Did passengers have firearms onboard?
- Thread starter Duck_Dur
- Start date
-
- Tags
- firearms guns passengers
Thomas Krom
Member
Yes, some passengers were armed.
On the body of second class passenger Michel Navratil (1880-1912) a loaded revolver was found (likely linked to his successful attempt of kidnapping his two sons). First class passengers Antoinette Flegenheim (1863-1943) and Pierre Marie Georges Maréchal (1883-1942) claimed that Alfred 'Baron Von Drachstedt' Nourney (1892-1972) had a revolver with him and fired it off in lifeboat number 7 (which isn't supported by many people). First class passenger Norman Campbell Chambers (1884-1966) stated in his testimony he had an automatic pistol with him, which he removed from his back.
I'm sure there may be a few other ones but those are the few that spring to mind, with two in my view being confirmed as a fact.
Last edited:
Was Michel Navratil’s gun preserved?
Arun Vajpey
Member
Did Archie Butt have a gun with him?
Richard C Elliott
Member
Or Mauritz Bjornstrom-Steffanson. It doesn't seem improbable that some of the military officers aboard would have brought sidearms with them.
Steven Christian
Member
I was getting ready to post when I saw your post. There were newspaper accounts that he did have a gun with him. How true those are I can't say as you know how the stories were flying around right after the sinking. But it seems logical he would. Many officers in those days and later often had a sidearm with them. Some issued and many were personally owned. They weren't often displayed but available to get to if needed. Patton was known for his famous ivory handled revolvers but like many officers he also carried concealed small automatics known back then as pocket pistols. That was in peacetime too. So it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that the Major could have his own sidearm with him on Titanic.
Thomas Krom
Member
George Behe his excellent book on Major Butt his final two months, with the sinking as the focus, doesn't mention it if my memory serves right. Accounts of him maintaining order according to Irene Harris mention he often used brute force instead. I'll look again.
Arun Vajpey
Member
But the man with the ivory/pearl handled gun in that picture appears to be Ike!
Thomas Krom
Member
I believe it's General George S. Patton (who has two White Star Line connections), he always had a Colt revolvers with a white gun-handle.
Steven Christian
Member
Yes. That's Patton with one of his ivory handled pistols. The other 2 are General Omar Bradley and Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery.
Arun Vajpey
Member
Thanks. From that profile angle, Patton does look a bit like Eisenhower
Steven Christian
Member
Patton was known to get upset with people/reporters who called his Colts a pearl handled revolver. He had said that only a pimp from a cheap New Orleans wh~~~ house would carry a pearl handled revolver. And there was a documented incident where he once thought a girl was being abducted by 2 men. He pulled a pistol from his coat and forced the men to let her go. But it was a mistake. They were friends and she wasn't being abducted. I just mention that because officers often carried back then. But so did many sailors in those days. Like Lowe and his automatic. Sometimes they hit some pretty rough ports where safety was an issue. So like I said before seems reasonable to me that the Major could have had a gun with him. But reading some of the quotes/actions that were reported about him from the press of the day seem made up to me. Sounds like reporters were laying the purple prose on a little heavy if you know what I mean. Cheers.
Arun Vajpey
Member
That incident was mentioned (by the Germans!) in the 1970 film Patton with George C Scott in the title role. I was not sure if it was fact or fiction. I'm afraid I look at Patton (the real-life General) more from a British perspective and feel he was something of a "Cowboy" rather than a seasoned Commander like Montgomery or Zhukov. You will find that view to be the same among a lot of senior former armed forces personnel and civilians in the UK and Europe.
Seumas
Member
At the risk of taking this thread way of topic, broadly speaking that was also the conclusion of two Max Hastings and Anthony Beevor namely: Bradley > Patton, Slim > Montgomery & von Manstein > Rommel.
Steven Christian
Member
Well Patton was a bit of a cowboy. But he was a seasoned commander. He fought the mexican revolutionaries during the Pancho Villa days and then as a tank commander in WW1. Yes a lot of it is perception. The American generals in WW2 didn't like or respect Montgomery. They thought he was an over rated pom-pas ass that made bad decisions that got a lot of soldiers killed unnecessarily. Ike had a lot of trouble just keeping the peace between the generals. I'm sure many of the brits probably thought the same of Patton. At least until he took over the 3rd army. The results of that speak for itself. Up until WW2 Patton out ranked Ike. But Ike was a great organizer which the army needed. Patton was a great field commander but his political skills were lacking which is why he often was in trouble. But Ike and Patton were close friends from the old days and he often bailed out Patton during the war because of that and he needed him. Ike had good political skills also. It's why he was made Supreme Allied commander. The Americans were never going to accept Montgomery in that role. Churchill knew that and it was one of the reasons he supported Ike for the job. Ok I drifted off the subject too much. Back to Titanic. Cheers.
Last edited:
