I have a small collection of cavalry sabres hanging on my wall, and THIS is my favorite. For what it’s worth, taking this off the wall and swinging it around my living room a bit makes me go “Phwoar - that’s badass” more than any of the others. And on the basis of that scientific testing, I declare it the best.

Something I’m surprised you didn’t highlight that seems to me a major reason the 1796 is so popular today was the period in which it was used. No matter the qualities of any sword that replaced it, none of them were used in such a prominent capacity during a global conflict, the last such major conflict in which swords would ever have such an effective role.

3 thoughts: 1. A lot of the bragging of the 1796LC is because the Germans adopted the Blucher and kept it in service for donks, also it looks nice with it's "bacon-slicer" as Colin likes to say. 2. Hand protection is an odd one. It's always struck me that most British instruction (e.g. the Angelo poster) has the fencers at a distance where it's extremely easy to just drop/lift the hand to void a hand shot which isn't properly set-up, even if they have lunged. 3. I MUST NOT START BANGING ON ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SA80. I MUST NOT START BANGING ON ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SA80. I MUST NOT START BANGING ON ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SA80.

I would love it if you could do a video on all the common sabre patterns. C'mon. I'm an American and I spelt sabre that way as an offering.

As a General in the armchair army i have to say the 1796 fills the talwar ,kilij ,polish saber and other curved sword role without having to have multiple swords. Its a winner for me in thar regards.

If the 1796 saber was not adopted Napoleon would have won the war, and to this day we would all live under the galactic French empire of man. Everything depended on the 1796 /s

As a lefty, I like it because of its ambidextrous guard.

It's basically an 18th century Grosse Messer. Which means it's cool! Now we need a video on the 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword. With Sean Bean!

It was liked enough that it was re-introduced for British Indian Native Horse (With better hand protection).

I would say that fashion plays a lot more into a weapons popularity than people think. You see that pop culture, like games and movies all the time that time ,and that sabre looks cool you should do a video on that.

Great video, I always enjoy our little chats.

If I were given a choice, I'd pick the basket-hilted broadsword. I'd rather be able to give the least amount of thought to protecting my hand, so I can focus more on attacking, and I feel like a straight, double-edged, cut-and-thrust blade gives me the widest range of options

Lots of good points raised there mate!! Enjoyed the watch

I would love to see a video of Matt's top picks for the best thrust-centric saber, the best cut-centric saber, and then, finally, the saber that is the best compromise of both worlds. That would be AWESOME. 👍👍

Thanks so much for this. I saw origional examples of these in the Harris museam in Preston Lancashire. They feachured in both battles of Preston (English Civil War and Jacobite Rebellions) before they became popular. The origials look very similar but very thin and pointy.

I picked one of these up in a small hardware/antique store in North Texas for $125. It was the blued and gilt Officers version in amazing condition and Matt was kind enough to authenticate it for me via email conversation. Having no particular attachment to the sword, my wife sold it locally for a very tidy profit. Thanks Matt!

I have a German WW I horsemen's parade sword, very similar hilt, very common at any Antique shop. With that being said, I would like to have a nice antiqued version of the 1796 Light Cavalry sword. You have a really nice version. Kudos Matt!!

I just discovered this channel, and I must say I am thrilled right down to my toenails. I've been collecting swords and sabers for over 30 years now, and my very first sword is a 1796 pattern, American made, so around 1800 ir slightly later, complete with it's metal scabbard, although it's in rough shape. It has a great deal of allure for me because it is the first of my collection, which numbers now just under 100, and I wouldn't trade it for anything. I went to Norwich University, which is America's oldest private military college, predominantly a cavalry school, and fencing was my sport and it is probably the reason I love swords so much today. I can not wait to start binge watching all of your back episodes. Thanks.

Nice video as always :) A while ago, you told us which sword you would pick as a sidearm if you didn't have prior knowledge of the enemy you might face or of the context you might find yourself in. Has that changed since? And if soldiers today were to be issued swords or other melee weapons bigger than the average combat knife, if you were picked to advise on the choice of said weapon, what would you elect to equip the ground troops with?

Gods, you are a thoughtful man. Thank you for your work.

The only standard that really counts in the modern world is ‘will it take a zombies head off in one blow?’ Go 1796!

I was lucky enough to get a really great one of these by Osborn a few years ago before prices got so high. It's an officer's version, and apart from having been overcleaned, and as a result lost all of its blue and gilt decoration (my guess is that the blade was at one time covered in black rust, like the scabbard still is, that was all cleaned off by some previous owner, taking the blue and gilt decoration with it), it's in astoundingly good condition. The blade has no pitting. The hilt is solid, apart from the metal ring just below the guard being loose, and the leather and wire is all intact. The leather washer at the base of the blade is even still there, though it's a bit dried out at this point. The scabbard's in great shape as well, though it's sadly missing one of its suspension rings. All in all, it's hard to believe it's in such good shape being over 200 years old. It really seems like if you put an edge on it, you could probably still fight with the thing today. I have it hanging on my wall, and everyone who sees it likes it. They're amazed how light it is if I let them handle it -- I suppose the fact that it's such a broad-bladed sword makes them imagine it would be heavy.

Would love to see a 1788 in comparison to the 1796. Thx for a great video - context is everything 😋

I love them, I own 6 so far. My favourites are officers variants by Runkel and Woolley & Deakins. All of them have been service sharpened. One day I hope to find a nice Gill.

It's not that the preceding weapon is better. As a veteran, from my experience, it is the anticipation of new training that causes troopers to complain. If you are trained on a curved cutting implement and now your NCO is telling you that you must use a straiter, more thrust centric weapon, you;re gonna be annoyed. We had the same reaction when we switch over from the M16A2 to the M4, the adjustment was irritating.

Funnily enough, I used to like these until I actually handled one. It's the tip, I think, and the relatively light handguard. Much prefer the Blucher, and to me the French period equivalents are the best. I do like the BF sparring 1796 though, although I don't think it handles at all like the original despite what some claim.

Hi matt love your stuff been with you for years and binged all your back catalogue. Q. What is you 3 favourite sabers be it looks and or performance.

Here's a perhaps silly question, but I really want to know: Having cut a whole lot of cabbages and so on, in training, did they eat them afterwards or was it all just discarded?

Great video ! Thanks Matt ! Looking forward to see non regulation cavalry swords ;) cheers.

the 1821 is my favorite sword! Once I'm out of debt, I hope to save up and buy one, perhaps even from Easton Antique Arms :)

I seem to recall reading that the first issues of the 1796 were disastrous, troopers complained that the blades bent and they performed very poorly until the contractor was replaced.

Nearly every one likes the SMLE but it took over 70 variations & 15 or so years to make it the rifle it became..

The Prussians thought highly of the 1796 light cavalry saber. They (as did other German allies, Spain and Portugal) used British originals in the Nappy Wars, then from 1811 their own copies, called 1811 "Bluechersabel". Prussian light cavalry kept their version until 1858, but even after adopting a less curved blade, retained the hilt. Manfred von Richtofen's uhlan saber in 1914 would have used the 1796 hilt. It soldiered on until the Third Reich.

One of my favorite looking sabers.

A 1st hand account of the '96 in use in 1811 "Just then a French officer stooping over the body of one of his countrymen, who dropped the instant on his horse's neck, delivered a thrust at poor Harry Wilson's body; and delivered it effectually. I firmly believe that Wilson died on the instant yet, though he felt the sword in its progress, he, with characteristic self-command, kept his eye on the enemy in his front; and, raising himself in his stirrups, let fall upon the Frenchman's head such a blow, that brass and skull parted before it, and the man's head was cloven asunder to the chin. It was the most tremendous blow I ever beheld struck; and both he who gave, and his opponent who received it, dropped dead together. The brass helmet was afterwards examined by order of a French officer, who, as well as myself, was astonished at the exploit; and the cut was found to be as clean as if the sword had gone through a turnip, not so much as a dint being left on either side of it.

one of the problems is for the 1796 swords were originally going to be two swords infantry and cavalry but then committees took over Le Marchant design was over ridden (sorry) by the Cavalry (life guard and the royal horse guard) as far as they were concerned dragoons were mounted infantry and well the lights were not really cavalry they were just skirmishes and yes the Le Marchant was good for them but Cavalry need a sword just like the Austrians hence the 1796HCS. The infantry sabre was also scrapped (came back as the 1803 which had a vague description which is why there are so many variations ) and as the Staff view of Officers "they do not use swords the have a side arm it is called a Company of infantry", so an updated spadroon is much more elegant (which is why there is the folding shield so it sit better against the leg) - they did not think of the lights/rifles at the time (both were experiments after the war in America) until Sir John Moore showed what they can do which is why so many infantry regiments got converted latter on. on that note one interesting light cavalry unit was formed Hompesch's mounted rifles they got disbanded in 1802 most of them went into 5th battalion 60th foot. After the Napoleonic wars the Staff brought in Lancers "look at what the French lancers did to the Scots Greys" and cuirass for the heavy cavalry, but the rest of the light cavalry there role changed to been almost the same as the Heavy cavalry with the exception of they could go skirmishing when needed - charge of the light brigade as an example of them used a heavy cavalry.

