bboywizard Posted 7 May , 2014 Share Posted 7 May , 2014 Thanks for the info mate..so that 2 under the broad arrow signifies N.S.W ..it has no numbers at all,i havent seen anything like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 May , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 May , 2014 Yep, it's the Military District number for New South Wales. It would have come out with all the others but when the early marking was being done it was AWOL. May have gone astray for a while, but then turned up again later on, so was marked in the interwar fashion at the time. The Aussies never seemed to get too hung up on the business of removing the hook, or adding the clearance hole for that matter. For many years a lot of the original bayonets stayed on in local service without any modification at all. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bboywizard Posted 7 May , 2014 Share Posted 7 May , 2014 She may not be a Lithgow but at least rare, thanks once again mate..ad it to the database Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bboywizard Posted 7 May , 2014 Share Posted 7 May , 2014 Also my understanding is that it came from a house in Newcastle NSW, i got it from an antique store in Newcastle that had a number of bayonets out the back not on display Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 7 May , 2014 Share Posted 7 May , 2014 ... The D^D marking is usually recognised as an interwar period marking so it is extremely unusual to be seeing this marking on a hookie. But there you go, it must have surfaced again later on. Yep, it's the Military District number for New South Wales. S/S - you seem a bit hesitant when talking about the D/D marking being interwar: does that mean there is no evidence as to when it was used? That apart, there you go bboywizard! Told you SS would crack it once he came back into play! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 7 May , 2014 Share Posted 7 May , 2014 Wow - thats an interesting bayonet, thanks for posting. First time I've seen a hookie with those "interwar" Australian markings. Nice find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 May , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 May , 2014 This style of D^D marking is said to have started being used in the mid 1920's, when it repaced the previous D^ (Department of Defence) marking seen on the pommel. Now this "D^D" stamping did continue on right through WW2 and until the Vietnam era, in some shape or form, however the style did change markedly over this period. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Warnes Posted 1 June , 2014 Share Posted 1 June , 2014 My Sanderson with D 2 D and D^ markings scabbard is D5^D with * marked (Australian scabbard) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 June , 2014 Share Posted 2 June , 2014 That's a great example - I love those clear markings! I never fail to be amazed at what you guys in Australia have in your collections and are happy to share with us all! There must be quite a market for GW things down where you are, given that I have seen on GWF all sorts of lovely things that exist in Australian collections, from rare types of German bayonets to even rarer German studio photographs! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 14 June , 2014 Share Posted 14 June , 2014 Now this "D^D" stamping did continue on right through WW2 and until the Vietnam era, in some shape or form, however the style did change markedly over this period. A possible correction needed here as according to this site - http://www.milsurps.com/archive/index.php/t-29951.html - " The D/|\D is ... not normally found on any Australian made L1A2 bayonet in general service", and so if this report is accurate (no source is given), then that would mean it was rare after 1958 when the L1A2 bayonet was first produced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithmroberts Posted 14 June , 2014 Share Posted 14 June , 2014 We are heading in two posts here into more modern times. Can we please all keep to our time period. Thanks Keith Roberts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 14 June , 2014 Share Posted 14 June , 2014 Can we please all keep to our time period. Sorry! But knowing that some non-WW1 bayonet people follow the threads here I thought it best to put matters right...!!! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 15 November , 2014 Share Posted 15 November , 2014 I recently returned from a trip to Turkey, which included four nights in Gallipoli and a week in Istanbul. I looked everywhere for military antiques, but there was very little to be had. The one thing I did find, at the back of a tiny shop in the Grand Bazaar, was a P1907 hooked quillon bayonet and its broken scabbard. Neither piece is in great shape, but as it's the only hooked quillon my collection I'm just pleased to have found it. Many of the markings are well worn, but it appears to have been made in December, 1908, and sold out of British service. The double broad-arrow mark is clearly visible on the pommel. From what I've read on this thread so far it would seem the number on the crossguard, V2334, indicates that it went on to serve with an Australian unit from the state of Victoria. And, although they are very hard to see, there are numbers on both wooden handle inserts. One appears to be 175, and the other might be 222. I'm reluctant to clean off even the sticky labels at this point... What an excellent find - you've done well.! Now if someone said to me that was an Australian "Gallipoli bayonet" ... I would certainly have to agree.! While it is in semi-relic condition, the very clear and specific Australian markings definitely add tremendous value especially from an historical perspective. Strangely the markings that identify it as Australian just happen to be the clearest, which is fortunate. I also think it is a Sanderson maker, made Dec.1909. From my collected data and by general comparison this would be most likely. A lot from this batch were Victorian marked at the same time. (see post #22) I think many collectors travelling to Turkey to visit Gallipoli would only dream about finding such a piece with such strong links to the battle. You're so lucky.! Well it seems that I may have struck lucky here! A V 20845 marked HQ admittedly in terrible shape, but potential Gallipoli-usage... See: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=219406#entry2186537 Of course, I would like to have sourced confirmation the mark is for Victoria, but I am happy to go with the argument, so many thanks SS, and JScott and LF for pointing me back to this thread. And yes, the bayonet is in the post... Probably the worst condition example of a P.1907 I have in my small collection but I might well give it a point of pride on my wall display for its potential Gallipoli link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 15 November , 2014 Share Posted 15 November , 2014 Congrats Trajan - a nice bayonet. I'm jealous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 15 November , 2014 Share Posted 15 November , 2014 Thanks Jscott - but I would never have worked out what it was w/o the help from you and others. It won't be the prettiest of beasts to hang on the wall - but it does have a putative history! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 24 December , 2014 Share Posted 24 December , 2014 And here is the closeup of the bayonets in the OP showing their Australian markings stamped on the crossguard. On the left is the 1911 Enfield HQR with the V 36 serial. The V is the State letter for Victoria so a Category 3 example. On the right is another Category 5, being the standard 1917 Lithgow with 4th Military District serials for South Australia. Cheers, S>S 500.JPG Hi S>S, I was just re-reading this thread and note that since I last read it I have acquired a 1917 Lithgow P07 marked to 4MD with a serial number a few hundred earlier than the version that you posted (which was also a 4MD marked 1917 Lithgow). I thought you may be interested as I've not seen many 4MD marked bayonets (which makes sense given that South Australia had a much smaller population than NSW, Vic etc), and hopefully this will add to the data that you collect. Ill send across the exact serial shortly but its 13,xxx. Cheers, Jonathan Sorry, my "reply" above is caught within your quote. Hopefully it still makes sense. Cheers, Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 24 December , 2014 Author Share Posted 24 December , 2014 Thanks Jonathan, I would appreciate that. I actually have that 1917 Lithgow on my bench as we speak, which is quite coincidental.! Nice pickup BTW. Actually the SA marked bayonets are not that scarce comparatively, they seem to turn up fairly often. I've found that QLD, TAS and WA are more scarce.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 25 December , 2014 Share Posted 25 December , 2014 That sounds consistent with my experience - I've seen a few WA 5MD markings, but very few Queensland 1MD markings and probably only one or two from Tasmania (and come to think of it that may have been in photos earlier in this thread!) The marking on my bayonet is 4MD13845. Merry Christmas! J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 12 January , 2015 Share Posted 12 January , 2015 Just for record purposes I'm putting up this Enfield NSW HQ P.1907, 3/12, serial 16820, which I had a first refusal on, but decided that the price asked was too high for the condition. Note the SOS mark, which seems to be a common feature of Australian HQ bayonets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gew88/05 Posted 13 January , 2015 Share Posted 13 January , 2015 ............................................ 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. .......................................... Cheers, S>S That is an interesting statement Shippingsteel, the "Australia" marking is quite uncommon here in the US, when found it is considered a marking applied in Australia on a replacement grip that was supplied by the Australian government. If you look again at the photo supplied by jscott showing the "Australia" marking on his grip, it is quite worn indicating that the bayonet has been used quite a bit with the marking on the grip. As far as I know, none of the Australian surplussed P07 bayonets - I have had a number of them and have seen many over the last 15 or 20 years since Jovino brought them into the US - show import marks and only occasionally the "Australia" marking. Import marks are however required on the rifles in conjunction with the name of the importer. EDIT - I should say that this has been a great thread with wonderful input from many, especially Shippingsteel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 13 January , 2015 Share Posted 13 January , 2015 As far as I know, none of the Australian surplussed P07 bayonets - I have had a number of them and have seen many over the last 15 or 20 years since Jovino brought them into the US - show import marks and only occasionally the "Australia" marking. Import marks are however required on the rifles in conjunction with the name of the importer. That is an interesting point - did some / most / many of these (especially - if any - HQ ones) have SOS marks? It might just be my luck but I seem to remember seeing more Australian HQ's with SOS marks than there are UK ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 13 January , 2015 Share Posted 13 January , 2015 The "AUSTRALIA" making on 07 bayonets is some kind of export/import stamp, it also can be found on some SMLEs on the underside of the butt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 13 January , 2015 Share Posted 13 January , 2015 The "AUSTRALIA" making on 07 bayonets is some kind of export/import stamp, it also can be found on some SMLEs on the underside of the butt. I agree - and I believe it dates from the mid/late 1960s. The equivalent is the "ENGLAND" stamp often found on Enfields (esp No5 rifles) and Enfield/Webley revolvers. In 1968 the National Firearms Act in the US required suplus rifles imported into the US to have Calibre, Country of Origin and importer stamped on the rifle. More recently the size of this stamping has increased. I think the Australia and England stamps were the first step in this process in the mid-late 1960s. The frequency of SoS marks on Australian state marked (NSW etc) rifles and bayonets might be because Australia has a federated system and they were sold out of British Service and to the State governments rather than the Australian Commonwealth government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 13 January , 2015 Share Posted 13 January , 2015 That is an interesting point - did some / most / many of these (especially - if any - HQ ones) have SOS marks? It might just be my luck but I seem to remember seeing more Australian HQ's with SOS marks than there are UK ones. Trajan, No ' SOS ' marking on my ' Australian ' service Pattern 1907 with hooked quillon attached. Regards, LF 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gew88/05 Posted 14 January , 2015 Share Posted 14 January , 2015 I agree - and I believe it dates from the mid/late 1960s. The equivalent is the "ENGLAND" stamp often found on Enfields (esp No5 rifles) and Enfield/Webley revolvers. In 1968 the National Firearms Act in the US required suplus rifles imported into the US to have Calibre, Country of Origin and importer stamped on the rifle. More recently the size of this stamping has increased. I think the Australia and England stamps were the first step in this process in the mid-late 1960s. Yes, the Gun Control Act of 1968 does require the marking of surplus rifles as you state. However, bayonets do not require an import mark of any kind. The "Australia" mark on P07 bayonet grips was applied to a replacement grip in Australia by the manufacturer. A number of new replacement grips were imported when the rifles and bayonets were brought in. They were marked with their Australian marks, that is the word "Australia". They are said to be post-WW2 replacement grips contracted for in the late 1940s. As I said in my post above, the grips on the bayonet illustrated are too worn to have come to the US for the collector's market as new, they show heavy use and wear including the Australia mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts