WW1 GERMAN BAYONETS FROM MY COLLECTION

[AndyBsk]

Mr. Christian Mery even dont known about the exact  bayonet modell pictured in his book, this is not a M1867 but a M1870/73 or shortened M1870 and not a NCO bayonet as described!! .

I dont known about the units in area of Belgium, offcoarse there was a austrian unit on westfront, question is what for arms they were equiped with. There exist more as one conversion of Werndl bayonets to Gew88. Is certainly that a large numbers were made and reworked by Austrians for german delivered Gew88 rifles. About belgium collector i dont known details.

Edited 25 November , 2019 by AndyBsk

[trajan]

Austrian soldiers were in Belgium with their Skoda siege guns in 1914 and I have a memory that in the summer of 1918 four divisions of the KuK XVIII Korps were on the Western front. So, yes, KuK soldiers were in Belgium...

[AndyBsk]

In german fighting areas mostly austrian used the german equipment to get easier to german ammunition as on different places where the ammunition would be a logistical problem, so when mixed german/austrian units, i would in opinion that they could use a Gew88 as arms, but mainly on second line troops, security units probably not by front line.

Certainly a nice period photo of german soldier with Werndl rifle or Werndl bayonet on Gew88 would be confirmation and good for Carter theory.

[zuluwar2006]

1 hour ago, trajan said:

Austrian soldiers were in Belgium with their Skoda siege guns in 1914 and I have a memory that in the summer of 1918 four divisions of the KuK XVIII Korps were on the Western front. So, yes, KuK soldiers were in Belgium...

Julian, certainly they were Not in Brussels were Charles Dangre find the German ersatz converted werndl bayonets with a lot of other rare Ww1 german ersatz converted foreign bayonets. 

Brussels always was a point of german army and NO AUSTRIAN UNIT SERVED THERE, EVER, DURING WW1. 

Even if we assume that an austrian unit with Skoda guns was somewhere in Belgium, the Austrian soldiers were equipped with Gew 88 and converted  werndl ersatz bayonets attached??? 

I do not think so.... 

Regards

D. 

 

[trajan]

9 hours ago, AndyBsk said:

Mr. Christian Mery even dont known about the exact  bayonet modell pictured in his book, this is not a M1867 but a M1870/73 or shortened M1870 and not a NCO bayonet as described!! .

 

 

Andy, the caption ("NCO bayonet") refers to the photograph of the bayonet below the one Zulu war posted. It has the NCO ring on the pommel for attaching the troddel.

[trajan]

Well, I cannot find my PDF of Dangre... Which is very worrying....

 

1) According to my rough notes, however, Dangre published this drawing of a Werndl in his "Bayonnettes ‟ersatz” allemandes. Guerre de 1914-1918. Deuxième Partie Modèles étrangers de bayonnettes modifiées par les allemandes. Portugal, Italie.", Carnet de la Fourragère. [Journal de la Musée Royale de L'Armée, Bruxelles, Belgium.], 3e Série., No.1, Décembre 1930. pp.93-102. It was among the conversions of Austrian and Dutch bayonets he showed there as Figs. 134 -142. He died in 1931 without publishing any text to go with these. So, we have no idea where it came from or what he thought of it. 

 

2) There is nothing as far as I can remember in any of his writings to say where he collected the ones he published in his "Bayonnettes ‟ersatz” allemandes" series. In other words, he did not necessarily collect them all in Brussels. Again, from my notes, his first article on bayonets in December 1921 indicated he wanted to make a collection and a record of these weapons when it was appropriate to study them at a time close to the end of WW1. So, they could have come from anywhere. More to the point, I cannot for the life of me see how all the many erstaz bayonets he studied and published (over 100) could all have been in use in Belgium in 1914-1918 never mind all in use in Brussels!!!!

 

3) Don't forget Dangre had his own private collection of bayonets. We don't know what was in this or where or how he collected these, but I do have one that apparently came from his collection, a  Belgian M.16 quadrilateral - see: https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/192861-belgianm-1916-bayonet-the-quadrilateral-version/ post 10.

