|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 13, 2011 21:24:54 GMT -5
Upon the request of Hiram, here is an excerpt of a long article that I found a couple weeks ago in the Sept. 8, 1889 Fort Worth
Daily Gazette. It is titled: A Hero of the Alamo and subtitled: Origin of the Bowie Knife and How It Looked. I'm not sure how well-
known this interesting article is to the Alamo Community, but I couldn't find it published, cited or mentioned anywhere.
James Madison Wells (Governor of Louisiana, friend of James Bowie and alleged Sand Bar Fight witness) gives an extremely detailed
Louisiana origin and description of the big knife (although it seems overly large) that James Bowie used outside of Natchez, Miss. on
Sept. 19, 1827. Gov. Wells also states that this huge knife was the one James Bowie had with him at the Alamo, which conflicts with
modern perceptions of Bowie's famous weapon.
Origin of the Bowie Knife and How It Looked, Sept. 8, 1889 - Fort Worth Gazette (reprinted from the Washington Sunday Herald)
"At the time he (James Bowie) was living with his brother Stephen in Louisiana, on a plantation situated on the dividing line between the
parishes of Lafourche and Assumption. Near them there was a blacksmith and worker in iron and steel of great skill. He was of Spanish
or Portuguese blood, and had been, according to local rumor, one of Lafitte's crew of pirates."
"One day he (James Bowie) and his brother Stephen were riding down the road and one of the horses cast a shoe. They stopped at the
blacksmith's mentioned to have it repaired. While waiting Bowie saw some of the workmanship on a sword, or rather a Spanish machete,
and the thought occurred to him to have a knife made for defense and offense according to his own notion by this blacksmith. There
was a bundle of shingles near at hand, and taking one, Bowie whittled out of the soft, thin pine a rough model in shape of what he wanted.
The blacksmith had a long worn out file, which was used in the heaviest iron work, and out of this he made the knife which James Bowie
used in twenty-two bloody encounters and finally died grasping in his hand at the Alamo."
"I will describe it for you, for I have frequently seen and handled it," continued Governor Wells. "It was seventeen and one-half inches in
the blade, two inches in width, until within five inches of the point, when it widened a half inch, and then, curving backward a little ran
off suddenly to a point. In weight it was just three pounds. The handle was made of the lower part of a horn of an elk sawed in two halves
and neatly riveted on to the shank of the blade, the handle and blade being twenty-three inches in length with a handsome cross-piece
where the two joined. The knife was ground down and then put on an oil stone until it was so sharp that it would shave the hair off one's
hand, so admirable was its temper. The sheath was made of two pieces of this pine wood neatly covered with alligator skin. It could be used
for both cut and thrust, and it never failed when Jim Bowie got a fair blow."
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Apr 13, 2011 22:21:54 GMT -5
Many thanks RangerRod for posting the excerpt.
Two numbers jump out at me upon the initial read. The first being the "twenty-two bloody encounters" and the second being the "seventeen and one-half inches in the blade." Both reside comfortably within the realm of incredulity. For some reason I am reminded of the fish story, the size of the piscis is relative to the number of years that have passed.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 13, 2011 23:19:55 GMT -5
Many thanks RangerRod for posting the excerpt.
Two numbers jump out at me upon the initial read. The first being the "twenty-two bloody encounters" and the second being the "seventeen and one-half inches in the blade." Both reside comfortably within the realm of incredulity. For some reason I am reminded of the fish story, the size of the piscis is relative to the number of years that have passed. You're welcome. Of course I knew Gov. Wells' memories of an almost two foot long Sand Bar Knife would astound Bowie historians, which is why I was hesitant to post this article and stated that the blade "seems overly long," especially for that time period. Gov. Wells was a really old man in 1889 and may have exaggerated the length of the blade, but he seems to have had a remarkable memory for little details in the creation and the appearance of something that he supposedly held in his hands decades earlier. Although Gov. Wells implied that Jim Bowie's famous knife was based on a Spanish machete or cutacha, the writer of the article or the editor of the Washington Sunday Herald could have increased the length of the blade to sell more papers. I've heard of 19 inch Bowies, so a 20 inch head chopper doesn't seem beyond the realms of possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Apr 13, 2011 23:53:07 GMT -5
I'm a staunch supporter of the "more information is always better than less information" school of history. In other words, let's look at everything that we can find, and then iron out the wrinkles in the story.
So, even with the questionable details concerning the number of encounters and the length of the blade, I feel it's important that recollections such as the one given by Wells be made accessible. We are not only evaluating history, we are examining the historiography which surrounds the event, or in this case, the object.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Apr 14, 2011 1:05:00 GMT -5
The unromantic interpretation of all this probably comes down to confusing a tool with a weapon. A lot of early descriptions of the equipment carried by those crossing the Mississippi refer not to Bowie knives but butcher knives.
Now away out there, whether in Texas or anywhere else a butcher knife is going to be a pretty esential bit of kit. Just to cite one example the volunteers at Goliad were living on little more than fresh killed beef - and they weren't cutting that up with a pen-knife. Butcher knives will also have been useful for all sorts of other mundane tasks from cutting wood and brush to digging graves, so the rationale for carrying them is clear. No doubt of a night time, young men being young men, there was talk of extending those uses to the extirpation of Mexicans and anyone else inimical to the American Dream. Over time tradition meant these knives also became equally essential to the young volunteers intent on extirpating Yankees too. After all if they were carried by those heroes who wrested a third of the country from Mexico, then they too needed them - but of course as they were't fighting on the frontier and shooting was easier than hacking and stabbing, the extravagant cutlery soon fell by the wayside - literally.
As to "Jim" Bowie and his knife, Rezin's letter is pretty clear that his brother was provided with something a touch sturdier than the normal lock knife which might be carried in a gentleman's pocket, and that out of sheer necessity when set upon, he used it to the astonishment of those more accustomed to the sight of discreetly small pistols and daggers, or sword sticks. Whether he ever used it again is moot and Rezin suggests not.
Now there's no reason to suppose that he didn't also own the big 17 and a half inch knife described by Wells, a butcher knife would have been pretty handy on the San Saba expedition for a start, and I'd suggest that ultimately what we may be seeing is the two being confused; the sturdy (but ungentlemanly) sheath knife used to some notoriety at the Sandbar, and the big butcher knife which would never have been carried in ordinary life.
Ultimately its down to reputation; just as Davy could ride alligators, so Bowie was remembered for using a big knife in that one fight on the Sandbar, and so around the camp-fires those big butcher knives became Bowie knives.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Apr 14, 2011 9:48:05 GMT -5
I'm inclined to agree with Stuart that there was probably more than one "knife" involved in these reports. A 17 inch blade would have been difficult to conceal at the Sand Bar.
For newcomers, some contemporary reports of the Sand Bar fight can be found in the thread titled, "Did Bowie Go Down Fighting."
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Apr 14, 2011 9:50:29 GMT -5
Here's another description of a knife allegedly owned by Bowie. This is from the Idaho Register, April 6, 1889, but the story was reprinted by many papers at the time. Some details compare with the "machete" story. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Apr 14, 2011 10:04:52 GMT -5
Another relatively early mention of the "Bowie" knife. From the Alexandria Gazette, July 11, 1836. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 14, 2011 12:14:38 GMT -5
I have a full-sized replica of the Musso Bowie knife, which has a 13-inch blade and is nearly 19 inches overall. It is very heavy and I cannot see someone lugging this thing around all the time. It would be awkward and impractical. It does seem more like a specialized tool that could be brought along on specific expeditions, military operations, etc., when such a knife could be employed in the practical way that Stuart suggests. I still wonder if Bowie really carried a knife with him at all times, as we have become conditioned to believe thanks to Hollywood. From the descriptions of the Sand Bar fight, it doesn't seem that anyone else was armed with a knife or regarded knives as practical weapons to have "just in case" when heading for something like that. It seems that the Bowie brothers had concluded that a knife of some particular type, size, design could be a very good defensive weapon in a pinch, especially considering that firearms only fired once. If they missed their target or misfired, as several did at the Sand Bar, things could move to a hand-to-hand situation rather quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 14, 2011 19:37:16 GMT -5
I'm a staunch supporter of the "more information is always better than less information" school of history. In other words, let's look at everything that we can find, and then iron out the wrinkles in the story.
So, even with the questionable details concerning the number of encounters and the length of the blade, I feel it's important that recollections such as the one given by Wells be made accessible. We are not only evaluating history, we are examining the historiography which surrounds the event, or in this case, the object. Well, more, different or better information isn't what everyone wants, but I'm with anyone willing to iron out wrinkles instead of creating them. There are certainly problems with Gov. Wells' detailed account of the making and description of the Sand Bar Knife, but I think we can easily separate the wheat from the chaff. Since Gov.Wells wasn't a blacksmith, a cutler or promoter of the Bowie Knife, I think his story has more kernels of truth than some Bowie creation myths. Gov. Wells' history of the Bowie Knife is at least equal to Daniel Webster Jones' (Governor of Arkansas) mistake-riddled account 30 years later, where he claims James Black created the Bowie Knife in 1830 before he went completely blind. How does an Arkansas blacksmith create something that apparently already existed? |
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 14, 2011 22:22:25 GMT -5
Here's another description of a knife allegedly owned by Bowie. This is from the Idaho Register, April 6, 1889, but the story was reprinted by many papers at the time. Some details compare with the "machete" story. Now there's some wheat that corresponds to Gov. Wells' story later in the year. It stars a Spainard (Padillo), who was a former Lafitte pirate and had possession of really long Bowie blade at 16 inches with a buck horn handle. It seems possible that both articles could be referencing the same weapon. Thanks for posting this interesting newspaper link and the others. |
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 21, 2011 23:14:08 GMT -5
A knife collecting friend of mine was looking over the newspapers that Jim posted and noticed a couple of items that lend some validity to Gov. J. M.
Wells' claim that he was present at the Sand Bar Fight and saw Bowie's original knife. The Nov. 1, 1827 Essex Register (Mass.) and the Dec. 12, 1827
National Intelligencer mention an M. Wells as present in the battle in one article and not on the ground in the other. Gov. Wells may not have taken
part in the fight, but could have been a witness.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on May 11, 2011 17:43:59 GMT -5
One of the popular stories in the years after Jim Bowie's death was the belief that Rezin Bowie had his blacksmith friend Jesse Clifft forge the Sandbar Knife. The 31 year old blacksmith/ farmer later followed the Bowies to Texas in November 1829 with his 16 year old wife and settled on a 1/3 league of land in Fayette County. I'm not sure what Mr. Clifft was doing during the main battles of the Texas Revolution, but on Jun. 4, 1836 at New Year's or Mill Creek, he joined Captain Henry Reed's company of Augustine Volunteers. He later served on the 2nd Fayette County Grand Jury and was apparently living on Cummin's Creek in Fayette County as late as 1850. It's a little odd that there doesn't seem to be any history or legend of the Bowie Knife's creator living in this county or even Texas. Jesse Clifft's Request for Admission to Stephen F. Austin's Colony scandocs.glo.texas.gov/webfiles/landgrants/pdfs/1/0/2/9/1029304.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by loucapitano on May 12, 2011 16:05:22 GMT -5
"Jim Bowie, Jim Bowie, he was a bold adventuring man.
Jim Bowie, Jim Bowie, battled for right with a powerful hand.
His blade was tempered and so was he,
Indestructible steel was he,
Jim Bowie, Jim Bowie, he was a fighter a fearless and mighty adventuring man."
I don't know how many of you remember this theme song for the Life and Legend of Jim Bowie TV show starring Scott Forbes. It was one of my favorites, and I watched it every week hoping the episode would involve the Alamo, which, to my knowledge, it never did.
I have a few episodes in my DVD collection. The first one recounts the story that his gun misfired while hunting a bear. He wanted a weapon that couldn't misfire and locates a nearly blind Blacksmith, who forges his knife and as an added measure, installs a brass strip to catch the blade of an opponent. He was sure Jim would need that feature in the future.
I know there's nothing historical about this, but I don't know of any way to strip away the myth surrounding Bowie and his knife. For me, it's sufficient to say, he had it, it was big and he wasn't afraid to use it.
The postings you guys provide are excellent!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on May 12, 2011 16:15:09 GMT -5
I wasn't around to watch the initial run of The Adventures of Jim Bowie, but I saw it in the mid-60s in syndication. Here's the opening:
goo.gl/dE5AK
|
|
