I have a suggestion for why the knuckle-bow has the p-shape. The way it is shaped offers great protection around the pommel, which is more often exposed in light cavalry ride-bys than in sword to sword combat. Think about how your arm and hand would move if you had to cut at someone while riding - your hand would need more protection around the pommel area than a guard that has more of a b-shape. I could also imagine the p-shape makes it easier to hold on to the sword when riding and striking at speed. Just an idea.
Quite a few people have asked about heavy vs light cavalry. It is not a simple matter, because by the 19th century we see heavy and light cavalry performing similar functions, but originally the difference is mainly in 1) the horse and equipment and 2) the jobs they do. Originally heavy cavalry had bigger horses, sometimes armour, and longer swords. They were used for shock impact in close formation - the charge. Light cavalry were intended more for scouting, skirmishing and harrassing enemy flanks and suchlike, using lighter equipment, often sabres rather than swords, with smaller fast horses. At a basic level think of the contrast between a knight (heavy cavalry) and a Mongol horse archer (light cavalry). By the 19th century both types also carried guns - either pistols or carbines - and could also sometimes fight on foot.
Any idea why the heavy cavalry sword of 1796 was straight, versus the curved blade you show in this video? I assume it was related to the differences in their roles, but I guess I just don't have the imagination to quite figure out why a straight blade would be preferable for the heavies.
Anthony Ridgway It was mostly due to tradition, heavy European cavalry has always carried straight swords and it has always worked, so why change them? Le Marchant, the guy who designed both sabers, actually wanted the Light Cavalry Pattern to be adopted by all British cavalry formations, but opposition from Horse Guards led him to adapt the famous heavy cavalry sword from an Austrian design.
John Huang That sounds good, I suppose, but I've been looking into this, and I've heard another possibility: the perception that the light cavalry saber wouldn't give a strong enough cut. I'm not saying that was TRUE, but apparently there are some period records of people saying such things.
Anthony Ridgway Well I guess that made sense and again it tied back to the tradition thing, that English cavalry had always carried heavier, broader bladed broadswords and backswords, so a newfangled seemingly flimsy curved piece of metal in the hands of the big lads of the Scots Grey would certainly draw some ridicule from Horse Guards.
Anthony RidgwayThe point is, that in europe the heavy cavalry had straight swords since the 16th century traditionally (see german Reiterschwert, english Mortuary sword and so on). I guess this was also because of the kind of cuirass armor heavy reiters wearing back then. Light cavalry in the beginning was adopted from eastern regions like Hungary, Poland, tatars, cossacks etc. who alle used the curved scimitar/saber types (in case of polish and hungarian hussaria, they also used straight ehavy pallaschs or konercz, the panzerstecher for armored combat). So as it was said before, somehow it was "traditionally" that way. In the 18th century, there was also the discussion about "thrust vs cut" in cavalry swordsmanship, especially in the case of cavalry vs cavalry. While heavy cavalry more often encountered their own type of riders, the light cavalry was much more often as skirmishers and run over a picket and hunting infantry. But I guess, it was also some kind of à la mode which sword was better for which cavalry type ;-) In the end of the 18th and early 19th century the dragoons as mounted infantry was often melting together with the cuirassiers as the new type of Chevauxleger cavalry, as a hybrid of ehavy cavalry and dragoons with having both of their dutys.
According to sources, Le Marchant is recorded as saying that the "blades of the Turks, Mamalukes, Moors and Hungarians [were] preferable to any other" so especially mamluk fashion in the west might also be an influence in this saber's design.
Nice to see an example from the 18th Century (however late on). Interesting sword used by the British and their "odd" Dragoon rating system for cavalry. Very good chat, thank you!
yeah they are really a thing of beauty indeed. I have been trying to promote this Cavalry Saber among mod authors to make it in a mod! so far no luck, those nerds seems they only love Katanas lol
Matt, thank you for these videos. I - and a number of people, in fact - really enjoy them. Although scholagladiatoria's videos might not be as entertaining as those done by certain users (I won't mention any names here, it's been done already :D ), you definitely seem to have the most expertise as opposed to theories and educated quesses.
I think the idea of that knuckle guard is so that you are less likely to fumble while drawing it and in case your grip loosened up when making a chop so that you still have something to hold on to, but that kind of aplies anyhow to knuckle guards.
So, who makes a decent replica of this weapon? Everyone says the Cold Steel one is heavy and badly balanced, but looking at stats on KoA, it seems to be balanced at just under 8", similar to the real one, and it's just over 2 pounds. For the price, I'm not really seeing anything better.
It does look like a stirrup could make some awesome fantasy art of a knight with two really long cutlasses pointing forward attached to the saddle like a double lance blade thing extending in front of the horse
i think the origin of this sabre has trace from the hungarian light horse served in austrian army. the curve of the sabre is more eastern european than southern germany.
I have 1796 light cavalry sword in great blade condition ,hilt and rivets exellent knuckle guard exelent lost leather grips , it is very robust solid as new ,although needs profesional clean and grips. . Looking to sell . this weapon in the correct hand was the most feared of all swords , used like a helicopter blade your wrist a universal joint employing spinning follow through ,like dancing foot work and reverse swing ,became an easy follow on hacking and full blade slicing was dreadful hallmark of this .its also dubble edged ,no need for thrusting with a skilled operator , also little known was a broad side smack , by a flick of ones wrist , the operator could bring the flat side of the blade down to make contact , breaking jaw knocking teeth , i suppose thats better than alternitive
The curve of the hand guard is so that after your downswing and (maybe) getting caught in your opponents neck the sword comes out easily as you ride by and you swing it back up for the next guy.
Does anyone know what the historic proper point of balance was on these? I'm buying a sword from universal to do cutting with as well as to practice my form and swordsmanship. it has a 7 3/8 inch point of balance and to me that seems like alot, but I'm not very experienced, I just don't want to buy a ground sword that's balanced like a cavalry sword. I want something agile and controllable, but also something with cutting power.
Regarding heavy cav vs light: heavy cavalry (and for the French, this included dragoons) were armed with straight swords and carbines. They were used in an attack role to assault enemy infantry and artillery formations. A straight sword could be used almost like a lance to stab at enemy soldiers on foot. Light cavalry was occasionally called upon to assault enemy positions as well but their intended role was for recon and to counter other cavalry units.
One of the recommended tactics for infantrymen when attacked by cavalry while out of square formation was to lie down. A hussar using a curved saber designed for slashing would have a difficult time hitting someone lying prone. Even with a straight sword, a dragoon or cuirassier would have some difficulty in stabbing at a prone target and this was one reason why the French created lancer units later on during the Napoleonic Wars. The French learned that lances had an advantage in combat during the initial charge and in one on one combat but were at a disadvantage during a melee against other cavalry. For this reason, the second rank of a Lancer company were only armed with a saber, pistol, and musketoon (carbine) with bayonet. The front rank had a lance, pistol, and saber.
While this was in general true, the British 1796 heavy cavalry sword was definitely not designed as a thrusting weapon, its hatchet point was completely unsuitable for a thrusting centric weapon, so much so that in service it was generally modified to make it more suitable for the thrust. Le Marchant sword manual for the British cavalry in fact barely taught the thrust at all, considering it unsuitable for swordplay on horseback. By the 19th century dragoons were generally considered a type of heavy cavalry in European armies, in fact in the British army of the early Napoleonic Wars only had 'heavy dragoons' and 'light dragoons'.
Historically most of the Turco-Mongol swords were wide near the tip and thin near the hilt and this is a centuries before any European sword as an example the kilij is a Turco-Mongol sword it is wide near the tip and thin near the hilt and got a sharp back edge before the tip in-fact you can find hundreds and hundreds of historical examples in museums of a tulwar withe such a description and of course there are Turco-Mongol swords in which the same width from the hilt to the tip
Cavalry sabres seem to have been pretty much identical all over Europe in this period. This one is almost identical to the 1811 Prussian cavalry sabre, which is known as the “Blüchersäbel”.
The Prussian 1811 was a copy of the British 1796, because Britain supplied the Prussians to enable them to keep fighting the French (prompting Napoleon to refer to the British as a nation of shop-keepers - because we fought with trade and supply of our allies).
These things are all pretty cool and indeed very light. I have one of these as well as a smaller one with a less wide of a blade. The small line indentations of the grip have some wire like material in them. I have nothing to do with them though.
I have an old rusty and heavily damaged pipe back sword worth shit actually, but its almost straight slightly over 1 meter long. I'm practising with it quite often, since then I have much better joits and muscles, maybe it would be nice for you too. Anyhow if I was closer I would have give you a fine offer to buy them
Do you think you could do a video about the French AN XI Light Cavalry Saber? First adopted by Chasseurs-a-Cheval and later hussars. I have a modern reproduction of the saber and it would be interesting to hear your opinion on how it handles so that I could compare it to my own model. The distal taper is pretty significant and it feels nice in the hand but I don't have the pleasure of handling authentic sabers like you. I know your specialty is British military sabers but it would be interesting to see some of the French designs.
Matt would you advise a purchase of the troopers version or the officers blue and gilt version and how do you distinguish the officers version apart from the troopers version if the blue and gilt is missing? Cheers
Great video, Matt. Prussia also copied it in the form of the M1811 "Blucher" sabre, and the pattern was used in to the mid-1800s in East India Company cavalry regiments. I recommend "The British Cavalry Sword 1788-1912: Some New Perspectives" by Richard Dellar for more on the P1796 and its variants. The Cold Steel replica, while it looks decent, is really nothing like an original. The taper and grind on the fuller are completely wrong, and it feels completely wrong in the hand.
Thanks - agreed on all the above! I don't know why I forgot to mention the Blucher in the video, especially given that I've owned a couple in the past.
I would like a sabre like this, but do you know where and if there is one with a balance closer to the hilt? I know you referenced it, I'm not sure where to look, though.
Dear Mr. Easton, what, in your opinion, is the best 1796 replica to buy? I don't really want to buy Cold Steel. Would you recommend an antique instead? And if so, do you know where I could purchase one? I went to your website, but you are not currently selling any 1796's. Thanks!
I have just bought the Cold Steel version. Well made and definitely a serious weapon. OTOH, I don't think anyone would be too happy with me practicing chopping up shit in the garden with an antique :-)
Hi Matt, random question I know but I recently saw one of these come up for sale. Whilst it has seemingly authentic assurance marks on the hilt, there’s no marks on it to indicate a date of manufacture. However the seller says that was common on swords of this pattern made for export to Prussian forces during the mid-1800s. Does that ring true to you or is the seller trying to pull something?
Is there a difference between a sabre and a saber? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I don't know much about swords; and if they are the same thing why do people sometimes spell it differently?
im actually doing research on the 1796 light cavalry saber for a relative, would there happen to be a reason the one I've been looking at is painted blue with designs that look to be stamped into the first third of the blade? unfortunately, I don't have the current expertise on any of this subject or the ability to invest enough time to actually look into it more. finding the Oakeshott institute's 3d model is what clued me in on what I had but as of yet I haven't found anything other than it's an officer's and likely a decorated officer at that. there's also semi-ambiguous cursive on the back of the blade that's closest to the hilt and nearly hidden by the guard.
Ive got a odd question. How well is the biding on the leather grip? Ive got a family sword we've carried since the war of 1812 and a local historian says its still combat capable but the leather on the grip scares me its tearing slightly. Its original as far as I know but is it worth repairing to make it full combat ready.
Dear Mr. Easton: Do you know the material of 1796 light cavalry sabre? Is it of steel or just iron? What amount of carbon is in the alloy? Do you know the manfacture procedure of it? Thanks a lot for your answer.
I would just like to add, I have a cold steel 96 light cavalry sabre. Its not heavy and cumbersome, it has a respectable distal taper and is to my feeling a decent replica. I can only imagine those complaining of cold steel's version handled older models or fake copies. The John Gill Singh version IS massively heavy and awful
Every time he says light cavalry, I think of the Charge of the Light Brigade, then I begin to sing the Trooper by Iron Maiden. And next thing I know, I'm singing about every Iron Maiden doing I know. Then he mentioned the trooper's model.
Matt, I was thinking while watching that the knuckle guard is made so spacious to make the hilt easier to grasp from the sheath on horseback while moving.
What was the point in having different swords for officers? I understand wanting to have a badge of rank/status, and so perhaps having a more elegant construction of the same sword for the higher-ups, but why have a different kind of sword altogether?
It wasn't a whole different kind of sword, it basically just had a nicer hilt with different grip wrapping along with overall finer construction. I think they may have tended to be a bit lighter in the case of the 1796 light cavalry pattern, but they were basically the same sword. With the heavy cavalry pattern there were two different officer swords, an "undress" sword which was used for fighting and was a nicer version of he trooper pattern with a more ornate hilt, and a "dress" sword which was carried only for ceremonial occasions and was a spadroon similar to the infantry officer sword. I don't know why they did this, might be due to the fact that the undress sword was heavy and a bit of an inconvenience for ceremonial wear, or might have something to do with the fact that heavy cavalry were seen as more lofty, particularly the guards regiments, and might have required a mores gentlemanly weapon.
Hey Matt, how do originals compare to the Cold Steel 1796 Light Cavalry Sabre - as far as weight/liveliness/performance compare??? I want to buy one, but want to know if the Cold Steel is too heavy & needs modification...
I think it is Shamshir or Saif, it is more curved and thinner, and have more wight on the hand, it was use by Arabs, and it is very similar with the Sabre in alot of ways.
Iv read that this is the sword favoured by the dragoons. From what Iv read they would fight on horse back (obviously as light cavalry) but that they could also fight on foot. So having just watched your video - would you say that this sword could or would have been used in sword vs sword infantry combat? You made the point in the video that this weapon wouldn't be best for that task - is it only due to the point of balance? I ask as I can see very little difference between it and a flank officers sabre. Many thanks.
Hey matt I had a question for you regarding training tools. I wanted to try some Sanatan Shatarvidiya techniques but I can't find a tulwar training blade, do you think a synthetic sabre would work as well?
Matt, your videos are fascinating and I enjoy them very much. Have you done a video on the kinds of swords used by the British cavalry (and other Western European cavalry forces) before 1796? What kind of swords were used by cavalry in the American Revolutionary War, the Seven Years Wars, the War of the Austrian Succession, the War of the Spanish Succession, and the War of the Grand Alliance? I think that you've touched on this subject before. If I remember correctly, you said in your video on Polish sabers that curved sabers became popular in Western Europe starting in the mid 18th century (as a result of Eastern European influence). I think that in your video review of the The Patriot you mentioned that, during the Revolution, the British used sabers like the one shown in the fight that you analyze. But I don't think that you've gone into depth on the subject. Would I be wrong in thinking that curved sabers very much like the 1796 light cavalry saber were already in widespread used in Western European cavalry forces for some decades before 1796?
You first said that the design originates from eastern-central Europe and than said that the polish for example "copied"(my word) it? And With that do you mean the Hussar sabre?
kidage22 By then the difference in heavy and light cavalry were mostly in the size of recruits and type of horses they use, as well as their preferred utilization. Heavy cavalry obviously got all the taller lads and rode on heavier draft-crosses or warmbloods, while light cavalry were preferably mounted on 'Eastern' type horses such as Arabs, Turkomans, Cossack, etc. Both can charge in a disciplined formation, but the lights were not expected to be able to stand up to the heavies frontally, since the bigger men and horse gave one at least a morale advantage, and the heavies often still retained some armor. On the other hand the light horse ridden by the lights have much better stamina and were much hardier when living at short rations, making them ideal for the endless riding the lights must do during patrols, raids, escort mission, courier duty, etc. The big impressive mounts of the heavies would lose condition rapidly if driven at such a pace.
I remember seeing (years ago) a painting in the Castello San Giusto in Trieste an depiction of a Austro-Hungarian cavalry charge (late 17th or early 18th C. I think) The sword appeared to be a shorter, curved wide blade, wide almost to the tip. I have looked for something comparable on line, the closest being a shell hilted dussack. Is that what it was or do you know of anything that was specifically used by cavalry with that design? Thank you.
Why is it that different swords were designed for use by officers and enlisted men? For example, in the video Mat says that there was a different sabre for cavalry officers and cavalry troopers. I don't see why the different classes of soldier would have different requirements in a sword so I can only guess that a manufacturing cost is the cause. Any thoughts?
Dewi Bevan Back then British cavalry officers were almost exclusively recruited from the aristocratic class, so it's unthinkable that they use the same swords carried by the rank and file. Even today officers have some distinguishing marks on their uniforms.
can you do a video on heavy cavalry saber fencing? i read somewhere that it was done primarily with something called a hanging guard and as i recently got a 36 inch US cavalry saber i would like to see how it was used when not on horseback
Basically, heavy cavalry were designed to fight in pitched battles, while light cavalry were meant more for reconaissance, raiding and other activities pertaining to irregular warfare. This usually meant that the heavies would be comprised of bigger men on bigger horses, with heavier armour and more melee-focused weapons, and their training focused more on disciplined maneuvring in formations. The lights on the other hand were often noted to be bettwr horsemen overall, as they spent more hours in the saddle during the long rides that characterized irregular warfare, and generally have horses more suited to the hardships of war, since smaller horse breeds were generally hardier.
Do you have a favorite type of sabre? I've seen some hanging on your wall in some of you older videos, and have been curious for a while. Thanks for the cool videos, Matt. Keep up the good work!
You mentioned this wouldn't be a good sword for duelling or on foot. Why is that? I'm looking to buy a sabre. Should I buy another one instead? If so, which one would you recommend?
the reason I think it's not meant for foot combat is because of the way it is shaped, mostly that would probably be used for cutting off heads of the people below you
It's simply a bit unwieldy for duelling (overall mass, point of balance). That being said, you could do it, you'd just be a bit slower than an opponent with an infantry officer's sabre.
Thanks Matt, very interesting vid. Might be a silly question but does the "light" refer to the mass of the blade itself, or the type of cavalry unit that used this weapon? If so, were the light and heavy cavalry sabres used by different cavalry units, who fulfilled different tactical roles? Or were they simply two different swords, designed at different times?
The curved sabre was for light cavalry, the straight sword was for heavy cavalry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cavalry en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_cavalry
I don't quite understand why you ppl bash Cold Steel replica blades. I own one, and is quite good and they pass that British test, and comes with the certificate. They are very good for the money, otherwise, don't know how many of you, will ever own a real one. TheI really blades, look similar to the Tulwar or the turkish Kilij hatchet tip design. I have an original Austrian blade from 1700, and doesn'the have the hatchet tip.
Well the thing is, many people actually modified their blade because were s hatchet tips are great for slashing and hacking, that, along with a heavily curved, thin in the middle, broad profile blade make it a relatively poor thruster. Thus, many soldiers would modify the design to make more verstalie.
Dear Matt. Are you familiar with the Circassian Shashka? (very old design, fascinating origin, adopted later by imperial Russia, weird handle though) And if so, does it handle/feels like a light cavalry sabre?
A.I Varouqa I have held a few antique examples. The ones I held just felt exactly like a typical cavalry sabre, but with more blade presence than average (because of less mass at the hilt). A bit like a long Afghan knife or machete.
Why is it important to have good hand protection on a cavalry sword? You're not supposed to fence with it aren't you? I don't know a lot about cavalry so I don't really understand this.
Im no horseman but if im lowering my arm to swing at a guy then my hand is going to be the closest body part to them and someones probably gonna try to hit it.
by the Hungaryan cavalary in the 10 century were the sabers one of the most imortant weapons, and there werw examples found they were made of damascus steel, in fact the sabers have their origin from asia where we hungarians come from and it's still the best sword for cavalary because it has a litle edge on the back of the blade, that makes is easy to remoove from the enemy body while riding on the horse and it doesn't stuck in the body, and with the right stike they could penetrate steel armor (and sorry for my bad english)
I have a CS 1796 right here - and it has plenty taper. At the base: 9mm. It tapers rather sharply to 5mm within the first 15cm, and from there tapers gradually. At the CoP it is 2mm thick. The construction itself is every bit as solid as you'd want; the downside to it is the balance. It feels extremely heavy, but that is certainly not due to lack of taper or fuller.
I've seen pictures of German artillery officers sabre of WW1, their shape is very similar and almost identical to that of the 1796 light cavalry sabre, but I'm questioning weather or not they were ever actually used
@@tristinarnold2747 Pure coincidence :-D I am currently dealing with the subject of Prussian sabers and the German wars of liberation in 1813/14, and there was no way around the British one. At that time, a total of 16,000 of them were delivered directly to Prussia, and then continued to be produced there, slightly modified, as the "Blücher Saber" type M1811. At times there were around 70,000 of them, half of them in depots, and as noted, they were last issued to Landwehr units in WW 1...
Hello, Matt, could you please share some thoughts about french infantry officer's sword? I know you have mentioned it briefly in one of your videos, but (according to your antiques webpage) now looks like a perfect opportunity for more in depth review. And thank you for your work, very informative.
scholagladiatoria Could you do a video on the Spanish 1895 pattern cavalry sword? The grip on that sword seems rather interesting as if they were attempting to replicate the form of a sword with finger rings but without said finger rings.
Hello Mat, really loving your posts. A friend of mine and I are having issues with the 1796 manual, and its interpretation. Q: what do you think about the way La Merchant has described the way you grip the sabre? In particular the loosening of the grip? I'd love you to do a post on that. no pressure! thanks for a great channel.
EnglishWrangler I'll be honest - I have only skimmed through Le Marchant a few times, I have never properly sat down and gone through it thoroughly. I did notice some strange things in there though, including using the back of the blade to parry.
Thank you for your reply, If you every get around to it, I would love your valued opinion. I'm ex Royal Armouries, Leeds, and have looked at a few manuals , but this manual just doesn't make any sense. the illustrations are poor and the text seems to suggest odd things as far as your grip. which go against all theory of swordsmanship, as far as we're reading it!! we want to get this correct and a pair of expert eyes would be welcome. But in lieu of that Q: Would you say that the best grip for the 1796 light cavalry sabre is the hammer fist?
I apologize if this is an obvious question or one you've already answered, but in a couple videos you talk about how some blades aren't good for thrusting but can use the "push-cut". While I can sort of see the mechanical difference, is there any practical difference between the two? Thank you in advance!
scholagladiatoria Matt when you say that this particular model of 1796 light cavalry sabre was the best you mean it was the best in England or in the world? Because if you mean the World there were quite a few better sabres at the time and later on as well. For egsample Winged Hussars black sabre and 1934 type poish cavalry sabre (the last cavalry sabre ever used in combat). Just to say - I'm not saying you lie. I know you don't. You might be simple not aware of some other sabres ;) Great vid by the way!
scholagladiatoria Sorry. WELL DUH! Did the British Army ever use Mounted Infantry? (Ride horses to the Battle and then dismount to fight afoot.) I think that only came into vogue about the time Repeating Firearms were perfected. .....RVM45
The Indian Talwar was influenced by the persian Shamshir and British light cavalry sabre was modeled after the Talwar. Its a simple concept of having the blade curved that way and having the back of the blade being sharp up to 6-7 inches. It is the truth and I don't know how anyone could look at it any differently. The reason why Indians might have used old British blades was because they were so similar anyways...
vatiguti No, the 1796 light cavalry sabre was not modelled on the tulwar - that is a myth. The 1796 light cavalry sabre was based on Polish and Hungarian sabres. Le Marchant designed it and his influence was the Austro-Hungarian army.
scholagladiatoria Well i guess the polish Hungarian sabres thing might be true but I don't think that Indian Tulwars copied British. It seems much more likely that Indian Tulwars must"ve been inspired by Persian Shamshir somewhere around the time of when the Mughals came into India. If you look at paintings/drawings of the even the very early Mughal Emperors drawn in their time period you can see that the blades were curved that way in there... I guess Austro-Hungarians might've gotten their idea from the kilij/kilic.
vatiguti He wasn't saying that the Indians were copying the British at all, he simply stated matter of fact-ly that many of the decommissioned 1796 ended up in India and were used by native Indian horsemen, often rehilted in talwar style. Matt would completely agree that the Indian use of curved swords greatly preceeded the British one, as early as the 10th century of even earlier Turkic invaders from Central Asia has brought the sabre to India. Cheers
Cavalry units only sharpened their Sabres when they were going into action because when they were in barracks they did sword drills when mounted on their horses, and could have accidentally cut their horses ears off
it is copied exactly from tulwaar... its made at a time when british was directly and fully in India, at right time, at time when it was the exat norm for Nritain to copy and manufacture goods produced in india back ito England. It IS tulwar.
sten beetlex Darma No, it is very different to tulwars - it has a totally different cross-section (you find me a tulwar with a broad shallow fuller like this) and a very differently shaped tip - tulwars generally get pointy towards the tip, not fat like this. The tulwar connection is an urban myth. It is inspired by Hungarian sabres.
sten beetlex Darma An argument doesn't get smarter because you keep repeating it. No; you are talking absolute nonsense. The British were in contact with India, what with having conquered it, but they were also in contact with the Poles and Hungarians. The '96 is MUCH more like an Eastern European weapon than a tulwar and Marchant, the designer, served with European troops armed with the Polish style weapon but never visited India. So given greater similarity and familiarity with the Hungarian & Polish weapons you are talking utter nonsense. Which was fine the first time, but not when you ignore intelligent corrections! ...In fact the very word "sabre" derives from the Polish "szabla".
+sten beetlex Darma I dont know if it was copied exactly from the tulwaar, but one of Tipu's inscribed sabres was a spitting image of the Pattern 1796 light cavalry are used by the British with great success in the Napoleonic Wars. You know history is written by the victors so don't expect the facts to add up.
+TheGreatAmphibian A name can be applied to anything, it doesn't signify its origin. So you're telling me the designer never got his hands on Indian weapons? The flow of goods and weapons never stopped. Tipu was acknowledged by the Duke of Wellington for the quality of his weapons and tech. Congreve rockets was indigenous British invention, I guess. You can spin the yolk anyway you like......its the same buddy.....
I have a suggestion for why the knuckle-bow has the p-shape. The way it is shaped offers great protection around the pommel, which is more often exposed in light cavalry ride-bys than in sword to sword combat. Think about how your arm and hand would move if you had to cut at someone while riding - your hand would need more protection around the pommel area than a guard that has more of a b-shape. I could also imagine the p-shape makes it easier to hold on to the sword when riding and striking at speed. Just an idea.
A great idea!
Quite a few people have asked about heavy vs light cavalry. It is not a simple matter, because by the 19th century we see heavy and light cavalry performing similar functions, but originally the difference is mainly in 1) the horse and equipment and 2) the jobs they do. Originally heavy cavalry had bigger horses, sometimes armour, and longer swords. They were used for shock impact in close formation - the charge. Light cavalry were intended more for scouting, skirmishing and harrassing enemy flanks and suchlike, using lighter equipment, often sabres rather than swords, with smaller fast horses. At a basic level think of the contrast between a knight (heavy cavalry) and a Mongol horse archer (light cavalry). By the 19th century both types also carried guns - either pistols or carbines - and could also sometimes fight on foot.
Any idea why the heavy cavalry sword of 1796 was straight, versus the curved blade you show in this video? I assume it was related to the differences in their roles, but I guess I just don't have the imagination to quite figure out why a straight blade would be preferable for the heavies.
Anthony Ridgway
It was mostly due to tradition, heavy European cavalry has always carried straight swords and it has always worked, so why change them? Le Marchant, the guy who designed both sabers, actually wanted the Light Cavalry Pattern to be adopted by all British cavalry formations, but opposition from Horse Guards led him to adapt the famous heavy cavalry sword from an Austrian design.
John Huang That sounds good, I suppose, but I've been looking into this, and I've heard another possibility: the perception that the light cavalry saber wouldn't give a strong enough cut. I'm not saying that was TRUE, but apparently there are some period records of people saying such things.
Anthony Ridgway
Well I guess that made sense and again it tied back to the tradition thing, that English cavalry had always carried heavier, broader bladed broadswords and backswords, so a newfangled seemingly flimsy curved piece of metal in the hands of the big lads of the Scots Grey would certainly draw some ridicule from Horse Guards.
Anthony RidgwayThe point is, that in europe the heavy cavalry had straight swords since the 16th century traditionally (see german Reiterschwert, english Mortuary sword and so on). I guess this was also because of the kind of cuirass armor heavy reiters wearing back then. Light cavalry in the beginning was adopted from eastern regions like Hungary, Poland, tatars, cossacks etc. who alle used the curved scimitar/saber types (in case of polish and hungarian hussaria, they also used straight ehavy pallaschs or konercz, the panzerstecher for armored combat). So as it was said before, somehow it was "traditionally" that way. In the 18th century, there was also the discussion about "thrust vs cut" in cavalry swordsmanship, especially in the case of cavalry vs cavalry. While heavy cavalry more often encountered their own type of riders, the light cavalry was much more often as skirmishers and run over a picket and hunting infantry. But I guess, it was also some kind of à la mode which sword was better for which cavalry type ;-) In the end of the 18th and early 19th century the dragoons as mounted infantry was often melting together with the cuirassiers as the new type of Chevauxleger cavalry, as a hybrid of ehavy cavalry and dragoons with having both of their dutys.
According to sources, Le Marchant is recorded as saying that the "blades of the Turks, Mamalukes, Moors and Hungarians [were] preferable to any other" so especially mamluk fashion in the west might also be an influence in this saber's design.
Nice to see an example from the 18th Century (however late on). Interesting sword used by the British and their "odd" Dragoon rating system for cavalry.
Very good chat, thank you!
yeah they are really a thing of beauty indeed. I have been trying to promote this Cavalry Saber among mod authors to make it in a mod! so far no luck, those nerds seems they only love Katanas lol
8 years later and I have a repro that Matt helped windlass create. 1 to 1 copies.
This is my favorite sword of all time
you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just cause some watery tart threw a sword at you
If I went 'round, saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!
SHUT UP WILL YOU, SHUT UP
+capnhands HELP, HELP, IM BEIN' REPRESSED!
bloody peasant
Did you hear that?! You saw him oppressing me, didn't you? That's what I'm on about!
Matt, thank you for these videos. I - and a number of people, in fact - really enjoy them. Although scholagladiatoria's videos might not be as entertaining as those done by certain users (I won't mention any names here, it's been done already :D ), you definitely seem to have the most expertise as opposed to theories and educated quesses.
Thanks :-)
That diagonal strut in the top right-hand corner: it's crying out for the dangling of pretty weaponry from it.
I think the idea of that knuckle guard is so that you are less likely to fumble while drawing it and in case your grip loosened up when making a chop so that you still have something to hold on to, but that kind of aplies anyhow to knuckle guards.
So, who makes a decent replica of this weapon? Everyone says the Cold Steel one is heavy and badly balanced, but looking at stats on KoA, it seems to be balanced at just under 8", similar to the real one, and it's just over 2 pounds. For the price, I'm not really seeing anything better.
It's really cold steel or nothing for a modern version of this.
Might be able to ask a custom smith for it. But that would be really expensive
The blade looks very similar to Hussar-type sabers, and also if I had to guess I'd say that the blade is based on a cutlass-pattern blade.
It does look like a stirrup could make some awesome fantasy art of a knight with two really long cutlasses pointing forward attached to the saddle like a double lance blade thing extending in front of the horse
i think the origin of this sabre has trace from the hungarian light horse served in austrian army. the curve of the sabre is more eastern european than southern germany.
I have 1796 light cavalry sword in great blade condition ,hilt and rivets exellent knuckle guard exelent lost leather grips , it is very robust solid as new ,although needs profesional clean and grips. . Looking to sell . this weapon in the correct hand was the most feared of all swords , used like a helicopter blade your wrist a universal joint employing spinning follow through ,like dancing foot work and reverse swing ,became an easy follow on hacking and full blade slicing was dreadful hallmark of this .its also dubble edged ,no need for thrusting with a skilled operator , also little known was a broad side smack , by a flick of ones wrist , the operator could bring the flat side of the blade down to make contact , breaking jaw knocking teeth , i suppose thats better than alternitive
The curve of the hand guard is so that after your downswing and (maybe) getting caught in your opponents neck the sword comes out easily as you ride by and you swing it back up for the next guy.
Does anyone know what the historic proper point of balance was on these? I'm buying a sword from universal to do cutting with as well as to practice my form and swordsmanship. it has a 7 3/8 inch point of balance and to me that seems like alot, but I'm not very experienced, I just don't want to buy a ground sword that's balanced like a cavalry sword. I want something agile and controllable, but also something with cutting power.
Regarding heavy cav vs light: heavy cavalry (and for the French, this included dragoons) were armed with straight swords and carbines. They were used in an attack role to assault enemy infantry and artillery formations. A straight sword could be used almost like a lance to stab at enemy soldiers on foot. Light cavalry was occasionally called upon to assault enemy positions as well but their intended role was for recon and to counter other cavalry units.
One of the recommended tactics for infantrymen when attacked by cavalry while out of square formation was to lie down. A hussar using a curved saber designed for slashing would have a difficult time hitting someone lying prone. Even with a straight sword, a dragoon or cuirassier would have some difficulty in stabbing at a prone target and this was one reason why the French created lancer units later on during the Napoleonic Wars. The French learned that lances had an advantage in combat during the initial charge and in one on one combat but were at a disadvantage during a melee against other cavalry. For this reason, the second rank of a Lancer company were only armed with a saber, pistol, and musketoon (carbine) with bayonet. The front rank had a lance, pistol, and saber.
Two good references on the subject are "With Musket, Cannon, and Sword" by Brent Nosworthy and "Napoleonic Cavalry" by Philip Haythornthwaite.
While this was in general true, the British 1796 heavy cavalry sword was definitely not designed as a thrusting weapon, its hatchet point was completely unsuitable for a thrusting centric weapon, so much so that in service it was generally modified to make it more suitable for the thrust. Le Marchant sword manual for the British cavalry in fact barely taught the thrust at all, considering it unsuitable for swordplay on horseback.
By the 19th century dragoons were generally considered a type of heavy cavalry in European armies, in fact in the British army of the early Napoleonic Wars only had 'heavy dragoons' and 'light dragoons'.
Historically most of the Turco-Mongol swords were wide near the tip and thin near the hilt and this is a centuries before any European sword as an example the kilij is a Turco-Mongol sword it is wide near the tip and thin near the hilt and got a sharp back edge before the tip in-fact you can find hundreds and hundreds of historical examples in museums of a tulwar withe such a description and of course there are Turco-Mongol swords in which the same width from the hilt to the tip
thank you, much appreciated
Cavalry sabres seem to have been pretty much identical all over Europe in this period. This one is almost identical to the 1811 Prussian cavalry sabre, which is known as the “Blüchersäbel”.
The Prussian 1811 was a copy of the British 1796, because Britain supplied the Prussians to enable them to keep fighting the French (prompting Napoleon to refer to the British as a nation of shop-keepers - because we fought with trade and supply of our allies).
Want one SO BAD
These things are all pretty cool and indeed very light. I have one of these as well as a smaller one with a less wide of a blade. The small line indentations of the grip have some wire like material in them. I have nothing to do with them though.
I have an old rusty and heavily damaged pipe back sword worth shit actually, but its almost straight slightly over 1 meter long. I'm practising with it quite often, since then I have much better joits and muscles, maybe it would be nice for you too. Anyhow if I was closer I would have give you a fine offer to buy them
I have one of these sabers. Mine is marked " 10.T.P. 1.54" Anyone know what unit this designates?
Thanks.
light calvary sabre has nothing to do with lightsabre though =(
Seems like it probably is one of those cases where iteration reaches a model very difficult to improve.
Do you think you could do a video about the French AN XI Light Cavalry Saber? First adopted by Chasseurs-a-Cheval and later hussars. I have a modern reproduction of the saber and it would be interesting to hear your opinion on how it handles so that I could compare it to my own model. The distal taper is pretty significant and it feels nice in the hand but I don't have the pleasure of handling authentic sabers like you. I know your specialty is British military sabers but it would be interesting to see some of the French designs.
Matt would you advise a purchase of the troopers version or the officers blue and gilt version and how do you distinguish the officers version apart from the troopers version if the blue and gilt is missing? Cheers
Great video, Matt. Prussia also copied it in the form of the M1811 "Blucher" sabre, and the pattern was used in to the mid-1800s in East India Company cavalry regiments. I recommend "The British Cavalry Sword 1788-1912: Some New Perspectives" by Richard Dellar for more on the P1796 and its variants.
The Cold Steel replica, while it looks decent, is really nothing like an original. The taper and grind on the fuller are completely wrong, and it feels completely wrong in the hand.
Thanks - agreed on all the above! I don't know why I forgot to mention the Blucher in the video, especially given that I've owned a couple in the past.
I would like a sabre like this, but do you know where and if there is one with a balance closer to the hilt? I know you referenced it, I'm not sure where to look, though.
Dear Mr. Easton, what, in your opinion, is the best 1796 replica to buy? I don't really want to buy Cold Steel. Would you recommend an antique instead? And if so, do you know where I could purchase one? I went to your website, but you are not currently selling any 1796's. Thanks!
I have just bought the Cold Steel version. Well made and definitely a serious weapon. OTOH, I don't think anyone would be too happy with me practicing chopping up shit in the garden with an antique :-)
Hi Matt, random question I know but I recently saw one of these come up for sale. Whilst it has seemingly authentic assurance marks on the hilt, there’s no marks on it to indicate a date of manufacture. However the seller says that was common on swords of this pattern made for export to Prussian forces during the mid-1800s.
Does that ring true to you or is the seller trying to pull something?
Is there a difference between a sabre and a saber? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I don't know much about swords; and if they are the same thing why do people sometimes spell it differently?
+Ichigo Drosera Saber is the American spelling. Sabre is British English and French.
+scholagladiatoria Thank you.
kind of the same reason we in the states spell if defense, and the blokes in England spell it defence
my one is marked GILL very flexable a few nicks on the blade so has been there good vid by the way
im actually doing research on the 1796 light cavalry saber for a relative, would there happen to be a reason the one I've been looking at is painted blue with designs that look to be stamped into the first third of the blade? unfortunately, I don't have the current expertise on any of this subject or the ability to invest enough time to actually look into it more. finding the Oakeshott institute's 3d model is what clued me in on what I had but as of yet I haven't found anything other than it's an officer's and likely a decorated officer at that. there's also semi-ambiguous cursive on the back of the blade that's closest to the hilt and nearly hidden by the guard.
Think the pea shape was for ease of gathering the hilt when attached to the sword knot, reflecting the Dragoon heritage.
Anyone have any info on a makers mark K.W possibly a poorly struck C after the W. Hidden on the tang
The blade is stamped warranted in london
Ive got a odd question. How well is the biding on the leather grip? Ive got a family sword we've carried since the war of 1812 and a local historian says its still combat capable but the leather on the grip scares me its tearing slightly. Its original as far as I know but is it worth repairing to make it full combat ready.
Dear Mr. Easton:
Do you know the material of 1796 light cavalry sabre? Is it of steel or just iron? What amount of carbon is in the alloy? Do you know the manfacture procedure of it? Thanks a lot for your answer.
I would just like to add, I have a cold steel 96 light cavalry sabre. Its not heavy and cumbersome, it has a respectable distal taper and is to my feeling a decent replica.
I can only imagine those complaining of cold steel's version handled older models or fake copies. The John Gill Singh version IS massively heavy and awful
The Cold Steel sword is ok, but it does not accurately replicate the distal taper nor the handling characteristics of original examples.
Every time he says light cavalry, I think of the Charge of the Light Brigade, then I begin to sing the Trooper by Iron Maiden. And next thing I know, I'm singing about every Iron Maiden doing I know. Then he mentioned the trooper's model.
Matt, I was thinking while watching that the knuckle guard is made so spacious to make the hilt easier to grasp from the sheath on horseback while moving.
What was the point in having different swords for officers? I understand wanting to have a badge of rank/status, and so perhaps having a more elegant construction of the same sword for the higher-ups, but why have a different kind of sword altogether?
It wasn't a whole different kind of sword, it basically just had a nicer hilt with different grip wrapping along with overall finer construction. I think they may have tended to be a bit lighter in the case of the 1796 light cavalry pattern, but they were basically the same sword.
With the heavy cavalry pattern there were two different officer swords, an "undress" sword which was used for fighting and was a nicer version of he trooper pattern with a more ornate hilt, and a "dress" sword which was carried only for ceremonial occasions and was a spadroon similar to the infantry officer sword. I don't know why they did this, might be due to the fact that the undress sword was heavy and a bit of an inconvenience for ceremonial wear, or might have something to do with the fact that heavy cavalry were seen as more lofty, particularly the guards regiments, and might have required a mores gentlemanly weapon.
Best of all war sword ever.
very interesting..., thanks for making this video!
Hey Matt, how do originals compare to the Cold Steel 1796 Light Cavalry Sabre - as far as weight/liveliness/performance compare??? I want to buy one, but want to know if the Cold Steel is too heavy & needs modification...
Is this the sabre in the new Battlefield 1 trailer?
yes
I think it is Shamshir or Saif, it is more curved and thinner, and have more wight on the hand, it was use by Arabs, and it is very similar with the Sabre in alot of ways.
The 8th Hussars - attacking the Gurkha fort of Nalipali on foot in 1814 - were badly cut up by Gurkhas using kukris.
Anyone know how these compare to the later, WW1 Blucher sabres?
Iv read that this is the sword favoured by the dragoons. From what Iv read they would fight on horse back (obviously as light cavalry) but that they could also fight on foot.
So having just watched your video - would you say that this sword could or would have been used in sword vs sword infantry combat?
You made the point in the video that this weapon wouldn't be best for that task - is it only due to the point of balance? I ask as I can see very little difference between it and a flank officers sabre.
Many thanks.
Hey matt I had a question for you regarding training tools. I wanted to try some Sanatan Shatarvidiya techniques but I can't find a tulwar training blade, do you think a synthetic sabre would work as well?
Yes, any curved simulator should work for the basics, but getting something (or making it) with a tulwar disc pommel would be important.
Matt, your videos are fascinating and I enjoy them very much. Have you done a video on the kinds of swords used by the British cavalry (and other Western European cavalry forces) before 1796? What kind of swords were used by cavalry in the American Revolutionary War, the Seven Years Wars, the War of the Austrian Succession, the War of the Spanish Succession, and the War of the Grand Alliance?
I think that you've touched on this subject before. If I remember correctly, you said in your video on Polish sabers that curved sabers became popular in Western Europe starting in the mid 18th century (as a result of Eastern European influence). I think that in your video review of the The Patriot you mentioned that, during the Revolution, the British used sabers like the one shown in the fight that you analyze. But I don't think that you've gone into depth on the subject. Would I be wrong in thinking that curved sabers very much like the 1796 light cavalry saber were already in widespread used in Western European cavalry forces for some decades before 1796?
You first said that the design originates from eastern-central Europe and than said that the polish for example "copied"(my word) it? And With that do you mean the Hussar sabre?
Might you do a video about the difference between light and heavy cavalerie? And on how boh were used on the battlefield?
I'm afraid that I don't feel well informed enough on the subject to make a video about that.
Ok thanks I understand :)
Thank you, but I was wondering more about the 1700-1900's. Stil thank you!!
kidage22
By then the difference in heavy and light cavalry were mostly in the size of recruits and type of horses they use, as well as their preferred utilization. Heavy cavalry obviously got all the taller lads and rode on heavier draft-crosses or warmbloods, while light cavalry were preferably mounted on 'Eastern' type horses such as Arabs, Turkomans, Cossack, etc. Both can charge in a disciplined formation, but the lights were not expected to be able to stand up to the heavies frontally, since the bigger men and horse gave one at least a morale advantage, and the heavies often still retained some armor. On the other hand the light horse ridden by the lights have much better stamina and were much hardier when living at short rations, making them ideal for the endless riding the lights must do during patrols, raids, escort mission, courier duty, etc. The big impressive mounts of the heavies would lose condition rapidly if driven at such a pace.
thank you !
I remember seeing (years ago) a painting in the Castello San Giusto in Trieste an depiction of a Austro-Hungarian cavalry charge (late 17th or early 18th C. I think) The sword appeared to be a shorter, curved wide blade, wide almost to the tip. I have looked for something comparable on line, the closest being a shell hilted dussack.
Is that what it was or do you know of anything that was specifically used by cavalry with that design? Thank you.
Nice
Could you discuss the US Marine Sabre? Maybe a little history for it?
Which one, the sword for officers or NCOs?
I'm afraid that I don't really know much about US swords, other than what the different patterns look like.
scholagladiatoria , what's the purpose of the metal flaps on the sides of the hilt?
To make the hilt more secure on the tang.
Why is it that different swords were designed for use by officers and enlisted men? For example, in the video Mat says that there was a different sabre for cavalry officers and cavalry troopers. I don't see why the different classes of soldier would have different requirements in a sword so I can only guess that a manufacturing cost is the cause. Any thoughts?
Dewi Bevan
Back then British cavalry officers were almost exclusively recruited from the aristocratic class, so it's unthinkable that they use the same swords carried by the rank and file. Even today officers have some distinguishing marks on their uniforms.
can you do a video on heavy cavalry saber fencing? i read somewhere that it was done primarily with something called a hanging guard and as i recently got a 36 inch US cavalry saber i would like to see how it was used when not on horseback
The sabre you showed in the video about cross sections what was the blade length
Greenie
Did you talk about colichemarde's or schiavona's in one of your videos? If not I would really like to hear something on these topics.
Ok Matt, if you had to have a real sabre duel to the finish, which sabre would YOU choose and why?
What's the difference between Heavy cavalry and Light cavalry?
Basically, heavy cavalry were designed to fight in pitched battles, while light cavalry were meant more for reconaissance, raiding and other activities pertaining to irregular warfare.
This usually meant that the heavies would be comprised of bigger men on bigger horses, with heavier armour and more melee-focused weapons, and their training focused more on disciplined maneuvring in formations. The lights on the other hand were often noted to be bettwr horsemen overall, as they spent more hours in the saddle during the long rides that characterized irregular warfare, and generally have horses more suited to the hardships of war, since smaller horse breeds were generally hardier.
Do you have a favorite type of sabre? I've seen some hanging on your wall in some of you older videos, and have been curious for a while. Thanks for the cool videos, Matt. Keep up the good work!
You mentioned this wouldn't be a good sword for duelling or on foot. Why is that? I'm looking to buy a sabre. Should I buy another one instead? If so, which one would you recommend?
the reason I think it's not meant for foot combat is because of the way it is shaped, mostly that would probably be used for cutting off heads of the people below you
It's simply a bit unwieldy for duelling (overall mass, point of balance). That being said, you could do it, you'd just be a bit slower than an opponent with an infantry officer's sabre.
Thanks Matt, very interesting vid. Might be a silly question but does the "light" refer to the mass of the blade itself, or the type of cavalry unit that used this weapon? If so, were the light and heavy cavalry sabres used by different cavalry units, who fulfilled different tactical roles? Or were they simply two different swords, designed at different times?
The curved sabre was for light cavalry, the straight sword was for heavy cavalry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cavalry en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_cavalry
I don't quite understand why you ppl bash Cold Steel replica blades. I own one, and is quite good and they pass that British test, and comes with the certificate. They are very good for the money, otherwise, don't know how many of you, will ever own a real one. TheI really blades, look similar to the Tulwar or the turkish Kilij hatchet tip design. I have an original Austrian blade from 1700, and doesn'the have the hatchet tip.
Well the thing is, many people actually modified their blade because were s hatchet tips are great for slashing and hacking, that, along with a heavily curved, thin in the middle, broad profile blade make it a relatively poor thruster. Thus, many soldiers would modify the design to make more verstalie.
Your mention of the lack of hand protection makes me wonder what it would be like paired with a buckler?
+BlueNeonBeasty Since a buckler would have to move a lot to cover the hand, it would make it hard to use with reins.
Dear Matt.
Are you familiar with the Circassian Shashka?
(very old design, fascinating origin, adopted later by imperial Russia, weird handle though)
And if so, does it handle/feels like a light cavalry sabre?
A.I Varouqa I have held a few antique examples. The ones I held just felt exactly like a typical cavalry sabre, but with more blade presence than average (because of less mass at the hilt). A bit like a long Afghan knife or machete.
Cool video, what do you think about the Polish Winged Hussar sabers?
I think until you see them "in person", it's difficult to appreciate just how thin the blades get near the tip.
Why is it important to have good hand protection on a cavalry sword? You're not supposed to fence with it aren't you? I don't know a lot about cavalry so I don't really understand this.
Im no horseman but if im lowering my arm to swing at a guy then my hand is going to be the closest body part to them and someones probably gonna try to hit it.
by the Hungaryan cavalary in the 10 century were the sabers one of the most imortant weapons, and there werw examples found they were made of damascus steel, in fact the sabers have their origin from asia where we hungarians come from and it's still the best sword for cavalary because it has a litle edge on the back of the blade, that makes is easy to remoove from the enemy body while riding on the horse and it doesn't stuck in the body, and with the right stike they could penetrate steel armor (and sorry for my bad english)
i have a sabre that screams 1796 light cavalry but it is only 30 1/2 ' long so 3 ' short,maybe it was made for a very short trooper
I bet the coldsteel version has no tapering... Also the handle looks like its only peened at the bottom if at all.
I have a CS 1796 right here - and it has plenty taper. At the base: 9mm. It tapers rather sharply to 5mm within the first 15cm, and from there tapers gradually. At the CoP it is 2mm thick. The construction itself is every bit as solid as you'd want; the downside to it is the balance. It feels extremely heavy, but that is certainly not due to lack of taper or fuller.
my friend....congratulations for your video. Do you know about Wilkinson Pall Mall ???
I have a sable very similar to your sable!!!!
what are the pros and cons of sabers vs swords?
sabers are swords. you mean curved swords vs straight swords?
Ye, but it was a long time ago nvm the comment.
I've seen pictures of German artillery officers sabre of WW1, their shape is very similar and almost identical to that of the 1796 light cavalry sabre, but I'm questioning weather or not they were ever actually used
The sabre was manufactured as M1811 in Prussia and still in use by the Landwehr in WW1...
@@raka522 thank you, 5 years later and I got a reply! 🤣
@@tristinarnold2747 Pure coincidence :-D
I am currently dealing with the subject of Prussian sabers and the German wars of liberation in 1813/14, and there was no way around the British one.
At that time, a total of 16,000 of them were delivered directly to Prussia, and then continued to be produced there, slightly modified, as the "Blücher Saber" type M1811. At times there were around 70,000 of them, half of them in depots, and as noted, they were last issued to Landwehr units in WW 1...
give it a swept hilt and a shield, you got a great hacker good for killing through the centuries!
Ah I would love to clean up that blade.
Hello, Matt,
could you please share some thoughts about french infantry officer's sword? I know you have mentioned it briefly in one of your videos, but (according to your antiques webpage) now looks like a perfect opportunity for more in depth review.
And thank you for your work, very informative.
I can certainly talk about the 1845, 1855 and 1882 models, yes. I am not really experienced on the earlier ones.
It was exactly 1845 (55) I had in mind.
How do you feel about the cold steel version?
It is quite different to the originals unfortunately. Feels very different in the hand and lacks the same type of distal taper.
@@scholagladiatoria thanks for the reply. Figured you're the most qualified swordsman to ask.
Where can i purchase this sword for a reasonable price?
www.antique-swords.co.uk
scholagladiatoria Could you do a video on the Spanish 1895 pattern cavalry sword? The grip on that sword seems rather interesting as if they were attempting to replicate the form of a sword with finger rings but without said finger rings.
Hello Mat, really loving your posts. A friend of mine and I are having issues with the 1796 manual, and its interpretation. Q: what do you think about the way La Merchant has described the way you grip the sabre? In particular the loosening of the grip? I'd love you to do a post on that. no pressure! thanks for a great channel.
EnglishWrangler I'll be honest - I have only skimmed through Le Marchant a few times, I have never properly sat down and gone through it thoroughly. I did notice some strange things in there though, including using the back of the blade to parry.
Thank you for your reply, If you every get around to it, I would love your valued opinion. I'm ex Royal Armouries, Leeds, and have looked at a few manuals , but this manual just doesn't make any sense. the illustrations are poor and the text seems to suggest odd things as far as your grip. which go against all theory of swordsmanship, as far as we're reading it!! we want to get this correct and a pair of expert eyes would be welcome.
But in lieu of that Q: Would you say that the best grip for the 1796 light cavalry sabre is the hammer fist?
Just curious, How much did that saber cost you?
Well, it's for sale on my website: www.antique-swords.co.uk
I apologize if this is an obvious question or one you've already answered, but in a couple videos you talk about how some blades aren't good for thrusting but can use the "push-cut". While I can sort of see the mechanical difference, is there any practical difference between the two?
Thank you in advance!
scholagladiatoria Matt when you say that this particular model of 1796 light cavalry sabre was the best you mean it was the best in England or in the world? Because if you mean the World there were quite a few better sabres at the time and later on as well. For egsample Winged Hussars black sabre and 1934 type poish cavalry sabre (the last cavalry sabre ever used in combat).
Just to say - I'm not saying you lie. I know you don't. You might be simple not aware of some other sabres ;)
Great vid by the way!
What distinguishes Heavy Cavalry and Light Cavalry?
.....RVM45
Please see the comments.
scholagladiatoria Sorry. WELL DUH! Did the British Army ever use Mounted Infantry? (Ride horses to the Battle and then dismount to fight afoot.)
I think that only came into vogue about the time Repeating Firearms were perfected.
.....RVM45
RVM451 I just KEEP doing it. I was in such a hurry to pen my apology, I didn't read all the way down...
I wish my katana had a D guard
can you make a video to compare the 1796 saber to twular and order sabers
The Indian Talwar was influenced by the persian Shamshir and British light cavalry sabre was modeled after the Talwar. Its a simple concept of having the blade curved that way and having the back of the blade being sharp up to 6-7 inches. It is the truth and I don't know how anyone could look at it any differently. The reason why Indians might have used old British blades was because they were so similar anyways...
vatiguti No, the 1796 light cavalry sabre was not modelled on the tulwar - that is a myth. The 1796 light cavalry sabre was based on Polish and Hungarian sabres. Le Marchant designed it and his influence was the Austro-Hungarian army.
scholagladiatoria And incidentally, the 1796 light cavalry sabre blade is not even the same shape as a typical tulwar!
scholagladiatoria Well i guess the polish Hungarian sabres thing might be true but I don't think that Indian Tulwars copied British. It seems much more likely that Indian Tulwars must"ve been inspired by Persian Shamshir somewhere around the time of when the Mughals came into India. If you look at paintings/drawings of the even the very early Mughal Emperors drawn in their time period you can see that the blades were curved that way in there... I guess Austro-Hungarians might've gotten their idea from the kilij/kilic.
vatiguti
He wasn't saying that the Indians were copying the British at all, he simply stated matter of fact-ly that many of the decommissioned 1796 ended up in India and were used by native Indian horsemen, often rehilted in talwar style. Matt would completely agree that the Indian use of curved swords greatly preceeded the British one, as early as the 10th century of even earlier Turkic invaders from Central Asia has brought the sabre to India. Cheers
İ want
dul cavlory sabre
Cavalry units only sharpened their Sabres when they were going into action because when they were in barracks they did sword drills when mounted on their horses, and could have accidentally cut their horses ears off
This is a copy of the Bedouin tradisional sword of Saudi Arabia , the British might got the design idea during their army stationed over there!
it is copied exactly from tulwaar... its made at a time when british was directly and fully in India, at right time, at time when it was the exat norm for Nritain to copy and manufacture goods produced in india back ito England. It IS tulwar.
sten beetlex Darma No, it is very different to tulwars - it has a totally different cross-section (you find me a tulwar with a broad shallow fuller like this) and a very differently shaped tip - tulwars generally get pointy towards the tip, not fat like this. The tulwar connection is an urban myth. It is inspired by Hungarian sabres.
it is imitated from it, it is derived from it....... i didnt say its the same. i said they got it from the indians.
sten beetlex Darma An argument doesn't get smarter because you keep repeating it. No; you are talking absolute nonsense. The British were in contact with India, what with having conquered it, but they were also in contact with the Poles and Hungarians. The '96 is MUCH more like an Eastern European weapon than a tulwar and Marchant, the designer, served with European troops armed with the Polish style weapon but never visited India. So given greater similarity and familiarity with the Hungarian & Polish weapons you are talking utter nonsense. Which was fine the first time, but not when you ignore intelligent corrections! ...In fact the very word "sabre" derives from the Polish "szabla".
+sten beetlex Darma
I dont know if it was copied exactly from the tulwaar, but one of Tipu's inscribed sabres was a spitting image of the Pattern 1796 light cavalry are used by the British with great success in the Napoleonic Wars.
You know history is written by the victors so don't expect the facts to add up.
+TheGreatAmphibian
A name can be applied to anything, it doesn't signify its origin. So you're telling me the designer never got his hands on Indian weapons? The flow of goods and weapons never stopped. Tipu was acknowledged by the Duke of Wellington for the quality of his weapons and tech.
Congreve rockets was indigenous British invention, I guess. You can spin the yolk anyway you like......its the same buddy.....
Very tulwar-ish.