If you happen to Getting around to reviewing the model 1821 British artillery officer sword on cult of Athena , with leather sheath. I'd love to see a review of it!!!
My guess is the officers version is less robust because it was more of a tool of last resort and personal defense, rather than an offensive weapon. In that situation you could argue that having a more nimble sword could be an advantage.
@@mattamathics1108 Also it may have something to do with fencing styles perhaps? The sergeants version has a hatchet point instead of a spear point, which suggests that maybe they expect more of a cut-centric form of fighting (which I guess would make sense in a battle), whereas the spear point on the officer's version would make more sense for a thrust-centric way of fighting. IIRC the higher social classes would have been trained in epee dueling so they may have been more likely to use the point whereas usually the first instinct is to cut.
@@jellekastelein7316 that’s also a very good point. I love the NCO swords. I was looking at purchasing a 1889 pattern British sergeant’s sword. Such an awesome design. In a day when almost all swords, (at least what was still being used in warfare) had transitioned to thrust centric designs, the 1889 pattern NCO sword goes back to the straight backsword sword design of much earlier days. It’s a very interesting subject of discussion, because there were a few models being released in various European armies of the very late nineteenth century which straight up went back about 80years to the cut centric swords. I have never really heard a concrete explanation for it.
@@mattamathics1108 While I understand the advantages of using the point, I have a thing for very curved, very wide bladed cut-centric sabers from an aesthetic POV. I'd love to one day get my hands on a nice British m1803 flank officer's infantry saber. And probably my favorite 19th century saber is the Ottoman pala kilij. But both are monstrously expensive (especially the kilij), unfortunately. Also worth a look are the Swedish swords M1842/1847. Very neat design. As to why the Germans went back to a more balanced cut-and-thrust design... I'm not entirely sure, but if I can speculate wildly for a bit, it may be that with the increasing rate of fire of firearms the sword became more and more of a backup weapon for close combat, at which point again hacking and slashing is probably the go-to instinct, and in close quarters fighting thrusting becomes more difficult and also more dangerous as you can't defend with your weapon while your sword point is in your opponent's body. And IIRC the Germans generally had a more cut-centric philosophy to their sword designs, no? For example, the German WWI cavalry saber is straight bladed and more thrust centric but still has more cutting ability than the British one, which is basically a long spike.
If you happen to Getting around to reviewing the model 1821 British artillery officer sword on cult of Athena , with leather sheath. I'd love to see a review of it!!!
My guess is the officers version is less robust because it was more of a tool of last resort and personal defense, rather than an offensive weapon. In that situation you could argue that having a more nimble sword could be an advantage.
That’s a very good point.
@@mattamathics1108 Also it may have something to do with fencing styles perhaps? The sergeants version has a hatchet point instead of a spear point, which suggests that maybe they expect more of a cut-centric form of fighting (which I guess would make sense in a battle), whereas the spear point on the officer's version would make more sense for a thrust-centric way of fighting. IIRC the higher social classes would have been trained in epee dueling so they may have been more likely to use the point whereas usually the first instinct is to cut.
@@jellekastelein7316 that’s also a very good point. I love the NCO swords. I was looking at purchasing a 1889 pattern British sergeant’s sword. Such an awesome design. In a day when almost all swords, (at least what was still being used in warfare) had transitioned to thrust centric designs, the 1889 pattern NCO sword goes back to the straight backsword sword design of much earlier days. It’s a very interesting subject of discussion, because there were a few models being released in various European armies of the very late nineteenth century which straight up went back about 80years to the cut centric swords. I have never really heard a concrete explanation for it.
Like the the German artillery officer’s sword of the early 1900’s. It’s curved, wide and meant for cutting.
@@mattamathics1108 While I understand the advantages of using the point, I have a thing for very curved, very wide bladed cut-centric sabers from an aesthetic POV. I'd love to one day get my hands on a nice British m1803 flank officer's infantry saber. And probably my favorite 19th century saber is the Ottoman pala kilij. But both are monstrously expensive (especially the kilij), unfortunately.
Also worth a look are the Swedish swords M1842/1847. Very neat design.
As to why the Germans went back to a more balanced cut-and-thrust design... I'm not entirely sure, but if I can speculate wildly for a bit, it may be that with the increasing rate of fire of firearms the sword became more and more of a backup weapon for close combat, at which point again hacking and slashing is probably the go-to instinct, and in close quarters fighting thrusting becomes more difficult and also more dangerous as you can't defend with your weapon while your sword point is in your opponent's body. And IIRC the Germans generally had a more cut-centric philosophy to their sword designs, no? For example, the German WWI cavalry saber is straight bladed and more thrust centric but still has more cutting ability than the British one, which is basically a long spike.
I like that.