|
Post by pellius on Dec 4, 2019 14:01:18 GMT
I've wanted to be able to take this "family photo" ever since I started to learn a (very) little bit about real actual swords and the history surrounding them. Thanks to several very kind forumites, I now have unlocked this achievement. So, happy Wednesday, SBG. I hope you all are having a great week! Top to Bottom: Fr. m1829/1832 Mtd Art'y Ofc, Fr. m1822/1824 LC Tpr, Fr. m1822/1817 HC Ofc
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Dec 4, 2019 14:12:49 GMT
Quick side note: the relative sizes of the swords are distorted due to the camera angle. Just for reference, here's a photo of the scabbards to give a better idea of the relative blade lengths and profile shapes. Cheers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 20:46:43 GMT
Looking goo! Can we see the basket side?
My beast is my officer (buffalo horn grip) 1854 dragon, early 1860s. I had almost bought an 1816 and still kind of kill myself.
Nice set
Cheers GC
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Dec 4, 2019 21:40:05 GMT
edelweiss - Thank you. I'm happy to share better photos of the baskets. I don't know much about the m1854's, but they look very impressive in photos. A forumite was recently selling a nice one, and I really wanted to buy it, but I had already (over)spent my budget. Soooooo hard to stay within budget.... Not to pour lemon juice in your paper cut, but which type 1816 got away? The Heavy Cav? I am still slowly wading into the world of 19th Century Frenchies, so most of my conversations about them have to pause from time to time while I do google searches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 23:04:52 GMT
The 1816 that got away was a sabre. My 1854 is actually a little shorter than the carbiniers and cuirassiers but looms over the sabres Here with a generic German 1822/1840 Here is the 1816 that got away. There was no scabbard and why I waffled but the price was right, at a couple of hundred. With few exceptions now, I don't visit the later decades much and concentrate on my early eagles and 18th (and earlier) century stuff. Cheers GC
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Dec 5, 2019 2:31:19 GMT
Very nice.
|
|
|
Post by legacyofthesword on Dec 5, 2019 8:07:13 GMT
I'm not a huge saber fan, but damn. That 1829 is wicked looking.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Dec 5, 2019 21:17:35 GMT
Impressive! Very nice.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Dec 5, 2019 21:43:47 GMT
legacyofthesword - The 1829 was the first of these I managed to acquire, and was the impetus to seek out the other two. I just happen to be a pretty big saber fan. To my eye, the 1829's pointy exaggerated S curve, deep fuller, and slim overall proportions make for a beautiful and interesting sword.
markus313 - Thank you for the kind words.
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Dec 6, 2019 10:39:06 GMT
Very nice sabres! The 29 is my favourite too. Handles very well, nice curves, a real sabre. What I would like to know is this: The M1816 had the pipe back blade. The Officers model too. The M1822 LC hilted sabre, the last one, has an 1817 blade, so from before the M1822. And it is not a pipe back. Could this 1817 blade be an ,,A la Chasseur'' blade? Made to fit an Officers AN XI style hilted sabre as those were made long after Empire? And here re-used under an M1822 LC hilt? The hilt itself is from at least the Second Republic as the Royal French Lily on the beak is not filed off as was done with most older M1822, but cast without it. At least it looks that way. If so then it seems that an Officer used his Pa's old AN XI style blade from 1817. Family heirloom and such?
Cheers.
Edit. Some AN XI blades were taken in by Klingenthal, inspected, old spine texts removed and after inspection the spine re-etched with the later period etch. Waste not, want not kinda thing. Is there any sign of this happening here?
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Dec 6, 2019 13:08:44 GMT
Very nice, indeed.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Dec 6, 2019 14:36:17 GMT
Uhlan - Thank you for the kind words, and for the information contained in your musings and speculations. Honestly, I know very little about history and swords, but I'm eager to learn. (Not eager enough to buy books instead of swords, though...)
Regarding this particular 1822 HC, Dave Kelly opined that the blade, being "Klingenthal 1817" marked, means the blade "came off a Royal Household Guards regimental that was heirloomed or retired."
Since I did not know what the Royal Household Guard was (I know - beginners, right?), he informed me that, "in 1815 when the Bourbon's were restored the second time, they turned Napoleons Imperial Guard into the Royal Household Troops. Some regiments were retained, others disbanded. The household heavies were the first users of the 38.5 inch Montmorency blade." (Thanks and credit to Dave Kelly.)
My (very limited) understanding is that the AN XI LC did not use a Montmorency blade, and instead featured a single more broad fuller. The AN XI HC was a pallasche(?). I sadly do not have any information regarding the mixing of AN XI hilts and Montmorency blades. My understanding was that HC officers of the time did not like the HC Montmorency blade. While I could imagine an officer keeping the much more beautiful AN XI hilt, opting for a "bancal" blade seems puzzling.
The later m1829 Art'y kinda seems to harken back to the old AN XI, at least in cross section. However, my 1829 is an officer sword, and apparently French officers of the period delighted in refusing to follow regulations and conventions regarding their swords. So deriving any conclusions from my particular 1829 example might be ill advised.
Of course, my 1822 HC is also an officer variant. It is demonstrably anachronistic in at least some aspects. Also, being an officer variant, any or all aspects of the sword might be very different from the trooper standard.
That said, this particular blade feels magnificent in the hand. It is longer than my trooper LC variant, but faster, more nimble, and much more precise. Though I'm not a swordsman, it feels like it would be quite a formidable fencing saber. On the other hand, it seems to be a committed cut and thrust blade, sacrificing the rigidity and mass commonly attributed to HC swords. Again, drawing broad conclusions from this particular example seems a bit dubious, but if any 1822 HC was so wobbly as to be called "bancal," this is the one. Fine with me. I'm not much of a pallasche guy anyway.
Also, thank you for the tidbit regarding the Royal French Lilly. I find it fascinating to see such tangible evidence surviving the centuries to mark such tumultuous historical events as well as deeply personal endeavors and relationships.
The pinned article you wrote regarding the 1822 LC and 1829 Art'y gets into a little of this, and was/is a great read. I noticed that the peen cap on my 1829 is smooth, and have wondered if it too had been modified in subjection to successive political upheavals.
Anyway, I have no answers; only questions. Still, very interesting stuff!
*edit* I reread your post, and now understand what you were getting at a little better regarding the AN XI. Also, I tried to be a little more clear.
pgandy - Thank you.
|
|