Silver hilted

Jim McDougall · 12th May 2025, 07:06 PM

Glad I could find useful info Norman. While not wishing to derail Keiths thread, regarding Cullum, as he passed in 1790 it would seem that his widow was still moving his stock through, and she passed in 1795 with John Prosser taking over. All of these were well connected regally to George III and IV.

Back to Keiths sword.
Not fully understanding the protocols pertaining to silver hilts etc. I wonder why makers marks would be removed......when would assay marks NOT have to do with taxation?
In some countries certain makers for the king (i.e. Spain) were free of taxation, thus sometimes spurious marks used by kings cutlers.

In another aspect, I have a brass hilt briquet, totally munitions grade, but with the cutlers assay touch mark in the hilt, and totally an anomaly. This cutler was aligned also with George III, but seems to have been providing other ranks side arms during invasion threat by France in 1790s. But WHY in brass! ?
Seems to have been curious matters at hand involving these protocols.

urbanspaceman · 12th May 2025, 07:19 PM

During my inspection of those empty apertures on the quillon I began to realise that it had been soldered back together at exactly that spot. Look closely and you will see the solder and how it has spread into those holes. Maybe the maker's marks were sacrificed during the procedure.
When I did exactly that job on the smaller of the two Shotley Bridge smallswords in my collection; I had a sacrificial hilt that I chopped the quillon from. Obviously it was virtually identical.

urbanspaceman · 12th May 2025, 07:23 PM

During my inspection of those empty apertures on the quillon I began to realise that it had been soldered back together at exactly that spot. Look closely and you will see the solder and how it has spread into those holes. Maybe the maker's marks were sacrificed during the procedure.
I did exactly that same job on the smaller of the two Shotley Bridge smallswords in my collection; I had a sacrificial hilt that I chopped the quillon from. Obviously it was virtually identical.
The apertures here are on the re-attached quillon which may well be from another sword: is that nefarious enough a reason Richard?

urbanspaceman · 12th May 2025, 07:41 PM

Name: Solder joints.jpg
Views: 288
Size: 115.8 KB

urbanspaceman · 12th May 2025, 07:49 PM

I think we have exhausted the possibilities of this discussion.

12th May 2025, 07:19 PM	#2
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 677	possible solution During my inspection of those empty apertures on the quillon I began to realise that it had been soldered back together at exactly that spot. Look closely and you will see the solder and how it has spread into those holes. Maybe the maker's marks were sacrificed during the procedure. When I did exactly that job on the smaller of the two Shotley Bridge smallswords in my collection; I had a sacrificial hilt that I chopped the quillon from. Obviously it was virtually identical.

12th May 2025, 07:23 PM	#3
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 677	possible solution During my inspection of those empty apertures on the quillon I began to realise that it had been soldered back together at exactly that spot. Look closely and you will see the solder and how it has spread into those holes. Maybe the maker's marks were sacrificed during the procedure. I did exactly that same job on the smaller of the two Shotley Bridge smallswords in my collection; I had a sacrificial hilt that I chopped the quillon from. Obviously it was virtually identical. The apertures here are on the re-attached quillon which may well be from another sword: is that nefarious enough a reason Richard? Last edited by urbanspaceman; 12th May 2025 at 07:24 PM. Reason: typo

12th May 2025, 07:41 PM	#4
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 677	picture

12th May 2025, 07:49 PM	#5
urbanspaceman Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: Tyneside. North-East England Posts: 677	The End I think we have exhausted the possibilities of this discussion.

12th May 2025, 07:06 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,426	Glad I could find useful info Norman. While not wishing to derail Keiths thread, regarding Cullum, as he passed in 1790 it would seem that his widow was still moving his stock through, and she passed in 1795 with John Prosser taking over. All of these were well connected regally to George III and IV. Back to Keiths sword. Not fully understanding the protocols pertaining to silver hilts etc. I wonder why makers marks would be removed......when would assay marks NOT have to do with taxation? In some countries certain makers for the king (i.e. Spain) were free of taxation, thus sometimes spurious marks used by kings cutlers. In another aspect, I have a brass hilt briquet, totally munitions grade, but with the cutlers assay touch mark in the hilt, and totally an anomaly. This cutler was aligned also with George III, but seems to have been providing other ranks side arms during invasion threat by France in 1790s. But WHY in brass! ? Seems to have been curious matters at hand involving these protocols.