shippingsteel Posted 14 August , 2012 Author Share Posted 14 August , 2012 Your bayonet is a Turkish M1887 which was made in 1306 (roughly 1888) by Weyersberg, Kirschbaum & Cie of Solingen, Germany. The toughra is that of Sultan Abdulhamid II, while the other markings are inspection marks that were applied during the manufacture. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepcutMark Posted 14 August , 2012 Share Posted 14 August , 2012 Awesome. Thanks very much indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 14 August , 2012 Share Posted 14 August , 2012 I'd add that the bayonet is in pretty good nick - in particular the markings are lovely and crisp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepcutMark Posted 14 August , 2012 Share Posted 14 August , 2012 I'd add that the bayonet is in pretty good nick - in particular the markings are lovely and crisp. Yeah, it does look OK, is there anything she should be doing to care for it? Should it cleaned (and if so, does anyone have any tips) or is better to leave it as is? Next task is to find out more about a ceremonial sword from the 14th Durham LI. Not sure what more we can research beyond the person who owned it, and we know who he is (he has a wiki page too, which is nice) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 10 March , 2014 Share Posted 10 March , 2014 A bit behind on this thread, I know, shocking! But this is a nice bayonet and the scabbards are pretty hard to come by! For every one I see with a scabbard over here I will see five of more scabbardless bayonets - and that's in Turkey - although in theory, I suppose, there are probably more scabbards outside Turkey (as they will be kept as take home souvenirs). Is the leather still flexible? Might need some TLC with saddle-butter or whatever it is called in the UK. Don't think you need to do anything to the bayonet, beyond light oiling of the blade. They are really beautiful crisp marks - is there a number in (real!) Arabic (actually Persian!!) numerals on the crossguard? Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 May , 2014 Share Posted 24 May , 2014 I am very behind with posts here and need to cross-post and update the Ottoman markings and the German unit markings thread as well, but I thought I'd put this one up to share with you as it might be coming my way. Relatively common type, maker not so common, and scabbard is bent and looks a bit shrunken, but even so it is quite nice and tempting! PS: Sawdoc, busy as h**l but will reply to your mssgs soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 16 June , 2014 Share Posted 16 June , 2014 Another M.1887 recently acquired. No time to do anything so it is as acquired. In my ignorance I thought that the maker was Alex Coppel et Cie, but recent research by S<S seems to suggest that it was actually C.G. Haenel et Cie of Suhl. The date is 1890. The original order was for 500,000 of these bayonets but due to the introduction of a 7.65 mm smokeless round the order was stopped after about 220,000 had been delivered, and the design modified for the new rifles, becoming the M.1890. Quite a nice example tho'. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 16 June , 2014 Share Posted 16 June , 2014 A close-up showing the maker's markings. SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 19 June , 2014 Share Posted 19 June , 2014 S<S. Thanks for your information - never could read those Arabic figures despite having spent time in Egypt, Aden, Bahrein, and the Trucial Oman, So, 1888 is the corrected date. I have another which will interest you I think ; a P.1888 with unusual markings. I'ii put it up shortly. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 19 June , 2014 Author Share Posted 19 June , 2014 No problems SW. Actually you read the figures correctly as being 1306 ... it then comes down to how we/they then converted that Ottoman date into our Western calendar (or vice versa.!) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 4 July , 2014 Share Posted 4 July , 2014 Another M.1887 recently acquired. No time to do anything so it is as acquired. In my ignorance I thought that the maker was Alex Coppel et Cie, but recent research by S<S seems to suggest that it was actually C.G. Haenel et Cie of Suhl. The date is 1890. The original order was for 500,000 of these bayonets but due to the introduction of a 7.65 mm smokeless round the order was stopped after about 220,000 had been delivered, and the design modified for the new rifles, becoming the M.1890. Quite a nice example tho'. - SW Well, if that is as acquired, a very nice find! Much cleaner that what I see here, and the scabbard in so much better condition also! A nice find! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 17 July , 2014 Share Posted 17 July , 2014 Hi, Got this 1903 yesterday. I think it's Weyersberg. Do you add 582 or 584 to get the Western date? Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 17 July , 2014 Author Share Posted 17 July , 2014 Yes WKC. To roughly convert from the Islamic Calendar to our Gregorian Calendar, you add 582 to the date ... so 1321 + 582 = 1903 Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 18 July , 2014 Share Posted 18 July , 2014 Nice one Tony! As you probably know from SS's earlier posts, Weyersburg are the most prolific in terms of surviving and reported examples, but any example of these is nice to have as they are fine looking pieces! So nice that (despite protestations from my good lady wife) I can't stop myself from buying one when I see one - well, I can when the price is way over the top, or, like one I saw last week, an unusual maker (guess who!) for only GBP 100, but with the Osmanli inscriptions scrubbed off the pommel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 19 July , 2014 Share Posted 19 July , 2014 Thanks guys. Yes, the 1903 is a seriously pointy thing! Especially when it comes with no scabbard. Only have this and the equally scabbardless 1890 one so far. This is the first 1903 I've seen for sale in the flesh at the fairs I go to. Look forward to my first scabbard - at the right price of course! Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 19 July , 2014 Share Posted 19 July , 2014 Yes, scabbards are a problem for these... Last 1903 bayonet I nearly bought was with a chapeless scabbard, and badly sewn up along the back... The bayonet was in bad nick, otherwise I would have bought it regardless ... I have been advised, though, that the bloke in the US of A who makes replica frogs does scabbards also... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 21 July , 2014 Share Posted 21 July , 2014 Yes WKC. To roughly convert from the Islamic Calendar to our Gregorian Calendar, you add 582 to the date ... so 1321 + 582 = 1903 Cheers, S>S SS, you may have explained this somewhere, but if so, I couldn't find it using a quick search, but any idea why these bayonets were dated according to the Hijri, or religious, calendar (and so a 582 year difference by 1903) and not according to the Rumi or official civil calendar, adopted for commercial purposes for trade, etc., with Christian countries in 1840 (which result in a constant 584 year difference until it was dropped in 1917). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 21 January , 2015 Share Posted 21 January , 2015 In the process of checking what's on GWF while revising the entries for my Turkish 1887 collection brought these posts up: J.P. Sauer & Sohn,(Post 5) Made M.1887 and M.1890 bayonets, not sure about anything later. S.W. Yes my apologies SW, I did take note of your earlier suggestion regarding JP Sauer & Son for #5, however I have not been able to find another reference anywhere that can confirm this. Try 'German Bayonets', by Anthony Carter, 1992, Vol. III, Page 300 should answer all your questions. - SW So, I checked - and what Carter actually says is "not enough research has been carried out to state whether the other firms, V C Shilling and J P Sauer and Sohn who made the M 1890, also produced the M 1887". I have examples of WKC and Simson M.1887's, and I have seen a Coppel 1887 that was in such bad condition I wouldn't pay the asking price, but too date I have not come across either a Schilling or a Sauer M.1887 - SS? Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 21 January , 2015 Author Share Posted 21 January , 2015 I would be interested in seeing a photo of the ricasso markings on your Simson M1887.? The more commonly seen makers are WKC and Alex Coppel. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 21 January , 2015 Share Posted 21 January , 2015 Well, it looks like a Simson to me and it is an 1887, so here you go! Mind you, it is only the second I have seen here, but against that I have only ever seen one Coppel... Now, do you know of any reported examples of Schilling or Sauer 1887's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 21 January , 2015 Author Share Posted 21 January , 2015 I have seen examples of the M1887 made by Schilling, but never any made by JP Sauer. Thanks for the photo, it certainly is a Simson (and relatively scarce) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 21 January , 2015 Share Posted 21 January , 2015 I have seen examples of the M1887 made by Schilling, but never any made by JP Sauer. Thanks for the photo, it certainly is a Simson (and relatively scarce) Cheers, S>S Thanks for that update SS! Rats... I was hoping that I was only missing a Coppel but I'll keep my eyes peeled back for a Schilling.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 21 January , 2015 Share Posted 21 January , 2015 Here just for the sake of completeness are a general view of that Simson 1887 and a detail of the tughra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 March , 2015 Share Posted 25 March , 2015 Time for an update on my 1887 collection, now that I have the fourth of the five makers... I guess that the gods (both regular and the bayonet sub-section) must be smiling at me in recognition of my sacrifice in turning down that HQ Lithgow, as there are choices of bayonets a plenty coming my way these days, the Simson being one of those ... Just wish the cash-flow gods would put in a word in my favour... Anyway, I'd like to share with you just the four by the four different makers so far from my 'pile of 1887's'. As you can see, scabbards are variable (there are more M1903 examples of these around than M.1887 or M.1890): the third one down needs a frog-stud, but a conservator assures me, it can be encouraged back into shape by a humidity treatment, while the fourth one, well, all I have is the locket and chape! (the second scabbard down by the way, came with a P.1907 HQ... ). Now, when and where will that missing Coppel example turn up? And please SS, do share with us your semi-mythical data base on these Turkish bayonets so that we can all get an insight into years of manufacture, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 26 March , 2015 Author Share Posted 26 March , 2015 Now, when and where will that missing Coppel example turn up? Well I know that I have at least one of them.! See THIS thread (post #11) the only reason I bought such a roughy was because they are a bit scarce.! That is the advantage of collecting information, when you see something you have an edge because you know more about it than others might. If you want to know about the years of manufacture, you just need to look on the ricasso and translate those Arabic numbers - easy enough to do ... PS. Try this http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=222253&page=1 Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts