Light cavalry sword

Possibly the 1796 HEAVY cavalry? Unfortunately I'm not sure where to get a replica, but maybe searching that term (heavy) will get you decent result? Sorry I can't be more helpful than that.

Glen is correct, but one year off as far as patterns if you go by Robson. Officers of light cavalry and hussar regiments would have carried Pattern 1821 light cavalry officers' swords (until recently oldswords.com referred to the pattern as 1822). Within this Pattern there would have been some blade variation. Older swords (made pre-1845) would likely have pipe back blades like this P1821:



And post 1845 P1821s would have a fullered "Wilkinson" style blade like this:



Troopers in light cavalry and hussar regiments would have carried either Pattern 1821 light cavalry troopers' swords...



...or Pattern 1853 universal cavalry troopers' swords (this was the first British cavalry pattern for both light and heavy cavalry).



As far as I know the only repro of cavalry swords of this era in British history is the Military Heritage Pattern 1822 light cavalry trooper's sword (which should be called a Pattern 1821 light cavalry officer's sword--troopers' swords had leather grips and the grip backstrap had ears).

Coincidentally, I just watched the Errol Flynn 1936 "The Charge of the Light Brigade". It was mostly fictitious, but was reasonably entertaining. The lancers appeared to be carrying P1821 heavy cavalry officer's swords instead of the light cavalry pattern, but what can ya do?

Oh, sure, make me take out the book...

;D

P1821 LC Trooper's Sword
Called Pattern 1821 because of a 10 December, 1821 letter from the Adjutant-General's office to the Board of Ordinance requesting to issue 296 swords "of the new pattern for light cavalry" to the 4th light dragoons. Robson (Swords of the British Army, 1996) writes, "The Board of Ordinance was forced to reply that it had no knowledge of any new pattern and in reply the Adjutant-General forwarded two new pattern swords, made by Prosser, which the King had recently approved for heavy and light cavalry respectively. This was the first appearance of the Pattern 1821 cavalry swords."

P1821 LC Officer's Sword
Essentially a more posh version of the P1821 trooper's sword, it was made official in the 1822 Dress Regulations. I assume the 1821 designation is a result of when the King approved the design, or perhaps since it is so similar to the trooper's sword from that year and for convenience it is lumped together with this design.

P1822 Infantry Officer's Sword
Called Pattern 1822 for convenience since it first appeared in the 1822 Dress Regulations.


So it is not necessarily incorrect to call the P1821 LC or HC swords P1822s, but most regard Robson's book to be the Bible of British military swords and will follow his lead as far as the naming of this pattern. Later swords have official government designations that remove the ambiguity, e.g. "the sword, Pattern 1908".

There are several possibilities. The first reason for a new sword has to do with the relationship between the maker Prosser and King George IV. During the period 1810-1820 Prosser was on the cutting edge (no pun intended) of blade design and sword fashion due to his relationship with the Prince Regent. This relationship carried on after the Regent became King. On a basic level, Prosser designed swords that were well-received by George IV and he approved his favoured cutler’s designs which were to become the regulation pattern swords of 1821/1822.

The P1796 was not a universally well-loved pattern. One of the main complaints was that it was only suited to the cut and that it was a very poor thruster. The new cavalry patterns were straighter and had spear points (rather than hatchet points), and were supposed to be equally suited to cutting and thrusting.

So in a nutshell, I think that the change was for both functional and political reasons.