M-1917 boarding cutlass

[Mr.Jerry]

Hello,

 

This week I had a bunch of various swords and bayonets walk in my shop, including a nice M-1917 boarding cutlass by MILSCO. I have had several of the loose cutlasses turn up before, but this is the first I have seen complete with the scabbard & frog.

 

Any idea of value on a complete rig? I need to make an offer on this one and want to be fair.

 

Thanks,

Jerry

 

 

[jw517]

Where are you Jerry? I'm in Altoona,by EauClaire.

[Mr.Jerry]

Hey,

 

We are just outside of Milwaukee, a few blocks west of the State Fair Park

I get up to Eau Claire quite a bit to see my wife's sisters family up there. (and on the way to Bob's MN show).

[tankerman]

for what it is worth...a couple recently on Ebay 315--395 $ range. Been on several times with no bidders.

[jw517]

My wife is from S. Milwaukee . Get any interesting knives give me a shout! [email protected]

[Mr.Jerry]

for what it is worth...a couple recently on Ebay 315--395 $ range. Been on several times with no bidders.

 

Thanks,

There seems to be some "foreign" ones that are similar as well, not really my area of expertise. But that does get me into the ball park. This one also has the swivel frog, a piece missing on every other example I have seen.

I had once found a photo of WW2 marine carrying one, that helped me sell the one I had previously.

 

John, I will drop you an email-

[SARGE]

The Dutch ones are virtually identical. Be careful that it is USN marked.

[Mr.Jerry]

It's not USN marked, but it is MILSCO marked. (???)

[doyler]

Several Topics on the Klewang. This looks to be a US made for the Dutch

 

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65426-m1942-naval-cutlass/?fromsearch=1

[Horseclover]

The 1917 does not have the openings in the bowl.

 

http://www.angelfire.com/wa/swordcollector/cutlass.html

 

 

 

 

Cheers

 

GC

[gunbarrel]

It's not USN marked, but it is MILSCO marked. (???)

Mr. Jerry.

 

It's a klewang. Milsco made them for the Dutch government. Click on the link provided by doyler and you will see how the Milsco drawing is titled.

[reschenk]

There seems to be a lot of confusion and conflicting data out there about these MILCO swords. It seems clear that MILSCO was contracted to produce these for the Dutch, but I have also seen it frequently stated that the US took delivery of at least some of these. This seems to be supported by photos of US troops carrying these swords. The one attached here was taken in Noumea, New Caldonia on 2 Nov 1942. Also supporting US use in the existence of some examples with US markings on the scabbard. See the example in Horseclosver's posting above.

[doyler]

Is there any information avaiable to the possibility of these Dutch contracted swords not reaching the Dutch due to the war basically ending open trade wth the Dutch mainland and her colonies?

 

THis to me would make sense that existing stock may have ended up being available to US toops or use.

[earlymb]

Since the Klewangs were standard issue for the colonial army too, it's not unlikely US troops in the Pacific would be able to get their hands on a few now & then. It's also very possible orders couldn't be delivered by Milsco due to the Japanese overrunning the Dutch East-Indies in January 1942; the same happened with the Johnson M1941 rifles that went to the USMC instead.

 

Also, the M1917 naval cutlass is a copy of the Klewang, not the other way around

 

Here a Milsco Klewang with scabbard will do around €250. There are good copies around and the Dutch Hembrug-made examples are worth more. The hinging scabbard is for the army.

 

There is a specialised book on the Klewang available that is partly in English.

[Mr.Jerry]

Ah, so my confusion was warranted~

Thank you gentlemen for all of your help, I have made an offer, we will now see where this goes.

[reschenk]

Ref the comment "Since the Klewangs were standard issue for the colonial army too, it's not unlikely US troops in the Pacific would be able to get their hands on a few now & then."

 

My question is whether in 1942 U.S. forces would have had much contact with Dutch/Dutch East Indies forces. I really don't have much expertise in WWII history, but it seems at this early point in the war US forces were staging from/through bases in the US and Australia/New Zealand into Japanese occupied British/Australian colonial territories. Were there sizable Dutch forces in those areas from which American troops could have acquired the klewangs we see them carrying in these pictures? If not, this would tend to support the theory at least some of these MILSCO cutlasses found their way into US ordinance channels.

[bayonetman]

A lot more in a previous discussion of the Klewang:

 

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65426-m1942-naval-cutlass/?hl=klewang&do=findComment&comment=476013

[earlymb]

Ref the comment "Since the Klewangs were standard issue for the colonial army too, it's not unlikely US troops in the Pacific would be able to get their hands on a few now & then."

 

My question is whether in 1942 U.S. forces would have had much contact with Dutch/Dutch East Indies forces. I really don't have much expertise in WWII history, but it seems at this early point in the war US forces were staging from/through bases in the US and Australia/New Zealand into Japanese occupied British/Australian colonial territories. Were there sizable Dutch forces in those areas from which American troops could have acquired the klewangs we see them carrying in these pictures? If not, this would tend to support the theory at least some of these MILSCO cutlasses found their way into US ordinance channels.

 

I think most Klewangs in US service came straight from Milsco from batches that couldn't be delivered to Dutch colonial forces anymore. Contact between US & Dutch forces could have happened in Australia and on New Guinea. Later in the war Klewangs and Heiho's could also have been captured from the Japanese, on a small scale ofcourse.

 

[bayonetman]

Although I am not absolutely certain of this, my contacts with Carter Rila and others some years back indicated that the WW2 Klewangs made in the US were made by Vince Fencing Equipment Inc, not by Milsco. The well known drawing of the Klewang by Milsco that is referenced in the preceding thread that I mentioned is dated 1947 and is for post-WW2 contracts (also noted as Obsolete 5/12/1960). Not as clear as I would like, but is definitely 1947 on the original drawing.

 

If anyone has information about Milsco producing this item prior to 1947, I would appreciate your posting the information so I can correct my files.

 

 

 

 

 

[earlymb]

Gary, it seems you are correct.

 

According to the book 'Klewang' Milsco's first contact with the Klewang was in 1946-1947, although the authors suspect Milsco did make the scabbards for the Klewangs made by Vince in 1941-42, although Milsco couldn't confirm that. They did however produce and deliver 40.000 Klewangs to the Dutch East Indies government in 1947. These were, however, initially ordered from Vince with Milsco contracted to produce the scabbards.

 

Vince however was not able to fulfill this contract for unknown reasons and so Milsco took over. The blanks were made by United Drop Forge Company from Milwaukee, which were further finished and assembled by Milsco, who made the guards themselves. They also made the complete scabbard (source of the above: authors' correspondence with Milsco). The book also reproduces the same construction drawing, along with 2 others covering the scabbard.

 

The authors conclude that of all the US contracted Klewangs the ones made by Vince were delivered in 1941-42, while those made by Milsco were delivered in 1946-1947. They also state that a number of Klewangs made by Vince could not be delivered anymore due to the Japanese invasion of the Dutch East Indies and were instead sent to Australia, where a number of them were issued to US forces. The US Navy also got a number of Klewangs, although it's not sure if those were part of the diverted batch made by Vince, or part of a previous order by the US Navy self.

 

(J.P. Puype & R.J. De Stürler Boekwijt, Klewang - Catalogue of the Dutch Army Museum, Eburon 2001, p. 45-49, 186, 187).

 

For those who are interested in this topic, this book is partly in English.

 

In short, the Klewangs seen in the hands of US troops will have been made by Vince for the most part, maybe with a few pre-war made examples made by Hembrug or locally. I was wrong in my first reply, Milsco didn't enter the scene till 1947 (at least for the Klewang itself).

[1SG_1st_Cav]

I sold an authentic US Navy 1917 Boarding Cutlass here on the FORUM about 4 years ago for $725. It had the closed hand guard.

[reschenk]

Thank you earlymb! At last it appears we have a definitive answer to the long-standing dispute about MILSCO cutlasses. It's not necessarily the answer I would have wanted. I have a nice MILSCO in my collection of US swords, and had always thought this was one of the wartime contract swords which might have been issued to American troops in the South Pacific. Clearly it isn't, and I will need a Vince-produced example to fill that vacancy. Still, it's good to know the facts.

[gunbarrel]

I sold an authentic US Navy 1917 Boarding Cutlass here on the FORUM about 4 years ago for $725. It had the closed hand guard.

I regret having to pass on one at a local gun show about a month ago. It was all original in VG condition, including the scabbard, for $500. But, it was either that, or an Astra 300 in .380 with Nazi Germany markings for $450. Just could not pass up on the Astra...

[reschenk]

Check out this SFI thread on the M1917 cutlass/M1941 klewang (http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?117508-M1941-Cutlass);

 

Not only does it contain great new info on the US manufactured klewangs produced for the Dutch, but also some entirely new info (at least to me) on the production of new M1917 cutlasses for the USN Bureau of Ordinance. The most interesting data:

 

"In 1941, according to JP Puype, the US Navy decided to order more 1917 cutlasses. The Bureau of Ordnance could not find technical drawings or specifications so sample swords were supplied by the New York Naval Yard. Lilley-Ames (formerly Ames) contracted to produce 3000 cutlasses. This was in the same period as they were producing approx the same number of klewangs for the NEI army via the VINCE contract. After producing only 170 1917 model cutlasses Lilley-Ames asked the Bureau if the US navy order could be produced to the same pattern as the Dutch order. The Bureau agreed with only minor changes. The NY Navy Yard reported that 2958 cutlasses of the 1917 klewang variant had been completed and paid for. These were not marked."

 

From this I would conclude that somewhere out there there might be 170 M1917 cutlasses without the "USN" marking on the ricasso, and an additional 2788 with the cut-out guard. Presumably these would all be in 1941-style scabbards vice the original M1917-style. My question would be, what "minor changes" from the Dutch order pattern did the Navy request, and are these such as to allow differentiation of the USN from the Dutch swords?

[reschenk]

For some reason I can't edit my above post. The first sentence of the last paragraph should read "From this I would conclude that somewhere out there there might be 170 M1917 cutlasses without the "USN" marking on the ricasso, and an additional 2788 with the cut-out guard.".

 

Change made as per request - Bayonetman