1910 Canvas Bayonet scabbard...Got a weird one here

[Misfit 45]

Hi Folks,

When I saw this one on ebay, I thought I was looking at a first production 1910 Canvas scabbard. It has the butterfly, one piece leather tip cover. I has the sewn seam on the side. It had what looked like a longer web hanger. It did not. And it did not have the brass tube that protects the canvas from the double hook.

When I got it in the mail. I was surprised to find how light it was, so I weighed it. The regular 1910 scabbard weighs 8 1/2 oz. This one weighs 4 1/2 oz. That's because there is no rawhide covering the wood scabbard body! The whole thing is generally smaller, although it fits the 1905 bayonets just fine.

There are a lot of small differences, but I'll post some pictures to see if anyone else can identify it as a known variation, or foreign made, or what.

 

The weird scabbard is the one in the middle.

Marv

[Misfit 45]

Here's a couple more pics. I'm not sure if the aluminum insert was removed, or if it never had one.

[militariaone]

Greetings Marv,

 

I have always viewed the example in question as being a USMC's depot made M1910 Scabbard's variation. Google "USMC M1910 Scabbard" and several similar examples will show up for your comparison. I have viewed variants with and without drain hole's grommets on the inside of the tip. Thoughts complete.

 

​Best,

 

​V/r Lance

[Misfit 45]

militariaone, Thank you for your response.

 

I have found that there is very little written about the USMC M1910 scabbard.

 

This scabbard has quite a few similarities to the USMC scabbard. Here are a few.

 

1. The leather tip is very similar to the USMC scabbard by the way the leather is in one piece and folded over and sewn.

2. The canvas is a much lighter weight than the standard M1910 scabbard (just like the known USMC scabbards)

3. The canvas is sewn up the side similar to the USMC scabbard.

4. The wire double hook is thinner than the standard M1910 scabbard. (similar to the USMC scabbards)

 

The differences in this scabbard to a USMC scabbard, though few, are substantial.

 

1. The wood body of the scabbard does not seem to have any rawhide sewn around the wood. This makes the scabbard quite a bit thinner than any M1910 I've seen. I have not compared it to a USMC scabbard. Also, I cannot remove the canvas to see for sure. There are indeed some odd ridges along the length, but not quite like the regular 1910. Maybe a very thin layer of rawhide.

2. The top of the web hanger on a USMC scabbard should be set about a 1/2 inch below the top of the throat opening of the scabbard. My scabbard has it set about 3/8" above the opening.

3. The leather on the USMC scabbards I have seen, whether original or reproduction, are all black.

4. The USMC scabbard has the aluminum insert in the throat opening. My scabbard does not. Of course, I have never seen a scabbard with a missing aluminum insert.

 

Are there USMC M1910 scabbard variations out there that are this divergent from the "normal" USMC scabbard?

 

If anybody has seen any M1910 scabbards, whether USMC or not, that have these distinctive features, please let me know.

 

Also, let me know if you have NEVER seen anything like this. Thanks.

Marv

 

 

[P-40Warhawk]

Very strange one. I've seen prop one from old movies, but none were made this well, but none of the military versions I have seen were made this flimsy. As stated it's super similar to the depot USMC ones, but also substantially different. The lack of the drain eyelet is interesting. Only thing I can think of, and in no way am I saying it is or isn't, is that it's vaguely reminiscent of some of the pre-WWI Manila depot made items. So maybe something to look further into.

[P-40Warhawk]

Now I had a thought after this, the leather stitching is so light that it's unmilitary (but there are poorly made examples of all sorts of webbing out there that have seen military use). That having been said, the scabbard insert looks well made. I am wondering if something made up in the 1920s or 1930s for sale with the R F Sedgely M1903s, although I think they and Bannerman were selling M1892 bayonets for that purpose (which is why so many old movies that use the ersatz M1903s have krag bayonets).

[robinb]

Is the wire hook steel or brass?

[Misfit 45]

Is the wire hook steel or brass?

 

The hook is steel.

Marv

 

[Misfit 45]

Is the wire hook steel or brass?

 

The hook is steel. And thank you all for your comments.

Marv

 

As I look at the picture in the first post, I can see the ridges I spoke of. Now I'm more inclined to think that there may be a thin layer of leather sewn around the wood, however thin.

 

[robinb]

The hook being steel pretty much dates it to 1943 or later.

[Misfit 45]

Maybe we're back to some USMC variation. The first M3 scabbard contract was from October 41 to October 42. They had steel hooks. What about the USMC scabbard? Did it have steel hooks?

Marv

[robinb]

For what it's worth here are my 4 examples of USMC scabbard covers. The one at far right is very similar to your unusual one. Brown leather, no drain hole. But the steel wire hook is the typical USMC type. Also made of very thin canvas.

[robinb]

[robinb]

[robinb]

Mine all are on M1910 scabbards that were missing the original covers. Yours without the aluminum mouth piece could be a very early production scabbard as the first year production, 1906, did not have the aluminum mouth piece. They are all wood.

[Misfit 45]

Thank you robinb.

Those are great examples. I mentioned the dearth of information on USMC scabbards. Is there a book or article or some other source to find out more info about these USMC scabbards? Gary Cunningham's works do not go into it very far.

Thanks again.

Marv

[LenR]

Interesting postings. I have not previously seen a similar scabbard.

Regarding the thinner gauge wire hooks for the USMC covers - were these brass or steel?

The only ones I have seen are made from steel.

Thanks.

Len.

[remman]

There is a dealer on ebay selling under the name "btmilitariaanddollcollectibles" that has at least three M1905 bayonets with scabbards very similar to the one being discussed in this thread. they are listed under the bayonets category.

[jeremy69]

So I found the below 1910 USMC and SA 1905 combo at the LGS, initially passed on it because the scabbard was so light and cheap feeling. After reading this thread and conversing with Roninb I decided to go back for it as it compares favorably to his examples. Anyway it’s a nice SA 1909 dated in what I feel is a legitimate USMC 1910. Comments welcome 

[Misfit 45]

jeremy69,

This scabbard is very much the Marine Corps replacement scabbard cover made circa 1940.  The Marine Corps used the 1905 bayonet in some areas throughout WWII.  One thing you'll notice is the Marine scabbards like "yours", is that most, if not all, have a belt hook that is bent to be much wider than the standard belt hooks.

Marv

[jeremy69]

Thanks for the reply Marv. 
 

I was kind of surprised how light and cheap

it feels. This is my first USMC type. The leather and canvas on the regular ones is just so much heavier.

[GWS]

Though I no longer own it, this is the USMC scabbard cover I had for many years. It had the aluminum throat piece but I did not document that feature. The tip was black and the hanger was steel. Hope this helps.

 

                                        Steve

[GWS]

I forgot I also had this sheet of unknown origins in my photos:

[jeremy69]

Thanks GWS… looks like mine compares favorably and your sheet confirms the thin leather.