The M1913 Patton Sword

[Dmitry]

I don't think these are rare. A regional arms and militaria show will probably have at least one vendor who has an example for sale.
This saber, ironically, is straight...
I like it, as swords go. Used to wonder about the massive basket, the need for it. Odds of a US cavalry soldier engaging a mounted enemy with swords were almost non-existent in 1913.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Dmitry

I don't think these are rare. A regional arms and militaria show will probably have at least one vendor who has an example for sale.
This saber, ironically, is straight...
I like it, as swords go. Used to wonder about the massive basket, the need for it. Odds of a US cavalry soldier engaging a mounted enemy with swords were almost non-existent in 1913.

Thank you Dmitry.
I agree, I dont consider them rare either, however they do seem desirable if nothing else for their unusual heft and design. They were designed to be carried attached to saddle mounts, much as the British cavalry swords of 1899, 1908.
You are right, there was little chance of these being actually used in combat, in fact they were entirely left behind in WWI and never saw combat.

It is also odd that the term saber is often used for these straight blade swords, and most probably a term simply used as it was aligned with cavalry intent.

As far as 'rarity' it does seem that these never had the commonality of for example the Civil War swords. In the old days you could find 1840, 1860s all over the place, but hardly ever did anyone see one of these.

I am mostly wondering just how many of these were cut down, or simply disposed of.

Again, thank you for answering Dmitry, its a bit of an unusual topic, so very much appreciated.

[David R]

The cut versus thrust argument looks to have gone on throughout the entire time swords were in use. By the end of the 19th C thrust was winning out but if swords had carried on in use longer, cut might have gained ground again.
It certainly did in the Imperial Japanese Military, who in the 1930s abandoned the Western style sabre and appeared to go back to their traditional style sword for both Army and Navy.
The funny thing is that it seems to have not been the nostalgia for tradition that is so often put forward, but a practical decision based on experience in Manchuria.There was considerable research done, field testing, and a lot of to and fro between the various arms... Tradition and familiarity undoubtedly played a part though.
Below archive pictures from the development process, and fuller discussions in great detail here https://www.warrelics.eu/forum/japan...komiya-691796/

[Jim McDougall]

That is some most interesting perspective David, thank you. It is well noted that the cut vs. thrust thing was a most active debate throughout the last centuries of the sword, and the 'Patton' as well as the British 1908 were of course distinctly thrusting swords.

Again, here I would emphasize that these two patterns were effectively the 'end game' in regulation military swords, along undoubtedly with certain variation in some other countries. I wanted to touch on them only as a 'closing look' at swords that evolved out of the 19th century efforts to establish a close to these debates, but without moving into analysis of 20th century swords.

Again, thank you so much for this detailed input, very well presented!

[David R]

I would also point out the British 1897 infantry officers sword as a dedicated thrusting sword, and a variant of this was adopted as a cavalry sword by the City of London Yeomanry.
As late as the 1920's British Imperial Officers webbing had a frog for the sword. What is often missed is that in combat a pistol can not parry a sword attack, and this matters if your primary enemy (Afghanistan) is a dedicated sword user. The P1897 is as much a parrying bar as it is a thrusting blade.

[Jim McDougall]

That is well noted David, and I had forgotten about that sword with my concentration on cavalry swords.
With the M1913 Patton sword, at the time Patton was advocating its design focused on the thrust, the war department was intent on redeveloping the M1906 Ames cavalry sword with a more curved blade.

I suppose that if being attacked by a sword wielding opponent, if you had a pistol you would presumably fire and have no need to parry. However in remote circumstances, lack of ammunition or serviceable firearm, clearly the edged weapon would become primary.

[David R]

There is no doubt, but that I would like a Patton sword, it looks a damn sight handier than the British equivalent. Living in the UK I have to accept that this would be very unlikely.
Regarding shooting your blade wielding assailant, look up the US experience in the Philippines. In the end, they had to invent/adopt a new pistol 45.ACP, because a 38 revolver did not do the job!