Tulwar Vs sabre.

katana · 10th March 2007, 01:42 PM

Hi Jim,
excellent infomation (as usual

)
It backs up what I have previously read about the British regulation pattern swords of the 19c. Complacency amongst the ranks, with regards sword care seemed common, as the reliance on firearms came to the fore. This complacency must have been created within the higher ranking officers whom should have enforced orders to ensure swords were 'fit for battle',..but didn't.
It was unfortunate that the effects of this poor maintenance was not acted upon. As the accounts you state, and Richard's references to 'Sahib' have shown, that the sword still had a useful function in warfare during that period.
It seems strange to me that officer scabbards were wood (a cheaper, more easily worked material) and the 'others' metal ( a more expensive solution...although more robust ) Personally, (obviously) wood would be my preference.
I also think that an 'oiled' blade may have a slightly enhanced cutting performance over a similar 'un-oiled' blade......at least while the lubricated blade surface remained (cuts through clothing, for instance, would wipe this coating off.)

Jim McDougall · 10th March 2007, 03:30 PM

Hi Katana,
Thanks very much

!
There were dramatic improvements in firearms throughout the 19th century that focused attention toward these as principle weapons, especially repeating arms, while percussion caps and the use of cartridges had already paved the advance. The use of the sword became more of a stubbornly held tradition and a secondary weapon used when firearms failed, ammunition supply ran out or a position was overrun. In these times of change, there were of course those gallant individuals who maintained the importance of the sword in combat as primary. It is well known that many of the older generals strongly favored the sword above all, and the development of the British M1908 cavalry sword and American M1913 "Patton" sword illustrate the ongoing determination to design the ultimate cavalry sword.

Consider these statements;
"I consider that the sword has a great moral effect on both the man carrying it, and the enemy. One of the chief values of the sword is the spirit of progress it inspires in the carrier. He does not allow himself to be bluffed by slight opposition".
Brigadier General Wilson
3rd Australian Light Horse
Beersheba Palestine, October,1917

"The charge will always be, the thing in which it will be the cavalrymans pride to die....sword in hand".
"Cavalry Journal", 1909

The use of swords clearly remained profoundly favored by officers who were of course keenly driven by pride and adherence to military tradition, while troops in the rank and file did not necessarily have the same perspective. Even in the Civil War in the United States, it is well known that swords were constantly worn by troops on both sides, yet medical accounts of casualties revealed no significant number of sword inflicted wounds. Most of the instances of even those revealed only bruising or even broken bones from blunt force trauma, suggesting that the weapons were probably not sharpened or used improperly.

The use of oil on the blades seems well established in maintaining the servicability of sword blades, and this was emphatically noted by Nolan in India, as well as the use of wooden scabbards. As has been discussed many times here on the forum, the use of certain oils of varying botanical nature is prevalent with edged weapons in India and throughout that cultural sphere. We are learning more on the often religious and talismanic values in the application of these through outstanding references such as Robert Elgood's magnificent "Hindu Arms and Ritual", and it would seem that the use of such oils may have been observed in a simpler and practical sense by individuals from the west.

The wooden scabbards used in sheathing the swords carried by officers were of course designed structurally as support for the leather and varying types of covering used to enhance these typically more decorative swords. Most officers maintained a number of swords for varying occasions from the dress and parade swords to the combat weapons very similar to those of other ranks. Many of the officers swords used for actual combat were often referred to as 'fighting' swords and if I am not mistaken, these were most often sheathed in metal scabbards in the same manner as other ranks.

Thank you very much for responding, and giving me the chance to ramble on further on this topic, which remains fondly with me from my early collecting days which focused on British cavalry sabres. A nice trip down memory lane!!

All the best,
Jim

Pukka Bundook · 10th March 2007, 03:40 PM

Hi William,
In the book "Sahib" there are many first hand accounts of problems with dull swords, and those that broke, or bent "nearly double" on first strike, (Which may well indicate a badly executed cut!) but the point is, there does appear to have been a problem with quality at that time.
Re. your swords from this period being of very good quality, I am not surprized for two reasons:

1, Many would be of good quality, by no means would all be bad, and..

2, it is to be expected that more of the good ones will have survived than the bad ones!

I had an 1822 pattern with a lovely temper, but if it Had been a bad one, it may well have been dumped long ago....

All the very best,
Richard.

Jim McDougall · 10th March 2007, 03:51 PM

[QUOTE=Pukka Bundook]

I had an 1822 pattern with a lovely temper, but if it Had been a bad one, it may well have been dumped long ago....

Richard, according to the fantastic job you have done with the tulwar you just saved....I doubt it!!!

