Bayonets with a possible Gallipoli pedigree

[trajan]

Seeing as the centenary of this major event is upon us I though it might be of interest if we on GWF shared examples of bayonets with a Gallipoli pedigree, that is to say, examples that were, or probably were, used in that campaign,

The obvious criteria for inclusion here are fairly straightforward: a family item with the history and appropriate record.

That said, I have collected bayonets bought over here in Turkey that are reasonably certain to have a Gallipoli pedigree, and I will be showing some of these. My arguments for their Gallipoli pedigree is based on these being of the appropriate date and having markings of units attested at Gallipoli - and having been found here in Turkey. After all, to the best of my knowledge Turkey was never supplied with any GB rifles or bayonets at any time in its history, and so examples of these found over here (including the Enfauser and its bayonet) are more than likely to be GW captures - and if the dates and unit markings match, then a more than 50% chance that they are Gallipoli captures...

I'll start the ball rolling with what is probably not my best example and the one with least good ranking, a P.1888 I bought a couple of years back.

A 'Wilkinson London', 12/92, Mk.1 2nd type, and pommel marked '7 MAN' over serial number '714'. Well, as I understand it, the 7th Manchesters' landed at Gallipoli 6th May 1915, and were formed into the 127th Brigade, 42nd (East Lancashire) Division on 26th May 1915, before being evacuated 28th December 1915. They then went to Egypt, so this could have been lost there, which is why this is a rather iffy example, only just making the 50% probability threshold...

Trajan

[jscott]

Nice idea for a thread Trajan, and nicely marked P88. I own a number of bayonets that were potentially used at Gallipoli - including P88s marked to the 5KOSB and 8 Scottish rifles who both fought at Gully Ravine and to the 7 Cheshires who fought at Suvla. I also have 4 pre-ww1 marked Australian P07s marked to NSW and QLD. However none of these are certainties and they definitely don't have any family history (mores the pity).

I look forward to seeing the rest of your Turkish sourced examples.

Cheers, J

[trajan]

Nice idea for a thread Trajan, and nicely marked P88. I own a number of bayonets that were potentially used at Gallipoli - including P88s marked to the 5KOSB and 8 Scottish rifles who both fought at Gully Ravine and to the 7 Cheshires who fought at Suvla. I also have 4 pre-ww1 marked Australian P07s marked to NSW and QLD. However none of these are certainties and they definitely don't have any family history (mores the pity).

Oh I think they would qualify - perhaps on the border-line, but if right date and right unit, that's close enough!

I'll get some of my 'newer' acquisitions up first, then go back to some of the 'older' ones later...

[trajan]

This P.1907 03/11 was one that Lancashire Fusilier and NWhite decoded for me - thanks again!

It is very much a borderline one in that it is marked to the 3rd Leinster Regiment (Royal Canadians), and the LLTrail shows the 3rd (Reserve) Battalion as a home based unit - "moved on mobilisation to Cork, going on in November 1917 to Portsmouth as part of the Portsmouth garrison. Absorbed 4th and 5th Bns in May 1918."

But what is the most likely (but not only) explanation for a not especially finest of the fine bayonet from the 3/Leinster's to end up in Turkey? Capture, methinks... So, possibilities of it being an Ottoman soldier's pick-up are (from LLT):

1) Came to Gallipoli with the 6th (Service) Battalion - landed Anzac Cove 5 August 1915, left 29 September 1915 via Mudros to Salonika;

2) Or, same Batt., got to Egypt for service in Palestine, 14 September 1917

3) Or, got to Egypt with 1st Batt., for service in Palestine, 14 September 1917.

Of course, this one could have come here post GW, or even very recently - except that it is not the nicest of examples (bad corrosion/erosion on the blade [which some would say - "Bloodstains!"] and pommel), which makes me doubt that it is a recent arrival - e.g., a dealer.

So, a borderline one indeed... Here it is -

Trajan

[shippingsteel]

After all, to the best of my knowledge Turkey was never supplied with any GB rifles or bayonets at any time in its history, and so examples of these found over here (including the Enfauser and its bayonet) are more than likely to be GW captures ...

