Victorian Era Infantry Officer’s Sword?

Ken Maddock · 23rd October 2015, 10:50 AM

hi
I have had a few of these and be v careful if trying to un bend the brass
it is so brittle and very difficult to straighten
and if brazing it melts at a lower temp than normal brass brazing rods
is there a proof slug in the blade
regards
Ken

dana_w · 23rd October 2015, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Maddock

hi
I have had a few of these and be v careful if trying to un bend the brass
it is so brittle and very difficult to straighten
and if brazing it melts at a lower temp than normal brass brazing rods
is there a proof slug in the blade
regards
Ken

Thanks Ken Maddock!

When it comes to antiques, I feel better not trying to "unbend" anything. There are no markings on the blade.

RobertGuy · 24th October 2015, 07:53 AM

Dana
Looking for examples of this hilt style I noticed that it actually conforms to a rifle officer's sword hilt but without the stringed bugle emblem and not made of steel! Robson's Swords of the British Army states that there were slight hilt variations and this may just be one makers take on the regulation hilt. I also noted that the Royal Army Medical Corps carried the same pattern and the 1892 version is exactly the same hilt as yours. (Robson 1st edition, plate 172).

I was looking more closely at your photo and the blade tip looks almost like it has a 'yelman' (flattened back with central ridge) and yet it does not seem to have a pipe back blade. Is it just my failing eyesight?

dana_w · 24th October 2015, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertGuy

Dana
Looking for examples of this hilt style I noticed that it actually conforms to a rifle officer's sword hilt but without the stringed bugle emblem and not made of steel! Robson's Swords of the British Army states that there were slight hilt variations and this may just be one makers take on the regulation hilt. I also noted that the Royal Army Medical Corps carried the same pattern and the 1892 version is exactly the same hilt as yours. (Robson 1st edition, plate 172).

I was looking more closely at your photo and the blade tip looks almost like it has a 'yelman' (flattened back with central ridge) and yet it does not seem to have a pipe back blade. Is it just my failing eyesight?

Thanks for the great info RobertGuy.

I've post some closeups of the tip for you these are enlargements from a small area of the original photos. I played with the brightness and lighting a little bit.

RobertGuy · 24th October 2015, 11:04 PM

Thanks for the extra photos. The point does have a yelman so this should be a pipe back blade. (rounded spine). If that is the case the pipe back blade was discontinued in 1845 but the normal officer's hilt had a fold down inner portion until 1854. A real conundrum. My money is now on it being a Royal Army Medical Corps sword but...

dana_w · 27th October 2015, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertGuy

Thanks for the extra photos. The point does have a yelman so this should be a pipe back blade. (rounded spine). If that is the case the pipe back blade was discontinued in 1845 but the normal officer's hilt had a fold down inner portion until 1854. A real conundrum. My money is now on it being a Royal Army Medical Corps sword but...

Thanks RobertGuy. It is a "real conundrum".

Jim McDougall · 28th October 2015, 05:48 AM

This really is an anomaly, and interesting as to the average collector this would likely be assumed simply an 1822 infantry officers sword. As you have all well illustrated, there is complexity beyond such simplicity even in regulation swords.
I have not had my trusty Robson (1975) out for a long time, and it was good to go through it again.
From what I can gather, most assessments here seem pretty well placed, and it does seem this hilt aligns most readily with the post 1854 guard without folding section.

What is most curious is that in 1845, a new blade form was introduced by Wilkinson for these swords (broadly classified M1822 and gothic hilt, as per Ffoulkes). The blade on Danas example is the earlier 'pipe back' (often called quill back). Hilts fitted with these new Wilkinson blades also had a tang button.
This sword has the earlier style blade, yet the hilt is more to the 1854 solid guard form also without tang button.
To carry further, the Royal cypher remains 'open', that is without the rose, thistle and shamrock embellishments of the 1850s (Robson, p.119).

In my thinking, it seems likely this example may fall into the period of early 1850s, in perhaps a transitional sense. The unmarked blade of 'pipe back form seems likely German made (these type blades were used on their swords well through the 19th c) and often 'blanks' sold to British outfitters.

The hilt, as noted, may have been of prototype before official changes to guard early 1850s.

The scabbard, as noted, possibly not original.....by 1855 these carry ring steel scabbards replaced the leather and brass frog carry type.

I do not think this is Medical officers (1892) as these of course had the 'dumb bell' cross section blade, unless this was one with a German blade of the period (which seems unlikely), also these hilts had the tang button and I think without 'steps'.
It is of course possible that it might have been in the Medical officers use given the unusual circumstances in the elements here, and in that early 1850s period with a German blade.

23rd October 2015, 10:50 AM	#1
Ken Maddock Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Ireland Posts: 104	hi I have had a few of these and be v careful if trying to un bend the brass it is so brittle and very difficult to straighten and if brazing it melts at a lower temp than normal brass brazing rods is there a proof slug in the blade regards Ken

24th October 2015, 07:53 AM	#3
RobertGuy Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Posts: 135	Dana Looking for examples of this hilt style I noticed that it actually conforms to a rifle officer's sword hilt but without the stringed bugle emblem and not made of steel! Robson's Swords of the British Army states that there were slight hilt variations and this may just be one makers take on the regulation hilt. I also noted that the Royal Army Medical Corps carried the same pattern and the 1892 version is exactly the same hilt as yours. (Robson 1st edition, plate 172). I was looking more closely at your photo and the blade tip looks almost like it has a 'yelman' (flattened back with central ridge) and yet it does not seem to have a pipe back blade. Is it just my failing eyesight?

24th October 2015, 11:04 PM	#5
RobertGuy Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Posts: 135	Thanks for the extra photos. The point does have a yelman so this should be a pipe back blade. (rounded spine). If that is the case the pipe back blade was discontinued in 1845 but the normal officer's hilt had a fold down inner portion until 1854. A real conundrum. My money is now on it being a Royal Army Medical Corps sword but...

28th October 2015, 05:48 AM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,295	This really is an anomaly, and interesting as to the average collector this would likely be assumed simply an 1822 infantry officers sword. As you have all well illustrated, there is complexity beyond such simplicity even in regulation swords. I have not had my trusty Robson (1975) out for a long time, and it was good to go through it again. From what I can gather, most assessments here seem pretty well placed, and it does seem this hilt aligns most readily with the post 1854 guard without folding section. What is most curious is that in 1845, a new blade form was introduced by Wilkinson for these swords (broadly classified M1822 and gothic hilt, as per Ffoulkes). The blade on Danas example is the earlier 'pipe back' (often called quill back). Hilts fitted with these new Wilkinson blades also had a tang button. This sword has the earlier style blade, yet the hilt is more to the 1854 solid guard form also without tang button. To carry further, the Royal cypher remains 'open', that is without the rose, thistle and shamrock embellishments of the 1850s (Robson, p.119). In my thinking, it seems likely this example may fall into the period of early 1850s, in perhaps a transitional sense. The unmarked blade of 'pipe back form seems likely German made (these type blades were used on their swords well through the 19th c) and often 'blanks' sold to British outfitters. The hilt, as noted, may have been of prototype before official changes to guard early 1850s. The scabbard, as noted, possibly not original.....by 1855 these carry ring steel scabbards replaced the leather and brass frog carry type. I do not think this is Medical officers (1892) as these of course had the 'dumb bell' cross section blade, unless this was one with a German blade of the period (which seems unlikely), also these hilts had the tang button and I think without 'steps'. It is of course possible that it might have been in the Medical officers use given the unusual circumstances in the elements here, and in that early 1850s period with a German blade.