trajan Posted 1 March , 2015 Share Posted 1 March , 2015 Strolling around the monthly antika pazari, and one of my contacts says "Got a nice Mauser bayonet for you"... "Oh no, not ANOTHER Waffenfabrik 98/05 W/17", I think, and sure enough it is, sans scabbard... But joy of joys, it's marked 1920 on the crossguard! Which means it is one of those selected for service use by the Reichswehr after the order of 1 August 1920 (HVBl. 657/7.20.J2.(W2) IV), that all weapons held by the Reichswehr be stamped, as I understand it, with the year-mark 1920, to show these have been officially retained for service use as per the Treaty of Versailles regulations. This order, by the way was re-confirmed on 28 August 1920 (HVBl. 498/8.20.J2 (W2)), with official instructions issued 28 September 1920 on the size of the '1920' mark (HVBl. 302/9.20.J2.(W2)). And, as this one is not unit marked, so it went out of service use late 1923 or early 1924, as HDV 464 of 12 December 1923 required that all weapons and equipment in use by the Reichswehr be unit-marked! This one has seen some wear - the right grip is almost worn smooth, but the left grip is fine. But how it got to Turkey I have no idea... I have seen photographic evidence of Turkish soldiers using 98/05's in 1922 and later, up to the 1930's, but I have always assumed these were ones supplied in 19117, when 90-95% of Waffenfabrik's production went to Turkey... Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 5 March , 2015 Share Posted 5 March , 2015 Nice bayonet Trajan - I know absolutely nothing about German post war markings, but I can only assume they are fairly difficult to find. You do seem to dig up a lot of interesting bayonets at those antika pazari. Presumably the bayonet is ex-WW1 which may account for the wear... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawdoc34 Posted 5 March , 2015 Share Posted 5 March , 2015 Agree, nice find Julian Dont often see those come up, you must have quite a collection of 98/05s now mate, bet you are about as popular with your missus as I am with mine at the mo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 5 March , 2015 Author Share Posted 5 March , 2015 Agree, nice find Julian Dont often see those come up, you must have quite a collection of 98/05s now mate, bet you are about as popular with your missus as I am with mine at the mo Yes, a growing collection, partly thanks to you with two important examples! Must admit, though, that my missus likewise doesn't always quite see why I need so many of those 98/05's, but with that 1920 I could show her Walter's book with one on the cover so it slipped through into the collection without too much of a problem... The real problem would be explaining why so many of the ones I have are Waffenfabrik's - but she hasn't noticed that yet... That aside, I did almost get caught out the other day when looking for the complete Turkish Martin-Peabody we use for cutting birthday cakes (little un's 6th!). The lovely lady peeped over my shoulder when I opened the relevant drawer and enquired as to what, exactly, the difference was between the four she could see... So I explained about how the different initials on them indicate different assessors, etc., and she soon got bored and wandered off with the selected one... I guess that's the best way to solve the problem, mate - keep them hidden except for a select few... Out of sight, etc... Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 13 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 13 October , 2015 This is another 1920 marked one that came my way - in imagery at least! A Fitchel and Sachs number spine-marked L/18, and with a 1920 crossguard mark and also a Weimar unit marking. In this case the '1920' mark dates to that same year, as per instructions issued on 1 August 1920 (Heeresleitung Nr. 657/7.20.J2.(W2) IV, if you must know ...), and so just within the parameters of the GWF... But the unit marking - II/J.R.20.8., which I understand is for the 2 Bataillon, 20 (Bayerisches - Ingolstadt) Infanterie-Regiment, 8 Kompanie (Maschinengewehr) - apparently belongs to the period either after June or November 1922 when the instructions were issued for marking the weapons of the new army. That said, the regulations issued in March 1924 show a different marking system, with - as I understand it - the Roman numerals at the start being replaced by 'Arabic' ones. In which case it would appear that this marking can be nicely dated to the period 1922-1924. Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 13 October , 2015 Share Posted 13 October , 2015 Julian,A nice bayonet and hard to find with the 1920 marking. Taking up the point made by jscott above, Carter writes at Vol.1 p.53 that most of the S98/05s issued to the Reichsheer/Police were completely refurbished before issue. In any event, I doubt yours was issued with such a worn grip. Interesting to speculate how it acquired such wear given the shortish service with the Reichsheer/Police. I wonder if the bayonets were sold off to Turkey, or another government, when they were replaced by the S84/98? Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 14 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 14 October , 2015 ... A nice bayonet and hard to find with the 1920 marking. Taking up the point made by jscott above, Carter writes at Vol.1 p.53 that most of the S98/05s issued to the Reichsheer/Police were completely refurbished before issue. In any event, I doubt yours was issued with such a worn grip. Interesting to speculate how it acquired such wear given the shortish service with the Reichsheer/Police. I wonder if the bayonets were sold off to Turkey, or another government, when they were replaced by the S84/98? Hi Michael, It was a dealer find and I was very tempted to buy it but as I already have an example of a Fitchel and Sachs S.89/05, and a Waffenfabrik S.98/05 with a 1920 mark, then buying it would have lead me down a new path, into Weimar markings, and so I decided against it before my wife did so for me... But yes, it doesn't quite match what one would expect in several ways. To begin with it has a bright blade, not blued, and then it has original 98/05 bolts with fraktur marks, which I would not expect on a bayonet made this late, although they could have been in stock from earlier days or may have even come during a re-hilting... But if rehilted, why not screw bolts, as used on many Weimar bayonets? As for what happened to all the S.98/05's in service when the S.84/98 became the bayonet of choice - good question! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 15 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 October , 2015 ... Carter writes at Vol.1 p.53 that most of the S98/05s issued to the Reichsheer/Police were completely refurbished before issue. ... I followed up on that Carter reference when I got home, and Carter implies that the Reichsheer and Polizei bayonets did not have their blades blued, but I was under the impression from what I have seen that they (or most!) were. As it is, Carter then goes on to note an example of a Herder S.98/05 marked L/15 that has the 1920 mark and also a unit mark - 2/J.R.6.90, for 2.Kompanie / 6.Infanterie-Regiment, Waffe Nr.90. As far as I can establish (but I could be wrong!), this style of marking was adopted on 1 November 1922 and published in a Vorschrift zur Kennzeichnung von Waffen... for 1923, and so given the absence of a 3R mark on the bayonet, it seems that some at least of the 1920 ones were blued. So I double-checked with Wheeler, Seitengewehr, who, on p.63, states that: "The re-ssued S 98/05 bayonets given to the Reichswehr were inspected, refurbished, and modified by Weimar armorers [sic]. The Weimar period modifications normally consisted of cutting screwdriver slots in the press stud in the pommel and the screwbolts in the grips; or simply replacing these parts with new slotted pieces. Flashguards were normally added to those bayonets which did not already have them; and sawbacks were generally ground away. The entire bayonet was then polished and blued overall [emphasis added] and re-issued in a blued steel scabbard. Polizei-Seitengewehr for the police were modified in the same manner except for those which were worn as sidearms only. These particular police bayonets had a V notch ground in the pommel..." Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 Julian, I agree that Carter writes that the hilts and scabbards were blued and makes no reference to the blades implying they were not blued. However, on page 54 there is a photo of a blued S 98/05 together with another example which he writes bears no trace of blueing. I think the lack of reference to blueing the blades is an oversight, understandable given the apparent lack of consistency in refurbishing these bayonets. Reading Carter's text and Wheeler's quoted by you above there is plenty of scope for variations. Carter writes "Most were completely refurbished" and Wheeler uses "normally" twice and "generally" once and it appears there was a complete lack of consistency. Interesting subject. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 15 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 October , 2015 ... Carter writes "Most were completely refurbished" and Wheeler uses "normally" twice and "generally" once and it appears there was a complete lack of consistency. Interesting subject. ,,, Quite - and analysis is not helped by the lack of any references to source material! I have since cross-checked with Walter, The German bayonet, and on p. 86, he makes the claim that under the 3R, when there was an initial shortage of bayonets for rifles (shades of 1914-1915!), "... many S 98/05 were brought out of storage, refurbished, heavily blued, and issued in the interim." - again, no reference though... Williams, vol.1, pp. 462-473, carefully does not commit himself. Under a group of what he calls 'POST WAR ISSUE - during the Weimar Republic and Third Reich', he illustrates a mix of 908/05's, some with blued blades, others without, some with '1920' marks, some without... All one can say for certain, methinks, is that it seems there is indeed a 'complete lack of consistency'! Julian 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