Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 27 of 27

Thread: Someone really really wanted it

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    791
    Thanks Simon. Quite an elaborate hilt. especially for an early 1820s sword. It rather reinforces my guess that the sword on the top of this thread is probably roughly contemporary with this one. Glen still seems to believe an 1840s date is more likely based on the hilt design. Perhaps so, but that seems a bit late for B&G, and brings up the related question of just when did B&G stop being routinely used to decorate officer sword blades? I haven't done any real study of the issue, but if pressed for a WAG I'd say sometime in the 1830s. Any thoughts?

    Another factor that leads me to believe that, if it is a Navy sword, the top sword is prior to the 1840s is that in the 1840s the Navy had a standard pattern established by regulation to which I believe most officers would conform. Unlike the Army, there were no Navy militia units to provide a market for non-regulation patterns. On the other hand, there was a merchant marine, and this may have provided such a market if these civilian ships' officers carried swords. Do any of you forum members know if this was the practice? I've often speculated this might explain the relatively large number of clam shell-hilted swords with nautical themes on the counterguards. The Navy was very small in the first half of the 19th century, and the number of such nautical-themed swords seem to far exceed what would have been needed to equip all the officers serving during that time period.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Nipmuc USA
    Posts
    12,049
    Glen still seems to believe an 1840s date is more likely based on the hilt design. Perhaps so, but that seems a bit late for B&G, and brings up the related question of just when did B&G stop being routinely used to decorate officer sword blades?
    I think it is important not to misinterpret what I have been writing. Please do reread what I have posted in this thread. If I have to repost everything I have posted, it is a grand waste of my time.

    I have indicated that I am not regarding the blade at all, in terms of my impression of the hilt and if you go back to the first page, I am writing it as a hunch and quite likely. My impressions without proof.

    Secondly, I would remind all again that blades were available for decades and that yes indeed, we see b&g blades and complete swords in the 1840s. Writing of this becomes a bit exhausting when posting it time and again. One need only look at Horstmann in the issue. C'mon be real

    I also posted that the sword might also be earlier regarding naval swords of the 1830s. I may have been as brief as a couple of words but of course there were other possibilities for use. How many academies? How much demand for a dress swords, inland and coastal (aside from the revenue cutters). Sure, lump in the merchant marine.

    I could write another paragraph or so about the sword Simon posted but it has more to do why some of the Widmann marked swords share this bird while other examples don't. Why some might list this knuckle guard to Widmann and others don't. So, let's go to the object sword and convince me that hilt (ignore the blade) belongs to the 1820s, or iist it an overlap to regulation swords in the early 1930s (as I have previously posted), or is it really as likely to be the 1840s (Mexican war period) which I had initially posted as a hunch.

    That would be my installment for today and feel free to quote all of my posts in this thread, then print it out so that my thoughts can be read with some continuity.

    Cheers

    GC

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •