bob lembke Posted 25 March , 2011 Share Posted 25 March , 2011 Re: post # 20, the first half of the inscription (going right to left) is quite different, the second (left) half, word or phrase, is the same, allowing for stylistic variation. So if you figure out what what that is, it might be useful. Have another comment, but will have to send and exit to make it. Bob Lembke Yes, seeing the later comment about "Factory of", the above makes sense. However, does that suggest that Ottoman Turkish is read (unlike Arabic) right to left? Or would the phrase in Turkish be written something like "Mauser, Factory of"? We are in a mine-field. As you know, Turkish was simplified big-time in the Attaturk reforms, yet both my wife (she who works in perhaps 80 languages at work, I kid you not) and I (much her junior, but I work faciley in say five, and a bit in 8-9 others) both agree that Modern Turkish, after reform, is probably still, overall, the most difficult major language there is. Wife has the Arabic alphabet, but doesn't know a word of vocabilary; I know a bit of Arabic, but not a character of the alphabet. (US Army tried to send me to Iraq as a translator, which indicates how desperate that situation was). Only place where I have ever been able to read Arabic was in Istanbul taxis, where religeous banners across the dashboard (naturally in Arabic), were written in the modern Turkish Latin script. Could be worse. Turkish has been written in about 10 alphabets. Arabic is an extremely poor alphabet to express the much more complicated Turkish language in. Ain't this stuff fun! Bob Lembke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 26 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 26 March , 2011 I have a batch of Turk bayonets, to go with the 8 Turk rifles I have. I will try to dig them out this afternoon and see what I have....chris3 Hey that would be great Chris, if you find anything looking different to what I have already posted, I would appreciate a closeup pic of the marking. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 26 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 26 March , 2011 Yes, seeing the later comment about "Factory of", the above makes sense. However, does that suggest that Ottoman Turkish is read (unlike Arabic) right to left? Or would the phrase in Turkish be written something like "Mauser, Factory of"? Bob Lembke Thanks Bob. Yes it appears that the Ottoman scripts are written and read 'backwards' as in right to left, just to add to the confusion.! And if language experts and Turkish speakers are struggling with the markings than I surely have no chance - I should give up right now.! I am having a bit of fun with my Ottoman language keyboard though, trying to recreate some of the characters found in the markings. Now that IS a good way to waste a few hours of your life .... Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 27 March , 2011 Share Posted 27 March , 2011 Well, I dug all of the so called Turk bayonets out and all of them have either had the script ground off or it was not there in the first place. One had the German maker's mark on it. At least they fit all my Turk Mausers.......chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 May , 2011 Share Posted 3 May , 2011 And to make things even more interesting here is another variation which is very similar yet not identical to the photo in post #5 identified as JP Sauer & Sohn. Newly found inscription is on the left. Anyone got any ideas .... Cheers, S>S Hi Shipping Steel, I have an exact match to your post on the left with Islamic year date 1311 but without the letters FM beneath the Osmanli script, Mine is a shortened 1890 with serial number 1806 on the opposite side of the guard. But has nobody yet figured out who the maker is? BTW it is heavy for its size! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 May , 2011 Share Posted 3 May , 2011 We are in a mine-field. As you know, Turkish was simplified big-time in the Attaturk reforms, yet both my wife (she who works in perhaps 80 languages at work, I kid you not) and I (much her junior, but I work faciley in say five, and a bit in 8-9 others) both agree that Modern Turkish, after reform, is probably still, overall, the most difficult major language there is. Wife has the Arabic alphabet, but doesn't know a word of vocabilary; I know a bit of Arabic, but not a character of the alphabet. (US Army tried to send me to Iraq as a translator, which indicates how desperate that situation was). Only place where I have ever been able to read Arabic was in Istanbul taxis, where religeous banners across the dashboard (naturally in Arabic), were written in the modern Turkish Latin script. Could be worse. Turkish has been written in about 10 alphabets. Arabic is an extremely poor alphabet to express the much more complicated Turkish language in. Ain't this stuff fun! Bob Lembke And just to confuse things further Osmanli Turkish used lots of Persian words that have (and are) slowly been (being) eliminated from modern Turkish. BUT I do have access to students who study Osmanli so perhaps I could start approaching them for help. BTW - if of any use to all out there - the Turkish for sword bayonet is kasatura and for knife bayonet is sungu, trjan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 3 May , 2011 Author Share Posted 3 May , 2011 Hi Shipping Steel, I have an exact match to your post on the left with Islamic year date 1311 but without the letters FM beneath the Osmanli script, Mine is a shortened 1890 with serial number 1806 on the opposite side of the guard. But has nobody yet figured out who the maker is? BTW it is heavy for its size! Trajan Greetings Trajan, thank you for your interest. The "letters FM" is actually the date stamp 1311, but it is quite battered from hard use, so difficult to make out. Some of the makers have been identified, but I would welcome any confirmation on any of the meanings represented by the problematic Osmanli script. We do know the names of most of the makers involved, but matching these names with the script is proving difficult, any help would be most appreciated. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 4 May , 2011 Share Posted 4 May , 2011 Greetings Trajan, thank you for your interest. The "letters FM" is actually the date stamp 1311, but it is quite battered from hard use, so difficult to make out. Some of the makers have been identified, but I would welcome any confirmation on any of the meanings represented by the problematic Osmanli script. We do know the names of most of the makers involved, but matching these names with the script is proving difficult, any help would be most appreciated. Cheers, S>S Silly me... Of course it's the date-stamp... I was working on this late at night... Anyway, I have printed off the 1311 example and I will talk to a guy who does Osmanli today about it. If I can get him interested enough then I will pass the others by him as well! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 4 May , 2011 Share Posted 4 May , 2011 Greetings Trajan, thank you for your interest. The "letters FM" is actually the date stamp 1311, but it is quite battered from hard use, so difficult to make out. Some of the makers have been identified, but I would welcome any confirmation on any of the meanings represented by the problematic Osmanli script. We do know the names of most of the makers involved, but matching these names with the script is proving difficult, any help would be most appreciated. Cheers, S>S Silly me... Of course it's the date-stamp... I was working on this late at night... Anyway, I have printed off the 1311 example and I will talk to a guy who does Osmanli today about it. If I can get him interested enough then I will pass the others by him as well! Trajan [/quo Not had any luck yet with Osmanli transcriptions for osmanli bayonet inscriptions. BUT why is the 1890 Turkish bayonet so heavy? My shortened one ('10 inches') is 489 gr. I have just weighed an 1895 bulgarian manlicher knife bayonet about the same length and it is 289 gr. Then did some others: German sword bayonet mauser 98/05 is 588 gr; French berthier 1892 sword is 442 gr; French Lebel sword 1886 is 406 gr; British P1907 sword is 488 gr. So, the orifinal 1890 turk mauser bayonet must have been a helluva weight on the end of the rifle! Does anyone have a weigh for an unshortened 1890? Must beat some records!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 4 May , 2011 Author Share Posted 4 May , 2011 The M1890 bayonet is heavier because it has a thicker blade than most bayonets, and it is also slightly wider at the crossguard and then tapers to the point. The blade thickness at the crossguard is nearly 8mm while the blade width is 26mm, providing extra strength for its very long blade which extends to 463mm. While your shortened bayonet has had the tip removed, the bulk of the weight still remains in the hilt and the very thick blade found near the crossguard area. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 6 August , 2011 Share Posted 6 August , 2011 As luck would have it, sitting down, having a quiet beer in the uni bar (yes, I know, its Ramadam - but I am a yabanci [foreigner] and excluded from fasting and the bar knows that!), and three post-grad Osmanli students I know walk in... Showed them the 'mystery markings' (I now have two of these, one on an unshortened and one on a shortened 1890!) as per photo. Consensus? 'M, S, R' before 'fabrikasa', and so one would assume MauSeR...!!! Makes sense, as the Turks were using Mauser rifles! Now, my other 1891 is a different maker... Want to check now the weight and the qualitity of the steel using approved analysis methods. I am wondering if the price of the original Mauser bayonets were over the top and so the Ottoman's looked for cheaper bayonet suppliers (e.g,Simson, etc.) Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Thats very interesting Trajan. I believe Waffenfabrik Mauser was the 'primary contractor' for the supply of the rifles and bayonets to the Turks. I think Ludwig Loewe may also have been involved initially but later pulled out of the deal, leaving Mauser to supply all of the contracted rifles. I didn't even realise that they were involved in making bayonets. I always thought they just subcontracted the supply of bayonets out to other makers. What markings did you actually show them for the translation.? You realise that image above is missing a couple of worn characters at the bottom.? Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Thats very interesting Trajan. I believe Waffenfabrik Mauser was the 'primary contractor' for the supply of the rifles and bayonets to the Turks.I think Ludwig Loewe may also have been involved initially but later pulled out of the deal, leaving Mauser to supply all of the contracted rifles. I didn't even realise that they were involved in making bayonets. I always thought they just subcontracted the supply of bayonets out to other makers. What markings did you actually show them for the translation.? You realise that image above is missing a couple of worn characters at the bottom.? Cheers, S>S Hi S>S, I used the same photo you put up as reproduced in my post before (had it on my laptop), which matches my two. All three post-grads (two Turks one USA) started of identifying the first letter as M, then some discussion but agreement on the S, from which the R came and so 'Mauser' naturally followed! They were a bit bemused at first: they are used to Osmanli documents rather than stamps! I will try them on some other stamps next time I see them. BTW, does Otto's Turkish bayonets CD not have samples of stamps? I don't have it as I waiting for a friend to bring it over. Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 I tend to stay out of these bayonet threads as it is not my area of knowledge, but seeing Trajan's latest post regarding the transcription of "Mauser" into Osmanli. I thought I would post a similar point about their ammunition. Turkish 7.63x53mm Mauser ammunition made prior to about 1908 was all supplied by D.W.M. and bears an Arabic headstamp as shown on the 1904 round below. The part of the script highlighted reads as "MAWZR", a phonetic interpretation of "Mauser". With respect to the manufacturers, it must be remembered that Ludwig Loewe owned Mauser Werke and that production was split between the various companies of the group (Loewe, Mauser, Steyr, FN and DWM) as was deemed necessary. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Thanks for that information TonyE. Its very interesting to get confirmation from the different perspectives, and it all helps to complete the picture.That script on the cartridge headstamp also correlates with the script on the receivers of the Turkish Mauser rifles supplied with these contracts.You can see it matches with the section I have underlined in blue. I believe that inscription reads from the right as Waffenfabrik Mauser Arms Factory.Thanks again for chiming in Tony. (Also see post #22, your information supports what I uncovered there - which took me many hours.!) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 28 October , 2011 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2011 I am revisiting this thread after having recently turned up another 'new' inscription marking on a Turk bayonet - which I think may be the long version of Simson (on left). It's one I haven't seen before, and has the extra bit at the right hand side (shown in red) which I now realise is common with a couple of the other unknown examples. I have shown them all below for a comparison. I guess if we can work out what the common piece is in the red box, it could really help in working out what the rest is.? It's interesting that this script is not present on the examples already identified as WK&C or Alex Coppel from Solingen. Could the common link be the town of Suhl.?? Any help in this translation would be appreciated. I am keeping my fingers crossed here and hoping for a breakthrough that could finally help to complete the puzzle.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 28 October , 2011 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2011 And a couple more of the photos. The thing about Suhl is that it was one of the key locations of the big German cutler firms, together with Solingen. We believe the marking to the left is that of JP Sauer & Sohn of Suhl, while the other Ottoman-Turk 'osmanlic' inscription to the right is still unknown. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 31 October , 2011 Author Share Posted 31 October , 2011 The Ottoman-Turkish script reads from right to left, and I have been able to mostly replicate the actual script with the assistance of my trusty OT keyboard.! The Mauser marking on the rifles has included the town where the factory was located, so we should probably assume that the bayonet stamps are the same. Taking this new theory forward, I have attempted to attack the bayonet inscriptions, and quoting my favourite movie character King Julian - "My clever plan has worked, Maurice.!" (For those not "in the know" or up to speed with the latest in animated movie entertainment, King Julian is that crazy misguided lemur character from the cartoon movie Madagascar) So looking at one of the major makers Alexander Coppel & Cie, who we know was located in the town of Solingen, I looked to replicate the markings using Solingen as the lead word. And I think the resulting translations shown below, while not perfect due to the vagaries of the different fonts being used, are close enough to suggest that I am on the right track. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 November , 2011 Share Posted 1 November , 2011 S>S, This is really amazing work! Thanks for sharing it with us!!! Any luck with the great mystery one??? Cheers, Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 1 November , 2011 Author Share Posted 1 November , 2011 Thanks Trajan, if anyone could appreciate this - it would have to be you.! But yes, the more I look into this stuff, the more fascinated I become. And as I suspected the word that I highlighted in the red box, that was common to 4 different makers, has turned out to definitely be the town of Suhl. So now I have been trawling through the reference books tracking down all the major German cutlers that were located in Suhl during the 1890's.! I have been able to list 4 so far which would fit the bill, and have translated the two inscriptions in post #41 as being Simson & Cie and CG. Haenel. So that just leaves the two in post #42 that I'm still uncertain about. I believe one of them is JP. Sauer, but of course they are being a bit awkward. Another major Suhl cutler was VC. Schilling but it doesn't seem to be fitting in anywhere. Maybe I am still missing another maker that I'm not aware of.? Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garron Posted 1 November , 2011 Share Posted 1 November , 2011 Nice work S>S, very impressive. I found this when searching it lists the makers from Suhl who made German bayonets. Don't know its its any use. http://www.worldbayonets.com/Misc__Pages/Imperial_German_Blade_Markings/imperial_german_blade_markings.html Simson and Co Suhl Ernst Wilhelm & Co Suhl Gebrüder Simpson, Suhl Sampson Werke, Suhl C.G. Haenel, SSuhl V. C. Schilling & Co., Suhl Gaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 1 November , 2011 Author Share Posted 1 November , 2011 Hey thanks Gaz.! Those makers were ones that I had found as well, just getting the earlier dates/periods to fit in properly is the hard part. The Gebruder Simson maker actually became Simson & Cie sometime around 1880 if I remember correctly, so thats one less to worry about. I still need to do a bit more of the deciphering first, and then I will have more idea what I should be looking for. That list of makers is a good start. PS. Oh yeah, picked up another M1890 the other day in average condition sans scabbard for $75.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garron Posted 1 November , 2011 Share Posted 1 November , 2011 Hey, Yeah that list is a step in the right direction, something might crop up on it. Nice buy, seems like Turkish bayonets are getting harder to find, all I've seen lately is the Turkish 1935 model and a rather battered US 1908 M1905 sadly turned into a M1905E1. I seem to have stripped my hunting grounds bare. Gaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 November , 2011 Share Posted 1 November , 2011 ... seems like Turkish bayonets are getting harder to find, all I've seen lately is the Turkish 1935 model...Gaz If it's any consolation I have never yet seen a Turkish 1935 for sale over here except one on the Turkish e-bay with the tip missing, and at the ridiculous price of US$ 150... On the other hand, on Sunday I did get a reasonably nice Ersatz EB47, with original metal imitiation leather scabbard and frog for US$ 20 - and just to broaden my collection, a Turkish metal-grips 1955 Garand, a rather rare type, at the same price! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 2 November , 2011 Author Share Posted 2 November , 2011 Any luck with the great mystery one??? Well guys, I think I may have finally solved this one (see post #42). I have unearthed a couple more things and come to the realisation that they are BOTH for JP.Sauer of Suhl.! Unfortunately I haven't got the best of photos for the mystery marking's shown below, which doesn't help either. Trajan would you happen to have a clearer picture of this one.? You can see that the one in the centre is missing a few of the characters from the very middle of the stamping, however I think I've been able to nearly identify them correctly. Anyway working from what I've got, I have noticed a couple of key things. The thing that's out of place I have circled in the red - some bright spark has decided to "add punctuation".! The marks look like ordinary 'commas' which someone must have thought was a good idea to put in there, unaware that in Osmanlic script ALL the markings are to mean something. Then I noticed that the dates on the mystery item (in the blue box) was also the same being 1311 or roughly 1895 in our years, just earlier than the other Sauer dates of 1312 and 1313. So the explanation that I've come up with, is that the mystery samples on the left are the early JP.Sauer markings, which were then corrected and modified for the later year dates (right) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts