Hi all,

I just got this saber blade at an antique/souvenir shop in, of all places, Cape Town (South Africa). Never was into late European military swords, but this was incredibly cheap and I bought it as a project blade to restore and re-handle (not necessarily in the original style, maybe as an earlier hanger or something).
It looks to me like a late XIX century original rather than a recent repro. Significant surface rust, some notches in the edge but not deep (under 1/32"), so I think I should be able to restore the edge and surface finish without losing too much steel (may have to leave some pitting in place to avoid going too thin).
Overall, it is a relatively short and light blade, probably just solid enough for actual combat use, not just parade. I would expect it to be mostly a cutting blade, as the point is rather thin and springy, not stiff enough for solid thrusting. But again, I am not really an expert.
My guess is it could have been an infantry or artillery officer's sword. Just not long or heavy enough for cavalry.

Would be interesting to find out what county / model of a sword it comes from. Any ideas?

Some pictures are attached (not perfect quality, sorry). Other details:
- blade length 26 3/4"
- width 1 3/16" at base, 1" at where false edge (which is 9 3/4" long and sharpened) starts
- thickness 1/4" and 1/8" correspondingly
- weight 13.5 oz (380g)
- pretty strong curvature (1 1/8" if measured like on Japanese swords)
- a wide fuller in the middle and a narrow one along the edge
- no decoration or marks, other than what looks like a deep oval stamp 5/8" long in the tang (can't make out anything in it, though)
- end of tang was peened (no thread). Tang is somewhat longer than I expected (6").

---

 Attachment: 89.32 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 165.33 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 474.62 KB
[ Download ]

Hi,
This blade is from a European cuttoe/hanger sword, second half of the 18thC. The wide fuller extending to the tip is the feature that would indicate the provenance. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Norman.

Norman, thanks for the interesting comment. If true, this makes the blade significantly older than I expected. I thought saber-like blades this light should be dated very late XIXc (when actual combat was becoming less of a consideration). Weren't XVIIIc hanger/cuttoe blades of this length typically more "substantial"?

In any case, I still think in such a bad condition and with no clear provenance the blade by itself doesn't have much of a collectible/historical value.

I am considering what to do with it, and my latest idea is to mount it as a Caucasian Shashka. Those could have very light blades, and pretty often used remounted (sometimes shortened) European saber blades. So this blade seems to be a good fit.

It just so happens that my current hobby project is a Caucasian dagger (Kama), I am almost done making the blade for it. I could try to mount them both in a similar style, as a matched pair...

Alex.

Hi Alex,
Some hangers, typically silver hilted types of which I have slot hilted one, are more for show than go. The blades were not terribly substantial and the guards made from silver were rather brittle. Think dashing Georgian officer's going out dress sword rather that fighting weapon. Hunting swords of the period, of which I have a few, tend to be more substantial, though not always, and were favoured by Naval officers for shipboard fighting as they were short and therefore more manoeuvrable in a confined space. Any 19thC swords, apart from court swords, I have or have handled are certainly more substantial in the blade and guard department than most late 18thC cuttoes/hangers. George Washington had a couple of cuttoes/hangers and they are well documented and easily seen on the net as are countless examples from the past sales of specialist auction houses e.g. Bonhams, Olympia Auctions etc.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. It is true, your blade is 2nd half the 18thC, 1770/80 ish. Personally I would remount it in the 18thC manner but I see your thinking as many European blades were repurposed elsewhere although any Shashkas I have handled have quite meaty blades.

Norman,

you are right, I took a closer look at George Washington's hanger https://www.si.edu/object/nmah_434865 and found it extremely similar to my blade in general proportions and fullers arrangement!
Another similar sword found after a quick search: https://www.faganarms.com/products/revolutionary-war-side-arm-hanger-c-1760 .

Mounting this blade as a hanger was my initial idea and now looks like I will come back to it after all!
Will need to decide on hilt style, either like above examples or like this repro: http://myArmoury.com/review_ve_hanger.html
I like the originals style much better, never tried to make a cross guard of this type but would be interesting to try.

BTW, I noticed that the GW hanger has a leather only scabbard (no core). Was this typical? Isn't leather too flimsy for sword length scabbards?

Alex.

If you're on FB, check out Nick Skinner's page - he's a bladesmith up in Nova Scotia that has done several variants of hangars in the last year or so. Might find some additional inspiration there - he's done at least three different cuttoe/hangar styles.

BTW, I noticed that the GW hanger has a leather only scabbard (no core). Was this typical? Isn't leather too flimsy for sword length scabbards


Hi Alex,
Leather only scabbards, to my knowledge, were mostly the norm for hanger/cuttoe swords. They were basically civilian swords albeit many were used in a military context so no hard and fast rules re scabbards. All the scabbards I have, have seen or have handled for these type of swords are only leather with brass/steel furniture and no wooden cores.
My Regards,
Norman.


P.S. I have an N.C.O's 1796 pattern spadroon, military issue, and the scabbard has no core only leather with brass furniture.

Another question about scabbards - suspension type.

I always thought that hangers were supposed to be carried vertically in a frog or baldric, so they should have a stud on the scabbard throat (as opposed to sabers which have suspension rings).
But now I see it isn't always true. The GW hanger has saber like suspension (I guess second ring is broken off). On the other hand, this example (with a similar blade) has a very much "saber like" hilt, but no suspension rings on scabbard (front isn't shown, but there must be a stud): https://www.amrevmuseum.org/collection/british-officer-s-saber .

I would say that for hangers with a "hunting sword like" hilt (GW one and the other example I linked below), the stud on scabbard is more appropriate than rings (and looks better). Does this make sense?

Alex.

Hi Alex,
I don't think there are any hard and fast rules re suspensions. The GW one you show does look as if it had another suspension ring at some point in time. If you look further down the scabbard there is an area of wear on the leather which would suggest another ring. Baldric or frog type suspension with stud would appear to be more the norm in my experience. I have attached a photo of the baldric/frog stud on my 1796 pattern N.C.O's spadroon scabbard and I would say that this type is much more the common on hanger/cuttoe swords although double suspension rings were obviously utilised as well some times. If I was recreating an 18thC hanger/cuttoe I would certainly use the stud type suspension. This chap https://olddominionforge.com/swords.html makes good repro's of these kind of swords, it would be worth a look to get some ideas.

Regards,
Norman.

---

 Attachment: 30.92 KB

Norman,

thanks to your help, looks like I have my next project defined now. Appreciate it very much!

I was aware of Old Dominion Forge, used their work for inspiration years ago for a sort of hanger/hunting sword project (short and heavy non-period correct modern blade, shell sideguard, wood core scabbard with by-knife).

Alex.

I finally got around to working on this blade, and a new question came up: how should it be sharpened in a "historically correct" manner?

It is a pretty narrow blade, and in getting rid of a bunch of nicks in the edge I had to grind off about a millimeter more.

This is not a problem with the foible, I mean about 10" at the point, as this part is extremely thin. I already reestablished the edges, and it is obvious that when I am done with polishing/sharpening, it will become a double edged straight razor!

At the very base of the blade, I am fairly sure it has never been sharpened. I am planning to leave about 4" unsharpened there.
For the rest of the blade in the middle, I am thinking it should be sharpened to a decent edge but obviously it won't get as sharp as foible.
Is that more or less how such swords were sharpened historically?


Alex.

After finishing rough stoning of the blade to restore the edges, I ended up leaving only the last couple of inches completely dull.
The middle will actually be pretty sharp, though not as much as the foible.

I also did initial hand sanding (100 grit) on one side of the blade. Looks like fullers will have a lot of shallow pitting left on them, and some around the base/back as well. Flats are mostly (not completely) clear as a result of edge restoration.
No way to get majority of the pitting off without losing too much metal, and this is a pretty delicate blade as it is.

I see long hours and days of sanding in my future...