Remembered Today:

jimmy9fingers1

P1907 Markings

68 posts in this topic

Hi all,

I wonder if someone could give me the benefit of their expertise,

on of my friends has an old first type P1907 bayonet that is marked A 4643 on the pommel,

it isn't regimentally marked and only has the other markings you'd expect to see on the blade,

Will the A 4643 marking indicate that this was a training model, or is it just a factory code thing perhaps?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

I wonder if someone could give me the benefit of their expertise,

on of my friends has an old first type P1907 bayonet that is marked A 4643 on the pommel,

Do you know the bayonet's maker, and could it possibly be an Australian ' Lithgow ' made bayonet ?

Regards,

LF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A4643 is probably the rifle it matched serial number

1907 RSAF Produced Rifles A0001 - A9999

1913 RSAF Produced Rifles A0001 -A9999

Ditto for 1915 and 1917

The Bayonets inspection / issue date will place it in one of these groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and in addition:

BSA used A prefix in 1916

Ishapore used A prefixes in 1916 (and again in the 60s on 2A rifles)

Lithgow used A prefixes starting in 1918 and up through 1922

Here is one

post-14525-0-34839100-1420401016_thumb.j

Like LF I would bet it is an Australian numbering to rifles - it is pretty common here are a couple of my Lithgows

post-14525-0-91114900-1420401015_thumb.j

(BTW it could easily be a British produced bayonet with the Australian number added too as early bayonets were supplied from the UK and then later returning Australian forces took a lot of British produced equipment home with them)

When you say "old first type" do you mean with a hooked quillon?

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lithgow A prefixes 1918, 1920, 1921,1922

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't regimentally marked and only has the other markings you'd expect to see on the blade

A simple description of some of these markings will help to narrow down the possibilities, especially the date marks and Maker. Broad Arrow.?

From what IS provided, I would guess it is a 1918 dated LITHGOW made bayonet, with a 'shield' marking and stars with letter A's inside them.

Cheers, S>S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

sorry for not being clearer with the description,

it's a hooked quillon bayonet made by Chapman, so it is British (but as a couple of you have said, it could have been issued to Australia (my knowledge is very limited, although I am slowly learning).

it's marked with an N, which I believes denotes it was Naval?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a hooked quillon bayonet made by Chapman, so it is British (but as a couple of you have said, it could have been issued to Australia (my knowledge is very limited, although I am slowly learning).

it's marked with an N, which I believes denotes it was Naval?

Sounds like a nice piece!

Where is that 'N'? I am not very knowledgeable about P.1907's, but my recollection is that the RN used P.1888's (and P.1903's), not these longer jobs. I could be very wrong on that though! :blink:

EDIT: Well, there you go, check out: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/British-WW1-P1907-Bayonet-with-Scabbard-Wilkinson-1917-Navy-Issue-/251752273970 for one with an 'N' on the pommel - is that what you have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

sorry for not being clearer with the description,

it's a hooked quillon bayonet made by Chapman, so it is British (but as a couple of you have said, it could have been issued to Australia (my knowledge is very limited, although I am slowly learning).

it's marked with an N, which I believes denotes it was Naval?

I have seen a reference to a Pattern 1907 with a hooked quillon marked for Naval use, and that was an Australian service bayonet.

So I am still of the opinion that this bayonet's markings indicate Australian service use.

Regards,

LF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen a reference to a Pattern 1907 with a hooked quillon marked for Naval use, and that was an Australian service bayonet.

So I am still of the opinion that this bayonet's markings indicate Australian service use.

Regards,

LF

The link I just posted is for a WILKINSON 06/1917, 're-issued' 1920, on sale in Australia, but it doesn't seem to have any Aussie markings... Being watched by 3 - wonder if our mate down under is one of them???

Trajan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

yes it certainly seems a possibility it could have been used by the Aussies.

The blade is marked N, not the pommel. I don't know if it is unusual (there's no ships name on it)

Also , I remember seeing later examples stamped with the naval N, and also have come across an early SMLE with a naval mark on the left side of the wrist band (so I guess they must have used these things or like Trajan says, more likely a 1903 bayonet?

