View Single Post
Old 4th October 2022, 05:03 AM   #9
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,738
Default

Robert and Will, thank you very much. After checking further in copies of "The British Cavalry Sword 1788-1912" (Richard Dellar, 2013) and "Swords of the British Army" (Brian Robson, 1985) I can recall some of the particulars on these light cavalry swords.

The M1821 light cavalry troopers saber indeed had a new type blade for both cut and thrust which was not with pipe back, while in many cases officers swords did have them. The production of these m1821 swords began in 1823, with about 6000 done by 1825. While there were some complaints about them by 1827, it was mostly about being 'too light' but the scabbards were most of the issue. It seems these complaints were finally set aside and the swords remained in use until the introduction of the M1853 (for both light and heavy cavalry troopers).

In these transitional times there surely was confusion on designations etc.

Richard Dellar discusses the 'Balaclava presentation swords' in a chapter of his book, and three of these swords which are all M1796 light cavalry sabers which all have oval escutcheons with "BALACLAVA OCTOBER25, 1854"
There are regimental markings on the guard bottom, two for 17th Lancers, one for 4th Hussars (4th Light Dragoons at time of charge).
It is believed these were likely issued by the Balaclava Commemoration Society, which was begin in 1875.

The unit markings it seems were intended to align with those of the men these were presented to, but do not seem purported to have been carried in the charge.

I agree with Will, swords with proper unit markings and other markings which set in correct period can possibly have been in the charge, but no way to prove without proper provenance.

In Dellar (op.cit. p.120; 13.6, 13.7) a M1821 light cavalry saber is shown as by Charles Reeves & Co. of Birmingham, with notation of 'Reeves hilt' . It says this form is believed to have started in 1829, which is about the time some of the consternation on these swords was taking place, partly noting the hilts were of concern. I have always wondered what the number 111 was for.
It is tempting to think perhaps numbering in test examples but no record of such tests are recorded, and these remained in service until arrival of the M1853.
Interestingly Reeves held the patent for the 'sandwich' application of the new grips to tang of the new M1853 sabers. It has been noted that some of the first examples of these had blades from Solingen by the maker Kirschbaum, as in this example to supply to troops departing for Crimea (op. cit. Dellar, p.136, pl.15.9 showing knights head mark).
Both of these types were on the field at Balaclava.
Attached Images
    

Last edited by Jim McDougall; 4th October 2022 at 06:24 AM.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote