Basket hilted swords

[E.B. Erickson]

Hi Cathey,
That is an odd one. If it weren't for the etching one would just ID it as an English cav/dragoon sword. What I really find unusual is the reference to Wallace.

Haydn Vesty's hypothesis seems like it would work, but are there any other examples of this type of etched motto on a sword from the 1700s so we can verify his opinion?

Here's another hypothesis: there was a revival of interest in all things Scottish in England in the first half of the 1800s (I'm not sure I've got the date right). Perhaps the blade was etched at that time. So you'd have a good baskethilted sword from the 1700s with later commemorative etching. But again, are there similar etched designs dating from the Scottish revival?

Just rambling. --ElJay

[Jim McDougall]

I personally echo Eljay's comments, this type of blade is indeed of 18th century English dragoon style, and of course Cathey's observations on the hilt as English and period are spot on.

There is an old 'axiom' that I have seen issued by Anthony Darling (I believe) which says loosely if it isn't a broadsword (meaning double edged, the term was used for both SE and DE in the 18th c.) then it isn't Scottish.
This seems to hold true as the dragoon swords produced for the British regiments were in accord with accepted military standards using single edged backsword blades.
It is a truly romantic notion that this blade might have come from the tragedy at Culloden, wielded by a patriotic Scot, but unfortunately not likely.
This tragic day was of course furthered by the disrespectful and patently heinous act of dismantling the broadswords of fallen Scots there, and using some of them in a garish garden fence.

As Eljay has well noted, the style of etching and likely even the content seem to correspond to the heightened awareness and revival of things Scottish in the Victorian era. In these times of course there was great attention to Scottish lore, history and fashion . Even the Royals would wear kilts etc. and in the military, officers in particular were rightfully proud of their Scottish heritage.
The '45 was a century or more in the past, and Scottish heritage was not only flaunted but a mark of prestige.

I think this blade more likely decorated later, though the blade seems of the period of the hilt. Despite the fact it is a sword of troopers grade in the hilt, it does not seem unlikely that an officer in a British cavalry unit might have had this sword beautifully inscribed reflecting the pride of the true Scots and their heritage.

[E.B. Erickson]

Hi Jim,
If Darling said that, then I'd have to disagree with someone considered an authority. Take a look at most of the swords produced by Walter Allan: backswords are in the majority. And how about the Scottish Turcael?

Just to get a sampling of how many back versus broadswords one finds in a Scottish context, I got out my copy of "Culloden; the Swords and the Sorrows". Out of 50 Scottish baskets shown, 20 have backsword blades. That's 40%. And, consider the blades that have Scottish patriotic mottos ("Prosperity to Scotland and No Union"; "God save King James") that date from the early 1700s: they're all backsword blades (well, the ones I've seen are, but I imagine there's a broadsword out there somewhere).

Concerning English cav/dragoon swords, the backsword does predominate in the 1700s, but there are still broadsword blades in an English cavalry context. In "Culloden", sword 1.52, while not a baskethilt, is an English cav sword. I think that one of these is in Neumann as well. And while the troopers mainly received back blades, the officers could do what they pleased, so you do find their swords with broadsword blades. Maybe later I'll get out Mazansky and do some tallying!

--ElJay

[Jim McDougall]

Great Eljay!! Here I thought I had this all figured out!!!
I would have to dig a bit to find those words cited, but after your beautifully supported rebuttal, I would hate to tarnish whoever it was who wrote them.

Naturally, with arms as with most things, there are countless exceptions for every rule and I must admit that most desperate attempts at neatly and concisely cataloguing, classifying and rigidly identifying certain forms are usually pretty futile. I will say however that Oakeshott, Norman and Mazansky did set some pretty reliable 'guidelines'. Even Norman however steered clear of blades due to the constant flux of trade blades and refurbishing using incongruent blade forms during the often extending working lives of sword hilts.

Thank you for the clarification, which clearly reflects the tremendous knowledge you have on these swords gained through decades of experience. Nicely stated, and it's great having your posts here!!!

All the best,
Jim

[Cathey]

Hi Guys

I went back to my file of correspondence with the Baron of Earlshall, and noted that this sword was one he requested additional pictures of for his book back in 2007. The Baron dated the sword and blade 1745-65, he also thought the engraving may have been added around 1790. I still query the sanity of anyone having this particular inscription added to a blade they intended to carry in a British regiment. William Wallace was after all executed as a traitor to the English King, not something easily forgiven. Also, there had obviously been an attempt to destroy the blade when it surfaced in England, so evidently someone was far from happy about it.

Having seen the French basket hilts posted I began to wonder if this sword was actually carried by an Ex-Pat Scott living in France after Culloden. I believe Scots fought on both sides of the Culloden campaign, perhaps this one became Patriotic after he had left the country, sadly we will never really know.

With regard to Darlings comment “if it isn't a broadsword then it isn't Scottish” has probably been taken out of context. Jim as you say the word broadsword is often applied to blades that are actually backswords. I suppose it’s a bit like calling a basket hilt a claymore, when claymores where actually two handed swords.

In the end I concur with Eljay, the Scots had both Broadsword Blades and Backsword blades, and as most of these where imported they have no real relevance to whether a sword is Scottish or English. Generally I usually look at the pommel, if it is the common bun shaped it is likely English. Then of course there are all the other variations Spiracle, Cone shaped, flat bun etc. I have just popped a letter in the post to the Baron; hopefully he will confirm a publishing date for the first volume of his book soon.

While I have your attention Eljay, a while back you posed a question of Sword forum, when did the S disappear from the SH stamped in the Fox mark on Harvey blades, did you ever find the answer?

