trajan Posted 23 March , 2017 Share Posted 23 March , 2017 47 minutes ago, GWF1967 said: Markings on the Mk2. 11/06 dated. The Pommel stamp looks like TB R.E. or R.A. Training Brigade? Many ideas for the C4 stamp are welcome. 1904 Instructions for Armourer's has: "1.T.B.R.E." as " 1st Division, Telegraph Battalion, Royal Engineers". Can't help with the "C" stamp though! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 23 March , 2017 Share Posted 23 March , 2017 6 hours ago, trajan said: 1904 Instructions for Armourer's has: "1.T.B.R.E." as " 1st Division, Telegraph Battalion, Royal Engineers". Can't help with the "C" stamp though! Julian Many thanks Julian. Much appreciated. Guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 23 March , 2017 Share Posted 23 March , 2017 The P1888 Mk.II looks to have been made in November 1900 (11 - '00) and has 'reissues' for '03, '04, '05, '06 and possibly even an '07. This would make it a prime piece of 'evidence' for the regular inspection programme case, in the great 'reissue marking' debate.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 March , 2017 Share Posted 24 March , 2017 9 hours ago, shippingsteel said: The P1888 Mk.II looks to have been made in November 1900 (11 - '00) and has 'reissues' for '03, '04, '05, '06 and possibly even an '07. This would make it a prime piece of 'evidence' for the regular inspection programme case, in the great 'reissue marking' debate.! Ah, yes, the great ‘Reissue marking debate’... Well, there is no doubt that a fair few P.1888’s do have multiple inspection / date stamps on their ricassoes. E.g., of the 16 or so P.1888’s shown on this thread plus a check of six GBF pages that gave another eight, then where it is possible to be reasonably certain of what there is, eleven certainly have ‘multiple marks’, the rest (13) do not. Of course this quick analysis has no ‘solid’ foundation, other than to show that from what people have collected and chosen to publish slightly less than 50% have multiple marks... On the other hand, of my own small collection, I would guess (away from home right now) that only three or four out of eight or ten have multiple marks... Perhaps Sawdoc and SS would check their much larger collections and comment on this? So, some P.1888’s do have regular inspection marks, and others – a slight majority - do not, and it would be interesting to assess what years are represented on the multiple-marked ones to see if there is any pattern there. My impression as I scanned the ones that came up was that most of the multiple-marked ones had years leading up from about 1890 to 1906 or so, although three at least (if I recall correctly) have (19)16 stamps. (Probably / perhaps inspection stamps from when they were withdrawn from service and placed into store as by then all soldiers were armed with SMLE’s?). It would also be of interest to see if the multiple-marked ones are unit-marked as well, indicating these were service bayonets that were regularly inspected – and if they don’t have these, then perhaps held in store? Another way of looking at this matter though is through looking at the official Instructions to Armourers to see if there was any official doctrine on inspecting bayonets at regular intervals and then adding marks to indicate this had been done. I only have the 1897 and 1912/1916 versions on file on this box, and a quick scan suggests that the 1897 version says nothing on this matter, while the 1912/1916 version simply says that bayonets were to be inspected quarterly. So, no help there! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 March , 2017 Share Posted 24 March , 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, GWF1967 said: Many ideas for the C4 stamp are welcome. Looking back at this - is it a poorly impressed (19)'04? Have a look at this one of 4G's, a 'C 3' which is surely '04' reproduced from: see http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?/topic/151202-pattern-1888-bayonets/ post 21 Also one of your other ones above, post 264, also a 'C 3' PS: OH, I think this is what SS means with his '04' in the earlier post.... Edited 24 March , 2017 by trajan Add PS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 March , 2017 Share Posted 24 March , 2017 4 hours ago, trajan said: ... On the other hand, of my own small collection, I would guess (away from home right now) that only three or four out of eight or ten have multiple marks... Perhaps Sawdoc and SS would check their much larger collections and comment on this? So, back at home - and what do I find? Two only of my ten total P.1888's have multiple markings... Now, I am a hoarder, in the sense that there are certain bayonets I buy automatically whenever I see them, i.e., in Turkey and in the UK, and P.1888's are on that list. So. my collection of P.1888's is not one made up of 'carefully selected specimens' as is, for example, assembled by those who choose their bayonets carefully, for condition, markings, etc... So. I would suggest that my collection is typical of what is really 'out there'. That is to say, that multiple-marked P.1888's are in the slight but clear minority - and probably just reflect individual armourer's approaches to weapons on hand / in store... I'll try and post photographs if this side-discussion develops, but for now, both of my multiple-marked ones are Mk. I type 2s, the first WD marked, the second Wilkinson, and all with left ricasso marks. The WD one is '08 91'. and has clear inspections marks for: '96, '03, and '06, and is unit-marked 'M' above the catch button, and '3 A & S.H.' on the pommel proper, so 3rd Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders... The Wilkinson is '06 96, and has clear inspection marks for: '00, '04. and '07, and is unit-marked 'W.A.M.', which is....??? Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 March , 2017 Share Posted 25 March , 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 16:23, trajan said: So, back at home - and what do I find? Two only of my ten total P.1888's have multiple markings... Overlooked one on display... So - ye gods, I have eleven! Where did they all come from! A Mk II, EFD, "(0)2 02", with a blurred right ricasso marking that looks to be the bottom of a '16'... BUT, it is under a "crown/35/RE" stamp, and the '16' stamps seem to go with a "crown /X.../ E" stamp (e.g., post no. 195), so, probably not. Either way, this one does not have a "multiple marking" left ricasso, so that makes it (from the above), eleven I know of that are, but 24 that are not... Again, I stress that my collection of these P.1888's is a random one, and with only two from eleven of mine being "multiple-marked" it looks to be that these "multiple marked" examples are the more unusual. What is needed though is for somebody with time to spare (so, not me!) to check through them all and see if there are recurrent years or not ('04' seems to crop up a lot) that match inspector stamps, then we can test the beloved 'regular inspection' a tad more. Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 June , 2017 Share Posted 14 June , 2017 P1888. Wilkinson London. /|\. X. No other marks at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 15 June , 2017 Share Posted 15 June , 2017 7 hours ago, GWF1967 said: P1888. Wilkinson London. /|\. X. No other marks at all. None on the tang or on the blade-back? The first might well be absent, but if I recall correctly, the 'X' for the bend test was done after at least one of the blade-back inspection marks was added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 15 June , 2017 Share Posted 15 June , 2017 9 hours ago, trajan said: None on the tang or on the blade-back? The first might well be absent, but if I recall correctly, the 'X' for the bend test was done after at least one of the blade-back inspection marks was added. No other marks at all. I thought it peculiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 16 June , 2017 Share Posted 16 June , 2017 23 hours ago, GWF1967 said: No other marks at all. I thought it peculiar. 'Tis indeed peculiar... I checked with Michael Rose's book and on p.22 he has the bend mark on P.1888's preceding the first of the blade-back marks, the next one being done at the polished stage, and the other usual inspector's markings on the blade ricasso being applied at the finished stage... The 'X' mark on yours is in an ok position - I checked with mine - and the "WILKINSON, LONDON" stamp looks to be kosher, and so...??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 Two new additions. 1. Blade. Crown V.R. 1. 98. - /I\ EFD. Crown 8.12 X. Tang. E - Crown 2.14. Pommel stud has been ground flat. Muzzle ring is bent and cracked. Scabbard. /I\ Crown. 28*? R.E. 15. 2. Blade. Crown E.R. 5. 03. - /I\ Crown 35 W. X Wilkinson. London. I paid the asking price for No.1, with No.2 thrown in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 28 minutes ago, GWF1967 said: Two new additions. 1. Blade. Crown V.R. 1. 98. - /I\ EFD. Crown 8.12 X. Tang. E - Crown 2.14. Pommel stud has been ground flat. Muzzle ring is bent and cracked. Scabbard. /I\ Crown. 28*? R.E. 15. 2. Blade. Crown E.R. 5. 03. - /I\ Crown 35 W. X Wilkinson. London. I paid the asking price for No.1, with No.2 thrown in! What a stroke of luck...mk 3 P1888's rarely come up in any condition, I'm beginning to think they're scarcer than the mk 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 2 hours ago, Dave66 said: What a stroke of luck...mk 3 P1888's rarely come up in any condition, I'm beginning to think they're scarcer than the mk 1. I have trouble walking past a P1888; once I pick them up and handle them I have a problem putting them back again as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 3 hours ago, GWF1967 said: ... Pity about the press-stud, but two for the price of one? You lucky , um, what's the word...??? But hey, a 1915 scabbard! I repeat with emphasis, "You lucky , um, what's the word...???"... 14 minutes ago, GWF1967 said: I have trouble walking past a P1888; once I pick them up and handle them I have a problem putting them back again as well! Same here. I have only turned down one only that I have seen here in Turkey, and that simply because it was at the cash-only Antika Pazar and I had already bought something else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 36 minutes ago, GWF1967 said: I have trouble walking past a P1888; once I pick them up and handle them I have a problem putting them back again as well! Very nice indeed, They are indeed very addictive, I think my tally is just under 20, but always room for another!!! The only mk111 I've got was 30 quid with no scabbard.....but previous owner had restored it with a rasp, took a wee while of fine fettling to try and make it presentable but not too bad now. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 8 minutes ago, trajan said: Pity about the press-stud, but two for the price of one? You lucky , um, what's the word...??? But hey, a 1915 scabbard! I repeat with emphasis, "You lucky , um, what's the word...???"... Same here. I have only turned down one only that I have seen here in Turkey, and that simply because it was at the cash-only Antika Pazar and I had already bought something else... Bayonet No. 1 had a price ticket attached. The stallholder's first offer took a third off, my first offer added in Metford No.2; by the time I'd added the "butchered butcher", a framed photo of a mounted R.A. officer and a 60's R.H.A. stable belt (named & No.'d; present for a friend), we were still £10 shy of the original ticket price: I do love to haggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyH Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 Oddly I also have a P1888 which had the muzzle ring bent back around 15 deg. when I acquired it, but not cracked as per #287. Was able to bend it back into shape in the vice. Wonder how this damage might have occurred? Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 26 minutes ago, trajan said: Pity about the press-stud, but two for the price of one? You lucky , um, what's the word...??? But hey, a 1915 scabbard! I repeat with emphasis, "You lucky , um, what's the word...???"... Right place, right time....and yes, a lucky ??????. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 2 minutes ago, Dave66 said: Very nice indeed, They are indeed very addictive, I think my tally is just under 20, but always room for another!!! The only mk111 I've got was 30 quid with no scabbard.....but previous owner had restored it with a rasp, took a wee while of fine fettling to try and make it presentable but not too bad now. Dave. Always room for another indeed! sounds like your man with the rasp was the one who "restored" my new German butcher bayo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 2 minutes ago, GWF1967 said: Always room for another indeed! sounds like your man with the rasp was the one who "restored" my new German butcher bayo. Don't you just hate it, takes hours to get them somewhere near presentable...quite therapeutic though on a summers day, can of beer and an endless supply of wet and dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 6 minutes ago, Dave66 said: Don't you just hate it, takes hours to get them somewhere near presentable...quite therapeutic though on a summers day, can of beer and an endless supply of wet and dry. Short of knocking the "cornflakes" off a relic, or cleaning off light surface rust to read markings, I like to leave them as I find them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 3 hours ago, Dave66 said: What a stroke of luck...mk 3 P1888's rarely come up in any condition, I'm beginning to think they're scarcer than the mk 1. I've been thinking on that - and I think you are right! Never seen one - not that I have diligently searched, but it is certainly easy (relatively!) to find a three-rivetter for sale on the web, but never noticed a Mk.3 25 minutes ago, GWF1967 said: ... Bayonet No. 1 had a price ticket attached. The stallholder's first offer took a third off, my first offer added in Metford No.2; by the time I'd added the "butchered butcher", a framed photo of a mounted R.A. officer and a 60's R.H.A. stable belt (named & No.'d; present for a friend), we were still £10 shy of the original ticket price: I do love to haggle. Sounds like you could out-do my Turkish ma-in-law - and you are probably faster with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 8 minutes ago, trajan said: Sounds like you could out-do my Turkish ma-in-law - and you are probably faster with it! First look, I read it as fatter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 14 January , 2018 Share Posted 14 January , 2018 26 minutes ago, trajan said: I've been thinking on that - and I think you are right! Never seen one - not that I have diligently searched, but it is certainly easy (relatively!) to find a three-rivetter for sale on the web, but never noticed a Mk.3 Online I stumble across 2 or 3 mk1 with the 3 rivets a year, yet I'm searching for a better mk3 but seen only a couple in the last few years. My personal theory is a large amount would have been converted to P1903 as demand arose...maybe something of a paper in that!!! regards, Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now