George IV Infantry sword variant.

[kronckew]

Acquired this sword today, should be with me next Monday. The 1822 pattern brass hilt with folding guard has the George IV cipher on it, blade appears older, 75cm. long. (29.5in.).

Flank Officer's private purchase?

[colin henshaw]

Not my area really, but I like it ... congrats. Good form and patina. Is the hilt made of horn ??

[kronckew]

Can't tell from the photos, does not appear to be worn shagreen/rayskin wire wrap looks original to it. Could be a pale goldish coloured horn. will know more when I pick it up...

[M ELEY]

I particularly like the blade, definitely older 18th c. or very early 19th, double fullered. I wonder why this was remounted? Very nice piece, Wayne!

[kronckew]

Thanks, George IV ruled 1820-1830 and was succeeded by Queen Victoria, so the brass cypher could only be from that decade. the blade, however, looks more like the late 18 to early 19c you mentioned. I'm wondering if the patination pattern corresponds to remnants of bluing. Ah, well will find out in a few days.

This was the beginning of standardisation of sword patterns, started in 1796, but still a bit flexible. Officers especially (probably exclusively) were still able to be 'flexible' as they were (and still are) expected to buy their own swords in the UK, and in the USA.

I'd guess this was a personally liked blade, possibly an heirloom passed down from a martial daddy that was rehilted to fit in with his regiment. The std. pipe back blade was not all that popular as it wasn't terribly good at slashing, being later replaced by the straighter fullered blade that carried on thru the Victorian era. the troops using pipe backs in crime complained they flexed on Russian greatcoats rather than penetrated. The officer that carried this one probably preferred the cut to the thrust.

[thinreadline]

Typically the grip was made of wood covered in shagreen . I expect this grip had lost its shagreen covering , exposing the wood that has dried out to this horn like colour . It is very unlikely to be horn however. On a purely technical point , George IV was succeeded by his brother William IV rather than by Victoria though.

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by thinreadline

... George IV was succeeded by his brother William IV rather than by Victoria though.

Correct, I keep forgetting him since he wasn't around very long...he ruled 1830-37.

Alexandrina Victoria became Queen in 1837, starting the Alexandrinian age, er, somehow she became just Victoria on accession, so we think of her reign as Victorian'. (Probably too much of a mouthful, she was known as 'Drina' until she was crowned and finally broke free from her mother and insisted on being called 'Victoria'. The Drinian age would have sounded a bit odd.)

Anyhow, wood would () be better, the golden translucent fibrous horn of an overweight bellicose African herbivore on the endangered species list would not be PC.

[Kmaddock]

Hi
You said in your post

the beginning of standardisation of sword patterns, started in 1796, but still a bit flexible.

I believe the 1788 light cavilary troopers sabre was start of standardization for the British army

I picked up A 1788 LC a few weeks ago and I will put up pictures on forum to show example of what this sword looks like

Nice item you have aquired though

Well done

Ken

[thinreadline]

Originally Posted by kronckew

Correct, I keep forgetting him since he wasn't around very long...he ruled 1830-37.

Alexandrina Victoria became Queen in 1837, starting the Alexandrinian age, er, somehow she became just Victoria on accession, so we think of her reign as Victorian'. (Probably too much of a mouthful, she was known as 'Drina' until she was crowned and finally broke free from her mother and insisted on being called 'Victoria'. The Drinian age would have sounded a bit odd.)

Anyhow, wood would () be better, the golden translucent fibrous horn of an overweight bellicose African herbivore on the endangered species list would not be PC.

Yes people do , he was always in the shadow of his older , badly behaved brother ! But on the matter of British monarch's name titles , it is very common for them to take one of their other forenames when they accede to the crown. For example Edward VII was Albert Edward and George VI was Albert Frederick Arthur George .It is unlikely that Prince Charles will be crowned as Charles III .
Your sword is highly interesting and I wish I could suggest a reason, but these hybrids do turn up from time to time, its often suggested that officers serving in India preferred this style .

[thinreadline]

Originally Posted by Kmaddock

Hi
You said in your post

the beginning of standardisation of sword patterns, started in 1796, but still a bit flexible.

I believe the 1788 light cavilary troopers sabre was start of standardization for the British army

I picked up A 1788 LC a few weeks ago and I will put up pictures on forum to show example of what this sword looks like

Nice item you have aquired though

Well done

Ken

Yes I believe you are right re 1788 swords . I think 1796 is often quoted as that year a number of pieces of military equipment were introduced and it is seen as the first year of large scale 'patterning' of British military equipment. Here is my 1788 ... not a great pic , but it is so high up I would need a ladder to get to it !

[kronckew]

I quite like the 1788 versions. re: my curved 1822 variant, I have a 1910 Indian army pattern sabre with an 1821 style hilt and a 1796 blade variant, slightly shorter and a stronger blade forte, we discussed earlier here. The Indian army was reluctant to adopt the thrust-centric 1908 sword, preferring the curved cutting swords, so they opted for these, I gather they are not common as they were not issued before the Indians reluctantly adopted the 1908 for WW1.

[thinreadline]

Originally Posted by kronckew

I quite like the 1788 versions. re: my curved 1822 variant, I have a 1910 Indian army pattern sabre with an 1821 style hilt and a 1796 blade variant, slightly shorter and a stronger blade forte, we discussed earlier here. The Indian army was reluctant to adopt the thrust-centric 1908 sword, preferring the curved cutting swords, so they opted for these, I gather they are not common as they were not issued before the Indians reluctantly adopted the 1908 for WW1.

Yes that is a good looking and unusual sword .

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by thinreadline

Yes that is a good looking and unusual sword .

The Indian is noticably better balanced & i'd prefer it to my 1796 LC, which is a bit ip heavier. I'm not a horseman tho, and prefer navy/infantry nangers & sword variants.