|
Post by adtharp on Oct 17, 2015 18:38:11 GMT
I found an odd sword at an antique shop today...Unfortunately they would not let me take pictures, so I am stuck describing it. Seemed over priced and they wouldn't nogotiate, so I did not pick it up. To start - I would guess german. The hilt looked very much like an Armee Corp officers saber. www.history-revisited.com/detail/id/737/name/german-cavalry-sabre,-1800-till-ww1-bergmannssaebel;jsessionid=D4D8DF165B2C7077DD9A75CA04AA6D64 It did not have a backstrap on the handle, which was black leather and wire wrapped. The blade seemed like a tiny hussar blade, imagine a 1796, but smaller. It was light and handled very well. Scabbard was wood wrapped leather. No makers mark or identification on the blade. Any ideas what I was looking at?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Oct 17, 2015 18:55:15 GMT
It's not Imperial German. What did the pommel look like? Tell the knuckle head to let you take a couple of pictures so you can figure out what you've got.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 17, 2015 19:46:30 GMT
How ornate was the hilt - was there a lot of detail, or very plain? Was the blade smaller than the 1796 in terms of length, or thickness (ie: long and thin, or short and stumpy)?
I dunno. No negotiating, and no pictures. Does not seem very friendly
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Oct 17, 2015 19:49:15 GMT
Not ornate at all, black leather, no onamentation on the pommel.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Oct 17, 2015 20:23:22 GMT
It *might* be French. Definitely not British if it lacks a backstrap. Try to sneak some photos.
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Oct 17, 2015 21:04:48 GMT
Couldn't get a photo, but I might try and email the shop. I'm thinking it kind of seemed like a scaled down blutcher...
Shorter and lighter...
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Oct 18, 2015 9:16:35 GMT
Could it be something Navy? Also there were a lot of short swords around for Infantry and artillery.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Oct 18, 2015 12:25:21 GMT
Time to play seven blind men and the elephant. Need three more contestants...
|
|
|
Post by aussie-rabbit on Oct 18, 2015 12:39:05 GMT
Time to play seven blind men and the elephant. Need three more contestants... Ok, I'll bite, one off personal piece ?
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Oct 18, 2015 13:37:30 GMT
Time to play seven blind men and the elephant. Need three more contestants... Yeah right. I always get to do its ass.
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Oct 18, 2015 19:22:30 GMT
Ok, still waiting for photos. I did get a look through the window when the shop was closed. It DOES have a backstrap...
Drew
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Oct 18, 2015 22:48:16 GMT
Ok, still waiting for photos. I did get a look through the window when the shop was closed. It DOES have a backstrap... Drew Did you do that on purpose this morning? Eeeeeewwww; I'm just soooo mad (uuurrrrrr, uuuurrrrr, uuuurrrrrrr! ) P-)
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Oct 18, 2015 23:47:19 GMT
Ok, still waiting for photos. I did get a look through the window when the shop was closed. It DOES have a backstrap... Drew www.deutsches-blankwaffenforum.de/galerie/index.htmlWhile teasing you is great fun. How bout going to the blankwaffen gallery and trying to see if any of their items look familiar. The first items on the left are for sabers without or with langets. The gallery is free. You need to sign up to get into the forums.
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Oct 19, 2015 19:38:22 GMT
Could it be a variant of a British 1796? It really seems like a scaled down 1796 cavalry trooper's saber. Were officer's sabers significantly lighter? Did any of them have wooden and leather scabbards? Should I be concerned about the lack of makers mark?
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Oct 19, 2015 19:51:42 GMT
Could it be a variant of a British 1796? It really seems like a scaled down 1796 cavalry trooper's saber. Were officer's sabers significantly lighter? Did any of them have wooden and leather scabbards? Should I be concerned about the lack of makers mark? Yes, it is possible. Officers' weapons were sometimes lighter than troopers' weapons. And many did indeed have wood and leather scabbards. One possibility is that it is a dress sword, meant for wear with formal attire, essentially designed to look the part and not be too heavy or get in the way. As for lacking a mark, it is odd, but at that age, not extraordinarily concerning.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Oct 19, 2015 20:51:55 GMT
Could it be a variant of a British 1796? It really seems like a scaled down 1796 cavalry trooper's saber. Were officer's sabers significantly lighter? Did any of them have wooden and leather scabbards? Should I be concerned about the lack of makers mark? There were variants, and many swords with similar hilts that are, properly speaking, not variants. Officer's swords and militia (Yeomanry) swords were often private purchase, often un-marked, and often lighter. But usually of similar size. E.g., what is probably a Yeomanry sword next to a replica 1796LC trooper's sword: The Yeomanry sword is 780g (compare with about 900g for a trooper's sword, or the 1050g of this replica), so lighter, but doesn't look scaled-down (a little narrower, but not much). A scaled-down sword is likely to be a different sword. See, e.g., the Prussian artillery sword shown here: sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/44053/1796-1811-light-cavalry-sabresSimilar hilts with smaller blades were used on various artillery and infantry and cavalry officer's sword from German states, Austria-Hungary, and USA. Plenty out there. There are also customs and police sword with the same kind of hilt and much smaller blades (though they usually have straight blades).
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Oct 22, 2015 17:01:18 GMT
Finally got some pictures! From the shop - Let me know what you guys think!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Oct 22, 2015 17:35:46 GMT
Finally got some pictures! From the shop - Let me know what you guys think! Good news: It certainly does look like a model 1815 Prussian Lite Cav Sergeant's saber. The scabbard appears consistent with early 19th Cent date. Bad news: the model stayed in service thru WWI, reverting to a police saber. Looks old enough to be a military sword, but the lack of acceptence markings gives one pause. 500.00 would be a bit high without some inspection marks to verify the date of it.
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Oct 22, 2015 17:47:46 GMT
Thanks for the quick response Dave.
I assume that the 1815 Sergeant saber is a variant of the 1811 Blucher? I actually quite liked the handling and feel of this saber. It was much lighter than I would have expected. The reason I didn't think 1796 when I picked it up is because it felt so small and fencible. Is this a standard characteristic of these sabers?
I might attempt to make an offer. This is was a fancy pantsy "Antique Shoppe", so I doubt I will be able to haggle much more than shipping. I would have picked it up had it been a couple hundred cheaper.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Oct 22, 2015 20:44:28 GMT
Thanks for the quick response Dave. I assume that the 1815 Sergeant saber is a variant of the 1811 Blucher? I actually quite liked the handling and feel of this saber. It was much lighter than I would have expected. The reason I didn't think 1796 when I picked it up is because it felt so small and fencible. Is this a standard characteristic of these sabers? I might attempt to make an offer. This is was a fancy pantsy "Antique Shoppe", so I doubt I will be able to haggle much more than shipping. I would have picked it up had it been a couple hundred cheaper. Yes to lineage. Officers and noncoms were leaders and men assumed to have more than rudimentary knowledge of fencing, thus a lighter, more agile weapon. 1796-1811 weapons run a curve of 1.8 - 2.5 lbs depending on regimental tastes. This is a somewhat rare find. The asking price isn't unreasonable for the market. Blade is stained but appears undamaged. Hilt is firm and tight. Scabbard if serviceable and untorn is a definite bonus, as they don't last well. Might be willing to get talked down 10%. Asking price on service man 1811s appears to be 500.00.
|
|