Found and Restored: 17th Century Biscayne Trade Axe!!!

paleomaxx

Hero Member
Aug 14, 2016
841
6,887
Upstate, NY
🥇 Banner finds
6
Detector(s) used
Deus XP
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I actually recovered this some weeks back, but between the preservation research it's taken me awhile to put this together. The research was especially thorough because I know quite a few hatchets can resemble trade axes, and true Biscayne trade axes are quite rare. But against all odds it appears I've found the real deal!

I was doing some more gridding around where I found all those IHPs and seated dimes last year. Clearly a Victorian campsite of some sort, but I was hoping for some more coins so I gridded much further away from the main scatter this time. No luck on more coins and almost nothing in the soil besides a couple oxe shoes and a modified conestoga bell. When I pulled the axe head out of the ground it appeared to be just another 19th century iron relic so I put it in the bag with the rest and continued on my way. It wasn't until I cleaned everything up and took a closer look that I started to suspect that I had found a much older piece.

20200129_212446.jpg

Even for a 19th century piece of iron, the rusting on this axe head would have been fairly minor. This flat area is raised above the nearby river by a good 10-20 feet and almost entirely sandy soil so I suspect any water runs off quickly. It's quite fortunate because otherwise I would never have spotted the faint four lobed mark imprinted into the surface.

DSC09850.JPG

The touchmark combined with the odd shape is what jogged my memory and made me start to think that I had found a trade axe. But to be sure I would have to clean off the rust and if this was in fact a trade piece I wanted to do so in a way that would preserve as much metal as possible and prevent any future corrosion.

So into the electrolysis tank it would have to go!

DSC09843.JPGDSC09844.JPG

I actually built one specifically for this piece. I wanted to be able to check on it frequently and control the treatment rate carefully so only one carbon electrode and a relatively small bath. After testing it on a few less important pieces it was ready for the crucial relic.

View attachment Trade Axe 2.jpg

The above progression photos are of the axe head at the start, midway, and at the end. Lots of pitting, which is expected, but incredibly some of the original flat surface survived! I also found that both sides of the trade axe have the same touchmark. After I scrubbed off all the carbon deposits and was sure that absolutely no rust remained, I put it in hot wax (300 F) for well over an hour. Once no more bubbles were emanating from the piece it was finally done:

IMG_20201229_185736.jpgIMG_20210107_112129.jpgTrade Axe Bottom View.jpg

The result is an incredible artifact and I'm certain that this is a trade piece as opposed to a later reproduction. The touchmark matches number 3 in the below table which is from the reference book, Les Armes de Traité. It also has the correctly shaped eye that's produced from the very specific blacksmith method for manufacturing them.

Trade Axe Touchmarks.jpg

Trade axes like these were made starting in the 16th century and production continued until the early 18th century. However the style of construction changed over the centuries so they can be somewhat dated by the profile shape of the blade. Also of interesting note is that this particular touchmark is found most associated with Oneida tribe sites and between the approximate dates of 1575 and 1670. Kind of amazing to think that this could be a 16th century piece, although I think it's more likely mid 17th century.

IMG_20201229_190011.jpg

I found this on the East side of the Hudson, but many miles up a tributary. I suspect it wasn't directly traded for in this area, but rather made it's way down from the St. Lawrence Seaway. Must have been an incredible journey back when the land was entirely primordial forests. Even if this originated in Montreal, it still would have been more than 250 miles on foot or by canoe to get to where I found it. I've known there was indigenous activity in this area for awhile and the field almost directly across the river is where I found my first and second stone points! But even still, finding a trade axe is more than I could have hoped for! :hello2:

An incredible piece of history, one that I never expected to uncover, and certainly my best iron relic to date!

IMG_20210107_112624.jpg
 

Upvote 41
I was where is this touch mark ref.?? Then I looked and looked and there it was in this photo. Seems like others have missed it as well.

