DANES V PRUSSIANS: 1st SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN WAR

 

The Prussian Advance

Greetings, dear reader(s).  Recently, I wanted to introduce fellow Chocolate Box Wars (CBW) enthusiasts in the club to an alternate use for their CBW armies. Specifically, using my Volley and Bayonet battalion scale post-19th Century variant. In this case, the multi-stand version, which pre-dated CBW and shares the same figure and stand structure.  I had intended that there would be four players with me facilitating, but one of the lads couldn't make it, so I wound up taking up the fourth seat and both playing and facilitating. The players had all participated in the CBW Tournament, so were keene to find an expanded use for their budding Post-Napoleonic CBW collections. As usual, in this post, you may clix pix for BIG PIX.

The scenario was an amalgam of my Frontier Clash and Battle of Schleswig scenarios. I pitted Danes against Prussians in a meeting engagement. The intent of the scenario was to promote engagement so that players would get exposure to full rules system. Towards these ends, each player had two brigades, with a lead brigade starting on the table and the second following. There were 8 objectives on the table, 3 on each side and 2 in the middle.  The side that controlled the most objectives at the end of the opposing side's turn would win the game. Control was defined as having the only unit within 4" of the objective (so if both sides were within 4" it was contested).  Open or contested objectives were marked by yellow chips: flipped to blue for Danish control and Black for Prussian.

Illustration of a Lead Regiment with Brigade Units (left) and a follow on Regiment (right)--pictured units are Prussian. The markers on the back indicate the number of hits per battalion (or half Bn/Squadron). The color indicates the regiment. The stand with the number is the waver level of the regiment (when a unit takes a hit, a marker is removed from the unit and placed on the stand--markers are magentized and both the strip on the back of the stand and the tracking stand are metal). The brigade units (and the cavalry squadrons) have square markers: they don't count towards waver. 

The lead regiments for both were organized in "advance guard" configuration, each with a light cavalry squadron (hussars), a half battalion of jagers, and 2 line infantry battalions. Each brigade also had two brigade level units: a Field Artillery Battery and cavalry regiment (a Dragoon for each of the Danish Bdes, and a Dragoon in the Prussiann 1st Bde, and an Uhlan in the Prussian 2nd Bde).  The follow on units in each brigade were 3 battalion line regiments, each with an attached half battalion of jagers. One of the brigade units would deploy with a regiment (player's choice). The brigade HQ would start with the lead regiment. 

Illustration of Army Level Units (in this case Prussian, again)

Each side also had army level units, consisting of a Heavy Cavalry Regiment (Cuirassiers for Prussians and Garde Du Corps for the Danes), an elite infantry units (Grenadiers for the Prussians and the Grenadier Guards for the Danes), and a Field Artillery Battery.  These would arrive anywhere on the baseline between the original deployment areas (inclusive) on turn three--handling and allocation to be determined by the players. The "X" strength point markers on the Army level units indicates that they are independent (and don't count towards waver). 

Prussian Army Command

Each side had an Army HQ stand (of course).  The dice on the command stands (Army and Bde) indicate the number of command points available. These could be used to re-roll morale results or to reduce waver. The Army command points could be used by the Army Command stand or transferred to Bde Commands. Once used, they were gone. If curious about these, see the Rationale and Explanation on the VnB Variant Page. In this game, the Danes had 2 reserve infantry battalions with variable morale, so I gave them an extra command point (Prussians 4 overall, 2 Army and 2 for each Bde; Danes 5, 2 for each Bde and 1 Army). 

Earl (standing, left) and AJ took up the Prussian cause. I was teamed with Mike on the Danish side (but did not get a pix of either he or myself). 

The ball opens:  I was on the right with the Danish 2nd Bde. facing off against AJ while Mike and Earl faced each other on the Danish left/Prussian right. 

Left: A detail of Mike's Danish advance guard and artillery taking up positions. Right: the bully lads of my Danish 2nd Bde bravely advancing to contest the ground vs AJ's Teutonic butchers.

On the other end of the line, elements of Earl's advance guard regiment, a squadron of the Prussian Madgeburg hussars and half Battalion of Jagers, push on under the watchful gaze of the 2nd Bde HQ stand.  

A shot of the conclusion of first stage of the battle, with each side deployed across the field and controlling 3 objectives--the next stage would be the "meat grinder" phase, where the lines would advance to contest the middle objectives. Given that I was involved with playing the game, I did not get any shots of the mix up that ensued...

