Lanyards & the M1911

wkambic
Society Member
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:44 pm
Last Name: Kambic

I've followed a couple of discussions in other groups regarding lanyards and the M1911. One item that often surfaces is the use of a lanyard on an M1911 equipped with a magazine that has a lanyard ring. According to some, M1911 magazines had the lanyard ring as "standard equipment" until sometime in 1915; it was deleated thereafter.

Is there any specific guidance in any published instructions on the proper use of the magazine lanyard ring? One claim often made is that the troopers of the time would wear two lanyards, one for the pistol and a second for the magazine. This sounds sort of "Rube Goldberg" to me but might be the case. If two lanyards were not used, what was? If anything? Or was the magazine lanyard ring considered "superfluous" and just ignored?

Any help would be appreciated! :)
Jim Bewley
Society Member
Posts: 597
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 10:04 am
Last Name: Bewley

I just found a reference that said the original lanyard had "three" clips. One for pistol and two for mags. I have no idea if this is true and can't seem to find a picture of one if it is.

Jim
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

I've been bumping up some items from another lanyard thread that may be of interest here, pertaining to this topic. I may repost a few them here as well.
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

GerryRA wrote:Cavalry Drill Regulations, 1916, Manual of the Pistol:

"When a lanyard is used the snaps are attached to the butt of the pistol and the magazine, the lanyard is passed over the head and the sliding loop drawn snug against the right armpit. The lanyard should then be of just such length that the arm can be extended without constraint."

This indicates that the "M1912" lanyard had 2 snap hooks. I expect that it was identical to the M1904 but with a leather mounted japaned snap hook on each end of the cord. Used as indicated, the spent magazine would be ejected and suspended from one end of the lanyard depending from the sliding loop under the right arm pit. In a mounted pistol charge, I doubt if it was expected to use more than a second magazine or to move the magazine lanyard to the new magazine in the pistol. Around 1915, the loop on the magazine was discontinued, but looped mags continued in service.
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

Couvi wrote:Ron,

All I have been able to uncover is the pistol lanyard with two cords ending in a single hook. No one seems to have heard of the "Two-Row" pistol lanyard. See enclosed from the Ordnance Museum:

Ordnance Bulletin No. 1719</u>, <u>Horse Equipments and Equipments for Officers and Enlisted Men</u>, May 10, 1905 (revised July 3, 1908). Page 45, Revolver lanyards; the parts are:

1 body.
1 sliding hoop.
1 chape.
1 bag snap hook

For officers the body is made from russet leather 6 or 7 ounces per square foot, cut and braided around a core of chalk line so as to form a cord. The cord is doubled, provided with a sliding loop, and the ends fastened to a 5/8-inch bronze bag snap-hook by a chape of 8 to 9 ounce russet collar leather.

For enlisted men the body is made from No.5 olive-drab sash cord with sliding loop of leather covered with thread to match. The ends are fastened to a 5/8-inch brown japanned bag snap hook by a russet leather chape, to which they strongly stitched.
Couvi
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/ ... opic=60985

From that thread, note:
Hello Fausto:

The following is from page 283 of the "Drill Regulations of Field Companies of the Signal Corps", 1915 edition.

Regards,
Charlie Flick

SIGNAL CORPS DRILL REGULATIONS.

Changes 1 WAR DEPARTMENT,

No. 3. / Washington, August 16, 1915.

Paragraphs 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 10*6, 107, and 108, Drill Regulations for Field Companies of the Signal Corps, are changed as follows:

95. The recruit is first made familiar with the mechanism of the pistol, the names of the principal parts, and the method of cleaning, assembling, and operating it.

When a lanyard is used, the snaps are attached to the butt of the pistol and the magazine; the sliding loop is passed over the head and drawn snug against the right armpit. The lanyard should then be of just such length that the arm can be extended without constraint. (C. S. C. D. R., No. S, Aug. 16, 1915.)
wkambic
Society Member
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:44 pm
Last Name: Kambic

Thanks to all who responded, and to Pat for bumping up the earlier threads.

Of course, now we have the critical question: does anyone have a photo, drawing, or detailed specification of the two-snap lanyard for the M1911? I note that there might be an example at Ft. Sill in the Museum. Any way to verify that?

