Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Chapman P1907 regiment cancellation markings


mja
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’m new to the bayonet collecting game , I bought a couple of bayonets recently, one being this Chapman , on the pommel

looks to be R B with 709 underneath, then these have been neatly cancelled , with an R stamped where the cancellation marks bisect.

there are no other regimental marks on the bayonet . I’m assuming the original R B is the Rifle Brigade , any idea what the extra R signifies, would it have been sold or given to the soldier who used it at this time ? 

there is some wear to the bayonet as I can’t see a year made mark . But I guess it may have seen service. It came with a J.W.B 17 scabbard 

CD369B79-EA3F-4F43-A72B-45FCC0A78F31.jpeg

B643E6D6-E6FE-4527-BA88-F2625C04009B.jpeg

FF63371C-3FD9-4BAC-9586-817B681FAF49.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi MJA, Bayonet collecting , a slippery slope ! I think your x and R signifies 

x - “ obsolete/sold out of service,”

R - possibly “Reserve” I.e. returned to stores for possible re-issue.

as to the date possibly feb 1916 ?

hopefully one of the Gentlemen of the Forum ( who are far more knowledgable than I) will correct me if my assumptions are astray.

Nice piece of history.

regards Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello mja, and welcome.

R would certainly indicate the bayonet was issued to the rifle brigade reserve, the year of manufacture looks to have been obscured by a later inspection stamp from the twenties. Initially Chapman bayonets were stamped J.A.C., this later changed to Chapman, don't know the exact date of this change (somebody else may wish to chip in), but I'm sure it was during the Great War, and may well match the date of the scabbard.

The unit stamping was officially cancelled probably during an inspection when it was put into stores for future use, as so many were from that era.

 

Dave.

 

Edited by Dave66
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change from J.A.C. to CHAPMAN, was 1916 I think, but may stand to be corrected.

 

Mike.

Edited by MikeyH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MikeyH said:

Change from J.A.C. to CHAPMAN, was 1916 I think, but may stand to be corrected.

 

Mike.

Thanks Mike,

thought it was 16 or 17,but wasn't 100 percent.

 

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike & Dave,

 

There was a discussion on this a couple of years ago, see

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/243324-jac-or-chapman-on-p07-bayonets/?tab=comments#comment-2447025

where the then-available data were summarised in post #9.

 

Regards,

JMB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JMB1943 said:

Mike & Dave,

 

There was a discussion on this a couple of years ago, see

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/243324-jac-or-chapman-on-p07-bayonets/?tab=comments#comment-2447025

where the then-available data were summarised in post #9.

 

Regards,

JMB

Many thanks JMB,

I knew I'd read something somewhere, but couldn't remember where I'd seen it.😄.

 

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may help to clarify 1916 or 1917.

R

6E9A0499-3FDF-49B7-A0E2-3698344C9E5F.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback , the bayonets came from a family member of the original owner, her grandad had them on the wall for many years

 

the other bayonet was a really nice 1917 Winchester , I bought them both to keep them together as they always had been.

incidentally the Winchester scabbard was made by Jewell and dated 1918 

 

referring to the Rifle Brigade reserves comment , I pretty sure the middle R was added after the cancellation cross was put over the Rifke Brigade marks .. so Reserve returned to stores makes sense , unless the R is simply Returned  to stores 

 

also intrigued by the 1920s inspection mark that you spotted , So a possible order of events , used in service , possibly from 1917 . Then Post war , was re inspected in the 1920s , removed from service , cancelled and returned to stores or sold to the soldier5C608990-27AD-429A-B6EF-12603643DF0E.jpeg.b6bb2acf57e84b72266788b9f47e8ca9.jpeg

 

and of course I appreciate the scabbard may not necessarily be the one it was issued with , did they get inspected as well as there are some stamps near the makers initials

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

Mike & Dave,

 

There was a discussion on this a couple of years ago, see

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/243324-jac-or-chapman-on-p07-bayonets/?tab=comments#comment-2447025

where the then-available data were summarised in post #9.

 

Regards,

JMB

 JMB,

 

Had noted this, but could not recall the source.  Only have one Chapman, is quite badly struck and worn, so one of the rarer 'HAPMA' variants!

