I am currently looking for information concerning bulgarian infantry. I would especially like any information relating to uniforms, infantry weapons (machine guns, rifles and pistols), trench mortars, helmets and caps.
Any photo or drawing is welcome.
Regards from Spain
__________________
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
Pistols The old model 7.65 mm Parabellum in small numbers The new model 9mm Parabellum (10,000 ordered) Officers might also have made their own private arrangements with the handgun of their own choice
Rifles The 1888 pattern Mannlicher converted to use the M93 smokeless cartridge The M95 Mannlicher in both long and carbin form Old Peabody- Martini from Turkey and Berdan II from Russia used by some 2nd line units
Machine guns M1907 Maxim rechambered to take Austro Hungarian 8mm rimmed ammo (aprox 150) M1909 Maxims already built for the 8mm ammo (unkown number) Maxims fired from tripods
I'd say yes. The hats and cockades definitely look Bulgarian, the clearest one is the guy second from the right. The Bulgarian cockade was an oval of white porcelein (sp?) with concentric green and red ovals in the center of it. The only thing that would look even close would be the Russians, with a similar cap and a cockade of black and orange ovals inside an outer edge of bare metal...which might be as shiny as the photo shows (though not so white as the Bulgarian cockade).
However the Russians normally had a wheeled mount for their maxim MG, while the photo shows Schwarzloses, which could have been supplied by Austria. The MG could be a captured weapon, conceivably, but would the Russians use a gas mask so similar to the german version? I know they had one that was a box suspended from the nose, but they probably had other types as well.
According to The WWI Sourcebook, most Bulgarian Maxims were on a wheeled carriage, and only a minority on a tripod. Doesn't say anything about a shield. There's one on a tripod in the IWM North, if anyone wants a photo.
I think they must be Bulgarians. The service cap was v. similar to the Russian pattern but the Bulgarians tunic was very different from the Russian gimnastirka. The uniform in the pic looks like the 1908 grey-green issue with no external pockets. Germany supplied huge mounts of materiel, so those could be German gasmasks. Would A-H have supplied Schwarzlose mgs? Haven't seen any mention of that.
Bulgarian artillery was mostly French-made: Schneider-Creusot 75mm guns and 105mm howitzers, plus Schneider 75mm mountain guns. There were also some older Krupp 75 & 87mm guns and 120 & 150mm howitzers and 75mm mountain guns.
News just in: have found reference saying that Bulgaria used Hotchkiss, Madsen, Maxim, and Schwarzlose machine-guns.
-- Edited by James H at 23:03, 2007-03-25
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
James H wrote: According to The WWI Sourcebook, most Bulgarian Maxims were on a wheeled carriage, and only a minority on a tripod. Doesn't say anything about a shield. There's one on a tripod in the IWM North, if anyone wants a photo.
-- Edited by James H at 23:03, 2007-03-25
John Walter's 'Central Powers Small Arms of WW1' states "Apart from guns retained in static roles or mounted aboard warships, the Bulgarian Maxims were all issued with tripods" Completely opposite reports from two sources - how do we resolve?
Centurion wrote:John Walter's 'Central Powers Small Arms of WW1' states "Apart from guns retained in static roles or mounted aboard warships, the Bulgarian Maxims were all issued with tripods" Completely opposite reports from two sources - how do we resolve?
He can have one of each.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
A bit more info In 1915 the organisation of a division in the Bulgarian arm was :
2 Active Brigades of 2 regiments each 4 battalions with regimental MG coy and Artillery Brigade 4 battalions of Infantry (regular) 4 battalions of Infantry (reservist) 1 Machine gun company (regular) 1 Machine gun company (reservist) (Mix regular and reservist battalions in the same regt)
This actually worked out at 4 machine guns per regiment. By 1918 this had risen to 32 guns per regiment.
The export version of the 1909 Maxim was equiped with a tripod as standard (as per those supplied to the Turkish Army) on this basis one would expect the tripod to be the normal mounting for Bulgarian Maxims
The export version of the 1909 Maxim was equiped with a tripod as standard (as per those supplied to the Turkish Army) on this basis one would expect the tripod to be the normal mounting for Bulgarian Maxims
The Belgian Maxim was on a tripod, so perhaps the wheeled carriage theory hasn't got a leg to stand on.
Cavalry uniforms:
Three divisions of 2 brigades each. Four regiments wore a German-style ulanka, 3 in dark blue and 1 in dark green. The Royal Guard had a hussar uniform, colour not stated. Armament was a sabre and carbine.
In 1908 a Russian-style campaign uniform was adopted, but the old uniforms were used until worn out. Because of supply shortages Germany provided large numbers of field grey uniforms, to which the Bulgarians attached their own insignia.
The cavalry played only a very minor role in operations. All horses were mounted on four hooves.
This is quite interesting: in 1917 Germany began supplying the M16 Stahlhelm to Bulgaria with possibly some M17 later. Some Austrian M16 and Berndorfers also found their way there.
The second photo appear to show officers in a mixture of 1908 and pre-1908 uniforms. (The Bulgarian army seems to have had a very ad-hoc appearance)
What is the MG in the first photo? It looks like a Lewis, but is belt-fed.
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
The cavalry played only a very minor role in operations. All horses were mounted on four hooves.
I thought I read about a squadron of three-legged horses the Bulgarians had captured from the Russian 'Turkmen Horse' half regiment? But maybe that was an error? Hee hee!
Seriously though, that belt fed Lewis-looking gun is pretty strange. I haven't been able to find any reference to a belt fed conversion for the Lewis, and it doesn't seem like that sort of air cooling system would work on a MG designed for sustained fire, even if they modified the barrel to include the Lewis forced air vanes. Curious.
OK, I took another look and now I think it's just an ordinary Maxim 08/15 (or something similar). The large diameter hole that we're looking into is actually on the flashguard, not the (water) jacket. You can see where the base of the flashguard is coming out of the bottom edge of the front plate of the water jacket.
J Fullerton wrote: Seriously though, that belt fed Lewis-looking gun is pretty strange. I haven't been able to find any reference to a belt fed conversion for the Lewis, and it doesn't seem like that sort of air cooling system would work on a MG designed for sustained fire, even if they modified the barrel to include the Lewis forced air vanes. Curious.
When various synchronised/interrupter gears were being developed for aircraft some thought was given to a belt fed Lewis but the real problem was that it is almost impossible to synchronise or interrupt the Lewis gun reliably. The Hotchkiss used in Mk IV and Vs was in fact an aircooled gun converted to belt feed. German observer's guns on most C and CL aircraft were belt fed (the belt being held in a drum) aircooled. However as you say the gun in the picture is an 08/15.
Oh, I didn't mean to say that no air-cooling system would work for sustained fire, just that the Lewis air-cooling system probably wouldn't. Ian Hogg seems to consider it's value to be dubious at best. I've read that the full sized Hotchkiss could fire indefinitely if it wasn't set at too fast of a rate.
huhncc wrote: What color, generally, was the uniform in 1917-18?
All the indications are that there would have been a mixture of uniforms and headgear, even by that late stage, as the pic of officers in Stahlhelms shows. The 1908 uniform was grey-green, the pre-1908 is described as "tobacco brown", and peace-time uniform was dark green, with double-breated tunic. In addition, many German feldgrau uniforms were issued. Some reserve units still sported fur or astrakhan hats, and all units seem to have carried the bachlik, a voluminous hood that covered the head, including the service cap. The tails of the hood were either crossed over on the chest and tucked into the belt or thrown over the shoulders.
Plenty to choose from, huhncc.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Hi folks, I've just been looking back at the image of the prone mg team posted two days ago. It's been suggested that it's a Maxim 08/15. If you look closely at the gunner's hands they appear to be resting on two horizontal grips. That would suggest a Shwarsloze to me. (spellings not my strong point) Would anyone care to comment?
jellytwig wrote: Hi folks, I've just been looking back at the image of the prone mg team posted two days ago. It's been suggested that it's a Maxim 08/15. If you look closely at the gunner's hands they appear to be resting on two horizontal grips. That would suggest a Shwarsloze to me. (spellings not my strong point) Would anyone care to comment?
Oh, dear. Of course it's a Schwarzlose. I'll claim that the Lewis theory was down to an optical illusion, but I wasn't convinced it was an 08/15. Even with the perspective, the flashguard looks much too big, and another clue is the odd bipod it seems to be on, which looks as if it's made out of a pitchfork. That is actually a short tripod introduced in place of the standard one to make the gun portable by a two-man team. I've got a picture which shows it very well, but can't upload it at present.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
The snag seems to have sorted itself out. Please find enclosed 3 sets of illustrations of Bulgarian uniforms. B3 is from Mollo & Turner, in which I don't always have the greatest confidence. The pre-1908 uniform is described as "tobacco brown", and their pic seems much lighter. Their illustrations are all taken from contemporary photos which are then "colourised". The cut of the brown and grey-green uniforms are very similar so I wouldn't swear this is correct, and they don't specify in the text. Anyway, it seems that the Bulgarians were a motley lot as far as uniforms were concerned, so no great harm done.
PS: The reason I've coded the pics is that if you edit a post the pics seem to swap places.
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Well done, on identifying that Schwarzlose. To be fair, I was trying to be cautious about calling it an 08/15. "Or something like it" is accurate enough by my low standards; a normal full-sized water-cooled MG adapted into a "light" (ha!) version by means of a more minimal bipod (or tripod, as it turns out).
On a different note, I believe the Bulgarians also used Austrian made short bayonets of the Mannlicher style (as did Romania and Serbia), only with the sharp edge on the bottom rather than the odd Austrian upside down way of doing it.
My bayonet collection has finally grown to include all the major combatants with the exception of the balkan states. They all look so similar to the Austrian type (except for Montenegro, which used the Moisin Nagant, as I understand) that it doesn't seem worth the time and expense of aquiring them .
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.