Mark Sheffy Posted January 10 Share #1 Posted January 10 Hello All, Just picked this up and I am having a hard time finding a match . Next to the Rock Island Arsenal marking is W.P.G. No date that I can find . It doesn’t match the pre WW1 holsters or the Indian Wars either. Thanks in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWS Posted January 10 Share #2 Posted January 10 Congrats, you have one of the 500 Forsyth pattern holsters made at Rock Island Arsenal in 1883! Two variations were made, one for the Colt SAA and the other for the S&W Schofield. 250 of each variation were made by July, 1883 as authorized by the Chief of Ordnance. Brigadier General S.V. Benet. Lt. Col. James W Forsyth, for which this pattern holster is named, did not actually design it but recommended it be made after he examined a "cowboy holster" at Fort Clark Texas made in this manner. It turns out that this design solved a problem that the Cavalry had with the Model 1881 holster, ie., that it would not fit over the current Mills mfg. belt for carbine ammo and a second pistol only belt had to worn. Of the 500 total made, some of each were issued for evaluation to the 4th, 5th, 8th and 10th Cavalry and the 16th Infantry stationed in Texas, Kansas, Nebraska and New Mexico at that time. The field reports were all favorable, yet the design was not adopted as a regulation holster! Go figure! My opinion is that it followed the design of many civilian made "Cowboy " holsters of and before 1883 with a skirted design that fit over various width belts an generally held the pistol more securely to the wearer's body than the Model 1881 holster. Because it was so well received by troops in the field, non-regulation copies were made of this design by saddle makers of this era.Thanks for posting this rather rare "improvement" holster that should have been adopted. Steve P.S. -- If you have a Colt SAA or Schofield, carefully try it to see which model this is made for. Please don't try to force either as this 141 year-old holster may have shrunk slightly over that time! More pictures please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Sheffy Posted January 10 Author Share #3 Posted January 10 Thank you Steve for the detailed reply! Wow , I guess it’s a pretty rare piece . I may hold on to it a bit as I just got it today. Thanks again Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Sheffy Posted January 10 Author Share #4 Posted January 10 Steve, I just saw your “PS”. I don’t have either pistol to try . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWS Posted January 10 Share #5 Posted January 10 5 minutes ago, Mark Sheffy said: Steve, I just saw your “PS”. I don’t have either pistol to try . Mark--No problem, just send it to me as I have 1 of each to try!!! Seriously, I'll risk plagiarism and make a copy of a picture out of Scott Meadows' holster book with a period mounted trooper wearing this holster. Give me a while for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Sheffy Posted January 10 Author Share #6 Posted January 10 Sounds good thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWS Posted January 10 Share #7 Posted January 10 Mark--Here's the photo I mentioned plus a couple more. Before I get in real trouble, these photos came from: US Military Holsters and Pistol Cartridge Boxes Author-Edward Scott Meadows Published-1987, Taylor Publishing Co.,Dallas Texas pages-128,132 The first photo speaks for itself, the holster on a 45-70 cartridge belt, the second is a close-up of the holster which, ironically, is a Schofield revolver in a Forsyth Colt SAA pattern holster! The flap has had a second hole punched in it to accomodate securing a Schofield rather than the Colt for which it was made. Oddly. neither hole is centered on the flap, which doesn't make sense to me either as one of the holes should have been centered as yours is when it was made. And yes, either model revolver can be made to fit in either holster pattern, I know this from actual experience with my pistols. I don't know why RIA made a pattern for each revolver when one would have worked! The last photo shows a holster made at RIA in 1883 with the RIA stamp on the flap. The photo is a bit fuzzy, but I assume the inspector's cartouche is there also? WPG was a known inspector at RIA. Note the buckle is square rather than somewhat rounded as your example has, but there were small variations in both the hardware used and the method of attachment of the strap to the holster body during the manufacture of the 500 made. Interesting holster you have there, please take more photos of it when you can, or better yet, pick up Colt and Schofield to try the fit! Again, thanks for posting. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ludwigh1980 Posted January 10 Share #8 Posted January 10 Burgess & Co and What Price Glory both made a good repro of this holster. (Burgess & Co has been out of business for some time). IMO this looks like one of those to me and the W.P.G. would indicate it was made by them (What Price Glory) and then artificially aged. The originals I have seen used white waxed thread which would darken over time. This looks like black thread was used. The repros even have authentic markings ie, "ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL" stamped on the flap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWS Posted January 11 Share #9 Posted January 11 49 minutes ago, ludwigh1980 said: Burgess & Co and What Price Glory both made a good repro of this holster. (Burgess & Co has been out of business for some time). IMO this looks like one of those to me and the W.P.G. would indicate it was made by them (What Price Glory) and then artificially aged. The originals I have seen used white waxed thread which would darken over time. This looks like black thread was used. The repros even have authentic markings ie, "ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL" stamped on the flap. It's entirely possible what your saying is true. It is impossible to determine authenticity from a few photos and the only sure way is to have the item in hand. I hope you are wrong, but it wouldn't be the first time a new collector was taken in as such. If a reproduction, it's a convincing one! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Sheffy Posted January 11 Author Share #10 Posted January 11 I have a large collection of military antiques. This is a bit out of my focus. I don’t believe it’s a reproduction. I’ll post more photos in natural light tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWS Posted January 11 Share #11 Posted January 11 Thanks Mark. That might help sort this out. I also assumed you might be a relatively new collector, my mistake! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Sheffy Posted January 11 Author Share #12 Posted January 11 No problem Steve. I looked at both Burgess and What price glory holsters and there are no comparable examples. Markings and construction do not match . I’ll post pictures tomorrow . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jprostak Posted January 11 Share #13 Posted January 11 HI, There are two Forsyth holsters on eBay right now. Please take a look. One is a What Price Glory repro and the other is original. I think what you have is a repro, but that is my opinion from the photos that were posted. Your results may vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Sheffy Posted January 11 Author Share #14 Posted January 11 Here are some pictures in natural light. I have leather from Indian Wars and earlier. This sure feels, smells, looks like old leather . Looks like old construction to me . Notice the missing distressed stitching and the edge wear on the “US” . A few old gouges and interior wear . Can’t imagine how you could replicate this wear . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAC1901 Posted January 11 Share #15 Posted January 11 I'll refrain from saying whether it is for a repro for sure, but from the pics there are signs that lean towards that, in my view. (Hope I'm wrong) The leather appears to be too supple and sound for leather of that age. Where it was finish rubbed or scuffed on the edges particularly. The seam separation is too clean. As far as whether leather can be aged to this degree -- the answer is absolutely yes. There was a fellow in my area that made 'worn' cowboy gear for big bucks. I had him make me and a friend some tow/pack gear for an 1880 Hotchkiss gun. His work was stunning, it almost perfectly matched the original gear I had. Some of his cowboy holsters were spooky beautiful. Albeit with that telltale feel that the leather was a bit too strong and supple for its age. I remember I had to wait a couple months to get my work done because his work was so much in demand. Again I'm not saying definitively your holster is original or not, just that the apparent age it shows is something that can indeed be done. The thing is still beautiful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWS Posted January 12 Share #16 Posted January 12 Thanks for the additional photos Mark. For me, it's a toss up. You have a huge advantage with the holster in hand to evaluate it, we on here, not so much. I did find one that sold at auction in 2018 titled as an 1881 Forsyth holster. It looked extremely good too, except the price---$1400 plus fees! If you are comfortable with it, that's really all that matters. Please post some photos of your other equipment too when you can, your photos are excellent. Thanks, Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now