 

4) Last but not least... The lack of German markings on any of these CONVERTED Werndl's and the complete lack of any photographic evidence for the use of a Werndl ON A RIFLE by German troops is to my mind pretty conclusive. Yes, there is one photograph of a German officer with a Werndl worn as a sidearm, and there is an example of an UNCONVERTED Werdl with Württemberg ownership markings, but that seems to be it... And some of the Württembergische Gebirgs-Kanonen-Batterie did fight with the KuK - e.g.,  with the österreichische Brigade Nr. 179, so that Württemberg marked one (unconverted, remember) could have been worn as a sidearm by one of those artillery guys... 

 

I am always happy to be corrected and to change my mind in the face of new evidence. But sorry D., on the face of it, and certainly to my mind, these converted Werndl are Austrian (if possibly German) conversions for Austrian use, not German conversions for German use,

 

Best wishes to all involved in this debate,

 

Julian

 

[zuluwar2006]

19 minutes ago, trajan said:

Well, I cannot find my PDF of Dangre... Which is very worrying....

 

1) According to my rough notes, however, Dangre published this drawing of a Werndl in his "Bayonnettes ‟ersatz” allemandes. Guerre de 1914-1918. Deuxième Partie Modèles étrangers de bayonnettes modifiées par les allemandes. Portugal, Italie.", Carnet de la Fourragère. [Journal de la Musée Royale de L'Armée, Bruxelles, Belgium.], 3e Série., No.1, Décembre 1930. pp.93-102. It was among the conversions of Austrian and Dutch bayonets he showed there as Figs. 134 -142. He died in 1931 without publishing any text to go with these. So, we have no idea where it came from or what he thought of it. 

 

2) There is nothing as far as I can remember in any of his writings to say where he collected the ones he published in his "Bayonnettes ‟ersatz” allemandes" series. In other words, he did not necessarily collect them all in Brussels. Again, from my notes, his first article on bayonets in December 1921 indicated he wanted to make a collection and a record of these weapons when it was appropriate to study them at a time close to the end of WW1. So, they could have come from anywhere. More to the point, I cannot for the life of me see how all the many erstaz bayonets he studied and published (over 100) could all have been in use in Belgium in 1914-1918 never mind all in use in Brussels!!!!

 

3) Don't forget Dangre had his own private collection of bayonets. We don't know what was in this or where or how he collected these, but I do have one that apparently came from his collection, a  Belgian M.16 quadrilateral - see: https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/192861-belgianm-1916-bayonet-the-quadrilateral-version/ post 10.

 

4) Last but not least... The lack of German markings on any of these CONVERTED Werndl's and the complete lack of any photographic evidence for the use of a Werndl ON A RIFLE by German troops is to my mind pretty conclusive. Yes, there is one photograph of a German officer with a Werndl worn as a sidearm, and there is an example of an UNCONVERTED Werdl with Württemberg ownership markings, but that seems to be it... And some of the Württembergische Gebirgs-Kanonen-Batterie did fight with the KuK - e.g.,  with the österreichische Brigade Nr. 179, so that Württemberg marked one (unconverted, remember) could have been worn as a sidearm by one of those artillery guys... 

 

I am always happy to be corrected and to change my mind in the face of new evidence. But sorry D., on the face of it, and certainly to my mind, these converted Werndl are Austrian (if possibly German) conversions for Austrian use, not German conversions for German use,

 

Best wishes to all involved in this debate,

 

Julian

 

Julian let me get it clear. 

All the writers for Ww1 german bayonets, all the books about, even Roy Williams, all were completely wrong on this???

Because they all categorized and accept that this is a german modification. 

That is why they said "German Ersatz Bayonet" and NOT  Austrian ersatz. 

