WW1 bayonets as 'honour' weapons in the Bavarian Reichswehr

[trajan]

An interesting Bavarian directive this, Nr 79092A, issued 10 June 1919, that whereas the entire Reichswehr was to be equipped with identical bayonets (kurze Seitengewehr are specified), soldiers in Bavaria with more than 25 years service (with double accounting for the war years) were permitted to wear their old bayonets as 'Ehrenwaffe'. There are a few WW1 pieces known with monogrammed hilts, not all of them for Kaiser Bill, so I wonder if this is what these are? Of course, the directive may have been countermanded by the allies when they imposed their de-commissioning on Germany...

Trajan

[trajan]

Oh, and here's another of note, but from the Berlin Kriegsministerium, Nr 38I.3.19.A 2 III, of 10 April 1919... It explains that kurze Seitengewehr are the S.98/05 and the S84/98... I assume this is because long Seitengewehre are swords/sabres? Which might connect with something in another document I glanced at earlier that talks of a shortage of langen Seitengewehre in August 1914, and which at first glance I took to be bayonets, but perhaps are sabres? Hmmmm...

[Gew88/05]

..........a shortage of langen Seitengewehre in August 1914, and which at first glance I took to be bayonets, but perhaps are sabres? Hmmmm...

No, I expect that it means the Sg98, at least in 1914 that would be the correct translation. Since the Sg98 (or as you call it S.98) was the primary bayonet of the German soldier, that is the translation I would give it. "lange Seitengewehre" certainly doesn't refer to the Sg98/05, it was considered short.

Edited 30 October , 2015 by Gew88/05

[trajan]

Thanks Gew88/05.

My mistake for not elaborating and explaining... The document mentioning the 'langen Seitengewehre' and which I originally thought might be a reference to 'long' bayonets is Bavarian KM Nr.7679 of 12 Aug. 1914. After talking about a shortage of lances in one paragraph, in the next it discusses problems with the supply of the 'langen Seitengewehre' and also problems with the supply of scabbards for the "A.S", which I assume have to be scabbards for artillery swords... Hence my change in mind on that one once I saw the two other documents I mentioned above. After all, the Berlin Kriegsministerium, Nr 38I.3.19.A 2 III, of 10 April 1919, as I have in in transcript, is quite explicit: "... als kurze Seitengewehre moeglichst nur [sic] die Seitengewehre 98/05 und 84/98 zu verwenden".

For what it is worth I can now also add in support of the change in thinking Bavarian KM. Nr.75983, of 20 Aug. 1915. This reads: "Auf dem Kriegsschauplatz tragen die berittenen offizier der fechtenden Truppe ... ausser dem langen [sic] am Sattel zu befestigenden, Offizier-Seitengewher - noch ein kurzes, aufplanzbares Seitengewehr am Leib", which I would translate as: "On the battlefield the mounted officer of fighting troops will carry ... in addition to the long officer Seitengewehr, to be fastened to the saddle - also a short, fixable bayonet on his body". To my mind this stresses the distinction between 'long' sidearms, meaning a sword or sabre, and 'short' ones, meaning a bayonet.

I have only just started on these texts, so please bear with me as it will take a while to go through them as I do have other obligations on my time (e.g., something called "work", also known as the curse of the drinking classes(!) being a notable one!)

Trajan

[trajan]

One more directive confirming that 'langer Seitengewehre' are swords - at least in Bayern! This is K.Bay. KM. Nr. 152009, and it refers inter alia to "... eine bemessene Anzahl länger Seitehgewehre für Berittene (Kav.Säbel n/A und dgl mit Trageriemen)...", which I would translate as: "... a set number of longer 'Seitengewehre' for Mounted [troops] (Kav.Säbel n/A and the like with shoulder strap)..."

It's a pity really as I was originally interpreting the shortage of 'langen Seitengewehre' mentioned in Bavarian KM Nr.7679 of 12 Aug. 1914 as being associated with the decision of the Bavarian KM to order their Werder bayonets in store to be converted to fit the Gew.98 owing to the shortage of S.98...

Trajan

[Gew88/05]

For what it is worth I can now also add in support of the change in thinking Bavarian KM. Nr.75983, of 20 Aug. 1915. This reads: "Auf dem Kriegsschauplatz tragen die berittenen offizier der fechtenden Truppe ... ausser dem langen [sic] am Sattel zu befestigenden, Offizier-Seitengewher - noch ein kurzes, aufplanzbares Seitengewehr am Leib", which I would translate as: "On the battlefield the mounted officer of fighting troops will carry ... in addition to the long officer Seitengewehr, to be fastened to the saddle - also a short, fixable bayonet on his body". To my mind this stresses the distinction between 'long' sidearms, meaning a sword or sabre, and 'short' ones, meaning a bayonet.

Trajan

In light of that, it would appear that you may be correct.

[trajan]

In light of that, it would appear that you may be correct.

Thanks Gew88/05!

I have just come across another directive relating to this subject, but in this case Berlin KM, Nr.2205/10.17 A.2, of December 1917 (the day-date is unclear). Quite amazing really, as it starts by discussing the war-time wearing by all ranks of the kurzen Seitehgewehre', and then goes on the mention how officers and portapee officers can wear 'lange Seitengewehre'... But, that part on the wearing of 'lange Seitengewehre' comes in a concluding section that begins: "Es tritt jedoch die frage auf wie die friedensbewaffnung mit dem Seitengewehr für vorstehende militärpersonen zu regeln sein wird"... Talk about optimism and - I guess - typical military worries about how in peacetime there might not be a clear rank distinction by weaponry between officers and the hoi polloi!