Talk:MP 18

Untitled

I added a list of citation references to a number of points made here regarding to the weapons production and issue to the battlefield. I marked these specific areas because it contradicts with many sources on the subject, or needs verification.

Many pages (including here on Wikipedia), as well as published books such as Ian Hogg's Encyclopedia of Infantry Weapons of World War II and Chris Bishop's Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II state that the Beretta 1918 preceded the Bergmann MP-18 into service by a number of weeks or months.

Not only this, but according to such sources, as well as V.G Fedor's Evolution of Small Arms, the Beretta 1918-- as it appeared in the First World War, was not even technically a submachinegun. Whilst a number of prototypes fielded on an experimental basis were capable of select-fire, the adopted variant was only able to fire in semi-automatic, making the weapon simply a pistol-caliber carbine.

Also, according to one of the very links posted to as a source for the page contradicts the statement that full-scale production began in 1917 or 1918. It explicitly states that 50,000 pieces were ordered in 1918. Surely full-scale production did not enter before an order was ever even placed? --68.113.199.134 01:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Fingus

first paragraph

I removed a sentence which noted that this gun is "beautifully crafted" and is so rare that it sells for "20,000" or more at auction. This sentence was poorly worded and didn't cite it sources. In addition to this I don't see how someones opinion on the aesthetic qualities of this firearm or todays current sale price in USD are valuable or relevant pieces of information for an encyclopedia article

Vietminh 09:18, 23 March 2006

Edited: OOOPS! I just discovered I answered to an old message that was not sent to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quickload (talk • contribs) 22:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Quickload's answer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quickload (talk • contribs) 13:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

please follow the link I posted and read. I have had so far to examine 3 pieces of this rare MP 18. I have had exchanges with a few persons in charge of museums and armamement development including Birmingham Small Arms Pattern Room of Enfield now located in Manchester. The director told me they searched one of these for 80 years. I do shoot the one exhibited when some of the worlds specialists want to examine it. I have taken pictures of all specimen I could lay my hands on and examined those seized in combat in documented cases by french or americ n soldiers. I do not write by cutting and pasting formerly published articles full of inaccuracies. I did examine specimens from serial number 9XX to 33XXX.

I don't remenber having posted anything about its value .

Absolutely no military action report or no historical document or picture to state that the Beretta 1918 preceded the Bergmann MP-18 into service by a number of weeks or months unlike the documents I started to publish. 4 samples of seized MP 18 are shown in military academies rounds the round the and one is exhibited at the Army Technical School in Koblenz, Germany ( now moving to Berlin)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Quickload (talk • contribs) 09:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC) 

Edited to add, the WTS will finally stay in Koblenz

Edmond HUET (talk) 16:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Banned in the Treaty of Versailles

The first reference does not prove that this weapon was banned in the Treaty because it made such an impression, but merely that it was banned (and even that via a website and not by linking the Treaty text - which on second thought might be because there is nothing in the treaty to indicate the veracity of the statement). This should either be reworded or backed up by a source. Madcynic (talk) 09:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

IIRC, according to Alexander Zhuk, MP 18 "military" 32-rnds mags were banned; however, the Germans rebranded their MP gun as a "police" kind of weapon (with box magazine) 81.89.66.133 (talk) 06:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Actually, no provisions banning submachine guns were part of the Treaty of Versailles. Also - where did this clause quote: "A clause that appears in some copies reads "Automatic rifles and carbines are to be counted as light machine guns" - comes from. Treaty itself stipulates that English and French official texts of it are identical and considered authentic. English text feature no such provision at all. RussianTrooper (talk) 12:27, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Ireland?

Ireland is listed as one of the "users" of the MP18, but I have never encountered any documentation of its use in the period of the Irish War for Independence or the Civil War period. Is this intended to refer to a adoption by Free State forces? Its use appears in a movie, and is used in wargames about the Irish war for Independece, which might be the origins of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.220.223 (talk) 02:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Primary weapon?

The lead tells us that the MP 18 "was introduced into service in 1918 by the German Army during World War I as the primary weapon of the Stosstruppen..." while the main body of the text informs us that roughly 5,000 may have seen actual service during the war. Obviously, given the scale of the conflict, 5,000 submachine guns was closer to spitting into the ocean that it was constituting the "primary weapon" of German Stormtroopers.--172.190.146.36 (talk) 09:28, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The Stoßtruppen ("shock troops") were a specialized unit in WWI specializing in infiltration and fast assaults on enemy trench positions. MP18s were a primary weapon of the Stoßtruppen. So 5,000 MP18s were a primary weapon of a specialized unit, not a primary weapon of the German Army as a whole. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 21:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MP 18. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071202134302/http://www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/mar04.pdf to http://www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/mar04.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:14, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MP 18. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080913183651/http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg76-e.htm to http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg76-e.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:22, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Statements by "Cornish"

Hello,

I deleted as misleading passage: A common myth is that the Treaty of Versailles banned the production and use of the MP 18 by Germany. In fact, the treaty only limited the number of machine guns that Germany was permitted to stockpile, and no mention is made of machine pistols or the MP 18 in particular.[2]

The passage used Cornish 2009 as a source that states:

Cornish (2009): "It is frequently repeated as fact that the Bergmann Muskete had so impressed the Allies during the 1918 campaign that they specifically banned its production and military issue. In fact no such prohibition appears in the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Strict controls were placed on the production of fire arms – principally by means of severely limiting the number of companies permitted to manufacture war materials – Bergmann was not among them. With regard to military issue, the numbers and types of weapons permitted to the 100,000-man German Army were carefully stipulated. There is no mention whatsoever made of machine pistols, although every other weapon type (apart from pistols) is listed – from cavalry carbines to 105mm Howitzers. Given the care that was taken to lay down such specific restrictions, it would appear that, far from having impressed the Allies, the MP 18 had not really registered on their consciousness at all. The fact that they were still unconvinced of the utility of such weapons on the eve of the Second World War would also suggest that the impact of the MP 18 on the fighting of 1918 was marginal."

So, now my reasons to delete this:

1) Misconception of the Treaty of Versaille:

First of all Cornish does not seem to understand the Treaty of Versaille. The treaty states:

Up till the time at which Germany is admitted as a member of the League of Nations the German Army must not possess an armament greater than the amounts fixed in Table No. II

To be more specific, the treaty list very detailled what weapons the Reichswehr is allowed to have and in what quantity. See here: https://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/versa/chart1.gif

That means weapons of war not listed are not allowed. The Reichswehr couldn't just say "Oh, they restricted 5,5 and 10,5 howitzers... well, then let's just build 11cm revolver cannons".

The Treaty of Versaille did not provide an encyclopedia of banned firearms, but a chart of allowed firearms.

To counter Cornish with a more reliable source, here a quote from "Die Maschinenwaffen im Rahmen der Taktik" ("The machine-weapon within the scope of tactics") by Colonel Dr.Gustav Daeniker, member of the swiss Generalship, 1942, Verlag E.S. Mittler & Sohn, Berlin.

"The machine-pistol has proven it's value as a close quarter combat-weapon in the world war, and surely the best proof for that it is an excellent weapon is the Treaty of Versaille's prohibition for the Reichswehr to carry her"

2) Apparent low expertise

Cornish calls the MP18 "Dreyse Muskete". Dreyse Muskete was NOT the name of the MP18, but of the Bergmann MG15. So this author doesn't seem to be such an expert that he should be quoted.

3) Apparent confirmation bias

"It is frequently repeated as fact that the Bergmann Muskete had so impressed the Allies during the 1918 campaign that they specifically banned its production and military issue(...) the MP 18 had not really registered on their consciousness at all."

Another red flag is that the author is apparently trying to "prove a point", which might lead to a confirmation bias.

I hope you accept the deletion. If the MP18 did "not really registered on their consciousness at all", than the MP wouldn't have become a standard army weapon shortly after WW1.

84.178.49.117 (talk) 22:14, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I believe you are right. I checked "MP 38 and MP 40 Submachine Guns" by Alejandro de Quesada, Osprey Publishing. Page 9: "Bergmann produced the weapon [the MP 18.I] from the summer of 1918 until the Treaty of Versailles took effect in 1920. [...] The Treaty of Versailles specified in its terms that Germany was not allowed to produce the SMG." So we have at least 2 sources claiming that the Treaty of Versailles banned the production of SMG (except for police) and only one source saying the opposite. --Le Petit Chat (talk) 22:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Cornish is essentially correct. There was no clause in the Versailles Treaty that outlawed SMGs ("submachine guns" were not even recognized as a category of weapon at the time), nor was the MP18 explicitly banned from use by the German Army. Production of SMGs generally ceased in post-war Germany because they fell under "weapons of war", not because they were specifically banned.

The extent to which the Allies valued the MP18 is also vastly overstated - the British High Command actively thought it was rather useless and the French tried a half-hearted attempt in the 1920s to produce an equivalent weapon, but cancelled it because they couldn't find a use for it. One has to ask, if the MP18 was viewed with such reverence, why the post-war commercial version of the gun - the SIG Model 1920 - sold so poorly in Europe. The fact of the matter is that it took another decade at least before SMGs were taken seriously as a military weapon. 2A00:23C7:C887:2301:152:FDD0:2CAE:2352 (talk) 13:10, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Ottoman use

I noticed this page has the "WW1 Ottoman Weapons" template. Is there are source for this? if so this information could be added to the article; 170.82.14.193 (talk) 18:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)