Pre-War USN Sword & belts

[INIMICUS]

I just obtained a fine sword, two belts and other material from an estate sale.

 

The officer was a '39 USNA grad, and had his sword monogram'd and leather case initialed; and the blade engraving includes his name fancily spelled out near the ricasso.

 

A few things I'd like help on, please:

 

- why does this sword have no maker's name, just an inletted black "Proved" surrounded by the familiar Jewish star design?

 

- do wartime and pre-war swords differ in quality? This one has all the gilt, polished highlights etc.

 

- one belt sword seems heavier weight and better quality than the other, esp. the buckles; one seems almost die-struck, the other mayber stamped (?) - plus one eagle head looks right the other left (?).

 

- prices for these rigs today seem to be in the $250-$325 range. Sound fair? Condition is very close to mint. Thanks, and good hunting.

[INIMICUS]

I just obtained a fine sword, two belts and other material from an estate sale.

 

The officer was a '39 USNA grad, and had his sword monogram'd and leather case initialed; and the blade engraving includes his name fancily spelled out near the ricasso.

 

A few things I'd like help on, please:

 

- why does this sword have no maker's name, just an inletted black "Proved" surrounded by the familiar Jewish star design?

 

- do wartime and pre-war swords differ in quality? This one has all the gilt, polished highlights etc.

 

- one belt sword seems heavier weight and better quality than the other, esp. the buckles; one seems almost die-struck, the other mayber stamped (?) - plus one eagle head looks right the other left (?).

 

- prices for these rigs today seem to be in the $250-$325 range. Sound fair? Condition is very close to mint. Thanks, and good hunting.

 

 

Oopps- I meant "one sword belt..." Also, the sword has the original bullion knot in the original tie.

[Dave]

I just obtained a fine sword, two belts and other material from an estate sale.

 

The officer was a '39 USNA grad, and had his sword monogram'd and leather case initialed; and the blade engraving includes his name fancily spelled out near the ricasso.

 

A few things I'd like help on, please:

 

- why does this sword have no maker's name, just an inletted black "Proved" surrounded by the familiar Jewish star design?

 

- do wartime and pre-war swords differ in quality? This one has all the gilt, polished highlights etc.

 

- one belt sword seems heavier weight and better quality than the other, esp. the buckles; one seems almost die-struck, the other mayber stamped (?) - plus one eagle head looks right the other left (?).

 

- prices for these rigs today seem to be in the $250-$325 range. Sound fair? Condition is very close to mint. Thanks, and good hunting.

 

TO answer your questions:

 

I'm guessing that there's no maker name on the sword as it was probably carried and sold through the Academy or local tailor's shop directly from the sword maker, rather than through an importer, which is typically who stuck their names on Navy swords during that time period. That's just a guess though!

 

As far as the Star of David, that's actually the Star of Damascus. This was an eastern symbol of two intertwined triangles used by the early sword craftsman to show the quality of the sword, and was carried on by European sword crafters. It has nothing to do with Judaism.

 

Is there a big difference in quality between pre-War swords and later? No, really it all depends on the maker of the sword. Wilkinson still makes a very nice quality sword, but the ones currently made in Toledo (which are the most common you'll find because they're cheap) are crap. At the same time, I've run into some pretty crappy pre-War Navy swords, and yet my own personal sword dates from 1917 and is an incredible sword. It's really dependent upon how much someone wanted to pay for a sword rather than an actual time period.

 

As far as the belts, one is probably the original belt (with the right facing eagle) and the other is a later belt (perhaps a larger size???)

 

AS far as the price, a heavy factor in this is who the guy was. If he retired as an admiral or had some good decorations, it will obviously bring more. If he resigned as an Ensign, not so much. On the low end, I'd agree with your price range, depending on who it was I think it could bring upwards of $500 or more if he was pretty well known.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Dave

[SARGE]

Inimicus,

 

I agree with all that Dave has said about your sword and accouterments. The value really is in the quality of the sword and the provinance. While a known Admiral's sword will obviously bring more money than that of an Ensign, quality is a key factor (along with condition of course).

 

Here is the problem that I see with the 1852 Naval Officer sword. It has been around since its introduction in 1852 and these swords are plentiful on the collector's market. Also, they tend to all look more or less alike with little variation. As Dave said, the current crop of Spanish and Japanese made US Navy swords are a pretty sad and junky lot. They are cheap though, so there are a lot of them out there made of poor materials, with shoddy etching, and cheaply finished. On the other hand, pre-war German made US Navy swords are very nice and cost more money when they were made. They command more money now. Would you rather have a cheaply made 1852 Navy sword with plastic grips or a high quality 1852 Navy sword with sharkskin grips?

 

Early swords can command much more money. Here is a German made Civil War period Naval Officer sword that has a heavy wide blade with a high quality etch. It also has a fine silver wire mesh grip instead of sharkskin. There is little comparison to a sword like this and the post WWI period swords, IMHO.

 

I hope this is helpful.

 

[INIMICUS]

TO answer your questions:

 

I'm guessing that there's no maker name on the sword as it was probably carried and sold through the Academy or local tailor's shop directly from the sword maker, rather than through an importer, which is typically who stuck their names on Navy swords during that time period. That's just a guess though!

