The sharpening of sabres

[bisley45]

First things first- I hope 2014 finds everyone happy, and in good health!

Now my question- On another discussion board, a member posted a question about whether sabres were actually sharpened during the ACW era. He references a remark made by a friend, indicating that sabres were not sharpened because some of the officer corps considered using a sharp sword to be somehow "unsporting."
The debate may be viewed here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=740071

The debate is lively so far, with plenty of rabbit holes and tangents to explore. My own stance is that a dull sabre is a fair impact weapon; a sharp one should be good for cutting. If we translate "unsporting" to mean "effective," I can only imagine that an enlisted trooper would maintain his blade in a decidedly "unsporting" state of readiness. I might be able to see the sense in dull blades during peacetime, or in garrison, maybe.

What say you?

[mnhorse]

Well, I've heard this "dull vs. sharp" saber a lot over the years. I have only three observations to make.
1) I've run across only one quote from a ACW era source that referred to cavalrymen sharpening their sabers in preparation for battle. Than may have been a bit of journalistic hyperbole, however.
2) I have 8 sabers (plus several Navy cutlasses) dating from an early STARR right on thru a 1914 "Patton". All, save one cutlass, show NO signs of ever having been sharpened.
3) None of the several hundred ACW sabers I have examined showed any sign of having been sharpened.
A great subject!!!
Richard

[bisley45]

Excellent start! Thanks, Richard! The debate rages on at THR; my comments are posted under the nom de net AJumbo.

That being said, what would be the liability encountered with a sharp sword? A tendency to stick in bone? A clear and present danger to Dobbin's ears? I know that troopers throughout history found out what worked, then applied it without regard to the regs.... so, what did the regs say, circa the ACW?

I read an account of NB Forrest using a farmer's grinding wheel to sharpen his sabre; so many stories about him were apocryphal, though, that most should be taken with a grain of salt. If the tale is true, we should recall that Forrest tended to do things his way, AND that he was no cavalryman, in truth.

Please keep it coming, folks!

Mark

[Jon Holford]

Not directly relevant to the ACW, but my step father's uncle's British !912 pattern sword, now in my possession, was certainly sharpened. Since it is a thrusting sword, and hacking with it was discouraged, this was probably done "just in case". Mobilisation regulations included the direction: "Cavalry regiments sharpen swords". Since all US cavalry swords were curved sabres, prior to 1913, I'd be surprised if they were not sharpened in war. Perhaps not in peacetime garrison though, as sharpening causes wear, and does little for appearance.

Jon H

[browerpatch]

This is a comment I posted in 2011. I still think this stands:

"It's my supposition that a saber, at least during the ACW era, was not as much of a slashing/cutting weapon as it was a slashing/bone-breaking weapon. The point could be used, but the purposely dull blade was heavy enough that if the party of the first part struck an opponent on a long bone or the head, it could seriously injure or kill the party of the second part. A sharp blade could get lodged in the party of the second part, or his gear, making it difficult for the party of the first part to recover from delivering the blow. A heavy, dull blade wouldn't cut into accoutrements, but would still bruise the s--- out of the underlying flesh and likely breaking a bone. Also, a wounded enemy costs the enemy more than a dead enemy.

Also, a dull blade would keep a clumsy trooper from docking his mounts ears!

Of course, this is just my guesswork. I don't recall any documentary evidence or discussion of sharp vs dull blades. I may be way off base, but it make sense to me.

Frank"

[Jon Holford]

I take Browerpatch's point. n reflection, he may well be right. When I was younger and more nimble, I practiced mounted skill-at-arms, where a sharp edge was needed, but when training in that art, under an old cavalry serjeant-major, I was warned: " Don't cut the 'orse's 'ead orf; we need 'im for another day!" The same gentleman greeted tumbles with : "Oo told you to dismount, Mr H?"!

Jon H

[Pat Holscher]

FWIW, I wonder to what extent we might be observing condition vs. cause here? That is, it may well be the case that most Civil War sabers are observed to be dull, but that might inaccurately lead to a conclusion on the cause.

