Pattern British Sword?

[Jim McDougall]

Just wanted to add:
After 1750s the British army brought emphasis on longer blades for the cavalry, which at this point were being inclined to combat from horseback in the European fashion. This broke from the characteristic 'dragoons', who actually used the horse as transportation primarily, and dismounted for action. Obviously this was the practice, outside incidental circumstances.

Blades for horsemen were increased to lengths ranging from 35 inches to 40 inches. I have seen M1788 heavy cavalry swords with such 40" blades, which are pretty imposing.

This example is a Glasgow type basket hilt for horsemen of the standing dragoon style units which remained in place as 'heavy' cavalry through the 18th century, even as 'light dragoon units' were evolving post 1760s.
This is believed of the form used by Royal Scots Greys (then Royal North British Dragoons) from then into 1770s.
Note the oval aperture in the hilt, which has now been agreed to have been for the horseman to secure his reins while discharging holster pistols.
Though these apertures have been regarded to have been from c.1750s, much earlier examples are known.

To the original query on the interesting sword shown in OP, I just wanted to illustrate that in character, the cavalry option appears unlikely. However, I might suggest there is even the potential this could be a private purchase, or ersatz version of a cutlass for naval use c.1800. British naval cutlasses of this period had straight blades of about this length. Naturally these areas are pretty clouded, and there are easily as many exceptions as there are norms, but wanted to present options.

[kronckew]

See also:


British Dragoon Sword


My American Dragoon Sword

[mgolab]

found this online

https://fineart.hallsgb.com/auction/...ot=144110&sd=1

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks Wayne,
The slotted hilt on that recalls the M1803 Flank Co. officers sabers.

MG,
That fighting saber is of a type (not official pattern) of these favored by naval officer in early years 1800+ in England. The 'montmorency' cross section on blades on these were favored by Wooley as seen in several examples of that early period (this one Wooley& Deakin, 1801-1803).

With your sword, the blade just reminds me of those type straight blades on the naval cutlasses c.1804, but the back fuller recalls the hanger blades 1740+

[mgolab]

Thanks Jim.

Finally received it. Seller was only 1 hr. or so from my house but USPS took three days...I should have picked it up.

anyway, there is a crown over TG. I assume Thomas Gill?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mgolab

Thanks Jim.

Finally received it. Seller was only 1 hr. or so from my house but USPS took three days...I should have picked it up.

anyway, there is a crown over TG. I assume Thomas Gill?

Thats great! Then it IS a Thomas Gill! Very nice! That puts the blade roughly 1784 and straight as were popular for dragoon swords, however these cavalry swords were of course longer. If the blade was indeed shortened that would go to the 'possible' naval' connection, but might have had other options as well. The brass hilt would be unusual for cavalry in these years. though certain anomalies did exist, but with much fancier blades.

According to various reading if I recall, there were certain tendencies toward cavalry type swords in naval contexts, and many in the 1800 period had stirrup hilts, just as seen in your previous post of the 'montmorency' blade saber shown as naval fighting sword .

When I got the Wooley & Deakin example I posted in comparison back in the 70s, it was listed as a cavalry officers saber.

I have seen these exact sabers, brass stirrup hilt, fluted ebony grip and montmorency blades, it seems a number produced by Wooley and Deakin c1800, as well as another the same by Durs Egg.

As I mentioned earlier, James Wooley of Birmingham seems to have certain preferences for French sword elements, as seen in his versions of the M1788 light cavalry saber (Thomas Gill followed German). This nuance I have never seen addressed, but I noticed it years ago, but being another of my petty quirks, was never really pursued.

Along with these preferences, Wooley also favored montmorency blades, but will place this later in separate thread.

Back to your sword, and again the blade, it seems likely the blade probably is something used in a rehilt about 1800 in any number of scenarios...the blade itself with profound intrinsic historic value.

[urbanspaceman]

Good work as usual Jim... well done.