Edged Wpns Help identifying a saber

[R. Porter]

This is the sword I was able to examine yesterday.

I am not the best photographer; that fleece blanket does not make an acceptable background.

At first glance, this appears to be an enlisted man's model 1840 cavalry sword. The pommel is without decoration and the blade has a flat spine. The grip is wood, wound with cord and covered with leather; the seam being on the back of the grip but not dead-center. The grip is wound with a heavy copper wire. Whenever I see a grip wound this way I think that someone in the past was trying to make a sword look Confederate so that it might be considered more valuable. There are no inspector's stamps, there is no "U.S." and no date anywhere on the sword.

There is no engraving on the blade and the edge on the upper part has a number of gouges taken out where the blade has been parried or used to parry another blade edge-on. My first thought on seeing a blade edge like this it that it had a life in the theater after its military service. I once read that a real cavalryman was taught not to parry this way but to use the side or spine of the blade to keep the edge intact. I've seen a few blades like this; one of them was a Patton saber, which, I have read, never saw combat.

On this sword the quillon is bent which I have been told is a field modification and a clue that it saw active service. It is interesting to note that not only does the quillon have a design on top,

but it also has a design on the bottom.

This is perhaps the flimsiest guard I have ever seen on a model 1840 cavalry sword. It was so thin and weakened that when the quillon was bent over, the guard cracked and there is a hole you can see light through.

This is a Horstmann & Sons officer's sword with short blade. The blade is about 31.75 inches long and is stamped "HORSTMANN & SONS" in two lines on one side and "PHILADELPHIA" on the other. Unfortunately the images are not very good.

Looking at these stamps, they don't look very deep. Polishing the blade as part of refurbishing might eliminate the maker's mark and perhaps severe weathering, but it doesn't seem like either of those would leave a vee shaped channel. It looks like it would take human intervention to be left with vee shaped channels. The sword I have been studying has the blade stamps on the opposite sides of blade than the sword that started this thread; judging by the one and two lines that would have formed the maker's mark and city.

 

[Jonl51]

This is the sword I was able to examine yesterday.

View attachment 402393

View attachment 402394

I am not the best photographer; that fleece blanket does not make an acceptable background.

View attachment 402395View attachment 402396

At first glance, this appears to be an enlisted man's model 1840 cavalry sword. The pommel is without decoration and the blade has a flat spine. The grip is wood, wound with cord and covered with leather; the seam being on the back of the grip but not dead-center. The grip is wound with a heavy copper wire. Whenever I see a grip wound this way I think that someone in the past was trying to make a sword look Confederate so that it might be considered more valuable. There are no inspector's stamps, there is no "U.S." and no date anywhere on the sword.

View attachment 402397

There is no engraving on the blade and the edge on the upper part has a number of gouges taken out where the blade has been parried or used to parry another blade edge-on. My first thought on seeing a blade edge like this it that it had a life in the theater after its military service. I once read that a real cavalryman was taught not to parry this way but to use the side or spine of the blade to keep the edge intact. I've seen a few blades like this; one of them was a Patton saber, which, I have read, never saw combat.

View attachment 402398

On this sword the quillon is bent which I have been told is a field modification and a clue that it saw active service. It is interesting to note that not only does the quillon have a design on top,

View attachment 402399

but it also has a design on the bottom.

View attachment 402400

This is perhaps the flimsiest guard I have ever seen on a model 1840 cavalry sword. It was so thin and weakened that when the quillon was bent over, the guard cracked and there is a hole you can see light through.

View attachment 402401

This is a Horstmann & Sons officer's sword with short blade. The blade is about 31.75 inches long and is stamped "HORSTMANN & SONS" in two lines on one side and "PHILADELPHIA" on the other. Unfortunately the images are not very good.

View attachment 402402

View attachment 402403

Looking at these stamps, they don't look very deep. Polishing the blade as part of refurbishing might eliminate the maker's mark and perhaps severe weathering, but it doesn't seem like either of those would leave a vee shaped channel. It looks like it would take human intervention to be left with vee shaped channels. The sword I have been studying has the blade stamps on the opposite sides of blade than the sword that started this thread; judging by the one and two lines that would have formed the maker's mark and city.

Thank you for the pictures and information
of the M1840. I do agree that my saber has
a number of characteristics of a Horstmann
cavalry saber. Perhaps Horstmann at one time used the recessed line style seen on my ricasso to mark their name and city. Its
and interesting puzzle to try to solve.
Regards. Jonl51

 

[gjpratt]

Very interesting and a worthwhile project. Here is a picture of a type of College Hill cavalry saber courtesy of Richard Bezdek's
" Swords of The American Civil War", page 240, although not an officer's saber. Have you come across a similar cavalry style in your College Hill research? Thank you!
Regards, Jonl51

View attachment 402370

View attachment 402371

I am not personally aware of any other example of this College Hill variant.

 

[gjpratt]

One of the unsolved mysteries is why are there 2 almost identical versions of the cavalry sabers of Nashville Plow Works and what are called College Hill sabers. The only difference being that the ones identified as College Hill sabers do not have "Nashville Plow Works" cast in the guard. The College Hill style saber was attributed to that manufacturer by early Confederate sword scholars by deduction because the hilt is identical to the College Hill Staff and field swords (and those swords were identified to College Hill by LT Cunningham's etched signature). More recent hypotheses are that the NPW was produced by Nashville Plow Works for a state contract and the version without the manufacturer's name was for a Confederate contract (the contracts themselves may not be extant); that NPW manufactured the version without its name for College Hill for a Confederate contract. NPW also had a Tennessee state contract to provide mounted officer's swords and there are a handful of theses that survive -- they also have the maker's name cast in the guard, which corroborates the sourcing of the NPW cavalry sabers. I do not believe College Hill produced the unmarked cavalry saber because the blade styles are too different; College Hill would have needed two different manufacturing processes and machinery for blades, which is not logical or economical. We may never know why the guard designs are identical for both variants of the cavalry saber and nearly all College Hill staff and field swords. The example from Bezdek is a clue that College Hill produced another version of a cavalry saber that used its "proprietary," if you will, blade and hilt rather than the NPW style saber. It is related to another variant -- a presentation cavalry officer's saber in the College Hill staff and field hilt style without the name cast in the guard and with a College Hill blade and etching. It is pictured in John Sexton's online gallery of Confederate swords.

http://civilwarappraiser.com/

(Identified as a foot officer's sword possibly made by College Hill; looks like a steel scabbard).