I found 1796 with some etching and it appears to be a blue blade but would love to get it looked at

'Other Ranks' please Matt. Not 'enlisted men'. And yes the SLR was better.......the SMLE always worked.....the Martini jams.....the Snider is slow to extract.....the P1853 was more accurate....percussion caps are fiddler to fit in the cold than the flint which stays on the cock,,,,,matchlocks always go off......bows shoot arrows faster than guns....... the pointy stick never runs out of ammunition.......

Couple of questions as my only info on this sort of stuff if watching Sharpe: Does the shorter curved blade make it easier to draw? Particularly on horseback? How does the weight balance affect handling on horseback? (you would expect reach to be very important, but in a cavalry duel is proximity more important?)

Back in the late 70’s I was in Anglesey, North Wales, and visited a pub, hanging above the bar was a 1796 light cavalry sabre. The guard and scabbard were dark brown and pitted, obviously after spending many years hanging there. I don’t know how many years and neither did the landlord, he said it had always been there. Anyway, I asked if he would take it down an let me examine it as I was a keen on Napoleonic history. He did and we took it to a back room to examine, I wasn’t sure what to expect, would it be welded by rust into the scabbard, or would the blade be rusted as well. I drew the sabre with ease and beheld a perfect blade, still extremely sharp. It was greased, what with I can’t say, and this obviously had helped maintain its condition. It was marked with some letters, I can’t remember what they were, and was very nice to handle. The landlord asked if I wanted it for £20, being the honest person I am I said it was probably worth more than that, but really it should remain above the bar as that is obviously where it had lived for a very long time.

Hey Matt, will that spadroon you showed in the video go up for sale in your website? I am asking because I am interested in seeing some pictures of its handle and ferrule for a restoration project

Most cavalry units in the Napoleontic era tended to avoid clashing with one another on horseback in a full gallop charge with sabres, because of the very high risk involved. And when they did men mosty avoided eachother at the last moment before actual contact. You had to be both a very highly skilled horseman and swordsman, as well as being a bit lucky, to survive such a clash. And most cavalrymen knew this. This was the reason why lancers were seen as the most effective countermeasure against enemy cavalry. Hence Polish lancers and why Russian cossacks still used lances up till WW1.

1796 looks a lot like Polish "Black" saber, the hilt, the curvature, the choppy tip. Seems people can come to similar conclusions on the same topic

Small request: If you could sometime, would you contrast cavalry sabre with infantry sabres of the same times? For instance, the 1795 light cav, but what were the foot soldiers carrying at the time?

Beautiful example of a beautiful design

Anyone know what type of sword that is in the background on his right, between the black heater shield and the 1handed axe? It looks absolutly beautiful.

You are forgetting that contributeing to its popularity is the fact that it is the sword that Sharpe used...and I'd love one for that!

"We should never underestimate how popular a weapon is based on purely what it looks like, not wether it's good or not." I think we all know what he means

Hi Matt, quick question. Who manufactured the Small Sword hanging in the background? (Over your left shoulder, from the viewer's point of view) Thanks.

A few months ago I purchased a synthetic 1796 infantry sabre. It's definitely an interesting sword to wield; however, single bars hilts? Mind your hands from snipers. Also nice video.

Has Matt done a video on the multi use bayonets like Ian on Forgotten Weapons?

Always wanted one. But I could never find one I like, the shape and look was always different than what I remember

Realistically when looking at the practical function of the curved sabre in real warfare, it seems the exact design mostly isn't especially important. They were most effectively used against opponents who couldn't really fight back effectively (flanked enemies, infantry, fleeing enemies etc.). By contrast heavy cavalry who did engage in more direct combat often heavily favored straight sabers both because they could more easily thrust but also because thrusting injuries caused more deaths in this context. When light cavalry were used for charges they often used lances.

