Hooked Quillion still in service use in 1920 ?

[Lancashire Fusilier]

In regard to the dating of your photo in the OP, The enlargement of your original photo (that was provided by Auchonvillersomme) shows a number of Indian soldiers wandering around in the background.

In another photo showing a parade at the Jaffa Gate after the capture of Jerusalem, those same Indian soldiers also feature prominantly in the march past.

Cheers, S>S

shippingsteel,

Thanks for the follow up.

The ' Indian ' troops shown in the march past photo are definitely not the same ' Indian ' troops shown in the enlarged OP photo. Not all ' Indian ' troops are the same, and they came from many different regiments, often distinguished by their headwear.

If you look closely at the headwear of the march past troops you will see that they are wearing ' Sikh ' turbans, whereas the ' Indian ' troops in the enlarged OP photo are wearing a completely different style of headwear often seen in ' Indian ' Muslim regiments, i.e. they are completely different troops, so your mistaken identification does not assist at all in dating the OP photograph.

The photo caption stated circa 1920, which it may very well be, however, the purpose of the Thread was not to raise any earth shattering revelations, but merely to register my surprise at seeing a 1907 Hooked Quillion Sword Bayonet still in service use so long after the decision was made to remove the HQ.

I would still be surprised to see the HQ in service use, be it in 1919 - 1921 or even later.

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Examples of Indian troops' headwear - Sikhs and Punjabis for example.

LF

[shippingsteel]

They may not be exactly the same troops in the photos, but I would bet that the photos were taken at the same time upon the capture of Jerusalem in late 1917.

If you look at the evidence in detail you will note that in both photos bayonets are fixed for the ceremonial occasion, not something thats usually done ex battle.?

The capture of Jerusalem was a very big deal and a propaganda victory for the British allies. Like a 'victorious Crusader' Gen. Allenby walked through the gates.!

EDIT. The Indian troops would be from the 20th Indian Brigade which formed part of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force which fought in the Battle of Jerusalem.

The Brigade comprised :-

Alwar Imperial Service Infantry Regiment, Patiala Imperial Service Infantry Regiment, Gwalior Imperial Service Infantry Regiment, 110th Mahratta L. I. Regiment

Cheers, S>S

[Lancashire Fusilier]

They may not be exactly the same troops in the photos,

Cheers, S>S

shippingsteel,

I appreciate you taking part in the Thread, and as I said, although the photo caption says circa 1920, even if the British troops were photographed in 1917 or 1918 - 1919 - 1920 - 1921 - 1922 or even later, it was still a surprise to see British troops wearing a 1907 Hooked Quillion Sword Bayonet that long after the decision to remove the HQ was taken, and the photo, particularly auchonvillerssomme's much larger and better version, is still a great photo, I am sure you will agree with that.

Regards,

LF

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Just to add a nice water colour of the, Grand New Hotel

as in the photograph Palestine.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Just to add a nice water colour of the, Grand New Hotel

as in the photograph Palestine.

Very nice painting, from the same viewpoint. Is the postcard dated ?

Regards,

LF

[shippingsteel]

As to the instructions of exactly when the hooked qullions were to be removed, the book does not say. I assume it was to be done as soon as possible after the LOC was issued on 29 Oct 1913, so to see an intact 1907 HQ bayonet still in service use as late as 1920, 7 years after the order to remove the hooked quillion was made, is very unusual ...

Considering it is estimated that some 300,000/400,000 1907 Hooked Quillion bayonets were produced, and when also considering the rarity of those 1907 Hooked Quillion bayonets issued into service use that still exist today with their HQ intact, it shows that the October 1913 LOC requiring the HQs to be removed was comprehensively implemented.

Just to set the record straight - there never was any "order to remove hooked quillons" given as such, and what you are basically doing is perpetuating a "collector's myth".

The List of Changes reference (shown below) to which you mention is extremely light on detail and only serves to notify the acceptance of the new pattern for manufacture.

Sure some of the existing quillons were removed over time, as they came in for routine repairs and maintenance, but nothing was done in the way that you are so implying.

So essentially the quillons were slowly phased out in service, all new manufacture was without quillons meaning the numbers were reduced through wastage and damage.

At the wars end when much of the surplus wartime equipment would have entered storage, all the stocks still then in service would have been checked and 'standardised'.

Cheers, S>S

[David Filsell]

It is a model T - and a great shot of one too.

[shippingsteel]

It is a model T - and a great shot of one too.

Here is the full shot again (posting it again on this page for ease of reference)

Cheers, S>S

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

This how it would look today if you pulled up in your model T with hookie and lewis.

