# Communities > Antique Arms & Armour Community > Antique & Military Sword Forum >  Indian Cavalry Sword by Thurkle, markings??

## Will Mathieson

Just received this Thurkle marked sword. Has a faint etched shield with first four lines illegible, then "by Thurkle, Soho London" Any ideas what the complete marking reads? Stamped on the ricasso "RBG" B being larger than the other two letters. A possible regimental mark or rack number found on the guard just above where the thumb rests is a large 1 over slightly smaller 56. Also illegible numbers stamped on the pommel, these appear to be intentionally removed. Remnants of fishskin on wooden core grip

----------


## Matt Easton

Linking the threads:
http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25408

----------


## Ben Bevan

Hi Will, I have an identical sabre, the shield is etched, ' Manufactured for H S King & Co Cornhill by E Thurkle Soho London'. There have been several threads on this type of sword, two certainly by Gordon Byrne and Matt Easton, sadly it appears the RBG mark is still eluding us. My efforts show a Henry S King of 65 Cornhill London-publisher, ex partner of Smith Elder & Co, entrepeneur who had business interests in India, Java and Africa. There is also a reference to King in Robert W.Latham's excellent 'Swords and Records of Robert Mole' page 125 if you have it ( H S King & Co Foreign Depot Division 1 65 Cornhill). It seems this is the only sword noted with reference to King as a supplier, unless any other forumites can add more. Of my meagre collection it has to be one of my favourites, well made and workmanlike, sadly never seen one with a scabbard though, I assume it would have been leather, with a long steel chape.

----------


## Matt Easton

Again, linking this related thread:
http://www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1441

Matt

----------


## Will Mathieson

Thanks Matt and Ben. It must have been quite a change from the Indian Tulwar to this heavy bladed sword. A farmers sythe is lighter, make contact though and the offending appendage is removed! 
This ebay find was with a brother that went where? The grip covering was all there. I also inhereted 1000's of pink styrofoam peanuts in the box!
RBG may be German, the sword is heavy like some other export patterns.

----------


## Will Mathieson

I have discussed my sword with a long time collector who has 3 of them, he believes they are an Indian pattern 1860 issued about 1860, just after the British gov't took over from The East India Co. about 1859. The markings on mine, 1 over 56 would be for the 1st Duke of Yorks Own Lancers.

----------


## Ben Bevan

Will, interesting stuff, but Edward Thurkle's dates appear to be from 1876 when he was at his Soho premises ( as per the cartouche ) . Mine is stamped on the quillon 1 above 6 above 45. Could you expand on the 'Duke of Yorks' connection please, it would be nice to identify the regiment at least, thanks .

----------


## Matt Easton

And mine simply has RBG on the ricasso and 115 on the pommel.

----------


## gordon byrne

Hello all,

Reading these various notes and counting up the swords, it would seem we have a collective group of about eight or more swords of this pattern including my two. As I have said in previous posts, this pattern appears to be the most plentiful apart from the late 19th century (and WW1) types made by Wilkinson and Mole.

The other sword on ebay that Will mentioned did not have any fish skin left on the grip, which was plain wood, unless of course there was another example I didn't see. Until I compared my two examples, I assumed the blade length was the same however, there is about 1/2" difference in length, and it does not appear to be as a result of the point being ground down, as the fuller is proportionately shorter as well.

It would now be interesting to compare the blade length of all known examples to establish if the variation in blade length is a common detail; I have 31 1/4" and 31 3/4" and both blades are fully sharpened from the full length of the edge from ricasso to point.

As far as I can make out, all known examples have regimental numbering stamped on the back of the quillon, and some examples also have numbers stamped on the pommel which remain, whereas other examples show evidence of the number having been ground off the pommel.

Mine are numbered 6 over 352 and 8 over 538; one has the number 26 on the pommel, the other has had the number ground off the pommel.

Gordon

----------


## Matt Easton

Hi Gordon,
Mine doesn't have any numbering apart from on the pommel (115).

Are you aware of the officer's sword in the National Army Museum dated to the Mutiny of 1857 that looks like a prototype for these swords?  It shares the same basic features of a large 1821 light cavalry hilt, a large and fat grip and the same style of broad curved blade (of equal width all the way up - like these swords and unlike a 1796LCS).  Unfortunately I do not recall the officer's name, but I believe it was someone fairly prominent in the Mutiny.

Regards,
Matt

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Hi Will, I have an identical sabre, the shield is etched, ' Manufactured for H S King & Co Cornhill by E Thurkle Soho London'. There have been several threads on this type of sword, two certainly by Gordon Byrne and Matt Easton, sadly it appears the RBG mark is still eluding us. My efforts show a Henry S King of 65 Cornhill London-publisher, ex partner of Smith Elder & Co, entrepeneur who had business interests in India, Java and Africa. There is also a reference to King in Robert W.Latham's excellent 'Swords and Records of Robert Mole' page 125 if you have it ( H S King & Co Foreign Depot Division 1 65 Cornhill). It seems this is the only sword noted with reference to King as a supplier, unless any other forumites can add more. Of my meagre collection it has to be one of my favourites, well made and workmanlike, sadly never seen one with a scabbard though, I assume it would have been leather, with a long steel chape.


Many thanks. To those of you who don't have a copy of my book on Mole which been was kind enough to mention (_The swords and Records of Robert Mole and Sons 1835-1920_) her is the entry from Mole's Ledger.
Seasons Greeting to you all
Robert

----------


## Will Mathieson

How did I miss that? can't fit all your books in my head, that's why I have them. Also confirms my belief that they are later made, not 1860 era swords.

----------


## gordon byrne

Hi Will,

First I will say that as yet I have not been able to date these Thurkle marked swords precisely however, I will also suggest that we cannot automatically assume that the notation posted by Robert refers to the same pattern. 

Although it is obvious from the note that H.S, King & Co. had oversaes trading interests in the early part of the 20th century, these same trading interests existed in the 19th century when King took over the trading activities of Smith, Elders  & Co.

It would also be fair to suggest that by 1914, the India Office had more or less adopted a standardized 3-bar guard which is most commonly found on swords produced by Mole and Wilkinson from the later part of the 19th century and through WW1, and this IO guard is a different guard to the Thurkle/King swords.

One might also assume that if blades were produced by Mole they may have had a Mole trade mark; it would also be worhwhile to cross reference the terminology in the note with the drawing and specification posted by Robert at an earlier date, which shows the IO hilt and blade (Tulwar) in clear detail.

It is also worthy of note that the Thurkle /King swords never had any wire binding on the grips.

The fact still remains that the RBG marking is the actual key which unlock the puzzle; I am quite open to acceptng the fact that these particular swords may be of a later date, special pattern made for someone??, and that may explain why a number of examples still exist, but if they are so late as 1914, how is it that nobody has ever seen one in its original scabbard?

They have a different blade shape and thickness and will not fit in in a circa 1914 scabbard, whereas the more common types sold by Mole, Wilknson and Bourne, exhibit scabbards which broadly speaking are of four main types with varying chape and drag profile and varying locket/mouth/ frogstop treatment.

Gordon

----------


## Ben Bevan

Hi Gordon, thanks for your further input into this pattern, for your info my Thurkle/King has a blade length of 31.5 inches, sharpened the whole length. The grip is bound with fishskin, no evidence of wire binding.  Stamped 'LONDON MADE' on spine nearest hilt and 'THURKLE' on lower edge of ricasso, with oval stamp of 'E Thurkle Soho London' on left ricasso.It does not have the RBG mark. These stamps are identical and in the same position on an Indian Mountain Artillery sword, date stamped 12.04, that I also have.

Regards Ben.

----------


## Will Mathieson

Thank-you for those points Gordon. Here are measurements of my sword blade, the guard marked 1 over 56. Length of blade: 31.5" width of ricasso; 1 13/64", thickness at ricasso; 5/16" Aslike the others it is also sharpened the full length.

----------


## Matt Easton

I have just measured mine and it precisely matches Will's - Length of blade: 31.5". Width of ricasso: 1 13/64". Thickness at ricasso: 5/16".

Mine has the RBG mark, no other maker's marks, 115 on the pommel and it did have numbers on the underside of the rear quillon, but these are not legible - perhaps a 2 over a 55.  My blade is unsharpened, though it is not very blunt.
I have over half of the fish skin remaining and there is no evidence of any wire ever having been there.

----------


## gordon byrne

Hi Matt,

Interesting to note that although your sword has the RBG mark, it does not have the etched shield indicating manufacture for H.S. KIng & Co., also the fact that your sword does not have the full length sharpening like most of the others that are encountered. I wonder if this is indicative of another and seperate order which went direct to the customer as apposed to supply by King & Co. On some examples I have seen, the etched shield is very faint, in fact almost polished off.

Gordon

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

I don't think I have mentioned this before but could these RGB marked swords perhaps be surplus India Store Depot/India Office surplus sold off, cleaned, reconditioned and marked by the purchaser (Agent/Merchant in India) and sold to Princely States for their troops? After all, this would explain the multiple names on some examples and their possible pre 1883 date.

See attached for one sale of surplus in 1883.  This announcement appeared on the front page of the Times for the sale on February 21st 1883.

----------


## Matt Easton

Hi Robert, 
If this happened, wouldn't the existing examples have ISD still on them somewhere?  I can't really see anywhere on my example where a mark or stamp could have been ground off.

On a related topic, do we all agree that the B of RBG is bigger and more prominent?  In that case, isn't it likely that the name of this company or organisation is actually BRG?  Like Birmingham, Bombay or Bengal something something?

Matt

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Hi Robert, 
> If this happened, wouldn't the existing examples have ISD still on them somewhere?  I can't really see anywhere on my example where a mark or stamp could have been ground off.
> 
> On a related topic, do we all agree that the B of RBG is bigger and more prominent?  In that case, isn't it likely that the name of this company or organisation is actually BRG?  Like Birmingham, Bombay or Bengal something something?
> 
> Matt


I am not sure when the ISD mark was first used but these may have been earlier swords (pre 1880's) returned to Stores as obsolete/worn etc and then disposed off by Auction when they had enough.

----------


## gordon byrne

Matt.

I would certainly suggest that "B" represents the principal name. Maybe we should ask Will if he could find out exactly what markings appear on the other three swords he knows of and mentioned in an earlier post.

Gordon

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

Here is another RGB sword which you probably know about.
Bonhams, San Francisco 15 May 2007.

1078
A lot of two British cavalry sabers
Comprising: 1) A Pattern 1829 trooper's saber, curved 31 inch blade stamped at the ricasso RBG, iron three bar hilt, quillon stamped 8/325, ribbed wooden grip, no scabbard. 2)...........

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

I have just found on Mole's handwritten list of his 

PATTERN MOULDS - GAUGES for BLADES - PATTERN TROUGHS, 
the following:

Pattern Mould- Tulwar I.O (_ My Note:-India Office_) Patt -/68 (_My Note-1868_)

This is probably the year (1868) of  introduction of the 3 bar hilted Indian Cavalry Pattern sword as 2 years previously The C in C India issued Standing Orders for Bengal which included the information that for the swords for Sowars _"...uniformity is not required either in the handles or blades of swords. They should be allowed to wear any sword they like, providing it is of good quality."_

Whether this is to allow regimental variations or it was a 'free for all' is not clear.  In light of this it is interesting to se the introduction in 1868 of some form of Pattern-see above in this post  re Mole.

----------


## Ben Bevan

Just found an interesting reference, page 361 of Professor Richard Holmes book 'Sahib, The British Soldier In India' ; " In the Indian Army Memorial Room at Sandhurst is the sword of Lieutenant J. B. Edwards, made for him by the sword cutler Edward Thurkle in 1881. It has the three bar steel hilt of the regulation light cavalry sword, but a mighty meat-cleaver blade". Has anyone been fortunate enough to visit the academy or seen photos, might be a similar variant?

----------


## Will Mathieson

Just found an interesting book with a Indian soldier holding a sword that appears to be the ones we are talking about. 
Cavalry Training Indian Supplement Instructions for Sword Practice for Indian Cavalry 1911 (Military)
It can be found on Amazon.co.uk for 6 pounds.

----------


## Matt Easton

> Just found an interesting reference, page 361 of Professor Richard Holmes book 'Sahib, The British Soldier In India' ; " In the Indian Army Memorial Room at Sandhurst is the sword of Lieutenant J. B. Edwards, made for him by the sword cutler Edward Thurkle in 1881. It has the three bar steel hilt of the regulation light cavalry sword, but a mighty meat-cleaver blade". Has anyone been fortunate enough to visit the academy or seen photos, might be a similar variant?


I have a hunch that this is the same sword I saw in the National Army Museum mentioned elsewhere...

----------


## Matt Easton

> Just found an interesting book with a Indian soldier holding a sword that appears to be the ones we are talking about. 
> Cavalry Training Indian Supplement Instructions for Sword Practice for Indian Cavalry 1911 (Military)
> It can be found on Amazon.co.uk for 6 pounds.


I have this book - it's not the same sword, it is more like the 'mountain artillery' type with a simple knucklebow.

----------


## gordon byrne

Hi Will, Ben & Matt,

The picture shows the troopers' pattern sword of generic type, and for what it may be worth, I believe the particular sword may have been supplied by Bourne; the blade curve and point profile are different to the swords supplied  under the name of Wilkinson and Mole.

The pictured sword also has a stirrup hilt which was carried regimentally by the 13th and 17th Bengal.

Gordon

----------


## Matt Easton

This looks like it could be one of our sabres:



It is labelled as "Havildar 1st Central India Horse 1886".

Matt

----------


## gordon byrne

Hi Matt,

I must say he is standing very nicely to attention, and just well enough to hide the full guard, But I think you could be correct.

As they say, history has a strange way of putting itself together, and maybe we have an answer to one of our questions?

The 1st & 2nd Central Indian Horse (then 38th and 39th Central India Horse post 1903) were originally a local Corps which grew out of regiments raised during the Mutiny, and remained largely independant for many years; the 1st Regiment, originally Mayne's Horse after it's original Commander, Captain H.O. Mayne and the 2nd from the 1st Beatson's Horse, originally under the command of Colonel Beatson, forming the 2nd Central India Horse.

They used this type of sword and bought their own swords from a Birmingham maker/supplier who supplied directly to the regiments; and as it happens to be a fact, that supplier was no less than BOURNE.

Is it possible, the dominant B in the trade mark RBG is in fact Bourne?

When they were taken into the regular army and changed to the use of the 1908 Indian pattern sword, all the previuos pattern swords would have exchanged for new patterns, thus leaving a large quanity of like patterns swords as surplus, This would go a long way to explaining why there seems to be a considerable number (comparitively speaking) of one pattern sword which does not bear the ISD marking.

Everything would seem to fit into place just nicely in terms of date, type, supplier and regiment.

Gordon

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

The problem is that we cannot explain the R and the G, neither initails being used by this side of the Bourne manufacturing family.

Joseph Bourne started as and was essentially a Gunmaker, (Late Redfern and Bourne) who went on his own in 1849.

Joseph Bourne 1849-1866

Joseph Bourne & Son 1866-1900

Bourne's are noted  as _'...being active in the South African market.'_

By 1912 Joseph Bourne & Son, Gun and Cycle works were located in a prominent position at the corner of Bath St. and Loveday St (see attached photo of works)

By the attached they seem to have their hand in many areas and we know that Mole and others supplied them with swords for some of the Indian Cavalry regiments.

However, the initials on these swords of RGB just do not add up.  Bourne never changed their name from 1866.

----------


## Matt Easton

Some other photos that may show this model of sword.  The first, surprisingly, possibly carried by Lieutenant Walter Hamilton VC! (died 1879) -



British and Indian officers of the 3rd Sikhs, Punjab Frontier force at Kabul 1879 or early 1880:



4th (Prince Alberts Own) Bengal Cavalry , 1897:



6th Bombay Cavalry (Jacobs Horse), 1897: 



Risaldar-Major Gurdath Singh 12th Bengal Cavalry and his orderly:



An illustrated example of the Scinde Horse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:37..._35_Scinde.jpg

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

Here is a larger image of the 37th Lancers, 35th Scinde Horse and 35th Jacobs Horse.

Note the interesting mouthpiece on the sword of the man standing nearest the horse (35th Scinde Horse) which has  double fixed rings to the mouthpiece and a different style chape on the scabbard to the man from Jacob's Horse.

from Lovett and McMunn (Published 1911)

----------


## gordon byrne

Hi,

Thanks Robert, it was worth a try! But I had an feeling the other two letters would be the downfall.

The only trouble with the Hamilton (Guides) photo, is that he would probably not have used a troopers sword, and even if he did, looking closely at the photo, you can see that the back piece of the hilt has ears; the swords in the colour image also have ears to the back piece, and regarding the last black and white image of the trooper and Indian officer, if you look carefully at the trooperes' sword, you can see the pommel shape nromally associated with the 1853 (Reeves) type hilt.

Gordon

----------


## Matt Easton

Hi Gordon, yes I noticed the ears and that pommel - still, some of the others could be 'our' swords, I thought I should post anything remoteley similar for completeness.
The hunt for the RBG continues!

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks Robert, it was worth a try! But I had an feeling the other two letters would be the downfall.
> 
> The only trouble with the Hamilton (Guides) photo, is that he would probably not have used a troopers sword, and even if he did, looking closely at the photo, you can see that the back piece of the hilt has ears; the swords in the colour image also have ears to the back piece, and regarding the last black and white image of the trooper and Indian officer, if you look carefully at the trooperes' sword, you can see the pommel shape nromally associated with the 1853 (Reeves) type hilt.
> 
> Gordon


_if you look carefully at the trooperes' sword, you can see the pommel shape nromally associated with the 1853 (Reeves) type hilt.

Gordon_

from the '53 pommel/top plate I would say the sword had a flat tang and slab grips fitted each side with rivets like the '53.

The more one gets into the so called 'Tulwar' pattern the more varied it gets!!!!

We must remember that Mole, Thurkle and later Wilkinson supplied swords to Regiments as well as via the India Office and even the Crown Agents. Many of the Contract Orders via the India Store Department and even for regiments were for BLADES only, presumably to be hilted in India with the regimental pattern. Add to this the Regimental pattern variations. such as the 33rd for example,  which Mole and Wilkinson supplied as complete swords. 

Again, this arena of collecting is NOT simple!!!

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

Several years ago Bonhams sold Hamilton's sword: Sale 15101-Arms & Militaria, 11 Dec 2007 Oxford.  Searching Bonham's past sales from Haltimon VC will get you to the catalog entry and photos of the sword.  It is a P1821 LC trooper's sword with brown leather scabbard and steel chape.

----------


## gordon byrne

Thanks for the input and Hi Robert and Jonathan,

Re the Hamilton sword, I talked about that sword at the time of the auction with a very knowledgeable person who should have known more than I did, and although the scabbard with attached silver label looked OK to me from what I could see in a small photo, other than that I can't judge. The other person was concerned on account of the fact that it was plain trade sword, and he considered that a British officer would have at least armed himself with a quality sword by a known maker, even if it was of the same pattern. Should we be influenced by the expression of such opinions? There was also the fact that it was a bit late (1879) for an officer to have been using an actual troopers pattern sword that had been superceeded some twenty five or more years before. One of the patterns supplied by Henry Wilkinson was essentially the same as the 1821 troopers pattern, ears to the back piece and all, and Hodson (although at an earlier date) also used a 3-bar hilted sword with ears to the back piece, however his sword is known to have been made by Charles Reeves. All very difficult.

As far as Hamilton's sword is concerned, apart from what I was told and the description that was given by Bonhams at the time of the sale, I can't make any comment myself and I guess I/we will never know any differnet from what has already been said.

So the search for the elusive RBG continues!

----------


## Matt Easton

Many thanks to Jonathan for pointing out Hamilton's sabre - it certainly seems to match exactly what is shown in the photo above, and does indeed seem to be based on an old 1821 pattern cavalry trooper's sabre, but housed in a steel-chaped wooden scabbard.

I have no trouble believing that this was Hamilton's 'fighting sword' (we basically have photographic proof).  He may indeed have had another 'normal' sword for parade.

Coupled with the fact that some of the other photos above show ears on the backstrap I suspect that this was just another form of Indian cavalry sabre, but that it is so indistinquishable from the actual 1821 trooper's sword that surviving examples today just get classified as 1821 trooper's swords (with the scabbard missing..).  A few times I have seen swords like this without marks classed as 'European, based on the British 1821', but in fact perhaps some of these are Indian trade swords?  The type of sabre that started this thread is altogether more distinct, having a heavier more curved blade.  I think that perhaps a couple of the photos above do show that type.

But yes Gordon, the elusive RBG remains...  :Smilie: 

(p.s. Are you sure Hodson's sword has 'ears'?)

Regards,
Matt

----------


## Will Mathieson

"Hodsons sword has ears" by the photo it looks to be so. I find that the old photos do not show metal in the white or shiney objects very clearly. The white metal like what is on the cross belts reflect enough to blurr the outline, sword and bayonet blades do not show outline well and appear wider than what they actually are. The white spot on Hodsons sword grip appears to be the ear. Talk about a pose! Hodson was definately aware of how the photo would turn out. I find that these types of swords go at relatively low prices probably because most do not recognise them for what they are. The leather scabbards would protect the blade edge much better, these swords were made to be used, if only they could talk! The book Sword fighters of British India give good accounts.

----------


## Matt Easton

Hodson's sword is in the National Army Museum - I'll be there in a couple of weeks, so I'll check.
Regards,
Matt

----------


## gordon byrne

Hodson's sword is well illustrated in the NAM publictaion "Soldiers of the Raj" and yes it definately has ears and is given a description in part of being "...virtually a copy of the 1821 pattern other ranks weapon."

----------


## Matt Easton

Interesting, thanks!
Matt

----------


## John Hart

> Re the Hamilton sword, I talked about that sword at the time of the auction with a very knowledgeable person who should have known more than I did, and although the scabbard with attached silver label looked OK to me from what I could see in a small photo, other than that I can't judge. The other person was concerned on account of the fact that it was plain trade sword, and he considered that a British officer would have at least armed himself with a quality sword by a known maker, even if it was of the same pattern. Should we be influenced by the expression of such opinions? There was also the fact that it was a bit late (1879) for an officer to have been using an actual troopers pattern sword that had been superceeded some twenty five or more years before. One of the patterns supplied by Henry Wilkinson was essentially the same as the 1821 troopers pattern, ears to the back piece and all, and Hodson (although at an earlier date) also used a 3-bar hilted sword with ears to the back piece, however his sword is known to have been made by Charles Reeves. All very difficult.
> 
> As far as Hamilton's sword is concerned, apart from what I was told and the description that was given by Bonhams at the time of the sale, I can't make any comment myself and I guess I/we will never know any differnet from what has already been said.


I handled this sword at the pre-auction viewing, and I clearly remember it was marked with a very simple stamp at the ricasso: "SIALKOT" (in the Punjab, and an important manufacturing centre for the Bengal army).  This definitely affected my maximum bid, as I wondered why an officer of such a regiment would have purchased a sword locally when high quality mail-order swords from Wilkinson etc were so freely available.  From experience I have with other swords, officers were more likely to choose best-quality swords (often to their own specification) for their "fighting" weapons, and standard models for their parade versions...after all, their lives might well depend on such a choice!

John

----------


## Will Mathieson

Logically it could be a Reeves sword, as Reeves now only supplied to the private trade and was out of the contract market by 1869. Reeves also supplied the Household Cavalry until 1880. Reeves quality is high with hand forged blades. Just as we look for brand named items of today as a symbol of quality, Hodson would be steered into purchasing one of the best swords within his means.

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

As a slight aside, here is a copy of a Bill for a Lt cavalry sword from Reeves in 1846. Interesting in that is shows the cost.
For our discussion, unfortunately, it is for a Yeomanry Officer and a bit too early!

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Thanks for the input and Hi Robert and Jonathan,
> 
> ..........So the search for the elusive RBG continues!


Don't hold your breath but I am on the trail of *RBG* and am waiting for one piece of confirmation evidence.  Sorry to be so tantalizing but have to be sure of the facts before making an 'idiot' of myself!

Hopefully later today may confirm one way or another.
Robert

----------


## gordon byrne

Robert,

There still remains my Indian Mountain Battery sword which has both the marking of R*B*G and Mole on the same blade.

Could there be the possibility of a trade link or trading between Mole and R*B*G?

Gordon

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Don't hold your breath but I am on the trail of *RBG* and am waiting for one piece of confirmation evidence.  Sorry to be so tantalizing but have to be sure of the facts before making an 'idiot' of myself!
> 
> Hopefully later today may confirm one way or another.
> Robert


Dead end I am afraid!

I thought, because the rather haphazard way the mark was used on various types of swords that it _may_ be a Film prop hire company. One fitting the book would be  the long established and well know firm of BAPTY in the UK.
I contacted them asking if before they were Bapty & Co, perhaps they were R.G. Bapty.

Alas as the answer below shows -----------*NO*!

_Dear Robert,
We don’t recognise that stamp, but I can confirm that to our knowledge that is not anything to do with Bapty.
_

----------


## Matt Easton

Good lateral thinking Robert!
Thanks for trying anyway.

As it happens another Thurkle-RBG sword sold in auction today - I bid on it, but was not successful... maybe someone else here was.

Matt

----------


## gordon byrne

Hi Matt,

By any chance did you get the details of the sword you bid on but missed? Was it the same guard/grip/blade type as most of the others we have been discussing and did it have the H S King etching or just the Thurkle name?

Gordon

----------


## Matt Easton

It was exactly the same hilt and blade as mine, it had RBG and etching to Thurkle - there was more text above the Thurkle etching, which may indeed have been HS King etc, but the person who was viewing the item for me could not read that part because of dirt on the blade.  My guess however, given the number of words/space they occupied, is that it was the exact same HS King by Thurkle marking.  It was sold at Chiswick Auctions yesterday.  It had no scabbard (of course  :Smilie: ).

Hope this is helpful!
Matt

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

*RBG*

Looking again at this 'stamped' mark set me wondering concerning the relationship between Thurkle, Mole and RBG.

My thinking is that none of the swords you have all mentioned were supplied to *RBG* by Thurkle or Mole, they possibly came 2nd hand.
Bear with me on this please!
The Mole and Thurkle swords (together with the H S King ) are all ETCHED by the makers.
Now if Mole or Thurkle or even H S King via Thurkle/Mole were supplying *RBG* then why isn't the RBG mark etched on the blade?
This stamping which is some cases is pretty haphazard in location and striking looks like the swords were marked long after they had left Mole or Thurkle or King.

The mark does not look as if it was put there at time of manufacture.

Maybe we are looking for a Merchant, probably Birmingham, who bough up a job lot from India Stores Surplus and marked them and sold them.  I cannot think that these have been through Official or even Regimental channels.

Just a thought for discussion.

----------


## Will Mathieson

Very interesting thought Robert, apon closer examination of my sword, the RBG mark is centred nicely but appears to be covering an older stamp that is partially visible. Maybe this was done to cover a government marking and at the same time add theirs?

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

Let me just throw this into the melting pot!

Information is sketchy but I came across reference (still trying to find more detail) of
R G Blakemore, London and or Birmingham 1870's, 80's and 90's..  Described as Export Agents who mainly seemed to have specialised in Railways and Railway Locomotives etc. (India Big Customer!).

Perhaps these swords were for his employees working out in the 'wilds' or as gifts to Indian princes for their troops through whose territory the track was being laid? Perhaps Mr Blakemore was too mean to order NEW swords from Mole or Thurkle when second hand ISD surplus would do!!!

All supposition until I or WE can find about more about R G Blakemore.

----------


## Will Mathieson

I am curious if other swords with the RBG mark show it covering an older mark similar to the picture I posted previously here. I think the covered mark may be an inspection mark or??

----------


## Matt Easton

Interesting re. Blakemore, Robert.  I couldn't find any more details on him, other than engineering associations.

Will, I'm fairly certain that there are no other visible marks on mine. Is it possible that yours could be a re-striking of the RBG mark?  I have seen other swords and bayonets where the first strike got messed up or was not deep enough, so they did it again on almost the same spot.

----------


## Will Mathieson

Yes Matt, it's possible it is a re-strike, it is hard to tell from the picture I posted due to cleaning over the years, remaining marks are weak.

----------


## gordon byrne

I have looked closely at two examples with the etched shield naming Thurkle as maker for H. S. King, and the RBG mark is quite clearly stamped on both with no obviouis restrike.

We must also look at the markings on my Mountain Battery sword, which although a different type to the cavalry pattern undere discussion, it has three markings which includes the RBG mark.

The maker in this particular case is MOLE (marked on the back edge of blade), with India inspection mark on the left side ricasso, and the RBG mark on the right side ricasso; there has been absolutely no attempt to obscure the original marks by applying the RBG mark over the top of the inspection mark, nor has there been any attempt to cross out or remove the inspection mark, or the issue date and unit marking on the guard, which could possibly be the case when, or if a piece of equipment was sold out of service.

At this point, I still tend to believe that the cavalry pattern under dicussion was likely supplied direct to a silladar cavalry regiment or other unit, who purchased swords direct from a maker/agent rather than supply via the India Office; this would go some way in explaining why nearly all of the known examples have regiment or unit numbering on the guards, but no ISD marks.

Gordon

----------


## Matt Easton

Resurrecting this old thread, as I've found another related example (though some of you may be aware of this).
We have many times mentioned Frederick Roberts' sword in the NAM:
http://www.nam.ac.uk/online-collecti...c=1955-04-73-1

But looking through the NAM website I have found another similar sword, which as far as I'm aware is not on display there:
http://www.nam.ac.uk/online-collecti...cc=1951-02-1-1

This second example seems even more closely related to these Indian trooper's sabres to me. The blade is extremely similar to mine. The hilt is also a close match.

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

Being simple and just 'FISHING' here but could RBG be a regimental mark as Gordon suggested for one of the Princely States such as
Royal (or Raja's) Guard Baroda?

----------


## Matt Easton

Hi Robert, I had a similar thought, but I couldn't find any that matched. Though there were loads of them, so it's entirely possible!

----------


## gordon byrne

It is interesting that the sword originally owned by John Burard Edwards, 2nd Central India Horse (now in the NAM) is a very close match to these Thurkle and RBG swords under discussion; at one stage in my search for an answer, I actually concluded that they could have been supplied to the CIH, owing to the fact that the CIH had swords supplied direct to the regiment from merchants (possibly makers as well) as apposed to government issue; at one stage they were supplied by Bourne & Son, and there is every possibility that they could also have been supplied by Thurkle, and the time frame circa 1881 (which matches the date of Edwards sword) sits well with me in terms of the configuration of these swords.

----------


## Matt Easton

Very interesting Gordon. I feel that is _must_ be more than coincidence that Edwards' sword matches so very closely the outline of these 'RGB' and Thurkle swords. It's not a 1796 sabre outline to the blade, it's really quite a distinct and different form.

----------


## Colin Hartwright

Another resurrection of this thread which I have been reading with much interest as I have a sword of this pattern. Firstly looking at the reproduction of the "rgb" or "rbg" mark. Could it possibly be "RG" later over printed with "B"? Mine which is a Bourne made sword has RB followed by a number (2112?) stamped on the guard. Also 6 over 36, could this be Jacob's Horse? The 6/36 has been lined through as has the following illegible number.

----------


## John Hart

> Firstly looking at the reproduction of the "rgb" or "rbg" mark. Could it possibly be "RG" later over printed with "B"?


I think from the thickness and depth of the stamping, the R, G and B were all done at the same time; ie not an overstrike or cancelling.

Photos of your sword and its marking would no doubt be very interesting to many of us here!

John

----------


## gordon byrne

> Another resurrection of this thread which I have been reading with much interest as I have a sword of this pattern. Firstly looking at the reproduction of the "rgb" or "rbg" mark. Could it possibly be "RG" later over printed with "B"? Mine which is a Bourne made sword has RB followed by a number (2112?) stamped on the guard. Also 6 over 36, could this be Jacob's Horse? The 6/36 has been lined through as has the following illegible number.


Hi Colin,

At the risk of another resurrection, I would be very! interested to see some photos of your sword and in particular the markings; any chance?

Gordon

----------


## Colin Hartwright

John, Gordon.

I will post photos when I get some half-ways decent ones! I had a different query re this sword some time ago and put some pictures on facebook but I think they have gone into limbo. Bear with me!

----------


## David. L

I had not noticed this thread before its recent revival but this may add another small piece of information to the search for RGB.

I have an 1859 naval cutlass marked on the ricasso Robt Mole & Sons, Birmingham, in two lines, and with a broad arrow over a capitol I. On the other side RGB in the same configuration as shown in previous pictures on this thread. I was not aware that Colonial India had a separate navy until I came across this piece and I have always wondered about the RGB.

Regards, David.

----------


## Ben Bevan

Colin, David, as you can see many many of us have been following this fascinating thread, and before it drops off the page, could we PLEASE have some photos soon ( sorry to beg, but this thread is becoming obsessive/compulsive!) Many thanks, Ben.

----------


## David. L

Hi,

Here are the pictures of the markings on the cutlass. As you can see the RGB marking is very similar to those already recorded on this thread.
Regards, David.

----------


## Ben Bevan

Thanks to David for his photos, other than Gordon,s Mountain Battery sword, are these the only examples of War Dept. marked RGB weapons that have come to light? Gordon, do these examples upset your theory about 'direct supply' to Indian Forces, or do you think they,re just an anomaly and slipped through? Curiouser and curiouser! Ben.

----------


## gordon byrne

> Thanks to David for his photos, other than Gordon,s Mountain Battery sword, are these the only examples of War Dept. marked RGB weapons that have come to light? Gordon, do these examples upset your theory about 'direct supply' to Indian Forces, or do you think they,re just an anomaly and slipped through? Curiouser and curiouser! Ben.


Hi Ben,

Yes, David is to be thanked for the images and he has a very interesting piece. I think we now have three ports of call taking into account my Mountain Battery sword and David's cutlass, and these are:

1. The maker - Mole
2. The end user which in my case was the Indian Artillery with the later inspection marks. In the case of the cutlass, it was the Indian Navy with the very much earlier inspection mark, which I have on swords that date to circa 1858
3. Both sword and cutlass are marked RBG

As an extension to these three points, we know that the RBG marking is found quite consistently on the 3-bar cavalry swords under discussion in the section, and some of those were made by Thurkle. If we apply the same three point analysis, we have the following:

1. Maker - Thurkle
2. The end user - ???
3. Has the RBG mark

In this case the unanswered question is the end user of the 3-bar cavalry swords which possibly started this post, but the RBG mark is common to all three types of sword. Therefore it is still possible that swords with this RBG marking and no Indian inspection mark were sold direct to the end user.

If the RBG marking was applied to the blade at the time the swords were made, in the case of the cutlass, it effectively gives us a very much earlier date for this marking than was previously thought to be the case.

Gordon

----------


## Colin Hartwright

Here are the sword pictures (at last) sorry for the delay. Any comments welcome. Sword dimensions are, in inches, L(chord) 31 1/2, W at hilt 1 5/8, T at hilt 1/4. As you can see it has a fearful kink also one or two hopeful looking notches on the blade.  They of course could be anything. If you read this Chris I still have a note of your interest!

----------


## John Hart

Thanks, Colin.  The arrangement of the bars doesn't match anything I've seen before: in your first picture, for a traditional 3-bar 1821 LC hilt, I would normally expect the second bar from the left to run parallel with the third bar from the left to join the guard near the base of the blade.  To have it joining the _outer_ bar instead is quite interesting!  Could you do a front-on shot (similar to the attached) so we can see that more clearly?

John

----------


## Colin Hartwright

Will these do John? Not sure the front-on is much better than my previous effort but the second picture might help. Quite happy to keep them coming!

----------


## John Hart

Fascinating guard!  The pattern of cutouts and engraved scroll decoration visible in your second photo are like nothing I've seen before, quite apart from the branch arrangement...

John
PS:  Nice prominent "36" amongst others - 36th Jacob's Horse?

----------


## Matt Easton

Indeed, a very odd beast! It looks Indian made to me.

----------


## gordon byrne

> Fascinating guard!  The pattern of cutouts and engraved scroll decoration visible in your second photo are like nothing I've seen before, quite apart from the branch arrangement...
> 
> John
> PS:  Nice prominent "36" amongst others - 36th Jacob's Horse?


Hi gentlemen,

Yes the guard is of a relatively scarce type, and I think I recall seeing three or four in total, and own one myself. All examples I have seen have solid wood grips with no covering or binding, and Matt might be interested to learn that my blade is marked E. THURKLE - SOHO - LONDON,  is 33" inches and sharpened to a point a couple of inches short of the guard; whereas I understand that Colin's sword has a blade of 31 1/2".

In all cases where I've seen the actual sword or decent photos, the guards have fluted bars and some moderate engraving; judging by the fact that in some cases the guards bear numerous marks such as yours Colin. I hold the opinion that they were a special pattern made for Indian officers.

Gordon

----------


## Robert Kemp-Gee

Similar scabbard to this one perhaps?

----------


## gordon byrne

> Similar scabbard to this one perhaps?


Hi Robert,

Assuming that this sword is yours, is there a makers name or any regimental marks, and what might the blade length be?

Gordon

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

Here is one in the Wilkinson 1912 catalogue

----------


## Robert Kemp-Gee

Hi Gordon,

It is indeed mine, 33" along the curve, made by Cockburn and Co. On one side of the quillon, 4476, on the reverse 3245 (I think!) Below quillon, 8612 - possible date?
I have a Wilkinson one also, shark grip, no wire, same size blade, fits the pictured scabbard. I have seen a Wilkinson one in a scabbard, last Goodwood fair: -  Very thin and tacky, very long chape. Not nice at all.

----------


## gordon byrne

> Hi Gordon,
> 
> It is indeed mine, 33" along the curve, made by Cockburn and Co. On one side of the quillon, 4476, on the reverse 3245 (I think!) Below quillon, 8612 - possible date?
> I have a Wilkinson one also, shark grip, no wire, same size blade, fits the pictured scabbard. I have seen a Wilkinson one in a scabbard, last Goodwood fair: -  Very thin and tacky, very long chape. Not nice at all.


Robert,

This is very interesting stuff, and by ' 33" along the curve', do you mean in a straight line from guard to point, or measured following the curve?

Could you possibly post some comparative  images of the  Wilkinson and Cockburn & Co. full length side by side; would also be very interested to see comparative front view of the guards; Can you also tell me the length of the grip, back of guard to the base of the pommel, and the knuckle space between the finger side of the grip and the underside of the guard on both swords.

I notice that your Cockburn example has a broader point, and in terms of the scabbard,  the style is fairly common as is the length of chape and the shape of the drag however, your example is the only one I have seen that accepts a 33" inch blade, all others I have seen are for the shorter blade of nominally 30" - 31 1/2", and the only example I'm aware of that was sold by Cockburn & Co. 

As for the Wilkinson example you saw at the fair, can you recall what the chape and drag looked like?

Gordon

----------


## Matt Easton

I know we're not supposed to talk about active auctions, but this is an interesting/important piece of data: There is a Wilkinson-made sword of the 3-bar Paget-bladed form discussed above coming up for sale at a certain UK East Sussex-based military auction. Intriguingly it was made for Haile Selassie of Ethiopia in George VI's reign! It looks to all intents and purposes like the 3-bar Indian sabres of this thread, but with etched decoration to the blade.

----------


## Colin Hartwright

Strikes me it's well worth reviving the odd neglected thread, this one certainly took on a  new lease of life although I think I've exhausted the possibilities of my own particular sword.  Thank you all all who added to my knowledge. I don't have a scabbard so can't add to that line.
In passing, is there or could we establish a convention for measuring curved blade length? There isn't a vast difference in most cases between curve length and chord length I think. Do you measure the inside or outside of the curve? Not easy in either case whereas a straight edge from guard to tip is.

----------


## gordon byrne

> Strikes me it's well worth reviving the odd neglected thread, this one certainly took on a  new lease of life although I think I've exhausted the possibilities of my own particular sword.  Thank you all all who added to my knowledge. I don't have a scabbard so can't add to that line.
> In passing, is there or could we establish a convention for measuring curved blade length? There isn't a vast difference in most cases between curve length and chord length I think. Do you measure the inside or outside of the curve? Not easy in either case whereas a straight edge from guard to tip is.


Hi Colin,

Blade curve is indeed an interesting subject in relation to Indian Cavalry swords, and well worth more attention. 

As far as I'm aware, the curve is measured at the back from a straight line to the deepest part of the curve, the only thing I'm unsure of is how to treat with the straight edge at the point, in particular in the case of a spear point where the straight edge will rest on the curve of the false edge, as apposed to touching the actual point (hatchet point). Maybe someone on the forum has an answer?

The other suggestion would be to expand this area of discussion to include other merchants and/or makers, such as Bourne & Son who supplied a lot of stuff to Indian regiments; also worth including types with Sialkot markings, and various guard types, such as stirrup hilts, 1853 types, 3-bar guards with a folding section and so on.

Gordon

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

Here is another sword like Colin's which recently ended on eBay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/BRITISH-POSS...vip=true&rt=nc

----------


## gordon byrne

> Here is another sword like Colin's which recently ended on eBay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/BRITISH-POSS...vip=true&rt=nc


Hi Gentlemen,

Very interesting that you should mention this sword Jonathan, the blade is near identical to Colin's sword however, the guard although very much the same at a glance, is a variation of this type (lacking one bar) which I haven't seen before and very likely one of the guard types that are mentioned in the Mole records, which lack identification up to date. 

Referring to Robert's book "Pictorial History of Swords and Bayonets", we can find the following; ..._In the cavalry, the hilts and scabbards varied but the blades were mainly of a standard pattern. Native Bengal cavalry had a 33" blade to their swords while Madras and Bombay had a 31 1/2" blade described in an India Sore Department order of September 1883 for 2304 blades to Robert Mole of Birmingham as 'India Stores Pattern 6480, Native India Cavalry/Madras and Bombay/blades tulwar. Paget pattern'._

The blade length on some of the earlier 3-bat hilted swords can vary between a nom. 30" up to 31 1/2", and whilst I believe I have identified one particular  sword (with a shorter blade ) as Bengal, there is no doubt that Bengal cavalry used swords with 33' blades, and this may explain why they are somewhat rarer then the shorter types, as in general terms there would be a ration of two-to-one  with Madras and Bombay grouped together with 31 1/2" blades, and Bengal with 33".

Based on this analysis, I believe Colin's sword with a 33" blade, and other swords with this length of blade can be categorized as Bengal Cavalry patterns. Although the guards are quite different, they could well have been made in England to a regimental specification, as the back piece and pommel configuration seems very similar between those swords by different makers/merchants.

Gordon

----------


## gordon byrne

> Hi Gentlemen,
> 
> Very interesting that you should mention this sword Jonathan, the blade is near identical to Colin's sword however, the guard although very much the same at a glance, is a variation of this type (lacking one bar) which I haven't seen before and very likely one of the guard types that are mentioned in the Mole records, which lack identification up to date. 
> 
> Referring to Robert's book "Pictorial History of Swords and Bayonets", we can find the following; ..._In the cavalry, the hilts and scabbards varied but the blades were mainly of a standard pattern. Native Bengal cavalry had a 33" blade to their swords while Madras and Bombay had a 31 1/2" blade described in an India Sore Department order of September 1883 for 2304 blades to Robert Mole of Birmingham as 'India Stores Pattern 6480, Native India Cavalry/Madras and Bombay/blades tulwar. Paget pattern'._
> 
> The blade length on some of the earlier 3-bat hilted swords can vary between a nom. 30" up to 31 1/2", and whilst I believe I have identified one particular  sword (with a shorter blade ) as Bengal, there is no doubt that Bengal cavalry used swords with 33' blades, and this may explain why they are somewhat rarer then the shorter types, as in general terms there would be a ration of two-to-one  with Madras and Bombay grouped together with 31 1/2" blades, and Bengal with 33".
> 
> Based on this analysis, I believe Colin's sword with a 33" blade, and other swords with this length of blade can be categorized as Bengal Cavalry patterns. Although the guards are quite different, they could well have been made in England to a regimental specification, as the back piece and pommel configuration seems very similar between those swords by different makers/merchants.
> ...


I forgot to say something about the markings on the guard of Colin's sword, which are almost certainly the regiment. This does create another confusing situation in respect of blade length however, it is also a fact that 36th Jacobs Horse carried swords with longer blades, which are quoted in Roberts book as 37" inches. Personally I've never seen an example with this length of blade, but this doesn't mean they don't exist.

The 1888 title of the 2nd Scinde Horse was 6th Bombay Cavalry (Jacob's Horse), and in 1903 the number changed by the addition of thirty, the 6th becoming the 36th which is exactly what we have on Colin's sword with the 6 crossed out and replaced with 36; the 1903 title becoming 36th Jacob's Horse.  One step forward and one step back! until someone finds an example with a thirty seven inch (37) blade???

----------


## Robert Kemp-Gee

Hi Gordon,

Excuse the monumentally tardy response.

33" following the curve.

The scabbard at the fair was thin, very cheap feeling, with an enormous chape, around 10" long I think. Thin metal, very unlike one pictured. The drag was not unusual. I found rthe business card of the chap that had it - i bought a different sword from him. His name is Michael Jolly, I think. If you want to contact him, let me know and I will try to find the card.
Pictured are both Wilkinson and Cockburn versions, sadly lacking the floral decorations and unusual guards as pictured above.

----------


## gordon byrne

> Hi Gordon,
> 
> Excuse the monumentally tardy response.
> 
> 33" following the curve.
> 
> The scabbard at the fair was thin, very cheap feeling, with an enormous chape, around 10" long I think. Thin metal, very unlike one pictured. The drag was not unusual. I found rthe business card of the chap that had it - i bought a different sword from him. His name is Michael Jolly, I think. If you want to contact him, let me know and I will try to find the card.
> Pictured are both Wilkinson and Cockburn versions, sadly lacking the floral decorations and unusual guards as pictured above.


Hi Robert,

As far as the other sword is concerned, I am mainly interested in the dimensional data, the style of the hilt, blade and chape; if the chap still has it, maybe he could take some photos.

Your Wilkinson example (with 1915 date) appears to have a shorter blade than the Cockburn, I normally measure them in a straight line from the guard to the point. I believe your Cockburn example is quite a rare type, as it has an earlier and totally different guard type to the Wilkinson and the 33" blades are not common.

There are a number of different guard types mentioned in the Mole records, and I've been trying to identify the different types and match them to the Mole codes, and this is not an easy task however, I still consider these 33" blades are more likely to be Bengal swords.

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

ref
Thurkle

Wikinsons supplied George Thurkle with blade for India Office Orders (as well as others) while Mole is recorded as supplying Pillin with blades.  There were also numerous Regimental variations in blades that were supplied either on occasion by the India Office but usually direct to the regiments by the makers of various London and Birmingham merchants such as J Bourne & Son and FP Baker. Others and I have record of direct supply to 16 regiments, all with variation in b lade hilt and scabbard.

----------


## gordon byrne

> ref
> Thurkle
> 
> Wikinsons supplied George Thurkle with blade for India Office Orders (as well as others) while Mole is recorded as supplying Pillin with blades.  There were also numerous Regimental variations in blades that were supplied either on occasion by the India Office but usually direct to the regiments by the makers of various London and Birmingham merchants such as J Bourne & Son and FP Baker. Others and I have record of direct supply to 16 regiments, all with variation in b lade hilt and scabbard.


Hi all,

I've attached two images showing the front view first of a Thurkle sword the same at that on page one of this thread, and second is a Mole guard the same as Robert KG's Wilkinson sword; if we include Colin's unusual guard, the sword that Jonathan mentioned and Robert KG's Cockburn retailed sword, we have five (5) distinctly different guard patterns which in my opinion cover a period of circa 1875 - 1918.

As Robert WL has pointed out, many regiments were supplied direct by makers and merchants, and the Wilkinson/Mole records contain coded descriptions of various guards, I've identified a number from a regimental point of view, with some having regimental markings on the blades or guards, and some with hilt variations. The subject of these Indian Army cavalry patterns is vast and very complicated, and I wonder at times whether we will ever have a complete list of all variations however, his thread is important as a basis for identifying some more of these patterns, which are often overlooked from an individual point of view, and simply grouped together.

----------


## gordon byrne

> Hi all,
> 
> I've attached two images showing the front view first of a Thurkle sword the same at that on page one of this thread, and second is a Mole guard the same as Robert KG's Wilkinson sword; if we include Colin's unusual guard, the sword that Jonathan mentioned and Robert KG's Cockburn retailed sword, we have five (5) distinctly different guard patterns which in my opinion cover a period of circa 1875 - 1918.
> 
> As Robert WL has pointed out, many regiments were supplied direct by makers and merchants, and the Wilkinson/Mole records contain coded descriptions of various guards, I've identified a number from a regimental point of view, with some having regimental markings on the blades or guards, and some with hilt variations. The subject of these Indian Army cavalry patterns is vast and very complicated, and I wonder at times whether we will ever have a complete list of all variations however, his thread is important as a basis for identifying some more of these patterns, which are often overlooked from an individual point of view, and simply grouped together.


Follow-up,

First is the sword with the variant hilt in the last image, second from left is marked to the 18th Bengal, and notice the different style of pommel similar to Colin's sword; third from the left is marked to the 15th Bengal Cavalry and dated 1886; last one is another guard variation. Don't know how well the images will come out, but thought these might be of further interest.

----------


## Steve Langham

A very old thread, but I have an addition to the saga. I have a P1866 staff sergeant pattern by Mole, dated to 1885 with the RBG stamp to the ricasso. Marked 9/92 on the guard, no pommel marking.

----------


## Will Mathieson

Steve the RGB marking has been previously discussed but without results. I'm no good at pulling up old threads but someone could find it.

----------


## Ben Bevan

Steve, many thanks for adding to this fascinating thread, your sword is the first Infantry example of the RGB mark I believe, and the Mole connection continues, like others I still think there is a strong Indian connection somewhere. For the record can we see the whole sword please. Thanks, Ben.

----------

