Lanyards & the M1911

[Brian P.]

I just went through Machado's and Tompkins' books on the PE. You're right, the fashion seems to be NO lanyards. Maybe no one felt that they would ever drop their pistol in a fight. I must admit that I don't think that I've ever dropped my sidearm, mounted or dismounted. On the other side, I've never found the lanyard to be constrictive or in the way, when I've worn it.

There is still very little provenance for the top lanyard in those pics, in my mind. I read somewhere that the last Colt issued with a lanyard loop mag was in 1915. By WWI, they'd definitely not be making double lanyards. It could still be a private purchase or even unit level saddlers' or ordnance made item, though.

Your last post is a good summary of the problem. (Is that your closing argument, counselor?! )

[Pat Holscher]

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.

Quite right. I wonder if that soldier found his revolver to be a nuisance and was simply opting to try it out as a camp stool?

Also on that photo, which depicts the New York National Guard in Federalized status, the photo also shows how new the M1911 was at the time, which may connect in with our lanyard story. There are a lot of examples of revolvers still being carried in that period. Granted, this was National Guard unit, but quite a few photos of M1911s in Guard use also exist (as for example, Col. Wingate, who is carrying one). The point, I guess, would be that this was a transitional period, so the Army might not have been really speedy about supplying double clip lanyards, if they existed, and then perhaps for one reason or another (including the fact that nobody seemed terribly keen on their lanyards in general) they may have drooped them.

I went on and did a brief search for WWI and WWII photos showing US troops using them. My search wasn't exhaustive, but I didn't find any that clearly showed them. I'm sure some did, after all we know it was an issue item, and the photos might be of the type that they're just hard to spot. But, for example:

Two doughboys with M1911s. Lanyards? Hard to say:



We recently discussed this photo here, and I went back and looked at it again. At least one clear shot of a holstered M1911, no lanyard:

http://digitalcollections.uwyo.edu:8180 ... mi=0&trs=1

[Pat Holscher]

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.

Added to that, note that the lanyards would have had to be pretty long in order to just get down to the holster of that period, which was hinged and worn very low. Odd, given the short lanyards.

They might, therefore, have been a colossal pain.

Also, something I've wondered about is whether solders regarded them as dangerous. I have no reason to believe that, but a long cord around your body is not really a good thing for a mounted man in some circumstances. Cavalrymen rode in some rough country, and maybe cavalrymen in the heavy brush region of Texas worried about roping themselves off of their mounts. I'll confess that I've had an experience where a horse suddenly darted on me in fairly heavy timber so quickly that before I could react I was taken right off the back of a M1917 Packer's Saddle by a tree limb.

That hurts by the way.

So, maybe they worried about some nasty brush hanging them up. Anyhow, it's something I've wondered about in regards to lanyards.

On that, I know the idea is not to loose your pistol, but in a bad fight if I've dropped it, I may not be getting it back and now I have it swinging around down there whopping the horse. My imagination?

[Pat Holscher]

Two doughboys with M1911s. Lanyards? Hard to say:

By the way, what's up with the solider on the right's boots?

[Pat Holscher]

Your last post is a good summary of the problem. (Is that your closing argument, counselor?! )

More of a remand for further evidentiary hearings.

[wkambic]

I guess the plaintiff rests, for now!

[Pat Holscher]

No lanyards at the range:

Here are a couple of scanned and cropped pages from “The Devil Dogs at Belleau Wood” as I promised. Sorry for the quality – the scanner to which I have access to are not as good. And I trying to avoid any damage to the book.



The first presented to us is an officer with left-handed M1912 mounted holster. Men behind him are a French Blue Devils – Chasseurs Alpins.



The next man identified as the NCO who are shooting his gun in presence of French instructors from same unit named above.


Alex.

And none in USMC recruiting posters:

I don't know much about Marine Corps kit of this period, but I wonder if the mounted holster was common for Marines.

This is a famous WWI vintage Marine Corps recruiting poster by illustrator James Montgomery Flagg. Note that this depicts the mounted holster, but of course it might not be accurate either. Note also this enlisted Marine has the wool OD shirt and khaki trousers, at a point in time at which the Army did not issue khaki.

[Jim Bewley]

I'll just toss this out for what it might (or might not) be worth. As a new MP in 1973, I was issued a single clip lanyard for my .45. These were in large supply in unit supply rooms. Not sure when it went out, but I know it was in use through early 80's.

Jim

[Brian P.]

Two doughboys with M1911s. Lanyards? Hard to say:

By the way, what's up with the solider on the right's boots?

The boots are the issue rubber waders. - very handy in the trenches.

[Jim Bewley]

Added to that, note that the lanyards would have had to be pretty long in order to just get down to the holster of that period, which was hinged and worn very low. Odd, given the short lanyards.

They might, therefore, have been a colossal pain.

Also, something I've wondered about is whether solders regarded them as dangerous. I have no reason to believe that, but a long cord around your body is not really a good thing for a mounted man in some circumstances. Cavalrymen rode in some rough country, and maybe cavalrymen in the heavy brush region of Texas worried about roping themselves off of their mounts. I'll confess that I've had an experience where a horse suddenly darted on me in fairly heavy timber so quickly that before I could react I was taken right off the back of a M1917 Packer's Saddle by a tree limb.

That hurts by the way.

So, maybe they worried about some nasty brush hanging them up. Anyhow, it's something I've wondered about in regards to lanyards.

On that, I know the idea is not to loose your pistol, but in a bad fight if I've dropped it, I may not be getting it back and now I have it swinging around down there whopping the horse. My imagination?

What you point out is a valid thought. The lanyard was good, while dismounted. If someone got your weapon, you could turn into the lanyard, pulling the butt of the weapon and preventing the other person from shooting you with it.

Jim

[wkambic]

Thanks to all for the input on the M1911 Lanyard.

I've started doing some leatherwork and may try my hand at "plaiting" a double-clip (a la the photo) just because it would be an intereting project. And it would justify buying a "lanyard ring magazine" for my 1911.

Perhaps lanyards, in general, are things that sound good to designers but don't work out all that well in the field. The few times I carried while flying I secured my pistol to my SV-2 survival vest using the string that was already sewed into the holster. In a life raft you want stuff you can't afford to lose secured to your person. Ditto for the signal mirror, radio, etc. Once you get onto terra firma priorities can change and those "security strings" can become their own sort of hazard. When I carry astride I don't usually use one. I'm not in combat and the constant fouling of the lanyard with tack, branches, etc. makes it a Papa India Alpha. That might explain why we see so few in actual use in period photos.

They are a good subject for discussion, though!!!

[Pat Holscher]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1938-Corporal-R ... 4164f19a11

Enlargement shows a lanyard in use.

[Pat Holscher]

I posted this on the CMH forum, and received these replies:

John Morris

The answer was supplied by Karl Karash and Ed Costello. Ref: Poyer, Joe, "The Model 1911 and Model 1911A1 Military and Commercial Pistols," North Cape Publications, Incorporated, 2008, pp. 201-202. "...although the lanyard loop was added to Model 1911 type 1 though 3 magazines manufactured by Colt and the type 1 magazine manufactured by Springfield, the two-loop lanyard was never issued."

In reply to this, I linked in this thread and the earlier photo of what we think is a dual clip lanyard, and received this followup:

John Morris

My sources looked at the photos and think the lanyard(s) shown were designed for US military revolvers which had large circular lanyard rings. The snap hooks on those lanyards are large in cross-section compared to the lanyard rings on the M1911, and can only be inserted into the M1911 rings with difficulty. When the need for lanyards for the M1911 series of pistols arose in WWII, the Army came up with a snap-hook of small cross-section, one resembling a "safety pin."

I have little or no knowledge of this area myself; am acting as a messenger.

[Pat Holscher]

The caption reads:
Promotion ceremonies for Jonathon Wainwright to Brig Genl Nov/1/1938. Regimental standard of 3rd Cav being dipped while passing in review.

Bump.

[Trooper]

Note the pistol lanyard in the last photo.

[stablesgt]

Ummmh, what is remarkable about the lanyard? It was standard issue. If the notation presupposes continued use of the loop ring magazine, I don't know if the photo is evidence of that. Couldn't the lanyard be hooked to the loop on the butt? Or am I misremembering the 45 auto which I last had in my hand in 1972? Was there not a ring loop at the backstrap side of the butt?

[Trooper]

The lanyard is almost certainly attached to the loop on the butt, but that is not the point of my post.
What is unusual is finding photographic evidence of the use of the lanyard at all.
Whilst the lanyard was prescribed regulation equipment, photographs showing it in use, in my experience, are much scarcer than those showing the holstered pistol without lanyard. We discussed this in another thread but I forget which now.

[Pat Holscher]

The lanyard is almost certainly attached to the loop on the butt, but that is not the point of my post.
What is unusual is finding photographic evidence of the use of the lanyard at all.
Whilst the lanyard was prescribed regulation equipment, photographs showing it in use, in my experience, are much scarcer than those showing the holstered pistol without lanyard. We discussed this in another thread but I forget which now.

I bumped that thread up a few seconds ago.

[Trooper]

Thanks Pat.
I look closely at every period photo I encounter and seldom see lanyards in use.
I think the conclusions in the bumped up thread still hold good.

[Pat Holscher]

Thanks Pat.
I look closely at every period photo I encounter and seldom see lanyards in use.
I think the conclusions in the bumped up thread still hold good.

I agree. It appears that in field use, they were rarely used. I wonder if they simply weren't liked?