ASC Pat 1903 Bayonet

[shippingsteel]

Part of Queen Victoria's crown is just visible on my example and she died in January 1901 so the original date of manufacture cannot be any later.

Yes it can be. It is not unusual to find bayonets of this era that still have the VR cypher stamped, even after she had passed on, for a number of reasons.

Bayonets were produced by the contractors with blades that had already been stamped up, with the acceptance dates being stamped on at a later date.

We have discussed this previously on the forum, and it seems there was quite a carryover period until all the previously marked VR blades were used up.

As far as I am concerned there is no doubt that your bayonet was originally made in 1901, with date of manufacture and/or acceptance April of that year.

Cheers, S>S

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Indeed, it is the very twin !    Part of Queen Victoria's crown is just visible on my example and she died in January 1901 so the original date of manufacture cannot be any later. If the 89 mark is in fact an issue mark, one would think it's manufacture would have been earlier ? Having looked again however my '89 mark could well be an 09 reissue stamp.

 

Tomo,

 

By way of marking comparison, here is the obverse blade ricasso for my non-converted Pattern 1903 Sword Bayonet with the EVII Crown & Cyper and a single issue date of ' 4 06 ' for April 1906.

 

Regards,

LF

[museumtom]

Anyone interested in a trade for a 1903 bayonet and scabbard. I am looking for a 1907 with a scabbard. The scabbard has some damage, see pics.

[museumtom]

[trajan]

JMB,

Where applicable, the side of the blade showing the Royal Crown & Cypher and the bayonet's Pattern is generally considered as being the front ( obverse ).

Regards,

LF

You have touched on a very interesting point there!

But many bayonet "anoracks" would see it this way. The front / obverse / right side of the blade is what you see when the bayonet point is to the right, the grip / hilt to the left; the rear / reverse / left is with the bayonet point to the left, and the grip / hilt to the right. Generally speaking, in most bayonet publications that show the bayonet horizontal, then the point is to the right, while those that show bayonets with a downward quillon, show that to the left, indicating a bayonet point to the right if it was shown horizontally. Note also, in support of this approach, that with some exceptions (just to prove the rule!), when bayonets are viewed as worn in their scabbards, the 'muzzle ring' (if there is one) is seen to the right, and the 'quillon' (again, if there is one) is seen to the left, so that - when viewed in a scabbard - we are observing the 'front' face of the bayonet

In which case, when a GB bayonet is illustrated showing the crown on the ricasso, that is the reverse...!!!

Julian

[Lancashire Fusilier]

You have touched on a very interesting point there!

Trajan,

I was not referring to any military regulations, which I am sure dictate the position of the bayonet in the scabbard, and therefore what would officially be the front and back of a bayonet's blade once it is correctly mounted in it's scabbard.

I was rather thinking what would be the best way to describe the front of the WW1 period bayonet blades, such as the Pattterns 1888/1903/1907 when discussing their markings, and thought it appropriate for this purpose, to call the side showing the main information, such as the Pattern, the issue date, and often the maker, the front ?

Regards,

LF

[trajan]

Anyone interested in a trade for a 1903 bayonet and scabbard. I am looking for a 1907 with a scabbard. The scabbard has some damage, see pics.

I wish I could, as I have several spare P.1907's, but the Turkish customs guys are not too keen on things like that coming in the post...

But it is a nice P.1903! And looks to be a Sanderson Sheffield mark? The 'X' mark is characterstic of Mole, Sanderson and Chapman... And the 'S' on the inspectors mark is Sheffield, I believe. Is it another P.1888 blade converted to P.1903 - note the Enfield inspection mark above the crown and cipher. Look for an EFD mark on the pommel head...

Julian

[trajan]

I was not referring to any military regulations, which I am sure dictate the position of the bayonet in the scabbard, and therefore what would officially be the front and back of a bayonet's blade once it is correctly mounted in it's scabbard. ... I was rather thinking what would be the best way to describe the front of the WW1 period bayonet blades, such as the Pattterns 1888/1903/1907 when discussing their markings, and thought it appropriate for this purpose, to call the side showing the main information, such as the Pattern, the issue date, and often the maker, the front ?

I do follow you and agree that it makes sense in its own way to think of the side with the pertinent details as the 'front' or obverse. But, a quick look at all bayonet books I have in my limited library (Dutch, USA, French, German, GB) confirms that accepted practice set by those before us (and some still around!) is to show the hilt to the left of the image when this is printed with the blade horizontal, and with the bottom part of the grip / hilt to the left when printed with the bayonet blade vertically. Of course, there will probably be exceptions that I am unaware of - but this is the general rule for showing these things in all the publications I use regularly, and so obverse / reverse, and right / left.

Julian

PS: Note incidentally, that just as with GB ones, WW1 German bayonets almost always have the makers mark on the reverse, but OEWG ones are another kettle of fish, as they say...

[museumtom]

Sory Trajan, I don't see an EFD on the pommel

[JMB1943]

Lancs----thank you for your answer; it did coincide with what I had thought, but did not want to pre-judge the issue.

Trajan---I don't think that directional conventions used in illustrations of bayonets actually define obverse/reverse. My understanding, taken from (British) coinage is that the image of the head of state (monarch), which defines the country of issue is the obverse; the other side is, by default, the reverse. Clearly, the P.'07 has a Crown/Royal Cypher/Pattern date etc all on the same side; the other side has only various factory inspection & proof marks. I would argue strongly that these are the obverse & reverse sides, respectively.

Regards,

JMB

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Lancs----thank you for your answer; it did coincide with what I had thought, but did not want to pre-judge the issue.

Trajan---I don't think that directional conventions used in illustrations of bayonets actually define obverse/reverse. My understanding, taken from (British) coinage is that the image of the head of state (monarch), which defines the country of issue is the obverse; the other side is, by default, the reverse. Clearly, the P.'07 has a Crown/Royal Cypher/Pattern date etc all on the same side; the other side has only various factory inspection & proof marks. I would argue strongly that these are the obverse & reverse sides, respectively.

Regards,

JMB

JMB,

As also with British WW1 military medals.

Regards,

LF

[mark holden]

i have two 1907 pattern bayonets if you still want a trade, regards Mark

Anyone interested in a trade for a 1903 bayonet and scabbard. I am looking for a 1907 with a scabbard. The scabbard has some damage, see pics.

[Tomo.T]

Yes it can be. It is not unusual to find bayonets of this era that still have the VR cypher stamped, even after she had passed on, for a number of reasons.

Bayonets were produced by the contractors with blades that had already been stamped up, with the acceptance dates being stamped on at a later date.

We have discussed this previously on the forum, and it seems there was quite a carryover period until all the previously marked VR blades were used up.

As far as I am concerned there is no doubt that your bayonet was originally made in 1901, with date of manufacture and/or acceptance April of that year.

Cheers, S>S

Thanks for that SS I was unaware that blanks were pre struck with the cypher. That tidies things up nicely and as you say 1901 would have been the original build date.There is also a very faint 05 Enfield stamp on the hand grip so that would be the earliest date for conversion.

I have had some more thoughts re the M I stamp and I now think Madras Infantry is most unlikely. Apart from the now later date of conversion, there are no Indian inspection or acceptance stamps. I would have expected to see some 'I' stamps on British Indian issue kit and there are none. Mounted Infantry sounds very attractive, but seems a bit vague for a unit marking. As to my first thought, Military Intelligence, the same applies and this perhaps would be more correctly stamped I C for Intelligence Corps. The mystery remains !

Tomo

[museumtom]

PM sent Mark

[trajan]

On 6/13/2016 at 5:53 PM, museumtom said:

Sory Trajan, I don't see an EFD on the pommel

 

Not to worry - they are not always there, if I remember rightly. I'll check back on sources when I get home.

[trajan]

LF, JMB, and the Austin(!),

 

I take your points and dealing with coinage of all periods and places on a regular basis, I see the argument. However, convention in bayonet studies - if I recall correctly! - says otherwise! But I'll go through the books and see what we have.

 

That said, and coming back to LF's comment, how things are published  - it is a fact that most (all?) bayonet publications show them when horizontal with the hilt to the left, and when vertical with 'quillon' / hilt underside to the left, and so perhaps the 'convention' arose from this practice? I.E., the 'obverse' is the thing that you see first off, the 'reverse' is the other side? 

 

Needs more checking!

On 6/13/2016 at 11:02 PM, JMB1943 said:

Trajan---I don't think that directional conventions used in illustrations of bayonets actually define obverse/reverse.  My understanding, taken from (British) coinage is that the image of the head of state (monarch), which defines the country of issue is the obverse; the other side is, by default, the reverse.  Clearly, the P.'07 has a Crown/Royal Cypher/Pattern date etc all on the same side; the other side has only various factory inspection & proof marks.  I would argue strongly that these are the obverse & reverse sides, respectively.

 

On 6/13/2016 at 11:10 PM, austin1100 said:

As also with British WW1 military medals.

Julian

Edited 15 June , 2016 by trajan
Shorten quoted messages

[Ogilwy]

Tomo,

When are you down the pub?  If you bring the Bayonet I'd like a look!

Rod

[Toby Brayley]

I thought this might be of interest to you. ASC chaps in 1915 (no location) with the 1903 Bayonet, note the 1882 buff leather frogs and 1888 type scabbards. 

 

 

 

[trajan]

OK, well, you all know me - a POF who is still here! So, I thought I'd check my books and the internet.

 

1) For starters, Everything I have and every reputable web-site I have seen shows bayonets in one of two ways - horizontally, with the hilt to the left, or vertically with the bottom side of the hilt on the left. So, that is established convention - even with those pesky M.95's with the 'upside down' blade!

 

2) Nomenclature in the books I have and on the internet normally avoids the terms 'obverse' and 'reverse'. This is quite understandable as - coming back to LF, aka Austin(!) and JMB, whiel we might think of the 'State mark' on something being the obverse, there is no consistency from one country to another as to where the "state mark" will be on a bayonet: German bayonets have theirs on the blade spine (i.e., W/17); Peruvian ones on the pommel (sometimes); Argentine on what I call the obverse; British socket bayonets on the blade face - facing upwards; etc. etc., etc., Moreover the position of the mark will vary within an individual country over time. So, best to drop 'obverse' and 'reverse'.

 

3) However, there is consistency in all the sources I have checked over the past two hours over how rifles and bayonets are described. A rifle is described as if being looked down from above the barrel, and so "right" and "left" sides - and when viewed from the side, then when the butt is to the left this is the "right" side; thus when describing a rifle the terms right and left apply (it seems) universally. Likewise with bayonets (and positions of bayonet lugs) as, e.g. (using web sources thanks to me old mate Google) from which we find the following selected examples:

 

http://www.bajonet.be/bajonetten/ger_verenigde_staten_1917.htm  “Jedes M1917-Bajonett wurde auf der linken Seite des Ricasso mit „1917“ gestempelt, unabhängig vom Jahr der Herstellung. Die Bezeichnung steht nur für das Modell, nicht für das Produktionsjahr. Das Abnahmejahr kann von der Ziffer unter dem Adlerkopf hergeleitet werden. … Auf der rechten Seite sehen wir den Stempel „US“, den Adlerkopf und die Inspektoren-Nummer.”

 

http://www.egun.de/market/item.php?id=5956884  “Die Klinge ist 16 cm lang,.ca. 2,2 cm hoch und ca.3mm starkauf der linken Klingenseite ist eine 11 im Kreis und darunter1956 zu sehen....auf der rechten Seite steht A00779 ...”

 

http://www.militaria-fundforum.de/showthread.php?t=579730   "Einmal auf der linken Seite eine vierstellige Seriennummer, auf der rechten Seite die russ. Abnahme und an der Verbindung von Tülle zur Klinge ein W.A ."

 

http://www.linguee.fr/anglais-francais/traduction/bayonet+lug.html  (This gives a list of examples describing rifle bayonet lugs and talks of their location when viewing the right side of the rifle barrel – that is with the butt to the left…

 

http://www.44thcollectorsavenue.com/Militaria/WWI/US/Field-gear-and-equipment/US1-F-000032.html  “The left side of the blade is stamped: SA, “flaming bomb”, 1906 and the right side is marked with the “US” and the code “34014”.” AND “Le coté gauche de la lame est marqué : SA , «bombe enflammée », 1906 et le coté droit est marqué « US 34014».”

 

http://www.solo-bayonetas.com/2012/10/argentina-argentina.html  “Datos de identificación: sobre el ricasso del lado derecho se estamparon los datos del fabricante W.R. KIRSCHBAUM (formando un arco) y debajo SOLINGEN y sobre el ricasso lado izquierdo las siglas RA (República Argentina) dentro de medio óvalo. “

 

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipo_56 “El Tipo 56 tiene los controles del AK-47, con la manija del cerrojo y la palanca de seguro/selectora de fuego del lado derecho del arma.”

 

 

So, if you are still around and not fast asleep by now, then can we at least agree on what is the right side, and what is the left side - and I'll try to avoid 'obverse' and 'reverse' from now! - and now look to see what Toby's message - which came in half-way through - was about - and it is a fantastic photograph! Thanks!...

 

Julian

Edited 15 June , 2016 by trajan
rewrite last sentence and reformat links

[JMB1943]

Trajan,

 

It looks like an innocent question has somewhat hijacked the original thread, sorry for that.

 

Certainly, the LHS & RHS sides of a rifle/bayonet/car/ship/train are obvious, but no matter which side of a sea-going vessel is customarily displayed in photos or models its port & starboard descriptors are NOT interchangeable.

I can't imagine that the Royal Mint would define any striking error as being "easily visible on the LHS" of the coin.

Again, it seems to me that a convention for illustrations has no relevance to correct assignment of obverse & reverse.

 

Can I suggest a new thread to hear other views if this is to be continued?

 

Regards,

 

JMB

 

 

 

[trajan]

13 minutes ago, JMB1943 said:

... It looks like an innocent question has somewhat hijacked the original thread, sorry for that. ... Certainly, the LHS & RHS sides of a rifle/bayonet/car/ship/train are obvious, but no matter which side of a sea-going vessel is customarily displayed in photos or models its port & starboard descriptors are NOT interchangeable. ... I can't imagine that the Royal Mint would define any striking error as being "easily visible on the LHS" of the coin. ... Again, it seems to me that a convention for illustrations has no relevance to correct assignment of obverse & reverse. ...  Can I suggest a new thread to hear other views if this is to be continued?

 

Regards,

 

JMB

 

Yes, threads do sometimes 'Gang aft gangly' on occasion - and bayonets ones oft so when I am sounding off - so before Mr.A.J.Kirk clicks in, apologies and pardon Tomo and others! Don't have time now JMB, but if you or LF or anybody wish to do so, then yes, a 'left or right' thread would be appropriate, if only to ensure that we (think) we know what we mean. Starboard and Port? Yes, but when facing the bow with the stern behind(!), still right and left, as was used in the US of A until reasonably fairly recently! 

[Tomo.T]

11 hours ago, Toby Brayley said:

I thought this might be of interest to you. ASC chaps in 1915 (no location) with the 1903 Bayonet, note the 1882 buff leather frogs and 1888 type scabbards. 

 

 

 

Thanks Toby, cracking picture.

[DJM]

Anyone brought up with horses, and indeed motor mechanics above a certain age, know that near-side and off-side are as permanently assigned as port and starboard. Don't know where this left and right business came from with cars??

[museumtom]

The 1903 is no longer available, snapped up by Mark.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

On 6/15/2016 at 05:16, Toby Brayley said:

I thought this might be of interest to you. ASC chaps in 1915 (no location) with the 1903 Bayonet, note the 1882 buff leather frogs and 1888 type scabbards. 

 

Toby,

 

Nice photograph, also nice to see the use of the Pattern 1903's scabbard with the external chape.

 

Regards,

LF