Yeah it is hard to spot with the way the photos appear in the post. I'd like it if I could put in blow-up photos, but they are high resolution photos so if you click on them to get the window and then click on them again they will fill the whole screen and the details like the touchmark can be seen clearer. Below are some up-close photos though which may make it easier to see even without the fullscreen view:

Touchmark.jpgDSC09873.JPGTouchmark #3.jpg

Also is an expanded picture of touchmark #3 from the book for side-by-side comparison.

Touchmark Expanded View.jpg
 

Last edited:
This was brought to my attention... Paleo... Unfortunately I do not agree... sorry man... and which in the grand scheme of things... who cares right ? ? ?

There are a few "red flags" for this...

Although its a nice find...

1. The overall appearance screams modern to me.

2. No fold... which means it was cast... and that makes it modern.

3. Perfect cuts and angles also points modern.

4. Deterioration of metal "pock marks" for lack of the real term in my mind right now... is not indicative of other heads of this period. (NOW this could be due to an "element situation")

5. and..... most importantly... This "style"... IS NOT... a 16th century style hatchet... which is what it is... not an "axe".


Sorry... but... hey... "it is what it is".

LOve to be proven wrong.

You're welcome to disagree; doesn't bother me at all, just allow me to post a few rebuttals to your points. I did do a ton of research on this piece and would love to post up some more of it! :laughing7:

For starters it does indeed have a fold inside the eye. It's devilishly tricky to get a good photo of because there's no real contrast with the treated surface, but the below photo turned out okay:

Seam.jpg

People may have to click on it to get the expanded view to really see the features, but it does have the classic seam from the butterfly of iron being folded over and hammered into the axe head shape. There's a neat diagram in Bouchard's book that shows the steps in the process:

Trade Axe Steps.jpg

On your point about it not having a 16th century hatchet style you are correct. Keep in mind that Biscayne trade axes are a very specific product produced for the fur trade with the Native Americans. European hatchets produced for use by the colonists or even local blacksmith-made colonial hatchets could have been produced with different styles, weights, and quality.

You mention "crude" as an overall look for other period pieces and I would agree that for a lot of locally blacksmithed iron pieces that's an easy way to distinguish older artifacts, but it's important to note that what was being manufactured for trade with the Native Americans may not have been crude. The furs that were being traded for were extremely valuable in Europe and continued trade was crucial for justifying repeated expeditions. Also it's easy to think of the indigenous tribes as being willing to trade for whatever they could get their hands on, but that may be a later bias as evidence suggests that indigenous tribes preferentially trade for quality items. Serpent muskets and trade silver were quality items were mass produced, but not cheaply made. The European traders wanted goods that were desirable so pieces like these trade axes would have been made to high quality standards at the time. Poorly made axes might have been rejected in favor of better ones and if word got around that your goods were junk, your supply of furs might dry up.
 

Last edited:
Now the little one I found didn't have a touch mark, and it was the style that one would expect from a blacksmith folding the iron over and pounding it into shape.

Pepperj, in regards to you point on the shape; the one that I recovered actually is a classic trade axe shape. They went through several iterations and it seems to have depended on where the trade axes were being made. Below is from Bouchard's book:

Type A.jpgDSC09867.JPG

The type "A" style matches the piece that I found and according to the book was manufactured in France. The one that you posted seems to closer match the type "C" style:

Type C.jpg62D61298-8DBB-49AD-8449-25B87E6DE3A1.jpg

Instead of being manufactured in France, these were manufactured in Canada around the 18th century. At this point production may have been moved locally to reduce costs or to increase available trading supplies, but not using the same blacksmiths so the final product was slightly different.
 

Last edited:
Thanks for the clarification on the head, and the added information on mine as well, this is much appreciated that you took the time. Mine would be classified as a belt axe as it's so small (still looking for big brother).

BC4616E6-E9E6-42A4-BC8C-1DABE2ED0E9D_1_201_a.jpeg
 

Neat axe, nice research and cleaning, and I’ve enjoyed the follow up posts..Lots of points to think about.
 

Great post and ensuing discussions...
 

Neat find!!! Its awesome that you were able to find the mark and identify it!!!
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top