19th and 20th Century British Cavalry Lances and their Markings

Although not of substantially ranked interest, there have been some requests for further knowledge about the markings appearing on British cavalry lances, both the lancehead and foot (shoe). This interest apparently was developed as a result of a relatively early article in this blog; http://arnhemjim.blogspot.com/2011/03/british-pattern-1868-cavalry-lance-at.html ; The British Pattern 1868 Cavalry Lance at Arnhem? Obviously a rather esoteric subject, it requires a significant search to come up with reliable authoritative information. Most of the reference data is on the Lance, Cavalry, Pattern 1868, as it represents to this author’s best understanding the largest population of lances still in existence, and actual use, albeit in ceremonies only.

The following photographs first appeared in the above referenced blog article, and are shown again here for the convenience of the reader.

British Cavalry Lance Patterns 1885 and 1868 from
LoCs (List of Changes) 

British Pattern 1868 Lancehead and Foot manufactured by
Wilkinson Sword Co. Ltd circa 1936    

Wilkinson Sword Co. Ltd etched trademark

on lancehead; no other markings on head or
foot

Standard British Army Lance Pennon circa 1900   

Pattern for Lance "Flag" (pennon) for British1868 Pattern

 Cavalry Lance

The Ordnance List of Changes (LoCs) pertaining to the Pattern 1868 are §4451, §8366 and §9065. These were introduced 6 June 1868. There are several references that this author is aware of, the first being “BRITISH SERVICE SWORD & LANCE PATTERNS”, Pattern Identification, Descriptions & Lists, Official References & Drawings, Accessories & Fittings, I. Skennerton, S.A.I.S. No.6 (Small Arms Identification Series), Published by the author,1994, ISBN 0 646190 36 9.

In another book "THE BROAD ARROW", BRITISH AND EMPIRE Factory Production, Proof, Inspection, Armourers, Unit & Issue Markings, I.D. Skennerton, Published by the author, 2001, ISBN 0 949749 43 5, he states; "Lances were marked with the same indicators (Broad Arrows) on the shoe (foot) above the collar, the marks to be in an upright position. The four patterns of lances had ash or bamboo staves but any unit markings were made on the shoe. Inspector's marks are found on the metal head as well as the shoe." Elsewhere he states, "Lances: Lances were stamped with unit designations and stand numbers on the shoe, above the collar, with the marks in the upright position."

Another reference is the Internet web site; The Sword Forum, http://www.swordforum.com/forums/content.php . Which includes the knowledge, database and participation of Robert Wilkinson-Latham, of Wilkinson Sword Ltd. The visitor has to dig a bit in the forum’s discussions to find data on the subject of lances.

Other references on the Internet include;

https://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=249559

http://cotswoldsport.co.uk/shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=127

http://www.theswordpattern.co.uk/category_s/1837.htm .

None of these references provide any further knowledge regarding a standard marking of lances beyond what has been stated. To the best of the author’s knowledge any further marking was the prerogative of the individual regiment/unit. The following being an example courtesy of Ashoka Arts (believed to be in Udaipur India). With full acknowledgement and expressed gratitude, the firm sold the following pair of Pattern 1868 Lances, attributed to the 13^th Bengal Cavalry (Watsons Horse). Note the difference in pennons, the first being the newer pattern. While an older pattern, because of its apparent physical condition, the second pattern pennon shown may well be a reproduction. 

From a gentleman named Nick in Australia the author received information in the comments on four lanceheads he has in a collection. Unfortunately photographs weren’t provided. The first one is marked with [5^th”[(possibly 5^th Royal Irish Lancers, 5^th (Princess Charlotte of Wale’s) Dragoon Guards (ceremonial use) 5^th Bengal Cavalry or Probyn’s Horse (5^th King Edward’s Own Lancers). Not too definitive, but narrows the “ownership” to four regiments. The second is marked [No. I I.P co ILG 1917 and below 47]. Not much to go on there. The third is marked [5 2], and the fourth marked [No. I I.P] below a Broad Arrow, then M&amp:C1917]. Other than the date, again not much to go on. The "I.P" stands for Indian Pattern. Some readers may be able to discern additional information from these markings, but at this time the author cannot. These lanceheads however, may have come from the same regiment/unit as some shown in the following photographs, based on the similarity of markings.

   

In summary a lance will normally have a set of markings on the lancehead comprised of (but not necessarily all);

A manufacturer’s or arsenal name, mark, or logo (Etched or stamped, i.e., ENFIELD)

            • The Mark and Pattern designation (i.e., No. I I.P)

            • A form of Broad Arrow (Various styles, some with letters WD)

            • An individual inspector’s stamp (Current monarch's crown, letter and number)

            • A year of manufacture (i.e., 1915)

            • A set of numbers and letter(s) designating regiment/unit (i.e., 17 L.)

