M1859 USMC Musicians Sword

[Richard E. Schenk]

For some time I have been researching M1859 USMC swords, including the M1859 musicians' swords, for a potential article. I would appreciate Forum members' help in gathering some information on this topic. Here is what I have so far:

USMC M1859 Musician's Sword: The Marine Corps Uniform Regulations of 1859 called for a sword similar to the M1840 Army NCO sword. It was to be made in two blade lengths, 31" for adults and 24" for boy musicians. Horstmann received the first contract in 1859, then Ames received a contract later in the same year for delivery in 1860. Horstmann received another contract in November 1860 and then, in 1861, the contract went to Bent and Bush which received all subsequent contracts for musician swords for the remainder of the war. The second Horstmann contract was modified in June 1861 to specify there should be no rear counterguard. The blades of all these early swords were polished bright with no etching.

There are many questions about the identification of these swords. Cureton and Sullivan, in "The Civil War Uniforms of the United States Marine Corps: The Regulations of 1859", contends the swords produced under the first two contracts were identical to and indistinguishable from the M1840 NCO swords. It is probaible the Horstmann swords had the turned-down rear counterguards which are traditionally attributed to the Marines.

The swords produced under the second Horstmann and the Bent and Bush contracts should in theory be easy to identify because they would have no rear counterguards. Unfortunately, this isn't the case. First, there are no known examples with the name/logo of Bent and Bush. Bent and Bush probably subcontracted other producers such as Roby and Ames to male the swords to fill their contract. Second, although I have seen photos of a couple M1859 USMC musicians' swords, both boy musician length, made with absolutely no counterguards, I have seen no such adult musician full-length examples. Given that, according to McAuley's figures, the USMC ordered some 193 musicians' swords, most of them adult length, between June 1861 and January 1865, it seems some adult size examples should exist. I believe they do, and that they are the rare M1840-style swords with a scalloped vestigial rear counterguards with a raised rim as seen in the photos below.

I have seen seven examples of this sword, listed below, all but one of which was made by Ames; the initials are the inspectors initials on the blade, knuckle bow, and scabbard drag respectively.


1862 Ames ADK ADK GWC Number 18 on Pommel and guard


1862/3 Ames ADK AHC ---- Last digit of date unclear; no scabbard


1864 Ames CSL JH ---- CSL on underside of guard; no scabbard


1864 Ames GKC JF None


1865 Ames JCW JCW LHK


1865 Ames ADK JF ---- No scabbard


Undated R&C ---- ---- ---- No inspection; no scabbard


R&C is the mark of the Solingen firm R. Rohrig & Co. which was founded about 1849 and provided about 5000 swords to the Union during the CW. Although this sword looks all original with undisturbed peening, it is possible the blade was remounted with an Ames hilt, although there are no inspector marks on the hilt as are usually found on Ames examples. The more likely explanation is that Bent and Bush subcontracted some production to non-Ames sources.

The only thing that bothers me about my USMC theory is that all the examples I have seen except the R&C have inspectors' marks, and ordinarily Marine swords were not inspected. However neither were private purchases or swords purchased directly by States for their militia/volunteer elements. I find it difficult to believe Ames or the Ordinance folks would have made these nonregulation-compliant hilts just on a whim. There are too many of them to have been one-off samples made up for whatever reason. Thus my fall-back theory is that they were made as an experimental model for issue to a limited number of NCOs for test purposes, similar to what was done with the experimental M1905 and M1911 cavalry swords. There are a few problems with this alternate theory as well. One is the range of production dates from 1862 - 1865. Experimental pieces are typically made in a single batch. Second, it is hard to imagine there would be a 4-year test of an experimental model which would leave no documentary evidence in the records. Finally, the Rohrig example presents another minor issue: it would seem odd for an experimental arm to be purchased from multiple producers, especially a relatively minor foreign producer.

As I said above, your all's help. First, do any of you have, or know of, additional examples of this M1840 NCO-style sword with the scalloped vestigial rear counterguard? If so, I would appreciate it if you could send me the info on the maker, date, and any inspection or other markings. Pictures would also be appreciated. Second, I would appreciate any comment and/or suggestions regarding the above theories about this sword. Does anyone have alternate theories? Thanks for your help.

 

[UCVRelics]

Thanks for the post and sharing the info. It looks like you have covered a lot of ground. I'm no expert on NCO or the USMC swords. The best I can help you with is the names of the inspectors who marked the swords you have listed.