Sergeant York's Rifle

[Pete1052]

With thanks to Liam on the Gun Talk forum, the following image ends the debate on which rifle Sergeant Alvin York carried, the M1903 Springfield or the M1917 Enfield.

[centurion]

Although I've not been following any such argument - all the photo does is show which rifle he was carrying at the time the,posed, photo was taken! Which with his full medals up was probably some time after he won them.

[CROONAERT]

- all the photo does is show which rifle he was carrying at the time the,posed, photo was taken! Which with his full medals up was probably some time after he won them.

I think the clue's in the thread title , Centurion.

(photo taken in (IIRC) May 1919... not much need for an automatic rifle (slung or otherwise) on a troopship bound for NY)

Dave

[Steven Broomfield]

not much need for an automatic rifle (slung or otherwise) on a troopship bound for NY)

Dave

Dunno ... mean streets, innit? I watched Kojak. I know all about New Yoik, New Yoik.

[Piorun]

Surprised he was allowed to carry his arms on the troopship home. Should've been locked in the armoury. A

[Pete1052]

With all the small arms experts who frequent this forum and offer their opinions I'm surprised that nobody has identified the rifle slung over his shoulder. Verily, our small arms pedant Tony E has a tough row to hoe. Our Pal 4thGordons might know, maybe.

[4thGordons]

With all the small arms experts who frequent this this forum and offer their opinions I'm surprised that nobody has identified the rifle slung over his shoulder. Verily, our small arms pedant Tony E has a tough row to hoe. Our Pal 4thGordons might know, maybe.

M14 if I had to guess

Edit

like this:

[AndyHollinger]

I thought M14 when I saw it ... and yes, photoshop strikes again.

[Steven Broomfield]

So if that's an M14 and the photo was taken in 1919, does that mean he has an old rifle?

[ph0ebus]

Dunno ... mean streets, innit? I watched Kojak. I know all about New Yoik, New Yoik.

Indeed, we issue arms at the front door.

What, he didn't carry a phase plasma rifle with a 40-watt range?

-Daniel

[Ice Tiger]

If you look closely you can easily see that he had no need for a plasma rifle due to the proton grenade in his right breast pocket

Andy

[4thGordons]

If you look closely you can easily see that he had no need for a plasma rifle due to the proton grenade in his right breast pocket

Andy

My attention was diverted by the 106mm recoiless rifle on his other shoulder!

[Old Tom]

I have wondered if his exploits were in any true manner related to the film. As far as I recall, in the film, he was armed with a bolt action rifle and a .45 pistol. I also recall that he came from Nashville. I have a few friends from Nashville and they had never heard of him. Sic transit etc.

Old Tom

[CROONAERT]

I also recall that he came from Nashville.

He was from Pall Mall, Fentress County, Tennesee - where he lived and worked practically all his life (and is buried). He only died in Nashville (in the Veteran's Hospital).

Dave

[Torrey McLean]

Hello, Tom -

The short answer is yes, Alvin York accomplished the wartime feats shown in the movie. Extensive research has been conducted about York's action On October 8, 1918, and with some differences in several details shown in the movie, he virtually single-handedly saved a very adverse situation. While the survivors of his squad guarded several prisoners, York engaged in a one-man fight with German machine guns and infantrymen. In that action he killed more than two dozen Germans with his rifle and .45 pistol and with the help of several surviving members of his squad, he brought 132 prisoners to the rear. York was largely responsible for eliminating an entire German hilltop position that had held up the 82nd Division attack in that area.

York was a modest and unassuming man who became famous only because a war correspondent at the 82nd Division headquarters heard soldiers talking about York's feat and wrote about it. Extensive investigations were conducted by 82nd Division officers and other authorities after the Armistice. These investigations included detailed examinations of the site, with York present to point out where the various events occurred. Interviews with all surviving members of York's squad also were conducted.

After he returned to the U.S., York turned down all offers to financially benefit from his fame for years. He finally agreed to allow the movie to be made so that he could make the money necessary to open a Christian school for boys. He used his money from the movie for that purpose.

York was from Pall Mall, Tennessee, not Nashville. Anyone from Tennessee who does not know about Alvin York is sadly ignorant of WWI, an unfortunate situation resulting from history not being emphasized in many American schools now.

I may have made one or two mistakes in details of what I've written, and if so, I hope that some knowledgeable researcher will correct me. However, I believe that the gist of what I have written is absolutely correct; namely, that York was a true WWI hero who thoroughly deserved his fame.

During the past several years there has been a public argument concerning the exact location of York's exploit. Extensive research has been conducted, and this information is available on the internet if you would like more details about York's exploit.

I hope that this information helps.

Regards, Torrey

[deadin]

What looks like a slotted flash hider is a trick of the light and what is shown in the picture is the front end of a M1918 BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle).

[Whitedog]

What looks like a slotted flash hider is a trick of the light and what is shown in the picture is the front end of a M1918 BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle).

Trick photo showing and M-14 for certain. Anyway, all joking aside, There is pretty solid evidence that just before his unit went back into action leading up to the historic even for which he is famous, York had borrowed one of the few 1903 Springfields that had been grabbed from behind a mess tent some time earlier by one of Yorks buddy's where they had been in stack arms along with a lot of others. The soldier who took them was on hiss sway back to his unit from mess when he saw them there and while nobody was looking, he made off with several. York had kept his 1917 for some time afterwards, but just before he went into action on that fateful day, he'd visited a wounded buddy of his in an aid station and asked if he could borrow the guy's 1903 that the man had earlier traded his 1917 for. This was one of the rifles that had been stolen (borrowed). The wounded man, who wasn't allowed to report back to his unit yet, said OK and odd Alvin went with the man's rifle. The wounded man's son, who later became a colonel in the U.S. Army, was told by his father of the event many times. The former Colonel is still alive and related his story to a fellow gun club buddy of his who verified it to me. The Colonel also sent his story in as an interesting bit of history to the National RIfle Association some years back where I read of the account in an American Rifleman magazine. York himself said that the rifle that he used in his famous act was a 1903 Springfield and told his son that. His unit was issued 1917 Enfields during that action, but like many men often did, aquired 1903 Springfields in their place. The unauthorized switching of the 1917's for the 1903's is something that my grandfather had many times told me occured. He was a veteran of the Great War and he said "Fred, they'd find a Springfield lying on the ground and they'd just drop their Enfield and pick up the Springfield and off they'd continue." So, I'm going to believe that Sergeant York used a 1903 Springfield. Now "Experts" can pontificate about this and that, and how improbable the story is because of such and such detailed knowledge that they, as "Experts of the Great War" can verify (as if they were there experiencing every detailed moment). I know better than to ignore what a veteran of that war has to say about something. I'll accept the account as accurate.

[4thGordons]

I have never really understood the importance of this discussion to be honest, it seems to have something to do with some concern for national technical prowess.

Regardless of the situation with York (undoubtedly a hero IMHO), it is clear that a large proportion of the AEF were armed with and fought with the M1917.

Including pre war stocks immediately prior the US entry into the war the US had slightly fewer than 600,000 1903 Springfields on charge, this had increased to nearly 900,000 by the end of the war. M1917s were first produced in August 1917 and by November 1918 production had totaled nearly 2,300,000.

The official US govt record claims that the Springfield (arming the first divisions to arrive in France) fired half of rifle ammunition used. (Ayres 1919 p64)I suspect that his ignores the fact that a couple of US divisions who arrived quite early and fought very bravely were armed with Lebels and Berthiers!

The reasons this whole argument seems moot to me is that both the 1903 and the M1917 were essentially Mauser actions anyway!

[Torrey McLean]

Trick photo showing and M-14 for certain. Anyway, all joking aside, There is pretty solid evidence that just before his unit went back into action leading up to the historic even for which he is famous, York had borrowed one of the few 1903 Springfields that had been grabbed from behind a mess tent some time earlier by one of Yorks buddy's where they had been in stack arms along with a lot of others. The soldier who took them was on hiss sway back to his unit from mess when he saw them there and while nobody was looking, he made off with several. York had kept his 1917 for some time afterwards, but just before he went into action on that fateful day, he'd visited a wounded buddy of his in an aid station and asked if he could borrow the guy's 1903 that the man had earlier traded his 1917 for. This was one of the rifles that had been stolen (borrowed). The wounded man, who wasn't allowed to report back to his unit yet, said OK and odd Alvin went with the man's rifle. The wounded man's son, who later became a colonel in the U.S. Army, was told by his father of the event many times. The former Colonel is still alive and related his story to a fellow gun club buddy of his who verified it to me. The Colonel also sent his story in as an interesting bit of history to the National RIfle Association some years back where I read of the account in an American Rifleman magazine. York himself said that the rifle that he used in his famous act was a 1903 Springfield and told his son that. His unit was issued 1917 Enfields during that action, but like many men often did, aquired 1903 Springfields in their place. The unauthorized switching of the 1917's for the 1903's is something that my grandfather had many times told me occured. He was a veteran of the Great War and he said "Fred, they'd find a Springfield lying on the ground and they'd just drop their Enfield and pick up the Springfield and off they'd continue." So, I'm going to believe that Sergeant York used a 1903 Springfield. Now "Experts" can pontificate about this and that, and how improbable the story is because of such and such detailed knowledge that they, as "Experts of the Great War" can verify (as if they were there experiencing every detailed moment). I know better than to ignore what a veteran of that war has to say about something. I'll accept the account as accurate.

Hello, Captain G - For what it's worth, what you have written corroborates what a friend told me. That friend once interviewed Alvin York's son in Pall Mall, Tennessee and the man informed my friend that York had indeed switched his issued M-1917 rifle for a M-1903 rifle and that he used the M1903 on October 8, 1918. York informed his son that he did not care for the peep sight of the M-1917 rifle. Regards, Torrey

[59165]

Some great Sgt.York stuff here that I never knew of,still.Can anyone tell me if York was left handed?

Dave.

[Old Tom]

Torrey,

Many thanks for that. It was not my intention to suggest that Sgt York did not deserve his reputation, merely that films normally exagerate. Other than the film my only knowledge of him was from a memorial plaque at Chatel Chehery which I saw about 8 years ago. That plaque was erected in 1987 - the centenial of his birth - by the Tennessee Historical Commission with the support of the Rotary Club of Nashville, I drew the wrong conclusion. I would post a picture of the memorial but the one I have is only a film snapshot. However the fine brass plate has a description of his actions 8th October 1918 in French and English. It is mounted on the inclined top of polished black stone slab with the word York in gold on the front of the slab.

Old Tom

[Pete1052]

During the 1920s the M1903 Springfield rifle achieved an almost legendary status for accuracy in U.S. shooting circles. Some very high scores were shot at the national matches at Camp Perry, Ohio; one guy of modest means came to the match and took an M1903 out of the rack and shot a perfect score. The other shooters were so impressed that they raised money and bought him the rifle he had used. Doughboys who were also gun enthusiasts usually thought the M1917 Enfield was a second-best rifle. That is part of the reason why this M1903 versus M1917 debate continues to this day.

[Torrey McLean]

Hello, Tom -

Thanks, I didn't think that you were suggesting that York's reputation was overblown.

I've visited Chatel-Chehery and examined the memorial to York. I also visited the valley west of the village where the 82nd Division attacked, but unfortunately, at that time I had no idea of the specific site of York's exploits. [The site was on the low ridge to the left, as you stand at the eastern end of the valley.]

I'm sure that the film did indeed exaggerate (or at least simplify) certain things, especially the parts concerning York's pacifist background. [For example, I don't recall his biography containing any mention of his having been struck by lightning while riding a mule on his way to kill a neighbor who had cheated him.] I suspect that such "artistic license" was taken to make make York's background clearer to the movie audiences. Additionally, there are inaccuracies in some of the battlefield scenes [e.g., there was no squad member named "Pusher" or anyone else killed by a hand grenade thrown by a German prisoner, etc.] However, on the whole, the movie depiction of the October 8th scenes are pretty accurate - no mean feat for a Hollywood production!

Coming when it did in 1940(?), the movie helped undermine the isolationism of the U.S. population at the time and made the country more supportive of the UK's struggle against Hitler.

Every time the movie is shown on TV, I try to catch the action scenes and thus appreciate what a remarkable man York was.

Regards, Torrey

[Joe Sweeney]

I suspect that his ignores the fact that a couple of US divisions who arrived quite early and fought very bravely were armed with Lebels and Berthiers!

Chris,

I think you will find that only one US Division (4 Regiments of the 93rd) was armed by the French with Berthiers. The other Division you may be referring too--The 92nd--was always armed with US small arms and fought as a US division. Although occasionally attached to French units (all US formations can say the samething of either being attached to British (Australian) or French units when in the line).

Joe Sweeney

[Thunderbox]

Other collectors/ historians who have met Alvin York's son at his museum affirm that Andrew Jackson York had no idea what rifle his father had used, and that his father had never mentioned it......

There is a huge industry devoted to proving - against the only known evidence - that the rifle was a Springfield.