1916 Lithgow bayonet

[4thGordons]

Obviously anything after the war and heading into WW2 is next to worthless though.

Cheers, S>S

How about ones like this?

Chris

[shippingsteel]

How about ones like this?

Yes Chris everything has its price.!

You know some guys have ones smaller than others .... does it make you feel proud.?!!

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Sorry - I mistyped that serial number on the mouthpiece before - it starts with 5MD (same district as the bayonet) but has a serial number after it - 5373, whereas the bayonet just has a 5 above the D/\D.

The 1903 was a great find, especially a unit marked Mole!

[jscott]

Hi Chris - apologies if this is a silly question, but isn't that a WW1 style MD marking with a round WW2-style frog stud? Or were the round ones made during WW1 as well?

[Andrew Upton]

Hi Chris - apologies if this is a silly question, but isn't that a WW1 style MD marking with a round WW2-style frog stud? Or were the round ones made during WW1 as well?

All the simplified mounts were authorized during the war, quite early as I recall but only become really common much later. Some of the WW1 rounds studs made in Australia are smaller than normal, hence ShippingSteels joke to Chris.

[4thGordons]

All the simplified mounts were authorized during the war, quite early as I recall but only become really common much later. Some of the WW1 rounds studs made in Australia are smaller than normal, hence ShippingSteels joke to Chris.

In the early 1920s some scabbards were made with smaller round studs, This was actually an approved pattern but very short lived - hence scarce, hence more valuable to collectors -which is why I posted it in response to the comment that "Obviously anything after the war and heading into WW2 is next to worthless." The WWII scabbards have standard large size studs. Double stitched scabbards (seams front and back) were also approved during the war (1915 I believe) but I do not think that these were produced until the '20s either. I have never seen production figures but I suspect the double stitched would be the rarest Lithgow scabbard, followed by the small button, followed by the teardrop WWI standard, followed by the WWII round stud.

Chris

[jscott]

Thanks guys - very helpful. Clearly I'm not quite advanced enough to pick up on the humour in bayonet banter!

[4thGordons]

Coincidentally - I obtained this today.

A 1916 Lithgow SMLE MkIII.

This particular example was FTR'd in 1952 and rebarreled at that point (and had a replacement foresight protector fitted with holes to both lighten and allow more light to fall on the blade) - but all numbered to match everywhere. The rifle is not fitted with a cut-off although, the receiver is milled for it. The green stripe was probably applied during the latter days of its career - probably in a cadet force. I believe the coding was Green = ball ammunition OK, Red = not safe for ball ammunition and yellow = Drill purpose.

Chris

[shippingsteel]

Whats the serial number on that one.? Would you say that the butt is the original - colour doesn't seem to match, may be a replacement.?

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

I'm going to be very upset if its the same serial number as mine and I have to give you my bayonet...

Lovely find!

[4thGordons]

I'm going to be very upset if its the same serial number as mine and I have to give you my bayonet...

Lovely find!

Serial number is 604_ _ (the last digits of the serial number are there of course but I prefer not to list it online)so it looks your bayonet is safe!

I am not sure if the buttstock is a replacement or not. As the rifle has been through FTR it is very possible - however the fore-end is numbered to the rifle as is the butt. The Numbering on the butt is a little unusual in that it is on the underside and the side of the butt is plain, where Lithgow rifles of this period almost always have assembly dates and other stampings so it may indeed be a replacement. If I had to guess I would say it might also be a different type of wood, rather than just difference in aging.

Chris

[Pete1052]

I'd like to gently point out again that most serving soldiers probaby wouln't have given a hoot about these minor variations in an item that are so important to collectors. For us collectors these things tell us a lot about a weapon's provenance and market value, but the average Tommy, Doughboy, or G.I. wouldn't have cared at all. These distortions of the relative importance of minor details within the collector community are okay as long as we remember that they didn't amount to hill of beans to the soldiers who once used these weapons.

[4thGordons]

I'd like to gently point out again that most serving soldiers probaby wouln't have given a hoot about these minor variations in an item that are so important to collectors.

Has anyone suggested or even implied that they would?

