# Communities > Antique Arms & Armour Community > Antique & Military Sword Forum >  British P1896 Mountain Artillery Sword v. Indian Mountain Artillery Sword

## J.G. Hopkins

This is a bit of a rant.

We all know that the term "rare" is often overused when it comes to describing antiques for sale. One example of this in the realm of British military swords is the Indian Mountain Artillery Sword. Everyone selling this pattern describes it as "rare", and sometimes "very rare", and a good number describe it as "rarest of all British regulation patterns"--a quote from Robson. In _Swords of the British Army_, Robson is actually talking about the British Pattern 1896 Mountain Artillery Sword. This pattern has a steel D-shaped guard, and not a brass stirrup hilt like the Indian pattern. From what I can see, the Indian pattern may not be common, but it isn't all that rare. IMO, it is one of the most commonly over-priced patterns on the market because there is a perception--a misreading of Robson--that it is "the rarest". And that is BS.

Ben Bevan shared some nice side-by-side photos of these two patterns in this post.

Robert Wilkinson-Latham shared the schematics for the British P1896 here.

The Canadian D-guard artillery sword IS rare.

Below is a British Pattern 1896 Mountain Artillery Sword in the collections of the Royal Armouries in Leeds. THIS one is rare.



And here is an Indian Mountain Artillery Saber, also from the Royal Armouries. It is not that rare.

----------


## Will Mathieson

Canadian D Guard artillery

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

Very nice, Will! That is a great example of a sword that is actually very rare.  :Smilie:

----------


## M Forde

A dealer I sometimes buy from has an Indian Mountain Artillery Sabre for sale and has mistakenly listed it as an ultra-scarce 1796 LC variant from the late 1700s. I explained, politely, the likely real identity of their sword but have been ignored.  :Frown:

----------


## Eric Fairbanks

I recently saw one of these variant m1853 types listed as a Confederate calvary saber. I saved the photo but alas save so many it is lost somewhere in my files. Many of the espada anchas, Mexican and federal period swords I by are (confederate?) In someones mind. Eric

----------


## Ben Bevan

Yep, and it never ceases to amaze me that both dealers and Auction Houses (who should know better) sill keep referring to the brass hilted Indian Mountain Battery sword as the '1896 Pattern' , or cynically do they know better and hope the customers don't?!

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

> Yep, and it never ceases to amaze me that both dealers and Auction Houses (who should know better) sill keep referring to the brass hilted Indian Mountain Battery sword as the '1896 Pattern' , or cynically do they know better and hope the customers don't?!


It is probably a mix, but I'm sure a some sellers are crossing their fingers that buyers are ignorant.

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

> A dealer I sometimes buy from has an Indian Mountain Artillery Sabre for sale and has mistakenly listed it as an ultra-scarce 1796 LC variant from the late 1700s. I explained, politely, the likely real identity of their sword but have been ignored.


That is always disappointing.

----------


## Mark Cloke

'Mea culpa'.  I had some of these incorrectly labeled on www.oldswords.com.  After reading the thread I went back and checked and made the necessary corrections.

Great discussions as always.  Thanks Jonathan.

----------


## M Forde

> That is always disappointing.


Agreed! Especially as a quick Googling can provide confirmation or the opposite. I'm not sure if it's allowed on this forum but does anyone know how much an Indian Mountain Artillery Sabre goes for in the UK?

----------


## Ben Bevan

PM sent.

----------


## J.G. Hopkins

> 'Mea culpa'.  I had some of these incorrectly labeled on www.oldswords.com.  After reading the thread I went back and checked and made the necessary corrections.
> 
> Great discussions as always.  Thanks Jonathan.


Mark,
Thanks for making that change! OldSwords.com is not alone in that error, so not to worry. I know you work hard to make sure everything is as accurate as possible, and that is very much appreciated!

Jonathan

----------


## Nicky G

> Agreed! Especially as a quick Googling can provide confirmation or the opposite. I'm not sure if it's allowed on this forum but does anyone know how much an Indian Mountain Artillery Sabre goes for in the UK?


one went for 230gbp at the recent antony cribb auction. its lot 190

----------


## Alan Campbell

I have what appears to be an Indian Mountain Artillery sword that I bought about 25 years ago when I first started collecting (from a dealer who stated that it was 'similar' to a P1796LC, which I suppose, strictly speaking, was true, and he'd thoughtfully put it into a P1796LC scabbard). There are no markings on the brass hilt but the blade is marked to "Woolley and Sargant" on thr rear edge near the guard. According to the  Old Swords makers database, Wooley and Sargant operated in Birmingham from 1815 to 1816 and 1821 to 1825. So the blade appears to  have been originally used on a P1796LC. The Old Swords gallery has an identical sword listed as "probably Mountain Artillery" with the blade also marked to Woolley and Sergeant (sic):https://oldswords.com/details.php?id=21321 Does anyone know if P1796LC blades were recycled for artillery use after 1821 (or did my dealer make up a composite weapon)?

.

----------


## Will Mathieson

Alan it's best to post photos of your sword. In India they did recycle 1796 LC blades as the steel was superior in quality to locally made swords. This type of blade was used into the 20th century.

----------


## Alan Campbell

> Alan it's best to post photos of your sword. In India they did recycle 1796 LC blades as the steel was superior in quality to locally made swords. This type of blade was used into the 20th century.


Will,
Many thanks for this. Photos attached. Overall length is 35 inches, blade 30 inches.
Alan

----------


## Will Mathieson

To me your sword appears to have been made this way, the 1796LC sword blades are 33 inches and yours is 30 inches. I do not see any shortening of the blade as the fuller ends well back from the tip.

----------


## Alan Campbell

Thanks again, Will. And I agree with Jonathan and Ben's comments above regarding the usage of '1896 pattern' in relation to Indian Mountain Battery swords. I found this quotation interesting: "Gunner and driver N.C.Os. and men had from the earliest days been armed with swords, with brown leather shoulder and waist belts. The curved sword had a brass hilt; the shoulder belt had a frog and was originally called the 'Hazara Mountain Battery' pattern." 

_The History of the Indian Mountain Artillery_, Brig.-Gen. C.A.L. Graham (Aldershot, 1957), page 105.

----------


## Max C.

I was looking at The Last Stand painting, and wondering if this is the type of sabre carried by the man on the left.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...%281898%29.jpg

----------


## Max C.

So doing a little bit of thread necromancy here, but I came upon these photographs, which seem to never be mentionned anywhere in relationship to those swords. The first one is a group of Sikh soldiers from WW1. I am not sure of their identity or the context of the photograph. The second one is dentified as Mule handlers of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps parade with drawn swords, 16 November 1940 from the Imperial War Museum Archives. They appear to be identical to those mountain artillery types, down to the scabbard's drag.

----------


## Max C.

And in this photograph of a mountain gun assembly ca. 1895.

----------


## Matthew Honey

Interesting photos. I find it interesting that they seem to be wearing the scabbards backwards from what I would expect or am used to seeing.

----------


## Ben Bevan

Matthew, yes the scabbards are ‘the wrong way round’, for the reason that when most of the crew were working the ‘screw gun’, they were in the kneeling position, and it was clearly felt the scabbard facing forward was presumably more comfortable. This was amplified by the Mark II scabbard chape having a rounded end as the MarkI flat end no doubt wore out or was easily damaged on the ground. Both the British and Indian Mountain Battery Swords were worn like this. This is the accepted reason given (as per Robson) but I’ve always wondered if rear facing would actually have been more practical given the well known photo above shows the Gunners sword ‘planted’ in the dust!

----------


## Ben Bevan

British Mountain Battery Gunners..

----------


## L. Braden

Another reason may be that Asians (and Europeans in Asia) commonly wore their sabres in reverse because they preferred the backhanded draw and cut.

----------

