1898 n/A Seitengewehr bayonet

[PAULEVE]

Hi Guys just picked this up which I won at auction condition is great chape a bit rusty but has cleaned up ok

the unit markings on the crosspiece I believe are for The 7th Royal Bavarian Infantry "Prince Leopold"Regiment `

if i have this wrong please correct me

and the scabbards markings I believe relate to the 1st Royal Bavarian Jager regiment again please correct me if wrong

Here are the rest of the markings on the blade and scabbards throat

http://s30.postimg.org/4wv0seiy5/WP_20140814_017.jpg

http://s30.postimg.org/6ne1tw0h9/WP_20140814_022.jpg

I look forward to all your comments and opinions

Paul Evenden

[shippingsteel]

Nice clean blade - you've done well.! There should also be a date and cypher letter on the back of the blade near the crossguard.

If you could confirm what the letter is on the crossguard stampings, that will help identify the proper regiment. Is it B. 7. then R or A.?

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

In regard to the regimental markings found on this type of bayonet, the date of manufacture can be particularly important as the regulations changed in 1909.

So what was true pre-1909 can have a totally different meaning after that date. These bayonets were made from about 1902 thru to 1914, just from memory.

The marking on the scabbard should indicate issue to the Koniglich Bayerische, 1st Jaeger Bataillon, Rekrutendepot, Waffe Nr.146 (ie. the Recruiting Depot)

Cheers, S>S

[PAULEVE]

Thanks S>S

Totally forgot to put this up on the original

B.7.R.3.161 on the cross piece

B.1.J.R.146. on the scabbard

[trajan]

Indeed, a very nice example of a steckenrückenklinge with a very nice scabbard to boot! To be precise this is a Sg.98 n.M or neuen Muster ("new type") - the n.A. is a neologism coined (i think) by A.Carter. Yours is a 1907 issue with the cipher of Otto, King of Bavaria. Yours does not seem to have a flashguard, which was introduced for these in Bavarian use in December 1915, which suggests that yours may have stayed in front-line service from 1914-1918.

Oh-oh - got to dash - doorbell and so visitors... Will add more later...

[trajan]

To continue.

B.7.R.3.161 is for Kgl. Bayer. 7. Infanterie-Regiment Prinz Leopold, company 3, waffe 161 Their history is at: http://genwiki.genealogy.net/KB_IR_7

B.1.J.R.146. on the scabbard is indeed for Königlich Bayerisches 1. Jägerbataillon „König“, Recruiting depot, waffe 146. There is a history at: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6niglich_Bayerisches_1._J%C3%A4gerbataillon_%E2%80%9EK%C3%B6nig%E2%80%9C

Haenel 98’s are not common overall, although they were the second most common maker for Bavaria. That aside, B.7.R. marked bayonets are on the rare side! I have not found another example!

TTFN

Trajan

[trajan]

These bayonets were made from about 1902 thru to 1914, just from memory.

Good memory there! But slipping a bit! - why are they 98's? Because the first 98's were made in the year of their designation, 1898... The majority of recorded examples were made 1901-1907, the latest one was made/inspected in 1915. The OP example is 1907, the most common year for Bavarian ones - Bavaria was a bit slow in adopting this type of bayonet.

[PAULEVE]

Thanks for all that info Trajan appreciated . Guess i got lucky going for this particular bayonet and maybe a steal at £65 (€81).Will be looking for more regiment marked bayonets with leather scabbards . `

[shippingsteel]

Good memory there! But slipping a bit! - why are they 98's? Because the first 98's were made in the year of their designation, 1898...

Trajan, what a fool you are ... I really wonder why I bother replying to any of your rubbish comments. Once again you need to do more research and gain more experience.

In the post above I was replying to the OP's example bayonet which as you indicated from your greater pool of "book learnin" is a S98 n.A. (made between 1902 and 1914)

The S98 bayonets that were made prior to 1902 were the earlier model a.A which this example is NOT so it can't be made earlier than 1902. You need to check your facts.

Shown below is the much scarcer S98 a.A. model with the one-piece timber grips. Once you've actually handled these things the subtle differences become second nature.

[trajan]

Hi SS,

I will ignore the childish part of your response in the above post... I honestly didn't mean to rattle your cage but clearly have done so!

Now, let's be clear. What you wrote in post 3 was:

These bayonets were made from about 1902 thru to 1914, just from memory.

So, by 'These bayonets' in that post you seem to be saying that all 98's were made between about 1902-1914... I was clarifying what seemed to be an error on your part! Hence the and the As you clarified in your recent post you meant to refer to the second type 98 bayonet - but that was not clear from what you originally wrote. That aside, the last reported date for one of these 98's is indeed 1915...

S98 n.A.

Well, you stated in another thread (http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=210898&page=18#entry2097101) that you have never claimed to be a scholar, but sometimes a bit of scholarly research and the "book learnin" you evidently disparage does help! By which I mean if you do not have a copy of Carter's Volume II, then perhaps you can get a copy from one of your Aussie friends who have helped you out before with photographs, etc., and read therein pp.54-55, along with the original specification details as reproduced in that book pp.201-215.

Here you will read that the official name for the second version of the 98 bayonet was 'Seitengewehr 98 neuen Musters'. Carter then explains (p.55, second paragraph, lines 1-3): "The second improved type was introduced in 1902. It is now usually referred to as the S 98 nA (neuer Art - new type), but appears in the specifications as the neuen Musters - new model or pattern. For the sake of uniformity the nA designation has been used in this work". (Incidentally, a scholarly aside, Carter was fond of introducing on his own initiative the abbreviation nA for a second version of an existing type of bayonet - see infra p.10).

Now, I am happy to go along with the nA suffix for ease of arguments, but it is good and proper to know what the correct terminology is!

All that aside, a very nice first pattern model you have there!

TTFN,

Trajan