22nd October 2020, 03:46 AM | #9 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,943
|
Quote:
Here's what I found in Robson, p.190: "...from 1796 onwards, swords from whatever source had to be inspected for quality at the Tower and thus view marks began to appear -initially in the form of a crown over a single number. On many cavalry pattern 1796 swords, the view marks are not readily discernible, but whether this is because they were never stamped on or because they have disappeared with cleaning or refurbishing is not east to determine". Also,"...from 1796 cavalry swords were often purchased in bulk by the Board of Ordnance and, in consequence, many pattern 1796 light and heavy cavalry swords bear no makers name". It seems that in this period, and later, many swords purchased by the EIC were of course not inspected nor marked by the Tower. As far as I have known, swords were not marked by the Company, and as David Harding ("Small Arms of the East India Company") told me some years ago, 'swords were NOT marked in any way by the EIC'. The only marks were the familiar 'bale marks' (the quartered heart with VEIC) as used on goods and firearms (incl. bayonets). Even swords made for native cavalry units were not inspected by BO, and went directly to outfitters and arsenals in India. The only marks seen were ISD (india Stores Depot) but even that was inconsistent. Perhaps these options might offer some solutions to these unmarked swords as being discussed. |
|
|
|