2 swords for ID please.

[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