A Wilkinson hookie

[trajan]

Wilkinson hookies with intact quillons don't seem to be that common - well, that seems to be the case is one relies on the GWF search engine! Whatever, an Aussie mate of mine - knowing of my interest in Wilkinson bayonets sent me this link to one on sale in the US of A, so I thought I'd pass it on. Slightly outside my price range - and anyway, I prefer the hunt in the markets and junk shops!

http://www.ima-usa.com/british-p-1907-first-model-hooked-quillon-bayonet-earliest-scabbard.html

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Wilkinson hookies with intact quillons don't seem to be that common - well, that seems to be the case is one relies on the GWF search engine! Whatever, an Aussie mate of mine - knowing of my interest in Wilkinson bayonets sent me this link to one on sale in the US of A, so I thought I'd pass it on. Slightly outside my price range - and anyway, I prefer the hunt in the markets and junk shops!

Trajan,

I am fortunate to have among my bayonet collection 4 bayonets with hooked quillions, including a Wilkinson HQ bayonet complete with its rare original Mark I scabbard with the internal chape ( as shown in your ima link ), additionally, this Wilkinson's pommel is marked to the King's Shropshire Light Infantry.

One of my other HQ bayonets made by Chapman, is pommel marked to the Royal Irish Regiment, another an Enfield, is pommel marked to the Seaforth Highlanders. Another, an Enfield, the pommel has the Australian service mark and may have been used at Galliopli.

Attached are some photographs, in the first photograph, the Wilkinson with the Mark I scabbard is at the top

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Wilkinson bayonet with Hooked Quillion ricasso.

LF

[trajan]

A very nice set you have there LF! Acquired, I assume, before the prices started rising!

I just got back home and so was able to check with S&R, p. 187, and see that (according to them) by the end of 1911, there were some 25,575 P.1907 plus another 49,000 or so by Mole, Sanderson and Chapman, and that by then Enfield had made 175,000.

It would seem that of the contract-made ones, Mole was the rarest (well, up to then!). They give (in ascending order):

Mole: 13,308

Chapman: 14,250

Sanderson: 22,497

Wilkinson: 25,575

[Lancashire Fusilier]

A very nice set you have there LF! Acquired, I assume, before the prices started rising!

I just got back home and so was able to check with S&R, p. 187, and see that (according to them) by the end of 1911, there were some 25,575 P.1907 plus another 49,000 or so by Mole, Sanderson and Chapman, and that by then Enfield had made 175,000.

It would seem that of the contract-made ones, Mole was the rarest (well, up to then!). They give (in ascending order):

Mole: 13,308

Chapman: 14,250

Sanderson: 22,497

Wilkinson: 25,575

Yes, and it is always nice to see the prices jumping up still higher.

Regards,

LF

[trajan]

Just out of interest, I have by now seen several pre-1913 P.1907's in the flesh and on GWF and elsewhere, with hooks and without, but a fair few seem to have rather orangey-coloured grips - e.g., the one on the cover of S&R, which is a Sanderson. Do you or does anyone know if these are of any significance, e.g., they are typical of Sanderson; and/or what wood they are made from?

TIA,

Trajan

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Just out of interest, I have by now seen several pre-1913 P.1907's in the flesh and on GWF and elsewhere, with hooks and without, but a fair few seem to have rather orangey-coloured grips

Trajan,

If you look at my HQs, one of the grips is particularly lighter with that orange hue, and that is probably closer to the original colour of the grips, however, with the mud, oil, sweat and perhaps some blood getting on the grips, those grips got darker and darker in colour.

Regards,

LF

[trajan]

Many thanks for the quick reply LF! And one day I'll tell you the story of the P1907 hookie that got away from me for less than GBP 320...

Best,

Trajan

[18th Battalion]

Here's another one in an upcoming auction, estimate is £500-£550. It's an Enfield made example produced in 1909 with 'MAN' stamped on the pommel, is that estimate what they typically sell for?

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Here's another one in an upcoming auction, estimate is £500-£550. It's an Enfield made example produced in 1909 with 'MAN' stamped on the pommel, is that estimate what they typically sell for?

The pommel regimental mark ' MAN ' is for the Manchester Regiment.

Auction Houses will typically advertise an item with a much lower estimate than it's actual value, which is done to attract and encourage bidders. Personally, I would gladly pay 550 pounds today for this bayonet still with its hooked quillion, and more importantly the rare Mark 1 scabbard with the internal chape. However, I would be very shocked if their advertised estimate did not quickly double or triple once the actual bidding starts on auction day.

Regards,

LF

[18th Battalion]

How did these examples survive in their original form without the armourers modifications of hook removal and clearance hole, I'm guessing they where brought back during the war by soldiers on leave as souvenirs?

[Lancashire Fusilier]

How did these examples survive in their original form without the armourers modifications of hook removal and clearance hole, I'm guessing they where brought back during the war by soldiers on leave as souvenirs?

I am sure a small number were kept or brought back, and a few were just never turned in for modification, as can be seen here in this photograph of British troops in Palestine sometime in the 1920s, with one soldier still carryng an un-altered Pattern 1907 bayonet with a hooked quillion.

Regards,

LF

[shippingsteel]

LF, we have been through this before, that photo you have posted is dated December 1917, taken upon the capture of Jerusalem. See HERE

Cheers, S>S

[Lancashire Fusilier]

LF, we have been through this before, that photo you have posted is dated December 1917, taken upon the capture of Jerusalem. See HERE

Cheers, S>S

Hello SS,

You were wrong with your 1917 guess back in 2012, and you are still wrong today to continue to guess that it was taken in 1917, when that photograph was in fact taken on April 8, 1920 during the 1920 Palestine riots.

The source of that photograph of British troops at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, was the American Library of Congress and it comes from their photograph collection.

Here is the link :-

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/mpc2004003646/PP/

Regards,

LF

[shippingsteel]

Agreed, but that is a specially important photo as far as "hookie chronology" is concerned, so it is imperative that the correct date be attached.

And the other thread also has information regarding the usage of the hooked quillon bayonet, that is quite relevant to 18th Battalion's question.

I do have conclusive evidence to confirm the date of the photo to be 11th December 1917, taken upon Allenby's ceremonial entry to Jerusalem.

EDIT. We both appear to have posted simultaneously, this post was obviously in reply to LF's post #14 (which is now deleted)

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

LF, regarding your latest post, that is very interesting information on the source of that photo. I note that the image was gifted to the collection mentioned.

But as we know from experience, captions are just that, captions ... always to be taken with a grain of salt until otherwise proven or disproven, either way.

The information noted in your source, appears to have also been taken from a caption. Anyway I shall continue this with my evidence on the other thread.

Cheers, S>S

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Agreed, but that is a specially important photo as far as "hookie chronology" is concerned, so it is imperative that the correct date be attached.

And the other thread also has information regarding the usage of the hooked quillon bayonet, that is quite relevant to 18th Battalion's question.

I do have conclusive evidence to confirm the date of the photo to be 11th December 1917, taken upon Allenby's ceremonial entry to Jerusalem.

Cheers, S>S

SS,

I absolutely doubt that you do have any conclusive evidence whatsoever to support your pure guess that the photograph was taken on 11th December 1917, as the actual date the photograph was taken was 9th April 1920.

The photographer took several photographs on April 8 and April 9, 1920 during the Jerusalem riots, and fortunately, he was a professional photographer and he dated his photographs.

Attached is the original photograph taken and dated by the photographer, and you will note that it is clearly dated 9th April 1920.

As it was you who resurrected your old 2012 ' Guess ', and now we have the photographic evidence to show your December 1917 date guess was way off, and that the photo was in fact taken on 9th April 1920, I think it is time for you to do the right thing,set the record straight, and admit you were wrong back in 2012, just as much as your were wrong today.

This photograph is extremely important, as it clearly shows the continuing use of the 1907 bayonet with the hooked quillion intact as still being in use with the British Army as late as 9th April, 1920.

Regards,

LF

Photograph c/o the Library of Congress

[shippingsteel]

OK then LF, you make a fair point and if I am wrong than I stand happy to be corrected, as and when the new information does become available.

