Five Ball Hilt spadroons

[David]

I hate to be so pedestrian, but there is even a Wiki on this sword form.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spadroon

[celtan]

Thanks Guys, got my answer!

Now, if I only could discover what was the significance of a 7 ball, as compared with a 5 or 3 ball hilt...

Best Regards

Manolo

Originally Posted by David

I hate to be so pedestrian, but there is even a Wiki on this sword form.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spadroon

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks so much guys! Kisak, when you say get the ball rollin' .....you really mean 'rollin' ! You are exactly spot on in noting these as infantry swords, and specifically for officers.
Fernando thank you for the work on the etymology, and as you note, it is often hard to determine actual meanings or intentions in changing parlance and context. As we have learned, often terms become used colloquially in a sense, which is truly a confounding circumstance for the weapons historian.

Although I know there are certainly references on these swords online, and I have done research on them some time ago (again notes not at hand), I wanted to initiate a discussion here in which we could all participate. This is something I could not have experienced in my earlier research days B.C. (= before computer

Actually the material typically found online is indeed often somewhat 'pedestrian' compared to more specialized reference, it does serve well as a benchmark.
Clearly the joining of well versed international forces here will far exceed that benchmark, and hopefully we can establish more compehensive material.
Again, this is what I believe we are here for.

Nicely done on the Castle reference Chris, thank you! It seems you are extremely well versed in fencing, are you a fencer yourself? I noticed your reference to Angelo in addition to the Castle work.

Celtan, you are right on it! The seven ball eaglehead, good question, and since it is an American piece, whether these, or the French multiple ball hilts were also called spadroons is an excellent question.

I am thinking that the term spadroon may have possibly been in kind of a allusion toward fencing and smallswords, as might have been the case with military officers, who were of course gentry and often nobility in varying status. Since this was in a time of elevated neoclassicism evidenced in sword decoration (these swords actually were the British pattern 1786 infantry officers, as shown in Robson , 'Swords of the British Army' p.107) perhaps these were intended as a more fashionable style of smallsword intended for military use?

I am not sure if the term 'spadroon' followed as these became popular in France, and subsequently the U.S. nor the meaning or significance of the number of beads or balls in the hilt decoration. These things are what I hope to discover as we move on.

All best regards,
Jim

[Chris Evans]

Hi Jim,

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Nicely done on the Castle reference Chris, thank you!

And thanks to you too for your kind words and initiating this thread.

It seems you are extremely well versed in fencing, are you a fencer yourself? I noticed your reference to Angelo in addition to the Castle work.

Not really, though I did learn a bit of the military sabre-sword, as used by infantry, in my teen years, but that was using wands and doing only the basic moves over and over plus some extremely simple pre-arranged exchanges with a partner. No safety gear of any kind and rough or free play was forbidden. Boring and simple stuff at best. However, ever since then I have had a life long armchair fascination with swordplay.

BTW. A bit more information on Spadroons from E.D.Morton:

"...... It was slightly adapted, by the British Army, for use as the standard infantry officer's sword, but proving grossly inefficient in the Peninsular War (1808-14), became the subject of many complaints."

I also had a very hasty look in Norman's and whilst he devotes some space to this weapon, I could not find an answer to the perplexing numbers of balls on the knuckle guards and their curatorial significance.

Cheers
Chris

[Jim McDougall]

My pleasure Chris. I experienced a liitle fencing also, it seems several lifetimes ago, and with the sabre as well. We did use the mask and gear, but one learned quickly as those stiff blades really hurt on a good hit, one on the side of the mask would rattle your head pretty good! Not sure if that was supposed to happen, but it sure did.

I finally dragged out my trusty Robson (not an easy task finding it in this bookmobile) and found that these infantry swords were indeed not too well thought of. On p.107 Robson notes that the M1786 hilts were flimsy wigh minimal hand protection, despite its intent for a fighting weapon with potential for cut and thrust.

It noted that prior to 1786, the symbol of authority for infantry officers was the staff weapon known as the 'spontoon'. I wonder if the term for the sword introduced to replace this might have somehow inspired the term 'spadroon', which was apparantly already in the parlance of swordplay and the fashionable smallsword?

Robson notes further that the outbreak of war with France in 1793 and further displeasure with these hilts may have led to a new style hilt in 1796, which was similar to the smallsword with the double shell guard, and using the same style blade.

With your quotation from Morton concerning the complaints on these infantry swords, which at this point must have been the shellguard pattern 1796, Robson cites another;
"...nothing could be more useless or more ridiculous than the old infantry regulation sword, it was good for neither cut nor thrust and was a perfect encumbrance".
Gen. Cavalie Mercer, remininscing about Royal
Artillery at turn of the 18th century.

It remains unclear whether the spadroon term continued to be used referring to the subsequent pattern 1796. Robson does note that the five ball hilt did become popular with English naval officers c.1790, and that the French adopted the form for naval and dragoon officers c.1800 (described as a'la anglaise= in the English style). The U.S. adopted the pattern about 1812, and seems typically associated with 'Federal Period' eagleheads.

