Guest Posted 5 February , 2020 Share Posted 5 February , 2020 Hi, I am trying to identify this bayonet. It is marked "C" "X" on one side of the blade and "04" on the other. The Blade is 12 inches in length. The overall length is 16.5 inches. The top has the number "40241" engraved. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, DBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 5 February , 2020 Share Posted 5 February , 2020 Hello DBA, Welcome to the forum. This looks like a British Pattern 1903 bayonet. 40241 on the pommel is an inventory number; there seems to be a letter, F or P, above the number. X on the ricasso is the proof of the bending test. 04 may be the year of manufacture (19)04. The bayonet lacks the crown and royal cypher, and the broad arrow (govt ownership) so was not made for the British Army. This lack of official markings shows that this bayonet was probably made for private purchase, i.e. for a volunteer unit. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OLD ROBIN HOOD Posted 5 February , 2020 Share Posted 5 February , 2020 Greetings from Sherwood Forest I agree with JMB , a very nice example of a private purchase Patt 1903 bayonet and in such good condition , does it have a scabbard ?,if so could you post a picture of it please ?. Old Robin Hood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 6 February , 2020 Share Posted 6 February , 2020 (edited) 16 hours ago, JMB1943 said: This looks like a British Pattern 1903 bayonet. This may "look" like a P1903 in its overall shape, but it certainly IS NOT a British Pattern 1903 bayonet ... it looks like a foreign copy to me. There are noticeable differences in the blade, ricasso, grinding and spine together with the crossguard, timber grips, pommel and clearance hole. Too say nothing of the markings which are unlike anything seen on British bayonets. It could possibly have been made in Afghanistan who were once known to make their own very rough copies of the British issue bayonet, plus some examples that were of better quality and standard. Cheers, SS Edited 6 February , 2020 by shippingsteel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 9 February , 2020 Share Posted 9 February , 2020 On 06/02/2020 at 09:26, shippingsteel said: This may "look" like a P1903 in its overall shape, but it certainly IS NOT a British Pattern 1903 bayonet ... it looks like a foreign copy to me. There are noticeable differences in the blade, ricasso, grinding and spine together with the crossguard, timber grips, pommel and clearance hole. Good points SS. But note that the 'C' is very similar in size and font to the 'CCC' mark and the 'C[star]C' marks used by an unknown maker of commercial P.1888's for volunteer units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OLD ROBIN HOOD Posted 9 February , 2020 Share Posted 9 February , 2020 Greetings from a very windswept Sherwood Forest. I would like to make a few comments on SS's observations about the illustrated 1903 Pattern bayonet. Whilst this bayonet is not made for issue to the British Forces it is none the less of the 1903 Pattern. It is a Volunteer / Commercial bayonet which I believe was made in Britain. I have for some years included in my collection commercial bayonets, regrettably I do not have a 1903 but I do have several 1888's which utilise the same pattern of blade. Some of these do not have the finish of ordinance types and a poorer finish including grind marks is not unusual. This however does not mean that they have been produced abroad. The markings on the blade coincide with those found on ordinance examples as JMB points out. 04 for the year in which it was made (1904) and X on the ricasso is proof of the bending test. The quality of manufacture of the hilt from the photograph appears to be very good with an excellent metal to metal fit where the catch fits into the pommel. Looking at the wooden grips I would say that they may have at some time been replaced. So I repeat that this is a nice example of a PRIVATE PURCHACE Pattern 1903 bayonet which I would be proud to have in my own collection. Old Robin Hood (militaria collector since 1958) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 10 February , 2020 Share Posted 10 February , 2020 Well where I come from, cobbling a P1907 pommel and a P1907 crosspiece to a P1888 style blade does not maketh a British Pattern 1903.! Anyone familiar with British bayonets should be able to identify these individual components. No one has yet commented on the pommel stamping. Well it is an F series 5 digit serial number which is usually encountered on a specific type of P1907 bayonet. And the pommel shape very closely resembles that same specific type of P1907 bayonet. You can even date a particular bayonet to when it was manufactured from this very serial number.! Without holding this example in my hands for closer inspection I won't say definitely what this is ... but it is these kinds of little details that REALLY set my alarm bells ringing.! Cheers, SS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 10 February , 2020 Share Posted 10 February , 2020 Having set the ball rolling with my initial "looks like a P.1903", it looks like it is now my turn. Inspection of the grips on my own P.1903 shows that the wood is very similar to that shown here. I do also have an authentic P.'88 three-rivet type that has been severely ground down and bears the marks of it; so poor finish alone is not an adequate definition of copy. Also, regarding poor workmanship, Skennerton (BCB, p. 173) discusses some P.88's as "apparently for the export market, are of poorer quality, and were hand made." However, as S>S points out the cross-guard and pommel are both of the P.07 model, so it does appear more likely than not to be an Afghan copy. Well it is an F series 5 digit serial number which is usually encountered on a specific type of P1907 bayonet. And the pommel shape very closely resembles that same specific type of P1907 bayonet. You can even date a particular bayonet to when it was manufactured from this very serial number.! Can you elaborate on these three claims? We would all like to see the chapter and verse where this info is spelled out. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 14 February , 2020 Share Posted 14 February , 2020 Yes, I would like to see the evidence for this 'F series of 5 digit serial number' - and what specific type of 1907 bayonet it comes on would be of interest and how you can date it from the number! I don't expect to see anything though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 14 February , 2020 Share Posted 14 February , 2020 (edited) . Edited 14 February , 2020 by shippingsteel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 14 February , 2020 Share Posted 14 February , 2020 https://www.awm.gov.au/articles/blog/australian-issued-rifles-and-bayonets-first-world-war https://www.lithgowsafmuseum.org.au/factsheets/fs001_smle_markings.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 15 February , 2020 Share Posted 15 February , 2020 22 hours ago, shippingsteel said: https://www.awm.gov.au/articles/blog/australian-issued-rifles-and-bayonets-first-world-war https://www.lithgowsafmuseum.org.au/factsheets/fs001_smle_markings.pdf Many thanks SS! But now the mystery deepens... According to that first web-link "F00001 to F39580 (1944 – 1945) Manufactured Orange SAF-3 F39581 to F40580 (1953) Manufactured Lithgow SAF (machinery trials)" So, a WW2 period P.1907 pommel on a P1888-type blade. How very odd! What an antique dealer might call a marriage, but these usually combines parts of the same type. Certainly not a marriage made in heaven! BUT, as it is, with that number it is one of these 'machinery trials ones - wonder what they were doing? Trying to convert old stocksfor re-use? Whatever, a bit of a rarity, methinks! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 15 February , 2020 Share Posted 15 February , 2020 S>S, Thanks for posting that info! Trajan, Skennerton (Austrln. Serv. Bayos, p. 33) says that the run of 1953-6 was more of a test to prove the original Pratt & Whitney machinery from 1912. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 20 February , 2020 Share Posted 20 February , 2020 re Picture 10. Take that mans name! -- Rust in the muzzle. Cheers, SW. 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