Civil war sword question

[Jonnym]

Hi guys,

I recently bought this sword advertised as a civil war Horstmann Naval Officers m1852 but I'm thinking it may be a fake. Can anyone help with that? I'll post some pictures. It is in nice condition, a few things I think might be off though. The spelling of Horstman is with only 1 N and the wire wrapping appears to be fine copper. Any comments from anyone more knowledgeable then I would be appreciated as I can return it if I'm not happy. Thanks

 

[Jimklag]

Hi guys,

I recently bought this sword advertised as a civil war Horstmann Naval Officers m1852 but I'm thinking it may be a fake. Can anyone help with that? I'll post some pictures. It is in nice condition, a few things I think might be off though. The spelling of Horstman is with only 1 N and the wire wrapping appears to be fine copper. Any comments from anyone more knowledgeable then I would be appreciated as I can return it if I'm not happy. Thanks

Welcome, @Jonnym . The weapons experts among us will no doubt provide you all the info you need.

 

[JOHN42768]

Welcome, enjoy

 

[Seduzal]

Welcome to CWT from the Smoky Mountain side of North Carolina.

 

[William G Hendry]

Hello and welcome from Ont. Canada.

 

[Jobe Holiday]

Your sword is not a modern reproduction. However, I am not well versed enough on the nuances to determine the exact time frame of production. We have some phenomenal sword experts here and I am rather confident they will be able to give you much more information than I can!
J.

 

[Richard E. Schenk]

I think I'd ask for my money back. Jobe may be right about it not being a modern reproduction - it doesn't look like one of the usual suspects and it appears to have some age to it. However it is not a Horstmann. Aside from the mis-spelling of the name, it's style is all wrong. Horstmann never used a font with slanting letters. The design features on the hilt are all too crudely modelled and not quite right, e.g. the leaves are too long.. I don't know what it is, but since it is not what it purports to be, I'd turn it back.

 

[WJC]

I think I'd ask for my money back. Jobe may be right about it not being a modern reproduction - it doesn't look like one of the usual suspects and it appears to have some age to it. However it is not a Horstmann. Aside from the mis-spelling of the name, it's style is all wrong. Horstmann never used a font with slanting letters. The design features on the hilt are all too crudely modelled and not quite right, e.g. the leaves are too long.. I don't know what it is, but since it is not what it purports to be, I'd turn it back.

"Not as advertised" is a perfectly reasonable reason to return for refund. Keep looking: the real thing is out there....

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

Hello @Jonnym, welcome to CivilWarTalk.

I believe you've received some good advice.

By no means am I an edged weapons expert, but something about this sword just didn't look right.

 

[Glen_C]

Actually, the etch is ok and the mark style ok, as used. This per Peter Tuite's book
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1931464162/?tag=civilwartalkc-20

Reference figure 6.23 and notes in that chapter for Horstmann marks. The missing N is not the first I have seen. Apparently some even marked hw instead of WH. Whether the template just didn't fit or the N simply omitted, I wouldn't condemn the sword due to that. The wire could have been a replacement but at the same time, not the only use of a coiled wire I have seen.

If anything, leave it as well post war.

Cheers

GC

 

[Patrick H]

Hi! I'm sorry that I don't know much at all about swords, but I do like them. I am confident you will get lots of good information about yours here. Welcome from Missouri.