This is such a wonderful comparison! I love side by sides, and to get two swords that are so close yet clearly so unique is such a fun opportunity. Great job showcasing how subtle differences in “appearance” can make a big difference in experience. Keep it up
Thank you very much! More measurements incoming very soon. I am planning to measure the individual parts of each sword (as this is a happy case of easily disassembly) and then plot in the data for the dynamics chart!
I have no information on active use of this type of blade to be able to say whether the double fuller makes sense or not, but just from handling the heavier of the two, it does seem to make the blade stiffer. Moreover, that thick median ridge adds a lot of authority to the tip as a thrusting element. Could this have been achieved more easily and at a lower cost? Possibly, but I cannot say. It is not the only example of complex blade configuration, though. The French 1845-55 adjudant sabre also has a rather elaborate fuller setup, so it might be there were aesthetic preferences involved too, though the 1845, most definitely passed the test of battle use.
Official sword designs that look very similar to each other are the British 1895 and 1897 Infantry Officer's Swords, British 1822 and 1845 Infantry Officer's Sword, US m1840 and m1860 Cavalry Saber, and French 1880 and 1882 Cavalry Sabers. Fulham and Pompeii Gladius even look similar on an initial glance.
That's definitely another issue that can cause a lot of confusion in beginner collectors. Not only are swords of the same model not the same amongst each other, but different models often look identical too!!!
Aside from the median ridge it also looks in the final shot like the longer one has significantly more distal taper throughout the blade. Is that correct?
Good question, which I do not have a definitive answer to. If I had to speculate I would say that it's a mix of the desire to benefit from the improved control given by the ring, while also allowing for a more natural grip that is easier to handle. Unlike the leather rings on Prussian swords, for example, the hand automatically slides into the correct position on the Albertina, without having to take extra action to pass a finger through a loop. Also, the grip feels very natural when holding it, to the point you could almost forget about the ring. So my guess is that ioffers the best of both worlds: A comfortable and natural grip with the benefits of a finger ring. But, as I mentioned, this is speculation. I also would not discount the aesthetic value of the ring either. It's definitely an element that sets the Albertina aside from most other swords.
Nice video! There are sword types that I just don't see as being forged. One, because the cost of doing a decent forgery is greater than the cost of an original due to the complexity of the sword. And two, because who cares, the 12 people that have this hobby? I'm exaggerating, but collecting these types of antiques is not lucrative enough to attract forgers. What people do need to keep an eye out for is repairs and composite models that are sold off as atypical originals in the period.
Very true, and this is a consideration that I think comes with time and experience. I know with my first few swords I was terrified of forgeries, and measurement discrepancies did not help. As time went by I realized there is a lot more variation and that I could relax a bit :) Also, as you mention, forgers will not put any effort into faking most cheap sword models.
Interesting you mention that, as I have been trying to look into the inspiration for the design of this sword. There are definitely mid-1700s hilts that are very similar (minus the ring), especially in Sweden, as far as I can tell.
L'importanza dei dettagli! Ottimo video.
This is such a wonderful comparison! I love side by sides, and to get two swords that are so close yet clearly so unique is such a fun opportunity. Great job showcasing how subtle differences in “appearance” can make a big difference in experience. Keep it up
Thank you very much! More measurements incoming very soon. I am planning to measure the individual parts of each sword (as this is a happy case of easily disassembly) and then plot in the data for the dynamics chart!
is the double fullered tip an overly complicated design? they could have gone for a simpler spear point
I have no information on active use of this type of blade to be able to say whether the double fuller makes sense or not, but just from handling the heavier of the two, it does seem to make the blade stiffer. Moreover, that thick median ridge adds a lot of authority to the tip as a thrusting element. Could this have been achieved more easily and at a lower cost? Possibly, but I cannot say.
It is not the only example of complex blade configuration, though. The French 1845-55 adjudant sabre also has a rather elaborate fuller setup, so it might be there were aesthetic preferences involved too, though the 1845, most definitely passed the test of battle use.
Official sword designs that look very similar to each other are the British 1895 and 1897 Infantry Officer's Swords, British 1822 and 1845 Infantry Officer's Sword, US m1840 and m1860 Cavalry Saber, and French 1880 and 1882 Cavalry Sabers.
Fulham and Pompeii Gladius even look similar on an initial glance.
That's definitely another issue that can cause a lot of confusion in beginner collectors. Not only are swords of the same model not the same amongst each other, but different models often look identical too!!!
Aside from the median ridge it also looks in the final shot like the longer one has significantly more distal taper throughout the blade. Is that correct?
My impression is that yes, there is a clear difference in distal taper, but I will be measuring that in the coming days to be sure.
why are their loops meant for 2 fingers instead of just the index finger like earlier examples?
Good question, which I do not have a definitive answer to. If I had to speculate I would say that it's a mix of the desire to benefit from the improved control given by the ring, while also allowing for a more natural grip that is easier to handle. Unlike the leather rings on Prussian swords, for example, the hand automatically slides into the correct position on the Albertina, without having to take extra action to pass a finger through a loop. Also, the grip feels very natural when holding it, to the point you could almost forget about the ring. So my guess is that ioffers the best of both worlds: A comfortable and natural grip with the benefits of a finger ring. But, as I mentioned, this is speculation.
I also would not discount the aesthetic value of the ring either. It's definitely an element that sets the Albertina aside from most other swords.
Nice video! There are sword types that I just don't see as being forged. One, because the cost of doing a decent forgery is greater than the cost of an original due to the complexity of the sword. And two, because who cares, the 12 people that have this hobby? I'm exaggerating, but collecting these types of antiques is not lucrative enough to attract forgers. What people do need to keep an eye out for is repairs and composite models that are sold off as atypical originals in the period.
Very true, and this is a consideration that I think comes with time and experience. I know with my first few swords I was terrified of forgeries, and measurement discrepancies did not help. As time went by I realized there is a lot more variation and that I could relax a bit :) Also, as you mention, forgers will not put any effort into faking most cheap sword models.
look like a 1730 's design
Interesting you mention that, as I have been trying to look into the inspiration for the design of this sword. There are definitely mid-1700s hilts that are very similar (minus the ring), especially in Sweden, as far as I can tell.
Хубовички.