C broad arrow mark

[Mattyr82]

Even more interesting for it to be in a 1914 lithgow mkIII.

Generally Canadian troops did not often encounter Australian ones very often in ww1.

It makes me wonder if it’s one of the rifles the Australians shipped to the UK in 1914 for British army use, and was perhaps turned over to Canada when the Ross was withdrawn.

The giving of rifles to Britain at the start of WW1 is a subject that was taken out of context from Charles Bean. Britain asked for Australia to send every rifle. It can to assist Britain but leave about 10,000 rifles within Australia to help with training. Australia didn’t send the rifles to Britain directly.

That in-turn meant that Australia sent between 95,000 to 100,000 rifles to the Dardanelles between late 1914 and October 1915. Australia began to run out of rifles in Australia in 1915, so from October 1915, Britain began issuing rifles to Australians in Egypt before they went to Gallipoli.

Once Gallipoli was finished, the Australian forces began handing SMLEs over to British ordnance. The Australian rifles were sighted for Mk.VI ammunition but Australians needed Mk.VII sighted rifles for the Western Front. The Australian forces who remained in the Middle East battled on with older Mk.VII sighted rifles sighted rifles until mid-1917 when they swapped rifles with the 22nd Mounted Brigade and Royal Marines.

The older Australian rifles were then sent back to Britain, refurbed and sighted for Mk.VII ammunition and handed back to who ever required rifles so it was probable in mid/late 1916 this rifle was handed to Canadian forces for use.

 

[Claven2]

Hello gents. The C broad arrow was initiated in 1907. The Snider was withdrawn from service in the Maritimes about the same time. The Canadian Sales Mark (C with converging broad arrows) would have been initiated shortly after 1907. So a Snider or Martini with a C broad arrow indicates dispirsal from government stores after that magic 1907 date. At that time
Canada had military districts and the military with centralized arrogance kept the old unserviceable stuff in the Maritimes
and also in many parts of the west. It was expected that the East would supply manpower for naval emergencies. The newest item I ever saw with a factory placed C broad arrow was a rifle made 1944. The C broad arrow was normally applied at factory of origin. Unfortunately one of the last auctions had original C broad arrow dies so with misuse who knows what will show up.
John

I think that is true of things made in Canada. C-arrow ownership marks were applied outside factory settings too, for example all the c-broadarrow marked SMLE rifles out there. You even see c-arrow marks applied overseas during ww1 on guns that ended up swapped around on the battlefield and later got Australian or Indian service markings before reaching the surplus markets.

It was also applied as an ink stamp on webbing until at least 1950 based on pouches and slings I’ve owned.

 

[jtaylor]

I think that is true of things made in Canada. C-arrow ownership marks were applied outside factory settings too, for example all the c-broadarrow marked SMLE rifles out there. You even see c-arrow marks applied overseas during ww1 on guns that ended up swapped around on the battlefield and later got Australian or Indian service markings before reaching the surplus markets.

It was also applied as an ink stamp on webbing until at least 1950 based on pouches and slings I’ve owned.

Hi Claven2. I totally disagree with you. C broad arrow stamps never left Canada period. The marks you think were applied on rifles overseas were applied in Canada after WW1. The SMLEs Canadian troops acquired during the war were all turned back over to the Brits and many were either scrapped or used for parts. Many collectors think because a 1916 SMLE has a C broad arrow that it was used in war. Wrong assumption. Canada received their 100K SMLE for Ross swap with the vast majority after the war. Most C broad arrow marked SMLEs in the hands of collectors were in fact rebuilds that were performed either in Canada or in GB. Many of the parts don't match and much of the woodwork is Pattern B which didn't come out until the 1920s. There must have been a significant emphasis in refurbished late 30's in Canada as there are even rebarrel jobs (I have one 5/39 stamped on the knox). You may know that Long Branch refurbed rifles with Long Branch barrrels in 42, 43, and even 44. Most of those were reblued with the LB blueing which is different hue then British production.
The C broad arrow stamp was applied by many equipment manufacturers at the point of origin (the factory). Certainly a quality inspector would have been assigned by the government inspectorate to monitor pattern in production.
One of the SMLE rarities is a fully matching SMLE with all the original WW1 parts put on at the Brit factory but has a C broad arrow stamp. I have only examined one.
Whereas its true that all Canadian Divisions carried Ross rifles overseas by Hughes order. But rare to see any soldier coming back with any rifle or bayonet at all. The deficit of rifles at Valcartier or on base were made up by the Ross until much later on replaced by refurbed SMLEs. Some bases never even got the SMLE at all in WW2 and trained with a Ross.
JOHN T.

