Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Jim McDougall · 5th March 2009, 06:05 PM

Hi Fernando,
Extremely well placed points! and your summation of them present your ideas in a compellingly plausible manner. I understand that in these times, as noted, these hilt components, in particular the pommels, were often stockpiled by makers.
In following your lead in this outstanding material on the identification and purposes of these stamped markings, I thought to look into the venerable reference by J.D.Aylward , "The Smallsword in England" (1945), as the use of silver in smallswords was of course prevalent. As he quotes on p.65;

"...a silver sword? Well! thou shalt have that too! Now hast thou everything!".
- Vanbrugh, 1705

.....with this noting the extreme importance, and legacy, of the silver hilted sword to the gentry of these times.
It is noted also on this page, corroboration of your notes on the meaning of the grouping of marks, typically four, as found on London weapons of early 18th century.
1. leopards head, mark of assay at Goldsmiths Hall.
2. Makers mark...his initials (both)..as beginning c.1739
3. Date letter, each marked consecutively indicating a fiscal year, from
alphabets in various types, omitting letters J,W,X,Y,Z
4.Standard mark, always lion passant except between 1697-1720 when alteration of silver standard caused use of Britannia figure.

Apparantly there was a duty on silver, and the assay marks had to do with this, in cases where no 'touchmarks' (touchmark= hallmark, thus the function of goldsmiths hall etc.).
It seems that strictly speaking, every separate silver component should have been so marked, however in practice punches only appear in one location. In the early dates, stamps were often placed in the upper knuckleguard, but due to fragility of this spot, the concussion of heavy stamping blows caused weakening.
In note toward this fact, the fragility of silver hilts caused considerable concerns as these were extremely susceptible to damage and defacement, thus more of a dress accoutrement. This is noted by Aylward, and the source for my thoughts concerning the probable appointment of this sabre as a dress piece discussed earlier in the thread.

I think you have hit on the most likely means of identifying more on Norman's silver hilt sabre, and with your thoughts, it seems this information from Aylward provides some good support.

Your radar is definitely on high definition my friend!!!

All the best,
Jim

5th March 2009, 06:05 PM	#25
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,785	Hi Fernando, Extremely well placed points! and your summation of them present your ideas in a compellingly plausible manner. I understand that in these times, as noted, these hilt components, in particular the pommels, were often stockpiled by makers. In following your lead in this outstanding material on the identification and purposes of these stamped markings, I thought to look into the venerable reference by J.D.Aylward , "The Smallsword in England" (1945), as the use of silver in smallswords was of course prevalent. As he quotes on p.65; "...a silver sword? Well! thou shalt have that too! Now hast thou everything!". - Vanbrugh, 1705 .....with this noting the extreme importance, and legacy, of the silver hilted sword to the gentry of these times. It is noted also on this page, corroboration of your notes on the meaning of the grouping of marks, typically four, as found on London weapons of early 18th century. 1. leopards head, mark of assay at Goldsmiths Hall. 2. Makers mark...his initials (both)..as beginning c.1739 3. Date letter, each marked consecutively indicating a fiscal year, from alphabets in various types, omitting letters J,W,X,Y,Z 4.Standard mark, always lion passant except between 1697-1720 when alteration of silver standard caused use of Britannia figure. Apparantly there was a duty on silver, and the assay marks had to do with this, in cases where no 'touchmarks' (touchmark= hallmark, thus the function of goldsmiths hall etc.). It seems that strictly speaking, every separate silver component should have been so marked, however in practice punches only appear in one location. In the early dates, stamps were often placed in the upper knuckleguard, but due to fragility of this spot, the concussion of heavy stamping blows caused weakening. In note toward this fact, the fragility of silver hilts caused considerable concerns as these were extremely susceptible to damage and defacement, thus more of a dress accoutrement. This is noted by Aylward, and the source for my thoughts concerning the probable appointment of this sabre as a dress piece discussed earlier in the thread. I think you have hit on the most likely means of identifying more on Norman's silver hilt sabre, and with your thoughts, it seems this information from Aylward provides some good support. Your radar is definitely on high definition my friend!!! All the best, Jim