Add a Comment

Comment by Kevin D 1 hour ago

Historical Research:   PART II

Besides the cantons previously mentioned, many other cantons also developed sidearms for the ‘sharpshooters’ for adaptation in 1842.  Some of these other designs had a longer and narrower blade and already complied with the 1852 regulations.  <Kevin’s thought> Because they were were typically the wealthier cantons, was the drafting of the regulation a bit biased toward those canton’s designs?

While this created a country-wide standard uniform regulation, several features regarding the knife had to be changed.

• Predominately in the French cantons, the sheath had to be replaced because it had different fastenings for the frog.
• In the canton of Glarus, the blade and sheath had to be replaced because they had used a different lengt
• All of those wealthy cantons?  The handles of those weapons needs to be replaced to avoid the appearance of discrimination.

According to all of the information I have seen, ALL of the 1842 knives were supposed to have been upgraded to the 1842/52 version.  However… Every once in a blue moon you see a ‘real’ 1842 offered for sale.  This is just a verification that even back then, in that society, thefts from the warehouse were committed.

There were a LOT of 1842 knives/swords made, so no further production was required for the modification to the 1842/52.

 

The standard Swiss M1842/52 sniper knife was issued together with an M1851 bayonet. The M1851 was the first Swiss service rifle and was procured for snipers.  The M1851 bayonet was to be attached to the cartridge pouch. 

 One thing that seems to be a contradiction…

The regulation of 1852 also stipulates that the knife must be carried on the shoulder strap or saber belt (for officers).  However, all shoulder straps were confiscated and replaced with belts. Bayonets and knives were now carried on a frog.

 

In 1875, stocks were running low and the government decided to place an order in Solingen – this is the so-called M1852 (as it is based on the 1852 ordnance and was not modified).  However, as the knives were abolished in 1878, most M1852s went to the police authorities. It is therefore virtually impossible to find a M1852 in the army.

These sidearms were identical in physical appearances to the 1842/52 sidearms, but none of the M1852s had any canton markings of any sort.

 

After it was taken out of service (1878), several cantons (primarily the French-speaking ones) expressed interest in the knives. In these cantons, the knives were carried by high-ranking police and judicial officials.

The Sharpshooters Sidearm that I found, is definitely the longer design (not a ‘true’ M1842), and has the canton markings.  So there is no real question that this is :

1. not a M1852, and
2. has had the blade and scabbard replaced to comply with the 1852 regulation.

Comment by Kevin D 1 hour ago

Historical Research:   PART I

This information is based on several conversations with an acquaintance in Germany (who seems to have good knowledge of Swiss weapons) and additional personal research.  This is of course to the best of my knowledge.  If I have something wrong, just let me know and I will try to include it in with that which I have received so far.  There is not much information out there that covers this relatively niche area of hand weapons.  One book (in German), seems to have a good handle on it though.  That book is Volume 7 of Bewaffnung und Ausrüstung der Schweizer Armee seit 1817.

 

Through 1851, each canton in Switzerland had its own regulations for army clothing and equipment. This was very chaotic.

There are three variants of this model:

• Model 1842
• Model 1842/52
• Model 1852

In 1842, a few of the Swiss cantons (Glarus, Bern, and Solothurn) designed, developed, and procured a knife that was shorter, but a bit wider than those we typically see now.  Please see the picture below.  Notice how wide and short the blade is.  Also of note is that there was a saw-back version of the knife.  The saw-back version was quite rare.

 

A few cantons (Zurich, Lucerne, and Vaud) were considerably wealthier than the others.  These used stag horn on the handles.

In 1852, a standard uniform regulation was created that also standardized the armament.

Comment by Kevin D 1 hour ago

Due to the 4000 character limitation that these reply have, I cannot put my findings, thoughts, and observations into a single reply...  Therefore please forgive the PART I and PART II replies.

Featured Comment by dead_left_knife_guy on February 14, 2026 at 21:06

I love knives that straddle the knife-sword line.  THAT looks like it would qualify as a dirk...!  (The term "dirk," by the way, IS etymologically related to "dork," by the way...)  Nice score, Kevin!

Comment by Kevin D on February 14, 2026 at 15:09

For the longest time I could not get the time frame or even the model nailed down with the degree of certainty I am used to.

Everything I found, read, or was told was between 1842 and 1875.  I wanted something a little more definitive.

FINALLY.  I found a guy in Germany that was able to speak with me a little in english (I am embarrassed that I am barely fluent in english, let alone other languages...) about these weapons.  I am now confident that this is a M1842/52, and made between 1842 and 1852.

This particular one was accepted by the Canton of Glarus, but being as they were not one of the wealthy cantons, the handle is wood and not stag horn.  I say it still looks good!

Looks pretty good for being about 175 years old!   LOL!

Comment by Lars on February 14, 2026 at 13:53

Well it's about time you showcased this bad boy! Man that piece is beautiful. Great photo too. I only have three worrds for it - (Envy, envy, envy)  Thanks for sharing.; Looking forward to your classic "historical write-up" on it.