|
|
Post by likehotbutter on Jan 31, 2018 10:30:11 GMT
Hey all As we all know, later military swords had their lower bracelet rings removed as the trend shifted from the sword been mounted on the trooper to the horse (often via a frog).  However, how would such a blade be worn on foot (aside from using a frog)? I would imagine the lack of the lower ring would result in the end of the scabbard swinging wildly. The pictures that I have (as below) don't seem very clear on how such swords would be worn. Would appreciate other pictures if you guys got em!  P.S Bonus pic: Russian 1881 system using the good ole two ring system  |
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Jan 31, 2018 13:12:20 GMT
The sword in the first photo looks German and as such, may in fact have two attachment points. One being the normal ring and another slot-type attachment point on the inside (the side not visible in the photo) at the same upper level.
In American service, scabbards for swords intended to also be worn when on foot invariably have two rings but the practice has nearly always been since before the Civil War for the sword to be hooked up even though the scabbard is attached by slings. The exceptions and there are always exceptions, are those intended to be worn in a frog and which have no rings. Those include the army NCO sword and most cadet swords. US Army swords are intended to be worn with a metal chain attached to the lower ring only, there being only one chain. So the sword is always carried hooked up, hilt to the rear. In British service, practices vary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 31, 2018 14:05:26 GMT
I would imagine the lack of the lower ring would result in the end of the scabbard swinging wildly. The pictures that I have (as below) don't seem very clear on how such swords would be worn. I haven't had any issues when I've worn single point suspension scabbards. The suspension ring should be well above the POB, especially the POB of the sword-in-scabbard, so gravity is your friend. Whether hung from a belt or baldric, the sword should be fairly high, with the top of the scabbard maybe about at hipbone level. If hung from a belt, by a short strap. The sword should sit close by your side, very vertical. |
|
|
|
Post by likehotbutter on Jan 31, 2018 14:25:49 GMT
I would imagine the lack of the lower ring would result in the end of the scabbard swinging wildly. The pictures that I have (as below) don't seem very clear on how such swords would be worn. I haven't had any issues when I've worn single point suspension scabbards. The suspension ring should be well above the POB, especially the POB of the sword-in-scabbard, so gravity is your friend. Whether hung from a belt or baldric, the sword should be fairly high, with the top of the scabbard maybe about at hipbone level. If hung from a belt, by a short strap. The sword should sit close by your side, very vertical. This is for saber right? Without a frog Do u have pics of the rigging? |
|
|
|
Post by Pino on Jan 31, 2018 14:34:58 GMT
Hmm if the sword is swingling wildly while on foot its because you are in trouble and running for your life. Wearing a sword on foot at that time meant you were either in parade or other ceremonial event, both of which mean not moving much and for that there was a handful of hangers and sword belts with hooks that were made so as to adjust and hold the sword in a confortable manner. British officers had the very smart Sam Browne system that was pretty good. Dismounted German officer swords were held with a leather loop with hook that clipped with the square ring located in the side of the scabbard. French cavalry troopers and officers on foot service were required to hold the sword by the left hand or use their leather sling that was adjusted to elevate the sword and keep the scabbard from touching the ground when on movement. French officers also had a special sling with hook that held the hilt for more stability. It was not uncommon that when on horseback single suspension slings could be used.     |
|
|
|
Post by likehotbutter on Jan 31, 2018 15:59:37 GMT
The sword in the first photo looks German and as such, may in fact have two attachment points. One being the normal ring and another slot-type attachment point on the inside (the side not visible in the photo) at the same upper level. In American service, scabbards for swords intended to also be worn when on foot invariably have two rings but the practice has nearly always been since before the Civil War for the sword to be hooked up even though the scabbard is attached by slings. The exceptions and there are always exceptions, are those intended to be worn in a frog and which have no rings. Those include the army NCO sword and most cadet swords. US Army swords are intended to be worn with a metal chain attached to the lower ring only, there being only one chain. So the sword is always carried hooked up, hilt to the rear. In British service, practices vary. You're talking about this hoop right?  I've seen pictures of Weimar and 3rd Reich era officer on parade wearing single ring scabbards but I cant make out their rig properly. Guessing they hooked it and left it hanging? You got me thinking so I went to google the mounting system of the US/UK army. In British service, practices vary. and vary away indeed.. I'm guessing two scabbards are issued, one for mounted wear and another for foot Some mount them on the horse as per early 20th century style  And some hang them the traditional way from the trooper  British 1892 on foot  Canadian Army P1908/12 on foot  |
|
|
|
Post by likehotbutter on Jan 31, 2018 16:24:35 GMT
Boom! Many thanks Pino getting much clearer now...so the key is.. a belt hook! So on horseback the full strap is left extended and on foot, the scabbard ring is hung from a belt hook I take it the officer belt in the first pic is the same as the 1822 trooper system below? Just in finer black leather? French cavalry troopers and officers on foot service were required to hold the sword by the left hand in every military I guess even I had to do that and our swords are hung via the traditonal two rings |
|
|
|
Post by Pino on Jan 31, 2018 17:13:00 GMT
Butter sir, pretty much that, just a little precision: officers had indeed 2 types of scabbards, the campaign leather one for either saddle or Sam Browne kit and the parade metal one with 2 rings for the double suspension belt. Regular cavalry troopers only had the metal scabbard and it was fastened to the saddle via the horseshoe frog; on dismounted parade they don't wear them. Guard cavalry had a different scabbard with the side lock so this is why they wear the old fashioned 2-slings, unlike the regular cavalry they have the privilege of parading with their swords when on foot, lucky bastards!! |
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Jan 31, 2018 17:32:31 GMT
One reason the scabbards for mounted soldier's swords were changed to the two-ring arrangement as illustrated in the photo of the Royal Horse Artillery trooper above and also attached to the saddle instead of the trooper was because if the top strap or ring broke, the sword could be lost. Or so they said. The Royal Artillery are also unusual in using a leather-covered scabbard with rings, which I believe is unique.
Early Sam Browne belts also had an extra strap for steadying the sword.
In British service, the word "uniform" has little meaning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 31, 2018 23:36:44 GMT
This is for saber right? Without a frog Do u have pics of the rigging? An Indian wallhanger sabre and a katana remounted as a shashka; these were my costume swords c. 1990. I used either a short cord from belt to suspension loop on scabbard, or a short leather loop (maybe 8-10cm long when worn) made from the buckle end of an old belt. The only trick, if one can call it that, is to have the sword sit against your hip rather than your leg. Don't have any photos. |
|
|
|
Post by likehotbutter on Feb 3, 2018 7:01:47 GMT
Many thanks all
My knowledge and image library continues to grow
I'll probably get one of them French belts made maybe
|
|
