M1840 Saber Spine Mark

[celtan]

Hi Guys,

One of my swords has this mark on its spine. It's an M1840, and its scabbard has the S&K logo in its chape. Which doesn't necessarily means they were originally together.

The shape reminds me of the French Coulaux Freres mark.

I think I once saw one similar back at SFI.

What do you think?

Best

M

[Hotspur]

Can you share a profile picture of the entire hilt? Any markings on the casting itself? I don't see anything but a smudged blur on the spine of the blade, so I guess it could read as anything. One note I am quoting from somewhere else writes

John Thillmann’s “Civil War Cavalry and Artillery Sabers” discusses this rare variation on page 370. This is identical to that example, with the tall pommel cap, blade marking of a diamond with “O” cartouche over 39 over S&K on the blade back, and matching diamond/O over 39 on the face of the guard. Scabbard drag marked crown/D and S&K. The 1839 trials were to select new swords for the cavalry, artillery and dragoons.

So, that does indicate there may be markings on the spine from time to time. I have also seen blade spines marked with the somewhat ubuiquitous term of PROVED. all by itself. Why anyone would obliterate any mark aside from deception is something to consider. Offering an What If? presentation that some find fond of further speculation. I just see a smudge.

Cheers

GC

[celtan]

Hi G,

It doesn't look like someone has put a file to the seal, but more like honest use and wear, due to the scabbard's throat action on that area.

The sword is gorgeous, a confederate presentation sword of apparent german make, which I have been researching for years. Yet, that spine's hallmark still eludes me. The thing is that it "feels" maddenly familiar. Perhaps some stylized initials?

Merry Xmas to you all!

M

Originally Posted by Hotspur

Can you share a profile picture of the entire hilt? Any markings on the casting itself? I don't see anything but a smudged blur on the spine of the blade, so I guess it could read as anything.

So, that does indicate there may be markings on the spine from time to time. I have also seen blade spines marked with the somewhat ubuiquitous term of PROVED. all by itself. Why anyone would obliterate any mark aside from deception is something to consider. Offering an What If? presentation that some find fond of further speculation. I just see a smudge.

Cheers

GC

[Hotspur]

What determines this to be a confederate presentation? I am not familiar with the theme, nor have you mentioned much description of it in this thread. Etched yes, how would you better describe the blade decoration to a blind man (as I can't make much from those photos)? Is there some other provenance that goes with the blade?

As to the spine photos, I still just see a blur and actually little that resembles normal or regular wear to me. Again, what I see and I hope read to be objective, as I have no reason to declare it anything in particular. What stylized initials do you read in the marks? Again, all I see is a blurry smudged look. Could it be a WR that has been deliberately obscured or just worn down?

Cheers

GC

[celtan]

Hi Glenn,

I was just asking _about the spine's mark_. Since you seem to be interested in the rest of the sword, here are other pictures. I hope you like them.

Since you ask, her owner was the commander of 61st Va Inf. Company A at the Battle of The Crater/Petersburg/Cold Harbor .

BTW: If by any chance, you find info on the post-war whereabouts of John W/G Wallace (from VA's Norfolk county), I'd love to hear it. He was gravely wounded on the charge. Also, I have been trying to check the 61st Va Roster, as published by Benjamin Trask, unsuccessfully. Current copies run into the $200, and I'm just not _that_ interested in that unit, only what relates to Capt. Wallace. I guess I'll wait til' I find a copy at EB.

There's a chance that a relative of Wallace, also serving in the 61st but in Company C, died in the Confederate charge.

BTW, that "blur" is quite clear to me in that it represents the edges of some stylized letters, probably K, S or G. I simply can't correlate the remaining traces to W or R. And, if someone wanted those removed, it would have been extremely easy to do so, they lie very exposed on the spine. So much so, that even I could do it.

Best/TTFN

M

Originally Posted by Hotspur

What determines this to be a confederate presentation? I am not familiar with the theme, nor have you mentioned much description of it in this thread. Etched yes, how would you better describe the blade decoration to a blind man (as I can't make much from those photos)? Is there some other provenance that goes with the blade?

As to the spine photos, I still just see a blur and actually little that resembles normal or regular wear to me. Again, what I see and I hope read to be objective, as I have no reason to declare it anything in particular. What stylized initials do you read in the marks? Again, all I see is a blurry smudged look. Could it be a WR that has been deliberately obscured or just worn down?

Cheers

GC

[celtan]

More!

[celtan]

Even More!

[Jim McDougall]

Wow!! Manolo, that is incredibly impressive and I'm glad you showed us the rest of the sword. Obviously an extremely nice commemorative sword issued at some point later to either Captain Wallace or his survivors, and to the importance of that event.
I wouldn't spend a great deal of money on a book that esoteric simply to establish a single reference, especially these days with the computer etc. It was rough in the old days when we did it that way, ouch!

I would get hold of a reenactment group, who have thier historians for particular units constantly researching those who served in the units. Geneology groups are especially good as well, with Virginia being profoundly thorough. Often it is easier to obtain the capsulated unit histories of the regiments that are more focused and far less costly as far as I know.

My great great grandfather was in the 2nd US Sharpshooters in the Civil War, and I dropped a bundle to obtain a couple of books on this unit.....all I found was a single line where his name appeared. Interesting history, but none specific I could relate to him, and this was a key unit, one of only two known as Berdan's Sharpshooters.

Also I would contact historical societies near the location of that battle. If I recall correctly from that research long ago, my grandfather was there as well. When I lived in Nashville there was Civil War history everyplace!!! and I was often corrected that it was 'The War Between the States' , not the Civil War, and of course the motto, 'Lee surrendered, I didnt' everyplace
History lives passionately in many such places, and I'm sure such records should be reasonably accessible without such expensive books.

As impressive sabre Manolo, well worth the research to pursue.

All the best,
Jim

[celtan]

Hi Jim!

'Lee surrendered, I didnt'

: )

I was in CAP in the 70s, and whenever we had an encampment, I had to be careful not to mix southern and northern cadets from rural areas in the same Flight. Amazingly, the war was ideologically still going on for them.

Puerto Rico has been an US territory for more than a century, and yet some locals are still fighting the SAW of 98'. If you visit Spain, you'll see how the Left and the Right are coming back to very same old Boxing Ring.

ca plus le change...

The sword was logically given after the event. What I wonder is, what happened to Wallace himself after the battle?. His femur was broken, that kinda' wound would either incapacitate him for active duty for at least a year, or require amputation. What happened to the poor guy afterward?

Also, the fallen Captain of Company A was named William Wallace. Brothers? Cousins? John had been with the 61st since its creation in 62, so it wouldn't surprise me if he brought a blood-relative to command Co. A. All were from Norfolk County, VA.

Best, and Merry Xmas to y'all!



M

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Wow!! Manolo, that is incredibly impressive and I'm glad you showed us the rest of the sword. Obviously an extremely nice commemorative sword issued at some point later to either Captain Wallace or his survivors, and to the importance of that event.
I wouldn't spend a great deal of money on a book that esoteric simply to establish a single reference, especially these days with the computer etc. It was rough in the old days when we did it that way, ouch!

I would get hold of a reenactment group, who have thier historians for particular units constantly researching those who served in the units. Geneology groups are especially good as well, with Virginia being profoundly thorough. Often it is easier to obtain the capsulated unit histories of the regiments that are more focused and far less costly as far as I know.

My great great grandfather was in the 2nd US Sharpshooters in the Civil War, and I dropped a bundle to obtain a couple of books on this unit.....all I found was a single line where his name appeared. Interesting history, but none specific I could relate to him, and this was a key unit, one of only two known as Berdan's Sharpshooters.

