HAL-9000 Posted 5 January , 2015 Share Posted 5 January , 2015 I've managed to get my hands on a French Chassepot bayonet with the original serial number ground off and german unit markings put on the quillon in their place. The markings read "117.L.I.4.106." and I have very little idea what those could mean or how to read them, but would like to see just how much of the history behind this sword I can learn. I can provide pictures if you would like, and any help is greatly appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 5 January , 2015 Share Posted 5 January , 2015 Hi HAL-9000, The mark stands for: Landwehr-Infanterie-Regiment 117, Bataillon I, Kompagnie 4, Waffe Nr. 106. The battalion number should be a Roman 1 if you look carefully. Most of these captured Chassepots ended up with the Landwehr. Is there any sign at all of the French manufacturing arsenal on the back of the blade, or is it thoroughly ground off? Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 5 January , 2015 Share Posted 5 January , 2015 Put the below in Google Translate: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanterie-Leib-Regiment_„Großherzogin“_(3._Großherzoglich_Hessisches)_Nr._117 I'm no expert on German units, and I'm sure someone else will comment, but I assume the Landwehr battalion relates to the regular one re regiment number. This gives the organisation of the German Army: http://www.worldwar1.com/sfgarmy.htm Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAL-9000 Posted 6 January , 2015 Author Share Posted 6 January , 2015 Thanks Tony! To answer your question, yes the french markings are still there, I didn't include that because I didn't think it would help. They read: [odd scribble I can't read, maybe N something?] Imp"ale De Chat"t - 7"bre 1867. Do you think there's any way I could track down more specific information than Company and Weapon Number? Ideally I'd like to be able to tell anyone I show her off to exactly who owned her and which, if any, battle they died in. Thanks again,-James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N White Posted 6 January , 2015 Share Posted 6 January , 2015 Your bayonet was manufactured at the imperial French arsenal of Chatellerault, in September of 1867. Given that this bayonet was manufactured prior to the Franco-Prussian war, it (given the French defeat in that war) likely fell into German hands then, rather than later. Someone else may be able to tell you when the unit marks date to. Tracing it to an individual soldier is likely impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAL-9000 Posted 6 January , 2015 Author Share Posted 6 January , 2015 Tracing it to an individual soldier is likely impossible. I had kinda figured, but thank you for the manufacture information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 6 January , 2015 Share Posted 6 January , 2015 Sounds like a nice bayonet! Any chance of a photograph of the markings - French and German? Speaking from memory, the German markings are likely to have been added close to or at the start of the GW. Many of these bayonets were adapted or sent out as is to Landwehr units at the start of WW1 - I have summarised some of the evidence as reported in German sources in: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=219748 posts no. 3 and 16. I have done a quick check of German sources but can't find anything there on the (Hessisches) Landwehr-Infanterie-Regiment 117, although I did quickly find stuff on two other Hessian Landwehr units - the Hessisches Landwehr-Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 116 and the Hessisches Landwehr-Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 118. One other thing - has the bayonet mortice slot area been adapted in anyway to fit a German rifle? Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAL-9000 Posted 29 January , 2015 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2015 Hello! sorry I took so long in getting back. I've tried several times in getting pictures of the markings, but so far my camera is not cooperating with me. I will give it another go in a couple days when I don't have school and can try using natural light. Hopefully I'll get a more clear shot with that. As for the mortice slot I honestly have no idea what it would look like if it had been modified, I will add a picture of that as well. Oh, and I warn you now, this bayonet is not a beautiful rusty relic in perfect antique condition, it is relatively shiny and clean. Yes I know this has effectively devalued it into nothingness, and I'm sorry to anyone who is horribly offended by the functional condition of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2015 Share Posted 29 January , 2015 ... As for the mortice slot I honestly have no idea what it would look like if it had been modified, I will add a picture of that as well. Oh, and I warn you now, this bayonet is not a beautiful rusty relic in perfect antique condition, it is relatively shiny and clean. Yes I know this has effectively devalued it into nothingness, and I'm sorry to anyone who is horribly offended by the functional condition of it. There should be a photograph somewhere of one of these but I don't have time to search right now - course registrations start today... But I think Nwhite has one? Don't worry about the condition! Sometimes they come in like that, and nice when they do, other times they come in well-used and uncared for and we just have to accept that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2015 Share Posted 29 January , 2015 Aha! Found this lovely photograph which will help you - reproduced for reference from JPS's wonderful site at: http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?166857-German-WWI-issue-Bayonets&highlight=chassepot+bayonet The top one is a regular Chassepot; the next three have all been adapted by having the head of the pommel and the top of the mortise slot cut down to fit German rifles. The middle two were adapted to fit the Gew. 71 and 71/84; the bottom one to fit these and also the Gew. 88 Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAL-9000 Posted 31 January , 2015 Author Share Posted 31 January , 2015 So it appears, using the picture you were so nice to supply me with, that mine is unmodified. Makes sense really, my hand is at the far edge of too large to hold it comfortably so I'm not really sure if anyone intending to use it would want it cut down. Also I couldn't get a picture of the writing on the spine of the blade or any better pictures of the small marks, my camera doesn't like to take pictures of anything close than about 2 feet away, but I did get this almost non-potato picture of the german markings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 February , 2015 Share Posted 1 February , 2015 The photograph is fine, and now one can see the marking it raises a question! In my limited experience but also according to the books and notes I have the usual way of marking a Landwehr bayonet would be 'xxx L.R.x.xxx' for '(unit number) Landwehr(-Infanterie)-Regiment (company number).(weapon number)'. So you are missing an 'R' if it is a regiment - and in any case I can't find a L.R.117 in the usual sources, although there is a Landwehr Regiment 118... Nor can I find any other Landwehr marking that quite matches yours except - for a rifle marking '76.LII.4.50' which has been interpreted along the lines of 'Landwehr(-Battaillon Zweites Hanseatisches Landwehr-Regiment) II (Bataillon) 76, 4 Kompagnie, Gewehr 50)... Perhaps yours is something similar, with the Roman 'I' after the 'L' indicating an Erstes Bataillon? So 'Landwehr(-Battaillon ??? Landwehr-Regiment) II (Bataillon) 117, 4 Kompagnie, Waffe 116? Whatever, it is certainly an odd marking! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 February , 2015 Share Posted 1 February , 2015 Well, as luck would have it... This morning I found a really battered S71 at the local antika pazari... The price was reasonable for me as although the crossguard is pretty far gone (I can just make out a number or two), they are: not that common over here; and it is a rare maker (COULAUX AND CO); and best of all, it still had a double-regimentally-marked locket in place, one set of marks crossed out and another set inscribed higher up. Well, Sundays are Sundays, as anyone with young kids will know... and so it was only just now, 8 hours after buying it, that I had a chance to look at that locket... I'll be posting it properly with a photograph on 'unit marks', but the first crossed-out marks are: '26.L.I.4.185'... So, the same format as your's HAL 9000... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 February , 2015 Share Posted 1 February , 2015 ... I couldn't get a picture of the writing on the spine of the blade or any better pictures of the small marks, my camera doesn't like to take pictures of anything close than about 2 feet away, but I did get this almost non-potato picture of the german markings. ... Nor can I find any other Landwehr marking that quite matches yours except - for a rifle marking '76.LII.4.50' which has been interpreted along the lines of 'Landwehr(-Battaillon Zweites Hanseatisches Landwehr-Regiment) II (Bataillon) 76, 4 Kompagnie, Gewehr 50)... Perhaps yours is something similar, with the Roman 'I' after the 'L' indicating an Erstes Bataillon? So 'Landwehr(-Battaillon ??? Landwehr-Regiment) II (Bataillon) 117, 4 Kompagnie, Waffe 116? Whatever, it is certainly an odd marking! Well, as luck would have it... the first crossed-out marks are: '26.L.I.4.185'... So, the same format as your's HAL 9000... Here's a couple of quick photographs of that locket to be going on with - perhaps the crossed-out mark '26.L.I.1.185'? I need sometime with this and when I get a chance I'll discuss more on the German Unit Bayonet Markings threadat: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=208575&page=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 1 February , 2015 Share Posted 1 February , 2015 Here's a couple of quick photographs of that locket to be going on with... With the especially rare "ersatz" scabbard, introduced in 1916 to save on leather... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAL-9000 Posted 2 February , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 February , 2015 Here's a couple of quick photographs of that locket to be going on with On the one hand it's a really cool find and quite interesting looking, on the other hand, as someone who likes to actually use swords, the state of it makes me cringe. But really, sweet find and thanks for all your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 February , 2015 Share Posted 2 February , 2015 With the especially rare "ersatz" scabbard, introduced in 1916 to save on leather... That's right - ... Nor can I find any other Landwehr marking that quite matches yours except - for a rifle marking '76.LII.4.50' which has been interpreted along the lines of 'Landwehr(-Battaillon Zweites Hanseatisches Landwehr-Regiment) II (Bataillon) 76, 4 Kompagnie, Gewehr 50)... Perhaps yours is something similar, with the Roman 'I' after the 'L' indicating an Erstes Bataillon? So 'Landwehr(-Battaillon ??? Landwehr-Regiment) II (Bataillon) 117, 4 Kompagnie, Waffe 116? Whatever, it is certainly an odd marking! I think I have solved the problem... I am now in my office where I checked with my copy of the 1877 Vorschrift über das Bezeichnen und Numerieren and on p. 51-52 it indicates that the Roman numeral after the 'L' does indicate the battalion number of the respective Landwehr regiment. And so your '117.L.I.4.106' indicates 117.L(andwehr-Regiment).I(Bataillon).4(Kompagnie).(Waffe)106., and my '26.L.I.1.185' is 26.L(andwehr-Regiment).I(Bataillon).1(Kompagnie).(Waffe)185. Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 February , 2015 Share Posted 2 February , 2015 On the one hand it's a really cool find and quite interesting looking, on the other hand, as someone who likes to actually use swords, the state of it makes me cringe. But really, sweet find and thanks for all your help! Yes, well, this is NOT the worse case I have seen in Turkey... The blade on this is fine, as is the brass handle (although the catch is stuck), but there is not a lot that can be done about that muzzle-ring... Unless I dismantle this one and a companion piece that has a bad blade, and 'marry' the parts together - but I don't think that would be easy, even if possible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 2 February , 2015 Share Posted 2 February , 2015 Yes, as per my Post 2! The standard Landwehr marked bayonet has a Roman 1 or 2 (separated by a dot from the L) signifying either the first or second battalion. But are these 2 below from the same era of markings? Trajan's extract above shows how the Franco-Prussian War captured 1866's were marked according to those 1877 regs, but the 2 below are R.L., and presumably with the form of the R meaning Reserve Landwehr. Notice that there seems to be no battalion, just a company number. So are these also according to those 1877 regs, or later? Did that mean that there was a Reserve Landwehr to feed the 2 Landwehr battalions??? Cheers, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 February , 2015 Share Posted 3 February , 2015 Yes, as per my Post 2! The standard Landwehr marked bayonet has a Roman 1 or 2 (separated by a dot from the L) signifying either the first or second battalion. But are these 2 below from the same era of markings? Trajan's extract above shows how the Franco-Prussian War captured 1866's were marked according to those 1877 regs, but the 2 below are R.L., and presumably with the form of the R meaning Reserve Landwehr. Notice that there seems to be no battalion, just a company number. So are these also according to those 1877 regs, or later? Did that mean that there was a Reserve Landwehr to feed the 2 Landwehr battalions??? Whoops, sorry Tony! But if nowt else, we can at least say for certain that the 1877 regulations do confirm that marking! Funnily enough, though, all of the examples that the 1877 regulations give for regular Landwehr markings refer to a 2nd batallion and they give no example of a first batallion marking... Now to look at and explain these two of yours by way of fulsome apology... And what do we find on p. 55 of the 1877 regulations, this - "35.R.L.I.resp II. III.IV.4.50" - "Landwehr-Bataillon Berlin resp. II., III, IV (Reserve-Landwehr-Regiment Nr. 35) 4 Kompagnie, Gewehr Nr.50" And the next entry is: "38.R.L.III.4.50" - "Landwehr-Bataillon Breslau III (Reserve-Landwehr-Regiment Nr. 38) u(nd)s(o)w(eiter)". These are not quite what you have got - but although in all honesty I know very little about the organisation of the Landwehr, these seem to confirm your interpretation - there were Reserve Landwehr Regiments! However, unfortunately, I only have a part of the 1909 regulations with me right now, and so I'll have to check later to see if these include this or your type of marking and unit - but if these are unmodified Chassepots I would think that these are early rather than later markings. Remember always, though, that there is enough evidence to show that a fair few markings were in effect made up on the spot as they do not feature in the official regulations... Best, Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 4 February , 2015 Share Posted 4 February , 2015 Trajan's extract above shows how the Franco-Prussian War captured 1866's were marked according to those 1877 regs, but the 2 below are R.L., and presumably with the form of the R meaning Reserve Landwehr. Notice that there seems to be no battalion, just a company number. So are these also according to those 1877 regs, or later? Did that mean that there was a Reserve Landwehr to feed the 2 Landwehr battalions??? Found something else that might tie in while munching breakfast... The 1909 regulations, p. 23, section VIII, Train - "R.L.2.8" - "Reserve-Feldlazarett nr.2", Waffe 8... I'll try to have another search of both regulations later to see if I have repeatedly missed an exact match... Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seaforth78 Posted 4 February , 2015 Share Posted 4 February , 2015 Trajan, Far from what I know about bayonets as you know I am a sword collector, but since you are in Turkey, have any excavations of the Gallipoli battlefield taken place and if so, have they yielded any bayonets? In our own Civil War battlefields in PA and VA a lot has continued to turn up, quite a few surprising results here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 4 February , 2015 Share Posted 4 February , 2015 Trajan, Far from what I know about bayonets as you know I am a sword collector, but since you are in Turkey, have any excavations of the Gallipoli battlefield taken place and if so, have they yielded any bayonets? In our own Civil War battlefields in PA and VA a lot has continued to turn up, quite a few surprising results here. To the best of my knowledge there has been no official excavation at Gallipoli / Cannakale, but there is certainly a wealth of old rusted material - bayonets and the like - that turns up at the Antika Pazari that is allegedly from the site. There is also a shoe shop(!) in a local mall that displays a lot of similar material, but also rifle clips with bullets still in them, shell fuzes, etc., that is likewise allegedly from the site but I have my doubts on some of it. TTFN, Trajan PS: And I see the great move has taken place! Enjoy the sushi! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogilwy Posted 4 February , 2015 Share Posted 4 February , 2015 Trajan, Hi mate, wasn't there an evaluation done within the last couple of years? I seem to remember reading an archaeological report, (possibly from the Aussies) on the state of preservation of the location. Rod P.S. I may be over your neck of the woods this year so will speak when I can confirm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msdt Posted 4 February , 2015 Share Posted 4 February , 2015 Hi Trajan, I think Reserve Landwehr under the 1877 regs more likely - 40. R.L.4.166 seems like too many weapons for a field hospital!!! I guess more knowledge of how the Reserve Landwehr worked would settle it. Cheers, Tony 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