...however, I can report that it was a victory for Prussian efficiency over Danish elan, but a good time was had by all.  And given that I got thumped, I can only surmise that the "new" guys in the room had certainly learned the rules: mission accomplished. 

Excelsior!

SWORD LORE V: BRITISH 1821 LIGHT CAVALRY TROOPER'S SWORD

 

Cassin-Scott Illustration of 14th Light Dragoon Trooper and equipment, 1854, showing the 1821 Pattern Light Cavalry Saber. 

Greetings, dear reader(s), it's time for a continuation of the "Sword Lore" series.  As a reminder, I collect antique swords with a focus on cavalry/mounted weapons from the time when they were primary fighting weapons. I focus also on collecting "service" swords--the actual weapons issued to troopers (although I have also gathered officer versions along the way).  The thrust of the collection starts with the Napoleonic era and continues through the mid/late Victorian. More by accidents of availability and opportunity, I've managed to acquire swords that trace the progression of from the Napoleonic to the Franco Prussian (see Sword Lore: 1811 Blucher and Sword Lore II: 1852 Prussian Cavalry Saber). A recent acquisition--the topic of this post--has filled the gap in the progression of the British light cavalry swords from Napoleonic through Crimea.  Specifically, this is a study of the 1821 British Light Cavalry Saber, which follows on from the Sword Lore IV  study of the British 1796 Light Cavalry Saber.  As usual, in this post, you may clix pix for BIG PIX.  Enough of the preliminaries. If you have the time (and endurance), here is my study of the saber's history and how I decode the antique sword in my possession...

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

My recently acquired British 1821 Light Cavalry Saber with Belt.

The same, unsheathed over scabbard.

The author's swords--illustrating the progression of the Napoleonic British Pattern 1796 Cavalry Saber to the Post-Napoleonic Pattern 1821--as influenced by the French Napoleonic AN XI Light Cavalry saber. 

    In this study, we'll be dealing with light the cavalry, apart from the heavy cavalry, which differed in sword and doctrine. The sword that came before the 1821 was the famous British 1796 Light Cavalry Saber, which was the weapon carried through the Napoleonic wars. This was up against the French AN XI Light Cavalry saber, which was carried by the numerous French chasseur, hussar, and lancer regiments. 

    The British 1796 was a specialized weapon, designed for the cut, whereas the French AN XI light cavalry saber had a longer reach and a multi purpose blade: it was less curved, but still had an effective cutting edge with a spear point capable of delivering an effective thrust. This was reflected in the doctrine of the combatants. The French emphasized the thrust whereas the British the cut (cut vs thrust: a broader topic on which much more could be said but is beyond the scope of this study).  For a more detailed discussion of the British Light Cavalry Pattern 1796, see the Sword Lore IV post. 

    When you compare the British 1821 saber to the French AN XI, it is clear that the experience of the Napoleonic Wars influenced the development of the post-Napoleonic successor, with more hand protection and a multi-purpose cut and thrust blade (the latter being consistent with post-Napoleonic blade development in general).

    The earlier British swordsmanship manual that was distributed concurrent with the 1796 illustrated how to deliver six different cuts, but did not include any instruction on the thrust (outside of one illustration of how to hold the saber to "give point"). The updated 1819 British mounted swordsmanship manual, on the other hand, which was being put together no doubt with the updated 1821 blade in mind in mind, included instructions on delivering several different thrusts in addition to the standard cuts. 

The British 1821 Pattern Light Cavalry saber was issued to the Light Dragoons, Lancers, Hussars, and gunners of the Royal Horse Artillery.

British 1853 Universal Cavalry Saber

Consistent with the progression towards the merging of heavy and light cavalry swords, the Pattern 1821 was replaced by the British Pattern 1853 Universal Cavalry Saber--which, as the name suggests, was a single pattern for all cavalry. The Pattern 1853 is beyond the scope of this study, but the major difference, aside from being issued to all cavalry, was to the hilt, which had a full width tang that extended all the way to the pommel around which was a two-piece grip secured by five rivets. The blade and guard remained virtually the same. 

Charge of the Light Brigade, 1854

The fielding of the new Pattern 1854 was still in progress when the Crimean War broke out. It is estimated that roughly half of the British cavalry at the Battle of Balaclava--and in the charge the Light Brigade--were still equipped with the Pattern 1821 Light Cavalry Saber. 

Crimean veterans of the 4th Light Dragoons back in England posing with their 1853 pattern universal cavalry sabers and Crimean War medals. According to a British army report, all the cavalry in the Crimea were equipped with the new pattern 1853 sword by the end of 1856. The Pattern 1821, along with others, would continue in use in Indian and other cavalry regiments of the Empire. 

DECODING AN ANTIQUE SWORD

The Markings and Parts.

At this point, we move from the general history and background to an examination of the actual sword in my possession, to tell the "story" of this particular sword. To begin with, it is useful to understand that a sword is composed of two parts: the blade and the hilt. Each of these also have their own sub components, but they provide us the framework for analysis. In the case of this sword, we also have the scabbard and the belt. We look at the markings (if present), the form, and the materials, against what the references tell us. 

Aside from several online sources, which I'll list later, the main references I relied upon to authenticate and "tell the story" of this sword were:

     Withers, Harvey J.S. The British Sword from 1600 to the Present Day, an    Illustrtated History. Harvey Winters Military Publishing, 2024.

     Robson, Brian. Swords of the British Army: The Regulation Patterns, 1788-1914.    2nd Edition, Arms and Armor Press, 1975. 

For anyone interested in the topic, Robson is considered the definitive resource for collecting British military swords. Now, on to the analysis...

THE BLADE

The blade on this sword is a curved/hybrid cut and thrust model, just shy of 36" long, with a spear point and a false edge for the last 10" along the top. It has a single fuller running for roughly 2/3 of its length. 

Blade Markings

The spine (left) has the manufacturer's name (W. Harvey) and the ricasso has a British Ordnance mark (a crown over a number), the latter indicating that this sword has been inspected and accepted into the inventory for issue as a "service" sword to a unit/trooper.

Ordnance Marks, post 1820

The topic of Markings on the blades of British Swords in the 19th Century is rather involved and beyond the scope of this study.  In summary, it can be said that it is not unusual for British blades to be unmarked. Beyond that, as the century progressed, markings became both more consistently present and more standardized.  During the period concerned--the lifespan of the pattern 1821 light cavalry sword from 1821-53--suffice it to say that it was a transitional time for such standardization. Swords were starting to be centrally acquired by the Board of Ordnance as opposed to the regiments, in which case they would be marked "B.O." with an arrow. Swords were also beginning to be manufactured by the government at its own facility at Enfield (which would be marked as such). And (finally), contracted swords would still have an ordnance stamp, but this mark evolved, post 1820, to three parts: a crown over a letter over a number. Given that the sword in question does have an ordnance mark, we will focus on its significance when telling its "story" (more on that later...).

The Scabbard

The Unit: Regiment, Troop, Sword #

Manufacturer

The scabbard markings indicate the manufacturer on one side, and the unit on the other. In this case, the Manufacturer is the same as is listed on the spine of the blade: W. Harvey--of Birmingham.  According to my references, this version of the stamp for the firm of W. Harvey in Birmingham was in use from 1816-1839 (another important bit of information). On the reverse of the scabbard we have the full unit:

W.Y.C: 

Worcestershire Yeomanry Cavalry

H: 

Troop H

7: 

Sword #7

Again, the topic of unit markings, like blade markings, is an involved one. However, what can be said is that like blade markings, unit markings became more standardized as the century progressed. At the point in time we're dealing with, they tended to be by-unit, if present, but still conformed to a consistent pattern. Eventually, the regulation would follow these conventions, with an abbreviated form of the regiment, the troop letter, and a number. The swords were numbered consecutively, running from 1 to the number of troopers authorized in the squadron. Ostensibly, trooper #7 would be assigned sword #7. 

The Hilt

The parts of the Hilt

Troop and Sword #

The steel hilt has improved hand protection, being of the very common "three bar" guard configuration, with a knuckle bow (the bottom guard) and two additional guards merging together and connecting to the pommel. There is a backstrap that runs the length of the grip, ending in a pommel cap with a peen button. Extending down from the backstrap are two "ears" secured to the tang by rivets. The grip is leather. Consistent with the scabbard, the Troop (H) and Sword # (7) are marked on the quillon above the backstrap.  

The Belt

Belt Markings: Regiment, Troop, Trooper #

The markings on the belt are consistent with the markings on the scabbard and hilt: 

Regiment:  W.Y.C. 

(On Scabbard, Belt)

Troop:  H 

(On Scabbard, Hilt, Belt)

Sword/Trooper:  7 

(On Scabbard, Hilt, and Belt)

However, the belt has the additional "Q. O. R."

This stands for:
Queen's Own Regiment

(a significant indicator, as will be mentioned later...)

