![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,141
|
![]()
Thank you, Jim! Don't say that too often or I'll get a big head!
![]() ![]() But before I accept my award, I want to make sure that this isn't just another type of Dutch model before I go guessing that it is a prototype or private purchase assemblage. I know of of least two Dutch patterns that have this type hilt. Before the m1790, there was a very similar model pictured in Neumann, #48S, however, it also has the traditional curved blade. The point being, perhaps there IS a straight bladed pattern I'm unfamiliar with? Infantry favored straight bladed hangers of this type, as did naval. So, if it can't be pinned down as that, I would stick to 'private purchase naval', possibly one of a small batch and rather uncommon. A great piece, either way... Dutch sword experts, any thoughts??? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,141
|
![]()
So far, can't find a straight bladed Dutch saber or hanger of this type with the pattern 1780-90 hilt. Evidence seems to point to my original thought.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 143
|
![]()
Dear Mark, thank you very much for the research effort.
I had an inkling it might be Dutch. I now hesitate to make suggestions as to identification, as every thing I have posted here has turned out to be something different from what I thought. I once had a Dutch sabre with a similar brass hilt and projection in the pommel cap, bought in Switzerland, with running-wolf blade snapped in the middle, with a vellum tag attached inscribed, 'Villmergen 1720', or something similar. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 607
|
![]()
Why would it be naval?! Because you want it to be?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 143
|
![]()
Could be...and I saw something vaguely similar, described as French Naval. I'll re-check.
You spotted 'Dutch' first, many thanks. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,141
|
![]()
Why would it be naval?! Because you want it to be? -Dmitry
But of course, my friend, of course! ![]() Still could be infantry. I was guessing naval because hilt is a known marine pattern and straight blades were popular with naval and finally because it appears to be a 'one off', something you wouldn't see in any other service at that time (army, artillery, infantry had their specific models/patterns) except private purchase. Boarders Away addressed these types and had some great ones illustrated... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 143
|
![]()
Gentlemen, many thanks for these useful pointers.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|