Pattern 1903 Bayonet - 1888 conversion?

[MrEd]

Hello all,

Picked this up recently from an antiques dealer, least rough of the last 3 I have looked at over the last 12months or so.

I think it’s a conversion from an 1888 pattern sword bayonet (based on my reading and what I can see), but have put up some photos in this thread for confirmation (or not) from people that are experts! If not a conversion then I am sure it’s a British issued and used bayonet.
 

Sheath markings 

arrow and a D and maybe some faint traces of some other letter to the left (maybe a W or an EF?)

the bayonet and it’s markings

pommel

blade

 

possible polished away inspection mark?

 

Brazed joint?

inspection mark

 

number 7 - don’t know what this refers to

 

main blade stamp - would any previous marks have been over stamped or would they have been polished away then the blade stamped on the other side?

 

Edited 5 February by MrEd

[MrEd]

And the bayonet as a whole, not the best one but not the worst either (of those I have looked at)

top appears to have been rounded at some point.

 

[JMB1943]

Mr Ed,

Nice looking, and with a scabbard to boot!

My read is as follows,

EFD on pommel = conversion to Patt 1903 was performed at RSAF, Enfield 

Scabbard = probably (E) FD

1 R F on locket throat = 1 st Bn, Royal Fusiliers and 255 = rack number

KRR on pommel (lined through) = Initial issue to Kings Royal Rifle Corps

16 R D on pommel = unknown to me.

Passed re-inspection in 1907 and 1910  and 1909.

7 on the tang = quite common to see these odd numbers; usually taken to indicate an intermediate view mark during manufacture.

I hope that someone can put a unit to R D.

Regards,

JMB

EDIT: An interesting inspector’s stamp above the ER crown—- possibly 01 over E??

 

 

 

Edited 27 July , 2023 by JMB1943
add info

[MrEd]

Thanks JMB

i think 16RD is ‘16th Regimental District’ 

in another post I was sent this which explained what 16RD is likely to be (but I don’t know for sure)

 

what’s curious about that inspection marking? I couldn’t make out of it was an ‘01’ or ‘07’?

 

scanbard is more rough than it looks. All the stitching on the seam was rotted away and the seam open. I dabble in leather work so I sewed it back together with waxed linen thread

Edited 27 July , 2023 by MrEd

[Dave66]

Excellent work on the re stitching, I’ve seen,/had this problem before so will bear restitching in mind.

Good honest example, so many thanks for sharing.

Dave.

[shippingsteel]

JMB has mostly covered it all. An Enfield P1903 bayonet in an Enfield scabbard.

I do believe this is a conversion from an earlier P1888 even though the original date of manufacture is not visible. That extra inspection stamp on spine of the blade above the Crown is usually a good giveaway of a conversion.

Several prewar reissue marks indicate typical service period of this Pattern of bayonet. And yes the RD is for Regimental District.

Cheers,  SS 

[Steve1871]

Hey SS, the 1903 used the same scabbard as 1888, just kept making them with no change, is this correct?? Thanks

[MrEd]

5 hours ago, Steve1871 said:

Hey SS, the 1903 used the same scabbard as 1888, just kept making them with no change, is this correct?? Thanks

From what I have read there are several iterations - internal chape, external chape, land pattern and frog stud type - but essentially they stayed broadly the same I think 

[MrEd]

5 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

JMB has mostly covered it all. An Enfield P1903 bayonet in an Enfield scabbard.

I do believe this is a conversion from an earlier P1888 even though the original date of manufacture is not visible. That extra inspection stamp on spine of the blade above the Crown is usually a good giveaway of a conversion.

Several prewar reissue marks indicate typical service period of this Pattern of bayonet. And yes the RD is for Regimental District.

Cheers,  SS 

Thanks SS - it’s been around the houses a bit then! Who else made the scabbards other than EFD? Is maker matched scabbard/blade any relevance? I guess scabbards and bayos were swapped around a lot so just wondering how unusual an EFD scabbard with an EFD bayo is? (Of course we don’t know who made it originally?). I am guessing the scabbard dates from the consecration period or around then rather than being later, rather than original to some 1800’s date?

[shippingsteel]

6 hours ago, Steve1871 said:

Hey SS, the 1903 used the same scabbard as 1888, just kept making them with no change, is this correct?? Thanks

See the following ... from the archives.! 

Should answer a few questions.

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/186439-patt1903-scabbard-land-mki/

Edited 28 July , 2023 by shippingsteel

[shippingsteel]

5 hours ago, MrEd said:

Who else made the scabbards other than EFD? Is maker matched scabbard/blade any relevance? I guess scabbards and bayos were swapped around a lot so just wondering how unusual an EFD scabbard with an EFD bayo is? (Of course we don’t know who made it originally?).

