Printable View
Corrosion won't change firing pin indentation dia. significantly, once cleaned enough to measure. It might be interesting if some few '03 cases were found in a predominately M1917 area. I mean, if you're going to actually investigate, at least be thorough!
Mind you, I don't know if it really matters to me what he used- I don't think it particularly would have influenced his actions that day...
I have been researching the Sgt. York myth for many moons now and have been published on the events of that day.
This is true. The folks who insist he had a Springfield or an SMLE like to ignore the later part of this.Quote:
The history of the 82d Division published in 1919 indicates (p.11-13) that upon arrival at Le Havre, France that they remained only long enough to exchange their M1917 rifles for British rifles. The "British" rifle issued to them was the SMLE (later known as the No 1 Mark III). In addition, the infantry elements received Lewis automatic rifles, Vickers Machine guns and Stokes mortars. The division spent the next six weeks being trained by British NCOs in the use of the "Lee-Enfield" rifle. Not suprisingly as soon as they began to develop proficiency with these new weapons they were taken away and M1917 (Eddystone) rifles were reissued. In late June the division was redeployed to Toul for training with the AEF. Upon arrival the infantry received Chauchat automatic rifles and Hotchkiss machine guns.
This is not true.Quote:
As stated in previous comments the M1903 rifle was available throughout the AEF to anyone who really wanted one.
Soldiers in WWI didn't just swap rifles and the 1903s weren't just floating around. The only folks who had 1903s anywhere close to York were Marines. The 82nd had M1917s, just like the other 75% of AEF forces in France at the time. If you believe a Marine would have "traded" his rifle, then I have some real estate in Florida I'd like to sell you. And if no one in his DIVISION had one, where'd he get it?
I'd believe he could have picked up a Chauchat, but not a Springfield.
Finally, there is a picture of the 328th with other members of York's company IDed in the photos. I have a better resolution photo somewhere, but am not able to lay my hands on it. You can see part of one, admittedly lower resolution than I'd like, at http://www.the-othersixteen.org/home.html
The photo shows the Enfield-style "heel" on the butt, which Springfields didn't have and a protruding barrel, which the SMLEs didn't have. End of story. They're M1917s. There is no mix of 1917s, SMLEs, 1903s, etc.
The York story was inflated first by the military as propaganda in WWI and then by Hollywood in the 1941 film. The movie Sgt York was a Harry Warner (Warner Bros) project constructed to bolster sentiment for US involvement in WWII. Warner was a key player in the government's propaganda machine, and for obvious reason since he came from European Jews.
I shouldn't have to tell anyone that the movie is a WORK OF PURE FICTION. If you want to educate yourself further on the matter, there's a hard-to-find book called "Celluloid Soldiers" about the whole thing. It was written by the Middle Tenn. State U. professor who is the caretaker of the York papers.
The Skeykill "biography" is also a work of fiction. If you read it with a critical eye, it's not hard to see the "diary" is put together after the fact. The narrative clearly refers to supposedly "present" items with knowledge of future events. The York myth is just that. He pulled off an awesome feat for which he absolutely deserved the MOH, but there were 16 other guys there, many of whom spilled blood in the fight and several of whom died.
Back to the issue at hand, there is a vigorous dispute over the location of the G Co. exploit. I mean, there are some REAL hard feelings on both sides. One of the few things I've found that they agree on is that York had an M1917 and a M1911.
Very interesting site, but none of photos or articles appear when I click on them.
I think it's spelled "affidavits" too.
The plot thickens...
A Marine might not have traded his rifle, but in the same way that Canadians picked up SMLE's in large numbers from the battlefield to replace their Rosses, don't you think York might have done the same with a Springfield? Was he ever in an area where that might have been possible?
I have to say that I'm a partisan for the M17 though!
I have noticed they're having some server problems lately, but the lo-res photo is right there on the index page. I'll admit it's tough to see, but it's been a couple of years since I've had cause to pull out the good one.
I'm not saying it's IMPOSSIBLE that he had a Springfield, just quite unlikely. Three quarters of all US soldiers over there had the M1917. The quarter that did were Marines. I don't have the time or interest in checking to see whether a quarter of all AEF soldiers were Marines. That would be an interesting exercise.
Army units had the 1903 also. For example, the 42nd Division. I have found where Marines were court martialed in May and June of 1918 for having rusty rifles. They would most certainly be court martialed for having the wrong rifle.
I find it amusing that people think soldiers or Marines could just carry any weapon he wanted to carry. You signed for your weapon, and you better return that same weapon in good condition. No where in the Marine Corps that I was in could that be done. No beards, none of that crap. The WWI Muster Rolls indicate it was no different in WWI.
Jim
Not true - my G-Grandfather served in the 3rd Artillery, 6th Division. I have photos taken by him at the time of members of his unit and they are carrying '03s. Its my understanding that most regular Army units (which his was) carried 1903s whereas most Guard and National Army units carried 1917s - not always true, but generally true. I have also read where had the war extended into 1919, Pershing wanted all rifles in theater to be 1917s to improve logistics and repair issues.Quote:
Three quarters of all US soldiers over there had the M1917. The quarter that did were Marines.
After reading tfltackdriver's comments (#32) it appears that some readers (hopefully few) interpreted my comments (#18) that Corporal York obtained a M1903 rifle (presuming of course he had one) from a Marine. In this he is mistaken. At no time did I indicate that he had definitely used a M1903 rifle.
My reference to the Marines was a simple comparison of Corporal York's circumstances and desire for what he thought was a better weapon to that of the Marines serving on Guadalcanal some 24 years and one World War later. From my readings of WWII history many Marines "traded" their '03s and Reising guns to the Army for their new Garands. Of course this story, like that of Corporal York, could be more fiction than fact.
My conclusion, then and now, is that yes, if he really wanted a '03 that he could have obtained one. If this was not possible through official channels he could have utilitized what most veterans would call "Back Door" channels, namely, find, trade, buy, or at last resort, steal one.
Regarding whether or not any M1903 rifles were used by the 82nd Division I did, I must admit, make a presumption that the Sniper and Recon sections of the Division's infantry regiments used the standard M1903 sniper system. Of course I could be wrong as they may been the only unit in the AEF not to do so.
Subsequent to reading tfltackdriver's posting I reviewed both the official history of the 82nd Division and Volume two of "Order of Battle" (the US Army's official history of WWI) regarding when and where the 82nd Division deployed to the front during the St. Mihiel and Meuse-Argonne offensives.
The Army's "Order of Battle", indicates that in August 1918 during the St. Mihiel offensive the 82nd Division relieved the 2nd Division.
If the 82nd Divison's history is correct in October 1918, the 164th Infantry Brigade (327th & 328th Infantry Regiments) relieved the soldiers of the 1st Division's 1st Infantry Brigade (16th & 18th Infantry Regiments) on the Meuse-Argonne front.
To the best of my knowledge both the 1st and 2nd Divisions were armed, throughout the war, with only the M1903 rifle.
Where there is a possibility that both the soldiers and marines of the 2nd Division and the soldiers of the 1st Division did what undoubtedly has to be the most complete "Police Call" of "No Mans Land" known in the history of the US military service and collected from the battlefield every Springfield rifle assigned to them prior to departing the front line, I, for one, think that they could have missed at least one. Who knows, maybe Corporal York salvaged a rifle when passing through. I for one don't know and don't really care as I think the M1917 was a better battle rifle to begin with.
In closing, the intent of my original remarks was to discuss the possible ways in which Corporal York might have obtained a Springfield rifle. I believe I have shown that while not definite, it was possible. As Sergeant York and all the members of his unit are deceased it is a matter that will never be totally resolved.
Oh yes, before I forget, I am afraid that you will have to find another buyer for your Florida real estate. If it fronts on the Gulf I would hold out for top dollar as you never know you might just strike oil on it any day now.
:surrender:Quote:
Oh yes, before I forget, I am afraid that you will have to find another buyer for your Florida real estate. If it fronts on the Gulf I would hold out for top dollar as you never know you might just strike oil on it any day now
I'll put it to you this way: I am in touch with all the known surviving family members of the G co. squads that went out with Sgt. Early's group. And to put it another way, I think it's very unlikely, but you are absolutely right.:thup:Quote:
In closing, the intent of my original remarks was to discuss the possible ways in which Corporal York might have obtained a Springfield rifle. I believe I have shown that while not definite, it was possible. As Sergeant York and all the members of his unit are deceased it is a matter that will never be totally resolved.
I don't have any accounts of US WWI soldiers doing the ol' battlefield pickup other than doing everything they could to get rid of the terrible Chauchat. In WWII and Korea, I've heard lots of first-hand stories from guys issued a Garand that didn't need it, and did everything they could to get a carbine... then when they weren't happy with that, a Thompson or BAR. Guys who had been issued the carbine first wanted a Thompson, etc.
Off topic, but we can delight that there is no controversy over York's use of the M1911 to kill at least five bayonet-weilding Germans while his position was being raked by machine gun fire. You ever try to use the sights on an M1911?
By late 1918 the battlefields of Europe were heavily littered with equipment. Many eye witnesses of that era commented on the vast amount of equipment on the battlefields. There were helmets, canteens, rifles, stripper clips, etc, from the American lines all the way to the German lines. Units rotated in and out of the trenches every 30 days. It was a very fluid situation with heavy losses on both sides. Finding a weapon would have been very easy for an NCO. Mind you, I personally believe York carried an M1917, but have no proof of that belief.
Why, yes! Yes, I have! I don't mind 'em except on really sunny days. I've even got a "stealth" match pistol that uses the stock sights and have done "fairly well" w/ it in CQB events....Quote:
Originally Posted by tfltackdriver
1911 sights are rather bigger than .38 Colt auto sights (1900,1902,1903) and those are pretty accurate also! (w/ the right ammo- .360" bullets not .355")