Sword for ID ... please

[toaster5sqn]

The blade has standard Solingen etching, the fullers appear to run out the end of the blade showing it to have been cut down, probably from cavalry length. The hilt is in the style of the British P1796 Light Cavalry but in brass when cavalry hilts were steel. My best guess is an unofficial British infantry sabre with a field blade replacement from approx 1796 - 1803.

Robert

[fernando]

Thanks much Robert. Will pass the info to my friend.

[thinreadline]

I do agree with the above answer but the scabbard fittings are most un British in style

[Will M]

Originally Posted by thinreadline

I do agree with the above answer but the scabbard fittings are most un British in style

A cut down blade (reused broken blade) and repurposed could have been done in India or elsewhere.

[fernando]

Thank you guys. Most certainly the scabbard is not the original one, shortened to fit the new blade lenght, but one arranged for the purpose. This because the present one suspends with a button and the previously longer sword must have suspended with rings.

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by fernando

Thank you guys. Most certainly the scabbard is not the original one, shortened to fit the new blade lenght, but one arranged for the purpose. This because the present one suspends with a button and the previously longer sword must have suspended with rings.

This is not necessarily the case. I have a full length (807mm blade) 1803 Pattern ‘Flank’ Officers sabre that only has the frog stud on the scabbard which shows no evidence of ever having had the suspension rings. One of my late 18th Century spadroons also only has the frog stud and thats a full length blade as well.

In fact almost all my swords with leather scabbards have a frog studd, even if they have suspension loops as well. Having both options offered the retailer flexibility in who the sword was sold to.

For the ones that don’t have the studd, a strong case can be made that they belonged to cavalry officers.

[fernando]

Duly noted, thank you .

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Radboud

This is not necessarily the case. I have a full length (807mm blade) 1803 Pattern ‘Flank’ Officers sabre that only has the frog stud on the scabbard which shows no evidence of ever having had the suspension rings. One of my late 18th Century spadroons also only has the frog stud and thats a full length blade as well.

In fact almost all my swords with leather scabbards have a frog studd, even if they have suspension loops as well. Having both options offered the retailer flexibility in who the sword was sold to.

For the ones that don’t have the studd, a strong case can be made that they belonged to cavalry officers.

It seems that often these studs were a fixture on these leather brass mounted scabbards in addition to suspension rings as you note. I am wondering if perhaps flank company officers, who like infantry officers, were typically mounted might have preferred the option for both.

Will's suggestion of possibly India for this compellingly British hilt might be well placed as the unusually flamboyant character of the mounts. The idea of a colonial setting for this seems possible, and British officers were known for propensity for 'exotic' sword hybrids and trophy blades.