Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 28th July 2024, 05:32 PM   #1
NeilUK
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 125
Default a puzzle

I recently was bequeathed by a friend, now sadly dead, a most unusual socket sword bayonet. Overall its length is 81.5cm, with a blade of 69cm, and that despite the loss of its point. The blade is back edged with a narrow fuller for 3/4 of its length just in from the back. The blade has a single mark - a crown over the number '2', a standard British government acceptance mark. The socket is marked '11' and '81' which suggests Company 11, rack number 81. I have been able to discover that it is probably a Pioneer sword converted into a bayonet, hence the extreme length. What do the edged weapon experts think?
I have no information as to its provenance, my friend had never mentioned it and his family know nothing about it.
Neil
Attached Images
      
NeilUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th August 2024, 07:19 PM   #2
NeilUK
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 125
Default

I am a bit surprised that this most unusual bayonet (69cm blade) has not inspired a single comment or expression of interest. There is still time to comment!
Neil
NeilUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th August 2024, 08:33 PM   #3
10thRoyal
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 78
Default

In my opinion it looks like a bayonet for an Indian Brown Bess. The spring on the socket seems to be pretty standard for that type. Maybe EIC?
10thRoyal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2024, 10:13 PM   #4
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,971
Default

I have no expertise on bayonets, but have a couple of references I was able to dig out.
As 10th has noted, that spring catch is exactly right for EIC Brown Bess c.1800-1805 ("Collectors Pictorial Book of Bayonets", F.Stephens, 1971. #31).

However this is entirely an anomaly, and that catch is most of what corresponds to the EIC example.
There is the recent book, "Socket Bayonets" by Graham Priest (2016) which is an intriguing insight into these bayonets which offers information not in the venerable old references.

One thing I notice in the markings on the socket......supposedly 11 over 81, in accord with rack numbers often seen, however.....these characters look more like Roman numerals II rather than 11 (note serifs).

The '81' also seemed more like letters than numbers.
In the Priest book, I was astounded to see the example 98 (p.51) shown as a bayonet from a British volunteer unit from around 1790(?) .
LOOK AT THE CHARACTERS! very similar, looks like an 18 (it is noted only 18 made).
This bayonet obviously looks nothing like yours, but that marking is compelling.
In this period 1790s in England, there was a great deal of worry about French invasion, and there were numbers of militia, volunteer units formed, for which records are pretty scarce.

With the key element of the EIC type spring catch, it is tempting to think this might have been some sort of innovation in accord with the many changes in firearms design etc. of the time.

The view mark is in accord with the crown over numeral used 1796-1820 (after that letters were added, Robson, 1975, p.191).

It is unusual to see a back fuller on a blade, which seems entirely out of the norm with the triangular socket bayonets, and I am unclear on what sort of pioneer sword might be source for a host blade, or why one would be used for a munitions grade bayonet. There was however a great deal of artisan 'for the cause' work with people in various trades doing other work unrelated to their trade.

Could the '18' (?) be letters for some local unit, S.I. and the II the unit number? Then the MOST unusual blade shape.

These are the pieces of the puzzle, and all we can do is speculate at this point. One thing for sure, this is an anomaly with potential for some remarkable history!
Attached Images
 
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st August 2024, 07:19 PM   #5
NeilUK
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 125
Default

Thanks for the extra info, Jim. It helps us along the road a bit more even if we haven't yet reached a conclusion.
Neil
NeilUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st August 2024, 10:01 PM   #6
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilUK View Post
Thanks for the extra info, Jim. It helps us along the road a bit more even if we haven't yet reached a conclusion.
Neil
You bet Neil! I felt kinda the same way....these posts just sit there and nobody says anything. As I noted, I dont know a lot on bayonets...but Im not afraid of opening a book, searching online etc. there are so many resources these days.

The whole idea of this forum is to discuss, share ideas, investigate, discover, preserve history.....and I am grateful to those who DO participate.
I learned from this unusual bayonet you posted, so thank you.

These kinds of anomalies often remain unresolved, but imagine if this WAS one of those 18 made for British volunteers!!!

Three THOUSAND views.......only TWO responses, myself and 10th.......incredible.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.