Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword - Antique vs Replica
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июл 2020
- A good look at an original antique of the famous heavy cavalry troopers sword besides a replica of it available today. An overview of how good the replica is, and how to spot fake antiques.
Glad to see someone else cover this topic. Especially with both an original and repro in-hand
Very educational video! I have always been a big fan of the backsword, the spadroon and the 1796 heavy cavalry swords. Keep up the great content!
watching you handle swords like this really shows the heft of these beautiful weapons
My great great great grandfather carried a 1797 Heavy Dragoon Saber in the Mexican American and into his service in the 8th Texas Cavalry serving the state of texas in the U.S. Civil War, he was given it from his grandfather who a Scotts Grey trooper from what I've ready from his Journal of he carried in his military career. His saber is in a museum and I've gotten to handle it a little and it's a bit ocward to carry but its something you'd get used too awhile. I use a repro in Recreating, the first year I had mine it was a bad idea took a long time to get used to having that mutch steel on your hip and presenting at times
Looks a lot like Richard Sharpe's sword. Good for soldierin'.
Indeed it is, exactly the one.
Did some measurements on mine. The guard/knucklebow metal is almost exactly a tenth of an inch thick and very smooth, more like steel than wrought iron. The knuckle guard is flat for most of it but when it's bent up to join the pommel/backstrap it is curved for extra rigidity in that section. The diamond shaped stiffening plate is just under an eighth of an inch thick, just slightly thicker than the guard material.
Sharpee--stabee! 😁
Gads if I had a 200 year old [or older] sword, there is no WAY that I'd go steel to steel with it.
But that's just my thinking. I'm a reenactor I'm WELL aware of the fakes in the militaria market. So instead of getting pissed off at a seller and burning his house down because I spent $1000 on a cheap as Pakistani pot-metal wall hanger, I just chose to buy replicas and reconstructions. I do have some 'period' gear in my kit, but that's reserved for education purposes.
I Always liked the 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword, It's not Pretty like must of the Cavalry sabers around the time of the Napoleonic wars, But it was a true Butchers Blade designed to hack an opponent to death with brutal efficiency. also I loved reading the Sharpe Series of books written by Bernard Cornwell.
_Sharpe's Sword_ was the first I read in the series, circa 1985 or so.
Great stuff thanks for sharing 😈😇💪👌👍
Nice video , nice swords :) if anyone would like to hear about the great history polish saber . . szablotłuk polski
Very interesting video.
Hate the lack of distil taper in most modern reproductions...
In 2019 I made some display brackets for a Troopers HCS, I also had to clean the surface rust and strip the post WW2 black paint off the guard (and leather !!).
It had what I'm assuming was Unit ID engraved on the knuckle bow. "L Y", "D" and "No 5" , I think that may be "L______ Yeomanry, Troop D, Man 5".But I'm willing to be corrected...... For that matter, a suggestion as to what the "L" stands for would be great.
I promised the customer to keep them informed should I find out any other info about the sword.
Full length blade, never sharpened. Not reshaped. Full guard, slightly rolled at the edges. Langets unmodified. Knuckle bow flat. Leather cracked where the finger tips fall and some nicking to the edge implies that its been used for drill
Might have that slight curve you mentioned.
No maker's mark that I could find
I may be able to find out all the measurements from the owner, if you want mate
This is probably stupid but the L could stand for Lancashire or something like that
the one that was offered by windless has a flat knuckle bow , i know , because i have one
Excellent, good to know.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing as far as i can find out , museum replicas no longer offers the 1796 heavy cav repro in their line up, neither does windlass
There will be fencing demonstration with heavy cavalry sword?
I have a perfect reproduction of officier des Grenadier de la garde à Cheval and it is way heavy asf. So would be curious to see fencing types for my hand muscles
I've got one by Woolley and Deakin. A LOT of distal taper.
Very nice. Any chance you could tell me the weight and balance? It's great data to collect. If so, also let me know the features, as in is it as they came from the factory or with mods.
As requested, some stats.
Weight w/scabbard 2.035 kg or 4.49 lbs.
Weight sword alone 1.093 kg or 2.41 lbs (2 lbs 6.5 oz.)
Blade length (spear point mod)- 34.5 ". (There is a small chip at the tip- without the chip I estimate it would've been 34.625")
POB approx. 6" forward of guard. Blade is marked with 2 "B" marks on the back, one about at the PoB, the second about 6" further towards the tip.
Overall (unsheathed)- 39.5". Inner grip length about 4.25".
Thickness at guard- 8.35 mm or 0.329"
"" PoB- 5.1mm or 0.200"
"" midpoint- 4.25 mm or 0.167"
"" end of fuller (about 6.5" from tip) - 2.1 mm or 0.083"
Width at guard- 39.5 mm or 1.55"
"" at midpoint of blade- 35 mm or 1.38"
"" at end of fuller- 35 mm.
This was made by Woolley & Deakin Co. , placing manufacture around 1805 as far as I've been able to find out. It has been spear-point modified losing close to half-inch, and there is a small chip at the tip, possibly through use but who knows? Also the guard has been cut down on the left but the langets are still in place. Hope this helps.
Now, I don't know for sure but given the manufacture date I would guess the mods were post-manufacture but they seem to have been very professionally done, likely unit armourer level. Also, the right side of the guard like yours has been curved in slightly.
That is fantastic! Thank you so much for this. The data is hard to come by, especially as not that many people have 1796HCs. This data is hugely useful to my research. Curiously the specs are very close to by Reddell, just with the langets still in place. Thanks again!
What would the technique on horseback have been with the '96 HC sword compared to the '96 LC? Was it a pure horse momentum strike or was there arm movement?
They were taught according to the same methods. Gaspard Le Marchant designed the LC and the first official regulation sword exercise in the same year. It was for all cavalry swords when used mounted. Likewise infantry manuals of the time treaded all swords near enough the same, from sabre to spadroon and broadsword. The heavy and light cav are also not hugely different in handling. The heavy is a little longer, but barely any heavier. The LC is a handful because of its flared tip, carrying a lot of mass there. The doctrine of the time was to swing from the wrist. Momentum would play a part with both when at speed, but cavalry on cavalry engagements frequently boiled down to a slow speed melee if they were not resolved at the charge.
Academy of Historical Fencing from the wording i think its easy to assume that heavy and light cavalry swords would be decently different in weight, but with my experience with an antique light cavalry sword and from what you say, it doesnt seem that much! of course the definition is probably more one of the tactical role of the regiment rather than the particular swords weight. i was pretty surprised at first how chunky a light cav sword was!
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Here in Colorado at my school we practice mounted saber using reproduction period swords, some sharp for cutting and some blunt. This is a good vid for us as we move to implement some of these into our drills.
@@midshipman8654 Indeed, they're a lot closer than people realise. Their intended role should play a part in their use. The light cavalry were intended fo a scouting and haressing role, as opposed to the blunt instrument of the heavies. In reality of large battles of course, they often ended up playing much the same role.
@@midshipman8654 Only if you were looking at swords in isolation and out of context. The terms light and heavy didn't refer to their weights but whether they were for use by heavy or light cavalry.
My Woolley and Deakin very definitely is slightly curved and not from damage, as looking down the back it's still straight as an arrow.
Absolutely, quite a lot of them do have a few milimetres of curve, which is amusing for what is famously called a straight sword.
My french cuirassier sword has that very subtle curve in it as well
Interesting! Which model is it?
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing it's a xi/xiii heavy cavalry sword, Versailles made hilt, "AP" marked blade. So aside from the blade manufacturer nothing special. But the curve is noticeable but subtle like your 1796
The beak or toe or whatchamacallit of the grip tend to be sticking out further on real ones.
I was kicking myself I forgot to mention this after it was already uploaded, because yes that is the general trend.
Reproduction blades of these 1796's are made from sheet steel and they use material removal to give the shape whereas originals the blades are forged and hammered into shape with final finish being ground on huge wheels.
Yep, that's why so few blades today have thick shoulders and extreme distal taper as a lot of antiques do, as it's very time consuming and expensive to do stock removal on an 8-10mm sheet and reduce it down to 1-2mm at the tip.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing I've found the price is a lot more usually as well. Saw a Thorpe Falchion that was supposedly hand forged and the guy wanted 3 or 4 grand for it!
Did austrian cuirassiers and dragoons use these swords?
I'd be very surprised if individual troopers were permitted to modify their own swords. I suspect certain modifications was authorized, and done by armourers, on a unit basis, not by individual soldiers.
It's not likely it could have been done on the initiative of the individual no, only officers typically enjoyed those kinds of freedoms. A Colonel of a regiment could order it and it's possible even at a troop leader could. Sadly it's such a small and localised issue that it rarely got mention in any historical record and that makes it hard to research in more detail.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Yes, I imagine that's how it would work. At least that way you'd get a reasonable level of uniformity. Like you I have an original 1796 Pattern HC sword. It's similar to your sword in that it's spear pointed and has the back of the handguard ground to thumb width. Unlike your example, mine retains the langets. As you mention, the sword is much less cumbersome in the hand than one might imagine.
If I recall correctly, enlisted men were issued swords, but did not own or keep them. Officers bought theirs, and modified them to their liking within regulations.
Nick...buddy.. pal...
WHERE IS THE REST OF YOU?
Like a norwegian wiking designd a saber. A brawlers choice.
Someone knows their blade typologies!
He captured the eagle at talevera not Waterloo.
Ensign Ewart captured an eagle at Waterloo whilst serving in the Scots Grey as I mentioned in the video. Sharpe captured one in fiction at Talavera, whereas in reality the first capture of an Eagle by the British didn't happen until 1811 at Barrosa.
I've seen aged replicas sell too many times to unsuspecting buyers. Many will languish in their collections without being identified for what they truly are. In any larger collection you can find a reproduction that slipped by the discerning eye of the collector. Usually price is too good to be true. Too many collectors don't do the research, refuse to pay for references and rely on other peoples views. Some only trust dealers so they pay over double of what they could have bought the same sword for at public auction.
I see this happening at least a couple of times a month sadly. The trouble is from a beginner perspective it is hard to know what they even need to look for in terms of resources. There is an assumptiuon that a major antiques dealer or auction house would not sell a fake, which is a reasonable assumption, just sadly an incorrect one. I find it astonishing that people wouldn't do a lot of research before spending big money, but it happens all the time in all walks of life.
Don't buy replicas because they will not hold their value, Are not the same weight and feel, Poor tempering, and lack distal taper. Save your money and put a few more dollars with it to buy an original that will hold its value.
Whilst that is correct and good advice for those that can, it's simply not an option for many. It depends on which sword you are talking about, in the case of a 1796 heavy troopers sword, the antiques typically cost 10x the replica prices. Replicas beeing £200-250, and antiques £2000-2500. For many people they will never have a chance to own the original of such a sword.
You're right about the comparative qualities. The shop grinders and smiths working 12 hours a day forgot more about making swords than I'll ever know.