Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

Two points here. The flippant one first - Rochester's mock epitaph on Charles II:

"Here lies our sovereign Lord the King, whose word no man relied on 

He never said a foolish thing and never did a wise one."

To which the King is said to have responded:

"Too true, for my words are my own but my actions my ministers'."

 

Secondly, Edward II's opponents were no doubt familiar with St Augustine's teaching that the efficacy of the sacrament does not depend on the worthiness of the minister.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

re the mediaeval nature of things I think the peasants are beginning to revolt.

 

When my father was learning Russian for the military one of the teachers was a White Russian emigree who had married a Mr Worthington. The unfeeling junior subalterns were wont to sing (to the tune of don't put your daughter on the stage..) "Throw another peasant on the fire Mrs Worthington" She was most indignant and protested that she had always treated her peasants properly.  I fear we are in the state we are now because we have indeed been throwing some of our peasants on the fire.

Edited by webbcompound
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nick_bastable said:

But the Edwardian's where true gentlemen  and a loaded revolver sat in many desk draws

 

Nick

 

Just had a look through the Army&Navy store catalogue for 1907.

 

You could get various marks of Webley revolvers , likewise Smith&Wesson revolvers, Colt revolvers, Colt Browning automatic pistols, Webley&Scott automatic pistols and Mauser automatic pistols, at prices to suit all pockets, as it were.

 

If you were really annoyed, you could get as many as you wanted of "The New Short Lee-Enfield Service Rifle" at £6/10/- Govt quality or £5 Ordinary.  Suitable ammunition (per 100) .303 solid 15/3, hollow point 15/9, split bullet £1, "Jeffry" split bullet £1.

 

I must say that the hollow point and split bullet varieties sound unethical....

 

 

 

  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

Just had a look through the Army&Navy store catalogue for 1907.

 

You could get various marks of Webley revolvers , likewise Smith&Wesson revolvers, Colt revolvers, Colt Browning automatic pistols, Webley&Scott automatic pistols and Mauser automatic pistols, at prices to suit all pockets, as it were.

 

If you were really annoyed, you could get as many as you wanted of "The New Short Lee-Enfield Service Rifle" at £6/10/- Govt quality or £5 Ordinary.  Suitable ammunition (per 100) .303 solid 15/3, hollow point 15/9, split bullet £1, "Jeffry" split bullet £1.

 

I must say that the hollow point and split bullet varieties sound unethical....

 

 

 

 

Hollow point was the British developed expanding bullet of 1897. Colloquially called the Dum Dum bullet, after the British-Indian arsenal that had first developed expanding bullets (though using a different method).

 

The British used them with great effect at Omdurman in 1898.

 

The Germans complained about them and they were banned for use in warfare by the Hague Convention of 1899.  The Americans dissented and went on to use them in the Phillippines.

 

They could still be legitimately used for hunting, however.

 

Unethical? 

 

Well, that's a nice point in this case. The development of full metal jackets for Enfield rifle bullets was found to create smaller wounds than the soft lead bullets of the rifle previously in service, the Martini Henry.  This was a problem, because it meant that the Enfields had less stopping power.

 

Now, if you are a British infantryman of the day, your likely opponents come on very quickly, in the 'Fousands' and are often whipped up to a frenzy by drugs (e.g. Zulus) or religious fanaticism (e.g. Mahdists) and what you really need in you ammo pouches is something that will literally stop them in their tracks should you hit them.  Guaranteed. Every time. That's what I'd want and I rued the day that we gave up the SLR (self-loading rifle) with its 7.62 round in favour of the SA80 with its 5.56.  I always felt that someone put down with an SLR, be he dead or alive, wasn't getting up again. That, I'd imagine, is a good feeling when the other chap is trying to kill you. 

 

The soft lead bullets of the Martinis would do this, because they expanded on impact and did a lot of damage. The Enfield round caused less damage, so you could not be so sure that you had incapacitated enough of your enemy before they were, literally, on top of you.

 

All of which goes to remind us what an absolutely horrific business warfare is.  However, the Dum Dum was not an attempt to make it more horrific, but to keep the effect of new bullets the same as that of old ones. In other words, to avoid the unintended consequence of a better weapon, one otherwise more efficient at killing the opponent. 

