Bayonets from here

[assafx]

Of the good ones, the EB and the S.98/05 are WW1 and so could be used by the Ottoman army in the GW- but not the shortened Turkish M.1890, which is a pre-GW bayonet shortened in the post GW period (probably 1930's), nor the S.71/84, which - to the best of my knowledge - never made it to the Ottoman army (it is for the Gew. 71/84). The relic 98/05 yes, that will be GW period in use by the Ottoman army. But, I strongly suspect that all those good ones arrived in the Levant long after the GW as collector's/dealers items'

On the subject of relics, I looked back at the one in post no. 13... What is the distance overall from rivet (or screw bolt?) to rivet, centre to centre or overall? It looks to be 6.5 cm which I can't fit with anything obvious that I have of GW date...SS might now as he likes that kind of esoterica!

The relics came from an archeological context of an Intense GW battlefield so i wasn't worried about that.

i might be mistaken but here are two questions:

is it possible that the m1890 was used on the m1890 rifles during the GW?

if i'm not mistaken the the mauser 1887 is based on the Gew 71/84, is it possible that the bayonet will fit?

the crumbling remains of #13 is in the same store as the rest of the relics that i need to confirm and photograph.

I wrote your request down and will check the distance between the rivets. it would be interesting if it is a Mauser 1887 bayonet, it will be the first to be found here.

Assaf

here is a pattern 1907:

[Lancashire Fusilier]

here is another relic(not photographed on the studio yet) and what i suspect an equivalent:

Assaf,

I do not collect German or Turkish bayonets, however, it is very interesting to see what you are finding over there.

Regards,

LF

[assafx]

Assaf,

I do not collect German or Turkish bayonets, however, it is very interesting to see what you are finding over there.

Regards,

LF

Thank You LF,

I find it interesting too, especially the few bayonets that i took from a collector.

The market here seems to have more sources then i thought

still there's at least one example that is similar to a relic and that's what i'm looking for.

Assaf

[shippingsteel]

The relics came from an archeological context of an Intense GW battlefield so i wasn't worried about that.

i might be mistaken but here are two questions:

is it possible that the m1890 was used on the m1890 rifles during the GW?

if i'm not mistaken the the mauser 1887 is based on the Gew 71/84, is it possible that the bayonet will fit?

the crumbling remains of #13 is in the same store as the rest of the relics that i need to confirm and photograph.

The M1890 could well have been used during the GW, but NOT in its current form. It has been reworked / shortened in the post-war period (ie. AS.FA)

The German S71/84 bayonet will NOT attach to the Turkish M1887 rifle. The MRD's (muzzle ring diameter) are different. Turk rifles have smaller barrels.

The relic bayonet in post #13 appears to be one of the Turkish models. Determining if they are rivets with washers, or screw bolts with nuts will be helpful.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

... Of the good ones ... , the EB and the S.98/05 are WW1 and so could be used by the Ottoman army in the GW- but not the shortened Turkish M.1890, which is a pre-GW bayonet shortened in the post GW period (probably 1930's), nor the S.71/84, which - to the best of my knowledge - never made it to the Ottoman army (it is for the Gew. 71/84). The relic 98/05 yes, that will be GW period in use by the Ottoman army. But, I strongly suspect that all those good ones arrived in the Levant long after the GW as collector's/dealers items'

On the subject of relics, I looked back at the one in post no. 13... What is the distance overall from rivet (or screw bolt?) to rivet, centre to centre or overall? It looks to be 6.5 cm which I can't fit with anything obvious that I have of GW date...SS might now as he likes that kind of esoterica!

... the crumbling remains of #13 is in the same store as the rest of the relics that i need to confirm and photograph.

I wrote your request down and will check the distance between the rivets. it would be interesting if it is a Mauser 1887 bayonet, it will be the first to be found here.

here is a pattern 1907:

The M1890 could well have been used during the GW, but NOT in its current form. It has been reworked / shortened in the post-war period (ie. AS.FA) ... The German S71/84 bayonet will NOT attach to the Turkish M1887 rifle. The MRD's (muzzle ring diameter) are different. Turk rifles have smaller barrels. ... The relic bayonet in post #13 appears to be one of the Turkish models. Determining if they are rivets with washers, or screw bolts with nuts will be helpful.