DECODING THE "STORY" OF THIS SWORD

THE WORCESTERSHIRE YEOMANARY CAVALRY:

The Worcestershire Yeomanry Cavalry was raised in 1794. After the Napoleonic Wars, it was disbanded in 1827 and then re-raised in 1831, continuing on in service through the end of the century and beyond. For the purposes of this study, we are concerned with the period from 1821 through 1853 (the lifespan of the Pattern 1821 Light Cavalry sword).  In this timeframe, they were not deployed outside of the country. Other than training and musters, they were employed, like other yeomanry, to deal with incidents of civil unrest that were happening in this period of social transition. Their first overseas deployment would come in the next century during the Second Boer War (1900-1903). 

There were ten, 50-man troops, in the regiment, each stationed in a different town in Worcestershire.  This sword was assigned to Troop H, which was stationed in Upton, and probably to trooper #7 (as marked on scabbard, hilt, and belt).  

Worcestershire Yeomanry Cavalry Uniforms

From 1794 through either 1824 or 1827 (depending on the source), the W.Y.C. were in the tarleton helmet and ladder-laced tunic (above left picture). They later adopted the double breasted tunic and bell topped shako (whether that was in 1824 or when they were re-raised in 1831 depends on the source).  Up to 1821 (and possibly beyond), they would have been armed with the pattern 1796 Light Cavalry saber (as is the figure in the upper left image).  There is a clue to when they would have been issued the Pattern 1821...more on that in a bit.

When (then) Princess Victoria toured Worcestershire in 1832, the W.Y.C. provided the escort.  In recognition of this service, when she ascended the throne, the regiment received the Royal Designation in 1837, which added the "Queen's Own Regiment" to its title. 

For more about the Worcestershire Yeomanry online, you can go to:

The Mercian Regiment Museum Site

The Queen's Own Worcestershire Hussars Wikipedia Page

Putting it all Together:

Authentication

(is it a fake or authentic?)

Materials and Form: The materials are all consistent with the sources. The specifications (length and configuration of blade, hilt, and overall sword) are exactly consistent with all sources. 

Markings: The form and placement of markings are all consistent with what the sources indicate for the period in question. It is more usual than not for an antique sword and scabbard to not be matched. On the other hand, a matched sword and scabbard, as in this case, is not unheard of. The fact that the unit markings on the scabbard and belt are not an exact match lends credibility (the "Q.O.R." on the belt but not the scabbard) . In the case of a fake, they most likely would match.

The Vendor: This sword was obtained from a U.K. dealer in antique arms. Although this, by itself, does not ensure authenticity, it does weigh in favor of authenticity where there is any ambiguity involved as opposed to a sword acquired via ebay or a similar source. 

Placing the Sword In Time:

Service Life:  the service life of the sword runs from 1821 to 1853, so we can say that this particular sword was manufactured and issued sometime in that period.

Manufacturer: We know that the firm of "Harvey" in Birmingham had a long history with several different variations as the ownership shifted, but the period when it would have been "W. Harvey" was from 1816-1839, so we can narrow the timeframe further down to 1821 to 1839.

Royal Designation: We know that the regiment received the Royal Designation, "Queen's Own Regiment," in 1837. The unit stamp on the scabbard does not include the Royal "Q.O.R." designation. Given the match between sword and scabbard, we can assume that they share the same history. Thus, we can infer that this sword & scabbard are Georgian rather than Victorian, dating from before 1837. 

Again, taken at face value, the belt, given that it has the "Q.O.R" stamp, dates from 1837 or after. So we can infer that the belt is later than the sword. 

So far, these factors all place the sword in the 1821-1836 timeframe (post sword-pattern adoption, pre-Royal designation). But we can infer a more specific time within that range...

-----------------------

Manufacturer and Ordnance Mark Combination:  If you're still reading this and recall the hint that I dropped in the discussion of the ordnance mark, here is the payoff. 

Napoleonic Era Ordnance and Manufacturer's Markings

The above image is of my 1796 British Light Cavalry Saber illustrating the earlier ordnance and maker's mark combination. This sword dates from 1797-1803. During the Napoleonic Wars, the mass production of swords was done under contract by various firms (many of them based in Birmingham, Harvey being one of them--other major ones being Gill and Osborne).  During this time, the colonel of the regiment, subsidized by the government, was in charge of equipping the unit. Thus, although swords were all of the same pattern they would be provided by different firms (and marked accordingly). Many swords of this period have no markings, but if marked, they usually will have the manufacturer on the spine and the government ordnance stamp on the ricasso: which was a crown over a letter. 

Post 1820 Ordnance Mark: Crown over Letter over Number

After 1820, the configuration of the ordnance mark changed (as noted earlier), adding a third symbol, going from the Napoleonic crown over a letter to a crown over a letter over a number.  This change was not clear cut, but took place over time.  The manufacturer's names were also becoming less likely given that these firms were no longer mass producing swords and the evolving changes in acquisition. 

The blade markings on this sword conform to the (early) Napoleonic combination: the manufacturer is on the spine (left) and the ordnance mark pattern is the two-part crown over letter.

Stacking this information on top of what we know of the service life of the sword and the unit history...

...we can infer that this sword falls into the Tarleton timeframe (1821-27), and within that window, is probably closer to 1821 than 1827 given the form of the ordnance stamp.  As far as when the sword was actually in the hands of the W.Y.C. the most straightforward guess would be consistent with it's earlier markings: before it was disbanded in 1827.  It could also be that the regiment, being yeomanry, retained its pattern 1796 swords until it was disbanded and was then issued the 1821 pattern sword when it was re-raised in 1831--from swords which had been manufactured earlier on and were in store. The royal designation was no small matter, so one could assume that the "Q.O.R." would have been added over the "W.Y.C." on the scabbard upon receiving the royal designation, although it is also possible that this was simply overlooked and not done.  

We can't say for sure, but reading what is evident, and what is absent, the indicators are that the sword was most likely produced in the early 1820s, and dates no later than 1837. 

BUYER BEWARE

Antique Pattern 1821 Cavalry Swords are not hard to find. More specifically, swords listed as Pattern 1821 British Cavalry Swords are not hard to find, most being officer's swords (and they are advertised as such in most cases, so no error on that score). There are also replica versions made by firms like Kult of Athena (and others): nothing at all bad about these, but it's important to recognize them as such.  The vast majority of the antique ones available are officer's swords: and there are generally always listings with these at any given time. Trooper's  swords are another matter, and don't come on the market very often. Unfortunately, listings (by either design or mistake), sometimes fail to distinguish between the two, so being able to differentiate between them is important (but not difficult)...

In overall form, the officer's sword is very similar to the service sword...

The difference is the hilt. The officer's hilt ends in a stepped pommel, sometimes with a peen cap, sometimes not. The biggest difference is in the backstrap and grip: in all cases, the officer's version does not have the ear extending down from the backstrap. Furthermore, the officer's grip has wire wraps (usually silver) and is shagreen covered  (the shagreen--shark skin--is no longer present on my officer's sword seen in the immediate upper left image--you can see it in the example in the upper right picture).  The trooper's grip is leather with plain wire wraps; quite often, but not always, the wire wraps are missing on antique troopers swords (as is the case with the one in my possession). 

The details on the hand guards are also different. The trooper's hand guard (top) are plain. The officer's hand guards are fluted (bottom image). 

Finally, this pattern sword was adopted as the Royal Artillery Officer's sword in the 1830s--and is still the pattern to this day.  You will see these also listed as British 1821 Light Cavalry Officer's swords, which technically they are. The artillery adopted the cavalry pattern, as opposed to having a pattern specifically designated for the artillery. So it is important to understand that there are both cavalry and artillery versions, both designated the same. The artillery officer's swords come in two lengths: the horse artillery officer's sword has the 35 1/2" cavalry blade. The foot artillery officer's sword has a 32" (or 32 1/2") blade. So if you see a sword of this pattern with a 32" or  32 1/2" blade, it is not a cavalry sword--or if it is one, it is non standard. [Addendum: according to expert Matt Easton, there was a "medium" cavalry officer's version of this sword with a 34 1/2" blade, as well as a few other variants: for more on the topic of variations, please see this piece on his Easton Antique Arms site] 

    Officer's blades are also decorated with the royal cipher and other marks. Artillery swords will generally have one or more artillery symbols, most often a cannon, but also flaming bombs and clouds with lightning bolts. Having said that, other than the markings, a horse artillery officer's sword is identical to the cavalry officer's. There are also NCO versions as well. These have the officer's hilt with a plain blade (all of the NCO versions I've seen have had 32" blades: most likely foot artillery--but a cavalry NCO sword might have the 35" blade).  

INFLUENCE

Although US edged weapons are generally influenced by French models, the US Ames 1833 saber was influenced by the British 1821 Light Cavalry Sword. 

If you've read this far, I am both thankful and impressed at your endurance!

Excelsior!