Quote:
Originally Posted by kronckew
I've read somewhere that many Brits still had the older 1821 pipe back blades, not terribly good cutters, and too flexible to thrust through Russian greatcoats.
The photographer of the road likely replaced the cannon balls in the road for effect, after the fact. That was a busy supply road and the Supply corps would have pushed them off to the sides.
|
Thank you Wayne! It does seem there was a variance in the equipment of the different units of course, though the M1821 light cavalry saber was prevalent (along with the M1822 for officers) both three bar hilts.
There was a disruption in the production of the M1821 light cavalry saber from what I understand, and production did not resume fully until 1829. This is why these are often termed M1829. I was not aware that the early models had pipe back blades.
It was not known until recent years (mostly thanks to research by Richard Dellar , "The British Cavalry Sword: Some New Perspectives", 2013) that the M1853 cavalry saber for both light and heavy cavalry was present in some degree at Balaklava.
In later years at survivors reunions etc. it seems there were cases of M1796 light cavalry stirrup hilt sabers inscribed and presented.
The Russian great coats were a test for virtually all sword blades and that issue was brought up constantly over many of the British swords in the Crimea.
The two photos of the 'valley' by Roger Fenton in 1855 were probably staged as per the practice of photographers in so many cases in war or military images.
All that is known is the actual location of these photos was some distance from the location of the actual charge. as you note, these spent balls would have been moved off the road with the traffic of supply, equipment and forces.
I have thought (though it is not indicated) that this might be the Wozoronoff Road, which if the case, was near several of the British redoubts. It does seem that often with artillery, spent shot was retrieved and used for further action, but unclear how much of the Russian fire was shot, shell and canister.
It is known that both Russian and British had 12 pounder guns.
One thing I wanted to achieve in this thread, is to determine just how many Russian guns there were; the sizes included; and where positioned.
Also, I am curious why there has never been any archaeological study of the Balaklava battle field, and why there are no known (substantiated) relics of the battle from the field. It would be interesting to know if any examples of spent shot or shells were taken as souvenirs. I know Mark Twain visited there in the 1860s and I think found something but cannot locate notes.