SMLE found by an author researching the fighting and retreat to Dunkirk

[Peter Laidler]

Here are a selection of self explanatory photos of a SMLE found very recently by an author researching the fighting and retreat to Dunkirk. The rifle was found on a farm, jammed into the now rotten wall frame of a large pockmarked or riddled barn, about 8 miles from the town. He had free access to the farms in the area and having a French wife helped! Other items including rotten webbing found in the floor and floor of the hay loft indicate that the place was occupied and abandoned by Royal Engineers and RASC (Service Corps) troops.

NO names - no pack drill, but the down side was that he brought the rifle back in all innocence believing that as it was rusty, woodwormed and with a bore that is barely see-through, it was nothing more than a harmless souvenir. Alas, this isn't how the Police here see things so it was given to us at Warminster after being documented. Incidentally, some of the webbing bears an identifiable soldiers service number (from the RAOC).


The UP side is that a quick glance shows that the is a Mk1 type SMLE without the bridge charger and closed eared nosecap. The bolt and magazine have been removed and hidden presumably within throwing distance!

That's all I know about it but is there any other documentary evidence that such an early Lee Enfield will have been used as late as 1940. Can anyone out there identify the exact mark of the rifle from the photos. No markings are visible and I'm loath to bead blast it to try to identify any marks

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.

[Lou Cypher]

You should have open a new post for your SMLE, the subject worth it. Unfortunately, it's hidden at the 4th page of the thread.
But what I noticed, is that finally this SMLE finally went back in England 72 years after the events

[Brian Dick]

Could it be that Engineers and RASC troops had second line rifles instead of the first line Mk.III and III*'s that would have been issued to Infantry and such in 1940? Just a thought.

[Frederick303]

I would be more inclined to think it was in Beligium since WWI or at least was out of the U.K. military system in the WWI time period for the following reasons:

1) It has the magazine cut-off, that was pulled for land service in what, 1915/1916? If it was in the British Army or RAF in 1939/1940, why would it have the cut-off still in place? That seems to imply to me it was lost relatively early in WWI

2) It has the lobbing sights. Now a lot of the SMLE rifles sold off in the US of A between 1958 and 1968 came out of the big British surplus sales and most of the SMLE MK III with 1914, 1915, and early 1916 dates seem to have been reworked, and so marked on the rear wood. All of these rifles have the lobbing sights removed that I have seen that also have the commercial proofs applied (i.e. they came out of British UK stocks and not from some other source such a Belgium, Portugal or Ireland). The rework mark I refer to is the Star and E on the underside of the buttstock.

3) I have never seen a picture of any British troops in the 1939/40 time frame equipped with SMLE MK I variants. Also I doubt that there were sufficient spares for these rifle in the system in 1940, as when the Irish requested parts to update their rifles in 1940/41, no MK I spares were supplied, at least according the limited documentation I have found relating to forends and safeties supplied to the Irish in late 1941/early 1942.

None of the above is in any way proof positive, but the alternative is that a SMLE MK I with WWI features (lobbing sites, magazine cut-off) was never put through the WWI/ post WWI rework but managed to remain in circa 1915 issue features, issued in WWII and lost. The number of 1914 and 1915 SMLE MK III rifles in the US of A that are in original shape is truly small, as in virtually unknown. 1916, 1917 and 1918 yes, but not the early dates. It makes a lot more sense that it left the British military system sometime in the WWI period.

So you ask why would it be placed in a barn around 1940? Well one of the first things the Germans did in 1940 was to publish a number of flyers that anyone found in the possession of arms would be shot. That part of Belgium was not occupied by the Germans in WWI; it was in the area where the British armies were stationed. A fellow that had found the arm around WWI might have thought it was prudent to stash it someplace other than his house once the Germans arrived.

[Beerhunter]

1) It has the magazine cut-off, that was pulled for land service in what, 1915/1916? If it was in the British Army or RAF in 1939/1940, why would it have the cut-off still in place? That seems to imply to me it was lost relatively early in WWI.

The magazine cut-off was restored between the wars so there is no reason why it could not have been with RE or RASC soldiers in France in 1940. Thge volley sights are another matter of course.

Having said that, I go along with Brian here, soldiers like RASC rarely needed their personal weapon and so it makes sense to issue them older kit. That goes double if they were also TA.

[P-07ShortLee]

The magazine cut-off was restored between the wars so there is no reason why it could not have been with RE or RASC soldiers in France in 1940. Thge volley sights are another matter of course.

Having said that, I go along with Brian here, soldiers like RASC rarely needed their personal weapon and so it makes sense to issue them older kit. That goes double if they were also TA.

There are pictures of mark III's with the front volley sights intact taken during the 1940-1943 period, so a few were still intact.

[Mag Fed]

Hi Peter,
What an incredible find. Looks a lot like my Mk 1***....has the curved-in front sight protector ears on the nosecap....the mag cut off, of course....and the rounded receiver wall....perhaps never had the charger bridge update.

[Peter Laidler]

I'm only telling you what the finder told me and as a well known author (and I'm reading one of his books as we speak.........)but I would imagine that Brian has hit the nail on the head. There's usually a simple explanation for these things.........

[Ridolpho]

Amazing your police wouldn't let someone keep an artifact like that, Mr. Laidler. Come to think of it I have no idea what the law here in Canada would say about a gun in this state. Mr. Cypher- assuming you weren't going to slap the rifle in the old drill press and attempt to do the work to install the mounting pads for the H & H style mount (ie. assuming you hire a gunsmith), why not find an old shot out #4 Mk1 or Mk 2, have a new barrel installed, throw on a new stock, and have the body drilled for the pads/ mounts? You'll have restored a rifle that might have been headed for the scrap-yard and preserved your recently discovered good condition rifle. Just a thought generated by having attended a small gun show recently where clapped out Lee Enfields were in abundance (I snagged what appears to be an authentic Savage #4 Mk1*T).

Ridolpho

[enfield303t]

Come to think of it I have no idea what the law here in Canada would say about a gun in this state

Ridolpho, I think it would still be considered a firearm even in its detoriated condition so as long as you had a PAL you could own it. Seeing as the Long Gun Registry is gone the hassle of trying to register it does not exist any longer so trying to find the serial number would no longer be required.

Can you imagine before the LGR ended trying to convince someone from the CFC youi can't find the serial number as the condition of the gun makes it impossible. I had enough trouble trying to register a Lee Enfield that according to the person at the registry should have had a letter prefix which it didn't.

I would love to have a gun like that, just think of the nights you could sit before your fireplace trying to imagine the stories it could tell if it could speak, or for that matter who carried it.