2 swords for ID please.

[Jim McDougall]

This is excellent David, and thank you for posting this beautiful saber which truly does offer compelling evidence to Napoleonic French for your saber.

I have been pondering over Glen's well presented rebuttal concerning some of my previous comments concerning my thoughts toward possible U.S. provenance for this, and the close ties between American and French swords both during and post Revolutionary War. As noted, I was drawing on somewhat distant recollections, but wanted to illustrate the sources as well as points for consideration which led me to my comments.

I looked to H.L.Peterson's "The American Sword" and found interesting notes concerning swords of the U.S. Marines, who of course still use the Mameluke sabre adopted from thier exposure to these during wars with the 'Barbary Pirates' in 1801-1805. These same type ivory hilted sabres were adopted by the French and British after thier campaigns in Egypt.
Interestingly, Peterson (#142, p.165) notes one of the early swords used by the Marines from 1804-1818. While most Marine swords seem to have followed artillery officers swords of the time, this interesting sabre (which apparantly belonged to Francis Wharton, the commandant) .."illustrates a type of French sword which was quite popular among American officers of the period".
On p.192 (Peterson, op.cit. #159) the eaglehead sword presented to to Lt. Presley O'Bannon of the Marines for his valor at the action at Derna in 1805 has the distinct knucklegard feature of the drop down semi arc seen on the Napoleonic sabre posted here. This sabre was Baltimore made and reflects again the French influence on American swords.

Another interesting case illustrating the common thread between French and American swords brings in, as noted, the British. The British infantry officers sword known as the pattern 1786 (or commonly 'five ball hilt') has the five bead pattern on the knuckleguard as well as on the raised crossguard. Brian Robson ("British Military Swords", p.107, fig. 4) notes that around 1790 a "...similar hilt in either gold or silver, described as a'l'anglaise (in the English style) was in use in France from about 1800, mainly by naval and dragoon officers. A hilt of the same kind was prescribed for infantry officers in the American army between 1812-1840".

Returning to the mameluke sabre of the USMC, it cannot be stated that the style was taken from either the French or the British, but interestingly seems derived from separate influence with the Barbary pirate wars noted despite being contemporary with those used by French and British officers in these times. The mameluke sabre was described in Marine regulations of 1825, but it is noted that Marine officers were likely wearing them prior.

With these notes I would qualify my reference to French influence in military fashion and weapons as being in considerable degree rather than typical, and avoid implying 'dominant'.

It seems that post Revolutionary War the neoclassicism in Greco-Roman themes of French style of the times was in distinct accord with America's growing national identity, and well received in conjunction with other American patriotic symbolism. After France joined the United States in the war naturally many numbers of French swords such as the M1767 grenadier sabres and others were well represented. Peterson notes, concerning the NCO sword adopted in 1840 (p.13) that the form was "...based principally on a type used in the French army", but that it was also reminiscent of a model used in England.

With regard to the comments on the long, parabolically curved blades I wanted to add the references I was thinking of in suggesting this sabre might be of the type of early U.S. form. Peterson (op.cit. pp.26-27) discusses the Virginia Manufactory sabres of 1803-1820, known collectively as types #1, #2 and hunts at a third, with variations on hilt and somewhat blades. I had noted that these were later altered by Confederate officers during the Civil War from the dramatic 40 1/2" curved blades, shortened to 35".
The notes to 18th century cavalry being 'dragoons' and actually mounted infantry who dismounted and fought on foot usually are well placed. It was in the latter 18th century when the fast moving light cavalry concept was being adopted from East Europe and Continental forces that the use of the sabre became prevalent for cavalry in England. On the Continent the use of the sabre for cavalry was around considerably before this.
By the end of the 18th century there were indeed similarities in the swords/sabres used by cavalry, infantry officers, and artillery officers. in many cases as well, naval officers used sabres of cavalry type, shorter of course.

All of this does not necessarily offer more to the identification of David's fascinating sabre, and I simply wanted to reinforce the connections between U.S. and French swords from the Revolutionary War into the 19th century.
The vertically lined shield type langet to me was quite reminiscent of Federal period motif, though the 'halbrundschild' type heater (shield) is more Austrian or Swiss via heraldic standards. The 'Phrygian helmet' style pommel (Peterson, p.44) is as noted known quite early in French neoclassic hilt features and used in many U.S. sword forms through the 19th c.

Anthony North notes in his "18th and 19th Century Europe" ("Swords and Hilt Weapons" , ed. M.Coe, 1989, p.92), that "...in France, in the Directoire and Consulate periods, French officers were presented with simple brass stirrup hilted swords, inscribed on the scabbard with details of the campaign in which they were won. A number of scabbards are inscribed 'Armee d' Italie' for example, commemorating Napoleons campaign against the Austrians in 1796. Boutets Versailles factory made silver hilted sabres for presentation".

This presents the texture of Napoleonic presentation sabres, and the kinds of weapons which were clearly given to officers in varying circumstances. Is it possible that this sabre may have been self commissioned by a patriotic officer in Napoleons service?

The deeply curved blade as noted was to augment slashing power in the drawcut, delivered from a fast moving mount...in noticing the unusual rounded blade tip, I would point out that these type blades are seen also on broadswords to increase cutting potential in slashing cuts. Would these together reinforce a cavalrymans sabre?

All best regards,
Jim

[Hotspur]

A note briefly Jim and you may even mention this in the latest but I don't see it.

The initial contract for the U.S. official mamelukes were produced in England.

Despite my now reading more French than British influence in your last post, the majority of bladed arms coming into the U.S. after the revolution continued to be from England with Solingen the second largest supplier to American retailers and cutlers..

We could go to the twelfth inning again regarding beaded hilts but I see it a bit of a red herring in this discussion and proves nothing except even more artillery and infantry swords being produced in England. Can you show me more than one (I can think of only one example I have seen) continental maker of beaded (balls of any kind and number) hilt Eagle pommel swords for the American market?

The post federal period and French influence is a bit of a non sequitur in this thread from my perspective. I honestly see no French influence in the early American makers (of quantity) such as Rose, Starr, etc. The hussar hilts really don't look much like the French of that timeline, do they? The dove head reverse p hilts that follow that? I think not. That some sword design was symbiotic and almost universal, I really don't see the argument. Taking a real census of officers swords would (I believe) still only show the supply and demand truths of where the majority of the officer swords were being produced (England and Prussia).

Singular examples of French style and influence in some popularity by a few does not an American trend make (in my opinion). The first real turn I see in nco type swords are the short straight infantry hangers by Rose and Starr which honestly could be as German as French influenced. I see no French briquet or glaives coming to vouge until lots of extra brass was around .

Some odds and ends to toss on the ashes. Here is a French form around a lot of the 18th century (pre revolution), along with another pair with mixed feelings Quite British that pair but the spadroon blade looks almost Prussian.

Anyway, I see the major influences of domination in sword manufacture for the U.S late in the game when looking at the French styled sword in this thread. That some were individual pieces were adopted is recognized as well as some presentation swords but if we look at the demand and supply, the French goods and influence of the American federal period is lacking. Even beyond that, consider the boat shell hilt of the U.S. infantry officer sword of the 1830s not having a roman helmet but a variety of large eggs instead. All the roman helmeted swords post dating the federal period are a given and I agree that by that time, French stylings are dominating but not so during the Napoleonic/Federal period.

So anyway, when I subtract influx to America from French influences through the federal period, I come up with a remainder of the L'épée des troupes de Terre decades later with perhaps a nod in the Rose nco and one lone five ball producer from Alsace (Berger following closely the Ketland eagle and hilt). Oh, ok one more and this also from Berger, a very English looking sabre for the U.S. market

Cheers

GC

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Glen,
It is always a learning experience in these discussions with you, and you are certainly inspiring me to try to do my 'homework' here It really is great to touch base on these American swords once again after a very long hiatus, but quite honestly I think I'm learning more in the last couple of days than I ever accomplished back then.

I did not know of the detail on the first mameluke sabres being a British contract (was this the 1825 regulation?) but not surprising as I know some of the famed 'eaglehead swords' were produced there, with American made versions known as Baltimore and Philadelphia 'schools'.

I think it is important to note here that I am not suggesting that the French were prevalent in the supply of swords to America against the well known products of England and Solingen you note. I am however noting what I consider significant influence of French swords and styles in American military swords . Returning to Peterson (p.59), he notes while some of the swords for officers were made by makers such as Starr and Rose, the great majority of blades and large numbers of entire swords were made by Solingen makers as well as some from "...France, Great Britain and Belgium". These were apparantly largely mounted or furbished as required and by c.1830 the major outfitters of Horstmann of Philadephia and Schuyler, Hartley & Graham of New York were prominantly known. Some of the eaglehead swords of c.1830s by Widmann of Philadephia (Peterson, p.115) have marks of the German swordsmith on the blade, along with 'warranted' (interestly a word often used on British blades decades before). It is noted that some of these Widmann type swords also are seen with Horstmann stamps on blades.

Peterson #98 (p.107), a mounted artillery officers sabre c.1815-30 is described as a "distinctly French sabre", and that these sabers were made in France in accordance with the latest modes there. The one shown has American devices and motif on the blade, apparantly contrary to the larger number of these typically known.
With #93 (p.102,Peterson) this is an eaglehead with a bust of Washington in cartouche, and described as made in France c.1800 (Washington died 1799) or shortly after.

#63, (pp.69-70) describing a field officers sword of c.1800-10, Peterson notes "...during the first decade of the 19th century many of the higher ranking American officers purchased swords typified by the saber illustrated herewith. These saers were made in France in what the Continental taste of the period considered the very best tradition. These swords were made especially for the American market and usually possessed an eaglehead pommel and decorations utilizing American motif".

Again, these references from Peterson are simply the basis of my opinion which considers that French swords were significant in the influence of American sword styles from the end of the Revolution, through the Federal Period and as noted, through the 19th century. The influences of both German and English swords cannot be discounted obviously, nor can thier participation in actual production of blades and entire weapons, so it seems counterproductive to try to assess which offered more influence or actual production. The styles favored by makers such as Rose and Starr are agreed, not particularly relevant as they primarily were producing contract swords for enlisted ranks in number, and thier 'style' may be considered loosely 'European' but loosely similar to various forms of the period and slightly earlier. It seems most of the focus here is on officers swords, which as previously noted here were of different status, and more inclined to fashionable styles for which France was much admired and very much along with its closeness in its alliance with America in the war.

The pair of vertically fluted ebony swords you show here are outstanding! and actually remind me of a brass hilt example of one of these I have (Mark Eley has one as well). In these they are brass 'birds head' pommel with the fluted ebony grip and curved 'montmorency' type blade with centerpoint fuller (mine by Wooley & Deakin, his may be as well). Something I noticed some time ago with Wooley M1788 light cavalry sabers as opposed to Thomas Gill's..the hilt features on Wooley's seem to favor French influence (rounded pommel cap, elliptical langets, montmorency blade) while Gill's seem to favor German...elongated rectangular langets, flattened pommel cap, hollow ground blade. It is truly interesting to see this type of ebony grip sword with the curved blade and spadroon blade together.

While I'm not sure this discussion has put us any closer to identifying David's sabre, I think it is good to have set out some criteria as far as whether it is Napoleonic French, or whether the initial assumption of American might have had merit. I hope we can continue to seek a comparable example with more definitive likenesses, but the example David posted remains to me compelling.

Best regards,
Jim

[Hotspur]

Hi Jim

#98 second sentence "Many are known, because of their histories, to have been used in this country" Not quantified further, group b had 30% fewer cavities than group a You'll like the one attached below.

#93 Again a quantitative and subjective relationship in influence. Much more so when in the 1840s and beyond, Horstmann and others flood the market with Solingen made long neck French style eagles (note the dateline again). Of many hundreds of eagles shown in the elder Mowbray's bible and in the Medicus collection indexing, the French made eagles genuinely pale not just in production numbers but also lacking the diversity of the swarm of English made eagles. Again, look to early influences and desire, the eagles main eyrie (sp) of eggs was English, balls or not.

#63 Jim, it is easy to cherry pick such a statement by Peterson and disregard the rest of that chapter. Forty years after that book was published it again becomes a quantitative falsehood. Did many favor French eagles? I don't see it from the numbers end.

There are certainly a good many other swords that could be mentioned in several books, for instance the Lattimer collection and other examples from Peterson that are French but it doesn't carry the weight of conviction to me (nor does the elder Mowbray's eagle pommel book) They are all a starting point for me rather than books of absolutes.

You'll like this one from S&K

Oh, yes, while you have #93 in mind, note that he misidentifies #91 as wholly American made, while returning in Mowbray's 1990s eagles as now known to have been from Thurkle

Cheers

GC

[Jim McDougall]

Glen, I can only offer my compliments, you really know your stuff, and it is truly a pleasure to discuss these issues with you.As I mentioned, a true learning experience, and reminding me that despite so many years studying these things, I know I remain much more student than any kind of 'expert'

Actually as I mentioned, my familiarity with most of these references are from decades ago in my 'collecting' days. In looking back at some of the cites I used, I must concede that I am quite guilty of some cherry picking as you have astutely noted, but such was more inadvertant as I was trying to minimize some of the text for volume. The reference to 'histories' did not seem relevant, but as you point out perhaps in retrospect was. My selective choice of references was from quite a few hours of revisiting the few books I have with me. Ironically, although I have the revised Peterson from 1965, I acquired it only a few years later. These books; Neumann, Blair and later Robson (1975) I have had all these years are are still my treasures, and it is great to revisit them (glad I brought them!). As you note there have been considerable revisions and newly presented material in these past decades, so it is good to have that made known here.
Also, I neglected to thank you for sharing the article in Man at Arms on Rose!
I have subscribed to Man at Arms since the first issue in 1979, but all of these are with most of the rest of my books in deep storage for years.

Interesting note on the sabers identified as American made, but now known to be by Thurkle. This seems inevitable with all the cross traffic in trade and as I had noted, many swords came in from Germany and were mounted in America, so provenance may easily have dictated American made, as many German blades were veiled by thier furbishing in America. The interpolation of products is evident by German blades with the 'Warranted' term seen on British swords; Germany was also producing blades for France in given periods.
Actually I was not even aware that the French made eaglehead hilts, and though I knew Andrew Mowbray, I regret I never had his book on these swords, a monumental oversight on my part. He was a great scholar and very giving individual who inspired me a great deal, so even more regretted realizing this.


I am extremely grateful to have this discussion with you on this aspect on the influences in early American swords, and the considerable and important key points you have provided showing much better perspective on these than I previously had. While I think we have pretty well covered much of the detail here, it seems we both remain in degree apart in our views on the French influences, though I admit I lean more toward many of your points.
I would very much enjoy continuing this on a separate thread, but think we should return to the original sword identification featured in this thread.

David, thank you so much for your courtesy and patience in this digression.

Glen, I very much thank you again for your courtesy and outstanding detail in presenting some extremely important history and material in better understanding of these military swords. I know personally I have learned from your most admirable knowledge, and look forward to continued discussions on this and any topics you are in.

All very best regards,
Jim