I'm not an expert on sabers at all, but I've been told that they were shipped from the manufacturer dull. It was up to the trooper to sharpen them. Many that we now find may have had light use, or perhaps troopers just didn't get around to sharpening them, but that doesn't mean that they weren't supposed to be sharpened and in later eras other explanations have been provided, or even inaccurate ones at the time.

While not the same thing at all, I've observed a sizable number of bayonets from prior to World War Two and up into World War Two and the overwhelming majority of them, from any army, are dull. I'm quite sure that they were shipped dull also, and that generally in training they were left dull. I think they were likely supposed to be sharpened before a soldier went to battle with them, but either lots of them were never used in anger, or people found that they were busy with other stuff. Every single bayonet for a 98 Mauser I've ever seen was as dull as a butter knife and obviously never sharpened. I have also seen, however, a bayonet for a M1903 Springfield that was cut down for a M1 Garand in World War Two, and in spite of having served for at least 25 years or so, it was really dull also. It had been copper clad after cut down for the Garand and pretty obviously not sharpened thereafter. My point being, that just because we find them dull, doesn't really mean that was regarded as the ideal.

Having said that, I don't know anything about sabers and could well be off the mark.

[Couvi]

Just as four-wheel-drive will get you stuck further from home than a two-wheel-drive, it could be that a sharp saber would get stuck deeper in an enemy’s body that a dull one.

[bisley45]

I have really missed this site, and the quality of info to found here. Thanks again!

I seem to remember reading somewhere- perhaps on SMH- a letter from a cavalry officer lamenting the quality of his latest shipment of sabres, noting specifically that they wouldn't take an edge. Such an arm would have serious flaws in any case, whether an edge was desirable or not.

I'm not advocating for either condition; I'm actually beginning to see the value in a dull blade, provided it's not seriously chipped.

Mark

[wkambic]

What kind of training would an enlisted trooper have received during the ACW in the use of the saber?

What kind of training would an officer, particularly a non-West Point officer*, have received?

By this time in American history the blade as a primary weapon was in serious decline, being strongly overshadowed by the firearm. If troopers and officers did not have extensive training in the correct use of the saber might it not have made a lot of sense to not put an edge on the blade? A 30+ inch piece of sharp steel is not a toy.

Bill

*From doing some Googling I found a reference to training for West Point cadets. Saber, foil, and bayonet instruction was given in the Fourth Class, three times a week, for a semester (I think; the time period was unclear from the reference). A Fencing Team existed at both West Point and Annapolis during the 19th Century. I don't know when formal fending instruction ended.

[Brian P.]

If you study pre-war manuals, you learn that only the tip of the saber, called the feeble, (the last 6-8 inches) is supposed to be sharpened. The remainder of the blade, the forte, is left dull. Saber exercises describe making cuts with the feeble, or drawing the blade down in a cut so that the tip does its work. You are meant to use the forte in the parry. Cooke's Cavalry manual, which dates to wartime, describes using the saber in this way. I would infer from that that sabers were at least intended to be sharpened at that time. Furthermore, I've read numerous accounts of troopers sharpening sabers prior to a battle or campaign. Now, I can't account for the reports of antique sabers being dull, except that sabers can become dull rattling in metal scabbards or just sitting on shelves. I maintain that the story of the dull saber is a myth.

[Trooper]

I included the following discussion from “Volunteer Cavalry. The Lesson of a Decade” by former Brevet Captain Frederick Whittaker, Army & Navy Journal 1871 reprinted in “Journal of the United States Cavalry Association” Vol. XX Nos.76, & 77 1910, in my book "Arming & Equipping the U.S. Cavalry 1865-1902".It may add something to the discussion:

“…During the war many officers contracted a positive prejudice against the use of the sabre, and in some regiments…it was entirely laid aside, all charging being done with the pistol…But the individual fancy of a colonel generally regulated the matter for his regiment. If he were an enthusiastic swordsman he always managed to infuse the same spirit into his men, and such regiments depended on their sabres with just confidence. But very few colonels on either side were swordsmen. The sabre is a weapon that requires constant practice to keep one’s hand in and our cavalry officers, as a class, are entirely deficient in that practice. Hence the contempt for the sabre inculcated by a class of men who simply could not handle it.
Many officers now advocate the pistol for a charging weapon in preference to the sabre. They insist that a pistol shot kills, when a sabre cut only wounds. We have heard officers openly avow the sabre to be useless … But in all the instances during the war, in which the sabre proved ineffective, it may be safely asserted that it was owing to two things – want of fencing practice and blunt sabres.
The latter cause, as much as the former, conduced to this want of confidence in the sabre. The men shrunk from using a weapon with which they had never encountered a foe, and they knew also that the said weapons would not cut.
It is a strange fact, that after all that has been said and written about sharp sabres, by everyone who has written on the subject of cavalry, they still remain, in every service known, as blunt as ever… Sabres are issued blunt enough to ride on to San Francisco. The steel is hard. Grindstones are not to be found. The soldier loses confidence in the weapon, and prefers the revolver.
Now if the War Department would simply require in all future contracts for sabres that they should be delivered, each sharp enough to cut a sheet of paper, by striking the paper on the sword lightly, the American cavalry of the future will be revolutionized.
If whetstones were furnished the men, or what are called scythe-rifles, a sabre issued sharp would be kept sharp. But as it is, the men cannot get them sharp. The writer has stood at a grindstone turned by steam, and tried to grind an Ames sabre for over an hour. He can testify that it is hard, the hardest kind of work. But if ground while in soft temper, at the factory, the hardening temper subsequently received would leave them sharp still, and easily kept so.
And there is no fear but that the men, with very little looking after, would keep them so. Soldiers are fond and proud of good weapons, and take good care of them. All men are apt to be vain of bodily strength and skill. It gives a man a braver feeling to cut down an adversary than to shoot him, and by just so much as he trusts to his sword, his morale will be raised… A …recent book, unconnected with military science, and therefore unwarped by prejudice, gives testimony on this point, convincing to anyone.
Sir Samuel Baker…has published a book of his adventures on the Blue Nile…in which he gives a full account of the Hamran Arabs of that region, who hunt all kinds of game, from the elephant to the wild boar or antelope, with no other weapon but the simple sabre…Their swords are Solingen blades, made in Germany, and quite common in the United States as officer’s swords…But the remarkable fact about these swords is there wonderful cutting power. This cutting power arises simply from their being kept sharp as razors literally.
Sir Samuel Baker says that the Arab’s first care after a march is to draw his sword and strap [strop?] it to and fro on his leathern shield. He never rests satisfied till with it he can shave some hair off his bare arm. This shows to what keenness of edge our own weapons might be brought. No mysterious Damascus blades, but the familiar Solingen sabre, which is advertised daily in every military gazette; and we have no doubt that the Ames blades, from Chicopee Mass., could be brought to an equally fine edge with care.
Now for the performances of these weapons:...we quote from memory; but the verbiage is the only inaccuracy. The facts are as stated.
Taher Shereef, with a single blow, cut deep enough into the colossal leg of an old elephant to divide the tough back sinew and hamstring the animal…and, in the Arab fights, men are quite frequently cut in two at the waist Baker informs us.
If our men had weapons like that, which they might have without expense, almost, we should have no more of “useless sabres”. A sabre should be kept as sharp as a razor. No halfway should be allowed. It can be done and it should be enforced. Fancy our men armed with razors three feet long! What ghastly wounds they could inflict on an enemy, the very first fight, when every accidental slash would open a gash a foot long; and how shy an enemy would fight of such men, if in other respects well armed and horsed.
In the cavalry of the future these “three foot razors,” if ever a man is found to introduce them, will be the greatest innovation of modern warfare since gunpowder…”

[Pat Holscher]

I included the following discussion from “Volunteer Cavalry. The Lesson of a Decade” by former Brevet Captain Frederick Whittaker, Army & Navy Journal 1871 reprinted in “Journal of the United States Cavalry Association” Vol. XX Nos.76, & 77 1910, in my book "Arming & Equipping the U.S. Cavalry 1865-1902".It may add something to the discussion:

“…During the war many officers contracted a positive prejudice against the use of the sabre, and in some regiments…it was entirely laid aside, all charging being done with the pistol…But the individual fancy of a colonel generally regulated the matter for his regiment. If he were an enthusiastic swordsman he always managed to infuse the same spirit into his men, and such regiments depended on their sabres with just confidence. But very few colonels on either side were swordsmen. The sabre is a weapon that requires constant practice to keep one’s hand in and our cavalry officers, as a class, are entirely deficient in that practice. Hence the contempt for the sabre inculcated by a class of men who simply could not handle it.
Many officers now advocate the pistol for a charging weapon in preference to the sabre. They insist that a pistol shot kills, when a sabre cut only wounds. We have heard officers openly avow the sabre to be useless … But in all the instances during the war, in which the sabre proved ineffective, it may be safely asserted that it was owing to two things – want of fencing practice and blunt sabres.
The latter cause, as much as the former, conduced to this want of confidence in the sabre. The men shrunk from using a weapon with which they had never encountered a foe, and they knew also that the said weapons would not cut.
It is a strange fact, that after all that has been said and written about sharp sabres, by everyone who has written on the subject of cavalry, they still remain, in every service known, as blunt as ever… Sabres are issued blunt enough to ride on to San Francisco. The steel is hard. Grindstones are not to be found. The soldier loses confidence in the weapon, and prefers the revolver.
Now if the War Department would simply require in all future contracts for sabres that they should be delivered, each sharp enough to cut a sheet of paper, by striking the paper on the sword lightly, the American cavalry of the future will be revolutionized.
If whetstones were furnished the men, or what are called scythe-rifles, a sabre issued sharp would be kept sharp. But as it is, the men cannot get them sharp. The writer has stood at a grindstone turned by steam, and tried to grind an Ames sabre for over an hour. He can testify that it is hard, the hardest kind of work. But if ground while in soft temper, at the factory, the hardening temper subsequently received would leave them sharp still, and easily kept so.
And there is no fear but that the men, with very little looking after, would keep them so. Soldiers are fond and proud of good weapons, and take good care of them. All men are apt to be vain of bodily strength and skill. It gives a man a braver feeling to cut down an adversary than to shoot him, and by just so much as he trusts to his sword, his morale will be raised… A …recent book, unconnected with military science, and therefore unwarped by prejudice, gives testimony on this point, convincing to anyone.
Sir Samuel Baker…has published a book of his adventures on the Blue Nile…in which he gives a full account of the Hamran Arabs of that region, who hunt all kinds of game, from the elephant to the wild boar or antelope, with no other weapon but the simple sabre…Their swords are Solingen blades, made in Germany, and quite common in the United States as officer’s swords…But the remarkable fact about these swords is there wonderful cutting power. This cutting power arises simply from their being kept sharp as razors literally.
Sir Samuel Baker says that the Arab’s first care after a march is to draw his sword and strap [strop?] it to and fro on his leathern shield. He never rests satisfied till with it he can shave some hair off his bare arm. This shows to what keenness of edge our own weapons might be brought. No mysterious Damascus blades, but the familiar Solingen sabre, which is advertised daily in every military gazette; and we have no doubt that the Ames blades, from Chicopee Mass., could be brought to an equally fine edge with care.
Now for the performances of these weapons:...we quote from memory; but the verbiage is the only inaccuracy. The facts are as stated.
Taher Shereef, with a single blow, cut deep enough into the colossal leg of an old elephant to divide the tough back sinew and hamstring the animal…and, in the Arab fights, men are quite frequently cut in two at the waist Baker informs us.
If our men had weapons like that, which they might have without expense, almost, we should have no more of “useless sabres”. A sabre should be kept as sharp as a razor. No halfway should be allowed. It can be done and it should be enforced. Fancy our men armed with razors three feet long! What ghastly wounds they could inflict on an enemy, the very first fight, when every accidental slash would open a gash a foot long; and how shy an enemy would fight of such men, if in other respects well armed and horsed.
In the cavalry of the future these “three foot razors,” if ever a man is found to introduce them, will be the greatest innovation of modern warfare since gunpowder…”

That's really fascinating stuff, and it sort of confirms my suspicions.

