Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotspur
That goes back to the possibilities of older crown over initials, or even numbers, as Loades writes.
Cheers
GC
|
Wholeheartedly agree that your sword predates the 1796 patterns. My point by bringing in the examples from the Dutch Army Museum is to provide conclusive evidence that Loades is incorrect in his assumption that the Crown over a number stamp ordinance marks are for specific sword makers.
I believe that your sword would have been an officer's private purchase so is unlikely to have been inspected by the ordinance board in any case. Which means that the stamp was likely to be an internal practice by the sword maker. Like the Osborn and Jeffries examples Bryce gives.
In absence of other examples and the early date of your sword (quite possibly from the beginning years of T Gills' career), Thomas Gill is a good candidate.