Is there any information available on the british cavalry swords used in the American war of independence.

Reading the Deluge, how does it compare to a 1650's Polish sabre?

The 1796 is the Pumpkin Spice of military sabers. ... I want one-

Something about this video made me realize that, at some point while swords were still in military use, cloth military uniforms overtook steel armor in terms of mass usage. I imagine it had to do with the rise and improvement of firearms (good plate would still be effective against early muskets and such, but eventually they got powerful enough to punch through) and with the cost of outfitting an organized military force. Do you, Matt Easton, or any of my fellow watchers know roughly when this transition would have taken place, and if any other factors were in play to cause it?

I think one of the things that stand out about that piece is that it was one of the first pattern swords to be rigourously tested to a specific standard.

I admit, I really have no love for this sword. Matt uses the term "brutal" and that's kinda how I feel when I look at it. I honestly react in the same was as the Obi-Wan Kenobi meme - "so uncivalised." The Wilkinson model later in the video is far more visually appealing to me.

what about the Superior attack geometry of a curved blade in a cavalry charge?

Well,when british soldiers complain about the S80 for the L1A1 you really cannot blame them....

How light is the one you are holding is?

Matt, I've had real '96s in my hands, comparing it to other period swords, and my first impression was, jeez, this must be a BRUTAL cutter. Whether it served well in battles of the period, I think, would be a different matter.

Sword novice here. I recently saw a light cavalry troopers sword that had the hilt of the 1821 version, but the more curved blade of this (1796) version. Is that possible? would there have been a crossover/hybrid between the two versions?

I own one of these, and I admit I did buy it for it's looks. It's such a mean looking sword, with that kind of defiant broadening hatchet tip. When I look at it next to my 1822 French light cavalry sabre, it somehow reminds me of Jaws and shark's teeth. "We're gonna need a bigger boat." But obviously I accept the reality that it was just one design in a long arms race.

So does anyone know the reasoning behind the B shaped knuckle guard on the 1796? Ive always found that feature interesting and iconic, but couldnt figure out what its for

what's the best way to fit .410 in a basket hilt? drums?

what about the 3 branch saber? you know, like the one centered behind your head on the right between the other 2 swords

Just then a French officer stooping over the body of one of his countrymen, who dropped the instant on his horse's neck, delivered a thrust at poor Harry Wilson's body; and delivered it effectually. I firmly believe that Wilson died on the instant yet, though he felt the sword in its progress, he, with characteristic self-command, kept his eye on the enemy in his front; and, raising himself in his stirrups, let fall upon the Frenchman's head such a blow, that brass and skull parted before it, and the man's head was cloven asunder to the chin. It was the most tremendous blow I ever beheld struck; and both he who gave, and his opponent who received it, dropped dead together. The brass helmet was afterwards examined by order of a French officer, who, as well as myself, was astonished at the exploit; and the cut was found to be as clean as if the sword had gone through a turnip, not so much as a dint being left on either side of it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_1796_light_cavalry_sabre

When you'll do the review of Darksword Two handed sword ? I saw you have it, you even said you'd review it.

I had my cold steel 1796 reground to handle more like the originals. It’s very agile now comparatively, but at that thickness I’m not sure if the steel quality and hardness is up to snuff. I should probably get a charpy test to see. My antique 1845 Wilkinson is very durable I trust it more.

Have you read Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels - The main character wields the 1796 Heavy Cavalry Sword despite being an Infantry Officer.

Off the subject, but what is that wooden handled sword in the center under the round shield?

I'm not sure how to look it up but did people with sabers ever go up against like a long sword just kinda curious about how often outdated weapons were still in use why back when

I think i could be interesting to compare those from a statistical point of view. In other words, how did thoses evolution impacted the probability of injury or succes ? But i doubt that such data would be available.

MATT!!! I have a question...are the techniques different from the 1796 vs the 1822??

The reason I originally wanted on was not only did it look deadly and cool but because I heard that from the Napoleonic wars the French soldiers complained about grievous nasty wounds from the British sword

Just wanted to make a point that, by experience, the aversion to change is not just a military thing, but human nature at its core. Just to give an example in a completely unrelated field: try changing the accounting software of a secreterial pool to the newest version, or change the procedures of an office worker to move from paperwork to digital filing, and you'll have the EXACT same reaction ("Oh the old way was better, I lose so much time like this", "Oh but we used to do this all the time!"). People simply don't like the change and have a hard time, especially at first, to gauge whether something is better or worse.

You mentioned cavalry troopers using fruits for saber practice regularly. In the movie Glory, Colonel Shaw was practicing his saber work by cutting watermelons from horseback. The watermelons were held in place by nails sticking out of the posts and he hit too low and hit the nails. The point is if it is true that they used nails, could that account for some edge damage on cavalry swords instead of use in combat since you train far more than you fight in a military career if you fight at all

Damn it I want one of those so bad

I received in the mail one of these 1796 swords, the officers version, shortly after I had won it in an internet auction. Someone I worked with was there when I received it, and I was pleased to show it to him. I told him about how they were renowned is being very efficient at cutting and slashing. He looked at the edge and said it did not seem very sharp to him. I then proposed that he tested in a different fashion. I held the sword up in one hand, Edge down, the tip at my right hip. I grasped the extreme end of the sword with my right hand, folding my fingers over the edge. I then let go and held it a couple of seconds. I invited him to do the same, and to see how long he could hold it that way yet still be comfortable. He did as I had done, and after about half a minute, he handed it back to me and said, " I see what you mean." Looking at it, I can see it was once beautifully blued, with very nice gilding on the etching. Obviously, someone left it hanging on the wall for a very long time. I'm surprised at how crude the guard is in comparison to the blade and the hilt material, which is sharkskin. As I have no Scabbard, I would be very interested in obtaining a replacement of some kind.

Yes.

where did the concept of hussars came from?

Hi matt could yourself and Todd come together and create a 1796 that fits your standard

I suspect many of the later complaints about the 1796 stem from the change in training, one can imagine a trooper saying "how could I have charged giving point with that" when those of the previous generation weren't taught to use the point as the primary attack but the edge.

Now isn't the 1821 a bit like the basket hilt (more hand protection), a bit like the 96 (somewhat curved) and a bit like the spadroon (somwhat more capable of giving points)?

I want to know about one sword that helps in all kinds of warfare?

Me and you have alot in comman. I have sub. I love knives swords and all types of weapons

As a former British Soldier I'm amazed that the procurement people actually produced a bit of kit that wasn't a certified POS. I remember leaky crippling DMS boots and woolen gloves of the 1970's.

One thing to consider was that Prussia/Germany liked them so much they almost exactly copied the 1796LC, with minor variations well into the 20th Century. (I.E. The 'Blucher' Sabre)

Some people: In thrust we trust!

I like practicing with lighter sabers of 650ish grams because we tend to hit hard and don't like a lot of protective gear. Is that not heavy enough in general? To fully kit up I usually opt for longsword.

It seems that even British Army wasn't adverse to the old: "Is it better thrust or cut in a cavalry combat?"

Why did they go for the divot in the guard instead of a continuous D shape like the 1788? Also, (proto) lightsabers exist now thanks to the Hacksmiths.

I am just impressed you have met someone who thinks the SA80 is good.....

Of the 2 I like the 1821 better. That's just personal preference about liking a straighter blade. It's not even about which is better at what, it's just aesthetics. I just prefer the look of a blade that's only a little bit curved.

I like the 1821 pattern a lot. One of the best all-rounders of the era.

I disagree when it comes to reach in a cut. The way you hold it, with a talwar like 90deg grip, it surely reaches less than the other one, but it's not the only way of cutting. The whole idea of a hatchet point was to be able and deliver a serious tip cut with a fully extended sword. That's also a reason for a more prominent curvature. Regarding thrusts from horseback, it's much less obvious than you make it. A straight blade will often become stuck in a target, while a curved blade has a better chance getting itself freed as you gallop past. Regarding hand protection, a complex asymmetric guard makes certain type of cutting barely possible. Iwanowski describes how you are supposed to use this type of weapon. It's an advanced skill, so obviously probably not very relevant for a typical British trooper, though it seems that Polish and Hungarian cavalry was trained to use it. On many paintings they appear holding their sabers back edge forward. In summary, it's a very good cavalry sword, optimized for melee more than for a charge. It requires specific skills in order to either take full advantage or minimize the disadvantages of this design. Yeah, I can see how a "simple" straight blade would work better.

So, with sabre or sword is so good or/and revolution in its period? Or ot os always thing of person taste?

i wonder could you strip down a cold steel sword to just the blade and grind it down to the historically correct thickness and taper