I am getting along in years, but I was not a Union Army Officer
in the Civil War. Both the hat and the 1860 Army Colt are replicas.

The holster appears to be left handed, but it's not. Actually
officers and cavalry troopers carried their holstered revolver on
the strong side with butt forward.

Officers carried their swords, and cavalry troopers their sabers,
on their weak side for a strong side cross-draw. With the sword
or saber in their strong hand they could pull their revolver with
their weak hand cross-draw. They could use the so called
"cavalry draw" if their sword or saber was in it's sheath.

The cavalry draw involved twisting the strong side hand to
an inverted position, with palm out, to grasp the stock and
draw the revolver.

It wasn't until early 1900s that our military went to the
conventional butt-back carry that we see almost always today.

If you hold your curser on the thumbnail a photo will appear.
Then you can enlarge the photo by clicking once or twice.

Attached Images

SAM_1328.jpg (74.4 KB, 379 views)

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

Phil, you have once again reduced my ignorance. This explains several old "thought-they-were-lefthanded" holsters in the pile.

__________________
de minimus non curat lex

Probably made sense at the time, but doing the "Calvalry Draw" sweeps your own midsection with the muzzle of the handgun. Might not be the best thing to do in a stressful situation, especially if still mounted!

I had horses for 20+ years. It cavalry draw makes sense when mounted. You typically hold the reins in your left hand. That leaves your right hand for your sword or pistol. In fact, many cavalrymen also had a butt forward pistol holster on each of the pommel of the saddle.

To draw you pull the pistol straight up to clear the holster, rotate while the pistol is still pointed to the ground, then push forward. You don’t draw across your body. We just don’t use the technique today.

I don't see that what you are saying is true . . .

There are lots of non-sweeping illustrations on Google.

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

Spad has it right, of course.

Keep in mind that for cavalry, the sabre and the pistol were reserved for enemies close at hand; the carbine was for distance; and they were surrounded by soldiers, ideally, who did the fighting on foot. The pistol initially only fired once, then the six shooters that had to be reloaded manually, then the cartridge versions; but the sabre never needed a reload so could be fought with endlessly.

Polo was created to train and challenge cavalrymen, to fight from the horse. Even today we recognize (thanks, Col Cooper) that the pistol is not an offensive weapon, but a defensive one.

What we call a Sam Browne belt was created because Samuel Browne, while an officer in the British Indian Army, in 1858 had his left arm hacked off at the shoulder by another's sabre; and so no longer could support the sabre with his left hand as is still done today; which is to say, a Sam Browne properly has a shoulder strap support that loops over the right shoulder:

princes and sabres (1).jpg princes and sabres (2).jpg

All this was set out in a 1921 newspaper article, explaining how the 'sword belt' had come to be formally adopted after WWI after trialing it during that war. At his death in 1901 he was General Sir Samuel James Browne, VC, for continuing in battle after losing that arm.

__________________
The Holstorian

How bout a video?
Notice he does not sweep his midsection.

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Sword or Saber? What's the difference?
Sword is kind of a generic term for almost any long bladed weapon.
Saber is slightly curved blade, sharp on one side only, usually used
by Cavalry.
In Red's photos it appears that Prince Philip's is definately a sword.
Prince Charles appears to have a slight curve in his blade?
But I don't think he was ever in the cavalry. Most of his ranks
are honorary.

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

Those appear to be extremely poorly fitted sword attachments. However, I expect as ceremonial items they're designed for comfort/convenience rather than practical use.

IIRC, the Prince of Wales was Royal Navy for actual service.

Bottom line is, in the heat of any confrontation when you are relying on training and muscle memory, you would probably almost always sweep part of yourself and the mount when accessing the pistol with either hand.

Being that it's a single action and cocking is probably going happen well after that point, it's probably not unsafe enough to worry about considering what else is going on.

Hiram Maxim made it all a moot point. Still my dad was in the cavalry until it was disbanded then went in the navy until '58. I believe the only way to score a good score on the mounted pistol course was to touch the target as you rode by.

__________________
Well done > well said

You guys do know who designed the last US Cavalry Saber?

Model 1913 Cavalry Saber - Wikipedia

Attached Images

A52E9A3F-1D05-4C0C-BAA1-943D5B1C0A92.jpeg (56.4 KB, 108 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Patton did. He was with the british cavalry school and used their 1908 pattern i believe. The was a small book out called the Last Bright Blades about it history. I have a copy but you might find one on the net.

__________________
Well done > well said

Yes, Patton developed the 1913 “saber.” However, it is not a cutting sword like most sabers. True sabers have a curve so that you can roll the saber out of your opponent as you ride by. Strait blades tend to go in deeper and stick if used on edge. The 1913 is a point weapon meant to be used more as a spear like the British, German and French heavy dragoon swords. Pick up one, it’s heavy but extends out nicely. The 1860 saber is meant to be used on edge or on point. In the pre-maxim days heavy cavalry was the equivalent of the tank.

Bringing this back to the cavalry draw, because the M1913 was so long it was only carried on the horse. It was carried either strapped to the off side (right side) of the McClellan with the hilt up by the pommel of the saddle and the scabbard under the trooper’s leg or in a carrier attached to the right side of the saddle behind the cantle. And because the 1911 pistol was in use and much easier to reload than any revolver the 1911 started to become favored over the saber. The 1912 holster was specifically developed for use on horseback. It has a swivel so that when mounted you pull the 1911 back out of the holster, not up. It’s easier than the cavalry draw. Oddly, 1917 revolvers were still carried in cavalry draw holsters during WWI.

