Sanderson 1907 hooked quillon bayonet

[Lawyer095]

Good day!

First of all -very good forum and a lot of useful information.

Would like to know opinion about this hooked bayonet.

It was reissued in 1910, 1913 and 1914.

Is everything fine with the hook?

Will be very greatfull for your replies.

 

Regards!

[trajan]

25 minutes ago, Lawyer095 said:

Good day! ... First of all -very good forum and a lot of useful information. ... Is everything fine with the hook?

 

Welcome to GWF! And if you are just starting to collect bayonets, well, it becomes a highly addictive matter!

 

The '2 S K' shows that this was issued to the 2nd battalion of the Suffolk Regiment. 

 

I personally cannot see anything obviously wrong with the hook. They do vary somewhat from one to the other as they are essentially hand-finished. Quite by chance the only two HQ immediately accessible to me are both SANDERSON and both 1909, so have a look at these photographs and see what you think.

 

Trajan

 

PS: I should add though that I am not a dedicated P1907 collector!

 

 

 

Edited 4 June , 2017 by trajan
Spelling...and add PS

[Lawyer095]

Thank you for your reply. 

From the provided pics I can see some difference in the angle of the hook. But if they were hand furnished it can explain everything. 

Than also I can see some difference in the style of digits of 1907. But I also saw another bayonet with such style of digits. 

Edited 4 June , 2017 by Lawyer095

[trajan]

42 minutes ago, Lawyer095 said:

... I can see some difference in the angle of the hook. But if they were hand furnished it can explain everything. 

Than also I can see some difference in the style of digits of 1907. But I also saw another bayonet with such style of digits. 

 

I was so focussed on the hook that I forgot to see the scabbard, which is an early one, without the external chape! I am away from any reference books on P.1907's right now but if I recall correctly, that is the first type of scabbard issued with these bayonets, but it was quickly replaced by one with a chape. Somebody else will doubtless know more - I am not a P.07 buff! Yes, the '09' on yours is a bit odd, as most of the Sanderson P.07's I have seen have this very distinctive and larger one as on my examples. But, I shouldn't worry about that: my experience of looking at a fair few P.07's is that the stamps were done with what was available and so they don't always match up.

 

Trajan 

[Lawyer095]

I have seen a lot of bayonets with 1st type of scabbards (also reissued).

Does it mean that they are all wrong? 

As I can remember, after few years  they started to use another type of scabbard to make production a bit cheaper. But as I remember, the didn't replayced scabbards for older bayonets. 

Maybe I am wrong.

Edited 4 June , 2017 by Lawyer095

[trajan]

If you have seen many chape-less P.07 scabbards, then I reckon you are a lucky one! But others here know these things much better than I, and so I'll let them comment. Scabbards are, of course, interchangeable... GB scabbards were rarely marked (yours is, on the throat), and to the best of my knowledge, matching GB scabbard and bayonet serials are very rare. They are more usual in German contexts, especially for WW2, as the bayonet number was recorded in the soldier's pass book - a case of "Vorsprung nach Ordung", or something like that!

[Lawyer095]

Yes. Even matching bayonets of German WWI are quite rare now.

According to your explanation: could this bayonet to be used together with this scabbard? Or not?

[trajan]

I suspect (but GWF Pals JMB,or 4thGordons, or MSDT, or SS or others will better know!) that the scabbard is from 1907/1908. I don't have my British bayonet book to hand... So, pre-dates the bayonet.

 

Matching (or better still, unmatching!) German bayonets and scabbards are more my forte, and yes, it is uncommon to get any WW1 ones that way. WW2 matching examples are fairly common because this was recorded in their book (the Wehrpass, I think), and so chaps made an effort never to mix bayonets up. 

[Lawyer095]

A lot of useful information.

Thank you!

[JMB1943]

According to The Good Book (British & Commonwealth Bayonets by I.D. Skennerton; p. 186) this Mk. I scabbard with the internal chape was the original design.

This was superseded by the Mk. II, with external chape, on Dec. 18, 1909 as per List of Changes to British War Materiel para. 14678 (Skennertn, p.187).

You have a very nice-looking set here.  Are there any stamps on the reverse of the scabbard, running down close to the seam ?

