![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,192
|
![]()
An absolutely magnificent acquisition Nando!!!!! and outstanding observations by Kronckew.There were indeed powerful French influences in play near the turn of the century, and actually the dragoon sword that was referred to as the M1799 was influenced by contemporary French sabres with the 'birdhead' type pommel/backstrap. This was the model that appeared in the 1803 text regulations.
This particular form of cuphilt was I think as you mention possibly called a M1798, but it seems that its classification is a bit sketchy. I think that Juan Perez has more on that but I hevent really reviewed his material from some years ago. According to Chamberlain (p.83, plates 150,151) this type cuphilt was more in accord with earlier forms and as always revealed Spain's inclination to adhere to traditional forms. It seems these were possibly in use much earlier than the 1798 benchmark, and probably contemporary with the M1728 forms which have become known as the 'bilbo' for thier bilobate shellguard basic in hilt. These 'bilbo' type swords were the form most well known in New Spain as far as military dragoon swords, while the cuphilt style broadswords were well known among infantry officers primarily. Naturally in frontier environments there were few set standards observed conclusively. With reference to your observation on the Alamo ![]() The presence of the French cuirassier blade on this sword affirms it Continental provenance rather than Colonial. These early Spanish swords, especially this particular 'M1798' is probably one of the most desirable and hardest to obtain examples of these 18th century cavalry Spanish cavalry swords as I have understood (when I tried to find one once! ![]() All the best, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|