The images I have hopefully attached show the markings, even after editing, they're a bit blurry

post-111754-0-43560400-1420477568_thumb.

post-111754-0-52184000-1420477503_thumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy,

I also have an HQ removed P1907 with N mark on the left side of ricasso.

Mine is enfield EFD marked & yours is a rarer chapman JAC marked example

but both share the 7 '09 date :)

Have you checked the rim of the scabbard as mine has N marked there also ;)

Hopefully the sun will come out to play tomorrow & I can get decent pics of markings on this & Gottschos.

Aleck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The blade is marked N, not the pommel. ... Also , I remember seeing later examples stamped with the naval N, and also have come across an early SMLE with a naval mark on the left side of the wrist band (so I guess they must have used these things or like Trajan says, more likely a 1903 bayonet?

Well, like I said, P1907's are really not my field. But the 'Naval'-marked P.1888's I have seen (not certain about any P.1903's) have always been marked on the pommel, not the ricasso.

EDIT: One day I AM going to catalogue that collection of yours Aleck - you have all sorts of wonders there! :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know that much about these things ( I have only seen a couple of others online that are marked N on the ricasso, I have also seen one marked N on the pommel,

Excuse my lack of knowledge, but is it likely this bayonet was used in training at HQ, rather than out on a ship then?.

Also I doubt it would have had a long service life (from what I've read anyway), as the quillon is still there and there's no oil hole.

Yes it would be good if you could get some picture Aleck, and sadly this bayonet has a later edition scabbard made by enfield (like so many of these things), they get separated along the way.

And there are no other markings on the scabbard .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse my lack of knowledge, but is it likely this bayonet was used in training at HQ, rather than out on a ship then?.

Also I doubt it would have had a long service life (from what I've read anyway), as the quillon is still there and there's no oil hole.

We all start from the same place, and then slowly progress - with sometimes the odd slip-up along the way, so don't worry, it is a continuous learning process!

If you use the search function you'll see that there is quite a bit on these HQ jobs on GWF, and if you look at this: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=185724&hl=hooked then you'll see how Lancashire Fusilier, a GWF member, conclusively showed that HQ bayonets were still around in 1920. And there is also something in that thread (linking to others) about the provision of those clearance holes in the pommels and explains how some were never supplied with one of these after their due date.

I honestly have no idea as to whether or not these Naval P.1907's were ever hanging around on ships or what, but you don't seem to have a 'Sold out of Service' mark on yours, so who knows how this one came to survive. There are, IIRC, quite a few HQ that don't have that mark, but all the ones I have seen in Turkey do have this.

Trajan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here you go! This photograph from: http://parallaxscurioandrelicfirearmsforums.yuku.com/topic/33736/Non-bubba-Cutdown-Enfields-Something-to-look-out-for#.VKvxodKUeo4 and reproduced here for reference purposes is supposedly dated 1939 (according to that site) and shows a HQ in a naval armoury with its HQ intact! I'd better cross-reference this on that thread of LF's...

Trajan

post-69449-0-54261200-1420554786_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here you go! This photograph from: http://parallaxscurioandrelicfirearmsforums.yuku.com/topic/33736/Non-bubba-Cutdown-Enfields-Something-to-look-out-for#.VKvxodKUeo4 and reproduced here for reference purposes is supposedly dated 1939 (according to that site) and shows a HQ in a naval armoury with its HQ intact! I'd better cross-reference this on that thread of LF's...

Trajan,

What an excellent photograph, which comes from the Australian War Memorial Photo Archive and is dated circa 1939. This photo shows Australian sailors aboard the Auxiliary Minesweeper ' HMAS Goorangi ' replacing .303 rifle used to fire at mines for detonation, back into the ship's rifle rack.

Also on the rifle racks, can be seen 2 Pattern 1907 Bayonets with their hooked quillons still attached, which are probably the same type of Pattern 1907 with the hooked quillon and marked ' N ' for naval use as shown in Jimmy's posts and used in Australian service.

Regards,

LF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info guys,

I was surprised when I looked at a more recent thread on the forum of a hookie still in use in 1920, and the pic above was even more surprising (I previously thought they'd been obsolete since the middle of WW1).

Yeah it's a case of learning slowly about these beasties, and when I can, I though HQ was Head Quarters (Not Hooked Quillon.....Woops), a daft moment.

