In the book Roy Williams, "The Collectors book of German Bayonets 1680-1945" presents such pictures. To the question on the marks he answered
S98/05 Makers
D - Single letter mark for Durkopp Werke A.G.
Deutscher Offizier-Verein Berlin - German Officier Association Berlin.
Hilger & Sohne (Sons) Remscheid - made with no date, also with the trademark of L O Dietrich on the rverse of the blade. Anthony Carter recorded one dated 1916.
I hope this helps. Roy
The only thing ..
In the 1984 Carter edition, I did not find references to this manufacturer as the manufacturer of the 98/05.
Well done Dok.
Deutscher Offiziers Verein Berlin is not a maker, only distributor in reality i assume it should be on a dress piece normally.
Hello Andy,
I answered on a question related to the manufacturer Hilger & Sohne (Sons) . As for the other photos in the book Roy Williams, i can say the following.
I have not seen 98/05 bayonets where there is a mark Deutscher Offizier-Verein Berlin.
I only have a 98/05 butcher marked "D" and I think that it does not belong to the manufacturer Durkopр Werke.
Maybe it belongs to the L.O. Dietrich company, but I don’t know for sure.
The only other well-known bayonet marked "D", besides mine, was made in cooperation with the company H.Kaufmann &Sohne Indianwerk
Last edited by Dok; 12-28-2019 at 04:40 AM.
Very good thread support Doc cool miitaria
It is not the size of a Collection in History that matters......Its the size of your Passion for it!! - Larry C
One never knows what tree roots push to the surface of what laid buried before the tree was planted - Larry C
“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” - Winston Churchill
It could be like You mentioned,D could be Dietrich,but for this should be compared inspector stamps of same period, about officers union it was probably error by Carter,could be find on a dress bayonet,b.r.Andy
Hi there,
unfortunately you can only grasp the very obvious and simple things here, i.e. the markings of the blade manufacturer and assembly company.
A. Carter has summarized these very well in his book.
However, this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Belong to an S98/05
- blade
- grip head
- Wooden handles
- Crossguard + 2 rivets
- Press stud - holding pin
- Mother to the holding pin
- Spring to the holding pin
- Leather sheath with fittings, clamps, button, carrying hook, mouth plate, clamp and mouth plate screw.
- seamlessly drawn steel sheath with retaining spring insert, carrying hook, button and mouth plate screw + bluing.
An S98/05 therefore consists of a large number of parts and hardly any company has manufactured all of them itself.
There was a large flock of suppliers and subcontractors.
It does not necessarily mean that the company stamp has anything to do with the actual manufacturer. The part can also come from a supplier.
To really capture the entire cooperation of manufacturers in the production of the S98/05 should, in my view, be an unmanageable undertaking.
Too much information from company archives is missing today. I also think that not all companies are known. This will be illustrated later with an example.
Steel sheaths for the S98/05 were e.g. initially i.a. distributed by Ales Coppel and sold 5000 pieces to the Amberg rifle factory.
I have an example here that illustrates the complexity somewhat and that we are still in the dark in many areas.
I was able to secure fragmentary documents from a bequest. They come from the company Krumm & Co Tool Factory from Remscheid.
The businessman Wilhelm Horwitz from Berlin commissioned this company to build 100.000 S98/05 and all the necessary information regarding the material / steel properties. Krumm & Co replaced Pfaff AG in Kaiserslautern regarding a collaboration. Pfaff declined because it only accepted orders from the Ministry of War.
Here is another aspect. On the one hand there were government contracts for companies and on the other hand businessmen were producing and then offering it to the state. Two completely different systems.
Krumm & Co then wrote in a letter stating that they could not make delivery dates for the 100.000 S98/05, since the army had drafted a large number of the workers. In addition, companies should also be informed about which materials can be obtained.
Unfortunately there were no more letters.
Fortunately, the original official blue break set for the production of S98/05 was still in the documents.
Such an original sentence is only known to me from the Bavarian military archive.
Therefore I think that at Krumm & Co. came to production, because these documents are officially classified.
This example shows how companies are searched for production via a merchant, who in turn are looking for suppliers and were dependent on mediated material deliveries.
The situation is similar with the production of the royal rifle factories as assembly plants. In my opinion, every part was delivered by suppliers. May also have something to do with secrecy. So no company had the complete information. There was a similar procedure between 1945 and 1990 in the ehm. GDR where everything was assembled in the VEB equipment at Riesa.
Similar Threads
Bookmarks