Jump to content


Photo

Help needed - correct SAW sabre


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 usmc-scout

usmc-scout
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 2,950
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silicon Valley

Posted 15 April 2008 - 10:35 AM

I am in process of putting together a Mills .38 caliber Cavalry pistol belt w/sabre chape (Dorsey pg. 307), a R.I.A. 1885 modified Stuart Sabre Attachment (hanger)(Dorsey pg. 178, a R.I.A. holster dtd 1907 and a M1901 Colt DA 38 revolver.

I know nothing about U.S. sabres but believe either a M1897 or M1902 would be correct for the Philippine-American War, AKA the Philippine Insurrection, c. 1899-1913. Any insight on this issue would be greatly appreciated as I am considering a search to find and add the most correct sabre to this rig. Would a Marine NCO sword possibly be appropriate as well? I hate to purchase a reference book which will be used only once, but what would be the best book available?

Thanks

#2 SARGE

SARGE

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 130
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas City Metro

Posted 15 April 2008 - 11:54 AM

I am in process of putting together a Mills .38 caliber Cavalry pistol belt w/sabre chape (Dorsey pg. 307), a R.I.A. 1885 modified Stuart Sabre Attachment (hanger)(Dorsey pg. 178, a R.I.A. holster dtd 1907 and a M1901 Colt DA 38 revolver.

I know nothing about U.S. sabres but believe either a M1897 or M1902 would be correct for the Philippine-American War, AKA the Philippine Insurrection, c. 1899-1913. Any insight on this issue would be greatly appreciated as I am considering a search to find and add the most correct sabre to this rig. Would a Marine NCO sword possibly be appropriate as well? I hate to purchase a reference book which will be used only once, but what would be the best book available?

Thanks


I am not certain if you are asking about officer or enlisted sabres. I presume you are wanting to make an enlisted cavalry rig by using the modified Stuart Sabre hangers. If so, you probably want a CW style light cavalry sabre as these continued to be regulation during this time period. You could use a CW dated one or an iron hilt of the same style, aka the model 1906 enllisted cavalry sabre. Of course there were the experimental cav sabres tried during this same time period they they are difficult to find and expensive. USMC NCO swords were worn in frogs and would not be proper for your cavalry rig.

If you want an officer sword you need either the 1872 Cav officer sabre or the 1902 Sabre for all officers depending upon the exact date you wish to portray.

#3 usmc-scout

usmc-scout
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 2,950
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silicon Valley

Posted 15 April 2008 - 12:11 PM

Thanks for the informative reply. Didn't think the Marine NCO would be correct. Can you help by providing the nomenclature for what you describe as enlisted CW, so that I know what to look for?

Also, were the modified Stuart hangers not used by officers during this time frame? This is a revolver rig, so I presumed it to be for an officer as I expect enlisted would be wearing a rifle cartridge belt, yes?

Time frame is dictated by the 1907 R.I.A. holster - so 1907-1913 in the PI.

All thought appreciated.

Semper Fi

#4 SARGE

SARGE

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 130
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas City Metro

Posted 15 April 2008 - 01:28 PM

Thanks for the informative reply. Didn't think the Marine NCO would be correct. Can you help by providing the nomenclature for what you describe as enlisted CW, so that I know what to look for?

Also, were the modified Stuart hangers not used by officers during this time frame? This is a revolver rig, so I presumed it to be for an officer as I expect enlisted would be wearing a rifle cartridge belt, yes?

Time frame is dictated by the 1907 R.I.A. holster - so 1907-1913 in the PI.

All thought appreciated.

Semper Fi



I don't have the large Dorsey book but I do have "American Military Belts and related Equipments" by Dorsey. So, I am not certain exactly which web Mills belt you are talking about using. Narrowing your time frame down to 1907 would dictate the use of a 1902 Army Officer sabre for a Cavalry Officer as the 1872 Cav sabre would be out of regulation after 1902.

Here is the 1902 Army Officer Sabre that would be regulation for mounted officers in 1907.

Army_sword_hilt.JPG

The chain hanger is what was usually worn by officers, but a brown leather double strap hanger might also be worn. The black 1885 pattern Stuart hanger would have been largely out of use by 1907. I would suspect that the 1903 Officer sabre hangers would be proper for your belt.

Sword_hanger_brown_EM.JPG

I hope this is helpful.

#5 usmc-scout

usmc-scout
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 2,950
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silicon Valley

Posted 15 April 2008 - 02:37 PM

Go to Dorsey's site: rsdmilitaria.com
Click on Accoutrements at the top of the page
Click on page 3 at the bottom of the page
Click on item #A101

This is exactly the belt and hanger I am working with. It would have been in service in the PI during the SAW in 1898 and would have continued in service there into the early 1900's during the Moro conflict. The handgun in use would have been the Colt New Army & Navy revolver. My version is the Colt M1901 with an R.I.A. holster dtd 1907. This belt was in service c. 1892-1910, per Dorsey. The belt may be from a Mills contract c. 1901 and modified with the addition of the sabre chape by R.I.A., common during the SAW period.

#6 Brig

Brig

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 22
  • 21,270 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crossroads of the Corps

Posted 15 April 2008 - 02:42 PM

Thanks for the informative reply. Didn't think the Marine NCO would be correct. Can you help by providing the nomenclature for what you describe as enlisted CW, so that I know what to look for?

Also, were the modified Stuart hangers not used by officers during this time frame? This is a revolver rig, so I presumed it to be for an officer as I expect enlisted would be wearing a rifle cartridge belt, yes?

Time frame is dictated by the 1907 R.I.A. holster - so 1907-1913 in the PI.

All thought appreciated.

Semper Fi

The Marine NCO stems from an Army calvary sword that officers adopted during the Civil War. Afterwards, they went back to the Mamaluke, and gave the calvary swords to the NCOs, making it the second oldest weapon still used by the US military to date

#7 SARGE

SARGE

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 130
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas City Metro

Posted 15 April 2008 - 05:43 PM

Go to Dorsey's site: rsdmilitaria.com
Click on Accoutrements at the top of the page
Click on page 3 at the bottom of the page
Click on item #A101

This is exactly the belt and hanger I am working with. It would have been in service in the PI during the SAW in 1898 and would have continued in service there into the early 1900's during the Moro conflict. The handgun in use would have been the Colt New Army & Navy revolver. My version is the Colt M1901 with an R.I.A. holster dtd 1907. This belt was in service c. 1892-1910, per Dorsey. The belt may be from a Mills contract c. 1901 and modified with the addition of the sabre chape by R.I.A., common during the SAW period.


Yes, thank you for the clarification. I see that since it has the integral regain hook for dismounted use it would not be made for either the chain or 1903 sword hangers as they both had integral regain hooks of their own. That leaves the possibility, as Dorsey says, of the belt being for either officers or enlisted and for anyone who might have carried a sword and pistol such as cavalry or light artillery. It seems that this belt arrangement might have simply been carried over for use. Certainly, the Stuart hangers would have been what this belt was made for.

The problem is what sword do you wish to use with it since you have a 1907 dated holster? You would have to use the 1902 Army Officer sabre shown above for any Cavalry or Artillery or Infantry (mounted) officer from 1907. The other swords would be obsolete by that date. If you wish to portray a mounted enlisted man from 1907, the then regulation sword would be the iron hilt Light Cavalry sabre of 1906.

1906_sword.JPG

This cavalry sword would more properly be worn with the then obsolete Stuart hangers.

#8 usmc-scout

usmc-scout
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 2,950
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silicon Valley

Posted 15 April 2008 - 06:52 PM

Sarge,

Thanks very much. I think you have answered my question and it would seem I have a choice of either the M1902 Officer, or M1906 NCO/enlisted, sabre Yes?

Now the really important part: where can I find these in representative condition and what's the average they sell for in todays market?

#9 SARGE

SARGE

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 130
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas City Metro

Posted 15 April 2008 - 08:11 PM

Sarge,

Thanks very much. I think you have answered my question and it would seem I have a choice of either the M1902 Officer, or M1906 NCO/enlisted, sabre Yes?

Now the really important part: where can I find these in representative condition and what's the average they sell for in todays market?


I would look for them on ebay as you can find them cheaper there than on dealer sites, IMHO. You can probably buy a 1902 Officer sword for around $100-150 and a 1906 Cavalry sword for around $400-450. One problem you will encounter is that you need an early 1902 sword and they tend to run a bit higher than the later ones. The very early Springfield 1902 swords will probably cost around $250-300.

Edited by SARGE, 15 April 2008 - 08:13 PM.


#10 cavsaddle

cavsaddle
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,782
  • 354 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hudson Valley N.Y.

Posted 16 April 2008 - 10:29 AM

The 1907 dated leather gear would not be correct for a true Span Am display. If I'm not mistaken the belt you have was issued to light artillery units and not cavalry. Cavalry units would have been issued the Mills double looped web belt for the 30/40 krag cartridge. There were also two sets of loops on the front of the belt for .38 cal revolver cartridges. The belt was also equipped with a leather chape and a bronze loop to carry the saber hanger. For Span Am the M1885 hanger would be correct with the M1860 cavalry saber. The proper holster would be the M1894 in black leather. The 1907 dated leather would be proper with the M1903 eagle button rifle belt issued with the 1903 Springfield rifle. This belt was also equipped with a leather chape and bronze loop. This would be correct with the M1906 cavalry saber.
Best George.

Edited by cavsaddle, 16 April 2008 - 10:29 AM.


#11 usmc-scout

usmc-scout
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 2,950
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silicon Valley

Posted 16 April 2008 - 11:37 PM

The 1907 dated leather gear would not be correct for a true Span Am display. If I'm not mistaken the belt you have was issued to light artillery units and not cavalry. Cavalry units would have been issued the Mills double looped web belt for the 30/40 krag cartridge. There were also two sets of loops on the front of the belt for .38 cal revolver cartridges. The belt was also equipped with a leather chape and a bronze loop to carry the saber hanger. For Span Am the M1885 hanger would be correct with the M1860 cavalry saber. The proper holster would be the M1894 in black leather. The 1907 dated leather would be proper with the M1903 eagle button rifle belt issued with the 1903 Springfield rifle. This belt was also equipped with a leather chape and bronze loop. This would be correct with the M1906 cavalry saber.
Best George.


Hey cavsaddle,

Thanks for the input, but I think you failed to read everything in the thread. The fighting in the PI extended well beyond the surrender of Spain and the official end of the SAW in 1898. The Philippine-American War - by U.S. standards - began in 1899 and ended in 1902. Fighting continued until c. 1913 - commonly referred to in the U.S. as the Moro/bandit period. The Philippines, however, recognize the PAW continuing well beyond 1902, with hostilities ending c. 1913. Interestingly, all U.S. troopers who became casualties through 1913 were shown on Army roles as suffering their wounds in the SAW and their retirements were also handled as SAW retirements.

As to the gear, please see my references to Dorsey in above post and view the site. I believe you are incorrect regarding the holster use being limited to the M1894. The primary sidearm during the PI conflict -1898 thru 1913 - was the Colt New Army DA in .38 Long Colt. Army models were the M1892, M1894, M1896, M1901 and M1903, all of which saw extensive service in the PI. The holster for this sidearm was never given a specific nomenclature or model number. You will find the holster referred to in varying descriptions in different documents including RIA and the 1908 edition of the Manual on Horse Equipment (Thanks Charlie Flick). A 1907 dtd holster is certainly correct for the ongoing conflict in the PI, as is the belt and sabre hanger, according to Dorsey.

The fact is that the PI conflict covers a span of some 15 years, during which the field gear and primary sidearm and long arm of the U.S. Army was in a state of almost constant change/revision. Consequently, I believe any number of issue items and arms did serve in the PI. Even the Colt DA 45 M1909 was produced (for only 3 years) primarily for service in the PI while the M1911 was still undergoing modification and testing.

At least this is my understanding but I wasn't there and could be wrong.

#12 usmc-scout

usmc-scout
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 2,950
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silicon Valley

Posted 16 April 2008 - 11:41 PM

The 1907 dated leather gear would not be correct for a true Span Am display. If I'm not mistaken the belt you have was issued to light artillery units and not cavalry. Cavalry units would have been issued the Mills double looped web belt for the 30/40 krag cartridge. There were also two sets of loops on the front of the belt for .38 cal revolver cartridges. The belt was also equipped with a leather chape and a bronze loop to carry the saber hanger. For Span Am the M1885 hanger would be correct with the M1860 cavalry saber. The proper holster would be the M1894 in black leather. The 1907 dated leather would be proper with the M1903 eagle button rifle belt issued with the 1903 Springfield rifle. This belt was also equipped with a leather chape and bronze loop. This would be correct with the M1906 cavalry saber.
Best George.


