Need help IDing Sword found on battlefield.

[Gen. Breckinridge]

This sword was recently found on the Civil War battlefield at Marion VA. I don't think that a CW sword could have lasted this long in this good condition and think it is probably a WWI or later sword that was lost, maybe by some kid playing with it. My hunting buddy thinks it is a reproduction. It measures 38" overall and has a brass insert in the blade near the hilt that says PROOF on it. The scabbard is in fairly good condition with only one place rusted through. We soaked it in oil for several days before knocking the scabbard off and revealing the blade. Although rusted the blade is in pretty good condition. There are no other marks other than the PROOF on the brass insert that we can find. The brass insert is set into a hole in the blade but the hole does not go all the way through the blade. That's about all I can tell you about it. Any info will be apprecitated.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[RELICDUDE07]

British nationals in the Union Army won 67 Congressional Medals of Honor4 during the Civil War. Many who fought for the Confederacy were undocumented, but a number of senior officers were British. As ever in fields of battle, there was a generous representation from Ireland, including General Patrick Cleburne of the Confederate Army, born in Cork, commanding a division in the Army of Tennessee. He too had served in the British Army, the 41st Regiment of Foot, in which he reached the rank of Corporal.

Healing the Wounds

At the end of the war, Britain retained the diplomatic position it held during the war. Some complicity in the Confederate cause was identified and at the Tribunal of Arbitration held in Geneva in 1872, Charles F Adams served as an arbitrator to settle any financial claims of damage against Britain. Damages of $15.5 million were awarded to the USA in respect of the damage caused by the commerce raiders to the US merchant fleet and their cargoes. Thus ended the involvement of Britain in the American Civil War

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[ivan salis]

ok now that that I have showed you a site backing my claims ----SWR its your turn to show me ANY source other than your personal statements ( SAY a website ) that states that these types of british swords were NOT used by the confederates in the american civil war -- because I'd really love to see one---- (good luck on finding one)

most military surplus type equiptment is already made older items that are "in stock and ready to move" as is---- since demand is often urgent (we need em NOW!!! ) they are is normally sold in the unaltered "as is" state -- these swords were just sold "as originally made" complete with its original british markings - and as such it would not have any csa markings on it , like "made to order" ones did.

it is with out a doubt a imported british made 1827 / 1845 infantry sword -- with the gothic type rifle regiment steel hilt design of the 1827 and a 1845 wilkinson type blade -- it was found on a civil war era battlefeild (marion ,va)-- and was most likely lost by a person (most likely an infantry officer -- who carry swords along with a pistol normally as their weapons) engaged in that battle in marion ,va on dec 17th or 18th 1864 and as such is a highly impressive find in my opinion -- being I can not do much more with this topic I will leave it at that --- (and the fact that I veiw both my time and energy that I spent "bickering" back and forth with SWRon this topic as wasted time and effort -as well as boring as hell --- and the fact I could better use my time and effort to help ID other things or doing other useful research which I enjoy much more than fussing ).

 

[mxtswinger]

HOLY MOLY! I don't care who owned it, but if it's a period piece then this is simply an amazing find.



Bigtime congrats to ya.

 

[trikikiwi]

HOLY MOLY! I don't care who owned it, but if it's a period piece then this is simply an amazing find.



Bigtime congrats to ya.

I agree with mxt

Mike

 

[Montana Jim]

I found this... you guys can argue it's authenticity if you want to - I'm just sharing it. I think Ivan used some of this in his earlier post...

I do agree that we need to be very careful about writting our own version of history in these pages when so many rely on us to provide facts and historical data about these items.

There is room for speculation, but it needs to be labled as such.

Here is a Wilkinson bladed sword that is VERY close to the one in question. It also features the Royal Cypher on the guard! Apparently British Observers always carried these as sidearms and confederate officers would pay top dollar to have one! Below is more text and the source...

I'd venture a hypothisis that the sword in question can be described as this one is...

Model 1822/1845 Infantry Field Officer's Sword. This sword is the modified version of the 1822 pattern when the folding guard was officially discontinued and the back of the blade became flat, opposed to the 1822 piped-back blade. This sword saw incredible service in the 19th century including the Crimean War, the American Civil War, Boer War (unofficially) and the Zulu, Australian, New Zealand and Indian Colonial Conflicts. It was officially replaced in 1897 with a new pattern Infantry sword.

However it continued to be used by some officers into the 20th century. During the American Civil War, not only did the British observers have this side arm but Confederate officers paid top dollar for one. One British observer noted in 1863: "In Houston, I myself saw an English regulation infantry sword exposed for sale for $225." Our price is in fact less today than its price over 130 years ago! Even the Mexican Army used this sword as early as the Battle of the Alamo.

The stories around this sword are too numerous for this short description. The sword itself has a gothic type hilt with a VR and crown (the Royal Cypher) on the guard. The brass backstrap/pommel piece is finely detailed, and is finished with a pommel nut at the top. The grip is imitation fish skin wrapped with twists of wire. In addition the 32 1/2 inch blade is masterfully etched with the appropriate devices. Completing the sword is its two ringed brass scabbard. The use of brass was reserved for field officers and steel for company grade officers.

http://www.militaryheritage.com/swords2.htm

 

[Montana Jim]

SWR - thats why I almost always (as much as possible) quote from or list my sources... I like to offer the other sources, but seldom can claim it true myself...