 

[Claven2]

Not that I doubt your knowledge, but on what basis can it be said no field armories applied c-broad arrow marks to rifles in the Canadian Army or the CEF? I’ve not personally seen that from a primary source.

I have definitely seen c-broad arrow marks in matching rifles without obvious signs of ftr. Is it possible they were lightly refurbed? Yes. But impossible to say for certain.

 

[Mattyr82]

The CEF brought back 67,000 SMLEs from Britain that they had used in the war by 1919. A further 49,000 came by the end of 1921 which was all organised under the Imperial Ordnance Program (to which Australia also obtained 100,000 SMLEs to replace the rifles sent over during the war and left in the British system)

I’ve noted that Canadian marked SMLEs can have two styles of C with a broad arrow. The later sent SMLEs have the factory applied C with the full length arrow stamped on Knox and butt. These rifles tend to be 1917/1918 made rifles which were all refurbed or new and stamped in accordance with British ordnance contracts organised by the War Office of Britain.

 

[jtaylor]

Not that I doubt your knowledge, but on what basis can it be said no field armories applied c-broad arrow marks to rifles in the Canadian Army or the CEF? I’ve not personally seen that from a primary source.

I have definitely seen c-broad arrow marks in matching rifles without obvious signs of ftr. Is it possible they were lightly refurbed? Yes. But impossible to say for certain.

Here is a pic of one of the Canadian U.K. based armourer repair depots in WW1. Notice no bins of spares, no powered machinery, no rack for hand tools - just the most basic table and a few shared tools. I think there were 4 of these shops.
After looking at this is anyone naive enough to think any serious work was done such as barrel replacement? Does any one think this shop would have C broad arrow stamps? I wonder how they can even see anything in such poor light. Looks like it could have doubled as a mess hall judging by soldiers at the back. You must remember also that these armouers had worked on Ross Rifles for several years and maybe the odd Lee. Canada finally got SMLE rifles in exchange for Ross in the spring of 1917 - just in time for Vimy Ridge. So the SMLE is a relatively new unpractised item and spares must have been scant. Armourers had other mechanical repair tasks with vehicles too.
The not too funny part was that workshops hadn't changed much over the decades. I was in one in Quebec (albeit temporay shop) that I'm reasonably sure they must have had a loaded weapon at the ready to ward off rats. One in Ontario was as small as a single car garage. I remember there was a dutch door entrance where they kept the bottom locked to prevent unauthorized entry. I had to get a new front handguard for my No.4 target rifle - mine was heat cracked. I hope that George and Kevin get a laugh out of this pic and please join in with the fun. John T.

 

[Claven2]

Honestly that workshop does not look overly rudimentary to me, despite the basic crate wood work in the foreground. It’s clear they are stripping rifles down to barrelled actions and to apply stamps just requires a hammer and the stamp itself.

 

[Mattyr82]

The SMLEs that returned with the CEF immediately at the end of WW1 were marked with the Canadian property mark upon return to Canada and entered into stores.
The other style Canadian property mark (full length arrow in the C) was stamped on items sent to Canada in 1919/1921 and these items were stamped at either the factory or at Woolwich Docks in accordance with War Office instructions for items sent overseas on consignment.

