Osmanli bayonet markings

[trajan]

I just now got back onto the Turkish bayonet thread begun way back in 20111 by our esteemed arkadasim ShippingSteel, and added a comment - and then I thought, hang on, this has got to nine pages - far too much for newcomers and even cognoscenti to work their way through!

So, knowing that SS has made a major study of Osmanli bayonet marks (the 1887, 1890 and 1903 series - all around in WWI!) and of their frequency vis a vis the bayonet types, I thought I'd put out a plea - SS, will you please provide an nicely accessible catalogue / listing of what you have so that others interested in the topic can - if possible - take it a stage further?

Cheers!

Trajan

[trajan]

Well, I had put this up as a teaser because SS is the leading guy on Osmanli bayonet markings, and some two years ago already had recorded over 90 markings (see http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=161354&page=7), which is why I asked him some 18 months ago if he would help us all by (a), putting up a final version of identified makers marks on the forum so we can carry it around for ID purposes, and posting the results of his analysis (indicating, e.g., who made what types and when?) (see http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=161354&page=8)

No response, so I opened this thread…

So I will have to bite the bullet and tread in his footsteps, without - I hope - making too many mistakes. Because such information - the result of much research and cataloguing - should be shared so that we can all appreciate and benefit from it! And it will make everyone’s life easier if we have it all in one simple and accessible place (the original GWF Turkish bayonets thread meanders from Martin-Peabody examples through artillery pieces to ASFA marked examples!). So much for the padding!

The bayonets we are concerned with here are the models 1887, 1890, and 1903, all of which were made by German manufacturers to fit the Mauser rifles that the Germans supplied to the Ottoman Empire. As such they all employ the same types of inspectors’ markings along with the tughra, or Sultan’s mark on the pommel, this being the tugra shown below, the tugra of Sultan Abdulhamid II (r.1876-1909).

[trajan]

The German maker’s marks are found - guess where?, yes the ricasso!

The letterings, diacritical marks, etc., suggest (according to SS’s research) a certain amount of uncertainty among the makers who designed the stamps, because Osmanli, the Turkish language and script of the time, is NOT identical to Arabic (or Persian) as the German makers seem to have assumed.

They also come with the year of manufacture, which – to add to the confusion – is given in the Rumi system, not the Islamic AH or Christian AD system. No need to bother here with the difference except that the Rumi system was used for official purposes when dealing with Europeans, and so it does not exactly match the regular AH Islamic year-dating! Basically you add 584 to the Rumi date - oh, and there is a thread on this somewhere on Arms… But you can try wikketing Rumi calendar and get a score!

Now with some trepidation, not being quite prepared for a blast from the antipodes where SS resides, I offer you the regular Weyersburg as found on the 1887 and 1890, and as found in two lines to match the shorter width of the 1903 bayonet

[trajan]

It was amiss of me not to acknowledge where those photographs came from - so, thanks to Deepcutmark for the Tugra and the big Weyersburg one, and Shipping Steel for the other, which is certainly much clearer than my example!

Incidentally, the Ottoman army, as was the case with so many armies at the start of WWI (but probably much more so in their case!), was using a lot of obsolescent equipment including the 1887 rifle (and presumably bayonet), as is shown by a rifle that is marked "CAPTURED AT KURNA [= Qurna] DEC 1914". Details of that relevant campaign are to be found at - http://www.1914-1918.net/mespot.htm

Trajan

[trajan]

And this is another of the single-line Weyersburg marks, this time on an M.1890, dated '1312', by which time they had got the lettering, etc., a bit better that in the one above, which is on an 1887, dated '1306'. The photo is from my collection, I think!

[trajan]

While on this subject of 1887 rifles in use in WWI, it might be of interest to add this link to one of these neatly converted to fit the 1890 rifle - http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=181035

[trajan]

And it might also be of interest to note that there is at least one of these Weyersburg 1887's with a '1306' marking (as above) that was in German service! It has the 'DEUTSCHLAND' requistioning stamp on the pommel!

[trajan]

And so to another maker... Simson and Cie of Suhl - albeit this identification was never actually confirmed by S>S>, who did most of the work on getting these things sorted out. But see the banter on http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=180869&hl=suhl which seems to conclude with SS accepting it as such! And so in default of a denial, I'll go with it!

This marking is on an M.1890, of '1312' so 1896, the photograph supplied by Simon127 on the aforementioned thread. I don't know if they made any 1887's or 1903's - SS? - but they were not really bayonet makers, more shotgun and rifle guys. They made a few 98/05's, but I have no idea of anything else bayonet wise.

Note that this has post-1927 'Arabic' numbers on the crossguard, not the pre-1927 'Osmanli' numbers (which are really Persian/Arabic!) - simon127, is this a shortened one? Or a full-length?

Trajan

[N White]

Hey, some of those markings look familiar. Both of these were sadly, chopped later in life.

[trajan]

Nice clear markings! Just out of interest, do either have the A.S.F.A. marking on the pommel, for the Turkish Weapons factory? If so, then they were done post-1928 or so, but I have seen shortened examples without the mark which should mean they were done before then, and nobody else seems to have noticed the existence of these non=ASFA marked ones!

(BTW, I kind of like the chopped ones now, and have two or three of them - but that's just because of the way they are evidence for the historical bit, the decision by the powers that be to change the existing long bayonets into short bayonets, so "let's cut them all down to size!" I suspect the process started after the introduction of the 1913 short bayonet, and became standard policy by 1928 or so. BUT, what is amazing is that the photographic evidence clearly shows the Turkish army using long unaltered 98/05's etc into the 1930's.)

Now, back on topic. All that I know about these Osmanli marks - with the exception of the Simpson one - results from SS's sterling work: I started this thread to try and cajole him into sorting the data out and writing a definitive work on his research, and in the absence of that I do rely on his identifications! Having said that, the one on the left should be a Weyersburg, dated 1310, so 1310 plus 584 = 1894 (give or take a couple of months!). I'll try to deal with the other mark tomorrow, but the date looks like it is 1312 (just possibly 1313?), and so 1896/1897.

Regards,

Trajan

[N White]

Trajan, the first and third and 2nd and 4th numbers on the rightmost one are identical.

Both are asfa chops. I agree the progression is cool, but part of me really wishes they hadn't, especially when I look at whats left of my Serbian 1880!

[trajan]

So to continue with this, again summarising SS's extensive and much appreciated research into the subject to make it easier to use by others (not least me!)! So if I get it wrong anywhere I hope he will come back to correct me on one of his most important contributions to bayonet studies.

Here we have J.P.Sauer of Suhl, who were (and are!) mainly makers of firearms. They used two somewhat different marks for their Turkish bayonets - if you go back to the original thread you will see the problems SS had with working these ones out! Check out http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=161354&page=3

Basically, as SS shows there, somebody screwed up and added the wrong and unnecessary diacriticals... But here they are !

[trajan]

Not exactly Osmanli or even WW1, but certainly connected as many Turkish-use WW1 bayonets are marked ASFA, indicating they were modified (shortened and/or rehilted) in the Turkish Republican period by the ASkeri FAbrikasi ('Military Factory'). There has been some debate as to when this concern was created, and so the date these markings were applied to the older and modified bayonets, but I have just seen a copy of what appears to be the original decree establishing the Askeri Fabrikasi (in the Turkish National Archives, 208-106), and this is dated 19.01.1938. So any WW1-period Turkish-use but ASFA marked bayonets were converted after that date.

[trajan]

And this is another of the single-line Weyersburg marks, this time on an M.1890, dated '1312'...

I have just come across this WK&C one which has been 'Turked', but I thought it might be useful to show as although the marks is very worn, the main elements - especially the highly distinctive 'E'-type letter - are quite clear. Note the cross-guard numbering, which indicates a post 1928 alteration (adoption of the western 'Arabic' numbering system).

[trajan]

So any WW1-period Turkish-use but ASFA marked bayonets were converted after that date.

Funnily enough, tho', rather like the existence of P1907 hookies with hooks intact and post-1913 re-issue dates, I have just seen that one of my shortened ASFA marked M.1890's (Sauer) has an intact quillon! It is serial numbered 1806, the regular (new-made) ASFA '1935'-type bayonets generally all have 6-digit numbers

[trajan]

Not exactly Osmanli or even WW1, but certainly connected as many Turkish-use WW1 bayonets are marked ASFA, indicating they were modified (shortened and/or rehilted) in the Turkish Republican period by the ASkeri FAbrikasi ('Military Factory'). There has been some debate as to when this concern was created, and so the date these markings were applied to the older and modified bayonets, but I have just seen a copy of what appears to be the original decree establishing the Askeri Fabrikasi (in the Turkish National Archives, 208-106), and this is dated 19.01.1938. So any WW1-period Turkish-use but ASFA marked bayonets were converted after that date.

Oh-oh, just to confuse the issue, I have just spotted a Turkish newspaper report in its 'Historical section' that a rail link to the Askeri Fabrikasi was built in 1933... My preference for the document though, and so for ASFA-marked bayonets being later than this, is based on my understanding that the production of the Turkish 'Mauser' rifle by the Askeri Fabrikasi began around 1938... Well, that's what the Turk Mauser collectors seem to believe! See, e.g., http://www.turkmauser.com/1938/

Hmmmmm.... More research needed....

[trajan]

Well, its the centenary of Gallipoli landings, and so an appropriate time to post this nice little example of an 1887 that came my way... A 'Coppel', and so now all I need is a 'Schilling' to complete the set of five makers!

[Jim C]

Hi, I'm brand spanking new to the forum.  This post is very interesting to me.  I have this old bayonet that I'm trying to identify.  What I see here is very similar.

Here are some pics

[AndyBsk]

Looks like shortened M1903,hook of crossguard removed,  date there should be 1322 most real for 1906, it was shortened post 1935 and reserialed with normal digits, in Askeri Fabrikasi? on pommel. the scabbard is a replacement type 1935.

[Jim C]

That's the S.FA on the handle?

By M1903, I assume that you mean it would fit the lugs on the Springfield?

If this is Turkish, I don't see that Turkish forces were users of M1903.

The scabbard does not fit without rubbing against the blade in either orientation.  I thought it was due to how banged up it is.

Thanks!

[AndyBsk]

No there is AS.FA on pommel even the first A is not good visible, turks became 4 modell of rifles M1887, M1890, M1893 and M1903, for the turkish Mauser 1903 was used a german type S98 bayonet with long thin quilback blade, the turks has nothing here with US Springfield. Normally this scabbard should be used by various M1935 turk bayonets, we should see the hole in mouth area as this determine what for bayonet it was used with. Maker on blade could be WKC.

Edited 5 January by AndyBsk

[shippingsteel]

Andy is correct. This Turkish M1903 was indeed made by Weyersberg, Kirschbaum & Cie (WKC) with the date stamped as 1322, which indicates manufacture in this case in approximately 1904. Sadly it has been "Turked" and is now known as "butchered" or alternatively an M1935(sic) 

Cheers,  SS 

[Jim C]

2 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

Andy is correct. This Turkish M1903 was indeed made by Weyersberg, Kirschbaum & Cie (WKC) with the date stamped as 1322, which indicates manufacture in this case in approximately 1904. Sadly it has been "Turked" and is now known as "butchered" or alternatively an M1935(sic) 

Cheers,  SS 

You guys are awesome.  I might be dense - where are you getting the 1322?  

[shippingsteel]

The Arabic numerals 1322 are stamped on the ricasso of the bayonet just above the crossguard.

Cheers,  SS 

[trajan]

10 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

Andy is correct. This Turkish M1903 was indeed made by Weyersberg, Kirschbaum & Cie (WKC) with the date stamped as 1322, which indicates manufacture in this case in approximately 1904. Sadly it has been "Turked" and is now known as "butchered" or alternatively an M1935(sic) 

Cheers,  SS 

Hardly 'butchered' as this shortening was done as part of an official shortening programme! And such bayonets are of importance to the historian as evidence in the weaponry development of the Turkish Army!!

Apart from which, that 'M1935' deisgnation is a collector's one, under the mistaken belief that that year saw the first production of a standard Mauser-type rifle for the Turkish army (the factory where it was made did not exist until 1936, and the probable year for first production was 1938!). Add to that, all the evidence I have surveyed, and set forth in a published peer-reviewed academic article, indicates the shortening programme began 1937/38 and was completed before 1951.

Trajan