This was the first antique sword I ever owned, my parents took me to Islington to spend my birthday and saved up money, it cost me £18, ( 1980 ) , it was in pretty poor condition, no scabbard, no washer, but it was pretty sharp.
I genuinely think it's a really good sword, and better than most of the models that followed it! With a flatter grip, deeper checkering and maybe a couple more bars to the guard, I think it would be just about perfect.
The date of Reeves' patent is significant. The first modern UK patents act was passed in 1852; because the Great Exhibition of 1851 had highlighted problems with the cumbersome and expensive earlier system. Reeves very probably took advantage of the change.
As much as I'm biased towards the 15th and 16th centuries, I find these videos Matt does on 19th century military swords to be his best ones, since it seems to be what he's most passionate about.
There's something about a 3 bar hilt that, to my eye, is just about flawless. It's protective, yet minimalist. Elegant, yet understated. I dunno, it just seems like everything that a "working" sword should be. Anywho, another great video, Matt! Thank you for sharing your passion with us 🙏
Nice. I’ve got a saber that looks a lot like that,other than the guard. It has a full guard rather than a pierced or barred one. Maker is Alex Koppel of Solingen and the guard is stamped with EUB( Estats Unitas Brasilia). The pommel has the number 48 stamped on it.
I just got one of these a few days ago! I thought a previous owner had ground away the stamps on the forte, but it's great to hear that the stamps weren't on the forte!
I realize that many would consider this anathema and heresy, but in looking at that long, relatively wide blade, it crossed my mind that it would make a spectacular 2 handed style sword with a long, katana like grip. If I had just the blade, I'd consider it. It would be more nimble than a katana and a better in the thrust. Sorry if that offends anyone, but that blade design just looks fantastic.
Can't see that it would offend anyone, however 2 handed swords are not necessarily the first choice for horse mounted combat. Abd you would loose the hand protection with removal of the guard.
Checked out your website and in the future when I am ahead with finances I'm getting myself an antique sword. would love some historical firearms but due too epilepsy don't think I can get a license and join a club. But yeah love this channel Matt, thanks so much for making my RUclips premium subscription worth every penny.
A note on the grip. I had the occasion to replace a grip that was missing from a broken, relic condition one and the grip actually has a center core of wood with the leather wrapped around it.
You may have already done the US Army pattern 1913 cavalry saber but I was quite interested into the why Patton decided to move away from the British style sabres such as the one in the video?
Patton wanted a French style thrusting focused sword, he loved to tell the story that Napoleon would always tell his cavalry to “Attack with the point!”, not observing that Napoleon was an artillery officer not a cavalryman
Patton didn't move away from British type sabres as the US was influenced by French designs. US Cav sabres prior to the 1913 were based on the French 1822. The French had already introduced the 1896 which is a heavy thrust only sword. The British.. the 1908 and other nations had already issued thrustcentric swords. George (an Olympic fencer) contributed to a sword that was suited to swordsmen, but not your basic trooper. Consequently the 1913 had a weak blade that was sometimes broken and often bent in training. His instructions insisted that after impaling the target the wrist must be rotated in order for the blade to exit via the edge and not the flat. Failure to do this would result in a bent or broken blade. This required some presence of mind, especially on a galloping horse.
Honestly, they're not great about the first two of those things. The edge did tend to get dulled from rubbing on the scabbard unless you drew it carefully, while retention is purely gravity-based and the sword will simply spill out if you invert it or even bend over too far. However, that makes it pretty quick to draw. Edit- also, on a sword usually fixed to a horse saddle rather than a belt, concerns like it falling out when bending over cease to be an issue.
The 1853 pattern is such a handsome pattern. The 3-bar hand guard, the shape and curve of the blade and the way it curves into the handle, the way fuller is placed and shaped, even the length is pleasing. The only thing that leaves something to be desired, to me, is the look of the grip.
Best at making light brigade charges unsuccessful? ;) In all seriousness though, looks like a very durable design. The grip however would have me worried if I were a cavalryman. Losing your saber during a fight would be both dangerous and embarrassing.
The charge itself was actually successful... they took the Russian guns. What was unsuccessful was that they lost a lot of men doing it, and then got counter-charged by the Russian light cavalry. But the Battle of Balaclava as a whole was a resounding victory for the British and French allies.
@@scholagladiatoria Well I was just joking but approaching it a bit more seriously... while the initial objective was achieved it resulted in what basically could be described as the destruction of a military unit. At the time, it would probably be described as a costly win but speaking from the perspective of modern military theory such an attack would be classified as a failure. But, yes you are right it was technically a successful charge.
@@kamilszadkowski8864 the overall losses may have been reduced if the following Heavy Brigade under Lucan hadn't turned around half way up the valley, abandoning the Light Brigade to their fate. Elements of the LB penetrated deep into the Russian rear area causing havoc and if adequately supported by the HB could have inflicted a decisive defeat on the Russians.
I love it. I don't think I would personally ever choose one in period, as it's just too specialised for my taste, but I own one and they are lovely things.
@@scholagladiatoria I have read that French officers serving in North africa used them very effectively against native cavalry who wore "Burnous" a heavy wollen coat Can you please do a video about it since you go one ?
I have a rather different1853 pattern made for native Indian cavalry regiments (made in England, and shipped to India for the native troops). Because the Indians were deemed "smaller", the swords were scaled down and the cavalry blade is only 32 inches long. I'm not sure if the grip is scaled down a bit as well, but it is a marvelously dexterous blade, despite being undersized for a cavalry weapon. In fact, it is my favourite sabre for both cutting and practicing forms. It would make for a great infantry sword as well.
The day you could go to angel market and get antiques. Mine was a German butcher bayonet immaculate and a 1856 ish Enfield Tower of London rifle converted to a carbine hunter good to ok but pitted . Still have . Oh both for £12 in 1980s😊
The three bar guard reminds me of the first sword I ever owned. It was a horrible Indian knockoff, and I think it had a rat tail tang. I wonder if it was made as a replica of any particular sword pattern.
What sword was carried by Captain Nolan? He is the guy that wrote "the book" on cavalry for all British cavalry. Got a cannon ball after he pointed out that: " There M'Lord are the guns".
Found one of these 'in the wild' over here in Canada. I'm presuming it was used by a Canadian militia cavalry unit, but unfortunately it's not unit marked.
Hey matt I had a question about central asian cavalry. They are often described as using a bow and lance together as their main armaments, with perhaps a small shield, mace, dagger, and sabre. My question is how do you carry two two-handed weapons at once? I know about bow scabbards, but how would you carry a spear while firing a bow? I've also seen Cataphracts being describing with this configuration of weaponry.
There was a huge debate during the 19thC about cut vs thrust which was mostly won by thrust on the basis of doctors reports from field hospitals that they could save most men who arrived with cuts but very few who had stab wounds so the thrust was "obviously" more deadly. Of course the fact that the data set is only of those who lived long enough to reach medical aid means there is a huge case of survivor bias in it.
@@robertprovan9374 like viewing gun shot patterns only on planes that return for examination. It's interesting that more deadly was highly valued then though. In current military thinking, is often better to wound than kill. A dead soldier is one enemy out of the fight, while someone with a wound that could be survived takes out that enemy, another enemy, or possibly two, to carry them to safety, and a significant expenditure of resources to patch them up. So wounding just severely enough to take someone out of the fight is often, from a logistic standpoint, preferable to killing then.
@@RockModeNick The better to wound than kill appears to be an after the fact rationalization of the lower lethality of 5.56mm ammo. The Victorian era search was for the most effective weapon rather than the most deadly. They used kill rates because that was the only data point they had.
@@robertprovan9374 I wonder to what extent it wouldn't have been as good a strategy historically, too - in many militaries during a lot of history, sparing resources to take care of survivors was done after the engagement ended, not during.
