Hi Bryce,
Thank you very much for these insights.
it seems Robson mentions early in the century that the crowned view or acceptance process used numbers for certain makers for example '9' for Gill and 4 and 6, I think for Wooley and Osborn. It seems like in these early times there was a great deal of push and pull trying to establish some sort of consistency and control in administrative regulation.
The use of HO on these early examples of 1796 by Osborn is interesting and in all the references on British swords, this kind of data is markedly (no pun intended) absent.
It is interesting that an example with HO exists with the more common name on the blade spine next to hilt concurrently. I suppose that would be due to the name being placed by maker at mfg. and the other being placed at proof center on acceptance.
Perhaps these capital letter stamps were an identifying device used by the blade makers themselves in the sale of their blades to purveyors (such as Ketland) which were being sent to American cutlers or brokers such as Upson in New York. This must be who so much data regarding these capital letter stamps is found in a reference on American officers swords, while it is so noticeably absent n references on British swords.
|