![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: North Queensland, Australia
Posts: 189
|
![]()
G'day Jim,
Those sorts of dimensions mean it is just as likely that this is a cavalry officer's sword as an infantry officer's. It is a pity it no longer has its scabbard as this may have given us some more clues. The scabbard may also have given us some more clues as to the country of origin. I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't actually British, or maybe it was made for a British officer serving with a foreign army. The taped grip is unusual for a British sword of this period. Cheers, Bryce |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,292
|
![]()
Thank you Bryce. I am thinking that given the 'experimentation' convention of the period, there are many possibilities, and as I mentioned the bolstered point (as in armor piercing) is a curious feature on this sharp point. While the British swords being produced in the 1796 patterns followed certain consistencies, the colonial circumstances likely created numerous other influences and requirements.
Although it seems that 'giving point' with curved sabers is not considered likely, it does seem that some cavalry methods (I think of France) did do this with the saber at high tierce with point downward. Perhaps I am misperceiving ths sword position, and it was just a guard position prior to contact. Best Jim Just thought of this Arab sa'if from Hadhramaut, 18th century to 19th, note the silver bandng on the scabbard very similar. The British were of course n Egypt, and Aden in Arabia and Ottoman contact prevalent. Could such a saber (noting the 'armor piercing'feature) have developed around ths time? Last edited by Jim McDougall; 12th December 2020 at 09:25 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,224
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,292
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: North Queensland, Australia
Posts: 189
|
![]()
G'day Guys,
Just to further illustrate how difficult it is to determine what branch of the army an unmarked 1796 style sabre may have been used in, on page 14 of Richard Dellar's "The British Cavalry Sword 1788-1912 Companion Volume" is an example with a canted grip and short, very curved, 28 inch blade marked to the 13th Light Dragoons. It has a steel mounted leather scabbard and if unmarked would have instantly been labeled a light infantry officer's sabre. Cheers, Bryce |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,292
|
![]()
Well noted Bryce, and agreed, it is very hard to accurately determine which particular type of unit a sword might have been used in, and likely they sometimes ended up in other types of units. Officers often sold commissions and acquired new in others such as cavalry to infantry or other.
In my post #21, I mentioned a basket hilt which had been mounted with a cavalry blade, but forgot to post photos. To reiterate, this was an infantry basket hilt, contrary to those well known for cavalry units through the 18th century as favored by dragoons, and with long straight blades. This type munitions grade basket was produced by London cutlers Jeffries as well as Drury and perhaps others in about 1740s. During the American revolution and after, the infantry other ranks ceased carrying swords, and relied on the bayonet. These basket hilts apparently ended up largely in stores and it is unclear what further use they mght have had. However, with my example, it was mounted with a M1788 light cavalry blade and when I acquired it about 40 years ago, it was suggested to have been for a flank company officer. For some time that seemed somewhat plausible and it was some time before I saw another also mounted with 1788 blade in the same way. Could this have indeed been for a flank company officer's use as a fighting weapon? or perhaps for cavalry officers in similar manner? or....further, a naval weapon? (naval officers also often favored cavalry weapons, and not all combative situations with naval contingents were at sea). It is known that in numerous cases, the basket hilt was found in maritime context. These are questions which typically will remain held secret to the weapons themselves, and we can only speculate. Still certain forensic and other types of evidence can sometimes offer compelling direction to these theories. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 411
|
![]()
I hope to attach two pictures showing flank officers and their swords, which seem to be used as instruments of command.
I am not sure their 'fighting qualities' were rated at the time as highly as we would expect them to be. We must also remember the huge numbers of self-funded militia at this time whom, judging from Jane Austen novels etc. did not, realistically, expect to be called on to fight. Regards Richard |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,292
|
![]() Quote:
Many officers, driven by personal hubris and enthusiasm to motivate their forces were compelled to actively lead their troops. Officers swords were often of course highly decorated, and regarded as less than combat worthy, but officers would often have secondary 'fighting' weapons which were used on campaign. These were often similar of course to other ranks weapons in general, despite obviously having more leeway in elements and features, such as the blades. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|