[jscott]

I think you're spot on about provenance being important. I really collect this stuff as an adjunct to my interest in WW1 and the markings mean that I can potentially link the bayonet (or whatever the item is) to a regiment etc and therefore give it a bit more context and value (in my opinion). I agree that the average soldier wouldn't have cared less about the markings themselves, but wouldn't be surprised if they checked out the markings on the German bayonets they souvenired (anyone would prefer a JA Henckels to a boring AG Duisberg)...

Sounds like I'm going to have to go and have a look at this swagger stick discussion, it sounds intense.

[shippingsteel]

In the early 1920s some scabbards were made with smaller round studs, This was actually an approved pattern but very short lived - hence scarce, hence more valuable to collectors -which is why I posted it in response to the comment that "Obviously anything after the war and heading into WW2 is next to worthless." The WWII scabbards have standard large size studs. Double stitched scabbards (seams front and back) were also approved during the war (1915 I believe) but I do not think that these were produced until the '20s either. I have never seen production figures but I suspect the double stitched would be the rarest Lithgow scabbard, followed by the small button, followed by the teardrop WWI standard, followed by the WWII round stud.

Chris

Grabbed this one off ebay last night just for you Chris - thought it might be a good gauge of the current market price .....and for a bit of fun, of course.!!

Obviously in fairly rough condition with a bit of surface rust. Appears to have been a garage/attic "scabbard storage" job - blade is very clean and still greased but external metal surfaces suffering oxidation. The bayonet is a "scarce" early wartime production Wilkinson dated 1914 now appearing with the very "scarce" but non-matching Lithgow manufactured small stud scabbard. Ebay valuation for the set - $77USD.

These "scabbard storage" bayonets are my favourite value-adding exercise as the blades are often in excellent condition. The surface rust over the pommel and crossguard is usually the easiest to remove and doesn't take anything away from the character of the overall article once properly cleaned. Some of the nicest bayonets in my collection came to me in this similar state, looking very 'unloved' and 'unwanted' (and hence priced accordingly = very important.!!)

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

Ebay valuation for the set - $77USD.

So is this what you got it for? (nice one)

or current price?

Chris

Edit: here are my two most recent finds:

[shippingsteel]

Yeah that's what I had to pay for the set.

FWIW that Vickers certainly raises some interesting questions in my mind ...(Chris you may not want to know about any of this - suggest stop reading here.!)

Any ideas on what refinishing or refurbishing it is supposed to have had.? Half a crown appears strange - the rest of it obliterated and the bluing remains immaculate.?

Also the grip screws look odd to me, with the clean 'bevel' on the top.? I haven't seen that before in any of my period examples, it may be just the photo but that nut almost appears to have a slightly domed appearance. From what I've seen WW1 screws are all fairly flat and smooth in appearance ie. like the one shown on the Remington grip. Anyway food for thought.?

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

FYI, here's a LINK to a similar dated Vickers in period standard finish and expected appearance and markings (albeit with a little extra black paint.!)

Note the standard grip screw nut (complete with screwdriver burrs.!) - makes for a good comparison.

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

Thanks

I have several to compare it to.

There is no difference in the grip nuts on this which are entirely standard (if a little shallow set). Your impression is a function of either you or the photo.

I know where my money lies.

Chris

[shippingsteel]

Recently picked up another 1916 Lithgow (in apparently rough condition) off ebay as a project bayonet. It came with a poorly photographed scabbard which looked somewhat "prospective" - it wasn't described at all, but I was hoping for an early Lithgow scabbard. Well the package arrived yesterday and I have to say a more authentic "frontline" article you could never hope to find. I never thought that one single bayonet could invoke such a range of emotions in me as this one did. No pristine collectors bayonet here, upon initial inspection my first thought was - WOW!!, this thing should be in a museum ....

As I said it needs a bit of work but the blade has no serious rust problems, just the normal spotting and stained patina. The ricassos are both very clearly marked with the early Lithgow proof and inspection marks and it has the rifle serial 43823 imprinted neatly on the pommel. The Queensland Maple grips are slightly chipped but remain virtually intact and the screws are still factory slotted (no refurb here). But most importantly for me was the early 1MD numbers found deeply stamped over the crossguard. All of my relatives that served in the GW were enlisted with the 1st Military District (Queensland) so yes, certainly emotional.

