Australian Bayonets

[shippingsteel]

Hi Jonathan, just remember that Lithgows are included here (as Cat.5) as well as the late-war British P1907s that have had the D^ stamped on the pommel (as Cat.6)

The only Lithgows that don't really fit in here are the later issued ones marked with the D^D which is an interwar marking which indicates service during a later period.

Accumulating this data is basically a continual learning experience. The more examples that are seen and recorded, the greater the understanding of the whole process.

I don't think there are any surviving records of when, how or why these markings were applied. So we can only record what is observed and then slowly join up the dots.

As an example of this I may already need to make up another category.! I've never seen a V marking on the pommel as in post #7 they're always on the guard re post #22.

The various States seem to have had their own ways of doing things. Some also started marking the MD serials up on the pommel at first before moving to the crossguard.

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

I think you may have a world class collection of these early state markings S>S, I'm very jealous! Thanks for posting all the photos. For number of reasons these early Australian bayonets are much harder to find/ acquire here in the UK, but as soon as I make it back home to Australia I can see that this area may become a focus for me.

[shippingsteel]

I think you may have a world class collection of these early state markings S>S, I'm very jealous!

Hang on a minute Jonathan, I don't own all of them you know .... some are just photos of ones that I have come across whilst doing my research.!

I do try to grab as many as I can although I am always running out of space and funds become an issue. I am rapidly becoming a collector of data.!

You do come across some fascinating stories while doing this research ... like when you find full sets of marked equipment from deceased estates.

There was one British hookie with the Victorian serials that had an original frog with the guys service numbers and AIF battalion details marked on.

This kind of info is gold to me as I can then trace back the service records and work out exactly when the kit was issued to establish firm timelines.

Along the way you find all kinds of interesting stories about the individuals themselves which helps to make this kind of study so fascinating to me.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

For a further comparison of these markings, here is another standard Lithgow, with the 2MD serials on a battered 1915 production example (without hook quillon)

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

S>S, as I've mentioned before - this is a fabulous thread and contains a huge amount of very interesting information for Australian bayonet collectors. I will upload a few shots that may interest you shortly (in the next week or so) - I believe they fit into categories 1 and 4 (per your second post).

Cheers, J

[jscott]

Righto - sorry for the delay.

Here is bayonet #1, which is Type 1 as S>S described in one of his original posts. A 1909 dated Enfield with the hook quillon removed, sold out of service stamp and Queensland markings "Q2952". There are some more recent markings too - one grip is marked "Australia" (was this WW2 era?) and "5DE" carved into the other grip. I'd be very interested to hear what people think this might stand for.

Cheers, J

[jscott]

PS. S>S I notice that the serial on this bayonet is only 33 numbers off the one you posted earlier...

[shippingsteel]

Jonathan, that's a real nice bayonet, and a perfect example of what I was talking about earlier in this thread ... QLD issue and has it seen some service.!!

So made at Enfield and shipped to Australia, stamped in the same block as my earlier example, later dehooked and then much later surplused post Korea.

The AUSTRALIA marking stamped into the grips is the US import mark which shows that it was imported into America according to their Gov't regulations.

This is commonly seen on Australian used P1907 bayonets, as the bulk of the SMLE rifles and bayonets were sent to the US when it was finally surplused.

The other 5DE marking is very interesting, but I have no idea what it means. It could be a unit designation or something - I will have to see what pops up.??

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Yes I was glad to finally find one of these bayonets, I agree that this type was likely to have been used from the early days of Australia's involvement in the war. From my experience they are much harder to find that the hookies (and perhaps even the Lithgow hookies). It is in quite nice aged condition with a nice patina to the guard and pommel, albeit with a few bumps and scrapes.

I will try to post another Aussie bayonet I picked up recently later tonight. Unfortunately not one of these early ones but rather a Category 6 but with a serial number (of sorts).

Cheers, J

[jscott]

Here is the next Australian bayonet, which I think falls loosely within your category 6. Its a Sanderson dated 3' 18 - and is stamped on the pommel with the D arrow marking (this stamp is slightly double stamped). There are quite a few things about this bayonet that I can't quite pin down:

1. The guard is marked "3/78673". Is this the equivalent of a 3MD" type marking? Or something else?

2. The blade has been very heavily sharpened (and is now razor sharp), so that there is a visible drop in the level of the blade where the sharpening begins. The blade has been blued at some point however this blueing sits on top of the sharpening. My thoughts are that if this bayonet was being used by Australian troops in 1918 then it may have been something that an individual soldier decided to do. I would imagine that the under strength (but highly effective) Australian units of 1918 would probably have had a lot of flexibility to treat their equipment as they wished.

3. The scabbard is the small stud type, is in superb condition and has "2nd MD xxxxx" markings on the throat. There is another marking on the top of the throat - "arrow R". I dont know what this stands for.

Anyway, I managed to get this bayonet for a bargain price and it seems to have quite a colourful and detailed history. Any thoughts on the points above would be much appreciated!

Thanks, Jonathan

[jscott]

no.1

no.2

no.3

[shippingsteel]

Another very interesting bayonet Jonathan, and one which has certainly ended up in Australian hands ... not too sure about the sharpening though, that could be "civilian".?

Anyway the scabbard being of the scarcer 'small-stud' variety should be worth the purchase price on it's own I should think. I gauge those 2MD markings as being WW2 era.

That bayonet could have came back to Australia with the diggers when they returned from the GW ... but I would like to have a closer look at the D^ stamping on the pommel.

The lighter coloured grip looks to be made of the softer uniquely grained Queensland Maple timber, which means it has been replaced sometime when it got back to Australia.

As for the crossguard marking I think it's just another variation of the 3MD marking, most likely done when they were short on letters. The serial being more interwar, WW2 era.

I guess the sharpening could have been done somewhere during WW2, but it would have occurred when some serious grinding equipment was readily to hand (no grindstone.!)

I checked my Q serial example posted earlier, and interestingly it's also dated 12 '09, but made by Wilkinson. Seems they all got shipped out and stamped together in one lot.

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Did the D stamp change over time? I will take a better shot of it tonight and post it. Agree on the other points - no doubt it saw some service in WW2 and the grips do look like maple replacements.

I guess that would make sense re the stamping of the Q bayonets (ie that they were shipped out en masse and stamped together).

Also - have you seen this type of early "Q/NSW" etc marking (your category 1) for each of the Australian states??

[jscott]

S>S, here is a closeup of the D stamp.

Cheers, J

[jscott]

And to round out the triumvirate, here is a 1916 Lithgow (with later scabbard). Another example which has clearly seen its share of service. The markings on the ricasso are lovely and crisp but unfortunately the markings on the guard and pommel are less distinct. I'm fairly certain its "3MD" but it could also be "5"...

no.1

no.2

no.3

[shippingsteel]

Did the D stamp change over time? I will take a better shot of it tonight and post it.

Also - have you seen this type of early "Q/NSW" etc marking (your category 1) for each of the Australian states??

I am really pleased you are posting these photos J, as each new example helps me to expand my information database on these Australian bayonets.

Your D^ stamping on the pommel is particularly interesting as it shows the progression from the early marking to the later marking (this is a later mark)

Yes the early D^ had the very short arrow inside (see my post #9) while the later mark towards WW2 had a much longer tail on the arrow, as in your pic.

I have seen the letters serial on the pommel for Qld, NSW, Tas & SA. Victoria seems to have stamped mostly on the crossguard. No WA seen as of yet.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

And to round out the triumvirate, here is a 1916 Lithgow (with later scabbard). Another example which has clearly seen its share of service.

The markings on the ricasso are lovely and crisp but unfortunately the markings on the guard and pommel are less distinct. I'm fairly certain its "3MD" but it could also be "5"...

Jonathan, another nice Lithgow bayonet. Given that it is on a 1916 example, the serial will be 3MD 365?1 (it can't be a 5MD as Western Australia never had serials that high)

And from the dataset that I have accumulated it will have been issued towards the early part of 1916, so a nice example to have. Can you make out the serial on the pommel.?

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Thanks S>S, very helpful. I'm impressed that you know the run of serial numbers for Victoria and WA! Looking under better light you are completely right - 3MD 36501. The number on the pommel is less distinct. I'm glad to hear it was issued in early 1916 - its condition is certainly commensurate with some solid use.

As a slight aside, do you know why the bayonets were marked to military districts as opposed to battalions?

[shippingsteel]

Back in the day the population of Australia was very concentrated in the states of Victoria and New South Wales, with much less numbers elsewhere.

The other smaller states were known as the "Outer States" and due to their lower population base, the enlistment numbers were consequently lower.

This is seen in the various Military District serial numbers range as well, with only Vic (3MD) and NSW (2MD) reaching into the higher 5 digit bracket.

So the smaller states are never found with those higher serials, which is why it is relatively easy to identify a serial given a date and a number range.

And the serial numbers are the "ownership" marking for the State / Military District (basically for administrative purposes) so not really a unit identifier.

I guess that each state funded their own branch of the army with their own funds, so were particularly keen to keep track of their own armaments, etc.

Each Battalion was initially raised at the State level and would have been armed as such by the State, with weapons purchased through State coffers.

Cheers, S>S

[apple]

As a slight aside, do you know why the bayonets were marked to military districts as opposed to battalions?

Pre Federation, in 1901, what became the states of Australia each had their own army. Circa World War each state was its own military district.

[jscott]

_{Thanks both, much appreciated.}

[shippingsteel]

Your D^ stamping on the pommel is particularly interesting as it shows the progression from the early marking to the later marking (this is a later mark)

Yes the early D^ had the very short arrow inside (see my post #9) while the later mark towards WW2 had a much longer tail on the arrow, as in your pic.

Hi Jonathan, I happened to have a closer look at this D^ stamp on another computer (with a better screen) and it seems I may have been mistaken.

The double tap does make it difficult, but I now think this IS the early marking ... with the underlying stamp giving the impression of the longer arrow.

So just wanted to clarify that point, and not give the wrong info there.! Thanks again for posting your bayonets, they have all been very interesting.

Cheers, S>S

[jscott]

Thanks S>S.

Funny you should bring that up, I was thinking that might have been the case - its a little unclear with that double stamping. I have just taken another look at the marking in the sunlight and I agree that it may well be the shorter arrow, with the tail apparently extended by the double stamp. So I guess that just adds another layer to the hypothetical life of the bayonet? In summary - made in 3' 18, "D" stamped with the early marking (do you know when the longer arrow marking came in?), and then likely reissued interwar/ WW2 (hence the later 3MD markings on the guard and the 2MD scabbard markings?

Thanks again for your comments on this, all the information is very helpful.

Cheers, J

[Strawb67]

Hi Shippingsteel

I was browsing this thread and remembered that I had a Bayonet that was given to me about 30 years ago when I was living in Bathurst, I dug it out of where I have it stored last night to look for some of the markings on it and unfortunately the majority are unclear. I was able to make out 1907 on it, it has been dehooked but the serial number is unclear, I will attempt to get some decent photos of it this evening and post them.

The history that I have of it was that it was from my old neighbour who had it issued in WW2 he was in a pioneer unit that was formed after he returned from the Middle East and Greece, then went up through Kokoda and Borneo late in the war, he said that he packed up the bayonet and sent it back with his kit when he was issued with an Owen gun and when he was demobbed that the the bayonet and a Japanese bayonet that he took were shipped home undetected. He gave both to me as I had an interest in the military that his own sons didn't have.

The Aussie Bayonet didn't have a scabbard, but when my Grandparents died and I was helping my parents move and clear out their house, I was going through a suitcase and found a scabbard and frog in there! The scabbard was in pretty wel perfect condition and the leather frog had the rivets corroded and the stitching had let go, they both appear to be WW2 vintage. Now the strange thing here is that my Grandfather was too young for WW1 and too old for WW2 to enlist. We have not found any direct link to the military from my paternal side of the family and do not know why this scabbard and frog would be in my grandparents possession!

Anyway, I will photograph both the Australian and Japanese bayonets for you to have a look at, they are both a great item that I had packed away since I have had my own family.

Cheers

John

[shippingsteel]

G'day John and welcome to the forum. Sounds like you have some interesting bayonets there. The ones with history or provenance are always fascinating.

I've had a few like yours, still the same as they were when they were put away so many years ago. The sad part is often the condition has been neglected.

But when you hold them in your hands they just give the feeling of having so many stories to tell. I look forward to seeing your photos when you get them up.

PS. If you have any issues with posting the photos just send me a message (PM) They can be a bit difficult to size appropriately, especially for new members.

Cheers, S>S