No4 MK1 T

[Surpmil]

I'm afraid I don't buy the "Gujarat Forces" story.

First of all, is there any evidence of any formation(s) called "Gujarat Force(s)", now or since WWII? I can't find any.

And if there was, why would such a marking be put on the scope bracket, rather than the logical place: on the rifle? Totally out of keeping with normal practice in firearms marking.

And if it was a military mark why would it go on upside down?!

"G------ Foundry" seems a much more logical and likely marking to me, just as we see "JG" and "N92" for other makers.

Plenty of possibilities here.

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.

[smle addict]

Mr Laidler answered this one back in 2009 and 2011 when the topic of GF was brought up.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=33307

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....1&daysprune=-1

It was explained the Gujarat Forces were Indian State Forces, and not part of the Indian Armed Forces.

[GeeRam]

Mr Laidler answered this one back in 2009 and 2011 when the topic of GF was brought up.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=33307

Yes, its true what Peter posted in this thread about the Thompson collectors in the USA (and elsewhere) identifying these marks about Indian paramilitary forces markings, as I've been recently finding out about the marks on one of my M1928 Thompsons, which I thought was a British issue, but appears to have been Indian Army issue, later seeing Indian Police/Paramilitary service.

[Surpmil]

Mr Laidler answered this one back in 2009 and 2011 when the topic of GF was brought up.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=33307

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....1&daysprune=-1

It was explained the Gujarat Forces were Indian State Forces, and not part of the Indian Armed Forces.

Thanks, I reviewed the those threads. I had one of these No4(T)s with a "GF" bracket. The marking was not stamped, it was deeply cut, unless it was stamped as part of the manufacturing process and the resulting raised edges around the letters ground off at that point.

Gujarat was not one of the Princely States from what I can see online.

IMHO there are too many of these brackets around anyway for the purported issue to the tiny tinpot forces of some Indian Princely state to account for them. IIRC most of those states bought their own weapons privately and where would they have bought No4(T)s just after WWII??

Or does anyone believe the British Indian Army was handing such stuff out in 1946-47?

And if they were in the possession of some Indian force, why would they have been disposed of, when and to whom? None of the usual signs of Indian service are seen on them.

[GeeRam]

IMHO there are too many of these brackets around anyway for the purported issue to the tiny tinpot forces of some Indian Princely state to account for them. IIRC most of those states bought their own weapons privately and where would they have bought No4(T)s just after WWII??

Or does anyone believe the British Indian Army was handing such stuff out in 1946-47?

Where do you think all the British kit and weapons went when we pulled out of India in 1947?

We certainly didn't bring it all home, we left most of it there. A lot of the stuff then got passed onto the regional paramilitary later on, to replace a lot of the captured kit we got of the Italians in East Africa, that we sent to the regional paramilitary forces in 1940/1, to replace the 19th century kit they were still equipped with. A lot of the markings seen on this ex-Italian stuff that has turned up, are the same makings to be seen on ex-British issue WW2 stuff that later turned up as well.

[Surpmil]

Where do you think all the British kit and weapons went when we pulled out of India in 1947?

We certainly didn't bring it all home, we left most of it there. A lot of the stuff then got passed onto the regional paramilitary later on, to replace a lot of the captured kit we got of the Italians in East Africa, that we sent to the regional paramilitary forces in 1940/1, to replace the 19th century kit they were still equipped with. A lot of the markings seen on this ex-Italian stuff that has turned up, are the same makings to be seen on ex-British issue WW2 stuff that later turned up as well.

Well, let's assume for a moment that something called "Gujarat Forces" actually existed, and that they marked their small arms in totally new and illogical ways, and that a whole bunch of kit was shipped out to them in 1945-47. Because the evidence is pretty clear that No32 Mk3 scopes had hardly reached the front lines by the end of WWII in Europe. There were weapons enough in the UK and Europe to equip huge armies which had just been demobbed, why take new weapons out of store and send them to India of all places? After WWI the second-line, unwanted stuff was sent to India: Rosses, P14s etc. Now, with Indian independence clearly in the offing, they are sent a bunch of new kit instead of some of the stuff sitting around from the demobbed armies of WWII?

Seems doubtful to me.

Not being an expert on post-colonial Indian/Pakistani history, I can't say when the Princely States disappeared, but IIRC it was not long after independence - or rather the rule of the various Ranas, Maharajas etc. went under, even if the states remained as geographic entities within the Indian federation(?)

So, their little "armies" died with them, and where did all the kit go again? Would have been collected up by the Indian Army and in some sense divvied up with East and West Pakistan by means fair or foul; at least that seems like a logical outcome to me.

The Indian Army was in no rush apparently to sell off their other holdings of No4(T)s, for example, so why would they sell off these? They would have just taken them into inventory and used them for another 50+ years as they did the other rifle we see on the market today.

It's not not like they had more of weapons than they wanted, or didn't have the space to store them or the labour to handle them, is it?

So let's assume also that they had some big pantograph engravers in Gujarat and they liked to mark things upside down, exactly what wold be the point of marking the scope brackets and not the scopes or the rifles? What tends to get stolen in that part of the world? Rifles...

So where's the big GF on the rifle? Or where's the GF stamped in the woodwork?

The whole things makes no sense whatever and therefore I'm not inclined to believe it without some documentation.

Now in those threads linked on the previous page, there was some debate about possible Israeli markings such as "AL" prefix serial numbers. I can well believe that Israeli buyers were combing through recently independent India for arms they could buy in 1947-48. And India is a country where money talks, walks and sings.

As for the rifle itself, severe identity crisis: replaced bolt, rifle renumbered to match the bolt...ugh!

Total bitzer, the label in the No8 Case giving M47C as the rifle number

Perhaps Rose Bros. had a temporary surplus of work and sub-contracted to another foundry? The "JG" in that case would simply represent their inspection mark and be entirely in keeping with usual practice in such situations.