Jump to content

Is this just a broken sword?


shouston
 Share

Recommended Posts

Been a long time since I've posted anything because militaria has dried up or is way over-priced in my area.

 

Found this in the Austin, Texas area at a local junk shop with delusions that it's an antique store. The internet wasn't working on my phone for me to look it up, but it was cheap enough I thought I'd take a chance.

 

The blade (or what remains of it) is only 16 inches long and 1 1/4 wide at the base. I'm no sword expert, but I'm guessing it used to be of a more standard length. If so, the shortening must have been a long time ago because there are no signs of modern power tools or even filing on what's left of the tip, and the patina matches everywhere.

 

I haven't tried any cleaning, and don't see any sign of any markings under bright light and moderate magnification.

 

The shape of the handle made me think of early 1800's. So anyone have an opinion? War of 1812? Texas Revolution? Confederate re-purposed? All of the above? Or, more probably more likely, a broken child's toy and waste of $20?

 

post-19868-0-30007500-1468256315.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ludwigh1980

Any relic like that for $20 is no brainer. Dates to the turn of the 18th/19th century. I will let others chime in on origin as British and continental armies has similar sabers as well as the U.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats not a waste of money to my thinking.

 

Not a sword expert but does look real early 1800 or before.We have some members who are very good with theseand Im sure you will have an answer soon.

 

It may have been shortened to a type of fighting knife like the bowies popular in the Civil War. Also if it was broken it may have been shortened for any use.Sounds odd but have seen old Civil War swords here that were shortened and used as farm tools...corn knife for cutting stalks etc.

 

Nice find and its a parts piece if nothing else.Post the full blade if you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a picture showing the full blade (such as it is). I kind of like the idea of it maybe having been a farm tool after life in the service. Not as romantic as being shortened to avoid getting tangled up in the rigging during pitched battles on the high seas, but a cool idea, nonetheless.

 

post-19868-0-47567600-1468261302.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill_Carman

I have one very similar in style save for the grip. Marked "Fischer" and dated "1849" the blade is 26 inches in length

post-140407-0-99422300-1468263558.jpg

post-140407-0-21535800-1468263571.jpg

post-140407-0-15099100-1468263579.jpg

post-140407-0-22336700-1468263585.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Horseclover

I have one very similar in style save for the grip. Marked "Fischer" and dated "1849" the blade is 26 inches in length

This one you show is an Austrian model 1837 infantry sword.

 

Cheers

 

GC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spathologist

It's certainly very similar to the Nippes, but contract sabers had proof or verification stamps...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, guys. That Nippes definitely looks very close. So far, it's the only one I've seen with the correct number of wraps on the handle, the handle appears to be the right shape, and the way the guard connects look right. However, the slot in the guard is in a slightly different location. Would they have varied that much within a single model?

 

post-19868-0-90905000-1468270880.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would guess the variation might be within tolerances. Is there any evidence of a "P" and/or "W" stamped on the reverse side? If so, that would be a strong indication this is indeed a M1810. If not, given the level of corrosion and wear on your sword, I wouldn't necessarily conclude there never were inspection marks.

 

1810pwmarks2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have one very similar in style save for the grip. Marked "Fischer" and dated "1849" the blade is 26 inches in length

 

 

Bill,

 

Your "Fischer 1849" dated sword is not US but Austrian. It is a version of the Austrian Infantry Model 1836 sword. There are a few variations but the extravagant P guard is the tell-tale signature of this Imperial Austrian saber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may have to try some gentle cleaning when I have time to see if there's a ghost of any type of stamping under the rust. Is it possible it's a state militia sword of the same era and pattern, and therefore unmarked? I've been reading that similar swords were sold to the states after the Militia Act of 1808.

 

I've also seen pictures as I was researching of several similarly "modified" sabers of similar vintage that claim to be Confederate "Fighting Knives", including a picture of a very similar one that was supposedly dug up in the Confederate trenches at Gettysburg. That's a good, if unprovable story that at least makes it potentially more interesting than "just a broken sword".

 

Thanks again for the wealth of knowledge you guys so freely share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I just acquired an example of the James Winner/Abraham Nippes M1810 horseman's saber in relatively good condition. Unfortunately, it cost me considerably more than the $20 you paid for yours.

 

In June 1810 James Winner received a contract to produce 500 horseman's sabers. It took him until April 1811 to deliver the first 100 swords, of which only 22 passed inspection. He was unable to complete the contract "because of intemperance". In October of 1811, therefore, Abraham Nippes was given the contract to complete. I'm not sure exactly how many he produced. In his book "American Swords" Arther Wyllie states he had produced 220 by the time he died in Dec 1812. In any event, it seems to be a relatively rare sword.

 

Like your sword, mine does not seem to have any inspection marks. Perhaps the were worn off or perhaps there never were any. Actually, in looking at past sales of this model, the lack of markings seems not uncommon. Whether that indicates these were among the swords that failed inspection or were just simply unmarked for some reason is unknown. It seems clear, however, these are Winner/Nippes M1810s because of their distinctive grips, the way the knuckle guard fits into a slot in the pommel, and the curve of the blade.

 

post-160923-0-79589400-1469280127.jpgpost-160923-0-64788600-1469280147.jpgpost-160923-0-82498500-1469280617.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old swords were often cut down by farmers to use as a corn knife.

Dick

Yes...I've seen swords cut down to be used as farm implements...but only to be used against a Militant strain of Corn... :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spathologist

Like your sword, mine does not seem to have any inspection marks. Perhaps the were worn off or perhaps there never were any. Actually, in looking at past sales of this model, the lack of markings seems not uncommon. Whether that indicates these were among the swords that failed inspection or were just simply unmarked for some reason is unknown. It seems clear, however, these are Winner/Nippes M1810s because of their distinctive grips, the way the knuckle guard fits into a slot in the pommel, and the curve of the blade.

 

Bezdek notes on page 14 of Swords and Sword Makers of the War of 1812 that Nippes finished finished the Winner contract, delivering 478 balled-grip sabers to round out the 22 Winner sabers that had been accepted. He also notes that Nippes was subcontracted to make hilts for John J. Henry's contract of balled-grip sabers, which were practically identical, that he made sabers for local militia cavalry units, and that his son continued the business after his death.

 

Given that this example is unmarked, and that from period documents the Federal inspectors were quite serious about their business, your example is not a Federal contract saber and was likely made for a local militia. Nice example of the type, though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the numbers, I should have checked Bezdek before writing my note. I wouldn't think there would have been that large of a disconnect. I wonder if the difference might be swords produced by the company after Nippes death.

 

The local militia possibility had occurred to me, and that might even be the case if it were a failed government contract sword - I understand contractors sometimes sold unaccepted swords to the States or other customers. I don't yet have the sword in hand, and am hoping, but not really expecting, to find on close inspection some vestige of a "V", "P", and/or "W".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I may have to try some gentle cleaning when I have time to see if there's a ghost of any type of stamping under the rust. Is it possible it's a state militia sword of the same era and pattern, and therefore unmarked? I've been reading that similar swords were sold to the states after the Militia Act of 1808.

 

 

Were you ever able to find any markings? Something else to look for is an "M" stamped on the spine. Maryland contracted for a number of these swords during the War of 1812, and that is the way they marked them. They are not surprisingly labeled "Maryland Swords" in the collector community.

 

Incidentally, if you are interested in more info on these 1810-style swords, there is an extensive discussion on them on the Sword Forum International site (http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?118038-What-Did-I-Buy)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...