Lancashire Fusilier Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Tony, One other, Campbell College O.T.C. used C.C. as their mark. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 The CC marking is interesting - your suggestion sounds plausible, but I note that in Michael Rose's recent book on P88s this marking is referred to as meaning not known. Did you have a source for the county cadets theory? Tony is correct in attributing that CC marking to the County Cadets. This marking is noted in several reference books by Skennerton as "sale mark to County Cadet corps". Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 30 November , 2015 Author Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Good to know - thanks both. I've seen the mark a few times so it's good to know what it stands for. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Tony is correct in attributing that CC marking to the County Cadets. This marking is noted in several reference books by Skennerton as "sale mark to County Cadet corps". Cheers, S>S For everyone's future reference, which are the several of Skennerton's books and the page numbers confirming this C.C. mark ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 "The Broad Arrow", page 82. Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 30 November , 2015 Author Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Ah. I really want that book but its insanely expensive every time I see it. Can't really complain given I got Skennertons British and Commonwealth bayonets book for next to nothing but still slightly irritating... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 "The Broad Arrow", page 82. Cheers, Tony Tony, Yes, I saw that. However Ian Skennerton specifically attributes that mark to a rifle's barrel, receiver or furniture not to a P1888's pommel. Skennerton had the opportunity to make reference to that mark and also list it in the appropriate section of ' The Broad Arrow ' dealing with known bayonet markings and yet he does not list it there ? Based solely on page 82, that does not confirm your pommel's mark. S.S. refers to several Skennerton references, so hopefully, we shall see some others to confirm your P1888's pommel marking. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Hi LF, Yes, that's why I said "I believe that is what it is". Actually when I was in the Cadets at school I don't remember that we were trusted with bayonets, don't know if there were any in the armoury or not! What would be interesting too would be to know the status of Cadet Force weapons. I guessed that they still belonged to the supervising regiment's inventory. If that were so, then why the 'Sold Out of Service' mark at all, unless things were different 100 years ago. Cheers, Tony P.S. Actually I have an interesting addition to this debate. Will post tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackGriffin1933 Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 I have corresponded with Ian Skennerton about this C><C marking and he says verbatim the "definition comes from Armourers Instructions" and "virtually any equipment related to County Cadets could justifiably be so marked". Bayonets and their pommels would fit the "virtually any equipment" category quite nicely. Jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 I have corresponded with Ian Skennerton about this C><C marking and he says verbatim the "definition comes from Armourers Instructions" and "virtually any equipment related to County Cadets could justifiably be so marked". Bayonets and their pommels would fit the "virtually any equipment" category quite nicely. Jack. Jack, I actually looked in Skennerton's List of Changes books to see if it was mentioned in any Instructions to Armourers. Ian Skennerton is extremely knowledgeable and reliable, so if you have that information directly from him, that sounds conclusive. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackGriffin1933 Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 if you have that information directly from him I do. He was quite brief about the matter, yet that is exactly what he said. Jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 I do. He was quite brief about the matter, yet that is exactly what he said. Jack. Jack, By the way, welcome to the Forum. Your getting confirmation of this marking directly from Ian Skennerton will hopefully answer any remaining questions, and to see the ' Instruction to Armourers ' regarding this marking to which he refers, would certainly be the icing on the cake. Perhaps, someone has a copy ? Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Well, guess what I found yesterday? Had to buy it bearing in mind this post!!! Very similar to my other example above. Quite early, October 1892, devoid of any re-issue (inspection) marks: Now to the marking, I think that this is Imperial Yeomanry Inverness-shire (also with reference to 'The Broad Arrow'!). If so it asks some more questions I do not know the answers for. Were all Yeomanry Regiments county based? The Yeomanry for Inverness-shire were the Lovat Scouts, but was equipment stamped to the county, in particular for the Imperial Yeomanry? And guess what's on the other side of the pommel: Well, isn't life funny!!!! Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 And this is on the rear of the Shropshire IY scabbard: Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 30 November , 2015 Share Posted 30 November , 2015 Very similar to my other example above. Quite early, October 1892, devoid of any re-issue (inspection) marks: Tony, A nice example of the stamping, and much clearer, also the first C<>C scabbard marking I have seen. Also, nice to have Jack confirm via Ian Skennerton that this mark was also used for bayonets. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 December , 2015 Share Posted 1 December , 2015 Been off working the past few days and so this is the first chance to catch up on things - and what an interesting discussion! Informative! Thanks one and all! ... Nice set of 're-issue' markings, including two "B" and one "BR" inspections on the ricasso, with another "BR" on the tang, all of which I assume to be Birmingham but do correct me if I am wrong. ... Is BR for 'Birmingham Repair'? I think I have seen that somewhere... Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 5 December , 2015 Share Posted 5 December , 2015 From post #178 † The underside and ends of the grips should be coated with “composition preserving arms” before assembling. Is this "composition, preserving, arms" described in another Instruction to Armourers ? Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Victorian Crown. 01 and 3 stamps. Broad Arrow. EnFielD? Stamp. Crown 85 E. X3 E. 16. Edge of blade. Crown 16 E. Crown 85 E. P? 9. Pommel. T. VV. S. R. 912. There are 3 pairs of teardrop marks. Ian Skennerton in "The British Service Lee" identifies them as Armourers Cancellation or Separation marks on SMLE's. Scabbard is numbered with a previous number struck out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Pommel and Scabbard marks. Side of blade with two service marks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Any help with the pommel marks would be welcomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Pommel marks. M. YK. RGA. I thought the RGA was obvious until I looked at " The British Service Lee" which suggests its Royal Guernsey Militia Artillery. Any ideas for the YK please? W⬆️D marked Scabbard also numbered and marked to 13 LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Pommel. T. VV. S. R. 912. There are 3 pairs of teardrop marks. Another not seen too often mark :- ' T / W. SR. ' for Territorial Force - The Queen's ( Royal West Surrey Regiment ). With 912 being the bayonet's serial number. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Stamps to Scabbard and blade. Small c on side of handle. ⬆️ CC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Sold stamp on the back of the pommel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 6 December , 2015 Share Posted 6 December , 2015 Pommel marks. M. YK. RGA. Another nice mark :- ' M / YK. RGA.' for Militia - Yorkshire Royal Garrison Artillery. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now