And off course with your opinion, you are starting a dangerous game for refunds (the prices for a full lenght ersatz werndl bayonet are coming to 1. 500 euros and for models 1870 or 1873 about 850 to 1. 000 euros according the condition).

I am willing now to ask back my money from the seller, saying that you and Andy are sure that those bayonets are Austria and not german. How I will proove this, when all Ww1 books  accepted the german modification of them??? 

Roy Williams was certain this is a German Ersatz convertion. 

The absence of unit markings, he said, can be easily explained because Austrian army was allied to the germans. 

German markings were for the bayonets of the enemy. 

This is a very well noted explanation, which Carter himself had accepted also. 

 

Also, Roy insisted on the german modification, as there is no other modification similar on Austrian army. On the contrary, german army modified with similar way the Romanian Peabody martini 1879 bayonet, inserting an iron tube on the muzzle ring, exactly with the same way as on ersatz werndl bayonet. 

 

The wuttemberg marking was for the use of the bayonet as a side arm and not a bayonet. 

Roy Williams believed that this modification is among the most rare, since very few specimens have been found until today. 

In my 27 years, I have recorded 31 specimens and I bought the 4.

 

Dangre published what he found in Brussels museum, as his text indicates when you read the first paragraphs. 

Also his book is referring as "Bayonnettes ‟ersatz” allemandes. Guerre de 1914-1918. Deuxième Partie Modèles étrangers de bayonnettes modifiées par les allemandes. Portugal, Italie.", Carnet de la Fourragère. [Journal de la Musée Royale de L'Armée, Bruxelles, Belgium.]. 

HE HIMSELF SAID THIS IS German what he describes on it. 

Again the Museum find those bayonets in warehouses abandonned by germans in Brussels and around this area. 

Gew 88 was the main rifle for Landstrum units and a lot of Landstrum units were in service at Brussels area. 

If you have photo with Austrian soldier carrying this modification of german ersatz bayonet, I am willing to accept it also. 

But ONLY with informations and proofs. 

Regards

D. 

[trajan]

Dimitri,

 

What I am saying is simply this. There is - as yet - no clear proof in the form of German markings - whether unit markings or ownership markings - that these converted Werndl bayonets were ever converted for German use . Such marking are found regularly on other types of foreign bayonets that the German's converted or used as they were. I respect the opinion of Dangre, Carter, and Williams - and your own opinion and that of Andy. And remember how both Roy and Carter commented on the absence of German acceptance markings on these yataghan's. Carter certainly, and Roy presumably also, saw this as evidence that that while they were converted for use on a Gew.88, this was not for use of the rifle by German troops. Quite simply, looking at it objectively in the absence of any clear proof of German conversion for German use, we are relying on people's opinion, not factual evidence. Whether or not sellers classify these as German ersatz is immaterial. 

 

If you have it handy, though, as I cannot find my photocopy of Dange, would you send me a copy of the page where he says he found all of the bayonets he studied in Brussels. I find this VERY difficult to accept. That would indicate that the regular and Landswehr/Landsturm troops there used over 100 types of Ersatz bayonet!

 

Best wishes,

 

Julian

[AndyBsk]

Still here are arguments only with opinion on bayonet collectors!!, not a really researches in archives and documents,that were done in Austria in this case.

The Roy Williams books are catalogs as written in first pages, he was not expert in austrian bayonets, same as Carter was not expert in austrian bayonets, there are some errors in their books, but it doesnt means all is bad, majority of german bayonets are ok described, but some are problematic, i could discusse about Roy first and second book and i wrote with him, and he say me that he has wrote it wout made a good correction of the text.

Similar to Ch.Mery as he is not a austrian bayonet expert, already on his small page are 2 errors as there is no pictured a M1867 bayonet and in text of conversion is a error. Even not visible the NCO piece, which could be correct there.

I would like to see how is made the conversion for M1879 bayonet as the details are little different from my standpoint. Problem with Werndl bayonets is there his locking dimmension is 105mm and  Gew88 is only 101mm so the good fit could be done by adding of barell ring thickness to backside or shortage of handle to made correct lock dimension.

Prior this time exist many period pictures of using Gew88 by Austrians complete with Werndl bayonets. Some of the pictures are small to find out there is bushing on crossguard or not. Prior this time i dont saw any Werndl photos with german soldiers, any Werndl bayonets with Gew88 rifles.

Thanks to Julian for explain the Darne arguments.

Edited 27 November , 2019 by AndyBsk

[AndyBsk]

Even here presented Werndl M1870 reworks are of 2 variations, the first 2 pieces wooden handle and next M1870 are bushed out with thin material cylinder, what for inner MRD is there?? exact measured by caliper, the notch on spine of handle is shallow. A detailed picture of central position of new ring in old barell ring would be helpfull.!!

The third piece of Werndl M13 rework is done as described in Mery book and is not centrical in section, his smaller part is upper section and thicker part is in lower section, which means it was done to made position of barell ring above handle. the backpart is same thickness as old crossguard ring. The notch or step of back of handle is higher.

With M1879 conversion is little different as the bushing is cylindrical in section, the locking lenght was prolonged by additional tube, the position of ring is here ok, and original bore was too ok for Gew88 - 17,4mm.

Edited 26 November , 2019 by AndyBsk

[zuluwar2006]

Dear friends, 

Before we make a statement we must be sure that there is a clear proof which is not "supposed" or "circumstantial" . 

There is no photo indicating the use of this ersatz bayonet by Austrian troops. 

There is no written reference also for this. 

All the collectors, the great bayonet writers and museums, are catalogued this bayonet as a german ersatz convertion. 

Until we have something in handy about the opposite, I will stand to the opinion of Carter, Roy Williams, Ch. Merry, and all the museums and serious collectors, who are sticked to the same point of view, for german ersatz convertion. 

Offcourse everyone can have another point of view than mine. 

BUT unless I see something written, I keep the same opinion. 

P. S. I have allready 7 P. M. From collectors, who are frustrated with this matter, as they have spend some serious money and if the bayonets are Austrian, they are asking me, as a barrister I am, how they can forward a full refund from the sellers. 

Must be understood to everybody, that we do not want to start a war between collectors and auction houses in here, just Andy, Julian and i, we all writing our different opinions, always in good faith and with great respect to each other. 

Andy and Julian, are very well educated on bayonet issues, and I am enjoying our discussions very much. Also my respect on them (and I am not forgetting my good friend Steve in here) , is great, as they indicating to me views, I did not think of them, and they are always gentle. 

Through discussion, we can get the truth. And this is something we all want. 

Thank you all

Regards

D. 

 

 

 

 

Edited 26 November , 2019 by zuluwar2006

[trajan]

Hi Dimitri, Andy, (and dear old Steve who started it off!), and others

 

Yes, I think we have to agree to differ. We give our opinions and we both stress and emphasise one or other view. I don't need to repeat mine, so I think we can leave it at that. 

 

Incidentally I did find my downloaded copy of Dangre. I found the original at https://sites.google.com/site/baioersatzinfo/home - but I am missing (it seems!) the one part we are interested in! The anonymous person who put it on line doesn't really such much about why or how Dangre put it all together other than that (rough translation, page 78) he had 'access to enormous quantities of materials captured or abandoned at the end of the conflict [i.e., WW1] and available for study' which would make a "military arsenal [I think he means study collection] for the period of the conflict." It really is a mixture - the second piece he describes is a GB 'Elcho' bayonet, and I do find it very hard to believe that was in use in WW1!

 

All for now,

 

Julian

[AndyBsk]

D. certainly i would like to see details of mentioned Werndl bayonets, what i asked? thanks.

Offcoarse we remain here in friendly discussion, only factical arguments could win here.

I could only bring here real facts that i got from well known researches as are Heino H. and Reinolf R. (professor of history and curator of Museum near Linz) which are long life experts on austrian materials.

Thats the reason because i like monografies, because people/collectors that publish a books about their bayonets collection and dont have enough background, historical documentation and confirmed information, even dont speak german ,  are only booklets for bayonet collector beginners like is Atlas or other old catalog books. When i need to known about one area of bayonets, i go to native authors that are really experts in area.

I could made some correction on russian books the authors are excellent in russian bayonets, but when writting about german or austrian, there were many errors.

Personally i believe that some errors were repeated in books like possible the mentioned Darne quelle to sample , could be bringed partly in Carter, Roy Williams partly copied text of Carter, and now new books copied into the material old errors. So when You look to history You have 4 or 5 sources with wrongly information, which is hard to explain only with facts.

Personally i dont see any problem here with value of similar bayonets, even made by Austrians its certainly a valuable WW1 conversion. Even when it was made by Germans for Austrians.

 

[zuluwar2006]

On 24/11/2019 at 20:25, zuluwar2006 said:

From the French book, Atlas of baïonnettes, 1st edition. 

Roy Williams has no reference for the rare model with wooden grips, proof of the great rarity for this ersatz model. 

Regards

D. 

 Dear friends, 

Compare the different ersatz werndl models with wooden grips. 

They are not same, but have differences on wooden grips and the way grips are attached to the handle. 

Again those are german ersatz convertions, extremely rare. 

Regards

D. 

[AndyBsk]

Still dont see the details of the additional tube on ring of Your piece,as asked twice for it, thanks. The dimmension and view of the securing in ring would be nice.As the first ring conversion is little different.

When You believe the Atlas is the best choice for assigning a austrian bayonet is Your choice, i asked CH.Mery about his presented "Werndl 1867 bayonet" on the added scan of his book,the bayonet is not his, he never hold it in hand and his experiences are the bayonet is correct designated. Thats about how are errors made.

About wooden grips on Werndls they could be not dated as Werndl bayonets were equiped with wooden grips since 1880 and many were repaired in time, as majority of this equipment served in to end of WW1 in austrian army. When You dont have exact sources and information about austrian bayonets You should look at austrian authors as are Gabriel, Ortner chief of HGM or Hintermeier, Schuyi (werndl rifles book) and Moetz.

As mentioned is Your choice what You believe.b.r.Andy

 

[zuluwar2006]

 

I will never make anything, to cancel serious (and dead, so they cannot defend themselves) authors of ersatz german bayonets, the last 80 years, without written documents about. 

Offcourse is also your choice to believe whatever you want. 

The convertion on the Atlas book described, is a new gripped german ersatz convertion, tottaly different than the one I posted last. 

The different models they do exist (I have 4 different models, as the posted photographs indicate), are a clear proof that there was a certain way for converted Austrian werndl bayonets for Gew 88 by the Germans. 

I am posting photos from iron tube inserted to the muzle ring, as requested. 

 

1 hour ago, zuluwar2006 said:

 Dear friends, 

Compare the different ersatz werndl models with wooden grips. 

They are not same, but have differences on wooden grips and the way grips are attached to the handle. 

Again those are german ersatz convertions, extremely rare. 

Regards

D. 

 

[AndyBsk]

Thanks for adding the details, i was only interested to see the thin tube allignment to old barell ring, which is only first picture.I saw only 3 modell of Your collection here, but maybe one was mixed into them and is identical refurbished.

When You read my post corectly i wrote about error in new book and living author. by Roy Williams i could find the discussion in my old emails, but is not so important as it were different bayonets that i discused with him. With Antony Carter i discussed two years before his death as he was a BCN member about austrian bayonets M88 and M95 produced in Germany.

In all bayonet books are errors, questions are how many and how important they are.!!

I assume You known how were Werndl bayonets used an reworked in their life by austrians,and You have deciphered the unit codes.even they are not good visible.

Edited 30 November , 2019 by AndyBsk

[zuluwar2006]

4 hours ago, AndyBsk said:

Thanks for adding the details, i was only interested to see the thin tube allignment to old barell ring, which is only first picture.I saw only 3 modell of Your collection here, but maybe one was mixed into them and is identical refurbished.

When You read my post corectly i wrote about error in new book and living author. by Roy Williams i could find the discussion in my old emails, but is not so important as it were different bayonets that i discused with him. With Antony Carter i discussed two years before his death as he was a BCN member about austrian bayonets M88 and M95 produced in Germany.

In all bayonet books are errors, questions are how many and how important they are.!!

I assume You known how were Werndl bayonets used an reworked in their life by austrians,and You have deciphered the unit codes.even they are not good visible.

Andy

Until we have some written proofs for the opposite,  I am stick on the late writers (Carter, Roy Williams, Ch. Dangre) who all accept the german ersatz convertions on werndl bayonet. 

Regards

D. 

Edited 30 November , 2019 by zuluwar2006

[zuluwar2006]

Here is an Austrian werndl bayonet convertion. The differences between the german ersatz converted werndl bayonets, are clearly visible. 

Regards

D. 

[AndyBsk]

Firstly this is repair piece of M1867/73, the screws in wood are not austrian but yugoslavian, the locking nut was repaired in time of service. Secondly the crossguard is damaged by pressing to side and was later welded as broken. Its one of the austrian reworks for Gew88/M13 rifle, here unfortunally refurbished post 1918 by other country most real Yugoslavia. 

Interestingly You are not interested to decipher old austrian unit stamps on the presented refurbishments, as not cleaned the unit area. I assume Your interest is focused only on german rework and german using of similar items. 

The question to the pieces, that i send was because there exist more as 3 variations of refurbish the bayonet to Gew88, but i assume You have all in the mentioned books well described and confirmed.

Edited 30 November , 2019 by AndyBsk

[zuluwar2006]

23 minutes ago, AndyBsk said:

Firstly this is repair piece of M1867/73, the screws in wood are not austrian but yugoslavian, the locking nut was repaired in time of service. The crossguard is damaged by pressing to side and was later welded. Its one of the austrian reworks for Gew88/M13 rifle, here unfortunally refurbished post 1918 by other country. 

Interestingly You are not interested to decipher old austrian unit stamp on the refurbishments,as not cleaned the unit area.

Andy

I added the photo with Austrian werndl bayonet (I am not an expert on Austrian bayonets) just willing to show that Austria werndl bayonets ONLY had machined the back of the hilt. 

   On the contrary, german ersatz werndl bayonets, were converted AND with the added iron tube on the brushed muzzle ring. 

This is something all the great bayonet collectors accepting the last (50 and more) years. 

    No written proof for the opposite has been discovered until today. Unless you have something to share with us. 

    Also look at the screw on locking nut, is tottaly different the Austrian bayonet than the German ersatz bayonet with wooden grips.

On the German ersatz bayonet with wooden grips, the screw on locking nut is oversized than the Austrian. Clearly a modification not being made by Austrians. 

Finally yes, I am not interesting to decypher old Austrian unit markings. 

Edited 30 November , 2019 by zuluwar2006

[AndyBsk]

You dont known even how the versions are of austrian Werndls correctly named,what for reworks were done in 40 years of service, You dont known what  for were used press buttons on various modells, offcoarse germans have not similar slots on press buttons, how looks repair etc, so its no need to continue in this discussion. 

Ok believe what You will, but about Werndls You known a very little, because You dont have correct literature.I already added the links when You sometimes are interested to read about austrian bayonets.

To this time there is no archive documents about buying of Werndl rifles to german depots in 1914, no reporting of one Werndl rifle with Deutsches Reich stamp on buttstock, no archive documents of reworking in similar way for german units. No period pictures of exact bayonets refurbishment used by german troops.

Is well documented the germany sent Austria minimum 80000 of Gew88 rifles. Is in austrian archive, as dont have enough PFM1871 and HF1871, various other ersatz bayonets were used, same as Werndl are confirmed were reworked.