Regards,

JMB

 

[Lawyer095]

These are the only pics I have at the moment. Bayonet will arrive in 1-2 days and I will examine the scabbard for more marks.

Thank you for your reply and comment about the bayonet. 

[Lawyer095]

Good evening!

Bayonet finally arrived. 

I found marks on the scabbard. Picture included. 

There are arrow, letters A and C, the Crown at the bottom or something else. Hard to see. 

[shippingsteel]

That is a very nice Mk.I scabbard, which highlights a very handy set you have there. Those scabbards are quite scarce.

AC is the maker of the scabbard, which is A.Cooper of Birmingham. Below that is an inspection mark with a letter B for Birmingham and below that is the date of manufacture in the standard format, which looks like it may be '09.

Overall it is a lovely scabbard, and the bayonet looks good to me as well. I like seeing the '14 reissues as to me they indicate it was still in service when the action began, not safely tucked away in some reservists cupboard.

Speaking of which, the set does not appear to be an original pairing, as the bayonet has the first-line battalion 2SK stamping, while the scabbard throat is marked with the Reservist number R754.

[Lawyer095]

Thank you for the reply and very useful information about the scabbard and bayonet itself.

I also think that set is not originally pairing, but in good condition. 

And yes. The date on the scabbard is clearly indicated and visible with the sunlight. It is 09.

 

Edited 7 June , 2017 by Lawyer095

[HCLiu]

Dear fellow collectors, allow me to use this thread for further discussion. 

 

I recently ran into a HQ in a militaria show. I have only basic knowledge about P1907 and can't be 100% sure about its authenticity, but this one is beautifully made so I still bought it. I want to share it with you and maybe you can help me to verify whether this is a real one and confirm my interpretation about the markings (the only reference book I have on British bayonets is Mr. Skinnerton's great book , but it doesn't say much about the markings).

 

First, on the left ricasso, "E.R under a crown" mark represents King Edward VII. "1907" is the pattern of this bayonet. "7 '08" means this bayonet was manufactured in July 1908, hence it's a pre-war example. "EFD" means this one was manufactured by RSAF. These markings are typical.  

 

Second, on the right ricasso, on the top is a broad arrow, which is normal. The markings In the middle and lower left seem identical, which are inspection stamps. The "X" locates at the lower middle is the bend test mark. On the lower right, the marking looks like a small broad arrow over "EFD" and "51". I suppose it is also an inspection stamp.  

 

On the pommel, there is a "CH" mark, with C slightly bigger than H. I assume it's a regimental marking for the Cheshire Regiment? Below the "CH" marking is "R333". I suppose this bayonet was issued to a reservist unit and the rack number is 333. No clearance hole, which is a right feature.  

 

As to the scabbard, it's a black Mark I (I see most of the examples shared by GWF friends are in brown colour). On the backside of the scabbard, near the upper steel component, there is a broad arrow, a manufacturer mark ("A.C" stand for A.Cooper of Birmingham, thanks to shippingsteel), two inspection stamps (looks like a crown over an "A" and an italic "B") and date of manufacture (1908, same as the bayonet).

     

 

Serial number also appears on the steel mouth piece, which matches the serial number on the pommel. 

 

Besides the markings I mentioned above, there is no other markings can be seen on other parts of the bayonet and scabbard.

 

Here is a picture of the overall look of the bayonet: 

 

Any comment will be appreciated. 

 

HC

[JMB1943]

This is a VERY nice, numbers-matching (R 333) bayonet and scabbard (rare)!!

Issued to a Reserve (R) battalion of the  Cheshire Regt, and , Interestingly, it is in the large-font C and small-font H as shown in Instructions to Armourers, 1912.; goes with the rifle in rack number 333.

Beautiful, unmarked condition, with no re-inspection dates, so never saw active service.

I had not seen a Reserve marked P. ‘07 until about 2 weeks ago, and now every other P.07 posted here is an “R”.

Scabbard is the internal-chape, Mk.I.

Where do people find these HQ P. ‘07 gems, apart from militaria shows ?

 

Regards,

JMB

Edited 12 April , 2018 by JMB1943
Add info

[MikeyH]

Yes, that is a real beaut. and a very early example of the P1907.

 

Mike.

[Dave66]

Nice early example, and even better given it has the early Mk1 scabbard and matching.

this one has two bend test marks, could the batch have been retested ?

