Lt Col. John Gaspard Le Marchant

[Jim McDougall]

I once had a M1796 light cavalry sabre with traces of bluing and inscribed motif on the blade, including the pre-1801 British coat of arms (with fluer de lis in upper right quadrant). It seems it was possibly even slightly shorter than the 31" described here. It was entirely unmarked as far as maker and was without scabbard.
I was always curious about this sabre as being rather on the short side, and wonder as well if there was a particular instance of the period for the size of the blade so much shorter than the typical cavalry length.

[Ian Knight]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I once had a M1796 light cavalry sabre with traces of bluing and inscribed motif on the blade, including the pre-1801 British coat of arms (with fluer de lis in upper right quadrant). It seems it was possibly even slightly shorter than the 31" described here. It was entirely unmarked as far as maker and was without scabbard.
I was always curious about this sabre as being rather on the short side, and wonder as well if there was a particular instance of the period for the size of the blade so much shorter than the typical cavalry length.

Hello Jim,
I have five British P1796 LC sabre in my collection at the moment. They all have 33" blades apart from one which is 32".
One of my sabres, made by Osborn (the same maker who made Le Marchant's sabre), has much of its blue & gilt remaining, it also has the pre-1801 coat of arms. The blade is 33".

Would they have made shorter sabres for Officers of a smaller stature I wonder?

Ian

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Ian Knight

Hello Jim,
I have five British P1796 LC sabre in my collection at the moment. They all have 33" blades apart from one which is 32".
One of my sabres, made by Osborn (the same maker who made Le Marchant's sabre), has much of its blue & gilt remaining, it also has the pre-1801 coat of arms. The blade is 33".

Would they have made shorter sabres for Officers of a smaller stature I wonder?

Ian

Hi Ian,
I always wondered the same thing, and it seems the blade on the one I had may have even been 29 or 30", I need to find my notes to check. It does not seem that stature would have been an issue as it seems it was quite the fashion of the times for cavalry officers to wear these sabres rather in a low slung manner, accounting for the pronounced drag on the scabbard tips.

Until now I had not realized that these pre 1801 arms were Osborn products, which would make distinct sense as he was working with LeMarchant on this form. I truly regret now having sold that sabre!!! Who knows, maybe somebody out there knows who has it now.

All the best,
Jim

[Richard]

Jim and Ian,

Most of the P1796 light cavalry swords I have seen have a blade of around 32½ in. but they do vary between 31 and 33½ in. Anything less than 31 in and I would start to question whether it was cavalry or not. Le Marchant's sword was difficult to measure of course because I couldn't take it out of the case.

In answer to the other questions :

Ian, no I dont think Le Merchant carried this at Salamanca. Apart from the fact that he was heavy cavalry and this is a light cavalry sword, I think this is very much a presentation sword, i.e. a gift of thanks, not meant for campaign use. The sword remains in the possession of the Le Marchant family. When I was invited to see it a few years ago, I thought I was going to see the original prototype, i.e. P1796 No. 1 - can you imagine how exciting that would have been? In fact, it turned out to be this presentation sword but still pretty exciting nonetheless

Celtan - The P1796 blade with its high curvature and thickening towrds the point was an entirely new design, based if anything on eastern sabres. In fact, it was referred to as the "new cavalry scimitar" when it was first being produced. The Prussians, of course, copied the design for their M1811 cavalry sabre (the so-called Blucher sabre)

Richard

[Ian Knight]

Richard,
I wonder why they presented Le Marchant with a light cavalry sabre and not an officer's heavy cavalry sabre?
Ian

[Richard]

I an only imagine because the 1796 light cavalry sword was the real design revolution ; the 1796 heavy cavalry sword was pretty much a copy of the 1769 Austrian heavy cavalry sword and I am not sure if the 1796 heavy cavalry officers sword, i.e. the ladder hilt, was Le Marchant's design. It is an anomaly that when regulations said that officers and troopers should carry the same pattern of sword, the 1796 heavy cavalry officers and troopers are so different.

Richard

Originally Posted by Ian Knight

Richard,
I wonder why they presented Le Marchant with a light cavalry sabre and not an officer's heavy cavalry sabre?
Ian