Pattern 1888 bayonet marked 'MTS'

[Nutting]

On - yet another - Pattern '88 bayonet, a unit stamp of MTS.  This bayonet has at least 3, possibly 4, unit markings, but MTS is the only one I can decipher at present.  

 

Anyone have any ideas?  MT= Motor Transport?

 

Nigel  

[trajan]

Unit markings should be on the metal bits not th grips - a soldier's initials perhaps? What are the other ones - if you post them we can all have a go!

[Nutting]

Trajan,

 

The MTS on the grip is stamped ‘consistent & official style’, not cut/scratched as a name probably would be.  On balance I’m happy it’s a unit marking.  The other markings are so faint that I haven’t been able to photograph them satisfactorily.  I’ll post more photos of the bayonet generally and try to include the marks.

 

Nigel

[trajan]

On 19/07/2019 at 18:52, Nutting said:

The MTS on the grip is stamped ‘consistent & official style’, not cut/scratched as a name probably would be.  On balance I’m happy it’s a unit marking.  The other markings are so faint that I haven’t been able to photograph them satisfactorily.  I’ll post more photos of the bayonet generally and try to include the marks.

 

Interesting! Excuse me asking, but can you determine if actually stamped and not branded?

 

Julian

[Nutting]

On 02/08/2019 at 12:23, trajan said:

 

Interesting! Excuse me asking, but can you determine if actually stamped and not branded?

 

Julian

Julian,

 

You are excused!   My initial response was immediately to say “stamped“, but on close inspection, whilst the wood has been compressed, the letters are quite dark which could be an accumulation of dirt or burning. Bottom line: I can’t actually say with certainty.  I’m leaning towards burning (but with a heated metal stamp – it certainly wasn’t done freehand).  What lies behind your question?

 

Nigel

[Michael Haselgrove]

Hi Nigel,

Thanks for your post.

Whereas Julian is obviously correct that the marking should be in the metal in the usual place, I have a P'07 HQR dated 11 '08 with 2 EKR stamped into the wood of the right-hand grip and 254 on the other side.  The size of the letters/numerals, as on your example, is relatively large when compared with the size of the usual markings stamps.  I suppose this method of marking may have been used when stamps suitable for use on metal were not available? 

As an aside, in "The Collector and Researchers Guide to the Great War" Howard Williamson at page 201 illustrates two P'07 bayonets marked to 7th Battalion Royal West Kent Regiment on the right ricassos so non-standard markings are not unknown.

The only reference to MTS I can find if for Merchant Taylor's School - see page 100 of The Broad Arrow by Ian Skennerton. 

Regards,

Michael.

[Nutting]

32 minutes ago, Michael Haselgrove said:

Hi Nigel,

Thanks for your post.

Whereas Julian is obviously correct that the marking should be in the metal in the usual place, I have a P'07 HQR dated 11 '08 with 2 EKR stamped into the wood of the right-hand grip and 254 on the other side.  The size of the letters/numerals, as on your example, is relatively large when compared with the size of the usual markings stamps.  I suppose this method of marking may have been used when stamps suitable for use on metal were not available? 

As an aside, in "The Collector and Researchers Guide to the Great War" Howard Williamson at page 201 illustrates two P'07 bayonets marked to 7th Battalion Royal West Kent Regiment on the right ricassos so non-standard markings are not unknown.

The only reference to MTS I can find if for Merchant Taylor's School - see page 100 of The Broad Arrow by Ian Skennerton. 

Regards,

Michael.

Michael,

 

Thanks for that.  Yes, I am not surprised that non-standard markings occur.  Someone stamped in the 'wrong' location, got a rollocking for it, but by then the job was done!  I have a Patt.'88 purchased from South Africa which is marked 'D.6'.  '6.D' might make sense as "6th (Inniskilling) Dragoons", but 'D.6' is an issue.   MTS for Merchant Taylor's makes sense if it was acquired by their OTC unit, although there is no back-to-back R which you might expect in those circumstances.  All interesting stuff...

 

Regards,

Nigel.

[trajan]

16 hours ago, Nutting said:

... You are excused!   I’m leaning towards burning (but with a heated metal stamp – it certainly wasn’t done freehand).  What lies behind your question?

 

Thanks! I was thinking of the crowned inspection marks sometimes branded into the grips of P.1888'1 and P.1903's, and less frequently of P.1907's. 'Branding' just somehow seems more 'official' than 'stamping' - don't ask me why! And, of course, certainly easier to do if a mark needs to be permament.