Was the British 1796 light cavalry sabre really such a great weapon?
2024 ж. 22 Мам.
81 985 Рет қаралды
The British 1796 pattern light cavalry sabre is one of the most popular swords. But some urban myths have grown up around it, with some exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims. Was it really such a great weapon?
Support & extra content on Patreon: / scholagladiatoria
Support & extra content on Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/matt-ea...
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
Matt Easton's website and services:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
I have a small collection of cavalry sabres hanging on my wall, and THIS is my favorite. For what it’s worth, taking this off the wall and swinging it around my living room a bit makes me go “Phwoar - that’s badass” more than any of the others. And on the basis of that scientific testing, I declare it the best.
This is in fact the only scientific test that matters with a sword
@@TheChadPad 😁
Something I’m surprised you didn’t highlight that seems to me a major reason the 1796 is so popular today was the period in which it was used. No matter the qualities of any sword that replaced it, none of them were used in such a prominent capacity during a global conflict, the last such major conflict in which swords would ever have such an effective role.
Hence the inordinate love for the 1796 infantry officer's spadroon :)
@@Robert399 weren't those hated at the time?
@@josephgilboy6259 just found: "It was widely disliked, as is noted in many sources at the time. Though it is important to note that officers had to purchase their own swords, and so whilst many 1796 pattern spadroons are poor weapons, it is entirely possible to specify and make a successful and effective sword within the parameters of the regulation. Therefore, decent fighting weapons do exist among surviving examples of this pattern type, as well as many that range from adequate to poor fighting weapons. Attempts to replace this spadroon with a robust sabre were only partially successful. With an infantry pattern introduced in 1803, and many non-regulation sabres carried both within and against the regulations of the day. Despite this, the 1796 spadroon lived on until it was replaced in army service in 1822 by a new model of sabre, and ended the use of the Spadroon in British army service, and in Naval use in 1827 (also by a new sabre pattern)."
and thus make the modern Englishman harken back to a time when their country mattered on the world stage.
@@TigerDude333 lol
As a General in the armchair army i have to say the 1796 fills the talwar ,kilij ,polish saber and other curved sword role without having to have multiple swords. Its a winner for me in thar regards.
I’m an armchair captain in the medieval guard and I’m not familiar with these swords, how do they differ in purpose? they all appear to be just different sabers
General in the armchair army is a phrase I’m going to shamelessly steal.
As a lefty, I like it because of its ambidextrous guard.
Me too, also that blade is THICC
Knucklebows always look sexy as well.
@South Paw looks nice online, what sort of edge did it come with? Can you cut bottles etc straight out of the box or does it need sharpening?
id give my right arm to be ambidextrous
@@Eagle-eye-pie No idea. I don't have one, personally. I just like the idea of ambidextrous handling.
3 thoughts: 1. A lot of the bragging of the 1796LC is because the Germans adopted the Blucher and kept it in service for donks, also it looks nice with it's "bacon-slicer" as Colin likes to say. 2. Hand protection is an odd one. It's always struck me that most British instruction (e.g. the Angelo poster) has the fencers at a distance where it's extremely easy to just drop/lift the hand to void a hand shot which isn't properly set-up, even if they have lunged. 3. I MUST NOT START BANGING ON ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SA80. I MUST NOT START BANGING ON ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SA80. I MUST NOT START BANGING ON ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SA80.
Well done about not banging on about the history of the SA80, it must have been difficult. Sit yourself down in your favourite chair, pour yourself a stiff drink and relax.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 Thank you. You're a gentleman and a scholar. Luckily I'm 6 cans deep on Stella Artois which has taken the edge off.
@@benstoyles1297 I'm on the brandy myself, and should probably go to bed. Pleasant dreams :-)
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 likewise
@@benstoyles1297 Please bang on the history of the SA80...
I would love it if you could do a video on all the common sabre patterns. C'mon. I'm an American and I spelt sabre that way as an offering.
Your channel is big enough to do it yourself now! Congrats
If the 1796 saber was not adopted Napoleon would have won the war, and to this day we would all live under the galactic French empire of man. Everything depended on the 1796 /s
Wellington apparently thought a single regiment of Cavalry was a bonus. . . more than one regiment of cavalry was a liability. He hated the cavalry. Much reiterated in Bernard Cornwall novels.
😁😁😁
It's basically an 18th century Grosse Messer. Which means it's cool! Now we need a video on the 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword. With Sean Bean!
It was liked enough that it was re-introduced for British Indian Native Horse (With better hand protection).
Yup, 3 bar hilt, stronger & wider ricasso/forte, very 1796-ish blade thereafter. I like mine better than the 1796LC. The Coast Rider's version is cool too, 3 bar guard, steel grip, andess entially a 1796 LC blade.
@@kronckew and don't forget the locally manufactured wood and leather scabbard. I have 2 of them. The earlier one is very sharp. The later one is issued but not service sharpened.
@@akashahuja2346 I'm guessing they're fairly rare? I'd love to at least see one live lol
@@Sk0lzky they are not that common but a couple were sold recently. Certainly there are many more 1796 LCS out there as they were in service for 30 years and went to all the hussars and Lancers regiments and when you add up all the militia and yeomanry regiments then add all the lend-lease to our allies like the Prussians and the Dutch. That's a lot of swords
@@akashahuja2346 My Indian one came without the scabbard :( The Coast Rider (Coast Guards) one came with a steel scabbard and a leather frog for vertical belt suspension, and was slightly shorter than the Indian one. When the riders were disbanded, the swords were re-issued to the Hospital Corps and Mountain troops.
I would say that fashion plays a lot more into a weapons popularity than people think. You see that pop culture, like games and movies all the time that time ,and that sabre looks cool you should do a video on that.
You have a point, look at the uniforms of some of those cavalry units.
If I were given a choice, I'd pick the basket-hilted broadsword. I'd rather be able to give the least amount of thought to protecting my hand, so I can focus more on attacking, and I feel like a straight, double-edged, cut-and-thrust blade gives me the widest range of options
Give me a longsword. I want the reach and the ability to use two hands.
Give me a zweihander. I wanna go helicopter blade on the entire enemy pike formation.
1796 Heavy Cavalry either that or a club I’ll just bludgeon the person to death
@@wargey3431 have you handled a real one mate? Floppy blades, I was so surprised at the lack of stiffness. I love my 1796 LCS's but I would probably prefer to fight with my 1827 RN prosser or my slim 1821
@@akashahuja2346 hence why I said heavy cavalry sabre not light massive difference in blades
Great video, I always enjoy our little chats.
Lots of good points raised there mate!! Enjoyed the watch
I would love to see a video of Matt's top picks for the best thrust-centric saber, the best cut-centric saber, and then, finally, the saber that is the best compromise of both worlds. That would be AWESOME. 👍👍
Thanks so much for this. I saw origional examples of these in the Harris museam in Preston Lancashire. They feachured in both battles of Preston (English Civil War and Jacobite Rebellions) before they became popular. The origials look very similar but very thin and pointy.
I have a German WW I horsemen's parade sword, very similar hilt, very common at any Antique shop. With that being said, I would like to have a nice antiqued version of the 1796 Light Cavalry sword. You have a really nice version. Kudos Matt!!
The only standard that really counts in the modern world is ‘will it take a zombies head off in one blow?’ Go 1796!
Turning a "zombie", as you put it, into a pez dispenser is good enough I'd think.
@@FoxtrotFleet doctrine is I believe the requirement to sever the spinal column.
@@akashahuja2346 Start doing push ups I guess.
@@FoxtrotFleet believe me, the 1796 LCS would have no trouble severing heads. And pull ups are what you need :)
I guess thrusting is out then. Of course, if we were to really fight zombies, a spear or other polearm would be preferable.
I picked one of these up in a small hardware/antique store in North Texas for $125. It was the blued and gilt Officers version in amazing condition and Matt was kind enough to authenticate it for me via email conversation. Having no particular attachment to the sword, my wife sold it locally for a very tidy profit. Thanks Matt!
Nice video as always :) A while ago, you told us which sword you would pick as a sidearm if you didn't have prior knowledge of the enemy you might face or of the context you might find yourself in. Has that changed since? And if soldiers today were to be issued swords or other melee weapons bigger than the average combat knife, if you were picked to advise on the choice of said weapon, what would you elect to equip the ground troops with?
Hi matt love your stuff been with you for years and binged all your back catalogue. Q. What is you 3 favourite sabers be it looks and or performance.
I just discovered this channel, and I must say I am thrilled right down to my toenails. I've been collecting swords and sabers for over 30 years now, and my very first sword is a 1796 pattern, American made, so around 1800 ir slightly later, complete with it's metal scabbard, although it's in rough shape. It has a great deal of allure for me because it is the first of my collection, which numbers now just under 100, and I wouldn't trade it for anything. I went to Norwich University, which is America's oldest private military college, predominantly a cavalry school, and fencing was my sport and it is probably the reason I love swords so much today. I can not wait to start binge watching all of your back episodes. Thanks.
Gods, you are a thoughtful man. Thank you for your work.
I love them, I own 6 so far. My favourites are officers variants by Runkel and Woolley & Deakins. All of them have been service sharpened. One day I hope to find a nice Gill.
Funnily enough, I used to like these until I actually handled one. It's the tip, I think, and the relatively light handguard. Much prefer the Blucher, and to me the French period equivalents are the best. I do like the BF sparring 1796 though, although I don't think it handles at all like the original despite what some claim.
I was lucky enough to get a really great one of these by Osborn a few years ago before prices got so high. It's an officer's version, and apart from having been overcleaned, and as a result lost all of its blue and gilt decoration (my guess is that the blade was at one time covered in black rust, like the scabbard still is, that was all cleaned off by some previous owner, taking the blue and gilt decoration with it), it's in astoundingly good condition. The blade has no pitting. The hilt is solid, apart from the metal ring just below the guard being loose, and the leather and wire is all intact. The leather washer at the base of the blade is even still there, though it's a bit dried out at this point. The scabbard's in great shape as well, though it's sadly missing one of its suspension rings. All in all, it's hard to believe it's in such good shape being over 200 years old. It really seems like if you put an edge on it, you could probably still fight with the thing today. I have it hanging on my wall, and everyone who sees it likes it. They're amazed how light it is if I let them handle it -- I suppose the fact that it's such a broad-bladed sword makes them imagine it would be heavy.
Would love to see a 1788 in comparison to the 1796. Thx for a great video - context is everything 😋
the 1821 is my favorite sword! Once I'm out of debt, I hope to save up and buy one, perhaps even from Easton Antique Arms :)
9:00. Looks do play a part. I love the Mauser C96 because of its looks. It’s just a beautiful looking gun. I love the highland basket hilt for the same reason.
Great video ! Thanks Matt ! Looking forward to see non regulation cavalry swords ;) cheers.
One of my favorite looking sabers.
The Prussians thought highly of the 1796 light cavalry saber. They (as did other German allies, Spain and Portugal) used British originals in the Nappy Wars, then from 1811 their own copies, called 1811 "Bluechersabel". Prussian light cavalry kept their version until 1858, but even after adopting a less curved blade, retained the hilt. Manfred von Richtofen's uhlan saber in 1914 would have used the 1796 hilt. It soldiered on until the Third Reich.
really long and good service time
It's not that the preceding weapon is better. As a veteran, from my experience, it is the anticipation of new training that causes troopers to complain. If you are trained on a curved cutting implement and now your NCO is telling you that you must use a straiter, more thrust centric weapon, you;re gonna be annoyed. We had the same reaction when we switch over from the M16A2 to the M4, the adjustment was irritating.
Imagine the annoyance of the first soldiers who saw the introduction of firearms!
@@arx3516 I don’t think that’s analogous. Killing from a distance is a distinct advantage over getting hand to hand combat. But within those categories, adjust from one platform or implement to another, requires retraining the body for essentially the same function.
@@mjsuarez79 a rifleman requires totally different training and tactics from a pikeman. I mean, you're trained in stayng in tight formations and stab the enemy, and then they ask you to learn to reload an arquebuse as quickly as possible, during combat, and possibly you even have to learn how to use a sword, because in the 30 seconds it takes to reload that thing between each shot the enemy can get really close to you, and nayonets have not been invented yet. The introduction of firearms in great numbers totally revolutionised combat.
@@arx3516 I think we’re on the same point, but from different perspectives. Absolutely, the introduction of firearms was revolutionary. It would have been a major change. Arduous. Not annoying. Switching over from one type of equipment within the same category is an irritation because you will be retraining and reconfiguring for the same basic function and approach. Switching from from pole arms to firearms is a whole new world. Arduous vs. annoying. I’m just addressing why soldiers would gripe about switching from one type of sword to another. If you have to retrain and you don’t see a whole hell of a lot of difference, it is annoying.
I was in the 1St Battalion The Kings Regiment 1983 -89 and I was one of the soldiers who transitioned from the SLR to the SA80. We all loved our SLRs and didn't want to change. Don't believe all the BS about the SA80A1 being a bad weapon it wasn't. I spent plenty of time in Senalager firing thousands of rounds though my SA80 and nobody had a problem with them. However, if right now I was given the choice of either rifle to go into battle with I would choose the SLR.
I seem to recall reading that the first issues of the 1796 were disastrous, troopers complained that the blades bent and they performed very poorly until the contractor was replaced.
A 1st hand account of the '96 in use in 1811 "Just then a French officer stooping over the body of one of his countrymen, who dropped the instant on his horse's neck, delivered a thrust at poor Harry Wilson's body; and delivered it effectually. I firmly believe that Wilson died on the instant yet, though he felt the sword in its progress, he, with characteristic self-command, kept his eye on the enemy in his front; and, raising himself in his stirrups, let fall upon the Frenchman's head such a blow, that brass and skull parted before it, and the man's head was cloven asunder to the chin. It was the most tremendous blow I ever beheld struck; and both he who gave, and his opponent who received it, dropped dead together. The brass helmet was afterwards examined by order of a French officer, who, as well as myself, was astonished at the exploit; and the cut was found to be as clean as if the sword had gone through a turnip, not so much as a dint being left on either side of it.
It was not that unusual. During the battle of Aspern-Essling, fighting for the Habsburg, in command of the Moritz Liechtenstein Cuirassiers, Colonel Nicolas-François Roussel d'Hurbal had his helmet cut by a French sabre, although in his case the wound didn't kill him.
No, not unusual at all - but a great quote to display the cutting quality of the sword. The 1821 by contrast, and only taking the Crimea into account, had difficulty cutting through a Russian cavalryman's greatcoat.
Hey Matt, will that spadroon you showed in the video go up for sale in your website? I am asking because I am interested in seeing some pictures of its handle and ferrule for a restoration project
Nearly every one likes the SMLE but it took over 70 variations & 15 or so years to make it the rifle it became..
I found 1796 with some etching and it appears to be a blue blade but would love to get it looked at
Couple of questions as my only info on this sort of stuff if watching Sharpe: Does the shorter curved blade make it easier to draw? Particularly on horseback? How does the weight balance affect handling on horseback? (you would expect reach to be very important, but in a cavalry duel is proximity more important?)
A curved blade, overall, is much easier to draw than a straight sword. Reach would be very important on horseback... Weight balance is a complete topic of its own! Weight more to tip gives more cutting power, but sacrifices control. Weight more to the guard/pommel gives more control and speed, but brings the ideal cutting area further down the blade... Different strokes for different folks, eh?
I suppose it would be easier to draw but, given it's the light cavalryman's primary weapon, it's not a major concern - just like muskets and rifles - it should already be drawn before any action. Handling is generally less important on horseback than on foot because you don't fence with your opponents; you ride past them and deliver 1 cut or thrust (making reach very important). That's why cavalry swords tend to be longer and more forward-weighted than infantry swords.
The other thing is in a protracted melee which some cavalry engagements became it was clear that even soldiers trained to thrust like the french cavalry resorted to hacking and slashing instead of stabbing hence why the 1796 light and heavy were both really nice blades for cutting or even bludgeoning people but didn’t have the best stab
What is of greatest importance for fighting on horseback is that a shorter well-curved sword can be moved far more quickly, and in a tighter arc, from one side of the body to the other than a longer straighter sword. Also, in moving a sword from side to side the well-curved sabre has an advantage in being less likely to cut your horse on the head or neck. In general, curved sabres are superior in melee combat and straight swords are superior in a formal battlefield charge. This is why the Byzantine cataphracts and the later Polish Hussars carried both a long straight sword (spathion and pallasch, respectively) and a curved sabre (paramerion and szabla, respectively).
@@urseliusurgel4365 is it not the Polish one called Koncierz?
Here's a perhaps silly question, but I really want to know: Having cut a whole lot of cabbages and so on, in training, did they eat them afterwards or was it all just discarded?
Same, seems like a waste
Napoleonic / Victorian military rations weren't great, so I'd guess the ready chopped cabbage went into the pot along with the beef.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 But just imagine all those hoofs amidst all that horse poop treading on what is going into the pot. Have to be some hungry.
@@dutch6857 Wash it off, a bit of muck never killed anyone. The typhoid and cholera is going to get you first anyway.
@@dutch6857 fed to the horses?
Back in the late 70’s I was in Anglesey, North Wales, and visited a pub, hanging above the bar was a 1796 light cavalry sabre. The guard and scabbard were dark brown and pitted, obviously after spending many years hanging there. I don’t know how many years and neither did the landlord, he said it had always been there. Anyway, I asked if he would take it down an let me examine it as I was a keen on Napoleonic history. He did and we took it to a back room to examine, I wasn’t sure what to expect, would it be welded by rust into the scabbard, or would the blade be rusted as well. I drew the sabre with ease and beheld a perfect blade, still extremely sharp. It was greased, what with I can’t say, and this obviously had helped maintain its condition. It was marked with some letters, I can’t remember what they were, and was very nice to handle. The landlord asked if I wanted it for £20, being the honest person I am I said it was probably worth more than that, but really it should remain above the bar as that is obviously where it had lived for a very long time.
one of the problems is for the 1796 swords were originally going to be two swords infantry and cavalry but then committees took over Le Marchant design was over ridden (sorry) by the Cavalry (life guard and the royal horse guard) as far as they were concerned dragoons were mounted infantry and well the lights were not really cavalry they were just skirmishes and yes the Le Marchant was good for them but Cavalry need a sword just like the Austrians hence the 1796HCS. The infantry sabre was also scrapped (came back as the 1803 which had a vague description which is why there are so many variations ) and as the Staff view of Officers "they do not use swords the have a side arm it is called a Company of infantry", so an updated spadroon is much more elegant (which is why there is the folding shield so it sit better against the leg) - they did not think of the lights/rifles at the time (both were experiments after the war in America) until Sir John Moore showed what they can do which is why so many infantry regiments got converted latter on. on that note one interesting light cavalry unit was formed Hompesch's mounted rifles they got disbanded in 1802 most of them went into 5th battalion 60th foot. After the Napoleonic wars the Staff brought in Lancers "look at what the French lancers did to the Scots Greys" and cuirass for the heavy cavalry, but the rest of the light cavalry there role changed to been almost the same as the Heavy cavalry with the exception of they could go skirmishing when needed - charge of the light brigade as an example of them used a heavy cavalry.
Small request: If you could sometime, would you contrast cavalry sabre with infantry sabres of the same times? For instance, the 1795 light cav, but what were the foot soldiers carrying at the time?
Most cavalry units in the Napoleontic era tended to avoid clashing with one another on horseback in a full gallop charge with sabres, because of the very high risk involved. And when they did men mosty avoided eachother at the last moment before actual contact. You had to be both a very highly skilled horseman and swordsman, as well as being a bit lucky, to survive such a clash. And most cavalrymen knew this. This was the reason why lancers were seen as the most effective countermeasure against enemy cavalry. Hence Polish lancers and why Russian cossacks still used lances up till WW1.
A few months ago I purchased a synthetic 1796 infantry sabre. It's definitely an interesting sword to wield; however, single bars hilts? Mind your hands from snipers. Also nice video.
Well,when british soldiers complain about the S80 for the L1A1 you really cannot blame them....