Randy Steffan wrote an excellent book on US military saddles from the Revolution to the dismounting of the cavalry. And the movie In Pursuit of Honor shows some great US cavalry gear from the 1930s. There is a Patton character in the movie who doesn’t come off too well because he goes over to the mechanized side.

The 'princely' images were only to illustrate General Browne's particular handicap in carrying a sabre at his left side: unable to steady the item in any conditions, he relied on the added shoulder strap for that duty.

1962 bucheimer clark (1).jpg

__________________
The Holstorian

I got your intent in that post Red. But I thought it also
kinda shows Phillip's sword, and Charles saber(?) I think
I see a slight curve in his blade.

As for the Sam Browne shoulder strap looped over the right
shoulder to support saber, or whatever, on the left side...
this was nothing new. Way before belts came into vogue,
straps were criss-crossed over shoulders to support weight
on their opposite sides. Not only swords & sabers, but also
powder horns, possibles bags, pistols, etc.

The evolution of the belt replacing the sash is another interesting
study. Could there be a Beltstory in our future?

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

I had the rare honor of knowing the late Fred Almeraz, Deming, New Mexico. He joined the NM National Guard in 1939 because they still had a cavalry unit. In 1940 the cav unit was disbanded, and they became the 200th Coastal Artillery (only the military could dream up a coastal artillery unit in a desert, land-locked state).

In January, 1941 the 200th was deployed to the Philippines; in December, 1941 the 200th was folded into the mixed units being pushed down the Bataan Peninsula. The night before the surrender, a major told Fred's provisional company that if they wanted to keep fighting, they needed to leave that night to fight with Filipino guerillas or cross the bay to Corregidor. Fred's squad chose Corregidor and were three on each side of a log. They swam across the open bay to Corregidor. They fought on two more months until the Japanese finally got a 240mm shell into Battery Geary's magazine and effectively ended serious defense against Japanese ships.

He spent the rest of the war in a series of Japanese prison camps. Of 1800 New Mexicans deployed in 1941, 900 came home.

Those cavalry boys were pretty tough.

By the way, I believe Samuel Browne was knighted, so I should have
referred to him as Sir Samuel Browne.

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

One more.
Maybe the last one?

Attached Images

784FE8B5-66EE-4ABD-B9FA-5E5AE36E9FF8.jpg (49.0 KB, 30 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Is this a .38 Cal 1892 series revolver?

Sent from my MX10.00.d4 using Tapatalk

Just a side note unrelated to the cavalry:

While the gentleman proves the point, carrying the gun INTENTIONALLY like that in a quick-draw holster intending to routinely draw like that seems silly. In terms of muscle dynamics it's very inefficient. The holster appears too far back to be a comfortable cross-draw.

Before rotator cuff injuries were invented.

It IS true.
I know from a lot of personal experience.

The US Cavalry used several versions of the reverse draw holster until the introduction of the 1911.
Here’s a Trooper posing with his 1911 and M1912 Holster.

Attached Images

90D4587D-A666-4491-A78E-E775CFE65BE6.jpg (68.3 KB, 43 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

I first read about the “Calvary twist draw” in those very historically (in)accurate books by JT Edson. The Ysabel Kid carries his 1848 Dragoon in one.

I have only seen one, it was at a Wild Bunch shoot and the wearer referred to it as “reverse draw” not “calvalry” when I asked him about it. Like The Pilgrims video he lifted the gun, rotated the muzzle forward and then rotated the pistol upright.

The R/O was not concerned as the holster was vertical, not canted barrel rearwards.

__________________
View from down under

Just don't shoot your horse in the head.

Lawrence of Arabia is reported to have killed his camel that way with a Mauser Broomhandle.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Interesting post with some good information. I will disagree somewhat with the comment about the revolver being a defensive weapon, not offensive. During the Civil War and later mounted cavalry trained for and practiced "revolver charges" in which the primary weapon was the revolver, with the goal being to overwhelm defensive positions.

The US Army Cavalry continues to exist, but now uses armored vehicles and helicopters, rather than horses, to conduct assaults.

The photo of British royals in uniform with swords brings up the difference between swords as weapons and swords intended for ceremonial use. The swords carried in ceremonial functions will frequently be nothing more than the scabbard with a sword handle fixed in place, eliminating a few pounds of weight for the gentlemen so encumbered.

True swords were heavy weapons designed for striking an opponent, caving in skulls, creating massive and deep wounds. The cavalry saber is generally lighter and curved, with only one cutting edge, designed for stabbing, slashing and cutting without becoming deeply entangled.

George Patton was the only serving officer to ever receive the "saber master" title, requiring several years of study in England and France. Patton did indeed design the 1913 Cavalry saber, and was extremely upset when his commander, General Pershing, decided to conduct the Mexican Punitive Campaign without sabers.

Patton was still a junior lieutenant at the time, serving on Pershing's staff (it took a couple of world wars for him to achieve high rank). The families were quite close, including some degree of relationship by marriage. Both were independently wealthy, and both served about a half-century in our nation's uniform.