Civil War Swords?

[bravo30]

i have 3 swords. 1 is possibly Civil War era. the other 2 may be older. thoughts? i also have uniforms that i will posting as soon as i get a chance over the next few days. the uniforms and swords are from the same home.

 

[bravo30]

 

[Jobe Holiday]

They look good to me!
J.

 

[bravo30]

[/ur
l]

 

[bravo30]

story from the family is that their family member served on the USS Mohican. im trying to verify now. the problem i am having is that you can google search the family member and he comes up but how do you place the sword and uniform with him ?

 

[WJC]

Nice swords.
Not sure how you can trace them. The family probably has the best knowledge of the owner's service. Start by trying the verify his service at one of the websites, such as Ancestry.com.

 

[originalrebelyell]

All three of them are nice and look good to me, the last one looks like a medical sword.

 

[bravo30]

All three of them are nice and look good to me, the last one looks like a medical sword.

-2nd is a model 1852 naval sword.
-3rd i believe to be a model 1840 Medical Staff Sword.


still on the fence about the first one. model 1860 calvary sabre perhaps ?

 

[bravo30]

are the medical staff sword blades plated? ... mine appears to be when viewed under a loop.

 

[UCVRelics]

tory from the family is that their family member served on the USS Mohican. im trying to verify now. the problem i am having is that you can google search the family member and he comes up but how do you place the sword and uniform with him ?

All 3 are very very nice pieces. The Cavalry sword should have some markings. If he was on a Naval ship I can see the naval sword but I don't believe he would have carried a cavalry sword. Unless his name and the ship name are on the naval sword its going to be very hard to tye them to him. I would get a letter from the family as a backup. Either he was in the cavalry, medical staff or navy maybe, maybe 2 of the 3 but I doubt it. What kind of uniform is it? what is his name?

 

[James N.]

-2nd is a model 1852 naval sword.
-3rd i believe to be a model 1840 Medical Staff Sword.


still on the fence about the first one. model 1860 calvary sabre perhaps ?

This is right on as to ID. The M.1860 cavalry at top looks like it's marked on the blade at the ricasso (top of the blade) and should have manufacturer, year of manufacture, and US acceptance stamp. The M.1852 Naval Officers is etched W. H. Horstmann & Sons, Phil'a (Philadelphia) which is the name of the very famous military outfitter company that sold it. Medical staff swords were regulation for army doctors (surgeons and assistant surgeons having the rank of major or captain respectively) but not always worn by the volunteer officers of the Civil War making it a rare and desirable sword type.

Edit: A note on the navy sword. They're still regulation, but before 1900 the blades became an 1" or less wide and useless; this is a nice, robust Civil War-era piece!

 

[bravo30]

All 3 are very very nice pieces. The Cavalry sword should have some markings. If he was on a Naval ship I can see the naval sword but I don't believe he would have carried a cavalry sword. Unless his name and the ship name are on the naval sword its going to be very hard to tye them to him. I would get a letter from the family as a backup. Either he was in the cavalry, medical staff or navy maybe, maybe 2 of the 3 but I doubt it. What kind of uniform is it? what is his name?

1 family member was a surgeon in the navy and the other a doctor in the army.

 

[UCVRelics]

1 family member was a surgeon in the navy and the other a doctor in the army.

That would explain the 2 different swords. If you will pm there names Ill check the fold3 records and see what I can find on both of them.

 

[Richard E. Schenk]

I agree with all the model identifications. I suspect, however, that the Medical Staff Officer's sword is probably post-CW. The scabbard appears nickle plated which would date it to after 1868 when the plating process was perfected. The M1860 cavalry saber is definitely civil war - they stopped producing them in 1865 and didn't start again until 1906 when the made about 10,000 more, but with steel hilts. You should be able to date it exactly by the markings on the ricasso. The M1852 Navy is likely CW, and definitely pre-1872 when the width of the blade was first reduced.

I agree with the recommendation you get a letter from the family to document their story. I would also suggest, however, that you take it with more than a grain of salt. My experience is that after 150 years of retelling, the stories connected to these relics are usually corrupted beyond recognition.

 

[bravo30]

I agree with the recommendation you get a letter from the family to document their story. I would also suggest, however, that you take it with more than a grain of salt. My experience is that after 150 years of retelling, the stories connected to these relics are usually corrupted beyond recognition.

i learned a long time ago to read the piece not the story. the hard way

 

[bravo30]

Edit: A note on the navy sword. They're still regulation, but before 1900 the blades became an 1" or less wide and useless; this is a nice, robust Civil War-era piece!

i just measured the blade width, 13/16ths ... how can this be a Civil War era sword if the blade was narrowed in 1872 after the war had ended?

 

[James N.]

i just measured the blade width, 13/16ths ... how can this be a Civil War era sword if the blade was narrowed in 1872 after the war had ended?

In your photo it looks wider than 1" and definitely has Civil War-era type etching on the blade. (Though it could be a little later than that too.) I hope you're not taking it literally that the blade was narrowed in 1872 after the war to mean swords were recalled and modified to comply with the new regulations; they weren't - it only meant that after 1872 manufacturers discontinued making the wider blades on these and the other officer's swords. Since officers had to buy their own swords (as well as uniforms and equipment too) they were allowed to continue using their old swords and sabers, as long as they were the right pattern. But if an officer changed branches to go from, say, infantry to cavalry or artillery, he was required to buy the "proper" sword for the new service.

 

[bravo30]

I hope you're not taking it literally that the blade was narrowed in 1872 after the war

i took it as if the blade was narrowed then it would have to be post 1872. what your saying is that its possible for a sword to have a narrow blade prior to 1872?

 

[Richard E. Schenk]

i took it as if the blade was narrowed then it would have to be post -1872. what your saying is that its possible for a sword to have a narrow blade prior to 1872?

If the sword has a narrow blade, it was made post-1872. If your sword is 13/16" size, it is definitely post-1872. I agree with James N that your photo made the blade look wider. Although not CW, based on the etching and Horstmann markings, I would still guess it's a relatively early sword, certainly not one of the 2oth century versions.