|
|
|
27th October 2008, 12:19 AM
|
#1 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA Georgia
Posts: 1,599
|
Quote:
Hi Jeff, In the hand it looks more like those letters -- 17 -- were struck harder. May or may not be a different font. It is also hard to tell if the last number is a 2 or a 9. I think it is a 2 as in 1762, if that helps. There are no markings on the spine or anywhere else. Last edited by Bill Marsh; 27th October 2008 at 01:33 AM. |
|
|
|
|
27th October 2008, 01:03 AM
|
#2 |
|
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,571
|
Hi Jeff,
I think you're right, the font does look different. David, I think the last number is a 2. All the best, Jim |
|
|
|
|
27th October 2008, 05:45 AM
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 473
|
Hi Jim and Bill,
The 1 and 7 appears slightly larger, has a deeper imprint and has a different font ( I have seen similar 1's and 7's on British blades of early 20th century but not on the forte). Possibly added at a later date to add 100 or more years. Wilkinson and Mole both used the spine to place their numbers, but, I don't think Wilkinson started this practice until 1854? I am not sure when Mole numbered their blades. I think it was at about the same time. Mole of course was a Birmingham not a London maker. All the Best Jeff |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
