P1907 Scabbards

[18th Battalion]

I've been browsing through P1907 bayonet threads for a couple of hours looking for scabbard info without much success; does anyone have examples of the different variations and their chronology they can post, or point me in the direction of an existing thread that I've missed?

Here's my sole example that came with my 9/18 Wilkinson bayonet, it's stamped T.A.A. Ltd on the leather and has a very indistinct stamp on the metal throat above the staple that appears to be 2 characters, the first I can't make out at all and the second could be S or 5? What variation do I have and when might it date from?

Any help would be appreciated.

[trajan]

Ooooh, now there is a subject wide open for research! To be brief, nobody seems to have any comprehesive record of P 1907 scabbard makers... On the other hand, yours does have a 'teardop' frog stud which should be WWI period as round frog studs don't appear before 1915, and to confuse the isssue, both types were made up to 1918, which does at least mean your scabbard could well belong to the bayonet. (Who is the bayonet maker and the month, BTW - the P1907 guys love this information!!). Have a careful look, though, ont'other side of the scabbard - might be a date there. But my linited experience is they are always ont' side where your mark is. I'll send more information if I find it!

[trajan]

Should have mentioned - yours doesn't have any rivets attaching the throat piece to the leather and so for the records is a 'No. 1 Mk II' type scabbard... Nice to have!

[18th Battalion]

Trajan

Thanks for the info; is the No.1 Mk2 desirable because it's earlier (pre war) production and less common, also, do you know when the scabbards with the external domed rivet heads rather than the flush ones like mine were introduced, I assume it was a war time expediency to speed up production?

I've got a P1907 Remington (9/15) bayonet on the way with no scabbard, so I will have to find a suitable example to go with it.

[shippingsteel]

I think you might have a wartime manufactured Remington scabbard, which was of course made in the USA. Their symbol was the letters RE stamped above the staple.

Not sure about the marks on the leather, but it will be one of two things - either the factory inspectors initials ... or the name of the subcontractor that supplied the leathers.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

And for the record, the rivets actually attach the steel springs in place inside the locket. It is these two springs which grip and hold the bayonet in place inside the scabbard.

The locket (and chape) are attached to the leather body by way of the iron laces (staples). And just about every P1907 scabbard you pick up will be of the No.1 Mk.II type.!

Cheers, S>S

[18th Battalion]

Hi S>S

Thanks for the info, the stamp on the leather of my scabbard is definitely 'T.A.A. Ltd' so it's not an inspectors mark, did US companies use 'Ltd' then, or is that just British companies?

If most scabbards in circulation are No.1 Mk2's are the flush rivet versions earlier than the domed variety?

Paul

[shippingsteel]

The Remington marked scabbards can be tricky as not only were they the original producers of entire scabbards, but they also supplied a lot of spare parts for repairs of the Brit scabbards.

So for example you will often see RE marked lockets on earlier Enfield inspected scabbards. American leathers did have 3 letter inspectors initials, but the Ltd may well indicate Brit leather.

Yes the lockets with flush rivets were the original early ones, while the exposed rivets came later, most likely a wartime expediency as you say. I don't believe a date has yet been confirmed.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

So I've gone to the books to try and identify the T.A.A. Ltd. marking, and it seems like we're on the right track. It should stand for Thomas A. Ashton Ltd. of Sheffield (Yorkshire)

Apparently they made the scabbards from September 1916, but as I said the Remington made locket could well have been produced earlier than that, explaining the flush rivets.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

And for the record, the rivets actually attach the steel springs in place inside the locket. It is these two springs which grip and hold the bayonet in place inside the scabbard.

The locket (and chape) are attached to the leather body by way of the iron laces (staples). And just about every P1907 scabbard you pick up will be of the No.1 Mk.II type.!

Cheers, S>S

Thanks for the correction re: rivets.

[shippingsteel]

For future reference purposes here are a couple more variations of the No.1 Mk.II scabbard (to be perfectly correct when first introduced the scabbards were simply known as Mk.I or Mk.II)

First we have the small round stud version which is typically Australian manufactured around 1920, and then the large round stud with exposed rivets which is your later 'WW2 period' type.

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

First we have the small round stud version which is typically Australian manufactured around 1920, and then the large round stud with exposed rivets which is your later 'WW2 period' type.

Cheers, S>S

IIRC, I think the round frog stud (larger variety) was actually approved as a permissible manufacturing simplification in November 1915.

Chris

[shippingsteel]

That's interesting, I always thought it was the small round stud that was introduced at that time as a manufacturing alternative but upon checking the LOC it appears not.!

The actual listing implies nothing in regard to size, just that it is circular stud as opposed to the normal teardrop style. So where's that leave the little Aussie round stud.!

A lot of these changes were offered to the manufacturers as wartime expediencies to save on costs, but there is no certainty that any or all of them were used at the time.

It would be interesting to see if anyone has an example of the original brown leather bodied scabbard (or a similar GW dated leather) with a large round stud on the locket.

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

I thought the small round stud was an Australian (Lithgow) 1920s only thing (on chapes with the figured/curved ends).

I suspect it would probably be possible to find photographic evidence of round studs in WWI use if they were widely used.

Chris

The difference might be UK/Australia.

Just checked Skennerton and Richardson (p276) and they do indeed indicate "small circular stud produced from the 1920s" and large round stud introduced in Australia WWII but earlier they indicate in UK production circular stud introduced in Nov 1915.

Edited 27 February , 2014 by 4thGordons

[shippingsteel]

Yes Chris, as you state Skennerton does make mention of these modifications, as he sourced his information directly from the List of Changes documents. (see below)

The problem with that is when it is mentioned in a book, collectors then extrapolate that as a 'given', when in reality the changes were only added as an extra possibility.

Whether any round stud scabbards were actually produced during the war is debateable, I'm sure some experimental samples were, but in what quantities is hard to say.

I think the key word in the paragraph below is "may". In fact it appears twice which is quite significant as far as these LOC's go.! They were always very precisely worded.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

...Skennerton does make mention of these modifications, as he sourced his information directly from the List of Changes documents. ...The problem with that is when it is mentioned in a book, collectors then extrapolate that as a 'given', when in reality the changes were only added as an extra possibility.

Whether any round stud scabbards were actually produced during the war is debateable... I think the key word in the paragraph below is "may". In fact it appears twice which is quite significant as far as these LOC's go.! They were always very precisely worded.

1) To be fair on Skennerton and Richardson (poor chap, common co-author's fault - tends to get forgotten!), they do say, re: round studs, etc. (p.195), that "These relaxations in standards were offered as alternatives to the contractors, and therefore were not necessarily all embodied from that point in time". I take your point SS that others have misinterpreted or built sand castles upon what they wrote, and taken round studs as being made as of November 1915 - but we needs be fair to S&R and so NOT leave it open to an interpretation that they did not add that qualifier.

2) Anyone have a JWB marked one with round frog stud? JWB (= I think J.W.Brown(e) of Birmingham?) were active pre-WWI, so could be worth looking to see if there is one with their marking...

3) Yes, so precisely worded as to be ambiguous in usual civil-serpentish fashion! 'May'... 'may'... I remember back in 1967 when I signed the Official Secrets Act that it also was full of ambiguities - OMG! Have I broken the Act in saying that?!

[trajan]

Having a kid-free and idle hour I thought I'd check on those JWB marks. Googleygoogle threw up a few references to various auction sites, and those where they gave extra details about the scabbard markings indicated a 1917 date. I didn't look very hard, but I thought that was interesting - clearly a reasoanble number of JWB 1917 scabbards are around. And so a JWB marked scabbard with a round stud locket would have a claim to be a WW1 product - but allowing for re-furbishments with new metalware that would still be debateable!

I did think that whoever JWB were they were working earlier than 1917... I have a vague memory of a P 1888 scabbard with a JWB mark being discussed on GWF - SS will probably remember?

[trajan]

A Turkish contact has asked me about these scabbards, which are stitched both back and front... Anybody have any ideas on them? I do recall that some 1907 scabbards were stitched along the sides, but I can't remember anything quite like this - and don't have S&R to hand...

Trajan

PS: While looking for this thread I found another earlier one on 1907 scabbards with some useful bits in it - see: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=108318&hl=%2B1907+%2Bscabbards

[calibre792x57.y]

Page 194, 'British & Commonwealth Bayonets' shows two of these double seamed scabbards, approved 29 Sept 1915 as Scabbard, Sword Bayonet No.2 Mk 1; to allow two smaller pieces of leather be used to construct the body. It goes on to say that this LoC 17623 was cancelled in 1920 with the remark that 'no scabbards of this pattern have been made'. However some have been seen with British contractor's names so there were certainly small runs were made, and others were produced in Australia in the Twenties. As previously stated Skennerton & Richardson emphasise that these were merely production options. - SW

[trajan]

Page 194, 'British & Commonwealth Bayonets' shows two of these double seamed scabbards, approved 29 Sept 1915 as Scabbard, Sword Bayonet No.2 Mk 1; to allow two smaller pieces of leather be used to construct the body. It goes on to say that this LoC 17623 was cancelled in 1920 with the remark that 'no scabbards of this pattern have been made'. However some have been seen with British contractor's names so there were certainly small runs were made, and others were produced in Australia in the Twenties. As previously stated Skennerton & Richardson emphasise that these were merely production options. - SW

Thanks SW. I suspect, to judge from the black paint showing on some of these, that they are in a large group of scabbards that have been coming out on the market from a guy in Cyprus over the past 3-5 years - I have bought a couple from him to fit on WW2 bayonets that I have since sold.

What is interesting, though, is that some of these in the photograph have WW1-type teardrop and some have late WW1 or WW2-type round frog-studs.

As for that bit that 'no scabbards of this pattern have been made', well, usual caution needed there: first thing one learns in research like this is never say never! As there is a LOC, so better to say - 'no scabbards of this pattern have been made to our knowledge'. I will enquire more about these...

[ragnorak72]

I was wondering if anyone could give me some info on a scabbard I purchased recently? I wanted to verify that it is WW1 era. After giving it a bit of a clean I discovered it has the marking M/44 which started me wondering if it was WW2 era.

Edited 20 December , 2014 by ragnorak72

[shippingsteel]

Yes it will be WW2 era. The M44 code indicates J.B. Brooks & Co. of Birmingham. Your scabbard should have a large round frog stud, not the teardrop style of the GW period.

PS. Your photo is not showing ... at least on my screen anyway.!

Cheers, S>S

[ragnorak72]

Yes it will be WW2 era. The M44 code indicates J.B. Brooks & Co. of Birmingham. Your scabbard should have a large round frog stud, not the teardrop style of the GW period.

PS. Your photo is not showing ... at least on my screen anyway.!

Cheers, S>S

Thanks for the info and yes mine does have the large round frog stud. I didn't read the item description properly before buying. I tried linking to Dropbox but I couldn't get the link to open properly.

Edited 20 December , 2014 by ragnorak72

[Medaler]

Regarding scabbards stitched down both the front and back, at least one was made - I have one!

I picked up a whole bunch of 1907 scabbards about 15 years ago, to pair up with a load of bayonets I had bought previously that did not have them. I bought the double stitched one as a "spare" because I thought it might be a rarity.

I must admit, I don't have it to hand at the moment, but I will dig it out and examine it if anyone wants any details.

Cheers,

Mike

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Regarding scabbards stitched down both the front and back, at least one was made - I have one!

I picked up a whole bunch of 1907 scabbards about 15 years ago, to pair up with a load of bayonets I had bought previously that did not have them. I bought the double stitched one as a "spare" because I thought it might be a rarity.

I must admit, I don't have it to hand at the moment, but I will dig it out and examine it if anyone wants any details.

Cheers,

Mike

Mike,

Yes, it would be extremely interesting to see your ' double stitched ' bayonet scabbard.

Two so called ' double stitched ' scabbards were produced, one if found, would be exceedingly rare, as it was an experimental British Pattern 1907 Scabbard made by laying 2 leather strips on top of each other and then stitching them down both side edge seams. This scabbard never went into production, although some manufacturers samples could have been made.

The other ' double stitched ' Pattern 1907 Scabbard was made in Australia in the early 1920s, and was made differently to the British type in that 2 leather strips were again used but with the Australian version the joining seam runs down the middle of the scabbard both front and back, unlike the British version where the joining seams are on both side edges of the scabbard.

Although the Australian ' double stitched ' scabbard is not WW1 vintage, but rather early 1920s, collectors would still find it an interesting variation.

So, are the double stitched seams on your scabbard running down both side edges of the scabbard, or are the double stitched seams running down the middle front and the back of your scabbard ?

Regards,

LF