British Basket Hilt Cavalry

celtan · 18th November 2010, 05:56 PM

Hi Guys,

I'm trying to fully ID this baby. On p. 147 of Neuman's there appears a similar design, on p. 46 of Wither's there's an identical sword. He IDs same as a 1750 English Cavalry Basket Hilt. The blade doesn't look mid 18th C, yet I have seen similar ones on regulation british-scottish swords of 19th C fin-de-siecle.
No marks evident.
Any ideas?
Best
M

Jim McDougall · 18th November 2010, 07:51 PM

That truly is a beauty Manolo!!!!

While I cant add a great deal of detail at the moment without dragging out the references stashed away here in the bookmobile, I will say you are entirely correct this is English, as were most all basket hilts post '45.
What is most interesting is that this appears to be a cavalry sword as the much debated feature of the 'horsemans ring' appears in the structure of the hilt. This is dealt with the the venerable article by Anthony Darling back in the 70s I believe as well as several others. This aperture is believed to hold the reins through but there have been a number of suggestions.

In any case they appeared on the basket hilt swords issued to dragoon regiments as they developed in the English army after 1750. The King began to favor basket hilted swords for these mounted regiments and variations based on the famed Scottish swords evolved. I would say that the pommel is of Scottish character, as are many of the elements of the hilt including the rams head design and pierced saltires. Many of the more rank and file versions had unpierced saltires and other characteristic features.

Interestingly however, most of these cavalry swords were backswords, contrary to true Scottish hilts which were almost invariably broadswords.
Yours appears to be with a 19th century type broadsword blade of the type seen on swords such as the M1796 heavy cavalry officers dress swords, but I think some of these appeared on the 19th century regimental basket hilts.
That would seem incongruent with the apertured basket hilt here, which for cavalry disappeared with the advent of regulation swords in 1796.

All the best,
Jim

Cathey · 19th November 2010, 05:44 AM

Hi Guys,

I believe the Basket to be Scottish c1750 Glasgow school, however the blade is Victorian and not original to the basket. That said, if is common to see earlier blades married to latter hilts, (a common practice where a family sword would be updated in use). It appears that the Scott’s cared more for the blade than the hilt, and I have a number of early swords with even earlier blades.

I must say that recently I am seeing a lot of Victorian blades married to hilts much earlier and then being sold as original via a number of well known dealers. Having declared the sword hilt to be Scottish, I say this with the understanding that it was most likely used by Scottish regiments in the service of the British hence the confusion. When ever you see pronounced shoulders on a blade close to the grip, more than likely it will be Victorian although early in this period.

I would recommend contacting the Baron of Earlshall for a definitive answer though. His web site is http://www.thescottishbaskethiltedsword.co.uk/

Cheers Cathey

celtan · 19th November 2010, 04:05 PM

Thank you guys,

I knew that I would get a worthy answer specifically from you both. Cathey is the local basket-hilt guru, and you Jim, is there something blade-related that you don't know about?

: )

Now, that would not explain the existence of similar blades mounted on different basket hilts, unless it was a deliberate attempt to mislead. I had the suspicion that there would be some sort of english/scottish military unit, which was issued this type of sword for ceremonies, which would account for the victorian blade.

So, these hilts do not follow a particular pattern, that can be traced to an unit?

Best regards.

Manuel Luis

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathey

Hi Guys,

I believe the Basket to be Scottish c1750 Glasgow school, however the blade is Victorian and not original to the basket. That said, if is common to see earlier blades married to latter hilts, (a common practice where a family sword would be updated in use). It appears that the Scott’s cared more for the blade than the hilt, and I have a number of early swords with even earlier blades.

I must say that recently I am seeing a lot of Victorian blades married to hilts much earlier and then being sold as original via a number of well known dealers. Having declared the sword hilt to be Scottish, I say this with the understanding that it was most likely used by Scottish regiments in the service of the British hence the confusion. When ever you see pronounced shoulders on a blade close to the grip, more than likely it will be Victorian although early in this period.

I would recommend contacting the Baron of Earlshall for a definitive answer though. His web site is http://www.thescottishbaskethiltedsword.co.uk/

Cheers Cathey

Jim McDougall · 19th November 2010, 04:44 PM

It is good to have Cathey join us on this, as basket hilts are one of her primary fields of collecting, which is well illustrated by her formidable knowledge on these fascinating swords. With that noted I heartily concur with her assessment, and after reading it was inspired to drag out the books!