SS: Thanks for confirming my observations in post 25 (re-posted above in case you missed it!)

Incidentally, I can't find the reference right now but if I recall correctly, the war-time GB intelligence report on the Ottoman army in the region mentioned them using short bayonets meaning the M.1913, but M.1890's were certainly still around and again, relying on memory, I think there is in a museum somewhere an 1887 bayonet 'captured' in Mesopotamia in the GW.

The relic grip one in post 13 - well, it seems to have a straight-ended pommel, so could be anyone of many, but the pommel does look rather short and the distance between the grip rivets/screws is a puzzle to me - without checking everything that I have!

Asaf: yes looking forward to that measurement.

The P.1907 is the right type and date for one used in the region in the GW - but it could be a post-GW import... The S.98/05's I have bought in Damascus in years gone past, though, were pretty certainly left-overs from the GW as they came from a non-specialist general junk shop. The same shop, on another visit, also had some P.1907's, but one of these was certainly an Australian one from the 1930's, and so those could have got to Syria in WW2. On yet a third visit to the shop, I found a French WW1 Berthier, which presumably came with the French occupation after 1918. So, the P.1907, well - take your pick! Could have arrived there in the GW; could have arrived during the Mandate period; or could be a much more recent dealer / collector's import!

Trajan

[assafx]

Thank you S^S and Julian,

regarding the measurements, i will have to be there in the next three months.

I'm starting the process of turning my thesis into a book, I still to procure more finance but i need to deal with all the finds and i'm heading slowly that way.

I'm using this collector's gear just as examples, showing a relic against a bayonet in good condition (if i have one).

so in that case i'm less worried about the context on which it was found but more about the general GW context.

is there any more data that i can get from the P.1907 stamps?

Thanks again

Assaf

[assafx]

I have a few more relics, these were photographed on the store just so i'll know what i'm dealing with (still need to figure how to transport them to the studio without ruining them).

all from the same site as #13 but from different areas.

this one still have some scabbard remains:

this one is also with scabbard remains and in better shape (metal wise) but was broken and bent !

I sent it to an X-ray to see if some of the marks remained underneath the scabbard but nothing came out besides a cool shot of the blade inside it.

and i found the scabbard of the 98/05 relic posted earlier.

Assaf

[trajan]

here is a pattern 1907:

is there any more data that i can get from the P.1907 stamps?

Lancs Fus. and SS collect these ones, and I don't. But I'll have a go!

As I understand it, the frog, with the loop for the pommel, is a WW2 type. The GR is for Georgius Rex, so King George V, and the '1907' is for Pattern 1907. This is a SANDERSON product, and seems to be dated 10/17, so October 1917.Sanderson were prolific makers and are thought to have made around 1,600,000 P.1907 bayonets during the GW. The stamps on the obverse (right) side are the 'X' bend-mark, to show it has been tested by bending to prove it won't break(!), and the other stamps are official RSAF at Enfield appointed inspectors marks. The scabbard is the usual one for this type of bayonet and the metal bits may have visible markings showing who made those, and the leather should have on one side of the seam further marks to indicate its date - but these marks are not always clearly visible. LF or SS can probably link you to a thread with examples of these, I can't!

Julian

[trajan]

I have a few more relics, these were photographed on the store just so i'll know what i'm dealing with (still need to figure how to transport them to the studio without ruining them).

all from the same site as #13 but from different areas.

The top one is certainly a P.1907, given the clearance hole in the pommel, introduced in early 1916. The bottom one also looks to be a P.1907, with the remains of the locket and the internal bayonet spring (to stop it from falling out!) remaining in situ.

[trajan]

this one is also with scabbard remains and in better shape (metal wise) but was broken and bent !

I sent it to an X-ray to see if some of the marks remained underneath the scabbard but nothing came out besides a cool shot of the blade inside it.

This one is an American-made Turkish Martini Peabody bayonet, M.1874, Originally with leather grips, some of these were cut down before the GW for use as NCO sidearms, but some were still in use with the reserve, jandarma, etc.

