Water bottle patterns

[Jack31916]

Hi to all

I'm new here , and help if it's possible .

I dug bottle like this , in Lithuania , at the place , where in the first world war was the front line .

Can anyone help identify it please ?

Thanks in advance

stegger

Hi Stegger,

This is a Dutch waterbottle as used by the Dutch army up 'till 1940. After the Dutch surrender, the German army used a lot of Dutch uniforms and equipment for second line troops / non combat units. http://www.leger1939-1940.nl/Uniform/Infanterist/veldfles.htm

This bottle was carried in a special sewn up pocket on the Dutch breadbad, which is very similar to the German type of breadbag. http://www.leger1939...st/broodzak.htm

For more information you can visit this website: http://www.leger1939-1940.nl/

Regards,

Jack

[dickiek]

Ok, I should know this...and there have been other threads (none of which I can find), but...apart from the obvious blue enamel, can I get a definitive answer from someone in the know about water bottle patterns, please? I'm confused about cover-colour, seams and shoulders. Anyone game?

Hope so...I've got a lot of water bottles to sort out, and I'm still confused

Thanks!

Peter

I have a blue enamel water bottle which doesn't have a welded seam around the bottom, unlike WW2 blue & green enamle bottles.......it's also slightly smaller. I was under the impression it's a WW1 type.

It was found in a 03 leather carrier with black felt covering it.

There is also no little ring near the neck of the bottle for the string to attach to, the string is stitched underneath the felt around the neck of the bottle.

Dick

[petey]

Hi all, an interesting topic.

I have two bottles and a little confused on both. [ hoping for some help ]

one is the normal ww1 bottle, kahki felt , blue enamel , cork on string. This has a straight neck with a service number on the base.

The webing is blue, and stamped A.M. m.e co 1935. Same service number on webing.

Question - Am i right in thinking that the R.A.F. used the surplus stock of the R.F.C. ? Can it be dated by the webbing design ? And the bottle neck ? liped or spout older then straight neck ?

Two , now this is far more confusing ! and older.

This bottle looks like the standerd round one , Boar war. Exactly the same construction as the previous pic,s. but the neck is copper , bottle is proberly copper and coverd in a khaki canvas. Cork n chain design. No stamps or marks but genuine.

Any ideas ? Thanks Petey.

[Jerry B]

Here is my 1895 mkiv water bottle/canteen, probably a private purchase example maker marked on the stopper and unit marked on the leather strap.

Regards,

Jerry

It is the grey type, less commonly seen than the blue type, though sadly it is missing it's cover.

Jerry

The markings are for I company 1st Volunteer Battalion Worcs (or Welsh?) Regiment.

Regards,

Jerry

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

'Lancashire Fusilier'

Reference the WW1 Water Bottle & Carrier, as Chris suggested to you, I also contacted Karkee Web regarding a Water Bottle & Carrier I have in my Collection, and was pleased to hear that it was in fact a somewhat unusual version, in that instead of the usual stitching, it has rivets, and they intend to use my example on their website.

I am attaching a photograph, plus their comments :-

This is standard for late war made Carriers, I have 4 in this style, it not unusual.

You bottle looks like a WW2 Canadian made example with the string attached to a "ring".

These are prolific in New Zealand with dates stamped to the base 1941 to 1943 covers made of felt with bluebottle, ring and with lipped bottom.

The Ink stamp sometimes wears of maybe on purpose.

They very well stitched with ginger thread, the felt is slightly thiner than on the WW1 bottle covers.

Here is one of my all rivet carriers

Jonathan

[robins2]

example of Canadian bottle strap marked "Carson Co Ltd" Ottawa 1914 also stamped on strap RCHA 166

[Lancashire Fusilier]

'Lancashire Fusilier'

Jonathan

Jonathan,

Your Water Bottle Carriers are similar in design, however, mine is a Carrier, Water bottle, with strap (Mark II), as introduced by LoC 12994, authorised 9 Sep 1905.

There are major differences between mine and your's. Firstly, mine is clearly embossed stamp dated 1918 ( WW1 ) and secondly, it is clearly British, having been made in London, England. ( See my post # 10 )

It is neither Canadian, New Zealand nor WW2.

Some successful equipment designs were continued post WW1, through the inter-war years and even into WW2.

Regards,

LF

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Hi LF

Mine are all, "British made 1917 or 1918 dated".

New Zealand did not manufacture water bottles or carrier's during WW1, we were supplied with British made...