@@RockModeNick It hasn't been a good strategy for the last 20 years either, the western militaries have been fighting fanatics with very little concern for their cannon fodder. Combat data from Afghanistan also suggests that the main reason for going to the smaller calibre, volume of fire for suppression, hasn't worked either. The taliban ignored 5.56 because they weren't loud enough, they ducked for 7.62 and shat themselves and started burrowing for 50cal.
Hello Matthew. I have a question for you. What would be your choice between a 1885 trooper sword or a 1840 heavy cavalry saber? Thanks for the input. I think 1885. Blade a bit shorter yet strong and I like the spear point. What do you think?
I feel like the pertinent question is whether imperfection X was caused by the tool or process used to create the original sword (keep that imperfection) or was it caused by an overworked apprentice churning out hundreds of this thing (consider not keeping that imperfection)
From an earlier video you'd said the 1821/45 Heavy Cavalry Officers was the best blade/guard, do you still stand by that or was that more a comment on Officers swords only with the troopers not being included? I'm a tad more partial to the Household pattern of guard just for total symmetry but I do love the Honeysuckle hilt, more so the earlier more rounded ones though i do have an 1896 pattern patent for the 6th dragoons out for delivery right now. (Source: ruclips.net/video/FzJAvVH-HeY/видео.html )
matt, have you ever done test cutting using model 1853 side y side with model 1821? i am curious on how much the grip shape and construction effect the cut
This is bizarre. For years I was was led to believe that the 1853 pattern sabre wasn't very good. The grip was slippery and the sword would turn in your hand during use. I guess opinions change 😉😊 OK I jumped in with this comment a tad too soon...oops! 😳😳
Scabbard with 2 suspension rings hanging in the typical Hussar fasion. The later pattern swords had a duel ring next to each other. Was this because the sword was now attached to the saddle rather than the rider?
This is an odd request but can u do a video on if u used a 2 handed sword 1 handed but instead of holding it at the top hold it in the middle.... How would this effect stuff.... I got this idea from im im left handed for 2 handed swords but right for a one hand, so i to alow me to dual with a two handed sword i use my right and can then put my left hand on top in a second to two hand it
I saw one kinda like that (full width tang), minty but a 1901 model ? I missed it by that > < much and haven’t seen one since :(. I’m just a casual though so I’m not savvy on what rocks to kick over.
Various things, including: sold off to other governments, sold for private purchase, passed down to yeomanry volunteers/cadets, blunted and used as drill/training weapons, stockpiled in arsenals just in case of war requirements (like modern planes), scrapped, etc
HEAVY Cavalry guys were not the Typical AVERAGE guys . To join HEAVY cavalry , minimum height requirements was 5 feet 10 inch tall or 5 feet 11 inch tall and good muscular physique . Many Heavy Cavalry Troopers were easily above 6 feet and quite big and muscular . Even during 19 th century.
Full-width tang?! It's a cavalry messer! Which raises a question, in the era of german messers were there cavalry messers? Or, was there a distinction between cavalry versus infantry swords back then?
There are messers with handle and blade shape that seems apt for cavalry use (curved blade and rather short handle, not apt to be used with two hands).
@@scholagladiatoria cheers! I think there are a lot of books out there getting it wrong. I definitely read one on the Crimean War that said the Light Brigade were armed with the 1822 pattern Light Cavalry Sabre.
The 1845 is an infantry officers' sword. The 1853 is for cavalry troopers (privates). Very different swords, for different use, and the 1845 is a private purchase item.
@@scholagladiatoria I’m sure I’m confusing things. You have a video where you discuss the 1845 Wilkinson evolving to replace the 1821 pipe back? The knight shop also seems to have the 1845 listened as the light cavalry sabre ??
IMO the U.S. Model 1860 Light Cavalry Saber was better overall. A little more curved, while slightly lighter and shorter. But the U.S.A. and C.S.A had no heavy cavalry.
I noticed a RUclips video (linked below) about one of the ceremonial swords for King Charles' coronation ceremony. Would anyone know what pattern that sword would be? (For our American friends who watch the video a Warrant Officer in the British military is a senior NCO equivalent to a sergeant major not a technical expert or helicopter pilot.) ruclips.net/video/4HFamS6wQcs/видео.html
Not to discourage too much, because we like what we like, but the US M1860 is a relatively poor imitation of the French M1822. The French sword is better made, with a more finely tuned blade. Compared to the British 1853, the British sword is better for thrusting and has a much stronger hilt construction and stronger guard. I do like the French 1822, but for cavalry campaigning, I'd choose the Brit 1853.
@@scholagladiatoria Good to know ! Thus my Town from 500 BC is just as "antique" as that 1863 sword ? wow ! In my language Antique is: "from ancient times" mostly BC and up to the fall of Rome, thus some AD 500. For all others periods different words are used to make it as clear as possible. Ex: Late-Medieval, pre-industrial, post-WWI, etc. Antique being reserved for everything pre-Medieval. Also the use of Centuries is quite common. ... The marvel of modern English language. One words meaning so many things ...
This was the first antique sword I ever owned, my parents took me to Islington to spend my birthday and saved up money, it cost me £18, ( 1980 ) , it was in pretty poor condition, no scabbard, no washer, but it was pretty sharp.
A very good first sword!
One of the best birthday presents I can possibly imagine. Great choice Sir. I wonder, do you know where it is today?
Hi ,just got one for my sons birthday,,….he is 18.
@@toooldfortwowheels2048 No idea, I did sell it for a little more than I paid for it.
@@benrobertson7855 Thats a really awsome gift.
Every cut-and-thrust blade is necessarily a compromise, but as compromises go that one looks pretty good.
I genuinely think it's a really good sword, and better than most of the models that followed it! With a flatter grip, deeper checkering and maybe a couple more bars to the guard, I think it would be just about perfect.
The date of Reeves' patent is significant. The first modern UK patents act was passed in 1852; because the Great Exhibition of 1851 had highlighted problems with the cumbersome and expensive earlier system. Reeves very probably took advantage of the change.
Wow, I did not know that at all. Very interesting, thanks.
As much as I'm biased towards the 15th and 16th centuries, I find these videos Matt does on 19th century military swords to be his best ones, since it seems to be what he's most passionate about.
We need to see more videos on cavalry sabers especially non regulation blades
I wish Matt was my history professor
They are an excellent piece of kit.
I have used mine from the saddle with very good results.
On foot, fencing it is a very practical weapon.
There's something about a 3 bar hilt that, to my eye, is just about flawless. It's protective, yet minimalist. Elegant, yet understated. I dunno, it just seems like everything that a "working" sword should be. Anywho, another great video, Matt! Thank you for sharing your passion with us 🙏
Nice. I’ve got a saber that looks a lot like that,other than the guard. It has a full guard rather than a pierced or barred one. Maker is Alex Koppel of Solingen and the guard is stamped with EUB( Estats Unitas Brasilia). The pommel has the number 48 stamped on it.
It look perfect, this is the one I want
I just got one of these a few days ago! I thought a previous owner had ground away the stamps on the forte, but it's great to hear that the stamps weren't on the forte!
I realize that many would consider this anathema and heresy, but in looking at that long, relatively wide blade, it crossed my mind that it would make a spectacular 2 handed style sword with a long, katana like grip. If I had just the blade, I'd consider it. It would be more nimble than a katana and a better in the thrust. Sorry if that offends anyone, but that blade design just looks fantastic.
Can't see that it would offend anyone, however 2 handed swords are not necessarily the first choice for horse mounted combat.
Abd you would loose the hand protection with removal of the guard.
A Swiss saber is very much like that, sounds like it would be up your alley
Checked out your website and in the future when I am ahead with finances I'm getting myself an antique sword. would love some historical firearms but due too epilepsy don't think I can get a license and join a club. But yeah love this channel Matt, thanks so much for making my RUclips premium subscription worth every penny.
Nice looking sword, I think I'd like just a little more curve for my perfect sabre but that's nitpicking.
Thanks for the upload, great as usual.
I have an example of the 1853 made by Enfield. Sadly without its scabbard, but I couldn't resist.
I have a couple. I love 1853
I need an Easton Sabre Typology.
I love your passion and knowledge 🍁 Canadian fan!
A note on the grip. I had the occasion to replace a grip that was missing from a broken, relic condition one and the grip actually has a center core of wood with the leather wrapped around it.
"Let me show you its features!" said the way JoergSprave says it :)
Mr. Easton is master of reference.
You may have already done the US Army pattern 1913 cavalry saber but I was quite interested into the why Patton decided to move away from the British style sabres such as the one in the video?
Patton wanted a French style thrusting focused sword, he loved to tell the story that Napoleon would always tell his cavalry to “Attack with the point!”, not observing that Napoleon was an artillery officer not a cavalryman
Patton didn't move away from British type sabres as the US was influenced by French designs. US Cav sabres prior to the 1913 were based on the French 1822. The French had already introduced the 1896 which is a heavy thrust only sword. The British.. the 1908 and other nations had already issued thrustcentric swords. George (an Olympic fencer) contributed to a sword that was suited to swordsmen, but not your basic trooper. Consequently the 1913 had a weak blade that was sometimes broken and often bent in training. His instructions insisted that after impaling the target the wrist must be rotated in order for the blade to exit via the edge and not the flat. Failure to do this would result in a bent or broken blade. This required some presence of mind, especially on a galloping horse.
Listen to that lovely "schwing" sound at 6:48!
heres a topic... HOW DO THEY
MAKE THE SCABBARD to minimize
compromising the edge while also
keeping good retention
and easy drawing?
Honestly, they're not great about the first two of those things. The edge did tend to get dulled from rubbing on the scabbard unless you drew it carefully, while retention is purely gravity-based and the sword will simply spill out if you invert it or even bend over too far. However, that makes it pretty quick to draw.
Edit- also, on a sword usually fixed to a horse saddle rather than a belt, concerns like it falling out when bending over cease to be an issue.
The 1853 pattern is such a handsome pattern.
The 3-bar hand guard, the shape and curve of the blade and the way it curves into the handle, the way fuller is placed and shaped, even the length is pleasing.
The only thing that leaves something to be desired, to me, is the look of the grip.
Thanks Matt very interesting history 👍 much appreciated
Beautiful sword! Is it more or less the best compromise between cutting a thrusting when it comes to sword design?
Best at making light brigade charges unsuccessful? ;)
In all seriousness though, looks like a very durable design. The grip however would have me worried if I were a cavalryman. Losing your saber during a fight would be both dangerous and embarrassing.
The charge itself was actually successful... they took the Russian guns. What was unsuccessful was that they lost a lot of men doing it, and then got counter-charged by the Russian light cavalry. But the Battle of Balaclava as a whole was a resounding victory for the British and French allies.
@@scholagladiatoria Well I was just joking but approaching it a bit more seriously... while the initial objective was achieved it resulted in what basically could be described as the destruction of a military unit. At the time, it would probably be described as a costly win but speaking from the perspective of modern military theory such an attack would be classified as a failure. But, yes you are right it was technically a successful charge.
@@kamilszadkowski8864 the overall losses may have been reduced if the following Heavy Brigade under Lucan hadn't turned around half way up the valley, abandoning the Light Brigade to their fate. Elements of the LB penetrated deep into the Russian rear area causing havoc and if adequately supported by the HB could have inflicted a decisive defeat on the Russians.
Matt what are your thoughts on French non regulation "the Préval blade"?
I love it. I don't think I would personally ever choose one in period, as it's just too specialised for my taste, but I own one and they are lovely things.
@@scholagladiatoria I have read that French officers serving in North africa used them very effectively against native cavalry who wore "Burnous" a heavy wollen coat
Can you please do a video about it since you go one ?
With that time range there's a good chance they would've been used here in New Zealand.
More than a chance, there's at least one on display in the Auckland War Memorial Museum.
If you ever come to America you should set up an antique arms and armor show starting in North Carolina
I have a rather different1853 pattern made for native Indian cavalry regiments (made in England, and shipped to India for the native troops). Because the Indians were deemed "smaller", the swords were scaled down and the cavalry blade is only 32 inches long. I'm not sure if the grip is scaled down a bit as well, but it is a marvelously dexterous blade, despite being undersized for a cavalry weapon. In fact, it is my favourite sabre for both cutting and practicing forms. It would make for a great infantry sword as well.
is it marked Rodwell by chance?
@@doratheexploder286 It is, actually. RODWELL & Co, London
The day you could go to angel market and get antiques. Mine was a German butcher bayonet immaculate and a 1856 ish Enfield Tower of London rifle converted to a carbine hunter good to ok but pitted . Still have . Oh both for £12 in 1980s😊
The three bar guard reminds me of the first sword I ever owned. It was a horrible Indian knockoff, and I think it had a rat tail tang. I wonder if it was made as a replica of any particular sword pattern.
What sword was carried by Captain Nolan? He is the guy that wrote "the book" on cavalry for all British cavalry. Got a cannon ball after he pointed out that: " There M'Lord are the guns".
Found one of these 'in the wild' over here in Canada. I'm presuming it was used by a Canadian militia cavalry unit, but unfortunately it's not unit marked.
Relatively quickly. Loyal followers burst out in laughter
Matt, if you ever come to Solingen, bring some blades. A lot of people there will offer to sharpen them, it's what they do, almost like a tradition...
So you go like to a random household, ring the bell and show the blades. They will invite you in and you get some tea while they sharpen your swords?
@@Whatthehell-nx4ju You can try and it might actually work. Better to ask around in coffee lounges or small shops.
Hey matt I had a question about central asian cavalry. They are often described as using a bow and lance together as their main armaments, with perhaps a small shield, mace, dagger, and sabre. My question is how do you carry two two-handed weapons at once? I know about bow scabbards, but how would you carry a spear while firing a bow? I've also seen Cataphracts being describing with this configuration of weaponry.
I wonder what was driving all these changes in sabers. The trend seems to be to get more thrusty over time. Why?
There was a huge debate during the 19thC about cut vs thrust which was mostly won by thrust on the basis of doctors reports from field hospitals that they could save most men who arrived with cuts but very few who had stab wounds so the thrust was "obviously" more deadly. Of course the fact that the data set is only of those who lived long enough to reach medical aid means there is a huge case of survivor bias in it.
@@robertprovan9374 like viewing gun shot patterns only on planes that return for examination. It's interesting that more deadly was highly valued then though. In current military thinking, is often better to wound than kill. A dead soldier is one enemy out of the fight, while someone with a wound that could be survived takes out that enemy, another enemy, or possibly two, to carry them to safety, and a significant expenditure of resources to patch them up. So wounding just severely enough to take someone out of the fight is often, from a logistic standpoint, preferable to killing then.
@@RockModeNick The better to wound than kill appears to be an after the fact rationalization of the lower lethality of 5.56mm ammo. The Victorian era search was for the most effective weapon rather than the most deadly. They used kill rates because that was the only data point they had.
@@robertprovan9374 I wonder to what extent it wouldn't have been as good a strategy historically, too - in many militaries during a lot of history, sparing resources to take care of survivors was done after the engagement ended, not during.
@@RockModeNick It hasn't been a good strategy for the last 20 years either, the western militaries have been fighting fanatics with very little concern for their cannon fodder. Combat data from Afghanistan also suggests that the main reason for going to the smaller calibre, volume of fire for suppression, hasn't worked either. The taliban ignored 5.56 because they weren't loud enough, they ducked for 7.62 and shat themselves and started burrowing for 50cal.
Hello Matthew. I have a question for you. What would be your choice between a 1885 trooper sword or a 1840 heavy cavalry saber? Thanks for the input. I think 1885. Blade a bit shorter yet strong and I like the spear point. What do you think?
Thanks for the informative video..Any chance of doing one on US cavalry sabres ( ACW onwards ) ?
I feel like the pertinent question is whether imperfection X was caused by the tool or process used to create the original sword (keep that imperfection) or was it caused by an overworked apprentice churning out hundreds of this thing (consider not keeping that imperfection)
Was this 1853 design used any earlier? I saw a sword that looks identical to this but the owner said it's dated to at least the early 1830's.
From an earlier video you'd said the 1821/45 Heavy Cavalry Officers was the best blade/guard, do you still stand by that or was that more a comment on Officers swords only with the troopers not being included? I'm a tad more partial to the Household pattern of guard just for total symmetry but I do love the Honeysuckle hilt, more so the earlier more rounded ones though i do have an 1896 pattern patent for the 6th dragoons out for delivery right now. (Source: ruclips.net/video/FzJAvVH-HeY/видео.html )
i just got one
How much would this sword cost in 1850s ? Were they expensive
matt, have you ever done test cutting using model 1853 side y side with model 1821? i am curious on how much the grip shape and construction effect the cut
I just keep thinking of Iron Maidens trooper when I see this sword.
This is bizarre. For years I was was led to believe that the 1853 pattern sabre wasn't very good. The grip was slippery and the sword would turn in your hand during use. I guess opinions change 😉😊 OK I jumped in with this comment a tad too soon...oops! 😳😳
Scabbard with 2 suspension rings hanging in the typical Hussar fasion.
The later pattern swords had a duel ring next to each other.
Was this because the sword was now attached to the saddle rather than the rider?
Basically, yes.
This is an odd request but can u do a video on if u used a 2 handed sword 1 handed but instead of holding it at the top hold it in the middle....
How would this effect stuff....
I got this idea from im im left handed for 2 handed swords but right for a one hand, so i to alow me to dual with a two handed sword i use my right and can then put my left hand on top in a second to two hand it
Please review "By the Sword a 1991" movie, most people don't remember it but I think you might find it interesting 🤨
I saw one kinda like that (full width tang), minty but a 1901 model ? I missed it by that > < much and haven’t seen one since :(. I’m just a casual though so I’m not savvy on what rocks to kick over.
Really grotty looking grip, was it economy?
Were there left handed hilts, or was everyone forced to be right handed?
Interestingly, quite a few of these were imported for the American Civil War, mostly to the Confederacy.
Question, what happened to old swords when a new pattern was adopted?
I took them
Various things, including: sold off to other governments, sold for private purchase, passed down to yeomanry volunteers/cadets, blunted and used as drill/training weapons, stockpiled in arsenals just in case of war requirements (like modern planes), scrapped, etc
@@scholagladiatoria thanks!
Sir, do you have a favourite Sabre?
HEAVY Cavalry guys were not the Typical AVERAGE guys .
To join HEAVY cavalry , minimum height requirements was 5 feet 10 inch tall or 5 feet 11 inch tall and good muscular physique .
Many Heavy Cavalry Troopers were easily above 6 feet and quite big and muscular .
Even during 19 th century.
Full-width tang?! It's a cavalry messer! Which raises a question, in the era of german messers were there cavalry messers? Or, was there a distinction between cavalry versus infantry swords back then?
There are messers with handle and blade shape that seems apt for cavalry use (curved blade and rather short handle, not apt to be used with two hands).
any good stories of corruption or pride that caused notoriety or scandal in procurement in the armories back then?
I'm now convinced I know nothing. I alway thought the previous pattern to this was known as the 1822 not 1821 😳
1822 in Britain is an infantry officer's sword. The cavalry patterns came in 1821.
@@scholagladiatoria cheers! I think there are a lot of books out there getting it wrong. I definitely read one on the Crimean War that said the Light Brigade were armed with the 1822 pattern Light Cavalry Sabre.
Better than the 1885? If so, why? I thought they were pretty much the same, barring the Maltese Cross guard.
The 1885 has a smaller blade and worse edge geometry as a result.
👍👍👍
Won't full tangs like that rust more easily? Surely they didn't clean it after every time they grabbed the hilt?
If you handle things regularly, they don't usually rust. Think about knife handles, bayonets, or revolvers.
@@scholagladiatoria Thanks
how can you patent that tang? wtf?
4:35 feathers
windlass collab to reproduce one?
I'm not sure there is a big enough market to satisfy the development costs, and original 1853s are not very expensive.
Did this sabre replace the 1845? Or was the 1845 just for officers ?
The 1845 is an infantry officers' sword. The 1853 is for cavalry troopers (privates). Very different swords, for different use, and the 1845 is a private purchase item.
@@scholagladiatoria I’m sure I’m confusing things. You have a video where you discuss the 1845 Wilkinson evolving to replace the 1821 pipe back?
The knight shop also seems to have the 1845 listened as the light cavalry sabre ??
I see your British 1853 Pattern Cavalry Sword and rise a Sardinian/Pedmontese Mod. 1834 Trooper Cavalry Sabre. 😉
the overall design is very typical of the industrial era
I am watching this and thinking on the nerd rage of people I have interacted with, as they insist it is a messer...
I am now officailly a SaWORD NERD
5'4" dudes watching him talking about how a modern person is 6'1" be like
._.
If the 1853 was possibly the best sabre, why was it changed later?
IMO the U.S. Model 1860 Light Cavalry Saber was better overall. A little more curved, while slightly lighter and shorter. But the U.S.A. and C.S.A had no heavy cavalry.
British is best🇬🇧🙂 Except for....Food, weather, roads, cars, politicians, state pension😂At least our steel and swords did us proud.🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
so it's a Messer. :P
🙃🙃🙃
I noticed a RUclips video (linked below) about one of the ceremonial swords for King Charles' coronation ceremony. Would anyone know what pattern that sword would be?
(For our American friends who watch the video a Warrant Officer in the British military is a senior NCO equivalent to a sergeant major not a technical expert or helicopter pilot.)
ruclips.net/video/4HFamS6wQcs/видео.html
I prefer the US 1860 light sabre. It's lighter, slightly more curved blade and wire wrapped grips. If it was a full tang it would be about perfect.
Not to discourage too much, because we like what we like, but the US M1860 is a relatively poor imitation of the French M1822. The French sword is better made, with a more finely tuned blade. Compared to the British 1853, the British sword is better for thrusting and has a much stronger hilt construction and stronger guard. I do like the French 1822, but for cavalry campaigning, I'd choose the Brit 1853.
*The handle looks the cheapest* of everything that came before or after 🤪
Antique British *1853* Pattern Cavalry Sword ?
1893 is "Antique" ?👀🍺
Antique = 100 years old. So anything up to 1923 is antique.
@@scholagladiatoria
Good to know !
Thus my Town from 500 BC is just as "antique" as that 1863 sword ? wow !
In my language Antique is:
"from ancient times" mostly BC and up to the fall of Rome, thus some AD 500.
For all others periods different words are used to make it as clear as possible.
Ex: Late-Medieval, pre-industrial, post-WWI, etc.
Antique being reserved for everything pre-Medieval.
Also the use of Centuries is quite common.
...
The marvel of modern English language.
One words meaning so many things ...
@@krixpop we call things as old as that 'antiquities' rather than 'antiques'.
@@Wolf-Wolfman
Oh !
That figures !
And thanks for answering to my "middle-week" crisis.
Big fan !
The French had an ancient regime which was only a couple of hundred years old.