![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,231
|
![]()
Your sword has been made by Samuel Hoppe Frères à Solingen and was in use during the French July monarchy and Second Republic 1830-1852.
corrado26 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 426
|
![]()
The blade yes , the Guard is older.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nipmuc USA
Posts: 514
|
![]()
I have a small contention regarding SH and SHF as Samuel Hoppe. Samuel Hoppe is listed later in the 19th century and definitely as displaying a beehive mark.
Contrarily and confirmed in other threads, SHF is for Simon Helvig&Sons, SH as Simon Helvig. An adjacent thread here http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=16549 The preponderance of 1820s and 1830s blades marked SHF without the beehive, to me, reads as the Helvig theory sticks. The French book not being the first, or last to have a differing opinion. From Bezdek "Samuel Hoppe & Sohn of Solingen was active between 1827-1861 (Bezdek:54) being Samuel Hoppe & Co. between 1861-1885 (Bezdek:54)" So, that is not SH&F but rather clearly and in German, Sohn. The Feres or Fils and F of French notations Helvig. In my opinion anyway and I welcome more sources but as far back as my own studies go these past couple of decades, the Hoppe& Son(s?) and Co. marks are later than the Simon Helvig blades. A broad jump from the light b&g Helvig dress blades to the field infantry and cavalry swords known to Samuel Hoppe. Cheers GC Last edited by Hotspur; 8th June 2020 at 02:14 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,231
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nipmuc USA
Posts: 514
|
![]()
I understand it as F for fils. I don't know if a link to SFI would cause a problem but a discussion over the decades. A quote from Robert Wilkinson-Latham
Quote:
See my inquiry post #6 in that thread and following replies. I approached this at SFI a few years ago and the contention was that Hoppe did not use the mark we see on this blade above, indeed dozens I have archived as blades meant for the US (eaglehead pommel swords). Others insist the book plate shared above is correct. Honestly, it would not be the first disagreement but it is a mark SHetFils and SH for a ciouple oof decades and while the jury still seems to be out and a very divided opinion, Helvig is how I approach the mark, vs Hoppe. Helvig in Alsace and Hoppe in Soingen. Cheers GC |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nipmuc USA
Posts: 514
|
![]()
Another contention in the names list there is the K&S, which is labeled by most as Kirschbaum&Schimmelbush, not Kirschbaum&Schnitzler.
All tripe? I think not but how some read differences from text to text, discussion to discussion. More food for thought. A 2007 thread discussing the possibility of Knecht & Stamm ![]() Cheers GC ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,231
|
![]() Quote:
This you can find in the book shown here. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|