Your carrier is the same as mine and many others......

I was referring to your bottle as being Canadian WW2 not the carrier.

Regards Jonathan

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Hi LF

I was referring to your bottle

Regards Jonathan

Jonathan,

Firstly, I wish I had your superb experise, whereby I would sit in my armchair in New Zealand and pontificate about an item in England that I had never actually seen or handled.

Here are details of the British WW1 Water Bottle and Water Bottle Stopper :-

" The Bottle, water, enamelled. (Mark VI.), was approved in 1903, by §11460, just a few months after the Mark V. Where the latter had had a funnel-shaped spout, the Mark VI returned to the parallel-sided spout of the Mark IV. No explanation was given, but as this was the only difference, and the price was the same, it must follow that the funnel shaped spout had been deemed an un-necessary complication in manufacture. Like the Mark V, the body cross-section was of kidney form, the base joined to the body with a “tin can” type seam. The top was a pressing, with curved shoulders, to which the separate spout was attached.

The Stopper, cork, waterbottle was the same size as it had been since the Mark IV bottle of 1895, which had parsimoniously introduced the stopper as “… of a size in general use for ordinary wine bottles…”. The tapered cork was drilled for an eye bolt, which passed through a galvanised flanged cap. A dished washer and an oval nut held the eyebolt in place. During the Great War, a number of variations of the Mark VI had been produced, some with flat forms of “tin can” top, others with a flat base."

My WW1 Water Bottle and Water Bottle Stopper match this type, Pattern and constuction in every detail.

Why you assume that every item that looks similar to your ' Colonial ' item is in fact Canadian or New Zealand, is highly illogical and lacks common sense.

Has it not crossed your mind that many of the items produced by Britain for the British Army during WW1, actually remained in Britain, and not every item was sent off to Canada or New Zealand to be re-cycled.

I have no interest whatsoever in Candian or New Zealand items, and if you wish to collect them, that is your option.

You may have a ' WW2 Canadian ' Water Bottle, in a British WW1 Water Bottle Carrier, thankfully, mine is a British WW1 Water Bottle in a British WW1 Water Bottle Carrier!

Regards,

LF

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Hi LF

Sorry if my armchair views are an offence to you. I was going by your photographs.

Most of us are sitting in chairs while viewing what we see on screen....

We are not all in the UK that collect British items, or maybe you are of the opinion that anyone out of the UK should have knowledge any of British equipment.

My Bottles are not Canadian they are British and of the WW1 manufacture, so back at you.

One is ink stamped with a broad arrow to the felt then added with a NZ Defence stamp in ink another has ink stamps on the felt also British made.

The thing I have picked up is that the WW1 bottles have the Water bottle stopper cord sewn under the felt, British made.

WW2 production bottles have a metal ring or eyelet next to the spout this how the cord is attached.....

The Canadian WW2 water bottles that are seen all over the world, are blue enamelled with a pressed top the cord is attached to an eyelet or ring near the bottle spout and felt cover.

On your example, as it appears in the photographs, that I could see the metal eyelet poking though under the felt that the cord was attached to.

That is why i said this is a Canadian bottle.

Am I wrong? if so sorry.

This type of stopper did not change and was in use in WW2 and even up to the 1950s

As I my Great grandfather was born in England served in The NZ army in WW1 and his brothers in the British Army, I have an Interest in both. also with one Great grandfather in the Australian Army in WW1.

I have been interested in water bottles since I started collecting over 20 years ago, and still always open to new information, that is why we have these websites to exchange information and learn.

I can add some pics of my WW1 british made bottles if you are interested.

Regards Jonathan

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Hi LF

The thing I have picked up is that the WW1 bottles have the Water bottle stopper cord sewn under the felt, British made.

Am I wrong? if so sorry.

Regards Jonathan

Jonathan,

I do not know what you thought you could see, as there is no ring poking through the felt on my Water Bottle, and none of the photographs show that. If you look carefully at the photograph shown in Post #4 you will see the clean lines of the Water Bottle shoulders with nothing poking through the felt, and you will also see the Stopper Cord disappearing under the felt.

So yes, you are wrong, and I do accept your ' sorry '.

Previously, I had removed the Water Bottle from the Carrier and looked for any markings and there are none on the Water Bottle felt. The felt is too thin and a little fragile to pull it apart to look for markings on the body of the Water Bottle, and again, there are no markings on the spout either.

