Bayonet, P1888 Mk III

[Lance]

Decided to dust off some bayonets and thought I would share an uncommon Lee Enfield bayonet, The Pattern 1888 Mk III. Officially produced only at Enfield, per “British & Commonwealth Bayonets” from 1901-04, I suggest that the other bayonet manufacturers might of made a few also.

Often confused with the P1903 bayonet because of the grips, Enfield produced 65,000 of them but for some reason are not readily available to the collector, in fact I feel that the Pattern 1888 Mk I (first type) is more available to the collector even though there were fewer made.

Identical to the P1888 Mk II with two exceptions which gave it its Mk III status, first the grips are installed with screws, rather than rivets, and the pommel to cross guard steel was browned for protection. Many earlier P1888 variations were upgraded later in life to the Mk III status.

In my collection I have three examples:

Top, a factory Enfield made in January 1903. The pommel to cross guard has been browned.

Middle, a December 1902 Wilkerson example that was rebuilt in 1916 and has the remains of tan paint. There is no browning, but is it a factory Mk III or a rebuild? Unknown.

Bottom, a January 1903 Sanderson example. No browning or rebuild date, factory or converion??

As with all collecting, the hunt continues for a Mole manufactured version, I have yet to see one.

Scabbards are a whole other story but just to tease, here are the Mk III’s homes from top to bottom. All unusual to rare, just like their bayonets. Pattern 1888 Land Mk II*, Pattern 1903 Naval Mk III, and Pattern 1903 Naval Mk II

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[husk]

Very Nice! As you mention, all very hard to find.

[capt14k]

Very nice. I could use one of them.

[Cottage Hill Bill]

Lance, I agree the Mk III is harder to find than the 3-rivet Mk I. I just looked at my two, both EFD, both dated 1 '03. One is well used and the remaining finish appear to be browning. The other is, aside from some staining on the blade, apparently unissued and the pommel and crosspiece are definitely blued, not browned. That sent me to look at the LOC which states "pommel and crosspiece to be browned". I'm sure this isn't a re-blue. Is there any possibility that your non-EFD pieces were blades left over from other makers sent to Enfield for assembly? Nice collection of some tough to find blades.

[Lance]

Lance, I agree the Mk III is harder to find than the 3-rivet Mk I. I just looked at my two, both EFD, both dated 1 '03. One is well used and the remaining finish appear to be browning. The other is, aside from some staining on the blade, apparently unissued and the pommel and crosspiece are definitely blued, not browned. That sent me to look at the LOC which states "pommel and crosspiece to be browned". I'm sure this isn't a re-blue. Is there any possibility that your non-EFD pieces were blades left over from other makers sent to Enfield for assembly? Nice collection of some tough to find blades.

Anything is possible, but with the Sanderson lacking any "E" inspector marks and the Wilkerson only having one "E" stamp which was mostly likely added with the '16 I think they were either factory made, field upgrade or with the Wilkerson a factory rebuild. Collecting...more questions than answers eh?