Imperial German S 1898 aA Sawback ~ F.P.3.33. regimental........? ? ?

[trajan]

 

 

14 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

And then there is this photo of the Kamel troops, which is possibly one of the best of the Schutztruppen taken in the field during the Herero War dated 1904, from the Bundesarchiv so a reputable source. Who would have guessed they needed so many Kamel-reiters.? ... 

The original caption states ... "Deutsch-Sudwestafrika Hereroaufstand 1904 Kamelreiterkompanie der deutschen Schutztruppe"  ... so an entire company of camel cavalry  ... funny that doesn't appear more prominently in the "order of battle".! You also see some mounted horseman in that image to the very left. 

A quick update. 

To start with, I have not been able to find a single mention of camels anywhere in the Der Feldzug gegen die Hereros. BUT they are mentioned fairly often in Der Krieg gegen der Hottentot. Indeed, it indicates that while Camels were in use by the Schutztruppe from 1905 or so, a regular section (Zug) of camel troops did not exist before the Simon Kopper campaign of 1908.

E.g., p. 365-366: 'Als eine notwendige Folge der vollständigen Wasserarmut der Kalahari ergab sich nämlich die fast ausschließliche Verwendung von Kamelen, da es sich mit Bestimmtheit voraussehen ließ, daß Pferde und Maultiere, in größerer Zahl derberitten Expedition beigegeben, schnell zugrunde gehen mußten. ... Schon seit 1905 hatte sich am Bai-Weg der Nutzen der Kamele zur Überwindung wasserloser Strecken zwischen Lüderitzbucht und Keetmannshoop erwiesen. Sie konnten dort aber erst entbehrt werden, als der Bahnbau sich Keetmannshoop näherte. Auch aus dem Nordbezirk wurde eine Anzahl Kamele herangezogen. Bis Ende Januar 1908 waren etwa 800 Tiere eingetroffen, so daß alle Truppen an der Kalahari -Grenze , die Erckert für die Expedition bestimmt hatte , damit ausgerüstet werden konnten.' (my emphaisis). This is also stated, in effect, in K.Schwabe's Die Deutschen Kolonien vol.I: Togo - Kamerun - Deutsch-Sudwestafrika (1924), p.99, where it is noted that a "starkes Kamelreiterskorps" was formed for the 'Simon Kopper' expedition.

It looks to me, without admittedly reading both volumes all the way through, that camel troops were only needed by units stationed by or responsible for the Kalahari, i.e., in the Hottentot campaign, and at that only in numbers in 1908+. Thus, the Budesarchiv photo catalogued as showing a camel unit in the Heroian campaign of 1904 as reproduced in SS's post looks to be a case of mistaken identity. 

Trajan

[trajan]

5 hours ago, trajan said:

... If I understand the symbols on p.218 of the 1904 Heroen Krieg volume correctly, only the 3rd and 8th companies of the 1 Feld Regiments were mounted. As is always the case, I am happy to be corrected if wrong!

I should add that the 2 Feld-Regiment had one only mounted company - the 7th under a Hauptmann Preuster. Question: were all the men in these companies mounted? or just a platoon?

[trajan]

31 minutes ago, bert.f said:

Hello,

Information from the "Deutsche Kolonialblatt " 1905 year, the departure to the  South West Afrika, from Hamburg to Swakopmund 23.12.1904,

strength of the transport:

- Stab,1. und 2. Proviantkolonne der 3. ( Proviant) kolonnenabteilung in der Starke von 10 offizieren,1 sanitatsoffiziere, 2 zahlmeistern,1 oberveterinar, 1 buchsenmacher, 27 unteroffizieren,2 sanitatsunteroffizieren, 296 mann und 92 Pferden

- die 4 (Fuhrpark) kolonnenabteilung in der starke von 5 offizieren,8 unteroffizieren, 60 mann

-zur Verstarkung der 1.(Fuhrpark) Kolonnenabteilung ,1 offizier,1 zahlmeisteraspirant, 58 unteroffiziere, 229 mann

Thanks Bert. 

