British pipeback parabolic blade saber c. 1801

[Jim McDougall]

The entries here have really been informative and helpful in understanding the function of the 'flank companies' and much appreciated, and thank you guys again!

Richard, this is a quite reasonably thought out suggestion regarding the sabers often regarded (or specifically identified) as 'flank company'. It does not seem however that the size or length or for that matter curvature was necessarily in mind as far as for officers of these company's. It does remain a plausible concern though, as it does not seem these units fell into any consistent protocol in their activity or manner of function.

It does seem that these are typically officers sabers, and if I have understood correctly in the protocol's of the times, officers were most often mounted.
Obviously that likely was not necessarily the case in 'skirmishing', which falls outside the guidelines for battle in the times.

It seems further that while the M1803 swords were basically 'regulation' patterns, most other sabers deemed possible flank company examples are either other ranks forms (as with my parabolic saber) or other officers forms with blade variations.

I wanted to add here another example of an 'out of character' saber which may fall into this unusual 'flank company' denominator.

It is a garrison type basket hilt of c. 1740s (typically by Jeffries, Drury in London), but here it is found with a M1788 cavalry blade. When I acquired this many years ago, it was suggested it may have been for a flank unit using the old basket hilt, obviously likely in one of the Scottish regiments.
In the 1780s the use of the basket hilt was ceased by infantry (i.e. Black Watch ) and perhaps an officer chose to use this remounted hilt as a fighting sword with curved blade.

It would seem that the flank companies, by their very nature (skirmishing is described as 'irregular' fighting or combat outside normal battle regularities) had a degree of carte blanche in weaponry, particularly the officers.

This thread has become most interesting in looking at the unusual characteristics of the swords that seem attributed to these flank company's.
I look forward to ongoing examples.....and Wayne ....thank you for that excellent description of the dynamics of saber use.

Bryce again thank you for the great examples, and I WILL get the rest of the measurements on this blade asap

[Jim McDougall]

Finally!

The blade is 32"straight line hilt base to point.

It is 1 1/4 " for 23"

Then drops to 1" @6" from point as it radiuses out to sharp point.

The raised (thickened) 'step' begins 9" from point.
It is almost as if it was intended for armor piercing with respect to the bolstered blade points on Indian weapons such as tulwars.
We can only wonder if there was some imagined intent to piercing mail or thick padding of textile.

[Bryce]

G'day Jim,
Those sorts of dimensions mean it is just as likely that this is a cavalry officer's sword as an infantry officer's. It is a pity it no longer has its scabbard as this may have given us some more clues. The scabbard may also have given us some more clues as to the country of origin. I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't actually British, or maybe it was made for a British officer serving with a foreign army. The taped grip is unusual for a British sword of this period.
Cheers,
Bryce

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Bryce. I am thinking that given the 'experimentation' convention of the period, there are many possibilities, and as I mentioned the bolstered point (as in armor piercing) is a curious feature on this sharp point. While the British swords being produced in the 1796 patterns followed certain consistencies, the colonial circumstances likely created numerous other influences and requirements.

Although it seems that 'giving point' with curved sabers is not considered likely, it does seem that some cavalry methods (I think of France) did do this with the saber at high tierce with point downward. Perhaps I am misperceiving ths sword position, and it was just a guard position prior to contact.
Best
Jim


Just thought of this Arab sa'if from Hadhramaut, 18th century to 19th, note the silver bandng on the scabbard very similar. The British were of course n Egypt, and Aden in Arabia and Ottoman contact prevalent. Could such a saber (noting the 'armor piercing'feature) have developed around ths time?

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by Bryce

G'day Jim,...or maybe it was made for a British officer serving with a foreign army. The taped grip is unusual for a British sword of this period.
Cheers,
Bryce

Don't forget that the Brit King Georges were also rulers of a fairly strong German state for a while at the time and Brits served their king over there and visa versa.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by kronckew

Don't forget that the Brit King Georges were also rulers of a fairly strong German state for a while at the time and Brits served their king over there and visa versa.

Good point Wayne, the Honoverian thing. Many British sword patterns were taken from actual German swords in use in mid 18th c, like the infantry hangers (1742, 1751), Revolutionary war Hessian units etc.

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,
Just to further illustrate how difficult it is to determine what branch of the army an unmarked 1796 style sabre may have been used in, on page 14 of Richard Dellar's "The British Cavalry Sword 1788-1912 Companion Volume" is an example with a canted grip and short, very curved, 28 inch blade marked to the 13th Light Dragoons. It has a steel mounted leather scabbard and if unmarked would have instantly been labeled a light infantry officer's sabre.
Cheers,
Bryce

[Jim McDougall]

Well noted Bryce, and agreed, it is very hard to accurately determine which particular type of unit a sword might have been used in, and likely they sometimes ended up in other types of units. Officers often sold commissions and acquired new in others such as cavalry to infantry or other.

In my post #21, I mentioned a basket hilt which had been mounted with a cavalry blade, but forgot to post photos.

To reiterate, this was an infantry basket hilt, contrary to those well known for cavalry units through the 18th century as favored by dragoons, and with long straight blades.
This type munitions grade basket was produced by London cutlers Jeffries as well as Drury and perhaps others in about 1740s. During the American revolution and after, the infantry other ranks ceased carrying swords, and relied on the bayonet. These basket hilts apparently ended up largely in stores and it is unclear what further use they mght have had.

However, with my example, it was mounted with a M1788 light cavalry blade and when I acquired it about 40 years ago, it was suggested to have been for a flank company officer. For some time that seemed somewhat plausible and it was some time before I saw another also mounted with 1788 blade in the same way.

Could this have indeed been for a flank company officer's use as a fighting weapon? or perhaps for cavalry officers in similar manner? or....further, a naval weapon? (naval officers also often favored cavalry weapons, and not all combative situations with naval contingents were at sea). It is known that in numerous cases, the basket hilt was found in maritime context.

These are questions which typically will remain held secret to the weapons themselves, and we can only speculate. Still certain forensic and other types of evidence can sometimes offer compelling direction to these theories.