British Infantry Officers Battle Swords in the 19th C...and up to 1914

[Jim McDougall]

In previous post, the sword cane was noted, and it would seem that this convention was likely popularized from the exposure in India of certain innovative combination or concealed blades. While the enclosed blade in certain cases in canes did not begin there and is recorded earlier in numerous other instances, it seems officers in India began the popularized fashion from seeing them there.

The thing with this is that in the highly coded matters of nobility, status, and honor within the ranks of officers and civilian gentry, the notion of a concealed weapon was considered 'dastardly' and ungentlemanly, and profoundly looked down upon.
This was the reason for the restriction with these, and the sword stick was considered perfectly acceptable. While not bladed, fencing skills were taught using these as a weapon of self defense, using similar movements and attacks. With these seen in that sense, not just as an element of fashion, but a genuine weapon deadly in use as required....it is not surprising they became known as 'swagger sticks'.

As discussed, one of the distinct characteristics of officers, is the 'swagger' which represents not only their authority, but formidability.

Getting to the presence and use of the sword in other ranks, especially later into the 19th century. It must be remembered that officers were typically, if not invariably, of high echelon in their status. As such, much of their training as a gentleman involved the arts of fencing, as the primary martial art of these times. It was not just the act of sword combat, but confidence and skills in combative self defense circumstances.

It was these skills which were in accord with officers and their choice of weapons as well as key features in their use. While in command, though officers were intended to direct their troops, and were not expected to participate in the fray, it was difficult for many, if not most, to restrain themselves.

With other ranks however , the use of the sword was virtually a mechanical, rote exercise, using predescribed movements and positions. These men were unfamiliar with the sword itself, let alone the philosophies and skills that were inherent in the study of fence.

Anecdotally, in America during the Civil War, the M1840 dragoon saber, a heavy sword designed after French model, was derisively called by other ranks, 'the old wristbreaker'. This was because of its heft, and if used improperly, could cause injuries to ones wrist among other issues. These raw recruits, had no inclinations toward the formidable use of a weapon that required up close use rather than the less contact oriented gun.

Returning to the use of the sword by other ranks, these men were more adequately trained from the 18th well into the 19th as their lives depended on it. With the advent and concentration on firearms, these skills waned with cavalry, while the infantry had given up use of the sword in favor of the bayonet by the 1780s.

Still, the primary issue with the sword, even more than design in many respects, was not lack of training, but poor maintenance and care.
In India, the British cavalry were in awe of the deadly skills with the saber exhibited by Sikh horsemen in campaigns in 19th c. They were more than horrified when they realized that the inadequacy of their own regulation swords acquiesced to deadly Sikh sabers, which were in fact old M1796 sabers now obsolete, honed to razor sharpness and kept in wood lined scabbards.
Their own standard care was lacking, blades inadequately sharpened, and dulled further by the iron scabbards.

Even in America, once again, the blades of sabers were seldom sharpened, theoretically done only prior to battle (we know even then they werent).
In reading through medical records of the Civil War, only several instances of wounds from swords were accounted. These were invariably caused by blunt force trauma.

While the struggle with sword blade design raged through the 19th century, it seems one of the key factors which may have been at hand as the many accounts and complaints which were examined, may have been excluded, was the poor maintenance of swords, and poor training.

Although troopers were indeed 'trained' in the rote manner preciously noted, the strict and numbered actions followed without common sense or situational judgement also played a part.

In an anecdote from the Crimea, one trooper complained that a Russian horseman as they exhanged, responded to his 'cut so and so' in accord with numbered sword exercise... to which he responded accordingly with again 'cut so and so'. THEN, he exclaimed, the fool gave me a cut 'so and so'....completely out of the 'rules'....and knocked him off his horse!!!!
How dastardly!! not 'according to Hoyle!'.

In the photo, example of Victorian sword cane, often termed 'malacca' for the source of the cane used enclosing the blade. The blade is a Solingen epee blade, used on dueling swords of the period, again adding to the mystique and swagger of these gemtlemans defensive yet fashionable accoutrements.

[Pertinax]

My specimen.
British Infantry Officer's Sword M 1895/1897. The blade spine bears the serial number 49731, likely dated 1915.

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,
This is a great thread. British sword design is something that I find very interesting. My collection although focused on the Napoleonic period, contains many examples that show sword manufacturers were thinking about how to make their blades better at specific purposes.

