![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 75
|
![]()
Given that the shoulders of the blade are visible below the cross guard instead of being inset into it I suspect that you have an old blade that has been rehilted. The blade looks a lot like a British spadroon blade and 32" is the exact regulation length for such blades. Also there appears to be a peened rivet in the middle of the cross which is not correct for a properly made blade and hilt but more common when someone without a background in swords makes something that looks like a sword.
So my guess would be a 1796 pattern spadroon blade that was repurposed as a masonic sword in someone's home workshop. Robert |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 285
|
![]()
I second Roberts comments that it is likely a composite of a spadroon blade and a cosmetic/theatrical hilt. Personally, I don't think it's a 1796 and more likely a later European type based on the ricasso shape.
Older spadroon blades from the late 18th or early 19th Century generally have a cutting edge that terminates closer to the hilt. Cheers Bas |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,911
|
![]()
Bingo!
There is a mismatch between the single-edged blade and the symmetrical hilt typical for double edged blades. So I think you are spot on with your explanations! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 84
|
![]()
Ok thank you.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|