Apparantly the interest in Scottish basket hilts for horsemen began around 1707, where they were ordered by the Crown for all British cavalry regiments, and remained the standard horsemans sword until the 1788 patterns. With this being the case, naturally many of these 'English' type hilts were made in Scotland, while forms following the Scottish style were also produced in England.

I have always thought that after the tragedy of Culloden (April 17,1746) ending the rebellion which has become known as 'The '45', that weapons were officially outlawed in Scotland. It would seem that my somewhat adamant perception needed to be reconsidered as the 'Proscription Act of 1747' did outlaw weapons, but apparantly was somewhat vague in which regions it was enforced (it was repealed in 1782).

Apparantly in Glasgow, there was considerable dissent in political and religious sentiments, and in this climate, especially supplying swords for the Crown, production must have continued there contrary to my earlier perceptions.

Therefore, this hilt probably is Scottish in manufacture, and the conical pommel is another apparant distinction attributed to Scottish hilts.
The oval ring in the hilt, as noted now believed to hold reins to free the other hand in discharging firearms, seems to have appeared around 1730s-40s, and became common on British cavalry basket hilts by about mid 18th century.
It is noted that these rings were often inserted later by removing the inboard saltire plate.

I also agree with Cathey on the blade, and the shouldered forte does seem to be 19th century, probably into Victorian period. While I can well imagine the altogether too well known practice of dealers marrying often period incongruent blades to earlier hilts, unless the blade was in terrible shape I cannot see why they would do this. Naturally close examination will better tell whether such refurbishing was done during the swords working life.

In the Scottish regiments, now integral components of the British army, there was a great deal of ancestral pride of course, and with the typical latitudes afforded officers, it does not seem unreasonable that a heirloom hilt might have been mounted with a more contemporary broadsword blade. Naturally these type of practices, while probably not unusual, would not likely have been recorded in official documents or personal narratives, so all we can do is optimistically speculate.

Cathey, could you say more on the book by the Baron of Earlshall. I would like to see more on obtaining a copy.

Manolo, a magnificent acquisition!!! Thank you so much for posting it. I have really wanted to get more discussions on basket hilts going here, and Cathey, again, its wonderful having you here with us!!! ")

All best regards,
Jim

Manolo, we cross posted, thank you for the kind words! but Im still learnin'!!!

kronckew · 19th November 2010, 05:17 PM

the late victorian scots regiments had a cruciform hilt that could be switched onto the blade in place of the basket hilt. i imagine this could cause a bit of trading & swapping about of hilts of both sorts by the troops....

Basket hilt linky

i noted the section in that reference regarding blade fullers, ie. scots blades usually had two up to the late victorian era...

Jim McDougall · 19th November 2010, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kronckew

the late victorian scots regiments had a cruciform hilt that could be switched onto the blade in place of the basket hilt. i imagine this could cause a bit of trading & swapping about of hilts of both sorts by the troops....

Basket hilt linky

i noted the section in that reference regarding blade fullers, ie. scots blades usually had two up to the late victorian era...

Very well noted Kronckew! They did indeed have the convertible hilt feature on the Scottish swords in the 19th century. It seems like the single fuller blade was used on those swords, but need to find the reference.

All the best,
Jim

celtan · 20th November 2010, 04:16 PM

Hi Guys,

Interesting discussion!

IIRC, the 19th C cross-guard option was only used for informal, or de-ville use. It seems like switching from one guard to the other was relatively easy.

For the life of me, I can't see how they did it, unless it was some sort of screwed-pommel affair, like that in german WWII daggers. And yet, that doesn't seem to fit an actual combat sword.

The blade is not truly appealing, doesn't fel battle-ready. It's more like a modern sissified version (read ceremonial).

The basket-guard does feel like the real McCoy. Yet, the wood grip is ...unbecoming. It all says "modern" (<150yrs) military-ceremonial to me.

If switching guards is easy, that would explain the plain wood grip.

BTW: It's because of the grip that I bought/rescued the sword. Saw the original owner's teenage son banging away with it in a mock battle (D&Ds), and noticed that a small portion of the grip had already broken away.