Whlist we all want to exchange information and learn, and it is interesting to hear of a ' Canadian ' version, it would have been prudent and less offensive to firstly ask me if the Water Bottle had a ring attachment next to the spout, and let me answer, before jumping in and erroneously branding it a WW2 Canadian Water Bottle and letting yourself mistake it for a WW2 Canadian Water Bottle.

By all means post your photographs, I am sure myself and others will be pleased to see them.

Regards,

LF

[Grovetown]

Oh stop being so precious.

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Yes I must have been a bad guess, I should have asked for more photos.

I will take some pics this week and add them.

lol Grovetown

Jonathan

[Guest bluebuoy]

Hi all,

I did a little research on C & M and put an article in the New Zealand Antique and Historical Arms Association Magazine. Please find article below.

Another Mystery Marking! “C & M” up for Discussion

By ‘Blue’

Have you ever picked up a piece of Military Accoutrement and on scrutinizing it seen several markings. Usually a “B ↑ O” or a “W ↑ D”, a makers name, or maybe a “C & M” with makers name and a date. We know the difference between BO and WD or should do, and know WD marked equipment can be time framed as post 1857, makers names are self explanatory, but the “C & M” marking has baffled many.

Curiosity instigated the following research which still remains not completely solved but leaves a plausible answer unsupported by documentary evidence.

After extensive liaison with Joe Evans at the Waiouru Museum. He documented the genealogy of the Commissariats Department in the British Army from 1793 as staffed by Civilians and the same with the Department of Ordnance staffed by Military men, through, mismanagement, trials and tribulations until they amalgamated under the umbrella of the “Army Ordnance Corps” in 1894. However still a mix of Civilian and Military but now operating amicably to support the troops hence C & M.

Initially we thought we had the answer until I went outside the square. The C & M seemed to loosely tally, dates associated with it seem to loosely tally i.e., post 1793 and up to around 1894 the date of amalgamation.

Still not convinced I cross referenced with the National Army Museum – Chelsea – London and spoke with an old friend and Curator Keith Miller. Back his immediate reply came “C & M normally stands for those stores allocated for “Camp and Mess” use”. Nothing to do with quality control! Now with conflicting explanations I contacted Adam Culling, assistant Curator at the Royal Logistics Corps Museum, in England. Adam consulted superiors and came back with an honest answer, “beats me – probably “Colonial and Militia” Forces – but do let me know when you find out.” Adam now bitten by the curiosity bug furbished me with a list of C & M marked equipments dating from 1880 to 1917 registered in the Museum.

Next port of call was Pierre Turner’s excellent guide to British Army Accoutrements 1750 – 1900, many items being recorded with “C & M” markings with dates and makers names. The reference states, “The C & M Markings stand for “Certificate and Medal” with the date of the trade exhibition at which they were awarded.” The author could not find references to exhibitions which would have corresponded to military equipment and nothing regarding awards.

In summarizing I was more confused than when I started, however, after a process of elimination and research into the components of the complete C & M Stamp, i.e., C & M, date and manufacturers name, I believe I have come up with an answer – plausible, but is it correct?

Date: The date ranges from 1860 to 1917. (Items so far researched)

This eliminated the time frames and amalgamation of Civil and Military elements of the Ordnance Corps.

The date frame of 1860 – 1917 definitely coincides with the formalization and registration of guilds and manufacturers and covers that period of Army Accoutrements being predominately made of leather, however manufactured wooden and steel items are also encountered.

I have recorded leather items throughout this date frame with the earliest being “expense pouches and Pattern 53 bayonet frogs of buff leather and made by S.W. Silver & Co, dated 1860 to leather Sam Browns dated 1917.

Most Pattern 1854 and 1862 wooden water canteens bear the makers name as G. Brown, C & M and dated 1861/62. A set of handcuffs in my collection are dated 1862 with W ↑ D but the C & M mark in reverse i.e., “M & C”.

Makers Name: A research of early Directories show the makers who were awarded Military Contracts were generally manufacturers of items from processed leather or web. Manufacturers also of wooden items i.e., wooden canteens and steel axes.

Some were “Curriers” they processed hides to make the leather and then went on to manufacture items.

Therefore, does the C & M not refer to the named manufacturer as a broad title of “Currier and Manufacturer” in the same manner a table ware manufacturer would be generally termed a “Silversmith” if working in silver.