Its now called the Hotel Imperial, Built in the 1880s .

[Lancashire Fusilier]

The List of Changes reference (shown below) to which you mention is extremely light on detail and only serves to notify the acceptance of the new pattern for manufacture.

Cheers, S>S

Many thanks for posting LOC 16755.

Although we know that as and when, HQs were removed, Chris also highlighted another factor that would have greatly attributed to the demise of the Hooked Quillion Bayonet, which was the staggering losses to the men still carrying those bayonets at the start of WW1.

Those ' going over the top ' had their bayonets fixed, and the resulting carnage would have not just resulted in the staggering loss of those men, but also the equipment they were carrying at the time.

Of the estimated 300,000+ HQs produced, either by losses or damage in battle, or by the removal of the HQ, very few of those 300,000+ still survive today, not just those still having the HQ intact, but also those rarer examples which do not have the c/hole drilled in the pommel, i.e. as they were originally manufactured.

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

This how it would look today if you pulled up in your model T with hookie and lewis.

Its now called the Hotel Imperial, Built in the 1880s .

If walls could talk!

Some more photos.

Regards,

LF

[shippingsteel]

Although we know that as and when, HQs were removed, Chris also highlighted another factor that would have greatly attributed to the demise of the Hooked Quillion Bayonet, which was the staggering losses to the men still carrying those bayonets at the start of WW1.

Those ' going over the top ' had their bayonets fixed, and the resulting carnage would have not just resulted in the staggering loss of those men, but also the equipment they were carrying at the time.

Of the estimated 300,000+ HQs produced, either by losses or damage in battle, or by the removal of the HQ, very few of those 300,000+ still survive today, not just those still having the HQ intact, but also those rarer examples which do not have the c/hole drilled in the pommel, i.e. as they were originally manufactured.

That is a sad but true reflection and probably the major reason for the lack of surviving HQ bayonets. Wartime used hookies are indeed rare and some of the best examples were once German 'bringbacks'.

You just need to be careful of making generalisations. Hookies are not that scarce, but ones in good condition are. Prewar Reservist hookies are commonly seen, ones marked to frontline regiments less so.

Likewise with bayonets that are without the clearance hole (NCH) they are less common but not at all rare, especially when you consider that all the earlier Lithgow bayonets were never made with the hole.

My observation is that the early wartime dated P1907's without the clearance hole are the hardest to find of all the British bayonets, the '13 and '14 dates are especially scarce for the above stated reasons.

And before the war the numbers manufactured were relatively modest (which doesn't help availability) Of course this changed rapidly when the fullscale production of vast numbers kicked in later in the war.

Cheers, S>S

[Lancashire Fusilier]

That is a sad but true reflection and probably the major reason for the lack of surviving HQ bayonets.

Lithgow bayonets were never made with the hole.

Cheers, S>S

The top of my current bayonet want list is a 1907 Lithgow Hooked Quillion in excellent condition, however, with only some 8000 produced, I shall need to be patient.

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Likewise with bayonets that are without the clearance hole (NCH) they are less common but not at all rare, especially when you consider that all the earlier Lithgow bayonets were never made with the hole.

My observation is that the early wartime dated P1907's without the clearance hole are the hardest to find of all the British bayonets, the '13 and '14 dates are especially scarce for the above stated reasons.

Cheers, S>S

As far as hard to find 1907 Sword Bayonets produced without the HQ are concerned, Vickers did not commence 1907 bayonet production until mid-1917, and by Armistice has only made some 10,000 bayonets, not that much more than the rare Lithgow Hookie.

With R. Mole coming in at just 60,000 1907 bayonets.

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

From my Collection, a Vickers Ltd., of London SW1, Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet dated 11 17 for November 1917. Note the Vicker's distinctively large clearance hole in the pommel, a much larger clearance hole than on any other P1907 bayonet.

Also, a R. Mole and Sons of Granville Street, Birmingham, Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet dated 7 15 for July 1915.

LF

[gordon92]

The chap driving appears to be wearing a cap badge of Alexandra, Princess of Wales's Own (Yorkshire Regiment)(Green Howards).

L/Dfdr

I have not seen this photograph before, it is captioned :-

" British troops at the Jaffa Gate, Jerusalem circa 1920 "

One of the soldiers is clearly carrying a Hooked Quillion Bayonet, could these HQ bayonets have still been in service use as late as 1920, long after the hooked quillions were required to be removed, or is this just another incorrect caption ?

