Mandinka Sword Mark

Iain · 1st January 2016, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

According to " Pictorial History of Swords & Bayonets, R.J.Wilkinson.Latham" the crown is "British inspectors mark" and from "Swords of the British Army, Brian Robson, National Army museum Publications" the blade appears to be a version of a troopers "sword, light cavalry, pattern 1796" To cut a long story short, they were in service for about 30 years. Discarded swords were much sought after in India and I suspect traded widely elsewhere.
These swords were made by private manufacturers, supply delays due to wretched quality led to the decision that in future the Board of Ordnance would maintain a reserve of properly tested swords at the tower of London to meet any sudden expansion.

So tracking down the mark which I think is "Warren" might prove quick a task.

Hi Tim,

I agree the crown appears to correspond to a British inspection mark, however typically this is followed by a letter and/or a number. The lion is quite odd in this regard and the bit I'm having trouble tracking down.

Tim Simmons · 1st January 2016, 04:46 PM

Who knows how strict or how slack or the proper stamping procedure now?

RobertGuy · 1st January 2016, 07:37 PM

The fuller looks too narrow for a British 1796 LC sword. Similar to the 1896 Mountain Artillery blade, however the crown mark is not a British Inspection stamp. It does not look like there is enough room on the blade but could WARREN actually be WARRENTED a mark often seen on British and German made blades. My money would be on a Solingen blade, otherwise Bezdek gives Thomas Warren and successor Mary Warren trading at Chancery Lane 1846 - 1871.

Tim Simmons · 1st January 2016, 09:47 PM

Multiple private manufactures were producing versions hence the problem with quality. I will scan the illustration of the inspection mark. You have to bear in mind a time that is just before mechanized, standardized, industry and government issue. Yes the blades were influenced by Germanic forms.

Germany was not a unified state at this time so I am not sure the crown mark is anything to do with Solingen? A state crown did not appear until 1871. Austria had a crown and the Army museum publication does say that the 1796 blade was followed from the Austrian sword.

Bavarian perhaps?

Tim Simmons · 1st January 2016, 10:45 PM

This could help, but again before true standardisation.

mrcjgscott · 2nd January 2016, 03:29 PM

Certainly not 1796 light cavalry blade. More likely a hanger or cutlass blade which has been reworked.

The marking could be that of the East India Company, and is probably "Warranted" or a shortening there of as Robert has already suggested.

Kind regards,

Chris

Helleri · 7th January 2016, 04:38 PM

I am really only familiar with silver assay marks so I don't know how helpful this is. But Sheffield, England has always used the crown in combination with the lion. The arrangement and specific crown and lion used indicates the year. but they are stamped left to right. Of course this is not silver. But if people are thinking England but no clue on specifically where. The crown and lion are a Sheffield thing. And Sheffield does have an extensive history with cutlery as well, sooo...maybe?

1st January 2016, 09:47 PM	#4
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,855	Multiple private manufactures were producing versions hence the problem with quality. I will scan the illustration of the inspection mark. You have to bear in mind a time that is just before mechanized, standardized, industry and government issue. Yes the blades were influenced by Germanic forms. Germany was not a unified state at this time so I am not sure the crown mark is anything to do with Solingen? A state crown did not appear until 1871. Austria had a crown and the Army museum publication does say that the 1796 blade was followed from the Austrian sword. Bavarian perhaps? Last edited by Tim Simmons; 1st January 2016 at 10:27 PM.

1st January 2016, 04:46 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,855	Who knows how strict or how slack or the proper stamping procedure now?

1st January 2016, 07:37 PM	#3
RobertGuy Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Posts: 135	The fuller looks too narrow for a British 1796 LC sword. Similar to the 1896 Mountain Artillery blade, however the crown mark is not a British Inspection stamp. It does not look like there is enough room on the blade but could WARREN actually be WARRENTED a mark often seen on British and German made blades. My money would be on a Solingen blade, otherwise Bezdek gives Thomas Warren and successor Mary Warren trading at Chancery Lane 1846 - 1871.

2nd January 2016, 03:29 PM	#6
mrcjgscott Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 189	Certainly not 1796 light cavalry blade. More likely a hanger or cutlass blade which has been reworked. The marking could be that of the East India Company, and is probably "Warranted" or a shortening there of as Robert has already suggested. Kind regards, Chris

7th January 2016, 04:38 PM	#7
Helleri Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Chino, CA. Posts: 219	I am really only familiar with silver assay marks so I don't know how helpful this is. But Sheffield, England has always used the crown in combination with the lion. The arrangement and specific crown and lion used indicates the year. but they are stamped left to right. Of course this is not silver. But if people are thinking England but no clue on specifically where. The crown and lion are a Sheffield thing. And Sheffield does have an extensive history with cutlery as well, sooo...maybe?