Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Results 1 to 9 of 9


Article about: Hi_all_picked_up_this_1888_pattern_bayonet_yesterd ay.I_did_a_little_research_on_these_models_and_som e_one_correct_me_if_I_have_any_thing_wrong.It's_a_ MK1_type_2_1888_pattern_British_bayon

  1. #1

    Default 1888_pattern_bayonet

    Hi_all_picked_up_this_1888_pattern_bayonet_yesterd ay.I_did_a_little_research_on_these_models_and_som e_one_correct_me_if_I_have_any_thing_wrong.It's_a_ MK1_type_2_1888_pattern_British_bayonet.Oil_hole_i n_the_grip.Made_in_may_1891.5'__91_on_ricasso_of_t he_blade._possibility_reissued_in_96_and_98?Broad_ arrow_and_WD_stamps_for_war_department_approval.Th e_X_under_that_A_bend_test_mark._various_inspectio n_marks.The_marks_on_the_pommel_I_could_find_nothi ng_on_really_just_that_they_may_be_related_to_how_ many_times_it_has_been_issued_or_where(what_regime nt)it_was_issued_to.Maybe_some_type_of_number_code .The_Scabbard_Is_marked_03_I_think_being_replaced_ in_1903?the_other_marks_I'm_unsure_about.If_anyone _can_correct_me_or_give_me_anymore_info_that_would _be_great.Just_wondering_what_conflicts_were_these _bayo's_used_in?Thanks_all.

  2. #2


    Yes, your research is pretty spot on. The year of manufacture is may of '91, the '96 and '98 dates would have been when the armourer inspected it. the struck out numbers on the pommel might have been rack numbers. The N R could be a unit marking. I'm not too good with the old British regiments though. The scabbard is odd in that there's no stud on the metal collar, and there's no metal tip. I've not seen one like this before, but that doesn't mean much. It's a very nice blade

    47th MP Co/47th Inf Div 1983-1988
    583rd Ord Co 59th Ord Bde Muenster, W Germany
    Looking for P37 ammo pouch with No4 bayo frog

  3. #3



  4. #4


    NR ... Northamptonshire Regiment.

  5. #5


    your scabbard is for a pattern 1903 bayonet, I'm not near my references right now, so I can't tell you which model. But, it is a pretty uncommon one, if I am remembering correctly.


  6. #6


    Thanks_gary.And_jim_sounds_interesting.Anymore_inf o_would_be_great.Much_appreciated_guys.

  7. #7


    It seems like it most likely is a P1888 MKII Land pattern scabbard, but it should have a leather frog attached. I have never owned one and am unsure how it would be attached Without a stud or rivets. I'll do some more digging and hopefully someone else will have some more insight.


  8. #8


    Hello Matthew,
    It is actually a Mk 1 Second type issued May 1891. This was issued as well as the Mk 1 1888 (which has three brass retaining rivets on the handle) for the Lee Metford Rifle which was the first magazine fed rifle issued to the British Army.
    If you look inside the Mortice slot at the end of the pommel you will see inside a hole which extends inside the handle. This was to fit the cleaning rod which was attached to the underside of the barrel on the Metford hence the cleaning hole is on the grips and not the metal pommel.
    The two brass rivets are close together as well when you compare it to the MkII which has it's cleaning hole on the pommel and the rivets set further apart.
    If you look inside the Mortice slot on a MkII you will not see a hole as the cleaning rod was removed because the rifle had now been modified with an Enfield barrel and was now known as the Long Lee ( Lee Enfield MkI) this rifle did not have a cleaning rod fitted hence the removal of the hole.
    The scabbard does appear to be a land pattern which should have a leather frog attached .
    I will post some photos of my own 1888s as I have all models and in fact I bought another Mk1 two weeks ago.
    I hope this helps a bit more.


  9. #9


    cheers jim for the extra info . very interesting . would love to see some pictures of your collection .


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts