DMW5506 Posted 4 November , 2011 Share Posted 4 November , 2011 Is this any use to anyone? Know nothing about it, just found it in a pile from some where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 4 November , 2011 Share Posted 4 November , 2011 Is this any use to anyone? Know nothing about it, just found it in a pile from some where. A nice picture, perhaps brothers or cousins. I wonder if either of them made it. They are both either Kitchener lads (i.e. from a war-raised Service Battalion), or as a longer shot Territorials. The cap badge is either King's Royal Rifles or perhaps a battalion of the London Regiment that sported a similar Maltese cross type badge, and they have black buttons too. It looks to be early 1915 as both have the new 1914 leather equipment and Long Lee Enfield rifles (rather than SMLE) so they are still undergoing training. The house outside which they pose could either be a family dwelling, or where they were billeted over the winter during the training phase. P.S. I was once an 'Ought Six' too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7t2ndswinger Posted 4 November , 2011 Share Posted 4 November , 2011 I'd have thought one of the London Regiments probably with the 11th London Regt (Finsbury Rifles) being my choice. They could also be 6th or 9th London or KRRC but the cap badge proportions appear more likely Finsbury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardog Posted 4 November , 2011 Share Posted 4 November , 2011 Possibly Buckinghamshire Battalion-but the perhaps the badge is too big? Not armed with SMLEs. Cap also points to early war. Regards, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 5 November , 2011 Share Posted 5 November , 2011 Both the rifles appear to be slightly different to each other? Is this an optical illusion or just my eyesight--one rifle also appears to be longer than the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 5 November , 2011 Share Posted 5 November , 2011 I think it is just that he is holding his rifle further forward than the chap on his right; his arm is nearly straight while the other chap has a noticeable bend at the elbow. There are also what appear to be chalk marks to the right of the door - the bottom one is a figure "8". Billet for 8 men? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 5 November , 2011 Share Posted 5 November , 2011 I think it is just that he is holding his rifle further forward than the chap on his right; his arm is nearly straight while the other chap has a noticeable bend at the elbow. There are also what appear to be chalk marks to the right of the door - the bottom one is a figure "8". Billet for 8 men? Well spotted Squirrel, I think you have it. The chalking by 'Billeting Officers' of a number outside the dwelling (having agreed with the householder) was the common way of marking billets. On balance I think they are more 'likely' to be lads from a KRR Service Battalion, for whom the 1914 leather equipment was devised. It was more common (although not universal) for TF soldiers to have P08 Web Equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 6 November , 2011 Share Posted 6 November , 2011 My first thought when I saw the photograph was to focus on the house number, 119, thinking someone might be being clever and they from 1/19th Londons - then I looked carefully at the badge! I think it is KRR though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 6 November , 2011 Share Posted 6 November , 2011 The right hand rifle has no magazine protruding like the long Lee, it also has a straight (at Right Angles)Bolt handle looks like a 7mm Mauser I have ruled out the Japanese rifle as the but sling loop is not high enough up I would say 99% Mauser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T8HANTS Posted 6 November , 2011 Share Posted 6 November , 2011 I think Squirrel is right the 'shorter' appears to have a straight bolt, no box magazine only a mag floor plate, no butt socket, the woodwork being all in one, and no provision for a piling swivel. T'ain't an Enfield! G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 6 November , 2011 Share Posted 6 November , 2011 The right hand rifle has no magazine protruding like the long Lee, it also has a straight (at Right Angles)Bolt handle looks like a 7mm Mauser I have ruled out the Japanese rifle as the but sling loop is not high enough up I would say 99% Mauser I am going back and forward on this. I see what you mean about the butt sling loop but I think that might be an effect of the angle of the rifle. Neither the 7mm Chilean or Brazilian Mausers have a rectangular spring clip set in the underside of the fore-end holding the front band in place but the Arisaka does and I think I can see this catching the light in the picture. If that is an accurate interpretation then my bet is on the Arisaka. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 6 November , 2011 Share Posted 6 November , 2011 I have just dug out my 1898 7mm Mauser and there is a metal strap below the bayonet Boss 65mm x 10 mm which matches the rifle in the picture. Still stick to my guns it's a Mauser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 6 November , 2011 Share Posted 6 November , 2011 (edited) I have just dug out my 1898 7mm Mauser and there is a metal strap below the bayonet Boss 65mm x 10 mm which matches the rifle in the picture. Still stick to my guns it's a Mauser hahaha well I went and looked at my Chilean M1912 and Brazilian 08 before I posted too and neither of those have it, (both having front bands like the Gew 98 with a narrow spring mounted in the side of the forened) as far as I am aware these were the primary Mauser models in British Service.. were 7mm 1898s used?.. As you say my 7mm Spanish mauser has a similar strap but I think I'll stay with Arisaka as my best guess. Chris Edit Any chance that the Original Poster (Dai?) could post a higher resoultion version? I have to admit the floorplate looks more and more mauserish(eque?) as I look at it. Edited 6 November , 2011 by 4thGordons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 Very interesting photo of that 'mystery rifle' IN British army service. First photo that I've seen that was not one of the "regular suspects". From what I can see I would be leaning towards it being the Arisaka rifle, going on the small bayonet lug being situated on the bottom of the band. It also appears to have quite a lowset front sling swivel and a finer timber forend profile, both of which would seem to support the Arisaka theory. I doubt very much that it is a Gew98 style Mauser, because it looks to be lacking the long German bayonet bar attachment underneath the barrel. Just my thoughts, but I agree this is an excellent puzzle to ponder over. Thanks again to the OP for posting this photo.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
high wood Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 Rifles aside, I think that the men are from the Buckinghamshire Btn, OBLI as the chalked billeting instruction appears to read BK (Bucks) C (C Coy) 2 (Platoon?) 8 (8 men) Is there any evidence on the back of the photograph as to where the picture was taken such as the photographer's name and address? If you are still looking for a good home for the postcard I would be happy to have it in my photographic archive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 Rifles aside, I think that the men are from the Buckinghamshire Btn, OBLI as the chalked billeting instruction appears to read BK (Bucks) C (C Coy) 2 (Platoon?) 8 (8 men) Is there any evidence on the back of the photograph as to where the picture was taken such as the photographer's name and address? If you are still looking for a good home for the postcard I would be happy to have it in my photographic archive. Well spotted High Wood. Two platoon would have been in A Coy (1,2,3, Platoons), but looking at your theory I suppose it could be 2 men of 8 platoon, which would fit for C Coy (7,8,9, Platoons) and of course these would be the two men allocated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
high wood Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 I am never sure if there is an exact form for billeting details chalked on walls as I have seen several variations as in these King's (Liverpool)Regiment examples. First two: Liverpool Scottish. 3/6th Btn, C Coy, 10 men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 I am never sure if there is an exact form for billeting details chalked on walls as I have seen several variations as in these King's (Liverpool)Regiment examples. First two: Liverpool Scottish. 3/6th Btn, C Coy, 10 men. I too doubt an exact form. In general 'recommended' formats would have been taught on a Billeting Officers training course (if such existed), or perhaps just issued in a written guide / manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 Having been alerted to this thread by 4th Gordons, I have had a close look at the rifle and agree it is a bit of a mystery. I have merged the original picture with one of a man definitely armed with a Pattern 1907 (Type 38) Arisaka (on the right). As you can see, the point made by 303man regarding the position of the sling swivel is quite right, it is higher on the butt on the Arisaka than on the unknown rifle. Also, the unknown appears to have a straight wrist to the stock whereas the Arisaka has a semi pistol grip that is usually quite clearly evident. I have seen nothing that suggests that the Brazilian or Chilean 7mm Mausers were ever issued to army units, only to Royal Navy auxiliary vessels. However, there is evidence that 65,000 7mm Mausers were purchased from the Spanish government in September 1915 and that possibly another 200,000 were bought in late 1915. Whilst nothing is known for certain about these deliveries and the final note in the Ministry of Munitions file at the National Archives suggests that the rifles should be sent to Russia, it is I suppose conceivable that some found there way to the army, possible from the first consignment. I have also attached a picture of the Spanish 7mm M1893 Mauser and it does seem to fit the bill. I would love to see a higher res. picture and know when or where it might have been taken. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 November , 2011 Share Posted 7 November , 2011 I have merged the original picture with one of a man definitely armed with a Pattern 1907 (Type 38) Arisaka (on the right). As you can see, the point made by 303man regarding the position of the sling swivel is quite right, it is higher on the butt on the Arisaka than on the unknown rifle. Also, the unknown appears to have a straight wrist to the stock whereas the Arisaka has a semi pistol grip that is usually quite clearly evident. While I agree that the Spanish Mauser is probably the only other close match going on profile, I still think that its the Arisaka rifle shown, and possibly the Type 30 version. I have measured the dimensions of where the sling swivel is located on the butt (location midway between butt plate and trigger guard) and they do compare favourably. The placement of the sling swivel is not low enough to be the Spanish Mauser, and the difference in TonyE's photo comes down to whether the swivel is flipped up or down. Regarding the pistol grip, the earlier Type 30 Arisaka had a less pronounced semi-pistol grip than the later Type 38, and I think it could be close enough to match the original. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 8 November , 2011 Share Posted 8 November , 2011 I agree entirely that it should be an Arisaka, and in most respects indeed looks like one. My point about the semi pistol grip was that in nearly every picture of men armed with Arisakas, whether Pattern 1900 (Type 30) or 1907 (Type 38), the light tends to be reflected of the curve of the stock at that point. I also said that I supposed it was conceivable that some Spanish Mausers made it to issue, but I have no evidence that they did. In fact apart from the file record there is no physical evidence that the transaction actually took place. The whole thing was shrouded in secrecy, with a British merchantman flying a false flag supposedly collecting the weapons and transferring them to a British cruiser at sea where they were to be tested and accepted. You may well be right about the sling swivel (although it still looks low to me). Although the upper stock shape is slightly different I do not think that the Pattern 1900 had a less pronounced pistol grip than the Pattern 1907. The attached photograph shows both types (later type at top), both of which are British service issue, and the lower part of the grips are similar. I am still not totally convinced it is an Arisaka even though it cetainly ought to be, but on the basis that if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... BTW S>S with your new found interest in British rifles rather than just the bayonets, you really need to get my books on British secondary weapons, especially Part 1, "Arisaka Rifles and Carbines". Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 8 November , 2011 Share Posted 8 November , 2011 BTW S>S with your new found interest in British rifles rather than just the bayonets, you really need to get my books on British secondary weapons ... TonyE are you saying that I really "no nuffin' 'bout" Arisakas ... well, err (cough) ... you should remember Aussies do know a little about Jap rifles ... Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 9 November , 2011 Share Posted 9 November , 2011 Sorry my friend, you are not getting me down that road! ...and also, please don't attribute quotes to me that I did not say. TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 9 November , 2011 Share Posted 9 November , 2011 Sorry my friend, you are not getting me down that road! OK then, but now you are just being a spoilsport.! (And all offending non-attributable quotations have been removed.) I shall now have to return to being serious once again. Such a terrible bore ... Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanD Posted 3 January , 2015 Share Posted 3 January , 2015 Bit of a tread revival here. I wonder if the man on the right is holding a Chilean Model 1895 7mm Mauser? Is there any real difference between a Spanish Mauser 1893 as far as the underside of the rifle is concerned? Regards AlanD Sydney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now