Cheers Cathey and Rex

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Cathey

Hi Guys

I went back to my file of correspondence with the Baron of Earlshall, and noted that this sword was one he requested additional pictures of for his book back in 2007. The Baron dated the sword and blade 1745-65, he also thought the engraving may have been added around 1790. I still query the sanity of anyone having this particular inscription added to a blade they intended to carry in a British regiment. William Wallace was after all executed as a traitor to the English King, not something easily forgiven. Also, there had obviously been an attempt to destroy the blade when it surfaced in England, so evidently someone was far from happy about it.

Having seen the French basket hilts posted I began to wonder if this sword was actually carried by an Ex-Pat Scott living in France after Culloden. I believe Scots fought on both sides of the Culloden campaign, perhaps this one became Patriotic after he had left the country, sadly we will never really know.

With regard to Darlings comment “if it isn't a broadsword then it isn't Scottish” has probably been taken out of context. Jim as you say the word broadsword is often applied to blades that are actually backswords. I suppose it’s a bit like calling a basket hilt a claymore, when claymores where actually two handed swords.

In the end I concur with Eljay, the Scots had both Broadsword Blades and Backsword blades, and as most of these where imported they have no real relevance to whether a sword is Scottish or English. Generally I usually look at the pommel, if it is the common bun shaped it is likely English. Then of course there are all the other variations Spiracle, Cone shaped, flat bun etc. I have just popped a letter in the post to the Baron; hopefully he will confirm a publishing date for the first volume of his book soon.

While I have your attention Eljay, a while back you posed a question of Sword forum, when did the S disappear from the SH stamped in the Fox mark on Harvey blades, did you ever find the answer?

Cheers Cathey and Rex

Salaams Cathey, After getting slightly tied up in knots chasing non existent potential Irish hilt makers....which of course there aren't any...I then became drawn into a debate with myself about European Baskets....and then the inevitable twist which is the Schiavona.

I have my own theory on how this sleight of hand; ..The Irish Basket Hilt name came about based upon the fact that Scottish mercenaries to Sweden in the early 17th Century(1611) consisting of 800 such fighters were called Irishmen and that the trend continued but on the appearance of the basket hilt the term migrated to the hilt misnomer Irish Basket Hilt...simply by association...but a wrong one.

What I have discovered ...and it is understandable how the Earl has accumulated such a vast series of books and how difficult it must have been to stop taking notes/researching and start making the books! (and I will be after a copy of the collection soon as it comes out) is how convoluted the whole story is as it rolls out...In studying the Jacobite rebellion it becomes clear how many weapons were being supplied to the rebels and how many were sunk either by storm or by the English Navy and that a lot of these weapons came from /were collected by.. the French...who probably got them from Solingen ! or somewhere else...

What I found for beginners like me was a very reasonable account on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basket-hilted_sword and an excellent set of resources at the end including excellent photos at external links . and although these are from Scottish Museum sources it doesn't matter...I hope this helps.

I think it sets the balance and helps the beginner view the entire puzzle as it comes together.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahiim thank you for the input here, and the interesting notes on the explanations regarding the Irish/Scottish misnomer, which indeed often became somewhat misleading. Interestingly the events you mention with the Scottish mercenaries in Sweden and Norway reveal an interesting potential for the source of the basket hilts which became known as 'Highland'. It is further interesting that those sabres with basket hilts in Northern Europe became known as 'Sinclair' sabres in a further misomer having to do with one of the officers of Scottish forces in these campaigns.

In looking further into this sword of Cathey's, which is indeed an intriguing anomaly, I think the possibility suggested for the engraving having been done c.1790's is of course quite possible. I also feel that the sword was most certainly that of an officer in one of the Scottish regiments, as these men were given considerable latitude in matters of kit and weapons. In those times of course, supplying troops was the personal choice and responsibility of the colonels of their own regiments, and officers purchased their rank and commission, so given those circumstances it is quite understandable such carte blanche would be afforded them.

Perhaps the use of this earlier style hilt of English dragoons and in a Scottish regiment of cavalry would better explain the retention of the earlier sword and better placement of 1790s in its use.
While the engraving of this clearly pro-Scottish commemorative on the blade would seem bold, it must be remembered that Scot's are vehemently patriotic and proud, and such fervor, especially on the sword of an officer, would in no way be considered subversive. Things were quite different politically by then, and celebration of heroes of such early times was certainly allowable. While nationality was of course always an ever present notion, they co existed in these units as 'British'.

There was also some degree of national tension between Scots and Irish, but in battle, units such as Inniskilings and Royal Scots Greys rode together with great respect for each other in battle, in my own perception.

With regard to my apparent 'gaff' on the predominance of the broadsword as distinctly Scottish, in further looking and still not finding the source, I am thinking the comment (obviously too adamant) may have been geared toward 'typical' earlier Scottish basket hilts. As noted in German records, the Scots preferred heavy broadsword blades, perhaps more for their notably distinct style of swordsmanship , and that these clansmen were basically 'infantry' rather than cavalry. The single edged blade in my opinion became popular in the 18th century for dragoons (though these troops fought on foot mostly) and later cavalry for mounted combat.

The use of broadsword (DE) blades on cavalry swords was of course certainly occasional, but typically in the exceptions noted. Naturally blades used often lent to availability in many cases, so that might account for variations. Rehilting of hilts such as those found at Culloden might have been ersatz examples using either captured or otherwise obtained blades from perhaps English sources. Cross traffic in blades of course knows no borders ( I have a 'mortuary' with Andrea Ferara blade).

I think the comment on the broadsword (DE) blades would have been better worded as Scottish warriors pre Culloden 'preferred' those blades, and the term 'axiom' left out