 

As far as the Star of David, that's actually the Star of Damascus. This was an eastern symbol of two intertwined triangles used by the early sword craftsman to show the quality of the sword, and was carried on by European sword crafters. It has nothing to do with Judaism.

 

Is there a big difference in quality between pre-War swords and later? No, really it all depends on the maker of the sword. Wilkinson still makes a very nice quality sword, but the ones currently made in Toledo (which are the most common you'll find because they're cheap) are crap. At the same time, I've run into some pretty crappy pre-War Navy swords, and yet my own personal sword dates from 1917 and is an incredible sword. It's really dependent upon how much someone wanted to pay for a sword rather than an actual time period.

 

As far as the belts, one is probably the original belt (with the right facing eagle) and the other is a later belt (perhaps a larger size???)

 

AS far as the price, a heavy factor in this is who the guy was. If he retired as an admiral or had some good decorations, it will obviously bring more. If he resigned as an Ensign, not so much. On the low end, I'd agree with your price range, depending on who it was I think it could bring upwards of $500 or more if he was pretty well known.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Dave

 

Thanks Dave - big help.

 

Dead right about the sword belt buckles. Well, at least the "substitute" is still bright and uncorroded! And yeh - one belt is a little bigger- that's Navy chow for you!

 

Correct also - no maker's mark on sword. It is, tho, a high quality piece - from the "fire-gilting" (sorry, my usual ref. pt. is WWI/WWI Germany) to the blade etch, to the scabb. fittings, leather and knot. This kid had some mon for sure. He'd also bought the "fancies" newly-discused in the Uniform Forum - even if he never wore them!

 

"He" was Cdr. Andrew R. Drea, USNA '39, a Combat "V" earner, whose commands included the somewhat celebrated USS Mullany (DD-258).

 

Thanks again...

[INIMICUS]

Inimicus,

 

I agree with all that Dave has said about your sword and accouterments. The value really is in the quality of the sword and the provinance. While a known Admiral's sword will obviously bring more money than that of an Ensign, quality is a key factor (along with condition of course).

 

Here is the problem that I see with the 1852 Naval Officer sword. It has been around since its introduction in 1852 and these swords are plentiful on the collector's market. Also, they tend to all look more or less alike with little variation. As Dave said, the current crop of Spanish and Japanese made US Navy swords are a pretty sad and junky lot. They are cheap though, so there are a lot of them out there made of poor materials, with shoddy etching, and cheaply finished. On the other hand, pre-war German made US Navy swords are very nice and cost more money when they were made. They command more money now. Would you rather have a cheaply made 1852 Navy sword with plastic grips or a high quality 1852 Navy sword with sharkskin grips?

 

Early swords can command much more money. Here is a German made Civil War period Naval Officer sword that has a heavy wide blade with a high quality etch. It also has a fine silver wire mesh grip instead of sharkskin. There is little comparison to a sword like this and the post WWI period swords, IMHO.

 

I hope this is helpful.

 

 

Yes, thank you as well, Sarge; much appreciated

(and tks. for showing the fine silver-gripped sword!) Seems only some small details were changed over time: substituting the grip's laurel leaves for oakleaves, differeing acid-etches and such.

 

By the way, Dave had me thinking re his (dated?) 1917 piece. How d'you know if mine isn't earlier than '39? Or does the Damascus Star and "PROVED" mark date it?

 

Well, I wish it were Adm. Spruance's - but you can't have everything! (Sadly I missed out on the heavy, striped brocade belt that someone beat me to - and narrowly avoided not getting the sword!)

[SARGE]

Inimicus,

 

Makers are still putting the "Proved" mark within the six pointed Star of Damascus on swords. This "proof" mark is interesting in that it was a round brass mark inlaid into the steel blade very early on. This marking was a quality mark and the Germans used it a lot on export swords. During the US Civil War period German swords generally were etched with "Iron Proof" on the spine of the blade while those for home consumption were often marked "Eisenhauer." Both mean that the steel sword blade was waranteed to cut iron. Unfortunately, today the mark is almost meaningless.

 

It sounds like your sword is a nice one. The higher the quality the higher the value.

[INIMICUS]

Inimicus,

 

Makers are still putting the "Proved" mark within the six pointed Star of Damascus on swords. This "proof" mark is interesting in that it was a round brass mark inlaid into the steel blade very early on. This marking was a quality mark and the Germans used it a lot on export swords. During the US Civil War period German swords generally were etched with "Iron Proof" on the spine of the blade while those for home consumption were often marked "Eisenhauer." Both mean that the steel sword blade was waranteed to cut iron. Unfortunately, today the mark is almost meaningless.

 

It sounds like your sword is a nice one. The higher the quality the higher the value.

 

Cheers for the info and other help, Sarge. It's esp. nice when connected to a fairly big grouping.

[SARGE]

Posting a photo of the sword under discussion for Inimicus. He will comment on his very nice looking sword.

 

 

Closeup view of the dolphin drag.

 

 

View of the two Navy belts.