Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

P1907 Hookie - Is this a good one?


depaor01

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I have an opportunity to acquire this P1907 Royal Arms Factory hooked quillion. I've looked at previous posts, and this one passes the usual tests - no clearance hole, a clean and unmessed-with 1910 date etc.

 

I don't have it in hand, and only got these photos from the seller so can't provide any more at the moment.

 

My question is - is it likely to be kosher? Are there any other things I need to look for apart from a join at the quillion?

 

It does bother me slightly that there isn't a GR or ER below the crown.

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Dave

278.jpg

278_2.jpg

278_3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave,

 

Well that seems O.K. to me,  marks all looking good, any welding on the quillon should be easy to spot. 

 

Mike.

Edited by MikeyH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MikeyH said:

Dave,

 

Well that seems O.K. to me,  marks all looking good, any welding on the quillon should be easy to spot. 

 

Mike.

 

Thanks Mike. Much appreciated.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a good one Buy It!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fine to me...I'd buy it.

when you expand the photos you can just see the top line of the E under the crown for E R....poorly struck?

Do you remember if there are markings on the pommel that throw light on the country of issue?

 

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave66 said:

Looks fine to me...I'd buy it.

when you expand the photos you can just see the top line of the E under the crown for E R....poorly struck?

Do you remember if there are markings on the pommel that throw light on the country of issue?

 

Dave.

Looking at other comments I think the GR must be badly struck and not absent as you say. I'm OK with that aspect now. It'll be a couple of weeks before I see it again so I should be able to check the pommel then. From memory there was nothing there.

By the way there is a lesson here from a self confessed pedant. My post misspells quillon. I always thought the word was quillion. I will leave the error there as a warning to myself.

 

Thanks again for the opinions And I'll keep y'all posted on developments. 

Dave

Edited by depaor01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/01/2018 at 00:09, Dave66 said:

...when you expand the photos you can just see the top line of the E under the crown for E R....poorly struck?...

 

On 20/01/2018 at 03:24, depaor01 said:

...Looking at other comments I think the GR must be badly struck and not absent as you say. I'm OK with that aspect now...

 

I agree with Dave, a poorly struck ER - even with that date, it's not unusual to find blades with ER marks and a first issue/acceptance date from after the death of Edward VII in May 1910. As per this late 1911 example:

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/01/2018 at 03:24, depaor01 said:

... Looking at other comments I think the GR [sic in original po] must be badly struck and not absent as you say. ... By the way there is a lesson here from a self confessed pedant. My post misspells quillon. I always thought the word was quillion. I will leave the error there as a warning to myself ...

 

On 20/01/2018 at 11:54, Andrew Upton said:

...  a poorly struck ER - even with that date, it's not unusual to find blades with ER marks and a first issue/acceptance date from after the death of Edward VII in May 1910. As per this late 1911 example: 

 

 

Yes, for what it is worth (and I am not a P.1907 buff!), there is a poorly stamped Royal cypher there.

 

On the "quillion" versus "quillon" matter, well, both are acceptable according to the Oxford English Dictionary, but I have of late gone for the latter more than the former! See, e.g., http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/yaaa20 "An Investigation of the Weights of Pattern 1907 Bayonets made in the UK around the First World War Period" - which of course means some of us would like to know the weight of this one when it arrives!

 

The numbered crossguard suggests to me New Zealand or possibly Australian use after being sold down there soon after manufacture (but, I repeat - these are not my especial field of interest!). The date fits, if I remember correctly... So, look for a SOS - Sold out of Service - mark on the pommel or ricasso.

 

It looks a beauty - so enjoy! 

 

Julian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Julian. I will be sorely disappointed if I don't get this one! I assumed the number on the crossguard was a rack number. I will examine it all over when I see it!

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck! Me old mate down under - SS - knows a bit about these crossguard numbered ones as does a GWF mate down in Z whose tag esacapes me right now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, depaor01 said:

Cheers. Now all I need to do is acquire it! If I do I look forward to subsequent discussions here...

 

Dave

Good luck, and keep us informed.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say thats a NZ hookey, heres one of my examples, if you look at my profile you will find a couple of recent posts of mine on these.

 

20180121_101329.thumb.jpg.c3a5274aa3e99c565f4999bdeaa7051d.jpg20180121_101251.thumb.jpg.a5209841c63cc71caf97a4e5db156d9f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, trajan said:

Good luck! Me old mate down under - SS - knows a bit about these crossguard numbered ones as does a GWF mate down in Z whose tag esacapes me right now...