Also I would contact historical societies near the location of that battle. If I recall correctly from that research long ago, my grandfather was there as well. When I lived in Nashville there was Civil War history everyplace!!! and I was often corrected that it was 'The War Between the States' , not the Civil War, and of course the motto, 'Lee surrendered, I didnt' everyplace
History lives passionately in many such places, and I'm sure such records should be reasonably accessible without such expensive books.

As impressive sabre Manolo, well worth the research to pursue.

All the best,
Jim

[Hotspur]

Thanks for more background on the sword. One other thin g I wonder about is the apparent cleaning of the oxidation from the ricasso up that is shown in this attachment. Something is odd to me about that trait but perhaps meaningless (except someone was scrubbing off rust at some point)

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/attach...id=52669&stc=1

Again, I have no reason to doubt you see other markings there, I just can't see them or reconcile what you see of them. You mention it to be quite like the French markings but it is pretty obviously not a French built sword.

I'll poke about regarding the character a bit, as I have some other leads I often peruse. Thanks a lot for the entire sword as you have been able to provide it. I somehow hate to get one the teeniest of information regarding an item without as much background as possible.

Cheers

GC

[Hotspur]

A start here. He was too young to have had an early S&K in the Mexican war but look to this as his war sword and what the first issue of it was. Likely prewar militia arsenal stores. His entire bio should come up pretty easily. A number over S&K may be exactly what you are seeing on the spine (my first post). Then again, it could be just about anyone's trophy to begin with.

John G. Wallace. Papers, 1840–1910. Accession 41524.
Papers, 1861–1865, of John G. Wallace (1840–1910) of Norfolk County, Virginia, while serving as captain in the 61st Virginia Infantry. Includes accounts, certificates, vouchers, daybook, orders, ordnance records, receipts, regulations and instructions, published manuals and guides, clippings, clothing rolls, payrolls, muster rolls, and other items.

http://www.lva.virginia.gov/public/g...r/Soldiers.htm

Wrong John Wallace mebbe

[celtan]

Very observant. I confess, I am the guilty party. The sword was gray black and I couldn't see the etchings well.

Used fine wire-mesh to clean _some_ of it, still has a dark grayish shade. I didn't remove the ricasso's rust because there's nothing inscribed there...

I agrre it's not french, they were sticklers to detail, and left all sorts of inscriptions to denote manufacture, provenance, inspections etc....Haven't seen any of those.

Thanks for your assistance, I just did not want to saddle our merry troupe with one of those all-emcompassing questions "What is this sword"?, so I merely asked about the mark.

Best regards

M

Originally Posted by Hotspur

Thanks for more background on the sword. One other thin g I wonder about is the apparent cleaning of the oxidation from the ricasso up that is shown in this attachment. Something is odd to me about that trait but perhaps meaningless (except someone was scrubbing off rust at some point)

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/attach...id=52669&stc=1

Again, I have no reason to doubt you see other markings there, I just can't see them or reconcile what you see of them. You mention it to be quite like the French markings but it is pretty obviously not a French built sword.

I'll poke about regarding the character a bit, as I have some other leads I often peruse. Thanks a lot for the entire sword as you have been able to provide it. I somehow hate to get one the teeniest of information regarding an item without as much background as possible.

Cheers

GC

[celtan]

No, it's the right John Wallace. There was only one John Wallace serving in the 61st at Cold Harbor. Specially when you add the other details as rank and being in C Company, the Blanchard Grays. AFAIK, no other John Wallace ever served with them. That's what I wanted to confirm through the actual regimental roster.

The only caveat is that the sword states W as John's middle initial, a mistake?. It's not that farfetched, since the letters W and G in cursive handwriting (specially if stylized), look similar. Either the sword art or the documents themselves are wrong. That's another thing I need to clear.

G, I'm always learning. I though that when you commissioned a presentation sword, you always used a new sword, since the etching needed to be done at the manufacturer/forge level. Am I wrong? I have never etched anything. Are you saying that old blades were etched too?