This assumption is not actually correct, as Turkey did purchase a lot of post-war surplus rifles, including large numbers of British SMLE rifles and P1907 bayonets.

Examples of these are often seen with Turkish markings applied, and usually posted on auction sites complete with the tag of being "Gallipoli captured" weapons.!

The only way to ascertain where they came from is to check the dates of manufacture on them. "Gallipoli possibles" do exist, but most are late to post-war dated ...

PS. From memory Sawdoc posted a photo of one of his examples on the 'Obsvs. of Bayonets' thread. I recall it was a Turkish shortened/cutdown but dated 1918.

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Here you go...

and some closeups of the markings

[trajan]

This assumption is not actually correct, as Turkey did purchase a lot of post-war surplus rifles, including large numbers of British SMLE rifles and P1907 bayonets. ... [stress added]

Yes, I remember reading that somewhere, but I have never found a reliable source to confirm it - none of the Enfield sites I have checked mention it, never mind provide a source, and so I would love to know if 'proof' does exist! Personally, I do wonder if this might just be another case of 'received opinion' - like the belief derived from Carter's expressed opinion that Ersatz bayonets were predominately used by Bekleidungsamt and other REMF units: hardly, as 40%+ of those that are unit-assignable are in service with regular units, and if you include the ersatz units - which were in many cases front-line guys - then (guessing, don't have figures to hand in the 'pub'!) we are probably up to 75%! And why on earth would GB be supplying rifles and bayonets to Turkey between 1918-1935 - i.e., before the Kirikale concern was up and running? I am naturally familiar with the 'Enfauser' rifle, but the P.07 bayonets to fit these have the suitably altered crossguard, and as far as I am aware only have dates going up to 1918, and so could be Palestine/Syria captures from towards the end of that campaign - the rifles presumably being so also?

Anyway, that excursus apart, let's get back OT and back to bayonets with potential Gallipoli pedigree found in Turkey! Well, the 3/Leinster example I posted could be a late capture - as I indicated. It is really a very borderline example...

But I do doubt that my HQ P.1907's bought in Turkey and marked to units that were at Gallipoli are going to be later captures or 'supplied by GB to Turkey' - HQ intact? And another thing to bear in mind here is that almost all the bayonets used by the Ottoman and Republican Turkish army that I have seen are serial-numbered... Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule, but even though it is a grey cloudy day here, with snow threatening, I will take the positive view - that the 3/Leinster example is a capture, and as likely to be Gallipoli as anywhere else!

Trajan

[trajan]

Here you go...

And very nice too! I just love those P. 1888's! Thanks you for showing them!

I am not familiar with the histories of the individual units represented there in your assortment but with my Manchester one, I have seen a photograph of them using the P1888 in early GW period, which is why I think mine is a contender. Might be nice to discover if your units were up-to-date with weaponry in 1914/15? May not be possible... The German unit histories do tend to record that kind of detail, what rifles came when, but not, apparently, the GB and Commonwealth ones...

Trajan

[4thGordons]

Question: Is there a list of the units at Gallipoli that were armed with the MLE/CLLE and therefore using the P1888?

If not I think it would be worthwhile compiling.

I know from photo evidence that there were several units there that were so armed but the prevalence of P'88s in this discussion as "contenders" would seem to imply that the numbers of units so equipped was higher than I would have expected in an expeditionary force in 1915.

I suppose what I am suggesting is because there is a P'88 bayonet marked to a unit known to have served at Gallipoli the evidence of real "Gallipoli pedigree" would be significantly improved if it were known they actually used MLE/CLLE in the Dardanelles rather than making that assumption based on unit markings which could have been applied at almost any point in the previous 15 or so years when almost every unit would have been armed with the MLE at some point.

The issue with 1907s is less complex but knowing which units were so armed would add an additional layer of supporting "evidence"

Chris

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Here is my contender for a bayonet with a good possible ' Galliipoli ' connection, an Enfield made Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet with the Hooked Quillon still attached and dated September 1911, with an Australian Service marked stamped on the pommel.

Regards,

LF

2

3

[Lancashire Fusilier]

The Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet with the Australian Service mark is shown second from the right.

LF

[trajan]

Question: Is there a list of the units at Gallipoli that were armed with the MLE/CLLE and therefore using the P1888?... If not I think it would be worthwhile compiling. ... I suppose what I am suggesting is because there is a P'88 bayonet marked to a unit known to have served at Gallipoli the evidence of real "Gallipoli pedigree" would be significantly improved if it were known they actually used MLE/CLLE in the Dardanelles rather than making that assumption based on unit markings which could have been applied at almost any point in the previous 15 or so years when almost every unit would have been armed with the MLE at some point.

There indeed is the rub... From what very little I know probably no listing at all and so yes, one of those 'known unknowns' I suppose. I do take the point, though - any P.1888 (or for that matter a P.1903) with the 'right marking' is suspect. Like I said, it is a 'balance of probabilities' thing - but always that nagging thought: 'Why is THIS in Turkey?'. That said, in my own case I am certainly happier about probability with the appropriately-marked HQ P.07's over the HQR P.07's, and so in turn over the others.

Here is my contender for a bayonet with a good possible ' Galliipoli ' connection, an Enfield made Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet with the Hooked Quillon still attached and dated September 1911, with an Australian Service marked stamped on the pommel.

And a very nice example to boot! I do like the way that '9' is done - fair bit of an individualistic flourish there!

[jscott]

Morning all

Super hookie there LF, thanks for posting it. And yes I would be very interested to see a list (if there is one) of units using the MLE/CLLE during 1915. I did some research of photos taken at Gallipoli to see if I could ascertain how common the P88 bayonet was there, and managed to find quite a number of photos showing it in use (including by the KOSB at Helles). I will see if I can dig some of these photos up in postable format. If anyone else has any such photos I would love to see them.

And Trajan, for the purposes of this thread you are certainly at an advantage having acquired your bayonets in Turkey, although for bayonets acquired outside of Turkey I would actually think that a HQR would be a more likely contender for Gallipoli service (but agree a pre-war dated hookie found in Istanbul is a "probably" rather than "possible"!)

Cheers, J

[trajan]

And Trajan, for the purposes of this thread you are certainly at an advantage having acquired your bayonets in Turkey, although for bayonets acquired outside of Turkey I would actually think that a HQR would be a more likely contender for Gallipoli service (but agree a pre-war dated hookie found in Istanbul is a "probably" rather than "possible"!)

Cheers, J

Agree on both points! Mind you, on that first one, as SS observed, the story is that some SMLE's came Turkey way after WW1, but nobody seems to know of a source that confirms it... Personally, I DO find it hard to credit though, as the Turks used the 8x57 Mauser cartridge and so why would they want to get any SMLE's when that would mean converting them (and then their bayonets) to become the 'Enfauser'? I know zilch about the Enfausers, but I'd bet a pound to a penny that all of them are made up from (captured) pre-1918 SMLE's...

As for the P.07 bayonets here with post 1915 dates that I have picked up, well, they may well be Levantine captures... But two others that I have are dated 1915, and so could be Gallipoli captures - but assuming that they are captures, as there are no unit marks there is no way of saying where they may have been taken - assuming , of course, that they didn't come here post-1918!

Trajan

[trajan]

This is another Turkish buy which is one of my possible/probables and which SS kindly sorted out the date for me (issued 08/09, 're-issued' 1911)... A Sanderson HQ with markings that I assume are for the 3rd Essex... LLT says: "3rd (Reserve) Battalion - August 1914 : in Warley, Essex. A depot/training unit, it moved to Harwich in August 1914 and went on to Felixstowe in March 1916." So, how did this one get to Turkey?

Maybe with the: "1st Battalion - 21 March 1915 : sailed from Avonmouth for Gallipoli, going via Egypt and Mudros. Landed at Cape Helles 25 April 1915; 8 January 1916 : evacuated from Gallipoli and moved to Egypt."

Or - "1/4th Battalion - 21 July 1915 : sailed from Devonport for Gallipoli, going via Lemnos. Landed at Suvla bay 12 August 1915; 4 December 1915 : evacuated from Gallipoli and moved to Mudros, going on to Alexandria 17 December 1915. Remained in Egypt/Palestine theatre thereafter".

Or - "1st Garrison Battalion - Left Devonport, arriving Mudros 3 September 1915. Served on Gallipoli before moving to Egypt in February 1916, where it then remained".

All are possibilities... But an intact HQ? More likely (on balance?) to have been sent out post-haste with somebody and their unit to Gallipoli and 'lost' there before the unit made its way to Egypt? Anyway, here it is -

[trajan]

This assumption is not actually correct, as Turkey did purchase a lot of post-war surplus rifles, including large numbers of British SMLE rifles and P1907 bayonets.

Examples of these are often seen with Turkish markings applied, and usually posted on auction sites complete with the tag of being "Gallipoli captured" weapons.!

The only way to ascertain where they came from is to check the dates of manufacture on them. "Gallipoli possibles" do exist, but most are late to post-war dated ...

Haven't checked Aleck's example yet, but I had to look at Otto's CD for something else and checked his P.1907 page. He notes that:

"Turkey also acquired many British and Australian P1907 bayonets after WWI as evidenced by the existence of Turkish used and converted Australian and British examples bearing production dates and British ARSENAL REHAB dates as late as WWII.... A high percentage of those Turkish used and modified P1907 bayonets observed bear Australian markings and it has been suggested that many of these were given to Turkey by Nazi Germany after they were captured in Greece and particularly in Crete having been defended primarily by ANZAC troops. ... Turkish used and converted P1907 bayonets have been observed with normal British, Canadian, Indian and South African markings. ... Examples have also been observed with the 1944 British Admiralty contract "WSC" ricasso marking (for Wilkinson Sword Company) . These bona fide 1944-5 produced examples prove that Turkey continued to acquire, use and convert P1907 bayonets at least into the immediate Post-WWII time frame. (Stress added).

So, as you indicate SS, some P.1907 bayonets did get to Turkey post-1918, but it should be possible to separate these post GW-supplied examples from possible GW captures by their 'reissue' markings... My own suggestion re: the supply of late-produced bayonets to Turkey is that this could have happened immediately after WW2 - Korean War period? At that time the Turks were still basically using the Kirikale Mauser rifles, and they certainly received the more modern Garand's from the US of A then, so perhaps some SMLE's as well?

[shippingsteel]

Yes, I remember reading that somewhere, but I have never found a reliable source to confirm it - none of the Enfield sites I have checked mention it, never mind provide a source, and so I would love to know if 'proof' does exist! Personally, I do wonder if this might just be another case of 'received opinion' ...

Well I am glad you think that Otto's CD is a "reliable source". But did you ask him for a reference or source on that information.???

Of course he will not be able to provide one as this knowledge has been gained by handling and observing many examples which all help to indicate what actually transpired.

And as I said above the 'evidence' is available for those who wish to 'see'. Shown below is actual 'evidence' - Sawdoc's Turked P1907 and scabbard (Vickers dated Nov 1918)

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

Here is my contender for a bayonet with a good possible ' Galliipoli ' connection, an Enfield made Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet with the Hooked Quillon still attached and dated September 1911, with an Australian Service marked stamped on the pommel.

Regards,

LF

2

3

Interesting to see this one because my one "possible" makes for an interesting comparison - a Turked p1907, also Australian marked and also Enfield manufactured, from the month before yours. Unfortunately not such a nice example!

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Interesting to see this one because my one "possible" makes for an interesting comparison - a Turked p1907, also Australian marked and also Enfield manufactured, from the month before yours. Unfortunately not such a nice example!

Chris,

A very interesting example, and may indicate Enfield's production for that period August/September 1911 going to the Australians, and subsequently onto Gallipoli.

Regards,

LF

[shippingsteel]

A very interesting example, and may indicate Enfield's production for that period August/September 1911 going to the Australians, and subsequently onto Gallipoli.

Absolutely, and here is another one of mine also Sept. 1911. This one continued on in Aussie service and shows the crossguard serial & issue to the state of Victoria.

