# Communities > Antique Arms & Armour Community > Antique & Military Sword Forum >  Scots Grey sword. Restore or leave?

## Ian Knight

I am now the proud owner of a Scots Greys trooper's sabre.  :Smilie:  The actual sword blade and hilt aren't too bad but the grip is in a bit of a sorry state. There is no leather covering left and a piece of the grip near the pommel is also absent. I think I can see some of the original leather covering between the backpiece and grip but I might be mistaken. 
The blade is a hatchet point and the quillons are still present.
The question is: Should I restore the grip or should I leave it as it is? 
Your opinions please.

Many thanks.
Ian

----------


## David Critchley

I bought a disk hilt in a similar state Ian, I chose to restore the grip.

David

----------


## Ian Knight

Thanks David. If it wasn't a Scots Greys sabre I would restore it without hesitation. I am very tempted to, but very nervous about doing it all the same.  :Confused: 
I think someone has recently replace the rivet through the grip in any case. 


Ian

----------


## V.Simeonov

Congratulations.I thing that the authentical part is better than the new made, no matter how it looks like.

----------


## Mark McMorrow

Ian!

Congrats on a nice, historic sword.  If you do restore it, you might do so by carving a contoured shim to replace the wood that's been lost near the pommel.  Then recover it properly.  This way, you don't compromise what remains of the original grip.  

Mark ~

----------


## Ian Knight

> Congratulations.I thing that the authentical part is better than the new made, no matter how it looks like.


Thank you V,
I am still in two minds at the moment.
Ian

----------


## Ian Knight

> Ian!
> 
> Congrats on a nice, historic sword.  If you do restore it, you might do so by carving a contoured shim to replace the wood that's been lost near the pommel.  Then recover it properly.  This way, you don't compromise what remains of the original grip.  
> 
> Mark ~


Thanks Mark,
I was thinking that myself. I will see what develops if I take the sword apart. If the grip is original I will certainly use it. It is obviously very old and has some worm.
I have now made three grips but they were all carved from beech wood. The  ribs on this one will have to be created using cord wrapped around the grip and then covered with leather. 

Ian

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

I wonder what the regimental museum would do with such a sword?  My feeling is that they would preserve the grip as it is rather than make a new one.  At least that is what I would do!   :Smilie: 

And yes, I know we are not museum curators!

----------


## Mark McMorrow

> And yes, I know we are not museum curators!


Well, we are _curators_ of a sort.  Museum curators have facilities and resources at their disposal to aid in the care of public collections.  Meanwhile, we pay for the privilege of maintaining our own private collections!

----------


## Ian Knight

I have sent an email to the Scots Greys museum asking for their advice but I am inclined to restore the grip as Mark suggests incorporating what remains of the grip.

Ian

----------


## WBranner

I'd leave it as is.

I'm curious though. The markings on the blade are not what I would expect from a Napoleonic sword. Where these in use at the time or would they point to a post Napoleonic Wars weapon?

----------


## Ian Knight

> I'd leave it as is.
> 
> I'm curious though. The markings on the blade are not what I would expect from a Napoleonic sword. Where these in use at the time or would they point to a post Napoleonic Wars weapon?


Hello Wayne,
According to Robson (page 279):
"(a) before 1855, swords obtained by the Board of Ordnance were often stamped with the Board's mark - a broad arrow and the letters 'BO'. After the abolition of the board in 1855, this marking was replaced by a broad arrow and the letters 'WD', standing for 'War Department."

Ian

----------


## Shawn Gibson

BO markings are found as early as the 1750s or there about.  They stamped everything from weapons to clothing with these marks and in a variety of locations.  The crown with arrow pointing down is listed as an early Government ownership mark.  I don't think there is anything about these marks that would distract from a Napoleonic date.  I have no opinion about the sword itself.

----------


## Will Mathieson

I would leave it as it is. Most of the grip is intact and it looks presentable. If the grip was missing I would replace it, but there is just too much history in this piece. Maybe sell it to me and buy another with a good grip, Ha Ha!!! Wishful thinking.

----------


## WBranner

> BO markings are found as early as the 1750s or there about.  They stamped everything from weapons to clothing with these marks and in a variety of locations.  The crown with arrow pointing down is listed as an early Government ownership mark.  I don't think there is anything about these marks that would distract from a Napoleonic date.  I have no opinion about the sword itself.


Ok, that would bring up another question. Is the ownership mark different than a proof mark? Should there also be a proof stamp?

----------


## Shawn Gibson

Technically, proofs marks are for gun barrels and were highly regulated.  Inspection stamps are found on blades.  Although you might be able to call the bend test mark as a kind of proof.  I think the crown with an arrow under it shows it was inspected.

----------


## Ian Knight

> I would leave it as it is. Most of the grip is intact and it looks presentable. If the grip was missing I would replace it, but there is just too much history in this piece. Maybe sell it to me and buy another with a good grip, Ha Ha!!! Wishful thinking.


 :Stick Out Tongue: 

Ian

----------


## Martin Read

Personally, I would say that if a sword is so disabled by degradation that it doesn't function as a sword anymore then it isn't a sword, it is just a relic object. If you can restore basic functionality, such as restoring a grip, then I would do so. 

If you use organic glues, which are reversible, and remove nothing original  then adding missing areas of wood and covering in new leather is nothing other than an improvement, but I would avoid artificial ageing as this is a fundamentally dishonest treatment.

----------


## Ian Knight

> Personally, I would say that if a sword is so disabled by degradation that it doesn't function as a sword anymore then it isn't a sword, it is just a relic object. If you can restore basic functionality, such as restoring a grip, then I would do so. 
> 
> If you use organic glues, which are reversible, and remove nothing original  then adding missing areas of wood and covering in new leather is nothing other than an improvement, but I would avoid artificial ageing as this is a fundamentally dishonest treatment.


Thanks Martin,
I am still undecided but leaning towards sypathetic restoration as you describe. Brand new leather doesn't look quite right on a sword showing its age. I would either use old leather or try to age the new leather slightly to make it look more natural with the sword. I don't want the grip to stand out like a sore thumb. This will only be for my benefit however, because I have no intention of ever selling the sword.
Ian

----------


## Will Mathieson

How about trades then???

I can recommend Paraloid B 72, by Lascaux, a Swiss made granular clear material. I have used this on a 1796HC officers sword, the leather was worm holed and the wood underneath was dry rot and could not take any sort of handling without disintegrating. It can also be used with fillers and coloured during or after use. When dissolved as a liquid, it fills worm holes and soakes in wood to stabilize the grip. It is used by museums and is  totally reversable.
When dry, it hardens very well.

----------


## Ian Knight

Very nice job Will. 
I think you sent me some of this product. 
Ian

----------


## FJ Ferrero

> I am now the proud owner of a Scots Greys trooper's sabre.  The actual sword blade and hilt aren't too bad but the grip is in a bit of a sorry state. There is no leather covering left and a piece of the grip near the pommel is also absent. I think I can see some of the original leather covering between the backpiece and grip but I might be mistaken. 
> The blade is a hatchet point and the quillons are still present.
> The question is: Should I restore the grip or should I leave it as it is? 
> Your opinions please.
> 
> Many thanks.
> Ian


Hi Ian, very nice sabre, congrats! if the wood grip is original and you want to replace it, just keep it somewhere don't through it away  :Smilie:  
Quick question (and pls excuse my ignorance): What does the 2 D CN 44 mean? 2nd Dragoon...? do these inscriptions tell you it belonged to the Scots Greys? 

Does anyone know if there is some kind if way to know exactly when a sword of this model belonged to the napoleonic era? I have a similar sword that has some markings on it (Osborn & Gunby and BO, etc) but I don't know if this is napoleonic or post? would a spear point blade determine the approximate era? 

thanks!
Fed

----------


## FJ Ferrero

> Hi Ian, very nice sabre, congrats! if the wood grip is original and you want to replace it, just keep it somewhere don't through it away  
> Quick question (and pls excuse my ignorance): What does the 2 D CN 44 mean? 2nd Dragoon...? do these inscriptions tell you it belonged to the Scots Greys? 
> 
> Does anyone know if there is some kind if way to know exactly when a sword of this model belonged to the napoleonic era? I have a similar sword that has some markings on it (Osborn & Gunby and BO, etc) but I don't know if this is napoleonic or post? would a spear point blade determine the approximate era? 
> 
> thanks!
> Fed


OK...2nd Dragoon were actually the Scots Greys.. duh! sorry for that one.. embarrassing.. haha... 

Now, I understand that the spear point was probably a later modification of the blade.. some say that some swords were actually modified for the waterloo campaign, could this be true? 

Thanks!
Fed

----------


## Ian Knight

Hello Fed,
Thank you. 
The inscription reads:
2D Ds  (2nd Dragoons or Scots Greys).
C No. 44

Your blade markings are identical to mine.

Just before the Battle of Waterloo according to James Smithies of the 1st (Royal) Dragoons: "For the first time ever known in our army, the cavalry were ordered to grind the backs of their swords". This was intended to make the P1796 more effective against the French Cuirassiers.
Evidently this was not done by all troopers and hatchet pointed and spear pointed swords were used at Waterloo.

Many P1796 swords were cut down and re-used for naval culasses when the P1821 sword was introduced. 

Ian

----------


## FJ Ferrero

> Hello Fed,
> Thank you. 
> The inscription reads:
> 2D Ds  (2nd Dragoons or Scots Greys).
> C No. 44
> 
> Your blade markings are identical to mine.
> 
> Just before the Battle of Waterloo according to James Smithies of the 1st (Royal) Dragoons: "For the first time ever known in our army, the cavalry were ordered to grind the backs of their swords". This was intended to make the P1796 more effective against the French Cuirassiers.
> ...


Thanks Ian! What you are saying is very interesting, because now I can let my imagination fly and dream that the one I have could've been at the waterloo campaign  :Smilie:  
Too bad mine is not a Scots Greys!!  :Stick Out Tongue: 

Congratulations again on the precious relic! 

best regards,
Fed

----------


## WBranner

Don't feel too bad it's not a 2nd Dragoon. After all, Waterloo was the only time they saw action during the Napoleonic Wars. They literally got their 15 minutes of fame. 

Even regimentally marked swords, regardless of their regiment do not really have hard proof they were used in any action. All is speculation.

That said, having a spear point on a 96 HC is a better indicator than most that it saw campaigning. It may even have a longer, more notable career in the Penninsula.

If you like, speculate that it is a 6th Dragoons sword. Who's to say it's not!

----------


## Ian Knight

> Don't feel too bad it's not a 2nd Dragoon. After all, Waterloo was the only time they saw action during the Napoleonic Wars. They literally got their 15 minutes of fame. 
> 
> Even regimentally marked swords, regardless of their regiment do not really have hard proof they were used in any action. All is speculation.
> 
> That said, having a spear point on a 96 HC is a better indicator than most that it saw campaigning. It may even have a longer, more notable career in the Penninsula.
> 
> If you like, speculate that it is a 6th Dragoons sword. Who's to say it's not!



And I'll speculate that my sabre saw action in one of the most celebrated charges in military history. Even if it only lasted 15 minutes.
Ian

----------


## FJ Ferrero

> Don't feel too bad it's not a 2nd Dragoon. After all, Waterloo was the only time they saw action during the Napoleonic Wars. They literally got their 15 minutes of fame. 
> 
> Even regimentally marked swords, regardless of their regiment do not really have hard proof they were used in any action. All is speculation.
> 
> That said, having a spear point on a 96 HC is a better indicator than most that it saw campaigning. It may even have a longer, more notable career in the Penninsula.
> 
> If you like, speculate that it is a 6th Dragoons sword. Who's to say it's not!


The Inniskillings! yes, I can definitely speculate on that idea...  
Although, I guess they would also have markings like "6th D" on the disk or maybe not?

Wayne, saw your collection (on your website), very nice!!! I like the idea of describing the background of every sabre, with pictures of the regiments. By the way you have a 96HC Scots Greys too!!! niceee...

Best regards,
Fed

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Technically, proofs marks are for gun barrels and were highly regulated.  Inspection stamps are found on blades.  Although you might be able to call the bend test mark as a kind of proof.  I think the crown with an arrow under it shows it was inspected.


Inspection and View marks as we know them started in around 1788 when instructions were issued for stamps or punches to be made.  These were to be issued to Board of Ordnance viewers for military goods. Many of these were for firearms but some were obviously intended to be used on swords as well.
Joseph Witton was paid for having made viewers marks and the  document in the PRO states there were  7 designs, small crown and cross sceptres (For firearms), crown alone and a crown above the figures 1,3,4,6 and 8. the price was 1/6d (one shilling and sixpence)  (PRO WO.52/34 p 135)

----------


## WBranner

> The Inniskillings! yes, I can definitely speculate on that idea...  
> Although, I guess they would also have markings like "6th D" on the disk or maybe not?
> 
> ...


I have only seen a very few marked. The 1 & 3 dragoons and the 10 & 14 ld come to mind as well as the 7 Dragoon Guards. Oddly, I've seen more 2d & 14LD than anything. I'm keeping my eye open for a KGL saber if they have them. MDLong had a pistol marked to them once, but I've not seen a saber.

----------


## Matt Easton

Hi Ian, congratulations on the sword!
Personally, as an ex-archaeologist, I would not mess with the grip.  As someone else said, if the grip was missing then I may consider putting one on.  But I personally find the idea of covering up part of an artifact, or even worse, changing or damaging an artifact (for example to dismount the hilt) rather horrifying.  We know that some medieval and renaissance swords had this done to them in the 19thC, and frankly these artifacts are not viewed as highly as completely untouched originals are.  They are also less useful as archaeological artifacts for study.
But I accept that there are different opinions.  :Smilie: 

Regards,
Matt

----------


## Ian Knight

Hello Matt,
Thank you for your comments. 
Looking at the grip more closely, someone has replaced the original rivet through the 'ears' with a small nail on either side. Although the grip has been with the sword a long time I'm not 100% sure that is original and the only way of telling is to take the sword apart. 
The tang has also been re-peened, possibly to tighten a loose hilt. 
It would be possible, with much care, to remove the nails, file off the peen and take the hilt apart. The sword could then be lightly cleaned, the grip conserved or replaced (if found to be a later addition) and the sword re-assembled. 
Ian

----------


## Ian Knight

Please could anyone tell me if it would be possible from the rack number 'C No 44' to trace the trooper who carried this sword?
I have read that Corporal Dickson of the Greys belonged to Captain Vernon's troop (F) and that his number was 57. 
I wondered if there is a publication somewhere that might give me this information.

Ian

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Please could anyone tell me if it would be possible from the rack number 'C No 44' to trace the trooper who carried this sword?
> I have read that Corporal Dickson of the Greys belonged to Captain Vernon's troop (F) and that his number was 57. 
> I wondered if there is a publication somewhere that might give me this information.
> 
> Ian


Ian this may help but no where can I find which of the Troops (A.B.C.D.etc) were the actual 6 troop sent/
_Up to the return of Napoleon from Elba, the Royal North British Dragoons (Scots Greys) had 8 troops, but in 1815 this was increased to 10 troops, the total strength of officers and men in the 10 troops being 946.

Only 6 troops went to the Netherlands to join Wellington -- 4 remaining at Ipswich. The officers who went with the 6 troops were Lt. Col. James Inglis Hamilton and Majors Isaac Blake Clarke and Thomas Pate Hankin. 

The Adjutant was Lieutenant Henry McMillan; 
Assistant Surgeon James Alexander; 
Veterinary Surgeon John Trigg.

These Captains commanded the 6 troops 
Edward Cheny, 
James Poole, 
Robert Vernon, (F Troop we know!) 
Charles Barnard, 
Thomas Fenton 
Edward Payne. 

Thomas Reignolds, who was a Brevet Major and was Brigade Major to Sir William Ponsonby. 

The Lieutenants were John Mills, Francis Stupart, George Falconer, James Wemyss, James Carruthers, Archibald Hamilton,Thomas Trotter, James Gape, Charles Wyndham and James Graham. 
There were 3 cornets: Edward Westly, E.C. Knichant and Lemuel Shuldham.
_
Maybe The Waterloo Medal Roll would give you the troop letters there?

----------


## Ian Knight

Hello Robert,
Thank you very much for the information. I will look into obtaining the Waterloo medal roll although I am now a little nervous that 'C' troop was left at Ipswich.  :EEK!: 

Ian

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Hello Robert,
> Thank you very much for the information. I will look into obtaining the Waterloo medal roll although I am now a little nervous that 'C' troop was left at Ipswich. 
> 
> Ian


Medal Roll may not give Troop Initial but probabaly _Captain VVVVVVVVV's Troop._
An email to the regimental Museum may give the initials of troops and if 'there'!