 

Dave.

[HCLiu]

JMB, Thanks for sharing your knowledge. It is really fascinating to trace the history of the piece that you are holding in hands. And I have the same question in my mind, too. Where do those people find these and bring them to militaria shows? Do they go to many estate sales?   

 

Mike, Thanks. 

 

Dave, besides the normal bend test mark, which was struck into the ricasso, the other bend test mark (the golden one) does not look like being struck into the ricasso. It looks more like the blued surface was scratched off and the golden surface underneath is revealed. The golden "E" (looks like the lower part of the inspection stamp) is the same. The golden colour of this bend test mark and "E" resembles the colour of the golden line normally appears at the joint when different parts being welded together, such as the ricasso and the cross guard.       

 

HC

 

[Dave66]

The reason I asked, was because I have a couple of p1888s with similar stamps being filled with braise, presuming after a repair or just poor manufacturing, 

 

All the best.

 

Dave.

[trajan]

A very lovely set indeed!  There was a discussion some years back about traces of brazing on ricassoes (or should it be ricasso's???!!!), but I am damn'd if I can find it.

 

I wouldn't necessarily agree with my good mate JMB on it never having seen active service on account of the lack of 're-issue' or 're-inspection' marks, even though a 'Reserve' piece.

 

I have never studied the supply of bayonets to GB troops in the GW, but I do know that Germany was so short ofGew. 98 rifles and bayonets for front-line troops in 1914-1915 that some were supplied with the Gew.88, while others were given captured Nagant rifles.

 

And the 1st Cheshire Regt. was in the thick of it in 1914, so would have suffered losses of men and material. So, it is not impossible that it was sent out to the front in late 1914, although it is in remarkable condition if it did arrive there that early.

Edited 5 May , 2018 by trajan

[JMB1943]

22 minutes ago, trajan said:

 

 

I wouldn't necessarily agree with my good mate JMB on it never having seen active service on account of the lack of 're-issue' or 're-inspection' marks, even though a 'Reserve' piece.

 

And the 1st Cheshire Regt. was in the thick of it in 1914, so would have suffered losses of men and material. So, it is not impossible that it was sent out to the front in late 1914, although it is in remarkable condition if it did arrive there that early.

Trajan,

 

You are quite right to call me out on that—that was an unwarranted assumption on my part regarding lack of re-inspection dates!

However, looking at the photos again, I think that I will stand by my assertion because of lack of staining to blade/ light color of grips/lack of damage to grips & screws. Similarly, the scabbard appears to be in near-pristine condition.

The defense rests its case, M’Lud.

 

Regards,

JMB

 

[trajan]

3 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

Trajan,

 

You are quite right to call me out on that—that was an unwarranted assumption on my part regarding lack of re-inspection dates!

However, looking at the photos again, I think that I will stand by my assertion because of lack of staining to blade/ light color of grips/lack of damage to grips & screws. Similarly, the scabbard appears to be in near-pristine condition.

The defense rests its case, M’Lud.

 

Regards,

JMB

 

 

And the defence (you've been there too long mate!) has a good point (no pun, really!)

[HCLiu]

Since I bought this P1907 I start to look for a matching frog. I think for this bayonet made in July 1908, the correct frog should be the P1908 W.E. frog, but I was unable to find one in the militaria shows in my area. I was only able to find a P1914 frog as a substitute for now. 

 

Here is the picture of the P1914 frog I found. The only marking on the frog locates on the backside, under the strap. On the top is "SIMMONS", in the middle is a merely recognizable "KEEN KUTTER" inside a pizza slice-shaped mark, and at the bottom is the date "1915". I did a little google and found some information about the manufacturer (seems like an American company), but no information about the manufacturing of P1914 frogs of this company, so I am not sure about its authenticity (though it looks like a real one). 

 

Here are some pictures:

  

[Dave66]

Looks fine to me, I have one, also dated 1915. Mine is very thin leather which was quite common, and is therefore stamped for training purposes only. The only difference being mine is stamped on the helve strap.

According to carter, Simmons held the largest contract placed with an American contractor, the only difference being the use of domed rivets, and a steel buckle pin. Matching helve carriers were also manufactured.

 

Dave.