Shotley Bridge swordmakers

[urbanspaceman]

Ignore that earlier statement, I am now appearing instantly; thank-you Mr. Moderator.
Unfortunately the images I've just posted are out of stated sequence: so my sword is the one with the bone grip and the faded fox.

[urbanspaceman]

I haven't researched this issue yet, but it looks to me like the inscribing of Shotle & Bridg, or in some cases the full name Shotley Bridge, was an earlier practice restricted to Broad Swords. If Solingen imports were being passed off as SB swords then perhaps this is why they restricted indications to simply the fox/wolf.
Also, referring to an issue raised earlier , surely blade marking would have to be applied after grinding and polishing?

[urbanspaceman]

I mentioned earlier that my first encounter with the tale of the SB sword-makers was through the reading of David Richardson's book (published by Frank Graham in 1973 and long since unavailable) and I want to return to this work because he, more than anyone before or since, did so much detailed research (the hard way) that each chapter is a mine of information. There is one chapter, however, that gives light to a period much discussed but rarely substantiated. I don't know if I can link a pdf of this chapter into my post but I will attempt it; it might be too large. Failing that, I will simply paste the writings into a post. A pdf is better because it can be saved for future reference.
Incidentally, David Richardson was the grandson of Mary Oley.[IMG]

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

I mentioned earlier that my first encounter with the tale of the SB sword-makers was through the reading of David Richardson's book (published by Frank Graham in 1973 and long since unavailable) and I want to return to this work because he, more than anyone before or since, did so much detailed research (the hard way) that each chapter is a mine of information. There is one chapter, however, that gives light to a period much discussed but rarely substantiated. I don't know if I can link a pdf of this chapter into my post but I will attempt it; it might be too large. Failing that, I will simply paste the writings into a post. A pdf is better because it can be saved for future reference.
Incidentally, David Richardson was the grandson of Mary Oley.[IMG]

File Type: pdf Richardson chapter reduced.pdf see above #50

Salaams Keith ~A stunning revelation and a must for every member to hoist in ~ This passage is amazing. It ends with the question somewhat tantalizing but perhaps not totally answered Quote" My own opinion (that of the author) inclines to the view that no machines were set up
at Shotley Bridge and that hollow blades were nevertheless produced in
some quantity by hand. Otherwise, if machines had been set up and
hollow blades mass produced in consequence, then the fortunes would
have been made of everyone concerned." Unquote.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It occurred to me that the smuggling in and out of swords from Shotley Bridge had been going on for some time supported by the pdf just shown..These swords appeared to be moved in bulk and either abroad or more likely onto the London market...Could it be that they went to market not with Shotley Bridge markings...but with Solingen...since that is probably where they came from smuggled in...By Mohll ... It seems inconceivable that Shotley did not have a machine to hollow ground these items ~ unless they were all fully ground in Germany? Was the Shotley factory therefor(in the case of Hollow Ground Weapons) only fitting up blades with hilts and scabbards? and for the London specialist officers and gentlemens outfitter market. Was Mohll by sleight of hand and the fact that he must have had German friends and associates in London moving these blades through London markets ...as German imports? It seems to me that if there was machinery at Shotley bridge then he would not have needed to smuggle stuff half finished/threequarter finished? On the other hand I agree that if there had been a machine at Shotley to do hollow grinding why the subterfuge in smuggling in and out . And the fact that they would have made a fortune if they did have the means to opperate machinery for hollow grinding there....

So I suggest...sword blades were being imported by Shotley already hollow ground and virtually complete except for hilts and scabbards...and a polish up. Mohll was the wheeler dealer fetching in and taking out to London markets fully refurbished/ refinished Solingen Hollow Blade swords...It could also be that hilts were added by the London hilt makers plus scabbards...leaving only the refinishing of blades...to Shotley.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams Jim, I have to include this...