No one calls the SA80 the 'right arm of the Free World", do they? : )
@@oldschooljeremy8124 The "broken club foot of the Free World", maybe
A1 certainly, A2 and A3 not so much. Tbqh the only practical benefit the SLR had going for it over the original SA80 was reliability and that's a dead letter now.
@@MatthewDoye It's still heavy and does nothing better than any other weapon in its class. It still isn't ambidextrous. The rifle sucks, but when you invest that much in polishing a turd, it's hard to walk away.
@@KI.765 Granted, the weight is its biggest remaining weakness followed by not being ambidextrous. Other than that its as good or better than any other weapon in its class. The guts have been pretty much replaced by good or high quality components, it takes any contemporary optic, its barrel length gives it a greater muzzle velocity and consequently achieves comparable terminal ballistics at longer ranges, I could go on. Military kit, from vehicles to rifles to bootlaces, is frequently turd-like when first issued, given enough time, fifty years for the M16 to today's M4 or thirty for the SA80 and AUG, the turdiness gets polished away (unless it's the Land Rover which always was and always will be an utter turd).
Hi Matt, quick question. Who manufactured the Small Sword hanging in the background? (Over your left shoulder, from the viewer's point of view) Thanks.
It has always been my favorite, so it was the first reproduction sword I bought. The second was the basket hilt Scottish broadsword.
Has Matt done a video on the multi use bayonets like Ian on Forgotten Weapons?
Beautiful example of a beautiful design
I own one of these, and I admit I did buy it for it's looks. It's such a mean looking sword, with that kind of defiant broadening hatchet tip. When I look at it next to my 1822 French light cavalry sabre, it somehow reminds me of Jaws and shark's teeth. "We're gonna need a bigger boat." But obviously I accept the reality that it was just one design in a long arms race.
You are forgetting that contributeing to its popularity is the fact that it is the sword that Sharpe used...and I'd love one for that!
"We should never underestimate how popular a weapon is based on purely what it looks like, not wether it's good or not." I think we all know what he means
I always wondered: Did the muslim world favour curved blades because those resemble the crescent moon - one of their holy symbols; and did medieval Europeans favour straight swords with pronounced crossguards because those resemble a crucifix minus the naked dead guy on it?
@@MrAranton Doubtful, since they used straight bladed swords at the time of the Crusades (and the Sudanese also preferred straight blades, despite being Islamic).
'Other Ranks' please Matt. Not 'enlisted men'. And yes the SLR was better.......the SMLE always worked.....the Martini jams.....the Snider is slow to extract.....the P1853 was more accurate....percussion caps are fiddler to fit in the cold than the flint which stays on the cock,,,,,matchlocks always go off......bows shoot arrows faster than guns....... the pointy stick never runs out of ammunition.......
You forgot the P14.
In what world does a bow and arrow fire faster than a rifle?
@@charles2703 Muzzle loaders?
Actually the term other ranks is correct and used in all commonwealth nations. Enlisted men is more of an American term
@@DeepseaSteve I find myself having to explain OR to Americans all the time.
1796 looks a lot like Polish "Black" saber, the hilt, the curvature, the choppy tip. Seems people can come to similar conclusions on the same topic
reason why the British cavalry started to call themselves Hussars. Very much in awe of the Polish and Hungarian cavalries.
Not exactly, it’s suspected that it was based on Eastern/Central European sabers in the first place since Le Marchant travelled to the region.
Is there any information available on the british cavalry swords used in the American war of independence.
Realistically when looking at the practical function of the curved sabre in real warfare, it seems the exact design mostly isn't especially important. They were most effectively used against opponents who couldn't really fight back effectively (flanked enemies, infantry, fleeing enemies etc.). By contrast heavy cavalry who did engage in more direct combat often heavily favored straight sabers both because they could more easily thrust but also because thrusting injuries caused more deaths in this context. When light cavalry were used for charges they often used lances.
Anyone know what type of sword that is in the background on his right, between the black heater shield and the 1handed axe? It looks absolutly beautiful.
Matt, I've had real '96s in my hands, comparing it to other period swords, and my first impression was, jeez, this must be a BRUTAL cutter. Whether it served well in battles of the period, I think, would be a different matter.
Something about this video made me realize that, at some point while swords were still in military use, cloth military uniforms overtook steel armor in terms of mass usage. I imagine it had to do with the rise and improvement of firearms (good plate would still be effective against early muskets and such, but eventually they got powerful enough to punch through) and with the cost of outfitting an organized military force. Do you, Matt Easton, or any of my fellow watchers know roughly when this transition would have taken place, and if any other factors were in play to cause it?
The 1796 is the Pumpkin Spice of military sabers. ... I want one-
I had my cold steel 1796 reground to handle more like the originals. It’s very agile now comparatively, but at that thickness I’m not sure if the steel quality and hardness is up to snuff. I should probably get a charpy test to see. My antique 1845 Wilkinson is very durable I trust it more.
Sheffield steel of Victorian period was simillar to modern High Carbon steel alloys (1095 and such). If its a Solingen steel blade I would be more warry, the quality of Solingen went downhill in the later 19th century
MrPanos2000 My friend who is a blacksmith said it sharpened like 1095 so it’s almost definitely the Sheffield steel.
@@kyleman605 The proof slug reveals maker. If you have a Facebook, look up the group "Millitary and Classical sabre", if you want you can post pics there so we can help you date it and trace the maker
@@MrPanos2000 The heat treat is the important part, we can only guess about Cold Steel’s quality.
what's the best way to fit .410 in a basket hilt? drums?
I think one of the things that stand out about that piece is that it was one of the first pattern swords to be rigourously tested to a specific standard.
The reason I originally wanted on was not only did it look deadly and cool but because I heard that from the Napoleonic wars the French soldiers complained about grievous nasty wounds from the British sword
That is a popular urban myth :-) No evidence for it - many European nations had similar swords.
@@scholagladiatoria Thankyou. I didn't think it was factual but thought it might of been good unintentional propaganda . I wonder where that myth came from. Anyways, It sounded pretty cool though. Lol
Just then a French officer stooping over the body of one of his countrymen, who dropped the instant on his horse's neck, delivered a thrust at poor Harry Wilson's body; and delivered it effectually. I firmly believe that Wilson died on the instant yet, though he felt the sword in its progress, he, with characteristic self-command, kept his eye on the enemy in his front; and, raising himself in his stirrups, let fall upon the Frenchman's head such a blow, that brass and skull parted before it, and the man's head was cloven asunder to the chin. It was the most tremendous blow I ever beheld struck; and both he who gave, and his opponent who received it, dropped dead together. The brass helmet was afterwards examined by order of a French officer, who, as well as myself, was astonished at the exploit; and the cut was found to be as clean as if the sword had gone through a turnip, not so much as a dint being left on either side of it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_1796_light_cavalry_sabre
So does anyone know the reasoning behind the B shaped knuckle guard on the 1796? Ive always found that feature interesting and iconic, but couldnt figure out what its for
Off the subject, but what is that wooden handled sword in the center under the round shield?
Messer I believe
I also believe it is a messer. The brand escapes me, though.
Sorry I should have been clearer. I recognize it's a Messer. But by who? Just looking at the sheath isn't much to go on. It's got a bit of a point and about 30".
When you'll do the review of Darksword Two handed sword ? I saw you have it, you even said you'd review it.
www.darksword-armory.com/medieval-weapon/medieval-swords/two-handed-gothic-medieval-sword-1332/
Reading the Deluge, how does it compare to a 1650's Polish sabre?
Just wanted to make a point that, by experience, the aversion to change is not just a military thing, but human nature at its core. Just to give an example in a completely unrelated field: try changing the accounting software of a secreterial pool to the newest version, or change the procedures of an office worker to move from paperwork to digital filing, and you'll have the EXACT same reaction ("Oh the old way was better, I lose so much time like this", "Oh but we used to do this all the time!"). People simply don't like the change and have a hard time, especially at first, to gauge whether something is better or worse.
Have you read Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels - The main character wields the 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword despite being an Infantry Officer.
Sword novice here. I recently saw a light cavalry troopers sword that had the hilt of the 1821 version, but the more curved blade of this (1796) version. Is that possible? would there have been a crossover/hybrid between the two versions?
It may have had the original hilt broken and the person who did the replacement was only experienced in making the 1821. There's no reason to throw away a good blade, and if you did, whoever found it would likely repurpose it.
How light is the one you are holding is?
what about the 3 branch saber? you know, like the one centered behind your head on the right between the other 2 swords
what about the Superior attack geometry of a curved blade in a cavalry charge?
MATT!!! I have a question...are the techniques different from the 1796 vs the 1822??
I received in the mail one of these 1796 swords, the officers version, shortly after I had won it in an internet auction. Someone I worked with was there when I received it, and I was pleased to show it to him. I told him about how they were renowned is being very efficient at cutting and slashing. He looked at the edge and said it did not seem very sharp to him. I then proposed that he tested in a different fashion. I held the sword up in one hand, Edge down, the tip at my right hip. I grasped the extreme end of the sword with my right hand, folding my fingers over the edge. I then let go and held it a couple of seconds. I invited him to do the same, and to see how long he could hold it that way yet still be comfortable. He did as I had done, and after about half a minute, he handed it back to me and said, " I see what you mean." Looking at it, I can see it was once beautifully blued, with very nice gilding on the etching. Obviously, someone left it hanging on the wall for a very long time. I'm surprised at how crude the guard is in comparison to the blade and the hilt material, which is sharkskin. As I have no Scabbard, I would be very interested in obtaining a replacement of some kind.
does that make a shovel sharp? Because you couldn't hold one like that either
@@TigerDude333 Why, yes, I suppose it does. Consider leverage and inertia. When you swing that thing, with a drawing pull, you can slice right through a wide variety of meaty bits... You see, this thing isn't particularly Sharp, but it does have a certain sharpness about the edge that you don't have with an item that was purposely rounded... ... besides which, I used to use a shovel all the time. If you are digging frequently with a shovel, as the blade wears down, it often becomes terrifically sharp on the edge. Try using a shovel for a few months sometime, then get back to me. Shovels have also been used as combat weapons...