Does anyone know which regiment these men are from ? and were they serving in Palestine in 1920 ?

LF

The 1st Bn Green Howards were serving in Palestine 1919-1920. See http://web.archive.org/web/20071216143629/http://www.regiments.org/deploy/uk/reg-inf/019-1.htm

So, the 1920 dating of the OPs photograph is entirely plausible.

[Andrew Upton]

From my Collection, a Vickers Ltd., of London SW1, Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet dated 11 17 for November 1917. Note the Vicker's distinctively large clearance hole in the pommel, a much larger clearance hole than on any other P1907 bayonet.

Also, a R. Mole and Sons of Granville Street, Birmingham, Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet dated 7 15 for July 1915.

LF

Hopefully of course you returned those bayonets to their scabbards the correct way round? In British use the locking button on the pommel always goes towards the body/frog!

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Hopefully of course you returned those bayonets to their scabbards the correct way round? In British use the locking button on the pommel always goes towards the body/frog!

Andrew,

I reversed them in their scabbards just for the photograph so as to show the maker's marks, after which they were duly replaced correctly.

Well spotted!

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

The 1st Bn Green Howards were serving in Palestine 1919-1920. See http://web.archive.o...g-inf/019-1.htm

So, the 1920 dating of the OPs photograph is entirely plausible.

gordon92,

Many thanks for the information, which as you say, makes the original photo caption date of 1920 entirely plausible.

Regards,

LF

[Ron Clifton]

Just a thought -

List of Changes items were for the British establishment, so the British and Indian troops in India might not have conformed. Also, we all know that items made obsolete in the Regular Army often lingered in use in the TF, who were not originally intended to serve abroad, so it might be that when they were used for overseas service in something of a rush in late 1914, removal of the hooks might have been overlooked, or not given priority.

The same might apply to Dominions forces.

Ron

[findabetterole]

Lancashire Fusilier.... There is a very simple reason as to why there are quite a few -07- Hookies still around, and why so many were not altered as per AO's following 'LOC's. The WA appointed armourers teams visit units in a set sequence, at set periods of time. Unless an 'AO/LOC' was deemed contrary to the effective operating of a peace of equipment, or weapon... the units would be visited as originally forcast. When the team is actually at the unit, such an ammendment as taking off the hooked quillion would be carried out as best as could be at the time... taking into account the units operational task. The team will only have a certain time to remain at any one unit, so it is quite feesable that ex ammount of items may well be omitted from the actual ammendment.

Also take into account that items on operations are often lost. Some are stored for unknown periods, items are sent on loan (under signature) to other units... and so on, and so forth. The number of factors as to why so many still exist is endless.

Take into account salso the roster of equipments and weapons for normal wear and tear inspection / refurbishment. In that instance, it is all down to the individual unit to inspect, withdraw / replace worn or damaged items. Even in this catagory, items still are missed.

So, it is not really surprisein that the individual in question in the period photograph. still has an '07' Hookie in his possession.

Seph

[shippingsteel]

And here is another new photo that has only surfaced recently (from the Thuillier Collection) showing a 5th Division AIF 'Digger' that has only just come out of the line.

Note the chalky mud that is still plastered on the boots and rifle butt. The date is estimated to be somewhere between 1916-18 when they were on the Somme. (LINK)

And welcome back to the forum Seph - I have been kept busy here fighting a 'rearguard action' and otherwise attempting to 'hold the fort', whilst awaiting your return.!

Cheers, S>S

[findabetterole]

Thanks 'S-S'.... its really nice to back, and from what I've been reading.... YOUR SACKED!!! No.. seriously. you've done a sterling job!

Seph

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Since starting this Thread, new information has come to light confirming the date of the photograph I originally posted as being 9th April 1920.

The original photograph showing British troops in Jerusalem sitting in a Model T Ford armed with a Lewis machine gun, was extremely important as it also showed one of the British soldiers carrying a Pattern 1907 bayonet with the hooked quillion still intact, well after the date when most of the hooked quillions had long since been removed.

Fortunately, the photographer who took the photographs was a professional and he dated his photographs, and in the case of the photo I originally posted, he clearly dated the photograph as 9 April 1920.

The photographer took several photographs over the course of April 8 and 9, 1920 whilst he was documenting the 1920 Jerusalem riots.

Fortunately, because of his keeping excellent date records, we can confirm that the Pattern 1907 bayonet with the hooked quillion intact, was still in service with the British Army as late as 9th April 1920.

Attached is the original photograph, clearly dated by the photographer as 9 April, 1920.

LF

Photograph c/o the Library of Congress