And on top of all that, this example shows all the hallmarks of having been seriously used in aggressive action in the frontline. I knew that the Australian troops were considered to be very adept with using the "cold steel" but the realisation of what I held in my hands definitely sent a shiver up my spine. The blade has been period sharpened in the lines for battle, it has the characteristic slight bend to the left that usually identifies a P1907 that has seen "use", but the real shock came when I found the signs of damage inside the mortise slot and the ever so slight tip forward of the muzzle ring. This bayonet has had considerable leverage and agressive force applied to it whilst being attached to the rifle .... I'll leave the rest to your imagination but I'm certainly treating it with a certain respect (if not reverence)

And the scabbard which I thought could be "prospective" topped all expectations. At first glance it was YES!! an early Lithgow with teardrop stud, but on closer inspection it was only the topmount that was Lithgow made (It had the Lithgow star stamp as expected and the MD markings on the rim) The leather had a string of markings down the left side of the seam which clearly showed it was of original British manufacture. The broad arrow over an AC (maker) then the Crown/number/B inspection mark over the date '09 (!!) then the 'sold out of service' mark. Well, gobsmacked was I.!!

You see when Lithgow first started manufacturing the SMLE rifle they didn't have bayonets made for them, so stocks of British made bayonets were imported as a stopgap measure. I have a couple of these early P1907 bayonets in HQR format with Australian markings ( they also have the SOS marking which indicates being sold from British service) The majority of the bayonets that the Aussies carried at the start of the war were British made hook quillons. The reason I was so happy with the new scabbard was that my Australian used 1909 Sanderson (see below) now had a perfectly matching scabbard.!!

(The scabbard must have had some refurbishment done at Lithgow at some stage to have been fitted with the early Lithgow topmount)

Anyway a very happy ending for me, I will post some photos of the Lithgow once the cleaning and restoration is complete.

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Great post S/S and nice find. You do have a knack of uncovering some v nice bayonets! Very much looking forward to seeing the Lithgow when you've finished tidying it up!

[shippingsteel]

Recently picked up another 1916 Lithgow (in apparently rough condition) off ebay as a project bayonet. I will post some photos of the Lithgow once the cleaning and restoration is complete.

So as promised, here are some photos of the Lithgow bayonet to which I was referring to in the previous post. The cleaning and restoration is now complete and its time for it to tell its story. As I mentioned earlier this one is definitely not some pristine collector bayonet - far from it, in fact a more genuine battle weary example from the GW I am yet to find. To me this one is certainly more of an historical artifact and has great personal significance. It was issued to the troops of the 1st Military District (of Queensland) in which all of my related GW servicemen were first enlisted.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

This example displays all the special markings which identify it as a GW service bayonet, and at the same time exhibits no sign of having been reissued for use after the war. The timber grips are made of Queensland Maple and although showing the normal scars of use are still incredibly intact and the grip screws and nuts have not been turned at all, and are still slotted in the same fashion as it left the factory. The blade has never been refurbished and has luckily avoided any serious damage from rust with just some light staining and patina. It appears to have been period sharpened for battle and shows some small nicks from use. This type of bayonet was Australian made and fitted to the Australian made Lithgow SMLE rifles for arming the troops of the AIF that saw action in France & Flanders during the war.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

This closeup shot shows the early Lithgow inspection markings on the ricasso, and the 1MD ownership mark of the 1st Military District stamped into the crossguard together with the serial number 19040. The original finish on these Lithgow blades was entirely blued, which then wore progressively thinner with hard usage, associated scabbard wear and the normal deterioration over time.

The Queensland Maple timber used in these grips not only had a very distinctive colour and grain, but it was also very soft meaning that it bruised and scarred quite easily.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

And the other ricasso simply shows a partial shield symbol over the date of 1916 over the word LITHGOW to denote the maker. These markings are usually very lightly stamped. The Lithgow bayonets that were matched up with rifles from the factory also came with the rifle serial number stamped into the pommel just above the timber grips. This particular example shows the serial number of 43823. Note the absolutely intact grip screw nut which has never been touched, indicating that this bayonet is unlikely to have ever been reworked or refurbished.

Cheers, S>S