Silver mounted Georgian hanger.

Jim McDougall · 3rd March 2009, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi Jim,
Many thanks for the extra info. Do you really think it might Cavalry? I just assumed because the blade was only 26 3/4 inches it would be too short for use on horseback although dismounted would be fine. The only dedicated Cavalry Sabre I have is a Wilkinson 1821 Pattern Heavy Cavalry Officers Undress Sword which has a 36 inch blade so obviously quite a bit longer. I do remember the Tulwar Side Arm we talked about that had a short blade but it was early 20th Century and probably very much secondary to multi shot firearms. In the 18th century I would think the sword would have considerable more importance as most firearms were single shot and not without difficulty in terms of reloading. With regard to the initials contained within the oval cartouche stamped on the guard would they be the silversmith's or the cutler's mark? I can make out a T but the second letter is not easy to see so I have arranged to take the sword to a local jeweller in the hope that he can give me a positive I.D. on the initials. As far as I can see there are no date or assay stamps so if I can find the name of the hiltmaker I reckon I can get a time frame within which the sword would have been made. Will post more info as it becomes available.
My Regards,
Norman.

This would be a dress sabre, and these were often noticeably short as the longer swords were clumsy and most antisocial at events where these would have been worn. Officers typically carried more practical 'fighting swords' in combat, and these were of course usually more substantial. Despite the pretty swords often depicted in artwork of the period, these were often the artists licence, perhaps depicting actual dress swords in interpretations of celebrated battle events or portraiture. In this period, infantry officers swords seemed more of the courtsword, smallsword type. I think the advice everyone is suggesting on the hallmarks are great ideas.

Military fashion of the late 18th into the 19th century where regulation patterns began being recognized, officers had dress swords, undress for less formal events and often the fighting swords for campaign use. Naturally there were exceptions, but then that is always the case.

All the best,
Jim

Norman McCormick · 3rd March 2009, 11:22 AM

Hi Jim,
Didn't realise it was used as a dress item only. Am not sure what you mean by the advice re the hallmarks, there are no visible hallmarks that I can see only a makers mark, that's not to say there not there and I'm just missing them, but I think any hallmarks are being obscured by the hilt where it meets the guard it would be great if they were visible two minutes and I would have a date. Bonhams are having a 'Silver Day' in Glasgow on the 24th of this month I will take it along and see what an expert on 18th Cent silver can tell me.
My Regards,
Norman.

Jim McDougall · 4th March 2009, 06:40 PM

Hi Norman,
The reason I was suggesting dress sabre was simply due to the nature of the hilt components. Ivory and silver would tend to add to the fragility of the hilt, and seem to defer from combat choice. However, that is not to say an officer would not take it on campaign, as it is certainly still effective as a weapon, regardless of being more highly prone to damage.
Officers as previously mentioned, were highly inclined to flamboyance, so I suppose how to properly classify this sabre would be subjective.

The stamped marking in the hilt I would consider a hallmark, as typically hilts were not marked by makers, and virtually all silverwork items required being hallmarked. The exception I can think of pertaining to makers stamping names into hilts, ironically was on a brass lionhead, ivory grip and gadrooned example quite similar to this. In cartouche on the hilt in somewhat similar location was the name READ. This was John Read, Birmingham from what I can recall (its been quite a few years). The blade was the straight, long cavalry blade of c.1770's.
I really look forward to what the silver experts will say. The great thing about hallmarks is they were so stringently regulated and catalogued. The title by Leslie Southwick may have those pertaining to weapon makers, but I cant recall.

All the best,
Jim

fernando · 4th March 2009, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hi Norman,
The reason I was suggesting dress sabre was simply due to the nature of the hilt components. Ivory and silver would tend to add to the fragility of the hilt, and seem to defer from combat choice. However, that is not to say an officer would not take it on campaign, as it is certainly still effective as a weapon, regardless of being more highly prone to damage.
Officers as previously mentioned, were highly inclined to flamboyance, so I suppose how to properly classify this sabre would be subjective...

Amen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... The stamped marking in the hilt I would consider a hallmark, as typically hilts were not marked by makers, and virtually all silverwork items required being hallmarked....

I also think silver hilts would be hall marked in a general manner, and not as 'weaponry silver'... Britain and elsewhere.
The British system follows basically the pattern here illustrated.
If this sword (hilt) was British made, and judging by the orientation of that letter T, this could be the initial of the maker, assuming the little probability of the remaining symbols, which have to be horizontaly aligned, be hidden beneath the grip mount.
The last letter in the hallmark symbol sequence is the 'date letter', a system as old as beg. XVIII century, i would say. It is a precious symbol for dating and placing British silver stuff. There are lists with these letters, where one can see, depending on which letter, its font and the shape of 'estucheon' is inserted in, the date and city where the item was made ... better say, marked.
But this would not be the case of the letter in Norman's sword hilt, i guess.
Fernando

.

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

Norman McCormick · 5th March 2009, 07:24 PM

Hi Guys,
I'm betting the other marks, date, assay and place, as I proposed earlier, are hidden under the base of the hilt, to access this means dismounting the blade MMMMM????? Thoughts????????? My trip to Bonhams later on this month may elicit the makers name and the years which they were active, this info may have to be as near as I can get without the aforesaid dismounting. Will have to wait and see, will keep you posted.
My Regards,
Norman.

Norman McCormick · 6th March 2009, 08:07 PM

Hi,
After consulting with the Curator of European Edged Weapons at the Royal Armouries in Leeds he confirmed what I already surmised i.e. to dismount this sword to determine precisely actual age and place of manufacture would compromise the historical integrity of the piece. I will, as I said, take the sword to a silver expert in the hope that he/she will at least be able to identify the manufacturer of the silver mounts and that may give a smaller time frame within which I can place the sword. This style of sword did not last for very long so it is not as if we could be a century or so out. It is unfortunate, with British silver being so accurately marked, that the answers are so near and yet so far.

Regards,
Norman.

4th March 2009, 06:40 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,200	Hi Norman, The reason I was suggesting dress sabre was simply due to the nature of the hilt components. Ivory and silver would tend to add to the fragility of the hilt, and seem to defer from combat choice. However, that is not to say an officer would not take it on campaign, as it is certainly still effective as a weapon, regardless of being more highly prone to damage. Officers as previously mentioned, were highly inclined to flamboyance, so I suppose how to properly classify this sabre would be subjective. The stamped marking in the hilt I would consider a hallmark, as typically hilts were not marked by makers, and virtually all silverwork items required being hallmarked. The exception I can think of pertaining to makers stamping names into hilts, ironically was on a brass lionhead, ivory grip and gadrooned example quite similar to this. In cartouche on the hilt in somewhat similar location was the name READ. This was John Read, Birmingham from what I can recall (its been quite a few years). The blade was the straight, long cavalry blade of c.1770's. I really look forward to what the silver experts will say. The great thing about hallmarks is they were so stringently regulated and catalogued. The title by Leslie Southwick may have those pertaining to weapon makers, but I cant recall. All the best, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 4th March 2009 at 07:17 PM.

3rd March 2009, 11:22 AM	#2
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Hi Jim, Didn't realise it was used as a dress item only. Am not sure what you mean by the advice re the hallmarks, there are no visible hallmarks that I can see only a makers mark, that's not to say there not there and I'm just missing them, but I think any hallmarks are being obscured by the hilt where it meets the guard it would be great if they were visible two minutes and I would have a date. Bonhams are having a 'Silver Day' in Glasgow on the 24th of this month I will take it along and see what an expert on 18th Cent silver can tell me. My Regards, Norman.

5th March 2009, 06:05 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,200	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, 07:24 PM	#6
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Hi Guys, I'm betting the other marks, date, assay and place, as I proposed earlier, are hidden under the base of the hilt, to access this means dismounting the blade MMMMM????? Thoughts????????? My trip to Bonhams later on this month may elicit the makers name and the years which they were active, this info may have to be as near as I can get without the aforesaid dismounting. Will have to wait and see, will keep you posted. My Regards, Norman.

6th March 2009, 08:07 PM	#7
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Hi, After consulting with the Curator of European Edged Weapons at the Royal Armouries in Leeds he confirmed what I already surmised i.e. to dismount this sword to determine precisely actual age and place of manufacture would compromise the historical integrity of the piece. I will, as I said, take the sword to a silver expert in the hope that he/she will at least be able to identify the manufacturer of the silver mounts and that may give a smaller time frame within which I can place the sword. This style of sword did not last for very long so it is not as if we could be a century or so out. It is unfortunate, with British silver being so accurately marked, that the answers are so near and yet so far. Regards, Norman.