Victorian Era Infantry Officer’s Sword?

[dana_w]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

This really is an anomaly, and interesting as to the average collector this would likely be assumed simply an 1822 infantry officers sword. As you have all well illustrated, there is complexity beyond such simplicity even in regulation swords.
I have not had my trusty Robson (1975) out for a long time, and it was good to go through it again.
From what I can gather, most assessments here seem pretty well placed, and it does seem this hilt aligns most readily with the post 1854 guard without folding section.

What is most curious is that in 1845, a new blade form was introduced by Wilkinson for these swords (broadly classified M1822 and gothic hilt, as per Ffoulkes). The blade on Danas example is the earlier 'pipe back' (often called quill back). Hilts fitted with these new Wilkinson blades also had a tang button.
This sword has the earlier style blade, yet the hilt is more to the 1854 solid guard form also without tang button.
To carry further, the Royal cypher remains 'open', that is without the rose, thistle and shamrock embellishments of the 1850s (Robson, p.119).

In my thinking, it seems likely this example may fall into the period of early 1850s, in perhaps a transitional sense. The unmarked blade of 'pipe back form seems likely German made (these type blades were used on their swords well through the 19th c) and often 'blanks' sold to British outfitters.

The hilt, as noted, may have been of prototype before official changes to guard early 1850s.

The scabbard, as noted, possibly not original.....by 1855 these carry ring steel scabbards replaced the leather and brass frog carry type.

I do not think this is Medical officers (1892) as these of course had the 'dumb bell' cross section blade, unless this was one with a German blade of the period (which seems unlikely), also these hilts had the tang button and I think without 'steps'.
It is of course possible that it might have been in the Medical officers use given the unusual circumstances in the elements here, and in that early 1850s period with a German blade.

Thanks Jim. You are always a wealth of useful information and insights.

[RobertGuy]

The 29 inch blade could mean it's a medical sergeant's sword. These were in fact the same sword as carried by infantry drummers between 1822 and 1856 (Robson 1st ed. page 163)

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by dana_w

Thanks Jim. You are always a wealth of useful information and insights.

Absolutely my pleasure Dana, its fun research and a great example to work with. Your kind note very, very much appreciated

[David R]

A bit more known about these now, it is in fact an infantry sergeants sword. The blade which is fullered but with a yelman or quill point is the dead give away. So to with the solid guard without a hinge. I have a George the VI example.

[dana_w]

Sweet, thanks for the info.

[Jim McDougall]

David, thank you so much for that update!!!!
It means a lot to have new evidence and information added to these older threads, and greatly enhances our stored data archived for future research.
Great example as well

[David R]

Minor correction to my post above, it's a George IV (4th) 1820 to 1830, sergeants sword, somehow I got the Roman numerals the wrong way round. There were quite a few new patterns came in 1822 and this is one of them.
Yesterday I found and bought another of the pattern, this one a VR monogram, same hybrid pattern blade and a hinged thumb guard.... Probably pre 1850, I am told that the pierced monogram is the giveaway here. The later pattern without piercing was for Staff Sergeants only apparently, regular Sgt's no longer carrying a sword.
It has no stamps or etching, and again the later ones have Regt. issue stamps. Funny enough, these are rarer than the commissioned officers ones, apparently being an issue item they had longer service lives, and fewer were made!

[toaster5sqn]

Coming late to this thread, I just want to note that solid guards did exist before 1850 and hinged ones continued after due to the private purchase system meaning that individuals could choose which type they wanted in defiance of the regulations. Not so relevant with a sergeants sword of course.

Also that scabbard is almost certainly from a cavalry sword, could be a 1796 LC or either of the 1821 patterns (light and heavy had the same blade with different guards in 1821 I believe).

Robert