Basket hilted swords

[victoriansword]

Originally Posted by Cathey

Date Circa 1750-70 (18th Century)
Nationality Scottish Black Watch 42nd Highland Regiment

English basket-hilted backsword A Scottish military basket hilted backsword issued to the 42nd Highlanders, circa 1750-1770, older straight single edged fullered blade marked FARARA. Regulation hilt, panels pierced with triangular and circular openings. Truncated conical pommel (marked with an ?) with special button, wire bound leather grip.

If anyone can work out what is on the pommel I would be very grateful. I think they are numbers.

Cheers Cathey

Why are these frequently attributed to the 42nd even without regimental markings? Is it because the blades are not of the Jefferys/Drury backsword type and therefore presumed to be earlier (when the 42nd were the only Highland regiment in the British Army)?

Thank you,
VS

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by victoriansword

Why are these frequently attributed to the 42nd even without regimental markings? Is it because the blades are not of the Jefferys/Drury backsword type and therefore presumed to be earlier (when the 42nd were the only Highland regiment in the British Army)?

Thank you,
VS

I think that the 'hilt form' is what is attributed to the 42nd, which is the collective regimental designation for the "Black Watch" battalions which were formed in 1739 as the 43rd but later renumbered 42nd. It seems there are few of these regimentally marked, but the hilt form is well established as being produced by Nathaniel Jeffries (3500 swords in 1759) and as a 'pattern' of 1757 . The Highland units comprised of 42nd went to North America in 1758 (to 1767) with enlisted men carrying these in French-Indian war.

Later, the last purchase of these was in 1775, and after battle of Long Island in 1776, the swords were collected and stored. The Black Watch at the end of the war went to Nova Scotia in 1783, and swords were only carried by officers and NCO's.

By 1770s, Dru Drury had taken over the business and both he and Nathaniel Jeffries had produced these swords.

I think this is the reason for the collective classification of these particular enlisted mans basket hilt as 'Black Watch' is because of this rather broad classification for the Highland Regiments in America using them.

This is a very large thread so not sure which post you are referring to as far as the sword with Farara . Most of the blades are marked Jefries or Drury and if Farara it would be an import from Solingen.

[victoriansword]

Thank you, Jim. I can understand the hilt form being attributed to the 42nd. I’ve seen some sales listings which seem to imply the swords (with non-Jefferys/Drury blades) are for the 42nd. Without regimental markings or other very strong evidence, I personally wouldn’t confidently state that a sword with this pattern hilt was used by someone in the 42nd.

Thanks again,
VS

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by victoriansword

Thank you, Jim. I can understand the hilt form being attributed to the 42nd. I’ve seen some sales listings which seem to imply the swords (with non-Jefferys/Drury blades) are for the 42nd. Without regimental markings or other very strong evidence, I personally wouldn’t confidently state that a sword with this pattern hilt was used by someone in the 42nd.

Thanks again,
VS

I agree VS, that would be a bit irresponsible to classify any type of sword to a regiment etc. without markings or provenance, though it is OK to note that it is 'of the type' used accordingly. What I was noting is that Jeffries and later Drury were prolific suppliers of this munitions grade hilt form (it seems Harvey had a few).

I have one that I've had since the 70s which was remounted with a M1788 light cavalry saber blade, and would suspect it was taken from the stores of these collected after 1784 when they ceased being issued to infantry.
Possibly it was remounted for militia or yeomanry during the 1793+ concerns over possible French invasion etc. hard to say really, but pretty interesting saber.

I got most info from "Swords for the Highland Regiments 1757-1784". Anthony Darling, 1988.

[victoriansword]

Jim,
I was also using Darling as a reference, which is why I was confused since Darling is careful to not offer conjecture and only states regimental affiliation when his examples have the proper markings. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge and perspective on these interesting early regimental swords,

All the best,
VS

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by victoriansword

Jim,
I was also using Darling as a reference, which is why I was confused since Darling is careful to not offer conjecture and only states regimental affiliation when his examples have the proper markings. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge and perspective on these interesting early regimental swords,

All the best,
VS

Absolutely, and as you well note, Darling was extremely cautious, in fact as you know, he had that one instance of '42' on the one example, which was noted as specifically 'unusual'. Though I've learned so much all these years, I still learn virtually every day, thanks to queries and discussions as here with you.

The regimental markings situation with British weapons in the 18th century are fascinating because they are so mysterious and not necessarily standardized nor always accurately recorded.