What is a Warranted Sword?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Some late 18th and early 19th century British swords carry the term "Warranted" or "Warranted Never To Fail". Here we look at what that means, the history and why it was important.
The Thomas Gill Shirt is available here -
www.redbubble....
Yeah you can get your warranty...if you live long enough :)
Every time I have had a steel practice sword fail is has been when someone was parrying a hard cut coming in and the sword doing the cutting was the one that broke. Ironically, it was usually the person doing the parrying that ended up getting struck because the incoming sword, once broken, was able to continue on it's path to the target. I don't know of any accounts in history that record this outcome, but it has been consistently my experience with broken swords that it favors the wielder of the broken sword.
Is it somewhat like the parachute regiment joke where when you are handed the parachute the supply chap tells you to 'bring it back if it doesn't work'.
I do actually own a 1796 Officer's LCS Gill warrented never to fail that has been cut down to klewang length so presumably the blade had broken at some point.
Do Gill still stand by their warranty?
I also own several other 1796 officer's LCS that are quality blades (Runkel and Woolley & Deakins etc.) That are plain fighting blades. I find them interesting.
What are your views on the really cranked hilt versions of these swords?
A lot of surplus swords were bought up and cut down, modified etc. Many HC swords were cut down to serve as cutlasses, for example, warranted does not mean "warranted against being modified".
Great information, Nick. That 1796 is awesome. I seem to remember seeing an example from Osborne that had a unique tip profile. Kind of a clip point that made the blade more capable of giving point while keeping the curve for cutting. I'm assuming this is a rare type. Any chance you have an example to show us? Love this channel thank you for keeping these vids coming during shutdown. Cheers!
That kicks out at the bottom at a interesting amount
That officer was very practical.
Nick, how does the Gil system relate to the testing system developed by Henry Wilkinson and his Star-of-David proof marks?
The Wilkinson swords after 1850 (-ish) have markings on the ricasso like "by appointment", mostly under the crest of the Prince of Wales, or "By Warrant", mostly under the Royal Coat of Arms. Are these also related to the quality of the sword?
All the functionality without any fancy stuff seens like a wise choice in a sword. Unless it's an ornamental sword used as an heirloom or something, not much purpose in decoration, and having good functionality and durability could be the difference in the outcome a battle. The decision to make a sword intended for combat fancy has never made too much sense to me.
Fashion was hugely important to many warriors throughout history, for a lot of reasons. The concept of dying well dressed is clearly one. But a show of wealth was often seen as a show of success and experience, that one is accomplished. It also sets one apart from common soldiers and lesser officers and can imspire respect and admiration, especially among aspirational peop;le. Remember that most swords spend 99% of its time being worn or carried, not fought with. Pride is another factor, which feeds back in to fashion often being very important in discipline and how one is percieved by friend and for alike. A combat sword can be decorated without compromising it's function, in which case it fullfils many rolls. Whereas the sword in this video would suggest the officer didn't have a huge amount of money, but spent what he had well by ensuring what he did have went on the important fighting elements.
In feudal times it could also mean the difference between being killed or ransomed.
This is erronious logic influenced by the artistic and craftsmaniship decay of the post industrial era. Blue and Gilt blades or gilded hilts do not influence functionality at all. Boring post modern minimalism is sad
@@MrPanos2000 I wouldn't go that far, you can over bling blades and you can add flare to sword without blinging the blade at all. But the idea probably comes the hyper saturation of fragile wall hangers that are uber blinged with pot metal on the modern sword market.
@@PJDAltamirus0425 I have Napoleonic era swords from Western Europe in mind, since this is the subject at hand. I relate to what you say about the gaudy rubbish wallhangers made today, a perfect expression of what I wrote above. Decay of craftsmanship. In our era of cheap materials and easy manufacturing, we have lost the point
If the sword failed it would be during combat, your horse falling on it or stepping on it. Unlikely to survive to claim that warranty.
The point really is that the smith stands by their sword and testing so much that they have the confidence to back it with a warranty because they are confident of it's quality. As for swords breaking, there are a lot of accounts of swords breaking in combat, and plenty where the users survived. Checkout Kinsley's "Swordman of the British Empire" where you will find quite a number of first hand accounts of swords being broken and the user surviving the experience.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing I have some of Kinsleys books, I believe the name is a pseudonym of a member on SFI. Unfortunately the books have no reference to the pictures in them so you have to guess at what you're looking at. There is no real way to look up accounts for areas, particular battles etc as it all is just one account after another not necessarily in any order. It's too bad because they could be written much better.
Doesn't seem to have accounts where sword break and the soldier dies, I suppose he's no longer there to write about it. It's like bayonet wounds, sources claim few wounds were by bayonet but then they were observing survivors and not going through dead bodies. Bayonet wounds are mostly fatal and the victim usually receives more than one thrust because aim is not as critical at that moment. The sources that claim there are few bayonet wounds only tell a small part of the reality.
