Identifying WW1 bayonet

[allankelly]

Hello - first post here, and don’t know anything about WW1 arms but I’m looking for advice or help please. I rescued this bayonet (images attached) from going to the dump about 50 years ago. My 2 young boys are fascinated by it and it’s finally made me take a closer look at it and try to find out more about it. Could someone on here kindly help with advice on how to find out more about it or tell me more about it please? Thank you.

[MikeyH]

British MK1 second pattern P1888 bayonet, made at Enfield and dated October 1901.

Unfamiliar with the unit marking, but the number refers to the weapon it was originally paired with.

Mike.

[mancpal]

Can’t help with the detail but it looks a well preserved item, nice.

Simon

[allankelly]

18 minutes ago, MikeyH said:

British MK1 second pattern P1888 bayonet, made at Enfield and dated October 1901.

Unfamiliar with the unit marking, but the number refers to the weapon it was originally paired with.

Mike.

Thanks Mike. That’s interesting and I wondered if 10 and 01 meant October 1901. Queen Victoria died in January 1901 but this bayonet is stamped VR so presumably it took time for them to retool machines (although I would think they would have needed to change it sooner than this). Or could 10/1901 be a retest date as I’ve seen mentioned elsewhere?

So the unit is “OHTS”? Any suggestions where I could find out what that stands for pls?

 Thanks again Mike.

[allankelly]

13 minutes ago, mancpal said:

Can’t help with the detail but it looks a well preserved item, nice.

Simon

Thanks for looking Simon. I rescued it about 50 years ago from a neighbour’s wooden garden shed that was falling down so he was dumping what he saw as ‘junk’! I cleaned it up a bit (tho it didn’t need much surprisingly) and it’s been in our lofts since then.

[shippingsteel]

Actually a Mk.II version of the P1888 bayonet, and as stated made at Enfield. The unit marking looks to be related to the Hertfordshire Regiment but unsure about the 10 numbering.

Cheers, SS 

EDIT. Sorry it is the unit abbreviation for the Hampshire Regiment which also explains the 10 which indicates the 10th Battalion, Hampshire Regiment part of the New Army. 

Edited 30 November , 2021 by shippingsteel

[mancpal]

I’m not a collector though certain items appeal, generally run of the mill stuff that most Tommies would have known. 
In a perfect world I’d love a Pickelhuabe, British bayonet and an Imperial Service tablet., Two may be within price at some point though suspect the first will continue to be beyond me financially , I almost bought one from my cousin many years ago but burglars relieved me of the privilege of ownership.

Thanks for posting the shots.

Simon

 

[MikeyH]

1 hour ago, allankelly said:

Thanks Mike. That’s interesting and I wondered if 10 and 01 meant October 1901. Queen Victoria died in January 1901 but this bayonet is stamped VR so presumably it took time for them to retool machines (although I would think they would have needed to change it sooner than this). Or could 10/1901 be a retest date as I’ve seen mentioned elsewhere?

So the unit is “OHTS”? Any suggestions where I could find out what that stands for pls?

 Thanks again Mike.

Alan,

You may find some faint markings on the rear of the scabbard, this will indicate the scabbard maker also you should find a date.

If EFD and 01, it is likely original to the bayonet.  (frequently these marks have been erased by time and handling).

Yes, you are correct re the dating stamp, it is normal to find examples dated after the death of Queen Victori still carrying  VR,

October 1901 is the date of manufactiure.

Mike.

Edited 30 November , 2021 by MikeyH

[JMB1943]

Allan,

Don't damage or lose the scabbard--it is, arguably, more valuable than the bayonet!!

A VERY nice pairing.

The scabbard leather does not need to be fed/ to be made supple/ to be made to look like new/ to be conditioned.......etc.

Any treatments will eventually degrade the leather, and it will not last another 120 yrs.

Museum conservators will generally recommend only "Renaissance Wax" as a treatment; it seals the surface against oils from handling etc.

You can also use Ren Wax on all parts of the bayonet.