 

11 hours ago, 5thBatt said:

I would say thats a NZ hookey, heres one of my examples, if you look at my profile you will find a couple of recent posts of mine on these.

 

Thanks 5thBatt - and it was you I was thinking of!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/01/2018 at 00:01, depaor01 said:

Hi all,

 

I have an opportunity to acquire this P1907 Royal Arms Factory hooked quillion. I've looked at previous posts, and this one passes the usual tests - no clearance hole, a clean and unmessed-with 1910 date etc.

 

I don't have it in hand, and only got these photos from the seller so can't provide any more at the moment.

 

My question is - is it likely to be kosher? Are there any other things I need to look for apart from a join at the quillion?

 

It does bother me slightly that there isn't a GR or ER below the crown.

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Dave

278.jpg

278_2.jpg

278_3.jpg

So are you getting it/got it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave & 5th,

 

These two HQ’s make an interesting, and good-looking pair.

Same manufacturer, EFD,

Same date of manufacture, 12 ‘10,

Same inspection stamps, crown/35/E and (possibly) Broad Arrow/EFD/51, and

Finally, VERY closely numbered; were they in the same shipping crate for 12,000 miles ?

Regards,

JMB

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

Dave & 5th,

 

These two HQ’s make an interesting, and good-looking pair.

Same manufacturer, EFD,

Same date of manufacture, 12 ‘10,

Same inspection stamps, crown/35/E and (possibly) Broad Arrow/EFD/51, and

Finally, VERY closely numbered; were they in the same shipping crate for 12,000 miles ?

Regards,

JMB

 

I have another 2 1910 EFD 07s one dehooked but both dated  earlier 1910 & with lower numbers but i believe the numbers start from the very first Mk1 SMLEs NZ got in 1905.

 

20180123_174228.jpg.6cf985014e592c687f4d594320fbd9d9.jpg20180123_174319.jpg.11747962cf5fc187585462f96e79eff9.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

Dave & 5th,

 

These two HQ’s make an interesting, and good-looking pair.

Same manufacturer, EFD,

Same date of manufacture, 12 ‘10,

Same inspection stamps, crown/35/E and (possibly) Broad Arrow/EFD/51, and

Finally, VERY closely numbered; were they in the same shipping crate for 12,000 miles ?

Regards,

JMB

 

I never spotted the numbers and similarities! Very interesting indeed.

Dave

Edited by depaor01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 5thBatt said:

So are you getting it/got it?

It'll be another week before I'll know if I've got it. Sorry to be mysterious! As a matter of interest what would be a fair value for it?

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave,

 

Have seen these go from anything to £110 for a semi-relic, up to well over £1000 for a unit marked example in excellent condition with original scabbard.

Average examples seem to bring  around £250 - £350, this based on recent auction results.

 

Mike.

 

Edited by MikeyH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, MikeyH said:

Dave,

 

Have seen these go from anything to £110 for a semi-relic, up to well over £1000 for a unit marked example in excellent condition with original scabbard.

Average examples seem to bring  around £250 - £350, this based on recent auction results.

 

Mike.

 

Thanks for that Mike.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

Dave & 5th,

 

These two HQ’s make an interesting, and good-looking pair.

Same manufacturer, EFD,

Same date of manufacture, 12 ‘10,

Same inspection stamps, crown/35/E and (possibly) Broad Arrow/EFD/51, and

Finally, VERY closely numbered; were they in the same shipping crate for 12,000 miles ?

Regards,

JMB

 

Both missing the ER or GR but both seem to just have the top of ER. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2018 at 07:46, 5thBatt said:

I have another 2 1910 EFD 07s one dehooked but both dated  earlier 1910 & with lower numbers but i believe the numbers start from the very first Mk1 SMLEs NZ got in 1905.

 

20180123_174319.jpg.11747962cf5fc187585462f96e79eff9.jpg

 

 

 

19 hours ago, 5thBatt said:

Both missing the ER or GR but both seem to just have the top of ER. 

 

I have never seen a de-hooked (or circumcised???!!!) one that badly done before! Really was a'snipping' job!

 

Yes, my 12 09 / SANDERSON, serial 1877(but numbers facing down the blade) has just a vague trace of the very small 'G[???] R' - http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/topic/189766-australian-bayonets/?page=7&tab=comments#comment-2225060  post 166. Then thought to be Ozzie?

 

Julian

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...