Unit Abbreviation

[4thGordons]

I just acquired two scabbards from the same source with what I think are unit marks on them but I cannot come up with he unit! The marking is B.A.H. over a number (which I think is a rack/sequential number for the rifle/bayonet although the bayonets themselves are not numbered.)

The style of stamping makes me think these are unit applied and not manufacturers initials although this is a possibility - but I can't come up with a manufacturer either.

The scabbards are for British Pattern 1888/1903 bayonets and one of the bayonets has a 1915 reissue date.

Any suggestions (unit or manufacturer) for the initials BAH?

Chris

[findabetterole]

Chris,

Could you possibly post a pic of the stamping itself? I've no BAH listed, but it could be either: BAN = Bangor, BMH = Bournemouth School, BRK = Berkshire.

Seph

[4thGordons]

As requested:

Scabbard that came with the 1903 BAH over 302

Scabbard with the 1888 with 1915 reissue date BAH over 173

Given the age of the bayonets (Boer war vintage) - the only thing I can think of is perhaps the H might be "Horse"? as in a volunteer unit "___ ____'s Horse"

Chris

[findabetterole]

Deffo... BAH!

I might suggest that these are pre-territorial units or Yeomanry... possibly colonial.

Seph

[shippingsteel]

This is a fairly old topic but I uncovered it again whilst searching. I have just returned from our state militaria fair complete with bargain buys and interesting finds in hand. Amongst these was a nice P1888 bayonet that I managed to pick up, it came with a very good condition P1903 style leather scabbard. The scabbard is not the standard P1903 issue as it has an external metal chape and is slightly longer than normal.

The stampings in the leather are nearly exactly the same as Chris has posted with the letters BAH and in this case the numbers 168. The scabbard itself is 35cm long, with bottom metal chape and studless metal topmount to take the slip-on leather frog (approx 21cm) with sewn side seam. The rear of the frog has a leather loop sewn on. It looks just like THIS EXAMPLE which is noted as an "Indian pattern scabbard". This example also has the external metal chape and shows the exact same stitching pattern on the frog.

Chris, have you found out anything further about these scabbards since you last posted.? Or identified the meaning of the letters BAH.?

Cheers, S>S

[KevinBattle]

Just a thought, but Bombay Auxiliary Horse or similar (Bangalore, Bengal) etc? Mind you, don't see cavalry using bayonets, but....

[shippingsteel]

One possibility that I have found is the Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire Regiment as the B.A.H. abbreviation.

I understand that the original regiments were only combined in 1919, so that probably makes the scabbards postwar kit.

I have heard some comments that the scabbards were rumoured to have been made as latter-day replacements but can't be sure of that.

Its interesting that the P1888 bayonet Chris had was marked with the 1915 re-issue, as my bayonet was also marked with a 1916 re-issue date.

May just be coincidental as scabbards can be easily swapped around, but could again suggest some post-war refurbishment and refitting of bayonets that were still in use. Obviously it is the original leather scabbards that are the first things to deteriorate under hard battlefield conditions.

Cheers, S>S

[wainfleet]

One possibility that I have found is the Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire Regiment as the B.A.H. abbreviation.

Could be, though they might have been more likely to use "&" instead of "A". (Add: Do I have a better suggestion? No!)

[4thGordons]

S/S

Sorry missed this. No I have uncovered no further information at all.

Chris

[Grovetown]

Something from the BAHamas perhaps?

GT.

[shippingsteel]

Could be, though they might have been more likely to use "&" instead of "A". (Add: Do I have a better suggestion? No!)

That's true, I did consider that possibility. The scabbards are reportedly of Indian pattern or issue and I checked if battalions of the Beds & Herts were based in India post-war, and it seems they were. I was wondering whether the Indian manner of regimental ID at the time may have been responsible for using the 'A' letter instead of the '&'.? Its all purely speculation of course but you've got to work through the possibilities.!! Someone more experienced with the Indian way of doing things may be of some assistance here.?

I do know that the Indians didn't really like the extra length of the P1907 bayonets and always preferred to use the much shorter P1888/P1903 style. This may help to explain the use of these shorter length scabbards (and bayonets) well into the post-war period. This attitude seemed to continue into the WW2 period where the Indians were reknowned for producing cut-down and shortened versions of the P1907 bayonets for their Enfield rifles.

Anyway thanks for your thoughts.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

I just acquired two scabbards from the same source with what I think are unit marks on them but I cannot come up with he unit! The marking is B.A.H. over a number (which I think is a rack/sequential number for the rifle/bayonet although the bayonets themselves are not numbered.)

Possibly the 1st Bahawalpur Infantry? Formed originally as states forces in the 19th, and certainly a regular regiment by 1934.

[trajan]

QUOTE (Wainfleet @ May 27 2010, 11:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could be, though they might have been more likely to use "&" instead of "A". (Add: Do I have a better suggestion? No!)

...I was wondering whether the Indian manner of regimental ID at the time may have been responsible for using the 'A' letter instead of the '&'.? Its all purely speculation of course but you've got to work through the possibilities.!!

For what it is worth (and some would say very little, and so I'll pre-empt them!), I worked through what possibilities I could and found no evidence of a unit marking using 'A' for 'AND'.

[sgt-maj]

Wow... nice to see an old post. I couldn't for the life of me remember my old password. oh well!

I searched through my records time and time again during the period this thread was up originally, trying to find some reference that I may have missed, or an avenue I had not considered. Result:- Nada... Zilch... Zippo... Empty... Nothing!

Chris... From the time 'TRAGAN' revived this thread, I've been searching again through old references, and newer ones. All that I have been able to come up with which is anywhere near the original... is one letter short, and the unit is Canadian:- 'BH' ---> The Border Horse.

Seph.

[trajan]

Wow... nice to see an old post. I couldn't for the life of me remember my old password. oh well!

I searched through my records time and time again during the period this thread was up originally, trying to find some reference that I may have missed, or an avenue I had not considered. Result:- Nada... Zilch... Zippo... Empty... Nothing!

Chris... From the time 'TRAGAN' revived this thread, I've been searching again through old references, and newer ones. All that I have been able to come up with which is anywhere near the original... is one letter short, and the unit is Canadian:- 'BH' ---> The Border Horse.

Seph.

Happy to help reprise your old posts! Many of them before my time but all most interesting...

I thought the 1st Bahawalpur Infantry a good possibility because of the 'Indian-type' scabbards.

[trajan]

This is a fairly old topic but I uncovered it again whilst searching. ...

Same here! I was doing a Google while (re)searching for tang markings and I found another of these BAH ones! At: http://www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=5130 - in this case "B A H / 58". I have one of these also, somewhere... Must look for it, as I know I have posted it on GWF...

Trajan

[trajan]

I have one of these also, somewhere... Must look for it, as I know I have posted it on GWF...

Ah, here is the link to mine, which also notes the one just posted above (BAH / 58): http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=220894

Must get my research files in order, although Google did help me track down the above link faster that GWF 'Search' function...