Sabers

[rayarthart]

Any one have the locations of the foundriers that the Sabers were made at between 1858-1870?

[mnhorse]

If I understand your question correctly, following is a short list of manufacturers that made swords prior to and after the American Civil War.
- Ames Mfg Co. Chicopee Mass.
- C. Roby & Co. West Chelmsford Mass.
Then there were dozens of companies that made swords for the American market at Solingen, Germany.
Richard

[rayarthart]

I was interested in the Confederate side. What you gave me was good also. I recently got a saber that had no proof marks on it that I could find. I think that the saber was made in Austin, Texas in 1860's.

[mnhorse]

I was interested in the Confederate side. What you gave me was good also. I recently got a saber that had no proof marks on it that I could find. I think that the saber was made in Austin, Texas in 1860's.

The Confederates imported swords/sabers from the makers in Europe, throught not as many as some folks trying to sell them today would have you believe.

Look for this book: CONFEDERATE EDGED WEAPONS by Wiliam Albaugh.. He has done extensive research and written a good deal on CSA swords/sabers.
Richard

[Larry Emrick]

The question about sabre manufacturers, and the fact that I have just watched Ken Burns' monumental Civil War for about the fourth time, prompts me to wonder how effective sabres were as a weapon and if they actually saw much use as such.
Historian Shelby Foote noted in the production that bayonet wounds and deaths were not frequent given the numbers of bayonets issued, and I wonder if that might be the case for sabres.
Larry

[mnhorse]

The question about sabre manufacturers, and the fact that I have just watched Ken Burns' monumental Civil War for about the fourth time, prompts me to wonder how effective sabres were as a weapon and if they actually saw much use as such.
Historian Shelby Foote noted in the production that bayonet wounds and deaths were not frequent given the numbers of bayonets issued, and I wonder if that might be the case for sabres.
Larry

My thought is that the number of death wounds delivered by the saber is about the same as the bayonet.
I have six Civil War era sabers in my collection and have examined dozens of others. The one thing they all have in common is a very DULL blade, nor do the ones in my collection show any signs of having been sharpened. It would seem that cavalrymen spent a good part of their "fighting time" battering each other about the head and shoulders with a "blunt instrument".

I think is was General Rosencrans who wired Washington to request that grindstones be sent to his command so that cavalrymen could sharpen their sabers.

I think that a rush with bayonets or charge with sabers caused most folks at whom it is directed to fall back if possible.
Another thought is that it is one thing to fire a weapon at a foe several yards away and quite another to actually stick him with a blade .
Richard

[rayarthart]

The saber and bayonet were generally used a a weapon to instill terror in the enemy. You have to ask yourself if you would want to stand your ground if a bunch of people were running at you with bayonets or Cavalry mounted charging down on you with sabers drawn.

[browerpatch]

The question about sabre manufacturers, and the fact that I have just watched Ken Burns' monumental Civil War for about the fourth time, prompts me to wonder how effective sabres were as a weapon and if they actually saw much use as such.
Historian Shelby Foote noted in the production that bayonet wounds and deaths were not frequent given the numbers of bayonets issued, and I wonder if that might be the case for sabres.
Larry

My thought is that the number of death wounds delivered by the saber is about the same as the bayonet.
I have six Civil War era sabers in my collection and have examined dozens of others. The one thing they all have in common is a very DULL blade, nor do the ones in my collection show any signs of having been sharpened. It would seem that cavalrymen spent a good part of their "fighting time" battering each other about the head and shoulders with a "blunt instrument".

I think is was General Rosencrans who wired Washington to request that grindstones be sent to his command so that cavalrymen could sharpen their sabers.

I think that a rush with bayonets or charge with sabers caused most folks at whom it is directed to fall back if possible.
Another thought is that it is one thing to fire a weapon at a foe several yards away and quite another to actually stick him with a blade .
Richard

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

[Philip S]

Years ago I was privledged to examine a large collection of Confederate swords. The officers' swords were very fine and beautiful. They no doubt were quite expensive. The troopers' swords on the other hand were generally of very poor workmanship. So poor, in fact, that the owner of the collection agreed that a very cheap Indian made sword would be a good approximation for a reinactor.

[browerpatch]

bump!

[JV Puleo]

You need to get a copy of Confederate Edged Weapons and/or the Photographic Supplement to the same by the late William Albaugh. Its a bit dated now and new information has come to light but it is still a good starting point and the added benefit is that Albaugh did his collecting before the market was polluted with huge numbers of fakes. One of the primary problems with Confederate arms is that everything crude is described as "Confederate" regardless of whether this makes any sense or not.