It is highly unlikely that any brass was made and cast in Arkansas. A frontier smith would have forged an iron guard--but fact is Black DID NOT PUT GUARDS on ANY of his known knives. ALL of his knives are coffin-handled guardless ones. He did make at least one large Bowie knife, it is in the museum in Little Rock and has "Bowie No.1" engraved on a plate in the guardless coffin handle. At least 9 other Black knives are known--all look alike except for blade length [most were short, more like hunting knives or the later California knives]. Many Sheffield makers copied early Black knives and often labeled them "Arkansas Toothpick". The English were known for their shear steel, and I suspect a faker in England obtained some and made this knife in the 20th century.

 

P.S. as regards to the sketch of Houston's knife--I have not seen it, but I have seen a photo of the actual knife and it DOES NOT look like the Musso knife. There are several drawings of the "original Bowie knife" in books--most of them figments of imagination. There is also a drawing of a purported Smithwick Bowie in a book on Texas lore..it does not look like the Musso knife--Smithwick, you may recall, claimed to have made copies of Jim Bowies knife in the early days of the Texas revolution. The Houston knife looks more like the Smithwick knife!

 

[CrackStock]

A beautiful piece of work from Wick. But then, that is not surprising at all.

Also a good chance to learn a bit of the history of these knives from Mike and Wick. I have always especially admired the coffin handled Arkansas Toothpick knives and Bowies.

Some interesting picks that I found: Knife Pics

Thanks!

CS

 

[LRB]

Neither of us know for sure that there is, or is not, a deposit of phosphorous and bauxite around Washington. No one said brass was made there. The guard was supposedly cast there, and presumed to be sand cast with the sand having traces of both phosphorous and bauxite, which supposedly showed up in, or on the guard. The following is from a magazine article. The resident knifemaker of Washington Ark. State Park sent a soil sample used in period castings, termed "green sand", to Truesdail Laboratory for analysis. Their findings showed major elements of this soil include phosphorus iron, bauxite precursors and silicon, matching the minor elements in the brass guard. This deposit is supposed to be about 250 yrds from downtown Washington Ark. I don't know, what do think Mike? Another question. I have always heard that Black did not mark his blades. What's the story on that? And are we to assume that Houston only owned one knife during his life? Not argueing, just questioning. Not looking for battle, just good answers that you are good at supplying. Your knowledge in this area is way beyond mine.

 

I would be interested in that mag article you quote, but do not reference. I know the resident knife makers at Old Washington, see them pretty frequently [I live a hour and a half from there], and have two knives made by one of them [Billy Nations]. I don't know what is meant by 'bauxite precursers'--bauxite is an advanced weathering product of aluminum bearing minerals. It is not widespread, but I suppose certain weathered zones could have similar elements present. Phosphorus is not that common. Silica (SiO2)is almost universal and is the most common material on the surface of the earth. I would have to read the reports in detail.

 

[LRB]

Sorry, I did not realize that I did not name the knifemaker. I did mean to, his name is listed as Bill Hicks. The article is from dec. 92 "THE ALAMO JOURNAL", issue 84. Anyone can order a copy of this issue from William R. Chemerka, c/o "THE ALAMO JOURNAL", 7 academy Drive West, Whippany, NJ 07981. $5.00 post paid.
The article also has the sketch of Houston with both blades compared in a close up.
I doubt you will find anything that would surprise you, or that could not be argued, but it is worthy of a look. Some of it could be easily be considered hype, but nothing above ordinary hype considering the subject.

 

I realized I did not answer all of your questions--and there may not be good answers to all of them. Why didn't Black mark his knives? Don't know--why didn't most riflemakers of the early period mark their guns? Maybe because his characteristic style was enough of a trademark? In any event, the key to Black's knives is the Carrigan knife, now in the LR museum, owned by the Carrigan family who were pioneers of Washington, Ark [their old place was behind the current 'tavern' restuarant in the park--my uncle is a Carrigan]. This knife has documentation to the hand of James Black--and it is the only one with it. ALL other knives attributed to Black [EXCEPT Musso's attribution of his knife] are nearly identical in construction--and it is a unique construction--even a few have handles made from the same walnut plank according to some experts who have studied them. Musso's is TOTALLY [in EVERY rspect] differently made. Of course Sam Houston could have owned more than one knife--so did James Bowie without doubt. Several accurate descriptions and several actual knives [belonging to Rezin] have been preserved--and none of them even remotely resemble the Musso knife. In fact, I know of NO 1830 Bowie knife that looks like the Musso knife no matter who made it or where it was made. I no of NO 1830 Bowie knife with a brass back. I know of NO 1830 Bowie with brass guards. I know of NO knife of any kind made by Black with any guard at all. Smithwick claimed that J. Bowie came to him in 1828 in Texas with his 'sandbar fight' knife and had him copy it. Rezin described the sandbar knife as being a plain straight backed butcher knife with a 9.25" blade. Smithwick made his 'copies' with a 10" blade. The Musso knife is huge and heavy and would be unwieldy to tote and use. Everything about the Musso knife is wrong--but it appeals to many modern folks because it IS an exaggerated knife, bigger than life, the type of thing we imagine hero Bowie to carry, the type of thing folklore made the Bowie knife into--and many late Bowie knives WERE exaggerated to fit the legend....bigger is better...I still think it is a fake.

 

P.S. know Bill Hicks, I'll have to ask him about it. Might pass through there tomorrow. I'll check on the sediments around Washington--don't know of anything special about them, but perhaps I overlooked something. Still don't think the chemistry proves anything, especially not age or origin.

 

[davy]

Here is a copy of the image in question, I do believe that Joe Musso wrote that article as well in the Alamo Journal .. it is an interesting read .. you can indeed get a copy from Bill Chemerka. :hatsoff:

Davy

 

[LRB]

Mike, please report your findings when you get back and have the time.
I do not recall Musso ever stating that the knife was definately made by Black, just that the evidence he has gathered points very strongly in that direction. Maybe he did, but I have not seen this stated as to be fact. What is the documentation on the Carrigan knife? Is there more than just family history?
As far as being heavy, and unweildy, it really isn't that bad at all. I have handled meat cleavers heavier than this knife. According to my trigger pull scale, it weighs 1 lb, 11 oz. Hefty, but not over bearing. My copy cannot be too much different in weight from the Musso knife. I would believe that a younger man than me, with a good arm, and strong of wrist, might surprise you with what he could do with it. The shape, and length of the grip help make it very manageable for it's size. All in all, I do not think a definative answer will be found, until the knife is re tested with newer technology maybe one day. I have some skepticism myself, but lean toward it not being a fake.

 

Wow. If this is his 'evidence' he is worse off than I thought. Musso once published an article in which he showed a photo of a real J Black knife and said :"see, it looks just like mine"--which of course it did NOT look anything like his. What is the origin of this sketch. Date? Drawn from life? Artists imagination? Note that the blade is much smaller than the Musso knife and has no visible guard. Wick, what is the blade length on yours? It looks smaller than Mussos....the extant Houston knife is heavy bladed but nothing like Mussos in any way--it is more like the original 'sandbar' knife as reconstructed from descriptions and Rezins early knife [in a museum in Miss], except it has an abrupt clip point [very unlike Mussos] and a simple iron guard. I have a copy of the photo somewhere--but you can find it googling Sam Houstons knife...I obviously cannot convince you that Mussos claim has little merit, and Musso does a good job of "selling" his knife [makes it worth a whole lot more than if it is a fake]. He has foisted it upon the public in several movies. I have an open mind on Bowie knife history and am always willing to learn. If someone can prove to me that knife is really old I would accept that, however there is absolutely nothing to link it to J Bowie or J Black. JB on the guards--absolutely a unique place for initials and of course a good choice for a faker--but JB can mean John Bull, Joe Blow, etc....

 

The documentation on the Carrigan knife is good family history as opposed to the common family myths. Only the most cynical doubters, especially writers with other axes to grind or knives to tout, doubt the link between the Carrigan knife and J Black. Recently I discovered a 'new'original J Black knife and was about to publish on it [it is not mine]when the publisher asked me to delay while a certain party tried to buy it. If the deal goes through, I will publish on the find. It is much like the Carrigan knife. The link of Black knives to the Bowies is through one in a museum in Berryville, Ark which is inscribed as a gift from "Col. Bowie" to a Tunstall. Then, of course there is the "Bowie No. 1" whose meaning is disputed. There is of course written period info on J Black. At least a couple of writers in the past claimed Black was a myth. He was real. He made knives in Washington Ark in the late 1820s-30s. I have seen a photocopy of a period document from Washington with his name on it. A newspaper in 1841, just 5 years after the Alamo, proclaimed Black as the true Bowie knife maker. The state park folks have info on him, too. I have been in the house where he spent his last days and in the cemetary where his unmarked grave lies according to the family that took him in [he became blind].

 

[LRB]

Mike, I was not thrilled with the photo. The angle I had to use doing the shoot makes the blade look smaller than it is. Also the grip length in the photo makes the entire knife look smaller. My blade is 13 3/4", as is the original. Take another look at the photo of it stuck in the board. It looks longer than the side shot. The blade is made to the originals' specs, in all details, within common reason. I did not use a micrometer. Only a steel machinists rule. The blade is 7/32" at the guard with a distal taper to 3/16" near the beginning of the false edge. The extreme width is 2 5/16" without the brass catcher. I have seen in print that it is 2 1/2" wide, but I can assure you, that is incorrect. I am convinced that the guard was cast. I have made many S, and C guards of brass and steel, but I had to make four of these before getting one correct because of the way the brass behaved in hammer shaping. It could have been easily forged, had it been steel, but I had to hand file the center section from 3/8" brass down to a centered 1/4", then file, grind, bend, and hammer the tear drop finials in order to get the correct shape and thickness. It was not fun!

 

[jbg]

All I can say is that when I asked to be educated, both Mike and Wick have certainly done so. I thank you both, gentlemen.

I love this forum!

 

[LRB]

Here are some much better pics that give a better idea of the size, and shape compared to the original. If you will notice the knife has a leather bumper between the blade, and guard. This was to protect the guard when sheathed in a metal throated sheath. This is a common feature on swords, but the first I've seen on a knife.

[/img]

[/img]