A Pair of English Swords?

drac2k · 20th January 2022, 03:50 PM

Thanks for your response Radboud, but I'm pretty sure that the long sword is the 1796 Light Cavalry Sword. It measures 33.5" long, it has the hatchet type end and as per "Swords of the British Army," by Brian Robson, there are examples without the langets.
I think that you could be correct in attributing the lion-headed sword as being German.
Thank you for your comments

toaster5sqn · 20th January 2022, 06:58 PM

I'd be inclined to agree with Radbound that it looks slightly off for a 1796 LC. The heavier guard is generally an indication of the Prussian Model 1811 Light Cavalry sabre which was a copy of the 1796.

But there is still that very short quillion and long ricasso that seem off even then.

That makers mark could be the clincher but I haven't found it in any of my references.

Robert

kronckew · 20th January 2022, 07:16 PM

The '1796' could be a British officer's private purchase sword. Doesn't appear to be a Prussian Blucher 1811 variant. Officers ones vary considerably, have different grip 'ears' and even languets shapes – or missing them entirely. Officer ones were lighter and quite flexible. The Indian Army liked them, and made their own versions, I'd bet with larger ricassos. Officer ones frequently had the Mfg.'s name on the spine. Trooper ones were mostly all marked with regimental/troop/rack numbers.

I'd guess German (Prussian) officer ones also would vary.

With no markings other than that on the ricasso, no bluing, or blade decorations, unless someone else knows whose it is, you may be out of luck for more details.

What is the weight of the 1796 lc? My officer's one weighs 698 grams and the balance is about 6 inches in front of the guard. It also has no markings surviving.

Radboud · 20th January 2022, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kronckew

Trooper ones were mostly all marked with regimental/troop/rack numbers.

British 1796 LC sabres with regimental/troop/rack numbers are significantly less commonly found than those without. Normally such numbers indicate foreign service, for example, with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Sweden, Prussia or Portugal. All of these countries received supplies of British cavalry swords amongst other weapons during the Napoleonic wars.

The most one can realistically hope for on a British troopers sword is an inspectors stamp (crown over a number) and a makers mark on the spine at the base. Some are marked with a B on the spine for the balance point. But plenty have nothing.

Of course there are exceptions like with the Yeomanry, who often had swords purchased privately by their Colonel. So I’m not saying that they aren’t out there, but they are not “mostly all” marked.

For some reason, such markings are more common on the 1796 heavy cavalry sword, and one possible reason could be because the yeomanry were all light cavalry and for the large part used the 1796 LC sabre. But again there were exceptions here as well.

Edit: Kronckew, that’s a light cavalry sword! What is the blade length?

Bryce · 20th January 2022, 08:31 PM

G'day Drac2k,
I agree with the previous comments that neither sword is British. The top sword isn't a British 1796 LC sabre. Can you please post a better photo of the hilt?
Cheers,
Bryce

awdaniec666 · 20th January 2022, 11:36 PM

I could only add that in my opinion when one is talking about certain models (f.e. "M1796 LCS") there is often a relative narrow spectrum in which a thing can vary. I would therefore not describe your sword as a british 1796 light cavalry pattern sword because it´s missing too many criteria swords of this model had in common. I´d point out the difference in hilt, as well the blade design.

The lionhead sabers brass hilt has a "Patina" which is not fitting my personal experience with old brass. Suggestion: Maybe red/orange paint remainings?
The argument "it could be a German state" is too often brought when the origin of a sword is uncertain. I do not see this sword come from the germanic influence sphere. My "guts tell me" it could be dutch colonies, but I am far away to be in any kind educated on these swords.

cheers

drac2k · 21st January 2022, 05:42 AM

Thank you all gentlemen for your informative posts; I guess if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it still might not be an LC 1796 sword.
The man I got it from said that he purchased it in London; I know him and he tells the truth, however, he has bought so many swords, he might just have been confused . The sword looked worn to me and some aspects, such as the hilt seemed a bit off.
Based on the place of purchase, the variations, and the armory mark that looks like it could be Indian, I think that kronckew's theory of an Indian copy of an LC 1796 could be the most plausible conclusion. I will post better pictures of the hilt tomorrow.
In regards to the lion head sword, it doesn't look like paint, traces of gilding possibly or like old Confederate swords, sometimes the brass has a coppery patina(I am not suggesting that this is a Confederate sword).

awdaniec666 · 21st January 2022, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drac2k

The man I got it from said that he purchased it in London; I know him and he tells the truth, however, he has bought so many swords, he might just have been confused .