Peter, I have to disagree about the paisley influence on British sword hilt design. I think it is much more about the Honeysuckle flower, which first originated prior to the 1796 patterns. Below is a photo comparing an example of a honeysuckle themed hilt on an earlier sword and a 1796 pattern heavy cavalry officer undress sword.

Also Jim, the 1908 pattern cavalry sword is a superb thrusting weapon, but is basically just a spike, with almost zero cutting ability, even when sharpened.

Cheers,
Bryce

[Bryce]

G'day Peter,
I completely agree with your point that there is no one sword design that will suit all purposes. Swords can be specialised for a single purpose, which makes them useless for other situations or they can be designed for "general purpose" where the design is a compromise and they aren't ideal for any one particular purpose. There are examples in history of soldiers carrying two swords, one being a thrusting blade and another being a cutting blade, or in the case of Lancers a lance and a sabre.

I think your example of the Japanese carrying a katana and wakizashi as being better than the British example though is flawed. The katana and wakizashi are basically identical in design, with the wakizashi just being a little shorter. The blade design, apart from length is basically the same. The way the blades are constructed also makes them blade heavy, making them difficult to use one handed, unless the blade is relatively short, so you can't easily use a katana and a pistol at the same time.

It is always about specialise or compromise.
Cheers,
Bryce

[Peter Hudson]

Originally Posted by Bryce

G'day Guys,
This is a great thread. British sword design is something that I find very interesting. My collection although focused on the Napoleonic period, contains many examples that show sword manufacturers were thinking about how to make their blades better at specific purposes.

Peter, I have to disagree about the paisley influence on British sword hilt design. I think it is much more about the Honeysuckle flower, which first originated prior to the 1796 patterns. Below is a photo comparing an example of a honeysuckle themed hilt on an earlier sword and a 1796 pattern heavy cavalry officer undress sword.

Also Jim, the 1908 pattern cavalry sword is a superb thrusting weapon, but is basically just a spike, with almost zero cutting ability, even when sharpened.

Cheers,
Bryce

Hello Bryce, Excellent pictures showing what is called honeysuckle design...I actually never heard of that name til I saw it on this thread noted by Jim and yourself. I should have my camera functioning soon and hope I can get a series of pictures uploaded of some more examples of swords in my collection. ...I dont actually have any Scinde Cavalry so its really good to see your exhibits.Thanks again for the great pictures.
I should add that the perforations cut through most of the styles in the 19th C. are a different design to the Scinde Cav. but I accept the influence of the general shape...and I have come around to accepting more than one source in the influence of these hilts.
Regards,
Peter Hudson.

[Bryce]

G'day Peter,
I don't have a Scinde cavalry sword in my collection, but I do have the 4th Light Dragoons pattern sword of Alexander Low. Some of the decoration on this hilt is similar to the Scinde pattern. Low ordered this sword with a custom hilt and Toledo blade from Henry Wilkinson on his return from the Crimean War, having survived the charge of the light brigade.
Cheers,
Bryce

[Peter Hudson]

Originally Posted by Bryce

G'day Peter,
I don't have a Scinde cavalry sword in my collection, but I do have the 4th Light Dragoons pattern sword of Alexander Low. Some of the decoration on this hilt is similar to the Scinde pattern. Low ordered this sword with a custom hilt and Toledo blade from Henry Wilkinson on his return from the Crimean War, having survived the charge of the light brigade.
Cheers,
Bryce

Hello Bryce, Oh I thought this was a Scinde Cavalry Sword, I have to say its a superb piece... Thanks for showing this.
Peter Hudson.

[Peter Hudson]

One thing I like to feed in are good videos on all things antique weaponry... especially in this case on Swords..Please do hit the buttons and view these as they are very well placed for easy viewing and are excellent for information...I use the Matt Easton videos which I find very good so expect a few of these to turn up ... Matt has an extensive range of the 19thC.British Sword variety thus I will feature his work a lot..

Please see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJm6OBHZcxs

Peter Hudson.

[Peter Hudson]

Originally Posted by Pertinax

My specimen.
British Infantry Officer's Sword M 1895/1897. The blade spine bears the serial number 49731, likely dated 1915.

Hello Pertinax , I have a few George V swords here and some with different Rulers Cyphers on the blades...and some with different capital letters on the stub on the blade test mark.My examples also have the I Beam either side of the Fuller ...Cavalry Swords in the 1820s had a massive fuller running to a spear point but from the end of the fuller to the point...about 12 inches of blade was raised as a central ridge . I often read of swords being too bendy at the foible caused by having no raised central ridge ... this mistake is common on many 19thC. examples.
Regards
Peter Hudson.