To answer your questions, the P1888 scabbards were also made by A.Cooper of Birmingham, indicated by the commonly seen AC stamping.

An Enfield bayonet still in an Enfield made scabbard is not really indicative of anything, it would be very common, however service bayonets would have switched scabbards as required.

We do know your bayonet was originally manufactured by Enfield even though the markings are virtually illegible ... by the shape of the blade and spine, they were all made slightly different by each of the manufacturers.

Cheers,  SS 

Edited 28 July , 2023 by shippingsteel

[MrEd]

Thanks SS - I saw some comparison photos (I think yours?) and the differences are quite apparent when they are next to each other 

 

Yes the photo added into the edit is the one I saw, great photo thank you 

Edited 28 July , 2023 by MrEd

[shippingsteel]

Here is a better photo of a selection of P1888 bayonets showing the various manufacturer differences.

Cheers,  SS 

[Mk VII]

All the later scabbards had weaknesses  of design and it is common to see '88 scabbards used instead.  As late as WW2 Parker-Hale were contracted to make parts for '88 scabbards. 

[MrEd]

44 minutes ago, Mk VII said:

All the later scabbards had weaknesses  of design and it is common to see '88 scabbards used instead.  As late as WW2 Parker-Hale were contracted to make parts for '88 scabbards. 

Who was using them in ww2? Rear echelon type troops or some dominion/commonwealth troops?

[peregrinvs]

9 hours ago, MrEd said:

Who was using them in ww2? Rear echelon type troops or some dominion/commonwealth troops?

I have a WWII Indian manufactured P1903 scabbard. It differs from the original by having a P1907 style external chape rather than internal. IIRC the Indian army preferred the P1903 bayonet to the P1907 and many stayed in service there.

[MrEd]

Aah okay thanks 

[trajan]

On 02/08/2023 at 22:56, Mk VII said:

All the later scabbards had weaknesses  of design and it is common to see '88 scabbards used instead.  As late as WW2 Parker-Hale were contracted to make parts for '88 scabbards. 

A new one on me - not that I am an expert! Where did that information come from?

Trajan

[MrEd]

3 minutes ago, trajan said:

A new one on me - not that I am an expert! Where did that information come from?

Trajan

I would like to know to, for accuracy 

[trajan]

On 02/08/2023 at 23:40, MrEd said:

Who was using them in ww2? Rear echelon type troops or some dominion/commonwealth troops?

These WW2 ones were according to marked examples I have seen - made by Barrow, Hepburn, and Gale, now better known for making the handbags of the late QEII. The ones recorded all seem to be 1939. Some of these certainly have 'N' markings, indicating issue and use by the RNavy.

Trajan 

[trajan]

On 28/07/2023 at 12:59, shippingsteel said:

To answer your questions, the P1888 scabbards were also made by A.Cooper of Birmingham, indicated by the commonly seen AC stamping.

FWIW, always happy to be corrected, but I have yet to see a period P.1888 scabbard with a marking indicating manufacture other than by Enfield or AC.

Trajan

[4thGordons]

Contract issued 4/4/1940 for Scbd, Pattern '88 metal parts brown Wilkinson 3,000. (an identical order or possibly a duplication was also recorded in 1942)

Source: Skennerton, I. !988. "British Small Arms of WWII" Skennerton Publications: Margate. p66

Skennerton suggests these scabbards/parts may have been for use with P1903 bayonets which also fit the Rifle No1 whereas by this point the P1888 was obsolete. I have not found a record of a Parker Hale contract for bayonets or scabbards in the listings.

Chris

[Mk VII]

2 hours ago, trajan said:

A new one on me - not that I am an expert! Where did that information come from?

Trajan

I found it in the contract records at Kew

[MrEd]

2 hours ago, 4thGordons said:

Contract issued 4/4/1940 for Scbd, Pattern '88 metal parts brown Wilkinson 3,000. (an identical order or possibly a duplication was also recorded in 1942)

Source: Skennerton, I. !988. "British Small Arms of WWII" Skennerton Publications: Margate. p66

Skennerton suggests these scabbards/parts may have been for use with P1903 bayonets which also fit the Rifle No1 whereas by this point the P1888 was obsolete. I have not found a record of a Parker Hale contract for bayonets or scabbards in the listings.

Chris

Nice one thank you, so Wilkinson made parts for ww2, and it seem Parker-hale aswell (as per MKVIII and TNA)

Edited 29 September , 2023 by MrEd

[Chasemuseum]

The Royal Navy also had P88 bayonets cut down for use as fighting knives.