Survivor bias is a thing and that is important to consider certainly, though the book does include accounts of users both surviving after swords breaking, such as the 95th rifles officer breaking his sword over a Frenchman's head and then beating him with the knucklebow and kicking him to death, as well as the sword failing and the user dying, such as Corporal Shaw at Waterloo who broke his sword after killing many cavalryman and turning to his helmet as a weapon before being killed.
Kinsley's books are by far the best collections of first hand accounts of combat, but I absolutely agree the layout and formatting really lets it down. A searchable e-book would go a long way to solving that, though better structure and indexing would be nice.
The records from various battlefield surgeons can be really useful in understanding these wounds too, and add a great layer of detail, many of which can be found freely on google books.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing thanks, I have not thought of consulting battlefield surgeons records on google books.
I have heard only about a third to a quarter of the blade was sharpened for use, plus the first few inches of the back on the 1796 LC sabre. Was this for parrying and did the officers tend to also have this done as standard?
The length the true edge was sharpened seems to vary, but about half of the front edge seems to have been common. There isn't really much written about why, but I think it's fair to say that there was considered no need to sharpen the rest and to do so would mean more maintenance. This is common with a lot of swords in different eras. That said, I have come across some officer swords that were sharpened their entire length, and this may well have been to reduce the risk of disrams. As to how officers sharpened their own swords, there is no certainty as their swords were their own private possessions and so they likely did whatever they wanted, and that certainly seems true based on surviving antiques. As for the back edge, this was rarely sharpened at all on British swords of this era, probably because their were no techniques using it to cut and presumably they saw no neccessity for it for thrust work.
I'm about to buy a Craig & Co. warranted blade. When were they primarilly working? This blade has never been mounted and looks like it was wrapped in greased paper and put into a storeroom and forgotten about, still blueing is great and blade is very nice. Also, was Craig using mostly English or German blades?
That is surely Alex Craig & Co of Edinburgh, who operated between 1819 and 1857. Your blade sounds gorgeous, but unfortunately I can't say much more on the blades they were using as I have seen far too little data to give an impression. There aren't that many Craig & co swords/blades out there.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing It weren't surprise me that not a lot were made, nor that a lot weren't mounted, of that pattern. IIRC the pattern changed within 2-3 years. The major wars being ended, not much call for new officers who would have been the purchasers and had the blades mounted to suit their tastes and pockets.
So if the warranted system was made for the 1796 model LC sabre, why do some of the 1788 LC models also have “gills warranted” on them? Pardon my ignorance I’m pretty new to this
It wasn't made for the 1796, warranted blades go back to around 1780, it's just that the process was adopted for board of ordnance swords as a standard then. Warranting is a private process by sword makers to sell supposedly high quality swords to those officers willing to pay extra for them (Officers having to purchase their own swords and were not supplied by the army as for enlisted soldiers). These tough blade tests attracted the attention of the army and board of ordnance and went on to form the basis of proofing regulation soldiers swords. So when you see a troopers sword with an inepection stamp, it is the equivilent of a warranted blade by a reputable maker (in theory).
did the beaked pommel evolved from the scimitar/ kilij hilt design?
Quick question- do sword guards on (British) cavalry swords tend to be steel, wrought iron or a mix? I would swear the guard on my Woolley HC is steel, for various reasons, as well as many LC sword stirrup guards.
This is a question I have pondered on many times and I really am not sure. I have read up many times on how to tell the difference, but there are no simple answers. When you have a blade with an obvious scarf well to have an iron tang and forte and the rest steel it highlights just how difficult it cam be to tell the two materials apart. Sources like Robson's British MIlitary Swords say the 1796 cavalry hilts can be either. Dellar says iron was standard. Honestly I am just not sure and would love to have more data on it.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing The construction of the heavy cavalry guard, which has multiple pieces and apparently a lot of cold-punching would seem to rule out wrought iron as first, I don't see any signs of splitting which is common with wrought and second, no really visible grain.
Using a light cav with a pistol grip would result in some pretty interesting "techniques" appearing I'm sure!
Definitely. I will do a new video all about sabre grips soon as there is some facinating variety out there. A few of our students instinctively started doing this, but it was only later I started to see sources for it actually being a thing. It is an extremely grip which comes with some unique advantages and disadvantages.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing I use it quite a lot but only really for centre lines stuff, it suits my 1827 Rifles sword down to the ground, but I wouldn't have thought it would work at all for a chopper. Looking forward to seeing what you have to say on the subject!
The backstrap on your 1796 saber seems to be a bit elongated, compared to others. Is that a common thing to see? It´s very striking visually and I believe it to be quite pleasing to the eye, too. Also, does this affect handling in any way?
Oh well.....should've watched the video to the end :D.
Haha no worries. They are rare yes, but there was a small following for them and antique examples do come up for sale from time to time. I find them rather beautiful. You can see the potential grip possibilities. As for overall handling, well it adds weight, though as much as it may look as it is hollow. This one weights 850g with a 16cm point of balance. Officers cavalry sabres are hugely varied, but I would say it has brought the balance back a little compared to a lot of examples, and made it just a little more agile than some others.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Ok, thank you!
swords break because of hitting something really hard.