Ark Posted 31 January , 2015 Share Posted 31 January , 2015 Hi All,Just writing in to see if anyone can help with identifying these shells a little bit better and to help with the authenticity.I recently purchased these shells on ebay. It was sold as being used in Gallipoli by Anzac once displayed in the Whitehall Theatre Of War in London. The chap who sold me them said he was a friend of Paul Raymond and was given a great deal of relics by him after it closed down. There are 4 French shells and 1 British. I now have some doubt over the authenticity of the story of the shells, Gallipoli, Whitehall Theatre Of War etc. After receiving them I started to polish them, which was when I discovered a French newspaper stuffed down the bottom of a French shell. Why would a French newspaper dated 1991 be inside a French shell that was supposedly used in Gallipoli, displayed in the ‘White Hall Theatre Of War’, which closed in 1985.. ending up in someone’s collection in the UK since?Any help or wisdom that someone can pass on would be much appreciated.French Shells:75 DEC ^ RS L2279 16 Rs75 DEC MAM 937L 17 Bo75 DEC D 938L 15 D +T75 DEC PDPs 843L 18 H2 x 23cm Height 2 x 35cm HeightBritish: 1916 S CF MRY 68A M.L.W (A). 18PR II. N 17 5 16. S.Primer: L 11/1.7 N II 29.5cm Height. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnreed Posted 31 January , 2015 Share Posted 31 January , 2015 They are called Cartridge Cases. It would help to have photographs of the bases. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 31 January , 2015 Share Posted 31 January , 2015 This could be difficult. Can you photograph the wording on the French Shells? The first thing that strikes me is that as Gallipoli ended in 9 January 1916 any shells used would be dated 1915 or before. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted 1 February , 2015 Author Share Posted 1 February , 2015 Cases ! Apologies John. Just resizing the images. 250kb is quiet small for this day and age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted 1 February , 2015 Author Share Posted 1 February , 2015 75 DEC PDPs 843L 75 DEC MAM 937L 17 Bo 75 DEC ^ RS L2279 16 Rs British: 1916 S CF MRY 68A M.L.W (A). 18PR II. N 17 5 16. S. Primer: L 11/1.7 N II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 1 February , 2015 Share Posted 1 February , 2015 All those in post # 5 are later dated than the Galippoli campaign, so by definition could not have been there. This does not of course stop someone turning a later dated case into trench art. Are all 5 cases engraved as the one in post #1 ? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted 1 February , 2015 Author Share Posted 1 February , 2015 From looking around at other forums I take it the marking on the French cases with '18' '17' 16' '15' denote the year. On the British 18 pounder it denotes 17 5 16. Considering the campaign ran from April 25th 1915 to January 9th 1916 only one of these shells could have been used. Which is doubtful. Still any information and thoughts on the markings would be appreciated. Many Thanks Ark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 1 February , 2015 Share Posted 1 February , 2015 The French 75 and the British 18pdr were the standard field artillery pieces used for close support bombardments. Both had a normal range of about 7000 yards. The shell cases of both are very common. All are dated. The French by year and the British either by year or a more precise date (sometimes both). Other marks are factory and batch numbers. CF on the 18 pdr is 'Cordite Full Charge'. British shells were reloaded up to 5 times before being scrapped. You will often see that the primer has a later date than the shell, indicating reuse. Looking at this group as a single lot, I think its unlikely any of them were at Gallipoli. Only one could have by date. Also most of the Theatre of War items were sold off at auction, so why these escaped that fate I don't know. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted 2 February , 2015 Author Share Posted 2 February , 2015 Many Thanks John much appreciated. Just helping to confirm something I suspected. I think the guy is a bit of swindler pawning things off with a story to help sell the item. Putting anzac on an item will help create more interest for the rarity. I think there were French near Anzac cove with artillery but the fact remains the markings on the casings are from the wrong period. To guess if there were any souvenirs collected by the anzacs they went back with the wounded to Australia were they would remain. The fit and able were sent to the Middle East and western fronts for the rest of the war to fight. To carry around souvenirs from Gallipoli on the Somme for years let alone survive it would be a bit of an ask… I think for the survivors the patches on their shoulders, a diary with a few postcards and letters from home was an achievement to keep ! Ark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 2 February , 2015 Share Posted 2 February , 2015 There's an old saying in the antique trade - ' Buy the item not the story'. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbarchetta Posted 2 February , 2015 Share Posted 2 February , 2015 Ark, Sorry to say, but I think you have been 'had'. Thought the first one of these, when it appeared, was 'interesting', and sold for a considerable sum, but then, over the following days/weeks, more and more of them appeared, all pretty much the same, with etched text, all the 'trigger words' etc, to the point where there were two or three running concurrently on Ebay and were selling for sub-£50 (still way too much, though). These cartridge cases are genuine WW1 cases, but the etching is probably dated circa 2014. My views on this 'Whitehall Theatre of War' have already been expressed on this site, and I personally have grave doubts about the authenticity of any of the rash of items that appeared in 2014 using this as provenance. Happy to get one of my blank cases and etch '1st July 1916, Somme' and '25th April 1915, Gallipoli' and perhaps '25th December 1914 Football trophy' on it if someone will pay me a sizeable sum for it... PM me if interested... James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maytree4me Posted 3 February , 2015 Share Posted 3 February , 2015 I was asked to find out more about the markings on the end of this shell case. Can anyone help? Maytree4me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dugout Posted 7 February , 2015 Share Posted 7 February , 2015 A more detailed photo of the base would help... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigelfe Posted 8 February , 2015 Share Posted 8 February , 2015 I'd ignore anyone who refers to a cart case as a shell case, clear case of inability to differentiate arrsse from elbow. WW1 shell cases are plentiful - all those shrapnel shells - but being steel haven't worn as well as brass cart cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robins2 Posted 8 February , 2015 Share Posted 8 February , 2015 75 DEC PDPs 843L 75 DEC MAM 937L 17 Bo 75 DEC ^ RS L2279 16 Rs British: 1916 S CF MRY 68A M.L.W (A). 18PR II. N 17 5 16. S. Primer: L 11/1.7 N II bottom right photo appears to be Canadian 18 pdr with c broad arrow regards Bob R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robins2 Posted 8 February , 2015 Share Posted 8 February , 2015 I'd ignore anyone who refers to a cart case as a shell case, clear case of inability to differentiate arrsse from elbow. WW1 shell cases are plentiful - all those shrapnel shells - but being steel haven't worn as well as brass cart cases. what kind of usefull comment is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigelfe Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 Extremely helpful for the terminologically challenged, for whom I have a low tolerance threshold, it's a professional thing. Are you one such? If so I'm happy to continue your education in the artillery domain, I'll leave the rest to someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 Re # 14 I'd have thought a cartridge was put in a rifle or pistol and a shell was put in an artillery piece. Hence 99% of people calling artillery shell cases - shell cases. I know some serious collectors of large brass cases and they all refer to them as shell cases. There are always two languages. One spoken by the techie and the other as spoken by the majority of the population. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 The late and greatly-missed TonyE was a stickler for terminology too, but had the wisdom and forbearance to treat it as an education issue and take an interest in the items themselves, as Sod's Law dictates that the rarest and most interesting examples are likely to turn up in the hands of people who do not speak the language and don't know what they have got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 I suspect most Cartridge Case collectors will be the ones with Small Arms Ammunition collections. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogilwy Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 Gent's, John is right, almost, there are two languages one spoken by the military and one by civies. Both are correct in their own way but as SG says forebearance is always required, (except for spelling FUZE wrong!). The military definition of a Cartridge is as follows: "A cased quantity of propellant complete with its own means of ignition." The modern version also states excluding Rocket Motors! I shall go back to trying to teach some 'techies' how to speak correctly, and hopefully how to understand what they're actually looking at! Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikB Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 Extremely helpful for the terminologically challenged, for whom I have a low tolerance threshold, it's a professional thing. Are you one such? If so I'm happy to continue your education in the artillery domain, I'll leave the rest to someone else. I agree with your critics. You ain't gonna make no friends puffing out your professional chest. People use the term 'shell case' to indicate an artillery, as distinct from SAA, propellant casing. Just as they use 'bullet head' to indicate the top end of the assembly popularly called a 'bullet'. Language is a democratic thing, and words mean whatever the folk in the conversation think they mean, whatever your opinion or mine. If you're going to ignore the postings, you don't have to bother to reply. Regards, MikB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 How about a compromise .... let's drop the argument about cases and all gang up on those who call rifle/pistol/shotgun ammunition 'shells' ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 Dear All, I have read a number of threads like this on GWF. The arguments over the use of terminology such as "shell cases" or "fuse" have, without exception, ruined the pleasure and interest to be derived from reading the thread. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjohn Posted 9 February , 2015 Share Posted 9 February , 2015 Rod Rod he spelt it wrong ;-) 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