|
|
Post by tp53 on Sept 5, 2024 15:22:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by madirish on Sept 6, 2024 14:48:53 GMT
Appears to be authentic, but a later Horstmann based on the black grip, if I recall correctly. Horstmann sold swords until around 1935 from what I've read. With these swords, "authentic" often doesn't mean a great deal as most of this series of sword were intended for purely ceremonial use and were not fighting blades. The same design is used today and is often made with stainless components.
|
|
|
|
Post by edm on Sept 6, 2024 16:46:19 GMT
Like Madrish said, the 1902 model officer's sword is still in "use" today. They are optional: officers are authorized them, but don't have to have them. As such, the government does not issue them, so there are no government marks or proofs. They are private purchase items. When I was in the Army and in a U.S. cavalry unit in Germany in the 80s, we officers all bought one as an end of tour presentation item. I still have it: it was made by WKC in Solingen. There are lots of different makers and all are "authentic" as far as the U.S. Army is concerned (so long as they fit the 1902 pattern--and generally speaking, any vendor who sells officer's swords to military personnel will produce an authorized version, just as they do other private purchase uniform items).
If the era or look and feel of this particular sword is what you're after, I don't think you need to be concerned that it isn't authentic. |
|
|
|
Post by tp53 on Sept 8, 2024 14:34:23 GMT
Thank you for commenting, I knew it was a ceremonial sword, I just wanted a nice wall hanger, and I do not deal with reproductions. One last question, is there a potential time frame you could date the sword, if not that is alright. Thank you
|
|
|
|
Post by edm on Sept 8, 2024 16:36:41 GMT
It certainly is a handsome model (the scabbard and hilt show their age, but the blade is quite nice and the decorations are splendid). Despite me actually having my own from my time in service, I have thought about getting an antique "old army" version of the 1902 U.S. Army Sword (funny how the one I am literally a part of the provenance for does not signify in the same way).
I am not up on the history of the U.S. Army 1902, so can't conjecture on provenance. You may not be able to get an exact date (such is the world of collecting), but if Madirish's information on the maker, Horstman is correct, you can at least get an era (Pre-WWII), and that's at least something.
Given that all these swords are (and were) private purchase, and that you can still buy them from commercial vendors (like Marlowe White), I rather doubt that there is much of a market for fakes.
|
|
|
|
Post by madirish on Sept 8, 2024 18:37:43 GMT
Did you read the comment I made re the maker? Can't do better than 1902 to 1935 atm. Suggest closer to 1935 than 1902.
|
|
|
|
Post by tp53 on Sept 10, 2024 2:58:15 GMT
Yes, I did read your comment, and I’m sorry for the miscommunication, I only meant to ask if there was any other way to narrowing down the date, and thank you for answering my question. And I am glad to hear that the blade is quite nice, as that is one of the main reasons I picked it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by edm on Sept 10, 2024 11:39:25 GMT
Regarding further narrowing the date: in my brief foray into your sword and Horstmann, I did not see that particular design for their maker's mark (circle with a human figure): the ones I saw were textual. I'm guessing that if you can run down more information on this particular design, you may be able to get a more defined window to date the sword.
|
|
