![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Tyneside. North-East England
Posts: 526
|
![]()
Jim mentioned duelling with smallswords, so here are two pieces I came across durinmg my research. They may be well known to some but others will find them intriguing to say the least: I certainly did. Here's the first:
Duel with Small Swords - The Graphic - February 1897 Towards the end of the seventeenth century, a very significant and important change of sword play came into fashion, and consequent on this the long weighty rapier gave way to the dress small sword with its lighter blade, grip and guard. The Fronde in France and the Civil War in England had been conducive to much ruffianly bravery, but with a more quiescent state of affairs came a less pugnacious, though at the same time a more effeminate influence over the two nations, and the sword began to be in requisition merely as an ornamental appendage to the dress, though it was not till the reign of Queen Anne that it became what is called the " Small Sword," developing eventually into the perfect Court and duelling sword of the period of George II. and III. , and later still of the School of Angelo, upon which the modern French school of fencing is founded. Though small and unimportant looking, there was still the necessity for making it a deadly weapon on an emergency; hence the evolution of an entirely different system of fence. Owing to the comparative lightness of the new weapon and the much shorter blade, the attack became more rapid, the feint more intricate, and the lunge itself more involved. With the earlier forms of about 1650, it was not possible to execute the same rapid succession of parries and ripostes as are attainable with the modern duelling rapier, which is practically the same as the small sword of the latter part of the eighteenth century. The shape of the blade varied, but the bayonet or triangular form was universal. A shape known as "Colichemarde" obtained great favour from 1730 to 1760. Here the forte of the blade was made much broader with the idea that the parry would have greater force. It had, however, the defect of throwing the weight too near the hand, allowing the point to be dangerously high and the lunge in consequence less direct. A notable feature in all swords of this period is the very small size of the shell or protection to the hand, proving how much the science and finesse of the parry had increased, keeping pace with the lightness and delicacy of the weapon. The introduction of a larger shell in the modern French duelling rapier is due to the fact that now so much play is made to touch the hand or forearm, thereby disabling the opponent and bringing the duel to a close without fatal results. In the days of the small sword the adversary was invariably run through the body, and if death ensued the successful duellist was tried for murder, being acquitted or not according to the circumstances of the case. And the second: Mad and Bad: a very interesting small-sword duel took place on January 26, I765, between Lord Byron and his neighbour Mr. Chaworth. These gentlemen were dining with others at the Star and Garter Tavern in Pall Mall about seven in the evening when the conversation turned upon the subject of game on their estates (precise story varies). This resulted in a drunken altercation, after which Lord Byron left the room, and meeting Mr. Chaworth in the passage stated that he wished to speak with him. He then called a waiter and asked if there were any room disengaged. The waiter showed them to an unoccupied room and left them with a candle, which was all the light in the apartment except a dull fire. As Mr. Chaworth turned round after shutting the door, he perceived Lord Byron with his sword half drawn, who instantly exclaimed "Draw." Mr. Chaworth immediately complied, and at the first thrust his sword passed through Lord Byron's waistcoat, and he thought he had wounded him, when Lord Byron, shortening his sword, gave him a fatal wound. A struggle then took place between the parties, for they were found grasped in each other's arms by the landlord and waiter, who, hearing the noise, hurriedly entered the room. A surgeon was immediately sent for who pronounced the Chaworth wound mortal, the sword having entered on the left side of the stomach, and, passing obliquely upwards, had made its exit five or six inches higher on the left side of the back. It appears that when Mr. Chaworth's sword passed through the waistcoat of his antagonist, he expressed his apprehension that he had seriously wounded him. Now under such an apprehension it is probable that he was thrown off his guard and Lord Byron quickly shortened his sword and ran him through. Writhing under the agonies of his wound, Mr. Chaworth several times declared that, although he well knew that he was in immediate danger of death, he had rather be in his present situation than live under the misfortune of having killed another person. He also observed that when, after closing the door, he turned round, he perceived that Lord Byron's sword was half-drawn and knowing his man, he drew his own as quickly as he could, and had the first pass at him. After three months incarceration the House of Lords found William, Lord Byron, "not guilty of the felony of murder, but of manslaughter," and his lordship, being a Peer and claiming the Benefit of Clergy and the statute of Edward VI., was discharged after paying his fees. The two swords involved were preserved: at Annesley, and Newstead. nb. About 300 aristocrats a year died of duels in France in the 1600s. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|