don't know if this helps, and this is not my thing but ...
http://www.geocities.com/old_lead/oops.htm scroll down to the Meigs article.
The "Fort Meigs Belt Axe."
Many vendors carry this neat little item, often with the descriptor that it is copied from an axe “found at Fort Meigs.” One such description reads: “is a copy of an early hunter's belt axe found at the site of Fort Meigs.”
Other descriptive discussions indicate that the axe was issued to American soldiers during the War of 1812 (perhaps an extrapolation of the Fort Meigs association.) Many woodsrunning and War of 1812 reenactors carry this axe based on these descriptions. Their comments generally note that while the axe is lightweight and very portable, it is simply too light for anything other than very modest chopping chores. Practically no one has questioned its provenance.
There’s just one problem. Fort Meigs State Memorial at Perrysville, Ohio reports it has no artifact like the “Fort Meigs Belt Axe” in its collection!
Retired Illinois State Blacksmith James Patton first brought to my attention the lack or artifact or other provenancial association with Fort Meigs. Other investigators have weighed in to confirm this assertion. Researcher Randy Wolfe wrote: “There is an ‘original,’ was found on the Maumee not actually at Ft M, currently owned by Jim Johnson. Ft Meigs does have, in its collection, an axe (full sized not belt) that is a scaled up version of the 'Meigs Axe'. After years of research, I haven’t found any other originals that match the shape and weight of the so-called "Ft Meigs Axe".
If there is no provenance for this hatchet as being from Fort Meigs, what exactly IS this tool?
One answer may be found in the late Dr. Carl Russell’s Firearms, Traps, and Tools of the Mountain Men. On pages 264-5, Dr. Russell described the tool as a “Kentucky” model ax “with a fourteen inch handle; the blade is about 5 inches long, with a cutting edge of 1 7/8 inches.” He noted that while original specimens are rare, one documented example was attributed to General Samuel Hopkins, circa “late eighteenth century,” in the collection of the Audubon Museum, Henderson, Kentucky. The line illustration of General Hopkins’ axe very strongly favors the so-called “Fort Meigs belt axe” found in reenacting supplier's catalogs.
Dr. Russell continued: “The Kentucky Model… continued in favor all through the fur trade days…” He recorded several merchants--including the fur-trading post at present-day Milwaukee, Wisconsin-- that either purchased or looked to purchase such Kentucky or “Yankee” axes from the post-Revolutionary war days through 1845.
CONCLUSION: The “Fort Meigs belt axe” has been incorrectly named because of association with "artifacts" at the historic site of the same name, which reportedly do not exist. According to Dr. Russell, the tool should properly be termed the “Kentucky axe” or the "Kentucky belt axe.”