Best wishes,

Julian

PS: oh, and good luck with turning the thesis into a book! I made the mistake of not doing that and five or so years later saw some of my ideas coming out elsewhere without any acknowledgement - academia can be a cut-and-thrust business, even in archaeology! What's it on?

[assafx]

The top one is certainly a P.1907, given the clearance hole in the pommel, introduced in early 1916. The bottom one also looks to be a P.1907, with the remains of the locket and the internal bayonet spring (to stop it from falling out!) remaining in situ.

I just went and checked the photographs of the loci cards of these two and the 98/05. it turns out that all came from the same locus !(only different basket numbers).

I don't have the notes or the plans of the archaeologist who dug this area but i might have another proof to the close quarter combat on this site.

[assafx]

This one is an American-made Turkish Martini Peabody bayonet, M.1874, Originally with leather grips, some of these were cut down before the GW for use as NCO sidearms, but some were still in use with the reserve, jandarma, etc.

Best wishes,

Julian

PS: oh, and good luck with turning the thesis into a book! I made the mistake of not doing that and five or so years later saw some of my ideas coming out elsewhere without any acknowledgement - academia can be a cut-and-thrust business, even in archaeology! What's it on?

that's the first one that i know of, i'll check with alex to confirm if its the first in the whole IAA !

this is amazing, where it was found was a small Ottoman outpost that was "silently dealt with" by forces of the 60th division.

i have an Ottoman button that came out from there. it terms of cartridges there was a mix of GW and 1948 i'm happy !!!

is there a book that i can find data on this bayonet?

My M.A thesis, which was written but won't be submitted (because i can't pass German) deals with the fighting in Nebi Samuel.

It combines the Historical story and Archaeological research.

I need to take a month or two off work, to expand the 80 pages thesis to a book and to do that i need to finish processing all the finds first.

while doing my two last classes, M.A exam, writing an excavation report and working full time

oh and the cut and thrust business seems to be especially active in archeology both in the academia and outside of it.

Thanks

Assaf

[trajan]

I just went and checked the photographs of the loci cards of these two and the 98/05. it turns out that all came from the same locus !(only different basket numbers).

I don't have the notes or the plans of the archaeologist who dug this area but i might have another proof to the close quarter combat on this site.

Doubt if the scabbarded ones got lost in combat - they are in scabbards and would have had frogs attached to fix them on the belts. Perhaps stacked up in a corner with other gear? Maybe one was a souvenir? Or, unlikely, but one or the pair of P.1907's could have got left behind when one side or the other left the site and the other side never bothered to pick them up? From what little I know of work on the France and Flanders front, it seems that there was a fair amount of equipment often left kicking around in abandoned trenches and the like, which then covered by erosion or explosions...

(And for the non-archaeologically versed: a locus is what we in the UK call either a context or a feature - a deposit what (usually) has finds in it! A basket number is a lot or layer number, so something (usually/often a different type of soil) that is within the said locus... )

that's the first one that i know of, i'll check with alex to confirm if its the first in the whole IAA !

There has been some discussion on Martini-Peabody bayonets here on GWF - see e.g., http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=232634&hl=peabody and http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=152688&hl=peabody#entry1470730 post 10 - which also gives the details of what I couldn't find earlier about the 'short bayonets' in use by the Ottoman army, from the 1916 'Handbook of the Turkish Army! There has also been plenty of discussion on these on the GBoardsForum, and there is a nice article about the rifle and the bayonet at: http://www.militaryrifles.com/Turkey/PeabStory/PeabodyStory.htm

Frankly, it will be pleasing to me and others to have archaeological confirmation of the bayonet's presence in an active WW1 context. All the other evidence is photographic and is rearguard, so great news!

Julian

PS: on the thesis: sorry to hear about the final German exam - I never realised that competence at exam level in another language was a requirement in Israeli universities at post-graduate level - not the same here until one gets an academic post, when it becomes a state requirement to pass an exam in French, German, or English to be promoted above Assistant Professor.

