New Scabbard for my 1895 Lee Navy Bayonet.

[Misfit 45]

Happy day! I bought a loose scabbard on ebay for my Remington1895 Lee Navy bayonet. (How hard do you think THAT is to come by?) As far as we know, there were three makers (Maybe) of this bayonet, Remington, Winchester, and the mysterious "T in a Triangle" maker, which is at this point, unknown. I see more of the "T" makers on ebay than either of the other two. Well, to the point, this scabbard has the "T in a Triangle" mark on the leather hanger. I would like to know if this mark has been seen by anyone recently. The two styles of scabbards that were made were supposed to be from Ames Co. and Winchester. I've seen this mark on the bayonets, but never on the scabbard (mainly because the scabbards are usually in pretty rough shape). Maybe someone knows of this mysterious maker and their mark. Maybe this mark is simply a proof mark for those bayonets and scabbards that do not have company names on them. Of course, then why were others unmarked except for the proof mark? Why don't the Remington and Winchester blades have this "proof mark"? Who knows? Thanks for letting me share this.

I guess that makes my bayonet and scabbard a miss-match, I'm not complaining though.

Marv

 

PS. I just got back from ebay again, and found a "T in a Triangle" bayonet with a scabbard that the seller says has the same mark on the scabbard as well. When it rains it pours. Ebay number 200960417894

 

 

 

 

 

[SKIPH]

Marv- I'm going way out on the limb here. I just checked out Gary's book, he mentioned the "T". I f my memory is not mistaken, the Russians bought a bunch Remingtons in the 1890s. Could the Triangle w/ the "T: represent, say "TULA" arsenal in Russia. I'm almost sure that's their stamp. Maybe Ames made them on contract for Tula. THIS IS AN EXTREME GUESS. I have no reference backing anywhere. Let's see how this flies. SKIP

[bayonetman]

Since writing that section in my book, I have learned that the T in a triangle mark is the Navy inspector's stamp of Ensign Nathan C Twining. His mark also may appear in the rifle, in the case of one that I had at one time it was on the buttplate.

[SKIPH]

I guess Gary just put my unfounded theory to rest. LOL!! Gary, thanks for the info, put a sticky in my book of the 1895 page. Thanks. SKIP

[Misfit 45]

Thanks, Gary.

The next question is, why does Ensign Twining's mark only appear on otherwise unmarked specimens, not Remington or Winchester?

Marv

[militariaone]

Greetings Marv,

 

I did a little looking on the internet and thought I’d share what I found with you.

 

Remington Arms Company provided 10,200 knife bayonets per their contract and the Ames Sword Company provided the exact same number of scabbards (GPO. 1898, p. 317). That said, my assumption is the bayonets and scabbards were delivered in batches as they were manufactured. I would assume that the earliest batch(es) may of not had Remington’s Trademark Logo on them and those are the ones with Ensign Twining’s “triangle T” acceptance mark on ricasso of the blades. I have owned Lee Navy Scabbards with and without Ensign Twining's inspection mark/stamp.

 

There were two patterns of scabbards for these Bayonets, yours is the second type and would of had a brass hanger, passing through the sewn loop at the top of the frog. You may order a repro brass hanger here for $6.00 http://www.ssfirearms.com/proddetail.asp?prod=HS20 I seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference to an original other than by patina (perhaps). Sometimes, Mr. Hayes Otoupalik has loose originals for sale and it may be worth contacting him about an original brass hook replacement at http://hayesotoupalik.com/index.htm he’s always been helpful/friendly when I’ve inquired about odd bits and bobs. Nice bayonet you have posted, I sold my variants several months ago to focus (the funds) on other collecting areas, thanks for sharing yours with us.

