The Prussian Posted 3 January , 2017 Share Posted 3 January , 2017 Hello Julian! That´s a complexe question. You know, we had: Infantry Regiments Reserve Regiments Landwehr Regiments Then in addition there were: Ersatz-Infantry Regiments Brigade-Ersatz-Bataillons Reserve-Brigade-Ersatz-Bataillons Landwehr-Brigade-Ersatz-Bataillons Ersatz-Bataillons of the Infantry Ersatz-Bataillons of the Reserve-Infantry Ersatz-Bataillons oif the Landwehr-Infantry and: Field-Recruit-Depots Field-Recruit-Depots of the Army-Groups Field-Recruit-Depots of the Armies Field-Recruit-Depots of the Korps Field-Recruit-Depots of the Divisions Field-Recruit-Depots of the Regiments and: Field-Infantry-Regiments Field-Infantry-Bataillons Field-Infantry-Companies I really recommend the books of formations by Dr. Kraus: By example: https://www.militaria.at/Book.aspx?book=6144600&Language=de I don´t know, if the men had completed their experience. A lot of men were Landwehr or Landsturm soldiers. Note, that Landsturm men not always served with Landsturm units! A have several Militärpässe, where a "Landsturm-Rekrut" served with an active Infantry-Regiment! About the structure of the german army I recommend the english written book https://www.militaria.at/Book.aspx?book=2277660&Language=en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 3 January , 2017 Thanks Andy. I have Great War Dawning and need to go back and check that obviously. Funny, for one who likes doing unit markings I have a terrible memory for the complicated structure of the German army in WW1... Roman legions and auxiliary regiments are easier! Kraus looks interesting - wonder if I can tempt my university library into buying the set? Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 3 January , 2017 Share Posted 3 January , 2017 Thnat wozld be a good idea. But they are in german only. By the way, I help Mr. Kraus in his work for those books. The upcomming volumes of the telegraphs and Landsturm were with my help. I have regulary contact with Mr. Kraus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick1 Posted 4 January , 2017 Share Posted 4 January , 2017 (edited) Very interesting...kinda what I was thinking (wartime). Amazing to me this was marked like 26 years after manufacture. Thanks again. Rick Edited 17 January , 2017 by rick1 Math Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 4 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 4 January , 2017 12 hours ago, rick1 said: Very interesting...kinda what I was thinking (wartime). Amazing to me this was marked like 16 years after manufacture. Indeed - and even more amazing that (1), it was still around in 1914 in an unconverted state, and (2), they marked it, even though as I understand it the regulations stated that unit markings need not be applied in war-time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gew88/05 Posted 10 January , 2017 Share Posted 10 January , 2017 On 1/3/2017 at 00:13, The Prussian said: Hello Gew88/05 Unfortunately you are wrong. The imperial army didn´t had any training units in the peace-time line (or guard) -infantry regiments! Each regiment consists of "only" three bataillons with four companies each! Like I wrote, the Ers.Btl. (especially for 123, was raised in august 1914, at the beginning of the war). .................................................... On 1/3/2017 at 00:13, The Prussian said: So this bayo has a war-stamp! Thank you for the correction. I may not completely agree with you but your knowledge is unquestionable and I do not have sources handy so will let it go. On 1/3/2017 at 00:13, The Prussian said: Hello Gew88/05 Unfortunately you are wrong. The imperial army didn´t had any training units in the peace-time line (or guard) -infantry regiments! Each regiment consists of "only" three bataillons with four companies each! Like I wrote, the Ers.Btl. (especially for 123, was raised in august 1914, at the beginning of the war). .................................................... On 1/3/2017 at 00:13, The Prussian said: So this bayo has a war-stamp! Thank you for the correction. I may not completely agree with you but your knowledge is unquestionable and I do not have sources handy so will let it go. On 1/3/2017 at 00:13, The Prussian said: Hello Gew88/05 Unfortunately you are wrong. The imperial army didn´t had any training units in the peace-time line (or guard) -infantry regiments! Each regiment consists of "only" three bataillons with four companies each! Like I wrote, the Ers.Btl. (especially for 123, was raised in august 1914, at the beginning of the war). .................................................... On 1/3/2017 at 00:13, The Prussian said: So this bayo has a war-stamp! Thank you for the correction. I may not completely agree with you but your knowledge is unquestionable and I do not have sources handy so will let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobaltrage Posted 27 January , 2017 Share Posted 27 January , 2017 Hello everyone! First time posting but I have been reading the forums on this site for a while and I really enjoy it. I have a question that I am sure some of you will be able to answer for me. I bought this M1898/05 aA S in an online auction. As you can see in the photos, it was made by Simson & Co and is marked W14. It has an original leather scabbard which has several unit markings. Unfortunately, the bayonet is not unit marked. I was hoping that someone could clarify for me which units are represented by the three different markings on the scabbard and possibly point me to where I might find out information about those units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 27 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2017 (edited) On 1/27/2017 at 08:14, Cobaltrage said: Hello everyone! First time posting but I have been reading the forums on this site for a while and I really enjoy it. Welcome to GWF, Cobaltrage! That is a nice bayonet and those are excellently clear markings - all to Pioneer units and so the scabbard was originally for what you now have, a S.98/05 a.A.m.S. R.P.III.1.34 - if that is a 1? = 1 Reserve-Pionier-Kompagnie, III Armee Korps, Waffe 34. Edit: inserted "Pionier" 3.P.2.247. = 3 Pionier-Bataillon, 2 Kompagnie, Waffe 247. R.1.P.6.242. = 1 Pionier-Bataillon, 6 Reserve-Kompagnie, Waffe 242. Edit: corrected to: 1st Reserve company of Pionier-Bataillon Nr.6, 242nd weapon - see posts 241 and 242. I am not too hot on unit histories, and others will quickly correct me if I am wrong, but the first of these units would have moved around with the III Armee Korps, which had its own Pionier-Bataillon (Nr. 3), and so see: http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/III._Armeekorps_(Alte_Armee) The second should be Pionier-Bataillon von Rauch (1. Brandenburgisches) Nr. 3, which was with the III Armee Korps, and so they took this scabbard from the first unit, the 1 Reserve-Kompagnie, and there is a history of sorts at: http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/PB_3. The last one is: Pionier-Bataillon Prinz Radziwill (Ostpreußisches ) Nr.1, with a history at: http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/PB_1 Julian Edited 30 January , 2017 by trajan Additions and corrections Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobaltrage Posted 28 January , 2017 Share Posted 28 January , 2017 Julian, Thanks for the info. Another question. On the first marking, you said it meant 1 Reserve-Kompagnie, III Armee Korps, Waffe 34. I was wondering if the "P" meant Pionier and if so does it change the unit designation? Also, can you give me an idea of how common these are? I have read that less than 10% that were originally produced were sawbacks and that most of those were ground off in 1917. I assume that it must have been a battlefield souvenir taken prior to 1917, otherwise the saw teeth would have been ground off. Does that sound correct? Finally, can you give me an idea what this might be worth? I just want to make sure that I didn't cheat myself by paying too much. Thanks again. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 28 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 28 January , 2017 8 hours ago, Cobaltrage said: ... I was wondering if the "P" meant Pionier and if so does it change the unit designation? ... I have read that less than 10% that were originally produced were sawbacks and that most of those were ground off in 1917. I assume that it must have been a battlefield souvenir taken prior to 1917, otherwise the saw teeth would have been ground off. Does that sound correct? Finally, can you give me an idea what this might be worth? I just want to make sure that I didn't cheat myself by paying too much. Whoops! Yes, my mistake there - 1 Reserve-Pionier-Kompagnie, III Armee Korps, Waffe 34.... If I recall correctly (I am away from home and my records/books right now), prior to 1914, the S.98/05's were made in two forms, with sawback for pionier units, and without sawback for telegraph and other 'technical' units. In mid-1915 or so, when the 98/05 began to be 'mass-produced' for issue to all troops, to replace the S.98, then according to the documentary evidence, roughly 6% were made with the sawback (6% was certainly the stipulation for bayonets ordered by Bavaria). The order about removing the sawback was a two-stage thing. First off, they were gradually removed from front-line service and exchanged with non-sawbacks carried by rear echelon troops; and then - where and when possible - the sawback was removed from those returned to the rear echelon units. BUT there was no order (I think!) stating that soldiers in rear echelon units could not carry on using the sawbacks, and so while yours could well have been a capture from before 1917, it could have been taken from rear echelon men or stores after that date. No idea on value, I'm afraid, not the least because it will vary from one country to the next but mainly from one person to another! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobaltrage Posted 28 January , 2017 Share Posted 28 January , 2017 Thanks again, Julian. I am thinking that the last unit marking is who it was with when it was taken but I am having difficulty figuring out which unit it is. I haven't found a 6th Reserve Kompagnie for the 1 Pionier-Batallion. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 28 January , 2017 Share Posted 28 January , 2017 Hello! It doesn´t mean 6th company. R.1.P.6.242 1st Reserve company of Pionier-Bataillon Nr.6, 242nd weapon (1918 under command of 12th Res.Div.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobaltrage Posted 28 January , 2017 Share Posted 28 January , 2017 Thank you for clarifying that, Andy. Do you agree with Trajan's previous remarks concerning the first two unit markings? If not, what units do those markings represent? I am having a difficult time trying to figure out a standardized way to translate the markings. It almost seems as if they changed from unit to unit. I have been a student of WWI for years but most of my knowledge is of the British, French, and US forces. I am just getting started with the German, Austro-Hungarian, and Turkish forces. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 28 January , 2017 Share Posted 28 January , 2017 Hello! Yes, I agree with the others. The marking system is difficulty. There is a book about those markings! Albrecht Wacker and Joachim Görtz: Handbuch deutscher Waffenstempel auf Militär- und Diensthandwaffen 1871-2000. https://www.amazon.de/Handbuch-Deutscher-Waffenstempel-Diensthandwaffen-Wehrwissenschaft/dp/3932077105%3FSubscriptionId%3DAKIAI62UFGM6SSSKNQIQ%26tag%3Dsfb%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D3932077105 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2017 15 hours ago, The Prussian said: ... It doesn´t mean 6th company. R.1.P.6.242 1st Reserve company of Pionier-Bataillon Nr.6, 242nd weapon (1918 under command of 12th Res.Div.) 8 hours ago, The Prussian said: ... Albrecht Wacker and Joachim Görtz: Handbuch deutscher Waffenstempel auf Militär- und Diensthandwaffen 1871-2000. https://www.amazon.de/Handbuch-Deutscher-Waffenstempel-Diensthandwaffen-Wehrwissenschaft/dp/3932077105%3FSubscriptionId%3DAKIAI62UFGM6SSSKNQIQ%26tag%3Dsfb%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D3932077105 Hi Andy, Am I missing something? The 1909 regulations give "3.P.3.18" as an example of the marking for "Pionier-Bataillon von Rauch (Brandenbugisches) Nr.3. 3.Kompagnie, Waffe 18." Wacker and Görtz (p.102) give the same unit mark and same explanation... So, why do you say in this case, R.1.P.6.242, it does not mean 6 Kompagnie? Or is the explanation simply that there was no such thing as a 6th Kompagnie in a Pionier Batallion???!!! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 29 January , 2017 Share Posted 29 January , 2017 Hello Julian! Probably Wacker and Görtz might be right, but maybe the man who stamped was not... With 3.P.3.18 it´s easy; but what if there ain´t no 6th company? Each Pi.Btl. had two reserve-companies, not more. They were called: 1.Res.Komp./Pi.Btl.1 (by example), so a number 6 can´t be a 6th company. 1.Res.Komp./Pi.Btl.6 is the only logical explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2017 OK, I get you, so what you are saying is that the marking is 'wrong' in this particular case because there was no 6th Kompagnie in a Reserve Pionier Batallion?And indeed a look at the 1909 Regulations does provide this example: "R.2.P.18.3" as the unit mark for the 2nd Reserve Kompagnie in Pionier-Batallion 18, weapon no. 3... So, I stand suitably corrected - and thanks for the insight, as I did not know the structure of a Reserve Pionier-Batallion before this! Oh, and I checked back with what Carter might have listed in his vol 1, and I see that he made the same mistake as I did, on his p.14, coincidentally with an S.98/02 marked: "R.1.P.6.32", so not too far off from Cobaltrage's!... Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 29 January , 2017 Share Posted 29 January , 2017 Hello Julian! Now it´s right! Well, the Pioneers were very complicated units. Imagine, in peace-time there were only 32 bataillons. Aftre the outbreak of the war, each bataillon formed two bataillons (don´t ask me why... I don´ tknow) with three companies each. By example Pi.Btl.3. It formed: I.Btl./Pi.Btl.3 with 1., 2. and 3.comp. and searchlight-platoon II.Btl./Pi.Btl.3 with 4 comp., 1. and 2. Res.comp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2017 1 hour ago, The Prussian said: Hello Julian! Now it´s right! Well, the Pioneers were very complicated units. Imagine, in peace-time there were only 32 bataillons. Aftre the outbreak of the war, each bataillon formed two bataillons (don´t ask me why... I don´ tknow) with three companies each. By example Pi.Btl.3. It formed: I.Btl./Pi.Btl.3 with 1., 2. and 3.comp. and searchlight-platoon II.Btl./Pi.Btl.3 with 4 comp., 1. and 2. Res.comp. Thanks Andy! My unit marks list is still in progress (with over 4,300 so far but only two more reference works to check!), and is not yet sorted by units, issue-dates, etc., but I have listed a number of regular unit marks for Pioneer units that go up to six companies, e.g., "B.1.P.6.179", and "4.P.6.248", but nothing higher than '6', which fits with what you say. But, note that some of these marks for the higher-numbered companies, are for bayonets originally issued pre-1914... For example, I have a "3.P.6.54" on a Pfm M/71 marked "W/90". So, were there two bataillons of three companies each at an earlier date than 1914? Julian Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 29 January , 2017 Share Posted 29 January , 2017 (edited) Hello Julian! No, there never were more then four companies in the Pi.Btls. before 1914. If you look in the ranklists, you´ll only find officers in: Staff, 1st - 4th company. I´ve checked the history of the Pionier units and there were yet mor then 4 companies in several bataillons August 2, 1914: 4 comp. in the Pi.Btls. Garde and 1-30 and bavarain 1-4. 2 comp. in the Res.Pi.Btl. Garde, 1-27 and bavarian Btl.4 1 reserve comp. in bavarian Btl. 1 and 2 1915: 5th comp. in Garde-Pi.Btl. 9.-16. comp. III.Btl./Garde-Pi.Rgt. a 5th comp. in Pi.Btl. 1-7, 9, 11, 14-17, 26, 27 and bavarian 2 and 4 a 5th and 6th Comp. of bataillons 8, 10, 12, 13, 21, 22 a 3rd Res.Comp. in Pi.Btls. 9 and 13 3rd-5th Res.Comp. in Pi.Btl.12 3rd and 4th Res.Comp. in Pi.Btl.22 and 24 1st and 2nd Res.Comp. in Pi.Btl.28 1st-3rd Res.Comp. of Pi.Btl. 32-34 1916: 1st and 2nd Comp. of IV.Btl./Garde-Pi.Rgt. 6th Res.Comp. of Pi.Btl.12 1917: 4th-6th Comp. of Pi.Btl.31 1918: 1st-5th Comp. of Pi.Btl.44 To me it´s complicated too. I can recommend the book of Cron (available in english). There is everything mentioned you need to know about the german structure: https://www.eurobuch.com/buch/isbn/1874622701.html?author=&coverState=&doAbeDe=1&doAchtungBuecher=1&doAko=1&doAlibris=1&doAmazon=1&doAmazonCa=1&doAmazonCom=1&doAmazonEs=1&doAmazonFr=1&doAmazonIt=1&doAmazonUk=1&doAudibile=1&doAudiobooks=1&doBUCH=1&doBUCHCH=1&doBbBuch=1&doBetterworld=1&doBiblio=1&doBlackwell=1&doBn=1&doBoeken=1&doBolCom=1&doBookdepository=1&doBooklooker=1&doBruna=1&doBuch24=1&doBuchfreund=1&doBuchhaus=1&doBuchmarie=1&doBuecherDe=1&doCalendars=1&doCasaDelLibro=1&doCiando=1&doDodaxAt=1&doDodaxCh=1&doDodaxDe=1&doEBS=1&doEBay=1&doEBooknl=1&doEbooks=1&doEbookscom=1&doEci=1&doElsevier=1&doFnac=1&doFnacEs=1&doFoyles=1&doGoogle=1&doHoepli=1&doHugendubel=1&doIbs=1&doImosver=1&doIndigo=1&doJokers=1&doKobo=1&doLaFeltrinelli=1&doLehmanns=1&doLibri=1&doLibriEB=1&doLibroco=1&doLonelyplanet=1&doLuisterboeken=1&doMedimops=1&doMondadori=1&doMusicnotes=1&doMusicroom=1&doNotenbuch=1&doOnderwijsboek=1&doPalgrave=1&doPrimera=1&doProlibri=1&doProxis=1&doRegalfrei=1&doRheinberg=1&doScholastic=1&doSpringer=1&doStudystore=1&doThaliaAt=1&doThaliaDe=1&doThriftbooks=1&doVoordeelboekenonline=1&doWaterstones=1&doWebster=1&doWordery=1&doZVAB=1&fromDateDays=7&isbn=1-874622-70-1&land=&maxJahr=&maxPrice=&mediatype=&minJahr=&minPrice=&noBids=0&noReprint=0&pageLen=2000&proSearch=&professionalState=&publisher=&search=&search_submit=suchen&title=&updatePresets=1&updateProState=1&usedState= I´m confused with your marking 3.P.6.54. Logically it must be: weapon 54 of 3rd company/Pio.Btl.6 I know, that doesn´t fit with Wacker/Görtz, but a 6th company doesn´t make any sense... Edited 29 January , 2017 by The Prussian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 29 January , 2017 Share Posted 29 January , 2017 By the way... Do you want to show the marking in our german forum? We have some specialists for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2017 (edited) 36 minutes ago, The Prussian said: By the way... Do you want to show the marking in our german forum? We have some specialists for that! I'll take you up on that when I finish the last two reference sources for unit marks... So far I have completed listing all that is in the Carter volumes, plus those from several other books with markings (e.g., the books by Roy Williams), but I haven't really started on the internet yet, never mind the ones posted here on this thread - or, for that matter - even my own unit-marked examples... It is a labour of love, in my own time, and an attempt to see what patterns might appear (an archaeological approach!). And it clearly already throws up some oddities that do not fit what is supposed to be - as with: I have several Pionieer 6th Company marks on pre-1914 marked bayonets... True, they could have been re-issued and unit-marked in 1914, but if so, then it is still surprising how many older bayonets were around at the time! And if they were unit-marked in 1914, then that goes against all the regulations, that unit-marking was not necessary in war-time... Julian Edited 29 January , 2017 by trajan Add comment on wartime marking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 29 January , 2017 Share Posted 29 January , 2017 Normally, the marking was stopped after mobilization, but we know, that some units did. Another idea. Cron wrote in his vol IV, that in 1889 in case of mibilization each Pionier-bataillon had to set-up two bataillons (like 1914). Maybe those six companies were counted 1-6? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 January , 2017 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2017 1 hour ago, The Prussian said: Normally, the marking was stopped after mobilization, but we know, that some units did. Another idea. Cron wrote in his vol IV, that in 1889 in case of mibilization each Pionier-bataillon had to set-up two bataillons (like 1914). Maybe those six companies were counted 1-6? Some units did indeed continue marking until quite late... Somewhere I read of a 'mauser' pistol that was made in 1917 and unit marked. With bayonets. though, a very clear drop-off after 1915 - certainly with 98/05's. I have hundreds of S.98 and S.98/02 listed, but less than 100 or so of S.98/05's made in 1914 or later. Latest bayonet marking I can remember off-hand without going through my files is on a W/16 - see: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?/topic/245810-waffenfabrik-mauser-9805-bayonets/#comment-2474099 post 8 Cron might have given the answer to this one on the 6th (and 5th!) Company markings. When I get these unit markings sorted out (probably during the summer) I suspect - from briefly looking back at my list - that most of these 6th (and 5th) Company markings may well prove to be on pre-1914 bayonets (S.71 and the like), and so they were done in the 1890's. There are a number of bayonets around with markings for units that were proposed in the scheme of things before 1914 but which were never actually formed. That could be the case with these 5th and 6th Company ones? Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prussian Posted 29 January , 2017 Share Posted 29 January , 2017 (edited) That really could be the case. They marked the bayonets for the mobilization, that came in 1914. And becvause of after 1914 there were (normally) no mor markings, they left the old markings upon the bayo. But I really warmly recommend the english Cron!!! Uncfortunately the other volumes were not published in english. The volumes are written by Curt Jany. (Vol. V of Jany is "The Cron", written by Hermann Cron) I) From the beginning to 1740 II) The army of Frederick the Great 1740-1763 III) 1763-1807 IV) 1807-1914 V) 1914-1918 The Cron next to Vol. V is an earlier production from 1923 with just a few differences to vol. V. Edited 29 January , 2017 by The Prussian 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