# Communities > Antique Arms & Armour Community > Antique & Military Sword Forum >  A special order Wilkinson, for a Prince of Egypt

## Matt Easton

Hi folks,
I thought you might enjoy seeing a special sword I have recently acquired.

According to the proof book record, this was ordered in 1882 by 'Larking' (I believe John Wingfield Larking) for 'Mahmoud Hamdy Pasha' - I believe Prince Mahmoud Hamdi, son on Ismail Pasha, the former Khedive of Egypt. I believe that Prince Mahmoud then gave the sword to an unnamed veteran officer with the initials CS, who had fought for the Ottomans and either the Egyptians or the British. John Wingfield Larking was the British Consul to Egypt. His son Cuthbert Larking was also ADC to the Khedive in 1884, but I think the proof book entry more likely refers to his father John.

On the blade are the battle honours, in French, of Shipka Pass (1877-78), the Siege of Plevna (1877), Egypt 1882, the Sudan 1884-87 and Crete 1897.

On the underside of the scroll guard is an applied brass monogram of the initials CS. Engraved on the backstrap are the initials CS again. Both appear quite French in style to me, though the banner with the battle honours looks more German to me. 

Both the Ottomans and Egyptians employed a lot of European officers, including French, British, Swiss, American, German and others. Despite the sword being British in origin, I suspect that the officer who finally carried this sword, and for whom the battles honours refer, was probably French, Swiss or German.

The sword itself is wonderful, featuring a patent solid hilt, with wooden grips, a scroll guard and a 33 x 1 1/8 inch 'biconvex' blade which seems to have been manufactured ready sharp.










More images: http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/antiqu...rticles/egypt/

----------


## Matt Easton

Of course, any leads on how to track down that illusive officer are much appreciated!

----------


## JordanPL

I haven’t had a chance to read through everything so not sure if it fits, but this is what I received from the auction house on the day of the auction: 

“After asking the seller again for information concerning the blade lot 414,
He told me he had found a service book with certificates in which appears the various posts and missions of this colonel.
His exact name is Colonel W. Sidney Churchill Bey, he was in service from January 28, 1880 to June 1, 1910.
He was appointed First Class Drogman in the Cyprus Regiment and Pioneer under Colonel Gordon from 28 January to 26 October 1880
Attached to Colonel Leach, Chief Military Commissariat of the Egyptian Campaign from June 1, 1882 to October 7, 1882
Appointed second lieutenant in Egypt and attached to Lieutenant Colonel Prescott, commander of the Cairo police, on January 2, 1883.
Appointed lieutenant on August 11, 1883
Appointed Captain June 28, 1884
Appointed Adjutant Major Honorary and Police Inspector of Cairo August 15, 1887
Leave the service of Egypt on January 1st, 1892
Appointed Captain of the Cretan gendarmerie on 11 February 1897 under the command of Colonel Bor
Appointed Commander of the gendarmerie and police of the duchy of Candié August 16, 1898
Leaves Candié for Constantinople on October 18, 1898
Appointed by Imperial Graduate in the Gendarmerie of Constantinople on March 30, 1899
Appointed Major by Serman on May 11, 1899
Appointed Colonel of the Gendarmerie of Constantinople on September 28, 1901
Appointed Inspector General of Police and Gendarmerie of Pera December 5, 1908
Leave the Police on July 14, 1909
Leave the service of the gendarmerie on June 14, 1910”

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks Jordon, I had been searching down the Churchill clue from the auction house, but this was more info than I had!

Looks like there is lots to read:
http://www.academia.edu/34914929/The...capegoat..docx

----------


## L. Braden

How can CS be SC?

----------


## Matt Easton

It's a good question and I don't know the answer.
My first thoughts are that names and initials are sometimes written with the surname first - Hungarians always do that. And it seems more than coincidence that this seemingly diverse range of battle honours does in fact match William Sidney Churchill's career, as he was an interpreter during the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-80. There cannot have been many people who were in Turkish employ during 1877-80, Egyptian from 1880-1887 and then back in Turkish employ again and in Crete in 1897. It seems to match too well.