From http://www.rapper.org.uk/archive/shotley_swords.pdf

Quote"The historic record would be incomplete without
some reference to the employment of the Oleys af-
forded to the skilled metal engravers of Newcastle,
and more especially to the great renovator of English
wood engraving, during his apprenticeship to Ralph
Beilby. Thomas Bewick was articled to Beilby on the
1st
of October, 1767. “The first jobs I was put to,” he
says, “were – blocking out the wood about the lines
on the diagrams (which my master finished) for the
‘Ladies’ diary,’ on which he was employed by Charles
Hutton (afterwards Dr. Hutton), and etching the
sword-blades for William and Nicholas Oley, sword
manufacturers, &c., at Shotley Bridge.”"Unquote.

What is interesting and has yet to be unpicked is the sword at thread blade marked W HARVEY. and since there is no W Harvey in the Harvey line up who was that?... There is however a William Harvey who was a pupil under Thomas Bewick above; engraver. Could this be the same W Harvey of Birmingham who was listed as a Sword Maker but later on in proceedings and becoming somewhat clouded in the chronology but seemingly fitting the bill as the W Harvey Birmingham Sword Maker..A sideline but interesting.

That particular piece of the jigsaw can be seen at http://americansocietyofarmscollecto...2_Darling1.pdf

Here is the business card of W Harvey

It states that M1751 hangers were still being used by British NCOs in the mid 19th C see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/printthread.php?t=10515

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Another potential piece of this amazing story is the Royal lineage that developed placing a German King on the English throne ... here you may note the inclusion of the collapsing South Sea Company...which you may recall was so wrapped up in the Shotley proceedings with financiers in the city, big names, Royalty and world trade including slavery. Also of interest is the potential inclusion in our story of the Jacobite situation and resupply of arms thereto...for which Mohll had landed up in Morpeth jail for a month for smuggling swords thought to be for the Jacobites for which he was found not guilty.

Note~ From http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/histori...e_i_king.shtml

Quote"George was elector of Hanover and, from 1714, the first Hanoverian king of Great Britain.

George was born on 28 Mary 1660 in Hanover, Germany, the eldest son of the Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg. In 1682, George married his cousin Sophia and they had two children. A decade later, he divorced her for alleged infidelity and imprisoned her in a castle until her death in 1726.

In 1701, under the Act of Settlement, George's mother Sophia was nominated heiress to the English throne if the reigning monarch William III and his heir Anne died without issue. The Act sought to guarantee a Protestant succession and George's mother was the closest Protestant relative, although there were at least 50 Catholic relatives whose claims were stronger. The Electress Sophia and Anne died in quick succession and George became king in August 1714.

The following year George was faced with a rebellion by the Jacobites, supporters of the Catholic James Stuart, who had a strong claim to the throne. This was concentrated mainly in Scotland, and was suppressed by the end of the year. Another smaller rebellion in 1719 was not a serious threat.

With some Tories sympathetic to the Jacobites, George turned to the Whigs to form a government, and they were to dominate politics for the next generation. Opposition to the king gathered around George's only son, the prince of Wales, making their already poor relationship even worse.

George was active in British foreign policy in the early years of his reign. His shrewd diplomatic judgment enabled him to help forge an anti-Spanish alliance with France in 1717 - 1718.

In 1720 the South Sea Company, with heavy government, royal and aristocratic investment, collapsed. The resulting economic crisis made the king and his ministers extremely unpopular. Robert Walpole was left as the most important figure in the administration and in April 1721 was appointed first lord of the Treasury and in effect, 'prime minister'. His ascendancy coincided with the decline of the political power of the monarchy and George became less and less involved in government.

George remained unpopular in England throughout his life, partly because of his inability to speak English but also because of the perceived greed of his mistresses and rumours concerning his treatment of his wife." Unquote.

[Peter Hudson]

Please see post 53 To this and the information in post 321 above...some clarity...On W. HARVEY HIGH ST. DERITEND, BIRMINGHAM, SWORDMAKER;
and the Conundrum of W.HARVEY who appears there as a swordmaker and with the co incidental same name of an engraver who worked under Bewick etc etc ...
At last I have a clearer idea who this Sword Maker was and it can be seen at https://www.antique-swords.com/v09-1...er-harvey.html what sort of swords he made In a parallel search I also realised that the W Harvey mentioned by Thomas Bewick and who was one of his apprentice engravers is not the same W Harvey... which tidies up that somewhat. Peter Hudson.


.