Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12th July 2009, 01:09 AM   #5
Jeff D
Member
 
Jeff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 473
Default

Hi Glen,

Great example, of no doubt masonic symbols on a late 18th century saber. But, I am not sure it answers my question of; were officers allowed to put obvious Masonic symbols on their regulation field or dress weapons? Clearly symbols appear on Masonic ceremonial pieces, the Ames catalogues show obvious symbols on military presentation pieces, and Hamilton cites examples of symbols added to retired military pieces, but I can't think of a mixing of clearly masonic symbols and the usually military motifs. Was it against regulations? What I am getting at is; A large number of officers in the late 18th century, early 19th century were masons, who clearly found some importance in symbols, it would stand to reason that if they were not allowed to openly display there signs, they would go to more covert methods.
I really don't know, but, still think it is possible that the original bead hilts do have some masonic significance. However it is very far from being proved. I also believe that the significance was lost as the original hilts became the style which further muddys the water.

All the Best
Jeff
Jeff D is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.