I'm guessing the Chapman Naval marked Bayonet is fairly rare. Although like I was reading elsewhere, there are plenty of these early bayonets about, they just seem to be expensive in terms of monetary value.

I guess in some cases, the relatively short service life of some bayonets (before the HQ's were removed) has made unaltered p1907's quite desirable for collectors.

It doesn't appear to have the sold out of service mark on it.

I will have a look at the search function.

Thanks again for the info all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not uncommon to see these early P1907 bayonets marked on the ricasso with the N. This was the mark for the Royal Navy and shows Admiralty ownership.

The A serial will no doubt be a matching to a rifle, but without any Australian ownership marks on the bayonet, it's just as likely to be matched to a British SMLE.

Cheers, S>S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing the Chapman Naval marked Bayonet is fairly rare. Although like I was reading elsewhere, there are plenty of these early bayonets about, they just seem to be expensive in terms of monetary value.

I guess in some cases, the relatively short service life of some bayonets (before the HQ's were removed) has made unaltered p1907's quite desirable for collectors.

They are indeed generally pricier than than the un-hooked variety - there are certainly less of them around than the other ones. But it is a bit like German sawbacked bayonets - they are a 'must-have' item, but the price differential is ridiculous.

Trajan

PS: That "Yeah it's a case of learning slowly about these beasties, and when I can, I though HQ was Head Quarters (Not Hooked Quillon.....Woops), a daft moment. Take heart - You are not alone in making that mistake! Added to which I once let a HQ go for a ridiculously low price for the simple reason that I had no idea as to the rarity of these things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not uncommon to see these early P1907 bayonets marked on the ricasso with the N. This was the mark for the Royal Navy and shows Admiralty ownership.

The A serial will no doubt be a matching to a rifle, but without any Australian ownership marks on the bayonet, it's just as likely to be matched to a British SMLE.

General agreement on that 'N' mark cobber, even though there is a lack of documentary evidence - as far as I know. I have no ideas as to whether those serial marks are Aussie or not, but what is much more interesting in so many ways is the clear evidence that these HQ bayonets were in use as late as 1939 - and in Australia at that! This makes it even more understandable as to what may have happened in those cases where a 1907 HQ comes with a later-type scabbard or the wrong type of frog...

And there are no other markings on the scabbard .

Jimmy, take a good hard look at the scabbard of yours. There might be (should be - unless refurbished!) markings on one side (left) of the back seam that will indicate the place and date the scabbard was made. I think you said it had EFD marks on the metal bits - but have a look on the leather anyway.

Trajan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

the back of the scabbard is stamped EFD and BF underneath with the British Army Crows Foot,

Regarding prices, they seem to have rocketed in the last two or three years, (I saw what looked like a great example of a HQ bayonet marked with E.Y for East Yorks Reg and made by Sanderson, sell two years ago for 220 at auction (including commission). The guy who bought it stuck it on American ebay and it did about three times that amount. (I still have some good photo's of that piece). I notice dealers are getting very optimistic with their pricing.

Trajan, you raise a good point about the how the HQ bayonets have come to have mis-matched frogs and scabbards, a long service life in the Navy (particularly the Aussies) would certainly be a possibility.

Thanks Guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy,

I also have an HQ removed P1907 with N mark on the left side of ricasso.

Mine is enfield EFD marked & yours is a rarer chapman JAC marked example

but both share the 7 '09 date :)

Have you checked the rim of the scabbard as mine has N marked there also ;)

Hopefully the sun will come out to play tomorrow & I can get decent pics of markings on this & Gottschos.

Aleck

I'm posting on Aleck's behalf, photographs of his example:

post-69449-0-12803700-1420730148_thumb.j

post-69449-0-35982900-1420730159_thumb.j post-69449-0-72047800-1420730174_thumb.j post-69449-0-75070800-1420730187_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks a nice piece, thanks for posting. N looks in a very similar place.

Would these things be carried on ships in case of attacks or boarding parties,

I know the Royal Marines obviously carried bayonets but

am I right in thinking their bayonets would be marked RM on the pommel.

I briefly read there was a Royal Naval Division also, at the start of the War (although it looks like they were original using CLLE

Apologies if slightly of topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now