Here is another... http://www.medalsandmilitaria.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.asp?item=AS014

And another from the same site... http://www.medalsandmilitaria.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.asp?item=AS020

Wiki - not always the best source, but it's in line with the other information... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_Hilted_British_Infantry_Swords_(1822,_1827,_1845,_1854_and_1892_Patterns)

And this from diggerhistory... scrolling required... http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/swords.htm

 

[ivan salis]

you will simply ask for more and more proof -- because you can not produce anything to back your "claim" and are incapable of saying --gee your right --or gee I made a mistake and am wrong =--- I'm both old enough and wise enough to know the type of person that does that cannot be "cured"of the habit and will not waste any more of my time or effort as its a waste of both.

I at least showed some "proof" of what I was sayng (and if I cared to spend more of my valuible time looking (which quite frankly I do not) I'm sure I could produce more websites with even more info) -- now on the other hand you have produced nothing -squat- to back your claims -- so I saylet the people read for themselves and decide who is full of BS.--me or you.

 

[Monty]

I don't know squat about swords and I don't give a darn if it belonged to General Lee or Groucho Marx, but it is still an excellant find and I would cherish it if it were mine. That's the mistique of treasure hunting, imagining how an item got to where it was found, who might have owned it or touched it last and what became of that person. If the finder fails to follow up and see who it might have belonged to and enhance his imagination even more, it would be his loss. Though the person who lost it or discarded it is probably long dead, he still lives in the minds and imagination of the discoverer and those with whom he chooses to share. So, thanks for sharing with us on Tnet General and follow your dreams as you wish in spite of those who may unwittingly try to spoil it for all of us. M nty

 

[ivan salis]

I do not just "guess" ---I use a logical process when studying things -- I call it the highest % of probiblity -- or the whats more likely approach * -- lets say you find a sword ion a battlefeild * like this case --- now side "A" union got some war supplies from england up till 1863 --side "B" confederate got almost all their weapons from england (their major supplier) from which side do you think it more likely to be from ? --- say side a got 5 swords and b got 10 swords -- thus its twice as like to be a side "B" sword than a side "A" sword--follow my drift?--- so I say is more likely confederate due to a % basis ( since the south got more war supplies from england than the north did)

ok -- now we know that a officers sword was a sign of rank -- plus it was one of a officers main weapons during the war --the sword and pistols (was a officers "normal" arms ) and that these types of swords from england (due to their top quality) were high dollar items -- thus most likely by custom and cost its a officers sword -- and since its an infantry style sword -- an infantry officer

now such an important and valuible thing would not be just left behind -- far more likely the owner was shot --killed or wounded or if about to be captured --threw it in the bushes or buried it to prevent use by union troops.

now if one takes the location where it was found --and maps out the killed/ wounded or captured confederate infantry officers location on the battlefeild -- its possible that you might get some ideal to who it belonged to --- maybe not 100% dead on proof -- (since theres no name etched in it )--but a fair chance. in my veiw.

thus I believe its a confederate infantry officers sword * by my whats more likely veiw point --but of course there is no name etched into it to "prove" it -- so I could be dead wrong .

 

[Gen. Breckinridge]

I have studied every first hand account of the Battle of Marion that I can find. Where the sword was found was occupied by the Confederates for the entire battle. Once the Confederates left the battlefield, which was found out by Stoneman and his Yankees the next morning when the sun came up, The Yankees hightailed it for Saltville. Doing this they would not have even come close to the area where the sword was found since the only way across the river was a covered bridge from which they would have headed west on the main road which went through Marion and on toward Saltville. The sword was found on the very east end of the Confederate line which was 1/4 mile east of the bridge and not even near the Yankees path. Although this still proves nothing, it does increase the odds that this sword was carried by a Confederate since at no time, by any account I have read, did the Yankees enter or occupy that area of the battlefield or for that matter cross the river until they headed for Saltville after Breckinridge and his men left under cover of darkness. A very good account of the battle can be found at http://www.bencaudill.com/documents_msc/battle_of_marion.html and is true to the first hand accounts that I have read.

Thanks to everyone for their comments and input on the sword.
Ken

 

[ivan salis]

humm since ther confederates "pulled out" of the area of the battlefeild at night --the sword might have gotten lost in the confusion & darkness of the night as they pulled out --and thus been left behind -- that makes sense. --- from what I read the southern soldiers pinned downed northern troops at the covered bridge with a deadly fire during the battle and only after the southern troops left (due to a shortage of anmo) did the northern troops advance past the bridge and then onward toward saltville --- Ivan

 

[rebelfirefighter07]

[/quote]

I do agree it is a good find. But, without documentation...I cannot see why either the North or South would import an outdated sword. The P1851 (pattern of 1851) sword was being produced during the Civil War era in England.
[/quote]


You would be greatly surprised what "outdated" items were used by both sides during the war especially in the South. Early war you had guys that were fighting in Revolutionary uniforms and using flint lock rifles. The examples are endless.
Theres no way to say 110 percent that this sword belonged to an officer but you can about say 99 percent because thats what military tradition was in the time. Privates did not carry swords for the most part. If they had one early war they didnt carry it long before they got rid of it. A sword for the most part was a ceremonial item that represented rank. It could be used as a weapon but was not common as one. It could stick you but most of them had no sharp edge because they weren't made for slashing, they were made for directing troops and ceremonial use. Sabers on the other hand like those used by cavalry are a different story.

 

[Montana Jim]

SWR - thats why I almost always (as much as possible) quote from or list my sources... I like to offer the other sources, but seldom can claim it true myself...

Here is another... http://www.medalsandmilitaria.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.asp?item=AS014

And another from the same site... http://www.medalsandmilitaria.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.asp?item=AS020

Wiki - not always the best source, but it's in line with the other information... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_Hilted_British_Infantry_Swords_(1822,_1827,_1845,_1854_and_1892_Patterns)

And this from diggerhistory... scrolling required... http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/swords.htm

You seemed to have misunderstood what I posted. I do not doubt the sword is a British sword of the 1822 pattern. The conversation is strictly about falsely labeling it as "Confederate" issue. None of the above links support what the conversation is about

SWR... I know. I'm cool with all that - I was just showing more pictures of the sword...

I understood what you were saying, and, completely agree. I am always reminding people that just because they found a button doesn't mean they found a camp. Or, just because they can't say soldiers marched through an area doesn't mean they didn't find military accouterments. Stuff from everyplace is found everyplace for a lot or reasons, and we should be careful to not make assumptions because they fit in a mold or an obscure reference.

I think we can assume some things based on knowledge and understanding of history, but not assign history to an item without documentation no matter how knowledgable we are.

I DO think we assume too much here about many items because we read a history book or saw an example someplace... but I ALSO think that it hardly matters unless we misrepresent the item during a sale. If I'm keeping it - it can be whatever I say it is! LOL

 

[ivan salis]

it was found at an area that only held confederate troops during the battle of marion , va according to the finder of the item (a 62 year old local ) who is a bit of a buff on "his" local battle and who by his own statement to me has been detecting since the 70's----- SWR you all but admit its an officers sword --- so is it really that far of a leap of faith to think "confederate officers sword" most likely? -----note the key words here are "most likely"-- not "without a doubt."

 

[Gen. Breckinridge]

SWR,
Read my post again. The sword was found at the BATTLE OF MARION, VA, not the Battle of Saltville. There was only one battle in Marion, Dec. 17 & 18th, 1864. I have read seven first hand accounts of the battle and I know what I'm talking about as to troop positions.

 

[ivan salis]

very nice info YOU PROVIDED on the two battles of saltville * SWR now please READ YOUR OWN INFORMATION VERY VERY CAREFULLY --- the finder said the sword was found at the battlefield spot in marion * which is only talked about during the second attack on saltville in the article you provided--- (the one in dec of 1864 )* the report noted that gen stonesman's men came from marion * to saltville --- thus its the second battle of saltville that involved the battle of marion, va * not the first battle of saltville. ---

During the battle of Marion, Va on Dec 17 & 18 ,1864 --- the rebels held the area in question where the sword was found --as a matter of fact -- it was the fact that the rebels held that area which is what prevented the union troops from advancing towards saltville -- since it controlled the ability to cross the river via the bridge --- the union forces could not advance without getting mowed down by fire from the confederate soldiers in trenches over looking the bridge --- (due to a shortage of ammo) the rebel forces were forced to abandon the area under the cover of darkness --- in the morning when the union troops found out the rebels had retreated they rapidly went over the bridge and down the road and went on to destroy their main objective --the salt works at nearby saltville.

your info basically really helps me make my case.

I gotta go -- my wifes wondering why I'm laughing out loud so hard.

 

[ivan salis]

bump

 

[Monty]

Regarding the age of the sword. I can imagine General Fogbottom presenting the sword, his sword to his son Lt. Boregard Fogbottom when he graduated from West Point in 1861. It would be an heirloom he would wear with pride and and rue the day he lost it at Marion. Just an example of why the early sword design could have belonged to a Confederate troop. Anything is possible as long as you describe it in the terms of imagine, possible, could have. Nothing is finite about history forgotten when all the eye witnesses were long dead and buried. That's all I have to say on this subject, except, very excellent find. Monty

 

[ivan salis]

psst --its a 1845 blade design * with a older style 1827 hilt design -- so due to the blade design it was made in or after 1845 --a mere 16 years prior to the start of thev civil war * 1861 -- and according to records british "observor officers" watching the civil war were carrying just these type of swords --so there not "outdated"

 

[cheese]

Wow...nice find! Given the accompanying provenance, I'd say the rational person would go ahead and make the leap of faith and call it what it most likely is...as long as the finding details are provided so each interested person may draw their own conclusion based on the facts. That has been done, so what's the problem?

If it looks and sounds like a duck, it might be a deformed dog with a sore throat and peculiar way of barking. Or there could be a tiny chance it might be a duck, if the dog theory can't be proved.