Pinch of Snuff Basket-hilt

[Radboud]

This week I received a new sword for my collection, a basket-hilted broadsword with a brass ‘pinch of snuff’ hilt. The hilt derives its name from the 18th Century painting that shows a highlander taking a pinch of snuff. On his side is a basket hilt with this style of basket.

Based on this, it is believed that the style relates to the early to mid 18th Century.

My sword is a composite with an older 17th cent. London made blade. The blade is also shorter and lighter than one normally would expect and the edge shows signs of having repairs to the edge. The grip is a later repair as is the pommel (as informed by the dealer I purchased it from).

The blade is marked:
Thomas Hvmffreies
Londin Fecit
Anno 1668

Has anyone else encountered a blade by Thomas?

[Battara]

What a great example. Congratulations! I love this.

I agree that the blade does look older than the bronze basket.

[Jim McDougall]

This is truly a wonderful acquisition! and these hilts, as noted known colloquially by collectors as the 'pinch of snuff' style are not often seen, though well known. The elaborate styling and character is of the Stirling form, and interesting in brass. It seems that brass in Scottish hilts did exist c.1720s however it was more favored for officers dress swords.

While in Scottish form, this would be more a Hanoverian example, and the wire wrapped rayskin grip, and form altogether remind me of a British dragoon officers sword with branched guard I had many years ago, also in brass contrary to other examples of its form in iron.

The phrase 'pinch of snuff' of course refers to the c.1760 painting by William Delacour of an officer of the 78th or Fraser's Regiment of Highlanders, in which a sword with similar hilt is seen. While the history of this regiment is complex, as noted by Anthony Darling in "A Relic of the First Raising (1757-1763) of Frasers Highlanders" ('Arms Collecting' Vol.24, #4, Nov. 1986), the painting by Delacour was intended as a homage to Malcom MacPherson of the 78th Regt.

This form of hilt was deemed a 'military' pattern, though it was by no means regulation, though clearly favored by officers of these times (during the Seven Years War).

Other excerpts attached are from "Blades of Glory: Swords of the Scottish Infantry 1756-1900", Stephen Wood , in 'Book of Edged Weapons' 1997.

"Scottish Swords and Dirks", John Wallace, 1970. #44.

It seems likely this is a heirloom blade, as often were mounted in current hilts by officers in Scottish regiments. This blade is remarkable, and in unusual fuller pattern in which the name, lettering and manner are quite consistent with 17th c. English blades.
The Latin type manner in wording is like that seen on Hounslow blades of the 1630s, with the use of ANNO in following apparently with the Solingen convention of this date associated word used by Iohannes Stam for example on blade ANNO 1612. However other examples of ANNO are found with the magic numeric palindrome 1414, obviously not a date.

I have not found a THOMAS HUMFFRIES in any of my references, but the spelling is consistent with other names and widely variant spellings in this English convention of placing names on blades. It seems possible that he might have worked in the Oxford manufactory in London where many of the Hounslow workers are alleged to have gone after Cromwells take over.
Perhaps Southwick (which I do not have handy at the moment) might reveal this name.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Here is one in a similar vein which was sold last year. It has an interesting plaque on the blade which I would suggest was accurately described thus-:

"Note: The applied 19th century gold plaque reads ‘The claymore was once the property of the Unfortunate Prince Charles and worn by him at the Battle of Culloden, after his defeat it fell into the hands of CAPt DRUMMOND of his suite who gave it to the late ROBt GRAHAM of Gartmore Esq’.
Although the information on the plaque surely cannot be correct, this sword is neither a claymore nor a pattern known at the time of the ‘45 it shows the great historical value placed on relics of this period by the early 19th century."

Regards,
Norman.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi,
Here is one in a similar vein which was sold last year. It has an interesting plaque on the blade which I would suggest was accurately described thus-:

Note: The applied 19th century gold plaque reads ‘The claymore was once the property of the Unfortunate Prince Charles and worn by him at the Battle of Culloden, after his defeat it fell into the hands of CAPt DRUMMOND of his suite who gave it to the late ROBt GRAHAM of Gartmore Esq’.

Although the information on the plaque surely cannot be correct, this sword is neither a claymore nor a pattern known at the time of the ‘45 it shows the great historical value placed on relics of this period by the early 19th century.

Regards,
Norman.

As you well note, this 'pattern' was not known in the time of the '45, and probably not around until early 1760s, most certainly not anything to do with Prince Charlie. There was a great fervor from early 19th century in England having to do with celebrating Highland heritage,tartans, antiquities etc. Sensationalizing items to purport glorified historical provenance is hardly unique (we see it constantly in hubris laden arms for sale).

Still the sword is an interesting item in its own right as an example of this type of sword which has is known but hardly seen often.

The term 'claymore' is another of the ever distorted terms in the realm of collectors jargon. It actually of course means 'great sword' and refers to the large two handers, but later became colloquially aligned with the well known basket hilt, which were not of course called that by the Scots.

[Jim McDougall]

I found the image I was looking for of the British dragoon officers sword with branched guard that I once had. While these are typically of iron as seen here and other references, mine was with brass hilt. The wire and rayskin grip was similar.

It seems that as officers swords of course were privately commissioned there was a certain penchant for gilt hilts, which often were done over brass.
It would seem that here we have examples of officers swords on this period, 1760s, which were done in brass perhaps for such application.

The image is from "the British Basket Hilted Cavalry Sword" by A.D.Darling,
'The Canadian Journal of Arms Collecting" Vo.7, #3, 1974

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi,
Here is one in a similar vein which was sold last year. It has an interesting plaque on the blade which I would suggest was accurately described thus-:

"Note: The applied 19th century gold plaque reads ‘The claymore was once the property of the Unfortunate Prince Charles and worn by him at the Battle of Culloden, after his defeat it fell into the hands of CAPt DRUMMOND of his suite who gave it to the late ROBt GRAHAM of Gartmore Esq’.
Although the information on the plaque surely cannot be correct, this sword is neither a claymore nor a pattern known at the time of the ‘45 it shows the great historical value placed on relics of this period by the early 19th century."

Regards,
Norman.

I fpund this reference in "Arms and Armour: The Northern Branch Arms and Armour Society", Manchester, 1968, plate 6.

In the text it mentions Sir Walter Scott, Rob Roy, and the associated allusions thereby,and that it is 'reputed' that two swords in Culloden House at the turn of the century (similar hilts) were 'assumed' to have been picked up off the field after the 45.
There is no mention of the 'pinch of snuff' phrase of course, and it is worthy of note that only 193 swords were found there after the battle. Prince Charlie was of course not a combatant, and was heavily guarded as he made his escape.
Of the 193 swords picked up, the rancor toward them is best described by the fact that a large number of these were dismantled and placed in the abhorrent 'twickenham fence' where they were disgraced being welded into this horrible work.

It is interesting here to see the probable root of this hubris laden description on the example shown from auction. While the attached plate is like most of these cases, entirely apocryphal, the 'romantic' in many of us wish it to be true. Who knows, maybe the hilt form existed before Delacour depicted it c. 1760.