“- If you, approximately, Bondarenko, are standing in the ranks with a gun, and the authorities come up to you and ask:“What do you have in your hands, Bondarenko?” What should you answer?
- Rougeau, uncle? - Guesses Bondarenko.
- You are flawing. Is this a rougeau? You would also say in a village language: towel. That was a gun at home, but in the service it is called simply: a small-caliber rapid-fire infantry rifle of the Berdan system, number two, with a sliding bolt. Repeat, son of a bitch!"
("Duel" A. Kuprin.)
The history of the German Mauser rifle is very remarkable, as, in fact, probably the history of any technically perfect system. The British had perfected the foreign Martini-Henry rifle and abandoned it when it had exhausted its capabilities. The French created their own, national weapon, but only new gunpowder allowed them to take a real step forward and outstrip other countries in this field. The experience of Switzerland, the most "advanced" country in terms of arming the infantry with rapid-fire rifles, at that time did not impress anyone, but both the British and the Germans were equal to France with its new cartridge and solid-compact bullet. Well, in Russia, the excellent Berdan rifle was also adopted and used, which, unlike the English Martini-Henry rifle, had a great modernization potential. But … the revolution of gunpowder swept all these samples to the sidelines of history. Completely new samples were needed, and they appeared. Among the first was our Russian model 1891 rifle. And, of course, the story started in the previous materials about rifles - the same age as the "Mauser", would not be complete without reference to its history. Until now, we meet a variety of judgments about what kind of weapon it was. From purely enthusiastic to … frankly dismissive. Meanwhile, the history of this type of weapon is just very well documented, traced literally day by day and can be presented in great detail. Well, if so, why not tell about it in the most detailed way? Without a doubt, this story will be very instructive, especially since it is based on archival documents from the archives of the Military-Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineers and Signal Corps!
Infantry of the Russian Imperial Army on the march with M1891 rifles. Many have rifles with bayonets attached.
Well, and we must start with the fact that on April 16, 1891, that is, seven years before the appearance of the German model G98, when the German army was still using the previous model G88, the Russian Emperor Alexander III approved a model of a new rifle for the Russian army, which should replace the old one. single-shot rifle "Berdan number 2" in 4, 2 lines or 10, 67-mm caliber with pure lead bullets in a paper wrapper. According to the measurement scale adopted in Russia, it was designated as 3-line, that is, it had a caliber of 7.62 mm and was equipped with a middle magazine that could hold five rounds. From that moment, her long and, in general, glorious life began. Because for more than 60 years it has remained the main weapon of the soldiers of our army, and the experience of its use has unambiguously shown that it has such indisputable qualities as high reliability, durability, good rate of fire and accuracy. The rifle was modernized twice: in 1910 and 1930. and was also used as a sniper. In addition, rifle grenade launchers and three samples of carbines were created on its basis. In addition to Russia, the armies of countries such as Montenegro, Finland, Poland, China, North Korea and Afghanistan were armed with this rifle.
Berdan rifles. V. G. Fedorov "Atlas of Drawings for the Armament of the Russian Army in the 19th Century".
As already noted, many publications have been devoted to the history of this rifle, and, above all, to the problem of its namelessness. But in Soviet times, the conclusions of the authors most often did not differ in variety and, mainly, they accused Tsar Alexander III of "reverence for the West" it was not he who introduced the famous national uniform on hooks into the army and called Russian ships the names of Orthodox saints!) and therefore, they say, disdainfully treated its designer S. I. Mosin and even hinted that L. Nagan bribed the tsarist minister P. S. Vannovsky, although, if you think about it, he ended up with some strange bribery.
However, it is the documents of those years that make it possible to explain the events associated with the circumstances of the adoption of a three-line rifle, in the title of which the author's name for some reason did not appear. Moreover, they were all in those years when, in connection with the political situation in the country, or rather, for the sake of her, historical facts were replaced by conjectures.
M1891 rifle at the Army Museum in Stockholm. In the exposition it is called "Mosin-Nagan"
For the first time, experts began to consider the first samples of magazine-fed rifles in the weapons department of the GAU Artillery Committee back in May 1878 [1]. At the same time, the military attaches in different countries were ordered to enter into contacts with designers and purchase new items of various systems. Five years later, namely on May 14, 1883, under the same department of the GAU Artillery Committee, a commission was created, called the "Commission for the Test of Multiple-Charge Rifles", chaired by Major General N. I. Chagin. It consisted of relevant specialists and carried out practical work on the assessment and testing of the samples at its disposal. The results of the activities of this commission were approved and the allocated money was distributed by another commission - the "Executive Commission for the Rearmament of the Army" headed by Comrade General Feldzheikhmeister (Deputy Chief of Artillery) Adjutant General L. P. Sophiano. The Minister of War relied on the conclusions and opinions of both of these commissions.
At the same time, the work of the Chagin commission could well be chronologically divided into two periods. The first one, from 1883 to 1889, is characterized by the fact that at that time its main task was considered to be the development of the most profitable in all respects alteration of a single-shot "Berdank" into a shop one. It is interesting that not only military specialists were concerned about this problem at that time, but also representatives of the most diverse classes of the population of the Russian Empire, so that this idea was clearly “in the air”. The student of the 1st Kiev gymnasium V. Dobrovolsky, the Voronezh landowner Korovin, and the Rybinsky bourgeois I. P. Shadrinov, and even a certain prisoner F. Kh. Denike, who was in a pre-trial detention center awaiting exile to Siberia, and many others. The projects were discussed by the Commission and mostly rejected. However, dozens of systems, both Russian and foreign, have been severely tested. Among them were rifles of colonels of the Russian Imperial Army Tenner and Khristich, Captain Mosin, Cornet Lutkovsky, gunsmiths Malkov, Ignatovich, Kvashnevsky, as well as foreign systems of Winchester, Wetterley, Spencer, Kropachek, Lee, Hotchkiss, Mannlicher, Schulhoff, Mauser and others.
Usually the Commission gave the following conclusions: “The tests should be stopped”, “Mr. N’s proposals to be rejected” or “further consideration should be considered useless”. But there were also such developments that attracted her attention. For example, the rifle of the gunsmith of the Officer Rifle School of Kvashnevsky, equipped with an under-barrel magazine. They were made 200 pieces, military trials began, but after twice the cartridges in the store ignited from the prick of the primer, they were immediately stopped. The rifle S. I. Mosin, equipped with a rack-applied shop, was recognized as worthy of full attention. In 1885, it was decided to make 1000 of these rifles, and 200 of them should be adapted for the barrels not of 4, 2-line, but of a reduced caliber [2].
Mosin carbine sample 1938.
The year 1889 became, so to speak, a turning point in the work of the Commission. On May 29, Major General Chagin announced that she had taken the French Lebel system as a basis, and work was underway to design a new three-line gun. Then, on August 8 of the same year, it was noted that "the 3-line barrel according to the Lebel model was worked out," and it was necessary to hurry up with the creation of a new cartridge for it with a charge of smokeless powder. So, in 1889, a barrel was created, and then a cartridge for a new rifle. Let us emphasize that S. I. Mosin did not have all this, unlike the same Gra or Mauser, who developed rifles and barrels and their mechanisms for their own. Since the same year, the name of the Commission has changed. Now it began to be called the "Commission for the Development of a Model of a Small-Bore Rifle".
French magazine rifle "Lebel" Mle1886 - it all started with it!
In 1889 - 1891, this is the second period of work on the development of a new rifle, the main content of which was testing the guns of two designers - Nagan and Mosin, whose rivalry ultimately yielded a remarkable final result.
The first information about the Nagant gun in Russia was received in the spring of 1889. The specialists were interested in his rifle. The first copy of its caliber 3, 15-line (8 * mm) was delivered to Russia on October 11, 1889. After 1, 5 months, on November 30, two more rifles were brought, and in December Mosin received the following task “guided by the Nagant's gun, to design a gun of a batch system for 5 rounds, but to use the bolt of his system in this gun” [3]. In this case, of course, it was understood that both the barrel for the rifle and the cartridge would be used ready-made. On January 13, 1890, Nagant sent to the Commission a new 7.62 mm rifle with changes in the bolt. Well, in the middle of February S. I. Mosin completed the work entrusted to him and submitted his version in the form of a model to the Commission. It is interesting that in the Nagant rifle, which came to Russia in 1889, the bolt was direct action, that is, without turning and had a handle bent down in its rear part, behind the trigger bracket. But the members of the commission did not like this shutter.
The documents and the samples of these rifles themselves make it possible to quite convincingly answer the question: what first of all interested the Russian military in the development of both designers? In the rifle presented by Nagan, it was first of all … a magazine and also the principle of feeding cartridges from it; in the Mosin rifle - a bolt. That is, the situation was in many ways similar to that which took place with the Lee-Enfield rifle in England: from the design of James Lee, the new rifle had a bolt and a magazine, but the Arsenal at Anfield presented a ready-made barrel with a new type of rifling. Only in our sample, in this case, there were not two, but three author's parts: the barrel, the bolt and the magazine.
After checking both rifles, the Commission returned them for revision. And in the spring and summer of 1890, both Mosin and Nagan were improving their designs. Mosin worked at the Tula Arms Factory. Nagant - at his own factory in Liege, which he equipped with new machines, counting on a lucrative Russian order, and even refused orders for the production of revolvers and carbines for the Dutch army and now worked only for Russia.
The result of the competition was the decision of the Executive Commission for the rearmament of the army, adopted on July 4, 1890, to produce 300 magazine and 300 single-shot rifles of S. I. Mosin and 300 more - Nagant rifles. Since back in March, Nagant set a price of 225 francs for a rifle without a bayonet, the commission decided: to order Nagant 305 rifles, but take a receipt that each of his guns would not cost more than 225 francs. The total cost of the order as a result amounted to almost 69 thousand francs, i.e. about 24 thousand rubles (1 franc at that time cost 35 kopecks). Bayonets and sights for his guns, to make it cheaper, decided to make at the Sestroretsk Arms Factory. What was needed for 1900 rubles.
At the Tula Arms Factory, it was decided to produce 300 Mosin rifles along with bayonets and accessories (18 thousand rubles); but at the Sestroretsk Arms Plant to produce 300 single-shot Mosin rifles (15 thousand rubles).
The production of 20,000 clips of the Mosin system required 2 thousand rubles. (10 kopecks per piece). Nagant said that for 30,000 clips for his guns, he demands 13,500 francs (that is, about 15 kopecks apiece). The commission found the price prohibitively high and decided to order 20,000 clips at the same price. Another 38 thousand rubles were allocated for the production of test cartridges [4].
At the same time, in addition to the development, in fact, of the rifle, there was also the re-equipment of Russian arms factories for the mass production of new weapons. In 1889, the amount required for this was determined, and here it seemed to the tsar excessive. New, more accurate machines were required, construction work at factories and hydraulic structures, the purchase of materials, etc. The highest order to reorganize the factories followed on October 11, 1889. It was planned to allocate 11.5 million rubles for 1890, and almost 70 million rubles were allocated for 1890-1894. But practically for 1890 10 million rubles were allocated, but they spent much less - about 6 million rubles. Well, while the factories were being rebuilt, work on new rifles was also moving forward.
So, on September 20, 1890, Nagant wrote to Lieutenant General Chagin:
Armory Factory Em and L. Nagant
Luttih 20th September 1890
His Excellency General Lieutenant Chagin
Your Excellency
Upon receipt of your letter dated 2/14 of this month, I took measures to correct the defect you found in my gun, namely, the fact that when you use it, the 3rd cartridge often does not rise up to be captured by the drummer and introduced into the chamber. During shooting, this will not happen, since the shocks and shaking of the gun help the movement of the cartridges; this happens, as you yourself noticed, only with a slow action by the magazine mechanism.
The reason was the unequal strength of the two springs that fed the cartridges. The ratio of the stresses of these springs changes with each rising cartridge due to their conical shape, but it is extremely difficult to calculate this average force from which each spring must act in order for all 4 cartridges to be fed simultaneously. To correct this deficiency, I destroyed a very small spring and retained only a large one, as it was in the previous guns, which functioned perfectly in this sense.
I kept the lifting sled only to cover the box window in case of using the gun as a single shot, but gave the sled a different device than the gun you currently have. The slide is connected to the feeder by a hinge, and as a result, it has limited up and down movement. A through elongated quadrangular hole is cut across the slide, and the end of the feeder slightly protrudes from above the slide, so that the latter do not touch the cartridges at all when they are lifted up.
When using the gun as a single shot, the magazine is empty and the slide should not touch their socket; for which the feeder has special protrusions that go into the window of the slide, and, in addition, there is a protrusion behind the slide and on its left side, which also stops the slide from vibrations.
I was quite pleased with this design when I tested it and applied it to 4 final shotguns. It simplifies the mechanisms and guarantees the correct operation of the feeder so much that you, I am sure, will also be quite pleased with it.
(Photocopy on page from Nagant's letter). Fig.: c-joint connecting the feeder with the slide; protrusions against the window; sled; the prominent part of the feeder. (Archive of the Military Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineering Troops and Signal Corps F.6. Op. 48/1. D. 34. LL. 312–319.)
As for the larva, I have not changed anything in its adaptation to the shutter. The method I proposed in my letter of September 8th, there is only a draft that you can consider, test, and, if you wish, can be changed at your discretion. At the same time, … if the soldier had not screwed in completely and properly the larva, then the bolt could not be closed.
In 4 guns, the striker will protrude from the larva by 1.8 m / m, i.e. as much as the drummers of already made rifles are given out. The diameter of the striker in one of the guns will be 2.23 m / m. The trigger spring force will be as you wish, from 4.1 to 5.3 lbs.
Colonel Chichagov informed me that he would arrive next Wednesday, September 24th, with a soldier, to carry out prolonged shooting tests of the gun. According to my promise, the guns will be quite adaptable, and henceforth they will be of substantial benefit to us.
However, I still consider it necessary to come to St. Petersburg myself in order to be present at their tests and to find out your opinion about the changes I have made in them. So, no sooner than I find out what your requirements are regarding changing the device of the larva and the trunk, I cannot finally start manufacturing these parts, as well as the trigger and other details; all of this interferes with the correct manufacture and delivery of rifles. 300 guns are being made, but I'm in a hurry to finish 30, the bolts and magazines of which are already ready.
During my trip, nothing will be finally decided, and except for what we have already agreed upon, and your decision in St. Petersburg, I will have the right to submit to my firm for discussion. So, I believe that this journey is necessary in order to get out of this uncertainty, and to be able to continue making rifles in full confidence that it will meet the requirements of your rearmament.
Further, I am sure that all our efforts and expenses will not be in vain, since when I last arrived in St. Petersburg in March, your Minister of War informed me that even if my gun was not accepted, we would still are rewarded for all our expenses.
My departure had to be delayed, of course, to correct all of the above corrections, and also because of the slowdown in obtaining the necessary material for the packs. An Englishman who made steel sheets for me had to change the machines for cutting them. As soon as the expected is sent to them, we will start further work, since everything we need is ready, I will be able to go to you. This will probably happen in 8 days, and I will have the honor to see you on my departure. While waiting, please take ave….
Nagant [5].
Translated by Lieutenant Merder on September 18, 1890.
It follows from the text of the letter that the Russian government was well aware that, having contacted a foreign private trader, it would in any case have to reimburse him all his expenses.
A week before Nagan, on September 14, 1890, S. I. Mosin also wrote to Chagin that the order of General P. A. The Kryzhanovsky plant now does not need to fulfill all its requirements, because: "The Minister of War ordered the plant not to deviate in anything for my success in the competitive testing of my guns." And on the same day, Mosin informed Kryzhanovsky about the results of the demonstration of his rifle to the Minister of War: “… the guns worked perfectly. The Minister of War was very kind to me, several times at the plant, in front of everyone, expressed that my success would be his success, and when parting at the station said: “I will go to pray to the Moscow saints for the success of our business” [6].
Again, you need to understand that, like many Russian people, Mosin was too trusting in words and clearly did not understand that only the entries in the checkbook could be completely and completely trusted. Well, you can understand the minister too. The pleasures are a good thing, but if it is possible not to pay someone, then … why do this, especially since it was a question of spending millions in the end? You can pay someone only in case of the most extreme necessity, especially with government money.
Finally, on September 11, 1890, the Arms Department of the Artkom presented a test program for finished rifles. The firing was carried out by the companies of the Pavlovsky Life Guards, Izmailovsky Regiments, the 147th Samara Regiments and the Life Guards His Majesty's 1st Rifle Battalion. Based on the results of the firing, the troops had to answer the following questions asked to them:
1. Which of the two rifles in the three-line caliber has the greatest advantage: single-shot or batch-loaded?
2. If the advantage is on the side of the batch sample, which rifle: Mosin or Nagant should be preferred?
3. Which of the packs can be called the best: the box-type Nagana or the plate-type Mosin?
After the tests, representatives of the regiments spoke in favor of the Nagant clip and rifle. A month later, on October 12, 1890, a contract was signed with him, according to which the latter undertook to produce 300 guns and 20,000 clips at the already agreed price and spare parts (combat larvae, drummers, extractors, etc.) for 245 francs. The terms of delivery of the guns were also indicated, the violation of which for more than 15 days led to the termination of the contract, which gave the Russian government the right to refuse the services of Nagant and "use the system of his gun at its own discretion." Clause 12 of the contract stated that “the Russian government undertakes, for its part, if Nagan's guns enter service with the Russian army, to pay Nagant in the form of a premium of 200,000 credit rubles, after which all rights to use the Leon Nagant gun system and its various modifications are completely transferred to the Russian government ". That is, the conditions were set for him very harsh and, in fact, it was a "trap", since as soon as he for some reason did not fulfill this condition, he lost 200,000 rubles - a considerable amount for that time and was practically left without profit …
Thus, the reasons why 200,000 rubles were paid to Nagan are very simple and understandable, and to explain them, no speculation about some "kickbacks" from Nagan given to the Minister of War Vannovsky is needed at all. That is, this money was given to him for EVERYTHING, and for what exactly - the second part will tell. In any case, it is not very correct to compare the Nagant's fee and the award given to Mosin, as many historians have done in the past. Nagant received this amount under the contract, and this money meant covering all his expenses, and Mosin was given the Great Mikhailovsky Prize in the amount of 30,000 rubles as a recognition of his creative services to the Fatherland, was promoted, awarded the Order of St. Anna II degree and appointed to the position of director of an arms factory, since he … did not bear any other expenses, except for straining his mind, from his direct service, for which he was paid a salary, he was relieved, and he had nothing to compensate, since all the costs of manufacturing his rifles and their fine-tuning was carried out by the state treasury.
