Basket hilted swords

Jim McDougall · 13th April 2015, 08:24 PM

I would like to thank you guys for the input, and would add here that I am fully in accord with your views......here each weapon should be observed and discussed openly and with unrestricted discourse on all aspects.
My thinking was admittedly toward early writers on Scottish swords such as Whitelaw who noted he had deliberately avoided attention to blades on these as they were virtually all imported. Obviously a book on Scottish arms makers would be less than well served discussing German blades.

However, here we are observing and examining wonderful examples of these incarnations of the melding of trade and vintage blades and wonderfully fashioned hilts and to learn from the stories these components in union can share with us.

With that I am going to reintegrate the other thread into this one, where it might be in proper union in the same manner, and fully open to discussion.
While I can understand how certain subtopics can become distracting, I am confident participants here can successfully maintain proportion in the overall discussion.

Thank you very much guys!

Cathey · 14th April 2015, 06:46 AM

Dear Jim

My understanding is the Ethnographic Weapons forum exists to deal in detail with weapons such as African broadswords, kaskara and takouba etc, unless I am mistaken this is the European Armoury.

When I started this thread in January 2009, it proved very hard to keep going as I had hoped it would be devoted to the Basket hilted swords and draw out like minded enthusiasts. Thanks to Eljay’s contributions, for the first time I feel encouraged that it might actually take off. If someone visits the thread expecting to see basket hilts and get drowned in debate over African blades I am concerned that they will just move on and I suspect we will lose the opportunity to see what else is out there in the world of Basket hilted swords.

Regards Cathey

Jim McDougall · 14th April 2015, 03:38 PM

Hi Cathey,
Let me clarify what I was trying to say here. I do understand the 'debate' on African swords was becoming somewhat distracting as obviously an African made blade has nothing to do with discussion on Scottish basket hilts, that is 'technically'. However the crux of the points toward the kaskara blade were whether the moons were European (i.e. German, the primary provider of blades for Scottish hilts) or indeed 'African'. The reason that was important was in determining the congruence of this blade with the hilt.

While somewhat digressive, it was in degree relevant to the discussion. However, I did agree that the discussion was becoming more complex on the moons, notably a distinct anomaly on blades occurring with Scottish hilts, so I moved to a new thread accordingly.

When it came to the '1515' blade, my objective was to avoid another digression to 'blade discussion', however my thinking in that respect was completely misguided, as well pointed out by Ibrahiim and Jasper, and I'm sure you agree, these swords should be discussed comprehensively on all aspects.

Therefore, my suggestion was to return my attention to the '1515' blade to this thread, and eliminate the other thread on blades on Scottish swords....the one on the 'moons' remains as separate as per originally intended.

Indeed, this forum is intended to field discussions on European arms and armour, however on occasional the ethnographic field can of course become somewhat entwined due to colonial and trade circumstances. In my opinion discussions should not be so fragile as not to allow a sometimes broader spectrum of subject matter to be introduced as required. I do agree that these topics should remain incidental and not take over the original subject of discussion, as became the case with the moons and kaskara blade.

I sincerely apologize to you and the forum for this unintended interruption on this valuable thread, and hope we might continue this outstanding review of these most important Scottish swords......and their blades, together

The posts from the 'other' thread are joined here as posts #94 and #95.

Thank you again Cathy for this thread, and for your understanding.

All very best regards,
Jim

S.Workman · 14th April 2015, 11:11 PM

Well, I am an amateur on these swords and know little technically about them but they are some beautiful blades. That's pretty much the sum of my "input".

Jim McDougall · 15th April 2015, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S.Workman

Well, I am an amateur on these swords and know little technically about them but they are some beautiful blades. That's pretty much the sum of my "input".

The whole idea here is to learn from these weapons, which we are all doing together, so no such thing as an amateur....especially when one has the courage to step forward and make an entry regardless of status.
Thank you so much!

Very much agreed, the blades are intriguing, and offer us much toward learning more on the history of each sword as a whole.

On that note, I would ask more on a question Cathey directed to Eljay (post #89) concerning the Samuel Harvey mark often seen on British dragoon blades, in many cases initials SH in the running wolf.
It seems that at some point the 'S' was dropped and the 'H' stood alone on the 'wolf' (fox as termed in England).

I tried to find what I could on the Birmingham swordsmith Samuel Harvey, which apparently was the name of Samuel Sr. (b.1698) ; junior, and his son the third. Senior died in 1778; junior in 1795 and grandson in 1810.
Since all three had the same name , that would not be the cause of the omission of the S.

It would seem that there were a number of variations in marks, in that a slotted hilt (c.1780) had a crown over H/vey....some were marked S.Harvey with no fox.....some cavalry blades were inscribed Harvey and one example (I think in Neumann) has a fox with only the H, dating from 1750-68.

Does anyone have more data on variations of Harvey stamps?
While on many types of swords, some of the British dragoon basket hilts had Harvey blades......any examples?

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 15th April 2015, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The whole idea here is to learn from these weapons, which we are all doing together, so no such thing as an amateur....especially when one has the courage to step forward and make an entry regardless of status.
Thank you so much!

Very much agreed, the blades are intriguing, and offer us much toward learning more on the history of each sword as a whole.

On that note, I would ask more on a question Cathey directed to Eljay (post #89) concerning the Samuel Harvey mark often seen on British dragoon blades, in many cases initials SH in the running wolf.
It seems that at some point the 'S' was dropped and the 'H' stood alone on the 'wolf' (fox as termed in England).

I tried to find what I could on the Birmingham swordsmith Samuel Harvey, which apparently was the name of Samuel Sr. (b.1698) ; junior, and his son the third. Senior died in 1778; junior in 1795 and grandson in 1810.
Since all three had the same name , that would not be the cause of the omission of the S.

It would seem that there were a number of variations in marks, in that a slotted hilt (c.1780) had a crown over H/vey....some were marked S.Harvey with no fox.....some cavalry blades were inscribed Harvey and one example (I think in Neumann) has a fox with only the H, dating from 1750-68.

Does anyone have more data on variations of Harvey stamps?
While on many types of swords, some of the British dragoon basket hilts had Harvey blades......any examples?

Salaams Jim, Yes!!....Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ht=blade+marks at #196

There is another with just an H inside the Running Fox at#15 ON http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?86414-Samuel-Harvey-question-(British-sword-maker)

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Jim McDougall · 16th April 2015, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Jim, Yes!!....Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ht=blade+marks at #196

There is another with just an H inside the Running Fox at#15 ON http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?86414-Samuel-Harvey-question-(British-sword-maker)

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Thanks so much Ibrahiim, and I was going through old notes last night and found some discussions in which Eljay was indeed included and my notes from 2008. Apparantly there were notable variations in the stamps and inscriptions used by Samuel Harvey Sr,; Junior, and grandson the third. Many had the name or initial and no fox, but the fox with SH was well known, in c.1750. The fox with simple 'H' seems an anomaly as the number of them seems limited.
In my thinking, various means of marking and signing blades was not necessarily a chronological development, so trying to establish a date period with a mark probably not that reliable. I know that is the case with the running wolf marks of Passau/ Solingen contrary to the Wagner plate showing examples with period. These were pretty much free form and varied widely in any time of application.

PS thanks for the link to that thread.....the good ole days!

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 30th August 2015, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The whole idea here is to learn from these weapons, which we are all doing together, so no such thing as an amateur....especially when one has the courage to step forward and make an entry regardless of status.
Thank you so much!

Very much agreed, the blades are intriguing, and offer us much toward learning more on the history of each sword as a whole.

On that note, I would ask more on a question Cathey directed to Eljay (post #89) concerning the Samuel Harvey mark often seen on British dragoon blades, in many cases initials SH in the running wolf.
It seems that at some point the 'S' was dropped and the 'H' stood alone on the 'wolf' (fox as termed in England).

I tried to find what I could on the Birmingham swordsmith Samuel Harvey, which apparently was the name of Samuel Sr. (b.1698) ; junior, and his son the third. Senior died in 1778; junior in 1795 and grandson in 1810.
Since all three had the same name , that would not be the cause of the omission of the S.

It would seem that there were a number of variations in marks, in that a slotted hilt (c.1780) had a crown over H/vey....some were marked S.Harvey with no fox.....some cavalry blades were inscribed Harvey and one example (I think in Neumann) has a fox with only the H, dating from 1750-68.

Does anyone have more data on variations of Harvey stamps?
While on many types of swords, some of the British dragoon basket hilts had Harvey blades......any examples?

Salaams Jim, I stumbled upon this http://drbenjaminchurchjr.blogspot.c...3_archive.html which examines the Hounslow Factory(and a possible copy of a sword in the USA) and indicates that the H in the Fox is from that Foundry...thus perhaps not the Harvey designation. I have somewhere in a pile of notes a sword photo with the Harvey stamp in a block with HAR then VEY underneath.

Salaams Cathey ~ May this have a bearing on your #154 and #156. The single H being for Hounslow not Harvey?

Quote" A "Hounslow Mark" was placed on a sword manufactured in Great Britain by the Hounslow Sword Factory, established in 1629 when a number of German swordsmiths emigrated from the continent to England to begin work at a sword factory, located in Hounslow about 12 miles just to the west of London, that was established by an entrepreneur named Benjamin Stone. The different swordmakers put their individual marks on the blades they manufactured but some put their names on instead. Many blades were left unmarked. Not a great deal is known about the individual marks but the swords produced by the Hounslow factory were the best made in England, even if they did not quite match the quality of the swords made on the continent. The Hounslow factory made thousands of blades and swords".Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Cathey · 6th September 2015, 02:18 AM

Hi Ibrahiim al Balooshi

I thought you may have solved this mystery until I looked at the dates Hounslow was in business. I have gone through a few articles on the Hounslow makers and whilst two of these show pictures of the fox with the H and describe this as an authentic Hounslow mark, there is no historical link in the body of the articles to support this or link it with a particular maker.

