Rode the 600

Jim McDougall · 29th May 2014, 08:08 AM

Ken, thank you for the correction, and it is indeed properly the M1821.
My original research on this event and these swords goes back to the late 1970s into 1980s and there was a great deal of complexity on these sword patterns in existing literature.

Much of this evolved with reference to the production of the M1821 light cavalry sabre as well as the M1821 Heavy cavalry sabre (with iron bowl guard ).Apparently the light cavalry sabres began in 1823, but was interrupted in 1825, at least at Enfield. Robson (p.29) states by this time about 6000 were made but it is unclear if this was the entire number (there were up to 18 contractors making them so this seems unusual).

Complaints on both sword types persisted, and production of the heavy cavalry M1821 which had begun in 1825 ceased in 1827, with both models being brought to review in 1828.

In Robson (p.179) it is footnoted with reference to the M1821 light cavalry sabre that "..the sword is sometimes referred to as the '1830 pattern' based on the statement by C.J.Ffoulkes and E..Hopkinson in "Sword, Lance and Bayonet" (p.48). It is an error deriving from a confusion between the date when the pattern was actually approved and the period when first service issues were made"
The first issues were made in 1824, but it would appear that the 'approval' must have referred to results of the July 2, 1828 board which resumed production on these swords. Further improvements to the 'light' model were suggested in 1833, and Robson (p.30) notes large numbers were then on hand.

In 1835, an order for another 1000 heavy cavalry swords issued, and by this time 1500 of original batch of 2138 produced were issued. These presumably were of the 1825 order which ceased in 1827.

It seems I had seen references where these two models were referred to as either M1821 or M1829 or in more recent times M1821/29 due to these production and complaint issues, and referring to the dual 'start' times for them.

As a collector of British swords back then, I recall the M1821 light cavalry sabre was fairly easy to find (I had several) but the M1821'heavy' ....that was tough!!! I had one of the regular model, and another which had been refitted with lighter and rebated blade for practice use.

An even more complex matter, and with remarkable new findings, is the number of the newly issued M1853 pattern swords which were actually present in this famed charge. There were apparently a good number more than originally thought, and I believe some of the heavy cavalry had them as well (these were universal to both rather than light and heavy).

David, thank you for bringing up this thread. Your friend is of course technically correct.....the brigade itself despite being terribly decimated was in effect 'ready to go again'...and narrations note groups of troopers who stated they were ready...to which Cardigan declined. It would have been difficult however as they were scattered about and regrouping what viable forces remained would have been futile in my opinion.

This is much the same case with the also famed charge of the Royal Scots Greys at Waterloo, where though there were disastrous casualties, the greatest issue was the disassembly of the riders to where regrouping and further combat was rendered nearly impossible effectively .

As always, these kinds of events were certainly far different in reality than characterized in literature, poems, and of course movies. Still, the heroism of the men who fought these battles cannot be discounted.

As I said six years ago

it would indeed be great to see some examples of the swords of this famed battle, or that is, of the types used.

Norman McCormick · 29th May 2014, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

As I said six years ago

it would indeed be great to see some examples of the swords of this famed battle, or that is, of the types used.

Your wish etc.etc.

An Osborn '1821' L.C. sabre.
My Regards,
Norman.

Jim McDougall · 30th May 2014, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Your wish etc.etc.

An Osborn '1821' L.C. sabre.
My Regards,
Norman.

Thank you so much Norman!!! and an Osborn yet!!!
There is something inherently exciting about these sabres, which seems to transcend even the obvious associations with the 'Charge'. It seems they were drawn from French cavalry pattern types, and they were paralleled in the U.S. M1833 Ames dragoon sabres.

If I recall correctly there was even one of these British M1821 found on one of the battlefields here in Texas from around the time of the Alamo (1836). Apparently it and some number of them found their way into the Mexican army as large volume of British firearms deaccessed were sold to them.

29th May 2014, 08:08 AM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,954	Ken, thank you for the correction, and it is indeed properly the M1821. My original research on this event and these swords goes back to the late 1970s into 1980s and there was a great deal of complexity on these sword patterns in existing literature. Much of this evolved with reference to the production of the M1821 light cavalry sabre as well as the M1821 Heavy cavalry sabre (with iron bowl guard ).Apparently the light cavalry sabres began in 1823, but was interrupted in 1825, at least at Enfield. Robson (p.29) states by this time about 6000 were made but it is unclear if this was the entire number (there were up to 18 contractors making them so this seems unusual). Complaints on both sword types persisted, and production of the heavy cavalry M1821 which had begun in 1825 ceased in 1827, with both models being brought to review in 1828. In Robson (p.179) it is footnoted with reference to the M1821 light cavalry sabre that "..the sword is sometimes referred to as the '1830 pattern' based on the statement by C.J.Ffoulkes and E..Hopkinson in "Sword, Lance and Bayonet" (p.48). It is an error deriving from a confusion between the date when the pattern was actually approved and the period when first service issues were made" The first issues were made in 1824, but it would appear that the 'approval' must have referred to results of the July 2, 1828 board which resumed production on these swords. Further improvements to the 'light' model were suggested in 1833, and Robson (p.30) notes large numbers were then on hand. In 1835, an order for another 1000 heavy cavalry swords issued, and by this time 1500 of original batch of 2138 produced were issued. These presumably were of the 1825 order which ceased in 1827. It seems I had seen references where these two models were referred to as either M1821 or M1829 or in more recent times M1821/29 due to these production and complaint issues, and referring to the dual 'start' times for them. As a collector of British swords back then, I recall the M1821 light cavalry sabre was fairly easy to find (I had several) but the M1821'heavy' ....that was tough!!! I had one of the regular model, and another which had been refitted with lighter and rebated blade for practice use. An even more complex matter, and with remarkable new findings, is the number of the newly issued M1853 pattern swords which were actually present in this famed charge. There were apparently a good number more than originally thought, and I believe some of the heavy cavalry had them as well (these were universal to both rather than light and heavy). David, thank you for bringing up this thread. Your friend is of course technically correct.....the brigade itself despite being terribly decimated was in effect 'ready to go again'...and narrations note groups of troopers who stated they were ready...to which Cardigan declined. It would have been difficult however as they were scattered about and regrouping what viable forces remained would have been futile in my opinion. This is much the same case with the also famed charge of the Royal Scots Greys at Waterloo, where though there were disastrous casualties, the greatest issue was the disassembly of the riders to where regrouping and further combat was rendered nearly impossible effectively . As always, these kinds of events were certainly far different in reality than characterized in literature, poems, and of course movies. Still, the heroism of the men who fought these battles cannot be discounted. As I said six years ago it would indeed be great to see some examples of the swords of this famed battle, or that is, of the types used.