German WW1 conversion of 1866 French Remington?

[msdt]

Picked this up recently - it's been in the wars a bit! It started life as an '1866' bayonet for the Remington rifle, with a Kirschbaum (German) makers mark; assume the other mark is a French inspection. Nothing on the spine as per all the Remington 1866 bayonets. The hilt has been removed and a new crosspiece put on - it's a bit crudely done, and the hilt is now loose on the tang. As the width of the crosspiece is less than a proper 1866 it means that there was enough tang to peen back over. Also it makes the distance from the muzzle ring to the mortise slot a little shorter. MRD is a shade over 17 mm.

Could this be a 1914/15 German conversion? I don't see anything similar pictured in Roy Williams book. I don't have any bayonets for the German 1871 or 1871/84 to compare with.

Cheers,

Tony

[shippingsteel]

The MRD that is required to be a German conversion to fit the Gewehr 88 will need to be around 17.5mm (But I will have to check further details when I get a chance)

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

Tony, I think there has been some discussion of these conversions on the Gunboards Forum, so you might want to check there. Oddly enough, I do have a S71 to hand right in front of me - but no calipers to check any dimensions, and no reference books here either...

JB

[shippingsteel]

Tony, not much help I'm afraid ... I have had a look into this but basically just keep coming up with what you already know.

So a German manufactured (see Kirschbaum trademark) M1866 style bayonet that was originally made for the Remington Rolling Block rifle (see Remington style hilt/slot)

No visible indication of where it was used, and with modified crossguard (and of course modified muzzle ring) any possible French serials would have also been removed.

However the German manufacturers made these for export so no guarantees where it would have ended up. The MRD at 17.5mm could suit the original rifle or the Gew88.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

Some further looking around has revealed a possibility that may be getting fairly close to the truth behind this conversion ...

It is well known that Egypt was a major user of the Remington Rolling Block rifle, together with the M1866 style bayonet with the slightly different 'Remington style' brass hilt/slot.

So it is interesting that Janzens Notebook mentions a later Egyptian conversion which involved replacing the crossguard. The reference states it was done for a Martini variant.?

And also on old-smithy's website there are photos of a similar style of Egyptian conversion to suit the SMLE rifle. These pics also involve a German made 'Remington' bayonet.!

Cheers, S>S

[msdt]

Hi S)S,

Thanks for the research. I also was heading in the Egyptian direction after talking to a dealer / collector last weekend. I have found references on the internet that these were made in 1914 to fit Martini-Enfields. It is definitely not for the SMLE as I freed up the catch today and tried to mount it on one! The muzzle ring is a little too big, and the catch will not lock as it needs to be further back for a SMLE.

If anyone has a Martini Henry bayonet to measure, my bayonet has an mrd of 17 mm, it is 73 mm from the back of the mr to the start of the slot, and 89 mm to the forward edge of the catch.

I am now pretty sure now that this an Egyptian conversion of a bayonet originally for an Egyptian Remington.

Cheers,

Tony

[trajan]

Hi Tony,

Travelling in internet badlands of SE Turkey so late reply... I have several M-H but they are all at home so can't help! Did you try Gunboards Forum though? As I remember it, there was quite a bit on these conversions there.

[trajan]

So it is interesting that Janzens Notebook mentions a later Egyptian conversion which involved replacing the crossguard. The reference states it was done for a Martini variant.?

Problem here is that Janzen is frequently wrong on his attributions and dates. As a cheap and rough guide, he is useful, which is why many amateur collectors like and quote from the 'Notebook', but more serious collectors avoid - except as a nice handbook for identification... Janzen gives very few sources and in any case his entries are mainly copied from Kiesling (who also suffers from a lack of sources and a faith in popular belief).

As SS doesn't supply the reference from his Janzen, it is p.39 in mine, with facing page being the illustration. Janzen describes his no. 3 (the one SS is referring to) as:

"Egyptian Model 1914 - Police: This piece is another modification of their old Remington bayonets, however this time for the .303 Martin-Enfield Rifles. The bayonet retains the Remington handle and incorporates a new crossguard. The scabbard is all steel"

No dimensions are given, no sources, except "Carter, Guns Review, 9/81"... I'll try to find if anything exists in any more recent published and reliable source(s)....

[trajan]

Hi S)S,

Thanks for the research. I also was heading in the Egyptian direction after talking to a dealer / collector last weekend. I have found references on the internet that these were made in 1914 to fit Martini-Enfields. It is definitely not for the SMLE as I freed up the catch today and tried to mount it on one! The muzzle ring is a little too big, and the catch will not lock as it needs to be further back for a SMLE.

