US Model 1816 Socket Bayonet

[SARGE]

Gentlemen,

Not a sword but a bayonet this time. I picked up a US Model 1816 socket bayonet recently that I thought I would show. It is in a Regulation Pattern 1839 scabbard that could be worn in either a shoulder belt or a later waist belt frog. This is the earlier style of leather scabbard that has the throat piece retained by two copper rivets, instead of four, and seemingly was made for wear with the earlier shoulder belt arrangement.

The bayonet itself is a 19" overall US Model 1816 with a short bridge and an elongated T shaped mortise slot. The socket is marked with an "N" and a "90" near the end of the slot. The blade has distinct shoulders with a "US" over an inspector marking of "JE" on the flat side. The distinctive blade has a short 9" fuller toward the tip that runs out at the point of the blade on the flat side. The distinctive "slash" point was called for in the 1816 regulations and is unique to this model of US bayonet. The numbering on the socket indicated each lot of 100 bayonets preceeded by a letter. For instance the prefix "A" would be used for the first 100 while the prefix "B" would be used for the next 100 bayonets.

These M1816 bayonets served for quite a long time with both US flintlock and percussion muskets. Some were also reworked during the Civil War but were phased out at the end of the CW.

 

 

[SARGE]

Some closeups of the bayonet blade details and markings.

 

 

[Frank Trzaska]

Could the marking be US / JB? The JB marking is a known marking made by an unknown maker.

 

The initials on the 1816 type bayonets are not inspectors, they are the Forgers initials. Pay records call out most of the forgers; the unknowns are a combination of unattributed workers or unknown contractors. With the alpha numeric rack numbers and the lack of an inspector mark this leads me to believe that JB was a National Armory employee and the bayonet was made at the Armory not a contract piece.

 

Cool bayonet and most likely a Pattern of 1827 version of the Model of 1816.

 

All the best

Frank Trzaska

[SARGE]

Thanks Frank... that does make sense. Particularly with the presence of the 1839 Pattern scabbard.

 

The markings could well be "JB". They are hard to read but appear to be "JE" or "JB" when held in hand. These are always hard to read so I would not bet a cup of coffee on my interpretation.

[SARGE]

Frank,

 

I know there is a theory that the small letters on the blade are not inspector markings but instead indicate a maker such as "NS" to indicate Nathan Starr. However, Hardin and Reilly both thought these were inspectors. Are there any period documents that state these markings are makers (forgers) instead of inspectors?

[Frank Trzaska]

Sarge,

I wish it was that easy... Looking at these for years the stamped letters never matched up to any of the known inspectors of the times they worked. But payroll records and their positions did line up for a large amount of the known markings to the fellows listed as Bayonet Forgers at Springfield and Harpers Ferry. The contractors like Nathan Starr and Springfield Mfg Co., have their initials of the companies (makers) stamped, and smaller inspector marks like the one Gary shows in his post. The National Armory made bayonets do not have inspector marks on theirs.

 

This is true of known barrel forgers and lock forgers as well having their initials in the parts.

 

The general thought of everyone I know out there is that these marks are Inspector initials, I disagree. Hardin and Reilly were ground breakers, great guys and have helped the study immensely but they did get some things wrong that we all know today. As for getting things wrong the list includes Cole, Janzen, Silvey and me. I wish it weren't so.

 

Anyway I say the initials are forgers (makers) not inspectors, punch holes in my theory... please.

 

All the best

Frank Trzaska