Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Doughboys Weapon of Choice


shippingsteel

Recommended Posts

As for the maker of the mystery bayonet there should be no need for guessing, how many P1907's came without the imprint of the crown/cypher.??

Well these three for a start. :whistle:

post-14525-1273634720.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Chris, the crown is found on the blade underneath the scabbard.!! :lol:

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not on these three it isn't....

have a closer look

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do see where your coming from Chris. I also notice you conveniently left off from your quote the second line of my clue questions - they do go together you realise. Anyway if you insist I shall rephrase that line, how many WW1 era non-Lithgow P1907's came without the imprint of the crown/cypher. How's that Tony - ah sorry, I mean Chris.!! :P

EDIT: And also barring those awfully crappy mis-stamped Sandersons you come across quite regularly.!!

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pictured bayonets are all UK produced actually (about 3/10,000).

Now we shall have to dicker over the specific meaning of WWI era :innocent:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pictured bayonets are all UK produced actually (about 3/10,000).

Now we shall have to dicker over the specific meaning of WWI era :innocent:

Ah yes Chris, I do believe you might be drifting off-topic once again (as you are prone to do.!!)

Thinking of exotic locations and steamy jungles where they have lions with funny stripes and strange looking cats.?? B)

No they are definitely not GW era and have very little in common with the current topic I'm afraid to say, sorry. (good try though.!!)

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well actually - all the references suggest these were standard UK WWI service bayonets refinished and resold, so in that regard they would be as relevant as your "interesting example that served throughout both wars" wouldn't they? (there are marks on the chape/locket that support this) and I would think that 1920 might count as "WWI era..."

But, as my frequent digressions offend I'll leave you alone to play, with yourself.

G'night

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you're right - those Siamese P1907 bayonets were said to have been taken out of surplus stocks leftover from the war, and then refinished and tiger mark applied etc. Is there any evidence remaining of the original British inspection marks.? But if that is true surely they would also have originally come with the crown/cypher mark as well.?(before the refinish) That is if they were originally UK manufactured as you say they were. Which is really back where we started, talking about what P1907's would have been made without having the crown applied.?

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well these three for a start. :whistle:

post-14525-1273634720.jpg

Chris, are those three all yours? I ask as they're all backwards in the scabbards - the sticking out part of the locking button should always point to the rear of the scabbard. You can't do proper bayonet fixing drill otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris, are those three all yours? I ask as they're all backwards in the scabbards - the sticking out part of the locking button should always point to the rear of the scabbard. You can't do proper bayonet fixing drill otherwise.

Hi Andrew,

I am tempted to make a joke about the intracies of Siamese drill as practiced by the elite Wild Tiger Corps but instead I will admit my error.

Yes they are and yes I know - Seph pointed this out too when I first posted the picture :blush: .

So fear not, they are now correctly in the scabbards! I was just recycling a picture rather than retaking one. You can see these scabbards have had the leather replaced with sheet metal which actually makes the fit a little tight (especially on the more dented one!) I have never worked out why the tips on all three are braized on "backwards" but I am sure there was a reason.....

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Thought I'd better come back and finish off telling the "interesting" story of this P1907 bayonet. I believe it is interesting anyway, because it has "history".

The original idea for posting was to be of some slight "educational value" for anyone who may be interested, so hopefully someone will have benefited.

Anyway, this bayonet was made by the Americans for the British and eventually ended up being used by the Australians in France/Belgium during WW1. How can I say all this with any confidence.? Well the whole story is written on each ricasso shown below, in each little stamp that has been added during its time in service.

It started off by being made in the US by Remington in August 1915 as part of a contract for about 100,000 bayonets which were ordered by the British to help fill a shortfall in bayonets for their SMLE rifle early on in the war. This small contract could be seen as a precursor to what was to follow with the large contract for the delivery of P14 rifles and P1913 bayonets. This then rolled on into the production of the M1917 rifles and bayonets which served as the principal US arms during the war.

These Remington bayonets were manufactured to the P1907 specifications at the time which included, no hook quillon and no clearance hole. On the right ricasso you can see the 'broad arrow' mark at the top, the 'bend test' mark at the bottom (of which there are 2) and the Crown over 1 over A, which signifies inspection by a British inspector based in America.