The shoe may have the following stamped markings (again not necessarily all, perhaps nothing)

            • A manufacturer’s or arsenal name

            • A form of Broad Arrow

            • An individual inspector’s stamp

            • A set of numbers and letter(s) designating regiment/unit

            • A stand/rack number

War Canoes in the 21st Century

For a sustained period of time, since it was published in January of 2012, there has been a continuing interest in the article “The War Canoes of World War II – Cockleshell Heroes”. See; http://arnhemjim.blogspot.com/2012/01/war-canoes-of-world-war-ii-cockleshell.html . Recently this has included search terms requesting whether the Royal Marine Commandos SBS (Special Boat Service) still use canoes for special missions. The following article, written as recently as September 2015, brings the subject up to date, including the SBS, U.S. Navy SEALs, and several other Western maritime special forces. The principal differences, are being driven by evolving technologies, being hull design, new construction materials, motorization, and submarine design. See; https://www.amazon.com/Covert-Shores-Special-Missions-Minisubs/dp/1533114870?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0 and http://www.hisutton.com/. Not wanting to plagiarize this highly informative web site, with full acknowledgement and expressed gratitude, the following images will give the reader an idea of the site’s content.

"Sleeping Beauty" updated; the Ortega Submersible Canoe Mk 1B

"The Mokai ES-Kape motorized canoe is another cross-over from the recreational market. Something like a jetski, this craft has the potential to operate in Special Forces roles ordinarily carried out by jetskis but with a lower profile and lighter weight. It is limited to one person but can operate in just 6" of water at speeds of up to 16kts carrying 300lb (including the driver). It is however relatively heavy at 200lb (compared to less the 100lb for a two-man folding kayak) and only carries a single adult. Its Achilles heal from the military perspective is the petrol engine (diesel is NATO standard).which is both non-standard (diesel being the NATO single-fuel standard) and much more dangerous. It is unlikely that a submarine captain would allow it inside the sub, although the same is true of early outboard motors for inflatable boats."

"For storage and transport it breaks into three parts with the nose and motor fitting inside the cockpit."

For those readers who might be inclined in a more in-depth study of this clandestine "back-water" subject area (please forgive the pun), H.I. Sutton, the author of the above blog, has recently published (May 2016) a highly researched and detailed book entitled "COVERT SHORES", in a second updated edition. See; https://www.amazon.com/Covert-Shores-Special-Missions-Minisubs/dp/1533114870?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0

In addition to the projects shown on the web site, Lockheed Martin is currently developing what they term as a “Dry Combat Submersible” for the U.S. Navy SEALs. The company having disclosed the following recent status information in an article in Popular Science Magazine.

Military
Lockheed Martin Will Build New Shallow Submarine For Navy SEALs
So they don't have to get wet
By Kelsey D. Atherton

A submarine similar to this one will someday carry Navy SEALs on secret missions.

Lockheed Martin Conceptual Design for Dry Combat Submersible

Traveling underwater offers Navy SEALs a lot of advantages. Troops are hard to see below the waves, and until they reach the shore they’re no louder than the ocean itself. The problem is all the water. The current “swimmer delivery vehicles” used by the Navy’s elite special forces require them to wear scuba gear the entire time, because they're exposed to the sea itself. A new submarine, from Submergence Group LLC and defense giant Lockheed Martin, will instead carry SEALS covertly, underwater, and inside an enclosed submarine.

It’s called the Dry Combat Submersible. From Lockheed Martin:

    Currently, personnel transiting underwater use the SDV to reach their final destination – the personnel are in dive gear and exposed to the undersea environment. DCS allows the personnel to get closer to their destination before they enter the water, and be more effective upon arrival.

    “Our advancements in undersea technologies will ensure personnel are equipped with technologically capable and adaptable systems that can easily be refreshed with the latest capabilities,” said Erika Marshall, general manager and program director at Lockheed Martin’s site in Palm Beach. “These reliable undersea vehicles will protect personnel, ensure they arrive ready to execute their mission, and return them safely.”

Lockheed’s existing dry manned submersibles, the submarines likely most similar to this new one, can operate for over 24 hours underwater before running low on air, travel just over 5 mph, and carry enough fuel to go 70 miles. There isn’t much known about the existing advanced swimmer vehicle, but both it and the Dry Combat Submersible are built to get SEALs close to shore in shallow waters.

Riding in a shallow-water submarine probably isn’t the most exciting thing a SEAL will do, but the key to a successful infiltration is avoiding excitement for as long as possible.

Vintage Films on the Making of Wm. Britains Ltd. Toy Soldiers

The following two videos are short subjects produced in 1949 and 1965 by British Pathe News about the production of vintage Wm. Britains Ltd. toy soldiers. The first being produced in 1946, was probably intended to promote international sales in a recovering post World War II British economy. The second film ironically was produced approximately two decades later, and one year before the cessation of all Britains Ltd. major metal toy soldier manufacture in 1966. This was as a direct result of public health laws enacted to protect children from potential poisoning from the lead alloys, bismuth, and lead content in paints (requirement <1.1%) used in their production. Limits having been established under the British Consumer Protection Act of 1961. In 1967 the Safety in Toys Act further restricted the sale of certain metal toys.

The third video is briefly about a distinguished gentleman by the name of William Y. Carman F.S.A., F.R. Hist. S.. He is a legend as a recognized authority on the History of the British Army. He served as the Deputy Director of the National Army Museum, served in the British Army during WWII,  and was a founding member, and the long termed Vice-Chairman of the British Model Soldier Society. He personally produced a range of historical figures in the 1930s and 1940s. His numerous definitive books on the uniforms of the British Army and the British Army in India are considered reference standards.