Thank you kindly for your assistance, now I know that John survived the War !

Best-est regards

Manuel

Originally Posted by Hotspur

A start here. He was too young to have had an early S&K in the Mexican war but look to this as his war sword and what the first issue of it was. Likely prewar militia arsenal stores. His entire bio should come up pretty easily. A number over S&K may be exactly what you are seeing on the spine (my first post). Then again, it could be just about anyone's trophy to begin with.

John G. Wallace. Papers, 1840–1910. Accession 41524.
Papers, 1861–1865, of John G. Wallace (1840–1910) of Norfolk County, Virginia, while serving as captain in the 61st Virginia Infantry. Includes accounts, certificates, vouchers, daybook, orders, ordnance records, receipts, regulations and instructions, published manuals and guides, clippings, clothing rolls, payrolls, muster rolls, and other items.

http://www.lva.virginia.gov/public/g...r/Soldiers.htm

Wrong John Wallace mebbe

[Jim McDougall]

Nicely done guys! Its great to see more on this swords history unfolding, and I really like the teamwork
Glen, its nice to have you here posting again, especially on this topic, as your knowledge and background with American swords has long been well established. Thank you for bringing it in on this one.

Manolo, thanks again for sharing this....we really dont get to see much on the Confederate weapons, and regardless of what side anybody was on...the entire history of it all is monumentally moving. After growing up in essentially a Northern environment, and living the past decades essentially in the South from Tennessee to Texas, I honestly see a larger perspective. I think Sherman had it right, "..it is good that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it".

Thank you for the great Christmas wreath and greetings!!! and wishing you and yours wonderful holidays as well.

All the very best guys!
Jim

[celtan]

Hi Guys, interesting news,

Just got my digital copy of three books written about Norfolk, VA.
In one of them I found this tasty tidbit:


THE H I S T O R Y OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

A review of Important Events and Incidents which occurred from 1736 to 1877

BY H. W. BURTON, .

" HARRY SCRATCH” OF THE NORFOLK VIRGINIAN.

NORFOLK, VA.

Norfolk Virginian Job Print; 36 and 38 Roanoke Avenue., 1877

page 93

/"...the charge, about fifty yards from ihe ditch, Captain John W. Wallace, of Company C, Sixty-first Virginia Regiment, was stricken down with a broken thigh. He lay upon his back, refusing to allow his men to take him from the field till the battle was over, waving his hat and urging his men to " Go on; go forward ."/

So it seems that some documents refer to Captain Wallace as John W., yet others refer to him as John G., which makes my suspicion this is a matter of a W/G cursive handwriting misinterpretation very likely.


Now, which one would be the correct version?




Manuel

[Hotspur]

Good find,

Something else to consider is that the William mentioned, may well be the John W. Wallace of the blade. I have not spent more than superficial time with this but this William Wallace was (iirc) from the Carolinas (google notes of). It is and was no surprise to have folk going by their middle name and not their first (or Christian) name. My family was no different in the Americas of the 19th century and continues today with me often referred to as Alan (my middle name), just as my father Alan was more often referred to as Robert (his middle name). I have come across it even in musters of the American Civil War and company records differing from enlistment lists (the commander's notes sometimes using the middle names). In a sense, some of this also goes back to surname and descendants of the UK history with Mc and Mac.

I would (if me) pursue both Wallaces until better reckoning of the sword might be made.

Cheers and Happy Holidays

GC

Originally Posted by celtan

Hi Guys, interesting news,

Just got my digital copy of three books written about Norfolk, VA.
In one of them I found this tasty tidbit:


THE H I S T O R Y OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

A review of Important Events and Incidents which occurred from 1736 to 1877

BY H. W. BURTON, .

" HARRY SCRATCH” OF THE NORFOLK VIRGINIAN.

NORFOLK, VA.

Norfolk Virginian Job Print; 36 and 38 Roanoke Avenue., 1877

page 93

/"...the charge, about fifty yards from ihe ditch, Captain John W. Wallace, of Company C, Sixty-first Virginia Regiment, was stricken down with a broken thigh. He lay upon his back, refusing to allow his men to take him from the field till the battle was over, waving his hat and urging his men to " Go on; go forward ."/

So it seems that some documents refer to Captain Wallace as John W., yet others refer to him as John G., which makes my suspicion this is a matter of a W/G cursive handwriting misinterpretation very likely.


Now, which one would be the correct version?




Manuel

[celtan]

Hi G.,

No, I don't think so. The other Captain's name was William C. Wallace, and he was a close friend of Col Stewart, there's no way he'd mistake one for the other in his accounts. They were both from Norfolk, and, as a matter of fact, from a place called (sic.) Wallaceton...(Wallacetown?).

...small wonder!

Best

M

Originally Posted by Hotspur

Good find,

Something else to consider is that the William mentioned, may well be the John W. Wallace of the blade. I have not spent more than superficial time with this but this William Wallace was (iirc) from the Carolinas (google notes of). It is and was no surprise to have folk going by their middle name and not their first (or Christian) name. My family was no different in the Americas of the 19th century and continues today with me often referred to as Alan (my middle name), just as my father Alan was more often referred to as Robert (his middle name). I have come across it even in musters of the American Civil War and company records differing from enlistment lists (the commander's notes sometimes using the middle names). In a sense, some of this also goes back to surname and descendants of the UK history with Mc and Mac.

I would (if me) pursue both Wallaces until better reckoning of the sword might be made.

Cheers and Happy Holidays

GC

[celtan]

Got more info from the " Wallace Company Records, 1783-1975".

Seems our friend's middle name was Gallaudette, and William C (Curtiss) Wallace (The KIA Captain of 61st Inf. Va Company A) was his brother. The G/W conundrum seems to arise from a mistake in Norfolk's documents. I suspect the sword was commissioned by the city.

They belonged to well known and prosperous family in Wallaceton / VA, owners of the "Wallace Company". Their plantation was named "Dover Farm" and their mansion grounds "Glencoe" John died at 71 yrs, of age and left numerous descendants. The company disappeared after WWII.

Captain John Wallace is also mentined in "Canoeing Sketches, by John Boyle O'Reilly": Canoeing in the Dismal Swamp, From Athletics and Manly Sport, Boston: Pilot Publishing Company, 1890, 350-452.

Other mentions to the Wallaces appear on the book "The Great Dismal: A Carolinian's Swamp Memoir" (UNC Press, 1990) by Bland Simpson.


Best!


M

[celtan]

Hi G and Jim,

I remember asking, but can't find the actual post, about captured swords and etching. Was it normal to have a captured sword etched with names etc... and presented as a trophy? I still have no idea of the maker of this sword.

Best

M

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Manolo,
In history there are of course instances of swords being captured and being presented as trophies, and the captured crusader swords which ended up in Alexandria, then Constantinople were engraved with Islamic inscriptions and held as trophies in these armouries.
The Russians were well known for using captured blades as awards for gallantry to thier officers, and these were often profusely etched or engraved.
In North America, I am not aware of this affectation being used with swords, although certainly swords were indeed captured at times. I recall research on a sword which belonged to Custer and was said to have been taken from a Confederate officer in combat in the Civil War. The sword had a huge blade with the 'Spanish motto' and was clearly a Mexican blade. I discovered later that the sword was actually 'given' to Custer by one of his officers who had taken the sword in battle, and knew Custer collected swords, so he gave to him out of respect.
Other swords were taken in battle from Confederates and many were swords that had been taken by them in turn in battle during the Mexican war.
None of these were ever afforded any additional engraving or salutations, simply used as is.

While the sword was never used as much in combat during the Civil War as it may be presumed, it did serve well in almost a symbolic or metaphoric sense.
The most profound example of this was at Appomattox when General Robert E. Lee surrendered to President Abraham Lincoln. Out of his deep respect for this brilliant commander, Lincoln refused to take his sword in the traditional gesture of surrender, and ordered that Confederate officers were to be allowed to keep thier sidearms in expanding that respect. It was one of the most deeply moving occurrences to me of this war as this tragic episode of American history ended.

I would however note that after the Civil War, and with the fluorishing of fraternal organizations, many militarily based, a great deal of regalia was produced. This might well have included swords that were either captured or used in significant events or by individuals preserving thier legacies. I think one of the instances of these kinds of uses were in Masonic lodges, where of course the Tylers sword was of key importance. Although the regalia outfitters produced these specifically, it does seem there were many cases were an authentically 'used' sword with historical provenance was donated for the purpose.

My thoughts,

All the best,
Jim

[Hotspur]

The most profound example of this was at Appomattox when General Robert E. Lee surrendered to President Abraham Lincoln. Out of his deep respect for this brilliant commander, Lincoln refused to take his sword in the traditional gesture of surrender, and ordered that Confederate officers were to be allowed to keep thier sidearms in expanding that respect. It was one of the most deeply moving occurrences to me of this war as this tragic episode of American history ended

Umm, no Jim. Grant included/added a sentence to the paperwork regarding the allowance to let officers retain their sidearms. The sword was never ceremoniously offered by Lee and then refused by Grant (receiving and overseeing the surrender). There may be different versions of that account.

Interestingly, I do have a copy of a letter from a Union officer writing home the day of the surrender. He was bemoaning to his wife that he had the duty that day (A Sunday) and thanking her for the spectacles sent. It was apparently moments before news would reach the west. A letter maybe never sent. It is here in my family papers somewhere and I'm not remembering specifics well. Here he is. No direct relation here but associated through my dad's second wife first husband (his paternal family tree). He is evidentially writing at the very moment the surrender is taking place. I do hope the original (that did surface in turning dad's house inside out) was forwarded to other descendants of that family but another in the process was a bit lax in following through. I did get a copy of it though, on Vicksburg headquarters stationary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_R._Warnock

As to etching, it isn't such a chore, nor something that couldn't have happened at any time. I bumped into some reunion information for the veterans associated with that but have not delved deeply into the Crater episode. An interesting search for someone to undertake, I'm sure. I'm having problems remembering what it was I was taking off to a young descendant for Christmas.

Ho ho ho

Glen

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Glen,
Thanks for correcting that, it seems my history wires get crossed sometimes, especially in this area on Civil War history, so getting it right is very much appreciated to keep the record straight. Still, the point was that as an important gesture, these officers were to keep thier swords.

Your outstanding comprehension on U.S. history and weapons has always been clear in your compelling posts through the years, and as I have noted many times, its great to have them here!! Thank you.

BTW, Ho Ho Ho!! yourself Merry Christmas morning!!
All the best,
Jim

[celtan]

Hi Guys,

Once again, Season's Greetings to y'all.

I will let you know anything else I find regarding this sword, it is an interesting subject to research. " ) . Jim knows how determined I become when I get a scent of the prey...

Jim, are you actually saying that swords were _never_ used as an offensive weapon during the CW..?

So Glen, from your perspective I get that 1. No captured swords were etched and presented as trophies 2. This might be a post CW sword presented during a post-war Veteran's Reunion. 3. Alternatively, it could also be a CW presentation sword, or (my contribution to our "what ifs" ) perhaps 4. even could be Capt. Wallace's own war-time sword, etched after the events of the Crater, "to preserve the legacy".

Mind you, I'm jot particularly converse with post-CW events in the South. I imagine conditions for the defeated were not particularly pleasant. MY knowledge is limited to the movie "The Outlaw Jesse Wales" and some comments made by South-American friends regarding "carpetbaggers" and "Federal insidiousness".

Would it be logical to assume that Confederate Veterans Reunions were not something to sprout in the faces of the "invading Northerners"? I can't imagine a Wehrmacht Veterans reunion in 1950 Germany, or the presentation of a sword to Michael Wittman, or Erich Hartmann, on account of their wartime actions, no matter how courageous they might have been.

And from the little I know, Civil Wars consistently leave behind a far greater deal of resentment and downright animosity than the "regular" kind. Wouldn't CSA Veteran reunions be effectively prohibited by the Victors..?

Best regards

Manuel

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hi Glen,
Thanks for correcting that, it seems my history wires get crossed sometimes, especially in this area on Civil War history, so getting it right is very much appreciated to keep the record straight. Still, the point was that as an important gesture, these officers were to keep thier swords.

Your outstanding comprehension on U.S. history and weapons has always been clear in your compelling posts through the years, and as I have noted many times, its great to have them here!! Thank you.

BTW, Ho Ho Ho!! yourself Merry Christmas morning!!
All the best,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Manuel,
You are indeed relentless on the search for accuracy and authenticity in studying these weapons, which is an outstanding trait that benefits us all as we join together in sharing the learning.

I would clarify my statements on the use of the sword during the Civil War, in which I noted that the sword was not used 'as much' as often presumed, during the Civil War. One of the key indicators of this situation was that sword blades were often nearly blunt, unsharpened, or not maintained if they were. In a reference on the medical aspects of the war it was noted that there were remarkably few records of any sword cuts among the wounded, and that instances of injuries caused by swords were usually blunt force trauma.
One of the reasons the most used sword patterns by the Union, the M1840, was called the 'old wristbreaker' was it was admittedly a heavy weapon, but mostly the use of it was not well instilled in the men. Sword drill was mostly a superficial exercise, and the sword itself considered more of an encumbrance endured mostly at the behest of military tradition. That in itself was what I meant when noting the swords more symbolic presence, but naturally, in the heat of combat, anything can become a weapon, even an dull sword.

As always, I look for, and appreciate, opposing views, and look forward to supported accounts of actual and effective use of sabres in the Civil War, which certainly might have happened incidentally. My comments have been placed in a much broader sense, and from generally held opinion.

With regard to the etching of sword blades, whether captured, or issued, or even associated in some way with an event or individual in the Civil War, many swords undoubtedly were afforded this decorative motif commemoratively after the war.
As I noted, while the war ended on the battlefield, in the country and its people, especially in political essence and culturally, it still prevails in degree and virtually as an open wound. There were many versions of military based fraternal organizations, the GAR (Grand Army of the Republic),et al. There were many suborganizational groups that were offshoots of these various entities, and of course, the most prevalent fraternal society of all, the Freemasons, which had already stood for many years, burgeoned in membership.

It was indeed a country torn asunder by the strife of the war, and its aftermath led to the wild encroachment of the 'carpetbaggers' with the frontiers full of 'lost' ex soldiers disillusioned and who had become wandering victims of this tragic episode of our history.
As I had mentioned, living in Nashville, Tennessee for nearly ten years was quite an eye opening experience. Here, the entire area was of course 'occupied' during most of the war by the Union forces, so the animosity can be well imagined. Its intensity is still present in many areas among the population of distinct ancestry there, and Southern Pride prevails.


There were certainly fraternal groups that focused on the gallantry and heroism of the Confederate forces, and as I mentioned, thier monuments and cemeteries are privately maintained. While there are no provisions federally for these, I am not aware that there were restrictions against veterans groups. In the assemblage of these military brotherhoods, their reunions are not emplaced to celebrate the horrors of war, but contrarily to celebrate the brotherhood among themselves forever bonded in those events. It is even more deeply to honor and respect heroism and gallantry, to remember those who fell, and based in respect.
I would imagine that any concerns or restrictions would obviously be placed on any subversive groups whose existance was based on hatred or terrorism, but far deeper treatment on history would be needed to elaborate in detail.

Despite animosity that of course will probably always dormantly be present (with obvious exceptions in degree I think that for the most part the sense of being American prevails.
Naturally there is wide berth for argument here, and I would ask to not reopen the 'Civil War' here and keep the focus on following that trail on the history of this outstanding sabre. Its true story deserves to be known.

All the best,
Jim

[Jeff D]

Interesting thread Gentlemen, but, there is a very large bull elephant in the room. Since we are here to learn I will place a quote from William A. Albaugh III 's A Photographic Supplement of Confederate Swords In his Addendum Preface;
' In the past, those with a strong case of Dishonesty would take an artillery saber (with single fuller) attach the guard assembly from a yankee foot officer's sword, and lo and behold, this ugly hybrid became in the eyes of the uninitiated - a Confederate sword! The stamping of the three magic letters "C.S.A." removed any vestige of doubt.
When the fraternity grew wary of such trickery, the faker simply turned to some artist friend to etch the blade with fantastically pro-Confederate designs. These included not one, but several "C.S.A.'s", southern flags and mottos such as "Death to all Yankees.."
This type of quackery still persists and in some cases is quite accomplished, particularly when a genuine Confederate sword supplies the basic ingredient.'

All the Best
Jeff

[Hotspur]

I am not familiar with (don't own) Albaugh's work, aside from brief passages posted by others. Is this a quote from the 1960s? I do consider a lot of the old work of others (such as Peterson) as bibles but these are sometimes revised to correct assumptions and update information. In this particular quest of a sword's information, some of those very basic precepts still hold true.

Yes, it could have been etched at any time. There is a problem with the etching because of how the name reads when compared to history. Could a well meaning organization screw that up in a reunion effort? Sure it could but first we have to find the presentation of the sword and more specifically presentation to the person assumed. Why a cavalry sword for an Infantry officer would be another boggle.

My last spurt of reading regarding this was to find mention of the slogan itself "Carry The Crater" and why any would etch that without some common reference of its use. If my sword, yes, I would be going to the trouble to pursue a good diary and bio for the name and events. Specifically a presentation to him and when that occured. Not so easy at times.

One of my favorite lines from researcher Bernard Levine is the comments of "Look at the mark. Look at how the mark was made. Ignore what the mark may say (spell out)". With this sword being discussed, that is fairly sage insight but once determined how, the why of follows on its heels. To me, the attribution with a named sword is then the curiosity of why bother to etch a name at all if not supplied with ample storytelling (provenance, if true) behind it?

Attached is a sword Albaugh would love to pull apart in the passage quoted above. These attached really did have me wondering for a few minutes but then plonked them in the "remember this" file.

Cheers

GC

[Jeff D]

Hi Glen,

The first edition was published 1963, my edition with this addendum was published 1979. In your photo's is the top saber the same as the lower one, the scabbard looks different.

Jeff

[Hotspur]

Hi Jeff,

I'll have to look at my folder again and it may have been another artillery sword from the same source. One is showing the scabbard with the throat removed. Otoh, it may be a picture with the non-historical brass throat lumped in with those files. I know the fellow was selling more than one with brass retrofits. Someday I'll figure out how to show the thumbnails in folders automatically while browsing instead of just the names. Folder preference settings somewhere got confused between drives.

It was the etch itself that really might be of interest.

Cheers

GC

[celtan]

Hi Guys,

There have a lot of interesting contacts regarding our sword. I will let everyone know the most recent info as soon as I have time to wind down and write.

Also, just got the Photographic Supplement to my Albaugh's. Nice reading!

Best

M

[GTWiv4]

I have read this with interest. It appears this sword was my great grand father's. The best I can piece the story together his sister most likely ended up with it and upon the death of her grandson it went to auction. His name is John Gallaudette Wallace. William Curtis Wallace is his brother. Col Stewart is a cousin. Some how in his book "A Pair of Blankets" he uses the wrong letter for his middle name. I know John did attend reunions of the Battle of the Crater. It is my guess it was given to him at one of those gaterings.