Most C & M items also bear the W ↑ D stamp and confirm (tongue in cheek) that the C & M marking was instigated after 1857.

Is this the mystery mark solved? The author would be pleased to hear from other Confused and Mystified researchers.

‘Blue’

Acknowledgements:

National Army Museum , Chelsea, London - Mr Keith Miller

Waiouru Army Museum - Joe Evans

RLC Museum - Adam Culling, Assistance Curator

Cambridge Museum

References:

To the Warrior his Arm’s - The RAOC 1918 -93, Chapter 1

From Arrow to Atom Bombs - A History of the ordnance Board – 1975

Soldiers Accoutrements of the British Army 1750 – 1900 - Pierre Turner

Bayonet Belt Frogs Part 1 - A. Carter, 1983

Photographs:

Terry Shattock - Pouch marking

The author has compiled a list of C & M marked accoutrements. The following are an example only and not exhaustive.

Date

Item

Manufacturer

W↑D Mark

Reference

1860

Patt. 1855 Wooden Canteen

G Brown

Yes

Authors

1861

Patt. 1855 Wooden Canteen

G Brown

Yes

Authors

1862

7lb Broad Axe

A. Lyndon

Yes

Authors

1862

Handcuffs

Hiatt & Co.

Yes

Authors

1867

Naval Bayonet Frog

Bryan & Co

Yes

Authors

N/K

Expense Pouch (A.C. marked)

Hobson & Sons

Yes

circa 1878 - 1886

1879

Model 1878 Adams/Tranter .450

Bryan & Co

Yes

Authors

Revolver Holster(AC)

1884

Pattern 1882 Entrenching tool

Edward Lucas & Son

Yes

"Soldiers Accoutrements"

by. Pierre Turner

1896

Naval Bayonet Frog

C & W Almond

?

"Bayonet Belt Frogs"

by. A. Carter

1900

Pattern 1888 Bayonet Frog

Sheldon & Sons

N↑Z

"as above"

1904

Blanket Roll Carrier

? , London

Yes

Trade Me

1914

"J" Pattern Bayonet Frog

M. Harvey & Co. Ltd

Yes

"Bayonet Belt Frogs"

by. A. Carter

1917

Sam Brown

?

Yes

Ryl Log Museum, London

[Wardog]

I have 3 prs hiatt handcuffs 1915 1916 1917-with M&C over the date- I think in the handcuff world this is thought to be Military and Colonial- To confirm- mark is M&C. Regards, Paul.

[133.R]

Hi

maybe anybody can help and say more about this pattern ?

Best regards Sven

[Joe Sweeney]

Sven,

It's a "Bottle, water, aluminium"

Actually, introduced in 1913 these were only made in small quantities and came covered like the enameled Water bottles.

Nice example

Joe Sweeney

[133.R]

Thanks Joe !

Best regards

Sven

[Chris Henschke]

Ref post 42. Great to see an image of your 1915 dated water bottle 133. R.

Is this a list of change citation for the same aluminium water bottle?

Joe, is there a 1913 reference?

[paulowen]

I've just dug out my aluminium water bottle from store. It's got 'Hancock & Sheffield 1915' (sic) on the neck and doesn't have any hook for a cork string.

Smells a bit as well! I won't be taking it on any picknicks.

I recall a well- illustrated book on Passchendaele which seemed to feature a lot of these. I'd guess the stock of photos came from the same collection. I liked one in particular showing someone with a dozen or so on his shoulder in 14 pattern holders and shoulder straps at a water pipe.

[wainfleet]

I've just dug out my aluminium water bottle from store. It's got 'Hancock & Sheffield 1915' (sic) on the neck and doesn't have any hook for a cork string.

Paul

Are you sure it doesn't say Hancock and Corfield? They made messtins during the war so it seems a reasonable presumption etc.

Rgds, W.

[paulowen]

Paul

Are you sure it doesn't say Hancock and Corfield? They made messtins during the war so it seems a reasonable presumption etc.

Rgds, W.

Ha ha! I think it does. The neck's slightly bent the wrong way which slightly obscures things and badly stamped but I think you're right.

Well corrected. Impressed!

Cheers

Paul

[133.R]

Another bottle , water, aluminium. Made by Hancock and Corfield Ltd.1915

Regards Sven

[133.R]

Some other bottles......

Best regards Sven

[133.R]

An australian ww1 pattern bottle in a canadian 1916 pattern carrier.......

Regards Sven