Imperial German Bayonet’s from my Collection

[AndyBsk]

Interesting what is added per hand into the origin text of manual, one word is clear there Kavallerie, the other Korps, the second row is Kraftwagen????

so there was done change by using not script K but normal latin letter K instead of older 1909 manual.

Edited 11 December , 2021 by AndyBsk

[trajan]

3 hours ago, AndyBsk said:

Interesting what is added per hand into the origin text of manual, one word is clear there Kavallerie, the other Korps, the second row is Kraftwagen????

so there was done change by using not script K but normal latin letter K instead of older 1909 manual.

Hi Andy, 

You have touched upon a problem with these documents that some, e.g., SS, is quite unaware of, namely these handwritten corrections. I would never claim to be an expert in these markings, but I do have some knowledge of the relevant literature, plus - as you said in a previous post - they in theory DO follow a logical and official pattern - but there are always exceptions to test that rule!

That aside, as you have noted, reading these corrections is not always that easy. I read the first correction in the section I posted as 'Kavellerie, Korps' replacing the original use of a script (italic) 'K' for these two army units - see the next line. That amendment, by the way in my 1911 updated copy of DVE 185 or 1909 refers this correction of the 'K' section, on DVE 185, p.13, in or December 1910.... See below. 

The second correction begins, as far as I can make out, KraftfahrwagenXXXX', not a Kolone or a Staffeln, or an Abteilung, but something apparently with a 'g' in it. 

Well, as SS noted above, he has been 'banging on' about this 'K' mark for years. and so with Andy's very experienced and informed opinion on record on this topic, perhaps he will now be happy!

Trajan

[ersatz]

trajan, Andy, and participants:  After reading the additional explanations and documents on the topic, I now understand the complexity associated with the interpretation of some regimentals.  I have been collecting on & off for some 50 years now, but my interest in the Imperial German regimental markings has slowly developed over the past few years now.  Yes, it appears that the "regulations" are extremely helpful to those who are avid researchers & historians of this hobby.  I am very happy to be a part of this forum as many members have helped to further my interest and knowledge of various pieces in my collection and those presented for discussion.   Thanks to All.........  Ted

[trajan]

1 hour ago, ersatz said:

trajan, Andy, and participants:  After reading the additional explanations and documents on the topic, I now understand the complexity associated with the interpretation of some regimentals. 

Cheers Ted - thanks for understanding so well how difficult this matter of German unit markings is in reality as opposed to theory, but also note the interesting ramifcations regarding their use. The one that led to this discussion is a good case in point - SS's beloved interpretation of the 'K' abbreviation aside!

The S.71/98 was intended for artillery use, not for infantry regiments. Most of the 15 or so I know of are for artillery units... Here we have one marked for an infantry regiment - only the second or third one I know off, but all (IIRC) issued to infantry ersatz / reserve units. But in 1914, as these reserve units were called up for service the shortage of regular bayonets in armoury stocks meant the re-use of what ever was available, and so, shortly after the emergency 'Erstatz' production programme was begun (although that was also motivated by the need to provide short bayonets for cavalry units). I explain some of this in my corrections on p.14 of C.Mery's 2nd English edition of his Ersatz bayonets. 

Julian

[AndyBsk]

hello Julian, the additional script is in german sutterlin font, but i assume there is Kraftwagenpark as second row moved from lower script letter K to normal latin letter K, and the Kraftwagenkolonne was added in italic K instead.

So the bayonets as S71/98 with artillery blade and here presented S98/02 even destined for Pioniers were in start of war assigned to new formation as were RIR 233 - 235 offcoarse, this was done by building of the unit, but later in war was this equipment replaced with normal proper models. Similar models mainly the S98/02 was too heavy for infantry units, but i assume in that time were not enough proper modells avialable, same as the ASG88/98 as replacements were in preparation in autumn of 1914.

Edited 11 December , 2021 by AndyBsk

[Steve1871]

Bayonet #58.       
12/19/21

S.98/02 sawback 

Spine   “O”.   04.  For King Otto/ Bavarian I believe, 04 for 1904 of coarse   
Maker.   V.C. Schilling       
 
First off, this bayonet was cleaned through out. The grips , being dark look untouched. I have posted my two other 98/02’s. This one is different in that this one is the only one I have found with a flash guard.  Metal has light peppering from light rust but still good condition, grips have some dents but still solid. Both the screws and washers are clearly marked. No scabbard. Would look great with a 98AZ stuck on the end of it

[trajan]

That's seen some use, and not for cutting wood! 

