jscott Posted 22 January , 2012 Share Posted 22 January , 2012 I agree with Trajan - that seems wrong on many levels, but most odd is the conflicting date/ ER stamping. Either its an original hookie from Edwards reign which was redated (no idea why and surely they would have removed the hook at the same time), or its a rather confused forgery? Having said all that I know you've been trawling the AWM archives so wont be surprised to hear that there is some legitimate explanation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 23 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 23 January , 2012 It sure is a strange one thats for certain. And both of you have raised the very same questions that I have been trying to answer myself. Firstly, I don't think its a fake.! I can't find one detail that suggests that its anything other than correct - except for the '14 date that is. The cypher, pattern number and the makers mark all match out. And I have compared it closely with other Wilkinson examples that were made during the ER reign and dated 1911/12. Even down to the exact same inspection marks. So I guess that brings us to the question 'why' is this so. Probably the most important thing to keep in mind is that the dates actually indicate acceptance into service. While the wartime mass production meant that the manufacture and acceptance dates normally coincided, this wasn't always the case especially with earlier contracts. In the pre-war period much smaller numbers were produced, and any production over runs above the stipulated contract number would simply remain as factory 'leftovers'. So these would most likely be put aside into the stores to never see the light of day. But all that changed when war broke out, with the shortages in the rush to mobilisation. It is well known that rifles and bayonets were in short supply in the beginning, with a pressing need to arm all the new recruits. This one was most likely grabbed for service. It is known that the 'end date' for the hook quillons was October 1913, but this only applied for the new production. Those ones already in service had them slowly phased out. The bulk of the bayonets in use at the start of the war would have been hook quillons, and I have even seen surviving hookies with '14 reissue dates stamped on their ricasso. So it seems that not everything happened 'by the book' and are not as clear cut as we would like to believe. Especially in times of war the 'rules' tended to be more overlooked. Leaving us with the BIG question of is this the last hooked quillon to ever be accepted into British service? (The headline mentions something about the Last of the Mohicans.!) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 23 January , 2012 Share Posted 23 January , 2012 ... Probably the most important thing to keep in mind is that the dates actually indicate acceptance into service.... Leaving us with the BIG question of is this the last hooked quillon to ever be accepted into British service? (The headline mentions something about the Last of the Mohicans.!) Hi S>S, Well, first off, thanks for clarifying that bit about the ricasso date being the date of acceptance into service and not manufactire: I have been wondering about that ever since I got caught up in this pointy-thing malarkey - I certainly can't recall a definitive statement either way in Skennerton and Richardson! That aside, I think your analysis is spot-on, and I think, yes, it's a fair bet it is one of the very last if not the last hookie accepted into service! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 23 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 23 January , 2012 I have been wondering about that ever since I got caught up in this pointy-thing malarkey ... Not having second thoughts I hope (can't be having that on my watch) here's another pic of a nice bayonet to keep you focussed - they don't come much better.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 23 January , 2012 Share Posted 23 January , 2012 Not having second thoughts I hope No, no second thoughts, just wish I could find some nice pointey things over here to come somewhere near matching the quality and price that you, Jscott and sawdoc have at your hands and command... (Hey, S>S, just how many P1907's [and P1888''s and P1903's] DO you have?) OK, I picked up this Turkish 'M1913' the other day (and S>S, thanks again for the ID), and they are not that common, and you might not find them your way - BUT you will barf/larf when I post a photo and if I tell you what I paid for it... Now, this hookie in the last post - nice, clear Enfield inspection marks, with nice ricasso blueing, and - I take it this is the other side of the Edwardian 1907 hookie? It's luverly, luverly - and so now to assuage my feelings of jealousy, I will turn to hold my nice unmodified Greek Mannlicher-Schonaeur M 1903, one of the rarest of the rare...!!! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 23 January , 2012 Share Posted 23 January , 2012 I didn't actually realise that was your bayonet S>S. Very impressive and the explanation of the markings sounds pretty convincing as well. You really do have a superb collection of Aussie bayonets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 23 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 23 January , 2012 I didn't actually realise that was your bayonet S>S. Very impressive and the explanation of the markings sounds pretty convincing as well. Hang on a minute JS. I think Trajans been spreading rumours again, technically I'm not owning up to anything, as these photos have been 'borrowed' for "research purposes only". BTW this one is NOT an Aussie bayonet, it has been stamped with British regimentals and has not been hit with the SOS stamp on the pommel, which all my early Aussie/Brit bayonets have. (Hey, S>S, just how many P1907's [and P1888''s and P1903's] DO you have?) Now, this hookie in the last post - nice, clear Enfield inspection marks, with nice ricasso blueing, and - I take it this is the other side of the Edwardian 1907 hookie? It's luverly, luverly - and so now to assuage my feelings of jealousy, I will turn to hold my nice unmodified Greek Mannlicher-Schonaeur M 1903, one of the rarest of the rare...!!! Trajan it's not polite to ask any 'searching' questions, as refusal may offend.!! But seriously to answer that I'd have to count them, and if I counted them, the other half may take note ... And I don't want that - I REALLY don't want that.!! Lets just say for the moment that my 'monster truck' tool cabinet is overflowing, and I'm looking to expand with an even bigger version. And you take good care of that Greek M1903, its a real nice bayonet - and those comforting feelings that you get when you hold it will keep you going until you find your next 'true love'.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 January , 2012 Share Posted 24 January , 2012 Trajan it's not polite to ask any 'searching' questions, as refusal may offend.!! But seriously to answer that I'd have to count them, and if I counted them, the other half may take note ... And I don't want that - I REALLY don't want that.!! Lets just say for the moment that my 'monster truck' tool cabinet is overflowing, and I'm looking to expand with an even bigger version. Yes, rude of me, I know, and your answer is direct and honest - meaning one doesn't want one's other half to notice just how many of these things might be filling assorted spaces in the house...!!! But what does continue to amaze me is just how many high quality bayonets you seem to come across in the antipodes! Ah well, 12 days to go to the next monthly 'antik fuari', so hopefully I'll see something nice there... Mind you, in the nine months I have been visiting this fair, i.e., since starting to collect on a more serious basis, I have never seen a single P1907. On the other hand, I have seen two P1888's (which I bought, one with scabbard, the other without) and one grossly mistreated P1903 (which I didn't buy when I first saw it, as the pommel and quillion were gone and it had 'new' wooden grips: 20 minutes later, having surveyed what else was available, I decided to get it for its original leather scabbard, but it had gone by then...been kicking myself ever since...). Cheers for now, Trajan EDIT: Oh, just seen that I have been promoted - to the same rank as S>S! Think I need an Efes to celebrate!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 24 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 24 January , 2012 Oh, just seen that I have been promoted - to the same rank as S>S! (I think I'll choose to ignore that - was going to mention something about the "top brass" now coming in 'ersatz' version, but that may not be sporting, what ...) Anyway enough with the chit-chat, lets get back to business with another example of bayonets which don't exactly fit within our 'defined criteria', or as we expect. This example was posted by forum member Welshdoc a while back and created quite a lot of attention, where it was bandied around as being an outright fake. Then our good mate Sawdoc brought the topic up once again when he sought to compare his newly acquired Vickers P1913 bayonet with another known example. Anyway it's a very nice (and rare) bayonet and supports my previous argument about the 'surplus to contract' factory leftovers not being dated when manufactured. Which makes sense when you think about it, because if left unmarked there was always the chance these 'leftovers' could be brought back round for the next order. I'm sure there was a lot of things that went on that will remain a mystery, as none of it was recorded and few would have cared about such small and trivial details. Its only now that us collectors try to make sense out of all these things (and see everything nicely pigeon-holed) but they never really worked like that in the real world. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 28 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 28 January , 2012 It is known that the 'end date' for the hook quillons was October 1913, but this only applied for the new production. Those ones already in service had them slowly phased out. The bulk of the bayonets in use at the start of the war would have been hook quillons, and I have even seen surviving hookies with '14 reissue dates stamped on their ricasso. So it seems that not everything happened 'by the book' and are not as clear cut as we would like to believe. Especially in times of war the 'rules' tended to be more overlooked. To provide a little supporting evidence, here is an interesting photo of some hook quillon bayonets in service in the trenches, you can easily see why the tips got so abraded in use.! It would be good to be able to date this picture. I think I'll post it for the equipment and uniform buffs to ponder over - I think that guy might even be wearing a kilt, so that may be of use. PS. So that was easy - posted this image HERE and got it dated as 18th May 1916, and being used by Australian troops.! Looks like thats not a kilt after all.!! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Here are the results of my work done on the Australia Day holiday. Kicking back watching the cricket on TV with steel wool in hand - you just can't beat the smell of gun oil.! These are a couple of 'old soldiers' - Aussie bayonets that not only survived the GW outing but managed to scrape through WW2 as well - with more than a little sharpening ... I can't understand collectors that will not have a bar of sharpening on blades - they obviously are only interested in the aesthetics and couldn't give a damn about actual history. The top one is a 1917 Lithgow with WW1 rifle serial on the pommel and early 4MD stampings on the crossguard, it came complete with the excellent Mangrovite '42 scabbard. The other is the 1911 Enfield HQR example that I mentioned previously, with the early Victorian mark. It actually cleaned up really well and looks to have been retired after WW2. When I bought it out it was filthy and had the press catch frozen solid. With a little work it freed up and the rest of the gunk just peeled off leaving nothing but sweet patinated metal. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawdoc34 Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Real nice bayonets there S/S, cleaned up very well, must find some time to clean up some of my recent additions. How many P07s have you got now mate? Must be quite a sizeable collection, green with envy Here is a new 1 for you to identify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Real nice bayonets there S/S, cleaned up very well, must find some time to clean up some of my recent additions. How many P07s have you got now mate? Must be quite a sizeable collection, green with envy Here is a new 1 for you to identify Thanks Aleck, and yeah I've got a 'few' but not a 'lot' - they are a common bayonet so I only bother collecting ones specially marked or with other history (ie. NCH or HQR) As for your new one, it is the Belgian M1889 'short' - the standard infantry bayonet for the Belgian Mauser. They are nice little bayonet and getting a little harder to find now. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 My, my, S>S, you were busy on Australia Day! And they have come up very nicely - do you have an before shots for comparison? Aleck - back home then? And yes, that's a nice one too! I hope to be getting a 'new' ersatz later this week - without scabbard, unfortunately, but it looks in good condition, and it will replace one of the same type I already have that the previous owner had cleaned with - wait for it... .. a rotary grinder... The blade and handle weren't too badly damaged but the cross guard had deep gouges in it... Still, that one has served as a 'keeper' in my ersatz collection while I waited for another of the same type to turn up - and hopefully I can off-load it at a suitably inflated (aka. 'outlandish'!) price. Cheers, Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2012 The blade and handle weren't too badly damaged but the cross guard had deep gouges in it ... and hopefully I can off-load it at a suitably inflated (aka. 'outlandish'!) price. Now you're catching on Trajan, you can always 'trade-up' for something really nice, especially in that kind of sellers market. If you can't beat it you may as well join in.! Regarding my cleaning job, you can see some 'before' shots of the 1911 Enfield over the previous page, from roughly about post #250 through to #260 (blue background). Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawdoc34 Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Cheers S/S, quite liked the look of it & it was cheap, so thought what the heck, I have added german & turk bayonets to the collection so 1 more from another country wont hurt (will it?) Yes Trajan, I am back again mate, unfortunately I have to drive up to Forfar early tomorrow morning for a funeral but can kill 2 birds with 1 stone as a friend of wor lasses in Arbroath has some bayonets to sell so wil check them out while I am up that way. Remember, we need pics of your new blade when you get it Anyone got any info on full length serbian milanovich bayonets with muzzle ring removed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 I have 4 1907 Pattern hooked bayonets in my Collection, which I would enjoy sharing with members. I know that one bayonet in particular will be enjoyed by member Shippingsteel who recently posted a question regarding a trench photograph, as one of my bayonets is a 1907 Enfield with an Australian Issue Mark ( I have to be careful now! -at least that is what I was told by the Seller ). I shall post all 4, then each one individually, with details of each's ricosso front and back. One has the much rarer Mk.1 scabbard with the internal chape. LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 1907 Enfield - issued date September 1911 - Pommel has the Australian issue mark. 1907 Enfield bayonet - with Australian issue mark - Ricosso front - Ricosso - reverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Those are some exceptionally fine examples, and the MkI scabbard is great too. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 1907 James A. Chapman Ltd. hooked bayonet - issue date May 1910 - the pommel is marked " 5379 3 R.I. " ( which I am told is for the Royal Irish Regiment ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 1907 Enfield hooked bayonet - issue date May 1909 - Pommel marked SEA. R. 210 ( which I am told is for the 1st Battalion The Seaforth Highlanders - Ross Shire Buffs - The Duke of Albany's Regiment.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawdoc34 Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Wow LF thats some seriously nice looking hookies you have there, many thanks for sharing those beauties Do you collect bayonets from different nations or just brit/commonwealth? Cheers, Aleck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 1907 Wilkinson hooked bayonet - issue date July 1910 - Pommel is marked 3 SH 169 ( which I am told is for the King's Shropshire Light Infantry ). This bayonet has the rare Mk.1 scabbard with the internal chape. The scabbard is marked along the reverse stitched rib " HGR 09 ", which is for the scabbard's maker - Hepburn. Gale and Ross Ltd. of Grange Mills, Grange Road, Bermondsey, London SE1. and is dated 1909. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Very nice collection/selection there! Thanks for sharing! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Mark 1 scabbard details - Maker's mark - date - photo of internal chape. Internal Chape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts