Sword markings

[Mgunn]

Are these markings legit? Never seen the stamps spaced out this far, but I am a novice.

 

[UCVRelics]

Its right as rain and with the DR its an Ames and should have the banner address.

 

[JOHN42768]

D.R. stands for Daniel Reynolds, inspector

 

[Mgunn]

ucvrelics. this is what is in the reverse.

 

[Bud1863]

Looks like a cavalry saber that saw a lot of service! The fact that the quillion is bent so far down indicates a real veteran. I'm betting the scabbard drag has a worn, flat edge, too. Would love to see more photos!

 

[Bud1863]

1863-dated Mansfield and Lamb.

 

[Cornpone and Molasses]

1863-dated Mansfield and Lamb.

Here is the bent quillion on my 1864 Emerson & Silver, Trenton NJ.

 

[bayonet]

1863-dated Mansfield and Lamb.View attachment 473349View attachment 473350

Oh yeah my 1859 AMES M1860 drag is even worse than yours. Guess that's why it's called a drag. Lost his Horse and had to walk so he dragged it all over the place!

 

[Bud1863]

Here is the bent quillion on my 1864 Emerson & Silver, Trenton NJ.

View attachment 476699

View attachment 476700

View attachment 476701

Nice M1860 example, C&M! I've been told by a knowledgeable collector that the quillion was bent down so the trooper could place their thumb on it for better control of the saber.

 

[Bud1863]

Oh yeah my 1859 AMES M1860 drag is even worse than yours. Guess that's why it's called a drag. Lost his Horse and had to walk so he dragged it all over the place!

Good one, Bayonet! My (unscientific) observation of mid-to-late war dated cavalry sabers indicates a much higher percentage of flat-worn scabbard drags. I believe that is due to the later-war practice of cavalry being deployed as skirmishers and mounted (fighting as dismounted) infantry.

 

[R. Porter]

Years ago I read a discussion of the turned-down-quillon phenomenon on a sword website. The poster was saying that this discussion had happened before on the website so a couple of the members decided to do an little "experimental archaeology" and test the different theories that were posed. At the time I thought the thumb-rest theory seemed the most logical since that mirrors a grip style used in saber fencing. The conclusion reached by those testing was not the thumb-rest theory. In making cuts with an unaltered quillon and an altered quillon, it was decided that the normal quillon smashed into the trooper's hand between the thumb and index finger when making a cut while the altered quillon did not. In a cut with that much force, placing the thumb on the bent quillon might do some serious damage to the trooper's thumb.

I never tested the two types of quillon myself but by holding a saber and rotating it backwards you can get an idea of their argument. It was my understanding that the correct way to alter the quillon was to heat the metal of the quillon first and then bend it slowly. I'm sure you have seen sabers where someone has tried to straighten the quillon out. What you get is a quillon with a line across it with cracks and maybe even holes where the quillon was bent back without trying to soften the metal by heating. Sometimes the end of the quillon has broken off.

Another interesting modification, which can clearly be seen on the saber above belonging to Cornpone and Molasses, is the case of the outer branch being bent back, sometimes behind the middle branch. I used to imagine that the trooper had clocked his opponent in the face with the guard of his sword even though I knew that it wouldn't be enough force to bend the branch inward like that. About a week and a half ago I was talking to a dealer in Murfreesboro who told me that he had been told that the bend occurred when a horse went down and rolled over it. That seems like it would have enough force to push the outer branch inward.

A last comment about worn drags suggesting the late war practice of using cavalry as skirmishers and mounted infantry; if you are a skirmisher or an infantryman and you need a cavalry saber to fight with, you are in way more trouble than a sword can get you out of. Cavalry swords are for use while mounted. If you are deployed as a skirmisher you are shooting with a carbine. Your range is less than a rifle but more than a musket. If an infantry advance is close enough for you to use a sword, you're already dead or captured. If you are functioning as infantry, a cavalry sword banging and clanging around your legs is extra weight, extra noisy when trying to do things quietly or hear commands of your sergeant, and extra distracting when trying to shoot and reload your carbine. When Custer headed out on his last campaign which ended at the Little Big Horn, he had his men leave their swords in the fort. They were armed with carbines and pistols. Skirmishers should not be close enough to touch their opponents with a stick. Did cavalry acting as infantry have carbines with bayonets? If they did, was the reach as far as regular infantry with infantry rifles with bayonets? If cavalry acting as infantry was close enough to enemy infantry to be stuck with bayonets, was their enemy close enough for them to stick with bayonets on carbines? Perhaps a number of the flat sections found on scabbard drags was due to their owners trying not to look like a nube to other men in his regiment by making it look like he had been dragging that sword around for a long time.

 

[bayonet]

Nice M1860 example, C&M! I've been told by a knowledgeable collector that the quillion was bent down so the trooper could place their thumb on it for better control of the saber.

Another was to catch & trap the saber of the enemy as it stroked down the top of his saber. Or so I've been told.

 

[bayonet]

Years ago I read a discussion of the turned-down-quillon phenomenon on a sword website. The poster was saying that this discussion had happened before on the website so a couple of the members decided to do an little "experimental archaeology" and test the different theories that were posed. At the time I thought the thumb-rest theory seemed the most logical since that mirrors a grip style used in saber fencing. The conclusion reached by those testing was not the thumb-rest theory. In making cuts with an unaltered quillon and an altered quillon, it was decided that the normal quillon smashed into the trooper's hand between the thumb and index finger when making a cut while the altered quillon did not. In a cut with that much force, placing the thumb on the bent quillon might do some serious damage to the trooper's thumb.

I never tested the two types of quillon myself but by holding a saber and rotating it backwards you can get an idea of their argument. It was my understanding that the correct way to alter the quillon was to heat the metal of the quillon first and then bend it slowly. I'm sure you have seen sabers where someone has tried to straighten the quillon out. What you get is a quillon with a line across it with cracks and maybe even holes where the quillon was bent back without trying to soften the metal by heating. Sometimes the end of the quillon has broken off.

Another interesting modification, which can clearly be seen on the saber above belonging to Cornpone and Molasses, is the case of the outer branch being bent back, sometimes behind the middle branch. I used to imagine that the trooper had clocked his opponent in the face with the guard of his sword even though I knew that it wouldn't be enough force to bend the branch inward like that. About a week and a half ago I was talking to a dealer in Murfreesboro who told me that he had been told that the bend occurred when a horse went down and rolled over it. That seems like it would have enough force to push the outer branch inward.

A last comment about worn drags suggesting the late war practice of using cavalry as skirmishers and mounted infantry; if you are a skirmisher or an infantryman and you need a cavalry saber to fight with, you are in way more trouble than a sword can get you out of. Cavalry swords are for use while mounted. If you are deployed as a skirmisher you are shooting with a carbine. Your range is less than a rifle but more than a musket. If an infantry advance is close enough for you to use a sword, you're already dead or captured. If you are functioning as infantry, a cavalry sword banging and clanging around your legs is extra weight, extra noisy when trying to do things quietly or hear commands of your sergeant, and extra distracting when trying to shoot and reload your carbine. When Custer headed out on his last campaign which ended at the Little Big Horn, he had his men leave their swords in the fort. They were armed with carbines and pistols. Skirmishers should not be close enough to touch their opponents with a stick. Did cavalry acting as infantry have carbines with bayonets? If they did, was the reach as far as regular infantry with infantry rifles with bayonets? If cavalry acting as infantry was close enough to enemy infantry to be stuck with bayonets, was their enemy close enough for them to stick with bayonets on carbines? Perhaps a number of the flat sections found on scabbard drags was due to their owners trying not to look like a nube to other men in his regiment by making it look like he had been dragging that sword around for a long time.

Some of your earlier Rev War period swords the quillon was broken off purposely because it was always hanging up on clothing or other equipment. Another reason some swords have half guards because the guard would rub against the body and cause discomfort.