I did get a private message stating that while a two snap lanyard was proposed with a specification it was never manufactured or issued. This suggests that any existing examples would be either "experimental" or private purchase.

Still gonna chase the elusive "photo" for a while. :)
Couvi
Society Member
Posts: 1236
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:30 am

wkambic wrote:Thanks to all who responded, and to Pat for bumping up the earlier threads.

Of course, now we have the critical question: does anyone have a photo, drawing, or detailed specification of the two-snap lanyard for the M1911? I note that there might be an example at Ft. Sill in the Museum. Any way to verify that?

I did get a private message stating that while a two snap lanyard was proposed with a specification it was never manufactured or issued. This suggests that any existing examples would be either "experimental" or private purchase.

Still gonna chase the elusive "photo" for a while. :)
The Fort Sill collection is still closed to the best of my knowledge.
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

wkambic wrote:Thanks to all who responded, and to Pat for bumping up the earlier threads.

Of course, now we have the critical question: does anyone have a photo, drawing, or detailed specification of the two-snap lanyard for the M1911? I note that there might be an example at Ft. Sill in the Museum. Any way to verify that?

I did get a private message stating that while a two snap lanyard was proposed with a specification it was never manufactured or issued. This suggests that any existing examples would be either "experimental" or private purchase.

Still gonna chase the elusive "photo" for a while. :)
I'm pondering merging those old posts with this one. I know there's actually more on old, old threads here, and the elusive dual clip lanyard has been a fairly popular mystery/topic, here.

I've never seen a photo of the dual clip lanyard, but one thing that occurs to me is that the M1911 was a very new sidearm when World War One broke out. Even though purchases of the pistol started in 1911, it took some time for the production to really result in a significant number of pistols, and Colt started civilian manufacture also in 1911. Indeed, I've seen one period item noting that private purchase by military officers was sufficient enough to be disrupting Colt's ability to rapidly produce its military orders.

Anyhow, the reason I mention that is that the written things quoted here are distinct enough to suggest that the Army had at least adopted a dual clip lanyard, and the fact that the very early magazines would accommodate one seems telling to me. What I wonder is if the lanyard was adopted, but there was no immediate need to buy a bunch as existing lanyards would work well enough until there were enough M1911s to really start buying lanyards. When that day arrived, WWI came hard on its heels, and expediency may have dictated forgetting about it. After all, if I recall correctly, in spite of the vast material overproduction there was enough of a concern about conservation that at some point in WWI the Army went to one chevron, instead of two, for em ranks in order to conserve cloth (correct me here if I am in error). With that sort of thinking, forgetting about an extra clip may have made sense.

Or it may be an item like the M15. Adopted, but just not that good of idea in actual practice, so rapidly dropped.

We sure don't seem to be able to actually find an example in use.
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

wkambic wrote:
Still gonna chase the elusive "photo" for a while. :)
I posted this query on the WWI list and received this reply:
I found a picture in an old forum message thread on M1911.0rg.

The forum is set so that only members can view the pictures, so... I provided an alternate location.

http://www.billybishop.net/images/lanyard.jpg

I only hope the link is allowed to work in this list. :)

Al Lowe
jake@billybishop.net
http://www.billybishop.net
Canada's Greatest Ace
That is, indeed, a dual clip lanyard.

Now, the question is, can we say it is a GI official one?
Jim Bewley
Society Member
Posts: 597
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 10:04 am
Last Name: Bewley

Pat, there are two lanyards there. Is it comparing the two types, or it one for the mags and the other the pistol?

Jim
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

Jim Bewley wrote:Pat, there are two lanyards there. Is it comparing the two types, or it one for the mags and the other the pistol?

Jim
I believe the top item is a single lanyard with two clips.
wkambic
Society Member
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:44 pm
Last Name: Kambic

Pat Holscher wrote:
Jim Bewley wrote:Pat, there are two lanyards there. Is it comparing the two types, or it one for the mags and the other the pistol?

Jim
I believe the top item is a single lanyard with two clips.
I concur. It looks like the "slide" is missing from the top item but it definitely has both clips.

Thank you for the photo! :D
Jim Bewley
Society Member
Posts: 597
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 10:04 am
Last Name: Bewley

It was the missing slide that threw me. I couldn't really see them wearing both. It actually looks like a good idea. One to the pistol and one to the mag, so all is neat and orderly. Then eject the mag and forget about it, while going for the second. :thumbup:

Jim
Brian P.
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:28 pm
Last Name: Petruskie

Pat Holscher wrote:Anyhow, the reason I mention that is that the written things quoted here are distinct enough to suggest that the Army had at least adopted a dual clip lanyard, and the fact that the very early magazines would accommodate one seems telling to me. What I wonder is if the lanyard was adopted, but there was no immediate need to buy a bunch as existing lanyards would work well enough until there were enough M1911s to really start buying lanyards. When that day arrived, WWI came hard on its heels, and expediency may have dictated forgetting about it. After all, if I recall correctly, in spite of the vast material overproduction there was enough of a concern about conservation that at some point in WWI the Army went to one chevron, instead of two, for em ranks in order to conserve cloth (correct me here if I am in error). With that sort of thinking, forgetting about an extra clip may have made sense.

Or it may be an item like the M15. Adopted, but just not that good of idea in actual practice, so rapidly dropped.

We sure don't seem to be able to actually find an example in use.
If the lanyard existed, I doubt it made it to the conservation cuts of the WWI period. In all of the Punitive Expedition photos that we've viewed, I have never seen a double-clipped lanyard.
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

Brian P. wrote:
Pat Holscher wrote:Anyhow, the reason I mention that is that the written things quoted here are distinct enough to suggest that the Army had at least adopted a dual clip lanyard, and the fact that the very early magazines would accommodate one seems telling to me. What I wonder is if the lanyard was adopted, but there was no immediate need to buy a bunch as existing lanyards would work well enough until there were enough M1911s to really start buying lanyards. When that day arrived, WWI came hard on its heels, and expediency may have dictated forgetting about it. After all, if I recall correctly, in spite of the vast material overproduction there was enough of a concern about conservation that at some point in WWI the Army went to one chevron, instead of two, for em ranks in order to conserve cloth (correct me here if I am in error). With that sort of thinking, forgetting about an extra clip may have made sense.

Or it may be an item like the M15. Adopted, but just not that good of idea in actual practice, so rapidly dropped.

We sure don't seem to be able to actually find an example in use.
If the lanyard existed, I doubt it made it to the conservation cuts of the WWI period. In all of the Punitive Expedition photos that we've viewed, I have never seen a double-clipped lanyard.
Brian, note the lanyard photo posted since this item.

As an odd thought here, how many WWI and Punitive Expedition photos actually show any lanyard in use, as opposed to none (or none that we can see)? I haven't really taken a close look at them in that context.
Brian P.
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:28 pm
Last Name: Petruskie

wkambic wrote:
Pat Holscher wrote:
Jim Bewley wrote:Pat, there are two lanyards there. Is it comparing the two types, or it one for the mags and the other the pistol?

Jim
I believe the top item is a single lanyard with two clips.
I concur. It looks like the "slide" is missing from the top item but it definitely has both clips.

Thank you for the photo! :D
I suspect that the top lanyard is not our mystery lanyard, or at least not an early variant. The bottom lanyard is the M1917, the WWI model. The top one appears to be constructed similarly; so I would assume that it would be a contemporary. If they were making double lanyards in the WWI period, I would assume that we could find more than a handful of examples. (You can still buy NOS 1918 stamped mag pouches on eBay, there's so many of them!) I'll remain a skeptic until we see a few more lanyards.
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

Pat Holscher wrote: As an odd thought here, how many WWI and Punitive Expedition photos actually show any lanyard in use, as opposed to none (or none that we can see)? I haven't really taken a close look at them in that context.
For example, this photos is very distant, but I can see two M1911s and no sign of any lanyard (but it is a very distant photo):

http://runyon.lib.utexas.edu/r/RUN00000 ... N00615.JPG

Federalized NY Cav, no lanyard:

http://runyon.lib.utexas.edu/r/RUN00000 ... N00611.JPG

Can't seen the lanyard if it is there:

http://runyon.lib.utexas.edu/r/RUN01000 ... N01675.JPG

If the lanyard is here, I can't see it. . . but if he has one he better be thinking about making it into a leash.

http://runyon.lib.utexas.edu/r/RUN01000 ... N01695.JPG

Maj. Frank Tompkins. He is using a lanyard:

http://gallery.unl.edu/picinfo/4238.html

No lanyards:
Pat Holscher wrote:Col. G. A. Wingate, New York National Guard, on the border. This was an artillery unit.

Image

Image
This is making me begin to wonder how often troops even used their lanyards. Of course, if they didn't, there should be plenty of nice ones surplus, assuming that this isn't the sort of item that ends up getting lost or tossed out, or turned into a cat leash (see above).
Pat Holscher
Society Member
Posts: 7553
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Last Name: Holscher

Brian P. wrote:
I suspect that the top lanyard is not our mystery lanyard, or at least not an early variant. The bottom lanyard is the M1917, the WWI model. The top one appears to be constructed similarly; so I would assume that it would be a contemporary. If they were making double lanyards in the WWI period, I would assume that we could find more than a handful of examples. (You can still buy NOS 1918 stamped mag pouches on eBay, there's so many of them!) I'll remain a skeptic until we see a few more lanyards.
I agree that the jury is still out on this one, except I'm less skeptical about that example being a defacto lanyard. Here's a post in reply to the provenance of it:
The guy who first posted it was clueless as to what it was for, someone else responded that one clip was for the pistol and the other for the magazine. Some thought at first that the artillery wanted that lanyard, until it was pointed out that the senior service of the time in the US Army was the Cavalry, and would have a lot more utility on horse back.

Al Lowe
jake@billybishop.net
http://www.billybishop.net
Canada's Greatest Ace
The problem there, however, is that we can't get all the way with that. It is a lanyard, and it appears to very closely parallel the military pattern of the time, but we don't know anything else really. It could even have been a private purchase item.

The evidence we have so far is that:

1. A double clip lanyard shows up in the official military paperwork of the time, indicating that the Army clearly intended to use such a lanyard, and seemingly suggesting that they had adopted one.

2. The M1911 was clearly manufactured contemplating such a lanyard (i.e., with two clips).

3. There's a pervasive story of such a lanyard existing.

The evidence to the contrary is:

1. Examples of other lanyards aren't hard to find, but these are next to nonexistent today, even if we accept an example such as this.

2. We can't find any photos of one in use (so far), and we don't have any first hand stories about them being used, in so far far as I'm aware.

Somewhat countering the above is the following:

1. Photographs of the period mostly show nobody using their lanyards. That frankly surprises me, but it appears that troops just didn't use them.

Countering that:

1. If troops weren't using the double lanyards, there ought to be some might fine examples around.

Switching from an evidentiary angle to less stringent anthropological one, what that might suggest is that the double lanyards was adopted, but there were piles of existing lanyards on hand (and there ought to have been, as nobody seems to have been using theirs) so there wasn't any great need to buy a bunch. Perhaps only a very few were acquired, and then the pattern dropped for one of a host of reasons (and I can think of quite a few why they might have been). But, there's a lot of pure guess in that.
wkambic
Society Member
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:44 pm
Last Name: Kambic

Brian and Pat make some interesting points.

People were smaller in those days. I've seen and tried original lanyards and they were too short to properly handle an M1911, at least for me. I'm bigger than I ought to be, but even when one of my shorter and more svelte companions tried it he found it too short. So maybe the reason they weren't used is because they didn't work? And if the single clip version didn't work well then why would anyone mess with a double clip version (twice the complexity to get the same bad result)?

Since there is no real evidence of manufacture or issuance of the "double clip lanyard" then maybe what we see in the photo is private purchase, experimental, or just a local manufacture by a soldier who did like the system. Or maybe who like the idea of making one but then didn't like it "operationally." There's a bunch of possible explantions for the existence of one, but not many.

In any event, it's an interesting discussion and shows that real historical fact is sometime difficult to pin down. :lol:

As another interesting "historical anomaly" is in the Col. G.A. Wingate photo. The kneeling soldier on the left is carrying a revolver with the holster about square in the middle of his back. Not exactly regulation, AFAIK. :D
Locked