Julian

PS: I have read about the Colorado boycott... 

[AndyBsk]

This bayonet is pretty scarce, as bavarian S98/02 were introduced much later as in Prussia, i assume the switch to S98/05 was delayed by them too.

The grip screws looks corect proofed, possible the flashguard was added in war when used with short carbine Kar98AZ, that would be prevent the smashing of grips by shooting blast.

[Steve1871]

Bayonet #59.         
01/03/22 

S84/98aA  standard blade

Spine.     W over 89 date.        
maker.  Weyersberg Kirchbaum.    
Unit.      72.R.R.6.2       

the grips are a little beat up, original screws and washers have faint remains on Fakturs, no scabbard. I got this because it was inexpensive, but I found the unit stamping, interesting and puzzling?

The second “R” has slight trace of an older stamp, also, this letter looks double stamped like the strike bounced once. That said, these two “R” are different stamp/punch dies. The first one is slightly smaller, the top of first R comes down sooner, the second one is a strait line on top before it curves

If an armorer had a punch (R) in hand, strike the first one. Why would he switch to another punch die of same letter. ?

If first R were ment to be a small r, they had smaller letter punches for those. Hope this is not a big deal about nothing here

[AndyBsk]

Looks like nice period Erfurt rework to S84/98aA from older S71/84 bayonet made by WKC, question is the unit new or remains of older unit as the crossguard is old. 72 Infanterie Regiment ? or Reserve Regiment, 6.company, weapon nr.2

[Steve1871]

Do you agree with me Andy , on the different “R”’s.  Looks like both are capital R, but different punch/stamp

[AndyBsk]

Yes the second R is different, anyway for Rekruten Depot is this with 6.Company not real, so even by missing cursive letters it could be Reserve Regiment instead of Rekruten Depot. As mentioned the unit stamp could be older used with S71/84 configuration, not all old units on S84/98aA bayonets were striked out, or filled from surface metall. In Williams book are more samples visible.

Edited 4 January , 2022 by AndyBsk

[Steve1871]

Bayonet #60.        
1/9/22

S.98nA. Quill/Pipe back   2 piece grips

Unit  168.R.7.243      168th Infantry Regiment, 7th Company, waff 243, do not know which “Army” it was assigned to

Spine.    Crown. Over W. 06 date.    
Maker.    W.K. & C.    Solingen.        
no scabbard         
 

A recent buy,          
Overall very good plus, grips are great, but a little dark, stamps on pommel, and screws/washers. Very nice blade. I can not help myself when I find one of these pointy things with inexpensive price, a weakness of mine

 

[AndyBsk]

Looks like untouched condition piece. Nice in all places marked.

[Steve1871]

Bayonet #61       
1/17/22

S.71 HF.  Hirschfanger.   
NavaI believe, most were.  
 

Date  crown/W/72   Crown ect.    
maker   P.D. Luneschloss. Solingen.       
 

The unit markings are confusing for me.   
Has clearly G. S  2. 237.     
but before and between the S and 2 there is a smaller , what looks like an 8c struck together. I never seen anything like it and  both are identical . This odd marking could be part of an earlier marking but that also, makes no sense to me, Why erase part of a unit and have both old and new markings equally spaced out

I have done a section in this ongoing post, on Hirschfangers, but anyway, The Hirschfangers were originally for the M65 Dreyse rifle, many were bushed/ thin ring inside muzzle ring to fit the S.71Jaeger, They also fit the Gew.88 rifle and were used in Germany at some Naval stations. Guard duty and such in beginning .  . The converted/ bushed ones were then S.65/71Hf and best way identify is the grips were pinned using 3 pins.  New made ones for the M.71 like this one have 5 pins

Edited 4 April , 2022 by Steve1871

[AndyBsk]

Nice piece looks like a well stamped, the & is twice on crossguard, the GS could be for Garde Schuetzen Battalion, 2.company weapon nr.227. on other side was probably remains of older unit stamp?