The British War Office did not want items stamped with the respective country ownership marking whilst in France as the agreement was that items on “loan” for the war would be handed back to British ordnance depots at the end of hostilities and the actual consignments of weapons to return to the countries under the imperial ordinance program, would be worked out via indents and requests once hostilities ceased.

 

[jtaylor]

Hi Mattyr82. I agree with your posted assessment. SMLE rifles marked after WW1 and went directly to stores with only a very few possible exceptions. I never caught on to the differentiation in C broad arrow markings indicating which shipment.
Checked out mine and I do have both types of C broad arrow on the bodies. Canadian navy is one exception as their rifles were marked C arrow N without any C broad arrow body mark so they were probably swaped directly to CN. Your original post stated a total of over 100K rifles came to Canada and that sounds quite right. Later on in the thirties Canada must have received some spares (that is where the Pattern B and the beach furniture came from) to refurbish SMLE rifles for war preparation or general preparedness. Ammunition stores were beefed up too I heard at the same time. Most of the Pat 07 Canadian bayonets have dates of '22, '23, '24 which indicates acceptance after a Brit refurbish so they came shortly after the rifles. Now we all have reasonable accurate time lines between the wars thanks to your post. Good work. Cudos. John T

 

[Claven2]

So by the above logic, would Canada have kept the rifles the CEF was issued, and returned home with them, marking them in Canadian depots, or would they have returned all arms to British stores, and then later been issued a random draw of SMLE rifles from war office stores post-war?

I have personally owned rifles with both Canadian and Indian or Australian pre-ww2 markings in the same rifle. Not sure how that could happen if c-arrow markings were only applied post-war in Canada, as those rifles would not have gone overseas again until likely 1939.

 

[Mattyr82]

I studied the Australian issuing of rifle post-WW1 and uncovered the Canadian rifles whilst at it.

So the batch that went back with the CEF would have been the better condition ones and they’d have handed back the more worn out rifles.

The rest that came later would have been either new or refurbished.

I actually have a 1917 made bayonet with the larger style C and arrow that made its way into Australian service.

I worked out that it was probably part of the equipment that the Canadian divisions took to Britain and later handed into British ordinance in 1940/1941. They then re-equipped with newer Lee Enfields and the bayonet might have been sent with the Australia Australian division that was in Britain at the time before it got sent to the Middle East.

 

[jtaylor]

I studied the Australian issuing of rifle post-WW1 and uncovered the Canadian rifles whilst at it.

So the batch that went back with the CEF would have been the better condition ones and they’d have handed back the more worn out rifles.

The rest that came later would have been either new or refurbished.

I actually have a 1917 made bayonet with the larger style C and arrow that made its way into Australian service.

I worked out that it was probably part of the equipment that the Canadian divisions took to Britain and later handed into British ordinance in 1940/1941. They then re-equipped with newer Lee Enfields and the bayonet might have been sent with the Australia Australian division that was in Britain at the time before it got sent to the Middle East.

Hi Mattyr82. You are dead on. The best war issued rifles were kept by the Canadians and the junk turned in. In fact the best were probably wood crated in the U.K. for destination Canada and in that process the C broad arrow was applied. Inventoried by the Brits and stamped by the Brits. Bayonets and web equipment would have been turned over to the Brits too.
I was unable to find the introduction of the Pattern B (wood) furnature for the SMLE in the list of changes. Beach and possibly maple was introduced as the preferred walnut was diminished of course. But I did find the Pattern B piling swivel listed as L. of C. 24014 introduced 7 Dec. 1920. I imagine that near the same time the furnature was approved. With so many
Canadian rifles sporting Pattern B parts it is most likely that furnature was acquired after the load of refurbished rifles landed in Canada and I have always assumed it was for a Canadian program set out in the late 1930's for war readiness.
The Pat B piling swivel was placed on SMLE rifles Mk V (starting 1922) and Mk VI (starting 1930) as they were new manufacture. Those rifles were set up in walnut. John T.

 

[Claven2]

I don’t think the change to “pattern B” wood was considered a material change in the ordnance system. At one point they stopped shaping the volley sight hump into the stocks, likely as wood duplicator stencils got worn and needed replacement. The Australians, on the other hand, never changed to b pattern stocks.

In practise, I most often see pattern b stocks on rifles with early 1920’s barrel dates (in the event of a barrel change at ftr) and I think most people assume them an inter-war item. For years and years, you could still find 1920’s dated walnut Enfield Lock replacement b pattern forestocks at gunshows around Ontario, still in paper ordnance wrap. I saw my last one maybe 15 years ago.

For beech, generally, it was seen in quantity in around 1941+. I don’t recall seeing a beech pattern b forestock on a pre-41 rifle that was not an obvious later refurb, but I have not seen every Lee Enfield out there, so stand to be corrected.

 

[jtaylor]

I don’t think the change to “pattern B” wood was considered a material change in the ordnance system. At one point they stopped shaping the volley sight hump into the stocks, likely as wood duplicator stencils got worn and needed replacement. The Australians, on the other hand, never changed to b pattern stocks.

In practise, I most often see pattern b stocks on rifles with early 1920’s barrel dates (in the event of a barrel change at ftr) and I think most people assume them an inter-war item. For years and years, you could still find 1920’s dated walnut Enfield Lock replacement b pattern forestocks at gunshows around Ontario, still in paper ordnance wrap. I saw my last one maybe 15 years ago.

For beech, generally, it was seen in quantity in around 1941+. I don’t recall seeing a beech pattern b forestock on a pre-41 rifle that was not an obvious later refurb, but I have not seen every Lee Enfield out there, so stand to be corrected.

The Pattern B furniture was not significant to warrant a change in nomenclature I agree. But it does indicate that Canada used
Pattern B furniture in refurbishment/repair which indicates that SMLE was in Canadian service post 1921 because that Pattern was not available prior to that. That is a sure indicator that Canada did receive rifle furniture spares prior to WW2. I've never seen any dates on B Pattern material even in the wrapper. I have also never seen a Canadian SMLE that has either Indian or Aussie markings. Beech may not have been used at all but the lightly oiled Pattern B furniture that does appear on Canadian SMLEs is a choice between new walnut and something else. I don't have any examples. One of my Canadian Mk III* 1917 SMLEs EFd made sports a 1922 made barrel and the refurb date is 5 - 39 on the knox. I've saved it for near 50 years. Others I've seen similarly marked. Long Branch did make SMLE barrels but those have dates on the side of the barrel. John T.

 

[Claven2]

undoubtedly the Canadian Army received bulk spares for the SMLE from the British factories, including new wood and barrels. Likely also every other conceivable replacement part.

I honestly have no photos, but I did pull a walnut EFD made type B stock from the wrap I bought at a gunshow in Cornwall Ontario in around 2005. I don't even own the gun anymore, but it belonged to a family member who wanted the rifle de-sporterized. The Wrapper have what appeared to be a Canadian supply depot tag on the wrapper, and my memory could be failing me, but pretty sure there was a 1920's dated ink stamp on the original British label. Out of the wrap, the stock was a light walnut, not overly oiled, and looked identical to what you encounter on 1920's FTRs done in either the UK or Canada.

At any rate, I agree, Canada most certainly had british-supplied replacement stocks in inventory and used them for whatever repair work deemed necessary. I also wholeheartedly agree that Canada kept the SMLE in service as its primary arm from the latter part of WW1 through to circa 1941/42. After that, they kept them in inventory for secondary roles and there are rifles out there with Longbranch made barrels and late war dates, showing some were still being repaired and issued for various purposes. I've seen several of these myself.

Now here's an intresting (dubious?) rifle to look at - a 1943 dispersal rifle with an early style c-broadarrow stamp on the knox form... barrel also dated 1943, so...??

 

[Claven2]

And here's another "interesting" case of a Canadian marked rifle with later Ishapore markings - though I'm leaning toward a fake C-broadarrow.

 

[jtaylor]

undoubtedly the Canadian Army received bulk spares for the SMLE from the British factories, including new wood and barrels. Likely also every other conceivable replacement part.

I honestly have no photos, but I did pull a walnut EFD made type B stock from the wrap I bought at a gunshow in Cornwall Ontario in around 2005. I don't even own the gun anymore, but it belonged to a family member who wanted the rifle de-sporterized. The Wrapper have what appeared to be a Canadian supply depot tag on the wrapper, and my memory could be failing me, but pretty sure there was a 1920's dated ink stamp on the original British label. Out of the wrap, the stock was a light walnut, not overly oiled, and looked identical to what you encounter on 1920's FTRs done in either the UK or Canada.

At any rate, I agree, Canada most certainly had british-supplied replacement stocks in inventory and used them for whatever repair work deemed necessary. I also wholeheartedly agree that Canada kept the SMLE in service as its primary arm from the latter part of WW1 through to circa 1941/42. After that, they kept them in inventory for secondary roles and there are rifles out there with Longbranch made barrels and late war dates, showing some were still being repaired and issued for various purposes. I've seen several of these myself.

Now here's an intresting (dubious?) rifle to look at - a 1943 dispersal rifle with an early style c-broadarrow stamp on the knox form... barrel also dated 1943, so...??

Canadian barrel gone to England.

 

[jtaylor]

Hi Claven2. My preliminary assessment based on information received from this post is that there are 4 possible Canadian marked Service SMLEs used between the wars.
Type 1. C broad arrow stamp on the knox stamped there by the British with a British made die. Rifles used in war by Canadians then turned over to the Brits for inspection and refurb/repair. The British die has a broad arrow in the C
that doesnt touch the C (2 pics attached). The rifles then are crated and are sent to Canada either with or without
Canadian troops on board returning from war. Rifles go to Canadian storage.
Type 2. C broad arrow stamp on the knox that is stamped with a Canadian die in Canada. The die has the broad arrow with all 3 arms touching the inside of the C (pic attached). Rifles are a further Brit alotment ending 1921 (approx). I can prove
that the same style of Canadian die was domestically used in 1912 on rifles and again starting 1922 when the .22
Martinis started to arrive from BSA to augment the Ross .22.
Type 3. Canadian Navy received SMLE rifles probably from the British Navy as Canadian Navy rifles have no C broad arrow at all but instead stamped with C broad arrow N. Example in pic shows body and knox stamped. Somehow Canadian Ordnance stores were bypassed. Pic attached. Since I had my camera out:

In addiion I added a pic an arsenal repair job of a handguard done as a precaution against splits. Notice the reinforces are
narrow and at an angle. Pattern B flat rivots are used too. Pattern B handguards have reinforces at 90degrees with flat rivots.

 

[Claven2]

Interesting. I;ve owned maybe a half dozen C-broadarrow marked SMLEs, and still have one. All my examples were what you call the type 2, which is interesting, if Canada brought back 60K rifles initially and they were supplemented with a later 40K, then you would think the Type 1 would be the more common mark, but I've never had one.

The type 1 mark closely matches the mark on the above Indian service marked SMLE butt, so I wonder how a Canadian SMLE ended up getting refurbed later in India?

 

[Mattyr82]

India got a lot of SMLEs from Australia after the Australian forces switched to the L1A1 SLR.

I wonder if Canada did the same and sent some of its older stocks of rifles to India as well.

Of noted a few Australian made rifles within Canada and I wonder if they were rifles sent after Australia sold off its stock of SMLEs to the USA and Canada in the 1980s or whether Australia sent some to Canada before hand.