 

 

  • Informative/Useful 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
41 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

Just had a look through the Army&Navy store catalogue for 1907.

 

You could get various marks of Webley revolvers , likewise Smith&Wesson revolvers, Colt revolvers, Colt Browning automatic pistols, Webley&Scott automatic pistols and Mauser automatic pistols, at prices to suit all pockets, as it were.

 

If you were really annoyed, you could get as many as you wanted of "The New Short Lee-Enfield Service Rifle" at £6/10/- Govt quality or £5 Ordinary.  Suitable ammunition (per 100) .303 solid 15/3, hollow point 15/9, split bullet £1, "Jeffry" split bullet £1.

 

I must say that the hollow point and split bullet varieties sound unethical....

 

 

I assume the later two are Dum Dum ?

 

Nick

41 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When did it cease to be possible to buy an arsenal from the A&N by mail order? I have in mind that people went to an awful lot of trouble to procure similar things for irregular use in Ireland not long after 1907, so before then, presumably. I also have in mind that when I bought a raincoat in the A&N about fifteen years ago, the place didn't look as if it stocked weaponry, in fact it looked like very run-down shop indeed.

 

 

 

Edited by Nearholmer
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

Down here theres no need for a ditch when you've got the Pacific handy...

 

https://www.smh.com.au/national/that-summer-when-prime-minister-harold-holt-vanished-at-sea-20131214-2ze92.html

Is the back beach at Portsea on the Pacific or the Southern? Either way, it's an ocean - if he'd swum away at Bondi, for example, it would definitely have been the Ditch/Dtch (previous correspondence refers).

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That outline of bullet options put me in mind of my thinking when I seriously considered joining the army when I was in my mid-teens.  Tank corps, no thanks, too big a target and you're in a box.  Artillery, no, the enemy know where you are, next to that big gun.  Infantry, yes.  The chance to run away if confronted by death.  Fortunately, the defence of the realm was enhanced by me taking an alternative career path.

 

Alan

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

When did it cease to be possible to buy an arsenal from the A&N by mail order? I have in mind that people went to an awful lot of trouble to procure similar things for irregular use in Ireland not long after, so before then, presumably. I also have in mind that when I bought a raincoat in the A&N about fifteen years ago, the place didn't look as if it stocked weaponry, in fact it looked like very run-down shop indeed.

 

As Sir Roger Casement discovered, running guns to one illegal paramilitary organisation was a capital offence whilst running guns to a different illegal paramilitary organisation  was something cabinet ministers could do with impunity. Fortunately we're not there yet by a long chalk.

Edited by Compound2632
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sir Roger was exactly who I was thinking of. Before my MiL moved over to England, she lived not far from Banna Strand, which, setting aside its place in history, is a quite amazing place, with big sand dunes that go on for miles and miles and miles, and is usually as near deserted as makes no difference.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

When did it cease to be possible to buy an arsenal from the A&N by mail order? I have in mind that people went to an awful lot of trouble to procure similar things for irregular use in Ireland not long after 1907, so before then, presumably. I also have in mind that when I bought a raincoat in the A&N about fifteen years ago, the place didn't look as if it stocked weaponry, in fact it looked like very run-down shop indeed.

 

 

 

I haven't got it to hand, but I have (somewhere) a late 30s A&N catalogue* which I think still offered a range of firearms to suit all purposes.  The true Army & Navy stores were in effect set up to supply the Officer class in the UK and across the Empire.  The range of goods that you could procure was amazing, the weaponry is a mere few pages, its just amazing that it was available!  I must also add that the Lee-Enfields bear the caveat that purchasers must be British Citizens...

 

In "Secret Water" by Arthur Ransome, its mentioned that Captain Walker ordered supplies from the A&N for the childrens adventure.

 

I suppose that after the Empire and both the Army and Navy dwindled post WW2 that their customer base evaporated and they more or less went out of business.  The "Army and Navy" stores that I remember in the 70s onwards mainly sold camping gear and army surplus clothing and were, as you noted, very run down.  I've a German gas-mask case obtained from such an A&N store that I used for many years as a camera bag.  I've still got it, containing a Zorki 4K 35mm rangefinder (a vague Russian copy of a Leica) with lenses and filters.

 

* Btw, these catalogues are not "originals" but reprints published by David and Charles some years ago.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...