Silver hilted

[urbanspaceman]

I recently acquired this silver hilted smallsword. The hilt is one of the finest I have ever seen but, unfortunately, the maker's hallmark (London) remains a mystery even after many hours of searching. Does anyone recognise it? It's possible it is an early Andrew Folgelberg (the standard is certainly worthy of him) and thus what we see is an AF; because nothing else out there even comes close and considering the date is about right 1760/70, I am giving it consideration. Anyone any-the-wiser, please...
PS
According to my colichemarde blade theory, posted earlier, this is a Shotley bridge (Oley) blade.

[Seeker]

Magnificent!

[Richard G]

Could it be the date letter 'm', in which case where is the makers mark?
Best wishes
Richard

[urbanspaceman]

Quite right! Richard... thank-you.
The M is 1767. The crowned (lion?) is London. The far left is the lion passant for Sterling silver.
So, where is the makers mark... ? Exactly.
Further scrutiny may reveal something.
Here we go.

244937

[urbanspaceman]

This on the blade forte:

244938

[urbanspaceman]

I think the engraving above is purely decorative but I'm no expert.
I've scrutinised the hilt in strong light with assorted magnifying devices and all I've found is another Lion Passant on the neck of the pommel (top of the grip):
244950
244949
I've noticed that maker's mark stamps can be almost deliberately hidden (my William Kinman colichemarde for example is almost impossible to locate) so does anyone have any tips?
Surely the maker of this superb hilt would want his identity advertised.

[Jim McDougall]

Keith, do you have the Southwick book on London silver hilts?

[Richard G]

A maker's mark was compulsory and it really should be there with the other marks.
It could, of course, have been erased later, for some nefarious reason.
Best wishes
Richard

[urbanspaceman]

Now you mention it, there are two semi apertures each side of the quillon that I had noticed, inspected, but saw nothing. They may well have been the makers stamp but where and why have they gone?
Thanks Richard.244962

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
I have a similar issue but the other way round. I have a silver hilted hanger where the makers mark is visible but assay stamps are nowhere to be found. They may well be hidden by the hilt as the makers mark was possibly not that visible originally but time and use has resulted in a good bit of movement in said hilt so the makers marks are now quite visible if one moves the hilt to one side. I did make enquiries at Bonhams re their arms and armour person who suggested that assay stamps were not always sought as a way to avoid taxation. I would be grateful if somebody could identify the maker.
Regards,
Norman.

[Jim McDougall]

Norman,
As near as I can guess, the TC initials in cartouche MIGHT be for Thomas Cullum, Charing Cross (1751-90).

While most blades were marked on spine as to maker in bold block letters, it seems possible that these touch mark stamps might have been used by cutlers producing precious metal hilts but on the blade. I have not researched that in depth but seems possible.

What is interesting is that he was involved in the famous 'sword trials' of 1788 with Runkel, Gill and Wooley. He also was cutler to King George III. His widow Mary Cullum took over then, but also passed in 1795.

The business then went to her shop man, John Prosser, who later became well established as cutler to Prince Regent of Wales, later George IV.

While these touch marks of cutlers were typically on hilts, it seems possible to have been placed on blades or for that matter in other instances as I have found evidence of in other research. Though not a definite answer seems a possibility given the high quality saber silver mounted.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Jim,
Thanks as always for your detective work. The timescale, and the initials of course, tie in very well with the typology of the sword. I found another sword attributed to Thomas Cullum with the marks also stamped on the flat of the guard albeit the underside as opposed to mine which is on the topside. https://bid.candtauctions.co.uk/lot-details/index/catalog/10/lot/10665/Infantry-officer-s-sword-spadroon-with-hallmarked-silver-mounts-by-Thomas-Cullum-London-1794?url=%2Fauctions%2Fcatalog%2Fid%2F10%3Fpage%3D 2 Another one at the National Maritime Museum https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-78453 A mystery solved I hope.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. The U.K. National Archives have a catalogue description of the will of a Thomas Cullum, Sword Cutler of St Martin in the Fields, Middlesex.

[Jim McDougall]

Glad I could find useful info Norman. While not wishing to derail Keiths thread, regarding Cullum, as he passed in 1790 it would seem that his widow was still moving his stock through, and she passed in 1795 with John Prosser taking over. All of these were well connected regally to George III and IV.

Back to Keiths sword.
Not fully understanding the protocols pertaining to silver hilts etc. I wonder why makers marks would be removed......when would assay marks NOT have to do with taxation?
In some countries certain makers for the king (i.e. Spain) were free of taxation, thus sometimes spurious marks used by kings cutlers.

In another aspect, I have a brass hilt briquet, totally munitions grade, but with the cutlers assay touch mark in the hilt, and totally an anomaly. This cutler was aligned also with George III, but seems to have been providing other ranks side arms during invasion threat by France in 1790s. But WHY in brass! ?
Seems to have been curious matters at hand involving these protocols.

[urbanspaceman]

During my inspection of those empty apertures on the quillon I began to realise that it had been soldered back together at exactly that spot. Look closely and you will see the solder and how it has spread into those holes. Maybe the maker's marks were sacrificed during the procedure.
When I did exactly that job on the smaller of the two Shotley Bridge smallswords in my collection; I had a sacrificial hilt that I chopped the quillon from. Obviously it was virtually identical.

[urbanspaceman]

During my inspection of those empty apertures on the quillon I began to realise that it had been soldered back together at exactly that spot. Look closely and you will see the solder and how it has spread into those holes. Maybe the maker's marks were sacrificed during the procedure.
I did exactly that same job on the smaller of the two Shotley Bridge smallswords in my collection; I had a sacrificial hilt that I chopped the quillon from. Obviously it was virtually identical.
The apertures here are on the re-attached quillon which may well be from another sword: is that nefarious enough a reason Richard?

[urbanspaceman]

245024

[urbanspaceman]

I think we have exhausted the possibilities of this discussion.