|
Post by noobcollector on Aug 28, 2023 21:31:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by madirish on Aug 28, 2023 22:38:23 GMT
Looks like an 1821 Light Cav/Royal Artillery Officer's Sword
|
|
|
Post by jimmythedonut on Sept 3, 2023 23:42:38 GMT
I believe the proof disc indicates William Buckmaster. As to light cavalry or artillery, how long is the blade? Technically both should be 35.5" but Royal Artillery also used shorter blades down to infantry length (32.5"). IIRC it was largely dependent on if you were royal field artillery (the big guys on the ground) or royal horse artillery (lighter more maneuverable horse drawn guns with cavalry forces with them). The pommel is stepped which makes me LEAN towards royal artillery as there was a ROUGH rule of thumb that cavalry had checkered pommels but this was not exact and cavalry could also have stepped pommels.
|
|
|
Post by treeslicer on Sept 4, 2023 2:35:43 GMT
Looks like an 1821 Light Cav/Royal Artillery Officer's Sword
I believe the proof disc indicates William Buckmaster. As to light cavalry or artillery, how long is the blade? Technically both should be 35.5" but Royal Artillery also used shorter blades down to infantry length (32.5"). IIRC it was largely dependent on if you were royal field artillery (the big guys on the ground) or royal horse artillery (lighter more maneuverable horse drawn guns with cavalry forces with them). The pommel is stepped which makes me LEAN towards royal artillery as there was a ROUGH rule of thumb that cavalry had checkered pommels but this was not exact and cavalry could also have stepped pommels. I see no etching on the blade to indicate branch or unit affiliations. Without that, early date (IMHO, 1845 to 1860) Artillery and LC patterns are often identical. The backstrap seems to be smooth. Checkered thumb rests appeared in the 1860's, became regulation in 1870, and full backstrap checkering appeared after that, until it became regulation in the 1890's (I forget the exact date, but it was 1892 or later). The photos are poor, but I suspect that the version here here is a pre-1860 Light Cavalry pattern, that was perhaps carried by someone other than an officer, or else a very frugal one, which would explain the absence of etching.
|
|
|
Post by maxdchouinard on Sept 7, 2023 15:07:54 GMT
I pretty sure that your sword once had etchings, but that through pitting and agressive cleaning they simply got erased. Buckmaster sometimes used a Scottish style strap and buckle around the proof mark, instead of the typical star. A google search will bring a few examples. I have a baskethilt from them with such a proof mark. I think you can see the remains of its outline in your pictures. Buckmaster usually had lavishly etched blades, so I would be surprised to see a bare blade from them.
As for the FH, I would be pretty confident that it is a German manufacturer stamp. Solingen makers had the curious habit of putting their mark right on the bottom of the shoulder, or even in between the shoulder and tang. You often miss them as they are hidden by a washer, and I often wonder if this was the intent. Solingen blades were often the bargain price option, so cutlers were maybe not too keen on exhibiting their mark too visibly. They also often produced blades with these exaggeratedly long shoulders like yours has. Both of those things also come up on Solingen blades made for the French market, so clearly it was a thing there. My guess is FH probably stands for Freidrich Hörster or something like that.
|
|