Cavalry sabre with a parabolic blade

sirupate · 6th January 2014, 03:07 PM

It looks like a flankers sword to me, but not being an expert I await for the experienced guys to give their views.

Jim McDougall · 6th January 2014, 06:37 PM

Hi Nando,
I think Sirupate is spot on, as it seems flank company officers did seem to favor in many cases these deeply parabolic blades, though it seems that may have been incidental. I have seen the familiar M1803 lionhead brass hilt forms (for infantry officers but also flank company officers)with the slotted guard with these kinds of blades on occasion . I have stirrup hilt sabre with deeply parabolic blade and unusually canted hlt which has been regarded as a variant M1796 ( I will see if I can find photos).

Whether your example was originally mounted in M1796 stirrup hilt (before restoration) is unknown. However that blade does seem to be with some slight resemblance to fullering of 1796 light cav, though obviously not remotely like the hatchet point blade.

The 1790s was a most innovative period for British cavalry swords as great interest was centered on the effectiveness of various sword forms, as LeMarchant introduced the first regulation patterns in 1796. Although the M1796 light and heavy cavalry forms were pretty consistant, there were still variations as many forms of blades were considered, even one case of a M1796 light cavalry sabre with recurved yataghan type blade (carried by the commanding officer of 10th Hussars at Waterloo).

Beyond the testing and prototypes regarding the most effective blade forms (which included tulwars, kilij, and of course the European forms, some with yelman) in this period, there was also a profound obsession with military fashion. While the colorful and often somewhat dramatically overdone clothing was part of the obsession with image and status, in many cases the swords also were rather exaggerated. The fashion for some time was to have the sabre low slung so that the scabbarded sword would effectively drag along (the reason for the 'drag' fixture at the chape). This added to the 'swagger' effect along with the colorful headgear, tunics etc. I would note here that even the much fabled ' Beau Brummel' was for a time in one of the British cavalry regiments and around this time.

It seems quite possible that these considerations might have had some bearing on the use of these dramatically parabolic blades, as the deep curve does not seem to have had any particularly pragmatic reason otherwise.

So I suppose this blade may have been either a prototype in this period, or perhaps the selection of a fashion conscious young officer. I cannot say whether this might be Portuguese or British, but as you know in many cases these were closely connected.

All the best,
Jim

fernando · 6th January 2014, 07:35 PM

Thanks for your comment Sirupate; and thanks for your extensive lines, Jim.
Far away from me to contradict your precious observations, but let me dare telling what i think this sword is not ... or apparently is not.
I have seen the grip before being restored; only the leather cover and wiring were added. Not objecting that the original hilt was a different one, this makes it more remote.
I wouldn't say that the blade was a 1796 one; this one lacks the sharp lines of its back, the hatchet point, the heavy weight look and all, having a more legere (thinner) and roundish appearance. I know that the overbending of a standard blade tends to somehow distort its lines, but still; the 1796 weighs well over 2 pounds and this one weighs less than 1 1/2 pounds.
Also i wouldn't call it a prototype ... at least a 'one and only' prototype; the guy i got it from had another example, with precisely the same curvature, although with a narrower blade. I would rather go for the swagger version, as you also well suggest.
And to finish with my is not catharsis, agreeing with you in absolute on what concerns British and Portuguese weapons having followed a paralel path, i think that, in this specific case, this is local work.
On the other hand, i find the term flanking very suggesting; confessing i never heard of it, i will look for its correspondence in Portuguese cavalry formation.
Thank you.

Jim McDougall · 6th January 2014, 10:42 PM

Good observations Nando, and what I was noting was a remote similarity in the fuller, at least what I can see of it, and not that it was actually a M1796 blade.
Excellent approach which I think is always prudent in examining an item, observing exactly what that item is 'not', using a rational scope of similar possibilities and process of elimination.

I know that you are of course extremely well familiar with both British and Portuguese cavalry swords (in fact much I have learned on these parallels has been from you). I agree that this is likely to be local work, particularly that you have more than one example to corroborate the idea. In the case of prototypes, it is not uncommon to have more than one of a unique style or form but what is noted would be considered rather 'not of an established or regularly seen pattern'.
What I was thinking of was the number of 'prototypes' in terms of the British swords on this early period, i.e. the yataghan blade example, a number of blades on M1796 officers sabres with yelman, and the shamshir type parabolic blade but with pronounced 'pipeback' rib etc.

