Help identify cutlass marking please

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Mark! I forgot about police swords, which do indeed fall into this civilian category that corresponds to maritime associated weapons. Since most of these are essentially private purchase of course, they are not as easy to identify as regulation.
This discussion really has gotten me intrigued with these rather obscure patterns, especially as they have so little data on them.

Ed, I think the main problem is that although it looks like a makers mark, no match or similar mark has yet been found to correspond, and the nature of the mark looks very much like merchants marks as described. Since this appears to be a commercially connected sword, there is a strong possibility of the marking placed much as those of East India Company on its weapons and those of the Dutch VOC as well. As Mark has noted, the Friedrich Holler time frame does fit loosely into the period this sword might have been used, but no confirmation of that marking for Holler or any maker has been found in the standard resources.

All best regards,
Jim

[BBJW]

This cutlass I got along with the WIDC cutlass. No markings at all on it. I'm not certain what exactly it is.

Cheers
BBJW

[Jim McDougall]

Excellent! and great that these two came together in the same lot. This looks like the same basic stirrup hilt weapon discussed with the artillery swords issued to mountain batteries, but there is no quillon disc. The blade looks like early 19th century blade, similar to the 'Montmorency' cross section favored by Wooley, is there evidence any markings might have been at back of blade?.
This heavy blade suggests of course the possibility of being of the type used as discussed for private issue maritime use, and possibly later to mountain artillery units.

[Jim McDougall]

Bump!

[Jim McDougall]

This conundrum as can be seen remains perplexing, and I wanted to revisit to see if any further information or ideas might bring us closer to answer.
This cutlass pictured in OP (2008) has the markings WIDC , which can only refer to West India Docks and the security forces who guarded materials in transit to and from vessels.

This has a brass stirrup hilt, no langet, and extra guard bar. Robson (1975, p.163) pictures one of these same style hilts was given to Army Hospital Corps in 1861. It is noted that these were IDENTICAL to those issued to the Coast Guard (no date of these noted but probably early in the century).

These IMO may be deemed 'cutlasses' despite the fact that they have cavalry type blades typically around 29-30" blades.

In about 1850 the Indian Army began mountain artillery units with the Hazara mountain train, followed by Peshawar mountain train in 1853.
By 1889 there were 8 mountain train batteries.

In 1896, a pattern sword was issued for these units, with the same ribbed iron grip, and a brass stirrup guard for Indian units, iron for regular British.
The guard on these was fuller than the stirrup guard forms earlier in the century, and like all if these, there were NO langets.

I have had the sword I am posting here for at least 45 years, but have never been clear on what it is. My presumption has always been that it is likely one of the Indian mountain artillery swords of the mid 19th century. It has the simple brass stirrup hilt, ribbed iron grip, and what appears to be the M1796 light cavalry saber blade. These 1796 sabers were so ubiquitous, they seem to have appeared everywhere, especially after end of Napoleonic campaigns when they became surplus .

What is unusual with this saber is the LANGETS. The Coast Guard cutlasses had the extra bar on the guard and NO langets. It seems langets were absent of either cutlasses, and the later mountain artillery swords.

With the seemingly consistent pattern overall with these swords with ribbed iron grips and brass hilts, typically M1796 blades.......these langets are a distinct anomaly.

Could this be a private purchase cutlass? There are no ordnance marks, unit stamps or any sort of markings. Would the langet suggest earlier issue perhaps in accord with the extant M1796 cavalry saber? and perhaps private purchase cutlass ?

Photos and of Robson illustration 1896 sword

[kronckew]

[QUOTE=Jim McDougall;294834]... It is noted that these were IDENTICAL to those issued to the Coast Guard (no date of these noted but probably early in the century).
...
What is unusual with this saber is the LANGETS. The Coast Guard cutlasses had the extra bar on the guard and NO langets. It seems langets were absent of either cutlasses, and the later mountain artillery swords..../QUOTE]


See also Coast Guard Sword


The amalgamation of the various sections into the Coast Guard in 1822/23 saw the Coastal Riding service adopting their own sword shortly thereafter, as mentioned in "British Naval Swords & Swordsmanship" by Mc Grath and Barton, ©️2013, page 25. After 1856 these were repurposed for the mountain troops and the Hospital corps, the CG adopting the then current model Naval cutlasses. The CG became a civilian volunteer service and unarmed in 1923.


Mine: (I've cleaned off the rust on thscabbard & re-lacquered it since this photo - and It has a suitable belt frog.)

[adrian]

I am not a sword collector per se so I have very few reference books on the subject.
From researching firearms of this period I encounter material on other arms and I note that there were a few 'stand out' brief spates of concentrating on making arms for the Coast Guard and, as well as Muskets, carbines and pistols, swords/cutlasses were also included.

There were 1500 'cutlasses' to be made at Enfield in 1831, with some urgency (WO 47/2702, 21 Mar). At this time there were also a lot of pistols made for that service, P/1833 Coast Guard Pistols.

Next notable orders were 1000 x short flintlock muskets made in 1844, the P/1844 Coast Guard Muskets - the last Ordnance made flintlock muskets. In that same year 800 Coast Guard Swords were ordered to be mounted at Enfield from blades already in stock. The other materials for those were malleable cast iron grips from Thomas Clive, the grips Japanned by Charles Dunn & the brass guards were from Samuel Hargroves (WO47 1992-2027, 13 Mar).

Note that in this period the nomenclature was very 'loose', with 'sea service sword', 'cutlass' and 'sword' being used sometimes for the same weapon. Just as for land service 'scimitar' had been used fairly regularly for the P/1797 Light Cavalry Sword, and other cavalry swords etc.

Do modern sword reference books describe the two orders (1831 & 1844) of Coast Guard swords/cutlasses? And if so are they all the same, or are there small differences?

Are the blades of the Coast Guard swords/cutlasses made from altered P/1797 Light Cavalry Sword blades?