Truth be known, being able to sharpen a blade is an art. Probably more men at that time, than know, knew how to really do that, but chances are high not everyone did. And some blades are really hard to sharpen.

I'll confess that I'm just lousy at sharpening a blade. My father in law and brother in law are experts at sharpening blades with whetstones and my father was an expert at sharpening one with a whetstone or a steel. I have the same whetstone and steel my father used and I can dull a blade by using them. I can easily imagine a trooper being issued a new sabre, spending an hour on it, finding it still dull, and thinking "ah crap. . . I'll use my revolver."

And sharp edges grow dull over time. It'd probably be a mistake to examine a Civil War era dull sabre now and conclude that it had never been sharp.

[Couvi]

There is also the matter of wear on the blade from sharpening and the subsequent thinning of the metal to the point where it is useless or dangerous to the user. Removing metal also removes some structural strength. If sabers were sharpened on grindstones, and even on whetstones, they would have to be replaced with some degree of regularity. Impecunious governments would disdain having to replace items that work equally well in the “as-issued” condition.

[selewis]

I included the following discussion from “Volunteer Cavalry. The Lesson of a Decade” by former Brevet Captain Frederick Whittaker, Army & Navy Journal 1871 reprinted in “Journal of the United States Cavalry Association” Vol. XX Nos.76, & 77 1910, in my book "Arming & Equipping the U.S. Cavalry 1865-1902".It may add something to the discussion:

“…During the war many officers contracted a positive prejudice against the use of the sabre, and in some regiments…it was entirely laid aside, all charging being done with the pistol…But the individual fancy of a colonel generally regulated the matter for his regiment. If he were an enthusiastic swordsman he always managed to infuse the same spirit into his men, and such regiments depended on their sabres with just confidence. But very few colonels on either side were swordsmen. The sabre is a weapon that requires constant practice to keep one’s hand in and our cavalry officers, as a class, are entirely deficient in that practice. Hence the contempt for the sabre inculcated by a class of men who simply could not handle it.
Many officers now advocate the pistol for a charging weapon in preference to the sabre. They insist that a pistol shot kills, when a sabre cut only wounds. We have heard officers openly avow the sabre to be useless … But in all the instances during the war, in which the sabre proved ineffective, it may be safely asserted that it was owing to two things – want of fencing practice and blunt sabres.
The latter cause, as much as the former, conduced to this want of confidence in the sabre. The men shrunk from using a weapon with which they had never encountered a foe, and they knew also that the said weapons would not cut.
It is a strange fact, that after all that has been said and written about sharp sabres, by everyone who has written on the subject of cavalry, they still remain, in every service known, as blunt as ever… Sabres are issued blunt enough to ride on to San Francisco. The steel is hard. Grindstones are not to be found. The soldier loses confidence in the weapon, and prefers the revolver.
Now if the War Department would simply require in all future contracts for sabres that they should be delivered, each sharp enough to cut a sheet of paper, by striking the paper on the sword lightly, the American cavalry of the future will be revolutionized.
If whetstones were furnished the men, or what are called scythe-rifles, a sabre issued sharp would be kept sharp. But as it is, the men cannot get them sharp. The writer has stood at a grindstone turned by steam, and tried to grind an Ames sabre for over an hour. He can testify that it is hard, the hardest kind of work. But if ground while in soft temper, at the factory, the hardening temper subsequently received would leave them sharp still, and easily kept so.
And there is no fear but that the men, with very little looking after, would keep them so. Soldiers are fond and proud of good weapons, and take good care of them. All men are apt to be vain of bodily strength and skill. It gives a man a braver feeling to cut down an adversary than to shoot him, and by just so much as he trusts to his sword, his morale will be raised… A …recent book, unconnected with military science, and therefore unwarped by prejudice, gives testimony on this point, convincing to anyone.
Sir Samuel Baker…has published a book of his adventures on the Blue Nile…in which he gives a full account of the Hamran Arabs of that region, who hunt all kinds of game, from the elephant to the wild boar or antelope, with no other weapon but the simple sabre…Their swords are Solingen blades, made in Germany, and quite common in the United States as officer’s swords…But the remarkable fact about these swords is there wonderful cutting power. This cutting power arises simply from their being kept sharp as razors literally.
Sir Samuel Baker says that the Arab’s first care after a march is to draw his sword and strap [strop?] it to and fro on his leathern shield. He never rests satisfied till with it he can shave some hair off his bare arm. This shows to what keenness of edge our own weapons might be brought. No mysterious Damascus blades, but the familiar Solingen sabre, which is advertised daily in every military gazette; and we have no doubt that the Ames blades, from Chicopee Mass., could be brought to an equally fine edge with care.
Now for the performances of these weapons:...we quote from memory; but the verbiage is the only inaccuracy. The facts are as stated.
Taher Shereef, with a single blow, cut deep enough into the colossal leg of an old elephant to divide the tough back sinew and hamstring the animal…and, in the Arab fights, men are quite frequently cut in two at the waist Baker informs us.
If our men had weapons like that, which they might have without expense, almost, we should have no more of “useless sabres”. A sabre should be kept as sharp as a razor. No halfway should be allowed. It can be done and it should be enforced. Fancy our men armed with razors three feet long! What ghastly wounds they could inflict on an enemy, the very first fight, when every accidental slash would open a gash a foot long; and how shy an enemy would fight of such men, if in other respects well armed and horsed.
In the cavalry of the future these “three foot razors,” if ever a man is found to introduce them, will be the greatest innovation of modern warfare since gunpowder…”

That's really fascinating stuff, and it sort of confirms my suspicions.

Truth be known, being able to sharpen a blade is an art. Probably more men at that time, than know, knew how to really do that, but chances are high not everyone did. And some blades are really hard to sharpen.

I'll confess that I'm just lousy at sharpening a blade. My father in law and brother in law are experts at sharpening blades with whetstones and my father was an expert at sharpening one with a whetstone or a steel. I have the same whetstone and steel my father used and I can dull a blade by using them. I can easily imagine a trooper being issued a new sabre, spending an hour on it, finding it still dull, and thinking "ah crap. . . I'll use my revolver."

And sharp edges grow dull over time. It'd probably be a mistake to examine a Civil War era dull sabre now and conclude that it had never been sharp.

Excellent, Dusan. Just holding a three foot razor would intimidating, let alone being on the business end of one.

Pat, do edges dull over time? Why, providing they are protected from rusting? Last year when a friend and I were tearing off the roof on our family cabin I found a jack knife in the eaves. Knowing the history of the cabin it had to have been there since the 1930's. It was as sharp as a good, stropped razor -much sharper than a new utility knife blade. It's an old German three blade and I carry it now. It's no longer quite as sharp as when I found it because I'm not that good with knives. Chisels I can sharpen pretty well because I do it all the time and mine are softer and they are straight. Knives I've always had trouble with.

[stablesgt]

A factor that might be considered in drawing conclusions from the examination of blades of CW or IW sabers today is whether they were unissued surplus that entered the civilian market via Bannerman's. Also, would not the edges or lack thereof on peacetime M1906 sabers reflect then prevailing military theory on cutting versus billy club use? M1913 was obviously intended as thrusting weapon so no edge not a surprise.

[Pat Holscher]

Excellent, Dusan. Just holding a three foot razor would intimidating, let alone being on the business end of one.

Pat, do edges dull over time? Why, providing they are protected from rusting? Last year when a friend and I were tearing off the roof on our family cabin I found a jack knife in the eaves. Knowing the history of the cabin it had to have been there since the 1930's. It was as sharp as a good, stropped razor -much sharper than a new utility knife blade. It's an old German three blade and I carry it now. It's no longer quite as sharp as when I found it because I'm not that good with knives. Chisels I can sharpen pretty well because I do it all the time and mine are softer and they are straight. Knives I've always had trouble with.

I wouldn't suppose that they really dull if simply unused. But with sabers that are issued, the blades are going to get dulled a bit, even if really sharp at one time, just be being drawn out of the saber from time to time.

I'm not any sort of expert on sabers at all, but I'd guess (and it'd be a guess) that issued ones would have that happen to at least some degree, and otherwise get banged up, so that the edges would dull.

Neat find on the jack knife, by the way!

[Pat Holscher]

A factor that might be considered in drawing conclusions from the examination of blades of CW or IW sabers today is whether they were unissued surplus that entered the civilian market via Bannerman's. Also, would not the edges or lack thereof on peacetime M1906 sabers reflect then prevailing military theory on cutting versus billy club use? M1913 was obviously intended as thrusting weapon so no edge not a surprise.

That's a really good point. I don't have any idea how many sabers were made in the Civil War to start with, but of the ones we see now, I wonder how many saw pretty light use. I suppose there's no real way to know.

[bisley45]

Steel can lose an edge simply from sitting on a shelf due to simple oxidation, but to what extent it dulls depends on several factors- steel hardness, the actual chemistry of the steel, whether it was oiled, what it cut last (salt, blood, and acids can accelerate oxidation.) I've never seen a knife so dulled by "shelf wear" that it couldn't be brought back to sharpness in short order. I can't imagine restoring a dulled, nicked sabre edge under field conditions.

My Dad tells me that as late as 1961, he was instructed to sharpen only the first 2 inches or so of his bayonet. The logic was that it would be a fine stabbing weapon, but would tend to tear a foe's flesh when being withdrawn. Dad was in the Navy, and doesn't recall getting a lot of actual bayonet drill at Great Lakes.

Regarding the chemistry and temper or sabres, wouldn't a good quality spring steel be preferable to cutlery steel? I saw a documentary about cavalry that showed the different techniques employed for the Patton sabre and a French hussar's sabre, both employed at the gallop, and a both showed a good bit of "whipping" when the frame rate was slowed down. The hussar sword tended to whip after cutting horizontally through a watermelon, the Patton model when being withdrawn from a grass target butt.

[JV Puleo]

The Light Cavalry Saber... a.k.a. the M1860 (which is actually a misnomer) remained in service until 1913 although it wasn't made after the end of the CW. There was no significant sale of them as surplus... in fact, if you have one, it was almost certainly issued to someone at some time and could easily have been in service for close to 50 years. In 40 years of handling this stuff, I have never seen one sharpened, with the exception of a few that are obviously done so crudely that no one could imagine it was done in service.

In contrast to the gentleman Dusan quoted, we have Col. Frank Phipps asserting, to the Chief of Ordnance, that a sharpened saber in peace time was a danger to both man and horse. Phipps added that there would be plenty of time to sharpen them should it be needed in wartime. I suspect that we give much too much credence to the naysayers on this subject... the fact is that the saber remained in active issue until after WWI so there could not have been a really widespread consensus that it was obsolete. Patton, after all, only wanted the design changed not its abandonment... and his changes only copied the current military thinking in Europe.

Actually, the CW is pretty new stuff in my world... I've much more experience with 17th and 18th century swords and have observed that they were commonly sharpened in the 17th century but as time passed, this became less and less common. By the early 19th century it was not all that common and by the end of the 19th century, almost unknown. This seems to correspond directly to the effectiveness of firearms... the "arme blanche" was the primary weapon of the horse soldier in the 17th century... by 1800 it was only one of his choices and by 1860 it was an "emergency backup" choice.