Regards,

JMB

[allankelly]

4 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

Actually a Mk.II version of the P1888 bayonet, and as stated made at Enfield. The unit marking looks to be related to the Hertfordshire Regiment but unsure about the 10 numbering.

Cheers, SS 

EDIT. Sorry it is the unit abbreviation for the Hampshire Regiment which also explains the 10 which indicates the 10th Battalion, Hampshire Regiment part of the New Army. 

Thanks SS. This is great to know. So I wonder how on earth it found its way into a council house garden shed in the east end of Glasgow!!

Out of interest how do you distinguish between a Mk I and a Mk II?

 Thanks again.

[allankelly]

2 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

Allan,

Don't damage or lose the scabbard--it is, arguably, more valuable than the bayonet!!

A VERY nice pairing.

The scabbard leather does not need to be fed/ to be made supple/ to be made to look like new/ to be conditioned.......etc.

Any treatments will eventually degrade the leather, and it will not last another 120 yrs.

Museum conservators will generally recommend only "Renaissance Wax" as a treatment; it seals the surface against oils from handling etc.

You can also use Ren Wax on all parts of the bayonet.

Regards,

JMB

Thanks JMB - I’ll look after it. I’ve not done much with it since I rescued it and nothing for past 30 years or so. When I rescued it I think I may have polished it with something like ‘Pledge’ and ‘Duraglit’! Sorry!!

[JMB1943]

Allan,

YOU rescued it, so no need to apologize to me!

Regards,

JMB

[allankelly]

5 hours ago, mancpal said:

I’m not a collector though certain items appeal, generally run of the mill stuff that most Tommies would have known. 
In a perfect world I’d love a Pickelhuabe, British bayonet and an Imperial Service tablet., Two may be within price at some point though suspect the first will continue to be beyond me financially , I almost bought one from my cousin many years ago but burglars relieved me of the privilege of ownership.

Thanks for posting the shots.

Simon

 

You’re welcome and good luck with your quest!

[allankelly]

4 hours ago, MikeyH said:

Alan,

You may find some faint markings on the rear of the scabbard, this will indicate the scabbard maker also you should find a date.

If EFD and 01, it is likely original to the bayonet.  (frequently these marks have been erased by time and handling).

Yes, you are correct re the dating stamp, it is normal to find examples dated after the death of Queen Victori still carrying  VR,

October 1901 is the date of manufactiure.

Mike.

Thanks again Mike. I’ve had a quick look at the scabbard but can’t see any markings but I’ll dig out a magnifying glass and better light tomorrow and look again.

[mancpal]

This may sound odd but the security code on the back of my bank card had worn off so I went to the nearest bank (miles away) expecting a high tech solution. In fact he used the torch on his personal phone and was able to determine the number via indentations made during manufacture. I simply wonder if your scabbard may reveal some detail under different forms of light (halogen, led, phone etc).

Simon

[allankelly]

39 minutes ago, mancpal said:

This may sound odd but the security code on the back of my bank card had worn off so I went to the nearest bank (miles away) expecting a high tech solution. In fact he used the torch on his personal phone and was able to determine the number via indentations made during manufacture. I simply wonder if your scabbard may reveal some detail under different forms of light (halogen, led, phone etc).

Simon

Interesting - what number did they find ……??!! 😉😂

I plan to look again with different types of light and thot I might even try a “rubbing” with tissue paper and pencil/crayon.

[mancpal]

Allan .

the number was 963, I share this secure knowledge with you purely because the following day I both lost and cancelled said card. Hadn't thought of doing a rubbing, which for a bloke who scrapes a living from art/design and previously has done a bit of rubbing ( Oooooh Pardon) means I'm slowing down faster than anticipated.

Simon

[trajan]

16 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

EDIT. Sorry it is the unit abbreviation for the Hampshire Regiment which also explains the 10 which indicates the 10th Battalion, Hampshire Regiment part of the New Army. 

That is not only a very nice find of one of my favourite bayonets but is of interest in other ways! 

As SS noted in his correction, this is for the 10th (Service) Battalion Hampshire Regiment. Formed in 1914 as part of the 'New Army', the existence of this unit-marked bayonet indicates they were initially provided with the technically obsolete LM Mk.1* - IIRC! The unit landed at Gallipoli in August 1915, suffering heavy losses during its stay there, including a hero of mine, Lt.G.L.Cheesman, killed 10th August 1915. So, there is a potential Gallipoli connection there, although it does not prove this one was in that campaign. I don't know if the unit was re-equipped with SMLE's before August 1915... Even so, while there are several photographs of the rifle and P.1888 in use at Gallipoli but in most cases the unit is not identified, so this is a nice one to know about. 

Julian

[4thGordons]

Are you sure they had Lee-Metfords rather than Magazine, Lee-Enfields? Externally they are very similar they key difference is the rifling. That would be very surprising to me in 1915. MLEs or especially CLLEs would not be, but Metfords  would. I are aware of MLEs used at Galipolli but not Metfords.  
 

CLLEs and their P1888s continued in use even on the Western front until early 1916 (common at Loos etc) 

 

Chris

 

[trajan]

9 minutes ago, 4thGordons said:

Are you sure they had Lee-Metfords rather than Magazine, Lee-Enfields? Externally they are very similar they key difference is the rifling. That would be very surprising to me in 1915. MLEs or especially CLLEs would not be, but Metfords  would. I are aware of MLEs used at Galipolli but not Metfords.  

 

Thanks for the correction - my mistake in missing out a letter there!

[trajan]

I was just re-admiring that 'VR' cipher, one of the clearest I have ever seen! Then it hit me - the date mark is October 1901, but Vickie died 22 January 1901... Another example of a bayonet with a contrasting cipher and year date...

Julian 

[allankelly]

12 hours ago, mancpal said:

Allan .

the number was 963, I share this secure knowledge with you purely because the following day I both lost and cancelled said card. Hadn't thought of doing a rubbing, which for a bloke who scrapes a living from art/design and previously has done a bit of rubbing ( Oooooh Pardon) means I'm slowing down faster than anticipated.

Simon

😂👍

[allankelly]

6 hours ago, trajan said:

That is not only a very nice find of one of my favourite bayonets but is of interest in other ways! 

As SS noted in his correction, this is for the 10th (Service) Battalion Hampshire Regiment. Formed in 1914 as part of the 'New Army', the existence of this unit-marked bayonet indicates they were initially provided with the technically obsolete LM Mk.1* - IIRC! The unit landed at Gallipoli in August 1915, suffering heavy losses during its stay there, including a hero of mine, Lt.G.L.Cheesman, killed 10th August 1915. So, there is a potential Gallipoli connection there, although it does not prove this one was in that campaign. I don't know if the unit was re-equipped with SMLE's before August 1915... Even so, while there are several photographs of the rifle and P.1888 in use at Gallipoli but in most cases the unit is not identified, so this is a nice one to know about. 

Julian

Thanks Julian. I’m glad you’ve found this interesting and helpful tho I have to admit that much of the detail is over my head! The Gallipoli aspect is very interesting. If this unit/regiment still exists (sorry for my ignorance) do you think they or a museum would be interested in seeing the photos?

[allankelly]

4 hours ago, trajan said:

I was just re-admiring that 'VR' cipher, one of the clearest I have ever seen! Then it hit me - the date mark is October 1901, but Vickie died 22 January 1901... Another example of a bayonet with a contrasting cipher and year date...

Julian 

Yes I noticed and puzzled over that too - see earlier comments from/with MikeyH. 

[4thGordons]

5 hours ago, trajan said:

I was just re-admiring that 'VR' cipher, one of the clearest I have ever seen! Then it hit me - the date mark is October 1901, but Vickie died 22 January 1901... Another example of a bayonet with a contrasting cipher and year date...

Julian 

This would go nicely with it!