1796LC-like sword

Timo Nieminen · 24th April 2014, 01:09 AM

Here is a 1796LC-like sword (next to a modern 1796 replica troopers sword (Weapon Edge)). Unmarked. Yeomanry? American? I assume the grip is a replacement.

Anyway, whatever its origin, it embodies all that is good about the handling of the 1796LC. The numbers are:
Blade: 83cm/32.5"
Overall: 94cm/37"
Weight: 780g
POB: 165mm
Centre of percussion [1]: about 21cm/8" from the tip (at about the end of the fuller)
Thickness at hilt: 10mm
Thickness at end of fuller: 2.5mm
Thickness drops to 2mm at 105mm from the tip, and continues to thin towards the tip.

(The replica is about 1050g, and is thinner near the hilt and thicker near the tip - the tip section is about 4mm thick. The handling suffers accordingly, and it is somewhat of a clunker. Some weight would be taken off if I sharpened it, but it would need some serious grinding to match historical handling.)

[1] Forward pivot point or centre of oscillation if you prefer; "centre of percussion" is widely misused in sword circles, so there can be good reasons to prefer them.

Jim McDougall · 24th April 2014, 09:00 PM

Timo, these stirrup hilt light cavalry sabres of the M1796 type were probably the most widely varied as this was technically one of the first 'regulation' British patterns. There were only a few established British makers relatively but soon many contractors began producing these new patterns. While swords for troopers more closely adhered to the set pattern, officers had their campaign sabres ordered privately, and various makers sometimes had nuanced characteristics in their products.

These sabres, while officially superceded in 1821/29 by a three bar hilt, had been produced in huge numbers, with many exported to other European countries (some even ended up in the U.S.) as well as profoundly into India.
Some countries began producing their own versions (the Prussian M1811 Bluchersabel) and contractors in England continued various examples for native regiments in India.

This example could be transitional, later produced, with more of a spear type point if this blade is unaltered, as the hatchet points gave way to more of a cut and thrust blade as seen in the M1821.
I think markings might be the only effective answer, otherwise we must remain with the variant solution or from another country. Yeomanry swords were usually deactivated regular patterns for the most part I believe .

Timo Nieminen · 24th April 2014, 10:29 PM

It's a mystery to me for now. As it's not a regulation army pattern, I lack references (don't have anything about American swords; perhaps there is an American equivalent to Robson, but I don't have it). Brass hilt, unmarked, plain blade, no sword knot slot in guard. Unmarked suggest private purchase, if it was actually used. Private purchase suggests officer (but I've been led to believe that yeomanry troopers would, at times, buy their own). There were officer's swords with plain blades, so that doesn't rule it out. Wood grip might be replacement for ivory grip.

Closest I've seen have been yeomanry officer's swords, American mounted artillery (officer's?) swords, and Indian swords (EIC?).

Hotspur · 27th April 2014, 03:08 AM

Hi Timo

I would definitely say not American cutlered but like so many of its type, meant for mounted use and with no langets likely once had a leather scabbard. Can you post a closeup of the hilt itself? The way the guard at the right angle is joined can be telling. is thre a little buttress in that area? One then can also wonder where the sword surfaced and was sold in the last decades.

Looks kinda British Yeomanry militia to me. US imports of mounted artillery swords tend to be even lighter and slimmer, even at the same length. At some point we must discard the thought that any sabre with a P guard is 1796 like.

American makers did produce brass hilts without langets but most often shorter swords. The US made mounted swords at the end of the 18th century more often a hussar type hilt in iron/steel (Rose, Starr et al). Harold Peterson's 1950s "bible" still holds a lot of the best water 60m years later. Brass/yellow for artillery and plated or steel/iron white for cavalry and infantry officers. I have notes somewhere about the need for finished brass hilts and scabbard fittings because the US could not keep up with the wartime need in the Napoleonic/War of 1812. That letter from a US Marine officer.

There are a good many US sword books. These three combined are a good start.

http://www.amazon.com/American-Sword.../dp/0960309411

http://www.amazon.com/Swords-And-Swo.../dp/0873649273

http://www.amazon.com/American-Sword.../dp/0917218787

Cheers

GC

Timo Nieminen · 27th April 2014, 10:59 PM

Here are some photos of the hilt, from various angles (raining outside, so was stuck with indoor light). No buttress in the angle. Looks like it was fitting with a leather washer; perhaps gone and not replace when the grip was redone.

Peterson looks like a good book. Do you know if the photos in the current printings are reproduced well?

Matt Easton · 1st May 2014, 03:24 PM

Yeomanry cavalry, I would say. Brass hilts of this general form were quite popular for yeomanry between about 1800 and 1825. The grip looks like a replacement.

24th April 2014, 01:09 AM	#1
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	1796LC-like sword Here is a 1796LC-like sword (next to a modern 1796 replica troopers sword (Weapon Edge)). Unmarked. Yeomanry? American? I assume the grip is a replacement. Anyway, whatever its origin, it embodies all that is good about the handling of the 1796LC. The numbers are: Blade: 83cm/32.5" Overall: 94cm/37" Weight: 780g POB: 165mm Centre of percussion [1]: about 21cm/8" from the tip (at about the end of the fuller) Thickness at hilt: 10mm Thickness at end of fuller: 2.5mm Thickness drops to 2mm at 105mm from the tip, and continues to thin towards the tip. (The replica is about 1050g, and is thinner near the hilt and thicker near the tip - the tip section is about 4mm thick. The handling suffers accordingly, and it is somewhat of a clunker. Some weight would be taken off if I sharpened it, but it would need some serious grinding to match historical handling.) [1] Forward pivot point or centre of oscillation if you prefer; "centre of percussion" is widely misused in sword circles, so there can be good reasons to prefer them. Attached Images

27th April 2014, 03:08 AM	#4
Hotspur Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nipmuc USA Posts: 489	Hi Timo I would definitely say not American cutlered but like so many of its type, meant for mounted use and with no langets likely once had a leather scabbard. Can you post a closeup of the hilt itself? The way the guard at the right angle is joined can be telling. is thre a little buttress in that area? One then can also wonder where the sword surfaced and was sold in the last decades. Looks kinda British Yeomanry militia to me. US imports of mounted artillery swords tend to be even lighter and slimmer, even at the same length. At some point we must discard the thought that any sabre with a P guard is 1796 like. American makers did produce brass hilts without langets but most often shorter swords. The US made mounted swords at the end of the 18th century more often a hussar type hilt in iron/steel (Rose, Starr et al). Harold Peterson's 1950s "bible" still holds a lot of the best water 60m years later. Brass/yellow for artillery and plated or steel/iron white for cavalry and infantry officers. I have notes somewhere about the need for finished brass hilts and scabbard fittings because the US could not keep up with the wartime need in the Napoleonic/War of 1812. That letter from a US Marine officer. There are a good many US sword books. These three combined are a good start. http://www.amazon.com/American-Sword.../dp/0960309411 http://www.amazon.com/Swords-And-Swo.../dp/0873649273 http://www.amazon.com/American-Sword.../dp/0917218787 Cheers GC Last edited by Hotspur; 27th April 2014 at 04:03 PM.

27th April 2014, 10:59 PM	#5
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	Here are some photos of the hilt, from various angles (raining outside, so was stuck with indoor light). No buttress in the angle. Looks like it was fitting with a leather washer; perhaps gone and not replace when the grip was redone. Peterson looks like a good book. Do you know if the photos in the current printings are reproduced well? Attached Images

24th April 2014, 09:00 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,738	Timo, these stirrup hilt light cavalry sabres of the M1796 type were probably the most widely varied as this was technically one of the first 'regulation' British patterns. There were only a few established British makers relatively but soon many contractors began producing these new patterns. While swords for troopers more closely adhered to the set pattern, officers had their campaign sabres ordered privately, and various makers sometimes had nuanced characteristics in their products. These sabres, while officially superceded in 1821/29 by a three bar hilt, had been produced in huge numbers, with many exported to other European countries (some even ended up in the U.S.) as well as profoundly into India. Some countries began producing their own versions (the Prussian M1811 Bluchersabel) and contractors in England continued various examples for native regiments in India. This example could be transitional, later produced, with more of a spear type point if this blade is unaltered, as the hatchet points gave way to more of a cut and thrust blade as seen in the M1821. I think markings might be the only effective answer, otherwise we must remain with the variant solution or from another country. Yeomanry swords were usually deactivated regular patterns for the most part I believe .

24th April 2014, 10:29 PM	#3
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	It's a mystery to me for now. As it's not a regulation army pattern, I lack references (don't have anything about American swords; perhaps there is an American equivalent to Robson, but I don't have it). Brass hilt, unmarked, plain blade, no sword knot slot in guard. Unmarked suggest private purchase, if it was actually used. Private purchase suggests officer (but I've been led to believe that yeomanry troopers would, at times, buy their own). There were officer's swords with plain blades, so that doesn't rule it out. Wood grip might be replacement for ivory grip. Closest I've seen have been yeomanry officer's swords, American mounted artillery (officer's?) swords, and Indian swords (EIC?).

1st May 2014, 03:24 PM	#6
Matt Easton Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, Great Britain. Posts: 53	Yeomanry cavalry, I would say. Brass hilts of this general form were quite popular for yeomanry between about 1800 and 1825. The grip looks like a replacement.