 

Regards,

 

Lance

 

Reference:

 

Government Printing Office. (1898). Annual Reports of the Navy Department: Report of the Secretary of the Navy 1897. Retrieved September 13, 2013, from http://books.google.com/books?id=_cldKaMaOAAC&pg=PA325&lpg=PA325&dq=Lee+Navy+Ames+Sword+Company&source=bl&ots=mYNjyFrdpo&sig=qwVV_h5mAmOV8NpZuHN91M6cRdY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=V8YzUrHZIq_C4APUmoGQDA&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Lee%20Navy%20Ames%20Sword%20Company&f=false

 

 

[Misfit 45]

Thank you Militariaone.

There is so little information on these bayonets and scabbards. I appreciate any bit that can be pieced together.

You said, "..., I would assume that the earliest batch(es) may of not had Remington’s Trademark Logo on them and those are the ones with Ensign Twining’s “triangle T” acceptance mark on ricasso of the blades."

If that is a correct assumption, and the scabbard I have is actually the second pattern, then, the second pattern scabbard (which is marked by Twining) as well as the first pattern scabbard was made before Remington marked their name on the blades.

I can see why you would say the earliest bayonets might not have had the Remington name on them, not having totally tooled up for production, but if the Twining mark stopped as soon as the Remington name was added, then I would think the mark should have stopped for the scabbard as well. Yet that is evidently not the case. (of course it is possible that Twining continued to mark most of both pattern scabbards throughout the contract)

Also, how did you find out that my scabbard is the second type and not the first type? Is that because my scabbard is the more elaborate of the two types and has the addition of the belt hook and thus was an improvement over the rather plain first production scabbard without the hook?

Do you think both patterns were made by Ames without Winchester's involvement with either pattern?

I think we can assume and agree that Remington had the only contract for the first 10,200 and did not have a second contract for this bayonet. (I hope that is correct) Winchester making their own bayonets after that.

Thank you for the foregoing information.

If you could clear some of this up for me it would be greatly appreciated. Of course if anyone else wishes to add anything feel free to do so. I know this is a topic with very narrow appeal, but it's all in the details.

Marv

[militariaone]

Greetings Marv,

 

I think I’d be typing a whole lot more than I’d care to, if I attempted to transcribe what’s in both the referenced (below) books on the Lee Navy Bayos (9 Pages worth). I have PMed you the scans of the appropriate pages. One clarification though, Hardin shows both styles of bayonet scabbards, but uses the word “assumed” when referencing which scabbard style he felt came first (This was based upon the method of attachment to the belt for each), (Hardin, 1987, p. 155). In Janzen’s book he refers to them in opposite evolutionary order than Hardin (Janzen, 1993, p. 109).

 

Hope the info assists you with learning more about your bayonet.

 

Regards,

 

Lance

 

References:

Hardin, A. N. (1987). The American bayonet, 1776-1964. Philadelphia: Hardin. (Original work published 1964)

Janzen, J. L. (1993). Bayonets of the Remington cartridge period. Broken Arrow, Okla.: Cedar Ridge Publications.

 

 

[Misfit 45]

I can't thank you enough Lance, for the work of scanning all those reference pages. They are now part of my bayonet file. I'll not have to ask for more info for a while. One thing I noticed was a Twining marked bayonet with a serial number of 16949 with a "W" in a triangle on the obverse side of the blade!! Never saw that before!! Thanks. I love this forum!

Marv

[militariaone]

I can't thank you enough Lance, for the work of scanning all those reference pages. They are now part of my bayonet file. I'll not have to ask for more info for a while. One thing I noticed was a Twining marked bayonet with a serial number of 16949 with a "W" in a triangle on the obverse side of the blade!! Never saw that before!! Thanks. I love this forum!

Marv

No sweat Brother,

 

Scanning them was a whole lot easier than typing 'em!

 

Njoy,

 

Lance

[militariaone]

Greetings all,

 

While doing an internet search, I stumbled upon this medal group belonging to the same bayonet/scabbard inspector of the OP's scabbard Nathan C. Twining http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/23335115_rdml-nathan-crook-twining1869-1924usn-medals It reminded me of this thread and while not the medals forum I thought it was relevant enough to this specific post to post it here.

 

Regards,

 

Lance