|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 14, 2020 23:49:14 GMT -7
Must admit I have wondered about the common woods used on English Trade Knives. Beech was a perfect wood as it was cheap and easy to get from England and was good for knifemaking. Boxwood was also fairly cheap, but it was a tougher wood and had already begun to be used in parts of period planes that wore more than other parts, as well as wood rules and similar uses. Trade knives were sold in huge quantities and keeping the costs down by using less expensive woods was important. I thought the "Red" handles were painted because Beech and Boxwood are often rather plain looking and the red paint made them more attractive to Native American Customers? Gus Actually, tropical woods (like cocobolo) were frequently used, giving the "red" coloring referenced. Ken Hamilton is a great source on this and many 17-18th c. cutlery topics. OK, since these exotic woods would have been much more expensive having come from the Caribbean and Africa, thereby driving up the cost of the trade knives, are there trade lists showing different costs, due to the handle materials or at least higher costs in the same shipments? Gus |
|
|
|
Post by paranger on Feb 15, 2020 6:26:19 GMT -7
Actually, tropical woods (like cocobolo) were frequently used, giving the "red" coloring referenced. Ken Hamilton is a great source on this and many 17-18th c. cutlery topics. OK, since these exotic woods would have been much more expensive having come from the Caribbean and Africa, thereby driving up the cost of the trade knives, are there trade lists showing different costs, due to the handle materials or at least higher costs in the same shipments? Gus I am not convinced of your assumption that tropical hardwoods "drove up the cost," or, at least, have seen no such evidence. Remember that there was already a centuries old, robust Caribbean trade (sugar, logwood for dye, etc.) and good hardwoods in England were already scarce from deforestation by the 18th. C. |
|
|
|
Post by paranger on Feb 15, 2020 6:42:21 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 15, 2020 10:37:04 GMT -7
OK, since these exotic woods would have been much more expensive having come from the Caribbean and Africa, thereby driving up the cost of the trade knives, are there trade lists showing different costs, due to the handle materials or at least higher costs in the same shipments? Gus I am not convinced of your assumption that tropical hardwoods "drove up the cost," or, at least, have seen no such evidence. Remember that there was already a centuries old, robust Caribbean trade (sugar, logwood for dye, etc.) and good hardwoods in England were already scarce from deforestation by the 18th. C. Please understand I'm certainly not saying such tropical woods were not imported during our period. Compared to English "home grown" knife handle woods like Beech and Box, of course woods imported from the Caribbean and Africa had to cost more in the period. We must not forget the difference in transportation costs by ship to get the woods to Britain. Your example of logwood for dye brings a smile to my face considering how the English had to abandon harvesting the wood at times when the Spanish got too close or deliberately came looking for them and sometimes burnt their camps, then after the Spanish left, the English would return to harvest more. Gus |
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 15, 2020 10:40:59 GMT -7
Thank you for that link. There are what appear to be similar knives with different prices in some of the lists on that link. I have a bit of a problem reading original lists when posted on the internet, due to cataract surgery in both eyes. However, with time I hope to read them in detail. Gus |
|