Kids..!

To be frank, while I like the hilt very much, not so the rest of the sword. My real quarry now is a Black-Watch Basket-Hilt that was captured in 97' during a British invasion attempt to San Juan. Let's see when (and if) my hunting bears fruit..!

BTW Jim, the Baron's book is not yet published.

Salud, Oro y Fortuna!

Manuel

Jim McDougall · 20th November 2010, 09:40 PM

Hi Manolo,
Looking in Robson, that blade does indeed appear to be latter 19th century from Scottish regiment sergeants sword. Thank you for the update on the book, which I have seen mentioned by Cathey over some time, and most kind of her to attach the link. Looks like a great book, but no mention seen on the mysterious Scotts's

All the best,
Jim

celtan · 21st November 2010, 02:35 PM

Thank Cathey, Jim and Kronckew, for all your assistance.
Best regards.
Manuel Luis

18th November 2010, 05:56 PM	#1
celtan Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PR, USA Posts: 679	British Basket Hilt Cavalry Hi Guys, I'm trying to fully ID this baby. On p. 147 of Neuman's there appears a similar design, on p. 46 of Wither's there's an identical sword. He IDs same as a 1750 English Cavalry Basket Hilt. The blade doesn't look mid 18th C, yet I have seen similar ones on regulation british-scottish swords of 19th C fin-de-siecle. No marks evident. Any ideas? Best M Attached Images

19th November 2010, 05:44 AM	#3
Cathey Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: adelaide south australia Posts: 277	Identity of this sword Hi Guys, I believe the Basket to be Scottish c1750 Glasgow school, however the blade is Victorian and not original to the basket. That said, if is common to see earlier blades married to latter hilts, (a common practice where a family sword would be updated in use). It appears that the Scott’s cared more for the blade than the hilt, and I have a number of early swords with even earlier blades. I must say that recently I am seeing a lot of Victorian blades married to hilts much earlier and then being sold as original via a number of well known dealers. Having declared the sword hilt to be Scottish, I say this with the understanding that it was most likely used by Scottish regiments in the service of the British hence the confusion. When ever you see pronounced shoulders on a blade close to the grip, more than likely it will be Victorian although early in this period. I would recommend contacting the Baron of Earlshall for a definitive answer though. His web site is http://www.thescottishbaskethiltedsword.co.uk/ Cheers Cathey

19th November 2010, 04:44 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,897	It is good to have Cathey join us on this, as basket hilts are one of her primary fields of collecting, which is well illustrated by her formidable knowledge on these fascinating swords. With that noted I heartily concur with her assessment, and after reading it was inspired to drag out the books! Apparantly the interest in Scottish basket hilts for horsemen began around 1707, where they were ordered by the Crown for all British cavalry regiments, and remained the standard horsemans sword until the 1788 patterns. With this being the case, naturally many of these 'English' type hilts were made in Scotland, while forms following the Scottish style were also produced in England. I have always thought that after the tragedy of Culloden (April 17,1746) ending the rebellion which has become known as 'The '45', that weapons were officially outlawed in Scotland. It would seem that my somewhat adamant perception needed to be reconsidered as the 'Proscription Act of 1747' did outlaw weapons, but apparantly was somewhat vague in which regions it was enforced (it was repealed in 1782). Apparantly in Glasgow, there was considerable dissent in political and religious sentiments, and in this climate, especially supplying swords for the Crown, production must have continued there contrary to my earlier perceptions. Therefore, this hilt probably is Scottish in manufacture, and the conical pommel is another apparant distinction attributed to Scottish hilts. The oval ring in the hilt, as noted now believed to hold reins to free the other hand in discharging firearms, seems to have appeared around 1730s-40s, and became common on British cavalry basket hilts by about mid 18th century. It is noted that these rings were often inserted later by removing the inboard saltire plate. I also agree with Cathey on the blade, and the shouldered forte does seem to be 19th century, probably into Victorian period. While I can well imagine the altogether too well known practice of dealers marrying often period incongruent blades to earlier hilts, unless the blade was in terrible shape I cannot see why they would do this. Naturally close examination will better tell whether such refurbishing was done during the swords working life. In the Scottish regiments, now integral components of the British army, there was a great deal of ancestral pride of course, and with the typical latitudes afforded officers, it does not seem unreasonable that a heirloom hilt might have been mounted with a more contemporary broadsword blade. Naturally these type of practices, while probably not unusual, would not likely have been recorded in official documents or personal narratives, so all we can do is optimistically speculate. Cathey, could you say more on the book by the Baron of Earlshall. I would like to see more on obtaining a copy. Manolo, a magnificent acquisition!!! Thank you so much for posting it. I have really wanted to get more discussions on basket hilts going here, and Cathey, again, its wonderful having you here with us!!! ") All best regards, Jim Manolo, we cross posted, thank you for the kind words! but Im still learnin'!!! Last edited by Jim McDougall; 19th November 2010 at 05:26 PM.

