Blades without a scabbard!

Jim McDougall · 6th September 2019, 05:50 PM

A most interesting, and unusual topic Stefan.
Scabbard or no scabbard.........it is really a matter of preference it some ways.
In my early collecting days, I was able to afford regulation type swords which were without scabbard. These were deemed 'incomplete' by collectors usually so dealers would reduce price accordingly.

I later discovered (to my dismay and shock) that there were actually collectors who COLLECTED scabbards alone! which I totally could not understand.
In many cases of swords without scabbards, discounting the idea of them being collected away from the sword itself, the strong possibility of the sword being a battlefield pick up after being separated from the owner in combat, the scabbard usually still with him.

With ethnographic weapons, there are typically more pragmatic situations.
The kampilan for example, is typically fitted with a break away scabbard, slats of wood bound together which are sheared away as the sword hits first strike, without being drawn.
Many cultures regard the scabbard as a 'house', where the sword lives, and nomenclature uses according terms.

The idea of protection of the blade is also key. The Japanese typically store their blades in shira saya mountings, including a scabbard of plain wood which will protect from moisture.
Regular scabbards, often with decoration and treatments which attract moisture were deadly to these amazing blades as corrosion was inevitably attracted by these.

On regulation swords, one of the most intriguing cases was in India, where troopers were shocked by the effective potential of the deadly sharp blades of Indian warriors. It turned out they were actually old British blades, highly honed and kept well oiled in wooden scabbards.
The metal scabbards not only were noisy, gleamed in the light revealing positions, attracted moisture , but dulled the blades.

For me, if displaying a sword, the scabbard is simply extra and takes more space. If the sword is an investment, then having the original scabbard is key.
For ethnographic swords, as long as blade is maintained, no need for scabbard.

Battara · 6th September 2019, 06:18 PM

However, for me the scabbard is part of the sword/dagger. It is a part of the culture. So that is why I make scabbards (as well as other things) and others have sent me pieces to make scabbards to match. I base my designs on the research I do on a particular culture, tribe, people, etc. and their examples.

Some would say that my work is an interpretation, but my counter is "so is the work of the original craftsmen."

6th September 2019, 05:50 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,191	A most interesting, and unusual topic Stefan. Scabbard or no scabbard.........it is really a matter of preference it some ways. In my early collecting days, I was able to afford regulation type swords which were without scabbard. These were deemed 'incomplete' by collectors usually so dealers would reduce price accordingly. I later discovered (to my dismay and shock) that there were actually collectors who COLLECTED scabbards alone! which I totally could not understand. In many cases of swords without scabbards, discounting the idea of them being collected away from the sword itself, the strong possibility of the sword being a battlefield pick up after being separated from the owner in combat, the scabbard usually still with him. With ethnographic weapons, there are typically more pragmatic situations. The kampilan for example, is typically fitted with a break away scabbard, slats of wood bound together which are sheared away as the sword hits first strike, without being drawn. Many cultures regard the scabbard as a 'house', where the sword lives, and nomenclature uses according terms. The idea of protection of the blade is also key. The Japanese typically store their blades in shira saya mountings, including a scabbard of plain wood which will protect from moisture. Regular scabbards, often with decoration and treatments which attract moisture were deadly to these amazing blades as corrosion was inevitably attracted by these. On regulation swords, one of the most intriguing cases was in India, where troopers were shocked by the effective potential of the deadly sharp blades of Indian warriors. It turned out they were actually old British blades, highly honed and kept well oiled in wooden scabbards. The metal scabbards not only were noisy, gleamed in the light revealing positions, attracted moisture , but dulled the blades. For me, if displaying a sword, the scabbard is simply extra and takes more space. If the sword is an investment, then having the original scabbard is key. For ethnographic swords, as long as blade is maintained, no need for scabbard.

6th September 2019, 06:18 PM	#2
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	However, for me the scabbard is part of the sword/dagger. It is a part of the culture. So that is why I make scabbards (as well as other things) and others have sent me pieces to make scabbards to match. I base my designs on the research I do on a particular culture, tribe, people, etc. and their examples. Some would say that my work is an interpretation, but my counter is "so is the work of the original craftsmen."