London, like many other places, has been and is a marketplace for stuff from all over the world.
Whatever these swords are, and I wish you luck in researching them, they are part of history and to be honest sometimes it´s nicer to have something that stands out and is unique in its way than another one of thousands "M-whatever" that are around. But I get the point of having one of the iconic M1796 in Britain or M1811 in Germany.
If you´re still interested in a M1796 LCS, PM me. I know a guy who bought a batch of these from a museum in Europe yesterday and sells them for a good price

20th January 2022, 03:50 PM	#1
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,255	Thanks for your response Radboud, but I'm pretty sure that the long sword is the 1796 Light Cavalry Sword. It measures 33.5" long, it has the hatchet type end and as per "Swords of the British Army," by Brian Robson, there are examples without the langets. I think that you could be correct in attributing the lion-headed sword as being German. Thank you for your comments Attached Images

20th January 2022, 07:16 PM	#3
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,215	The '1796' could be a British officer's private purchase sword. Doesn't appear to be a Prussian Blucher 1811 variant. Officers ones vary considerably, have different grip 'ears' and even languets shapes – or missing them entirely. Officer ones were lighter and quite flexible. The Indian Army liked them, and made their own versions, I'd bet with larger ricassos. Officer ones frequently had the Mfg.'s name on the spine. Trooper ones were mostly all marked with regimental/troop/rack numbers. I'd guess German (Prussian) officer ones also would vary. With no markings other than that on the ricasso, no bluing, or blade decorations, unless someone else knows whose it is, you may be out of luck for more details. What is the weight of the 1796 lc? My officer's one weighs 698 grams and the balance is about 6 inches in front of the guard. It also has no markings surviving. Last edited by kronckew; 20th January 2022 at 07:29 PM.

20th January 2022, 06:58 PM	#2
toaster5sqn Member Join Date: Jul 2021 Location: New Zealand Posts: 74	I'd be inclined to agree with Radbound that it looks slightly off for a 1796 LC. The heavier guard is generally an indication of the Prussian Model 1811 Light Cavalry sabre which was a copy of the 1796. But there is still that very short quillion and long ricasso that seem off even then. That makers mark could be the clincher but I haven't found it in any of my references. Robert

20th January 2022, 08:31 PM	#5
Bryce Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Location: North Queensland, Australia Posts: 187	G'day Drac2k, I agree with the previous comments that neither sword is British. The top sword isn't a British 1796 LC sabre. Can you please post a better photo of the hilt? Cheers, Bryce

20th January 2022, 11:36 PM	#6
awdaniec666 Member Join Date: May 2021 Location: Central Europe Posts: 174	I could only add that in my opinion when one is talking about certain models (f.e. "M1796 LCS") there is often a relative narrow spectrum in which a thing can vary. I would therefore not describe your sword as a british 1796 light cavalry pattern sword because it´s missing too many criteria swords of this model had in common. I´d point out the difference in hilt, as well the blade design. The lionhead sabers brass hilt has a "Patina" which is not fitting my personal experience with old brass. Suggestion: Maybe red/orange paint remainings? The argument "it could be a German state" is too often brought when the origin of a sword is uncertain. I do not see this sword come from the germanic influence sphere. My "guts tell me" it could be dutch colonies, but I am far away to be in any kind educated on these swords. cheers

21st January 2022, 05:42 AM	#7
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,255	Thank you all gentlemen for your informative posts; I guess if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it still might not be an LC 1796 sword. The man I got it from said that he purchased it in London; I know him and he tells the truth, however, he has bought so many swords, he might just have been confused . The sword looked worn to me and some aspects, such as the hilt seemed a bit off. Based on the place of purchase, the variations, and the armory mark that looks like it could be Indian, I think that kronckew's theory of an Indian copy of an LC 1796 could be the most plausible conclusion. I will post better pictures of the hilt tomorrow. In regards to the lion head sword, it doesn't look like paint, traces of gilding possibly or like old Confederate swords, sometimes the brass has a coppery patina(I am not suggesting that this is a Confederate sword).