You mentioned cavalry troopers using fruits for saber practice regularly. In the movie Glory, Colonel Shaw was practicing his saber work by cutting watermelons from horseback. The watermelons were held in place by nails sticking out of the posts and he hit too low and hit the nails. The point is if it is true that they used nails, could that account for some edge damage on cavalry swords instead of use in combat since you train far more than you fight in a military career if you fight at all
Going by the proofing on the Wz.34 Ludowika they should be able to handle some thin nails.
I suspect many of the later complaints about the 1796 stem from the change in training, one can imagine a trooper saying "how could I have charged giving point with that" when those of the previous generation weren't taught to use the point as the primary attack but the edge.
Mind that cavalrymen often had a fencing training before being enlisted.
@@neutronalchemist3241 Officers, yes, other ranks, not so much. Even in prestigious regiments recruits mostly came from ordinary backgrounds, if they fit the bill physically and weren't disqualified for some reason then they were acceptable, social background only mattered for those purchasing commissions pre Cardwell or young Cornets after 1871.
I'm not sure how to look it up but did people with sabers ever go up against like a long sword just kinda curious about how often outdated weapons were still in use why back when
Would it be that different from a longsword vs scimitar? Because that definitely happened.
Sabres were used by Hungarian troops way back in the Middle Ages, centuries before they became the standard sword for light cavalry across Europe. So I think it's very likely that a cavalryman armed with a sabre will at some point have come across an infantryman armed with a longsword.
I think i could be interesting to compare those from a statistical point of view. In other words, how did thoses evolution impacted the probability of injury or succes ? But i doubt that such data would be available.
I admit, I really have no love for this sword. Matt uses the term "brutal" and that's kinda how I feel when I look at it. I honestly react in the same was as the Obi-Wan Kenobi meme - "so uncivalised." The Wilkinson model later in the video is far more visually appealing to me.
As a former British Soldier I'm amazed that the procurement people actually produced a bit of kit that wasn't a certified POS. I remember leaky crippling DMS boots and woolen gloves of the 1970's.
Why did they go for the divot in the guard instead of a continuous D shape like the 1788? Also, (proto) lightsabers exist now thanks to the Hacksmiths.
Its a direct copy of Austrohungarian stirrup sabers as a whole. The Heavy Cav. sword is also a direct copy of Austrohungarian pallasches. The Stirrup hilt was common in central Europe since the late 17th century
Most Polish and Hungry sabres I’ve seen have a straight or D guards
Of the 2 I like the 1821 better. That's just personal preference about liking a straighter blade. It's not even about which is better at what, it's just aesthetics. I just prefer the look of a blade that's only a little bit curved.
I want one of these so bad. Matt, what do you thing of Cold Steels take on this sword? Worth it for a guy on a budget?
Lots of reviews out there but they are a bit heavy imo to the real deal. There are a couple of guys who reprofile them for not too much. The Cold Steels are just a few grams heavy of fun but with a bit of hand work..... Temper is hit or miss allegedly but I never got a butter knife from CS. Got 3 CS swords. Heavy, unassuming beaters. Not faves or good but they work.
ChonkedaDevil Thanks for the reply. I will keep your words in mind when I decide to pull the trigger or not. Thanks 🤓
If you want a cheap 1796 that can technically be used, then I'd get one (on Kult of Athena of course). It is pretty heavy but not so heavy it's unusable.
Matthew Cooper Many Thanks 🤓
@@bacon81 Hey so I recently got a Cold Steel 1796 because I myself was curious, so I will give you a quick review: The 1796 sword is sold no rattles, no looseness. Blade is fairly stiff, overweight but not extremely so. I am happy to report Cold Steel finally put a decent distal taper on it. Mine tapers from almost 8mm down to 1.8mm, I heard stories of these swords in the past having almost no taper being a flat 4mm piece of steel, that indeed would make them handle poorly, but because of the taper It actually handles decently well. More so after I modified the blade. Bad part was the sharpening on mine was terrible. Only about 11inches were sharpened at all, and even then not very much so, and on the false edge only about 2 inches. So I got to work with a hand bastard file, and over the course of a week, and quite a few hours I reprofiled the entire edge and false edge so it is sharp and has a single bevel. This file work also took a fair amount of excess weight off, now it's fantastic. After using the file simply hand sanded the flat with 80grit sand paper working up to 1500 grit. Everything was done with dirt cheap hand tools and time, no expensive machinery or technical skill. Just be warned It might not be perfect out of the box, but honestly It's a good sword for the price, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it, if you can put some work into it. I think cold steel makes some good swords, or rather they contract good sword makers, because in fact many cold steel swords are just Windlass swords under contract. Likewise for some blades they hire existing companies forges to produce them in China. I believe many cold steel swords are quite decent they have 2 problems their swords used to be much worse years ago, and some of that reputation stuck to this day. Second they have a image problem with their old ads, the overweight Americans cutting stuff to rock music image makes many people cringe. However lets be real here cringe aside, and mediocre swords made years ago. The swords cold steel offer today are generally decent with some being really good for their price and they absolutely have improved over the years because of criticisms.
