Seitengewehr 98 Quillback bayonet, with scabbard and frog

[Hanniballector]

Edited 6 December , 2014 by Hanniballector

[Hanniballector]

[Hanniballector]

[Hanniballector]

[Hanniballector]

I'm I correct in saying that it was manafacturerd in 1906 ? obviously by v.c shilling &shul. This would be fantastic as I have a 1906 gew 98 so to have a matching dated bayonet would be a good find for it .

Regards

Nick

[Richie B]

I'm I correct in saying that it was manafacturerd in 1906 ? obviously by v.c shilling &shul. This would be fantastic as I have a 1906 gew 98 so to have a matching dated bayonet would be a good find for it .

Regards

Nick

Correct dating - I think the cypher is O for Otto of Bavaria.

[Wigwhammer]

That's V.C. Schilling in Suhl - a middle-size town in southern Thuringia, not far from the border with Bavaria....

And a nice looking piece too.

Cheers

Colin

[shippingsteel]

Very nice example in excellent condition. As noted, manufactured by V.C.Schilling and accepted into Prussian service in 1906 (with the Crown W over 06)

Cheers, S>S

[Hanniballector]

Thank you

slight spelling mistake with shul (suhl).

Any idea why this example hasn't been regimentaly marked,is the Crown over B ( or at least that's what it appears to be ) Bavaria makers mark ? wigwhammer mentioned that V.C. Schilling in Suhl was near the Bavarian border? W I assume is for Wilhelm II.

I seem to remember reading something on here about the Stitengewehr 98 being replaced by the butcher bayonet in 1905 in that case why is it marked 06, would a later dated bayonet more likely to have been issued to reserve / second line troops as it was phased out and replaced?

Regards

Nick

Edited 6 December , 2014 by Hanniballector

[Hanniballector]

[Hanniballector]

United after 108 years.Not a nice thing to have coming at you either !

Regard's

Nick

[shippingsteel]

Nice to see the S98 attached to it's Mauser rifle.! These bayonets were being made right up until 1914, and definitely still in use during the early stages of the war.

When the S98/05 'butcher' was introduced in 1905 they didn't totally replace the S98 'quillback'. It was more a case of the S98 being very slowly phased out of use.

It is impossible to say why some examples are not regimentally marked - not all are, it depends on its service and usage. The Crowned letters are inspection marks.

Cheers, S>S

[Gew88/05]

Thank you

slight spelling mistake with shul (suhl).

Any idea why this example hasn't been regimentaly marked,is the Crown over B ( or at least that's what it appears to be ) Bavaria makers mark ? wigwhammer mentioned that V.C. Schilling in Suhl was near the Bavarian border? W I assume is for Wilhelm II.

I seem to remember reading something on here about the Stitengewehr 98 being replaced by the butcher bayonet in 1905 in that case why is it marked 06, would a later dated bayonet more likely to have been issued to reserve / second line troops as it was phased out and replaced?

Regards

Nick

Nick, you have a very nice bayonet, made in 1906 for Prussia, not Bavaria. The marking "Crown over W over 06" signifies that the bayonet was accepted into Prussian service in 1906, the "W" stands for Wilhelm, the Prussian ruler. If it were a bayonet for the Kingdom of Bavaria, it would have been marked with a "Crown over O and the last two digits of the date". "O" would have signified the Bavarian King Otto, who ruled from 1886 to 1913. He was succeeded by his son Ludwig and his cypher "L" appeared on Bavarian property until he stepped down at the end of WW1. Except in wartime, by agreement, the kingdom of Bavaria maintained control over it's military, separate from the German Empire and only joined under singular command during war-time. The Kingdoms of Saxony and Württemberg did the same, only joining together as a fighting force in wartime. All 4 kingdoms armed and equipped their forces separately and at their own expense and put their own property marking with their kings initial or cypher on them.

The Sg98/05 was adopted for service with Pioneers and artillery in 1905, the long, slender Sg98 stayed on as the primary bayonet for Infantry and other front line troops until hard won experience in combat showed that it was too long and fragile for use in the trenches, then the 98/05 replaced it as issue by 1916.

[4thGordons]

Coincidentally I was sorting out some of my photos today and ran across this one:

Which I think shows the same bayonet and GEW98 combination, although the grips on the bayonet here do not appear grooved.

Chris

[Hanniballector]

Thank you all for your info !

Found this interesting page on the differences of the Peruvian S98. I read Trajan post on the subject and found this so took a pic.

[trajan]

Nice to see the S98 attached to it's Mauser rifle.! These bayonets were being made right up until 1914, and definitely still in use during the early stages of the war.

When the S98/05 'butcher' was introduced in 1905 they didn't totally replace the S98 'quillback'. It was more a case of the S98 being very slowly phased out of use.

It is impossible to say why some examples are not regimentally marked - not all are, it depends on its service and usage. The Crowned letters are inspection marks.

Cheers, S>S

ng1_11.jpg

I think they were still being made up to 1916/1917...

The photograph, by the way, of the soldier with the S 98 m.s., n.A, with what I think is a first-class marksman award, would appear to be member of the 72 or 73 or 78 regiment.

[trajan]

Coincidentally I was sorting out some of my photos today and ran across this one:

scan0018.jpg

Which I think shows the same bayonet and GEW98 combination, although the grips on the bayonet here do not appear grooved.

Chris

Nice photograph! The Imperial navy seem to have received quite a few S98's. Oh, and it would be very odd if I the grips were not grooved, so perhaps its just the angle of the photograph and/or light source. Any indication which unit/dockyard?

[trajan]

Thank you all for your info !

Found this interesting page on the differences of the Peruvian S98. I read Trajan post on the subject and found this so took a pic.

Thanks for this. As you can see the Peruvian shield is pretty deeply impressed, and so I think if there had been one of these as deep on my mystery S98/Peruvian 1909 then I would be able to see if the pommel had been ground down or not. I don't have it to hand but will give it a double check when I get back to Turkey.

[trajan]

It is impossible to say why some examples are not regimentally marked - not all are, it depends on its service and usage. The Crowned letters are inspection marks.

ng1_11.jpg

Now I have had a chance to catch up on things... One if not the original source of the photograph here, not given by SS, is http://www.bajonett.de/WK1-Galerie/Infanterie/WK1.11-Soldat.htm, although it is also shown on http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=65239

The first site, BTW, http://www.bajonett.de/WK1-Galerie/weltkriegfoto.htm, has lots of lovely photographs although drakegoodman has many more, but note also that excellent Lubbe book of German soldiers with bayonets.

I think they were still being made up to 1916/1917...

The photograph, by the way, of the soldier with the S 98 m.s., n.A, with what I think is a first-class marksman award, would appear to be member of the 72 or 73 or 78 regiment.

And thank the gods I found that probably original source on http://www.bajonett.de/WK1-Galerie/Infanterie/WK1.11-Soldat.htmas it had a note indicating that the soldier was with the RIR216 and so I was WAY-out! The caption on the site doesn't indicate how the owner knows this, though - name and address of the sender?

[trajan]

Any idea why this example hasn't been regimentaly marked...

Looking at something else altogether and suddenly remembered this question was not answered!

Well, speaking from memory, the documentation re: marking stressed that markings were only to be applied to weapons in actual service, actual service in this case meaning those units mobilised at full strength, i.e., garrisons and the like. But, as I think I mentioned on another thread, in 1912 the Prussian War MInistry issued an order that weapons no longer needed to be marked when accepted into service. That regulation was not always followed, as we know from the many ersatz bayonets that are unit-marked, and bayonets marked for regiments in the 300 series, which were not raised until after Spring 1916, and so another regulation issued in late 1916 saying, basically, 'Come on you guys, we said STOP MARKING!'

So, why is your S98 not regimentally marked? Probably in stock until 1912 or later, and then issued to a newly mobilised regiment in 1914 or slightly later...

[Hanniballector]

Thanks Trajan

Regards

Nick

[trajan]

Happy to help!