[trajan]

Assaf,

Just had a look at my M.1874's and I think yours may not be bent but actually is one of the original long yataghan-bladed examples missing its last 50% or so. Mine start out with a straight blade from the ricasso, and then slope away downwards to give the yataghan shape, more gradually than what yours has, but that could be a corrosion thing obscuring the real blade shape. The shortened M.1874's were also straightened which this one is not - SS showed a graphic somewhere on GWF on how this was done and perhaps he will re-post it here. It is reasonably assumed that the shortened yataghan ones were introduced after the general re-armament of the Ottoman army in the last decade of the 19th century with the M.1887, M.1890, and M.1903. As mentioned earlier, photographic evidence conforms that the long M.1874 bayonet stayed in use with some units up to and into the GW, as the 1916 Handbook indicates. What that report does not make clear, though, is whether these were the yataghan or the (now rare, once common) socket type of M.1874...

Julian

[assafx]

Assaf,

Just had a look at my M.1874's and I think yours may not be bent but actually is one of the original long yataghan-bladed examples missing its last 50% or so. Mine start out with a straight blade from the ricasso, and then slope away downwards to give the yataghan shape, more gradually than what yours has, but that could be a corrosion thing obscuring the real blade shape. The shortened M.1874's were also straightened which this one is not - SS showed a graphic somewhere on GWF on how this was done and perhaps he will re-post it here. It is reasonably assumed that the shortened yataghan ones were introduced after the general re-armament of the Ottoman army in the last decade of the 19th century with the M.1887, M.1890, and M.1903. As mentioned earlier, photographic evidence conforms that the long M.1874 bayonet stayed in use with some units up to and into the GW, as the 1916 Handbook indicates. What that report does not make clear, though, is whether these were the yataghan or the (now rare, once common) socket type of M.1874...

Julian

I did not photographed the M1874, otherwise you had a side view of it to see how bent it is.

what i mean by bent is not the yataghan shape, it was bent upwards as if something hard hit it in the middle.

It broke into three pieces, the tip was broken when it was found (as usual the worker hit it with a pick axe and then a piece is flying somewhere and no one can find it).

you could have seen the fresh brake when you looked at it, i was surprised to see that although the exterior looked bad the interior was still ina very good shape and seeing steel and not rust !

if you'll take a close look at the bottom of the scabbard you'll notice that the blade there was "glued" by our metal lab.

that was an older brake. I assume that whatever broke it also bent it.

so far this is the only archaeological evidence that i know of Peabody Martiny outside of the Negev. i still need to confirm it with alex though.

The m1874 came from a land fill between the remains of two abandoned houses from 1948.

as usual, there's a mix of GW and 1948 cartridges there but there is historical evidence of the 60th division "silently dealing" with Turkish outpost on this location.

in fact, one of the houses had a renovation after the war (makes a lot of sense). we proved it only after three cartridges came out from the land fill under a floor.

The latest cartridge was a 7.92 mm mauser from 1917, it gave us a "terminus post quem" date on that floor.

Regarding your comment on post #38 over the other relics, the distance between the two sides on the top of that hill was 15-30 meters.

Ii still need to verify the exec location of this Locus to make an educated guess but all what you mentioned is valid.

Assaf

p.s

In the hebrew univeristy you can do two kinds of M.A's a research one and the non research one, the first one requires that you'll pass an advance competence exam in a language relevant to your research.

they gave me two bad options, german or ottoman turkish. i failed four times in two years in german before i gave up (i can't understand grammer in any language and i'm too old to be diagnosed according to the hebrew u)

as far as i know it the same in Tel aviv. now if i want to do a phd in the Hebrew U, i must pass the exam, then submit my thesis and only then i'm allowed to move to a phd program...

[shippingsteel]

Assaf, another tip for identifying the relic in post #13, would be to determine which side the 'press-stud' is located on the pommel, that is important.

Also the scabbard shown in post #26 is not normally associated as being of WW1 vintage, as it has the round stud as opposed to the teardrop stud.

Markings found on the scabbard leather and stamped on the metal of the locket may prove the date of manufacture, but don't expect to date it GW.

Cheers, S>S

[Guest Maxwells]

Hi everyone, new to the site.  Need help

identifing a sawback WWI bayonet.  The

bayonet has a aluminum handle, metal scarab, has most of the round rifle muzzle

attachment and a push button slide on release. Only markings are a crown with 2 line going down with a C thru them. Both 

on the scarab and blade. Have a lot of pics, hopefully will be able to post. Thanks Maxwells

Unable to post pics, if interested please email me @ angelgeneral111@gmail.com

[trajan]

12 hours ago, Maxwells said:

Hi everyone, new to the site.  Need help

identifing a sawback WWI bayonet.  The

bayonet has a aluminum handle, metal scarab, has most of the round rifle muzzle

attachment and a push button slide on release. Only markings are a crown with 2 line going down with a C thru them. Both 

on the scarab and blade. Have a lot of pics, hopefully will be able to post. Thanks Maxwells

Unable to post pics, if interested please email me @ angelgeneral111@gmail.com

 

It sounds like it is a German Ersatz bayonet - but they have steel not aluminium hilts / handles, although they do have steel scabbards... Can't think of any bayonets with an aluminium hilt, although some of the French Lebel bayonets have 'German silver' hilts that look like aluminium - but they have a needle-type blade...

 

Not certain what you mean by the 'push button slide' system - do you mean a regular bayonet push button catch?

 

Where are you based and where did you get the bayonet from? That might help better for a provisional ID.

 

Trajan

[assafx]

On 3.6.2016 at 02:25, shippingsteel said:

Assaf, another tip for identifying the relic in post #13, would be to determine which side the 'press-stud' is located on the pommel, that is important.

Also the scabbard shown in post #26 is not normally associated as being of WW1 vintage, as it has the round stud as opposed to the teardrop stud.

Markings found on the scabbard leather and stamped on the metal of the locket may prove the date of manufacture, but don't expect to date it GW.

Cheers, S>S

Hi,

I had only a few minutes to photograph it (on a piece of marble...) and take measurements.

you can see the "press-stud" in here .

 

 

In this one we can still see the blade inside the scabbard.

 

 

On 2.6.2016 at 01:32, shippingsteel said:

The M1890 could well have been used during the GW, but NOT in its current form. It has been reworked / shortened in the post-war period (ie. AS.FA)

The German S71/84 bayonet will NOT attach to the Turkish M1887 rifle. The MRD's (muzzle ring diameter) are different. Turk rifles have smaller barrels.

The relic bayonet in post #13 appears to be one of the Turkish models. Determining if they are rivets with washers, or screw bolts with nuts will be helpful.

Cheers, S>S

 

This is the only rivet that seems to be completely preserved.

the distance between the center top of the rivets is " is 5cm and 3.5cm between the inner edges.

 

i have a feeling that this is another p1907...

 

Assaf

[trajan]

4 minutes ago, assafx said:

...  i have a feeling that this is another p1907...

 

And I have a feeling that you are right! That 5 cm is centre-to-centre?

 

Julian

[assafx]

yes, 5 cm center to center.

[trajan]

Well, not much doubt really - a P.1907 is most likely. The press stud is on the 'correct' side (left); it has screws at the right distance, and the pommel block looks to be around the 3.3. cm mark.I did wonder if it might be a P.1903, but the screws are closer than 5 cm on that.

 

BUT should always add that I claim no specific expertise on P.1907's!!!!

 

Julian

[assafx]

i was praying for a more "exotic" relic but that's also good.

 

Thank You.

 

Assaf

[trajan]

2 hours ago, assafx said:

i was praying for a more "exotic" relic but that's also good.

 

The Martini-Peabody is exotic enough! 

[trajan]

On 6/2/2016 at 01:32, shippingsteel said:

The relic bayonet in post #13 appears to be one of the Turkish models. Determining if they are rivets with washers, or screw bolts with nuts will be helpful.

 

Hi AJK / SS, in case you missed this one, it has come up again here, and so I am forwarding an 'alert' for you... 

 

On 6/26/2016 at 12:40, assafx said:

Hi,

I had only a few minutes to photograph it (on a piece of marble...) and take measurements.

you can see the "press-stud" in here .

 

This is the only rivet that seems to be completely preserved. ... the distance between the center top of the rivets is " is 5cm and 3.5cm between the inner edges. ...i have a feeling that this is another p1907...

 

On 6/26/2016 at 13:09, trajan said:

... a P.1907 is most likely.  ... BUT should always add that I claim no specific expertise on P.1907's!!!!

 

So is this a P.1907? Or do you still think possibly Turkish?