Search:

Type: Posts; User: Mark Austin; Keyword(s):

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.16 seconds.

  1. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Jonathan

    "I think that is where there is miscommunication".

    Bruce Slater opened the thread about his sword, not about a discussion on 1805 patterns generally. I have made it clear all along I was talking...
  2. Replies
    1
    Views
    586

    Wilkinson "Patent Solid Hilt"

    Does anyone know if I see this above the Wilkinson name if this fact alone means the sword in question has one of the special Wilkinson tangs? Even when you can not see any tang around the grip areas?
  3. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Jonathan

    Until the fact was stated by Bruce that his sword had a straight blade, I wondered if it could be a cavalry sword. I have NEVER stated it was a cavalry sword.

    Now he has said it is straight, I...
  4. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    ?

    "That includes further PMs Mark"

    I PM'd you to keep this off the forum board. You did not have the good grace to reply privately, instead choosing to continue with your public tirade, twice, even...
  5. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    David

    All I did was state my opinion that I do not believe a sword which resembles a British 1805 Pattern naval sword but which has army etching yet no anchors on the langets is a naval sword. I have said...
  6. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Hi David

    "how strange I thought it quite clear"

    I thought Mark McMorrow made himself quite clear and therefore I suggest your condescending words are inappropriate; I have no wish to reply to posts such as...
  7. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Hi David

    I went but I could not find a sword as described. That is of 1805 British Naval Pattern appearance (straight blade) but with army style etching and no anchor(s) on the langet(s). I look forward to...
  8. Hi again WB

    I meant at the top of the langet, like;
    This one
  9. Replies
    22
    Views
    3,301

    Thanks guys

    I really like the sword.

    RWL sent me a note that he is in Canada for his granddaughters pending birth right now, but he did let me know this;

    "Like the Latham stamp. JL introduced this in 1861...
  10. Hi WB

    Yes, bang on with the CYC markings, but these were after markings were standardized. The trouble with the H on the knucklebow being H troop is the B! The B is the troop letter, so what is the H?
    ...
  11. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Bednobs?

    Hope so, for your pride's sake.
  12. Hi Richard

    List
    1) Yes I know
    2) Yes I know
    3) Am only restating 'Swords of the British Army' by Brian Robson which says appellations were used, as in H for Hussars, but not necessarily the regimental...
  13. Replies
    22
    Views
    3,301

    Is this Latham Wilkinson a bit naughty?!

    OK, so I like punchy headlines.

    I bought an 1853 pattern calvary trooper's sword by Wilkinson, with a numbered spine and a little bit more. The number is 14433 dating the sword to 1866, and next...
  14. Replies
    8
    Views
    634

    Here's more for you

    Antique Swords Exempt
  15. Hi Martin Thanks for your input. I do not think...

    Hi Martin
    Thanks for your input.
    I do not think the H, B and 38 markings are baffling at all as they are pre-1835. The problems I have are a) the langet's "C6", and "D" over the yeomanry stamps....
  16. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Bruce

    You still have not said if the blade is straight or curved. If it is curved, it is probably an 1803 P infantry officer's sword you have.
  17. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Can't wait

    to see David's photos; hope it is me the one that is wrong :D
  18. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    David

    Beg to differ on several counts, not least that a spadroon is not an 1805 P, nor would an 1805 have a spadroon styler blade as I thought early 1805's were all curved, and when the blades became...
  19. Bugging me now!

    I suddenly thought, British swords were not marked on the langets normally, were they? Prussian swords were. No, I do not have a Blucher, I just have a theory about the 6C now. I have tried...
  20. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Is your blade straight?

    If so, then yes it is not a 1796 P cavalry sword. But lances and drums = army, not navy. Can you post photos?
    Regards
    Mark
  21. Replies
    50
    Views
    4,767

    Sounds like

    the only water is saw was a river! As in maybe it is a 1796 Light Cavalry Officer's Sword?
  22. Hi Martin

    According to 'Swords of the British Army' by Brian Robson (special thanks to Phillip Rodley in getting me a copy), page 191, certain regiments started the marking process and simply marked trooper...
  23. Hi Martin

    I am pretty sure it is a "B" and this is in keeping with the markings of the time. Bearing in mind they may not have had a set of punches issued to them to do this, there well may be differences. But...
  24. View Post

    I like 1796 pattern swords; I see a lot of 1796 LC Trooper swords with no regimental markings at all; I suspect these were not used by front line units in combat conditions where knowing whose sword...
  25. Replies
    44
    Views
    2,825

    Hi Ian

    Thanks, I think I will leave my brown scabbard as is.
Results 1 to 25 of 205
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4