All the best,
Jim

10th March 2007, 01:42 PM	#1
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	Hi Jim, excellent infomation (as usual ) It backs up what I have previously read about the British regulation pattern swords of the 19c. Complacency amongst the ranks, with regards sword care seemed common, as the reliance on firearms came to the fore. This complacency must have been created within the higher ranking officers whom should have enforced orders to ensure swords were 'fit for battle',..but didn't. It was unfortunate that the effects of this poor maintenance was not acted upon. As the accounts you state, and Richard's references to 'Sahib' have shown, that the sword still had a useful function in warfare during that period. It seems strange to me that officer scabbards were wood (a cheaper, more easily worked material) and the 'others' metal ( a more expensive solution...although more robust ) Personally, (obviously) wood would be my preference. I also think that an 'oiled' blade may have a slightly enhanced cutting performance over a similar 'un-oiled' blade......at least while the lubricated blade surface remained (cuts through clothing, for instance, would wipe this coating off.)

10th March 2007, 03:30 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Hi Katana, Thanks very much ! There were dramatic improvements in firearms throughout the 19th century that focused attention toward these as principle weapons, especially repeating arms, while percussion caps and the use of cartridges had already paved the advance. The use of the sword became more of a stubbornly held tradition and a secondary weapon used when firearms failed, ammunition supply ran out or a position was overrun. In these times of change, there were of course those gallant individuals who maintained the importance of the sword in combat as primary. It is well known that many of the older generals strongly favored the sword above all, and the development of the British M1908 cavalry sword and American M1913 "Patton" sword illustrate the ongoing determination to design the ultimate cavalry sword. Consider these statements; "I consider that the sword has a great moral effect on both the man carrying it, and the enemy. One of the chief values of the sword is the spirit of progress it inspires in the carrier. He does not allow himself to be bluffed by slight opposition". Brigadier General Wilson 3rd Australian Light Horse Beersheba Palestine, October,1917 "The charge will always be, the thing in which it will be the cavalrymans pride to die....sword in hand". "Cavalry Journal", 1909 The use of swords clearly remained profoundly favored by officers who were of course keenly driven by pride and adherence to military tradition, while troops in the rank and file did not necessarily have the same perspective. Even in the Civil War in the United States, it is well known that swords were constantly worn by troops on both sides, yet medical accounts of casualties revealed no significant number of sword inflicted wounds. Most of the instances of even those revealed only bruising or even broken bones from blunt force trauma, suggesting that the weapons were probably not sharpened or used improperly. The use of oil on the blades seems well established in maintaining the servicability of sword blades, and this was emphatically noted by Nolan in India, as well as the use of wooden scabbards. As has been discussed many times here on the forum, the use of certain oils of varying botanical nature is prevalent with edged weapons in India and throughout that cultural sphere. We are learning more on the often religious and talismanic values in the application of these through outstanding references such as Robert Elgood's magnificent "Hindu Arms and Ritual", and it would seem that the use of such oils may have been observed in a simpler and practical sense by individuals from the west. The wooden scabbards used in sheathing the swords carried by officers were of course designed structurally as support for the leather and varying types of covering used to enhance these typically more decorative swords. Most officers maintained a number of swords for varying occasions from the dress and parade swords to the combat weapons very similar to those of other ranks. Many of the officers swords used for actual combat were often referred to as 'fighting' swords and if I am not mistaken, these were most often sheathed in metal scabbards in the same manner as other ranks. Thank you very much for responding, and giving me the chance to ramble on further on this topic, which remains fondly with me from my early collecting days which focused on British cavalry sabres. A nice trip down memory lane!! All the best, Jim

10th March 2007, 03:40 PM	#3
Pukka Bundook Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 803	Hi William, In the book "Sahib" there are many first hand accounts of problems with dull swords, and those that broke, or bent "nearly double" on first strike, (Which may well indicate a badly executed cut!) but the point is, there does appear to have been a problem with quality at that time. Re. your swords from this period being of very good quality, I am not surprized for two reasons: 1, Many would be of good quality, by no means would all be bad, and.. 2, it is to be expected that more of the good ones will have survived than the bad ones! I had an 1822 pattern with a lovely temper, but if it Had been a bad one, it may well have been dumped long ago.... All the very best, Richard.

10th March 2007, 03:51 PM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	[QUOTE=Pukka Bundook] I had an 1822 pattern with a lovely temper, but if it Had been a bad one, it may well have been dumped long ago.... Richard, according to the fantastic job you have done with the tulwar you just saved....I doubt it!!! All the best, Jim