I have checked the organisation chart for the Schutztruppe as this is shown in Der Feldzug gegen die Hereros and there is mention of the Eisenbahn abteilung, Sanitats detachment, Telegraph and signal sections, MG section, and even the Feld-Baekerei kolonne, but no mention of a separate Fuhrparkkolonnen. I guess it was subsumed into the 'Kolonnenabteilung' which is named and its senior officers listed on p. 222.   

Julian

[trajan]

On 03/01/2022 at 15:39, GreyC said:

Could it be a SG 71?

GreyC

Just noticed that nobody answered your query! Yes that's an SG 71. I don't know what the percussion cap rifle is though...

Julian

[GreyC]

Thank you Julian,

my reliable friend!

GreyC

[AndyBsk]

I would personally tend to parade dress S1871 on that photo. Most real similar photos was done by photographer with his propertys avialable at that time.

[GreyC]

Thank you Andy. As a total layman in things like that: Is there a difference between parade dress S1871 and the SG 1871 and if so what?

Best,

GreyC

[AndyBsk]

It looks like a non attachable piece on rifle, as the spring of handle looks like part of handle cast, also non fixable on rifle and the scabbard looks like metall with black paint imitating a leather body. Its easy to tell a dress uniform propriety probably.Dress bayonets were for walking out in parade uniform.

[GreyC]

Great! Thank you.

GreyC

[shippingsteel]

On 06/01/2022 at 22:26, trajan said:

I have checked the organization chart for the Schutztruppe  as this is shown in Der Feldzug gegen die Hereros ...

Was able to find this online and check into it some more. And so it appears that ALL the frontline fighting troops, both the Feld-Regiment Nr.1 and Nr.2, were listed under the documents heading A as shown below, as Berittene Infanterie or Mounted Infantry. 

The Feld-Regiments were then broken into their respective Feld-Kompanies, and from the Battle maps this is how they usually fought ie. 5 F.K. etc 

Also it appears that the 3rd and 8th Kompanie which show a different designation actually included a detachment of light guns or MG, which explains that situation, however the Sutterlin can be problematic.! 

Cheers, SS 

EDIT. Looking further it seems the split rectangle symbol indicates a part unit ie. not full strength, so that is probably closer to the truth. 

Edited 9 January , 2022 by shippingsteel

[trajan]

13 hours ago, AndyBsk said:

I would personally tend to parade dress S1871 on that photo. Most real similar photos was done by photographer with his propertys avialable at that time.

On closer examination, I think Andy is quite right. The leaf-spring and its screw on a service S.71 is about half-way down the hilt fom the pommel, on this one it is much closer to the crossguard. Also, I cannot see a cut in the head of the 'screw'.

Julian   

[trajan]

8 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

... it appears that ALL the frontline fighting troops, both the Feld-Regiment Nr.1 and Nr.2, were listed under the documents heading A as shown below, as Berittene Infanterie or Mounted Infantry. 

... Also it appears that the 3rd and 8th Kompanie which show a different designation actually included a detachment of light guns or MG, which explains that situation, however the Sutterlin can be problematic.! 

EDIT. Looking further it seems the split rectangle symbol indicates a part unit ie. not full strength, so that is probably closer to the truth. 

G'morning SS! 

The script is very straightforward with practice...

Ok, those tactical symbols first - and thanks for posting this page (my scanner is kaput!), perhaps you would post the others also? As I was careful to stress when talking of these my understanding of German tactical symbols (which I have never studied with any rigour!) is that an open rectangle is an infantry unit, and a half-shaded rectangle is a mobile or at least part-mobile unit. MG's don't come into it. If you look at p.220 you will see the symbol for an MG unit - a vertical line with a dot either side. And if you look at p.221 you will see that the same half-shaded symbol is used for the Eingeborene-Abteilung, the local native units... For sure they are not under-strength units... 

I freely confess that I am still uncertain exactly what Berittene Infanterie means in this context. As the reports of both the Hereroan and Hottentot wars talk in places of mounted units operating with and alongside footsoldiers, my impression was that this must mean a part-mounted unit. Not cavalry, not infantry, but a unit of infantry with a mounted element - Berittente. I am perfectly happy to be corrected if necessary. But otherwise it becomes difficult to explain passages such as the following: 

p.63 - Der Umstand, daß nur ein ganz kleiner Teil der Abteilung mangelhaft beritten gemacht 

and 

Die 1. Kompagnie — Hauptmann Fischcl — war am 13. Februar in Windhuk Die angelangt, hatte dort sich mit Wagen und Vorräten versehen, ihre Offiziere beritten gemacht und einige Schutztruppenreiter zugeteilt erhalten...

p.66 - Er bestimmte hierzu die berittene Abteilung, ...

p.84 - Hauptmann Puder beschloß darauf, seinen Marsch in der Richtung auf Klein-Barmen fortzusetzen, und brach am 4. März 5 °° morgens dorthin auf; voraus marschierten die Berittenen unter Oberleutnant Ritter , dann folgte die 5. Feldkompagnie ...

p.88 - daß die durch ein sechsstündiges Gefecht erschöpfte, unberittene Truppe ihn nicht mehr erreichen konnte

BUT, then we read: 

p.94 - Von der Infanterie waren nur die alten Schutztruppen-Kompagnien (die 1., 2., 4.) sowie ein Teil der 5. und 6. beritten.

YET that is followed by:

p.97 - Ehe dieser indessen näher heranzudrängen vermochte, war auch schon die Maschinengewehr-Abteilung und der berittene Zug der 6. Kompagnie auf dem Gefechtsfelde eingetroffen und überschüttete Rücken und Flanke der die Kompagnie Franke umfassenden Hereros mit einem gewaltigen Schnellfeuer...

I could go on and list another 20-30 examples almost all of mounted elements operating alongside infantry elements - but life is too short!

What seems clear to me is that while the Schutzentruppe certainly had access to and used horses in the two wars, they were not some form of cavalry unit with rifles instead of lances, and they did not operate in the field as an entirely mounted unit but as a part-mounted unit. Thus my comparison with the Roman cohortes equitatae - an infantry unit with a mounted section(s). It could be of course that they did not have enough horses for everyone, but that seems unlikely also....

Perhaps GreyC and Andy the Prussian, our most prominent and knowledgeable WW1 German military specialists can comment? 

Trajan

[shippingsteel]

I have no idea what the memoirs report as I don't have the language, however I do enjoy looking at the units and organisation, as well as their symbols and markings. Of that I can grasp enough of the detail for an understanding.!

So just going on the charts the Schutztruppen in DSWA during that Herero period were predominantly Mounted Infantry and this is supported by the period photographs of the Soldaten wearing spurs etc. 

Now after researching the tactical symbols the rectangles with the pennant/flags at the top are indicating a "Cavalry unit" or the like ie. Mounted. And the half shaded rectangle (which I struggled with) is actually an under-strength "Cavalry unit" so not a full Kompanie, in this case. 

None of this means too much at all, but it does provide a better understanding of the Schutztruppen forces at the time, to allow an informed judgement to be made on the Regimental markings, etc, etc. 

Cheers, SS 

[AndyBsk]

The text is not sutterlin but schwabach fraktur font, the 8. and 3. company are declared as cavalry platoon in various places of internet by this diagram, so the Regiment was only partly unit as cavalry, as is clear from Julian provided part, Feld Regiment was most real multipurpose unit, with various parts that was needed in that special area of combat in Africa. It could be not a comparation with normal peacetime infantry Regiment. So part of the units were mounted. Maybe later was the structure changed to Kamelreiter or Horse units as writen on earlier answers. 

Edited 9 January , 2022 by AndyBsk

[GreyC]

Hi,

I have asked a specialist in these matters and he wrote:

Until the  Herero-and Hottentotten uprising of 1904-1907, there were only 4 Feldkompanien. With the uprising the Schutztruppe in Deutsch-Südwestafrika was enlarged considerably. After months of restructuring 1904 2 Feldregimenter were formed containing ca. 12 Kompanien. These were all "beritten", that´s why all Schutztruppler had to learn how to ride, unless they had been with the cavalry before.
Due to wrong feeding, heat and severe watershortage lots of hgorses died, so the operational readiness of the Feldkompanien was decimated. So those without horses were left behinfd on guard duty and only those on horseback were participating in the hunt of the rebells.
Best,

GreyC
 

[trajan]

3 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

I have no idea what the memoirs report as I don't have the language...

So just going on the charts the Schutztruppen in DSWA during that Herero period were predominantly Mounted Infantry and this is supported by the period photographs of the Soldaten wearing spurs etc. 

Now after researching the tactical symbols the rectangles with the pennant/flags at the top are indicating a "Cavalry unit" or the like ie. Mounted. And the half shaded rectangle (which I struggled with) is actually an under-strength "Cavalry unit" so not a full Kompanie, in this case. 

SS, I apologise for not translating those sections - I just this minute did a quick Google translate on them and that seems to get the basic idea. Basically, the ones I quoted all mention sections of the Schutztruppe operating as infantry in connection with/alongside those operating as 'cavalry'.  One of those quotes, though, does indicate that all the companies were mounted (at least in theory!): p.94 - Von der Infanterie waren nur die alten Schutztruppen-Kompagnien (die 1., 2., 4.) sowie ein Teil der 5. und 6. beritten. = 'Of the infantry only the older/original Schutztruppen Companies 1,2, and 4, were mounted, with a part of 5 and 6'. 

I braved COVID and went to my office this morning to check with Krauss - The German Colonial Troops From 1889 to 1918: History - Uniforms - Equipment. (COVID cases here at the uni 3 weeks back totalled 35: two weeks back it was 111 and last week 201, so 'braved' is the appropiate word!) Krauss says very little about what we want to know about, as the volume is more history and uniforms... But he indicates that Gew.98 began to be supplied from 1903, and compares the Schutztruppen as a mounted unit similar to a regiment of dragoons. So, yes, 'mounted infantry' is the best translation it would seem of Beritene-infanterie... Evidently, to judge from the quotes I gave earlier they sometimes operated on foot alongside a mounted contingent.    

2 hours ago, AndyBsk said:

The text is not sutterlin but schwabach fraktur font, the 8. and 3. company are declared as cavalry platoon in various places of internet by this diagram, so the Regiment was only partly unit as cavalry, as is clear from Julian provided part, Feld Regiment was most real multipurpose unit, with various parts that was needed in that special area of combat in Africa. It could be not a comparation with normal peacetime infantry Regiment. So part of the units were mounted. Maybe later was the structure changed to Kamelreiter or Horse units as writen on earlier answers. 

Thanks AndyB. Perhaps the 1904+ Schutztruppen were intended to be all mounted but then had only enough horses for some of the Companies? 

1 hour ago, GreyC said:

Until the  Herero-and Hottentotten uprising of 1904-1907, there were only 4 Feldkompanien. With the uprising the Schutztruppe in Deutsch-Südwestafrika was enlarged considerably. After months of restructuring 1904 2 Feldregimenter were formed containing ca. 12 Kompanien. These were all "beritten", that´s why all Schutztruppler had to learn how to ride, unless they had been with the cavalry before.
Due to wrong feeding, heat and severe watershortage lots of hgorses died, so the operational readiness of the Feldkompanien was decimated. So those without horses were left behinfd on guard duty and only those on horseback were participating in the hunt of the rebells.

Many thanks Grey - I'll reply to the PMessages later. I guess to get some answer to the many questions I have and resolve some of these contradictions in how they operated I'll have  sit down and read both volumes all the way through!

Now, back to that marking in the OPost...!!!! I think we can at the least safely say the 'P' has nothing to do with the Schutztruppen 'Pferde'. It looks pretty certain, though, that the 'F.R.' marking is appropriate for 'Feld (Berittene-Infanterie) Regiment'. So, what's that marking to be? Apart from, that is, an irregular marking!

Trajan

[shippingsteel]

Yes so after getting access to some of the important source documents I think it's safe to say it's all fallen into place.! With information that can be verified and referenced to the official period papers.

I have to thank the Bremen University for having digitalised those old books and making them available online as I don't have a library handy.

Schwabe, K. "The War in DSWA 1904-06"

https://brema.suub.uni-bremen.de/dsdk/content/structure/1835768

"The Battles of the German Troops in SWA : The Campaign against the Hereros", Prussian General Staff, 1906

https://brema.suub.uni-bremen.de/dsdk/content/structure/1828867

After confirming that both the Feld-Regiments (F.R.) were Berittene Infanterie , and that they were divided into individual Feld-Kompanie (F.K.) on the organisation charts, I agree that we can rule out any likely possibility of P = Pferde, etc. 

So then onto the support units and as suggested previously we find the Proviant-Kolonnen becoming the main suspect. The F.P.3 marked rifle being a Cavalry Carbine now appears to be the proverbial "red herring" ... looking back those Kar.98 carbines were really that bad that it's unlikely they would be issued to the frontline troops, even in a Colonial war.!

See below the transport ship records of the Schutztruppen contingents to DSWA late 1904, early 1905 which are quite detailed, even if somewhat abbreviated in places. So we see the 5 highlighted Kolonnens mentioned, with the 3. Proviant-Kolonne in the Red being the main candidate. 

To clarify, it would appear the organisation of these Kolonnen is as follows ...

Stab (Staff)  +  X. Proviant-Kolonnen. =  X. Kolonnen-Abteilung 

So with all that said it would now appear the F.P. is indeed a Schutztruppen marking, with the regimental stamp in the OP standing for Feld-Proviant-Kolonnen Nr.3 , Waffe Nr.33 

Also note, there was no mention of any Fuhrpark Kolonnen in that listing amongst the troop transports.

Cheers, SS 

Edited 10 January , 2022 by shippingsteel

[AndyBsk]

This could be real as earlier mentioned Fuhrpark Kolonne is most real identical to Proviant kolonne, but were so marked in manuals for marking in 1897, a 1909. Even not listed there in inventory Feld Proviant Abteilung or Feld Proviant Kolonne nr.3 in that case, Kolonnen is plural not singular.

[trajan]

An interesting piece of analysis SS! The possibility this is an irregular marking for a Feld-Proviant-Kolonnen is an interesting proposition - and an interpretation AndyB pointed the way towards on 31st December! According to the regulations as a proviant-kolonne was part of the Train then it should be a 'T.P.' marking, but that is neither here nor there.

But, why in your opinion does the marking on this OPost bayonet have to be a Schutztruppen unit?  

One obvious objection to the idea is that the sawback 98/05 was originally specifically made for and issued to Pioniers and Railway troops. It was only after 1914 or so that it began to be issued to all and sundry. In fact a quick scan of my listings seems to confirm that that all unit-marked 98/05 sawbacks made up to 1907 are marked to such units, with exceptions to the rule being later - e.g., examples dated 1908 and 1911 are found with Fussartillerie units and examples dated 1909 are found with the Seebataillon III markings. But as we all know, the unit marking only indicates what unit a bayonet was issued to not when. This is why some S.98/05 and other bayonets are found with markings of units that did not exist until as much as six years later. 

So, in short, a solid piece of work there, but it fails to convince me that the marking on this bayonet must be Schutztruppe-related. 

Trajan 

 

[bert.f]

Hello.

 

[trajan]

14 minutes ago, bert.f said:

Hello.

Hi Bert,

What is the source for that?

Julian

[shippingsteel]

On 01/01/2022 at 14:46, bert.f said:

Scan book by 'Werner Haupt Die Deutsche Schutztruppe 1889-1918'

Looks like the same source as these posted previously, just in a different format.

Cheers, SS 

[AndyBsk]

Looks like all these marking  is around the 3.Proviant Kolonnen Abteilung, commander Tauchler. Possible there were divided into Kolonnen nr1-3 as visible in text provided by SS, there would be interesting how many people were in that units, as not visible only the first collumn behind the unit. 

Edited 10 January , 2022 by AndyBsk

[shippingsteel]

Extra info as requested, note some troopships had a number of different units combined, however the 5th Proviant Kolonne on its own had 800 men, so decent sized units. 

Cheers, SS 

[shippingsteel]

It looks to me, in those pages Bert had posted, that somebody has decided to add detail where there never was any to start with. The (Proviant) and (Fuhrpark) notations in brackets describing the Abteilungs are not present in the source documents that I referenced. They were simply numbered Kolonnen-Abteilung with no description, whereas the Kolonnes themselves were described as Proviant-Kolonnen.

Cheers, SS