Edited 30 November , 2019 by AndyBsk

[Steve1871]

Instead of arguing over minor as well as major differences on who German/ Austrain conversion, If Germany had same ( tube type) attachment to other type of bayonets, that would be kind of like a “ trademark “ style. I do not have books with me to argue.

 

My opinion is to simply admire the Bayonet, wood and press leather grips, Huge Yatagan blade, for German or Austrain conversion to take an out dated bayonet since already on hand, During Great War, both sides wanted length, reach of arms in the trenches, to find simple yet effective ways to convert these Werndl Bayonets to be rugged enough to. Survive war time using simple means to fit the German Gew.88 , these Bayonets, depending on where you are, More old stuff here in U.S.,  are scarce to rare. From the talk so far, one bayonet would be great in any collection, but according to Demitrios, there are four types, for a very impressive collection. I greatly enjoy the photo’s, A request if you please, any way to get a photo or two when you have time of all four lined up for close up of the guards, conversion areas to compare .

Thank’s for your post Demitrios

[zuluwar2006]

3 hours ago, AndyBsk said:

You dont known even how the versions are of austrian Werndls correctly named,what for reworks were done in 40 years of service, You dont known what  for were used press buttons on various modells, offcoarse germans have not similar slots on press buttons, how looks repair etc, so its no need to continue in this discussion. 

Ok believe what You will, but about Werndls You known a very little, because You dont have correct literature.I already added the links when You sometimes are interested to read about austrian bayonets.

To this time there is no archive documents about buying of Werndl rifles to german depots in 1914, no reporting of one Werndl rifle with Deutsches Reich stamp on buttstock, no archive documents of reworking in similar way for german units. No period pictures of exact bayonets refurbishment used by german troops.

Is well documented the germany sent Austria minimum 80000 of Gew88 rifles. Is in austrian archive, as dont have enough PFM1871 and HF1871, various other ersatz bayonets were used, same as Werndl are confirmed were reworked.

The greatest virtue in life is not to boast that you know it all.

Regards

D. 

Edited 30 November , 2019 by zuluwar2006

[zuluwar2006]

7 hours ago, Steve1871 said:

Instead of arguing over minor as well as major differences on who German/ Austrain conversion, If Germany had same ( tube type) attachment to other type of bayonets, that would be kind of like a “ trademark “ style. I do not have books with me to argue.

 

My opinion is to simply admire the Bayonet, wood and press leather grips, Huge Yatagan blade, for German or Austrain conversion to take an out dated bayonet since already on hand, During Great War, both sides wanted length, reach of arms in the trenches, to find simple yet effective ways to convert these Werndl Bayonets to be rugged enough to. Survive war time using simple means to fit the German Gew.88 , these Bayonets, depending on where you are, More old stuff here in U.S.,  are scarce to rare. From the talk so far, one bayonet would be great in any collection, but according to Demitrios, there are four types, for a very impressive collection. I greatly enjoy the photo’s, A request if you please, any way to get a photo or two when you have time of all four lined up for close up of the guards, conversion areas to compare .

Thank’s for your post Demitrios

Steve, 

Here are some photos from the Romanian 1879 sword bayonet. 

On this model, with the iron tube inside the muzzle ring, for the Gew 88 rifle, is clear that the modification is exactly the same as on werndl bayonet to fit the Gew 88.

Again (as on werndl ersatz bayonets) no Deutschland markings (imperial eagle or Deutschland) exists, as the lengthened loop added to the muzzle ring, is the characteristic proof for this german ersatz convertion. 

Austrian army did not made any of this kind of convertions, neither any photo exist with an Austrian soldier carrying an ersatz werndl bayonet with iron tube on the muzzle ring. 

On the contrarie, this convertion (lengthened loop to the muzzle ring) was made by Germans. 

I will get the photos you want during Christmas, as allready I am running out of time, for a very serious case I have. 

Regards

D.