The 'flank' companies were (at least in British battle order) units for the infantry regiments, which is why it is so interesting to see the use of these sabres.

I think we are pretty much on the same page, and this is likely more the 'swagger' situation during this time of flamboyant military fashion .

Richard G · 7th January 2014, 12:45 PM

I've always known these as bandsmen's swords.
Regards
Richard

Jim McDougall · 7th January 2014, 06:18 PM

Bandsmens swords? Now that is really interesting Richard! Can you please say more on what military etc. do you mean British or Portuguese? Can you please note what references might have this?

Its not that I am doubting this, but most of the band swords I have seen are of course the brass hilted short swords listed in the Robson books for British army swords. Some of these do have short sabre blades but certainly not these long ad dramatically curved blades.

As an aside pertaining to these dramatically parabolic blades, another instance of these are the examples made in America by the Virginia Manufactory of arms around 1808. These sabres had a slotted stirrup type hilt with a long deeply curved blade (40"). I often wondered why in the world these were so long and incredibly curved, but in retrospect I am thinking about the 'swagger' factor we have noted here. The state of Virginia is known for rather being its own 'country' in those early days, and the officers of their cavalry were known for flamboyance and 'swagger', one of them was of course 'Lighthorse Harry' Lee, father of Robert E. Lee.
In the Civil War, these sabres were apparently still in use or drawn out of stores, and the blades considerably shortened, presumably to render them more usable in combat.

fernando · 7th January 2014, 08:34 PM

Bandsmen swords ? I am getting more and more distant from where i started with this sword query

I mean, flanking sword was already an enigma (for me) but then, i am far from being a connoisseur. Naturaly knowing the basic meaning of the term 'flank' i searched for 'flankers' into the military environment. I didn't go further from flanking being a way of either defending the flanks of an infantry formation or atacking it, either by footmen or cavalry. I was not lucky to find any writings on swords made specifically for such maneuvers; neither i discern the difference between a 'basic' cavalry sword and a flanker's one. Still i am not closed to that ... and Sirupate must know what he is talking about.
Now, a bandsmen sword; the only examples i found on the Net have nothing (at all) to do with this sword i am posting. But a Net search is what it is; i am prepared for whatever comes from a further explanation, in this case from Richard G ... if not from whoever decides to enlighten me/us

7th January 2014, 06:18 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Bandsmens swords? Now that is really interesting Richard! Can you please say more on what military etc. do you mean British or Portuguese? Can you please note what references might have this? Its not that I am doubting this, but most of the band swords I have seen are of course the brass hilted short swords listed in the Robson books for British army swords. Some of these do have short sabre blades but certainly not these long ad dramatically curved blades. As an aside pertaining to these dramatically parabolic blades, another instance of these are the examples made in America by the Virginia Manufactory of arms around 1808. These sabres had a slotted stirrup type hilt with a long deeply curved blade (40"). I often wondered why in the world these were so long and incredibly curved, but in retrospect I am thinking about the 'swagger' factor we have noted here. The state of Virginia is known for rather being its own 'country' in those early days, and the officers of their cavalry were known for flamboyance and 'swagger', one of them was of course 'Lighthorse Harry' Lee, father of Robert E. Lee. In the Civil War, these sabres were apparently still in use or drawn out of stores, and the blades considerably shortened, presumably to render them more usable in combat. Attached Images Last edited by Jim McDougall; 7th January 2014 at 07:10 PM.

6th January 2014, 03:07 PM	#1
sirupate Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: England Posts: 373	It looks like a flankers sword to me, but not being an expert I await for the experienced guys to give their views.

6th January 2014, 06:37 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Hi Nando, I think Sirupate is spot on, as it seems flank company officers did seem to favor in many cases these deeply parabolic blades, though it seems that may have been incidental. I have seen the familiar M1803 lionhead brass hilt forms (for infantry officers but also flank company officers)with the slotted guard with these kinds of blades on occasion . I have stirrup hilt sabre with deeply parabolic blade and unusually canted hlt which has been regarded as a variant M1796 ( I will see if I can find photos). Whether your example was originally mounted in M1796 stirrup hilt (before restoration) is unknown. However that blade does seem to be with some slight resemblance to fullering of 1796 light cav, though obviously not remotely like the hatchet point blade. The 1790s was a most innovative period for British cavalry swords as great interest was centered on the effectiveness of various sword forms, as LeMarchant introduced the first regulation patterns in 1796. Although the M1796 light and heavy cavalry forms were pretty consistant, there were still variations as many forms of blades were considered, even one case of a M1796 light cavalry sabre with recurved yataghan type blade (carried by the commanding officer of 10th Hussars at Waterloo). Beyond the testing and prototypes regarding the most effective blade forms (which included tulwars, kilij, and of course the European forms, some with yelman) in this period, there was also a profound obsession with military fashion. While the colorful and often somewhat dramatically overdone clothing was part of the obsession with image and status, in many cases the swords also were rather exaggerated. The fashion for some time was to have the sabre low slung so that the scabbarded sword would effectively drag along (the reason for the 'drag' fixture at the chape). This added to the 'swagger' effect along with the colorful headgear, tunics etc. I would note here that even the much fabled ' Beau Brummel' was for a time in one of the British cavalry regiments and around this time. It seems quite possible that these considerations might have had some bearing on the use of these dramatically parabolic blades, as the deep curve does not seem to have had any particularly pragmatic reason otherwise. So I suppose this blade may have been either a prototype in this period, or perhaps the selection of a fashion conscious young officer. I cannot say whether this might be Portuguese or British, but as you know in many cases these were closely connected. All the best, Jim

6th January 2014, 07:35 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Thanks for your comment Sirupate; and thanks for your extensive lines, Jim. Far away from me to contradict your precious observations, but let me dare telling what i think this sword is not ... or apparently is not. I have seen the grip before being restored; only the leather cover and wiring were added. Not objecting that the original hilt was a different one, this makes it more remote. I wouldn't say that the blade was a 1796 one; this one lacks the sharp lines of its back, the hatchet point, the heavy weight look and all, having a more legere (thinner) and roundish appearance. I know that the overbending of a standard blade tends to somehow distort its lines, but still; the 1796 weighs well over 2 pounds and this one weighs less than 1 1/2 pounds. Also i wouldn't call it a prototype ... at least a 'one and only' prototype; the guy i got it from had another example, with precisely the same curvature, although with a narrower blade. I would rather go for the swagger version, as you also well suggest. And to finish with my is not catharsis, agreeing with you in absolute on what concerns British and Portuguese weapons having followed a paralel path, i think that, in this specific case, this is local work. On the other hand, i find the term flanking very suggesting; confessing i never heard of it, i will look for its correspondence in Portuguese cavalry formation. Thank you.

6th January 2014, 10:42 PM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Good observations Nando, and what I was noting was a remote similarity in the fuller, at least what I can see of it, and not that it was actually a M1796 blade. Excellent approach which I think is always prudent in examining an item, observing exactly what that item is 'not', using a rational scope of similar possibilities and process of elimination. I know that you are of course extremely well familiar with both British and Portuguese cavalry swords (in fact much I have learned on these parallels has been from you). I agree that this is likely to be local work, particularly that you have more than one example to corroborate the idea. In the case of prototypes, it is not uncommon to have more than one of a unique style or form but what is noted would be considered rather 'not of an established or regularly seen pattern'. What I was thinking of was the number of 'prototypes' in terms of the British swords on this early period, i.e. the yataghan blade example, a number of blades on M1796 officers sabres with yelman, and the shamshir type parabolic blade but with pronounced 'pipeback' rib etc. The 'flank' companies were (at least in British battle order) units for the infantry regiments, which is why it is so interesting to see the use of these sabres. I think we are pretty much on the same page, and this is likely more the 'swagger' situation during this time of flamboyant military fashion .

7th January 2014, 12:45 PM	#5
Richard G Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 409	I've always known these as bandsmen's swords. Regards Richard

7th January 2014, 08:34 PM	#7
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Bandsmen swords ? I am getting more and more distant from where i started with this sword query I mean, flanking sword was already an enigma (for me) but then, i am far from being a connoisseur. Naturaly knowing the basic meaning of the term 'flank' i searched for 'flankers' into the military environment. I didn't go further from flanking being a way of either defending the flanks of an infantry formation or atacking it, either by footmen or cavalry. I was not lucky to find any writings on swords made specifically for such maneuvers; neither i discern the difference between a 'basic' cavalry sword and a flanker's one. Still i am not closed to that ... and Sirupate must know what he is talking about. Now, a bandsmen sword; the only examples i found on the Net have nothing (at all) to do with this sword i am posting. But a Net search is what it is; i am prepared for whatever comes from a further explanation, in this case from Richard G ... if not from whoever decides to enlighten me/us