Hey cavsaddle,

Thanks for the input, but I think you failed to read everything in the thread. The fighting in the PI extended well beyond the surrender of Spain and the official end of the SAW in 1898. The Philippine-American War - by U.S. standards - began in 1899 and ended in 1902. Fighting continued until c. 1913 - commonly referred to in the U.S. as the Moro/bandit period. The Philippines, however, recognize the PAW continuing well beyond 1902, with hostilities ending c. 1913. Interestingly, all U.S. troopers who became casualties through 1913 were shown on Army roles as suffering their wounds in the SAW and their retirements were also handled as SAW retirements.

As to the gear, please see my references to Dorsey in above post and view the site. I believe you are incorrect regarding the holster use being limited to the M1894. The primary sidearm during the PI conflict -1898 thru 1913 - was the Colt New Army DA in .38 Long Colt. Army models were the M1892, M1894, M1896, M1901 and M1903, all of which saw extensive service in the PI. I'm told the holster for this sidearm was never given a specific nomenclature or model number. You will find the holster referred to in varying descriptions in different documents including RIA and the 1908 edition of the Manual on Horse Equipment (Thanks Charlie Flick). A 1907 dtd holster is certainly correct for the ongoing conflict in the PI, as is the belt and sabre hanger, according to Dorsey.

The fact is that the PI conflict covers a span of some 15 years, during which the field gear and primary sidearm and long arm of the U.S. Army was in a state of almost constant change/revision. Consequently, I believe any number of issue items and arms, including sabres, did serve in the PI. Even the Colt DA 45 M1909 was produced (for only 3 years) primarily for service in the PI while the M1911 was still undergoing modification and testing.

At least this is my understanding, but I wasn't there and could be wrong.

Edited by usmc-scout, 16 April 2008 - 11:44 PM.


#13 cavsaddle

cavsaddle
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,782
  • 354 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hudson Valley N.Y.

Posted 20 April 2008 - 07:51 PM

Hey cavsaddle,

Thanks for the input, but I think you failed to read everything in the thread. The fighting in the PI extended well beyond the surrender of Spain and the official end of the SAW in 1898. The Philippine-American War - by U.S. standards - began in 1899 and ended in 1902. Fighting continued until c. 1913 - commonly referred to in the U.S. as the Moro/bandit period. The Philippines, however, recognize the PAW continuing well beyond 1902, with hostilities ending c. 1913. Interestingly, all U.S. troopers who became casualties through 1913 were shown on Army roles as suffering their wounds in the SAW and their retirements were also handled as SAW retirements.

As to the gear, please see my references to Dorsey in above post and view the site. I believe you are incorrect regarding the holster use being limited to the M1894. The primary sidearm during the PI conflict -1898 thru 1913 - was the Colt New Army DA in .38 Long Colt. Army models were the M1892, M1894, M1896, M1901 and M1903, all of which saw extensive service in the PI. I'm told the holster for this sidearm was never given a specific nomenclature or model number. You will find the holster referred to in varying descriptions in different documents including RIA and the 1908 edition of the Manual on Horse Equipment (Thanks Charlie Flick). A 1907 dtd holster is certainly correct for the ongoing conflict in the PI, as is the belt and sabre hanger, according to Dorsey.

The fact is that the PI conflict covers a span of some 15 years, during which the field gear and primary sidearm and long arm of the U.S. Army was in a state of almost constant change/revision. Consequently, I believe any number of issue items and arms, including sabres, did serve in the PI. Even the Colt DA 45 M1909 was produced (for only 3 years) primarily for service in the PI while the M1911 was still undergoing modification and testing.

At least this is my understanding, but I wasn't there and could be wrong.

Sorry if there was a misunderstanding.Your comments concerning post SAW equipment is indeed correct. My response was to the original wording of the post needing help with "SAW" sword and setup. I answered the question as to the proper setup for a SAW display. None of my response included any comments about equipment after 1898. The true SAW setup would not have included the M1906 saber or any russet leather equipment. As to the cartridge belt mentioned on the Dorsey web site, it was strictly issued to mounted or "light" artillery units which were not armed with the Krag carbine, thus no loops for carbine ammo. The loops were for .38 cal. revolver ammo only. If this is a display for a mounted artilley unit it would be correct. For a cavalry display it would not. George.

Edited by cavsaddle, 20 April 2008 - 07:57 PM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users