----------


## L. Braden

The evidence seems to be contradictory; e.g., that he was not in the 1st Sudan War nor in the Russo-Turkish War in 1877-8, but in 1879-80. Anyway, except for Crete (about which I can't find any evidence thus far), if the initials were GS, a perfect match would be Col. George Conrad Sartorius Pasha, who was in all of the other conflicts and who signed his personal letters "GS". Would like to see a close-up shot of the initials. You're certain, though, that it's a "C"?
Cheers!

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks, yes it is puzzling. I'm pretty sure the initials are CS, though I will ponder some more on them and post photos (of the initials, not of me pondering).
George Sartorius is interesting indeed! A good thread about him over at Victorian Wars: http://www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=8694
I don't think these initials are GS however and I'm reluctant to throw out the provenance provided by the seller, which seems to be fairly meaty, even if it does not seem to match on a few counts. Churchill was tortured to death by the Turks in 1919 according to newspaper accounts (contrary to what is written on some websites) for dabbling in Ottoman politics. His wife died many years later in Genoa, Italy - which may help explain how the sword came to be in an auction not so far away in Switzerland.
There is always the possibility that CS relates to someone other than Churchill, but that Churchill still owned the sword. He could have been given it, or taken it. But then we come back to the question of Shipka Pass and the Siege of Plevna - was he at either? Though I suppose it is also possible that the battle honours relate to CS and Churchill acquired the sword after those had been added - perhaps during his time in the Gendarmerie in Crete, or afterwards.

----------


## Matt Easton

> a perfect match would be Col. George Conrad Sartorius Pasha


Sartorius served in Afghanistan 78-79 and Burma 86-88, so if it were him, I'd rather expect to see those major campaigns on the list! Also, he had nothing to do with Crete. But an interesting character for sure! Amusingly, I have a sword with the initials GS on it that I have never been able to attribute to anyone and the dates kind of match!

----------


## L. Braden

Re Sartorius: "was with Baker Pasha through the greater part of the Russo-Turkish War" (Who's Who, 1903). Mentioned numerous times in Baker's "War in Bulgaria" (1879). "From assisting Colonel Valentine Baker in the war in Bulgaria, Major Sartorius rejoined his regiment in Afghanistan" (Centurions of a Century, 1911). But no matter.

----------


## L. Braden

As the Khedive's agent, J. W. Larking sent Mahmoud Hamdy (or Mahmud Hamdi) to England at age 9 to be educated by a clergyman in Kent. (Trivia.)
If the sword was ordered in 1882, why do the battle honours extend beyond that date? Who added them? Cuthbert Larking? (Larking Sr. died in 1891.) As far as I know, the prince wasn't a military man; but there was another Mahmud Hamdi Pasha who was. Also, a collateral relative of the Larkings was Capt. Rodney Charles Style of the Queen's Own Royal West Kent Regt., of which Cuthbert was lt. col. He served with the Soudan Frontier Field Force in 1885-6 (Medal, and Khedive's Star). He was known as "Charley Style". Trivia, or a connection?
Another damned mystery!

P.S. I know that presentation swords weren't given only to military men, but also to civilian officials and others.

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks for the extra material, L.

In fact when I first got the Wilkinson proof book record, the first Larking I found was Cuthbert and of course his appointment as ADC to the Khedive in 1884. But then after more searching found his father and I think it's more likely that his father John was the one who commissioned the sword from Wilkinson.

Regarding the battle honours, these were definitely added later - they have all been etched at the same time and must therefore date to 1897 or later. The natural assumption is that the battle honours relate to CS, but that's not certainly the case. It's entirely possible that CS was not the same person who added the battle honours.

Whoever added those battle honours must have been working for the Ottomans for a long time, but must have also been involved with both the Egyptians and the British, in my opinion. And of course the sword is a British-made sword in the British style: When we look at photos of Ottoman officers, they tend to be wearing Turkish swords. The Egyptian top officers tend to be wearing Mamluk or French style swords. But the battle honours are written in the French form, not English. So perhaps not someone who was entirely British. Though French was the lingua franca of the officers serving in Egypt apparently.

Given the Egyptian emblem and initials MH on the blade, I don't feel any doubt that Larking bought this sword for Prince Mahmoud Hamdy. That part of the story is simple, I think. I don't think there is any possibility of this being the famous Ottoman officer Mahmud Hamdi, who did take part in the Turkish conflicts listed on the blade, but I believe had no involvement in Egypt or the Sudan.

Prince Mahmoud did in fact hold a military rank in the Egyptian army and I believe he was commissioned in 1883. This could be why Larking was purchasing a sword for him in 1882. But whether that was the case or not, it seems clear that the Prince gave this sword to someone else - the CS person. Of course the battle honours later etched on the blade cannot relate to the Prince himself, as they range from 1877-1897, across campaigns that the Prince cannot have had any involvement in.

So, even putting aside the matter of the Churchill lead, we're looking for someone who:
Served alongside the Turks in 1877-79 and 1897
Served alongside the British and/or Egyptians in 1882
Served in the Sudan between 1884-87
Was probably high-ranking
Was probably in the infantry or engineers rather than cavalry (due to sword and scabbard details)
Had some reason to have the battle honours written in French
Was probably in favour with the Egyptian royalty

Could it be Churchill? Maybe. I agree lots doesn't add up. I think it is more likely that Churchill ended up with the sword, but 'CS' owned it before him and is the person who the battle honours relate to.

Regards,
Matt

----------


## L. Braden

Great post, Matt, and I agree! 
The prince died on Sept. 16, 1921, at age 61; and according to an obit in The Near East of Sept. 29, he had "a short career" in the Military College at Abbassieh, near Cairo, which confirms what you mentioned.

----------


## Matt Easton

I think a next step might be to look for any British officers with initials CS, who were employed by the Khedive in 1882-1887.

Here is a document showing that French was the preferred language of the Khedive:

----------


## L. Braden

But what if the initials were added after 1887? And what person matches the battle honours, unless they are inaccurate? 
Anyway, here's some more genealogical info on Bimbashi (Major) or (according to other sources) Colonel William Sidney Churchill Bey of the Egyptian Army: Born in Constantinople (Istanbul) on Sept. 26, 1860; son of a newspaper editor and publisher of British descent; married Bianca Sereno, who presumably died, previous to 1887; married Elise Bensi (a.k.a Elisabeth Benci & Philomene Elisabeth Sophie Benci), on Aug. 29, 1887, who died in Istanbul (not Genoa) on Mar. 18, 1946; had 3 children, 2 girls and a boy; died in Constantinople on July 30, 1918. Contradictory accounts of his death.
As for the sword ending up in Switzerland: Slatin Pasha, who preferred his middle name Carl, lived in Switzerland from 1918 to 1922, then Meran(o), South Tyrol, N. Italy. Just a coincidence, of course!

----------


## L. Braden

P.S. If the initials were original to the sword, then they can't be those of a person, who in 1882 was the prince. They would have to represent something other than a person. But if they were added subsequently, presupposing that the sword no longer belonged to the prince, then they could be those of a person. It's as simple as that! However, why would the prince give the sword to someone else; and if he did so, was it after John Larking's death in 1891? He was reputedly a great friend of the British. And why would he give it to that notorious Churchill?
Speaking of whom, he was only 17 in 1877 and working in the family macaroni and biscuit factory; so is it likely that he was in the Russo-Turkish War? There's no known military record for him at that time.

----------


## Matt Easton

The battle honours definitely cannot be those of the Prince and they were definitely added after 1897.
Were they added at the same time as the CS initials? No way to know, but it seems possible. Likely even. 
CS therefore would have to have been involved in all those campaigns. 
Why did the Prince give his sword to CS? Perhaps in he just had it lying around and thought it would make a good gift for CS.

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks for the extra info by the way. The contradictory details of Churchill's death are quite bewildering.
I am not convinced that this was Churchill's sword anyway, although he was pictured wearing a sword and it still seems slightly possible.

----------


## L. Braden

We may never know for sure!  :Frown: 
Glad to have been of limited help, anyway.
Cheers!

----------


## L. Braden

It just struck me! Since Churchill inherited his deceased mother's baking business in 1875, he could have supplied the Turkish Army and been present during the Russo-Turkish War. That might also explain how he got attached to the chief commissariat officer of the Egyptian campaign of 1882. And as for CS rather than SC: the official languages of the Near East were then French and Turkish. The Turks wrote from right to left, and the French emphasized surnames and rarely used first and middle names in documents, etc. (E.g., "M. le General Marbot" or simply "Marbot".) Churchill was always known as "Sidney Churchill", and evidently preferred that to "William".

----------


## L. Braden

CS = Churchill Sagh (Major or Adjutant-Major) or Churchill Soubachi (in French) or Subashi/Soubashi/Subasi (Chief of Police). In the East, rank always followed name.

----------


## L. Braden

In 1878, C. was awarded his grandfather's and father's Nishani Iftikhar or Order of Pride, the second highest decoration in the Ottoman Empire, conferred on foreigners for services to the Turkish State, presumably for supplying the Turkish Army with macaroni and peksimet (rusk; hard, dry biscuit or twice-baked bread; the Turkish equivalent of hardtack).

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks for all this! You are finding much more about Churchill than I have managed! I think it bring things back to the approach that sometimes the simplest answer is most likely to be the correct one.
Perhaps the most difficult factor to deal with, in my view, is why the Prince should have given his own sword to a relatively low-ranking official. It must have been the Prince's, due to the Wilkinson entry and his own initials and the royal emblem of Egypt on the blade, I think. It's one thing to give a presentation sword to an official, but giving someone your own sword, when you're a Prince, seems rather unusual.

----------


## james.elstob

Matt,

What's the first thing you do with your old kit once your get something new?

Or perhaps realise your not going to need it any more?

Pass it on to someone else?

----------


## L. Braden

More titles: serkerdeh (colonel or major of gendarmerie), salisseh (major), sanieh (colonel), Stambouli (native of Constantinople) or "de Stamboul". But I'm not convinced that any of these proposed suffixes are valid. "Bey" would be more valid. 
The battle honours are evidently those of Churchill, but we still have to explain the "CS". Does it represent a person's initials, or something else? If something else, was it added to the sword in 1882 or subsequently? There should be a way of determining if it was part of the sword in 1882. My guess is that it was added either when the honours were added or thereabouts. But who did the work: a swordsmith in the Near East or in Europe?
I should have added the word "deceased" before "grandfather's and father's", because their decoration would not have been officially passed on to their descendant during their lifetime.

----------


## L. Braden

P.S. If CS isn't Churchill, then the sword would have presumably passed from the prince to C. to the elusive CS, the possible identity of whom I am still pursuing.
Cheers!

----------


## L. Braden

Matt - I'm no sword expert, but it looks to me like a combat weapon, especially since you think the blade was manufactured "ready sharp", and especially since it was presumably intended as a present in honour of MH's graduation from military college. But since MH evidently never pursued a military career, the sword would have been of no use to him in that regard. Moreover, even if he had remained in the military, I presume that he would have worn some fancy ceremonial sword on ceremonial occasions, as he almost certainly would have done during civilian functions and ceremonies. That would probably have been a Mameluke sabre or something similar.
Best Regards!

----------


## L. Braden

Info not found in the linked article above:
"Maj. Bertie's Court of Inquiry found that Edhem Pasha and Churchill Bey also were implicated in the massacre of Cretan Christians in Candia in the bloody aftermath of the Dime Office incident. The court prepared and handed over these two cases to the International Military Commission at Candia. Both cases were tried, the two men were convicted, they each were sentenced to death, and the pair of them were duly executed by firing squad after formal confirmation of their sentences by the Council of Admirals." (International Humanitarian Law, 2003, paraphrasing official documents.) This was in 1898, and yet C. reportedly died in Constantinople 20 years later!
Cont'd.

----------


## L. Braden

The names of the two men who were shot were not revealed in the official documents; and because officers were usually shot rather than hanged, they were mistakenly assumed to have been Edhem and Churchill, who were in fact the two unnamed men who were acquitted because the evidence against them was weak or insufficient. Churchill had reportedly "protested strongly" against any innocent blood being shed. (See The New York Times of Nov. 27, 1898 and numerous other newspapers.)

----------


## Matt Easton

> P.S. If CS isn't Churchill, then the sword would have presumably passed from the prince to C. to the elusive CS, the possible identity of whom I am still pursuing.
> Cheers!


Thanks - if CS is a different person to Churchill, then I think it's more likely that the Prince gave the sword to CS, but then the sword came into Churchill's hands somehow. CS would have owned the sword in 1897 (or somewhat before or after - he could have owned it since 1882 at the earliest, if the Prince gave it away as soon as he got it). I have wondered whether the sword passed from CS to Churchill around WW1 or during Churchill's time running the Cretan Gendarmerie.
But of course, as discussed, it's also just as possible or perhaps more so, that Churchill was the CS of the hilt.

----------


## Matt Easton

p.s. Based on experience with other swords which were given as gifts, it is possible that Prince Mahmoud Hamdy asked Laking to purchase this sword for him so that he could give it as a gift to CS. 
It is not so unusual for the person giving the gift to have their initials and emblem put on the sword - often this takes the form of "From XXXX to XXXX", but perhaps in the Arabic tradition sticking the royal initials on the blade (like VR in Britain of course) and the recipient's initials on the hilt was the done thing.
I cannot honestly say whether the initials on the hilt were done at the same time the sword was made, or at some time after. It's kind of unusual that CS is engraved on the backstrap and also as an applied brass badge on the guard. My *guess* would be that CS added their own initials later - on the backstrap first and then on the guard when they had the money and time to have it done. The applied badge to the guard is not very British in style, in my opinion - it has more of a French or Prussian feel.
Regarding the sword as a fighting weapon - yes absolutely it is. The scroll guard was specifically favoured by officers in India (originally patterned after John Jacob's design for the Scinde Irregular Cavalry officers). When I first saw this sword, my assumption was that it was for an Indian officer. The blade is also a specific design intended to give a sharper edge and one other similar example I own of that blade type was ordered by an officer who broke his first sword killing a Russian officer at Sebastopol and then ordered a new sword to go off to the Maori Wars. Another example I own was ordered by an officer of the Royal Horse Artillery, who also had Wilkinson make him one of John Jacob's style scabbards with a solid wooden liner right up to the throat of the scabbard, to make sure a sharp edge was maintained.
The patent solid hilt of course was also perceived to make for a stronger fighting weapon and was the most common non-regulation feature ordered by officers going off to the Crimea, India, Sudan etc.
However, I don't think we can necessarily infer a great amount from this being a 'fighting' sword - Egypt and the Sudan were pretty dangerous places in the 1880s! I think anybody who could afford a decent sword and expected to potentially see action would probably get the best sword they could afford. Between Bedouin, Tuareg, Beja and others, policing or just travelling in that part of the Ottoman and Egyptian lands was probably pretty dangerous. One other sword I own belonged to an officer who was murdered by Bedouin in Egypt in 1882.

----------


## Matt Easton

> The names of the two prisoners who were shot were not revealed in the official documents; and because officers were usually shot rather than hanged, they were mistakenly assumed to have been Edhem and Churchill, who were in fact the two unnamed prisoners who were acquitted because the evidence against them was weak or insufficient. Churchill, for one, had reportedly protested against any such bloodshed as he was allegedly accused of.


Fascinating! Churchill seems to have had very complicated allegiances. And the gradual collapse of the Ottoman Empire at that time seems to have bred a ridiculously complex political climate.

----------


## Matt Easton

> Matt - I'm no sword expert, but it looks to me like a combat weapon, especially since you think the blade was manufactured "ready sharp", and especially since it was presumably intended as a present in honour of MH's graduation from military college. But since MH evidently never pursued a military career, the sword would have been of no use to him in that regard. Moreover, even if he had remained in the military, I presume that he would have worn some fancy ceremonial sword on ceremonial occasions, as he almost certainly would have done during civilian functions and ceremonies. That would probably have been a Mameluke sabre or something similar.


I agree - the main question for me remains; if MH were to give his sword to someone, who would he give it to? My main problem with CS being Churchill, is that I just cannot see why a Prince of Egypt would give his sword to an Ottoman policeman of dubious background and involvement. Not to say that it didn't happen, but at the moment I cannot see how or why that would happen.

----------


## L. Braden

Matt - Please note that I revised my last post based on additional info. EP and SC were never arrested and therefore were never "prisoners" or even present at the trials; and altho they were advised to leave Crete, both took their time in doing so.

----------


## L. Braden

Matt - Thanks indeed for your additional info and opinions! I have nothing to add except that I agree with you. If it weren't for that service record as provenance, we wouldn't even be considering Churchill! I suspect, therefore, that we'll never be able to untangle this web.

----------


## L. Braden

Afterthought! A possible reason why the prince would give C. his sword might be as a gesture of sympathy and support after the official British attempt to make him (to them, a mercenary outsider) a scapegoat and therefore tarnish his reputation. In any case, the prince also allegedly supported 'Urabi Pasha for much the same reason. But the mystery remains as to who or what is "CS"!

----------


## Matt Easton

What do you make of this, from 1919??

----------


## L. Braden

What do you make of this, from The Near East of June 8, 1917, regarding Bedri Bey and Ismail Janbolat, the chief of secret police: "Both are reported to have had a hand in the murder of Colonel Churchill in 1914." 1914! Quoting the Cairo correspondent of The Times! More "fake news"? 
I'm now willing to concede that he was CS, which either represents a surname precedence (Churchill, Sidney) or is a simple mistake. You mentioned the Hungarians and this customary reversal of initials (on swords?). In this regard, note that the "H" is emphasised or larger than the "M" on the sword.
P.S. Besides the Order of Pride, C. as colonel of the Ottoman gendarmerie was also awarded the Order of Osmanieh and the Order of Medjidieh; so he was obviously highly regarded by those in supreme power.
Cheers!

----------


## Matt Easton

So bizarre. Truly a case for CSI!

I found this nice image of British officers in the Ottoman Gendarmerie from 1904 - gives an impression of their uniforms. The two swords that are visible are of Prussian form (many Ottoman swords were inspired by German ones).

----------


## L. Braden

Interesting photo!
What do I make of that newspaper report? C. wasn't "a British subject"; he was a Turkish subject; and certain words like "infamous" betray a bias. As for the other report, how could the Cairo correspondent of The Times not know that C. was alive and apparently well in 1914 and still alive 3 years later? That he was ignorant of this is possible, but not probable, because he claimed to know what else was happening in Turkey; and Egyptians were well aware of what was happening in Turkey, especially regarding those like C. who had served them. (Note that Britain was and had been at war with Turkey when these reports were disseminated.)   
Note also that I revised my post of yesterday, particularly regarding the H and M on the sword, perhaps meaning that the H takes precedence over the M, just as the C takes precedence over the S. This was not the Egyptian and Turkish order of names and titles. MH was officially Mahmud Pasha Hamdi in Turkish and Arabic (Basha), whereas in French and English he was commonly Mahmoud Hamdy Pacha (or Pasha). So C. would have been Sedn (or Sidn) Bey Churchil (or Jurjil) in Turkish and Arabic, but Sidney Churchill Bey or simply Churchill Bey in French and English. That might explain why the C precedes the S, just as the H predominates over the M. Or it might not!

----------


## L. Braden

P.S. The Times correspondent in Cairo was Arthur Sidney Merton, a friend and associate of Philip Perceval Graves, who was The Times correspondent in Constantinople (1908-14) and a captain of army intelligence in Cairo during WW1; and G's uncle, Sir R. W. Graves, was in civil intelligence. So, from whom did Merton get his info?

----------


## L. Braden

Lieut. Gen. (Ferik Pasha) Charles Stone, chief of staff and a.d.c. to Khedive Isma'il Pasha, 1870-83. The "big gun" more likely to have been given the sword? But he returned to the U.S. after service, so how would Churchill have acquired it? Mystery still unsolved.

----------


## L. Braden

P.S. Stone left Egypt in January of 1883. It's highly unlikely that MH had received the sword by then, let alone had time to have the initials added. If they were GS, there was Major Gotz (von) Seckendorff; but he was killed in 1883 with Hicks Pasha et al. Couldn't find any other with initials CS, so we're back to Churchill.

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks for the ongoing search!
Yes, I think if it were not for Shipka and Plevna then I wouldn't doubt that this was Sidney Churchill. Especially when coupled with the documents that the previous owner apparently had access to. Though I still cannot find any real relationship between Churchill and those two battle honours.

----------


## L. Braden



----------


## L. Braden



----------


## L. Braden

Could it be that C. was at Shipka and Plevna as a commissariat supplier, or a newspaper correspondent, or an official or unofficial observer, or a volunteer combatant, or whatever? And were all those listings necessarily "battle" honours? He evidently wasn't involved in any combat as a commissariat attache in Egypt or a police official in Crete, so his mere presence there would explain the so-called honours. However, as for the Sudan, his alleged service record indicates that he was in Cairo as a police officer in 1884-7! So, either he or someone else falsified what's on the blade or that sword wasn't his and those battle honours weren't his. Anyway, why was he awarded the Ottoman Order of Iftikhar in 1878 if not for some service or services in the Russo-Turkish War? There are too many unanswered questions about him; e.g., how he wangled his way up from a mere interpreter to a high-ranking police official. I suspect we'll never know!

----------


## L. Braden

More! There were several British officers whose service records matched that on the blade, even serving as military attaches and official observers in the Russo-Turkish War, but none of them with the initials CS.
Not only Churchill's service record but official Egyptian records indicate that he was not in the Sudan but in Cairo as a police officer and then official. But to be absolutely certain, I checked all of the official reports of the commanding officers in the Sudan, which listed all staff and other officers and civilians; and there was no Churchill nor even a police detachment. 
Conclusion as in the previous post. And am still wondering if "CS" is actually "CS"!

----------


## Matt Easton

Thanks so much for your help with this.
I think that I am starting to feel that this cannot have been Churchill's sword until after 1897, if at all. Maybe he obtained it in Crete somehow in 1897 or after. Maybe there is no connection with Churchill.
I do not think that Shipka and Plevna can relate to Churchill, nor any of the other inscriptions really, except arguably for Egypt 1882 (dubious) and Crete 1897. As you say, he wasn't in the Sudan. 
The initials could be GS perhaps.

----------


## L. Braden

Glad to help as always, Matt! 
Now what?

----------


## L. Braden

P.S. Am intrigued by the swords in the photos, particularly their length. What are they? Am adding what I hope is a larger image:

----------


## L. Braden

That's as large as I can get from my own copy of With Hicks Pasha in the Soudan (1884). What a waste of space!

----------


## Matt Easton

The swords that I can see clearly here are all British 1845 pattern infantry officers' swords.
As far as I can see from Egyptian and Ottoman service photos, British and other foreign seconded officers continued using whatever swords they wanted to, which normally meant their previous service swords. You can see Italian officers in Egyptian & Ottoman service with Italian swords for example.
Cheers!
Matt

----------


## L. Braden

Thanks indeed for your reply!
I enlarged the images, but for some reason the uploader reduced them.

----------


## Matt Easton

Reviving this thread!

Here is a photo of Churchill (note the funky spelling of his name!). Now, I'm not a medal guy, but those look like a lot of medals to me.

----------


## Matt Easton

That seems to be the same man sitting to the left shoulder of Colonel Bor here, from the Crete crisis, though he's given a different name here (in error?):

----------


## Matt Easton

And someone has thrown up a Wiki page about him since last year:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sydney_Churchill

----------


## Matt Easton

If we run with the assumption that this is Churchill's sword, he did seem to start service in Egypt in 1882 and that's the year that this sword seems to have been purchased on behalf of the Prince. Perhaps these swords were simply being given in the Prince's name to new officials joining the service.

Looking to the photo above, that does indeed look like it could be this sword. I wish I could find a higher resolution copy of the image, or the original photo it was drawn from. That image is from The Graphic.

----------

