Guns Aboard the Titanic

Titanic, as most British vessels of the same size, was an auxiliary vessel of the Royal Navy. She would carry the same type and number of small arms as any other British vessel with the same number of officers and crew of the time period.

Yes the crew had guns and locked an awful lot of people below to drown.

That is what a true dictatorship will do (and the captain of a ship is just that.)

Deaf

Webleys For Sure

Details here:

http://www.williammurdoch.net/articles_13_Guns_on_Titanic.html

http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/forums/gunshots/5111-guns-titanic.html

I recall some officers who had to deal with passengers at the lifeboat stations being issued revolvers, but I don't remember what type. IIRC one officer actually fired shots into the air in order to stop a stampede on his lifeboat station.
If any longarms were aboard I do not believe they were issued.
And it's really anyone's guess what guns passengers might have been transporting ... they were a lot less concerned about these sorts of things one hundred years ago.

I would make a bet that almost all the guns that the passengers had would have been owned by 1st and 2nd class passengers. Almost all of the 3rd class or steerage passengers would have been onboard with literally just the shirts on their back. If they had a weapon it would have been most likely a knife. The guns on the Titanic that were available for use by captain and senior officers were revolvers and of British manufacture, Webley's. As far as long arms I have not read anything stating that rifles were carried on the Titanic at the time of it's sinking. I am sure the Titanic having been built to be easily converted into a wartime auxiliary cruiser, would have had area's designed to be quickly converted into small arms weapons(rifle and handgun) storage areas. It was also designed to have 6" naval guns and other weapons mounted on it and the accompanying ammunition storage facilities. Only after WWII was the 3 or 4 thousand year tradition of using armed merchant ships as warships was finally abandoned.

Traditionally on merchant ships at that time, firearms were carried onboard but kept locked up and were available only to captains and senior officers, mainly as a deterrent to mutiny or to repel pirates in certain waters. Ordinary crew members were prohibited from carrying weapons although on sailing ships they were allowed knifes only with broken off tips, the reason being a sailor might have to cut a rope to save himself or the ship. I am sure that any of the passengers who did have firearms on merchant sailing or steam ships were 1st or 2nd class passengers.

Oh well, if there were actually guns aboard the Titanic, that's probably why she sank. The iceburg had nothing to do with it.

I would think that because of the wealth of the First Class passengers, that they would have access to the latest and greatest. What comes to mind is that there must have been at least a few Colt 1911's on board, since they just came out the year before the Titanic sank (especially among American First Class Passengers). I think that is what Calvin Huxley had in the HIGHLY fictitious movie from several years back. Okay, Hollywood does take lots of liberties, but, my guess, is that it would be the firearm that he most likely would have had. At least they had enough sense to use a firearm that actually existed in 1912. I think I saw a Western within the last year in which the year is in the 1860's or early 1870's and one of the characters whips out a Colt SAA, which did not exist until 1873. A Colt SAA might have made its way on board, although I think by 1912 its popularity was waning.

I think longarms would be less likely, but not unheard of, on the Titanic. Someone might have been on Safari and on their way back. I would think that a Winchester 1895 in .405 WCF or a .50-110 Express Model 1886 Winchester (or maybe one in .45-70) would have been a good bet.

I think the best bet would be what I detailed above. Additionally, if anyone has access to information detailing the best selling firearms in 1911 and 1912, I would think the top sellers would be a good bet. It would be interesting to see such a list, independent of its relevance to the Titanic.

Of course, originating from Southampton, England, a few first class passengers could easily have had with them a few of London's finest, most likely a Holland & Holland double rifle (or shotgun), although possibly a Boss or Purdey. Less likely, though possible, a firearm from a Birmingham maker or even a John Dickson from Edinburgh.

Hurryin' Hoosier said:

Oh well, if there were actually guns aboard the Titanic, that's probably why she sank. The iceburg had nothing to do with it.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it was actually an AK-15 ghost gun with its 30 magazine clip and shoulder thing that goes up that went crazy and blasted a hole in the hull. That whole iceberg story was a cover up by the NRA.

The Titanic was headed to NYC in 1912. NYS Sullivan Act, outlawing non-permit handguns, had been passed the year before.

May have had an effect on passengers private possession of handguns. However, wealthy passengers may have thought they had the connections not to get arrested, sort of like today.

SharpsDressedMan said:

People in Europe in 1912 probably didn't get the letter about the Sullivan Act. Seem to me that few outside of NYC would even know about it, public television and the internet being what it was back then.

Click to expand...

But shouldn't the people organizing the trip be aware of the laws of the port where they would land?

jrmiddleton425 said:

Titanic, as most British vessels of the same size, was an auxiliary vessel of the Royal Navy. She would carry the same type and number of small arms as any other British vessel with the same number of officers and crew of the time period.

Click to expand...

"...Of the same size..."
At 882 ft. 6 in. long, there was no other ship of the same size. The R.M.S. Titanic was the largest ship afloat at the time.
That was one of its "selling points."

But I get what you meant.

Of course there were. The HMHS Brittanic (882'9") and the RMS Olympic (882'6"), the sister ships of the RMS Titanic. The Titanic was laid in 1909, with the Olympic predating the Titanic by a year, being laid in port in 1908.

By the way, here's a comparison of the Titanic and a modern cruise ship:

https://www.google.com/search?q=com...diculous-compared-to-moder-1462306555;640;360

They had newspapers, radio, and the transatlantic cable, which was placed in 1858. News went back and forth across the Atlantic.

Although I do remember reading a British newspaper headline, "Channel Completely Fogged, Europe Cut Off"

Speedo66 said:

By the way, here's a comparison of the Titanic and a modern cruise ship:

https://www.google.com/search?q=com...diculous-compared-to-moder-1462306555;640;360

They had newspapers, radio, and the transatlantic cable, which was placed in 1858. News went back and forth across the Atlantic.

Click to expand...

cool pic. here is another

USAF_Vet said:

Of course there were. The HMHS Brittanic (882'9") and the RMS Olympic (882'6"), the sister ships of the RMS Titanic. The Titanic was laid in 1909, with the Olympic predating the Titanic by a year, being laid in port in 1908.

Click to expand...

The Titanic may have been larger by a few inches ...but it was LARGER.

I don't know where you got the Britanic's measurement at 882'9" .... the Titanic was the largest of the three sisterships. Perhaps the extra inches came after a refit ....? (The Olympic was 882' 0" according to my sources. If you ever get to Alnwick, England, you can see some of the Olympic's interior fittings at the White Swan Inn. Man they made FINE woodwork back then.....).

But the Britannic had a larger displacement. The Brit was newer than Titanic, not seeing its maiden voyage until after the Titanic met her fate.

Olympic was slightly smaller, but its a matter of semantics to compare the two. Almost like comparing a C-5 to an AN-124.

USAF_Vet said:

But the Britannic had a larger displacement. The Brit was newer than Titanic, not seeing its maiden voyage until after the Titanic met her fate.

Olympic was slightly smaller, but its a matter of semantics to compare the two. Almost like comparing a C-5 to an AN-124.

Click to expand...

But none of the sisters were "of the same size?"

AHA! GOTCHA!



OK, I realize I have now decended into utter absurdity. In my defense let me say it's getting late. I may be a little punchy.
I'll be good and get some sleep now ....

The first commercial M1911s shipped a few days before the Titanic left Southampton, so it's not feasible that they made their way across the pond in time to be taken back again.

Some years ago a Webley came up at auction as supposedly having been owned and carried by one of the ship's officers. It was pointed out that the serial proved it had been made long afterwards and the lot was withdrawn.

Although Titanic and other fast transatlantic liners could be taken up as auxiliary vessels in wartime (and some were, although they proved to be unsuitable as they were designed to only carry enough coal and food/water for the short Atlantic crossing) there's no reason why they should have carried an extensive range of smallarms in peacetime.

In the movie though that cop guy have that silver 1911 if I remember correctly. So they must have had them in real life.

It was not unusual back at the turn of the century for travelers who "toured" in foreign countries, to be armed.

My great uncle and great aunt were Broadway actors and later successful silent screen stars in Hollywood. They traveled overseas a number of times, often to exotic places, not only to see the sights but to publicize my great uncle's silent movies. According to my great aunt, he always had a Colt revolver with him when they were in foreign countries, and in certain U.S. cities. She did not remember the caliber, nor what happened to it. He died in 1949.

Obviously they traveled overseas on cruise ships. He had grown up in Pennsylvania, hunting, etc., and was on his college's shooting team.

Back in those days, my great aunt often carried a "muff gun," a Colt 1908 .25 ACP, hidden away. About 36 or 37 years ago, she gave it to me. I still have it. Shoots like a champ, too.

Things are kinda different these days, huh?

L.W.

EDIT: Here is a picture of my late great uncle in the driveway of his home in the Hollywood Hills above Sunset Blvd. The man standing with him is his good friend from Broadway days, John Barrymore. Barrymore is on my great uncle's left.

People in Europe in 1912 probably didn't get the letter about the Sullivan Act. Seem to me that few outside of NYC would even know about it, public television and the internet being what it was back then.

Click to expand...

I honestly don't think that Europeans cared an iota about American gun laws. Moreover, The Sullivan Act was only enforced against poor Americans and immigrants. Teddy Roosevelt could have walked around Times Square with a suppressed pistol, shooting at squirrels and rats, and nobody would have blinked, except maybe if they wanted to cheer him on. If your name was Alfonso, Guido, or Pasquale, and you came from Kings County with only one set of clothes to your name, yes, you were getting arrested.