Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24th March 2024, 01:45 AM   #1
phil.reid
Member
 
phil.reid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 61
Default

Fantastic! I was hopefully but the odd fonts had me confused. I thought the back edge was to worn to read but there is some lettering ending in a D
Attached Images
 
phil.reid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 02:10 AM   #2
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

I forgot to add the forte inscription. This was distinct Thomas Gill, who was quite a promoter, and so much so he pretty much infuriated his competitor James Wooley.
He was the one who began emblazoning 'WARRANTED NEVER TO FAIL' on his blades, a convention soon followed by some of the other makers after the 'sword scandals'of the 1780s.

This sword is truly an anomaly, as I mentioned, these hilts were a munitions grade type of half basket dragoon sword distinctively Birmingham, and most typically seem to have been by Samuel Harvey about 1755, into possibly 1760s. The form does not seem to have been overly prevalent as there were of course other types. Thomas Gill, who is not recorded as making swords until 1778, even if perhaps several years earlier, still seems a gap.
As always, it is hard to define how long certain hilts remained in use, and if they might have been refitted later from stores as required.

I have one of the Black Watch style basket hilts of c. 1750s and these were turned in c. 1783 when infantry mostly no longer carried swords .....mine seems to have been refitted with a M1788 light cavalry saber blade. I have seen I think 2 other examples like this which suggests it was not entirely unusual to have earlier hilts remounted with newer blades, though unclear what circumstances.
Attached Images
 
Jim McDougall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 02:31 AM   #3
Peter Hudson
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 315
Default Thomas Gill .. Famous Birmingham Sword Maker.

https://landandseacollection.com/id564.html Shows some excellent swords from this stable. The Sword shown (SOLD)is an excellent example of a Naval Officers Hanger..Gill marked his blades with a capital G as shown.

Peter Hudson.
Attached Images
  
Peter Hudson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 02:43 AM   #4
Peter Hudson
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 315
Default Thomas Gill .. Famous Birmingham Sword Maker.

Adding to my previous post ...
This type of weapon, which was preferred
by Naval Officers, is well documented in various sword collecting books such as Bill Glikerson’s, “Boarder’s
Away“ on page 120-121
, who discusses a similar sword known to be Commodore Preble’s fighting sword (1797-1805).

Peter Hudson.
Peter Hudson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 03:09 AM   #5
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

Thank you Peter!
Gill was indeed a famed maker, who pretty much changed the texture of the sword industry in England. If I recall , there was some confusion on these 'G' marks and these were on swords exported to America, much to do with 'eagle head' swords, with Gill very much at the fore.
Jim McDougall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 06:43 AM   #6
phil.reid
Member
 
phil.reid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 61
Default

G and GG stamps on all my Osborns, not a GILL stamp
phil.reid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 04:58 PM   #7
Peter Hudson
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 315
Default

I agree ! Some of Gills swords have a G many do not. Some have the name in capitals..GILL.some do not and there is even a peculiar griffon on some blades but again not on all. As you note Jim the often placed mark of "warranted never to fail " is seen on his weapons. It's a weak excuse to suggest that many blades were changed in those days thus ommissions can be expected...Some Gill swords went to America and I saw one that had returned to England with a modified pommelin the form of a miniature George Washington. To muddy the waters even more it may be noted that Naval Swords in the UK never got the name Cutlass untill after about 1804 when that weapon became produced by/on behalf of the Amiralty...
It is however true that in studying English sword making Gill deserves a long hard look as his swords were like jewels in a goldmine...and stand as prime weapons in the British Armoury along with Harvey and others plus of course Shotley Bridge Swords.

Peter Hudson.
Peter Hudson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2024, 09:28 PM   #8
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

Peter, good notes! However going back through research , Andrew Mowbrays "The American Eagle Pommel Sword" (1988) and the 'unthinkable', using the search here I found some interesting things.

In a brisk discussion between Bryce and Glen(2018), two of the local specialists here IMO of British and American swords, they revealed some most intriguing details, well supported by their in depth research:

ALL Osborn blades have G or GG, with no determination as to why these letter 'G' are singular or paired. Suggestions are made that perhaps the GG came after Osborn partnered with Gunby in 1808, nothing substantiates this . These letters seem to occur on officers sword blades, but not as far as seen on the troopers sword blades. As these are typically at the very highest part of the ricasso, so not easy to see with the langets typically on troopers hilts.

Osborn seems to have ended the convention between 1810-1816.

GILL: This is most disturbing, as Mowbray (1988, p.97, c.1805) states the 'G' was the house mark for Gill? All indicators at this point claim, as noted, NO Gill blades have a G.

There are notes that early, that O over a G occurs on an 1808 blade (Osborn&Gunby? Mowbray. p.112)while an 1805 blade (p.105 Mowbray) has a deep 'O';
On p.104,p.102 either O or Ob thought Osborn.

None of the other makers/cutlers (Gill and Osborn produced blades while others were typically cutlers) had these letters on blades, yet all were exporting swords to America.

One blade in this period has the number 12 in the same blade location.
On some occasions it seems I have seen a '3' on Gill blades.

So what we have here seems to be some sort of administrative system in blades being produced and exported to America with these makers. There was a notable commerce in these swords between England and America in the period 1794-1830s. It is important to remember that American colonists were still basically British culturally after the Revolution into early 19th c.and American industry and commerce was not yet well developed in many cases.
So British swords and blades were notably exported to America by Gill, Osborn, and a number of other makers at least until 1820s.

Interesting note on the term cutlass, and while pretty much everywhere the terms hanger and cutlass seem to have been interchanged almost invariably, aside from the Spanish....who had the term machete interpolated in the same capacity. Seems odd the British resisted the cutlass term so late and all sorts of speculation might be added here.

Gill is the only maker who used 'WARRANTED NEVER TO FAIL' on his blades, but others followed suit but more briefly with 'WARRANTED' alone.

Not sure on the changing of blades note, but it seems the reuse of blades and swords held in stores or rendered obsolete by changing patterns was well established. The M1796 saber was so ubiquitous that by the time it was superceded by the M1821 (1829) these ended up everywhere, America, India, Germany produced their own version the M1811 Blucher etc.

The 1821/1829 heavy cavalry saber when replaced by 1853 were in Tower stores and made into practice swords, even attempt to make cutlasses.
same was done with numbers of M1796 heavy cavalry in Tower, attempt to make into cutlasses but most of these destroyed in fire there.

Getting back to the original subject, this Gill blade on an unusually earlier style hilt, it is not unusual to see earlier hilts with later blades. In Wallace Collection (Mann, 1962) there are many later blades mounted on earlier hilts.
All conundrums.
Jim McDougall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2024, 01:11 AM   #9
Radboud
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall View Post
ALL Osborn blades have G or GG, with no determination as to why these letter 'G' are singular or paired.
Minor correction here Jim, but Henry Osborn initially stamped his blades with a crown over the letters HO. This changed somewhere around 1797 as there exists a 1798 dated Osborn sword with the G stamp.

My 1796 LC officers by Osborn is stamped with the Crown over HO proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall View Post
None of the other makers/cutlers (Gill and Osborn produced blades while others were typically cutlers) had these letters on blades, yet all were exporting swords to America.
I'm not sure if I read your sentence correctly, but officer blades produced by Dawes typically have an S stamp on the ricasso, close to the tang. This is not evident on his trooper swords.
Radboud is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.