Nutting Posted 2 June , 2019 Share Posted 2 June , 2019 I have a MK.II, Patt. '88 bayonet winging its way to me from South Africa (seems like reasonable Boer War provenance!) which appears to have a stamp on the pommel of 'D.6' over '1336'. Anyone have any ideas about 'D.6'? Sorry about the quality of the photo, but it's all I've got at present. Thanks, Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 June , 2019 Share Posted 2 June , 2019 6th Dragoons seems possible - in the 1897 regulations. But did they have rifles/carbines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutting Posted 2 June , 2019 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2019 19 minutes ago, trajan said: 6th Dragoons seems possible - in the 1897 regulations. But did they have rifles/carbines? Trajan, I haven’t seen any unit marks which consist of a single letter. Guards regiments are generally abbreviated to xG, where x is the initial of the word preceding ‘Guards’, I for Irish, W for Welch, etc. I am, of course, happy to be proved wrong! Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 2 June , 2019 Share Posted 2 June , 2019 (edited) Nigel, I have attached the 1907 Instructions for Armourers. P.79 shows the abbreviation in question; Dragoons = D, so Trajan wins this bet! Regards, JMB [Edit: I did post the relevant pages from the 1912 Instructions on here (last year ?), and 4th Gordons very kindly tidied it up for me. If you search my/his activity the thread should turn up.] Instr. for Armrs. 1897.pdf Edited 2 June , 2019 by JMB1943 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutting Posted 2 June , 2019 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2019 12 minutes ago, JMB1943 said: Nigel, I have attached the 1907 Instructions for Armourers. P.79 shows the abbreviation in question; Dragoons = D, so Trajan wins this bet! Regards, JMB [Edit: I did post the relevant pages from the 1912 Instructions on here (last year ?), and 4th Gordons very kindly tidied it up for me. If you search my/his activity the thread should turn up.] Instr. for Armrs. 1897.pdf 7.57 MB · 5 downloads JMB, I stand corrected; I’m very happy to be educated (which is what I enjoy about this forum)! I’ll keep a copy of that file. 6DG were in the Boer War virtually all the way through, so I’m happy with my purchase. I’ve just got to wait for it to arrive now! Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 2 June , 2019 Share Posted 2 June , 2019 Nigel, Very nice provenance!! https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/262673-unit-markings-on-p1907-bayonets/?tab=comments#comment-2662305 will give you the 1912 Instructions. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutting Posted 2 June , 2019 Author Share Posted 2 June , 2019 47 minutes ago, JMB1943 said: Nigel, Very nice provenance!! https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/262673-unit-markings-on-p1907-bayonets/?tab=comments#comment-2662305 will give you the 1912 Instructions. Regards, JMB JMB, Thanks, Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 2 June , 2019 Share Posted 2 June , 2019 Unlikely I think to be a Dragoon Guards regimental marking from the Boer War. The main reason would be that during the Boer War the cavalry regiments were armed with the Magazine Lee-Metford Carbine or the Magazine Lee-Enfield Cavalry Carbine neither of which could mount a bayonet. Then there is the matter of the stamping itself which would also not fit with a British Cavalry regiment. Firstly the rack number is exceedingly high for a Cavalry regiment which usually numbered between 500-600 men. And secondly the British manner for stamping numbered regiments or battalions always had the numeral/s preceding the letters. So I am thinking this marking is not British ... but Indian Army could be more a possibility. It will be interesting to check the rest of the bayonet for any other markings which may provide a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 June , 2019 Share Posted 3 June , 2019 I wondered about the high number myself, and why the 6 came after the D, and I wasn't certain what the Dragoons carried into the field. However 'D' is for Dragoons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutting Posted 3 June , 2019 Author Share Posted 3 June , 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, shippingsteel said: Unlikely I think to be a Dragoon Guards regimental marking from the Boer War. The main reason would be that during the Boer War the cavalry regiments were armed with the Magazine Lee-Metford Carbine or the Magazine Lee-Enfield Cavalry Carbine neither of which could mount a bayonet. Then there is the matter of the stamping itself which would also not fit with a British Cavalry regiment. Firstly the rack number is exceedingly high for a Cavalry regiment which usually numbered between 500-600 men. And secondly the British manner for stamping numbered regiments or battalions always had the numeral/s preceding the letters. So I am thinking this marking is not British ... but Indian Army could be more a possibility. It will be interesting to check the rest of the bayonet for any other markings which may provide a clue. I must admit that the numeral after the initial, rather than the other way around, had me stumped as well. From the only photos to hand, one face of the ricasso has WILKINSON LONDON and the bend test X, while the other face appears to be blank. I’m surprised to see the maker’s name and the bend test mark on the same face. There is a degree of corrosion to the blade, so there may well be other markings that I cannot make out at this time. Nigel Edited 3 June , 2019 by Nutting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 3 June , 2019 Share Posted 3 June , 2019 8 hours ago, Nutting said: I must admit that the numeral after the initial, rather than the other way around, had me stumped as well. From the only photos to hand, one face of the ricasso has WILKINSON LONDON and the bend test X, while the other face appears to be blank. I’m surprised to see the maker’s name and the bend test mark on the same face. There is a degree of corrosion to the blade, so there may well be other markings that I cannot make out at this time. Nigel Nigel, I have a P.03, similarly stamped on the right ricasso with Wilkinson London and crown/49/W inspector’s stamp, but no X-bend marking. The left ricasso is totally blank. However, it does have Urdu script on both of the tangs; this suggests use in or close to India. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutting Posted 3 June , 2019 Author Share Posted 3 June , 2019 52 minutes ago, JMB1943 said: Nigel, I have a P.03, similarly stamped on the right ricasso with Wilkinson London and crown/49/W inspector’s stamp, but no X-bend marking. The left ricasso is totally blank. However, it does have Urdu script on both of the tangs; this suggests use in or close to India. Regards, JMB JMB, Until I see the bayonet 'in hand' I can't be sure, but the apparent lack of markings apart from maker's name and X bend test suggests that mine is a unit purchase, rather than issue from WD stores? It's being posted to me this week, so I won't be able to investigate further until it arrives. I just HATE waiting for parcels! Off to the UK mainland shortly, and I hope to have a look around one or more bric-a-brac shops - always hoping for a hidden gem. N. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now