My wife has accused me of  sometimes buying bayonets because I feel sorry for them.

 

Mike.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MikeyH said:

 JMB,

 

Had noted this, but could not recall the source.  Only have one Chapman, is quite badly struck and worn, so one of the rarer 'HAPMA' variants!

My wife has accused me of  sometimes buying bayonets because I feel sorry for them.

 

Mike.

 

The giving bayonets a good home look has also been noted in this household!, well, just has to be done at times.

 

with regard the R in the unit marking, I'm fairly sure it's consistent with the original marking, as one of the four individual cancellation stamps...in the form of a cross seem to overlap the centre R.

With regard the scabbard, the only way to tell if it was original to the bayonet is to see if there is a matching number (708) stamped on the top of the scabbard locket.

 

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mja,

 

Just to put you straight on one point.

The War Office NEVER sold any item of kit to a soldier.

The closest to that was allowing the soldiers to wear their (dirty, lice-infested) greatcoats for 30 days after demobilization.

 

Regards,

JMB

 

[edit: I do agree that R seems to be overstruck on the cancellation marks.]

Edited by JMB1943
Add info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wondering, given there is also a 1917 bayonet mentioned, that the two were souvenirs from the Second World War...the 1917 being the standard home guard issued piece?

 

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mja said:

Thanks for the feedback , the bayonets came from a family member of the original owner, her grandad had them on the wall for many years

 

the other bayonet was a really nice 1917 Winchester , I bought them both to keep them together as they always had been.

incidentally the Winchester scabbard was made by Jewell and dated 1918 

 

referring to the Rifle Brigade reserves comment , I pretty sure the middle R was added after the cancellation cross was put over the Rifke Brigade marks .. so Reserve returned to stores makes sense , unless the R is simply Returned  to stores 

 

also intrigued by the 1920s inspection mark that you spotted , So a possible order of events , used in service , possibly from 1917 . Then Post war , was re inspected in the 1920s , removed from service , cancelled and returned to stores or sold to the soldier5C608990-27AD-429A-B6EF-12603643DF0E.jpeg.b6bb2acf57e84b72266788b9f47e8ca9.jpeg

 

and of course I appreciate the scabbard may not necessarily be the one it was issued with , did they get inspected as well as there are some stamps near the makers initials

 

There is usually a broad arrow stamp above the makers mark , and a W which indicates the scabbard has been waxed.

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Dave66 said:

I'm wondering, given there is also a 1917 bayonet mentioned, that the two were souvenirs from the Second World War...the 1917 being the standard home guard issued piece?

 

Dave.

So you think the US Winchester bayonet was a home guard one , the Jewell scabbard is a dark olive green colour 

99FC6859-E22A-4B54-B153-282079A1E081.jpeg

367900AE-BA2D-4AEB-830F-AC2CE86588EE.jpeg

F4A923DB-6E0A-4A1D-A752-9AAA6A30C751.jpeg

4575E4EB-CBFC-4862-8B7C-0CB9874C5CFB.jpeg

Edited by mja
Scabbard colour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Dave66 said:

The giving bayonets a good home look has also been noted in this household!, well, just has to be done at times.

 

with regard the R in the unit marking, I'm fairly sure it's consistent with the original marking, as one of the four individual cancellation stamps...in the form of a cross seem to overlap the centre R.

With regard the scabbard, the only way to tell if it was original to the bayonet is to see if there is a matching number (708) stamped on the top of the scabbard locket.

 

Dave.

Thanks, looks like it was 643 and that’s been crossed out 

4EA2F53E-5A24-450E-894F-5B916ED5CDD7.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mja said:

So you think the US Winchester bayonet was a home guard one , the Jewell scabbard is a dark olive green colour 

99FC6859-E22A-4B54-B153-282079A1E081.jpeg

367900AE-BA2D-4AEB-830F-AC2CE86588EE.jpeg

F4A923DB-6E0A-4A1D-A752-9AAA6A30C751.jpeg

4575E4EB-CBFC-4862-8B7C-0CB9874C5CFB.jpeg

Hello mja,

The 1917 bayonet was obviously produced in the last two years of ww1, for the American produced P14 rifle chambered in British .303,  and saw little or no front line service, mainly used in Britain for training and home defence. At the end of the war a huge amount were stored, and during ww2 were issued to the home guard. The scabbard is the typical American pattern with belt hooks, but the leather frog is a 39 pattern and is typical of home guard issue.

With regard the Chapman and scabbard it's a shame the scabbard numbers don't match, but it would be a rarity if they did.

 

Dave.

Edited by Dave66
Clarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Dave66 said:

Hello mja,

The 1917 bayonet was obviously produced in the last two years of ww1, for the American produced P14 rifle chambered in British .303,  and saw little or no front line service, mainly used in Britain for training and home defence. At the end of the war a huge amount were stored, and during ww2 were issued to the home guard. The scabbard is the typical American pattern with belt hooks, but the leather frog is a 39 pattern and is typical of home guard issue.

Shame the scabbard numbers don't match, but it would be a rarity if they did.

 

Dave.

Do you mean the 1917 vs 1917 on the Winchester bayonet / scabbard or 709 vs 643 on the Chapman 

re the Chapman scabbard , I guess they would be reused and have a cancellation mark when they ar3 parted from the original bayonet

 

thanks for the info re the Winchester bayonet, I did wonder why the frog was in such good condition , so I guess the home guard issue stuff is not as valuable 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mja said:

Do you mean the 1917 vs 1917 on the Winchester bayonet / scabbard or 709 vs 643 on the Chapman 

re the Chapman scabbard , I guess they would be reused and have a cancellation mark when they ar3 parted from the original bayonet

 

thanks for the info re the Winchester bayonet, I did wonder why the frog was in such good condition , so I guess the home guard issue stuff is not as valuable 

 

 

Sorry, I was referring to the Winchester 1917 pattern bayonet and scabbard.....except the last line which was with reference to the Chapman scabbard number not matching the bayonet.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave66 said:

Sorry, I was referring to the Winchester 1917 pattern bayonet and scabbard.....except the last line which was with reference to the Chapman scabbard number not matching the bayonet.

 

Dave

No worries Dave, I appreciate your help 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, mja said:

No worries Dave, I appreciate your help 

More than happy to help, and nice to see you've kept the pair together.

The Winchester 1917 is far rarer than the standard Remington that is commonly found, and the Chapman is one of the manufacturers that produced far less than say wilkinson etc, so you've done quite well.

 

Dave.

Edited by Dave66
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 24/08/2018 at 22:10, MikeyH said:

 ... My wife has accused me of  sometimes buying bayonets because I feel sorry for them.

 

On 24/08/2018 at 23:40, Dave66 said:

The giving bayonets a good home look has also been noted in this household!, well, just has to be done at times.

 

Sounds familiar...:rolleyes: My SWMBO could not beleive that I came back from my just-ended 'study/research' stay in the UK without a bayonet! Only because, as I did not inform her, the Turkish Customs sometimes X-ray incoming bags :ph34r: and don't like pointed things coming in as they might go to arm certain unspecified terrorist groups! But I always look around the local Antika Pazar, altough truth-to tell, I have almost all the ones I need now, just looking for better examples only!

 

Julian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Winchester 1917 bayonet was in fact produced for the Model 1917 rifle in .30-06 calibre, that rifle of course being based on the P14 that the US companies had just stopped producing. It would have been in US service and come to Britain during WW2 as aid. I believe that the majority of Home Guard rifles were the Model 1917. It could have seen service in WW1 in France with the Americans, they had more Model 1917's than Springfields.

It is quite common to find the bayonets in the HG frogs, so looks like a lot of HG bayonets did not get turned in and were kept as souvenirs.

Cheers,

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note also that the M.1917 will fit the Winchester M.1897 'Trench (Shot-)Gun' as used by USA forces for trench warfare and also, IIRC, in Vietnam!

 

And I agree with the observation that many of these M.1917 bayonets (in fact almost all that I have seen!) are in the so-called 'Home Guard' frog and so were 'souvenired'...

Edited by trajan
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...