Nick Norman was a brilliant scholar, and his book is an amazing reference using actual art and portraiture to date hilt forms. I was truly surprised that there was no attention given to this curious feature, but given the monumental undertaking of this work I suppose it would have been extremely difficult to attend to such a detail. As I have mentioned, it would seem that the only arms scholar who seems to have considered this hilt feature a curiosity or anomaly was May.....until us

All very best regards,
Jim

[Hotspur]

Hi guys, I am somewhat of a spadroon enthusiast and can't say no to just one. Some have indicated that the term more relates to hilt type than specifically the blade, as we see shallow double diamond crossections of the same period.

In terms of the beading, my impression from some studdy is that they staryted to turn up on the continent and then somewhat went wild in Birmingham and then on specifically American market swords. While seven may seem unusual, by the first quarter of the 19th century, some have shown more than seven. Celtan's seven ball, with the indicated etched rather than engraved blade and a later knuckle bow that is a squared step at the pommel end instead of the earlier period with this bird that inevitably had a round step that was actually the casting boss to be optioned as a ring, which is found on a fair number of them.

Salter just listed and quite uniform three ball that is somewhat undeniably late in make, albeit a cushion pommel. I'll see if I can pull these up via attachments here. The many beaded is clearly seen in Perterson's bible, yet not just like the seven balled example shown here. I would dispute it to be a matter of a badge of rank exceping for those early French beaded hilts (of typically three or less in contrasting scale).

My files are a bit of a mess after a meltdown on the last drive. I hope to recover my 2008 and part of this year's work. Mowbray the younger and Fladerman put together a good book as well. It includes the chronology of a good many books.

Lets see here: Some odd balls, including some spadroons with a reproduction Patton and a period 1854 for scale. The pretty Frenck one with the cigar band went to Dmitry in a momentary lapse of my mind but it did help reach my funds for the mle1854. The two eagles include one five ball. I think the general knowledge base reaches most folk as the five ballers the one they think of, so other peculiar numbers seems noteworthy but the truth is that there was a wide range and variety that (I believe) started with the French and other continental trends and fancy. More than a non-com? Sure I'd buy that philosophy but (my feeling and investigation) seeing seven on a post 1812 war eagle didn't mean diddley squat compared to some of the wilder cutlery we see from that period. Seeing more or less on an American market sword simply means a special request, or indeed an option, as I have seen other seven balls on that eagle hilt. It could happen as easily as a cutler simply filing two more graduated balls on the same hilt as the five.

Cheers

Hotspur; there is a dandy five out there somewhere that I have dubbed the earliest five baller out there but it is probably just my enthusiasm

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Hotspur,
I wanted to welcome you, and thank you for the great insight and illustrations on these interesting swords, outstanding grouping there!!!
I think there does seem to be some differences in opinion, as is often the case, whether a sword is identified by term for the blade type or hilt style.
To me the spadroon term seems to be more a colloquial term used by officers, as the M1796 infantry officers swords do not seem to be referred to as spadroons, even though the blade form I believe was essentially the same.

I agree that the five ball style turned up on the Continent not too long after the British M1786 infantry officers sword was around. My main point of interest has always been, why the five ball motif? Was it possibly a Masonic numeric association? its transference to the Continent via fraternal associations, which were certainly a gentry oriented possibility . The eventual departure from the five ball numeric seems to correspond to other numerics also significant in symbolism, three and seven. But then the variations appear, and as noted, the Federal period eagleheads with varying numbers appear in the U.S.
While personal preference may have been behind the numbers chosen, the five seem to appear on many, and there were of course significant Masons among American officers as well.

The stirrup hilt with birdhead pommel and writhen knuckleguard is really intriguing, especially with the star and sunburst on the langet. Now that one would really be a hit here in Texas!!!
It seems also a Federal period type, is it?

Again, thank you for these postings.

All the best,
Jim

[celtan]

Nice pics ! : )

I also like these...Spadroons?. I must admit they are not the most effective of weapons, somewhat unwieldy, but the straight blade and the stirrup hilt give them a stately appearance, simple yet noble. They are more suited up to be a symbol of power than an instrument of power.

I had a most illuminating exchange at another forum, I learned more from the discussion there than from reading Mowbray's. One of the local veterans, Glenn, was an expert in early american swords. He posited a relation between Ames and the early Eagle pommels. (IIRC, Ames imported them from England) . Another interesting tidbit was that they were in full fashion locally _20 years after_ their use was abandoned in Europe.

Jim: I find the numerology association with the Masons very intriguing. My grandfather was very high in the Mason's hierarchy, I didn't know this until very recently. I remember him always telling me that my "lucky number" was five, and never to forget it. What the significance of the numbers 3/5/7 in Mason's lore?

OTOH, perhaps they used 3/5/7 balls depending on the size of the striking hand?

Best

Manuel Luis