SWORD for comment and I D please

Atlantia · 30th December 2008, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Hi, and thanks for the replies so far from those who have answered.

Consensus seems to suggest a Walloon, but I sense some doubt.
I have had a look at all references to Walloon that I can fine in my books, and although the hilt is SIMILAR, it is not in my mind a definate identification.
WHAT ABOUT THE BLADE??
I have yet to see an illustration showing this blade profile. All that I have seen on illustrations of Walloon have fullers, or are what I would call standard blade profile.
What do you think?

I think possibly everyone is right to some extent here. This may be a late sword of the walloon style, not quite a 1796 heavy cavalry officers sword, but in that line of evolution.

If thats the case there is probobly some merit in calling it a walloon-esq Cavalry officers sword.

Can you post measurements and tell us if there are any markings on it at all?

Gene

P.S. I'll go back and hit the books and see if there is a similar one anywhere. Between us we must have one like it pictured.

kahnjar1 · 30th December 2008, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlantia

I think possibly everyone is right to some extent here. This may be a late sword of the walloon style, not quite a 1796 heavy cavalry officers sword, but in that line of evolution.

If thats the case there is probobly some merit in calling it a walloon-esq Cavalry officers sword.

Can you post measurements and tell us if there are any markings on it at all?

Gene

P.S. I'll go back and hit the books and see if there is a similar one anywhere. Between us we must have one like it pictured.

Hi Gene,
No marks whatsoever. Overall it is 37 1/2" (955mm) and the blade is 30 1/2" (775mm). Blade is absolutely straight, both edges blunt (never sharpened by look of it) but tip sharp.
Regards Stuart

Gavin Nugent · 30th December 2008, 07:14 AM

G'day Stu,

The peened tang in one image there doesn't look to me as the original finish I would expect to see on a European sword, maybe a better photo might say otherwise??? It might be a marriage of some sort rather than a regulation weapon?

Gav

Atlantia · 30th December 2008, 12:50 PM

Its a bit shorter than I'd have expected.
Here is a picture of the 1796 and the similarities are clear. It does look like it might be a marriage of handle parts from one of these with a different blade.

Well, done Manuel and freebooter, Henk, Stuart, I stand corrected

Overall length 39" Blade 32 1/4"

30th December 2008, 07:14 AM	#3
Gavin Nugent Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,818	The peened tang G'day Stu, The peened tang in one image there doesn't look to me as the original finish I would expect to see on a European sword, maybe a better photo might say otherwise??? It might be a marriage of some sort rather than a regulation weapon? Gav

30th December 2008, 12:50 PM	#4
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	Its a bit shorter than I'd have expected. Here is a picture of the 1796 and the similarities are clear. It does look like it might be a marriage of handle parts from one of these with a different blade. Well, done Manuel and freebooter, Henk, Stuart, I stand corrected Overall length 39" Blade 32 1/4"