Museum

homehq@scotsdg.org.uk

Curator:
Lt Col R J Binks

----------


## Ian Knight

Many thanks Robert.
Ian

----------


## Richard Dellar

Ian,

Unfortunately the Waterloo Medal Roll lists the Scots Greys troops just under the name of their Captain rather than giving the troop letters. The Scots Greys muster roll for Waterloo is also given as an Appendix in Dalton's Waterloo Roll Call but again the troops are just listed under their Captain.

The listings for the 1st Royal Dragoons give both the Captain and the troop designation. The sword below was carried by a trooper in Captain Methuen's D Troop. 

Richard

PS, I have never understood why Scots Greys swords seem more celebrated that Royal Dragoons' swords (or indeed 6th Inniskilling swords) as they all took part in the famous charge together and the Royals also captured the Eagle of the veteran French 105 regiment of the line (Captain Kennedy Clark and Corporal Stiles)

PPS, Captain Vernor's name is incorrectly spelt as Captain Vernon in the Army Lists.

----------


## Ian Knight

Thanks Richard. I forgot to look in 'The Waterloo Roll Call'.
I have sent a request for information from the regimental museum as Robert suggested.

I would be happy with any Waterloo associated sword but they are few and far between and command huge sums of money as you know. I acquired this sword for a reasonable price.

Ian

----------


## WBranner

This thread was my query on trying to determine what troops were at Waterloo. It was inconclusive, but does contain some information.

http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93434

Richard: I agree about the facination with the Scots Greys. I think it has something to do with all the paintings. Also, the bearskins & grey horses look so much more snazzy!

----------


## Ian Knight

I have heard back from the regimental museum. Their archivist is going to do some research into which six troops were at Waterloo. I will post his reply as soon as I receive it.

Ian

----------


## WBranner

... ahhhh, but do we really want to know?

I'm rooting for C & E.

----------


## Ian Knight

> ... ahhhh, but do we really want to know?
> 
> I'm rooting for C & E.


I don't think I do now. Just in case.  :Frown:

----------


## David Critchley

> Richard: I agree about the facination with the Scots Greys. I think it has something to do with all the paintings. Also, the bearskins & grey horses look so much more snazzy!


Yes, I think Lady Butler is largely to blame

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

Swords with Scottish associations also seem to command attention and a premium.

----------


## Richard Dellar

There was a Serjeant Critchley serving with the 1st Royal Dragoons (Capt Phipps' troop). You would have thought that would give the Royals prominence to some people.

----------


## FJ Ferrero

> I have heard back from the regimental museum. Their archivist is going to do some research into which six troops were at Waterloo. I will post his reply as soon as I receive it.
> 
> Ian


Ian, this thread has a lot of suspense... We are all eagerly waiting for the archivist to come back with the detailed info! 

Best regards,
Fed

----------


## David Critchley

> There was a Serjeant Critchley serving with the 1st Royal Dragoons (Capt Phipps' troop). You would have thought that would give the Royals prominence to some people.


Good old Lancashire name  :Smilie:

----------


## Ian Knight

I have found out some information about the person who owned the sword at the time of WW1. It was a family piece:

Corporal Douglas S. Edward of the Royal Engineers 7th Div. no. 161783.
Apparently he was of Scottish decent. 
He subsequently moved to The Netherlands.

I have checked 'The Waterloo Roll call' and can only find a George Edwards not Edward.  :Frown: 

Ian

----------


## WBranner

Well, you're halfway there.

How did you come by it?

----------


## David Critchley

> I have found out some information about the person who owned the sword at the time of WW1. It was a family piece:
> 
> Corporal Douglas S. Edward of the Royal Engineers 7th Div. no. 161783.
> Apparently he was of Scottish decent. 
> He subsequently moved to The Netherlands.
> 
> I have checked 'The Waterloo Roll call' and can only find a George Edwards not Edward. 
> 
> Ian


Could still be the same name Ian.
They weren't too fussy about spelling after all, and he might have spelled his name with an 'X' anyway.

----------


## Ian Knight

Very true David. 

Ian

----------


## dominic grant

> Only 6 troops went to the Netherlands to join Wellington -- 4 remaining at Ipswich.



Actually It was the Barracks in Maningtree 8 miles outside Ipswich at the time

Its just marked in most records as Ipswich as Maningtree is quite small...from there they crossed the fields opposite where I sit at this moment in time, on the way to Harwich to transfer over seas

----------


## Brian Rollason

I am a collector of both guns, swords, documents etc from this period....I think adding anything to this sword would devalue it and take away from its HONEST history and appearance.  Personally I wouldn't buy anything that has been messed with...your sword is an honest piece which is getting harder and harder to find!!!!!... it shows its age for two hundred years which would be expected...personally I would leave it alone. I also see a trend in the musket market...muskets that have been cleaned, and or messed with are becoming less desirable than ones that may be a little rough and dirty..BUT...are good honest pieces for the period.  Are we not preserving history not trying to change it by making things look pretty, its wear is part of its history?  I find swords untouched hold far more weight.

----------


## Shawn Gibson

I agree Brian.  I like to see honest wear and damage.  I normally leave things as I find them except for stabilizing them.  I did restore one very rare Confederate sword because someone recently had gone after the blade with a bench grinder.  But except for modern damage, I think it is part of the history.

----------


## Shawn Gibson

> Inspection and View marks as we know them started in around 1788 when instructions were issued for stamps or punches to be made.  These were to be issued to Board of Ordnance viewers for military goods. Many of these were for firearms but some were obviously intended to be used on swords as well.
> Joseph Witton was paid for having made viewers marks and the  document in the PRO states there were  7 designs, small crown and cross sceptres (For firearms), crown alone and a crown above the figures 1,3,4,6 and 8. the price was 1/6d (one shilling and sixpence)  (PRO WO.52/34 p 135)


Robert-  I've been doing a bit more reading on the crown arrow mark.  Take a look at Erik Goldstein's "The Socket Bayonet in the British Army 1687-1783."  The crown over arrow mark (an ownership mark)shows up at the very beginning of the 18th century.  The view mark of a crown over a number starts in 1738 according to Erik.  The crown over arrow mark continues to be used as well as the view mark, but more normally found on muskets instead of edged weapons.  I'm a bit surprised this sword doesn't have a crown over number view mark on it.  It might have at one time, but has worn away.  I think the order for stamps you see in 1788 were replacement stamps.  The Crown 4,5, & 6 view marks are often found of 1750s vintage bayonets, long before 1788.

BTW, this is a bit of an aside about these markings.  I see nothing in the swords markings that are inconsistent with its reported age.

----------


## Brian Rollason

Ian...I also think by adding a new grip it would add unwarranted suspicion to  its originality.

----------


## Ian Knight

Thanks for your comments guys. 
I have had another good look at the grip under a magnifying glass and it isn't original. Also, someone has driven a small nail either side through the ears and into the wood. 
Had the grip been original and in this state I would have left it well alone but I have taken the tough decision to replace the grip. 
Doing this won't detract from the sword in my opinion because it has been 'messed' with in the past. Perhaps that was part of the swords history, but my replacement grip will also be in a few years time.
I will make sure that the grip doesn't look out of place. 
I will be taking photos of the various stages of the grip's construction. If anyone thinks it might be of interest to them I will post a thread when it is completed.

The sword will remain in my own collection and not be sold on at any time.

Ian

----------


## Shawn Gibson

Ian,

You can do what you want with your sword.  There is nothing unethical about replacing the grip unless it is being done to fool someone.  But, why would you say it will stay in your collection and not be sold on.  Unless you are planning to live forever, it will move on to another collection pretty quickly in the life span of the sword.  The sword is 200 years old give or take.  Even if you will the sword to a museum, it is likely to be sold.  The vast majority of items donated to museums are sold eventually.  So, by all means replace the grip if you want (I think most collectors would replace it), but you should realize it will very likely go on to another collector someday.

----------


## WBranner

> Thanks for your comments guys. 
> I will be taking photos of the various stages of the grip's construction. If anyone thinks it might be of interest to them I will post a thread when it is completed.
> Ian


I vote that you either do this as an article or get a moderator to make it a "stickey" thread. 

... of course, you'll get the hate mail about it.

----------


## Brian Rollason

I have an 1804 cutlass that has an arrow with crown over it as well...I have seen this on several swords...as with muskets it means inspected approved and purchased....now the property of the Government.

----------


## Ian Knight

> I vote that you either do this as an article or get a moderator to make it a "stickey" thread. 
> 
> ... of course, you'll get the hate mail about it.


Wayne,
I am fabricating a new grip as we speak. I'm taking photos of the construction and will write a explanation to go with them. I'm not saying this is the right way to make a grip but it is the method that I use and it seems to get quite good results. I am quite fussy and won't fit the grip if it doesn't look right. I would be happy to hear member's comments once they have read it and seen the finished grip in situ.
I am sure that other collectors would have preferred to have left the grip as it was but it wasn't original and didn't look good. Many might have swords in their collections with replacement grips without even realising it. :Wink: 
The new grip isn't meant to 'fool' anyone. I have photos of the sword as I bought it and these will remain with the sword as part of its history.


Ian

----------


## David Critchley

> Robert-  I've been doing a bit more reading on the crown arrow mark.  Take a look at Erik Goldstein's "The Socket Bayonet in the British Army 1687-1783."  The crown over arrow mark (an ownership mark)shows up at the very beginning of the 18th century.  The view mark of a crown over a number starts in 1738 according to Erik.  The crown over arrow mark continues to be used as well as the view mark, but more normally found on muskets instead of edged weapons.  I'm a bit surprised this sword doesn't have a crown over number view mark on it.  It might have at one time, but has worn away.  I think the order for stamps you see in 1788 were replacement stamps.  The Crown 4,5, & 6 view marks are often found of 1750s vintage bayonets, long before 1788.
> 
> BTW, this is a bit of an aside about these markings.  I see nothing in the swords markings that are inconsistent with its reported age.


The mark shows up on stuff brought up from the Mary Rose, so it dates back further than that. There is a story that it originated with the Edward IIIs vintner who marked hogs heads of wine fit for the Palace with part of his own coat of arms - a broad arrow, that would put the mark's origin around 1327.

David

----------


## Martin Read

> I have an 1804 cutlass that has an arrow with crown over it as well...I have seen this on several swords...as with muskets it means inspected approved and purchased....now the property of the Government.


I harbour grave suspicions that the absolute equation of "marked = government owned" was true for all periods.

I would say rather, at least for the Napoleonic period that "marked = having passed the government sanctioned tests."

I suspect that anyone wanting a blade or sword subjected to the government test could submit it. In particular I have a 1796 P light cavalry officer's sword with a crown over 1 mark to the blade. The sword is of typical officer weight, made by Johnstons of 8 Newcastle St. Strand (cartouche on scabbard), typical Johnstons' square langets, comma ears and a wire-wrapped grip. The scabbard even has an old, slightly pitted, indent from the bottom of the inner square langet - so the sword and scabbard are an original pairing.

The sword could have been bought into government ownership from the original owner, but I think that it is more likely that a cautious buyer wanted the sword subjected to the government tests before buying from the sword cutler.

----------


## Shawn Gibson

I think you are right about having the government inspectors pass a volunteer or private purchase item.  However, the inspector would stamp a view mark crown over number as on your sword.  The crown over arrow or BO with arrow are not inspection marks, but governmen ownership marks.  If I understand this all correctly.

----------


## Ian Knight

Nearly there. I'm not 100% happy with it so I may make another.
About 12 hours work to get this far.  :EEK!: 


Ian

----------


## WBranner

I'd say that's looking pretty good.

----------


## Ian Knight

Thanks Wayne.

There are the initials 'IR' on the tang. Would I be correct in assuming that thes are the initials of Issac Reddell? The back of the blade is marked 'BIRMm'

Ian

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

> Thanks Wayne.
> 
> There are the initials 'IR' on the tang. Would I be correct in assuming that thes are the initials of Issac Reddell? The back of the blade is marked 'BIRMm'
> 
> Ian


Ian
Seems a good assumption to me

----------


## WBranner

Is the spine script possibly gone with age? I've seen Redell spine scripts before although I can't remember them saying Redell Birmm

----------


## Ian Knight

I don't think that there was anything on the back of the blade apart from 'BIRMm'

Ian

----------


## A.Ducote

Very nice sword, Ian.   I am torn on this.  It is becoming more and more acceptable in the American Civil War sword collecting ranks to restore grips.   Then again, the lack of the grip is part of the sword's history. 
 I can't remember on this sword, but wasn't the wooden core wrapped with cord toform the "ridges" of the grip?    To me, the challenge is to get leather thin enough to duplicate the original grip and to age it to where it looks proper.  IMO, a brand new grip on a non-pristine sword looks funny.  

We have all seen good regrips and bad regrips.   Even a good regrip will reduce value somewhat, though.   For this sword, the question is will a good regrip improve the value over the state that it is?   Real question, however, Ian is for you to decide -- do you like the aesthetics of the sword as is?  In other words, would it be more pleasing to your eye regripped or is the historical signficance of the sword enough to satisfy you?

----------


## Ian Knight

Thanks Andre.
I was in two minds about replacing the grip but as the grip wasn't original to the sword I thought it acceptable. In the antiques world it is deemed acceptable to have an item such as a painting restored without effecting its value. In some cases a valuation of an antique increases upon professional restoration. 

I believe that grips of this type could be cord bound or ribbed wood. I chose to use the ribbed wood method as I have made grips of this type in the past.
I am not 100% happy with the finished result and will probably have another try in a while. 
You are correct in saying that the leather covering is the key to achieving a good result, which is part of the reason that I am thinking of remaking the grip using a piece of skiver leather this time. I have only loosely fittted the hilt at the moment so the sword can be pulled apart easily.
The leather that I have used on my grips is very thin but does have a slight grain which doesn't look quite right.
Original grips do have that hard, shiny and worn look which I will practice at achieving. Maybe using an old piece of aged leather might be the answer?
Another solution would be to find a P1796 light cavalry sword in poor condition and use the grip from that as a replacement but having made four grips now I can see that this wouldn't be as straight forward as you would imagine. They have all been slightly different in some way. The length, the width, the curve on the backpiece, the size of the ferrule, the shape and dimensions of the tang, the way the knuckleguard connects with the backpiece at the pommel etc.

I don't believe that my replacing the grip will have too much effect on the value, but I'm not really concerned about that. I just want to be fully happy with the end result so that the grip looks original to the sword.

Ian

----------


## Brian Rollason

I think,  thin leather, aging and making it shiny before you make the grips is the key.

----------


## Ian Knight

I think that might be worth trying next time Brian.

Ian

----------


## A.Ducote

As the grip is not original, I see no harm in the replacement.

----------


## Will Mathieson

I have had good sucess to smooth leather using a microwave. Wet the leather, a piece large enough to take some shrinkage and bind it to the grip, microwave, keeping an eye on it, about 20 or so seconds maybe more. The leather will contract and be develop a very smooth tight fit on the grip. Just trim any excess and you're done. Practice is good and it does not hurt the grip.

----------


## Brian Rollason

What if you used a car buffer on the leather as well as soaking with water and a bit of vegetable oil..this might produce the same environment it would have had in the past 200 years only the process sped up.  This would be replicating wear and sweaty oily palms...of course the buffing will be last.


Brian

----------


## WBranner

Modern man has no patience!

Put the leather on and wait 200 years!

----------


## Rob O'Reilly

Ian,

In one of my grip experiments I fixed the leather, bound it tight using cord, than heated it using a heat gun, being sure to keep it moving.  This had the effect of causing the leather to go almost rock hard.  It did contract, as in Will's example, however had not done the final trimming yet.  An application of shoe polish and a buff finished it nicely.

Rob

----------


## Robert Wilkinson-Latham

Here is an 'old' trick we used as Wilkinsons in my day and well before when cleaning and restoring for aging leather.

Take a plastic box container (Ice cream box, Tupperwear or equivalent) large enough to suspend your bit of leather/leather covered grip (already on grip is probably best).  Half or quarter fill the box with Vinegar (level depends on size of leather/grip and level of suspension arrived at by a dry run! Suspend the leather or grip covered in leather just above the surface of the vinegar (Not touching). Put on the lid and watch carefully as the leather takes on age.
To get a 'perfect age', say 1800, do the above with a small bit of leather as a test and time it.  Should take a few hours to a day or so to get some real age on it.

----------


## Ian Knight

Robert, Will and Rob,
Thank you for the tips. I will spend a day or two experimenting.  :Cool: 

Ian

----------

