Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

NorthStaffsPOW

Vickers P1907, South African Acceptance Stamp

Recommended Posts

NorthStaffsPOW

Hi all. I was pleased to pick this up the other day. 5/18 dated P1907 made by Vickers. With the added bonus (for me at least) of having a South African acceptance mark. It came in the later model scabbard so I assume this may have been issued during the Second World War. I added the South African frog (which I picked up at the same location) and believe it to be roughly the correct era for this set up as it has the U and broad arrow stamp rather than the later UM mark. Any comments are welcome. Many thanks.

 

 

Vickers P1907 1.jpg

Vickers P1907 2.jpg

Vickers P1907 5.jpg

Vickers P1907 7.jpg

Vickers P1907 10.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trajan

Very nice! I will post soon my latest P1907 HQ find, marked for NSWales.:whistle: BUT, musn't hijack this thread with its lovely pair of goodies! Frogs for these ones must be rather like hens teeth? How I miss SS as I'd like his comments on this one of mine when I post it. :unsure:

 

 

Edited by trajan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave66

Nice honest example north staffs, works well in that frog, thanks for sharing.

I must admit to having a couple of these frogs in the spares box, given the cost (and sourcing) of the British stuff in my early collecting days these were a much cheaper display option. Replaced them with the correct British pattern eventually so they languish in darkness...just waiting to find the correct bayonet to suit the frog.

 

Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sgt-maj

Congratulation's  'NorthStaffsPOW', a extremely nice blade indeed. In all my decades of collecting, I've managed to pick up several 'Vickers 07's' for my collection, but this one is a first for me. The South African Acceptance Stamp is beauty, and has already been added to my info files The scabbard is obviously a WW2 addition, and I would surmise by model of locket and chape… quite a late one.

 

Nice find indeed. Well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JMB1943

NStaffs,

 

Very nice example!

First time that I have seen an inverted arrow inside the U.

 

Regards,

JMB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NorthStaffsPOW

Thanks for the comments guys.  I had guessed the scabbard was a later addition so I wasn't too worried about pairing it with the slightly later frog as well, as I believe this is the combo that would have been used while in service. 

 

I'm glad that you have found the SA stamp interesting as I do. I suppose the service career of most of the Vickers P1907s was post war as they were a bit late to the party for WW1. 

 

Many thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sgt-maj

Since posting my previous comment, I've delved into my reference library, specifically seeking out this particular publication by Skennerton (1st edition : 1993)...

The reference in question which refers to LOC: 17883 : 19th November 1915 / Scabbard, Sword-bayonet, Pattern 1907, No.1, Mk II.

 

'Modification which may be embodied in future manufacture. In future manufacture, scabbards of the above-mentioned pattern (LoC 14678, 15271 and 17623) may be modified as follows:-

Furniture.

A circular, instead of a pear shaped stud fitted to the locket. Ends of locket and chape left square instead of being figured.

Leather.

Seam left high, also stained and waxed without high finish. Interchangeability of components issued as spare is not affected by these modifications.'

 

It has to be noted here that this LOC is purely advisory, and would certainly account for the reason as to why the -round- frog stud is so rarely seen on WW1 scabbard examples. It would also be fair to say that this also bares out the reason as to why scabbard examples such as this are commonly referred to as WW2 issued. Allowing for the reasonable assumption that manufacturers were left to their own devices on this modification, I think that they would have weighed up the comparisons of continuing with present production / re-tooling to the new modification + disruption of production / assessment of total existing stocks. History + the overall numbers of these scabbards encountered, certainly verifies the result.

 

SAM_9536.JPG

Edited by sgt-maj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NorthStaffsPOW

Thanks for the Sgt-maj. I did not know the round stud was proposed so early. I always thought it was an inter-war modification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sgt-maj
51 minutes ago, NorthStaffsPOW said:

"... I always thought it was an inter-war modification."

 

From my experience, the majority of collectors think in one of two ways... either as you do, or that the round-stud is a WW2 modification. Prior to my being attached in 1982 to the 'School of Infantry', Warminster, England, I had always of the opinion in line with yourself. However, information obtained at the S-of-I, and the purchase of the illustrated publication, both led to the confirmation result for me personally. For several years now, my question in connection to the round frog stud has been... 'Who was the first manufacturer of the round frog stud?' To date, I have had no clear evidence, but am sure that problem will be solved in due course with a little more diligent research..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave66

An old thread I know, but this thread is very interesting.....any ww2 manufacturer codes on the scabbard NorthStaffs?

 

Dave.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NorthStaffsPOW

Sgt-maj, this thread has definitely changed my opinion on the round stud scabbards. Seems that they can be legitimately called WW1, although as you say, more diligent research is required.

 

Dave, no markings that I can discern unfortunately. So I think I am right in saying, according to the thread you posted, that it is an earlier round stud scabbard as it does not have the three rivets near the throat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trajan

My impression always was that the rivet type (and number?) varied from WW1 to post WW1. Don't have Skennerton and Richardson to hand - what do they say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4thGordons

Approved 19th  Nov 1915: (cited LOC above)

1) ends of locket and chape squared instead of figured

2) circular instead of pear shaped frog stud on locket

3) leather seam left high

4) leather without high finish

 

rivets showing or ground flat are illustrated in a photo (with both round and pear shaped studs) and described as "manufacturing variants" rather than officially approved changes.

 

(S & R pp195)

Edited by 4thGordons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NorthStaffsPOW
23 hours ago, 4thGordons said:

Approved 19th  Nov 1915: (cited LOC above)

1) ends of locket and chape squared instead of figured

2) circular instead of pear shaped frog stud on locket

3) leather seam left high

4) leather without high finish

 

rivets showing or ground flat are illustrated in a photo (with both round and pear shaped studs) and described as "manufacturing variants" rather than officially approved changes.

 

(S & R pp195)

Thanks for confirming that 4thGordons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...