19th November 2010, 05:17 PM	#6
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,170	the late victorian scots regiments had a cruciform hilt that could be switched onto the blade in place of the basket hilt. i imagine this could cause a bit of trading & swapping about of hilts of both sorts by the troops.... Basket hilt linky i noted the section in that reference regarding blade fullers, ie. scots blades usually had two up to the late victorian era... Last edited by kronckew; 19th November 2010 at 05:28 PM.

20th November 2010, 04:16 PM	#8
celtan Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PR, USA Posts: 679	Hi Guys, Interesting discussion! IIRC, the 19th C cross-guard option was only used for informal, or de-ville use. It seems like switching from one guard to the other was relatively easy. For the life of me, I can't see how they did it, unless it was some sort of screwed-pommel affair, like that in german WWII daggers. And yet, that doesn't seem to fit an actual combat sword. The blade is not truly appealing, doesn't fel battle-ready. It's more like a modern sissified version (read ceremonial). The basket-guard does feel like the real McCoy. Yet, the wood grip is ...unbecoming. It all says "modern" (<150yrs) military-ceremonial to me. If switching guards is easy, that would explain the plain wood grip. BTW: It's because of the grip that I bought/rescued the sword. Saw the original owner's teenage son banging away with it in a mock battle (D&Ds), and noticed that a small portion of the grip had already broken away. Kids..! To be frank, while I like the hilt very much, not so the rest of the sword. My real quarry now is a Black-Watch Basket-Hilt that was captured in 97' during a British invasion attempt to San Juan. Let's see when (and if) my hunting bears fruit..! BTW Jim, the Baron's book is not yet published. Salud, Oro y Fortuna! Manuel Last edited by celtan; 21st November 2010 at 02:29 PM.

18th November 2010, 07:51 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,897	That truly is a beauty Manolo!!!! While I cant add a great deal of detail at the moment without dragging out the references stashed away here in the bookmobile, I will say you are entirely correct this is English, as were most all basket hilts post '45. What is most interesting is that this appears to be a cavalry sword as the much debated feature of the 'horsemans ring' appears in the structure of the hilt. This is dealt with the the venerable article by Anthony Darling back in the 70s I believe as well as several others. This aperture is believed to hold the reins through but there have been a number of suggestions. In any case they appeared on the basket hilt swords issued to dragoon regiments as they developed in the English army after 1750. The King began to favor basket hilted swords for these mounted regiments and variations based on the famed Scottish swords evolved. I would say that the pommel is of Scottish character, as are many of the elements of the hilt including the rams head design and pierced saltires. Many of the more rank and file versions had unpierced saltires and other characteristic features. Interestingly however, most of these cavalry swords were backswords, contrary to true Scottish hilts which were almost invariably broadswords. Yours appears to be with a 19th century type broadsword blade of the type seen on swords such as the M1796 heavy cavalry officers dress swords, but I think some of these appeared on the 19th century regimental basket hilts. That would seem incongruent with the apertured basket hilt here, which for cavalry disappeared with the advent of regulation swords in 1796. All the best, Jim

20th November 2010, 09:40 PM	#9
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,897	Hi Manolo, Looking in Robson, that blade does indeed appear to be latter 19th century from Scottish regiment sergeants sword. Thank you for the update on the book, which I have seen mentioned by Cathey over some time, and most kind of her to attach the link. Looks like a great book, but no mention seen on the mysterious Scotts's All the best, Jim

21st November 2010, 02:35 PM	#10
celtan Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PR, USA Posts: 679	Thank Cathey, Jim and Kronckew, for all your assistance. Best regards. Manuel Luis