dllagost Posted 28 January , 2014 Share Posted 28 January , 2014 Hi All, I am new on this forum and I hope I am posting this in the correct location on here. I need some help from one of you fine gents with respect to identifying some markings on a British Pattern 1903 bayonet that I recently acquired. I have exhausted all the online resources that I am aware of trying to figure out this puzzle. I've even studied Ian Skennerton's Broad Arrow... book and all I can get so far is the following: 1. Broad Arrow is noticeable on the ricasso (although it does have a somewhat unique curved shape) 2. I can almost make out where EFD was printed on the ricasso. (Enfield) 3. I can an F1 over some number, can't really make it out. The F1 is also noticeable on the wood handle. 4. There are no markings at all on the pommel and it doesn't appear that there were ever any 5. No crown cypher. It may have been polished away. 6. No maker ID such as MOLE, Sanderson, Wilkenson, etc. The biggest puzzle are the markings on both sides of the crossguard AND a very faint caricature of some type on the ricasso (it is very faint) . The symbols do not appear to match any Canadian markings. It isn't blued (I don't think, although the pommel and part of the ricasso appear to MAYBE have had some bluing at some point but I am not sure). There is another number on the ricasso that appears to be 12 and possibly a 3. I also can't determine if the date on the ricasso is 10 '03 or something else. These are not the best marks. Although the blade is in great shape as is the handle/grip it looks like some of the markings have gone through some rough times. I would welcome any comments/remarks, suggestions, hints, any help that could help me solve this puzzle. I hope the pictures are useful. Thank you all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 28 January , 2014 Share Posted 28 January , 2014 dllagost, Welcome to the Forum, and as you say, you have a Pattern 1903 Sword Bayonet, which was announced in the List of Changes, para 11716 and approved on 19th December 1902. Your bayonet is maker marked to Enfield, and just below the WD ' Broad Arrow ' mark there is faint ' EFD ' for Enfield. The ricasso has an issue date of 10 '03 for October 1903. Also shown on the ricasso are the ' X ' Bend blade test mark, and the various inspection marks. The mark on the wood grip is also an inspection mark. On the ricasso above the issue date there was originally the ' Pattern ' date of 1903 and above that the Royal Crown with the ' ER ' Cypher for King Edward VII ( see attached example from my Collection ). Some 119,755 Pattern 1903 Sword Bayonets were made at Enfield, so it is not a commonly seen bayonet. Another 66,707 Pattern 1888 bayonets were converted to Pattern 1903 bayonets at Enfield, the conversion involved fitting a new pommel, crosspiece and grips. Converted P1888 bayonets, will still have their old pre-1903 issue dates stamped on the blade, and I am unable to see any pre-1903 issue dates stamped on your blade. I am unable to make out the markings on the crosspiece. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 28 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 28 January , 2014 Hello Lancashire, Thank you for the information and for responding so quickly, I really appreciate it. As for the cross guard marks, you say you can "not make them out," did you mean that you could not see the pictures clearly or that the marks are unfamiliar to you? i can get better pictures if need be. I hope that someone on here has seen those marks somewhere before, thy are a real mystery to me. Also, I am not sure if you noticed on the ricasso that there was some other sort of symbol on there but it is very very faint. and the 12.. on the ricasso also has me baffled. I can't tell if those are actually symbols, or some other lettering like sanskrit or rune derivation. Or maybe just a pattern of some type with the period "." between the marks. Thank you again and looking forward to hear more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 did you mean that you could not see the pictures clearly or that the marks are unfamiliar to you? Both, the above. It is hard to tell if they are British or Dominion markings, or sometimes on captured bayonets you sometimes see foreign markings ? It could read DN '1 , with the number on the right looking like a year date number '1 However, I am sure someone else may have seen them before, and will come up with the answer. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 An interesting bayonet - more for what it doesn't tell us than for what it does. It purports to be a British P1903 but there is not one clearly marked symbol that can be checked off as British. FWIW there is enough about it to keep me dubious. It should be a refurbished 1903 blade but I remain sceptical. At best it is a foreign rework ... and at worst, it is a very foreign "rework". Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 29 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2014 Thank you all. All very interesting comments. I was wondering myself what the heck I picked up here. :-). I couldn't pass it up at the price I got it for and I was and still am hoping to unravel this mystery but it looks like a tough one. I will hold out hope that someone might see it here and maybe recognize the marks. I wish the ricasso marks were clearer but it looks like someone may have deliberately tried to remove them as Lancashire mentioned. Could have been whoever had it at some point didn't want the makers name nor the royal cypher on it. Just conjecture at this point but maybe we can all solve this puzzle. BTW, I found this bayonet on eBay and bought it to go along with the SMLE No.1 Mk. 1*** that I am restoring. I wonder if it would be weird or unethical in some odd way to put a possibly captured bayonet on a British Enfield rifle I am respectfully trying to bring back to its hayday. That's one of the reasons I am trying to find out what I have. Once again,thanks all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 FWIW there is enough about it to keep me dubious. It should be a refurbished 1903 blade but I remain sceptical. At best it is a foreign rework ... and at worst, it is a very foreign "rework". Cheers, S>S I think we all agree this is not your typical P1903 bayonet, however, there are marks on this bayonet, although some are not too clear, that are the usual British markings seen on British bayonets i.e. the WD ' Broad Arrow ', the X Bend Test mark, and the typical British month and year stamps. The main problem with this bayonet is the crosspiece, and I doubt that anyone would take the time and trouble to fake a P1903 and then stick a major red flag on it by placing spurious marks on the crosspiece, the problem is the crosspiece. There is still the possibility that this was a captured bayonet, and the British Royal Crown was deliberately removed, with the ' foreign ' markings added to the crosspiece, which we have all see before, or it is a bayonet that was re-finished or re-worked overseas, unfortunately, we may never know for sure. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 The Indian Army preferred the 1903 to the 1907 and quite a lot of 03s seem to have done Indian service (although many of those appear to have blackened or "parkerised" blades.) and I believe there may have been a conversion programme in India too - I am away from Skennerton and Richardson currently so cannot check if they say anything on this but my recollection is they may. The low right FI Inspection stamp looks very like the style of such markings on Indian rifles so I will offer that as my suggestion. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 As I said, it could be a foreign rework, and India was my first thought as well. If it is Indian then the markings are unlike any I have seen, and I did check the references. If the spine markings are correct and indicate an original 1903 blade, then the grip timbers, the grip screws, the visible X mark and FI 'inspections' have all been added. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 29 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2014 I agree with you guys. My first thought was Indian but since I didn't notice it blued, could find any indiction of RFI marking, and those symbols are so uncommon, that I thought Indian was the wrong path. BUT - I wonder if someone tried to remove the blueing off of it. I say that because there seems to be some kind of darker tint to the pommel I think; and on the other side of the blade there are some splotches that look like the beginning of corrosion but could also be patches of blue. Another thing I would like to add is that on the ricasso right below the EFD there appears a very faint mark or symbol that looks like a bar with a vert small "o" set on top of it. That could be the remnants of something that might help. If you guys think it worthwhile, I can remove a couple of those pics and add a couple of different ones. Also, the mark on the crossguard that looks like a 6 0 is not clear to me if that is actually a 6 or a slanted B. Let me know if a picture of the other side of the blade would help. In the meantime, I'm gonna start researching Indian 1903's. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 29 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2014 One other note: I think I ran across a symbol in Skennerton's Broad Arrow.. or SAIS books that had that bar and small o on it but I can't seem to find it again so I am gonna have to go back and peruse through the books again carefully to see if I can spot it. I've looked at so many markings lately that I have symbols on the brain all the time and it's dizzying; I don't know how the heck Skennerton kept up with it all. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 Thats right, nothing reduces the value of a P1903 bayonet more than an Indian blued blade, so naturally some people would try to remove that bluing to increase value. The blade has been heavily buffed back, as you can see by the obliterated markings so that could be a possibility. The spine marks should be from top Broad Arrow, EFD ... ... then the original inspection mark of Small Crown over Letter/Number over E, then the original Bend Test X mark. The small "o" you see is part of the Small Crown mark. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 I have had a look at some of my Ishapore bayonets and I am more confident than ever that the FI stamp is Indian. Not only are there similar stamps but the font (plain and without serifs) appears the same According to Edwards (p22 India's Enfield) Ishapore converted 26,000 1888 blades to Pattern 1903 format between 1912 and 1914. Looking at my P1907 Ishapores I found this mark which, though faint is, I think, very similar. This is on a 1920 Ishapore 1907 here are the markings on my Indian 1903 and an overall view Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2014 Share Posted 29 January , 2014 I have had a look at some of my Ishapore bayonets and I am more confident than ever that the FI stamp is Indian. Not only are there similar stamps but the font (plain and without serifs) appears the same According to Edwards (p22 India's Enfield) Ishapore converted 26,000 1888 blades to Pattern 1903 format between 1912 and 1914 Chris, You look to be spot on with the P1888 Indian conversion and the ' FI ' mark, and Skennerton and Richardson page 345 also confirm that 2,307 P1888s were converted to P1903s in 1912/13 and a further 23,015 P1888s were converted to P1903s in 1913/14. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 30 January , 2014 Share Posted 30 January , 2014 That looks to be the mark Chris. The style of it certainly suggested India, however it is one I have never seen before. I'm not sure about the conversion though. It could just be a reworked P1903 instead of a converted P1888. The date of October '03, the new bend test X, and style of inspections suggest a later rework. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 30 January , 2014 Share Posted 30 January , 2014 S>S Yes- I am agnostic on that - I am not sufficiently expert to distinguish an Indian conversion from an Indian refinish of a P1903 - so either way. My only confident contention here is the the FI mark is an Indian inspection mark. Cheers Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 30 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 30 January , 2014 Guys, you all are great! I think Chris and shippingsteel are spot on. After further inspection, it does seem to appear that the bayonet was indeed at one point blued. Since I have never seen an original 1903 up close I wasn't sure if the pommel was the same steel color as the blade or if it may have been a slightly different tint. I attached these two pictures so you guys can tell me if you see what I see and that is that the pommel is a faint shade of blue. At least I have a place to start to look into what those strange marks on the crossguard could be - if I even want to pursue that at this point. The other question I would have is, is it worth re-bluing the blade back to what it was, is it better to completely remove the blue from the pommel, or is it best to leave it alone, punt, try to sell it and find a British or other commonwealth version or just keep it? I welcome your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 30 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 30 January , 2014 (edited) I also wanted to reply to 4thGordons post that the F1 and markings do indeed have a lot of similarities. For some reason though, I thought the India 1903 had the large R.F.I. on it but that too may have been rubbed out. I also wanted to reply to 4thGordons post the the F1 and markings do indeed have a lot of similarities. For some reason though, I thought the India 1903 had the large R.F.I. on it but that too may have been rubbed out. Edited 30 January , 2014 by dllagost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 30 January , 2014 Share Posted 30 January , 2014 I also wanted to reply to 4thGordons post the the F1 and markings do indeed have a lot of similarities. For some reason though, I thought the India 1903 had the large R.F.I. on it but that too may have been rubbed out. RFI (Rifle Factory Ishapore) is a post independence mark (post 1947/8) as the main cypher on the blade (although it was used in inspection stamps earlier) prior to that they were marked ERI/GRI (for Edw./Goe. Rex Imperator - King and Emperor) regarding your question....tens of thousands of Indian troops fought in WWI (and again in WWII) many of them armed with 1903 bayonets - frankly I don't really understand the apparent devaluing of anything associated with Indian service - I'm not sure how an Indian refinish really devalues the bayonet from an interest point of view -- it probably means it actually got issued, and used -- probably for the best part of the 20th Century. S>S is however correct that Indian refinishes do often reduce the exchange value(market price) of rifles/bayonets and other equipment. I don't mind this at all because I prefer items with a rich history of use, ie typical items, rather than examples that accidentally got preserved in their original state and this is what drives my collecting -- not some sense that I am investing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 30 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 30 January , 2014 4thGordons, good point. I agree that at least this item looks used. Do you know if the blue in the bayonet was also used by the old Indian territories before their independence such as Burma, Nepal, Pakistan, Siam, etc. I am wondering if the marks in the crossguard could be one of those alphabets. I also would ask if the pommel in my pic does look like it was blued, is it best to re-blue the blade or leave it alone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 30 January , 2014 Share Posted 30 January , 2014 Yes- I am agnostic on that - I am not sufficiently expert to distinguish an Indian conversion from an Indian refinish of a P1903 - so either way. Just FYI here are a few examples of the Indian conversions of earlier Patt.88's into P1903 format. They usually have a very heavily stamped Pattern mark and often a new 'Ishy' crown. And the RFI was certainly in use in earlier times, principally as a Maker's mark (as found on GW dated P1907's etc) and not as a cypher of any kind. The GRI was the common cypher. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 30 January , 2014 Share Posted 30 January , 2014 On the cross piece the stamping looks to me like a letter Z on its side, this is a common error in India where the copying of markings the guy mistakes the Z stamp for a N. several Kyhber Pass Martini's have the word MARTINI but the N is a Z stamp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 30 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 30 January , 2014 303 man; thank you for that bit of info. I gonna look into that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dllagost Posted 31 January , 2014 Author Share Posted 31 January , 2014 Hello again all, I have been doing some research and I wonder if the markings that we don't recognize on this bayonet could possibly be Egyptian. I did read that there were some Egyptian forces at Gallipoli and they did possess some of the SMLE's. I am not sure if the 1903 bayonet could have been used there but it wouldn't surprise me since India acquired many of those 1903's after the pattern 1907 bayonet was used. Just a thought, I am giong to see if I can find any Egyptian markings thay resemble these marks. I just wanted to throw that out there to see if anyone has a comment or can let me know if there was no way Egypt used the 1903's. They could have also acquired them from India although none where made there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 31 January , 2014 Share Posted 31 January , 2014 FWIW there is enough about it to keep me dubious. It should be a refurbished 1903 blade but I remain sceptical. At best it is a foreign rework ... and at worst, it is a very foreign "rework". When I saw this bayonet in the first photos, I thought there were quite a few things that weren't quite right about it. Hard to explain but you get that 'gut feeling' about something. One of the issues for mine was the pommel shape, and now with the extra photos it is much easier to see. I always check suspect examples against my own known 'standards'. So I go through my pile until I find one from the same maker and period, etc. to compare. In this case it is an Enfield made Patt.88 blade that was converted to P1903 at Enfield. Now this still could be the foreign rework that was done in India, where they have replaced everything except the blade, but I think it is fair to say that the pommel is not original. It just makes me think of the stories I've heard about the stuff that was coming out of the Afghan markets, of 'merchandise' that was being made-up for the Army souvenir trade. Cheers, S>S 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