This particular bayonet has had a clearance hole drilled into the pommel at some later stage and this 'upgrade' has been noted towards the left of the ricasso with the small Crown over 01 over E, which signifies it having been done by a British armourer/inspector originally based at Enfield. The other marks which include an '18 inspection date together with a letter R are a little unusual and their origins are probably more debateable. However from my own research I now believe they have been applied by Australian armourers working from mobile workshops, that were attached to the Australian Corps from September 1918.

The letter R has in the past been associated with Australian refurbishment and this bayonet does show signs of some serious grinding having been applied to the right side of the pommel and over the locking bolt. These marks are consistent with working on a grindstone wheel. See photo post #141. If all this is true it would mean that this bayonet was most probably 'acquired' for Australian use after being collected off the old battlefields and refurbished for recycling back into service.

To finish off its service history this example has then been taken out of storage for use during WW2. It has had its left hand grip replaced and a '42 mark stamped into the tang before receiving a coating of dark green paint over the crossguard and pommel before going back into service. The blade also shows signs of a possible WW2 'resharpen' which was commonly done. When the blade was 'parkerised' is hard to say and is probably the most uncertain detail of all, however the markings do look fairly clean and unaffected.

To wrap it up, I probably doubt whether it would ever have been used by the 'doughboys' at the front, but then again anythings possible.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-1275182408.jpgpost-52604-1275182388.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

S-S...

No disrespect, but your descriptions certainly are colourful, and can be akin to romantic novels... very entertaining.

The US made '07's were manufactured from April 1915 to December 1915, with, as you correctly point out, a total production run of approx 100,000 items. They were issued en-block (at agreed delivery dates) to the British War office depot at weedon, then as were required by whatever force needed supply at the time.

The right ricasso markings you show are all pretty standard stuff, with the '18 correctly identified as an armoury re-issue into service mark after refurbishment.

The US '07's were originally issued with polished blades. I have one of each production month for which Chris can verify.

The blade edge finish to all '07's is somewhat of a contradiction, in that they were issued 'factory sharpenned', but this is referred to as 'unsharpenned', and is the most saught after finish by collectors. A 'sharpenned' blade = post production... can, depending upon the professionalism of the job carried out, actually reduce an example to nothing more that a near worthless wall hanging. If at all possible, when mentioning a blades cutting edge, please try to show the actual item as this helps in the reader to identify and understand the description. Otherwise, we are effecively just waxing lyrically.

Seph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No disrespect, but your descriptions certainly are colourful, and can be akin to romantic novels... very entertaining.

Thanks for your comments Bootnecks, and I'm glad you find my "amateur literary work" entertaining .... I think.

(Doing my small bit to convert the masses to the fascinating sport of bayonet collecting perhaps, trying as best I can as always)

I'm very happy that you could expand on some of the points I made, but find it somewhat strange that you think that the R marking is "pretty standard stuff". I have found it to be fairly uncommon and still can't find reference to it being used in that way exactly, in any of the reference material that I have seen. Have you been able to uncover any more details on this R marking since our last discussion of this issue in THIS THREAD back in January.?

In regard to your comments on the blade edge, there are shots of the overall bayonet from different angles to be found in post #140, #141, #142, #145.

(I would have shown more of the ricasso and blade area but I was struggling to fit my high-res shots both in together, while staying under the 100k cap.)

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A close up of the marking would be apreciated in order to assertain as to what context it is being used, for in some cases it may not actually be the letter 'R'. Just my observations from my experiance.

Seph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A close up of the marking would be apreciated in order to assertain as to what context it is being used, for in some cases it may not actually be the letter 'R'.

Always happy to oblige ..... (this time I'll max it out to the full 100k.!!)

I have found it to be quite an interesting phenomenon, the R marking.

I have come across it several times and on each and every occasion it is found with the accompanying '18 date marking.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-1275276679.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

......It started off by being made in the US by Remington in August 1915 as part of a contract for about 100,000 bayonets which were ordered by the British to help fill a shortfall in bayonets for their SMLE rifle early on in the war. This small contract could be seen as a precursor to what was to follow with the large contract for the delivery of P14 rifles and P1913 bayonets. This then rolled on into the production of the M1917 rifles and bayonets which served as the principal US arms during the war....

Just a small point of historical accuracy...

The first contract for Pattern '14 rifles was placed with Remington on 24 November 1914 and was Contract No.B.7235 for 200,000 P.14 rifles, P.13 bayonets and scabbards.

The contract for the 100,000 Pattern '07 bayonets was placed a week later on 1 December 1914.

Regards

TonyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a small point of historical accuracy...

Hi TonyE, I just knew you'd be the man to see about that point, its quite uncanny how the thought crossed my mind just as I was typing that very line ..... :D

Thanks for dropping by - I've been expecting you.!!

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a small point of historical accuracy...

The first contract for Pattern '14 rifles was placed with Remington on 24 November 1914 and was Contract No.B.7235 for 200,000 P.14 rifles, P.13 bayonets and scabbards.

The contract for the 100,000 Pattern '07 bayonets was placed a week later on 1 December 1914.

TonyE would you happen to have the monthly production volumes and/or delivery dates for all of the bayonets that were made by Remington under the British contracts.? (ie. for both the P1907 and the P1913 production) I think the total volumes were about 100,000 for the P1907 contract compared with around 1,243,000 in total for the P1913 bayonets, is that correct.?

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Forget about that last "near worthless wall hanging" - this next bayonet's the real deal (and definitely on-topic, to boot.!!) :D

I finally managed to track down a nice Springfield Armory version of the M1905 bayonet that is probably worthy of inclusion here.

This one has the bright finish blade and was manufactured in 1909 for the M1903 Springfield rifle, and comes with a "matching" M1910 scabbard.

When I say "matching" it may not be the exact scabbard it was issued with, but at some point they have both been stamped with matching "unit markings", which I have found to be fairly unusual amongst the Springfield bayonets. I just love finding these bayonets that are marked with regimental or other identifying stamps as they provide a great avenue for further research, which I find to be one of the most enjoyable parts of my collecting interest. This bayonet comes with the original grooved timber grips and the blade shows the very low bluing line that is just visible above the crossguard.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-1276412619.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TonyE would you happen to have the monthly production volumes and/or delivery dates for all of the bayonets that were made by Remington under the British contracts.? (ie. for both the P1907 and the P1913 production) I think the total volumes were about 100,000 for the P1907 contract compared with around 1,243,000 in total for the P1913 bayonets, is that correct.?

Cheers, S>S

My apologies S>S, I had forgotten to answer your questions on bayonet volumes etc.

For P.'07 bayonets.

Remington-U.M.C. 100,000 ordered on Contract B.7230 dated 1 Dec. 1914. Delivery 500 per day from 1 Mar.15, increased to 1,000 per day from 1 Apr.15. Status: Completed.

For P.'13 bayonets.

Remington-U.M.C. 200,000 ordered on Contract B.7235 dated 24 Nov.1914. Delivery 1,000 per day in 9-12 months.

Remington-U.M.C. 600,000 ordered on Contract 94/R/207 dated 21 Sep.1915. Delivery to commence Mar.1916 working up to extra 1,000 per day by June 1916.

Remington-U.M.C. 200,000 ordered on Contract R.2511 dated 10 Feb.1915. Delivery 500 per day from Nov.15 increasing to 1,000 per day in Feb.16.

Remington-U.M.C. Up to 5,000 ordered on Contract 94/B/869 dated 23 Dec.1915.This covered over run on previous contracts. Actually received 4,078 bayonets, 4,392 scabbards.

Remington Arms Co. (Eddystone) 1,500,000 ordered on Contract 94/R/39 dated 30 Apr.1915. Delivery 1,000 per day in Feb.16, 2,000 per day in Mar.16, 3,000 per day in Apr.16 rising gradually to 4,000 per day. No. due 1,231,900 (estimated), No. delivered 102,880.

Remington Arms Co. (Eddystone) 500,000 ordered on Contract 94/R/207 dated 2 Aug.1915. Delivery 200,000 by 30 Jun.16, another 200,000 by 31 Dec. 16 and final 100,000 by 12 Apr.17.

