2 Victorian Lances

Jim McDougall · 22nd January 2012, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadaxe

My city, Haifa, was captured from the Ottoman turks at the end of WWI, 23th September 1918, by the 16th Indian cavalry brigade, Jodhpur & Mysore lancers. 1st photo is a very famous one, showing the Indian lancers as they march into Haifa via Jaffa Road, on that very day. 2nd photo shows Indian lancers somewhere else at the end of WWI - watch the cheering crowd - I think this is Tel-Aviv. 3rd photo shows British lancers on ceremonial guard in Haifa, probably 1920's. Last photo shows 2008 Australian lancers during the declaration of the Australian cavalry Park in Beersheba, captured from the Ottomans by ANZAC cavalry on 31st October, 1917.

Absolutely fantastic photos and info!!! Thank you for adding these, which add perfect dimension to our discussion on these

All the best,
Jim

katana · 23rd January 2012, 03:55 PM

Hi Broadaxe

,
thanks for the great images and info.

It seems that during the Victorian era there were only 4 lancer regiments ...

The 5th Royal Irish
The 12th (Prince of Wales's Royal )
The 17th
The 21st

All saw action in Africa ....and most of these units saw action in India.

As most of the armoury markings etc are quite rubbed ...I will have to try and decipher those that are legible. I do not think the T.P is a badly struck I.P (India Pattern) however, if this is the case...I have read that consignments of British manufactured lances were sent to India for the use of the British Units, that seem to have been later marked I.P . (The 'standard' Indian Pattern butt has a larger ball/doughnut that is different to the British )

The male bamboo shaft was also considered superior to the Ash shafts ....and Ash was only used with the 1868 pattern if there was a shortage of suitable bamboo.

So its out with the magnifying glass.....

Regards David

katana · 24th January 2012, 09:19 PM

As best as I can make out, the markings on the lances are..

LANCE 1

SHAFT

E (approx 5mm high)

crown
75
E

crown
71
E

BUTT

crown
06
E

crown
K (?)

05 (approx 5mm) 90 (approx 5mm)

4 (perhaps size number)

POINT

T.P. (approx 5mm )

'3'

crown
71
E

crown (possibly, badly rubbed)
14

LANCE 2

SHAFT

crown
75
E

crown
73
E

17 (17th Lancers ??)

BUTT too much patination to see any markings

POINT

T.P.

??? ' 27

??? could be SRN or SQN

Any suggestions as to the possible meanings of some of the markings gratefully received.....as is any other comments or information

Kind Regards David

katana · 8th February 2012, 03:16 PM

I recently contact the Lancer Museum requesting information on the various markings and they have kindly replied

"....... Thank you for your email. It seems to us that the '17' is a Regimental mark and would refer to the 17th Lancers. The small letters could be SQN and
refer to Squadron. '05' & '90' could be dates when repairs were undertaken.
'T.P.' could be TP for Troop and would be with a letter such as 'A' or 'B',
etc. ....."

Link to 17th Lancers ....... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_Lancers

It would seem that these Lances may have seen / been at several historical battles

Best
David

thinreadline · 8th February 2012, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katana

I recently contact the Lancer Museum requesting information on the various markings and they have kindly replied

"....... Thank you for your email. It seems to us that the '17' is a Regimental mark and would refer to the 17th Lancers. The small letters could be SQN and
refer to Squadron. '05' & '90' could be dates when repairs were undertaken.
'T.P.' could be TP for Troop and would be with a letter such as 'A' or 'B',
etc. ....."

Link to 17th Lancers ....... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_Lancers

It would seem that these Lances may have seen / been at several historical battles

Best
David

Hi there .. I hate to ruin the theory of the number between the Crown & E as being the date , but it is not. It is the Enfield Inspectors number . Each Inspector at Enfield had a personal number and when he was satisfied as to the serviceability of of piece of equipment , his number the plus crown & E ( for Enfield ) was stamped on it. It is possible to identify the names of the individual inspectors provided one has a date of manufacture of the item . British weapons of this period were always dated in the following fashion : '6/79' for June 1879 for example. Enfield Inspectors also checked equipment made by private contractors & forign manufacturers for Service use and indeed if the output was large enough would actually be based at the factory ... in this case although the Inspectors number would remain the same there would be no 'E' .. instead there would be another designated code letter for the factory eg 'B' BSA , 'X' London Small Arms, 'S' Solingen , 'L' Liege etc
Hope this helps .

katana · 11th February 2012, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thinreadline

Hi there .. I hate to ruin the theory of the number between the Crown & E as being the date , but it is not. It is the Enfield Inspectors number . Each Inspector at Enfield had a personal number and when he was satisfied as to the serviceability of of piece of equipment , his number the plus crown & E ( for Enfield ) was stamped on it. It is possible to identify the names of the individual inspectors provided one has a date of manufacture of the item . Hope this helps .

Thanks Richmond,
no other clear markings are legible

. However the fact that the "17" could indeed signify the 17th Lancers is

It seems that conclusive dates are going to be difficult.

Kind Regards David

PS sorry for the late reply.

thinreadline · 15th February 2012, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katana

Thanks Richmond,
no other clear markings are legible

. However the fact that the "17" could indeed signify the 17th Lancers is

It seems that conclusive dates are going to be difficult.

Kind Regards David

PS sorry for the late reply.

Hi David.. a really useful book to have re such markings is 'THE BROAD ARROW' by Ian Skennerton .. it deals comprehensively with markings on weapons from Britain & the Commonwealth .

Dmitry · 21st October 2017, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katana

It seems that during the Victorian era there were only 4 lancer regiments ...

The 5th Royal Irish
The 12th (Prince of Wales's Royal )
The 17th
The 21st

All saw action in Africa ....and most of these units saw action in India.

My guess is that they were deployed against poorly-armed and poorly-trained opponents for a reason. Why waste expensive ammunition and wear and tear of the firearms, when a lancer can pick as many running natives as he wishes?

I just bought a lot of three lances myself, haven't looked at them properly yet. This is a a useful thread.

Jim McDougall · 22nd October 2017, 12:10 AM

This is a fascinating topic and glad to see it back up!
Actually seeing the bit about the pennons purpose being for soaking up blood seems kind of like so many other 'explanations' for features on weapons in the eventual 'lore' that evolves.

Interesting that the source for this is said to come from RCMP history. I recall many years ago seeing one of their music parade events with laces drill...it was spectacular. These forces are in themselves most impressive and quite historically profound.
However it seems that they really never used the lance but for performances from c. 1870s and to notably impress American Indian tribes etc. They may have had some use in WWI, but while the unit was certainly there, unclear on how much use the lance had.

In my opinion, the 'blood' element may well have come from the long tradition of the British 16th Lancers, who fought Sikh forces at Aliwal in 1846. Apparently after the battle the pennons of the lances were so blood soaked and encrusted, that the regiment traditionally crimped their pennons 16 times, in remembrance of that terrible battle.

It seems that the Canadians adopted the crimping of the pennons as they took to use of the lance in 1870s and later Queen Victoria took exception to their use of that feature in the pennons. Perhaps there had been some earlier connection between the 16th and the 5th who later formed part of the Canadian brigade in WWI as they were amalgamated together in 1922.
Whatever the case, the blood soaked pennons of Aliwal may be the source of this notion.

In actuality, the pennon has been suggested as more regimentally symbolic and for parade type purposes than such matters. In WWI, the German lancers left their pennons off during battle.

Jim McDougall · 22nd October 2017, 03:00 AM

Continuing:
On the practical and physiological aspects of the lance.

These weapons, while psychologically terrifying in an advance formation of cavalry, their impact was quickly ended once in the melee. These were useless in the ensuing combat, and even to drop them and draw swords would put the rider in immediate vulnerability.
Because of the horrific wounding potential of the lance, these horsemen were despised and vehemently attacked, never receiving quarter.

They were cumbersome even in normal maneuvers, and could be dangerous to other riders in formation. During the Civil War, an attempt was made to duplicate European lancer regiments, I believe it was a Pennsylvania regt.
The results were horrendous, and the troopers were their own worst enemy.
I believe the idea was abandoned and the troops back to regular cavalry.

The idea of lances ended up with blood hampering their grip is no more likely than from a sword or any edged weapon. Lances had their grips about half way down the shaft, suggesting that their use was not as much a full length penetration thrust, but more of a jabbing action. The idea was not to impale a victim on the lance, obviously rendering the rider weaponless or unhorsing him....but to inflict lacerating wounds at key locations.

At San Pascual, in California during the Mexican-American war, the dragoon forces attacked by Mexican lancers often had as many as 13 or more wounds. Actually they were unable to load their guns in the darkness and place the caps, while the Mexican lancers simply chose their targets . They used jabbing thrusts so as not to lose their weapons.

The notion of the pennon causing mortal sepsis by its entry into the wound is a valid observation, but penetration of that depth and with that pennon now an obstruction in retraction from the wound, something that probably led to some cavalry removing them prior to combat.

I think one of the most notable instances of lore about lances is the one about Polish lancer units attacking German tanks with these in WWII. This was pure propaganda, and while the unit was a lancer named unit, and they did have swords, they did not attack the tanks, especially not with lances.
They did use swords as German's exited disabled or stopped tanks though.
German Wehrmacht also had cavalry using sabres.

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 23rd October 2017, 09:35 PM

Lancers were somewhat despised by their enemies since the wounds inflicted by the lance were so horrific...thus falling off ones horse in a melee was a very bad place to be...as no quarter was given.
Here is some artwork ~The black and white is Elandslaagt in the Boer War..and the other is Omdurman. The lance head and base are of the style made by Wilkinson.

kronckew · 23rd October 2017, 11:02 PM

the pennants were there not only to identify the regiment, but to prevent the over-penetration of the point, much like the cross bar on a boar spear. why they didn't just put a cross bar on them i do not know.

one of the last true cavalry charges, in early ww1, a group of british cavalry drew sabres & charged a group from a german uhlan, brits has swords, the germans had the steel lance. they were a new unit and apparently not well trained, they broke and ran, only being saved when the survivors managed to get behind a farmer's barbed wire fence that stopped the pursuing brits as the horses refused to jump it.

and the poles never charged tanks with their lances in ww2 as german propaganda suggested...they did successfully charge a complacent german encampment that hadn't posted proper sentries and did great damage to it, and retreated in good order when some armour turned up. their lances were back in HQ for parades, they used firearms (and sabres) and were used more as mounted infantry. there were just not enough of them, especially with no air cover, and the russians attacking from the other side to aid their german allies.

Dmitry · 3rd November 2017, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Lancers were somewhat despised by their enemies since the wounds inflicted by the lance were so horrific...thus falling off ones horse in a melee was a very bad place to be...as no quarter was given.

If this were the case, then the artillerymen would probably be drawn and quartered, when captured. I think you are repeating a myth.

23rd January 2012, 03:55 PM	#2
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	Hi Broadaxe , thanks for the great images and info. It seems that during the Victorian era there were only 4 lancer regiments ... The 5th Royal Irish The 12th (Prince of Wales's Royal ) The 17th The 21st All saw action in Africa ....and most of these units saw action in India. As most of the armoury markings etc are quite rubbed ...I will have to try and decipher those that are legible. I do not think the T.P is a badly struck I.P (India Pattern) however, if this is the case...I have read that consignments of British manufactured lances were sent to India for the use of the British Units, that seem to have been later marked I.P . (The 'standard' Indian Pattern butt has a larger ball/doughnut that is different to the British ) The male bamboo shaft was also considered superior to the Ash shafts ....and Ash was only used with the 1868 pattern if there was a shortage of suitable bamboo. So its out with the magnifying glass..... Regards David Attached Images

23rd October 2017, 09:35 PM	#11
Ibrahiim al Balooshi Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE Posts: 4,408	Lancers were somewhat despised by their enemies since the wounds inflicted by the lance were so horrific...thus falling off ones horse in a melee was a very bad place to be...as no quarter was given. Here is some artwork ~The black and white is Elandslaagt in the Boer War..and the other is Omdurman. The lance head and base are of the style made by Wilkinson. Attached Images Last edited by Ibrahiim al Balooshi; 23rd October 2017 at 10:23 PM.

24th January 2012, 09:19 PM	#3
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	As best as I can make out, the markings on the lances are.. LANCE 1 SHAFT E (approx 5mm high) crown 75 E crown 71 E BUTT crown 06 E crown K (?) 05 (approx 5mm) 90 (approx 5mm) 4 (perhaps size number) POINT T.P. (approx 5mm ) '3' crown 71 E crown (possibly, badly rubbed) 14 LANCE 2 SHAFT crown 75 E crown 73 E 17 (17th Lancers ??) BUTT too much patination to see any markings POINT T.P. ??? ' 27 ??? could be SRN or SQN Any suggestions as to the possible meanings of some of the markings gratefully received.....as is any other comments or information Kind Regards David

8th February 2012, 03:16 PM	#4
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	I recently contact the Lancer Museum requesting information on the various markings and they have kindly replied "....... Thank you for your email. It seems to us that the '17' is a Regimental mark and would refer to the 17th Lancers. The small letters could be SQN and refer to Squadron. '05' & '90' could be dates when repairs were undertaken. 'T.P.' could be TP for Troop and would be with a letter such as 'A' or 'B', etc. ....." Link to 17th Lancers ....... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_Lancers It would seem that these Lances may have seen / been at several historical battles Best David

22nd October 2017, 12:10 AM	#9
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	This is a fascinating topic and glad to see it back up! Actually seeing the bit about the pennons purpose being for soaking up blood seems kind of like so many other 'explanations' for features on weapons in the eventual 'lore' that evolves. Interesting that the source for this is said to come from RCMP history. I recall many years ago seeing one of their music parade events with laces drill...it was spectacular. These forces are in themselves most impressive and quite historically profound. However it seems that they really never used the lance but for performances from c. 1870s and to notably impress American Indian tribes etc. They may have had some use in WWI, but while the unit was certainly there, unclear on how much use the lance had. In my opinion, the 'blood' element may well have come from the long tradition of the British 16th Lancers, who fought Sikh forces at Aliwal in 1846. Apparently after the battle the pennons of the lances were so blood soaked and encrusted, that the regiment traditionally crimped their pennons 16 times, in remembrance of that terrible battle. It seems that the Canadians adopted the crimping of the pennons as they took to use of the lance in 1870s and later Queen Victoria took exception to their use of that feature in the pennons. Perhaps there had been some earlier connection between the 16th and the 5th who later formed part of the Canadian brigade in WWI as they were amalgamated together in 1922. Whatever the case, the blood soaked pennons of Aliwal may be the source of this notion. In actuality, the pennon has been suggested as more regimentally symbolic and for parade type purposes than such matters. In WWI, the German lancers left their pennons off during battle.

22nd October 2017, 03:00 AM	#10
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Continuing: On the practical and physiological aspects of the lance. These weapons, while psychologically terrifying in an advance formation of cavalry, their impact was quickly ended once in the melee. These were useless in the ensuing combat, and even to drop them and draw swords would put the rider in immediate vulnerability. Because of the horrific wounding potential of the lance, these horsemen were despised and vehemently attacked, never receiving quarter. They were cumbersome even in normal maneuvers, and could be dangerous to other riders in formation. During the Civil War, an attempt was made to duplicate European lancer regiments, I believe it was a Pennsylvania regt. The results were horrendous, and the troopers were their own worst enemy. I believe the idea was abandoned and the troops back to regular cavalry. The idea of lances ended up with blood hampering their grip is no more likely than from a sword or any edged weapon. Lances had their grips about half way down the shaft, suggesting that their use was not as much a full length penetration thrust, but more of a jabbing action. The idea was not to impale a victim on the lance, obviously rendering the rider weaponless or unhorsing him....but to inflict lacerating wounds at key locations. At San Pascual, in California during the Mexican-American war, the dragoon forces attacked by Mexican lancers often had as many as 13 or more wounds. Actually they were unable to load their guns in the darkness and place the caps, while the Mexican lancers simply chose their targets . They used jabbing thrusts so as not to lose their weapons. The notion of the pennon causing mortal sepsis by its entry into the wound is a valid observation, but penetration of that depth and with that pennon now an obstruction in retraction from the wound, something that probably led to some cavalry removing them prior to combat. I think one of the most notable instances of lore about lances is the one about Polish lancer units attacking German tanks with these in WWII. This was pure propaganda, and while the unit was a lancer named unit, and they did have swords, they did not attack the tanks, especially not with lances. They did use swords as German's exited disabled or stopped tanks though. German Wehrmacht also had cavalry using sabres.

23rd October 2017, 11:02 PM	#12
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,224	the pennants were there not only to identify the regiment, but to prevent the over-penetration of the point, much like the cross bar on a boar spear. why they didn't just put a cross bar on them i do not know. one of the last true cavalry charges, in early ww1, a group of british cavalry drew sabres & charged a group from a german uhlan, brits has swords, the germans had the steel lance. they were a new unit and apparently not well trained, they broke and ran, only being saved when the survivors managed to get behind a farmer's barbed wire fence that stopped the pursuing brits as the horses refused to jump it. and the poles never charged tanks with their lances in ww2 as german propaganda suggested...they did successfully charge a complacent german encampment that hadn't posted proper sentries and did great damage to it, and retreated in good order when some armour turned up. their lances were back in HQ for parades, they used firearms (and sabres) and were used more as mounted infantry. there were just not enough of them, especially with no air cover, and the russians attacking from the other side to aid their german allies.