Interestingly there is a large block of these examples of 1911 manufacture that saw Australian service. The ones observed from these months are ALL Victorian issue.

Cheers, S>S

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Absolutely, and here is another one of mine also Sept. 1911. This one continued on in Aussie service and shows the crossguard serial & issue to the state of Victoria.

Interestingly there is a large block of these examples of 1911 manufacture that saw Australian service. The ones observed from these months are ALL Victorian issue.

S>S,

Further confirmation with another Enfield ' Australian ' August/September 1911 example, in excellent condition.

Regards,

LF

[4thGordons]

Without taking this too far off topic: One wonders (assumes?) if these were supplied paired with rifles from the same period or if just bayonets were supplied. Lithgow did not start producing SMLEs until 1913 of course, but bayonets could have been supplied to fit rifles sent earlier I suppose.

Chris

[shippingsteel]

I think it is most likely these bayonets were shipped to Australia with orders of SMLE rifles. Britain was the only source of weapons for Australia at that time (pre Lithgow)

And BTW, I am not so sure your cutdown example IS 'Turked' as much as it could be 'Khybered'. That crossguard piece looks too bad to have even been Turk produced.!

Note also that the scabbard is not your standard Turkish production, and I would be looking for Turkish serial numbers or AS.FA markings showing the Turkish provenance.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

Well I am glad you think that Otto's CD is a "reliable source". But did you ask him for a reference or source on that information.???

Of course he will not be able to provide one as this knowledge has been gained by handling and observing many examples which all help to indicate what actually transpired.

And as I said above the 'evidence' is available for those who wish to 'see'. Shown below is actual 'evidence' - Sawdoc's Turked P1907 and scabbard (Vickers dated Nov 1918)

SS, it really would help if you read what I wrote before, as is often the case, jumping up to object or contradict! I did not put Otto forward as a "reliable source"... I treat Otto's information the same way as I do yours: in the absence of any published reliable data openly shared for public inspection to go with the statement offered it is simply an opinion and no more (and in my eyes often much less!)

Now, if Otto - or you, for that matter - could say and demonstrate that "XX% of a sample of YY type ZZ bayonets were AAA", that would be a different matter altogether! If I may blow my own trumpet a little here, I can say - for example - that "B.A." marked Ersatz bayonets constitute (at the moment) exactly 3.0232558139535% of my data base of Ersatz bayonets by units... That is not an opinion, that is a fact. My data base is imperfect, I know, but I have the evidence there to rebut Carter's statement that these weapons mainly went to 'rear-line' units...

But let's get back OT! Yes, Otto states that from his knowledge and experience that post-GW P.1907's went to Turkey, and he shows a range of these with most mainly adapted for the Enfauser and all (where visible) with a Turkish serial number: he also states that he "has observed no bona fide, Ottoman re-issued, unaltered P1907 bayonets to date but there remains a high probability that Ottoman re-issued unaltered P1907 bayonets exist". For your part you have kindly shown an example of a 1918 Vickers that Aleck has, and which been adapted to fit the Kirikale Mauser - and which is (IIRC) serial-numbered to boot. OK, so some P.1907's got to Turkey after the GW - but how? My point was that I could not really see any circumstances under which they could have been supplied to Turkey by the UK! Perhaps they were - or perhaps they were WW2 captures by the Germans that were then sent to Turkey... I don't know - nor, obviously, do you... So let's drop the topic until we get some evidence one way or the other, eh?

Because the important thing as far as this thread is concerned, is that as yet, neither you nor anyone else has put forward a GW period bayonet bought or found in Turkey of an appropriate date for Gallipoli that has NOT been chopped, and/or which has NOT been converted for an 'Enfauser' and/or which does NOT have Turkish serials on it. So, I will go with my possibles and probables until one surfaces!

TTFN

Trajan

[trajan]

Interestingly there is a large block of these examples of 1911 manufacture that saw Australian service. The ones observed from these months are ALL Victorian issue.

QED ... This is of course just your opinion?

Cheers cobber!