Modified 18th C Hanger ?

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Jim,
Thanks again, there seems to be more than a little confusion over the dating of these swords, it appears to be rather difficult compared to the ease of the recorded chronology of the Victorian era.

Hi M,
Thanks for your input, is there a possibility of posting the image of the sword you mention as unfortunately I don't have that particular volume.

My Regards,
Norman.

[Mark Cloke]

Hello,

Nice sword. I particularly like these hangers for some reason. The naming of the patterns date from paintings of the period and the 1742 is the type you have with the 'heart' shaped guard and single knuckle bow. The 1751 is the same style but with 2 side bars. The dates don't really mean anything as they are not official patterns as no official British patterns were introduced until c1786. The style of the "1742" was certainly in use a lot earlier in the century and continued to be made into the early 19th century.
By far the largest numbers were issued to the Militia regiments and they are commonly found with militia regimental markings.

I think there is considerable debate about these and their use in the Revolutionary war. Both types are often sold by dealers as being "used in the revolution" however as far as I know there is no evidence of large scale use. Other styles are more often found at excavations.

The mark which is commonly referred to as the 'running fox' is of particular interest to me as I am currently carrying our research on it. The example on your sword is a more unusual version. There were many variation used of this mark but most are attributed to the Harvey family. However some do appear of swords sold by other makers.

Nice sword!



Mark.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Mark,
Thanks for the insight. Are you able to comment on the guard removal, was it a convenience thing or may there be other reasons for doing this, concealment perhaps? Thanks again for your interest.
My Regards,
Norman.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Norman,
Well noted, and there truly is since in these 18th century times, particularly in British swords, regulation patterns had not been officially established and the references to these were broadly based assumptions from contemporary illustrations.
Neumann notes the reference to Duke of Cumberlands "Representation of Clothing of His Majestys Forces" (1742) which shows hangers thought to be of this type, leading to the arbitrary designation even though there was no official pattern.
It seems these may have been Prussian hangers, or perhaps British versions of them. There is a great article which I do not have, but its author the late Anthony Darling was a brilliant authority on these weapons; "British Infantry Hangers" (Canadian Journal of Arms Collecting, Nov. 1970). This publication has been out of print for about ten years I think, but pretty sure Jim Gooding in Ontario, Canada still has back issues.

I'm puzzled about the 1770 infantry hanger, as the 1768 regulations called for swords for sergeants and grenadier companies, but none for corporals and private soldiers of infantry companies.
Without regulation swords for infantry prior to the 1768 warrant, it would seem there were numerous variant type hangers, and that numbers of these were either German swords or made in Germany for England, with heart shaped guards (1725-40, Neumann 11.S).

What is also puzzling is that there are, if I am not mistaken, hangers of this type known of latter 18th century as they reflect British makers of that period, such as Thomas Craven, not in business until 1797. This, coupled with the notable absence of them or thier parts aming battlefield artifacts excavated in Revolutionary War sites has seemed to present the most contention as far as their proper identification and use.

Again, the stock removal of the guard on this hanger, and the curious wolf mark on its blade, which could of course suggest Harvey though seeming atypical, really makes this weapon a curious and intriguing anomaly.

It would not be a German mark, as by the 18th century, as far as I know, these wolf/fox markings were not used in Germany any longer, possibly due to the deliberate use of the mark by the Shotley Bridge makers. Therefore it would seem the mark would not suggest this sword would have been one of the German hangers present by 1742, but it certainly appears to have once had the heart shaped guard.

Manolo, thank you for the reference, is this the book by Harvey Withers?

All very best regards,
Jim

[celtan]

Hi guys,

Yep, that's the one. Nice photos. It's basically a sword' collector's price guide published in 2006.

The image in question, ID'ed as a 1770 hanger, has a wire grip and heart shaped guard. This seems to correspond to the M1742 you mention.

I own some north-european versions, but they sport spiral solid brass grips, and their knuckle-guard is attached to the pommel by means of a screw. I understand that even though they were made in the mid 18th C they were still being used until the mid-19th C by NCOs.

Mark's statement is very interesting, regarding their absence at excavations.

IIRC, brass was a premium metal in those times. Large salvage operations were instituted just to recover the brass cannons from sunken vessels. Could this be the reason they weren't left behind? Perhaps scavengers removed these from the battlefields after the action was over.

M

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hi Norman,
Well noted, and there truly is since in these 18th century times, particularly in British swords, regulation patterns had not been officially established and the references to these were broadly based assumptions from contemporary illustrations.
Neumann notes the reference to Duke of Cumberlands "Representation of Clothing of His Majestys Forces" (1742) which shows hangers thought to be of this type, leading to the arbitrary designation even though there was no official pattern.
It seems these may have been Prussian hangers, or perhaps British versions of them. There is a great article which I do not have, but its author the late Anthony Darling was a brilliant authority on these weapons; "British Infantry Hangers" (Canadian Journal of Arms Collecting, Nov. 1970). This publication has been out of print for about ten years I think, but pretty sure Jim Gooding in Ontario, Canada still has back issues.

I'm puzzled about the 1770 infantry hanger, as the 1768 regulations called for swords for sergeants and grenadier companies, but none for corporals and private soldiers of infantry companies.
Without regulation swords for infantry prior to the 1768 warrant, it would seem there were numerous variant type hangers, and that numbers of these were either German swords or made in Germany for England, with heart shaped guards (1725-40, Neumann 11.S).

What is also puzzling is that there are, if I am not mistaken, hangers of this type known of latter 18th century as they reflect British makers of that period, such as Thomas Craven, not in business until 1797. This, coupled with the notable absence of them or thier parts aming battlefield artifacts excavated in Revolutionary War sites has seemed to present the most contention as far as their proper identification and use.

Again, the stock removal of the guard on this hanger, and the curious wolf mark on its blade, which could of course suggest Harvey though seeming atypical, really makes this weapon a curious and intriguing anomaly.

It would not be a German mark, as by the 18th century, as far as I know, these wolf/fox markings were not used in Germany any longer, possibly due to the deliberate use of the mark by the Shotley Bridge makers. Therefore it would seem the mark would not suggest this sword would have been one of the German hangers present by 1742, but it certainly appears to have once had the heart shaped guard.

Manolo, thank you for the reference, is this the book by Harvey Withers?

All very best regards,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by celtan

Hi guys,

Yep, that's the one. Nice photos. It's basically a sword' collector's price guide published in 2006.

The image in question, ID'ed as a 1770 hanger, has a wire grip and heart shaped guard. This seems to correspond to the M1742 you mention.

I own some north-european versions, but they sport spiral solid brass grips, and their knuckle-guard is attached to the pommel by means of a screw. I understand that even though they were made in the mid 18th C they were still being used until the mid-19th C by NCOs.

Mark's statement is very interesting, regarding their absence at excavations.

IIRC, brass was a premium metal in those times. Large salvage operations were instituted just to recover the brass cannons from sunken vessels. Could this be the reason they weren't left behind? Perhaps scavengers removed these from the battlefields after the action was over.

M

Excellent point Manolo!!!! Brass was, and in many cases remained ,a prime commodity in salvage for continued use in weaponry. It was easier to produce munitions grade weapons in volume as they were of course cast hilts. Also, they were less susceptible to the elements and corrosion in the field.
In actuality, most battlefields were indeed scavenged to retrieve weapons, far beyond souvenier hunting, as weapons became surplus materials often resold as described.
I once had a cavalry sword with certain regimental markings of standard issue on the hilt, but the scabbard was not with it.
Years later, the scabbard with matching markings and rack number showed up at a museum among listings of holdings of that weapon type. While purely circumstantial evidence, the suggestion would be a battlefield pickup, as one would presume that weapons so marked would remain together unless interrupted by circumstances separating them.

Best regards,
Jim

[M ELEY]

Just to repeat what others have already stated here, in that hangers of these types did span into the 19th century. I had a so-called M1751 with the marking of Dawes Birm, for Dawes Birmingham. Although John Dawes was making swords in the 1770's, this marking reflects that from about post-1795. Several M796 light cavalry officer's swords bear this marking. There was an excellent article in a Man-at-Arms antique weapons magazine from some years back by the esteemed artist/writer/curator Don Trionni in which he did research on the M1751 and pretty much proved that with rare exception, they were post 1790/post Rev War and most likely issued to the militias. My 2 cents...

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by M ELEY

Just to repeat what others have already stated here, in that hangers of these types did span into the 19th century. I had a so-called M1751 with the marking of Dawes Birm, for Dawes Birmingham. Although John Dawes was making swords in the 1770's, this marking reflects that from about post-1795. Several M796 light cavalry officer's swords bear this marking. There was an excellent article in a Man-at-Arms antique weapons magazine from some years back by the esteemed artist/writer/curator Don Trionni in which he did research on the M1751 and pretty much proved that with rare exception, they were post 1790/post Rev War and most likely issued to the militias. My 2 cents...

Well said Mark, and excellent support for what seems to be a growing perspective on these. I wish I could recall the number for that article in Man At Arms by Mr. T, which is a great article and I have seen that information in various posts on threads over the years.
In looking at the wolf/fox on this example further, it really does to have the overall appearance of one of the Harvey examples, and again wonder if these were blades supplied to various cutlers. The use of these hangers by militias would easily explain thier late use and obviously use by other ranks, not corresponding to the line units restricting swords to sergeants etc. only

All the best,
Jim

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Many thanks to all for the info and opinions.
Regards,
Norman.