Please help on 1796 HC sword marks

[Ian Knight]

The sword fitted with its new grip, made by myself. Rivet still to replace.
Ian

[fernando]

Great work; well done.
Fernando

[Ian Knight]

Thank you Fernando. It's very time consuming making a bespoke grip but very rewarding. This one took me two days to complete.
Ian

[katana]

Hi Ian,
nice job.....what wood did you use ?

Regards David

[celtan]

Beautiful results.

I must confess to be envious of your abilities, I have no idea how to dismount a hilt or replate silver finish...

Best

M

Originally Posted by Ian Knight

The sword fitted with its new grip, made by myself. Rivet still to replace.
Ian

[Jim McDougall]

Absolutely magnificent Ian!!! You have done a wonderful job at maintaining the integrity of this great old warrior!! I love the M1796 heavies!!

All the best,
Jim

[Ian Knight]

Thanks very much guys. I may write a illustrated list of instructions when I make my next grip.

David,
The grip was made from beech wood shaped and covered in leather. The grip was made out of two pieces. The tang is marked out on one piece and cut out to the full depth of the tang. The second piece is then glued to it.

Manolo,
Taking this sword apart was fairly easy as the leather buffer/washer was placed between the blade and hilt not just slid over the blade. I cut the old leather buffer away and was then able to push the blade backwards exposing about 2 mm of the tang. The peened over end of the tang can then be filed off allowing you to dis-assemble the sword. Hey presto.

Jim,
I have always wanted a P1796 HC sword but could never afford one. I bought this old thing at a fair price because of the grip.

Ian


Ian

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Ian,
The M1796 heavy was one of my very first swords, I think I got it in 1966, and it was/is pretty beat up. The scabbard was mismatched (as often found), the blade welded back together at center, and it was by T Craven.
I still have it, couldnt ever let it go In those days these things were around a hundred bucks usually if in good condition. I think I spent 50, but hey that was a lotta money then....gas was still 27cents a gallon!!!

All the best,
Jim

[Ian Knight]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hi Ian,
The M1796 heavy was one of my very first swords, I think I got it in 1966, and it was/is pretty beat up. The scabbard was mismatched (as often found), the blade welded back together at center, and it was by T Craven.
I still have it, couldnt ever let it go In those days these things were around a hundred bucks usually if in good condition. I think I spent 50, but hey that was a lotta money then....gas was still 27cents a gallon!!!

All the best,
Jim

Hello Jim,
I wish that I had bought one when my interest in the Napoleonic Wars started after seeing the film 'Waterloo' back in the 70s. Now they sell at auction in the U.K. for up to £3000 (nearly $5000).
I'd like to see a picture of your P1796 HC sword please.
Ian

[Richard]

All, re the markings that have been debated, I don't want to complicate matters but Portugal was not the only country to which Britain sent the P1796 heavy sword. Some 2000 P1796 HC swords were sent to Sweden around 1807 and the Swedes adopted the exact pattern as their own M1808 cavalry pallasch* (although after Bernadotte become Crown Prince Charles John in 1810, they remodelled to a more French style of sword).

Ian - very nice grip restoration.

Jim - one of my 1796HC swords is by Thomas Craven who was in business from 1800-1801. Brian Robson was in error when he gave Craven's dates as 1818-20

Richard

* Source : Svenska Blankvapen by Olaf P Berg

[Richard]

But talking about Portugal, below is a p1796 HC officer's sword which has a "JR" cypher on the blade. I believe this is the cypher used by John of Portugal when Prince Regent from 1799 - 1816 (the cypher became JR IV after he became king). I think sword was used by a British officer in the Portugese army after it was reorganised by Beresford in 1808 at the command of Wellington and that it originally had a GR cypher which had been polished out and re-engraved "JR"

Richard

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Richard,
As you've probably read on this thread I was very fortunate in being able to purchase from Fernando the sword that was the subject of the initial post on this thread. The V mark on the guard has never been satisfactorily explained and I wondered if you have any insight as to its meaning. The sword was discovered in Portugal and has been in the possession of a Portuguese family for some considerable time although it is not possible to determine how long that may have been nor the original source.
My Regards,
Norman.

[celtan]

Thanks for answering my Q, Ian.

But then, if you file off the tang's end. How do you reassemble the grip afterwards, and keep the whole shebang together? Not Krazy-Glue, I hope!

: )

Originally Posted by Ian Knight

Thanks very much guys. I may write a illustrated list of instructions when I make my next grip.


