1pm
Re: New Zealand Carbines in the Boer War (pics)
A couple of months ago, I posted a survey questionnaire for owners of the Magazine Lee-Enfield Carbine Fitted for the Pattern 1888 Bayonet, generally known as the New Zealand carbine. I received numerous responses and full findings will be posted here soon.
While all this was going on, however, I got a number of e-mails asking general questions about New Zealand carbines. One of these was, what were they used for? And by whom?
Some suggested answers as to users were (a) the New Zealand constabulary, (b) the infantry and (c) the cavalry.
The constabulary answer had a certain appeal, but was too “cute,” too eager to make these carbines analogous with the similar looking Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) carbine.
The infantry answer was problematic because why would infantry be armed with carbines instead of long Lees?
As for the cavalry option, this seemed the most promising avenue, though it did not immediately explain why a special bayonet-fitting carbine needed to be designed and issued to the New Zealanders in favor of the ordinary Lee-Enfield mk. I or mk. I* cavalry carbine.
I dropped a line to Enfield guru Ian Skennerton, who is remarkably good about responding to e-mails from groupies like me. The answer, he said, was that the carbines were almost certainly issued to cavalry, who were not cavalry in the British sense but were, rather, mounted infantry — riding to reach their destination but then fighting on foot. As such, they might very well have needed bayonets.
This prompted a further a question: where were New Zealand cavalry used at the turn of the 19th century? The answer, of course, is the Boer War, 1899-1902. So I decided to investigate whether these carbines were used in that conflict. I am convinced that the answer is that they were.
Before moving on to the photographic evidence, it might be as well to define our terms. The first three photos below are quite detailed images of (a) the Martini-Enfield artillery carbine (MEAC), (b) the standard Lee-Enfield cavalry carbine, mk. I (LEC I) and (c) the New Zealand carbine (NZC), of which a batch of 1,000 was shipped to New Zealand in 1901, and another of 500 in 1903. Some points about each carbine are worth noting. While the foreend of the MEAC is similar to that of the NZC, its buttstock is completely different, having no semblance of a pistol grip; also, the MEAC has no upper handguard. The LEC I, in contrast, has a foreend entirely covered by a full-length handguard, secured by a barrel band in the middle. The NZC, in contrast again, has only a three-quarter length handguard, with no barrel band. On the NZC, as on the MEAC, 4.5 inches of barrel are exposed at the muzzle end, which is not the case on the LEC I.
A bit of background history: New Zealand sent a total of 10 “contingents,” as they were called, to the South African war. These ranged in size from 215 men (the first) to over 1,000 (the last), and a total of 6,500 men served. The first contingent arrived in late 1899. The ninth and tenth arrived in late 1902, too late to see any really action; they functioned in policing capacity instead.
Turning to the historical photos, the first is of an unnamed trooper of the first contingent, posing before shipping out. He is armed with a MEAC, beyond doubt. And there is every reason to suppose that the rest of the first contingent was too. True, this trooper’s weapon may just be a studio prop. However, the second photo, of trooper Walter Stackwood just after enlisting in 1899, shows what seems to be a MEAC as well. His carbine-length firearm has an exposed barrel at the muzzle, but appears not to have a box magazine, otherwise Stackwood would not be able to wrap his right hand around the foreend immediately in front of the triggerguard in the manner seen here.
However, things had changed by the arrival of the seventh contingent, which landed in South Africa in May 1902. Photo 6 shows a large group of seventh contingent men in South Africa. Clearly, they are armed with long Lees (a.k.a. long Toms). The weapon of the man in the right foreground has no unit disc in the buttstock and so it must be a Lee-Metford II, a Lee Enfield I or a Lee-Enfield I*. As very few, if any, Metfords were sent to New Zealand, it is almost certainly a Lee-Enfield, probably a mk. I*.
But not all of the seventh contingent had long Lees, as photo 7 shows. Remember, the seventh contingent was still in New Zealand until early 1902, and thus could have been issued with the 1,000 NZCs of the 1901 batch. This shot shows a group from the seventh contingent posing with livestock raided from a Boer farm (all three men are holding dead chickens and the man on the left is sitting on a sheep carcass; he is also armed with a double-barreled shotgun, presumably stolen from the same farm). Beyond any doubt, these men have Lee-Enfield carbines of some sort or another. The firearm in the saddle bucket on the left has a pistol grip and a unit disc in the stock. It thus cannot be an MEAC. If further evidence is needed, the other two men have carbines the undersides of whose box magazines can easily be seen.
But what sort of Enfield carbines are these? Sadly the picture is not clear enough to tell for certain. The most visible carbine, the one in the bucket, has its telltale muzzle concealed. As for the other two, my sense is that the one on the right is a standard LEC I or I*, as it seems to have a barrel band. The one in the middle is harder to discern. There seems to be no band, though it may be obscured by the middle trooper’s hand.
However, a zoom-in on the same shot (see photo eight) reveals something very interesting. Looking like dark line and projecting from the trooper’s right hand, there is what appears to be an exposed barrel. The case is made all the stronger by the fact that there is undoubtedly the shadow of such an exposed barrel falling across his right shoulder. Such a shadow simply could not be produced with an LEC mk. I or I* carbine — quite impossible. Also, if you look immediately above the trooper’s hand, there is a small white (i.e., shiny) protrusion from the gun. Can this be anything apart from a bayonet lug? Finally, the man seems only to have three fingers. Can this be true? No, in fact his index finger is probably just obscured by his carbine’s top swivel, not feasible with an LEC I or I* — as these do not have any swivels.
The clincher seems to be the opinion of the Waiouru Army Museum in New Zealand. The final, ninth picture is a life-size diorama in the museum, representing New Zealand troopers in action in South Africa. There can be no doubt at all that the horse-riding sergeant — contingent unspecified — is armed with a New Zealand carbine. Note the box magazine, the three-quarter length handguard, the lack of barrel band and the exposed barrel at the end. If it’s good enough for the museum, it’s good enough for me. I say the carbines were in South Africa.
Coggansfield
<p>