A hunting knife for comments
 

I wonder if, by the pictures and details, you Gentlemen could tell me where this one comes from and its estimated age. In fact judging by the scabbard i would, within my limitations, place it in the (end)18th century. On the other hand, i see by some marks on the leather in that, the locket had a previous fixation, of one centimeter distant from the present one, which i would not assume this scabbard to be from a different knife but an 'elongation' of its length due to leather extreme shrinkage ... if you Gentlemen agree to that.
I am less surprised with the blade deep wide fuller than with is strong roundish back, both stopping less than 1/4 from the tip.
It would be so nice to receive your comments.

Blade length: 26 cms.
Total length:37 cms.
Width at forte: 37 m/m.
Thickness at forte: 9 m/m.
Wight: 357 grams.


.


.

I am no expert on such kifes but as there is no ricasso and no mark or stamp of a maker, I think that the blade is the tip of a former sabre or sword.

Thank you for your input, Udo but ... i don't see the present format suggesting the final section of a previous sword. A sword with such blade back would be tremendous. But i might be wrong, though. I wouldn't reject it could be some other kind of modification... but which ?
Let us hear from other members... please :o.


.

the blade looks like a repurposed bayonet blade , and the grip , crossguard & scabbard are reminiscent of hunting knives made in India for sale to British officers and hunters in the late 19th / early 20th C.
.

Hello,

I think a part of a pipe-back blade was repurposed in the 19th century here. For me it is difficult to say where and when exactly the dagger was made, but it doesn't look like a typical German or French piece.

Regards
Robin

Thanks again for your judgements.
I can now follow Robin's assumption that this would be a cut down part of a first quarter XIX century pipe-back sword blade; the back part, that is. I was skeptical of it being the tip section, as first suggested, due to its sturdy structure.
I understand that they copy European style hunting knives in India for British customers, and not only, but i find it hard to digest that the guard+scabbard in this one do not come from somewhere in Europe.

Precisely my opinion too!

:)

Mulțumiri, Mario ;).
So the blade is one of a 1822 British sword. I am still considering readline assumption that this knife was mounted in India. I wish i saw some examples of such setups to give the benefit of the doubt.

Just to add a few things, blades of this type cross section were often referred to as 'pipe back' or 'ram rod' and seem to have first appeared noticeably in the latter 18th into 19th c. in England. This was a period of innovation as types of blades and sword patterns were being tested and becoming the first of various regulation patterns there.

The ramrod (pipe back) blade I have is unusual in that it is dramatically parabolic in its shamshir like curve, and is an early variation of the M1796 light cavalry saber, probably c. 1795-1805.
These ramrod blades became popular on a number of British sabers, but as noted it did become known on M1822 officers sabers for infantry and remained on many until c. 1840s.

Interestingly, this 'pipe back' type blade reappeared in Germany on swords from c.1870s along with the 'yelman' tips (expanded point).

The fabrication of this knife, recalling the 'hirschfanger' (hunting sword) form of Europe, primarily Germany with stag horn suggests of course possible repurposing there. The scabbard seems fashioned out of a military type which indeed does resemble British examples, except with the carry ring on the throat.

With these things considered, it is hard to say exactly when and where this was fabricated, but these notes on the components are established.

The photo is of the parabolic saber with ramrod blade c. 1795-1805
The images of German cavalry sabers are from "Cut and Thrust Weapons", Eduard Wagner, Prague, 1967, and the blades are described as 'round back'.

Coincidence ...
 

Thank you for your input, Jim.
As a curiosity, let me here show the Portuguese version of the 1822 pipe back, mounted with a Queen Dona Maria II (1834-1853) guard.
It is said to be known that, despite its round back (cota) this sword pattern was fragile. To confirm that, this specific blade was (also) broken by one third of its extension.

(Courtesy As Armas e os Barões by Eduardo Nobre)

.

MOST interesting! as always Fernando.
It seems that the Portuguese had a profound presence with their own versions of many sword types, and it is great that you furnish so much material on this important dynamic. I honestly would never have known of these Portuguese versions of what has become known as the British 'Gothic hilt'.

It seems that these M1822 hilts with incorporated cartouche were produced by a number of sword makers in England , especially Wilkinson of course (after 1850s). It seems that the hilts were made in the same form but often using various cyphers and symbols or badges in the cartouche.

Interesting that these were regarded as 'fragile' but these primarily infantry swords were actually never thought of as particularly 'combat' oriented.

It does seem that there are numerous contexts which the blade of this knife might have originated.

Broken blades ...
 

Jim, do you mean to say that infantry swords were not meant for combat, or this pattern in particular ?
Call it a flaw from the abovementioned book author but, in fact, Queen Dona Maria II reigned twice, the first period between 1826-1828, ended by an uprise followed by a Civil War, that lasted until 1834.
This would give place for a 1822 (pipe-back) sword hilted with this Queen cartouche to be present in such episodes and break in combat; or as well be broken for another zillion reasons.

No, what I meant was that infantry did not really carry swords after 1780s (British), but these were officers swords. These were typically regarded as secondary of course, and to direct etc. Officers were not expected to participate in combat, but there were of course exceptions.

I dont think this adaption was from a blade broken in combat or that sort of situation, but swords in those days were not especially regarded as practical.
However , the blades were valued, and of course cut down for use in knife form.
The sword was essentially obsolete in the 19th c in the US, which was the reason for extra large Bowies, and the espada anchas in Mexico. While swords were still worn, actual use was incidental.

Turning to Scotland, after Culloden (1746) swords were prohibited....however, dirks were considered utility and OK to use for hunting etc...........which is what happened to many of the famed Highland basket hilts. It was not from being broken in combat.

As noted, this distinctive type 'round back' blade was not especially common, but known in early British sabers (not just infantry) until about 1840s..they were seen on German sabers c. 1870s-80s, and these swords were used into WWI period.

The blade here seems from the upper section of the blade, reprofiled tip. I cannot think of any bayonet with ramrod back blade, and would welcome any information on such types.

Thank you Jim, for sharing all that knowledge.
I will follow your assumption on the " but there were of course exceptions " part.
Whether 'my' author mentioning could be a fantasy, i find more than one source admitting that the pipe-back sword was fragile indeed.

"As a fighting weapon, the 1822 Pattern was rather unsatisfactory, the blade being far too weak and the hilt bars affording little protection".

https://www.militariahub.com/british...officer-sword/

Besides the fragility issue, this could mean (these) infantry swords were still "serviceable" :o.

At last ...
 

I would like to say that i found the support text of this item when it was last included in an auction.
"Spanish, with a repurposed sword blade".
Judging by the fact that also the Spanish had their version of the 1822 pipe-back, it all makes sense ... i would say.


.

as they say here in Texas, "..well....there ya go!" :)

All's well that ends well :D.