calibre792x57.y Posted 1 June , 2015 Share Posted 1 June , 2015 As bayonets seem to be carrying the day....well, if you can't beat them. A common enough German Sg84/98nA, but.. first the condition, blade absolutely mint apart from scratching from the tight scabbard springs. Secondly it's a two makers job. On the left side is the crossed keys of F. HERDER A.S.n, SOLINGEN and on the obverse Walter & Co. Mulhausen in Thr. Prussian Inspection mark for 1916 is on the back of the blade. Why the scratching on the blade - well it's not a standard issue scabbard for this bayonet but one for the Ks 98 which is a little tighter. It has a fraktur mark on the frog stud and a number '358' on the reverse. I can conceive that an Officer or S.N.C.O. who carried a Ks 98 as a mark of rank, perhaps changing to the Sg84/98 when the saw-backs became notorious. Certainly both bayonet and scabbard are in similar condition. So perhaps not so common. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 1 June , 2015 Share Posted 1 June , 2015 Sommewalker, I agree, your bayonet is not so common. Although I may have missed it I can find no reference in Carter Vol.II to a Herder/Walter dual marked S 84/98 such as yours. He does mention in "The Sword and Bayonet Makers of Imperial Germany" that some of Herder's bayonets also bore Move-Werke Walter & Cie marks but I can find no reference to to a S 84/98 so marked. Yours is a really nice example so thanks for sharing. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 1 June , 2015 Share Posted 1 June , 2015 That's interesting ... I appear to have an exact "twin" for it.! I did post this one earlier in the year, but here it is again for a comparison. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 2 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2015 As regards the bayonet -Snap! - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 June , 2015 Share Posted 2 June , 2015 It is indeed a nice (and rare) bayonet - and a pretty rare fraktur marked scabbard to go with it! I agree, your bayonet is not so common. Although I may have missed it I can find no reference in Carter Vol.II to a Herder/Walter dual marked S 84/98 such as yours. He does mention in "The Sword and Bayonet Makers of Imperial Germany" that some of Herder's bayonets also bore Move-Werke Walter & Cie marks but I can find no reference to to a S 84/98 so marked. I am away from my books, but I think you are quite right that it is not listed in Carter II - but could be worth to check the 'corrections' pages in vols. III and IV. That's interesting ... I appear to have an exact "twin" for it.! I did post this one earlier in the year, but here it is again for a comparison. As SS says, he reported his example earlier this year at: http://worldbayonets...e_markings.html- but the 'Abr. Sohne' was the give away.The Herder's were renowned blade-makers - razors especially. Their history is at: http://de.wikipedia....er_Abraham_Sohn.Walter and Co. of Muhlhausen were machinery and motor-bike manufacturers - so probably blank blade makers in this case? Their abbreviated history is at: http://de.wikipedia....iki/Walter_&_Co." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 2 June , 2015 Share Posted 2 June , 2015 Yes SNAP indeed.! Note also both scabbards look to be identical. My possible explanation for the 'linear striations' on the blade is "wartime manufacturing" ... So perhaps done in a more hurried environment, with less emphasis placed on the final polishing, leaving these near-mint blades with these strange markings.? Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 2 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2015 Ah, S>S, looks are deceiving! If you get set of engineers calipers and measure the width of the mouthpiece, immediately below the reinforcement at the rear edge, then measure 200mm down from the edge of the mouthpiece and measure the width again. Check the same measurements on the Sg84/98 scabbard and on a Ks98 scabbard and you will find a considerable difference. My Ks scabbard measures 30.3mm and 24.7mm on those positions. The scabbard shown with the Sg84/98 I posted which I say comes from a Ks measures 30.4mm and 25.1mm.. . A standard S84/98 by Henckels' scabbard shows 31.7mm and 28mm at the same points. Doesn't sound a lot but there is also 1.0mm difference in the depth (thickness) between the two types, the Ks98 being thinner. Although a S84/98 bayonet will enter the Ks scabbard it is a much tighter fit. The difference is apparent if you do a side by side comparison. Furthermore every Ks98 scabbard I have examined has a fraktur mark on the frog stud and often a serial number on the reverse. SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 June , 2015 Share Posted 2 June , 2015 ... Furthermore every Ks98 scabbard I have examined has a fraktur mark on the frog stud and often a serial number on the reverse. SW That's news to me - thanks! KS98's are rare on the ground here, and I only have one, m.S., which came without a scabbard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 2 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2015 What it comes down to is that the Ks scabbards are slimmer and taper more towards the point. There are commercial variations but all the originals manufactured between 1901 and 1914 by the arsenal at Erfurt have the fractur mark on the stud. Without any markings the scabbards could be for commercial bayonets, not military.- SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 2 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2015 Another mildly interesting piece from my collection. A Sg14 in its original scabbard. The manufacturer was Bayard which was by then behind German lines. Although we tend to refer to the all-metal bayonets as 'Ersatz' in fact they were a war utility design like the grey metal pickelhauben. It was the Sg14s that were 'ersatz'.-SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 2 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2015 The maker's mark. Quite lightly struck and difficult to photograph, but the mounted knight is apparent. The scabbard is that which should always be with this bayonet and which was originally painted black overall. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 13 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 13 June , 2015 Since 'Butcher Knives' are in vogue ( have just seen a box of brand new repro steel scabbards, so beware.) Here is a Sg98/05 aA mitt Schutzbleche. These are quite reasonably described as 'transitional' models as they retain the characteristics of the old model but have flashguards. All that I have seen are dated 1915, and most were by Erfurt Arsenal. Complete with it's steel mounted black leather scabbard. Note how unobtrusive these factory-fitted flashguards are. Didn't use to be considered unusual but now difficult to find in this sort of condition. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 13 June , 2015 Share Posted 13 June , 2015 Another mildly interesting piece from my collection. A Sg14 in its original scabbard. The manufacturer was Bayard which was by then behind German lines. Although we tend to refer to the all-metal bayonets as 'Ersatz' in fact they were a war utility design like the grey metal pickelhauben. It was the Sg14s that were 'ersatz'.-SW Am I correct in thinking that square-ended fullers are generally Belgian? That aside, there was never such a thing as an 'Ersatz' bayonet... The SG 14 was officially classed as an 'Interims Seitengewehr', and although those all metal jobs had a variety of monikers, none of there were 'Ersatz', and they were certainly not all classed as SG 88/98, as some of them will fit a Gew.98 only... Aufhilfseitengewehre seems to be the most usual description. The term 'ersatz' as a synonym for ‘substitute’ when referring to the assortment of bayonets of non-regular types used by the German and other armies during the Great War seems to have been coined by Charles Dangré, curator of the Brussels Musée royal de l'armée et d'histoire militaire between 1925-31, referring to bayonnettes 'ersatz' allemandes, and was then popularised by J.Watts and P.White in their 1975 Bayonet book followed by Carter, with his German Ersatz Bayonets (1976). Since 'Butcher Knives' are in vogue ( have just seen a box of brand new repro steel scabbards, so beware.) Here is a Sg98/05 aA mitt Schutzbleche. These are quite reasonably described as 'transitional' models as they retain the characteristics of the old model but have flashguards. All that I have seen are dated 1915, and most were by Erfurt Arsenal. Complete with it's steel mounted black leather scabbard. Note how unobtrusive these factory-fitted flashguards are. Didn't use to be considered unusual but now difficult to find in this sort of condition. - SW A very nice example that! With the steel locket and chape to the scabbard! Note especially the broad tip - IIRC, after 1916/1917 they had a narrower tip... Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 14 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 14 June , 2015 Morning Julian. A couple of valid points you have raised. My own bayonets are too few in number to enable me to come to a valid conclusion on the Belgian bayonets and their fullers. However as can be seen the late 19th Century Belgian bayonets such as the various M.1889s certainly seem to have been produced on the same machinery as the 'Bayard' Sg14. Not only are the fuller dimensions similar but so is the blade thickness and width, and the grinding of the point profile. See below for a better picture of the Sg14. and a Belgian M.1889. The only difference is 50 mm or so of blade length.- SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 14 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 14 June , 2015 Trajan, - As for the shape of the points on the Sg98/05s. I think any perceived difference is in part to my lack of photographic skills, but mostly due to the grinding of the false edge. The blade sharpening of both the true and false edge on the old model is quite lightly done; the false edge is also unevenly sided. Probably done as an 'add-on'. That on the new model (a Sg98/05nA by Alex Coppel and dated 1916) is much more pronounced and this gives the appearance of a slimmer point as you say. In fact superimposing one on the other shows that the blade profiles are actually identical. - Cheers S.W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 16 June , 2015 Share Posted 16 June , 2015 Hi SW, On my travels again and so frequently out of internet range - hence late reply... Morning Julian. A couple of valid points you have raised. My own bayonets are too few in number to enable me to come to a valid conclusion on the Belgian bayonets and their fullers. However as can be seen the late 19th Century Belgian bayonets such as the various M.1889s certainly seem to have been produced on the same machinery as the 'Bayard' Sg14. Not only are the fuller dimensions similar but so is the blade thickness and width, and the grinding of the point profile. See below for a better picture of the Sg14. and a Belgian M.1889. The only difference is 50 mm or so of blade length.- SW Being away from my books, I'll have to check when I get back, but I think one of the all-metal Erstaz uses a blade with squared fullers which Carter thought might be Belgian. Trajan, - As for the shape of the points on the Sg98/05s. I think any perceived difference is in part to my lack of photographic skills, but mostly due to the grinding of the false edge. The blade sharpening of both the true and false edge on the old model is quite lightly done; the false edge is also unevenly sided. Probably done as an 'add-on'. That on the new model (a Sg98/05nA by Alex Coppel and dated 1916) is much more pronounced and this gives the appearance of a slimmer point as you say. In fact superimposing one on the other shows that the blade profiles are actually identical. - Cheers S.W. Take your point - but I think Carter mentioned something about this tendency for later 98/05's to have a narrower tip. I do know that while some of my 98/05's have a wider tip than others. I'll try to remember to check when I get back. Best, Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 25 June , 2015 Author Share Posted 25 June , 2015 A recent acquisition. Nothing special but for the scabbard, but I thought it might interest S>S. The bayonet is marked 'CHAPMAN' and 1 '17. No post war stamps. Other than some 'sleepy' rust darkening in it's original finish. The scabbard however is an early Mark 2, manufactured by RSAF Enfield in 1911. Above the factory markings is an Australian Department of Defence stamp and the mouthpiece has a 'South Australia' serial number. The scabbard leather has a dark brown finish, and flush rivetted locket. The markings are very clear. On offer with it, but not purchased, was a HQ '07 by Wilkinson, dated 1909 and in a Turkish scabbard. No Australian ownership marks. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 June , 2015 Share Posted 25 June , 2015 A recent acquisition. Nothing special but for the scabbard, but I thought it might interest S>S. The bayonet is marked 'CHAPMAN' and 1 '17. No post war stamps. Other than some 'sleepy' rust darkening in it's original finish. The scabbard however is an early Mark 2, manufactured by RSAF Enfield in 1911. Above the factory markings is an Australian Department of Defence stamp and the mouthpiece has a 'South Australia' serial number. The scabbard leather has a dark brown finish, and flush rivetted locket. The markings are very clear. On offer with it, but not purchased, was a HQ '07 by Wilkinson, dated 1909 and in a Turkish scabbard. No Australian ownership marks. - SW That is a very nice clean looking original 'London Brown'(?) condition scabbard! SS has been off for a long while but doubtless he'll chip at some point. Your D-with-an-arrow, though, is the short arrow variety, which - IIRC - is also found on some of the pre-war pommels. Interesting that you came across a P/1907 HQ in a Turkish scabbard - I found one like that earlier this year! Worth getting in my case as I had the right scabbard for the HQ and the right M.1890 bayonet for the scabbard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 3 July , 2015 Author Share Posted 3 July , 2015 Okay Trajan, Another question - probably very simple. Who is the maker of this P.'07 scabbard? A bit of difficulty in photographing it to bring up the stamps in the leather, but the reverse of the locket has a small diamond shape with the letters W J over M therein. The scabbard has the usual British viewer's stamps in North America in the leather, consisting of a broad arrow over a Crown over '14' over 'A' with the date '15 beneath. There is a diamond stamp on the other side of the seam which appears to be a 'J' in a diamond. Would these markings be for Jewell & Co.? The bayonet is routine, a late War production by Sanderson & Co. Unissued condition.- SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 July , 2015 Share Posted 3 July , 2015 ... the reverse of the locket has a small diamond shape with the letters W J over M therein. The scabbard has the usual British viewer's stamps in North America in the leather, consisting of a broad arrow over a Crown over '14' over 'A' with the date '15 beneath. There is a diamond stamp on the other side of the seam which appears to be a 'J' in a diamond. Would these markings be for Jewell & Co.? I have always understood the J in a Diamond to be for Jewell but have to confess I have only ever seen this mark on the Green M.1917 scabbards, but this looks to be a nice 'London Brown' one, as originally issued. In which case, interesting to me to see this mark: whenever I have seen blurred markings on the right hand side of the seam I have generally assumed that they must be a 'W' for waxing mark - now I'll have to have a better look at these! That apart, a 1915 Jewell made scabbard, I assume - but happy to be corrected - would be for a P.1913? The 'W.J' over 'M' mark on the locket - with a teardrop? I have seen it before... Is it on the chape also? Aaha! A quick look on the other computer reveals this mark has been discussed here: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=207428&page=2 BUT no ID on the maker... LF, in post 46, suggests from his collection that it is not a common maker - but it is an early one. Perhaps a US of A maker??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 3 July , 2015 Author Share Posted 3 July , 2015 Trajan. Here is the whole thing. Yes, the WJM in a diamond is repeated on the chape. It is definitely an American made scabbard because of the typical viewer's marks, but as to what it came from I couldn't say. I have owned it over twenty years and it has always had the present bayonet in it. Most likely I would say part of the contract for the P'13 but we don't actually know. - Many thanks for your reply. I see the question wasn't as simple as I thought! - A late thought - the date beneath the viewer's mark is definitely '15 - part of the U.S. '07 contract? SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 3 July , 2015 Share Posted 3 July , 2015 I have a very similarly marked example (1916 dated J in Diamond, inspection stamp etc) and with WJ/M on both locket and chape. Mine (purchased 30 odd years ago from a market stall in Wellingborough) came with a Remington Pattern 13 bayonet, also dated 1916. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 3 July , 2015 Author Share Posted 3 July , 2015 Same maker - only difference is that mine is dated '15. The markings are clear under light from a low angle. The only thing I can add is that the bayonet is dated Sept 1918, has no post-War markings and both it and the scabbard are in unissued condition, which suggests they have been together for some considerable time. Thank you for showing your example.- SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 July , 2015 Share Posted 3 July , 2015 ... Perhaps a US of A maker??? ... It is definitely an American made scabbard because of the typical viewer's marks ... A late thought - the date beneath the viewer's mark is definitely '15 - part of the U.S. '07 contract? SW I have a very similarly marked example (1916 dated J in Diamond, inspection stamp etc) and with WJ/M on both locket and chape. Mine (purchased 30 odd years ago from a market stall in Wellingborough) came with a Remington Pattern 13 bayonet, also dated 1916. Should have made myself clearer on that 'perhaps a US of A maker?' comment - I had a vague notion that some bits and pieces such as lockets and chapes may have been UK made and sent over there... Wasn't that the case with some rifle parts? I am probably absolutely way off the mark, but I am happy to admit to still being a learner in these and many other WW1 matters! Didn't know about the '07 contract (or had forgotten that I did!), but nice to see that Chris has one of these Jewell brown scabbards paired with a P.13 - not, of course, that that means very much as scabbards can (and do) move around... Incidentally, though, nice to see that a fair few of these 'London Brown'(?) scabbards seem to have escaped darkening. I have exactly three (all EFD) like this and they are a nice colour - even the one that has a 'W' mark has retained its original brownness! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 3 July , 2015 Author Share Posted 3 July , 2015 Probably because at the end of the War they and their rifles were put into storage and missed the order that unit armourers should heel ball etc the scabbards? Likewise one rarely sees a P.13 with a polished blade because this only applied to bayonets in service with the Regular Army. - SW 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