It appears Hounslow opened for business in 1620 and ceased manufacturing in 1660, which in some cases is earlier than a number of blades I have seen that bear this particular mark.

One explanation might be that a family that left the Hounslow business continued to use the mark into the 1700’s. Time wise the Harvey family remain a better fit for the dates of swords bearing this variation on the fox mark which we do know they used. Also apart from the missing S, the fox mark is virtually identical to the one used by Harvey.

If we could find a link between the Harvey’s and Hounslow then we might be on to something.

Cheers Cathey

14th April 2015, 06:46 AM	#2
Cathey Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: adelaide south australia Posts: 284	Ethnographic Weapons Dear Jim My understanding is the Ethnographic Weapons forum exists to deal in detail with weapons such as African broadswords, kaskara and takouba etc, unless I am mistaken this is the European Armoury. When I started this thread in January 2009, it proved very hard to keep going as I had hoped it would be devoted to the Basket hilted swords and draw out like minded enthusiasts. Thanks to Eljay’s contributions, for the first time I feel encouraged that it might actually take off. If someone visits the thread expecting to see basket hilts and get drowned in debate over African blades I am concerned that they will just move on and I suspect we will lose the opportunity to see what else is out there in the world of Basket hilted swords. Regards Cathey Last edited by Cathey; 14th April 2015 at 08:29 AM.

14th April 2015, 03:38 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,469	Hi Cathey, Let me clarify what I was trying to say here. I do understand the 'debate' on African swords was becoming somewhat distracting as obviously an African made blade has nothing to do with discussion on Scottish basket hilts, that is 'technically'. However the crux of the points toward the kaskara blade were whether the moons were European (i.e. German, the primary provider of blades for Scottish hilts) or indeed 'African'. The reason that was important was in determining the congruence of this blade with the hilt. While somewhat digressive, it was in degree relevant to the discussion. However, I did agree that the discussion was becoming more complex on the moons, notably a distinct anomaly on blades occurring with Scottish hilts, so I moved to a new thread accordingly. When it came to the '1515' blade, my objective was to avoid another digression to 'blade discussion', however my thinking in that respect was completely misguided, as well pointed out by Ibrahiim and Jasper, and I'm sure you agree, these swords should be discussed comprehensively on all aspects. Therefore, my suggestion was to return my attention to the '1515' blade to this thread, and eliminate the other thread on blades on Scottish swords....the one on the 'moons' remains as separate as per originally intended. Indeed, this forum is intended to field discussions on European arms and armour, however on occasional the ethnographic field can of course become somewhat entwined due to colonial and trade circumstances. In my opinion discussions should not be so fragile as not to allow a sometimes broader spectrum of subject matter to be introduced as required. I do agree that these topics should remain incidental and not take over the original subject of discussion, as became the case with the moons and kaskara blade. I sincerely apologize to you and the forum for this unintended interruption on this valuable thread, and hope we might continue this outstanding review of these most important Scottish swords......and their blades, together The posts from the 'other' thread are joined here as posts #94 and #95. Thank you again Cathy for this thread, and for your understanding. All very best regards, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 14th April 2015 at 04:06 PM.

13th April 2015, 08:24 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,469	I would like to thank you guys for the input, and would add here that I am fully in accord with your views......here each weapon should be observed and discussed openly and with unrestricted discourse on all aspects. My thinking was admittedly toward early writers on Scottish swords such as Whitelaw who noted he had deliberately avoided attention to blades on these as they were virtually all imported. Obviously a book on Scottish arms makers would be less than well served discussing German blades. However, here we are observing and examining wonderful examples of these incarnations of the melding of trade and vintage blades and wonderfully fashioned hilts and to learn from the stories these components in union can share with us. With that I am going to reintegrate the other thread into this one, where it might be in proper union in the same manner, and fully open to discussion. While I can understand how certain subtopics can become distracting, I am confident participants here can successfully maintain proportion in the overall discussion. Thank you very much guys!

14th April 2015, 11:11 PM	#4
S.Workman Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 116	Well, I am an amateur on these swords and know little technically about them but they are some beautiful blades. That's pretty much the sum of my "input".

6th September 2015, 02:18 AM	#9
Cathey Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: adelaide south australia Posts: 284	Fox with H = Hounslow? Hi Ibrahiim al Balooshi I thought you may have solved this mystery until I looked at the dates Hounslow was in business. I have gone through a few articles on the Hounslow makers and whilst two of these show pictures of the fox with the H and describe this as an authentic Hounslow mark, there is no historical link in the body of the articles to support this or link it with a particular maker. It appears Hounslow opened for business in 1620 and ceased manufacturing in 1660, which in some cases is earlier than a number of blades I have seen that bear this particular mark. One explanation might be that a family that left the Hounslow business continued to use the mark into the 1700’s. Time wise the Harvey family remain a better fit for the dates of swords bearing this variation on the fox mark which we do know they used. Also apart from the missing S, the fox mark is virtually identical to the one used by Harvey. If we could find a link between the Harvey’s and Hounslow then we might be on to something. Cheers Cathey