MA57 Posted 24 June , 2021 Author Share Posted 24 June , 2021 Just now, peregrinvs said: It’s an inspection stamp. The ‘E’ may stand for Enfield. Ok, thank you so much for all the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 June , 2021 Share Posted 25 June , 2021 The 'E' does stand for Enfield indicating it was inspected by an an Enfield based inspector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 June , 2021 Share Posted 25 June , 2021 (edited) On 23/06/2021 at 16:06, peregrinvs said: It’s a British made 1907 bayonet made by Wilkinson in November 1917. ... The notches denoting a kill thing is probably a bit of a myth. Statistically, it is quite unlikely that it ever stabbed anyone. It's actually a WILKINSON / PALL MALL with the lower line polished out - nobody knows why but there are a fair few about, all late war. The notches, yes a story... Some soldiers may have done that, but... On the other hand, there are an awful lot of accounts of bayonets in use during trench raids, we simply don't have verifiable data to suggest how common this was. GB medic data report very few bayonet wounds being treated, and really only for major battles. I suspect that once bayontted a man was left to die there, and burial parties would not be too bothered about recording how a man died.... Julian Edited 25 June , 2021 by trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March A 1918 local "Lithgow" with 1918 local original frog. Put together 1918 manufacture just in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 9 March Share Posted 9 March 11 hours ago, jacks back said: A 1918 local "Lithgow" with 1918 local original frog. Put together 1918 manufacture just in time. Where is the local online bully critics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 9 March Share Posted 9 March So there's some images of a "crepe" (get in before our resident critique online Aussie type / version/ variation. Being made in Pall Mall it's use could still have been Australian (especially earlier in the war) but would then likely show Australian state acceptance marks (eg 5 is WA I believe without checking) so there usually will be a clear identification. If you look here my collecting peer you will see 1918 bayonet with 1918 frog but upon close knowledgeable inspection it's indicating a WA issued Lithgow pattern 1907 but matched with a QLD frog made at the famous Commonwealth foundry. As is marked on the back. So that's a quick lesson on basic identification for Australian in most situations. However being an online forum with comfortable residents one may enlighten us on my "inadequacies" to provide helpful information for others. Good luck collecting. Someone belittling your collectable really doesn't belong on a online welcoming forum where online bullying is not tolerated. But that's just my opinion so take it with a grain of salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 9 March Share Posted 9 March 1 minute ago, jacks back said: So there's some images of a "crepe" (get in before our resident critique online Aussie type / version/ variation. Being made in Pall Mall it's use could still have been Australian (especially earlier in the war) but would then likely show Australian state acceptance marks (eg 5 is WA I believe without checking) so there usually will be a clear identification. If you look here my collecting peer you will see 1918 bayonet with 1918 frog but upon close knowledgeable inspection it's indicating a WA issued Lithgow pattern 1907 but matched with a QLD frog made at the famous Commonwealth foundry. As is marked on the back. So that's a quick lesson on basic identification for Australian in most situations. However being an online forum with comfortable residents one may enlighten us on my "inadequacies" to provide helpful information for others. Good luck collecting. Someone belittling your collectable really doesn't belong on a online welcoming forum where online bullying is not tolerated. But that's just my opinion so take it with a grain of salt. Live and let live. It's really quite simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 9 March Share Posted 9 March The ones I've seen in local museums with notches that match talked about records (numbers/notches) have usually been on the rifle butt. I've seen for example 7 notches on a soldiers rifle butt for this bayonets rifle. It's unlikely anyway a bayonet would notch up 7. But this bayonet I don't see any purposely notched records/numbers just some wood damage where a chunk has been somehow removed. Soldiers kill counts look very obvious with atleast the numerous notches. Some will be 4 notches followed by the fifth "bunching" them so you read in 5's plus 1-4 extras depending the number. But that would be preference. It's the most likely first learnt counting system for those type things all kids learn and remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattr82 Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March (edited) I myself have personally never seen a rifle in Australia with notches for kill marks but I was sold a rifle that was described as having 'kill notches' which I knew wasn't the case but was merely done to cover up a former inventory number on the butt. It's a nice example of a P1907 bayonet and interesting that it has no Australian stamps on it. Doesn't mean it was never used by Australia however. I have a 1917 EFD bayonet that carries post-WW1 Canadian markings on it however was used by Australian forces somewhere. Probably one of the items that was sent to Nth Africa from Britain once the Canadian DIVs began swapping to No.4s in 1942 hence freeing up equipment to be sent out from Britain. I know that the 9th DIV was rekitted to a full complement of 'War Equipment Table' levels prior to returning in 1943. I see that 1918 Lithgow bayonet is a really good example. That bayonet was originally issued to the 3rd Military District which is a nice touch as well. Nice QLD markings on the frog too! Edited 10 March by Mattr82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March There's one at the Redcliffe museum with 7 clear notches from a known digger donated by family anyone can see mind you a gold coin donation would be well worth it if that kind of stuff interests you. Myself I'm just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March Also Matt there is an Australian marking on the bayonet apart from Lithgow inspection marks etc and that is the Military District number which in this case is a 5 which denotes the state. The frog has the Commonwealth Govt Horse Thingy ma jig. Thanks for your appreciation of the bayonet. I personally don't call any persons bayonet crepe because there all the same. There not like racehorses. Of course condition is a factor but that's a matter of money. Collecting is a personal thing you may wish or not to share. It's just not worth the high horse moment and for what. But I agree. This one's alright for a local mismatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacks back Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March Sorry Matt, my mistake, it certainly is a 3 which is W.A. as far as I remember which is hard getting old. Haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattr82 Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March (edited) I was about to say it would be for 3 Military District (Victoria) as the 5th Military District (WA) reached 8300 (inventory numbers) in March 1918 and 11000 in Oct 1918 and the 3rd Military district had 56000 in August 1918 (I think). - Edited for correct details I'll definitely go up and check that museum out. It's only an hour up the road. I collect SMLEs and bayonets so I'm always wanting to have a squiz at the likes of things like that! Edited 10 March by Mattr82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March I agree with Mattr82 regarding the 1918 Lithgow bayonet. The inventory marking stamped on the crossguard will read 3MD 56411 ... even though the 3 is very faint we know what it should be from observations of other similarly marked bayonets and rifles. The 5th Military District (WA) recorded far fewer than the 3rd Military District (VIC) simply because they were a much smaller State at the time with far fewer people and military personnel. My recorded examples show the 3MD markings ranged from 55*** through to 62*** in 1918, while the 5MD markings ranged from only 10*** to 11***, which means your bayonet cannot possibly be marked to the 5MD with that high number. Cheers, SS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattr82 Posted 10 March Share Posted 10 March (edited) Apologies SS, yes 56000 I should have stated. 56XXX entered 3 MD inventory in August 1918. 57XXX entered 3 MD inventory in December 1918 49XXX entered 3 MD inventory in Nov 1917. Regards, Matt Edited 10 March by Mattr82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navydoc16 Posted 8 April Share Posted 8 April Couple of things- Bayonets were military equipment and owned by the Crown or whichever government they served with- marking one in such a way would be a very easy way to earn a court martial. most bayonets have been used as swords by kids, spurious marks for “battles” won ect are found on many a bayonet that have nothing to do with the war they served in 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