It is so good to finally be able to put a source to that particular photo. Back then I was basing my position on my independent reading and research.

Shown below is the image from the AWM that was taken that day in December 1917 at the Jaffa Gate, with Gen. Allenby entering the sacred city.

It is found HERE . You will have to forgive me for thinking that the Indian soldiers and the vehicle parked in that position was not just coincidental.

It is interesting to read about the American Colony that was established in Jerusalem. I wonder if they were always treated as neutrals by the Turks.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

And I am not a photographic expert, somebody may be able to help out ... the image shown in post #17, is that an original negative strip.?

Or does it appear to be a photo of a photo.? The underlying original image appears to be a bit tattered around the edges. Just wondering.

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

THIS LINK MIGHT HELP.

This appears to be the source album of prints from which some of the titles are drawn. You will note that at the start there are a lot of pictures of 1917 but that the album page containing this print is indeed dated 1920 in the album.

The picture SS posted is also included and the album gives access to a very hi-res version from which this detail can be extracted (hi res Tiff files can be downloaded for each page):

So it would seem that yes the positioning of the vehicle is coincidental -- and it clearly is not the same vehicle.

What is interesting is if you look at the photos of soldiers on subsequent pages (all dated 1920) - the bayonets all have quillon removed as far as I can see.

Chris

[Michael Haselgrove]

Whereas I have no opinion as to the date that the particular photograph under discussion was taken I do agree that S>S is absolutely correct to question it if he is uncertain. Mistakes in captioning photographs arise. For instance, those lucky enough to have of Anthony Carter's German Bayonets Volume III will see at page 53 that he relied on the IWM caption which states that the Mauser anti-tank rifle shown in the photograph was in use at the Battle of Ypres in 1917 in circumstances where that rifle was not introduced until 1918. The IWM has another copy of the same photograph the caption on which states the rifle was in use in the retreat from Verdun in 1918.

As to the survival of HQ bayonets, in The Collector and Researchers Guide to the Great War II Howard Williamson writes:

"It is my contention that most surviving hooked quillon bayonets were stored by reserve battalions or used by Officer Training Corps so did not make it back for refurbishment. A survey I carried out, about ten years ago, showed a ratio of seven reserve unit/battalion to one front line battalion. Further evidence was gained when a number of bayonets, I observed, had original first line regimental markings crossed out and substituted with reserve units".

Regards,

Michael.

[beestonboxer]

Was there any purpose in the design of the hooked quillion ?

[trajan]

I do have conclusive evidence to confirm the date of the photo to be 11th December 1917, taken upon Allenby's ceremonial entry to Jerusalem.

Uh-oh, shades of Torgau prison...!!!

Anyway I shall continue this with my evidence on the other thread.

Would this 'original thread' be: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=185724

[Lancashire Fusilier]

This appears to be the source album of prints from which some of the titles are drawn. You will note that at the start there are a lot of pictures of 1917 but that the album page containing this print is indeed dated 1920 in the album.

The picture SS posted is also included and the album gives access to a very hi-res version from which this detail can be extracted (hi res Tiff files can be downloaded for each page):

Chris,

Not the same Ford Model T vehicle.

Here is another photograph taken by the same photographer the day before, April 8 1920, again showing British troops with a Lewis gun in position to deal with civil unrest in Jerusalem during 1920.

Regards,

LF

Photo c/o the Library of Congress.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

OK then LF, you make a fair point and if I am wrong than I stand happy to be corrected.

It is so good to finally be able to put a source to that particular photo.

Cheers, S>S

S>S,

The photographer took several photographs in and around Jerusalem on April 8 and April 9, 1920 whilst he was covering the riots in Jerusalem. Looking at your photograph in post # 18 I can see how you jumped to the wrong conclusion, and Chris' enlargement shows it is a completely different vehicle.

Attached is another of his photographs showing the same or another stripped down Ford Model T armed with a Lewis Gun, with the photograph dated April 8 1920.

As you are someone with an interest in bayonets, you should be pleased to have documented photographic evidence confirming the 1920 British Army's use of the Pattern 1907 bayonet with the hooked quillion still attached.

Regards,

LF

Photo c/o the Library of Congress.