Manolo,
Taking this sword apart was fairly easy as the leather buffer/washer was placed between the blade and hilt not just slid over the blade. I cut the old leather buffer away and was then able to push the blade backwards exposing about 2 mm of the tang. The peened over end of the tang can then be filed off allowing you to dis-assemble the sword. Hey presto.


Ian

[Ian Knight]

Hello Manolo,
I'm sorry my explanation wasn't very accurate. The end of the tang is not filed off, just the sides of the 'mushroom' created when the tang was originally peened over. See my very basic drawing.

Ian

[Ian Knight]

Originally Posted by Richard

All, re the markings that have been debated, I don't want to complicate matters but Portugal was not the only country to which Britain sent the P1796 heavy sword. Some 2000 P1796 HC swords were sent to Sweden around 1807 and the Swedes adopted the exact pattern as their own M1808 cavalry pallasch* (although after Bernadotte become Crown Prince Charles John in 1810, they remodelled to a more French style of sword).

Ian - very nice grip restoration.

Jim - one of my 1796HC swords is by Thomas Craven who was in business from 1800-1801. Brian Robson was in error when he gave Craven's dates as 1818-20

Richard

* Source : Svenska Blankvapen by Olaf P Berg

Thanks Richard,
I am not 100% happy with it. When sizing and finishing the wooden part of the grip you have to make the grip slightly smaller to allow for the thickness of the leather covering. I actually made the grip a little too small and so there is a slight gap between the finished grip and the backpiece.
I might make another.
Ian

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Richard

All, re the markings that have been debated, I don't want to complicate matters but Portugal was not the only country to which Britain sent the P1796 heavy sword. Some 2000 P1796 HC swords were sent to Sweden around 1807 and the Swedes adopted the exact pattern as their own M1808 cavalry pallasch* (although after Bernadotte become Crown Prince Charles John in 1810, they remodelled to a more French style of sword).

Ian - very nice grip restoration.

Jim - one of my 1796HC swords is by Thomas Craven who was in business from 1800-1801. Brian Robson was in error when he gave Craven's dates as 1818-20

Richard

* Source : Svenska Blankvapen by Olaf P Berg

Thank you so much Richard for the input on Craven. I remember all the years I researched that sword, the 1818 date seemed odd as this appeared a much earlier sword. The references I had were the old May & Annis based ones with the directory records.
Its great to have updated references, and I know you're always researching as evidenced by the detail in the outstanding articles you present!!!

All the best,
Jim

[katana]

Originally Posted by Ian Knight

Thanks Richard,
I am not 100% happy with it. When sizing and finishing the wooden part of the grip you have to make the grip slightly smaller to allow for the thickness of the leather covering. I actually made the grip a little too small and so there is a slight gap between the finished grip and the backpiece.
I might make another.
Ian

Hi Ian ,
could you 'double-up' on the leather covering (if glued to the existing layer)....or would you loose the detail of the grooves ?

Thanks for answering my question ....Is beech the original wood used ....or your own personal preference?

Regards David

[fernando]

Hi Richard,

Originally Posted by Richard

All, re the markings that have been debated, I don't want to complicate matters but Portugal was not the only country to which Britain sent the P1796 heavy sword ...

The assumption that this sword's marks are either Spanish or Portuguese relies on the use of genre ... feminine, in the case. The 2ª for segunda and Cª for Companhia are undoubtedly the type of initials used on marks in the Peninsula,
Fernando

[Ian Knight]

Originally Posted by katana

Hi Ian ,
could you 'double-up' on the leather covering (if glued to the existing layer)....or would you loose the detail of the grooves ?

Thanks for answering my question ....Is beech the original wood used ....or your own personal preference?

Regards David

Hello David,
I did think about doubling up the leather but I do think it would spoil the grooves but I suppose if I am not happy with it I could give it a try.
I believe that the wood originally used would either be beech or obeche.

Ian

[fernando]

Hi again, Richard,

Originally Posted by Richard

But talking about Portugal, below is a p1796 HC officer's sword which has a "JR" cypher on the blade. I believe this is the cypher used by John of Portugal when Prince Regent from 1799 - 1816 (the cypher became JR IV after he became king). I think sword was used by a British officer in the Portugese army after it was reorganised by Beresford in 1808 at the command of Wellington and that it originally had a GR cypher which had been polished out and re-engraved "JR"

Richard

Nice sword you got there; with a hilt rather different from the current model, right?
Not trying to correct you, but the right cypher would be the monogram JPR for João Principe Regente.
He was indeed crowned in 1816, but as João VI, not IV. The new cypher would then be JVI ... no more R for regent.
But then if, as you say, your sword was used by a British officer, i don't see the logic in changing the British cypher into a Portuguese one. In such case the sword would have been 'donated' by the British, like thousands of them, and used by Portuguese ... or am i completely blocked
Fernando

[Richard]

Hi Fernando

Of course I bow to your knowledge of Portuguese Royal cyphers! Do you think that JR might not be Prince Regent Joao? or maybe JR is the British interpretation of what the cypher should be? The sword is not unique, I know of another exactly like it where the GR is still just visible under the new JR cypher. And of course, I am speculating that it was carried by a British officer in the army of Portugal, no-one can know for sure - but it is an officer's sword, not a trooper's sword which means it was not a government issued sword but bought by private purchase by an officer. The blade is by Runkel Sohlingen which puts the date of manufacture from 1796 to around 1800 (after 1800 the "h" was dropped from the spelling of Solingen on Runkel's blades). So it was certainly used by an officer in the British army before relocating to Portugal!

Fernando, I'm not sure what you mean when you say the hilt is not like "the current model"? Do you mean that its not like the disc hilt being discussed in this thread? If so, its because this hilt is the version for officers, sometimes called the "ladder hilt" or "first honeysuckle hilt".

Richard

Originally Posted by fernando

Hi again, Richard,


Nice sword you got there; with a hilt rather different from the current model, right?
Not trying to correct you, but the right cypher would be the monogram JPR for João Principe Regente.
He was indeed crowned in 1816, but as João VI, not IV. The new cypher would then be JVI ... no more R for regent.
But then if, as you say, your sword was used by a British officer, i don't see the logic in changing the British cypher into a Portuguese one. In such case the sword would have been 'donated' by the British, like thousands of them, and used by Portuguese ... or am i completely blocked
Fernando

[Richard]

Hi Norman

I'm afraid I do not know what the V stamping might mean. I don't think I've ever seen it before on one of these swords, or any other British sword of the period. However, of course, it is a very well known stamp on French Napoleonic swords, often found on hilts, blades and scabbards and signifying as I recall "verifie" (checked or approved). But on a British sword ?

Richard

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi Richard,
As you've probably read on this thread I was very fortunate in being able to purchase from Fernando the sword that was the subject of the initial post on this thread. The V mark on the guard has never been satisfactorily explained and I wondered if you have any insight as to its meaning. The sword was discovered in Portugal and has been in the possession of a Portuguese family for some considerable time although it is not possible to determine how long that may have been nor the original source.
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Richard

Hi Fernando

Of course I bow to your knowledge of Portuguese Royal cyphers! Do you think that JR might not be Prince Regent Joao? or maybe JR is the British interpretation of what the cypher should be? The sword is not unique, I know of another exactly like it where the GR is still just visible under the new JR cypher. And of course, I am speculating that it was carried by a British officer in the army of Portugal, no-one can know for sure - but it is an officer's sword, not a trooper's sword which means it was not a government issued sword but bought by private purchase by an officer. The blade is by Runkel Sohlingen which puts the date of manufacture from 1796 to around 1800 (after 1800 the "h" was dropped from the spelling of Solingen on Runkel's blades). So it was certainly used by an officer in the British army before relocating to Portugal!

Fernando, I'm not sure what you mean when you say the hilt is not like "the current model"? Do you mean that its not like the disc hilt being discussed in this thread? If so, its because this hilt is the version for officers, sometimes called the "ladder hilt" or "first honeysuckle hilt".

Richard

Well, i am not such a specialist (at all), but the JPR monogram is what you massively see around, when it concerns this monarch's cypher, assuming that his contextual activity was more reflected while he was a prince, i would say.
On the other hand, the initials JR would fit to JOANNES REX, if such cypher was ever practiced, since he was later crowned as king; i am just excluding this for lack of instantly evidence, and not with final determination.
... besides, this would be a bit outdated, when it comes to weaponry potentially used during thr Peninsular war.
By the way, and still wandering about the cypher swap on the blade/s, did you know that George in portuguese is Jorge ?
Obviously this means no more than that.
Fernando

.

[Gonzalo G]

Interesting thread. I just found it, and some questions came to my my head when I read it completely . To begin with, I understood that long straight one-edged swords were used by the cavaly not because some theoretical reasons/preferences over the subject "thrust vs. slash-cut", but because they were designed to penetrate-perforate the cuirasses-protections (since cuirasses were not the only body protection) used by other heavy cavalry corps at the time, and also to make effective cuts but, am I wrong? That need would be also the reason for the appearance of more pointed and rigid (by diamond-shaping the blade) medieval swords, associated with the development of the full plate armour, according with Oakeshott. Sometimes, those long and straight cavalry blades would replace gradually the lances used also by this corps, though the lances did not dissapeared completely. That would explain also the geometry of the hatchet point, since it permits the use of the thicker back of the blade to reinforce the point and give more rigidity to the thrust against body defensive protection, especially in the case of non diamond or non rhombic shaped blades (under this practical light, I feel necessary to re-evaluate the Spanish cavalry sword form this period), isn´t it?

And it is also the reason why some heavy cavalry corps in oriental Europe used a long estoc carried on the saddle as a permanent complement of the curved sabres suspended routinely from their belts or, am I wrong? This last fact, of alternative but consecutive uses, would put the "thrust vs. slash-cut" dicussion on a serious metaphysical contradiction (and on a practical dilemma, for that matter: "what do I do now, perforate him...or slash him...what do I pull?") if the subject is not considered under the more practical terms of purposes related with body armour (even horse armour, in the case of oriental European cavalry fighting against the Turkish), than with wound-effectiveness. Because wound effectiveness also does not explains the fact that frequently, at the same time and in the same army, cavalry troops used a curved sabre, meanwhile infantry troops used a straight sword. Unless a slash from a horseback in more dangerous than a thrust, or a thrust on foot more dangerous than on horseback. Though the curved sabres does not impede thrusts, and straight swords does not impede slashing cuts, and I recall one cavalry very old excersice of thrusting rings suspended from a fixed points (did I see to many Hollywood movies?). And worst yet, that does not explains the fact that some cavalry corps used straight swords, meanwhile other corps in the same army used curved sabres....I feel confussed....

I always thought that the problem of wound effectivenes was seriously considered in the design of sword blades, but I believed it was not the only one, and that the adoption of specific geometries obeyed to more complex and less....theoretical reasons, but I can be mistaken.

I don´t know for sure if this ideas are wrong, so please illuminate me, as I understand that the gradual dissapearance of those long and heavy straight swords is related with the dissapearance of all body protection in the cavalry corps, though not in a linear form, since traditions or preferences related with the tastes of those who decide over the official models (and, as we have seen, they are not always versed on the needs of the field), or the latter irrelevancy in the use of the edged weapons in combat, but for the bayonets, explains the survival of straight swords on the late 19th Centrury-early 20th Century cavalry corps, and the progressively lesser curvature of the sabres. Am I too simplistic or misinformed?
Thank you for your attention.
Regards

Gonzalo

[fernando]

BTW, Norman, Ian, Richard and all.
I am sure you have this listing on British Regimental markings on swords, but just in case .
Fernando

.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Fernando,
Many thanks for the info.
My Regards,
Norman.

[Richard]

Fernando

Yes I know that listing - I compiled it! It is not comprehensive, just marks I had noted from personal observation

Richard

Originally Posted by fernando

BTW, Norman, Ian, Richard and all.
I am sure you have this listing on British Regimental markings on swords, but just in case .
Fernando

.

[celtan]

Wowie! Nice to have you here.

: )

BTW: There was a strange english short sword from the mid 19th C that we were discussing a couple months ago, would you mind taking a look at the thread?

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10937

Best regards

Manolo

Originally Posted by Richard

Fernando

Yes I know that listing - I compiled it! It is not comprehensive, just marks I had noted from personal observation

Richard

[Ian Knight]

Originally Posted by Richard

Fernando

Yes I know that listing - I compiled it! It is not comprehensive, just marks I had noted from personal observation

Richard

Thanks Fernando/Richard.

Ian

[Richard]

Hi Manolo

Well, its an interesting sword, not a British regulation pattern that I've ever come across, so I'm afraid I can't help much (or actually at all!). It looks ceremonial to me, that's about it I'm afraid

Richard

Originally Posted by celtan

Wowie! Nice to have you here.

: )

BTW: There was a strange english short sword from the mid 19th C that we were discussing a couple months ago, would you mind taking a look at the thread?

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10937

Best regards

Manolo