If anyone has a Martini Henry bayonet to measure, my bayonet has an mrd of 17 mm, it is 73 mm from the back of the mr to the start of the slot, and 89 mm to the forward edge of the catch.

I am now pretty sure now that this an Egyptian conversion of a bayonet originally for an Egyptian Remington.

Tony, I know very little about French or Egyptian bayonets, but I did a bit of 'bookish learin' to see what I could find.

First a question, though - is there a step in the top of the hilt? It looks to me as if there is.

Now, that apart, I can follow the argument / suggestion that this bayonet ended up as an Egyptian bayonet converted to fit a Martini-Enfield. But a ticklish problem here is to start at the beginning of its history by explaining how a Kirschbaum-made bayonet blade with what looks to be a French inspection mark, which to me would suggest a blade made for a French 1866, end up in Egypt? BTW, I assume it is a yataghan blade, not a straight sword one? And don't forget that Rolling Blocks were used by quite a few countries.

On the other hand, one thing can - I think - be ruled out: the MRD at 17 mm is too small for a German rifle...

[msdt]

Hi Trajan,

There's no step on the hilt, and it is a yataghan. I understand that the bayonets for the Egyptian Remington rolling blocks were supplied from Coppel, Kirschbaum and Weyersberg (according to worldbayonets.com). The example on Old Smithy is a near identical Weyersberg one, with an inspection mark visible in the same spot. And I have just found an unconverted one for sale on Otto's (http://www.ebayonet.com/bayonetsa_f.htm) that has the identical inspection mark. So I think that the inspection mark is not French, though as it's not very German perhaps it represents the contractor's inspector - Belgian???

Actually I'm beginning to wonder about these 'Remingtons'. I have taken a shine to them, and now have 8, I think - that's going by the mrd at 18 mm, 2 have a chamfered mortise slot. At first I thought they were scarce, but actually there seem to be many around. worldbayonets (http://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Identification_Guide/Egypt/egypt_2.html) says:

The 60,000 rifles from the 1869 Egyptian contract were diverted to France for use in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71. A second contract for 55,000 rifles was made in 1874 and these were delivered to the Egyptian government.

Maybe what I have is examples of bayonets for the above 2 batches, plus others for other Remington rifle users. Guess further study of the inspection marks will help (no inspection marks on some).

I have also just noticed that one of my Remingtons also matches the one for sale on Otto's with the H inspection mark (photos below). As this makes 2 unconverted Kirschbaums, and one converted one all with the H inspection mark, I guess these represent the second contract where the rifles went to Egypt - and subsequently some were converted in 1914 for the Martini Enfield (still to be verified as the correct rifle).

Cheers,

Tony

[trajan]

... There's no step on the hilt, and it is a yataghan....

....

... I have also just noticed that one of my Remingtons also matches the one for sale on Otto's with the H inspection mark (photos below). As this makes 2 unconverted Kirschbaums, and one converted one all with the H inspection mark, I guess these represent the second contract where the rifles went to Egypt - and subsequently some were converted in 1914 for the Martini Enfield (still to be verified as the correct rifle).

Tony,

A great piece of research there! I knew about the ones diverted to France in the F-P War, but did not know about the 1874 contract.

Sounds like you will be becoming the GWF resident expert on these Rolling Blocks - they were used in the GW, so no problem with that! And let's hope that you'll get some confirmation on the conversion to M-E calibre in 1914. (BTW, a google search found several web-sites advertising Egyptian Martini-Henry socket bayonets converted for the Martini Enfield rifle: see, e.g. -http://www.antiqueswordtrader.co.uk/british-bayonets/451-british-1876-martini-henry-socket-bayonet.html)

The inspector's mark doesn't look Belgian to me (although I am no expert), but I'll see if I can find any other parallels. Incidentally, according to the information I have some of the German and Austrian firms did employ inspectors of Dutch/Belgium nationality - both Coppel and Steyr, for example, employed K. A. Bräuning, and both Coppel and Eickhorn employed E.B. Brossois: but their marks - and those of other Dutch/Belgian inspectors that I have seen are a small letter with a crown above, not the punched 'H' we are concerned with here.

Julian

[trajan]

My Kiesling and my Skennerton and Richardson are away on loan to a mate working in Batman, so I am unable to check these for the MRD of the bayonet(s) that fitted the .303" caliber Martini-Enfield Rifle. However, this site: http://arms2armor.com/Bayonets/brit1895.htm, gives this MRD as 0.70" , which is 17.78 mm, so too big for yours. Can you double check the MRD using calipers? You'll have to start your search for what it was converted for by this method, and there are a fair number of possibilities in the 16.8 - 17.2 range.