Federalist sword

[Hotspur]

Originally Posted by Jeff D

All side issues, but, sure I will bite. Nowhere, in 1954 edition, does the description of sword #18 say the hilt is of German manufacture. I am not sure what you want.
To my knowledge not a single brass lion pommel and grip is discussed in Mowbrey's work. I have reviewed the text and you are talking about apples when the topic is oranges.
Ok I have answered you, now tell me where in the Medicus discredits the Brazelon article.

All the Best
Jeff

My Revised edition 1996. Is it different than his description?

18. "American Light Horse" Saber, 1785-1800

One of the sabers of the immediately post-Revolutionary period that has succeeded in capturing the imagination of sword collectors is a German made weapon that has received the designation...

The conclusion of that paragraph/description of the sword describes the cast grip lion pommel of #18.

In an earlier post, I mention the bulk of his writing of #18 is about the overall bulk of similar sabers with organic and bound grips but otherwise similar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You might find this interesting in the light of Bazelon and his notes on Prahl and found elsewhere.

Northern Liberties Of Philadelphiaa, May 22nd, 1777.

To the Honourable Thomas Wharton, Junior, Esquire, President and Commander-in-Chief of the State of Pennsylvania, <tea.:

The Petition of Lewis Prahl of the Northern Liberties of the City of Philadelphia, Gunsmith, Most Respectfully Sheweth:

That your Honours petitioner entered into a Contract with Colonel Benjamin Flower to furnish him with One thousand Swords for the Use of the Horsemen raised in this State, of which he is obliged to deliver at least two dozen every week, and that your petitioner hath Sixteen Workmen, (whose names are hereunto annexed,) in his employ, in the making of the said Swords, all of which are Associators and belong to different Companies of the Militia, the several Captains whereof insist on their doing Military duty, notwithstanding the Resolve of Congress of the 12th of April last, by which the Work is greatly delayed.

Your Petitioner therefore humbly prays that your Honour would be pleased to take the Premisses into Consideration and direct what your Honour in his Wisdom shall think meet. And Your Petitioner in duty bound Shall ever Pray,

LEWIS PRAHL.

1. William Brown, 9. Christian Cane,

2. Caspar Christ, 10. Thomas Quigsall,

3. Jacob Frey, 11. Paul Dawson,

4. Robert Man, 12. George Strebey,

5. Patrick Vaun, 13. Lewis Smith,

6. Conrad Waltner, 14. Nathaniel Bean,

7. Thomas Hltt, 15. Jos. Fanckleberry,

8. Matthew Grimes, 16. Adam Layer.

Lewis Prahl

Now all we need is lion pommel cast spiral grips to go with them? Bazelon does not describe the sword contract any better than that, nor assign a maker to his grooved doggie in the PA collection. Does he do so in the 1992 article? Or, is he (as I read it) starting his foundation with the same type of information I add here above and Perterson's old testament (which is as often disputed as are other author's wrks and description)

~~~~
What Bazelon does not describe may well be the grail as yet unfounded but Prahl was making brass gun mounts as of 1777 (also found elsewhere).

There were earlier brass foundries in Philly and that I do not deny Prahl either. There are some decent histories out there. Here is one I read through.
http://books.google.com/books?id=8uYkAAAAYAAJ

~~~~~~~~~~~~
As to Flayderman and Stuart Mowbray in contention regarding Bazelon's article and the earlier posts regarding Flayderman's own experience, as well as sales; I find Medicus as less supportive of the conjecture that appears to drive this particular discussion. For a third time, I now point to the lion pommel sabers listed in that book as counter to the Flayderman sale descriptions posted earlier. As the elder Mowbray's notes and Flayderman's collaboration I mention them as less absolute about a great many swords and offer less speculation than earlier sword books.

Again, I have not read Bazelon's article and have only other's read on that. I have though read in this thread that some of what is definitive of Bazelon's article is presented only as second hand interpretations that could be as misread as I feel my own posts here are.

Cheers

GC

[Jeff D]

Originally Posted by Hotspur

My Revised edition 1996. Is it different than his description?


The conclusion of that paragraph/description of the sword describes the cast grip lion pommel of #18.

In an earlier post, I mention the bulk of his writing of #18 is about the overall bulk of similar sabers with organic and bound grips but otherwise similar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The quote is the same, point being.....? Oh I see that 38 years before the article in discussion Peterson implied that the Hilt is German. Ok I will give that to you.

Originally Posted by Hotspur

You might find this interesting in the light of Bazelon and his notes on Prahl and found elsewhere.



Now all we need is lion pommel cast spiral grips to go with them? Bazelon does not describe the sword contract any better than that, nor assign a maker to his grooved doggie in the PA collection. Does he do so in the 1992 article? Or, is he (as I read it) starting his foundation with the same type of information I add here above and Perterson's old testament (which is as often disputed as are other author's wrks and description)

~~~~

Thanks that is interesting. No Bazelon does not ascribe a specific maker. If five or six shops are casting hilts and 3 or four guards, who would you say the maker was. would you label them with one?

Originally Posted by Hotspur

What Bazelon does not describe may well be the grail as yet unfounded but Prahl was making brass gun mounts as of 1777 (also found elsewhere).

There were earlier brass foundries in Philly and that I do not deny Prahl either. There are some decent histories out there. Here is one I read through.
http://books.google.com/books?id=8uYkAAAAYAAJ

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Are you on my side of this? If true would you risk the embargoes during the Napoleonic and French revolution to get imported hilts for the above contract?

Originally Posted by Hotspur

As to Flayderman and Stuart Mowbray in contention regarding Bazelon's article and the earlier posts regarding Flayderman's own experience, as well as sales; I find Medicus as less supportive of the conjecture that appears to drive this particular discussion. For a third time, I now point to the lion pommel sabers listed in that book as counter to the Flayderman sale descriptions posted earlier. As the elder Mowbray's notes and Flayderman's collaboration I mention them as less absolute about a great many swords and offer less speculation than earlier sword books.

It was not the purpose of the book to prove or disprove anything. I don't know of any controversial issues mentioned in the book, even dates. The book was to showcase the massive collection and to give descriptions only. Controversies had no place there, but are saved for other venues like here and the literature.

Originally Posted by Hotspur

Again, I have not read Bazelon's article and have only other's read on that. I have though read in this thread that some of what is definitive of Bazelon's article is presented only as second hand interpretations that could be as misread as I feel my own posts here are.

Cheers

GC

Glen your posts may have been misread by me, but, not intentionally I can assure you. I have most certainly questioned them. I have not been convinced by your arguments, do not take it personally. If the only part of the Medicus book that you feels outdates the 1992 article is a lack of a ringing endorsement of the theory, then I remain unconvinced. That would be counter to its purpose.
In my original post I suggested that the Bazelon article be reviewed to counter your observations, I still believe this. It is not now or ever been a 'blow off' . I could care less if you do, I do suspect you will not feel it is a waste of time. If my scanner was actually working I would try to get it to you.
Mark, As in the original post I still feel that the best theory on the origin of your hilt is Revolution-Federal period Philadelphia.

All the Best
Jeff

[Hotspur]

Hi Jeff

In my original post I suggested that the Bazelon article be reviewed to counter your observations, I still believe this. It is not now or ever been a 'blow off' . I could care less if you do, I do suspect you will not feel it is a waste of time. If my scanner was actually working I would try to get it to you.

Indeed and even though I am a two finger typist as well, I often manage to transcribe quite a bit of text for others. Nor do I offer the Medicus book as a whole proof but it is certainly better described than a lot of the same (types of and at times exactly those) swords in other texts and sales.

Cheers

GC

[M ELEY]

Thank you, Jeff, for giving me your opinion on the proper title for this sword. It was my assumption as well, based on the article (I have a photocopy that Man-At-Arms sent me as that issue is long out of print and hard to come by). I am unfortunately a Luddite and don't own a scanner. If the Forum has someone I could fax it to, I would be happy to provide it??

[Hotspur]

Mark Cloke of www.oldswords.com/ is eager to share such articles for all and would gladly take submissions to add to an ever growing database of Man At Arms articles.

As mentioned before, I take photos of pages instead of a scanner (I do have a dead one of those here). I realize there are copyright issues as well but we are more often relating book information with credit for the source and being used for educational purposes. I am kind of old fashioned as well as not having a fax set up.

Cheers

GC

[Jeff D]

Originally Posted by Hotspur

Mark Cloke of www.oldswords.com/ is eager to share such articles for all and would gladly take submissions to add to an ever growing database of Man At Arms articles.

As mentioned before, I take photos of pages instead of a scanner (I do have a dead one of those here). I realize there are copyright issues as well but we are more often relating book information with credit for the source and being used for educational purposes. I am kind of old fashioned as well as not having a fax set up.

Cheers

GC

Just so happens that Santa brought my daughter a new camera. I will see what I can her to due this week.

All the Best
Jeff

[M ELEY]

In leu of better pics, here is the original piece from Dmitry's site before our trade-

www.sailorinsaddle.com/product.aspx?id=1202