These statistics are taken from a Ministry of Munitions document of contracts and shows production figures up to 31st March 1917. This is why the Eddystone contract has an estimated number due and not the entire amount. Whether those 102,880 bayonets were ever produced at Eddystone or whether the contract was actually manufactured at Rem-U.M.C. is open to speculation.

For most of the contracts the number received is shown as "No report".

With the exception of the P.'07 and P.'13 over run contracts, the above all coincide with the rifle contracts in terms of number and delivery rates. I have not looked for any figures on actual monthly deliveries of bayonets, but I do have the monthly acceptance figures for the rifles. Whether the rifle and bayonet deliveries were coincident though is unknown.

That is about all I have on the bayonets contracts so I hope it is of interest.

Regards

TonyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all that information TonyE, you never cease to amaze me with the amount of data that you seemingly have available at your fingertips, I appreciate that tremendously. :thumbsup:

There is a lot of very interesting and at the same time very confusing data that you have provided there. What with the various contract numbers and the possibility of overlapping orders it is very easy to understand how difficult the job becomes for researchers, when trying to nail down the actual numbers of items produced over any given period. Possibly the monthly acceptance figures for the rifles would provide the best gauge for actual numbers but as you say that would be again open to speculation. Does serve to highlight the difficulties involved though - thanks again for your help.

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another shot of the Springfield bayonet. This time the ricasso area showing the lettering SA for Springfield Armory, the "flaming bomb" of the US Ordnance mark and the date of manufacture 1909. Once again the dark line of bluing makes a nice contrast against the brightly polished finish of the blade. This bayonet appears to have seen very minimal actual usage whilst in service - definitely not a "frontline use" article.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-1276479653.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all that information TonyE, you never cease to amaze me with the amount of data that you seemingly have available at your fingertips, I appreciate that tremendously. :thumbsup:

There is a lot of very interesting and at the same time very confusing data that you have provided there. What with the various contract numbers and the possibility of overlapping orders it is very easy to understand how difficult the job becomes for researchers, when trying to nail down the actual numbers of items produced over any given period. Possibly the monthly acceptance figures for the rifles would provide the best gauge for actual numbers but as you say that would be again open to speculation. Does serve to highlight the difficulties involved though - thanks again for your help.

Cheers, S>S

My pleasure.

Don't be too surprised at the amount of info, I live 3,000 miles nearer to our National Archives than you do! Also I practically lived there when I was writing my master's dissertation on the supply of rifles.

Cheers

TonyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been curious as to the reasons why some items manage to survive virtually unscathed over the years whilst others can become battered and bruised beyond all recognition. Obviously it all starts with the level of usage they are subjected to, the type of service they have to endure and over what period of time they remain in use.

Luckily this item came with some clues to help us discover some of these reasons. Towards the pommel of this bayonet we have the letters MDNB stamped into the timber of the grips/scales, to form an acronym or abbreviation. These same letters are also stamped into the leather tip of the scabbard. Usually this type of lettering found on bayonets tends to be a unit designation of some kind.

It took a fair bit of searching until I finally made some headway. I read somewhere that early in the war the US Marines were quite adequately supplied with Springfields, and it was the rapidly expanding Army that was experiencing the shortage of rifles. When I split up the letters I also realised that NB generally referred to a Naval Base. So the penny dropped and I started looking for a Marine Corps garrison stationed at a Naval Base some time during the war.

When the US entered the war the Navy intended to lay an extensive underwater mine barrage in the North Sea to protect commercial shipping. The site of the new Mine Depot was acquired for the Navy by a presidential proclamation on August 7, 1918, and was at the time the largest naval installation in the world, covering about twenty square miles. As many as 10,000 persons worked at this facility during WW1. (This base later became known as the NWS Yorktown)

A compliment of US Marines was stationed at the Mine Depot in 1918 to provide security. Amongst other duties the Marines patrolled the station and its perimeter on horseback due to its vast area and difficult terrain. (The horses were replaced by motor vehicles in 1960, making NWS Yorktown the last naval activity to use horse-mounted Marines)

So it seems this particular bayonet could have spent the larger part of its time in service safely racked away in a garrison armoury on a naval base. This would definitely help to explain the relatively untouched condition which we find it in today.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-1276740563.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...