Old M1903 photos

[Liam]

Hadn't seen these before. Always like to share finds that are clear and large.http://i1274.photobucket.com/albums/y423/liamflanagan/03s2_zpsb79a20d9.jpg
http://i1274.photobucket.com/albums/y423/liamflanagan/03s_zpsdf9c84c6.jpg

[rayg]

Great photos. The 1st one is 1902-1911. Anyone notice that my mannequin in this earlier thread titled "Two very early 1903 rifles", on pg 3, has the same equipment on it as the two guys in the 1st photo. The only difference is mine has the 1902 over blouse and in above photo they have the 1902 shirts. All the other equipment is exactly the same type as on my mannequin.

Just thought I'd mention that, http://i59.tinypic.com/9zv8uu.gif...Ray

[03Rifleman]

Excellent...really appreciate those pictures and thanks for posting!

[the_1st_sgt]

The second photo reminds me of a scene in Abbot and Costello's Buck Privates

[Liam]

"N.G." written by hand on the edge of the photo suggests "National Guard." This goes a long way in explaining the uncanny resemblance to Abbot & Costello antics. Oops. I'm sure I offended someone.

[Rick the Librarian]

Based on the rifles in the first pictures, some time in the 1905 to 1910 period. The left sides have "straight edges" and there are no stock bolts. No Springfields issued in the 1902-1904 period like that.

[Fred]

Somewhere I've seen a photo of national guardsmen in Alaska posing in a group with 1903 Rod Bayonet rifles. It was in 1904 I believe. Wish I could find it again.

[rayg]

Based on the rifles in the first pictures, some time in the 1905 to 1910 period. The left sides have "straight edges" and there are no stock bolts. No Springfields issued in the 1902-1904 period like that.

You're right, I was focusing on just a general dating. And if you want to be specific, the shirt and shoes are 1902 pattern, the campaign hat is a 1902 to 1911 pattern, The Marines wore that style of hat until their 1914 hat was adopted. The rifles as you say are 1905-1910 and probably more like 1905-1908 as the stock bolts started to be added about 1908. The bayonet and scabbard and the canteens are 1905 -1910 pattern, the cartridge belt and suspenders are 1903 pattern, the leggings are 1907 pattern. Keeping in mind my estimate of the photo was based on just a general dating of the items but also keeping in mind that they may have also been worn well post 1910 by many state and guard units and as well as the Marines. Ray

[Rick the Librarian]

Somewhere I've seen a photo of national guardsmen in Alaska posing in a group with 1903 Rod Bayonet rifles. It was in 1904 I believe. Wish I could find it again.

I believe Bruce Canfield has a picture in his M1903 book. I didn't hear them described as being from the National Guard, though.

[Rick the Librarian]

This is still one of my favorite pictures, taken at Fort Casey WA (where I give tours during the summer). Very detailed look at an early M1903. Note the "customized" shirt worn by the soldier in front.

http://www.fototime.com/E63E615940BF03C/standard.jpg

A closeup of the rifle:

http://www.fototime.com/478B941BED2E100/standard.jpg

[Fred]

They're firing their rifles with the sight cover on. Not good. I know it was done but it does throw the sight picture off.

[rayg]

Beautiful classic look of those 03's. The photo probably dates about the same as the 1st photo in this thread with the exception the shirt is a 1883 pattern that was replaced by the 1902 pattern shirt as worn in the 1st photo. So it might be a bit earlier then the 1st photo but as had been mentioned the rifle has to be post 1905, so anytime after that date. But If they're Marines it could be just pre WWI. As they wore the 83 shirts until then, but I don't see a EGA on the hats. Nice shot of the 1902 campaign hat also.
Two of my favorite items, the early 03 and early pre 1911 campaign hats, Ray

[Rick the Librarian]

These are soldiers from Fort Casey and are coast artillerymen - notice the canteens with the artillery "crossed cannon" symbols. The Coast Artillery, as a separate branch, wasn't founded until 1907 (earlier units functioning at coast artillery had been part of the field artillery until the two were separated).

[rayg]

Oops it didn't sink in that they were from Fort Casey. I should learn to pay attention to what I read better. Also probably why they still have the old issue 83 shirts. And judging from the ripped sleeve they may be just using up the old shirts in the field. Ray