Edited 17 January , 2022 by AndyBsk

[Steve1871]

I still do not know what that mark is that looks like an 8 with a small c joined to it. It stamped twice on the unit marking.  
Andy, it makes no sense to erase only part of an old unit, leaving these two mystery letter/ numbers intact, clearly struck and add new numbers spaced between them

[Steve1871]

Bayonet # 62.         
1/24/22

 S.71. Kadet 

I do not know if solely private purchase or may even been used in military schools for bayonet practice?. Someone else on forum did a post, I did not find. I remember there were either no pics or no detail ones. Just goes with the “ Family” here ( I.G. 71)       
Notice how the whole Kadet was simply a slightly reduced size, pommel, guard, blade overall and thickness. The standard S.71 and the cheap “ Walking Out/ parade/dress” type, that come in several types are common.

I think most people selling one think it simply is a standard bayonet. I did not know I had one for a long time, just sitting in the pile, in a safe. I found it only when try do photos of my collection and a side by side look. I do not remember ever seeing an ad selling a S.71 Kadet before

 

[AndyBsk]

Very nice and interesting piece, is the MRD smaller ? the piece is certainly lightened construction, could be a dress piece or a cadet piece, remains a question did there existed smaller kadet rifles, as the locking distance on that piece should be shorter about 8-10mm in lenght.

[Steve1871]

It has mortise slot but as you pointed out Andy,the leaf spring is too short. So it would not lock on the rifle. No, there was not a smaller Kadet rifle of the M.71 Mauser rifle.    
As seen in period photo’s, The Artillery photo that Julian showed awhile back ( common pic) the Side arms, no muzzle ring or slot were used by artillery units. To include the M64,  M 68, both patterned to look like the S.71, the second had curved blade. And the lion head M.92 artillery PFM. Again, side arm only. So the  S.71 Kadet like mine here could have very well joined the others. We collectors will never know for sure 

[trajan]

On 25/01/2022 at 09:52, Steve1871 said:

 S.71. Kadet ... Someone else on forum did a post, I did not find. I remember there were either no pics or no detail ones. 

 

Might be this one on an old and now-locked thread by Shipping Steel -   https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/160916-german-m1871-bayonet/page/2/#comment-2048406

I requested details but these were not provided...

[Steve1871]

Bayonet #63.       
2/6/22

S.71PFM.    Pioneerfashinenmesser 

This term is a broad one covering, usually Saw backed bayonets, as well as small sword type ( Side arms) that are not bayonets. The German Artillery units had most of those, even in beginning of Great War, as seen in a few photos. Saw backs were not new. England had saw backs on their Martini Henry carbines in the P.79 saw backed Cutless bayonet among others. The concept of the Pioneerfashinenmesser or simply PFM for short was a logical one of creating a little larger, heavier blade to combine a bayonet and a saw for cutting small brush, hiding artillery, camouflage and all instead of a soldier carrying both bayonet and a saw

Spine  Crown/W/91     Crown ?  ?       
Maker  E F  Horster    Solingen      
Unit      3.P..L.3.142    
Unit/Scabbard 11.P.5.111.
 

A carefull look, and I see the remains of an older unit. Under the (L) I see F.A.  Part of an Artillery unit. Brass pommel has nice mellow aging, with 2 crowned Frakturs.     
 

Scabbard, not matching, has not shrunk, but short area of stitching has come open slightly. Both brass staples intact and throat had Fraktur’s.    These PFM’s are not rare, except the Bavarian’s. Just expensive. The scabbards are rare to find. Hope you like😊

I been searching for 2-3 months now, I had found a good pic on line of a German guard with a Gew.88 with a S.71PFM marching Russian P.O.W.’s , just can not find it, still looking

Edited 8 February , 2022 by Steve1871

[bert.f]

Hi. Steve

very nice PFM

3.P.E.3.142- Pionier- Bataillon von Rauch ( Brandenburgisches) Nr.3, Ersatz-Bataillon , 3- kompnie, nr weapon 142

11.P.5.111- Kurhessisches Pionier- Bataillon , Nr 11, kompanie 5 , weapon nr. 111

 

Edited 7 February , 2022 by bert.f

[AndyBsk]

Same opinion as Bert, i see there no link to any artillery units, the P speaks clearly for Pionier Battalions, PFM by germans PionierFaschinenMesser.

[zuluwar2006]

Excellent pfm Steve!!!!