I am just impressed you have met someone who thinks the SA80 is good.....
Compared to the L1A1, which is probably a better rifle but there's obviously good reasons modern armies have moved to 5.56. Why we didn't just license some version of the AR-15 I don't know
If all you're doing with the gun is carrying it, then the lighter one is better.
I've never heard people be particularly negative about the L85A2... Sure, there are plenty of people who will tell you all about how terrible the A1 was, and how the process of getting from A1 to A2 was a national humiliation and all the rest of it. But the weapon that the SA80 eventually ended up being, people generally seem to regard as perfectly decent, if not exemplary.
@@rjfaber1991 yeah the A2 with iron sights was decent and light. But the A3, with picatiny rails and a small arms sight, is still stupidly heavy for a 5.56... and then you stick on a laser light module and foregrip to throw off the balance. (This probably falls into 'championing the previous rifle' as Matt said 🤷♂️)
I actually like the L85A2, I think it's a bit heavy but it's short and handy with a good long barrel. I actually preferred it over the AR15 I tried, purely because I preferred the balance and the shortness of the L85. Still prefer the L129 though and the L86A2 LSW, those things were beautiful to shoot, less so to lug around though.
Damn it I want one of those so bad
In german army this kind of saber was used up to 1941. ln Eastern Germany a saber of this look was used as ceremonial saber until 1990. But a lighter version is still produved, not for german military or police etc.. Some historical societies still use t for some historical events.
Those you mention arent really the same as this, but simillar to the Prussian Blucher swords that were inspired by these. Dont forget the stirrup hilt was an Austrian style copied by the British in the first place. All things considered, a very Germanic weapon
@@MrPanos2000 : Yes , it was not the exact same saber, Mr. Easton made a video about this toppic, but it looks so similar , that the design of german military sabers followed the english ones. Also many short sabers used by german imperial policemen looked similar to french Briquet .
Now isn't the 1821 a bit like the basket hilt (more hand protection), a bit like the 96 (somewhat curved) and a bit like the spadroon (somwhat more capable of giving points)?
I like practicing with lighter sabers of 650ish grams because we tend to hit hard and don't like a lot of protective gear. Is that not heavy enough in general? To fully kit up I usually opt for longsword.
Do Radaelli.
@@Brigadier9 I was looking at the weapon named after him. Didn't really know where it lies in the realm of HEMA.
He's one of the sabre masters HEMA works off. Maestro Radaelli put together a manual for the gymnasium sabre (lighter than military sabres). I suggest going on the Facebook Military and Classical Sabre page - I don't do Radaelli.
@@Brigadier9 thank you for the info. I saw that it was often labeled under classical fencing and didnt know if it was heavy enough as a weapon. I did all 3 disciplines of modern fencing to the exausting point of being approached with junior olympic offers. I didn't go. Was not a huge fan of the modern sabre rules and weak "cuts". I will check out Radaelli. Ty again.
Flat swipes/brushtrokes in sports sabre annoy me a lot. I came from sport fencing but am now at the point where my arsenal of proper swords out numbers the fencing swords about 15 to 1.
One thing to consider was that Prussia/Germany liked them so much they almost exactly copied the 1796LC, with minor variations well into the 20th Century. (I.E. The 'Blucher' Sabre)
Me and you have alot in comman. I have sub. I love knives swords and all types of weapons
It seems that even British Army wasn't adverse to the old: "Is it better thrust or cut in a cavalry combat?"
I disagree when it comes to reach in a cut. The way you hold it, with a talwar like 90deg grip, it surely reaches less than the other one, but it's not the only way of cutting. The whole idea of a hatchet point was to be able and deliver a serious tip cut with a fully extended sword. That's also a reason for a more prominent curvature. Regarding thrusts from horseback, it's much less obvious than you make it. A straight blade will often become stuck in a target, while a curved blade has a better chance getting itself freed as you gallop past. Regarding hand protection, a complex asymmetric guard makes certain type of cutting barely possible. Iwanowski describes how you are supposed to use this type of weapon. It's an advanced skill, so obviously probably not very relevant for a typical British trooper, though it seems that Polish and Hungarian cavalry was trained to use it. On many paintings they appear holding their sabers back edge forward. In summary, it's a very good cavalry sword, optimized for melee more than for a charge. It requires specific skills in order to either take full advantage or minimize the disadvantages of this design. Yeah, I can see how a "simple" straight blade would work better.
I want to find a reasonably priced 1845 type Rifles Saber, Wilkinson blade, please. The 1796 is interesting to me historically, but the later blades were far more useful on foot.
Funny you should say that, I now have an 1845 Pattern Rifles Officers sword adorning my wall, which I bought off Matt only a little while ago. They turn up quite frequently there...
I've got an 1827/45 Volunteer Rifles up for sale on Combatant Arms Antiques.
Some people: In thrust we trust!
Having used the 1796 and the 1821 in mounted Skill at arms and re-enactments I have to say the 21 has the edge ( no pun intended)
I like the 1821 pattern a lot. One of the best all-rounders of the era.
Hi matt could yourself and Todd come together and create a 1796 that fits your standard