![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nipmuc USA
Posts: 508
|
![]()
The implementation of the rings does seem to be the last decade(s) of the 18th century into the 19th but in general, to me it seems just an extra. That we saw the castings with ample space to drill for a ring and a majority not added makes it an option, something a patron asked for or elected from stock. With slots and holes continuing on a lot of hilts, those methods seem more lasting and secure. A ring not allowing for much width of what we see for ribbon like knots. A ring affording for little more than a braided cord, what have you.
Cheers GC |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,215
|
![]()
I agree, one reason i have not yet found a knot that sets well on it, the one photo i found with a wide strap on one looked awful. A round cord like on the std. naval nots would be better, but the std. ones are still a bit too fat. Flat ones thru the slot on a 1796 LC look fine tho...
I've seen a braided leather round cord (about 3mm dia. cord) knot in brown with a ball knot termination that looked like it's be fine for a hanger, it was being sold as an original cutlass lanyard for more than some of my swords cost. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|